[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
5 14T 22.e U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospherict,,-L@ I proving Administration Your Waterfront: A Practical Guide Alown il!@' At .Mom 30 1 .660 A= L .7vw *tagq 0 'Wl 4 E?;% 7 PI it 46 4101 NO .Olt - %N, HT 175 1.47 1980 JA c.4 I I& 001, oft '; r Cover photo: Aerial view of Boston wa- terfront with Quincy Market- Faneuil Hall shopping area in the right center, warehouses converted to residences and shops in the foreground. Rouse Cc For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 ps 56 u- ,AT OF Cq4@, Prepared by Improving A/ U.S. Department of Commerce Your Waterfront National Oceanic and Atmospheric If/* Administration A Pracifie cal, Guide *rATES 0* Office of Coastal Zone Management In cooperation with U.S. Department of the Interior Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service 1980 r 5 O@ "R Ali M s3p -44F- -a 35, DR. @.J In 1Z lra@ 1%J t D D Y. 1,p Is Lq 's M RN, KIM DR, i Y I f- i, Table of Contents Preface .......................... 5 Background ...................... 6 How to Use the Guide ............ 7 Acknowledgements ............... 7 Chapter I-Waterfronts Today ...... 8 Waterfront Potential ............... 9 Waterfront Features ............... 9 Redevelopment Difficulties ......... 11 Public Access-A Special Issue ..... 12 Chapter 11- Management Structures ........ 14 Q, =7- Waterfront Management Councils (Commissions) ................. 15 L4ASan Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission .. 16 71* - - tffltt'@ OMRhode Island Coastal Resources 99@1 Management Council ........... 17 'Z@ -Public Development orpora- MIMI!, Quasi ZINC' M " c-,,-'-, I'll tion ........................... 18 OJJCharles Center-Inner Harbor: Man- agement, Inc.: Baltimore ........ 18 Joint Public-Private Development Venture ....................... 21 @@UFreemason Harbour: Norfolk .... 21 Port Authorities ................... 24 KAMassachusetts Port Authority: Commonwealth Pier Five/Boston Fish Pier ...................... 25 Private Development Corporation ... 27 2 Chapter III- Zoning and Districting .......... 28 Zoning ........................... 29 Waterfront Zones .................. 29 Overlay Zoning ................... 32 OMMaumee Riverfront Overlay District: Toledo ........................ 32 Incentive Zoning .................. 34 K'MSalem, Massachusetts ........... 34 @Water or Harbor Area Management Zones ............. 36 Districting ........................ 37 Special Districts ................... 37 PUSpecial South Street Seaport Dis- trict: New York City ........... 38 Historic Districts ................... 43 MMNew Bedford, Massachusetts ..... 44 Mixed-Use Development Districts ... 46 Planned Unit Development ........... 47 Chapter IV-Land Acquisition ...... 52 AL Fee-Simple Acquisition ............. 53 Leaseback ......................... 53 MMMission Bay: San Diego ......... 54 Land Write Downs ................ 55 Conservation Easements ........... 56 Land Banking ..................... 56 Land Exchange ................... 58 W-A 3 Chapter V-Incentives to Private Developers .................... 60 Tax Incentives .................... 61 MMLaclede's Landing: St. Louis ..... 62 Special Tax Districts ............... 64 Tax Increment Financing ........... 65 KAPortland Downtown Urban Waterfront Renewal Plan ....... 66 ftil Regulatory Simplification ........... 68 Public Facilities ...................... 70 Chapter VI-Federal Financial Assistance .................... 72 M-MSeattle ........................ 74 WPortland, Maine ................ 81 Explanation of the Matrix ........... 83 Federal Grant-In-Aid Matrix ..... 84,85 Appendixes ................... 86-108 Federal Program Summaries ........ 86 A. Grants ...................... 86 B. Loans ...................... 92 C- Urban Waterfront Revitalization -The Role of Recreation and Heritage ...... 96 D. Urban Waterfront Action Group ...................... 98 E. Contract for Implementation of the Freemason Harbour Urban Development Action Grant No. B-79-AA-51-01 11 ........... 101 F. Zoning Bylaw, Plymouth, Mass ....................... 103 G. Maumee Riverfront Overlay District .................... 104 Bibliography .................... 106 4 Preface The Office of Coastal Zone Management, with the cooperation of the Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, is pleased to present this guide in the hope that it encourages communities to take a new look at their waterfronts. Waterfront space has the potential for serving varied uses in settings made attractive by their proximity to water. Housing, shops, parks, and museums, for example, all can prosper on waterfronts as can port facilities and industry. A number of national interests are served by current waterfront redevelopment around the country. In addition to providing expanded recreational sites, waterfronts can also be the locations for new jobs, revitalized neighborhoods, and the preservation of historic structures. The emphasis in the guide is on the desirability of teamwork among private developers, citizens, and public officials in waterfront projects for the maximum public benefit. In addition, our agencies are particularly interested in encouraging, wherever feasible, the maximum amount of public access to the shore. Because waterfronts have great attractions for varied uses, both public and private, the task of selecting the best possible mixture of uses of these areas is complicated and often controversial. Good faith efforts by all concerned will be necessary to achieve new, lively waterfront areas in our communities. It is toward that end that we have written this guide, containing what we hope are concrete, practical suggestions on how to bring this about. Michael Glazer Chris Therral Delaporte Office of Coastal Zone Management Heritage Conservation and National Oceanic and Recreation Servce Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Department of Commerce Background Until recently, urban waterfront The National Oceanic and Atmos- A working-level interagency Urban areas were one of America's most pheric Administration's Office of Waterfront Action Group was neglected resources. Once thriving, Coastal Zone Management, De- formed in mid-1979 by representa- they fell into disuse and disrepair as partment of Commerce; and the tives of 10 federal agencies plus the economic and technological changes Heritage Conservation and Recrea- National Trust for Historic Preserva- occurred. tion Service (HCRS) of the Depart- tion, Partners for Livable Places, ment of the Interior both recognize National League of Cities, and the Waterfronts have been identified in the potential of urban waterfronts. U.S. Conference of Mayors. A list of a number of studies over the years participants who serve as initial as areas with great redevelopment During 1978, HCRS began a study points of contact for their agencies is potential. Among these reports (see of waterfront projects around the included as Appendix D. The bibliography for complete listing) country, with a particular emphasis group's role is to provide informa- are: on those with potential for recrea- tion on and facilitate the delivery of tional use or historic preservation. federal assistance to communities. 9 "Waterfront Renewal," Wisconsin This study was a followup of an ear- The group will also examine pro- Department of Resource Develop- lier report on urban recreation by grams to see if more effective ways ment, 1966; the Interior Department that iden- of delivering federal services can be * Arthur Cotton Moore, "Bright tified waterfronts as one of the key put into practice. Breathing Edges of City Life- areas for providing enhanced rec- Planning for Amenity Benefits of reational opportunities for city Urban Water Resources," Depart- dwellers. A partial summary of the ment of the Interior, 1971. waterfront study is included as Recent publications include: Appendix C. In 1978 NOAA's Coastal Zone Man- "Urban Waterfronts," entire issue, agement Program selected wa- Progressive Architecture, June terfront redevelopment as one of 1975; four general areas to receive em- e "Reviving the Urban Waterfront," phasis in its funding of states with Partners for Livable Places (with the approved coastal zone management Office of Coastal Zone Management programs. Prior to this, the office and National Endowment for the had experimented with demonstr6- Arts), fall, 1979; tion grants to 35 cities and towns for o "On the Waterfront," Planning, waterfront planning and engineering November, 1979; studies. * "Urban Waterfront Revitalization: Both the Heritage Conservation and The Role of Recreation and Herit- Recreation Service and the Office of age," Volumes One and Two, Coastal Zone Management have Heritage Conservation and Recrea- sponsored and participated in sev- tion Service, Department of the eral meetings on waterfront rede- Interior, November 1979; and velopment to make their programs * "Small Seaports," The Conserva- as responsive as possible to wa- tion Foundation, December 1979. terfront initiatives. 6 How to Use the Guide Acknowledgments The focus of the guide is on The guide is organized to cover the The authors are indebted to a large implementation- translating a plan different management structures number of persons who have con- into action-rather than on for- that could be employed by a city, tributed to this guide. mulating or designing waterfront the mixture of zoning and districting In each of the case study com- renewal. techniques that can be used, land acquisition methods, incentives to munities there was at least one The key decision that must be made involve private interests, and a dis- person who gave time to provide by both private interests and public cussion of the types of federal as- material and then to check the bodies is what the character of the sistance that are available. draft manuscript for accuracy. Re- waterfront should be. Hard bar- viewers of the document are gaining may well occur over the The selected case studies used numerous. Many persons re- amount and kind of commercial or throughout the guide are illustrative sponded to a proposed outline of industrial activity that will take place, and are not intended to suggest the the report circulated in the summer or how much valuable property will full range of possible waterfront of 1979. A first draft of the guide be given to residential or recrea- projects. was distributed in the fall and was tional uses. The assumption is that commented on by a number, some these decisions will be made as part Waterfront redevelopment will and in great detail. A final draft went to of the local planning process, sub- should reflect the special cultural,. yet another group of reviewers in ject to a variety of political geographic, political, and economic December. considerations. situation of each city or town. The tools outlined in this guide will natu- To all who took time to comment The guide does not presume to ad- rally have to be adapted to reflect by phone or letter, we are deeply vise a community what mix of uses these factors. The reader should appreciative. Major sections of the is appropriate for its waterfront. It is consider which of these tools is most guide have been rewritten, a dif- intended instead to help city offi- appropriate for his or her particular ferent organization is provided, cials, leaders of citizen groups, and situation, and will then use the cited and new segments are included as private developers who want to references to obtain additional a result of the comments received. bring about change in their commu- information. nity's waterfront. The language is Of all the persons assisting with this nontechnical. report, we wish to give special thanks to one individual, Robert One of its major purposes is to con- W. Knecht. As the Assistant Ad- vey ideas about the wide range of ministrator of the National Oceanic developments that can comprise and Atmospheric Administration waterfront renewal projects, and the for Coastal Zone Management until varied sources of governmental aid January 1, 1980, and the leader of that might be used. the program since its inception, he was a strong backer of com- munities interested in their wa- terfronts. He saw this as a fertile area in which the coastal zone pro- gram together with other federal agencies could make significant contributions to the well-being of many people. He was the original supporter of this publication and was the key person responsible for its inception. Ann Breen Cowey Robert Kaye Richard O'Connor Richard Rigby Chapter I Waterfronts Today or el_ .10K ----------- -,.Ookr Ar Waterfront Potential Waterfront Features Size A number of factors came together Customarily the term "urban wa- 0 Differences in size affect strategies in the late 1970s to spur urban wa- terfront" is taken to mean the port of urban waterfront revitalization. terfront revitalization. The nation's areas of large metropolitan regions Waterfront sections can be compact, effort to clean up its waterways, on the nation's coast or major rivers. neatly carved out of one section of a begun in earnest in the mid-1970s, San Francisco, Long Beach, St. city or town, as in Alexandria, Va., is beginning to pay off. The success Louis, Detroit, Boston, New Or- or they can sprawl for miles along means that once fetid waterfront leans, and Baltimore come to mind. two or more rivers that form the areas are becoming cleaner and land In fact, however, the term "urban principal geographic feature of an along the water's edge is suddenly waterfronts" is much more inclusive. area, as in Wilmington, Del., and more usable. Small resort towns with busy har- Charleston, S.C. In addition, tax benefits for struc- bors, commercial fishing towns, Scale many medium-sized cities, as well as 0 Projects will also differ vastly in tures placed on the National Regis- communities located on bays or ter of Historic Places have helped channels miles from the ocean, scale. They can be as small as the encourage creative reuse of old should be included. replacement of rotting pilings with a buildings. Likewise, the rising costs single, boat-launching ramp-from of new construction make conver- In this guide, the term "urban wa- this small beginning the City of Bal- sion of existing structures econom- terfront" will be used broadly. timorelplans to begin redevelop- ically attractive. Waterfronts often Communities with populations well ment of its Middle Branch area-or possess unique opportunities to under 50,000 are considered be- as large as its well-known Inner reuse older structures. Perhaps cause the problems of and potentials Harbor site. At Grand Street in best-known is the Ghirardelli Square for waterfront revitalization exist Brooklyn, N.Y., a former ferry project in San Francisco. Ata cost of here as well as in larger urban areas. landing-turned junkyard was re- approximately $10 million, a turn- claimed and turned into a small of-the-century chocolate factory was Waterfronts vary enormously in type neighborhood park. transformed into a shopping and and character as well as in size and Heritage restaurant complex. The Faneuil age. Some port cities such as 0 Many waterfronts contain historic Hall/Quincy Market restoration in Charleston, S.C., and Savannah, structures or uses. This can enhance Boston, adjoining the waterfront, is Ga., owe much of their current at- the attractiveness for investors, a more recent example. tractiveness to the restored beauty given the possible tax breaks on of their early days in American his- designated historic buildings, and Coinciding with the increasing at- tory. Other ports such as Oakland , help develop tourism. The maritime tractiveness of "adaptive reuse" or Cal., are big, bustling, and brand heritage of old seaports and ships preservation of older structures is new. has sparked renewed public interest, the " back-to-the -city" movement, Among the many factors that con- as witnessed by the crowds visiting intensified by gasoline shortages in the 1970s. The trend toward in-city tribute to the unique character of the "tall ships" during the Bicenten- living has attracted young people, each waterfront and which must be nial. Furthermore, the possible tax retired people, and others interested taken into account when examining breaks on designated historical in the amenities and convenience of redevelopment possibilities are: buildings rehabilitated for income- city living. Waterfront locations are producing uses makes such renova- Geographic Location tion attractive to investors. prime attractions for new or con- * Waterfronts are located on coasts, verted residences and offices near along rivers, at the terminus of ship- Use city and town centers. ping channels, or alongside bays 0 Many waterfronts are heavily in- Competing with such uses of wa- leading inland from the ocean. dustrialized, reflecting either current terfront property is the recognized While an obvious geographic fact, activity or the past port-related need for expanded recreational op- the difference between a river and functions. Other waterfronts, how- portunities for city residents. This an ocean site will affect engineering, ever, may be exclusively resort point was acknowledged by Con- design, and type of construction in communities with harbors for plea- gress in 1976, when it ordered a new projects. (Coastal.sites have to sure craft and perhaps commercial study of urban recreation needs. take into account ocean storms and fishing vessels. More commonly, Presently, there is an increasing em- the corrosive effect of salt water, for waterfronts reflect a mixture of uses. phasis in federal, state, and city rec- instance). The pattern of existing land uses on reation programs to use available a waterfront is important in deter- land, such as waterfronts, to provide mining future redevelopment. That open space and parks where people pattern can easily pose problems. live. For example, historic use in a high- density industrial area makes con- version to residential and commer- cial uses a complex task, especially if Enjoying the new Quincy Market on the the area has an unsavory reputation. Boston waterfront. 9 Recreation * Recreational opportunities abound along waterfronts, whether they are now industrial, mixed use, or aban- doned. With the prospect of cleaner waters in many areas, due to recent public investments in pollution con- trol facilities, the public's stake in using and protecting waterfronts is high. evelopment 9 Under used waterfront areas repre sent major community assets. Their @7 disposition, therefore, can be ex- r pected to be of major interest to pri vate investors, public officials, citizen groups, and the general public. Projects of whatever dimension will have to balance the various interests that are sure to influence plans to @i improve or bring about waterfront redevelopment. Increased interest in waterfronts is 4,& r often accompanied by higher prop- 5,01 erty values along the rivers and shores of the country and increased competition for their use. This means most suggestions for renewal, redevelopment, or other investment in waterfronts may run into con- tr versy. Public interest groups will @CZ want greater access and more space for recreation of one sort or another. cl. gat fil Private property owners will natu- rally want to maximize return on an investment they might contemplate, arguing that this will increase tax revenues for the community. These 0 bjectives are not incompatible; they suggest divergent views that have to be considered. 5@1 In the foreground, the Pier 39 marina and shops, a major tourist attraction on San Francisco's waterfront. Ships unloading in New York Harbor. 10 Redevelopment Difficulties While there are examples of suc- cessful waterfront development projects in all sections of the coun- try, some of which date back to the .7 . . . . . . . . . . 1930s, there should be no illusion 17 about the ease of beginning or ex- re Boston's Quincy Market renewal panding similar efforts elsewhe and waterfront revival took 15 years X_ to complete. Baltimore began in the late 1950s with a central city urban renewal that then spread to its wa- terfront. It is years away from com- pletion. Seattle is still grappling with how to tie its waterfront to a revived downtown. Beyond the inherent difficulties of any major public-private city re- newal or redevelopment project, waterfronts present several prob- lems what are unique or serve to compound problems elsewhere. Finance 7, e ZI,' e Financing waterfront projects, whether small, single-purpose efforts 7 or major, multi-acre redevelop- ments, poses special difficulties. Pri- vate investors may be. reluctant to Derelict piers in North Bergen. N.J. risk a venture because the area may have an unsavory reputation or be in an especially deteriorated condi- Government Jurisdictions Pollution tion. City officials likewise may be & Government jurisdictions in wa- 9 Despite the trend toward cleaner hesitant to spend major sums for terfronts are more complicated than water in general, pollution problems improved services and facilities in elsewhere, because the presence of remain. The difficulty of dealing with unproven sections. water introduces additional and runoff frorn construction and other Conflicts overlapping government agencies non-point sources of pollution 0 Conflicts among varying interests and regulations. For instance, in complicates efforts to clean up over what use to make of wa- Baltimore Harbor there are 30 state, waterways. terfronts can be intense, perhaps local, and federal government agen- Ownership cies involved in various aspects of more so than in other areas of a city, decisions about that area. *Ownership of waterfront land may Industrial users may resist efforts to be more tangled than in other sec- recast waterfront sections into shop- Age tions of a community. Waterfronts ping and residential areas. Residents a The rundown condition of build- generally are in older sections, may be disturbed at the thought of ings and municipal facilities in many creating title problems, and the higher-priced restored housing, older waterfronts is made worse by presence of railroad and utility rights fearing displacement of older, often problems with bulkheading along of way adds further complications. poorer, residents by the more the shore or with rotting piers and Sometirr@es; there is difficulty in de- affluent. pilings. These conditions present termining the demarcation between expenses and hazards unique to the public and private property, espe- Underutilization waterfront. Piers have been rebuilt cially if the shoreline has shifted *Waterfronts currently serve rnany and converted, at major cost, to over the years. Alexandria, Va., has cities and towns as convenient . provide such attractions as Pier 39 a long-standing dispute with the dumping grounds. Refuse, staging in San Francisco, and Seattle's wa- federal government over ownership areas for overseas shipment, tank terfront park/aquarium site. Compe- of the waterfront along the Potomac farms, lumber yards, and city lots for tition among cities for public funds River. towed cars all have found waterfront to repair bulkheads or install shore areas convenient. Redevelopment protection devices is intense. means new locations will have to be found for such uses. ;7 4 dM P" -7 7- Seattle's Central Waterfront Park, central business district to the left. Public Access- States have different laws affecting permitting authority to require pro- A Special Issue the line near the water's edge where vision of direct public access to the The complicated question of the private ownership stops and public bay waters. The shoreline manage- public's right to have ready access to ownership begins. These laws are ment program developed by Seattle the water deserves special attention often in flux, subject to legislative uses permits to preserve visual ac- as a key issue in waterfront rede- action or court ruliIngs. cess throughout the city. velopment. The advent of generally A number of compromise solutions The growing trend is toward cleaner waters, at public expense, seem to be winning increasing favor multiple-use projects, where more raises a basic question: Who should in various jurisdictions. Many com- than one major type of land use oc- reap the benefits of these improved munities are using their zoning (or curs in a specific area. Often these waterways, private development landfill) permit authority to win con- projects include activities previously interests, the public at large, or cessions from developers of wa- considered incompatible. Ways are some mixture of the two? If a deci- terfront lands to allow public access. being found, for instance, to provide sion is made favoring widespread In Wilmington, Del., for example, it the public with opportunities to view public use of the water's edge, the is proposed that 20-foot strips along cargo-handling operations in a har- question quickly becomes one of the Brandywine and Christina Rivers bor, as at the Port of Seattle. how that use is to be financed, since be obtained from industries locating public holdings of waterfront terri- there. In San Francisco, the Bay tory are limited. Conservation and Development Commission has for years used its 011, VT_FfP7^,_* 12 A MY R R V R F 77 eys" (nQ 9h, IMM Z ?fge F; t '4 W, @4, The nation's premier lakefront park: Chicago. Some waterfront sections combine object to having the general public Waterfront redevelopment has a older industrial activities with newer stream across their land to the major obligation to meet the public's public attractions. Baltimore's new shore. In many cities and towns need for increased recreational op- aquarium is located beside a former there are frequent cases of trespass portunities in cities and towns. As generating plant that will be con- as citizens cross whatever property is new projects are developed, access verted to a hotel, which in turn is lo- in their way to get to the waterfront. can be built into the design. The cated near traditional pcirt facilities. projects can also provide the occa- Even in communities where the sion for clarifying public ownership Complicated legal questions are in- shore is "public," there are ques- of shoreside territory. In return for volved in deciding about providing tions of access: Should "outsiders" public investment in support of re- access. The shore may be in public be allowed to use the facilities, development projects, parks, public ownership, but only up to a certain should they pay, and should resi- piers, or marina facilities can be in- point, such as the normal high tide dents be given preference? corporated into approved private mark. This means that the territory ventures. Or, a local permit re- in public ownership will be under quirement can be made contingent water twice a day in coastal areas, on private provision of access to effectively limiting the public's ac- what is unmistakably in the public cess. Owners of private property ownership, the water of the nation's adjacent to public shorelines often rivers and coasts. As always, care must be taken so that there is no "taking" of private property without compensation. 13 Chapter II Management Structures I - fil I J%lt ........... t @Etl 14 Some of the most difficult problems This chapter examines some of the Councils may be regional, encom- in urban waterfront revitalization re- alternative management structures passing multi-county or multi- sult from complicated and frag- that have been used successfully to township areas, or they may be lim- mented institutional arrangements. bring about waterfront redevelop- ited to a single municipality or dis- Urban waterfronts are subject to ment more efficiently. Case studies trict. State enabling legislation is multiple jurisdictions and overlap- will show how alternative manage- usually required. ping governmental responsibilities, ment structures can be used, under more so than other areas. For the proper circumstances, to facili- Waterfront councils are empowered example, an independent port au- tate both large- and small-scale wa- to control land use and development thority may control shipping opera- terfront projects. within their zones of jurisdiction. tions and associated land based Land use planning studies, en- support facilities on the waterfront. Each of these management struc- vironmental assessments, shoreline The state may own and control tures has certain advantages and access plans, and waterfront de- submerged lands offshore, while the disadvantages that will apply differ- velopment proposals are common city planning department may in- ently according to the local situation. examples of planning functions fre- clude the port areas as part of its A key factor in establishing a differ- quently assumed by these councils. comprehensive plan. The U.S. Ar y ent governmental apparatus is Corps of Engineers controls perm s whether sufficient political lead- Councils also assume a regulatory for dredging, and the Environmental ership and support exist, since a function as part of their manage- Protection Agency has extensive transfer of some power and respon- ment responsibilities. This is usually regulatory influence on coastal and sibility will probably be involved in in the form of a permit that is re- riverine development. State coastal creating the new structures. Wide- quired before a land owner can sig- zone management programs may spread appreciation for the wa- nificantly alter shorefront property. add regulatory control and permit ter.front and its potential will have to The permit mechanism provides the approval requirements. exist before such a major change is council with a powerful too] for possible. Local officials, in selec- guiding development in the coastal Apart from problems with gov- tively tailoring the tools to fit their zone. ernmental jurisdiction, local de- situation, will need to investigate Some of the most successful coun- velopment agencies and private in- thoroughly the positive and negative 0 vestors may encounter a number of implications of each approach. cils and commissions, as in Rhode other difficulties in implementing Island, have utilized a mixture of waterfront projects. Obtaining suffi- representatives from all levels of cient investment capital to finance Wate&ont Management government, private business. and an entire project is a major obstacle. Councils (Commissions) citizen groups. The approach of in- Waterfront redevelopment often re- Waterfront councils are special pur- cluding a broad cross section of quires unique, high initial capital pose government bodies formed interests allows a council to avoid I charges of elitism or special interest outlays for bulkheads or pier im- specifically for the purpose of cleal- dominance. The San Frnacisco Bay provements. Local governments ing with coastal areas. This type of Conservation and Development may have difficulty raising the management structure is created Commission is perhaps the best necessary funds and face stiff com- when circumstances arise that re- example of this type of structure. petition in acquiring federal aid. quire a separate government body, in addition to and independent of Because of the need to work closely existing agencies. Girls at play in waterfront park at Balti- with investors and because of high more*s Inner Harbor adjoining the costs involved, some communities downtown business and financial district. have selected alternative organiza- tional structures to implement and manage their waterfront projects. These management structures can be more efficient than traditional local government approaches of CA working with private financial and development interests. Z k fiv I oil 1111111111irl, mm uftuauu Ban Basil gas N@Nn. Baltimore's new Inner Harbor dominated by 14 the World Trade Center on right. Two shopping plazas have been added in the 1P, 1*1 center since this aerial shot was taken. KA Case Study San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission Kent Watsor The San Francisco Bay Conserva- tion and Development Commission (BCDC) is a prime example of a re_ has helped protect the natural re- gional waterfront commission that' IL AW sources of waterfront areas and as- sure that developers provide public access. The commission maintains substantial control over land uses along the shoreline, including much of the bay area's wetlands and salt 77- marshes. In addition, the commis- 7@ Sion has developed a comprehen- sive planning process aimed at ftA maximizing public access to the shorefront and wetland areas where appropriate. While unique to San Francisco Bay, the commission has elements that could be employed elsewhere, al- though the political difficulty of es- tablishing effective waterfront com missions such as BCDC should not be underestimated. Background BCDC was created in the 1960s by the efforts of a well organized citi- Music in the foreground against the background of boats in San Francisco's waterfront. zens group intent on stopping the filling of San Francisco Bay. A study published in 1959 by the U.S. Army In 1969, after study and review, the The focus of BCDC's effort to date Corps of Engineers showed a high Bay Plan and associated legislation has been in administering permit rate of fill, as well as a chronic ac- gave BCDC permanent status and applications for bay shoreline de- cess problem. Less than one percent control over land use and develop- velopments. This is a direct proce- of the 1,000 miles of bay shoreline ment around San Francisco Bay. dure involving application by a de- was open to the public. A grassroots veloper, review by the staff and citizens' movement called the Save Organization commission, a public hearing, and San Francisco Bay Association was finally a vote by the full commission. formed to publicize the problem to BCDC is a 27-member commission The permit from the commission is bay area residents. A study commis- comprised of members with a broad in addition to whatever other per- Sion was created by the state legis- range of backgrounds, affiliations, mits may be required. lature to investigate the problems of and interests. The commission con- the bay and make recommendation sists of a representative from each of for their solution. In 1965, the study the nine counties surrounding the group proposed the establishment of bay, which includes the City of San a commission to prepare and im- Francisco-, five state agencies; seven plement a plan for the protection of members from the general public; the bay. Later that year, BCDC was and four from the Association of Bay formally created by the legislature. Area Governments. Two federal representatives also serve on the commission, but do not vote on permit applications. 16 Case Study Results Rhode Island Coastal The permit process has allowed Resources Managment Council BCDC to greatly control filling of San Francisco Bay. The average an- The Rhode Island Coastal Re- One of the council's most difficult nual rate has dropped from 1,500 sources Management Council is a and controversial decisions involved acres a year.in 1940 to the current 17-member citizens council estab- the building of homes on barrier rate of about 30 acres a year. Some lished in 1973 by the state legisla- beaches. The council's original reg- permits require developers to re- ture to manage the state's coastal ulations prohibited all building on claim wetlands and marshes as a lands and waters. barrier beaches in the state, but the tradeoff for allowing landfill. These law was struck down in court. A re- "mitigating measures" have resulted The council has direct authority over vised version of the law permitted in a net increase of 4.6 acres of all activities between the mean high construction on already developed wetlands and marshes and 21.4 water mark and the three-mile limit barrier beaches, but prohibited ex- acres of public access land. of the state's territorial sea, plus pansion to beaches that were unde- coastal wetlands, physiographic veloped in 1974-about one-half of Each permit application also is re- features, and all directly related the state's beaches. The revised viewed by the commission to deter- contiguous areas. Council permits regulations restricted all forms of mine the amount of public access are required for coastal activities development on the beach face, as that can be included in a develop- after all other state and local permits well as on dunes and wetlands. ment proposal. The commission has have been given. The council also the power to require access to the reviews permits for other coastal ac- Because the state is small, there is actual permit site, or it can substitute tivities: power generation, desalini- often considerable exchange be- a requirement for provision of ac- zation plants, chemical or petroleum tween applicants and the regulatory cess at another location that is -better processing, mineral extraction, body as a proposed project is drawn suited to the public's needs. In addi- shoreline protection facilities, sew- up and a permit application pre- tion to the permit process, a age treatment plants, and solid pared. If a project is clearly incon- mechanism called Special Area waste disposal including private sistent with council policies and reg- Plans has been created so that septic systems. ulations, the applicant is urged to BCDC and individual local govern- abandon or reconsider the proposal ments can jointly plan for special The council's mandate is to "pre- without going through the permit waterfront areas. serve, protect, develop, and where process. The conditions attached to possible restore the coastal re- its vary depending on the type permi Contact: sources of the state for this and suc- of project. Common conditions San Francisco Bay Conservation ceeding generations through com- stipulate when and how dredge and Development Commission prehensive and coordinated long materials should be disposed and 30 Van Ness Ave., Room 2011 range planning and management." require that wetlands not be dam- San Francisco, Ca. 94102 The 17 members are appointed for aged. All structures must be placed (415) 557-3686 varying terms. Seven are private above mean high water and no References: citizens; eight are from local and wastes can be discharged into tidal "The BCDC Experience as a state governments. The directors of waters. Coastal Manager," Alan R. Pendle- the state departments of natural re- Contact: ton and Charles R. Roberts. Coastal sources and health serve ex-officio. Rhode Island Coastal Resources Zone '78. American Society of Civil The council currently processes 125 Management Council Engineers, 1978 to 150 permits a year. Since 1977, 80 Park Street more than one-third of all applica- Providence, R.I. 02907 "A Public Access Plan for San Fran- tions have been for the construction (401) 277-2476 cisco Bay," Kent E. Watson. of docks, piers, boat ramps, or Coastal Zone '78. American Society floats. of Civil Engineers, 1978. 17 Quasi-Public (Non-Profit) Development Corporation KA Case Study The quasi-public organization has proven successful where traditional public efforts to guide development Charles Center-Inner Harbor have not worked satisfactorily. Its Management, Inc.: Baltimore, Maryland primary purpose is to create a flexi- ble organization that operates sepa- rately from a public redevelopment agency, but under the general guid- -2 ance of local government. In some cases, such an organization can ac- commodate the special interests of local governments, the private sec- tor, and various community groups more easily than can a traditional department of local government. Also, private corporation status al- lows a management group to as- sume an unaligned, third party role in negotiations between local offi- cials and developers. In this way, differences in goals and policies can be negotiated while projects con- tinue to be managed with a minimum of confusion, conflict, and delay. Development corporations must register with a state corporation commission in the same way that groups legally incorporate. Non- profit status provides tax benefits. Baltimore's Inner Harbor playground. After the corporation is approved, it may execute a contract with a local government in which planning and Charles Center was the first in a Beginning in 1959 with the 33-acre management responsibilities are de- series of urban revitalization propos- Charles Center downtown de- fined. The degree of autonomy als that have been implemented by velopment project, the City of Bal- granted the private corporation will the City of Baltimore in the past 20 timore began a massive $180 million vary depending on the nature of the years. In all, over $700 million in renewal effort in the heart of the project and state's enabling statutes. public and private investment have city. Charles Center was one of the Frequently, the corporation will as- been committed for one of the most first experiments in mixed-use urban sume all responsibilities that are successful urban renewal efforts in development, bringing together a commonly performed by a local the nation. A broad spectrum of variety of commercial enterprises, community development agency. facilities is represented, including of- office space, entertainment facilities, An example of a non-profit, quasi- fice buildings, shops, restaurants, hotel accommodations. and parking public development corporation is hotels, theatres, apartments, parks, in one planned development pack- Charles Center-Inner Harbor Man- a community college, federal court- age. The project has been the pro- agement in Baltimore. house, nursing center, housing for totype for many similar efforts. the elderly, a convention center, sci- ence museum, and marina. 18 Six years later, the second phase of Inner Harbor Charles Center-Inner Harbor Man- the overall downtown redevelop- agement operates on a contract with ment proposal began in Baltimore ,s Development the City of Baltimore that allows it central waterfront, at the site known As proposals for the Inner Harbor considerable freedom in planning as the Inner Harbor. This portion of surfaced in the 1960s, public offi- and management for development the renewal effort is a multi-stage cials decided to capitalize on the around the Inner Harbor. However, program for revitalization of the en- benefits offered by a private man- the corporation takes all policy di- tire downtown waterfront. The inner agement group as demonstrated rection from and is officially respon- harbor adjoins and will be con- with Charles Center. The Charles sible to the commissioner of the De- nected to Charles Center through a Center Management Office was ex- partment of Housing and Commu- system of pedestrian overpasses. panded to become Charles nity Development. The management Center-Inner Harbor Management, corporation works closely with pub- Several projects have been com- Inc., a private, non-profit lic and private agencies, including pleted, including the World Trade organizaton. Center designed by I.M. Pei, a wa- 7-- terfront promenade, playing fields, a '11 1111111K7 V-1i" park and playground, area, a marina, 71, and a science center designed by Edward Durell Stone. Nearby are three major office buildings and a & variety of other commercial. resi- dential, and industrial land uses. Under construction are an aqu -room Hyatt Re- arium, a 500 gency hotel, an $18 million mar- ketplace of restaurants and shops, the first of 250 townhouses, a 300- T1 room hotel recycled from an old electric generating plant, and hous- ing on two piers. Management History The Charles Center project was originally controlled by the Charles in Center Management Office, an i dependent management group es- tablished in 1959 to oversee con- A struction of the downtown project. The office was run by an influential, fq, retired department store executive on a dollar-a-year personal services contract, with a skeleton administra- tive staff for aid in planning and legal assistance. Much of the plan- ning was accomplished by the man- agement office, subject to approval by the local planning council. -fi.L U Tee A cc U.S.S. Constellation in the background, visitors enjoying one of the Baltimore waterfront's ubiquitous summer festivals. 19 Results 2 By the mid 1980s, the Inner Harbor will be substantially redeveloped, with an exciting mix of commercial, 'evil industrial. residential, and recrea tional uses in a picturesque setting. L Thousands of jobs have been c ated, millions of dollars in tax re revenues generated, and significant % amounts of housing and public ac- 4 cess made available. The quasi- 4 1 public appr oach was used success- fully to stimulate confidence in the value of inner city reinvestment by po it t a the private sector. This, in turn, has promoted private interest in other nearby areas of the central city, such as Federal Hill and Fells Point, now entering the first stages of redevelopment. Contact: Charles Center-Inner Harbor Man- agement, Inc. 2 -1444 World Trade Center Baltimore, Md. (301) 837-0862 References: Briefings on Development-An Ac- tion Guide, P.A.C.E., Inc. Cambridge, Mass. U 4,, Coordinated Urban Economic De- velopment National Council for Urban Economic Development Washington, D.C. 1978 Taking a rest along Baltimore's waterfront park. the city planning department, the One of the most useful functions of Offstreet Parking Commission, the the corporation is selecting develop- Department of Transit and Traffic, ers and facilitating the operation of the Baltimore Economic Develop- public and private construction in ment Corporation, and other com- the Inner Harbor. As a private in- munity groups. termediary group, the corporation acts as a liaison between city officials and private contractors to expedite construction and keep projects on schedule. In addition, the chairman of the corporation is a prominent leader in the business community. This has resulted in a high degree of cooperation with local financial in- stitutions and other private interests. 20 Joint Public-Private Development Venture Case Study In many cases, neither local gov- ernments nor the private sector acting independently, will have suf- Freemason Harbour: Norfolk, Virginia ficient financial resources to turn a proposed development into a com- pleted project A joint public-private venture is an alternative that can be used. C@ Public and private groups work as 84 120 325 partners, under a contractual agreement, to contribute different E__) portions of a proposed develop- ment. Freemason Harbour in Nor- folk, Va., is a prime example of how X the public and private sectors can mutu- 115 work together to accomplish Tazewell St. ally advantageous social and eco- nomic goals. 22 & "A MOO v, C 7 j05 & Map showing the Harbour Square redevelopment area in Norfolk. Shaded areas are the streets and sidewalks to be improved during the first phase of renewal. Numbers refer to parking spaces. Structures are dark blue. Public access is provided around the project's waterfront edge. Norfolk's urban waterfront revitali- Freemason Harbour zation efforts have centered around Associates Freemason Harbour, a multiple-use The Freemason Harbour project waterfront project that is a joint began in 1973, when the Norfolk venture developed by the Norfolk Redevelopment and Housing Au- Redevelopment and Housing Au- thority (NRHA) announced plans for thority, the Oliver T. Carr Co., and a neighborhood development pro- Chessie Resources, Inc. gram that included portions of the The 25-acre downtown waterfront central city waterfront. At that time, site has been abandoned since the representatives from Chessie Re- late 1960s. It is bound on the north sources. a subsidiary of the Chessie by the West Freemason Street His- railroad, expressed interest in rede- toric District and on the east by the veloping its waterfront properties downtown Granby Mall, a commer- that formed a large portion of the cial revitalization project. The site area under consideration. includes eight buildings originally used for mercantile warehousing, three piers, and a large molasses storage tank. r @325 21 -4 r `77 i'l F. V11 4@ _NW Aerial view of Norfolk's central waterfront with the redevelopment project area outlined in blue. 00@ Originally, Chessie wanted to de- velop the site on its own, but rea ize h d that the massive costs in volved in providing the necessary public facilities, principally parking, street improvements, and bulk- heading, made it advantageous to el work with NRHA. The authority, on Ic me other hand, at first wanted to S purchase the property from the rail- road for its own development. but Z V 01A iaS also realized that the combined cost freen of land construction made this goal arbou unreachable. The parties agreed that E a Wderfrorit community a combined effort represented a better course of action. The authority and the railroad de- '110 cided to proceed as a joint venture, and divided the cost of a preliminary The first townhouses, part of the plans to transform aportion of Norfolk's underused waterfront. planning study with 65 percent borne by the authority. In August 1975, Ar- thur Cotton Moore Associates com- pleted the initial plan for the site, 22 which involved an elaborate eight- A synopsis of the most important Results phase proposal. Local financial inter- aspects of phase two of the agree- As of December 1979, phase one of ests expressed concern over several ment follows. The complete agree- the master plan was completed. elements of the plan, and there was ment is included as Appendix E. Twenty townhouses ranging in price disagreement over the accuracy of the e Norfolk Redevelopment and from $82,000 to $130,000 are oc- market analysis. Housing Authority will provide street cupied and the supporting site im- Oliver T. Carr Co., a large Wash- improvements, utility relocation and provements completed. Progress on ington, D.C., development firm, installation, landscaping, bulkhead- phase two has begun with bulkhead contracted in 1975 to conduct f6r- ing and related marine work, and improvements to one pier, as well as ther marketing studies. Following park and beautification work. street and utility improvements. Re- the collaboration of Carr and the 0 Freemason Harbour Associates habilitation of the warehouses into project coordinator, Barton Meyers agreed to construct and/or rehabili- condominiums and commercial Associates, thepublic and private tate a 195,113-square-foot resi- space is slated for early 1980. aspects of the plan were redefined. dential condominum project, con- In April 1979, the Norfolk Rede- A new land use concept was de- sisting of 7,800 square feet of acces- velopment and Housing Authority veloped without the originallypro- sory retail space and 94 residential received a $1.06 million Urban De- posed large marina, with less hous- units. Total cost is estimated at $6.9 velopment Action Grant from the ing, commercial space, and parking, million. Department of Housing and Urban and with greater public access to the 0 NRHA will construct an enclosed, Development to provide street im- waterfront. 104-space parking garage at an es- provements, landscaping, detailed In 1976, the city, Carr, and Chessie timated cost of $772,500. Owner- engineering work, and utility instal- signed an agreement forming ship of the garage will be retained lation. Freemason Harbour Associates to by NRHA, but spaces will be leased Contact: implement the new proposal, the to owners of the condominium units. Norfolk Redevelopment and Hous- Freemason Harbour/Harbour 0 NRHA retains a 60-year renewa- ing Authority Square master development plan. In ble ground lease for site improve- Box 968 a separate, more specific agreement ments on the developed parcels and Norfolk, Va. 23501 with NRHA, Freemason Harbour will collect a monthly payment from (804) 623-1111 Associates agreed to finance its por- each of the condominium owners. tion of the project from private Reference: sources; the redevelopment author- Financing Freemason Harbour/Harbour ity uses a variety of sources includ- The total cost of the project is esti- Square Master Development Plan, ing Community Development Block mated to be $120 million of which Norfolk Redevelopment and Hous- Grant money, other federal funds $93 million will come from private ing Authority, Oliver T. Carr Co. from the Department of Housing sources and $27 million is public. and Barton Meyers Associates. and Urban Development's Urban Private costs are for 842 con- Development Action Grant Pro- dominiums and apartments and gram, and revenue bonds. The au- 193,060 square feet of commercial thority agreed to purchase 19 acres space. The estimated total public of land owned by Chessie Re- cost includes $5.5 million in streets @sources, combine it with its own six and utilities, $3.7 million in land ac- acres, and lease it back to Freema- quisition, $9.5 million in parking son Harbour Associates. This ar- facilities, $5.1 million in marine rangement requires the private de- work. and $3.2 million in various velopers to obtain financing only for related activities such as planning, construction of the buildings on the demolition, dredging, relocation, site. The city benefits because it and landscaping. collects rent directly from the leases. Previously, the owners paid prop- erty taxes that went to the state. 23 Port Authorities The importance of port authorities in Ports traditionally have been limited Port Authorities are an established waterfront redevelopment has in- to heavy industrial land uses, such management structure common in creased in recent years, because as cargo handling and manufactur- commercial harbors throughout the they have expanded their jurisdic- ing, while retail, commercial and nation. In most cases, these are tions to include activities outside the recreational uses, and general public special-purpose public agencies spe- traditional water-borne transporta- access traditionally have been cifically created to manage local port tion emphasis, including airports, viewed as inappropriate in port operations. Port authorities normally bridges and office buildings. These areas. Until recently, there has been have broad legal powers, including investments often endow a port au- little thought given to the potential bonding authority and eminent do- thority with major financial re- for varied uses of the abandoned or main, and often function as entities sources. Many ports now control underutilized land owned by a port separate from local government. vast acreages along coastal and authority. They are created either by state riverine waterfronts. The combination However, port authorities in Balti- legislation as state-level departments of broad legal authority, fiscal more or as independent special authorites. strength, and substantial political in- , New York-New Jersey, Seat- fluence gives port authorities signifi- tle, Oakland, and Boston are taking A port authority serves as an overall cant resources for urban waterfront steps to expand their focus to in- management structure, with respon- redevelopment. clude some multiple-use elements. sibility for publicly-owned port ter- An ambitious example of a mixed- minals, as well as regulatory control use waterfront redevelopment pro- over privately-owned operations. In posed by a port authority is at the addition, a port will have land use Commonwealth Pier Five/Boston planning authority for properties Fish Pier in Boston Harbor. within its jurisdiction. '4@ "WM0WWft MW ;P1_ J'; Looking out at the Newport, R.I., waterfront. 24 6 low- awmW Case Study Massachusetts Port Authority: Commonwealth Pier Five/Boston Fish Pier The Massachusetts Port Authority In the fall of 1978, Massport em- In conjunction with the Fish Pier op- (Massport) is an independent barked on an ambitious campaign to eration, Massport has a proposal for special-purpose governmental unit provide some types of mixed-use the redevelopment of the adjacent established by the Commonwealth development that would be different Commonwealth Pier Five. The huge of Massachusetts in 1956. The port from the previous retail/residential 750, 000-square -foot pier presents a authority has management control projects on two deteriorating piers. tremendous challenge to the port. over cargo transfer throughout Massport secured a $6.5 million The proposal includes substantial Boston Harbor. Massport also man- grant from the Department of restoration and rehabilitation of the ages Logan International Airport, Commerce's Economic Develop- covered pier. Improvements are operates several bridges, and is a ment Administration, which will be planned for the wooden pilings that major landowner in the area. The augmented by $2.5 million from the support the pier, as well as the pier state enabling charter granted port, for the renovation of the itself. This will provide substantial Massport broad government powers, Boston Fish Pier. The goal is to im- public access. Renovation work will including bonding authority, land- prove the commercial fleet and en- also occur at the pier entrance, use controls, and power to establish hance local economic conditions. known as the Head House, which is user charges, such as landing fees, The project is under construction, listed on the National Register of docking fees, and tolls. and when completed will include a Historic Places, and will be con- renovated fresh fish processing pier, verted to a visitors' center. The port authority charter authorizes office space, and leased retail space Massport to engage in mixed-use for lobster dealers and other mer- development. Currently, Massport chants. has two major proposals in the I South Boston harbor area. ,@J @N- U Development Proposals Urban waterfront redevelopment al- ready has occurred in Boston Har- bor, including the nearby Fanueil Hall/Quincy Market complex and the Waterfront Park. The emphasis there and in the adjacent neighbor- hood is on commercial and resi- dential use. The more industrialized areas of the waterfront have, until 71D recently, been overlooked. The Quincy Market in Boston-a successful retail enterprise on the waterfront that many cities seek to emulate. 25 Plans include docking facilities for charter fishing boats, water taxi service, and excursion boats to nearby ports. Plans for the interior IU . . . . . . . . . . call for a center where various -7; high-technology industries (elec- tronics, data processing, transporta- tion, and navigational instruments, for example) would operate a year- __T'4R round trade mart for sales, service, Qv h and information exchange. Other uses include restaurants and retail commercial space, as well as 1400 parking spaces on the pier's lower level. Total estimated cost is $50 million. The significance of this project is that the development is being done .1 by a state port authority using its own funds to encourage other public and private investment capital. Massport hopes to prove that obso- lete port facilities can be rejuvenated and integrated into the general community as publicly-used com- mercial and recreational areas. ontact: 4W Massachusetts Port Authority Qunicy Market in the right foreground,.Boston's harbor 99 High Street stretches out in the background. Pier Five and the Boston, Mass. 02110 Boston Fish Pier are located in the area to the right (617) 482-2930 of the photograph. References: Commonwealth Pier Five Study Massport, 1979. Hershman, Marc, et al. Under New Management-Port Growth and Emerging Coastal Management Pro- grams. Washington Sea Grant Pub- lication, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. 1979 -'a 26 Private (Profit-making) The procedure for establishing such The use of private development Development Corporation a corporation will vary somewhat corporations in the planning and from community to community, de- implementation of large-scale de- Special private development corpo- pending on existing statutes, but it is velopments can be controversial, rations have been used in many likely that legal authority must be because some interests may feel that cities to expedite urban redevelop- granted to the local government this allows too much control by pri- ment projects. The intent is to pro- through special enabling legislation. vate interests in projects that affect vide developers with the legal Missouri, for example, used its the whole community. Such difficul- means of implementing all phases of Urban Corporation Law (Chapter ties can be overcome by making revitalization proposals by granting 353 Missouri Code) at Crown Cen- these private ventures part of a for- them powers normally assumed by ter in Kansas City and various loca- mal public review process, where local governments. Typically, private tions in St. Louis to encourage pri- opinion can be solicited from a corporations of this sort control plan vate investment in urban rede- broad range of interests. preparation, land acquisition (in- velopment. Once the legal basis is cluding acquisition by eminent do- achieved, a special development There are several private develop- main in some cases), clearance, and corporation can be formed between ment corporations currently en- site improvement. All actions are gaged in urban waterfront rede- subject to supervision and approval private developers and financial velopment. These include: by the local government. interests as a profit-making entity. The area or district is then defined,' 0 Retail commercial development in The assumption is that a private and the private development corpo- Baltimore's Inner Harbor-Rouse group, operating outside the tradi- ration can begin action as a rede- Co., Columbia, Md. tional urban renewal process, may velopment agency. Planning studies o Housing projects at Freemason be able to manage a redevelopment are done, public opinion is solicited, Harbour in Norfolk, Va. - 0. T. project more smoothly, and will designs finished, and financing ac- Carr Co., Washington, D.C. have greater flexibility in acquiring quired. The final proposal is then 0 Crown Center, Kansas City, the necessary capital than would a reviewed by government agencies Mo. -Crown Center Redevelop- public development agency. and public hearings are held. ment Corporation, Kansas City. 0 Laclede's Landing, St. Louis, Mo.-Laclede's Land Rede- velopment Corporation, St. Louis. @ A.T* mmA NOAA 27 Chapter III Zoning and Districting AA ,;*arm= 28 The traditional use of waterfronts Zoning Chicago, Hoboken, N.J., Portland, has been for shipping, manufactur- Waterfront Zones Me., and Plymouth, Mass., all have ing, and associated land-based A city agency or developer with a taken one or more of these ap- transportation and storage facilities. mixed-use waterfront project in proaches to waterfront redevelop- Many older waterfronts are no mind is often deterred by an obso- ment. longer used as intensively for such lete or restrictive zoning code. Some activities. Communities are realizing cities are taking measures to change Chicago Lakefront Plan the potential of the vacant lots, this pattern and are zoning their The first city to recognize the wa- abandoned buildings, and de- waterfronts as unique areas able to terfront as a unique and special teriorating piers for a variety of uses, accommodate a variety of creative place was Chicago. In 1901, Daniel including different types of man- and compatible uses. Burnham, in his Plan for Chicago, ufacturing, retail and commercial placed waterfront enhancement operations, marinas, museums, There are several approaches to foremost in the planning effort. parks, and promenades. The prob- recognizing the waterfront as a Today, 24 miles of the city's W-mile lem comes in attempting to fit to- unique area of the city that requires shoreline is publicly owned. day's multiple use developments special treatment: into yesterday's buildings, codes, The most recent Lakefront Plan, and zoning categories. 0 designating a special waterfront adopted in 1974, divides the planning area and recognizing it as shoreline into several general zones. A number of coastal and riverine such in the city or town master plan, A "water zone" extends from the communities are coming to grips 0 adopting a waterfront zone as part shoreline to approximately the 25- with this problem by using special of the existing zoning ordinance, foot depth line in Lake Michigan; purpose zones and districts. These 0 developing criteria and perform- here is where many improvements alternative tools provide local gov- ance standards that pertain to wa- are allowed. The "park zone" varies ernments with the legal authority for from a mile wide to a very narrow innovative land use controls. Such terfronts. area and consists of the individual authority can encourage waterfront It makes a substantive difference to parks"that comprise the present and redevelopment, when simple re- include the waterfront area in an future public park area within the zoning of waterfront parcels is not adopted master plan, because it city limits. The "community zone" is enough to accommodate special re- comprise provides legal standing as part of a d of the private and public quirements of waterfront activities, standard zoning ordinance. lands adjacent to the lake, most of such as mixed-use commercial de- which are in residental use. Four- velopments, historic preservation, Calling attention to the waterfront teen basic policies are set forth, and recreation. In addition, conven- through special area plans is an im- most of which center around and tional zoning often fails to provide portant first step. Even without a reinforce the park-like, aesthetic, the essential flexibility required to site-specific zoning designation, the and recreational aspects of the lake- respond to the changing market goals and objectives articulated in a front: conditions that occur as areas be- special area plan can be the basis for come redeveloped. community action. This part of the guide describes sev- -------- V-177 Mw, eral innovative districting and zoning techniques. The purpose is to show z 5 how communities can employ alter- native approaches to land-use plan- ning. The examples listed here do 01, not represent all techniques, but provide an overview of what has been done in several waterfront communities. Chicago's lakefront. 29 0 Complete the publicly owned and locally-controlled park system along -Eo the entire Chicago lakefront. 0 Maintain and enhance the pre- dominantly landscaped, spacious, and continuous character of the Z lakeshore parks. 0 Continue to improve the water quality and ecological balance of Lake Michigan. tar T79 Preserve the cultural, historical, jolt @J! :nd recreational heritage of the OF lakeshore parks. ! ; 07, Maintain and improve the, formal all character and open water vista of Grant Park with no new above 7, 9 round structures permitted. r "T ft IN s@ Increase the diversity of recrea- 4L tional opportunities while em- phasizing lake-oriented leisure time activities. 0 Protect and develop natural lakeshore park and water areas for wildlife habitation. � Increase personal safety. 4, � Design all take edge and lake con- struction to prevent erosion. 0 Ensure a harmonious relationship between the lakeshore parks and the community edge, but in no instance will further private development be permitted east of Lake Shore Drive. 0 Improve access to the lakeshore parks and reduce through -vehicular "All traffic on secondary park roads. Strengthen the parkway charac- teristics of Lake Shore Drive and The Statue of Liberty in New York Harbor, as seen from the New Jersey shore. Liberty prohibit any roadway of expressway State Park will reclaim some of the abandoned waterfront area for a major new public standards. facility near New York. 0 Ensure that all port, water supply, and public facilities are designed to enhance lakefront character. 0 Coordinate all public and private -t@ development within the water, park, -7, UWA.- and community zones. *These goals are extracted from City Plan- ning Commission, The Lakefront Plan, 1974. The Liberty Harbor area near Jersey City, Abandoned waterfront at Jersey City, N.J. N.J., with the famed statute at center, top. 30 Hoboken, New Jersey 0 The waterfront should be beauti- Hoboken, with assistance from the ful. When this happens the full po- Department of Housing and Urban tential of the waterfront will be Development, spent two years realized. Attractive use of land in- studying and planning for its wa- creases the values of surrounding terfront. The resulting report rec- properties and improves the repUta- ommended that an Urban Wa- tion of the city as a whole. The wa- terfront Planning Control System be terfront should be viewed as one of established and that the waterfront the finest amenities in a municipal- be divided into zones similar to ity. those used in Chicago: 9 Housing should not be placed close to the water. A Water Zone-Extending from the 0 Maintenance is one of the most shoreline property to the pier head line, a possible area for future filling important features in any waterfront in. Controls over this area would plan. Maintenance methods should protect other water and land uses. be required as part of a facility prior W-4 A Park/ Commercial/Research to approval. Zone-This zone would allow for Contact: uses compatible with a park setting Fred Bado while encouraging multiple uses of Community Development Agency the land. Access for the public to the 84 Washington Street river's edge would be a basic re- Hoboken, N.J. 07030 quirement in this zone. A Community Zone-This area Portland, Maine should include all of the sections not In 1975, Portland, with assistance mentioned in the Park and Water from a National Endowment for the Zones. It would control develop- Arts grant, undertook a waterfront ment that could degrade the wa- improvement program. Along with terfront area. proposals for transportation and publicly-funded improvements such The report recommended the foi- as fish processing facilities, the city's ]owing: planning department recommended 0 Special attention should be given the creation of a special waterfront to underused and unsightly areas of zone designed for greater flexibility the waterfront. of uses than is currently allowed. The special zone could include a va- 0 Consi ration should be given to riety of specified uses such as ship- filling certain portions of the wa- yards, restaurants, seafood plants, tertront in order to create additional and museums. space. *Waterfront recreational facilities Contact: Brian Nickerson should be added wherever possible. Planning Department 0 Where feasible, community Portland, Me.04103 A @J ,i !, - `VY facilities should be placed on the CE (207) 775-5451 waterfront; it is a natural congregat- ing spot. .. .. . ................... .. . . 0 Planning review and permits must make certain that private facilities provide for some areas of public ac- cess. Along the Hudson River near Edgewater, N.J. 31 Plymouth, Massachusetts Contact: Plymouth enacted a waterfront City of Plymouth zoning bylaw in 1973, which creates Planning Department Case Study a waterfront district as part of the 11 Lincoln Street project design review procedure. Plymouth, Mass. 02360 Maumee Rivei*ont (See appendix F for the entire ordi- (617) 747-1620 nance.) The Maumee Riverfront Overlay The waterfront district is design d to Overlay Zoning District (MR-O) was incorporated encourage the development of ma- The use of "overlay ... .. floating," or into the Toledo Municipal Code in rine, historic, and tourist uses along interim zones sidesteps the static 1979 (see appendix G). In general, Plymouth's central waterfront. The nature of traditional zoning fixed to the special zoning classification will zoning bylaw established three particular tracts of land. Instead, be used to provide public amenities categories: allowed waterfront land overlay zones "float" over the and facilitate development of a wide community and are placed in spe- variety of compatible land uses uses; special permit uses, which ci must meet specified environmental 'fic locations when and where they along the riverfront. Specifically, the design conditions and review proce- are deemed most appropriate by the ordinance calls for increased public dures; and prohibited uses. local government. An overlay zone access to the water, improved scenic may contain regulatory provisions and aesthetic controls, improved The intent of the special permit uses concerning use, height, and bulk as transportation, and better coordina- is to require for certain types of de- in a standard zoning ordinance, or it tion of recreational, commercial, velopment the coordination of site may have unique features that are and industrial land uses. In addition, plans, pedestrian circulation, and incorporated into the language of several locations are identified as compatibility with the adjacent his- the ordinance for a specific purpose, prime residential, park, and water- toric area. Allowed waterfront land such as an industrial park or oriented recreation sites. These uses include boat sales, service, mixed-use commercial develop- areas are to have a "superior level rentals, ramps and docks; commer- ment. of public access, convenience, cial sightseeing or ferrying; marine Overlay zones can also be used as a comfort, and amenity." railways, repair yards, storage yards, type of interim development control. Background marine supply outlets; and commer- This technique is often applied by cial fishing and seafood wholesale or After the completion of the Great retail outlets and related outlets. local governments in undeveloped Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway System Special permit uses include restau- areas of a community that are re- in 1959, ports on the Great Lakes, rants, recreation, motel, specialty ceiving intense pressure for new such as Toledo, came to play a shopping, and similar compatible construction, or where redevelop- major role in the nation's wa- facilities that complement and ment is already occuring at a rapid terborne transportation system. strengthen the function of the wa- rate. In these cases, a temporary There was a substantial increase in terfront area, and multi-family and zoning jurisdiction is established that the number and size of vessels call- single-family attached dwellings. freezes existing land uses and pro- ing on the ports, and demands in- hibits further development until a creased on waterfront sites for con- Special permit uses are subject to new strategy or revised zoning ordi- tainer facilities, warehouses, proc- review by the board of appeals, the nance can be implemented. The essing plants, and transportation planning board, and the design re- overlay zone allows the local com- links. view board. The administration of munity additional time to assess the the environmental design conditions implications of newly proposed de- In Toledo, this expansion began to may involve, in addition to these velopments. cause conflicts with other waterfront three boards, the building inspector, Unless created and implemented activities, such as pleasure boating conservation commission, town en- and other types of recreation. It also gineer, public safety commission, properly and cautiously, overlay began to cause adverse impacts board of water commissioners, and zoning ordinances are in danger of from dredging and filling for harbor board of sewer commissioners. De- being struck down as being beyond improvements. Through the 1960s tailed site plans, and plans showing the legal authority of local govern- and early '70s, dredging, loss of the relationship to adjacent prop- ments, depending on state enabling wildlife habitat, and lack of public erties, must be submitted for review. laws. An overlay zone has been suc- access to the waterfront became im- General and, specific conditions and cessfully implemented in Toledo, portant issues in the community. standards upon which plans will be Ohio. reviewed are defined in the zoning bylaw. M Overlay District Toledo, Ohio In 1975, citizens and planners took The current overall planning effort Results the first steps toward creating a bet- in Toledo is to "provide a detailed During 1978, the special overlay ter balance among land uses along analysis of the urban waterfront zone was successful in increasing Toledo's waterfront. A study pre- coastal area in terms of suitability public control over much of the de- pared by the city's Department of and capability for various types of velopment along the riverfront. The Natural Resources, "Toledo Looks land uses and activities." Emphasis existence of the overlay zone, and to the River," outlined an ambitious will be on determining the potential the associated site plan review pro- program for riverfront parks and as- for water-oriented commercial, in- cedure, gave local officials a tool sociated mixed-use development. dustrial, residential, and recreational that has been used to encourage de- Since then, the study has come to development. sign quality and increase the amount be viewed as somewhat unrealistic, of public access included in private but its broad goal of a balanced The role of the special interim zone developments. multiple-use waterfront has pubjic in this process is two-fold. First, it support. acts as a measure that protects the Contact: existing properties within the dis- Toledo/Lucas County Planning Impetus for the overlay zoning trict's boundaries from conversion to Commission began in 1977 when two major de- land uses that are inconsistent with 415 North St. Clair Street velopments were proposed for the the city's goals for the waterfront Toledo, Ohio 43604 riverfront area that dramatized To- district. Second, the ordinance pro- (419) 247-6287 ledo's problems of conflicting wa- vides a mechanism by which specific terfront land uses. The first called for land use regulations and provisions References: construction of a bulk cargo facility can be included in the redevelop- Toledo Looks to the River, City of near an established residential ment of the Maumee riverfront. Toledo, Department of Natural Re- neighborhood on the river. The sec- sources, 1975. ond was a master plan for revitaliza- The shared (multiple-use) portions "Land Use Planning for the Toledo tion of the central business district of the district encourage coordina- that included substantial new public tion of all types of land uses. De- Harbor Area," Barry F. Hersh and open space along the riverfront. velopments in the Maumee River David Hanselman, Toledo/Lucas These developments vividly illus- Overlay District are to be designed County Planning Commission, trated the problem of land use con- with an "open character" allowing 1978. flicts, and the increased public sup- views to the riverfront and providing port for additional planning and land pedestrian circulation. use control in the area. A permanent management plan will As a result, the Toledo-Lucas be created for the area, so that deci- County planning commission passed sions about land use patterns, own- the Maumee Riverfront Overlay ership, public access, and multiple District Ordinance. This zoning use in the district will be based on a measure was designed to increase publicly-adopted plan. public control over land use deci- sions within the district until a re- vised zoning ordinance could be de- veloped and basic decisions made about what the community wanted to see along the river. 33 Incentive Zoning Incentive zoning has been widely Incentive zoning is a method fre- used in cities throughout the nation. KA quently used to overcome the strict San Francisco offers a 20 percent Case Study site regulations and separation of density increase in exchange for di- land uses characteristic of conven- rect access to a transit platform. New SMem, tional zoning. Its primary purpose is York City offers bonuses for a van- to prevent zoning from stifling in- ety of public amenities, including Massachusefts novative land uses and creative provision for a legitimate theatre as Salem's urban waterfront program urban design. Zoning incentives may part of a new office building in the developed from the city's long in- be applied in a variety of ways, but Broadway Special District. Ar- volvement in urban revitalization. in nearly all cases they are used as a lington, Va., and Prince Georges means of securing public benefits in County, Md., have used incentive Presently, there are two main wa- exchange for some sort of design zoning for many years to control de- terfront revitalization projects. The concession given to a developer. velopment. first is Pickering Wharf, a 4.7-acre, mixed-use development incor- The most common type of incentive The use of incentive zoning in- porating residential, commercial, is known as "bonus zoning." In this creases flexibility, but only to the and recreational facilities with public procedure, additional densities or degree stipulated in the zoning code. access to the waterfront. Second is increased floor areas, beyond those The amount of private incentives Nathaniel Bowditch Park, a proposal specified in the local zoning ordi- and public benefits available for that will link six community eco- nance, are given in exchange for bargaining must be clearly estab- nomic development projects with a some type of public benefit, such as lished in the local zoning ordinance ' mixed-use recreational, commercial, dedication of open space or provi- providing a fixed amount of poten- and educational facility. These proj- sion for public access. tial trade-off. Table 1 lists examples ects, combined with the existing of public benefits and private incen- Salem National Maritime Historic tives that often are used as trade- Site, comprise about six percent of offs in incentive zoning. Salem's urban waterfront, and pro- vide the public with major new vantage points for enjoying Salem's harbor. Table I Pickering Wharf Types of Benefits and Incentives Pickering Wharf is directly adjacent Public Benefits Incentives to the National Maritime Historic Site being developed by the De- partment of the Interior. The site � Parkland 0 Increased floor area ratio (of consisted of eleven abandoned oil � Preservation of building capacity to lot size) storage tanks, a one-story block historic structures 0 Increased residential storage building in poor condition, � Waterfront access units per acre and 1,000 feet of deteriorating 0 Street improvements bulkhead. The wharf had been used � Open space/special for administrative purposes since landscaping 0 Unit size increases/ 1974, when an oil distribution cen- Fees in lieu of dedication additional use types ter was abandoned. References: The Pickering Wharf redevelopment Innovative Zoning: A Local Official's Guidebook, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban and planning process began in Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. Washington, D.C. 1977. 1974, when the Pickering Oil and Meshenberg, Michael J.. "The Administration of Flexible Zoning Techniques," American Heating Company petitioned the Society of Planning Officials. 1976. city to construct a new oil distribu- tion facility one-half mile from the present site. The city, through the city solicitor and the planning de- partment, began negotiations with the oil company to utilize its old site for a mixed-use redevelopment. Be- cause the oil company needed a city 34 % 7X 3 41 in Al emit I rr@ 77, qw -7 Pickering Wharf, a redeveloped section of the Salem, Mass., waterfront. permit to move its storage facilities the city was able to negotiate a trade-off, granting a change in zon- ing for an option on the waterfront site. An agreement was reached between the city and Pickering Oil in which ALM,. ......... .. the city was given an option to buy Mai 1 .10- the old property and resell it to a 10 private developer. The sale price of the land was set at one-half the ap- praised value with the oil company T1,71 paying for the appraisal. The Pick- U ering Oil Company also donated $25,000 for the appraisal, a soil test, and a development prospectus out- lining four alternatives for potential P@ developers. The city's initial intent was to develop the site as a hotel Salem, Mass., officials hope to be able to redevelop this section mixed-use complex, but market of waterfront, combining continued industrial use with a park analysis suggested this approach and public walkways. was questionable. 35 Water or Harbor Area Management Zones Water use management has not re- ceived from any level of government On May 29, 1976 the city entered The site consists of a 45-slip marina, the kind of study and regulation that into an agreement with a develop- 54 condominiums ranging in price has been bestowed on land, despite ment group consisting of Heritage from $60,000 to $125,000, four the widespread and often conflicting Trust, the Salem Five Cent Savings restaurants, 2,000 square feet of of- uses taking place. Just as on land, Bank, and local enterprises to de- fice space, and 70,000 square feet commercial, industrial, recreational, velop the site as a multi-use com- of commercial space. The project is transportation, and occasionally mercial zone. Construction began expected to cost $6 million when even residential uses vie for limited early in 1977 and by the end of completed. One major feature of the space in harbors. A mix of local, 1979, 90 percent of the project had project is the provision of over state, and federal controls are exer- been completed. 1,000 feet of public access along the cised, sometimes with conflicting water's edge, an extensive addition objectives. The incentives that the city used in to the city's shoreside accessibility. its negotiations with the oil company A village atmosphere has been Navigational requirements, water and the private developers included: created by requiring landscaped quality regulations pertaining to 1. Pickering Oil Company received a walkways, low profile buildings near boats, and speed limitations are re-zoning of its new facility in ex- the water's edge, and design scale typical of the current methods of change for an option from the city to that is compatible with the sur- control. These powers usually apply purchase the property at a favorable rounding neighborhood. statewide and therefore do not focus on the particular problems and po- rate and turn around and sell it to a Contact: tential of a specific harbor setting. private developer, Salem Planning Department 2. The city required that the de- One Salem Green Comprehensive management sys- veloper include certain provisions in Salem, Massachusetts 01970 tems for water areas are nonexist- the development, such as public ac- (617) 744-4580 ent, although interest is being gen- cess to the waterfront for the entire erated in the topic. Some of the al- site, and architectural and street de- References: ternatives f6r managing the surface sign requirements that would blend History of Pickering Wharf water zones include: into the maritime character of the Salem Planning Department, 1976 Fixed-area zoning restricts uses area. Nathanial Bowditch Park Plan to specified areas. Some examples In addition, density zoning was pro- Salem Planning Department, 1976 include restricting swimming to an vided so the developer could create area within 200 feet of the shore a village atmosphere instead of the (boats would be prohibited from this traditional zoning approach in this In the background at Salem, Mass., historic area except for slow ingress and area of the city. houses overlook the renewed waterfront. A egress) and restricting water skiing view of the Pickering Wharf area of shops and restaurants. or surfing to specified areas. Buoys can also be used to mark swimming areas, surfing areas, traffic lanes, pier fishing areas, or water skiing courses. Areas may be designated by general description, by maps, by signs, or by buoys. Time-area zoning is a kind of fixed area zoning where particular uses are prohibited in certain areas at specific times. For example, to avoid conflicts with fishing, water skiing or surfing might be prohibited in early morning and late evening hours. Qt Separation-distance zoning estab- lishes a buffer area between uses similar to that now in place in mer- chant shipping lanes. Such zoning could, for example, separate moving boats from anchored or trolling fishing boats to avoid interference or wake impact. 36 Disbicting Special Development The focus in federally funded urban Special Districts Districts redevelopment has shifted from Special districts are sub-units of local In recent years, the concept of spe- wholesale bulldozing to spot clear- government that are created to pro- cial districting has been expanded to ance and restoration. Special dis- vide goods or services to a particular address specific goals of local gov- tricts, however, remain a viable con- area within a community. They are ernments: improving social and cept, and variations of this proce- usually formed when the needs of economic conditions, preserving the dure have been implemented by an area cannot be met sufficiently character of historic areas, or im- local communities throughout the by the standard type of municipal proving the business climate for new nation. government. Special districts have private investment. Special de- In most cases, economic rede- specific, geographically defined velopment districts operate much boundaries, and the powers given to like special service districts in that velopment districts are established the appointed or elected officials of they have clearly delineated bound- by a local ordinance on the basis of the district apply only within those aries and may retain governmental recommendations from the city boundaries. Prior to implementa- powers. These districts are tied more planning office, a local planning tion, state enabling legislation is directly to community redevelop- commission, or a special study usually required to grant local gov- ment issues, however, and could group. Specific boundaries for the ernments the power to create special apply in a variety of ways to urban district are delineated, and an over- districts. This establishes a legal waterfront revitalization. all development program is created. basis for action by the municipality. This may include a variety of public In addition to having a broader pur- and private projects for commercial, There are many types of special dis- pose, special development districts residential, industrial, and recrea- tricts. Some are formed to provide differ from service districts in that tional development. essential utilities, such as water and they often have more extensive electricity, others to protect the pub- governmental powers, such as erni- The primary advantage of economic lic interest in land allocation deci- nent domain, urban renewal au- redevelopment districts is that they sions and the design of the urban thority, taxation powers, and con- allow local governments to obtain landscapes. In general, special dis- trols over planning, management, more extensive powers over land tricts can be divided into two and urban design. use in the district, including con- categories: special service districts demnation, special zoning, and de- and special development districts. Three major types of special de- sign standards. In addition, the spe- velopment districts are economic re- cial district creates a planning Special Service Districts development, historic preservation, mechanism that can be integrated For many years, local governments and mixed-use. more easily with other tools and techniques of redevelopment, such used this tool to provide a variety of Economic Redevelopment as tax deferrals, tax increment public services, including Water, Districts financing, and less-than-fee-simple sewer, fire protection, hospitals, and This technique involves the creation land acquisition. sanitation. These districts are iden- of special districts in deteriorated tified by distinct boundaries and areas of local communities for the The Special South Street Seaport have varying levels of political au- specific purpose of economic rede- District along New York City's tonomy. Some districts have broad velopment. The concept originated Lower Manhattan waterfront pro- powers within their jurisdictions, in- during the "urban renewal" era of vides an example of a special district cluding the authority to establish the 1950s and '60s when "model that has economic redevelopment of user rates, issue bonds, and levy cities" programs and housing an urban waterfront as one of its taxes. Others may serve only to pro- oriented urban renewal districts chief goals. vide a service to a specific area, such were present in nearly every major as a fire district. city in the United States. Under Service districts have had a pro- these programs, certain areas within nounced influence on waterfront a municipality were designated as projects, especially in cases where urban renewal districts. The land in the provision of public utilities pre- these districts was then condemned, sents an unusual problem for de- cleared, and new buildings were velopers, either for financial or constructed under an assortment of physical reasons. federal grant and loan programs. 37 KA Case Study Special Soudi Street Seaport District: New York City South Street Seaport is a mixed-use Gradually, new technologies de- commercial/historical area located veloped that transferred shipping to immediately south of the Brooklyn other waterways, such as the Hud- Bridge along Manhattan's East River son River, and allowed construction I waterfront. In December 1973, the of the giant office buildings which special district boundaries were es- now characterize Lower Manhat- tablished from Pier 15 northeast to tan's skyline. The East River docks Peck Slip, and inland to Water and fell into a slow decline, and with the Pearl Streets. The district was de- advent of containerization in the signed to implement the Brooklyn 1950s, pier activity virtually came to Bridge Southeast Urban Renewal a standstill in Lower Manhattan. Plan, part of a broader proposal of Lower Manhattan waterfront de- In the early 1960s, a private group velopment. This plan covers a large formed that was interested in pres- - Ow-, portion of the riverfront from Bat- ervation of several historic structures JP= tery Park at the tip of Manhattan located near Pier 16 at the foot of north to the Manhattan Bridge, a'nd Fulton Street. By 1967, the group includes a variety of measures for was successful in creating the South residential, commercial, and recrea- Street Seaport Museum, a private, tional development. non-profit corporation officially controlled by New York University. South Street Seaport Museum, near Wall The primary purpose of the Special The following year, the area was in- Street in New York City. South Street Seaport District is to cluded in the Brooklyn Bridge encourage the preservation, restora- Southeast Urban Renewal Area, an Economic Development tion, and in certain cases rede- unassisted urban renewal district velopment of properties and build- created by the city. Since that time, Although the district was not created ings in the Brooklyn Bridge South- the Seaport has expanded to a solely for economic development east Urban Renewal Area into a membership of over 10,000 and the purp6ses, improving economic con- South Street Seaport Museum. Such area is listed on the National Regis- ditions, along with historic preserva- a "museum," which is an area of ter of Historic Places. tion and recreational and cultural the city rather than a building-per activities, are high priority goals for se, has special cultural, recreational, Currently, the Special South Street revitalization of the waterfront. and retail activities. District, including the Seaport Some of the specific project goals Museum, is engaged in many ac- are: Background tivities, including historic preserva- tion, recreation, and economic de- e Realization of the Seaport's full The wharfs and piers aroulid South velopment. Since the district is in- economic, cultural, and historical Street Seaport were the focus of cluded as part of an umbrella-like potential to strengthen tourism in New York City's vast shipping in- urban renewal area, it has broad New York City; dustry during the late 19th and authority over land use decisions e Diversification of Lower Manhat- much of the early 20th centuries. made within the district and is eli- tan's narrow economic base; During this time, the city becam .e the gible for a variety of economic as- *Revitalization of the local country's chief cargo transit point, sistance programs. and the entire area became a center neighborhood and support of its of commerce and port-related busi- growth into a viable community; ness activities. e Protection and assurance of the future prosperity of the Fulton Fish Market, and *Preservation and protection of the historic character of the district by generating sufficient revenue to rehabilitate its unique buildings and support its education pro- K grams. 38 fl; AIM ftf ,Vow WIN V, WV IT IIIM@ MW 0VU Ir $0 Now PRINT VW ...aglor 0 MMONOW VI el 'I,, A7 I i7t, A 71, Loot( R J, cc From the Brooklyn Bridge, a look at the South Street Seaport area. A number of projects have been galleries, a book and chart store, a A recent development is the completed at the Seaport that relate restaurant, and other enterprises are reopening of the Fulton Street Ferry. specifically to these goals, and sev- in operation. In addition, consider- The ferry will serve commuters and eral others will soon be finished. able office space has been provided tourists between South Street Sea- Piers 15 and 16 have been refur- to adjacent properties through a port and Fulton Ferry Landing on bished, and five historic vessels are transfer of development rights the Brooklyn side of the East River permanently moored there. Two begun in 1974. at the base of the Brooklyn Bridge. museums are located in the district, the Seaport Museum and the State Millions of dollars in federal, state, Contacts: Maritime Museum in the Scher- and local grants have been spent at South Street Seaport Museum merhorn Row Block. the Seaport, including $8 million 203 Front Street from the city's budget, $5.4 million New York, N.Y. 10038 The Fulton Fish Market, New York's from the Economic Development (212) 766-9020 major fish market, is being improved Administration's Federal Public rather than being relocated. Plans Works Program, $5 million in Urban Director, City of New York Office of call for extensive redesign of the Development Action Grants from Development production system and extensive HUD, and $6.3 million from the 225 Broadway improvements to the structures, state for the Maritime Museum. In New York, N.Y. 10007 piers, and mechanical systems they the future, private investment by the (212) 566-7441 contain. Substantial commercial re- Rouse Company will include more References: development has already taken than 200,000 square feet for various Lower Manhattan Waterfront. place at the market, and several retail and office purposes. The esti- City of New York. Office of Eco- mated cost of this project is about nomic Development, 1975. $60 million. South Street Seaport Redevelop- ment. City of New York. Office of Economic Development. 39 Transfer of Development Rights Manhattan World Trade Center lop, Battery Park Brooki Bridge South St. Seaport El Transfer District Receiving Lot Granting Lot 8Brooklyn Bridge Southeast Urban Renewal Plan Parcel Designation Transfer of Development to the owner. Instead, the land- An alternative to this approach is to Rights owner is able to recoup the eco- allow the development rights from Transfer of development rights can nomic value from the lost develop- each preserved structure to be protect special sites on which de- ment rights by selling them to a transferred to specified properties velopment ill deemed inappropriate landowner in another location, adjacent to the site. This alternative by state and local governments. where the additional development works well when the areas to be Most often it has been used to pre- rights can be *applied without signifi- preserved are scattered and could serve historic buildings, agricultural cant negative impacts. not be zoned easily as a single pres- lands, or open spaces from en- Transfer of development rights can ervation district. It allows greater croaching or undesirable be used in waterfront areas to pre- control over the exact location of the development. transferred development rights, and serve structures of historic signifi- is most useful when a local govern- A transfer system breaks the tradi- cance, protect physical and visual ment wishes to tightly control the tional link between a particular par- access, and provide recreational and placement of additional activities cel of land and its development po- economic opportunities for local citi- and people in the area. tential. This separation allows the zens. The implementation of a development rights to be transferred transfer system requires the clear A transfer ordinance must clearly from the site to another area in the identification of the resource to be state the standards for designating community where development is protected. the preserved land, and define the not objectionable. The actual own- One option is to create dual zones: restrictions to be placed on those ership is not affected. Only the right the first, a preservation district in properties whose development to develop is sold. This system is which development will be re- rights are sold. Most ordinances re- seen as a more equitable land use stricted; the second, a transfer dis- quire a convenant attached to the control than traditional zoning, be- trict where the development rights property deed that binds future cause the loss of development po- will be used. owners. tential due to governmental action does not result in an economic loss The South Street Seaport Museum area, shown in the inset in its retation to tower Man- hattan. Numbered parcels are those involved in the transfer of development rights that was instrumental in the South Street project, showing those that gained and those that retained their present development level. 41 M Transfer Development Rights at South Street Seaport 4: To preserve the existing low-density historic structures of the South .4 Street Seaport area without penalizing land owners in the area whose property contained a much greater development potential for office space, the city used the tech nique known as transfer develop- AU 11 @-, ,@M O-P ment rights. W V 4 a won An overall special district was estab- lished where development rights above 45 feet could be transferred 4 from individual properties to other lots (within the district boundaries) ,IV* that could accommodate additional densities. In addition, the ordinance k made provisions for closing several of the district's streets, and included the air space above the streets in the total amount of development rights that were sold'. Limitations were 1_4 placed on the total amount of de- velopment rights transferred. A consortium of banks, headed by Chase Manhattan, purchased the development rights from designated granting parcels. The rights were then to be sold to land owners on nearby receiving parcels. A portion Lower Manhattan as seen from Brooklyn. of the rights were used to construct nearby office buildings, but in 1974, the development market was in a Recently, an insurance corporation The experience of city officials has depression, and a large portion of announced plans to construct a shown development rights transfer the development rights were not high-rise office building a few blocks to be a useful planning tool, effec- immediately sold. from the Seaport District at an esti- tive in preserving the nature of his- mated cost of $65 million. It plans to toric neighborhoods. They caution, use a significant amount of the re- however, that the mechanism maining development rights for this should be used on a site-specific project. basis, with the local government Results exercising a high degree of control over the location and amount of de- To date, the transfer of development velopment rights that are rights has been a successful ap- transferred. proach in protecting many of the historic structures at South Street References: Seaport. In addition, the Fulton Fish The Future of Transferable Develop- Market and adjacent restaurants are ment Rights, Environmental Com- functioning and many shops now ment. Urban Land Institute. Wash- occupy rehabilitated buildings on ington, D.C. 1978. Front and Water Streets. The state Maritime Museum also occupies a Chavoosian, Bud, et al., Urban portion of the district. Land 34 (1), January 1975. (Entire issue) 42 171F U M 0 , MIR ilk @ . . ...... . .. 0 C U VI A pier near South Street used as a theatre. Hlstoflc Disticts tax incentives to owners of historic In many cases, local preservation Many communities have preserved buildings, such a designation carries groups can guide the redevelopment the unique character and aesthetic with it strict regulations governing of the historic district. The group may quality of their historic areas and the use of federal funds within the be private non-profit, public, quasi- have upgraded their community's district. public, or some other arrangement. economy using special historic pres- Usually, the organization obtains ervation designations. Many states have provisions for es- funds for restoration projects in the tablishing local historic districts. Once district, either by directly financing There are several common elements such a district is created, it can make it projects or by facilitating loans and in any plan for historic preservation. easier for a state to establish a Na- conducting fund drives. The Historic The first step is to decide whether to tional Register Historic District. Savannah Foundation in Savannah, establish the historic district at the Such districts are usually set up by a Ga., and the Historic Charleston federal, state, or local level. city ordinance that designates special Foundation in Charleston, S.C., are It may be possible to set up a Na- zoning or performance standards. Tax two successful examples of these or- tional Register Historic District that incentive programs may also be in- ganizations. would qualify property owners for cluded to preserve existing structures. Reference: special grants and loans from the The Contribution of Historic Preser- Interior Department's Heritage Con- uation to Urban Revitalization. servation and Recreation Service or Advisory Council on Historic Pres- the National Trust for Historic Pres- ervation. U.S. Government ervation. While the register is a val- Printing Office, Washington D.C. uable tool, especially in providing 1976. 43 KA Case Study Historic Preservation: New Bedford, Massachusetts New Bedford has been committed to preserving its rich maritime herit- age for many years. Most of the ef- fort has occurred in the historic wa- terfront district, which occupies ap- proximately 15 acres between the central business district and the city wharfs. This area was once the focus of a flourishing whaling industry, and in subsequent years housed textile manufacturing and a variety of other commercial activities. There are three major aspects of the historic preservation effort in the city that are of importance for this guide. First is the New Bedford Historic District itself, which is included on All the National Register of Historic district as Places and is a local historic well. Second is the importance of p ublic and private cooperation in the planning and management of the dis- trict. Third is the emphasis placed on combining historic preservation with ril @, i, I'll I I economic revitalization in the wa- terfront area. now.%, New Bedford Historic U11 District 4;_ With the passing of the whaling in- dustry, New Bedford's waterfront area slowly began to decline. Man- ufacturing took over for 6 number of M', years, but it too faded under the pressures of suburbanization and changing technologies. By the early Z W", '!E 1960s, the city's urban renewal agency began making plans to raze major sections of the historic area. At this time, the Waterfront Historic Sketching some of the charm of restored New Bedford, Mass. Area League (WHALE) was formed as a private, non-profit corporation to help protect the historic character of the waterfront. This group was a spin-off of the Old Dartmouth Histori- cal Society, which has operated a popular Whaling Museum since 1903. 44 In 1963, WHALE acquired financing Economic Development for a survey of the historic area, and One aspect of New Bedford's his- three years later gained approval for toric preservation effort is its em- the district's inclusion on the Na- phasis on active commercial use of tional Register. the historic district. From the outset, members of the community felt Organization strongly that preservation was com- After several years it became clear patible with existing industries, such as New Bedford's large fishing fleet. that the economic situation in New Bedford was not sufficient to keep The city and private groups the historic structures occupied and launched a major revitalization pro- properly maintained. In 1970, gram. In 1975, public improvements WHALE began purchasing property for streets, sidewalks, utilities, and using a revolving fund, and soon A landscaping were begun with a became the largest landowner in the grant from the Housing and district. Other significant landowners Urban Development's Community are the Old Dartmouth Historical Development Block Grant program. rs Society, Bedford Landing Taxpaye Since that initial investment, more Association, and the New Bedford than $5 million in public and private __n Redevelopment Authority. funds have been invested in the dis- Together, these private and public trict. Many structures have been re- groups have played a guiding role in habilitated, piers refurbished, gardens 5" PKI the redevelopment of the waterfront planted, and a variety of commercial historic district. In 1972 the city es- enterprises, such as hotels, restau- tablished an historic District Com- rants, shops, a candlewotks, and a 2 mission to regulate structural design glass museum have appeared. changes. Guidelines for redevelop- ment have been established to pro- Improvements just underway are vide direction for changes of build- expected to push the private in- ing facades and structures. In 1974, vestment figure toward $4 million. the Old Dartmouth Historical Soci- Also important are the 200-plus ety, the Taxpayer's Association, and permanent jobs that have been WHALE, formed a coalition named created. Property values have in- the "Ten'Acre Revival." The goals creased over 40 percent since 1974. of this organization are to influence Contact: planning, coordination, and eco- New Bedford Waterfront nomic revitalization in the New Historic Area League (WHALE) Bedford Historic District. Soon after 13 Centre Street the agreement, Ten Acre began a New Bedford, Mass. 02740 program of attracting public and pn*- (617) 996-6912 vate investment to the district. The organization represents 85 percent Reference: of the district's residents, and the The Revolving Fund Handbook. The group has been very successful in Architectural Conservation Trust. working with the New Bedford Re- Boston, Mass. September 1979. development Authority to change the area. 45 e three or more significant of revenue-producing uses (such as National Histodc Presemation Act retail, office, residential, hotel/motel, recreation) that are mutually sup- 1966 portive in well-planned projects; Since passage of the 1966 National Historic Preservation Act, a 0 significant functional and physical nationwide program of matching grants-in-aid has been established for integration of project components preservation, acquisition, and development of National Register prop- (and thus a highly intensive use of erties. land) including uninterrupted Applications for grants to establish historic districts and preserve indi- pedestrian connections; and vidual historic properties must be made to each state historic preserva- * development in conformance with tion officer, who, in turn, submits the application to the National Reg- a coherent plan (which frequently ister of Historic Places, Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service, stipulates the type and scale of uses, Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. 20243. This office pub- permitted densities, and related lishes a variety of documents to help in the application process. For a items). complete "how to" guide that discusses all aspects of the federal pro- gram and includes several case studies, consult "Historic Preservation One of the primary applications of and Federal Projects," by Harbridge House, Inc., for the Advisory the mixed-use development concept Council on Historic Preservation, 1522 K Street, N.W., Washington, has been in revitalization of inner- D.C. 20005. city areas in both large metropolitan centers and medium-sized com- munities. Its use allows coordinated, appropriately scaled, and innovative Mixed-Use Development urban designs that can be used to overcome public perceptions about Districts the blighted, decaying central city. Mixed-use development is a rela- In addition, projects of this nature tively new approach offering private often have spill-over effects that en- developers and public officials ad- courage further redevelopment in vantages in planning and im- surrounding areas. plementating revitalization propos- Urban waterfronts are prime candi- als. This technique marks a signifi- dates for mixed-use development cant change from the parcel-by- projects because of the substantial parcel pattern of development that amenities offered by the waterfront has characterized urban growth in and the diverse nature of the ac- American cities. Mixed-use de- velopment provides an opportunity tivities that can be accommodated to combine a variety of land uses in there. Several of the case studies one, master-planned unit that allows presented in this guide, such as greater control by both government Freemason Harbour and South officials and the developer over the Street Seaport, are good exam- nature and location of various proj- ples of mixed-use development. For ect elements. Well-known pro- details, including over 20 individual totypes of such developments are case examples, as well as an in- Rockefeller Center in New York, the depth examination of the entire Charles Center-Inner Harbor in Bal- concept, the following publication is timore, and Century City in Los recommended: Angeles. Mixed-Use Developments: New The Urban Land Institute defines Ways of Land Use mixed-use development as relatively Urban Land Institute large-scale real estate projects 1200 Eighteenth Street, N.W. characterized by: Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 331-8500 46 Planned Unit Development (PUD) The interest in mixed-use develop- Preservation and Tax Reform Act of ment has encouraged local officials 1976 * to consider new legal structures that The Tax Reform Act of 1976 established important tax incentives for can accommodate the integrated land uses and unique designs that the preservation and rehabilitation of "certified" historic, income-producing are characteristic of such projects. buildings that are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The act contains provisions designed to stimulate rehabilitation of historic One approach is planned-unit de- buildings and to encourage donations of partial interests, such as facade velopment or PUD, in which the easements, in significant properties. subdivision and zoning regulations of a residential development apply Section 2124 of the Tax Reform Act provides major tax incentives for to an entire project area rather than rehabilitation by owners of commercial or income -producing historic -1 structures, and tax penalties for those who demolish such historic to its individual lots. Because den- structures and replace them with new construction. The act allows an sities are calculated based on the owner of a "certified historic structure" to deduct for federal income tax whole project, PUD allows for a va- purposes over a 60-month period most of the 'Costs of "certified rehabilita- riety of development options such as cluster housing, and increased open tion." space. The Revenue Act of 1978 offers a 10-percent investment tax credit to Nthough planned unit development encourage the rehabilitation of older buildings. This new incentive ordinances have traditionally been applies to buildings in use for 20 years Or more that will have 75 per- tailored to residential projects, the cent or more of the external walls remaining after rehabilitation. If the concept could be easily applied as a tax credit is to be used for a property on the National Register, or is means of increasing flexibility in the certified as contributing to an historic district under the Tax Reform Act use of land in mixed-use develop- of 1976, the taxpayer must have the rehabilitation certified by the De- ment projects. Some state laws on partment of the Interior. planned unit developments do not permit mixed uses and would render *Portions of this discussion are excerpted from "A Preservation News Supplement," this approach useless for mixed de- National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1785 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, velopment. Mixed-use zoning, a D.C. 20036. technique that allows a variety of uses that traditionally have been considered incompatible, is another means of encouraging non- traditional projects. Cities such as Washington, D.C., Pittsburgh, and Detroit all have in- corporated a version of mixed-use zoning into their municipal codes. References: Planned Unit Development Ordi- nances. American Society of Plan- ning Officials, Report No. 291, Planners Advisory Service, 1973. The Planned Unit Development Handbook: A Complete Guide to Planning, Processing, and Developing the Successful PUD. As- sociated Homebuilders of the Eastbay, Inc., Berkeley, Calif. 1970. 47 41 PIN A ipw A X mi. Ir N P One of the entries in Wilmington's Riverfest '79. Community Action Community action takes many forms in dealing with waterfront issues. Illustrating this range are the two examples given here: a grassroots cleanup drive along the Bronx River in New York City, and a communitywide riverfront festival in Wilmington, N.C. The examples point up the great potential resource outside government in nonprofit citizens' organizations. These independent groups can be a catalyst for a waterfront project and can be instrumental in working with local government. Many waterfront redevelopment success stories feature to one degree or another the activity of a citizens' group. Wilmington, North Carolina The Cape Fear River in Wilmington forms one boundary of the downtown business area. A major port lies to the south, making the downtown waterfront the site of only nominal commercial and industrial activity. A major new hotel is the dominant feature of the waterfront. In 1976, leaders in Wilmington recognized the need to revive the deteriorating downtown business and shopping district. A large shopping center five miles away forced the leading department stores to close their downtown installations and many buildings there became vacant or were converted to temporary uses. Recommendations from a task force formed by the mayor in 1976 led to creation of the Downtown Area Revitalization Effort (DARE), whose 48 mission it is to breathe life back into the city's traditional downtown. It is financed by the city (40 percent), county (20 percent), and private interests (40 percent). Leaders of DARE and another organization came to recognize that the i n city s riverfront constituted a neglected resource for the community general and the downtown in particular. -T- r-T1 A@ In 1979, the community relations director of DARE agreed with the '0@ executive director of the Lower Cape Fear Arts Council on the need for an event. The latter group, concerned with promoting appreciation of Lt 77 and participation in a broad range of art activities, had been thinking of a street festival. N What Mary Gornto of DARE and Jan Strohl of the arts council came up A cruise ship passes the U.S.S. North with was the idea of some sort of celebration to be held in the downtown Carolina during Riverfest'79 in Wilmington. at the river. Fall was settled on as the time of year. In February 1979, the two organization leaders wrote the groups they thought m;ght be interested in a downtown event. No advance preparations were made, the two simply called a meeting. Invited were the chamber of commerce, city administration, police department, a historic foundation, a neighborhood group of downtown residents, and three merchants' associations (the traditional main street merchants plus those associated with two new sections of shops). The initial meeting produced a positive reaction to the idea of an event and October was selected. Next came more detailed planning as to number of days, types of events, and additional participants. Operations at this stage were underwritten'by DARE. Ultimately the bulk of the support for Riverfest '79, as the event was named, came from local merchants. The eventual chairmen of the festival were downtown merchants. Additional participation came from the city recreation department, fire department, the U.S. Coast Guard, an advertising agency, an arts and crafts organizer, and two historic museums. Assistance from outside was limited; the arts council leader attended a conference on street festivals and learned of some of the pitfalls, and leaders in Galvesto in, Tex., were contacted about their "Dicke ns-on-the-Strand" annual Christmas event. The outcome of the volunteer labor during the spring and summer months was the first annual Riverfest on October 5-7, 1979. The originators, Mary Gornto and Jan Strohl, had hoped that 5,000 or perhaps 6,000 persons would attend. More than 30,000 showed up to watch or take part in concerts, dance performances, rides, a dog show, water skiing, sky diving, bike racing, arts and crafts displays, art and photography exhibits, antique displays, African and Caribbean imports, juggling, chess and dart tournaments, clowns, and storytellers. The event culminated with a raft race on the river. The Riverfest brought people downtown and demonstrated to them the potential attractiveness of their riverfront. The fledgling downtown revitalization effort in the community received a major boost. Contact: Mary Gornto DARE Inc. 118 E. Princess Street Wilmington, N.C. 28401 (919) 763-7349 49 Bronx River Restoration (BXRR) The Bronx River Restoration is a community-based redevelopment effort aimed at cleaning up and revitalizing a 10-mile stretch of the 7 waterfront from the Bronx Zoo to the East River. The project began in 1974, when Police Chief Anthony Bouza and community activist Ruth Anderberg (now executive director of the N% BXRR) organized a group of volunteers to remove tons of junk and trash from a section of the river. Anderberg solicited help from local businesses, city agencies, utility companies, residents, and the National Guard in an extensive effort that cleared 40 years of accumulated junk h. from the river in just two months. After the initial clean-up project, the organization operated on donations and volunteer help until its first $20,000 from the Robert Sterling Clark Foundation in 1975. Several other small grants followed, including $36,000 from the Youth Conservation Corps program. In 1976, Axel Horn joined the staff as director of long range planning. He began searching for more substantial sources of assistance, and in ,4 1977, the BXRR received a $60,000 grant from the New York State ,;t'A Legislature to develop a master plan for the Bronx River. Bronx River Master Plan This ambitious plan calls for a major redevelopment of the river, with substantial recreational opportunity, public access, and commercial development. The river will become a major urban accessway for walking, jogging, bicycling, and boating. Several activity centerswill 0 locate along the way, including theaters, museums, craft shops, playgrounds, and picnic areas. The model for the Bronx River Plan is San Antonio's Riverwalk, which turned a junk-filled canal into the city's ,A major commercial attraction. The Bronx Plan has the support of city ", @1 ',V- ,, ;4 "V, v officials, state and federal elected representatives, and a variety of __4 community groups active in the Bronx. The project has already shown significant results. Youth Conservation The Bronx River in New.York. Corps workers have stabilized a portion of the riverbank and constructed a path on one side of the river. The workers have also begun restoration of the BXRR headquarters building that when finished will contain a complete crafts studio, darkroom facilities, and a workshop where residents will make their own park furniture. The largest single accomplishment to date is a mini-park at Tremont Avenue built with $100,000 from the city. Future developments include an amphitheater/environmental arts building and a watermill located a short distance from the BXRR building, development of Soundview Park, and construction of a continuous pathway along the river that will connect the Bronx Zoo, Botanical Gardens, and Westchester Bikeway. Plans call for a six-phase construction program with an estimated completion date in 1984. Contact: Bronx River Restoration 375 E. Fordham Rd. Bronx, N.Y. 10458 (202) 933-4079/9292 50 //14 14, %T"N" Robert Kaye Ln 4m, Ij 0, 40'.. JAI_ 4- MAY 0 k2j& \Nk ML 'A Netv York Port Authority In addition to rapidly increasing Fee-Simple Acquisition Leaseback costs there are other serious prob- Purchase of fee-simple title is the A fee-simple technique that has lems involved with the purchase of most direct means of obtaining often been used both to encourage urban land for waterfront rede- property, because all that is involved 'redevelopment projects and control velopment. These include frag- is the outright purchase of land by the manner in which they are im- mented ownership of properties, re- state or local governments or private plemented, is the purchase/ stricted property rights, such as interests. This tool involves acquisi- leaseback arrangement. Under this easements and deed restrictions, tion of complete ownership in prop- procedure, a local government pur- and problems identifying and locat- erty, the "fee-interest," by outright chases property for rehabilitating ing the actual owners. Moreover, purchase, gift, condemnation, or existing structures or creating new waterfront locations have tradi- purchase with donated funds. development. The property is then tionally been used heavily for rail- leased back to private interests road, utility, and highway rights- Ownership is, however, restricted by under a standard lessor/lessee of-way, which severely complicates government regulation. It is also the agreement. attempts to assemble land. In addi- most expensive method of obtaining tion, special waterfront features land, and this often becomes a lim- Leaseback is an incentive for rede- such as eroding shorelines, and legal iting factor in acquiring necessary velopment, because the local gov- questions regarding ownership of properties for urban redevelopment. ernment may lease the property at a submerged lands and riparian water relatively low rate, creating a desira- rights may present additional obsta- Because of tax considerations, land ble climate for private investmeni. cles. is sometimes donated to a commu- Additional public benefits can be nity, or sold below the fair market obtained if the local government The purpose of this chapter is to de- value. Donations or "bargain sales" chooses to attach restrictions or co- scribe some of the land acquisition of land by private groups, both venants to the deed, including pub- techniques commonly used by gov- non-profit and profit, have been im- lic access, setbacks, landscaping, ernments, private interests, and portant in many redevelopment etc. non-profit organizations in obtaining projects. For non-profit groups such land for urban waterfront rede- as land conservancies, charitable Leaseback arrangements are benefi- velopment projects. Most of the ac- donations of land to local govern- cial to both public and private inter- quisition techniques described ments have been used as a means of ests for several reasons. For the below are standard. insuring that the donated property local government, high acquisition will be developed in a manner that costs can be defrayed by revenues Detailed information on acquisition maximizes public benefit. For pri- from the lease-back arrangement. is readily available from a variety of vate, profit-making groups, a gift or Also, much of the upkeep and im- technical publications, and through sale below the estimated market provement costs are assumed by the local governments, realtors, or de- value (a bargain sale) will result in private, tax-paying, developers. velopment companies. substantial reductions in the need Benefits for private interests are in for intial investment capital. avoiding high initial capital outlay, Reference: and the advantage of deducting rent The Use of Less Than Fee-Simple from taxes as a business expense. Acquisition as a Land Use Man- Mission Bay in San Diego has used agement Tool for Coastal Programs. such a leaseback system. National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Com- merce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, Va. 22161 The Jersey shore in the New York area. 53 Case Study San Diego ------ Nssion Bay Park Mission Bay Park is a 4,000-acre mixed use recreation facility com- prising over seven square miles of the city of San Diego including 1,800 acres of usable land and 7 2,200 acres of water. The park provides a variety of rec- reational activities along with a mix of commercial uses under a leaseback arrangement from the park authority. Nine hundred and sow W", 'is ninety acres have been developed for public water-oriented recreation and over 19 miles of developed beach exist. Private and cornmercial leases are restricted to 25 percent of the park land area and total 369 acres. Leased land includes hotels, guest houses, marinas, non-profit groups, a golf course, information center, restaurant, and marine life exhibit. Initial development in the Mission Bay area dates back to 1921 with the establishment of the Belmont Park Amusement Center. The park was acquired from the state in 1945 and work began in 1948 on dredg- ing to improve the channel for the San Diego River. Major dredging operations continued until 1961 with over 25 million cubic yards of material deposited within the park. Revenues from lesees during fiscal The private leases range in size from A series of public bonding authori- years 1970 to 1975 averaged $1.2 0.75 acres up to 99 acres and expire zations has paid for construction of million per year. During fiscal 1976, from 1986 through 2027. Each the park. These include: 1945, $2 revenues totaled $1.8 million or a lease is bound by stringent height million; 1956, $5 million and 1966, return of approximately 12 cents per limitations and zoning regulations. $7.4 million. In 1958, the city coun- square foot of leased land. Total City policies give priority to future cil adopted a Mission Bay Land and public operating expenses for the leases that include low- and Water Use Plan which governed de- park during this time amounted to moderate-cost public recreational velopment of the park. In 1978, a $2.3 million. and visitor-oriented facilities. New new Mission Bay Park Master Plan leases stipulate that public access for was adopted by the city council to pedestrians and bicyclists be pro- conform with the policies and pro- vided as a condition of the lease. grams of the California Coastal Zone Management Program. 54 Land Writedowns Land writedowns have been widely used by local governments as an in- centive for private investment in The basic procedure involves the urban renewal projects. This proce- city's selling newly renovated build- dure involves purchase of blighted ings to private investors, and leasing properties by the local government, the property back from them at rel- clearance of any dilapidated struc- atively low rates. Lease payments tures at public expense, and resale are set at levels according to the of the land to private development interests. The incentive for rede- owner s costs for items such as taxes, debt amortization, and in- velopment of these properties oc- vestment premiums. The Industrial curs because the land is sold by the Development Authority's role is in local government either below the N financing the initial purchase of the purchase price, or at a level below property by private investors. Be- the appraised land value after clear- cause of its special legal status as a ance. quasi-public, non-profit corporation, Land writedowns reduce the it can borrow money at tax-exempt rates and in turn loan it to private amount of capital needed by de- investors at low interest rates. This velopers to finance local redevelop- allows the private party to borrow at ment projects. This in turn reduces a low interest rate from the IDA, their equity requirement and purchase usable property from the amount of debt service on loans. In addition, sale of property at an at- It lilt, city, and lease it back to the city at a rate that just covers the debt service tractive price may allow the local on the loan and some other ex- government leverage with the de- penses. veloper in providing amenities, such as public access, open space, or The main advantages of the pro- other provisions that can be in- gram are that private interests can cluded as restrictive covenants at- mg quickly obtain large amounts of tached to the land transaction. The Up" capital to purchase space at low cost theory is that the tax revenues gen- Us r g and relatively small risk. In addition, erated by the new development will MHO, investors will be able to deduct eventually cover the public's in- building d epreciation from their vestment expense. U taxes, because technically they are P Y the owners of the buildings and property. Eventually, all properties will revert to the city. The primary advantages for Baltimore are that Inverse Leaseback inner city revitalization becomes feasible without increasing the city A unique variation of the leaseback debt, issuing municipal bonds, or arrangement has recently beenin- providing tax incentives to individual stituted by Baltimore City. This pro- owners. gram, probably the first of its kind to be applied in a major metropolitan area, uses a three-pronged contrac- tural arrangement between the city, a newly-formed Industrial Develop- ment Authority, and private inter- ests. The goal is to entice commer- cial and industrial operations back into the city. 55 Conservation Easements Conservation easements are restric- tions that land owners place on Obtaining Business Support property voluntarily or for payment. The business community- financial institutions, retail stores, They can involve such things as al- organizations such as the Chamber of Commerce-has directly lowing the public to cross a property supported urban waterfront revitalization in a number of ways: through to reach the shore, restricting build- donations of money, land, materials, equipment; of time and expertise; ing height to protect a view, or agree- and by various promotional activities. These actions obviously have a ing to maintain a garden or plant- sound public relations value for businesses and also reflect a community ing that is a community amenity. spirit and belief in the project's value. To get this kind of support, it is When the owner places a conserva- important for waterfront project sponsors to make the business tion easement on a parcel of land, community aware of their goals and, ideally, to encourage business certain rights specified in the ease- involvement during the project's conceptualization and planning. ment document are relinquished. As a matter of form, the rights are Illustrative of the role business can play is the experience in Tulsa of the transferred to a recipient (such as a River Parks project. conservation organization or gov- ernmental body) in a legal docu- ment. When the document is prop- erly drawn, signed, and recorded, Land Banking Small-scale land banking programs, the owner and future owners of the Land banking has been suggested as however, are less expensive, and property can no longer exercise a means of directing the nature and generally more politically accept- those rights given up in the ease- timing of urban development in able. These are usually labeled "ad- ment document. local communities by keeping land vance acquisition programs" and out of the open marketplace. In this are implemented by local gov'ern- An easement holder, such as a local approach, land is purchased by a ments as a hedge against inflation in government, has the right to ensure local government and held in re- land values or to obtain optimal lo- that the restrictions on the land are serve until such time as conditions cations for future public facilities. observed. The easement does not are right for its resale and sub- This technique is used in Maryland, automatically allow public access to sequent development. for example, to preserve space for the land unless that is specifically energy installations. provided in the easement document. Land banking provides local de- The owner of the property retains all cisionmakers with a tool to control Short-term land banks can be espe- other rights. Unless the easement or forestall development within a cially useful in redevelopment of document provides otherwise, the community to accomplish goals such blighted areas. In these cases, land owner can, for example, sell the as containing sprawl or providing banking consists of purchasing property, live on it, or bequeath it. open space. existing dilapidated structures, pos- Also, taxes must still be paid, but sibly rehabilitating them and then often a consideration will be given in Land banks may operate on a large disposing of the property at a rate return for the easement restrictions. or small scale. Historically, these that best meets the goals of the programs have not been im- community at the particular time. plemented in American cities be- With this degree of control over land cause they require intial capital out- disposition, local governments can lays that are excessive for most integrate other incentives, such as municipal budgets. Large-scale land provision of public facilities, in banks are usually long-term pro- timely fashion. grams (20 years or more) that serve to control much of local land use Reference: decisionmaking. Indirectly, they in- Land Banking: Public Policy Alter- fluence land values, location, and natiues and Dilemmas. Sylvia timing of development on privately Kamm, Urban Institute, owned lands. Large-scale land Washington, D.C. 1970. banking is often a politically un- satisfactory approach, because pub- lic opinion tends to run against gov- ernment taking full control of land ownership and use. 56 River Parks: Tulsa, Oklahoma Cooperation among public agencies, private citizens, and the business community has created Tulsa's River Parks- 138 acres on both sides of the Arkansas River with picnic areas, hike and bike trails, playgrounds, an exercise trail and other attractions. The three-phase development program, when completed in 1990, will include a two-mile long lake, a science-aerospace-petroleum museum, a planetarium, a marina, and a variety of commercial ventures. Tulsa's River Parks Authority anticipates the project will create 150 new jobs with an annual payroll of $2.4 million, and generate at least six million annual visitor days. The cost for completing the River Parks project is estimated to be between $30-to-$40 million in public and private investments. Tulsa began its waterfront revitalization with a number of recreation components and has used these to attract support for the additional, more expensive development. Recognizing that simply providing facilities was not enough, a series of activities was planned to heighten public awareness of the city's waterfront and to build the support necessary to implement the overall plan. The business community played a key role in this process. Local radio stations support two popular annual events. Two businesses teamed up with the local chapter of the American Institute of Architects to sponsor the annual Sand Castle contest at a riverside sandbar. These are only a few of the annual "River Romp" events, initiated by the Chamber of Commerce and now sponsored by a number of public agencies, businesses, and non-profit organizations. These activities include a Christmas tree lighting, oktoberfests, kite flites, square dances, bike rides, footraces, and fireworks. The business sector's role in the River Parks has not been limited to support building. When a link between the east and west bank developments along the river was needed, the Missouri-Pacific Railroad donated a railroad bridge to the city. Twenty thousand dollars was raised when Tulsans were given the opportunity to "purchase" an inch of the bridge for $5.50. The Tulsa Tribune was instrumental in encouraging support for the bridge's conversion. The McMichael Concrete Company has agreed to donate approximately four acres of prime riverfront property, valued at $40,000, to the city. Use of additional waterfront land for the project has been obtained from the Public Service Company of Oklahoma-10 acres-and Texaco-41 acres-which have leased these key parcels to the city at no cost. A large volume of soil was needed to reshape the riverbank. Three hundred and eighty thousand cubic yards from downtown construction sites were given for this purpose. Students from a vocational school then moved one half million cubic yards for $300,000. A contract for the same work ordinarily would have cost twice this amount. Under the leadership of a community organization, private nurseries donated approximately 500 plants and trees valued at $5,000 to help with the landscaping. Contact: River Parks Authority 411 South Denver Tulsa, Okla. 74103. The experience in Tulsa is far from unique. The business community in many other cities has responded to the idea of revitalizing waterfronts. 57 NW, All: 4. T @7 4, - Land Exchange i7 Land exchange is a technique com VC monly used by local governments to M. acquire properties from private interests or from other government agencies in situations when outright purchase would be too costly. In this approach, the local government trades public properties for private lands of equal value. J -1 The goals of land exchange are var- ied. Lands are frequently exchanged to preserve open space, wetlands, or provide public access. They are also used to consolidate properties for development. On urban waterfronts, Quincy Market in Boston. private owners of land zoned for in- dustrial uses or other types of busi- ness may want to exchange their waterfront parcels for other city- Denver owned lands that are better located The Platte River Greenway in Denver, 17 miles of riverfront that runs or have easier access to transporta- through the heart of the city, was given a boost when a local bank, First tion facilities. of Denver, started a promotional campaign for the project. It provided a Land exchange can be divided into tree for each new savings account opened or every $200 deposited in an the following categories: existing account. Contributions from three private foundations, Pepsi Cola, and individuals provided an additional $1,164,000-some of From one governmental agency to which was earmarked for specific purposes-for the Greenway. another. For example, the Mass- Contact: achusetts Port Authority transferred Robert Searns title of all non-airport related natural Urban Edges areas (salt marsh and tidal flats in 1421 Court Pl. East Boston) to the Metropolitan Denver, Co. 80202. District Commission for conserva- tion and recreation purposes. I - Ww" 58 Little Rock One of the major contributions that the business sector has made to urban waterfront redevelopment efforts is direct, formal participation in a project's conceptualization and planning, often taking a leadership role. Events in Little Rock are illustrative. K In 1977 Little Rock Unlimited Progress (LRUP), an organization of local business interests, along with architects and city planners, began research on urban waterfront development possibilities in direct < conjunction with public acquisition of 17 acres along the Arkansas cE Rive . Through the International Downtown Executives Association they gathered information on other waterfront projects throughout the c ountry. On the basis of this information a decision was made to combine recreation with a variety of commercial activities along Little The World Trade Center towers in e York are in the center background; a Rock's waterfront. The Chamber of Commerce donated $10,000 abandoned pier awaits redevelopment. towards the matching requirement for a HUD 701 planning grant to the city. LRUP then put together a 20-member public-private waterfront advisory committee to help shape the overall waterfront plan, which Properties held by governmental has recently crystallized. (See Volume II of the HCRS report, Urban agencies because of tax delinquency Waterfront Revitalization: The Role of Recreation and Heritage, for a or foreclosure. Again in Boston, the detailed description of this plan.) Real Property Department has agreed to transfer certain properties; Little Rock's waterfront, as in many cities, is lined by rail and highway the Boston Conservation Commis- corridors which effectively block public access to the water's edge. sion will manage them and the Pub- Initial plans had called for costly pedestrian bridges linking the central lic Facilities Department will process business district to the revitalized waterfront, which would span these and facilitate each transfer. barriers but the possibility of eliminating these pedestrian bridges was 9 Gaining control of surplus prop- discussed in an effort to reduce project costs. However, the chairman of erty. When a governmental agency, Union National Bank in Little Rock has stated that his bank is willing to such as the Department of Defense, provide interim and, if necessary, permanent financing for a proposed no longer needs an installation or convention center on the condition that these overhead walkways-for base, the property is declared which the bank would also provide financing-be retained. surplus and is transferred to the General Services Administration. Many park areas have been ac- quired by state and local govern- ments through this means. * Land consolidation, or exchanging one piece of property for another in Pittsburgh a different location. This technique has been used successfully to pre- Cooperation between the city and a private firm in Pittsburgh resulted serve open space and access in the in a mutually satisfactory arrangement. Davison Sand and Gravel Middlegrounds area of Toledo's Company needed a permit from the Corps of Engineers to expand its waterfront and at Detroit's Rennais- barge-loading facilities on the Monongehela River. At the same time sance Center. This can be an ex- the city had been exploring ways to develop a badly needed waterfront change between public and private community park on property adjacent to this site. interests. The city's Department of Parks and Recreation agreed not to object to Reference: the permit application if the company would provide a public easement Urban Growth Management Sys- on its land for a bikeway and other developments. Davison not only met tems: An Evaluation of Policy Re- these provisions but went further, promising to do some additional lated Research, Planning Advisory landscaping, build overlooks near the river, and improve the aesthetic Service quality of its own operation. Report nos. 309, 310. American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago, 111. 1976. 1@1 59 Chapter V Incentives to Private Developers VIP= 71F@ 60 This chapter will examine some of Local Tax Incentives The actual tax reduction program the incentives local governments can Tax incentives can stimulate private will vary from community to com- use to encourage urban waterfront development on the urban wa- munity,, depending on the local redevelopment. It includes several terfront. Although tax incentives economy and the provisions of the approaches successfully used to may reduce revenues in the short enabling statutes. Missouri's law, for bring urban waterfront revitalization run, local governments can realize example, permits removal of all proposals to fruition. long-term economic benefits that far taxes on site improvements for 10 Private developers are among the outweigh the temporary losses. Four years, and then increases them to 50 primary participants in most urban methods of tax reduction are: percent of assessed value for the next 15 years. Michigan's law waterfront redevelopment proposals, Abatement exempts property taxes for the first with profit as the major incentive. Taxes are either partially reduced or 15 years of the project, and requires Government can serve as a catalyst totally eliminated for a specific payment in lieu of taxes equal to the for private action as well as perform period of time. prior tax assessment on the im- regulatory functions to protect the proved property. public interest. Government pnivate Exemption sector partnership is especially needed Property is eliminated from the tax Another type of tax incentive is the if the proposal is large-scale, requires rolls by a special action of local gov- separation of the tax assessment detailed market analysis or long-term ernment. from actual property value, making capital investment, or has significant Exclusion the tax owed dependent on the social or environmental impacts. Property is placed in a classification amount of revenue actually pro- outside of the definition of taxable duced by the redevelopment activ- In recent years, participation by property. ity. This approach gives pioneering government as part of joint public/ businesses a tax break during the private ventures has broadened the Income Assessment initial investment years when profits nature of developments to include in Taxes are based on the income of may be lower, and allows upward addition to the profit motive social the redevelopment project and not adjustment by the local government objectives such as providing jobs, on the value of the property itself. as the redevelopment project improving the local tax base, or The most common tax incentive for catches on and begins to produce creating recreation opportunities. local governments is property tax re- more revenue. Even in such joint ventures, the con - duction. This technique is useful, The optimal method of tax reduction sideration of the potential return on because it is relatively easy to ad- will differ for each project depending the private investment remains the minister, and has broad application on a variety of factors. These in- governing factor. Waterfront rede- and attraction to landowners velopment projects, above all else, throughout the community. Property clude: the overall economic health have to make sense in economic taxes can be a significant factor in an of the community, goals of the local terms in order to attract private cap- government, condition of the prop- ital. owner's decision to redevelop a site. erty and the surrounding area, This is particularly true if the property method of tax collection, and degree In addition to direct financial contri- values have risen as a result of nearby of enforcement. A tax reduction butions, communities have other development or real estate specula- program should be designed so that means of encouraging private in- tion. the amount of overall investment vestment, including special tax pro- and public benefit produced by the grams and zoning incentives. These redevelopment project is greater considerations frequently involve than the amount of tax revenue lost negotiations between local govern- to the local government. ments and private interests as part of the complex real estate develop- ment process, which includes de- tailed analyses of interest rates, cash flows, tax advantages, and land as- sembly methods. The incentives de- scribed below suggest various ap- proaches that might be used to en- courage private action. The Portland, Ore., skyline at night, with the Willamette River in the foreground. 61 Tax incentives to the private sector can have a widely varying impact on a local community, depending on -Case Study the nature of the program and the characteristics of the community in- Laclede's Landing: St. Louis, Missouri volved. Incentives can provide a means of stimulating private de- Downtown St. Louis is undergoing a By September 1975, a redevelop- velopment that does not require ad- major revitalization that includes a ment plan was completed and sub- ditional public investments, and they convention center, the Jefferson mitted for review by the St. Louis can be targeted to achieve specific National Expansion Memorial, and Community Development Agency economic development goals and several other attractions along the and the Board of Aldermen. In objectives, such as increasing em- city's Mississippi riverfront. La- January of the following year, an ployment in low income areas. In clede's Landing is an important part approved plan was initiated that addition, tax incentives can be used of this redevelopment, representing provided for rehabilitation of ap- to insure that public benefits, such an expansion into the city's exten- proximately 45 structures, amount- as access to the shore, are included sive urban waterfront. ing to nearly one million square feet, in projects. as well as control over the uses al- Laclede's Landing encompasses lowed in the district and provisions If not structured properly, tax re- nine square blocks adjacent to the for pedestrian and vehicular circula- duction'programs can have negative central business district not far from tion. The plan also included a com- effects on a community. Conflicts the giant Gateway Arch. The landing mitment by the City of St. Louis to with other established policies of the contains over 30 historically signifi- provide $1 million for new lighting, local government may occur, such cant structures that have survived streets, curbs, and landscaping. as transportation plans, or other the changing functions along the Mis- economic development programs. sissippi River over the last 150 years. Property Tax Incentives They can begin competing for a fixed amount of investment dollars Laclede's Landing In addition to the property tax in- and distort local development pat- Redevelopment Plan centives offered by the Missouri terns to the long-range detriment of Corporations Law, the Redevelop- the community. In some cases, tax Since the 1830s, the primary use of ment Corporation took steps to pro- reductions may provide a windfall to the area has been for warehousing vide tax advantages to property developers who would have im- and manufacturing, but by 1975, owners who rehabilitate structures at plemented the redevelopment proj- over 75 percent of the buildings Laclede's Landing. In August 1976, ect regardless of the tax incentive. were vacant, and only a few com- the area was included on the Na- panies remained. tional Register of Historic Places. As St. Louis, Mo., has been successful mentioned in the section on historic in stimulating private investment in In November 1974, an effort was districts, this designation qualifies the downtown area using property begun to improve the economic situ- property owners for direct grants, tax incentives and other techniques ation in the area when local business accelerated depreciation, and other under the Missouri Urban Rede- interests, property owners, and gov- tax advantages under the Tax Re- velopment Corporations Law. emment officials decided to use a form Act of 1976. Since that time, public/private development corpora- six individual projects have received tion approach to redevelopment. grants-in-aid, and ten have used ac- Early in 1975, the interested parties celerated depreciation as part of formed and sold stock in the La- their redevelopment. clede's Landing Redevelopment Corporation under Chapter 353 of the Missouri Urban Redevelopment Law. By utilizing this statute, the corporation assumes the role of a local redevelopment agency and is empowered to grant property tax relief over a 25-year period to indi- vidual property owr-,,rs in the land- ing district. 62 CL Results C Redevelopment is now established E at Laclede's Landing. Since 1976, substantial amounts of office, resi- dential, entertainment, and com- mercial uses have appeared. Light- MV.@. ing, cobblestone street renovation, curbs, and landscaping have been provided by the city, and private developers have invested over $25 million in major rehabilitation proj Ir ects in the area, totaling over 450,000 square feet. In addition, over 500,000 square feet of new construction is planned. 72V A wide variety of new tenants have located in the area. Design studios, promotion and marketing firms, a theater, offices for architects and lawyers, a furniture store, restau- rants, and assorted retailers now oc- cupy the once abandoned site. Contact: Aerial view of the Mississippi riverfront in Laclede's Landing Redevelopment St. Louis, the Gateway Arch to the left, Corporation Laclede's Landing area between the Parcel Development 717 North First bridges, ce -n.ter. Agreement St. Louis, Mo. 63102 (313) 274-1841 GE One of the most important aspects K, of the Redevelopment Corporation References: is the Parcel Development Agree- Development Plan of Laclede's ment, which is signed between the Landing Redevelopment Corpora- ;@7. corporation and individual property tion, Laclede's Landing Rede- owners in the area. This legal con- velopment Corporation, 1976. tract obligates the property owners to complete the agreed-upon im- "A Development Memorandum on provements within a specified time Laclede's Landing, St. Louis, Mis- period in order to obtain tax bene- souri.- Laclede's Landing Rede- fits. The Parcel Development velopment Corporation. Agreement also offers the corpora- tion an added measure of control over the types of development al- Closeup aerial view of Laclede's Landing. lowed in the district and the design of individual projects through an of- ficial set of urban design guidelines that were adopted simultaneously with the Parcel Agreement provi- sions. 63 Special Tax Districts Many states have adopted legislation that allows local governments to es- tablish special taxation districts. This Missouri Urban The private corporation approach approach institutionalizes the tax in- Redevelopment Lows developers to react better to centive mechanism and allows it to Corporations Law changing economic conditions ' such cover a broad area. The goal is usu- as interest rates and materials costs. ally to stimulate private investment Chapter 353-Missouri 0 The review process is simplified, in specific areas of the community State Code because the local government deals by reducing the tax burden on Under the urban corporations law of with a private corporation operating existing properties in the district. In Missouri private developers and under both a "Parcel Development this way, the tax district serves as an local financial interests may form a Agreement" and a set of design incentive for private investors to lo- private, profit-making, redevelop- guidelines that clearly defines the cate new enterprises in the area, or rove and expand existing struc- ment corporation that has all powers obligations and limitations placed on imp normally assumed by a public both parties. tures. agency, including the power of emi- 0 The power of eminent domain al- Most special tax districts are estab- nent domain. The establishment of lows the private development corpo- lished by local governments ac- the corporation is subject to ap- ration to overcome problems of land cording to specific criteria that are proval by the local government. acquisition. This significantly re- outlined in enabling legislation. An duces the developer's risk in project example is the Michigan Plant Re- The -redevelopment corporation . plementation. habilitation and Industrial Districts then submits a request to local offi- 'm Act of 1974, which requires a city to cials for the area of the proposed The primary negative aspect of the make a determination that 50 per- redevelopment to be declared Missouri law is that it is useful only cent of the property in the district is blighted and subject to redevelop- for large-scale projects that have "obsolete" before special status is ment. If this status is granted, then solid financial backing. Substantial granted. In some cases, property the project qualifies for certain preliminary costs for plan prepara- owners in a proposed area may property tax advantages: tion, land acquisition, and project petition the local government for * During the first 10 years, the cor- administration tend to limit use of special tax district status. When this poration pays taxes on the value of the law to relatively large corpora- occurs, a majority of the landowners the property at the time of acquisi- tions. must be in agreement, and the area tion. No additional taxes are paid on Another shortcoming is the relatively must meet the established criteria in improvements made to the site dur- limited potential in this scheme for order to qualify. Once a special tax- ing that time. inclusion of housing in redevelop- ation district is proposed, a formal * In the next 15 years, the land and ment proposals. Traditionally, review is mandatory, which includes improvements made on the site are housing is a low-return investment public hearings where all property taxed at 50 percent of the assessed compared with commercial or in- owners in the district can testify. The value. dustrial land development. Under local government will then approve * After 25 years, the corporation high-interest loan conditions, it may or disapprove the application. pays full taxes on the property. be difficult to include housing as Special tax districts can be im- part of mixed-use development pro- plemented in a variety of ways, but The tax incentive program, espe- posals. each has the common purpose of cially when implemented on a large encouraging private investment in scale, can provide substantial finan- areas targeted for development. The cial incentive to private investment. most common type of district is one In addition to these monetary ad- that reduces property taxes for spe- vantages, the private development cific time periods. The assumption is corporation approach provides other that a lower tax rate will be an in- types of advantages that may facili- centive for new businesses to locate tate project implementation. in the area. Another approach, which primarily effects existing de- velopments, is to exclude the value of improvements made to a site from the overall tax assessment. 64 The use of tax districting can result 0 Each year, the additional tax rev- The long-term nature of the incre- in an effective and equitable enue generated by higher assessed ment bonds demonstrates a com- stimulus to the private sector, since property values in the redevelop- mitment on the part of local gov- all owners within a district are ment district (the amount above the ernments to revitalize urban areas. treated alike, and spillover effects base level) is collected separately This can be an important factor in from public improvements or new from other taxes, and is used spe- attracting other investments to the private investment have the same cifically to retire the bonds issued to area. In addition, these projects impact on all property owners. help finance the redevelopment normally produce immediate and project or to directly pay some of highly visible results, where returns Tax Increment Financing the project costs. on investment are realized soon Urban redevelopment projects often e When all outstanding debt is re- after occupancy of the new struc- result in substantial increases in local paid, the tax increment process tures. property values, both on the actual ceases. Thereafter, the increased as- There are also some negative as- site, and in the surrounding area. sessed value from the project creates pects of tax increment financing. It Depending on the local laws, these additional tax revenues for the local may not be possible to integrate higher assessments can generate government or results in a lowering such programs with other tax incen- greater property tax revenues for of general property tax rates. tive proposals that encourage pri- local governments, and tax incre- Tax increment financing has proven vate investment. In addition, pro- ment financing is a method of tem- most useful in projects where rela- jects funded in this manner must porarily using these increased as- tively high-value business activities clearly obtain land uses that are rea- sessed values to provide funds for dominate. Industrial and commercial sonably certain to produce sufficient redevelopment projects. office buildings and shopping cen- tax revenues to meet debt repay- Tax increment financing establishes ters are the most common applica- ment schedules. This tends to limit a method of financing urban rede- tions, although housing can also be the range of elements that can be velopment projects outside the gen- integrated into these development included in redevelopment propos- eral fund of a local government, proposals. These types of land uses als. which is derived principally from must be included so that a suffi- The need to convince potential property taxes. This technique iso- ciently large tax increment will be bond investors that the development lates the additional property tax.rev- insured and the outstanding debt will needed to repay the bonds will, in enues produced by redeveloping be retired within a reasonable time. fact, occur also discourages the use and upgrading deteriorated prop- There are many positive implications of tax increment bonds to finance erties, and uses these revenues to for local governments that choose to initial or "up front" costs. Investors repay the costs, including retirement use this technique. Tax increment in bonds prefer to have the de- of the municipal bonds that were projects are designed to enhance the velopment completed or at least sold to finance construction of the economic vitality of depressed cen- substantially underway before the public's share in the project. A gen- tral city commercial areas. They can bonds are sold. Consequently, other eral description of the procedure be especially useful for revitalizing sources of money are sometimes follows; state laws differ in some deteriorating waterfronts situated necessary to finance initial costs. details. near older commercial and industrial It is sometimes necessary to wait for 0 A local government adopts a plan enterprises with a high potential for private development to occur. The for a redevelopment area and sells adaptive reuse. I increased taxes from this develop- special tax increment bonds to fi- In addition, this approach requires ment then can be used to finance nance the necessary capital outlay that those who benefit directly from the project's public costs. Finally, tax for facilities such as streets, bulk- public investment in urban rede- increment financing may require heading, parking, or land acquisi- velopment pay the majority of the special legislation that specifically tion. initial costs involved. This is a more grants local governments the power 0 A redevelopment district is estab- equitable arrangement than funding to use this technique. lished in which the property values by general obligation bonds where of all parcels within the district are all taxpayers bear the expense Portland, Ore., has recently used tax considered to be "influenced" by equally. This technique may provide increment financing as part of its one or more of the projects. In other a new source of revenue that a plans for renewal of the downtown words, property values within these community can use without the business area and adjacent wa- boundaries are expected to rise as a need for special bond elections. In terfront. direct result of the project. The total times of tight budgets and anti- value of the property in the area is taxation sentiments, this can be criti- assessed and this becomes the "tax cal for local governments. base" for the district. 65 KA Case Study Portland Downtown Urban Waterfront Renewal Plan The Portland Development Com- Encouraged by the previous succes- With these developments underway mission is the city's designated ses, and guided by the overall direc- and more anticipated, Portland sold urban renewal and development tion established by the downtown $10 million in urban renewal tax in- agency. It is responsible for imple- plan, two additional plans were de- crement bonds during 1976, and menting Portland's Downtown Wa- veloped that combined downtown another $15 million in 1978. These terfront Urban Renewal Plan, which redevelopment with provisions for funds were used to finance the first includes approximately 300 acres on recreation and access along the two phases of the Waterfront Park, the west bank of the Willamette urban waterfront. The first was the preservation and improvements in River. The project contains 35 acres Downtown Waterfront Urban Re- two historic districts within the urban of linear waterfront park, part of a newal Plan, and the second was the renewal area, land acclusition for a nearby railroad yard, and much of Waterfront Park Plan. parking structure, and other related the eastern portion of the central actions. business district (see map). Tax Increment Bonds Background In April 1974, the city council Results adopted the Downtown Waterfront Major private development began Portland's current downtown rede- Urban Renewal Plan, which desig- shortly thereafter. The U.S. National velopment effort began in December nated a large portion of the wa- Bank of Oregon and a federal office 1972 when the city council adopted terfront and surrounding commercial building built for and leased by the the "Downtown Plan," which in- district as a- redevelopment area. General Services Administration cluded goals and guidelines for the The plan was general in nature, rec- added $23 million to the assessed entire downtown area. The plan ognizing that details would be filled valuation of the area by 1977. Far contained suggestions to develop a in as the planning process con- West Federal Savings and Loan As- Waterfront Park. tinued. Later that year, the citizens sociation and Portland General of Portland voted to remove the Electric constructed facilities valued Prior to this, Portland had begun legal restrictions that limited the use at $60 million. These projects alone downtown revitalization through the of tax increment financing and have generated nearly $2 million a Auditorium Urban Renewal Project opened the way for its use in the year in added tax revenues for the to revitalize an area not far from the combined central business district city. waterfront. Included in the renewal and waterfront program. were a civic auditorium, pedestrian The initial phases of the Waterfront malls, a new office and housing de- In 1975, a completed master plan Park have recently been completed, velopment, and a noted fountain for the waterfront was officially and the third phase is under con- designed by Lawrence Halprin. The adopted by the city council, along struction. The park is scheduled for success of these projects, and the with a plan for downtown transpor- development over another three- to subsequent tax revenues that were tation and parking. The plan called five-year period and will eventually generated, created a positive atmos- for a series of public improvements include an esplanade on the river- phere for more extensive rede- that would encourage private in- front, plazas, extensive open grassed velopment and encouraged the city vestment in the downtown area, areas, a public boat facility, commu- to take broader steps towards re- such as replacing a four-lane high- nity activity centers, and a larger vitalizing other parts of its way with a mile-long waterfront center suitable for restaurants, retail downtown, including proposals for park, providing free bus service in activities, and entertainment. the nearby Willamette riverfront. the downtown, and constructing short-term parking garages to serve downtown patrons. The added rev- enues from the private development could then be used to fund commu- nity improvements and a portion of the waterfront park. 66 PORTLAND sT.,E L-E-11 MM", L_J L_J P IT. EIAIL Coo CC- CENTER @Co'o Co. C CCC'. CO .. ............ IT. 31D AL AID ... E _T.R.C O=TOWN 111TRI A 'A U ITT R I -1 IN =.,L A E NIF I-E 0 PnoposED CURRENT -EL.FNME.T so 71 DOWNTOWN WATERFRONT 1111.1-IRRIE1 A PHISTOFUC DEVEL PNIEIT RESE-ION 'REA PL ED SNIC co" E- 0 HoLsING DISTRICTS .. -R-ME.T. 0 111-P, "I STREET The Portland, Ore., waterfront redevelopment project in relation to the central city and Willamette River. @Iv Contact: Portland Development Commission 1500 S.W. First Avenue Portland, Ore. 97201 (503) 248-4800 References: _'Ax@ Completing the 2nd Decade-A Progress Report from the City Of on, Portland Development Commissi City of Portland Development Commission, 1979. Downtown Waterfront Urban Re- newal Plan, City of Portland De- velopment Commission, 1978. LL. A" Waterfront Park in Portland allows citizens to enjoy the cleaned Willamette River. a 67 Regulatory Simplification The regulatory patchwork that ac- San Diego County celerated during the late 1960s and early 1970s was, in part, a response In recent years, private developers in Southern California have been to environmental concerns and a creating new urban designs that no longer fit the standard zoning public desire for greater participation classification used in most communities. Many of these designs include in local land-use decisionmaking. In clusters of different residential densities integrated with various retail urbanized areas, these additional and commercial activities on the same site. regulatory measures were placed on top of existing zoning ordinances, County planners, supportive of the innovative ideas, were frustrated by building codes, and other require- the failure of traditional zoning to accommodate the unusual siting ments. In many jurisdictions, the re- requirements of these new designs. They set out to revamp their zoning sult has been a complex maze of system to make it more flexible and sensitive to current market overlapping, and sometimes con- pressures. tradictory, regulatory specifications In November 1978, the San Diego Board of Supervisors approved a and permit requirements from vari- revised zoning format that utilizes the basic categories of traditional ous levels of government. zoning, but packages them in a system referred to as the "building Urban waterfronts are directly af- block approach." The basic goal of the building block approach is to fected by these additional regula- provide the necessary flexibility required to accommodate multi-use tions, especially in cases where developments, while retaining a measure of stability and accountability dredging, filling, or construction in in the regulation of urban land use. The system sets up three major floodplains is included in project types of zoning units: use units, development units, and special area proposals. The Army Corps of En- units. gineers, Fish and Wildlife Service, A zoning "unit" defines the basic type of land use that will be permitted, Environmental Protection Agency, such as residential, commercial, or agricultural. The amount of and Coast Guard, as well as state re- flexibility in combining various land uses increases with each type of source management agencies and unit. Use units are the most restrictive, allowing only one type of use per local governments have an interest zone. Development units are more inclusive, allowing different types of in dredging and filling activities near land uses within a zone with height, bulk, density, and open space urban waterfronts throughout the specifications. About ten different groupings are possible for each nation. These interests are often not development zone. the same. The result is a system of permit requirements and regulatory The final category is the "special area unit," which is similar to the controls than can take months or floating or overlay zones described in the section on alternative zoning years to pursue. Cumbersome reg- techniques. Special area units are designed for unique areas, such as ulatory procedures can therefore beaches, floodplains, scenic areas, and planned development areas. They obstruct implementation of urban allow developers and community officials a high degree of discretion in waterfront projects. land use development decisions in the zone. There are ways in which the regu- Building block zoning has proven to be an effective approach in San latory system can be streamlined or Diego, because of the flexibility that the system allows in responding to otherwise improved as a means of private development interests. It allows a simple, direct format and is encouraging waterfront redevelop- not difficult or expensive to adopt. Recently, Orange and Fresno ment. Examples of innovative regu- Counties have begun a review of their zoning ordinances with an eye latory systems already exist. These towards the San Diego example. cases should be used as references on which to base regulatory refonn References: rather than as models that can be re- Thirteen Perspectives on Regulatory Simplification, Urban Land produced in all situations. The nature Institute, Research Report 29. Washington, D.C. 1979. of permits and regulations is such that each system must be adapted to a particular set of circumstances. must be adapted to a particular set of circumstances. 68 Ile Michigan Experience The State Division of Land Resource Programs is the lead agency in Michigan for dredge and fill permit applications. In recent years, the number of applications has grown to nearly 2,500 per year. This volume, combined with increased public participation in the review process, resulted in an inefficient regulatory system. In 1977, the state began to take steps to alleviate the problem by consolidating some permits, and improving the permit information network. The first step was creation of a joint application process between the Army Corps of Engineers and Michigan's Department of Natural Resources. This eliminated duplicative paperwork for an applicant, and improved coordination between state and federal officials. The Division of Land Resources Programs also took steps to improve efficiency by increasing its permit processing and field enforcement staff. In addition to improving the permit mechanism, the state wished to expand the information network that accompanies the permit process, in order to further improve decisionmaking and enforcement of state statutes relating to shorelines. In March 1977, the Michigan Coastal Zone Management Program financed development of the Coastal and Inland Waters Permit Information System. This computerized system has four basic functions: 0 It supports permit processing by identifying all necessary application procedures for specific county, section, range, and township, as well as primary attributes of location, such as geographic area, body of water, and project type. 0 It tracks applications that are being processed and provides comprehensive information on the status of all applications, permits, and conveyances that have been granted. 0 It provides information regarding workload in regional offices and Department of Natural Resources headquarters. 0 It meets external reporting requirements, such as a list of new permit applications, and responds to inquiries from public, state, and local agencies. The system will also identify special areas of concern, such as erosion-prone sites, wetlands, unique habitats, or spawning areas, and the agencies that make decisions about these areas. Implementation of this system with the Corps of Engineers-state permit process, expanded state staff, and use of the computer has reduced processing time from 90-120 days to approximately 20 days for most applications. Contact: Michigan Coastal Management Program Land Resource Programs Division Department of Natural Resources Steven T. Mason Building Lansing, Mich. 48926 (517) 373-1950 69 Public Facilities As part of a development agreement Areas targeted for urban with Chessie Resources, Inc. and redevelopment are usually in the Oliver T. Carr Co., the Norfolk older, deteriorated parts of a Redevelopment and Housing community, characterized by Authority is providing a series of outdated and faulty public facilities. public improvements using $20 Improving these dilapidated streets million in community block grant and poor quality utilities is a major money from the Department of part of the overall expense in an Housing and Urban Development. urban redevelopment project. The improvements include streets, walkways, utilities, drainage, and Urban waterfronts frequently have landscaping, as well as bulkheading problems involving such public at the harbor to protect aginst facilities, but waterfronts also have erosion and tidal flooding. AJso unique requirements, including included are two 100-car parking bulkheading and pier garages that will serve the harbor reconstruction, that result in project and the nearby Granby Mall additional expenses for urban downtown revitalization project. waterfront redevelopment. In many cases, the additional costs are so The projected investment for public high that they make the venture facilities represents one-quarter of the unprofitable or scare off the $120 million cost of the project. This investor, and the proposal is never is a substantial incentive to the private implemented. developer, and illustrates the enor- mous costs that can accrue when City planners are beginning to major public improvements are re- realize that financing the majority of quired in urban waterfront projects. urban redevelopment projects is The private incentive arrangement beyond the means of local budgets, was a key element of the project pro- especially if they include waterfront posal and has led to the implementa- elements such as bulkheading. As a tion of an urban waterfront project result, several communities have that eventually will provide substantial offered to pay for these public increases in the local tax base, a facilities as an incentive to attract number of jobs, and increased private investment. This approach pedestrian access to the waterfront. has recently been used in Norfolk, Va., at the Freemason Harbour site. Other communities have provided public facilities as a means of encouraging private redevelopment. New York City, for example, will provide major utility improvements at South Street Seaport; St. Louis has spent over $1 million at Laclede's Landing for public facilities; and Portland, Me., has spent public funds to improve its passenger ferry landing. NOAA 70 The Water Tower -John's Landing: Portland, Oregon Private interests have awakened to profit possibilities in older urban sections, including waterfronts. The following description was prepared by a mortgage banking firm and is adapted from a publication of the Mortgage Bankers Association of America titled Urban Revitalization Handbook (Washington, D.C., Urban Investment Committee, Mortgage Bankers Association, 1125 15th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005, 148 pages). In March 1976, United California Mortgage Company arranged permanent financing of $2.3 million for the first phase of a 75-acre private riverfront redevelopment project known as John's Landing in Portland, Ore. Master planning began in 1969 with the initial purchase of land. Special attention was given to minimize the relocation of families living in the area. The developers conceived Johns Landing as an experiment similar to San Francisco's Ghirardelli Square. The first phase involved an old three-story furniture factory built in 1904 that was renamed the Water Tower. It was renovated to provide a nostalgic setting for offices, shops, pubs, and restaurants. To further modernize the facility, the developers constructed a two-level concrete parking garage and built an outside glass elevator shaft etched with early Portland scenes that provides a panoramic view of the complete Johns Landing project. It was completed in March 1976. A Village Center consisting of additional waterfront restaurants and a motor inn is planned. Residential units - both condominium and rental -comprise a portion of Johns Landing. The housing offers an alternative to suburbia without resorting to high-rise buildings. Recreational facilities include a platform tennis court and pathways for biking. Construction of additional office and commercial space is underway. Economic Analysis At the time of loan the Water Tower was en-L'-rely leased, with additional retailers on a waiting list. Rents averaged $6 a square foot. The market strategy was to lease space at reasonable minimums to generate and maintain activity. Retail leases in the Water Tower call for an annual adjustment based on the movement in the Portland area price index, and increased utility costs are immediately passed on to all building tenants. It is estimated that in about ten years the building should have a net worth of $100-$120 million. Included in Johns Landing are esplanades and bike and pedestrian ways close to the water, boat landings, new restaurants, and other facilities that have already guaranteed the survival of the nearby neighborhoods. Additional Information: John C. Opperman, President United California Mortgage Company Suite 2401 One Embarcadero Center San Francisco, Calif. 94111 71 Chapter VI Federal Financial Assistance ow 72 For those not familiar with federal The Planners' Guide to Private Funding Case Studies procedures, the process of obtaining Sector Reinvestment, Planning Ad- One of the realities of community a federal grant can be confusing and visory Service Report No. 840, development is that there are no time-consuming. Efforts have been American Planning Association, longer federal catagorical grant pro- made in recent years to cut out 1313 E. 60th Street, Chicago, Ill., grams that will fund entire urban re- some of the paper work, but the fact 60637. A publication on private development projects. In most remains that dealing with federal loan and finance arrangements for cases, federal agencies are spending agencies requires some knowledge neighborhood investment and re- their money on projects that will be of their language and their proce- vitalization. combined with or stimulate invest- dures. * Mixed-Use Developments-New ment by the private sector. As a re- This chapter will provide the project Ways of Land Use, Technical Bulle- sult, it is difficult to obtain sufficient manager, community leader, and tin No. 71, Urban Land Institute capital from a single agency that will citizen activist with an introduction Washington, D.C., 1976. A boo@ on cover today's high capital invest- to federal assistance programs that large-scale, mixed-use development ment costs, Increasingly, cities are can be used to develop urban wa- finance and land assembly. looking to piece together smaller terfront projects. Aid is available for sums from a wide variety of sources. a variety of projects, whether large Some federal agencies, such as the The purpose of this section is to il- or small, and of whatever design. Department of Housing and Urban lustrate how two communities, Development, the Economic De- Seattle, Wash., and Portland, Me., In some circumstances, private in- velopment Administration, and the were able to combine funds from vestors are able to proceed without Small Business Administration, con- federal, state, and local sources for federal aid. Detroit's Renaissance tract with the National Development their urban waterfront redevelop- Center, for example, was planned Council, a private consultant group ment projects. entirely through private sources. in Washington, D.C., to help local However, most cities have used one governments through the various Following the case studies is a ma- or more sources of federal financial steps in the grant process. The serv- trix showing 28 federal grant-in-aid assistance in their waterfront rede- ices of this group are paid by the programs. This matrix illustrates velopment projects. federal agency through which the what each grant program can be For city officials and others familiar services are solicited. used for, total funding in fiscal year with the major sources of federal The National Development Council 1979, and the percentage of local funds, for example, the programs of has participated in revitalization of government match,ing funds re- the Department of Housing and small- and medium-sized cities quired. Urban Development, the guide may through its Washington headquar- The programs chosen for brief de- help identify additional sources that ters and offices in six other major scription include the principal may be used. For leaders of citizens urban centers. For further informa- sources of aid for -virtually any as- organizations just starting out, this tion, contact: pect of waterfront redevelopment. section will identify which programs might help in the critical early plan- National Development Council Following the matrix is a description ning stages, and the points of con- 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. of each federal program and a list of tact for finding out about them. For Washington, D.C. 20014 key publications for further refer- developers interested in a possible (202) 333-5142 ence (beginning at Appendix A). waterfront investment, the section will serve to advise what kinds of aid can be obtained to provide the pub- lic facilities that might be necessary to make a redevelopment project feasible. General discussions of public and private investment in urban areas have been presented in two publi- cations that would be helpful to any group considering an urban, mixed-use waterfront project. 73 KA Case Study Seattle The idea of including a park on the The city purchased property running The primary concentration of Seat- central waterfront dates back to from Piers 57 to 61 in the early tle's waterfront revitalization has 1911, when the city's Municipal 1970s for the waterfront park. Con- been along its central waterfront Plans Commission included a park struction took place through 1975, area, a few blocks west of the cen- as part of a $17.5 million rede- when the park was officially dedi- tral business district. Four of these velopment proposal for the wa- cated. Rehabilitation of Pier 57 is projects have received substantial terfront area. Although the total plan now complete, and a variety of assistance from governmental agen- was turned down by city voters, the shops and restaurants are leased to cies in addition to private invest- idea of a public open space on the private businesses. Access to the ment: Central Waterfront Park, working waterfront remained alive. water is provided around the Seattle Aquarium, Pike Market periphery of the pier. The tip of Pier Urban Renewal Project, and Pier 66 During the 1940s, use of the central 57 is a popular spot for fishing and Redevelopment Project. waterfront as a deepwater port de- picnicking. Pier 59 contains retail clined, and many of the narrow shops, office space, a book store, Cenftal Wate&ont Park piers, most of them privately owned, and a movie theater. The Central Waterfront Park is a were used as parking lots and ware- 22-acre mixed-land use area that in- houses, or were demolishedor Financing cludes Piers 57 and 59 along Seat- abandoned. The original bond proposal called tle's Elliot Bay on Puget Sound. The In 1957, the city adopted its first for allocation of $5 million for ac- park was constructed between 1973 comprehensive plan, which con- quisition and development of ap- and 1975 to provide public open tained a special waterfront element. proximately 15 acres of public park space at the water's edge and en- A waterfront advisory committee and recreational facilities in the area courage public and private rede- was formed by the mayor, and de- of Piers 50 to 63. velopment in the surrounding area. tailed studies were undertaken. Community leaders, however, The park provides approximately Between 1958 and 1965 several realized that the money would not 1,500 linear feet of continuous pub- proposals were made for a wa- be enough to completely revitalize lic access and is used for a variety of terfront park, but funding needed this large area. Funding for the park recreational activities, including for pier acquisition and construction was seen as seed money to attract fishing, picnicking, and sightseeing. was not available. other public and private funds in the There are retail stores on both Piers arby area. 57 and 59, and the aquarium and In 1966 and 1967, local officials as_ ne related educational facilities are lo- sembled a countywide $118 million The strategy was to implement the cated within the park (see photo). parks and recreation bond proposal waterfront park plan in several called "Forward Thrust." Included phases. The first was the nucleus of Background in this bond package was $5 million the park itself, which includes a The central waterfront was the focus for development of a Central Wa- large open space with a fountain of Seattle's commercial activity since terfront Park. In February 1968, the and a spectacular view of Puget the first wharfs were constructed in park was approved by the voters, Sound and the Olympic Mountains. the 1850s. The area expanded and construction plans were begun. Second was the reconstruction of rapidly until 1889, when the Great Piers 57 and 59 to provide some Fire destroyed all of the waterfront revenue from lease agreements with structures. Despite public concern private concessionaires at an early about the waterfront's future and point in the project's development. preparation of several plans for the area, the waterfront was rebuilt on a piecemeal basis. 74 A primary goal was to provide commercial activities that would en- Table 2 hance the recreational environment. Financial SummaW - Wate&ont Park In addition to the $5 million in bonds, $1 million was added from interest and supplemental funding King County Bond Issue $5,000,000 sources. Another $400,000 in com- Interest 1,076,000 munity block grant funds from the Community Development Department of Housing and Urban Block Grant (HUD) 400,000 Development was added for pier State Interagency Committee rehabilitation, and $367,000 from for Outdoor Recreation 367,000 the State Interagency Committee for Economic Development Outdoor Recreation was obtained Administration (Commerce) 300,000 through the state. Smaller grants were also obtained from local $7,143,000 groups such as the Jaycees, which contributed $4,000 for picnic tables. In 1978, the city received $300,000 from the Commerce Department's Economic Development Administra- tion for parking facilities and for traffic improvements. N IN, 1- k Kik F, , M0 Af. :=FAr LTI A 4:7 _7--- jM, 4 Elliot Bay Park in Seattle is beside a grain terminal. 75 Seattle Aquarium The aquarium now occupies the site Pike Place Market Urban The Seattle Aquarium is a major of Pier 60. It has exhibits in the Renewal Project entertainment and educational facil- center of Pier 59. Exhibits include a The Pike Place Market is a 22-acre ity for both tourists and local resi- working fish hatchery and walk- mixed-use development located di- dents. Its unique design places the through interpretive displays of the rectly above the Waterfront Park/ visitor "under the sea" as the vari- marine coastal environment, A Aquarium site. It is connected to the ous ocean specimens swim around major goal of the aquarium is to waterfront by means of a block-long and overhead. The aquarium is one teach people about the marine life landscaped pedestrian walkway. of the waterfront's major attractions, Of the Northwest and Puget Sound, drawing over 700,000 vistiors in and the roles these seagoing in- The site provides a superb 1979. habitants play in the environment. panorama of Elliot Bay, Puget Sound, and the Olympic Mountains. Development of the aquarium was a Construction of the aquarium over In 1974, the city began a major highly controversial issue between the water greatly increased de- federally-assisted urban renewal ef- 1966, when it was authorized by $3 velopment costs, and the project fort at the market, including sub- million in Forward Thrust Bonds, was allocated an additional $2.5 stantial renovation and rehabilitation and 1977, when it was actually con- million in bond interest for comple- of existing structures. Within the structed. The controversy was over tion of the $5.5 million project. project area is the Pike Market His- location. Many influential persons toric District, a seven-acre block of wanted the aquarium far to the historic structures which was placed north of the Central Business Dis- on the National Register of Historic trict, at a park named Golden Gar- Places in 1971. The accompanying dens. In 1971, they were supported maps show the relationship of the by a city council vote, but in Oc- Historic District to the overall Pike tober of that year, a citizens' initia- Place Urban Renewal Project area tive prohibited construction at Gol- and waterfront. den Gardens. The alternative selected by the council was to incor- Background porate the aquarium into the The Market has been a Seattle in- downtown waterfront area. stitution since 1907 when local farmers first brought their wagons full of fresh fruits and vegetables to the corner of Pike Street and West- ern for sale directly to consumers. From those early years, the Market evolved into a series of multi-level structures containing a variety of retail shops, arcades, rental stalls for crafts and produce, restaurants, and fish markets. 76 7/ its; WWI -mom ... ... . .... v zrl Pike Street Market, a Seattle landmark. Port of Seattle Park. The height of activity at the market Place continued to deteriorate and Pike Place Market Financing occurred during the years just before several proposals surfaced to de- By 1969, an urban renewal plan World War 11, when over 500 ven- molish the structures and replace that would have significantly dor permits were issued annually. them with apartment buildings and changed the character of the area The war seriously interrupted busi- parking lots. These plans were met was adopted by the city council and ness, and the Market never fully re- with strong opposition by commu- was funded by HUD, but plans were covered. During the 1950s, the nity leaders and were never im- interrupted by the passage of an Market became a losing enterprise plemented. In 1965, city planners historic district initiative in 1971. for the city, and in 1957, the city began considerations for an urban This citizen action changed the na- council voted to suspend funds for renewal program for the Market. ture of the planning effort, and em- maintenance and upkeep. Through- phasized the goal of economic re- out the 1960s, the buildings at Pike vitalization compatible with preser- vation of the historic character of the Market. 77 In April 1974, a revised plan that in- corporated the goals of the historic Table 3 district ordinance was approved by Pike Market Fact Sheet the city council and urban renewal was begun. The HUD grant made Public Investment available $21 million for major structural rehabilitation, historic preservation, relocation, and land Residential Area 350-400 units acquisition. The city matched this Mixed-Commercial Area 136,000 square feet with $7 million in Community De- Mixed-Commercial Historic velopment Block Grant funds, also Rehabilitation/Replacement Area 106,800 square feet from HUD. Parking/Commercial Area (1050 spaces) 106,200 square feet Park 30,000 square feet When HUD categorical grant pro- grams were reduced in the early 1970s, the federal agency provided Funding Sources "closing grants" for the completion of ongoing HUD projects. The Pike -HUD Urban Renewal Grant $21.0 million Market received another $7 million City of Seattle- Community Development in 1973. Recently, the city applied Block Grant $7.0 million for a $7 million Urban Development EDA- Local Public Works $1.5 million Action Grant to complete work in State Historic Preservation Grant $0.1 million the Historic District. SBA-Section 502 loans $2.0 million The city also used a $1.5 million HUD-Section 312 loans $0.5 million grant from the Commerce Depart- $33.0 million ment's Economic Development Private Investment $75.0 million Administration, through its Local Public Works Program, to construct the Pike Market Hill Climb. This landscaped pedestrian walkway As part of the historic area rehabili- Other Sources provides attractive access to the tation, the city obtained $500,000 in In addition to acquiring funds for Waterfront Park and aquarium. loans from the Small Business Ad- project development from a wide ministration that allowed local prop- variety of public and private erty owners to finance their own sources, the city has also obtained construction at low interest rates. grants for related activities that will Commercial loans of $2 million were complement the waterfront's new also obtained from SBA for first vitality. In 1979, the city obtained a mortgage financing. These were $1 million grant from the Transpor- matched 50/50 by the businesses tation Department's Urban Mass themselves. Transportation Authority (UMTA), HUD low-income housing grants for conversion of approximately were also obtained for 386 units. one-and-one-half miles of railroad Private developers have constructed track, and inclusion of a streetcar 700 moderate- to high-income units system that will shuttle people along the waterfront between Pier 48 and which makes the Market area a sub- Pier 70. Track improvements and stantial urban neighborhood. Total construction of the trolley stops are private investment in the Market re- being designed, and the system is development is estimated at $75 expected to be in operation in 1980. million, primarily for rehabilitation and new commercial and residential development. 78 Pier 66 Redevelopment A short distance north of the Fi,M M- aquarium,,the Port of Seattle is de- veloping Pier 66 into a major C C mixed-use commercial facility. The project includes rehabilitation of the 15'. %ce MarkW IR port offices, retail space, a restau- Western Av* rant, a public viewing terrace, and an apron around the front of the pier providing 14,000 square feet of public access. ------------- a' NeS*11 The project is intended to maintain the existing turn-of-the -century ar- chitecture, while blending it with Park new styling that will attract visitors to the site. The pier was constructed in 1913 as the first publicly-owned wharf in the city. The primary pur- pose of the pier was to provide small shippers with docking and ware- house space. The building was used for cold storage for many years and has been the main office for the Port @Pubfic Access of Seattle since its construction. In 1929, an automobile viaduct was constructed across the railroad tracks and the Alaskan Way High- way to provide access to Lenora Street and the port-owned prop- s 71 erties in the Denny Regrade area 0 F above. VO, M, E EE P,. M 'Ir @6106cal District Project Area Two maps of Seattle's waterfront, showing public access in blue along the piers and the two major entry ways from the central downtown business district to the waterfront. The detailed map shows the relationship of the Pike Place Market area (center) to the wa- terfront. The Alaska Way Viaduct and Alaskan Way form major barriers between the waterfront piers and the downtown. 79 The port estimates improvements to the pier and pilings will cost $2 mil- lion; an additional sum will be re- quired for building facade and office improvements. The port investment will be matched by $15 million in private funds by the Pier 66 Rede- velopment Corp. for rehabilitation and construction on both sides of Alaskan Way. The spaces will then be leased to various private busi- nesses. The improved pier will be available for cruise ships, fishing Port of Seattle Building -Existing Situation boats, historic vessels, tour boats, and passenger ferries. The project is expected to be completed in 1982. A major aspect of the project is the participation of the Pier 66 Rede- velopment Corp. This is a private development corporation working in conjunction with the Port Authority A to implement the redevelopment project. Detailed plans are still being negotiated, but the port has begun the major repair and renovation of Port of Seattle Building - Proposed Renovation the pier. The Pier 66 Corp. will lease some renovated properties from the port, and will purchase others on the east side of Alaskan Way. These References: upland areas will be redeveloped by Seattle Central Waterfront 11968- both parties under a three- to four- 1971, Seattle Parks and Recreation year phased program. Department, 1968. W I L The city has also proposed to build a Pike Place Urban Renewal Plan, C OIZI "people mover" to help pedestrians City of Seattle Department of get up and down the steep hill be- Community Development, 1974. tween the waterfront and downtown along Mairion Street. A proposal has Draft E.I.S. -Pier 66 Redevelop- been made to UMTA for $1 million. ment Corporation, Pier 66 Rede- velopment Corporation, 1978. Contact: Pier 61 in Seattle-off limits. City of Seattle Department of Community Development Downtown Projects Division 400 Yesler Building Seattle, Wash. 98104 (206) 625-4496 7 5- 1 80 KA Case Study Pordand, Maine In 1975, Portland published "City Relocation of Portland's privately- Edges: Waterfront Improvement operated island ferry service to Waterftont Program." This report was prepared modern facilities was another of the The Portland waterfront area runs by the Portland Planning Depart- City Edges' recommendations. The east-west along the northern side of ment and a consulting firm, Ander- city has submitted an application to the Fore River and is bound by son Notter Associates, Inc., with the Department of Transportation's the river on the south and Commer- funds provided by the National En- Urban Mass Transportation Admin- cial Street on the north. The wa- dowment for the Arts. istration for $2.8 million, to be com- terfront lies between the Maine State bined with state and local funds to Pier and the Portland/South Port- As a result of the City Edges report, provide a $3.6 million facility for the land Bridge (Million Dollar Bridge). a variety of projects have been in- island ferry service. The city is also stituted. A recommendation for investigating Federal Highway Ad- The area between Commercial zoning changes in the waterfront re- ministration funds for this project. Street and the Fore River is devoted sulted in approval of the W-1 wa- to a mix of marine and general in- terfront zone. Coastal Zone Management funds dustrial activities such as fishery op- were used during 1978 and 1979 to erations, the Maine pier (the area's The recommendation to adopt a study potential sites for a public major general cargo terminal), the waterfront rehabilitation code re- landing on the waterfront. Six sites Naval Reserve Training Center, the sulted in the city using funds from were identified and it was recom- International Ferry Terminal (pas- the Office of Coastal Zone Manage- mended that the site selection be senger, auto, and truck service to ment to develop a "waterfront postponed until relocation patterns, Nova Scotia), the Casco Bay Ferry standards" code. caused by other major develop- terminal (serving the many outlying ments, are established. islands), waterfront restaurants and a new marina. Most of the wa- terfront property is in use; much of the industrial, warehousing and dis- tributional uses are not marine- related. Recent developments in the New England fisheries industry have led to increased use of the wa- terfront by the fishing industry. 81 Private Development At the beginning of the project it be- At the opposite end of the wa- During the mid-1970s, a traditional came evident that the lack of berth- terfront is the city-owned Interna- marine commercial center adjacent ing was only one problem facing a tional Ferry Terminal. This facility to the Port Exchange and filled with fragmented and inefficient fishing serves two ferries running between historically interesting Victorian industry. It was also evident that a Portland and Yarmouth, Nova structures underwent a revitalization proper analysis of the situation was Scotia. In 1976 the city purchased, into a retail/commercial center that beyond the scope of the city. The with Department of Housing and has become a tourist attraction and city applied for and received a tech- Urban Development funds, the east- a vital link between Portland's nical assistance grant from the erly end of the International Ferry downtown and its waterfront. The Commerce Department's Economic Terminal for a proposed hotel. result of the private investment in Development Administration to While this project did not reach frui- the Old Port area has begun to study the economic feasibility of tion, the property has interested spread directly into the waterfront. A public improvements to aid Port- several potential purchasers. The new 100-boat marina, several res- land's fishing industry. The study Army Corps of Engineers is starting taurants, and residences have been indicated that construction of mod- maintenance dredging along the en- attracted to the harbor area. ern facilities at a competitive cost to tire Fore River. the fisherman would require a mas- Still other private investment has sive dose of public money. Portland has a keen interest in the been attracted to the waterfront for development of its waterfront. The different reasons. Changes in na- The result, the Portland Fish Pier increased activity in the fishing in- tional fisheries policies in 1976 re- Project, is in its final stages. The city dustry, renewed interest in sulted in increased fish landings. has obtained a $5 million commit- container-port facilities, the com- This, in turn, resulted in an upswing ment from the Economic Develop- muter needs of the island popula- in investment in Portland's fishing ment Administration and a $5.4 mil- tion, and the general increase in industry. lion commitment from the state public awareness of waterfront which, when coupled with $3.4 mil- problems and needs have led the Public Projects lion of city money and $6.6 of pri- city to seek out solutions to costly vate investment, totals $20 million and complex problems. The largest public project on the for the Fish Pier complex. Portland waterfront is the develop- The use of Coastal Zone Manage- ment of the Fish Pier complex. Ini- The oldest publicly-funded activity ment and Economic Development tiated in 1975 by a group of local on Portland's waterfront is the Administration technical assistance fishermen, the project has grown to Maine State Pier. Traditionally, this funds for planning and investigation a $20 million investment, including facility served the cargo handling has led to capital grant requests $14.4 million in public funds. needs of the port. The past decade from the Urban Mass Transportation saw a decline in general cargo ship- Administration and the Economic ments in Portland, but recent market Development Administration. changes and a possible change to containerized handling has led the state to allocate $950,000 for im- provements to the pier. 82 Federal Explanation of the Matrix Project Components (costs eli- Grant-in-Aid 0 The program numbers across the gible for federal funds) top of the matrix refer to the pro- 0 Planning-data acquisition and Matrix grams listed on pages 86-91. research, site specific (only on site The primary sources of federal funds 0 Agency refers to the federal de- for specific project) or comprehen- partment or office responsible for sive plans. for waterfront redevelopment proj- administration of the program. ects have been from the Department 0 Preliminary engineering. of Housing and Urban Develop- 0 Eligibility for aid (who may apply) o Architectural design-sketches ment's Community Development 1. state government agency and initial design. Block Grant and Urban Develop- 2. state and local agency 0 Final engineering and architec- ment Action Grant programs, the 3. local government tural design-detailed engineering Commerce Department's Public 4. state and local governments or drawings, blueprints, and design Works Assistance program of the private interests specifications. Economic Development Administra- 5. state and local governments or 0 Legal and administrative-legal tion, and the Interior Department's public non-profit organizations consultation, administrative costs of Land and Water Conservation Fund 6 individuals program. from its Heritage Conservation and Recreation Service. In fiscal year 7. individuals, corporations, and In- 0 Land and building acquisition- 1979, total funding available from dian tribes fee simple acquisition. these three programs was $3.5 bil- 8. state and local governments, pn- Construction equipment-rental, vate and public non-profit organi- 0 lion. zations, and individuals purchase, or lease. 0 Personnel-part-time, fulltime, Other less obvious sources are also 0 Match requirements means the wage and benefit packages. available to a project manager or percentage of federal and non- community leader. federal funds required. 0 Improvement and rehabilitation -conversion or adaptive reuse of Putting together multiple-use proj- 0 Funding is in millions. existing structures. ects to meet the often conflicting Maintenance-general upkeep. objectives or timetables of different federal programs poses a major problem for communities. Wa- -N,4 terfronts are especially challenging, because the opportunity for varied '_J, "AW activities is great and the involve- ment of federal entities frequently cumbrous. The matrix examines each program in terms of the amount of assistance available and the purposes for which the money can be used. k Nk, 83 Planning Final En- Federal (Y gineering 01@' /z & Archi- tectural .0 Grant-in-Aid @T (Y IQ' ly q1F Matrix \Ib Ile "0 0 4z Q6 Agency Program Comment Economic Local Public Works Grant and Funding only in Develop- Loan Programs 5 50/50 189 00 000 10 0 01 designated areas ment Ad- I ministration Business Development Loan & Funding in designated Guarantees 7 65/35 121 0 0010 0 areas Indian tribes up to 100% Planning Assistance 2 75/25 25 01 0 1 funding Economic Development and Adjustment Grants 5 75/25 99 0 10 010000 0 Public facilities only Supplemental and Basic 5 75/25 20 Assistance 304 Grants I I I 0@00000 Office of Coastal Zone Administration 1 80/20 9 25.7 Not Construction Related Coastal Grants 0000 0 0 Zone' I I I Public facilities and ser. Manage- Coastal Energy Impact Grants ment 2 100 13. required as a result of Sec.308(B)(5)(b) 15. 000000 00010 OCS energy activity Coastal Energy Impact Grants Prevent, reduce loss if due Sec.308(b)(5)(c) 2 100 1 8 000000 10000 to coastal energy facility Coastal Energy Impact Grants 2 100 3.8 2.2 Sec.308(c)(1) 000010@100000# Coastal Energy Impact Loans d(l) same as 5b but no 2 62.1 27.5 OCS link d(4) same as 5c Sec.308(d)(1&4) 0 10@0 0@0# 0000 when no grant money Maritime Maritime Administration Port To establish commodity Adminis- Planning Grants 2 50/50 .895 .700 10 and port plans tration National National Trust Maritime Property acquisition Trust Preservation Grants 9 50/50 0 00 00 0000 eligible Heritage Land and Water Conservation Conserva- Fund 3 50/50 169 0@000 0 000000 Recreation orientat. tion & I A Service n Urban Park 2 5 Recovery Program-Planning 1 0/501 0 1 101 1 0@1 I I I I I I Recreatio and Recreation Urban Parks and Recreation 0 Must 3 70/30 be Program-Rehab. and Innovation 011 part of match Historic Grant-in-Aid 1 50/50 7.6 0 0 0 0 Housing Comprehensive Planning and Urban' Assistance 701 2 66/34 56 53 Regional planning groups Develop- also eligible ment Community Block For- rnula no Grant-Entitlement 3 match 2,755 2,903 101 1000000 Community Development Block For- Grant Discretionar 3 mula 611 641 Targeted to Small Cities no ,y match 0000 0000100 3% loan Construc. equip. must be Housing Rehabilitation Loans-312 6 up to 80 268 supplied by contractor 77,000 0 000@ targeted areas Urban Development Action Private Grants 3 sector 119 400 com. 0000 FEIVIA National Flood Insurance Program 6 85 74 0 0 0 National Endowment Design Arts Program 3.6 4.1 for the Arts 0000 -0 Army Harbors Clean Up Drift Removal Corps of Program 2 Engineers 0 0.0 Is *0 Department Mass Transit Capital of Trans- Improvements 2 80/20 1,400 portation 0116 0 0 010 0 Mass Transit Planning 2 80/20 53 0000010 Bike Paths 2 75/25 000@000101000@000 Railroad Property EPA 208 Planning Grants 1 75/25 16 000 Wastewater Treatment and Grants 2 75/25 2,786 3,200 0 00 00 0 GSA Disposal of Property 2 0 Appendix A Federal Grant-in-Aid Program Summaries The following are summaries of the 2 Business Development Contact and Address 28 federal programs listed in the, Loans and Guarantees Director, Office of Technical Assis- matrix. The identifying numbers cor- Agency tance respond to the program in the ma- Economic Development Administra- Economic Development Administra- trix. tion tion 1 Public Works and De- Department of Commerce Department of Commerce velopment Facilities Purpose Washington, D.C. 20235 Grant Program To encourage industrial and com- Authorization mercial expansion in designated Public Works and Economic De- Agency areas by providing financial assist- velopment Act of 1965; Public Law Economic Development Administra- ance to business for projects that 89-136, as amended; 42 U.S.C. tion cannot be financed through banks 3151,3152 Department of Commerce Type of Assistance Key Publications Purpose Direct loans, guaranteed insured Leaflet-EDA Technical Assistance, For construction of public facilities to loans What Is It, How to Apply encourage long-term economic Contact and Address 4 Economic Develop- growth in designated areas Director, Private Sector Investments ment and Adjustment Type of Assistance Economic Development Administra- Assistance Program Grants, direct loans tion Contact and addresses: Department of Commerce Agency Director, Office of Public Investment Washington, D.C. 20230 Economic Development Administra- Economic Development Administra- Authorization tion tion Public Works and Economic De- Department of Commerce Department of Commerce velopment Act of 1965; Public Law Purpose Washington, D.C. 20230 89-136, as amended; 42 U.S.C. Special economic assistance to help 3142, 3171 areas meet needs arising from sud- Authorization den and severe dislocation Public Works and Econorniic De- Key Publications velopment Act of 1965; Public Law EDA Business Development Type of Assistance 89-136, amended; 42 U.S.C. 3131, Loans-Who Can Borrow-How Grants 3135 to Apply Contact and Address Director, Office of Special Adjust- Key Publications 3 Planning Assistance ment Assistance Building Communities with Jobs, Agency Economic Development Administra- EDA; Grants and Loans for Public Economic Development Administra- tion Works and Development Facilities, tion Secretary of Economic Development EDA; Title 13, Code of Federal Department of Commerce Operations Regulations, Chapter III, "Qualified Purpose Department of Commerce Areas under the Public Works and Multi-county district economic plan- Washington, D.C. 20230 Economic Development Act of 1965;" Guided for Overall Economic n Iing Authorization Development Programs, Directory of Public Works and Economic De- Approved Projects. velopment Act of 1965, Public Law 89-136, as amended; 42 U.S.C. 3241, 3243, and 3245 86 5 Supplemental and Contact and Addresses Purpose Basic Funding of Assistant Administrator To assist state and local govern- Titles, I, II, III, IV and IX Office of Coastal Zone Management ments to plan for the consequences National Oceanic and Atmospheric of new energy facilities in the coast, Activities (304 Grants) Administration financial assistance for public Agency 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. facilities to support new or ex- Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20235 panded coastal energy activity Economic Development Administra- Authorization Type of Assistance tion Coastal Zone Management Act of Projected Grants, loans Purpose 1972; Public Law 92-583, Section Contact and Address To provide funds which enable 306 Assistant Administrator Governors to select projects to assist Key Publication Office of Coastal Zone Management in the construction of public facilities List of urban waterfront grants National Oceanic and Atmospheric and other projects which meet the funded under Section 306 funds Administration criteria of Titles 1, 11, 111, IV and IX in 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. areas of their state where economic 7a Coastal Energy Im- Washington, D.C. 20235 growth is lagging pact Program -Formula Authorization Type of Assistance: Grants Coastal Zone Management Act Project Grants, Direct Loans Agency Amendments of 1976, Section Contact and Address: Office of Coastal Zone Management 308(c), 308(d)(1) loans and Economic Development Administra- National Oceanic and Atmospheric 308(d)(2) bond guarantees, Public tion Administration Law 94-370 Department of Commerce Department of Commerce Key Publication Washington, D.C. 20230 Purpose Coastal Energy Impact Program Authorization Financial assistance to states and brochure; 15 CFR, Part 931, May 21, Public Works and Economic De- local governments for impacts from 1979 velopment Act of 1965, Public Law Outer Continental Shelf energy ac- 8a Coastal Energy 89-136; as amended; 42 U.S.C. tivity 3131,3132,3141,3142,3153 Type of Assistance Impact -Formula Grants Key Publications Grants Agency Code of Federal Regulations, Title Contact and Address Office of Coastal Zone Management 13, Chapter 111, Part 312 (published Assistant Administrator National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration also in the Federal Register, Vol. 39, Office of Coastal Zone Management No. 220, November.13, 1974); National Oceanic and Atmospheric Department of, Commerce "EDA Grants for Public Works and Administration Purpose Development Facilities ... .. EDA 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Financial assistance to states and Business Development Loans- Washington, D.C. 20235 local governments for impacts from Who Can Borrow-How to Apply" Authorization Outer Continental Shelf energy ac- 6 Coastal Zone Man- Coastal Zone Management Amend- tivity agement Program Ad- ments of 1976, Section 308(b) Pub- Type of Assistance ministration (306) lic Law 94-370 Grants Agency . Key Publications Contact and Address Office of Coastal Zone Management Coastal Energy Impact Program Assistant Administrator National Oceanic and Atmospheric brochure; 15 Code of Federal Reg- Office of Coastal Zone Management ulations Part 931, May 21, 1979 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Administration Department of Commerce 7b Coastal Energy Im- 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Purpose pact Program -Planning Washington, D.C. 20235 To assist states administering a Grants/Loans and Authorization coastal zone management program Coastal Zone Management Act approved by the Secretary of Com- Guarantees Amendments of 1976, Section merce. State coastal zone grants can Agency 308(b), Public Law 94-370 be used to support planning for Office of Coastal Zone Management urban waterfront programs National Oceanic and Atmospheric Key Publications Type of Assistance Administration Coastal Energy Impact Program Department of Commerce brochure; 15 Code of Federal Regu- Grants lations (CFR). Part 93 1, May 21, 1979 87 8b Coastal Energy Im- Contact and Address Contact and Address pact Program -Planning Director, Office of Port and Inter- Heritage Conservation and Recre- Grants/Loans and modal Development ation Service Maritime Administration Department of the Interior Guarantees Department of Commerce Washington, D.C. 20243 Agency Washington, D.C. 20230 Authorization Office of Coastal Zone Management Authorization 15 U.S. C. 1-4 et seq. Land and Water National Oceanic and Atmospheric Section 8, Merchant Marine Act Conservation Fund Act of 1965; Administration 1920 Public Law 88-578; 78 Stat. 897; as Department of Commerce Key Publications amended by Public Law 90-401 (82 Purpose Cooperative Port Planning Studies Stat. 354); Public Law 91-485 (84 To assist state and local govern- Highlights of MarAd Port Activities' Stat. 1084); Public Law 91-308 (84 ments to plan for the consequences Stat. 410); Public Law 92-437 (86 of new energy facilities in the coast, 10 Maritime Preserva- Stat. 460); Public Law 93-81 (87 financial assistance for public tion Grants Stat. 178); Public Law 94-422 (90 facilities to support new or ex- Agency Stat. 1313); and Public Law 95-42 panded coastal energy activity National Trust for Historic Preserva- (91 Stat. 210) Type of Assistance tion 12 Urban Park and Rec- Project Grants, loans Purpose reation Recovery Pro- Contact and Address Preservation of maritime heritage gram Assistant Administrator with significant community impact Office of Coastal Zone Management grants Agency National Oceanic and Atmospheric Contact and Address Heritage Conservation and Recrea- Administration Director, Maritime Preservation tion Service 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. National Trust for Historic Department of the Interior Washington, D.C. 20235 Preservation Purpose Authorization 740-748 Jackson Pl., N.W. To assist hard-pressed communities Coastal Zone Management Act Washington, D.C. 20006 in the rehabilitation of critically Amendments of 1976, Section Authorization needed recreation areas and de- 308(c) 308(d)(1) loans and National Historic Preservation Act of velopment of improved recreation 308(d)(2) bond guarantees, Public 1966 (PL 89-665) programs Law 94-370 Key Publication Type of Assistance Key Publication "Maritime Preservation," in Preser- Grants Coastal Energy Impact Program ation News, special pullout Dec. Contact and Address brochure; 15 CFR Part 931, May 21, 1) 1978 Heritage Conservation and Recrea- 1979 tion Service 9 Port Planning Studies 11 Land and Water Department of the Interior Agency Conservation Fund - Washington, D.C. 20243 Maritime Administration Acquisition, Development Authorization Department of Commerce and Planning Urban Parks and Recreation Recov- Purpose Agency ery Act of 1978, Title X (P.L. 95-625) To plan for development and utili- Heritage Conservation and Recrea- Key Publication zation of ports and port facilities, tion Service Handbook for Recreation Planning and to provide technical advice Department of the Interior and Action Type of Assistance Purpose Port planning studies, technical infor- To acquire and develop outdoor mation recreation facilities Type of Assistance Grants 88 13 Historic Preservation 15 Community Authorization Fund Development Block Title I of the Housing and Commu- Agency Grants - Entitlement nity Development Act of 1974, Pub- Heritage Conservation and Recrea- Grants lic Law 93-383, 42 U.S.C. 5301- tion Service Agency 5317 Department of the Interior Key Publication Department of Housing and Urban Administrative Regulations for Purpose Development Community Development Block To identify, acquire, and preserve Community Planning and Develop- historic properties. ment Office Grants, 24 CFR 570 Type of Assistance Purpose 17 Housing Grants Federal aid to promote sound com- Rehabilitation Loans Contact and Address munity development through pro- (312) State Historic Preservation Offices jects that principally help low and Agency Heritage Conservation and Recrea- moderate income people or prevent Department of Housing and Urban tion Service or eliminate slums and blight or Development Department of the Interior meet urgent community develop- Community Planning and Develop- Washington, D.C. 20243 ment needs ment Office Authorization Type of Assistance Purpose Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L. Grants To provide low interest loans for re- 89-665, as amended) Authorization habilitation of residential and to a Title I of the Housing and Commu- limited extent commercial properties Key Publications nity Development Act of 1974, Pub- Type of Assistance The Secretary of the Interior's lic Law 93-383, 42 USC, 5301- Direct Loans Standards for Acquisition and De- 5317 velopment Projects, Secretary of the Contact and Address Interior's Standards for Historic Key Publication Community Planning and Develop- Preservation Projects, Historic Pres- Administrative Regulations for ment ervation Grants-in-Aid Community Development Block Department of Housing and Urban Grants, 24 CFR 570 Development 14 Comprehensive 16 Community 451 7th Street, S.W. Planning Assistance (701) Development Block Washington, D.C. 20410 Agency Grants/Discretionary Authorization Department of Housing and Urban Housing Act of 1964, as amended, Development Grants (Small Cities) Section 312; Public Law 88-560-1 42 Office of Community Planning and Agency U.S. C. 1452 B Development Department of Housing and Urban Key Publication Purpose Development Handbook 7475.1 "Rehabilitation To strengthen comprehensive plan- Community Planning and Develop- Financing Handbook" ning functions to state, regional, ment Office areawide and local entities Purpose 18 Urban Development Type of Assistance To assist small communities in fur- Action Grants Grants thering community development in Agency addressing the activities and needs Department of Housing and Urban Contact and Address of low and moderate income per- Development Office of Community Planning and sons Office of Urban Development Action Development (HUD) Type of Assistance Grants 451 7th Street, S.W. Grants to units of general local gov- Purpose Washington, D.C. 20410 ernments To encourage private investments in Authorization residential, industrial or commercial National Housing Act of 1954 as Contact and Address Community Planning and Develop- projects in distressed cities amended, P.L. 83-560 40 U.S.C. ment (HUD) 461 451 7th Street, S.W. Key Publication Washington, D.C. 20410 Administrative Regulations for Comprehensive Planning Assistance Grants 24 CFR 600 89 Type of assistance Key Publications Contact and Address Grants to units of general local gov- 44 CFR 59, et seq. (formerly Regu- U.S. Army District Engineer or Di- ernment lation 24 CFR 1909, et seq.); Publi- rector of Civil Works Contact and Address cation "Questions and Answers on DAEN-CWO-M Office of Urban Development Action the National Flood Insurance Pro- Office of the Chief of Engineers Grants gram," "Mandatory Purchase of Department of the Army Community Planning and Develop- Flood Insurance Guidelines"; "How Washington, D.C. 20314 ment (HUD) to Read a Flood Hazard Boundary Authorization 451 7th Street, S.W. Map ... .. How to Read a Flood Insur- Section 3 of the 1945 River and Washington, D.C. 20410 ance Rate Map," Community As- Harbor Act; Public Law 79-14; 33 Authorization sistance Series Publications (4 publi- U.S.C. 603a Title I of the Housing and Commu- cations), Elevated Residential Key Publications nity Development Act of 1974 Pub- Structures Manual for Construction Engineer Regulations 1165-2-101 lic Law 93-383, 42 U.S.C. 5@01- of Basements and 1165-2-4 and sheets describing 5317, as amended by Title I of the 20 Design Arts Program this program are available from Housing and Community Develop- Agency nearest District Engineer ment Act of 1977, Section 110, National Endowment for the Arts 22 Urban Mass Transit Public Law 93-128, 42 U.S. C. 5304 Purpose Authority Key Publication To encourage communities to intro- Administrative Regulations for duce exemplary design as an inte- Capital Improvement Urban Development Action Grants gral part of their planning processes; Agency 24 CFR 570.450 to encourage arts activities in com- Department of Transportation 19 National Flood munities by assisting in design and Federal Highway Administration Insurance Program planning of cultural activities Purpose Agency Type of Assistance Mass Transit Projects Federal Emergency Management Grant Type of Assistance Agency Contact and Address Grant Purpose Director, Design Arts Program Contact and Address Flood Insurance and technical as- National Endowment for the Arts State Highway Commission Located sistance on flood hazard mitigation 2401 E Street, N.W. in State Capital or Contact and Address Washington, D.C. 20506 Associate Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Authorization Office of Transit Assistance, Agency National Foundation of the Arts and Urban Mass Transit Administration 451 7th Street, S.W. the Humanities Act of 1965, Public 400 7th-Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20410 Law 89-209 as amended by Public Washington, D.C. 20590 Law 90-3, Public Law 91-346, Authorization Authorization Public Law 93-133, and Public Law Urban Mass Transportation Act of Housing and Urban Development 94-462;,20 U.S.C. 951 et seq. 1964; Public Law 99-365, as Act of 1968; Title XIII, Public Law Key Publications amended through February 5, 1976; 90-448, 82 Stat. 476,572 as "National Endowment for the Arts, 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. amended, 42 U.S.C. 4011, 4127, Guide to Programs" and "Design Key Publications 83 Stat. 39, 42 U.S. C. 4056; 83 Arts Program Application and 49 CFR 601.2; "Program informa- Stat. 479, 42 U.S.C. 4021, and Guidelines" tion for Capital Grants and Techni- Flood Disaster Protection Act of cal Studies Grants," "Guidelines for 1973, Public Law 93-234 21 Harbor Cleanup, Project Administration" Drift Removal Program Agency Department of the Army Office of the Chief of Engineers Purpose To improve channels for purposes of navigation 90 23 Urban Mass Transit Key Publications 26 Office of Real Authority State and Local Assistance (40 CFR Property- Disposal of Agency Part 35) General Grant Regulations Federal Surplus Real Department of Transportation and Procedures, (40 CFR Part 30)- Federal Highway Administration Procedures for Providing Grants to Property State and Areawide Planning Agen- Agency Urban Mass Transit Administration cies, (40 CFR Part 130). "Federal General Services Administration Purpose Assistance Programs of the En- Purpose Mass Transit Projects vironmental Protection Agency" Donates excess Federal Government Type of Assistance property to be developed for the Grant 25 Section 201 of the benefit of the area Contact and Address Federal Water Pollution Type of Assistance State Highway Commission located Control Act - Wastewater Land in State Capital, or Treatment Facilities Contact and Address Associate Administrator Agency Assistant Commissioner, Office of Office of Transit Assistance Environmental Protection Agency Real Property Urban Mass Transit Administration Purpose Public Buildings Service 400 7th Street, S.W. Purpose General Services Administration Washington, D.C. 20590 Treatment of wastewater Washington, D.C. 20405 Authorization Type of Assistance Key Publications Urban Mass Transportation Act of Project Grants Contact Address "Disposal of Surplus Real Prop- 1964; Public Law 99-365, as State Water Pollution Control erty," 41 CFR 101-47, Utilization amended through February 5, 1976; Agency or and Disposal of Real Property 149 U.S.C. 1601 et seq. Municipal Construction Division 24 Section 208 of the - Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 Federal Water Pollution Authorization Control Act-State and Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Areawide Water Quality as amended; 33 U.S. C. 1251 et seq. Planning Key Publications Agency Final Construction Grant Environmental Protection Agency Regulation, Environmental Protection Agency, (40 CFR Part Purpose 35, Subpart E). General Grant To encourage and facilitate t e de- Regulations and Procedures, EPA, velopment and implementati n of (40 CFR Part 30). "Federal water quality management p ans by Assistance Programs of the areawide agencies. Environmental Protection Agency," Type of Assistance "Grants Administration Manual," Grants available from the National Contact and Address Technical Information Services, Water Planning Division, Department of Commerce, EPA Springfield, Va. 22161 on a Washington, D.C. 20460 subscription basis for $60 for two Authorization years. "How Wastewater Treatment Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Works" as amended: 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq. .h 0 91 Appendix B Federal Loan Programs In addition to grant-in-aid programs, Program Eligibility there are other sources of federal as- Government National Mortgage FHA-approved mortgages may sistance to local governments, de- Association Special Assistance apply to sell federally underwritten velopers, and private citizens for Mortgage Purchases ("Tandem") mortgages to GNMA. Lenders ap- urban redevelopment projects. Aid proved by the Federal National is usually in the form of low interest A secondary mortgage market Mortgage Association or by the Fed- loans, rent subsidies, or guaranteed created by GNMA purchases eral Home Loan Mortgage Corpora- mortgages. The primary source of mortgages from private lenders to tion to participate in their conven- assistance is the Department of expand and facilitate investment in tional mortgage purchase programs Housing and Urban Development, housing. may apply to sell conventional loans although the Economic Develop- to GNMA. ment Administration and the Small Description Business Administration also have GNMA was originally established as Information Source some loan programs. a secondary market for federally- Regional offices of the Fed .eral Na- The following is a description of the insured residential mortgages not tional Mortgage Association in At- programs offered by HUD ' EDA ' readily saleable in the private mar- lanta, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, and SBA that might be applicable to ket. These mortgages generally fi- and Philadelphia. The National Of- urban waterfront revitalization. This nance housing for groups or in areas fice is at 451 7th St. SW, Washing- is not a complete list of loan pro- with special needs. ton, D.C. (202) 755-5926 grams, and it is recommended that More recently, GNMA was au- interested persons contact the local thorized to purchase both Program offices given with each program for federally-insured and conventional Rehabilitation Loans, U.S. De- more detailed information. mortgages at below-market interest partment of Housing and Urban This part of the compendium of fed- rates to stimulate lagging housing Development (Section 312). Sec- eral assistance programs is excerp- production. These mortgages are tion numbers refer to a particular ted from a larger list of loan pro- then resold at current market prices section of the Housing Act 1964 as grams prepared by the Mortgage with the government absorbing the amended. Bankers Association of America in loss as a subsidy. its publication, "Urban Revitaliza- Loans to assist rehabilitation in tion Handbook." Further informa- Twenty-five special assistance pro- federally-aided Community De- tion on the role of mortgage, banking grams have been implemented since velopment Block Grant, Urban in community development can be 1954. GNMA is currently purchasing Homesteading (Section 810), Urban obtained from: mortgages under the following pro- Renewal, and Code Enforcement grams: program 17 (Section 236 areas. Mortgage Bankers Association of and 221(d)(3) rent supplement - America projects); program 21 (unsubsidized 1125 15th Street, N.W. multifamily projects); program 23 Washington, D.C. 20005 (HUD-insured multifamily project (202) 785-8333 mortgages). 92 Description Description Information source Direct federal loans finance re- By insuring commercial lenders Assistant Secretary for Housing habilitation of residential, mixed use, against loss, HUD encourages them Federal Housing Commissioner and nonresidential properties cer- to invest capital in the home Department of Housing and Urban tified by the local government. By mortgage market. HUD insures Development, financing rehabilitation to bring the loans made by private financial in- Washington, D.C. 20410, and all property up to applicable code, stitutions for up to 97 percent of the HUD area offices project, or plan standards, the loans property value and for terms of up prevent unnecessary demolition of to 30 years. The loans may finance Program basically sound structures. A loan homes in both urban and rural areas , may provide insulation and installing (except farm homes). Less rigid con- 3pecial Credit Risks (Section 237) U S Department of Housing and weatherization equipment. struction standards are permitted in Urban Development rural areas. Eligibility Mortgage insurance and homeown- Property owners and business ten- Eligibility ership counseling for low- and ants of such property whose leases Any person able to make the cash moderate-income families with a have at least as long to run as the investment and the mortgage pay- credit history that does not qualify terms of the loan. The applicant ments. them for insurance under normal must demonstrate the capacity to standards. repay the loan and be unable to se- Information Source cure necessary financing from other Assistant Secretary for Housing Description sources on comparable terms a d Federal Housing Commissioner HUD insures lenders against loss on conditions. Preference is give o Department of Housing and Urban home mortgage loans to low- and low- and moderate-income a i- Development moderate-income families that are cants. Washington, D.C. 20410, and all marginal credit risks. HUD is also HUD area offices authorized to provide budget, Information Source debt-management, and related Assistant Secretary for Community Program counseling services to these families Planning and Development when needed. These services are Department of Housing and Urban Homeownership Assistance for performed by local HUD-approved Development Low- and Moderate-Income organizations. Applicants may seek Washington, D.C. 20410 Families (Section 235 loans) U.S. credit assistance under most FHA Department of Housing and Urban home mortgage insuraince programs. HUD regional offices and area of- Development fices, and housing and community Mortgage insurance and interest Eligibility development agencies of local gov- ernments can provide information subsidy for low- and moderate- Low- and moderate-income house- also. income home buyers. holds with credit records indicating Description ability to manage their financial and Program other affairs successfully if given One- To Four-Family Home To enable eligible families to afford budget, debt-management, and re- Mortgage Insurance Section 203 new homes that meet HUD stand- lated counseling. (b) and (i) U.S. Department of ards. HUD insures mortgages and Housing and Urban Development makes monthly payments to lenders Information Source to reduce interest to as low as 4 per- Assistant Secretary for Housing Federal mortgage insurance to cent. The homeowners must con- Federal Housing Commissioner facilitate homeownership and the tribute 20 percent of adjusted in- Department of Housing and Urban construction and financing of hous- come to monthly mortgage pay- Development, ing. ments and must make a down pay- Washington, D.C. 20410, and all ment of 3 percent of the cost of ac- HUD area offices quisition. There are dollar limits on loans and sales prices. n n t pp, 93 Program Eligibility Local public housing agencies ad- Urban Homesteading (Section Homesteaders must be equitably minister the existing housing pro- 810) U.S. Department of Housing selected by each participating city. 7am, certifying eligible tenants, and Urban Development Cities are chosen as demonstration inspecting the units proposed for sites by HUD after submitting ac- subsidy, and contracting with ap- A national demonstration program ceptable homesteading plans. proved landlords for payment. transferring HUD properties to local (Tenants execute separate leases governments to revitalize declining Information Source with landlords to pay their share of neighborhoods and reduce the fed- rent.) eral inventory of defaulted Assistant Secretary for Policy De- mortgages. velopment and Research Nonprofit and prof it- motivated de- Urban Homesteading Demonstra- velopers, alone or together with Description tion Program public housing agencies, submit Department of Housing and Urban proposals for substantial rehabilita- Vacant HUD-held 'properties are Development tion or new construction in response transferred to local governments Washington, D.C. 20410 to invitations from HUD; or they that have developed home plans may apply to their respective state approved by HUD. Each city has to Program housing finance agency. On ap- devise a plan ensuring the availabil- proval of the proposals, HUD con- ity of rehabilitation financing, tech- Lower Income Rental Assistance tracts to subsidize units to be oc- nical assistance to homesteaders, (Section 8) U.S. Department of cupied by eligible families. and all essential municipal services Housing and Urban Development to the target neighborhoods. A rent subsidy for lower-income Eligibility The local governments selected for families to help them afford decent Tenants must be lower-income the program then "sell" these prop- housing in the private market. households with incomes amounting erties for a token sum (as low as one to 80 percent of the area median in- dollar) to individuals or families Description come or less. Project sponsors may called "homesteaders." The HUD makes up the difference be- be private owners, profit motivated homesteader must make repairs to tween what a lower-income house- and non-profit or cooperative or- meet minimum health and safety hold can afford and the fair market ganizations, public housing agen- standards, then occupy the property rent for an adequate housing unit. cies, or state housing finance as a principal residence for at least No eligible tenant need pay more agencies. three years. Within 18 months of than 25 percent of adjusted income occupying the property, it must be toward rent. Housing subsidized by Information Source brought up to local code standards. HUD must meet certain standards of Assistant Secretary for Housing When all these requirements have safety and sanitation, and rents for Federal Housing Commissioner been met, the homesteader receives these units must fall within the range Department of Housing and Urban full title to the property. of fair market rents as determined Development by HUD. This rental assistance may Washington, D.C. 20410 be used in existing housing, in new construction, or in substantially re- habilitated units. Different proce- dures apply in each case. 94 Program Program Program Multifamily Rental Housing for Condominium Housing (Section Cooperative Housing (Section Low- and Moderate-Income 234), U.S. Department of Housing 213), U.S. Department of Housing Families Section 221(d) (3) and and Urban Development (single and Urban Development -Federal (4), U.S. Department of Housing family) mortgage insurance to finance co- and Urban Development Federal mortgage insurance to fi- operative housing projects. Mortgage insurance to finance rental nance ownership of individual units or cooperative multifamily housing in multifamily housing projects. Description for low- and moderate-income HUD insures mortgages made by households. private lending institutions on co- Description operative housing projects of five or Description HUD insures mortgages made by more dwelling units to be occupied To help finance construction or sub- private lending institutions for the by members of nonprofit coopera- stantial rehabilitation of multifamily purchase of individual family units in tive ownership housing corpora- (five or more units) rental or co- multifamily housing projects under tions. These loans may finance new operative housing for low- and Section 234(c). Sponsors may also construction; rehabilitation; acquisi- moderate-income families, HUD obtain FHA-insured mortgages to fi- tion; improvement or repair of a conducts two related programs. nance the construction or rehabilita- project already owned, and resale of Both insure project mortgages at the tion of housing projects that they individual memberships; construc- intend to sell as individual con- tion of projects composed of indi- FHA ceiling interest rate. Projects in , both cases may consist of detached, Ciominium units under Section vidual family dwellings to be bought semi-detached, row, walk-up, or 234(d). A project must contain at by individual members with separate elevator structures. The insured least four dwelling units; they must insured mortgages; and construction be in detached, semi-detached, row, or rehabilitation of projects that the mortgage amounts are controlled by walk-up, or elevator structures. owners intend to sell to nonprofit statutory dollar limits per unit that cooperatives. are intended to assure moderate A condominium is defined as joint construction costs. Units financed ownership of common areas and under both programs may qualify facilities by the separate owners of Eligibility for assistance under Section 8 if oc- single dwelling units in the project. Nonprofit corporations or trusts or- cupied by eligible low-income ganized to construct homes for families. members of the corporation or Eligibility beneficiaries of the trust, and qual- Eligibility Any qualified profit- motivated or ified sponsors who intend to sell the nonprofit sponsor may apply for a. project to a nonprofit corporation .or Section 221(d)(3) mortgages may blanket mortgage covering the proj- trust. be obtained by public agencies; ect after conferring with his or her nonprofit, limited-dividend, or co- local FHA insuring office; any cred- Information Source operative organizations; and private itworthy person may apply for a builders or investors who sell com- mortgage on individual units in a Assistant Secretary for Housing pleted projects to such organiza- project. Federal Housing Commissioner tions. Section 221(d) (4) mortgages Department of Housing and Urban are limited to profit motivated spon- Information Source Development sors except in the case of tenants re- Washington, D.C. 20410, and all ceiving subsidies. Assistant Secretary for Housing HUD area offices. Federal Housing Commissioner Information Source Department of Housing and Urban Assistant Secre tary for Housing Development Federal Housing Commissioner Washington, D.C. 20410, and all Department of Housing and Urban HUD area offices. Development Washington, D.C.'20410, and all HUD area offices. 95 Appendix C Urban Waterfront Revitalization - The Role of Recreation and, Heritage What follows is an excerpt from To Gain From Their Water To Enhance Environmental Urban Waterfront Revitalization: Quality Investment Quality The Role of Recreation and Herit- * Public access to the water's edge 0 Overall urban environmental age, issued in November 1979 by has been provided which capitalizes quality improvement has been sub- the Heritage Conservation and Rec- on the public's investment to im- stantial. reation Service. In addition, there is prove water quality. volume one, containing conclusions Findings: Factors Facilitating and analysis, and volume two, dis- To Protect Heritage Re- Successful Projects cussions of 18 case study cities that sources These factors were typically as- form the basis of the report. The re- * There has been renewed pride sociated with successful projects ports are available from the Heritage and interest in the activities and ac- during their conceptual izati on, plan- Conservation and Recreation Serv- complishments of previous genera- ning and implementation. ice, Department of the Interior, tions. 0 A determination to succeed. Washington, D.C. 20243. To Encourage Energy Con- * Support building. This is a summary of Volume I cov- servation 0 Private sector involvement. ering key factors, needs, and goals. e Energy saving by an increasing 0 Coordination with other wa- number of people looking for 'at terfront programs and projects. "Benefits: home' recreation opportunities in, Urban waterfronts have helped on or near the water has been made 0 Wise planning. communities in many ways: possible, existing structures have *Reduction of land acquisition To Meet Recreation Needs been 'recycled.' costs. e Active use of facilities- To Support Economic De- e A visible accomplishment within recreational and commercial-by velopment Goals one year. people of all ages and income levels e Tax revenues for cities have in- The sponsors of projects which have been increased. Creased as real estate values rise in never got off the ground or became e Inner city young people can enjoy waterfront and adjacent areas. bogged down often did not under- and understand the need for natural 9 Jobs lost through waterfront de- stand the importance of or know resource conservation and recrea- terioration have been recovered and how to go about pursuing one or tion experiences. more jobs created as new commer- more of these factors. While there cial establishments thrive. are no guarantees of success, there is every indication that good luck is To Reduce the Impact of Nat- more often on the side of cities fol- ural Hazards lowing this general pattern than 0 Wise land use has reduced the those which do not. impact of floods and hurricanes. 96 Critical Needs in Urban Short and long term goals which re- 9 Public opportunities for visual and Waterfront Projects spond to these needs should be es- physical access to urban waterfronts (The) report has established back- tablished and actively pursued by all need to be increased by: ground information essential to the levels of government and the private Providing appropriate public access development of sound national pol- sector. in all urban waterfront projects, icy on the role of recreation and Based on an analysis of the needs especially those which are Federal, heritage resources in urban wa- described above, the following goals federally supported or require a terfront revitalization. The identifi- have been identified. Federal permit; cation and understanding of factors contributing to successful projects 0 The coordination of Federal de- -Encouraging the private sector are an important part of this policy cisionmaking in projects using Fed- to provide and permit public access; background, so that ways to in- eral resources or requiring Federal -Seeking solutions to public ac- stitutionalize these factors can be approval should be supported. Such cess problems caused by railroads explored. It is equally important to programs are related to Federal and highways. the policy process to identify and policies on urban community and understand factors which have de- economic development, energy, These goals will only be met by a layed or prevented the completion hazard mitigation, water quality, en- commitment on the part of de- of waterfront projects so they can be vironmental planning and design, cisionmakers at all levels, but espe- avoided or their impact reduced. and recreation and heritage cially those in urban areas. Without resources. this strong local role the complex Despite the dccumented record of 0 Knowledge about and skills for problems associated with waterfront achievement, critical needs have making the most of opportunities for revitalization cannot be solved. Suc- been identified which must be met if and environmental, social and eco- cess will be determined by clarity of the interest in and the potential nomic benefits of urban recreation, policy, support provided by for it by benefits of urban waterfront revitali- open space and heritage resources city leaders, and constant oversight zation are to be optimally realized. should be increased. on their part to ensure that program 9 Increased public understanding of 0 The planning and design of urban and projects are completed. waterfront revitalization goals, waterfront projects having public ac- During Fiscal Year 1980, the Herit- benefits and methods. cess, recreation, open space and age Conservation and Recreation * Improved project planning and heritage; and the relationship of Service, in cooperation with federal, design, especially in the following these projects to the total waterfront state and local agencies and organi- areas: needs improvement. zations, will work toward the 0 The benefits of urban waterfront achievement of these goals." Enhancing unique qualities; revitalization activities and the clean 0 Water resistant designs and con- water investment need to be avail struction; able to people now lacking such op- 0 Project staging; portunities; those whose income is below the national average, * Small scale projects; minorities, the elderly and the e Water dependent activities; young. 9 Recreational opportunities for everyone; 9 Comprehensive planning. *Resolution of highway and rail- road problems. a Provision of timely technical as- sistance in essential areas. � Resolution of funding constraints. � Development of private sector in- centives to provide public access. * Improvement of Federal coopera- tion and coordination. 97 Appendix D Urban Waterfront Action Group Directory of Participants Federal Agencies Economic Development Adminis- Maritime Administration United States Army Corps aition (EDA) Office of Port and Intermodal De- of Engineers 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. velopment Washington, D.C. 20230 14th & Constitution Avenue ' N. W. Regulatory Branch Al Gunther Washington, D.C. 20230 Headquarters Dept. of the Army Phone: (202) 377-3027 John Pisani Phone: (202) 377-3350 Office of the Chief of Engineers CEDS is a new approach to helping Washington, D.C. 20314 communities plan and implement Responsible for port promotion, Attn: DAEN-CWO-N economic revitalization activity. In planning, and development on na- Ralph Eppard the CEDS process, communities de- tional, regional, state, and local Phone: (202) 272-0200 velop investment strategies in which levels. The office sponsors: cost- Authorizes permits for activities in they identify local needs, set de- shared comprehensive port planning the waters of the United States. velopment priorities, and establish studies which provide needs projec- specific ways of addressing those tions through the year 2000 and Department of Commerce priorities. Through this process, commercial port impact on urban communities are able to better link waterfront development; com- Office of the Secretary investments by federal, state, and puterized port facilities inventory Regional Action Planning Com- local agencies, and to stimulate in- which provides physical and opera- mission creased private sector participation tional characteristics of all U.S. pub- 14th & Constitution Avenue, N.W. in economic development and job lic and private terminals; and techni- Washington, D.C. 20230 creation. cal assistance on local site develop- Frances Phipps ment issues. Phone: (202) 377-4556 Office of Coastal Zone Manage- ment Department of Housing and Provides assistance in gaining access Office of Policy and Evaluation Urban Development to the planning, technical, and fi- 3300 Whitehaven Street, N.W. Office of Environmental Quality nancial resources and services for Washington, D.C. 20235 451 7th Street, S.W. local urban waterfront projects Ann Breen Cowey Washington, D.C. 20410 available from multi-state Regional Phone: (202.) 634-4245 Andy Euston Action Planning Commissions. OCZM funds urban waterfront and Phone: (202) 755-8909 Office of the Secretary harbor planning projects through Office of State and Local Govern- state CZM grant programs. In addi- Responsible for ensuring depart- ment Assistance tion, the office conducts research ment compliance with the National 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.w. and offers advice and technical as- Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Washington, D.C. 20230 sistance pertaining to urban coastal as well as overseeing HUD concerns Room 5893 issues. relating to the physical, social, and economic environment. Carolyn Tieger Phone: (202) 377-4556 The central point of contact for state and local government officials in- terested in gaining access to and coordinating Department of Com- rnerce resources and services for urban waterfront projects. 98 Office of Policy Development and The Water Resources Section con- National Workforce Development Research ducts studies, reviews projects and Staff 451 7th Street, S.W. plans, and provides a variety of 401 M Street, S.W. Room 8146 technical assistance to communities Washington, D.C. 20460 Washington, D.C. 20410 interested in urban waterfront re- John Gerba Joel Friedman vitalization. Phone: (202) 426-8882 Phone: (202) 755-7335 National Park Service Coordinates the EPA Urban Work Provides support services in the Office of Park Planning and En- Group, which was established by areas of long-range policy develop- vironmental Quality EPA to deal with urban-specific ment, program evaluation, and re- 18th & C Street, N.W. problems and to carry out EPA's search for the program offices within Washington, D.C. 20240 portion of the current administra- the Department. Luther Burnett tion's urban policy. Office of Community Planning and Phone: (202) 343-5625 Federal Insurance Development This office interested in the relation- Administration, Federal 451 7th Street, S.W. ship of urban waterfront projects to Emergency Management Room 7224 existing parks or proposed park Agency Washington, D.C. 20410 sites. Peter Hahn Program Analysis and Evaluation Phone: (202) 755-6240 Department of Transportation Division 451 7th Street, S.W. Provides funding for local govern- Office of the Secretary Room 5264 ments through Community Develop- Office of Intergovernmental Af- Doug Lash. ment Block Grants, Urban Develop- fairs, 1-23 Phone: (202) 426-1891 ment Action Grants, Section 312 400 7th Street, S.W. Rehabilitation programs. AJso pro- Room 10405 The National Flood Insurance Pro- vides Section 701 Comprehensive Washington, D.C. 20590 gram, administered by the Federal Planning Assistance. Leroy E. Johnson Insurance Administration, enables Phone: (202) 426-0163 persons to purchase insurance Department of the Interior Coordinates the development of against losses from damage or de- Heritage Conservation and Rec- transportation systems as they im- struction of real or personal property reation Service pact upon urban and rural areas. caused by floods or flood-caused Technical Preservation Services erosion, and to promote wise (Maritime Hefitage Program) Environmental Protection floodplain management practices in 440 G Street, N.W. Agency the nation's flood prone areas. Room 230A National Endowment for the Washington, D.C. 20243 Clean Lakes Program Gary Hume, Dale Lanzone Criteria and Standards Division Arts Phone: (202) 343-7217 (WH-585) - Design Arts 401 M Street, S. W. 2401 E Street, N.W. This office administers a $5 million Room 2812M maritime preservation grants-in-aid Washington, D.C. 20460 Washington, D.C. 20506 program to the states and to the Na- Bob Johnson Geri Bachman tional Trust for Historic Preservation. Phone: (202) 472-3400 Phone: (202) 634-4286 Categories include urban waterfront Small grants (maximum of $30,000) development, planning, engineering Provides technical and financial as- are awarded to non-profit organiza- and architectural services, historic sistance to restore and protect the tions, including local governments, vessels, and maritime educational water quality and usability of pub- for planning and design work. The programs. licly owned freshwater lakes. EPA grants can be used for the concep- has recently announced an urban tualization necessary to initiate wa- Heritage Conservation and Rec- lakes initiative which will provide an terfront revitalization. The grant reation Service additional focus for the program on awards must be matched 50/50 by Water Resources Section urban lakes. the organization. 440 G Street, N.W. Room 312 Washington, D.C. 20243 Irene Murphy, Bill Honore Phone: (202) 343-5571 99 National Endowment for the Non-Federal Organiza- This Department of Commerce- Humanities tions funded program provides technical assistance to cities and railroads to Special Assistant to the Chairman National Trust for Historic relocate railroad facilities and to help 806 15th Street, N.W. Preservation overcome barriers to the rede- Mail Stop 302 Maritime Preservation Office velopment of railroad properties in Washington, D.C. 20506 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. cities. Many ports and waterfront Leonard P. Oliver Washington, D.C. 20036 areas are encumbered by rail Phone: (202) 724-0297 Capt. Harry Allendorfer facilities which act as barriers to The Endowment supports waterfront Phone: (202) 673-4127 reuse. This program can advise projects in the humanities including public and private agencies as to historic documentation and preser- This office encourages and assists. how these barriers can be over- public agencies and private organi- vation, media projects, exhibits re- come. search, and issue discussion at ihe zations to include maritime heritage national and state levels. focus in'urban waterfront revitaliza- National League of Cities tion proj'ects through adaptive use of Urban Environmental Design historic maritime resources ashore Project and afloat. Provides technical and advisory services and financial as- 1620 1 Street, N.W., 2nd Floor sistance through maritime heritage Washington, D.C. 20006 preservation grants program. Trudy Gayer Moloney Phone: (202) 293-6795 United States Conference of The National League of Cities repre- Mayors sents over 800 cities directly and Railroad and Revitalization Pro- over 15,000 through their state gram municipal leagues in Washington. 1620 1 Street, N.W. The League provides its members Suite 510 with technical assistance in a variety Washington, D.C. 20006 of subject areas, one of which is Jeffrey A. Parker urban environerrintal design. NLC's Phone: (202) 293-6910 Urban Environmental Design Project assists cities to improve the design management and quality in their de- velopment processes. 100 Appendix E Contract for the Implementation of the Freemason Harbour Urban Development Action Grant No. B-79-AA-51-0111 THIS AGREEMENT, entered into as NOW, THEREFORE, in considera- 2. Private Development: of the day of 1979, between tion of the premises and of the The Developer agrees to construct the NORFOLK REDEVELOPMENT promises mutually exchanged and/or rehabilitate on Parcels 6, 7, AND HOUSING AUTHORITY herein, the parties do agree as fol- and 8 of the Freemason Harbour (hereinafter referred to as the "Au- lows: project a 195,113 gross square foot thority"), CHESSIE RESOURCES, 1. Public Site Improvements: residential condominium project INC., a Virginia Corporation (here- The Authority will proceed to do all consisting of 94 residential con- inafter referred to as "CRI") and those things necessary to complete dominium units and 7,800 square FREEMASON HARBOUR AS- the public work involved in street feet of accessory retail space. Con- SOCIATES, a partnership com- improvement, utility relocation and struction of these improvements is posed of Oliver T. Carr, Jr., indi- installation, landscaping, bulkhead- scheduled to begin in October of vidually, Oliver T. Carr Manage- ing and related marine work, and 1979 and to be completed in De- ment, Inc., and Chessie Resources, park and beautification work in cember of 1980. The total cost of Inc., (hereinafter referred to as the those public spaces known as Col- these improvements is estimated to "Developer"); lege Place, College Cross, Dunmore be $6,868,339. A site plan giving WITNESSETH THAT- Street, Yarmouth Street, Tazewell the location, shape and size of these Street and Harbour Square. The parcels, prepared by McGaughy, Marshall and McMiflan, is attached WHEREAS, the Authority has general nature, amount and cost of hereto as Exhibit 2. agreed to cause the construction of such work is described in Exhibit B certain public improvements and and Exhibit C of the Department of 3. Public Garage: the Developer has agreed to make Housing and Urban Development, The Authority shall construct or certain private improvements; and Urban Development Action Grant cause to be constructed on Parcel 6 Agreement, No. 3-79-AA-51- an enclosed garage containing 104 WHEREAS, the Authority has pre- 0111, for the Freemason Harbour parking spaces at an estimated cost pared and received preliminary ap- project (Grant Agreement) which is of $722,500.00. Such construction proval of an application for federal attached hereto as Exhibit 1. Con- is to be begun and completed in ac- funds under the Urban Develop- tinuing to recognize the need to cordance with the schedule set out ment Action Grant (UDAG) program have the public improvements com- in Exhibit F of the Grant Agreement. which will enable the Authority and pleted prior to completion of the 4. Lease of Garage: the Developer to accelerate and in- private improvements, the Authority tensify their development activities; agrees to complete the foregoing in Ownership of the parking garage will and a timely fashion consistent with the be retained by the Authority but schedule set out in Exhibit F of the ]eased to a Condominium Associa- WHEREAS, the parties desire to de- Grant Agreement. tion made up of purchasers of the fine and detail the scope and de- condominium units as a monthly scription of the improvements which rental of not less than $26.50 for the parties now desire to have com- each parking space. The Developer, pleted by the public and private in establishing this condominium re- sector in conjunction with the de- gime agrees to incorporate provi- velopment of Parcels 6, 7, and 8 of sions for the aforementioned lease the Freemason Harbour project; agreement as a part of the purchase contract for the sale of the con- dominium units. 101 5. Ground Lease for Condominium 6. Payment of Taxes: IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the par- Units: Developer agrees to include in its ties hereto have executed this The Authority agrees to execute a sale documents a provision impos- agreement as of the day and year ground lease for 60 years, renewa- ing upon the condominium associa- first above written. ble for another 60 year term, for the tion or the individual condominium site of the private improvements to unit owner the obligation of payin ATTEST: be constructed on Parcels 6, 7, and to the City of Norfolk the annual g NORFOLK REDEVELOPMENT AND 8 calling for the payment of not less real estate taxes due on the con- HOUSING AUTHORITY than $42.94 monthly for each of the dominium units and common ele- 94 condominium units. The exist- ments, which taxes are estimated to Executive Director Date ence of the underlying ground lease aggregate the sum of $92,356 an- will be recognized in the Developer's nually. Approved as to form and correctness: sales documents for the con- dominium units. NRHA, Counsel Date ATTEST: CHESSIE RESOURCES, INC. Approved as to form and correctness: ATTEST: FREEMASON HARBOUR ASSOCIATES Approved as to form and correctness: r"MM, rp FT- I 'T 'a 7 102 Appendix F .Zoning Bylaw, Section 401.09, Town of Plymouth,. Massachusetts, July 18, 1973 401.09 Waterkont B. Allowed uses. 5. Multi-family and single family at- A. Intent. l. Boat sales, service, rentals, ramps tached residential provided such To encourage the development of and docks; commercial sightseeing complexes are designed not to pre- marine, history or tourism land uses or ferrying; clude public access to and along the and activities which take advantage 2. Marine railways, repair yards, shoreline. of the peculiar characteristics of the storage yards, marine supply outlets; D.-Prohibited Uses. waterfront as well as its central loca- 3. Commercial fishing and seafood 1. Industrial uses; tion in Plymouth Center and its wholesale or retail outlets and re- proximity to the historic area. lated uses. 2. General commercial uses not re- To aid in revitalization of the central lated to any of the stated purposes area by encouraging uses which at- C. Special Permit Uses Subject to or activities of the waterfront which tract people into the area and gen- Environmental Design Conditions. would not make appropriate use of erate ped estria n -oriented activity. 1. Restaurants and outdoor eating its unique potential. facilities; To complement the seasonal nature E. Dimensional and other Re- of the waterfront and tourist areas 2. Recreational, social, or cultural quirements. by establishing uses of year-round facilities such as theater, playhouse, 1. All uses, premises, and structures activity and vitality. bandshell, outdoor pavilion, night should be designed to allow all To require special Environmental club, community center; pedestrian access to and along the Design Conditions for special permit 3. Hotel, motel, or other tourist re- shore for a minimum distance of ten uses to insure, among other pur- lated facility; (10) feet inland from the mean high poses, proper emphasis on a pedes- 4. Speciality shopping facilities such water mark; trian environment, adequate pedes- as art galleries, gift shops, antique 2. Minimum setback of major struc- trian links between the proposed shops, import shops, leather and tures from mean high water mark development and surrounding prop- natural goods stores, as part of a shall be twenty-five (25) feet, unless erties, high standards of site plan- pedestrian-oriented shopping arcade the wetlands designation and regu- ning, architectural design which .is or center; and including uses of a lations of Section 401-02 apply. compatible with the adjoining his- more general commercial nature toric area. which do not detract from the pur- poses of the waterfront and which are necessary to the economic via- bility of such a complex; 103 Appendix G Toledo Municipal Code Arficle XXVI the Council of the City of Toledo cient pedestrian and vehicular ac- Maumee Riverfiont may designate by ordinance. The cess, to provide adequate parking, MR-O District boundary, after des- to preserve and enhance principal Overlay District ignation by Council, shall be, shown vistas and visual relationships, and SECTION 9-26-1 Creation of Dis- on the zoning map as an overlay so to promote a beneficial relationship trict that the underlying zoning district between the waterfront area and SECTION 9-26-2 Effect of District will remain legible. adjoining areas. Such designated SECTION 9-26-3 Purpose and In- areas located within the MR-O Dis- tent SECTION 9-26-2 Effect of District trict, are: SECTION 9-26-4 Variation of The MR-O Riverfront District is of 1. Downriver from the Craig (1-280) Zoning District special and substantial public inter- Bridge on the northwesterly side of Regulations est because of its location along the the river; excluding the area fronting A. Variation of Regulations visual, environmental and transpor- on the easterly side of Summit B. Zoning Map Notation tation resource affecting substantial Street, Troy Street and the Toledo C. Prohibition of Change portions of the City of Toledo in- Terminal Railroad tracks north- D. Limited Exemption from Review cluding many neighborhoods, the easterly of Suder Avenue to a depth Central Business District, numerous of 200 feet, more or less, easterly SECTION 9-26-5 Review Proce- parks, and several areas designated from Summit Street to and including dure and Guidelines or with the potential for redevelop- the ConRail Railroad siding running A. Procedure ment. It is the general purpose and generally parallel to Summit Street. 1. Submission of Plans intent of these regulations to provide 2 Upriver on the westerly side of 2. Administrative Review for maximum public benefit from the the Maumee River from the cen- 3. Plan Commission Review further development of the river- terline of Maumee Avenue extended 4. General front area, through a combination southerly in a straight line to the and sharing of land uses. It is further river. B. Guidelines the intent of this ordinance to pro- 1. General Sources vide for public access to the wa- b) To encourage and foster within 2. Specific Items terfront, eliminate or minimize areas designated principally for 3. Uses negative environmental impact, im- commerce and industry, water- proved scenic and aesthetic con- oriented commerce and industry SECTION 9-26-6 Effective and trols, improved transportation coor- and to consolidate and unify such Expiration Dates dination and capability, and the development in locations with beneficial coordination of residen- adequate land area and access ca- Article )LXV1 tial, recreational, commercial, and pabilities. Maumee Riverfront industrial land uses. Such designated areas, within the It is further the purpose and intent of MR-O District, are: Overlay District this ordinance. 1. Downriver from the Craig (1-280) SECTION 9-26-1 Creation of Dis- a) To promote within areas desig- Bridge on the east side of the river, trict nated principally for residentially except within 100 feet of Consaul The Maumee Riverfront Overlay park and water-oriented recreati@n Street between Front Street and the District, which may be referred to as uses a superior level of public ac- Maumee River, and within 50 feet of the MR-O, is hereby created as an cess, convenience, comfort, and Front Street between Esther Street overlay district to be applied to such amenity; to encourage safe and effi- and York Street. lands related to and adjacent to the Maumee River and Maumee Bay as 104 2. On the westerly side of the river 1. Buffering and screening, modifi- For the purposes of the MR-O Dis- between the Penn Central (formerly cation of yards or other open space trict, change shall mean: New York Central) Railroad Bridge generally required, changes in signs, 1. Construction or alteration of a and main right-of-way into and and changes of height. structure; but not replacement of in- through the middlegrounds and the 2. Elimination of or limitation on dustrial machinery or fixtures which 1-75 Bridge, and between said Penn specific uses otherwise permitted. do not involve a structural alteration Central Bridge and main right-of- Determination of any such elimina- as defined in Section 9-26-1 of the way into and through the middle- tion or limitation of a specific use Toledo Municipal Code. grounds and the 1-75 Bridge, and may be requested without plan re- 2. Occupancy of vacant premises. between said Penn Central Bridge view in order to reduce the time and 3. Commencement of a different and main right-of-way and a straight expense of review in those cases land use. line bearing due east to the Maumee where the Commission finds it can 4. Filling, grading, or excavating of River from the intersection of feasibly determine such limitation land. Emerald Avenue with the centerline independently or a review of de- of Morris Street. tailed site and development or oper- D. Limited Exemption from Review 3. On the easterly side of the ational plans. 1. Proposed changes by existing in- Maumee River from the centerline of B. Zoning Map Notation dustrial uses which involve a total Fassett Street to the 1-75 Bridge. Notation concerning required or projected expenditure of less than c) With respect to those areas indi- permitted variations shall be made $100,000 or 25 percent of the ap- cated for shared use, being those lo- on the official zoning map, by ap- praised value of the premises as cated within the MR-O District not propriate identification and date, listed by the Lucas County Auditor included in the areas designated in and a copy of the variation shall be whichever is the lesser, shall be paragraphs a and b of this section, filed in the office of the Zoning Ad- exempt from review provided: to encourage the beneficial coordi- ministrator for future guidance and a. They do not involve a change in nation of residential, park, recrea- as a public record. As appropriate to land use, or the external configura- tional, commercial, and appropriate the circrnstances of the case, a copy tion of a main structure, external industrial uses. To these ends, de- may also be recorded with the oriented signing or substantial velopment shall be designed to es- County Recorder. change in the grade of the land or tablish through the spacing height C. Prohibition of Change access thereto. and bulk of structures, an open No person shall make a change as b. The cumulative total of said ex- character with respect to principal defined below before such change is penditures, over any three-year views of the river. Pedestrian circu- approved unless it has been period, on the same structure or lation systems wherever feasible exempted under the terms of this project is not reasonably expected shall form a convenient landscaped ordinance or is for emergency work. to, and does not exceed the lesser network to extensive areas of Emergency work may be com- amount specified above. shoreline. It is further intended at menced concurrent with an applica- 2. Review of proposed changes by adverse visual influences be pr ib- tion for review when there is immi- industrial uses not otherwise ited or minimized to preserve d en- nent danger of personal injury or exempt, located within the portion hance unusual visual qualities. material damage to property. Plans of the MR-O District designated by SECTION 9-26-4 Variation of for emergency change shall be filed Section 9-26-3 (b) as principally for A commerce and industry, and in ac- Zoning for review as soon as possible and cordance with the underlying zon- District Regulations not later than the first working day ing, shall be limited to the following after repairs have commenced. No A. Variation of Regulations building, occupancy, health depart- site plan review items: Variations may be required or per- ment or other permit or license shall a. Location, height, and bulk of mitted from a regulation or regula-. be issued for a change required to buildings tions applying generally within the be reviewed under this ordinance b. Traffic access, roadways, parking underlying district upon finding in a unless the change has been ap- c. Buffering, screening, site grading, particular case that such variations proved or is proceeding as emer- and erosion are necessary to achieve the public gency work under concurrent re- d. Signage purposes set forth for the MR-O view. e. Provision for public access. District or for public protection or protection of particular buildings and their environs, or undeveloped areas of public interest, or to ease the transition from one zoning dis- trict or type of use to another. Such variations may reqkiire or permit th oh an such change as: 105 Bibliography 1 American Society of Planning 7 Bronx River Restoration. Bronx 15 Cowey, Ann Breen, and Richard Officials. Urban Growth Manage- River Restoration Preliminary Mas- N. Rigby "On The Waterfront." Plan- ment Systems: An Evaluation of ter Plan, New York: Bronx River ning, November 1979, pp. 10-13. Policy Related Research. Planning Restoration, 1978. 16 Cowey, Ann Breen. "The Urban Advisory Service Report Nos. 309/ 8 Brower, David J. Access to the Coastal Zone: Its Definition and a 310, Chicago: American Society of Nation's Beaches: Legal and Plan- Suggested Role for the Office of Planning Officials, 1976. ning Perspectives, University of Coastal Zone Management." Master's 2 American Society of Planning North Carolina Sea Grant Publica- thesis, George Washington University, Officials. Planned Unit Development tion, 1978. 1976. Ordinances, Report No. 291, Plan- 9 California Coastal Zone Conser- 17 George T. Rockwise and As- ners Advisory Service. Chicago: vation Commissions. California sociates. Seattle Central Waterfront: American Society of Planning Offi- Coastal Plan. San Francisco: 1968-1971. Comprehensive Plan cials, 1973. California Coastal Zone Commis- for Its Future Development. Pre- 3 Associated Homebuilders of the sions, December 1975. pared for the City of Seattle Parks Eastbay, Inc. The Planned Unit De- 10 Center for Municipal Studies and and Recreation Department. Seattle, velopment Handbook-A Complete Services. Stevens Institute. "Wa- Washington: 1968. Guide to Planning, Processing and terfront Redevelopment Project Re- 18 Hershman, Marc. Under New Developing the Successful PUD. port No. I Existing Conditions." Management: Port Growth and Berkeley, California: Associated Hoboken, New Jersey, 1976. Emerging Coastal Management Pro- Homebuilders of the Eastbay, Inc., grams. University of Washington 1970. 1.1 Chicago City Planning Commis- Sea Grant Publication, 1978. 4 Balchen, Bess and Jack Linville, sion. The Lakefront Plan of "The City Waterfront: Ending an Chicago, 1974. 19 Kamm, Sylvia. Land Banking- Public Policy Alternatives and Di- Era of Neglect." Notion's Cities, 12 Coastal Resources Management lemmas. Washington, D.C.: Urban April 1971. Council. Rhode Island Coastal Re- Institute, 1970. 5 Baltimore Harbor Advisory sources Management Program. Committee, submitted to Regional Providence: Coastal Resources 20 Ketchum, Bostwick. The Water's Planning Council. Baltimore Harbor Management Council, 1976. Edge. Cambridge: Massachusetts In- Plan. Baltimore: Regional Planning 13 Commission on Marine Science, stitute of Technology, 1972. Council, March 1975. Engineering and Resources. Our Na- 21 Laclede's Landing Redevelop- 6 Barton Meyers Associates tion and the Sea: A Plan for National ment Corporation. Development Action. Washington, D.C.: Govern- Plan of Laclede's Landing Rede- Freemason Harborflarbour Square ment Printing Office, January 1969. velopment Corporation. St. Louis: Master Development Plan for the Laclede's Landing Redevelopment Downtown West Waterfront. Pre- 14 The Conservation Foundation. Corporation, 1976. pared for the Norfolk Redevelop- Small Seaports, Washington, D.C.: ment and Housing Authority. Nor- The Conservation Foundation, 1979. folk, Virginia, 1978. 106 22 National Council of Urban Eco- 32 Moss, Mitchell. "The Rede- 43 City of Seattle Department of nomic Development. Coordinated velopment of the Urban Wa- Community Development. Pike Urban Economic Development. terfront. " Paper presented at Ameri- Place Urban Renewal Plan. Seattle: Washington, D.C.: National Council can Institute of Planners Confer- City of Seattle Department of for Urban Economic Development, ence, San Antonio, Texas 1975. Community Development, 1974. 1978. 33 P.A.C.E., Inc. Briefings On 44 City of Seattle Parks and Rec- 23 New England River Basins Development-An Action Guide. reation Department. Forward Thrust Commission. People and the Cambridge, Mass: P.A.C.E. Inc., at the Halfway Mark. Seattle: City of Sound. Shoreline Appearance and 1978. Seattle Parks and Recreation De- Design: A Planning Handbook. partment, 1975. Springfield, Va: National Technical 34 Partners for Livable Places; Na- Information Service, 1975. tional Endowment for the Arts; and 45 New England River Basins Office of Coastal Zone Management. Commission. Southeastern New 24 New York, N.Y. City Planning Reviving The Urban Waterfront. England Study of Water and Related Commission. The New York City Washington, D.C., 1979. Land Resources. Urban Waters Waterfront. New York: Department 35 Pendleton, Alan R., and Charles Special Study. Boston: New Eng- of City Planning, 74-05, June 1974. R. Roberts. "The BCDC Experience land River Basins Commission, 25 City of New York, Office of Eco- As a Coastal Manager," Coastal January 1975. nomic Development. Lower Man- Zone '78. New York: 1978. 46 Stallings, Constance. "On the hattan Waterfront. New York: C .ity 36 Port of Seattle. Final Environ- Waterfront." Open Space Action of New York, Office of Economic mental Impact Statement- August 1969: 5-16. Development, 1975. Proposed Pier 66 Corporation De- 47 City of Toledo, Department of 26 Manton, Benjamin Dyer, 111. velopment. Seattle: Port of Seattle, Natural Resources. Toledo Looks to "Public Policy Alternatives for Con- 1978. the River. Toledo, Ohio: City of trolling Waterfront Development." 37 City of Portland Development Toledo, Department of Natural Re- Master's thesis, George Washington Commission. Completing the 2nd sources, 1975. University, 1973. Decade-A Progress Report from 48 Urban Land Institute. "The Fu- 27 Massachusetts Port Authority. the City of Portland Development ture of Transferable Development Commonwealth Pier Five. Boston: Commission. Portland, Ore: City of Rights," Environmental Comment. Massachusetts Port Authority, 1979. Portland Development Commission, Washington, D.C.: Urban Land In- 28 Meshenberg, Michael J. The 1979. stitute, 1978. Administration of Flexible Zoning 38 City of Portland Development 49 Urban Land Institute. Mixed-Use Techniques. Washington, D.C.: Commission. Downtown Waterfront Developments: New Ways of Land American Society of Planning Offi- Urban Renewal Plan. Portland, Ore: Use. Technical Bulletin No. 71. cials, 1976. City of Portland Development Cor- Washington, D.C.: Urban Land In- 29 McManis Associates. A Study to poration, 1978. stitute 1979. Identify Those Unique Aspects of 39 City of Salem Planning Depart- 50 Urban Land Institute. Thirteen Coastal Zone Management which ment. "History of Pickering Wharf." Perspectives on Regulatory Simplifi- Occur in Urban Areas. Washington, Salem, Mass: City of Salem Plan- cation. Research Report No. 29. D.C.: McManis Associates, October ning Department, 1976. Washington, D.C.: Urban Land In- 1975. stitute, 1979. 40 City of Salem Planning Depart- 30 Moore, Arthur Cotton, et a]. ment. Nathaniel Bowditch Park 51 Urban Land Institute: Adaptive Bright Breathing Edges of City Life. Plan. City of Salem Planning De- Use, Development Economics, Planning for Amenity Benefits of partment, 1976. Process, and Profiles. Washington, Urban WaterResources. Prepared 41 City of San Diego Planning De- D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1978. for Office of Water Resources Re- partment. Mission Bay Park Master 52 "Urban Waterfronts.'' Progres- search, Department of the Interior. Springfield, Va.: National Technical Plan, San Diego, California: City of sive Architecture. June 1975, entire Information Service, PB 202 880, San Diego Planning Department, issue. 1971. 1978. 53 U.S. Department of Commerce. 31 Mortgage Bankers Association of 42 San Francisco Bay Conservation National Oceanic and Atmospheric America. Urban Revitalization and Development Commission. San Administration, Office of Coastal Handbook. Washington, D.C.- Francisco Bay Plan. San Francisco Zone Management. Shorefront Ac- Mortgage Banks Association o'f Bay Conservation and Development cess and Island Preservation Study. America, 1979. Commission, January 1969. Washington, D.C.: 1978. 107 54 U.S. Department of Commerce. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Office of Coastal Zone Management. The Use of Less- Than-Fee-Simple Acquisition as a Land Management Tool for Coastal Programs. Springfield, Va.: National Technical Information Service, '977. 55 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Office of Pol- icy Development and Research. In- novative Zoning: A Local Official's Guidebook. Washington, D.C. 1977. 56 U.S. Department of the Interior, Urban Waterfront Revitalization- The Role of Recreation and Herit- age, Washington, D.C.: Heritage, Conservation and Recreation Serv- ice, 1979. 57 U.S. Department of the Interior. Historic Preservation and Federal Projects, Washington, D.C.: Herit- age Conservation and Recreation Service, 1979. 58 U.S. Department of the Interior. Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation. The Contribution of Historic Preservation to Urban Re- vitalization. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976. 59 Wood, Donald. "Urban Wa- terfront Pioblems. Aesthetic Ap- proach to Fatu'ure Improvement." Dock and Harbor Aulthority October/November 1965: unpagi- nated. 60 Watson, Kent E. "A Public Ac- cess Plan for San Francisco Bay," Coastal Zone '78. New York: 1978: 61 Wisconsin Department of Re- source Development. Waterfront Renewal. Madison: Department of Resource Development, 1966. 108 60 Ail so aTri Ile I A,R ....... 1.@ Ell 1 .14 Aw" 4f IL go amow @1 I [lip 11111101 @1 111 3 6668 14109 1126