When it comes to residential development, there are typically two types of site that are considered – greenfield and brownfield. The answer was once cut and dry, but obtaining planning permission for greenfield sites is not quite as straightforward as it once was. Brownfield sites, meanwhile, come with their own drawbacks. Here, we’ll put both under the microscope, hoping to offer a more balanced insight into the query.
Greenfield
Pros – As undeveloped agricultural land, greenfield sites are generally more flexible as there is more space to work with and nothing substantial to remove. This allows for more efficient layouts and can save on price. It’s effectively a blank canvas. As you’re in ‘the middle of nowhere’ there is also far less a chance of residents being disrupted by construction.
Cons – There has been a lot of noise made recently with local constituencies and initiatives like Campaign Protect Royal England (CPRE) kicking up a fuss over greenfield development. This has led to a 44 per cent increase in brownfield development and a situation where it’s that much harder to get greenfield planning permission. There are also valid concerns about pollution and congestion, with those who live in these green areas worried that the idyllic landscapes they once knew will disappear and become urban sprawls.
Brownfield
Pros – To catch up to increasing demand for housing, the UK needs to be building in excess of 250,000 homes a year. This means the government are actively encouraging brownfield site development. Indeed, the government is currently trying to approve plans to develop 90 per cent of brownfield sites in the UK by 2020, meaning planning permission will be much easier to obtain. The sites are also often easier to develop on as water, sewer, electricity and road infrastructure might already exist. There are economic benefits too, as most brownfield sites can be more easily transformed into public spaces and bring a new lease of life to otherwise rundown areas.
Cons – Unlike greenfield land, which is often completely fresh and untouched, brownfield sites are typically a more complicated situation, with existing buildings that might need to be demolished and sites that might need to be cleared. There’s also the unforeseen circumstances to compete with. The site might be contaminated with pollutants, for example, and if that contamination is decades old then it might be almost impossible to find whoever was initially responsible for it.
Ultimately, there’s no right or wrong answer here. It’s true that greenfield sites need protection, but in the same breath, governmental restrictions have promoted the use of brownfield sites for residential developers and property groups such as Andrews. Britain is in the midst of a housing crisis and the truth is that developments will need to be made on both sites before that crisis can be put to bed.