A STUDY OF THE RESULTS AND FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE BROWNFIELDS ACT
PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 206 OF THE ACTS OF 1998
JUNE 2000
A STUDY OF THE RESULTS AND FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE BROWNFIELDS ACT
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
II. INTRODUCTION
A. Legislative Mandate
B. Scope of Status Report
III. RESULTS OF BROWNFIELDS ACT
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF FINANCIAL INITIATIVES
A. Implementation Update Summaries
B. Financial Incentives Eligibility Map
APPENDIX
A STUDY OF THE RESULTS AND FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE BROWNFIELDS ACT
I. Executive Summary
|
The Brownfields Act |
The 1998 Brownfields Act provided tools needed to clean up contaminated properties and revitalize our economy. Its prime goals were to foster urban redevelopment (simultaneously saving green space); to capitalize on economic and environmental opportunities; and to coordinate a broad array of state and local resources for reclaiming abandoned or underused contaminated properties. After privatization of the Chapter 21E waste site cleanup program in 1993, the number of site cleanups completed annually in Massachusetts increased 14-fold. Nonetheless, both liability and financial barriers continued to discourage redevelopment of contaminated properties. The Act provided liability relief and financial incentives to those who return contaminated sites to productive reuse. The Act dedicated more than $50 million to programs to revitalize brownfields. |
|
Brownfields Act Report Objective |
This document provides a status report on implementation of the Brownfields Act to date, with information provided by the public, quasi-public, and private non-profit organizations that contribute to the state’s integrated brownfields strategy. The report highlights major activities initiated thus far and challenges yet to be addressed. Supporting information is located in the appendices and denoted in the text of the report by page number, e.g., A-x. |
|
Agencies Contributing to the Brownfields Act Report |
The Brownfields Act has brought together a number of public, quasi-public, and private non-profit agencies that have not had a reason to work closely together before. The goal of coordinating the activities for these different agencies in their administration of the Act’s regulatory and financial tools continues to meet with great success. Six agencies have primary responsibility for administering the Act’s regulatory and financial tools and are key contributors to this report:
|
|
What Works Well? |
This table describes the major components of the brownfields program and indicates the status of each as of the publication of this report. |
| The Brownfields Act: |
Status: |
|
This office opened in June 1999. By March 15. GOBR had
The DEP promulgated regulations in August 1999, which became effective in October 1999. As of March 15,
This fund began operating in February 2000. By March 15, MassDevelopment received
for major, financially viable redevelopment projects that may leverage private financing and equity investments of more than $496 million to deliver significant economic impacts, including job creation and neighborhood revitalization. Another 30 active projects are in the site assessment pipeline, with more than 15 in the remediation pipeline.
BRAC began operating in October 1999.
The BRAC program is the first of its kind in the nation and is already viewed as a model by other states. |
|
The Attorney General promulgated regulations in October 1999. A number of covenants are currently under negotiation. The Attorney General’s Office, MassDevelopment, and DEP have identified projects where covenants might facilitate deals. |
|
The DOR issued its technical information release on the tax credit in August 1999. The program provides for a 25 to 50 percent credit for cleanups that occur in designated economic development areas. |
|
Success Stories |
Many exciting redevelopment projects have been launched because of incentives provided in the Brownfields Act. The table below briefly describes just a few of them. The appendix (A-46 through 50) presents these and other brownfields projects in more detail. |
|
Project: |
Project description: |
|
|
Maple Hotel Company
|
Approved a $500,000 loan from the Fund for remediation. The property will become a 178-room Wyndham Garden Hotel, located at the center of the city’s urban renewal district. The hotel will result in 75 new jobs and has attracted redevelopment projects on nearby sites. |
|
|
Multigrains Realty, LLC and Faro Realty Trust
|
Approved a $150,000 loan from the Fund for testing and remediation. Also, BRAC provided more than $17,000 for insurance premiums for two lenders involved in the deal. The food processing facility is expected to create 100 new jobs in the first year of operation. |
|
|
Northland Development Corporation/Mission Hill CDC |
Approved a $10,500 loan from the Fund for site assessment work. This lot is the gateway to a $35 million mix-use development. The overall project will create 100 permanent jobs and extend Longwood Medical Area’s economic benefits into the Mission Hill neighborhood. |
|
|
City of Lowell |
Approved a $31,400 loan from the Fund for site assessment work. The city-owned 1.36-acre property contains two buildings and has attracted the interest of two manufacturers interested in expanding. |
|
|
Falulah Industrial Associates Realty Trust |
New remediation application – a request for $280,000 from the Fund to clean up a 12-acre site. Once the petroleum-contaminated soil is removed, the site will be sold; two potential purchasers have already come forward. |
|
|
What Could Work Better? |
The six agencies listed above participated in writing this report and have expressed concern about disincentives inherent in the Brownfields Act that became apparent only as the program was being implemented. |
|
|
Issue: |
Suggested Resolution: |
|
The Act prohibits developers from receiving state tax credits if they are also accepting BRAC subsidies or Brownfields Redevelopment Fund loans, regardless of the amount. Sometimes all the incentives must be bundled to ensure financial viability. |
Pass the corrective language in Senate Bill No. 1603 (A-3) to ensure that tax credits are available only for privately financed projects and not for publicly supported expenditures. |
|
Only projects located in "economically distressed area" (EDA) communities are eligible for Brownfields Tax Credits and loans from the Brownfields Redevelopment Fund. Just over half of the 351 towns and cities in Massachusetts, 183 communities in all, have EDA designations. Where cleanup costs exceed property value, developers and their lenders may seek to avoid cleanup costs entirely by building on pristine land areas. |
Expand the availability of these financial incentives to the rest of the state while providing additional incentives to EDA communities. State loans and tax credits can help ensure that brownfields sites are competitive everywhere. |
|
To be eligible for the Brownfields Tax Credit, a cleanup project must be located within a designated EDA; be underway by August 5, 2001; and be completed by January 1, 2005. Although the Brownfields Act became law in 1998, most of the program’s financial incentives have become available only recently. The lag time has created a problem for developers who need to plan on the availability of loans and tax credits. |
Extend eligibility for the tax credit to projects begun by August 5, 2003 and completed January 1, 2008. |
|
Legislative Mandate |
Section 40 of Chapter 206 of the Acts of 1998 (A-1) directs the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to consult with the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Economic Development (DED) to conduct a study of the results of the Brownfields Act. The Legislature also required that this report address the Act’s financial requirements so that future bonding authorization could be secured for amounts sufficient to successfully continue the Act’s programs and initiatives. DEP, DED, and the Attorney General’s Office interpreted Section 40 somewhat broadly to ensure that the General Court is provided the maximum amount of information currently available. |
|
Status Report Scope |
This report is a status report on the results of the Brownfields Act to date. Some Brownfields programs have been in existence longer than others, so some are more developed than others. DEP has compiled information from:
As a related matter, a description of DEP’s administration of the Federal Tax Incentive Program has been included in this report. Analysis of these programs individually and collectively shows that a dynamic program is emerging. |
|
Status Report Organization |
The report is divided into four sections with appendices. |
|
Section I |
Provides an executive summary and includes a brief discussion of each participating agency’s observations regarding the implementation of the Act’s financial incentives and liability endpoints. These observations may provide perspective on future financial requirements and statutory amendments for successfully continuing the state’s brownfields program. |
|
Section II |
Introduces the report and contains information regarding the Brownfields Act and the scope of the report. |
|
Section III |
Evaluates the results of the Act and contains summary descriptions of the liability endpoints, regulatory changes, financial incentives, and the new government entities and boards established by the Act to support implementing and administering the Massachusetts brownfields program. |
|
Section IV |
Contains summary updates from each agency responsible for administering the financial and regulatory incentives/tools established in the Act. These summaries provide "real time" insight regarding the nature of projects and requests for financial assistance being received. In addition to these agency summaries, Section IV also includes an eligibility analysis of the Act’s financial incentives to better understand the potential demand for financial incentives posed by 21E-regulated release sites in Massachusetts. |
|
Appendices |
Include backup material to support the agency update summaries and other pertinent information. |
The Act established deadlines for action and created new liability endpoints, regulatory changes, financial incentives, together with new government entities and boards to support the implementation and administration of the Massachusetts Brownfields program. Section A below describes the circumstances and obligations where parties who own or operate property contaminated by a release of OHM may be liable to the Commonwealth for response action costs.
A. Liability Endpoints
Ends liability for eligible persons once they complete a cleanup or achieve remedy operation status in accordance with DEP’s cleanup standards for oil or hazardous material releases. An eligible person is an owner or operator who did not own or operate the site at the time of the release and who did not cause or contribute to the contamination at the site. Upon completion of the cleanup, eligible persons are protected from Commonwealth claims for response action costs and natural resource damages, and from claims by third parties for contribution, response action costs, and property damage under c. 21E and property damage under common law.
Exempts certain owners and operators from liability for contamination that has migrated onto their property from an off-site source. Owners and operators are eligible if they have had no connection with the property that contains the source of the contamination and they did not cause or contribute to the contamination. If the source is unknown, the owner or operator has a defense to liability, rather than an exemption. This exemption, or defense, is available as long as the owner or operator: notifies DEP of the release; provides access to people who clean up; prevents exposure to the contamination; controls risks from imminent hazards; does not impede or interfere with the performance of response actions; and does not exacerbate the release of oil or hazardous material.
Exempts tenants from operator liability if their tenancy began after the release was reported to DEP and they did not cause or contribute to the contamination. To maintain this exemption, the tenant must: provide access to the site (or the portion the tenant controls) to parties conducting response actions; prevent exposure to the contamination; control risks from imminent hazards; and contain any further release or threat or release from a structure or container under their control. If the tenant uses oil or hazardous material similar to those found on the site, the tenant would need to show that he has not contributed to the contamination.
Exempts "innocent" redevelopment agencies and authorities, CDCs, and Economic Development and Industrial Corporations (EDICs) from liability for contaminated property acquired after August 5, 1998. To obtain and maintain the exemption, these agencies cannot cause or contribute to the contamination, and they must: notify DEP of the release; provide access to people who are cleaning up; prevent exposure to contamination; and take immediate response actions where needed. They must also act diligently to divest themselves of the property. The agencies are retroactively exempted from liability for sites acquired before August 5, 1998, provided that they meet the above requirements and notified DEP of any releases on these sites during a 6-month amnesty period that ended on December 9, 1999.
Establishes liability based on a causation standard and deletes the 5-year limit on the exemption after the secured lender takes ownership or possession of the property. It specifies the lenders' duties required to maintain the exemption after taking ownership or possession of contaminated property: lenders must prevent exposure to oil or hazardous materials, provide access to parties conducting response actions; respond to imminent hazards and substantial release migration conditions; and act diligently to divest. Lenders also must provide notice of contamination to DEP and to prospective buyers before a foreclosure auction.
Exempts governmental bodies or charitable trusts who hold property restrictions created for the public benefit pursuant to c.184, section 32 (conservation, agricultural preservation, watershed preservation, and affordable housing restrictions).
Protects owners and operators from liability for future violations when their permanent solution or remedy operation status includes an AUL and they transfer the property to a new owner. If a violation of the AUL occurs after transfer of the property, the former owner would be relieved from liability to the Commonwealth under c. 21E and to third parties for contribution response action costs for property damage under c. 21E and for property damage under the common law for claims that arise from the violation. Protection from third party claims is not available to persons conducting clean-up activities under CERCLA or RCRA or who are subject to enforcement at the time of property transfer.
Clarifies the existing contribution protection provisions regarding notice and matters addressed in the settlement. The Act also changed the provision to provide protection from any person who has had an opportunity to "comment on" the settlement instead of any person who has had an opportunity "to join in" the settlement.
Establishes a "Brownfields Covenant Not To Sue" for parties who are redeveloping contaminated properties and do not qualify for the statutory liability relief described above. The project must contribute to the economic or physical revitalization of the community in which it is located. The Office of the Attorney General adopted regulations and an application process to implement this program.
Increases penalties for failure to notify of oil releases, maintain a permanent solution or remedy operation status, or comply with the terms of an AUL from $1,000 to $25,000.
Defines "known" and "unknown" sources as they relate to the Downgradient/Downstream property exemption and defense discussed above. If the source is unknown, the owner or operator has a defense to liability, rather than an exemption.
A known source means that the original location of a release that has migrated in or on groundwater or surface water to a downgradient or downstream property, has been established by a preponderance of credible scientific and technical evidence. An unknown source cannot meet that standard.
Clarifies requirements for a condition of substantial release migration (SRM). SRM means a release of oil or hazardous material that is likely to leach from soil into groundwater or migrate in groundwater and is now a reporting obligation that will trigger the need to undertake an Immediate Response Action. The regulations specify six conditions that constitute a condition of SRM:
- releases to the groundwater that have resulted in or are within one year likely to result in the discharge of vapors into school buildings or occupied residential dwellings.
Amends the MCP to ensure that Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) are prepared, recorded, and registered in the same manner as other similar real estate instruments. With the funding the Legislature appropriated, DEP is conducting targeted audits on all sites that have submitted a Response Action Outcome (RAO) statement that includes an AUL (approximately 750 sites). We are also developing compliance strategies for sites with MCP violations.
C. Financial Incentives
Addresses lenders’ concerns that contaminated land is "impaired collateral" with a reduced value and that cleanup cost overruns might impede the borrower's ability to repay a loan. This $15 million program is being implemented by the Massachusetts Business Development Corporation. The BRAC program backs private sector loans with environmental insurance to ensure that cleanups are completed, the loan is repaid, and the collateral is restored to its "clean" value. The environmental insurance would be used to keep projects running.
If the insurance is not adequate to address unanticipated environmental problems, BRAC loan guarantees would be used to pay off the loans.
Provides low-interest loans and grants for site assessment and cleanup in designated "Economically Distressed Areas" (EDA). This $30 million program is administered by the Mass Development Finance Agency. EDAs include all Economic Target Areas (ETAs), areas that meet the criteria for ETA designation but have not yet been formally designated, and former manufactured gas facilities. Thirty percent of all BRF loans and grants must be used to fund site assessments.
Ranges from 25 percent of cleanup costs at sites with an AUL to 50 percent for non-AUL sites. Administered by the Department of Revenue, the cleanup costs must be incurred between August 1, 1998 and January 1, 2005.
The following offices were created by the Act. The duties and responsibilities of these new offices are summarized below.
This office was created by statute as part of the August 1998 Brownfields Act, but it was not funded through the accompanying legislation. GOBR was directed to accelerate the pace of cleanup and reuse of contaminated industrial and commercial properties by:
- Assisting project proponents in accessing all applicable resources (state, federal and local economic incentives, site identification, public and private financing), in working with state and municipal elected officials, and to resolve risk concerns.
The Brownfields Advisory Group was created to advise and assist the Massachusetts Development Finance Agency (MassDevelopment) in establishing guidelines for implementing and administering the Brownfields Redevelopment Fund, including the terms, procedures, and standards used by MassDevelopment for processing applications and making lending decisions.
The Brownfields Advisory Group was established in September 1999 and has had three meetings. The group’s membership, listed below, contains 13 members (2-year terms) and is comprised of the following representatives:
BROWNFIELDS ADVISORY GROUP
Tom Ahern
Senior Project Manager
Boston Redevelopment Authority
1 City Hall Square
Boston, MA 02201
Tel.: 617-918-4352
Jeff Bernstein, Esq.
Bernstein, Cushner & Kimmell
1 Court St., Suite 700
Boston, MA 02108
Tel.: 617-742-4340
Director
Dept. of Economic Development
One Ashburton Pl., Room 2101
Boston, MA 02108
Tel.: 617-727-8380
Michael Crawford
Senior Vice President
Commercial Real Estate Division
Citizen’s Bank of Massachusetts
40 Court Street
Boston, MA 02108
Tel.: 617-726-7345
Jeanne DuBois
Executive Director
Dorchester Bay E.D.C.
594 Columbia Ave., Suite 302
Dorchester, MA 02125
Tel.: 617-825-4200
J. Todd Fernandez, Esq., Director
(Advising Only)
Governor’s Office for Brownfields Revitalization
Ten Park Plaza, Suite 3720
Boston, MA 02116
Tel.: 617-973-8989
Elizabeth T. Foote
Vice-Chair, MassDevelopment
67 East Greenwich Road
Longmeadow, MA 01106
Tel.: 413-567-2483
Aaron Gornstein
Executive Director
Citizen’s Housing and Planning Association
18 Tremont St., Suite 401
Boston, MA 02108
Tel.: 617-742-0820
Deborah Gevalt
Senior Vice President and Principal
Haley & Aldrich, Inc.
465 Medford St., Suite 2200
Boston, MA 02129
Tel.: 617-886-7333
Robert R. Kuehn
President
Keen Development Corporation
2 University Rd.
P.O. Box 2589
Cambridge, MA 02238
Tel.: 617-661-9100
Lauren A. Liss (Alternate - Deirdre Menoyo)
Commissioner
Department of Environmental Protection
One Winter St.
Boston, MA 02108
Tel.: 617-292-5656
Thomas Reilly (Alternate - James Farrell)
200 Portland St., 3rd Floor
Boston, MA 02114
Tel.: 617-727-2200
The Honorable John Yunits, Jr., Mayor
City Hall
45 School St.
Brockton, MA 02301
Tel.: 508-580-7123
Vivien Li, Brownfields Advisory Group Chair
Executive Director
The Boston Harbor Association
374 Congress St., Suite 609
Boston, MA 02210
Tel.: 617-482-1722
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF FINANCIAL INITIATIVES
Most of the Brownfields financial initiatives created under the Act have only recently begun operating and therefore, quantifiable data in connection with these programs is limited. Those agencies responsible for implementing the Act’s financial initiatives have provided update summaries in subsection A below, describing their experience thus far in implementing the new Brownfields tools. These summaries provide some "real time" insight regarding the kind of requests being received for financial assistance.
As described below, implementation of the Massachusetts Brownfields Act has begun to produce environmental protection and economic gains in cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth.
A. Agency Update Summaries
Formation History/Purpose:
The Governor’s Office for Brownfields Revitalization (GOBR) (Ch. 21E Section 19) was created by the Brownfields Act, but was not funded through the accompanying legislation. Governor Cellucci and Lieutenant Governor Jane Swift established the office in June 1999.
GOBR’s role is to help accelerate the pace of cleanup and reuse of contaminated industrial and commercial properties by:
serving as a single point of contact for information on program specifics;
Staff
GOBR has a staff of two full-time employees. Todd Fernandez is the Director and Nancy Jackson is the Deputy Director.
Program Activities
Contact: Todd Fernandez, MA Governor’s Office for Brownfields Revitalization, 617 973-8989
Legislative Mandate
Pursuant to M.G.L. c. 23G, section 29A, MassDevelopment is the administrator of the Brownfields Redevelopment Fund (the Fund). This Fund is intended to stimulate economic development in economically distressed areas of the Commonwealth by providing loans and grants to eligible applicants for environmental site assessments and environmental cleanup actions.
MassDevelopment can provide up to $50,000 of funding for a site assessment and up to $500,000 of funding for a cleanup action. If the agency determines that a project qualifies as a "priority project" (defined by statute as a project that has received substantial assistance from the municipality in which the project is located through loans, grants, or property tax abatements), MassDevelopment can provide up to $2 million.
Funding Mechanism and Amount
The Legislature appropriated $30 million for the Fund. To date, MassDevelopment has received $20,024,916 of the $30 million, pursuant to Chapter 297 of the Acts of 1998, as amended by chapter 463 of the Acts of 1998. MassDevelopment has earned $1,354,655 in interest, with a fund balance as of January 31, 2000 of $21,379,571. The remaining $9,975,084 of the $30 million appropriation has not yet been disbursed to MassDevelopment.
With respect to loans, the agency expects to fund the entire amount of the site assessment or cleanup action (as permitted under the Fund’s enabling statute), but will encourage some form of equity contribution, as evidenced by either cash, equipment, or other costs associated with the individual project. MassDevelopment anticipates that an equity contribution will strengthen each application.
With respect to grants, MassDevelopment will require a minimum match of 20 percent of the grant amount, as required by the M.G.L.c. 23G, section 29A(d)(8).
Staff
MassDevelopment manages the Fund as another economic incentive tool that the agency provides, and has not created a separate office with new employees to manage the Fund. Instead, the agency has deliberately woven the tools provided by the Fund into MassDevelopment’s existing programs. The agency’s expertise in managing economic development programs results in greatly reduced operating costs for the Fund.
Internally, the entire agency staff provides the services necessary to staff and implement the purposes of the Fund. An environmental/real estate attorney was specifically recruited to serve as the Fund administrator (and also serves as a legal counsel to the entire agency). With respect to daily outreach and project management, the Fund administrator works with MassDevelopment’s regional Community Development, Lending, and Marketing staff in identifying and furthering projects.
Externally, MassDevelopment works closely with the Brownfields Advisory Group (chaired by Vivien Li, Executive Director of The Boston Harbor Association) in administering the Fund. The Advisory Group assists the agency by reviewing its regulations and guidelines, as well as providing important advice on policy issues that arise in operating the Fund.
Description of Program Activities
MassDevelopment has made significant progress with respect to brownfields projects. In fact, to date MassDevelopment has:
MassDevelopment accomplished the foregoing even though the Fund was not operational until February 28, 2000.
Pursuant to the Brownfields Act, MassDevelopment was unable to make loans or grants from the Fund until: (i) the Brownfields Advisory Group has reviewed MassDevelopment’s regulations regarding the administration of the Fund and offered advice, and (ii) the regulations have subsequently been promulgated.
The Brownfields Advisory Group was fully constituted in September 1999. Due to a need for technical corrections to the Brownfields Act as it affected the Brownfields Advisory Group, the group could not meet until after such changes were enacted in December 1999 (see chapter 158 of the Acts of 1999).
The Advisory Group met on January 20, 2000 and on February 10, 2000 to review the regulations for operating the Fund. On February 10, 2000, MassDevelopment’s Board of Directors’ approved the regulations. Pursuant to the Brownfields Act, MassDevelopment provided a copy of the regulations to the Joint Chairs of the Joint Committee on Natural Resources and Agriculture on February 14, 2000, and filed them as emergency regulations on February 28, 2000, to be effective that date. The Fund became operational on that date. MassDevelopment held three public hearings within three months of the filing date to afford the public an opportunity to be heard.
However, because of MassDevelopment’s actions during the delay, the Agency is well positioned to finance more than $3.71 million in projects from the Fund.
A breakdown of Fund activities is provided below.
Site Assessment Program
With respect to site assessments, MassDevelopment received 53 site assessment applications that the agency expected to finance from the Fund on or after February 28, 2000. The total amount to be financed is more than $2 million (A-11 and A-12). MassDevelopment had already directly provided $145,468 in site assessment funds for five separate projects that required assistance before February 28, 2000.
In addition, 30 active projects are in the site assessment pipeline (A-13). The number of applications received by MassDevelopment increased significantly after the Fund became operational and MassDevelopment launched an aggressive advertising campaign.
MassDevelopment is receiving more site assessment applications that are requesting early stage financial assistance that will help facilitate a property transfer and/or redevelopment project, resulting in the leveraging of private financing and equity investment.
The typical site assessment project reflected in the applications received to date is located in an economically distressed area and involves either a public entity or private developer, applying alone or in conjunction with each other, requesting approximately $40,000 in funding. The typical site assessment project has a proposed reuse of either a mixed-use commercial facility or an affordable housing project.
In addition, many of the applications involve business expansion, where business owners are looking to expand their operations onto adjoining or neighboring sites rather than relocating out of the community or out of state. Most applications have come from the Central Massachusetts or Greater Boston regions.
MassDevelopment’s site assessment program will enable the investment of significant private dollars, and will result in substantial economic impact. For example, MassDevelopment expects to provide $50,000 in funding for environmental testing to help facilitate the sale of property and redevelopment of an abandoned brownfields site in the Greater Boston area, which will encourage a $61,000,000 privately financed redevelopment project that will revitalize a blighted site and neighborhood. Additionally, MassDevelopment expects to provide $10,000 to a partnership comprised of non-profit corporations and a local developer in the Worcester area for early stage environmental testing, which will facilitate $1,650,000 in private financing for mixed-use commercial development. These short dollars will help revitalize more than seven acres of blighted, underutilized property located at the gateway to the city.
The amounts requested for site assessment applications have greatly varied, from as little as $4,000 to over $50,000. The average site assessment request has been approximately $40,000.
Remediation Program
With respect to the remediation program, MassDevelopment has received seven applications that it expects to finance from the Fund totaling $1.62 million (A-14). To date, MassDevelopment has directly financed $232,300 in remediation loans for two projects, while 15 active projects are in our remediation pipeline (A-15). MassDevelopment expects that the number of applications and pipeline projects will increase significantly once the Fund is operational and MassDevelopment launches an aggressive advertising campaign.
MassDevelopment is receiving applications that involve financially viable redevelopment projects with significant economic impact, through the revitalization of a neighborhood, as well as job creation. The typical remediation project in the applications received to date is located in a smaller urban city with an average request of $231,500. The typical applicant is a private developer with a commercial end use, varying from a hotel to an assisted living facility. Based on a review of the applications, the typical projects involve existing 21E sites.
The trend with the remediation program is commercial end uses – from assisted living, hotel, bakery, retail, to manufacturing and recycling. In addition, many of the applications involve business expansion, where business owners are looking to expand their operations onto adjoining or neighboring sites rather than relocating out of the community or out of state.
The amounts requested for the remediation program have also varied, ranging from $40,000 to $500,000. The average remediation request has been approximately $231,500.
MassDevelopment’s remediation program will also leverage substantial private investment and result in significant economic impact. For example, MassDevelopment provided $150,000 to a manufacturer for site assessment and remediation costs, leveraging approximately $1,400,000 of private financing, and $600,000 of owner equity. Because of MassDevelopment and the City of Lawrence’s assistance, the manufacturer expanded into Lawrence rather than moving out of state, and anticipates creating 100 new jobs. In addition, MassDevelopment expects to provide $500,000 in remediation financing to a private developer to help cover the costs of an estimated $2,000,000 remediation project. MassDevelopment’s financing will facilitate $8,000,000 in private financing, $9,000,000 in owner equity, and an estimated 75 new jobs in Chelsea.
Contact: Sean Calnan, Massachusetts Development Finance Agency,
413 755-1331.
The Massachusetts Business Development Corporation (MassBusiness) administers the Brownfields Redevelopment Access to Capital program (BRAC) for the Massachusetts Department of Economic Development. The BRAC program is a $15 million fund designed to address both lenders’ and borrowers’ concerns that cleanup cost overruns and liability might impede the borrower’s ability to complete a project or to pay back a loan, and to help dispel the notion that contaminated property could result in impaired collateral. BRAC backs private or public sector loans and cleanup/redevelopment projects with a complete set of pre-negotiated, volume discounted and subsidized environmental insurance policies.
The BRAC program has executed Participation Agreements with the following financial institutions:
According to the underwriters at AIG Environmental, fifteen BRAC deals have closed and twentyfive more are in process. The appendix includes additional details about Massachusetts Business Development Corporation’s activities, including a completed and pending deals list (A-16), a program schedule (A-17), a marketing schedule (A-18), and a seminar and conference list (A-19).
Additionally, MassBusiness has finalized the parameters governing the implementation and participation of the Redevelopment Access to Capital Fund. These parameters are embodied in the Participation Agreement form documents executed for each participating financial institution.
Contact: Peter Hollingworth, MA Business Development Corporation,
617 350-8877
Legislative Mandate
The Brownfields Act authorized the Attorney General to create a Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue Program under Chapter 21E, as amended. The Brownfields Covenant Not To Sue Program provides liability relief to owners and operators of contaminated properties interested in the cleanup and redevelopment opportunities not addressed by the liability endpoints established in other provisions of Chapter 21E.
Under this program, the Commonwealth may enter into agreements that provide individually tailored liability relief to current or prospective owners or operators. This program is directly available to causally responsible parties. The Covenant Not To Sue Program is intended to offer broader eligibility and increased flexibility to provide incentive for the cleanup and re-use of those complex or difficult sites where redevelopment would not otherwise be possible.
The Office of the Attorney General has promulgated regulations to implement the program, which can be found at 940 CMR 23.00: Criteria for When to Execute Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue Agreements. These regulations were promulgated under emergency authority in April 1999, and became effective August 3, 1999. The regulations were written in consultation with a diverse group representing environmental, economic, and legal interests, together with relevant state agencies.
Funding Mechanism and Amount
The Act appropriated $2 million for costs associated with operating the Covenant Not to Sue program, which shall be available until June 30, 2001.
Staff
James D.P. Farrell is the Brownfields Unit Chief for the Office of the Attorney General.
Description of Program Activities
The Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue Program has been operating since October 1999.
The Attorney General’s Office has received and reviewed a number of applications as of January 2000, and has had inquiries and requests for assistance concerning several other potential redevelopment opportunities.
The Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue Application Forms are attached in A-20 through 36). The program is also pursuing several initiatives to encourage eligible brownfields redevelopment projects involving the creation of new, permanent jobs, affordable housing benefits, open space revitalization, and historic preservation among other public benefits.
Although it is still early in the program, the typical project involves existing industrial and commercial 21E and/or federal Superfund sites. Many of the inquiries concern cities in the Commonwealth with high poverty rates that are located in economically distressed areas. The proposed redevelopment efforts’ main focus has been job creation.
Potential Purchasers – Contamination Assessment Study - [Section 42 of Chapter 206 of the Acts of 1998]
On February 28, 2000, the Office of Attorney General (in collaboration with DEP, the Office of Brownfields Revitalization, and Department of Economic Development) submitted a study to the Legislature that examined incentives for landowners to permit potential purchasers to assess their property for contamination.
Contact: James Farrell, Brownfields Unit Chief, MA Attorney General’s Office, 617 727-2200 x3354
The Department of Environmental Protection continues to be quite active in the Commonwealth’s brownfields program and a strong proponent of brownfields reuse. New staff, devoted exclusively to brownfields issues, are providing technical assistance on liability relief and financial incentives for parties seeking to cleanup and redevelop contaminated parcels. Outreach has been augmented through a "partnered approach" with other agencies at the federal, state, and local levels as well as with businesses, lenders, community groups, and other interested parties to further facilitate the coordinated approach necessary for a successful program. Additionally, development has begun, in coordination with the Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization and other state agencies, on a database of brownfields case studies and site information. These efforts complement DEP’s continuing objectives to identify new methods and programs that encourage the redevelopment of contaminated sites for open space or sustainable reuse.
The Commonwealth’s brownfield strategy started with the privitization of oil and hazardous material cleanups in the 1992 revisions to Chapter 21E.
DEP implemented the hazardous waste site cleanup program in 1993, placing responsibility for overseeing most cleanups directly in the hands of the private sector. Freeing most sites from direct DEP oversight removed the years long cleanup logjam. In the space of 3 years, the number of sites cleaned up each year went from fewer than 100 to approximately 1000, a remarkable and timely increase. Between 1993 and 1996, the annual number of sites cleaned up increased more than 14 times (A-2).
As a result, implementation of the Brownfields Act remains a high priority in FY2000. DEP continues to: develop operating procedures; coordinate with other state agencies as they develop and implement financial assistance tools and the new "Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue Program;" and implement substantial technical assistance programs for project developers, real estate trade organizations, and municipalities.
Through the Brownfields Act, DEP received 10 million dollars to expand its site audit program, increase oversight of private sector cleanups, increase compliance assistance and enforcement of "activity and use limitations" (AULs) that are required as part of site cleanups, increase training of DEP staff, and increase oversight and training of Licensed Site Professionals (LSPs). To support these expanded program activities, DEP has hired 40 new technical, legal, and information technology staff, the majority to be located in DEP’s regional offices, to work on site audits, site inspections, site oversight, and enforcement activities. DEP will also: use contract resources to define the AUL universe in Massachusetts and establish a baseline for its site audit activities; design information systems necessary to implement DEP’s AUL and audit activities; provide support for the brownfields regulation development process; and develop professional/technical training for DEP staff and Licensed Site Professionals.
Provide a Brownfields Site Manager
To help municipalities, DEP will provide technical assistance to municipalities in the form of a Brownfields Site Manager to oversee remedial actions at certain qualifying brownfields sites. This assistance is being provided to those communities/organizations that have applied for and received funding under the federal Brownfields Cleanup Revolving Loan Fund Demonstration Pilot program but which do not have staff expertise to meet that portion of the federal program requirement. The Brownfields Site Manager must be a "qualified government employee" who "will carry out the on-scene coordinator responsibilities identified in the NCP" (National Contingency Plan). DEP has entered into a Cooperative Agreement with EPA to receive funding to conduct these activities. DEP’s role will be documented in Memoranda of Agreement with the municipalities requesting this assistance.
As part of EPA’s Brownfield Revolving Loan Fund, DEP also plays an important facilitative role through its regional offices in moving sites from abandonment and inactivity to redevelopment scenarios in the public arena. This process will benefit the community by revitalizing under-used commercial properties, and, by moving sites to active cleanup, releasing DEP direct oversight staff to concentrate state resources on other high risk sites.
Provide a Single Point-of-Contact
In cooperation with the Boston Brownfields Program Coordinators, each regional DEP office provides a single point-of-contact for comprehensive assistance for brownfields issues and guidance. A summary of each regional office’s brownfields activities follows.
The Western Regional Office (WERO) project involvement includes:
The Central Regional Office (CERO) site involvement includes:
The Northeast Regional Office (NERO) is involved in assisting the following sites:
The Southeast Regional office (SERO) is working on the following large projects:
- Berkshire Hathaway Complex,
- Standard Times Field,
- Commonwealth Electric site
Activity and Use Limitation Audit
The Brownfields Act directed DEP to conduct targeted audits of sites at which Activity and Use Limitations (AULs) have been implemented. DEP is initially focusing on approximately 750 sites, not previously audited, with AULs filed between October 1, 1993 and December 31, 1998.
Audit Scope - Audits of these sites include either a screening or comprehensive evaluation of each of three inter-related components of an AUL submittal, which include a Response Action Outcome (RAO) Statement, an AUL Notice, and the implementation and maintenance of the AUL.
Audit Approach - DEP evaluates sites based on the regulation in effect at the time of receipt of the response action submittal. For the AUL Notice instruments, DEP organized an informed group of stakeholders to review a sample of AUL Notices and to make clear and practical suggestions on how to evaluate them. DEP is correcting errors in the AUL Notices using compliance assistance with a 180-day grace period for corrections and, therefore, where necessary, conventional enforcement. This approach only applies to AUL Notices implemented between October 1, 1993 and October 29, 1999. Audits of sites with AULs implemented from October 30, 1999 forward will be followed with conventional enforcement, where necessary.
Auditing Status
- To put the appropriate parties on notice, DEP started issuing Notices of Audit (NOAs) to each regulated entity beginning in March 1999. A total of 942 NOAs have been issued.Auditing Goals – DEP plans to audit all 750 sites, while also auditing new submittals, by August 2001 as follows:
The Federal Brownfields Tax Incentive Program
In August 1997, the federal government established its Brownfields Tax Incentive Program, under the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 (PL 105-34). This program allows businesses to claim costs for environmental cleanups on business-related properties located in certain targeted areas in Massachusetts as fully deductible business expenses in the year in which the costs are incurred or paid.
Massachusetts businesses seeking these deductions must obtain a certification of the property’s eligibility from DEP. This certification must then be submitted to the Internal Revenue Service with the business’s tax filings.
To be eligible for this tax credit, the property must be located in an area that meets at least one of the following criteria:
Based on this program’s eligibility requirements, 34 of 351 cities and towns in Massachusetts contain eligible census tract land areas that may qualify for this tax incentive. (A -37).
The actual usage by developers who take advantage of this credit (for costs incurred between August 5, 1997 and January 1, 2001) will not be available until 2001 tax year returns. However, DEP has received approximately 75 inquiries about the tax credit and its applicability to specific properties in Massachusetts. To date, the Department has issued four Certifications of Eligibility for fifty-eight parcels of property located in the Roxbury section of Boston, Lawrence and Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Contact: Robert Kalaghan, MA Department of Environmental Protection, BWSC, 617 292-5941
Overview
The state tax provisions were amended by the Brownfields Act to provide a 25 percent or 50 percent tax credit for site cleanup costs at sites located within designated EDAs. An overview of the credit provisions is set forth in DOR’s TIR 99-13 (A-38 through A-41).
The Brownfields Act also contains the Municipal Tax Abatement provision which, upon adoption, enables municipalities throughout the Commonwealth to negotiate outstanding tax obligations on contaminated properties in exchange for a commitment to clean up and redevelop such properties. The following six communities have notified DOR of their adoption of the Municipal Tax Abatement provision; Belchertown, Holliston, Lowell, Orange, Pittsfield and Walpole.
DOR received no additional funding to administer the tax credit provisions and has added no staff to work on the tax credit.
Progress
DOR issued a Technical Information Release explaining the credit and developed the necessary tax form, specifically the schedule to be filed by taxpayers claiming the credit. DOR staff has participated in a number of internal and external meetings to discuss some of the implementation issues, DEP personnel and the staff of the Governor’s Office for Brownfields Revitalization have participated in these meetings.
Potential Issues
As the number of taxpayers claiming the credit increases, DOR anticipates that there will be more questions about what expenditures qualify for the credit. Also there have been several questions regarding the interaction between the tax credit and M.G.L. c. 21J. Information to address these issues is currently being gathered. Based on this information, it may be determined that additional public written statements are necessary.
Contact: Lillian Rosario, MA Department of Revenue, 617 626-3264
The Brownfields Act provides a host of financial incentives and liability exemptions and protections to promote the assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment of properties located throughout Massachusetts that are impacted with oil and/or hazardous material. These financial incentives and exemptions and their respective eligibility requirements, are listed below.
PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENT(s)
Brownfields Redevelopment Fund (BRF) Qualifying EDA, Eligible Person
Provides low interest loans and grants
Brownfields Tax Credit (BTC) Qualifying EDA, Eligible Person
Provides tax credits
Brownfields Redevelopment Access to Capital (BRAC) Any area, any person
Provides environmental insurance
Brownfileds Covenant Not to Sue (CNTS) Any area, any person
Provides liability protection
The Brownfields Redevelopment Access to Capital (BRAC) and the Brownfields Covenant Not to Sue (CNTS) programs are available to any applicant located in any area throughout Massachusetts.
To take advantage of the Brownfields Redevelopment Fund (BRF) and the Brownfields Tax Credit (BTC), the following two eligibility requirements must be demonstrated:
Eligible person - An applicant must qualify as an "eligible person". An eligible person is defined in c. 21E as an owner or operator who did not cause or contribute to a release of oil or hazardous material, and who did not own or operate the site at the time the release occurred.
Qualifying EDA – To qualify as an EDA, the area must meet one of the criteria listed below. A list of EDAs is presented at A-42 thru A-45.
The Massachusetts Brownfields Program Incentives Map identifies the current list of 183 cities and towns in Massachusetts that contain "economically distressed areas" (EDAs) as determined by the Massachusetts Department of Economic Development1,2.
Clean-up and redevelopment projects located in EDAs may be eligible to take advantage of low interest loans and grants and tax credits offered through the state’s Brownfields Redevelopment Fund and the Brownfields Tax Credit programs.
NOTE:
APPENDIX
Chapter 206 of the Acts of 1998
AN ACT RELATIVE TO ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP AND PROMOTING THE REDEVELOPMENT OF CONTAMINATED PROPERTY.
Whereas , The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose, which is to ensure forthwith environmental cleanup and promote the redevelopment of contaminated property, therefore it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 40. The department of environmental protection shall, in consultation with the office of the attorney general, and the department of economic development, within 18 months of the effective date of this act, conduct a study of the results and financial requirements of this act and file the results of such study with the clerks of the house of representatives and the senate and the joint committee on natural resources and agriculture and the house and senate committees on ways and means. Based upon an analysis of said study and taking into consideration the constraints of the five year capital spending plan, the governor is hereby directed to file with the general court legislation seeking authorization to issue bonds in an amount sufficient to successfully continue the programs and initiatives established by this act.
SENATE, No. 1603
By Mr. Moore, a petition (accompanied by bill, Senate, No. 1603) of theAssociated Industries of Massachusetts, by Richard C. Lord, Richard T Moore, Stephen M. Brewer, Harriette L. Chandler, Brian P. Lees and other members of the General Court for legislation relative to the tax credit for cleaning up brownfields, so-called. Taxation.
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts
In the Year One Thousand Nine Hundred and Ninety-nine.
AN ACT relative to the tax credit for cleaning up brownfields.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:
SECTION 1. Subparagraph (4) of paragraph (j) of section 6 of Chapter 62, as appearing in the 1996 Official Edition and as most recently amended by Chapter 206 of the Acts of 1998, is hereby amended by striking the subparagraph in its entirety and replacing it with the following new subparagraph: -
(4) for the purpose of this section, net response and removal costs shall be expenses paid by the taxpayer for the purpose of achieving a permanent solution or remedy operation status in compliance with chapter 21E. No credit shall be allowed under this section for the amount of state financial assistance received from the redevelopment access to capital program established pursuant to section 60 of chapter 21A or from the brownfields redevelopment fund, established pursuant to section 8G of chapter 212 of the Acts of 1975, or its successor statute, section 29A of chapter 23G. the amount of state financial assistance received from the redevelopment access to capital program shall be calculated as the amount of state funds paid on behalf of the borrower for participation in the program, and not the amount of the loan guaranteed; provided, however that in the event the loan guarantee is invoked, any credit taken for the amount of the loan shall be added back as taxes due in the taxable year that the loan is paid.
SECTION 2. Paragraph (d) of section 38Q of Chapter 63 of the General Laws, as appearing in the 1996 Official Edition, and as most recently amended by Chapter 206 of the Acts of 1998, is hereby amended by striking the paragraph in its entirety and replacing it with the following new paragraph: -
(4) For purposes of this section, new response and removal costs shall be expenses paid by the taxpayer for the purpose of achieving a permanent solution or remedy operation status in compliance with chapter 21E. No credit shall be allowed under this section for the amount of state financial assistance received from the redevelopment access to capital program established pursuant to section 60 of chapter 21A or from the Brownfields Redevelopment Fund, established pursuant to section 8G of chapter 212 of the Acts of 1975, or its successor statute, section 29A of chapter 23G. The amount of state financial assistance received from the redevelopment access to capital program shall be calculated as the amount of state funds paid on behalf of the borrower for participation in the program, and not the amount of the loan guaranteed; provided, however that in the event the loan guarantee is invoked, any credit taken for the amount of the loan shall be added back as taxes due in the taxable year that the loan is pai d.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Speaking Engagements
Creating and participating in education/outreach events with key groups of players and stakeholders is a key element of the strategy to accelerate the pace of redevelopment of brownfields sites in Massachusetts. In the first 7 months of operation, GOBR organized, planned or participated in 16 seminars or conferences focussed on brownfields issues. Over 1200 people attended these events representing governments, private development companies, industry associations, environmental businesses, utilities and railroads, insurance brokers, public planning agencies, and historic preservationists.
June 30, 1999 - National Governor’s Association Brownfields Conference- hosted by Governor Cellucci in Boston. The Governor announced the formation of GOBR and the creation of the first-in-the-nation, state subsidized, pre-negotiated environmental insurance program. This event established MA as a leader among states in brownfields redevelopment initiatives.
July 29, 1999 - North Central MA. Chamber of Commerce- Leominster- attended by 15 people including the Mayors of Fitchburg and Leominster and Representatives Goguen and Simmons, municipal economic development officials, and chamber of commerce executives representing private manufacturers and developers.
August 12, 1999 - American Planning Association Luncheon- Boston-organized and hosted by the Boston Redevelopment Agency and HUD. Attended by 15 people representing public planning interests with a focus on metropolitan Boston.
September 15, 1999- Massachusetts Economic Development Council- Fitchburg - luncheon seminar organized by MEDC and GOBR. Attended by 30 people representing every economic development region of the state.
September 24, 1999- Historic Preservation Conference – Worcester - organized by the Massachusetts Historic Commission and Secretary of State Galvin - attended by 150 people.
September 30, 1999 - Central MA Economic Development Authority (CMEDA) Board meeting - Grafton- 12 people including representatives from 7 member communities: Worcester, Auburn, Clinton, Dudley, Grafton, Holden, and Leicester.
September 30, 1999 - New England Environmental Marketing Association – Woburn - attended by 50 people from all aspects of the environmental industry.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Speaking Engagements
October 13, 1999 - Environmental Business Council – Waltham - attended by 50 people from private environmental businesses.
October 15, 1999 - Massachusetts Association of Planning Directors – Lexington - attended by 30 people representing more than 50 communities.
October 27, 1999 - Brownfields Conference – Boston - organized by the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties (NAIOP), the Associated Industries of MA (AIM), GOBR, DEP, MassDevelopment, DED/MOBD, and the Attorney General. The event was also sponsored by 5 private sector firms. Governor Cellucci gave the keynote address to an audience of 550 people. Secretary Durand and DED Director Boviard gave opening addresses, and GOBR presented.
November 9, 1999 - Insurance Brokers Seminar – Newton - presented by AIG Environmental Insurance Co. - 30 brokers attended.
November 16, 1999 - Massachusetts Railroad Association – Worcester -attended by 10 railroad executives representing 8 of the 9 railroads in the state.
November 18, 1999 - Western Massachusetts Utilities – Holyoke - organized by Western MA Electric Company and Holyoke Water Power Co. Attended by 15 people including utility executives and the Pioneer Valley Planning Council.
January 11, 2000 - American Society of Military Engineers - Boston - attended by 70 people including LSPs, US Army Corps of Engineers.
January 14, 2000 - Seminar on the Brownfields Act – Quincy - hosted by Quincy 2000, the South Shore Chamber of Commerce, and MOBD. Attended by 45 people including developers, business owners, environmental engineers, consultants and municipal officials.
January 20, 2000- Brownfield Advisory Committee – Boston -at MassDevelopment - attended by 25 people including committee members, MassDevelopment staff and guests.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Site Visits /Municipal Projects
Dozens of communities have contacted GOBR for information or advice on their role in brownfields redevelopment, and many are considering tax-takings to initiate projects. The following list represents 13 communities that have specific projects underway with assistance from GOBR.
Fitchburg GE project
Amesbury Microfab project
Taunton Taunton Eco-Industrial Park
Colrain Component Building Systems project
Mansfield Hathaway/Patterson site
Newburyport Circle Finishing site - Senator Jajuga
Somerville IKEA project
West Boylston Shell Oil site
Hanson Plymouth County Hospital site - Representative Marini
Everett gas station site
Springfield Smith and Wesson site
Plymouth Cordage Park project
Pittsfield GE site
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Key and Active Brownfield Redevelopment Projects
GOBR has been working on over 60 brownfield sites throughout the state. Some are in the early assessment stage, and some still have unresolved ownership/control issues. The following list represents 36 projects that are actually in the redevelopment process. Key projects are identified as those most likely to be at the stage of a press announcement in the first quarter of 2000.
KEY PROJECTS
Brockton - former Bargaineer site. Six acres controlled by the City, who will put out an RFR on the site in early February. Tire Recyclers, Inc. plans to bid on the site. If successful, they will demolish the existing building, complete the assessment, and remediate the contamination. They will construct a 100,000 s.f. state-of-the-art tire recycling facility with the ability to process more than 3 million tires/year. 75 new jobs will be created. If not successful at this site, GOBR has introduced them to a back up site in Taunton.
New Bedford - former Chamberlain site. 600,000 s.f. multi-story mill building formerly used to manufacture munitions for the military in World War II. Proposed renovation and reuse by a publicly traded company that is a manufacturer of candy and food products. They plan to relocate their entire manufacturing operations from Rhode Island and employ more than 300 people in New Bedford.
Somerville - A 17- acre site in the Assembly Square area. A press announcement has already been released by the Governor announcing that the site has been purchased by IKEA, an international furniture/home furnishings store. They are the first company to use the insurance program, and they give full credit to that program and the Governor’s brownfields initiatives for making the acquisition possible. They had been looking at greenfield sites in Massachusetts for nearly a decade. Once permitting is complete, they will begin construction on a 250,000 s.f. superstore that will employ 400 people and is expected to generate sales well in excess of $100 million per year. The real estate investment will total $45 million. A groundbreaking event will be planned.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Key and Active Brownfield Redevelopment Projects
ACTIVE PROJECTS
Greater Boston Region:
Boston - Lawrence Court -10 unit mixed income residential development.
Boston - former Modern Electroplating site. Commercial-residential development is the proposed re-use.
Boston - former South Bay Incinerator site. Proposed manufacturing facility re-use.
Woburn - Woburn Industrial Park site - School transportation company re-use. 300 jobs.
Watertown - Coolidge Ave. 1.4 acre site. High tech re-use. 150 jobs.
Reading - 10 acre, city-controlled site. The proposed re-use is Reading Executive Park, an $80 million office and hotel complex.
Cambridge - Prospect St site. Commercial business expansion is the proposed re-use.
Everett - Beacham St ½ acre site. Industrial redevelopment is proposed.
Everett - former coal/gas site. Commercial development is planned.
Northeast Region:
Lowell - 52,000 s.f. building redevelopment into artist spaces to live and work.
Haverhill - Canosa Ave. commercial redevelopment project for the relocation/expansion of 2 small commercial businesses.
Burlington - former GTE site. 20 acres. Proposed re-use is the corporate headquarters for Oracle Inc. More than 1000 new jobs.
Lawrence - former Butler manufacturing site. A manufacturing expansion re-use is planned.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Key and Active Brownfield Redevelopment Projects
ACTIVE PROJECTS
Newburyport - Former Circle Finishing site. A city visitor center and related commercial/retail uses are proposed. Referred by Senator Jajuga.
Southeast Region:
New Bedford - City/CSX Rail site – transportation-related re-use.
Plymouth - Cordage Park site. 10 buildings. 100 acres total, with 50 acres and one mile of ocean shore line. Proposed $75 million mixed-use redevelopment including commercial/retail/residential with waterfront and marina redevelopment.
Mansfield - former Hathaway/Patterson site. 44 acres. Redevelopment planning includes industrial, commercial, and transportation-related (MBTA) re-uses.
Wareham - former gas station site. Proposed commercial re-use.
Hanson - former Plymouth County Hospital site. More than 30 acres. Proposed re-use will be determined by the town through a bid process.
Taunton - Weir Village site - proposed small business commercial re-use.
Whitman - 3 sites in tax title. The town will propose re-use options.
Central Region:
North Brookfield - Aztec Asbestos property- proposed re-use for the expansion of an adjacent manufacturing facility.
Concord - Active Starmet Inc. site. 46 acres. Proposed expansion of their 170,000 s.f. defense-related manufacturing facility.
Fitchburg - Former GE site. $9.5 million clean-up. Multi-tenant re-use controlled by the City . 17 acres. Over 500,000 s.f. to be re-used for manufacturing.
Hardwick - 10,000 s.f. site. Machining manufacturing proposed re-use.
Ashland - Nyanza Superfund site.
Auburn - Former Mass 10 Truck Stop site. Proposed re-users include Burger King, Uno’s Pizzeria, and Taco Bell.
Governor’s Office of Brownfields Revitalization
Key and Active Brownfield Redevelopment Projects
Worcester- Prescott St. site assembly. 10 acres. Commercial/industrial re-use proposed by the Worcester Business Development Corp.
ACTIVE PROJECTS
Western Region:
Pittsfield - A portion of the GE site. Proposed re-use is expansion of offices and a new plastics manufacturing operation.
Pittsfield - S. Merriam St site. Re-use includes proposed new vinyl recycling operation.
North Adams - Beaver Mill project- 130,000 s.f. renovated for artist studios and school.
Colrain - 5.6 acre former mill site destroyed by fire. Proposed manufacturing re-use by Component Building Systems.
|
MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AGENCY |
|||||
|
BROWNFIELDS - SITE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM |
|||||
|
Applications Received as of February 23, 2000 |
|||||
|
COMMUNITY |
$ REQUESTED |
||||
|
1 |
Billerica |
$50,000 |
|||
|
2 |
Boston |
$39,500 |
|||
|
3 |
Boston |
$50,000 |
|||
|
4 |
Boston |
$50,000 |
|||
|
5 |
Boston |
$50,000 |
|||
|
6 |
Boston |
$19,410 |
|||
|
7 |
Boston |
$48,900 |
|||
|
8 |
Boston |
$48,050 |
|||
|
9 |
Boston |
$49,520 |
|||
|
10 |
Boston |
$24,370 |
|||
|
11 |
Boston |
$37,250 |
|||
|
12 |
Boston |
$26,750 |
|||
|
13 |
Boston |
$19,662 |
|||
|
14 |
Boston |
$4,000 |
|||
|
15 |
Boston |
$3,000 |
|||
|
16 |
Boston |
$7,415 |
|||
|
17 |
Boston |
$15,000 |
|||
|
18 |
Boston |
$50,000 |
|||
|
19 |
Boston |
$10,500 |
|||
|
20 |
Brockton |
$50,000 |
|||
|
21 |
Brockton |
$50,000 |
|||
|
22 |
Buckland |
$28,000 |
|||
|
23 |
Clinton |
$37,500 |
|||
|
24 |
Clinton |
$42,002 |
|||
|
25 |
Fitchburg |
$50,000 |
|||
|
26 |
Grafton |
$21,570 |
|||
|
27 |
Grafton |
$43,568 |
|||
|
28 |
Greenfield |
$22,000 |
|||
|
29 |
Groton |
$45,000 |
|||
|
30 |
Lowell |
$34,400 |
|||
|
31 |
Lowell |
$34,400 |
|||
|
32 |
Lowell |
$48,950 |
|||
|
33 |
Lowell |
$34,400 |
|||
|
34 |
Lowell |
$34,100 |
|||
|
35 |
Lowell |
$50,000 |
|||
|
36 |
Malden |
$65,325 |
|||
|
37 |
Malden |
$33,595 |
|||
|
38 |
New Bedford |
$25,000 |
|||
|
39 |
Pittsfield |
$50,000 |
|||
|
40 |
Salem |
$25,000 |
|||
|
41 |
Springfield |
$50,000 |
|||
|
42 |
Springfield |
$50,000 |
|||
|
43 |
Springfield |
$40,000 |
|||
|
MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AGENCY |
|||||
|
BROWNFIELDS - SITE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM contd. |
|||||
|
Applications Received as of February 23, 2000 |
|||||
|
COMMUNITY |
$ REQUESTED |
||||
|
44 |
Springfield |
$25,000 |
|||
|
45 |
Springfield |
$16,750 |
|||
|
46 |
Taunton |
$95,500 |
|||
|
47 |
Uxbridge |
$80,914 |
|||
|
50 |
Worcester |
$137,400 |
|||
|
51 |
Worcester |
$40,000 |
|||
|
52 |
Worcester |
$10,000 |
|||
|
53 |
Worcester |
$50,000 |
|||
|
TOTAL |
$2,023,701 |
||||
|
MASSACHUSETTS DEVELOPMENT FINANCE AGENCY |