Government policy focuses on the use of brownfield land for development, ostensibly to reduce the use of greenfield land. Yet using data from Camborne-Redruth shows that there is a often a significant gap between policy and practice.
There is an implicit assumption in planning polices and proposals that Camborne-Redruth has vast areas of brownfield land. Images are projected of dereliction and wasteland. Such a perception lends credibility to the objective of focusing development in Camborne-Redruth. By developing brownfield land, greenfield land is retained ensuring that Government targets for maximising development on brownfield land are met and that Cornwall retains its image as a green, rural retreat. Also areas of "waste land" are ostensibly brought back to productive use. This all conjures up an ideal world. Yet the reality is disturbingly different..
Much of the land developed since the early sixties was greenfield (analysis of the 470 hectares of land developed since 1958 shows that brownfield accounted for 70 hectares, only15% of the total), and most of the land currently allocated or proposed to be allocated is also greenfield (The proposals in the CPR-AAP for 4,140 dwellings require 100 hectares (245 acres), of which 70% will be greenfield land.
The comparable figure for employment - meaning land on which offices, warehouses, and factories will be built - is 78% greenfield). All of the alternative options for housing development listed by Kerrier are greenfield. Despite the seeming focus on using brownfield land, Kerrier District Council admits that within the next ten years there won’t be any significant brownfield land left to develop!
Pool has been cited as the main area of brownfield land. Analysis of the CPR-AAP, and including areas proposed by the RDA for acquisition, indicates there are 68 hectares of land intended to be developed. A breakdown of the figures is illustrative. Of the total, nine hectares are actually greenfield while 26 consists of already developed land*, leaving 33 which is actually brownfield. Paradoxically, nearly half of the brownfield land - 15 hectares - is to be used as open space, continuing the long tradition of converting old mining areas into green open space while green open space is turned into developed land.
So whereas the rhetoric involves using brownfield, the reality is significantly different. [* The developed land consists of businesses and houses currently in use, some open space (previously reclaimed), together with existing premises currently vacant.]
The whole issue of what is brownfield and whether it should be developed and for what purpose requires careful scrutiny. Simply using the presence of limited brownfield land in an area, as a reason for over development is unwise and unsustainable.
