• 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

Technology

First in. Towards growth.

April 1, 2020

Lance Chimka, who became Director of Allegheny County Economic Development (ACED) in 2018, oversees an agency responsible for business expansion, planning, community and real estate development, and affordable housing projects for the second most populous county in Pennsylvania.  

Born and bred in Pittsburgh, Lance has long been familiar with the changes the region has gone through in its shift from a deeply embedded, industrial economy to one grounded in medical research, higher education and technologies such as robotics and cybersecurity. Soon after taking over at ACED, he noted that the local economy is hitting an important juncture, one in which Pittsburgh and local municipalities need to think beyond “eds and meds,” adding that a decade after the 2008 financial crisis “we’re in an economic expansion, but we’re not seeing some of the growth that other benchmark cities are seeing.”

Lance previously worked within the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development where he was Regional Director of the Governor’s Action Team, focusing on removing barriers to development, investment and job growth in the 11-county southwestern Pennsylvania region. And prior to working for the state, Lance led community development programs, commercial lending, business attraction and expansion activities for the ACED for a number of years.

Lance is certified as an Economic Development Finance Professional and he served in the U.S. Peace Corps, in Turkmenistan.

Information and Links

  • Lance is really proud of ACED’s partnership with RIDC to help the startup, Fifth Season, build a vertical farm in Braddock, PA. The project was profiled by Fast Company and won a NAIOP light industrial project of the year award.
  • Lance loves Pittsburgh International Airport’s microgrid project – he thinks it is both important and under-rated. Forbes loves it too.
  • And he’s inspired by the tech entrepreneurs that have led Pittsburgh into the forefront of the innovation economy, like Duolingo, MeeterFeeder or Thread.
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: [00:00:18] Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing.

[00:00:24] My guest today is Lance Chimka. Lance is the relatively new and extremely energetic director of Allegheny County’s Economic Development Department, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He has a very contemporary take on what government ought to be doing, and that includes investing in real estate to advance the economy. Lance is building a collaborative team environment, working with developers throughout the county, lending where banks dare not go, always with his eye on economic development growth, and always with the thought of how our region can do better. Learn how Lance and his team are supporting development in a not-quite-market rate environment.

[00:01:11] Be sure to go to EvePicker.com to find out more about Lance 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: [00:01:37] Hi, Lance. I’m really excited for the opportunity to talk to you today.

Lance Chimka: [00:01:41] Pleasure’s all mine, Eve. Thank you. I’m honored that you would have me on.

Eve: [00:01:45] We’re gonna have a great time.

Lance: [00:01:46] Absolutely. We usually do.

Eve: [00:01:48] In a not a lot of time, you’ve gone from being an intern at Allegheny County Economic Development to the organization’s director. And then you did a few odd jobs in-between. And that’s a pretty meteoric rise, wouldn’t you say?

Lance: [00:02:06] Ah, yeah. I mean, I guess it has been pretty quick. It sometimes didn’t feel that way. But I think the cool thing about that is that whole progression is absolutely vital to some of the stuff I want to get done, now. I wouldn’t have changed that course, at all. Like, understanding kind of the daily struggles of interns in my office absolutely directly informs how I work on efficiency measures here, for example. It’s been incredible and I’ve been really lucky to have incredible mentors along the way that have taught me a lot. That was one of my favorite things about public sector work, is it touches so much, that you’re able to, you’re able to learn.

Eve: [00:02:45] What led you to pursue a life in government service? Was it that first internship that you just liked so much?

Lance: [00:02:52] When I was pursuing an undergrad degree in finance, it was kind of in the boom times, the 2000s, and I didn’t want to take that route. Kinda always been a volunteer at heart, and so I joined the Peace Corps, and that was kind of the start of my real public service. And I just kind of knew, I came back to go to CMU and get a policy degree and just kind of always knew, in my heart of hearts, I would always be in some kind of public servant role. Not necessarily in government work, but that’s the path that I’ve chosen to this day, and it’s been incredibly rewarding.

Eve: [00:03:27] So, that what drives you, yeah. So, for listeners who haven’t connected the dots yet, Lance and I share a hometown, Pittsburgh, and a few decades ago, Pittsburgh was pretty well all but written off. You can listen to my podcast interview with Tom Murphy that I think just went live and you’ll get to hear the turnaround mayor talk about where we were then and what it took to shake that image. And that brings me to a statement that I read, that you made, Lance, which was, “we’re in economic expansion, but we’re not seeing some of the other growth that other benchmark cities are seeing.” And I’m just wondering what you meant by that?

Lance: [00:04:09] Not to, not to recap what you probably talked with Mayor Murphy about, but to get from the doldrums of 1983, which is really the trough of our local economy.

Eve: [00:04:19] It was the bottom, right? Yeah.

Lance: [00:04:21] Yeah. To where we’re at now, has been an amazing transformation, right? It’s been all about diversification and it’s, of a regional economy. And then we, now we have these five primary industry sectors: in financial services, IT, energy, advanced manufacturing and healthcare. And that’s really, really important because in recessionary periods, that diversified economy is very robust, and makes us the darling, and outperform benchmark cities in recessionary periods. However, the problem is that in expansionary economies we lack the kind of exponential growth that some of our other cities experience. It’s just kind of the nature of our economy currently, is slow and steady wins the race, which is fine. I think my goal is on the macro economic end, is to not throw the baby out with the bathwater, keep the diversification, keep the slow, steady growth, but then really experience some of the upside of expansionary times, which we’re in now. And I think the key to that is, and I’m really optimistic about the future of our economy, is across those five industry sectors. You have artificial intelligence, which we are an absolute worldwide hub of, cuts across all of those. And robotics, cuts across three of those, in advanced manufacturing, health care and energy. So, those eight intersection points that I think are the key to experiencing upside growth, and that’s some of the stuff I’m excited to work on.

Eve: [00:05:56] How do you work on that? How do you improve that?

Lance: [00:05:59] Great question. Especially like, how does government do that? The risk profiles associated with investments in startups are probably too, you know, too risky of an investment for governments to be making. And not to mention, we don’t have that skill set. But I think there are a lot of other ways we can invest in the city in a way to encourage that kind of growth. One of those ways is in real estate development, right? If you take something like biotech, right? A lot of times you’ve got companies that need wet lab space. You have extremely long periods to get through clinical trials. You have really expensive buildings that, you know, because of the nature of the beast, you have your non-credit tenants. So, I think when we’re making investments in real estate, we need to incentivize those kind of assets in buildings that aren’t going to happen in the open market. That’s just one example. We lack high-bay space for robotics. Some other specialty real estate that I think the public sector can play a role in: mitigating the risks for developers who have non-credit tenants, and making sure that building stock is available. Speculative development is another thing we’ve classically underperformed on. And in the kind of pace of the current economy, like, people are not waiting around 18 months to build a building, they want turnkey space ready to go. So, we’re working on a number of things to make sure that those types of building stock in speculative development is allowed for. And a lot of that is investment through tax abatements, and direct investment, and site assembly that I do here in this office. So, that’s just one example in real estate. I think you can find other examples in public infrastructure, amenities, recreational space, and being really intentional about how we connect our tech hubs through infrastructure work. Whether that’s public transit, or whether that’s, you know, really compelling a multi-modal streetscape design. Things like that.

Eve: [00:08:03] Quite a lot to think about, isn’t there?

Lance: [00:08:04] Yeah. Yeah. Keeps ’em busy.

Eve: [00:08:06] So, you also served as an advisor on Pittsburgh’s Amazon HQ2 proposal. And I’m wondering in retrospect how you feel about making it to the top 20 list, but not as an Amazon final city pick.

Lance: [00:08:20] Yeah, I mean, I feel great about it, because I think we extracted all the marketing benefit from it without any of the really, really, really painful stuff that might have been associated with it. I am proud of our approach to that. I think it was, hey, here’s a suite of stuff that we, as every Pittsburgher, there’s wide agreement that we need to invest in. And we don’t have a revenue stream to do that. So, let’s take that suite of things we need to invest in and treat this gargantuan investment coming our way as the revenue stream. You know, and I think it helped kind of distill that suite of, that wish list, if you will, for us. And now, ok, we might not have the revenue stream, but at least it helped distill what we want to be as a city, forcing us to go through that process. And I think it was overwhelming positive experience.

Eve: [00:09:13] What’s the top of the list that we should become?

Lance: [00:09:16] I think the two things that kind of rose to the top, given the time in our city and the way things are trending, are people want a really robust public transit network. I think that was clear. People want and are concerned about rapidly appreciating real estate values in some of our residential markets. And that would be exacerbated by a huge investment like that. And so I think it really rallied people around public transit, and around affordable housing. Which I think is a positive thing, you know?

Eve: [00:09:48] Yeah, no, I agree.

Lance: [00:09:50] It’s great that affordable housing is suddenly cool again. You know?

Eve: [00:09:53] Yeah.

Lance: [00:09:54] This is fantastic. People working in this field are like, wow, this great sea change, like, in a really short period of time.

Eve: [00:10:01] Yeah, that’s true. Affordable housing is a really hot button issue now, isn’t it? Everywhere.

Lance: [00:10:06] Yeah, no doubt. And it’s great. And I think ultimately, you know, we did not land that investment. I think predominately it was a numbers game, right? A population numbers game. You’re talking about …

Eve: [00:10:18] Yes.

Lance: [00:10:18] … a gigantic pool of workers, and being a small middle market city was tough for us to absorb that, A., and, you know, the facts that matters are we have zero population growth and a two million metro area, and it went to a place with a 20 million metro area and five percent growth. And a, what a, maybe a 12 million metro area, and like 10 percent growth down in D.C., right?

Eve: [00:10:42] Right.

Lance: [00:10:42] At the end of the day it was all about …

Eve: [00:10:45] The numbers.

Lance: [00:10:46] … you know, the numbers, demographics, bodies, population. And that put a fine point that we need to work on that as well, right? That’s a huge Achilles heel for us is a lack of population growth.

Eve: [00:10:56] It is and it isn’t. I mean, that part of Pittsburgh’s charm is its size. When you talk about what should Pittsburgh become, I think you should also think about what it shouldn’t become, right?

Lance: [00:11:07] Sure.

Eve: [00:11:07] It’s a pretty beautiful and rather unique city. And each city has its own strengths. I don’t know. For me, cities go beyond numbers, but perhaps not for Amazon.

Lance: [00:11:17] Yeah, well, exactly. I think, despite what they would tell you, I think they had to take a very analytic approach to that.

Eve: [00:11:23] Yes.

Lance: [00:11:24] And it’s something that like charm and culture and beauty were probably not heavily weighted …

Eve: [00:11:31] No.

Lance: [00:11:31] … on that algorithm scale, right? So. But I agree with you.

Eve: [00:11:35] Probably mobility and housing stock were right up there.

Lance: [00:11:38] Mm hmm. I imagine.

Eve: [00:11:39] You’ve barely started, but what would you like to accomplish at ACED?

Lance: [00:11:44] Oh, boy, I mean, a lot. So, our two-fold mission is this: one, is the work on the macro economic health of the city, which is really about building a diverse and growing regional economy that’s opportunity rich for everyone to tap into, right? And we addressed some of that already. The other part of our mission is much more neighborhood-based. And that’s, you know, we want to create healthy and vibrant communities. So, all of our investments, and we make those investments in the areas of housing, and industrial and commercial development, infrastructure development, parks and rec, things of that nature, all of our investments are done with that two-fold mission. So, there’s certainly a lot of things I think we can do and be more creative with the tools we have. You know, I’m a big proponent of good government, too, and I think there’s a lot we can do to make the public sector meet the needs of our citizens in a more efficient and customer-friendly way. So, that’s the other kind of side of this that I will work on is, not only mission delivery, but just, you know, government efficiency is a twisted hobby of mine that I like, I like working on.

Eve: [00:12:55] Ha! That’s a really great hobby.

Lance: [00:12:57] Yeah. I mean, everyone needs a hobby.

Eve: [00:12:59] Yeah.

Lance: [00:13:00] And to be more specific, again, I talked about the real estate assets that I think we need to incentivize. A big concern of mine is if you put communities, you can kind of classify them broadly in three buckets. And that’s, there are tons of communities that are thriving, and we need to support them. There are a number of communities that are revitalizing that need special attention. There are a lot of communities, they need stabilization. We need triage. And a lot of that is direct fallout from the 1983 exodus of people with any sort of social mobility leaving the city.

Eve: [00:13:37] Yeah. Yeah.

Lance: [00:13:37] And we have certain areas that, they have zero market. Land value is negative, right? And that presents a whole slew of economic and social problems that go along with that. And we really need to support those communities. At the same time, kind of leaving the development breadcrumbs from areas of high opportunity to establish markets, and you kind of need to string those investments along. It’s going to be a while until I can take the strength of the market that is the Strip District, for now, and pool it across the Allegheny Valley, right? And pool it down into the Mon Valley.

Eve: [00:14:14] Yeah.

Lance: [00:14:14] And in the process establish beachheads in Etna. And I need to establish that beachhead in Etna before I can really get to Tarentum and New Kensington, right? Same thing goes for the Mon Valley. I really need to establish a strong beachhead in Wilkinsburg and Braddock until I can really talk about strength of market in places like Clairton. In the meantime, we need to make sure that we are treating those communities with the respect that they deserve in addressing the blight and disinvestment they’re struggling with, and doing that in a really smart and strategic way.

Eve: [00:14:46] Well, it must be really tough making decisions because you can’t have endless resources, I’m sure. And then you have to decide where to direct those resources. And for people who don’t know who are listening, Pittsburgh was around 700,000 people strong and really lost more than half of its population in the 1980s. And it’s now still hovering just over 300,000. Although family units are smaller now.

Lance: [00:15:16] Yes.

Eve: [00:15:16] It’s still a lot of vacancy, right?

Lance: [00:15:18] Yeah, absolutely. And so, you know, there’s some opportunity there. You know, to some extent, affordable housing price per square foot is a supply demand calculation, right?

Eve: [00:15:27] Yes.

Lance: [00:15:28] The problem is the areas that are close to job centers, well-served by public transit, and have amenities like grocery stores. We’re seeing rapid appreciation there, and obviously, because they’re more desirable places to live. So, we need to make investments to ensure that those are mixed-income communities. And we also have the opportunity, though, that a lot of other cities don’t, to make proactive preservation investments in areas that have naturally occurring affordable housing. And we’re doing both of those things on the housing investment side.

Eve: [00:16:00] Real estate development is a major component of your work.

Lance: [00:16:04] Oh, yeah. I would say most of what we do has a real estate component to it. Now, one of the things we’re trying to get more engaged in, that we traditionally have not, is the workforce development arena. You know, I think one of the big transitions we talked about, like the change in public opinion around affordable housing … the innovation economy has forced site selection to go from a predominately site- and building-centric approach to predominately talent-based approach. And we, I think in the past, in the economic development community, have taken a very hands-off approach saying, hey, there are specialists in workforce development, we’re going to let them do their thing, and we’ll just, we’ll build the stuff, invest in those tangible building products. I don’t think that model works anymore. I think the workforce challenge and the future of work is such an acute need that we really need an all-hands-on-deck approach. And the more resources everyone can leverage, that and, the better. I’m just finalizing my budgets for next year and we’re probably making close to a million dollars in investments in workforce development, which doesn’t have a land and building component to it. And I’m proud of that. And I think that’s something we’ll continue to invest more heavily in. And that’s everything from workforce readiness of teens, to adults with barriers to employment, getting re-educated and prepared for the workforce. You know, we need to attack this from all angles.

Eve: [00:17:33] I was going to ask, is there a rhyme or reason to the projects you become involved in. But I think I’m hearing that your organization, you really play the role as almost a pioneer investor early on when perhaps it’s a little bit uncomfortable for private money to be involved?

Lance: [00:17:51] Oh, no doubt.

Eve: [00:17:52] Yeah.

Lance: [00:17:52] Yeah, absolutely. Our investments, I think, are predominately … well, one, we take first mover investments in site assembly. Right? For example. So, one of my big hypotheses was that people say there is no market, no real estate market in Braddock, right?

Eve: [00:18:14] Mmm Hmm.

Lance: [00:18:14] And I challenge that. I think it’s the fact that the available real estate is not the right kind of real estate. So, for example, we assembled 60 tax-delinquent, single-family structures, demolished them, consolidated them into one five-acre parcel, and worked with a very creative developer on a take-down period that worked for the finances of that kind of constrained market. And they built a 60,000 square foot high-bay light industrial building. It’s probably the first new industrial development in Braddock in, I couldn’t even tell you how long. This is a place that suffered 90 percent of population loss.

Eve: [00:18:52] Yes.

Lance: [00:18:52] Those are the type of things, in that case, we were a first mover and then worked on aggressive land conveyance strategy with the developer. And now the great thing is we have new tax base in Braddock, we new job base in Braddock, and almost more importantly, I have a comp now, I have established that land has value in Braddock.

Eve: [00:19:12] Oh yes, that’s very important.

Lance: [00:19:14] And previously that didn’t exist. So, that’s something we did in 2019. They’re going to take occupancy first quarter of 2020, and, yeah, we’re really proud of that kind of work. So, sometimes our investments are in that realm. Other times were physical investments, either through tax leverage finance or direct investment, and yes, we assume a much higher risk profile than our private sector partners.

Eve: [00:19:35] And have you been able to convince some banks to come along on the ride with you?

Lance: [00:19:39] Yeah. And I think as long as you understand their underwriting criteria, and their approach, they’re great partners. You just have to understand what their sweet spot is and work around it. We underwrite our investments in a very similar way that banks do, on the risk end. The difference being, one, we’re willing to assume more risk. And two, on the return end we think much more broadly about returns. It’s not just about debt coverage ratio. It’s about tax base expansion. It isn’t necessarily going to pay us, but is a return to the project because it’s a mission-based return.

Eve: [00:20:16] It’s a return to the region, right? As well.

Lance: [00:20:17] Exactly. We love working with banks and traditional funders. And we have the ability to be more flexible to allow them to meet their underwriting goals and and still participate in the project.

Eve: [00:20:28] What sort of projects do you hope to see more of? I mean, if things go really well and your investments pay off in the way you want them to. What sort of projects are you hoping to see arise independently in the next five years, let’s say?

Lance: [00:20:42] Yeah, I think if we do a couple of projects like that, that light industrial building in Braddock then … that’s the goal, is that you would then establish a market and I can then start making similar investments in Duquesne and McKeesport. And like I said, you just pull that market down to maybe less centrally located areas. So, yeah, more spec buildings, more high-bay light industrial for robotics industry, more wet lab for biotech and life sciences. You know, hopefully, some of our development community starts to realize that you can stand in Lawrenceville in 40 dollar square foot space and look across the river at 15 dollar square foot space. And …

Eve: [00:21:19] Yes.

Lance: [00:21:21] … start to recognize that arbitrage opportunity. Because these communities, they’re fantastic, unique, beautiful places. They are open to development. They are, you know, they’re wonderful places to do work. And they’re right adjacent to the urban core. So, you know, rethink your idea of proximity and let’s do some great projects in some of these communities that are maybe overlooked in a lot of cases.

Eve: [00:21:47] And then most importantly, it’s pretty fun to be at the leading edge, right?

Lance: [00:21:51] I think so! Sometimes, you know, that’s when you don’t have a comp and the bank starts to get real nervous …

Eve: [00:21:58] I know, I know.

Lance: [00:21:58] … that’s when, you know, they don’t find it as much fun as I do. But yeah. I mean, that’s part of the fun, is there’s additional challenge there, but it can be really, really rewarding if you pull something off.

Eve: [00:22:08] I agree. Totally agree. Yeah. We’ve also talked about how to empower people in these communities to be part of the change, the rapid change that’s occurring in cities like Pittsburgh. And I am wondering why you think that’s important?

Lance: [00:22:23] One of the big challenges we face as a society is disproportionate allocation of not only income, if you look at wealth, right? It becomes even more staggeringly problematic. So, we’re not trying to establish markets for, just because, just for tax base, right? Hopefully, the idea is then, by establishing market you can assist in families building wealth, right? And we want people to be able to participate in the benefits of these hopefully catalytic investments we’re making. How best to do that is a challenge. You know, obviously, it’s easy when you have homeownership, high levels of homeownership, because that’s, you know, your biggest asset that appreciates with change in real estate market.

Eve: [00:23:17] Yeah.

Lance: [00:23:17] If people have that asset and they want to cash out and participate in that upside return, well, great. You know, that’s building equity, that’s building wealth. And hopefully that’s life changing for the family that chooses to do that. I think the problem, because when people are very culturally, emotionally and kind of societally invested, but don’t have that asset to participate in the appreciation, how to plug those people in to our changing communities and make sure that they participate. And that’s where, you know, lots of novel ideas that I think we’ve been talking about, about microlending, and, you know, equity returns back to neighborhoods, start to become really, really compelling for that kind of segment of society and something that I really want to learn more about, and try and institute some really progressive things on that front.

Eve: [00:24:10] I’ve been talking to some people over the last year who also believe that making a space for those people, like a physical space, is really important. And they do that in different ways. Like maybe a community space or … there’s a developer that I know who very purposefully will create retail space and then look for someone in the neighborhood to fill it and really help them build their business into that space. And that, I suppose that’s another very concrete way to involve community and make them feel like they belong, right?

Lance: [00:24:47] Yeah. No, absolutely. Absolutely. And, you know, maybe that’s a, you know, a silver lining on the challenges to retail real estate now is that mixed-use buildings are kind of hoping that’s a break even spot? Right?

Eve: [00:25:01] Yeah.

Lance: [00:25:02] And so what you have is then, is a really affordable commercial …

Eve: [00:25:05] Right.

Lance: [00:25:05] … property for people to move into. You know, locally-owned, sole proprietorship businesses that provide a higher return back to the, to the owner.

Eve: [00:25:17] Yeah, yeah.

Lance: [00:25:17] Hopefully we can continue that.

Eve: [00:25:19] Yeah. And so, like, I have to ask, what’s, you know, your background? You mentioned a little bit about it, but what did you study? What got you to this place?

Lance: [00:25:29] Yeah. I grew up in Pittsburgh, to a … I was the youngest of four.

Eve: [00:25:35] You were the baby.

Lance: [00:25:36] I was the baby and I probably act like it too much. But, you know, my first education was growing up in incredibly hilarious and brilliant family. So, you know, my parents were really hardworking, great people. I went to a mix of public and Catholic schools when I was a kid. I studied finance in Washington, D.C., The Catholic University of America. Went overseas and lived in Turkmenistan for three years, which was arguably the most educative of all of my educational experience. And I came back to CMU to get a policy degree with the intention of going back to do more international development work, because I found it just fascinating. But really fell back in love with my hometown, recognized that there were parts of my city that were in as much need or possibly greater need than what we consider to be some of the, you know, the most poverty stricken places on earth. And that didn’t sit great with me. Yeah, all of those different educational life experiences, it kind of like, let me down this path. And, you know, people, like I said I have had great work mentors that have given me chances to work on stuff. I’ve just been incredibly lucky.

Eve: [00:26:51] I have a feeling it’s not just luck, but we can go with that.

Lance: [00:26:53] I think it’s mostly luck. It’s mostly luck. But yeah, like I say, it goes back to my parents. I do work hard at it because I love it. It never quite feels like work, you know. Some days it does.

Eve: [00:27:04] Yes.

Lance: [00:27:05] Most of the time it doesn’t.

Eve: [00:27:06] That’s great. And do you think on the whole, socially responsible real estate is necessary in today’s development landscape. Outside of the work you do, like everyday developers? What do you think that should look like?

Lance: [00:27:20] There’s crappy real estate development and there’s good real estate development, right?

Eve: [00:27:23] Yes.

Lance: [00:27:24] I think good real estate development is about placemaking, and placemaking is about integration into the community. Not just, you know, from a contextual design standpoint, but from a ‘community needs’ standpoint. And I think enlightened developers get that. Enlightened developers know that incorporating that kind of philosophy in the development usually leads to higher returns, too. So, I think it can be done well and it can be done profitably, right?

Eve: [00:27:52] Right.

Lance: [00:27:52] It just requires a kind of a philosophy, a mindset, and the ability to listen to people a little bit more. But in the end, they have a much better project to show for it.

Eve: [00:28:03] Creating something that’s responsible isn’t really swallowing a bitter pill, right?

Lance: [00:28:09] No, definitely not. Especially when you have your friendly local government economic development person to help you along the way and hopefully chip in where necessary.

Eve: [00:28:20] And are there any current trends in real estate that you think are interesting or most important to the future of our cities?

Lance: [00:28:28] Well, I mean, I think it’s interesting, you know, being the hub of technology that we are. I think the design considerations around places like parking garages, for example, I think are really interesting. Because the rate of technological change is forcing people to consider the fact that this structure could achieve obsolescence in five, 10 years.

Eve: [00:28:52] Yeah.

Lance: [00:28:52] Which, what previously was considered a 50 year asset. So, I find that inherently fascinating.

Eve: [00:28:58] It is fascinating, isn’t it? I just start thinking about, well, what could you do with a parking garage?

Lance: [00:29:04] Yeah, right.

Eve: [00:29:04] How many housing units could you put into those little slots?

Lance: [00:29:08] Precisely. And are they going to be livable, you know?

Eve: [00:29:10] Yeah.

Lance: [00:29:10] And how do you remediate the oil afterward? You know?

Eve: [00:29:12] That’s right.

Lance: [00:29:12] It’s a … it’s a really interesting thing. So, you see people spec-ing in higher ceiling heights than they would have previously. Flat floor plates. All these different design considerations that I find fascinating. And even more fascinating because we’re on the bleeding edge of all of the autonomous vehicle technology that is going to lead to obsolescence of those buildings. So, yeah, I mean, that’s one that I find fascinating. What else?

Eve: [00:29:39] I’m watching zoning changes across the country, and across the world. I’m pretty fascinated to see how quickly that’s going to move along. When you have cities, you know, basically outlawing single family homes. That’s quite a statement.

Lance: [00:29:53] Yes. I think Pittsburgh in particular is being very progressive in some ways with, you know, allowing for accessory dwelling units, which I know you’re probably an advocate for, and …

Eve: [00:30:05] Yeah.

Lance: [00:30:06] … and, you know, what they’ve done with the RIV district, for example, and ensuring access to the waterfront, I think is some really good things. However, in some city neighborhoods, and this gets even more acutely problematic when you move out to maybe smaller municipal governments that haven’t updated their zoning and code in a while. The thing that I find problematic is if you ask the average 10 people on the street what the vision for new development their community would look like? And then you show them what current zoning allows for, they would be horrified, right?

Eve: [00:30:40] Yes, yeah, I think that’s true in most places.

Lance: [00:30:43] It’s a huge disconnect and it’s worrisome to me.

Eve: [00:30:47] Yeah, I mean, how do, you know, it’s really expensive updating a zoning code. I’ve been involved in that. It’s a really big deal.

Lance: [00:30:53] It is. And when you multiply that by 130 municipalities with wide, varying levels of, kind of, capacity. It’s … yeah, it’s really a daunting task.

Eve: [00:31:05] Yeah. And one sign-off question, then. Given all of the possibilities, what comes next for ACED, and for you?

Lance: [00:31:14] I am very project focused. And I believe that markets are built one great project at a time and I try not to let the enormity of the challenges, you know, get me down, right? It’s just one good project at a time. We’re focused on that every day, and we’re focused on being innovative and creative every day. And there are a ton of innovative and creative people in Pittsburgh that we need to partner with and work with to solve these problems. Like I said, it’s all hands on deck.

Eve: [00:31:48] Well, thank you very much. I really enjoyed that conversation. I can’t wait to see what you do next.

Lance: [00:31:52] Awesome. Thank you so much, Eve.

Eve: [00:31:54] That was Lance Chimka. Lance is embracing his role as the head of an economic development department with energy. Our conversation reflects the way that Lance thinks. Broad and diverse ideas to get at very particular economic problems. Lance is focused on growth, first and foremost. Making sure that Pittsburgh’s growth matches other cities. But at the same time, he wants to make sure that no one is left behind. So, he thinks a lot about how to empower communities in the path of rapid change, and how to change the disproportionate allocation of wealth. I’ll be interested to see the impact that Lance’s leadership will have.

Eve: [00:32:46] 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.

[00:33:12] Thank you so much for spending your time with me today. And thank you, Lance, 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 Lance Chimka

How to transform a city.

February 26, 2020

Tom Murphy is the second-longest serving mayor of Pittsburgh (after David Lawrence).

He is noted for overseeing the difficult, but transformative transition of the city from the mid-1990s to mid-2000s during turbulent Downtown development cycles, an initially unpopular funding bid for two new waterfront stadiums, a new convention center (then the largest ‘green’ building in the U.S.) and investment in and development of 1,500 acres of land from abandoned steel mill sites to vacant houses. He built many miles of river trails and ran on them religiously.

“Public space can be the most democratic space in the city”

Mayor Murphy’s administration took a market-driven approach and downsized governmental departments. With the savings from downsizing, Tom created the visionary Pittsburgh Development Fund, a $60 million fund which he employed to leverage private real estate projects and investment all over the city. Public/private partnerships were key to this strategy. He was looking towards a future that not many others saw.

Struggling with outdated taxing structure regulated by the state, as well as state resistance to city growth through annexation, Mayor Murphy made hard decisions such as declaring a budget crisis and pushing through alternative funding sources such as a parking tax for commuters.

By the end of his tenure he had shepherded the city, kicking and screaming, onto a new track which led to it being held up as the model for urban transformation – a former industrial city reinvented as a biotech, medical, university and robotics hub. In 2008, the G-20 was staged in Pittsburgh, highlighting its transformation. 

Mayor Murphy, who studied urban studies in college, also previously served as a state representative for the North Side, as a neighborhood organizer there, and between college and graduate school, in the Peace Corps.

Insights and Inspirations

  • Tom focused on five things as mayor. Finding money for projects that would change the city. Taking control of vacant land. Building a really great team. Creating a vision. And building excellent public/private partnerships.
  • Since ending his tenure as mayor, Tom has come to believe that public spaces matter more than anything else in building better cities.
  • He believes that the interface between buildings and community is critical to the making of a place.

Information and Links

  • Mayor Murphy Gets Key to City (Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Jan. 3, 2020)
  • Reaching for the Future: Creative Finance for Smaller Communities (A 2016 report for the Urban Land Institute)
  • Adapting Cities for the Future (A 2011 article for the Urban Land Institute)
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: [00:00:14] Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing.

[00:00:23] My guest today is Tom Murphy, Pittsburgh’s turnaround mayor. He oversaw the difficult, but transformative transition of the city from the mid-1990s to mid-2000s. Those were turbulent times and included many highlights and many struggles. During his tenure, he declared a budget crisis, built two stadiums, created a $60 million development fund and built many miles of river trails. Tom Murphy is an authentic city expert.

Eve: [00:01:03] Be sure to go to EvePicker.com to find out more about Tom 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: [00:01:38] Hello, Tom, I’m so delighted that you found time to join me today.

Tom Murphy: [00:01:42] I’m always honored to be with you. You were one of the pioneers in many developments in Pittsburgh when very few people saw the opportunity.

Eve: [00:01:50] You were the second longest serving mayor in the history of Pittsburgh. And in 1994, when Pittsburgh wasn’t sure what it was going to become, was really on the verge of collapse. And you shepherded the city through a very turbulent transition from a place that had emptied out with the closing of steel mills and suburban flight, to a city transformed almost every respect. And I was in Pittsburgh for every moment of it. So, you reshaped Pittsburgh, kicking and screaming all the way.

Tom: [00:02:22] Underlining kicking and screaming, Eve. As you remember, every time we tried to do something, there were, there was controversy. I mean, it just, it was amazing to me.

Eve: [00:02:34] Well, this is slightly conservative city, so maybe that was part of it, but people couldn’t imagine what you imagined. When you begin with a city that has lost its industry and half its people?

Tom: [00:02:47] Well, I’m a product of that, I mean, my father worked for 51 years at Jones & Laughlin Steel steel mill on the South Side. So, my whole life was defined by the shifts he worked there, I mean … you know, he was, he worked in the mill. I mean, he wasn’t a boss or anything, he just worked in the mill and our lives were shaped by that and … and sort of everybody I knew pretty much, their lives were tied to the mill. And so I grew up with that. And to watch that disappear in the, really the 70s and the 80s, I was a state legislator on the North Side, and I don’t think people appreciate how incredibly destructive it is for families. You know, where you had very traditional families where the husband went to work in the mill, you can make a good living, buy a house, buy a car, take a vacation and now all of a sudden that disappeared. You know, the wives went to work, kids who had thought about going to college deferred that, you know, we lost a whole generation from Western Pennsylvania – 500,000 people left and they were overwhelmingly are our kids, young people who were leaving, because they didn’t see a future in Pittsburgh. And so having come through that, having lived it, you know, on the North Side, where we’ve lived for almost 50 years now, and how destructive it was, never thinking I would be mayor. When I became mayor, I mean, my focus was how do we stabilize this situation? And to do that, we needed to re-imagine Pittsburgh in lots of different ways. In how we educate kids, because you didn’t need a high school education, let alone a college education to work in a steel mill. And you know, what we did with all this land, all of these industrial, thousands of acres of industrial property. And the culture of Pittsburgh, which, you know, was almost opposed in the technology industry because they were seen as non-union.

Tom: [00:04:40] And so we went through huge controversies in talking about re-imagining Pittsburgh. And now we’ve come out the other side and, you know, it looks very different.

Eve: [00:04:51] It does. Did you have a strategy from day one?

Tom: [00:04:57] Well, I laugh at that. I mean, hindsight always gives you the strategy. But we did in the sense that we felt we needed five things, right? We needed money. We were a flat broke city and … you know, essentially, as you said, I mean, close to bankruptcy. And we needed to figure out how we will get money so we could invest in Pittsburgh and entice developers. Two, we wanted land control. A lot of this land was tied up in bankruptcies and it was, you know, uncertain titles. And so, a developer who has a choice of buying a 100-acre greenfield site or 100-acre steel mill site, they’re going to buy the greenfield site. It’s safer. And the third was that we needed a really good team of people who were going to be public entrepreneurs, in effect, that were willing to take risk. And the fourth thing we needed, we needed a vision. We needed to be, to sort of know where we wanted to go. And the fifth thing is we needed good public-private partnerships. We needed people who believed that Pittsburgh could be a different place. And you remember back then, Eve, you were one of the few people that …

Eve: [00:06:08] Yeh.

Tom: [00:06:08] … were willing to invest in places like East Liberty. It was very hard to get local developers to re-imagine Pittsburgh. They had their little niche. They were comfortable in it. They’ve been through 30 years of decline. And so all those ingredients, you know, we talked about them when I ran for mayor. And people obviously voted for me. But when we started to do this stuff, they said we didn’t know you meant that. So where do we get money? And the first month or so I was Mayor we reduced the city’s workforce, reduced the number of police officers we had, then shifted six million dollars of that money annually to finance a $60 million bond issue, which we called the Pittsburgh Development Fund, which gave us money to invest in the future. In every city, I mean, I talk, I meet with cities a lot and talk to them and that’s one of the challenges they face is, your demands for the day-to-day. Just ‘today’ is huge in a city. I mean, everybody wants more police. Nobody’s streets are getting salted enough, and potholes, and if you just spend the stuff on all your resources on today, nothing changes. I mean, you’re Pittsburgh and in Pittsburgh we were still declining, so the challenge was how do we get some of those resources and use it to invest in the future, which entails risk.

Tom: [00:07:27] The second thing we did, Eve, we went out and bought, as you know, Mulugetta Birru was head of the Urban Redevelopment Authority, and we had him go out and buy almost 1500 acres of land. You know, we bought what was then the South Side works of Jones & Laughlin. We bought the slag dump in Squirrel Hill. We bought the old Sears site in East Liberty. And then, you know, we looked at each other and said, what do we do with this stuff? And that’s when we began to form great partnerships with developers. Somebody like you who was willing to invest in that old building in East Liberty and, you know, and others. And the $60 million gave us the ability to create really creative and effective public-private partnerships that share the risk with developers who believe that Pittsburgh could be a different place. That’s what we did.

Eve: [00:08:17] I was going to ask the question that, do you believe developers played an important role in the transformation of the city? Obviously you do.

Tom: [00:08:24] I do. I think place is everything. I think it has huge impact on how people live, I think, like crime rates, a whole host of other things. How they, what they think about themselves. I mean, if I live in a neighborhood that has, half the buildings are vacant and there’s a lot of litter and everything, you know, I come out my door every morning, I probably have a different reaction than if I live in a neighborhood that has lots of gardens and clean. And so I think that, it has huge impact. And so developers, from our point of view, as you know, were really important partners. And this is, I tell this story all the time, is when we started to see things happen, developers would come and say, Mayor, I have a great idea for you. And we’d say, with all due respect, tell us why it’s a great idea for you. And we’ll decide whether it’s a great idea for us, and if our self interests come together, we’ll figure out how to be a good partner and share the risk with you. But that assumed we knew what we wanted and so that was one of the really big challenges. As you remember early in my administration, I had a really great planning director, Eloise Hirsh, who really helped shape that vision, as well as Tom Cox and Mulu and Steve Leaper, really helped shape that whole vision of what Pittsburgh could be. It was really reimagining, you know, old steel mills in the South Side and a slag dump in Squirrel Hill. And so we were looking at, not to ignore other things, but we were looking for things that could be catalytic, that could change people’s image of Pittsburgh. And the ballparks obviously help with that, too. I mean that when I was running for mayor, I wasn’t planning to be, have anything to do with sports stadiums. And that sort of was one of the challenges of running the city, as you know, I didn’t think about it. And then all of a sudden, it’s the number-one topic.

Eve: [00:10:17] Well, it’s always the number one topic in Pittsburgh. Sports, so.

[00:10:20] Well, unfortunately, I mean, I don’t know if you know the story, Eve. As I, when I ran for mayor, I was elected mayor in November. In early December, the then-owners of the Pirates gave me a letter that said they intended to sell the team. I don’t even know this, that Dick Caligiuri many years ago had signed an agreement with the team that if ever they were going to sell it, that the city would in affect own the team for nine months in which they would be required to find a buyer. And if we couldn’t in nine months find a buyer, then the team could be sold to another city. And so there I was, having run on crimes, jobs and taxes, now owning a baseball team. It really, literally when I was running in November, I had no idea that the first year of my time as mayor, two years, would be dominated by trying to figure out how to build a baseball park and a football stadium and a convention center. So, that’s life, right? So, we had to figure it out, right?

Eve: [00:11:20] When the sun goes down, with Downtown as a backdrop, it’s a very special place.

Tom: [00:11:27] Well, it’s a, my favorite seat in PNC Park, regardless of what the team is doing, is that, at the very highest point in the left field stands, and because the view of the city at dusk like that is incredible.

Eve: [00:11:41] Was the Pittsburgh Development Fund the most important thing that you implemented? Were there the other programs or policies with very big impact?

Tom: [00:11:49] Well, what’s the Development Fund gave us is, it gave us the ability to be, to be flexible. When I go to lots of cities, they would say, we’d love to do this, but we don’t have any money. The money, for better, for worse, becomes a really important part of being able to pursue your dreams. And so the Development Fund was our money in the sense that we didn’t have to look to the state or the federal government, you know, to wait for months or a year before you figure out whether you’re going to get the money or not. We also, as you know, in the URA, people at the URA led by Mulu and Steve, were very entrepreneurial in understanding how they used tax increment financing and other federal and state sources, so it … it was fairly typical, it might be true in your deal, your deals that you were doing, is that you were getting sources of money from 10 or 12 different sources. And what I have found is that’s unusual in a lot of cities, that cities are not entrepreneurial like that, of understanding how you mix and match money to make a deal work. So, what I say, Eve, is it’s really, it’s really a market driven approach, is that basically you as a developer come and say, you know, I want to do this building, but this is what the bank is going to lend me, and there’s this gap in financing, and if it’s something we want to see happen, we being the city in this case, then we become your partner and figure out how to help finance it, whether it’s our Development Fund or other sources.

Eve: [00:13:30] My experience with the Liberty Bank Building was very typical. I think I had 12 sources of financing.

Tom: [00:13:36] Yeh.

Eve: [00:13:36] Most of the URA money, which I’m really glad gets to be recycled. But Mulu was extremely entrepreneurial. He, first of all, he didn’t quite trust me when we started …

Tom: [00:13:36] Well, but you were a small developer at the time, right? With not a long track record. But with great ideas.

Eve: [00:14:05] There were really interesting meetings. I really became very fond of Mulu. So, but he, you know, his approach was, look, we have this amount of money. 300,000 dollars out of this pot of money, or whatever it was. And you need two million. Go away and think about how it might work. And so I would come back and I’d say, look, I could make it work if you took little interest payments for two years or, you know, whatever, whatever it was that made it to some sort of stabilized scenario. I learned a lot. And then, you know, things shifted very much, and I think the URA lost a lot of its funding in the mid-2000s and the banks got more skittish and it all changed, right?

Tom: [00:14:49] Well, it did and it didn’t. I mean, I think the philosophy in the city changed and maybe … so I was saying this about being market driven. Mulu met with you and you convinced him that the market was what it was, that without flexible public money that could defer interest or payments even for a few years, that that this deal was not going to happen, and we wanted it to happen, and so we would make the loan. The market has become much better in Pittsburgh, though. You were, you know, in my view, the early bird gets the worm in this case, in the case of your building, you were, you were the early bird. Is that you got better financing then maybe after the market’s healthy. So, we tried to be market sensitive in that sense. And at the same time, recognize that we wanted these deals to happen, so we were willing to put, risk public money. I think the key to it, what I learned about myself in this, Eve, as I was, I am not a good day-to-day manager, but I understood how to hire good people and just give them room. And if a deal blew up, you know, that’s what’s going to get reported on the news. But I need to be willing to support the people if they did the deal for the right reasons and it just didn’t work. And we had some of those done, you know, Fifth and Forbes Downtown was one of those examples. But we were willing to take those risks, whether it was with you or other developers, that we didn’t know with the market, we didn’t know if people would move and live on a slag dump in Squirrel Hill or, you know, live in apartments in South Side. We didn’t know what the market was. We were way out there and that was the risk involved in this, and using public money.

Eve: [00:16:33] I moved to Pittsburgh accidentally and was kind of involved in all of this on the periphery, and it really shaped my life. The way I think about cities is very different now. So, thank you for that. The plan that did not work out was the redevelopment plan to reshape Downtown which…

Tom: [00:16:49] Actually it worked though didn’t it? I mean, four of the five blocks that we were going to acquire have been redeveloped.

Eve: [00:16:57] Yes, it did work. But my question was, yeah, it just took time, didn’t it? Took time for people to get used to the idea.

Tom: [00:17:04] Well, it looks differently than what we would have, I mean, we were more focused on a retail strategy and it might or might not have worked. I don’t know.

Eve: [00:17:12] Well, today with Amazon, it might have backfired again.

Tom: [00:17:15] And that’s where you don’t, I don’t know with today’s retailing whether it would have worked or not. If we would have been able to put together sort of what we were thinking. But, in any case, all five blocks have now been redeveloped, that we focused on. And it’s a much more vibrant place. We could see the decline there. I mean, we could look at the sales numbers of businesses that were there and just see the decline of what was going on, and I think felt the need to try to intervene, you know, and maybe did it really in a clumsy kind of way. And but, you know, at the end of the day, it was a necessary intervention that ended up working. PNC played a big part, was a big partner in that with their new building

Eve: [00:17:59] Yes. It was really difficult, I remember. What would you do differently today? A different city.

Tom: [00:18:06] When I’ve come to really love is the public spaces. So, in East Liberty, I think we would have had, we had the opportunity, which we didn’t do, to create a sort of a central plaza somewhere there. That we could have really recreated a much more, you know, in a public space, it can be the most democratic place in the city. And so, I mean and so with Home Depot, we were looking to make a democratic place where people, wealthy people and poor people would all shop. If I had done East Liberty thoughtfully more, maybe we would have created a public space like that, too. And Market Square, in many ways, plays that role Downtown now. There’s a public space where people of, with all incomes and all backgrounds show up. And so even in smaller neighborhoods like Lawrenceville and other places, because there were such, you know, abandonment of property, we had opportunities to really create better public spaces, little town squares. Because one of the strengths of Pittsburgh is with its 90 neighborhoods is, is that we have this real sense of communities and I’ve come to appreciate that much more. And we really would have focused more on creating places where that community can play out in neighborhoods like Lawrenceville and other places. I go to China a fair amount. Not recently. thank goodness. And when I, I get up early in the morning to go for a run and one of the things I see there, and China has done a very bad job of creating public spaces, but where there is public spaces like at six, seven o’clock in the morning, there are hundreds of people there in the plaza doing tai chi or dancing to a boombox. It’s this great sense of community. There’s lots of older people or people running. And you can see feel this community, I mean, people talking and laughing. Every morning they’re there. And we don’t have that tradition in America. But it would be wonderful. We did, but but we ought to create places where that happens. You know, the Blue Slide Playground is a place like that in Squirrel Hill. I mean, famous now because of Mac Miller.

Eve: [00:20:24] I visited Beijing three years ago, and the photo I loved the most from there is a small urban park which had exercise equipment in it. And in fact, I saw this several times …

Tom: [00:20:34] Right.

Eve: [00:20:35] … exercise equipment, really basic. And you could see people all congregating, and doing their little exercises in the park, open to everyone, It was fabulous.

Tom: [00:20:46] Right. We did a half step under Eloise’s leadership in public works. We made a decision to rebuild all of our 100 and some neighborhood parks, like the Blue Slide Playground or the Schenley Park, and also many of the smaller ones. And we would have community meetings and we would hire landscape architects who would meet with the community and, you know, with the playbooks. And then they would work to design the kind of playground they wanted. They would given a budget, 100, 150 thousand dollars, and they could pick from the play equipment books, the playground they wanted. But the instinct we had was right, but we should have expanded it. And in many neighborhoods where, like Homewood. I mean, you have an opportunity in Homewood, still today, I think, to create a really great plaza that would become the center of Homewood, and how you would do that. And East Liberty represented that opportunity. I mean, there were, as you remember, lots of vacant land there that was tax, you know, essentially abandoned. So that’s probably one of my bigger regrets, was not creating places where that sense of community can play out.

Eve: [00:21:58] What do you love most about Pittsburgh? I know you still live here.

Tom: [00:22:01] Our strength and our weakness is our parochialism and that’s what I love most … is that we’re an unusually friendly city. I’m in Washington four days a week, right? And my habit in Pittsburgh is pretty much everybody you see, even before I was mayor, but when I’m mayor I don’t know whether I know them or not, or they know me. So you say hello to people, right? You get on an elevator, you say good morning, right? People, you do that in Washington, D.C. people look at you like you’re … going to rob them. You know, it’s a weird feeling for me. I see that in lots of cities. I would just did Orlando for a couple of days that I felt it there. Same thing, is that, sort of people don’t make eye contact, don’t acknowledge. I mean, if there was just two of you in a place, that you don’t, they don’t acknowledge you.

Eve: [00:22:50] You know, that’s interesting. There are other cities like, I think Atlanta and Detroit are very friendly. I always notice it when I go there.

Tom: [00:22:56] Yeah. So it’s, and I hear that. It’s funny, I mean, when I speak, and I was in 50 cities last year, so I end up engaging with thousands of people. One, is the numbers of people that have lived in Pittsburgh. You know, I mean, that’s sort of the legacy. I always say you’re our failures. We couldn’t give you a reason to stay, you know, there’s so many people that left in the 70s and the 80s. And the other is inevitably people who are not from Pittsburgh. I just was talking to a guy in Orlando yesterday who, his daughter and he, and they’ve never had any connection with Pittsburgh, but she loves the Pittsburgh Penguins. And they go to Pittsburgh every year to see a couple of Penguins game, and he was telling me he’s going in March and, you know, he said, I’ve never been to a friendlier place in my life. Everybody talks to you and it’s just, it’s a great place, right? We don’t even think of that. And that’s partly what I like. And I think that’s the strength of Pittsburgh. When I say parochial is that we are really, those of us who are from Pittsburgh or who moved there, you become really rooted in your neighborhood, and in the city. I think in places like Orlando, that is, you know, a lot of Florida cities in California and even Texas cities. You know, there’s lots of new residents. And so they don’t have that kind of history. And so I, that’s part of the challenge of Pittsburgh. How to keep that, and at the same time not have it be a deterrent to making Pittsburgh a competitive city.

Eve: [00:24:28] But you know, I think what’s most interestingly Pittsburgh, about Pittsburgh to me, is again, I’ve always thought it’s topography saved it from becoming what Detroit has become.

Tom: [00:24:40] Oh, I think definitely, I mean, the hills and valleys and how Pittsburgh is defined, I think is a large part because of its topography. You know, I learned that running for office when I was in the legislature, when I first ran for the legislature. If you confuse people from Spring Garden with people from Spring Hill, they will never vote for you. I mean, they’re very rooted in their neighborhoods, right? And so there’s that whole hierarchy like that around Pittsburgh. When I meet somebody, when they say they’re from Pittsburgh, I typically say, where did you go to school? And that tells me a lot about them.

Eve: [00:25:19] Interesting. Yeah, I think the topography also, it kind of contains each neighborhood. So, I think that that sense of being in a neighborhood is going to stay.  I can’t, I can’t see it disappearing in the city.

Tom: [00:25:33] No, and that’s what, when I was talking about the public space, I mean that’s, that’s what I have a big regret it was around that idea of how do you build even a stronger sense community using public space, whether it’s playgrounds or a park, a community. How do you in a very thoughtful way connect people in that neighborhood so they feel a sense of place? And there’s a purpose for that, because I think if people feel rooted in their neighborhood, I think they’re willing to put up with a lot of problems if they see themselves and others committed to wanting to making it better. I mean, if I can see a light at the end of the tunnel, I’m willing to stay on the journey, right? A lot of people are not willing if they don’t see any end to it. And I think of a neighborhood like Allentown that’s been through a lot of problems. And yet, there’s a strong core of people in Allentown who have really stayed with that neighborhood. And, you know, it has gone up and done and now I think it’s back, going back up again. I know we used say, Eve, you know, that houses in the North Side up in Fineview at the time, I mean, you could buy for 30 or 40 thousand dollars. And we said if Pittsburgh’s population were like any other city and it was growing, those houses would be worth a million dollars with the views. And that was part of the problem, is that we weren’t growing as a city. And it’s still part of the challenge of Pittsburgh, is that we’re doing much better, but we’re still not growing compared to, certainly the region is not, compared to a lot of other cities and communities.

Eve: [00:27:19] Today you work, you’re a senior fellow at the Urban Land Institute, which some of my listeners may not know about. What do you do in your role there?

Tom: [00:27:32] So the Urban Land Institute is an organization founded about 75 years ago by a group of developers concerned about the quality of development beginning to happen in America. And fast forward, the Urban Land Institute now has about 50,000 members worldwide. And it really, it’s focus is how do you create thriving communities? And ULI had participated in several programs in Pittsburgh when I was mayor, and then I got recruited to speak at different ULI events. And when I was leaving as mayor, it was right after Katrina in New Orleans and along the Mississippi coast. And they asked me whether I would go down and work with the mayor of New Orleans and with other public officials across the Mississippi coast. And so I did that for about a year and a half after leaving as mayor. And it was fascinating. I mean, it was really a fascinating experience. And, you know, in New Orleans, their mayor ended up going to jail for 15 years. And the political structure was really fairly inept back then. It’s gotten better. And so I watched, really, New Orleans return in large part because of grassroots decisions and leadership, through churches and nonprofit groups and neighborhood groups, and a lot of outside help. Foundations and movie stars like Brad Pitt. But people, but ultimately, the up-swelling was really, really bottom up. It wasn’t top down. And so it was a fascinating experience to work in, there. And I still am, I was on the board for many years of a community development corporation there. So it’s been an experience. Since then I got to about 50 cities a year and speak at ULI events or other events, and then often end up working with cities for a while. And I’ve written several papers – working on one now for ULI.

Tom: [00:29:40] It’s been a good, a good experience, really a great experience after being a mayor. And part of what I get asked to do all over the world is, in part I get asked to talk about Pittsburgh. How we went from this failing industrial city  to what we’re becoming. And the reason I get asked by, about that is, wheat I’ve come to realize, Eve, is virtually every city in the world, whether it’s Hong Kong or London or Dublin, or are all struggling with some of the same issues that we went through in Pittsburgh, of sort of what what is our place in the world? We were forced to have that conversation because of the collapse of the steel industry. Other cities have not had that kind of dramatic change, but they are seeing the world change and they are trying to figure out how to  stay current and get in front of those changes and manage them.

Eve: [00:30:34] Are there any current trends in real estate development that interest you the most?

[00:30:39] Well,every city, every place I’ve been, and this is, I mean, last month I was in Dublin and London, right. And I was supposed to go, I go to China about four times a year. I was supposed to be going in March. My plane trips are now all being canceled, but I was going to cancel anyhow. But so whether it’s cities in China or European cities, affordability is a huge issue. Of how do people, where do people live? And how do they afford to live? And so how cities develop affordable housing is a big, big issue. Where am I going to work? Because of the impact of technology and we see it in Pittsburgh up close every day as we see a whole litany of driverless cars on the streets of Pittsburgh or autonomous vehicles with attendants in them. But, you know, pretty soon the attendance won’t be there. As I mentioned, I was in Orlando yesterday, just east of Downtown Orlando but still in Orlando is a place called Lake Nona. And they now have, I don’t know, a half a dozen driverless autonomous buses that drive people around this very large development. Nobody driving. Nobody in, no driver. And no attendant. It is just on its own already on a sort of a, sort of private street where bikes and others places can go, but not cars. So we’re seeing this happen and what does that mean? I mean, if you think of 50 percent of the land use of a typical city is for cars, between roads and parking and everything like that, what does that do to how we think about cities. And not it’s not even that kind of technology. It’s why do young people want to come places? Part of what I say is what does General Electric and McDonald’s and Marriott and Fifth Third Bank and Heinz Kraft Foods and what they have in common is over the last five years they’ve all moved their headquarters from suburban office parks into cities. And why are they doing that? They’re doing it because … they’re having a hard time recruiting talent, young people, to move to the suburban office park. Where you need a car to get to. You know, if you do a survey of the Google employees in East Liberty, I’m betting that 25, 30 percent of them either walk or ride a bike to work. So that has huge implications on cities. You know, do you spend your money building more highways or do you build a transit system. That’s part of Orlando’s challenge. They don’t have a good transit system and now they’re  strangling, you know, because of the congestion.

Eve: [00:33:33] Yeah. It’s changing.

[00:33:34] So it’s those debates that I’m watching all over. Mobility is a huge conversation. The equity conversation, I mean, one of the things I see really fascinating, The New York Times did this, I thought, very cruelly. A few months ago they did an article about cities and they talked about winners and losers.

Eve: [00:33:56] Yes.

Tom: [00:33:56] And they talked, and they compared Nashville and Birmingham. And they said Nashville is a winner, they both start at the same place 25 years ago. Nashville is now a hot city, booming, and Birmingham is not. And they talk about, why, how that happens is really a lot to do with leadership. And then within, so we’re seeing cities sort of separate themselves, if you understand, those that are, where Amazon is going to consider locating, and those that are not. And what are the ingredients that make that cut? And then the other, within cities we are watching a huge divide with lower income people and the people that are sort of part of the new economy. And so, I think that equity issue is a huge challenge for cities also.

Eve: [00:34:43] Yes. You know, I have always thought that one of the things that’s most overlooked in discussions about cities and how to grow them is their connection to other cities. And, you know, I think that’s probably Pittsburgh’s growth problem. It takes a really long time go by train.

Tom: [00:35:00] Well, we lost a whole generation of people that would normally be having babies.

Eve: [00:35:07] If you want to get to New York by train, it’s a day. There’s no easy, fast way to get to work hubs. We’re sort of a little bit stranded. And I was always puzzled by the fact that we, you know, people would talk about better transit in the city, but I wanted better transit to other places, nearby, to open up opportunities. If I wanted to do a development project in a city, I wanted to be able to get there in a day in and back. Right?

Tom: [00:35:37] Right.

Eve: [00:35:37] So I, you know, I wonder if you plot out those connections, you know, where the, you know, the cities done well, will land.

[00:35:49] I think it’s a mix. I think mobility is one piece of the conversation of how easy it is to move around a city. Our son, for example, is now 29 years old, does not even have a driver’s license. He lives in Pittsburgh. On the North Side right now with us, he’s moving, though. You know, he is, has been able to manage fine living in Pittsburgh, using Uber and using public transit and, you know, walking a host of other things and abusing his friends every once while they’re able to, you know, he’s able to sort of manage living in a city pretty well. But I think mobility is part of the conversation. And that’s what, when I was becoming mayor, Eve, our focus was we need to figure out how to create a diversity of jobs. And we needed to make Pittsburgh a place where people wanted to live. You know, we’re never going to be, maybe we will someday, we’re never going to be a warm city. Like I was just in Orlando yesterday. It was 90 degrees. We’re not going to be near the ocean, but we had other assets. And so, as you might remember, I was very focused on building riverfront trails for that reason is that was an underutilized asset. You know, we watched, you know, a great music and bar scene sort of, and that happened organically. It’s funny, I watch the, I read the media in Pittsburgh now about the Strip District and we made a very intentional decision not to do anything in the Strip District. We, you know, people would come and why don’t we do this and why don’t we do that in the Strip District.tAnd we really said The place is working really well. Why do we want to get involved in it? Let it, it’s just happening on its own. So. You know, that it’s interesting that that’s the big, big debate right now in Pittsburgh, I guess about, are we killing the Strip District. So I think that you make decisions, you know, some of them are going to be right. Some of them were wrong. Hindsight will tell you whether it works or not.

Eve: [00:37:56] You know, this show is about real estate impact investing. And I want to know what you think a key factor is that makes a real estate development project impactful.

Tom: [00:38:06] You know, I think it’s the public space. Is the building itself attractive, but it’s the space around it, how it engages people that work in that building, and even people walking by, how they might use it. I think that, how it all connects. And you can get senses of it, right? When it works well? I think, you know, there are places in Pittsburgh that I think of that are just great places to be. People like to be there, right? I look at Mellon Park, you know, going back many, many years, long before I was mayor. Still a very iconic place on a nice summer day. It’s packed with people, having lunch. And I think how that happens, and that’s where the public private interface is so importantA and where the public needs to have, to be put money in the game, to say to a developer, you know, we want to get this quality in, and a developer might say, but I can’t afford to do that. And if you look at the books and the market is going to be make it hard for the developer to do that, then there’s a public role for that. I think another good example is that is Schenley Plaza, which for for 40 years or 50 years was a parking lot. I mean, think about that. I mean, I, you know, on one side is Schenley Park, on the other side are the museums, on the other side is the Pitt law school. And then on the other side, the Cathedral of Learning. And what is the highest and best use of that land for 50 years? It was surface parking. And Mark, this chancellor at Pitt and I got together and said we should be, we should do better than that. And so we work with the Parks Conservancy and came up with an idea to put a park there, to take the parking. And I got all this hate mail, but I’m never going to vote for you again. You’re taking away my parking place. And I said, you know, you’ll get over it. There’ll be other places to park it. But this is, this, we can do better than that is the interest of a great university. To a great park. To a great museum. We can do better than that. And you look at that on a nice summer day, it’s filled with people. So creating those kinds of places, I think is is that there’s a responsibility of both the developer and the community. You know, you did something quirky Downtown with those statues. And I bet lots of people walk over, who maybe have never been in Pittsburgh, walk over just to look at them.

Eve: [00:40:58] Yes. In fact, I think the taxi drivers use it for directions when someone says, I want to go Downtown.

Tom: [00:41:05] Yeah. So that’s what I mean. And look at Randyland on the North side.

Eve: [00:41:10] It’s fabulous. Yeah.

Tom: [00:41:12] You know, I mean, it’s just things like that make a cityS so the other word that we use a lot in ULI is authenticity, right? Pittsburgh has a great history. It has a great story. And we could still do better at telling that story. The South Side Works, when we started to develop that we put, had a competition for, and we brought artists and old steel workers who worked there together for like a morning of talking. And then we had a competition for artists. And there’s, at the end of Hot Metal Bridge is a little monument that we established for the steelworkers. But Pittsburgh is an incredible story.

Eve: [00:41:56] So I’m going to ask one last question, because I’ve taken up a lot of your time.

Tom: [00:42:00] It’s fine, I’ve enjoyed it. It’s fun to talk to somebody who actually knows Pittsburgh, Eve.

Eve: [00:42:05] So is there something that you think could really change real estate development in the U.S., for the better?

Tom: [00:42:14] I think it is, is the idea, the partnership idea. I’m amazed that the cities I go to, many developers attitude is I want a minimize my involvement with the city. Maybe there’s a reason for it. I want to get in and get out. I want to get the entitlements, whatever I may need and do what I want to do. So the challenge is the developer has a piece of property. The developer needs to figure out how to make money from that property. I accept that. I want the developer to make money from the property. On the other hand, the city, the city has the responsibility to build a great city. That it will never be a great city if these developers see their development as sort of an island disconnected from what’s next to it. And so the city’s responsibility is to figure out how that all fits together. Give you two examples that drive me nuts. I can drive on pretty much any suburban shopping street. I can go into a gas station. Maybe I want to go to the store next door. And I have to drive back out onto the highway. Or maybe I want to go to a store across the street, I have to go out on the highway. Maybe I have to drive a half a mile to get over there to the other side. So I can’t, there’s no sense of connection between any of that. And the other is, I watch in suburban areas like Cranberry Township subdivisions being developed of 100 acres or so. What would it take for those subdivisions that, maybe there’s five different developers doing one hundred acres each, if they would, then the city’s role would be to say we want to connect all this with a bike trail at the edge of your property so that every, so now instead of having a couple little playgrounds, you might have a five or ten mile bike ride, safe, off road. You don’t have to worry about traffic with your little children. And there is examples of where the public fails. Both the public and private developers fail. Because you create great, great amenities if you begin to think in a bigger way rather than individual pieces of property. That’s what’s destroying development, and quality in America today.

Eve: [00:44:33] Yeah, I agree, I think we both believe that real estate development, just as a financial tool, as a way to make money, isn’t making our cities better.

Tom: [00:44:43] Well, I think you make more money if you build quality. In the long run I think your development is more valuable. I mean, we didn’t get into all the other sustainability and all that which a lot of cities are facing.

Eve: [00:44:54] Thank you very much.

Tom: [00:44:55] Look forward to see you sometime. Bye bye.

Eve: [00:45:04] That was Tom Murphy, past mayor of Pittsburgh. Tom thinks place is everything, so place is what he invested in during his long term as mayor. He did that by reducing operational costs and creating the Pittsburgh Development Fund, a $60 million fund focused on helping developers who were willing to work in places and on projects that made the city better and better. It was a very bold, and unpopular move, but paid off in ways that no one imagined, as did many other moves that Mayor Murphy made.

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, Tom, for sharing your thoughts. We’ll talk again soon. But for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Tom Murphy

Delicious urban soup.

February 19, 2020

Entrepreneur-in-Residence is a bold and unusual title for a real estate developer. Emerick Paul Patterson, who owns that title, fits the bill.

Emerick’s work over the past two years has focused on the East Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, where he partnered with the real estate developer, Heritage Equity Partners, to create a large-scale (500,000 square foot) culture and innovation hub called The Bushwick Generator.

The Bushwick Generator is a community oriented – and most importantly community led – innovation lab in Brooklyn. It is home to experts and novices in urban tech, blockchain, AI, agriculture, and other social impactful focused industries. And its intention is to open the doors to the local community in the face of a swiftly growing technology hub. Emerick wants to make sure they are included.

Emerick is about to embark on his next venture, as founder of Urban Parti, an innovation studio and neighborhood planning lab. Urban Parti will focus on new neighborhood models for innovation as well as leveraging technology to enhance local participation and engagement.

Prior to joining Heritage, Emerick built and led a data-driven commercial real estate investment team at Marcus & Millichap, and started his career in emerging market investment banking. Emerick has a Masters in Real Estate Development from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture, Planning, and Preservation (GSAPP), where he founded the Real Estate Development Lab (RED Lab) and earned an undergraduate degree from The School of Sustainable Engineering and the Built Environment at Arizona State University.

Insights and Inspirations

  • What’s the process for community engagement? Developing deep relationships.
  • To Emerick, East Williamsburg, an extremely diverse neighborhood is a “delicious urban soup”.
  • For community engagement to be successful, Emerick believe you have to meet people where they are and provide a space for them to access.

Information and Links

  • The BK Reader has an interesting perspective on the changing hyper-local news landscape in Brooklyn.
  • The Bushwick Blockchain Alliance is an initiative that aims to integrate blockchain technology into the neighborhood in a more transparent and equitable way.
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve: [00:00:00] Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of impact real estate investing.

[00:00:06] My guest today is Emerick Patterson, a developer with a conscience. Emerick is currently entrepreneur in residence at Heritage Equity Partners, but he’s about to launch his own brand Urban Parti. With his latest project, The Bushwick Generator, he focuses on ways in which to find and keep a place for the existing community in the face of gentrification.

[00:00:33] Be sure to go to rethinkrealestateforgood.co to find out more about Emerick 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: [00:00:54] Hello, Emerick. Thanks for joining me today.

Emerick: [00:00:56] Hello. It’s nice to talk to you.

Eve: So I reached out to you because I heard about a project that you’re involved in called the Bushwick Generator. And I’ve seen it described as a community oriented and community led innovation lab in Brooklyn, which is pretty intriguing. So I wanted to start by having you tell us a little about that project.

Emerick: [00:01:22] Yes, I will. And for first I want to say thanks for having me on. And I am a big fan of Small Change and the work that you’re doing and just generally of the ecosystem or community that you are creating. So, yes, I’m happy to tell you about the Bushwick Generator. It’s an innovation hub based in Brooklyn, New York, an area called East Williamsburg. So have you been to Williamsburg before?

Eve: [00:01:47] Yeah, it’s been a while, but I have. Yes.

Emerick: [00:01:51] So Williamsburg was basically a manufacturing district on the waterfront. There’s a ton of industry. This is really north of Brooklyn. There was a ton of industry here in the 1900s. And you know, the industry is transformed, moved on in some cases and the waterfront of Williamsburg basically was repositioned into more of a living destination and also a tourist destination. You know, if you look on Netflix now, basically the majority of shows that are filmed are filmed in Brooklyn. So, you know, it has changed dramatically in the last 10 years and the area that I’ve been working in is in East Williamsburg and Bushwick, which is really an up and coming area in north Brooklyn. What’s special about it is that highly [friend] and accessible there. It’s right on the L-train and the L-train is really the main mode of transportation from Brooklyn to Manhattan. Aapproximately two hundred and fifty thousand people take the L-train every day. So this sits right on the L-train, very close to where folks live. That means it really has the potential to be a true live work and play district. And so all my focus over the past two years has been in this area. And Bushwick is generally a very central area, very, very diverse. I’d like to say that Bushwick has all the ingredients for a delicious urban soup because you have a mix of ethnicities. It’s primarily actually, Latino migrants, immigrants, that have been in the area for a long time. And then as well as a large African-American population. We’re also very close to Bedside.

Emerick: [00:03:47] So very interesting, very diverse area. You also have all the young creatives who live along the L-train. Most of them live in Bushwick because the price of housing is lower.

Eve: [00:03:58] Yes. Interesting. So what’s what’s the goal of the Bushwick Generator.

Emerick: [00:04:03] So when I showed up at the Bushwick Generator there wasn’t much going on, but it was always conceived as a place for office tenants and creative tenants, which is really, you know, the standard for a warehouse type development. So basically there was a lot that’s approximately a hundred thousand square feet. There was a warehouse and there was a company there that made tanks. We purchased the site in 2015. And since then, we’ve repositioned the buildings to be from the tank and storage facility to be for creative office, and, you know, in the creative office tenants, essentially. And so we’re now still today the building is a bit under construction because the L-train actually was shut down for a long period of time and really slowed down the progress of the East Williamsburg, Bushwick as far as tenants wanting to move in. Everybody thought that Bushwick and Brooklyn were going to be disconnected from Manhattan. And so it’s still today mostly under construction. However, we’re going through some permitting on a portion of the site.

Emerick: [00:05:26] And we do have a 5000 square foot space that is completed. And that space know is where I do a lot of the neighborhood work. And we also do have a couple of tech tenants in the building. So we have a tenant called Paper Space, which is a machine learning tenant. And we also have a company called Romenesko, which is a Latin American media tenant.

Eve: [00:05:52] So the ultimate goal is to… What is the ultimate goal of this space?

Emerick: [00:05:59] Yes, sure. So I would say that it’s a standard development. We are going through a process to build more than we’re currently building. However, I would say that the goal of the building is this  is a unique opportunity here to kind of offset gentrification, if you will. I mean, there’s clearly a lot of capitalized stakeholders that are moving into this area. Netflix is coming in just a stone’s throw away and they’re building 250,000 square feet of production facilities. Also, a company called [Consensys], which is a large blockchain company, founded Ethereum which is also a stone’s throw away.

Emerick: [00:06:42] There’s other tech and media tenants in the area. So tech is definitely moving into a neighborhood. But at the same time, as I mentioned, Bushwick and East Williamsburg is a highly diverse area. And so there’s a huge opportunity to really align some of the effects that a new capitalized stakeholders will create by coming into the areas. That could mean job training and job readiness. It could just mean space equity to convene for some of the residents in the neighborhood now. But in the end, it’s really about taking the steps to really have the neighborhood influence what what could be in the building. And I think that’s the most important part.

Emerick: [00:07:23] How did you take those steps and how do they have a say?

Emerick: [00:07:27] Yeah. So community work is not easy. Exactly. So we have space.and the Bushwick Generator really is its ethos. I mean, for lack of a better word at the moment, we have 5000 square feet, we have an open door policy for people in the neighborhood to come in. And we also encourage them to come in. And we do a lot of outreach to make sure that they get in the door. So when we do an event, for example, you know, we do a lot of outreach. We have a local nonprofit that works out of the space called Sustainable United Neighborhoods. And we do a lot of outreach to make sure that the people who show up in the generator, or virtually any event, make up a kind of representative sample of what the neighborhood actually is.

Emerick: [00:08:13] It’s very easy to throw a tech event, but it’s not as easy to get local young adults from, say, major housing into the building. So we really tried to bring together the normal events that would happen in the tech hub with kind of the young adults who are in the area who really want access to the possibilities that are happening now in the space and also will happen in the future. And we really work to bring these two things together.

Eve: [00:08:41] So what’s what’s the best outcome for this project? Do you think, for the neighborhood?

Emerick: [00:08:45] Well, there’s a lot of unknowns. I would say the absolute best outcome here is that there’s a shift in the status quo of creating a tech hub. You know, I mean, I think that this is a well-positioned development in an urban area that is outside the core district. And it’s really very close, within walking distance to a lot of people who could really use training without the cost of getting into the city every day. And they could use kind of the [augeration effect], frankly, that, you know, has happened in the city or has happened in Manhattan and in their own neighborhood. So I think that the scenario here is where the young adults that live in this neighborhood feel like this is also their home and they feel confident enough to be a part of this community and and really, you know, ask for help.

Emerick: [00:09:45] And I think the other side of that, of course, is that people coming into the area, into this tech hub, really understand what this neighborhood is all about. And that they offer, you know, their time and mentorship to make sure that the young adults of the neighborhood really have have access.

Eve: [00:10:03] I know how hard it is to make something like this happen in the face of, you know, wealthy development. So it’s commendable, ethical, and I hope you’re successful. I’ve also noticed that there’s a wiki page that the community keeps for the lab or incubator, which is really interesting.

Emerick: [00:10:33] Yes. The Wiki page. Yes. We’ve done a lot of work around open source technology and really looking at what is it that really makes it create trust in neighborhoods. And I think that I just don’t believe that the future is that people are going to shove technology down the throats of people who live in neighborhoods. So we’ve done a lot of work to consider what does it look like if for basically tech to be in the neighborhood. I feel like it’s something that the people in the neighborhood created or have access to to change or control themselves.

Eve: [00:11:11] Right. Interesting. What’s your background and what led you to this point? Working on projects like this?

Emerick: [00:11:21] My background is, I mean, just before even getting into real estate, I was very young, so I graduated with an engineering degree when I was twenty four. I got a crazy idea that the stock market crashed two thousand eight, that commodities were going to do very well, so I dreamt up a very crazy idea to move to Brazil and tried [to turn my farmland]. It didn’t work out and years paying people back for that mistake. And, you know, friends and family and so forth. And from there, I’ve gotten to investment banking.

Eve: [00:11:59] Hold on a sec. I wouldn’t call that a mistake. I would call that a pretty bold experiment.

Emerick: [00:12:07] It was a it was a grand journey. But, you know, when you’re young and naive, you know, you don’t you don’t think it’s easy to gloss over it.

Eve: [00:12:17] That’s how you learn, right?

Emerick: [00:12:19] I definitely learned. So I went into investment banking for a bit down in Miami where I was doing Latin American receivables financing. Eventually I made my way to New York and I worked for a few tech companies for a bit, doing fiber optic cable.

Emerick: [00:12:41] And then I had a friend call me up and say, Hey, man, I’m starting this real estate business. Will you help me build it? So I helped to build a real estate business. And then I went back to Columbia to do a degree in master’s in real estate development. It was at that point that I really committed myself to the urban environment. And I said, you know, this is what I’m going to focus on, basically the rest of my life. So whatever happens, it happens within the context of of the built environment or urban. And from there I went to work with a large developer in Brooklyn, really a pioneering developer. It’s called Heritage Equity Partners, led by Toby Moskovitz. And I went there to do acquisitions. But eventually I changed my my title to entrepreneur in residence and went to work on this property.

Eve: [00:13:46] That’s a nice journey. So shifting gears a bit. You know, this is a risk,  socially responsible work that you’re doing. So, you know, do you think socially responsible real estate is necessary in today’s development landscape?

Emerick: [00:14:02] Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. More than necessary. It’s almost it’s almost critical. I mean, because we’re really talking about know we’re really talking about equity. And we’re also talking about, you know, real estate is a political endeavor almost always, unless you’re building as of right. And you know that it’s really a negotiation oftentimes with the city as to what’s being built and why and for whom. And so I would say that it’s definitely critical that there’s more people in this conversation, essentially.

Eve: [00:14:45] All right. Yeah, I mean, I agree. But is there enough of it is the question. I’m not convinced that many developers think this way yet.

Emerick: [00:14:54] Yeah, I definitely don’t think there’s enough of it. And I would say that I don’t think enough developers have the capacity to think this way. I think until we see, you know, the capital markets really transformed for, you know, that we’re not going to see real change. And the reality is, is that, you know, with highly debt and debt driven investments and development, you’re going to continue to push rents.

Emerick: [00:15:19] And I’m not even speaking about the residential market. That’s just that’s its own animal. But even in the commercial market, you know that debt-driven investments are going to push rents into neighborhoods. And that is definitely going to a force displacement. So I agree that it’s very. It is also very tough for a developer to fully think through and to fully act on what would take to be a good developer, I mean, Brian, from Shift Capital, I think like one of the best examples of a developer who is really committed and, you know. I don’t know what his capital stack is. But I think that his capital stack is aligned with you know, the work that he wants to really do in the neighborhood. So, yeah, I don’t think we’re there yet.

Emerick: [00:16:16] Certainly on small change, we’ve helped raise homes for a number of developers who I think are really thinking hard about this and working hard on it. So I think they’re, um, there are more. But it’s a capital problem is huge because if you have to provide a return to keep hungry investors happy, it’s not always possible to do something that’s socially responsible. So they’re really at odds with each other, right?

Emerick: [00:16:44] Yes, exactly. Yes. Yes.

Emerick: [00:16:47] And just get put in a situation where you have to basically push rents. It’s a vicious cycle. Right. You know, and if you’re pushing rents, if you’re pushing rents in communities, I mean, you’re really, it really becomes a problem because if people don’t have the space to convene and to grow, you know, then the question is where do they really go for that? And it all plays, a lot of it plays into the structural transformation around mobility and, you know, just the cost on time and resources that it takes to get somebody from … As people move farther and farther out into neighborhoods, you can’t have them all coming all the way into the core area to get some sort of training. So there’s definitely, there’s definitely like a space shift that’s happening.

Eve: [00:17:46] Yeah. You know, if you if you get a moment and take a listen to the podcast interview I did with Jeremy McCleod in Australia. He’s building affordable, sustainable buildings in a country that really doesn’t have an affordable housing policy. But one of the things that is fascinating is they have like eighty five hundred people lined up for the units that they’re building, but they’re putting civil servants, teachers, firefighters, people who are necessary to keep the city going, at the top of the list. They are always the first to get an option to buy.Yes, because that group of people are not paid enough and pushed further and further out. It’s a really, it’s an interesting thesis, a different take on the problem. I just find it fascinating.

Emerick: [00:18:33] That’s how the affordable housing structure is kind of set up in New York, just to some extent was to make sure that the first responders always had a place to be close to the core area.

Emerick: [00:18:47] Yeah, is he in architecture, Jeremy?

Eve: [00:18:50] Jeremy, he’s an architect. Yeah, but he’s really stretching his role as an architect and has spun off a non-profit to build more buildings like this. And that’s really sort of taken on the role of developer in many ways. It’s fascinating. People are tackling the problem all over the world and in different ways, which I find really hopeful actually. It’s a really huge problem.

Eve: [00:19:18] Are there any other tenant trends in real estate development that interest you the most or that you think are important for the future of our cities.

Emerick: [00:19:27] Yeah, I mean, I believe. I believe governance, the governance dynamic is changing and the political, like the hyper local political landscape is changing. I think that cities generally and municipalities they’re stretched kind of to the limit. And I think that it’s going to be difficult for them to to really have the resources where their mouth is. And so I think that that is something that developers or intermediaries are going to have to really take on, which there’s an opportunity as well. You know, and really manage some of the hyper local type of coordination that’s needed to be sustainable. So, you know, I believe that sustainability includes both the social fabric and the physical fabric. I believe that they go hand in hand and I believe it is incumbent on people to understand what is it involved, you know, with some degree of creating, you know, neighborhood or cities. They understand the dynamics or understand what capacity they have to actually make a difference, do something in neighborhoods and what the mechanisms are to do that. You know, that is what’s needed for people to feel confident enough to change and to participate. I think the shift is that people actually want to co-create their neighborhoods and cities and you know, the mechanisms mechanisms to do so aren’t exactly there. And it’s not so much about a product or, you know, a short term goal, as it is about the long term process of education, of empathy and of feeling, also of innovation.

Eve: [00:21:39] So you talked about you know, we talked about how difficult it is to engage community members. What engagement tools have you seen or used that you think work best?

Emerick: [00:21:51] I think that space is very important. Having a space where people can access. The tool is really not an app, you know. I mean, you know, these are these are things that definitely complement the work. But I think that in the end, you have to meet people where they are and where they want to go in life. You know, not everybody is interested in real estate development. Not everybody is interested in local urbanist type stuff. You know, we are because that’s what we like. But that doesn’t mean that a young kid from Florida who lives in a housing project or you know around the neighborhood, cares at all about that. So they may want to go find a shoe or they may want to make a business or they may want to learn something and get a job. So I think that there’s this infinite complexity in neighborhoods. And to say that there’s one or one idea that’s really going to fix everything. It’s an approach that’s not necessarily my approach. So I think the tool is the process itself. The tool is in deep relationships. And also programming. So I would say programming is critical and everything else is secondary.

Eve: [00:23:12] So in other words, it’s a lot of hard work, right?

Emerick: [00:23:15] Yes. I think it’s a great because I think there’s a ton of opportunity in that. I mean, you know, every time you speak to somebody more in the neighborhood, you really you learn something new. And that is part of innovation. I mean, I don’t I frankly don’t see how innovation works in any other way. So I you know, I know what all the tech companies are doing, you know. But I think there’s tremendous opportunity in learning about people in dense urban areas.

Eve: [00:23:48] Where do you think ultimately the future of real estate impact investing lives? What do you think real estate in the US needs to look like in the future?

Emerick: [00:24:00] I think you started with your Small Change index, you know, in attempting to quantify impact. I think that is definitely important and that is that is the direction it’s headed. And I mean, I think that ultimately the capital markets have to change. There really has to be a new kind of return on investment that we’re getting to a point where debt capital for speculative development, at least in the commercial office space, for example, is not really the right way to fund a development, but it could be. That make sense?

Eve: [00:24:44] Yeah. It makes lot of sense. So with that, I’m gonna sign off. And thank you very much for taking the time to talk to me today. It’s been really fascinating. Oh, you know, I have one more question. I’m gonna I’m gonna ask you and that is what’s next for you? That’s the most important question.

Emerick: [00:25:01] Yeah. Thank you. For now, I’m still working with the generator property in Brooklyn. I do have launching a brand which is Urban Parti. You can see information at urbanparti.com that you know, which is really all the work I’ve done here in Brooklyn just to put a form to what I’ve done, which is really about creating local access points for urban innovation. And so the next step is really building up the partnerships around, you know, in this community, really, of people who care about real estate development. And I believe that it needs to be changed and I’m growing that brand.

Eve: [00:25:48] That sounds fabulous. I can’t wait to see what you do next.

Emerick: [00:25:51] Great. Thank you very much for the time. I appreciate it. Thank you. Bye.

Eve: [00:25:59] That was Emerick Patterson. Emerick believes that in order for socially responsible development really to take hold, the capital markets must change. We need to move away from debt and equity. That essentially requires developers to squeeze out more and more rent, displacing more and more people. And Emerick also believes that when there is a shift in status in a neighborhood, it is incumbent on developers to build a relationship with neighborhood residents and provide a space for them to stay and grow. You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access the show notes for today’s episode at my web site rethinkrealestateforgood.co. 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, Emerick, 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 Emerick Paul Patterson

A different kind of mobility conference.

February 7, 2020

The 2019 Mobiliti Conference, hosted in Pittsburgh, was described by one of its organizers, Karina Ricks, as “a conference, a workshop [and a] co-creation kind of event.” What resulted, she said, were great insights and innovative ideas and actionable steps that should help both individuals and communities gain increased access to mobility options. In fact, many of the suggested actions that emerged will be relatively easy to implement, such as new ways to incorporate micro-transit and micro-mobility into existing transportation infrastructure.

In an interview with Small Change, Ricks, who serves as director of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure, said the impetus for the Mobiliti Conference was a recent gathering she had attended on next steps in transportation, including the rise of autonomous vehicles and the future of urban mobility. At that invite-only conference were the best and brightest in the industry, and encouragingly, at the center of their discussions was a focus on equity and inclusion.

However, she said, noticeably absent were the very people that deal with these issues day in and day out – individuals that struggle with mobility with regard to access to jobs, services and food. Recognizing the importance of hearing from this group, Ricks and a colleague decided to create another conference.

New and revised

The Mobiliti Conference was also invite-only, but this conference had a more inclusive list of participants. One third of participants were leaders in the industry, one third were government organizations and nonprofits, and the final, but most important, group of participants were people that actually live on the economic margins and who continually struggle with mobility access. Reimbursed financially and given mobility funding to allow them to attend, this group included single mothers, ex-offenders who had lost driver licenses, night workers and individuals just trying to get by on minimum wage salaries.

Micro transit solutions

One big issue that was addressed at the conference was the need for transportation solutions for individuals that work at night, many in the hotel or restaurant industries. Those workers needing transportation during those hours have limited options. A team working on this noted that during daytime hours companies often use shuttle services for their employees. So, a plan emerged to leverage ride-hailing technology and those existing shuttles, otherwise sitting idle at night, to create an on-demand form of transportation.

The team worked with a company called MoveIt to create an app that would enable night employees to be picked up by shuttles. Further, they worked with employers to subsidize the project, known as Safe Shift Service. Encouragingly, employers quickly saw the value in the plan and were eager to help, as it offered a way to reduce turnover and help to create a stronger, more reliable workforce.

Mobility hubs

Another innovative idea with roots in the conference is that of Mobility Hubs. Transportation that aims at reducing the footprint needed to move people small distances within cities, such as electric scooters, docked and shared bikes, is called micro-mobility. Such quick commute options are popping up in cities around the country, but they’re often poorly utilized and not effectively used in cooperation with other transit options. Embracing this issue, another team, partnering with stakeholder companies, worked to rethink how to strategically implement micro-mobility such that it functioned with existing public transportation, rather than just competing with it.

What emerged was the concept of Mobility Hubs – highly trafficked locations that concentrated mobility options, such as scooters, bikes or zipcars, multi-purpose charging stations and even a designated ride-hailing station. These Hubs would enable users to use micro-mobility in conjunction with public transit options giving them more control and choices. Plans are currently underway to develop an initial 50 Mobility Hubs throughout the city of Pittsburgh.

–

By bringing together all of the relevant parties; talking and listening; and thinking creatively, Pittsburgh’s Mobiliti Conference led to innovative solutions to ongoing mobility issues. Hopefully other communities will track the progress of these projects and build upon their successes and learn from any failures.

To learn more about how Pittsburgh is thinking strategically about mobility issues, listen in to Eve’s interview with Karina Ricks.

Image courtesy of John D. Norton

Mobility, real estate and equity.

January 15, 2020

There is a nexus between mobility, real estate and equity – how much one must spend on transport directly relates to how little they have left for real estate and housing.

This is the relationship that Karina Ricks explores as the inaugural director of the City of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure. Mobility’s role is the design and implementation of a complete transportation network, policies and programs to manage emerging transportation including shared services and autonomous vehicles and strategies to address long term sustainability.

This new city department has very clear goals to serve its citizens:

  • That every household in Pittsburgh can access fresh fruits and vegetables within 20 minutes travel of home, without the requirement of a private vehicle;
  • That all trips that are less than one mile are easily and enjoyably achieved by non-vehicle travel;
  • That the combined cost of transportation, housing and energy does not exceed 45% of household income for any income group;
  • That streets and intersections can be intuitively navigated by an adolescent; and
  • That no one dies or is seriously injured traveling on city streets.

That might sound simple but it’s really quite a revolutionary way for a city department to be thinking about transportation infrastructure – it’s all about the relationship of mobility to the economic health and well-being of the city and its residents.

Karina formally served as the Director of Transportation Planning for the District of Columbia before becoming the inaugural director of the City of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure. She is a graduate of Cornell University, Michigan State University, and a Fulbright Scholar.

Insights and Inspirations

  • Learn about Karina’s Pittsburgh Micro-Mobility Collective.
  • You can follow the department’s progress on twitter or facebook, or follow Karina’s mobility thoughts here.
  • Take five minutes with Karina to hear what she thinks about the future of mobility and transit in Pittsburgh.
  • One year in, Karina reflects on creating an accessible and inclusive city.
Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: [00:00:05] Hi there. Thanks so much for joining me today for the latest episode of Impact Real Estate Investing. My guest today is Karina Ricks, the inaugural director of the City of Pittsburgh’s Department of Mobility and Infrastructure. This new department has very clear goals to serve its citizens. Karina wants to ensure that no one dies or is seriously injured traveling on city streets, that every household in Pittsburgh can access fresh fruits and vegetables within 20 minutes travel of home without the requirement of a private vehicle, that all trips less than one mile are easily and enjoyably achieved by non-vehicle travel, that streets and intersections can be intuitively navigated by an adolescent, and that the combined cost of transportation, housing and energy does not exceed 45 percent of household income for any income group.

Eve Picker: [00:01:11] These goals sound simple, but are really quite a revolutionary way for a city department to be thinking about transportation infrastructure. Be sure to go to rethinkrealestateforgood.co to find out more about Karina 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: [00:01:50] Hi, Karina. Thanks very much for joining me.

Karina Ricks: [00:01:53] Great to be here. Thanks.

Eve Picker: [00:01:54] So you’re the first director of a brand new department in Pittsburgh, the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure. And I’m wondering how that department came to be.

Karina Ricks: [00:02:05] So the department came the way that many of them have emerged in recent years in the US, which is that the city had a department of public works, which really was primarily responsible for maintenance of the transportation assets that we have in the city. So clearing snow from streets, patching potholes, generally replacing in kind. We also had a Department of City Planning which was tasked with sort of longer term, longer range objectives of communities. But there was this missing middle that was sort of thinking about this tremendous infrastructure that we have. We’re responsible for about one fifth of the land area of the city, which are the public rights of way. And rather than just replace in kind, replace in kind really starting to think about how is this asset contributing to the sustainability of the city, the ability to thrive of our local neighborhoods? What are the policies for management and operations that need to be put in place to really get to those objectives? And so the Department of Mobility and Infrastructure was created to fill that gap. And it drew staff from both the Department of Public Works and the Department of City planning to bring together, in a way this transportation land use, economic development objectives, and think about think very proactively about the design of our infrastructure, the use of our infrastructure. And if I can go just from a minute to talk about. I had nothing to do with the name of the department. It was, I’m the first director but the the creation of the department was something that was a product of mayor. But I’m thrilled at the name. So in the US, you know, initially these kinds of departments were called the Departments of Highways, which really sort of informs their priorities right where we were thinking about things in the time that was back in the 50s and 60s. They were departments of highways. Then they sort of morphed and changed their names to be departments of transportation. Well, that’s fine as well. But what we’ve learned – Recent research that was done at Harvard University found that the time that it takes to commute, so that the the time of travel and the reliability of travel is the single most important factor in families and households being able to change their economic status. So beyond the quality of their neighborhoods, public safety issues or other kinds of elements, their access to transportation, their ability to move from where they lived to where they were going to get the different kinds of goods and services and jobs that they had was the single most important factor in escaping poverty, in changing their economic status. And so, in essence, it said that physical mobility was the most important factor in economic mobility. And so I think that really sums up what this department is about. It’s about mobility, not just moving around, but it’s about mobility of changing lives. And that’s really some of the emphasis that I’m trying to bring to my staff and to the work that we do.

Eve Picker: [00:05:26] So, you know, this is really fascinating because as I do these interviews, all the threads sort of come together for me. I’m learning a lot. And I I just interviewed an architect in Australia who’s really built an entire sort of new affordable housing model around exactly that thesis – that cities don’t run with essential without essential people who serve it and those people are generally being pushed out. Well, this was in Melbourne, Australia, which is a very, very wealthy and sprawling city. But those people are going to being pushed out further and further and further. And so we have to find a way to have them be able to afford to live closer in and be mobile in in different ways without having a car. So there in Australia, he’s developed an entire new housing model kind of based on that thesis.

Karina Ricks: [00:06:18] Right. Well, we we we also refer often to the H plus T index. We talk about the housing plus transportation index. And we have a measurable goal for my department and for the city, which is that no household in the city of Pittsburgh should need to spend more than forty five percent of their income on housing and transportation, which are the two largest household expenses. At any income quintile, so you really need to look at it across income rates, and we know just like any other city, that housing prices are increasing. But what’s interesting is in Pittsburgh today, households spend about 21 percent of their income on housing, which is which is fairly low. Go to other places. But they spend 20 percent of their income on transportation, which is quite high. So if housing prices increase, we can keep people in our city if we’re able to work on the other side of that equation, which is driving transportation costs down so that we can stay at that affordable net net affordable threshold.

Eve Picker: [00:07:37] So your department is really a whole lot more than about transportation. You’re really an economic development department, too.

Karina Ricks: [00:07:43] We like to think of ourselves that way. Absolutely.

Eve Picker: [00:07:46] Yeah how interesting. Yeah. And so you talked about broad … Well, let me just ask you about you. How did you come to be in this position? What’s your background?

Karina Ricks: [00:07:57] I took the scenic route. I would say to my boss.  So my original career objectives were in environmental sustainability. And so really focusing on those issues around climate change and overall sustainability and efficiency there through some some different twists and turns, I ended up working, doing a fair amount of work in economic development, actually in Tonga, I was in the Peace Corps, and did economic development there. And then I continued to work in other communities of the global south. And and then from there, it actually morphed into some democracy work in the several countries in Eastern Europe. And I came back to the U.S. and got my master’s degree after having all of this experience. And it and it sort of, you know, these different threads came together in city building, the ways that cities are situated, the ways that that relates to economic prosperity, democracy, inclusion, equality. And those threads immediately led to transportation, because if you really can’t access these markets, you can’t access these forums where these decisions are being made, you are by definition being left out. And this is what leads to a lot of the social isolation that we have, a lot of cultural segregation that we have certainly in this country and other countries as well, where people are really just not engaging with one another. They’re not being exposed to two persons of different persuasions and different opinions. And it’s leading into a lot of a lot of strife. So, you know, oddly, it really is mobility, transportation, access, you know, that has this tremendous impact, the climate that has this enormous impact on economic prosperity, that has a huge influence over social cohesion. And and, you know, sort of political peacemaking. And so that sort of led me to this place that I’m at now.

Eve Picker: [00:10:22] Interesting. Interesting. So, you know, I connected with you through an article that I read in City Lab about the mobility conference that was held here in Pittsburgh last year, which sounded really fascinating to me. Tell me a little bit about that and the purpose of it.

Karina Ricks: [00:10:39] It was a tremendous experience. It was really one of the most inspiring things that I’ve had the privilege to be a part of. So it it was prompted from there was a very exclusive conference that was held here in Pittsburgh a couple of years ago that was really contemplating what the rise of autonomy and autonomous vehicles and new urban mobility, how what the consequences of that might be for city form and urban design and architecture and disciplines like that. And it was a it was an invite only convening. It had all of the greatest brains from around the world. As part of it. I was privileged to be included in that group, which was wonderful. And all of these good people throughout this two day meeting were consistently coming back to the themes of equity and inclusion. And then and then one individual that was there kind of approached me in the course of the meeting and they said, you know, isn’t this odd? Here are all of these people, all of whom are making, you know, very comfortable livings, have high educational attainments and they’re all talking about equity and inclusion and all of these good things. But where are the real experts in that area? Meaning where are the people who live it day in and day out who are really constrained by the situation of their lives and the things that they face and the problems that they need to solve each and every day. Those are the experts. Why are they not in this room? All of us, the privileged few, are talking as if we know.

Karina Ricks: [00:12:23] And so from that kind of discussion, he and I, he and I kept up the conversation going for the next year or so. And from that came this mobility conference, which was a conference, a workshop, co-creation kind of event, where we again, by invite only. But we brought these tremendous subject matter luminaries, experts, top of their class innovators in in mobility and technology and operations. And a third of the conference were those those folks leading into the city and the nation. But a third of the people we paid a living wage and we provided mobility supplement to them were people who are on the margins, on the edges. They’re the people that were formerly incarcerated, people that are single mothers with minimum wage jobs, trying to kind of just get their kids to all the places they need to go to and, you know, scrape by their own lives. They were people who face a host of other social and economic challenges that we we paid them to be the experts in the room. And so a third of the people of the conference were that representation. And the last third were governments and nonprofits and enablers that could be a part of it. And we really workshopped what are the challenges that you face, the mobility challenges that you face? What are the things that we can do that would make a real difference, which some of them were as small as providing better lighting at bus stops at night or being able to hail, you know, make sure that the bus driver can see that you’re you’re waiting there in the bus shelter so that the bus doesn’t the one bus that comes every 40 minutes doesn’t pass you by because they didn’t see you, to creating whole new services that would address these third shift working needs – the hotel and restaurant hospitality workers that oftentimes face certain challenges in the level of service that is provided at the time that they leave work, but also concerned for personal safety as they’re carrying, you know, tips or cash or something like that. To, you know, school age, children, mobility so that their parents can do that. So we really workshopped through what is the problem, what is the set of solutions, how can we create new services, new applications, just new improvements that are actionable, that there is actually a timeline and a you know, a funding means. And we came out of there with, you know, six or eight things that we’re continuing to really work through. But the solutions and stories that we never would have heard in that very intimate, tangible way, if those people if those experts hadn’t been there saying, this is what I do to get by. This is what I’m forced to do to make these things happen. Yes, that would make a difference in my, you know, in a way that I was traveling. So that it was a tremendous event. It was really inspiring.

Eve Picker: [00:15:44] It sounds inspiring. And what were the outcomes like? I know the one thing that cityLAB talked about was the micro ability, but I’m sure there were more.

Karina Ricks: [00:15:53] Yeah. So micro mobility was one of the bigger lifts that came out of there.

Eve Picker: [00:15:58] Let’s start with that first and then we can because I think that people would be interested in hearing what that is.

Karina Ricks: [00:16:05] So the micro mobility micro transit solution was one where it was particularly aimed at the workers who work at our hotels and night time restaurants, night time economy kinds of workers who are transit services do very, very well for the daytime office based workers. But transit service diminishes greatly in those evening hours. We have many employers in the city who operate shuttles for their daytime office employees to get them from various remote parking spaces to their campuses. And those shuttles that are just parked and silent in the nighttime. And so this was an opportunity using technology to actually map where workers were to allow a hailing application so that they could indicate when they were in need of a ride optimized route so that planning could be very highly efficient so that we could we could give kind of on demand in a way  on demand mobility or at least scheduled service to pick up these night time economy workers and bring them to their places of employment and back again. And using vehicles that already exist in the city, but are but are basically idled during the time that they are needed there so we can get that greater efficiency from them. And then talking with their employers who immediately saw the value of doing this because someone needs to obviously subsidize a service like this.

Karina Ricks: [00:17:50] And they immediately saw the value because of the high turnover rates that they experienced when their employees. If you need to have your your your cook, your chef there at a particular time, because you’ve got a dining room full of patrons that you need to attend to, if you need to have your room cleaning people there so that you can turn over the keys in your hotel, if you need to have trusted staff that you have trained and that you feel good about so that your customers and your clients have a great experience too. But that person is, you know, habitually 30 minutes late, you know, may not show up at all because of the mobility challenges they have. You can’t keep that person around as an employer. You you you’re going to have to dismiss them for failure and performance. But that has a cost to you to to find that next person, to train that next person to to to feel trusted with them. And so all they needed was to get their employees there on time. And all their employees really wanted was to get to work on time. So this was a this was a natural matching that we could do. So that was the micro mobility. And we called it the safe shift service and partnered with a company called Move It to help develop that application that would identify where those workers were, how to optimize the routes. We’re still working with employers to really bring that into operation. But the research has completed and so we’re continuing to advance on that one.

Karina Ricks: [00:19:35] Some of the other things that came out, as I said, were just just simple improvements, like could there be a a switch of sorts on the shelter that could illuminate, you know, something to make sure that the driver of a bus knew that there was a transit rider there in the shelter and they wouldn’t just blast by because, you know, there there’s not so many people in those late night hours. But if that bus passes them by, there’s a huge impact on the potential rider. I’m trying to remember some of the other things. But there is there is some really, really great, not necessarily deeply costly solutions that could be implemented that would have real benefits, too, so that we could do something more than just talk about how much we wanted to address equity and inclusion. But there were some things that we could really do that we knew would be welcomed and useful because they were co-designed by the people who who require them themselves.

Eve Picker: [00:20:39] Fabulous. And then there was also a description of these hubs that you have been building, and the partners. I was kind of really interested in them, the partners and and why they care and how you brought them to the table.

Karina Ricks: [00:20:55] Right. So so that’s a bit of a different initiative that came. It was, you know, maybe had some of its birth in the mobility conference. But through other inputs, we understood that there’s there’s a whole host of micro mobility, new mobility that’s coming to cities across the globe. And many cities, as is too typical for us, are caught flat footed with these new technologies. We really don’t know how to use them, how to manage them. We end up with our cities, you know, somewhat littered with e-scooters or know previously it was dockless bikes. And, you know, they’re there and we’re all excited about it, but we’re not quite sure exactly who they’re serving. The management of the public space could obviously be better in many cases. And they’re not really integrated together into a singular system. The onus is really on the user to figure out what are the what is the range of services available in the city, they need to setup a separate profile for each and every service that’s there. They need to kind of do their own comparison and cobble together their own services where they might take a ride share from this point to this point, but then a scooter share from here to here and then a transit there to there. But they need to open up three different apps and do their own planning to do that. And it’s really a very difficult and challenging arrangement for the user. We said we can do better than that. We can work with the private sector. Maybe just one provider in order to see what works, do some experimentation with them to develop our own policies, to figure out how we can really get toward this elusive mobility as a service concept where, you know, the users can have the whole buffet of mobility options available to them, presented to them in a single way so that they can choose based on what is motivating them, whether it’s time or price or environmental performance or fund factor or whatever it is that they want to do. So we put out a solicitation for a mobility collective and we said, you know, we want you to self-organize your industry, please self-organize and bring together different kinds of services. We don’t just want the walled garden, as it’s called, where it’s Uber that says, well, we’ve got scooters and bikes and car share and you only need work with us. Thank you very much. That’s wonderful. But we might see some downsides to having that much control in one place. So we said you need to have multiple companies, multiple services, and you need to be prepared to experiment with us to figure out how we best manage our public space, how we best really get to this notion of inclusion and inclusivity, and run some pilots and run some demonstrations to do that. And so we got great response. We were excited at the number of responses that we got. We selected a partnership that’s led by Spin, which is a subsidiary of Ford Motor Company, and they brought with them ZipCar and Swift Mile and Wayz Carpool and Transit App and a number of different independent ( they’re not all owned or even have an ownership stake with one another), so they’re an independent collection of companies, each bringing a different kind of service together. And they proposed to us that they would like to come to the city and establish mobility hubs where we would have this range of different services, all sort of co-located together in some of our different centers and critical destination areas that we would formulate a platform that would allow the user to tap into all of these different services so the user would really be in control that we would really use as the backbone of this system, our public transit system, so that it is additive rather than competitive to transit. That it would preserve our public bike share, which was very important to us as well. That we love micro mobility and all of the private companies that are popping up, but they’re also dispersing as quickly as they’re popping up.

Karina Ricks: [00:25:21] We don’t want that to happen that we’re we totally do away with our public bike share. That is as much a critical public transit option as buses and trains are. So that was one of the requirements as well. And it’s been great so far. We really applaud Spin for their willingness to kind of go into the unknown with us, to be really true partners, to be open and vulnerable. You know, and they’re able to do that because we’ve said we’re going to not allow any other entrance into our city while you’re going through this sort of experimentation phase with us. So we’re going to give you a safe space to be vulnerable as long as you’re willing to do that with us and to really figure this out in a very, very much of a partnership way. And I really applaud them. I couldn’t have asked for a better partner so far. They and all of the other companies that they brought along with them are really very authentically and truly working with us. And we’re figuring it out. And I’m excited to see where this is going to go.

Eve Picker: [00:26:34] It’s making me_____. It’s pretty fabulous initiative. So then there really are no results so far?

Karina Ricks: [00:26:41] It’s not not well that I would say that there have been some results so far. So we’ve talked a lot more about these mobility hubs. And so those are progressing to really ensure that we have, in particular, electric charging that can be multipurpose so that these charging stations so the recharging micro mobility vehicles is is a major limiting factor to them.

Eve Picker: [00:27:08] So that’s a core for these stations to have to be able to pull something up and charge it right.

Karina Ricks: [00:27:20] So that you can you can pull a bike up, you can point a scooter up, you can pull whatever the next generation of these things are up that the car share can be electrified. That ride hailing curbside can be managed for efficient drop off and pick up at the curb side. So a whole host of different things. And again, to the convenience of the user.

Eve Picker: [00:27:42] None of these hubs actually live yet?

Karina Ricks: [00:27:46] We’re doing the location selection right now. And then there’s there’s some like a fair bit of infrastructure that needs to go into again because it involves electrifying them.

Eve Picker: [00:27:57] And how many hubs do you are you shooting?

Karina Ricks: [00:27:59] Well, initially there’s 50, which is given the size of our city. That’s pretty good.

Eve Picker: [00:28:05] That’s pretty. And then I’m going to root for location near me, Karina. So it’s a really, really fabulous. And it really does. It’s really nice to hear that those companies care and want to think this through. It’s pretty fabulous.

Eve Picker: [00:28:26] Ok, so let me finish up by just saying I’m very excited that Pittsburgh, as you and I’m I can’t wait to see how this turns out.

Karina Ricks: [00:28:36] I’m really excited. And this is a great city to do these kinds of things. And it’s a city that values its neighbors. It’s a city that values the environment. It’s a fantastic urban and natural experience. So the people of Pittsburgh are just wonderful and they’re as much a part of the secret sauce of the city as anything else.

Eve Picker: [00:28:57] Okay. Well, thank you very much.

Karina Ricks: [00:28:59] Sure. Thank you. So great to talk to you. Bye.Eve Picker: [00:29:07] That was Karina Ricks the inaugural director of Pittsburgh’s brand new Department of Mobility and Infrastructure. Karina believes that there is a nexus between mobility, real estate and equity. How much one must spend on transport directly relates to how little they have left for real estate and housing. You can find out more about impact real estate investing and access, the show notes for today’s episode at my web site rethinkrealestateforgood.co. 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, Karina, for sharing your thoughts. We’ll talk again soon. But for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Karina Ricks

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

sign up here

APPLY TO BE A PODCAST GUEST

More to See

Passive House Duplex.

November 20, 2024

The case for social housing.

September 18, 2024

Pittsburgh champion.

September 3, 2024

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

  • Real estate and women.
  • Oculis Domes.
  • Bellevue Montgomery
  • West Lombard
  • Swank Atlanta.

Search

Categories

Climate Community Crowdfunding Development Equity Fintech Investing Mobility Proptech Visionary

 

Copyright © 2025 · Magazine Pro on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in