This article examines three case studies of brownfield redevelopment in Baltimore, Maryland, to refine understanding of the boundary between privately and publicly initiated brownfield redevelopments. The cases range from Camden Crossing, a city- initiated project that promised to turn an abandoned and contaminated site into middle-income housing, to Crown Cork and Seal, a privately funded site reclaimed for industrial use. The cases suggest trade-offs between the following three conditions: (a) the strength of local market demand, (b) the level of contamination, and (c) new use. When market conditions are strong, contamination relatively minor, and land use is remaining industrial, the private sector is more likely to be the sole initiator and implementer of redevelopment. When a project calls for a transfer from contaminated industrial to residential use, faces weak market demand for the final project, and con- tends with a complicated cleanup, the greater is the required public subsidy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bartsch, C. (1996, winter). Paying for our industrial past. Commentary, pp. 14-23.
2.
Bartsch, C., & Collaton, E. (1996, September). Coming clean for economic development. Washington, DC: Northeast-Midwest Institute.
3.
Bowie, L. (1996, November 5). Cleanup of terminal opens possibilities. Baltimore Sun, p. 1C.
4.
De Sousa, C. (2000). Brownfield redevelopment versus greenfield development: A private sector perspective on the costs and risks associated with brownfield redevelopment in the greater Toronto area. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43, 831-853.
5.
De Sousa, C. (2001). Contaminated sites: The Canadian situation in an international context. Journal of Environmental Management, 62, 131-154.
6.
Duff, L. B. (1994, January/February). Groundwater contamination and property transfer. Maryland Bar Journal, 27, 25-28.
7.
Green Leigh, N. (1994). Environmental constraints to brownfield redevelopment. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 325-328.
8.
Greenberg, M., Craighill, P., Mayer, H., Zukin, C., & Wells, J. (2001).Brownfield redevelopment and affordable housing: A case study of New Jersey. Housing Policy Debate, 12, 515-540.
9.
Gunts, E. (1998a, June 2). City eyes proposal for Barre Station. Baltimore Sun, p. 1B.
10.
Gunts, E. (1998b, September 1). Company to build housing east of B & O Museum. Baltimore Sun, p. 2B.
11.
Gunts, E. (1999, May 16). A Camden to call home. Baltimore Sun, p. 1K.
12.
Howland, M. (2000). The impact of contamination on the Canton/Southeast Baltimore land market. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66, 411-420.
13.
Howland, M. (2002, November 20). The legacy of contamination, Carroll Camden Industrial Area. Presented at the meetings of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Baltimore, Maryland.
14.
Howland, M.,& Dubroff, M. (1997, November 15). The demand for industrial/flex warehouse space in south east Baltimore. Unpublished manuscript, University of Maryland, Urban Studies and Planning Program.
15.
International City Managers Association. (1998). Beyond city limits, best practices from ICMA’s 1998 brownfield peer exchanges. Washington, DC: Author.
16.
Klein, A. (1998, March 24). Developers back out of Koppers deal. Baltimore Sun, p. 1B.
17.
Kline, A. (1996, October 21). Developers taking risk on former copper refinery. Baltimore Business Journal, p. 1.
18.
Kozera, D. W. (1995, September 5). Environmental site characterization and remediation feasibility study, Pistorio Property, 1601 South Highland Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland. Unpublished report, environmental consultant for the Mary- land Department of the Environment.
19.
Kozera, D.W. (1996, May 10). Pistorio property, soil stabilization bench study, 1601 South Highland Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland (Contract No. 95014). Unpublished report, environmental consultant for the Maryland Department of the Environment.
20.
Maryland Department of the Environment. (1996, December). Brownfields assessment, Parkin Street site, Baltimore, Maryland. Baltimore: Author and Waste Management Administration.
21.
Maryland Department of the Environment. (1997, April 18). A brownfields success story. Baltimore: Author.
22.
Maryland Department of the Environment. (2001, January). Barre Station/Camden Crossing project chronology. Unpublished internal memo.
23.
Maryland S. 340. (1997). Brownfields—Voluntary cleanup and revitalization program. Senate Bill 340.
24.
McCabe, D. (1995, May 14). City neighborhood pins hopes on revitalization. Baltimore Sun, p. 1L.
25.
McGrath, D. T. (1995, December). An investigation into the impact of hazardous waste contamination liability on urban industrial land redevelopment in the city of Chicago. Chicago: University of Illinois–Chicago, Great Cities Institute.
26.
Metroventures. (2002, July 12). Declaration of deed restriction (Draft No. 164327 VKO, Vol. 3). Baltimore: Author.
27.
Meyer, P. B., & Lyons, T. S. (2000). Lessons from private sector brownfield redevelopers. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66, 46-57.
28.
Mirabella, L. (1994a, January 16). Developers offer plans for vacant lot in Pigtown. Baltimore Sun, p. 1L.
29.
Mirabella, L. (1994b, April 22). Pigtown site to get 113 townhouses. Baltimore Sun, p. 12D.
30.
Mirabella, L. (1996, March 8). Site work delayed at townhome project. Baltimore Sun, p. 1C.
31.
Nubgart, R. (1998, March 29). “Clean” polluted site too risky. Baltimore Sun, p. 1L.
32.
Obrecht gets $20K grant to renovate brownfields site. (1996, July 11). The Daily Record, p. 1.
33.
Page, W. G., & Rabinowitz, H. (1993). Groundwater contamination: Its effects on property values and cities. Journal of the American Planning Association, 59, 473-481.
34.
Page, W. G., & Rabinowitz, H. (1994). Potential for redevelopment of contaminated brownfield sites. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 353-363.
35.
Penn, I. (2000, January 20). Board of estimates OKs first payment for townhouse development on west side; $3.5 million deal approved over comptroller's advice. Baltimore Sun, p. 8B.
36.
Pepper, E. M. (1997). Lessons from the field. Washington, DC: Northeast Midwest Institute.
37.
Ryland in Pigtown. (1994, April 26). Editorial. Baltimore Sun, p. 10A.
38.
Sanborn Map Company. (1890). Baltimore City fire insurance maps. Chicago, IL: Author.
39.
Sanborn Map Company. (1901). Baltimore City fire insurance maps. Chicago, IL: Author.
40.
Sanborn Map Company. (1915). Baltimore City fire insurance maps. Chicago, IL: Author.
41.
Sanborn Map Company. (1953). Baltimore City fire insurance maps. Chicago, IL: Author.
42.
Sandercock, L., & Dovey, K. (2002).Pleasure, politics, and the public interest: Melbourne’s Riverscape revitalization. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68, 151-164.
43.
Schoenbaum, M. (2002). Environmental contamination, brownfields policy, and economic redevelopment in an industrial area of Baltimore. Land Economics, 78, 60-71.
44.
Schriner, J. (1998, March 2). Brownfields still too risky. Industry Week, p. 8.
45.
Simons, R. (1998). Turning brownfields into greenbacks. Washington, DC: Urban Land Institute.
46.
Spotts, Stevens and McCoy, Inc. (1992, February 14). Environmental assessment report at 250 Scott St., Baltimore, Mary- land for Department of Housing and Community Development. Baltimore: Author.
47.
Staley, S. R. (1996). Environmental policy and urban revitalization: The role of lender liability. Capital University Law Review, 25, 51-75.
48.
Swartz, R. O. (1994). Michigan’s approach to urban redevelopment involving contaminated properties. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 329-337.
49.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1992). Guidance for performing site inspections under CERCLA (Directive 9345. 1-05). Washington, DC: Author and Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
50.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2002). Expediting clean-up and redevelopment of brownfields: Addressing the major barriers to private sector involvement—Real or perceived. Report of the Environmental Finance Board to Carol Browner. Available from http://www.epa.gov/efinpage/brncle/htm
51.
Wernstedt, K., & Hersh, R. (1998). Urban land use and superfund cleanups. Journal of Urban Affairs, 20, 459-474.
52.
Wernstedt, K., & Meyer, P. (2002, November 20). To risk or not to risk: Environmental insurance and urban revitalization. Paper presented at the meetings of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Baltimore, Maryland.
53.
Wheeler, T. (1997, February 2). Brownfields bill to help reuse old industrial sites. Baltimore Sun, p. 1B.
54.
Yount, K. (1997). The organizational contexts of decisions to invest in environmentally risky urban properties. Journal of Economic Issues, 31, 367-373.
55.
Yount, K., & Meyer, P. (1994). Bankers, developers, and new investment in brownfield sites: Environmental concerns and the social psychology of risk. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 338-344.
