The Brownfield Program Issues - Essay Example

Brown Fields A Brownfield can be described as a location that has been affected by the previous uses of the area; the surrounding areas are abandoned or underutilized and may also have real or perceived contamination problems. The locations are mostly found in developed urban areas and require intervention to bring the lands back to beneficial use (Oliver, Ferber and Grimski). The Agency responsible for environmental protection in the United States, the EPA, describes a Brownfield as a land or reuse that may be complex by the existence or possible presence of unsafe substances, pollutants, or contaminants (EPA). The Brownfield Program by the EPA was put in practice 1995. It has grown into a results-oriented program which has changed the way contaminated property is often taken to be. The Program was intended to empower communities, states, and other stakeholders in redevelopment of the economy to work together in an appropriate manner in order to assess, prevent, sustainably reuse, and safely clean up Brownfields (EPA). The Brownfields Program offers monetary and technical backing for activities in Brownfields through approaches that are based on four major goals. One goal is to protect the environment and address Brownfields in order to sustain safety. The second goal is to promote partnerships, enhance partnership and communication important to ease cleanup and reuse of Brownfields. Thirdly, the program aims to strengthen the marketplace, provide monetary and technical support to boost the private market. Finally, they program aims at sustaining the reuse and redevelopment of Brownfields to improve communities’ long-term quality of living (EPA). It is projected that there are over 450,000 Brownfields within the U.S (EPA). Reinvesting in these Brownfields and Cleaning up the properties increases home and neighboring tax bases, aids growth of jobs, makes use of existing infrastructure, takes off development pressures, and also protects and improves the environment (Hersh, Morley and Schwab). At first, EPA offered little amounts of money to the local governments that started many two-year Brownfield steering projects. The Brownfields Law has extended EPAs support by offering new tools for the private and public segments so as to encourage sustainable cleanup and reuse of Brownfields. There are a number of Brownfields grants that serve as the basis of Brownfields Program by the EPA (Hersh, Morley and Schwab). The grants support recovery efforts by backing environmental assessments, clean-up, and training activities for jobs. The Assessment Grants supply financial support for Brownfield planning, inventories, community outreach, and environmental assessments. Revolving Loan Fund Grants offer financial support to benefit from loans that can be used to clean up Brownfields. Job Training Grants give environmental training for inhabitants of Brownfield areas. Cleanup Grants supply direct financial support for clean-up activities at certain Brownfield lands (Hersh, Morley and Schwab). An example of a Brownfield project is the Michigan Brownfield Redevelopment Project. Michigan had been left with a considerable number of polluted Brownfield sites all through its Great Lakes coastal areas (Jones and Welsh). The State of Michigan was very dynamic in supporting redevelopment of Brownfields, recognizing cleaning up and reinvesting in these areas takes development and expansion pressures off or opens land, and that it protects and improves the environment. Its growing responsiveness of issues linked to urban sprawl and the growth of important open room and agricultural resources in the state led to increasing needs for the redevelopment of the industrial Brownfields (Jones and Welsh). The CERCLA (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act) of 1980 gave emphasis to the idea that owners of properties should compensate the cost used in remediating Brownfield properties, without putting into considerations of who might have caused the polluting, Michigan state recognized that such kind of approach would produce very little actual remediation of these sites. Rather land-owners had been abandoning these properties that were contaminated and allowing them to become tax delinquent (Jones and Welsh). A growing understanding of the problems and possibilities associated with Brownfield remediation and redevelopment brought about the passage of a remediation and redevelopment bond measure by the voters of Michigan in the year 1988 that involves Brownfields. The bond was known as the Environmental Protection Bond fund. It included 45 million U.S. dollars specifically put into site redevelopment purposes. Over two decades now, two programs are still active from this bond measure of1988 (Jackson-Elmoore). One of the programs is the Site Assessment Grant Program, which was originally funded with 10 million dollars. The other program is the Site Reclamation Grant Program, which was established with 35 dollars million in bond funds (Jackson-Elmoore). Due to this reason, there is still some work that remains to assess full projects of Brownfield redevelopment in Michigan. The state, thus, needs to develop systems and full methodology that will let the state be able to track its investments in the preparation Brownfield redevelopment sites. That will help DNRE in the assessment of outcomes of projects in Brownfield redevelopment. By the middle of the 1990s, the anxiety for Brownfield redevelopment made Michigan lead in crafting Brownfield policies that were innovative. Through both the administrative and legislative action, the state put aside the singular centralized focus on the cleanup of toxic locations and the imposition of severe liabilities put on property owners. The new approach for Michigan was specifically aimed at encouraging redevelopment, relying on a several private initiatives and public support (Jackson-Elmoore). Michigan pushed itself to the forefront of the redevelopment of Brownfields through the implementation of strategies and programs that limit the legal responsibility of those who purchase property that is contaminated (Oliver, Ferber and Grimski). The state also allowed flexibility in the standards of cleanup based on the redeveloped use of the sites. They relied heavily on clean up and redevelopment action that were voluntary. The state recognized economic redevelopment as a major Brownfield policy goal. Michigan State enhanced public support for site assessment and redevelopment actions and also expanded the definition of Brownfield to incorporate a collection of destroyed properties (Oliver, Ferber and Grimski). A study by both the Eastern Michigan University and DNRE (Department of Natural Resources and Environment) conducted comprehensive case studies of 55 sites for Brownfields redevelopment that represented 62 DNRE projects all through the State of Michigan. These projects were selected among the 365 projects in the location (Jones and Welsh). The 62 projects selected at 55 different locations were in 31 communities around the State and this represented about 17 percent of all the projects that received financial support from the 6 DNRE Brownfield redevelopment programs. The 54.3 million dollars granted for these projects represents around 35 percent of the total grants allocated to the six programs (Jones and Welsh). In assessing Brownfield redevelopment accomplishment in the State of Michigan, the case study projects were evaluated across a number of different impact areas. The areas include the environmental site remediation before redevelopment process, environmental impacts of the real project of redevelopment, monetary and fiscal impacts and the public development impacts. The tables below show the environmental, social and economic benefits as depicted by the study. Environmental Benefits Number of Projects Removed contamination 37 Protection close natural resources 12 Monitoring activities 9 Green or more sustainable development 9 Groundwater treatment 5 Improved public health 4 Table 1: Environmental Benefits Social Benefits Number of Projects improvement to neighboring businesses and properties 17 Improved and increased waterfront access 12 Quality of life improvement 10 Improved public space and facilities 9 Improvement of downtown 9 New and improved recreational opportunities 8 New market rate housing 6 Historic preservation 6 Reuse of existing infrastructure 6 Blight mitigation 5 New affordable and special use housing 5 Table 2: Social Benefits Economic Benefits Number of Projects New jobs 15 Improved tax base 14 Improved value of properties 9 Leveraging of private funds for development 7 Leveraging of public funds (local and non-DNRE) 6 Improved municipal finances 5 Better development capacity 5 Advanced local tourism 5 Sustain existing jobs 4 Table 3: Economic Benefits Indeed a considerable amount of redevelopment has happened at approximately about 500 of the 1800 sites which the state devoted funds for response and remediation activities (Jones and Welsh). Furthermore, the estimate is between half and two-thirds of the redevelopment projects have been done in conjunction with the 6 DNRE programs that were identified in the study (Jones and Welsh). In conclusion, the Brownfield Program intends to empower communities, states, and other stakeholders in redevelopment of the economy to work together in an appropriate manner in order to assess, prevent, sustainably reuse, and safely clean up Brownfields. From the perspective of remediation, it can be observed that the State of Michigan was very successful in the projects. All suggestions for assessment of the 55 Brownfield redevelopment projects were that Michigan was somehow successful at the redevelopment of Brownfield redevelopment. However, there is a lot of work that remains to assess full projects of Brownfield redevelopment in Michigan. Works Cited EPA. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 16 July 2012. 7 November 2014 . Hersh, Robert, et al. "Reuse: Creating Community-based Brownfield." American Planning Association (APA) (2010): 1-78. Jackson-Elmoore, Cynthia. Reclaiming Brownfields: A Comparative Analysis of Adaptive Reuse of ... Farnham: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd, 2012. Jones, Robert A and William F Welsh. "Michigan Brownfield Redevelopment Innovation: Two Decades of Success." Department of Geography and Geology Eastern Michigan University (2010): 1-52. Oliver, Lee, et al. "The Scale and Nature of European Brownfields." Land Quality Management Group, School of Geography, University of Nottingham, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 (2004): 1-8. Read More