Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-5r2nc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T06:17:19.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commentary: Delisting and Redeveloping Brownfields in Texas: A Question of Effectiveness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 July 2009

Stephanie Garcia  and
Craig E. Colten
Stephanie Garcia*
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Southwest Texas State University, San Marcos
Craig E. Colten
Affiliation:
Department of Geography and Anthropology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge
*
Department of Geography, Southwest Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666; (e-mail) [email protected].
Get access

Abstract

In spring 1995, the US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) announced plans to “delist” over 24,000 sites from its inventory of potential Superfund sites known as CERCLIS (Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System). The Clinton Administration hoped that by taking sites that had a very low probability of harboring severe contamination off the federal inventory, they could lift the cloud of environmental uncertainty; and with a gentle federal boost, laissez-faire development would improve conditions in the neediest neighborhoods. Through a review of the delisted sites available via Land View III, local records on brownfield properties, interviews with brownfields coordinators, and Texas Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) inventories, we tabulated the number of delisted sites that were included in the two redevelopment efforts in Texas—the federal brownfields program and state VCP. The most obvious element of this tabulation is the small correspondence between delisted sites and brownfield or VCP efforts. While there is legitimate reason to claim success for the brownfield and voluntary cleanup programs for stimulating redevelopment, they have had little impact on the delisted sites. A national assessment of the process might point to states where there is greater congruence and identify the steps necessary to create greater overlap nationwide.

Type
Features & Reviews
Information
Environmental Practice , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 2001 , pp. 122 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, R. H. 1997. Superfund and the Evolution of Brownfields. William & Mary Environmental Law & Policy Review 21(1):265–292.Google Scholar
Avinger, M., Brownfields Manager, City of Dallas Economic Development Office. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 20 June, San Marcos.Google Scholar
Black, T. 1995. Brownfields Cleanup. Urban Land 54(6):47–51.Google Scholar
Bruder, R. B. 1999. New Realities Surround Brownfield Investments. National Real Estate Investor 41(8):112.Google Scholar
Chalmers, J. A., and Jackson, T. O.. 1996. Risk Factors in the Appraisal of Contaminated Property. The Appraisal Journal LXTV (1):44–58.Google Scholar
Cleveland Plain Dealer. 1995. Superfund to “De-list” Sites to Spur Urban Development, 26 01.Google Scholar
Columbus Dispatch. 1999. Jury Out on Brownfields, 3 05.Google Scholar
Guerrero, S., Rio Grande Council of Governments. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 24 02, San Marcos.Google Scholar
Hansen, K., Regulatory Environmental Coordinator, City of Fort Worth Department of Environmental Management. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 24 02, San Marcos.Google Scholar
Jaconetty, T. A. 1999. Revitalizing Urban Brownfields—A National, State, and Local Effort to Reclaim Blighted Properties. Assessment Journal 6(4):56–67.Google Scholar
Jay, J. Senior Planner, San Antonio Neighborhood Commercial Revitalization Program, Neighborhood Action Department. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 29 02, San Marcos.Google Scholar
New York Times. 1995. EPA Helping Cities to Revive Industrial Sites, 4 12.Google Scholar
Nixon-Mendez, N., Historic Preservation Officer, City of Laredo Department of Planning. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 24 02, San Marcos.Google Scholar
Ramchandani, M. S. 1999. Brownfields Revisited. Urban Land 58(10):12–14.Google Scholar
Roddewig, R. J. 1997. Using the Cost of Environmental Insurance to Measure Contaminated Property Stigma. The Appraisal Journal LXV(3): 304–308.Google Scholar
St. Louis Post-Dispatch. 1995. EPA to Reduce Superfund List by 25,000 Sites to Help Cities, 26 01.Google Scholar
Simons, R. A., and Iannone, D.. 1997. Brownfields: Supply and Demand. Urban Land 56(6):36–38, 78.Google Scholar
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission. 1997. Introducing the Voluntary Cleanup Program. Texas VCP News 1:1.Google Scholar
Turner, W., Vice President, KMA Environmental [Galveston]. 2000. Telephone interview by author, 22 06, San Marcos.Google Scholar
US Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. The Brownfields Action Agenda, http://www.epa.gov/swerosps/bf/ascii/action.txt. 23 03.Google Scholar
Washington Post. 1995. EPA to Cut Sites from Superfund: Properties Cleared of Waste Are Open to Development, 4 02.Google Scholar