Author(s)

A. Bogen

Abstract

The Brownfields program has often served as a laboratory for technology and process innovation. It must again provide that leadership in getting sites redeveloped in a sustainable fashion. Most developer objections to sustainable design center on cost. They assert that green design requires an initial increased capital outlay with no or inadequate subsequent tax recovery. They also say that government processes create time and technical burdens that weigh against efficiency. This paper will assert the premise that government can and must lead by example in sustainable development especially in the reuse of Brownfields sites. There will be a discussion of streamlining the permitting processes and also funding and returns on investment for the public. This paper will also suggest ways that the sites can serve as living classrooms for the public to visually understand the critical importance of sustainable practices to our planet. Only government projects can be expected to illustrate what needs to be done. We have the opportunity and duty to re-make the worst Brownfield sites into the most sensitive and feasible places. We must not be satisfied with just increased taxes and jobs. With the leverage of public funds for infrastructure, tax credits and grants, we can demonstrate that sustainable development must be a drummer we all march to as soon as possible. Keywords: Brownfields, sustainable practices, taxes, permitting process, funding, return on investment. 1 The Brownfields legacy World markets can be described as being about under developed, developing, and developed economies. The relationship among these markets is always in flux. The conflict over resources and strategies results in winners and losers not unlike the subsuming and dominance of tectonic plates. Brownfields are byproducts of these shifting economic relationships. Sites became no longer useful

Keywords

Brownfields, sustainable practices, taxes, permitting process, funding, return on investment.