The role of Brownfields as sites for mixed use development projects in America and Britain.

• Author: Laitos, Jan G.

INTRODUCTION I. BARRIERS TO AND BENEFITS OF BROWNFIELD DEVELOPMENT A. Regulatory, Financial, and Physical Barriers to Brownfield Development B. Challenges to Communities Where Brownfields are Left Undeveloped C. Benefits of Brownfield Redevelopment II. BROWNFIELD DEVELOPMENTS: A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES A. Responses of the Government and Private Sector in the United Kingdom B. United States Response to Brownfields and Their Development III. VARYING SUCCESS IN TWO COUNTRIES WISHING TO CREATE MIXED USE SPACES FROM BROWNFIELD SITES A. Implementation of Brownfield Redevelopment in the United Kingdom B. United States C. Case Studies 1. Atlantic Station in Atlanta, Georgia 2. Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn, New York 3. Gates Redevelopment in Denver, Colorado CONCLUSION INTRODUCTION

Traditional zoning is a form of land use planning that focuses on separating and segregating land according to residential, commercial, industrial, or agricultural uses. Such zoning often divides uses from each other, so that more intense uses are not located next to less intense uses. (1) For example, only residential uses may be allowed in residential districts, both residential and commercial uses may be allowed in commercial districts, and residential, commercial, and industrial uses may be allowed in industrial districts. (2) These exclusionary zoning practices help to avoid the kinds of problems that arise when industrial factories are located beside residential units. However, the segregation of uses created by traditional zoning has brought about ecological concerns, and a belief that those kinds of separated land use patterns are not consistent with resource sustainability and the integration with socio-economic classes. (3)

Sustainable development focuses on the wise use and conservation of resources to fulfill present and future needs. Unfortunately, traditional exclusionary zoning often prevents land from being put to its most efficient use. When local patterns emphasizing a non-integrated, use-separated approach to land development dominate growth management and regional planning programs, resource and energy consumption are accelerated and infrastructure costs are increased. (4) Excluded development and prohibited uses are forced to relocate further from the urban core, resulting in suburban sprawl. (5) Along with sprawl comes environmental harms, increased traffic, more fuel consumption, racial ghettos, and a disconnect between work and home. Low density, automobile-dependent regional sprawl is, in the long run, unsustainable. (6)

In light of a global economic downturn and a shortage of housing, many communities around the world are rethinking the future growth of metropolitan regions. Instead of creating land use regimes that bring about traditional segregated uses and spatially divided development patterns, urban zoning and planning can instead be deployed to promote resource sustainability by permitting and encouraging integrated uses. There is a growing awareness of the importance of coordinated, but diversified, urban planning policy at the metropolitan level. (7) "Mixite," or mixed use development, is a land use planning concept that focuses on creating urban core areas where people are not functionally separated from what they do; rather, these spaces are where the inhabitants can live, work, shop, and play, all without daily use of an automobile.

Urban planning that promotes mixed-use development is one antidote to the ills of traditional zoning. It reduces the spread of scattered development and minimizes automobile dependency. (8) Higher density and functionally mixed urban spaces can be designed to reduce environmental impacts, consume fewer resources and energy, integrate social and economic classes, and provide for more economical and efficient infrastructure and public services, such as public transit. Mixite can accommodate a wide mix of housing types, social uses and amenities, and socio-economic classes.

The implementation of mixite themed planning requires urban space that is largely free of pre-existing uses. Such spaces exist in the form of brownfields, greenfields, greyfields, and red fields. (9) Brownfields seem particularly suited to urban redevelopment. In the United Kingdom, "brownfield" land is generally defined as land that has the potential to be redeveloped, but that has been adversely affected by the prior uses of the land and surrounding land. (10) The land may also be contaminated. (11) These sites are derelict or underused, mainly located in developed urban areas, and require intervention before they can be put to beneficial use. (12) In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency defines brownfields as "abandoned, idled, or under used industrial and commercial sites where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by real or perceived environmental contamination that can add cost, time or uncertainty to a redevelopment project." (13) In both the United Kingdom and the United States, brownfield land is the result of economic factors that discourage development, create an inability to attract investment for redevelopment, and reflect market failure. However, when they are cleaned up, brownfields do supply a "space" where new mixed-use redevelopments can emerge.

Such spaces can also arise when there are greenfields, greyfields, and redfields. "Greenfields" are uncontaminated, rural, or suburban sites that are being considered for development. (14) "Greyfields" generally include moribund shopping centers and vast, empty parking lots. (15) "Redfields" consist of underperforming, financially underwater, and foreclosed commercial real estate, and can include brownfields and greyfields. (16) Although greyfields and redfields supply space, these types of sites can present unique challenges in terms of being suitable locations for urban redevelopment. Greenfields, greyfields, and redfields that are not located in developed urban areas--such as failed subdivisions or vacant retail strips--may be better suited for parks and conservation areas, as opposed to dense urban cores. (17) Mixed-use spaces seem most likely to arise in locations that previously had been considered brownfield sites. (18)

This article will consider how, in both the United Kingdom and the United States, brownfields are increasingly being transformed into sites where much needed, and more sustainable, integrated mixed-uses can emerge. Part I addresses the barriers to and benefits of brownfield development. Part II discusses the differing ways in which the United Kingdom and the United States have responded to the need for brownfield development. Part III analyzes the varying degrees of success each country has experienced in actually creating mixed-use spaces from brownfield sites. The article concludes with three case studies of mixed-use development sites in the United States, where each has experienced differing degrees of success in implementing mixite.

1. BARRIERS TO AND BENEFITS OF BROWNFIELD DEVELOPMENT

   Brownfield development can be economically practical only if the financial benefits of reclamation outweigh the physical and financial costs of preparing the land for reuse. The economic rationale behind the financial feasibility of such development depends on several factors, including governmental regulations imposed on development, which either inhibit or encourage mixite, the overall marketability of the reclaimed site, and the physical characteristics of the land. (19) Each of these factors must be taken into account when assessing the viability of brownfield development for mixed-use. (20)

   1. Regulatory, Financial, and Physical Barriers to Brownfield Development

      Governmental regulations and policies may inadvertently impede brownfield development. (21) Hazardous waste rules and other environmental laws often impose stringent liability and strict clean-up standards on those seeking to transform these otherwise useless sites into mixite locations. (22) Such laws may discourage brownfield development. (23) Planning applications for differing uses can be time consuming, and progress can be further slowed due to a lack of certainty and predictability regarding applicable waste remediation policies and regulations. (24) Time requirements and associated costs for obtaining project consent from government officials can make development less desirable. Receipt of government funding can actually reduce the likelihood of success in some situations by imposing conditions that remove the flexibility of the project's scope or timescale. (25) Additional impediments to development may stem from public opposition, licensing mandates, and legislative requirements. (26)

      Unfavorable market conditions can also affect the feasibility of brownfield development. The cost of buying land at fair market value can cause financial problems, as can a general lack of demand for mixed-use housing or commercial buildings. Preparatory costs may be high for contaminated brownfield sites because the myriad of costs are difficult to assess before development commences; the cleanup and development of these sites may be considered risky investments. In a hostile or down-market environment, the risk of subsequent liability for environmental harms can deter prospective developers. Many site owners may not thereby be able to acquire affordable financing. (27)

      The environmental conditions of brownfield land can significantly affect the financial practicality of development. The history of any particular brownfield may include one primary use, or many prior uses, ranging from being a major industrial site to being a location where there were many local dry cleaning businesses or gas stations. (28) One of the first steps in any brownfield development project is to therefore perform an environmental assessment of the site. (29) This assessment in itself can be expensive, but it is necessary to do in order to...