Gresham vista business park

GRESHAM VISTA

BUSINESS PARK

Eco-Industrial Development

Pilot Project

LESSONS LEARNED

Final Report

December 28, 2016

Prepared by Light House Sustainable Building Centre

for the Port of Portland and City of Gresham

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

unlimited use granted to the Port of Portland and City of Gresham.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Gresham Vista Business Park (GVBP) was developed

by the Port of Portland (Port), in collaboration with the

City of Gresham (City). At present time, there is one new

business, the Subaru Distribution Center, operating on

Lot 4 (39 acres). Lot 4 was purchased and developed by

the Trammell Crow Company on behalf of Subaru, which

is leasing the site back from Trammell Crow. Trammell

Crow has purchased Lots 1, 2 and 3 and plans to develop

3 speculative industrial buildings by 2018. Madison-

Specht Vista Logistics LLC purchased Lot 9 and is building

three speculative industrial buildings. Madison-Specht is

a partnership between Specht Development Inc.

(Portland) and New York Life Real Estate Investors LLC.

Construction on Lot 9 will be completed in 2018. The

Port continues its marketing efforts to sell the remaining

lots.

Planning for the GVBP started at a time when the local

industrial market was slightly slower, allowing the Port to

take the time to consider alternative features for the

GVBP and to pilot the implementation of the following

eco-industrial development (EID) strategies:

1. Green (Stormwater) Infrastructure

2. Pedestrian Connectivity

3. Green Buildings

4. Marketing and sales for EIDs

5. Eco-Business Operations (Eco-Concierge)

The pilot was supported by a Community Planning and

Development Grant from Metro Regional Government.

As part of the pilot, the Port and City committed to

preparing this lessons learned report, to help support

future EID led by them or by others in the region. The

lessons learned were gleaned from interviews with 18

stakeholders and a review of documents developed to

support implementation of these strategies.

The lessons learned for each pilot eco-industrial strategy

are summarized below, followed by a summary of some

overall lessons learned. The GVBP was a successful pilot,

and the outcomes support the Port’s role as catalyst for

change in the regional industrial market.

Eco-industrial development involves a

conscientious effort to apply lessons from

nature (e.g., through more biophilic and

biomimicking design) and to take a systems

approach to industrial development.

Site Plans: Set the stage for infrastructure,

buildings and operations (e.g., to support

wastewater re-use, include land for a

wastewater treatment plant and illustrate

extra piping rights-of-way allowances).

Infrastructure: Stormwater: Apply bio-

mimicking design and a systems approach

(e.g., the integration of stormwater

infrastructure with connectivity elements or

the re-use of stormwater by businesses).

Pedestrian connectivity: Integrate with eco-

landscapes to increase access to nature.

Connect people and catalyze symbiosis.

Goods movement: Roads minimize resource

requirements, integrate natural landscapes,

or utilize recycled materials. Pre-approved

linear corridors support industrial symbiosis.

Water and ‘wastewater’: Ensure supplied

water quality matches demanded water

quality (e.g., cooling water re-used as truck

wash water).

Landscape: Support and integrate nature;

provide employee and public amenity;

supports stormwater management; and

improves building energy performance.

Buildings: ‘Green’ buildings (certified or not)

that incorporate lessons from nature and

catalyse resource conservation and industrial

symbiosis. Large industrial can integrate with

stormwater or energy infrastructure and/or

visibly demonstrate innovation.

Business Operations: Businesses are

integrated into a highly efficient and effective

‘industrial ecosystem’, practicing industrial

symbiosis, where the wastes of one business

become the inputs for another business, and

mimicking other ecosystem elements, such as

strategic and generally minimized use of toxic

substances and reliance on renewable energy

and materials.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Eco-Industrial Element: Green (Stormwater) Infrastructure

GVBP achieved exemplary green infrastructure via low impact stormwater management practices.

GVBP stormwater management comprises green infrastructure versus hardened ‘grey’ or concrete

infrastructure. All stormwater infrastructure will be privately owned and maintained. In hindsight, some

interviewees felt that the GVBP might have benefitted from master infrastructure. Green infrastructure

ensures the GVBP meets the City’s relatively stringent discharge standards for the area, and supported the

GVBP Development Standards, which in turn reflected the Stormwater Management Plan. The Plan was

useful in discussions between Port staff and lot developers, speeding up the development process by

essentially providing conceptual design. Although there was a $10,000 Green Infrastructure Incentive, the

City’s waiver of System Development Charges (SDC’s) was thought to have contributed more to inclusion of

green infrastructure. The community benefitted from a neighbouring industrial site that included more

natural, and arguably more aesthetically pleasing, landscape features, as well as from increased flood

protection to surrounding properties on the north side of the site.

Recommendation: EID master developers should implement development standards for green

infrastructure for all EIDs. More stringent standards could be supported by incentives or SDC credit.

Recommendation: When timelines permit, EID master developers may want to consider investing in site

specific conceptual green infrastructure scenarios to facilitate faster and more responsive lot design.

Recommendation: EID master developers should retain consultants experienced in innovative / low impact

stormwater management design.

Recommendation: Metro Regional Government should support regional capacity building around green

infrastructure, using the GVBP as a case study. The Port is well-positioned to support regional education

efforts.

Eco-Industrial Element: Connectivity

GVBP was successful at increasing connectivity within the park versus a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario.

Although the GVBP is not yet fully built-out, significant pedestrian connectivity has been achieved. The

community benefits from connectivity through a large block of land, with potential connections to bus

stops on Stark and 223

; the commercial node near Glisan and 223

, and any future commercial

development on Lot 11.

In general, the market appeared to view the trails as a constraint (i.e., land they pay for but can’t use

operationally) rather than an amenity. Lot owners also expressed security concerns. These concerns were

mitigated by the conditions in the Development Standards that ensure lot owners retain ownership of,

signage and fencing, and maintenance responsibility for pathways through their property, although there is

some concern this model may result in degrading of pedestrian connectivity over time. The Development

Standards very clearly presented the overall connectivity plan at build-out.

Recommendation: Future EID master developers should ensure that pedestrian connectivity is established,

using Development Standards as a key tool. The GVBP Development Standards can be used as a template.

Recommendation: Where local government resources exist, public ownership or easements for pathways

to maximize employee and community benefit should be considered.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

iii

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Buildings

GVBP will be home to LEED®-certified industrial buildings.

The GVBP will be home to at least 3 LEED® certified industrial buildings, representing a 10% increase above

the number of LEED® certified industrial buildings in the entire state. One other building is incorporating

some green building features, such as LED lighting or extra insulation because they had a good payback.

Overall, there appears to be substantial market resistance to industrial green buildings, especially LEED®

certified ones, due to misconceptions about the costs and benefits of industrial green buildings. LEED®

certification costs represent approximately 0.1 to 0.2% of the total construction costs for the type of

industrial buildings found in GVBP. Experienced design teams and contractors should be able to achieve

LEED® certified or LEED® Silver for very little to no extra cost, with extra cost frequently being associated

with items that have an operational payback. Even without pursuing LEED® certification, the GVBP

demonstrates that many green building features are frequently incorporated into industrial buildings

because they have a good payback.

Progressive institutional investors, like those backing the development of Lots 1, 2, and 3, are most likely to

pursue LEED® certification. It appears that very few end users, even those with strong sustainability

policies on their operational sides, have real estate arms that are demanding green buildings. Lot

developers felt that the LEED incentive did not affect their decision to (or not to) pursue LEED. However,

the incentive provided a lever for a green building conversation between Port staff and developers.

Recommendation: EID master developers and local economic development offices should ensure marketing

efforts reach institutional investors as well as progressive firms within local target sectors.

Recommendation: As the largest developer of industrial land in the region, the Port could support regional

educational efforts related to industrial green building (new and retrofit).

Recommendation: EID master developers should continue to use development standards to signal a desire

for green buildings, and consider mandating LEED® certification to a basic certified or Silver level.

Alternatively, specific design strategies could be required.

Recommendation: Where resources exist, a green building incentive could be used to catalyze the green

building conversation.

Eco-industrial Element: Marketing and Sales Efforts

It was difficult to market the GVBP as an EID because of capacity gaps in the market.

Because the GVBP was not marketed as an eco- / green / sustainable development, marketing efforts may

not have reached or influenced like-minded developers or end-users.

Marketing efforts have been somewhat successful by conventional measures in that several lots are sold, at

a slightly longer absorption rate than was expected but consistent with the overall regional market.

However, none of the lot developers is believed to have been strongly aware of and attracted by the

GVBP’s EID goals.

Most interviewees believed that the promotion of ‘green’ goals would drive away some prospective

purchasers and could scare away lenders to both the master developer and lot developer. Given the

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

financial risk undertaken by the Port (or any master developer), it is understandable that there is a desire to

ensure that absorption rates and sales prices are not negatively impacted by eco-marketing efforts. There

is clearly still a need for regional capacity building and education related to advancing EID.

As per recommendations in the marketing plan and feedback from site selectors, the GVBP marketing

collateral and approach did not present a sustainability-focused brand, thereby possibly limiting efforts to

reach sustainability-minded players within the target sectors. Although a general EID marketing campaign

was difficult due to capacity gaps in the market, a strategically focused EID marketing campaign may have

reached more developers or end users, especially progressive firms in the target sectors, more supportive

of EID and sustainability.

Recommendation: Until there is greater market capacity, EID master developers should consider a two-

pronged marketing approach targeting a general audience as well as progressive developers and end users.

This may require that the EID master developer pursue more direct marketing such as via social media.

Recommendation: As the largest developer of industrial lands in the region, the Port could help support

Metro Regional Government efforts to build EID capacity.

Recommendation: Metro Regional Government should consider updating its Eco-Efficient Toolkit.

Eco-Industrial Element: Sustainable Business Operations

Industrial symbiosis is difficult to achieve right from the start in a new EID.

Industrial symbiosis is best achieved by existing businesses, with greater opportunities to be found if

symbiosis is pursued regionally.

There are likely future opportunities to continue to boost the sustainability performance of businesses at

GVBP.

Currently, no industrial symbiosis (waste to input linkages) or other business-to-business collaboration

(beyond the site connectivity and two lots sharing stormwater management systems) has been established

in GVBP. ON Semiconductor has expressed interest in meeting with Subaru to explore collaboration

opportunities. This does not represent a failure of the GVBP. This is consistent with the conditions of a

democratic, market economy combined with the prevalent ‘develop and exit’ development approach that

makes it infeasible to only sell lots to end users that can plan some industrial symbiosis. New EIDs can set

the stage for symbiosis, but it is rare to achieve it during ‘start-up’.

The Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study explored whether an Eco-Concierge Program that creates a support

network for current and future GVBP business partners to reduce development operational costs and

support workforce education, training and networking is feasible. The Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study

conclusion that business collaboration, especially industrial symbiosis, is best fostered regionally with

existing businesses is consistent with what is now seen as international best practice, such as with the

National Industrial Symbiosis Program (NISP) model now running in 21 countries.

Aside from symbiosis, there are many other actions businesses can take to contribute to more sustainable

industrial operations. These actions range from implementing environmental management plans to energy

and water conservation to complete product redesign to phase out fossil fuel-derived inputs. Any one EID

(or standard industrial park) is unlikely to require a dedicated Eco-Concierge, but a regional Eco-Concierge

model, such as the two suggested in the feasibility study, could support businesses.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Recommendation: EID master developers should use design to set the stage for industrial symbiosis (e.g.,

extra utility corridors / easements or pre-approved symbiosis piping locations).

Recommendation: Local jurisdictions should ensure that zoning allows for uses that might support future

symbiosis, such as private utilities (e.g., shared wastewater treatment plants or waste heat recovery plants;

aquaculture; or greenhouses).

Recommendation: The Port and Metro Regional Government should champion regional industrial

symbiosis, which would benefit businesses at GVBP as well.

Recommendation: The Port and Metro Regional Government should further explore the Eco-Concierge

Feasibility Study recommended options.

Recommendation: The Port could act as an ‘honest broker’ between businesses in the GVBP, helping to

bring companies together to share knowledge and explore collaboration to advance sustainability.

General Lessons Learned

It takes (and will continue to take) leadership, partnership and very hard work to realize an EID.

 The GVBP was well-served by the preparatory work undertaken by the Port.

 The amount of technical information, documents, and people involved in the project made it

difficult to sustain broad knowledge and even buy-in for the life of the project. Not all stakeholders

or consultants will have the same level of eco-industrial / sustainability literacy.

The GVBP was successful due to the significant leadership and efforts of the Port and City staff, above what

would be required for a traditional industrial development. Much of the GVBP s success is due to the co-

operative partnership between the Port and the City. The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) structure

reflected the partnership approach. Some stakeholders who became associated with the project part-way

through reported that it was difficult to get up to speed, while others were frustrated by the number of

documents to track.

The GVBP was successful in piloting green infrastructure and green buildings. The GVBP was successful in

piloting green infrastructure and green buildings. The GVBP pilot also produced exemplary Development

Standards that articulated the integrated vision for the site with EID elements above and beyond City code

requirements. The Development Standards were an important tool for advancing green infrastructure and

green buildings in the GVBP. Once all the lots are sold, the Development Standards will stay in force

through the GVBP Owners’ Association, and will continue to influence any retrofit or re-development in the

GVBP. There are many other elements of an EID, such as incorporating renewable energy systems, even

higher performing buildings, or wastewater re-use, that are worth exploring in other pilots. Any future EID

developer, whether the Port or another organization, should be aware that EIDs will remain an innovative

concept for some time.

Over the years, an integrated design process has become standard for green buildings as a means of

ensuring the full benefits of inter-disciplinary collaboration are achieved, but also to create clear design

principles and goals that can be readily referenced as the project moves forward. The same process holds

tremendous value for EIDs.

Recommendation: EID master developers should engage local governments as early in the planning process

as possible to identify common goals and a process for maintaining collaboration.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Recommendation: New EID projects should continue to be guided by multi-stakeholder Technical Advisory

Committees.

Recommendation: EID master developers should use Development Standards as a means of articulating the

EID vision and helping to advance design beyond local code.

Recommendation: Master developer marketing efforts should be supported by and integrated with local

economic development efforts.

Recommendation: EID master developers and/or local governments should complete as much background

work as feasible to create a more robust master plan and to facilitate lot development.

Recommendation: EID master developers should produce a single, integrated master plan

, encompassing

land use, access and movement, landscape and ecology, site servicing, and lot development goals.

Recommendation: Consultants should be required to deliver / participate in an Integrated Design Process

(IDP). IDP training for the EID master developer and local municipal authority could also be beneficial.

Recommendation: EID master developers should seek design professionals and other consultants with

demonstrated knowledge and experience in advancing sustainability and EID.

Recommendation: Future EID master developers should consider requiring some sort of training for any

new staff (including at the local government) or consultants. The Port could help to develop such training.

Industrial park size / structure can affect implementation.

It was noted by several interviewees that the relatively small site made it difficult to pursue some of the EID

strategies. The site structure and constraints, such as limited access points from perimeter roads and

relatively few but large lots, did impact implementation. The site structure also allowed the Port to

maximize developable land by not requiring an internal road network. The flip-side, though, is that the

GVBP has no ‘gateway’ or internal road network to provide opportunities to incorporate more sustainable

infrastructure. A few interviewees cited a lack of anchor tenant as a barrier. However, many of the

historical EIDs with anchor tenants were not viable in the long-term as their reliance on an anchor tenant

failed to foster resiliency and the projects collapsed when the anchor tenants collapsed. Furthermore, an

anchor tenant development model does not generally reflect industrial development trends.

Recommendation: For future EIDs with planned internal roadways, the Port or other EID master developers

should consider piloting eco-industrial road designs.

Recommendation: For future EIDs that do have a clear ‘gateway’, the Port or other EID master developer

should use design to signal eco-efficient intent and to support marketing efforts.

Recommendation: For future EIDs, the Port or other EID master developers may want to consider sites

where diverse lot sizes to broaden marketing potential and increase the potential for symbiosis.

Examples of industrial park integrated site master plans in Oregon can be found at

http://www.corvallisoregon.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=6232 or

http://www.newbergoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/4676/south20industrial20area20master20plan_w

20appendices.pdf.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

vii

Closing

With respect to physical development, the GVBP pilot provides valuable examples for advancing green

infrastructure and green buildings in the industrial context, especially through the use of strategic green

infrastructure planning and development standards. The pilot also demonstrates the impact of market

knowledge on a developer’s and/or local jurisdiction’s efforts to advance EID, and underscores the need for

complementary regional capacity building in addition to concrete pilot projects. Further, the GVBP pilot

illustrates the importance of EID support and flexibility from local jurisdictions. Lastly, the GVBP

demonstrates that, as with conventional industrial development, the physical characteristics of a site shape

the final development; in this case, local drainage issues helped to drive innovative stormwater

management, while the site configuration limited lot sizing and, therefore, ultimate business diversity.

The GVBP pilot also helps to clarify that industrial symbiosis is difficult to embed in a new development; it is

easier to achieve industrial symbiosis by working with operational businesses. In addition, the GVBP pilot

helped to clarify the role of scale and a coordinating third-party in achieving industrial symbiosis. The Eco-

Concierge Feasibility Study rightly concluded that the GVBP would not have enough businesses to support

widespread industrial symbiosis, and that industrial symbiosis was best pursued from a regional

perspective.

On the whole, the GVBP pilot represents a very positive step towards achieving broader EID in the region,

and demonstrates the merit of collaborative pilot efforts. Future developments in the region can directly

incorporate some of the GVBP features, and can also springboard from the GVBP foundation to pilot

deeper green buildings; other sustainable infrastructure systems; design that supports future industrial

symbiosis; and alternative marketing approaches.

For more information, contact:

Ken Anderton, Sr. Manager, Industrial Development

Business Development & Properties

Port of Portland

T: 503.415.6575

E: Kenneth.Anderton@portofportland.com

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

viii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... I

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1

ABOUT GRESHAM VISTA BUSINESS PARK ....................................................................................... 1

MARKET CONTEXT ..................................................................................................................... 2

LAUNCHING THE ECO-INDUSTRIAL PILOT ....................................................................................... 4

ECO-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT MODELS ..................................................................................... 5

Site Plans ......................................................................................................................................................... 5

Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................................. 5

Building Design ............................................................................................................................................... 6

Business Operations ....................................................................................................................................... 6

Development Models ..................................................................................................................................... 7

METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 7

ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 10

METRO REGIONAL GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT GRANT APPLICATION .. 10

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 10

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 11

ECO-INDUSTRIAL ELEMENT: GREEN (STORMWATER) INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................ 12

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 12

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 13

ECO-INDUSTRIAL ELEMENT: CONNECTIVITY .................................................................................. 13

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 13

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 14

ECO-INDUSTRIAL ELEMENT: GREEN BUILDINGS ............................................................................ 15

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 15

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 15

ECO-INDUSTRIAL ELEMENT: MARKETING AND SALES EFFORTS ........................................................ 17

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 17

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 18

ECO-INDUSTRIAL ELEMENT: SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS OPERATIONS ................................................... 20

Overview ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

Analysis ......................................................................................................................................................... 21

LESSONS LEARNED ......................................................................................... 22

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Infrastructure ............................................................................................. 22

Eco-Industrial Element: Connectivity ........................................................................................................... 23

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Building ....................................................................................................... 23

Eco-Industrial Element: Marketing & Sales ................................................................................................. 24

Eco-Industrial Element: Eco-Industrial Operations ..................................................................................... 25

General Lessons Learned.............................................................................................................................. 26

Closing ........................................................................................................................................................... 30

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

INTRODUCTION

About Gresham Vista Business Park

The Gresham Vista Business Park (GVBP) was developed by the Port of Portland (Port), in collaboration with

the City of Gresham (City), to “…create a signature business park that showcases environmental

stewardship and eco-industrial innovation and attracts traded-sector businesses and industries providing

family wage jobs and economic prosperity for East County.” The site is shown on Figure 1.

The GVBP site wraps around the existing ON Semiconductor facility, and is surrounded by residential uses.

The site is located 0.8 miles from I-84, six miles from I-205 and 15 minutes from the Portland International

Airport. The original site plan projected 11 new lots / 11 new businesses. Eight of these lots are zoned

industrial; three lots are zoned for commercial mixed use development (Lots 6, 7, and 11 totaling 17.67

acres).

The 204 acres of industrially-zoned land in the GVBP represents an important opportunity to expand the

industrial employment base in the City. The Port estimated that a full build-out of GVBP over 10 years could

generate 4,970 direct, induced and indirect jobs (2,768 jobs-on site), $220 million in wages, salaries and

consumption impacts; $337 million in business revenue, and nearly $22 million in state and local taxes

annually.

Figure 1: GVBP Site Master Plan

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Market Context

The GVBP development process was initiated at a time when the local industrial market was slightly slower,

allowing the Port to take time to scope and pursue pilot eco-industrial initiatives with minimal impact on

developer timelines. On the other hand, the Port does rely on its industrial development efforts to

generate returns to support future industrial development, and was sensitive to pilot initiatives reducing

the absorption rate of the GVBP. Similarly, the City of Gresham had seen lower job gains than other areas

of the region, and was interested in seeing the GVBP site attract investment and support job creation in the

near-term. Neither the Port not the City was in a position to hold the site indefinitely for the ‘ideal’

developer or end-user.

Based on their experience at the time, the Port and the City believed the industrial market in general would

not only be focused on conventional gray infrastructure

development, but would be generally unaware of,

let alone supportive of, green or eco-developments. The Port was prepared to educate developers, and this

influenced the decisions that were made around prioritizing eco-industrial strategies and implementation.

With respect to more specific market sectors, the City had developed a traded sector jobs strategy, aiming

to strengthen and grow manufacturing, with a focus on advanced electronics (e.g., automotive electronics,

avionics, electronic medical devices; micro-electronics; semiconductors; clean technology) and specialized

machinery and equipment. Traded sector operations tend to be more complex versus other industries such

as logistics. Advanced electronics firms, by their definition, are supported by a culture more receptive to

innovation. Therefore, it is more likely that traded sector operations align with eco-industrial development

goals. However, while there was early interest in the GVBP from the manufacturing sector, it became

apparent early in the marketing of the GVBP that there was stronger market interest from the distribution

and logistics operations more commonly linked to port and airport supply chains. These firms tend to

require less sophisticated facilities and operations that may gain fewer benefits from eco-industrial

development elements like green buildings. With its emphasis on technology and more sophisticated

facilities, the advanced electronics sector tends to offer more opportunities to introduce LEED than the

distribution and logistics sector.

It should be noted that the GVBP site plan was re-configured to accommodate early sales; the current site

plan is shown in Figure 2 on the following page. As of fall 2016, there is one new business, the Subaru

Distribution Center, operating on Lot 4 (39 acres). Lot 4 was purchased and developed by the Trammell

Crow Company on behalf of Subaru, which is leasing the site back from Trammell Crow. Trammell Crow has

purchased Lots 1, 2 and 3 and plans to develop 3 speculative industrial buildings by 2018. Madison-Specht

Vista Logistics LLC purchased Lot 9 and is building three speculative industrial buildings. Madison-Specht is

a partnership between Specht Development Inc. (Portland) and New York Life Real Estate Investors LLC.

Construction on Lot 9 will be completed in 2018.

The Port continues its marketing efforts to sell the remaining lots. It is worth noting that GVBP had been

on the market since 2004 with active development and marketing by the Port since 2011. The first

industrial development on-site in 2015 with construction of the Subaru facility – a period of 11 years.

“… ‘gray infrastructure,’ the human-engineered solutions that often involve concrete and steel.”. World Resources Institute, 2012

from http://www.wri.org/blog/2012/06/green-vs-gray-infrastructure-when-nature-better-concrete, accessed December 11, 2016

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Figure 2: Revised GVBP Master Plan

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Launching the Eco-Industrial

Pilot

In September 2014, the City was awarded a Metro

Regional Government Community Planning and

Development Grant to help support planning and

implementation of four (of seven) strategies

identified in the Gresham Vista Implementation

Action Plan (Mithun, January 2013). The four

strategies were:

1. Integrated Site Master Plan

2. Green Infrastructure

3. Development Standards and Incentives

4. Eco-Concierge

The grant application requested funding to develop

five deliverables associated with those strategies:

1. Stormwater Master Planning Analysis and

Recommendations (completed July 2014)

2. Development Standards and Incentives

(completed April 2014 and revised July

2015)

3. Eco-industrial Concierge Feasibility Study

(completed April 2014)

4. Eco-industrial Marketing Study and

Recruitment Plan (completed July 2014)

5. Lessons Learned (this study, to be completed

by December 2016)

Light House Sustainable Building Centre (Light House)

was retained by the Port and City to prepare the

lessons learned report. Although some lots remain

for sale in the GVBP, sufficient development has

occurred to support a preliminary evaluation of the

lessons learned, with a focus on:

 what worked and what did not;

 the marketplace context;

 what challenges were encountered

compared to other eco-industrial models

studied as part of the grant;

 community benefits of the work to date;

 general lessons learned that may help

inform others interested in pursuing eco-

industrial strategies; and

 opportunities for longer term

implementation of eco-industrial strategies

at GVBP and the region.

Defining Eco-Efficient / Eco-Industrial Development

Metro Regional Government’s Eco-Efficient

Employment Lands Toolkit:

 High performance infrastructure - Model

approached for building more environmentally and

economically sustainable infrastructure systems

that reduce resource waste and the demand on our

current systems.

 21st century design – Code changes and

planning tools for designing vibrant employment

areas that facilitate community, attract industry and

reduce the impacts of climate change.

 Revitalizing employment areas – Strategies for

redeveloping and reusing underutilized

employment and industrial land for future economic

growth

Cogan Owens Cowan / Re Tem report

“Eco-Industrial Development is a system approach to

industrial development, enabling the sharing of

resources between companies on a common property

or an industrial district/region.” (Mithun, 2014)

“Eco-Industrial Development is an integrated system of

shared resources (material, knowledge, social, etc.)

among industries, businesses and the local community

that lead to economic gains, enhanced environmental

quality, and improved human resources for the business

and local community.” (President’s Council on

Sustainable Development, 1996)

“An Eco-Industrial Park (area) is defined as: ‘A

community of manufacturing and service enterprises

located together on a common property or in the same

region. Members seek enhanced environmental,

economic and social performance through collaboration

in managing resources.” (Lowe et al, 1996)

Mithun GVBP Implementation Action Plan

“Through workshops and drawing from policy and

previously developed materials, the Working Group

developed the following goals for Gresham Vista:

 Has a Strong Brand and identity that is attractive to

users, employees, and differentiates the site

 Achieves Investment Returns including financial

feasibility, revenue, and meeting target industry

clusters

 Offers Development and Operational Advantages

for users that maintains flexibility and leverages the

large lots

 Provides Connectivity and Accessibility of utilities

and transportation network to users

 Enhances Community Value as a regional model

for sustainable development that is a good

neighbor to surrounding communities and

improves employment opportunities

 Achieves Environmental Performance including air

quality, energy management, natural resource and

waste minimization goals.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Eco-Industrial Development Models

Eco-industrial development seeks to advance sustainability beyond ‘business-as-usual’ by applying

industrial ecology. This results in a conscientious effort to apply lessons from nature (e.g., through more

biophilic and biomimicking design) and to take a systems approach. This should be reflected in site

planning, infrastructure design, building design, and business operations. An Integrated Design Process

(IDP)

should inform every stage of an eco-industrial development. A brief overview of eco-industrial

elements is presented below

Site Plans

The site plan sets the stage for the infrastructure, building design and business operations. Conceptual

goals for these elements should be clearly established at this stage. For example, if conceptually, an eco-

industrial development is aiming to support wastewater re-use, then a site plan should include land set-

aside for a wastewater treatment plant and/or ensure that zoning is amenable to the inclusion of such uses

and/or provide extra rights-of-way allowances, even if within existing road allowances, for business-to-

business wastewater circulation. Similarly, if pedestrian access and movement is important, then the site

plan should show these features.

The site plan should be informed by as much site information as feasible. Topographic, geotechnical,

hydrological, and ecological studies should be conducted to as much depth as financing allows.

Ultimately, the site plan is likely best presented in a single, integrated master plan document that

summarizes the regulatory context, including proposed changes; summarizes background technical

information; and collects all development goals and concepts in a graphically attractive document that in

turn supports early marketing efforts. Concepts may be presented on ‘layered’ site plan drawings, such as

Land Use, Access & Movement, Utilities, and supplementary graphics such as those that illustrate building

design goals.

Infrastructure

Stormwater management within an eco-industrial park should reflect the applications of lessons from

nature (e.g., the use of bio-mimicking design), as well as a systems approach (e.g., the integration of

stormwater infrastructure) with connectivity elements or the re-use of stormwater by businesses.

Within eco-industrial parks, pedestrian connectivity can help to catalyze the interactions and build

relationships between different company employees that facilitate industrial symbiosis or even just

business-to-business mentoring or knowledge transfer. When integrated with ecological landscapes,

pedestrian connectivity can also provide opportunities to increase employee access to nature, which recent

research is showing improves health and well-being, and, therefore, productivity. Pedestrian connectivity

can also provide educational opportunities through interpretative signage describing ecological features,

green building practices, or sustainability achievements at operating businesses. Pedestrian connectivity

can also be combined with bicycle connectivity, providing lower impact commuting options.

For more information, refer to the Whole Building Design Guide (National Institute of Building Sciences) available at

http://www.wbdg.org/design-objectives/aesthetics/engage-integrated-design-process. While focused on a single building project,

much of the IDP approach can be translated to master planning and infrastructure design as well.

A full eco-industrial park development guide may be found here: http://www.caledon.ca/en/townhall/resources/CAO-2014-

002Schedule.pdf. Although developed for the eastern Canada context, much of the guide translates to other jurisdictions.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Goods movement in any industrial park, eco or not, is also important. Within an eco-industrial park, goods

movement can be achieved traditionally through roadways, with eco-industrial principles can be reflected

by designing those roads to minimize resource requirements, integrate natural landscapes, or utilize

recycled materials. As with any development, double-loaded roadways (development on both sides)

ensures the greatest value is achieved from the investment in roadways. Supporting efficient, multi-modal

goods movement within the eco-industrial park can contribute to greater industrial symbiosis, but this can

be achieved through more than just roadways. For example, pre-approved linear corridors can be used to

circulate hot wastewater or support district energy.

From an industrial perspective, water and ‘wastewater’ simply represent water of different quality. The goal

is to ensure that supplied water quality matches demanded water quality. For example, sometimes cooling

water can be re-used as truck wash water. As many modern industrial operations are not water-intensive,

this can be more about future-proofing (e.g., provision of pre-approved pipe corridors). The business case

for wastewater re-use can be challenging in a low demand environment. Where water treatment or

wastewater treatment is required, regardless of whether it is serving the site or a single user, it should

incorporate biophilic and biomicking design.

Landscape within an eco-industrial development serves multiple functions: supporting and integrating

nature; providing employee and public amenity; supporting stormwater management; and contributing to

better energy performance in buildings. Wherever possible, landscape should utilize species native to the

ecosystem in which the eco-industrial development is located.

Building Design

Eco-industrial development goals are usually reflected via the design and construction of ‘green’ buildings.

While the term ‘green building’ is now almost synonymous with one that is LEED® certified, in an eco-

industrial development, buildings are designed to incorporate lessons from nature, integrate with nature,

and catalyze resource conservation and industrial symbiosis, whether certified or not. From a green

building standpoint, industrial buildings are interesting in that they frequently have large, unbroken

exterior walls and large rooftop areas that present opportunities to integrate with stormwater or energy

infrastructure and/or to visibly demonstrate innovation (e.g., such as through the installation of solar

walls).

Business Operations

Theoretically, businesses operating in an eco-industrial development are integrated into a highly efficient

and effective ‘industrial ecosystem’

, practicing industrial symbiosis, where the wastes of one business

become the inputs for another business, and mimicking other ecosystem elements ( e.g., strategic and

generally minimized use of toxic substances and reliance on renewable energy and materials). Industrial

symbiosis (also called by-product synergy) has received by far the greatest attention, with many defining an

eco-industrial development solely by the absence or presence of industrial symbiosis (which, unfortunately,

neglects all the other aspects of development described above). Eco-industrial developments should help

to advance industrial symbiosis, but it is also important that they support other business efforts such as

reducing resource demand (i.e., efficiency and conservation) and increasing the consumption of renewable

energy and materials.

Frosch, Robert A. and Nicholas E. Gallopoulos. 1989. Strategies for Manufacturing. Scientific American 189 (3) 152

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Development Models

Eco-industrial parks can be achieved via new developments or the revitalization / retrofit of existing

industrial parks.

For new developments, the general model in the U.S. is that a master developer services the site and sells

lots to developers who: 1) build speculative developments and lease them out; 2) develop their own

facilities and become owner-operators; or 3) build to suit for a single, long-term tenant whose needs drive

the lot development features. The master developer can be a combination of private or public entity, under

a for profit or not-for-profit structure. Lot developers are almost always private, for-profit entities.

It is rare in the U.S. context to find a master developer who maintains ownership of lots and develops an

industrial park in which every business is a tenant.

Methodology

The GVBP lessons learned report was based on a review of the documents and deliverables prepared with

the support of the September 2013 Metro Regional Government Community Planning and Development

Grant, as well as interviews with key stakeholders. As additional context for the Port’s interest in exploring

eco-industrial development at GVBP, the consultant reviewed two other Port and Metro Regional

Government initiatives related to eco-industrial development that helped inform development of the grant

proposal and project approach. To provide regional context for this work, the consultant also looked at

Metro Regional Government’s Eco-Efficient Community Investment Toolkit.

The following documents, which were directly related to the Grant, were reviewed as part of this report:

1. Metro Regional Government Community Planning and Development Grant Application – April 2013:

awarded to City of Gresham and administered by the Port of Portland.

2. Stormwater Master Planning Analysis and Recommendations – July 2014: funded in part by Metro

Regional Government Community Planning and Development Planning Grant and Oregon Special

Public Works Fund, written for the City of Gresham and Port of Portland by Williams Creek Consulting.

3. Internal Connectivity and Access Plan – July 2014: funded in part by Metro Regional Government

Community Planning and Development Planning Grant, written for City of Gresham and Port of

Portland by Mackenzie.

4. Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions – May 2014 and July 2015: written by Port of

Portland.

5. Development Standards – May 2014 and July 2015: written by Port of Portland.

6. LEED Building Incentive – 2014: written by Port of Portland

7. Green Infrastructure Incentive – 2014: written by Port of Portland.

8. Eco-industrial Concierge Feasibility Study – 2014: funded in part by Metro Regional Government

Community Planning and Development Planning Grant, written for the City of Gresham and Port of

Portland by Cogan Owens Cogan.

9. Eco-industrial Marketing Study and Recruitment Plan – July 2014: funded in part by Metro Regional

Government Community Planning and Development Planning Grant, written for the City of Gresham

and Port of Portland by Johnson Economics, IronWolf, Cogan Owens Cogan.

10. GVBP Eco-Industrial Development Marketing One Pager – 2014: written by the Port of Portland.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

For context, Figure 3 shows the timeline for key project activities.

Figure 3: GVBP Timeline for Grant Documents / Deliverables

The following documents informed the Grant application, and were also reviewed for this report:

 Port Eco-Industrial Development Strategy – October 2012: funded by Port of Portland, written by

Cogan Owens Cogan and Re-Tem.

 Implementation Action Plan: Gresham Vista – January 2013: funded by Metro Regional Government,

written by Mithun.

2013

2015 - 2016

Marketing, Sales, Lot Development

2014

Green

Infrastructure

Incentive

Integrated Site Master Plan

Gresham Vista: Implementation Action Plan

Mithun, for Metro Regional Government

Metro Grant Application and Award

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

The following documents were also reviewed as they are part of the broader regional context for eco-

industrial development:

 Eco-Efficient Employment: Community Investment Toolkit – 2010: developed by Metro Regional

Government.

 Eco-Efficient Pilot Program: Final Report—January 2013: funded by Metro Regional Government,

written by Mithun.

Documents were reviewed with an eye to understanding their influence on the GVBP, especially with

respect to intentions to create an eco-industrial development.

In addition to reviewing project documents, the lessons learned report was significantly informed by

interviews with the following key stakeholders:

1. Ken Anderton, Senior Manager Industrial Development Program, Port of Portland

2. Miranda Bateschell, Community Development Planner/Grant Manager, Metro Regional

Government (now Long Range Planning Manager with City of Wilsonville)

3. Jamey Berg, Industrial Development Environmental Planner, Port of Portland

4. Steve Bloomquist, Land Use Planner, Port of Portland

5. Tom Bouillion, Planning Manager, Port of Portland

6. Paul Breuer, Partner, Colliers International

7. Erin Christensen Ishizaki, Project Managers, Mithun

8. Steve Fancher, Environmental Services Director, City of Gresham

9. Steve Faust, Principal, Cogan Owens Cogan

10. Lise Glancy, Manager of Strategic Initiatives, Commercial Division, Port of Portland

11. Brent Hedberg, Project Manager, Specht Developments

12. Jerry Johnson, Principal, Johnson Economics

13. Robin McCaffrey, Engineering Project Manager, Port of Portland

14. Neil Myers, Principal, Williams Creek Consulting

15. Ryan Parker, Industrial Development Project Manager, Port of Portland

16. Shannon Stadey, Economic Development Director, City of Gresham

17. Jim Swier, Facilities Manager – ON Semiconductor

18. Bob Thompson, Mackenzie, Architect, Lot 9

Each interview was flexible, but was based on a framework that established the interviewees’ roles in the

project; level of familiarity and use of key project documents; expectations for this new eco-efficient versus

a business-as-usual development; extent to which their expectations were met and why / how; and advice

for future projects. The interviews informed the lessons learned; however, no statements or findings are

directly attributed to any interviewee in this report.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

ANALYSIS

Metro Regional Government Community Planning and

Development Grant Application

Overview

The City, supported by the Port, sought a Metro Regional Government Community Planning and

Development Grant to support implementation of eco-industrial strategies at GVBP as part of the overall

planning and development efforts at GVBP.

The decision to pursue eco-industrial development at GVBP was inspired by two previous efforts. First, in

the fall of 2011, Port staff visited the Devens, MA – a 5,000 acre eco-industrial park established on a former

military base and subsequently participated in a working session with Cogan Owens Cogan and Re-Tem

Global to explore eco-industrial development opportunities for the Port.

Second, Metro Regional Government retained Mithun to scope potential pilot projects with implementable

goals and strategies based on Metro Regional Government’s Eco-Efficient Employment: Community

Investment Toolkit (November 2010). The Mithun report

considered the GVBP site specifically as an

opportunity to apply the Toolkit to a new development site. The Mithun work included several workshops

attended by multiple stakeholders, including staff at the City and Port. Mithun recommended eight

strategies for GVBP:

Category 1:Plans, Studies and Strategies:

1. Integrated site master plan:

2. District energy

3. Water conservation and reuse

4. Waste management

5. Multi-modal site access

Category 2: Programs, Codes and Standards

6. Development standards and incentives

7. Eco-concierge

Category 3: Capital improvements

8. Green infrastructure (specifically

stormwater versus other infrastructure)

The Grant Application proposed to deliver five elements for the GVBP as a means of pursuing four of the

strategies from the Mithun report (Integrated site master plan; development standards and incentives;

eco-concierge; and green infrastructure). The four elements are described below (excerpted from the

Grant application):

Element 1 - Creation of a green infrastructure master plan for GVBP (stormwater, landscape, habitat, and

internal connectivity/public access) that will provide the blueprint for successful green development at the

site.

Element 2 - Creation of development standards and incentives that promote green development practices

on the site, including connectivity.

Element 3 - Development of an eco-industrial marketing study and recruitment plan for GVBP that aligns

with the City’s Traded Sector Jobs Strategy and Port’s Marketing Plan.

These efforts formed the basis for the Port Eco-Industrial Development Strategy prepared by Cogan Owens Cogan and Re-Tem

Global in October 2012.

Implementation Action Plan: Gresham Vista (January 2013) and Eco-Efficient Pilot Program: Final Report (January 2013), both

prepared by Mithun for Metro Regional Government

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Element 4 - Implementation of sustainable development practices at GVBP through staff technical

assistance, incentives and an eco-industrial concierge feasibility study.

The grant application stated that the GVBP was expected to bring the following benefits to the region:

“Vibrant communities – People live and work in vibrant communities where they can choose to walk for

pleasure and to meet their everyday needs; Economic prosperity – Current and future residents benefit

from the region’s sustained economic competitiveness and prosperity; Safe and reliable

transportation – People have safe and reliable transportation choices that enhance their quality of life;

Leadership on climate change – The region is a leader in minimizing contributions to global warming; Clean

air and water – Current and future generations enjoy clean air, clean water and healthy ecosystems; and

Equity – The benefits and burdens of growth and change are distributed equitably.”

Analysis

Many interviewees recalled the Devens’ site visit and related workshops. Those events made a lasting

impression regarding what an eco-industrial park should be, perhaps even more so than the GVBP site-

specific Mithun report. However, the Devens’ site and examples cited in the Cogan Owens Cogan report

(and, presumably, in the workshops) may not have been the best fit for the region’s industrial parks, and

especially as examples for new eco-industrial developments. For example, the oft-cited Kalundborg,

Denmark

example involves business-to-business connections with the waste streams from one business

flowing to other businesses, such as wastes from an enzyme manufacturer being turned into fertilizer.

While this is a good example of the concept of industrial symbiosis (by-products being transformed into

inputs), Kalundborg took 30 years to evolve among existing businesses and is not a new industrial park

development. Devens is a mixed-use community developed on a brownfield site under a very unique quasi-

municipal governance structure. With respect to new development, its green infrastructure (sustainable

stormwater infrastructure) development standards are relevant, but are one of many such examples

nationally. Its Eco-Enterprise Center also offers an inspirational model for how the Port or City could work

with existing businesses to increase their sustainability performance, but does not inform new eco-

industrial development. Overall, Devens has incorporated many sustainability features, but much of its

success stems from the organization’s structure and continued presence in the development, elements

which do not translate to the GVBP site. The Cogan Owens Cogan efforts inspired interest and support in

the eco-industrial park concept, but may have contributed to unrealistic expectations regarding the ability

of industrial park developers to foster industrial symbiosis from the outset, while missing opportunities to

address eco-industrial potential in areas more relevant to a new development, such as for sustainable

infrastructure (with the exception of stormwater).

The Mithun report, which was directly referenced in the grant application, does generally advance the

notion that infrastructure and business operations (energy, water, waste management, stormwater and

transportation) should reflect eco-efficient goals; that development standards and incentives will help to

advance eco-efficient practices; and that an ongoing program (eco-concierge) is likely required to foster

collaboration and industrial symbiosis among the businesses in GVBP. The Mithun report also touches on

the importance of an integrated design approach by recommending an integrated master plan. However, it

too may have contributed to expectations that industrial symbiosis can be easily achieved in a new eco-

industrial development.

Based on the description of the Integrated Site Master Plan in the grant application, decisions were made

at this stage to narrow its scope to stormwater and related landscape elements reflected in a standalone

http://www.symbiosis.dk/en

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Stormwater Management Plan. Decisions were also made to not pursue district energy or other eco-

efficient infrastructure systems (water, waste management, transportation except for pedestrian

movement). This makes sense in light of the site structure and the limited degree to which feasibility for

those systems was evaluated in the Mithun plan, although development standards could have encouraged

eco-efficient water, materials, and energy use beyond that that would be achieved by buildings pursuing

LEED® certification (as is discussed in more detail later in this report).

Eco-Industrial Element: Green (Stormwater) Infrastructure

Overview

Stormwater Management Plan

The Stormwater Management Plan, developed by Williams Creek Consulting, provided the Port guidance

and recommendations for the development of Port-built master infrastructure and lot level infrastructure

within GVBP. The goals were to maximize development flexibility and increase marketability of individual

lots in a manner that provides benefit to the Port, City and developers through the implementation of

sustainable infrastructure. The Master Plan was supported by separate lot-specific scenario analysis that

evaluated business as usual versus low impact design options. The Stormwater Management Plan discusses

sustainability and triple bottom line benefits, consistent with eco-industrial development.

The Stormwater Management Plan helped to confirm the site’s infiltration capacity and clarify area-specific

stormwater management constraints and related City policy. This was especially helpful in providing

certainty to developers.

Development Standards – Green Infrastructure

The Stormwater Management Plan and City stormwater management policies specific to the GVBP

informed the preparation of the development standards for green infrastructure. Rather than

requirements, the green infrastructure development standards were presented as a toolkit from which lot

developers could select the best tools for their site. The development standards also reflected the Port’s

desire to not build master infrastructure (as well the City’s limited capacity to own and maintain such

infrastructure), but to keep the responsibility and control of stormwater infrastructure in the hands of the

lot owners.

Green Infrastructure Incentive

The Port offers an incentive to facilitate green infrastructure design at GVBP consistent with the

development standards. The incentive supports the developer in exploring green infrastructure options

during the preliminary design phase. This is a one-time, $10,000 incentive per lot. The lot developers can

(and should) retain green infrastructure consultants at any time outside of preliminary design, but the

incentive would not apply then.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Analysis

The GVBP stormwater infrastructure constructed to date reflects ‘natural’ stormwater management

systems, through infiltration and other low impact development (LID) practices. The GVBP has achieved the

development of green infrastructure, supported by a Stormwater Management Plan and Development

Standards that were consistent with eco-industrial development, and driven by relatively stringent

neighborhood-specific stormwater design requirements at the City. The community benefitted from a

neighboring industrial site that included more natural, and arguably more aesthetically pleasing, landscape

features, as well as from increased flood protection to surrounding properties on the north side of the site.

The Stormwater Plan was reported to be useful in discussions between Port staff and lot developers in

demonstrating the viability of designing for infiltration, and influenced negotiations with the Lot 9

purchaser. The Port’s groundwork on stormwater management was beneficial to the lot developers in one

other way – it sped up the development process by essentially providing conceptual design.

While the owner of Lot 9 did not end up claiming the green infrastructure incentive, the City’s regulations,

supported by the Port’s knowledge of infiltration capacity and conceptually feasible green infrastructure

design options, facilitated the kind of engagement and design envisioned by the Port. Ultimately, the more

ecologically desirable infiltration also proved to be the most cost-effective option for Lot 9.

Ultimately, the Port’s policy was to avoid the need to construct infrastructure before lots were sold to

maintain maximum flexibility for lot purchasers and to minimize the Port’s upfront capital costs. This policy,

combined with the lack of internal road requirements, meant that all stormwater infrastructure will be the

responsibility of lot owners. There are no plans to implement Port-built master stormwater infrastructure.

However, some staff acknowledge that, in hindsight, master stormwater infrastructure might have

benefitted the GVBP.

Eco-Industrial Element: Connectivity

Overview

Connectivity and Access Plan

The Port and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) worked with Mackenzie to develop the Internal

Connectivity and Access Plan, funded in part by Metro Regional Government Community Planning and

Development grant. The intent is to design this connectivity to support pedestrian access while

minimizing impacts at final build out and allow for integration with green stormwater infrastructure and

other improvements.

The Connectivity Plan focused primarily on pedestrian movement due to the ultimate lack of new public /

park-wide road infrastructure planned within the GVBP. Consistent with eco-industrial development, the

Connectivity Plan also referenced a triple bottom line approach, and included a discussion of sustainability

with respect to materials selection. The Connectivity Plan influenced the Development Standards.

Development Standards – Connectivity

The Development Standards clearly specify the intent for the GVBP to maintain connectivity within the site

as well as with surrounding public roads. The Development Standards include a graphic (recently updated)

showing the overall connectivity master plan, also shown in Figure 4. The Development Standards do

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

encourage artwork to be incorporated, but there is no specific encouragement of interpretative materials.

The Development Standards also encourage pedestrian pathways to be integrated with other facilities on-

site.

Figure 4: GVBP Pedestrian Connectivity Concept, 2016

Analysis

Although the GVBP is not yet fully built-out, significant pedestrian connectivity has been achieved.

Interviewees reported walking paths are frequently used by workers. The community benefits from

connectivity through a large block of land, with potential connections to bus stops on Stark and 223

; the

commercial node near Glisan and 223

; and any future commercial development on Lot 11.

However, some challenges were reported. In general, the market appeared to view the trails as a

constraint on the site development (i.e., land they pay for but can’t use operationally) rather than an

amenity. The developer of the Subaru site was concerned about a potential wind tunnel effect that would

draw in trash and debris. Lot owners also expressed security concerns. These concerns were mitigated by

the conditions in the Development Standards that ensure lot owners retain ownership of, signage and

fencing, and maintenance responsibility for pathways through their property, and supported by proactive

negotiations with lot owners. The pathways are not publicly maintained easements. Due to financial

constraints, the City was hesitant to undertake the financial responsibility for pathways. ON Semiconductor

was long-supportive of the trails, and reports that their employees use them. The ON Semiconductor trails

are marked private, as the existing ON Semiconductor site was not subject to the Development Standards.

It remains to be seen whether the pedestrian pathways achieve their full potential as an amenity for all

employees in the GVBP as well as for the public. Some stakeholders worry that the model, in which full-

control of the pathways is given to lot owners, will result in employees generally using paths owned by

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

their employer as a ‘lunch-time’ amenity versus as movement corridors and that there will be shrinking

public use and access, especially if any businesses feel they must increase screening or fencing.

There are no primary internal roadways in the GVBP. Due to the large lot size and relatively few number of

lots, as well as sufficient access from existing periphery roads, no primary internal roadways were required.

This also maximizes developable land within the GVBP. A joint access was ultimately included for Lot 9

(Subaru) and its neighbor. Overall, the lack of internal roadways, especially publicly owned and maintained

ones, meant that this opportunity for eco-industrial design was not applicable to the GVBP.

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Buildings

Overview

Development Standards: Enhanced Building / Site Design

The document encourages buildings to be developed to the LEED-certified standard, which if pursued has

the potential to address multiple sustainability elements, including energy and water conservation,

stormwater management, and sustainable materials selection. Specific stormwater (green infrastructure)

standards also align with LEED® requirements.

LEED® Incentive

The Port offers an incentive for LEED certification in an effort to help companies within the GVBP realize

lower operating costs, increased asset value, and a healthier more productive environment for their

occupants. The Port offers a one-time $20,000 incentive per lot to help offset the cost of certification. The

incentive does not specify which level of certification is to be achieved. As certification can take 6-12

months post-occupancy, the LEED incentive does not reduce any up-front project costs associated with

LEED® registration fees or documentation management, but a reimbursement for LEED® registration and

certification fees. However, the existence of the LEED® incentive offers a leverage point for a conversation

with potential and actual developers regarding green buildings generally, and the LEED® certification

standard specifically.

Analysis

In principle, some level of building performance above and beyond existing codes and regulations (the legal

minimum standard) should be achieved by every building in an eco-industrial development. This is usually

achieved through specific requirements in Development Standards and/or requiring that a green building

certification be achieved. When specific elements of green building design are targeted through

Development Standards, the requirements are often modelled on specific credits from certification

systems. LEED® building continues to have the highest market penetration particularly in the

commercial/office sector. Industrial LEED is less prevalent in the marketplace although growing. There are

more than 1,755 LEED-certified industrial facilities worldwide - 63% of which are in the U.S., with 29 in

Oregon, 48 in Washington, and 200 in California - plus another 2,710 projects in the “certification queue”.

GreenGlobes®, seen to be less stringent than LEED® is also gaining market share. Other systems such as

Passive House, Living Building Challenge or the WELL Standard have not yet made significant inroads in the

industrial sector, although there are now some Passive House industrial examples.

Based on interview responses from the Port and City staff, as well as the design sector, there does appear

to be local market resistance to LEED® certified industrial buildings. However, based on interview

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

responses, many LEED® compliant elements are incorporated, especially on the energy side, such as LED

lighting and higher levels of insulation. This occurs in addition to the relatively stringent state energy code.

Certainly, for the building archetypes likely to be built in the GVBP (simple industrial facilities that are

greater than 100,000 square feet), design elements that reduce heating and lighting costs are likely to have

acceptable simple paybacks, and should be pursued regardless of certification requirements. Therefore,

those design elements should be required by development standards without as much market pushback.

The selection of materials with low embodied energy and durability and that contribute to air-tightness

would likely have also have a business case to the building owner and, at a minimum, should be strongly

encouraged.

Where local policy exists to manage stormwater on-site or to increase green space / biodiversity, then

features such as green roofs can help to meet those policy goals. The direct benefits of such features to the

lot owner, however, are less than for features that improve energy or materials performance. This is one

area where incentives and local pilot projects may still be needed.

With respect to LEED® certification costs, it is important to note that they represent a very small portion of

industrial costs. Using a base cost of $50 per square feet (rough estimate using median cost index for

warehouses in Portland from the cost estimator at www.buildingjournal.com), the maximum LEED®Building

Design+Construction registration and certification costs would be as follows:

Building Size

Registration +

Certification Cost

Registration +

certification cost per

square foot

Registration +

certification costs (% of

building costs)

200,000 sf

$16,100

$0.08

0.2%

400,000 sf

$29,900

$0.07

0.1%

600,000 sf

$40,500

$0.07

0.1%

Interviewees felt that in addition to the above costs, there would be additional project costs to achieve

even the minimal LEED® certification, let alone Silver, Gold, or Platinum. This perception is not borne out by

market data, which suggests that LEED® certification and LEED® silver can be achieved with minimal extra

cost or extra cost that is associated with a quick payback especially if an experienced design team is

engaged. In theory, for experienced industrial developers and investors, there should be very little extra

design or construction cost because they have the potential to easily apply their LEED® compliant elements

and certification process to other industrial projects. There is frequently enough similarity project to

project in the industrial sector that the argument regarding LEED® certification costs becomes weak for an

experienced developer working with experienced, qualified design staff. Investments in energy

performance and quality materials will benefit operating businesses / tenants by minimizing operating

costs and will benefit building owners by maintaining the asset value for a longer period of time. This holds

true regardless of whether the development is advanced under a build-to-suit, speculative, or owner-

occupier model. For a speculative development, there should be no negative impact on marketability or

financial performance, especially for an experienced developer using an experienced design team who,

therefore, managed design and construction costs.

Currently, the owners of Lots 1, 2, 3 are targeting LEED® certification, while the owner of Lot 9 did not,

although the building incorporated some energy reduction measures beyond code requirements. The

development of Lots 1, 2, 3 is partly backed an institutional investor; such investors have tend to be

progressive but also seek green buildings as a means of protecting the value of assets in their portfolios. On

the other hand, Subaru, the Lot 9 tenant, did not appear to have explicitly LEED® goals, despite significant

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

sustainability efforts in its operations. Leverage points for advancing sustainability in the various

development models (build to suit, speculative, and owner-occupier) are further discussed in the

Marketing section.

It should also be noted that lot developers felt that the LEED incentive did not affect their decision to (or

not to) pursue LEED. However, the existence of the incentive provided a lever for a green building

conversation between Port staff and potential / actual developers.

Finally, there is clearly a need to support green building education within the industrial sector. As the

region’s largest developer of industrial land, the Port could play a key role in this. This could include

developing and disseminating additional resources, such as Industrial Green Building case studies or green

lease

templates. There are some strong regional organizations, such as the US Green Building Council

(USGBC) and NAIOP (Commercial Real Estate Development Association Oregon Chapter), with whom the

Port could collaborate on education initiatives. Building regional capacity would also facilitate future eco-

industrial marketing and sales efforts.

Eco-industrial Element: Marketing and Sales Efforts

Overview

Marketing Study and Recruitment Plan

Johnson Economics, IronWolf Community Resources and Cogan Owens Cogan were retained by the City

and Port to conduct an Eco-industrial Marketing Study and Recruitment Plan (“Marketing Plan”). The

Marketing Plan focused on industry trends and target industries for the eco-industrial park concept which

allowed them to formulate a series of strategies for recruitment but identified significant issues regarding

market knowledge and acceptance of the concept. It proposed a threefold strategy involving collaborative

marketing to local and regional companies, international/trade investment and targeting suppliers or

existing local companies. The report outlines potential motivations for firms and developers.

The Marketing Plan did not establish a brand (e.g., logo and a tag line), but did present target sectors and

means of reaching them. The study reinforced “[T]he branding of an EIP can be a good tool for recruiting

firms which have corporate goals for sustainability”, but because of perceived market confusion about the

eco-industrial concept, the study then recommended that the GVBP not be branded as an eco-industrial

park in marketing material. The report was thorough in identifying target sectors and even specific target

firms within those sectors, but missed the point that many of those firms, such as Pepsi Co, have

demonstrated very strong sustainability leadership. Subsequent testing with site selectors apparently

strengthened the report’s proposition that sustainability-related marketing might harm sales.

Based on this recommendation from the Study and subsequent conversations with site selectors, the

marketing collateral and approach did not present a sustainability-focused brand (or a strong brand

otherwise), thereby possibly limiting efforts to reach sustainability-minded players within the target

sectors. There were some early Port marketing materials (see next section) built around the eco-efficient

goals, but these were discontinued following discussions with developers and a site selector.

For example, see https://industry.gov.au/Energy/EnergyEfficiency/Non-residentialBuildings/Documents/glsTenantsGuide.pdf or

http://www.greenleaselibrary.com/lease-forms--case-studies.html

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

As has been standard practice for such developments, the Port relied on brokers and developers to drive

buyers to the site and undertook limited direct marketing itself.

GVBP Eco-Industrial Development Fast Facts

This two-page brochure was developed early in the marketing and sales process. It was not widely used

since, as noted above, the Marketing Plan and subsequent conversations with site selectors, advised

against branding the site as an eco-industrial development.

The brochure notes the Port’s experience as a developer, as well as the advantages of Gresham as a

location. It also includes a definition of eco-industrial development, an overview of available incentives, a

discussion of available EID opportunities, and benefits of an EID. There is no site plan or lot pricing on the

brochure.

Some of the EID opportunities listed may have been difficult to implement at GVBP, which may have

confused marketing efforts. For example, other than encouraging LEED® certification, the development

standards did not promote energy or water conservation or waste minimization. Similarly, although the

Port does have water rights at GVBP and has done extensive work on the use of non-potable water for

industrial development, there was no specific background technical work or corresponding development

standards at GVBP to promote the use of non-potable water by GVBP businesses. Furthermore, without a

pre-defined resource (e.g., an eco-concierge or dedicated Port / City staff person) dedicated to working

with businesses to improve their operations, it’s not clear how operating businesses would achieve further

resource conservation or synergies.

The EID benefits are well-presented, although there are no case studies or references.

Analysis

Marketing efforts have been somewhat successful by conventional measures in that several lots are sold, at

a slightly longer absorption rate than was expected but consistent with the overall regional market.

However, none of the lot developers is believed to have been strongly aware of and attracted by the

GVBP’s sustainability goals. Further analysis is provided below, based on the lot development model. The

discussion focuses on relationship of sales and marketing to goals related to building and site design, since

there were no explicit operational goals implemented or promoted.

Build to Suit Model

Sustainability can be driven by the end user or by the developer. Marketing efforts should reach

sustainability-minded developers and end-users.

For end users, green buildings and more natural sites can contribute to reduced operating costs and better

employee attraction, retention and productivity. For some end users, a green building represents means to

demonstrate a sustainability ethic that may in turn align with operations (e.g., FedEx

). With respect to

end users, the fact that even Subaru, which elsewhere in the U.S. is lauding its zero waste efforts, was not

engaged in the sustainability discussion during negotiations or facility planning and design speaks to a

capacity gap in the industrial sector (as well as to the classic situation wherein the right hand – operations –

not being aware of what the left hand – real estate and facilities – is doing). Nonetheless, it is worth

attempting to reach sustainability-minded end users during the marketing stage. For example, the

http://www.ccjdigital.com/fedex-pursues-leed-certification-for-new-buildings/

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

TaigaNova master developer worked with the industry trade magazine Oilsands Journal to secure a feature

article about proposed sustainability and innovation at the TaigaNova industrial park in Fort McMurray,

Alberta. While interviewees on both sides of the sales process reported that direct contact between the

seller and an end user would be frowned upon; there is some precedent in our experience. For example,

the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority sponsored an innovative stormwater management mini-

design workshop for a proposed 400,000 square foot logistics facility that engaged both the developer, his

design team, and his end user (Canadian Tire, a large firm competitive with Home Depot in the Canadian

market).

For developers, green buildings represent a strategy to protect the value of their assets, which they may

hold for longer than the original end user is in place. Green buildings are more durable, and are also more

future-proof with respect to maintaining relevance in the face of certain long-term building code and

market evolution. Many institutional investors, such as New York Life Real Estate, which is backing the

development of Lots 1, 2, and 3, already recognize this. Marketing efforts should reach as sustainability-

minded developers as possible.

Speculative Model

Sustainability is primarily driven by the developer, since end-users are often not identified until after

construction is underway. In addition, speculative developments frequently contain more than one end-

user. Some end-users with more complex operations can drive sustainability by exerting pressure through a

green lease or negotiating sustainability-driven fit-outs (e.g., targeting LEED®-Commercial Interiors

certification). Complementary marketing material would help the developer to attract eco-friendly tenants.

For developers, the situation is the same as discussed above under the Build to Suit Model.

Owner-Occupier Model

This model is the least prevalent in the industrial sector as more companies seek to remove real estate

assets from their portfolios, preferring to operate in long-term leases instead. From a marketing

standpoint, the owner-occupier can be considered as both an end-user and developer and the situation is

as described above.

General Comments

Most interviewees believed that the promotion of ‘green’ goals would drive away some prospective

purchasers and could scare away lenders to both the master developer and lot developer. The market

expects a discount on sites with significant development restrictions, regardless of whether they are

natural (e.g., poor soil quality) or regulatory. Given the financial risk undertaken by the Port (or any master

developer), it is understandable that there is a desire to ensure that absorption rates and sales prices are

not negatively impacted by eco-marketing efforts, especially since the Port relies on revenues from its

industrial development to help finance subsequent industrial developments. When the master developer is

solely a government or government-owned organization, profit targets are usually lower, with some

governments supporting investments (or subsidies, depending on the government philosophy) to achieve

other goals such as job creation or advancing sustainability demonstration projects.

However, there is merit in at least a two-pronged approach, with some effort made to reach sustainability-

minded end-users or developers. This might require that the Port (or other master developer or local

government economic development office) undertake greater and more direct marketing in addition to

standard methods.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

With respect to reaching sustainability-minded end users and developers, some other considerations are

listed below:

1. Early engagement with the market, such as during master planning, should be used to get a broad

read on the actual, versus perceived, market tolerance for sustainability requirements. For

example, master developers can pursue an integrated design process during master planning that

engages archetypical or use focus groups to vet draft development standards.

2. Conventional site selection features, such as lot size, level of servicing, location with respect to

major transportation routes, and pricing need to be clearly presented, even when pitching to a

‘greener’ audience.

3. Make sustainability goals clear and part of the branding, at least for the related marketing efforts.

4. Support marketing with a social and conventional media strategy.

5. Leverage the sales process itself. For example, TaigaNova issued a Request for Purchase and

Development Proposals, which included a submission form that helped potential purchasers to

explore and develop their sustainability efforts. Their proposals were attached to and referenced

in the final Purchase and Sales Agreements.

6. Target investors with known sustainability policies, such as New York Life Real Estate Investors or

Sunlife / Bentall Kennedy.

7. Target progressive end users within the existing traditional target sectors. For example, if the

region is a hub for food processing, research companies with strong corporate social responsibility

policies.

8. Tap the burgeoning ‘green’ scene in Portland to support marketing. The USGBC’s industrial

facilities committee includes two members from Portland. NAIOP and the Urban Land Institute

have local chapters, and have supported green building elsewhere.

9. Integrate marketing efforts with general capacity building efforts. For example, offer green

industrial building webinars in the months leading up to a marketing campaign or incorporate case

studies developed as part of educational efforts into marketing materials.

Eco-Industrial Element: Sustainable Business Operations

Overview

Eco-Industrial Concierge Feasibility Study

The Eco-Industrial Concierge Feasibility Study explored options for providing waste minimization and

resource efficiency services to support traded-sector businesses at GVBP and make connections to existing

businesses in the Columbia Corridor that are interested in sustainable business practices.

The Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study was a first step in exploring whether an Eco-concierge Program that

creates a support network for current and future GVBP business partners to reduce development

operational costs and support workforce education, training and networking is feasible. The study

recommended two options for an eco-concierge program. Option 1 involves working with multiple partners

to build on and expand the existing ResourceFull Use program, adding services related to “…resource

efficiency, energy efficiency, networking, sustainability consulting and marketing.” GVBP would be targeted

by the program, but the program would be delivered in the greater region (corridor). Option 2 also involves

regional delivery via either a new non-profit whose board would draw from multiple stakeholders or a

partnership with an existing non-profit. Option 2 would be linked to positioning the region as a ‘living

laboratory’.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Analysis

Neither option from the Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study was implemented, as neither option ultimately met

triple-bottom line requirement for the GVBP. Currently, no industrial symbiosis (waste to input linkages) or

other business-to-business collaboration (beyond the site connectivity and two lots sharing stormwater

management systems) has evolved in GVBP.

The Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study conclusion that business collaboration, especially in a manner that

results in industrial symbiosis, is best fostered regionally with existing businesses is consistent with what is

now seen as international best practice. While this outcome runs counter to some of the earlier documents

that suggest that industrial symbiosis is almost a necessary condition for eco-efficient employment lands, it

is actually rare that new developments, especially in democratic, market economies, achieve industrial

symbiosis from the start. Furthermore, the ‘develop and exit’ model that prevails in the North American

market makes it difficult to work with potential businesses in a new eco-industrial park.

However, our research indicates that the United Kingdom-developed National Industrial Symbiosis Program

(NISP) model, now running in 21 countries and endorsed by groups like the European Union Directorate

General for the Environment and Global Green Growth Forum, is the best model for advancing industrial

symbiosis regionally. A feasibility study documenting this research can be found here:

https://nispcanada.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/nispcanadafeasibilitystudy20160725.pdf. With respect to

advancing sustainability within individual businesses, such as improving energy efficiency, the models

suggested by the Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study are appropriate.

Although the Port will not retain ownership of any lots, they continue to have strong relationships with

businesses located in Port developments. As such, the Port could support continued business sustainability

improvement and the implementation of industrial symbiosis regionally, including in the GVBP, through

one of the proposed Eco-Concierge models or a NISP-type program. The Port could also include green

building retrofit education in any industrial green building education, thereby targeting existing businesses

and building owners.

Lastly, specifically within the GVBP, Subaru reported that it recycles 95% of its waste at its distribution

facility, and is striving for 100% to match their manufacturing facility operations. ON Semiconductor has

implemented a significant water reuse project and has an internal Green Team working to expand its

recycling efforts. Not only could these companies serve as mentors for other GVBP or regional businesses,

but they may be able to collaborate and share knowledge between them as well. ON Semiconductor has

already expressed interest in meeting with Subaru to explore collaboration opportunities; the Port could

help to facilitate such a meeting and support implementation efforts, such as any feasibility studies.

Industrial Symbiosis in Action: Case Studies from NISP-UK

Guinness Power

Quality control batches of Guinness Beer (which become unsaleable) used to be discharged to sewer. Now, they are sent to

Diageo’s power producing anaerobic digester.

A Fruitful Collaboration

Terra Nitrogen Ltd by-products of CO2, and steam are now with a 38 acre greenhouse owned by John Baarda Ltd. Now,

British greenhouse tomatoes compete Spanish ones in the winter!

Unlikely Playdate

Clean offcuts of light insulation foam used by Dunlop Marine to make hoses for offshore oil & gas industry are diverted by

landfill and now used by North Lincs in the manufacture of children’s teddy bears.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

LESSONS LEARNED

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Infrastructure

GVBP achieved exemplary green infrastructure via low impact stormwater management practices.

The example of the owner of Lot 9 re-designing their site to accommodate infiltration, and saving money in

doing so, is a compelling one. This outcome was made possible by the revisiting of site geotechnical

conditions and shaped by the Port’s proactive analysis of site-specific traditional versus low impact

scenarios; development standards; and the City’s willingness and ability to waive system development

charges (SDCs). The consultant retained to complete the GVBP stormwater management plan was also

well-versed and experienced in innovative stormwater management design.

The lot developers did not perceive the incentives as large enough to drive their decision-making. Low

impact stormwater management was achieved in response to the City’s relatively stringent discharge

standards for the area, and supported greatly by the technical scenarios developed by the Port and its

consultants. However, the City’s willingness and ability to waive SDC’s may have contributed more to the

incorporation of infiltration techniques than the incentives. A stronger pitch on potential incentives by the

Marketing team may have enhanced the use of incentives; however, developers often are reluctant to alter

their standard development team.

Recommendation: EID master developers should implement development standards for green

infrastructure for all EIDs. This is a key means by which to demonstrate eco-industrial principles, and there

is now regional precedent. The GVBP Development Standards and City GVBP stormwater policies can be

used as a template. The extent to which practices are required versus encouraged should be tested in the

market before such standards are adopted, keeping in mind an EID should aim for leading not just best

practice. More practices may be required, and/or higher quality and quantity goals may be established, if

the master developer or local government is able to offer green infrastructure incentives or SDC credit.

Incentives can offer a lever for green infrastructure discussions early in the lot development process.

Recommendation: When development timelines permit, and especially for highly constrained sites, future

EID master developers, including the Port, should also consider completing upfront technical analysis and

developing site specific traditional versus low impact stormwater management scenarios that can be used

by lot developers. These will support higher development standards and negotiations with developers with

respect to implementing more innovative stormwater management development.

Recommendation: EID master developers should ensure that consultants retained for stormwater

management plans are well-versed and experienced in innovative / low impact stormwater management

design. Green Infrastructure Incentives can be offered where feasible to encourage lot developers to do

the same.

Recommendation: The Port is well-positioned to lead regional education efforts regarding the benefits of

green infrastructure for industrial developments. The Lot 9 stormwater management design could be

developed into a case study that supports capacity building for marketing staff, civil engineering /

landscape architecture consultants, and the development industry. Such education would create more

interest and buy-in from lot developers.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Eco-Industrial Element: Connectivity

GVBP was successful at increasing connectivity within the park versus a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario.

Several interviewees felt a strong attachment to the connectivity piece, supporting it as a goal early on, and

expending effort to ensure it was implemented. One interviewee reported that if you visit the site, you are

likely to see ON Semiconductor or other employees walking along the site path. This amenity contributes to

employee health and well-being (and, therefore, productivity and retention) and supports the overall

intention of eco-efficient employment lands.

Recommendation: Future EID master developers should ensure that pedestrian connectivity is established

as a goal in the planning stages, and is then reflected in the master plan and development standards. The

GVBP Development Standards can be used as a template.

Recommendation: GVBP’s success in achieving pedestrian connectivity should be developed into a case

study two years after full build-out of the GVBP, and included in any EID education offered by the Port,

Metro Regional Government or other regional partners.

Recommendation: Where local government resources exist, local governments should consider public

ownership or easements for pathways to maximize employee and community benefit where appropriate.

In some cases, retaining private ownership may make more sense.

Eco-Industrial Element: Green Building

GVBP will be home to LEED®-certified industrial buildings.

The GVBP likely will be home to 10% of the LEED® certified industrial buildings in Oregon with three LEED

buildings on Lots 1-3. This represents a 10% increase in the market penetration of green building in the

industrial sector (a total of 32 buildings statewide) – a significant increase as industrial LEED has been

slower to catch on than commercial LEED. In addition, some of the other buildings designed to date were

reported to incorporate some green building features such as LED lighting or extra insulation because they

had a good payback.

While the incentives did not influence the investors’ decision to build to LEED® standards, the incentives

and design standards clearly signaled that the GVBP was open for ‘green business’. In the same way that

developers building business-as-usual buildings feel that higher green standards might delay their projects,

especially if they are inexperienced, developers experienced with green buildings know the inverse can also

be true – it can be difficult to design and build to a higher standard if the local regulatory authorities are

not open to approving different designs.

Overall, there appears to be substantial resistance to green buildings, especially LEED® certified ones, in the

industrial market. Some of this resistance is due to misconceptions about green buildings. There is an

opportunity for the Port and its partners to build regional capacity around industrial green building.

Recommendation: EID master developers and local government economic development offices should

ensure marketing efforts target institutional investors and other large real estate investors with known

sustainability efforts. Most large investors now seek out green buildings as a strategy for increasing and

maintaining the value of their portfolios. The US Green Building Council’s LEED® database can help to

identify such companies.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Recommendation: EID master developers and local government economic development offices should

ensure marketing efforts reach progressive firms within their target sectors.

Recommendation: As the largest developer of industrial land in the region, the Port should lead regional

educational efforts related to industrial green building (new and retrofit). These efforts could include the

delivery of in-person and webinar based training in partnership with groups like the USGBC or NAIOP as

well as the development of more passive resources such as an informational website. The Port should

develop case studies for the GVBP green building successes (for the LEED® certified buildings as well as for

some of the specific green building features incorporated in other buildings) to be incorporated into

educational efforts. Case studies could be developed pre-construction to reflect design goals, and then

updated after 1-2 years to reflect construction and operation.

Recommendation: EID master developers should continue to use development standards to signal a desire

for green buildings, especially given that, by definition, EIDs are meant to perform above the business-as-

usual benchmark. In future projects, EID master developers should consider mandating LEED® certification

to a basic certified or Silver level, citing GVBP and other Oregon precedents as examples of LEED® industrial

buildings and /or GreenGlobes® which was reported by one interviewee to be making inroads in the

industrial market. Alternatively, specific design strategies with more current market penetration, such as

those that reduce building heating and lighting-related energy consumption, could be required via

development standards.

Recommendation: If the local government or EID master developer has financial resources to support green

building incentive, they could implement a green building incentive like the one at GVBP to provide an

opportunity to discuss green building with developers. Financial resources may catalyze greater eco-

efficient activity they support an award (e.g., for the building that achieves the most LEED® points) or

education and capacity building, especially in the design and development industries.

Eco-Industrial Element: Marketing & Sales

It was difficult to market the GVBP as an EID because of capacity gaps in the market.

While some marketing materials can simultaneously act as educational materials, their role as such is

limited. In a market where there are still many misperceptions or a lack of accurate information about the

costs of green building, the implementation of industrial symbiosis, or the benefits of sustainable

infrastructure systems, the effectiveness of general EID marketing materials is minimized, and, as several

interviewees noted, may even weaken sales. Greater regional capacity around sustainable industrial

development is still needed to support the advancement of EID.

Recommendation: As the largest developer of industrial lands in the region, the Port should lead efforts to

build this capacity, focusing on green building and sustainable infrastructure (including green / stormwater

infrastructure, but also around water, wastewater, roads, energy, landscape and amenities). Target

audiences include developers, financial institutions, planners, architects, and engineers. The Port could

support the delivery of active education (e.g., courses and study tours) and passive education (e.g., online

case study libraries). There are many regional organizations with which the Port could partner to develop

and deliver sustainable industrial development education, such as the USGBC, NAIOP, Metro Regional

Government, local governments like Gresham or Portland, and utilities.

Recommendation: Metro Regional Government should consider updating its Eco-Efficient Toolkit, ensuring

it represents best and emerging practice for sustainable industrial development and operations, but only if

there are also enough resources to support broad and sustained dissemination of the updated toolkit. For

example, the GVBP successes and lessons learned should inform the next version. Additional case studies,

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

backed by ‘model pro forma’ and more detailed business case information, would be helpful. It would also

be helpful to more strongly distinguish between strategies for new developments versus strategies for

retrofit / revitalization. As the region’s largest developer of industrial land, the Port could be a strong

partner in creating the next toolkit. Other organizations such as the Urban Land Institute and NAIOP could

be supportive.

Because the GVBP was not marketed as an eco- / green / sustainable development, marketing efforts may

not have reached or influenced like-minded developers or end-users.

Although a general EID marketing campaign was difficult due to capacity gaps in the market, a strategically

focused EID marketing campaign may have reached more developers or end users more supportive of EID

and sustainability. This does not mean ignoring sectors known to be interested in the region; rather, it is a

means of reaching progressive players within those sectors.

Recommendation: Until there is greater market capacity, EID master developers should consider a two-

pronged marketing approach targeting a general audience via conventional channels such as site selectors

as well as targeting developers and end users more inclined to support EID goals. This may require that the

EID master developer pursue more direct marketing via less traditional avenues such as social media.

Market research can help to identify relevant developers and end users.

Eco-Industrial Element: Eco-Industrial Operations

Industrial symbiosis is difficult to achieve right from the start in a new EID.

Some of the work that influenced the GVBP, like the Cogan Owens Cogan workshops and report and Metro

Regional Government’s Toolkit seemed to suggest that industrial symbiosis could be achieved in a new EID

setting. There currently is no industrial symbiosis among the first two on-site businesses (if ON

Semiconductor is included). It is not likely that there will be symbiosis among any of the new businesses

without eco-concierge assistance. This is consistent with the conditions of a democratic, market economy

combined with the prevalent ‘develop and exit’ development approach that makes it infeasible to only sell

lots to end users that can plan some industrial symbiosis. No master developer has capital that patient, and

there are legal implications of refusing to sell land for a use that complies with local zoning.

Furthermore, there is also a perception from some stakeholders that an EID should target specific

industries and their supply chain (i.e., a sectorally-themed EID) to better support symbiosis. This means

that marketing efforts should target those sectors, and that sales should be limited where possible to those

sectors. Not only is this infeasible for the reasons discussed above, but international experience indicates

that symbiosis is frequently achieved across diverse sectors, establishing relationships outside conventional

supply chains. For example, the National Industrial Symbiosis Program (NISP) model, which is now running

in 21 countries worldwide, has determined that at least 50% of its implemented symbiosis involves

businesses from different sectors.

New EIDs can set the stage for symbiosis, but it will be rare to achieve it during ‘start-up’.

Recommendation: EID master developers should use design to set the stage for industrial symbiosis (e.g.,

extra utility corridors / easements or pre-approved symbiosis piping locations).

Recommendation: Local governments should ensure that zoning allows for uses that might support future

symbiosis, such as private utilities (e.g., shared wastewater treatment plants or waste heat recovery

plants); aquaculture; or greenhouses.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

Industrial symbiosis is best achieved by existing businesses, with greater opportunities to be found if

symbiosis is pursued regionally.

The Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study rightly noted that symbiosis opportunities within a single EID are

generally limited. There are some exceptions, like the 1,300 business Burnside Industrial Park in Halifax,

Nova Scotia, Canada, but new industrial parks at that scale are unlikely to be developed in the Portland

region (or in the United States). A regional approach results in more symbiosis opportunities for businesses.

Recommendation: Although the Port does not retain ownership of the industrial lands it develops, it does

maintain good relationships with lot owners and end users. The Port, working with Metro Regional

Government and other stakeholders like the Urban Land Institute, is well-positioned to champion regional

industrial symbiosis, which would benefit businesses at GVBP as well. Based on several international

studies, the National Industrial Symbiosis Program (NISP) model

appears to be the most successful at

identifying and implementing symbiosis opportunities. However, other methods such as databases and

technical audits / studies have also supported the implementation of industrial symbiosis.

There are likely opportunities to continue to boost the sustainability performance of businesses at GVBP.

Aside from symbiosis, there are many other actions businesses can take to contribute to more sustainable

industrial operations. This ranges from implementing environmental management plans to energy and

water conservation to complete product redesign to phase out fossil fuel-derived inputs. As discussed

earlier, marketing efforts can help to attract companies already working on improving their environmental

performance. However, any business, ‘green’ or not, likely has room for improvement and could benefit

from support to do so. Any one EID (or standard industrial park) is unlikely to require a dedicated Eco-

Concierge, but a regional Eco-Concierge could support businesses. The Port is well-positioned to support or

champion the creation of an Eco-Concierge.

Recommendation: The Port should further explore the Eco-Concierge Feasibility Study recommended

options.

Recommendation: The Port could play a role as an ‘honest broker’ between businesses in the GVBP, helping

to bring companies together to share knowledge and explore collaboration to advance sustainability.

(Note: Should a regional Eco-Concierge be established, then this would become the responsibility of the

Eco-Concierge.)

General Lessons Learned

It takes (and will continue to take) leadership, partnership and very hard work to realize an EID.

The GVBP was successful due to the significant leadership and efforts of the Port and City staff, above what

would be required for a traditional industrial development. Much of the GVBP s success is due to the co-

operative partnership between the Port and the City. City staff worked well and in a coordinated manner

with Port staff. City incentives such as reduced SDCs were helpful in advancing green infrastructure goals.

Future EIDs will still require this strong commitment and co-ordination with the local government.

https://nispcanada.files.wordpress.com/2016/06/nispcanadafeasibilitystudy20160725.pdf

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) structure reflected the partnership approach, engaging

representatives from multiple departments at the Port and City, as well as representatives from Metro

Regional Government and ON Semiconductor, throughout the entire project.

The GVBP was successful in piloting green infrastructure and green buildings. The GVBP pilot also produced

exemplary Development Standards that articulated the integrated vision for the site with EID elements

above and beyond City code requirements. The Development Standards were an important tool for

advancing green infrastructure and green buildings in the GVBP. Once all the lots are sold, the

Development Standards will stay in force through the GVBP Owners’ Association, and will continue to

influence any retrofit or re-development in the GVBP.

There are many other elements of an EID, such as incorporating renewable energy systems, even higher

performing buildings, or wastewater re-use, that are worth exploring in other pilots. Other development

models, such as Port-partner joint ventures or even private EIDs, may also require piloting. Any future EID

developer, whether the Port or another organization, should be aware that EIDs will remain an innovative

concept for some time.

Recommendation: EID master developers, whether the Port or others, should engage local governments as

early in the planning process as possible to identify common goals and a process for maintaining

collaboration as the development proceeds. EID master developers should consider how their EID can

support local goals such as for stormwater management, job creation, investment attraction, and resource

conservation.

Recommendation: New EID projects should continue to be guided by multi-stakeholder Technical Advisory

Committees, including representatives from the master developer’s team, local government, and Metro

Regional Government. Other TAC members could include representatives from businesses or associations

in the target sectors; the real estate industry (site selectors, developers, commercial brokers); financial

institutions; utilities, or local research institutions.

Recommendation: EID master developers should use Development Standards as a means of articulating the

EID vision and helping to advance design beyond local code.

Recommendation: Master developer marketing efforts should be supported by and integrated with local

economic development efforts.

The GVBP was well-served by the preparatory work undertaken by the Port.

Recommendation: Where time and resources permit, EID master developers and/or local governments

should complete as much background work as feasible (e.g., geotechnical studies, topographic surveys,

ecological site assessments) to create a more robust master plan and to facilitate lot developers’ due

diligence and design efforts.

The amount of technical information, documents, and people involved in the project made it difficult to

sustain broad knowledge and even buy-in for the life of the project.

Some stakeholders who became associated with the project part-way through reported that it was difficult

to get up to speed, while others were frustrated by the number of documents to track. Still others

appeared unaware of previous or related efforts that could have possibly influenced their efforts.

Over the years, an integrated design process has become standard for green buildings as a means of

ensuring the full benefits of inter-disciplinary collaboration are achieved, but also to create clear design

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

principles and goals that can be readily referenced as the project moves forward. The same process holds

tremendous value for EIDs.

Recommendation: EID master developers should produce a single, integrated master plan

to guide EID

planning and development. Integrated master plans bring all project plans into one document,

encompassing land use, access and movement, landscape and ecology, site servicing, and lot development

goals. Integrated master plans are supported by discipline specific technical studies, such as stormwater

management plans, but help to synthesize and integrate such studies. Integrated master plans can also

support marketing by having all project goals in one place and providing an opportunity to present case

studies or precedents to build capacity and inspire innovation. Integrated master plans usually contain

visual renderings that can be included in marketing collateral materials as well. For an EID, such plans

should indicate which elements are more innovative or advance sustainability. The integrated plan should

also describe interactions between individual elements (e.g., the sustainable stormwater features will

provide a more natural feeling and employee amenities).

Recommendation: To ensure an integrated process for concept planning, master planning, and site design /

engineering, consultants should be required to deliver / participate in an integrated design process (IDP),

and should have experience in doing so. IDP training for the land developer and local municipal authority

could also be beneficial.

Recommendation: The EID master developer should prepare a short document or presentation that acts as

a ‘touch-stone’ for the project. Anyone working on an EID should have had a clear vision and goals to check

back against and ask “do my efforts align with the overall vision and goals?” An executive summary of an

integrated master plan would serve this function. (Note: the GVBP Fast Facts brochure was meant to serve

this function, but some of its content did not align with later project efforts.)

Recommendation: By requiring pre-design meetings, Development Standards can be used to lever a

conversation with lot developers around integrated design. (The GVBP development standards did include

pre-design and preliminary design meetings, but this requirement was modified to accommodate the

development schedule which created some design and compliance issues.)

Not all stakeholders or consultants will have the same level of eco-industrial / sustainability literacy.

As discussed in the Analysis, there are still some misperceptions regarding the prevalence, cost, and

business case for green buildings; the implementation of industrial symbiosis; and eco-industrial models

(e.g., is an anchor tenant required or not). Misperceptions in the market can be addressed through

marketing and sales recommendations presented earlier, which, in turn, will be easier to implement if

there is an integrated master plan from which to work (also addressed in earlier recommendations).

However, in addition to a need for general capacity building to support EIDs, it is also critical that the

master developer’s staff, local government staff, and third-party consultants working on EIDs all have a

common foundation of sustainability literacy. While an integrated design process will help address this, the

EID master developer may also need to provide other education to the broad team.

Recommendation: EID master developers should seek design professionals and other consultants with

demonstrated knowledge and experience in advancing sustainability and EID. More traditional

Examples of industrial park integrated site master plans in Oregon can be found at

http://www.corvallisoregon.gov/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=6232 or

http://www.newbergoregon.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/planning/page/4676/south20industrial20area20master20plan_w

20appendices.pdf.

Gresham Vista Business Park

Lessons Learned

Final Report December 27, 2016

Light House | #90 - 425 Carrall Street, Vancouver BC V6B 6E3 | T:604.677.3126 | W: www.lhsbc.com

professionals / consultants can provide insight via consultation that informs EID deliverables, but they will,

by definition, not be able to produce deliverables that support a successful EID.

Recommendation: Future EID master developers should consider requiring some sort of training for any

new staff (including local government staff) or consultants. This will ensure that everyone has the same

understanding of EID in general as well as the specific project goals. The Port, Metro Regional Government,

local Urban Land Institute, NAIOP and US Green Building Council chapters could be helpful partners in

developing general information, while the integrated master plan would provide content related to the

specific EID.

Industrial park size / structure can affect implementation.

It was noted several times that the relatively small site made it difficult to pursue some of the EID

strategies. While the overall size of the site (204 developable industrial acres not including the ON

Semiconductor campus and the PGE substation) is not a barrier, the site structure and constraints, such as

limited access points from perimeter roads, did impact implementation. The site structure meant that

relatively few but fairly large lots, and therefore, very few new businesses, made the most sense. While

there is local demand from some sectors for such large lots, there is also demand for smaller lots. A mix of

lot sizes can broaden marketing reach and create a diversity that better supports future industrial

symbiosis opportunities.

The GVBP site structure also allowed the Port to maximize developable land by not requiring an internal

road network. The flip-side, though, is that the GVBP has no ‘gateway’. Gateways can provide a physical

point at which to underscore EID branding and identity. Internal road networks can also provide

opportunities to incorporate sustainable infrastructure, such as an alternative cross-section that includes

rights-of-way for symbiosis piping or a narrower carriage way to reduce materials consumption.

A lack of anchor tenant was reported by a few interviewees as being a barrier for the GVBP. However,

many of the historical EIDs with anchor tenants (e.g., Cape Charles, Londonderry) were not viable in the

long-term as their reliance on an anchor tenant failed to foster resiliency and the projects collapsed when

the anchor tenants collapsed. Furthermore, an anchor tenant development model does not generally

reflect industrial development trends in North America, particularly in the Pacific Northwest. Industrial and

business parks tend to comprise businesses of varying sizes and sectoral representation, even when there

is a sectoral theme.

Recommendation: For future EIDs with planned internal roadways, the Port or other EID master developers

should consider piloting eco-industrial road designs.

Recommendation: For future EIDs that do have a clear ‘gateway’, the Port or other EID master developer

should use design to signal eco-efficient intent and to support marketing efforts.

Recommendation: For future EIDs, the Port may wish to consider sites where diverse lot sizes may be

possible. This will broaden marketing potential, including tapping regional retention and expansion needs,

which can provide a greater return on investment than the straight attraction market. This will also

increase the potential for symbiosis.