Re: SUGGESTIONS FOR THE EPA BROWNFIELDS '98 CONFERENCE?

[CHARLES PATRIZIA <CAPATRIZIA@phjw.com>]

The first issue for any developer is whether the site is suitable for the
intended purpose -- if the site isn't as good for the intended use, or if it
will cost more to prepare and develop the site than another suitable site,
then the issue of community interests never gets teed up.  Remember
that from the developer's perspective, it's only worth taking on the
brownfields issues if the site has other attributes (location,
transportation resources, etc.) that give it value beyond what it will take
to rehabilitate.

Once a site has passed through that examination, then community
concerns are, at least for successful developers, an important issue. 
As others have pointed out, state authorities will look to the community's
reaction in setting clean-up standards; communities have a role in the
permitting process.  And good developers want to be good neighbors.  

On the other hand, a community group which pushes for a pristine
standard, especially early in the process, is very likely to live with a site
that remains contaminated -- developers want a site that can be
developed on time and on budget.   Risks of delay and risk of an ever
more stringent standard are two reasons why developers often look to
greenfield sites rather than brownfields.  If brownfields are to be
developed, communities must be involved, but they must also be realistic
about what a developer can do economically.