Unlocking the value of brownfield properties, sustainably

And it’s a big problem – as well as a big opportunity. The US Environmental Protection agency estimates that the country has over 450,000 brownfields.

Some of the most attractive brownfields for development are often by design located on the coastline, lakeshore or riverbank. Their waterfront location often makes them prime for development. But their location can also put them on the front lines for exposure to climate change – rising sea levels, storm surges and flooding.

 

This drives a bigger question in brownfield development – how can we do it in a way that is financially viable, yet will also be sustainable long term? This article looks at how resiliency, sustainability and carbon transparency guide property developers working with climate-vulnerable brownfield sites.

One of the big hurdles developers, investors, and engineering firms face is finding property and asset solutions that will stand the test of time in an increasingly rapid-changing world. Key to this is resiliency – the ability to absorb impacts and recover from adverse events.

Until recently, remediation was traditionally done with only today’s environmental conditions in mind. Examples include mitigation measures that focused solely on managing chronic flooding that might spread contaminated soil into watercourses or perpetual “pump and treat” technologies (pumping out contaminated groundwater for treatment before it is discharged).

Often times developers used historical climate and weather patterns to design infrastructures such as drainage networks, bridges and culverts. Although our past can help inform our decisions, looking backwards is no longer sufficient because it provides an inaccurate image of the future. What had been considered a once-in-a-century storm event even a few years ago is now more likely to be a 25-year event in today’s climate. Creating a sustainable and resilient brownfields development requires access and understanding of the best available computer-based models to predict how climate and weather events at a given location are expected to evolve, enabling the creation of more resilient site plans.

Innovations in remediation practices and standards for brownfield redevelopment demonstrate advancements in our understanding of sustainable and resilient remediation. Two well-regarded entities are advancing this concept by establishing climate-resilient remediation standards that can be applied to brownfield sites – ASTM International (formerly the American Society for Testing and Materials) and the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC). These organizations have incorporated real-world, scientifically based experiences to develop methodologies that are the best available.

Following these standards assures all stakeholders that the most resilient practices are being followed, in the face of a changing climate and weather. This matters because stakeholders, including property owners, banks, insurance carriers and elected officials, as well as the communities in which these sites are located, need to be assured that redeveloped properties will be resilient in the face of a future climate that is more extreme than today’s. 

Resiliency – the ability to survive and bounce back from damaging events -- is an important aspect of brownfield development in a changing climate. So is sustainability, defined as meeting the needs of future as well as current generations.

In the last 20 years, there has been a push to integrate sustainability principles in the field of contaminated site management, mainly by minimizing the environmental footprint of the remediation work itself. Although this creates value, a more holistic approach is needed. Finding the best remedy now requires minimizing the negative impacts of aggressive remedial approaches, switching to more sustainable and less impactful remedies, such as containment and stabilization, and ensuring solutions stand the test of time in a context of sea level rise and more frequent and destructive natural disasters. The stakes have literally and figuratively gotten higher.

Achieving a balanced approach usually involves making trade-offs, but sustainability and resilience don’t have to be mutually exclusive. Nature-based remedial solutions are of particular interest in this field because they provide a net positive impact on climate change, biodiversity, social equity, and enhance the resiliency of the site and surrounding land.

Several initiatives at many levels of government are encouraging the end use of brownfields as green space, such as parkland or forest cover. This is in part due to the increasing understanding of the importance of green space to the health and well-being of city residents. Specific benefits include improved community health and well-being, increased urban biodiversity, carbon capture and improved air quality, reduction of urban heat island effects, prevention of soil erosion and dust, and increased surrounding land value. These are some of the many ways by which the conventional thinking of brick-and-mortar projects are being challenged by the socio-economics benefits of biodiversity and natural capital.

Resiliency and sustainability are good principles to follow, but investors, municipalities, property owners and other stakeholders need to ensure they are being implemented. This can, in part, be done by calculating the carbon footprint of the project – the carbon emitted to remediate and redevelop the site, as well as operate it long-term.

Carbon footprint, a sub-set of a projects overall environmental footprint, is an emerging kind of accounting that provides carbon footprint transparency in terms of quantifiable numbers developed through a verifiable process. Beyond financial matters, these new accounting methods offer the means for assessing and comparing the environmental footprint of potential remedies.

This matters because many brownfield projects involve impacts to the environment. Quantifying impacts can help inform stakeholders and guide choices for developers.

For example, a brownfield development that modifies a watercourse may reduce natural carbon sequestration capabilities. To address this project developers in consort with stakeholders could seek to create a wetland habitat elsewhere or purchase carbon offsets.

There is an increasingly well-accepted body of best practices for project impact evaluation and mitigation. For instance, the US-EPA’s Methodology for Understanding and Reducing a Project’s Environmental Foodprint details a seven-step process for quantitatively tracking a project’s progress regarding green remediation of contaminated sites.

Brownfield developments are important to communities and the environment, but developers and other project stakeholders face new climate and weather challenges in bringing these sites back to productive use. Finding a partner with intimate knowledge of the latest resilience and sustainability guidance, as well as advanced computer modeling capabilities and environmental footprint analysis tools can help create lasting innovative solutions that developers, regulators and communities can be proud of.