• 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

Visionary

Lindsey is a scout.

October 4, 2023

Lindsey Scannapieco leads Scout, an urban design and development practice that focuses on the activation of underutilized space. Scout’s largest project to date is the redevelopment of Bok into an innovative space for makers, artisans and entrepreneurs. The project has been recently recognized with the Charter Award for Transformational Development by CNU (2021) and long listed in adaptive reuse by Dezeen (2022).

Lindsey has been recognized with the 40 Under 40 by the Philadelphia Business Journal (2023), Girls Inc Community Impact Award (2022), the Rising Star Award in Real Estate (2018) by the Philadelphia Inquirer. Outside of work, she is the co-President of the Friends of FDR Park and an active board member of Fleischer Arts Memorial and the Knight Foundation Advisory Council. Lindsey holds a B.S. from the University of Southern California and a MSc from the London School of Economics in City Design and Social Science.

Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: [00:00:05] Hi there. Thanks for joining me on Rethink Real Estate. For Good. I’m Eve Picker and I’m on a mission to make real estate work for everyone. I love real estate. Real estate makes places good or bad, rich or poor, beautiful or not. In this show, I’m interviewing the disruptors, those creative thinkers and doers that are shrugging off the status quo in order to build better for everyone.

Eve: [00:00:36] Lindsey Scannapieco is an urbanist and an artist in every sense of the word. While living and studying in the UK, Lindsey worked on projects such as activating an underutilized subterranean crossing alongside Westminster Council, supporting Tech Shop in their global expansion, and developing a community led design project that reconsiders traditional construction hoardings in South Kilburn. All of this led her to found Scout, an urban design and development practice that focuses on the activation of underutilized space. Not one to think little, Lindsey submitted a proposal to purchase a 340,000 square foot vocational school building from the city of Philadelphia. Much to her surprise, she won the bid. Eight years later, BOK, as it is called, is a thriving and creative mix of makers, small businesses, and nonprofits, and 100% full. The building is a testament to Lindsey’s staying power. You’ll want to listen in to learn more.

Eve: [00:02:03] Hi, Lindsey. Thank you so much for joining me today.

Lindsey Scannapieco: [00:02:07] Thank you so much for having me, Eve. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Eve: [00:02:10] Yeah, well, I had the pleasure of visiting BOK a few weeks ago. That was, that’s a monster project. I can’t wait to hear how you pulled it off. But first, I wanted you to tell me about your company Scout. When did it all begin and where did it all begin?

Lindsey: [00:02:28] Yeah. I’m so glad you were able to see BOK in person. It’s been a great project, but a little bit about how we got started. So, started Scout in 2011. We are an urban design and development practice, and in the early years we were really working on consulting projects, really about underutilized spaces, primarily for planning agencies in the UK. That’s where Scout was founded in 2011. We did our first kind of big public project that year, which was a pop-up cinema called Films on Fridges. And although a pop-up cinema might seem pretty different from large scale development, actually there was a lot of shared characteristics in both of those projects, which I think are kind of a common thread throughout our work, which is trying to reimagine histories of space and place. I think playfulness is a big piece of our practice and I think inviting people in to have an experience is another part that we think is a really strong tool in any project. And so, we started Scout with this idea of looking at underutilized space in different ways. And in the beginning that started off as cinemas, community engagement projects, public realm work and evolved into development many years onwards.

Lindsey: [00:03:58] And we got the name because when we were talking about it, we were thinking about this idea of both scouting for space, so actually being a scout in that way, but also kind of a Boy Scout or Girl Scout sash in that we were accumulating skills and we didn’t know where they would take us. And so, I remember after we did this pop-up cinema, we got calls from a bunch of people who said, oh, can you do a pop-up cinema here? And we said, actually we don’t want to become known as the pop-up cinema company. For us, the cinema was a tool to bring people to a space that they otherwise would not go to because people are willing to travel for experiences. And so, we kind of put that on our sash or on our badge and turns out that was kind of a skill set or an approach to space that came in handy when we were tackling much larger projects down the line. So, this kind of idea of a tool kit or different badges of different types of skills for how to reimagine vacant space.

Eve: [00:05:03] But let’s go back a little bit even further. So, what sort of training did you have that made you even want to think about scout? There’s surely a lot of story before that, right?

Lindsey: [00:05:17] So my background in undergraduate, I studied real estate finance with a minor in classics and art history. And at that time in my life, I thought I would go into art business because I really enjoyed the arts and that made sense to me, arts and business. I actually think that what I’m doing today is I get to work with way more artists than I ever would have had I kind of gone down that track further. And so I guess after I graduated, I became really interested in urban planning and development and then pursued a master’s in City design and social Science at the London School of Economics. And through that work focused my studio on an area adjacent to what was then the 2012 Olympic site called Hackney Wick. And from there started to work for the London Legacy Development Corporation, where I led interim uses, which was looking at kind of the opportunity of spaces before the long-term development plan comes to fruition, but is kind of a better alternative to just fencing or hoarding a site. And I think through that work was really the impetus to starting Scout and started Scout a little bit because of that role. I was encouraged to start my own company and to be able to kind of work for them as a consultant. And then through that we took on more clients and grew a team and grew projects and that was over a decade ago now, which feels pretty wild to say today.

Eve: [00:06:57] So how would you say your approach differs from a traditional real estate practice?

Lindsey: [00:07:03] I think one of the first things that we do is I think often times in development, people bring ideas for a project into a space. And so, they’re saying, I know what I want to do and I’m trying to force this building to do that thing. I think what we’re interested in is really looking at the infrastructure, the assets, the physicality of a building as it exists and finding value and usefulness in that and almost listening to the building, letting the building tell you what it should be and how it should be used. And I think, you know, we can be quite precious, I think, about development sometimes and sometimes actually there’s a real practical piece of what a good building can be or can provide, particularly in our cities. And so, we’re really interested in that. I say oftentimes I’m really interested in dirty work and that kind of means to say the work that doesn’t happen at kind of our clean desks. That unfortunately is often very fragile. It’s usually moved to, you know, the edges of our city. It’s at risk, it’s sometimes happening in buildings without proper heating or roof systems or it’s just, you know, warehouses we see, every single day, being converted into residential or kind of, quote, higher and better uses. And so, I think we’re really interested in the preservation of those spaces, and I think how we can allow spaces of experimentation and growth in cities, I think that’s really something that we’re very passionate about.

Eve: [00:08:49] Yeah. So, you moved out to Philly? That’s right. What was your first project there?

Lindsey: [00:08:55] So we moved Scout to Philly for BOK.

Eve: [00:08:58] Oh, okay. Okay, I didn’t realize that. So BOK came first and Philly came second.

Lindsey: [00:09:05] A bit, I’m from Philadelphia, so for me, it was a bit of a homecoming personally, but we had submitted to an RFP for this big old school. It’s a 340,000 square foot school. It occupies an entire city block. It’s nine stories high. It has a very commanding presence over its surrounding neighborhood. And so, we submitted a response to the RFP. And to be quite frank, we never thought that we would get it. I just thought we would learn something about what that process was like in the US. And we had been looking at buildings, but at the time in London we couldn’t afford a building in London, so it made sense to go to another place that I had familiarity. And to be honest, we were shocked when we found out that we were the highest bidder. I was also the youngest bidder, I was obviously the only female bidder and so said, uh oh, we’ve either done something really right or really, really, really wrong. And so we jumped in and built a team in Philadelphia to start to take on that project. We had a year about of due diligence before we actually closed on the property from the school district. And over that period of time, we realized that the building is not flexible. It was built as a bomb shelter. It was extremely resilient, and it has, you know, incredible floor cores and floor strengths. It was built as a vocational school. And so I think most people had said to the city, and I don’t know this, I’m just, you know, speculating that they said, I’ll give you a dollar because to convert the building into residential or something that was more market driven would have required a ton of money and they would have said there’s no way that they could tackle that.

Eve: [00:10:58] Yeah, I’ve been to the building. I’m not even sure it’s possible. It’s really, really tough. Very inflexible, as you said.

Lindsey: [00:11:07] And so we embrace that. And so, we said, you know, how do we take spaces that aren’t flexible and how do we actually allow them to stay that way, allow them to stay what they want to be? You know, that means that, you know, an old woodworking shop became a home to a woodworker, an old culinary arts classroom, became home to a catering company. And so, you know, it really was about looking at the infrastructure and matching that to people who could use the space.

Eve: [00:11:35] You saw the existing infrastructure as an asset rather than something that needed to be like swept away and replaced.

Lindsey: [00:11:43] That’s exactly right.

Eve: [00:11:45] Yeah. So, when you submitted your RFP, what did you tell the city you were going to do with it?

Lindsey: [00:11:50] We told the city our vision was exactly as it is being used today. We said that our goal was to create affordable workspaces and they were not just going to be for artists or nonprofits. It was a yes and, so art spaces, nonprofits, community services, small businesses, people who just need access to spaces to be able to work. We had a theory that South Philly, which is an extremely dense part of Philadelphia, is a neighborhood with a typology of kind of the 12- to 14-foot-wide row home so that, you know, people didn’t really have access to larger, wider open spaces. And so, you know, we had a theory that people would be seeking that space and seeking that space in proximity to where they live. And I think when we talk about local impact and community led development, I think the ability to walk to work has such an incredible impact not only on your mental and physical health, but also the health and wealth of your community and your neighborhood at all and attracts all different types of people to support the small businesses and operations that are happening in the building. So today we have over 260 businesses based out of BOK.

Eve: [00:13:14] A lot of businesses.

Lindsey: [00:13:15] And 72% of them are owned by somebody who lives in South Philadelphia. So very much locally driven.

Eve: [00:13:25] That’s amazing. How many residents in South Philadelphia like how big is the neighborhood?

Lindsey: [00:13:30] Oh, that’s a great question.

Eve: [00:13:33] It’s got to be big to draw that many people.

Lindsey: [00:13:36] Yeah, I’m just, hold on, I feel like I have this number somewhere, but I’ll have to look it up. I don’t have it off the top of my head.

Eve: [00:13:44] Nevertheless, it’s got to be a big neighborhood to have that many people wanting small business space. How long had the building been vacant?

Lindsey: [00:13:52] So the last graduating class at Bok was in 2013.

Eve: [00:13:58] Oh, not so long.

Lindsey: [00:14:00] So not so long. Although the top two floors of the building had been closed before we took it on. The building was a high or is a high rise, I should say, by its height. But the school district, in order to not comply with high rise building code, cut off the top two floors and said, see, it’s not a high rise so we don’t have to sprinkler the building. And so that was one of the big pieces of work that we undertook was the sprinkling of the entire building. But essentially it really wasn’t vacant for long. And crazily, the school district thought that out of all the schools that they put on the market, and they put over 30 schools onto the market in that year, that BOK would be the last to sell. So, they actually moved all of the stuff, all of the chairs, all the tables, everything from all the other schools to Bok. And people could essentially come and kind of find the furniture that they needed. And that was that was fine and good and when we went to actually go close on the property, obviously we wanted the building empty because there was rooms just filled with stuff up to the ceilings. Plus, it was practical stuff. And we all know that our schools need equipment, they need supplies, they need furniture. Unfortunately, approaching the end of the process of moving towards closing, they started to throw out things and we said, all right, that’s it we’ll keep the rest. So, if you go to BOK today, sometimes you’ll see, for example, children’s chairs and a lot of people will say, well, wait, wasn’t this a high school? And it’s because they thought that BOK would be the last building to sell, and I actually think it was one of the first.

Eve: [00:15:39] That’s interesting. So, when you tackle a project like this, 340,000ft², most people would feel overwhelmed. You had some really huge challenges like code compliance and financing. Where did you begin? What was your strategy and how full is it today, by the way? Is it 100% occupied?

Lindsey: [00:16:02] It is. Today, BOK is 100% leased. We have no available space in the building, Unfortunately, I know I’m supposed to say that’s a good thing, but I actually think it’s a bad thing because for so many years we’ve prided ourselves on being able to expand and grow with people as their business changes. And it’s actually been, it’s hard now when you actually are full. But I think we also feel very grateful to be at 100% occupancy. So how did we start this? I always kind of say, you know, how do you eat an elephant one bite at a time? But our first bite was a decision to open up a pop-up bar on the roof of the building. And I think kind of going back to the beginning of this conversation, that’s because that’s something that we had done before. And I think that people are willing to travel for food and drink in a way that we’re not willing to travel for other things. We talk about traveling for other things. I talk about going, you know, maybe to a neighborhood I don’t go to frequently for an art exhibit or a shop, but most of the time it actually takes a lot for me to actually get there. I can think about it. But to actually get there and food and drink and I don’t know if it’s because it’s a shared activity or because there’s actually kind of a sweet adventure at the end but we kind of really knew that that was a strong tool and had seen that in the past.

Lindsey: [00:17:33] And so we opened up a pop-up bar and the joke is that I invited a bank every single night for a drink until I closed on our big construction loan, which I did. And, you know, we were open for 22 nights that first year and we had over 30,000 visitors. And so.

Eve: [00:17:54] Oh, wow.

Lindsey: [00:17:55] You know, I think a lot of people were saying, who’s going to come? How’s this going to work? How are people going to find out about this building? How are you going to deal with the parking needs? Who wants to be in a big old school? And I think for a lot of people, whether that was neighbors, future tenants, partners, bankers, politicians, coming upstairs to a very full and vibrant bar allowed them to say, wow, there’s something here. And people are willing to come here to find it and be a part of this place. And so, I think actually that was helpful in convincing people that, A, we could pull things off and make things happen. And we did that within 30 days of closing on the building, mind you, because I really feel strongly that oftentimes in development we wait years, we talk about grand visions, we undertake the large scale, you know, development, construction, and then we have a ribbon cutting and we’ve actually never had a ribbon cutting for BOK and never will, obviously at this point.

Lindsey: [00:19:07] But the idea of kind of incremental growth, I really believe that slow is really healthy actually, when we’re talking about large scale projects in a city. I don’t think it’s natural, normal or good to just open up the doors and add 350,000ft² of activity to a neighborhood. It’s much better to have that be an iterative process where people get to know you, you build trust. You also learn what works and what doesn’t work. There were mistakes along the way, you know, where should the trash sit, for example? You know, we moved that around a few times before we got it to the right place where trash trucks could access it and it wouldn’t disturb neighbors. And so, you know, I really believe in kind of iterative and slow development, but I always kind of say the bar is the thing that started it all. And that really allowed us to gain the momentum and the confidence of our team, even our neighbors, all of our collaborators and partners in that something was possible here.

Eve: [00:20:15] So as you built this thing, what other major challenges did you face during the project? Because you built it slowly with 200 tenants. It’s a lot of space.

Lindsey: [00:20:28] So it’s funny because I think sometimes your greatest strength is also your biggest challenge. And so, I say, I really like the idea of slow development, of iterative development, of the idea of the building kind of taking and evolving over time. And it really has. It took seven years to essentially finish all the construction pieces. And I’d actually argue that there still are pieces of the building that we still want to tackle or want to go back to or kind of take further. But I say that, at the same time one of the biggest challenges is that that meant that we were doing construction while we were an occupied building. And so that was also a challenge. There’s no other way to say it. We installed the sprinkler system actually when we were probably at 40% occupancy, something like that. We had outlined a scope of work with the fire board where we would basically install major infrastructure every six months with a kind of timeline of completion. So new standpipes, for example, went into all stairwells, I think for the first year. And then the second year we sprinklered a part of the building and then the next part and the next part. And so, I feel very grateful for the creative minds in the fire board and the city who kind of allowed us to create a safe building together, knowing that that was a huge piece of infrastructure and a huge cost item. But also, it was just a real operational challenge in terms of we did that work overnight in occupied spaces. So, I think, you know, to every strength also sometimes has its drawbacks too.

Eve: [00:22:14] I mean, financing is something that you fill slowly, is got to be really difficult as well because you need revenue to pay the loans. And how on earth do you manage that?

Lindsey: [00:22:25] Yeah. So, a similar approach in that how do you eat an elephant that one bite at a time and that our first loan was actually really just based on an appraisal of the building. We had had a zoning change and so kind of was able to argue to the bank that, you know, it was now worth three times more than essentially it was purchased for and it was purchased very cheaply, I think that should be acknowledged. We purchased the building for 1.75 million, although as I said, we were the highest bidder by a lot apparently.

Eve: [00:23:00] You could say that was a huge liability when you purchased it.

Lindsey: [00:23:03] Oh, 100%. But I actually think that that kind of that low entry per square foot is actually really essential in terms of allowing you to take a more creative approach. And I think, you know, Jane Jacobs says this best when she says, you know, new ideas must use old buildings. And I think it’s really because, in that when you’re getting a building for cheaper, that’s kind of been considered less valuable, it actually has more opportunities for experimentation in it and less pressures on it. And so I actually think that’s a really important piece of the puzzle. But essentially, we first got our first piece of funding just based on the kind of increase in value from a zoning change. And then once we signed kind of our first couple of leases, we kind of showed them that this was working. We were able to increase that by, I don’t know, 2 million or something like that, and then we increased it again, then we increased it again, and then we brought in new market tax credits and historic tax credits. And I had to condo out the buildings that I could kind of apply different financing pieces to different pieces of the puzzle as they came online. And that’s how we got it done.

Eve: [00:24:18] A little bit at a time. So, what about the community in the neighborhood? What role have they played in this revitalization of this, it’s a huge building sitting in the middle of a very dense neighborhood, as you said. It’s very, very large.

Lindsey: [00:24:32] Yeah. So, one of the first things we did when we started the project is we did a community asset mapping and I would encourage everyone to do that before you start anything kind of on your on your own turf, which is to look around you and see what’s already working and what already exists. Because I really think, although, you know there are certain characteristics of our neighborhood that we wanted to speak to, we started off by saying, how can we help the existing agencies, communities, organizations and people that are already are, you know, symbols of strength or kind of have agency or have organizing efforts within the neighborhood? And I think one of the best examples of that is a group called SEAMAC, which is the Southeast Asian Mutual Aid Coalition. And we invited them in to use this space for their elder’s breakfast on Tuesday morning. And so, they did that for 3 or 4 years. And through that partnership, which was pretty loose, you know, we were just giving them free space to be able to have their elders breakfast, they were able to work with Jefferson Hospital System to bring in a health clinic called the Wyss Wellness Center, which is a primary care health clinic. So, anybody can go and see a doctor there for primary care, but they’re specifically trained in the immigrant and refugee needs of our neighborhood, both language and cultural sensitivities. And that has just been an incredible resource for our community. Not just South Philadelphia but think of Philadelphia at large. A lot of the refugees recently who have been kind of bused into the city, that’s actually their first port of call in Philadelphia. And so, it’s really become an incredible space and anchor for that community. But that took almost six years to make happen. And so, I do think it really is about building trust and understanding how you can enable and support the growth of organizations that are already A, doing the work and B, very trusted within the community itself.

Eve: [00:26:52] I’m just fascinated about who the tenants are. Tell us a little bit about the mix of people in the building. I was lucky enough to walk through it, so I some of it’s burned into my brain, but I think you need to describe it a little.

Lindsey: [00:27:06] Yeah. So, we have over 260 businesses based in the building today. And of those, 52% are women owned businesses, 25% are minority owned businesses. And think about 15% of the building is nonprofits. And so, what that means is that we have everything from a glassblower who’s also doing glass recycling, to a daycare, to a tattoo parlor, to architects, jewelry designers, fabric printers, a tufting workshop, photographers, graphic designers, an accredited art school that focuses on contemporary realist painting, so a lot of work on the nude form and portrait work. We have a bakery called Machine Shop Bakery, which was just nominated for a James Beard Award in the pastry category. We’ve got a restaurant, Irwin’s, which has been rated one of the top ten best new restaurants in America. We’ve got a fabric recycling center, we have Girls Inc, which is a national nonprofit supporting young women, we have ballet classes, we’ve got a catering company, we have ceramic makers. It’s all types of people doing all types of things. And I think that’s actually really, really important, is that it’s not just a building for one type of person or one type of use. It’s a building for a lot of different uses to happen side by side.

Lindsey: [00:28:41] And I think one of the questions we always get asked is, oh, is there kind of a jeweler’s row or wing? Is there kind of the carpenter’s wing? Is there the band wing? And, you know, how much do you kind of curate this building and this space? And the answer is that we really don’t curate the building. We allow people to find spaces that suit their needs and their budgets. So, if somebody has a budget of $500, we’re trying to find a space that fits that budget and has the infrastructure that they need, that’s a sink or a lot of power. But the thing that we are really conscious about is sounds and smells. So, the people who make a lot of sounds and aren’t sensitive to sounds, they do go together. But beyond that, there’s not a ton of curation. On the first floor, obviously, we very much focused on things that are more public facing and want to interact with the public, because ultimately a lot of the building is just a workspace, not just but is a workspace. And so, people don’t necessarily want people knocking on their door saying, can I buy a, you know, a product that you’re making right there? They’re really there to focus.

Eve: [00:29:53] And how big is the team that manages all of this?

Lindsey: [00:29:56] Yeah. So, we’re about ten people, 10 to 12 people. And this, none of this would be possible without the team. I have an exceptional team. We have a facilities director who is just wonderful, is constantly, as an old building, it’s constantly moaning and groaning and he’s kind of there to oversee it with a great facilities crew. We’ve got a director of operations, we have an events team that does a variety of different events in the building we do around, we do weddings, we do community events, we do self-initiated events like Open Studios, for example, is one of them. Alumni Day, where we invite people to come back who are alumni of the school and so just have a great team. And I think that’s just so, so, so important for the project to be able to get to where it is today.

Eve: [00:30:53] But it’s not a traditional leasing and maintenance team, right?

Lindsey: [00:30:59] No, I mean, most of our leasing is done in house. I think over 50% of the people that we’ve leased to this is their first commercial lease. So, a part of our process has been trying to break down some of the jargon and lease terminology that really people aren’t familiar with outside of the leasing world, to help people to feel comfortable making that first big jump into a space. And in our work, we’re not working with a lot of large credit tenants. I think in the most more recent years we’ve had a few, but generally, and particularly the early years, we had no credit tenants. And so the idea of trying to lock somebody into a long term lease really doesn’t make sense for us or for them. And so really, it’s about allowing people to test and experiment and see what works and see what doesn’t work. And at the end of the day, if it doesn’t work for them, we’re lucky enough that there’s been enough demand and the scale of the space is kind of a very, I think, attractive size that that’s okay. It’s okay for us to have, you know, people move on and move out if it’s not the right fit. And we’re not locking people into leases that are longer than they can really take on.

Eve: [00:32:19] I think you and I see eye to eye on that. I’ve always been very disturbed at the real estate industry that rewards leasing agents based by commission, because of course, that means that they’re going to focus more time on larger leases. And so I have a couple of buildings where I took pretty much the same attitude. You know, shorter leases were fine. And if they could only renew for a short time, that was fine too. And what’s happened is I’ve had some tenants in some of my spaces for 15 years just renewing one year at a time or expanding and eventually moving on. But yeah, there’s just there’s something really broken with the industry that doesn’t allow for that to happen more freely. I think unfortunately, you know, real estate agents have to make money like they’ve got to live, right? But if they’re going to make $200 on a small lease, of course they’re going to spend more time on renting a big space where they can make $10,000, right?

Lindsey: [00:33:21] You know, I wonder if Covid has made anybody rethink that, because I always joke that in the beginning of Covid, I think I was my first bank call. They were like that building with all of those non-credit tenants. It’s, how are they going to fare through Covid? And the reality is that we fared better than any other building, a commercial building and my bank’s portfolio or any bank’s portfolio.

Eve: [00:33:47] Dare I say that’s because it’s 50% women owned businesses?

Lindsey: [00:33:51] I mean, I also think, you know, listen, it’s small scale. I think, you know, a third of our building is under 800ft². And so, you know, when somebody decides to close their business or move to Maine or move to Mexico or wherever it was that, you know, whatever they decided to do kind of in the pandemic.

Eve: [00:34:12] It’s a tiny percentage of the whole building, right?

Lindsey: [00:34:15] It’s a tiny percentage. And so we were able to kind of, you know, stay flexible, stay nimble. I think we also created a really incredible program around rent relief and deferment for our tenants, where we gave over $300,000 of rent relief and support. And that meant that we basically had, I think it was under 10% turnover during Covid. And so, you know, I hope that the industry as a whole looks at buildings like ours and says, oh, these buildings that we’ve always thought are more risky because they don’t have large anchor tenants, they don’t have the credit tenants, actually, there’s strength in the small and that there’s something very strong about our ability to be nimble. But at the same time, you know, I think it’ll always be interesting to see how that grows and goes. But I hope that maybe it’s made some of the industry just rethink a little bit about kind of who we think are dependable.

Eve: [00:35:13] You know, I’ve had a similar experience. I’ve got a building that has these, it’s much smaller, but it has these 13 little studios that range from 400 to 800ft². And I keep telling people I wish I had four buildings like that because it really never lost steam during Covid. And the people who are looking for space now want space like that. And I’m thinking about how to subdivide larger spaces to turn them into these little spaces because, yeah, I totally agree with you. If it’s a, it’s much easier for a landlord to manage than losing an entire floor plate of a building.

Lindsey: [00:35:51] Yeah, I mean, it’s a lot of work. I think like, you know, doing 260 leases versus doing, you know, ten or something would have, you know, but we think it’s also more interesting. It’s the type of people we want to work with and…

Eve: [00:36:03] Much more interesting.

Lindsey: [00:36:04] I would take it every day. So.

Eve: [00:36:06] So what other projects is Scout working on today, or is this just keeping you busy full time?

Lindsey: [00:36:13] No. So, we’re starting to work on other projects, which is very exciting. So, we actually are working on two projects up in Providence. One is called 50 Sims, which is a manufacturing building that will be workspace. We have some great workforce development tenants in there today. We’ve got a great brewery; we’ve got people doing CNC training and forklift training and we have a boat builder and an artist studio and a preservation society that’s teaching people how to repair historic windows. So, we’re really, really excited about that project and excited to be also working in a new city. It’s been wonderful. I think Providence has a lot of similarities to Philadelphia and we’ve really enjoyed being a part of that community.

Eve: [00:37:11] And how big is that project?

Lindsey: [00:37:13] It’s around 110,000ft².

Eve: [00:37:17] Oh just weeny. Weeny Scale.

Lindsey: [00:37:20] I think for better or for worse, once you do big buildings, everybody calls you about big buildings. So, I think we have to get comfortable in this space.

Eve: [00:37:29] Yes. Yes. One other question. Is collaboration important in your projects? I know that’s what you started out doing with Scout, but how is that morphed into BOK? Who do you collaborate with? What does that look like?

Lindsey: [00:37:44] So yeah, Eve, there’s a few different things that come to mind there. I think we collaborate a lot with artists on site specific pieces. So, if we are looking for furniture, for example, for a space, we’re typically commissioning and working with local artists, oftentimes people in the building. In the last couple years, we’ve also done two amazing projects that are pretty different than our kind of real estate development practice side. So, we’ve done two projects for the flower show in Philadelphia, which were both incredible collaborations with a whole host of different creatives and makers in the city. The first year we did a Risograph printing house where we printed aspirational posters, or inspirational I’m sorry, inspirational posters to give people hope in 2021, kind of following the year of 2020 that we had all been through. Three of those posters were in a language other than English to speak to the population of South Philadelphia who previously really didn’t have any materials in their languages at the flower show. And then last year, I guess in 2022, we did an installation called The Smelly Tunnel, which was essentially just a piece that you would walk through, and it would mist scents on you. And the idea of kind of flowers in terms of our mental health and kind of the ability to just step back and breathe. And so pretty different from our kind of management and development of a large building. But I actually think are great examples of things that A, make our team really excited and B, kind of that that collaboration. And so, I think we like working at a lot of different scales and find that kind of continuing to keep our hand in some of those small scale installation work that makes our kind of our long term development practice also stronger.

Eve: [00:39:43] And one more question for you, and that is I’m wondering how your time in the UK influenced your perspective on the built environment.

Lindsey: [00:39:53] I think there’s so many examples in Europe, I think, of how adaptive reuse is encouraged and I think just really done well. I think that’s certainly something I think that the value of both the creative community, but also of the cultural community, of cultural institutions, cultural organizations, has a different value in Europe and a different, I think, support system in terms of actually how those entities are funded compared to here in the US. So, certainly drew inspiration from many projects that I had seen and worked on there in Hackney Wick. There were some great examples, The White Building being one of them, and Amsterdam and DSM, I think was a, is an incredible example of kind of a building where the government really allowed people to experiment with what was possible and has now become kind of a center, a cultural center in Amsterdam. So, certainly it was a was a huge inspiration, is a huge inspiration and certainly informs my work. And I think, you know, this idea of kind of allowing things to stay a bit unpolished, unruly, but also surprising, I think is just certainly something that continues to inspire me, and I certainly travel to get to see projects like that, that continue to just be an inspiration for our work here.

Eve: [00:41:27] Yeah, it’s pretty amazing when you can say government did something so fantastic. We should be able to say that all the time, right?

Lindsey: [00:41:37] It would be nice.

Eve: [00:41:38] I have one more question for you. What keeps you up at night?

Lindsey: [00:41:41] Oh, so many things, to be honest.

Eve: [00:41:44] Maybe nothing. Maybe nothing.

Lindsey: [00:41:47] Oh, no, I wish I could say it was nothing. I mean I think to be honest, um, maybe I’ll start with where I think the kind of the opportunities are in that I think we are seeing cities shift. We are seeing obviously a lot of office space come online and I think there’s an opportunity there. And just thinking about what types of workspaces we need. I think, again, that kind of dirty workspace is something that doesn’t actually work well in our homes. And I think particularly for creative individuals, I think collaborative and creative environments are really key as sources of inspiration. And you know, people work better in those communities than perhaps they would in a basement or a, you know, a guest room or whatever it is that they might otherwise be working. So, I’m excited to see how that evolves. I think I am always just, I think, I don’t know if you feel this way, but it always feels still very fragile, and I always feel like I’m, it’s hard to enjoy the successes because I’m always fearful of the next hit.

Eve: [00:42:58] Well, that means you’re prepared, right? I mean, I think, yeah, it’s scary, but it’s probably healthy too. If you don’t have any fear, then you’re probably being too cavalier because there will always be a next hit, right? There will always be something else.

Lindsey: [00:43:16] There will. And particularly in old buildings, there’s always the next hit. I think that’s the reality. And so, I think that certainly always keeps me up. And, you know, I think just also as we’re in this next phase, I think of trying to figure out, you know, what’s next for Scout as we’ve kind of gone to the city of Providence and I think we’re looking elsewhere, I think that’s something that’s certainly keeps me, kind of, keeps my brain thinking at night about all the possibilities and projects that we might take on. So…

Eve: [00:43:50] Well, it’s been a pleasure talking to you, and I can’t wait to see what you do next. You have to stay in touch. It’s very, very exciting work. I really appreciate it.

Lindsey: [00:44:00] Thank you. I would love to. I’d love to show you our next projects and the next ones after that. And I know many years ago when we were starting back, we came out to Pittsburgh to visit you.

Eve: [00:44:11] Yes, that was a long time ago. A long, long time ago, yeah,

Lindsey: [00:44:14] Long time ago. So, you’ve certainly been an inspiration and a part of this process.

Eve: [00:44:19] And maybe, sometime you want to even crowdfund one of your projects.

Lindsey: [00:44:23] I would love to explore.

Eve: [00:44:24] Can’t mention which one.

Lindsey: [00:44:30] That would be great.

Eve: [00:44:31] Thanks very much, Lindsey.

Lindsey: [00:44:32] Thank you, Eve.

Eve: [00:44:43] I hope you enjoyed today’s guest and our deep dive. You can find out more about this episode or others you might have missed on the show notes page at RethinkRealEstateforGood.co. There’s lots to listen to there. Please support this podcast and all the great work my guests do by sharing it with others, posting about it on social media, or leaving a rating and a review. To catch all the latest from me, you can follow me on LinkedIn. Even better, if you’re ready to dabble in some impact investing, head on over to smallchange.co where I spend most of my time. A special thanks to David Allardice for his excellent editing of this podcast and original music. And a big thanks to you for spending your time with me today. We’ll talk again soon. But for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Lindsey Scannapieco

ESG versus Impact Investing.

July 25, 2023

Impact investing is not ESG. And ESG is not Impact investing.

Is this news to you? Don’t worry, you’re not alone. Some of the smartest and most sophisticated people have trouble distinguishing between the two.

ESG stands for environmental, social and governance. It was the brainchild of governments wanting to bring these issues into mainstream investment decision-making. Impact investing, however,  was born in the private sector by philanthropists and investors who wanted to put a name to investments that  generated measurable social impact along with a financial return. 

Think of ESG as a framework and impact investing as a strategy.  The first focuses on integrating sustainability into existing investment strategies. The second is more hands-on, purposefully focusing on the actual impact or outcomes of a project or building. And this is what Small Change has adopted, with a purpose built impact index to measure the change that is being made.

If a building scores well in ESG, it might still make a negative impact. No weight is given to issues of the physical environment in ESG scoring.  Walk score, bike score, proximity to transit are nowhere to be seen. And yet these are the things that make buildings and cities comfortable and affordable to live in. 

It’s really pretty simple if you think about it. 

Image courtesy of Small Change

Globe Street Class of 2023

July 24, 2023

Who’s my crowd? According to GlobeSt.com/Real Estate Forum, the 2023 Women of Influence. 

That’s right: The publication named me a “Diversity Champion,” one of its special recognition awards. I’m proud to be included among so many women who are making their mark in what is still a male-dominated industry. And I’m especially proud that my work to enhance participation of women and minorities in real estate development and investment has resulted in this honor. 

Thank you to GlobeSt./Real Estate Forum!

Later this month many of the other winners will congregate at the annual Women of Influence event in Lake Tahoe. Although I’m unable to attend, I’ll be celebrating and congratulating my “new crowd” from afar. Let’s keep the momentum going as we further democratize commercial real estate! 

Strong Towns

June 7, 2023

Charles Marohn, known as “Chuck” to friends and colleagues, is the founder and president of Strong Towns. He is a land use planner and civil engineer with decades of experience. He holds a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering and a Master of Urban and Regional Planning, both from the University of Minnesota.

Marohn is the author of Strong Towns: A Bottom-Up Revolution to Rebuild American Prosperity (Wiley, 2019) and Confessions of a Recovering Engineer: Transportation for a Strong Town (Wiley 2021). He hosts the Strong Towns Podcast and is a primary writer for Strong Towns’ web content. He has presented Strong Towns concepts in hundreds of cities and towns across North America. Planetizen named him one of the 10 Most Influential Urbanists of all time.

Chuck grew up on a small farm in central Minnesota. The oldest of three sons of two elementary school teachers, he joined the Minnesota National Guard on his seventeenth birthday during his junior year of high school and served in the Guard for nine years. In addition to being passionate about building a stronger America, he loves playing music, is an obsessive reader, and religiously follows his favorite baseball team, the Minnesota Twins.

Chuck and his wife live with their two daughters in their hometown of Brainerd, Minnesota.

Read the podcast transcript here

Eve Picker: [00:00:12] Hi there. Thanks for joining me on Rethink Real Estate. For Good. I’m Eve Picker and I’m on a mission to make real estate work for everyone. I love real estate. Real estate makes places good or bad, rich or poor, beautiful or not. In this show, I’m interviewing the disruptors, those creative thinkers and doers that are shrugging off the status quo in order to build better for everyone.

Eve: [00:00:55] Charles Mahron is a recovering engineer. He used to build roads. Charles followed all the rules he learned while studying to become an engineer. But in 2008, well into his engineering career, he became disenchanted with the notion that more roads lead to prosperity. So, Charles started blogging his thoughts. He advocated for a new approach to land use and warned about the dangers of suburban sprawl. With each blog, Charles gained readers until the blog converted into a nonprofit organization called Strong Towns. Today, Strong Towns has millions of followers. Listen in to learn more.

Eve: [00:01:43] If you’d like to join me in my quest to rethink real estate, there are two simple things you can do, share this podcast and go to rethinkrealestateforgood.co, where you can subscribe to be the first to hear about my podcasts, blog posts and other goodies.

Eve: [00:02:09] Hi, Charles. I’m really honored to have you here today.

Charles Mahron: [00:02:12] Thanks, Eve. It’s so nice to chat with you.

Eve: [00:02:15] Very nice. So, you recently wrote a book called Confessions of a Recovering Engineer: Transportation for a Strong Town. That’s a really tantalizing title. What’s behind it?

Charles: [00:02:27] Well, I have a lot on behalf of the engineering profession to confess to people. I think there’s a lot that people take as being normal in our transportation system. And when you work inside of it, when you work as an engineer, when you work as a design professional, many of those things that are taken as gospel, that are taken as this is the way things are and this is the way things have to be, are built on a very kind of fragile construct. And it’s a construct that conflicts with a lot of the way humanity actually operates. We have these books that are seen as the, you know, the founding texts of our profession. We have these doctrines that are brought down from on high. And I just wanted to pull back the curtain and talk seriously about those things and make it far more accessible for people, particularly people who don’t think the system is working very well.

Eve: [00:03:30] So, I suppose my question is, is what made you think about that at all in the first place, if you were trained just like all other civil engineers in your profession?

Charles: [00:03:38] It’s a fair question. I’m not a very good engineer is the way I put it. I think a good engineer is someone who colors within the lines

Eve: [00:03:49] Embraces it.

Charles: [00:03:50] Yeah, follows the rules. I got a civil engineering degree and then worked as an engineer, got my license, but then I went back to graduate school and got a planning degree, a degree in urban planning and it’s interesting because I have only met one other person who holds the same two degrees, yet, I’m sure there are more, but I’ve only met one. They seem very similar, right? They’re both working with the built environment. They’re both the physical layout and construction of cities, but they’re two very different mental approaches and two very different backgrounds. One is a very left-brain pursuit; one is a very right brain pursuit. And I think that discomfort with both allowed me to see it in a different way. And so, I’ve acknowledged I’m not a very good engineer, I’m not a very good planner, but I am a really good strong towns advocate, which kind of tries to understand and reconcile some of the things that conflict between both of those pursuits.

Eve: [00:04:54] So then, you gave up this job and you created a nonprofit, Strong Towns, eventually. What is Strong Towns?

Charles: [00:05:01] Well, giving up the job was part of figuring that out, right? I started to write a blog and it was an evenings and weekends kind of pursuit. I was interested in figuring out why our cities were going broke. Why the cities that I was working with, which were all very fast growing, you know, had some degree of affluence, although a lot of them were very small and very poor. But they were all investing in growth in a certain way. And it was very obvious to me that this was not leading to success. And so, I started a blog way back in 2008 to explore that. Like, why is that? And, you know, because you do writing as well. When you write, it forces you to think through ideas in ways that, you know, just talking about them or just experiencing them doesn’t. And so, three days a week, I would write about these issues. And out of that came this kind of body of insight that some friends of mine said we need to start a nonprofit over. And my first thing was like, No, I don’t want to do that.

Charles: [00:06:09] And they’re like, no, we insist. And they actually filled the paperwork out and got it going. And all of a sudden, we had a 501C3, and then a foundation gave us a grant, and I’ve been trying to figure out how best to infect the world with a new set of ideas ever since. And that’s really what Strong Towns is. Strong Towns is about sharing this message, here’s how we build cities that are financially strong and resilient. Here’s how we build places that are prosperous and places where people can, through their own efforts, working together with others, make their community a better place to live and a better place to pass on to the next generation.

Eve: [00:06:52] So, how many followers do you have today? How has that grown?

Charles: [00:06:56] It depends on how we measure it. I remember in the very early days when I would have, you know, 20 readers in a month and I’d say, oh, my gosh, that’s incredible. We had two and a half unique viewers of our content last year, so it’s grown quite a bit. Strong Towns has, I think, 4200 members, which are people who have donated to our 501C3 in the last 12 months. And that also is trending upward. It has grown to be quite a movement of people dedicated to doing something different.

Eve: [00:07:30] So, let’s talk a little bit more in detail. What are the key features of a strong town versus a weak town?

Charles: [00:07:39] Yeah, it’s a very good question. And we have, you know, a Strong Town’s approach and Strong Town’s principles. We are currently in the midst of something that we call the strongest town contest. And in that contest, we try to identify places that are using good practices. So, ultimately, we describe a strong town, not in terms of a destination, but in terms of the journey. Are you doing things in a bottom-up way? Are you attentive and attuned and sensitive to the struggles of people in the neighborhood as opposed to the cash that you can get from this program, that program or this developer? Are you building things at a human scale as opposed to orienting your neighborhoods around the automobile? Are you taking incremental steps to try to learn and figure things out? Or are you doing kind of these big Hail Mary transformative projects? So, for us Strong Towns is about a frame of mind. I’d like to use the analogy, it’s a lot like diet and exercise for a city. How do we have good practices, good approaches, good discipline about how we go about things and then we celebrate that because the results are there, the results pay off.

Eve: [00:09:02] So, I mean, let’s talk about practices. I’m just wondering what position you take on key issues, just to spell it out for our listeners. So, what about zoning and density? What makes a strong town?

Charles: [00:09:16] I always like the density question. When it comes to zoning, and it comes to density, I think we recognize a couple things. First, if we look at traditional development patterns, the pattern of development we had really before the Great Depression and even going back a little bit further than that, it was organic. And in being organic, it did not have anything like the regulatory framework we had today. That is almost like a libertarian ideal of what a city is. I’ve been fortunate enough to spend a lot of time in Italy. I think you can think of like the Italian hill town is such a beautiful, wonderful place to be built with completely without regulation. We recognize, though, that today the body of knowledge that created that is in a sense, absent. All of the incentives, all of the cultural understandings, not to mention the trades understandings of how to build places like that. And so, zoning becomes this like essential thing we need to make our cities work. And we spend a lot of time on how do we make zoning codes better, less responsive to, again, the cookie cutter exercise of repeating the same development pattern over and over, and instead the very kind of humble and urgent exercise of making sure that the things we build connect with and respect neighborhoods and the, you know, the adjacent buildings and all that.

Charles: [00:10:56] If we take the next step to density then, we actually are not anti-dense, we’re very pro kind of density as an outcome, but we tend to struggle with density as a metric. I see a lot of planners who obsess over density and they build really horrible places. What we talk about is neighborhoods maturing over time. Every neighborhood should be allowed to evolve and mature and thicken up and the goal of a good street, the goal of a good zoning code, the goal of a city regulatory process should be to assist every neighborhood in reaching its next level of maturity. So, if you are a toddler neighborhood of single-family homes, the expectation should be how do you become an adolescent neighborhood of duplexes? And if you’re an adolescent neighborhood of duplexes, how do we get you into something that would be more intense. Two, three story buildings, densities of multiple units per lot. How do we get you to that next stage of success? That kind of mimics the development patterns of the past that were so successful. It also tends to harmonize a little bit some of the tensions across neighborhoods that make us resist growth. And I think it’s a more kind of realistic and reality-based way to experience prosperity as opposed to neighborhoods that are stagnant and designed to never change.

Eve: [00:12:29] So, I’m going to go back to something you said, which I think maybe a lot of people don’t agree with, and that how do you move a single-family neighborhood to the next level of success, which is duplexes? And I’m pretty sure that there’s a lot of people in this country who don’t see that as a successful move. Why is it important?

Charles: [00:12:52] Yeah, there are a lot of people who don’t see that as success. I respect that and understand that, but I wholeheartedly disagree. The marketing brochure of the post-World War II pattern of development is stagnation and eternal prosperity. The idea is that if we go out and build the perfect neighborhood and we plan it just right and we zone it just right and we build the homes in a certain way, and then we come in with this regulatory overlay after it that makes it stagnate in place that we will somehow be able to not only achieve prosperity but sustain prosperity. And the reality is anybody can go look at 1950s and 1960s neighborhoods and observe that for almost all of it that is not the case. Suburbia, post-war development has a natural life cycle to it. And the life cycle is very simple to understand. It is one generation of being brand new and prosperous, a second generation of hanging on and trying to sustain that prosperity. And then a third generation of decline and sometimes gentrification, but oftentimes just decline. This is the way that all systems that are artificially stagnated operate and as opposed to pre-war pre-depression development patterns, which always had the next increment of development intensity as part of their DNA, you would start small, you would add on, you would take that house that kind of went into decline and renew it up to something more intense, more productive.

Charles: [00:14:36] And this renewal process created this kind of natural vibrancy, a cycle of life that we see in neighborhoods that allowed them to mature and allow the people who lived in it to participate in that maturing, both physically participate, like go out and build stuff, but also financially participate, gain in wealth and gain in standing as their neighborhood became a more complete and more productive, a more valuable place. We’ve arrested that from our development patterns. So, now you know your choice is one version of stagnation or another. And if you’re very affluent, you can get a high-end version of stagnation. If you’re middle class, you can get a middle-class version of stagnation. And if you’re poor, which, you know, increasingly we are a very poor country with very poor neighborhoods, you can have the poor version of stagnation. And to me, this is a one-way path to a stagnant economy, a stagnant country, a stagnant population.

Eve: [00:15:42] I think that’s a great description. It’s bringing to mind some places I know that are tackling that. But then how do streets and roads and parking minimums and walkability play into that change? Because, you know, if you start with the single-family suburban neighborhood, how can you progress to the next level in a place that’s really designed quite rigorously never to be that?

Charles: [00:16:07] Yeah, it’s really hard. And I’m not going to pretend that it isn’t hard. I’m on record as saying I think that over half of what we built post World War Two is going to ultimately go away, that we don’t have the wherewithal to maintain it. We don’t have the desire to maintain it. We don’t actually have the capacity to maintain all those roads and sidewalks and pipe. We certainly don’t have the money to maintain it. And so, the question that I kind of deal with is less about how do we get people who live in single family home neighborhoods to allow that accessory apartment or allow the house next door to convert into the duplex or that kind of thing. And I focus more of my time on the neighborhoods that are ready to do this, the places that are ready to embrace it. How do we clear the things out of their path so that this natural evolution can start to happen again? Because I’m convinced that those are the places that actually will be the leaders where, when this becomes a more, and it’s becoming more of a widespread phenomenon. But I think when that expands even more, we need good places to turn to as examples to say, okay, the trajectory of my neighborhood is one of two paths. Path number one is the stagnation and decline. And ultimately my neighborhood is going to fail and go away and be a place that doesn’t thrive. That is the natural destination for the stagnant post-World War II development pattern. Or option number two is like this neighborhood over here, which, yeah, they allow duplexes and triplexes and corner stores and other things to come in. But wow, look at the cool place that that is now. Look at how that has added to their prosperity. And those places are growing in value, growing in prosperity, growing in wealth. I want to be like that. And so, we’re really focused on getting, I think, those green shoot kind of neighborhoods up and started that, as this accelerates, we can point to and say, be like this. This is a better option.

Eve: [00:18:17] Right. You know, this brings to mind I am actually developing a project in Australia with my sister, just a small 15-unit building. But it’s in a neighborhood that was, you know, the city very purposefully said we want this to be the next Barcelona. And what’s really interesting about the neighborhood is it’s a hodgepodge of zoning. It’s got commercial and retail and industrial and housing all jammed together. It’s a fabulously vibrant place. It has a very long main street with, you know, 20 restaurants, five banks, everything you really want in one place, lots of public transit and their goal is to remove all parking in the next ten years. So, that’s kind of taking it to the ultimate, you know, hillside Italian town ideal, right. So, I suppose you need to have visionaries who get that to be able to drive that forward, you know?

Charles: [00:19:14] Yes. I feel like what you’re describing is a neighborhood, right? Like a real neighborhood. It’s a real neighborhood. Yeah. And the thing about a real neighborhood is that once it starts to accelerate, the massive waste that is parking becomes revealed to everybody.

Eve: [00:19:34] It’s expensive. Yeah.

Charles: [00:19:35] If we didn’t have this parking, we could have more seating. We could have more places to, you know, more room for walking. We could have more stores. We could have more stuff.

Eve: [00:19:44] More housing, more housing.

Charles: [00:19:47] More housing, right. In most cities in the US, parking is looked at this necessary thing, maybe even a necessary evil that we need for transactions to take place. But once you start accelerating in this way, parking becomes the huge, obvious extraneous waste of resources, and most cities seek to lessen it or eliminate it altogether, which is a really smart step to take.

Eve: [00:20:16] Yeah, and what’s been interesting to watch there is the evolution of public transit and how that city’s recognized the value of the public transit they have, which isn’t strong everywhere, right. But in this particular place, there’s a tram, they’ve added a subway station. And these have all been towards this goal of making this a walkable only place. It’s been really interesting to watch and I really want to live there. I mean, I’m not going to live there full-time. My home is in the US, but it makes me want to be there because it’s so incredibly vibrant.

Charles: [00:20:51] Yeah.

Eve: [00:20:51] So, this is really a fiscally responsible argument too, right? That’s really what it’s all about.

Charles: [00:20:57] That is where I started and that’s where I kind of focus. And it’s fascinating because I’ve gotten to places where I think a lot of people who quite frankly don’t care about the money end up as well. But I got there by doing the math, by actually sitting and running the numbers. And you brought up transit. Transit is an interesting financial case because here throughout the US we tend to treat transit as this charitable overlay of our transportation system. And when you think of it as charity for the poor or what have you, it really doesn’t work very well. It doesn’t function very well and it doesn’t create a lot of value. When you look at transit and understand that when you can successfully deploy transit, you can actually get rid of that wasteful automobile space. You can you can move out the parking, you can move out the cars because you don’t need them because people can get around easily. You can get more transactions, more people per block, per unit of space. You realize that transit is the biggest wealth accelerator that our cities have.

Eve: [00:22:05] Right.

Charles: [00:22:06] And I think we can embrace that as a financial reality while also embracing some of the other things that we value about transit in terms of being able to help people and being able to, you know, create better places for people to live and places where people who can’t afford an automobile can also utilize it and be very successful with that.

Eve: [00:22:28] I’m going to ask a question I normally don’t ask, but I’m going to bring politics into this. You’re a Republican and I’m a Democrat. And why should we both believe in strong towns? I know we do, but why should we?

Charles: [00:22:42] It’s a good question, because I know there’ll be people who will react to that strongly.

Eve: [00:22:48] I’m sure.

Charles: [00:22:49] In Minnesota, we have the caucus system. So, for our primaries, you have to identify a party and go and sit in a room with a bunch of other people and talk about policy. And for many years I caucused with the Republican Party. I haven’t caucused with the Republicans since about 2012, which is neither here nor there. I don’t generally vote Democrat. I voted a lot of independent and third party the last maybe decade, but I’m certainly more conservative than I am progressive. So, it’s a very fair insight.

Eve: [00:23:24] Right. I really meant it as you, generally. You know, I mean.

Charles: [00:23:30] Yeah. No, totally get it.

Eve: [00:23:32] I hope it didn’t make you feel uncomfortable.

Charles: [00:23:34] No, no, not at all.

Eve: [00:23:36] I generally vote Democrat, but from time to time I’m really annoyed with them. So let’s, so I think we’re all on that page, right?

Charles: [00:23:44] Yeah. No, we’re on the same page. Yeah. I voted for way more Republicans in my life. But the Republican Party, we’re in a very interesting, like, strange political time, right?

Eve: [00:23:54] Very strange. Yes. Okay. Let’s just say, why should everyone believe in strong towns?

Charles: [00:23:59] Yeah, let me answer your specific question, because I think it’s very good because I do think Republicans should be about cities. Right. And Republicans tend to not be about cities. Republicans tend to be anti-city. Right. If we go through the things that make me personally a conservative and let’s traditionally look at things like fiscal prudence, responsible government, family values, community. These are all things that require a community. They require people working together. They require people living in spaces together. And when we step back and analyze that and look at that about the most dysfunctional way you can arrange people on a landscape financially, community wise, working together, family values, prudence, all these things disappear the more dissipated we become, the more kind of separated from each other physically, which is what the marketing brochure of suburban America is. The more we actually undermine those values. And I will throw a bone to the progressives because I’ve learned to really appreciate and value, if not the means, at least the intentions of some of my progressive friends.

Charles: [00:25:25] I think if we look at the suburbs, we recognize that these are largely places that through zoning, through our way of assembling them, through our way of investing in them, have segregated themselves by class at the very least. And to a degree that is almost pathological. If you’re going to live in $200,000 house, you will be in a pod with other $200,000 houses. And if you’re going to live in a $400,000 house, you’re going to live in a pod with other $400,000 houses. And there will be earthen berms and forests and fences between you because God help us, if someone who could only afford a $200,000 house had to interact with someone who could afford a $400,000 house. This is a pathological degree of separation that we have brought into our places that is anti-human anti-community and really, I think, anti-everything that conservatives suggest that they value about, you know, just about living, about life, about places.

Eve: [00:26:33] And probably caused a lot of unnecessary friction.

Charles: [00:26:36] Yes. And I write about this in confessions. I think there’s a libertarian aspect of modern Republicans that starts and ends with equating the automobile with freedom. And you get to crazy places where I will have people like Randal O’Toole saying that the proper role of local government is to go to the state legislature and lobby for more government funding for roads, because that will give people freedom to drive more. And I believe I’m a little more intellectually honest than that, I would like to think. But when I look at the automobile, I look at a tool that is really helpful for moving me long distance at speed. But I look at it as a tool that is not very helpful for allowing me day to day to take one block two block six, block 12 block trips. But I’m forced to do it in my automobile because of the very, very expensive environment that we’ve worked. And then, by the way, I’m also required to pay large amounts of taxes for this environment because it’s not financially solvent. And I’m required to sacrifice other services in my community, like maintaining the park and running a good government because we don’t have the money to do those things because we’ve spent it all on these roads. So, there’s a very good fiscal conservative argument, but you have to get beyond the automobile equals freedom libertarian overlay to that discussion.

Eve: [00:28:14] So, what crises are we facing that you think make your argument an imperative today?

Charles: [00:28:20] There are a lot of overlapping crises, obviously. I mean, I think we’re in very tumultuous times. I’ll say this and it’s going to sound a little over the top, but, you know, there’s a little bit of like the Romanesque decadence thing that we’ve gone through. I remember watching The Hunger Games and I think a lot of people watch The Hunger Games in the US and we’re like, Yeah, I can identify with District 12 and all this, and I’m like, no, no, no, we’re paying ‘em. We’re like the capital. You don’t get it. Like, that’s the way we are living today. But the crises that we focus on at Strong Towns primarily is the financial crisis that local governments have. Local governments are broke. If you go to any city across the country that is mature. So, not a suburb in their first or second life cycle, but any place that has gone through that illusion of wealth phase of this development pattern, what you’ll find is that they have really high taxes, they have high levels of debt, they have enormous backlogs of infrastructure maintenance that they cannot fund.

Charles: [00:29:32] And they are, in all intent and purposes, a ward of the state unable to provide reliably their basic services. That is a failed local government. And we have thousands of them here in the United States. We are trying to help them understand why they are broke and we are trying to help them take rational steps to deal with that, because ultimately Detroit is not some kind of crazy anomaly. Detroit is the destination that you get when you mismanage your city, when you take a great city and you spread it out, drive up your costs, denude your tax base, you get Detroit. And Detroit is a beautiful place that has struggled and its people have suffered as a consequence. And to me, that’s the crisis that gets me up in the morning, is I want an alternative path for cities that have gone decades down this road.

Eve: [00:30:32] And what about social equity? How does that play into the equation for a strong town?

Charles: [00:30:39] It’s a very good question. I don’t talk about social equity the way that progressives talk about it, because I’m not a progressive. I’m a conservative. And I know that sometimes riles people up because they want to be affirmed in their approach and their way of talking about things. But if people will be generous with me, I think they will hear someone speaking who shares a lot of their goals and values. When we look at the landscape of North America today, what we see is that the most productive places in every city is the pre-great depression development pattern. If we just look at cities through a financial lens, what we see is that those neighborhoods that were built before the 1930s, the walkable kind of mixed-use gridded neighborhoods around neighborhood cores or a downtown, those are the places that financially are the most successful in every city. And here’s the key insight to this. They’re the most successful even when they are occupied by the poorest people in the community. And often that is the case. I mean, you have fast growing cities where these neighborhoods have gentrified, but the vast majority of US cities, the poorest people in the city, live in the old neighborhoods. And those people are subsidizing through their taxes that they pay, through the rent that they pay, that their landlord pays the taxes they are subsidizing the new affluent development that is being built out on the edge.

Charles: [00:32:11] And so, once we recognize that, that that is where our repository of wealth is. It is a massive injustice for us to not only ask these people living in these struggling neighborhoods to pay for a luxury that other people are unwilling to pay for in their own neighborhoods, but that we are devaluing and not providing the level of service and support that is commensurate with not only just being a human being. I mean, I think we can make that argument and I would be willing to go there. But my gosh, with the level of commitment and the level of contribution that they’re making to the city, my office is in a very poor neighborhood. It’s adjacent to the neighborhood that I live, which is not a very poor neighborhood, but is a, you know, on the edge of that. This neighborhood here is subsidizing the wealthy people who live on the edge of town, on the lakes. There is no reason that this neighborhood should ever want for broken and cracked sidewalks for a rundown park or any of those things. Yet we are required to live with all of that while our city invests millions of dollars out on the edge. It’s an injustice combined with a ludicrously dumb financial approach for the community. And it’s that intersection that I think can bring us together, right?

Eve: [00:33:39] So, I have to disagree on one thing. I think you are mis-labeling yourself.

Charles: [00:33:44] Please.

Eve: [00:33:44] That is a very progressive point of view. Well, it’s the same point of view I hold. I mean, I think these labels are kind of ludicrous. And, you know, you’re, it’s a very pragmatic way to approach it, but it comes to the same conclusion. Right?

Charles: [00:34:01] Here’s where I feel that you and I overlap Eve, and it’s where I find a lot of people politically who identify from a top-down way in different factions over that. You’re a very bottom-up thinker. I’m a very bottom-up thinker. And when you are very bottom up, what you recognize is that cities need people who are sensitive to conservative things, and they need people who are sensitive to progressive things, and they need those people to work together in a place. And that is how cities have always been throughout all of human history. It’s the top down where we get divided and where we struggle and where we kind of lose each other. And so, I try to avoid all those top-down conversations because I don’t find them to be very helpful.

Eve: [00:34:50] No, I agree. And I think political divide really for me comes around some very emotional and personal issues, not necessarily these ones. So, at least for me, that’s true. So, I think we agree on all of this. And in fact, you know, I live in downtown Pittsburgh and, you know, my view out the front door is often a homeless person. And I feel very uncomfortable in places where people are segregated into one class. I don’t think, I don’t know why I feel that discomfort, but I like and need to be where, you know, the whole of mankind is because that for me is reality. So, everyone has a different way they want to live their life, I suppose.

Charles: [00:35:37] I think the idea of discomfort is an interesting one, right? Because what I hear you saying is that I feel discomfort perceiving this in this way, and I’m going to give some validation to that because I think that as humans, we are wired to, for example, find nature to be beautiful, right? In many ways. But nature is nothing but organic chaos.

Eve: [00:36:05] It’s violent.

Charles: [00:36:07] It is. It is. But the beauty emerges from that. And what we try to do as humans is create and impose a certain order on the chaos. And what happens is that you don’t get the emergent beauty then. So, we can look at a city like Charleston and we can go to the old core of Charleston or Pittsburgh, where you live, which has beautiful pre 1930 neighbors. I mean, just gorgeous places.

Eve: [00:36:38] Gorgeous and the architecture in downtown is spectacular. Beautiful.

Charles: [00:36:42] Spectacular. We can go to these places and we can see that what emerged from that messiness and chaos was something very beautiful. And it feels almost natural and organic. The way that a forest does, because it did emerge in this way. But then we can go to a different neighborhood that was built in the 80s or 90s or in the last couple of decades, and we see something that is very orderly and is very clean, but almost like orderly clean in a hospital kind of way. Right. Like everything has its place. Everything’s been taken care of, but it doesn’t feel natural. It feels unnatural. And for people who are sensitive to this, it actually is very disorienting.

Eve: [00:37:28] It’s very disorienting. And my question is, is which one is likely to have more tourists?

Charles: [00:37:36] Well, yeah. Yeah.

Eve: [00:37:38] I mean, I’m an urban designer, not an urban planner. So, I think about, you know, the physical aspect of what makes streets and squares great places to be. And, you know, Italy is really the best place in the world to understand this. And when cities sort of stomp out the ability for those surprising moments through zoning or not permitting a wide variety of density, you start to get creep into that very sterile sort of boring zone. So, I don’t know, for me, it’s like, make room for that chaos a little bit. I like my cities with a little grit in them, you know. My husband always laughs when we drive into the suburbs and I start looking very nervous because there’s something about in my brain I need markers to help me figure out where I am. And I just get lost in the suburb. It’s a sea of all the same to me. And it’s not, it doesn’t, I don’t know where I belong there. Does that make sense?

Charles: [00:38:43] It is disorienting. Yes. Let me tell you a funny story. We had a friend of Strong Towns, actually, one of our early colleagues here, who would write for us occasionally. He was getting married and he had this funny idea to go out and take his engagement photos in a suburb. And you know how most people, if you’ve seen like my daughter, I’ve got a daughter, graduated from high school and she had her grad photos taken. And of course, they go to, you go to a city and you sit on the bench and you stand by the wall and you do. They’re all urban photos or nature photos, right? Like she went out to a park and stood in the park and stuff. But Nate Hood, this friend of mine, went out with him and his wife and took the pictures in a cul-de-sac and in like a strip mall and at like a suburban setting. And it was so, the thing about it is the concept was funny, right? But the photos themselves were so weird because you just don’t, people don’t pose in these environments. They’re not appealing to look at. They’re not appealing to be in. You looked at them and it didn’t feel comfortable or safe. You got this very, it was the abstract, right? It was you felt a level of discomfort looking at these photos, even though it was two very attractive people all dressed up, very nice, posing, very nice. They were in a landscape that was very anti-human, which is what a suburb is. It’s very car oriented, anti-human. And so, they looked ridiculously out of place and it was stunning. I mean, it was visually stunning to see.

Eve: [00:40:33] Interesting. So, do you live in a strong town? Like what are the features of your hometown that you love and what would you fix if you could?

Charles: [00:40:43] I would fix a lot of things if I could. I am blessed with living in a city where my great, great grandparents lived. In fact, I grew up on the family farm that was homesteaded by my great, great grandparents. And I live in the city now near where I used to walk to from school to have lunch with my grandmother when I was a little kid. I take the dog for walks and we go past the cemetery where my ancestors are buried. I go to church right over there, like right outside the window. And on the wall is a plaque that has my grandfather’s name on it because he was a marine in World War Two. And they did something then to, to acknowledge that. So, I am here because this is where I am from and when I acknowledge that I can see a lot of the beauty in this place. But when I lose touch with that, which we all occasionally do, I start to get very frustrated. A lot of the early strong towns writing was me voicing frustration with my city, which I think in a lot of ways has become stronger over the last decade, has evolved in our thinking. There’s an article in the paper today about how we’re looking to get rid of our parking minimums throughout the core of the downtown, which is 20 years overdue, but better late than never.

Eve: [00:42:16] What city is this?

Charles: [00:42:18] Well, Brainerd, Minnesota. You probably have never heard of this. It’s a couple hours north of Minneapolis, Saint Paul.

Eve: [00:42:23] Parking minimum reduction is taking hold rapidly. But anyway, please go on. Yes.

Charles: [00:42:28] Well, my city is 14,000 people. So, that gives you some context. And it’s not 14. Yeah, it’s not 14,000 people adjacent to a larger city. It’s 14,000 people two hours away from Minneapolis. So, we’re a long way away. Yeah, but, you know, I have found a lot of beauty here in working with my neighbors and in doing things that are very Strong Towns. This summer we have a park, a small little neighborhood park that’s kind of been neglected and overlooked. And some of us are getting together, and as soon as the snow melts, which it’s the end of March and it was below zero last night, so I don’t know what is going on. It might be June before we get rid of the snow here. But we are going to go out and spend a summer making this park a more special place just with the resources that we have and the elbow grease and the that kind of stuff. So, I feel like we have aspects of a strong town and like any place, it is a work in progress and a struggle. But I see it starting to move in the right direction. And I guess ultimately I’m confident and I think this is a core part of being part of a strong town. I’m confident that my contribution will not be wasted. Like I’m confident that we won’t get there. Like this is always going to be a journey and there’s always going to be things that frustrate me. But I am more confident now that the things I do are going to matter and will make life better for people who come after me. And a decade ago, I certainly couldn’t say that.

Eve: [00:44:20] Well, that’s a great note to end this podcast on. I certainly appreciate what you do and I really enjoyed talking to you, Chuck.

Charles: [00:44:32] Thank you, Eve. That is very sweet. And I hope you know that I follow your work as well. And I feel like your part of the answer is an important part of the answer. This whole Small Change, bottom-up funding concept is a very radical way to activate capital in ways that I think connects our heart to our pocketbooks and can be, is essential to transforming our places. So, I’m a huge fan of yours as well. And I’m grateful you took the time to put this together. Thank you.

Eve: [00:45:22] I hope you enjoyed today’s guest and our deep dive. You can find out more about this episode or others you might have missed on the show notes page at RethinkRealEstateforGood.co. There’s lots to listen to there. Please support this podcast and all the great work my guests do by sharing it with others, posting about it on social media, or leaving a rating and a review. To catch all the latest from me, you can follow me on LinkedIn. Even better, if you’re ready to dabble in some impact investing, head on over to smallchange.co where I spend most of my time. A special thanks to David Allardice for his excellent editing of this podcast and original music. And a big thanks to you for spending your time with me today. We’ll talk again soon. But for now, this is Eve Picker signing off to go make some change.

Image courtesy of Charles Marohn

Toronto

May 30, 2023

Canada has opened its arms to immigrants. We tried to build a wall. This is how that decision plays out.

Drive just 5 hours directly north from Pittsburgh, and weave around the Great Lakes a little, and you’ll be in Toronto, perhaps the most multicultural and multi-racial city in the world.

With the foreign-born population in Toronto now over 50%, New York City is in the rear view mirror. Pittsburgh is not even a speck on the horizon, with only 4% foreign-born residents. This multi-cultural population gap plays out in so many visible and important ways that it’s impossible to even begin to list them here. But what’s most visible when you visit Toronto is that minorities are fully-integrated into every walk of life. They are economists, real estate developers, taxi cab drivers and business owners. They have turned Toronto into a very colorful mosaic indeed. Every corner of Toronto is a thriving, vital metropolis.

And then there is the construction. There is not a block that has escaped. The foreign-born population is expected to rise by another 500,000 immigrants over the next year. As Ontario works to add 1.5 million new homes by 2031, construction in Toronto is unrivaled by any other North American city. According to the RLB Crane Index for North America, Toronto, at a count of 238, has more cranes in use than all U.S. cities combined. And while Seattle (in second place) has a commendable 51 cranes, Pittsburgh is not on the list at all.

This dynamic metropolis with a core of soaring skyscrapers is not shying away from immigration. In India, Canada is hailed as pretty much the holy land. Adverts abound in Punjab urging one to “Study English, move to Canada.” Along the way, someone (collectively) decided that an immigrant is an economic driver and will bring prosperity. And that decision defined the remarkable course of Toronto and Ontario.

They decided to encourage immigrants. We decided to build a wall.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

sign up here

APPLY TO BE A PODCAST GUEST

More to See

The Seven

August 29, 2025

Real estate and women.

February 26, 2025

Oculis Domes.

February 25, 2025

FOLLOW

  • LinkedIn
  • RSS

Tag Cloud

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

Footer

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

Recent

  • Vacant Upper Floors: Unlocking Downtown Housing
  • Podcast hiatus.
  • Pop City: Changing the Conversation
  • The Mulberry
  • Mount Vernon Plaza

Search

Categories

Climate Community Crowdfunding Development Equity Fintech Investing Mobility Proptech Visionary

 

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