LAC Cities Challenge

IDB Cities Network

LAC Cities Challenge Workshop Case Studies: Local Economic Development Agencies (LEDA)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

4 Background 6 Agenda LAC Cities Workshop 16 Agenda Expert Workshop: Local Economic Development Agencies (LEDA) 20 City Profiles and Project Team Members 38 New York 52 Philadelphia 68 Washington D.C.

Background

The IDB Cities Network is proud to have launched the ‘LAC Cities Challenge’, an open call for proposals that invited local governments in the region to present innovative urban regeneration projects that impact local economic development. In total 29 cities from 11 countries sent a proposal. Each of the cities’ proposals was submitted by a team composed of three members, with a representative from the public sector, private sector, and local economic development agency. The eight winning proposals were reviewed, evaluated, and selected by a diverse panel of experts. The winning cities will join the ‘LAC Cities Workshop’, a knowledge sharing program with New York, Philadelphia, and Washington D.C.

BACKGROUND

LAC CITIES CHALLENGE

5 5

LAC Cities Workshop The objective of the ‘LAC Cities Workshop’ is to transfer hands-on knowledge about economic development in cities, centering the analysis and knowledge exchange on specific urban development projects financed by the private sector. From November 4-8, the eight winning teams will take part in the workshop, that will take place in New York, Philadelphia and Washington D.C. During the workshop, the teams will learn from the experience of these three cities in developing, structuring, and implementing urban regeneration projects with private sector financing that impacted local growth. Through the lens and experience of local economic development agencies (LEDA), this high-level knowledge exchange program aims to: (i) Identify and help cities develop, structure, and implement large-scale urban regeneration projects. (ii) Develop guidelines, build capacity and promote best practices so that cities and private sector entities can partner on economic development projects and initiatives. (iii) Promote private sector involvement, both through advocacy and capital mobilization, to increase economic growth and improve the urban sustainability of the cities. KEY THEMES

• Innovative financial strategies (rezoning of the area, value of land, land value capture, tax increment financing, property taxes). • Stakeholder engagement (public sector, private sector and civil society). • Legal and financial framework • Economic development strategy • Actions necessary to attract private development. • Coordination strategy between all the stakeholders involved.

SUNDAY NOVEMBER 3

PARTICIPANTS ARRIVE IN NEW YORK CITY Hotel: Marriott Courtyard New York Downtown Manhattan / World Trade Center Area 7:00–10:00 PM WELCOME COCKTAIL Location: Serafina Tribeca

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4 NEW YORK CITY

8:00 AM

MEET IN THE LOBBY OF THE MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL

9:00-9:30 AM

INTRODUCTION OF THE CITIES TEAMS AND THE IDB TEAM Location: Department of City Planning, Manhattan

9:30-10:15 AM

NYC DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING (DCP) BRIEFING Location: Department of City Planning, Manhattan The DCP briefing will introduce the teams to their strategic objectives, public engagement strategies, and the process by which the DCP executes projects, from defining key players, to establishing timelines and evaluation methods. Key partnerships will also be discussed.

AGENDA LAC CITIES WORKSHOP

AGENDA

Speakers Lara Mérida, Director, Neighborhood Studies, DCP Lara Mérida is the Director for Neighborhood Studies at DCP. Lara oversees all aspects of community focused planning initiatives and provides strategic guidance on outreach, agency planning policies and priorities. Previously, Lara served as the Deputy Director for Community Planning at the Boston Planning and Development Agency. Among her projects, she assisted in the design and management of Imagine Boston 2030, a plan that establishes a city-wide vision and goals; the master-planning of the South Boston Waterfront Innovation District; and the coordination of Boston’s allocated federal funds from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Claudia Herasme, Chief Urban Designer, DCP Claudia Herasme serves as Chief Urban Designer at DCP. Since joining the Department in 2003, Claudia has been involved in a wide variety of projects relating to public space design and policy, streetscape regulations, active design and wellbeing guidelines, and large-scale waterfront developments. Key projects include the Design Standards for Waterfront Public Access Areas, the Greenpoint-Williamsburg Waterfront Access Plan, and the Coney Island Comprehensive Plan. She also served as Associate Editor of the 2011 Zoning Handbook. Claudia holds a Master of

Science in Architecture and Urban Design from Columbia University, and an Architecture degree from Universidad Nacional Pedro Henriquez Ureña in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

NEW YORK CITY

Sylvia Xiaomeng Li is a senior planner/ team leader in the Manhattan Office of the Department of City Planning (DCP), overseeing a portfolio of projects and planning initiatives on the west side of Manhattan, including West Village, Hudson Square, SoHo/NoHo, Meatpacking District, Chelsea, Hudson Yards, Clinton, and Upper West Side. Prior to joining DCP, Sylvia worked as a research assistant at Center for an Urban Future, an NYC-based policy think-tank. Sylvia holds a Master’s Degree in City and Regional Planning from Cornell University, a Bachelor of Engineering from Peking University, and a Professional Certificate in Real Estate Finance from Baruch College.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4 NEW YORK CITY

10:15-10:45 AM NYC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (EDC) BRIEFING During this briefing, EDC will present NYC’s vision and strategy for economic development, centered around growth and employment, discuss Plan One NYC, and cover the financial and legal structuring of key urban regeneration projects.

Speaker: Julieanne Herskowitz, Vice-President, EDC Julieanne is the Vice-President of EDC in Manhattan, where she leads public-private planning and development projects for the Borough of Brooklyn, including the East New York Industrial Business Zone Planning Study. In 2014, she was an urban and regional policy fellow of the United States German Marshall Fund, during which she did research on London’s infrastructure financing models and how it could relate to New York. Julieanne holds a Master’s degree in City Planning with a concentration in Public Private Development from the University of Pennsylvania and Bachelor of Arts in Romance Languages, with a Minor in Growth and Structure of Cities from Haverford College. 10:45-11:15AM

11:15-11:40 AM

ONE REGION: PLANNING FOR A STRONG AND JUST METROPOLIS Speaker: Carolyn Grossman Meagher, Director of Regional Planning, NYC Department of City Planning Carolyn Grossman Meagher heads the newly formed Regional Planning Division within New York City’s Planning Department. Initiated in June 2016 following a recommendation from One New York, the city’s most recent strategic plan, the Regional Planning Division seeks to support New York City’s collaboration with governments across the region on issues of shared planning priority. Prior to this position, Carolyn served as the Director of Governmental Affairs for the Department of City Planning. She holds a Masters in Urban Planning with distinction from the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the New College of Florida. COFFEE BREAK

11:40 - 12:15 PM PLANNING FRAMEWORK FOR WEST CHELSEA AND HUDSON YARDS SPECIAL DISTRICTS Speakers: Sylvia Li, Team Leader, Manhattan Borough Office, DCP

AGENDA LAC CITIES WORKSHOP

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4

Nabeela Malik, Associate Planner, Manhattan Borough Office, DCP Nabeela Malik is an associate planner in the Manhattan Office of the Department of City Planning (DCP) focused on projects in Chelsea, Hudson Yards, Hells Kitchen/ Clinton, and the Upper West Side. Prior to joining DCP, Nabeela worked on the innovation and entrepreneurship team at the United Nations Foundation in Washington, DC. She holds a Master’s Degree in City Design and Social Science from the London School of Economics and a Bachelor’s Degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University. 12:15- 12:30PM

INTRODUCTION TO SITE VISITS IN NYC Speaker: Claudia Herasme, DCP

12:30 - 1:30 PM

LUNCH Location: Department of City Planning, Manhattan

2:30 - 6:00 PM

SITE VISIT: HUNTERS POINT SOUTH, QUEENS Location: Hunters Point South, Queens This visit will introduce the cities teams to affordable and public housing projects in New York City.

Speakers: Jaclyn Sachs, Director of Strategy and Operations, Office of Neighborhood Strategies, NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) Jaclyn Sachs is the Director of Strategy and Operations in the Office of Neighborhood Strategies at the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD). She leads a variety of initiatives and services to support affordable housing planning and policy across the city, as put forth in the Mayor’s Housing Plan. Previously she served as a senior planner in HPD, managing the land-use approvals process for several affordable housing development projects and planning initiatives. She holds a master’s in urban planning degree from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design.

NEW YORK CITY

Jeong-Ah Choi, City Planner, Office of the Queens Borough President

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5 NEW YORK CITY

7:40 AM

Speaker: Angela Cavaluzzi, President, Hudson Yards Development Corporation Architect, is an experienced leader in public and private urban development and has directed a wide portfolio of largescale planning and development projects from inception to implementation throughout New York City. As Director of the Mayor’s Office of Capital Projects from 2012 to 2016, she oversaw and supported a $1Billion plus portfolio of Mayoral priority capital projects to ensure expeditious and cost effective completion. Projects included Hudson Yards, The Shed, the High Line, the World Trade Center and the Cornell Tech Campus. As President of the Hudson Yards Development Corporation, she works with private and public stakeholders and consultants to design, plan and construct the Public Infrastructure including the Hudson Park and Boulevard and the extension of #7 Subway.

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 5 NEW YORK CITY

4:00-5:00 PM

MEET IN THE LOBBY OF THE MARRIOTT COURTYARD HOTEL

9:00-12:00 PM SITE VISIT: BROOKLYN NAVY YARD LOCATION: BROOKLYN NAVY YARD, BUILDING 77, BROOKLYN, NYC During the visit to the Brooklyn Navy Yard the teams will learn how old manufacturing facilities became the location for creation of new innovative jobs, the actions necessary to attract private investment, and the stakeholder involvement to make the project happen.

Ana Traverso-Krejcarek, Manager, Friends of the Highline Sociologist and urban planner with a passion for community development. She has a portfolio of projects for government and non-profit organizations in the US, Brazil, and Bolivia, with published work in urban studies and public policy. Her work gained notoriety in New York City after she created the Urban Lab for Open Spaces. Ana currently manages the High Line Network at Friends of the High Line.

1:00 - 2:00 PM LUNCH Location: Little Spain Market, Hudson Yards, Manhattan

SITE VISIT: HUDSON YARDS DEVELOPMENT, MANHATTAN Location: 10 Hudson Yards, NY, NY, 10001 Hudson Yards showcases just how powerful public-private partnerships can be in the catalytic development of the city.

SITE VISIT: THE HIGH LINE, MANHATTAN Location: The High Line, 34st and 12th Ave The High Line, traversing above the tops of buildings on the West Side of Manhattan, is an example of how community engagement can salvage transportation infrastructure in new and innovative ways that contribute to the city’s sustainable development.

Speakers: Adam Ganser, Vice President for Planning and Design, Friends of the Highline As Vice President, Adam oversees planning, design and construction of the High Line, as well as zoning advocacy and City and real estate partnerships. Adam also directs strategic initiatives at FHL including the development of a network of urban industrial reuse open space projects. Prior to FHL, Adam worked for Enrique Norten at TEN Arquitectos in New York City and led the architectural design of Orange County Great Park. The project received the National 2009 Institute Honor Award for Regional and Urban Design from the American Institute of Architects. Adam received a Master of Architecture from Yale University, a Master of Real Estate Development from Columbia University, and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Speaker: Shani Leibowitz, Senior Vice President, Planning and Transportation, Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corporation Shani manages the planning and transportation departments, focusing on strategies to support and guide the Yard’s growth. Before coming to the Yard in 2007 as Deputy Director of Development and Planning, she began her planning career at BFJ Planning. She holds a Bachelor’s in Journalism and Business from Indiana University and a Master’s in Urban Planning from NYU’s Wagner School of Public Service. She belongs to the American Institute of Certified Planners and the American Planning Association.

2:00-4:00 PM

AGENDA LAC CITIES WORKSHOP

Perris Straughter, Assistant Commissioner for Planning and Pre-Development, NYC Department of Housing Preservation Perris Straughter is the Director of Queens and Staten Island Planning for New York City’s Department of Housing Preservation and Development. He is leading planning efforts for thousands of new affordable housing units for these boroughs, including facilitating the redevelopment of over 100 acres of city-owned land. Previously Perris was Supervising Planner in the City of Newark, NJ, where he coordinated planning and zoning approvals processes for the City. He helped lead the comprehensive overhaul of Newark’s zoning code and master plan. During his tenure in Newark he also managed a $20 million commercial revitalization program as well as Newark’s public art program.

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 4

5:00-8:00 PM

PARTICIPANTS WILL TRAVEL TO PHILADELPHIA Hotel: Pod Philly Hotel

PHILADELPHIA

9:30 AM

MEET IN LOBBY OF POD HOTEL PHILADELPHIA

10:00-11:00 AM PHILADELPHIA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (PIDC) BRIEFING Location: Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation Office Introduction to Economic Development in Philadelphia and an overview of one of the most successful economic development authorities in the United States: the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation. This public authority is over 70 years old and has guided the growth of the city through many individual investments and partnerships.

Speakers: Jaime Flaherty, Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer Jaime provides expertise in market, financial, fiscal, and strategic analysis with over twelve years of experience in real estate and economic development consulting. She oversees project management, detailed market research, complex financial modeling, and tailored quantitative analysis. In addition to her work with clients, Jaime manages the internal operations of the firm.

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6 PHILADELPHIA

Alex Feldman, Managing Director, U3 Alex has served as a project manager for U3 Advisor’s work in Midtown Detroit. Working with key philanthropic and civic stakeholders and 3 major anchor institutions, U3 created and implemented a successful “Anchor Strategy” that leveraged the demand of the institutions into economic development and place making initiatives.

Speaker: Ann Nevins, Chief Strategy and Communications Officer, PIDC As Chief Strategy and Communications Officer, Anne Bovaird Nevins leads the team responsible for managing the integration of strategic communications, product innovation, resource development, stakeholder relationships, and business growth initiatives. This team drives a pipeline of new business and creates and sustains external partnerships to achieve PIDC’s mission. 11:15-11:45 AM

AVENUE OF THE ARTS REVITALIZATION WALKING TOUR Location: Avenue of the Arts Exploration of cultural development and office building conversions to residential along the Avenue of the Arts, a revitalized cultural avenue in the Center City. Visit Kimmel Center concert hall.

Speaker: Uwe Brandes, Professor of the Practice, Urban & Regional Planning at Georgetown University Uwe S. Brandes is professor of the practice, faculty director of the Urban & Regional Planning Program, faculty director of the Georgetown Global Cities Initiative and affiliated faculty in the Science, Technology, and International Affairs program at the Walsh School of Foreign Service. Brandes is a distinguished scholar-practitioner in the field of urban design and sustainable urban development, with more than 25 years of experience in the planning, design, and development of new buildings, the public realm, and development partnership. 12:00-1:30 PM

ANCHOR INSTITUTIONS AS DRIVERS OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, U3 ADVISORS (Lunch to be catered) Location: U3 Advisors offices Briefing on how universities can be drivers of economic development. Philadelphia is a city of institutions and historically a weak economy. New strategies developed in Philadelphia have become a national best practice as hospitals and universities are harnessed as drivers of economic development.

AGENDA LAC CITIES WORKSHOP

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6

Nicole Buchholz, Associate Nicole has public and private work experience in Philadelphia and New York City. Nicole’s work focuses in activating public spaces in underserved communities through innovative placemaking strategies, including the Pop-Up Pool Project and the Roosevelt Pop-Up Park in Camden. 1:45-2:15 PM

SITE VISIT: UNIVERSITY CITY DISTRICT: A CASE STUDY IN CIVIC PARTNERSHIP Location: Bus tour of University City A short tour through the district, to see first-hand how universities can propel development projects in cities and to make university life safer while advancing economic development associated with university functions. Speaker: Jaime Flaherty

3:00-4:15 PM SITE VISIT: PHILADELPHIA NAVY YARD, A PIDC LEGACY PROJECT Location: Philadelphia Navy Yard, 4747 South Broad Street, Building 101, Suite 120, Bus tour of Philadelphia Navy Yard, observing the long-term reuse of a military site and example of a place-based economic development. This is one of the most important public-private redevelopment projects in the history of Philadelphia.

Speaker: Prema Gupta, Senior Vice President, Navy Yard Planning and Real Estate Development Prema leads the team that manages all aspects of property planning, leasing, real estate development, operations, marketing and communications for PIDC at The Navy Yard. 4:30-5:30 PM

SITE VISIT: PHILADELPHIA NAVY YARD, A PRIVATE REAL ESTATE DEVELOPERS PERSPECTIVE Location: Philadelphia Navy Yard

How does the private sector view public-private partnerships? This discussion will explore how the private sector investors and developers work with the private sector.

PHILADELPHIA

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7 WASHINGTON D.C.

Speaker: Alan Razak, Principal, AthenianRazak LLC Alan Razak is Principal of AthenianRazak LLC, a Philadelphia-based company that consults on, creates, and manages real estate. Alan has four decades of commercial real estate experience, encompassing development and project management, finance, architectural design, and consulting. His diverse real estate background includes managing the development process, both as owner and on a consulting basis as owner’s representative, in project types including residential, office and commercial, as well as specialized expertise in data centers and other highly technical facilities. 5:30-8:00 PM

12:30-1:30 PM LUNCH AT UNION MARKET: A FOOD INDUSTRY BUSINESS INCUBATOR Location: La Cosecha, Union Market, 1280 4th St NE, Washington, DC 20002 Union Market is the private redevelopment of the old wholesale food market in Washington. What was formerly a specialized use within the city, the market is now being transformed into a new mixed-use neighborhood. One of the signature accomplishments of the project is the creation of a new business environment which encourages new chefs to innovate and experiment at a very low cost, due to a unique sharing of industrial kitchen equipment. Speaker: Uwe Brandes

PARTICIPANTS TRAVEL TO WASHINGTON D.C.

Hotel: Eaton Hotel - 1201 K St NW, Washington, DC 20005

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 7 WASHINGTON D.C.

8:30 AM 9:00-10:30AM

MEET IN THE LOBBY OF EATON HOTEL

2:30-4:00 PM SITE VISIT: GEORGETOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT, A BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR A HISTORIC NEIGHBORHOOD How do the public sector and private sector come together to preserve the city’s oldest historic district and make it accessible to a broad audience? The Georgetown Business Improvement District is an example of a public-private partnership designed to engage businesses in the economic development of a historic treasure.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF PLANNING, AN OVERVIEW OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT Location: District of Columbia Office of Planning After 50 years of population decline, Washington, D.C. is now one of the most desirable places to invest in the world. A new generation of public-private partnerships have created new neighborhoods, while also protecting existing neighborhoods with historic preservation and affordable housing. Several large-site development projects have transformed the perception of the city and have attracted new residents.

Speaker: Joe Sternlieb, CEO, Georgetown Business Improvement District (BID) Joe has over 20 years of experience in city planning in Washington, DC. A graduate of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with a Master’s Degree in City Planning, his experience prior to joining the BID includes his role as VP of Acquisitions for Georgetown-based EastBanc, one of Washington’s premier mixed-use development firms; almost 10 years as deputy director of the Downtown DC BID, the nation’s third largest BID, leading a variety of major civic projects including the DC Circulator system and citywide visitor wayfinding system.

Speaker: Sakina Khan, Deputy Director for Citywide Strategy Sakina Khan is the Deputy Director for Citywide Strategy and Analysis at the DC Office of Planning. She oversees the State Data Center, Geographic Information Systems as well as systems planning related to housing, transportation, sustainability, economic development and capital facilities. Ms. Khan was previously Senior Economic Planner, specializing in economic development analysis with a focus on emerging sectors and neighborhoods. In this role, she led numerous strategic planning, policy and implementation efforts, including the Creative DC Action Agenda, the DC Vibrant Retail Toolkit, the Retail Action Strategy, creative placemaking, and the St. Elizabeths Innovation Strategy.

10:30-12:00 PM SITE VISIT: THE WHARF DC, PPP PROJECT CASE STUDY Location: The Wharf, 1110 Maine Ave, SW, Washington, D.C., 20024 Site visit along the Southwest Waterfront. We will visit one

of the most complex projects in Washington, DC that is only possible because of a public-private partnership between the city and a private developer. The project is 50% completed and already very successful in creating a new space in the city which is a destination for: city residents, suburban residents, and tourists. Speaker: Uwe Brandes

AGENDA LAC CITIES WORKSHOP

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6

4:00-5:00 PM EXPERIENCE GEORGETOWN VIA WALKING!

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8 WASHINGTON D.C.

5:30-8:00 PM LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES: CUTTING EDGE EVENT Location: Inter-American Development Bank 15

Agenda Expert Workshop: Local Economic Development Agencies (LEDA) FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8

8:30-9:00 AM

REGISTRATION OF PARTICIPANTS WELCOME AND OPENING REMARKS Federico Basañes, Manager Knowledge, Innovation, and Communications, IDB Federico Basañes is the Manager of the Knowledge, Innovation and Communication Sector, from which he promotes the generation and dissemination of knowledge and innovation to strengthen public and private sector capacities in Latin America and the Caribbean. Mr. Basañes served as manager of Knowledge and Learning at the IDB (2014-2018). In this position, he strengthened the role of open knowledge as a key tool for development, generating an ecosystem to leverage the Bank’s knowledge and experiences to increase development in the region. Mr. Basañes was head of the Water and Sanitation Division (2007-2013), a role in which he was responsible for the Bank’s pipeline in water, sanitation and solid waste management; generation and dissemination of sectorial knowledge; management of specific Funds, as well as the relationships with partners in the public and private sectors within the different initiatives and platforms.

WASHINGTON D.C.

9:15-9:30 AM

WORKSHOP OBJECTIVES AND REVIEW OF THE AGENDA Gilberto Chona, Lead Specialist, Urban Development Economics Housing and Urban Development Division, IDB An expert in the formulation and supervision of Action Plans for the intermediate cities of Central America and the Caribbean. In 2015-2017, he served as Regional Coordinator for the Emerging and Sustainable Cities Program (ESC) in the IDB’s Housing and Urban Development Division. He also formulates and oversees urban regeneration studies and investments and human settlements upgrading projects in several countries. His 27 years of experience with projects at the IDB include fiscal, institutional and operational analysis in Mexico, Central America, Panama, the Dominican Republic and, most recently, the Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Costa Rica,

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8

Jamaica, Nicaragua, Suriname and Trinidad & Tobago. His current interests are fiscal sustainability, leveraging private urban investments, the institutional governance of cities and smart city solutions. Mr. Chona holds a degree in Urban Planning (Urbanist) from Venezuela’s Simón Bolívar University (1986) and a master’s in city planning from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology – MIT (1991).

WASHINGTON D.C.

9:30-9:50 AM

PRESENTATION: THE WHY OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES IN METROPOLITAN CITIES Pablo Vaggione, Urban Management Expert (formerly UN-Habitat) Pablo Vaggione is a spatial planning and urban and regional development specialist. In his 20 years of experience in emerging markets, he has assembled top international consortiums and led complex multidisciplinary teams on the field, working in projects supported by government agencies, development companies and most major International Financial Institutions, including the Asian Development Bank, CAF – Banco de Desarrollo de América Latina, Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank Group. Pablo has developed an extensive portfolio of operationally useful knowledge management, facilitation and training activities. He is the author of UN-HABITAT’s Urban Planning for City Leaders, a guide for emerging cities intending to fill the gap between the technical and the policy aspects of urban planning. He has advised Singapore’s Center for Livable Cities and served as Secretary General and Chair of the Scientific Committee of the International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP). He has collaborated with the Economist Intelligence Unit in the preparation of the Green City Index comparing 54 cities in Africa, Asia and Latin America. He received a master’s degree at Harvard University and has completed graduate studies in the United Nations University.

9:50–10:20 AM PRESENTATION: HOW TO FINANCE METROPOLITAN CITIES IN LAC? Huascar Eguino, Lead Specialist, Sub-National Fiscal Management Division of Fiscal and Municipal Management, IDB. Huáscar Eguino is a Leading Specialist in Fiscal Management at the IDB. He is an economist specialized in fiscal management of subnational governments, fiscal decentralization, management of public investment, and financing of territorial entities. He has over 20 years of experience in the IDB, having worked in 17 countries in the Latin American region and provided direct advice to more than 75 subnational governments. Currently, his work focuses on the management of public investment and the strengthening of subnational fiscal management. He holds a master’s degree in Local and Regional Development from the Institute of Social Studies (ISS, Netherlands) and has postgraduate

AGENDA EXPERT WORKSHOP: LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES (LEDA)

AGENDA

WASHINGTON D.C.

10:20-10:40 AM PRESENTATION: URBAN REGENERATION AND TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT Mauro Alem, Senior Infrastructure and Transportation Specialist Transport and Mobility Division, IDB (TBC) 10:40-10:50 AM COFFEE BREAK 10:50-11:10 AM

PRESENTATION: ECONOMIC GROWTH AND URBAN REGENERATION STRATEGY, THE CASE OF MEDELLÍN Catalina Restrepo, Executive Director Agency for Cooperation and Investment of Medellín

11:10-11:30 AM

PRESENTATION FISCAL AND FINANCIAL TOOLS FOR URBAN REGENERATION, THE CASE OF NEW YORK CITY Stan Wall, Partner, HR&A Stan Wall brings over 20 years of public-private real estate experience in the Washington Metro Area market. Stan counsels public and private clients on complex real estate projects by advising on strategy, planning, finance, development, and construction. Prior to joining HR&A, Stan was the Director of Real Estate and Station Planning at the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, where he led the organization’s transit-oriented development program and advanced the development of the organizations land holdings around the Washington Metropolitan region. Stan is also the founder of Wall Development Group, an organization that pursues opportunities focused on sustainable development, urban infill, and public-private partnerships.

11:30-11:50 AM

11:50-12:20 PM 12:20-1:10 PM

PRESENTATION: FISCAL AND FINANCIAL TOOLS FOR URBAN REGENERATION, THE CASE OF WASHINGTON, D.C. Nate Cruz, Deputy Director, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, District of Columbia Nate Cruz initially joined EDF in 2006. He was previously employed by the Port of San Francisco as finance manager for the real estate division. He also worked for San Francisco’s Budget and Legislative Analyst Office, where he calculated the fiscal impact of legislation. Cruz is a returned Peace Corps volunteer (Morocco 2001-03). He earned a master’s in public policy from Carnegie Mellon University and a bachelor’s in business administration from Georgetown University. PERIOD FOR Q&A LUNCH - VIDEO SESSION

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8 WASHINGTON D.C.

1:10-1:30 PM

PRESENTATION: STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT IN URBAN REGENERATION PROJECTS Uwe Brandes, Professor, Urban & Regional Planning Program Georgetown University Uwe S. Brandes is professor of the practice, faculty director of the Urban & Regional Planning Program, faculty director of the Georgetown Global Cities Initiative and affiliated faculty in the Science, Technology, and International Affairs program at the Walsh School of Foreign Service. Brandes is a distinguished scholar-practitioner in the field of urban design and sustainable urban development, with more than 25 years of experience in the planning, design, and development of new buildings, the public realm, and development partnerships.

1:30-3:20 PM ROUNDTABLES: Table 1 - Vision, Strategy, Local Economic Development Plans, Employment Generation and Investment Attraction Table 2 - Urban Regeneration Strategies for Sustainable Metropolitan Growth 3:20-3:30 PM COFFEE BREAK 3:30-4:00 PM PRESENTATION OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON VISION, STRATEGY AND PLANS FOR LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, EMPLOYMENT GENERATION AND ATTRACTION OF INVESTMENT (TABLE 1) 4:00-4:30 PM PRESENTATION OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON URBAN REGENERATION STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABLE METROPOLITAN GROWTH (TABLE 2)

AGENDA EXPERT WORKSHOP: LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES (LEDA)

studies at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania, and Universidad de los Andes.

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 8

4:30-4:45 PM SURVEY ON FUTURE DIALOGUE ISSUES 4:45-5:00 PM CLOSING REMARKS María Camila Uribe, Coordinator of the IDB cities Network Maria Camila served as IDB Representative in Chile, and then worked on the coordination of the IDB Group Institutional Strategy. In addition, she served as Chief of the Services Section for Committees and Executive Directors in the IDB Secretariat. Maria Camila is an economist at the University of Los Andes in Colombia, where she also completed master’s courses in economics and has a master’s degree in Public Administration from Harvard University. She has more than 18 years of experience in the Colombian public sector, having served as Secretary of Planning of Bogotá, Director of Cadastre and Director of Taxes of the same city, advisor to the Ministry of Finance of Colombia and the Department of National Planning. Local and urban tax matters stand out among its many specializations.

LAC CITIES CHALLENGE

City Profiles and Project Team Members

BARRANQUILLA—COLOMBIA

Barranquilla POPULATION: 1,232,462 inhabitants (2018) Fourth largest city in Colombia LOCATION: Northern Colombia, on the banks of the Magdalena River ECONOMY: Industry, services, trade and transport

PROJECT: RIVER CITY (CIUDAD RÍO)

River City, located in an excellent position between the Magdalena River and Route 40, is a priority intervention and redevelopment operation in Barranquilla. With underutilized and wasted spaces, it has the potential to become an area that promotes sustainable development through more green space, mixed use, urban infrastructure and new alternatives for energy generation. Not only does this area have a strategic location, it also has the adequate public services and land regulation conditions that make it attractive for development to the public and private sectors, academia, the main institutions and professional associations of the City.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS JUAN CARLOS GÓMEZ VALLEJO

Assistant Manager of Urban Development, Barranquilla Urban Development Company (EDUBAR) An Industrial Engineer with postgraduate studies in International Business Management, he is currently Assistant Manager of Urban Development for the Barranquilla Urban Development Company. He has experience in project planning and execution in the water and sanitation sector, having been Corporate Manager for Planning and Control of the Bogota Aqueduct Company and Technical Director of Aqueduct and Sewerage Management for the Public Services Superintendency. He has experience with international organizations such as the World Health Organization having worked in the Department of Cooperation and Country Focus at its headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland.

BARRANQUILLA—COLOMBIA

COLOMBIA

BARRANQUILLA URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY (EDUBAR)

EDUBAR S.A. is a mixed economy entity (74% public sector and 26% private sector) that manages and executes large-scale projects that generate comprehensive urban development. It actively participates in the implementation of land use plans, partial plans, electrification projects, assessments, resettlement programs, architectural and technical designs, urban renewal and development projects, inspections and construction, as well as the promotion of partnerships and innovative businesses. MARÍA AMAYA SAADE

Coordinator of Urban Projects, Designs and Concepts Architect and Specialist in Urbanism and Territorial Planning from the University of the Andes, with a master’s degree in Sustainable Urbanism and Territorial Planning from NOVA University Lisbon. Throughout her studies and professional life, she has been involved in the structuring and design of city projects on different scales and in different sectors. She currently works as Coordinator of Urban Projects at the company Designs and Concepts and is responsible for the structuring and formulation of city projects on different scales. DESIGNS AND CONCEPTS

Designs and Concepts is an urban consulting company with extensive experience in the comprehensive structuring and development of city projects. Its priority is to develop proposals that are inclusive; sustainable economically, environmentally and socially; and responsive to global and environmental challenges; in order to create better cities to live in for all socio-economic and cultural sectors. GUSTAVO ADOLFO ROCHA PARRA

Senior Financial Advisor for Structuring, Puerta de Oro Caribbean Development Company Specialist in Finance, with undergraduate studies in Economics and a focus in Finance and Administration, with a post-graduate certificate in International Financial Reporting Standards. For ten years he has held various positions in the public sector, such as Advisor for the City of Barranquilla and Financial Manager for the City’s mass transit company. He is currently Financial Advisor for Puerta de Oro’s Structuring Division dealing with financial matters and the development and assessment of different projects in the city and the Colombian Caribbean region. PUERTA DE ORO CARIBBEAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

Puerta de Oro is a simplified joint-stock company, with majority public ownership, working to improve the quality of life in Barranquilla, its metropolitan area and the Atlantic, through the structuring and development of city projects that contribute to the generation of sustainable economic growth. It seeks to contribute to the sustainability of urban spaces aimed at community recreation as well as the productive companies of the district. 22

BOGOTA—COLOMBIA

Bogota POPULATION: 7,181,000 inhabitants (2018)

Colombia’s capital LOCATION: Central Colombia, on the Eastern Range ECONOMY: industry, trade, financial services and business PROJECT: COMPREHENSIVE URBAN RENEWAL PROJECT “ALAMEDA ENTREPARQUES”

The conceptual proposal for the Comprehensive Urban Renewal Project “Alameda Entreparques” seeks to consolidate a new part of the city over the long term through partial plans or regulatory instruments. It will generate a morphological reconfiguration that promotes the integration of different systems, like public space, roads and ecological structure, in an orderly manner and based on cutting-edge urban planning guidelines. The urban project will be sustainable, dense, compact, mixed-use, and accessible to all types of transport and will create quality public space.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS CAMILA NEIRA ACEVEDO

Director of Heritage and Urban Renewal, District Planning Secretariat Architect with a master’s degree in Urbanism. She has extensive experience in the management, formulation and execution of urban renewal and heritage projects. During the years 20122015, she worked in the National Government’s Urban Renewal and Development Company. Since 2016, she has been Director of Heritage and Urban Renewal for Bogota. DISTRICT PLANNING SECRETARIAT

The District Planning Secretariat of Bogota is responsible for leading the development and monitoring of policies and territorial, economic, social and environmental planning of the Capital District. Its main functions include coordinating the development, implementation and monitoring of district and local development plans; coordinating the development, regulation, implementation and evaluation of the Land Management Plan (POT), as well as land use regulations, in accordance with national regulations and the regulations issued by the District Council.

BARRANQUILLA—BOGOTA

COLOMBIA

MARÍA MERCEDES JARAMILLO

Manager of Sustainable Urban Development, ProBogotá Architect-Urbanist passionate about the challenge of helping public authorities and private agents to envision and come to agreement on long-term urban design and territorial planning strategies. She is currently Manager of Sustainable Urban Development at ProBogotá. Before taking this position, María Mercedes lived in Paris for 13 years working with two major French engineering groups and designing new urban developments, urban regeneration and architectural renovation projects, economic development strategies for industrial and artisanal parks, urban centers, tourist and historical sites, among others. PROBOGOTÁ

A non-profit, private and independent organization created by the leading companies in Colombia to help make Bogota and its metropolitan region a better place to live, work and invest, focusing on five main areas: transport and mobility, sustainable urban planning, security, government, and the future of employment. It aims to facilitate the necessary political dialogue between Mayors, Local Government, National Government, Councils, the Assembly, and other government and civil society bodies, to promote institutional strengthening, analysis, discussion, and the evaluation of public policies. ADRIANA FORERO

Strategy Manager, Invest in Bogotá Since 2011, she has served as Strategy Manager for Invest in Bogotá. She holds an undergraduate degree in Finance and International Relations from the Universidad Externado de Colombia, a master’s degree in European Studies from the University of Vienna (Austria) and a PhD in Socio-Economic Sciences from the University of Economics and Business in Vienna (Austria). She has held senior positions with full responsibility contributing to the strategic direction and growth of organizations. She has been responsible for the administration of agreements with public entities, private organizations and multilateral agencies. She worked in the Commercial Information Department of ProColombia and has worked as a consultant in market prospecting projects and internationalization strategies for companies. INVEST IN BOGOTÁ

Invest in Bogotá is Bogota’s investment promotion agency, a public-private initiative between the Bogota Chamber of Commerce and the Capital District. It seeks to support investors who are exploring opportunities in Bogotá by providing valuable information and advice, achieving important results in investment attraction, international positioning and improvement of the investment climate. Invest in Bogotá is the first regional agency in Colombia and Latin America created specifically for the promotion of foreign direct investment.

MEXICO CITY—MEXICO

Mexico City POPULATION:

8,767,071 inhabitants (2019)

POPULATION OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA OF THE VALLEY OF MEXICO:

about 22 million inhabitants Capital of Mexico and the most populous city in the country. LOCATION: South-Central Mexico ECONOMY: trade, financial services, transport and tourism PROJECT: POST-INDUSTRIAL ATLAMPA: NEW GATEWAY TO DOWNTOWN MEXICO CITY

AAtlampa currently suffers from multiple challenges that have made it a dull, insecure, abandoned and underappreciated area. These problems cover an area of more than 430,000 m2 of abandoned or deteriorated industries, with few facilities and a lack of spaces for all. The objective of the project is to generate interesting spaces and corridors in these places, improve the quality of life, bring economic flows and improve social dynamics. It seeks to make Atlampa a model of a micro-city, providing its current and future population with a friendly place that has everything necessary to live and work in the same area.

MARÍA DE LA LUZ HERNÁNDEZ TREJO

Undersecretary for Economic Development, Secretariat for Economic Development, Government of Mexico City Graduate of the Faculty of Economics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), with bachelor’s and master’s degrees specialized in the areas of planning, development and economic policy. With experience and solid professional development in the public sector, she has held senior positions in the Government of Mexico City and in the Federal Government. At the Secretariat of Economic Development of the Government of Mexico City, she served as General Director of Economic Regulation and Development. From November 1, she will assume the position of Undersecretary of Economic Development for Mexico City.

MEXICO CITY—MEXICO

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS

MEXICO

SECRETARIAT FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (SEDECO)

The Secretariat for Economic Development is responsible for defining and coordinating the economic policy of Mexico City so that economic growth and employment are underpinned by a framework of regulatory and legal certainty. This facilitates and promotes competitiveness, innovation, investment and the development of economic activities, focusing on improving the quality of life in Mexico City. LUIS ARMANDO DÍAZ INFANTE CHAPA

President, Mexican Chamber of the Construction Industry Civil engineer who is currently President of the Mexican Chamber of the Construction Industry (CMIC) in Mexico City (CDMX), member of the Academy of Engineering of the Mexican Institute of Finance Executives of CDMX, Director of the Alumni Society of UNAM’s Faculty of Engineering and member of the Urban Development Committee of the Professional Association of Civil Engineers of Mexico. He is co-author of the book Sustainable Planning of Cities: Proposals for Infrastructure Development and the research note Seismic Safety of Affordable Housing (both in Spanish). MEXICAN CHAMBER OF THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY (CMIC)

The CMIC is a public, autonomous institution with legal status and jurisdiction throughout the Mexican Republic with around 12,000 affiliates. The explicit objective of the CMIC is to represent the issues concerning the Mexican construction industry, to study those issues and to defend the interests of business owners. ENRIQUE GARCÍA FORMENTI MENDIETA

Assistance and Guidelines Liaison to “A” Municipalities, Directorate General of Development and Land Use Planning Research experience in planning, development, urbanism and regulations in Mexico City, as well as in database management and creation of maps. Participates in the Directorate’s projects, including: Special Program for Urban Regeneration and Inclusive Housing, research on Affordable Housing and Accessible Housing, and identification and analysis of underutilized lots within zones and corridors. Collaborates on the comprehensive care strategy in 333 districts, towns, and neighborhoods. GENERAL DIRECTORATE OF DEVELOPMENT AND LAND USE PLANNING

The General Directorate of Development and Land Use Planning is a unit of the General Coordination of Urban Development whose responsibilities include coordinating the projects entrusted within the framework of the Secretariat, identifying public and private priorities and institutions, and establishing the actions to be taken to meet citizen demands captured in the different media and forums to comply with established regulations.

CORDOBA—ARGENTINA

Cordoba POPULATION: 1,430,000 inhabitants (2017)

Argentina’s second most populous city LOCATION: Central Argentina Capital of the Province of Cordoba ECONOMY: car factories, nuclear plants, petrochemicals and agricultural products PROJECT: PLAN FOR THE SOCIAL, URBAN, AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESTORATION OF THE RAILWAY

The city of Cordoba is located in the center of Argentina, and is the second most populated city in the country and the main city in the province of Córdoba, housing more than 50% of the province’s population. In the city center, the urban area is crossed by an important railway system, that holds buildings of great value for the industrial heritage of the city and has a high potential for urban regeneration. The plan for the social, urban and environmental recovery of the railway is a joint initiative of the Municipality of Córdoba and the Nation of Argentina, which aims to recover 62 hectares of unused land belonging to the national railway system, located in the North pericentral area of the city, through urbanization, urban regeneration and integration of public space.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS RAMÓN JAVIER MESTRE

Mayor of Cordoba Mayor of Córdoba since December 2011, this is his second term in office. He is also President of the Cordoba Economic Development Agency, and First Vice President of the Argentine Federation of Municipalities. Lawyer from the National University of Cordoba, he specialized in Public Services Regulation Law at the University Austral of Buenos Aires and took the advanced course in International Trade taught by the Institute of Business Training (IFE) in Madrid, Spain. MUNICIPALITY OF CORDOBA

CÓRDOBA—ARGENTINA

ARGENTINA

The Mayor of Cordoba holds the executive power of the municipality. The municipality was created on July 9, 1857. LETICIA GÓMEZ

Undersecretary of Planning, Planning Secretariat of the Municipality of Cordoba Architect trained in the Faculty of Architecture, Urbanism and Design of the National University of Cordoba; she also holds a master’s degree in Urban Planning from the Polytechnic University of Catalonia. She has served as a civil servant in the Municipality of Cordoba since 2012 and has held the position of Undersecretary of Planning since December 2015. Previously, she collaborated with the Planning Institute of the Metropolitan Area of Cordoba and with the development of Urban Master Plans for the Government of Catalonia, Spain. SECRETARIAT OF PLANNING OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CORDOBA

The Undersecretary of Planning sets the technical guidelines and specific policies for urban and territorial planning in general and more specifically for sectors and projects, as established by the Municipal Executive Department for the Urban Planning Directorate and the Directorate of Private Works and Land Uses. It deals with issues related to these areas, such as the division, use and occupation of city land; development and construction; architectural heritage; extension operations; widening or opening of streets; and coordination of studies and policy proposals. RICARDO ARIEL OCCHIPINTI

First Vice President, Cordoba Agency for Economic Development Electrical Engineer and Technician graduated from the Cordoba Regional Faculty of the National Technological University. He is Secretary of the Chamber of Computer and Electronic Industries of Central Argentina (CIIECCA) and serves on its Board of Directors. He is Assistant Treasurer and member of the Executive Committee of the Industrial Union of Cordoba and First Vice President of the Cordoba Agency for Economic Development. In addition, he has been a member of the Group of Experts on Subnational Competitiveness (GTECS) of the Inter-American Competitiveness Network (RIAC) associated with the Organization of American States (OAS). CORDOBA AGENCY FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (ADEC)

The Cordoba Agency for Economic Development (ADEC) is a non-profit institution that promotes the economic and social development of Cordoba and its metropolitan region. This public-private body is composed of 43 entities including business chambers, professional schools, the city’s universities and the Municipality of Cordoba. ADEC brings together private action with that of the public sector and promotes reflection on Cordoba’s (and its metropolitan area’s) development policies. In turn, it enhances entrepreneurship and the capacity for innovation and management, and proposes national strategies and policies.

HERMOSILLO—MEXICO

Hermosillo 907,233 inhabitants (2018) Mexico’s 16th largest city LOCATION: Capital of the State of Sonora, located in its central area ECONOMY: industry, trade, agriculture, livestock, fishing and aerospace POPULATION:

PROJECT: REGENERATION OF HERMOSILLO’S HISTORIC CENTER

Hermosillo’s challenge is to boost the economic development of the city through urban regeneration that incorporates socially inclusive and environmentally sustainable principles. To this end, it proposes the Revitalization Plan of the Historic Center of Hermosillo as a strategy to increase the social capital of the city. The total area of the intervention encompasses approximately 92 hectares. Its main objectives are: (i) the regeneration of Cerro de la Campana (La Campana Hill) including its economic activation and water management; ii ) the revitalization of streets and public spaces; (iii) the activation of underutilized vacant spaces; and (iv) urban regeneration through the recuperation of properties for business and sustainable housing development.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS ANTONIO COLIN CANIZALES

Advisor, Hermosillo Municipal Institute of Urban Planning and Public Space (IMPLAN) Antonio Colin Canizales has a bachelor’s degree in International Trade from Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education (Tecnológico de Monterrey) in 2010 and has worked as a professional in business processes and project strategy. He has worked for the private sector focusing on asset management, and in the public sector, both at the municipal and federal levels, focusing on improving internal processes, digital governance and tax collection. He currently serves as an Advisor at the Hermosillo Municipal Institute of Urban Planning and Public Space (IMPLAN).

HERMOSILLO—MÉXICO

MEXICO

HERMOSILLO MUNICIPAL URBAN PLANNING INSTITUTE (IMPLAN)

IMPLAN is a regulatory entity for the planning, regulation, land use management and urban development of the Municipality of Hermosillo, with a comprehensive vision that is built with citizen participation. ERNESTO URBINA MIRANDA

Managing Director, Hermosillo, ¿Cómo Vamos? Ernesto Urbina has both a bachelor’s and a master’s in Economics from the Metropolitan Autonomous University (UNAM). He has served as Director of Research and Human Development for the Science and Technology Council of the State of Sonora, and as Director of Innovation at ETHOS Laboratory for Public Policy, one of the main research centers in Mexico and Latin America. He is currently Managing Director of the citizen organization Hermosillo, ¿Cómo Vamos? (Hermosillo, how are we doing?), which promotes citizen participation for the analysis, monitoring and proposal of public policies that accelerate economic, social and sustainable development. ¿HERMOSILLO CÓMO VAMOS?

Hermosillo ¿Cómo Vamos? is a non-profit initiative whose main objective is to open dialogue and promote citizen participation through the monitoring, evaluation and promotion of public policies that contribute to the solution of problems as well as the economic and social development of the city. JAIME ISAAC FÉLIX GÁNDARA

Chairman of the Advisory Council, PROSONORA Jaime Isaac Félix Gándara is a Civil Engineer graduated from the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education (Tecnológico de Monterrey) in 1987. He holds a master’s degree in Construction Science from Arizona State University (2000), and a master’s degree in Business Administration from Tecnológico de Monterrey (2008). He has more than 30 years of experience in the areas of construction and housing. He has held senior positions in the construction industry since 1995, and in the civil service he was Director of Works for the State of Sonora in 2000. He is currently Chairman of the Advisory Council for PROSONORA, President of CANADEVI Sonora and Managing Director of the company CONSTRUVISION. PROSONORA

PROSONORA is a new platform for economic promotion which seeks to attract greater investment and job creation, as well as to strengthen, with work and commitment, the confidence of established companies.

MONTEVIDEO—URUGUAY

Montevideo POPULATION: 1.3 million inhabitants (2017)

Capital of Uruguay where a third of the national population lives. LOCATION: Southern part of the country ECONOMY: services, manufacturing, banking and finance and tourism Home to Uruguay’s main commercial port PROJECT: THE AREA OF THE MERCADO MODEL (MAIN MARKET)

The project intends to move the Mercado Modelo, the main wholesale trade center, so as to open up an important public and private land area within the urban fabric of Montevideo. The main objective is to revitalize and densify this area of the consolidated urban fabric, contributing to democratic access to services and facilities, quality habitat and the strengthening of a system of local centralities.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS ANA ELENA RIVERA

Director, Territorial Planning Division of the Municipality of Montevideo Director of the Territorial Planning Division of the Municipality of Montevideo since January 2015. As an independent professional and in her activities as a civil servant with the Municipality of Montevideo, she has carried out multiple studies and tasks in planning and territorial management. She was an advisor to the Directorate of the Territorial Planning Division between 2000 and 2006, and to the Public Spaces, Habitat and Buildings Division between 2006 and 2010; and served as Coordinator of the Montevideo Food Unit Project between 2010 and 2014. TERRITORIAL PLANNING DIVISION

MONTEVIDEO—URUGUAY

URUGUAY

The Territorial Planning Division of the Municipality of Montevideo is responsible for guiding the urban and territorial process of the Montevideo District, coordinating public and private actions in order to ensure sustainable physical and social development. MATÍAS COLL PERI

Member of the Board of Directors, Association of Private Construction Developers of Uruguay Uruguayan architect, member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Private Construction Developers of Uruguay since 2015, and candidate to join the General Secretariat of the trade union for the period 2019 – 2021. Since 2012, he has participated as technical advisor to Board in the evaluation of projects, and since 2017 has led their real estate development team. He developed his professional career independently as a founding partner of the studio OMM Arquitectura up until 2016, where he specialized in residential architecture. ASSOCIATION OF PRIVATE CONSTRUCTION DEVELOPERS OF URUGUAY (APPCU)

The Association of Private Construction Developers of Uruguay is a non-profit institution, composed of real estate developers, university professionals, public and private institutions and companies linked to the sector. Created in 1990, it brings together more than 280 companies. The main objective of APPCU is to guide, coordinate, encourage, incentivize, protect and develop the construction industry, mainly in the area of private development, managing a wide range of activities aimed at supporting and providing services specific to its partners. RICARDO PABLO POSADA

Director, Economic Promotion Division of the Economic Development Department Agricultural technician and entrepreneur from the micro-enterprise sector. President of the National Economic Council in 2007-2008 and the National Association of Micro and Small Business (Anmype) in 2004-2009. General Secretary of the Latin American Association of Micro, Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (Alampyme) in 2004. Part of the Tripartite Higher Council of Wages and Coordinator of the SME Unit of the Municipality of Montevideo in 2010-2015. Director of the Economic Promotion Division from 2015 to the present. ECONOMIC PROMOTION DIVISION OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

The Economic Promotion Division of the Department of Economic Development of the Municipality of Montevideo is responsible for managing the municipality’s assets and spaces that are occupied, granted, leased, or whose use has been authorized to natural persons; monitoring and enforcing compliance with concessions, permits or leases granted; and performing administrative tasks related to sales in public spaces. In addition, it is the division responsible for promoting the development of small and medium-sized enterprises and the plans for productivity and development in rural areas. 32

QUITO—ECUADOR

Quito 2.7million inhabitants (2019) 3.1 million inhabitants (2019) Ecuador’s most populous city LOCATION: Northern Ecuador Capital of Ecuador ECONOMY: construction, trade, tourism, services, financial activity and agribusiness POPULATION:

METROPOLITAN AREA POPULATION:

PROJECT: SPECIAL INTERVENTION PLAN FOR THE QUITO METROPOLITAN CORRIDOR (PEI-CMQ)

In the last 20 years, Quito has suffered a multidimensional crisis that has been evident in its territorial disorganization, resulting in abandoned buildings, a mismatch of urban uses and functions, misuse and degradation of public space, high rates of insecurity and businesses that fail. The Special Intervention Plan for the Metropolitan Corridor of Quito seeks to: (i) reverse the multidimensional territorial planning crisis; (ii) generate a proposal for participatory, transparent and socialized urban development; (iii) promote a comprehensive urban policy proposal, with clear and specific guidelines, that is the result of a comprehensive vision of the problem; and (iv) carry out a proposal that is based on urban principles.sustente en principios urbanísticos.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS RAFAEL CARRASCO

Secretary, Secretariat of Territory, Habitat and Housing Architect who studied in Buenos Aires, Argentina, with 12 years of professional experience in the private and public sectors, including as a consultant for the German Council for Sustainable Construction and as Undersecretary of Housing for the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development where he contributed to the development of Ecuador’s housing policy. He is currently the Secretary of Territory, Habitat and Housing, generating public policy for the capital of Ecuador.

QUITO—ECUADOR

ECUADOR

MINISTRY OF TERRITORY, HABITAT AND HOUSING OF QUITO

The Secretariat of Territory, Habitat and Housing of Quito leads the processes related to urban and territorial architectural development of public space, landscape recovery and urban equipment through the formulation and implementation of public policies in planning, land use, habitat, built heritage and housing. It works under the concepts of sustainability, inclusion, quality, universality, and promotes coexistence, ownership and citizen identity within the framework of good living. FAUSTO GONZALO ESTUPIÑÁN

General Advisor for the Special Plan, Metropolitan Institute of Urban Planning (IMPU) Architect and Urbanist specialized in real estate appraisals from the Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain. He has served as an Advisor in architecture and urbanism competitions (heritage buildings, plazas in Quito’s historic center and urban furniture), consultant in project development (FLACSO), expert of the Ecuadorian State before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, current President of the Ecuadorian Association of Expert Appraisers AEPA and urban planning consultant for Quito to promote the approval of 24 IESS Buildings projects. He has been invited as a guest speaker in Madrid, Spain (2011), Medellín, Colombia (2014) and Santiago de Chile (2014) to present the methodology for valuation of heritage buildings in historic centers. He is currently Advisor for the Quito Metropolitan Corridor Contest. METROPOLITAN INSTITUTE OF URBAN PLANNING (IMPU)

IMPU was created to carry out the long and medium-term planning of the city. IMPU dedicates its work to thinking about the future of Quito and aims to develop the Vision of Quito 2040 towards a solidary, resilient and competitive city to achieve sustainable development through the generation of plans and urban and architectural designs. FERNANDO CARRIÓN MENA

Advisor to the Mayor’s Office of Quito Architect graduated from the Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism of the Central University of Ecuador. He holds a master’s degree in Urban and Regional Development with a specialization in Research and Teaching, as well as a doctorate from the University of Buenos Aires in Social Sciences. He is a promoter and founder of 7 international and national institutions, among which are the Latin American Organization of Historic Centers and the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO-Ecuador); founder of the Latin American Organization of Border Cities; and founder and first coordinator of the interuniversity network of urban studies (18 universities). He is an independent consultant and has worked with more than 45 national and international institutions such as GTZ, HABITAT, UNDP, CAF, ECLAC, IDB, as well as with universities, municipalities, governments and NGOs from Ecuador, Latin America, Europe and the US. He is currently Advisor to the Mayor’s Office of Quito. MAYOR’S OFFICE, MUNICIPALITY OF THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT OF QUITO

The Municipality of the Metropolitan District of Quito is the body that governs the Metropolitan District of Quito. It is headed by the Metropolitan Mayor of Quito, who chairs the Metropolitan Council and chooses zone administrators, metropolitan directors, and managers of metropolitan institutes, agencies and companies. públicas o privadas, controlar el cumplimiento de las concesiones, permisos o arrendamientos

SALVADOR BAHÍA—BRASIL

Salvador, Bahia 6,643,000 inhabitants (2018) Most populous city in the Northeast Region of Brazil. LOCATION: Northeast Region of Brazil ECONOMY: tourism and export of sugar and cocoa POPULATION:

PROJECT: #VEMPROCENTRO

In 1985, UNESCO declared the historic center of Salvador (Bahia) a world heritage site given its cultural importance in Brazil and the region. Since 1990, the city has had a renovation plan to promote tourism and local economic development of the Pelourinho, a neighborhood within the historic center. Despite these measures, the historic center continues with underutilized and deteriorated areas. The #vemprocentro (meaning “come to the center”) project aims to regenerate the social, economic and urban fabric of the historic center through territorial reorganization and policies that promote new uses of public spaces. To boost this regeneration, the main objective of the program is to turn the historic center into the main axis of the creative and innovative industries given its employment generation potential.

PROJECT TEAM MEMBERS GUSTAVO MENEZES

Director of Public-Private Partnerships for the City of Salvador Director of Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) and Technical Director of the Board of Directors of the City of Salvador, with 13 years of experience in infrastructure. Business Administrator with specializations in Finance and Project Finance, and currently in the process of certification in PPP by the World Bank and the Andean Development Bank. He worked in the public and private sectors in project structuring and investment analysis. He led the structuring of projects such as the PPP for the Fonte Nova Arena in Salvador, the North Bahia highway in the Salvador metropolitan region, the light rail in Rio de Janeiro, Hub Salvador (innovation center), the Salvador Convention Center and #vemprocentro.

SALVADOR DE BAHIA—BRASIL

BRASIL

MUNICIPAL SECRETARIAT OF DEVELOPMENT AND URBAN PLANNING (SEDUR)

SEDUR is the body responsible for the licensing and supervision of all works in the city of Salvador, from residential buildings to large urban complexes, according to the parameters of the current legislation. MARCOS CIDREIRA

Vice President, Bahía Trade Association Administrator with specialization in socioeconomic studies and revitalization of urban areas in important cities of Brazil. He has served as chairman and director in the public and private sectors. For eight years he was Director of the Office of Rehabilitation for the Salvador City Center. He currently holds the position of Superintendent of the Miguel Calmon Foundation for Social and Economic Studies (IMIC) and Vice President of the Bahía Trade Association, the first of the Americas. BAHÍA TRADE ASSOCIATION (ACB)

The ACB is a multisectoral entity, the oldest in Brazil, that brings together Bahian entrepreneurs and businesses and defends their interests. The Bahia Trade Association leads the campaign to revitalize business in the center, not only to return it to its former state as the city’s financial center, but also to modernize it and promote tourism. TÂNIA SCOFIELD

President, Mario Leal Ferreira Foundation Architect and Urbanist graduated from the Federal University of Bahia. She holds a master’s degree in Architecture and Urbanism from the same school, and postgraduate studies in Urban Planning from the Institute of Applied Research (IPEA) of the Ministry of Planning of the Federal District. She is currently President of the Mario Leal Ferreira Foundation, the planning body of the City of Salvador, a position she has held since 2013. She was responsible for the technical coordination of the Urban Development Master Plan (PDDU) of Salvador approved by the City Council in June 2016. She is coordinator of the Salvador 500 Plan that strategizes Salvador’s urban planning until 2049 when the city will celebrate its 500th anniversary. In addition, she is responsible for the historic center project and all urbanization projects in the public areas of the city. THE MÁRIO LEAL FERREIRA FOUNDATION (FMLF)

The FMLF is a Brazilian government municipal foundation responsible for urban planning in Salvador linked to the Municipal Secretariat of Urbanism, and for producing and coordinating the production of socio-economic information about the city.

New York City Economic Development Corporation Case Study

I. INTRODUCTION The New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC) is the result of a merger in 2012 between the original NYCEDC (created in 1991 by another merger of agencies) and the non-profit corporation known as the New York City Economic Growth Corporation. While the former was mostly in charge of industrial policy, real estate development, and land management; the latter was more aligned with attracting private investment, creating jobs in NYC, broadening the City’s revenue base, and streamlining urban planning.1 The consolidation of several economic policy objectives has allowed NYCEDC to generate a sizeable list of innovative local economic development programs and real estate projects with effective partnerships between city government, private investors, and communities.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES (LEDAS)

A. THE VISION OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) Fueled by the City’s diverse people and businesses, NYCEDC’s vision is to make New York a global model for inclusive innovation and economic growth, to strengthen the City’s competitive position, and to facilitate investments to support high-quality jobs and cultivate dynamic, resilient, and livable communities. Related to the NYCEDC vision, its mission is “to create shared prosperity across New York City’s five boroughs by strengthening neighborhoods and growing good jobs.”2 In its efforts to carry out its vision and mission, NYCEDC is recognized as a “highly active body that undertakes real estate management and rent collection for the city, manages programs to support key city initiatives and provides financing and technical assistance to businesses, developers and nonprofits.”3 B. POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL GENESIS In 1991, the original NYCEDC was officially formed by merging the Public Development Corporation (PDC, created in 1966) and the Financial Services Corporation (FSC, created in 1979) and assuming the services and responsibilities of each, including overseeing programs of the Industrial Development Agency (NYCIDA), such as industrial park management and small business support. NYCEDC also assumed economic development services previously performed by the City’s Department of Ports and Trade, and subsequently undertook a wide variety of additional economic development services as the demand and the need for restructuring determined. Between 1991 and 2012, the New York City Economic Development Corporation brought billions of dollars in private investments to the City and helped create thousands of jobs through its various projects and initiatives. By encouraging commerce within the City, managing City-owned properties, administer1 Clark, Greg, et al. “Organising Local Economic Development: The Role of Development Agencies and Companies.” Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), June 2010, https://doi. org/10.1787/9789264083530-en. 2 NYCEDC, www.nycedc.com

This profile was written by Pablo Vaggione under the supervision of Gilberto Chona (IDB) and IDB Cities Network Team in the context of the Local Economic Development Agencies Cutting Edge.

3 Clark, Greg, et al. “Organising Local Economic Development: The Role of Development Agencies and Companies.” Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), June 2010, https://doi. org/10.1787/9789264083530-en.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

C. THE MAIN STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) IN NEW YORK CITY The local economic development goals of New York City are summarized in the OneNYC 2050 economic development strategy formulated in 2013. New York City proclaims its main strategy goal is “to secure our city’s future against the challenges of today and tomorrow. With bold actions to confront our climate crisis, achieve equity, and strengthen our democracy, we are building a strong and fair city.”4 The LED strategy encompasses eight consensus goals for the City: • a vibrant democracy • an inclusive economy • thriving neighborhoods • healthy lives • equity and excellence in education • a livable climate • efficient mobility • modern infrastructure Within this strategic framework NYCEDC identifies, negotiates, structures, finances, and builds large urban development projects with a comprehensive scope. II. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A. APPROACH Since the last consolidation of NYCEDC in 2012, the City of New York has promoted economic growth and employment generation by applying and renewing traditional expenditure and investment mechanisms, which fall into four basic categories: tax expenditures, operating programs, capital spending, and conduit financing.5 Tax expenditures consist of incentives or tax exemptions for businesses or non-profits that improve the physical quality of the communities or generate local jobs. Similarly, operating programs, capital spending, and conduit financing promoted by the NYCEDC are aimed at growing the local economic base, regenerating the urban environment, and creating business and job opportunities in New York City. NYCEDC is funded by transfers from several other NYC agencies, an example of 4 City of New York. OneNYC 2050, https://onenyc.cityofnewyork.us 5 Edwards, Riley. “Managing Economic Development Programs in New York City.” Citizens Budget Com40

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

ing loans and financing, and facilitating commercial and industrial development, NYCEDC successfully completed hundreds of development projects and implemented many public policy initiatives. In 2012, the former NYCEDC merged with a non-profit corporation named the New York City Economic Growth Corporation. The newly merged entity has a more commercial core mission and a more corporate structure; however, it kept the name of the New York City Economic Development Corporation. The new NYCEDC assumed the services previously undertaken by the former NYCEDC, like real estate property management and land management, plus a role in economic growth, investment attraction, and job promotion.

mission of New York, 2 Jan. 2018, https://cbcny.org/research/managing-economic-development-programs-new-york-city.

The Vessel in Hudson Yards, Stefano Giovannini

which is in the form of project contracts from the Department of Small Business Services (SBS). Also, through a single contract, NYCEDC is responsible for administering all the programs of the NYCIDA. NYCEDC also promotes the creation of local development corporations (LDCs) to attend to specific investment projects in New York City. These LDCs are responsible for investing and managing urban assets. Two examples of LDCs are the Hudson Yards Infrastructure Corporation and the Brooklyn Bridge Park Development Corporation. At the operational level, NYCEDC is comprised of over 400 employees and a small number of departments, including the asset management/capital program, corporate communications, government and community relations, marketing, and public affairs. III. FINANCIAL STRATEGY The City of New York has several different programs and incentives to promote local economic development. Some programs are executed through the New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC), while others are managed through other City departments depending on the nature of the program (social, environmental, educational, etc.). A. INVESTMENT ATTRACTION (FINANCING AND TAX INCENTIVES) 6 The list below summarizes the most relevant equity, financing, and tax incentives programs applied by NYCEDC to spur economic growth in New York City. Emerging Developer Loan Fund. NYCEDC found that there is a substantial financing gap for emerging developers that want to work on projects below USD 30 million. As a result, NYCEDC initially committed USD 10 million of capital to pilot 6 This section pulls information from: “Finance Solutions.” NYCEDC, https://edc.nyc/finance-solutions.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

B. STRATEGIC FINANCIAL STRUCTURING7 Business Improvement Districts. In addition to equity, financing, and tax incen7 This section is based on information from: “Business Improvement Districts.” BIDs - SBS, https://www1.nyc.gov/ 42

site/sbs/neighborhoods/bids.page; and Armstrong, Amy Gould, et al. The Benefits of Business Improvement Districts: Evidence from New York City. NYU, 2007, https://furmancenter.org/files/publications/FurmanCenterBIDsBrief.pdf.

tives programs, New York City has also promoted the creation of Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) to foster economic development across communities. BIDs are economic development organizations that deliver public services to specific neighborhoods to supplement the bundle of public services provided by the government. Unlike other neighborhood economic development organizations, BIDs are authorized by state legislation and are funded by mandatory assessment fees paid by merchants and property owners within the district. The menu of services provided varies across BIDs, but generally includes some combination of sanitation, security, capital improvements, neighborhood promotions, and business attraction. A BID is formed when property owners in a defined geographical area agree to levy an additional tax on themselves to improve the area’s conditions. The BID, operating as a non-profit, is then responsible for collecting the fee for all properties within the BID’s boundaries. The BID then uses the revenues to promote economic development either by enhancing services or delivering capital investments. Over the past few years, New York City has supported the development of BIDs to finance supplemental public services in designated commercial areas. BIDs are financed by fees paid by local property owners and use the funds to provide basic services such as sanitation and security, as well as neighborhood amenities such as unified signage, street lighting, and street plantings. New York City is home to more BIDs than any other city in the United States. Its BIDs, all of which have been formed within the past two decades, provide services to businesses in neighborhoods across the five boroughs. New York City’s BIDs reflect the diversity of the City’s neighborhoods, spanning from high-density office districts to more suburban-style retail strips. Their annual assessments range from a low of USD 53,000 for the 180th Street BID in Queens to a high of USD 11.25 million for the Downtown Alliance in Manhattan. Today, there are more than 70 BIDs in New York City that invest hundreds of millions of dollars per year and serve more than 90,000 businesses. They maintain more than 130 public spaces and collect several million trash bags per year. In short, the BIDs help create vibrant, clean, and safe districts, emphasizing self-funded investments. Public-Private Partnerships. New York City has also embraced Public-Private Partnerships to enhance public infrastructure and promote local economic development. To expand efforts in this direction, Mayor Bill de Blasio created the Mayor’s Office of Strategic Partnerships (OSP) in 2014. The Office has a mandate to oversee and develop high impact public-private partnerships for the City of New York and to engage the private sector in the Administration’s policy priorities. OSP seeks to build strategic partnerships with the business, philanthropic, and non-profit communities to further the Administration’s goal of addressing income inequality through innovative solutions that require cross-sector solutions. The Office has oversight of city-affiliated non-profit organizations called “Funds”, including the Mayor’s Fund to Advance New York City, the Fund for Public Schools, the Fund for Public Health in New York, and Gracie Mansion Conservancy, among others. OSP coordinates and aligns the strategies of the Funds and City agencies with mayoral priorities while working in an inter-disciplinary manner across government and the private sector.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

the Emerging Developer Loan Fund. The fund provides low-interest loans to New York City-based real estate projects including mixed-income housing; mixeduse, industrial, and commercial projects; and projects with development costs under USD 30 million. Accelerated Sales Tax Exemption Program. The Accelerated Sales Tax Exemption Program (ASTEP) provides companies with sales tax exemptions up to USD 100,000 for the purchase, installation, and maintenance of construction materials, equipment, and furnishings in order to upgrade, expand, and grow a variety of business activities. These incentives are administered through the NYCIDA and Build NYC Resource Corporation (Build NYC). NYCIDA programs are designed to support business growth through incentives for businesses, such as property tax reductions for up to 25 years, reductions on the mortgage recording tax, and/or a waiver on sales taxes for certain materials. Eligible businesses and projects include businesses renovating or constructing commercial office space in transit-rich parts of New York City; property owners leasing space to fashion manufacturers in the Garment District; and/or businesses building or expanding industrial facilities. Build NYC. Build NYC offers tax-exempt and taxable bond financing for tax-exempt organizations. This capital can be used for real estate, debt refinancing, or operations. Benefits may also include a mortgage recording tax waiver. Empowerment Zone Benefits. Businesses that qualify and operate in one of two New York City Empowerment Zones may be eligible for an employer wage credit for increased depreciation tax deductions. The federal zones are administered by local development corporations. Industrial Business Zone Relocation Tax Credit. The Industrial Business Zone (IBZ) Relocation Tax Credit is a one-time tax credit of USD 1,000 per relocated employee, up to a total maximum of USD 100,000. It is available to industrial and manufacturing firms relocating to or within one of the City’s IBZs. Industrial and manufacturing businesses relocating to an IBZ generally apply within the tax year of relocation. New York City Industrial Development Agency (NYCIDA) Commercial Office & Industrial Space/Facilities Incentives. NYCIDA tax incentives can lower the costs of constructing, renovating, and owning commercial office space and industrial facilities for tenants and developers. Commercial Expansion Program. The Commercial Expansion Program (CEP) provides property tax abatements for qualified new, renewal, and expansion leases for commercial offices and industrial/manufacturing spaces to increase tenant occupancy in a designated abatement zone. For manufacturing businesses, the abatement lasts for up to ten years depending on the lease. Commercial and manufacturing businesses apply within 180 days of lease commencement. Retail businesses are ineligible.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

C. FINANCING STRATEGY FOR URBAN REGENERATION New York City has also set up special purpose financial models that allow the city government to support urban regeneration initiatives such as public spaces, transit-oriented development, and large housing projects. This has resulted in a number of successful financial vehicles that illustrate the financial principles and instruments that other cities could adapt and adopt to improve their urban infrastructure. Through NYCEDC, the City of New York has mastered the skill of creating the appropriate corporate structures and financing instruments to create, finance, and sustain strategic urban regeneration projects. These structures could be for-profit or non-profit oriented, and carefully balance the costs, benefits, and risks related to each project. This allows viability and sustainability through a careful balance of assets and liabilities, while optimizing the need for subsidies. The urban regeneration financing strategy can be better explained by summarizing three emblematic projects: C.1 Public-Private Partnerships for Public Spaces: The High Line Linear Park.8 As of 2013, the model of a public-private partnership (PPP) to fund public parks was more than 30 years old. Since the 1980 creation in New York City of the groundbreaking Central Park Conservancy (CPC), the model had been adapted, advanced, and imitated across the country and around the world. New York was one of the most avid users of PPPs to restore and maintain green space. A recent success story includes the City’s High Line Park. 8 This section comes from the following source: “High Line Construction.” High Line Construction | Pub44

lic-Private Partnerships for Green Space in NYC, http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/caseconsortium/casestudies/128/casestudy/www/layout/case_id_128_id_903.html.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

Hunter’s Point South / Courtesy of TF Cornerstone

In 1999, the City prepared to sign off on the demolition of a disused elevated freight line that ran from Gansevoort Street north to the 34th Street rail yards through the Chelsea and West Village neighborhoods. Area residents had another idea. Determined to save the massive section of urban infrastructure, then owned by rail giant CSX Transportation Inc., neighborhood residents Joshua David and Robert Hammond stepped up. The politically connected and media savvy preservationists established Friends of the High Line as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. They worked to save the elevated, abandoned railways and eventually led the effort to convert it to a sizeable linear park. This would mean halting demolition, transferring the property from CSX to the City, “rail banking” the tracks under a federal program that allowed rails-to-trails conversions, and changing neighborhood zoning from primarily manufacturing to mixed use, including commercial and residential. When Mayor Bloomberg took office in 2002, prospects for the High Line improved. Unlike his predecessor Mayor Giuliani, Bloomberg saw the project as integral to lower Manhattan’s recovery from the September 2001 terrorist attacks and as a complement to economic development plans for the area near the former World Trade Center. The Mayor’s Office decided to pursue the idea of an overhead park. In 2003, Friends of the High Line spurred community interest in the potential of the viaduct by sponsoring a competition for whimsical design ideas. The winning submission was a 1.7-mile lap pool, the runner up a roller coaster. A serious design competition followed in 2004. The winners were landscape architects and urban designers James Corner Field Operations, and architects Diller Scofidio+Renfro. James Corner became project lead and the landscape architect for the project. Meanwhile, the City took steps to make the park possible. In 2005, it rezoned the area to create the Special West Chelsea District. This area on the Lower West Side, from 16th Street to 30th Street between 10th and 11th Avenues, had been zoned mostly for light industry and commercial use. The West Chelsea rezoning permitted a mix of residential, commercial, and some manufacturing (for art galleries). The scheme hinged on a provision for the transfer of development rights from properties located directly under or flanking the High Line’s easement to parcels along 10th and 11th Avenues. The transfer meant that the mostly private owners under the viaduct, who previously favored demolition so they could build on their property, could now benefit by selling their development rights to developers on 10th and 11th who wanted to build higher than originally permitted. The rezoning included a bonus: property owners developing lots adjacent to the High Line between West 16th and West 19th Streets could, for a fee, build a higher Floor-to-Area Ratio (FAR) than the previous zoning allowed. The additional monies would go to a High Line Improvement Fund for amenities such as elevators, stairways, and public restrooms. The fee, at USD 50 per square foot, was well below the market rate in the neighborhood, which could reach hundreds of dollars per square foot. Developers took advantage to expand. Chelsea Market, for example, controversially even persuaded authorities to shift the District’s border south and east to include their property so that it could leverage the bonus incentive to enlarge. The City Planning Commission approved the expansion on the condition that Chelsea Market direct roughly a third of the USD 19 million in bonus fees to an affordable housing fund and educational programs in nearby public housing.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

C.2 Innovative Financing for Urban Regeneration through Transit-Oriented Development (TOD): The Case of New York’s Hudson Yards.9 Less than a mile west of Times Square along the shore of the Hudson River, workers are transforming Manhattan’s last frontier of developable land into millions of square feet of office, residential, and commercial space — one of the largest private real estate projects in U.S. history. At Hudson Yards, a massive 37,000-ton platform will cover dozens of acres of live train tracks. The development, 45 square blocks of rail yard and industrial land between 30th to 42nd Streets, will surely be studied for its planning, design, and engineering, but one of the most innovative aspects of the project is its financing. New York City is redeveloping Hudson Yards with the understanding that public actions such as regulatory changes or infrastructure investment can generate large increases in the value of land. Large private development has been made possible by rezoning the area, beginning in 2005, from mostly industrial to mixed use. The City also funded the first addition to the New York subway system in 26 years, an extension of the number 7 line to the new 34th Street–Hudson Yards Station, which opened in Fall 2015. These two actions alone are projected to generate billions of dollars in increased land value. Through a policy approach known as land value capture, the city will recover some of the new land value and use it for public benefit — for the subway extension itself, as well as the reconstruction of a street, the development of affordable housing, and the provision of green space. Much of the up-front capital to pay for the public investments will come from USD 3 billion in bonds sold to investors. The bonds will be repaid through revenues tied to the increase in land value, and other sources. One of the largest revenue sources to repay the bonds will be property taxes distributed through a mechanism similar to tax increment financing. The city established boundaries around the Hudson Yards District, inside of which property taxes from new or newly renovated buildings are set aside for infrastructure within the District. Additional revenues will come from bonuses paid by developers for the right to build at greater density than would otherwise be allowed, and from the sale of development rights to builders of commercial buildings along a planned boulevard and park. Some developers can also become eligible to build more square footage by building a portion of the boulevard and park. Finally, residential developers that purchase bonuses are required to set aside a portion of their projects for

affordable units or pay fees for the construction of affordable housing elsewhere in the neighborhood. All of this is coordinated through a complex legal and financial framework that includes two independent development corporations established by the City, which work in collaboration with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and other public agencies. The project has not been free from criticism. The property tax revenues are partly limited by tax breaks given to entice office developers, who make payments in lieu of taxes (PILOTs) discounted up to 40 percent for 19 years. The City also had to spend more than expected from its general fund during the project’s early years to help pay interest on the bonds, compensating for a slower than expected pace of development, and thus slower growth of land-based revenues. Still, the project is instructive for cities looking to capitalize on the land value generated by public actions, which often escapes completely as private windfalls.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

Together, these measures opened the way for development that all hoped would generate enough additional tax revenue to offset the City’s cost to renovate the elevated freight line. The first of the High Line’s three half-mile sections opened in 2009 and the second section in 2011. The first two sections of the park cost USD 152.3 million, of which the City provided USD 112.2 million, the federal government USD 20 million, and New York State USD 400,000. By 2013, the City’s analysis put the cumulative economic benefit of the park at close to a billion dollars, well over the roughly USD 200 million that had been originally projected.

C.3 Housing: Hunter’s Point South Redevelopment Project.10 Hunter’s Point South is a proposed mixed-use, affordable housing development situated on approximately 30 acres of prime waterfront property in Long Island City, Queens. Up to 5,000 housing units, 60 per cent of which will be affordable to low/moderate income families, are expected to be developed on the site. NYCEDC, as part of an inter-agency initiative, seeks to revitalize this underutilized waterfront to improve the quality of life of New York City residents. NYCEDC’s scope includes the design and construction of the infrastructure and roadway as well as a ten-acre waterfront park, which will support the seven housing parcels of Hunter’s Point South. This Project is being implemented in phases, with NYCEDC’s scope of Phase 1 completed in August 2013. Phase 1 of the Infrastructure and Waterfront Park Project includes the area bound by 50th Avenue to the north, 2nd Street to the east, 54th Avenue to the south, and the East River to the west. Phase 2 includes the area bound by 54th Avenue to the north, 2nd Street to the east, Newtown Creek to the south, and the East River to the west. Construction companies Phipps Houses, Related Companies, and Monadnock Construction have been selected to complete Phase 1 housing construction of the project. This includes two mixed-use buildings of more than nine hundred housing units and roughly 20,000 square feet of new retail space. One hundred percent of the housing in this phase will be for low, moderate, and middle-income families. Other additions will include five acres of new waterfront parkland, a new school, new retail space, and parking. TF Cornerstone has been selected to complete the third housing parcel in Phase 1. To develop this project, the City has directly provided a USD 700 million loan package that includes a USD 173.3 million mortgage from the Department of Housing Preservation and Development. IV. SUCCESS FACTORS To achieve economic growth and employment generation through investment at-

9 Information in this section comes from the following source: “Innovative Financing at New York’s Hudson 46

Yards.” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 22 Mar. 2017, https://www.lincolninst.edu/news/lincoln-house-blog/

10 Information in this section comes from the following source: “Hunter’s Point South.” NYCEDC, https://edc.

innovative-financing-new-yorks-hudson-yards.

nyc/project/hunters-point-south.

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

traction, NYCEDC has become a commercial development corporation. However, due to its non-profit nature, the capital revenues obtained are reinvested in the development of better communities. In this process of becoming an effective and high performing LEDA, there have been various unique factors of success that are worth considering for replication in other cities to improve local economic development: capital structure, organizational structure, partnerships, tax incentives, financial incentives, among others, as described below. A. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LED APPROACH IN NEW YORK CITY Capital Structure. The NYCEDC capital structure is unique and different from other city agencies. Its asset management is the main source of funding for investment projects, and its capital investment budget is funded with revenues from a portfolio of capital assets. A portion of the Department of Small Business Services’ (SBS) expense budget goes to NYCEDC to fund non-capital related expenses, which are typically programs that NYCEDC executes on behalf of other agencies. It should be noted, however, that these funds do not cover NYCEDC’s operating expenses. Since NYCEDC is a self-sustaining non-profit organization that was created to drive and shape New York’s economic growth, a portion of its revenues comes from city grants, which in turn are funded by local tax revenues. NYCEDC uses city resources to create a bridge between city agencies, private businesses, and local communities. NYCEDC has established three main lines of business, which represent successful practices: 1. A capital construction and asset management firm, which oversees 80 million square feet of ports, cruise terminals, heliports, industrial facilities, and other city-owned assets; and implements a USD 3 billion capital construction portfolio for park, streetscape, and infrastructure development. 2. A real estate planning and development firm, which focuses on neighborhood-wide planning and physical development, harnessing underutilized assets and brownfield sites, and catalyzing growth around the city. 3. A strategic planning and implementation firm (a “think and do tank”), which helps traditional industries adapt to global disruption, encourages the development of emerging sectors, and helps build strong career pathways through the workforce system. NYCEDC’s 501(c)(3) Status. As a non-profit corporation that performs economic development services for the City, NYCEDC can complete its projects more efficiently because it is not bound by the same set of operational regulations and requirements as other New York City agencies. This 501(c)(3) status gives NYCEDC particular advantages around contract procurement. This status has also given them the flexibility to respond to the changing economic climate. An example of this is how before Fall 2008, NYCEDC had already engaged an internal team of real estate experts to examine how it could maximize the use of the City’s real estate portfolio. The team has made several recommendations to NYCEDC’s leadership and has identified ways to save the City and its taxpayers a significant amount of money.11

Brooklyn Navy Yard / Rendering via Steiner NYC

Organizational Structure. NYCEDC operates under the guidance of the Deputy Mayor for Economic Development and has city, state, federal, and regional agencies; businesses; and residents as partners. Notwithstanding, it has an agile and independent corporate structure that allows for the creation and dissolution of project teams and investment vehicles. For instance, in the process of neighborhood revitalization, NYCEDC works in partnership with city agencies, local officials, and community members to harness the benefits of private development initiatives. It establishes a development plan and executes that plan with a private developer to bring about lasting change in the communities in which it acts. Another success factor is the significant presence of private businesses on the Board of Directors of NYCEDC. Partnerships. The relationships NYCEDC has with other agencies and actors vary from project to project. At times, NYCEDC acts as a thought partner, providing expertise and research services to agencies. At other times, NYCEDC serves as a facilitator, bringing several stakeholders together to move a project forward. NYCEDC also serves as a project lead in situations where it is the best candidate to complete a project successfully and efficiently. It has close working relationships with many organizations across the City, and a number of critical relationships that include: Office of the Mayor; Deputy Mayor of Economic Development; Department of Parks and Recreation; Department of City Planning; Office of Long Term Planning; Department of Housing, Preservation, and Development; Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications; Department of Transportation; Department of Small Business Services; Department of Finance; Office of Management and Budget; New York State’s Metropolcies and Companies.” Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), June 2010, https://doi.

48 11 Clark, Greg, et al. “Organising Local Economic Development: The Role of Development Agen-

org/10.1787/9789264083530-en

CASE STUDIES—NEW YORK

itan Transportation Authority; Port Authority of NYC and New Jersey; and Empire State Development Corporation. Highly Talented and Broadly Skilled Staff. NYCEDC can effectively contribute to local economic development because of the broad range of expertise and commitment of its leadership and staff. NYCEDC has real estate professionals, engineers, management consultants, economic analysts, and attorneys, among several other professionals on its staff. Its diverse staff allows it to look at a policy or real estate challenge across several different dimensions and to tackle economic development challenges in a thoughtful and innovative way.12 B. KEY ECONOMIC STRATEGY, FINANCING, AND IMPLEMENTATION FACTORS Tax Incentives. In order to successfully deliver economic opportunity, there have been various economic development incentives used by the NYCEDC that have contributed to local development and investment promotion, mainly in the form of tax abatements (tax incentives are listed and described in section III.A). Corporate Efficiency. Relative to other agencies and government departments, NYCEDC is a small, responsive, and flexible organization. The fact that NYCEDC structures operations in small, narrow-purpose teams, which are almost always constituted by members from different departments, is beneficial. It permits the cross fertilization of ideas, minimizes bureaucracy, and improves efficiency. Strong Revenue Generating and Maximizing Capability. NYCEDC has been able to successfully meet its increased financial commitment to the City, cut its expenses where possible, and, with the help of its internal consulting departments, optimally leverage its assets to produce additional revenue. Internal Self-evaluation Framework. Given the current pressures, NYCEDC recognizes the need to be even smarter, faster, and more flexible with its work. The organization is continuously reviewing its internal operations to increase efficiency. NYCEDC also reaches out to community groups and asks for ideas as a common practice. By improving the quality of its connections with its stakeholders, NYCEDC can enhance its customer service orientation. Financial Incentives. Finally, through its tax and bond incentives, NYCEDC has been able to successfully lower the costs of large urban regeneration projects that increase investment, generate jobs, and significantly improve the quality of life in the local communities in which the investments take place.

12 Clark, Greg, et al. “Organising Local Economic Development: The Role of Development Agen50

cies and Companies.” Local Economic and Employment Development (LEED), June 2010, https://doi. org/10.1787/9789264083530-en

Philadelphia Case Study

I. INTRODUCTION Philadelphia’s Local Economic Development Agency is the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation (PIDC), a non-profit agency founded by the City of Philadelphia and the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce in 1958. PIDC capitalizes on its experience in managing the City’s industrial land inventory to provide financing, advisory, and public-private partnership structuring for the City’s key policy areas and priorities. To this day, PIDC has acquired, improved, and sold more than 2,800 acres (1,133 hectares) in 6,700 projects distributed over 90 percent of Philadelphia’s zip codes. The Corporation indicates that financing for USD 14 billion has leveraged over USD 25 billion in total, and its direct loan and managed third-party portfolio at the start of 2016 exceeded USD 642 million. PIDC has invested USD 49 million in low-income communities and has lent USD 12 million to small growing businesses.1

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES (LEDAS)

A. THE VISION OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) PIDC’s stated mission is “to spur investment, support business growth, and foster developments that create jobs and revitalize neighborhoods.”2 PIDC attracts, manages, and invests resources with the backing of both private and public sectors to drive evenly distributed economic growth throughout Philadelphia. In a city with a significant industrial footprint, PIDC provides spatial and market knowledge to clients who range from non-profit organizations to real estate developers to commercial and industrial businesses. B. POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL GENESIS PIDC was created at the time that migration of industrial corporations away from Philadelphia was having a negative impact on its economic base. Mayor Joseph Clark (1952-56), an advocate of administration modernization, envisioned a local government entity that could engage with businesses directly to promote economic development. This was the seed of PIDC, leading to its founding as a non-profit entity by the City of Philadelphia and the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce in 1958 by Mayor Richardson Dilworth (1956-62). An independent entity with public and private equity in equal proportion, PIDC’s mandate was to tackle the rapidly deteriorating industrial sector – hence the “I” for “industrial” in PIDC’s name. The goal was to keep as much industrial activities as possible in Philadelphia. PIDC operated across the City purchasing, upgrading, and selling land in new industrial parks; investing in urban infrastructure; and issuing industrial revenue bonds to finance the retention of the manufacturing and industrial economy and job base. As Philadelphia transitioned away from a major industrial center and towards a globalized economy in the 1980s and 1990s, PIDC supported economic diversification, capitalizing on its extensive real estate expertise; its bond-financing tools; its growing land and capital endowment; and its know-how to deploy and manage those assets. This profile was written by Pablo Vaggione under the supervision of Gilberto Chona (IDB) and IDB Cities Network Team in the context of the Local Economic Development Agencies Cutting Edge.

1 PIDC, https://www.pidcphila.com/impact/stats 2 PIDC, http://www.pidcphila.com/

53 53

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

C. THE MAIN STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) IN PHILADELPHIA Greater Philadelphia’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) document underlines three main objectives: i) generate economic opportunities for everyone; ii) help Philadelphia compete globally; and iii) sustain a high quality of life. In addition to economic development priorities such as transportation, education, international trade and business climate, the CEDS emphasizes urban revitalization, workforce development, and advancing social equity and diversity.4 The CEDS is managed by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC), the organization responsible for metropolitan planning for nine counties in the greater Philadelphia area.5 Although each county has its own approach to the economic development process, they have identified the following common goals: • Increase economic productivity; • Diversify local wealth; • Improve the culture for underrepresented businesses; and • Increase individual prosperity for the region’s residents.6 PIDC is one of the county-level economic development-related organizations in Greater Philadelphia. II. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A. APPROACH 1. Theoretical principles The CEDS builds on the Keystone Principles for Growth, Investment, and Resource Conservation. The Principles, agreed upon by 23 state agencies, identify general goals and objectives for economic development and resource conservation. They are designed as a coordinated interagency approach through the state’s investments in communities.7 The Principles document underlines the importance of urban regeneration, prioritizing the reuse of previously developed “brownfield” sites in urban, subur3 PIDC, https://www.pidcphila.com/who-we-are 4 Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, https://www.dvrpc.org/Economic/ 5 Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia in Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Gloucester, and Mercer in New Jersey. 6 Greater Philadelphia Economic Development Framework, https://www.dvrpc.org/reports/09008.pdf 54

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

When Philadelphia, home of the first bank in the United States, started losing its prominence as a banking center due to closures and consolidations in the sector, PIDC began providing lending services and structured complex transactions in partnerships with private banks. During the 1980s, reacting to changing regulatory conditions, PIDC devised new ways to attract capital, finance projects, and retain and create jobs and tax revenue. PIDC is governed by a thirty-member Board of Directors, appointed by the Mayor of Philadelphia and the President of the Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce. The Corporation operates with 65 full-time professionals and an annual budget that originates from service fees generated by its activities.3

7 Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Keystone Principles for Growth, Investment, and Resource Conservation, http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/bhp/pkp.pdf

Philadelphia Navy Yard / Photo courtesy of PIDC

ban, and rural areas. It also proposes mixed-use, dense development in designated growth areas should capitalize on the improvement of existing road infrastructure, intermodal connections, and public water and sewer networks. According to the Principles, new development shall be compact, walkable, and bikeable. Neighborhoods should conserve land and be integrated with existing or planned transportation, water and sewer services, and schools. This intent will be further supported by the provision of housing for all income groups in a coordinated manner with the location of jobs, public transit, services, schools, and other existing infrastructure. Private and public expansion of services are required to be consistent with approved comprehensive plans. The Principles promote development that respects and enhances natural resources, including the conservation and restoration of environmentally sensitive lands and areas with ecological value, biodiversity, and wildlife habitat. They aim to maintain and improve recreational and heritage assets, including forests, parks, historic sites, and areas offering recreational and cultural opportunities. 2. Applied methodology The Economic Development Administration (EDA) requires that comprehensive economic development strategies include a section which identifies regional projects, programs, and activities designed to implement their goals and objectives. Building on the Keystone Principles, a number of projects have been identified by the region’s economic development agencies and organizations as most likely to contribute towards attaining CEDS’ goals and objectives. Projects cover a wide range of types, including planning, research, job training, workforce development, redevelopment, adaptive re-use, waterfront development, site acquisition, construction, and infrastructure investment; estimated costs range from USD 75,000 to several million dollars. Project sponsors have identified a multitude of different funding sources, often (but not always) including the EDA.

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

2. Employment generation The strategy’s aim is to grow the economy to create family-sustaining jobs for all. This includes the following actions: • Establishing a Business Acceleration Team and improving customer service • Eliminating Business Income and Receipts Tax (BIRT) filing for small businesses • Expanding entrepreneurial supports for people of color, women, and immigrants • Building global identity • Deploying smart business incentives • Investing in logistics, distribution, and transportation infrastructure • Identifying a cluster-based growth strategy C. MAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS 1. Regeneration of industrial assets The decline of the manufacturing sector in the Greater Philadelphia region during the 1970s, 1980s, and early 1990s has left a significant amount of dilapidated industrial land and building assets. The reutilization of such assets is a key component of the city’s economic development programs. For example, the implementation of the industrial land strategy, sponsored by PIDC, is a USD 100 million effort that includes site acquisition, remediation and infrastructure improvements, and renovation of underutilized industrial properties in districts identified through the Industrial Market Analysis and Land Use Study conducted by the Commerce Department, the City Planning Commission, and PIDC.8 For example, the Economic Development Framework cites the adaptive reuse of 4601 Market Street, the 320,000 sq. ft. former headquarters of the Reliance In-

surance Company, into a new headquarters facility for the Philadelphia Police Department for a cost of USD 60 million; and the transformation of the former DuPont Marshall Laboratories into a multi-tenant research, development, and advanced manufacturing center, at a cost of USD 50 million.9 The reutilization of the Navy Yard, a former military facility, is a key PIDC project. The project goal is to improve the site infrastructure to enable a dynamic, mixeduse development. With a cost of USD 65 million, specific improvements include the reconstruction of the Broad Street access bridge, the main thoroughfare into the Navy Yard; seawall repairs; streetscape improvements; broadband infrastructure; upgrade of power distribution facilities; abatement and demolition of buildings; water and sewer utility upgrades; and the fit-out of labs and office space. A complementary project described in the Economic Development Framework is the Net Zero Energy Innovation Center, which consists of the design, construction, and operation of a “net-zero” energy efficient building at the Navy Yard, to function as a living laboratory on building technology development with research, education, and commercialization activities.10

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

B. POLICY AREAS 1. Economic growth Under Mayor Jim Kenney, in office since 2016, the City released “Growing with Equity: Philadelphia’s Vision for Inclusive Growth”, a document that describes the administration’s plans to support continued economic growth. The document highlights the following policy directions for economic growth: • Regenerating neighborhoods, steering development to existing centers which are well-served by infrastructure and utilities. Allocate public investment in infrastructure that spurs private investment and contributes to expand Greater Philadelphia’s connections to the global economy. • Developing talent, increasing the quality and productivity of the labor force. Create appropriate jobs that match workforce supply in distressed areas and for populations most in need. Develop industry partnerships, apprenticeships, and career skills training, improving degree completion and creating a diverse talent pool. Support innovation, new business formation, and the growth of key economic sectors, including the emerging “green” economy.

2. Regeneration of urban areas Within the CEDS, several projects promoted by the City of Philadelphia intend to spur private development to regenerate aging urban areas. The investment in the upgrade of public space and the promotion of commercial and cultural activities, and the role of civic organizations such as Center City District, have been key components in the regeneration of run-down urban areas. For example, the USD 20 million improvements of the Avenue of the Arts, which comprises infrastructure and streetscape improvements, including lighting, trees, and sidewalks; the improvements of the Benjamin Franklin Parkway, a focal point for Center City, which involve extensive landscape and roadway enhancements to restore the Parkway as a tree-lined boulevard that is engaging for pedestrians and bike riders, allocating a budget of USD 17 million to new public art, street improvements, and enhanced green spaces; and a master plan for the revitalization of Centennial District through improvements such as land use, transportation, signage, and community development. Center City has experienced extraordinary growth over the past 15 years, with large amounts of people visiting parks and streets, and shopping, dining, and attending entertainment events. The Center City District reports downtown retail space occupancy remains at an all-time high of 88 percent and the number of fine restaurants has increased by 240 percent since 1992.11 IV. FINANCIAL STRATEGY A. INVESTMENT ATTRACTION (FINANCING AND TAX INCENTIVES) PIDC offers a variety of financial products to assist the growth of businesses both based in or relocating to Philadelphia. According to Philadelphia Business Services, 9 Greater Philadelphia Economic Development Framework, https://www.dvrpc.org/reports/09008.pdf

8 An Industrial Market & Land Use Strategy For The City Of Philadelphia (2010) http://www.pidc.pidcphila.com/

10 Ibid.

images/uploads/resource_library/PIMLUS_Executive_Summary_Final_September_2010.pdf

11 Center City, https://centercityphila.org/research-reports/state-of-center-city-2019

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

Business loans include: Working Capital and Equipment Loan. Supports small and midsize businesses and nonprofits that need term financing for working capital, equipment, or leasehold improvements to support their growth. Loans are directed to small and midsize businesses with revenues between USD 150,000 and 10 million which have been in operation for at least two years, among other eligibility criteria. Priority is given to businesses that are in a low to moderate income census tract or primarily employ low to moderate income individuals. Capital Project Loan. The Capital Project Loan supports businesses and non-profits undertaking capital projects such as building acquisition, renovation, leasehold improvements, or equipment purchases that need additional financing to complete the project. PIDC can typically fund up to 40 percent of the total project cost (with a maximum loan size of USD 750,000), and borrowers must create at least one new full-time equivalent job for every USD 35,000 lent. Loans can be used for property acquisition, construction or renovation of buildings, machinery and equipment, and soft costs. Contract Line of Credit. The Contract Line of Credit Loan provides support to small, minority, women, and disabled-owned businesses that need a line of credit to fund contract-related working capital. To qualify, contracts must be assignable to PIDC. Use of funds is restricted to labor, materials, and equipment costs directly associated with the contract being financed. Borrowers are required to participate in PIDC-sponsored technical assistance programs designed to support their business growth. Partner Bank Guarantee. The Partner Bank Guarantee Program is available to any small business or non-profit located in or planning to move to Philadelphia that is having difficulty accessing conventional financing. Through this program, PIDC provides a guarantee of up to 50 percent of the loan amount through an approved partner bank with a maximum guarantee amount of USD 250,000. In terms of project development finance: Subordinate Term Loan. The Subordinate Term Loan provides financing to experienced developers of commercial and industrial projects of all sizes throughout all neighborhoods of Philadelphia. PIDC seeks to fill funding gaps in projects that will create jobs for low and moderate income people, spur investment in underserved areas, and/or improve building energy efficiency. Loans can be used for property acquisition, construction/building renovation, machinery and equipment, and soft costs. Welcome Fund (EB-5) Loan. The Welcome Fund Loan provides low-interest senior financing for large-scale, job-creating projects undertaken by strong governmental, corporate, or institutional sponsors. The federal EB-5 program provides

12 City of Philadelphia Business Services, https://business.phila.gov/city-state-and-federal-loan-programs/ 13 PIDC, https://www.pidcphila.com

an opportunity for prospective immigrants to invest in U.S.-based commercial enterprises, qualifying the investors for residency status. The program is under the oversight of the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). Loans can be used for new construction, building renovations, tenant improvements, machinery and equipment, and working capital. Bridge Loan. The Bridge Loan provides interim financing to bridge timing gaps for contract receivables, primarily State and City grants. The program is particularly targeted to assist recipients of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s Redevelopment Assistance Capital Program (RACP) grants. Capital projects that promote sustainable, green building practices can be funded with the following PIDC Loan Program: Stormwater Management Incentives Program. The City of Philadelphia, through the Philadelphia Water Department (PWD), and PIDC created the Stormwater Management Incentives Program (SMIP) to offer low-interest financing to stimulate investment in and utilization of stormwater best management practices which reduce a parcel’s contribution of stormwater to the City’s system. Use of funds is restricted to loans which support the design and construction of stormwater mitigation measures. This may include, but is not limited to, detention and retention basins, swales, detention pipes, infiltration basins, green roofs, porous paving, and rain gardens. Loans range from USD 75,000 to 1,000,000.

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

the Corporation initiates loans starting at USD 50,000. Amounts are generally determined based on the number of jobs created by a project and capped at 40 percent of total project cost.12 This section is based on information available from PIDC.13

Tax-advantaged financing includes: Tax Increment Financing (TIF). The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania has approved the Tax Increment Financing Act that authorizes the taxing bodies of the City of Philadelphia (the City and School District) to create “TIF Districts” where certain increases in tax revenue may be used to finance improvements in the district. The TIF loan is usually funded by a private lender, i.e., bank, and is paid by the incremental taxes from Real Estate, Use and Occupancy, City Sales, and Business Privilege. This financing tool enables local taxing bodies to establish a district in a blighted area within which increases in taxes resulting from development of the district can be applied to project costs in the district or to project-related debt service. PIDC, acting on behalf of the Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development (PAID), can propose any area of the City to City Council and the School District for approval as a TIF District under the terms of the Act. Any new improvements can be funded by the TIF loan. Uses include new construction, building rehabilitation, site improvements, machinery and equipment acquisition, and limited settlement and processing fees. The amount of the TIF funding or loan is determined by the present value of the incremental tax revenue discounted according to the lender’s underwriting criteria. The term of the TIF District and, therefore, the financing cannot exceed 20 years. The interest rate of the TIF Note will depend on the lender’s criteria. Repayment is secured among the TIF Developer, City, School District, PAID, and TIF Lender by the TIF Agreement. Tax Exempt Bond Program. Administered by PIDC, provides tax-exempt bond financing for capital projects or equipment lease/purchase by certain manufactur-

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

B. STRATEGIC FINANCIAL STRUCTURING Business Improvement Districts (BID): Funds for BID programs and services are generated from a special assessment paid by the benefited property owners directly to the organization that manages the BID’s activities. Assessments are paid by each property owner and determined by, for example, the property’s linear front footage along a sidewalk, or by its share of the total assessed value for real estate tax purposes of the entire district. Because they are authorized by the City of Philadelphia, the assessment becomes a legal obligation of the property owner and failure to pay can result in the filing of a lien.14 BIDs can supplement their budgets from other sources such as grants, parking revenues, sponsorship income, or other income-producing activities. Owners of properties that are exempt from real estate taxes, such as churches and nonprofit organizations, are not subject to the BID assessment but may contribute through a voluntary agreement. Some BIDs in Philadelphia do not impose an assessment on residential properties, or only assess income-producing or multi-unit residential properties. The total yearly amount collected for all BID properties is unique to each BID, ranging from approximately USD 50,000 to 15 million. Fourteen BIDs have been

established between 1990 and 2008 in Philadelphia:15 • Chestnut Hill District • Mount Airy • Roxborough District • Manayunk Special Services District • City Avenue District • University City District • East Passyunk Avenue • Germantown Special Services District • Port Richmond Industrial Development Enterprise (PRIDE) • Aramingo Shopping District • Old City District • Center City District • South Street/Headhouse District • Sports Complex Special Services District

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

ing or 501(c)(3) organizations. PAID issues bonds that are non-recourse to PAID and PIDC requiring the beneficiary (non-profit or manufacturer) or bank guarantor to be responsible for the repayment of the debt to the Bond purchasers. The Bond purchaser and/or guarantor, in consultation with the investment broker or underwriter and borrowers, determine(s) all business terms, including collateral, amount, term, and rate. New Markets Tax Credits (NMTC). A federal tax credit program designed to generate private sector capital investment in low-income areas. The program permits individual and corporate taxpayers to receive credit against their federal income taxes for making qualified equity investments in projects that finance community development, stimulate economic growth, and create jobs. To be eligible, an applicant must demonstrate that a proposed project will provide long-term benefits to the low-income community. The applicant and/or project must also be in an eligible census tract. Priority is given to projects located in census tracts that have a poverty rate of greater than 30 percent, an area median income of less than 60 percent of the metropolitan statistical area, and an unemployment rate of more than 1.5 times the national average. Appropriate uses of funds include property acquisition, if associated with substantial renovation or new construction; and machinery, equipment, and working capital, if these are associated with business growth, new construction, or substantial renovation. NMTC financing consists of an equity investment from an investor and a loan from a third-party lender (Leverage Lender) on a non-recourse basis funded into an Investment Fund. The Investment Fund is used to make Qualified Low-Income Community Investments (QLICIs), in the form of loans, to a Qualified Active Low-Income Community Business (QALICB, Borrower).

Center City District. In 1991, the Central Philadelphia Development Corporation (CPDC) created the Center City District (CCD) business improvement district with the objective of making Center City clean and safe. CCD directly bills and collects mandatory payments from properties in the district and receives voluntary contributions from the owners of tax-exempt properties that benefit from its services. In exchange, CCD makes physical improvements to streetscaping in the area, for example installing and maintaining lighting, signage, trees, and landscape elements; manages Dilworth, Sister Cities, John F. Collins, and Cret parks; and provides security, cleaning, and promotional services. These services supplement, but do not replace, basic services provided by the City of Philadelphia and the fundamental responsibilities of property owners.16 CCD indicates that hotels in the district generate 3.5 million hotel room nights and 17,400 hospitality jobs. Overall, Center City has 42 percent of Philadelphia’s jobs. CCD is governed by a 23-member Board of Directors, representing Center City’s major property owners and a wide cross-section of businesses, labor unions, neighborhoods, and civic and health-care organizations. University City District. University City District (UCD), launched in 1997, covers an area of 1,536 acres (621 hectares). The University of Pennsylvania and Drexel University, as well as the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, are in this part of West Philadelphia, which is served by intercity, regional, metro, and trolley public transportation networks. UCD is a partnership of academic institutions, small businesses, and residents. It invests in public spaces, provides additional public safety, street cleaning, and marketing services for commercial corridors, as well as help in coordinating district initiatives. According to UCD, the area has 55,000 residents and generates 80,000 jobs, principally in hospitals, universities, IT, and hospitality. It has become a center for innovation with USD 1.48 billion allocated to R&D.17

14 The City of Philadelphia Department of Commerce and Drexel University’s Center for Public Policy. Starting a

15 Ibid.

Business Improvement District in Philadelphia. https://business.phila.gov/media/Starting-A-BID-in-Philadel-

16 Center City District, https://centercityphila.org/

phia-FINAL.pdf

17 University City District, https://www.universitycity.org/

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

C. FINANCING STRATEGY FOR URBAN REGENERATION C1. Navy Yard. The Navy Yard project consists of the redevelopment of a 1,000 acre (about 400 hectares) former military facility. PIDC acquired control of the Navy Yard in 2000, and, as master developer, manages master planning, leasing, property management, infrastructure including roads and mass transit, utility operation, and structuring development transactions.22 The Navy Yard is within walking distance from Philadelphia’s sports stadiums, close to Philadelphia’s International Airport and Amtrak’s 30th Street Station, and a short subway or bus ride to Center City and University City districts. Two bus routes and multiple bike sharing stations facilitate mobility to and within the site. After acquiring the property, PIDC solicited proposals from local developers to 18 Plan for the Manayunk Special Services District, https://phila.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=1236595&GUID=8DDA4484-0ED3-4F63-9505-D5DE485D37FD 19 Fisher, Geraldine A., “The Gentrification of Manayunk” (2006). Theses (Historic Preservation). 5. http://repository.upenn.edu/hp_theses/5 20 Public-Private Partnerships, https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Pages/default.aspx

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

Manayunk Special Services District. The Manayunk Special Services District (MSSD), in Northwest Philadelphia, is a non-profit organization established in 1997 to maintain a clean and safe business district, manage capital improvements, and conduct marketing and promotion activities. It provides services such as pedestrian lighting improvements; year-round seasonal lighting; public art, signage, plantings, and other beautification; parking signage, access, and management; security improvements; and sidewalk cleaning. The source of funds is a special assessment on commercial properties on and adjacent to Main Street in the MSSD area. Owner-occupied residential properties including single-family homes and residential condominiums are the only classes of taxable property exempt from the MSSD assessment.18 Modest row houses within walking distance of Main Street with 19th century run-down storefronts and mill buildings characterized Manayunk in the 1970s. Today, the area is an upscale post-industrial neighborhood with intact 19th century architecture and increased real estate prices. Its vacant factories and rundown storefronts have been transformed into luxury condominiums, fashionable restaurants, and upscale boutiques and shops.19 Public-Private Partnerships: In addition to the projects delivered by PIDC in the reuse of industrial land, the Pennsylvania Transportation P3 Office indicates that it develops innovative project delivery and financing models to improve the condition of bridges, increase motorist safety, enhance mass transit and rail service, and in some cases, generate new revenue to support future investment.20 The P3 Office identifies, screens, develops and, once financing has been secured, assists with contract management and serves as a resource for any commercial issues that may arise during the project’s development, operations, and maintenance phases. The P3 Office’s role also includes certain contract compliance responsibilities.21

Philadelphia Navy Yard / Photo courtesy of PIDC

transform the former industrial yard to a mixed-use campus. A comprehensive master plan, developed in 2004, retained historic structures and included specifications for new high-performance, LEED-certified buildings. According to the master plan, the diverse, flexible building design options, with varying heights and floorplates, enhance the commercial attractiveness of the development.23 More than USD 150 million in publicly funded infrastructure improvements has leveraged in excess of USD 750 million of private investment. Today 13,500 employees work in the Navy Yard in 150 companies ranging from the headquarters of retail corporations to technology startups, manufacturers, life sciences and corporate R&D, and a graduate engineering and research satellite of Penn State University. These companies occupy over 7.5 million sq. ft. of office, industrial, and research and development space. According to Navy Yard, the development will support an additional 10 million square feet of commercial and residential development at full buildout.24 C2. Center City District and Dilworth Park. The Center City business improvement district covers an area of 1,325 acres (536 hectares) and has around 193,000 residents. It features a blend of historic sites such as the Liberty Bell and Independence Hall, with modern structures like the Comcast Center. CCD is at the confluence of a multimodal public transport system of regional scale, consisting of rail lines, rapid transit and trolley lines and bus routes. These transit networks bring nearly 300,000 passengers every weekday to the area. According to CCD, the Pennsylvania Convention Center, cultural destinations such as the Barnes Foundation and the Franklin Institute, recreational spaces, and a variety of cultural activities, contributed to attract more than 18 million visitors in 2018. In 2014, Center City District completed the USD 55 million, ten-year transfor-

21 The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Providing for Public Private Transportation Partnerships Implementation 62

Manual & Guidelines. https://www.penndot.gov/ProjectAndPrograms/p3forpa/Documents/P3%20Offiice%20

23 Philadelphia Navy Yard Master Plan, https://www.pidcphila.com/images/uploads/resource_library/TheNavy-

Documents/P3%20Implementation%20Manual%20and%20Guidelines%20Amended%20November%202015.pdf

Yard2004MasterPlan-NEW.pdf

22 Navy Yard Philadelphia, https://navyyard.org/

24 Navy Yard Philadelphia, https://navyyard.org/impact/stats

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

C3. Sharswood Blumberg Regeneration. The Philadelphia Housing Authority (PHA) is conducting a regeneration project in Sharswood, a distressed neighborhood with poverty levels at twice the rate of Philadelphia, crime and youth violence, and derelict buildings. The area, which was severely affected by rioting in the 1960s, is less than 10 minutes away from Center City District. Under the USD 500 million Sharswood Blumberg Choice Neighborhoods Transformation Plan, two high-rise apartment buildings from the late 1960s and other dilapidated low-rise apartment buildings were demolished. The removed structures will be replaced by 1,200 new housing units. Most will be for rent or sale at below-market prices. To address some of the underlying causes of urban distress, PHA is adding shops, schools, and offices in an ambitious bid to revitalize a struggling community. Key to the success of the project is whether new businesses can be persuaded to open in Sharswood. The project includes the creation of a new commercial corridor along Ridge Avenue, the neighborhood’s main street, which lost businesses as the local economy declined; and 400,000 square feet of commercial space including everyday essentials such as supermarkets, drugstores, and banks. The revitalization also depends on providing public schools to replace two that shut down in 2013. The Housing Authority is working with the school district and an educational non-profit to evaluate whether to reopen the shuttered schools or build new ones. To further anchor the revitalization effort, PHA plans to relocate its headquarters from downtown to the Sharswood area bringing around 1,100 employees who will bolster demand for businesses. The project has attracted support from the federal Department of Housing and 25 City Center District, https://centercityphila.org/parks/dilworth-park 64

26 Briggs, R. Philly Gets a Stunning Remake for City Hall’s Front Yard (2014), https://nextcity.org/daily/entry/ philadelphia-city-hall-plaza-dilworth-park-public-private-funding

Urban Development (HUD), which awarded it a USD 500,000 planning grant under its Choice Neighborhoods Initiative (CNI) program. IV. SUCCESS FACTORS A. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LED APPROACH IN PHILADELPHIA Philadelphia’s strong manufacturing legacy is evident in the amount of industrial land and the number of mills, plants, and workshops that, once occupied by small enterprises which provided jobs for a diverse immigrant population, have become progressively underutilized since the 1970s. Regeneration is consistently embedded in economic development policy, strategies, and the corporate mission of key public and public-private entities in Philadelphia. As Philadelphia transitioned away from a major industrial center and towards a globalized economy, the Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation (PIDC) capitalized on real estate and financing resources to support economic diversification and revitalize neighborhoods. The Corporation’s know-how on managing land and capital resources was instrumental in the process.

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA

mation of the former Dilworth Square located on the west side of Philadelphia’s City Hall. The formerly inaccessible, multi-level, hard-surface plaza has been renovated into a green public space without stairs or barriers with and additional 20,571 sq. ft. of useable area (an increase of 21 percent) resulting in an expanded 120,557 sq. ft. public space. 25 Dilworth Park is managed by the Center City District through a 20-year lease (with an option to extend for an additional 10 years) with the City of Philadelphia. Its design, with improved access to transit lines, urban furniture with seating areas, and a fountain which is used as an ice-skating rink in winter, is complemented by on-going programming that creates a civic place. The park features cultural and recreational activities such as festivals, live musical performances, and outdoor movie screenings. As Dilworth Park is located above a major transit hub, the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), the primary public transit agency, was also involved in the transformation project. Center City District’s successful application for a USD 15 million federal Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant supported the improvement of the station into a well-accessible multimodal hub.26

B. KEY ECONOMIC STRATEGY, FINANCING, AND IMPLEMENTATION FACTORS The Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) emphasizes local revitalization, improving the skills of the workforce, and advancing social equity, three strategic intents that are consistently aligned with Philadelphia’s challenges. PIDC, the executing agency, manages the City’s industrial land inventory in a manner that connects economic development goals with the city’s unique spatial and physical characteristics. Common to all projects sponsored by PIDC is the premise that civic investment must be the spark for private investment. The USD 14 billion in financing that PIDC has mobilized has leveraged over USD 25 billion in total. To achieve its intent, the strategy identifies several projects whose budgets range from a few thousand dollars to hundreds of millions. Each project benefits from a variety of incentives that cover from construction and improvement projects to skills development. Project sponsors include regional government agencies, universities, district improvement entities, county agencies, and civil organizations. For example, PIDC sponsors industrial land regeneration projects while the City of Philadelphia sponsors streetscape improvement projects. C. WHAT ELEMENTS OF THE PHILADELPHIA CASE STUDY ARE WORTH ADAPTING AND REPLICATING IN LAC CITIES? Urban development is not about building housing in areas of solely residential use on cheap land regardless of potential services and transport accessibility issues; it is about creating a public realm, which is shaped by civic spaces, commercial facilities, and cultural activities, in addition to residential and employment spaces. A successful investment in public space is determined by its usability and, therefore, depends not only on how much is spent on hard infrastructure, but on how the space is managed and the activities that are programmed in it.

CASE STUDIES—PHILADELPHIA 66

A project’s success can be measured by its capacity to trigger private investment in co-financing and development of built assets, and towards the boost of economic activity, especially in neighborhoods’ small businesses. The establishment of Business Improvement Districts as management and programming entities has been instrumental in linking urban infrastructure investment with soft aspects such as programming, innovation, and business facilitation.

Washington, DC, Case Study

I. INTRODUCTION Within the Washington, DC, local government, economic development policies are the responsibility of the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED). The specific functions cited by the Office include assisting the Mayor in the coordination, planning, supervision, and execution of economic development efforts in the District of Columbia. Implementing DC’s Economic Strategy; increasing the affordable housing stock; and developing neighborhood real estate projects, with a focus on the New Communities Initiative (NCI) neighborhoods; are mentioned as priority actions.1 The DC Office of Planning (OP) is responsible for formulating the District’s Comprehensive Plan and coordinating the delivery of real estate development projects. Adopted in 2006 and amended in 2011, the Plan follows the principles of “Planning an Inclusive City”, a vision document published in 2004 that establishes that the city must grow inclusively to achieve its full potential. The Comprehensive Plan is structured around less traditional sectors such as the major challenges of creating successful neighborhoods, increasing education and employment, and connecting the city through public space and transport.2 To adjust to the transformations that occur at a faster pace than the original 20year horizon, the Comprehensive Plan recommends its own amendment approximately every 4 years.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCIES (LEDAS)

A. THE VISION OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) DC’s Economic Strategy document states that its aim is to make Washington, DC, “the global model for inclusive prosperity and resilience, showcasing how diversity and innovation can drive equitable economic growth.”3 The components of the vision are • inclusive and equitable growth, • preservation of diversity as a strength that positions the city to innovate, and • being proactive and forward-looking to retain economic vitality.4 The strategy calls for increasing the commercial tax base, creating jobs, fostering entrepreneurship and innovation, and advancing inclusive prosperity measures as key approaches to fulfill the vision. B. POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL GENESIS The Council of the District of Columbia established the National Capital Revitalization Corporation (NCRC) in 1998 as an independent entity of the District government “to retain and expand business located within the District, attract new business and induce economic development and job creation by developing and updating a strategic economic development plan; providing incentives and

1 Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, https://dmped.dc.gov 2 DC Office Of Planning, https://planning.dc.gov/

This profile was written by Pablo Vaggione under the supervision of Gilberto Chona (IDB) and IDB Cities Network Team in the context of the Local Economic Development Agencies Cutting Edge.

3 Washington DC Economic Strategy (2017), http://dceconomicstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ DC-Economic-Strategy-Strategy-Report-FULL-May-1-2017-1.pdf 4 Ibid.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

assistance; removing slum and blight; and coordinating efforts.”5 Documents indicate that NCRC was given powers to lease, purchase, acquire, hold, manage, and improve real property, along with the power to make and perform contracts.6 The Anacostia Waterfront Corporation (AWC) was established in 2004 by the Government of the District of Columbia, under Mayor Anthony Williams, to revitalize neighborhoods next to the Anacostia River and to coordinate the environmental rehabilitation and use of the River. In 2007, the NCRC and the abolished AWC transferred their duties to the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development (DMPED). The intent of the transfer was to provide the Mayor and DC Council more control of development activities and to speed up delivery while reducing costs. Management was streamlined to avoid task duplication and to rationalize issues associated with the control of properties along the Southwest Waterfront.7 DMPED is structured around the divisions of business development and strategy; communications; interagency and economic intelligence; general counsel; legislation; operations; procurement and grants; real estate development; and the Industrial Revenue Bond (IRB) Program. C. THE MAIN STRATEGIC OBJECTIVES OF LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (LED) Growing the economy and making this growth inclusive are overarching goals that guide the economic strategy of Washington, DC. The strategy specifies the following objectives: 1. Grow a vibrant and resilient economy driven by private sector expansion. Specifically, grow the DC private sector economy to USD 100 billion by the end of 2021, up from USD 83.4 billion as of the second quarter of 2016. 2. Foster economic prosperity by increasing job opportunities and decreasing employment disparities by the end of 2021. Reduce unemployment across wards, races, and educational attainment levels, bringing unemployment levels below 10 percent in all segments by the end of 2021.8 II. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY A. APPROACH Theoretical principles According to OP’s “A Vision for Growing an Inclusive City”, its thriving economy, growing housing market, and improved government services are transforming Washington, DC. However, it remains geographically divided by race, education5 D.C. Code 2-1219.02 et seq. (repealed) quoted in Office of the District of Columbia Auditor (2010). Auditor’s Review of Compliance With Certified Business Enterprises Requirements Pursuant to the Compliance Unit

The Wharf / SHOP ARCHITECTS/WDG ARCHITECTS

al attainment, income, and employment. Physical barriers, such as rail lines and freeways, exacerbate social and economic divides.9 The District’s stated vision is to become the global model for inclusive economic growth and resilience, showcasing how diversity and innovation can drive economic prosperity. This vision informs both spatial and economic strategies. Spatial development is guided by the Comprehensive Plan, the legally mandated document that regulates growth. Economic development is guided by the Economic Strategy. Both strategies converge in several urban regeneration projects conceived to foster inclusion. 2. Applied methodology DC’s Economic Strategy includes a Framework for Action which identifies 43 initiatives to strengthen the core sectors of the economy and grow new opportunity areas. The formulation of the Framework was led by DMPED with the input of 450 stakeholders in 2016. The document groups initiatives in five key areas:10 • Fostering a customer-centric business and regulatory environment • Improving access to capital and funding opportunities • Supporting local identity and economy • Retaining talent and empowering residents to prosper • Providing space for companies to grow and affordable housing for residents to live in

Establishment Act of 2008, https://bit.ly/2mrz7dc. 6 Office of the District of Columbia Auditor (2010). Auditor’s Review of Compliance With Certified Business Enterprises Requirements Pursuant to the Compliance Unit Establishment Act of 2008, https://bit.ly/2mrz7dc

B. POLICY AREAS 1. Economic diversification

7 US Government Accountability Office (2008). Federal Real Property Report to Congressional Committees.

Property Conveyances between the District of Columbia and the Federal Government Await Completion, and

9 Office of Planning, A Vision for Growing an Inclusive City, https://planning.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/

Development Will Take Many Years, https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08684.pdf

op/Vision%20for%20Inclusive%20CIty%202004.pdf

8 Washington DC Economic Strategy (2017), http://dceconomicstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/

10 Washington DC Economic Strategy (2017), http://dceconomicstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/

DC-Economic-Strategy-Strategy-Report-FULL-May-1-2017-1.pdf

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

2. Employment generation Increasing employment opportunities and decreasing economic disparities would require creating jobs for residents from all income and ethnic groups. This policy goal translates to the following targets: • Reduce unemployment levels for African American residents of DC. African American residents face an unemployment rate of 13.5 percent, which is higher than DC’s overall unemployment rate and over 5 times that of Caucasian residents (2.6 percent). • Reduce unemployment levels of high school graduates without a bachelor’s degree. The unemployment rate of high school graduates is 15.6 percent compared to 3.3 percent for those with a bachelor’s degree (or higher). • Reduce unemployment levels in Wards 7 and 8. The 12-month average unemployment rates (November 2015-16) for Ward 7 and 8 were 10.9 percent and 13.4 percent, respectively. Unemployment levels in other Wards were consistently below 10 percent. 3. Inclusiveness Promoting urban regeneration projects by increasing affordable housing for residents are key supporting drivers of inclusive economic growth in DC. DMPED’s measures in this regard include: • Increasing affordable housing through partnerships with the housing production agencies (DHCD, DCHA, and DCHFA)11 and continued investment leveraging all available sources including the Housing Production Trust Fund (HPTF), federal funding, and land dispositions. The Preservation Strike Force, a private-public fund to preserve affordable rental housing, and the reform of Inclusionary Zoning are specific initiatives to increase housing affordability. • Moving forward several large-scale and neighborhood real estate development projects, with a focus on the New Communities Initiative (NCI) neighborhoods. Key neighborhood projects include The Parks at Walter Reed, St. Elizabeth East, DC United Stadium, New Communities, and McMillan Sand Filtration redevelopment. C. MAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS New Communities Initiative. Funded through public bond financing that allows the District to leverage resources for development projects, the New Communities Initiative (NCI) program’s objective is to transform troubled public housing complexes into vibrant mixed-income neighborhoods with adequate affordable housing options, economic opportunities, and access to appropriate services.

The Initiative identifies the following as guiding principles:12 • One for One Replacement of existing affordable housing to ensure that there is no loss of subsidized units in the neighborhood. • The Opportunity for Residents to Return/Stay in the Community giving current residents the priority for new replacement units and thus remain in their neighborhood. • Mixed-Income Housing to eradicate the concentration of poverty and low-income housing. • Build First, starting the development of new housing before the demolition of distressed housing to avoid displacement. Through a human capital grant program, NCI provides support to households in health and wellness, education, employment, financial skills, and parenting, among others. Great Streets. Started by DMPED in 2006, Great Streets is a multi-year program intended to generate job opportunities for residents and expand the tax base in 13 corridors. Through retail grants of up to USD 50,000 for qualified small business owners, the multi-year program supports existing small businesses and the creation of new ones in Great Streets designated corridors. III. FINANCIAL STRATEGY According to DMPED’s Pathways to Inclusion report, entrepreneurs from underrepresented backgrounds disproportionately do not receive venture capital or seed funding, and lack access to the networks that provide funding.13 For DMPED, improving access to capital and financing opportunities involves: • Strategic investing of resources aimed at mitigating barriers for underrepresented entrepreneurs, stimulating growth in key sectors, and enabling scaling up. These are intended to complement resources, both public and private, that currently exist for this purpose, such as the various incubators and accelerators operating in DC. • Strengthening the capacity of DC entrepreneurs, particularly in under-represented segments, to access capital and tap new markets through mentoring, training programs, and incubators. • Facilitating connections between entrepreneurs and investors.14 A. INVESTMENT ATTRACTION (FINANCING AND TAX INCENTIVES) The list below is a summary of incentives available from DMPED and other resources to spur economic growth.15 Homeowner grants. Grants created under the Targeted Historic Preservation Assistance Amendment Act of 2006 are available to low- and moderate-income households living in specific historic districts. Grants may be up to a maximum of USD 25,000, except in the Anacostia Historic District where the maximum is 12 New Communities Initiative, www.dcnewcommunities.org 13 DMPED. Pathways to Inclusion, https://dmped.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/dmped/publication/attachments/Pathways%20to%20Inclusion%20Report.pdf 14 Washington DC Economic Strategy (2017), http://dceconomicstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ DC-Economic-Strategy-Strategy-Report-FULL-May-1-2017-1.pdf

72 11 Department of Housing and Community Development, DC Housing Authority, DC Housing Finance Agency

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

A larger contribution of the private sector to DC’s economy would enhance economic resilience by diversifying the economy away from its focus on the federal government, while increasing the amount of available jobs and the municipal revenue base. The policy aim stated in the strategy is to achieve an expansion of the private sector GDP by 20 percent to USD 100 billion, which would imply an annual growth of the private sector of around 3.4 percent.

15 DC Business Incentives and Resources, https://incentives.dc.gov/

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

B. STRATEGIC FINANCIAL STRUCTURING Business Improvement Districts. The Department of Small and Local Business Development defines a Business Improvement District (BID) as a self-taxing district established by property owners to enhance the economic vitality of a specific commercial area. The department manages the certification of BIDs and the charter extension process. The tax, a surcharge on the real property tax liability, is collected by the District and returned entirely to the nonprofit organization managing the BID, which controls how funds are spent.17 Expenditures are used primarily for purchasing supplemental services, which could include • improving street cleanliness and landscaping, supplementing city services; • enhancing safety; • promoting the commercial district and its businesses; • providing homeless and youth services; • making capital improvements (e.g., street furniture, decorative lighting) to supplement city services; and • other collective business issues.

There are currently 11 established Business Improvement Districts: • Adams Morgan Partnership • Anacostia • Capitol Hill • Capitol Riverfront • Downtown DC • Dupont Circle • Georgetown • Golden Triangle • Mount Vernon Triangle • NoMa/Union Market • Southwest Georgetown and NoMa/Union Market are two good examples of BIDs. Georgetown. Established in 1999 by its property owners and merchants, the Georgetown BID is a publicly chartered, private, non-profit organization dedicated to protecting and enhancing the accessibility, attractiveness, and overall appeal of Georgetown’s commercial district.18 In 2014, the BID launched Georgetown 2028,19 a 15-year action plan which provides recommendations on mobility and public space infrastructure to avoid vehicle congestion and to capitalize on the area’s distinctive canals and pedestrian ambiance so as to attract customers and visitors. For example, the restoration of the Chesapeake & Ohio Canal is intended to create a unique public space for visitors and residents, anchoring local identity in a new, revitalized waterfront area. Streetscape improvements on K Street, supported by city-wide plans for dedicated bus lanes (and a possible streetcar in the future); improved bike accessibility; and safer pedestrian conditions; will enhance public and non-motorized transport options while supporting the visual and physical integration with the Potomac waterfront. A proposed aerial gondola over the Potomac River to the Rosslyn BID in Virginia would connect Georgetown with the Metro system, and, according to Georgetown 2028, improve accessibility for commuters and visitors. NoMa/Union Market. The NoMa BID, created in 2007, is funded through a special assessment collected from property owners within a 35-block mixed-use area connected by regional rail lines, two Metro stops, cycling infrastructure, and pedestrian spaces. NoMa’s strategic plan expects that 25 new residential buildings will break ground on sites in and adjacent to the BID, 20 including the Union Market area, which is near the NoMa/Gallaudet Metro station. The 45-acre (18 ha) Union Market area is anchored by a historic food hall that was renovated in 2012. According to the Urban Land Institute, the real estate developer behind the renovation started investing in the area in 2007 envisioning that the well-known market could serve as a catalyst for new mixed-use development. In 2009, the D.C. Council drafted an area plan allowing for 8 million square feet (743,000 sq m) of mixed-use development. The food industry as a strategy for local economic development, including the preservation of the mar-

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

USD 35,000. Grants are awarded on a competitive basis with preference given to major structural repairs and work that restores important and prominently visible architectural features, including windows, doors, roofs, porches, and ornaments, and historic materials like brick, wood, and slate. Revenue Bond Program.16 DC’s industrial revenue bond program (IRB), led by DMPED, provides access to tax-exempt financing for businesses and non-profit organizations at interest rates up to 4 percent lower than a traditional commercial loan. IRB can be used to finance, refinance, and reimburse the costs of acquiring, constructing, restoring, rehabilitating, expanding, improving, equipping, or furnishing real property and related subordinate facilities. More than USD 11.5 billion has been issued through Washington, DC’s IRB program since 1994. Bonds are used to finance a wide variety of projects including: • Elementary, secondary, college, and university facilities • Health care & health facilities • Housing & hotels • Industrial and commercial development • Manufacturing • Pollution control facilities • Recreational facilities • Sports, convention, and entertainment facilities • Student loan programs • Transit and utility facilities Neighborhood Prosperity Fund (NPF). DMPED funds non-residential components of mixed used, real estate, or retail development projects in targeted census tracts where unemployment is 10 percent or greater. The grant provides necessary gap funding only for the commercial component of development projects.

18 Georgetown Business Improvement District, http://bid.georgetowndc.com 74

16 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/dc-revenue-bond-program

19 Georgetown 2028, http://www.georgetowndc.com/customer_media/2028-plan-agenda_1-29.pdf

17 Department of Small and Local Business Development, https://dslbd.dc.gov/service/business-improve-

20 NoMa Strategic Plan, https://www.nomabid.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/NoMa-BID-Strate-

ment-districts-bids

gic-Plan-2016-2021.pdf

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

Opportunity Zones. Opportunity Zones (OZ) is a federal program created in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 that provides tax incentives for investments in new businesses and commercial projects in twenty-five designated census tracts in low-income communities. According to DMPED,23 OZ project sponsors place their capital gains into a Qualified Opportunity Fund to be eligible for obtaining a tax deferral on capital gains until the OZ asset is sold or December 31, 2026 (whichever is later); a 10-15 percent reduction in the taxable amount for investments held for 5-7 years; and an abatement of taxes on any new capital gains if the investment is held for 10 years. Designated OZ tracts have the following characteristics:24 • They can generate economic activity and jobs, and significant investment opportunities, such as real estate projects and commercial corridors. • Average unemployment rate is higher. • Average percentage of population below the poverty line is higher. • Average commercial density is higher. • 72 percent are located in Wards 7 or 8. C. FINANCING STRATEGY FOR URBAN REGENERATION Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT), and grants from the federal level are among the financial instruments used by Washington, DC, to finance key projects. C1. Anacostia Waterfront Initiative. The Anacostia Waterfront Initiative (AWI) aims to restore and revitalize the Anacostia River, enabling access to the waterfront by creating new park, recreational, cultural, residential, and commercial areas on mainly publicly owned lands. This 30-year, USD 10 billion investment is led by the District of Columbia government and embraced by 19 regional and federal agency partners. During the 19th century, the east side of the River today known as Historic Anacostia was developed to house workers in riverfront industrial areas. In the1950s, highways were built on reclaimed lands to reduce the need to take land from existing neighborhoods. In the mid-20th century, the neighborhoods along the River became primary targets of urban renewal. Existing residences and businesses were demolished and replaced with housing projects. The area, characterized by an African American population, poverty, deteriorated public housing conditions, neglected environment, and poorly maintained parks and urban infrastructure, stands in contrast with Wards to the west where most of the Caucasian and educated population live. 21 Urban Land Institute, Union Market. http://uli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/Union-Market.pdf 22 Urban Land Institute. District of Cool: Developments Transforming the Nation’s Capital https://urbanland. uli.org/development-business/district-of-cool-development-has-transformed-the-nations-capital-neighborhood-by-neighborhood/

The District of Columbia Office of Planning (OP) is the lead agency in planning AWI. Growing out of the dialogue fostered between citizens and the federal agencies, OP produced the Waterfront Framework Plan, an unprecedented urban planning effort which identified five planning themes: • Environmental restoration of the River over 25 years. • Transportation infrastructure that better serves neighborhoods and the region. • The transformation of 1,800 acres of public open space into an interconnected River Parks system. • New museums and monuments that emphasize the civic importance of Anacostia. • Increased vitality of waterfront neighborhoods by adding over 20,000 households and up to 40,000 new jobs. The following is a list of neighborhood projects which are part of the Anacostia Waterfront Initiative: • Anacostia Riverwalk • Barry Farm • Barry Farm Recreation • Diamond Teague Park • Kingman Island and Heritage Island Parks • Marvin Gaye Park • Matthews Memorial Terrace • Poplar Point • Sheridan Station • The Wharf (Southwest Waterfront) • Waterfront Station Tax Increment Financing (TIF), Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) bonds, and grants from the federal level are AWI’s principal financing mechanisms. District and Federal investments in the AWI amounted to USD 1.2 billion; these were matched by USD 1.8 billion in private investments.25 • Federal grants: A USD 35 million HOPE VI grant was allocated to the redevelopment of a 700-unit public housing complex. Measures to reduce gentrification include 100 percent replacement of public housing, within development feasibility. An increase in building density allowed the addition of 400 units of subsidized housing and 400 units of market rate housing to 700 units of public housing. • PILOT Bonds: A USD 230 million PILOT bond was used to pay for parks, the construction of streets with lighting that connect with consolidated residential and commercial areas, the connection of public utilities to the grid, and the construction of new sewers. The federal government covered costs of the environmental remediation of the industrial land. • Tax Increment Financing: In addition to the PILOT bonds, the Department of Transportation contributed USD 100 million in TIF to help fund multiple infrastructure and parks projects. A USD 198 million TIF contribution from the District catalyzed a USD 1.3 billion private investment project. • Other municipal financing: In 2004, the District allocated a total of USD

23 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/page/opportunity-zones-washington-dc 24 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/page/how-dc-designated-our-opportunity-zones

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

ket’s historic core and many of its wholesale vendors, attracts nearly 3 million visitors annually.21 Building on the success of Union Market, developers are creating a mixed-use urban area immediately surrounding the market with retail, residential, restaurant, hotel, entertainment, and culinary incubator spaces.22

77 25 Ibid.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

C2. The Wharf (Southwest Waterfront). The Wharf is a mile-long, 24-acre mixed-use waterfront site developed by PN Hoffman and Madison Marquette, two companies specialized in condominium and infill mixed-use development. The Wharf sits on what was an underutilized plot centrally situated on the Potomac River. Although the area is along the historic Washington Channel and within a short distance from national monuments (e.g., White House, Capitol, Smithsonian Museums), the waterfront was made inaccessible by highways that separated it from the rest of the city. The DC government issued a Request for Proposals for development teams to produce a waterfront design which would reconnect the city with the riverfront and establish the site as a premier destination. The competitively selected developer’s vision for the Wharf consists of active public spaces for outdoor activities, a clean river, retail areas, and cultural and entertainment landmarks.26 The developer holds a 99-year ground lease. According to the DC Fiscal Policy Institute, DC subsidized a substantial portion of the project’s USD 2 billion cost. About USD 200 million in TIF and PILOT financing was allocated to the project, as well as a USD 95 million land subsidy and nearly USD 5 million in contract expenditures through DMPED.27 The TIF and subsidies were used for road and other infrastructure upgrades, river wall reinforcement, and the resettlement of existing houseboat residents. Phase 1, which is about half the total development, began construction in 2014, while phase 2 is expected to be completed by 2022. Over the two phases, the 2.8 million gross square feet development will include:28 • 9 buildings, 4 piers, 2 public parks • 1,375 residential units • 335,000 square feet of retail • 945,000 square feet of office • A 6,000-seat indoor concert venue • About 690 hotel rooms, to be operated by major brands such as Intercontinental, Hilton, and Hyatt • Waterfront parks, piers, and docks connected by a public promenade

Plans for the Wharf development originally included a requirement that 30 percent of residential units be designated as affordable housing, as indicated by DMPED. Half of all affordable units were to be set aside for households at 60 percent or less of DC’s area median income (AMI), or USD 52,140 for a family of two. The other half were for households at 30 percent or less of AMI, or USD 26,070 for a family of two.29 However, reports indicate that only about 10 percent of the 1,400 units being developed are truly affordable housing (30 percent of the first 500 units, or 150 homes).30 The redevelopment converted unused land into a highly-walkable and active area, attracting new residents, creating jobs, and expanding the property tax and sales tax base.31 Sustainable construction features allowed the attainment of the first LEED-Silver mixed-use certification in the District and the LEED-Gold Neighborhood Development pilot project certification. The development is the first DC neighborhood on the waterfront and is complementary to other developments like the Yards, Baseball District, and the Waterfront Station.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

611 million to pay for the land and construction of a LEED-certified baseball stadium which supported the relocation of the former Montreal Expos professional baseball team to DC where they were renamed as the Nationals. The stadium, owned by the DC government and operated by the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission, has been paid for by the sale of USD 535 million in municipal bonds, which will be repaid by stadium-generated revenues and by a tax on businesses. Stadium upgrades over DC’s cost cap are being paid for by the Nationals’ owners.

C3. Capitol Crossing. Located Downtown on a 7-acre site, Capital Crossing is expected to link East End to Capitol Hill and, according to DMPED, create Washington, DC’s first “eco-district.”32 The USD 1.3 billion project, funded by DCbased developer Property Group Partners, consists of five Platinum LEED-certified buildings connected by landscaped public areas. It broke ground in 2015 and is expected to be complete by 2021. Once finished, the yearly property tax revenue generated for the District will be approximately USD 40 million.33 Sustainable features include water cisterns that will capture and treat more than 90 percent of storm water runoff; centralized recycling; and power cogeneration with simultaneous production of electricity and heat. The developer plans on creating “EcoChimneys” which will clean car exhaust emitted from the below-grade parking and the Interstate 395 freeway.34 According to DMPED, infrastructure upgrades include tunnel extensions, roads, and ramps, which will improve traffic flow and make travel safer for pedestrians and cyclists; and the installation of a 30-inch water main and telecommunications and gas lines.35 The development program consists of: • 995,000 gross square feet of office • 70,000 square feet of retail • 180,000 square feet of residential The site is currently zoned for 150 residential units, with a minimum of 50 units designated as affordable housing units for those making 80 percent of the area median income. Below grade there will be a four-level garage with 1,146 parking 29 Ibid. 30 Ibid. 31 World Bank Getting Creative about Revenue Generation: Land Value Capture (LVC) To Help Finance City Resilience, https://www.gfdrr.org/sites/default/files/events/crp-bkk1-lvc-overview.pdf. Retrieved 23 September 2019

26 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/node/1105042

32 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/release/capitol-crossing-what-expect-one-dcs-largest-revitalization-proj-

27 DC Fiscal Policy Institute. Lessons from the Waterfront: Economic Development Projects Must Do More

ects. Retrieved 18 September 2019

to Lessen DC’s Worsening Income Inequality, https://www.dcfpi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Les-

33 Ibid.

sons-from-the-Waterfront-formatted-final.pdf

34 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

35 Ibid.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

Georgetown Gondola

spaces and 440 bicycle parking spaces.36 According to DMPED, Capitol Crossing is expected to create 4,000 construction jobs and 8,000 permanent jobs. At least 30 percent of the housing will be made affordable and at least 51 percent of new jobs will be filled by District residents. The development is expected to generate USD 1 billion in tax revenue during the next 25 years.37 Identified benefits include increased environmental sustainability and improved pedestrian connections between Downtown’s East End and Capitol Hill, bridging the gap currently generated by a major interstate highway. IV. SUCCESS FACTORS A. THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LED APPROACH IN WASHINGTON, DC The last several years have brought about unprecedented economic growth in Washington, DC. A distinctive trait of DC’s economy is the role of the federal government. Its presence creates a large customer base, attracts a highly educated workforce, and makes DC the place where standards for regulated industries are set.38 According to the Economic Strategy, the LED approach is focused on increasing the resiliency of DC’s economic growth. To diversify the economy and reduce unemployment disparities across races, the strategy sets out actions to grow the commercial tax base, create jobs, and foster innovation. The strategy is meant to complement other plans and efforts addressing topics critical to the economic resilience of the District, particularly those related to urban regeneration and affordable housing, which are essential to DC’s continued prosperity and inclusiveness. 36 Ibid. 37 DMPED, https://dmped.dc.gov/node/540672. Retrieved 5 September 2019 80

38 DC Economic Strategy (2017). http://dceconomicstrategy.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/DC-Economic-Strategy-Strategy-Report-FULL-May-1-2017-1.pdf. Retrieved 3 September 2019

B. KEY ECONOMIC STRATEGY, FINANCING, AND IMPLEMENTATION FACTORS To achieve diversification and inclusiveness, the goals of the economic strategy are growing the private sector contribution to the economy and increasing employment opportunities in core sectors and opportunity areas. Core sectors currently have a significant presence in the DC economy, in terms of employment and/or GDP contribution, and should be supported and enhanced. These are federal government, hospitality and tourism, real estate and construction, health and life sciences, technology, professional services, post-secondary education, retail, media and communications, and the creative economy. Cross-cutting industry clusters that offer high potential for success in tax revenue growth, industry development, and better jobs for workers with various levels of educational attainment are areas poised for growth due to their strong existing activity, potential, and ability to play to DC’s comparative strengths. These include the impact economy, smart cities and civic solutions, professional services, hospitality, security technology, and data science and analytics. To improve access to financing opportunities, the strategy recommends building the capacity of DC entrepreneurs to access capital and tap new markets; strategic grant-making or investments of public resources aimed at mitigating barriers for underrepresented entrepreneurs, stimulating growth in key sectors, and enabling scaling-up; and facilitating connections between entrepreneurs and investors. Specific initiatives include creating an inclusive innovation fund aimed at growing business activity in DC’s opportunity areas and enabling access to capital by underrepresented entrepreneurs; catalyzing economic development in underserved communities; and helping businesses pursue government contracts through a Procurement Technical Assistance Program (P-TAC), among others. C. WHAT ELEMENTS OF THE WASHINGTON, DC, CASE STUDY ARE WORTH ADAPTING AND REPLICATING IN LAC CITIES? Washington, DC, economic development policy acknowledges that, despite GDP growth, disparities and lack of inclusion inhibit the region from realizing its full economic potential. Diversifying the economy by complementing government-generated activity with an increase of public sector contribution to GDP is an important approach for capital cities. Diversification also means identifying opportunity areas that can capitalize on DC’s comparative strengths. A successful economic strategy will continue to create jobs in DC, and people will need more land, housing, and services. If spatial disparities and social fragmentation widen as growth proceeds, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to create a region that is competitive, prosperous, and livable. Affirmative action to avoid gentrification is a necessary element of a local economic development and urban regeneration strategy.

CASE STUDIES—WASHINGTON DC

The strategy is closely coordinated with affordable housing initiatives, the Comprehensive Plan, and other plans related to transportation, education, culture, health, and community development.

LOCATIONS NYC HOTEL Courtyard New York Downtown Manhattan/World Trade Center Area 133 Greenwich Street, NY, NY, 10006 (212) 346-0088 RESTAURANT Serafina Tribeca 95 West Broadway, NY, NY, 10007 (212) 766-2700 LITTLE SPAIN MARKET 10 Hudson Yards, NY, NY, 10001 (646) 495-1242 FIELD VISITS DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING, MANHATTAN Equitable Life Building, 31st Floor, 120 Broadway, New York, NY 10271 Conference Room: Central Park HUNTERâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;S POINT SOUTH NYC Ferry Landing, 54th Ave on, 2nd St, Long Island City, NY 11101 BROOKLYN NAVY YARD Building 77 141 Flushing Avenue, Suite 801 Brooklyn, NY 11205 HUDSON YARDS 10 Hudson Yards, NY, NY, 10001

AVENUE OF THE ARTS South Board Street and Chestnut Street University City District 210 South 34th Street PHILADELPHIA NAVY YARD 4747 South Broad Street, Building 101, Suite 120 WASHINGTON HOTEL Eaton Hotel 1201 K St NW, Washington, DC 20005 (202) 289-7600 RESTAURANT Union Market 1309 5th St NE, Washington, DC 20002 FIELD VISITS DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA OFFICE OF PLANNING 1100 4th St SW, Washington, DC 20024 THE WHARF DC 1110 Maine Ave, SW, Washington, DC, 20024 GEORGETOWN BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OFFICE 1000 Potomac St NW, Washington, DC, 20007 INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 1300 New York Ave NW, Washington, DC 20577 Sala: Felipe Herrera 3

THE HIGH LINE 34st and 12th Ave, NY, NY, 10001 PHILADELPHIA HOTEL Pod Philly Hotel 31 S 19th St, Philadelphia, PA 19103 (267) 494-0440 RESTAURANT Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation Centre Square, 1500 Market St #3500, P hiladelphia, PA 19102 FIELD VISITS U3 Advisors 30 S. 15th Street, 15th Floor, Philadelphia, PA 19102

CONTACTS MARIA CAMILA QUINTERO Consultant, IDB Cities Network mariaqui@iadb.org +1 202 413 3034 (Whatsapp) CLAUDIA HUERTA Consultant, IDB Cities Network chuerta@iadb.org +1 347 968 7504 (Whatsapp)