integrated and inclusive planning for sustainable...
TRANSCRIPT
INTEGRATED AND INCLUSIVE PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION
By
JENIFFER SUH-KYUNG SHIN
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2016
© 2016 Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin
To my parents
4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I thank the each member of my dissertation supervisory committee: Dr.
Kathryn Frank, Dr. Joseli Macedo, Dr. Abhinav Alakshendra, and Dr. Mike Spranger.
Also, there is one more person who supports my dissertation; I thank Jeanne Dubois, a
former executive director of the Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation. I
was so fortunate to have conversations and discussions with you all for my academic
progress. I also thank Lisa De LaCure who assisted editing process of this manuscript.
To you all, what we have shared during this doctoral program continues to invigorate my
life-long academic career. Last but not least, I thank my parents for their endless
support and encouragement which make me toward this achievement. Also, l thank my
sister, brother in law, and precious nephew.
“I can do all this through him who gives me strength” (Philippians 4:13, The New
International Version).
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 9
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ 10
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... 11
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 13
Research Overview................................................................................................. 13
Organization of the Study ....................................................................................... 17
2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 22
Brownfield Revitalization as a Platform for Sustainable Community Development ....................................................................................................... 22
The Lack of Policy Instruments for Integrated Environmental Remediation and Economic Development ......................................................................... 27
The Growing Emphasis on Inclusive Planning in the Decision-Making Process ......................................................................................................... 29
Redefining the Role of Local Actors for Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization ....... 32 Defining Study Keywords ........................................................................................ 40
Integrated and Inclusive Planning .................................................................... 41 Transition of Brownfield Revitalization toward Sustainable Community
Development ................................................................................................. 43 The Summary of Literature Review......................................................................... 44
3 RESEARCH METHOD ........................................................................................... 46
Case Study ............................................................................................................. 46
Analytical Framework.............................................................................................. 48 Analytic Steps ......................................................................................................... 51
The Brownfield Revitalization Stage ................................................................. 51 The Transition to Sustainable Community Development Stage ....................... 52
The Sustainable Community Development Stage ............................................ 54 Case Selection Criteria and Data Collection ........................................................... 58
4 THE FAIRMOUNT INDIGO LINE CDC COLLABORATIVE CASE.......................... 64
Description of the Boston Case .............................................................................. 65
The Collaborative and Dorchester Area in Boston, MA........................................... 70
6
Policy Elements of the Boston Case ....................................................................... 72 Federal-Level Actor and Policy Instruments: EPA and HUD Brownfield
Programs and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities’ Brownfield Pilots ............................................................................................................. 72
State-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Massachusetts Brownfield Act of 1998 and State Insurance, Incentives, and Funding ........................... 73
Municipal-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Fairmount Indigo Planning Initiative .................................. 74
Policy settings: Federal Brownfield Policies, the Central Artery/Tunnel Project, and the Fairmount Indigo Commuter Rail Line Project ..................... 75
The Collaborative: Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and Southwest Boston CDC................................................................................. 77
Sketching the Policy Environment of the Boston Case ........................................... 78
5 THE BANWOL INDUSTRIAL PARK REVITALIZATION CASE .............................. 80
Description of the Ansan Case ............................................................................... 81 The Banwol Industrial Park and the City of Ansan in Korea.................................... 84
Policy Elements and the Industrial Policy Division .................................................. 86 National-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Ministry of Trade,
Industry, and Energy (MOTIE) and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) with the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Act ........ 86
Regional-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: Gyeonggi Regional Government and Gyeonggi Vision 2030: the West Coast Industrial Belt ...... 87
Local-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: Potential of Local Industrial Community Participation ............................................................................... 87
Policy Settings: the New Ansan Subway Line Project ...................................... 88 The Industrial Policy Division in the City of Ansan ............................................ 89
Sketching the Policy Environment of the Ansan Case ............................................ 89
6 INTEGRATED PLANNING IN BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION .......................... 92
Evaluating the Performance of Integrated Planning in the Boston Case ................ 92 The 65 Bay Street Reuse for Light Industrial Redevelopment .......................... 95
Project Narrative ........................................................................................ 96 Analysis of Planning Activities .................................................................... 99
Analysis of Funding Requirements .......................................................... 100 The Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Small Business Center Project ........ 102
Project Narrative ...................................................................................... 102 Analysis of Planning Activities .................................................................. 105
Analysis of Financial Requirements ......................................................... 105 The Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot...................... 107
Project Narrative ...................................................................................... 108 Analysis of Planning Activities .................................................................. 110
Analysis of Financial Requirements ......................................................... 112 Findings in Case Analysis .............................................................................. 112
7
The Importance of Community Development Corporations and Quasi-Public/Social Capitals ........................................................................... 113
Evaluating the Performance of Integrated Planning in the Ansan Case ............... 114 Project Narrative: an Obsolete Textile Dyeing Industrial Complex ................. 116
Analysis of Planning Activities .................................................................. 118 Analysis of Financial Requirements ......................................................... 120
Findings in Case Analysis .............................................................................. 121
7 INCLUSIVE PLANNING IN BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION ............................ 123
The Boston Case: Inclusionary Action in Community Revitalization ..................... 123 Inclusive Planning in the 65 Bay Street Redevelopment and the Bornstein &
Pearl Food Production Center ..................................................................... 124 Establishing an Inclusionary Environment through a Diverse Interested
Actor’s Intervention: the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot ........................................................................................... 128
Findings in Case Analysis: Inclusive Planning Fosters the Social Capital of Disadvantaged Communities in Brownfields ............................................... 130
The Ansan Case: the Potential of Reformed Policies and Cooperative Structure . 132 Streamlined Planning Process and Inclusive Planning Need ......................... 134
Findings in Case Analysis: the Necessity of Inclusive Planning for Project Success....................................................................................................... 138
8 BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................... 141
Finding a Link between Planning Mechanisms and Sustainable Community Development ..................................................................................................... 141
The Boston Case: Becoming an Example of Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization ..................................................................................................... 142
How Integrated Environmental Remediation and Economic Development Planning Created a Sustainable Land Reuse Mechanism .......................... 143
How Inclusive Planning Fostered Local Community’s Potential for Long-Term Community Development ................................................................... 147
The Ansan Case: Beyond Economic Revitalization toward Comprehensive and Sustainable Industrial Development .................................................................. 151
The Potential for Cooperative National and Local Industrial Revitalization Initiative ....................................................................................................... 153
How Collaborative Governance Can Make a Milestone for Sustainable Industrial Revitalization in Korea ................................................................. 157
9 DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................... 161
Cross-Case Analysis to Envision Sustainable Community Development ............. 161
Substantive Paths to Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization: Connecting Environmental Remediation and Economic Redevelopment....................... 164
8
Substantive Paths to Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization: Maintaining Inclusive Planning for Community Sustainability ......................................... 165
The Great Potential of Local Planning Initiatives and Community-Based Revitalization Process ....................................................................................... 168
10 CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................... 172
Study Limitation and Future Study ........................................................................ 172
General Policy Recommendations ........................................................................ 174
APPENDIX
A STREAMLINED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS IN SOUTH KOREA .................................................................................................... 177
B THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION’S SPECTRUM OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ......................................................... 179
C INTERVIEW INFORMED CONSENT IN THE US ................................................. 180
D INTERVIEW INFORMED CONSENT IN SOUTH KOREA .................................... 182
E SITE HISTORY COMPARISON ........................................................................... 185
LIST OF REFERENCES ............................................................................................. 186
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................... 204
9
LIST OF TABLES
Table page 3-1 Description of the explanatory and responsive variables in the analytical
framework. .......................................................................................................... 59
4-1 Demographic description of neighborhoods around the Collaborative ............... 65
4-2 Description of existing built-environment conditions of neighborhoods around the Collaborative ................................................................................................. 66
4-3 Description of case study variables, the Boston case ......................................... 67
5-1 Area, demographics, and built-environment descriptions of the city of Ansan and Banwol Industrial Park ................................................................................. 81
5-2 Description of the case study variables, the Ansan case .................................... 82
6-1 Summary of three projects led by the Collaborative and the variance of diverse interested actors’ involvement ................................................................ 94
6-2 The funding use of the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project ...... 104
6-3 The characteristics of workforce and subcontractors in the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center by percentage (%) ..................................................... 105
6-4 The funding sources of the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project 107
6-5 Summary of a textile dyeing industrial complex revitalization project led by the industrial policy division and national agencies .......................................... 116
10
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page 2-1 Gaps of knowledge found in the literature review. .............................................. 40
3-1 Analytical framework .......................................................................................... 50
3-2 The analytic step of the brownfield revitalization stage. ...................................... 52
3-3 The analytic step of the transition stage. ............................................................ 54
3-4 The analytic step of the sustainable community development stage. ................. 56
3-5 Analytic steps of case study process. ................................................................. 57
4-1 A key map of the Fairmount Indigo Corridor and project sites ............................ 64
5-1 A key map of Banwol Industrial Park .................................................................. 80
6-1 Analysis process of the Boston case .................................................................. 93
6-2 Analysis process of the Ansan case ................................................................. 115
7-1 Inclusive planning model based on civic engagement and outreach process by the Boston case ........................................................................................... 132
8-1 Case development stages in analytical framework ........................................... 142
8-2 The Collaborative’s integrated brownfield revitalization model ......................... 146
8-3 The Collaborative’s unified model of integrated and inclusive planning process ............................................................................................................. 151
9-1 The level of local participation in the Boston and Ansan cases ........................ 167
A-1 Streamlined industrial (re)development process in South Korea ...................... 178
B-1 The International Association of Public Participation’s spectrum of public participation ...................................................................................................... 179
E-1 Case history and comparison ........................................................................... 185
11
Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
INTEGRATED AND INCLUSIVE PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE BROWNFIELD
REVITALIZATION
By
Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin
August 2016
Chair: Kathryn I. Frank Cochair: Joseli Macedo Major: Design, Construction, and Planning
Brownfield revitalization is an urban revitalization strategy that is linked to
sustainable community development consisting of local initiative with diverse
stakeholders. According to a review of the literature on brownfield revitalization in
Western Countries, integrated planning resources and inclusive decision-making
process contribute to making brownfield revitalization a form of sustainable community
development. Currently, Korea has developed industrial revitalization policies to
revitalize obsolete industrial parks, though these are at the initial stage of policy and
practice development. Therefore, this dissertation conducts a comparative case study
that analyzes the federal/national level policies and local/municipal level practices in the
U.S. and Korea. By focusing on a local practice comparison (between the Fairmount
Indigo Corridor, underutilized commuter rail lines, in Boston, Massachusetts and the
Banwol industrial park project in Ansan, Korea), this study identifies the relationships
between policy elements and integrated/inclusive planning and assesses the impact of
integrated/inclusive planning on community sustainability in the selected cases.
12
This study finds that, in the Boston case, integrated and inclusive planning
facilitated the connection of environmental remediation to economic development as
well as inclusive decision-making processes. Specifically, the significant factors that
transferred brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development include (1)
interagency partnerships among diverse stakeholders, (2) federal and state’s cohesive
policies of environmental remediation and economic development, and (3) community-
based planning. This study finds that these factors can be applied to the Ansan case's
procedural and strategic policy development. Accordingly, this study, first, proposes that
the national and local management committees of the Banwol revitalization be
composed of diverse members from multiple levels of government as well as from
academia, private sectors, and civic organizations in order to represent various interests
in Banwol’s revitalization. Second, this study addresses enhancing the Banwol’s
streamlined environmental review process by balancing the anticipated environmental,
economic, and social impacts of the industrial park’s revitalization. Lastly, based on the
Boston case and the potential of the Ansan case, this study argues that local
organizational actors need to assist the targeted communities of industrial revitalization
in envisioning their long-term community development plans through brownfield
revitalization planning.
13
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Research Overview
Revitalizing the abandoned industrial and environmentally contaminated
properties called brownfields is a global urban planning issue (Raco & Henderson,
2006), and brownfield redevelopment has been assessed as an opportunity to improve
the quality of life of the communities near brownfields (De Sousa, Wu, & Westphal,
2009; Leigh & Coffin, 2010). Both academic literature and local practice identify the fact
that brownfield redevelopment contributes to environmental, economic, and social
improvement in the surrounding communities (Anderson, 2013; Eisen, 2009; EPA,
2013; Paull, 2013). The literature on this topic particularly emphasizes the necessity of
policy instruments and actions that connect environmental remediation to economic
redevelopment for successful brownfield revitalization (Opp, 2009). In addition, local
brownfield practice finds that building partnerships is a key planning strategy for
successful brownfield revitalization (EPA, 2013). However, brownfield revitalization
consists of complex planning processes and requires organized governance structures
(Adam, 2004; Adams & Hutchison, 2000; Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006; Meyer & Lyons,
2000). Although municipalities are commonly the main agent of local brownfield
projects, more variety of local actors and accessible governance are needed in order to
overcome the complexity of brownfield revitalization projects and to create solid
governance that maintains local brownfield revitalization initiatives (Gute & Taylor, 2006;
Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006; Meyer & Lyons, 2000).
To foster flexible and distributive local governance in brownfield revitalization,
local actors need to build (1) integrated planning that connects planning and
14
implementation of environmental remediation and local economic development, and
also construct (2) inclusive planning that enables diverse stakeholders to participate in a
planning process and to affect decision-making. However, the research and practice of
brownfield revitalization often lack knowledge regarding how to lead local actors toward
effective and collective planning actions (Greeberg & Lewis, 2000; Gute & Taylor, 2006;
Solitare & Lowrie, 2012). The present study focuses on this knowledge gap and sets
research objectives to investigate how policy elements are constructed in local-level
brownfield revitalization practices; the goal of this inquiry is to identify how local actors
connect environmental remediation to economic development (a part of integrated
planning) and facilitate an inclusive decision-making process. Also, the research verifies
how integrated and inclusive planning affects community development and sustainability.
This study specifies research questions and creates an analytical framework based on
three research inquiries that (1) verify the policy environment of brownfield revitalization,
(2) examine integrated and inclusive planning processes created by the policy
environment, and (3) assess the impact of those processes on community sustainability.
The first group of research questions, which examine the relationships between
explanatory policy elements and local actors to verify the policy environment of
brownfield revitalization, includes:
How do diverse interested actors (federal and state governments) and local actors (municipalities and community-based organizations) interact to conduct effective brownfield revitalization planning and implementation?
What and how are policy instruments and settings used for effective brownfield revitalization planning and implementation?
The second group of research questions, which analyze how the verified policy
environment creates integrated and inclusive planning (performance), includes:
15
How do local actors in brownfield revitalization link environmental remediation to economic development?
How do local actors in brownfield revitalization facilitate inclusive planning and decision-making processes?
How do diverse interested actors intervene in integrating environmental remediation and economic development as well as in inclusive planning?
The last group of research questions, which evaluate the impact of performance on
project outcome and community sustainability, includes:
How does integrated and inclusive planning affect project outcomes and community sustainability?
What policy implications in this impact assessment construct collaborative local governance for sustainable brownfield revitalization?
An analytical framework to investigate the three parts of the research inquiry
consists of observing three progressive stages of brownfield revitalization: (1) the
brownfield revitalization stage, (2) the transition to sustainable community development
stage, and (3) the sustainable community development stage. Regarding the brownfield
revitalization stage, this study identifies the planning activities and results originating in
the policy environment of brownfield revitalization constructed by policy elements. In
terms of the transition to sustainable community development stage, this study
examines the integrated and inclusive planning processes created by the planning
activities and results from the interactions among policy elements in the previous stage.
Lastly, regarding the sustainable community development stage, the study assesses the
impact of integrated and inclusive planning on community development and
sustainability.
This study conducts a comparative case study based on this analytical
framework, investigating two local practices in the US and South Korea. International
16
comparison of cases in this study contributes to expanding the scope of applicability of
single-case analysis to another case which has both contextual similarity and difference
(Yin, 2014). The selected local brownfield practices are respectively led by Community
Development Corporations (CDCs) and municipalities. This study established the
components of the analytical framework based on the findings of the literature review on
brownfield revitalization. Also, indicators of institutional environment (Zucker, 1987) and
brownfield policy instruments (Alexander, 2015) were considered. This study uses the
components of the analytical framework to examine the collected data which consist of
(1) formal and informal interviews with staff and officials, (2) officially published
documents from journals, local news media, organizations, and web sources, and (3)
legislative and administrative documents. The research focuses on identifying relational
contexts among policy elements and local actors by analyzing collected data. Also,
inter-governmental structures (joint planning processes of federal/national,
state/regional, and city governments) provide a way to collect data and organize the
analytical research steps in each case. The local actors represent a responsive variable
in each selected case, and all of the other variables are explanatory variables that
interact with the responsive variable.
The selected case study areas are located in Southeast Boston, Massachusetts
and the city of Ansan, Korea. In Boston, the Fairmount Corridor and the Fairmount
Indigo Community Development Corporations (CDCs) Collaborative (hereafter known
as the Boston case) are selected as a case of brownfield revitalization in the U.S. The
present study also selects the Banwol industrial park revitalization (hereafter known as
the Ansan case) and the industrial policy division in the city of Ansan as an industrial
17
revitalization case in Korea. In South Korea, revitalizing underutilized industrial parks is
the main objective of industrial revitalization policy; accordingly, these efforts provide a
common ground of comparative research on revitalizing brownfields and industrial sites.
The Boston case is led by a local civic organization, while the Ansan case is led by a
municipal agency. By conducting a comparative case study between the Boston and
Ansan cases, the present study synthesizes the distinct findings of policy environments,
integrated/inclusive planning processes, and community sustainability in each case. The
synthesized results suggest policy implications for creating effective local governance
that links brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development.
Organization of the Study
From its introduction to its conclusion, the present study consists of a total of ten
chapters. This introduction chapter provides an overview that will help readers to
understand the dissertation’s overarching idea and structure. Chapter 2 Literature
Review contains an analysis of the existing literature on brownfield revitalization and
sustainable community development. In this review, academic literature and local
brownfield best practices inform the readers about the existing relationships between
brownfield revitalization, integrated/inclusive planning, and the potential of local actors.
Based on the findings of this literature review, this study establishes research questions.
Chapter 3 Research Method establishes an analytical framework based on the
literature review that identifies the knowledge gaps regarding integrated and inclusive
planning, and the role of local actors in brownfield revitalization. Theoretically, the
knowledge gaps reveal that integrated and inclusive planning affects the transition of
brownfield revitalization into sustainable community development. Thus, the present
study builds an analytical framework based on this theoretical relationship. The
18
analytical framework is composed of three progressive stages: the brownfield
revitalization stage, the transition to sustainable community development stage, and the
sustainable community development stage.
Chapters 4 and 5 provide the descriptive analyses of the Boston and Ansan
cases, respectively. The Boston case involves grassroots initiatives and cooperative
network governance. On the other hand, the Ansan case is led by a municipal agency
that forms local governance. This case context, the different type of leading local actors,
provides a comparative case study background to investigate the similarities and
differences between the two cases. The two selected cases have a similar inter-
governmental policy structure (with federal/national, state/regional, and municipal
levels) and solid federal/national level brownfield/industrial revitalization initiatives. By
contrast, the local initiatives and governance structures exhibit differences in terms of
the characteristics of local-level central actors and their planning process.
In Chapter 6 Integrated Planning, the present study conducts research on the
integrated planning in the Boston and Ansan cases. The research focuses on the
connectedness between environmental remediation and economic development by
examining the interactions between local actors and explanatory policy elements.
Planning activities and funding requirements are indicators to analyze those interactions
in each case. In the Boston case, the state brownfield programs play a major role to
connect environmental remediation and economic development for local brownfield
projects. Furthermore, this case shows incidences of community development
corporations, as members of the Fairmount Indigo Collaborative, actively conducting
19
economic development by planning affordable housing and light industrial development
through the federal and state programs as well as national non-profit funds.
In the Ansan case, the present study examines planning activities and funding
requirements within national- and local-level boundaries. The research identifies that the
core of the integrated planning process, in this case, mainly relies on the combination of
national policymaking and municipal agency’s planning and execution. However, the
Ansan case, to a large extent, lacks the type of local assets that induced the integration
of planning resources and funding opportunities identified in the Boston case.
In Chapter 7 Inclusive Planning, the study intensifies its analysis of the inclusive
planning created in each case. In the Boston case, the Dorchester Bay Economic
Development Corporation (DB EDC), a member of the Collaborative, led community
organizing and built collaborative local network governance in the initial planning
process of the Fairmount Corridor revitalization. The DB EDC’s community organizing
process began with launching a joint partnership with local civic organizations such as
housing associations near targeted project areas. Such local partnerships provide a
background of community-based planning that prioritizes the impacted communities’
needs and facilitates their participation in making decisions. Accordingly, the
brownfield/community redevelopment projects in the Boston case enable gaps between
the different development interests of local communities and other stakeholders to be
closed.
In the Ansan case, the national initiative of industrial parks revitalization
constitutes policies and programs that guide local agencies’ roles and ensure their
authority to execute site- and community-specific industrial parks revitalization. This
20
national motion indicates the potential for an inclusive planning process in industrial
park revitalization. In fact, the national laws for industrial revitalization require
establishing both national and local management committees to connect national
policies and assistance to local planning initiatives. Yet, in the Ansan case, the local-
level entities are experiencing a lack of local assets with which to collaborate. Thus, the
industrial policy division, a local actor of the Ansan case, should consider DB EDC’s
community-organizing strategies in order to identify local stakeholders who can conduct
on-site research and develop collective local actions.
Chapter 8 Brownfield Revitalization and Sustainable Community synthesizes the
analyses of the integrated and inclusive planning process analyzed in Chapter 6 and 7.
The Boston case proves that integrated and inclusive planning is covariates that link
brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development. On the other hand, the
Ansan case is in between the brownfield revitalization stage and the transition to
sustainable community development stage according to the analytical framework. Thus,
the present study only verifies that the Ansan case has established a policy
environment that might aid the capacity of local actors to develop integrated and
inclusive planning. In addition, this study anticipates that integrated and inclusive
planning contributes to supplementing the streamlined environmental review process in
industrial (re)development procedures by facilitating diverse stakeholders in decision-
making.
Discussion chapter focuses on how the study’s results underscore the
importance of local actors’ capacity and roles in brownfield and industrial revitalization.
According to the Boston case analysis, the participation of civic organizations
21
(community development corporations) can increase a project’s capability of actualizing
integrated and inclusive planning for the long-term community development that
originates in brownfield revitalization. In this respect, the Ansan case could consider
applying inclusive planning in the Boston case to its community outreach strategies for a
local management committee. Also, the industrial policy division, a municipal actor of
the Ansan case, could instate the integrated planning of environmental remediation and
economic development through the model of site remediation and affordable
housing/light industrial economic development in the Boston case.
In the last chapter, Conclusion, the present study proposes future studies that
test the transferability of the integrated and inclusive planning verified in the Boston
case to industrial parks revitalization projects in South Korea. Also, this study applies
the analytical framework to other local brownfield practices in the US for theory testing,
which verifies the relationships among brownfield revitalization, integrated/inclusive
planning, and sustainable community development.
22
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
According to the academic literature, brownfield revitalization is a strategy of
urban revitalization. However, there is a lack of connectedness between environmental
remediation and economic development; therefore, it is necessary to develop various
policies and programs that integrate environmental remediation and economic
development. At the same time, local brownfield best practices place an emphasis on
diverse stakeholders’ participation in the brownfield revitalization planning process. The
literature particularly notes that early civic engagement contributes to inclusive and
equitable planning that facilitates democratic decision-making and distributive project
outcomes in brownfield revitalization. Therefore, it is necessary to examine the inclusive
planning process indicated in brownfield best practices and build guidelines for inclusive
planning out of this analysis.
This study considers the lack of connectedness between environmental
remediation and economic development in brownfield revitalization as a knowledge gap
related to integrated planning processes. Also, the present study argues that inclusive
planning processes need to be examined and generalized in order to better understand
the role played by inclusive planning in successful brownfield revitalization.
Furthermore, this research theorizes that filling the knowledge gaps within integrated
and inclusive planning in brownfield revitalization will contribute to transforming
brownfield revitalization into sustainable community development.
Brownfield Revitalization as a Platform for Sustainable Community Development
Urban revitalization, which is the process of reviving obsolete and degraded city
infrastructure and communities, has a history that is decades long. In particular,
23
brownfields, real properties that were once used as industrial and commercial lands,
have the potential to cause environmental harm that threatens human health and
environmental security (EPA, 2013). Furthermore, the environmental conditions of
brownfield sites degrade the economic vitality and quality of life in their surrounding
communities (De Sousa, Wu, & Westphal, 2009; Leigh & Coffin, 2010). In academia
and practice, a wide variety of literature has examined the issue of brownfields and
related environmental, economic, and social problems. Sustainable development
literature, in particular, provides the theoretical framework for how to resolve the multi-
faceted brownfield problems (Hollander, Kirkwood, & Gold, 2010). Dale and Newman
(2009) note that the three tenets of sustainable development – environmental,
economic, and social dimensions – justify local brownfield redevelopment initiatives that
accompany the growing capability of community sustainability. Furthermore, Bleicher
and Gross (2010) assess the potential of brownfield redevelopment for sustainable
development through three different sustainability goals: “securing human existence,
maintaining society’s productive potential, and preserving society’s options for
development and action” (p. 61). Thus, the environmental, economic, and social tenets
of sustainable development reassess brownfields as an impetus that can improve the
environmental, economic, and social quality of local communities. Raco and Henderson
(2006) note that brownfield development has emerged as a core feature of strategies to
regenerate urban areas under the central planning themes of urban development:
“sustainable development, holistic revitalization, and community capacity-building” (p.
499). In this study, it is expected that brownfield revitalization constitutes sustainable
24
community development if its planning and practice adopt integrative and community-
based development approaches.
However, the environmental conditions of brownfields produce various obstacles
that demand complex and long-term remediation and redevelopment processes. In
environmental remediation, brownfields impose potential legal liabilities and cleanup
responsibilities to degraded environmental settings (Meyer & Lyons, 2000; Opp, 2009).
After brownfield cleanup is done, furthermore, the uncertainties of economic investment
create additional pressures on brownfield redevelopment (Heberle and Wernstedt, 2006;
Meyer & Lyons, 2000). Moreover, the brownfield remediation and redevelopment
processes require the long-term commitment of stakeholders and local communities,
which addresses the issue of inclusive planning and decision-making processes
(Greenberg, Mayer, Lowrie, & Shaw, 2008). Brownfield revitalization should be limited
to sustainable community development that resolves the intertwined layers of
challenges that brownfields present (Solitare & Lowrie, 2012). Thus, the planning for
brownfield revitalization should adopt environmental management and community
development in order to overcome the embedded environmental, economic, and social
challenge in brownfield remediation and redevelopment (Paull, 2008; 2013).
In brownfield revitalization, environmental management focuses on
environmental remediation policy and implementation that affects the natural and
human environments near brownfields. Nijkamp, Rodenburg, and Wagtendonk (2002)
point out that site-specific remediation designs as well as integrated legal, economic,
and social policy instruments are able to decrease cleanup costs and connect
remediation processes to socioeconomic redevelopment. Integrated brownfield
25
remediation policies can result in various outcomes, from decreasing urban sprawl to
regenerating blighted urban areas, to improving community health. Remediating
brownfield sites is a strategic planning approach to control urban sprawl and induce
compact city development (Greenberg, Lowrie, Mayer, Miller, & Solitare, 2001). Heberle
and Wernstedt (2006) note that, according to a report by Deason, Sherk, and Carroll
(2001), “‘[e]very acre of reclaimed Brownfields saves 4.5 acres of greenspace such as
park and recreation areas’” (p. 487). At the same time, brownfields, with their proximity
to economic and social infrastructures, are prioritized to foster sustainable urban
communities (Dale & Newman, 2009). In addition, Litt, Tran, and Burke (2002) argue
that substantial health disparities in urban populations correlate to the existence of
brownfield sites; therefore, addressing public health issues via brownfield cleanup is
essential to both the quality of community health and redevelopment.
In this respect, brownfield revitalization has a wide spectrum of sustainable
development that embraces the sustainability of natural, built, and human environments.
Holistic planning processes and the cohesive use of policy instruments are major
factors in such diverging causes and effects of brownfield revitalization (Australian
Public Service Commission [APSC], 2007). In other words, coordinating planning
processes and resources is crucial to reaching the goal of sustainable development.
The main point of the holistic and cohesive planning of brownfield revitalization is to
connect the environmental remediation process to the economic/community
redevelopment process.
Broadly, the brownfield revitalization process consists of three phases: site
assessment, remediation, and redevelopment (The U.S. Environmental Protection
26
Agency [EPA], 2015). The guidelines of the Superfund cleanup process recommend
beginning redevelopment planning at the remedial investigation and design phase of
site assessment. In this phase, stakeholders need to develop plans and designs for
both environmental remediation and economic/community redevelopment. Specifically,
remedial investigation, design, and redevelopment planning influence each component
through the planning and decision-making processes. For example, the level of
remedial action designated by remedial design decides the expected quality and
outcome of remediation; accordingly, future land use planning necessarily takes these
remedial quality and outcome expectations into account for securing the future
development of remediated sites. As indicated in this procedural feature, cohesiveness
between remediation and redevelopment planning is essential in order to maintain the
process of brownfield revitalization. An obvious impact factor that bolsters this
cohesiveness is an inclusive planning process that facilitates interactions between the
public, private, and community actors involved in brownfield revitalization. Greenberg
and Lewis (2000) argue that it is worthwhile to devote municipal and private
development efforts to engaging local communities in the early planning processes of
brownfield redevelopment. Based on this argument, furthermore, early and genuine
local stakeholder participation creates accessible planning environments that increase
the feasibility of remediation and redevelopment planning.
In short, brownfield revitalization is a strategic planning feature for sustainable
community development. Cohesively integrated remediation and redevelopment
planning increases the sustainability of brownfield revitalization; at the same time,
meaningful stakeholder participation builds integrated and shared planning
27
environments for the brownfield revitalization process. In other words, integrated
remediation and redevelopment planning and meaningful stakeholder participation are
prerequisites that connect brownfield revitalization to sustainable community
development. However, the ability of the existing brownfield policy environment to fully
adopt these two conditions for directing brownfield revitalization toward the desired
community development is limited.
The Lack of Policy Instruments for Integrated Environmental Remediation and Economic Development
In general, brownfield revitalization projects begin when there are a responsible
and eligible entity and a local call for its revitalization. This beginning indicates that the
purpose of brownfield remediation is to transform blighted and underused areas into
productive and receptive places. Planning and implementation strategies of reusing
brownfields commonly rely on economic redevelopment to make brownfields productive
and receptive. In brownfield revitalization, economic development approaches affect the
surrounding property values, the local tax revenues, and the success of local
businesses (Dalton, Riggs, & Yandle, 1996; Habisreutinger & Gunderson, 2006; Hamm
& Walzer, 2007; De Sousa, 2002; 2005; De Sousa, Wu, & Westphal, 2009; Coffin &
Barbero, 2009). Even though brownfields are obsolete and neglected, such sites were
once used for commercial and/or industrial properties; thus, the physical settings of
brownfield sites typically entail proximity to public infrastructures such as sewers, roads,
and electricity. These locational benefits promote the attractiveness and
competitiveness of brownfield redevelopment by reducing the required entry fees of
land development (Eisen, 2009; Paull, 2013). However, cleanup costs and potential
liabilities counteract these locational benefits; thus, federal, state/regional, and local
28
governments often offer legal, administrative, and technical supports to lower the
barriers of brownfield redevelopment. In particular, state programs such as voluntary
cleanup programs and various tax credits, incentives, and grants make brownfield
redevelopment feasible and accessible (Howland, 2007; Opp, 2009).
Opp (2009) identifies that state voluntary cleanup programs induce responsible
parties to remediate and redevelop brownfield sites by allowing liability protections.
Liability protections restrain strict cleanup liability rules; accordingly, liable parties are
able to lighten the cleanup costs and financial risks for economic investment. The scope
of state cleanup programs mainly focuses on brownfield remediation; hence, financial
needs for economic development after brownfield remediation lack governmental
funding opportunities, relatively speaking. Opp (2009) identifies that “a number of states
have started to make the connection from brownfield-property needs to other state-
supported economic development grant programs, which often have many more grant
opportunities than the brownfield programs do—but there exists a lot of room for
improvement in this connection” (p. 276). This finding explicitly addresses the existence
of a gap in policy instruments that connect brownfield remediation to the economic
development process in organizational systems. Because it limits brownfield
revitalization to environmental remediation, the policy disconnect between
environmental remediation and economic development in brownfield revitalization
imposes possible failures to the sustainability of this process.
It is essential to develop an organizational system that reinforces the missing link
between environmental remediation and economic development in the brownfield
revitalization process. Brownfield revitalization at local-level practice has a site-specific
29
nature that demands different types and amounts of planning and funding for
remediation and redevelopment. Therefore, federal- and state-level policy instruments
need to sense municipal deficiencies in order to cover local brownfield redevelopment
needs. Connecting and allocating brownfield policy instruments, however, brings
another challenge that influences the potential of brownfield revitalization for sustainable
community development. The challenge is associated with sharing planning process
and outcome of brownfield projects; furthermore, this sharing issue of process and
outcome affects the balance of environmental remediation, economic redevelopment,
and social consensus, which signifies sustainability respect in brownfield revitalization.
The Growing Emphasis on Inclusive Planning in the Decision-Making Process
Local communities are units of planning practice in which planning themes and
policies converge to make the quality of community living sustainable. In brownfield
revitalization, local communities expect to begin and maintain the search for communal
needs and collective actions, which is the primary task of community development.
However, the intertwined socioeconomic conditions of the communities residing in and
around brownfield sites hamper community development initiatives. As the
environmental justice movements have pointed out since the 1980s, hazardous waste
sites such as industrial and disposal facilities tend to be located in racial and economic
minority communities. Identifying the geographical patterns of hazardous facilities and
particular populations draws attention to the environmental disparities experienced by
members of these communities that bring health, economic, and social inequalities into
those underrepresented neighborhoods (Pastor, Sadd, & Hipp, 2001; Mohai, Pellow, &
Roberts, 2009). The contexts of brownfield sites and their surrounding communities
represent a correlation between hazardous facilities and minority populations that has
30
frequently been addressed in the environmental justice literature; thus, revitalizing
brownfields means more than just environmental cleanup and economic redevelopment.
Brownfield revitalization is an opportunity for the social reconstruction of disadvantaged
and underrepresented communities. In this respect, engaging local communities in
planning and decision-making processes is crucial because reusing brownfields offers a
second chance to address and resolve the environmental and socioeconomic problems
of disadvantaged populations. Heberle and Wernstedt (2006) found that it is best for
community involvement to begin as soon as possible in the brownfield revitalization
process. These authors’ survey research verifies that “nearly two-thirds of our public
sector respondents indicate that it is always or almost always beneficial to developers to
involve residents and community members in designing environmental response plans”
(Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006, p. 491). As shown in the literature, community involvement
in brownfield revitalization embodies the potential for equitable development:
Equitable development is an approach to creating healthy, vibrant, communities of opportunity. Equitable outcomes come about when smart, intentional strategies are put in place to ensure that low-income communities and communities of color participate in and benefit from decisions that shape their neighborhoods and regions. (PolicyLink)
As such, “smart” and “intentional” strategies that facilitate underrepresented
communities’ participation need to focus on how to resonate community inputs across
the beginning and end of the remediation and redevelopment processes. As mentioned
previously, brownfield revitalization is a core strategy of urban revitalization (Raco &
Handerson, 2006; Nolon & Salkin, 2006). In other words, the planning process of
brownfield revitalization is similar to that of urban revitalization, particularly after
brownfield cleanup is finished. Such similarity poses the probability of following the
procedures of the urban renewal programs that took place from the1930s to the 1970s,
31
which involved exclusive, discriminatory, and undistributed planning and practice
(Thomas, 2012). To prevent this possible planning failure, brownfield revitalization must
leverage community participation in its early planning process. Krumholz (1982) argues
that a planning process that pursues equity for the disadvantaged expands its capacity
in the decision-making process by building its decisions on hard and relevant
information. This implies that equitable brownfield revitalization becomes real when
experts and the impacted communities communicate and collaborate.
State voluntary cleanup programs, federal brownfield grants, and technical
supports are pipelines to actualize local brownfield revitalization initiatives. The current
federal brownfield programs have started to reinforce the support of local communities’
capacity-building. The EPA, for example, accommodates the environmental justice
programs through grants and cooperative agreements. The main goal of the programs
that provide funding for local organizations is to build partnerships, network systems,
and educational programs that invigorate the grassroots capacity of brownfield
revitalization. However, federal brownfield programs that target grassroots brownfield
initiatives are much scarcer than regular brownfield funding programs, such as site
assessment and cleanup grants. For instance, since 1994 Environmental Justice small
grants (EJ grants) by EPA have awarded average $17,142 to communities facing
environmental justice issues; however, the average amount of EJ grants is 8.9 percent
of Environmental Workforce Development and Job Training Grants (which award
$192,300 per recipient). This fact implies that the local capacity for community
participation in decision-making is limited when brownfield projects scale down to
community practice. Moreover, the circumscribed condition of local brownfield initiatives
32
influences the sustainability of brownfield revitalization in terms of the social equity
tenets of sustainable development. Thus, it is essential to building a local governance
model that underpins community participation in the decision-making process of
brownfield revitalization. Unfortunately, there has been a lack of research so far that
develops such a model for brownfield revitalization.
Redefining the Role of Local Actors for Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization
Brownfield revitalization is a site- and community-specific planning issue; thus,
local actions initiate the revitalization process. Municipal governments generally take
responsible actions for local brownfield revitalization. Meyer and Lyons (2000) note that,
“typically, when the owner of an abandoned site defaults on property taxes, the title
goes to the local government” (p. 46). However, such municipal ownership posits
lingering administrative and legal requirements that burden the private sector’s
brownfield redevelopment (Meyer & Lyons, 2000; Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006).
Furthermore, Heberle and Wernstedt (2006) assert that “public ownership is not
essential for successful brownfields redevelopment” (p. 489). In addition, Davison and
Legacy (2014) point out that the statutory requirements of land (re)development
imposed by planning authorities have negative impacts on land markets and
development outcomes. Krumholz (1982) notes that “one of the goals of city planning
was comprehensiveness, but most planners were more at home with incremental
decisions” (p. 172). The issues addressed in the literature criticize the bureaucratic and
procedural brownfield policy environments because they make the planning process dull
and dismiss cutting-edge ideas. This adverse effect of institutionalized planning
restrains the capacity of brownfield revitalization for sustainable community
development. Specifically, the adverse effects of this counteract two preconditions:
33
connecting environmental remediation to economic development and facilitating an
inclusive planning process.
However, there are local practices that offer solutions to this problem. In fact, the
well-known brownfield revitalization best practices highlight how integrating planning
resources and the collaboration of diverse stakeholders make brownfield revitalization
sustainable. The Zuni Pueblo tribal community’s petroleum brownfield redevelopment
(the Zuni Pueblo case) is an example of how to navigate the planning process of
brownfield revitalization through partnerships. The Zuni Pueblo tribe considers
brownfields (particularly abandoned gas stations and auto repair shops) as an
opportunity to discover local redevelopment potential. Next, the tribe translates
environmental problems and community needs into goal-setting for community
development (EPA, 2013, p. 1). However, the Zuni tribe faces a lack of expertise,
funding, and technologies in these efforts; accordingly, the tribe calls for support from
the public and private sectors. The federal government – the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
and the Department of Transportation (DOT) – and private-sector entities become
partners in the tribal brownfield revitalization projects. These partnerships bring planning
resources – federal funding programs and technical assistance – and help to develop
long-term community planning agendas. The issues in the Zuni Pueblo tribe’s
redevelopment projects are the liabilities and cleanup costs, the uncertainty of funding
and future investment, and the demanding long-term commitments required of
stakeholders. However, in an early planning stage, the partnerships establish
specialized task force teams that consist of four departments: the community and public
34
relations agents, the revitalization team, the intra- and intergovernmental working
groups, and the public-private partnerships (EPA, 2013). The four departments of
planning actors in the Zuni Pueblo case carry out community engagement and
environmental remediation, foster local economic capacity, and envision an area-wide
redevelopment plan. This area-wide redevelopment plan reflects how brownfield
redevelopment can become a focal point to gather other local planning needs and
redress them together comprehensively. Furthermore, integrated and shared brownfield
revitalization attracts federal and state interagency supports for the Zuni Pueblo
community. A New Mexico-targeted brownfields assessment program, EPA region 6-
targeted brownfields assessment grants, federal area-wide planning pilot grants, and
other federal and state programs are combined to enable the tribe’s brownfield
remediation and redevelopment. This case points to the fact that building partnerships
in the early planning process raises the possibility of utilizing more planning resources;
also, it emphasizes how federal and state agencies are a substantial funding and
program provider in local brownfield revitalization. However, planning implementation is
beyond the purview of federal and state stakeholders in many local brownfield practices;
accordingly, it is necessary to know how these external and internal planning resources
are managed and used.
Next, local brownfield revitalization practice can explain the important role of
municipal governments in maximizing the planning resources of local brownfield
communities. Bridgeport, Connecticut (CT), a city that has experienced stagnant growth,
is a case that shows the impact of democratic decision-making on brownfield
revitalization. Gute and Taylor (2006) analyze how the democratized decision-making
35
processes facilitate identifying the environmental risks perceived by local residents and
incorporating these community concerns into brownfield remediation and
redevelopment planning. As a result, the remediation and redevelopment outcomes
meet the needs of the end users who live near and enjoy the redeveloped brownfields.
In the Bridgeport case, a municipal government managing the brownfield planning
process invested time and effort in garnering community participation through regular
meetings and workshops. Through those community participation opportunities, local
residents were informed about the remediation processes and worked together to
envision redevelopment plans. The authors of this case study emphasized how
sustainable brownfield redevelopment needs to accommodate deliberate stakeholder
participation, secure and preserve the transparency of environmental data, prioritize the
risks addressed by the stakeholder communities, and provide public outreach and
education in order to allow various stakeholders to understand planning process (Gute
& Taylor, 2006, p. 555). The gist of inclusive, informative approaches for sustainable
brownfield revitalization is that the authorities in brownfield revitalization projects need
to adhere to “a proper balance between the ‘expert’ decision process and local control”
(Gute & Taylor, 2006, p. 555). The research conclusion of these authors indicates that
municipal governments, a common authority in brownfield revitalization, are beginning
to acknowledge the impact of community participation on making brownfield
revitalization effective and sustainable. In fact, local participation in the decision-making
process is continuing to grow from projects like these as community sustainability and
equity planning become general planning objectives in the field of urban revitalization,
including within brownfield revitalization.
36
A few remarkable brownfield reuse practices indicate the potential of grassroots
brownfield revitalization initiatives that lead the planning management and decision-
making process. For one, the City of Spartanburg in South Carolina indicates how a
grassroots initiative can empower blighted brownfield communities through
entrepreneurial local leadership. Before its brownfield revitalization efforts began, the
Arkwright and Forest Park neighborhoods in this city, home to many low-income and
African-American residents, were near two Superfund sites, six brownfields, and an on-
site manufacturing plant. Ten percent of the total population of this area was
unemployed, and the neighborhoods were initially neglected by the city’s revitalization
plan (American Planning Association, 2015). The communities experienced severe
health and economic disparities as well as having no comprehensive plan for land uses
and zoning regulations for environmental management. However, Harold Mitchell, a
resident who grew up in this community, began a project to revive it. First, he
established a grassroots organization, the ReGenesis Economic Development
Organization (ReGenesis), in 1997. ReGenesis started to build partnerships with
diverse stakeholders from federal, state, and local governments as well as with
community residents and a local university. Multi-governmental grants and programs
offered ReGenesis both financial and technical support for planning and implementing
remediation and redevelopment. Since its inception, ReGenesis has achieved a wide
variety of community improvements in healthcare, employment, affordable housing, and
social networking within the pursuit of environmental justice and equitable development
(Fleming, 2004). The ReGenesis case is exceptional, but it clearly highlights the
37
potential of local power and leadership to maximize local actions through ‘in situ’
planning and decision-making environments.
Federal brownfield programs expand grant eligibilities and allow the flexible use
of funding sources; thus, not just municipal governments, but also other local initiatives
are able to utilize the federal grants and technical assistance programs for site- and
community-specific brownfield problems. In particular, the EPA’s environmental justice
small grants program has continued providing grant opportunities to community-based
grassroots organizations and tribal governments since 1994. However, the amount of
these environmental justice small grants has averaged $18,571, which is approximately
ten times less than other EPA brownfield grant programs (for example, the amount of
brownfield area-wide planning grants is $200,000). Although the estimated costs of
each brownfield grant will vary by project, issues, and baseline cost estimates, a
relatively smaller amount of funding is provided to local civic organizations that lead
brownfield revitalization. Solitare and Lowrie (2012) argue that a community-based
approach to brownfield revitalization stimulates participatory and distributive planning;
as such, Community Development Corporations (CDCs) have the potential to allow
local actors to conduct the community-based approach. However, there is currently a
lack of academic research examining the potential of grassroots brownfield initiatives for
sustainable revitalization; also, community-led brownfield revitalization is not a panacea
that guarantees the brownfield transformation will be sustainable and equitable. Rather,
it is necessary to materialize a model process that guides local-level actors –
communities, municipal governments, and civic organizations – in how to effectively
collaborate with and integrate their internal and external planning resources.
38
Municipal governments and private developers are a main local agent in
brownfield revitalization (Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006; Meyer & Lyons, 2000; Solitare &
Lowrie, 2012); however, the demand on brownfield revitalization exceeds the capacity
of local municipalities. According to a study conducted by the U.S. Conference of
Mayors, “respondent cities of the study ranked that EPA Assessment Funding, Private
Sector Investment, EPA Clean-Up Funds, and State programs such as the State
Voluntary Clean-Up Programs are the most useful programs for local brownfield
revitalization” (2010, p. 11). As indicated in this study’s findings, federal grants and state
programs are major planning tools for brownfield remediation and redevelopment.
Alexander (2015) addresses the importance of policy instruments that enhance the
capacity and communication ability of municipal governments for effective and efficient
brownfield planning and implementation. Also, that author argues that increasing the
number of policy instruments that are available for municipalities will contribute to
balancing their interactions with the federal and state authorities of brownfield programs
(Alexander, 2015). Nevertheless, increasing the municipal capacity of local brownfield
projects has two main weaknesses: first, it makes brownfield revitalization compulsory
to municipal governments; second, it limits the opportunities for other local actors to
lead brownfield revitalization. In addition, these limited opportunities of other local actors
create an exclusive planning process that undermines marginalized brownfield
communities. The potential of an exclusive planning process has an adverse effect on
the distributive planning outcome. Moreover, if municipal governments’ authority in
brownfield redevelopment is over-organized, brownfield revitalization will hardly connect
to long-term and sustainable community development. In the institutional theory of
39
organizations, organizational actions build routines that decrease the transaction costs
of institutional activities. However, the stability established by those routines produces
inefficacy “if more efficient ways of organizing are ignored” (Zucker, 1987, p. 446).
Reinforcing the municipal capacity of brownfield revitalization is needed in terms of
intergovernmental policy environments, but building an interactive, local-level planning
structure is an essential precondition to this that will intensify collective local actions for
connecting the brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development.
Accordingly, the present study argues that a local-level governance model must be
developed that facilitates the collaboration of diverse local stakeholders – municipal
governments, local organizations, leaders, etc.
Currently, brownfield revitalization has become a focal point in the effort to create
better-quality environments, vibrant local economies, and interactive social networks.
The academic literature on the subject points out that the premises for sustainable
brownfield revitalization are connectedness between environmental remediation and
economic development and inclusive planning for diverse stakeholder participation.
Empirical evidence that has been found in local brownfield practices proves that building
partnerships and inclusive decision-making processes foster the sustainability of
brownfield revitalization. However, the complex planning nature of brownfield
revitalization – including its legal liabilities, cleanup costs, the uncertainties of
investments, and potential local resistance – complicates the process of connecting
environmental remediation to economic planning and building inclusive
planning/decision-making procedures. Nonetheless, brownfield best practices – as
exemplified in the Zuni Pueblo case, the Bridgeport, CT case, and the ReGenesis, SC
40
case – show how site-specific problem-solving and receptive planning processes can
overcome the obstacles of brownfield revitalization.
Figure 2-1. Gaps of knowledge found in the literature review.
Defining Study Keywords
Based on the literature review, this section confines several subject keywords to
pipeline the fundamental background of this study. The subject keywords are
brownfields, brownfield and industrial revitalization, integrated planning, inclusive
planning, and sustainable community development. First, the definition of brownfields in
this study follows the legal term defined by the Small Business Liability Relief and
41
Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002: “the term "brownfield site" means real property,
the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence
or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant” (Public Law
107-118, [H.R. 2869]). Brownfield revitalization is an urban regeneration strategy which
embraces two major planning processes consisting of site remediation and
economic/community redevelopment (Opp, 2009; EPA, 2012). In Korea, the conditions
of obsolete and closed industrial sites are similar to those of brownfields in the US.
Particularly, industrial sites in Korea experience degraded environmental conditions and
declining economic growth, which is a common phenomenon around brownfields in the
US. In this respect, this study finds the supporting background of selecting policy and
practice in the two different countries - the US and South Korea –and also conducting
cross-case analyses between local practices in each country.
Integrated and Inclusive Planning
Brownfields and industrial sites require environmental treatment that resolves
perceived or actual existence of environmental hazards; at the same time, economic
redevelopment needs to be assured for turning back underutilized properties in
productive use. Smith (2014) notes that there are two categories of integration, with
which local governance inevitably deals: “vertical (between tiers of governments)” and
“horizontal (across policy domains) integration” (Smith, 2014, p. 474). Accordingly,
brownfield reuse planning necessarily considers integrating the policy domains of
environmental management and economic development. Also, the three local
brownfield practices in the previous section place an emphasis on the role of local
actors to engage diverse stakeholders in governments, private sectors, and targeted
local communities. This study argues that such stakeholder engagement in planning
42
process initiates and actualizes both vertical and horizontal integration in brownfield
projects. Thus, integrated planning in this study is to link the policy domains of
environmental remediation and economic redevelopment (horizontal integration) and to
connect diverse stakeholders’ planning interests in the two policy domains (similar to
vertical integration).
In particular, the latter definition, connecting diverse stakeholders’ interests,
needs to embrace each tier of governments and private and civic entities which are
willing to participate in brownfield revitalization process. This study names such
stakeholder engagement effort inclusive planning. In the field of urban and regional
planning, there are several planning approaches that emphasize engaging stakeholders
and their participation in planning process called participatory, advocacy, and equitable
planning (Davidoff, 1965; Forester, 2008; Krumholz, 1982). Those planning terms share
the value of addressing diverse interests in the planning process; especially, the shared
value among the terms focuses on balancing relatively underrepresented parties’
interests and planned project objectives which usually rely on economic development
theories. Accordingly, both conflict and agreement are inevitable while integrating and
including diverse interests in planning processes for brownfield revitalization. Moreover,
the process of resolving conflict contributes to seeking collective action to reach an
agreement among stakeholders. In other words, a process created by the integrated
and inclusive planning constructs a basis of collective and collaborative planning
models. Furthermore, Campbell (1996) notes that “procedural paths to sustainable
development” begin with “conflict negotiation” (p. 305). It highlights that the integrated
43
and inclusive planning for brownfield revitalization posits the potential for linking
brownfield revitalization to sustainable development.
Transition of Brownfield Revitalization toward Sustainable Community Development
Brownfields and underutilized industrial sites demand a new paradigm that is
beyond an economic development perspective and revisits the potential of social,
economic, and environmental arrangements around neglected properties for
sustainable development (Paull, 2008). Also, Conroy (2003) places an emphasis on
“ways that reproduce and balance local social, economic, and ecological systems, and
link local actions to global concerns” (p.460) toward sustainable development.
Greenberg and Lewis (2000) argue that sensitizing local community values and
concerns related to brownfields raises the capability of resolving conflicts and reaching
supportive actions among stakeholders. Furthermore, the three local brownfield
revitalization practices in the previous section prove the capacity of community-based
planning, led by grassroots initiatives and civic organizations, in brownfield revitalization
projects. Creating local governance to conduct brownfield remediation and
redevelopment in local practice builds a link between brownfield revitalization and
community sustainability (EPA, 2013). Therefore, this study coins the term “sustainable
brownfield revitalization” that means the progress of brownfield revitalization process
toward envisioning community sustainability, which is initiated through environmental
remediation and economic redevelopment. As a result of sustainable brownfield
revitalization, local communities around brownfields and/or underutilized industrial sites
have an opportunity to constitute their sustainable development agenda.
44
The Summary of Literature Review
The planning and practice literature of brownfield redevelopment shows that
revitalizing brownfields is a platform toward sustainable community development.
Actualizing the transition of brownfield revitalization into sustainable community
development involves environmental remediation and economic development.
Simultaneously, inclusive planning and decision-making build trust among the different
stakeholders and a trust-based planning process will be able to enhance collective
actions in each of the planning phases of brownfield revitalization. Local actors in the
brownfield revitalization process – municipal governments and private developers –
expect to perform an active role in fulfilling the two preconditions for sustainable
brownfield revitalization: connecting environmental remediation to economic
redevelopment and providing a receptive planning process. The academic literature on
the subject argues the importance of fostering local power for sustainable brownfield
revitalization, though the authors do not always agree: some scholars argue for
increasing the capacity of municipal governments, while others focus on the potential of
local organizations such as nonprofit organizations, community development
corporations, etc. (Alexander, 2015; Solitare & Lowrie, 2012). The major planning
resources of brownfield remediation and redevelopment are federal grants and state
programs (the U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2010); thus, collective and integrated local
actions increase the possibility of maximizing the utility of this external funding and
assistance. However, there is currently a lack of guidelines and models to lead local
stakeholders toward collective planning and action. The current policy environment of
brownfield revitalization affirms the positive effects of community-based planning in that
federal agencies focus on allocating funding and technical assistance programs to
45
diverse local communities (Office of Sustainable Communities, 2014). The present
study identifies that a model of collaborative governance structure is needed, however,
to guide local-level stakeholders toward shared goals and plans for sustainable
brownfield revitalization. Based on this academic inquiry of local brownfield initiatives
and sustainable brownfield revitalization, the present study’s research objectives are to
investigate how the policy environments and process are created in local-level
brownfield revitalization practices and to identify how local actors connect environmental
remediation to economic development and facilitate inclusive decision-making
processes. Lastly, this research will verify the ways in which integrated and inclusive
planning affects community development and sustainability.
46
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHOD
This chapter defines the research methods, a case study, and establishes the
research design that develops an analytical framework, analytic processes, and
research implementation.
Case Study
This study relies on a small number of cases (in other words, a few local best
practices) to develop a theoretical model of collaborative local governance for
sustainable brownfield revitalization. Based on this research setting, an investigative
and explanatory approach to the cases (local best practices) is suitable for continuing
this academic inquiry. In many urban policies and studies, examining best practices
(case studies) contributes to the development of effective planning interventions that
create better processes and outcomes; at the same time, case studies can be used to
investigate the details of a few exceptional cases at once better than statistical methods
(Campbell, 2003). This study examines collaborative local governance in pursuit of
establishing a policy environment and implementation process that decreases the gaps
between local actors and the external/internal planning resources of brownfield
revitalization, including the other actors involved. Therefore, the overarching research
method in this study is a case study that analyzes local brownfield best practices. In its
case study design, the present study:
1. Sets progressive stages from brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development.
2. Develops an analytical framework to direct the data collection and the case study analysis.
3. Elaborates analytic steps to conduct the case analyses. 4. Defines case selection criteria and explain date collection.
47
In the literature review chapter, the present study verifies that the role of local
actors in brownfield revitalization becomes critical because their role affects the
potential for transforming brownfield revitalization into sustainable community
development. However, there is competing and cooperative context between local
actors – municipalities and civic organizations, which needs to be analyzed to foster the
overall capacity of local actors in brownfield revitalization.
As such, the case studies in the research involve two local brownfield practices
as cases, one led by a municipal agency, the other initiated by local civic organizations.
To examine the policy environments between these two local actors, this research
conducts both single-case and cross-case analyses. In addition, one unit of the case
analysis includes the brownfield revitalization projects that have been conducted within
the selected cases’ geographical boundaries. In the cross-case analysis, each single-
case analysis is compared and contrasted in order to synthesize the findings of two
different brownfield/industrial site revitalization practices: one is led by community
organizations and the other is led by a municipal agency. Moreover, the cross-case
analysis evaluates the transferability of each policy dynamic. The logical reasoning
process of this case study follows an analytical framework that depicts theoretical
process connecting brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development
through integrated and inclusive planning (Bleiher & Gross, 2010; EPA, 2014; Gute &
Taylor, 2006; Nijkamp, Rodenburg, & Wagtendonk, 2002; Raco & Henderson, 2006;
Schädler, Morio, Bartke, Rohr-Zänker, & Finkel, 2011; Tedd, Charles, & Driscoll 2001;
Turvani, & Tonin, 2008).
48
Analytical Framework
The present study’s premise is that connecting brownfield revitalization to
sustainable community development determines the sustainability of local brownfield
revitalization projects (also called sustainable brownfield revitalization). According to the
literature, integrated and inclusive planning does facilitate the connection between
brownfield revitalization and sustainable communities. Therefore, if this research verifies
that the policy environments of brownfield revitalization in the case studies utilize
integrated and inclusive planning, the present study can anticipate that those cases of
brownfield revitalization contribute to sustainable community development. At the same
time, this research examines the impact of integrated and inclusive planning on project
outcomes and community sustainability in order to identify a connection between the
two planning forces and sustainable community development. As a result, the present
study establishes a theory of brownfield revitalization as a platform for sustainable
community development. Simply put, brownfield revitalization is a cause, integrated and
inclusive planning is a mechanism, and sustainable community development is an
outcome. Therefore, the present study confirms the connection between brownfield
revitalization and sustainable community development by identifying the linkages
between the cause and the mechanism as well as between the mechanism and the
outcome. This underlying logical framework is based on Mahoney (2012).
Logically speaking, X (a cause) cannot be necessary for Y (an outcome) unless it is necessary for all intervening conditions (a mechanism) that are sufficient for Y. (Mahoney, 2012)
In detail, the logic of defining these relationships follows a congruence theory: to verify a
relationship between variables X (brownfield revitalization) and Y (sustainable
community development), the study identifies the relationships between mechanism Z
49
(integrated and inclusive planning processes) and variables X and Y respectively. By
identifying the relationships between mechanism Z and each variable, the study is able
to develop a connection between the variables X and Y through their commonly verified
relationships with mechanism Z. Based on this reasoning process, this study develops
an analytical framework that consists of three progressive stages: the brownfield
revitalization stage, the transition to sustainable community development stage, and the
sustainable community development stage.
Each progressive stage responds to the three parts of research questions;
therefore, the analysis in the brownfield revitalization stage illuminates policy
environments that are led by either municipal agencies or civic organizations in each
case. The analysis that follows verifies the relational context of policy environment with
creating integrated and inclusive planning that is implemented for brownfield
revitalization and on the broader community development agendas. These case
analyses comprise the transition to sustainable community development stage, and they
define the roles and capabilities of local civic organizations and municipal agencies for
further governance model development. Lastly, the research examines the impact of
integrated and inclusive planning on the project outcomes and overall community
sustainability in the sustainable community development stage. In this process, the
brownfield revitalization stage indicates a cause, while the transition stage measures a
mechanism that is necessary to link brownfield revitalization with sustainable community
development. The sustainable community development stage, finally, is analogous to
Mahoney’s (2012) known value of Y.
50
Figure 3-1. Analytical framework
51
Analytic Steps
This section describes analytic steps that analyze each stage in the analytical
framework. The main analytical methods are process-tracing, congruence test, and
cross-case analysis.
The Brownfield Revitalization Stage
This stage intends to find answers to the first part of research questions:
How do diverse interested actors (federal and state governments) and local actors (municipalities or community-based organizations) interact with to conduct effective brownfield revitalization planning and implementation?
What and how are policy instruments and settings used for effective brownfield revitalization planning and implementation?
Diverse interested actors are composed of federal agencies like the EPA, HUD,
and DOT, state agencies managing environmental remediation and economic
development, municipal agencies that control local land-use changes and finance, and
local communities such as CDCs and civic organizations. The policy instruments
contain operational tools for remediation and redevelopment accommodated by
federal/state/municipal governments. The policy settings are the passage of federal,
state, and municipal brownfield laws and regulations, which closely affect the intensity
of remediation standards and the following redevelopment activities. Also, other local
plans are considered as policy settings that are possibly integrated into or related to
brownfield revitalization.
The research conducts process tracing between explanatory and responsive
variables. For example, the research investigates the relationship between a state
agency and a local actor with a hypothesis assuming that state brownfield programs
facilitate multiple funding opportunities to finance environmental remediation and
52
economic redevelopment. Likewise, each explanatory variable and a responsive
variable will be examined under this hypothetical inquiry of process tracing. Based on
this process tracing, the research verifies and organizes policy environment that leads
local actors to integrated and inclusive planning in brownfield revitalization. Also, this
part is the beginning of congruence tests which verify the relationship between
brownfield revitalization and sustainable community development.
Figure 3-2. The analytic step of the brownfield revitalization stage.
The Transition to Sustainable Community Development Stage
To investigate the second part of research questions, the research focuses on
evaluating local actors’ performance that integrates environmental remediation with
economic development and facilitates an inclusive decision-making process.
How do local actors in brownfield revitalization link environmental remediation to economic development?
How do local actors in brownfield revitalization facilitate inclusive planning and decision-making processes?
How do diverse interested actors intervene in integrating environmental remediation and economic development as well as in inclusive planning?
53
This study defines that integrated and inclusive planning is a mechanism which
expands the scope of brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development.
Therefore, the research conduct congruence tests on the results of process tracing in
the previous stage. The research analyzes the results from the interactions between
explanatory variables and local actors by verifying if those results contribute to
integrating environmental remediation to economic development and creating inclusive
planning process. For instance, the research examines environmental remediation
process and post-remediation plans assisted by state brownfield programs and
executed by local actors to identify integrated planning between environmental
remediation and economic redevelopment.
Second, inclusive planning efforts by local actors are examined in two layers: (1)
the interaction between local actors and diverse interested actors in each case, and (2)
the level of community engagement evaluated by the spectrum of community
participation established by the International Association of Public Participation1. At the
local level of brownfield revitalization practice, municipal agencies, civic organizations,
and nearby communities are major and potential partners for leading local actors.
Municipal agencies can be associated with federal and state agencies when brownfield
programs, grants, and technical assistance are linked to civic organizations. At the
same time, engaging the local communities is required to plan brownfield revitalization
that is sustainable (Greenberg & Lewis, 2000; Heberle & Wernstedt, 2006). In other
words, local-level actors who are civic organizations, municipal agencies, and local
communities sharing goals and plans can increase the internal and external support for
1 Appendix B
54
a brownfield revitalization project tremendously. As a result, project outcomes and
community sustainability become tangible in the sustainable community development
stage. Thus, the research conducts process tracing between diverse interested actors
and local actors in terms of their efforts in cooperation for project implementation.
Figure 3-3. The analytic step of the transition stage.
The research collects archival data regarding environmental remediation and
economic development in order to analyze how these two planning phases are
connected. Simultaneously, stakeholders and community involvement tools and
processes are evaluated in order to discern their level of participation in the decision-
making processes. The research gathers public meeting records, local media reports,
and community web sources in order to analyze this.
The Sustainable Community Development Stage
In the sustainable community development stage, the research focuses on
assessing the third part of research questions:
How does integrated and inclusive planning affect project outcomes and community sustainability?
55
What policy implications in this impact assessment construct collaborative local governance for sustainable brownfield revitalization?
Analyses in this stage consider project outcomes in each case that were
garnered by integrated environmental remediation, economic development, and the
inclusive planning process in order to assess the potential of local-led brownfield
revitalization for sustainable community development. Project outcomes in the analytical
framework mean actual planning results from integrated and inclusive planning in local
projects. For instance, brownfield area-wide planning programs2 include everything from
brownfield site prioritization to remediation planning, economic development planning,
and community envisioning. Accordingly, the study is able to assess the project
outcomes of integrated planning by examining area-wide plans or similar planning
activities in each project of the two selected cases. The project outcomes consist of the
net effects of environmental improvement, economic development, and social wellness
(e.g., environmental justice and equal participation). In terms of community
sustainability, this research evaluates long-term community development agendas
and/or area-wide plans that are based on brownfield revitalization plans.
Lastly, the investigation of local capacity for sustainable brownfield revitalization
aims at developing a local governance model that facilitates the two key planning
strategies: connecting environmental remediation to economic redevelopment and
engaging diverse stakeholders in the decision-making process. Therefore, this study
synthesizes the benefits and limitations, which are identified in this consecutive stage of
analyses on the Boston and Ansan cases, to suggest recommendations for a
2 Brownfield area-wide planning programs assist local communities’ planning tasks in a broader planning
spectrum from project sites to surrounding communities’ quality of life.
56
governance model development of sustainable brownfield revitalization. Also, the
research examines each case’s transferability that indicates the area of future study.
The next section elaborates the case selection criteria and data collection.
Figure 3-4. The analytic step of the sustainable community development stage.
57
Figure 3-5. Analytic steps of case study process.
58
Case Selection Criteria and Data Collection
The present study aims to suggest the importance of collaborative local
governance for sustainable brownfield revitalization. Its research approach is that of an
explanatory case study that investigates best local brownfield practices as cases. In the
study’s analytical framework, the brownfield revitalization stage builds the theoretical
ground to explain brownfield policy environments by analyzing the relationships
between policy elements and local actors. Based on this understanding of local-level
brownfield policy environments, the study then examines whether the two categories of
local actor performance within the selected cases contribute to integrating the planning
resources and engaging the local stakeholders and communities. At the same time, the
research examines the two categories’ impact on project outcomes and community
sustainability. In the sustainable community development stage, furthermore, the
research evaluates the project outcomes in terms of community sustainability in order to
verify the capacity of the local actors as well as the brownfield revitalization project’s
potential as sustainable community development. By comparing and contrasting the
analyses from the two selected cases, finally, the present study discusses modeling
collaborative governance. This is a cross-case analysis that identifies the limitations and
benefits of the selected local cases and bolsters the transferability of the governance
structures in each case. The two case studies were selected by considering the
explanatory and responsive variables mentioned in the analytical framework. The
variables represent the fundamental policy elements that make up the policy
environment of the brownfield revitalization project; thus, each case search relies on
these policy elements.
59
Table 3-1. Description of the explanatory and responsive variables in the analytical framework.
Variable Category Description
Explanatory variables
Diverse interested actors
Federal agencies Grant and technical assistance programs for brownfield remediation and redevelopment
State agencies Voluntary cleanup programs and specialized departments
Municipal agencies Specialized departments or collaborative partners/departments
Community organizations
Specialized in community/economic development at specific geographical boundaries
Policy settings The chronologies of passage of laws and regulations in federal/state/municipal institutions
National legislation changes (for example: the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (the Brownfields Act), the Brownfields Utilization, Investment and Local Development (BUILD) Act)
Modification of provisions in current legislation
Other state and local plans
Critical local development plans that are not brownfield revitalization projects, but affect brownfield revitalization projects in selected cases (for example: the Big Dig project, a state-level transportation development in Boston, MA)
Policy instruments (This variable is
categorized into federal/state/municipal levels in the analytical framework.)
Partnerships Implementation strategies for environmental remediation and economic development as well as stakeholder participation
Legislative and regulatory
Institutional control for remediation and redevelopment processes (for example: liability waivers, soil and water quality regulations, building and construction codes)
Agreement Contracts and subcontracts among stakeholders
Economic and fiscal Monetary systems to support remediation and redevelopment actions (for example: tax credits, assessment grants, remediation grants, revolving funds, environmental insurance, loan programs)
Information Official documents to prove plans and implementation processes (for example: environmental assessment reports, technical assistance, redevelopment plans)
60
Table 3-1. Continued Variable Category Description
Responsive variables
Local actors Local community organizations
Leading local actors in selected case’s geographic boundary plan implementing brownfield revitalization projects
Municipal agencies Leading local actors who are part of the municipal government in selected case’s geographic boundary plan implementing brownfield revitalization projects.
*The categories of policy instruments – legislative and regulatory, agreement, economic and fiscal, and information – in this table are based on Alexander (2015).
Note: Alexander, R. (2015). Policy instruments and the remediation and redevelopment of contaminated properties. Environmental Politics, 24(1), 75–95.
These defined variables are the case selection criteria for finding qualified local
brownfield revitalization practices that are matched with each variable in Table 3-1. In
each single-case study, the research builds prototypes of collaborative governance to
conduct cross-case analyses. Thus, the case search involves a cross-case analysis
process that compares and contrasts the developed prototypes of each selected case.
This cross-case analysis examines the limitations and benefits of each prototype and
synthesizes those findings for collaborative local governance and sustainable brownfield
revitalization. At the same time, this synthesis enhances the transferability of each
prototype into other local brownfield revitalization cases.
Second, the description of the explanatory and responsive variables guides the
data collection for the case analyses. Based on the analytical framework, the present
study investigates the relationships between explanatory variables – diverse interested
actors, policy settings, and policy instruments – and local actors – community
organizations and municipal agencies – in each case. During this analysis phase, the
archival data of policy settings and policy instruments is collected in order to examine
the relationship between local actors (community organizations and municipal agencies)
61
and diverse interested actors (federal, state, and municipal agencies) involved in the
brownfield revitalization projects in each selected case. The research particularly
focuses on how local actors and diverse interested actors interact with each other in
order to integrate their planning resources and facilitate stakeholder and community
engagement. As a result, this analysis focuses on each local actor’s strategies for
integrated and inclusive planning as well as the dynamics of planning intervention by
diverse interested actors.
The research data in this study is composed of (1) open-ended interviews with
staff and officials in the selected case study areas, (2) officially recorded and/or
published documents from journals, local news media, organizations, and web sources,
and (3) legislative and administrative documents related to brownfield or industrial
revitalization projects in the selected case study areas. The present study organizes the
data collection process and analysis by examining the context of explanatory and
responsive variables in the selected case study areas. Also, multi-governmental
structures (at the federal/national, state/regional, and city levels) provide a way to
collect and organize the analytical data in each case. The present study conducted
interviews with senior project managers and staff members in local organizations as
well as officials in state/regional governments who were involved in the brownfield and
industrial revitalization projects in Boston and Ansan. However, except Jeanne Dubois,
a former Executive Director at Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation (DB
EDC), and Leah Whiteside, a project manager at DB EDC, all interviewees chose to
remain anonymous in providing information. Thus, this study cited interview information
with basic reference (interview title, interviewer, year, month, and date). The case
62
selection was based on preset criteria, not random sampling; consequently, the open-
ended interview questions preclude statistical inquiries. Therefore, the interview findings
are considered as descriptive and indicative evidence, which supports verifying the
archival research findings and evaluating the outcomes/impacts of brownfield
revitalization on local communities (Meyer & Lyons, 2000).
Lastly, this study divides the unit of analysis into two levels: local practice and
project. According to the analytic steps, the first analytic step in this study is to identify
the relationships between explanatory and responsive policy elements to mapping
policy environments that put forward a process of integrated and inclusive planning in
local brownfield/industrial site revitalization practice. The next analytic step examines
integrated and inclusive planning processes of selected local practices. In this step, the
research needs to specify integrated and inclusive planning into practical planning
activities (performance). Thus, this study narrows down its focus of analysis on
brownfield/industrial site revitalization projects within the selected local practices. By
focusing on projects, the research investigates the path of integrated and inclusive
planning processes embodied in the selected local practices. At the same time, this
project-based analysis connects to evaluating outcomes created by integrated and
inclusive planning processes. This last analytic step assesses project outcomes
resulted from integrated and inclusive planning processes of specified
brownfield/industrial revitalization projects (hereafter called sub-projects).
In summary, the present study selects two local brownfield and industrial
revitalization practices, the first led by local community organizations and the latter by
municipal agencies. This case selection is intended to conduct a cross-case analysis
63
that compares and contrasts findings in each case. Also, this study suggests policy
recommendations by examining these findings which result from research based on the
analytical framework and analytic steps.
64
CHAPTER 4 THE FAIRMOUNT INDIGO LINE CDC COLLABORATIVE CASE
This chapter provides background information, variable descriptions, and critical
case histories3 of the Boston case: one led by local community organizations,
Community Development Corporations (CDCs). First, it will provide the description of
the Boston case and describe the formation of the Fairmount Indigo CDCs Collaborative
(the Collaborative) and the surrounding geographical conditions. Next, the chapter will
detail the explanatory and responsive variables in the case context, specifying critical
case elements in order to understand policy environment of brownfield revitalization in
the Boston case.
Figure 4-1. A key map of the Fairmount Indigo Corridor and project sites
(Source: http://www.mbta.com/uploadedFiles/documents/Fairmount_corridor_map.pdf)
3 Appendix E
65
Description of the Boston Case
The Collaborative is composed of three community/economic development
corporations: Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and Southwest Boston CDC.
These community organizations are located in the jurisdiction of Boston city and are
responsible for neighborhood developments in real estate, housing, and economic
growth. Particularly, their common missions serve to preserve the stability of
neighborhoods’ socioeconomic conditions, since the neighborhoods surrounding these
community organizations are low-income and have racial minority populations (the City
of Boston & BRA, 2010).
Table 4-1. Demographic description of neighborhoods around the Collaborative
Population 93,104
(15% of Boston’s overall population)
% Racial/ethnic minority African American 58.8 Hispanic or Latino 20.3 White 10.4 Asian 1.6 Other 8.8 Household income/characteristics Less than $20,000 27.2 $20,000 to $39,999 20.2 $40,000 to $59,999 16.5 $60,000 to $74,999 8.9 $75,000 to $99,999 10.8 $100,000 or More 16.5 Poverty level* 76.4% of the population in the Fairmount
focus area is below the Boston poverty level.
*The average poverty line in the City of Boston is 21.2%. Note: The City of Boston & the Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2013). Fairmount/ Indigo
Planning Initiative: Corridor Profile. Boston, MA.
Furthermore, over five hundred properties designated as brownfields or
Superfund sites have been located in these neighborhoods. Accordingly, environmental
remediation is a prerequisite for redevelopment projects in this community.
66
Table 4-2. Description of existing built-environment conditions of neighborhoods around the Collaborative
Category Description
Brownfields A total of 523 properties is designated as brownfields or Superfund sites.
Industrial activity and contaminant
Light industrial activities – metal plating, automotive-related uses, and dry cleaners – are operating or abandoned in neighborhoods.
Identified major contaminants: Halogenated VOCs, Non-halogenated VOCs, Halogenated SVOCs, Non-halogenated SVOCs, fuels, metals, and metalloids.
Land use According to “Fairmount/Indigo Planning Initiative: Corridor Profile,” the property profile consists of approximately 70.79 % residential use, 0.44% industrial use, 5.73% commercial and mixed use.
Note: The City of Boston & the Boston Redevelopment Authority. (2013). Fairmount/Indigo Planning Initiative: Corridor Profile. Boston, MA.
At the same time, this community has experienced a lack of transit proximity for
over twenty years. Hence, the Greater Four Corners Action Coalition,4 a local civic
group, drove a transit equity campaign in 2000; this was the beginning of the Fairmount-
Indigo initiative. After the campaign, Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and
Southwest Boston CDC participated in the Fairmount-Indigo initiative and created a
CDCs action coalition, the Fairmount-Indigo Line CDC Collaborative (the Collaborative)
in 2004 (the Collaborative, n.d.). This growing local initiative worked on bringing state
and federal support for transit equity and community development. In particular, EPA
awarded the Fairmount-Indigo initiative as a brownfield pilot grantee, which was an
affiliate program of the Partnership for Sustainable Community (PSC).5 At the same
4 The Greater Four Corners Action Coalition is a grassroots organization that works to promote
neighborhood stabilization in the Four Corners Community of Dorchester, Massachusetts.
5 The Partnership for Sustainable Communities (PSC) is a federal interagency partnership program; EPA,
HUD, and DOT are members. These federal agencies work together to coordinate federal housing,
67
time, the government of Massachusetts, urged by the Collaborative, began to be
involved in transit development in 2005. In 2012, the Boston Redevelopment Authority
(BRA) became a partner of the Collaborative by launching the BRA Fairmount-Indigo
planning initiative.
Table 4-3. Description of case study variables, the Boston case Variable Category: Description:
Explanatory variables
Diverse interested actors Federal agencies Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
The Department of Transportation
State agencies Brownfield Support Team (BST) in the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Department of Transportation and Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
Municipal agencies Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA) in the City of Boston: Consultant Team (Cecil Group) and Advisory Groups (including local residents, community groups, and professional organizations)
Community organizations
This is a responsive variable in this case.
transportation, water, and other infrastructure investments. The objective of this interagency program is to make neighborhoods more prosperous, reduce pollution, and allow people to live closer to their jobs, saving households time and money.
68
Table 4-3. Continued Variable Category Description
Policy settings The chronologies of passage of laws and regulations in federal/state/municipal institutions
National brownfield legislation changes from the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (the Brownfields Act) to the Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development (BUILD) Act
Massachusetts’s Brownfields Act of 1998
Other state and local plans
The Fairmount-Indigo rail line project6 by Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA)
Policy instruments (This variable is categorized into federal/state/municipal levels in the analytical framework.)
Partnerships Federal interagency partnership programs: the Partnership for Sustainable Community (PSC), brownfield pilot programs
State brownfield insurance, incentives, and funding
The Fairmount-Indigo Planning Initiative at the municipal and community level
Agreement Contracts and subcontracts among stakeholders
Economic and fiscal Tax credits, assessment grants, remediation grants, revolving funds, environmental insurance, loan programs offered by diverse interested actors
6 The Fairmount/Indigo Commuter Rail Line is the oldest rail line located in the city of Boston. It is the only
line that is entirely contained within the limits of the city of Boston. The rail line began its service in the 1980s, but only had five stations until 2012. After transit equity and environmental issues broke out due to the Greater Four Corners Action Coalition’s transit campaign in 2000, various local organizations began to participate in the campaign. The train stations have been remodeled and reconstructed since the campaign started. The Fairmount Indigo Community Development Corporations Collaborative (the Collaborative) has been working on brownfield/community revitalization projects within a half-mile radius of each train station, boundaries that are defined as the Fairmount Corridor. (Source: The Fairmount Indigo Corridor Collaborative [the Collaborative]. (n.d.). History. Retrieved from http://fairmountcollaborative.org/about-us/history/ )
69
Table 4-3. Continued Variable Category Description
Information Environmental assessment reports, technical assistance, redevelopment plans
Responsive variable
Local actors Local community organizations
The Fairmount-Indigo Corridor Collaborative that consists of Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and Southwest Boston CDC
The Massachusetts’s (MA) government has continuously provided state
brownfield programs since 1998, and it established the Massachusetts Brownfield
Support Team (BST) in 2008. BST provides streamlined procedures and tools for
brownfield remediation in order to promote local economic development. At the
municipal level, the city of Boston adopts review process on development impact
caused by (re)development projects within the jurisdiction. Accordingly, this review
process requires establishing an advisory board which includes but not limits to
community members in impacted areas (BRA, 2016).
The description of the Collaborative and its local development projects indicates
that a grassroots initiative, the Greater Four Corners Coalition, has embarked on
reclaiming the neighborhoods and their living environments. Furthermore, the
Fairmount-Indigo Line CDC Collaborative’s growing amount of local action highlights the
potential of community organizations to invite opportunities for environmental
improvement and economic redevelopment. Based on these case conditions, the
present study selected the Collaborative and its local development projects as a case
led by community organizations for brownfield revitalization.
70
The Collaborative and Dorchester Area in Boston, MA
The Fairmount Line is the oldest commuter rail line in Boston, MA. It was
originally built in 1885 as a passenger route; however, in the early 1900s, due to the low
ridership, it was transferred to moving freight. In 1979, the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority (MBTA) restored the line’s passenger service. This reinstated
commuter service was not intended to be permanent; however, it became locally
popular. After several stations and rail line constructions and rerouting, MBTA resumed
operating the Fairmount Line as a response to community demand in 1987. In that
same year, the Fairmount Line was extended to the south part of Boston. In spite of the
rail line’s extension, local communities around the Fairmount Line addressed the lack of
access to it during the 1990s. This transit deficiency brought local attention when the
Greater Four Corners Coalition, a local civic organization in Dorchester, Boston,
launched a transit equity campaign in 2000. Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square
NDC, and Southwest Boston CDC participated in this campaign and established the
Fairmount-Indigo Line CDC Collaborative in 2004. After the Collaborative was founded,
local communities’ environmental and socioeconomic development – affordable housing
and commercial/light industrial uses – began to accelerate. Initially, the Collaborative
focused on a 0.5-mile radius from each transit station as its community development
project boundaries. However, the neighborhoods along the Fairmount Line – Roxbury,
Dorchester, Mattapan, and Hyde Park – had about 2,000 parcels of foreclosed land,
and many of these properties were designated as brownfields. Additionally, the state
identified 470 hazardous waste sites in Dorchester, 306 in Roxbury, and 102 in Hyde
Park. Accordingly, the Collaborative needed to conduct environmental remediation
before focusing on transit, community, and economic development. In addressing this
71
issue, the EPA’s brownfield programs supported the Collaborative’s brownfield cleanup
projects by providing brownfield assessment and cleanup grants. In 2005, the State
Head of Economic Development and MBTA promised to invest in constructing new
stations along the Fairmount Line. Moreover, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
agreed to make improvements on the Fairmount Line as part of its legally binding
commitment to mitigate increased air pollution from the Big Dig7. As the Fairmount Line
project expanded and improved its train stations, the communities near each station
became geographical focuses of environmental remediation and local development. In
2012, Mayor Thomas Menino launched the Boston Redevelopment Authority’s (BRA)
Fairmount Indigo Planning Initiative (FIPI). This initiative established the Corridor-wide
Advisory Group (CAG), a volunteer entity, to work with the BRA planning team in order
to develop community-based rail line corridor plans for bettering the community
environment.
As a grassroots initiative for transit equity that evolved an interconnected body of
local governance for community revitalization, the Collaborative and the neighborhoods
around the Fairmount Line project areas have been working closely with diverse
stakeholders in the federal, state, and local governments as well as nonprofit
organizations and volunteering private parties. In terms of the dynamics of the shift from
ideas or needs to plans and implementations, the Collaborative and other planning
actors’ covariate is important to understanding the policy settings that lead local
initiatives toward integrated and inclusive planning ground. Therefore, the next section
7 The Central Artery/Tunnel Project (CA/T), known unofficially as the Big Dig, was a megaproject in
Boston that rerouted the Central Artery (Interstate 93)—the chief highway through the heart of the city—into the 3.5-mile (5.6 km) Thomas P. O'Neill Jr. Tunnel (Wikipedia, 2016. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig).
72
examines the policy elements – diverse interested actors, policy instruments, and policy
settings – shown in the Collaborative’s case.
Policy Elements of the Boston Case
The present study categorizes the policy elements of the Boston case based on
the description of variables in Chapter 3: federal-level, state-level, and municipal-level
actors, policy settings (the chronologies of laws and regulations) and other state/local
plans, policy instruments, and the Collaborative (a responsive variable). Each element
is described by the Collaborative’s case-specific context in order to analyze the
dynamics of the planning process that constitute the case’s policy environment.
Federal-Level Actor and Policy Instruments: EPA and HUD Brownfield Programs and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities’ Brownfield Pilots
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities (PSC) is a federal-level
interagency partnership of DOT, HUD, and EPA that provides local communities with
integrated federal-level grant programs and technical assistance in the planning themes
of green building, transit, affordable housing, mixed-use development, brownfield
redevelopment, and water management. In 2010, the PSC selected the Collaborative
and its project areas as a grantee of brownfield pilot programs to assist brownfield
remediation planning and implementation through direct technical support. The
brownfield pilots noted that “brownfield revitalization is an inherently sustainable
community practice that has already been developed and is typically connected to
existing transportation and utility infrastructure” (EPA, 2012, p. 1). The Collaborative
and the Fairmount Indigo Line project embody this locational link between brownfields
and transportation. The goals of the pilot programs were to maximize the impact of
federal resources on transit, housing, and brownfields, to ensure the equitable
73
redevelopment of brownfields near transit, and to accumulate lessons to implement
area-wide planning approaches (EPA, 2012). Accordingly, the agency staff and
consulting team worked with the Collaborative on five subject matters: (1) brownfield
remediation planning and the associated long-term quality of life improvement, (2) local
economic development planning, (3) community engagement, outreach, and charrettes,
(4) integrated local land-use and transportation planning, and (5) developing area-wide
revitalization plans that address community needs (EPA, 2012). Also, the Collaborative
received brownfield site assessment and remediation grants from the EPA for several
site-revitalization projects along the Fairmount Corridor. These EPA grants directly
supported brownfield site assessment that included a review of records, site inspection,
and interviews with owners, occupants, neighbors, and local government officials. At the
same time, the assessment conducted sampling and laboratory analyses in order to
confirm the presence of hazardous materials. Based on this site assessment, each of
the Collaborative’s projects envisioned the future use of remediated sites.
State-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Massachusetts Brownfield Act of 1998 and State Insurance, Incentives, and Funding
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ state government enacted the
Massachusetts Brownfield Act of 1998 in order to restore the state’s post-industrial or
commercial properties with actual or perceived contamination. The act constituted a
legal background to lessen cleanup liabilities and provide financial incentives for eligible
parties that were willing to redevelop brownfields in Massachusetts. In 2002, the Small
Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act (the Brownfields Act) was
enacted by amending the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA); as such, Congress affirmed that it would fund state
74
governments in redeveloping brownfields and improving states’ voluntary cleanup
programs. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MDEP) has
received these funds since 2003 (MassDEP & NEWMOA, 2013). Even though federal
funds for state governments were cut between 2008 and 2013, MDEP continued
supporting state and local brownfield revitalization projects. In doing so, MDEP
established working relationships with the EPA’s Region 1 Office and its local grantees
in MA, usually municipalities, regional planning commissions, or local nonprofit entities.
In particular, MDEP advised local grantees to ensure that their site characterization and
cleanup plans were consistent with the state’s brownfield revitalization requirements. At
the same time, MassDevelopment, the state’s economic development, and finance
agency, provides a brownfield site assessment program and a remediation loan
program to local communities. The Collaborative received these state-funded direct
assessment grants and remediation loan programs for brownfield revitalization projects
along the Fairmount Corridor.
Municipal-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Boston Redevelopment Authority and the Fairmount Indigo Planning Initiative
The Boston Redevelopment Authority (BRA), the city’s urban planning and
economic development agency, participated in community and economic development
along the Fairmount Indigo Corridor in 2012. BRA named this the Fairmount Indigo
Planning Initiative (FIPI) and created the Corridor Advisory Group (CAG). The main goal
of FIPI was to plan and implement economic development opportunities associated with
the improvement of the Fairmount commuter rail line. The members of CAG consisted
not only of BRA staff and a consulting team, but also of representatives of local
residents, community groups, businesses, nonprofit organizations, and other
75
neighborhood institutions as well as experts from related professional organizations.
CAG’s major purpose was to guide FIPI’s planning process and connect it to local
communities. BRA built its own planning ecology through FIPI in order to develop the
city’s brownfield sites located along the Fairmount Line. Simultaneously, BRA supported
projects conducted by the Collaborative through financial and technical assistance.
Policy settings: Federal Brownfield Policies, the Central Artery/Tunnel Project, and the Fairmount Indigo Commuter Rail Line Project
Federal brownfield policies have evolved by responding to state and local
communities’ needs for the environmental remediation of industrial and commercial
lands and economic redevelopment. The Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) was enacted in 1980 to control the nation’s
hazardous waste sites. CERCLA had three significant legal effects on managing actual
or perceived contamination in properties. First, CERCLA established a liability scheme
for determining who could be held accountable for the release of hazardous
substances; second, it authorized the EPA to conduct brownfield programs; finally, it set
forth which entities and properties are eligible for brownfield grants (EPA, 2009).
However, the legally defined liability became the burden of responsible parties, and the
cleanup costs added to this burden. Accordingly, brownfield revitalization projects were
perceived as complex and lingering. The Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields
Revitalization Act of 2001 (the Brownfields Law) altered this by expanding federal
financial assistance for brownfield revitalization and providing liability protection for
prospective purchasers, contiguous property owners, and innocent landowners
(Wiegard, 2003). This liability relief and increased federal funding bolstered the EPA
brownfield programs, which included site assessment, revolving loan fund, cleanup,
76
area-wide planning, job training, multi-purpose pilot, and technical assistance grants for
state and local communities (EPA, 2016). Specifically, the EPA awarded the
Collaborative brownfield cleanup grants for brownfield revitalization projects along the
Fairmount Line. These cleanup grants lessened the loan burdens on the Collaborative
in project financing because they were direct funds for brownfield cleanup rather than
loan funds.
The Central Artery/Tunnel project (the Big Dig) in Massachusetts was its largest,
most complex, and most technologically challenging highway project, involving 25 years
of planning and implementation by the state government (Massachusetts Department of
Transportation [MDOT]). The Big Dig’s focus was to replace Boston's deteriorating six-
lane elevated Central Artery (I-93) with an underground highway, two new bridges, and
an extension of the existing highway as well as the creation of open space to connect
downtown Boston to the waterfront (MDOT). While the Big Dig was in process, its
environmental impact was addressed by a lawsuit, Conservation Law Foundation v.
Romney, in 2006. At the culmination of this lawsuit, MDOT agreed to complete twenty
public transit projects, including enhancements to the existing public transit system and
the construction of the additional subway, bus, and rail lines (Conservation Law
Foundation v. Romney, 2006). As a result, the Fairmount Line’s renovation and
extension projects received momentum from the state government.
The Fairmount Line (the Line) renovation and extension project has been in
process since 2005. The Line, approximately 9.2 miles of track, is composed of a total
of eleven stations, from South Station in downtown Boston to Readville in Hyde Park,
Boston. Currently, six stations – South Station, Upham’s Corner, Talbot Avenue, Morton
77
Street, Fairmount, and Readville – are in service, and the other four stations are in the
proposal, design, or construction phase. The focus area of economic and community
development projects is a 0.5-mile radius from each station named the Fairmount
Corridor. The Collaborative has prioritized brownfields or vacant lands within the
Fairmount Corridor for creating affordable housing, public space, light industry, and/or
small business.
The Collaborative: Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and Southwest Boston CDC
The Collaborative was founded in 2004, when three community development
corporations – Dorchester Bay EDC, Codman Square NDC, and Southwest Boston
CDC – participated in the transit equity campaign by the Greater Four Corners Action
Coalition. The three CDCs were established during the 1970s and 1980s by indigenous
civic associations, community activists, and neighborhoods. In other words, these CDCs
have had more than twenty years of experience in community-based development
projects such as real estate, affordable housing, local economic development,
community engagement, and local leadership development. Based on this community
development experience, the Collaborative became actively involved in acquiring
underutilized properties within a half-mile buffer of each station area with the intention of
reusing those properties as affordable housing, community centers, and local
businesses. Private donors, federal funds, and state funds are a major project enabler
of the Collaborative’s community revitalization projects. At the same time, the
Collaborative partners with the city to undertake synergistic revitalization efforts around
the Fairmount Corridor. However, sustaining financial support is a continuous challenge
to the Collaborative’s brownfield revitalization and community redevelopment. To get
78
through this obstacle, the Collaborative continues to find funding sources for
environmental remediation and redevelopment.
The Collaborative focuses on preserving the living conditions of existing
neighborhoods by ensuring affordable housing and job opportunities in community
development projects. Preserving indigenous communities is a unique function of CDCs
and helps to prevent those communities from being displaced by redevelopment. The
neighborhoods near the Fairmount Corridor are low income and have racial minority
populations who are vulnerable to urban redevelopment. Therefore, the Collaborative’s
effort to provide affordable housing and create jobs within the Fairmount Corridor
directly affects these neighborhoods’ quality of life. On March 29, 2016, the
Collaborative spoke about the placement of the Massachusetts Community
Preservation Act (CPA) at the City Council hearing. The CPA credited the state funding
for affordable housing, historic preservation, parks, and open spaces in cities and
towns; because of this, the Collaborative is currently expecting more financial support to
accommodate affordable housing and open space around the Fairmount Corridor.
Sketching the Policy Environment of the Boston Case
The Collaborative and diverse interested (federal, state, and municipal) actors
have created relationships in order to implement environmental remediation and
community redevelopment in and around the Fairmount Corridor. Federal agencies –
EPA, HUD, and DOT – have provided funding and technical assistance to the
Collaborative through each agency’s programs and PSC. Likewise, the state has
offered funding opportunities and related assistance to local communities. First, the
state enacted the Massachusetts Brownfield Act in advance of the federal amendment
of CERCLA. The state’s brownfield policies streamline the brownfield remediation
79
process and facilitate economic development through multi-faceted financial programs.
Federal and state actors have built relationships with the Collaborative in providing
financial support and technical assistance rather than being directly involved in planning
and implementation efforts. The city and the Collaborative have developed closer
relations than those between the Collaborative and federal/state actors. Since the
mayor, Thomas Menino, announced the BRA FIPI in 2012, the city has become another
local actor that actively plans and operates the Fairmount Corridor’s revitalization. At the
same time, the city has been a partner of the Collaborative since 2004; therefore, this
study anticipates that the relationship between the Collaborative and the city is both
competitive and mutual. To further examine this matter, Chapters 6, 7, and 8 of this
study will investigate how the policy elements of the Boston case – the explanatory and
responsive variables – create an integrated and inclusive planning process for
successful brownfield revitalization in order to conduct a cross-case comparison with
the Ansan case.
80
CHAPTER 5 THE BANWOL INDUSTRIAL PARK REVITALIZATION CASE
This chapter provides background information, variable descriptions, and critical
case histories8 of the Ansan case. The chapter will begin by describing the description
of Banwol industrial park and its surrounding geographical conditions. Next, the chapter
will detail the explanatory and responsive variables within the case context and specify
critical case elements in order to build the background of the cross-case analysis.
Figure 5-1. A key map of Banwol Industrial Park
8 Appendix E
81
Description of the Ansan Case
The Banwol industrial park (Banwol) in the city of Ansan is one of the oldest
industrial parks in South Korea, developed by a national initiative from 1986 to 2006.
Banwol’s initial purpose was to relocate factories and related industrial facilities in the
Seoul metropolitan area. At the same time, the city of Ansan was planned and
developed to serve the demands of the living and working populations of Banwol.
Banwol has located apart from the city’s residential and commercial areas; however, the
neighborhoods in the residential areas have complained about water and air quality
issues in relation to this industrial park. Moreover, after the mid-1990s, industrial decline
created an outflow of the manufacturing industries in Banwol.
Table 5-1. Area, demographics, and built-environment descriptions of the city of Ansan and Banwol Industrial Park
Category Description
Ansan Area (acres) 36,942.25 Population 753,604
Banwol Area 4,094.04 Zoning (acres%)
Industrial zone 2,702.59 66.0 Supporting facility 328.40 8.0 Public space 861.65 21.1 Open space 201.39 4.9 Total 4,094.04 100
Industrial activity Food and beverage, textile, paper, chemical, light metal, electronic engineering, and machine-making factories are located in Banwol.
Banwol comprises both an on-site industrial complex and an abandoned complex.
A closed textile and garment manufacturing complex is designated as the first Banwol revitalization area in the project period (2018–2025).
Since industrial zones began to develop in 1987, the comprehensive plan of the
Banwol industrial park management changed twelve times. In 2010, the comprehensive
82
plan was amended in order to accelerate the transformation and diversification of
Banwol’s industries from manufacturing to green and high technology. The Ministry of
Land, Infrastructure, and Transport (MOLIT) designated Banwol as a pilot grantee of
national industrial park revitalization programs in 2014. Currently, the industrial policy
division in the city of Ansan’s government has begun to plan and implement Banwol’s
revitalization.
Table 5-2. Description of the case study variables, the Ansan case
Variable Category Description
Explanatory variables
Diverse interested actors
National agencies The Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT)
The Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE)
Regional agencies Gyeonggi Provincial Government
Municipal agencies This is a responsive variable in this case.
Community organizations
Potential of local industrial communities’ participation
Policy settings The current change or progress of laws and regulations
The special law for reinforcing obsolete industrial parks’ revitalization
Other regional and local plans
The new Ansan subway line project
Policy instruments (This variable is
categorized into federal/state/municipal levels in the analytical framework.)
Partnerships Multi-governmental cooperation based on financial support (national-regional-municipal structure)
Siheung-Ansan environmental monitoring collaboration
Agreement The streamlined industrial (re)development process by the national industrial development initiative
83
Table 5-2. Continued Variable Category Description
Economic and fiscal The national initiative to facilitate private investment and development in national industrial parks redevelopment
Responsive variable
Local actors Municipal agency The industrial policy division in the city of Ansan’s government
After industrial decline increased in the 1990s, Banwol experienced an outflow of
its manufacturing industries; simultaneously, its population growth has decreased.
Currently, the stagnated local economy is a common public concern in Ansan (Kim,
2015). The city and local communities, particularly the industrial communities, expect
that the Banwol industrial park revitalization will aid the local economy and growth. In
2015, the industrial policy division was about to finalize a municipal-level revitalization
and zoning plan. After this localized plan is adopted, the industrial policy division will
begin to conduct an environmental impact assessment and appoint an advisory board.
Banwol is a municipal agency-led industrial revitalization case with the national
and regional governments’ support. This is a significant difference from the Boston case
in Boston, MA. As stated previously, this study will conduct single-case analyses
because of this difference. Each single-case analysis will then be examined via a cross-
case analysis, which will allow the research to seek policy directions for collaborative
local governance that guides both community organizations and municipal agencies to
make their planning processes integrated and inclusive, thus supporting sustainable
brownfield revitalization.
84
The Banwol Industrial Park and the City of Ansan in Korea
The Banwol industrial park (Banwol) was the first national industrial park in South
Korea. In 1978, a national industrial development initiative led Banwol’s development in
order to relocate industries from the capital city, Seoul. A few years earlier, in 1976, the
national government had announced its master plan of building an industrial town,
Ansan, in the nearby area. As shown in its history, Ansan was a planned town
development that was intended to accommodate housing, commercial areas, and
infrastructure for the workers and residents of Banwol. Banwol’s development was
completed in 1987, and Ansan was raised to the status of a city in 1986. The Ministry of
Land, Infrastructure, and Transport (MOLIT) deputed management authority of Banwol
to the city of Ansan in 1988. However, during the late 1990s to early 2000s, Banwol
experienced an outflow of industries that was triggered by an industrial decline in Korea.
Simultaneously, the city of Ansan experienced a population decline.
Since the industrial and population decline impacted the city’s economy, Ansan
began to consider reviving Banwol and the city in a mutual relationship. Before industrial
decline began affecting the city’s economy and population, the city had barely
interconnected the vitality of Banwol to its own environment. This is because Banwol
was a nationally-owned industrial park, even though its management had been
delegated to Ansan. Since 1998, the comprehensive plan of Banwol national industrial
park management has been amended to facilitate increasing industrial business. In
2010, the comprehensive plan was repurposed to embrace upgrading and diversifying
the industries in Banwol from manufacturing industries to bio- and high-technology
industries. The industrial policy division of the city government became a main local
agent that plans and implements Banwol’s revitalization. Accordingly, the division
85
worked on developing a master revitalization plan; currently, the division has finished
the first draft of this by defining the project’s planning phases and districts as well as
conducting a preliminary investigation on local needs in terms of Banwol’s revitalization.
Specifically, the planning draft consists of three planning and implementation phases:
re-enhancing infrastructure by investing national and city funds, prioritizing focal points
(re-developable districts) that have the potential to cause a ripple effect of industrial
redevelopment, and facilitating the private sectors’ development and/or investment
through mixed use near the main corridors in Banwol. The project to regenerate Banwol
industrial park is still at the beginning of the planning stage, proposing revitalization
plans and designating revitalization districts. In particular, one of the proposed
revitalization districts in Banwol is an obsolete textile dyeing industrial complex.
According to the preliminary investigation, an in-depth analysis of the present conditions
and needs of the on-site industrial companies and workers in this complex needs to be
conducted in order to further develop these revitalization plans.
The national initiative for industrial revitalization enacted the Obsolete Industrial
Park Revitalization Act in 2016 in order to accelerate industrial redevelopment for local
economic development. The Act provides a legal foundation for establishing a national
board of directors that guides and supports local industrial revitalization. Furthermore,
the Act states the formation of a sub-committee at the local level that is composed of
members who are involved in local industrial revitalization projects. Specifically, the Act
requires the sub-committee to be comprised of local industrial business owners,
landowners, local residents, and experts in industrial revitalization. Based on how this
86
connects national and local organizations for industrial revitalization, both national and
local stakeholders expect local, industrial, community-based revitalization.
Policy Elements and the Industrial Policy Division
The present study categorizes the policy elements of Banwol’s case based on
the description of variables in Chapter 3: national-level, regional (provincial)-level, and
local-level actors, policy settings (the chronologies of laws and regulations and other
state/local plans), policy instruments, and the industrial policy division (a responsive
variable). Each element is described by Banwol’s case-specific context in order to
analyze the dynamics of the planning process that constitute the policy environment.
National-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: the Ministry of Trade, Industry, and Energy (MOTIE) and the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport (MOLIT) with the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Act
There is a total of forty-one national industrial parks in Korea, and all of those
were developed in the 1970s and 1980s. Thus, the industrial parks aged over time and
were limited in being utilized by the bio- and high-technology industries. Accordingly, the
national government began to develop a long-term agenda for industrial revitalization in
both physical infrastructure improvement and industrial upgrading. In 2010, this national
industrial revitalization initiative selected Banwol and two other national industrial parks
as grantees of obsolete industrial park revitalization programs under the partnership
between MOLIT and MOTIE. The city of Ansan was qualified to develop the Banwol
industrial revitalization plan as a leading agent because the city had a population of over
500,000 (population: 761,445 in 2013). The planning of the Banwol revitalization has
been taking place since 2010; however, this early period of Banwol revitalization lacked
legal and technical support to actualize local-oriented planning and implementation. In
2014, the subcommittee of national industrial development in Korea’s national assembly
87
passed the obsolete industrial park revitalization bill. This bill proposed easing the
regulations on industrial building construction and repayment as well as streamlining the
permit process. In 2015, the bill became the obsolete industrial park revitalization act,
and the Banwol revitalization plan became more active.
Regional-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: Gyeonggi Regional Government and Gyeonggi Vision 2030: the West Coast Industrial Belt
The Gyeonggi regional government established “Gyeonggi Vision 2030” in 2002,
which envisioned a thirty-year plan to make Gyeonggi’s economic and social
environments prosperous. As a part of this long-term plan, the regional government
intends to develop the west coast industrial belt that links industrial parks located along
the western coastal line of Korea. Banwol, located in the northwest part of this industrial
belt, has the potential to become a focal point that has a ripple effect on the other
industrial parks along the west coast industrial belt. Since 2010, this regional-level plan,
has posited the Banwol revitalization’s potential contribution to forming the west coast
industrial belt. Therefore, the regional government has supported Banwol’s revitalization
and gradually increased the budget for Banwol since 2014. However, the regional
government’s authority is limited in its ability to directly manage Banwol’s revitalization
because the city of Ansan has been appointed as a major local actor to conduct the
revitalization. Thus, the Gyeonggi government is required to define its position and
relationship with the city of Ansan in order to connect Banwol’s revitalization to the west
coast industrial belt.
Local-Level Actors and Policy Instruments: Potential of Local Industrial Community Participation
Ansan is the first planned city for industrial economic development in Korea. As
such, the city has nurtured systems and infrastructures that support industrial labor,
88
businesses, and investments. However, Banwol has the lowest rate of unionization
nationwide and the highest rate of dispatched labor. This fact indicates that the
dispatched laborers are limited in their ability to request services and support for their
labor rights. Recently, this problem appeared in reality; however, there are no legal or
organizational systems at the national, state, and municipal levels to resolve this labor
rights’ issue. Therefore, the city has constituted a local ordinance to protect and improve
dispatched laborers’ rights. If the ordinance is passed in the Ansan assembly, it will
become the first labor rights ordinance in Korea. The ordinance gives the Ansan mayor
the power to protect labor rights, to adopt a comprehensive plan for labor policy every
five years, and to establish a committee of labor rights protection in the city. This local
initiative for labor rights is expected to expand its boundary to labor welfare and service
infrastructure in Banwol. Thus, this study anticipates that the city’s labor rights initiative
has the potential to affect Banwol’s revitalization.
Policy Settings: the New Ansan Subway Line Project
MOLIT has been conducting the new Ansan subway line project, which will be
open in 2017. Banwol industrial park has experienced traffic congestions during rush
hours and an extreme lack of parking spaces. Hence, the new Ansan line is considered
an opportunity to redesign transportation systems – public transportation options,
parking areas, and bike lanes – in Banwol. Two of the subway stations of the new
Ansan line are located in Banwol industrial park; this shows that the city is focused on
improving multimodal transportation options in Banwol. Also, the city has included
redesigning parking areas with worker priority parking and paid parking garages in the
Banwol revitalization project. Having a multimodal transit system and redesigning the
parking areas are developments that are inevitably interrelated between the new Ansan
89
line and Banwol revitalization projects. Thus, multi-governmental (national and local)
and interagency cooperation is necessary both projects to achieve effective
performance and successful outcomes.
The Industrial Policy Division in the City of Ansan
Although Banwol is a national industrial park, the city acquired a discretionary
plan, making it the authority according to the obsolete industrial park revitalization act:
A corporation that national or local governments acquire more than 50 percent or 30 percent of share is eligible to appoint board members of a corporation; thus, a corporation is qualified as a project operator of industrial park (re)development.
Based on this legal effect, the city appointed the industrial policy division as a project
operator of the Banwol industrial revitalization project in 2014. Currently, the division
works on a preliminary investigation that aims to develop a comprehensive plan for
Banwol’s revitalization. After the preliminary research and report are finished, the
division will establish a review committee for this project. The committee will guide and
support the planning and implementation of Banwol revitalization; thus, members of the
committee are expected to be gathered from diverse fields, including labor or civic
organizations in Ansan as well as experts in industrial revitalization. At the same time,
the division is required to conduct an environmental impact assessment of the Banwol
revitalization review process; therefore, diverse stakeholders’ engagement becomes a
major task of the division in facilitating the project.
Sketching the Policy Environment of the Ansan Case
The Banwol industrial park revitalization is rooted on a national initiative;
however, the industrial policy division of the neighboring city of Ansan is conducting the
planning and implementation of the revitalization. National agencies – MOLIT and
90
MOTIE – are a major funding provider of this project. In total, the budget for Banwol’s
revitalization is comprised of 50% of national funds, 10% from regional funds, and 40%
of city funds. In terms of policy settings, adopting the obsolete industrial park
revitalization act of 2016 has accelerated local industrial park revitalization. In particular,
the act establishes national- and local-level committees to guide and review industrial
revitalization projects. The local-level committee is intended to represent diverse local
interests in industrial park revitalization by appointing its members from various
backgrounds. In addition, the city is preparing the labor rights ordinance to protect
neglected laborers in Banwol industrial park. These local-oriented policy changes reflect
the potential for creative and community-based industrial park revitalization. By contrast,
the regional government has not defined its position in relation to the Banwol industrial
park revitalization. Therefore, it is necessary to delineate the role of the regional
government in order to enhance the Banwol revitalization initiative.
According to the review of policy instruments in the previous section, policy
processes that are based on the obsolete industrial park revitalization act require an
environmental impact assessment in a phase that submits industrial revitalization plans
for approval. In this approval process, the environmental impact of industrial
revitalization plans is reviewed by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and the Korea
Environment Institute (KEI). Also, the review process of environmental impact
assessment is open to the public; however, the assessment is required for a property
that is being (re)developed in industrial use. This procedural loophole posits the
possibility of omitting the environmental review process on a property that was once
industrial use, but has changed its land-use type to commercial or residential uses.
91
In the next chapters, Chapters 6, 7, and 8, the research analyzes the integrated and
inclusive planning processes of the Ansan case based on this case sketch. Also, a
cross-case comparison with the Boston case will be conducted.
92
CHAPTER 6 INTEGRATED PLANNING IN BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION
Establishing planning task forces and financing projects through solid funders
were a core common strategy to integrate environmental actions (environmental
remediation and/or review) and economic redevelopment in the Boston and Ansan
cases. Furthermore, this study identifies that this core and common strategy inevitably
requires inclusive planning process which facilitates diverse interested actors’ support
and participation that enable local actors to foster planning task forces and financial aids.
Evaluating the Performance of Integrated Planning in the Boston Case
Multi-governance structures consisting of the federal, state, and local agents
integrate the policymaking, planning, and implementation of brownfield revitalization.
The Boston case shows how a local initiative connects its community’s revitalization
needs to federal, state, and municipal policies and programs. The community
revitalization needs in the Boston case are categorized by two kinds of planning fields:
first, environmental remediation, and second, housing and economic development.
However, the policy processes and each actor’s role or impact need to be investigated
further in this case in order to verify if the processes and each actor’s activities
contribute to establishing integrated planning. It is particularly important to identify how
environmental remediation is linked to community/economic development since this is a
key aspect of planning that increases the potential of brownfield revitalization for
sustainable community development. The research scope includes environmental
remediation and the community/economic development processes that are created by
the interactions between each explanatory variable and the Collaborative. The
categorical framework to examine these interactions is composed of the planning
93
activities and funding requirements for environmental remediation and
community/economic development. Here, “planning activities” include creating planning
committees or boards, establishing plans (environmental remediation and
community/economic development plans, planning process guidelines, or agreements
and covenants), and developing planning tools (community mapping tools, site
prioritization tools, etc.). The funding requirements show how the explanatory variables
and the Collaborative capitalize and finance those planning activities. The present study
examines the Boston case through this framework and identifies how the Collaborative
builds integrated planning efforts that result in sustainable brownfield revitalization.
Figure 6-1. Analysis process of the Boston case
In the case analysis of the Collaborative, the research examined several projects
that represented the Fairmount Corridor development. The project selection considered
the relations between explanatory variables and the Collaborative. For example, this
research analyzes projects in which federal agencies and the Collaborative were
involved as well as projects in which all diverse interested actors and the Collaborative
worked together. In other words, this research examines multiple projects led by each
94
CDC member of the Collaborative with the variance of diverse interested actors’
involvement to verify the presence of integrated planning processes. As a result, three
projects were selected. Two light industrial redevelopment projects led by the
Dorchester Bay EDC can be used to elaborate how planning activities and funding
requirements are delivered through all diverse interested actors’ participation. These
two projects include a redevelopment project on 65 Bay Street and the Bornstein &
Pearl Food Production Small Business Center project. These two light industrial
properties are located near the Four Corners/Geneva Avenue Station on the Fairmount
Line (less than two miles on foot from the train station). The research examines the
planning activities and funding requirements that resulted from interactions between
each explanatory variable and the Collaborative in these two light industrial projects.
The third project is the PSC’s brownfield pilot, which is comprised of three sub-
projects: developing the Fairmount Collaborative corridor-wide site prioritization tool,
designing the Morton Street home, and fostering public participation in the initiative of
Codman Square NDC and the Talbot Norfolk Triangle Neighborhood Association (TNT).
This project was led by a collaboration between the Collaborative and federal
interagency partnerships among EPA, HUD, and DOT.
Table 6-1. Summary of three projects led by the Collaborative and the variance of diverse interested actors’ involvement
Projects Leading member of the Collaborative
Variance of diverse interested actors’ involvement
The 65 Bay Street for light industrial redevelopment project
Dorchester Bay EDC Federal, state, and city agencies, and non-profit organizations
The Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Small Business Center project
Dorchester Bay EDC Federal, state, and city agencies, and non-profit organizations
The PSC’s brownfield pilot The Collaborative (Codman Square NDC, Mattapan CDC)
Federal agencies – EPA, HUD, and DOT
95
The 65 Bay Street Reuse for Light Industrial Redevelopment
The Dorchester Bay EDC (DB EDC) has been developing a strong real estate
and community engagement portfolio since it was founded in 1979. DB EDC’s real
estate ventures mainly focus on economic development and affordable housing. In this
spectrum, the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project highlights the organization’s efforts
to integrate planning and funding resources for environmental remediation and real
estate development. As shown in Chapter 4, the neighborhoods around the Fairmount
Corridor have experienced degraded surroundings (with over five hundred properties
designated as brownfields) and limited economic opportunities (with a higher
unemployment rate 14.9% than the city’s average rate 9.3%). Thus, the affordability and
quality of living conditions – housing, employment, and mobility – are always key issues
to be resolved in DB EDC’s redevelopment projects. Also, environmental remediation
typically challenges DB EDC’s initiation of redevelopment. The 65 Bay Street
redevelopment project shows how DB EDC overcomes these issues by integrating
planning and funding opportunities.
The 65 Bay Street redevelopment project began in 1994 when DB EDC acquired
a foreclosed 5-acre parcel at 65 Bay Street for $158,000. This project repurposed the 5-
acre property for light industrial business. Furthermore, a growing civic connectedness
in the project facilitated housing improvement that was associated with the light
industrial development during the project period (from 1996 to 2002). This research
analyzes the outcomes of the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project in terms of the
project’s planning activities and funding requirements.
96
Project Narrative
This project narrative is mainly based on Dubois, 2014 and J. Dubois and L.
Whiteside, personal communication, July 8, 2015.
The 5-acre foreclosed property on 65 Bay Street had been owned by the Boston
Insulated Wire & Cable Company since 1989; however, the company decided to
relocate its facilities. Consequently, the site was abandoned until DB EDC purchased
the property in 1994. The site generated a negative influence on the surrounding
neighborhoods: for example, facilities on the site experienced arson fires and crime
activities. Moreover, a lagoon and a railroad spur occupied a 1.1-acre portion of the site;
the lagoon was contaminated with lead and silver, volatile organic compounds, and
petroleum, while the railroad contained lead, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH),
and total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH). DB EDC reserved $14.5 million to fund the
total costs of site remediation and redevelopment for business use. Growing needs and
interests in economic development – job creation for stabilizing low-income
neighborhoods – as well as a city referral facilitated the decision to carry SPIRE, a
digital printing and marketing company, to the site. In 2002, SPIRE opened its
headquarters office on the site and contributed to local job creation. Since it opened, the
company has increased its employment from 100 workers to 166 workers (Dubois,
2014).
As an adjoining project, DB EDC acquired 159 units of the distressed multi-family
housing adjacent to 65 Bay Street. Remodeling units of the housing provided
substantial inputs for DB EDC’s financial portfolio. Furthermore, this housing project
helped them to create networks with other community development corporations,
private real estate developers, neighborhoods, and civic organizations. Based on this
97
financial portfolio and social capital, DB EDC was able to find diverse funding sources
for the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project. Those funding sources mainly came from
nonprofit organizations, private sectors, and government agencies. The 65 Bay Street
redevelopment project had seventeen different funders; its leading lenders were Fleet
Bank, the Massachusetts LIFE Initiative, Mass Development, Boston Community
Capital, and the Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC) (Dubois, 2014).
Community-focused financial institutions such as LISC and the Massachusetts
Association of CDCs’ Ricanne Hadrian Initiative particularly supported the Collaborative
in creating a loan fund base and increasing its community-organizing capacity for 65
Bay Street and housing projects (Dubois, 2014).
At the same time, DB EDC approached the neighborhoods surrounding the
project area to facilitate civic engagement in the economic and housing redevelopment
projects on 65 Bay Street. DB EDC began to build a strong working relationship with
civic groups in the neighborhoods of the project area. The Dudley Street Neighborhood
Initiative (DSNI), a nonprofit community-based planning and organizing entity, became
an important facilitator that helped DB EDC to connect neighborhoods and other
stakeholders such as funders, developers, and experts involved in the 65 Bay Street
project (Dubois, 2014). As a result of this community organizing through the
collaboration of DB EDC and civic organizations, the Columbia Savin Hill Civic
Association, located right around the 65 Bay Street project, came into the planning
process as a member who held and managed the review process of the 65 Bay Street
remediation and economic redevelopment. In this review process, the Columbia Savin
Hill Civic Association created a development committee and conducted monthly
98
meetings to review DB EDC’s plans for site treatment and economic redevelopment. In
the course of this review process for economic redevelopment, there were forty-five
economic development proposals from business development entities.
From 1994 to 1999, before SPIRE’s business proposal for the 65 Bay Street
redevelopment, DB EDC demolished facilities and executed site remediation. In 1997,
the Massachusetts Governor, Paul Cellucci, selected the 65 Bay Street project to
accommodate a special state fund for site assessment and remediation while the state
was preparing the Massachusetts Brownfield Act of 1998. After this remarkable
progress of site rehabilitation for reuse, SPIRE was recommended by BRA and made its
business proposal to the development committee and DB EDC in 1999. While the
committee and DB EDC reviewed SPIRE’s proposal, the Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) was established by the committee, DB EDC, and SPIRE. MOU
included agreements to prioritize local residents for employment and manage property
resale by SPIRE.
As such, SPIRE and its business leveraged local economic growth within the
nearby communities of the project. Small businesses like retails and restaurants
benefited from the 65 Bay Street redevelopment via the increased amounts of
commuters and residents. Furthermore, the 65 Bay Street redevelopment contributed to
creating an environment that values local civic participation in the planning and
implementation of community development projects.
In the next sections, the research will examine the planning activities and funding
requirements of the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project within the Boston case.
99
Analysis of Planning Activities
The 65 Bay Street redevelopment project showed three obvious planning
activities: linking light industrial development and housing complex rehabilitation,
establishing a development committee composed of neighborhood leaders and
residents, and creating agreements that sustained the initial planning objectives shared
by the neighborhoods, DB EDC, and the business stakeholders (SPIRE).
Prior to this project, the neighborhoods around 65 Bay Street struggled with
limited job opportunities and the low quality of housing and the surrounding environment.
DB EDC addressed these community problems and layered economic redevelopment
and housing rehabilitation together in the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project.
Repurposing contaminated property to light industrial use, furthermore, induced DB
EDC to acquire blighted multi-family housing from private sellers to recapitalize loan
funds. This rehabilitated multi-family housing supplied substantial capital that supported
both the light industrial redevelopment and DB EDC’s funding portfolio. Moreover, this
housing investment became an affordable housing choice for the low-income
neighborhoods that largely occupied DB EDC’s service area, Dorchester in Boston.
Such integrated economic and housing revitalization has been one of DB EDC’s key
planning strategies since the organization was established in 1979 (J. Dubois, personal
communication, July 8, 2015). The 65 Bay Street redevelopment project became a
milestone that proved DB EDC’s integrated economic and housing planning processes
to be significant and effective. As mentioned in the project narrative, the 65 Bay Street
project created 100 new jobs, and the housing rehabilitation provided 159 affordable,
remodeled units. In addition, the light industrial development on 65 Bay Street with
housing rehabilitation affected the growing commercial industries in the surrounding
100
neighborhoods (Dubois, 2014). Also, DB EDC supported those small businesses
through the Dorchester Bay Small Business Assistance Program. Some restaurants and
retail shops, assisted by this light industrial redevelopment and the DB EDC program,
became community hotspots that attract local shoppers and employees (Dubois, 2014).
Second, the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project established a development
committee of the Columbia Savin Hill Civic Association that was actively involved in
both the pre- and post-development phases. This committee’s constant involvement in
the redevelopment project enabled the initial project objectives – local job creation and
economic redevelopment – to be sustained. Particularly, the committee contributed to
agreements with SPIRE and DB EDC ensuring local employment and property
ownership. This is analyzed further in conjunction with the public outreach efforts of DB
EDC in Chapter 8. In terms of activities that fostered integrated planning, the committee
facilitated the collection of community input and opinions in planning for the future use
of the revitalized property, including input regarding the need for local jobs. Furthermore,
agreements among the committee, DB EDC, and SPIRE provided the basis for keeping
the property productive in creating local jobs by tackling property use and ownership
issues.
Analysis of Funding Requirements
The 65 Bay Street redevelopment project had two major financing issues: the
cost of environmental remediation and the need for investment in economic
redevelopment. DB EDC approached these financing tasks with diverse funders from
federal, state, city, and quasi-public capitals. The total cost of the project was $14.5
million, which was composed of $200,000 for demolition, $204,000 for remediation, and
the remaining $14,096,000 for pre-development and development (Dubois, 2014). The
101
property acquisition cost DB EDC $158,000, and $13,938,000 was invested in
redevelopment. Seventeen funders financed this remediation and redevelopment; the
financial portfolio of this project consisted of $10,000,000 of debt and $4,500,000 of
equity or grant. The $4.5 million of equity or grant was funded by the U.S. Economic
Development Administration, the City of Boston’s federal Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds and HUD 108 funds, HUD’s Office of Community Services
grant, LISC, the CDC Tax Credit Collaborative, Massachusetts Growth Capital
(previously the Community Development Finance Corporation), the Community
Economic Development Assistance Corporation, and three private donors (Dubois,
2014). The overall leading lenders in this project were the Bank of America (previously
Fleet Bank), the Massachusetts LIFE Initiative, Massachusetts Development, Boston
Community Capital, LISC, the City of Boston’s Department of Neighborhood
Development, and the HUD Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program. As indicated in the
main funders’ affiliation, the financial support of the 65 Bay Street redevelopment relied
on public and quasi-public/social capitals. Also, the federal, state, and city governments
collaborated to finance the project; in particular, the HUD CDBG and Section 108 Loan
Guarantee programs created an interrelated financial relationship among HUD, the city
of Boston, and DB EDC through solid funds (federal money) and a credible loan
guarantor (the city).
In environmental remediation costs, site remediation ($204,000) required the
relatively easy removal of wastewater pools (a lagoon) and an abandoned rail spur (J.
Dubois, personal communication, July 8, 2015). Taking into account the average cost of
site remediation in Massachusetts ($500,000 or less), this site remediation cost was
102
minimum and affordable to DB EDC. According to an open-ended interview with Jeanne
Dubois, an executive director at DB EDC, brownfield remediation in Massachusetts was
well-organized in terms of financing and executing the remediation because the state
had enacted the Massachusetts Brownfield Law of 1998 with an initial $10 million in
funds. Also, Mass Development has continued to provide remediation funds with low-
interest rates to brownfield revitalization projects. Recently, the state proposed a new
bond bill that allows it “to borrow money for capital projects” and “proposed making $75
million available for the Brownfields fund over the next five years” (Gittelman, 2016).
Furthermore, the increased state brownfield funds are expected to contribute to
reducing the housing shortage in municipalities. This signifies that brownfield
remediation in Massachusetts has been an opportunity for housing and economic
development. Likewise, DB EDC’s strategic brownfield revitalization approach in the
project narrative is congruent with this state-level policy direction.
The Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Small Business Center Project
The 65 Bay Street redevelopment project was an initial light industrial
redevelopment that proved that DB EDC’s economic development strategies were
integrative in planning and financing brownfield projects. The Bornstein & Pearl Food
Production Center, secondly, was a later project that directly connected to the
Fairmount CDCs Collaborative.
Project Narrative
This project narrative is mainly based on Dubois, 2014 and J. Dubois and L.
Whiteside, personal communication, July 8, 2015.
DB EDC purchased the Bornstein & Pearl food production facilities on 196 Quincy
Street in 2007. This purchase was a part of the Collaborative’s Fairmount Corridor
103
economic development planning initiative with the goal of reviving the blighted
neighborhoods and distressed local economies within the Corridor (J. Dubois, personal
communication, July 8, 2015). This project was also based on DB EDC’s community
revitalization strategies that integrated economic development and affordable housing in
a project area. As redevelopment potential increased within the Fairmount Corridor, DB
EDC started to focus on Quincy Street as a primary project area not only because of its
blighted environment but also because of its proximity to a proposed new station on the
Fairmount Indigo Rail Line, the Columbia Road Station. The initial intent of this project
was to perform housing rehabilitation through a joint venture with United Housing
Management (UHM), the for-profit owner of 262 distressed apartments in the targeted
area, Quincy Street (Dubois, 2014). This proposed joint venture aimed at upgrading the
existing apartments for current residents, turning over the ownership to DB EDC, and
retaining UHM as a property manager. While the joint venture progressed, DB EDC
discovered the Bornstein & Pearl buildings located right across from the apartments. DB
EDC’s revitalization focusing on Quincy Street had a wider project spectrum than just
targeting housing rehabilitation; thus, DB EDC sought an economic development
opportunity in the Borstein & Pearl buildings (Dubois, 2014; J. Dubois, personal
communication, July 8, 2015). Recognizing that the abutting neighborhoods needed job
creation and local businesses, DB EDC accelerated its process of motivating economic
development through community support. However, the property acquisition required
more funding efforts than the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project. Nevertheless, DB
EDC and the members of the Collaborative worked together to get through the
revitalization processes in this project. Twenty-seven funders were involved in this
104
project; HUD CDBG, with the Section 108 Loan Guarantee program ($3.2 million), and
the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program ($3.76 million) became the largest
funders of redevelopment (total: $14.7 million) (Dubois, 2014). The site assessment and
remediation were covered by EPA grants ($118,065) and the Mass Brownfield Fund
($163,500) from Mass Development. In addition, the owners of the Bornstein & Pearl
property were cooperative with DB EDC’s acquisition. The owners of this property, the
Bornstein and Pearl families, financed $800,000 for DB EDC’s acquisition and gave DB
EDC a two-year stay period. DB EDC could thoroughly plan and review their
redevelopment scenario of Quincy Street during this stay period (Dubois, 2014). Great
funders and a great community agent rebuilt and reopened the Bornstein & Pearl Food
Production Center in 2014. Since then, the center has been operating as a network of
spaces for small food businesses to start up, expand, and eventually grow out of the
facility (Brownfield Renewal, 2014).
Table 6-2. The funding use of the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project
Fund use Amount ($)
Acquisition 1,330,248 Cruz acquisition and demolition 383,000 Hard costs (including 10% contingency) 6,736,908 Soft costs 1,868,766 Reserves 1,616,485 Tenant build-out 400,000 Kitchen equipment 568,000 CCK shared kitchen equipment 285,000 CCK small wares for opening 47,055 NMTC closing costs 738,138 Developer overhead and fees 728,955 Total 14,702,555
Dubois, J. (2014). Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation Project Narrative: the Bornstein & Pearl food production small business center. pp. 1 – 7.
105
Analysis of Planning Activities
The Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project was a part of the
Fairmount Corridor planning, and the Collaborative – DB EDC, Codman Square NDC,
Mattapan CDC, and Southwest Boston CDC – worked together to fund and organize it.
The project’s initiatives for local job creation and businesses were particularly driven by
the opinions from surrounding neighborhoods. As a result, this newly opened food
production center could ensure the prioritization of a local, minority, and female
workforce as well as subcontractors with permanent hiring.
Table 6-3. The characteristics of workforce and subcontractors in the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center by percentage (%)
Local resident Minority Female
Workforce 51 65 19 Subcontractor N/A 45 19
Dubois, J. (2014). Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation Project Narrative: the Bornstein & Pearl food production small business center. pp. 1 – 7.
After the construction of the new facilities was completed, DB EDC established
lease agreements that required contractors to offer 50% of the new jobs that were
created by this food production center to local residents. Since then, DB EDC has
continued to monitor the diversity and quality control in the business’s food production.
Analysis of Financial Requirements
This food production center project had twenty-seven different funders from
public, private, and non-profit entities. This is a similar pattern to the 65 Bay Street
redevelopment, which received funding from multi-governmental grant and loan
programs, state brownfield programs, and non-profit organizations for local initiatives in
action. The HUD CDBG and Section 108 programs played a major role in financing DB
EDC’s economic development through a guaranteed loan system, and the city
106
contributed to creating this loan system by being a guarantor of DB EDC (Dubois,
2014). This was possible because the city was also deeply connected to the Quincy
Street revitalization. The city of Boston had a Quincy corridor Transformation Plan,
selecting this neighborhood as a Choice Neighborhood9 in 2012. Also, DB EDC was
awarded $12 million funding for affordable housing development from HUD Choice
Neighborhoods; furthermore, DB EDC was awarded $500,000 in Choice
Neighborhoods: Critical Community Improvements Funds for a project that was
projected to create 150 jobs within the first three years of operation (Brownfield
Renewal, 2014). This federal funding opportunity was possible because of a partnership
9 The Choice Neighborhoods program supports locally driven strategies to address struggling
neighborhoods with distressed public or HUD-assisted housing through a comprehensive approach to neighborhood transformation. Local leaders, residents, and stakeholders such as public housing authorities, cities, schools, police, business owners, nonprofits, and private developers come together to create and implement a plan that transforms distressed HUD housing and addresses the challenges in the surrounding neighborhoods. The program is designed to catalyze critical improvements in neighborhood assets, including vacant property, housing, services, and schools.
Choice Neighborhoods is focused on three core goals:
1. Housing: to replace distressed public and assisted housing with high-quality mixed-income housing that is well managed and responsive to the needs of the surrounding neighborhood; 2. People: to improve educational outcomes and intergenerational mobility for youth with services and supports delivered directly to youths and their families; and 3. Neighborhood: to create the conditions necessary for public and private reinvestment in distressed neighborhoods to offer the kinds of amenities and assets, including safety, good schools, and commercial activity, that are important to families’ choices about their communities.
To achieve these core goals, communities must develop a comprehensive neighborhood revitalization strategy, also known as a Transformation Plan. This Transformation Plan will become the guiding document for the revitalization of the public and/or assisted housing units while simultaneously directing the transformation of the surrounding neighborhood and positive outcomes for families. To successfully implement the Transformation Plan, applicants will need to work with public and private agencies, organizations (including philanthropic organizations), and individuals to gather and leverage the resources needed to support the financial sustainability of the plan. These efforts should build community support for and involvement in the plan’s development. Implementation grants support those communities that have undergone a comprehensive local planning process and are ready to implement their Transformation Plan to redevelop the neighborhood.
Source
The US Housing and Urban Development [HUD]. (n.d.). Choice Neighborhoods, Overview. Retrieved from http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/public_indian_housing/programs/ph/cn
107
with the city in pursuing the common goal of community revitalization (J. Dubois,
personal communication, July 8, 2015).
Table 6-4. The funding sources of the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project
Funder Amount ($) Type
Boston Community Capital Loan 2,560,000 Loan City of Boston/HUD Section 108 Loan 3,200,000 Loan Coastal Enterprise, Inc./Wholesome Wave 500,000 Loan New Markets Tax Credit Program Equity 3,761,700 Tax Credit Equity Mass Work grant 1,500,000 Grant Office of Community Service grant 788,000 Grant CHOICE neighborhoods grant 500,000 Grant EPA grant 118,063 Grant Mass Development grant 163,500 Grant DB EDC equity contributed 496,237 Equity DB EDC Community Development Financial Institutions small business loan fund
300,000 Grant
The Boston Foundation 100,000 Grant City of Boston: The Fairmount Corridor Acquisition Loan Fund
217,945 Soft loan
The city of Boston grant 57,055 Grant Boston Community Capital Loan 126,755 Loan DB EDC Equity 38,300 Equity Kendell Foundation grant 275,000 Grant
Total 14,702,555
Dubois, J. (2014). Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation Project Narrative: the Bornstein & Pearl food production small business center. pp. 1 – 7.
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot
The Partnership for Sustainable Communities (PSC) brownfield pilot involved
technical assistance from federal interagency partnerships among the EPA, HUD, and
DOT. This technical assistance allowed the development of strategic planning tools,
transit-oriented community designs, and community participation strategies to support
communities’ planning initiatives and capacities. There were three sub-projects in this
brownfield pilot: developing the Fairmount Corridor-wide site prioritization tool, creating
the transit-oriented design for the Morton Street home, and the Codman Square NDC
108
and Talbot Norfolk Triangle Neighborhood Association (TNT) public participation
initiative.
Project Narrative
The Fairmount Corridor-wide site prioritization tool was developed through the
PSC brownfield pilot. The Fairmount Corridor, composed of the half-mile radiuses
surrounding each train station on the Fairmount commuter rail line, had over 500
properties designated as brownfields or Superfund sites. Furthermore, the lack of public
transit choices and proximities urged the Fairmount Corridor-wide redevelopment
projects to take systematic and problem-solving planning approaches. After the city
finalized a greenway project within the Fairmount Corridor, this prioritization tool was
also used to find potential sites for greenway use on the Fairmount Corridor. Technical
tools were visualized into property lists in an Excel- and Google Earth-based tool. The
city of Boston’s Department of Neighborhood Development became an end user of this
site-prioritization tool as well (EPA, 2012).
The second sub-project was to develop transit-oriented designs for a Morton
Street affordable housing project by Mattapan CDC. Transit-oriented development was
one of the livability principles promulgated by PSC, and the Fairmount Corridor’s needs
in terms of public transit and affordable housing fit into the PSC’s objective at local-level
program implementation. The Morton Street housing development is an example of
convergent planning directions between federal agencies and local needs. In this
project, Mattapan CDC, a member of the Collaborative, acquired properties on Morton
Street and planned to develop new four-story mixed-use buildings. When a brownfield
pilot team and Mattapan CDC interacted for this development project, the walkability to
transit and housing affordability were subject matters that arose as needing to be
109
resolved. The housing project was able to focus on decreasing the walking distance to
Morton Street Station, remodeled and reopened in 2007, on the Fairmount commuter
rail line. Additionally, housing affordability was secured through funding sources from
federal, state, and city programs. The brownfield pilot helped Mattapan CDC and its
neighborhoods prepare funding applications for affordable housing.
The Talbot Norfolk Triangle (TNT) Neighborhood Association, a civic initiative,
has traditionally been an underrepresented, economically disadvantaged neighborhood
in the Dorchester area. Therefore, the Codman Square NDC and TNT neighborhoods
needed to prepare collective and adaptive community actions for new development
originating in the Talbot Avenue Station, a new station on the Fairmount Indigo
commuter rail line. Community gatherings hosted by Codman NDC and the TNT
neighborhood association became more formal and regular through organizing
participation opportunities in their meetings. For example, the brownfield pilot team and
Codman Square NDC proposed and discussed planning issues and projects that
impacted the TNT neighborhoods during the meetings. Specifically, the meetings
enabled neighborhoods and agencies to identify community goals and outline
community preferences for new development (EPA, 2012). In the meetings, a new
development on several vacant and potentially contaminated properties located in TNT
neighborhoods was discussed in terms of remediation and redevelopment planning.
Furthermore, these regular community gatherings facilitated envisioning long-term
community development plans in the TNT neighborhood. In summary, the community
meetings helped continue the dialogue between the TNT neighborhood association and
Codman Square NDC in identifying local needs; because of this, the TNT neighborhood
110
association was able to address its needs in terms of affordable energy sources, utilities,
and housing. As a result, the participants in the meetings developed a proposal for
transit-oriented development in the TNT neighborhood. At the same time, the pilot team
guided the TNT association and the residents to develop plans to secure affordable and
renewable energy through green building strategies.
Analysis of Planning Activities
The three sub-projects in the PSC brownfield pilot focused on creating planning
procedures that nurtured local initiatives through advanced planning tools, designs, and
public participation in planning processes. The federal interagency partners – EPA,
HUD, and DOT – collaboratively supported the CDC members of the Collaborative and
neighborhood associations in planning property reuse, new development, and housing.
Site-prioritization tools advanced the site selection criteria and allowed the property
inventory to be shared with members of the Collaborative and its partners. The site-
prioritization tools also preserved parcel IDs, site addresses, property ownerships,
property/tax values, etc., which supported site selection for greenway projects and
brownfield redevelopment. This tool contributed to creating integrative planning
approaches for property reuse in the Fairmount Corridor. The Morton Street home
development, furthermore, was guided by a transit-oriented design that facilitated
walkability and mobility in the targeted neighborhoods. This transit-oriented design was
an urban design strategy that actualized the livability principles10 established by PSC;
10
The six livability principles: (1) Provide more transportation choices.
Develop safe, reliable, and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation’s dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health.
(2) Promote equitable, affordable housing.
111
taking such a design approach allowed the Collaborative and Morton Street home
project to qualify for federal funding programs for affordable housing and community
development. The TNT neighborhood association and Codman Square NDC’s public
participation initiative established a collaborative relationship between neighborhoods
and community organizations that engaged local residents in the planning and decision-
making processes. Furthermore, the neighborhoods and organizations identified local
needs and integrated those needs into the community planning agenda during
community organizing activities that took place in regular meetings assisted by the PSC
brownfield pilot. Those planning interactions between the neighborhoods and
Expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices for people of all ages, incomes, races, and ethnicities to increase mobility and lower the combined costs of housing and transportation.
(3) Enhance economic competitiveness.
Improve economic competitiveness through providing reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services and other basic needs by workers as well as expanded business access to markets.
(4) Support existing communities.
Target federal funding toward existing communities—through strategies like transit-oriented, mixed-use development and land recycling—to increase community revitalization and the efficiency of public works investments and to safeguard rural landscapes.
(5) Coordinate and leverage federal policies and investment.
Align federal policies and funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding, and increase the accountability and effectiveness of all levels of government to plan for future growth, including making smart energy choices such as using locally generated renewable energy.
(6) Value communities and neighborhoods.
Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities by investing in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods, whether rural, urban, or suburban.
Source
The Interagency Partnerships for Sustainable Communities [PSC]. (2013, October 31). Livability Principles. Retrieved from https://www.sustainablecommunities.gov/mission/livability-principles#sthash.offa34Qw.dpuf
112
organizations resulted in long-term community plans linked to the Collaborative and the
city’s broader area-wide planning initiatives.
Analysis of Financial Requirements
The PSC brownfield pilot was not a federal funding program; instead, it was
technical assistance that helped targeted communities to prepare and apply federal
grants to revive blighted local environments and economies. PSC’s technical assistance
and funding programs prioritized economically and socially disadvantaged and
underrepresented communities, focusing on identifying and fostering community
capacity and social capitals. The collaboration of Codman NDC and the TNT
neighborhood association is an example of PSC’s efforts to establish public participation
initiatives. Such local initiatives facilitated integrating local needs into planning and
decision-making and increased the potential for long-term community development. The
present study discusses this and other inclusive brownfield revitalization planning efforts
in Chapter 7.
Findings in Case Analysis
In the three projects analyzed in the previous sections, integrating the funding
sources for economic and housing development was a key to making the projects
profitable and sustainable. The cost of environmental remediation in these brownfield
revitalization projects was relatively less critical than that of economic and housing
development; thus, a theoretical framework that emphasizes integrated environmental
remediation and economic development must be modified. However, ideas related to
integrating environmental remediation and economic development were considered in
the planning activities of all three projects. At the same time, DB EDC’s projects in this
study dealt with brownfield revitalization efforts that required only a medium amount of
113
remediation costs, from $180,000 to $200,000 (J. Dubois, personal communication, July
8, 2015); therefore, it is hard to apply this modification of the theory framework to
general brownfield projects. In the planning processes of these projects, site
assessment and remediation were always prerequisites for site redevelopment;
accordingly, the Collaborative needed to discuss this environmental management
planning in its initial community and stakeholder meetings. The state brownfield
programs guided and supported environmental remediation by providing procedural
regulations and funding programs. Particularly, state-certified environmental specialists
should be appointed in every brownfield remediation in Massachusetts, as in the Boston
case. By mandating this environmental policy, both the state and local communities can
rely on environmental remediation for the safe reuse of brownfield sites.
While planning site assessment and remediation, the three projects also
envisioned the future use of the brownfields. As already mentioned, achieving
integrative financing for the economic and housing development was the most crucial
element of brownfield revitalization in the Boston case. According to open-ended
interviews with Jeanne Dubois, a former Executive Director at DB EDC, there were two
very challenging aspects of financing the brownfield and community development
projects: finding funders and securing financial portfolios.
The Importance of Community Development Corporations and Quasi-Public/Social Capitals
The major funders of the two DB EDC-led projects were a federal agency (HUD)
and quasi-public/social organizations (Mass Development, LISC, and NMTC). Also, the
state brownfield funding programs covered the majority of the site remediation costs in
the two projects. Based on the project narratives, the research identified that
114
Massachusetts and Boston had a solid culture of neighborhood initiatives that were
actively involved in the Collaborative’s planning and decision-making processes. Such
strong grassroots culture in the city allowed the CDCs to lead the community planning
and project implementation in the Fairmount Corridor. Furthermore, the community
revitalization was accelerated by well-formed state and nationwide nonprofit entities
financing distressed neighborhoods. Thus, the research summarized three main project
facilitators in the Boston case: local civic organizations (homeowners associations or
civic coalitions), CDCs, and quasi-public/social capitals. The two DB EDC-led projects
elaborated DB EDC’s strategies that reserve budget for environmental remediation,
economic, and housing development. In these projects, DB EDC proved the potential of
experienced CDCs for allowing local actors to lead brownfield and community
revitalization in terms of financing brownfield revitalization projects.
Evaluating the Performance of Integrated Planning in the Ansan Case
The Banwol industrial park revitalization was started by a national initiative but is
being conducted by the industrial policy division of the city of Ansan. According to the
budget ratio of the Banwol project, national agencies – MOLIT and MOTEI – fund 50%
of its budget, while the city invests 40%. The regional government capitalizes the
remaining 10% (Personal communication, October 22, 2015). This ratio reflects how the
city and national agencies are the core body of Banwol’s revitalization; in particular, the
city agency operates the actual planning process and implementation of this project.
Accordingly, this study focused on the relationships of the city and national agencies in
order to verify an integrated planning process of environmental remediation and
economic redevelopment. The roles played by policy settings and the potential of local
organizations are both considered under this policy environment of a local and national
115
planning task force. As in the Boston case, the research examined the planning
activities and funding requirements between the two major actors in the brownfield
reuse program. However, the funding requirements of this case are relatively less
diverse than in the Boston case because the Banwol revitalization is a multi-government
funded project. Therefore, the research places more emphasis on planning activities:
creating planning committees or boards, establishing plans (environmental remediation
and community/economic development plans, planning process guidelines, or
agreements and covenants), and developing planning tools (community mapping, civic
engagement tools, etc.). Also, the present study points out different contexts of the
Ansan case from the Boston case. The differences and similarities between the two
cases in their integrated planning processes are discussed in Chapter 9.
Figure 6-2. Analysis process of the Ansan case
According to a proposed master plan for Banwol revitalization, there are three
zones that are prioritized for redevelopment; however, two of the three zones are new
developments and one, an obsolete textile dyeing industrial complex, is a revitalization
project. Thus, the study selected this textile dyeing industrial complex as a research
116
focus to analyze the Ansan case as well as to compare and contrast with key projects of
the Boston case.
Table 6-5. Summary of a textile dyeing industrial complex revitalization project led by the industrial policy division and national agencies
Projects Leading actor Variance of diverse interested actors’ involvement
An obsolete textile dyeing industrial complex revitalization
The industrial policy division in the city of Ansan
MOLIT and MOETI
Project Narrative: an Obsolete Textile Dyeing Industrial Complex
This project narrative is based on interviews, anonymous communication, with
city staffs and officials in Ansan.
The South Korean government began to build a textile dyeing industrial complex in
Banwol industrial park in 1981; this complex has become the second biggest textile
dyeing industrial complex in Korea. According to a report published by the Korea
Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade (KIET), overall industrial outputs and on-
site businesses in Banwol have decreased since 2006. Small- and medium-sized
industrial businesses have particularly decreased. As these comprise the majority of the
industrial business in Banwol, the decrease has contributed to the industrial park’s
falling status. Also, the textile dyeing industries and businesses have decreased since
2006, and many facilities in this complex have relocated to other regions and countries.
In addition, the residential communities in a new town adjacent the south and southeast
parts of the textile dyeing industrial park have continued to complain about the odor
produced by the textile dyeing processes. After the city of Ansan began to consider
Banwol industrial park’s revitalization in 2010, revitalizing this textile dyeing complex
became the main issue in regional and local planning agendas. However, the lack of a
117
governmental initiative and task force has hindered this economically and
environmentally critical industrial complex’s revitalization (Personal communication,
October 22, 2015).
In 2015, after the special law for industrial revitalization facilitation was enacted, the
Banwol revitalization project was able to take a major step in overcoming the lack of
planning and implementation effort. The city actively began to establish a master plan
for Banwol’s revitalization, proposing three initial project sites, including the textile
dyeing industrial complex (Personal communication, October 22, 2015). There have
been both on-site and off-site facilities in this textile dyeing industrial complex; thus, in-
depth research and complete enumeration surveys were suggested to build a
groundwork for the complex’s revitalization (Personal communication, October 22,
2015). Also, the national law for industrial location and development was amended to
accelerate the revitalization of industrial parks. According to the amendment, the
procedure for industrial park revitalization was streamlined11, the entry of private
investment and development was lowered, and incentives (mitigating building-to-land
ratio and floor area ratio, supporting infrastructure improvement, etc.) were reinforced.
Additionally, committees for industrial park revitalization were mandated by allowing
local special accounts. Specifically, the streamlined procedures adopted a zoning
strategy that divides industrial districts into several zones in order to organize
development phases for each zone. Simultaneously, the amendment provided a
background in which the national government gives local governments funds to improve
the obsolete infrastructure in industrial parks. The planning process of Banwol
11
Appendix A
118
revitalization was initiated based on this legislative change, and the textile dyeing
industrial complex in Banwol was proposed as a prioritized zone for industrial
revitalization.
Recently, the city of Ansan finalized a master plan of Banwol’s revitalization, a
plan that is currently waiting for final review and approval from the city assembly. As the
approval is confirmed, the city will begin to organize a committee of industrial park
revitalization that mitigates and negotiates potential conflicts or developmental needs in
the Banwol revitalization project.
Analysis of Planning Activities
Banwol’s revitalization is at the initial stage of preparing a ground-up policy
environment for national planning and local-level implementation. Therefore, national
and city agencies are working to prioritize industrial districts to conduct pilot projects,
which will help in refining the larger project’s development and investment approach.
The flexibility of zoning and land use change and achieving permits have become
important planning matters; accordingly, the supporting national laws were amended
and special laws for industrial revitalization facilitation were enacted.
The national initiative of industrial park revitalization places particular emphasis on
facilitating the participation of the private sectors in investment and redevelopment. The
laws mandated forming committees of industrial park revitalization at national- and
local-level executive offices. Those committees function to connect local needs and
contexts to national review and decision-making processes regarding industrial park
revitalization projects. In particular, the laws define that a local committee is to mitigate
and negotiate any conflicts among local stakeholders that may originate in industrial
revitalization processes. In addition, a local committee is responsible for developing
119
local plans and implementation strategies, which it will then propose to a national
committee. Thus, the role of local committees is practical and fundamental for these
projects.
However, a new, streamlined procedure12 for this project has combined its master-
planning phase into its enforcement-planning phase by reducing the required number of
review boards and processes of environmental impact and project feasibility
assessment. The new procedure particularly lessened the number of review processes
required to assess environmental impact. The former procedure required multiple
responsible agencies to plan environmental impact assessments at the beginning of the
master-planning phase, and there were three phases of review processes, consisting of
first drafting, public hearings with the KEI, and final review by committees of
environmental and disaster impact assessment. On the other hand, the changed
environmental review procedures unified these three phases into one review phase that
aims to consolidate the review bodies – executive agencies examining industrial
redevelopment and environmental impact as well as the public. This streamlined review
process would bring efficiency in achieving zoning permits and in the stages following
redevelopment; simultaneously, however, the process contains potential loopholes that
may increase the negative impact of industrial revitalization on the environmental and
social surroundings of the targeted industrial park. Furthermore, the relatively shortened
review processes may hinder diverse stakeholders’ participation in the review and
decision-making practices of environmental impact assessment.
12
Appendix A
120
Analysis of Financial Requirements
The Ansan case has a relatively simple array of funding sources, which include
the national, regional, and city governments; however, the budgeting of this project is
still in process, and only a certain ratio of each government’s investment is fixed. MOLIT
and MOTIE are forming investment and development methods to facilitate private
sectors’ participation in industrial park revitalization. Therefore, the financial
requirements at the local and private levels may vary based on policy decisions at the
national level. In general, financing strategies in property redevelopment in Korea rely
heavily on zoning and land use planning by authoritative agencies at the national and
local government levels. Consequently, facilitating private or third-party involvement in
investment and development of property reuse is an easily complicated situation. To
overcome this policy context, groundbreaking change in governmental policy-building is
needed.
The city of Ansan has begun to form a local committee of industrial revitalization
that reviews and proposes Banwol revitalization plans to the public and a national
committee. Based on staff interviews, the proposals prepared by the industrial policy
department in the city will suggest financing strategies that induce the private sectors’
interest in redevelopment; however, the national initiative of industrial revitalization is
also preparing zoning and financing guidelines for local practices. Therefore,
autonomous financing rules or guidelines at the local level are debatable and even
changeable, regardless of potential investors’ preferential financing strategies. Taking
into account this multi-governmental policy structure, financing strategies that induce
private investment need to consolidate the potential gap between national financing
initiatives and local contexts of investment and redevelopment.
121
Findings in Case Analysis
The project to regenerate Banwol industrial park originated in a strong national
initiative and policy to revitalize nationally owned, obsolete industrial parks. National
laws have been amended, and programs have been established from 2010 to the
present. The Banwol revitalization project is now enacting its master-planning phase
and preparing its enforcement-planning phase. Existing policy processes for industrial
(re)development were streamlined in this project, in that the former environmental
review processes were consolidated. Financing strategies are in process as a national-
level initiative; simultaneously, a local agency, the industrial policy department in the city
of Ansan, is working on proposals for Banwol industrial revitalization. These conduct in-
depth research on prioritized redevelopment zones, including a textile dyeing industrial
complex in the Banwol industrial park. The streamlined environmental review processes
(environmental and disaster impact assessments) of this project make the industrial
revitalization processes efficient; however, the project, in relation to the case of the
Collaborative, lacks a controlling level of environmental assessment and remediation. In
Korea, the environmental remediation of previously industrial or commercial land uses is
not obligatory within environmental review processes. Therefore, streamlined
environmental review processes and the absence of site remediation rules may create
loopholes that cause conflicts among the stakeholders in Banwol’s revitalization.
As stated in the project narrative, national and local agencies are planning and
executing Banwol’s revitalization. National agencies – MOTIE and MOLIT – have
planned overarching policy environments to facilitate practices at the local level, and
local agencies – the city and the industrial policy division – will execute the plans in the
project’s sites. To communicate and make collaborative decisions, national and local
122
committees of industrial revitalization have been mandatorily formed. The local
committee of industrial revitalization in the city of Ansan is responsible for collecting
stakeholders’ opinions and proposing enforcement plans to the national committee.
Additionally, national agencies now develop financing plans that induce private sector
investment and redevelopment. At the same time, the industrial policy division in the city
of Ansan is forming a local committee for Banwol’s revitalization. As financing plans and
this local committee are established, the possible gaps in this case between the national
policies and local implementation should be resolved. In the Boston case,
environmental remediation is a signal that embarks the process of brownfield and
community revitalization; likewise, project feasibility and environmental review enable
local and private actors to start industrial revitalization. Therefore, it is important that the
local committee is responsible for the execution of environmental review and the
creation of a rigid financial portfolio for the Banwol revitalization.
123
CHAPTER 7 INCLUSIVE PLANNING IN BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION
In the Boston case, the Collaborative shares a well-established community
outreach model that roots on the collaboration between CDCs and civic coalitions in the
Fairmount Corridor. This grassroots collaboration is the core that generates integrating
diverse interested actors beyond project boundaries. Also, this strong local coalition
promotes reaching agreements that ensure targeted communities’ share in economic
development after brownfield remediation. The Ansan case has yet to establish such
community-based planning identified in the Boston case; however, a municipal agent,
the industrial policy division, conducts community outreach to find local leaders who
voice local needs and opinions in the streamlined industrial redevelopment process.
This difference of inclusive planning context in the two cases provides the background
of cross-case analysis that verifies the impact of inclusive planning on sustainable
community development.
The Boston Case: Inclusionary Action in Community Revitalization
Communities in and around brownfield sites commonly struggle with economic
and social disinvestment. Likewise, the populations living around the Fairmount Corridor
also bear socioeconomic disadvantages (higher unemployment and poverty rates than
those of the city average). Generally, a long history of industrial land use and the
following environmental degradation induces such conditions. At the same time, it has
been perceived that the environmental and economic disadvantages of brownfield
communities affect social segregation in city planning (Essoka, 2010; Krumholz, 1982;
Pastor, Sadd, & Hipp, 2001). Industrial communities in Banwol industrial park also
experience the lack of environmental and physical infrastructure such as air and water
124
control facilities, green spaces, walkable streets, and parking lots. Academic research
identifies that those disadvantaged communities easily experience disenfranchisement
in local decision-making processes, such as zoning changes for economic development
or urban renewal projects (Greenberg & Lewis, 2000; Pastor, Sadd, & Hipp, 2001).
Because of this, securing those communities’ participation in local planning processes
has become a critical issue that is addressed in various fields of research and practice.
In the field of urban and regional planning, inclusive or equity-planning theories and
practices try to mitigate these community problems through inclusionary and
participatory approaches to planning and decision-making. The three projects examined
in Chapter 6 exhibit inclusive planning approaches actualized by the collaboration of
CDCs and civic associations. On the other hand, the Ansan case has yet developed
initiatives for the inclusive planning process in the textile dyeing industrial complex. In
this chapter, therefore, the present study analyzes how inclusive planning is reflected in
the three projects of the Boston case, and seeks inclusive planning directions for the
Ansan case.
Inclusive Planning in the 65 Bay Street Redevelopment and the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center
Research analysis in this section is mainly based on Dubois, 2014 and J. Dubois
and L. Whiteside, personal communication, July 8, 2015.
The two projects led by DB EDC in the Boston case show a typical planning approach,
which DB EDC adopts to execute housing and economic development. DB EDC
initiates housing and/or economic development projects with civic associations located
within or near the targeted project areas as partners. In the 65 Bay Street project, the
Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative helped DB EDC to find and connect with a
125
housing association near the project area: the Columbia Savin Hill Civic Association. DB
EDC called this collaboration with civic entities “community organizing” because it
allows them to identify communities’ indigenous conditions, contexts, and needs as well
as to develop community-based planning environments such as regular community
meetings and review boards (Dubois, 2014). These planning activities are a key to
making the DB EDC projects inclusive and participatory. The steps of DB EDC’s
community organizing in the two projects consisted of six levels of community outreach
processes. First, DB EDC held one-on-one individual interviews with residents. Second,
they conducted group gathering in order to get residents’ feedback regarding the
interviews. This group gathering also focused on identifying residents’ common
concerns. Third, DB EDC and the Columbia Savin Hill Civic Association held house
meetings to solidify their relationships with the residents, and those meetings facilitated
collecting information on the community’s common issues. Fourth, DB EDC conducted
group research, met with decision makers, and interacted with diverse stakeholders.
Fifth, larger public action meetings were held to secure decision makers’ and other
stakeholders’ commitments. Lastly, the stakeholders – DB EDC, civic organizations,
residents, and decision makers – collectively measured the results from those
commitments (Dubois, 2014). This consecutive process of community organizing
embodied the increasing levels of public participation from informing communities to
enabling collaboration13. Particularly, creating neighborhood coalitions and community
review boards in an early planning stage was significant to raising this level of
community participation in the planning process.
13
Appendix B
126
This six-level community participation process identified new community leaders,
engagement ideas, and creative community planning activities. Furthermore, this
process fostered the local communities’ capacity to solve larger community issues and
problems (Dubois, 2014). In the monthly development committee meetings of the 65
Bay Street redevelopment, the development committee reviewed forty-five business
proposals. After three meetings with SPIRE, the development committee and residents
voted to support SPIRE’s proposal. Residents’ voting for accepting a new business into
their neighborhood signaled the delegated power of citizens in negotiations with other
stakeholders such as public officials (Arnstein, 1969). Such a level of community
participation was possible because of DB EDC and the civic associations’ inclusionary
approach at the beginning stages of the projects. Also, a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) signed by DB EDC, SPIRE, and the civic association secured
local hiring, property transaction, and the (industrial) land use of the 65 Bay Street
redevelopment. Additionally, the MOU required SPIRE to obtain approval from the
development committee when the corporation plans to sell the property.
The Borstein & Pearl Food Production Center project is an example of DB EDC
and its partnering civic associations fostering community participation at an even earlier
planning stage than in the 65 Bay Street redevelopment. While DB EDC and the civic
associations followed the six levels of community organizing steps, the residents
addressed their needs regarding local job opportunities. This community need induced
DB EDC to change its initial redevelopment plan of the mixed-use building (housing
over retail) on a 2-acre property by demolishing the existing Bornstein & Pearl meat
packing building. After this modification of the initial land-use plan, weekly diversity-
127
monitoring meetings were held by two civic associations: Project Right and the Dudley
Street Neighborhood Initiative. Community members, funders, and the residents of
adjacent neighborhoods came to the weekly meetings, and their involvement got deeper
as the remodel of the Bornstein & Pearl building proceeded. The regular interactions
among stakeholders in this project created an inclusive outcome that melded local
demographical characteristics and needs regarding job opportunities into a business
model of the remodeled food production center. As stated in Chapter 6, the food
production center became an incubator that fosters local food economies and
businesses with a focus on small-scale food production. In the food production center,
CommonWealth Kitchen (formerly known as CropCircle Kitchen, Inc.) operates a multi-
functional commercial kitchen that fosters the growth of local food businesses, creates
employment opportunities for residents, and facilitates improved access to healthy food
in the immediate neighborhood (Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation,
2013). The workers and business partners in the food production center are balanced in
terms of race, gender, and local hiring because DB EDC established a lease agreement
that requires the food production center to offer local residents 50% of the new-hire
positions. This hiring ration has been secured since the center opened in 2014. In
addition, DB EDC has worked with the carpenters union adjacent to the food center to
monitor the diversity ratios of race, gender, and locality as well as to conduct program
quality control. In summary, engaging local residents in the initial stage of the
redevelopment planning brought better land-use planning (a mixed-use building
transformed into a food industrial facility), and the continuous efforts of local actors
established community-based mechanisms to operate the food production center.
128
This research confirms that DB EDC’s community organizing strategy, the six
levels of community engagement approach, created inclusive and participatory planning
processes in the two cited projects. Also, forming working relationships with local civic
associations facilitated the process of finding and engaging diverse stakeholders in
funding and managing the projects. Likewise, the Collaborative was established as part
of the Four Corners Action Coalition’s transit equity campaigns which ignited the
Fairmount Indigo revitalization along the Fairmount Indigo commuter rail line. In this
respect, community engagement examined in these two projects affirms that involving
local neighborhoods and raising their decision-making power (the collaboration level14)
significantly affects planning process and performance. At the same time, solid
relationships between the community and civic organizations obviously proved the local
capacity of brownfield and community revitalization in the Boston case.
Establishing an Inclusionary Environment through a Diverse Interested Actor’s Intervention: the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot
This analysis in this section is mainly based on a report by the Partnership for
Sustainable Communities EPA Brownfield Pilot.
In this section, the research focuses on the third sub-project in the PSC brownfield pilot:
the Codman Square NDC and Talbot Norfolk Triangle (TNT) Neighborhood
Association’s public participation initiative. Targeted communities in the PSC brownfield
pilot experienced typical brownfield-related problems: degraded environments, limited
economic opportunities, and isolated social contexts. In particular, the TNT
Neighborhoods have had a long community history in crime and poverty (BRA, 2014). In
the past, the neighborhood initiatives had less cohesion than their counterparts in other
14
Appendix B
129
neighborhoods in the Dorchester area. However, when the Fairmount Indigo commuter
rail line project was initiated by coalitions of local CDCs and civic associations, the TNT
Neighborhoods became a focus of the Fairmount Corridor redevelopment. In 2012,
Talbot Avenue Station was opened on the Fairmount rail line; at that point, adjacent
areas (within a half-mile radius from the station) became a target of brownfield and
community revitalization. Partial but intensive community revitalization was planned and
executed by collaborations of neighborhoods and supporters (BRA, 2014). The PSC
brownfield pilot contributed to these community actions, establishing an inclusive and
participatory planning process that engaged more residents, soliciting their opinions and
information on their needs. The TNT neighborhood association built a relationship with
Codman Square NDC for community organizing, and the PSC brownfield pilot provided
technical assistance that supported engaging local residents, envisioning community
goals, developing action plans, and preparing grant applications. While the pilot
program proceeded, the city also provided administrative and financial support to the
TNT neighborhood association and its supporters. Specifically, the city typically
managed the brownfield assessment and cleanup grants coming from federal and state
programs; thus, the TNT association built a working relationship with the city to finance
the neighborhood’s brownfield remediation and redevelopment as well.
In the PSC brownfield pilot’s sub-projects, communities in and around the
Fairmount Corridor were able to gain opportunities to develop their community plans
through assisted meetings and technical support. The pilot even helped the target
communities to prepare grant applications for federal funds, which made the community
initiatives result in tangible and influential outcomes. Furthermore, public participation in
130
the TNT neighborhood and Codman Square NDC initiative facilitated the transfer of
local needs into a community-planning agenda. However, this project is still in progress
and requires a constant financial source to fund planned projects in a community-
planning agenda. Thus, the execution of this initiative needs the integrated financial and
planning resources with a continuous inclusionary planning process. Also, in terms of a
community planning perspective, the TNT neighborhood and Codman Square NDC
initiative reached out to the involvement level15 which created and designed community-
based plans and projects. To execute these developed plans and projects, the initiative
needs to continue increasing their level of participation to the collaboration level16.
Findings in Case Analysis: Inclusive Planning Fosters the Social Capital of Disadvantaged Communities in Brownfields
The neighborhoods in and around the Fairmount Corridor have had a long history
of environmental and economic disadvantage, resulting in and being exacerbated by
over five hundred local brownfield sites. Furthermore, increasing levels of crime and
blight have caused stigma related to the Dorchester area, where the Collaborative’s
current projects are mostly happening (BRA, 2016). However, solid grassroots initiatives
based on the collaboration of local civic associations and community development
corporations have begun taking action to improve the living conditions in these locales.
This autonomous local morale has formed or affected the core planning and
development plans and decision making along the Fairmount Corridor. According to the
project-specific analysis in this chapter, the role played by CDCs and civic associations
was crucial in building an inclusive environment that valued and facilitated local
15
Appendix B
16 Appendix B
131
residents’ participation in the planning processes of each project. This civic coalition’s
effort contributes to raising neighborhoods’ impact on the planning process and decision
making which achieved or anticipated to achieve the collaboration level of public
participation17 in the Boston case.
DB EDC’s inclusive planning strategies – the six steps of community organizing and
collaboration with a civic association at the initial project planning stage – were
considerable in terms of developing project-level guidance for inclusive planning in
urban redevelopment. Also, those devoted local actors had an impact by garnering
diverse interested actors’ support, which facilitated the project’s planning and execution
as well as its funding application. Moreover, the community organizing processes
utilized in this case offered CDCs and civic associations the opportunity to find local
leaders who contributed to maintaining the planning and execution in a local
perspective. In the 65 Bay Street redevelopment, DB EDC supported the residents of a
new housing complex located near the economic redevelopment area in building a
housing association, which became an active civic member of DB EDC’s Board of
Directors (Dubois, 2014). This indicates that projects led by a joint effort of CDCs and
civic organizations within the Fairmount Corridor have established review or planning
committees/boards that consist of local residents with high levels of motivation and
interest in community revitalization. Those local and civic-based groups participated in
the decision-making of these projects have verified the presence of inclusive planning
that values and embodies collaborative partnerships between local neighborhoods and
agencies.
17
Appendix B
132
Figure 7-1. Inclusive planning model based on civic engagement and outreach
process by the Boston case
The Ansan Case: the Potential of Reformed Policies and Cooperative Structure
As described in Chapter 5, the city of Ansan is the main agent in implementing
the enforcement plans for Banwol industrial park’s revitalization, and these enforcement
plans require cooperative processes with national agencies (MOLIT and MOTIE) and
regional governments (the Gyeonggi provincial government). In particular, national laws
for industrial revitalization have established a subdivision that requires an arbiter of
industrial revitalization projects to create national- and local-level management
committees for industrial revitalization implementation. A local-level committee of
industrial revitalization takes responsibility for conducting research on project sites,
133
mitigating any addressed conflicts, and proposing local-level enforcement plans. Thus,
structuring a cooperative policy process between national and local agencies is crucial
in Banwol’s revitalization. Currently, the project is in its initial execution planning stage,
and the national policies have been progressing to facilitate local and private entity-
based industrial revitalization. Accordingly, it is necessary to create a policy and
planning environment that enables national, regional, local, and private entities to
interactively communicate and share strategies together. At the same time, the local
management committee of Banwol revitalization must consider including, but not being
limited to, local representatives who depute the interests of the communities that will be
directly impacted by Banwol’s revitalization.
The Banwol revitalization project began in 2010, and now the industrial policy
division is about to finalize the prioritization of districts for revitalization in Banwol
industrial park. The next step is to propose this finalized plan to a management
committee for the project through public hearings and prepare environmental impact
assessments. To meet the national policy objective that pursues active private sector
investment and development in industrial revitalization processes, the decision-making
in a local-level management committee and public hearings needs to accommodate
diverse interest groups or individuals in order to create an inclusive, receptive planning
environment. However, the Ansan case experiences the lack of planning strategies in
place for creating an inclusive planning environment. Additionally, the streamlined
environmental review process of industrial revitalization contains potential loopholes
that would prevent the inclusion of reviews from a diversity of perspectives on
environmental impact assessment and project feasibility. Thus, the present study
134
analyzes the previous and streamlined planning processes18 as well as identifying
potential loopholes in the streamlined process of Banwol revitalization.
Streamlined Planning Process and Inclusive Planning Need
In Korea, the overall planning process of industrial park revitalization and/or
development was streamlined by amending and enacting laws and regulations during
2015 and 2016. The previous planning process of industrial development consisted of
two phases: the development planning and execution planning phases. However,
national, regional, and local agencies recognized that this planning process took a long
time and had complex review steps that frustrated investors, developers, and the local
community members who expected economic development from industrial revitalization.
Taking this tardiness in the planning process into account, a series of unified application
and review steps were designed by the reformed laws and regulations. The streamlined
process is expected to shorten the planning periods from approximately two years to
approximately six months. The main point of the process change was to make the
review and discussion steps between and within agencies instantaneous rather than
sequential. However, the public review process – public notices and hearings – has
barely changed in terms of the number of its review steps and the level of engagement.
On the other hand, an initial stage of the streamlined process lightens the
obligations of the stakeholders who are interested in investing in and developing
industrial businesses. Before the change, many steps in the planning process
emphasized a governmental perspective, such as learning how to establish a
comprehensive plan, how to conduct the application and review processes, and obtain
18
Appendix A.
135
the necessary permits. However, the reformed process begins with accepting a letter of
investment from interested entities like municipalities or private sectors. Thus, existing
barriers that limited the authority of comprehensive planning and zoning to
governmental entities are loosened to induce private sectors’ participation in the
(re)development of industrial parks. Accordingly, the Banwol revitalization project is able
to expect investment from the private sectors and to execute planning interventions that
support diverse private-sector development activities. On the economic side, the
streamlined planning process of industrial revitalization is seemingly profitable; however,
a detailed guideline is needed to balance or mitigate any conflicting interests that may
originate in this planning process. In particular, the environmental/disaster impact
assessment and review process is critical to an industrial revitalization project being
approved. However, the streamlined process merges the role of the previous
environmental/disaster impact review committees into the Ministry of Environment
(MOE) and Korean Environment Institute’s (KEI) review process. Accordingly, this
procedural change in the environmental review has the potential to incite conflicting
interests in environmental treatment and industrial redevelopment.
Brownfield revitalization emphasizes the positive effects of early participation by
diverse stakeholders, including local communities, in its planning and decision-making
processes (Ellerbusch , 2006; EPA, 2009; Gallagher, & Jackson, 2008; Hays, 2104;
McCarthy, 2009; Smith, 2009; Solitare & Lowrie, 2012; Walzer, Hamm, & Sutton, 2006;
Wright, 2004). Although Banwol industrial park revitalization has a slightly different case
context than brownfield revitalization in the U.S.-based Collaborative case, the mixed
use of industrial facilities has been proposed as a planning strategy of Banwol
136
revitalization. For example, the industrial policy division proposed a zoning plan that
includes residential areas within designated districts to construct buildings with multi-
family housing units over light industrial use. At the same time, a textile dyeing industrial
complex has mixed on-site and off-site facilities. Therefore, the site’s context requires
discerning the needs and opinions of industrial tenants in this complex as well as
examining the impact of revitalization on this industrial community. Because of this, one
review step in the streamlined industrial revitalization planning process needs to provide
further guidance in ensuring the participation of local community members and the
anticipated users of the regenerated Banwol industrial park.
The local management committee of Banwol’s revitalization has been able, thus
far, to create an inclusive planning environment. According to interviews with staff
members in the industrial policy division, the division is searching for locals who
represent the interests of workers, business owners, and tenants in Banwol industrial
park to form the management committee of Banwol revitalization. The fact that a local
agency, the industrial policy division, recognizes that local civic participation is essential
to the process of planning and executing Banwol’s revitalization is a positive signal.
However, local initiatives of Banwol’s revitalization are under a relationship with the
national industrial revitalization initiative, which is represented by the national
management committee of industrial revitalization. Even though the national agencies
place emphasis on local and private entity-led industrial revitalization, there is still a
possibility of conflicting interests between the national and local actors. Thus, the local
initiative within the Banwol revitalization project will have two major tasks: facilitating
diverse local stakeholders’ participation and negotiating with the national initiative.
137
These two tasks demand mitigation and negotiation among each stakeholder’s interests;
however, the national and local governments’ policy structure in the Ansan case may
cause limited mitigation and negotiation process because of high local dependence on
the central government in funding and decision making. In this respect, Fisher and Ury
(2011) argue that “the basic problem in a negotiation lies not in conflicting positions, but
in the conflict between each side’s needs, desires, concerns, and fears” (p. 42);
because of this, focusing on stakeholders’ interests rather than on their positions often
results in a solution or agreement (Fisher & Ury, 2011). Therefore, the national and local
agencies in the Ansan case need to ensure an interactive planning process rather than
a bureaucratic planning mode in order to foster inclusivity.
In this case, inclusive planning has the potential to supplement the streamlined
environmental review process in industrial revitalization. According to the changed
review process, described in Appendix A, a sequential procedure has been altered into
one that is instantaneous among governments, departments, institutions, and the public.
Also, the environmental impact assessment and review procedures follow this
instantaneousness. Even though the number of environmental reviews was reduced
and the role of the environmental review committee merged with roles of the MOE and
KEI, environmental impact assessment and review are conducted as part of industrial
development planning. Therefore, if inclusive planning is ensured as part of the MOE
and KEI’s environmental review process in the initial stage of industrial development
planning, the streamlined policy process will include proactive planning actions on
environmental treatment. At the same time, the industrial policy division, MOE, and KEI
need to collaborative in order to facilitate the engagement and address the needs or
138
concerns of local groups that are concerned with the environmental impact of industrial
revitalization.
In conclusion, it is not easy to integrate an environmental review with an
industrial development plan because environmental reviews require modifying and/or
taking countermeasures in an industrial development plan. Nevertheless, industrial
revitalization policies must address diverse interests in the environmental impact of
industrial revitalization because doing so in the planning process contributes to
decreasing the costs and conflicts which are caused by limited engagement in planning
and decision-making.
Findings in Case Analysis: the Necessity of Inclusive Planning for Project Success
Streamlining the planning process of industrial revitalization has both strengths
and weaknesses. By reducing its review steps and committees, the changed process
shortens the project periods remarkably from a minimum of two years to one of six
months. The role of the environmental/disaster impact assessment committees has
been merged into the MOE and KEI review process. Because of this, the initial planning
stage lightens the responsibility of investors and/or developers on planning
requirements through an instantaneous planning process of governmental,
departmental, and public discussion and participation. The national laws emphasize
creating national and local management committees of industrial revitalization for
effective policy and planning implementation. Therefore, the industrial policy division is
now forming a local management committee to address Banwol’s revitalization. The
division’s main tasks in this committee’s creation are, first, to appoint local and civic
representatives who embody the interests of the industrial communities and adjacent
139
neighborhoods of Banwol industrial park and, second, to empower the committee to
mitigate and/or negotiate diverse interests or conflicts addressed by both the local
stakeholders and the national management committee. Lastly, the industrial policy
division needs to collaborate with MOE and KEI to develop a site-specific environmental
impact assessment and review process that facilitates the participation of diverse
interested groups or individuals. However, the existing public engagement in the revised
planning process is at a consulting level,19 which limits the active and interactive
decision-making with the public. Instead, the public is kept informed and is given
feedback on how public input influenced decisions. This public engagement context in
the planning process bears the potential for conflicts centering on the environmental
impact of Banwol’s industrial revitalization on surrounding communities. For example,
the residential communities near Banwol industrial park have continuously addressed
an odor problem originating in a textile dyeing industrial complex. Local and regional
agencies have found a solution to decrease this odor emission that requires the textile
dyeing facilities to add an odor treatment process with a qualified odor-filtering machine.
However, the cost of new machines and maintenance fees make the textile dyeing
facilities reluctant to perform this treatment process. This problem is caused by the lack
of precautionary regulations and monitoring systems on industrial facilities.
Diverse stakeholder participation is crucial to developing a precautionary policy
and planning process because those stakeholders’ concerns and interests allow the
possibility of considering and mitigating various planning issues that might originate in a
19
The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) developed a spectrum of public participation that defines the level of public impact on decision-making. The level of public impact is divided into five categories: inform, consult, involve, collaborative, empower. ‘Empower’ is the highest level of public impact on decision-making. The spectrum also sets a public participation goal, a promise to the public, and an example of participation techniques in each category. This spectrum is in Appendix B.
140
project. Therefore, an inclusive planning environment is essential in this case because it
will supplement potential loopholes which the streamlined planning process may
overlook in Banwol’s revitalization. Accordingly, the industrial policy division needs
community engagement plans that demonstrate locals’ interests in Banwol industrial
park revitalization. This study argues that designating local represents and
environmental experts for the environmental review process is the beginning of inclusive
planning in the Ansan case. Furthermore, the decision-making level of the local
management committee necessarily reaches out to the collaborative level20 as Banwol’s
revitalization moves forward to ensure local impacted communities’ participation.
20
Appendix B
141
CHAPTER 8 BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION AND SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Finding a Link between Planning Mechanisms and Sustainable Community Development
This chapter will identify whether integrated and inclusive planning in each case
has resulted in sustainable outcomes for the surrounding communities. Also, the
relationships between each planning approach and sustainable outcomes will be
examined. It is important to remember, however, that the two cases are in different
planning stages of the analytical framework. The Boston case is at the sustainable
community development stage; on the other hand, the Ansan case is in between the
brownfield revitalization stage and the transition to sustainable community development
stage. Therefore, the research is able to find a link between integrated/inclusive
planning and community sustainability (affordable housing, transit-oriented community
design, green buildings, etc.) in the Boston case; however, the Ansan case analysis is
composed of an investigation into the project’s potential for integrated and inclusive
planning that supports sustainable development based on the case analysis in Chapters
6 and 7. Additionally, the research conducts a cross-case analysis that suggests a
model process that is applicable to the Ansan case in terms of sustainable local
industrial and community development.
142
Figure 8-1. Case development stages in analytical framework
The Boston Case: Becoming an Example of Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization
The Collaborative has been working on revitalizing the Fairmount Corridor
through integrated and inclusive planning approaches. These approaches included how
the CDC members of the Collaborative established joint project implementation with
local civic organizations such as housing associations and/or civic coalitions;
furthermore, this integrated housing and economic development by CDCs has had
positive effects on local job creation and affordable housing. At the same time, state
brownfield laws and programs with a connection to federal brownfield policies have
helped municipalities and local organizations to resolve the burdens of environmental
assessment and remediation. Furthermore, state agencies have accommodated
financial programs that facilitate integrating environmental remediation with economic
development in brownfields. Within the Fairmount Corridor, the supportive intervention
of such governmental entities meets with local organizations’ community development
143
needs. Additionally, CDCs such as DB EDC have accumulated a large amount of
experience in integrated financing and community organizing that nurture sustainable
community development. In the next section, this research analyzes how integrated and
inclusive planning in the Boston case transformed brownfield and community
revitalization into sustainable community development.
How Integrated Environmental Remediation and Economic Development Planning Created a Sustainable Land Reuse Mechanism
In the Boston case, there are two main integrated planning approaches:
integrated environmental remediation linked to economic development and integrated
financing. The integrated environmental remediation and economic development
resulted from an inter-governmental policy for local community organizations. As
described in the three projects of the Boston case, the major funders of brownfield site
remediation were the EPA and Mass Development (a quasi-state agency). According to
interviews with Jeanne Dubois, a former DB EDC executive director, knowing the cost
of brownfield site remediation initiates the site assessment and project financing
process and connects the project to economic development. Thus, estimating and
assessing the cost of remediation is critical to beginning brownfield redevelopment;
fortunately, Massachusetts is a leading state in brownfield policy that supports local-
level brownfield revitalization. The state enacted the Massachusetts Brownfield Act of
1998 before the federal government enacted the Brownfield Act of 2000. The state’s site
assessment and remediation programs have accommodated grants, loans, and
incentives that induce grantees, municipalities, and civic organizations to implement
housing and/or economic development plans after remediation. The state policies for
affordable housing and economic development particularly support joint housing and
144
small business development, as identified in the three projects of the Boston case. In
2016, the state proposed a new bond bill that affirms brownfield funds, and it is
expected that the bill will support five years of brownfield revitalization, which
contributes to affordable housing (Gittelman, 2016). Gittelman (2016) also mentions that
4,000 housing units were created by state brownfield revitalization funds during the last
six years and that two-thirds of those housing units are affordable. This fact indicates
that brownfield revitalization has become a platform for building sustainable
communities since the construction of affordable housing after brownfield remediation is
an indicator of communities’ increased social and economic stability (De Sousa, Dubois,
2014; Wu, & Westphal, 2009; Heberle, & Wernstedt,2006).
For example, the TNT Neighborhood Association and Codman NDC’s brownfield
revitalization project with the PSC brownfield pilot conducted a LEED ND charrette and
assessment in 2012. The TNT Neighborhood Association partnered with Codman
Square NDC, Boston Local Initiative Support Corporation, Boston Foundation, the
Natural Resource Defense Council, the U.S. Green Building Council, and others. The
goals of hosting this LEED-ND charrette were to reduce the energy costs of existing
housing units in the neighborhood, to construct at least one new highly efficient mixed-
use and transit-oriented development (TOD) project, to explore a locally self-sufficient
energy power generation model, to create green infrastructure such as green roofs and
rain gardens, and to measure the health and economic benefits of these sustainable
design approaches. Since the charrette successfully envisioned the future of the TNT
neighborhood, the city and the TNT neighborhood, along with the neighborhood’s
alliances, designated this project an EcoDistrict (BRA, 2014). Currently, the TNT
145
neighborhood and Codman Square NDC have hired their own specialist to execute
these five goals of sustainable community development (BRA, 2014; PSC, 2012). This
project proved that the Collaborative achieved sustainable community development by
joining brownfield revitalization with the community’s need regarding affordable and
livable environments, and it highlights the relationship between brownfield revitalization
and sustainable community development.
The other two projects – 65 Bay Street and the Bornstein & Pearl Food
Production Center redevelopments – are evidence of how brownfield revitalization
contributes to local socioeconomic sustainability by increasing residents’ job
opportunities. As analyzed in Chapter 6, these two local economic development projects
leveraged brownfield revitalization into the creation of local businesses and jobs. In
particular, the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center gave local residents and
adjacent communities the opportunity for job training and business consulting in the
food industries. In terms of economic sustainability, the Borstein & Pearl center, which is
managed by CommonWealth Kitchen, achieved both sustainable job creation and
equitable employment. CommonWealth Kitchen’s business model prioritizes racially,
socially, and economically displaced people who are seeking a way to create and
continue their own food businesses. This model fits with the demographic
characteristics and economic needs of the Dorchester area overlaid with those of the
Fairmount Corridor. While they did retreat Bornstein & Pearl meatpacking facilities, DB
EDC and its alliances paid attention to the economic needs of adjacent communities.
Accordingly, DB EDC changed its initial plan of mixed-use development into the plan to
build a food production center by partnering with CommonWealth Kitchen. The
146
programs offered by the food center and CommonWealth Kitchen foster trainees’ ability
to organize and maintain their businesses. Additionally, the employment ratio of the
food center is balanced in terms of race, gender, and locality. Recently, CommonWealth
Kitchen was recognized as a food incubator that is renowned nationwide (McLeod,
2016).
In summary, the Boston case provides two types of community redevelopment models
that link brownfield revitalization to sustainable community development. The first is a
model that integrates brownfield remediation with affordable housing and transit-
oriented development. The second model involves nurturing remediated brownfield sites
into becoming local business generators by launching small businesses, light industrial
uses, and/or job-training centers.
Figure 8-2. The Collaborative’s integrated brownfield revitalization model
According to the analyses in Chapters 6 and 7, the integrated planning that has
been verified in the Boston case was always paired with inclusive planning that
prioritized civic engagement in the initial stages of brownfield revitalization. The next
section assesses the impact of inclusive planning in the Boston case, and the research
unifies a model of this inclusive planning into the Collaborative integrated brownfield
revitalization model.
147
How Inclusive Planning Fostered Local Community’s Potential for Long-Term Community Development
Inclusive planning is a key planning approach in brownfield revitalization to
appeasing the disproportionate burdens of environmental degradation, and economic
and social inequalities within surrounding neighborhoods. Specifically, the inclusive
planning approach provides an opportunity to seek the common interests of diverse
interested actors (government agencies, community organizations, private developers,
and local residents) involved in brownfield revitalization. Within a communicative
planning environment, those stakeholders can begin to develop goals and strategies
that fuel brownfield remediation and redevelopment while seeking these common
interests. This general account is elaborated by the three projects of the Boston case,
and the inclusive planning in the three projects is correlated with the integrated planning
model described in the previous section. Thus, this section analyzes the impact of
inclusive planning on community sustainability and elaborates the relationship between
integrated and inclusive planning that was explicated in the Boston case.
The Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation (DB EDC) provides an
important model of inclusive planning, in this case, seen through the 65 Bay Street
redevelopment and the Bornstein & Pearl food center project. This model is indicated in
the three common strategies of DB EDC’s community organizing: partnering with
housing or civic associations in or around project areas, conducting the six steps of
community engagement and forming a civic committee to manage the planning
processes and outcomes.
First, DB EDC approached housing or civic associations at the initial stage of the
brownfield revitalization projects; this is the beginning of the community organizing
148
processes that DB EDC customarily utilizes. According to a DB EDC report written by
Dubois, partnering with local civic or housing associations always helps to lower the
barriers to civic engagement and agreement in redevelopment processes. Once the
communities that are affected by the redevelopment have taken notice of the projects,
DB EDC and its partnering community organizations start in-depth civic engagement
efforts called community organizing. The six steps of community organizing enable DB
EDC to actualize in-depth community recognition. In the housing development projects
that were conducted parallel with the 65 Bay Street project, DB EDC engaged
community leaders through joint community organizing efforts with the Columbia/Savin
Hill housing associations. This joint effort helped a new housing association, the Groom
& Humphrey Association, to be founded in newer apartments within the Dorchester area.
In addition, this new association has become a leading community organizer in crime
watch. Additionally, the economic development of the 65 Bay Street redevelopment
shows milestones of the six steps of community organizing to create inclusive planning
environments. First, DB EDC and the Dudley Street Neighborhood Initiative (DSNI)
helped the Columbia/Savin Hill housing association to form a development committee to
participate in the planning and decision-making processes of the redevelopment. As a
result, representatives of the most impacted community by the 65 Bay Street
redevelopment were able to voice their needs. After the consecutive committee
meetings with DB EDC and other stakeholders, the Columbia/Savin Hill development
committee voted to select SPIRE as a business partner of 65 Bay Street’s light
industrial development. This community voting process hit the right note to establish an
inclusive planning environment around the Dorchester area. Additionally, this
149
community voting elevated the level of public participation in DB EDC’s six steps of
community organizing, from community involvement to community collaboration in
decision-making. Also, the elevated community participation level contributed to a
community-based project outcome. For example, having a community organizing
process induced DB EDC to change its initial plan of reusing the Bornstein & Pearl meat
packing site. The initial plan was for mixed-use residential development; however, when
impacted neighborhoods addressed their needs regarding local job opportunities, DB
EDC decided to change the initial residential development type to light industrial
business development as well as facilitating the creation of related commercial business
development such as restaurants and retails near the project site (Dubois, 2016). In this
light industrial development project, DB EDC, CommonWealth Kitchen, and local
communities reached an agreement that has assured stable local hiring in racial, social,
and economic equity. Also, the 65 Bay Street redevelopment project established an
MOU that advocated a common goal of locally sustainable job creation and property
use among DB EDC, SPIRE, and local residents. This MOU guided SPIRE to prioritize
local residents in its hiring process as well as mandated that SPIRE receives the
Columbia/Savin Hill development committee’s approval in future property transactions.
According to this MOU, SPIRE needs to ensure that its property retains industrial or
commercial uses when ownership is transferred to other developers.
In summary, the MOU in the 65 Bay Street redevelopment and the business
agreement in the Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center project pursued lasting
local economic sustainability by ensuring local hiring in newly built light industrial
facilities. This consensus in economic development projects is meaningful because it
150
originated in inclusive planning efforts and community-based development, as well as
contributed to community’s socioeconomic sustainability.
The PSC brownfield pilot project highlights how an inclusive planning
environment is a fundamental element of envisioning long-term community goals.
According to a report by the PSC brownfield pilot in the Boston case, the TNT
neighborhood initiative and Codman Square NDC partnerships were able to reinforce
collective community actions for planning and decision-making processes after several
community meetings and design charrettes. In particular, community envisioning in
these engagement activities drew a picture of sustainable development in the TNT
neighborhoods, which have had a long history of disadvantaged socioeconomic
circumstances. Because of envisioning and sharing the goal of community sustainability,
this PSC brownfield pilot project successfully named its project site an EcoDistrict in
Boston. Furthermore, the TNT neighborhood initiative and Codman Square NDC
partnerships were able to achieve a greater position in acquiring political and financial
support through technical assistance from the PSC brownfield pilot.
Taking into account the presence of an inclusive planning scheme in these three
projects, integrating multi-governmental planning resources and diverse stakeholders’
capacities were covariate with the inclusive planning approach. For example, DB EDC
affirms that the two projects led by DB EDC and local civic associations were made
possible by having multiple funders from federal, state, and nonprofit organizations
(Dubois, 2014). Moreover, the CDC members of the Collaborative note that, in the PSC
brownfield pilot, federal agencies’ intervention facilitated planning procedures for federal
funding applications and also escalated the organizational and political awareness of
151
projects within the Fairmount Corridor (Dubois, 2014; EPA, 2012). Also, it is obvious
that the Collaborative valued community participation in the planning and decision-
making process because it had already recognized, in the initial stages of the projects,
that such civic participation uncovered common interests and generated shared
objectives among the public, private, and civic entities, as occurred in the Fairmount
Corridor revitalization. In the Boston case, integrated and inclusive planning strategies
created a collaborative and synergistic planning enforcement for brownfield remediation
and economic/housing redevelopment.
Figure 8-3. The Collaborative’s unified model of integrated and inclusive planning
process
The Ansan Case: Beyond Economic Revitalization toward Comprehensive and Sustainable Industrial Development
The Ansan case initially undertook policy and program development for local
industrial revitalization practices. This means that the Ansan case is currently between
the brownfield revitalization stage and the transition to sustainable community
development stage in the analytical framework. Therefore, it is important to develop
152
integrated and inclusive planning strategies to usher Banwol’s revitalization toward
sustainable industrial revitalization in Korea. The national agencies – MOLIT and
MOTIE – have acknowledged the necessity of integrated and inclusive planning
strategies in actualizing industrial revitalization. Accordingly, the agencies have enacted
special laws and streamlined their policy procedures to facilitate forming integrated and
inclusive planning environments in local practices. The enacted laws support a
cooperative policy implementation structure between national, regional, and local
entities by organizing national and local management committees of industrial
revitalization. Additionally, the role and authority of regional or local actors, who are
commonly jurisdictional entities of targeted industrial sites, become crucial to executing
project implementations. On the other hand, the streamlined planning procedures of
industrial (re)development have the potential to limit the environmental impact
assessment and participatory review process by diverse interest groups. Therefore, the
industrial policy division (a local actor) needs to prepare three planning tasks for
Banwol’s successful industrial revitalization. First, the division needs to establish
participatory planning environment that represents diverse interested actors from
governmental to civic entities; secondly, the division needs to foster its capacity to
balance its authority with the national management committee. Finally, the division
needs to equip itself with strategies to supplement the streamlined planning procedures.
In the next section, the present study synthesizes the analysis of integrated and
inclusive planning that was conducted in Chapters 6 and 7 in order to guide these three
planning tasks. Also, this study applies the planning strategies reflected in the Boston
case to suggest policy directions for local-level project execution in Banwol revitalization.
153
The Potential for Cooperative National and Local Industrial Revitalization Initiative
Before the Industrial Revitalization Facilitation Act of 2015 was enacted, there
had been no legal subdivision to form national and local management committees of
industrial revitalization and development. In Korea, overall industrial fields have
experienced a decline since the 2000s. As such, the national initiative for industrial
revitalization began to develop policies that reinforce industrial revitalization. Hence,
these committees are expected to develop systematic and cooperative policies by
facilitating national and local agencies that take charge in industrial (re)development.
Specifically, the local management committees of industrial revitalization are
responsible for direct and operative actions that manage site and community research,
action planning, and project execution. Thus, building cooperative relations among
national and local committees and local agencies is a key to initiating integrated and
inclusive planning for Banwol’s industrial revitalization.
According to interviews with staff members in the industrial policy division of
Ansan, the division has finalized three prioritized districts for Banwol revitalization and is
now seeking candidates for a local management committee to review and further the
planning process. The division is considering and contacting regional and city officials,
experts, and civic leaders in local organizations as members of the management
committee. The candidates from civic leaders in local organizations include industrial
tenants and business owners working in Banwol industrial park. The division’s approach
to local communities is similar to DB EDC’s initial step of community organizing in that it
includes identifying local leaders and civic associations to work with for
brownfield/community revitalization projects. However, there are no existing labor
unions or community organizations in Banwol that could represent workers’ and
154
business owners’ needs and interests in the industrial park’s revitalization. Thus, the
division is experiencing a lack of resources to network local stakeholders who could
infuse participatory and inclusive planning into the local management committee of
Banwol revitalization. The textile dyeing industrial complex, one of the prioritized
districts for the revitalization project, particularly requires participatory planning because
it has both on- and off-site industrial facilities. Accordingly, it is important to engage
industrial tenants and owners of the textile dyeing industrial complex in the revitalization
process. Moreover, the industrial policy division needs to conduct in-depth site and
community research to identify those existing industrial tenants, workers, and business
owners’ needs. A consulting firm hired by the industrial policy division proposed a plan
for community-based planning research on the textile dyeing industrial complex in
Banwol; however, the methods in this research basically focus on collecting contextual
data through surveys and interviews. For this reason, it is difficult to expect this
community-level planning research to contribute to the involvement of stakeholders in
the textile dyeing industrial complex within the revitalization process.
Taking the specifics of the Boston case into account, it becomes clear that
facilitating early community participation contributes to gathering the support of local
residents for redevelopment projects. DB EDC’s six steps of community organizing
provide a direction to start in-depth site and community research on the textile dyeing
industrial complex in Banwol industrial park. The first step of DB EDC’s community
organizing is to interview communities in and around the targeted site, and DB EDC
helped people in these communities to establish organizations or groups that lead
collective community actions in the planning process. Likewise, interviews with people
155
in the textile dyeing industrial complex provide opportunities to research the site and
context as well as search for potential leaders who can engage in the planning process
to deliver the targeted community’s needs in Banwol revitalization. At the same time, the
industrial policy division should be able to appoint at least one party who represents the
needs and interests of communities located within the prioritized districts of Banwol’s
revitalization. This inclusive effort will create local-level participatory planning and
contribute to designing community-based industrial revitalization.
Secondly, the industrial policy division needs to develop planning strategies that
grow its role and impact in decision-making. The national initiative of industrial
revitalization promulgates that national policies and programs for industrial revitalization
support local and private sectors’ investment and development. Accordingly, zoning
regulations and infrastructure reinforcement tend to rely on local contexts and execution
plans. Under this policy background, the industrial policy division is responsible for
developing and proposing Banwol revitalization plans to the national management
committee. Thus, the industrial policy division balances the diverse interests in Banwol’s
revitalization planning. In particular, the division needs to equate local communities’
interests in Banwol revitalization with the national interests. Such effort requires all
stakeholders to be at the same table in order to identify common interests and resolve
potential conflicts. For this reason, participatory and inclusive planning, from the local
management committee to the national committee, is crucial. The purpose of the local
and national management committees is to share common objectives and envision the
future of industrial revitalization. In other words, organizing local and national
committees in the Banwol revitalization project is similar to the collaboration of civic
156
coalitions and CDCs in the Boston case; however, the Ansan case lacks grassroots
initiatives. Accordingly, as stated above, organizing the local management committee is
crucial.
Lastly, the industrial policy division needs to consider how to conduct the
streamlined industrial (re)development procedures. The planning and implementation
processes of industrial (re)development have been unified by reducing the sequential
procedures of feasibility and the environmental review processes. The purpose of
modifying the procedures was to shorten the planning and implementation periods of
industrial (re)development and to lighten the administrative and regulatory burdens on
the process. As a result, the streamlined procedures are expected to take six months of
total planning and implementation, a process which usually took a year or more in the
outmoded procedures. It seems that a unified process of industrial (re)development
induces more development and investment initiatives; however, this process contains
the potential for policy and procedural loopholes in feasibility and environmental reviews.
In particular, the environmental review process, which includes an environmental impact
assessment of industrial (re)development activities, is streamlined by unifying multiple
committees’ sequential review procedures. For instance, the previous environmental
review process required the organization of an environmental impact review committee
with input from the local, regional, and national government levels. The streamlined
process eliminates this committee and transfers its review authority to national entities
(the Ministry of Environment and the Korea Environment Institute). Therefore, the
streamlined process has the potential to limit participation in the environmental review
process and subsequently overlook environmental issues originating in industrial
157
(re)development. Furthermore, the role and authority of the national and local
management committees on environmental review is currently undefined. Also
environmental assessment and remediation for previously industrial or commercial
properties is noncompulsory. Hence, it is necessary to supplement the streamlined
environmental review process to prevent potential loopholes in industrial
(re)development planning. By considering the enacted laws and procedures of industrial
(re)development, the national and local management committees could take in charge
of guiding and reviewing environmental impact assessment for industrial
(re)development. However, environmental impact assessment requires the combination
of expertise and local cooperation in gauging the environmental impact of certain
development activities. Accordingly, it is unrealistic that the committees solely cover this
environmentally focused planning task; thus, decentralizing the environmental review
authority could be an option. The Ministry of Environment and Korea Environment
Institute need to enumerate their environmental review processes, implementation
strategies, and qualities that facilitate participatory environmental review by increasing
the involvement of environmental experts and civic organizations.
How Collaborative Governance Can Make a Milestone for Sustainable Industrial Revitalization in Korea
Banwol’s revitalization is the first pilot project led by the collaboration of national
and local industrial revitalization initiatives in South Korea. The national policies and
programs pursue enabling local-based planning processes and implementation;
particularly, the national initiative focuses on increasing private investment and
development in the project. Therefore, the national laws and procedural requirements
have been streamlined; at the same time, the roles and authorities of local entities
158
(regional and/or local governments) in the planning process of industrial revitalization
are growing. Local entities are responsible for targeted community research, civic
engagement, proposal development, and the organization of a local management
committee. Those entities still need to construct cooperative relationships with the
national agencies and the management committee, however. Taking this changing
policy context of industrial revitalization into account, fostering local capacity is essential
to accomplishing these local-level planning and implementation tasks. According to the
Boston case, network governance and community-based planning are the core planning
strategies of successful and sustainable brownfield revitalization. Communities’ affluent
social capitals (civic coalitions, CDCs, and housing associations) in the Dorchester area
particularly sustained their initiatives of brownfield/community revitalization. This solid
local initiative in the Boston case indicates a way to enhance local capacity in the Ansan
case. The industrial policy division could build networks with local civic organizations
which are related to industrial communities (labor unions), environmental management,
and/or community development initiatives. This approach could help the division to find
local leaders as potential members of the local Banwol revitalization management
committee. At the same time, the division and those local groups could collaborate to
develop a proposal for Banwol’s revitalization through ongoing interactions, such as
public meetings and hearings. This local-level network governance will be able to
intervene in the environmental review process by addressing environmental concerns in
its Banwol revitalization proposals. However, such local and civic intervention requires
communicative and participatory relationships between local entities (municipal
agencies and civic organizations). Alexander (2012) identifies that network actors’
159
performance depends on “establishing stable internal city networks” (p. 764). The
Ansan industrial policy division needs to construct such internal networks among the
diverse local actors to actualize its proposals for Banwol industrial revitalization.
According to the analysis of the Boston case, a solid local-level internal network, the
Fairmount Indigo CDCs Collaborative, contributed to a participatory planning process
and sustainable community development. Having a participatory planning process
fosters communities’ ownership of their locales and futures; as a result, long-term
planning and implementation become possible. The Banwol industrial park revitalization
needs to establish such long-term industrial communal engagement in order to make its
project outcomes sustainable. However, the relationship between local engagement and
project sustainability should be researched further in terms of the context of the Ansan
case in order to affirm the impact of local participation on sustainable industrial
development.
Lastly, the industrial policy division should ensure a balanced environmental
review process that equates environmental issues with economic development in
Banwol’s revitalization. Residential communities near the Banwol industrial park have
addressed the issue of air pollution produced by industrial activities and especially of
odor from the textile dyeing industrial complex as a major environmental issue in
Banwol industrial park. The enacted laws for industrial revitalization create a subdivision
that bans locating certain categories of industries, such as heavy chemical and steel
industries, in regenerated industrial parks. Thus, the newly planned industrial use for
Banwol revitalization excludes those types of industries; however, existing heavy
chemical and steel industries like the textile dyeing industrial complex need to be
160
controlled by the revitalization plans. Engaging environmental experts and/or
organizations in the local management committee could be a way to actualize
environmental management planning in Banwol’s revitalization.
In summary, for sustainable industrial revitalization in Banwol, Ansan, it is
essential to engage diverse local stakeholders and build cooperative relations between
the local and national agencies and management committees. Also, the environmental
review process needs to become more diverse in order to resolve existing
environmental problems and manage the impact of future industrial activities on the
surrounding environments.
161
CHAPTER 9 DISCUSSION
Cross-Case Analysis to Envision Sustainable Community Development
The Boston case and the Ansan case have differences and similarities in terms
of policy and practice. Based on the stages of the analytical framework, the Boston case
has reached the sustainable community development stage because the Collaborative
and local communities have begun to achieve its project outcomes, which have
contributed to nurturing community sustainability. The Ansan case is still in between the
brownfield revitalization stage and the transition to sustainable community development
stage. In this stage, national and local agencies develop a policy ground that facilitates
local and private sectors’ participation in investment and development for industrial
revitalization. The common policy direction in the two cases is to build close
relationships between central (federal/national and state/regional) and local actors for
effective policy and practice planning and implementation. Furthermore, the Boston
case proves the capacity of grassroots initiatives (the collaboration of local civic
coalitions and CDCs) to create an inclusive planning process. The inclusive planning
process, in this case, facilitated integrating planning resources and the participation of
diverse interested actors who were able to support the Fairmount Corridor revitalization.
In particular, federal and state stakeholders collaborated with the Collaborative to fund
projects and guide targeted communities within the Fairmount Corridor. However,
municipal actors (BRA and the city of Boston) and the Collaborative formed a slightly
different relationship, one that was basically cooperative, but also competitive in
financing community revitalization projects within the Fairmount Corridor. Generally,
municipal actors can offer local projects solid financial structures and are familiar with
162
policies regarding the acquirement of intergovernmental assistance (Meyer & Lyons,
2000). Accordingly, it is usual for municipal entities to become central actors of local
network governance in local practices. As such, BRA and the city of Boston have led
the planning and implementation process of the Fairmount Corridor revitalization by
cooperating with the CDC members of the Collaborative. In this cooperative
relationship, the city and the CDC members, except DB EDC, pursued mutual benefits,
but created subordinated authorities in financial and administrative implementations.
In the Ansan case, the industrial policy division has a planning and financing
structure with national agencies that is similar to the subordinated relationships between
the city of Boston and the CDCs. However, the Ansan case has no existing grassroots
initiative or actors involved in the industrial park revitalization: the industrial policy
division in the city of Ansan, a municipal actor, currently takes local-level planning tasks
and represents local interests in Banwol’s revitalization. Accordingly, local-level network
governance is limited in the Ansan case; however, organizing a local management
committee of Banwol revitalization posits local engagement as a fundamental planning
component of the project. Simultaneously, national industrial revitalization policies focus
on facilitating local-led project implementation. Therefore, the industrial policy division
has considered applying the inclusive planning strategies that were elaborated in the
Boston case – the six steps of community organizing and local network governance – to
form a local management committee that engages industrial communities in Banwol’s
revitalization.
According to the Analysis of integrated and inclusive planning in the Boston case,
integrated and inclusive planning establishes a complementary relationship that makes
163
the planning process more inclusive and better integrated. Local network governance
(integrated CDCs and civic coalitions’ policy implementation and inclusive decision-
making process) is a key to constructing an integrated and inclusive planning process.
Also, these corresponding planning modes transform brownfield revitalization into
sustainable community development. At the same time, well-established federal and
state assistance for environmental remediation and economic development enabled the
Collaborative’s network governance to conduct execution planning for the Fairmount
Corridor revitalization. This policy mechanism of the Boston case can provide several
recommendations for Banwol industrial park revitalization. First, the Ansan industrial
policy division needs to build networks with local stakeholders that contribute to
developing a shared and balanced proposal for the project. Second, the environmental
review process needs to be supported by site-specific research and collaborations with
the MOE and KEI. Third, a local management committee of Banwol revitalization should
consist of diverse members from regional, local, and civic entities. Fourth, the industrial
policy division should focus on identifying site-specific issues and impacted
communities’ needs. Lastly, the division should develop strategies to close gaps
between local interests and national policy objectives in the industrial park revitalization.
In summary, the integrated and inclusive planning indicated in the Boston case
emphasizes establishing communicative governance that connects diverse
stakeholders and planning resources based on common interests. Local-level network
governance and intergovernmental collaboration-building are especially critical in both
cases in order to make policies and project outcomes sustainable. The Boston case
164
points to the role of local actors (both municipalities and civic organizations) and their
capacities in conducting integrated and inclusive planning processes.
Substantive Paths to Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization: Connecting Environmental Remediation and Economic Redevelopment
The Boston and Ansan cases emphasize the connectedness between different
policy domains, environmental and economic policies in brownfield/industrial site
revitalization, in terms of both project performance and outcome. The Boston case has
well-established state-level brownfield policies which consider environmental
remediation and economic redevelopment as consecutive planning objects in brownfield
revitalization. Also, the Ansan case develops plans that harmonize land use planning
and industrial activities. For instance, the industrial policy division limits new heavy
industrial uses (chemical and/or manufacturing industries) in the prioritized zones for
Banwol regeneration. Moreover, the division plans to invite high-tech and/or light
industrial businesses with residential units (industrial mixed-use planning) within Banwol
industrial park. Even though the Ansan case has no obligatory procedure of site
remediation, both cases adhere to bridging environmental management (site
remediation and/or land-use control) and economic redevelopment that is expected in
brownfields/industrial site revitalization process. This horizontal link between
environmental and economic planning allows brownfield reuse to draw step-by-step
progress of reclaiming environment and local economy. In this juncture of environmental
and economic planning process, Campbell (1996) argues that planners need to focus
on conflicts and the search for resolutions to begin a path toward sustainable
development. The search for conflicts and resolutions in brownfield revitalization
requires diverse stakeholders’ participation in decision-making process. As verified in
165
the Boston case, engaging targeted community members facilitates understanding
issues and problems that address local community’s needs. Also, stakeholder
engagement facilitates seeking agreements and sharing collective actions which resolve
conflicts and envision future goals. In other words, conflicts arising from environmental
remediation and economic redevelopment initiate a path to sustainable brownfield
revitalization. Understanding concerns and diverse interests continues to seek conflict
resolutions that make engaged stakeholders one-step closer to sustainable
development.
The next section discusses the role of diverse stakeholders’ participation in
brownfield remediation and redevelopment as socially substantive paths to sustainable
brownfield revitalization.
Substantive Paths to Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization: Maintaining Inclusive Planning for Community Sustainability
The quest for sustainable development formulates both tension and necessity of
balance among environment, economy, and equity (three Es) issues originating in
planning and development (Campbell, 1996; Fainstein, 2010). Particularly, equity issues
are interrelated with environmental and economic conflicts that urge social and
environmental justice in planning and decision-making process. Issues and problems
addressed in brownfield revitalization are on the intersection of tension among the three
Es and inquiry of justice. As examined in the two cases, brownfields and underutilized
industrial sites produce disadvantaged environmental and economic conditions that also
bring social displacement in surrounding communities. However, the Boston case
continues to overcome environmental and economic disadvantages by growing local
participation in brownfield revitalization process. Established local civic coalitions and
166
their initiatives foster local communities’ autonomous and participatory plan making for
brownfield and community revitalization. In the analyzed three projects of the Boston
case, local governance for each project was created at an early planning stage by
engaging targeted community members. Review and/or decision-making boards worked
with diverse stakeholders to integrate community needs and planning objectives.
Particularly, DB EDC-led projects enabled targeted communities to vote for decision-
making on final redevelopment proposals. In terms of the IAP2’s level of public impact21,
this community’s decision making reaches the collaboration level by establishing citizen
advisory boards and facilitating participatory decision-making in the two projects. The
Talbot-Norfolk Triangle Neighborhoods and Codman Square initiative also develops a
similar community involvement plan to DB EDC’s community engagement process.
The Ansan case also begins the groundwork for creating local governance and national
policies and programs support local initiatives for effective industrial revitalization.
Accordingly, the present level of public participation in the Ansan case is at the
consulting stage, because the industrial policy division prioritized redevelopment zones
and conducted community surveys as basic research to develop local governance. The
textile dyeing industrial complex project is expected to actualize industrial community-
based revitalization in the Ansan case.
21
Appendix B
167
Figure 9-1. The level of local participation in the Boston and Ansan cases
Both cases focus on increasing community impact on plan and decision-making.
DB EDC-led projects prove that community impact on decision-making contributes to
maintaining project outcomes such as abiding business agreements and monitoring the
performance of new businesses. These post-project activities are possible because of
early community engagement and sustaining local governing bodies. Therefore, this
study argues that preserving local governance through organized community coalitions
is a socially substantive path to sustainable community development. At the same time,
it is necessary to consider the capacity of local expert groups, particularly grassroots
organizations such as community development agencies, to attain this socially
sustainable development.
In the next section, the present study discusses the local actors’ roles and
abilities to build community sustainability through brownfield revitalization.
168
The Great Potential of Local Planning Initiatives and Community-Based Revitalization Process
Municipalities, which consist of solid neighborhood ownerships in lands and
properties such as the city of Boston, have abundant community assets and potential
for grassroots initiatives of community development. As described in the Boston case,
civic coalitions and CDCs prove that those local entities are able to conduct planning
projects in brownfield and community revitalization. Furthermore, nonprofit
organizations such as these civic coalitions and CDCs create networks to enhance their
impact on state policymaking. The Massachusetts Association of Community
Development Corporations advocates CDCs and other nonprofit organizations by
intervening in the state policies affecting the development of affordable housing, small
businesses, communities, and assets. Such local- and state-wide community planning
initiatives have enabled the overarching integrated planning of brownfield revitalization
in MA. Based on this collective grassroots action, CDCs and civic coalitions in the
Boston case have incubated community-based planning strategies by networking with
adjacent neighborhoods and/or diverse private and nonprofit organizations. By
networking with diverse stakeholders, CDCs expand their boundaries of financial
opportunities and alliances to aid planning and implementation.
In 2013, the Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development Act of
2013 (the BUILD Act) was introduced to the U.S. Senate’s Environment and Public
Work Committee. The BUILD Act amends the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) of 1980 to modify provisions relating to
grants and for other purposes. The bill proposes modifying eleven sections in CERCLA,
two of which (Sections 2 and 3) are directly related to grant eligibility and utilization.
169
Section 2 aims to expand brownfield grant eligibility for nonprofit organizations, and
Section 3 allows grantees flexible use of brownfield grants.
Section 2 – Expanded Eligibility for Nonprofit Organizations: Allows 501(c) (3) non-profits, certain limited liability corporations and partnerships, and qualified community development organizations to qualify for site assessment grants under Section 104(k) (1). Non-profits are currently eligible for site remediation grants only (S. 1479, 2015).
Section 3 – Multipurpose Brownfields Grants: Authorizes EPA to award grants that include multiple elements, including site inventory, characterization, assessment, planning, or remediation for one or more Brownfields sites. This allows grant applicants to secure financing for multiple phases of a Brownfields project. Individual grants are limited to $950,000, and total expenditures on multi-purpose grants are limited to not more than 15 percent of the total appropriated funds for Section 104(k) grants. EPA has already established a pilot project to provide multipurpose grants under the existing Brownfields program. This section would explicitly give EPA that authority (S. 1479, 2015).
This motion of brownfield revitalization reflects the positive impact of grassroots
initiatives on the brownfield project outcomes identified in actual practices; moreover, it
supports fostering local initiatives’ financing and planning capacity. The present study
anticipates that the proposed sections in the BUILD Act of 2013 could support building a
more rigidly integrated and inclusive planning process in local-level brownfield
revitalization. Also, this Act will incite more civic organizations to become interested in
reusing brownfields near their communities; accordingly, local network governance has
the potential of helping communities to grow and mature.
The national- and local-level industrial revitalization policies in Korea need to
consider utilizing an integrated and inclusive planning process that is constructed by
community-based planning initiatives, as in the Boston case. Although the overarching
policy context and the scale of local-level implementation in the Ansan case are
different from those of the Boston case, Korean national initiatives that support
170
expanding local roles and authorities in industrial revitalization imply that the integrated
and inclusive planning process in the Boston case is applicable to the Banwol industrial
park revitalization. In particular, the integrated scale of planning areas, the Fairmount
Corridor, in the Boston case provided an area-wide planning scheme that enlarged the
planning scope from individual train stations and brownfield sites to connected corridors
and the overall Dorchester area. Also, inclusive planning or network governance that
grows with the expansion of the physical planning scope is the significance of the
Boston case that the Ansan case should consider reinterpreting to create inclusive
planning strategies of its own.
The present study identifies, first, that the policy elements (explanatory variables
and local actors) create an integrated and inclusive planning process in executing
brownfield revitalization. Second, the impact of an integrated and inclusive planning
process on community sustainability is verified in the Boston case. In the Ansan case,
policy elements have begun to create an integrated planning process in the industrial
park revitalization; however, the case has yet to truly undertake an inclusive planning
process. For this reason, the present study is limited in its ability to analyze the impact
of integrated and inclusive planning processes on project outcomes in terms of
community sustainability. In spite of this research limitation, the present study can
suggest several policy directions for the Ansan case, outlined in Chapter 8, that are
based on a cross-case analysis with the Boston case. Network governance and
integrated policies and programs are a key to connecting brownfield revitalization to
sustainable community development in the Boston case. The Ansan case, alternately,
shows the potential for local-led industrial park revitalization via the fostered role and
171
authority of the city of Ansan’s industrial policy division. However, it will be necessary to
balance this local power in the industrial revitalization planning through the participation
of a local management committee consisting of diverse local stakeholders. Additionally,
the division and the committee need to adopt a discretionary environmental review
process that supplements any potential loopholes of national-level environmental review
on the Banwol industrial park revitalization.
172
CHAPTER 10 CONCLUSION
Study Limitation and Future Study
In many Western countries such as the United States and the United Kingdom,
brownfield revitalization is situated at a local and community planning issue with the
support of central and regional brownfield policies and programs. The shared objective
of the US brownfield policies is to foster the local capacity of brownfield revitalization
planning and implementation under the theme of sustainable development (Raco &
Henderson, 2006; Paull, 2008; 2013). Based on this comparative case study,
establishing local governance, structured by civic coalitions in the Boston case and
municipal committees in the Ansan case, is a fundamental step that initiates integrated
and inclusive planning for brownfield and industrial revitalization. Particularly, the
Boston case showed the transition of brownfield revitalization to sustainable community
development, which was led by the collaboration of civic coalitions and the city.
However, the research uncovered competing context between civic coalitions and the
city in project making and financing. For example, HUD Section 108 loan programs
create a loan system that commonly authorizes municipal entities to provide loan funds
to civic coalitions and CDCs. This loan mechanism increases debt burdens on civic
actors’ financial portfolio. Such condition contains a potential for hindering community-
based brownfield revitalization; thus, further research is needed to discover balanced
financing programs that distribute federal and state brownfield funds to more diverse
local actors.
Secondly, local groups, created to participating in decision-making process, is a
major factor that establishes inclusive planning which invites diverse interests in
173
redevelopment projects. In the Boston case, CDCs focus on finding community leaders
and establishing community boards that increase local residents’ participation in
decision making process. Those community boards voice local needs in planning
process and maintain project outcomes. The research affirmed that this strong
community engagement in planning process contributes to sustaining the initial goal of
brownfield revitalization: the quality of community life. Likewise, the Ansan case seeks
local leaders to create local governance structure that works with local and national
governments for Banwol industrial revitalization. Based on the two cases, this study
concludes that building local groups for planning and decision making is perceived as a
strategy to organize inclusive planning. Additionally, the research analysis finds that the
research design of this study is limited to examine the relationship between integrated
and inclusive planning to bring more effective community-based brownfield revitalization.
Accordingly, the present study will conduct a further study on this part.
Lastly, cross-case Analysis of local practices in two different countries is both a
research challenge and opportunity. The general backgrounds of politics, policy making,
and planning process in the US and South Korea are different; hence, comparing and
contrasting of the two local practices is limited to verifying similarities and differences.
However, the gap of planning stages – the brownfield revitalization stage in the Ansan
case and the sustainable community development stage in the Boston – enables this
study to suggest policy directions that guide the Ansan case to sustainable industrial
revitalization. The analysis of the Boston case in this study shows how localized
planning approaches embody integrated and inclusive planning processes in brownfield
revitalization, and displays how these planning processes enable sustainable
174
community development. This local evidence in the Boston case provides directions to
forming cooperative national and local management committees and expanding the
roles and authorities of local actors in the Ansan case.
Future study of these cases should focus on detailing inclusive planning
processes that fit in industrial park revitalization in South Korea. Future study should
also continue to assess the impact of streamlined environmental review process on
project process and outcome. The streamlined review process would raise the
procedural efficiency of industrial revitalization; thus, further research is needed to
examine both positive and negative impact of the review process on process and
outcome of industrial revitalization in South Korea. At the same time, future study
should investigate competing relationships between municipal agencies and civic actors
(CDCs and/or non-profit organizations), which was implied in the Boston case (limited
funding opportunities and completion between local actors). This future study will
contribute to addressing the capacity of civic and/or community-based actors and
finding a link between those local actors and community capacity building in brownfield
revitalization.
General Policy Recommendations
Todays, cities focus on defining and actualizing sustainable development in
various ways, and this study affirms that brownfield revitalization becomes a strategic
way that brings environmental and socioeconomic improvement in local communities.
Especially, creating grassroots initiatives and community-level governance structures in
brownfield revitalization projects have an impact on inclusive planning process.
Simultaneously, the outcome of inclusive planning process is maintaining economic and
social betterment (local jobs and affordable housing) that aids targeted brownfield
175
communities. Therefore, this study argues that government policies need to develop
and design programs that embrace more diverse local actors who are willing to
revitalize brownfields in their communities. Also, it is necessary to enhance both
horizontal and vertical network governance that facilitates interactive planning between
governmental agencies and civic groups (CDCs and/or civic coalitions) involved in
brownfield revitalization. In the US, executive order 1289822 places an emphasis on
governmental actions to support disadvantaged local communities like neighborhoods
around brownfield sites, which face the lack of environmental quality and socioeconomic
opportunities. Particularly, this federal action shares the goal of achieving environmental
justice by coordinating federal programs. Under this pursuant to environmental justice,
federal agencies – EPA, HUD, and DOT – collaborate to integrate federal programs to
directly aid those local communities in needs. This collaborative federal action leads
state and local actors to prioritize environmental and social injustice issues; at the same
time, civic groups have an opportunity to expand their contribution to environmental and
social justice within local boundaries. In this respect, this study affirms that federal
interagency partnerships and local brownfield revitalization initiatives are sufficient to
achieve environmental justice. Also, study findings provide directions to facilitate vertical
and horizontal network governance in brownfield/industrial site revitalization. The
Boston case signifies paths to establish local-level network governance (horizontal
structure) and the Ansan case indicates ways to develop efficient governmental network
22
Executive Order (E.O.) 12898 is federal actions to address environmental justice in minority populations and low-income populations - was issued by President William J. Clinton in 1994. Its purpose is to focus federal attention on the environmental and human health effects of federal actions on minority and low-income populations with the goal of achieving environmental protection for all communities (EPA, 2015; Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/summary-executive-order-12898-federal-actions-address-environmental-justice).
176
through strong national initiatives that support local-led planning and implementation
(vertical structure).
This study addresses that brownfield revitalization requires a planning
perspective which balances competing interests in environmental/social qualities and
economic redevelopment. Balancing those interests is a key to expanding the planning
scope of brownfield revitalization to the broader umbrella of sustainable development.
Such balanced view in brownfield revitalization can be well formulated through
interdisciplinary research and practice. Thus, brownfield research continues to diverge
into different fields of academic research, practice, and education. For example, there is
an emerging policy and programs that connect brownfield reuse with renewable energy
production such as solar farms and green buildings on remediated brownfield sites. In
doing so, planning and practice efforts also necessitate integrating applicable resources,
technologies, and collaborative planning process; thus, an inclusionary paradigm needs
to be established and shared beyond brownfield revitalization process. Based on this
essential planning background, brownfield revitalization expects its transition to
sustainable community development.
177
APPENDIX A STREAMLINED INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS IN SOUTH
KOREA
Appendix A is created by existing procedural diagrams retrieved from http://industryland.or.kr/web/il/ILNaPro.jsp and http://industryland.or.kr/web/il/ILLocPro.jsp.
178
Figure A-1. Streamlined industrial (re)development process in South Korea
179
APPENDIX B THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION’S
SPECTRUM OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
Figure B-1. The International Association of Public Participation’s spectrum of public participation
180
APPENDIX C INTERVIEW INFORMED CONSENT IN THE US
Protocol Title
Interviews with Government Staffs involved in brownfield revitalization projects in the
US and South Korea
Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study.
Purpose of the interview
The study will compare brownfield revitalization policy in the US and South Korea. The study will analyze integrated and collaborative planning approaches among the three levels of government entities, which are involved in the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot in the US and the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Program in South Korea.
What you will be asked to do in the study
The study consists of case studies of two initiatives of brownfield revitalization: the Fairmont/Indigo Collaborative and the Banwol/Shihwa industrial park revitalization. Interviews with professionals involved in the two initiatives will provide primary data for the case studies. Each interview will take 45 minutes to 60 minutes. Following a brief introduction of the research, interviewees will be asked to answer several questions about the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot in the US or the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Program in South Korea. The questions are about interviewees’ experience as experts who implement policy and practice of each federal/national program. Specifically, integrated and collaborative planning experience will be asked in depth. Please see the attached interview questions. The researcher will document responses in typed notes; additionally, responses may be voice recorded with permission of interviewees. Recorded responses will be kept securely until transcribed, then erased.
Time required
45 to 60 minutes
Risks and Benefits
The interviews will be used for empirical data that support a case study on intergovernmental partnership program/grant and local practice. Collected data from interviews will supplement archival research on legislative and regulatory contexts of interagency partnership/grant programs in the US and South Korea.
Interviewees will not directly benefit, and there will be no compensation for participation.
Confidentiality
There is minimal risk to participants resulting from this project. Research publications may quote and describe participants by name and affiliation, however, participants may request anonymity or to not be quoted. Participants are professionals who will be speaking about their involvement in public, community planning processes.
Voluntary participation
181
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating.
Right to withdraw from the study
You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence.
Who to contact if you have questions about the study
Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin, Doctoral Student, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, email: [email protected]
Kathryn I. Frank, Ph.D., College of Design, Construction, and Planning, Gainesville, email: [email protected]
Who to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study
IRB02 Office Box 112250 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-2250 phone 392-0433.
Agreement
I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I
have received a copy of this description.
Participant: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________
Principal Investigator: ___________________________________ Date: _________________
Lastly, please answer the question below,
I, participant, want any information I provide in this interview to be anonymous.
Yes □ No □
182
APPENDIX D INTERVIEW INFORMED CONSENT IN SOUTH KOREA
A Request for Interview Cooperation
387 Hwarang-ro, Danwon-gu, Ansan-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea
To: City Planning and Public Affairs Divisions, Ansan City Hall,
This is Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin, a Ph.D. Candidate at the University of Florida. I am writing this letter to ask for your cooperation, executing related interviews to conduct my doctoral dissertation research, “a comparative study on the US brownfield policy and Korean urban revitalization policy”.
This study is to examine and compare Korean urban revitalization policy and the US brownfield policy by analyzing similarities and differences between the two. Also, this study will investigate the local practice of each policy and grantees of government programs, to identify distinct governance and policy outcome, which would be impacted by those similarities and differences.
Banwol/Shihwa Industrial Park revitalization in Ansan City is selected as a Korean case of local practice. Banwol/Shihwa Industrial Park revitalization, a grantee of an urban revitalization program by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport (MLIT), is a national-driven planning initiative but also inevitably an intergovernmental collaboration, which leads me to ask for your acceptance and agreement to conduct interviews on this analysis of local practice.
This study respects all internal rules established by Ansan City during interviews and while contacting city staff. So please review this informed consent and interview questions attached. If any of the contents may violate your internal regulations, interviewees can reject to respond. Interviews will be a voluntary participation of interviewees, and responses are used only for research purposes. You may see more information about any risks or benefits of this study in the following consent form/paragraph section.
Lastly, I have work experience at the Architecture & Urban Research Institute, Korea, under the Prime Minister’s Office before starting this Ph.D. program. I worked on a research to establish an architecture and urban design policy of Metropolitan Gyeonggi-do, Korea. I met and interviewed regional and local staffs of Gyeonggi government for this policy research and thus, fully understand how policy process and government relationship in Korea are developed and implemented. Based on this work experience and research purpose, I would like to conduct this study under your permission and cooperation.
Thank you for your time and support and as to any questions or doubts, please do not hesitate to contact me through email or via phone below.
Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin Ph.D. Candidate
Concentration in Urban & Regional Planning University of Florida
Email: [email protected]│Phone: +1-352-284-6184
183
Protocol Title
Interviews with Government Staffs involved in industrial park (brownfield) revitalization
projects in the US and South Korea
Please read this consent document carefully before you decide to participate in this study.
Purpose of the interview
The study will compare brownfield23)
revitalization policy in the US and South Korea. Korean urban revitalization policy is conducted by similar contexts of the US brownfield policy – integrated and collaborative planning approaches. However, different factors between the two policies such as implementation strategies and stakeholder engagement process may result in distinct local governance and policy outcome.
Therefore, the study will analyze integrated and collaborative planning approaches among the three levels of government entities, which are involved in the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Program in South Korea and the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot in the US, by examining similarities and differences between the two policies through interviews.
What you will be asked to do in the study
The study consists of case studies of two initiatives of brownfield revitalization: the Fairmont/Indigo Collaborative and the Banwol/Shihwa industrial park revitalization. Interviews with professionals involved in the two initiatives will provide primary data for the case studies. Each interview will take 45 minutes to 60 minutes. Following a brief introduction of the research, interviewees will be asked to answer several questions about the Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfield Pilot in the US or the Obsolete Industrial Park Revitalization Program in South Korea. The questions are about interviewees’ experience as experts who implement policy and practice of each federal/national program. Specifically, integrated and collaborative planning experience will be asked in depth. Please see the attached interview questions. The researcher will document responses in typed notes; additionally, responses may be voice recorded with permission of interviewees. Recorded responses will be kept securely until transcribed, then erased.
Time required
45 to 60 minutes
Risks and Benefits
The interviews will be used for empirical data that support a case study on intergovernmental partnership program/grant and local practice. Collected data from interviews will supplement archival research on legislative and regulatory contexts of interagency partnership/grant programs in the US and South Korea.
Interviewees will not directly benefit, and there will be no compensation for participation.
23)
A brownfield site is real property that reuse of such property is complicated by perceived or actual contamination; therefore, the property remains underused and socioeconomically unproductive.
184
Confidentiality
There is minimal risk to participants resulting from this project. Research publications may quote and describe participants by name and affiliation, however, participants may request anonymity or to not be quoted. Participants are professionals who will be speaking about their involvement in public, community planning processes.
Voluntary participation
Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating.
Right to withdraw from the study
You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence.
Who to contact if you have questions about the study
Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin, Doctoral Student, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, email: [email protected]
Kathryn I. Frank, Ph.D., College of Design, Construction, and Planning, Gainesville, email: [email protected]
Who to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study
IRB02 Office Box 112250 University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611-2250 phone 392-0433.
Agreement
I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I
have received a copy of this description.
Participant: ___________________________________________ Date: _________________
Principal Investigator: ___________________________________ Date: _________________
Lastly, please answer the question below,
I, participant, want any information I provide in this interview to be anonymous.
Yes □ No □
185
APPENDIX E
SITE HISTORY COMPARISON
Figure E-1. Case history and comparison
186
LIST OF REFERENCES
Abukhater, A. B. E. (2009). Rethinking planning theory and practice: A glimmer of light for prospects of integrated planning to combat complex urban realities. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 64-79. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/233249317?accountid=10920
Adams, D. (2004). The changing regulatory environment for speculative house building and the construction of core competencies for brownfield development. Environment and Planning A, 601-624. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/a3557
Adams, D., De Sousa, C., & Tiesdell, S. (2010). Brownfield Development: A comparison of North American and British approaches. Urban Studies, 75 - 104.
Adams, D., & Hutchison, N. (2000). The urban task force report: Reviewing land ownership constraints to brownfield redevelopment. Regional Studies, 777-782. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/38979015?accountid=10920
Agyeman, J. (2005). Sustainable Communities and the Challenge of Environmental Justice. New York and London: New York University Press.
Agyeman, J. (2014). Entering Cosmopolis:Crossing over, Hybridity,Conciliation, and the Intercultural City Ecosystem. Minding Nature, 20 - 25.
Agyeman, J. (2014, May 18). Storying institutions: Understanding why things are as they are. Retrieved August 27, 2014, from Just Sustainabilities: http://julianagyeman.com/2014/05/storying-institutions-understanding-things/
Agyeman, J., & Evans, B. (2004). ‘Just sustainability’: the emerging discourse of environmental justice in Britain? The Geographical Journal, 155 - 164.
Agyeman, J., & Evans, T. (2003). Toward Just Sustainability in Urban Communities: Building Equity Rights with Sustainable Solutions. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 35 - 53.
Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. D., & Evans, B. (2002). Exploring the Nexus: Bringing Together Sustainability, Environmental Justice and Equity. Space & Polity, 77 - 90.
Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. D., & Evans, B. (2003). Joined-up Thinking: Bridging Together Sustainability, Environmental Justice, and Equity. In J. Agyeman, R. D. Bullard, & B. Evans, Just Sustainability: Development in an Unequal World (pp. 1 - 16). London, UK: MIT Press edition.
Alexander, R. (2015). Policy instruments and the remediation and redevelopment of contaminated properties. Environmental Politics, 75 - 95.
187
Alexander, R. (2012). Network structure and the performance of brownfield redevelopment PPPs. Public Performance & Management Review, 752 – 768.
Alker, S., Joy, V., Roberts, P., & Smith, N. (2000). The Definition of Brownfield. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 49 - 69.
Allmendinger, P., & Tewdwr-Jones, M. (Eds.). (2002). Planning futures: New directions for planning theory (First ed.). London & New York: Routledge.
American Planning Association. (2015, April 18). National Planning Excellence Awards 2015. Retrieved February 10, 2016, from American Planning Association: https://www.planning.org/awards/2015/haroldmitchell.htm
Anderson, G. (2013, 7 24). Testimony of Geoff Anderson. Retrieved 8 31, 2013, from Smart Growth America: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/documents/nbc-anderson-testimony_7-24-2013.pdf
Andres, L. (2012). Levels of Governance and Multi-stage Policy Process of Brownfield Revitalization: A Comparison of France and Switzerland. International Planning Studies, 23 - 43.
Andres, L., & Grésillon, B. (2013). Cultural brownfields in European cities: A new mainstream object for cultural and urban policies. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 40-62. doi:10.1080/10286632.2011.625416
Arnstein, S. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 216 - 224.
Australia Public Service Commission [APSC]. (2007). Tackling Wicked Problems: A Public Policy Perspective. Barton, ACT: the Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Attorney-General's Department.
Atkinson, G., Doick, K. J., Burningham, K., & France, C. (2014). Brownfield revitalization to greenspace: Delivery of project objectives for social and environmental gain. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 586-594. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2013.04.002
Bagaeen, S. G. (2006). Brownfield sites as building blocks for sustainable urban environments: a view on international experience in redeveloping former military sites. URBAN DESIGN International, 117 - 128.
Banerjee, D., & Bell, M. M. (n.d.). Environmental Justice. In R. T. Schafer, Encyclopedia of Race, Ethnicity, and Society (pp. 1 - 9). Thousand Oaks, CA and London: Sage Publications.
Bates, L., & Zapata, M. (2013). Revisiting equity The HUD Sustainable Communities Initiative. Progressive Planning, 14 - 17.
188
Beatly, T. (2012). Sustainability in Planning: The Arc and Trajectory of a Movement, and New Directions for the Twenty-First Century City. In B. Sanyal, L. J. Vale, & C. D. Rosan, Planning Ideas that Matter (pp. 91 - 124). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
BenDor, T. K., Metcalf, S. S., & Paich, M. (2011). The Dynamics of Brownfield Redevelopment. Sustainability, 914 - 936.
Beratan, K. K., Kabala, S. J., Loveless, S. M., Martin, P. J., & Spyke, N. P. (2004). Sustainability indicators as a communicative tool: Building bridges in Pennsylvania. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 179-91. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:EMAS.0000016887.95411.77
Bleicher, A., & Gross, M. (2010). Sustainability assessment and the revitalization of contaminated sites: Operationalizing sustainable development for local problems. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 17(1), 57-66.
Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA]. (2014). EcoDistricts. Retrieved from http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/planning/planning-initiatives/ecodistricts
Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA]. (2016). What is development review? Retrieved from http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/projects/development-review/mitigation-impact-advisory-groups
Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA]. (2016). Fairmount Indigo Planning Initiative. Retrieved March 28, 2016, from Boston Redevelopment Authority: http://www.bostonredevelopmentauthority.org/planning/planning-initiatives/fairmount-indigo-planning-initiative
Brenman, M., & Sanchez, T. W. (2012). Planning as if People Matter, Governing for Social equity. Washington D.C.: Island Press.
Brownfield Renewal. (2014). Bornstein & Pearl Food Production Center, a Winner of Social Impact. Retrieved from http://www.redevelopmentreuse.com/projects/Bornstein-Pearl-Food-Production-Center/216
Brownfield Utilization, Investment, and Local Development Act of 2013, S. Calendar No. 416, 113th Cong. (2013).
Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development Act of 2015, S. 1479, 114th Cong. (2015).
Brulle, R. J., & Pellow, D. N. (2006). Environmental Justice: Human Health and Environmental Inequalities. Annual Review of Public Health, 103 - 124.
189
Bryson, M. J., Quick, S. K., Slotterback, S. C., & Crosby, C. B. (2013). Designing Public Participation Processes. Public Administration Review, 23 - 34.
Bullard, R. D., & Johnson, G. S. (2000). Environmental Justice: Grassroots Activism and Its Impact on Public Policy Decision Making. Journal of Social Issues, 555 - 578.
Campbell, S. (1996). Green cities, growing cities, just cities?: Urban Planning and the Contradictions of Sustainable Development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 296 - 312.
Campbell, S. (2003). Case studies in planning: Comparative advantages and the problem of generalization (Working Paper No. URRC 02-07). Retrieved from University of Michigan Urban and Regional Research Collaborative website: http://www.caup.umich.edu/workingpapers
Campbell, S. (2013). Sustainable Development and Social Justice: Conflicting Urgencies and the Search for Common Ground in Urban and Regional Planning. Michigan Journal of Sustainability, 75 - 91.
Cheng, F., Geertman, S., Kuffer, M., & Zhan, Q. (2011). An integrative methodology to improve brownfield redevelopment planning in Chinese cities: A case study of Futian, Shenzhen. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 388-398. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2011.05.007
Choi, M. (2014, 4). Urban revitalization is a process to search an area-specific remedy through an integrated approach. (S. Jung, Interviewer)
Chrysochoou, M., Brown, K., Dahal, G., Granda-Carvajal, C., Segerson, K., Garrick, N., et al. (2012). A GIS and indexing scheme to screen brownfields for area-wide redevelopment planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 187-198. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.12.010
Coffin, S., L., & Barbero, C. (2009). Making Connections in the Brownfield Marketplace. Environmental Practice, 170–178.
Colantonio, A., & Dixon, T. (2010). Urban revitalization and social sustainability. best practice from European cities. West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons Ltd.
Collier, D. (2011). Understanding process tracing. Political Science and Politics, 823 - 830.
Conroy, M. M. (2003). The process of planning for sustainable development: dimension, comparison, and insights. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 460-477.
Conservation Law Foundation, Inc. v. Romney, 421 F. Supp. 2d 344 (D. Mass. 2006)
190
Cornelius, N., & Wallace, J. (2010). Cross-sector partnership: city revitalization and social justice. Journal of Business Ethics, 71 - 84.
Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. J., & Shirley, W. L. (2003). Social Vulnerability to Environmental Hazards. Social Science Quarterly, 242-261.
Dale, A. & Newman, L. (2009). Sustainable development for some: green urban development and affordability. Local Environment, 669 - 681.
Dalton, B., Riggs, D., & Yandle, B. (1996). The political production of Superfund: Some financial market results. Eastern Economic Journal, 75 - 87.
Davidoff, P. (1965). Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 544 - 555.
Davison, G., & Legacy, C. (2014). Positive Planning and Sustainable Brownfield Revitalization: The Role of Potential of Government Land Development Agencies. International Planning Studies, 154 - 172.
Department of Environmental Protection, Massachusetts. (2012, November). the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. Retrieved January 25, 2015, from Massachusettes Government: http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dep/cleanup/bst1112.pdf
De Sousa, C. A. (2002). Brownfield redevelopment in Toronto: An examination of past trends and future prospects. Land use Policy, 297-309. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0264-8377(02)00024-8
De Sousa , Christopher A. (2004). The greening of brownfields in American cities. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 579-600. doi:10.1080/0964056042000243249
De Sousa, C. (2005). Policy performance and brownfield redevelopment in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The Professional Geographer, 312-327. doi:10.1111/j.0033-0124.2005.00480.x
De Sousa, C. A. (2006). Urban brownfield redevelopment in Canada: the role of local government. The Canadian Geographer, 392 - 407.
De Sousa, C. A., Wu, C., & Westphal, L. M. (2009). Assessing the Effect of Publicly Assisted Brownfield Redevelopment on Surrounding Property Values. Economic Development Quarterly, 95-110.
Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation [DB EDC]. (2013). Economic Development. Retrieved from http://www.dbedc.org/economic.html
Dorsey, J. W. (2003). Brownfields and Greenfields: The Intersection of Sustainable Development and Environmental Stewardship. Environmental Practice, 69–76.
191
Dubois, J. (2014). Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation Project Narratives: the 65 Bay Street redevelopment. pp. 1 – 5.
Dubois, J. (2014). Dorchester Bay Economic Development Corporation Project Narrative: the Bornstein & Pearl food production small business center. pp. 1 – 7.
Dubois, J. (2015, July 8). Personal Interview: Interviews with Government Staffs involved in brownfield revitalization projects in the US and South Korea.
Dye, T. R. (2010). Understanding public policy (13th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Eckstein, H. (1997). Congruence Theory Explained. Center for the Study of Democracy. UC Irvine: Center for the Study of Democracy. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/2wb616g6
Eisen, J. B. (2009, 4). Brownfields development: from individual sites to smart growth. Environmental Law Reporter.
Eley, C., Shaw, E., Mitchell , H., & Martinez, C. (Performers). (2014). Getting Equitable Development into the Plan.
Ellerbusch, F. (2006). Brownfields: Risk, property, and community value. Local Environment, 559-575. doi:10.1080/13549830600853486
Elliott, M. (2009). The Federal Government as Agent for Promoting Collaboration in Local Planning and Redevelopment: An Evaluation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Brownfields Facilitation Pilot Program. The 22nd Annual International Association of Conflict Management Conference (pp. 1 - 29). Japan: 22nd Annual IACM Conference Paper.
EPA (2010, December). Partnership for Sustainable Communities [PSC] EPA Brownfield Pilot Boston, Massachusetts Better Communities for Brownfields: Three Tales from the Fairmount Indigo Line Corridor (Contract No. EP-W-07-023). Washington, DC: SRA International, Inc. & Goody Clancy.
EPA. (2012). Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfields Pilots: Lessons Learned Fact Sheet for Local and State Stakeholders. Washington DC: EPA.
EPA. (2012, 7 16). Brownfields and Land Revitalization: Laws and Statutes. Retrieved 12 7, 2013, from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/laws/
EPA. (1998, 4). Environmental Justice Considerations in the NEPA Process. Retrieved 10 20, 2014, from Compliance and Enforcement Home: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/ej/resources/policy/ej_guidance_nepa_epa0498.pdf
192
EPA. (2009). Building vibrant communities: community benefits of land revitalization. Washington, D.C.
EPA. (2012, 7 11). Brownfields and Land Revitalization. Retrieved 12 1, 2014, from Partnership for Sustainable Communities Brownfields Pilot Projects: http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/partnership.htm
EPA. (2013). Creating Equitable, Healthy, and Sustainable Communities: Strategies for Advancing Smart Growth, Environmental Justice, and Equitable Development. Washington D.C.: EPA.
EPA. (2013). Equitable Redevelopment of Petroleum Brownfields for Zuni Pueblo and Other Tribal Communities. Washington D.C.: EPA.
EPA. (2015, October 28). 2015 Brownfields Federal Programs Guide. Retrieved January 28, 2016, from the US Environmental Protection Agency: http://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/brownfields-federal-programs-guide-2013.pdf
EPA. (2015, November 16). Environmental Justice. Retrieved January 25, 2016, from the US EPA: http://www3.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/
EPA. (2015, September 30). Superfund Cleanup Process. Retrieved March 1, 2016, from The US Environmental Protection Agency: https://www.epa.gov/superfund/superfund-cleanup-process
Essoka, J. D. (2010). The Gentrifying Effects of Brownfields Redevelopment. The Western Journal of Black Studies, 299-315.
Fainstein, S. (2000). New direction for planning theory. Urban Affairs Review, 458 - 478.
Fainstein, S. (2009). Planning and the Just City. In P. Marcuse, J. Connolly, J. Novy, I. Olivo, C. Potter, & J. Steil, Searching for the Just City (pp. 19 - 39). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fainstein, S. (2010). The Just City. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Fisher, R. and Ury, W. (2011). Getting to yes negotiating agreement without giving in. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
Fischer, F. (1998). Beyond empiricism: Policy inquiry in postpositivist perspective. Policy Studies Journal, 129 - 146.
Fleming, C. (2004, June). When Environmental Justice Hits the Local Agenda. Project Management Magazine, http://webapps.icma.org/pm/8605/fleming.htm.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 219 - 245.
193
Forester, J. (2008). Challenges of Deliberation and Participation. In Fainstein, S. & Campbell, S. (Ed.), Readings in Planning Theory (pp.206 - 213). West Sussex, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Gallagher, D. R., & Jackson, S. E. (2008). Promoting community involvement at brownfields sites in socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 615-630. doi:10.1080/09640560802210971
George, A., & Bennett, A. (2005). Case studies and theory development in the social sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Gerber, E. R., & Loh, C. G. (2014). Spatial dynamics of vertical and horizontal intergovernmental collaboration. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1 - 19.
Gilderbloom, J. I., Meares, W. L., & Riggs, W. (2014). How brownfield sites kill places and people: an examination of neighborhoods housing values, foreclosures, and lifespan. Journal of Urbanism, 1 - 18.
Giordano, T. (2014). Multi-level integrated planning and greening of public infrastructure in south Africa. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(4), 480-504.
Gittleman, S. (2016, February 21). Recapitalizing brownfield fund is good for housing in the Commonwealth, Retrieved from http://www.massdevelopment.com/news/recapitalizing-brownfield-fund-is-good-for-housing-in-the-commonwealth/
Greenberg, M. (2002). Should Housing Be Built on Former Brownfield Sites? American Journal of Public Health, 703-705.
Greenberg, M., & Lewis, J. M. (2000). Brownfields Redevelopment, Preferences, and Public Involvement: A Case Study of an Ethnically Mixed Neighborhood. Urban Studies, 2501– 2514.
Greenberg, M., Lowrie, K., Mayer, H., Miller, K. T., & Solitare, L. (2001). Brownfield redevelopment as a smart growth option in the United States. The Environmentalist, 129 -143.
Greenberg, M., Lowrie, K., Solitare, L., & Duncan, L. (2000). Brownfields, Toads, and the Struggle for Neighborhood Redevelopment: A Case Study of the State of New Jersey. Urban Affairs Review, 717 – 733.
Greenberg, M., Mayer, H., Lowrie, K., and Shaw, J. (2008, February). Industrial Decline and the Opportunities and Challenges of Brownfield Redevelopment. Community Investment, 8 - 11.
194
Gute, D. M. (2006). Sustainable brownfields redevelopment and empowering communities to participate more effectively in environmental decision-making. Local Environment, 473-478. doi:10.1080/13549830600853015
Gute, D. M., & Taylor, M. (2006). Revitalizing Neighborhoods through Sustainable Brownfields Redevelopment: Principles Put into Practice in Bridgeport, CT. Local Environment, 537 - 558.
Habisreutinger, P., & Gunderson, D. (2006). Real estate opportunities within the ReGenesis project area: A case study. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 53 - 63.
Hamm, G. F., & Walzer, N. (2007). Returns from redeveloping brownfields: Preliminary estimates. Community Development, 87-98. doi:10.1080/15575330709489841
Hantrais, L. (2009). International Comparative Research: Theory, Methods, and Practice. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Harris , N., & Hooper, A. (2004). Rediscovering the ‘Spatial’ in public policy and planning: An examination of the spatial content of sectoral policy documents. Planning Theory & Practice, 147-169. doi:10.1080/14649350410001691736
Harris, J. M. (2003). Sustainability and sustainable development. Unpublished manuscript.
Haslam, C. (2009). Urban Redevelopment and Contaminated Land: Lessons from Florida’s Brownfield Redevelopment Program. Environmental Practice, 153–163.
Hawkes, J., & Hayward, D. (2002). The fourth pillar of sustainability. culture's essential role in public planning. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 111-112. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/38405985?accountid=10920
Hays, R. A. (2014). Neighborhood networks, social capital, and political participation: the relationships revisited. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1 - 22.
Heberle, L., & Wernstedt, K. (2006). Understanding brownfields revitalization in the US. Local Environment, 479-497. doi:10.1080/13549830600853064
Hendrickson, D. J., Lindberg, C., Connelly, S., & Roseland, M. (2011). Pushing the envelope: Market mechanisms for sustainable community development. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 153-173.
Hill, M., & Hupe, P. (2002). Implementing Public Policy: Governance in Theory and in Practice. London: SAGE Publications.
195
Holden, M., & Scerri, A. (2014). Justification, compromise, and test: Developing a pragmatic sociology of critique to understand the outcomes of urban redevelopment. Planning Theory, 1 - 24.
Hollander, J., Niall, K., & Gold, J. (2010). Principles of Brownfield Revitalization: Cleanup, Design, and Reuse of Derelict Land. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.
Howland, M. (2007). Employment Effects of Brownfield Redevelopment: What Do We Know from the Literature? Journal of Planning Literature, 91-107.
Jacobs, A. J. (2002). Integrated development planning, supportive public policies, and corporate commitment: A recipe for thriving major cities in Aichi, japan. Journal of Urban Affairs, 175-196. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/228355445?accountid=10920
Jo, Y.-J., Kim, Y.-R., & Choi., Y.-J. (2015). Design status and improvement methods of packed bed scrubbers as an odor removal device in Siheung and Ansan smart hubs. Journal of Odor and Indoor Environment, 341 - 350.
Kibert, C., Monroe, M., Peterson, A., Plate, R., & Thiele, L. (2011). Working Toward Sustainability Ethical Decision Making In a Technological World. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Kim, K.-H., Lee, Y.-E., & Kim, S.-W. (2013). A study on ways to improve the efficiency of the integrated approach for urban revitalization policy. Journal of Korean Planners Association, 471 - 494.
Kim, S-G. (2015). A public meeting held for the Banwol industrial park revitalization. Gyeonggi-dominilbo. Retrieved from http://www.kgdm.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=232863
Korea Industrial Complex Corporation. (2014). Seeking a Way to Reinforce Obsolete Industrial Parks. Industrial Location, 55. Retrieved from http://www.e-cluster.net/new_app/common/file_control/file_Download.jsp?property=upload.path.condition&filename=14139573643990.pdf&realname=%EC%82%B0%EC%97%85%EC%9E%85%EC%A7%80_55%ED%98%B8_%EC%B5%9C%EC%A2%85.pdf
Korea Industrial Complex Corporation. (2016). Industrial Location Booklet. Retrieved from http://www.e-cluster.net/common/file_Download.jsp?filename=SANUP(2016)_1.pdf&realname=SANUP(2016)_1.pdf&property=upload.path.etc.
Korea Investors Service. (2009). A Complete Enumeration Survey of Nationally Owned Industrial Parks. Retrieved from http://www.e-cluster.net/new_app/common/file_control/file_Download.jsp?property=upload.path.condition&filename=12747070724250.hwp&realname=%BA%D9%C0%D3_2._09_%B1%B9%B0%A1%B4%DC%C1%F6_%C0%D4%C1%D6%B1%E2%BE%F
196
7%C3%BC_%C7%F6%C8%B2_%C0%FC%BC%F6%C1%B6%BB%E7_%BA%B8%B0%ED%BC%AD-%C5%BE%C0%E7%BA%BB.hwp
Korea Ministry of Government Legislation. (2013, 12 5). Legislation search. Retrieved 11 27, 2014, from National Legal Information Center: http://www.law.go.kr/lsSc.do?menuId=0&p1=&subMenu=1&nwYn=1&query=%EB%8F%84%EC%8B%9C%EC%9E%AC%EC%83%9D&x=0&y=0#liBgcolor1
Krumholz, N. (1982). A retrospective view of equity planning Cleveland 1969 - 1979. Journal of American Planning Association, 163 - 174.
K-Water Institute. (2014). Sihwa Banwol Air Quality Management Plan. Retrieved from https://kiwe.kwater.or.kr/resu/subjView.do?s_mid=453&mngtno=F1600007#this
Lafortezza, R., Corry, R. C., Sanesi, G., & Brown, R. D. (2008). Visual preference and ecological assessments for designed alternative brownfield rehabilitations. Journal of Environmental Management, 257-269. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.063
Lau, M. (2014). Sectoral integration and meta-governance: Lessons beyond the 'spatial planning' agenda in England. Town Planning Review, 617-637. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1564441874?accountid=10920
Laurian, L., Day, M., Backhurst, M., Berke, P., Ericksen, N., Crawford, J., et al. (2004). What drives plan implementation? plans, planning agencies and developers. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 555-577.
Leage, P., Descheˆnes, L., & Samson, R. (2007). Evaluating Holistic Environmental Consequences of Brownfield Management Options Using Consequential Life Cycle Assessment for Different Perspectives. Environmental Management, 323 - 337.
Lee, S., & Mohai, P. (2011). Racial and Socioeconomic Assessments of Neighborhoods Adjacent to Small-Scale Brownfield Sites in the Detroit Region. Environmental Practice, 340 - 353.
Lee, S., & Mohai, P. (2013). The socioeconomic dimension of brownfields cleanup in the Detroit region. Population and Environment, 420 - 429.
Leigh, N., G., & Coffin, S., L. (2010). Modeling the relationship among brownfields, property values, and community revitalization. Housing Policy Debate, 257-280.
Ling, C., Hanna, K., & Dale, A. (2009). A Template for Integrated Community Sustainability Planning. Environmental Management, 228 - 242.
Litt, J., Tran, N., & Burke, T. (2002). Examining Urban Brownfields through the Public Health "Macroscope". Environmental Health Perspectives, Supplement 2: Community, Research, and Environmental Justice, 183 - 193.
197
Lubell, M., Henry, A., & McCoy, M. (2010). Collaborative Institutions in an Ecology of Games. American Journal of Political Science, 287 - 300.
Lyles, W. (2014). Using social network analysis to examine planner involvement in environmentally oriented planning processes led by non-planning professions. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 1961 - 1987.
Magis, K. (2010). Community resilience: An indicator of social sustainability. Society & Natural Resources, 401 - 416. doi:10.1080/08941920903305674
Mahoney, J. (2012). The logic of process tracing tests in the social science. Sociological Methods & Research. 570 - 597.
Mass DEP & the Northeast Waste Management Officials’ Association (NEWMOA). (2013). Getting Properties Back to Work Waste Site Cleanup Programs Key for Massachusetts Communities [Brochure]. Boston, MA: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection.
Metzger, J. (1996). The theory and practice of equity planning: An annotated bibliography. Journal of Planning Literature, 112 - 126.
McCarthy, L. (2002). The brownfield dual land-use policy challenge: reducing barriers to private redevelopment while connecting reuse to broader community goals. Land Use Policy, 287 - 296.
McCarthy, L. (2009). Off the Mark? Efficiency in Targeting the Most Marketable Sites Rather Than Equity in Public Assistance for Brownfield Redevelopment. Economic Development Quarterly, 1 - 18.
McCool, S. F., & Stankey, G. H. (2004). Indicators of sustainability: Challenges and opportunities at the interface of science and policy. Environmental Management, 294-305. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00267-003-0084-4
McLeod, D. (2016, March 17). No two incubators think alike: From social impact to zero waste, these eight models shape programs around priorities. Retrieved April 22, 2016, from The New Food Economy: http://newfoodeconomy.com/incubator-roundup/
MDOT, M. (n.d.). The Central Artery/Tunnel Project - The Big Dig. Retrieved March 25, 2016, from MassDOT: http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/highway/thebigdig.aspx
Meadow, P. (1967). The Rhetoric of Institutional Theory. The Sociology Quarterly, 207 - 214.
Meijburg, E. (1997). Towards an integrated district oriented policy: a policy for urban planning and the environment in Amsterdam. In D. Miller, & G. De Roo, Urban Environmental Planning (pp. 107 - 121). Vermont, USA: Avebury.
198
Meyer, J. (2010). World Society, Institutional Theories, and the Actor. Annual Review of Sociology, 1 - 20.
Meyer, P. B., & Lyons, T. S. (2000). Lessons from private sector brownfield redevelopers: Planning public support for urban revitalization. Journal of the American Planning Association, 46 - 57. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1474201609?accountid=10920
Middleton, N., & O'Keefe, P. (2001). Redefining Sustainable Development. London, UK: Pluto Press.
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. (2016). Press Release. Retrieved from http://cfile228.uf.daum.net/attach/2128F63D56B0701C04F6F7
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. (2015). Comprehensive Guidelines for Industrial Location and Development. Retrieved from http://www.lawnb.com/data/Focuslawdata/lawnbfocusB00025545927.pdf
Ministry of Public Safety and Security. (2014). Review Guidance for Environmental Impact Assessment. Retrieved from http://policy.dibrary.net/cmmn/FileDown.do;jsessionid=H4do1dbv1KDTKs7McQfPvBMeDBWRGe9XOQNMwDrhq1UDsneCqEqY01Sukgp71aZ1.sl-extwas_servlet_engine5?atchFileId=105002&fileSn=771
Mohai, P. (2006). Reassessing racial and socioeconomic disparities in environmental justice research. Demography, 383-399.
Mohai, P., Pellow, D., & Roberts, J. T. (2009). Environmental Justice. Annual Review of Environmental Resource, 405 - 430.
Murdoch, J. (2004). Putting discourse in its place: Planning, sustainability, and the urban capacity study. Area, 50-58. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/37886827?accountid=10920
Muzio, D., Brock, D., & Suddaby, R. (2013). Professions and Institutional Change: Towards an Institutional Sociology of the Professions. Journal of Management Study, 699 - 721.
Nadin, V. (2007). The emergence of the spatial planning approach in England. Planning Practice & Research, 43-62. doi:10.1080/02697450701455934
Newman, L., & Dale, A. (2005). The role of agency in sustainable local community development. Local Environment, 477-486. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13549830500203121
Nickum, J. E. (2001). Environmental Management, Poverty Reduction, and Sustainable Regional Development: Introduction. In J. E. Oya, New regional development paradigms (pp. 1-14). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
199
Nijkamp, P., Rodenburg, C. A., & Wagtendonk, A. J. (2002). Success factors for sustainable urban brownfield development: A comparative case study approach to polluted sites. Ecological Economics, 235 - 252.
Nolon, J. R., & Salkin, P. E. (2006). Land Use in a Nutshell. St. Paul, MN: Thomson/West.
Office of Sustainable Communities, EPA. (2014). Partnership for Sustainable Communities: Five Years of Learning from Communities and Coordinating Federal Investments. Washington, VA: EPA.
Opp, S. M. (2009). Experiences of the States in Brownfield Redevelopment. Environmental Practice, 270 - 284.
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response [OSWER]. (2013, 7 24). Community Engagement Initiative. Retrieved 10 19, 2014, from Solid Waste and Emergency Response: http://www.epa.gov/oswer/docs/cei_imp_plan_0510.pdf
Park, E.-H. (2016, April 12). Does the Labor Right Ordinance by the City of Ansan work? The Kyunghyang Shinmun. Retrieved from http://weekly.khan.co.kr/khnm.html?mode=view&code=115&artid=201603221409551&pt=nv
Park, J.-W. (2010). Legal Trend and Issues in the Field of Soil Environment. Environmental Law and Policy, 149-195.
Pastor, Jr., M., Sadd, J., & Hipp, J. (2001). Which came first? Toxic facilities, minority move-in, and environmental justice. Journal of Urban Affairs, 1 - 21.
Paull, E. (2008). Working Draft for Distribution, the environmental and economic impacts of brownfields redevelopment. Washington, D.C.: Northeast-Midwest Institute.
Paull, E. (2013, 3 7). Details of the Brownfields Utilization, Investment, and Local Development (BUILD) Act. Retrieved 2 23, 2014, from Smart Growth America: http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/2013/03/07/details-of-the-brownfields-
PolicyLink. (n.d.). Equity Tools. Retrieved March 3, 2016, from PolicyLink: http://www.policylink.org/equity-tools/equitable-development-toolkit/about-toolkit
Porter, M. (2009). The Geography of New York State’s Brownfield Cleanup Program: Population and Land Value Characteristics of Areas Surrounding New York City Properties Enrolled in New York State’s Brownfield Cleanup Program. Environmental Practice, 245 - 255.
Potts, G. (2014). The New Barn-Raising: Sustaining community and civic assets in Minneapolis-St. Paul, Detroit and Baltimore. Journal of Urban Revitalization and Renewal, 233 - 244.
200
Raco, M., & Henderson, S. (2006). Sustainable urban planning and the brownfield development process in the United Kingdom: Lessons from the Thames Gateway. Local Environment, 499 - 513.
Ravetz, J. (2000). Integrated assessment for sustainability appraisal in cities and regions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 31–64.
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 155 - 169.
Rotmans, J., Asselt, M., & Velling, P. (2000). An integrated planning tool for sustainable cities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 265–276.
Roughley, A. (1999). Ecologically sustainable local area planning: A framework to enhance integration of community workers and environmental planners. Urban Policy and Research, 267-286.
Ryu, N.-Y. (2015). Small-Scale Revitalization for Obsolete Industrial Park. The JoongAng Ilbo. Retrieved from http://news.joins.com/article/18419089
Sandercock, L. (2000). When Strangers Become Neighbors: Managing Cities of Difference. Planning Theory & Practice, 13-30.
Schädler, S., Morio, M., Bartke, S., Rohr-Zänker, R., & Finkel, M. (2011). Designing sustainable and economically attractive brownfield revitalization options using an integrated assessment model. Journal of Environmental Management, 827 - 837.
Schädler, S., Morio, M., Bartke, S., & Finkel, M. (2012). Integrated planning and spatial evaluation of mega site remediation and reuse options. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 88-100. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2011.03.003
Scott, R. (1987). The Adolescence of Institutional Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 493 - 511.
Scrase, J. I., & Sheate, W. R. (2002). Integration and Integrated Approaches to Assessment: What Do They Mean for the Environment? Journal of Environmental Policy and Planning, 275 - 294.
Seawright, J. & Gerring, J. (2008). Case selection techniques in case study research A menu of qualitative and quantitative options. Political Research Quarterly, 294 - 308.
Shin, W.-B. (2000). Dye Wastewater Treatment Efficiency Improvement and Separate Discharge Permit Evaluation (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from http://attfile.konetic.or.kr/konetic/xml/support/22B1A0400178.hwp
Slutzky, D., & Frey, A. J. (2010). Brownfields Uncertainty: A Proposal To Reform Superfund. Cityscape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research, 85 - 100.
201
Smith, M. (2014). Integrating Policies, Plans, and Programs in Local Government: An Exploration from a Spatial Planning Perspective. Local Government Studies, 473 - 493.
Smith, D. Y. (2009). Participatory planning and procedural protections: The case for deeper public participation in urban redevelopment. St. Louis University Public Law Review, 243-272.
Solitare, L. (2005). Prerequisite conditions for meaningful participation in brownfields redevelopment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 917-935. doi:10.1080/09640560500294475
Solitare, L., & Lowrie, K. (2012). Increasing the capacity of community development corporations for brownfield redevelopment: an inside-out approach. Local Environment, 461 - 479.
Taylor, D. E. (2000). The Rise of the Environmental Justice Paradigm: Injustice Framing and the Social Construction of Environmental Discourses. American Behavioral Scientist, 508 - 580.
Tedd, P., Charles, J. A., & Driscoll, R. (2001). Sustainable brownfield re-development — risk management. Engineering Geology, 333-339. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0013-7952(00)00113-7
Tellis, W. (1997, September). Application of a case study methodology. Retrieved February 19, 2016, from The Qualitative Report [On-line serial]: http://www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR3-3/tellis2.html
The City of Boston & the Boston Redevelopment Authority [BRA]. (2013). Fairmount/ Indigo Planning Initiative: Corridor Profile. Boston, MA.
The Fairmount Indigo Corridor Collaborative [the Collaborative]. (n.d.). History. Retrieved from http://fairmountcollaborative.org/about-us/history/
The U.S. Conference of Mayors. (2010). Recycling America’s Land: A National Report on Brownfields Redevelopment (1993 -2010). Retrieved from http://www.usmayors.org/pressreleases/uploads/November2010BFreport.pdf
Thomas, J. M. (2012). Social Justice as Responsible Practice: Influence of Race, Ethnicity, and the Civil Rights Era. In B. Sanyal, L. J. Vale, & C. D. Rosan, Planning Ideas that Matter (pp. 359 - 385). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Thomas, M. R. (2002). A Weighted, Multi-Attribute, Site Prioritization and Selection Process for Brownfield Redevelopment. Environmental Practice, 95-106.
Thornton, G., Franz, M., Edwards, D., Pahlen, G., & Nathanail, P. (2007). The challenge of sustainability: Incentives for brownfield revitalization in Europe. Environmental Science & Policy, 116-134. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2006.08.008
202
Todes, A. (2004). Regional planning and sustainability: Limits and potentials of South Africa's integrated development plans. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 843-861. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/214425608?accountid=10920
Turcu, C. (2013). Re-thinking sustainability indicators: local perspective of urban sustainability. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 695 - 719.
Turvani, M., & Tonin, S. (2008). Brownfields Remediation and Reuse: An Opportunity for Urban Sustainable Development. Sustainable Development and Environmental Management: Experiences and Case Studies, pp.397-411.
UN TERM. (n.d.). UN TERM Search. Retrieved February 7, 2016, from UN TERM: http://unterm.un.org/DGAACS/unterm.nsf/8fa942046ff7601c85256983007ca4d8/526c2eaba978f007852569fd00036819?OpenDocument
Vanheusden, B. (2009). RESEARCH ARTICLE: Recent developments in European policy regarding brownfield remediation. Environmental Practice, 256-262. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1466046609990202
Vig, N. J., & Kraft, M. E. (2012). Environmental Policy: New Directions for the Twenty-First Century, 8th Edition. Washinton D.C.: CQ Press.
Walker, R. (2004). Theorizing Land-cover and Land-use Change: the Case of Tropical Deforestation. International Regional Science Review, 247-270.
Walzer, N., Hamm, G. F., & Sutton, L. A. (2006). Involving brownfields in community development: Preliminary findings. Community Development, 79-89. doi:10.1080/15575330609490156
Watson, J. (2007). From water to land to brownfield: The land-people relation in the Eastern Thames. Capitalism, Nature, Socialism, 44-67,134. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200841912?accountid=10920
Wedding, G. C., & Crawford-Brown, D. (2007). Measuring site-level success in brownfield redevelopments: A focus on sustainability and green building. Journal of Environmental Management, 483-495. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2006.10.018
Whiteside, L. (2015, July 8). Personal Interview: Interviews with Government Staffs involved in brownfield revitalization projects in the US and South Korea.
Wiegard, S. (2003). The Brownfields Act: Providing Relief for the Innocent or New Hurdles to Avoid CERCLA Liability? William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 127 - 161.
Wilson, S. M., Fraser-Rahim, H., Williams, E., Zhang, H., Rice, L., Svendsen, E., et al. (2012). Assessment of the Distribution of Toxic Release Inventory Facilities in
203
Metropolitan Charleston: An Environmental Justice Case Study. American Journal of Public Health, 1974 - 1980.
Wolfe, C., & Delecki, L. (2004). Brownfields planning and process: A multidisciplinary primer. Planning & Environmental Law, 3-8. doi:10.1080/15480755.2004.10394419
Wright, T. (2004). Effective community involvement and partnerships. Economic Development Journal, 26 - 32.
Yin, R. (1981). The Case Study Crisis: Some Answers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58-65. doi:1. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2392599 doi:1
Yin, R. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.
Yount, K. R. (2003). What are brownfields? finding a conceptual definition. Environmental Practice, 25-33. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/215458811?accountid=10920
Zapata, M., & Bates, L. (2015). Equity Planning Revisited. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 245 - 248.
Zucker, L., G. (1987). Institutional theories of organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 443 - 464.
204
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Jeniffer Suh-Kyung Shin started her academic career in interior and architectural
design. She got her bachelor’s degree in consumer science and housing at Konkuk
University in South Korea in 2005. The undergraduate major focused on spatial design
background; accordingly, she worked as an assistant designer at an architecture and
engineering firm after graduation. During this first professional experience, she acquired
a strong sense of place that considers the connection between interior and exterior
space. Since her work was mainly to draw and implement the architectural design, she
experienced both design research and field work. While doing field works she found that
communal relationships were missing in the connection between interior and exterior.
Thus, she decided to study landscape architecture to fill this gap, receiving her master
degree in landscape architecture at Seoul National University. While doing her master’s
program, she worked at a landscape design firm and participated in the master planning
and detail drawing process of public parks located in a new town. This experience
helped her realize the importance of public spaces for the quality of life that pursues
distributive and equitable spatial norm. In her master study, she was also influenced by
fundamental spatial studies by Walter Benjamin and David Harvey. Based on this broad
spectrum of spatial sense, she continued her career in regional policy research in
spatial planning and implementation. In this policy research, she felt a thirst for
knowledge of policy, planning, and process that led her to begin her to the University of
Florida’s doctoral program. Currently, she continues her academic career in this wide
but interrelated spectrum of spatial and theoretical knowledge.