1112

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING , from page 5

save energy and money, minimize the carbon footprint, and increase the lifespan of the project. Foster weighs in, too: ❚ ❚ When underground storage tanks or hazardous waste site remedies are not proceeding through the site-closure process in a timely manner, a professional review of the remedy (how the site will be remediated) and monitoring program (sam- pling events during and after remediation) can often acceler- ate site closure and may reduce the client’s risk and cost. ❚ ❚ For clients operating multiple properties or facilities across multiple states, Kleinfelder’s Global Technical Network has provided clients with a programmatic approach, which pro- vides streamlined, single-point-of-contact contracting, consis- tent methodologies, site-specific solutions, quality assurance, and competitive pricing through efficiencies of scale. ❚ ❚ When clients have complex and tough problems, they need support from highly qualified technical specialists that can provide creative and innovative solutions using proven tech- nologies that will gain regulatory support without exposing clients to experimental or research approaches.

WHY HIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT? Flood provides a few examples of work and clients with which the firm has expe- rience: ❚ ❚ For cities served by combined sewer systems, green infra- structure – such as right-of-way bioswales and stormwater green streets – Hatch Mott MacDonald has helped prevent sewage from overflowing into waterways when snow or rain- fall is heavy. It has worked with clients to integrate green infrastructure into traditional solutions to maximize project value. ❚ ❚ Hatch Mott MacDonald’s environmental consulting work has seen an increased focus on the protection and restoration of coastlines, the development of port and harbor infrastruc- ture, and navigation-related projects. At a time when ports and coastal infrastructure are increasingly multimodal, a life- cycle design approach adds long-term value and protects the environment through resilient infrastructure. ❚ ❚ The firm has provided solutions for existing infrastructures to

GREEN , from page 6

ATLANTA , from page 7

impacts of material chemistry on human health. The Liv- ing Building Challenge employs a Red List to prohibit specific materials, and LEED v4 requires environmental product declarations, health product declarations, or third-party dis- closure certifications, such as Cradle2Cradle. Landreneau agrees with Parr about industry changes. “In the past, being more efficient than code or getting LEED certification (or comparable) was perceived as green. Now, the market has become more sophisticated and the mag- nitude of our environmental challenges has become more apparent,” she says. “Today, there is a sense that ‘green,’ or true sustainability, must be reaching toward net zero, re- generative and resilient design. What we considered ‘green’ a couple of years ago is the new baseline. This is confirmed by increasing adoption of green codes, such as IgCC, that ac- tually make design and construction criteria roughly equiv- alent to a LEED Certified or Silver rating the legal baseline for new construction. There is also a movement toward giv- ing social equity equal importance in triple-bottom-line as- sessments, whereas before there was more of an emphasis on balancing the environmental and economic issues, al- most to exclusion of social impacts.” AN EYE ON ENERGY USERS. Lincoln Pearce, principal at KJWW, reports that more cities are adopting energy reporting ordi- nances that require public buildings of certain sizes to pub- licly disclose their building energy consumption. “Owners of large commercial buildings across the U.S. are increasingly facing public scrutiny of their facilities’ energy use. Energy reporting ordinances – which require disclosure of a building’s energy consumption – are now in effect in 14 cities from coast to coast,” Pearce says. “Beyond mere compliance, these municipalities hope that putting building energy use on public display will motivate (some would say ‘shame’) owners of inefficient, energy-wasting properties to make improvements – resulting in cleaner, more energy-efficient communities and lower utility costs for tenants.”

❚ ❚ 48 percent urban tree canopy ❚ ❚ 30,000 cleantech jobs in Metro Atlanta ❚ ❚ 64 percent of residents within a quarter-mile walk of green space ❚ ❚ 42,000+ certified EarthCraft housing units ❚ ❚ 50 percent of jobs in city within half-mile walk of public tran- sit ❚ ❚ 4,777 acres of parks ❚ ❚ 65 public electric vehicle charging stations ❚ ❚ 66 miles of bike lanes and trails

❚ ❚ 25 farmers markets ❚ ❚ 385 LEED facilities Future goals include:

❚ ❚ Water management. Assess and track 20 percent of peren- nial streams annually, reduce stormwater runoff by 6.4 million gallons annually per 1-inch storm, and achieve a 20 percent reduction in per capita citywide water consumption by 2020. ❚ ❚ Air quality. Meet or exceed the National Ambient Air Qual- ity Standard for ozone by year-end 2015, meet or exceed the 2012 NAAQS for fine particles by 2015, increase the number of clean commuters by 25 percent during two week smog sea- son clean commuter challenge, and achieve a citywide green- house gas emissions reduction of 15 percent by 2020. ❚ ❚ Energy efficiency and renewables. Increase the number of residents actively completing home energy audits to 10 per- cent by 2015 year-end, triple the renewable capacity by 2015, and reduce citywide commercial building energy consumption 20 percent by 2020. ❚ ❚ Land use. Surpass and maintain a 50 percent engagement rate throughout city parks by 2015 end, and have all residents within a half-mile walking distance to a park or green space. For a more comprehensive list of accomplishments and plans, visit p2catl.com .

THE ZWEIG LETTER JULY 20, 2015, ISSUE 1112

Made with FlippingBook Annual report