Future Land UseFeedback

Success will depend on how well you match the revitalization project with community needs. Ways to assess regional and local needs include the following:

Assessing trends in the local community, or attempting to re-direct regional or local trends is another important consideration in determining reuse. Trends can include property reuse trends; local revitalization pressures to create low-income housing or jobs; land costs; development costs; infrastructure availability; the need for greenspace, retail space, libraries, or schools; or other reuse needs to address community desires and needs. The project coordinator should work closely with city and regional planning offices to understand the political and municipal intent for the region. For example, in the case of the Port of Ridgefield, a small port city on the Columbia River in Washington State, port officials became aware of the plans for an enterprise zone along the federal highway near the city. This fact was utilized in developing the vision for the port as a facility to support the planned long-term revitalization. The project coordinator should review other nearby revitalization projects in comparison with their planned project. Meeting with other developers, city officials, and stakeholders who were involved in other revitalization efforts, can provide valuable information to assist the project coordinator.

Because sustainability of natural systems is not isolated to individual sites, sustainable site development must be considered within local, regional, landscape, and often continental and global contexts. Site revitalization allows land-use decisions to be made that restores the site to fulfill its historic role in: ecosystem productivity and biodiversity; soil quality; hydrology of the watershed including surface flows and groundwater recharge; impacts on air quality; its affect on necessary natural disturbances; and potential ramifications from development to downstream users. Where decisions that affect site revitalization cannot affect broader contexts, negotiations with communities and their legal entities (for example: parks, recreation, division of fish and wildlife, and division of transportation) should be commenced to improve natural systems in their broader contexts.

State and regional planning agencies may be available to assist in a communities revitalization needs. Links to each state agency is available under Internet Links. Regional trends can also include revitalization projects that allow turnover to permit flexibility in the area. This was done at the Belmar site located in Lakewood, Colorado with the placement of “box stores” such as home improvement stores.

EPA's Search Your Community tool allows you to enter your zip code and choose from four databases to retrieve environmental information about your community. In addition, you can explore additional databases to learn more about your community.

Political considerations in the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites include the political realities that may affect the revitalization area. For example, in some cities, requests for zoning changes are channeled through local government representatives. Therefore, plans for revitalization of a site, which alter the basic land use, must be approved by local government officials. Other political considerations may include how the municipality views industrial retention and job creation. In addition, a revitalization property may lie within an Empowerment Zone and Enterprise Community (EZ/EC), a Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district, or a district designated historically significant. It also is important to consider the impact that local governments have over revitalization projects at potentially contaminated sites.

Local governments are in a unique position to consider the revitalization of potentially contaminated sites in the context of the broader plans and needs of the community. Because of that perspective, the local government can act to encourage revitalization projects that fit into those plans. Demolition and rebuilding, even significant remodeling, often involve discretionary permits from local government, and changing the use of a particular property almost always does. A local government also can assist in identifying high priority sections of its jurisdiction and focus efforts to revitalize potentially contaminated sites and to foster other revitalization efforts in those areas.

Community officials should encourage local citizens' participation in the decision-making process, provide them with good and timely information, and seriously consider their views. Local governments can help identify properties with important local historical or architectural value and match with prospective developers.

Local governments can also serve as a link among private companies and community groups, as well as state and federal environmental agencies. Local governments can work with agencies to ensure that they handle regulatory issues promptly and in a way that reflects local concerns. In some cases, local governments may agree to take on liability for remedial action at properties at which the perception of liability is preventing revitalization, quickly removing the primary deterrent to reuse.

The rules and regulations governing how a municipal jurisdiction goes about the business of exercising its discretion are enormously wide and varied, and different states have given their cities (and other political subdivisions) differing degrees of control and autonomy over what decisions can be made and how to make them.

Despite the broad array of rules, certain fundamental truths tend to predominate. Local government is more immediate and accessible than other forms of government. Perhaps for that reason, local decision makers are very sensitive to the views of their constituents. Moreover, county and municipal government is often made up of people whom one might know, people who can be visited without driving or flying to a state (or national) capital. This creates significant opportunities for local project advocates. First – it makes doing the “homework” on a project easier, and then, when the project proponent is ready, it is easier to meet with local officials and their staff to present the case for why the project should be supported. These opportunities should not be ignored, they are critically important in many instances.

Before meeting with the local government representative, do your homework! Find out what history there is to the site. Does it represent anything to the city or its own neighborhood? Who cares about the site? Are there others who support (or would support) the project? Who are they? What is the attitude about local government staff to the site or the proposal? Find out who the stakeholders are, meet with as many of them as you can, and try to form a consensus, wherever possible, for the project. If you can be successful, this results in a force that most local governments respect. At the very least, you will learn who the various stakeholders are and perhaps get insight into addressing their concerns. With local government support, many more things are possible for site revitalization. Local permits are easier to obtain, and state and federal grants and technical assistance can all be more easily accessed when the project has this support.

Local governments can use their own resources to fund portions of revitalization costs. Local governments can often provide information that can be used to locate the owner of a revitalization property who has the potential to provide funds for cleanup. Other types of financial benefits, such as tax incentives and infrastructure subsidies, also can be used to encourage reuse. Local governments can identify and target environmentally sound industries and assist in developing strategies for financing cleanup and informing private-sector parties about state and federal programs to assist in cleanup costs.

The Concerted Action on Brownfield and Economic Regeneration Network (CABERNET) has proposed a model for characterizing different types of sites. The ABC model can assist institutions that are responsible for regional development and investment. Depending on the cost of revitalization and the value of the land, sites can be classified as:

Revitalization should address the broader set of community goals and needs, including residential retention and other efforts to ensure the long-term viability of current communities. Land use planning and zoning decisions should be evaluated with a regional perspective of an entire metropolitan area (EPA, 1996). Many revitalization projects are looking to satisfy a desire for more livable communities with residential, commercial, and recreational facilities. Land use consistent with local ecosystems, regional economic, and social contexts, is a mechanism for implementing designs that enable the built environment to meet current human needs as well as efficiently adapt to change and evolve while leaving cultural and natural legacies valuable to future generations.

Planners and the environmental and public health professions are beginning to recognize the public health impact of poor land use choices. Examples undergoing research include increased air pollution, associated respiratory health impacts and injuries from increased cars and vehicle miles traveled, reductions in physical activity and its contribution to increased obesity, and reductions in social connection and capital contributing to social isolation and depression.

Discussions with local land use planning authorities and the public should be conducted early as part of the community stakeholder process in considering land use for a developed site. Beginning with an informal plan prior to entering into a formal planning process is desirable. The future land use can be considered through local public planning processes, such as zoning hearings, master plans, approvals, or other vehicles. Sources and types of information that may aid in determining the future land use (EPA, no date) include:

Revitalization should not cause a shift of existing commercial and industrial use from one location to a new one within the same or neighboring communities, thereby creating a new contaminated site. Revitalization should be addressed within a regional economic development plan (EPA, 1998).

The Sustainable Land Reuse Resources Exhibit contains resources for regional and local sustainable land reuse consideration:

In order to receive federal funds through the State Wildlife Grants program, Congress charged each state and territory with developing a comprehensive wildlife conservation strategy. Also known as wildlife action plans, these proactive plans will help conserve wildlife and vital natural areas before they become too rare and costly to protect. State-by-State Information is available on state wildlife strategy development activities, including contact information, links, and brief summaries for each state.

Studies have shown that, historically, a disproportionate amount of waste-disposal facilities and industrial factories have been located in neighborhoods of color (Davis, 1997). Revitalization sites tend to be located in close proximity to the neighborhoods and work places of low income and minority populations. The physical environment is connected to the overall social, human, cultural, and spiritual health of a community. Revitalization should recognize this connection to address the broader set of community needs and goals. Communities can receive assistance in addressing environmental justice from EPA Office of Environmental Justice. Some states may also have an environmental justice policy and outreach.

Many people in communities see the revitalization process as a way to rectify past environmental inequities, and thereby promote environmental justice. In the opinion of community members, revitalizing a site to facilitate further industrial use does nothing to rectify past environmental injustices (Davis, 1997). Community members typically desire an environmentally clean land use for a site, which may differ with developer’s interests due to the level of cleanup required. Future land uses that create additional emissions, environmental impacts, or that require less restrictive cleanup standards might be challenged by environmental justice claims.

Key factors to consider include:

Proper land use planning that aims to achieve social justice should also find ways to avoid land-use development of the type that promotes housing segregation, unequal property-tax funding of public schools, jobs-housing imbalance, the spatial imbalance of economic opportunity, and unequal access to open space and recreation (EPA, 1998).

Sustainable revitalization requires not only a concern for the environmental component of an individual project, but also engages the entire range of community values and patterns that may both affect and be affected by the revitalization (EPA, 1998). Sustainable revitalization actively engages a diverse group of individuals or organizations in the community that are interested or affected by the revitalization process.

Sustainable quality of life is described in Characteristics of Sustainable Brownfields Projects (EPA, 1998) as “a more sustainable community recognizes and supports a sense of well-being, a sense of place, a sense of worth, a sense of safety, a sense of connection with nature, and the provision of goods and services which meet their needs both as they define them and as can be accommodated within the ecological integrity of natural systems.” Some specific examples of quality of life aspects include: increased pedestrian access, parks, recreation facilities, and commercial/industrial opportunities.

Economic and ecological resources and processes must be evaluated and balanced with a number of social factors to achieve sustainability. This balance and the form the process will take depend on a number of factors unique to the individual interests, needs, and culture of the community. Quality of life includes education, safety, greenspaces, economic opportunities, and community character. To achieve a sustainable quality of life, a revitalization project should include (EPA, 1998):

Inclusion of these aspects will result in improved work, life, and play environment.

A revitalization project should consider the site’s existing infrastructure. When considering the reuse options for a potentially contaminated site it is important to look at the existing infrastructure such as accessibility, power, sewer capacity, emergency response, and water. A community’s estimated or projected future needs can be compared to the present infrastructure to determine needed modifications or augmentations (including high speed data connections – a must in today's business environment) to encourage revitalization. Sites that were previously prosperous typically have an inherent infrastructure feature, such as waterfront access or transportation hub, that would benefit the site in the future.

Costs for infrastructure improvements are another consideration for revitalization of potentially contaminated sites. It is often difficult to find subsidies to address the potentially inadequate or antiquated infrastructure of urban areas. Local governments in the suburban fringe are more willing to accept extensive subsidies for infrastructure improvements as part of the incentives built into the total revitalization package.

Tax increment financing is a method of financing infrastructure and other public costs of preparing and providing usable lands for development or revitalization. This enables a city to specifically allocate the property tax revenue generated from a new development to the debt incurred as a part of the initial improvements required for that development. Typically, improvements to inadequate or antiquated urban infrastructure are not subsidized, while new infrastructure in rural or fringe areas can be subsidized as part of the total revitalization. The older city structure is assumed to have an infrastructure advantage, but often, the urban infrastructure is not sufficient to accommodate modern construction (lot size, sewer hookups, telecommunications, etc.). Urban areas are often unable to subsidize infrastructure improvements.

University of Louisville Center for Environmental Policy and Management has developed a practice guide, Do You Want Utilities With That? Avoiding the Unintended Economic Consequences of Poorly Planned Growth on the Provision of Water and Sewer Service. The guide considers the economic costs of poorly planned growth on the provision of linear utilities (including electricity, natural gas, telephone, cable and drainage), but focuses on water and sewer service because they are most likely to be key to project approval.

Transportation funds from the State Department of Transportation may be used for remediation that is part of a transportation project. Transportation is an essential element of a revitalization project and needs to be tailored to meet changing land uses and to provide better public amenities. Transportation infrastructure provides access to the revitalization site for jobs and commercial activity. Many revitalization sites are valuable locations for transportation projects as they are often near natural transportation hubs and facilities, such as ports and railroad right of ways (Goode, 1996). These sites can connect and interact with neighboring communities through the use of public and pedestrian walkways.

Energy funds from Federal and State resources are available in the form of grants, tax-incentives, cost-sharing rewards, reduction incentives, and innovative technology awards. Many of the awards are geared towards the development of energy-smart communities. A listing of energy-based resources can be found at the Smart Communities Network.

An integrative analysis and documentation of all infrastructure features is needed and should be the basis for communication with the responsible parties.

Revitalization projects can be sites for historical and architectural preservation, cultural and educational opportunities, as well as economic development and revitalization. Existing historic districts, buildings, places, and objects serve to anchor assets within communities. These assets represent historic themes or architectural designs that foster a sense of permanence within the community and provide continuity from one generation to the next (EPA, 1998).

The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires developers to consider the impact of their actions on historic properties. Documented archaeological finds or sites of historical significance should be identified before acquiring or leasing a site. NHPA is a mandated partnership of Federal agency historic preservation programs, State Historic Preservation Officers, and local government participation.

The preservation and reconstruction of historic buildings, districts, and landscapes affirm the continuity and evolution of urban society. Revitalization projects that include the construction of new buildings or renovation of old buildings as museums and cultural and educational community centers not only promise economic benefits, they also bolster community pride as they celebrate the unique cultures and histories of their communities. Incorporation of cultural hertiage into revitalization often provides an excellent opportunity to formulate a new vision for the site. The National Park Service Historic Buildings and Structure provides information about taking care of historic buildings and structures--from planning and evaluation to preservation and rehabilitation. The National Park Service has identified cultural landscapes as a type of cultural resource, recognizing the importance of considering both built and natural features. The variety of cultural landscapes in the National Park Service system range from carriage roads to battlefields, designed gardens to vernacular homesteads, industrial complexes to summer estates.

University of Louisville Center for Environmental Policy and Management has developed a resource, Brownfields: Historic Preservation as a Redevelopment Option, that explores reasons for historic preservation and funding sources that are available at the federal, state, and local levels for a brownfield and historic preservation revitalization project. Case studies of successful rehabilitation and renovation projects are provided.

Revitalization can be limited by historic designations that are regulated in many communities. To assess the historical character of the site, a developer should determine the effects of past efforts; obstacles; historical, architectural, and archaeological significance; and infrastructure enhancements. If a revitalization project requires infrastructure enhancements, there will be a need to determine if this negatively impacts a historic property.