Future Land UseFeedback

Defining the keys to success for a revitalization project in the early stages of the process can be very helpful. Defining such keys to success provides information to the developer on essential stakeholder involvement, barriers that need to be addressed, and the schedule and timing required to overcome the obstacles. Site-specific keys to success often can be listed on one page and developed together by the developer and the various stakeholders. This provides a higher level of certainty that all potential “deal-breakers” are identified early on and that a plan for addressing the keys to success can be developed. Example issues include:

Project teams implement a variety of strategies to expedite projects. From an economic standpoint, for example, the reuse strategy can help offset typically higher revitalization costs of contaminated properties. Higher costs require greater cash flow to match a typical return on investment in the real estate industry. In general, private developers expect that revitalized contaminated properties will be able to generate a return commensurate with the additional risk associated with on site contaminants that may have migrated beyond the site. One approach to producing greater returns is higher-density revitalization. In some cases, though, lower-density projects are implemented where a lower rate of return is acceptable or where public subsidies are available.

In the case of private development, regardless of whether a project involves a low or high density reuse, the economic feasibility of most projects ultimately will depend upon the ability of the private developer to predict the market and meet market demand. Equally important is the ability of the private developer to devise a reuse strategy that takes advantage of a market opportunity. In that sense, the revitalization of contaminated or potentially contaminated sites is no different from any other development project. If the private developer does not have the ability to accurately gauge market demand for the proposed reuse, it is less likely that the project will proceed. Conversely, if the developer is able to conceive a viable reuse for the site, and assuming that environmental and other development costs are not excessive, the project is likely to proceed. The exception is the public revitalization project. Such projects are typically designed to improve the quality of the local environment for the community directly or to make the community more attractive for further development. This paragraph deals with private developer issues, but not all projects are privately developed.

The revitalization team may choose to develop sites incrementally or in phases. By doing so, they are able to proceed with a project that otherwise would not have been economically viable, sometimes using income generated from initial stages (for example, cleaning up a portion of the sites where minimal contamination is present) to help finance later site cleanup and development. Regulatory agency buy-in may be required to allow for incremental development of the site as less-contaminated portions are developed. Some agencies may see the entire site as “contaminated” - fenceline to fenceline - if they do not buy-in to the revitalization vision – hence they should be brought in early as previously described in this document. The completion of phases of the revitalization should be coordinated with regulatory agencies and the technical contractors to ensure it does not interfere with the cleanup of the remaining areas on site. In many cases, interim use is helpful to demonstrate the viability of the reuse vision, generate income to support further revitalization of the site, and avoid sites sitting idle during delays. Temporary uses may include craft markets or festival space. However, risk issues apply to interim use as well as end use. Problems have occurred where interim leasing (before final remediation) did not allow for adequate access for remediation and/or characterization activities.

Project teams may expedite projects by employing marketing strategies designed to enhance the demand and reduce any negative impact of stigma resulting from potential (or actual) contamination. For example, the team could attract a high-profile public use to a portion of the site (such as government or other public use building) by donating the property for such a purpose, and, in doing so provide a solid anchor for proposed residential revitalization elsewhere on the site. Interim land use controls (land use restrictions prohibiting sensitive uses such as residential, day care, or schools) may need to be adjusted to allow segments of the site to be developed. Stakeholders may consider it more practical to allow for the least intrusive development (industrial/commercial) to take place first since immediate residential reuse brings about the potential for exposure to contaminants during cleanup activities from other parts of the site.

National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals (NALGEP) and the Northeast-Midwest Institute recently released “Unlocking Brownfields: Keys to Community Revitalization.” This report represents the culmination of a decade of research and experience focused on brownfields reuse. It includes more than 50 profiles of successful brownfields projects and programs, five critical brownfields messages which document the evolution of brownfields success in America, and the "10 Keys to Brownfields Revitalization." To order a copy of this report, please email NALGEP or call NALGEP at 202-638-6254.

The International City/County Management Association (ICMA) has developed a resource regarding methods to track success in revitalization. The document, entitled Measuring Success in Brownfields Redevelopment Programs,examines the challenges and opportunities of applying performance measurement mechanisms to revitalization and the local government programs that oversee the process. In addition to an overview of the topic and examples of quantitative and qualitative measures, the report discusses the need to integrate both types of measures to describe the incremental successes of projects that can take many years to complete.

The Northeast-Midwest Institute is a nonprofit research and educational organization that works to enhance economic competitiveness and environmental quality. The institutes's Urban Environment Program addresses the dual challenges of redeveloping the urban core while improving the built and natural environment in metropolitan regions. The Institute has published many reports on all aspects of brownfields, including nearly 100 case studies of successful brownfield cleanup and redevelopment, examining projects in cities around the country.

Brownfield Success Stories are available from the United States Conference of Mayors.