• Skip to main content
  • Skip to secondary menu
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Say hello
Rethink Real Estate. For Good.

Rethink Real Estate. For Good.

  • Podcast
  • Posts
  • In the news
  • Speaking and media
    • About Eve
    • Speaking requests
    • Speaking engagements
    • Press kit
  • Investment opportunities

Impact

Advancing community development.

October 2, 2019

Joshua Lavrinc is a multi-disciplinary real estate professional with a breadth of experience in development and finance consulting, lending and investment, and fund management. He’s also a colleague and friend of mine in Pittsburgh,

What sets Josh apart is the type of funds and projects he is involved in. He’s carved out a little niche for himself in Pittsburgh, helping to raise and manage funds like the Strategic Investment Fund and Power of 32 Site Development Fund through his company, Callay Capital. Callay, a real estate investment advisory firm, was formed to advance economic and community development goals and that’s just what Josh does. And he’s an expert on alternative financial structures as well, like New Market Tax Credits and Opportunity Zone Funds. He sits on Novogradac’s national Opportunity Zones Working Group. 

More recently Josh founded Grow Community Development to explore the real estate development work he really loves. Some examples of the projects he is involved in are the recently opened the Oaklander Hotel and is working on impactful, mixed-use projects in Pittsburgh and Detroit anchored by co-working company the Beauty Shoppe. Josh’s education includes a B.S. in Accounting from Pennsylvania State University, a J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania and a Certificate of Management and Public Policy from the Wharton School of Business. 

Listen in to hear more about Josh and his thoughts on impact in real estate and Opportunity Zone Funds.

Insights and Inspirations

  • The capital markets can be squarely directed at impact investing.
  • There are some large and strategic impact funds that have been around for a while, like Pittsburgh’s Strategic Investment Fund.
  • Impact investing isn’t just one size fits all. It can serve projects of many shapes and sizes.

Information and Links

  • Josh is proud of the Oaklander, the first hotel development project he has co-developed with business partners Jim Noland and Concord Hospitality.
  • Josh loves the Rich Roll Podcast series which explores Rich’s plant-fueled feats of boundary-pushing athleticism and fuels Josh’s exercise routine. He likes this latest episode in particular.
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: Hey, everyone, this is Eve Picker, and if you listen to this podcast series, you’re going to learn how to make some change. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing. My guest today is Joshua Lavrinc, a colleague of mine in Pittsburgh. Josh is the CEO of Grove Community Development, a real estate development and consulting company. He’s also the CEO of Callay Capital, a fund advisory and management company.

Eve Picker: While Josh started his professional life as an attorney, he pretty quickly moved into the capital-raising world and has stayed there ever since, but he shifted his role to developer, development consultant, and fund manager, squarely in the impact arena. What sets Josh apart is the type of funds and projects he’s involved in. He’s carved out a little niche for himself in Pittsburgh, helping to raise and manage funds like the Strategic Investment Fund and the Power of 32 Site Development Funds.

Eve Picker: In this podcast, we explore the inherent challenges in impact investing. Be sure to go to EvePicker.com to find out more about Josh on the show notes page for this episode and be sure to sign up for my newsletter, so you can access information about impact real estate investing and get the latest news about the exciting projects on my crowdfunding platform, Small Change.

Eve Picker: Hi, Josh, how are you?

Josh Lavrinc: Good morning, Eve. I’m very well, thank you.

Eve Picker: Josh, I know a lot about you, but our listeners do not. I would love you to just tell us a little bit about yourself.

Josh Lavrinc: Fantastic. Well, thanks for the opportunity to speak. I’m in Pittsburgh, as you are these days, working on real estate investment, in particular, for socially responsible mission-based investments, which we’ll talk about as we proceed in the conversation.

Josh Lavrinc: My background … I’ve lived in several places in the Northeast and went to college, undergrad, at Penn State, where I learned accounting, among other things; started my career as an accountant very briefly, before deciding to continue on to law school. After studying accounting and being in an accounting firm for a short while, I decided to proceed to law school, and went to the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia with my now wife.

Josh Lavrinc: We stayed there for about five years, through law school and practicing law, really in the areas- two areas – one, real estate finance and development and the other area, structured finance, working, in particular, on commercial mortgage securitization for large rating agency clients and large investor clients. Then combining that with a more traditional dirt practice, as they call it, on real estate development, and then representing banks, insurance companies on lending and investment, as well.

Josh Lavrinc: When it was time to have children – my wife is from Pittsburgh – we came back to Pittsburgh and here we’ve been since about 2005. I continued practicing law for a few years until the market crashed in 2008. I had left the law firm to start a development career and started, actually, a distressed debt strategy that was difficult to pull off, raising capital and sourcing distressed debt transactions as a way to try and acquire property at the right basis during that cycle.

Josh Lavrinc: With little resources to pursue that strategy, my partner and I at the time – he was also young with new children in the house, like I – we decided to look at residential real estate as an overlooked asset class; something that had been hit pretty hard by the financial crisis. We started a real estate development and construction company in Pittsburgh, which went on. After starting that up. about 24 months into it, I sold my interests and moved on to the mission-based investment fund management platform that I’ve grown and am part of now. I sold those interests, and he went on to become the largest owner of houses in Allegheny County, where Pittsburgh is located, in 2014..

Josh Lavrinc: I have a residential development and an investment background thanks to those couple of years, but I’ve moved back into commercial, which was much more of my professional training. I’m excitedly applying my skills for a particular mission rather than an array of clients, an array of projects, where I had responsibilities previously, just to execute on a transaction somewhat disconnected from the underlying projects. Now, I’m on the front side of the transaction, helping, assisting clients in figuring out how to finance those projects or actually providing the capital for those projects, and with a particular mission, as I was saying [cross talk] I can talk a little bit about that.

Eve Picker: Yeah. Can you tell us a little bit about the mission? That’d be really great.

Josh Lavrinc: My current partner, Jim Noland, had a mortgage banking firm back in Pittsburgh that he had started in the late ’70s-early ’80s. At some point, towards the end of that decade, some of the local union building trades came to him and said, “We’ve been investing in these national strategies with our local pension fund money. They will create financial returns, but they’re invested in projects at major metros that are very large, and they don’t really have any impact on us, here locally, so we would like to see if we can invest our money in local projects, create jobs, and create financial return.”

Josh Lavrinc: So, before it became popular to talk about responsible investments or mission-based investment, here was a fund that formed. Fast forward, that fund is called the Employees Real Estate Construction Trust. It’s a regional fund from Cleveland, Ohio, through West Virginia that has a collection of union, municipal and private pension fund investors, the majority of whom originally were local union building trades. There is a 100-percent union building-trade labor requirement attached to those funds for every investment they do, in order to create high-quality jobs through the union building trades and invest that money for financial return, locally.

Eve Picker: How much has been invested locally through that fund over the years?

Josh Lavrinc: It’s been, I believe, over a billion dollars at this point, although the corpus of the funds is in the $200 million range, a little over that [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -that’s pretty high impact, Josh.

Josh Lavrinc: Pretty high impact, and that’s not a track record I can claim responsibility for. There’s a great team. There’s a trustee of those funds, AmeriServ Bank. My partner, Jim Noland, and his company, Penn Trust Real Estate Advisory Services, Incorporated, of which I was part, has served as the real estate advisor, essentially in charge of origination, and execution, and servicing of all those assets. There are strategies within those funds – a debt strategy and an equity strategy. They’ve been very flexible in the market; able to do things a little more aggressively than conventional lenders and have built up a great reputation in the development community in this region, as a result of that, and their great, diligent, and friendly relationships.

Eve Picker: That’s how you dipped your toe in the water of impact and socially responsible developments. If you fast forward today, what other projects have you worked on or what other funds have you managed that fit that criteria?

Josh Lavrinc: Great. When I met Jim Noland on a nonprofit board he and I were serving on, he was pursuing a program with the State of Pennsylvania – the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, I should say – called the Building Pennsylvania Mezzanine Loan Program, trying to do support; provide gap financing to support commercial projects in promoting an economic development mission in the state. That program successfully was pursued, and we’ve used that a number of times, including to finance the Ace Hotel here in Pittsburgh. That’s one additional mission-based fund that we continue to manage from time to time.

Eve Picker: Be sure to go to EvePicker.com and sign up for my free educational newsletter about impact real estate investing. You’ll be among the first to hear about new projects you can invest in. That’s EvePicker.com. Thanks so much.

Eve Picker: We should tell people, the Ace Hotel in Pittsburgh is a pretty high-impact project, because it’s a hotel that was … The hotel actually re-utilized, renovated a beautiful old building that had been long vacant in a very underserved neighborhood that was quite poor at the time. It really did a number of amazing things. It’s not just an Ace Hotel. It’s an Ace Hotel that really made an impact, I think.

Josh Lavrinc: Yeah, it came at a time, just before this … Really at the cusp for … This neighborhood in Pittsburgh, East Liberty, had been, prior to that, fairly distressed. Certainly, the Bakery Square project and the folks at Walnut Capital helped to transform that neighborhood, among others, but our friends, Nate Cunningham and Matthew Ciccone – Matthew sort of envisioning that project …

Josh Lavrinc: A former YMCA associated with a church across the street; had been sort of mid-block. Not a hard corner. Not an easy site to see, and certainly, at that time, not a neighborhood where you thought about hospitality assets, nor a brand, in Ace, that lenders still to this day think about wanting to see a major franchise and the loyalty customer base of that franchise brought to bear. Difficult to do boutique hotel financing in this neighborhood, mid-block, in the conversion of a former YMCA, but it turned out beautifully. It has been a social magnet for that neighborhood and certainly part of the recovery, I think [cross talk] 

Eve Picker: So that’s what-

Josh Lavrinc: Interestingly enough, another- Oh, go ahead, Eve.

Eve Picker: No, you go ahead.

Josh Lavrinc: Interestingly enough, at that time, we also arranged senior financing, or I should say bridge financing, with a fund called the Strategic Investment Fund, which I now manage through our company, Callay Capital – a third fund in our portfolio of funds that we manage. At that time, we were doing servicing for this fund and had helped with origination. We weren’t formerly the fund manager, we were just a particular service provider, but it was a good fit for that mission.

Josh Lavrinc: That fund now has recently changed its mission a bit but was originally formed in the ’90s to revitalize downtown Pittsburgh in the wake of the collapse of the steel industry. I should say not just downtown Pittsburgh, but also industrial reparation of the river valleys, where so much steel job loss actually was experienced. The Strategic Investment Fund’s intent was to create economic development – primarily its focus – in those river valleys, but also to revitalize housing and make a vibrant downtown community in the Pittsburgh CBD, in particular. It was very active in financing residential, retail, some hospitality, and a lot of commercial in the region, but focused on those two strategies.

Josh Lavrinc: Again, subordinate financing, taking aggressive pieces of the capital stack that were unable to be financed by conventional lenders – second, third mortgages, bridge loans, those kind of financing. We now manage that. The strategy is shifting a bit. We’re looking at- now that downtown Pittsburgh has essentially become revitalized, although, perhaps not at 100 percent, it’s drastically different than it was even 20 years ago. The mission now is to try and spread that growth into other neighborhoods that have more challenges for resources and try and help those more challenged communities. There’s also a sub-mission to assist with the affordable housing crisis that we have nationally and trying to create affordable housing. We’re looking at affordable housing in well-resourced communities, as well as lesser-resource communities [cross talk] In the last-

Eve Picker: No, you go ahead. Go ahead.

Josh Lavrinc: I was just going to say the last fund that we’re managing currently, as an active fund, is the Power of 32 Site Development Fund. This was a fund in 2014 that we raised to assist in creating shovel-ready sites for our region to promote a land development and attract companies from across the globe to locate here in our region and create jobs.

Josh Lavrinc: It’s called the Power of 32, because there was a larger think-tank initiative trying to promote the greater Pittsburgh region, identifying with four states: Ohio, Maryland, West Virginia, Pennsylvania – 32 counties in those states – and really community development, broadly – rails to trails, and venture capital, and site development. A bunch of initiatives were discussed, and we were one of those initiatives was to do the site development and we were chosen as the fund manager and helped to raise and implement that fund. It’s been successful to date. We’ve raised about $50 million and have … We’ve done about $25 million of projects right now, and we’re continuing that investment.

Eve Picker: That, in itself, is a huge body of work, but I know you’re squarely involved in socially responsible real estate and finance in Pittsburgh, but I also know that you are working on your own real estate development projects. You and I have partnered to try and raise money for Opportunity Zone real estate, which I’d love us to talk about and the difficulties around that entire tax law and how it’s playing out. Do you want to talk about that?

Josh Lavrinc: Yes, absolutely. That’s the fund that has not been named yet-

Eve Picker: That’s right.

Josh Lavrinc: and we are … Eve and I have been actively involved since the tax cuts and JOBS Act of 2017 came out. In the wake of the announcement of the designated Opportunity Zones in April of 2018, or March of 2018, we’ve been actively monitoring this potential huge impact game-changer for socially responsible investment and impact investment. Maybe I’ll unpack that a little bit and just-

Eve Picker: I think that’s a great idea.

Josh Lavrinc: -how it’s set up.

Eve Picker: I was going to suggest that, yep.

Josh Lavrinc: When we talk about impact investment or social responsibility and investment, these all sort of have a categorical place, I think, in my mind, around certain missions. I think any time we’re talking about investment funds, there’s obviously a financial mission, but when we talk about socially responsible or impact investments, we’re coupling financial investment, without trying to compromise it, with some social mission and likely environmental; which might be part of social, but I would break out as a third category. So, financial, social and environmental missions; social sometimes is referred to as community.

Josh Lavrinc: I think that community development should and does occur in all communities. Most of the time, when we talk about community development, we’re talking about low-income communities and trying to help the communities with less resources, but really, there can be good community, positive community development. For instance, we’re pursuing right now an affordable housing project in Pittsburgh’s Strip District, which is a neighborhood that’s on fire for job growth, and retail development, and hospitality resources, adjacent to the CBD, and multi-family apartment, market-rate apartments, condominiums, office. All of the commercial real estate products are well represented there, but not affordable housing.

Eve Picker: In other words, it’s gentrifying very, very quickly.

Josh Lavrinc: Yes, and I think it was a fairly low population community to begin with, because it’s primarily industrial in nature, right? [cross talk]

Eve Picker: It was. That’s correct. That’s correct.

Josh Lavrinc: -there are concerns about displacement and gentrification throughout all of these conversations about responsible community development, but here’s a community that maybe did not have a large, low-income population, and we need to try and develop it in a balanced manner and help-

Eve Picker: That’s correct.

Josh Lavrinc: I think a key to creating affordable housing and creating a region, a strong region for all, is in those hot neighborhoods to try and remember the responsible uses, as well. We’re working on a project that I hope we’ll be closing on later this summer to create a significant amount of affordable units in that neighborhood. A slight digression there from our categorical discussion of impact investment.

Josh Lavrinc: Just one example of community development, though, is affordable housing, and most of the time, that market, whenever we have a use that doesn’t bring in rents that are sufficient to motivate investors on their own – hence the crisis we’re in, where we don’t have enough supply because there’s not enough financial investment incentive to attract investors and developers to create that product – there’s some subsidy or incentives. And in this case of affordable housing, obviously, there’s the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, and those-

Eve Picker: Well, I’ve got to interject here. You have said a couple of things now that I think are absolutely key. That is that there’s not enough financial incentive; that we’re trying to do socially responsible projects, while at the same time keeping the financial returns the same. That, I think, is the crux of the issue. I think that perhaps we’ve all gotten a little bit too greedy, but it isn’t- it isn’t always possible to keep the financial return in the 20-to 25-percent internal rate of return arena for a project that is socially responsible. Yet you and I have not … I think we both don’t believe that we have investors really ready to invest for less. They really want both. Am I right? They want the financial returns, and they want [cross talk]

Josh Lavrinc: Yeah, they do. They do [cross talk] and it’s tough to deliver both. It’s tough to deliver both, especially when you get into … When you get into a structured product like the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, you’ve got rent restrictions – for good reasons – that go on for sometimes upwards of 20 years. That’s difficult to project a financial return on sort of … All real estate is perhaps a depreciating asset, other than their land value, that require repair and reinvestment over time. If you have a challenged underlying land value because it’s in a less-resourced community, you have a restriction on the income potential of that property, it really becomes a very specialized, niche investment opportunity [cross talk] like most other investments.

Eve Picker: -yeah, because the asset value can’t increase over time because it’s restricted. Typically, investors- or often investors are looking for some return over the years and then some share the upside at the end, when the project is sold. But the upside on an asset, on a building that has been restricted, is just not going to be there.

Josh Lavrinc: That’s right. Sometimes, it is. Obviously, on the margins, there are exceptions. When you have something in a rent-restricted unit to a project in a rapidly, or even not rapidly, but a neighborhood that changes over the course of 20 years and becomes very valuable at the end and you lift the restrictions. That’s no longer developed for the same mission. That then, perhaps … The value becomes in converting that to another use. I think the silver lining to all of this, interestingly … How do we reconcile financial return and investment? You hit the nail on the head. There requires some compromise, in the absence of other incentives. I think the Opportunity Zone program or incentive is potentially one of the solutions that can really spur new impact investment in communities. The reason I say that- oh, go ahead.

Eve Picker: No, I was going to say for our listeners who don’t know what Opportunity Zones are, they were introduced as part of the 2017 JOBS and Tax Act. I think there are over 8,000 of them. Am I right, Josh? 8,000 [cross talk]

Josh Lavrinc: -25 percent of all eligible low-income census tracts in the United States were delegated to the state level to be selected by the chief executives in each of those states, and then they designated 25 percent of those. It is a large number, as you said, Eve, across the country. There has been a lot of focus on this program, about whether it’s really a program. I’ve used that word a couple of times. It’s an incentive, for sure, but it is different than a tax-credit program or other incentive program that we’ve seen in the past in that only those with capital gains can directly benefit by investing into an Opportunity Zone – one of these designated low-income census tracts.

Josh Lavrinc: The benefit is in a short-term deferral of a prior capital gain. If, meeting the qualifications, you can maintain that capital gains investment in an Opportunity Zone for a whole period exceeding 10 years – a long-term investment -then you would receive a step up in basis for that capital gains that was reinvested into a new investment to the fair market value of that investment at the end of that hold period [cross talk] has the potential for tax exemption, essentially.

Eve Picker: That’s correct. I think it’s actually a great program. It could be a great program. It has a couple of really, I think, serious flaws, and it’s inequitable in the fact that only someone with capital gains can really take advantage of it. That already skews it towards wealthy investors. Secondly, in the selection of these census tracts, one can only imagine how much politics was involved, because you and I know that the tracks that were selected in Pittsburgh, particularly difficult, and they were selected for the right reasons, because those really need the most investment. But other states didn’t really think about it that way, or other cities. They selected tracts that already had investment and they thought they could attract more dollars to. Even the selection of the census tracts has been inequitable. I don’t know what you think about that, Josh, but …?

Josh Lavrinc: Yeah, I think it may have been equitable in that everyone every state was participating, and every leadership group had discretion to choose the census tracts that made sense for their for their states. But when you do things equitably, it doesn’t necessarily always result in an equitable distribution of resources after that. I think, unfortunately, there will be … With our real estate lens, thinking about it in a real estate investment perspective, over the past 18 months, as we have … When I say ‘we,’ I mean all of us; all of the thought leaders on the investment, accountants, lawyers, investment professionals coming together, talking about Opportunity Zones.

Josh Lavrinc: There has been concern about how will this come about? What is the financial impact of this incentive? Will it really be a game-changing flow of capital to all the Opportunity Zones? Obviously, I left out, in that conversation with the communities and economic development trust professionals across the country, who are hoping that this is a new resource to help revitalize their communities. There is certainly, when looked out through the lens of investment capital, in projects out, real estate projects out, there will be some lowest common denominator that attracts capital to the primary market.

Josh Lavrinc: Rather than changing a capital flow from Silicon Valley to Pittsburgh, which may have been the original intent of the program, and I think was, based on the political leadership that have spoken about it, if there are qualified Opportunity Zones, designated Opportunity Zones in Silicon Valley, in New York, in L.A., then those folks that are already investing in those communities don’t have to look very far to find another opportunities. In fact, West Hollywood, and East Palo Alto, and portions of New York City – of course, they have low-income communities and have been designated Opportunity Zones..

Josh Lavrinc: If there’s a competition among Opportunity Zones across the country for limited dollars, there will not- the problem necessarily won’t be solved by the Opportunity Zone designation, itself. But I think, and reflecting on it 18 months in, I think the real change that can come through Opportunity Zones is the operating business incentive. This doesn’t just apply to real estate projects. The Opportunity Zone benefit applies to capital gains of any type, with some exceptions – some very nuanced tax exceptions – but operating businesses are squarely within the regulations that have come out from the IRS.

Josh Lavrinc: I think that when we see greater investment in operating businesses … There are already folks saying that private equity shops looking to invest in venture capital, looking to invest in companies; Company A is located outside an Opportunity Zone. “Why don’t you just move down the street to an Opportunity Zone, and we’ll make an investment, because it’ll be more tax advantaged for us.”

Josh Lavrinc: When that flow happens, when we see venture capital, private equity, and investment, and operating businesses start to prefer Opportunity Zones, I think that tide – that’s a trend that can occur throughout the Opportunity Zones, not just isolated … When that happens, we’re going to see real businesses relocate, real jobs relocate, real homes relocate. That will attract more jobs, more retail, more housing, and start to really revitalize a community in a fundamental way that I think we talked about revitalization, which is putting dollars into a community.

Josh Lavrinc: There may be adverse impacts of that, if we don’t use those dollars responsibly by providing for affordable housing in those communities, along- maintaining affordable housing at a high quality, for instance, as a community is revitalizing, but hopefully, those jobs that are moving down the street initially … Although the people in those jobs may or may not have come from the target Opportunity Zone community, new jobs that are attracted to that new company, whether they are community goods and services, like retail, or strategically associated companies with the original company that moved, or some other service in the community that has more demand, those hopefully will be employing folks in the community, and is such that, hopefully, the gentrification that happens is inclusive and participatory, so that we’re not seeing a series of outsiders coming into this community alone, but that there is a strengthening of the existing community that may not touch and concern every person.

Josh Lavrinc: Therefore, there’s a need to make sure we’re thinking about responsible community development goals, like affordable housing and investing in social services. That program, creating new businesses in an Opportunity Zone and the downstream impact of a new business locating in a community, I think, is the opportunity to bring together financial return and impact investment, social responsibility, because we’ll then [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -where does that leave real estate in the equation?

Josh Lavrinc: That’s the downstream effect. I think that it only takes one company moving into East Liberty, for instance – Duolingo moving into East Liberty; Google moving into East Liberty – to suddenly revitalize that community. There are much more real estate- many more real estate projects taking place in that community as a result of those business moves..

Josh Lavrinc: If we can continue to see more businesses move into Opportunity Zones that will beget more real estate investment, and folks that say, “We’re going to invest in this community … We wouldn’t have otherwise, because we were worried about compromising our financial return.” But then, when we combine the incentives for capital gains with the Opportunity Zone incentive with the potential transformation of this community over 10 years – transformation meaning revitalization; hopefully, appreciation – now we have a large enough financial return to incentivize us to invest and in this particular community. That’s what we’ve been trying to accomplish all along.

Josh Lavrinc: Obviously, there is place-based responsibility. Just investing in a low-income community is helpful, but it’s also subject-based, use-based responsibility. What are we building in that area? We’re building commercial real estate to support jobs. That’s a that’s a version of social responsibility. If we’re doing it to support housing, that’s a version. Obviously, we want to consider the environmental impact, which I’ve kind of left out of this conversation about financial incentives and social responsibility. All of those things can be serviced. We’ll still have, however, a need for some segment of the market to support the under-resourced portion of the community through other affordable housing, or social services. I think [cross talk] role of responsible tax management and those kind of things for the governing bodies, in addition to charitable and private efforts.

Eve Picker: But also, there’s people in the community who want to invest, as you know, right? I do believe that equity crowdfunding can play a huge role in the revitalization of communities, because now, if you have a business that moves in, or a building that is revitalized, the people in that neighborhood can actually invest in it. That’s a really important piece of building wealth within a community for the community, not just making it better for the community and leaving them on the outside. Difficult, as you know.

Josh Lavrinc: I think that’s a great point that the community, itself, with new financial tools and e-commerce, information-age tools, like crowdfunding and the regulatory predicates of crowdfunding that you’ve harnessed with Small Change, bringing not just capital into these communities for financially viable projects, but also on tapping neighbors, and neighbors, perhaps in a colloquial sense, that might be stretching across the globe that are motivated about something that compromises financial return in order to accomplish impact. That’s a real experiment with social capital [cross talk] can be accomplished. That story hasn’t been told yet, entirely.

Eve Picker: In my time in Pittsburgh, the thing that has had the biggest impact on me is – this is true throughout the Rust Belt, I think. I’m not sure about other cities, but certainly many places I’ve been – how much people love the cities they live in, and how much they want to be engaged in making them better. It’s a pretty astounding phenomenon..

Eve Picker: Give them an opportunity to invest $500, $1,000, $2,000, or whatever, in the place they live, rather than put it in a mutual fund, where they don’t know where it’s going to go, that circulates money locally, and it gives them an opportunity to share in making that place better. It’s an amazing opportunity. Now we just have to educate investors, right, Josh?

Josh Lavrinc: Of course. Yeah, that’s right. Not to mention the bite-sized piece of the investment that you’re talking about. The other power of this is we would all like to own the local restaurant, or the local general store, or name any other part of the community that you utilize and would like to support or own. Without a large amount of resources, it’s practically very difficult to accomplish that.

Josh Lavrinc: This allows, through fractional ownership at very humble investment levels, the opportunity to make a change and invest in something that … Whether it’s financially motivated, or more community motivated, depending on the mission of that particular project or fund, crowdfunding certainly is a powerful tool to try and unlock investment and change for the masses.

Eve Picker: Yeah. Moving away from Opportunity Zones, what other current trends in real estate development are you seeing that you think are really important for the future of our cities?

Josh Lavrinc: I think I would focus on the word ‘community.’ What  by that is I think we’re defining the way – in particular, in cities and urban environments – the way people come together, and live, work, and play. Those are terms popularized by commercial real estate development to try and identify or put a friendly face around mixed-use projects and make them simple to understand, but fundamentally, there is a big social change there of trying to make productive and as accessible a community as possible.

Josh Lavrinc: I was listening recently to another podcast with the co-founder of WeWork, talking about their perspective on co-working, how that came out of a desire to create community. I’m involved with a co-working company here, locally, called The Beauty Shop, in Pittsburgh, where we’re trying to develop similar communities, but growing that community outside of just an office space. Their first thought, back right around of the time the financial crisis, was that people working in isolated environments can be more productive, more happy, more engaged, and feel more appreciated and better-served by those around them that are similarly motivated; similarly making sacrifices for their businesses, if they are put together in a community.

Josh Lavrinc: When you combine that and expand that into residential real estate, can those people perhaps live in environments where they feel more supported and have more of a social fabric? I think this comes along with trends on isolationism and depression that are plaguing our country these days. Those are growing problems for our nation. This is one way to tackle that social problem is bringing together community.

Josh Lavrinc: Obviously, it can extend into other parts of the community, where instead of spending time isolated, commuting to your job, you might be able to create an entire ecosystem around your business, or your apartment, or your entertainment venue, and have that all in one … Obviously, that’s what a city represents [cross talk] extending that community into a broader scale about technology, connectedness, and resource- infrastructure resources in a particular city – all of these things are really the same concept, at a different scale.

Eve Picker: I can’t help but think it’s the modern-day version of the kibbutz [cross talk]

Josh Lavrinc: Yes, right, and-

Eve Picker: -the kibbutz probably got all of this right a long time ago.

Josh Lavrinc: That communal living is exactly what is perhaps needed to get people back, attached, especially in the age of digital devices and the connected-with-ness we have, and yet, perhaps, the over-connectivity that’s coming with that, without having perhaps enough emotional and human support with that connectivity. Definitely, it’s funny [cross talk]

Eve Picker: It’s also affordability, because if you share resources, whether it’s a shared kitchen or whatever it is, then your living costs are going to go down. I think that’s also part of the reason why co-housing options are being explored.

Josh Lavrinc: That’s right. You’re right, when we talk about the impact of an urban environment, or it doesn’t necessarily have to occur just in an urban environment, the community, generally, there are social health and well-being aspects. There are business aspects, and there are certainly affordable aspects of the development that can be brought to bear as a result of the sharing of a common amenity base and spreading those costs across many uses.

Josh Lavrinc: That’s one of the focuses of my current development in addition to fund management and the structured finance consulting, new markets, tax credits, historic tax credits that I work on in my primary business, I also spend a lot of time on commercial real estate development; in particular, recently, anchored by coworking, but has molded that into a strategy around community, where we are looking at secondary and tertiary cities, not primary markets, to try and create these full-scale communities in urban environments. Although I think suburban environments are a huge untapped market, as well, to try and bring together a greater sense of community and all of those benefits that come with it – the social, the financial and the affordability.

Eve Picker: Probably in suburban markets, people are even more isolated.

Josh Lavrinc: Exactly, exactly. When we talk about commute times and disparate destinations for live, work, and play, bring those things together into a town center, into a real Main Street … Revitalizing the main street. Obviously, there are a lot of Main Streets programs across the United States. It’s a very similar theme for community development. But bringing an urban spin to it, with a responsible amount of density and set of uses, I think has a lot of power, and I think we’ll see a lot of that coming up.

Josh Lavrinc: Hopefully, we’ll see that happening in Opportunity Zones. I think if we can bring together Opportunity Zone development and businesses locating in those Opportunity Zones and then try to develop more community, then we’ll see some pretty significant change in the next decade of real estate, business, and real community development conspiring together to implement improvement or accomplish improvement.

Eve Picker: Given all of this, where do you think the future of real estate impact investing lies?

Josh Lavrinc: Well, I think that it probably is the future. I think that the days of solely focusing on financial returns are probably starting to narrow, and it seems that the aware, responsible person is going to make more decisions. As we provide more information and more connectivity to individuals to not only their investments, but to the world around them, and their neighbors, and the people in the communities around them, they’re going to make more conscious decisions to better … To increase their efforts to deploy what investment funds they have into those things that help people around them and the environment around them.

Josh Lavrinc: Whether it’s crowdfunding, whether it’s an Opportunity Zone fund, whether it’s a tax credit incentive, there are … We are seeing a growth in responsible investment, in mission-based investment, and for good reason, because, fundamentally, we aren’t robots. We’re humans, and we have a moral compass, and we have emotion, and emotional intelligence that directs our activities to things that we favor for reasons other than purely financial. The closer we can get to combining financial return – which is almost a third-party neutral arbiter, selecting return responsibly for our good of our income and wealth in the future – if we can start to align that financial return, even more strongly than just the Opportunity Zone, with responsible investment, I think I think we’ll get there.

Eve Picker: We have, in fact, lived through the era of green-washing, and we’re heading into the era of good-washing, right?

Josh Lavrinc: Yeah, that’s an interesting way … Hopefully, it’s not washing at all, but you’re right. You’re right that there’s been popularization, perhaps over-popularization and overuse of terms around, for instance, green. I think we’re getting into a period, an enlightenment, if you will, where individuals are receiving information about their investments, receiving information about what’s happening in the world around them, and then are given opportunities to vote with their own dollars in projects that have real meaning to them and to the people around them that they care about.

Eve Picker: I have three sign-off questions for you that I ask everyone. I’m wondering what your answers are going to be. The first one is what’s the one thing that makes a real estate project impactful to you?

Josh Lavrinc: The impact for me, although I skew towards economic development, I would say it’s serving the people. Keying in on that community that we have spoken about here, we could easily talk about the environmental crisis that we face as a globe. We could talk about the lack of social services and the need in our community for the poor. But I think that cutting across all of those for impact, in my mind, is assessing whether a project is responsibly targeting its community.

Josh Lavrinc: I’m not inventing anything new with that response. When you think about the New Markets Tax Credit program and what community development enterprises across the country look at, when they’re assessing projects, one of the first questions they ask are what are the community’s plans? Does the community have a development plan? Is there community support for a proposed project, prior to awarding a subsidy or incentive? I think there’s really good wisdom in that practice. It doesn’t necessarily mean that you’re getting the best project, or necessarily a particular outcome, but it does mean that you’re considering what that community’s needs are and trying to address it responsibly. That’s how I would answer that.

Eve Picker: The second question – other than by raising money, how do you think crowdfunding might benefit the impact real estate developer?

Josh Lavrinc: Well [cross talk] obviously-

Eve Picker: These are not trick questions.

Josh Lavrinc: No, no, I think … Obviously, I think, when we think about influencers, and social media, and the power of marketing in our current environment, crowdfunding has a way of making something more popular, more highlighted, and can be a great marketing tool, and perhaps a vote of confidence from the community. It might be a third party, whether those people are local to the community or outside, it’s a third-party validation of whether this investment is responsible, or desirable for whatever- depending on the purpose of the crowdfunded group, that it’s meeting their mission. I think there could be strong marketing efforts as a result of the crowdfunded opportunity, but I’m sure there are a couple of other [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -in effect, a community engagement tool.

Josh Lavrinc: That’s right.

Eve Picker: Yeah, yeah. Final question – what one thing in real estate development do you think would improve … I’m going to ask that question again. How do you think real estate development in the US could be improved by just one thing?

Josh Lavrinc: I think that if we could … We can work hard to tie together our incentives, make sure they are aligned. We have a lot of … All of the real estate industry is motivated fundamentally by financial return. We have folks whose livelihood is based on their development project, their construction project, their leasing of the project. That is a powerful tool to impact activity, to create activity financially, for each one of us.

Josh Lavrinc: The more we can align incentives, like the Opportunity Zone, to create the outcomes we want and make sure that those incentives are narrowly tailored to really accomplish what we want … For instance, I think there are some great things about the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, which is an area I don’t practice a lot in – although we’re investing in affordable housing, regionally, that’s not a national practice that I participate in – I think that we see the competition over the program; the structure of a program that tries to compensate with fees, given the lack of value creation. Those fees then create outsized projects that maybe are more expensive than they need to be, or more inefficient than they need to be.

Josh Lavrinc: If we can go back and fix programs to address the value equation differently and think about the model we’re setting up and the downstream impact of that model to be more efficient and more effective for our goals, I think that would have perhaps the most profound effect, because you’re not … Instead of trying to change the fundamental capitalistic income-driven goal of a professional, which I don’t think we can change – other than to redirect it through incentives – and if we can align those incentives with what we think currently are the crises facing our country, which are probably the social isolation, the isolation of resources, so that everyone has access to good education, and training, and jobs, and economic advancement of themselves, and healthcare, and all the rest of those basic needs, and hopefully in a way that’s aligned responsibly for the environment, long term … We have a lot of great rapid change happening there, obviously, with autonomous vehicles and renewable energy. The more we can align these programs into creating a community that’s hitting on all cylinders across both of those major programmatic missions, I think that the better our commercial real estate market will be, the better our professionals will be in accomplishing those goals and the end result for the community.

Eve Picker: Yes. Agreed. Well, Josh, thank you very much for talking with me today. I really enjoyed our conversation, and I’m sure we’ll be talking again soon. Thanks so much-

Josh Lavrinc: I did as well. Thank you very much, Eve.

Eve Picker: Bye.

Eve Picker: That was Josh Lavrinc. Today, I learned that the capital markets can be squarely directed at impact investing. There are some large and strategic funds in Pittsburgh that have been doing this for quite a while now. Impact investing in real estate spans the spectrum from tiny projects, some of which we’ve listed on Small Change, to large funds that focus solely on impact.

Eve Picker: You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access the show notes for today’s episode at my website, EvePicker.com. While you’re there, sign up for my newsletter to find out more about how to make money in real estate while building better cities. Thank you so much for spending your time with me today, and thank you, Josh, for sharing your thoughts with us. We’ll talk again soon, but for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Joshua Lavrinc

Create, don’t destroy.

September 27, 2019

The term “blight removal” conjures up images of construction cranes knocking down homes, displacement, and gentrification. But blight can take many forms and its removal has many remedies. Preservation of seemingly dilapidated structures can invigorate and reinforce a community’s value and sense of place.

Historic preservation

Instead of knocking down older buildings with neighborhood character, nowadays many developers are working on revamping those spaces and giving them new life. Fully renovating a vacant or underutilized historic building can add to and preserve the fabric of a place while providing opportunity for new development.

Rehabilitation of dilapidated structures is equally as effective for commercial, residential, and mixed-uses, and is particularly well suited to historic areas that have fallen on rough times, such as New Orleans’ Seventh Ward, parts of East Oakland or many of Detroit’s neighborhoods outside of the urban core.

By focusing on forlorn properties, investors can increase their returns while also improving the general character and quality of the area. Additionally, rather than displacing existing tenants, seeking out and improving vacant property creates more housing than existed before, without significantly altering the character of the neighborhood. This strategy preserves community charm and while still increasing the housing available.

Commercial benefits

One lesson that should be ingrained in every developer’s mind is the failure of purely residential communities. In study after study, mixed-use neighborhoods consistently show benefits in resident economic activity, safety and crime, and lowered carbon footprint. Commercial activity allows residents to work and to live in the same area, reducing local congestion, and transportation costs like cars.

Affordable set-asides

Mixed-use development is a step toward creating complete communities; creating neighborhoods for a variety of income levels is even better. These strategies can go a long way towards creating quality, affordable neighborhoods. When addressing de-blighting initiatives, locals often worry about being displaced due to increasing property values and commensurate rents in the area. Setting aside a portion of units specifically for those who are lower on the income scale can help alleviate many of those concerns. Updating zoning constraints that allow for more mixed-use development is an essential component too.

_

The old paradigm of development is…old. Blight removal should be thought of in the context of building communities up with the assets already in place. Building functional, thriving communities simply requires it.

Image of building in Bridgeport, CT, courtesy of Small Change,

Living the Jetson life.

September 25, 2019

Jennifer Castensen is the vice president of programming at Hanley Wood, a company which serves the construction and design industry through their analytics-driven Construction Industry Database.

In this capacity, she provides leadership and collaboration across all verticals in the building products industry to drive innovation. Castenson establishes themes and coordinates content from Metrostudy and Meyers Group, Hanley Wood’s industry leading data and research arms, along with content from the editorial team to provide audiences with fresh, innovative content in a variety of forums. Castenson also serves in a project management and editorial capacity for multiple concept projects spearheaded by the Hanley Wood editorial teams. Prior to joining Hanley Wood in 2015, Castenson spent nine years as the vice president of marketing for a building product manufacturer. 

Jennifer has her finger on the pulse of innovation in the building industry … and she loves it. Listen in to hear all about the rapidly evolving building industry and what Jennifer thinks the next big thing will be.

Insights and Inspirations

  • In the future housing will need to deliver far more than just shelter. Think the Jetsons.
  • Lots of attention is being paid to pre-fab. Innovations in prefab may well be a major part of the solution to the lack of housing in the United States.
  • Lots of attention is being paid to vertical integration. New companies and processes are emerging that promise to change the building industry forever.
  • A focus on health and well being is having massive cultural implications in the building industry.  
  • We need to stop thinking that change in the building industry is slow. Change is moving very fast.

Information and Links

  • The HIVE community brings an energy and passion for innovation and improvement in future housing options that Jennifer loves.
  • The HIVE 50 list showcases people, products, and processes that are leading the charge to inspire creativity, improve performance, and explore better ways to build. Look for the 2019 list in November.
  • Jennifer is proud of the concept project – Building Positive + Living Well – that she was involved in with Skidmore, Owings and Merrill and Amli Residential. She believes this work redefines how we will live in the future, in a healthier, more sustainable way. 
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: Hey, everyone, this is Eve Picker, and if you listen to this podcast series, you’re going to learn how to make some change.

Eve Picker: Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing. My guest today is Jennifer Castenson. Jennifer is the VP of programming at Hanley Wood, a company which serves the construction and design industry through their analytics-driven Construction Industry Database. Based on this information, Jennifer establishes themes and develops content to provide Hanley Wood’s audience with up-to-date industry intelligence. As such, Jennifer has her finger on the pulse of innovation in the building industry, and she loves it.

Eve Picker: Be sure to go to Eve Picker.dot com to find out more about Jennifer on the Show Notes page for this episode and be sure to sign up for my newsletter so you can access information about impact real estate investing and get the latest news about the exciting projects on my crowdfunding platform, Small Change.

Eve Picker: Hi, Jennifer. It’s really lovely to have you here. You have a fascinating job. I know that you’ve been on the marketing side of the building industry for at least a dozen years. Is that right?

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah, for a decade.

Eve Picker: A decade? Yeah. Now, as I understand it, you use leading data or research information from the industry to help establish themes and content for Hanley Wood, is that correct?

Jennifer Castenson: That’s correct. Yes.

Eve Picker: So, that means that you have your finger on the pulse of innovation in the building industry, which is pretty fabulous.

Jennifer Castenson: It’s amazing. It’s a really fun job, and it’s also very amazing to see the innovators who are behind the scenes and actually doing something to change all of the challenges that are facing the housing industry right now.

Eve Picker: Tell us a little bit more about what you actually do.

Jennifer Castenson: What I do at Hanley Wood is mostly programming for our events. Hanley Wood has a number of different publications and mediums, and we have conferences associated with a lot of those that we call branding conferences. Then we also do custom events where we program for our partners in various capacities.

Jennifer Castenson: For our conferences, we are very focused on creating a theme, and sticking with the theme, and finding experts who can deliver the content in the best way; who can deliver best practices; who can talk about research, innovation within a certain space. I work on the conference program in determining, with our editorial team, what is the right focus. Then I go out, I search for, find the experts, and then work with them to deliver the content at the event.

Jennifer Castenson: I also work on editorial content, working with some of those leaders in the industry to write certain material for our websites. That could be Builder, which focuses on single-family; for Multifamily Executive, for Architect, for Journal of Light Construction, or Remodeling or ProSales. I’m looking very holistically at the industry and then solutions for each one of those verticals within the industry and how we can help the industry leaders move forward strategically into the future.

Eve Picker: I was one of the fortunate ones who was found by you a couple of years ago, right? That’s how we [cross talk]

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah. Thank you so much for being part of Hive.

Eve Picker: Yeah, that was great. How did you end up in this role? This is pretty recent, right?

Jennifer Castenson: I’m going on four years that Hanley Wood. Before that, I worked for Organized Living, which is a building products supplier. Like I said, I was there for about a decade doing marketing and sales, and I was working with Hanley Wood. I had been part of the events from a sponsorship and exhibitor standpoint and knew the folks very well, and they recruited me in to be part of the Hanley Wood team.

Eve Picker: Pretty great. Your world intersects, then, with … You know this podcast is about impact in real estate, and the building industry is part of real estate, so your world intersects pretty squarely with that, as you see innovation emerge. I’ve seen that you’re a prolific speaker, as well as being an organizer, and you actually moderate panels yourself. So, you’ve touched lots and lots of topics; some of them, really big ones, like power, or affordable housing, or ADUs, or prefabrication. What theme do you think has the loudest drumbeat in the building industry today?

Jennifer Castenson: That’s a really good question, and I really have to think that there are two, and they, just like you said, intersect with each other. I think prefabrication/offsite construction and vertical integration are the two that I’m referring to.

Jennifer Castenson: I think modular and offsite are getting more and more attention. They’ve been around for a very long time. However, in today’s age, they are getting the benefit of new and enhanced technology. Then, they are extending the benefit to many different aspects that are really important to today’s construction environment. There’s more sustainability factors. There are more efficiency to respond to the need for more affordable housing.

Jennifer Castenson: That touches on the less need for less labor, faster construction cycle, less labor, and therefore reducing the time, reducing the costs. That’s just really, really critical in today’s age that we’re pulling together projects faster and at lower cost to put homeownership or rent in the hands of more people. But then, also the sustainability factors. There’s less onsite waste. There’s less waste altogether.

Jennifer Castenson: The projects can happen in any type of environment, which is also important, because if you look at climate change, we’re dealing with a lot of different climate factors, but if you’re inside of a factory, then the housing can continue to be built regardless of what the conditions are outside of that factory. Prefabrication/offsite construction just has a lot of different benefits right now.

Eve Picker: I never thought of that last one. That’s really interesting. But still, I’m in Pittsburgh. When I talk to some builders here, they still say that stick build is cheaper here than prefab. How much does that have to do with the labor in any particular market or the building conditions in any particular market? Is it really equally efficient everywhere?

Jennifer Castenson: No. Actually, I would say, nationwide, you’ll find that stick build, traditional build is very similar in cost to prefabrication. However, the time savings reduces the cost. The hard costs are there, and they’re probably the same. Sometimes, prefabrication might cost a little bit more. There are actually markets, right now, where prefabrication is so popular, for a variety of reasons, where the manufacturers are able to then bid up, and it’s … The costs are rising for factory construction. So, all those things are coming together.

Jennifer Castenson: Actually, if you think of labor unions, the costs involved with labor unions, sometimes the offsite construction might help avoid some of the labor unions. It depends on what kind of market you’re in and all of those variety of factors – how many offsite manufacturers are there, and what the demand is for that type of construction, along with labor unions, the amount of transportation to site, because that’s a huge component of it that will drive up costs. All of those things factor into the cost, but then the time savings is the real savings.

Eve Picker: Interesting. So, someone might argue that you’re putting people out of jobs. I’m in a heavy union-labor market in Pittsburgh, so they might not be happy to hear you say that.

Jennifer Castenson: No, I know, and it’s actually … Those jobs are evolving, and it’s a real big question right now. I said the second thing, for me, that I see impacting housing the most is vertical integration. There are a lot of organizations, like Katerra, and I’m also working with another one in the multifamily realm that’s called Cortland, who are trying to vertically integrate more and more and to take parts of the process that weren’t together under one roof and make them seamless under one roof where-

Eve Picker: I’m sorry I interrupted you, but I’m wondering what precisely you mean by vertical integration here? What is all part of that?

Jennifer Castenson: It might be different with different organizations. In the two examples I just gave, it’s very different. Katerra, for instance, is bringing in design, and development, and the manufacturing all under one roof. They’re bringing in even more than that, because they’re manufacturing some of the products that they’re using in their projects and some of the software that they’re using in the design regard.

Jennifer Castenson: It’s making the process- it’s making it more seamless and making fewer connections so that it can happen more efficiently and more effectively. They’re one of the biggest examples of it, but I was talking about Cortland, as well. They’re taking a lot of things under one roof that weren’t considered before, in terms of property management. It’s happening more and more with more organizations-

Eve Picker: Where do you think all of this is leading?

Jennifer Castenson: I think that it’s leading to more affordable housing, for one. That’s the aim that most people have; most organizations have, when they start doing vertical integration. That was why and how Katerra kicked off; and creating efficiencies. It will take some time to ramp up, because those, let’s say, legacy organizations – the big developers, the big builders – they have relationships that will be very hard to break. If you look at- I’m talking about the top 10 developers, legacy developers have relationships, in all the markets they’re building, with general contractors. Once they start saying no to the general contractors and start doing offsite construction or changing the parameters of those relationships, it’s going to be really taxing on their business to, one, just to figure out how to do it-

Eve Picker: Yeah.

Jennifer Castenson: -how to restructure their organization. But, two, what will, then, that general contractor do? That general contractor might go from being involved in 50 percent of the project to only having 10 percent of the project. Is he going to ratchet up his pricing? Those dynamics aren’t-

Eve Picker: Or is he going to be innovative and figure out how to become part of the industry, himself?

Jennifer Castenson: Exactly. Hopefully. Hopefully, there’s innovation behind it.

Eve Picker: Be sure to go to EvePicker.com and sign up for my free educational newsletter about impact real estate investing. You’ll be among the first to hear about new projects you can invest in. That’s Eve Picker.com. Thanks so much.

Eve Picker: That’s absolutely fascinating. The ramifications of one change towards the top can be huge, can’t they? Other than these two, which obviously really interest you, are there any other current trends in the building, or the real estate industry, or in cities that interest you the most?

Jennifer Castenson: There’s so much that’s happening, and I think there’s some really big trends in health and well-being from a living standpoint. It’s going to be a massive culture shift within the United States. We have been looking at housing as a shelter, but we’re going to be … As homeowners and as renters, we’re going to be thinking about our housing needs to be delivering more than that. That’s not only from health and well-being; that’s the builders and developers thinking about how to integrate technology in order to do that.

Jennifer Castenson: We are going to be able to, as homeowners, walk into our home and think of it as a character in our lives; to be thinking of it as we can have … Not only can we ask our house to put something on the grocery list, but we can also ask our house to get us ready for bed. That is a whole series of things that will be kicked off by a technology that’s behind the walls, and that will literally help us get to sleep and have better sleep during the night and, therefore, better performance during the next day.

Eve Picker: That is so awesome. It brings to mind a show I used to love called The Jetsons.

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah, right? Yes.

Eve Picker: It feels like we’ll be entering the life of The Jetsons.

Jennifer Castenson: It is. There’s so much. Years ago, I heard somebody talking who was an employee of Disney, and he was saying that we will have characters in our home; characters who speak to us. I feel like we’re almost there. Now, there’s a whole bunch of hurdles with security issues, and there’s also hurdles in terms of integration and what people are willing to pay for these sorts of technologies. However, we are on a fast track because of the way that technology accelerates, so [cross talk]

Eve Picker: -yeah, interesting. But do you think these trends will make for better cities? Are these really important, impactful trends, having [cross talk]

Jennifer Castenson: -I was talking about health and well-being. I think health and well-being, I was focused on it in terms of just one residence. However, more and more people, from an urban planning standpoint, and smart cities development standpoint, are working together. There are more and more collaborations, and more people are understanding, recognizing the benefits of collaboration.

Jennifer Castenson: You’ll see more cities are creating- working with developers or leading organizations in order to change the city; in order to mold it to be not only prepared for the smart city infrastructure, but to have a focus on health and well-being and creating a more strategically resilient community, where people can prosper; where they can, not only economically, but healthy- from a health standpoint.

Jennifer Castenson: Putting access to fresh food in walking distance of residences; putting more public transportation options in place. We are a nation that’s growing older. So, a lot of folks are starting to think about how are we thinking about accessibility, and how are we making that available for this aging population?

Eve Picker: Yeah, that’s really interesting because actually everything you touched on there is part of the Change Index on Small Change. I don’t know if you’ve looked at it lately, but those are the key things – livability for everyone, whether they’re three years old, or 85 years old, right?

Jennifer Castenson: Right. Exactly.

Eve Picker: An accessible, healthy place to live where you can move around, and reach good food, and all of those things. I was having a conversation with someone the other day about assisted living and how it needs to evolve. I think there was an article in The New York Times about how broken the system is. Do you see any innovation in assisted living or the way that people are thinking about housing our aging population?

Jennifer Castenson: Oh, for sure. I think there’s so much that’s going into that. There are new design guides that are going into that and actually being picked up by certain legislations that have to meet-  or building code that are being incorporated into the building code.

Jennifer Castenson: Then, there’s so much in terms of technology to help people. I’ve seen projects where there is technology that can alert a caregiver of somebody who is in a home alone – if they’ve fallen, if they haven’t moved for a certain amount of time; can tell them when to take their medications, can do so much for the aging population, assist them in just living for day to day and [cross talk]. 

Eve Picker: -help them age in place. 

Jennifer Castenson: Exactly. Well, the age place … That’s also, when I was talking about having the access to the public transportation, when people live that- age out of the ability to independently drive their cars, they lose a little bit of independence. So, having access to public transportation or having things within walking distance is really important. That’s why so many people are thinking of community design and not just how someone lives within their own residence.

Eve Picker: Yeah, I know everyone’s thinking ADUs as a way to deal with affordable housing, but I actually think about it a lot as a way to deal with the aging population, because, when I get old, I’d love one of my kids to have me in an ADU in their backyard. That sounds to me much more appealing than an assisted living community. If there’s technology developed that helps keep me safe in that place and able to age like that, that would be amazing, right? 

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah, absolutely, and you’re right. They are an option for affordability, but it’s also being looked at as a second home on property that could house in an older relative. A lot of people are looking at it as that option.

Eve Picker: Or a teenager you don’t want to see every day, right?

Jennifer Castenson: Right. 

Eve Picker: Okay, so the big question is, really, do you think socially responsible real estate or building methods necessary in today’s still development landscape?

Jennifer Castenson: Oh, for sure. It’s actually really impressive that we talk about that change in the building industry is very slow. But if you look at change in terms of code, all of it has been socially responsible, right?

Eve Picker: Yes.

Jennifer Castenson: We’ve actually layered on so much code to be more responsible in terms of environmental impact. Now, we’re using codes in projects, and certifications that also – like the Fitwel program – that are focused on health and well-being in our communities and in our homes. Then, we’re also taking on codes, and we’re involved in another project at Hanley Wood that’s focusing on reducing the amount of embodied carbon. Those types of things are the responsibility- are things that builders and developers are owning. They’ve been evolving quite quickly over the years. They’re taking more and more responsibility for providing housing in a way that is socially responsible, environmentally responsible, and then that is comfortable, and also will help people from a perspective of emotionally, psychologically, and mentally growing. It’s a lot to combine into a home.

Eve Picker: Maybe eventually we’ll become the happiest country on the planet.

Jennifer Castenson: Right.

Eve Picker: We’re far from that right now, right? We’re sort of gradually catching up on some European standards, which is really pretty fabulous. My big wrap-up question is where do you think the future of real estate impact investing lies?

Jennifer Castenson: I was talking about before that we’re working on various conferences, and the one that we had you involved in was called Hive, which stands for Housing Innovation Vision Economics. Through that conference, we do an honors program that’s called the Hive 50, which our editors select the top 50 innovations in housing. I would say that a lot of the innovations are around finance.

Jennifer Castenson: Impact investing has had a smaller presence on that list, and I think that there’s a lot of opportunity for that to grow. I think that as more cities and their collaborations come into the picture, we’ll see more and more of that happening. Tangentially, you see a lot of organizations getting involved in sponsoring, donating, subsidizing affordable housing construction in various areas. That actually has picked up a lot in the last 12 months-

Eve Picker: In fact, there’s impact investing, right?

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah, absolutely. And I think we’ll see more and more of that, just as we are not able to meet the demand of housing in this country, and we’re not actually on a trajectory to meet it anytime soon. So, hopefully we see more of that; more of the money coming in so that we can develop the housing that we need.

Eve Picker: I also have three sign-off questions that I usually ask, because I want to hear everyone’s answer on these. The first one is what’s the key factor that makes a real estate project impactful to you?

Jennifer Castenson: I think what makes it interesting to me is that it becomes something that teaches the industry, the rest of the industry, and that we can pick up at a volume scale and bring it to more places.

Eve Picker: That sounds like innovation-

Jennifer Castenson: Yeah.

Eve Picker: -really is the most important thing to you. You know I have a crowdfunding platform, right? Do you think there could be other benefits, other than raising money, that could come out of crowdfunding in real estate?

Jennifer Castenson: Oh, for sure. Absolutely. I think you have done such an amazing job bringing crowdfunding to a more visible level in housing, and that means … I give you all of the kudos in the world, and I hope that you guys keep elevating that. It has done a tremendous job to give visibility to projects that wouldn’t have made it otherwise. Those projects are the ones that we need more of, because they’re innovative. They’re new approaches to what traditionally, or legacy organizations, are not approaching because of their capital streams, so it’s … I think it’s amazing.

Eve Picker: Well, thank you. I feel like we’re just scratching the surface. There’s so much to do, right?

Jennifer Castenson: Right.

Eve Picker: This is a really big question: if you want to improve one thing about the real estate industry in this country, what would that be?

Jennifer Castenson: If I could change one thing, I think it would just be something about regulation, which I wouldn’t know how to approach because it’s such a complicated web. But I would say that there’s something either to policy and regulation that would remove some of the hurdles and allow building to happen in a more efficient way with maybe some of the responsibilities back on … I’m not sure. There’s just so much to do there.

Eve Picker: No, I think you’re talking about zoning and building codes all wrapped up together, and that’s a lot of stuff to unravel. I know some cities are trying to unravel bits of zoning codes and move things forward in a different way, but, yes, it’s a lot. Jennifer, this was just delightful. Thank you very much for taking the time to talk with me [cross talk] I’m going to call this Entering the Life of The Jetsons.

Jennifer Castenson: I like it.

Eve Picker: Okay. Have a great day. Bye.

Jennifer Castenson: Thanks, You, too. Bye.

Eve Picker: That was Jennifer Castenson. She gave me lots to think about. First, she thinks that a focus on health and well-being is having massive cultural implications in the building industry. Second, in the future, she believes that housing will need to deliver far more than just shelter. And third, innovations in prefab may well be a major part of the solution to the lack of housing in the U.S..

Eve Picker: You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access the show notes for today’s episode at my website, Eve Picker.com. While you’re there, sign up for my newsletter to find out more about how to make money in real estate while building better cities. Thank you so much for spending your time with me today, and thank you, Jennifer, for sharing your thoughts with me. We’ll talk again soon, but for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Jennifer Castensen

Striving for impact.

September 23, 2019

How can real estate developers and investors make substantial positive change in the places in which they build? It’s a vexing question that luckily has numerous answers. You just need to know where to look.

Be direct and honest

Let’s face it, you’re not going to be able to please all the people all the time. As an individual investor or developer, your project’s scope and scale is going to be limited, and while you can make an impact, there are limits to that ability. Your best path forward is to be accessible, transparent, and to listen to community concerns. Avoid falling into the trap of being too vague or using wishy-washy language. If you are unable to address people’s concerns, tell them, and tell them why. Be accessible, be transparent, listen to them, and give honest responses. You won’t be able to take everyone’s suggestions into account, but you can listen and sometimes that alone can bring value to a neighborhood.

Survey the locals

The primary factor in making a positive change is ensuring that the project meets the needs of the community it is located in. To do that, it is vital to get out and talk to people in the area and try to understand what they want. Some communities are in dire need of affordable housing. Other communities may need retail stores. Grocery stores, in particular, are needed in many communities. Urban areas throughout the United States exist in what are called “food deserts” where the only access to food is via unhealthy options like fast food, convenience stores, etc. When you know what that community needs, you can adjust your investment to be as impactful as possible.

Consider alternative funding sources

Traditional banks and lenders will, for the most part, only finance conventional forms of development: suburban tract houses, sprawling commercial districts, office parks with little connection to their surroundings. The democratization of real estate capital finance is upending their domination of the property and development markets. Options like real estate crowdfunding, hard money lenders, and Opportunity Zone funds are all excellent sources of financing for non-traditional, non-greenfield projects.

_

The definition of “impactful” is different for everyone. But the opinions of future residents and current stakeholders should be a primary concern when gauging what will work best for a development in a community.

Finding financing, working with local authorities, and getting the community on board are all necessary steps to building for the maximum impact. With the right approach, and the right team, you’ll be right on target.  

Rendering of Benning Market courtesy of Neighborhood Development Company.

The balancing act.

September 20, 2019

Modern community development is a balancing act

For most of the history of urban development, community input was rare. Top down design and planning prescriptions, like those of “urban renewal” were how communities were made. These days, planners and developers need to be far more agile and responsive to create communities. Working in tandem with the local community is an absolute necessity.

What residents want

Gentrification has become a loaded term, and rightly so. But it is a common misconception that existing residents of gentrifying neighborhoods do not understand or want the myriad benefits that come with rising economic tides. They want their communities to grow, and flourish- but they want to be able to enjoy the benefits of that renaissance, and not be displaced. Most people welcome newcomers, but they want to feel that newcomers respect the area and that new commercial businesses and housing developments serve all the people in that community.

Adding balance

Developers need to balance the needs and wants of locals with the march of progress. They have a financial responsibility to attract new residents who wish to join those communities, but sustainable development means targeting more than one social and economic strata. Instead of markedly altering the character of the community, developers should work to integrate their projects into the fabric of that community on its terms.

Include treasured local businesses

A community’s character does not only come from residents. Commercial spaces and businesses like restaurants, barbershops, local watering holes, and many other establishments define an area just as much as the people that live in the neighborhood.

Developers should make efforts to ensure that treasured local businesses are allowed to continue operations. A popular option for this route is to offer them below-market rent for a specified period. This will keep the best features of the neighborhood in place, building a sense of community and goodwill between neighborhood anchors and new tenants and developments.

Mixed-income considerations

Studies have consistently shown that mixed-income neighborhoods offer a plethora of social, economic and educational benefits. But it takes work to maintain that mix. In certain communities, people live on fixed or limited incomes. If these residents are unable to share in the collective progress of the neighborhood, they will likely oppose any new development. One way to do well and do right is to set aside a certain percentage of units in up and coming neighborhoods for low-income residents, or to explore bottom-up financing options like equity crowdfunding, which allow residents to invest direct in community projects.  

_

The choices developers make have a real impact on the daily lives of neighborhood residents. The most successful developers in the social impact space find a healthy balance between generating returns and ensuring that all residents benefit from a rising tide.

Image of building in River Terrace, DC, courtesy of Small Change.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

sign up here

APPLY TO BE A PODCAST GUEST

More to See

(no title)

February 22, 2025

Bellevue Montgomery

February 11, 2025

West Lombard

January 28, 2025

FOLLOW

  • LinkedIn
  • RSS

Tag Cloud

Affordable housing Climate Community Creative economy Crowdfunding Design Development Environment Equity Finance FinTech Gentrification Impact Investing Mobility Offering Opportunity zones PropTech Technology Visionary Zoning

Footer

©rethinkrealestateforgood.co. The information contained on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this website is intended as investment, legal, tax or accounting strategy or advice, or constitutes an offer to sell, solicit or buy securities.
 
Any projections discussed or made may not be accurate and do not guarantee a specific outcome. All projections or investments are subject to risk due to uncertainty and change, including the risk of loss, and past performance is not indicative of future results. You should make independent decisions and seek independent advice regarding investments or strategies mentioned on this website.

Recent

  • The Mulberry
  • Mount Vernon Plaza
  • The Seven
  • Real estate and women.
  • Oculis Domes.

Search

Categories

Climate Community Crowdfunding Development Equity Fintech Investing Mobility Proptech Visionary

 

Copyright © 2026 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in