Working Paper II

Working Paper 2
GNOBEDD
May 2010
2 Working Paper 2 Table of Contents May 2010
Table of Contents
Section: 01 02
Data Gathering Efforts Appendices
06 A
Task 2 Overview List of Data Collected to
Date
06
Data Collection Efforts to B
Date Case Studies of
Biotechnology Parks
07
Reports and Studies
Collected to Date
16
Data Gaps
3
Acknowledgement
The AECOM team would like to acknowledge the

GNOBEDD Board and staff as well as all of the
individuals, groups, agencies, and other entities that
supplied the team with data that will be vital to the
planning process. This report has also been developed
in coordination with the entire AECOM team. The team
includes: EDAW / AECOM, AECOM Economics, AECOM
Transportation, Bright Moments, Canon Design, CBRE,
Chester Engineers and The Ehrhardt Group.
4 Working Paper 2 Data Gathering May 2010
Section 01:
Data Gathering
5
Data Collection Efforts

Task 2 Overview • Roadways and evacuation routes;
• Transit, including streetcar and existing and

The purpose of Task 2 is to collect all information,
proposed bus and bike routes;
reports, and mapping relevant to the Greater New
Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District • Natural resource information such as soils,
(GNOBEDD). This data will be the foundation for topography, and hydrology;
the Team’s analysis and plan development used in
• Floodplain information, including flood depths just
subsequent tasks.
after Katrina and Advisory Base Flood Elevations
(ABFE);
Data Collection Efforts To Date
• Regulatory framework information, including
The collection of base data started immediately upon existing and future land use as proposed by the
kickoff of the project. The connections established 2030 Master Plan, and applicable building and
through the stakeholder interview process in Task 1 zoning codes or design requirements;
were also beneficial to the data collection effort. Team
• Historic districts and landmarks as identified by
members were able to contact interviewed stakeholders
the New Orleans Historic District and Landmarks
for additional information pertinent to their specific scope
Commission (HDLC) and the National Register of
and expertise, as well as general information pertinent
Historic Places;
to the entire project. Efforts were made to collect data in
a usable format, such as GIS or CAD, which allows it to • Existing and proposed residential and retail
be incorporated into base maps and graphics that will be developments within the Biosciences District;
developed in future project tasks.
• Existing institutional boundaries, including existing
hospital and medical school locations;
Data collected during this task will assist the Team in
understanding the physical and natural characteristics of • Proposed campus boundaries for the
the Biosciences District, and the regulations and existing University Medical Center (UMC) and Veterans
and proposed developments that will impact how the Administration (VA) hospitals, as well as the
Biosciences District is developed in the future. Specific Louisiana Cancer Research Center and New
information collected to date includes: Orleans BioInnovation Center, both currently under
construction; and
• Biosciences District boundary;
• Blighted property information, including properties
• 2009 aerial;
designated as blighted by the New Orleans
• Property ownership information, including city, Redevelopment Authority, properties considered
state, and institution; blighted pre-Katrina, and properties defined as
blighted by Chapter 28 of the New Orleans City
• Existing utilities/infrastructure, including sewage,
Code.
power, water, gas, and storm water drainage;
• Building footprints; A full list of collected data can be found in Appendix A.

7
Reports and Studies Collected To Date membership, and general powers of GNOBEDD.
Numerous plans, studies, and reports have been City, Regional, State, and Federal Plans:
developed and written that are relevant to the
Biosciences District and its larger context area. There are Historic District Design Guidelines. City of New
many still that are currently being studied or developed. Orleans.
These documents can be regulatory in nature, related http://www.cityofno.com/pg-99-4-guidelines.aspx
to proposed real estate or infrastructure developments
in or around the Biosciences District, or related to the The guidelines apply to projects that will affect the
biosciences industry and its establishment in New exterior of a property located in areas under the
Orleans. Below is a brief summary of the reports, plans, jurisdiction of the New Orleans HDLC. They are found
and studies collected to date. online and cover the following topics: building types;
lighting, paving, structural, and ornamental metal; new
GNOBEDD Strategic Plans: construction; rooftop additions; roofing and associated
details; signs; wood finish materials; demolition; doors
Greater New Orleans Biosciences Economic and windows; fences, gates, and walls; and existing
Development District & “Blue Ocean”: Shared masonry construction. Specific design guidelines are
Initiatives for Louisiana’s Future. GNOBEDD. also provided for the Central Business District.
The presentation reviews how GNOBEDD goals are Mid-City Neighborhood Planning District 4 Rebuilding
aligned with several of Louisiana’s “Blue Ocean” Growth Plan. Lambert Advisory, LLC. SHEDO, LLC. On behalf
Initiatives. They include (1) digital /media software of the City of New Orleans. September 23, 2006.
development; (2) next generation auto; (3) specialty
healthcare; (4) renewable energy and energy efficiency; The City Council charged the consultant team to assist
and (5) water management. The “Blue Ocean” initiative neighborhoods flooded by Hurricane Katrina in developing
was established by Louisiana Economic Development to revitalization plans that would be incorporated into a
set the state apart for new markets not fully exploited citywide recovery and improvement plan to be submitted
by other states by identifying, recruiting, and cultivating to the State of Louisiana and federal funding agencies.
high-growth industry segments, while building on the
state’s existing strengths. The neighborhoods within the scope of this report
included Treme / 6th Ward, 7th Ward, Fairgrounds /
Act 487 of 2005 & Act 239 of 2008 – Greater New Desaix, St. Bernard, Faubourg St. John, Mid-City, Gert
Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District Town, and Tulane Gravier.
Act. Louisiana Revised Statutes.
The report covers the following topics: a history of the
The Legislative Acts establishing the Greater New Mid-City neighborhood; the vision and goals specific
Orleans Biosciences Economic Development District. The to the recovery effort; existing conditions in the
acts describe the Biosciences District boundaries, board neighborhood prior to Katrina; the impacts of the storm;
a variety of neighborhood rebuilding scenarios; a detailed (as outlined) includes the existing and proposed hospitals
recovery plan; and implementation and funding strategies within GNOBEDD.
related to implementation of the recovery plan.
The Medical District vision statement is “to create a
New Orleans Regional Biosciences Initiative: vibrant, safe, urban Medical District that reflects quality
Strategic Plan-2007. Eva Klein & Associates on behalf education and research by creating a sustainable live/
of New Orleans Regional Planning Commission. April work, mixed-use setting that delivers high quality
2007. healthcare, while seamlessly integrating with downtown
New Orleans.”
This strategic plan outlines a vision to “Build a globally
competitive Innovation Economy for the New Orleans Plan recommendations regarding land use are to identify
region by building on the region’s knowledge institutions existing and future institutional buildings that could
to: perform globally competitive biosciences research; incorporate a mixture of uses; identify locations for stand-
grow and attract entrepreneurial companies; create good alone residential uses; ascertain the types of needed
jobs, a highly skilled workforce, and wealth for citizens; support services and identify appropriate locations;
and anchor a vibrant urban community at the region’s guide the density and design of land uses; and ensure
core.” relationship to the larger Biosciences District.
This report identifies the need for the development of a Plan recommendations regarding transportation are
New Orleans biosciences district which will be the core to develop changes to the transportation network to
of the regional biosciences development initiative, thus support the future land use scenario; examine changes to
creating the foundation for the Biosciences District. streets and street cross-sections; and ensure relationship
of transportation network to the larger Biosciences
The plan lays out a four part strategy to achieve the District.
vision: (1) an Innovation System Strategy that identifies
specific goals for growth in regional biosciences; (2) Plan recommendations regarding infrastructure are
a Physical Development Strategy that identifies goals to assess impacts of proposed land use scenarios
for urban place redevelopment; (3) a market strategy on streets and utilities and recommend capacity-
and marketing plan outline; and (4) a leadership and related improvements, if needed; establish standards
management strategy. for streetscape design; address currently needed
improvements to streets and utilities; develop plans
New Orleans Medical District: Strategic Integration for currently needed improvements to urban design
Plan. Final Report. N-Y Associates on behalf of the infrastructure; ensure urban design infrastructure is
Regional Planning Commission. December 2008. compatible with efforts of the Downtown Development
District (DDD) and the larger Biosciences District; and
This report is focused on how to improve the physical all major developments should conform to the DDD’s
environment comprising the Medical District in order to downtown urban design guidelines being developed in
help it reach its potential. As defined, the Medical District conjunction with the City Planning Commission.
9
The study also recommended over $14m in utility (CZO) will be critical to the implementation of the master
improvements and $50m in visual improvements for the plan. The CZO will include a zoning map that reflects the
Medical District. policies of the master plan.
A Plan for the 21st Century: New Orleans 2030. New New Orleans Redevelopment Authority Transition
Orleans Master Plan and Comprehensive Zoning Presentation. NORA. March 10, 2010.
Ordinance. Goody Clancy on behalf of the City
Planning Commission. Draft. September 14, 2009. The slide presentation was given to the City by Joyce
Wilkerson when she became the new Executive
The citywide plan establishes the goals and strategies Director of the agency. The presentation outlines why
that will guide the City’s growth for the next 20 years. neighborhoods matter; the large amount of funding
The plan has been approved by the City Planning remaining for various recovery programs (e.g., Road
Commission and is currently in the process of being Home, Soft Second Program, Long-Term Community
reviewed for adoption by the City Council. Recovery); the coordination of housing investments
with investments in commercial, residential, hazard
The main themes of the master plan are livability, mitigation, amenities, and public facilities; the use of
opportunity, and sustainability. Goals established to public subsidies and facilities to catalyze investment
achieve the vision include making New Orleans resilient and solve market failure; and why the City’s role in
in the face of storms and global climate change; creating implementation should be reduced and increased in the
partnerships of nonprofits, the business community, areas of coordination, policy, and enforcement.
institutions, and others that work to expand the economy
and extend opportunity to everyone; and building an US 61 / Tulane Avenue Corridor Improvements:
efficient and effective city government. Detailed goals Stage 0 Feasibility Study. Stakeholder Meeting
are provided for neighborhoods and housing; historic Memorandum. URS on behalf of the Regional
preservation; green infrastructure; health and human Planning Commission. April 8, 2010.
services; economic development; facilities, services,
and infrastructure; transportation; resilience; and Minutes from the April 8, 2010 meeting regarding
environmental quality. proposed improvements to Tulane Avenue. The minutes
include the slide presentation given by URS describing
The master plan establishes a future land use plan for existing conditions along the corridor, proposed typical
the City showing the desired distribution of land uses sections, and an overview of the complete streets
(by category) with general density and intensity. The concept.
map shows land uses that reflect the long-term vision,
goals, and policies expressed elsewhere in this plan. The The Unified New Orleans Plan (UNOP): Citywide
Future Land Use Map is not a zoning map and it does not Strategic Recovery and Rebuilding Plan. City of New
govern design. Orleans. 2006.
The creation of a new comprehensive zoning ordinance UNOP was written to identify the capital projects and
programs that would help guide the repair and rebuilding Institutional, Community, and Private Developer
of New Orleans in a way that “creates stability and Studies, Plans, and Projects:
paves the way for future growth and prosperity.” The
District Plans, or Lambert Plans, created the foundation Tulane University: Master Plan for Research Space
for UNOP by identifying those recovery projects within Downtown: School of Medicine and School of
the District Plans that had citywide significance. The Science and Engineering. RMJM Hiller on behalf of
document also grouped similar types of projects Tulane University. May 30, 2008.
mentioned frequently in the planning district plans and
created a citywide project of that category of project. The purpose of the plan was to accommodate a state-
of-the-art, interdisciplinary, academic and translational
The document identifies a ten-year time frame to research laboratory facility for both existing researchers
achieve recovery, at which point the physical damage and anticipated new hires as the university is seeking
of the storm would be removed, repaired, or rebuilt; to support collaborative work between health sciences
the major physical infrastructure serving the City would and biological and physical science, and to spur the
be renovated; there is high quality essential social university’s research mission.
infrastructure (schools, healthcare and public safety); the
economy is stable and growing; and there is a strong The plan encompasses a strategy to create a sense of
quality of life. place and identity for the university’s downtown campus.
While land uses will continue to be primarily medical
The Unified New Orleans Plan (UNOP): Districts 1 & and educational, new residential and retail uses are
4. Goody Clancy on behalf of the City of New Orleans. encouraged to create a more attractive community.
2007.
Medical Center of New Orleans Charity Hospital:
The District 1 plan provides a detailed assessment of the Feasibility Study. RMJM Hiller on behalf of The
lower portion of the Biosciences District area including Foundation for Historical Louisiana. August 20, 2008.
the existing medical center district. The District 4 plan
covers much of Mid-City and the remaining portion of the RMJM Hiller was hired to provide an assessment on
Biosciences District. the feasibility of reusing Charity Hospital as a hospital.
The analysis indicates that “Old Charity” has the floor
Both District Plans detail existing building stock, plates to accommodate a world-class hospital and can
infrastructure, impacts from Katrina, redevelopment be renovated in a few years at a reasonable cost. The
scenarios and establish a specific vision and set of goals study indicates the critical factors needed for renovation.
related to the redevelopment of the area. It also provides a preliminary design for redesign of the
A number of helpful appendices are included in these hospital.
plans including specific economic and marketing
strategies specific to the medical district.
11
Medical Center of Louisiana-New Orleans: Business standardized process for annual reporting and periodic
Plan Review. HPS Health on behalf of Downtown academic unit review; and (7) refining budget principles
Development District of New Orleans. for resource allocation, particularly as they related to
DDD hired HPS to review the Medical Center educational and clinical programs.
of Louisiana – New Orleans (MCLNO) Strategic
and Campus Master Plan Update, and provide an LSU Health Sciences Center Divisional Strategic Plan
independent assessment of the business plan’s 2009-2013.
assumptions and recommendations as to whether they http://www.lsuhospitals.org/Documents/
were valid and/or reasonable within the framework of the strategic%20plan2009-2013v3.pdf
general conditions of New Orleans at the time they were
drafted. The strategic plan outlines the mission, vision,
philosophy, and goals of LSU HealthCare Services
The report finds there is a need for additional acute care Division (HCSD). Goals include (1) supporting teaching;
bed capacity in New Orleans, and the proposal to build (2) supporting research; (3) maximizing limited revenue
a new teaching hospital to meet that need is sound. The to carry out the dual safety net and medical education
study finds that the larger hospital proposed under the mission; (4) enhancing access to patient care; (5)
“Likely” scenario in the business plan is more reasonable ensuring good medical outcomes that conform to
than the smaller hospital proposed under the “Baseline” evidence-based standards; (6) meeting and exceeding
scenario, from both a financial and community healthcare the standards in customer service with our internal
need standpoint. partners, external partners, and constituencies to
advance excellence in healthcare; (7) engendering
LSU Health Sciences Center School of Medicine stakeholder satisfaction among all of their stakeholders
Strategic Plan 2009-2013. (patients and their families, providers, employees,
http://www.medschool.lsuhsc.edu/faculty_affairs/ community groups, and leaders and government
som_strategic_plan.aspx officials); and (8) providing quality healthcare and clinical
education in safe, accredited environments.
The strategic plan outlines the vision, mission, and
goals of LSU-HSC School of Medicine. Goals include The plan establishes a goal of 17% of the annual budget
(1) promoting excellence and innovation in all School for LSU HCSD to be derived from nonstate sources.
of Medicine educational programs; (2) fostering a It also states that “each medical center will strive to
culture of academic and investigative excellence; (3) maintain or enhance the 2.5% of annual budget derived
structuring existing and new clinical programs to fulfill from grants.”
short and long-term goals, while strategically positioning
the School of Medicine and LSU HealthCare Network
for the completion of a new University Hospital; (4)
aligning goals and missions of core clinical entities; (5)
developing a cohesive mechanism for faculty orientation,
development, and evaluation; (6) establishing a clear and
Site-specific Environmental Assessment: Design, University Medical Center Traffic Impact Analysis.
Construction and Operation of the University Medical Urban Systems. March 2010.
Center (UMC) New Orleans, Louisiana. March 2010.
http://www.lsuamc.com/meetings/ Presents the findings regarding the traffic operation
of roadways and intersections that provide access to
FEMA will use the Site-specific Environmental the UMC. Also presented are projected future traffic
Assessment (SEA) to assess the design, construction, volumes associated with the project and traffic generated
and operation for the proposed UMC, and determine by the proposed VA Hospital, the Louisiana Cancer
whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement Research Center, and New Orleans BioInnovation Center.
(EIS) or a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Residential and commercial uses under construction
in the Tulane Avenue corridor were also included in the
Three design alternatives for the UMC are described in projected conditions analysis.
detail: (1) Canal Street E-configuration; (2) Canal Street
L-configuration; and (3) Tulane Avenue L-configuration. Key conclusions are the following: (1) signalized
The Canal Street L configuration is the preferred intersections that provide access to the UMC site and
alternative. other planned and proposed developments in the study
area can accommodate future traffic demand; (2) internal
No significant environmental impacts were identified. intersections that provide site circulation and access to
surface parking lots, emergency room, and truck docks
LSU Academic Medical Center: Public Meeting NEPA indicated acceptable traffic operations under projected
Presentation. Blitch Knevel Architects. NBBJ. April 29, volume demand; and (3) significant delay and congestion
2009. are expected at unsignalized external intersections that
provide access to site surface parking areas.
Presentation prepared for a public meeting reviewing
the UMC program and site design alternatives. A basic Recommendations: (1) install a traffic light at the
site analysis and a detailed review of the three design intersection of Tulane Avenue and S. Roman Street; and
alternatives are provided. (2) coordinate the new traffic signal with existing traffic
signals.
Strategic and Campus Master Plan Update: Executive
Briefing. Adams, NBBJ, Phase 2 Consulting, Smith Southeast Louisiana Veterans Medical Center Traffic
Seckman Reid, Inc. April 2007. Impact Analysis. Urban Systems. August 2009.
Presentation for MCNLO, providing an overview of the The document outlines (1) current traffic volume and
business plan for the proposed UMC medical campus. flow conditions at the site; (2) existing public transit
routes that service the site; (3) traffic volume estimates
Findings include projected number of medical and for announced and planned developments in the area;
surgical beds (416) as well as psych beds (68), and cost (4) an estimate of new traffic that will be attracted to
estimates for a new campus meeting this demand($1.2b). and produced by the new VA Hospital; (5) capacity
13
of the adjacent street network to accommodate site The development, known as The Building Block and
development; (6) recommendations to intersection previously as EcoPark, will be focused on supporting
and street traffic operations that will support site green industry technologies and will include a resource
development and mitigate potential traffic impacts; and center, office/retail, and warehouse/manufacturing.
(7) impacts due to street closures in conjunction with the The resource center will be the centerpiece of the
project. development, focusing on green education with
The report makes the following recommendations: (1) interactive displays of sustainable materials and
modify intersection geometry and install traffic signal, practices. The space is also planned to house public
with left turn phasing, at the intersection of Tulane amenities such as a café and meeting and event space,
Avenue at S. Rocheblave Street to support access to and provide access and support to emerging green
the employee and staff parking facility; (2) install left businesses.
turn lane and permit left turn movements on the Tulane
approaches at the intersection of Tulane Avenue at S. The New Lafitte (informational brochure). Providence
Galvez Street; (3) implement two-way traffic operation of Community Housing. Enterprise Community Partners.
S. Rocheblave between Canal Street and Tulane Avenue;
(4) prohibit left turn movements from westbound Canal Providence Community Housing and Enterprise
at the intersection of Canal Street at S. Rocheblave Community Partners were selected to plan and develop
Street; (5) implement one-way traffic operation of S. a new community on and around the site of the former
Rocheblave, southbound, between Tulane Avenue and Lafitte public housing development, a 27.5-acre parcel
Gravier Street; (6) implement one-way traffic operation containing 900 apartments in the historic Tremé/Lafitte
of S. Dorgenois, southbound, between Canal and Tulane; neighborhood of New Orleans. The project site is just
(7) remove traffic signal at intersection of Bienville at outside the Biosciences District boundary.
S. Galvez; (8) modify traffic signal timing patterns at
Tulane at S. Broad and Tulane at S. Galvez as required by When construction is complete, the project will feature
conditions once both the Southeast Louisiana Veterans 1,500 homes and apartments: a one-for-one replacement
Medical Center and LSU projects are in operation; and (9) of all 900 subsidized apartments and the development of
provide, at a minimum, sufficient width on S. Rocheblave an additional 600 homes for sale to working families and
to accommodate three travel lanes at the intersections first-time homeowners.
of S. Rocheblave at Canal and Banks Streets and S.
Rocheblave at Tulane Avenue. Xavier University of Louisiana: 2007 Campus Master
Plan. July 2008.
(EcoPark)The Building Block: Master Plan. CCWIV.
March 18, 2010. The campus master plan provides details on the existing
conditions of campus facilities (47 buildings, over 1.2m
The master plan for the redevelopment of the former square feet), as well as an implementation plan for capital
Bohn Ford dealership located at 401 N. Carrollton improvement projects through 2025.
Avenue, just outside of the Biosciences District.
Market and Economics Reports: housing voucher programs, providing rehab assistance
to owners of existing rental housing in return for
GNOBEDD has hired GCR to compile existing more affordable rents, controlling the cost of property
demographic, market, and economic reports for the insurance and utilities, involving businesses in helping
Biosciences District. They will furnish this data to the employees obtain affordable housing, and expanding
AECOM team as part of their scope of services. In the affordable housing options throughout the metropolitan
interim, a few reports have been collected by the Team. region.
They are listed below.
Current Housing Unit Damage Estimates: Hurricanes
Housing Production Needs: Three Scenarios for New Katrina, Rita and Wilma. U.S. Department of Housing
Orleans. Greater New Orleans Community Data and Urban Development. April 7, 2006.
Center and The Urban Institute. November 2009.
The report provides detailed tables on the housing
This is the first in a series of annual reports about damage from the hurricanes, including extent of damage,
housing in the New Orleans metropolitan area. The type of damage, tenure, insurance status, and housing
report assembles and analyzes the most current data on type. Detailed tables are provided for Orleans Parish and
housing conditions and trends. the Mid-City Planning District where the Biosciences
District is located.
Projections for the New Orleans area economy forecast
very slow job growth, which suggests slow population Creative Class Market Research. RDA Global on
growth for the next decade. If these trends continue, behalf of the Downtown Development District (DDD)
New Orleans would only need 3,598 additional housing of New Orleans. February 15, 2010.
units by 2012, a total of 9,153 additional housing units
by 2015, and a total of 25,911 additional housing units by Creative Class is defined by those who use creativity in
2020. their work. They typically possess a university degree
and have significantly higher than average earnings.
Demand for lower-cost housing remains high from the According to Richard Florida, author of The Rise of the
estimated 20,019 current renter households earning less Creative Class, “Places that succeed in attracting and
than 80 percent of area median income, 9,994 homeless retaining Creative Class people prosper; those that fail
individuals and families, and some portion of the new don’t.”
households moving to the City in the coming years.
DDD is seeking to grow the Creative Class in New
The document recommends that policy makers ensure Orleans by attracting and retaining those that are focused
the completion of the subsidized housing in the on digital media, biosciences, and arts-based businesses.
pipeline, and then implement policies that help low- It will use the study to inform a strategic economic
income households gain access to existing housing development program and branding initiative for the City.
and secondarily prevent and reverse blight. Suggested
strategies include strengthening the performance of The study found that the Creative Class are interested
15
in the following: (1) mixed-use neighborhoods where for New Orleans. The analysis explores and documents
they are able to live, work, and do all their shopping in a key characteristics of these projects, as well as lessons
small compact place or neighborhood without the need learned and implications for the development of a joint
for a car; (2) places that are authentic; and (3) diverse venture strategy for GNOBEDD.
options, as they relate to work opportunities, cuisine,
neighborhoods, and social community experiences. Other:
Canal Street Vision and Development Strategy. Preservation Research Council of New Orleans: New
Development Strategies on behalf of the Downtown Orleans Architectural Types.
Development District of New Orleans. May 2004. www.prcno.org/map/?architecture
The study sets a vision for the future of Canal Street Website provides an overview of the distinct architectural
and a strategy for implementing development activities styles found in New Orleans, including Creole cottage;
necessary to realize that vision. The area covered by the American townhouse; Creole townhouse; California style
plan is the one mile section of Canal Street between the bungalow; double gallery house; shotgun house; and
French Quarter and the central business district. raised centerhall cottage.
The study provides an inventory of the land uses and Mid-City Historic District: Determination of Eligibility.
assess traffic and parking along Canal Street. A chapter
of the study is devoted to the medical center complex This is the formal application for the Mid-City Historic
relationship to the street and adjacent redevelopment. District to be placed on the National Register of Historic
Places. The document includes: an architectural survey
STR: Trend New Orleans CVD- French Quarter. Smith listing the number of houses of each architectural style;
Travel Research. February 2010. a list of key landmarks; the historical background of the
area; and the contributing elements that identify it as a
Report that provides data on occupancy rates, daily rates, district.
and revenue figures for hotels in the French Quarter from
September 2008 through February 2010. Preservation Research Council of New Orleans: Mid-
City Brochure.
Biosciences Industry Related Studies: http://www.prcno.org/neighborhoods/brochures/
MidCity.pdf
As part of the AECOM scope of services, CBRE has
prepared a summary memorandum on bioscience The brochure provides an overview of the Mid-City
trends and potential opportunities for GNOBEDD (see neighborhood, events, important landmarks, and
Appendix B). The analysis benchmarks research and neighborhood organizations.
technology real estate initiatives across the U.S. Nine
projects are presented that provide a precedent for the
type of use and organizational structure contemplated
Greater New Orleans Community Data Center. and support efforts to boost adoption and utilization;
Various Documents. and (4) reform laws, policies, standards, and incentives
http://www.gnocdc.org/ to maximize the benefits of broadband in sectors that
government influences significantly, such as public
This website provides a variety of information on the education, healthcare, and government operations.
repopulation of New Orleans post-Katrina. Items that can
be readily accessed include block-by-block repopulation; Community Resilience: Lessons from New Orleans
commuter patterns; benchmarks for blight; details on and Hurricane Katrina. Community & Regional
public schools; and housing affordability, among other Resilience Initiative (CARRI) Research Report 3.
topics. September 2008.
Connecting America: The National Broadband Plan. The report assesses the resiliency of New Orleans
Federal Communications Commission. 2010. before, during and after Hurricane Katrina. Resilience
is defined as “a community or region’s capability to
In early 2009, Congress directed the Federal prepare for, respond to, and recover from significant
Communications Commission (FCC) to develop a multi-hazard threats with minimum damage to public
National Broadband Plan to ensure every American safety and health, the economy and national security.”
has “access to broadband capability.” Congress also The key strategies to improve community resilience are
required that this plan include a detailed strategy for to improve the city’s capacity to: (1) anticipate significant
achieving affordability and maximizing use of broadband multi-hazard threats; (2) reduce overall community
to advance “consumer welfare, civic participation, public vulnerability to hazardous events; and (3) respond and
safety and homeland security, community development, recover from such events when they occur.
healthcare delivery, energy independence and efficiency,
education, employee training, private sector investment, The report details the efforts the city has undertaken to
entrepreneurial activity, job creation and economic date to improve its response to hazardous events in the
growth, and other national purposes.” future. As part of these efforts, importance is stressed
on the integration of hazard mitigation and recovery into
The report identifies four strategies to encourage the ongoing planning processes for the city.
creation of a national broadband plan. They are to (1)
design policies to ensure robust competition and,
as a result, maximize consumer welfare, innovation, Data Gaps
and investment; (2) ensure efficient allocation and
management of assets, government controls, or While a tremendous amount of information has been
influences (such as spectrum, poles, and rights-of-way) to collected during this task, there are still substantial gaps
encourage network upgrades and competitive entry; (3) that need to be filled. Key missing data items that need
reform current universal service mechanisms to support to be obtained include:
deployment of broadband and voice in high-cost areas,
ensure that low-income Americans can afford broadband,
17
General Information:
Utilities:
• Plans, preferably in a digital format, are needed for
the following developments: • Telephone lines, fiber-optic cables, and other
• New UMC and VA campuses communications related data have been
requested from telecommunications companies
• New detention facilities complex from Sheriff
in the area. However, they have not provided
Gusman
information without a letter from GNOBEDD
• New Orleans BioInnovation and Cancer authorizing the request. Such a letter has since
Research Centers
been provided to the Team and submitted to the
• BW Cooper telecommunications companies; we are awaiting
• Jung Hotel receipt of the data.
• The former Texaco Building on Canal Street • Data regarding Entergy’s electrical distribution
• Common Ground’s Plan for permanent system has been difficult to obtain. The Team is
supported housing on Tulane Avenue trying a variety of avenues to obtain the data.
• Blue Plate Loft development by JCH • Estimate of future utility demand over the
Development
next 20 or 30 years or other horizon. The time
• Domain’s retail development on Tulane Ave period should be at least the life of the street
• Louisiana Superdome and Exposition pavement to be installed with the Tulane Avenue
Authority improvements. Such estimates of future demand
should consider what is currently possible under
• Benson Tower Plan
the existing and proposed zoning code, what
• 3D buildings for future sketch-up modeling GNOBEDD is planning, whatever deficiencies are
known to exist, or a combination of these or other
• TIF district boundaries or other overlay districts
indicators.
• Boston Consulting New Orleans Tourism Study for
• The Dutch Dialogues per David Waggonner
New Orleans Convention and Visitors Bureau
• LONI Network and other high-speed cable lines
• LED’s Blue Ocean Strategic Plan
• Existing plans for the Charity Complex and the Traffic & Transportation:
former VA
• General idea of trip demand by Delgado
• DDD’s Parking Mgmt Study 2008
• Estimate of trips between the proposed hospitals
• Enterprise Zone and Renewal Community maps and medical schools and a methodology to make
and program descriptions the estimate. Many of these trips were formerly
pedestrian trips, as the facilities of the three
• New Congress plans and findings for Claiborne
hospitals and two medical schools were adjacent
Ave. – David Waggonner
and, in some cases, intermingled. It will be an
estimated 10-15-minute walk in the future from

Miro and Cleveland (generally the location of the
VA front door) to Crozat and Cleveland (generally
the farthest extent of Tulane toward the river).
This estimate may be increased as there is no
direct route with Cleveland Avenue being closed
between Prieur and Galvez. More information
regarding the demand for these trips is needed,
even if it is anecdotal.
• Current and 2014 needs and operations from all

institutions
• RTA is planning a major service revision in the

near future. We will need to obtain their plans
once they have determined what the new service
will look like, and/or when we have enough
demand information to discuss 2014 service
needs, depending what comes first.
• A copy of the new Loyola Avenue Streetcar plans
• A copy of the Union Passenger Terminals plans

(UPT)
• A copy of the current plans for a Downtown

Heliport (Darryl Saizan)
19
20 Working Paper 2 Appendices May 2010
Section 2:
Appendices
21
Appendix A:
List of Data Collected
to Date
GNOBEDD!MASTER!PLAN 20"May"10
AECOM!Team!Consolidated!Data!Inventory!
Data!Requested Delivery
Data!Obtained!
Type Format!Requested Format!Obtained Source Year
(Y!/!N)
Administrative!Boundaries
Parcels Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007
Wards Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006
Parish!Boundaries Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006
Council!Districts Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006
Planning!Districts! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2006
Neighborhoods! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Study!Area Y GIS!or!CAD GIS EDAW 2009
Census!Tracts Y GIS!or!CAD GIS ESRI 2007
Traffic!Analysis!Zones Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2008
Transit!&!Transportation!Systems
Interstates Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Highways Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Streets Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2008
Rights!of!Way Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Public!Transit
RTA!Bus!Routes Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Existing!Street!Car Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Proposed!Loyola!Street!Car!Line GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Jefferson!Parish!Transit!(JeT) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Tulane!Shuttle!(promised!June!1) GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Heavy!Rail Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Bike!Routes Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Utilities
Sewer!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD TIF Sewerage!&!Water!Board 2010
Water!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD TIF Sewerage!&!Water!Board 2010
Power!Lines N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Gas!Lines Y GIS!or!CAD paper!!map Entergy!Gas 2010
Communications/!IT!/!Fiber!Optics N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
LONI!Network N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Natural!Resources
Soils Y GIS!or!CAD GIS
Topo!(2'!"!5'!contours) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Water!Bodies Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Rivers/!Streams Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Flood!Information
Floodplains Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 1999
Flood!Depths!at!Katrina Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Advisory!Base!Flood!Elevations!(ABFE) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Planning!&!Development
Land!Use Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Zoning Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2008
City"Owned!Property Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007
State"Owned!Property Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2007
Property!ownership!by!parcel Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Detention!Facilities!Complex N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
BW!Cooper N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Jung!Hotel N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Former!Texaco!Building!on!Canal!Street N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Blue!Plate!Loft!Developmnet N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Common!Ground's!plan!for!new!housing!on!Tulane!Avenue N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Domain's!retail!development!on!Tulane!Avenue N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Benson!Tower!Plan N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Union!Passenger!Terminal! N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Civic!&!Institutional
Colleges!&!Universities
Loyola! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Tulane Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
UNO Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Xavier Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Xavier!Area!of!Influence Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Hospitals
Children's!Hospital Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Delgado!Nursing!School Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
LCRC!"!detailed!digital!plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
LSU!Dental Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
LSU!Medical Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
5/21/2010
Page!1!of!3
Data!Obtained!
(Y!/!N)
Oschner! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Oschner!Baptist Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Touro!Infirmary Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Tulane!Area!of!Influence Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Tulane!Medical!School Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
University!Medical!Center!(Proposed!Campus)!"!Digital!plans!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
VA!(Existing) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
VA!(Proposed!Campus)!"!Digitial!plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
BioInnovation!Center!"!Digital!plans!still!needed Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Schools!(primary) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2004
Fire Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Police Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Church Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Libraries Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Recreation
Parks Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Trails!/!Greenways N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Imagery
Aerial!Photography!(2009!"!1!ft) Y TIF!or!similar IMG RPC 2009
Misc!Data
Building!Footprints Y GIS!or!CAD GIS RPC 2010
Assessors!Data Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2010
Historic!Districts!&!Properties!(HDLC) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS AECOM 2010
Historical!Districts!&!Properties!(National!Register) Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!NO;!AECOM 2010
Enterprise!Zone Y GIS!or!CAD GIS City!of!New!Orleans 2005
TIF!District!Boundaries N GIS!or!CAD DATA!GAP
Census! Y GIS!or!CAD GIS ESRI 2004
Any!existing!3D!modeling!of!the!study!area!or!vicinity N Sketch!Up DATA!GAP
Studies!&!Reports
New!Orleans!Architectural!Styles Y PDF PRCNO 2010
Campus!Maps
LSU!Medical!School Y PDF LSU
UNO!Downtown!Center!Location Y PDF UNO
Tulane Y PDF Tulane
Xavier Y PDF Xavier
Details!on!historic!properties Y PDF HDLC 2010
LSU!HSC!Strategic!Plan!2009"2013 Y PDF LSU
University!Medical!Center!Documents
Draft!Site"Specific!Environmental!Assessment Y PDF UMC!website Mar"10
LSU"VA!Basic!Facts!and!Goals Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07
LSU"VA!Strategic!and!Campus!Master!Plan!Update!!/!Pre"Design!Study Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07
LSU"VA!FAQ Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07
LSU"VA!Highlights Y PDF UMC!website Apr"07
UMC!Business!Plan! Y PDF UMC Apr"10
VA!Documents
Final!Site"Specific!Environmental!Assessment Y PDF Mar"10
Mid"City!Information
PRCNO!Mid"City!Brochure Y PDF PRCNO
Background!information!from!PRCNO Y PDF PRCNO
Lambert!Plan!Plus!Addendum Y PDF Dec"06
New!Developments
EcoPark!/!The!Building!Block Y PDF 2010
Providence!Community!Housing Y PDF AECOM 2010
Superdome!(Confidential) Y PDF 2010
List!of!Developments!in!Progress Y PDF DDD 2010
City!of!New!Orleans
2030!Master!Plan! Y PDF Goody!Clancy Sep"09
New!Orleans!Medical!District:!Strategic!Integration!Plan Y PDF NY!&!Associates Dec"08
United!New!Orleans!Plan!(Complete!and!Districts!1!&!4) Y PDF City!of!New!Orleans
NORA!Presentation Y PowerPoint NORA Mar"10
Public!School!Information Y PDF GNOCDC 2010
Map!of!School!Districts Y PDF GNOCDC 2010
Map!of!School!Enrollment Y PDF GNOCDC 2010
Map!of!School!Management!Type Y PDF GNOCDC 2010
Repopulattion!by!Block Y PDF GNOCDC 2919
Housing!Production!Needs:!Three!Scenarios!for!New!Orleans Y PDF GNOCDC Nov"09
Housing!Unit!Damage!Estimates!Hurricans!Katrina,!Rita!and!Wilma Y PDF Apr"06
Connecting!America:!The!National!Broadband!Plan Y PDF FCC
BioScience!Research Y PDF
Institutional!Development!Award!(IDeA)!Program:!Centers!of!Biomedical!Resesarch!Excellenc Y PDF Jul"08
Health!Care!and!Biotech!Workforce!in!the!Greater!New!Orleans!Area Y PDF 2009
5/21/2010
Page!2!of!3
Data!Obtained!
(Y!/!N)
(Regional!Labor!Market!Areas)!Revised!Industry!Forecast!Changes!to!2016 Y PDF Loren!Scott
ICLEI!2009!New!Orleans!Carbon!Footprint!Report Y PDF
Hospitality!Trend!Information Y Excel STR 2010
GNOBEDD!Blue!Ocean!Strategy Y PowerPoint
GNOBEDD!Charter Y PDF
Canal!Street!Vision!and!Development!Strategy Y PDF DDD
Charity!Hospital!Reuse!Study Y PDF RMJM!Hiller
Regional!Biosciences!Strategy Y PDF Eva!Klein 2007
New!Orleans!Tourism!Study!for!New!Orleans!Convention!and!Visitors!Bureau DATA!GAP Boston!Consulting
LED’s!Blue!Ocean!Strategic!Plan DATA!GAP LED
Existing!plans!for!the!Charity!Complex!and!the!former!VA DATA!GAP
DDD’s!Parking!Mgmt!Study!2008 DATA!GAP DDD
Enterprise!Zone!and!renewal!Community!maps!and!program!descriptions DATA!GAP
Congress!for!New!Urbanism!plans!and!findings!for!Claiborne!Ave.!–!David!Waggonner DATA!GAP CNU
Future!utility!demand!(20""30!year!timeframe) DATA!GAP
Dutch!Dialogues!per!David!Waggonner DATA!GAP
Downtown!Heliport!Study DATA!GAP
5/21/2010
Page!3!of!3
Appendix B:
Case Studies of
Biotechnology Parks
GNOBEDD DRAFT REPORT
TASK 2:
CASE STUDIES OF
BIOTECHNOLOGY PARKS
Submitted to:
AECOM
Prepared by:
CBRE
May 7, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
GNOBEDD TASK 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2

METHODOLOGY ..............................................................................................................................2
STRATEGIC ELEMENTS FOR GNOBEDD ................................................................................................3
AGENCY IMPLICATIONS......................................................................................................................4
CASE STUDIES – RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS ................................................................ 6
TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE PARK, ATLANTA, GA ......................................................................................6
CENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, ST. LOUIS, MO.........................................................................9
NORTH CAROLINA RESEARCH CAMPUS, KANNAPOLIS, NC ......................................................................13
INNOVATION DEPOT, BIRMINGHAM, AL ..............................................................................................16
DELAWARE TECHNOLOGY PARK, NEWARK, DE ......................................................................................19
COLDSTREAM RESEARCH CAMPUS, LEXINGTON, KY ...............................................................................24
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA – OAKDALE RESEARCH PARK, CORALVILLE, IA ...........................................................28
PIEDMONT TRIAD RESEARCH PARK, WINSTON-SALEM, NC .......................................................................33
TRI-CITIES RESEARCH DISTRICT, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON ......................................................................38
USC RESEARCH PARK ......................................................................................................................44
GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

TASK 2 – CASE STUDY ANALYSIS
GNOBEDD TASK 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The analysis benchmarks research and technology real estate initiatives across the U.S. CBRE has
identified nine projects that provide a precedent for the type of use and organizational structure
contemplated for New Orleans. The analysis explores and documents key characteristics of these
projects, as well as lessons learned and implications for the development of a joint venture strategy
for GNOBEDD.
METHODOLOGY
Any case study analysis of this nature has important limitations, all of which are driven by the
central precept that the each venture is unique in its specific characteristics, including its location,
physical components and, perhaps most importantly, its potential participant partners. It is
challenging to identify comparable research and technology park experiences that include all of
the same components as relevant to GNOBEDD. However, it is possible to identify similar
initiatives that, to a greater or lesser extent, share many of the similar fundamental characteristics.
Important criteria utilized in identifying case study candidates included any or all of the following:
! Joint venture approach to governance/operation and/or funding

! Local and state agency involvement in funding, development and marketing – economic
development framework
! Public-private partnerships
! Research university involvement – Physical science/life science research focus
! Participation by regional technology innovation/transfer entity
! Second or third tier regional economy/real estate market
! Urban fringe location
! Presence of a business incubator
Based on our assessment of potential candidates, the following nine benchmark comparables were
identified as the focus of the case study analysis:
! Technology Enterprise Park, Atlanta, GA

! Center for Emerging Technologies, Saint Louis, MO
! North Carolina Research Campus, Kannapolis, NC
! Innovation Depot, Birmingham, AL
! Delaware Technology Park, Newark, DE
! Coldstream Research Park, Lexington, KY
! University of Iowa – Oakdale Research Park, Coralville, IA
! Piedmont Triad Research Park, Winston-Salem, NC
! Tri-Cities Research District, Richland, WA
The research resources included the websites, related news articles, and primary phone interviews
with relevant administrative personnel of the individual research parks. Each case study analysis
has been conducted utilizing a standardized analytical approach, with the results organized with
the following basic components – a brief overview and history of conception of the research park,
the governance and funding mechanisms, commercialization and technology transfer related
GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 2 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

activity, performance including tenant base and development pattern, and the key outstanding
characteristics of the park.
STRATEGIC ELEMENTS FOR GNOBEDD

Following section summarizes the key characteristics of the profiled research and technology park
case studies, which while they are by their very nature unique ventures, do share a number of
common themes that have been instrumental in their implementation.
VISION: Shared Vision among Multiple Entities – All of the comparable initiatives analyzed
involved multiple entities and public-private partnerships. They demonstrate that it is possible to
develop collective goals and objectives for the project that are consistent with those of the
partnering entities. The development of a shared vision for the initiatives was crucial to their
success. Amalgamating what are oftentimes competing interests of the various entities involved in
the initiatives to a coherent and lucid vision for the park can be a lengthy and laborious process,
but ensures commitment for successful implementation from a broad base of stakeholders.
LEADERSHIP: Strong Research University Presence – The central involvement of a research
university has been pivotal to the viability of all of these initiatives, invariably playing a leadership
role. The proactive involvement of a research university committed to the commercialization of
intellectual capital was the key driver for a successful technology-based economic development
initiative. The technology transfer and commercialization emanating from this research base is the
key to leveraging intellectual capital, job generation and financial performance. Successful industry
partnering in the development and marketing of novel technologies is typically central to the
university’s mission.
FUNDING: Broad Variety of Funding for Adequate Implementation – All initiatives analyzed relied
on a broad base and depth of funding sources. These include direct investment in the form of
grants and loans by federal, state and local government agencies, direct investment from private
research foundations such as Battelle, investment by local and regional business and economic
development organizations, and private sector investment through developers and angel investors.
Identifying and securing adequate funding for up-front capital and ongoing operational
expenditures is critical for success, as is the development of a detailed implementation strategy
over time. Several initiatives stalled due to inadequate financial support for the projects,
particularly adequate funding for site planning and infrastructure investments.
COMMERCIALIZATION: Regional Technology-transfer Anchors – The involvement of regional
technology commercialization organizations is important in generating seed and venture capital
funding for start-ups and product development, and assistance in marketing new technologies.
They also provide assistance with grant funding applications assistance with patenting and
licensing new discoveries. They can also provide purpose built space and shared facilities for start-
ups and businesses that have graduated from incubators at competitive rents. Examples of such
potential anchors include federal and state research institutes and facilities, regional technology
commercialization organizations, and private research foundations such as Battelle.
INCUBATORS: Business Incubators and Accelerators – The case study projects included a start-up
incubator as a spawning ground for businesses engaged in innovative technologies and process,
and act as a conduit for technology transfer from intellectual property to commercialization. These
purpose built facilities are typically designed to accommodate start-ups with just a handful of
employees, and include shared equipment, meeting space and other facilities such as
teleconferencing. The inclusion of shared facilities and space creates an environment conducive to
scientific interaction, cooperation and knowledge-sharing.

ADMINISTRATION: Governance Structure – It is critical to establish a workable governance
structure with a strong leadership, which is most often a research university, often acting as a
conduit for state financial support. Governing bodies typically take the form a non-profit 501-(c)(3)
research or technology park corporation under the control of the state or university research
foundation, with a board comprised of individuals from the university, the park director, state and
local government, private sector business, regional economic development and technology
commercialization entities, private research foundations and private sector developers and
business leaders. In several of the initiatives, a major private corporation acted as a key driver.
SUPPORT: State and Local Government Involvement – State and local government agencies have
played key roles in both the planning and establishment and funding of all of these initiatives.
Their role has proven to be particularly important through investment in site development and
infrastructure costs, business and workforce development and funding key facilities such as
business incubators.
RESOURCES: Adequate Operational Resources – The provision of adequate operational resources
for the initiative for ongoing park operations can be pivotal in maximizing their potential. The most
successful initiatives include a full-time experienced park director with a proven track record, and
with responsibilities ranging from site development planning and park management oversight, to
the preparation of budgets and marketing strategies. Operational assistance could also be in form
of real estate incentives such as discounted or free leases for the gestation period for small start-
ups, or free rents through local government/economic development agency subsidies.
STRATEGY: Long-term Strategic and Site Master Planning – At some point in their evolution, all of
the projects have been the subject of strategic planning studies, and most have engaged land use
planning and architectural firms to prepare site master plans. These plans provide a clear
framework for a phased development strategy over time in a coordinated manner, and provide the
basis for the budgeting, financing and implementation of key capital expenditures, including trunk
infrastructure. They also provide the basis for the land use regulatory approval process. In
addition, it is important to develop park strategies and plans that are flexible and can adapt to
changes in the parks research and development focus over time. Marketing plans need to be
dynamic and evolve to reflect changes in economic conditions and research funding resources.
TIMELINE: Potentially long gestation period – Establishing and growing biotechnology companies
is a slow and expensive process. Additionally, any industry cluster takes time to achieve a critical
mass. Biotechnology firms, in particular, may have a growth period of up to 10 or 15 years,
compared to dot-com companies that often generate rapid growth and returns. The large up-front
funding requirement and long product development to market timeframe presents risks and
challenges related to funding. Therefore, to mitigate such concerns, access and involvement of
venture capitalists and angel investors’, who understand the biotech industry growth model and its
inherent risks, becomes crucial to ensure long-term sustainable viability of the park. An additional
strategy could be to aim for a diversified tenant base outside of biotechnology sector as well.
AGENCY IMPLICATIONS
The case study analysis clearly demonstrates a number of common themes and requisite
components for their successful implementation. This analysis when coupled with the analysis of
existing infrastructure and commitment from various stakeholders at GNOBEDD suggest that a
successful life science cluster is fundamentally feasible.

! Universities: LSU and Tulane University Health Sciences Centers/ Xavier University School of
Pharmacy/Delgado College – Funding, intellectual capital, sponsored research, governance,
business incubator, technology transfer
! Research Centers: South Louisiana Institute for Infectious Disease Research (SLIIDR), the
Louisiana Vaccine Center (LVC), and the Clinical and Translational Research, Education and
Commercialization Project (CTRECP), Tulane National Primate Research Center, Pennington
Biomedical Research Center – Research, Technology development and commercialization,
entrepreneurial assistance, research facilities and business accelerator governance
! Federal/State Agencies: State of Louisiana/National Institutes of Health/Small Business
Administration – Funding, governance (leadership role through state and regional economic
development agencies), marketing assistance and potential tenant, workforce training,
business incubator governance
! Local Economic Development Agencies: Regional Planning Commission/City of New Orleans/
Louisiana Recovery Authority – Land use regulatory framework, infrastructure funding,
governance, economic development incentives, Marketing,
! Hospitals: Academic Teaching Hospital, Veterans Administration Hospital, Cancer Research
Facility - intellectual capital, research facilities
! Private Firms/Venture and Angel Investors – potential direct and indirect funding assistance,
ownership and management of environmental legacy, sponsored research, entrepreneurial
assistance
While there are a number of fundamental challenges that will need to be overcome in order to
establish and implement a successful cluster, the case study research provides a potential
framework for how this can be achieved. Few challenges stand out as perhaps the greatest
potential obstacles to success:
! Collaboration and cooperation among all stakeholders

! Securing adequate funding and operational involvement by key stakeholders
! Prevailing market conditions’ impact on funding and financial support for biotech start-ups at
the park
Additionally, CBRE conducted a secondary data search documenting the biosciences industry
trends in the US and the existing base in Louisiana. Attached along with this report is the
“Battelle/BIO State Bioscience Initiatives 2010” report from May 2010 that provides the national
industry overview. An addendum to this report profiles the industry and its performance metrics for
the state of Louisiana. Finally, a report from Battelle published in May 2009 “Taking the pulse of
bioscience education in America: A State-by-State Analysis” includes a summary of science and life
sciences student achievement and examples of bioscience education activities in Louisiana schools
and colleges. These two documents, along with the relevant state addendums, are attached to this
deliverable.

CASE STUDIES –
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY PARKS
TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE PARK, ATLANTA, GA

Overview and History
The Technology Enterprise Park is located in Midtown Atlanta. The park was established in 2006
and is the only biotechnology park in the area.
Location
The park is located on 11 acres at southern edge of the Georgia Institute of Technology’s (Georgia
Tech) campus in Midtown Atlanta, approximately a mile northwest of the central business district.
The park has excellent access, both in terms of its proximity to a major university as well as
downtown, and also enjoys regional access via US highways 75, 85 and 20.
Conception
Georgia Tech is one of the top-rated research
universities in the United States, with a student
population of over 19,000. The university wanted
expansion space for the companies that graduated
from its incubator. In 2004, it began working on
the creation of the park. At that time, the mayor of
Atlanta, Shirley Franklin, was already encouraging
the Atlanta Development Authority (ADA) to
support the growth of the biotechnology industry,
by including it in her comprehensive plan for the City (in 2009, Atlanta hosted the 2009 BIO
International Convention which was attended by over 15,000 industry participants).
With help from the ADA, the park was established in 2006. Technology Enterprise Park was
designed integrate closely with Georgia Tech to achieve the following objectives:
! Create an environment where biotech companies can grow and be profitable

! Promote the economic development of Atlanta and the State through creating jobs, new tax
revenues and a biotech cluster
! Promote the seamless commercialization of Georgia Tech intellectual property
! Maintain Tech’s competitiveness in recruiting/retaining faculty and students by creating a
dynamic technology & business environment and providing employment, consulting and
sponsored research opportunities
! Provide financial strength
The park provides state of the art bio lab infrastructure in place (“plug-and-play”), as well as
complimentary shuttle services, and access to Georgia Tech’s athletic and recreational facilities,
library, research equipment, Global Learning Center conference facility, Georgia Tech Hotel and
Conference Center.

Map of Technology Enterprise Park

Governance and Funding
Governance
Though the park does not have a governing board, there are three general partners: Georgia
Tech, The University Financing Foundation (TUFF), and Gateway Development. Georgia Tech has
created an entity which oversees the operations at the park – TUFF. Based on the financing
mechanism, TUFF is technically the owner of the first building, and Gateway manages leasing.
Additionally, St. Joseph’s Hospital made major investments in its own building. The ADA also
provided financial incentives to companies to relocate to the park.
Operations and Funding: Key Players

Georgia Tech University, the ADA and TUFF were the key financing players. The ADA facilitated a
$65 million bond in order to make a loan to TUFF. TUFF, in turn leased the building (making it the
ultimate landlord) to a wholly owned subsidiary of Georgia Tech, called “Technology Enterprise
Park 1.” These funds were used to build the first five-story multi-tenant building at the park. St
Joseph’s hospital is an equity investor in the second building, having invested $20 million in
improvements and $15 million in equipment.
Technology Transfer and Innovation Activity

The park currently houses five tenants whose focuses are biotechnology, medical technology, and
chemicals. Tenants are mostly derived from or associated with Georgia Tech and include: Altea
Therapeutics, which create transdermal (through the skin) delivery systems for water-soluble drugs
and proteins; CardioMems, which develops wireless sensing and communication technology for
the human body; Kemira, a Finnish chemical group specializing in water & fiber management,
whose national; the Georgia Tech Research Institute, the
applied research arm of the Georgia Institute of Technology;
and St. Joseph’s Translational Research Institute, which is a
preclinical medical research facility.
Research funding is primarily driven by venture capital. As

Atlanta is not a large venture capital base, companies rely
on a national network of venture capital for funding.
Though the park doesn’t have an incubator onsite, the

Advanced Technology Development Center (ATDC) is
located on the adjacent Georgia Tech campus. Over 50
companies based on technologies developed at Georgia
Tech have been created since 1990. CardioMems, one of
the tenants at Technology Enterprise Park, graduated from
the ATDC.
Park Performance
Anchor Tenants and Space Concept
The park’s anchor tenants are Altea Therapeutics, which occupies 50,000 square feet in the first
building, and St. Joseph’s Translational Research Institute, which a collaboration of St. Joseph’s
Hospital and Georgia Tech, and occupies the second building.

Development Patterns
Currently, two buildings are complete, totaling approximately 250,000 square feet. The first
building, with 125,000 square feet, was constructed in spring of 2007, and fully leased by 2009.
The second building was originally a warehouse shell, which was converted into lab space by St
Joseph’s Hospital for its Translational Research Institute. At build-out, the park will have a total of
600,000 square feet in four buildings.
Lessons Learned
The park is one of a kind in the Atlanta area and has created employment as well as economic
benefits. The park employs over 300 with a $19 million annual payroll. At build-out, the park is
expected to employ 1,500, earning an aggregate $90 million. The park has also been able to
provide good integration between the university, park tenants, and private industry. St. Joseph’s
Translational Research Institute opened in May of 2009 and has already helped bring two
commerciality approved medical products to commercial use and helped two international
pharmaceutical and medical device companies enter the U.S. market.
One of the major challenges faced was that, despite strong marketing efforts by local and state
officials, the Atlanta area did not have a large biotechnology base at the time the park was
established, and absorption took more time and effort than was anticipated. In the current
economic environment, the park will not be able to build-out the rest of the site using its traditional
financing methods. The park’s operators are aggressively looking for grants in order to complete
the final two buildings.
CENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, ST. LOUIS, MO

The Center for Emerging Technologies (CET) is a biotechnology incubator located in Saint Louis,
MO. The CET was established in 1999 and is collaboration between the public and private sectors,
including three local universities: Washington University in Saint Louis, the University of Saint Louis,
and the University of Missouri-Saint Louis.
Location
The CET is currently comprised of 92,000 square feet housed in two buildings at Forest Park
Avenue in the heart of Saint Louis. This is a prime location for an incubator, as it sits between two
of its university partners, Washington University and the University of Saint Louis, which helped
found it. The University of Missouri Saint Louis is located approximately five miles northwest of the
center. The site enjoys excellent regional access, with US highways 55, 64, 70 providing access to
Chicago, Indianapolis, Memphis and Kansas City.
Conception
The CET was born out of economic development study for the City of Saint Louis, which
recommended the creation of a district focusing on the biomedical industries, including the
creation of an incubator. The area was already home to three universities with strong research
programs, including two medical schools, Washington University and the University of Saint Louis,
which were located within a mile of one another.

During the mid-1990’s, the City of Saint Louis purchased a 40,000 square foot warehouse
structure located between these two schools, with the intent of renovating it for use as an incubator.
At the same time, an existing 501(c)(3) organization, which had been geared toward advancing
technology in the area but had long since been stagnant, was restituted and re-positioned to
spearhead the development of the center. In 2001, the center was expanded to include an
adjacent building, which was a 52,000 square foot historic structure and had to be extensively
renovated.
Governance
The CET is operated as a non-profit 501(c)(3). Its board is comprised of representatives of all
stakeholders, including the three university partners, Washington University in Saint Louis, the
University of Saint Louis, and the University of Missouri-Saint Louis, as well as the City of Saint
Louis, corporate leadership, technology companies, and venture capitalists. The board hires staff to
manage day-to-day operations and marketing.

The CET is a public-private-academic partnership, with funding coming from several sources.
Capital funding has come from the City of Saint Louis, the St. Louis Development Corp., the
Missouri Development Finance Board, the U.S. Economic Development Administration (EDA), and
the three university partners.
The City purchased and

renovated the first building,
which required an $8 million
investment. The EDA
provided a $3 million grant,
the CET board itself provided
$4 million, mainly from the
three universities, and the
City provided the remainder.
The second building was
purchased and renovated for
an additional $8 million. Funding was comprised of $1.5 million in Historic Tax Credits, $400,000
in Tax Increment Financing (from the Missouri Development Finance Board), $230,000 in
Brownfield Remediation Tax Credits (from the St. Louis Development Corp.), as well as HUD
grants,.
Financial support for operations mainly comes from the state, via the Missouri Department of
Economic Development. The University of Missouri-Saint Louis provides some additional support,
as do private donors.

Map of Center for Emerging Technologies

The CET is in itself an incubator and serves as a place where the three university partners can
transfer local companies that have stemmed from their research programs. The center’s research
focuses on the biomedical, biotechnology, diagnostics and therapeutics fields, though it also is
home to a few advanced technology companies.
As much of the research is initiated within the universities themselves, research funding initially
comes from university sources. As companies are spun off into the CET, funding is comprised
mainly of local and national venture capital. The center has programs in place to connect its
companies with funding sources, including private capital and public grants.
Park Performance
Development Concept and Activity
The CET is currently home to 27 companies, all but five of which are in the biotechnology fields.
The center has graduated 8 companies to date. The CET owns the land and buildings it occupies
and leases space to tenants at what would be considered the low range of market rent levels.
The first building at the CET, with 40,000 square feet
of space, was leased up within a year of completion.
The second building, opened in 2001 with 52,000
square feet, took longer to lease up, however the
center is now fully leased. In 2008, needing expansion
space for its tenants, the CET initiated a campaign to
expand into a third building. The CET purchased an
adjacent site with plans to develop a 60,000 square
feet of predominantly wet lab space. Though the site
was purchased the existing structure demolished, plans
for the new building were put on hold due to a lack of
financing stemming from the economic downturn.
Lessons Learned
The development of the CET was somewhat of a piecemeal approach. The City of Saint Louis
purchased the site and married the CET organization with the site without an outlined plan for the
center. In retrospect, this helped the center when renovating the buildings, because spaces were
not fully built-out from the beginning. Instead, the CET built each space out as it was leased, being
able to cater to each tenant’s requirements. As tenants tended to be long-term, the approach
worked out to CET’s advantage. By the same token, the development of the CET could have been
efficient had it resulted from further up-front planning.

NORTH CAROLINA RESEARCH CAMPUS, KANNAPOLIS, NC
The North Carolina Research Campus (NCRC) is a biotechnology research park which was
envisioned and funded by David H. Murdock, owner of Dole Foods Company, Inc. The “Biopolis”
Campus is located at 201 North Main Street in Kannapolis, approximately 20 miles north of
Charlotte, 50 miles southwest of Greensboro, and 100 miles west of Research Triangle Park in the
Raleigh-Durham area. The site is located near the US-85, which provides access to Charlotte,
Greensboro, and Raleigh-Durham. Eight universities, including three University of North Carolina
(UNC) institutions, have established their presence in the park:
! Duke University
! UNC-Chapel Hill
! North Carolina State University (NCSU)
! UNC-Charlotte
! North Carolina Central University
! North Carolina A&T State University
! UNC-Greensboro
! Appalachian State University
In addition, the North Carolina Community College System provides work force training.
The Campus is planned as live/work community and will cover 350 acres when completed. Plans
include one million square feet of office and laboratory space, 350,000 square feet of retail and
commercial space and approximately 700 residential units. The NCRC is planned to form a
biotech corridor that links the Research Triangle Park, the Triad, Asheville and Charlotte.
Conception
David H. Murdock, owner of Dole Foods Company,
Inc. created the vision for the NCRC to advance
biotechnology as a way to improve human health. He
invested over one billion dollars of his own funds into
developing the campus, and employed Castle and
Cooke, a Dole Foods company, as developer. In
2004, Murdock purchased a 250-acre former
Cannon Manufacturing Company Mills site in
Kannapolis, and in 2005, announced plans to build
the $1.5 billion NCRC. February of 2006 marked the
groundbreaking for first building at the Campus,
which was completed that August. The campus now
also includes the 100-acre historic retail village, for which plans for renovation are under way.
Governance
The NCRC is primarily governed by the board of the David H. Murdock Research Institute (DHMRI).
Members of the board include Murdock, as well as representatives from Duke University, UNC
Chapel Hill, NCSU, and private industry.

Map of North Carolina Research Campus

David H. Murdock provides capital funding, as well as ongoing financial support, for the NCRC.
Castle and Cooke, a Dole Foods Company, is employed as developer, as well as manages and
markets the Campus. The tenant universities provide human and intellectual capital, and manage
their own research programs. The State of North Carolina has also contributed funding to the
university partners.

With the presence of eight universities, research and technology transfer covers a wide span of the
biotechnology spectrum. At the UNC Nutrition Research Institute, UNC-Chapel Hill’s research
focuses on the relationship between nutrition and cancer, obesity and the brain; at the Institute for
Fruit and Vegetable Science, NCSU researches and develops technologies that improve the
nutritional content of fruits and vegetables and increase agricultural production; UNC-Charlotte
expertise in bioinformatics helps processes the research data generated at the campus; and the
North Carolina Community College System provides work force training.
Incubator
The DHMRI is located in 105,000 square feet of the David H.
Murdock Core Laboratory Building, and is centrally located in
the heart of the NCRC. The DHMRI houses over $150 million
in laboratory equipment which is available for use by tenants
and university partners. Here, members of academia and
industry collaborate on advancements in health-related R&D.
Research at the DHMRI is currently focused on several
disciplines, including nutrition, wellness, obesity, heart
disease, diabetes, cancer, osteoarthritis, medical devices, and
agriculture. Research at the DHMRI is funded by a grant from
Murdock.
Park Performance
Anchor Tenants and Space Concept
Anchor tenants at the NCRC include the DHMRI and the University partners. The DHMRI is the
anchor tenant in the David H. Murdock Core Laboratory Building, which is also home to UNC
Charlotte’s campus operations. NCSU is the anchor tenant in the Plants for Human Health
Building, which also houses the Research and Development arm of Dole Foods and Appalachian
State University. UNC Chapel Hill is the anchor tenant in the Nutrition Research Building, which
also houses UNC Greensboro, NC A&T University, and NC Central University. Other tenants
include medical device developers, biotechnology and advanced technology companies, angel
investment funds.
Other tenants include Anatomics, an international privately held medical devices company, the
publicly-owned Carolinas Healthcare System, Inception Micro Angel Fund (IMAF), LabCorp, one of
the world’s largest biomed clinical laboratories that pioneered in genome testing, as well as other
biomedical research and development companies and advanced technology companies. Tenants
at the campus lease space in the commercial buildings, which are developed and owned by Castle
and Cooke. As an exception, the site for a future hotel may be sold to a hotel developer who will
be allowed to build according to the campus’ planning and architectural guidelines.

Currently, a little over half of the planned million square feet of office and laboratory space, has
been completed, with two new structures in the pipeline. The first building, the 311,000 square foot
David H. Murdock Core Laboratory, was completed in August 2006 and houses the DHMRI. Two
new buildings have been constructed since 2006. The 130,000 square foot Nutrition Research
Building was constructed in 2007, and is home to NC State University, Appalachian State
University, and Dole Foods, while the 110,000 square foot Institute for Plants for Human Health
Building was constructed in 2008, and is home to the UNC, NC A&T University, and NC Central
University. The university tenants occupy a majority of space in each building, and though the park
is majority leased, there is still availability in each.
The campus continues to expand, as the 70,000 square foot Rowan Cabarrus Community College
is currently under construction and is slated fore completion in June of 2010. A fifth building,
which will primarily be occupied by Duke University, is in the design process. In addition, plans call
for the renovation of the 100-acre historic retail village, as well as the construction of 700
residential units.
Lessons Learned
The North Carolina Research Campus benefitted greatly from the vision and funding of David H.
Murdock, the single-most important private sector driver of the research park. The campus
currently employs 300 and is planned to employ 5,000 scientists and up to 30,000 other auxiliary
personnel at completion. A key idea has been the notion of a ‘biopolis’, with a comprehensive
mixed use development including residential, office, retail, and public uses. It has become an
economic generator in a city that at one time suffered the largest mass layoff in the state.
INNOVATION DEPOT, BIRMINGHAM, AL

The Innovation Depot is a business incubator that operates in partnership with the University of
Alabama at Birmingham, focusing on the development of emerging biotechnology and life
science, information technology and service businesses. The park is the result of a public-private
economic development effort and is funded by the Birmingham regional business community, the
Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham and other leading private foundations, the UAB,
the City of Birmingham and Jefferson County. The 140,000-square-foot facility is located in the
heart of Birmingham, just north of the University of Alabama Birmingham (UAB). The site enjoys
excellent regional access via US highways 20, 59 and 65. The site is also near the future Railroad
Reservation Park.
Conception
In 2000, UAB contacted the Entrepreneurial Center, which was a successful incubator located near
downtown Birmingham, in order to hand off management responsibilities and explore partnership
ideas for its own incubator, the Office for the Advancement of Developing Industries (OADI), which
was located on its campus. In 2007, the partnership finally came to life when $18 million was
invested to purchase and renovate a former Sears building, a downtown Birmingham landmark
built in 1945 that had been vacant for 20 years. The OADI and the Entrepreneurial Center
relocated to the 140,000 square foot facility to form the Innovation Depot.

Map of Innovation Depot

A public-private economic development effort, Innovation Depot operates in partnership with the
University of Alabama at Birmingham, which was one of the funders of the $17 million, three-year
project, and will be an ongoing funding partner. Others are the Birmingham regional business
community, including many leading private foundations; the City of Birmingham; and Jefferson County.
The president and chief executive officer of Innovation Depot is Susan Matlock, who headed OADI and
the Entrepreneurial Center and led the development of the new, consolidated incubator.
Governance
The Innovation Depot is operated as a non-profit 501(c)(3) and overseen by a board of directors with
28 representatives including those from the UAB, the City of Birmingham, as well as representatives
from local utility companies, and local law and accounting firms.

Key funding partners include the Birmingham regional business community, the Community
Foundation of Greater Birmingham and other leading private foundations, the UAB, the City of
Birmingham and Jefferson County. The City of Birmingham, Jefferson County, and the UAB
contributed $11 million, while $5 million was raised from the local private sector. Additionally, $14
million was loaned from Wachovia Bank through a “New Market Tax Credit” loan.
The park is marketed and operated by a staff of six, most of which were part of the original
management team of the Entrepreneurial Center.

The Innovation Depot is an incubator in itself, which focuses on the development of emerging
biotechnology/life science, information technology and service businesses. The Depot provides
tenants with conference and educational space, as well as a full time business development coach.
The Depot has also contracted with the City to provide business plan development services to non-
tenant local entrepreneurs.
Park Performance
The Depot currently houses 65 tenants, including BioDtech – a biosciences company that develops
products that detect and neutralize biological toxins, Vaxin – a flu vaccine research and
manufacturing firm, and DiscoveryBioMed – a research and development firm focusing on drugs
to fight cystic fibrosis, hypertension and inflammation.
Tenants lease space from the Depot. Currently, rental rates for office space and lab space are
higher than market rates, however, they include a range of benefits and services, including all
utilities, use of conference and meeting space, and extensive business development coaching
services.
The Depot originally started off with about 50 tenants: 28 from the Entrepreneurial Center and 24
from the OADI. The Depot has traditionally maintained high occupancy. However, the economic
downturn has impacted this recently. It currently houses 65 tenants, with capacity for up to 80.

Lessons Learned
The Innovation Depot has benefited greatly from having joined a university incubator, with
academic and research funding resources, with a privately-run incubator that has a strong
management and connections within the local business community. It has been named as a top
incubator in several publications. In May of 2010, Inc. Magazine named it as one of the top 20
incubators in the nation, while Forbes has also named it a top 5 incubator. The Depot, together
with its two predecessors, is estimated to have had over a $1 billion impact on the area’s economy
over the last five years.
DELAWARE TECHNOLOGY PARK, NEWARK, DE

Delaware Technology Park (DTP) was established in 1993 in Newark, DE. The 40-acre park is
nearly built out with a total of approximately 350,000 square feet in five buildings. The park is the
only technology-related economic development initiative of its kind in the State.
Location
DTP is strategically located along the I-95 corridor in
Newark, Delaware, just east of the University of
Delaware. Regional accessibility for the park is provided
by Interstate 95 which provides access to Philadelphia to
the northeast and Baltimore to the southwest, and sub-
regional accessibility by State Highway 72. New York is
less than three hours away and Washington, DC less than
two hours. Interstate 95 also provides access to two major
international airports: Philadelphia and Baltimore-
Washington. New Castle County Airport is a nearby
reliever airport which accommodates corporate jets and
charter services, and Amtrak provides rail service to the Northeast Corridor.
Conception
The park has been a cooperative effort by the Delaware Economic Development Office (DEDO),
the University of Delaware and the private sector. It has benefited from its proximity to several
universities; the park is located adjacent to the University of Delaware and within 35 miles of over
30 other universities and colleges. In addition, the uniqueness of the park in the State has been a
valuable marketing asset to both public and private sector interests.
The potential for the DTP emerged as a result of the High-Technology Task Force (HTTF) created by
the administration of then Governor Michael N. Castle in 1986. Following a feasibility analysis
report prepared by the task force, the University of Delaware set aside 40 acres of farmland on the
eastern edge of campus for the creation of the park. At the same time, the head of DuPont’s
Advanced Materials business began to encourage the University of Delaware to expand its
biotechnology facilities. This would eventually lead to the formation of the Delaware Biotechnical
Institute (DBI), a research center and incubator at DTP. DuPont's Advanced Materials business was
already established in the Newark area, and relocated to a 48,000 square-foot building in the
park to become its first tenant in 1993, officially establishing the park.

Map of Delaware Technology Park

All building space in the park is multi-tenant, owned and leased by DTP. The land is leased by
DTP from the University on a long-term subsidized basis. The 40-acre site currently houses five
buildings, comprising 350,000 square feet of space, with two planned buildings currently in the
early design stage.
The development and success of DTP stemmed from the collective vision of the state government,
the interest and presence of major local private sector players (DuPont), and the University of
Delaware’s initial land endowment and its research presence in the park. Key players in the park’s
development included the following:
! The University of Delaware – land grant, research presence, government/operation of

incubator
! Delaware Economic Development Office (DEDO) – capital/infrastructure funding
! Science Center in Philadelphia – financing assistance
! Mid-Atlantic Nanotechnology Alliance (MANA), the Delaware BioScience Association, and
First State Innovation (FSI) – research/technology commercialization assistance

Governance
The park is governed by the independent non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, DTP, Inc. A board of
directors, including the President of the University of Delaware, a member of DEDO, a
representative from the business community, and five legal advisors, each with equal voting rights,
also oversees the park. DTP, Inc. hired a director to oversee all development, operating and
marketing activities at the park, including managing the financing and construction of most of the
park’s buildings and infrastructure. To minimize operating costs, independent contractors, such as
real estate brokers and contractors, are hired on an as-needed basis.

Instrumental to the development of DTP were the University of Delaware, the DEDO, and Science
Center in Philadelphia, a non-profit corporation owned by 30 academic and scientific institutions
with locations throughout the I-95 corridor from New York City to Washington, D.C. The University
agreed to ground-lease the land to the park at a discount. The State of Delaware, through the
DEDO, granted $6 million to finance the construction of the first building, which housed DuPont
and now holds multiple tenants. The State also provided a below-market loan and a small grant
for a later building.
Funding and development financing has perhaps been the most difficult hurdle for the park to
overcome throughout its development. The department of transportation eventually provided loan
financing for the construction of road infrastructure in 1998. Due to the high-risk nature of start-up
companies, the main demand driver in the park, development financing proved difficult to obtain
and creative financing measures had to be taken for the development of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th
buildings at the park. Science Center, which has significant real estate holdings and financial
capital, became a partner with the park in a development LLC, and signed as guarantor for
construction loans, in order to obtain financing to build three additional buildings. Other entities,
such as the Mid-Atlantic Nanotechnology Alliance (MANA), the Delaware BioScience Association,
and First State Innovation (FSI), formed partnerships with the park to help build an entrepreneurial
culture and foster and facilitate deal flow, funding, and networking.

MANA was formed in the fall of 2004 and is funded by the U.S. Department of Commerce
Economic Development Administration (EDA). The organization focuses on expanding research,
development, application and commercialization of nanotechnology in the tri-state region, mainly
through securing funding for research, development and commercialization of nanotechnology.
FSI, a privately held non-profit 501(c)(3), was launched in 2006 with the goal of increasing
Delaware's entrepreneurial capacity. FSI provides support for technology-based and early stage
businesses in securing seed capital, alternative funding, skilled human capital, commercialization
assistance, intellectual capital, and other entrepreneurial resources.

Research activity at DTP is focused on three high-technology areas that are central to the State’s
economy: biotechnology, information technology and advanced materials. The park maintains a
strong partnership with the University of Delaware, which operates the DBI incubator in a 72,000
square foot building. DBI cooperates closely with University research faculty in the biotechnology
field. Core research areas pursued by DBI-affiliated University research faculty include agriculture,
human health, marine environmental!genomics, biomaterials, and computational
biology/bioinformatics.
Incubator
The DBI was established in 1999 and is a major feature of the DTP. The incubator was created as
a partnership of government, industry and academia in which the University of Delaware is a
major stakeholder. The DBI serves as an incubator for biotechnology companies, conducts
interdisciplinary research and is a facilitator of K-12 education programs. The laboratory houses
more than 180 faculty and students, with a focus on business collaboration and technology
transfer. The DBI provides an opportunity for businesses to access the institute's shared core
instrumentation centers and equipment. The University benefits through commercialization of
intellectual capital through patents and license revenues.
The three other institutes of higher education in the State of Delaware along with two area hospital
systems are also partners in the DBI. They are Delaware State University, Delaware Technical &
Community College, Wesley College, the Helen F. Graham Cancer Center (part of the Christiana
Healthcare System), and the Nemours/Alfred I. DuPont Hospital for Children (part of Nemours
Biomedical Research).
The faculty and companies at the institute receive funding from many sources. According to the
park’s director, researchers and businesses at the DBI
have received $75 million in federal grants since 2001,
mostly from sources such as the National Science
Foundation (NSC), the National Institutes of Health
(NIH), the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). In addition, the
State of Delaware, which provided $5 million, and
private industry, have also contributed. Together,
AstraZeneca, DuPont, and Hercules contributed about
$8 million to the DBI.
Start-up companies are vetted by park operations and

pay their own rent, which runs around $22 per square foot full-service gross for office space and
ranges from $30 to $50 per square foot for lab space, with wet lab space at the high end of the

range. The DBI has spun out a total of 35 companies, averaging between four and five companies
per year since 1999.
Park Performance
The park has been developed along a multi-tenant model, with the DTP acting as master
developer in partnership with private developers as subcontractors, and in some instances equity
partners. The DTP retains an ownership stake in all buildings and does not sell or lease land per
se, with ground leases recovered through the space rent structure. With DuPont as its first tenant,
the DTP received attention and interest from its inception. However, development was stalled
between 1993 and 1999 due primarily to a lack of funding sources for road infrastructure in the
park, and difficulty in obtaining financing for buildings that would have to absorb some of the
some of the cost of the infrastructure. Once this obstacle was overcome, development activity
rapidly picked up pace, and between 1999 and 2002, the DTP constructed an average of one
building per year, and approximately 70,000 square feet of building space was absorbed
annually. Each building was developed with at least 50 percent pre-leased. With 30 of the Park’s
40 acres developed and two buildings planned on the remaining 10 acres, the Park is nearing
completion.
Anchor Tenants and Pricing

Approximately 90% of DTP’s tenants—excluding those in the DBI—are private. Anchor tenants
including DuPont, Quest Pharmaceutical Services LLC, and the Fraunhofer Center, a research
center employing researchers and scientists of the German company, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft.
Leasing is conducted on a case-by-case basis. The rent structure includes a ground rent
reimbursement component of approximately 50 cents per square foot of building space. Rents are
similar to those in the DBI at approximately $22 per square foot for office space, and $30 to $50
per square foot for lab space (full service gross).
Lessons Learned
DuPont’s presence in the park as its first tenant was important in placing the park on the map.
Difficulty in infrastructure funding and development financing were important hurdles for the park
to overcome, and led to its stagnation during its early years. Since 1999, the park has attracted
substantial capital and research funding from both public and private sources.
Key lessons learned were:

! Well-defined shared vision: It important for partners to share in the same vision for the park,
particularly given the competing primary objectives of the different entities.
! Clearly defined funding strategy: A detailed funding plan that explores all infrastructure and
development financing is crucial to park success. It is important to clearly identify funding
responsibilities early in the process, and achieve the right balance between public and
private investment.
! Adequate master planning: With only 10 acres remaining and room for two more buildings
currently in the planning stages, the park is nearing build-out without meeting its full

potential. It is important to prepare a master plan at a density that provides for long-term
growth in demand for space in the park.
! Lease terms: The full service rent structure resulted in electricity charges becoming a major
variable cost burden for the park. This created budgeting and cash flow problems for the
park.
COLDSTREAM RESEARCH CAMPUS, LEXINGTON, KY

The Coldstream Research Campus (CRC) was originally conceived as an opportunity to take
advantage of the University of Kentucky’s advanced pharmaceutical research focus. This has since
evolved to include a variety of tenants, including those related to biosciences, technology
manufacturing and hospitality.
Location
The 510-acre CRC is located on SR 922, in Lexington, KY, just north of the University of Kentucky
(UK). Nearby, State Highway 4 provides sub-regional access to metro Lexington, and Interstate 64
provides regional accessibility.
Louisville and Cincinnati are located
within 75 miles to the west and north,
respectively. Blue Grass Airport is
located 7 miles east of the site.
Conception
UK is one of only two universities in the
nation with a center that is capable of
formulating and producing small
batches of FDA-approved drugs for
human trials. The Center for
Pharmaceutical Science and
Technology (CPST), located in the university's medical campus, is also one of the nation's top-
ranked pharmacy schools. In 1991, Governor Wallace Wilkinson announced plans to take
advantage of UK's drug development expertise by creating a Coldstream pharmacy facility on the
former site of the University’s animal research farm.
In 1991, Hughes Aircraft Company became Coldstream’s first tenant, building a plant to produce
cathode-ray tubes. Since then, the campus has seen the addition of an Embassy Suites hotel, IBM’s
General Services Division, and Hewlett-Packard (HP).
The park is operated on a ground lease structure. Most of the buildings have been built by private
developers, either built-to-suit or as speculative multi-tenant projects. When the CRC was first
established, there was no clear vision or development structure in place for the 510-acre site. The
University is currently working to create a master plan future development of the campus. Key
players in the development of the campus include:

Map of Coldstream Research Campus

! The University of Kentucky (UK) – landlord, operations, marketing, research/technology
commercialization
! The City of Lexington – capital/infrastructure funding
! State of Kentucky – capital/infrastructure funding
! Private developers – capital investment

Governance
The CRC is governed by UK, which owns the land and oversees the operation of the campus. The
executive director is appointed directly by UK. There is currently no board of directors for the
campus, though future plans may include the formation of such a board.
Key partners in the development of the CRC are UK, the City of Lexington and the State of
Kentucky. Initially, the campus was slow to recruit companies due to a lack of infrastructure. In
1994, the City of Lexington invested
over $3 million to install sewer
lines, in exchange for 225-acres of
land surrounding the campus,
which the City has dedicated as
permanent regional open space. In
1999, the State of Kentucky
contributed $5.5 million in
infrastructure to support a new UK
mini-campus, including roads,
sidewalks and utilities, and annual
funding for full-time executive
director position. This infrastructure
investment by the State proved
crucial in attracting private industry interest in the campus. The attraction of key anchors such as
IBM was important in the subsequent marketing and success of the park.

Coldstream's main objective is to attract companies that can develop partnerships with the
University and foster technology transfer. UK’s research strengths are in the areas of agriculture,
engineering and robotics, medicine and pharmacy. The CRC houses UK’s Center for Aluminum
Technology, its Human Development Institute, and its Livestock Disease Diagnostic Center.
With a diverse body of companies, research funding at the CRC comes from various sources. The
CRC has six venture capital and angel investor tenants, providing private research funding and
business start-up financing. These include the Kentucky Seed Capital Fund, Bluegrass Angels
Venture Fund and The Bluegrass Angels. Public technology transfer funding is provided through
State programs such as the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program and the Small
Business Technology Transfer (STTR) program.

UK’s Office for Commercialization and Economic Development (CED) is responsible for the
university's technology commercialization activities and business development. UK receives
royalties and license revenues from companies spun out of its incubator, the Advanced Science &
Technology Commercialization Center (ASTeCC) (see below). In fiscal year 2008, 12 patent
applications have been filed and 19 new licenses contracted through the CED, and the university
has received $1.2 million in gross licensing revenue. Currently, the university holds 135 active
licenses, including 10 licenses to UK faculty startups, and 300 total active patents, with a strong
portfolio in drug development and design, plant biotech, equine health, materials for medical
implants, drug delivery systems, and medical devices.
Incubator
UK operates ASTeCC across State Highway 4 on the main campus. The $18 million, 80,000-
square-foot building was constructed in 1994, and was funded entirely by grants from the U.S.
Small Business Administration and the U.S. Economic Development Administration. ASTeCC
currently houses 12 tenants, with research focusing largely on biotechnology and engineering.
Each start-up in ASTeCC enters into a three-year lease at below-market rates, ranging from $10 to
$18 per square foot. This compares to lease rates of $30 per square foot for similar space at the
CRC. A significant portion of ASTeCC, is dedicated to free lab space for 24 faculty-led groups for
applied research. The center has graduated a total of 25 tenants since its inception, or an average
of 3 tenants per year.
Park Performance
The CRC has been developed on a long-term ground lease model. It was slow to develop for
nearly a decade, primarily as a result of a lack of a clearly defined strategy for the park, and
inadequate infrastructure funding. Approximately 75 percent of all development activity has
occurred following the funding of road and other infrastructure by the State in 1999. Development
of the park has occurred under a requirement that 50 percent of the site be open space. However,
this has resulted in the isolation of buildings from each other and does not foster idea exchange.

The campus is home to 50 companies, anchored by tenants such as HP and Coldstream
Laboratories, a pharmaceuticals research and development company. Approximately 450 of the
park’s 510 total acres been developed, with approximately 185 acres remaining. This translates to
land absorption averaging approximately 25 acres per year during the past 18 years or so, but
nearly twice that during the past eight years when most of the development occurred.
Annual ground lease rates currently range between $30,000 and $45,000 per acre, and are
typically priced to achieve 8-10% annual return on land value. Building space rents are typically
between $15 per square foot for general office space, on a modified gross basis, with laboratory
space rented for between $25 to $30 triple net.
Lessons Learned
From inception, the campus has benefited from a close cooperative relationship between local and
state government agencies and UK. Key lessons learned in the development of CRC include:

! Absence of a well-defined shared vision: A lack of a clear vision for the development of the
park was a major flaw in the campus’s development. With no master plan the campus has
developed in a manner that has not resulted in a sense of place, nor does it provide for the
optimal flow of knowledge. Current plans for the future development of the park now call
for a “town-center” environment, involving food service and retail, and possibly residential
components, to act as an activity center for the campus.
! Clearly defined funding strategy: A detailed funding plan that explores all infrastructure and
development financing is crucial to park success. It is important to clearly identify funding
responsibilities early in the process, and achieve the right balance between public and
private investment.
! Long-term industry development process: Establishing and growing biotechnology
companies is a slow and expensive process. Biotechnology firms may have a growth period
of up to 10 or 15 years, whereas “dot com” companies often generate rapid growth and
returns. The large up-front funding requirement and long product development to market
timeframe, can present funding difficulties for biotechnology companies making them high-
risk tenants. In light of this, the campus has diversified its tenant base.
! Adequate operational resources: Since 2000, the creation of a full-time dedicated executive
director post has greatly aided in the development of the campus.
UNIVERSITY OF IOWA – OAKDALE RESEARCH PARK, CORALVILLE, IA

The 189-acre University of Iowa Research Park, also known as Oakdale Research Park, was
established in 1989. The park’s research focus is engineering and information technology, and
life sciences.
Location
The park is located in the fast-growing community of Coralville, about 10 minutes from the main
University of Iowa (UI) campus. It has direct access to Cedar Rapids, located 20 miles to the north;
Davenport and the other Quad cities located 56 miles to the
east; and Des Moines 100 miles west. The Eastern Iowa
Regional Airport, located 15 minutes from the site, provides
commercial air service, while the Iowa City Municipal Airport,
located within 10 minutes of the site, provides charter and
corporate air service. Its location on Coral Ridge
Avenue/Highway 965 and near Interstates 80 and 380, and
U.S. Highways 16 and 218 affords the park excellent local and
regional accessibility.
The Park occupies 189 acres in the northern portion of the UI’s 500-acre Oakdale campus. UI’s
research in human health and medicine is world class, ranking 12th among public research
universities in the National Institute of Health’s rankings.

Map of University of Iowa – Oakdale Research Park

Conception
During the agricultural crisis in Iowa of during the early 1980’s, the State of Iowa started looking in
other directions to stimulate the economy. One of the directions taken by the State was to explore
opportunities in the technology sector, particularly technology based economic development near
its research universities. Initially UI, with State subsidies, developed the Technology Innovation
Center (TIC) in 1984, a business incubator and training facility on the Oakdale campus. It
provided a partnering environment for engineering and computer technology start-up companies.
The State later encouraged the University to develop a research park in order to retain and attract
more technology-based companies in the area. The result was the establishment of the Oakdale
Research Park in 1989.
The development of the park has been a direct result of the initiatives taken by the State of Iowa in
the early 1980’s. The State established the research park in joint partnership with the University of
Iowa, the City of Coralville and the Iowa Department of Transportation. The strategic development
plan for the park involved the development of three state-funded University laboratories that
reflected the University’s strengths in industrial biotechnology, drug development and driving
simulation. The key players in the initial conception and subsequent development of the park were:
! State of Iowa – capital funding

! City of Coralville – capital funding, governance
! State Board of Regents – research funding, governance
! Iowa DOT – capital funding, research
! University of Iowa – intellectual capital
! University of Iowa Research Park Corporation (UIRPC) – park operation
! University of Iowa Research Foundation (UIRF) – research funding, technology
commercialization
! Private business – capital funding, governance, research, commercialization
! Linn County Rural Electric Cooperative (REC) – governance

Governance
The Oakdale Research Park is owned and operated by the University of Iowa Research Park
Corporation (UIRPC). The corporation is a non-profit organization incorporated in the State of
Iowa in 1989. The Park is administered by a board of directors that includes the Coralville City
administrator, directors of the park’s anchor tenants, deans of colleges and institutes which have
established programs in the park, Linn County REC, an electric distribution cooperative serving six
counties, and private companies such as Integrated DNA technologies.

A number of public and private entities are directly and indirectly affiliated with the operation and
funding of the research park. Key players include the UIRF, the City of Coralville, the Iowa DOT,
and the private sector.
The park is a member of the Iowa Centers for Enterprise which was formed in 1995. The enterprise
is an umbrella organization of six members, and acts as a conduit for UI’s economic development
efforts. The UIRF is responsible for the commercialization of university-developed technologies
including technologies developed in the research park.

The City of Coralville has been a key partner in the development of the park since its inception,
including the incorporation of the Park into the City’s strategic plan. As noted above, the
administrator of the City also sits on the board of directors which oversees the UIRPC.
Funding for the park’s initial development was derived from various public and private sources.
The land for the park was
acquired by the State, with
management responsibilities
transferred to the University
through a master ground
lease between the State’s
Board of Regents and the
UIRPC. Roadways and other
essential infrastructure were
funded by $1.3 million in public funds from the Iowa DOT and the City of Coralville. Private sector
grants played a secondary but important role in funding these improvements.

Technology transfer and commercialization are central to the Park’s mission. There is a strong
University presence in the park, including a number of university research centers and programs.
Most important is the Oakdale medical research building, which is a 48,000 square foot
laboratory housing the UI College of Medicine with established basic science programs. The UI’s
Carver College of Medicine and College of Public Health also have strong, established basic-
science programs at the park.
Incubator
The TIC is an information-technology-based business incubator, and has been a central driver in
the park since its formation. In 2007, the management structure of the park was changed, with
management of the TIC transferred to the UIRPC.
Since its inception, the center has accepted 95 startup companies, out of which 40 have
graduated. There are currently 16 tenants, although the incubator program houses an average of
14 to 20 companies at any given time with approximately 3 to 5 companies graduating annually.
The incubator offers approximately 40 offices and suites for lease, ranging from 125 to 330
square feet. The TIC had historically catered to engineering and information-technology
companies, an environment which was not conducive for biotechnology startup companies.
To address the need for a life sciences incubator, a public-private partnership was established in
2006 between the developer Ryan Companies US, the State, the City of Coralville and the
National Genecular Institute to develop the Bio Ventures Center. The recently completed 90,000
square foot center was constructed at a total cost of $26 million. It will provide 20 wet laboratory
modules with an average rentable space of 785 square feet, 16 office/dry laboratory modules with
an average rentable space of 335 square feet, as well as other shared facilities and offices. Rents
are approximately $35 per gross square foot.

Park Performance
The park operates on a long-term ground lease basis. There is currently a total of 433,000 square
feet of building space in the 189-acre park, totaling an investment of about $140 million. To date,
approximately 60 acres and 10 of the 27 lots have been developed, ranging from 4 to 6.5 acres.
The park is also currently developing a new master plan and marketing strategy. These plans are
focusing on the removal of the physical and operational boundaries between the Research Park
and rest of the Oakdale campus. The park is developing new and consistent design standards, a
signage program, and an infrastructure development strategy with streets and landscaping which
will encourage the integration and connection between the academic and research
commercialization components of the park and the Oakdale campus.

The first multi-tenant facility in the park was opened in 1991, and the University’s College of
Medicine human health and medicine laboratory became the park’s first tenant. In 1993, UI
software spin-off CADSI (Computer Aided Design Software Inc.), graduated from the University’s
TIC and moved to its new headquarter facility in the park, becoming the park’s first corporate
tenant. The park has been home to 18 companies since its inception in 1991. At present, there
are 10 companies located in the park.
The park has three anchor tenants:
The Center for Biocatalysis & Bioprocessing (CBB) is the State of Iowa’s primary contract research
facility for fermentation and bioprocessing. The 123,000 square foot center houses approximately
60 faculty members and 300 researchers who work in research, development, training and
technology transfer. It was established in 1993-94 and receives funding from federal sources, the
park’s general funds, sales and services.
The Center for Advanced Drug Development (CADD) is an FDA-registered laboratory that performs
analytical development and stability testing in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and animal
health industries. The main funding sources of the center are sales and service and the park’s
general fund.
National Advanced Driving Simulator (NADS) is home to the world’s most-advanced driving
simulator, the NADS-1, and is the center for world-class driving simulation research. The NADS is
an $80 million, 40,000 square foot research facility which started construction in 1997and was
built and jointly funded by the State of Iowa and the Federal National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.
General office rents in the park range from approximately $18 to $22 per square foot on a gross
basis. Laboratory rents range from approximately $25 to $35 per square foot, with wet-lab space
at the high end of the range.

Lessons learned
Some of the more important lessons that can be learned from the Oakdale Research Park include
the following:
! Shared vision: The State, UI, the City and private sector business have consistently operated
in consort in the development of a vision for the Park. All have shared in the funding and
risk burden in the joint venture.
! Adequate funding: The State has been proactive in ensuring that the Park has adequate
capital and operational funding, including the location of key State-sponsored research
anchors in the Park.
! Dynamic growth strategy: The Park follows an adaptive development strategy to reflect
changes in the direction of technology sector growth.
! Technology transfer and commercialization: The strong relationships between UI faculty and
the private sector have been pivotal in the Park’s success. A strong UI applied research
presence in the Park has been central to the Park’s success since its inception.
! Develop research anchors: The early creation and establishment of a variety of research
centers has been pivotal in the Park’s success.
PIEDMONT TRIAD RESEARCH PARK, WINSTON-SALEM, NC

The Piedmont Triad Research Park (PTRP) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina currently encompasses
over 554,000 square feet of space in six buildings on approximately 80 acres of the City Center
When complete, the park will total 6 million square feet of developed space on 240 acres of the
City's central core.
Location
The park is located in Winston-Salem's
historical downtown business district and
centered in the North Carolina Technology
Corridor. The location is served by a
number of major highways including I-40,
I-85 and I-77, providing access to Raleigh,
located 100 miles east, and Charlotte, 100
miles southwest. The Piedmont Triad
International Airport is a 20 minute drive to
the east.
Conception
In the early 1990’s, the Winston-Salem community began exploring opportunities to develop a
research park in its downtown area. The former research facility for the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco
Company was deeded to the project, and in 1991, the Winston-Salem Downtown Development
Corporation (DDC) commissioned a redevelopment project with the aim of developing this part of
downtown for research activities. In 1994, the Wake Forest University Health Sciences (WFUHS)

Department of Physiology and Pharmacology located to the RJR facility. The park was also formally
established that year, as the Master Plan for the Piedmont Triad Research Park was approved. In
1998, the Winston-Salem Chamber of Commerce sponsored the creation of the North Carolina
Emerging Technology Alliance (NCETA). The alliance, which was reincorporated as Idealliance in
2000, had academic, business and governmental leaders as its members. In 1999, the ownership
of the park was transferred from the DDC to Idealliance.
In 2001, One Technology Place was constructed, purchased by WFUHS, and leased to the park’s
first private tenant, Targacept, a pharmaceutical company. By 2001, PTRP had four buildings on
approximately 10 acres and expansion plans were announced in the following year. Currently, the
park houses six buildings, with tenants including the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative
Medicine, several private companies, and the PTRP Wet Lab LaunchPad, which provides affordable
laboratory space for emerging life sciences companies.
The project benefits from its proximity to Wake Forest University, the university’s Baptist Medical
Center, Winston-Salem State University (WSSU), and Winston-Salem’s central business district. The
expanding park is being built around a new bio-medical campus for WFUHS that will create an
intellectual environment geared toward
biotechnology commercialization.
The Park has developed through a partnership

between WFUHS, the state, the City and the
private sector. Key players in the development
of PTRP were:
! Wake Forest University Health Sciences
(WFUHS) – research, funding, technology
commercialization, park governance,
incubator
! Idealliance – park operations and
management, technology
commercialization
! Winston-Salem Alliance – Incubator
funding
! Downtown Development Corporation
(DDC) – initial development management
and funding
! State of North Carolina – infrastructure funding
! Wachovia Bank - infrastructure funding
! U.S. Economic Development Administration - infrastructure funding
! North Carolina Department of Commerce - infrastructure funding
! Local government, community leaders and private industry – operational funding
Governance
The park is governed by Wake Forest University, through Idealliance, and both it and WSSU have
a strong presence on the park. Idealliance is comprised of academic, business and governmental
leaders as its members, and was officially subjugated by WFUHS in 2003.

Map of Piedmont Triad Research Park

The State of North Carolina, WSSU, Wachovia Bank, the Winston-Salem Millennium Fund, the
DDC, Idealliance, and WFUHS have all played key roles in the development of PTRP. The State first
granted $5 million to WSSU to contribute toward the purchase of the first three acres of land and
start the development process. In 2000, Wachovia financed the construction of the first ground-up
building at PTRP, One Technology Place, and in 2002 made a $10 million contribution to the
Millennium Fund, which in turn, contributed $3 million to the PTRP. The DDC officially managed
the development of the park until 2000, when ownership as well as operational and marketing
responsibilities were handed over transferred to Idealliance. In 2003, WFUHS took over Idealliance
and currently owns and governs the park operations through the Idealliance entity. PTRP’s board of
directors is primarily comprised of members of academia, community leaders, and representatives
from the private sector.
Assistance also came from the U.S. Economic Development Administration, which in 2005
contributed $1.1 million towards infrastructure improvements, and from the North Carolina
Department of Commerce, which in 2007, gave a one-time state grant of $3.5 million for site
development, primarily to assist with electrical power lines and site grading. Local government,
community leaders and private industry also contributed to the park, by raising a total of $2.5
million to fund the park’s annual operating budget of $500,000 for the first five years.

Research at the PTRP centers around biotechnology and information technology. Wake Forest
University’s graduate management program operates the Babcock Demon Incubator in the park,
and several of its departments are located at the park. These departments include the WFUHS
Office of Technology Asset Management, Wake Forest University School of Medicine (WFUSM)
Lipid Sciences Research, the WFUSM Department of Physiology/Pharmacology, the WFUSM
Physician Assistant Program and the WFUSM Office of Public Health Sciences. WSSU’s Project
Strengthen is also located at the park, and it operates eight laboratories devoted to research in
biochemistry and molecular biology, genomics, proteomics, microbiology, chemistry, immunology,
and physiology.
The WFUHS Office of Technology Asset Management, located in the One Technology Place
building, works with university faculty, students and staff to commercialize novel discoveries and
other intellectual property developed at, or in cooperation with, Wake Forest University and
WFUSM. To date, the office has generated $70 million in royalties, which is the primary source of
research funding at the park.
Incubator
The Babcock Demon Incubator (BDI) was established in 2001 and operates under Wake Forest
University’s Babcock School Angell Center for Entrepreneurship. The BDI supports new ventures
with both resident and non-resident client models. The BDI provides a range of facilities which
include office space, broadband internet, phone service, and conference facilities. Tenants are
admitted on a rolling basis throughout the year and each business that uses the incubator has
approximately 12 months to develop and graduate. Both resident and non-resident clients have
access to a wide range of business and mentoring resources. The BDI has graduated 24
companies and is currently home to 6 companies. Research at the BDI focuses on bioscience and
nanotechnology.

Capital investment in the BDI mainly came from the Winston-Salem Alliance, which is an
organization of Winston-Salem’s business community that aims to boost the city’s economic
development. Additional funding is obtained through /federal programs including the Small
Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR)
program, and regional angel investor groups including Inception Micro Angel Fund, and the
Piedmont Angel Network. The Angell Foundation also provides the BDI with administrative support.
Tenants at the BDI generally range in size from one to three employees. The rental structure is
unusual in that it is a flat rate per entity, rather than being based on the quantity of space rented.
Current rents are $300 per month per entity, regardless of the number of employees or space
occupied.
In addition, WSSU’s wet lab LaunchPad, established in 2007, acts as the phase two incubator. The
facility serves as an accelerator program for startup companies that are further along in the
development process. Applicants are approved based on an established prototype and are in need
of lab space to continue development. For these companies, the facility provides laboratory space
at affordable rates comparable to the BDI. To date, three companies from the BDI have graduated
to LaunchPad.
Park Performance
The park has been developed by Idealliance on a multi-tenant model. Currently, 40 of the 80
acres located in the first phase of PTRP have been developed, and including 554,000 square feet
of space in six buildings. Development has averaged approximately 3 acres, or 40,000 square feet
per year. PTRP expansion plans, led by WFUHS, provide for the redevelopment of a total of 230
acres to a three-district, five million square foot mixed-use community over the next 20 to 30 years.
Idealliance will act as master developer and will retain, sell and lease land as appropriate.

PTRP is home to over 40 technology tenants, including the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative
Medicine and the Wake Forest Lipids Sciences Program, who collectively employ over 850
university and corporate personnel, Targacept Inc., which is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical
company that discovers and develops a new class of drugs for the treatment of central nervous
system diseases and disorders, and Carolina Liquid Chemistries Corporation, a company engaged
in the business of developing, manufacturing and commercializing in vitro diagnostic reagents for
quantitative testing of analytes.
The park’s multi-tenant buildings’ full service rents range from $20 to $36 per square foot, with
wet lab space at the high end of the range.
Lessons Learned
PTRP’s success has been driven by a cooperative approach to technology-led economic
development, and the Park’s ability to commercialize research. Key lessons learned include the
following:

! Shared community vision: The success of the Park stems from the broad based community
vision that led to its establishment, with involvement by many different organizations and
private sector interests.
! Proactive University leadership: The willingness of WFUHS to assume operational control
and financial responsibility has played a key role in the growth of the Park, including
technology transfer and commercialization. The involvement of WSSU has also been
important as a demand driver.
! Adequacy and variety of funding: The Park owes its success in large part to the broad-based
funding for the project from a wide variety of public, institutional and private sector sources.
R.J. Reynolds contribution of the well located site gave the project a significant head start.
! Creating an entrepreneurial environment: From the park’s inception, PTRP management
strived to create an entrepreneurial environment. This meant establishing close working
relationships with the government, the community, industry organizations, and sources of
capital that would foster the creation of new research and business development in the park.
! Invest in intellectual capital: One of the more challenging aspects of the development of PTRP
involved encouraging academia to embrace the commercialization of research. Turning
university faculty into entrepreneurs requires training and the development of a system for
commercialization. This process was facilitated by the development of the WFUHS Office of
Technology Asset Management.
TRI-CITIES RESEARCH DISTRICT, RICHLAND, WASHINGTON

The Tri-Cities Research District (TCRD) is a 1,600-acre mixed-use research park located adjacent to
the Columbia River in Richland, WA. The park currently comprises approximately 3.4 million
square feet of office, laboratory and light manufacturing space, and employs approximately 5,000
workers.
Location
The TCRD is located in the City of Richland, in the
tri-cities area of the State, composed of the City of
Richland, City of Kennewick to the south and City of
Pasco to the east. TCRD lies just west of the
Columbia River and south of the Hanford
Reservation, a former nuclear power site. Interstates
82 and 90 provide east-west regional accessibility.
Regional air service is provided through the Tri-
Cities Airport located 14 miles to the south.

Map of Tri Cities Research District

Conception
The TCRD is located just south of the Hanford Site, a decommissioned nuclear power facility. The
TCRD is built on the former 4,500-acre Camp Hanford site, which housed military and civilian
workers involved in building the Hanford Works, part of the Manhattan project. In 1989, as
operations at Hanley Works began to wind down, the State Department of Ecology, US
Environment Protection Agency and the US Department of Energy entered into a tri-parte
agreement to address environmental remediation in the area which by was mostly in private
ownership. In 1990, a non-profit corporation, the Tri-Cities Science and Technology Park (TCSTP),
was created to help market the available land and buildings in a 4,500 acre area in North
Richland. Its board represented the major land and building owners and representatives of
companies who leased office space in the area. There were approximately 90 technology
businesses and 7,500 employees within the area comprising the park. Only a modest amount of
private sector investment occurred during the first 10 to 12 years or so, primarily due to the lack of
a coordinated strategy for the park.
In 2002, the City of Richland rezoned most of North Richland, including the TCSTP, into a new
business-research park zone, to facilitate the attraction of new research and technology companies
to the area. In 2005, the City commissioned a study to engage stakeholders from throughout the
Tri-Cities area to participate in a strategic planning process. Their recommendations provided the
basis for a new direction for the research park. In 2007, the Board was reconstructed, bylaws
were revised and the Tri-Cities Research District (TCRD) was formed. The new area of the TCRD
was reduced to 1,600 acres. The District is primarily comprised of the Port of Benton, the US
Department of Energy’s (DOE) Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and the Washington
State University Tri-Cities Campus (WSU-TC). It was created to coordinate development activity for
approximately 620 acres of undeveloped land, 300 acres of which is on the University Campus
and will be used for university related research and other facilities, with the remaining 320 acres
distributed throughout the balance of the TCRD.
PNNL is a U.S. DOE owned research laboratory operated by Battelle. It has been performing
research for DOE offices as well as other government agencies, universities, and private industry in
the fields of Microbial and Cellular Biology, Environmental Sciences, Analytic and Interfacial
Chemical Sciences, Radiological Sciences, Computational Sciences and Information Analytics and
Sensing and Measurement Technologies. PNNL also provides entrepreneurial services and
guidance for spin-off and start-up companies through their economic development department
and has provided assistance to over 400 regional businesses to date. In recent years, there has
been heavy investment in the PNNL facility, including a 300,000 square foot Physical Sciences
Facility, a 148,000 square foot Biological Sciences Laboratory, and a Computational Sciences
Facility.
The Port of Benton has played an important role in the formation of the TCRD and is actively
involved in current developments in the District. The Director of Economic Development &
Governmental Affairs also serves as the executive director of the TCRD. At present, the Port of
Benton owns the 71-acre Richland Innovation Center Site which is home to 18 research and
technology companies, and the 250-acre Richland Technology and Business Campus which
houses 27 research and other professional service firms.
The WSU-TC Campus was established in 1989. The University is currently in the process of
building a $24.8 million, 57,000-square-foot bioscience facility, on its campus in collaboration

with PNNL. The University, in partnership with local business and community organizations, is
developing the 35,000 square foot Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM)
High School as a technology-based workforce training facility for the region.
In 2006, Solaris Group, a large real estate developer, purchased much of the existing Stevens
Center Business park and other undeveloped property within the district. In 2007, the State of
Washington created a new Innovation Partnership Zone (IPZ) program and the Tri-Cities Research
District was named one of the 11 newly-designated zones. In 2008, it received a $275,000 grant
to assist with planning and implementing new capital projects located within the zone.
The initiative began to show signs of gathering momentum almost immediately after the
reorganization to form the TCRD in 2006. In 2007, the State of Washington created a new
Innovation Partnership Zone (IPZ) program and the TCRD was named one of the 11 newly-
designated zones. In early 2008, it received a $275,000 grant to assist with planning and
implementing new capital projects located within the zone. In March 2008, Solaris, the Port of
Benton, and PNNL, OR and WSU-TC, contracted with TVA Architects of Portland, to complete a six-
month master plan for the 620 undeveloped acres of their property.
The key players in the conception and development of the park are:
! State - capital funding, research funding
! Port of Benton – capital funding, governance, landowner
! PNNL - capital funding, governance, research presence
! WSU Tri Cities – governance, landowner, research presence
! Solaris Group LLC – capital funding, governance, landowner
! DOE - capital funding, governance, landowner, operation
! Energy Northwest – capital funding, governance, operation
! Tri Cities Industrial Development Council (TRIDEC) – incubator sponsor
! Battelle Institute – research funding, capital funding, operation, landowner
! Lockheed Martin – capital funding, brand marketing
! City of Richland - governance
! Garlick Enterprises - capital funding, landowner
! Benton-Franklin workforce development council – governance, research funding
! Columbia Basin College - governance
! City of Kennewick – governance

Governance
The Tri-Cities Research District is a 501(c)(6) non-profit corporation managed by a 15-member
board of directors representing key community partners. The board of directors represents the
Benton-Franklin Workforce Development Council, Columbia Basin College, the City of Kennewick,
the City of Richland, Port of Benton, PNNL, Solaris Group, WSU-TC and district land and building
owners. The board’s primary function is to oversee the development of the district.
The new bylaws created in 2007, along with the expansion of the Board, requires the latter to have
an Executive, Marketing, Communication & Community Outreach program and a Resource
Development Committee. The Board has also formulated an innovation zone and advisory
committee.

In the beginning of 2008, the research district created goals and strategies to fulfill its vision as an
economic driver of the region. The goals focused on identifying organizational funding and specific
responsibilities between the various partners, implementing the various policies and
recommendations of the committees required by the new bylaws, and pursuing local, state and
federal partnerships and funding support for the TCRD’s
development.
At present, funding for the TCRD’s development is largely

derived from the key State and community partners, land-
owners, and private developers. The significant funding
partners are the Port of Benton, DOE, the Tri-Cities
Industrial Development Corporation, Battelle Institute,
Lockheed Martin and the State of Washington. Some of the
local funding in recent years has included a $100,000
donation by Battelle for marketing purposes, a donation of
$150,000 by Lockheed Martin also for marketing purposes,
and a $275,000 grant from the State for planning and
implementation of capital improvements and infrastructure
development. The District is also in the process of applying
for grants from the US Economic Development
Administration.
Technology Transfer & Innovation Activity

The research focus in the TCRD is medical technology,
energy, advanced materials, and life sciences. The goal of
the District is to develop itself as a pioneer in energy and
sustainability by leveraging the presence of WSU-TC and
PNNL. PNNL and WSU-TC collaborate on a number of
research-related activities, including the 2008 joint venture
to develop the Bioproducts, Sciences, and Engineering
Laboratory (BSEL). BSEL is a $24 million multi-purpose
facility to support the research and development of the
science and engineering processes for bio-based product
manufacturing, particularly of high-value byproducts from
bio-based energy production processes.
WSU-TC also promotes the connections between students and regional businesses through student
internships, class projects, and collaborative research projects. It supports companies in the
research district with 31 academic programs, and opportunities for internships and collaborative
research.
The District receives funding for job training from the State, which contributes to the district through
the local Workforce Development Council (WDC) that sits on the board and has specific resources
allocated for the TCRD. After the organizational changes implemented in 2007, the TCRD has
started looking towards larger research funding sources. The State Life Sciences Discovery fund
could be a key funding source as a result of the TCRD’s IPZ designation.

Incubator
The Applied Process Engineering Laboratory (APEL) is a 90,000 square foot business incubator,
which was established in 1998. A warehouse structure was remodeled into office space and lab
space at a cost of $6 million. It differs from other business incubators as it accepts companies that
are ready to commercialize on a small scale and/or market their products. It has a 25,000 square
foot "high bay" with 28-to-30-foot ceilings and 35,000 square feet of wet lab space, business
startup bays, and entrepreneurial test spaces available for new business development activities.
APEL was financed by community funds and resources and a matching grant from the DOE Office
of Worker and Community Transition. Energy Northwest, a power supplier to the Northwest region,
owns and operates the APEL facility. APEL is supported and sponsored by major institutions in the
Tri-Cities area, including the Port of Benton, the DOE, Energy Northwest, WSU-TC, Battelle
Memorial Institute and PNNL, the City of Richland, and the TRIDEC. Building space in the incubator
is leased at a subsidized annual rate of $6 per square foot on a triple net basis.
Park Performance
Development Concept Activity
The park operates on a lot purchase or lease, and build-to-suit or multi-tenant structure. Of the
1,600 total acres of the research district, approximately 980 acres are developed. Around 300
acres of the 620 vacant and developable acres remaining are owned by the WSU-TC which has a
separate master-plan for its own expansion. Solaris Group representatives expect to see a
minimum of 1 million square feet of new buildings over the next ten years on the remaining 320
acres, with a potential of 15,000 to 20,000 employees.
In the past two years, there has been an investment of approximately $300 million in TCRD capital
by major landowners and partners, including Battelle Memorial Institute, Solaris Group and the
Port of Benton. Public and Private capital investments and new developments in the research
District within the last two years include:
! $80 million of private sector real estate investment by Solaris Group and other developers.
! $128 million invested in new buildings, including Battelle's new Toxicology Laboratory, the
new BSEL building at WSU-TC, the Washington Closure building and the Dept. of Ecology.
! $224 million invested in PNNL’s 300,000 square foot Physical Sciences Facility.
! $80 million financed by a third party developer for the Biological Sciences Laboratory and
the Computational Sciences Facility, each 74,000 square feet, located in the PNNL campus.
! $6.5 million invested in infrastructure improvements.
Approximately $271 million of investment within the TCRD will be implemented over the next five
years, including:
! Approximately $250 million in new buildings and facilities at PNNL's campus and the Port.
! Several million in new trunk infrastructure development, including the redevelopment of First
Street.
! Approximately $10 million in clean energy sustainable development projects.
! A 35,000 square foot science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) high school,
funded by Battelle, WSU-TC, and local community school districts.
! The Sienna Sky Townhomes project, a 40-unit, four phase project which is scheduled to be
completed in two years.
! Over $2 million for marketing and “place-making”, including parks, streetscape and other
infrastructure improvements.

There are more than 80 companies located in the research district, including private research firms
and foundations such as Battelle, government building and educational institutions, and residential
and commercial development. The TCRD’s anchor tenants are PNNL, Flour Hanford, American
Electric, YAHSGS Environmental Solutions and Tox Predictor.
Land lease rates range from $4,000 to $10,000 per acre, depending on location. Land prices vary
from $50,000 to $60,000 per acre. Office lease rates depend on location and services offered,
and generally range from $15 to $21 per square foot per year triple net.
Lessons Learned
TCRD is a partnership between various public and private organizations and entities, each with its
own goals and objectives. Some important lessons that can be learned from TCRD are:
! Collaboration and shared vision: The recent planning efforts have relied heavily on the
collaboration of diverse stakeholders to create a unified vision for the TCRD as a location for
innovation to achieve myriad objectives of employment, research, revenue generation, and
the advancement of technology. The District’s organizational change and new bylaws, both
made in 2007, emphasized the importance of a shared vision and a common mission for
the district.
! Creation of a uniform master plan: This is seen as a milestone in the Park’s development
and important from a funding perspective, particularly from State and federal sources. The
collective goals that have been developed for the undeveloped core provide for a
programmed implementation strategy that provides targeted funding for specific initiatives.
! Leverage the legacy: PNNL, WSU-TC and many of the companies that are located in TCRD
are closely tied to Hanford’s history.
USC RESEARCH PARK

USC has long sought to have a biotech park around its Health Science campus in the Boyle
Heights community of Los Angeles. Feasibility studies for such endeavor date back to more than 10
years. Only recently did the County begin negotiations with Momentum Biosciences, a private
business advisory group founded by UCLA and CalTech faculty to match promising academic
research with angel or venture investors and provide technical assistance to startups, to establish a
business incubator at the 114,000 square feet now vacant LA County USC Medical Center
building.
The Los Angeles Business Journal reports that the incentives for Momentum include free 10-year
lease for space that could house as many as 10 startups. While there is interest from multiple
partners, individuals and institutions for a biotech hub in Los Angeles, developers may not be
confident enough to propose biotech office and lab projects due to downturn in commercial real
estate markets. This project highlights the susceptibility of research park development to the
prevailing market conditions during conception and take off phases.


Working Paper II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Working Paper II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Working Paper 2

The AECOM team would like to acknowledge the

Data Collection Efforts

• Transit, including streetcar and existing and

• Building footprints; A full list of collected data can be found in Appendix A.

estimated 10-15-minute walk in the future from

• Current and 2014 needs and operations from all

• RTA is planning a major service revision in the

• A copy of the new Loyola Avenue Streetcar plans

• A copy of the Union Passenger Terminals plans

• A copy of the current plans for a Downtown

GNOBEDD TASK 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...................................................................................... 2

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

! Joint venture approach to governance/operation and/or funding

! Technology Enterprise Park, Atlanta, GA

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 2 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

STRATEGIC ELEMENTS FOR GNOBEDD

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 3 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 4 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

! Collaboration and cooperation among all stakeholders

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 5 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

TECHNOLOGY ENTERPRISE PARK, ATLANTA, GA

! Create an environment where biotech companies can grow and be profitable

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 6 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 7 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Operations and Funding: Key Players

Technology Transfer and Innovation Activity

Research funding is primarily driven by venture capital. As

Though the park doesn’t have an incubator onsite, the

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 8 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

CENTER FOR EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, ST. LOUIS, MO

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 9 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Governance and Funding

Operations and Funding: Key Players

The City purchased and

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 10 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 11 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 12 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Governance and Funding

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 13 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 14 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Technology Transfer and Innovation Activity

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 15 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

INNOVATION DEPOT, BIRMINGHAM, AL

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 16 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 17 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Operations and Funding: Key Players

Technology Transfer and Innovation Activity

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 18 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

DELAWARE TECHNOLOGY PARK, NEWARK, DE

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 19 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 20 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

! The University of Delaware – land grant, research presence, government/operation of

Governance and Funding

Operations and Funding: Key Players

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 21 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Technology Transfer and Innovation Activity

Start-up companies are vetted by park operations and

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 22 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

Anchor Tenants and Pricing

Key lessons learned were:

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 23 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010

COLDSTREAM RESEARCH CAMPUS, LEXINGTON, KY

GNOBEDD DISTRICT PLAN 24 DRAFT REPORT – MAY, 2010