Critically examine the impacts of government regulation, land ownership and developer behavior on urban brownfield development processes.
Brownfield Urban development has been introduced around the globe as being the response to unsustainability and urban sprawl problems that have developed in the newer generation due to deindustrialisation. Brownfield was further pressed as a solution in the in the 1990’s and has since been fine-tuned by policies and plans around the world. The definition ranges from the opposite of Greenfield being basically pre-developed land to unusable contaminated land that has the potential to be reused after clean up. For the sake of the essay we shall use previously developed land, which encompassed contaminated land. Although policy aimed to combat the previous problems that arose from Greenfield development such as car dependent cities, unused inner city areas and general unsustainability, further problems arose from the unacceptability of such complex development. Government policies and Developer behavior tended to lack commitment and fell short of expected performance while ownership constraints caused significant down time within the development process, as explored within this paper.
Government Policy and Regulation is basically where the Brownfield development process begins, with a far more complex process apparent in Brownfield Development in comparison to Greenfield. Government has to look towards policy to further entice developers and promote a greater need for sustainable communities and energy efficiency from the US to the UK. The continuation of Greenfield sites mean increasingly under-utilised space in the inner city and urban sprawl, making the communities worse off in the long run. T...
... middle of paper ...
...er their skill base to brownfield development without any kind of significant adjustment. Because of this the processes isn’t being entirely slowed down in such words but the intended effect it’s meant to have on society isn’t being recognised, as builders are just ignoring design in preference of cost efficiency. Land constraints however is most obviously just slowing down the development process and can’t really be avoided in the brownfield context. Because the land, to be brownfield, has to be previously developed, its harder to find inner-city land that arguably has no land constraints than to acquire greenfield on the outer periphery of the city. In conclusion land ownership it bluntly an unavoidable barrier in the development process of brownfield, however the developer behavior and government policy can be fine tuned as we become more aware of the drivers.
The following case study critiques Upton’s vision to establish a sustainable community through implementing comprehensive sustainable strategy. The urban periphery development is thought to demonstrate superior execution of sustainable principles in development (Jackson 2007). As a parallel, the report focuses on the development of Upton’s design code and demonstrates how large -scale mix-use developments can incorporate sustainable practice and principles of urban growth.
They are often contaminated, or owned by several parties. With Brownfield sites it is likely to pay extra as VAT charged at 17.5% on refurbishment or redeveloping existing buildings whilst Greenfield house building is exempt. What changes occur in an area as it undergoes the process of gentrification? It occurs in several important stages everywhere: 1. A 'pioneer group' moves in first.
Because of the amount of overdeveloped areas that are now vacant, the desire to renovate old vacant properties and land plots has all but disappeared. What if there was a beneficial solution to unused land plots in need of rehab and redesign? What if, instead of paving over every leftover inch of grass and dirt in urban areas to make room for more parking for our daily commuting polluters, we instead reinvent that land for a purpose that is both beneficial to our
In his article column titled Making sense of Measure S, the latest battle in L.A.'s long war over development, Christopher Hawthorne analyzes a development plan in Los Angeles called “Measure S” and the different sides of the issue. Hawthorne also discusses the history of development plans in Los Angeles and how the general outlook from different groups will and is currently affecting these plans. The general idea of Measure S is anti-development and to keep building projects from changing the general plan of the city. A general plan of a city is a guide to land use in different sectors that is used as a guideline for future and current development projects. Many different policies like Measure S have existed throughout Los
It was truly upsetting and heartbreaking to see that the South Central Los Angeles garden was to be tear down by bulldozer. During our discussion, my sister was shocked and angry at Ralph Horowitz, the owner of the land. Horowitz said that he would sell his land for approximately 15 million dollars, which the farmers and supporters were able to fundraise that money but he declined to sell it. What made my sister frustrated was the idea that he originally got the land for 5 million dollars, but he wanted way more money than he originally got. In addition, Horowitz sees the garden as “no good cause nor good conduct for it,” my sister opposed to his thinking about the garden because it was for a great cause. The garden served as a purpose to the local Latino residents of Los Angeles, they were able to grow crops to feed their families. Furthermore, the garden is a great idea because the crops are organic and does not damage the environment. In the documentary, the land Ralph Horowitz owned in 1986 was sold for 5 million dollars to the city to build a trash burning site, yet was not taken into action. Rufina Juarez, who is a South Central Farmer leader, discussed about how after the land was sold, it became an eminent domain. What my cousin and I was shock about was how the property was once a city owned land then become a property owned land without the farmers being informed about it. Jan Perry did a
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (2005) defines mountaintop removal as “a mining practice where the tops of mountains are removed, exposing the seams of coal.” Coal companies throughout Appalachia adopted this process as a means of acquiring coal faster. People in support of mountaintop removal concentrate, not only on the cheap, plentiful energy which is produced, but also the supposed increase in safer occupation opportunities for miners. Such individuals also argue that flattened land provides space for airports, prisons, and shopping centers. However, mountaintop removal has serious consequences, which need to be revealed.
community-building decisions affecting the use of land and is one tool that is used to manage
Residential, commercial and industrial development is the largest contributors to landscape change in the state of New Jersey. When buildout occurs in one region, development pressure begins in another, virtually insuring the Megalopolis concept of one huge urban corridor stretching between Boston and Washington D.C. Year after year, farmland dwindles, roads become congested, and more residents are left to compete for diminishing natural resources. Desperate measures and newer technologies are incorporated to replace poor planning and lack of vision on behalf of decision-makers caught between competing interests. When the long term health and wellbeing of the established population and the short term gain of a limited number of people compete for vital natural resources there should be no question who's interests should prevail.
Another type of problem with land use conflict centers on the local groups opposed to the project. These people, or NIMBYs, are generally underfunded, highly stressed, inexperienced in negotiation, and lacking political power. They want to participate meaningfully in the decision-making process about their LULU, but many find it difficult to obtain anything but an adversarial position in the process. Power, status, and wealth are the key attributes to gaining attention and consideration from the broader community. Unfortunately, most public NIMBYs are minorities, live in rural areas, live in the South, or have middle- to lower-class incomes (Morris, 1994). In their defense, though, NIMBYs can make harmful land uses difficult to site by creating gridlock on current standard operating procedures.
For the federal government to condemn property as blighted and then transfer it to private developers or corporations for the obvious purpose of increasing tax revenue is seen as being unfair and unconstitutional. The Constitution designates to Congress a list of specific enumerated powers. These powers can be found in Article I of the Constitution, which contains some important items. These powers range from things like declaring war, raising armies and collecting taxes. It also includes powers that are of secondary importance such as regulating the value of foreign coin and establishing post roads.(Baude, p1746) However, the power of taking private property is not c...
* Urban Professional^s recognition of the increased variability, robustness, and interest in both the urban area and their work. * Conservation Activist^s commendation of the lower consumption of resources, and reduced pressure on sensitive environment areas, suggestive of a reduction in urban sprawl. * The Development Industry^s equations of profit established through better and higher levels of land use. Essentially urban consolidation proposes an increase of either population or dwellings in an existing defined urban area (Roseth,1991). Furthermore, the suburban village seeks to establish this intensification within a more specific agenda, in which community is to be centred by public transport nodes, and housing choice is to be widened with increased diversity of housing type (Jackson,1998).
Cities all over the world are developing. As war ended in 1942, a significant number of people move to the city because they want to improve life. This urbanization process is causing a number of problems and should be met by sustainable development policies. In the beginning, it is important to know the definition of sustainable development. There are some definitions for sustainable development, but simply they say that sustainable development is a development which using resources now and preserving them for future generations (Adams, 1999, p.137). This concept has been agreed internationally at a Rio Conference in 1992 to be implemented by all government policies which mostly known as “Agenda 21” principles (Adams, 1999, p.141). This paper will show that traffic jams and housing problems caused by urbanization can be met by sustainable development policies. The structure of this paper will first explain the situation that leads to traffic jams and housing problems. Next, it will elaborate the sustainable development solutions, implications for the solutions, and evaluations how effective the sustainable development solutions solved the problems.
Issue: Implications for sustainability, social justice and equality associated with the urban consolidation in Pyrmont (i.e. How economically and environmentally sustainable are the impacts of the issue and who are the winners and losers)
...only a very small part of the extremely multifaceted phenomenon of urban sprawl. As previously mentioned, urban sprawl seems to be an inherent part of human community development and an issue that has always present worldwide. It seems highly unlikely that the phenomenon of urban sprawl itself can be eradicated from society. It may be a more realistic goal to attempt to change various aspects of society to decrease the effects of urban sprawl, which may require a dramatic paradigm shift for everyone in a society. It is impossible to correct a community problem if the members of that community are not even aware of the issues and the stakes at hand. Such an overreaching phenomenon such as urban sprawl will require acute awareness and enormous effort on the part of every individual in a community to make a marked difference on the negative effects of urban sprawl.
The Netherlands and the United States have similar challenges in land use planning. Both countries must deal with urban sprawl, farmland preservation, and nature development and preservation. However, the history behind each country forms a basis for the differences in land use planning.