Is Mass Timber the Future of Commercial Buildings? with Justin Den Herder – RFP 85 Transcript
Gordon Lamphere (00:04): Hi, I’m Gordon Lamphere with The Real Finds Podcast, where we have real conversations with key entrepreneurs, activists, and researchers who are shaping the real estate industry and, as a result, our world. On today’s podcast, we’ll be speaking with Justin Den Herder. Justin is a professor at the Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art and a principal at TYLin, a global engineering leader. On the podcast, we take a deep dive into mass timber, its commercial real estate applications, and its growing economic viability for larger projects. If you’re a developer, an investor, or looking for an alternative to traditional construction, today’s episode is a must-listen. Justin, thank you so much for hopping on the podcast today.
Justin Den Herder (00:55): Thank you so much for the invitation, Gordon. I’m glad to spend time with you.
From Heavy Timber to Mass Timber
Gordon Lamphere (01:00): I wanted to start by asking what got you into the world of timber and real estate.
Justin Den Herder (01:10): I work as a structural engineer, and we’ve worked on many different forms of buildings with all manner of common construction materials. Some of those old buildings were constructed of heavy timber. For example, we converted a heavy timber and masonry building into a commercial real estate venture, where we added stories on top, cut openings in walls, and modified the floor plate. I was really enamored with that experience, which differed from my experience designing new buildings.
Over time, I began to learn about this emerging technology of mass timber, which to some degree has been around for quite some time but is gaining more traction as new mass timber elements come to market. I began partly out of curiosity, but partly out of a sense of purpose, and that was quite intentional. The way we’ve been designing and constructing buildings, and the materials we use, contribute pretty significantly in terms of energy and what we call embodied carbon, which contributes substantially to climate change. The data will tell you that forty percent of human-generated carbon emissions come from the built environment, and mass timber plays a key role there, which I’m sure we can touch on. In summary, it’s a low-energy, low-carbon building material that is also a renewable resource. We can grow more trees. We can’t easily grow more iron ore at the moment.
Why Mass Timber Works Structurally
Gordon Lamphere (03:27): I grew up in my grandfather’s wood shop, so I’ve seen a lot of wood in my day. I’m also a fourth-generation developer and broker, and I rarely see significant amounts of wood on the average construction site. What makes mass timber structurally competitive when we’re talking about multistory buildings?
Justin Den Herder (03:56): I’m sure you have fond memories of being in that workshop, the smell and the feel of the place. I think that’s part of the appeal of mass timber buildings: the look and the smell. There are many studies of the benefits to human mental and physical health of being in a space like that.
In terms of timber as a structural material, part of it is those experiential qualities and health benefits, but timber is also one of the oldest construction materials humans have used. There’s a bit of a misconception that timber can’t be durable, but in fact some of the oldest human-made structures in the world are timber structures that have stood for hundreds, even thousands, of years, especially in Asia, even in high seismic zones. Part of why wood is so durable is its relative lightness, its lower density and mass compared to other building materials, and its strength-to-weight ratio as a function of that light weight. Timber beams do a pretty good job of spanning and supporting loads as beams or floor systems. And you see some pretty monumental trees in nature, so it also works really well under axial loads, as columns.
The evolution in timber construction is that we can now combine small wood components, two-by-fours, one-by-threes, two-by-threes. We can glue them together with high-strength adhesives and press them in a hydraulic press, and the end result is stronger than all the individual components. This allows for
Justin Den Herder (06:17): longer spans, column-free spaces, and taller timber buildings than we’ve ever been able to build. That’s important because the predecessor to mass timber was essentially heavy timber, which is just large-format wood components cut from very large, old-growth trees. We now understand how important it is to save those old-growth trees, for many different reasons. So the fact that we can build larger buildings, span farther, hold more load, and create really unique spaces with small-format wood through this technology is what’s spurring the mass timber revolution.
The Sustainability Case: Embodied Carbon
Gordon Lamphere (07:16): I think much of the revolution has been spurred, and correct me if I’m wrong, by viewing it as a more sustainable resource. How has that played out, and what really are the sustainability benefits of using mass timber?
Justin Den Herder (07:38): That’s an excellent question. I think you’re right that sustainability is a catalyst for the expansion of mass timber, and it’s happening at a pretty pivotal moment. It is a sustainable material relative to structural steel or cast-in-place concrete, and the reason is what we call embodied carbon. It reflects the embodied energy and the amount of carbon emitted to extract the material, fabricate it, transport it, install it, and so on, across the whole building life cycle. That sum total of energy and carbon is what we call the embodied carbon of a building structure, or of any material.
Structural steel and concrete take an enormous amount of energy to produce, and as a result emit an enormous amount of carbon. That’s largely because the extraction process is intensive. You’re taking these materials from the earth in an energy-intensive way, and then you need to melt them down at extremely high temperatures, which takes a lot of energy.
Juxtapose that with mass timber, which does take energy. You harvest wood from a forest, bring it to a fabrication plant, and create a piece of mass timber, and you typically need to kiln dry the wood. The difference is that it can be dried at much lower temperatures than it takes to melt iron ore into steel or to create cement, both of which are very energy intensive. And the last component, which I already touched on, is that we can easily regrow trees within our lifetime. If we design a mass timber building, we can calculate the volume of wood in it, equate that to a number of trees, and in theory plant
Justin Den Herder (10:04): that same number of trees. In 80 years or so, we can have regrown the material that went into that building. That’s really why it’s so important to think about the reciprocity between what we build as humans and what exists in nature, to set ourselves up for multigenerational success and multigenerational resources.
The Economics and the “Cost Premium”
Gordon Lamphere (10:32): My wife grew up in timber country, and I think a lot of people don’t understand how timber can be grown and harvested as a viable economic resource, and actually as a form of decarbonization. But ultimately, decarbonization is great, and the primary driver of most economic activity is economics. So what are the economics, and the investor demand, for mass timber, particularly for larger buildings?
Justin Den Herder (11:16): I want to preface this by acknowledging that I’m a structural engineer. I review cost estimates and help make the case for mass timber, but there are many people involved, from foresters to mass timber producers to construction workers to insurance folks, and all of them play a key role in establishing what it costs to create a mass timber building.
What I will say, from my experience, is that it’s important to acknowledge that in North America we’re at the threshold of building more mass timber buildings. As a result, there are things we need to raise awareness about and things we need to learn. To use a weightlifting analogy, we collectively need more reps, so we better understand the material and how to design and construct with it. I’ve had many projects with sustainability goals express interest in mass timber, and then mass timber fell by the wayside as a viable option because of economics early in the process. That’s unfortunate, but the reality is that there’s still a lack of familiarity with different components of mass timber buildings, and there are restrictions within building codes, for example.
So there’s a lot we need to learn. Personally, I don’t feel there’s a cost premium for the material itself. I think over time, as we get more experience, it will become more and more economically viable, and mass timber will be pushed to the fore, potentially in just a few years. Things move quickly here in the United States.
Justin Den Herder (13:43): I think the cost premium is predominantly due to a lack of familiarity and limited options. As more mass timber suppliers and fabricators come onto the scene, and as building codes recognize that this is truly a viable material for buildings from zero to eighteen stories, and potentially even taller, we’ll see it proliferate more, and I think the market will work out the so-called cost premium.
Moisture and Fire: The Two Things to Get Right
Gordon Lamphere (14:24): You mentioned unfamiliarity as a driver. Can you dive into that a little more?
Justin Den Herder (14:32): Yes. When I use the term unfamiliarity, it may sound contradictory to what I said earlier, that humans have designed with timber for hundreds, if not thousands, of years. The difference is in the makeup of the material itself. Unfamiliarity in this case has to do with code restrictions and limitations, and making sure the building is safe from a fire protection standpoint and a moisture protection standpoint.
Because there are adhesives in most mass timber components, not all, but many, you need to monitor moisture content very closely, from the moment of fabrication through the point when the building is enclosed. If moisture content isn’t monitored and kept within a certain range, it can create issues like mold or staining. In extreme cases, it can affect the strength and stiffness properties of the wood. That said, wood is quite adaptable to moisture. If it’s properly maintained from fabrication through construction, it can dry out quickly and be one of the most durable materials on the planet.
From a fire protection standpoint, we shouldn’t shy away from it. Wood is a combustible material. We should embrace that fact and understand how to deal with it. What’s great about wood is that there’s a lot of testing and data on how it performs in a fire, and it behaves in an extremely predictable manner. Say we know by code that a certain type of commercial building
Justin Den Herder (16:58): has to have a one-hour fire rating. That means if there’s a fire of a certain magnitude, the building needs to stay standing and stable for one hour, to give people enough time to get out safely. If we know the species of the wood, we can use tried-and-tested equations to determine how much larger a member needs to be, in terms of wood volume, to achieve that one-hour rating.
What’s so remarkable about wood is that it has its own fire protection mechanism built in: charring. If you’ve ever thrown a log on a campfire or into your fireplace, you’ve seen the blackened blanket that forms when wood is exposed to fire. That char acts as a protective blanket that preserves the inner portion of the wood. That’s why you have to poke at the fire and scrape off some of the char so the fire can keep going. There’s a lot of science and codified methods for planning around that to make sure the building is safe.
So moisture and fire protection are two key elements that absolutely need focus, and you need experts at all stages. Structural engineers, architects, fabricators, and construction workers all need to understand the process and collaborate on how to handle it for a given project.
Where Codes and Forests Line Up
Gordon Lamphere (18:50): You also mentioned the regulatory code earlier. Beyond fire protection, where are the problems occurring in the code? Are some places in the country more open to mass timber than others, and how is that playing out?
Justin Den Herder (19:12): I’ll preface this by saying Europe is ahead of us. They’ve been designing mass timber buildings for longer, and there are many great precedents built there. They’re probably a decade ahead of us.
Within the United States, it’s interesting: you mentioned your wife is from timber country. If you look at a map of forests in the United States, it tells you a story about where mass timber buildings are more likely to be found. The Pacific Northwest has many amazing forests, many of them Douglas fir and other softwoods that are ideal for mass timber components. So naturally, British Columbia, Washington State, Oregon, and the Pacific Northwest are leading the way in the design and construction of mass timber buildings. We’re seeing more and more in Michigan and Wisconsin. Milwaukee has the tallest mass timber building in North America, if not the world. And we’re seeing it expand more and more into the Northeast. So there’s a direct correlation with where the forests are, which makes sense, because there’s economic incentive and opportunity to take wood from the forest next door and put it in buildings.
Now, how that correlates with building codes: at a very high level, codes in the Pacific Northwest have been at the forefront of embracing mass timber and pushing what’s possible. They’ve been something of an incubator, paving the way and showing the rest of the country. New York City, where I’m based,
Justin Den Herder (21:36): is quite a unique scenario. It’s a very dense urban environment, and we face different challenges in adopting mass timber buildings as a result. So many jurisdictions in the Northeast, New York City included, have been slower to adopt mass timber, but adoption is happening.
Most city building codes are based on the International Building Code, the IBC, and the latest version of the IBC allows mass timber buildings up to 18 stories. Projects like the Ascent in Milwaukee, the tallest mass timber building, take a different approach. The local building department and officials say, “If you show us the data and the analysis and prove it out, we’ll approve it on the basis of empirical testing and rigorous structural analysis, and we’ll allow you to go above and beyond the code, because we want to be early adopters of this new technology.” So there’s quite a range, but there’s a direct correlation with where the forests and timber fabricators are.
Case Studies, From T3 to Amherst College
Gordon Lamphere (23:04): Let’s talk about where mass timber has been successfully deployed. What do you think are some of the best case studies of successful projects, from both a structural and an economic view?
Justin Den Herder (23:25): Since we’re talking about commercial real estate, I’d say Hines has created some really beautiful mass timber buildings and was a pioneer in that sense. Their T3 building in Minneapolis was a very early adopter of mass timber in a commercial setting, so that’s a very important precedent. In the Pacific Northwest, there’s a project called Brock Commons, a residence hall, which was the first mass timber project in North America to really push the limits on height, at 18 stories. I don’t recall exactly when it was built. I want to say 2017 or 2018, something like that. So those are two examples, and we’ve touched on Ascent in Milwaukee, again pushing the boundaries on height.
I’m passionate about bringing these opportunities to the Northeast, which is primarily where I practice. I’ve been working on a really intriguing project with the architects Herzog & de Meuron and Sasaki at Amherst College. There’s also a great example of a mass timber project in the Northeast at UMass Amherst, the Olver Design Building, completed around 2018. It was the first new mass timber building I was exposed to and really intrigued by in our backyard, so to speak. A beautiful project. Leers Weinzapfel was the architect.
Years later, we had the fortunate opportunity, with Herzog & de Meuron and Sasaki, to design a mass timber building for Amherst College, right down the road from UMass Amherst. We were going to design a new-construction mass timber student center and dining hall
Justin Den Herder (25:51): for Amherst College, as part of their newly rolled-out sustainability campus master plan. Given our experience with adaptive reuse projects and reusing existing buildings, we actually guided the team during concept design. We said, “We’ve worked out 70 different beautiful mass timber concepts with Herzog & de Meuron, all of which would be world-class buildings. But even though it’s mass timber, it’s still not as sustainable as reusing the existing building that’s already on the site proposed for this new student center.”
So we guided the team and said, based on our experience adding stories to existing buildings, we think we can take this new mass timber building and put it on top of the existing one. You’ll increase your square footage, lower your embodied carbon by saving what’s there, and save some new materials. And to our surprise, we weren’t kicked out of the room. The idea was embraced. There are a lot of challenges with doing that, so we don’t make the suggestion lightly. It was only because of our experience that we felt confident doing so.
So we moved forward with this approach. The existing building on the site was a massive cast-in-place concrete structure, some elements post-tensioned concrete and some conventionally reinforced. It was built in 1967, I believe, an old science lab building. We said this structure must have some additional capacity. How can we quickly evaluate it and determine its capability to support additional stories in mass timber? That’s what we went with.
Justin Den Herder (28:09): Why mass timber in that scenario? Because it’s lighter. We could potentially add another story or span farther with the vertical extension, and minimize the amount of reinforcement, and the cost and complexity that come with reinforcing the existing structure below.
So I’ve talked about some new-construction mass timber precedents, but personally, I’m really excited about mass timber’s ability to enhance existing buildings and facilitate adaptive reuse. Imagine old industrial buildings converted into commercial real estate, enhanced by adding or inserting mass timber within, on top of, or alongside them, creating a really unique space that respects the history of the building’s life cycle and its different uses over time. That Amherst College student center has now topped out, and they’re enclosing the building. We’re really excited for it to open, and hopefully it’ll be part of a paradigm shift in how mass timber can be beneficial, not just in new construction as part of decarbonization, but in helping us revitalize existing building stock.
Mass Timber in Commercial Space
Gordon Lamphere (29:39): Beyond revitalizing existing building stock and adaptive reuse, what do you see as the broader implications of mass timber in the commercial setting?
Justin Den Herder (29:56): Think about commercial real estate in the form of office space, for example. There are many studies on the mental and physical health benefits of being in a biophilic space with natural textures expressed and exposed. From an office standpoint, think about what those mental health benefits mean for your employees’ creativity and productivity. This is measurable, and there are studies showing benefits for creativity and employee retention from having mass timber in the space. Extend that to educational facilities, preschools, elementary schools, whatever the case. People want to be in a beautiful, calming interior.
And because mass timber provides that benefit, you don’t have to hang a ceiling or clad the walls and columns. You leave the structure exposed. Think about tenant fit-outs and all the costs that come with tearing down partition walls, sending them to the landfill, building new drywall partitions, and replacing floor and ceiling finishes every time a tenant moves in or out. I think there could be really beneficial long-term savings from having the timber expressed and exposed in the space. That’s probably just the tip of the iceberg, Gordon, but those are some of the immediate benefits that come to mind.
What Developers Get Wrong
Gordon Lamphere (31:57): Beyond the benefits and issues we’ve discussed, what do you think the average developer or investor gets most wrong about mass timber?
Justin Den Herder (32:10): For my part, on the design side, I think we need to raise awareness and work with our clients to educate them and debunk myths and misconceptions. I touched on fire safety. I still think there’s a common misconception among developers, insurance providers, and people assessing risk that because it’s wood, you’re building a tinderbox. By virtue of its massiveness, mass timber behaves very differently in a fire than, say, stick-built, balloon-framed wood construction, which will go up in flames like a tinderbox. That’s why we have to encase it in drywall and protect it. So fire protection is one thing we need to keep educating people about and raising awareness around.
I also think the cost premium is part of it. I recognize there are cost premiums where we are right now, and again, I think that’s our collective lack of experience and lack of built examples. Here, if I can, I’ll touch on the importance of public projects and public architecture. In most jurisdictions, it’s very challenging to build a building for a public agency on time and on budget. The process can be very bureaucratic and challenging, and I think that’s a fact in many places. But here in New York City, I have the privilege of having completed design on three mass timber projects that we hope will go into construction within the upcoming year. I think having public architecture where all people
Justin Den Herder (34:36): can go experience, smell, touch, and see how beautiful these buildings are will be a catalyst for the private sector. If the public sector can do it, the private sector certainly can. And I tell the public sector: the private sector is doing all of this, getting projects built on time and on budget, so you need to consider how the private sector operates efficiently to get things done. But vice versa, if a few public projects really stick their necks out to embrace this new technology in works of civic architecture, I think that’s a benefit the public sector can bring to the private sector. I really hope it becomes part of the catalyst for the private sector to be more open-minded about adopting mass timber.
The Final Four
Gordon Lamphere (35:35): We’ve had a great conversation so far, and one of the things we always like to do to wrap up is go into our Final Four. One of my favorite questions is: where do you see commercial real estate and commercial architecture going ten years from now?
Justin Den Herder (35:59): There’s where it will go, and where I hope it will go. Those might be two slightly different things, but I hope they line up. So I’ll talk about what I hope, in hopes of helping conjure up that future.
I hope we’ll see more mass timber buildings as people align the economic opportunities with this beautiful, very exciting material, and that the market value will catch up, making it easier to make the case that more commercial real estate should be mass timber. That can be the push from the private sector: mass timber being part of every conversation as a viable building material for almost every project.
On the public side, I’d love to see, and I don’t mean this in any punitive way, a better understanding of the data on how much energy and carbon goes into our buildings, so we can make more informed decisions as individuals, design teams, real estate developers, and city agencies. At every level, we need the data to understand how we’re doing. We’ve done a remarkable job over the past decade on operational carbon. Our buildings have become extremely energy efficient, and regulations have caught up and are holding people accountable to really high energy efficiency standards. We need to mirror that, but now the focus needs to be on the embodied energy and embodied carbon in our building materials. So I think within the next decade we’ll see
Justin Den Herder (38:19): similar tracking mechanisms and policy, and also market opportunities around understanding a portfolio’s embodied carbon and embodied energy. I hope that leads to more opportunity.
Gordon Lamphere (38:38): One way we like to find more opportunity is by improving ourselves, and we have a lot of younger listeners. Justin, if you could look back at yourself in your early twenties and give yourself one bit of advice, what would it be?
Justin Den Herder (38:58): I love this question. I try to build in some level of reflection at different timescales. Daily: what was the best thing I did today, and what did I dread having to do? I think about it weekly, I try to make it a habit, and of course I think about it annually. So you asking over the span of a decade, well, almost two decades now that I’ve been an engineer, I’m not as young as I once was, is a really wonderful question.
I have two parts to my answer. First, consider the why, not just the how. In my engineering education and early career, it was about becoming technically excellent, knowing my stuff inside and out for every building material and every type of building design that came across my desk. That’s the right thing to do early in one’s career, and it was the right thing for me too. But I never thought about the why. What are the buildings I’m helping create? Who are they serving? What are they for? To what end? Should I be working on this? Just because we can create an incredible analysis model or rendering of a project doesn’t necessarily mean it should be built, or built that way. We need to think about the implications for the natural environment and for the local community where we’re building, making sure the building is in the right context and serves the community as much as it can, and also where the materials are sourced from and how that affects the people in that place. Thinking about the why
Justin Den Herder (41:22): is a big part of where I am now, and I wish I’d been thinking about it earlier in my career. And the second part, Gordon, and sorry for the long answer,
Gordon Lamphere (41:35): Totally fine.
Justin Den Herder: is to embrace my non-engineering passions. If you have young commercial real estate developers out there, think about the things that make you unique: your passions and hobbies. They’re not separate from you as a developer. Over the course of my own career, I’ve loved reading and writing and poetry, and I love trees. Beginning to think about how structural engineering, poetry, and trees are interrelated, rather than separate, compartmentalized parts of who I am, has actually been a catalyst for my career, because it’s helped me focus my energy. This is what I want to do: I want to work on mass timber buildings that support healthy forests, and do it in a way that’s poetic, creating elegant, efficient, equitable buildings with a wonderful reciprocity with the natural environment.
I jokingly use the term “uniqueness” with my team, but I replace the “u” with “you.” What is your uniqueness? What makes you distinctly you, and how can you infuse that into your occupation? I wish I’d thought about that eighteen years ago.
Gordon Lamphere (43:14): I think that’s lovely. I’ll say definitively that around here we’ve really worked hard at it. Economic empowerment and community revitalization are so near and dear to my heart, and we always try to find our why, which is to make our community better. If you don’t focus on that and only focus on your own economic bottom line, this can be a very bleak industry. So I couldn’t agree more. One way we try to find, maybe not necessarily deeper meaning, but at least deeper wisdom, is through books. Is there a book we should be picking up anytime soon?
Justin Den Herder (44:08): I’ll answer this quickly in three parts. First, from a forest standpoint, there are two books, of many, that have had a profound impact on me. Most recently, there’s Designing the Forest and Other Mass Timber Futures by Lindsey Wikstrom, whose architecture firm, Mattaforma, does a lot of beautiful work around mass timber as a system. It changed my perspective, because it helped me think holistically about the forest and the mass timber building not as separate entities, but as interconnected ones. That was reinforced even further by How to Love a Forest by Ethan Tapper, a forester in Vermont. I think it’s a very beautifully written book, but it doesn’t pull punches about how we need to roll up our sleeves and engage in forest management, and how that can benefit a built environment of wood. That’s my forestry-related component.
Then, for the pure structural engineering part of me: Peter Rice is one of the best-known structural engineers of modern history, and his autobiography, An Engineer Imagines, is just really beautiful.
And the last component is the poetry side. I love the poet W.S. Merwin for who he was as a person, including as a steward of a palm forest in Hawaii that he grew, not single-handedly, but together with his wife. That of course had a profound impact on his poetry. I say that because for me, poetry is a way of being attentive to the world and paying deep attention to the materials we use.
Justin Den Herder (46:28): In poetry, the materials are our language and our words. When you write a poem successfully, and there are many different forms of poetry out there, but in a good poem, every word is placed with intentionality. That’s how I want to consider the beams and columns in my buildings. They’re there for a purpose, designed efficiently, elegantly, and safely, of course, and every component is put there with thought, care, intentionality, and collaboration. So the poetry of W.S. Merwin has had a big impact on me too.
Gordon Lamphere (47:14): Those are all great examples of books we should pick up. But collaboration is the whole point of the podcast. I started it primarily as a way to learn more about the industry, and it’s grown into a wonderful community. So who should be the next member of the community to hop on the podcast?
Justin Den Herder (47:45): I’ll answer from the mass timber side, in hopes that I’ve sparked some interest and intrigue around it. I’ll give three names. Michael Green, who has his own firm, Michael Green Architecture, has been and is a pioneer of mass timber in buildings. He has a few TED talks on the topic, and I’ve gotten to know Michael pretty well over the last couple of years. He’d be an amazing person to interview.
In the Midwest, since I understand that’s your neck of the woods, Gordon, Sandra Lupien from Michigan State University has done incredible work trying to create a mass timber ecosystem on behalf of the state of Michigan and Michigan State University. And in the Pacific Northwest, Erica Spiritos is a mass timber expert with her own consultancy who advises projects on mass timber, and she’s very eloquent in speaking about it. I think those would be three great people to talk to if you and your listeners are intrigued to hear more about mass timber.
Gordon Lamphere (49:18): We’ll have to reach out. But if somebody wants to reach out to you, what’s the best way to get in contact?
Justin Den Herder (49:24): I’m not on social media, save for LinkedIn. You can reach out to me on LinkedIn, Justin Den Herder, or feel free to email me at [email protected]. I’d love to continue the conversation with some of your listeners,
Gordon Lamphere (49:31): That sounds very helpful.
Justin Den Herder (49:53): tell you more about what we’re up to here, and hopefully have opportunities to collaborate and share further.
Gordon Lamphere (50:01): Justin, thank you so much for hopping on the podcast, and we’ll have to have you on in the future.
Justin Den Herder (50:06): Thank you, Gordon. Really appreciate it.
Gordon Lamphere (50:08): Thanks again to Justin. We appreciate his insights. If you enjoyed the podcast, please give us a like, a five-star rating, and a review. Your comments, interactions, and subscriptions truly matter and help us continue to bring on quality guests. You can find us on YouTube, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. I’m Gordon Lamphere with The Real Finds Podcast. Thank you for listening.
Van Vlissingen and Co. has been the Midwest’s oldest commercial real estate brokerage, development, and management firm since 1879, and today is independently ranked the #1 commercial real estate agency in Chicagoland, home to the #1 independently ranked agent, Gordon Lamphere, and the region’s #1 ranked commercial property management team. If you own, manage, or invest in energy-adjacent, mixed-use, or transit-oriented property across Lake County, the North Shore, the Northwest and O’Hare corridors, DuPage and the I-88 corridor, Will County, or southern Wisconsin’s Pleasant Prairie, Kenosha, and Racine markets, contact Van Vlissingen and Co. at 📞 847-634-2300 or 🌐 vvco.com. For a market-wide view of where these dynamics sit today, see our State of the Chicagoland Commercial Real Estate Market for Q3 2026.