Michael Obrecht

16 August 2012

Vacant and Abandoned Buildings

Strategies and Solutions in the American Post-Industrial Era

In Two Rivers, Wisconsin, there is a large industrial complex  that consists of a variety of buildings put up over roughly the last century. They once housed a company that at times was one of the largest employers in town.The corporate heirs of the company have recently announced that they will be ceasing the last local manufacturing operations as of September this year. Attempts by local government officials to discover what plans the company has for the future at the facility have been unsuccessful. This is predominantly due to the apparent lack of willingness on the part of the company to communicate clearly. (Buckley) As a result of these events, the civic and economic leaders of the community are faced with the likelihood that roughly a million square feet under roof, covering 12 acres of property within two blocks of the main commercial artery of the city, occupying 1200 feet of riverfront shoreline, is going to be vacant.

What are the potential effects of this situation on the city and the people in the surrounding area? This subject has been studied exhaustively, and there is significant agreement as to the range of likely consequences. One effect is lost tax revenue due to both lack of tenancy and the decline of property values. This decline also applies to other properties in the area, because an abandoned building lowers surrounding properties’ value as well (Satterfield 4; Vacant Properties 9). There are also increased costs to the city because of the increased likelihood of crime, accidental fire and arson, and risks to public health (Vacant Properties 3-6; Satterfield 4-6).

A less tangible, yet no less significant, negative effect is on the aesthetic value or ‘quality of life’ of the surrounding area. While related to the issue of property value, these terms also encompass other factors, such as social fragmentation, negative public perception of a neighborhood, and higher insurance costs (Vacant Properties 11; Satterfield 4-5). All of these factors contribute to what amounts to a feedback cycle where the conditions themselves cause conditions to deteriorate further (Mhatre 12).

All of this demonstrates the critical importance of taking decisive action when it becomes apparent that a building is heading towards vacancy. Vacant and abandoned buildings are a serious problem, not only because of their intrinsic negative conditions, but also because they are both an indicator of and a contributor to the deterioration of the community at large (Setterfield 14). It is in the best interests of all stakeholders in the community to apply any of a broad range of strategies to prevent, remediate, or remove such buildings in as timely a manner as possible. However challenging it may be, politically and economically, it will most likely only get more so if conditions are allowed to deteriorate. In order to prevent the problem before it gets to the point of tragedy or crisis, it would be expedient to evaluate the possible courses of action and determine which are the most advantageous under particular conditions.

To illustrate an example of what kind of issue a building like this can turn into, one needs to look no further than Manitowoc and the Mirro Building. To offer an extended quote from Mayor Justin Nickels’ April 16th, 2012 State of the City Address:

“This 1,000,000 sq. foot facility has been sitting idle and vacant since 2003, almost a decade ago. Five different private owners have occupied this building doing nothing more than stripping it for what it’s worth. This is a public safety and health concern and it is time that we take corrective action. If anyone questions why government exists the Mirro Building is a perfect example. Government exists to provide that which the private sector can’t - or won’t. I’m not blaming the private sector at all. What businessman would spend upwards of $5,000,000 plus to demolish the building and remove its contaminants not even knowing what’s underneath the ground then turn around and spend another couple millions of dollars to build a business that is actually profitable? A private businessman can’t risk that much money on a building that cannot be saved and as we have seen from all the past owners, no one won’t. The City of Green Bay just spent millions of dollars cleaning up old properties along their river front and this should be no different. It is time that we stand up as a community and collectively do something about this eye sore. Over the next year you will see my administration pursue how we can work with the private sector, or not, to get rid of it. This is an economic development issue and it is time that we address it before the costs become too extreme, before our safety is at risk or before the health of the neighbors is in jeopardy.”

The proliferation of vacant and abandoned buildings over recent decades is obviously unfortunate; on the other hand, it does provide a sort of advantage to a community dealing with it in 2012. There are ample precedents of communities that have been presented with the problem, and a wide range and number of solutions that have been proposed and enacted, and therefore an opportunity to gather data on what the best and most applicable solutions may be (Best Practices 17-48). It is appropriate at this time to take a look at those solutions and evaluate their desirability and effectiveness, taking into account the various conditions that accompany the abandonment or vacancy.

There is much information that needs to be collected and taken into consideration when determining the best solution for a particular property. An analysis of local commercial, industrial, and residential real estate market conditions, while not eliminating risk, can go far 

towards determining an appropriate plan for the future use of a distressed property. An evaluation of local economic conditions can be an important part of determining what options are financially sustainable. An architectural survey of the building and property ‘as is’ can provide valuable information regarding the range of possible alternative uses of the existing space, as well as determining current physical conditions and repair and maintenance needs. A cost benefit analysis of the most feasible options would also help to make informed decisions about the best course.

The solutions to the abandoned building problem fall into two main categories: those that retain the original structure and concentrate on putting it to use, and those that eliminate it. Each option carries with it its own particular set of challenges, costs, and potential benefits.

Utilitarian renovation involves evaluating the building’s structure, mechanical systems, and overall condition, and performing any work necessary to bring it to compliance with building and occupancy codes. Aesthetic decisions need to be made that will ensure salability, dependent upon planned potential use. Provisions need to be made for ongoing maintenance and security in order to ensure that the condition of the building remains suitable for occupancy while appropriate new tenants or owners are secured. This can result in ongoing costs should the building continue to be unoccupied due to lack of demand.

Adaptive reuse is the term used to describe the conversion of a building to a use for which it was not originally intended by its original owner or builder. An example of this would be the conversion of a factory or warehouse to condo lofts or office suites. This requires a more intensive design and planning process, and more significant changes to internal partitions and mechanical systems; it therefore requires a larger investment to execute. This is most often undertaken when there is already a new owner or a cooperative group of stakeholders and they have already determined feasibility and marketability for their ideas, and they have a vision, motivation, and the funding to see it through.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation cites a number of  examples of adaptive reuse in their Best Practices guide, one of them being the Freese Building Rehabilitation Project in Bangor, Maine. In this case, a six story former department store was converted for a variety of uses, including a museum, a commissary kitchen, elderly housing, and assisted living units. Putting the project together required a coalition of municipal, state, and nonprofit entities to simultaneously solve a diverse combination of problems, including a growing demand for elderly housing, a popular museum looking for a facility, and 140,000 square feet of abandoned and deteriorating commercial space.  (Rebuilding Community 42-43). This project emphasizes the need for sometimes widely diverse stakeholders to cooperate on creative solutions to these problems.

If a building has a significant history or a particular defining identity within the character of the community, historical restoration becomes an option. As the National Trust for Historic Preservation explains, “while not every building is a candidate for rehabilitation, generally, communities that remain vital, appealing places to live are those that have preserved their historic structures and streetscapes” (Rebuilding Community 6) This can be more challenging yet than adaptive reuse, because there are limitations placed on how much can be modified in order to qualify for historic designation. Facades, especially, need to be preserved, and any modifications to them must be designed to match the character and style of the original. 

In many cases, bringing a building back to usable condition is not economically viable. As the 2006 report entitled Managing Vacant and Abandoned Properties in your Community succinctly puts it, “For commercial or industrial properties the issue may be that the building has reached the end of its useful lifecycle and that it would cost more than the building is worth to improve it for continued use.” (8). In cases like these, the goal is to restore the land to a condition that renders it once more useful to the community.

Should it be determined that the most practical economic solution is to remove the building, the most common and expedient method of doing so is simple mechanical demolition using large construction equipment. The waste materials that result are deposited in landfills. This can be accomplished in hours or days, the labor costs are relatively low (Frisman 2),  and the result is a flat visually clean site that can then be evaluated for contamination hazards and subsequent remediation.

The drawbacks to this method result from the massive quantity of usable material and embodied energy that are lost, the consumption of increasingly limited landfill space, and the associated tipping fees that result. The timber contained in the structures of many older commercial buildings is “the last remaining of our Nation’s old growth forests” (Falk i). Vintage brick and stone do not deteriorate significantly with age. These materials are  worthy of preservation and reuse. There are also materials such as concrete that can not be reclaimed for crushing and recycling when included in the mix that results from machine demolition. Embodied energy is the term used to refer to the energy consumed to produce and transport material; if the material is lost to a landfill, so is the embodied energy. In addition, more energy must be expended to create new material to replace that which was discarded (Emmer 6).

Deconstruction is the systematic and deliberate dismantling of a structure with the intent of salvaging, reusing, and recycling the materials that it is made of.  The reuse of salvaged materials reduces the demand to create new materials, with its associated consumption of energy and resources. It also significantly reduces the amount of material in the waste stream: one source estimates that between 50-90% of the materials in a deconstructed building can be diverted from landfills and be reused (Frisman 2). An additional benefit to deconstruction is that the associated dust and floating debris of demolition are significantly reduced, decreasing the risk of spreading contamination by dust, airborne lead, and asbestos (Frisman 3).

Not only construction materials, but also entire constructed elements can be salvaged whole for reuse. Many US cities have businesses built around the sale of architectural salvage, including doors, windows, flooring, trim and fixtures. Michael J. Emmer conducted an analysis of salvaged structural steel components and determined that it can be quite advantageous to plan deconstruction strategies specifically to preserve complex structural steel assemblies for reuse in new construction; part of the advantage is in the significant savings in energy over recycling as scrap and remanufacturing (8-9). The sale of the reclaimed materials can offset the higher labor costs to a great extent (Frisman 3).

Critics, some of them demolition contractors, find that the deconstruction process takes too long and is too labor intensive (Frisman 2). Other stakeholders, however, see those same aspects as positive: more labor intensive processes provide an opportunity for training and employing low and semiskilled local workers, with the possibility that they can continue exercising the learned skills beyond a single project (Frisman 3).

One point that needs to be made is that any property - commercial, industrial, or residential - that is going through a change in use, needs to be evaluated for hazardous materials. This is an inherent cost that accompanies any significant work on an older structure or property, because of the toxic legacy of many formerly common materials and processes. If hazardous materials are detected, special precautions will be required; it may also result in the property being designated a brownfield (Mhatre 5), which, while requiring remediation, can also bring in additional funding.

Once the building has been removed and any environmental hazards cleaned up, an appropriate use for the renewed property needs to be determined. It may be useful here to borrow a term from the field of real estate appraisal: highest and best use. This term is defined almost universally (but with no apparent original source to be found) as:

“The reasonable, probable, and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are: legal permissibility, physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum profitability.” 

While this is a strictly economic framework, developed primarily for property investors, it still provides a basis for comparison. “Highest and best use” can be expanded to encompass quality of life as well as economic factors. There are other criteria that a municipal planning commission is likely to need to take into account, such as surrounding zoning, the place of the property in question in long term comprehensive planning, and the opinions of the inhabitants of the area about what sort of development they would find appropriate in their neighborhood. Should it be determined that the economic conditions in the area will not support development in the form of additional construction, conversion to usable public space such as a park can be a viable option that can add to the attractiveness and livability of a neighborhood, perhaps helping to stimulate revitalization in its own way.

It is clear that abandoned buildings are a serious civic and infrastructural problem, wherever they exist. It is also clear that procrastination is not a solution to the problem. In a time of lowered economic activity and expectations, it is likely that a building that is currently unoccupied will remain so without proactive efforts on the part of civic, economic, and citizen leadership. The consequences of this are continued deterioration, not only of the building, but also of the neighborhood and community around it. Preventing and/or solving these problems will require flexibility and creativity and the intelligent expenditure of human energy and of limited resources.

Bibliography

1. Buckley, Greg. Personal interview. 11 July 2012.

2. Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning and Metropolitan Mayors Caucus. How Can Municipalities Confront the Vacant Property Challenge? Chicago, March 2010

3. Emmer, Michael J. Capturing embodied energy: Specification guidelines for building demolition and deconstruction – Material salvage and reuse of structural steel components. Mohamed El-Gafy, ed., Proceeding of the 2006 ASC Region III Conference, October 18-21, 2006 Downers Grove, Illinois Associated Schools of Construction. PDF.

4. Falk, Robert H.,  Feasibility of Using Building Deconstruction at Wisconsin’s Badger Army Ammunition Plant: Salvaging Lumber for Reuse in Low-Income Home Construction. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest service, Forest Products Laboratory,  General Technical Report FPL–GTR–161, December 2005. PDF file

5. Frisman, Paul, Building Deconstruction. Connecticut General Assembly Office of Legislative Research Report, 13 December 2004. Webarchive.

6. Kelling, George and James Q. Wilson. Broken Windows. Atlantic Magazine, March 1982. Web.

7. National Trust for Historic Preservation. Rebuilding Community: a Best Practices Toolkit for Historic Preservation and Redevelopment. National Trust Publications, 2002. PDF

8. The National Vacant Properties Campaign. Vacant Properties: The True Costs to Communities. Smart Growth America, August 2005. PDF

9. Nickels, Justin M., Mayor of Manitowoc, WI. State of the City Address. 6 April 2012 Web.

10. Orbit Media Studios. Turning Vacant Spaces into Vibrant Places. Center for Community Progress, 2012. Web. 16 July 2012

11. Setterfield, Mark. Abandoned Buildings: Models for Legislative & Enforcement Reform. Hartford, Connecticut: Trinity Center for Neighborhoods, March 1997. PDF.

12. The United States Conference of Mayors. Vacant And Abandoned Properties: Survey and Best Practices.  Washington, D.C.: United States Conference of Mayors, June 2009. PDF.

13. USFA/ IAAI Abandoned Building Project. Managing Vacant and Abandoned Properties in Your Community. United States Fire Administration and International Association of Arson Investigators, 2006 Revision. PDF.

Web Resources

Center for Community Progress http://www.communityprogress.net

National Vacant Properties Campaign http://www.vacantproperties.org

Smart Growth America http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/

Business and Professional People for the Public Interest http://www.bpichicago.org

Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning http://www.cmap.illinois.gov

Metropolitan Mayors Caucus http://www.mayorscaucus.org

National Trust for Historic Preservation http://www.preservationnation.org

The United States Conference of Mayors http://usmayors.org

IAAI/USFA Abandoned Building Project http://www.interfire.org/features/eval_outline.asp