Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: CABERNET Network Report

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration:CABERNET Network Report9Conclusions and Recommendations9.2 Developing Benchmarks for BrownfieldRegeneration: The CABERNET BAROMETEROne of the possible ways of tackling the brownfield problem is to set brownfieldregeneration targets. This approach may be a valuable for a number of key reasons:- as identified by Network, there is a need to monitor and understand land usepatterns. This can could be combined with targets, albeit targets subject toreview at a local level so respecting subsidiarity- brownfield land will always be with us - it is a symptom of the processof urban land use change, seen as cities evolve to meet the needs andchallenges of a changing society and economy. There will never be, nor shouldthere be, no available brownfield land- a priority is to accelerate the pace at which brownfield land is reclaimed andbrought back to beneficial use. In order to achieve this there is a need toaccurately monitor the regeneration cycle- in most Member States, the area of brownfield land appears to be persistentlyhigh, with adverse impacts upon the achievement of sustainable cities. Landuse opportunities are lost and at the same time local communities can beblighted by derelict and further ‘decaying’ sitesBrownfield redevelopment needs to be seen in the overall sustainable urbandevelopment framework in order to avoid the persistence of long-term brownfieldsand more importantly recreation of these sites.As identified in the discussion of the scale and nature of the problem, each MemberState has different perceptions of what is needed to address the brownfield problem.Acknowledging the understandable variation in processes and perceptions, evendefinitions, across the EU it would be unworkable (if not inappropriate), to determinespecific and common brownfield land targets for delivery across the EU.In order to translate sustainable brownfield regeneration principles and objectivesinto actions at a EU level, three methodological approaches could be applied:• Obtain comprehensive data sets on brownfield sites and other land uses• Set operational targets and indicators within a realistic timescale at a local/subregional level. These targets should differentiate ‘stocks’ and ‘flows’ of brownfieldland, so characterising the dynamic nature of the brownfield land use andcreation cycle (i.e. the ‘bath’ model)• Identify and disseminate benchmarks at a European level. This wouldamount to a EU wide initiative to tackle brownfields129
9.2 Obtain comprehensive data sets on brownfield sites and otherland usesObtaining comprehensive data sets on the existing brownfield stock found withinboundaries of European municipalities and regions is essential. In a number ofcountries fairly detailed land use databases exist at a municipal / regional / nationallevel, however this is not true for a great many regions. A set of common metricswould need to be established.Set operational targets and benchmarks for brownfieldregenerationWhile acknowledging the importance of subsidiarity, proposed targets are (where xx,yy and zz years are defined at the EU level and l, n and m are percentages defined byEU framework defined within a national setting):- by ‘year 20xx’ a Member State (or a municipality etc) should have establisheda system to record the stock of brownfield land (and the ‘hardcore’component) within its territory as part of a comprehensive land use database- by ‘year 20xx’ a Member State (or a municipality etc) should have establisheda system to record the pace at which greenfield land is absorbed into theurban areas within its territory- by ‘year 20yy’ a Member State (or a municipality etc) should aim to have redeveloped‘n%’ of the stock of brownfield land as recorded in ‘year 20xx’- with effect from ‘year 20zz’ a Member State (or a municipality etc) shouldlook to achieve ‘m%’ of all / residential/ amenity / etc development onbrownfield land- by ‘year 20xx’ the planning / permission process should be comparable tothe greenfield planning timescale, with the overall aim of bringing sites backto beneficial use in 3-5 years- with effect from ‘year 20zz’ a Member State (or a municipality etc) shouldlook to reduce by ‘1%’ the pace at which Greenfield land is absorbed intourban areasThis is a bold proposal, however at the lowest level conducting a feasiblility studyto determine knowledge and organisational structure requirements, as well as theimpacts in terms of the economic, environmental and social costs and benefits willhelp to identify priority targets at a Member State and EU level.Communicating Benchmarks on a European LevelCommunicating Brownfield regeneration benchmarks supports strategic approachin European regions and cities and could lead to effective programmes and goodpractice. CABERNET proposes to set up a European Brownfield Barometer on targetscommunicated at the CABERNET conferences directed to European stakeholdernetworks.130
Page 7:
Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration
Page 13 and 14:
Chapter 1: Summary Message• Land
Page 15:
There is no standard definition for
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44:
Page 47 and 48:
4.3‘Self-developing sites’A: Pr
Page 49 and 50:
4.3 Once the stakeholder (using the
Page 51 and 52:
4.5 FIGURE 4.11: Land Use Puzzle Mo
Page 53 and 54:
4.6EnvironmentalHealthprotectionAtt
Page 55 and 56:
Chapter 5: Summary Message:• CABE
Page 57 and 58:
5.1 Economic Viability and Regenera
Page 59 and 60:
is able to assist with the costs (o
Page 61 and 62:
5.1.2Achieving such an ‘adjustmen
Page 63 and 64:
5.1.3Current approaches for C Sites
Page 65 and 66:
5.2Environmental Quality and Protec
Page 67 and 68:
5.2Human health / Ecotox / Risk Ass
Page 69 and 70:
5.2time as a specific parameter and
Page 71 and 72:
5.2Environmental aspects of plannin
Page 73 and 74:
5.3 Table 5.1: Social and Cultural
Page 75 and 76:
5.3 relevant to the experience of c
Page 77 and 78:
5.3 • initiate the development/cr
Page 79 and 80:
5.3 provide a high quality of life.
Page 81 and 82: 5.4.1Local governments therefore pl
Page 83 and 84: 5.4.1support and financial provisio
Page 85 and 86: 5.4.1 relevant information may take
Page 87 and 88: 5.4.1 ConclusionsEven though munici
Page 89 and 90: 5.4.2 development projects. In seve
Page 91 and 92: 5.4.2 RecommendationsIt is essentia
Page 93 and 94: 5.4.3 historically represented a ne
Page 95 and 96: 5.4.3 upwards to regional or nation
Page 97 and 98: 5.4.3 4. the relationship between s
Page 99 and 100: Chapter 6.1: Summary Message• Cit
Page 101 and 102: 6.1 equity in the light of structur
Page 103 and 104: 6.1Good practice in the CP process
Page 105 and 106: 6.1Factor 4 - Availability of resou
Page 107 and 108: 6.1Achieving this shift will requir
Page 109 and 110: 6.2 Qualifying People: Professional
Page 111 and 112: 6.2 a mixture of apathy and anger a
Page 113 and 114: 6.2 to a community. As an example,
Page 115 and 116: Chapter 7: Summary Message• High
Page 117 and 118: 7.2 Key Research Topics: Gaps and P
Page 119 and 120: 7.2 • Methods and frameworks to f
Page 121 and 122: 118
Page 123 and 124: Chapter 8: Summary Message• The r
Page 125 and 126: 8 an approach, key EC objectives re
Page 127 and 128: 8Furthermore, initiatives by Member
Page 129 and 130: 9.1Conclusions9.1CABERNET’s visio
Page 131: CommentaryThe regeneration of the g
Page 135 and 136: 99.3Sustainable Brownfield Regenera
Page 137 and 138: 134CABERNETwww.cabernet.org.uk
show all

Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: CABERNET Network Report

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?