The Adaptive Reuse of Historic Industrial Buildings:

Regulation Barriers, Best Practices and Case Studies

Sophie Francesca Cantell

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree

Master of Urban and Regional Planning

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

(May 2005)

What we need is continuity . . . historic preservation is not sentimentality but a psychological

necessity. We must learn to cherish history and to preserve worthy old buildings . . . we must
learn how to preserve them, not as pathetic museum pieces, but by giving them new uses.
Ada Louise Huxtable
Lessons In Healing the Citys Scars

Introduction
A growing number of cities are pioneering holistic and policy strategies to abate and
rehabilitate their vacant or underutilized historic industrial buildings. 1 Most
conversions are taking place in the Northeast due to the large number of industrial
buildings located there, but it is a common trend around the country. A few cities
have gone even further by making the adaptive reuse of vacant industrial buildings an
integral part of their infill development and affordable housing strategies under the
rubric of smart growth. 2 The opportunity to reuse obsolete facilities in the urban
core supports sustainability and smart growth initiatives designed to focus
redevelopment in inner cities in an effort to decrease urban sprawl. As an alternative
to our ever-increasing throw-away society, adaptive reuse offers a sustainable building
site with existing infrastructure and materials.
Historic buildings help define the character of our communities by providing a tangible
link with the past. Today, historic districts around the country are experiencing
unprecedented revitalization as cities use their cultural monuments as anchors for
redevelopment. Sometimes, efforts to preserve and revitalize historic buildings run up
against financial obstacles, restrictive zoning and codes, contamination, and structural
problems that create challenges in reusing these unique structures. Fortunately,
there are several planning tools and financial incentives available to make the
adaptive reuse of industrial buildings more economically feasible. Industrial buildings
will always have added costs associated with their reuse, but if anticipated early on,
can be successfully dealt with through some careful planning and creativity. 3
What is Adaptive Reuse?
Adaptive reuse is the act of finding a new use for a building. It is often described as a
process by which structurally sound older buildings are developed for economically
viable new uses.4 The recycling of buildings has long been an important and effective
historic preservation tool. It initially developed as a method of protecting historically
significant buildings from demolition. 5 The Urban Land Institute defines rehabilitation
as a variety of repairs or alterations to an existing building that allow it to serve
contemporary uses while preserving features of the past. 6 Adaptive reuse is then a
component of rehabilitation. Adaptive reuse is often called adaptive use referring the
redundancy of the term reuse.

Joseph M. Schilling, The Revitalization of Vacant Properties: Where Broken Windows Meet Smart
Growth (2002) International City/County Management Association, 4.
2
Joseph M. Schilling, The Revitalization of Vacant Properties: Where Broken Windows Meet Smart
Growth (2002) International City/County Management Association, 4.
3
Bonsall, n.p.
4
Austin, 49.
5
New River, n.p.
6
Bookout, 315.

Industrial buildings are especially well suited to adaptive reuse due to their large,
open spaces. Many industrial buildings are significant primarily for their architecture,
as vernacular relics from the industrial age, and may be less so for their association
with prominent people and events. Some industrial buildings, on the other hand, were
designed by prominent early twentieth-century architects, such as Albert Kahn. As
this transition took place, the red brick factories with load-bearing walls gave way to
steel frame construction at the end of the nineteenth century. By the early twentieth
century, the skeleton became prominent on the exterior, reinforced concrete was the
material of choice, and the windows became much larger. The decline of heavy
industry during the early and mid-twentieth century has left a legacy of abandoned,
idled, and underutilized dormant sites across the American landscape.
Many developers who do adaptive-reuse projects claim residential developments are a
matter of necessity (The overhead of updating these buildings is costly to the point of
being prohibitive, they say. Taking into account the specifics of the new fire code, the
common need for environmental remediation, and the physical neglect suffered by
most mills over time, the quickest, easiest, and most profitable way to deal with the
cost is to develop mills into residential units than can be sold. 7
Adaptive reuse should be the preferred strategy for an industrial when no other
industrial option is available. And should always be favored over demolition and
redevelopment. There are countless reuse options available for industrial buildings.
Some of the more popular conversions are of industrial building to museums, art
studios, live-work units, offices, residential units, schools, retail, and increasingly
more are combining several uses together. Indeed, it has been a growing trend in the
United States for the last forty years.
Adaptive reuse came into mainstream architectural parlance during the 1960s and
1970s due to the growing concern for the environment. According to a study by the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Adaptive Use: A Survey of the Construction
Costs, there was growing concern of the environment during this time period and fuel
and material costs were extremely high. 8 The prohibitive costs and associated
difficulties securing buildings permits resulted in adaptive reuse becoming a viable
alternative to new construction and the land clearance of urban renewal. At this
time, the preservation movement also was gaining ground and gaining national
attention with grassroots efforts to save SoHo and Penn Station in New York City, in
the early 1960s. In 1961, in The Death and Life of Great American Cities, Jane Jacobs
wrote the following praise for ordinary historic buildings:
Cities need old buildings so badly it is probably impossible
for vigorous streets and districts to grow without them.
By old buildings I mean not museum-piece old buildings,
not old buildings in an excellent and expensive state of
rehabilitationalthough these make fine ingredientsbut
also a good lot of plain, ordinary, low-value old buildings,

Aber, n.p.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Adaptive Use: A Survey of the Construction Costs,
Washington, D.C., vol. 4, no. 4, June 1976. Cited in Fitch, 169.
8

including some rundown old buildings.9

Thus, there was a growing advocacy base for the preservation of vernacular buildings,
long overlooked for the museum pieces and famous sites made famous by American
history. Ghirardelli Square in San Francisco is considered the first successful adaptive
reuse of an industrial complex. The chocolate factory relocated in the early 1960s and
the Roth family purchased the block in 1962 in response to fears that the block would
be demolished. In 1964, after an extensive renovation, the factory is brought to life
as a 176,000 square-foot retail center with a brick-terraced courtyard and restaurants.
The buildings are listed in the National Register in 1982. Efforts to reuse the
warehouses flanking Faneuil Hall and Quincy Market in Boston as a festival
marketplace materialized in 1976 after years of planning. New York City exerted
funds to revitalize South Street Seaport into a destination for shopping, eating, and
cultural activities. Finally, Struever Bros. Eccles & Rouse, redeveloped Baltimores
Inner Harbor wit the adaptive reuse of several industrial buildings and new
construction.
Importance of the Adaptive Reuse of Industrial Buildings
Preserving these industrial icons is an important part of maintaining the historic
industrial character of a community. Changes in industrial practices have changed so
dramatically in the last century that different regions have been prominent at
different times and presently few regions dominate anymore as industry has shifted
globally. Between 1880 and 1920, for example, the textile industry relocated from
New England to the southeast. 10 This rapid shift was followed by southern dominance
for almost a century, but globalization and inexpensive labor in other regions of the
world has resulted in the decline of the U.S. textile industry and other industries. In
the last half of the twentieth century, factories started to close in large numbers as
corporations moved their manufacturing to developing countries with cheaper labor in
Mexico or Asia. Other factories were affected by the dawning of a post-industrial
age where electronic circuitry silently replac[es] the hiss and clank of moving
parts. 11 As a result of these circumstances, among others, there truly is a large stock
of derelict industrial buildings in the western world. At first, northern factories
moved south and for the last few decades many southern plants are closing and
relocating. In 2001, 62 mills closed in North Carolina, many in small towns. 12 Such
closures have had devastating effects upon the local economies of many such towns. 13
Empty mill and factory buildings now can be found across our landscape. The latenineteenth and early-twentieth century construction dates of the southern industrial
buildings, and the earlier construction dates of many northern versions means that the
remaining buildings are architecturally significant and often less structurally sound.
Industrial complexes and buildings are impressive architecturally, both in their size
and muted decorations. They were built with practicality in mind production,
efficiency, and sometimes safety of employees. The majority of early American
9

Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York and Toronto: Random House,
1961), 187.
10
Bergsman, 66.
11
Niesewand, 9.
12
Bergsman, 69.
13
Bergsman, 69.

industrial buildings from the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries are remnants of
anonymous and vernacular architecture serving a functional purpose rather than a
theoretical one. The factories designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, Walter Gropius, and
Albert Kahn may indeed be exceptions, but the nineteenth century factories designed
and built by craftsmen are the ones most in need of protection and new life. As a
result of their lack of famous associations and their functional design, many industrial
buildings were historically ignored, unlike country homes, palaces, and castles which
early preservationists valued for their associations with famous people. The neglect of
industrial buildings by some in the preservation community confirms that they have
long been, and still are, considered by many to be a nuisance and an eyesore. They
are often overlooked due to their blighted surroundings, polluted landscape, and
ordinary architecture. Such a belief ignores the rich architectural detailing,
character-defining features, and unique public spaces often created in industrial
complexes.
When factory architecture is saved, it is the result of a belief of its potential to be
transformed or for its rich architectural fabric. The anonymous lives of the thousands
of workers who were subjected to harsh working conditions in the factory are seldom
recognized. Therefore, asking the question what has this building been? in addition
to what could this building become? will result in a conversion that does not hide the
buildings past. 14 Rehabilitating old urban industrial neighborhoods or structures is an
issue at the forefront of contemporary urban development in the United States. The
sites are called brownfields (as opposed to greenfields) because there's potential or
actual chemical contamination that needs to be dealt with before converting these
buildings into an alternative residential or commercial use. A successful adaptive
reuse project can bring redevelopment, heritage tourism, and new life into a
community.
Regulatory Barriers & Others Limitations
The Social Costs of Vacant Properties
It is widely accepted that abandoned properties attract vandals, homeless, arsonists,
and drug dealers, and as a result drive down property values, taxes, and services, and
discourage investment in a community.15 Vacant and abandoned properties impose
numerous social costs upon the local jurisdictions within which they are located. In
addition to reducing property values and property tax revenue and attracting crime,
they strain the resources of local police, fire, building, and health departments. 16
The drainage of municipality services is detrimental since the vacant properties are
providing little or no tax revenue in return. 17
The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, in a study of vacant and abandoned properties
both nationally and within the City of Philadelphia, summarizes the reasons for vacant

14

Bunnell, foreword.
Steve Chambers, New Law Helps Group Buy, Restore Vacant Properties, Star Ledger (New Jersey
what city?) (January 25, 2004): n.p.
16
Joseph Schilling, Vacant Properties: Revitalization Strategies (2002a), 1.
17
Smart Growth America. Social Costs of Vacant Properties. Draft (February 2004)
(www.vacantproperties.org), 1.
15

properties-induced blight, which can aptly be applied to vacant historic industrial

buildings:
The problems created by abandoned lots and structures
cannot be contained within property boundaries or city
limits or stopped at county lines; they spillover to affect
surrounding communities. As abandonment increases in a
neighborhood, property values decline and owners
become less willing, and perhaps less able, to maintain
their real estate. In turn, more and more properties fall
into disrepair and eventual abandonment. It is this selfperpetuating dynamic that makes the word blight, with
its association of disease and contagion, an apt metaphor
for neighborhood distress. In the worst cases, the
downward spiral of deterioration and abandonment
continues until entire blocks and neighborhoods are
rendered virtually uninhabited. 18
For the most part, when a property is occupied it will be adequately maintained in
order to accommodate its use as a business or dwelling. Yet, for some reason, many
owners have no interest in the upkeep of their properties. Some are speculative
developers sitting on their properties waiting for the real estate market in that area to
pick up, while others are industrial companies forced to close their plant or warehouse
as the economy has changed.
Neighborhood decay and blight happens at a rapid rate in those communities plagued
with abandoned buildings and vacant properties. A few abandoned buildings can
quickly spread throughout a transitional neighborhood. Local residents start to feel
unsafe and property developers and business owners become reluctant to invest in
these neighborhoods. Many residents eventually leave while those who remain
become accustomed to blight as the neighborhood norm. This vicious cycle continues
with each new pocket of vacant lots and abandoned buildings. 19 This idea of one
boarded-up building often leading to greater abandonment has been termed the
Broken Window Theory by public policy experts George L. Kelling and James Q.
Wilson. Kelling and Wilson have observed, ... social psychologists and police officers
tend to agree that if a window in a building is broken and is left unrepaired, all the
rest of the windows will soon be broken. 20 Therefore, a neglected property allowed
to remain in such a condition is a signal to the community that no one cares.
Stabilization
The stabilization of vacant properties is an important part of the revitalization cycle
and infill development process. Why is it important to stabilize vacant properties?
The cleaning up of debris and graffiti can have a positive effect on the blight caused
by vacant properties. In addition, it is important to prepare these sites for
rehabilitation or redevelopment. It is especially critical to stabilize buildings which
18

The Pennsylvania Horticultural Society, Urban Vacant Land: Issues and Recommendations (1995), 18.
Joseph Schilling, The Revitalization of Vacant Properties: Where Broken Windows Meet Smart
Growth, (2002b) International City/County Management Association, 21-22 (available at
www.icma.org/vacantproperties), 4.
20
James Q. Wilson and George L. Kelling, Making Neighborhoods Safe, Atlantic Monthly (February 1989).
19

might be rehabilitated, so that all deterioration is halted. The overall consensus is

that local governments and nonprofits should contain the vacant properties problem
before it gets worse; however, the local governments and the communities need an
array of new strategies and tactics (such as receivership) that address the sporadic,
spot blight that plagues the regions worst neighborhoods.
The use of inter-departmental working groups, which typically consist of an integrated
team that includes members from a number of key departments, are an essential
ingredient for effective local vacant properties programs. For example, the City of
Las Vegas integrated service teams (IST) includes police officers and inspectors.
It is apparent that local governments must have the ability to take a variety of actions
in order to tailor the remedy to the facts of a particular property. More importantly,
local governments need to build consensus with the community about their vacant
property programs and the specific applications of these legal remedies. Certain
properties demand more aggressive actions, while other properties may only need a
simple notice to the owner or some financial assistance. Partnerships with CDCs,
realtors, buildings, and the probate systems would further alleviate some of the more
complex vacant properties.
Slum Abatement and Blight Enforcement Response team: The City of Tucson, Arizona,
has created a Slum Abatement and Blight Enforcement Response team. The SABER
team has helped break down inter-departmental barriers. The program tries to
address social behavior issues that result when blighted properties become serious
problems. Tucson is a fast-growing Sunbelt city consisting almost entirely of singlestory structures with the exception of some commercial and apartment buildings. The
sprawling city has many neighborhoods with varied uses, including residential,
commercial, and industrial. Slum-like conditions are not centralized in any one area
of the city, but instead are dispersed throughout. SABER is a multi-agency project
lending assistance to individuals and neighborhoods to resolve issues, including
substandard housing conditions, overgrown vegetation, rodent problems, vandalism,
safety concerns, and abandonment. The city and the seven involved departments
utilize the following planning tools to improve their neighborhoods: uniform building
codes, administrative codes, housing codes, and vacant and abandoned building codes.
The city is still reviewing the ordinance to refine it to see how it could be even
better and cover more ground. In addition, they are also seeing how this model for
code enforcement could be applied to other issues and areas of local government.
Although it does not have a notable number of historic industrial buildings, Tucsons
SABER program could be applied in older communities with abandoned industrial sites,
especially when they are dispersed throughout a city or region.
Registration and Property Maintenance Ordinances: More research needs to be carried
out on how to tackle already-secure buildings which have been boarded up for years.
The City of San Diego has used successfully is to require property owners to register
their properties and produce a rehabilitation plan. The owners are assessed a fee
each time there is a complaint or nuisance call about the property. These registration
ordinances provide a disincentive for keeping buildings boarded, however, it is still
illegal for most local governments to demolish properties that are structurally sound.
In San Diego, the property owners are required to submit a rehabilitation plan, but
only about six owners have actually done this. There is no enforcement of the

rehabilitation plan, since there is no staff to monitor the properties. While this model
is not perfect, its flaws could be improved upon in similar ordinances elsewhere. By
imposing limits on boarded and secured structures, such an ordinance could greatly
improve the visual, security, and property value problems associated with spot blight
and general abandonment.
Rehabilitation and Infill Development
Infill Incentive Districts: Arizona passed a law two years ago that allows cities to pass
plans for infill incentive districts. Options that the law authorized include various
incentives for those areas, such as new zoning procedures, expedited processing, etc.
The City of Phoenix adopted an infill development ordinance and housing incentive
program. The citys Infill Housing Program encourages infill development through a
housing program, established by an ordinance in 1995. In order to be classified as an
Infill Incentive District, an area must meet three of the following six criteria: Vacant
and dilapidated buildings; vacant or underutilized land or contaminated sites;
nuisance activities; absence of development activity; high crime rates; and population
decline. Among the incentives offered by the city are the waiving of a number of
development-related fees; city participation in the cost of off-site improvements;
focused blight control efforts adjacent to infill development sites; expedited zoning
procedures; and different standards for development. The assistance of a city staff
Infill Development Team that has the explicit mission of shepherding infill projects
through the city planning and development process is also offered to those in the
districts. While the majority of new units have been single-family homes, the creation
of such a program has the potential to promote and encourage the rehabilitation of
contaminated and/or vacant industrial buildings.
In Arizona, cities can issue a notice of interest in acquiring properties and if they
cannot, they go to the City Council and request authority to condemn and demolish. It
is not an easy process to acquire properties, even in redevelopment areas. Once the
city gets ownership of the property, it issues a Request for Proposals (RFP) to select a
buyer. The city will typically sell a property to a potential developer at a reduced
cost. Phoenix began selling properties to nonprofits and shared plans and designs with
nonprofits for free.
Vacant Properties Revitalization Cycle
A wide variety of communities have vacant properties due to poverty, sprawl, race
relations, economic hardship, and loss of jobs. The impacts of vacant properties, not
limited to disorder, nuisances, decreased property values and taxes, can be negative
even in the healthiest of neighborhoods. While it is necessary to focus on the property
and what should happen to it, it is equally important to address why the property fell
into disrepair or was abandoned. The Vacant Properties Revitalization Cycle is a
strategic framework for revitalization. The cycle consists of the following five stages:
1.) Prevention and Assessment, 2.) Stabilization, 3.) Rehabilitation Resources, 4.)
Property Transfer or Demolition, and 5.) Long-Term Revitalization Strategies. The
cycle can serve as a self-assessment tool for local vacant property programs as a gauge
of how to best allocate resources.

The first stage of the cycle involves the following actions: Prevention: Work with
property owners, housing inspection, pro-active code enforcement, etc.; and
Assessment: Know your territory and understand particular local conditions affecting
abandonment. The first stage emphasizes the importance of developing a property
information system, often called early warning systems. In The Revitalization of
Vacant Properties: Where Broken Windows Meet Smart Growth, Joseph Schilling
details the next four stages of the Revitalization Cycle as follows:
Stage Two: Stabilization. For most cities, the
immediate goal is to stabilize the site or neighborhood.
Cities generally use a wide array of abatement powers
and code enforcement strategies to get the owners to
clean up and secure these properties. A major objective
is to attract private reinvestment back to these blighted
neighborhoods by using city resources to stabilize a few
target sites.
Abatement: The first responsibility is to abate those
unsafe and unhealthy conditions that create public
nuisances on the property and for the surrounding
neighborhood.
Investigation and owners profile: A critical step during
the preliminary investigation is to find out why the
property owner let the property deteriorate. Does he or
she have the interest and the commitment to make the
necessary repairs to bring the property back up to code?
Does he or she also have the financial or physical ability
to complete the rehabilitation? Is the owner only
interested in real estate speculation?
Neighborhood inventories: Vacant properties tend not to
exist in isolation. Local governments should routinely
inventory vacant properties throughout the city to assess
possible patterns within neighborhoods and among
property owners. 22 Such inventories also can provide a
list for possible investors.
Stage Three: Rehabilitation resources. After
stabilizing the site, cities often provide property owners
with a wide variety of resources to encourage them to
rehabilitate eligible vacant properties:
Financial resources: CDBG funds, rehabilitation loans, tax
credits, tax abatements, waiver of municipal liens.
Technical assistance: permit streamlining, flexible
rehabilitation codes, referrals to private sector
consultants and contractors, coordination with nonprofits
and other local agencies.

Community Development Corporations (CDCs): Several

cities have formed special development corporations that
provide neighborhoods in need with a wide array of
housing and community services. CDCs are ideal partners
for cities to enlist in their campaigns against vacant
properties. In some cases, the CDCs can take on the
responsibility of property management or even purchase
vacant properties.
Stage Four: Property transfer or demolition. With
certain problem properties and complex cases, a city may
pursue demolition or force the transfer of the vacant
property. Local governments have somewhat limited
legal authority to demolish or involuntarily transfer
private property. Consequently, cities must strictly
adhere to the requisite legal procedures. Cities generally
view demolition and property transfer as last resorts and
would prefer to work with the existing owner to perform
the necessary repairs and rehabilitation. However, in
some cases (such as where the property is structurally
unsound or the city cannot find a competent property
owner or manager), demolition or transfer may become
the only viable option to stop further neighborhood
blight.
Stage Five: Long-term revitalization policies and
prevention programs. Beyond the abatement and
rehabilitation of individual vacant properties, cities
should integrate vacant properties initiatives with
relevant community-wide revitalization efforts (e.g.,
affordable housing at the local and regional levels, jobs
and economic development, safe and healthy
neighborhoods) and long-term land-use and growth
management planning (infill development, smart growth,
mixed use, and community design). Instead of working
one vacant property at a time, cities could achieve
greater neighborhood stability through these traditional
planning strategies. Vacant property prevention
programs present the best hope of permanently
addressing the problem of vacant properties.
Unfortunately, few cities have sufficient resources to
design and implement such programs in a meaningful
way. Prevention can take many different shapes. A few
cities have used community groups to inventory potential
vacant properties or have applied geographic information

10

system (GIS) technology to track critical properties that

could become vacant soon. 21
The Cycle illustrates the essential steps for creating a holistic approach/program to
revitalizing vacant properties and the process that individual properties and
neighborhoods experience on their path from decay to revitalization. Local
government entities can use the Cycle as a diagnostic tool to evaluate vacant property
programs. The model starts with prevention and proceeds through long-range planning
and infill development. In Practice, many cities spend most of their energies and
resources stuck in the stabilization stage. The recommendations from the Vacant
Properties Roundtable, however, prove that rehabilitation and infill development
should be the focus.
Brownfields Abatement/Remediation
Across the nation, contamination from decades of industrial activity has left many
historic industrial buildings with hazardous materials in their soil or in the buildings.
Due to their industrial use prior to the passage of hazardous substances regulations,
many historic factories and warehouses are contaminated. 22 This contamination can
pose public health risks, if left unabated, and can leave a community blighted if the
industrial sites are left abandoned. This problem is prevalent in urban areas where
many properties, in locations prime for redevelopment, are vacant due to their status
as brownfields. Thus, the presence of contamination can present significant barriers
to the adaptive reuse of historic industrial buildings both in terms of added costs and
time. The added challenge of meeting remediation standards while also meeting the
Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation, if attempting to qualify for tax
credit certification, or local review, if the building is listed as an individual landmark
or part of a locally listed historic district, can make such a project difficult. What
happens, for example, when a contaminated object is considered an integral,
character-defining feature in conjunction with the Secretarys Standards. Increased
research into the role of historic preservation in brownfields reuse and remediation is
long overdue. 23 According to the Environmental Protection Agency, brownfields sites
are "abandoned, idled, or under-used industrial and commercial facilities where
expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental
contamination."
The location of contaminants and hazardous materials in historic industrial buildings
can be predicted to some degree, although they should be assessed on a case-by-case
basis. The interiors of most historic industrial buildings will contain asbestos, leadbased paint, and other heavy metals. Asbestos typically can be found in insulation
around pipes, ducts, wires, floor tiles, plaster, and other objects, while lead is found
in old pipes, glass, paint, and other surfaces. Asbestos, known for its fire-resistance,
was installed between the 1920s and 1970s. 24 Lead, on the other hand, known for its
durability and resistance to changes in humidity, is found in plumbing systems
21

Joseph Schilling, The Revitalization of Vacant Properties: Where Broken Windows Meet Smart
Growth, (2002b) International City/County Management Association, 21-22 (available at
www.icma.org/vacantproperties), 4.
22
Paulus, 1.
23
Paulus, 1.
24
Paulus, 3.

11

installed before 1930. 25 Old machinery can cause a problem if it needs to be removed.
Dumping of contaminants most likely took place some distance from the industrial
buildings and often at the same location. 26
New remediation techniques can alleviate such problems, including methods which are
sensitive to historic fabric. Contaminated architectural features and objects can be
encapsulated so that they can be preserved in situ. Alternatives include the removal
of contaminated items or their enclosure within new construction. Encapsulation and
enclosure are the least expensive and least detrimental to the integrity of the
building. 27 In addition, remediation specialists with equity backing, who use their
financial strength to secure sites at reasonable prices, can offer former and future
owners of contaminated sites some. Established strategies to bring brownfield sites
back into productive use, include (1) Major environmental cleanup and
decontamination; (2) Legal work to limit liability; and (3) Replanning and assembling
workable sites for new uses. 28 An environmental assessment should be performed to
identify and determine the nature and extent of any hazardous building materials or
environmental contaminants. This process can be a costly and time-consuming effort,
but there are methods to help make this more efficient and effective. Reduce liability
by thoroughly researching past uses. Federal law requires that past and present
owners of a contaminated site may be liable for its cleanup. Concern over the
liabilities associated with toxic and hazardous materials is especially relevant for
conversions of historic industrial buildings.
Noncompliance with the Comprehensive Emergency Response Compensation and
Liability Act of 1980, often called Superfund, can cause legal problems.
Amendments to Superfund and the Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA) have increased
the amount of federal funds available for cleanup. The Federal EPA Brownfields
Office and regional offices are a valuable source of information on brownfields sites
and sources of funding, such as grants and loans to aid in the cleanup process. Most
federal and state brownfields programs offer market-based incentives and limitations
on liability to spur brownfields redevelopment. 29 In certain situations there may be
local assistance to help with cleanup costs.
Case Study: EPA Brownfields Program Funding Opportunities
The EPAs Brownfields Program, started in 1995, empowers states, communities and
other stakeholders to prevent, assess, safety remediate, and reuse brownfields. The
program offers financial and technical assistance for revitalization, assessment, and
cleanup. A Revolving Loan Fund has capitalized approximately 60 loans to facilitate
cleanup. 30 In addition, cleanup grants provide funding, up to $200,000 per site, for a
grant recipient to carry out cleanup activities at brownfield sites. 31 These funds may
25

Paulus, 3.
Paulus, 2.
27
Paulus, 3.
28
Lambda Alpha International, Baltimore 2000: A Year Later, Part 2 - Urban Development Review,
http://www.lai.org/go/library/publications/Baltimore2.html (accessed April 30, 2005).
29
Mabbett, n.p.
30
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields Cleanup Grants,
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/cleanup_grants.htm (accessed May 8, 2005).
31
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Brownfields Cleanup Grants,
http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/cleanup_grants.htm (accessed May 8, 2005).
26

12

be used to address sites contaminated by petroleum and hazardous substances,

pollutants, or contaminants. Cleanup grants require a match equaling 20 percent of
the amount of the funding, which may be in the form of a contribution of money,
labor, material, or services. A cleanup grant applicant may request a waiver of the 20
percent cost share requirement based on hardship. An applicant must own the site for
which it is requesting funding at time of application or demonstrate the ability to
acquire title. The performance period for these grants is two years.
In August 1997, the federal government established a Brownfields Tax Incentive
Program, under the Taxpayer Relief Act. This program allows costs for environmental
cleanups on properties, meeting certain land use and contamination qualifications, to
be claimed as fully deductible business expenses in the year in which the costs were
incurred or paid. Currently, expenditures are eligible only through December 31,
2005, but this date might be extended.
Case Study: Massachusetts Brownfields Act
In 1998 the Massachusetts Governor and legislature signed a law creating financial
incentives and liability relief for parties undertaking brownfields cleanup projects.
Known as the Brownfields Act, this law provides state agencies with $50 million to
administer programs targeted towards the cleanup and reuse of contaminated
property. The Act provides liability relief and financial incentives to attract new uses
to these properties, while ensuring that the states environmental standards are met.
The Governors Office for Brownfields Revitalization (OBR), established in June 1999,
offers assistance, in the form of newly created tools and programs, to help in the
redevelopment of brownfields.
Examples of statewide programs created as a result of the Brownfields Act include the
Brownfield Redevelopment Access to Capital (BRAC) Fund, which supports private
sector loans to subsidize liability insurance for redevelopment projects; the
Brownfields Redevelopment Fund (BRF), which provides extensive loans and grants,
ranging from $50,000 to $2 million, to both the public and private sectors to fund site
assessment and cleanup at eligible sites; and the Brownfields Tax Credit Program,
which provides a 25 to 50 percent tax credit for cleanups performed in designated
Economic Development Areas. 32 The Act also funds liability protection and outreach
efforts.
Zoning Codes
Zoning codes often act as regulatory barriers to the adaptive reuse of historic
industrial buildings. The power for a local jurisdiction to zone is derived from state
enabling legislation, the primary goal of which is to promote healthy, safety, morals,
or the general welfare. Zoning achieves these goals by separating uses into districts
on a zoning map. Accompanying text typically accompanies the map and dictates
minimum standards for each district, such as use, height, setbacks, parking
requirements, bulk, lot sizes, density, and various other characteristics. The
separation of uses was a real health issue when industry was still common in urbanized
areas. Indeed, it was a relevant issue in the 1920s when the state enabling acts were
32

Mabbett, n.p.

13

created and in 1926 when the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of
zoning as a crucial part of the police power in the case Village of Euclid, Ohio, v.
Ambler Realty Company. Prior to the widespread use of zoning, many industrial
companies constructed their factories and mills near existing residential areas or
provided housing so that workers would live near work. Today, little noxious industry
is located in or near residential districts and there is less of a pressing need to restrict
incompatible uses. In many jurisdictions, local pressure to keep zoning codes, which
can be exclusionary, is based upon the codes ability to protect property values. The
underlying zoning of many jurisdictions, however, still does not allow residential or
commercial uses in industrial buildings. Most zoning codes disallow mixed uses. In
fact, it could take a major study to determine if a new use is compatible with existing
zoning. Many zoning codes have been amended numerous times and are difficult to
interpret. A variance is thus often required in order to change the use of an industrial
building. There are costs and lengthy time periods associated with this administrative
process. In addition, public review is typically triggered by an application for a
variance, and this could introduce an added layer of meetings.
Solutions to circumvent the regulatory barriers associated with zoning codes, include
the creation of mixed use zones, special preservation districts, form-based codes, or
zoning review procedures for reuse.
Best Practices: Form-Based Codes
A form-based code (FBC) is an alternative zoning mechanism, which focuses on form,
rather than use, and pays particular attention to how a building envelope addresses
the street. The recent use of codes to guide development began with the
development of codes for neotraditional communities in the late 1980s and early
1990s. The New Urbanist designers of Seaside, Florida, for example, created a code to
guide development of the subdivision. In the past few years, attention has been
placed on the use of form-based codes as a revitalization tool to guide infill
development in existing urban areas and inner suburbs. A municipality can
incorporate a form-based code into their regulatory framework in three ways to
modify the existing code to include criteria from the FBC, to replace the existing
zoning with a FBC, or to adopt the FBC as an overlay to the existing zoning. There are
few examples of form-based codes in areas with existing historic industrial buildings,
but the code could incentivize the rehabilitation of buildings by offering density
bonuses for historic preservation or making it a mandatory part of the FBC, depending
upon the regulatory framework of the specific state. Removing the elements of
traditional zoning which separate uses, require setbacks and parking standards
eliminates the need for developers to procure special use permits and waivers and
would alter the lengthy and costly pre-development administrative process.
Replacing existing zoning with a form-based code is one way of achieving a clearer and
more flexible administrative and development process.
Best Practices: Transfer of Development Rights
In urban areas, especially with development pressure, historic buildings can be
threatened by economic forces. Property rights proponents advocate the demolition
of historic structures if it allows a property to be redeveloped to its "highest and best
use." A "Transfer of Development Rights" (TDR) program can help make the

14

development process more financially equitable. A TDR program allows owners of

buildings in zoning districts where more intense development is permitted to sell that
development potential to owners of other sites. Used in combination with a local
historic preservation ordinance, such a program aims to encourage development while
also protect their ordinance from litigation. Of course, a TDR program does not
prevent all takings claims, and a local jurisdiction should be prepared to defend their
program and historic preservation ordinance. The City of Denver has a transfer of
development rights program for specific zoning districts in its downtown, where an
owner can transfer the unused portion of allowable floor area ratio to another site in
the same zone. Buildings located in the Lower Downtown (LoDo) area, which consists
of numerous historic warehouse and industrial buildings, are eligible for the TDR
program due to their placement in the Lower Downtown B-7 zone.
Building Codes
Complying with building codes is probably one of the most challenging aspects of an
adaptive reuse project. Standard building codes, intended primarily for new
construction, have few exceptions for existing buildings and thus act as a disincentive
for rehabilitation. 33 Codes consist of building codes, which regulate design and
construction of buildings, while maintenance and use codes regulate the use of an
operating building. In most cases, historic buildings were constructed prior to the
enactment of a building code and thus are probably not in full compliance. A code,
for example, most likely requires more space for fire-proof stairwells and egresses
than exists. Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements has
greater flexibility for existing structure, but it still requires longer lead times and
costly alterations to a historic structure, which often are not compatible with its
historic character. Often the minimum buildings standards in a code are restrictive to
adaptive reuse, while at times a code goes so far as to impede rehab. Such strict
codes actually go so far as to force a developer to demolish an existing building, so
that a building can be constructed from scratch. 34 In some cases, variances or waivers
might be an option to get out of certain building code requirements. It is important to
engage in conversations with local authorities early on in the project.
Recently the Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA) and the International
Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) included amendments to their model codes,
the basis for many states building codes, to allow for alternative code solutions on
historic preservation projects. The inclusion of this language acts as a variance for
historic preservation projects and replaces the formal filing process. Smart codes,
however, are a more flexible and predictable alternative to conventional building
codes. Smart codes is the term used to describe building and construction codes
that encourage the alteration and reuse of existing buildings. 35 They replace both
building and maintenance and use codes with a code geared toward existing and
historic buildings. They allow a state to reduce regulatory complexity and can
encourage the redevelopment of existing buildings. Local governments also have the
power to adopt more flexible code requirements. Recent studies have found that
adopting a rehabilitation code can cut costs for historic rehabilitation by up to 50

33

Arigoni, 25.
Paulus, 4.
35
Building Technologies Inc., 3.
34

15

percent. 36
Case Study: California Historical Building Code
The California Historical Building Code (CHBC), formerly the State Historical Building
Code, is to protect Californias architectural heritage by recognizing the unique
construction problems inherent to historic buildings. Passed in 1976, it is the first of
its kind in the country. The CHBC is an alternative code with building regulations and
standards tailored specifically to the rehabilitation, preservation, restoration,
relocation or change of occupancy of designated historic buildings. The CHBC aims to
preserve original architectural elements and encourage cost-effective rehabilitation
while also providing building safety. The CHBC achieves these goals by giving owners
flexibility in finding economical methods
The performance-oriented CHBC gives property owners flexibility to find economical
methods to restore and retain integrity the buildings historic features. To be eligible
for the alternate code, a building must be listed in the National Register of Historic
Places or contribute to a National Register Historic District, or be locally designated.
All new work is expected to meet the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the
Rehabilitation of Historic Properties. If any new construction is part of the adaptive
reuse design, it must conform to the states regular code.
Case Study: New Jersey State Rehabilitation Code
The most significant recent reform in the regulation of work in existing buildings
happened in New Jersey with the adoption of the New Jersey Uniform Construction
CodeRehabilitation Subcode on January 5, 1998, by the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA). New Jersey became the first state with a comprehensive code with the
goal of assisting the rehabilitation of existing buildings. The subcode aims to
encourage the redevelopment of existing buildings into housing. 37 A chapter,
dedicated to historic buildings, outlines greater flexibility for historic structures so
that they can more easily meet the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation. The subcode is based upon the notion that historic buildings do not
need to imitate new construction in every detail in order to be safe and accessible. 38
A significant aspect of the subcode, relevant to adaptive reuse, is the language on
changes in use. Under the old code, any change of use required full code compliance
for the entire structure, the subcode evaluates the actual increase or decrease in
hazard of the new use to create requirements. In addition, the subcode broadens the
definition of historic building and thus allows more historic buildings to qualify for the
subcode, by including buildings eligible, both identified and not yet identified, for the
National Register in addition to those already listed individually or as part of a historic
district.
Due to its balanced and predictable requirements, New Jerseys subcode significantly
reduces the cost and administrative obstacles associated with rehabbing the states
older buildings. During the codes first year, rehabilitation work in New Jerseys five
36

Leinberger, 11.
New Jersey Rehab Subcode, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions Database, October 2,
1998, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
38
Leinberger, 11.
37

16

largest cities increased by 60 percent with the vast majority of projects in Newark.
Surely influenced by the success of New Jerseys subcode, the state of Maryland and
city of Wilmington have created similar alternative codes.
Case Study: City of Los Angeles Adaptive Reuse Ordinance
In 1999, the City of Los Angeles adopted landmark legislation to encourage the
conversion of the downtown's mostly historic office buildings into lofts, apartments,
and hotels. The legislation applies to non-residential buildings, including industrial
buildings. The ARO is applicable to the reuse of historically designated buildings, both
local and national landmarks. Attention is also paid to existing industrial uses. The
ordinance notes that uses surroundings a propose adaptive reuse site will not be
detrimental to the safety and welfare of future residents and that a reuse project will
not displace existing industrial uses.
The Adaptive Reuse Ordinance's mission was revitalize downtowns cultural resources
to attract residents and visitors who would bring vitality to the urban core, while
addressing the City's housing crisis. The Adaptive Reuse Ordinance works by
significantly reducing the time required to obtain a building permit. Changing an
industrial or a commercial building to a new residential use would normally require
compliance with numerous rules and regulations. The ordinance works by cutting
through this red tape. The advantage has been significant, enabling the City to
leverage an extraordinary amount of private sector investment with a minimum of
public subsidy. The provisions streamline the application process and provide
significantly more flexibility in meeting building code and zoning requirements. Many
non-compliant site conditions (including building height, parking, floor area and
setbacks) are permitted without requiring a variance. Residential density
requirements are also waived.
A great deal of the housing boom associated with downtown Los Angeles is the result
of the progressive Adaptive Reuse Ordinance (ARO) passed in 1999 and revised in 2002.
Roughly half of the 2,850 new residential units finished between 1999 and 2004 are
conversions encouraged by the ordinance.39 Encouraged by the success in downtown,
the City expanded the Adaptive Reuse Ordinance to cover the historic suburbs of
Hollywood, Chinatown, Lincoln Heights, and Wilshire Center business districts. New
adaptive reuse projects in these areas are already in the works. Effective on December
1, 2003, the ordinance was expanded citywide, providing a streamlined process for
revitalizing neighborhoods and providing much needed housing throughout the City of
Los Angeles.
One of the first projects under the ARO was the conversion of three manufacturing
buildings into Santee Court. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Michael J.
Connell developed the first garment manufacturing buildings in an area that became
and is still known as downtowns Fashion District. Designed by architects Arthur Angel
and Carl Leonard, the three buildings, adapted into 165 loft-style apartments, 20
percent of which are affordable, were constructed between 1911 and 1912. All three
buildings are locally designated as historic monuments. MJW Investments conversion
of the buildings in Santee Court, the first phase of downtowns largest adaptive reuse
39

Berton, 27.

17

project, includes a rooftop garden, a basketball court, and a swimming pool. The
buildings are connected by a landscaped, pedestrian promenade (complete with
outdoor tables and chairs) that was originally a service alley. The promenade is
anchored by Rite Aid, and also features a Subway eatery, and other retail tenants will
include a market and a food court.
Design
Incorporating new uses within a historic framework can be complex. 40 The low ceiling
heights of many mills and factories, constructed in the late nineteenth century, make
them functionally obsolete for industrial and several new uses today. In addition, the
placement of columns every eight to ten feet in many buildings can cause a design
challenge. Concrete slab floors can be difficult to reconfigure. Old wiring and
plumbing will likely need to be removed. Features, such as the roof and windows, can
often by repaired rather than replaced. The windows of many mill buildings, however,
were altered in the 1950s when windows were bricked in and air conditioning installed
in an effort to control separation and shrinkage of textile thread due to humidity and
dryness. 41 The addition of extra stories to the exterior can often be problematic if the
project is undergoing design review. Solutions include building an addition that is not
visible from the ground, although this depends upon the buildings roof type. Some
large complexes can be difficult to adapt since it might have too much space and too
many structural problems. In some rare instances, the adaptive reuse of an older
industrial building may not be feasible due to unworkable structural problems or other
factors. In addition, there can be concern over how to determine circulation and
accessibility.42
The occasions where the adaptive reuse of an industrial building is avoided are rare;
instead, there are many design opportunities associated with such projects. Factories,
and especially mill buildings, are highly adaptable. Their short spans, masonry
construction, ornate detailing, and large windows results in naturally lit interiors with
unique features. Overall, the vernacular craftsmanship of historic industrial buildings
is of a higher quality than most current construction. Due to the large machinery in
the buildings, the floors were designed to withhold loads of 100 to 200 pounds per
square foot. 43 Many wall and floor surfaces are already left exposed, which can save
costs if that is part of the design aesthetic. 44 Foregoing the excavation and
construction of a new foundation, can save money and prevent that risk. 45
In any adaptive reuse project, there is a great need for a detailed analysis to
determine the buildings opportunities and constraints for finding a viable new use.
The buildings adaptive capacity can be determined by conducting a thorough analysis
of the buildings and its structure. 46 A historic preservation engineer or architect could
conduct such an investigation. In addition, it is important to undertake studies to
develop appropriate architectural solution or design alternatives for difficult design
40

Austin, 82.
Bergsman, 80.
42
Bergsman, 80.
43
Austin, 111.
44
Paulus, 4.
45
Paulus, 4.
46
Austin, 49.
41

18

challenges. 47 If an addition is being added to the historic resource, it should be

distinguishable from the original building. There are conflicting theories over whether
the addition should be contextual and be harmonious with the old in scale, proportion,
materials, or if the addition should be of its day and representative of current trends
in architectural design.
Best Practices: Design Guidelines and Handbooks
Design guidelines provide a set of criteria to guide any proposed changes to landmarks
or historic districts in a jurisdiction. The goal of design guidelines is to protect the
visual qualities of the historic district or neighborhood and preserve its historic
character. The guidelines do not forbid changes; instead, they present owners with
alternatives and suggestions for various types of rehabilitation. Typically, guidelines
call for the retention of distinguishing features, serve as a guide for new construction
in a historic district, encourage repair and reversibility of new materials, as well as
protect additions with significance on their own. Most often, a local preservation
commission administers and reviews design guidelines. The existence of guidelines
allows the local jurisdiction to simplify the review process and ensure the developers
know in advance the requirements of the guidelines. By following the standards set
forth in the guidelines, the projects are more likely to gain faster gain approval.
Case Study: Lower Downtown Historic District Design Guidelines, Denver, CO
The Lower Downtown portion of Denver, located at the confluence of Cherry Creek
and the South Platte River, emerged as the manufacturing and warehouse center of
the city in the 1870s when the railroads caused a building boom in the city. Following
World War II, with changes in manufacturing, the decline of the railroads, and the
construction of federal highways through the city, the Lower Downtown (LoDo) area
stopped booming. In the 1970s, during the oil boom, several buildings were renovated
into office use but few preservation efforts started until the late 1970s and early
1980s. To spur redevelopment of the Lower Downtown area, the city changed its
zoning from I-1 (industrial) to B-7 (mixed use). Two minor alterations made the
incentives package very enticing by the 1980s. In 1982, the B-7 provided a density
bonus for the preservation of historic buildings. In 1988, the city again modified the
B-7 district and created the Lower Downtown Historic District and Lower Downtown
Design and Demolition Review Board. The historic district encompasses a 29-block
area of turn-of-the-century brick warehouses and industrial buildings.
The resulting design guidelines address the buildings types found in the LoDo district,
which include shopfronts, factory/warehouse, and commercial. The general consensus
in public meetings and interviews was that Lower Downtowns historic buildings and
traditional character must be preserved. The majority believes that new buildings
should not be allowed to overwhelm or change the existing historic character of the
District.48 As the LoDo area continues to change by adaptive reuse and infill
development, the guidelines call out design features evocative of the districts
architectural character for new buildings on once-vacant parking lots and
underutilized sites. A coalition consisting of the City of Denver, Lower Downtown
47

Austin, 82.
LoDo Denver, Lower Downtown Neighborhood Plan, August 28, 2000, HP-5, http://www.lodo.org/
neighborhood_plan_pg2.htm, accessed May 9, 2005).
48

19

Development, inc., Historic Denver hired the design firm Goody Clancy to prepare the
design guidelines as well as a new vision for LoDo. The ultimate goal of the guidelines
is to preserve LoDos unique historic character while also guiding development in the
flourishing arts districts and strong housing market.
Best Practices: Green Adaptive Reuse
There is a great opportunity to extend the sustainable practice of adaptive reuse by
preserving energy and resources through green design. Currently, sustainable design is
most widely publicized for its applications to new construction. It is, however, an
important strategy for adaptive reuse. Increasingly, practitioners are combining
sustainable design with adaptive reuse of historic buildings creating the field of green
adaptive reuse. This combination makes sense since the premise of adaptive reuse is
more sustainable than greenfield development since the infrastructure and materials
are already in place.
In 2001, the U.S. Green Building Councils Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) program introduced a pilot to create guidelines for documenting
sustainable design practices for existing buildings. The rating system is point based
and upon review a building submitted certification is given one of four ratings:
general, silver, gold, or platinum. If attempting to gain LEED certification, it is
imperative to hire a consultant to guide the design team and supervise the recordation
necessary as part of the extensive LEED application process. In addition, decide if
LEED certification will be a goal of the sustainable adaptive reuse at the beginning of
the project because backtracking through records and translating them into the
lengthy documentation necessary for certification can be daunting task. 49 In addition,
it is important to see if the local jurisdiction has a sustainable development agency or
policy. Many cities, including Chicago, Portland, Seattle, and Austin, have policies
supportive of sustainable design.
Further research and advocacy is needed to develop guidelines to meet LEED
certification and mitigate any contaminants while respecting the architectural
integrity of the historic resource. Combined guidelines for the green adaptive reuse of
historic industrial buildings would greatly streamline this process.
Case Study: Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center, Portland, OR
Portland, Oregons Jean Vollum Natural Capital Center is a notable example of green
adaptive reuse. The project is reflective of the renewed emphasis in the U.S.
toward energy and resource conservation. 50 The $12.5 million renovation of an
historic warehouse into a mixed-use office and retail building opened in September
2001 in the citys booming Pearl District. The area north of downtown Portland, which
has undergone a remarkable transformation in recent years, once stood as a
deteriorating district of rail yards and warehouses. Built in 1895, the two-story
warehouse appealed to Ecotrust, the owner and redeveloper of the site, due to its
location in the Pearl District, its proximity to bike trails and transit, and the 70,000
square feet of space in an existing, historic building. Ecotrust is a local nonprofit
organization with a mission to build a conservation economy from Alaska to Northern
49
50

Flynn, 42.
Flynn, 39.

20

California based on the coasts rain forest, so it comes as no surprise that they would
want to build sustainably.
Ecotrust hired Holst Architecture as the designer and Green Building Services, an
environmental design consultant, to complete the LEED certification process. During
the projects renovation in 2000-01, the LEED certification program was not yet an
industry standard, so Ecotrust applied for the certification retroactively. They had
decided at the beginning that the building would follow sustainable design practices,
so they easily qualified, but it was difficult applying at the end of the construction
process due to administration and cost. 51 In January 2002, the Vollum Center became
the first building in the west to be certified with a LEED gold rating.
Sustainable practices included water and energy conservation, recycling of materials,
and foremost the reuse of an existing structure. The historic, brick-and-timber
warehouse was not in great condition; in fact, in portions it was suffering from
settling, dry rot, and was in great need of seismic reinforcement. Due to the existing
conditions and Holsts design of an exposed interior, the seismic and structural
challenges proved to be most expensive part of the project totaling about $2 million.52
Fortunately, Ecotrust remained dedicated to the building.
Holst focused the sustainable design portion of the adaptive reuse project on four
areas: social equity, water, light, and air. A large atrium and other public spaces are
open to the public. Photocell sensors adjust interior lighting and light from the skylit
atrium and skylights provides daylight to the interior. The construction team recycled
a very high 98 percent of debris and, thus, far outdid the 75 percent required to get
maximum points from LEED. The reuse included the construction of a 10,000 squarefoot addition, containing a 3,000 square-foot roof terrace with an open-air deck and a
7,000 square-foot eco roof built from salvaged timber. The stormwater runoff
reduction system consists of the eco roof and bioswales, which are plant-filled
drainage ditches. The native, drought-resistant plants filter runoff from the building
and parking lot and reclaims 95 percent of the runoff.53 The completed center has 17
retail, office, and nonprofit tenants, all with a social equity and environmental focus.
Ecotrust has its offices there also and conducts weekly tours of the building.
Ecotrust did not pursue historic tax credits and instead altered the west faade with
new fenestration. If better guidelines were in place combining LEED requirements and
the Secretary of the Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation, they might have taken
advantage of the tax credits.
Historic Preservation
The National Register of Historic Places, administered by the National Park Service, is
the official Federal list of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects significant
in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture. A property
is only listed in the National Register with owner consent for an individual listing and
at least 50 percent support for a historic district. In addition to the prestige and
associated property value increases, listing in the National Register provides limited
51

Flynn, 42.
Flynn, 44.
53
Flynn, 46.
52

21

protection from the adverse effects of federally funded, licensed, or assisted projects
and allows the owners of income-producing properties to apply for state and federal
rehabilitation tax credits.
Designation as a local landmark or as a contributing building in a local historic district
provides greater protection than federal designation. Local preservation ordinances
protect historic resources through a preservation commission or review board, which
supervises and grants permission to build additions, new buildings, or major
alterations to a buildings exterior. Inclusion in a local district does not restrict
routine maintenance. Many local ordinances often grant owners a set period of time
with a freeze on property tax assessment.
In many instances, properties listed in the National Register are automatically
included in the corresponding state register. State listing can also result in eligibility
for rehabilitation tax credits and a freeze of property tax assessment after a
substantial rehabilitation. Many states also have environmental review processes for
historic resources listed in or eligible for the State Register undergoing a state-funded
or licensed project.
The design review associated with many local preservation ordinances is viewed by
many as a regulatory barrier to redevelopment. In addition, to qualify for the state
and federal rehabilitation tax credits, a project must comply with the Secretary of the
Interiors Standards for Rehabilitation. Instead of viewing these requirements as
hindrances, developers should view historic preservation as a process to ensure that
the historic character of the building or complex is preserved for future generations.
Indeed, it is the tax credit review process which allows the federal government to
ensure that the historical integrity of significant buildings is not lost as a result of
rehabilitation. Extensive guidance is offered by both local, state, and federal offices
to guide preservation and tax credit projects through the process. Hiring a
preservation architect or preservation consultant can also significantly reduce
problems and complications.
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation are ten basic principles
created to help preserve the distinctive character of a historic building and its site,
while allowing for reasonable change to meet new needs. Rehabilitation projects
must meet the following Standards to qualify as certified rehabilitations eligible for
the 20 percent rehabilitation tax credit. The Standards apply to both the exterior and
the interior of historic buildings and include related landscape features as well as
additions and new construction. It should be noted that the Standards are interpreted
with economic and technical feasibility issues considered on a case-by-case basis. The
Standards are as follows:
1.

A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that
requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site
and environment.

2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal
of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a
property shall be avoided.

22

3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.
Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding
conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be
undertaken.
4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic
significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved.
5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of
craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved.
6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the
severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new
feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities
and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be
substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.
7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to
historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if
appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.
8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and
preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be
undertaken.
9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy
historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be
differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale,
and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its
environment.
10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in
such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of
the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.54
A meeting should be scheduled before formal application is made to the city for a
building permit or development review. Early project review often results in the
resolution of design issues which can save valuable time once the project is submitted
to the city. Finally, if the projects design will not qualify for the tax credits, it is
important to note that the resource will retain its listing in the National Register of
Historic Places unless the building is drastically altered, so that it no longer retains its
significance or integrity. A locally listed building, however, requires design review no
matter what. An investigation into historical significance of a building is critical and
allows the team to know what the character-defining features are in order to comply
with design review.
Many developers believe that the regulations associated with historic preservation
54

National Park Service, Heritage Preservation Services, The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for
Rehabilitation, http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/tax/rehabstandards.htm (accessed May 8, 2005).

23

make working with a historic building more difficult. 55 Yet the process does not have
be a barrier. Design approval and tax credit certification do add extra costs to a
project, but the result is a marketable historic resource with authentic materials that
more often than not add value to the final product. Indeed, many developers,
investors, and owners believe that the resulting product is far superior to new
construction and thus worth the wait and risk for added expenses. 56
Best Practices: Inventories
Inventories can be powerful preservation tool for vacant or underutilized industrial
buildings. They can reveal potential developments to for-profit and nonprofit
developers. A development boom can often threaten industrial buildings if there is
pressure for large new buildings, such as condominium projects, hotels, or convention
centers. In response to increased development pressure, a city or nonprofit
organization can ameliorate the threat by conducting a comprehensive citywide
industrial inventory to bring attention to the decreasing number of industrial buildings
and opportunities for reuse. Such an inventory could also highlight industrial
properties which have already been adaptively reused.
In 2001, Gerald Ingalls, director of Public Policy at the University of North Carolina at
Charlotte, conducted an inventory of mills in the Charlotte metropolitan area.
Research showed that 118 mills were constructed between 1880 and 1930 and that
only 16 had been demolished since then. 57 Ingalls found that many continued to have
an industrial use. Due to their location in the revitalizing north end of Charlotte,
several buildings have been redeveloped into a variety of projects, including office,
commercial, retail, and housing uses.
The Rhode Island Historical Preservation and Heritage Commission, the states agency
for historic preservation and heritage programs, co-sponsored a survey of Providences
industrial sites, with the Providence Preservation Society.
Case Study: Providence Mill Revitalization Initiative
In 2000, demolition threats to Eagle Square, a prominent nineteenth-century mill
complex in Providence, spurred advocacy groups to urge for the protection of the
citys industrial resources. City officials responded by establishing a mill preservation
program meant to diminish the threat to old mill buildings. A new landmark
designationthe Industrial and Commercial Buildings District (ICBD)protected historic
industrial buildings built before 1960. It was the first such non-contiguous thematic
local historic district in the country, and afforded the mills a new set of protections.
All buildings listed in the ICBD are granted an automatic live/work zoning variance and
are eligible for a tax abatement program, which stabilizes property taxes for 10 years
after the redevelopment of a mill property. Developers also could pursue the 20
percent federal rehabilitation tax credit in combination with Rhode Islands 30 percent
state historic preservation tax credit. Numerous mill buildings have been adapted into

55

Bookout, 317.
Bookout, 318.
57
Bergsman, 67.
56

24

mixed-use projects as a result of the economic incentives and protective measures.58

Most of the conversions have been into market-rate or upscale housing, which
produces sizable property-tax revenue for the city. It does, however, mean that the
small businesses, craftspeople, and artisans being forced out of the mills will be driven
away from the city in search of cheap rents. Can the incentives be altered to redirect
the development pressure or mandate a certain percentage of affordable work space
and residential space in each new project?
Administration & Community Support
The success of many adaptive reuse projects can result in revitalization of a block or
neighborhood. This is often more noticeable for reuse projects in distressed districts.
In such instances, the industrial buildings could have been a source of blight and the
reuse is welcomed by the general public. At a certain point, however, the success of a
revitalizing area causes displacement, whether it be of artists or small industries using
the industrial buildings or of residents living in nearby houses, and this is viewed
unfavorably by many. Other concerns the public might have in response to the
adaptive reuse of a historic industrial building include congestion and parking, as well
as contamination. It is important to notify the public about the project early on its
planning stages to get public buy-in and assess the neighborhoods support. This can
be achieved by holding public meetings and charrettes. Another way to engage the
public is to invite key members from the community, perhaps from neighborhood
associations and local businesses, to serve on a task force to help guide the adaptive
reuse of a particularly important building within a community.
Case Study: Pullman Factory Task Force, Chicago, IL
In June 1999, Governor George H. Ryan and Mayor Richard M. Daley announced the
creation of a task force to lead the community process for the stabilization of the
Pullman railroad car factory damaged by arson in 1998. Pullman, an early planned
industrial town located near Chicago, was constructed in the 1880s on the Illinois
Central Railroad as the home of the Pullman railroad car factory and surrounding
residences. The Pullman Factory Task Force included Pullman residents, historic
preservationists, economic development specialists, and civic and government
leaders. 59 Their goals were to produce an interim report on the stabilization of the
former factory, find a future use for the building, and secure funding sources.
Governor Ryan subsequently granted $10 million in Illinois FIRST funds to continue the
stabilization work on the factory and clock tower.
Economics/Finance
According to the Advisory Council report, adaptive reuse is not always cheaper than
new construction, but it typically falls within the same range making it a feasible and

58

Providence Mill Revitalization Initiative, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions Database,
September 28, 2003, http://forum.nationaltrust.org, accessed may 4, 2005).
59
Governor Ryan and Mayor Daley Announce the formation of Pullman Factory Task Force, press
release, June 25, 1999, http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/ShowPressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=
1&RecNum=307 (accessed May 9, 2005).

25

more sustainable alternative. 60 If the building is located in a distressed area then the
building and land might be very inexpensive, but it may be difficult to secure lending
and there might be little market demand for the completed project. Obviously the
more common exception is when a project costs far more than new construction, such
as when unexpected costs arise. In fact, many developers recommend budgeting a
large contingency expense for both architectural and construction costs in case there
are any unforeseen structural or contamination problems. 61 Many lenders require at
least 10 to 15 percent of the total construction costs as a contingency fund for
unintended expenses. 62
In some real estate markets, industrial buildings are not in great demand; as a result,
they present a tremendous opportunity for redevelopment. In such a setting,
abandoned industrial buildings can be purchased at prices substantially below
replacement cost. The low acquisition costs, combined with available incentives and
credits, can result in lease prices competitive with traditional office or industrial
space or sales or rental prices the same or lower than residential market rates. While
deteriorated industrial buildings are available at a lower acquisition cost in some
markets, in most cases they are priced for their development potential. Typically,
construction costs are less for adaptive reuse, but the process is very labor intensive
and takes longer than new construction. 63
Even when an adaptive reuse project costs more than new construction, there is an
added value since the building could serve as a catalyst for revitalization efforts and
the creation of new jobs, preserves a historic resource, which is a public good, and
promotes sustainable development practices. In Historic Preservation: Curatorial
Management of the Built World, James Marston Fitch points out that the adaptive
reuse of historic buildings is more economic not only in terms of the conservation
of the energy represented by the built environment, but also for the relative costs
of old and new built space. 64 Without any structural problems, a conversion can cost
the same as comparable new development. 65 There is a significantly higher quality of
building materials and ornamentation associated with historic industrial buildings,
however, that is not found in current new construction.
In the past, many developers avoided historic preservation and adaptive reuse projects
for fears of cost overruns, lack of qualified labor, and concern over unexpected
problems associated with historic buildings. 66 The growing number of examples and
heightened concern for smart growth planning and sustainability have made adaptive
reuse a more accepted tool both financially and socially. Currently, adaptive reuse is
particularly appealing due to low mortgage interest rates, the increased demand for
housing in urban areas, and the trendiness of living in industrial spaces.
Financial incentives make it easier to redevelop industrial buildings, especially large
complexes, many of which have sat vacant for several decades. It is important to
60

Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Adaptive Use: A Survey of the Construction Costs,
Washington, D.C., vol. 4, no. 4, June 1976. Cited in Fitch, 183.
61
Bilsky, 25.
62
Bookout, 327.
63
Austin, viii.
64
Fitch, 169.
65
Duell, 24.
66
Lawrence E. Reiner, How to Recycle Old Buildings (New York: McGraw-Hill), 9.

26

generate a mix of financing. Since adaptive reuse projects often acts as catalysts for
future redevelopmentencouraging both financial and social investmentthere is an
incentive for local jurisdictions to subsidize such projects. There is a strong need for
public subsidization. There are two types of public subsidydirect subsidization which
includes public monies in form of grants and indirect subsidization, such as preferred
tax treatment. Gap financing, bridging the gap between what the private sector was
support with public subsidies and monies, frequently makes the difference between a
successful adaptive reuse project and the building remaining vacant. Local tools used
to bridge the gap include payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTS), tax increment financing
(TIF), revolving funds, and other creative financing approaches.
Tax Exemptions, permitted under state law but typically administered on local level,
are granted for projects in areas where local jurisdictions want to guide future
development and growth. While traditionally tax exemptions have been granted
wholly to new construction, they remain a viable tool by which to encourage adaptive
reuse. Tax incremental financing is a useful and powerful tool, which local
governments can employ to offer developers incentives. The provision of capital
improvements, such as street lights, street furniture, sidewalks, landscaping, parks,
and other improvements, by a local jurisdiction is an important incentive to encourage
adaptive reuse.
In addition, it is important to engage the private sector through tax credits, both
through the federal rehabilitation tax credits, state tax credits, and the Low-Income
Housing Tax Credits.
Best Practices: Federal and State Rehabilitation Tax Credits
Historic preservation tax credits play a significant role in making the redevelopment of
historic industrial buildings feasible. Since redevelopment can cost more than new
development, federal and state tax credits close the gap.67 As a tool, tax credits are
praised for their economic impact. They promote reinvestment in existing areas
rather than greenfield sites and protect historic resources. While the design
requirements necessary to qualify for historic tax credits are viewed by some as a
regulatory barrier, tax credits provide key financial incentives which make
rehabilitation projects viable. Importantly, federal and state tax credits allow
developers to raise equity by leveraging the tax credits to convince lenders to provide
conventional financing. 68
Tax credits, while they do not cover the cost of rehabilitation, provide much-needed
financial incentives for historic preservation. Historic Preservation Tax Incentives are
available for income-producing buildings that are National Historic Landmarks, listed
in the National Register of Historic Places, or contribute to a National Register historic
district and certain local historic districts. Buildings eligible for the National Register
may apply for listing as part of the tax credit process. The project must meet the U.S.
Department of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. In addition to commercial and
multifamily housing, industrial buildings qualify for the tax credits. Historic tax credits
allow for a credit of 20 percent of the total cost and expenses of rehabilitation
provided the costs exceed 50 percent of the total basis in the property. Acceptable
67
68

Bergsman, 67.
Gose, 38.

27

hard costs include rehabilitation expenses and qualified soft costs are architectural
and engineering fees, site survey fess, and legal expenses. In general, every dollar of
tax credit reduces the amount of tax owed by one dollar. Every dollar of tax
deduction reduces the amount of tax owed by a fraction of a dollar equal to the
taxpayer's tax rate. Building owners must hold the structure for five years following
the completion of the rehabilitation or pay back the credit.
Federal tax credit incentives to encourage the preservation of historic buildings were
first authorized by the Tax Reform Act of 1976. The first federal credits, reauthorized
and improved by the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, offered a rehabilitation tax
credit of up to twenty-five percent depending on the buildings age and its eligibility
for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. 69 The 1986 Tax Reform Act
decreased the maximum credit from twenty-five to twenty percent, limited the credit
a taxpayer could use each year to $7,000, and established a maximum income limit for
users of the credits. Federal rehabilitation tax credits are, however, an important
revitalization tool and a valuable financial incentive for adaptive reuse projects. In
spite of the increased restrictions, tax credits have proven to be effective tools for
making the prospect of rehabbing a historic building more financial attractive to
developers and owners. The purpose of tax credits is to induce owners to preserve
and rehabilitate older properties rather than raze them. An incidental but important
outcome is the stimulation of investment that would not otherwise occur because of
the physical configuration of buildings and sites that are functionally obsolescent. 70
Best Practices: State Historical Tax Credits
State historic preservation tax credits are very similar to the federal program,
although often they do not have the restrictions of the property being income
producing. In addition, the state credit can total up to 25 percent of the rehabilitation
costs. Generally a bank buys the credits at the beginning of a large project but is not
able to use them until certification is granted and the project is completed. Some
states require that the credits be sold to a corporation while others allow individual
property owners to claim them against their own tax liability.
In 2002, 24 states had state tax credit programs in existence and several other states
were drafting programs.71 With state budgets in difficult times in recent years, there
have been threats to the funding of several state tax credit programs (MD for
example). The removal of a state tax credit program would have a significantly
detrimental effect on rehabilitation and adaptive reuse projects. 72
Case Study: Maryland State Tax Credit Program
Maryland is an example of an early state tax credit program, first introduced in 1975.
The Maryland Heritage Preservation Tax Credit Program, administered by the Maryland
Historic Trust, provides eligible owners with an income tax credit equal to 25 percent
69

The National Register of Historic Places is administered by the National Park Service, in conjunction
with the relevant State Historic Preservation Officer, which for Maryland is the Maryland Historical Trust.
70
Arthur C. Nelson and Janice Talley, Revitalizing Minority Commercial Areas Through Commercial
Historic District Designation, Journal of Urban Affairs 13.2 (1991): 222.
71
Gose, 38.
72
Gose, 40.

28

of the qualified costs expended on the rehabilitation. 73 To be eligible, the building

must be listed in the National Register of Historic Places as either an individual
landmark or as part of an historic district, be a local landmark or a contributing
building in a local historic district, or be a contributing building located in a certified
heritage area. The restoration must conform to the Secretary of the Interiors
Standards for Rehabilitation and must be certified by the Maryland Historical Trust.
Maryland also has a local property tax abatement option that allows for a 10-year
freeze. A tax abatement decreases or delays the taxes due on a given property over a
fixed period of time by either reducing the percentage of taxes due or applying a
lower tax rate than normal. 74
Many cities also have local preservation tax credits or loans available for rehabilitation
efforts of listed buildings. The Baltimore City Property Tax Credit Program, for
example, is a valuable tool for revitalization efforts. The program keeps assessed tax
of renovated or rehabilitated property at the same level as it was before start of
renovation for the following ten years. The credit is for 100 percent of the City tax
assessment increase if the rehabilitation of property is certified by the Commission for
Historical and Architectural Preservation (CHAP). The rehabilitation cost must exceed
twenty-five percent of the pre-rehabilitation cash value of the building. The credit
can be used for both income-producing and owner-occupied buildings listed in the
National Register and/or designated locally as landmarks or contributing buildings in
an historic district. In addition, the City, through the Commission for Historical and
Architectural subsidizes some investment opportunities through low interest loans and
grants.
Best Practices: Low-Income Housing Tax Credits
The Low-Income Housing Tax Credit rewards property owners for providing low-income
rental housing to the community. While not explicitly a preservation incentive, the
credit applies to rehabilitation, as well as new construction, and thus can be used in
conjunction with the federal and state rehabilitation tax credit programs. The
additional tax savings gained by combining multiple tax credit programs can make an
affordable housing project feasible. The credit is 4 percent per year for 10 years for
each unit involving the 20 percent rehabilitation tax credit, federal subsidies, or taxexempt bonds, and 9 percent for projects with no other government guarantees or
subsidizations, except for Section 8 assistance. Both forms of the credit last for 10
years. At least 40 percent of the units must be for tenants with incomes below 60
percent of the median family income, or 20 percent of the units must be rented to
tenants who earn 50 percent or less of the median family income. The LIHTC is only
available for the percentage of units conforming to the income restrictions. The tax
credit enables low-income housing sponsors and developers to raise project equity
through the sale of tax benefits to investors. Most credits are sold to corporate or
individual investors through public or private syndication.
Case Study: Rhode Island Mill, Eden, NC

73

Marylands tax credit program was started in 1975 and it originally allowed taxpayers to deduct 100
percent of the rehabilitation amount from their state income tax returns over a five-year period. There
was no minimum expenditure and no limit to the amount of the amortization basis.
74
Morris, 4.

29

The Rhode Island Mill, historically the main employer in Eden, North Carolina, closed
in 2001. The mill made blankets for 50 years and then for the last 50 years of its
industrial life served as a warehouse. As a result, it was structurally sound and had
only seen minor alterations. Raleigh-based Gould & Associates viewed the 102,000
square-foot building as a structure worth saving. The asbestos and lead paint, found
throughout the building, did not scare them away. Amenities, such as the mills
location overlooking the Smith River, made it an attractive property. Gould &
Associates did, however, face the prospect of the lack of demand for market-rate
multifamily housing in Eden, so providing affordable housing served a real need in the
community.
With various tax credits, the project became viable. 75 Ultimately, the project was
funded by federal historic preservation tax credits, North Carolina historic
preservation tax credits, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and North Carolina
affordable housing credits. This totaled 80 percent equity investment from the
credits. The mill was adapted into 64 affordable units and all were rented within one
year. A 4,500 square foot commercial space was later converted to a preschool. The
city of Eden played an active role in the projectrezoning the land and granting a
special use permit to convert the mill into a multifamily residential use. Ultimately,
the project had a positive effect upon the neighborhood and the town. A $1,250,000
grant enabled the town to rehab the surrounding neighborhood and build upon the
revitalization started by the Rhode Island Mill Apartments project.
Best Practices: HUDs 221(d) Market Rate Program
Through the 221(d) Market Rate program the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
insures mortgages for the new construction or substantial rehabilitation of multifamily
rental properties. Nonprofit and cooperative sponsors use Section 221(d)(3); for-profit
sponsors use Section 221(d)(4). The purposes of Section 221(d)(3) and Section
221(d)(4) are basically the same. Both programs assist private industry in the
construction or rehabilitation of multifamily rental and cooperative housing for low- to
moderate-income and displaced families by making capital more readily available and
by reducing the risk of default for lenders.
The project sponsor must make early contact with the HUD State/Field Office
Multifamily Housing staff to determine if there is a clear market demand in the area of
the proposed housing, if the project will be sound economically, and if project
financing is secure. Prospective project sponsors are responsible for finding a HUDapproved lender to make a loan and submit an application for mortgage insurance
commitment to the HUD State/Area Office. Only for-profit, nonprofit, and limited
partnership sponsors of eligible affordable rental projects may apply for FHA mortgage
insurance under this program.
Case Study: Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts, Cabbagetown, GA
The Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts, located about one mile east of downtown Atlanta in
Cabbagetown, is a large-scale adaptive reuse of a cotton mill into a mix of marketrate and affordable units. The mill operated from 1881 to 1968 in a 12.8-acre site
75

30

adjacent to its worker housing in the company-owned village known as Cabbagetown.

The mill abandoned the site in 1977 and thus a great deal of deterioration was
discovered when the adaptive reuse project started in the mid 1990s and so only 70
percent of the buildings were retained. The sites nine industrial buildings and
associated village are listed in the National Register of Historic Places. The Fulton
Cotton Mill Associates formed in 1996 to redevelop the site. Aderhold Properties, Inc.,
a developer well-practiced in the adaptive reuse of historic industrial buildings,
undertook the project in two phases. The first phase was completed in 1998 and the
second in 2000. The oldest building, constructed in 1881, could not be rehabilitated
and ended up in a ruinous state. Aderhold decided to retain the walls as a sculptural
form to enclose the outdoor swimming pool.
Aderhold did have difficulties securing funding since no commercial banks would fund
the reuse. Aderhold was, however, astute enough to apply for the HUD 221 (d) 4 and
this source of funding allowed the project to move forward. Of the two phases the
first phase was funded by HUD, city, local government interest groups, and the private
sector. The first phase produced 206 housing units, 86 of which are affordable due to
the use of Low Income Housing Tax Credits. The second phase of 298 market-rate
units, completed in 2000, qualified for more conventional funding since it built upon
the success of the first phase. With 504 units, the Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts are the
largest loft apartment complex in the country.76 In addition to serving as the new
offices for Aderhold Properties, the conversion spurred new developed and job
opportunities in Cabbagetown and increased the supply of 77affordable housing in a
close-in, gentrifying area of Atlanta.78
Best Practices: Historic Preservation Revolving Funds
A revolving fund, a popular and successful historic preservation tool, can aid in the
revitalization of residential communities. A revolving fund is a pool of monies used by
a non-profit organization or a governmental agency to buy and sell or help others to
buy and restore or renovate historic properties. The monies could also aid in the
homeowner in the rehabilitation of the building. Any proceeds from sales, loan
repayments, or donations are used to replenish the revolving fund pool. There are
several revolving fund techniques and which one to use should be selected in order to
best meet the needs of the particular historic community.
Case Study: Providence Preservation Society Revolving Fund
The Providence Preservation Societys Revolving Fund, for example, restores
endangered properties in the citys National Register-listed neighborhoods for sale to
low- and moderate-income buyers and provides low-interest rehabilitation loans to
low-income homeowners. The Society also has innovatively used federal funds to aid
in their revitalization efforts and to close financing gap between rehabilitation costs
and what the market will bear namely, Community Development Block Grants from
HUD in conjunction with funding from the Rhode Island State Historic Preservation
76

Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts, Cabbagetown, Georgia, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions
Database, October 19, 2000, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
77
78

Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts, Cabbagetown, Georgia, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions
Database, October 19, 2000, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).

31

Office and private donations, as well as HOME and HOPE funds due to their HUDdesignation as a Certified Housing Development Organization.
The Monohasset Mill Project, LLC, an adaptive reuse of a historic mill complex into
subsidized and market-rate live/work condominiums, has established a working
relationship with the Providence Preservation Society Revolving Fund to assist in
maintaining the vision of this project. The primary role of the Revolving Fund has been
to secure and administer the HOME Funds necessary for the subsidized component of
this project. The PPSRF will also have a permanent role in supervising any future
resale or transfer of the subsidized units and to help ensure compliance to the resale
restrictions. The Revolving Fund is also involved in rehabilitation design oversight,
State Historic Tax Credit compliance, and the fiscal responsibility of the construction
and operating budget of the project.
Best Practices: Real Estate Investment Trusts
A real estate investment trust (REITs) is similar to a mutual fund in that it allows
investors to pool funds for participation in real estate ownership or financing. REITs
are required by law to distribute 90 percent of its annual income to shareholders or to
reinvest the capital to improve its portfolio. Investors contribute capital to the trust
and in return receive a return on their capital through payment of dividends and an
increase in equity as the company grows.
Case Study: Madison Park REIT
Madison Park REIT is a real estate development company whose capital structure is in
the form of a real estate investment trust. Madison Park REIT specializes in adaptive
reuse of historic industrial buildings into live/work lofts and mixed-use projects. Most
of Madison Parks projects are industrial buildings surrounded by residential and
commercial properties, rather than industrial districts. As a result, local jurisdictions
and residents are supportive of the non-conforming propertys new use. Most of the
REITs properties are eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Landmarks
and they work to have the buildings listed, since the company actively pursues the
federal rehabilitation tax credit as a source of equity as part of their financing.
Madison Parks approach generates greater returns on investor capital than traditional
residential development since they save significantly on construction costs due to the
spare aesthetics of their live/work units. In addition, live/work units incur fewer
maintenance expenses than traditional apartments, which in turn results in greater
cash-flow to Madison Park REIT, and in turn, our investors.
Unique Adaptive Reuse Projects
The following three case studies show the breadth of recent adaptive reuse efforts.
All three are focused on promoting the arts or heritage as their core mission, and
industrial buildings have helped them achieve their goals. In addition, all three case
studies have had a profound impact on their surrounding communities.
Case Study: Artspace Projects, Inc., Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN
Artspace Projects, Inc., is the nations leading nonprofit real estate developer for the

32

arts. Created in 1979 as an advocacy group for the space needs of working artists
priced out of Minneapolis Warehouse District, Artspace has been converting buildings
into live/work space for artists since 1997. The mission of Artspace Projects is to
create, foster and preserve affordable space for artists and arts organizations. Finding
affordable live/work space can be a difficult task for artists. They often gravitate to
industrial districts, where the well-lit open spaces serve their needs well. The
presence of artists in a historic industrial neighborhood often acts as a catalyst for
redevelopment. By creating affordable live/work spaces, Artspace is supporting the
professional growth and self-sufficiency of artists while also enhancing the cultural
and economic life of the surrounding neighborhood. In addition to its role as
developer, Artspace achieves its mission through asset management activities,
consulting services, and community-building activities that serve artists and arts
organizations.
Artspace specifically targets underutilized or vacant historic buildings, many of which
formerly served an industrial function. 79 In its first seven years, the organization
created space for over 160 artists. 80 Artspace owns the buildings and rents them to
lease-hold artists co-operatives. The use of federal and state rehabilitation tax
credits is crucial to the financing of Artspace projects. In addition, the organization
receives funding from a long list of foundations, corporations, and private individuals,
including the Minnesota State Art Board and the National Endowment for the Arts.
In the late 1980s, after searching for a more proactive role in the creation of studios
after seeing so many artists displaced, the organization ceased its referral-only service
and entered into the role of developer at the request of St. Paul city officials. To
create the Northern Warehouse Artists Cooperative, located in downtown St. Pauls
Lowertown neighborhood, Artspace adapted a six-story brick warehouse dating from
the early 1900s into 52 live/work units. The Northern units, which range in size from
1,000 to 2,000 square feet, feature high ceilings, exposed brick walls and beams, large
windows, and modern kitchens and bathrooms. The cooperative rented out
immediately and the buildings occupancy rate has never dropped below 100
percent. 81 Listed in the National Register of Historic Places, the 149,000 square-foot
project includes two floors of commercial and nonprofit tenants. The Northern, which
only cost $5 million to redevelop, has had a noticeable impact on Lowertown. When it
opened in 1990, fewer than 100 people lived in the area while now its population tops
5,000.82 Due to the projects success, St. Paul invited Artspace to develop two more
live/work buildings in the city, the Frogtown Family Lofts near the State Capitol and
the Tilsner Building, a warehouse next door to the Northern.
In the mid-1990s, Artspace Projects looked outside of its region for the challenge of
bringing affordable live/work units to artists in other communities. Its first out-ofstate project consisted of the conversion of a former Pontiac dealership in Pittsburg
into 37 affordable live/work spaces. The organization has completed projects, or
79

Artspace Projects, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions Database,

http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
80
Artspace Projects, National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions Database,
http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
81
Artspace Projects, Inc., Project Portfolio, http://www.artspaceusa.org/about/more.htm (accessed
May 9, 2005).
82
Artspace Projects, Inc., Project Portfolio, http://www.artspaceusa.org/about/more.htm (accessed
May 9, 2005).

33

currently has projects underway in the following cities: Duluth, MN; Reno, NV;
Pittsburgh, PA; Galveston, TX; Portland, OR; Prince Georges County, MD; Chicago, IL;
San Francisco, CA; and Seattle, WA. The projects completed, or in development,
represent approximately $60 million worth of property owned (or co-owned) and
managed by Artspace. 83 They contain more than 500 units of live/work, studio, office,
exhibition, and performance space that serve the needs of more than 3,000 artists and
arts organizations. 84 In the last few years, Artspace has further expanded its mission to
incorporate the planning and development of performing arts centers, museums, other
arts facilities, and entire arts districts throughout the country.
Case Study: Lowell National Historic Park, Lowell, MA
Lowell, Massachusetts, a small industrial city founded 30 miles northwest of Boston in
1826, is a example of the comprehensive redevelopment of the urban industrial core
of a mill-town to private use, but with an emphasis on industrial heritage tourism and
education. In the late 1970s, a group of Lowell residents fought to preserve their
declining citys history after a string of urban renewal projects demolished mill
buildings and row houses. A research grant, funded by Dr. Patrick J. Morgan, Lowells
Superintendent of Schools, discovered that Lowell was the nations first planned
industrial community and the first city where mass production of textiles occurred on
a large scale. 85 Due to this national significance, Lowell became the nations first
Heritage State Park in 1974 and a National Historical Park in 1978.
The Lowell National Historical Park (LNHP), created to turn the city into a living
museum with federal and state funds, and the city rehabilitated 300 structures in the
1980s and 1990s.86 The Lowell Historic Preservation Commission, the former
development arm of the LNHP, provided over $5 million in preservation grants and
loans for faade improvements until it closed in 1995. In addition to 13 historic
districts listed in the National Register of Historic Places, Lowell has two local
architectural and design review districts. The success of Lowells revitalization as a
tourist destination and improved place to live and work is often attributed to the
strength of its public-private partnerships, cultural events and education activities,
support from the business advocacy organization Lowell Plan, Inc., bankers, and many
others. The Tsongas Industrial History Center, named after U.S. Senator Paul Tsongas
who was instrumental in creating the National Historical Park, is sited in the Boott
Cotton Mills complex in Lowell. The mills operated between 1835 and the 1950s and
are now the site of a hands-on education and history experience. A partnership
between the University of Massachusetts at Lowell Graduate School of Education and
the National Historical Park, the history center offers workshops and classroom
materials on the life of the famous Lowell mill girls and other aspects of the textilemaking industry. 87
83

Artspace Projects, Inc., All About Artspace, http://www.artspaceusa.org/about/more.htm (accessed

May 9, 2005).
84
Artspace Projects, Inc., All About Artspace, http://www.artspaceusa.org/about/more.htm (accessed
May 9, 2005).
85
Lowell National Historical Park, Lowell, Massachusetts, National Trust for Historic Preservation
Solutions Database, September 27, 2002, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
86
Lowell National Historical Park, Lowell, Massachusetts, National Trust for Historic Preservation
Solutions Database, September 27, 2002, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
87
Tsongas Industrial History Center, Lowell, Massachusetts, National Trust for Historic Preservation
Solutions Database, October 19, 2000, http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).

34

Case Study: Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art (MASS MoCA)

MASS MoCA, which became the largest center for contemporary arts in the United
States when it opened in May 1999, is part of a growing trend of the adaptive reuse of
historic industrial buildings into contemporary art museums. 88 The trend of industrial
conversions, as they are so named by architectural historian Helen Searing, is so
prevalent due the abundance of space and light in industrial buildings, the large size
and more industrial nature of much contemporary art, and the use of industrial
buildings as artist studios.
The Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art (MASS MoCA) opened in May of 1999
with nineteen galleries in five factory buildings and 300,000 square-feet of
mothballed space. 89 The large site consists of 26 buildings on 13 acres, constructed
primarily between 1872 and 1899 as a dyeworks for Arnold Paint Works, in the small
Berkshire town of North Adams, MA. Arnold closed in 1942 due to the Depression and
lower textile prices in the southern states, and the electronic-component company
Sprague Electrical Company, quickly took over the complex. Sprague closed in 1985,
primarily due to rising energy costs, and caused economic depression in North Adams
since two thousand employees were out of work. It did not take long for a new use for
the site to be envisioned, but it took 14 years for it to be implemented.
In 1986, the Williams College Museum of Art was searching for space to display its
contemporary art collection, which was too large for the museums conventionally
sized galleries. North Adams mayor, John Barrett, III, introduced the museums
director, Thomas Krens and his assistant Joseph Thompson, to the Marshall Street
industrial complex. Immediately, a public/private partnership was formed in 1987 to
garner support from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on the basis of [the
complexs] cultural and historical significance and the museums potential for
economic revitalization. 90 The owner of the site, American Annuity Group, donated
the complex and the state issued a bond for $35 million. The conversion process
began in 1988 with a master plan competition; submissions came from world-famous
architects, as evidenced in the names of the winning team of Skidmore, Owings &
Merrill, Frank Gehry, Robert Venturi, and Bruner/Cott.
Unforeseen problems then began. Funding was drastically scaled back from the initial
$72 million plan of 1987. 91 Citing concern over the states poor economy, negative
press about government-funded art programs and the likelihood of the museum to
serve as a economic revitalization engine, the commonwealth withdrew its $35 million
pledge in 1991. After several years of local fundraising and raising $1 million from 650
mostly local donors, Republican Governor Weld reassessed the states decision, and
decided, in 1995, gave the project $18.6 in matching funds to rehabilitate the
complex. 92 Ultimately, phase I cost $31.4 million (including $3 million in contributed
88

MASS MoCA, History of the Site, http://www.massmoca.org/about.html#press, accessed May 9, 2005.

Mothballing is the process of stabilizing and preserving a vacant building to protect it from the
weather, arson, and other threats until a new use can be found.
90
Trainer, 12.
91
John Fleischman, Small-Town Mill, Big-Time Museum, Preservation 51.2 (March/April 1999): 23.
92
Jennifer Trainer, ed, MASS MoCA: From Mill to Museum (North Adams, MA: MASS MoCA Publications,
2000), 12.
89

35

real estate and $4 million in environmental engineering and feasibility studies).

Funding came from several sources, including a $22 million construction grant from
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, $9.4 million in private funds for construction
support, and $5.6 million in private contributions for programming and start-up. 93 The
low construction budget of $65/square foot was achieved by little rebuildingproving
that it is cheaper to remove features than to build them.94 Admissions revenue and
fund-raising initiatives fund the museums general operating costs and programming
efforts.
Instead of pursuing a permanent collection, MASS MoCA adapted to its reduction in
funding, by creating a new missionto form partnerships with museums, collectors,
and artists and deciding to act as a platform for collaborative exhibitions and sitespecific installations. 95 Two buildings were demolished in order to create a prominent
axis through the complex. The Massachusetts Historical Commission, the state historic
preservation office, approved the demolition of Building 3. The red-brick buildings,
listed in the National Register of Historic Places and the State Register of Historic
Places, were under review of MHC since state monies funded a portion of the project.
Even though the team decided to not pursue tax credits, and most likely the removal
of floors and columns in many interior spaces might have disqualified the project, the
complex has received several historic preservation awards. Indeed, the Cambridge,
Massachusetts-based Bruner/Cott, in their design of the complex, masterfully combine
historic features with the display needs of a contemporary art museum. The adaptive
reuse is very respectful of original features; many galleries have exposed beam
ceilings, stained concrete floors, and exposed brick walls with layers of peeling paint.
The importance of the buildings and their evocative interiors was recognized early on
the 1988 winning master plan included the mantra, Love these noble buildings.
Honour them; modify and intrude upon them as little as possible inside and out.96
From its inception, the museum and city were in partnership knowing that the museum
had the potential to greatly improve the economy of North Adams. In addition to the
tourism associated with museum visitorship, MASS MoCAs phased construction of
60,000 square feet of office space was a key strategy to fuel new jobs in the town.
The wired spaces house tenants from the communications and new media industries,
artists studios, and a black box theater. The museums opening in 1999 has created
more than 200 jobs in North Adams; unemployment rates dropped to 3.7 percent from
12 percent in 1996. 97 Properties adjacent to the complex have been renovated or
purchased for commercial development, including office space and a hotel.
Lessons Learned
Developers, design professionals, owners, and other team members face many
regulatory and financial barriers when undertaking the adaptive reuse of a historic
industrial building. Issues range from contamination to historic preservation design
review to securing funds to designing a new use. There are, however, countless tools
93

MASS MoCA, History of the Site, http://www.massmoca.org/about.html#press, accessed May 9, 2005.

Trainer, 115.
95
Trainer, 21.
96
Jillian Burt and Michael Wise, Museum as Multinational, Blueprint 71 (October 1990): 48.
97
MASS MoCA, Economic Impact, May 19, 2000, http://www.massmoca.org/press_releases/
background/Economic_Impact.html, accessed May 9, 2005.
94

36

and incentives available to aid the adaptive reuse field, and increasingly they are
geared specifically to aiding the growing industrial conversion movement. Lessons can
also be learned from the countless case studies, which reveal innovative financing
schemes and unique design approaches. The adaptive reuse process will continue to
evolve and become less regulated as innovations become more mainstream and the
reuse of buildings becomes a more integral component of smart growth and
revitalization strategies. The seeds have been planted and it is only a matter of time
before the aesthetic, historic, revitalizing, and sustainable advantages of adaptive
reuse are truly valued and favored.
Bibliography
Amer, Robin. The New Fight for Providences Mills. Providence Phoenix (November
5-11, 2004).
Arigoni, Danielle. Affordable Housing and Smart Growth: Making the Connection.
Washington, D.C.: Smart Growth Network and National Neighborhood Coalition, 2001.
Austin, Richard L. Adaptive Reuse: Issues and Case Studies in Building Preservation.
David G. Woodcock, W. Cecil Steward, and R. Alan Forrester, editors. New York: Van
Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1988.
Barta, Gretchen. Everything Old is New Again. Commercial Investment Real Estate
21.2 (March/April 2002): 30-33.
Bergsman, Steve. Despite Problems, Developers and Architects Throughout Southeast
Are Working to Convert Former Textile Mills into Multifamily Properties. Urban Land
(April 2003): 66-69, 80.
Berton, Brad. Straw Into Gold. Commercial Property News (May 1, 2004): 27, 37.
Biggs, Linda. The Rational Factory. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1996.
Bilsky, Carolyn. Extreme Makeover: CCIMs Turn Property Redevelopment Dreams Into
Reality. Commercial Investment Real Estate 24.1 (Jan./Feb., 2005): 24-5.
Binney, Marcus. Our Vanishing Heritage. London: Arlington Books, Ltd., 1984.
Bonsall, G. Frederick. Renovation and Adaptive Reuse...A Smart Alternative.
http://www.dcd.com/insights/janfeb_2003_dcd_insights.html
Bookout, Lloyd W., Jr. Residential Development Handbook. Second Edition.
Washington, D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 1990.
Bradley, Betsey Hunter. The Works: The Industrial Architecture of the United States.
New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Building Technology Inc. Smart Codes in Your Community: A Guide to Building
Rehabilitation Codes. Prepared for the Department of Housing and Urban

37

Development, Office of Policy Development and Research. August 2001.

http://www.huduser.org/publications/destech/smartcodes.html (accessed May 3,
2005).
Bunnell, Gene. Built to Last: A Handbook on Recycling Old Buildings. Washington,
DC: Preservation Press, 1977.
Burt, Jillian, and Michael Wise. Museum as Multinational. Blueprint 71 (October
1990): 48.
Cantell, Sophie F. Industrial Conversions: Preservation & Curatorial Issues That Arise
When Factories Are Converted into Museums of Contemporary Art. Submitted in
partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree Master of Science in Historic
Preservation, Columbia University, May 2001.
Cantacuzino, Sherban. Re/Architecture: Old Buildings/New Uses. New York:
Abbeville Press, 1989.
Citywide Adaptive Reuse Ordinance, Section 12.24 X 1. Excerpt from the Los Angeles
Municipal Code. Adopted by Ordinance No. 172,571, effective June 3, 1999. Amended
by Ordinance No. 174,315, effective December 20, 2001. Amended by Ordinance No.
175,588, effective December 1, 2003.
Collins, Rick. Sparking Mixed-Use Redevelopment: Brewhouse Renovation Recharges
Northeast Minneapolis. Development (Summer 2003): 36-40.
Cruickshank, Dan, and Peter Davey. Working With Old Buildings. Architectural
Review 183.1094 (April 1988): 23-24.
Davis, Douglas. The Museum Transformed. New York: Cross River Press, 1990.
Duell, Jennifer D. Rundowns Reborn. Commercial Property News (September 16,
2003): 1, 21-24.
Dyen, Doris J., and Edward K. Muller. Conserving the Heritage of Industrial
Communities: The Compromising Issue of Integrity. Forum Journal 8.4 (July/August
1994).
Fitch, James Marston. Historic Preservation: Curatorial Management of the Built
World. Charlottesville and London: University Press of Virginia, 1998.
Fleischman, John. Small-Town Mill, Big-Time Museum. Preservation 51.2
(March/April 1999): 23.
Flynn, Larry. Conservation Economy. Building Design & Construction (June 2002):
39-42, 44, 46.
Fulton Cotton Mill Lofts, Cabbagetown, Georgia. National Trust for Historic
Preservation Solutions Database. October 19, 2000. Http://forum.nationaltrust.org
(accessed May 4, 2005).

38

Gose, Joe. Rehab, Reward, and Remorse: Are the State Historic Tax Credits That
Save Doomed Buildings Doomed Themselves? Urban Land (October 2002): 38, 40-1.
Governor Ryan and Mayor Daley Announce the formation of Pullman Factory Task
Force. Press release. June 25, 1999. Http://www.illinois.gov/PressReleases/Show
PressRelease.cfm?SubjectID=1&RecNum=307 (accessed May 9, 2005).
Kenney, Lawrence. The Adaptive Reuse Process. New River Valley Planning District
Commission, Radford, Virginia. June 13, 1980.
Lambda Alpha International. Baltimore 2000: A Year Later, Part 2 - Urban
Development Review. Http://www.lai.org/go/library/publications/Baltimore2.html
(accessed April 30, 2005).
Leinberger, Christopher B. Turning Around Downtown: Twelve Steps to
Revitalization. The Brookings Institution, Metropolitan Policy Program. Research
Brief. March 2005.
LoDo Denver. Lower Downtown Neighborhood Plan. August 28, 2000.
Http://www.lodo.org/neighborhood_plan_pg2.htm, accessed May 9, 2005.
Los Angeles Conservatory. Incentives for Preserving Historic Buildings. No date.
Lowell National Historical Park, Lowell, Massachusetts, National Trust for Historic
Preservation Solutions Database, September 27, 2002, http://forum.nationaltrust.org
(accessed May 4, 2005).
Mabbett, Arthur N. and Paul D. Steinberg. Brownfields: Measured Success and Future
Opportunity in Massachusetts. Enviro News (2003)
http://www.environews.com/Brownfields%20Section/Brownfields_MA.htm (accessed
May 8, 2005).
MASS MoCA. Economic Impact. May 19, 2000.
Http://www.massmoca.org/press_releases/background/Economic_Impact.html
(accessed May 9, 2005.)
MASS MoCA. History of the Site. Http://www.massmoca.org/about.html#press
(accessed May 9, 2005).
Mayors Office of Economic Development. Mayor James K. Hahns Adaptive reuse
Program. Http://www.lacity.org/mayor/moed/arp (accessed May 8, 2005).
Moore, Arthur Cotton. The Powers of Preservation. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1998.
National Park Service, Heritage Preservation Services. The Secretary of the Interiors
Standards for Rehabilitation.
Http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/tax/rehabstandards.htm (accessed May 8, 2005).
New Jersey Department of Community Affairs. New Jerseys Rehabilitation Subcode.

39

Http://www.state.nj.us/dca/codes/rehab/viewbysection.shtml
New Jersey Rehab Subcode. National Trust for Historic Preservation Solutions
Database. October 2, 1998. Http://forum.nationaltrust.org (accessed May 4, 2005).
The New Museums: Old Factories, Jails, and an Ex-Handball Court. ART News 90.9
(September 1991).
Niesewand, Norie. Converted Spaces. London: Conran Octopus Limited, 1988.
Paulus, Emily. The Role of Historic Preservation in the Redevelopment of Urban
Brownfields. Paper presented at National Brownfields Conference. (2002).
Http://www.brownfields2002.org/proceedings2000/track1.htm (accessed March 30,
2005).
Providence Mill Revitalization Initiative. National Trust for Historic Preservation
Solutions Database. September 28, 2003. Http://forum.nationaltrust.org, accessed
may 4, 2005).
Searing, Helen. The Brillo Box in the Warehouse: Museums of Contemporary Art and
Industrial Conversions. The Andy Warhol Museum. Ed. Callie Angell. New York:
Distributed Art Publishers, 1994.
Trainer, Jennifer, ed. MASS MoCA: From Mill to Museum. North Adams, MA: MASS
MoCA Publications, 2000.
Tsongas Industrial History Center, Lowell, Massachusetts. National Trust for Historic
Preservation Solutions Database. October 19, 2000. Http://forum.nationaltrust.org
(accessed May 4, 2005).
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mortgage Insurance for Rental
and Cooperative Housing: Section 221(d)(3) and Section 221(d)(4).
Http://www.hud.gov/offices/hsg/mfh/progdesc/rentcoophsg221d3n4.cfm (accessed
May 9, 2005).
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Brownfields Cleanup Grants.
Http://www.epa.gov/brownfields/cleanup_grants.htm (accessed May 8, 2005).

40