TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE: SUSTAINABLE REUSE OF SCHOOL OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING RYERSON UNIVERSITY

Transcription

1 TOWARDS A SUSTAINABLE FUTURE: MOVING FROM THE UNDERUSE TO SUSTAINABLE REUSE OF BROWNFIELDS CHRISTOPHER DE SOUSA SCHOOL OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING RYERSON UNIVERSITY CHRIS.DESOUSA@RYERSON.CA

2 OUTLINE Background Policy Evolution Goals & Outcomes Sustainable Brownfields Research Case Study Lessons Observations

3 BACKGROUND Contaminated site a site that exhibits, after suitable testing, soil or groundwater quality that exceeds quality criteria set by the government. Brownfields real property, the expansion, redevelopment, or reuse of which may be complicated by the presence or potential presence of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant (US Brownfields Act 2002)

4 Chicago, Illinois, USA

5 Burlington, Vermont, USA

6 Brantford, Ontario, Canada

7 Gorj County, Romania

8 BACKGROUND Brownfields in the United States Over 400,000 to 1 million brownfields 24,896 sites in 209 cities (USCM 2008) 6% of urban land in brownfield (Simons 1998) Brownfields in Canada 2,000 to 30,000 brownfields 21,000 listed on the Federal Contaminated Sites Inventory, 9,000 sites are listed as closed 3.3% of urban land is brownfield (De Sousa 2004)

9 BROWNFIELDS POLICY EVOLUTION Phase 1 (late 1970s to early 1990s) focus on public health and environmental risk Phase 2 (early 1990s to present) focus on addressing the real and perceived barriers to property redevelopment Phase 3 (early 2000 to present)

10 BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT GOALS Profit, taxes, jobs, contamination ti & blight management + ECONOMY ENVIRONMENT COMMUNITY

11 PROBLEM Redevelopment is done primarily by Developers Development motivations are primarily il economic Brownfield obstacles (and sustainability goals) impose real costs on a Developer s Pro Forma De Sousa, C Brownfield Redevelopment versus Greenfield Development: A Private Sector Perspective on the Costs and Risks Associated with Brownfield Redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(6):

12 SOLUTION Public programs and incentives that make a Pro Forma work Offsets (e.g., technical assistance, process facilitation, rezoning) Direct financing g( (e.g., grants, loans) Tax incentives (e.g., tax credits, deferral of taxes) Policy clarity Facilitation vs. Regulation De Sousa, C Brownfield Redevelopment versus Greenfield Development: A Private Sector Perspective on the Costs and Risks Associated with Brownfield Redevelopment in the Greater Toronto Area. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(6):

13 REDEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES Residential and Commercial Brownfield Redevelopment, Positive Change, Central Toronto, Area m2 Floor Residential Mixed-Commercial Commercial Year De Sousa, C. (2002). Brownfield redevelopment in Toronto: An examination of past trends and future prospects. Land Use Policy, 19 (4):

14 REDEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES De Sousa, C. (2002). Brownfield redevelopment in Toronto: An examination of past trends and future prospects. Land Use Policy, 19 (4):

15 REDEVELOPMENT OUTCOMES BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS ( )($) Milwaukee (n = 45) Mean Median Min Max Redevelopment costs ($) 6,273,013 2,300,000 49,900 34,000,000 Public investment ($) 126,702 47,962 1, ,040 Site area (acres) Minneapolis (n = 58) Redevelopment costs ($) 17,939, ,284, , ,365, Public investment ($) 8,614,854 1,964,722 35, ,813,017 Site area (acres) De Sousa, C., Wu, C. and L. Westphal Assessing the Effect of Publicly Supported Brownfield Redevelopment on Surrounding Property Values. Economic Development Quarterly 23(2):

16 BROWNFIELDS POLICY EVOLUTION Phase 1 (late 1970s to early 1990s) focus on public health and environmental risk Phase 2 (early 1990s to present) focus on addressing the real and perceived barriers to property redevelopment Phase 3 (early 2000 to present) focus on achieving a broader range of economic, social, and environmental outcomes associated with sustainability EG E.G., recent tusi initiativesiti EPA Sustainable Brownfield Pilots 2008 HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities 2009

17 SUSTAINABLE REDEVELOPMENT GOALS ( OUTCOMES?) Profit, taxes, jobs, contamination & blight management + Innovative cleanup Green space and habitat Green infrastructure Resource/waste recovery Multi-transport options Energy efficiency & generation Green building & design Water Efficiency ENVIRONMENT ECONOMY Influences local property values (catalytic effect) Influences local economic activity & income Job training Draws on local enterprises COMMUNITY Public amenities Public health Affordable housing Historical preservation

18 SUSTAINABLE BROWNFIELDS CONSORTIUM RESEARCH PROJECT Research Objectives Investigate site histories Catalogue sustainability features Examine how projects overcame barriers to brownfield reuse and the implementation of sustainability features Derive a series of lessons learned Methods (ongoing) Structured interviews with a coordinator from each Sustainability Pilot case study and 4-6 stakeholders interviews per Best Management Practice case study Comprehensive review of relevant project plans and technical reports

19 CASE STUDIES Industrial Menomonee Valley, Milwaukee WI (BMP) Office Chicago Center for Green Technology (BMP) Heifer International, ti Little Rock (BMP) Montgomery Park, Baltimore MD (BMP) Residential Artspace Commons, Salt Lake City (BMP) Anvil Mountain, CO (Pilot) Samoa Peninsula, Humbolt County, CA (Pilot) Community & Green Spaces Moran Center, Burlington VT (Pilot) Allen Morrison, Lynchburg VA (Pilot) Haynes Recreation Center, Loredo TX (Pilot) New York, Elmhurst Park, Fresh Kills, & the High Line (BMP) Greensgrow, Philadelphia PA (BMP) Corner Gas Stations June Key Delta House, Portland OR (Pilot) Tabor Commons, Portland OR (Pilot) Green Avenue, Greenville, SC (Pilot) Mainstreets Jackson Square, Boston (Pilot) Focus Hope, Detroit (Pilot) Commercial Street District, Springfield MO (Pilot) Mixed-Use & TODs Atlantic Station, Atlanta (BMP) South Waterfront, Portland (BMP) The Waterfront, Allentown PA (Pilot) Langdale & Riverdale Mills, Valley AL (Pilot) Brightfields Brockton Brightfield, Brockton Mass (BMP) Houston Solar, Houston (Pilot) Sustainable Brownfields Consortium, Research Results Page:

20 SUSTAINABILITY FEATURES Environmental Stormwater & Green infrastructure Green space and habitat Green building Solar technology Green roofs Resource recovery Social Public space Recreation Blight removal Sustainability Model/Education Affordable housing Community center Economic Job creation Job training Added real estate value (tax base) Promote & employ local l business Green jobs

21 MOTIVATIONS Primary reason(s) for site selection Interest in location Safety/Community cohesion Part of larger development initiative Vacant land Severe blight Stabilize local market Local demand Primary reason(s) for incorporating sustainability Public & Government Interest Promote change toward sustainable ideas Initiation through another program Regulatory compliance

22 PROJECT PLANNING & IMPLEMENTATION Main Obstacles Financial/Cost Local regulation & permits Technical capacity Communication/ Negotiation Education on sustainability Main Benefits Community development Community unification Model of sustainability Employment Affordability Energy efficiency & alternatives Reutilization of vacant space Increase local population and home ownership

23 A TALE OF THREE CASES Name End Use Developer Size Menomonee o ee Industrial/ Public/ 1400 Valley, Mixed Private acres Milwaukee WI Moran Center, Burlington VT Recreational /Retail Public 2.8 acres Tabor Commons, Community/ Community 0.32 Portland OR Retail nonprofit acres

24 LESSONS LEARNED: VISION Project and Sustainability Vision Extensive community and stakeholder consultation, input, & empowerment Extensive market & property research Funding required to generate a sustainable vision

25 EXAMPLE: MORAN CONSULTATION PROCESS

26 EXAMPLE: MORAN CONSULTATION PROCESS Ideas Matter: Planning for the Future Use of Moran Generating Plant (2005) Site tours Phase I: Idea Cards (2005) Phase II: Idea Technical Review Committee (Oct. 2005) Phase III: Survey and Public Forums (Dec. 2005) Phase IV: Voting (March 2006 Ballot) Phase V: Concept Drawings (Sept. 2006) Final Phase: Moran Advisory Ballot (Mar. 2008)

27 LESSONS LEARNED: IMPLEMENTATION Leadership Facilitate and support project champions and public-private partnerships

28 LESSONS LEARNED: IMPLEMENTATION Site Acquisition, Planning, & Preparation Assessment and Cleanup Master Planning Coordinated Infrastructure

29 EXAMPLE: MENOMONEE VALLEY AREA-WIDE PROCESS

30 LESSONS LEARNED: DEVELOPMENT & PROGRAMMING Sustainable Project Development Programming and Operations

31 EXAMPLE: FROM BOTTOM FEEDER TO CAFÉ AU PLAY AT TABOR

32 OBSERVATIONS, CONCLUSIONS, & LESSONS Growing interest in trying out sustainability, particularly among city governments and nonprofits More funding is required for both brownfields and sustainability Technical assistance is a useful tool for advancing and implementing sustainability, but it is not cheap Over reliance on sustainability champions Surprisingly limited knowledge about real estate and economic development fundamentals among public & nonprofit champions Need to enhance incentives/disincentives if we want to get the private sector to moving towards sustainability Need a better understanding of the benefits of sustainability

33 Thank You Case study work was performed under a subcontract with the University of Illinois at Case study work was performed under a subcontract with the University of Illinois at Chicago and made possible by grant number TR from U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (Its contents are solely the responsibility of the author and do not necessarily represent the official views of the University of Illinois)