Why you should build on derelict broken land
You might be tempted to build on the best spot in your options, where people gather, play and generally have a great time. However, it's not the ideal place to create. The quality of the spot is the end result of many factors including pedestrian traffic, lighting, privacy or even simply nature. There is no doubt developing such land would tip the balance over and cost the local community a great loss.
To avoid this situation, it is recommended by Christopher Alexandar in his book "A Pattern Language" to build on derelict or site that are unused. In that scenario, the architect or designer will be able to turn the site around and realize its full potential, whether it is a private residence or a community hub. The logic is rather straight forward, you don't want to reduce the quality of the region by redeveloping where wonderful moments are created, and you want to provide value by repairing a site to add a good space to the area. That also reduce the risk of creating worse spaces since the site already requires repairing.
Albeit the principle not being widely known, we can see its implementation in retrofitting, adaptive reuse and refurbishment projects. They converts abandoned and derelict spaces back into functional spaces that could fit into our society again. However, as a personal opinion I oppose to simply refurbishing its interior without making changes that can signify its transformation. For example, an old office tower's interior being refurbished without also updating its appearance. In such cases the public's impression of the building might remain unchanged, seeing an soulless old tower that is out of place, and out of its time. That however doesn't cover historic buildings and conservation since the goal for reintroducing live into the space is prioritized under the preservation of its original feature and historic value.
With the power to reshape community, developments should not just target high-value regions but focus on derelict sites and regions that can be further improved. In that case, investor will also potentially get a higher return of investment since the initial value of the site is low and the development can increase the value in a much higher ratio than redeveloping quality spaces. This section is indeed a justification for developers and investors that value monetary returns, but I truly think by doing so it would also improve reputation and unquantifiable values.
In conclusion, don't destroy a already nice place, make another nice space! Two nice spaces are much more preferable compared to a redeveloped and potentially not so nice place!.
-Toby
If you find this interesting and want to chat, come join our Discord!