brownfields.cz IURS- institut pro udržitelný rozvoj sídel o.s. Jiřina Bergatt Jackson

1. Visualising and regenerating brownfields in CZ www.brownfields.czIURS- institut pro udržitelný rozvoj sídel o.s.Jiřina Bergatt Jackson IURS 9.9.2010

2. About IURS IURS is a non-profit advocacy, research and project implementation organization, which aims are: • working to support sustainable land use development practices, • strongly focused on issues of underused urban land, containment of sprawl and sustainable urbandevelopment, • to foster broad coalitions that enhance the competitiveness of accessibleand equitable urban development and redevelopment.

3. Project BRIBAST Project BRIBAST http://fast10.vsb.cz/bribast - Brownfields in Baltic States – Lifelong Educational Project was designed to introduce education about brownfields into Baltic states. Project had 7 partners from 4 countries and was financed by the Lifelong Learning Programme. Project BRIBAST was an adaptation of its predecessor, the project LEPOB http://fast10.vsb.cz/lepob, which originated concepts of these educational materials. Outcome of BRIBAST project are: Brownfield handbook, Brownfields course and Teachers notes in English, Lithuanian and Latvian languages. PARTNERS ARE BEING SOURT TO TRANSFER THE PROJECT TO BALCAN STATES If interested to partner a new project please contact: barbara.vojvodikova@vsb.cz

4. Project CircUse Many regions are confronted with massive urban sprawl, economic crisis and effects of demographic changes, which are all causing unsustainable land use patterns and have an impacts on competiveness and on climate change. Circular land use management is an integrative policy and governance approach, philosophy can be expressed with the slogan: “avoid – recycle –compensate“. Main project outputs are: • Development of an overall strategy towards circular land use management • Tools and instruments of Circular Land Use Management • Pilot Projects 12 Partners from 6 countries, project duration 3/2010 – 02/2013, Project No: 2CE174P4, www.circuse.eu

5. Presentation content • CZ BF history and past inventory efforts • Sitting inbetweenchairs and potential offered by the new planning law • Barriers to BF data use and levels of tackling brownfields • Easy and communicative local inventories • The process • The products • What does data analyses reviel • Lead to BF strategy • Does inventorying supportsBF reuse? • What is there to learn from the CZ experience? • Case study example: Ústí nad Labem

6. CZ BF History/1 • 1997 Impacts of BF begin sensed in a piecemeal manner • 2001 Realization of the BF issue, named as a problem category • 2002 First BF projects attempted • 2002 First analytical report on BF • 2003 First EU know-how transfer projects • 2003 Launch of industrial BF remediation program • 2003 First BF web source and handbook • 2003 National development plan priorities for SF 2004-06 • 2004 First competent assessment of scope of BF problem • 2004 Completion of first major BF developments • 2004-6SF priorities spur private interest in finding eligible BF sites • 2005 First research BF programs • 2005 Program for communities dealing with army BF • 2005 Regional BF data inventories tool available • 2006 First attempt for national BF inventory (CzechInvest) • 2006 First BF handbook and course materials for professionals

7. CZ BF history /2 • 2006 National reference framework priorities for SF 2007-13 • 2007 New Law - inventory of already urbanized land for reuse • 2007 SF and their programs priorities • 2007 Priv. dev. boom of regional property including BF • 2007 CzechInvest BF expertise collapse • 2008 PPP partnership concepts introduced • 2008 NB strategy fails to obtain wider support • 2008 SF 2007-13 financed BF projects commence • 2008 BF included in the ORP scale planning support GIS layers • 2009 Recession effects most of commercial BF s projects • 2009 JESSICA contract signed between EIB and Ostrava region • 2009 regional and local authorities forecast serious budget shortfalls, this limits their ability to support public projects • 2009 Regional interests commences in data analyses aiding mitigatory regional BF programs • 2010 Inclusion of BF in planning documents • 2010 Local BF strategies start to emerge • 2010 second round of GIS inventorying – for BF no change

8. Past inventory efforts • Report from Project Czech Brownfield Regeneration Strategy, CSF, PHARE project lead consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff (2004) • Inventorying tool from project WB04/40http://www.brownfieldsinfo.cz • City of Brno Inventory http://www2.brno.cz/index.php?nav01=6158 • Brownfield database run by the CzechInvest http://www.brownfieldy.cz/, • Brownfield database run by the Zlín region http://mapy.kr-zlinsky.cz/ost/bf/ • Brownfield database run by the Liberec region http://www2.kraj-lbc.cz/index.php?page=3531 • Brownfield database run by the Ústecký region http://www.regenerace.org/database/U_kraj/search.php

9. Sitting in inbetween chairs • BF remediation is a multidisciplinary subject with no single public overall responsibility for solutions. • BF solutions vary and are not easy to transplant, but the principles are. • BF are not an industrial issue, but mainly a social, an economic and a spatial one. • The spatial aspect of BF in CZ took long time to be acknowledged. • The sectoral focus to achieve coordination was attempted several times, but got so far nowhere. • At LA offices there are planning and development departments, but none as as yet has the overall responsibility.

10. Potential of the new planning law • It visualised BF in planning (previously brownfields was not know category in planning), • it has given qualified planners the right to stigmatised properties as a BF, • it cleared out the BF data publicity issue, • it provided bases for a regular BF inventorying and data update in administrative units called ORP.

11. Barriers and solutions to BF data improvements • Terminology mixing - solved by subdividing the “Jev4” into several layers, helping to keep BF separate from other land types determined for redevelopment, • “Communication” to lay persons, and its suitability to share data between planning and strategic departments - solved by qualitative information added to the listing in the GIS attributes and polygons (photos, assessment of the owner’s ability to improve the property, rough evaluation of likelihood for market uptake of the property est.), • Incompatibility and inconsistency of data - solved by adopting a common methodology and by providing training (focused especially on collection of qualitative criteria and additional attributes in order to avoid subjectivity and inconsistency in classification), • 2 year frequency of survey is too expensive and consideration should be given to 4 year bases – amend law • Legal duty to handle BF data in ORPs is not of a sufficient scale – regions need to be “motivated” by a program (aimed on improving the regional interest to coordinate) or possibly by amendment of the law. • GIS skills and costs barriers – can be solved by simplified tools

12. Levels of tackling BF • Comunity level – individual BF projects, partnerships, local BF programs, local delivery vehicles • OPR level – detail databases, analyses of data, formulation of local BF policies, work with owners • Regional level – regional BF strategic databases, regional BF mitigatory programs, key BF sites promotion, regional delivery vehicles, education, information • National level - swots from regional databases, policy, programs, tools, legal changes, education, information exchange

13. Easy and communicative local inventories Data for community use need to be in a suitable, easy access, low skills formats, but they have to satisfy the new law requirements and besuitable for purposes of spatial planning • An effective and comparable data surveys with minimal costs • Data formats supporting analysis, benchmarking and other community development use • Easilyaccessible outputs allowing local advocacy of BF issue: indicators, printed brownfield cards with photos and locations, graphs and simple maps.

14. Easy tools - process • The survey • Start up training • The fieldwork stage • Expert stage • GIS stage • Analytical stage • Strategy preparation stage • Strategy implementation stage THERE IS A LITTLE POINT OF DATA GATHERING IF THIS DATA IS NOT USED FOR ANALYSES AND THE ANALYSES DOES NOT LEAD TO AN ACTION

15. Easy tools - products

16. Easy tools - indicators * Kalkulace bez předpokládaných brownfieldů

17. What analyses reviel BF data analyses • Types, sizes, locations, • Ownersip and development patterns • Accessibility • Development limits • Risks patterns • Trends • Ect. An overall analyses • Key barriers • Key issues • Key sites • Key opportunities • Main threats • Recommendation and grounds for an action

18. Leed to a BF strategy • Data collection in an analysable format • In depth analyses, which helped to understand city´s brownfield situation • Public meetings with stakeholders • Consultation with political leadership • Close cooperation between the consultants and the city Strategic development department • Publishing of strategy version on web for commenting • ………

19. How does inventorying supportsBF reuse? • To make national, sectoral or regional BF help programs, data and its analyses are a must. • Inventorying does tend to„visulalise“ the BF issue. If the incorrectly focused, then the analyses can be misleading and the issue can be missed. • Inventorying efforts tend to drive public aid towards the „hard measures. • For BF reuse the „soft measures! are however more beneficial, as they support development skills and sustainable bankable projects.

20. What is there to learn from the CZ experience? It takes 10-15 years to build up national expertise in order to: • address BF in a coordinated manner • adjust legal framework • achieve comparative data • be able conceive integrated regeneration programs and other useful tools • spend public money effectively • focus research correctly • focus education correctly • curb Greenfield developmentand tune other policies • start sharing knowhow and experiences CZ BF KNOWHOW IS HIGHEST AMIDES THE CEC COUNTRIES, BUT WE STILL DO NOT HAVE IT RIGHT!

21. CASE STUDYÚstí nad Labem

22. Key BF locationsTovární

23. Key BF locationsStřekov

24. Key BF locations Krásné Březno

25. Key BF locationsNeštěmice

26. Key BF locationsPředlice

27. Analyses Impact of BF size

28. AnalysesStatus of BF

29. AnalysesABC BF categorization D

30. AnalysesApproaches and policies BF as an issue are identified in the document „City Development Strategy until 2015“)priority 3.1,Creation of quality urban development (approved 2007) The first proposal for the new local plan (March 2010) is paying not much attention to BF reuse and it is deregulating a vast amount of Greenfield land for development City feels powerless because it owns only a few BF City activities towards BF owners so far brought not much of a positive outcome

31. AnalysesMain trends • Location on infrastructure + • Environmental quality + • Inner city quality improvements + • Regional city status + • Demography figures + • Education attainment - • Market - • Economic performance - • Entrepreneurship- • Unemployment-

32. Analyses outcomesKey issues • 79 brownfields,11.7% of build up area • 429ha of brownfields (cc 2.4 ha regen.) • At this rate regeneration would take around 300 years • 3 large areas, all with state/state companies owned land in their midst • 22% of city B. land is owned in this form and there is a little cooperation so far • Competition between large brownfield locations for development activities • New proposal for the LP adds to this another cc 700ha of Greenfields (togethercc 1100ha of developable land!) • Low market and competition of other large regional towns • Low proactively of local government • No regional partnership, • Insufficient and uncoordinated policy • No delivery structure • Low development skills

33. Approaching brownfields in low market situation • Partnerships and public sec. proactivity • Regional partnerships • Stakeholders cooperation • Pro-activity of local government • Creating delivery vehicles • Development tools • Integrated development approach especially for large brownfields areas • Curbing the Greenfields deregulation • Taking brownfields from the regime of developable land • Economic tools • Supporting development of bankable projects • Placing public project onto brownfields • Improving development skills • Marketing tools • Improving city image • Marketing development opportunities • Mitigation measures • Supporting temporaly use for brownfields • Creating alternative uses for brownfields (growing of timber, energy plant est.)

34. Main goal of the strategy • In 10 years to reduce brownfield land by 100ha (23,28 % reduction), while creating conditions, which enables owners and investors finding new uses for brownfields , so that brownfields stop being a burden and start to bring city an income or other wider benefits. (100% = 429,5ha)

35. Priorities PRIORITY 1 • Exploiting all the legal, formal and informal tools, which aid brownfields reuse PRIORITY 2 • Active identification of financing sources and resources with an aim of maximizing a leverage effect PRIORITY 3 • Increase of information flow and improvement of development skills PRIORITY 4 • Improving quality of life in the city

36. Indicators for the strategy deliverance

37. Preconditions for delivering a stategy PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE POLITICAL SUPPORT PARTNERSHIPS PLAN OF ACTION DELIVERYVEHICLE BUDGETS IN PLACE TECHNICAL SKILLS AND COMMITMENT BANKABLE AND FINANCABLE PROJECTS

38. Thank you for your attention Jiřina Bergatt Jackson 602 370 176 jjackson@iurs.cz www.brownfields.cz IURS