The athletic fields on the Harborside Campus of Johnson & Wales University in Providence, RI provide a picturesque setting on the shore of Narragansett Bay. It wasn’t always so ideal. Decades earlier, the site was home to various industries, and it had been classified as a brownfield. JWU has worked hard to revitalize the area, and a key part of that is developing a new waterfront athletic complex.

JWU’s Providence campus began participation in NCAA athletics in 1995. For the next eighteen years, the athletics department rented nearby locations for their outdoor practices and games.

The University hired Woodard & Curran to create a master plan and provide design services to develop a vacant portion of the waterfront brownfield into recreation facilities. These facilities include three natural-grass fields for baseball, softball, and soccer practice, and one state-of-the-art synthetic multi-purpose turf field. The project includes a soil cap over the site, drainage and stormwater management, site grading, and associated structures such as scoreboards, seating berms, bleachers, a grandstand/press box, and more. The athletic fields were designed with best practices in mind, like minimizing sun glare and NCAA compliance.

The athletic facilities are just one part of the brownfield renewal. The complex was designed to integrate with existing and future buildings and the Urban Coastal Greenway — a park and walking path that provides public access to the Bay. Environmental education signage is incorporated throughout the site in partnership with the nearby Save the Bay organization.

“It’s a fantastic site, aesthetically” said Rich Zarlenga, JWU’s project manager, as told to Johnson & Wales University Magazine. “The views of the Bay nicely compliment the [Urban Coastal] Greenway. It transforms brownfields into something the university will be proud of for a long, long time.”

Read more about Woodard & Curran’s property development and site-civil engineering practices, brownfield remediation, athletic field construction services, or the advantages of synthetic turf.

Chemical products are all around us – in our furnishings, personal care products, foods and other items we come into contact with every day. Often, these chemical products may be released to the environment in an uncontrolled way, impacting soil, water and air resources. Whether these products are harmful once released must be determined through the application of science. That application is accomplished through risk assessment. 

Risk assessment is a tool that supplies information about risks to human health or ecological receptors. It helps us understand the dangers of identified contaminants. We use it to direct remediation or to demonstrate that no cleanup is needed. Accurate site-specific risk assessment relies on identifying hazards, defining site boundaries, understanding current and future use, and balancing the needs of various stakeholders. 

There are several key questions that change the variables in any risk assessment:

• Who is exposed to hazards? Workers? Children? Future occupants?
• What are they exposed to and at what concentration? Are there toxic effects?
• When does exposure occur? Now? Later?
• Where is the exposure point?
• Why is the hazard being assessed? 
• How does the exposure occur and how often? What is within your control and influence?Answering these questions will guide a cost-benefit and risk-benefit analysis and influence plans to manage, reduce, or eliminate exposure to hazards. 

In one recent case, Woodard & Curran assessed contamination at a former lead mill. The risk characterization included evaluation of recreational and residential uses as well as the proposed redevelopment of a large, vacant parcel of land. Because the site extended into marine habitats, an ecological evaluation was performed to better quantify impacts to ecological receptors. Based on the presence of potential risk to construction workers, residents, and marine species, we developed a cost-effective remedial strategy to integrate risk-reduction measures. Risk assessment continues to be an essential tool in the restoration of contaminated sites. It will help all stakeholders involved, whether they are land owners, residents, or regulators, evaluate a viable and healthy path forward. 

For more information, contact risk assessment expert Lisa Campe.

Through its National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit program, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates stormwater discharges to waters of the United States from construction projects that ultimately will disturb one or more acres in Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Washington DC, some federal facilities, and most territories and Indian lands.

Projects in these areas that include one acre or more of land disturbance activities such as clearing, grading, excavating, and stockpiling and that discharge to a water of the United States must obtain coverage under the Construction General Permit by filing a Notice of Intent (NOI) with EPA, developing a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and meeting many other requirements.

The new 2012 CGP replaces the expired 2008 CGP, and includes increased and new requirements, such as:

• NOI is now due 14 days prior to construction, instead of 7 days,
• More prescriptive Best Management Practices (e.g. erosion and sediment controls, deadlines for stabilization, pollution prevention, etc),
• Enhanced provisions to address water quality impairments, and 
• Detailed staff training requirements.

Compliance with this permit will require a substantially greater cost and effort. If your project is currently covered by the CGP, you are required to submit a NOI for coverage under the new permit by May 16, 2012, or terminate your coverage. If you are planning a new project, you will be required to obtain coverage under the new CGP. Please contact Woodard & Curran’s stormwater experts for assistance with obtaining coverage for your project. More information, including frequently asked questions (pdf), is available on EPA’s Web site.

Note: There is some good news! The 2012 CGP will not contain numeric effluent limits for turbidity. EPA previously issued a turbidity limit for large sites but removed that limit due to questions on accuracy of data.

Contributed by our Stormwater team

The Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources (DOER) recently initiated a project to develop an energy rating program for commercial buildings in the state. The goal is to make knowing how much energy a building uses as simple as understanding a car’s fuel efficiency. With this effort, Massachusetts is joining the leaders of what is increasingly looking like a national movement to quantify and publicize the energy efficiency (or inefficiency) of buildings.

There are two types of energy rating systems, asset ratings and operational ratings. Asset ratings evaluate a building’s performance based on the thermal and mechanical and electrical systems, ignoring occupant behavior. Operational ratings evaluate a building’s actual energy use by analyzing energy billing data. According to the DOER, asset rating systems allow for direct comparisons among similar buildings, which is more difficult in the case of operational ratings.

The energy ratings systems emerging in this country seek to encourage the move to more efficient buildings and building systems. Whether they will accomplish that is yet to be determined, but the next few years should paint a much clearer picture.

To read more about the DOER program, check out the Spring issue of our Directions newsletter.

Internal EPA memo directs staff toward benefits of Superfund/RCRA site reuse, raises questions about windfall liens

In December 2010, the EPA Office of Site Remediation Enforcement issued an internal memo to Regional Counsel, Enforcement Division Directors, Superfund National Policy Managers, and RCRA National Managers in all EPA regions. The memo included a fact sheet titled “The Benefits of Integrating Reuse to Achieve Enforcement and Environmental Protection Goals.”

The EPA is coaching internal staff on the benefits of reusing land resources at federally regulated cleanup sites with a list that sounds strikingly like Brownfields program benefits, including:

• Reduction of blight;
• Jobs creation and increased property values;
• Creation of open space; and
• Urban redevelopment and smart growth.

An additional ‘benefit’ promoted in the memo is more focused on value for the agency, and has the potential to hinder, rather than promote, reclamation of Superfund and RCRA sites. The fact sheet explains to staff that “EPA may have a windfall lien if an EPA response action increased a property’s fair market value.” The windfall lien is a vehicle under federal statute that allows EPA to recover additional funds via property lien against the increased value of a redeveloped property. This value would come directly off of the balance sheet of a redevelopment project, and is a serious disincentive for prospective developers.

It is exciting to think about the potential for reclamation and reuse of the thousands of cleanup sites regulated under federal oversight. The specter of cost recovery via windfall lien calls into question the value of encouragement to redevelop under EPA’s enforcement policy. It will be important to watch what additional policy changes may occur in the wake of this memo.

Contributed by Dave MacDonald, LSP, PG

Could you be at risk for a lawsuit for poor soil management activities?

A recent news story highlighted the impact to project schedule and cost due to improper disposal of contaminated soil. In this case, a retailer purchased a site in 2005 to build a new store. Unfortunately, the store opening has been delayed several years because contamination in site soils was more extensive than originally identified during due diligence. As a result, soil from grading activities that was previously not identified as contaminated was improperly disposed off-site and the owner of the off-site location subsequently found that the soil was contaminated and sought damages from the retailer. After the contamination was discovered, about 17,500 cubic yards of soil needed to be relocated. At the end of the day, grading of the site resulted in a $14M lawsuit.

New development starts, work on existing sites, grading, refits to parking lots, placement of new buildings or expansions, or site work to comply with stormwater requirements all require management of soil. Due to the nature of this work, soil is displaced to allow for site grading, construction of footings, or installation of utilities and conveyances. As the news story above highlights, the potential for environmental liability exists when handling these soils.

Soil excavation and disposal performed in conjunction with legally mandated environmental cleanup used to be the only obvious instance where regulated handling and off-site disposal of soil was needed. With the tightening of waste handling regulations in many states and changes in the standard of practice that have occurred over the last decade, removing soil from your site for any purpose now represents one of your biggest environmental liabilities.

There are some simple but important things you should do to manage this liability:

Have a soil management plan that clearly communicates the requirements for disturbing, reusing, and disposing of soil. This plan will provide for consistency of soil handling practices within your project teams. Soil management should be included in bids and specifications to contractors to assure that pricing and disposal methods are consistent with your liability management goals.

Consider soil management costs early in project planning. Costs for soil disposal that were unanticipated just because the work was not being performed strictly for site cleanup can cause significant overruns. Avoid this by carrying a line item for soil management costs on every project that breaks ground. 

Be intentional about soil management. In many cases, you may have no choice but to take soil off-site, but in other circumstances, balancing cut and fill may allow for selective reuse of soils on the site. Connect the engineering design work and environmental planning early in the design process to determine the best way to minimize soil handling costs.

Understand your legal obligations and liabilities. Each state will have its own set of requirements for soil handling and disposal. When you are shipping soil across state lines, you will need to comply with requirements in both states. Each receiving facility will have its own requirements, established through permit or by regulation. When considering disposal options, remember that if you own the soil, you remain in the chain of liability. Make sure you work with your attorney and consultant to understand what will be required and prudent.

Whether you are planning a new development, or just operating an existing property, soil management represents an important liability that you must manage when breaking ground. With proper planning, budgeting and communication, you can control this liability and avoid unexpected costs.

Contributed by Dave MacDonald, LSP, PG

It's a nightmare scenario. A regulatory agency has conducts a review of a property where environmental cleanup has been completed and overturns site closure status because of potential indoor air concerns. You followed the rules, even consulted with the agency, and thought you had closed the site. Now, citing changing regulatory priorities, science, and standards, the agency has re-opened the site. Maybe you don't even own the property anymore. You may be exposed to liability or lose tenants when you are forced to sample indoor air in their space. How did this happen?

Regulators and the scientific community have shifted their focus from drinking water issues to subsurface impacts on indoor air quality. This is due to both the high potential for exposure to indoor air (time spent indoors and lack of alternate air sources and because science suggests the way we previously evaluated indoor air concerns is flawed) and that the transport and toxicity of some solvents are even higher than previously suspected. The result: a spotlight on the potential for contamination to move from soil and groundwater beneath buildings to indoor air, or vapor intrusion, potentially placing occupants at risk. In the wake of these changes, new sampling methods, new phases of assessment, new agency scrutiny, and new litigation by tenants and owners have become the norm.

The best defense is a good offense in dealing with this issue. Here are a few recommended "keys to the game".

Put liability control in your plan. Evaluate the potential for this issue to exist when contemplating a purchase or planning your remedial strategy. If you have previously completed remediation and/or closed your site, determine whether this liability may need to be addressed before selling, leasing, or redeveloping.
 
Figure it out now. If you are carrying out new construction and have a known source of contamination in the area of the planned building, conduct focused evaluation right where the building will go. If this evaluation shows a risk, design engineering controls into the construction. Fixing this problem after the building is done will be much more expensive than addressing it up front.
 
Trust, but verify. Engineering controls are a great design element, but somewhere down the line someone is going to ask whether they are working. Your design plan needs to include engineering oversight during installation and performance testing after installation. The standard of practice is moving toward installing means by which the physical performance of the system can be evaluated, rather than conducting indoor air testing. Why? Indoor air testing is expensive, may need to be conducted several times, can cause alarm among building occupants, and, particularly with new construction, may measure other sources of contaminants to indoor air.

Hire smart. Not all consultants or attorneys have experience dealing with vapor intrusion. In light of the fact that differences exist in standards of practice and regulations, make sure you have the right team to solve the problem. Having someone on board who can conduct the human health risk evaluation and knows the latest standards and methods will be critical to overcoming the issue.

Get focused. This is not a distraction or regulatory "flavor of the month" – it is here to stay. No one will be able to argue against protecting the health of the people that live, work or shop inside your building. Address this early in your existing portfolio and in future transactions.

Engage a qualified consultant right away if you are faced with this problem. Indoor air impacts may be expensive to litigate and this will be particularly true if you are not proactive in addressing this new regulatory concern, or if you address it improperly.

Please contact Woodard & Curran if you have any questions on this topic.

Contributed by Lisa Campe, MPH, LSP, Vice President

The New Jersey DEP is advancing contaminated site cleanups thanks to new privatized cleanup program. The Licensed Site Remediation Professional (LSRP) program has passed the New Jersey legislature and will be signed into law by the Governor. This program, informed by successful similar programs in Massachusetts and Connecticut, will speed cleanup of more than 20,000 contaminated sites that have stalled within the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) legislative process due to the volume of cases. This new law will enable qualified professionals to authorize the continuation of site cleanup and drastically increase the number of contaminated sites which are remediated annually, reduce the public's exposure to pollution, create jobs, and increase tax revenues for municipalities.

Cleanups for the majority of environmentally impacted sites will now be overseen by LSRPs. Instead of awaiting direct approvals by the NJDEP, licensed consultants will plan and direct the cleanup needed to comply with environmental laws, and to develop, maintain, or sell the property.

Standards will still be set by the NJDEP, which will conduct audits on 10% of all submissions while maintaining the management over a significant number of challenging cases, as necessary. To perform remediation work in New Jersey, consultants, engineers, and other site remediation professionals must be licensed as an LSRP. LSRPs will have the authority to take a case from start to finish and issue a response action outcome.

Woodard & Curran’s Duff Collins, P.G., Dave MacDonald, P.E., and Michael van der Heijden were closely involved in the development of New Jersey’s LSRP program, providing input to development of the bill and program standards, and testifying before the New Jersey Senate.

This program is a big step forward in getting the backlog of contaminated properties in New Jersey cleaned up and put to beneficial use.

Contributed by Michael van der Heijden

According to two recent studies, LEED-Certified and Energy Star rated buildings save significant energy relative to the national average and make sound investments.

One study, published by the CoStar Group, looked at LEED-certified and Energy Star buildings. It found that these green buildings demand a rent premium, have higher occupancy rates and lower operating costs, and achieve higher sale prices. Essentially, green buildings look like a better investment than non-green buildings.

The other study, conducted by the New Buildings Institute, found that the average LEED for New Construction building use 25-30% less energy than an average building. Ironically, it found that some certified buildings actually use more energy than the code baseline. According to the study, “Variation in results is likely to come from a number of sources, including differences in operational practices and schedules, equipment, construction changes and other issues not anticipated in the energy modeling process. More in-depth analysis of some of the best and worst performers could identify ways to eliminate the poorer outcomes and communicate lessons from the best results.”

Woodard & Curran’s new office expansion in Portland, ME was recently recognized as LEED Certified. When compared to older portions of the building Woodard & Curran also occupies, monthly utility bills in our LEED space show 10% less electricity usage, between 12% and 67% less natural gas usage (heating and cooling season, respectively), and 25% less water consumption.

Our experience confirms the findings of these studies, suggesting that green buildings will soon be the common-sense choice, whether or not states continue to mandate them.

Contributed by Barry Sheff, P.E.

More and more real estate investment trusts are pursuing high-performance building development, and they're doing it because it's good for their bottom line. The article linked above has some very interesting quotes from industry analysts:

“These are all businesses. They're not going green for green's sake. It's the cheapest way to run their businesses…”

“If it's not green, in the near future it won't be considered Class A space. Green is a must-have. It's the best way to attract key tenants and retain them…”

With several states close to enacting high-performance requirements for development, and new high-performance standards coming from ASHRAE, it’s clear that green building isn’t a fad – it’s here to stay.

Contributed by Dave MacDonald, LSP, PG

Mandating Green: LEED Certification Requirements in Connecticut

Connecticut is leading the way with LEED certification requirements. Beginning in January 2009, all construction projects (public & private) in excess of $5 million will be required to meet green building standards (LEED Silver – 33 of 69 points). By 2010, all renovation projects costing more than $2 million will have to meet the standards.

The new law, PA 06-187, exempts schools, parking garages, and maintenance facilities. Connecticut's state web site offers more detailed information on the requirements.

Buildings in the LEED rating system earn points toward levels of certification depending on how many green features are included in the building's design and construction. The basic level is called certification. New buildings with additional green features can earn ratings of silver, gold, or platinum. Among the measures that can earn points are enhanced energy efficiency, use of renewable energy, water conservation, environmentally sensitive site design, redevelopment of brownfields, and stormwater management. Buildings must be rated by an independent rater certified by the U. S. Green Building Council.

New York City recently enacted a similar requirement, and you can expect other states and municipalities to follow suit in the near future. In fact, the New Jersey legislature is considering several bills that promote green building right now.

Contributed by Jay Sheehan, PE

I have found that the most successful development projects use a collaborative approach. Engaging stakeholders in an inclusive planning process is crucial for building community support for a project.

As David Chrislip says in Collaborative Leadership (co-authored with Chris Larson), "If you bring the appropriate people together in constructive ways with good information, they will create authentic visions and sustainable responses to issues and opportunities within their communities and organizations." My participation in the Institute for Civic Leadership’s Collaborative Leadership Intensive reinforced this idea and my own views on the importance of collaboration.

The collaborative design approach ideally yields projects that are in harmony with the community; preserve environmental, scenic, aesthetic, historic, and natural resource values of the area; exceed the expectations of both designers and stakeholders and achieve a level of excellence in people's minds; and are seen as having added lasting value to the community. These values are well described in the Context Sensitive Solutions approach to transportation projects.

Wedding a collaborative process to sustainable design principles can drive amazing results. In the U.S., sustainable building design is exemplified by the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System. 

The intent embodied in the LEED rating system, which itself was developed through a consensus-based collaborative process, drives the types of projects I pursue. My goal in designing projects in the built environment is to give back to the communities and preserve their qualities. The City of Portland is one of my clients, and the qualities of places like Portland are what regularly gains it national recognition as a great place to live, work, and play. I think my best work supports the things that make Maine great.

I try to bring some of the concepts, concerns, and ideas of collaborative and sustainable design to each project my teams work on. Not only does this make the projects exciting to be a part of, but I think it produces more value for the communities involved. These values are shared by some of our local partners, including Winton Scott Architects, Holt and Lachman, and Scott Simons Architects, among others.

Contributed by Barry Sheff, P.E.

Sports and Recreation Facility Development: Proper permitting makes for a timely project

Community revitalization initiatives throughout the U.S. are using active and passive recreation areas as a focal point for development, and it all starts with planning and permitting.

Did you know that understanding how to navigate the permitting process at local, state, and federal levels could make the difference between completing your sports and recreation facility development project on time versus facing years of delays, not to mention avoiding potentially large fines for environmental noncompliance?

From wetlands permitting, to stormwater permitting, to state and federal environmental impact assessments and incorporating conservation measures in project design, permitting is about demonstrating the correct use of common resources.

Permits are issued for specific designs, and are based on the incorporation of best management practices. Woodard & Curran provides this technical support across our company with wetland scientists, planners, and engineers to meet the specific technical needs of your project.

The right site layout and conservation engineering can be the difference between getting project approval and being denied. Woodard & Curran’s engineering staff are LEED-accredited and Low Iimpact Development-certified and can implement Better Site Design practices, incorporating the right green design elements into your project.

Contributed by Anthony Catalano, PE, DEE 

Synthetic Turf Athletic Fields Cut Costs

Did you know that alternative construction products if correctly designed and specified, could result in cost savings of more than $80,000 for a typical synthetic turf field construction project? This can be 10% or more of the typical construction cost. While engineering represents a small percentage of the overall project from a cost perspective; it is the most critical investment made on a project.

By installing a synthetic turf field, the cost per game played over a 10-year period, when considering all capital and maintenance costs, is actually only about a third of the cost of a natural turf field.

The ACEC of New York awarded Woodard & Curran with an Engineering Excellence Award for developing a design solution for four state-of-the-art synthetic turf ballfields that met the Rye Country Day School’s fast-track schedule and reduced long-term field maintenance and labor costs while meeting the needs of the community, as well as state and federal regulatory stormwater management requirements.

Contributed by Anthony Catalano, PE, DEE