This article reports empirical research on the property characteristics and land uses of contaminated properties in New York State in the two principle environmental cleanup programs. This research investigated 321 contaminated properties in New York. The authors analyze the characteristics of contaminated property to discover information that research using a case study design with a small number of properties has not found. We also investigate similarities and differences in the properties that enter the two most important environmental cleanup programs in the United States. Some of their results are unexpected and have implications for public works management, including location and size data for the brownfield properties and both the past land uses and proposed future land uses of these contaminated properties after remediation.
Alberini, A., Longo, A., Tonnin, S., Trombetta, F., & Turvani, M. (2003). The role of liability, regulation and economic incentives in brownfield remediation and redevelopment: Evidence from surveys of developers (Fondazione Eni Enrici Mattei Working Papers Series). Retrieved April 22, 2003, from http://www.feemi.it/web/activ/_wp.html
2.
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO). (1997). ASTSWMO survey of state institutional control mechanisms. Washington, DC: Author. Available from www.astswmo.org
3.
Bartsch, C., & Collaton, E. (1997). Brownfields: Cleaning and reusing contaminated properties. Westport, CT: Praeger.
4.
Bartsch, C., Collaton, E., & Pepper, E. (1997). Coming clean for economic development: A resource book on environmental clean-up and economic development opportunities. Washington, DC: Northeast-Midwest Institute.
5.
Bennear, L., & Coglianese, C. (2004). Evaluating environmental policies (KSG Working Paper No. RWP04-049). Retrieved September 28, 2005, from http://ssrn.com/abstract=619901
6.
Chan, N. (2000, October). How Australian appraisers assess contaminated land. The Appraisal Journal, pp. 434-440.
7.
Coffin, S., & Shepherd, A. (1998). Barriers to brownfield redevelopment: Lessons learned from two Great Lakes states. Public Works Management & Policy, 2(3), 258-266.
8.
Collins, T., & Savage, K. (1998). A case study in learning to see assets as well as liabilities, opportunities as well as constraints. Public Works Management & Policy, 2(3), 210-219.
9.
Council for Urban Economic Development. (1999). Brownfield redevelopment: Performance evaluation (Report developed under a cooperative agreement with U.S. EPA No. CR826290-01-0). Washington, DC: International Economic Development Council.
10.
Davis, T. S. (Ed.). (2002). Brownfields: A comprehensive guide to redeveloping contaminated property (2nd ed.). Chicago: ABA Press.
11.
De Sousa, C. (2000). Brownfield redevelopment versus greenfield development: A private sector perspective on the costs and risks associated with brownfield redevelopment in Ontario, Canada. Journal of Environmental Planning& Management, 43(6), 855-872.
12.
Dienemann, E., Ahler, R., & Greenberg, M. (1991). Remediation of the Lipari landfill, America’s #1 ranked Superfund site. Impact Assessment Bulletin, 9, 13-30.
13.
Edelstein, M. (1987). Leger: The story of a contaminated community. In M. Edelstein (Ed.), Contaminated communities: The social and psychological impacts of residential exposure (pp. 17-42). Boulder, CO: Westview.
14.
Edwards, A. (2003). Brownfields redevelopment. Practical Real Estate Lawyer, 19(2), 47-57.
15.
English, M., & Rice, J. (1997). The cleanup and reuse of brownfields: Key issues and policy choices. Knoxville: University of Tennessee, Waste Management Research and Education Institute.
16.
Environmental Law Institute. (1999). Protecting public health at Superfund sites: Can institutional controls meet the challenge?Washington, DC: Author.
17.
Finegold, A., & Spiliotopoulos, D. (1998). Economic growth and environmental protection through revitalizing America’s brownfields. Washington, DC: National Governors’ Association.
18.
Gaspar, C., & Van Burik, D. (1998). Local government use of institutional controls at contaminated sites. Washington, DC: International City/County Managers Association.
19.
Greenberg, M., Miller, K., Lowrie, K., & Mayer, H. (2001). Surveying the land: Brownfields in medium-sized and small communities. Public Management, 83(1), 8-26.
20.
Hersh, R., Probst, K., Wernstedt, K., & Mazurek, J. (1997). Linking land use and Superfund cleanups. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
21.
Hersh, R., & Wernstedt, K. (1999). Land use risk and Superfund cleanups: At the nexus of policy and practice. Public Works Management & Policy, 4(1), 31-40.
22.
Hird, J. (1994). The political economy of environmental risk: Superfund. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
23.
Howland, M. (2000). The impact of contamination on the Canton/southeast Baltimore land market. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(4), 411-420.
24.
ICF Consulting and The E.P. Systems Group, Inc. (1999, March). An assessment of state brownfield initiatives. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research.
25.
Mazmanian, D., & Morell, D. (1992). Beyond superfailure: America’s toxics policy for the 1990s. Boulder, CO: Westview.
26.
Meyer, P., & Lyons, T. (2000). Lessons from private sector brownfield redevelopments: Planning public support for urban regeneration. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(1), 46-57.
27.
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. (2005). 2005annualreport. Accessed September29,2005 from www.dec.state/website/der/2005annualreport.pdf
28.
Page, G., & Berger, R. (in press). Characteristics and land use of contaminated brownfield properties in voluntary cleanup agreement programs. Land Use Policy.
29.
Page, G., & Rabinowitz, H. (1994). The potential for redevelopment of contaminated brownfield sites. Economic Development Quarterly, 8, 353-363.
30.
Pepper, E. (1997). Lessons from the field: Unlocking economic potential with an environmental key. Washington, DC: Northeast Midwest Institute.
31.
Probst, K. (1995). Footing the bill for Superfund cleanups: Who pays and how?Washington, DC: Brookings Institution and Resources for the Future.
32.
Probst, K., & Portney, P. (1992). Assigning liability for cleanups: An analysis of policy options. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.
33.
Robertson, H. (1999). One piece of the puzzle: Why state brownfields programs can’t lure businesses to the urban cores without finding the missing pieces. Rutgers Law Review, 51, 1075-1132.
34.
Simons, R. (1998). How many urban brownfields are out there? An economic base contraction analysis of 31 US cities. Public Works Management & Policy, 2(3), 267-273.
35.
Simons, R., & El Jaouhari, A. (2001). Local government intervention in the brownfield arena. Economic Development Commentary, 25(3), 267-273.
36.
Simons, R., Pendergrass, J., & Winson-Geideman, K. (2003). Quantifying long-term environmental regulatory risk for brownfields: Are reopeners really an issue?Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 46(2), 257-269.
37.
Smith, J., & Garcia, M. (2002). From Superfund site to developable property: The case of Rentokil. Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 45(2), 157-179.
38.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1988). Are we cleaning up? 10 Superfund case studies (Publication No. OTA-ITE-362). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
39.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1989). Coming clean: Superfund’s problems can be solved (Publication No. OTA-ITE-433). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
40.
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). State of the states on brownfields: Programs for cleanup and reuse of contaminated sites. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
41.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1990). The revised Hazard Ranking System: Background information (Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Publication No. 9320.7-03FS). Washington DC: Author.
42.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1991). National Priorities List characterization project (Publication No. 9345.1-09-0). Washington, DC: Author, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
43.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1992). Superfund at work: Valley of the Drums cleanup. A Superfund benchmark (Solid Waste and Emergency Response Publication No. EPA520-F-92-006). Washington, DC: Author.
44.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1995a). Land use decisions in the remedial process (Publication No. OSWER 9355.0-55, EPA/540/R-95/037, PB95-963230). Washington, DC: Author.
45.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (1995b). Users guide to the RPM site data (Publication No. PB95-169751). Washington, DC: Author, Office of Emergency and Remedial Response.
46.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2005). Superfund site status. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from www.epa.gov/superfund/site/npl/status
47.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2000a). Brownfields: Information on the programs of EPA and selected states (Letter Report, GAO/GAO-01-52). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
48.
U.S. General Accounting Office. (2000b). Superfund: Analysis of costs at five Superfund sites (GAO/RCED-00-22). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
49.
U.S. Senate, Committee on Environment and Public Works. (1983). A legislative history of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (Vol. 1, Serial no. 97-14). Washington DC: Government Printing Office.
50.
Wernstedt, K. (2001). Devolving Superfund to Main street. Journal of the American Planning Association, 67(3), 293-313.
51.
Wernstedt, K., Hersh, R., & Probst, K. (1999). Grounding hazardous waste cleanups: A promising strategy?Land Use Policy, 16, 45-55.
52.
Winson-Geideman, K., Simons, R., & Pendergrass, J. (2004). Tracking remediation and redevelopment trends of brownfield clean-up programs: The Cook County experience. Journal of Environmental Planning & Management, 47(3), 393-405.
53.
Wright, J. (1997). Risks and rewards of brownfield redevelopment. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
54.
XL Capital. (2002). The XL environmental land reuse report 2002. Retrieved June 24, 2004, from http://www.xlenvironmental.com/landreuse/reportpdfs/2002/2002_landreusereport.pdf
