2002 Roundtables

Friday, February 1, 2002

Atlanta’s Diminishing Greenspace: Preserving the City in the Trees
Over the last decade, Atlanta’s growth and development has resulted in a tremendous decrease in the amount of greenspace within the City. Four primary funding sources have recently become available to the City for greenspace acquisition and conservation. Additionally, the private sector is addressing this important issue, with the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation offering matching funds to acquire greenspace land trusts inside the Perimeter. Come hear how Atlanta is planning to work with the Governor’s Greenspace Program, this private family foundation, and other sources to protect our biodiversity, air and water quality through its commitment to greenspace conservation.

Speakers:

Report from February 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
by Ben Klehr

A record high attendance at the Feb. 1 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable demonstrated Atlanta's increasing concern over greenspace preservation. More than 150 attendees heard from Atlanta Planning Commissioner Michael Dobbins, the Arthur M. Blank Family Foundation's Margaret Gray and moderator Harvey Young, who coordinates the Department of Natural Resources Georgia Greenspace Program. Dobbins praised a "transformation in attitude" toward metro Atlanta greenspace in the last few years, which he called remarkable. This transformation, he said, may pre-date a "civic decade" for the city of Atlanta. "We've never had our civic decade," Dobbins said. "We've never paused to do what so many other cities in the country have done." Park development and greenspace preservation are just two examples. However, Dobbins said this changing attitude toward land preservation has had adverse affects for already existing greenspaces. Park maintenance fees, according to planning department member Susan Rutherford, cannot come from the same pool of funds as park acquisition fees. As a result, it is more difficult to keep existing parks and greenspaces in the proper condition. Maintenance becomes even more difficult since the lack of previous greenspace planning in Atlanta "puts even more pressure on our existing parks," explained Dobbins.

The Blank Foundation's Gray used her remarks to outline a two-year $30 million program to purchase greenspace inside I-285 that Home Depot co-founder, Arthur M. Blank, and his family announced late last year. Gray said the foundation money would be directed toward purchasing greenspace and funding related issues such as park maintenance fees and urban park development. "We went out there and decided that land preservation was quickly becoming an issue for Atlanta with the kind of development that was undergoing," Gray said.

Gray also expressed hope that the Blank foundation's involvement would help raise additional private funding toward greenspace acquisition and maintenance. "We hope that our jump into this area will bring other lead funders in as well," she added. Young, who was asked by Gov. Roy Barnes to head the DNR's Georgia Greenspace program, pointed out that as a child he was able to roam large tracts of undeveloped land, but that his own children do not have that opportunity while growing up in metro Atlanta. He noted that he believed the Blank Family Foundation's involvement in greenspace was an indicator of things to come. "I think we are likely to see private individuals or groups take responsibility for state parks," he said. "Neighbors are going to want to take more responsibility."

back to top

Friday, March 1, 2002

Building a Sustainable Future: Who’s Going Green?
Thirty to forty percent of our total energy in the United States is used by buildings. Five billion gallons of potable water is flushed down our toilets every day. Concerns over global warming and diminishing resources are prompting leaders in the construction industry to find a better way. The sustainable design movement is beginning to shift our ideas about the built environment through techniques that improve energy efficiency, conserve water, increase durability and enhance indoor air quality. The good news is these strategies are proving to be profitable while helping to preserve local ecosystems. It is no wonder that Atlanta’s universities and businesses are adopting green building policies and standards.

Report from March 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
By Sara Cheshire, sara@southface.org

Speaker Christine Ervin, President, U.S. Green Building Council Moderator Dennis Creech, Southface Energy Institute

Christine Ervin, President of the U.S. Green Building Council, addressed the March Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable on one of the biggest energy users in the country: buildings.

With thirty to forty percent of the total energy in the United States used for buildings, building a sustainable future is dependent on shifting our ideas about the built environment to include energy efficiency, water conservation and healthy indoor air quality techniques. Ervin and the U.S. Green Building Council are actively working toward these goals. Their mission: promoting buildings that are environmentally responsible, profitable and healthy places to live and work.

"There are so many solutions here in Atlanta," said Ervin. With excellent benefits from green building, sustainable solutions and implementation, Atlanta should gain prominence over the next few years. Not only do green commercial buildings have benefits to the environment, there are economic benefits such as competitive first costs, decreased operating costs and increased building value. They create jobs and have many taxpayer benefits. Moreover, green buildings offer healthy indoor air quality, which increases productivity and quality of life for the occupants.

LEED™ (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a program that was launched by the U.S. Green Building Council two years ago. Providing a checklist for constructing and managing commercial green buildings, four levels of LEED™ certification are offered. But the LEED™ program seeks more than just greening buildings. It seeks to recognize industry leaders, increase consumer awareness and competition for green building, establish market value and transform the market place.

LEED™ has been rapidly expanding since its inception two years ago. The largest landowner in the world, the General Services Administration, has pledged to build and certify all their facilities according to LEED™ guidelines starting in 2003. Other LEED™ users include the U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and the U.S. Department of Energy as well as many state and local organizations.

According to Erwin, Atlanta is one of the first ten locations where LEED™ has been adopted. In places like Oregon, green incentive funds, business energy tax credits and city-specific adaptations have been made to support and customize LEED™. In New Jersey, LEED™ is being used extensively for schools. Erwin commented, "What better recipients of green building benefits than our children?"

Discussions of green building tax incentives in Atlanta have already begun and Energy Smart Schools, a program managed by Southface Energy Institute, are helping to make Atlanta a leader in green building along with Oregon, New York, Maryland and New Jersey. As for the future of LEED™, the updated commercial version will be released in two to four years while development of the LEED™ residential guidelines continues. Additionally, dialogue has begun to possibly integrate LEED™ green building concepts with K-12 and collegiate curriculums.

For more information on the Sustainable Atlanta Roundtables or Southface programs, contact the Southface Energy Institute at 404/872-3549, ext. 0.

For professional information on LEED™ or to join the Atlanta Regional Affiliate of the U.S. Green Building Council, dial ext. 127.

back to top

Friday, April 5, 2002

Community Energy Cooperatives— networked, decentralized organizations are restructuring the familiar electric utilities and improving neighborhood development

As demand for energy continues to grow, the old ways of supplying it are becoming less viable. Industry restructuring, emerging technologies, competitive pressures and environmental concerns are prompting the utility industry to redesign itself.

Chicago’s Center for Neighborhood Technologies is seizing the opportunity to create more sustainable sources of electricity by using neighborhood-based solutions that benefit both energy consumers and energy providers. Hear how a neighborhood Co-op is being paid by the utility provider for reductions in peak load and energy reliability improvements, which saves the utility costly investments in infrastructure.

Report from April 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
By Sara Cheshire, sara@southface.org

Scott Bernstein—President, Center for Neighborhood Technologies Archie Hill, moderator—Director, Atlanta Partnership Office, Fannie Mae Corporation

Why do cities, communities and regions exist?

Scott Bernstein, President of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, makes it his business to understand the answer. During the April Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable, Bernstein talked about his success with community energy cooperatives and how such cooperatives are reaping monetary, environmental and community benefits.

According to Bernstein, cities, communities and regions exist for three reasons. There are natural and built advantages, the ability to accomplish more jointly than separately and increased individual and market prospertity when there is a sense of place. Applying these concepts, Bernstein created a community energy cooperative in the city of Chicago. After two power black outs in the downtown metro area, Bernstein meet with the city utilities to discuss energy use and reconceptulization of utility services.

What they discovered was that consumers were willing to pay more for clean, green power and that reliability was a bigger issue than cost. "The radical idea here was that reliability might be an alternative point of entry for energy efficiency", explained Bernstein. Using community cooperatives, Bernstein targeted the community of Pilsen with a plan to replace inefficient air conditioners. They set up an office, trained community members and proceeded to replace over five thousand air conditioners which resulted in a significant reduction of energy consumption, increased cost savings and power reliability.

The shared community energy savings from the air conditioning upgrade was divided into three areas. Two-thirds went directly to the customers, one-sixth to run the co-op and one-sixth went to a community benefit fund that provided grants, created enrichment programs and was used for other energy projects. "Energy efficiency not only saved them money, it paid for their local community programs at the same time," said Bernstein. "There is a huge demand for this kind of program. People like something as tangible as this."

The utility companies also benefited from the energy cooperative. It reduced the amount of peak power they had to purchase while also decreasing the cost. Plus, they were able to rebuild trust with their customers, improve the environment by creating fewer emissions and develop a generation of utility workers that understand that sprawl doesn't pay.

Bernstein's advice for developing a community cooperative, whether an energy co-op or car share program, includes discovering the hidden assets in the community: existing local organizations and infrastructure. In addition, being patient and starting with the economics of the situation are key requirements. Bernstein concluded, "Have faith in people, they can figure it out."

back to top

Friday, May 10

Parkland Bonanza—Tackling Atlanta’s Stormwater Woes with Green Solutions

As Atlanta paves the way to prosperity, its road to economic development is filled with pollutants that are destroying our streams. New Federal mandates require cleaner stormwater, and one exciting option provides preserved greenspace as well as improved water quality.

Community groups have galvanized in an effort to articulate solutions using park land for watershed protection and stormwater treatment. Beautiful amenities and improved water quality are proving to be a less costly option than mechanical water treatment.

Report from May 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
By Sara Cheshire, sara@southface.org

Atlanta, GA: Famous for sprawl, traffic and air pollution, the city may soon become known for its water woes. Not only are some experts forecasting Atlanta to deplete the Chattahoochee River and Lake Lanier by 2030, the city is also currently under a Federal mandate to clean up its stormwater pollution.

The main cause of concern is combined stormwater and sewer systems in older parts of the city that are overflowing and by-passing sewage treatment plants during heavy rain.

Equally as problematic is Atlanta's development trends. At the May Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable, moderator Robert Reed of the Peavine Watershed Alliance explained that impervious surfaces from buildings and automobile infrastructure cause stormwater run-off. Instead of soaking into the ground, the stormwater flows over parking lots and roads, carrying dirt, oil and other pollutants to rivers and streams. The result is erosion, poisoned water, fish kills and disconnected habitats.

The speakers at the roundtable addressed one of the options for cleaning up the sewage and run-off water pollution: natural aboveground systems in conjunction with greenspace. The other option would be to install large pipes for underground storage of all the water that flows through Atlanta. Although piping would be a quick fix, natural options have proven to be effective at removing pollutants and contain more community benefits.

For example, Jacqueline Echols of the Clean Streams Task Force said that by gaining more acres in greenspace and parks, Atlanta could treat stormwater on the surface in aesthetically enhancing water features such as ponds or wetlands. Also supporting the link between greenspace and stormwater was speaker Bob Woodall from the Sierra Club. "It comes down to what kind of legacy we want to leave for the city," said Woodall. For Woodall, the preferred legacy is natural water treatments, which last up to twenty-five years before major maintenance, may be one-fifth the cost of underground containment and have been shown to better remove pollutants. Additionally, in places like Texas, aboveground natural wetland treatments have stimulated new development and improved quality of life for residents.

Improving quality of life is also a key concern for the West Atlanta Watershed Alliance. Bruce Morton spoke on behalf of the organization, explaining that the focus should be on making sure that urban children of today and tomorrow have clean places to play, such as in greenspaces and clean streams, and not in parking lots and polluted watersheds. Echols summarized, "We need to create an awareness or become part of the new awareness for greenspace as an effective means for stormwater treatment… Greenspace is a part of who we are and what we are."

For more information on the city's water pollution issues and debate between using underground mechanical underground treatment versus aboveground natural systems, visit www.cleanstreams.org.

back to top

Friday, June 7

Home, Sweet Affordable Home: A look at community and housing

Co-Sponsored by ANDP, Inc.

Affordable housing-workforce housing-mixed income housing. What's the buzz about, and why should we care? Could your parents or children afford to live near you? How about your neighborhood restaurant worker, librarian, post person, or teacher? Can we afford to live near our jobs and avoid long commutes? Is location efficient housing even possible, given the barriers to affordability, and what are those barriers?

Hear how these questions relate to sustainable and healthy communities in Atlanta, and discuss the proposed answers on the horizon.

Jim Durrett-Urban Land Institute- Atlanta, John Ahmann- Board of Directors, ANDP, Inc., Young Hughley-Reynoldstown Revitalization Corporation, and Bill Bolling, moderator (not pictured)- Regional Leadership Foundation & Atlanta Community Food Bank

Report from June 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
By Sara Cheshire, sara@southface.org

As current rapid development continues in Atlanta without provisions for people of low to moderate income levels, affordable housing is becoming a critical issue in the metro area. Young Hughley of the Reynoldstown Revitalization Corporation emphasized that without changes to development patterns, Atlanta will see more children without homes, retired workers struggling to live and an increase in crime.

Hughley, along with John Ahmann of the Atlanta Neighborhood Development Partnership (ANDP) and Jim Durrett of Urban Land Institute-Atlanta, offered their insights and solutions for affordable housing at the June Roundtable. Moderator Bill Bolling from the Regional Leadership Foundation & Atlanta Community Food Bank lead discussion and posed questions to the panel and to the audience.

Together, the three speakers agreed on one thing: there is not enough affordable and mixed-income housing in Atlanta. Two large obstacles to affordable housing intown is the zoning that controls land use and the lack of housing policy. Not only is it difficult to change zoning to mixed-use, the current system allows new zoning ordinances to be created without reflection on existing ones. The result is conflicting ordinances that can be confusing and difficult, deterring would-be builders.

The economics of affordable housing is also a challenge. The expensive land costs intown does not favor construction of affordable housing. Developers are almost required build upper income residential units just to make a profit. The result is that it is difficult to find affordable housing near intown jobs, ensuring that Atlanta remains high on the list for commute time and poor air quality due to traffic pollution.

Just as important as political and economic obstacles are behavioral issues. Durrett explained that people are just comfortable being around other people like themselves. Preconceived negativity toward mixed-use and high-density may discourage such developments, because they would increase interaction amongst diverse people. There is a need to show real life examples of how density doesn't have to be "scary". Much of it is changing attitude and removing stereotypes of the type of people who need affordable housing. For instance, affordable housing is largely needed for middle-income workers with "lifetime occupations": teachers, policemen, firemen, day care workers - people who provide critical services to society.

Possible solutions to the coming housing crisis is creating options and choices for both home owning and renting. Developing a mixed-housing/affordable housing policy seemed to be favored by all at the Roundtable. Durrett suggested inclusionary zoning, which would require developers to build a percentage of affordable housing in new construction projects. Other policy suggestions included making the development permit process easier, subsidizing those people who truly want and deserve a home and providing tax incentives or density bonuses to intown builders to offset money lost in building affordable housing.

Additional action points include providing education, gaining the backing of political leaders that support policy changes and reviewing the continuum of housing needs for both renters and homeowners. Ahmann asked the key question, "How do we get high quality of life with high quality growth?" The answer, according to Hughley, involves deciding what kind of community we want to live in. Providing adequate housing for all income levels is just one of the first steps in creating a high quality of life for everyone.

back to top

Friday, July 12

Clearing the Air: What’s new in the discussion about Atlanta’s air quality.

The metropolitan Atlanta region is in the throes of another smog season, with code orange and red smog alerts occurring on a regular basis. The Clean Air Campaign, a nonprofit organization known for its attention-grabbing television and radio commercials, is hitting the streets in a bold, new way. Come to the roundtable discussion to hear about The Clean Air Campaign and the different roles business, government and individuals must play in order to solve our air quality and traffic congestion challenges.

Eric Meyer—Executive Director, Regional Business Coalition, Mary McGovern—Executive Director, The Clean Air Campaign, Ronald Methier from the Georgia EPA, and Michael Halicki, moderator—Policy Director, The Georgia Conservancy

Report from July 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
By Sara Cheshire, sara@southface.org

Atlanta is a city of rankings. It has remained in the top ten as a city with growing production, business and diversity. However, it is also a city that has remained in the top five for longest commute and bad air quality. The price of growth and the resulting traffic has caused serious air quality problems as the city continues to fail to meet EPA standards. One group, the Clean Air Campaign, is actively working to clear the air through education and practical solutions. Mary McGovern from the Clean Air Campaign along with Eric Meyer, Regional Business Coalition and Ronald Methier from the Georgia EPA, educated July Roundtable participants on the latest efforts to improve Atlanta air quality.

There are many sources of the air pollution, surprisingly, cars and other vehicles account for 35-40 percent, which is equal to or greater than the pollution caused by power plants. Other pollution sources that people rarely consider are construction equipment, boats and airplanes. Offering some solutions, Ron said changing behavior is crucial, but since behavior can't be regulated, industry needs to be. Examples of regulations include enforcing cleaner engines and better road emissions, using cleaner gasoline, making sure cars are maintained and kept in best operation and operating and driving vehicles less.

The last point is what the Clean Air Campaign is focusing on: reducing vehicles on the road. According to McGovern, they are having growing success with employer-based commuter programs. Assistance is provided to employers and employees in tailoring a program that meets the interests and needs of participants. For instance, a commuter program might include car pools, van pools, teleworking, using MARTA and implementing compressed work weeks.

Not only do commuter programs help improve air quality, they are also good for business. Better air quality means healthier employees, increased production and retention of employees and the commuter programs help make transitioning to Atlanta easier for job relocations. The overall impact of these benefits increase quality life, which attract more businesses to the city, keeping Atlanta a booming economic region.

Currently, more than 350 companies in the metro area work with the Clean Air Campaign and more than 600 in the region at little cost to the employers. Thousands of dollars are saved in parking costs while flexible work schedules allow for longer hours of operation. McGovern stressed that employers have a significant role in improving air quality due to their ability to reach large numbers of commuters and can account for commuter laws.

To share more of what has been happening on the political forefront, Meyer discussed the progress of the Regional Business Coalition, which falls under the Atlanta Chamber of Commerce. What they discovered was that many businesses feel that the air quality problems are a "downtown issue". Meyer illustrated that there can be just as much pollution on a day boating around Lake Lanier, and that air quality is connected to business movement. If the business are moving north to the suburbs, then the pollution will go with it.

The key solution, according to Meyer, is better managing demand and land use. After that, an emphasis on small personal changes can make big regional impact. Meyer also believes that Atlanta needs to increase its transportation options while decreasing costs of using alternative transportation.

For more information on the Clean Air Campaign, visit www.cleanaircampaign.com.

back to top

Friday, August 2

Water Resources: Atlanta’s Boiling Hot Topic

Straight from today’s headlines, the August Roundtable will examine the challenges of meeting Georgia’s growing water demands while preserving our natural resources and quality of life. We’ll get a report on the state’s new regional reservoir plan and investigate alternatives to traditional supply-driven water management. Come to the Roundtable prepared to discuss such alternatives as innovative demand management, regional watershed planning, goal-oriented conservation efforts, and reuse.

Allison Keefer—Department of Natural Resources Regional Reservoir Coordinator
Kathryn Hatcher—University of Georgia, Public Servant Asst. S.M.C.E.

Susan Kidd, moderator—Vice President, Education and Advocacy, Georgia Conservancy

Report from August 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:

More often than not, today's headlines highlight Atlanta's concern over water resources. Conflicting stories abound as to the quality and quantity of water available to a region experiencing such explosive economic and population growth. At the August roundtable, moderator Susan Kidd opened the discussion by stating the obvious. For decades, Georgians have taken for granted adequate quality and quantity of water, while water is, in fact, a fragile, finite resource.

In her role as Georgia Conservancy Vice President for Education and Advocacy, Kidd emphasized the Conservancy's position that water supply planning should be comprehensive, with analysis of demand prior to rushing to supply solutions. Conservation is a key component of any answer. With these principles in mind, Kidd introduced the first roundtable speaker.

Allison Keefer is a coastal geologist for the Georgia Department of Natural Resources. She currently serves as Regional Reservoir Coordinator for DNR. Over ten years ago, DNR projected water shortages based on population growth and drought conditions. In a renewed attempt to address potential shortages, a broad, sustainable regional reservoir plan has been implemented. The three steps to the plan are: identify processes to solving shortages, perform a gross needs analysis and consider a regional reservoir to feed the north Georgia areas of largest population growth.

Identifying processes to solving shortages begins with conservation. Keefer emphasized the importance of this step, as well as conservation implementation prior to moving ahead with reservoir consideration. Careful evaluation of supply and demand will be conducted within the context of conservation. Should a need still exist, a reservoir may be considered. For this next step, careful site criteria must be evaluated, including the biological, ecological and sociological implications of building a reservoir. A gross needs analysis will also impact reservoir building decisions, as will population projections, projected supply and shortages, and adequate needs assessments and conservation. Completion of these planning stages would result in consideration of a regional reservoir to address remaining needs.

The next roundtable speaker was Kathryn Hatcher, Public Service Assistant with the Institute of Ecology at the University of Georgia. Hatcher began with a provocative illustration. The earth, Hatcher professes, provides natural capital, which can be converted into economic capital. This subsequent economic capital, while highly sought after and competed for, is rarely considered in our human planning efforts.

As we continue to tax our natural capital, we must determine what is sustainable. Federal laws offer a framework for balancing rising human needs and environmental impact. Hatcher cited several planning principles and guidelines requiring the least damaging solution and demonstration of alternative impacts. These guidelines are not, however, required at the state level. Therefore, in reality, we are juggling federal water construction guidelines with regional political will and local interests.

Q&A raised several additional points, including the fact that funds are available through the Georgia Environmental Facilities Authority and Pollution Prevention Assistance Division to implement conservation efforts of individuals and local governments. Conservation impact varies around the state insofar as residential, commercial, industrial or agricultural efforts are realized. Energy, air and water were also cited as intermingled and inseparable elements of the larger natural capital illustration. A public campaign is on the horizon to encourage and educate individuals and businesses on what they can do to be an active part of the water quality and quantity solution.

back to top

Friday, September 6, 2002

Urban Gardening and Landscaping:
Horticulture practices to preserve the environment

67 million U.S. households participate in landscaping or gardening activities. Improperly managed landscapes and gardens waste water, increase erosion, and contribute to nonpoint source pollution. The Georgia Center for Urban Agriculture is a local resource for information on the best management practices for environmentally sustainable landscapes and gardens. Come learn about xeriscaping, plant selection, integrated pest management, composting and mulching, and pesticide certification.

Bob Westerfield—Consumer Horticulturist - UGA Center for Urban Agriculture
Randy Drinkard—Metro Atlanta Extension Agent
Dr. Mel Garber—Horticulturist - UGA Office of Environmental Sciences
Andy Hull—EnvironNetwork Consulting
Dr. Wayne Gardner, moderator—Entomologist & Coordinator, UGA Center for Urban Agriculture

back to top

Friday, October 4, 2002

November Election: Does your candidate have a sustainability agenda?
Co-Sponsored by Georgia Conservation Voters

November's midterm election will see some very close races, with "quality of life" issues touted by many candidates.  Polls have indicated that 86% of voters believe environmental issues are important when deciding how to vote.  Although elected officials and candidates often claim the environment is on their agenda, it is up to voters to ask the right questions in order to uncover the substance behind the rhetoric.  

Come to the October Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable to meet representatives from Georgia's political advocacy network, and learn how you can be sure you are voting for the environment.

Report from the November 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:
by Abi Paine, Communications Coordinator, abigail@southface.org

Neil Herring — Contract Lobbyist
William Perry — Southeast Program Assistant, League of Conservation Voters Education Fund
Jason Rooks, moderator—Executive Director, Georgia Conservation Voters

As November approaches, the upcoming elections are on the minds of many Atlantans, especially those worried about the "green" vote. At the Oct. 4 SART, Jason Rooks led a discussion among diverse audience members, including candidates and politicians currently serving in office. Rooks briefly discussed his organization's legislative scorecard, which identifies how our elected officials are voting on environmental issues. Copies of the scorecard were available to audience members.

GCV also endorses candidates for office. The first step is sending out questionnaires to the candidates. Of those responding to the 478 questionnaires sent, about 87% agreed water should be a public resource. Some candidates surveyed agreed off-record, but would not put their position on paper. Others did not want an environmental endorsement, and refused to answer the questionnaire at all. There are only about 33 votes in the House that are pro-environment. See www.protectgeorgia.org.

Next, William Perry explained two LCEV (Education Fund) efforts. The 2002 Environmental Briefing Book describes environmental issues, problems and solutions. The book, compiled with assistance from Georgia environmental groups like Southface, was distributed at the SART, and is targeted to the general (voting) public and government officials. Contact information is available for the author of each section. Perry also explained Georgia Environmental Action Network, an on-line service that sends subscribers one e-mail per month (on average) to alert these subscribed, environmentally conscious voters of upcoming policies. With "one click" you will be sending an actual letter over to the policy maker on his/her fax machine. Perry noted there have been Action Network success stories, with policy makers holding up the stack of letters and refusing to vote for anti-environment bills. Also, in efforts to help voters elect the most earth-friendly candidates, LCEV has conducted a citizen's poll and educates voters so that they have the ability to ask candidates important questions. See www.voteenvironment.org.

Neill Herring, asked by SART organizers to discuss whether or not candidates have a sustainability agenda, divulged topics or "buzz words" of which voters should be aware. According to Herring, listen for the following in candidates' platforms:

1) COMMAND & CONTROL

This is the "chestnut of brown lawyers." Politicians say you need to make laws flexible to help the environment. According to Cicero, "command and control" literally means law. Politicians who don't like command and control don't like the law.

2) FARM PONDS & BOTTLED WATER

Is water a public resource? Those who disagree use the excuses of personal property and business ventures. To clear up these "issues," a water source constrained on personal property, such as a farm pond, belongs to the property owner. Bottled water is considered a manufactured product that uses a public resource, water. The finished product belongs to the owner who can then sell it.

3) UN-FUNDED MANDATES

Candidates that want un-funded mandates do not want them to be un-funded, they merely want mandates. A law needs to be passed that makes attendance mandatory at the un-funded mandate institutes run by the politicians passing this legislation. Sound like someone's talking in circles? You bet.

4) OPPOSED TO NEW TAXES & DON'T WANT INCREASED FEES

Georgia charges one of the lowest rates for its businesses' taxes and legal paperwork fees. In Georgia, it's free to dump toxins into rivers and the paperwork to do so is free, too. The problem with existing fees lies in enforcement. For instance "dirt fees" are not instituted, even though storm water runoff has raised some rivers thirteen feet in the past ten years from silt/erosion.

Other salient points made through the Q&A session include the importance of getting to know your elected official. Herring stressed that this is why they are in office - to represent you. Unless you introduce yourself and let them know where you stand on the issues, they can't represent you.

Also, an extremely powerful way to make an impact is to make a business case to your representatives. Let them know that you are being burned by bad legislation or poor enforcement, and they will be more likely to act.

Upon adjourning the October Roundtable, it was apparent to attendees that they must stay in contact with their candidates and elected officials. It is also imperative that voters are supportive of the nonprofit organizations working to increase the number of proactive environmental legislators and "green" voters at the state capitol.

back to top

Friday, November 1, 2002

ARC’s 2002 Regional Development Plan: Policies and Next Steps

Co-Sponsored by Atlanta Regional Commission

The Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) is considering revised Regional Development Plan (RDP) policies that address a diverse range of topics, including greenspace preservation, redevelopment and housing. Three seasoned planning professionals will share their thoughts on how these policies might be implemented in the City of Atlanta and the region, with plenty of time to focus on your questions and comments.

Come to the November Roundtable prepared to discuss RDP policies and the next steps toward sustainable development in our region.

Michael Dobbins —former Planning Commissioner, City of Atlanta
Tom Weyandt –Director, Comprehensive Planning, Atlanta Regional Commission
Eric Meyer–Executive Director, Regional Business Coalition

Myles Smith , panelist & moderator– Chair, RDP team; Vice Chair, ULI Smart Growth Committee

Report from the November 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:

By Maggie Leslie, Southface Intern

Growing interest in smart growth is evident throughout the region as Atlanta realizes the consequences of previous decades of unchecked growth. Infrastructure developments have the power to shape the way Atlanta will continue to grow in the future, and this directly affects the quality of life of all Atlantans. The November 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable focused on the implementation of the Atlanta Regional Commission's (ARC) proposed draft of the 2003 Regional Development Plan, which seeks to unify a diverse consortium of local governments with a common mission: "Sustaining Livability for People and Places." The plan is outlined with fourteen policies that encourage clustered, mixed-use, transit-oriented development and redevelopment while protecting environmentally sensitive areas. As ARC Comprehensive Planning Director Tom Weyandt points out, the plan recognizes that Atlanta's center of gravity is still located within the 2- to 4-mile radius around the center of the city. Yet growth has extended into 19 counties.

The ambitious goals set by the ARC are crucial to revitalize the urban area and existing infrastructure but it are dependent upon local governing bodies to accept the challenges and implement the growth management policies. The Livable Centers Initiative (LCI) is one option for funding. The LCI, created by the ARC, extends "seed" funds to communities working to enhance "livability and mobility" for residents. According to former City of Atlanta Planning Commissioner Michael Dobbins, it is crucial to adopt policies set by organizations such as GRTA (Georgia Regional Transportation Authority) and GDOT (Georgia Department of Transportation). These organizations drive the future of development by planning and building roads.

Eric Meyer, Executive Director of the Regional Business Coalition, admits that fear exists in the business community when it comes to smart growth, because they feel growth management may put the "brakes" on growth. However, thoughtful development will sustain Atlanta's competitiveness in recruiting and retaining employees. Long and congested commutes make Atlanta unattractive to new businesses and employees. According to Dobbins, the private sector needs to reinvest in the community because too many of the repercussions of sprawl are left for the public sector to handle. Yet, banking institutions are, for the most part, hesitant to invest in the complicated mixed use developments because few recent precedents exist with demonstrated success. There are also often complicated zoning restrictions to tackle, with the general public often adopting a "Not in My Backyard" attitude which can turn a visionary project into an ordinary one. Michael Dobbins suggests that those developing model projects will build a constituency for such developments. Also, investing in the preexisting infrastructure is an efficient allocation of finances and resources.

The success of the RDP will depend on the confluence of diverse stakeholders as well as individual, influential voices. For instance, healthcare is a large industry in Atlanta but has been relatively quiet about the physical health effects of sprawl that include asthma, pollution from traffic and traffic or pedestrian accidents. Sprawl also creates mental health risks, as many Atlantans with long commutes become depressed or are more likely to exhibit road rage. Smart growth gets commuters out of their cars, spending more time walking or enjoying aesthetically pleasing environments.

It must also be noted that a regional development plan is a great start, but it is only a planning document. We should extend the implementation of this plan into our homes and everyday lives. This means making decisions based on efficacy as well as the effect each of our decisions will have on the future generations. Communities are complex ecosystems, interdependent and interconnected. Therefore, we must begin to live as if we are a part of that greater whole. For additional Information on the Atlanta Regional Commission, visit: www.atlantaregional.org

back to top

Friday, December 6, 2002

Historic Preservation and Sustainable Development
Co-Sponsored by The Georgia Trust

Human beings have historically sought to dwell in close social proximity to one another. Urban development has for centuries, followed a pattern of dense mixed uses, closely combining different types and scales of housing and incomes. However, development for the past half-century has changed the focus from personal interaction to vehicular mobility.

As Georgia explores alternatives to unchecked growth and sprawl development, historic preservation continues to provide many of the economic and context-sensitive design tools to revitalize our downtowns and neighborhoods.

Report from the December 2002 Sustainable Atlanta Roundtable:

Greg Paxton, President and CEO, The Georgia Trust
Tony Aeck—moderator, Managing Principal, Lord, Aeck & Sargent Architecture

The Georgia Trust for Historic Preservation seeks to reclaim, restore and revitalize our communities and preempt sprawling development by preserving historic neighborhoods. Mixed-use development patterns were common until the last fifty years. Before cars were commonplace, businesses and services were located where people live. According to Tony Aeck, Managing Principal of Lord, Aeck & Sargent Architecture, "what is old is new again." Preserving the existing fabric is Smart Growth, and accordingly, two-thirds of the Atlanta Regional Commission's Livable Centers Initiative is dedicated to Historic Preservation.

Resource efficiency and reuse of existing structures is an important element of sustainability and are basic credits in the US Green Building Council's LEEDtm rating system. Greg Paxton, CEO of The Georgia Trust, stresses that one-fourth to one-third of landfills are made of building materials. This negative impact on the environment does not mention the energy losses of old leaky windows and un-insulated attics.

A community or building cannot be sustainable if it is not also economically viable. Historic Preservation makes "cents" as it is less expensive per square foot to improve an existing building than to start from scratch with new construction. On a positive note, Georgia actually ranks second in the United States for its use of tax incentives for rehabilitation. A study by the Georgia Trust between 1992 and 1996 shows that projects participating in federal and state programs to encourage rehabilitation of historic properties created 7,550 jobs, $201 million in earnings and $559 million in total economic impact on the state economy in Georgia. Unfortunately though, according to Paxton, there is a shortage of builders with expertise in rehabilitation.

The Georgia Trust's Living Places program was created to educate and train neighborhood leaders to provide these alternatives to sprawling development. The Trust has recently outlined four points to sustain an economically viable community with a strong 'sense of place' through the preservation and reuse of local historic buildings, pedestrian-oriented development, attention to public safety, greenspace, recreational opportunities and supporting the town/neighborhood central business district. These include communicating with stakeholders, addressing security and safety, encouraging financial incentives and economic development and maintaining and encouraging communities with character. The Georgia Trust is working to sustain a rich cultural history and protect quality of life because, to quote Winston Churchill, "we shape our buildings and afterward they shape us."

back to top