Brownfield vs greenfield – which is better for developers? - Regent Land & Developments (2024)
What happens when property developers have to choose whetherto build on brownfield or greenfield land? There are pros and cons to each typeof site and it may even depend on the specific requirements of the project asto whether one is a preferable option over another. In this blog, we take alook at some of the factors developers will need to take into considerationwhen making their decision.
What is the difference between brownfield and greenfield?
Put simply, brownfield land is a site that has beenpreviously built on, which is why this is usually located in an urban area.Greenfield land is a site that hasn’t been built on – usually in a rural orcountryside area.
It is generally easier to obtain planning permission forbrownfield sites. In fact, the government are actively encouraging developersto build on brownfield land by aiming to approve the planning permission for90% of the UK’s brownfield sites by 2020. In conjunction with this, they haveplaced further restrictions on developing greenfield sites to encouragedevelopers to opt for brownfield sites instead.
The government’s increasing restrictions over thedevelopment of greenfield sites in recent years is to prevent the loss ofcountryside and wildlife. As there are already a plethora of brownfield sites,they are keen for developers to make better use of it before losing any moregreen spaces. There is also a concern about increased pollution in rural areas,as commuters will need to journey from their homes in the countryside intourban areas for work if more developments are built on greenfield sites.
Constructiontimes
When building on a previously developed area, there islikely to be a higher risk of running into a complication that will delay theconstruction, as opposed to building on a completely clear piece of greenfieldland. Brownfield sites can be in areas that were used for industrial purposes –such as factories, which may carry a risk of being contaminated. Anydecontamination that needs to occur to make the site safe for occupation fallsto the developer and rectifying the problem can set a project back.
Cost
The potential costs involved in clearing an area ofbrownfield land for construction can make a development more costly than if ithad been built on a greenfield site. However, there are also cost benefits tobe had, as some of the infrastructure for the development, such as roads,electricity lines and water supply, may already be in place, whereas they wouldhave to be built on a greenfield site.
In summary, there are different considerations for developers when choosing between brownfield and greenfield sites but, wherever possible, brownfield land is a preferable option. There are numerous pros to redeveloping urban sites – which you can read about in our blog, the benefits of brownfield land regeneration – that outweigh any cons.
While brownfield sites tend to be surrounded by other properties and often encroachments, greenfield sites
greenfield sites
Greenfield land is a British English term referring to undeveloped land in an urban or rural area either used for agriculture or landscape design, or left to evolve naturally. These areas of land are usually agricultural or amenity properties being considered for urban development.
Cost. A brownfield site's potential costs can be higher when compared to a greenfield due to the cleaning of the area that may be required to start the construction. It's more affordable to start building from scratch on a greenfield than on a brownfield.
As greenfield sites have more space and are typically in rural or suburban areas, there is an opportunity to build schools, healthcare centres and community hubs. Greenfield sites give architects and developers more freedom to be more forward-thinking in their design and create larger and more attractive developments.
Pros: Redeveloping a Brownfield site not only boosts the economy by creating jobs and lifting property prices, but it improves the environment and creates a safer, healthier space. Bringing a Brownfield site back into use prevents 'urban sprawl' thereby reducing traffic.
As brownfield site are often located in existing towns and cities, 'Much of the infrastructure needed for development, such as road networks, electricity networks and amenities, is already in place, which can reduce developer costs and timescales,' Evolution 5 elaborates.
Brownfields are abandoned, underutilized or contaminated properties. Redeveloping these properties into productive projects mitigates environmental impacts, provides tax revenue and improves the social foundation of these communities. However, brownfields may take longer to develop and could involve more risk.
There are numerous advantages to a greenfield investment, including the following: High level of control over business operations. High level of quality control over the manufacturing and sale of products and/or services. High control over brand image and staffing.
Economic. Brownfields reuse and redevelopment can create local jobs, provide additional tax revenue, and grow the local tax base by increasing area property values.
The bulk of IBM's investments were made in Asia-Pacific, where the company invested in 27 projects with a value of $829m, creating 7070 jobs. In Western Europe, the company invested $818m, creating 966 jobs.
These brownfield project locations, which were formerly used for large manufacturing facilities, railroads, petrol stations, and oil refineries, are primarily located in Western nations. Some examples of brownfield project locations are abandoned chemical industries, oil refineries, and heavy manufacturing facilities.
Literal examples of greenfield projects are new factories, power plants, airports which are built from scratch on greenfield land. Those facilities which are modified/upgraded are called brownfield land projects (often the pre-existing site/facilities are contaminated/polluted.)
While a Greenfield approach represents a complete reengineering of your SAP ERP, a Brownfield approach is more like an upgrade. Using the Brownfield approach, you can get SAP S/4HANA up and running, and at the same time, migrate your existing SAP workflows and systems over to the newest version of SAP S/4HANA.
The clear advantage of a brownfield investment strategy is that the building is already constructed, therefore reducing the start-up costs. The time devoted to construction can be avoided as well.
Brownfield sites have the potential for cost savings and maximum return on investment. As most brownfield sites are in cities or towns, much of the infrastructure needed for development is already nearby. This infrastructure includes road networks, electricity and water networks, and amenities.
Redeveloping brownfields enhances our communities, and benefits can include improving human health, cleaning up the environment, removing blight, or stabilizing declining neighborhoods.
Greenfield projects: Project investments that relate to a DBFOM that is recently awarded or under construction. Brownfield projects: Project investments in infrastructure assets that existed before the time of procurement or that were previously greenfields, but are in operation at the time the investment is made.
A greenfield site is a new area that has not been explored or drilled before, while a brownfield site is an existing area that has been partially or fully explored or mined before. The main difference between them is the amount and quality of available data and information.
Introduction: My name is Greg O'Connell, I am a delightful, colorful, talented, kind, lively, modern, tender person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.
We notice you're using an ad blocker
Without advertising income, we can't keep making this site awesome for you.
