Often brownfields re-use is considered in the context of hard re-uses such as for housing, business parks or infrastructure. Soft re- uses, such as for green space or biomass production, can tend to be overlooked. However, soft re-uses can provide services which enhance regeneration, both in their own right and when integrated with hard uses such as for buildings.
Depending on design, some examples of these services are:
• Provision of open space in urban areas of in and around new development areas, which brings benefits for well-being, health, leisure and sense of place,
• Providing green infrastructure and services related to mitigation of heat island effects, mitigation of urban air pollution, flood protection, water storage and encouraging habitat and wildlife
• Supporting the renaissance of and innovations in urban gardening, community gardens and urban farming increases demand for urban brownfields
• Supply of renewable energy and other environmental services (such as sustainable urban drainage).
A range of interventions might be used to deliver these services, in domains such as:
• Soil Management
• Water Management
• Implementing Green Infrastructure
• Gentle Remediation Options
• Other Remediation Options
• Renewables (energy, materials, biomass)
• Sustainable Land Planning and Development.
Some services may generate revenue in their own right, some may be important assets to support public investment in regeneration, and some may have direct or indirect impacts on the value of built redevelopment (for example providing a framing which enhances property values, or providing local energy supply or other environmental services). Regeneration / redevelopment projects that deliver a broad range of services have both improved overall sustainability and enhanced economic value.
HOMBRE (Holistic Management of Brownfield Regeneration) was a major EU FP7 project which concluded in November 2014 (www.zerobrownfields.eu). One of its outputs is a simple design aid to help developers and others involved in brownfields to identify what services they can get from soft reuse interventions for their site, how these interact and what the initial default design considerations might be. HOMBRE’s “Brownfield Opportunity Matrix” is a simple Excel based screening tool that essentially maps the services that might add value to a redevelopment project against the interventions that can deliver those services. It maps the prospective range of opportunities that might be realised by a brownfield redevelopment project and the project’s consequent sources of value. For each opportunity there is a hyperlink to additional information, including a case study. There is also supporting information to describe the various services and interventions listed in the matrix.
This mapping identifies where there are strong synergies between interventions and services, and also the relatively infrequent occurrences of antagonism. Wherever a particular intervention delivers a service, this interaction creates an opportunity to add value. The matrix describes the kinds of value that each opportunity might generate, namely:
• Revenue Generation: for example capital value uplifts, or income opprotunities for example from renewable energy or leisure
• Natural Capital: developed in a number of ways, including (but not limited to) providing green infrastructure, improvement of the local climate, improvement of water resources and mitigation of contamination (protecting and enhancing local ecosystem/environment).
• Cultural Capital: developed by improving the social environment (by improving the aesthetics of an area and/or creating a sense of place/belonging for e.g.) and can be a direct result of an increase in natural capital.
• Economic Capital – tangibles: e.g. increase of land and property values in the area (feeding back into Cultural Capital) providing benefits to the local community and also the investor.
• Economic Capital – intangibles: benefits that are immeasurable but can include for example, an improvement of the image of the investor (be it a company or individual).
Overall the brownfield opportunity matrix can:
• Support initial identification or benchmarking of soft re-use options for brownfields at early stage
• Support exploratory discussions with interested stakeholders
• Provide a structure to describe an initial design concept, in support for example of planning applications
• Provide a structure for more detailed sustainability assessment of different re-use combinations, and similarly for cost benefit comparisons.
The presentation will explore a benchmarking application using a worked example.
The final countdown.
“Successful remediation policies leads to the end of the Dutch Soil Protection Act”
The Dutch decentralized soil remediation operation is successful in remediating all top-priority locations and will result within 5 years in the withdrawal of the Soil Protection Act. After remediating the top-priority locations (the final countdown) legislation for dealing with remaining soil and groundwater contamination in a more integrated approach will be incorporated in the Environment and Planning Act.
The Dutch Policy on soil remediation has its origin in the early ‘80’s of the 20th century when the first scandals in soil contamination became apparent. In the small town of Lekkerkerk a residential area had been built upon a former industrial dump site and indoor air concentration of Benzenes caused health problems. This triggered public awareness, inventory programs and soil protective policies.
The Dutch soil Policy evaluated from a strict preventative policy and a foresight of total multifunctional clean-up of all contaminated sites in the ‘80s towards a more realistic policy which remained strictly preventative but amended the clean-up ambitions towards functional remediation of heavily contaminated sites. This resulted in the remediation of sites that had to be remediated for other reasons than the environment (i.e. the redevelopment for housing on former industrial sites) and therefore left urgent sites abandoned and not remediated.
In order to focus the remediation effort, the Dutch government in close collaboration with the competent authorities on soil remediation (the provinces and larger municipalities) established in 2009 a 5 year program. This program for 700 Million Euro had the aim of remediating all locations with urgent risks for humans and an inventory of all other locations with urgent risks for spreading of contaminants or the ecology.
This program is now finished and has proven to be very successful. Locations with urgent risks for humans are being remediated and the inventory of other urgent locations is finished. This resulted in a list of approximately 1500 locations with urgent risks for spreading of contaminants and urgent risks for the ecology. Human risks with top-priority are dealt with, groundwater contamination still is a top-priority. Groundwater contamination is more complex to deal with and needs instead of a site specific approach a more area based integrated approach where other interest such as heat and cold storage in the aquifer have to be taken into account. Groundwater as a resource for drinking water and (food and drink-)industry is a very important economic factor, therefore the current program needs to be extended.
The Dutch government, provinces, water boards, municipalities and involved private parties are now drawing up a new 5 year program with the aim of dealing with these 1500 locations and establishing new legislation for the period after this final countdown. When all urgent locations are dealt with, soil remediation can be integrated in the regular spatial planning processes. In the future soil remediation in the Netherlands will no longer be a stand-alone process but will only occur as a side effect of developments or in case the ecosystem functions of the groundwater are under pressure. Therefore the Soil protection Act will be withdrawn in 2018 and legislation on dealing with historic soil and groundwater contamination will be incorporated in the new Environment and Planning Act.
The full article will describe in detail the results, success and fail factors of the 2010-2015 program. What can be learned from the Dutch decentralized operation and the successful focus on priority locations? The full article will also describe the outline and organization of the 2016-2020 program and will answer the question why private parties will also be involved. Furthermore the full article will provide an outline of the new soil legislation which will be incorporated in the Environment and Planning Act.
Introduction:
In order to ensure knowledge of contaminated soil, regional authorities in Denmark register contaminated properties. The Region screens all properties with known activities that can have lead to contamination and registers those which are suspected to be contaminated. The Region pays for the environmental study and remediation of old contaminated sites, where no one can be held accountable in the present. This is a huge and expensive task, necessitating prioritization among contaminated properties situated upon valuable groundwater areas and recognition of the fact that some properties will never be remediated.
The process of studying properties with former possibly contaminating activities is ongoing, and the Region notifies all owners by letter, when a property is added to the contamination-register. This official register ensures that the knowledge is available and disclosed, when you buy a property. Everybody can look up any property to see if it is registered as (possibly) contaminated.
Danish legislation – the law for soil contamination - ensures that you must have permission to carry out construction on contaminated properties. I.e. when a property is in the contamination-register, you must apply for permission to build houses, schools and parks and you must ensure that the building-project does not lead to (further) contamination of groundwater and surface water. Permission is given by the municipalities, and the Region is always consulted before the final permission is given, to ensure that the contractor does not leave contamination, that the Region will have to remediate at a later stage in order to protect the groundwater and surface water.
The role of the Region:
The role of the Region is to ensure that no building is placed directly above a known contamination, which will make a future remediation of the groundwater and surface water more difficult and expensive. In the collaboration between the municipalities and Region, the Region is both a partner and an authority.
The Region is a partner, when we and a municipality discuss different solutions and techniques and what terms to set in a construction permission. The goal is to achieve solutions that are durable for the lifetime of the building. The Region must therefore at all times be up to date with the latest knowledge and techniques. The solutions must ensure that residents do not have physical contact with contaminated topsoil and that they have good indoor- and outdoor climate in their new home and surrounding garden.
The Region is the authority for groundwater protection and must ensure that building-projects do not lead to contamination of groundwater. E.g. if removal of concrete and asphalt from an old industrial property are proposed, contaminated soil may be revealed, causing groundwater contamination by percolation. In this case the Region emplaces certain terms to be upheld in a construction permission.
Case introduction:
The administrative procedures are illustrated through a case of current construction of an apartment block on a contaminated site in Copenhagen.
The terms in the permission given to build the apartment block, required the owner of the contaminated site to perform investigations based on past activities deemed to potentially have contaminated the soil at the site. Results from these investigations showed high levels of soil and groundwater contamination on the site. According to the permission, the high levels of soil contamination had to be cleaned up, before the building activity could begin, as risk assessment showed that the contaminated soil would otherwise constitute a health hazard to the residents in the new apartments as well as an environmental hazard.
After cleaning up the high levels of contaminated soil there were still high levels of groundwater contamination at the site, and a renewed risk assessment showed that vapor intrusion from the contaminated groundwater could still be a health hazard to the residents. Consequently, according to the permission, the building will be established with ventilation beneath it. The contractor has submitted a proposal for the ventilation system and the Municipality of Copenhagen and the Capital Region of Denmark will collaborate on evaluating the proposal to secure the safety of the residents both short and long term with a solution that is robust enough to ensure that no further measures have to be taken at the site.
Conclusion:
The consequences of the soil contamination law and register are:
• for the contractor - the process of building new houses some time takes more time, because of the sampling, removal of contaminated soil and building precautions. They know this when they buy the property, and it is reflected in the price of the property.
• for the people, who buy an apartment - insurance of a healthy indoor- and outdoor climate and insurance that the topsoil is uncontaminated.
• for the Capital Region of Denmark - a contaminated site, where indoor and outdoor climate and topsoil have been secured. I.e. the only possible remaining effort is the groundwater, which the Region can prioritize according to regular procedure.
Objectives
Sustainable redevelopment of large and complex brownfield sites has become a major challenge for urban regeneration policies. The REFRINDD project (Sustainable Brownfield regeneration Approach [2012-2015]) has developed an integrated approach for the sustainable remediation and urban redevelopment of complex contaminated brownfields sites. The project is partly funded by the French Environment and Energy Management Agency (ADEME).
Brownfield redevelopment projects often involve stakeholders with multiple and conflicting objectives. One of the project objectives is to deliver an approach that will assist elected representatives, local authorities and urban agencies in planning and managing sustainable brownfield regeneration projects. The project aims at developing a practical guidance and a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) tool to help these stakeholders discuss, assess and choose the most-fit for purpose redevelopment scenarios, in a transparent decision process. The project specifically examines industrial brownfield sites with contamination issues, which often combine poor environmental status with low social appreciation, and therefore bringing these sites back into beneficial use is a complex challenge.
Method
The development of practical guidance and accompanying MCA-tool involved the following tasks:
•Consultation with a wide range of French stakeholders (e.g. urban planners, landscape architects, contaminated land consultants, project managers);
•A systemic analysis of the relationships between the stakeholders and the data they exchange when delivering a regeneration project;
•An extensive literature review on methods, tools and criteria for assisting in integrated and sustainable approaches of brownfield regeneration;
•Specific interviews with relevant stakeholders involved in on-going brownfield regeneration projects.
Results and discussion
Stakeholder consultations helped identify the main challenges they face and the need for an integrated approach for assisting in sustainable brownfield redevelopment. The analysis of relationships between stakeholders and data exchange, helped listing and classifying data that is available, useful or missing in various typologies. Using the systemic information and communication theory, the stakeholder’s relationships were modeled. Data collection, historical memory and data transmission were noted as main areas where improvements are needed [1].
The review of stakeholder needs led to proposing a 6-step method for sustainable redevelopment of industrial and contaminated brownfield sites in France [2, 3, 4]. The iterative 6-Steps framework attempts to take into account a complex decisional making process, as follows:
•Step 0, Sustainable ambitions - collect sustainable ambitions on the site from elected local officials;
•Step 1, Project vision - understand the needs for redevelopment in the area and define initial redevelopment project;
•Step 2, Integrated analysis of opportunities and restrictions - define the project outline and feasibility assessment;
•Step 3, Planning and design - develop the final redevelopment program document;
•Step 4, Implementation - complete the redevelopment works and undertake final costing;
•Step 5, Review and make adjustments where necessary.
For each step, a key objective; spatial and time scale; specific beneficiaries and users; and themes to assess/discuss are provided. The requirements of supporting tools were identified for each of the 6 steps, in particular whether MCAs were needed. A prototype MCAs tool was then developed using Excel® software. It follows the ‘6 Steps’ approach and its main benefits assist in:
•Discussing and deciding the sustainable ambitions for developing a site and the constraints associated with the site;
•Assessing and choosing the most ‘fit for purpose’ redevelopment scenarios, taking into account the sustainability objectives and economic constraints (providing specific graphs for visualisation and discussion purposes).
The criteria provided in the MCAs are grouped into 15 recurrent themes. Some of the criteria are common and some are very specific depending on the step being considered. The MCAs enabling a sustainability review of the planning programme require information on the final chosen remediation for each considered brownfield sector.
Perspectives
French stakeholders have confirmed their need for an integrated approach to manage large and complex brownfield regeneration projects. Their recommendations, integrated into a project research, helped identify the MCAs and relevant criteria required to assess the delivery of successful projects. The REFFRINDD approach and the various MCAs are currently being tested in three on-going French brownfield revitalisation projects. The approach and a pilot MCA tool are to be delivered at the end of 2015.
[1] Valeyre, T., Vimond-Laboudigue, A., Alary, C., Laudati, P., (2013). Improvement of data collection, treatment, interpretation and diffusion in brownfield revitalization, in Innowacyjne rozwiązania rewitalizacji terenów zdegradowanych, Fundacja Ekonomistów Środowiska i Zasobów Naturalnych, 261-270
[2] Limasset, E., G., Zornig, C., A., Alary, C., Fourny, S., Collet, J-L., Laboudigue, (2014), Intégration des critères de développement durable relatifs à la requalification d’une friche dans la méthodologie REFRINDD et développement d’outils d’aide à la décision, BRGM/RP-63782-FR
[3] Limasset & al, Conference proceedings, Cabernet (2014), Tailored & Sustainable Redevelopment towards Zero Brownfield, October 2014, p74
[4] Limasset & al, Conference proceeding, ADEME, (2014), 3e rencontres de la recherche sur les sites et sols pollués
Joan Krogh, Morten Størup and Søren Helt Jessen
NIRAS, Alleroed, Denmark (jkh@niras.dk)
Abstract:
As a result of urbanization, urban development projects as well as sewer and cable work, large amounts of soil are relocated each year. Typically, soil is considered a waste product and often moved out of urban areas and transported several kilometers away from the origin. Instead, uncontaminated gravel materials obtained from mining pits replaces the soil.
Sustainable soil management must include the economic benefits for the construction business, the reduced inconvenience of soil relocation (i.e. CO2 emissions from transport, noise and heavy traffic in urban areas) as well as taking the environmental benefits of recycling both clean and slightly contaminated soil into account.
This paper will be based upon specific solutions for and challenges by local management of soil. This includes, options for reuse of topsoil on agricultural land; temporary storage (i.e. as soil piles) at empty sites in urban areas; ex-change of soil between individual construction projects, this includes description of a ‘possibility catalogue’; and processing of soil and its geotechnical properties. Furthermore, the paper gives examples of innovative solutions for the recycling of soil for i.e. park mounds, ‘health landscapes’ and climate protection.
It is important that the solutions is based on practical risk-oriented solutions, as these most likely to have the same usability across borders. Focus of this paper will be on the technical possibilities, which will be described through soil processing techniques and survey methods; thus, not the legalistic of Danish law. Practical solutions are described; i.e. the clarification of the strategic possibilities for alternative handling of the soil. Finally, the process related challenges are addressed in terms of timetables and not the least the responsibility for the soil at different times.
Background:
Over the next 20 years, numerous large construction projects will be carried out in the Capital Region (Region Hovedstaden) of Denmark; this includes construction of hospitals in urban areas, new highways, railway development and a whole new city in a rural area. During all these projects, great volumes of soil are to be handled. The Capital Region has a desire to minimize the amount of soil that is transported around the country and increase the amount of soil that is recycled. Thereby changing the perception of soil from being a waste product to a resource. The project is resolved in collaboration between a collective construction industry – The Danish Association of Construction Clients (DACC; Bygherreforeningen), NIRAS A/S, Grontmij A/S, municipalities, contractors, developers and analytical laboratories in Denmark.
The objective of the project is to contribute to new ways to manage excess soil from construction projects, whether it is clean or contaminated, thereby improving sustainability.
The project is in its latter half and the final products are taking shape. Thus, in spring 2015 the lessons learned and experiences gained since 2012, when the project began, can be presented.
The project includes nine sub-projects:
1 Approval of soil collectors; a project, which describes how to implement a system for approval of collectors in order to create a more uniform description of the soil.
2 Planning approaches; a project, which bring together experiences and tools to make it possible to consider alternative soil management possibilities as early in the process as possible.
3 Local soil management; a project that focus’ on the necessity of finding local soil piles, used for temporary storage to even out the temporal differences between projects that can utilize excess soil.
4 Portal for soil; a project, which creates an online platform for trading soil.
5 Processing techniques; a project, which has collected information regarding five difference techniques for processing of soil.
6 Excess soil on agricultural land; a project, which describes the possibilities for usage of excess soil in food production.
7 Health landscapes; a project, which uses soil mounds to advance health; i.e. by establishment of running routes and bike paths on the mounds.
8 Climate adjustment; a project, which uses excess soil from a construction site of a new district in Hillerød, Denmark, to manage water flow during extreme rain events.
9 Energy and excess soil; a project, which describes the possibility of reuse of excess soil to establish energy reservoirs.
Together, the sub-projects create an investigation and an idea development in relation to management of excess soil, which has echoed through all of the Danish construction industry.