TRANSPORTATION G E O R G I A
Volume 20, Issue 2 APRIL | MAY 2013
ONE PORSCHE DRIVE AEROTROPOLIS ATLANTA THE EVER CHANGING PORT OF SAVANNAH
Cover photo courtesy of Jim Ellis Porsche of Atlanta
G E O R G I A
ENGINEER Publisher: A4 Inc. 1154 Lower Birmingham Road Canton, Georgia 30115 Tel.: 770-521-8877 • Fax: 770-521-0406 E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Managing Editor: Roland Petersen-Frey Art Direction/Design: Pamela PetersenFrey Georgia Engineering Alliance 233 Peachtree Street • Harris Tower, #700 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Tel.: 404-521-2324 • Fax: 404-521-0283 The Georgia Engineer Editorial Board Thomas C. Leslie, PE, Chair Michael L. (Sully) Sullivan, ACEC Georgia, President Gwen D. Brandon, CAE, ACEC Georgia, Chief Operating Officer GSPE Representatives Tim Glover, PE
ASCE/G Representatives Daniel Agramonte, PE Steven C. Seachrist, PE GMCEA Representative Birdel F. Jackson, III, PE ITE Representatives Daniel Dobry, PE, PTOE John Edwards, PE ITS/G Representatives Bill Wells, PE Shaun Green, PE Kay Wolfe, PE WTS Representative Angela Snyder ASHE Representative Jenny Jenkins, PE SEAOG Representative Rob Wellacher, PE
ACEC/Georgia Representatives B.J. Martin, PE Lee Philips
The Georgia Engineer is published bi-monthly by A4 Inc. for the Georgia Engineering Alliance and sent to members of ACEC, ASCE, ASHE, GMCEA, GEF, GSPE, ITE, SEAOG, WTS; local, state, and Federal government officials and agencies; businesses and institutions. Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the Alliance or publisher nor do they accept responsibility for errors of content or omission and, as a matter of policy, neither do they endorse products or advertisements appearing herein. Parts of this periodical may be reproduced with the written consent from the Alliance and publisher. Correspondence regarding address changes should be sent to the Alliance at the address above. Correspondence regarding advertising and editorial material should be sent to A4 Inc. at the address listed above.
APRIL | MAY 2013
Advertisements A4 Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Atkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 & Inside Back Cover Ayres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Burns & McDonnell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Cardno TBE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Columbia Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 CROM Prestressed Concrete Tanks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Engineered Restorations Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Facility Design Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 GEL | Geophysics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Georgia Power Company. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Hayward Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Back Cover Hazen and Sawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 HDR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Heath & Lineback Engineers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 HNTB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Innovative Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 JAT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 M.H. Miles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Middleton-House & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Photo Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Pond & Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Prime Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Reinforced Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 RHD Utility Locating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Rosser International. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 RS & H. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Schnabel Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Silt-Saver Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Southern Civil Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Stevenson & Palmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 STV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 T. Wayne Owens & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Terrell Hundley Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 THC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 United Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Front Cover URS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Wilburn Engineering LLC. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Willmer Engineering Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Wolverton & Associates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
T a b l e
GEORGIA ENGINEER April | May 2013
One Porsche Drive ~ a strong foundation for growth
The Ever Changing Port of Savannah
Public-Private Partnerships Create Results for Perimeter
No Down Time for Construction at World’s Busiest Airport
A Plan for Integrating Roadway Operations is the ITS Georgia 2012 Wayne Shackelford Scholarship Winner
Practical Application of Water Quality Credit Trading for Georgia Utilities
ASCE Georgia News
GSPE Georgia News
ITE Georgia News
ITS Georgia News
SEAOG Georgia News
WTS Georgia News
APRIL | MAY 2013
To BIM and Beyond!
Transportation Enhancements Enriching Quality of Life in Georgia’s Communities
Georgia Engineering News
ACEC Georgia News
APRIL | MAY 2013
a strong foundation for growth On May 12, 2011 Porsche Car North America Inc. (PCNA) announced plans to construct a truly unique facility on the south side of Atlanta. The facility will combine modern offices, a technical training center, a business center and restaurant, and a world-class Porsche Experience Center—one of a handful of such facilities around the globe. The facility will be a must-see destination for Porsche owners, dealers, enthusiasts, and visitors from around the world. On November 27, 2012, PCNA held a ceremonial groundbreaking event for the $100 million North American headquarters project. The facility, ‘One Porsche Drive,’ will be the inaugural project in a development known as Aerotropolis Atlanta. Aerotropolis Atlanta is a planned mixed-use development owned by Jacoby Development. The development is located near the International Terminal at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport on the site of the former Ford Motor Company assembly plant in Hapeville, Georgia.
APRIL | MAY 2013
Building Program One Porsche Drive will include a four-story office tower, technical training center, driving experience center, classic car restoration workshop, and display area—all contained within a 200,000-square-foot facility. A 650space three-level underground parking deck is located below the office tower. The facility will be home for up to 400 U.S. Porsche employees. The building design team is headed by HOK’s Atlanta office and includes Barrett, Woodyard & Associates Inc. (MEP), KSi/Structural Engineers (structural), and Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. (civil), with Jacoby Development acting as project development manager, and Mace providing program management services to PCNA. The exterior structure of the building pays homage to the Porsche principle that ‘form follows function.’ HOK’s design captures the essence of the Porsche brand and performance, creating a high-performance building while emphasizing a superior customer experience. By integrating the track into the lower levels of the office building and weaving in subtle motorsport-related cues, the design communicates the Porsche experience. The contemporary, light-filled workplace will promote collaboration and inspire creativity. Central café areas, team rooms, and huddle spaces support a cooperative, transparent culture. Technology plays an important role in the facility design, especially in the achievement of sustainability goals. Energy conservation measures include fine-tuning the building orientation, a highly-efficient building envelope, landscaping that acts as a natural shade, and rainwater collection for use in the track wetting system. One Porsche Drive design goal is a silver LEED certification.
Entitlements Aerotropolis Atlanta’s original anticipated density included over six million square feet of office, hospitality, and retail space; a 500,000 square foot data center, and a 4,000 space off-site airport parking facility. The build-out was so large that a Development 10
of Regional Impact (DRI) Study was triggered by Jacoby Development’s rezoning application in 2008. Since the original master plan, Aerotropolis Atlanta’s build-out density and associated traffic generation has been dramatically reduced. Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport acquired 43 percent of the development for airfield clear zone protection. The ‘One Porsche Drive’ development comprises 16 percent of the site. The PCNA Headquarters and Driving Experience Center is the first element of development and will generate 1.8 percent of the ultimate daily traffic generation originally anticipated. Porsche Drive will form a T-intersection with Porsche Avenue to provide the headquarters building with easy access to I-75 via the adjacent Porsche Avenue/ I-75 interchange. Projected volumes do not warrant a signalized intersection. The existing traffic conditions were determined by conducting daily AM and PM peak traffic counts at the 25 intersections that would be affected by the development. Anticipated traffic generated by Aerotropolis Atlanta was layered on top of the existing traffic conditions and assigned various Aerotropolis Atlanta entry points. Future development of this density was projected to generate approximately 69,490 daily trips distributed over seven entry points. To satisfy this level of peak hour traffic, the master plan for Aerotropolis Atlanta included a spine road consisting of four through-lanes and divided median/left-turn lanes connected to Airport Loop Road at two signalized intersections. Four more signalized intersections on Porsche Avenue (formerly Henry Ford II Avenue) and one signalized connection to Elm Street were recommended to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic. The PCNA Headquarters and Driving Experience Center alone is not anticipated to have a significant traffic impact, however spinoff development will surely increase traffic demand. Some of the existing street system is under-utilized at present, but will be monitored by the local jurisdictions and transportation improvements will be programed as needed.
Porsche Site Development Aerotropolis Atlanta is the site of the former Ford automotive plant and, as such, includes various pavement and building floor slab surfaces and abandoned underground utilities. One Porsche Drive is predominantly located in the former Ford automotive plant employee parking lot. The Porsche Driving Experience track includes 1.3 miles of handling course with various horizontal and vertical alignments, a dynamic area for special driving activities, a kick plate area to replicate recovery from a spin on wet pavement, a low friction circle to replicate tight turns on wet pavements, and an ice hill to replicate handling in icy road conditions. Vehicles and pedestrians will enter the headquarters building at four locations on three different floor levels in a relatively short distance, requiring careful attention to street grades. Groundwater levels are approaching the lowest levels of excavation, which necessitated a balancing of finish floor and ground water elevations. The integration of the Driving Experience han-
dling course into the building courtyard required close coordination between the track and building components. Since the former Ford plant utilities were abandoned, 1,300 linear feet of water main and 2,230 linear feet of sanitary sewer main had to be extended onto One Porsche Drive. One Porsche Drive extends into three political jurisdictions—67 percent in the city of Atlanta, 24 percent in Clayton County and nine percent in the city of Hapeville. Open communication with and between all three was essential. Even though the headquarters building is physically located within the city of Atlanta, water and sewer service is being provided by the city of Hapeville. Entitlements and site development permitting were procured from all three jurisdictions. Porsche Drive is located in two jurisdictions as well. From the beginning, Jacoby Development has taken a regional approach to the Aerotropolis Atlanta infrastructure and will continue to work closely with all three political jurisdictions to ensure infrastructure needs are met in an economical and environmentally sustainable manner.
APRIL | MAY 2013
Stormwater Management A regional stormwater management approach was discussed up front with all three jurisdictions. A regional stormwater management facility serves the Porsche Headquarters and Driver Experience Center. The stormwater management facility will meet the most stringent jurisdictions regulations. Stormwater runoff will replenish a permanent pool of water used to wet the various track surfaces to replicate wet pavement training conditions. Track wetting runoff will be recirculated to the permanent water pool, with little or no potable water supply anticipated.
nal the beginning of a much larger movement toward sustainable development surrounding the world’s busiest airport. Local business should see new income from employees and visitors drawn to the area by Porsche’s presence. Porsche’s decision to utilize local design professionals is evidence of the quality and reputation of Georgia’s professional architects and engineers. Once complete, One Porsche Drive will be an example to national and international corporations and development groups that Atlanta’s and Georgia’s design and construction industry can produce one of the finest facilities in the world. v
Foundation for Growth It is hoped that One Porsche Drive will be a catalyst for an economic revival in the area. As a major corporate presence in the Aerotropolis development, it should draw attention from other corporate groups looking to locate near the airport. It should sig-
The Ever Changing Port of Savannah
The GeorGia enGineer
By Thomas C. Leslie
spent over $200,000 of its own funds during the period from 1868-1872. A milestone was reached in 1881, when the U.S. undertook to widen the channel to 600 feet and deepen it to 22 feet (completed in 1887). In 1896 the harbor was deepened to 26 feet and by 1900 there was talk of a 30-foot channel. By 1912, Savannah was the second largest exporter on the Atlantic coast; ahead of Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore—and the fourth largest in the nation. Savannah was the world’s largest exporter of naval stores, but cotton was still dominant. The port was extraordinarily busy during World War I but was devastated by the collapse of cotton in the 1920s due to the boll weevil and the subsequent collapse of Georgia’s rural economy. In broad terms, the Savannah Port was a booming enterprise, based on cotton exports during the century prior to the Civil War, but was in decline during the period between the Civil War and World War I. In 1921, the Georgia General Assembly created the Georgia Harbor, Port and Terminal Commission, which hired a consulting engineer (F.W. Cowie of Montreal) to study the harbors of St. Mary’s, Brunswick, and Savannah and recommend a location for construction of state-owned terminals. Interestingly, Cowie was hired in March and submitted his report in July, 1922—only 4 to 5 months later. This was apparently a time of simpler questions and The Port of Savannah handled mostly products and direct answers. Savannah was recommended, supplies for agriculture and forestry, which was hit provided it acquired land for the terminal. The reespecially hard by the Depression. It was not until port recommended $15 million in facilities, inWorld War II that traffic at Savannah was substantially cluding docks, wharves, rail and road connections, warehouses, sheds, and grain elevators. But 1922 increased. was a bad economic time, and the sponsoring broke the back of the slave-plantation system, it was only a governor was not re-elected; no action was taken. More than temporary interruption in cotton exports from Savannah, 20 years later, another consulting engineer, hired for substanwhich resumed in 1866 and constituted about 90 percent of tially the same assignment, wrote: “It is more difficult today to obtain this trade than it would have been in 1921. It will be Savannah’s total. No federal aid for harbor work came to Savannah dur- more difficult in 1970 than it is today (1945).” One outcome of the Cowie report was the creation of the ing the Reconstruction period, and it was not until 1872 that Congress approved $50,000 for this purpose. The city had Savannah Port Authority by the General Assembly in 1925. It he Port of Savannah is one of those infrastructure stories where economic development has been driven to success beyond anyone’s imagination. Well meaning Englishmen secured a charter from King George in 1733 to organize a colony in America. Led by General James Oglethorpe, the first settlers (many released from debtor’s prison) first landed in Savannah. The colony’s trustees expected they would export raw materials to England and import English manufactured goods. It did not work out, and by 1852 the trustees recognized the failure of their grand experiment and ceded the colony to the Crown. It was not until 1793 when Eli Whitney perfected the cotton gin that the slaveplantation system focused on cotton. Cotton exports from Savannah jumped from 1,000 bales in 1791 to 20,000 bales in 1801, 90,000 in 1821, 190,000 in 1826, and 314,000 in 1860. As trade increased, the port’s capacity became an issue of concern, and in 1800-1805, studies were conducted of the adequacy of its wharf and harbor. In 1826, Congress was asked for $50,000 to clear and deepen the channel. By 1856, the channel was 250’ wide and 17’ deep. Although the Civil War
APRIL | MAY 2013
was authorized to acquire property, operate a terminal, and incur indebtedness of up to $3 million. By 1945, it owned over 10,000 feet of undeveloped waterfront on both sides of the river. The State Planning Board, with assistance of the federal WPA, issued a study of state ports in 1939—in the waning days of the Depression. The Port of Savannah handled mostly products and supplies for agriculture and forestry, which were hit especially hard by the Depression. It was not until World War II that
Involving the state government in a ‘local’ project (a port) in a specific city (Savannah) was a big leap for Georgia’s political leaders. Between the 1922 Cowie report and the 1945 Harris report, however, a sea-change in public opinion had occurred, and a proposal for a state-supported port in Savannah was endorsed by the Georgia General Assembly. In March 1945, the Georgia General Assembly approved the creation of the State Ports Authority. The Authority was authorized to develop and operate state-
traffic at Savannah was substantially increased. The Frederick R. Harris Engineering Firm was hired to review the circumstances at the Georgia ports and produced a report in 1945 which recommended an $8 million terminal in Savannah. Long before the completion of this report, it was apparent that Savannah, with a population of about 100,000, did not have the resources to build and manage a facility of the size contemplated in the various reports. It would require state support.
owned facilities and issue up to $15 million in bonds. In 1948, the state acquired 407 acres up-river from downtown Savannah for a terminal, which opened to the public in 1953. In 1959, the Authority acquired land for expansion, the 388-acre Whitehall Plantation. Over the years the terminal has expanded to encompass about 1,200 acres. The Garden City Terminal is now devoted exclusively to container cargo, which is measured in TEUs (twenty foot equivalent units). Today, Savannah is the fourth largest, fastest growing container port in the US with over 2.9
million TEUs in 2012. It is also the largest single-terminal operation in the United States, which provides more flexible, eﬃcient, and secure operations. Significantly, it is the second largest container port on the east and gulf coasts. In 1956, the Ports Authority acquired the Central of Georgia Railway and Ocean Steamship Terminals in Savannah and developed what is now called the Ocean Terminal, which is located under the Talmadge Bridge. This terminal has also been expanded over the years to cover 200 acres and is currently used for breakbulk and RoRo (roll-on/roll-oﬀ) cargo. Both the Garden City and the Ocean terminals are served by two Class I railroads: Norfolk Southern and CSX. Garden City has immediate access to the Interstate Highway System (I-95 and I-16). The river channel to the two terminals was deepened to 42 feet and widened to 500 feet in 1994. In 1997, the Ports Authority proposed deepening the channel to 45 feet. The expansion of the Panama Canal to accommodate larger ships has changed the expected flow of ocean-going commerce. Cargos from Asia that are now oﬀ-loaded on the West Coast for land transport to the Midwest are soon expected to pass through the Panama Canal and be oﬀ-loaded at East Coast ports for much shorter land connections to markets. With this change in shipping strategy and infrastructure, the Georgia Ports Authority has amended its plans to deepen the channel to 48 feet to better accommodate the larger ships. Savannah is well-positioned to take advantage of this new opportunity. GeorGia enGineer
After 15 years of study, analysis, and regulatory review, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued their Record of Decision in November 2012 for the deepening project. The Corps concluded that the most cost-eﬀective channel depth was 47 feet, and they would only participate in the cost to achieve that depth. The project would include 32 miles of channel up to the Garden City Terminal. The estimated cost is about $652 million, and Georgia’s share is 30 percent, or about $196 million. Georgia has already approved $181 million, and the Governor expects to add $40-50 million in the current year budget. With the Record of Decision from the Corps, the only major action remaining is authorization of the project by the US Congress. To be sure the project is complex and controversial, and there could be further litigation to try to stop its implementation. To some observers, the Record of Decision is the hard part, and the two remaining steps relating to money, by the U.S. Congress and Georgia General Assembly, are on the down slope to implementation. It is a wonder that the Port of Savannah has grown to such a scale and significance in international trade. At one level it is not all that surprising that the Port has grown enormously since 1733; almost every American institution has grown enormously since European settlement. But the Savannah port has out-competed all its peers and is pressing a very small
APRIL | MAY 2013
number of larger ports. How can this be? It is true that Savannah is further west than its east coast competitors and thus has a shorter land leg on delivery of cargo to inland markets. Savannah does have very good railroad and interstate highway connections, but any port might have done the same. Savannah’s terminals are not hemmed in by dense urban development (think New York or LA/Long Beach) which makes connecting land transportation slower and less eﬃcient. But none of these factors, or others that could be conjured up, would make Savannah a lead-pipe cinch for top billing in port traffic. It may just be that the Georgia Ports Authority has been given suﬃcient autonomy to operate in a businesslike manner, its Board has set high expectations and hired well qualified leaders, and elected oﬃcials have left them alone. The port has been eﬀectively linked to other infrastructure which serves the requirements of customers, which increasingly are engaged in international trade. Georgia is surely the prime beneficiary of the Port of Savannah, which year after year does its work quietly and eﬀectively. v
Notes: (1) Much of this article is based on, and quotes come from, “Georgia’s Foreign Trade, A Brief History with Some Recent Statistics”, by L. Aubrey Drewry, Jr., Research Monograph Number 1, Bureau of Business Research, University of Georgia, 1964. (2) The Georgia Ports Authority owns and operates two terminals in Savannah, four terminals at the Port of Brunswick, and ‘inland’ ports in Bainbridge and Columbus. The Garden City Terminal in Savannah is by far the Authority’s largest facility.
Thomas C. Leslie
Thomas C. Leslie is Director of External Affairs for Georgia Engineering Alliance
Public-Private Partnerships Create Results for Perimeter By Yvonne Williams |President and CEO | Perimeter Community Improvement Districts eorgia’s first Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) at I-285 and Ashford Dunwoody Road is a showcase for an innovative, low cost transportation design that can provide immediate traffic congestion relief. Just as importantly, it is a model for the benefits of public-private partnerships in providing mobility solutions. The Perimeter Community Improvement Districts (PCIDs), through a partnership with the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) and several other government entities, has improved traffic flow and safety, and pedestrian access across a highly congested interchange that is a key gateway to Metro Atlanta’s dominant office district and one of the region’s largest employment centers. The Ashford Dunwoody DDI “is an example of the public-private cooperation that will be critical for moving transportation projects forward in Georgia in the future,” Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle said at the formal dedication of the project last November. The $6.4 million Ashford Dunwoody DDI was initiated in 2009 by the PCIDs to improve the more than 40-year-old interchange, which was inadequate to serve the nearly 55,000 vehicles that use it daily. We hired Moreland Altobelli Associates to find a creative way to make improvements quickly at a minimal cost. The interchange had been the subject of numerous studies in the past 30 years and a complete reconstruction at a projected cost of $172 million was included in the Atlanta Regional Commission’s Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) for Metro Atlanta to 2030. However, given the redesign cost and the fact that the RTP contained billions in unfunded needs, the project’s chances looked slim. We knew the market couldn’t wait 20 to 30 more years for traffic congestion relief at the Ashford Dunwoody Interchange. To retain employers and accommodate job growth and population increases, traffic delays had 16
Aerial of DDI heading north to be addressed quickly. After visiting the country’s first DDI constructed in 2009 in Springfield, Missouri, Moreland Altobelli recommended the design to the PCIDs. The PCIDs then undertook their second challenge—getting the design through the pipeline for approval. We had to get acceptance from GDOT and clearance from the Federal Highway Administration. The DDI was different from anything that had ever been done in Georgia. Making a business case for the value of the project was important. We communicated the project’s tie to job creation and the movement of goods and services. And we communicated the position of strength the PCIDs brought to the project. Putting the partnership and equity in place, the PCIDs applied for and received $800,000 in funding from the Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, and $450,000 from DeKalb County HOST Funds for the engineering and design. GDOT funded the $4.8 million cost of construction. The next challenge was to place a unique design on top of a busy, existing interchange without reconstructing the bridge. Specific design constraints included I-285 volumes and congestion, the proximity of Hammond and Ravinia Drive intersections, the high volume of traffic on Ashford Dunwoody Road
south of I-285, and signal timing and modeling. The closure of the bridge to foot traffic for a month in order to construct a protected bridge median crossing required creating and publicizing pedestrian detours. And, the PCIDs learned from the experience of other DDIs already installed around the country that a well-targeted public education campaign is important in overcoming public confusion, unfamiliarity, and non-acceptance. A campaign was created inhouse by the PCIDs External Affairs Team. The PCIDs in-house team created the concept of the unique and eye-catching campaign logo and slogan “Can you DDI?— Arrive, Crossover, Drive.” “We wanted the campaign to deliver a complete message that could assure the public that this would be an easy transition,” said Donna Mahaffey, PCIDs Chief of External Affairs. An outside graphics design firm created a campaign logo, slogan, and collateral materials such as postcards, newspaper ads and a large poster distributed to 65 major office buildings and hotels in the Perimeter market for display in lobbies to educate employees and visitors about the DDI. The PCIDs also created a Web site devoted to the Ashford Dunwoody DDI—www.canyouddi.org. The PCIDs also learned from the MisGeorGia enGineer
DDI pedestrian median 008: Sidewalk in Middle of DDI souri Department of Transportation that an initial emphasis on the windshield-level experience of driving a DDI is more effective in relaying the advantages of the interchange than an aerial view. To provide that experience, the PCIDs hosted a well-publicized and attended test drive in the parking lot of nearby Perimeter Mall a few weeks before the interchange opened to crossover traffic. Golf carts were used on a simulated track and participants completing the drive received tshirts with the logo created for the campaign. The city of Dunwoody, which has wholeheartedly embraced the DDI, helped with the event. The PCIDs’ two-year campaign also included the distribution of news releases, articles for the newsletters and Web sites of surrounding cities and neighborhood associations, e-blasts and e-mail by area employers to their workers, informational booths at business and community festivals, and targeted radio and newspapers ads. Specific funding from the PCIDs for the campaign implementation was $50,000. The External Affairs Team played a major role with its GDOT partner in generating extensive media coverage for the DDI. Metro Atlanta TV coverage for the bridge closing and crossover of traffic totaled 117 separate stories from May 21 to June 5, 2012. The coverage was valued at $400,000 if air time had been purchased, and the audience was 7.44 million. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution ran an article on the front of the Metro Section June 1 and front page articles June 2, 4, and 5. The Associated Press released the story statewide and there was coverage in every major market. National TV and newspaper coverage included major markets ranging from San Antonio to Minneapolis and Chicago. APRIL | MAY 2013
While detailed traffic studies and analysis won’t be completed until the summer, early reports and commuter feedback indicate that congestion and accidents are improving significantly. A six month comparison from June-November 2011 and the same period of 2012 shows a reduction in weekday accidents since the DDI opening. The project team worked with the contractor E.R. Snell on a fast track. The staff continues to work on the issue of weaving that presented a challenge for drivers heading north on Ashford Dunwoody Road through the DDI who sought to turn left on Hammond Drive or right on Ravinia Drive. “Through the Perimeter Transportation Operations Program (PTOP), we have worked with the city of Dunwoody to improve the situation by reducing the amount of time that traffic signals were overlapping and maximizing the synchronization of signals through the DDI and along the Ashford Dunwoody corridor,” PCIDs Program Manager Jennifer Harper said. PTOP is a three-year, $2.8 million program funded by GDOT to upgrade and synchronize signals to improve traffic congestion in the Perimeter business district of Brookhaven, Dunwoody, and Sandy Springs.
As part of its branding of the Ashford Dunwoody DDI, the PCIDs are now installing a $450,000 ‘signature’ landscaping design. GDOT’s construction budget included basic funding, and the PCIDs added $300,000 more. Eleven unneeded service poles have been removed, and the PCIDs are developing a lighting plan with GDOT and Georgia Power for the interchange ramps. The PCIDs now have signage that welcomes commuters with “Congratulations Perimeter—YOU CAN DDI!” Thanks to active coordination with GDOT and FHWA, the Ashford Dunwoody DDI project moved from idea to completion in record time. The process took two years from the time the project was added to ARC’s Transportation Improvement Program until it was open to traffic. “That is significantly shorter than the typical plan development process for a design-bid-build project, which is three to five years prior to construction,” said Marlo Clowers, project manager for GDOT’s Office of Innovative Program Delivery. “We are excited at how well DDIs around the country have been performing. We believe the Ashford Dunwoody DDI carries the largest daily volume of traffic of any DDI built so far in the U.S. and it is proving the design can handle significant traffic volumes in a densely-developed setting,” said George Merritt, a safety and geometric design engineer with FHWA’s Resource Center in Atlanta. The legacy of the PCIDs is a solutionbased, results-drive organization, and the Ashford Dunwoody DDI public-private partnership is an example of that best practice. v
Driving through DDI Practice Course 17
No D for Construction at World’s Busiest Airport O W N Time By James L. Drinkard, P.E., IAP | Assistant General Manager of Planning & Development | Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport
successfully in May 2012 ready to accommodate the expected surge in international traffic. While these three signature projects have appeared to be the focus of the Hartsfield-Jackson Development Program, the airport still is busy with many important planning, design, and construction projects. One of the most exciting projects the airport is currently undertaking is a master planning effort. This new master plan will determine how the airport will evolve in order to continue to meet the needs of the metro Atlanta area and its other stakeholders for the next 20 years. The master plan forecasts 120.6 million annual passengers will use Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport along with 1,075,000 annual aircraft operations by the year 2031. The master plan will detail the facility requirements of all airport components and select development projects that will help accommodate the forecasted demand. The master plan should be completed by the end of 2013. Some of the most visible ongoing projects at Hartsfield-Jackson include an inbound roadway construction project, expansion of the Concourse D midpoint, new food, beverage, and retail concessions, vertical transportation improvements, Concourse C midpoint expansion and terminal HVAC improvements.
Harts f iel d -Jack s o n At l ant a Inter nat io nal A ir p o r t has constantly evolved as it has remained the world’s busiest airport for the past 15 years. In 2012, the airport accommodated more than 95 million passengers and more than 930,000 aircraft operations (take-offs and landings). The airport has five runways and a terminal complex that measures 130 acres, or 6.8 million square feet. The complex includes the domestic and international terminals and concourses T, A, B, C, D, E and F. Within these concourses, there are a total of 207 gates comprised of 167 domestic and 40 international gates. Despite the very large amount of passengers using the facility, the design, system, and customer service at the airport has led the Air Transport Research Society to name it the world's most efficient airport. Hartsfield-Jackson has a direct economic impact of more than $32.5 billion for the metro Atlanta area economy. The last master plan for the airport was completed in 1999 and contained several large development components including a fifth runway, a consolidated rental car center and an international terminal. The Atlanta Airport opened “the most important runway in America” in May 2006. This fifth runway is south of the existing airfield and crosses over I-285. The Rental Car Center opened in 2009 and is connected to the airport by its own elevated people mover system, the SkyTrain. The international terminal and gates opened 18
Inbound Roadway Project The Inbound Roadway Project will upgrade the inbound roadway network from Interstate 85, Camp Creek Parkway and Riverdale Road to allow passengers to drive or ride safely and conveniently to the airport. The project will widen and realign Airport Boulevard and realign connecting ramps and loops to North and South Terminal Parkway, improving traffic merging and weaving conditions, increasing decision times, segregating conflicting movements, and extending sight distances. The project will include the demolishing of many of the former rental car buildings, building five new bridges and widening one existing bridge, paving 11 lane miles of concrete pavement, building 15 retaining walls, improving roadway lighting, and relocating utilities and FAA equipment. Work began in August 2012 and will be complete in the fall of 2014. The construction cost is $48,517,511. Concourse D Midpoint Expansion Concourse D is the narrowest concourse at the Atlanta Airport and currently lacks sufficient concessions and circulation space to accommodate the number of passengers that use it. The project will add or renovate a total of approximately 91,000 square feet of space on the three levels. Approximately 60,000 square feet will include new circulation, concessions, and support space. The construction of this three-level addition at the center of Concourse D requires modifications at the apron level to install reGeorGia enGineer
Concourse D Midpoint Expansion quired utilities and a building system to support expansion of the concourse level and the newly-created third floor. The project will include two new escalators for passengers to connect from the Plane Train system up to the concourse level. It also will provide three new elevators to service the facility. In addition to the improved circulation, concessions areas will be provided on both the second and third levels for new food and beverage as well as shopping opportunities. This expanded concessions and lounge space will more than quadruple the existing available space. The estimated cost for this project is $47.6 million, and it will be completed by July 2013. Concessions Improvements A complete concessions makeover is underway at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport. The airport is currently undertaking one of the largest concessions construction programs in the world as more than 120 stores in the airport are being reconfigured with new businesses. This program is scheduled to be substantially completed by the end of 2013. Vertical Transportation Project The airport is beginning the final phase to upgrade and modernize its vertical transportation system, encompassing elevators, escalators and moving walkways. The project APRIL | MAY 2013
focuses on the equipment that was installed in 1979 and provides for improved safety, reliability, and greater energy efficiency. The escalators and moving walkways are being replaced with a proprietary system that has minimal impact to airport operations since the modernization can be completed quickly and without disturbing the building structure or finishes. Phase 1 started in 2009, and Phase 3 will be complete in 2016. Phase 1 focused on bringing all elevators and escalators that were subjected to new code requirements into compliance. That work was completed in 2009. In 2010, seven of the most unreliable escalators serving the concourses and Automated People Mover (APM) levels of the airport were modernized. Phase 2 is underway, and to date, 10 additional escalators, seven elevators and one moving walkway have been modernized. Phase 2 will be complete in late 2013 when six additional elevators and one additional moving walkway will be modernized. The Phase 3 contract was awarded in January 2013 and provides for the modernization of 15 additional escalators, 14 moving walkways, and approximately 30 elevators. Additionally, four elevators and four escalators serving the lower levels of the north and south parking garages will be modernized. The Phase 3 project cost is approximately $40 million, and it is scheduled for completion in early 2016. 19
Concourse C Midpoint Project The Concourse C Midpoint Expansion Project will substantially improve passenger circulation as well as customer service levels with additional passenger amenities, including new and larger food and beverage outlets, and mixed retailing. The total renovation/expansion area is approximately 52,000 square feet. Two new escalator banks from the APM will be included in this project along with two new elevators to assist with concession deliveries. It will allow the two existing elevators that go between the APM level and the concourse level to be used exclusively for passengers. The estimated project cost is $51 million, and it is slated to be complete by late 2014. Terminal HVAC Project This is a ‘behind-the-scenes’ project that will replace the 30-year-old heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems that serve the North and South terminals and parts of Concourse T. Design is complete, and the project is in the construction bidding phase. Actual construction is expected to begin later this summer following the manufacturing and delivery of air handling systems. The estimated project cost is $81.5 million with a completion goal of early 2016. Other projects in the design or construction phase include: North Deicing Facility. This project will create an aircraft deicing facility to provide a minimum of five unobstructed narrow-body deicing positions with capability of deicing 10 aircraft per hour. The estimated project cost is $37.8 million with a completion goal of fall 2014.
concessions, expands the area for meters and greeters and upgrades the walls at the Plane Train Baggage Claim station. The estimated project cost is $4.9 million with a completion goal of summer 2014. Concourse T North Apron Optimization. This project will reconfigure the gate layout of Concourse T north to accommodate nine aircraft instead of the current six. This design incorporates hold rooms, passenger boarding bridges, new and repositioned fuel pits, and revised aircraft parking layout plans. New concession areas and restrooms will be added. The estimated project cost is $35 million, and completion goal is summer 2014.
public works effort in the state of Georgia during that period. Another crowning achievement of this program is the fact that over 35 percent of the construction dollars has been awarded and performed by minority and female businesses. As the airport completes its new Master Plan to map our course to the year 2031, Hartsfield-Jackson is expected to continue to be a significant source of future work for architects, engineers, and contractors, as well as be the economic catalyst for the entire Atlanta region. v
Ramp 5 and 6 Pavement Replacement. This project will replace approximately 177,800 square feet of concrete pavement on ramps around Concourse E. The estimated project cost is $11 million and the completion goal is summer 2014. Summary Even in what some would consider the ‘lean construction years,’ Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport is continually building to improve customer service and efficiency to serve its passengers, tenants and stakeholders. The airport has averaged approximately $400M annually in construction projects since the year 2000 when implementation of the 1999 Master Plan began. It is likely that the over $4B spent on these major projects represents the largest
Runway 8L/26R Pavement Replacement. This project will replace runway keel section and a high-speed taxiway. It will include concrete pavement, centerline lights, and subgrade repair. The estimated project cost is $28.5 million with a completion goal of fall 2014. West Crossover Improvement. The project will improve functionality of the west crossover area and bring the finishes up to date, aligning them with the rest of the domestic terminal. The project widens the corridor, converts previous rental car space to 20
A Plan for Integrating Roadway Operations is the ITS Georgia 2012 Wayne Shackelford Scholarship Winner
The ITS Georgia Chapter supports student involvement in the engineering profession, and hopes to encourage future Georgia ITS Engineers through the Wayne Shackelford Engineering Scholarship Program. Our 2012 winner of the fourth annual ITS Georgia Wayne Shackelford Engineering Scholarship is Bhargava Rama Chilukuri, a doctoral student at Georgia Tech’s school of Civil and Environmental Engineering. He is currently working on developing optimal ramp metering strategies for his dissertation. His primary interests include traffic flow theory and simulation. After graduation, he plans to continue to develop new models and strategies to alleviate congestion in urban areas. The question answered by this year’s applicants was: What emerging ITS technologies could be used to reduce congestion in the metro Atlanta area?” Below is the winning abstract.
Integrated Roadway Operations System Operation of arterials and freeways is so complex in itself that typically each of them is managed by a different agency; arterial systems by cities and freeway systems by the state DOTs. While these systems regularly interact and interfere in each other’s operations, currently there is little integration of these two systems for an efficient operation of a regional roadway transportation system. The proposed concept of Integrated Roadway Operations System (IROS) consists of integrated control of both freeway systems and the arterial system surrounding it. IROS is a software based architecture that manages the integrated operation of freeway and the arterial systems. The IROS system will have several modules such as Freeway Control module, Arterial Control module, Enforcement Module, Incident Response module, Surveillance module, Data Archive module, etc. to manage different aspects of the transportation operations. However, they will communicate and collaborate to make changes to their respective systems for
APRIL | MAY 2013
achieving efficient transportation operations in a region. The following paragraphs will briefly describe some of the critical features of IROS. The Freeway Control module will control ramp meters, changeable message signs, dynamic speed limit signs, HOT-lane pricing system, emergency ramp gates, etc. The ramp meters control will have an advanced metering algorithm that will consider the whole region as one system and determines metering rate for each on-ramp in order to minimize the total travel time of all the travelers in the region (this is a superior objective compared to the commonly used objective of maximizing freeway throughput). This algorithm will communicate with Data Archive module to determine optimal metering rate for each ramp during each time period. When queue spillback is anticipated at any location, this module will increase the metering rate (not shut down and flush the ramp) so as to minimize disruption to the freeway. It will also communicate with the Arterial Control Module to modify the signal timings of the phases feeding the ramp for an integrated ramp control. The Arterial Control Module controls the signal timings of all the intersections in the arterial network surrounding a freeway system. This module will continuously communicate with Freeway Control, Data Archive, and Incident Response modules, etc. to modify the signal timings at intersections during infrequent scenarios such as queue spillback, incidents, flow surges, etc. This module will also dynamically change the offsets to maintain coordination along the corridors. The Incident Response Module will manage incidents that occur on both arterials and freeways. This module will have several sub-modules such as First Responders, Alternative Routes, Emergency Maintenance, etc. During an incident, the First Responders sub-module will notify and coordinate the efforts of law enforcement, medical, and roadway assistance teams. The incident information will be used to trigger
the dynamic speed limit signs to change speeds at all the upstream locations to prevent secondary accidents. During severe incidents, the alternative routes sub-module will determine alternative routes for the freeway and arterial traffic. It will also notify the Arterial Control Module to change signal timings of the intersections affected. The incident and alternative routes information will also be notified via the changeable message signs. The Data Archival module continuously stores traffic data recorded by the VDS and Inductive Loops and also signal timings implemented on the arterials into an archival system. This module is the heart of IROS that provides data to help several other modules make critical decisions. This module could feed different algorithms to help automatically identify possible occurrence of incident, flow surges, and also support traveler information system. The Enforcement Module will have several sub-modules to help law-enforcement officials automatically identify and penalize ill-behaved drivers to help maintain efficiency and safety on the roadways. This is important because ill-behaved drivers either motivate other drivers to drive faster or create panic to make other drivers go slower ultimately decreasing safety and efficiency of the roadways. This module will have more sophisticated algorithms that monitor driver behavior not only at the detection device locations, but will estimate driving behavior at mid sections. While some of the modules described in this essay already exist independently, the main idea is to seamlessly integrate them for an efficient transportation system in a region. This essay also highlights some potential improvements to the state-of-the-art implementation of ramp metering, intersection control, incident management, data archival, and enforcement. These improvements in addition to an integration of operations could help relieve congestion in metro Atlanta. v 21
WA T ER
Pending numeric nutrient criteria and/or TMDLs for chlorophyll-a violations, like this bloom on Lake Jackson in 2007, will drive utilities to look for cost eďŹ€ective solutions to nutrient management. (Photo credit: GA EPD, Watershed Protection Branch)
Practical aPPlication of Water Quality credit trading for georgia utilities Thereâ€™s been a lot of talk about water quality credit trading (WQT) in Georgia in the last decade but little actual implementation. Between 2003 and 2008, a series of studies were completed by the Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center (including researchers from Georgia State University, Georgia Southern University, and Albany State University) to evaluate the potential for water quality credit trading in Georgia. These studies addressed the feasibility of trading in Georgia overall (Rowles, 2005a; Rowles, 2008), the feasibility in the Chattahoochee River watershed (Rowles, 2004), the comparative cost of nutrient removal at wastewater facilities (Jiang, et. al., 2005), legal considerations (Rowles and Thompson, 2005), and trading in the context of antidegradation requirements (Rowles and Thompson, 2006). These studies clearly identified WQT as a viable, legal, and cost effective approach to assist water quality managers and utilities in meeting overall goals for water quality improvement. By Doug Baughman, Senior Environmental Scientist, CH2M HILL | Kristin Rowles, Senior Policy Analyst, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center | Rick Brownlow, Senior Consultant, CH2M HILL 22
Federal agencies are also actively promoting the use of water quality trading. By 2007, the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) was fully supporting its original Water Quality Trading Policy (US EPA, 2003) and had developed a new guidance document for permit writers on how to incorporate trading in National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Permits (NPDES) to facilitate implementation of trading (US EPA, 2007). The 2008 Farm Bill directed the USDA to facilitate the participation of farmers and foresters in markets for environmental services, including WQT markets, and the agency’s Office of Environmental Markets supports the development of such markets. Internationally, interest in the use of market mechanisms to manage water quality and quantity is widespread. Almost 300 such programs, including water quality trading, were identified in a recent international survey, with China leading the way in the use of innovative ‘eco-compensation’ mechanisms for water quality. The same report estimates there were $7.7 million in water quality trades in 2011, and it projects that WQT will increase in the US in the coming years as pollutant loading restrictions tighten and drive new interest in trading mechanisms (Bennett et al., 2013). Recent interest in WQT in Georgia was evident in discussions of the regional water plans prepared under the direction of the State Water Plan (GA EPD, 2011). In several planning regions, water quality trading (primarily nutrient loading) was identified as a possible tool that should be considered to address future potential challenges in maintaining water quality in downstream reservoirs (Coosa North Georgia and Upper Oconee Regional Plans) and downstream river reaches or estuaries (Savannah-Upper Ogeechee and Middle Ocmulgee Regional Plans). Existing wastewater utilities and industrial dischargers are concerned that pending requirements for further nutrient reductions will be exorbitantly expensive and lead to significant increases in utility rates and reduced cost competitiveness for regional industries. Based on the new watershed/water quality models developed for the regional planning efforts, many dischargers were aware of the dominance of non point APRIL | MAY 2013
source contributions to water quality problems and expressed concern that additional nutrient reductions will need to be more balanced between non point source loadings (both agricultural and urban) and point source loadings. Water quality trading is one tool that can help to facilitate that balance. So why don’t we see active water quality trading yet in Georgia? The most important reason has been the lack of an immediate regulatory driver for trading. In the studies of WQT in Georgia discussed above, it was noted that regulatory limits were not strong enough to drive active trading at that time (early 2000s). However, now interest in WQT is expected to increase due to the pending requirements for numeric nutrient criteria (NNC) and total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) in watersheds with existing impaired waters. In a recently updated draft plan regarding NNC development in Georgia, lake standards are projected for development between 2013 and 2019 while streams and rivers standards are projected for completion between 2017 and 2020 (GA EPD, 2012). In the next few years, TMDLs and revised lake standards will be immediate drivers for utilities to consider WQT as a potential cost saving practice. Utilities have no time to waste: now is the time to evaluate their options for water quality credit trading and the most cost effective strategies for meeting nutrient reduction requirements. Frameworks for Implementation The driver for a water quality credit trade is the difference in treatment costs between the participants in the trade. Trades may be among point sources or between a point source and a non point source (or sources), and it is also possible to include stormwater permittees, though the latter is not yet a wellestablished practice. Trades among point sources are often considered first because they are simpler to structure and transact, but trades between point sources and non point sources are becoming fairly common. Trades can be arranged as simple bilateral trades negotiated between two parties, but they can also be transacted through clearinghouses or exchange markets established by a government agency or other party. For example, the Virginia Credit Exchange was
established by 73 major discharges to reduce the costs associated with required nutrient reductions to Chesapeake Bay. In some cases, trading takes the form of offsets that pollutant sources can purchase to compensate for pollutant loads over a defined amount. Usually, offsets are sold by a single source (government or private), though it is possible to have multiple offset sellers (e.g., carbon offset programs). In many trades, participants are required to buy credits at a ratio greater than 1:1; that is, if they are seeking to trade for 100 pounds of phosphorus loading, they might be required to purchase 200 pounds. When they are used, trading ratios are intended to compensate for scientific or technical uncertainty associated with a trade or to equalize the effects of abatement in different locations in a watershed. The form that is most appropriate for WQT depends upon several factors including the number of potential participants in a watershed and the interest of public agencies in establishing market infrastructure. Though the transaction costs of a bilateral trade may be high on a per trade basis, they can also be simpler and faster and even more cost-effective to transact in some cases. Accommodating WQT can require modification of NPDES permits. In some cases, individual permits are modified to reflect a trade. However, other approaches are possible. For example, a watershed or bubble permitting approach can allocate a pollutant load limit across several sources in the same watershed. The individual sources may determine how to allocate the load among themselves, as is the case in the Tar-Pamlico in North Carolina, or a government agency may establish rules for compliance, including possible bonus and penalty payments for over or under compliance, as is the case in the Connecticut’s WQT program for nitrogen in Long Island Sound. In both cases, fi-
e Virginia Credit Exchange saved major dischargers millions in capital improvement costs to comply with Chesapeake Bay nutrient reduction requirements. nancial transactions are used to allocate pollutant loading among the various point sources. WQT might be established by a state agency or a regional organization, such as a water management district, but in some cases, the development of WQT is driven by permit holders with an interest in trading. In Knox County, TN, for example, the Stormwater Department developed a watershed specific trading program to address a
sediment TMDL, a pending nutrient TMDL, and support implementation of their stormwater ordinance (Baughman, et al., 2009). In all cases, a successful WQT design and implementation will require engagement of the stakeholders in a watershed. Credit Stacking Provides Additional Incentives Engaging farmers and foresters in WQT is largely dependent on their potential eco-
e water quality credit trading framework for Knox County, TN was designed to address a watershed specific nutrient and sediment problem and supported implementation of the county stormwater ordinance (Baughman, et al., 2008). 24
nomic returns. In some cases, it may not be financially beneficial to a farmer to take land out of production for a stream buffer for water quality credit trading alone. However, a farmer may have greater interest when it is possible to ‘stack’ water quality and wetland mitigation credits. ‘Stacking’ environmental credits is gaining momentum around the country. Potential credit stacking opportunities include water quality, wetlands mitigation, carbon sequestration, and protected species/conservation credits. While some entities still question the environmental benefits (Fox et al., 2011) versus the risks, there is evidence that environmental organizations and regulatory agencies are willing to consider credit stacking to support implementation of water quality, habitat, and air quality improvements (Cooley and Olander, 2011). One example, regionally, is the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority (CPRA) program where the state is considering a carbon sequestration market and a water quality trading program to provide a sustainable funding source to continue their coastal restoration program. This approach would provide funding to support the expanding coastal wetland restoration program, improve water quality, support the reduction of the gulf hypoxia problems, and improve air quality in the region (Baughman, et al., 2012). Strategies for Facilitating Implementation in Georgia Existing federal guidance and regulatory policies provide sufficient flexibility to allow local governments and utilities to implement water quality credit trading to address regional water quality issues. The decision on whether to consider trading as an option and the appropriate trading framework should be based on a number of factors: e Driver For Action: What is the regulatory impetus for action? For example, is there a downstream standard—either a pending numeric nutrient criteria or existing reservoir loading limitation—that must be met? Has a specific TMDL been developed? In the former case, there may be more flexiGeorGia enGineer
bility in establishing a trading option than after a TMDL has been developed and specific load reduction requirements for point and nonpoint sources have been defined. Availability of Water Quality and Watershed Information: A thorough understanding of the existing water quality conditions, watershed land use, associated non point source loadings, and point source discharges is needed to evaluate the potential feasibility of trading and the appropriate framework for implementation. The good news is that GA EPD developed watershed water quality models for much of the state as part of the state-wide water planning efforts, and these models can be used to complete these evaluations. Cost-Eﬀectiveness and Market Investment: Are there sufficient differences among sources in the relative costs of abatement? If not, then credit trading will not be economically viable. Also, if the development of market infrastructure is envisioned, the potential scale and scope of the expected credit market and the expected cost savings should be large enough to warrant the investment in its development and operation. Equal or Better Results in Water Quality Improvement: It should be expected that there will be a need for science-based assessments and/or monitoring to document that WQT leads to equal or better results for water quality than would have occurred with no trading. These assessments are more readily documented for point to point rather than point to non point trading, but mechanisms have been defined in existing point to non point trading programs that can be used to gain the confidence of the regulatory agencies and stakeholders that trading provides equal or better results. So what should a utility or local government do to consider whether water quality credit trading is a viable option to help them meet pollutant reduction goals? First, stay engaged in your watershed and understand the water quality issues and pending standards. It will be easier to work with GA EPD to determine options for watershed based strategies before a TMDL is defined or effluent limitations are set. Second, consider collaboration with other dischargers in your watershed. It’s very likely that other disAPRIL | MAY 2013
chargers are facing the same issues, and you may find an opportunity to share with them in the costs of evaluation and development of WQT. This approach was successful in North Carolina’s Tar-Pamlico, where dischargers worked together to persuade the state to develop a WQT program. Finally, keep the lines of communication open with watershed stakeholders. Their understanding and support for WQT in your watershed will be a key to success. In summary, WQT is an option that might allow local governments and utilities to capitalize on watershed-based strategies and to use a market-based approach to meet anticipated requirements for reductions in pollutant loadings. Many others have paved the way with WQT in other states and provide models to follow. While WQT could take several forms in Georgia, it is most likely to flourish as a result of the interest of a few permittees that stand to benefit. While initial trades might be simple and small, they can still offer cost savings and support the development of policies and market infrastructure that can offer both financial and environmental benefits for decades to come. v
References Baughman, Doug, Roy Arthur, Lisa Bacon and Rick Brownlow, 2009. Ecological Credit Trading Pilot Study in the Beaver Creek Watershed. Proceedings of the 2009 Georgia Water Resources Conference, held April 2729, Athens, Georgia. Baughman, Douglas S., Guerry O. Holm, and Charles Killebrew, 2012. Sustainable Strategies for Dealing with Coastal Challenges: Examples from Louisiana, USA. Proceedings of the IWA World Congress on Water, Climate, and Energy. Dublin, Ireland, May 2012. Bennett, Genevieve, Nathaniel Carroll, and Katherine Hamilton, 2013. Charting New Waters: State of Watershed Payments 2012. Washington, DC: Forest Trends. Cooley, David and Lydia Olander, 2011. Stacking Ecosystem Services Payments: Risks and Solutions. Nicholas Institute Working Paper, NI WP 11-04, Duke University, 26 pp.
Fox, Jessica, Royal C. Gardner, and Todd Maki, 2011. Stacking Opportunities and Risks in Environmental Credit Markets. News and Analysis, Environmental Law Institute, Washington DC, Georgia Environmental Protection Division, 2011. Georgia’s Water Future in Focus: Highlights of the Regional Water Planning 2009-2011. Georgia Environmental Protection Division, 2012. Georgia’s Plan for Adoption of Water Quality Standards for Nutrients, Version 2.0. 48 pp. Rowles, Kristin, 2008. Water Quality Trading: Recent Developments and Policy Implications. Water Policy Working Paper 2008-001, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center. Rowles, Kristin, 2004. Nutrient Trading in the Upper Chattahoochee Watershed: A Feasibility Analysis. Water Policy Working Paper 2004-015, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center. Rowles, Kristin, 2005. An Evaluation of Water Quality Trading for Georgia Watersheds. Water Policy Working Paper 2005003, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center. Jiang, F., M.B. Beck, R.G. Cummings, and K. Rowles, 2005. Watershed Pollutant Trading: Estimation of Costs of Phosphorus Removal in Wastewater Treatment. Water Policy Working Paper 2005-023, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center. Rowles, Kristin and Ben Thompson, 2006. Water Quality Trading in the Context of the Antidegradation Requirements for the Federal and State Water Polices. Water Policy Working Paper 2006-010, Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2003. Water Quality Trading Policy. Office of Water. 11pp. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007 (Updated 2009). Water Quality Trading Toolkit for Permit Writers. Office of Wastewater Management. EPA 833-R-07004.
By Mario V. Macrina, P.E. | Director of Transportation Engineering | Wolverton & Associates Inc. | Duluth, Georgia
BIM and Beyond!
ou have most likely heard the term ‘BIM’ in various forums recently and not thought much about it; but should you? What is BIM?? What is it used for? Who uses it? What does BIM mean to you? These questions have been a topic of conversation, as well as debate over the past few years, at least in our office. Building Information Modeling (or BIM for short) has been defined by The American Institute of Architects as “a model-based technology linked with a database of project information.” The National Building Information Modeling Standards (NBIMS) Committee defines BIM as: “.. a digital representation of physical and functional characteristics. BIM is a shared knowledge resource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle; defined as existing from earliest conception to demolition.” That’s a mouthful! But what does this mean to you? The BIM process and related technology was introduced almost ten years ago in order to create a clearer distinction between the 3D world architects were exploring and the traditional 2D world engineers and designers are more accustomed to. What started in a field targeting vertical construction slowly made its way into the horizontal world and beyond. The ability to create, store, and share up-to-date digital information gives architects, engineers, contractors, and owners a better basis with which to make informed decisions and a clearer vision of a project’s potential. 26
Wolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A), and some other consulting firms like us, have been building BIM capabilities by investing in technology that can be used to create a ‘one stop shop’ of information for clients. This BIM technology, combined with a well- developed process of information-sharing, project management, and time management gives clients more detailed information that helps them visualize and analyze projects in a faster and less costly manner. Consulting firms are developing better, quicker, safer, and more cost effective ways to gather this information starting from the ground up. W&A has introduced three dimensional (3D) laser scanning techniques to
3D Model of a Proposed Tennis Facility
BIM is gaining traction in the horizontal world and picking up speed. We will need to catch up to the vertical construction industry. Are you onboard? Or will you be left behind? help augment our ‘traditional’ survey databases. Through technology like Terrestrial Laser Scanning, our surveyors can prepare what is termed as a ‘Point Cloud Model’ of the existing conditions. W&A uses a variety of software to extract surface features such as curb lines, pavement crowns, sidewalks, architectural building features, and utility structures. These extracted surface features set the basis for the creation of a Digital Terrain Model used for a variety of tasks such as surface topography development, culvert and channel analysis, and infrastructure inspection. For W&A, 3D laser scanning technology is becoming a preferred method of gathWhat will it look like? Ideas take form (3D Rendering)
APRIL | MAY 2013
ering millions of points of data to share with designers in a fraction of the time versus traditional survey techniques. A Point Cloud Model can be used to create a 3D surface that would allow designers to develop renderings of a proposed facility in order to coordinate space, utilities, access, and aesthetics with the facility owners. So then what? We have created this very pretty (and very useful!) ‘picture’ that de-
signers can use to make a clients’ vision a reality, but are we done? Not even close! BIM can be considered a process as well as a technology based idea. Information that promotes interaction among every team member should be the goal of a BIM project. We have all been accustomed to working in a 2D world and producing ink on paper. We now have the ability to build a multi-dimensional world to better depict our ideas.
What we should strive for is 4D (time), 5D (cost) and even 6D (as-built) dimensions to offer more information to everyone involved. This is what BIM gives us. Simply put, by utilizing BIM as the link between ideas, modeling, project management, schedule, cost, and ultimate project completion, we are becoming better engineers and stewards of our trade. Visualizing the client’s concept and linking all other components of a project will result in a more complete product for any stakeholder. Consultants will save time and money for their clients’, experience fewer design errors, improve efficiency, and provide a service that is unparalleled in the current market. BIM is gaining traction in the horizontal world and picking up speed. We will need to catch up to the vertical construction industry. Are you on-board? Or will you be left behind? v
Enriching quality of life in Georgia’s communities By Liz Rothman
Throughout its history, Georgia has been a state on the move, from Putnam County’s Rock Hawk Effigy to the Savannah River’s scenic Ebenezer community, from 19th century railroad depots and stagecoach houses that served as the nucleus of booming agricultural and industrial homesteads to the winding paths that were the earliest trails for pedestrians and bicycles. The history of Georgia is told along the roads, paths, and tracks that connect its towns and its people. Central to these stories is the effect of transportation on an evolving Georgia. Transportation Enhancements (TE) bring Georgia’s history to life. They explore our past. They preserve our story.
For information about the Transportation Enhancements program, please visit www.dot.ga.gov/te. 30
ransportation enhancements (TEs) are non-motorized surface transportation system enhancements. They enrich the travel experience of motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians through communityoriented projects that showcase cultural, natural, and scenic elements in the statewide transportation network. “TE projects support sustainability in communities, promote economic development and generally improve quality of life. They provide well-designed facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists, preserve historic transportation treasures, beautify travel corridors, and generate community pride,” says Elaine Armster, special projects chief with the Georgia DOT Program Delivery Division, which oversees the TE program at GDOT. “In fact, our favorite day in the life of a TE project is attending the ribbon cutting ceremony marking the completion of construction.” Extrinsic benefits of the TE program include the revitalization of rural downtown corridors with completed TE projects and verifiable increases in tourism, Armster explains. New sidewalks, street furniture, and well-lit pedestrian corridors create an inviting atmosphere to facilitate pedestrian movement and encourage central business district activity. Additionally, municipalities with TE projects such as the Silver Comet Trail have reported an increase in tourism and visitors with each completed segment. For 21 years, the TE program has enriched communities throughout Georgia. Here are a few projects.
town—like other small rural towns—needed to revitalize its town center. The streetscape design included a park and tree-lined streets to enhance the attractiveness of the downtown storefronts and encourage pedestrian movement. With the completion of the TE project, additional businesses moved to the district and façade transformations were made on existing storefronts. The project was completed in 2011. Southeastern Railroad Museum, Duluth, Georgia The restored 1870s rail depot houses 90 items of rolling stock, including historic Pullman cars and classic steam locomotives. This living piece of railroad history was completed in 2011. Silver Comet Trail, Cobb County, Georgia to Alabama The paved 61-mile off-road Silver Comet Trail runs from northwest Georgia through Cobb, Paulding, and Polk counties to the Alabama border. It is located on the abandoned Seaboard Coastline Railroad right-of-way, originally purchased by GDOT as a potential commuter rail corridor. The popular trail accommodates pedestrians, bicyclists, roller skaters, horse riding, dog walkers, and is wheelchair accessible. After crossing the state line, the Silver Comet Trail connects to the Chief Ladiga Trail, providing multi-state trail connectivity from Cobb County, Georgia to Aniston, Alabama. GDOT’s TE Program partnered with local municipalities and the PATH Foundation to build this TE project. The final segment of the trail was completed in 2008.
St. Simons Island Lighthouse, St. Simons Island, Georgia Built in 1872, the 104-foot tower, with a 129-step cast iron spiral staircase and an adjacent keeper’s house, was designed by one of Georgia's most noted architects, Charles Cluskey. To ensure authenticity of molds used to craft the replacement parts, the original hand-drawn lighthouse plans were used. The project was completed in record time, from turn-off in October 2009 to turn-on in May 2010, in time for Memorial Day weekend.
Pine Mountain Streetscape Phase I–IV, Pine Mountain, Georgia Pine Mountain, known as the ‘Gateway to Callaway Gardens,’ completed four phases of enhancements with the assistance of TE funding. The TE work includes pedestrian improvements such as new sidewalks, landscaping, pedestrian lighting and, concrete pavers. Phase I began in 1992 and Phase IV was completed in 2012.
Jeffersonville Streetscape, Jeffersonville, Georgia Originally called Rain’s Store, Jeffersonville earned city status in 1828, and boasted a population of 1,035 in the 2010 census. This
History of the Transportation Enhancements program Since 1991, federal funding has been available to build and support transportation enhancements that fall into an eligible category.
APRIL | MAY 2013
Local and state public agencies and universities apply for federal funds to implement a project. Up to 80 percent of the funds are provided by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with the local agency providing the 20 percent match that is used for preliminary engineering. “Many of these enhancements would not be possible if communities had to rely solely on local funds,” Armster notes. Since the inception of the GDOT Transportation Enhancements program, approximately 1,100 projects, totaling over $700 million, were awarded to communities throughout Georgia. Eligible entities may apply for up to $1,000,000 in TE project funding during the TE Call for Projects. Since 2005, Georgia has had the distinction of being the only DOT in the United States to design a completely web-based application process. Initial application submissions, reviews, and project selections are all completed using this innovative process. The 30-member TE Advisory Panel—comprised of subject matter experts from across the state—ranks the projects, and the State Transportation Board makes final project selections and awards. During the last TE Project Call, GDOT rolled out 144 new projects, worth over $55 million. v Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) is the two-year federal transportation reauthorization bill signed into law in July 2012. Under MAP-21, Transportation Enhancements now fall under the Transportation Alternatives (TA) umbrella. The federally-funded Transportation Enhancement program was established through the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). In 1998, it was further refined under the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). While TE was a separately funded program, under MAP-21, it is now part of a new Transportation Alternatives program. TE activities now compete for funding alongside two other TA programs - Safe Routes to School (SRTS), administered by GDOT, and Recreational Trails (RT), administered by Department of Natural Resources. “Although MAP-21 changed the funding,” notes GDOT Chief Engineer Russell McMurry, “GDOT is committed to delivering all the projects that have been selected based on readiness and the availability of funding."
Burns & McDonnell
Terracon ~ Alex Goharioon has joined Terracon as a senior vice president and senior principal. Goharioon will be the division manager for the Gulf Coast region, including Atlanta, and will also serve national clients. He brings more than 28 years of experience in geotechnical engineering and construction materials testing services. Project experience includes sport facilities, transportation, airports, medical and healthcare facilities, highrise office buildings, retail, correctional facilities, industrial, and higher education. He has a master’s degree in technology and a bachelor of engineering technology in mechanical engineering technology and civil engineering technology from Georgia Southern University. “We are delighted to have Alex join the Terracon senior management team,” said David Gaboury, P.E., president and CEO of Terracon. “His many years of proven leadership success and service to clients will be a great addition to the firm.” Mr. Goharioon can be reached by phone or e-mail: (770) 595-8671 or email@example.com Arnold Olender Celebrates Ten Years at Helm of Burns & McDonnell’s Southeast Region ~ Decade Marked by Continuous, Positive Revenues, Foresees More Growth Ahead In December 2012, Arnold Olender, vice president and regional manager of Burns & McDonnell’s Southeast Regional Office in Atlanta celebrated his 10th anniversary at the helm of the award-winning firm. With clients and projects throughout the South32
Wolverton & Associates
east, Olender has overseen a decade of positive growth, enviable talent recruitment and retention, and increasing revenues. The regional office is part of the full-service engineering firm Burns & McDonnell, based in Kansas City, Missouri. Since 2002, under Olender’s leadership, the Atlanta-based team of employee-owners has grown from less than ten people to more than 50, a growth of more than 500 percent. With more than 3,000 projects completed throughout Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, the Carolinas, and Florida, Burns & McDonnell-Southeast revenue has grown from less than $1 million in 2002 to more than $15 million this year, a growth of more than 1,500 percent over the last decade. With consistent focus on attracting and retaining top talent to be employee-owners along with unparalleled client service, Olender and his team built opportunities even through a challenging economic decade. “We’ve been able to use an entrepreneurial position supported by a 114-year old company and make real, tangible growth happen,” said Olender. “It starts and ends with a commitment to hire the right people, maintain a laser-like focus on client service and apply innovative solutions to the most challenging projects.” As one of the fastest growing regions in the country, Olender anticipates continued growth. “In this part of the country, with rapid population growth, the need for infrastructure, water, power and more, Burns & McDonnell will continue to be a partner of choice to meet those needs and deliver what our clients in the southeast region require.”
Lord, Aeck & Sargent
Recognized as one of Georgia’s ‘Best Places to Work’ by the Atlanta Journal Constitution and ‘Best Engineering Firm’ by the Atlanta Business Chronicle, the accolades reflect the company’s dedication to all of its employee-owners and to its clients. Additionally, Burns & McDonnell was ranked Number 26 on FORTUNE magazine’s annual list of ‘100 Best Companies to Work For,’ the 2012 ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan) Company of the Year from the ESOP Association, and one of eight architecture, engineering, and construction firms nationwide to receive the Premier Award for Client Satisfaction from the Professional Services Management Journal. Among the numerous awards and honors, Burns & McDonnell is one of FORTUNE 100 Best Companies to Work For and one of six Premier Client Service award winners in North America as named by the Professional Services Management Journal. The Atlanta regional team of more than 50 professional engineers and technical staff adds the distinction of being one of the Atlanta Journal & Constitution’s Top Workplaces in 2012 and one of Atlanta’s Best Engineering Firms as ranked by the Atlanta Business Chronicle. Learn more or start the conversation at www.burnsmcd.com. v Ivan Liu, E.I. Joins Finley as Bridge Designer Finley Engineering Group welcomes new staff member, Ivan Liu, E.I., as Bridge Designer to its growing bridge design and construction engineering firm. Ivan is a recent graduate of Texas A&M GeorGia enGineer
University where he earned masters and bachelors degrees in structural engineering. His experience includes on-site structural engineering as well as graduate research projects for transportation systems. Ivan will be the Bridge Designer for new FINLEY project, Road 1 Motza Bridge in Israel. This $170m cast-in-place segmental bridge includes two 800-meter bridges with three lanes in each direction and wide shoulders over the Motza Valley on the main Tel Aviv-Jerusalem highway. There will be three 25m spans above the valley floor and the project will take into consideration the unique landscaping and historic value of the area. “Ivan has a solid understanding of structural engineering design. He’s had the opportunity to work on-site on a project in Israel and has an understanding of the link between design and construction. While at Texas A&M University, he demonstrated the ability to work creatively and collaboratively on bridge engineering projects and his Steel Bridge Team took first place in the regional steel bridge competition. We’re delighted to have Ivan on our team.” said Craig Finley, Jr., P.E. President, FINLEY Engineering Group. Jacqueline Petrozzino-Roche, EI, Joins Finley as Bridge Designer Finley Engineering Group (FINLEY) welcomes new staff member, Jacqueline Petrozzino-Roche, EI, as Bridge Designer to its growing bridge design and construction engineering firm. Jacqueline earned a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from Florida State University and is currently pursuing a Master of Science in Civil Engineering at the University of Central Florida. Jacqueline’s experience includes steel fabrication estimating and preparation of steel joist designs. She is a member of the American Segmental Bridge Institute (ASBI). Jacqueline will be the Bridge Designer on the $160m I-49 North Segment K (I220 to Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive) in Caddo Parish Louisiana. This project includes three precast segmental bridges erected by balanced cantilever method with cranes. FINLEY is providing segmental bridge design and construction engineering services on this project. APRIL | MAY 2013
Jacqueline will also be working on pre-bid design and estimating for the Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project Phase Two located in Fairfax/Loudoun Counties, Virginia. This project will extend the Silver Line 11.4 miles northwest, through Washington Dulles International Airport to a terminus near Route 772 in eastern Loudoun County. FINLEY will be responsible for the segmental bridge design of the rail tracks on elevated (aerial) structures within the boundaries of Dulles Airport. “Jacqueline’s experience in plans and specifications for steel joist designs will be an asset to our team. Because we work on complex bridge design-build projects, we must provide designs that fit the contractor’s strengths, and pre-bid estimating is critical to optimizing the design.“ said Craig Finley, Jr., P.E. President, FINLEY. v Stantec Adds Staff in Duluth Engineer Bryan Lindsey joins transportation team Bryan Lindsey, PE has joined the transportation engineering team in Stantec’s Duluth, Georgia office as a senior associate. A registered professional engineer, Lindsey has more than sixteen years of experience designing intersection improvements, roadway expansions, bridge replacements, streetscapes, pedestrian trails, and other transportation infrastructure projects. He has worked throughout Georgia for the Georgia Department of Transportation and municipal clients. At Stantec, Lindsey will provide engineering design and project management for a wide range of transportation projects. He
joins a growing team of design professionals in Duluth, providing engineering for transportation improvement projects in communities across the state. Lindsey is a graduate of Georgia Institute of Technology with a Bachelor of Civil Engineering. Stantec provides professional consulting services in planning, engineering, architecture, interior design, landscape architecture, surveying, environmental sciences, project management, and project economics for infrastructure and facilities projects. We support public and private sector clients in a diverse range of markets at every stage, from the initial conceptualization and financial feasibility study to project completion and beyond. Our services are provided on projects around the world through approximately 12,000 employees operating out of more than 200 locations in North America and four locations internationally. v Wolverton & Associates Inc. Announces New Business Development Manager Wolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A), a Professional Services Civil Engineering and Land Surveying firm located in Duluth, Georgia, today announced the appointment of Tim Germaine to the position of Business Development Manager. In his new role, Germaine will be responsible for increasing W&A’s market share regionally in the private commercial sector by developing the firm’s external customer base with emphasis on new markets. Germaine brings with him a wealth of experience in corporate business development
and is actively involved in the business community. Prior to joining W&A, Germaine has held several leadership positions in business development for Skanska, Winter Construction, and the EMJ Corporation. He has served on the local board of directors for CORNET Global and the Georgia Foundation for Independent Colleges. Germaine earned a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration (BSBA) from Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan. “We are excited to welcome Tim to Wolverton & Associates,” said President and CEO, Jerry (Jay) C. Wolverton, Jr., P.E. “He will be a valuable addition to our firm. Tim’s contacts and strength in the civil engineering marketplace will enable him to lead our business development efforts and enable us to achieve our corporate goals. Wolverton & Associates vision for growth is based on having talented engineers and solid business expertise, and we want to make sure that we have the right leadership in place to do this.” Wolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A), founded in 1989, is a full service Consulting Engineering firm, which offers in-house professional services in civil (land development) engineering, transportation engineering, land surveying, traffic engineering, structural engineering, subsurface utility engineering and landscape architecture for both public and private clients. W&A experience includes and is not limited to federal, state, county, DOTs, municipal, CIDs, parks, educational, and private retail/facility project experience. Headquartered in Duluth, Georgia, W&A also has a branch office in Savannah, Georgia. v
Lexington, Kentucky, office. Beyond its Atlanta office, LAS operates from offices in Ann Arbor, Michigan; Austin, Texas; and Chapel Hill, North Carolina. “We welcome the opportunity to enhance our design and planning services for our clients, such as the University of Cincinnati and the University of Louisville, from a closer location,” said Joe Greco, LAS president. “Urban Collage’s urban design and campus planning expertise will be infused across all of LAS’ practice areas, which include multifamily housing and mixed-use, higher education, science and technology, and historic preservation ” Greco said. “And Urban Collage’s capabilities also will benefit many of our clients, including private developers, corporations and institutions of higher learning as well as federal, state, county and municipal governments. This is a great combination
of talent that will benefit our entire firm and will be an invaluable resource for our clients.” Greco added that the two firms have been collaborating on projects for more than a decade, and their cultural compatibility has been tested. “The merger is a natural extension of what we’ve been doing with UC for quite some time; we know and trust one another,” he said. Added LAS chairman Tony Aeck, “The merger is representative of our growth strategy. Although LAS’ growth is primarily organic, it has also come over the last decade from mergers similar to this one. “Many clients desire to focus on their core missions and are seeking out design firms with broader capabilities to help them plan strategically and then design their buildings,” Aeck noted.v
2013 Georgia Engineering Employer of the Year The Georgia Engineering Alliance, in coordination with the Georgia Society of Professional Engineers announced the establishment of Georgia Engineering Employer of the Year Award that honors the firms and agencies that help build the future. This is the first year the award was presented. The Employer of the Year Award recognized small, medium, and large private firms, as well as a public sector agency that contributed to the engineering industry through the planning, design, and implementation of critical projects, through the cultivation of talented professionals and through the advancement of the profession via community involvement and education. Employees nominated their firms or a firm they thought deserved to be recognized for contributions to the engineering field in Georgia. The award requirements for size of the different categories are: Small Business (<50 employees), Mid-size Business (50100 employees), Large Business (>100 employees), and Public Sector (any public entity). The following companies were selected as the first recipients of the Georgia Engineering Employer of the Year: Small Business – Prime Engineering Inc., Medium Business – W.K. Dickson & Company, Large Business – Geosyntec Consultants, Private Sector – Columbus Water Works
Lord, Aeck & Sargent and Urban Collage Merge Full-Service Architecture and Planning Expertise. Merger Adds Lexington Oﬃce for LAS, Its Fifth. In a move that brings full-service planning expertise to its already well-established architecture practice, Lord, Aeck & Sargent (LAS) has merged with Urban Collage (UC), one of the largest urban and campus planning and design firms in the Southeast. Combining these firms’ talents was made official today. UC plans to retain its name for the foreseeable future. The merger adds a fifth geographic office for LAS, since UC, in addition to its Atlanta headquarters office, operates a 34
ACEC Georgia Edgar G. Williams, PE President ACEC Georgia
In keeping with this issue’s Transportation theme, think of this article as a ‘roadmap’ for
News where we have been and where we are headed on our journey to a new American Council of Engineering Companies of Georgia. It has been very satisfying to see how our newly reorganized ACEC Georgia has gotten up to speed and covered lots of ground in less than a year. Reorganization options, ideas, and strategies had been under discussion for several years. The board recognized that firm leaders have many issues competing for time and resources and multiple alternatives for business-related associations. We recognized that an ACEC Georgia that tried to play it safe was going to lose market share over time. We concluded that for ACEC Georgia to be
relevant in the new economy, we would have to take a leap of faith and do what needed to be done to transform ACEC Georgia into a more robust and relevant association. A range of options were explored for the ‘route’ it should take. A year ago, at the board’s spring retreat, the board and others in attendance used the book Race for Relevance, by Harrison Coerver and Mary Byers as a guide for taking a fresh look at where we were and where we wanted to be. It was a great tool for examining how we govern and manage the association and which ‘products’ were truly of benefit to our member firms. We used our Value Proposition tripod, Advocacy,
The Value of ACEC Georgia Serving your firm’s business interests through:
• Advocating at all levels of government to advance policies that impact the business of engineering in Georgia. • Monitoring the regulatory issues and government agency actions that affect engineers. • Working for a more pro-business climate and defending against unfair business practices. • Fighting to protect the professional engineering practice.
Business Development • Providing networking opportunities, meetings, and programs that put you in contact with potential clients, industry peers, and the leaders of the engineering profession. • Hosting the Georgia Engineers Summer Conference, Transportation Summit, P3 Summit, and other programs that expand your professional knowledge and network. • Offering informative and relevant seminars, programs, and webinars with presentations from leaders who affect our industry and community.
For additional information on ACEC Georgia, please visit our Web site: www.acecga.org or call our office: 404-521-2324. APRIL | MAY 2013
• Providing a forum for the exchange of business and professional experiences. • Offering programs and resources on best business practices for member firms. • Sponsoring the Future Leaders Program to build the next generation of leaders within member firms and the engineering profession. • We provide executive development training for emerging leaders and firm management.
CONTACT US at ACEC GEORGIA
(404) 521-2324 acecga.org
President & CEO, Michael Sullivan (404) 537-1337 firstname.lastname@example.org
Secretary, Roseana Richards Pond & Company email@example.com
Chief Operating Officer, Gwen Brandon (404) 537-1415 firstname.lastname@example.org
Vice President, Charles Ezelle Thomas & Hutton Engineering Co. email@example.com
Member Services Manager, Kathy Belcher (404) 665-3539 firstname.lastname@example.org
Vice President, John Heath Heath & Lineback Engineers Inc. email@example.com
Accounting Manager, Mia Wilson (404) 537-1275 firstname.lastname@example.org
Vice President, David Wright, Neel-Schaffer Inc. email@example.com
Chair, Eddie Williams Keck & Wood Inc. firstname.lastname@example.org
National Director, Rick Toole W. R. Toole Engineers Inc. email@example.com
Chair-Elect, Jay Wolverton Wolverton & Associates Inc. firstname.lastname@example.org Treasurer, Darrell Rochester Rochester & Associates Inc. email@example.com
Director, Don Harris, URS Corporation firstname.lastname@example.org Director, Rob Lewis, HNTB Corporation rtlewis@HNTB.com Director, David McFarlin, Long Engineering Inc. email@example.com Director, Richard Meehan Lowe Engineers LLC firstname.lastname@example.org Director, Margie Pozin STV/Ralph Whitehead Associates email@example.com Director, Doug Robinson Walter P Moore and Associates Inc. firstname.lastname@example.org
Director, Jim Case, Uzun & Case Engineers email@example.com
Past President, Jim Hamilton Southern Civil Engineers Inc. firstname.lastname@example.org
Director, Scott Gero, AECOM email@example.com
ACEC GEORGIA MEMBER FIRMS Board of Directors Eddie Williams, Chairman Jay Wolverton, Chairman-Elect Darrell Rochester, Treasurer / Roseana Richards, Secretary Charles Ezelle, Vice Chair / John Heath, Vice Chair / David Wright, Vice Chair Rick Toole, National Director / Jim Hamilton, Past President Jim Case / Scott Gero / Don Harris / Rob Lewis / David McFarlin / Richard Meehan / Margie Pozin / Doug Robinson
Staff Committees Darrell Rochester, Government Affairs/ PAC David Wright, ACEC PAC Champion Jim Hamilton, Nominating Rob Lewis, Programs Richard Meehan, Seminars Rob Lewis, Future Leaders Program Doug Robinson, A/E/C Leadership Charles Ezelle, Membership John Heath, Communications Roseana Richards, R. Berl Elder Memorial Scholarship Don Harris, Technology Enhancement
Michael â€˜Sullyâ€™ Sullivan, President & CEO Gwen Brandon, Chief Operating Officer Kathy Belcher, Member Services Manager Mia Wilson, Finance Manager
Forums Bill Griffin, Building Systems Corky Welch, Environmental Chris Marsengill, Transportation Brannen Butts, Leadership
ACEC consists of 5,000 firms nationwide and represents approximately 500,000 employees. ACEC Georgia consists of 206 firms and represents approximately 6,050 employees.
Business Development, and Firm Operations as the test to evaluate every concept. As a result of the board’s hard work at the retreat, we streamlined our committee structure and separated those functions that were just events from those that were ongoing initiatives. Initiatives that did not fit our Value Proposition were either eliminated or re-purposed by rolling them into related committees. We resolved to hire top-notch staff committed to our initiatives and able to navigate for the association better than any GPS. We received some good advice from others on which routes to take and which to avoid. At the 2012 National Conference in DC last spring I had the opportunity to get an extended de-brief from my counterpart, President for ACEC New York. While their journey had a few potholes, he reported that his organization was dealing with the
save Date! The Spa & Lodge at Callaway, Pine Mountain, GA June 13 – 16, 2013
recession very successfully and with great participation. He attributed their success to keeping programs relevant to the needs of engineering businesses and to including opportunities for all practice areas to benefit. He reported that some committees had a waiting list of those eager to participate! The results in New York validate our board’s commitment to making ACEC Georgia so relevant that firm executives are highly motivated to join and participate, instead of doing it just to ‘give back.’ I want to mention a few highlights of our trip so far because we have had some notable successes along the way. In terms of Advocacy, our Environmental Forum participated in the development of the certification language now used by EPD in permitting wastewater projects. We were cosigners of a new memorandum of understanding with Georgia Department of
2013 GeorGia enGineers summer ConferenCe
Transportation in the Georgia Partnership for Quality Transportation. We engaged the secretary of state in response to his proposed overhaul of the licensing process and built a good relationship for participation in future initiatives. November’s Transportation Summit was a great success for those interested in engineering issues in transportation in Georgia. It was the first major event that the reorganized ACEC Georgia conducted. It set a new standard for quality and alignment with our Value Proposition. Attendees received tremendous value for the cost of admission in business development and advocacy. ACEC Georgia played a major role in the 2013 Engineer’s Week Banquet in February. The Engineering Excellence Awards included great examples of ‘monumental’ projects that will enhance the image of the business of engineering in Georgia. The projects included examples from all our practice areas and the State Awards should compete very well at the
Solving Subsurface Problems Since 1981 • • • • • • •
Subsurface Utility Engineering (sue) Underground utility locating Subsurface mapping and profiling Concrete imaging and inspection Geophysical exploration 3D subsurface imaging Geophysical borehole logging
Ga: 770-980-1002 sC: 843-769-7379 nC: 919-406-1808 www.gel.com APRIL | MAY 2013
national level. The event gave us an opportunity to congratulate Tom Leslie one more time and to celebrate his positive impact on the business of consulting engineering and the entire engineering profession in Georgia. Thanks again, Tom, for putting us on the path to greatness. Looking ahead to see where we are going next, I encourage you to keep alert for notable roadside attractions. In May we will host a major event focused on the Public Private Partnership model, AKA ‘P3,’ for delivery of infrastructure projects. The format will be similar to the Transportation Summit. We recognized the difficulty of attending monthly lunch meetings for member firms located outside the metroAtlanta area. To address this, we have been evaluating technology alternatives for remote viewing. We will experiment with this approach this spring. Depending on participation and feedback, this may become a standard option for the future. It may soon be possible for a group of firms to gather in Augusta, Tifton, Savannah, or Macon for example, and conduct a meeting that is
viewed in Atlanta by a similar gathering. Or, a firm CEO anywhere in the state may host a lunch and learn at his office for his staff. The Engineer’s Summer Conference at Callaway Gardens in June promises to provide a full program, touching all three areas of the Value Proposition. The conference will be led by ACEC Georgia in partnership with our sister organizations from the Georgia Engineering Alliance. Callaway Gardens provides a great setting at a good value. The central location and the program schedule will provide an opportunity for firms to send several associates for at least some of the events and seminars. The Programs Committee is in the early stages of planning a Firm Operations Summit for August. The focus of this event will be seminars and roundtable discussions covering the issues associated with the operation of a successful engineering business. This full-day event is expected to include topics like: • Financial Management for Future Leaders
• Banking Relationships and Finding Capital • HR Issues and Benefits • Recruiting, Insurance • Real Estate-Buy or Lease? • Trends in Design Software • Trends in Accounting Software • Broadband and Communications Technology • Business Development Strategies for Success. The reorganization of ACEC Georgia has created a new level of energy and enthusiasm among its members. If your firm is already an ACEC Georgia member, but you have not been actively participating, or if you are considering the value of membership, contact me or one of our excellent staff for information on the opportunities available to you. Now is the time to get on the ACEC Georgia train (high speed rail, no doubt) because we are about to leave the station! v
Lisa S. Woods, P.E., President American Society of Civil Engineers, Georgia Section www.ascega.org firstname.lastname@example.org
girls. Many volunteers spread out to several schools to educate students in Civil Engineering reaching 375 kids. In the next couple of months, we plan to reach an additional 5,000 kids at various events. Our Toothpick Bridge Building event held at the Fernbank Science Center drew 86 participants from 11 elementary and middle schools. Our What Do Civil Engineers Do? Contest urges kids to be creative and offers
cash prizes! Winners will be chosen shortly and will be in attendance at our May meeting. ASCE participated in the E-Week Banquet and Engineers Day at the Capitol, along with our partner GEA societies. We also had ASCE members volunteering their time with Mathcounts. Thanks so much to all of our wonderful volunteers for making all of these great things happen!
Greetings! The weather is getting sunny and itâ€™s great to be a Civil Engineer! Engineers Week The theme for this yearâ€™s Engineers Week was Celebrate Awesome!! Hopefully, you had the opportunity to volunteer during EWeek. ASCE members were out and about during the week participating in various opportunities. Electronic Billboards at six locations with eleven designs were up once again this E-Week celebrating Civil Engineering with almost 9,000 views. We had several volunteers that participated in Introduce a Girl to Engineering at Georgia Tech providing hands on learning opportunities for 180
ASCE/GEORGIA SECTION 2012 - 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS President Lisa S. Woods, P.E. JACOBS email@example.com President-Elect Katherine McLeod Gurd, P.E. AECOM Katherine.Gurd@aecom.com Vice President Rebecca Shelton, P.E. Gwinnett County DWR firstname.lastname@example.org
APRIL | MAY 2013
Treasurer Dan Agramonte, P.E. O'BRIEN & GERE email@example.com External Director Keith Cole, P.E. firstname.lastname@example.org Internal Director Christina Vulova, P.E. URS Corporation email@example.com Secretary Ernie Pollitzer, MS P.E.
Sierra Piedmont firstname.lastname@example.org Technical Director Richard Morales, M.Sc., P.E. LB Foster Piling RMorales@LBFoster.com Younger Member Director Julie Secrist, P.E. Lowe Engineers Julie.Secrist@loweengineers.com Savannah Branch Director C. J. Chance NE Georgia Branch Director
Matthew Tanner, P.E. Breedlove Land Planning Inc. email@example.com South Metro Branch Director Greg A. Wombough, P.E. Universal Engineering Sciences firstname.lastname@example.org Past-President James R. Wallace, Sc.D., P.E. AMEC (retired) email@example.com
Report Card Please be on the lookout for ASCE’s 2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure that was released on March 19th. Please visit Google Play or the App Store to download the free app for your tablet or smart phone!! We are ramping up to begin another update to our Georgia Infrastructure Report Card, slated for a January 2014 release! Rebecca Shelton and Dan Agramonte are leading this effort so please contact them if you’re interested in getting involved. On that note, we are hosting a ‘PR University’ in Norcross May 3. This is a workshop that ASCE National conducts and offers a hands-on introduction to public relations for civil engineers and gives attendees tools and tips for implementing public relations into their local activities and professional work. Contact Keith Cole to sign up and stay tuned for more information! Remember… Please join us at one of our remaining section meetings this year! May 3 and June 7. Please check out our new Web site, www.ascega.org, for more information. I would like to extend a sincere thank you to our sponsors—Belgard Hardscapes, JACOBS, Hayward Baker, AECOM, Heath and Lineback, ASCE Region 5, ASCE Foundation, LB Foster, Evonik, Applied Technology Group, and CH2MHILL. Please contact me if you are interested in becoming a sponsor. In closing, please e-mail me at any time if you have questions, concerns, suggestions, or would like to volunteer! Take care! v
Upcoming Volunteer Opportunity Exploring Engineering Academy at Georgia Tech: June 2-7 Needed: Professional Engineer Volunteers and Students in 10th, 11th, and 12th Grades! The Exploring Engineering Academy (EEA) at Georgia Tech in June is an awesome program put together by the Learning for Life Division of the Atlanta Area Council of the Boy Scouts of America and the Georgia Engineering Foundation and championed 40
for ASCE by Richard Morales! ASCE has been honored and excited to participate for many years. Please contact Richard Morales at 404275-6430 or RMorales@LBFoster.com for more information. STEM Schools We continue to reach out to schools that would like to partner with us. We are regularly visiting schools with presentations and projects for the kids. Please contact us to help out! GeorGia enGineer
GSPE Georgia David W. Simoneau, P.E.,. President Georgia Society of Professional Engineers
“I know there's a proverb which says 'To err is human,' but a human error is nothing to what a computer can do if it tries.” –Agatha Christie As engineers we have an obligation to do our best when we prepare designs, reports or other documents for our clients. The crux of the matter is they depend on us to give them our best. Through my career, I have encountered better methods of doing so many of the tasks that I need to complete. I think back to my first computer, a Vic-20. It only had 5 kilobytes of memory. Today, you need at least 3 gigabytes of random access memory to even run some of the computer programs. I actually drew my designs with pencil and paper. I was very happy when I was able to start using AutoCAD so my line weights would be correct. As I moved on, I was fascinated with multiple pen plotters that could remember where the circle was to start again in the right place. It only took thirty minutes to complete one drawing sheet. Now, you can plot a whole set of drawings in that time. If you ever went through the Technical Report 55 hand calculations, you are as thrilled as I am that they created a program to do that for you. I took my engineer-in-training exam with a slide rule. Today, I have a telephone that can take pictures, send text around the world, and even surf the internet. By now you should be getting the picture. Technology is great! Remember, the technology comes with a warning. “If we continue to develop our technology without wisdom or prudence, APRIL | MAY 2013
News our servant may prove to be our executioner.” -Omar N. Bradley Now we get to the real heart of the matter. As engineers, we need to use technology wisely. With it we have the potential to do great things or we can make bigger mistakes faster. When I was in school, I took several classes that required hand calculations just to find out that there was already a computer program that would do it for me. It took me a long time to realize that the real reason was not to make it harder to finish the work. It was so that I would know why the computer program worked, and so that I could gauge the correctness of the answer. Today, as I work with many younger engineers I try to make a point of explaining why we use the program and what the various components mean. I want to be sure that they remember to check the answer. It is too easy just to believe the answer because the program gave it to us. One example is the answer that is given when the rational formula is used to calculate runoff. If you let the program decide your answer, it may be shown to several decimal places. Since the assumptions made to create the answer are not that accurate, the answer is not either. While this example is unlikely to cause a problem that would endanger the public, other calculations could cause injury. For instance, being that careless with a calculation for a structure may cause
a catastrophic failure that could not only destroy property, but endanger lives. Using the technology of today makes our jobs easier, but we need to be sure that we know what the results represent. When we do, we are keeping our promise as professionals to perform our best work for our clients and the safety of the public. I am glad that the technology is there. I enjoy the speed and the precision. However, my warning is to know the what, why, and how when you use that ‘black box.’ So, remember the words of Sydney J. Harris: “The real danger is not that computers will begin to think like men, but that men will begin to think like computers.” v
ITE Georgia Dwayne Tedder, PE Georgia Section, Institute of Transportation Engineers
Greetings from the Georgia Section of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (GA ITE). We are already off to an exciting and event filled year with our section’s activities. If you haven’t been involved, I’d like to mention several of the events taking place soon. In my article last month, I emphasized that the events and activities are a huge part of making GA ITE successful in membership and value, so I’m providing a description of these events to entice you into joining or getting more involved in GA ITE if you haven’t already. I’ll provide some highlights of a couple of events here because this is your chance to get in on the fun.
News ners. AICP Certification Maintenance Credits (CM) and/or Professional Development Hours (PDH) are being offered for attending the various technical sessions and tours. In addition to the technical program, sticking with the theme of NCSITE to ‘Make it Funner,’ activities such as a tour of the NASCAR Hall of Fame have been planned. To get more information about the meeting and register please visit the meeting Web site at www.sdite.org. 2013 ITE Summer Seminar - Save the Date! - It’s never too early to begin preparations for the best statewide ITE seminar in the country! Save the date - July 21st through July 24th. Reserve your rooms now at the King & Prince Beach & Golf Resort, St. Simons Island, Georgia. These rooms fill up quickly because this seminar is so popular! Make your hotel reservations by calling 1-800-342-0212. Registration for the conference opened on GA ITE’s website in April. We hope to see you there! And now on to GA ITE’s recent events and opportunities. The first monthly meeting of 2013 was held on Valentine’s Day at Mary Mac's Tea Room in Midtown Atlanta. The featured
topic was a ‘State-of-the-State and Meeting Tomorrow’s Challenges.’ The speaker was Toby Carr, Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) Director of the Planning Division. Toby provided his assessment of the current GDOT state of affairs, what challenges the GDOT will face in 2013, and what issues the Department will focus on in years to come. GA ITE greatly appreciates Toby speaking to us. We had a good crowd and some Valentine’s trivia for prizes. The Intelligent Transportation Society of Georgia and GA ITE sponsored a Legislative Appreciation Reception with Governor Nathan Deal, GDOT Board Chairman Johnny Floyd, Vice Chairman Jay Shaw, and numerous other board members and legislators, on Wednesday, February 20th, 2013 at the Georgia Railroad Freight Depot in Atlanta, Georgia. World Fiber Technologies helped sponsor the event, which included hors d’oeuvres, drinks, and tons of networking opportunities. Governor Deal provided an overview of transportation in the state including comments on several high profile projects. This event has continued to grow in popularity and attendance with over 100 people in attendance. Members of the Amer-
The 2013 SDITE Annual Meeting ~ This meeting will be held in Charlotte, North Carolina this year from April 7th–10th. The theme, ‘Partnerships for Vibrant Communities,’ will focus on the changing environment in which we work to fulfill the new expectations of transportation engineers and plan-
Winter Workshop Attendees at Presentation 42
ican Society of Civil Engineers were also in attendance. On February 21st, 2013, Southern Polytechnic State University hosted their Engineers Week event. At the event, GA ITE was invited to introduce David Peters as the Student of the Year in Engineering Technology. David is the President of the Student Chapter of ITE at Southern Poly. We are very proud to have one of our own ITE members be awarded this honor. David is a traffic engineer intern for Transcore, where for the past five months he has assisted engineers in the implementation of intelligent transportation systems across the country. David was also a member on the 2012 Southern Poly team that beat Georgia Tech in the ITE Traffic Bowl and went on to the Southern District meeting in Kentucky for the regional competition. Please join me in congratulating David in these accomplishments. Engineer’s Day at the Capitol was held
on February 22nd, 2013. Several engineering organizations and the Georgia Institute of Technology were invited to set up displays and represent Georgia’s engineering community. Senator Hardie Davis from Augusta was the host of the event and is an electrical engineer from Georgia Tech. The House and Senate passed resolutions honoring Engineer’s Day. After the resolutions, representatives from the engineering organizations had photo opportunities with the legislators. Also, the engineering organizations displayed information about their groups on the lower floor of the capitol building. The Transportation Winter Workshop was held on February 24th – 25th in Athens, Georgia. This workshop was started a couple of years ago by GA ITE and had a focus as a training opportunity for younger engineers. The 2013 conference expanded with an introduction of a partnership between GA ITE and the Georgia Chapter of the Ameri-
Board Position President Vice President Secretary/Treasurer Past President District Representative District Representative District Representative Affiliate Director
Member Dwayne Tedder Jonathan Reid Andrew Antweiler John Karnowski David Low Carla Holmes Jim Tolson Patrick McAtee
E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
Phone 404.406.8791 404.364.5225 678.639.7540 770.368.1399 770.594.6422 678.518.3654 404.635.2849 404.574.1985
Committee Activities Annual Report Audio/Visual Awards/Nominations Career Guidance Clerk Comptroller Engineers Week Finance Georgia Engineer Magazine Georgia Tech Liaison Historian Host Legislative Affairs Life Membership Marketing Membership Monthly Meetings Newsletter Past Presidents Public Officials Education Scholarship Southern Poly Liaison Summer Seminar Technical/Web site Winter Workshop
Chair(s) Jim Tolson Mark Boivin John Karnowski Brendetta Walker Elizabeth Scales Jim Pohlman Steven Sheffield
E-mail firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org
Phone 404.635.2849 404.374.1283 770.368.1399 404.364.5235 404.574.1985 770.972.9709
Dan Dobry Paul DeNard Charles Bopp Vamshi Mudumba Bill Ruhsam Don Gaines Shannon Fain Sunita Nadella Jonathan Reid Vern Wilburn Todd Long Scott Mohler Mike Crawford Bryan Sartin Sean Coleman France Campbell Larry Overn
email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com
770.971.5407 404.635.2843 678.380.9053 770.423.0807 678.728.9076 404.355.4010 770.813.0882 678.969.2304 404.364.5225 678.423.0050 404.631.1021 678.808.8811 678.333.0319 678.518.3884 404.419.8781 678.518.3952 770.813.0882
APRIL | MAY 2013
Hands-on Activities at Winter Workshop can Society of Highway Engineers. The successful partnership this year changed a workshop that was averaging 40-60 attendees to well over 100 attendees this year in Athens. The workshop this year in Athens was located at the University of Georgia Hotel and Conference Center. David Clark, of AthensClarke County, welcomed the attendees. Many thanks and congratulations go to Brian O’Connor of TY Lin, and Larry Overn of Stantec, who co-chaired the event for ASHE and GA ITE respectively. This workshop themed, ‘Delivering the Program,’ provided technical sessions that depicted current developments at GDOT and the direction of things to come, as well as sharing knowledge of the current state of the industry and recent innovations. Technical sessions provided practical, interactive training from public agencies and private consultants. Additionally, a group project (a traffic/highway engineering related, group problem-solving activity) allowed attendees to work together to develop the most innovative and beneficial solutions to a complex problem while limiting the project costs to the client. Technical sessions also included • Plan Development & Project Management Processes and Pitfalls • Complete Streets • Signal Timing Innovations & Comprehensive Plan Updates • TIA Project Delivery Update • Statewide Freight & Logistics Mobility • Interactive Traffic Signal Laboratory If you have made it this far in this article, I commend you for taking the time to read about what GA ITE is doing. Thanks to all our committees for making these events, training, and learning opportunities possible. And there is still more to come… v 43
ITS Georgia Scott Mohler, P.E. ITS President
ITS Georgia has a broad mandate to advance the state of the art of intelligent transportation solutions in our state and region. Over the years we have helped to start a new chapter in Tennessee, encouraged ITS deployment in the Carolinas and partnered with Florida on a biennial congress called TRANSPO. We pride ourselves in our annual meetings, which routinely draw well over 100 participants. In 2013 the annual meeting and exposition is scheduled for September 14-17 at Callaway Gardens. Participants hear and see the latest in ITS solutions and technology. An important part of our mission is to reach out to policy makers and let them know about the benefits of ITS. For the second year in a row, we co-hosted a legislative reception for state leaders. An estimated 100 people, including Gov. Nathan Deal, GDOT Board Chairman Johnny Floyd, GDOT Board Members, and Members of the General Assembly gathered in February to talk transportation issues facing the state. Sponsored by ITS Georgia and Georgia Section ITE, the event was the second annual supported by World Fiber Technologies. Chairman Floyd introduced the Governor who spoke about Our monthly meeting dates for the remainder of 2013 are: April 25 May 23 June 27 July 25
August 29 September 14-17 Annual Meeting October 31
News transportation programs of his administration and the need to come together to support improvements in transportation infrastructure. After remarks, ITS and ITE members networked with state and local transportation officials and policy makers. This year we continue to hold monthly meetings that allow members to network and hear about the latest in ITS solutions. Our topics this year have included video analytics software in Buckhead that more accurately account for vehicle activity at intersections, the latest in big screen display technology, and what type of infrastructure will state and local governments need in place to support
the rapidly approaching connected vehicle highway. Please join us at our monthly meetings and bring a friend. We’ll keep you posted on times and locations on our Web site and by e-mail. If you are not on our e-mail list, then visit www.itsga.org, or scan the QR code and enter your information via smartphone. Suggest that your organization join ITS Georgia so that all of your fellow associates may enjoy the benefits of membership. v
ITS Georgia Mission We believe that ITS is a valuable tool for improved management of any transportation system, regardless of the inherent complexity of the system. ITS can help operate, manage, and maintain the system once it has been constructed. We believe that ITS should be systematically incorporated into the earliest stages of project development, especially into the planning and design of transportation projects. We believe the best way to achieve this systematic incorporation into the process is through a coordinated, comprehensive program to ‘get out the word’ on ITS to constituencies that might not otherwise consider the relevance of ITS to their transportation system.
President Scott Mohler, URS Corporation
OUR 2013 SPONSORS Control Technologies Metrotech Temple Arcadis Gresham Smith and Partners HNTB World Fiber Technologies Atkins Delcan Kimley-Horn and Associates Sensys Southern Lighting and Traffic Systems URS Telvent Cambridge Systematics Grice Consulting Wolverton & Associates
ITS GEORGIA CHAPTER LEADERSHIP
Vice President Tom Sever, Gwinnett DOT Secretary Kristin Turner, Wolverton and Associates Inc. Treasurer Christine Simonton, Delcan Directors Mark Demidovich, GDOT Susie Dunn, ARC Eric Graves, City of Alpharetta Carla Holmes, Gresham Smith & Partners Winter Horbal, Temple Inc. Keary Lord, Douglas County DOT Michael Roberson, GDOT David Smith, Dekalb Co. Transportation Prasoon Sinha, ARCADIS Grant Waldrop, GDOT State Chapters Representative Kenny Voorhies, Cambridge Systematics Inc. Ex Officio Greg Morris, Federal Highway Administration Andres Ramirez, Federal Transit Administration
SEAOG Georgia Rob Weilacher, PE, SE President The Structural Engineers Association of Georgia
As we continue through the 2013 year at SEAOG, there are a lot of interesting things going on. The following membership meeting topics are planned finishing out our spring season: April 18: Shape-Memory Metal Alloys for Structural Uses May 16: Design for High Winds and Emergency Shelters Thanks to Wilbur Bragg and the Programs Subcommittee for their vital work in organizing these opportunities for education. In addition to the membership meeting presentations, SEAOG will begin providing Structural Engineering Examination Preparatory Classes for the new 16-hour licensing exam required for structural engineers: Wood Design: March 14, 2013, from 4:007:00 pm AASHTO Design: March 20, 2013, from 4:00-7:00 pm Masonry Design: April 3, 2013, from 4:00 - 7:00 pm Classes will be held at the offices of Uzun & Case Engineers, 201 17th Street NW, Suite 1200, Atlanta, Georgia 30363. Each class has a cost of $99.00 for members and $149.00 for non-members with three PDH hours awarded per class. SEAOG will also be offering a full day spring seminar on the major changes in the upcoming ASCE7-10 code. The seminar APRIL | MAY 2013
News will be conducted by Dr. S. K. Ghosh, who is a knowledgeable authority on this topic. This code change will incorporate very significant changes to the way we calculate wind and seismic loads, so it is an opportunity not to be missed for structural engineers. ASCE-7-2010 Code Changes with Dr. S. K. Ghosh, April 30, 2013, see www.seaog.org Our subcommittees to coordinate activities in the separate areas of service are: • Structural Engineering Emergency Response (SEER) • Structural Engineering Licensing (SE) • Programs (for monthly membership meetings) • Liaison with the Board of Registration • Legislative Council • Young Members Group • Liaison to the NCSEA 2013 Convention (in Atlanta, Sept, 2013) • Awards Program (for winter 20132014) Each subcommittee includes a member of the board and a separate chairman. Subcommittee meeting notes, subcommittee purpose, and active members can be found on the SEAOG Web site. Please visit the site and volunteer ! Mark on your calendars that the NCSEA National Convention will be in Atlanta September 18-21, 2013 at the Westin Buckhead.
In summary, the Structural Engineers Association of Georgia of continues to offer quality continuing education and professional networking. We encourage you to keep tabs on our events and activities at www.seaog.org. Please consider getting involved with one or more of our subcommittees. Your involvement will keep SEAOG effective in service to the professional structural engineers of Georgia long into the future. v “Gort! Klaatu Borada nikto.”
(770) 521-8877 USE A COmPAny yOU CAn TRUST WITh yOUR TRAnSlATIOn PROjECT, because a little mistake in another language can have unpleasant results.
WTS Georgia Angela Snyder, P.E. President, WTS Atlanta
This is shaping up to be a great year with the WTS Atlanta Chapter! We held our Membership Meeting at the beginning of February and had a great turnout. We exceeded capacity on the meeting room and received an overwhelming response to the call for volunteers. Our committees have already started taking on new challenges and engaging more members of our chapter. Thank you to all of the committee members and chairs: Chairs: Daveitta Jenkins (Mentor-Protege), Marsha Anderson-Bomar (Regional Roundtable), Helen McSwain (Transportation YOU), Jenny Jenkins (Scholarship Luncheon) Volunteers: Tina Garbos, Cara Hodgson, Kristin Scurlock, Dametrice Cochran, Melody Butler, Audra Rojek, Katherine Park Stacy Blakley, Alyssa Sinclair, Raymell Shannon, Charlotte Weber, Sara Woracheck Patti Schropp, Ligia Florim, Courtney Vissman, Brendetta Walker, Jolene Hayes, Amanda Fox, Sheila Jordan, Susan Joyce, Alison Gonzalez During the Strategic Planning Session held in January, the board discussed the challenges that our chapter is facing and the ways that we can be sure that we are staying relevant in our industry. During that meeting, we determined that one of our main focuses this year needs to be diversity. We want to be sure that we are reaching a broad range of professionals in the transportation industry. In order to achieve this goal, we realize that we need to work with other organizations to be a partner with them in maximizing our poten46
News tial reach. One example of this partnership is the WTS/COMTO STEM Show and Tell. WTS Atlanta Transportation You and COMTO STEM Outreach have teamed up to host a STEM Show and Tell Event with three local high schools (Grady High, Columbia High and South Atlanta High). The event will take place at the MARTA Headquarters Atrium where the STEM students will showcase their projects and provide presentations. Two other joint events that are coming up in April that may be of interest to a broader group of participants are the Happy Hour with the YPT (Young Professionals in Transportation) and the Tennis Tournament Social with ASHE (American Society of Highway Engineers). WTS Atlanta has also been in contact with the GPA (Georgia Planning Association) to assist with their Spring Conference that is to be held in College Park in May. In addition to the joint programs that we are co-hosting with other similar organizations, we have also chosen to continue some of our signature programs for the year. One of those is the Mentor Protégé program. It kicked off in February to provide a lot of exciting devel-
opment opportunities for both young professionals in our industry and those who have more experience. We are also excited about the upcoming DC Youth Summit in June. Transportation You's flagship conference will be held in Washington, DC from June 2630. This annual event provides an opportunity for participants from across the country and their mentors to experience once-in-alifetime tours, meet-up with White House administrators, and participate in challenges and breakout sessions. The Atlanta Chapter will submit a Big and Little Sister for consideration to attend the 2013 summit. If any of these activities interest you or if you have any ideas for WTS Atlanta, please reach out to me or any of our Board. We are very passionate about our mission and strategy for growing our membership and outreach opportunities and welcome your feedback and suggestions. We are very thankful for those who have been involved with WTS for years and offer history and wisdom, as well as those who are just starting to get involved that have a fresh outlook to bring to the table. v
WTS ATLANTA 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Angela Snyder, P.E. President Wolverton & Associates Inc. Marissa Martin, P.E. Vice President, Membership Gresham, Smith and Partners Tonya Saxon Vice President, Programs MARTA Kirsten Berry Secretary HNTB Corporation Jennifer Stephan, EIT Treasurer Gresham, Smith and Partners Beth Ann Schwartz, P.E. Director-at-Large Michael Baker Corporation Helen McSwain, P.E. Director-at-Large Atkins Regan Hammond Director-at-Large Atlanta Regional Commission Shelley Lamar Director-at-Large Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport Jennifer King, P.E. Immediate Past President HNTB Corporation
firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com Jennifer_stephan@gspnet.com firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com firstname.lastname@example.org Shelley.Lamar@atlanta-airport.com email@example.com