Durham and Chisinau: Urban Revitalization through Adaptive Re-Use of Industrial Structures

1. Durham and Chisinau:Urban Revitalization through Adaptive Re-Use of Industrial Structures Urban Economics Kseniya Benderskaya

2. An Overview • Durham’s recent revival of its downtown’s economic and social activity can be used as a model for other cities with similar post-industrial disinvestment. • Besides being relevant for analogous American cities, Durham’s redevelopment strategies are even more pertinent for post-Soviet cities that are still undergoing industrial downsizing and could learn to prevent further urban degeneration.

3. A Durham-Chisinau Comparison? • Why? • Chisinau(Capital city of Moldova) • Is undergoing economic and political restructuring from centralized to market economy • One of USSR’s key industrial hubs • Soviet collapse in early 1990s-> ongoing deindustrialization = thousands of sq. ft of recently abandoned factory space in and around the city’s center

4. Its historic center is undergoing a wave of new commercial and residential construction- making room by demolition of architectural heritage • …While its idle factory/warehouse structures are wasting away on strategically valuable land. • These formerly industrial areas may develop into urban pockets of decay • Can Durham’s paradigm of facility rehabilitation become part of Chisinau’s sustainable growth strategy?

6. The Aim of this Project • Identify the specific catalysts for central Durham’s rebirth • assess the potential for and implications of its tactics in a place like Chisinau • Grounding this comparative analysis in actual examples of redevelopment efforts in both cities

7. What’s the Problem? • The specific examples in this discussion not only account for the disparate demographics of these two cities but also provide a platform for assessing the efficiency of Durham’s approach in aiding Chisinau’s spatial wastefulness.

8. So, How Did Durham Do It? • Catalysts of Durham’ successful revitalization fall in 3 broad categories: • Legacy of historically grandiose but inoperative industrial edifices (tobacco warehouses, cigarette factories, and nearby mill buildings.) • Well-coordinated pro-business leadership of local officials, non-profit organizations, and grassroots’ representatives • Local, state, and federal monetary incentives to attract Big Business, young entrepreneurs, and art community to downtown

9. A Bit on Durham’s Industrial Epoch • Durham’s role in the national tobacco industry for much of the 20thcentury. • Post-industrial reorientation from cigarette manufacturing toward services and innovative entrepreneurship • Suburban sprawl in the 1970s • Demise of Durham’s tobacco giants such as the American Tobacco Company in the late 1980s and the Liggett Group a decade late • left the city with over 2.5 million square feet of empty factory space • stigma of undesirable real estate,- barrier for the city’s regeneration efforts.

10. Adaptive Re-Use • Modernizing old warehouses into appealing dwellings and commercial venues • The shift in the public’s perception (urban ruins to commercial assets) did not happen spontaneously or overnight. • Use of urban “mega-projects” like American Tobacco Campus and West Villageto galvanize spatial change • Exemplify political initiatives, foresight, and private-public relations necessary for successful redevelopment

11. Durham’s Local Politics • Urban Liberalism Dimension • Durham’s City Council and County Commission • harnessing private investment for downtown’s revitalization plans. • DBAP scandal (ignoring referendum) Though this deal cost several councilmen their elected positions • Paying $16 mil. to keep Durham Bulls • Would the American Tobacco Complex as we know it exist? • Megaprojects as “stage setters” • ATC; Liggett &Myers West Village (600 luxury apartments)

12. Source:http://www.flickr.com/photos/westvillagetwo/3217236174/sizes/z/in/set-72157612828004899/Source:http://www.flickr.com/photos/westvillagetwo/3217236174/sizes/z/in/set-72157612828004899/ Liggett & Myers Redevelopment – West Village Residential and Commercial project

13. Creation of DDI • Downtown Durham Inc. • business league consisting of city council representatives, entrepreneurs, and non-profit organizations • Durham’s Downtown Master Plan • grassroots participation in strategic planning • Mass surveys, charettes, interviews with stakeholders

14. Government’s Monetary Incentives for Private Developers • tax reductions and/or partial funding for a project’s infrastructure. • Ex: Capitol Broadcasting Co. • 20% federal historic rehabilitation tax credits • federal new markets tax credits • 2 projects, Hill Warehouse and the Lucky Strike Buildingsqualified for the NC mill rehabilitation tax credit, (another 30% tax credit for development expenses).

15. Administration’s Energy and Leadership for Piloting new projects • constantly looking for additional federal funding opportunities • Business Improvement District • Community Development Block Grants and Intermediary Relending Program • total public sector expenditures to reach $300 million by 2012

16. Downtown Durham: “Luring Young Professionals with Amenities” • High-tech startups; American Underground • Joystick Labs, Bronto Software, Inc., Intersouth Partners, Square 1 and Launchbox Digital • “More than ever businesses and street life in revitalized downtown offer tech executives what clean labs, glass offices and concrete can’t” (Local Tech Wire 10/29/2010) • Attracting the arts community

17. Can Chisinau learn from Durham? • Comparing Chisinau to Durham

18. On a Map

19. Chisinau Post-1992 • Transition from industrial to service-based economy • Industrial downsizing; deconcentration of industrial facilities in the center • 19 industrial zones that dominate 2800 hectares of land and contain over 1,500 factories of various  profiles  This seems like a huge amount, even for a Soviet city. • 36 factory complexes in the center

20. Post 1992 Cont. • current factory stock was constructed during the late 1950-1980s • Durham’s developers are capitalizing on the aesthetic/historic value of the former warehouses • Chisinau’s factories draw investors for more practical reasons- buildings are equipped with seismic resistant technology- expensive

22. Context for Current Development Ventures • Production volume has declined to 36% of its capacity in 1990. • Government owns 61.3% of once-privatized factory space (repossession for debts) • 40% of production facilities in CBD- inoperative • Government also owns 89% of land in the city

23. Chisinau’s Attempts at Downtown Revitalization • attempted urban revitalization via2conflicting approaches • adaptive re-use of old structures vs. new construction and demolition. • The following analysis of these 2 policies shows that Durham’s adaptive re-use paradigm is most efficient for Chisinau’s growth.

24. Comparative Analysis • The “Al’fa” and “Tracom” projects- privately sponsored conversions of derelict factories into mixed-use developments • SKYTOWER Business Center and Megapolis Mall - urban revitalization by adding new structures to the landscape. • Which model has been more efficient for Chisinau?

25. Key Differences Between Durham’s and Chisinau’s Leadership • Chisinau’s support for adaptive reuse of old facilities has only been declaratory thus far • Chisinau’s General Plan 2025 and “UrbanProject” • Interview with A. Gordiv • no coordination or communication between city, municipal, and national government branches

26. Chisinau’s Policies- Economic Incentives? • Chisinau has never engaged in a public-private partnership of Durham’s nature • No tax incentives; no partial funding for infrastructure • Corruption within the government actually inhibits business interests and fair competition for real estate and land • Interview with N. Zaporozhan

27. What Attracted Private Investors to Convert the Old “Tracom” and “Al’fa” Factories? • Chaotic transition policies regarding land and real estate privatization • Paying 1/30 of the parcels’ market values • Little competition in land auctions; bribes • Real-estate “add-ons”

28. Need for Sustainable Economic Development of the CBD • Chisinau lost over 10% of its “protected” historic properties to make room for new business • In 2009, seventy 19th century homes in the historic district perished • The modernization of unused factories in Chisinau have attracted and retained small local business in formerly neglected areas • Tracom and Al’fa ventures are good examples

29. Re-Use is Better for Homegrown Business • “Tracom”- • shut down production in 2004 • the city inherited over 36 hectares of industrial space • with four large plants of concrete and steel • Located just “2 steps away” from CBD • attracted 4 different investors, each only needing a quarter of the space

30. “Tracom”

31. More “Tracom” Source: http://wikimapia.org/#lat=47.0332796&lon=28.8228035&z=15&l=0&m=b&tag=4979

32. Why This Redeveloped Space attracts Local Business • Cheaper construction= cheaper rent for tenants • Rents are 4.5 times lower in these mixed-use complexes than in new business centers downtown • Operates at 90% capacity; high retention rates • Theses businesses specialize in construction, home improvement, and legal and real estate services- which are in high demand

33. Distribution of Consumption Expenditures in Kishinev- Aspects of the Standard of Living of the Population in 2009: Results of the Household Budget Survey. National Bureau of Statistics of the Republic of Moldova 2009.Chisinau 2010. Pg. 53

34. Old “Al’fa” • The 17-hectare property that has once supplied USSR with TVs and other electronics now makes room for 158 small firms • Affordable leases (12 Euro/sq m per month), central location • diverse services: from children’s school preparatory programs and clubs to administrative offices for auto-repairs and cheap retail- in sync with population’s demand.

35. Al’fa’s newer section, 1985

36. Al’fa’s First Section, 1930s Construction

37. “Al’fa” and “Tracom” • Reduce business’ leasing expenditures • Divert more traffic from center’s main streets • Opportunities for parking- a rarity • Seem to attract local businesses that are better matches for local consumer needs than the more elite downtown establishments • reflect of purchasing power

38. SKYTOWER AND MEGAPOLIS MALL • SKYTOWER-Moldova’s fist “Grade A” international office complex

39. Cont. Source:http://www.rabota.md/image/megapolis-mall.jpg

40. Skytower • 56 euro per square meter (excluding amenities)- to cover construction costs • could only find tenants for 60% of its 2,000-m2 space • Catering to Moldova’s oligarchs and foreign officials. – very small segment of managerial positions in Chisinau • Lost 1/3 elite tenants during recession • The 700-m2 space reserved for an elite restaurant failed to attract buyers

41. Megapolis, Not Much Better • Follows Skytower’s business trajectory • A Chinese Investment (~80 mil) • Moldovan businesses could not keep up with the rents • Saved by a Ukrainian grocery chain • Boutiques outcompeted by cheap domestic clothing made in Ionel’s Textile Factory right downtown

42. Concluding Thoughts… • revitalization through renovation of vacant industrial structures is not only a “greener” approach to the center’s renaissance but one that engenders new functions for the built environment of a different age. • Moldova has enough construction- it does not need new buildings, just has to re-use old ones smartly.

43. Current Housing Shortage and Future Development • Factories Bucuria and Ionel are scheduled to move out of center next year • Could be used for multifamily apartments • Keep developers away from destroying historical structures • A need for strong political coordination and leadership in Chisinau • Sustainable growth is key

44. Bucuria Source:http://commondatastorage.googleapis.com/static.panoramio.com/photos/original/10227325.jpg