Volume 20, Issue 2

APRIL | MAY 2013

TRANSPORTATION

G E O R G I A

ENGINEER®

ONE PORSCHE DRIVEAEROTROPOLIS ATLANTA

THE EVER CHANGINGPORT OF SAVANNAH

Cover photo courtesy of

Jim Ellis Porsche of Atlanta

2 GeorGia enGineer

APRIL | MAY 2013 3

Publisher: A4 Inc.1154 Lower Birmingham RoadCanton, Georgia 30115Tel.: 770-521-8877 • Fax: 770-521-0406E-mail: p.frey@a4inc.com

Managing Editor: Roland Petersen-FreyArt Direction/Design: Pamela Petersen-Frey

Georgia Engineering Alliance233 Peachtree Street • Harris Tower, #700Atlanta, Georgia 30303Tel.: 404-521-2324 • Fax: 404-521-0283

The Georgia Engineer Editorial BoardThomas C. Leslie, PE, ChairMichael L. (Sully) Sullivan, ACEC Geor-gia, PresidentGwen D. Brandon, CAE, ACEC Geor-gia, Chief Operating Officer

GSPE RepresentativesTim Glover, PE

ACEC/Georgia RepresentativesB.J. Martin, PELee Philips

ASCE/G RepresentativesDaniel Agramonte, PESteven C. Seachrist, PE

GMCEA RepresentativeBirdel F. Jackson, III, PE

ITE RepresentativesDaniel Dobry, PE, PTOEJohn Edwards, PE

ITS/G RepresentativesBill Wells, PEShaun Green, PEKay Wolfe, PE

WTS RepresentativeAngela Snyder

ASHE RepresentativeJenny Jenkins, PE

SEAOG RepresentativeRob Wellacher, PE

The Georgia Engineer is published bi-monthly by A4 Inc. for the Georgia Engineering Al-liance 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. Opinionsexpressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the Alliance or publisher nor do they accept re-sponsibility for errors of content or omission and, as a matter of policy, neither do they endorseproducts or advertisements appearing herein. Parts of this periodical may be reproduced with thewritten consent from the Alliance and publisher. Correspondence regarding address changes shouldbe sent to the Alliance at the address above. Correspondence regarding advertising and editorial ma-terial should be sent to A4 Inc. at the address listed above.

G E O R G I A

ENGINEER

4 GeorGia enGineer

Advert isementsA4 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

8 One Porsche Drive ~ a strongfoundation for growth

12 The Ever Changing Port of Savannah

16 Public-Private Partnerships CreateResults for Perimeter

18 No Down Time for Construction atWorld’s Busiest Airport

21 A Plan for Integrating RoadwayOperations is the ITS Georgia 2012Wayne ShackelfordScholarship Winner

22 Practical Application of Water Quality Credit Trading for Georgia Utilities

26 To BIM and Beyond!

30 Transportation Enhancements Enriching Quality of Life in Georgia’s Communities

32 Georgia Engineering News

35 ACEC Georgia News

39 ASCE Georgia News

41 GSPE Georgia News

42 ITE Georgia News

44 ITS Georgia News

45 SEAOG Georgia News

46 WTS Georgia News

5APRIL | MAY 2013

T a b l e o f

CONTENTS GEORGIA ENGINEER April | May 2013

8

30

6 GeorGia enGineer

Visit: thegeorgiaengineer.com

7APRIL | MAY 2013

8 GeorGia enGineer

a strong foundation for growthOn May 12, 2011 Porsche Car North America Inc. (PCNA) announced plans toconstruct a truly unique facility on the south side of Atlanta. The facility will com-bine modern offices, a technical training center, a business center and restau-rant, and a world-class Porsche Experience Center—one of a handful ofsuch facilities around the globe. The facility will be a must-see destina-tion for Porsche owners, dealers, enthusiasts, and visitors from aroundthe world.

On November 27, 2012, PCNA held a ceremonial ground-breaking event for the $100 million North American head-quarters project. The facility, ‘One Porsche Drive,’ will be theinaugural project in a development known as Aerotropolis Atlanta. Aerotropolis Atlanta is a planned mixed-use develop-ment owned by Jacoby Development. The development is lo-cated near the International Terminal at Hartsfield-JacksonAtlanta International Airport on the site of the former Ford MotorCompany assembly plant in Hapeville, Georgia.

9APRIL | MAY 2013

10 GeorGia enGineer

One Porsche Drive will include a four-storyoffice tower, technical training center, driv-ing experience center, classic car restorationworkshop, and display area—all containedwithin a 200,000-square-foot facility. A 650-space three-level underground parking deckis located below the office tower. The facilitywill be home for up to 400 U.S. Porsche em-ployees.

The building design team is headed byHOK’s Atlanta office and includes Barrett,Woodyard & Associates Inc. (MEP),KSi/Structural Engineers (structural), andKimley-Horn and Associates Inc. (civil),with Jacoby Development acting as projectdevelopment manager, and Mace providingprogram management services to PCNA.The exterior structure of the building payshomage to the Porsche principle that ‘formfollows function.’ HOK’s design captures theessence of the Porsche brand and perform-ance, creating a high-performance buildingwhile emphasizing a superior customer ex-perience. By integrating the track into thelower levels of the office building and weav-ing in subtle motorsport-related cues, the de-sign communicates the Porsche experience.The contemporary, light-filled workplacewill promote collaboration and inspire cre-ativity. Central café areas, team rooms, andhuddle spaces support a cooperative, trans-parent culture.

Technology plays an important role inthe facility design, especially in the achieve-ment of sustainability goals. Energy con-servation measures include fine-tuning thebuilding orientation, a highly-efficientbuilding envelope, landscaping that acts asa natural shade, and rainwater collection foruse in the track wetting system. OnePorsche Drive design goal is a silver LEEDcertification.

Aerotropolis Atlanta’s original anticipateddensity included over six million square feetof office, hospitality, and retail space; a500,000 square foot data center, and a 4,000space off-site airport parking facility. Thebuild-out was so large that a Development

of Regional Impact (DRI) Study was trig-gered by Jacoby Development’s rezoning ap-plication in 2008.

Since the original master plan, Aero-tropolis Atlanta’s build-out density and as-sociated traffic generation has beendramatically reduced. Hartsfield-JacksonAtlanta International Airport acquired 43percent of the development for airfieldclear zone protection. The ‘One PorscheDrive’ development comprises 16 percentof the site.

The PCNA Headquarters and DrivingExperience Center is the first element of de-velopment and will generate 1.8 percent ofthe ultimate daily traffic generation origi-nally anticipated. Porsche Drive will form aT-intersection with Porsche Avenue to pro-vide the headquarters building with easy ac-cess to I-75 via the adjacent Porsche Avenue/I-75 interchange. Projected volumes do notwarrant a signalized intersection.

The existing traffic conditions were de-termined by conducting daily AM and PMpeak traffic counts at the 25 intersectionsthat would be affected by the development.Anticipated traffic generated by AerotropolisAtlanta was layered on top of the existingtraffic conditions and assigned various Aero-tropolis Atlanta entry points. Future devel-opment of this density was projected togenerate approximately 69,490 daily tripsdistributed over seven entry points. To sat-isfy this level of peak hour traffic, the masterplan for Aerotropolis Atlanta included aspine road consisting of four through-lanesand divided median/left-turn lanes con-nected to Airport Loop Road at two signal-ized intersections. Four more signalizedintersections on Porsche Avenue (formerlyHenry Ford II Avenue) and one signalizedconnection to Elm Street were recom-mended to accommodate the anticipated in-crease in traffic.

The PCNA Headquarters and DrivingExperience Center alone is not anticipatedto have a significant traffic impact, howeverspinoff development will surely increase traf-fic demand. Some of the existing street sys-tem is under-utilized at present, but will bemonitored by the local jurisdictions andtransportation improvements will be pro-gramed as needed.

Aerotropolis Atlanta is the site of the formerFord automotive plant and, as such, includesvarious pavement and building floor slabsurfaces and abandoned underground utili-ties. One Porsche Drive is predominantly lo-cated in the former Ford automotive plantemployee parking lot.

The Porsche Driving Experience trackincludes 1.3 miles of handling course withvarious horizontal and vertical alignments, adynamic area for special driving activities, akick plate area to replicate recovery from aspin on wet pavement, a low friction circleto replicate tight turns on wet pavements,and an ice hill to replicate handling in icyroad conditions.

Vehicles and pedestrians will enter theheadquarters building at four locations onthree different floor levels in a relativelyshort distance, requiring careful attention tostreet grades. Groundwater levels are ap-proaching the lowest levels of excavation,which necessitated a balancing of finishfloor and ground water elevations. The in-tegration of the Driving Experience han-

Building Program

Entitlements

Porsche Site Development

11APRIL | MAY 2013

dling course into the building courtyard re-quired close coordination between the trackand building components.

Since the former Ford plant utilitieswere abandoned, 1,300 linear feet of watermain and 2,230 linear feet of sanitary sewermain had to be extended onto One PorscheDrive.

One Porsche Drive extends into threepolitical jurisdictions—67 percent in the cityof Atlanta, 24 percent in Clayton Countyand nine percent in the city of Hapeville.Open communication with and between allthree was essential. Even though the head-quarters building is physically located withinthe city of Atlanta, water and sewer serviceis being provided by the city of Hapeville.Entitlements and site development permit-ting were procured from all three jurisdic-tions. Porsche Drive is located in twojurisdictions as well.

From the beginning, Jacoby Develop-ment has taken a regional approach to theAerotropolis Atlanta infrastructure and willcontinue to work closely with all three polit-ical jurisdictions to ensure infrastructureneeds are met in an economical and envi-ronmentally sustainable manner.

A regional stormwater management ap-proach was discussed up front with all threejurisdictions. A regional stormwater man-agement facility serves the Porsche Head-quarters and Driver Experience Center. Thestormwater management facility will meetthe most stringent jurisdictions regulations.

Stormwater runoff will replenish a per-manent pool of water used to wet the varioustrack surfaces to replicate wet pavementtraining conditions. Track wetting runoffwill be recirculated to the permanent waterpool, with little or no potable water supplyanticipated.

It is hoped that One Porsche Drive will bea catalyst for an economic revival in thearea. As a major corporate presence in theAerotropolis development, it should drawattention from other corporate groups look-ing to locate near the airport. It should sig-

nal the beginning of a much larger move-ment toward sustainable development sur-rounding the world’s busiest airport. Localbusiness should see new income from em-ployees and visitors drawn to the area byPorsche’s presence.

Porsche’s decision to utilize local designprofessionals is evidence of the quality andreputation of Georgia’s professional archi-tects and engineers. Once complete, OnePorsche Drive will be an example to nationaland international corporations and develop-ment groups that Atlanta’s and Georgia’s de-sign and construction industry can produceone of the finest facilities in the world. v

Stormwater Management

Foundation forGrowth

12 The GeorGia enGineer

The EverChanging Port of

Savannah

he Port of Savannah is one of those in-frastructure stories where economic de-

velopment has been driven to successbeyond anyone’s imagination.Well meaning Englishmen secured a charter

from King George in 1733 to organize a colony inAmerica. Led by General James Oglethorpe, the first

settlers (many released from debtor’s prison) first landed inSavannah. The colony’s trustees expected they would exportraw materials to England and import English manufacturedgoods. It did not work out, and by 1852 the trustees recog-nized the failure of their grand experiment and ceded thecolony to the Crown.

It was notuntil 1793when Eli Whit-ney perfectedthe cotton ginthat the slave-plantation sys-tem focusedon cotton.Cotton exportsfrom Savannahjumped from1,000 bales in1791 to 20,000bales 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 ofconcern, and in 1800-1805, studies were conducted of the ad-equacy of its wharf and harbor. In 1826, Congress was askedfor $50,000 to clear and deepen the channel. By 1856, thechannel was 250’ wide and 17’ deep. Although the Civil War

broke the back of the slave-plantation system, it was only atemporary interruption in cotton exports from Savannah,which resumed in 1866 and constituted about 90 percent ofSavannah’s total.

No federal aid for harbor work came to Savannah dur-ing the Reconstruction period, and it was not until 1872 thatCongress approved $50,000 for this purpose. The city had

spent over $200,000 of its own funds during the period from1868-1872. A milestone was reached in 1881, when the U.S.undertook to widen the channel to 600 feet and deepen itto 22 feet (completed in 1887). In 1896 the harbor was deep-ened to 26 feet and by 1900 there was talk of a 30-foot chan-nel. By 1912, Savannah was the second largest exporter onthe Atlantic coast; ahead of Boston, Philadelphia, and Balti-more—and the fourth largest in the nation. Savannah wasthe world’s largest exporter of naval stores, but cotton wasstill dominant. The port was extraordinarily busy duringWorld War I but was devastated by the collapse of cotton inthe 1920s due to the boll weevil and the subsequent collapseof Georgia’s rural economy.

In broadterms, the Sa-vannah Portwas a boom-ing enter-prise, basedon cotton ex-ports duringthe centuryprior to theCivil War, butwas in declineduring theperiod be-tween theCivil War and

World War I. In 1921, the Georgia General Assembly createdthe Georgia Harbor, Port and Terminal Commission, whichhired a consulting engineer (F.W. Cowie of Montreal) to studythe harbors of St. Mary’s, Brunswick, and Savannah and rec-ommend a location for construction of state-owned terminals.Interestingly, Cowie was hired in March and submitted his re-

port in July, 1922—only 4 to 5 months later. Thiswas apparently a time of simpler questions anddirect answers. Savannah was recommended,provided it acquired land for the terminal. The re-port recommended $15 million in facilities, in-cluding docks, wharves, rail and road connections,warehouses, sheds, and grain elevators. But 1922was a bad economic time, and the sponsoring

governor was not re-elected; no action was taken. More than20 years later, another consulting engineer, hired for substan-tially the same assignment, wrote: “It is more difficult todayto obtain this trade than it would have been in 1921. It will bemore difficult in 1970 than it is today (1945).”

One outcome of the Cowie report was the creation of theSavannah Port Authority by the General Assembly in 1925. It

13APRIL | MAY 2013

By Thomas C. Leslie

T

The Port of Savannah handled mostly products andsupplies for agriculture and forestry, which was hitespecially hard by the Depression. It was not untilWorld War II that traffic at Savannah was substantiallyincreased.

14 GeorGia enGineer

was authorized to acquire property, op-erate a terminal, and incur indebtednessof up to $3 million. By 1945, it ownedover 10,000 feet of undeveloped water-front on both sides of the river.

The State Planning Board, with assis-tance of the federal WPA, issued a studyof state ports in 1939—in the waningdays of the Depression. The Port of Sa-vannah handled mostly products andsupplies for agriculture and forestry,which were hit especially hard by the De-pression. It was not until World War II that

traffic at Savannah was substantially in-creased.

The Frederick R. Harris EngineeringFirm was hired to review the circum-stances at the Georgia ports and pro-duced a report in 1945 whichrecommended an $8 million terminal inSavannah. Long before the completionof this report, it was apparent that Sa-vannah, with a population of about100,000, did not have the resources tobuild and manage a facility of the sizecontemplated in the various reports. Itwould require state support.

Involving the state government in a‘local’ project (a port) in a specific city (Sa-vannah) was a big leap for Georgia’s po-litical leaders. Between the 1922 Cowiereport and the 1945 Harris report, how-ever, a sea-change in public opinion hadoccurred, and a proposal for a state-sup-ported port in Savannah was endorsedby the Georgia General Assembly.

In March 1945, the Georgia GeneralAssembly approved the creation of theState Ports Authority. The Authority wasauthorized to develop and operate state-

owned facilities and issue up to $15 mil-lion in bonds. In 1948, the state acquired407 acres up-river from downtown Sa-vannah for a terminal, which opened tothe public in 1953. In 1959, the Authorityacquired land for expansion, the 388-acreWhitehall Plantation. Over the years theterminal has expanded to encompassabout 1,200 acres. The Garden City Ter-minal is now devoted exclusively to con-tainer cargo, which is measured in TEUs(twenty foot equivalent units). Today, Sa-vannah is the fourth largest, fastest grow-ing container port in the US with over 2.9

million TEUs in 2012. It is also the largestsingle-terminal operation in the UnitedStates, which provides more flexible, effi-cient, and secure operations. Signifi-cantly, it is the second largest containerport on the east and gulf coasts.

In 1956, the Ports Authority acquiredthe Central of Georgia Railway and OceanSteamship Terminals in Savannah anddeveloped what is now called the OceanTerminal, which is located under the Tal-madge Bridge. This terminal has alsobeen expanded over the years to cover

200 acres and is cur-rently used for break-bulk and RoRo(roll-on/roll-off) cargo.

Both the Garden Cityand the Ocean termi-nals are served by twoClass I railroads: Nor-folk Southern and CSX.Garden City has imme-diate access to the In-terstate HighwaySystem (I-95 and I-16).

The river channel tothe two terminals wasdeepened to 42 feetand widened to 500feet in 1994. In 1997,the Ports Authorityproposed deepeningthe channel to 45 feet.The expansion of thePanama Canal to ac-commodate largerships has changed theexpected flow of

ocean-going commerce. Cargos fromAsia that are now off-loaded on the WestCoast for land transport to the Midwestare soon expected to pass through thePanama Canal and be off-loaded at EastCoast ports for much shorter land con-nections to markets. With this change inshipping strategy and infrastructure, theGeorgia Ports Authority has amended itsplans to deepen the channel to 48 feet tobetter accommodate the larger ships. Sa-vannah is well-positioned to take advan-tage of this new opportunity.

After 15 years of study, analysis, andregulatory review, the U.S. Army Corps ofEngineers issued their Record of Decisionin November 2012 for the deepeningproject. The Corps concluded that themost cost-effective channel depth was 47feet, and they would only participate inthe cost to achieve that depth. The proj-ect would include 32 miles of channel upto the Garden City Terminal. The esti-mated cost is about $652 million, andGeorgia’s share is 30 percent, or about$196 million. Georgia has already ap-proved $181 million, and the Governorexpects to add $40-50 million in the cur-rent year budget. With the Record of De-cision from the Corps, the only majoraction remaining is authorization of theproject by the US Congress. To be surethe project is complex and controversial,and there could be further litigation to tryto stop its implementation. To some ob-servers, the Record of Decision is the hardpart, and the two remaining steps relat-ing to money, by the U.S. Congress andGeorgia General Assembly, are on thedown slope to implementation.

It is a wonder that the Port of Savan-nah has grown to such a scale and signifi-cance in international trade. At one levelit is not all that surprising that the Porthas grown enormously since 1733; almostevery American institution has grownenormously since European settlement.But the Savannah port has out-competedall its peers and is pressing a very small

number of larger ports. How can this be?It is true that Savannah is further westthan its east coast competitors and thushas a shorter land leg on delivery of cargoto inland markets. Savannah does havevery good railroad and interstate highwayconnections, but any port might havedone the same. Savannah’s terminals arenot hemmed in by dense urban develop-ment (think New York or LA/Long Beach)which makes connecting land trans-portation slower and less efficient. Butnone of these factors, or others that couldbe conjured up, would make Savannah alead-pipe cinch for top billing in port traf-fic. It may just be that the Georgia PortsAuthority has been given sufficient au-tonomy to operate in a businesslike man-ner, its Board has set high expectationsand hired well qualified leaders, andelected officials have left them alone. Theport has been effectively linked to otherinfrastructure which serves the require-ments of customers, which increasinglyare engaged in international trade. Geor-gia is surely the prime beneficiary of thePort of Savannah, which year after yeardoes its work quietly and effectively. v

15APRIL | MAY 2013

Notes: (1) Much of this article is based on,

and quotes come from, “Geor-gia’s Foreign Trade, A Brief His-tory with Some Recent Statistics”,by L. Aubrey Drewry, Jr., Re-search Monograph Number 1,Bureau of Business Research,University of Georgia, 1964.

(2) The Georgia Ports Authorityowns and operates two termi-nals in Savannah, four terminalsat the Port of Brunswick, and ‘in-land’ ports in Bainbridge andColumbus. The Garden City Ter-minal in Savannah is by far theAuthority’s largest facility.

Thomas C. Leslie

Thomas C.Leslie isDirector ofExternalAffairs forGeorgiaEngineeringAlliance

16 GeorGia enGineer

eorgia’s first Diverging Di-amond Interchange(DDI) at I-285 and Ash-ford Dunwoody Road isa showcase for an inno-vative, low cost trans-

portation design that can provide immediatetraffic congestion relief. Just as importantly,it is a model for the benefits of public-pri-vate partnerships in providing mobility solu-tions.

The Perimeter Community Improve-ment Districts (PCIDs), through a partner-ship with the Georgia Department ofTransportation (GDOT) and several othergovernment entities, has improved trafficflow and safety, and pedestrian access acrossa highly congested interchange that is a keygateway to Metro Atlanta’s dominant officedistrict and one of the region’s largest em-ployment centers.

The Ashford Dunwoody DDI “is an ex-ample of the public-private cooperation thatwill be critical for moving transportationprojects forward in Georgia in the future,”Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle said at the formal ded-ication of the project last November.

The $6.4 million Ashford DunwoodyDDI was initiated in 2009 by the PCIDs toimprove the more than 40-year-old inter-change, which was inadequate to serve thenearly 55,000 vehicles that use it daily. Wehired Moreland Altobelli Associates to finda creative way to make improvementsquickly at a minimal cost.

The interchange had been the subject ofnumerous studies in the past 30 years and acomplete reconstruction at a projected costof $172 million was included in the AtlantaRegional Commission’s Regional Transporta-tion Plan (RTP) for Metro Atlanta to 2030.However, given the redesign cost and the factthat the RTP contained billions in unfundedneeds, the project’s chances looked slim.

We knew the market couldn’t wait 20 to30 more years for traffic congestion relief atthe Ashford Dunwoody Interchange. To re-tain employers and accommodate job growthand population increases, traffic delays had

to be addressed quickly. After visiting the country’s first DDI

constructed in 2009 in Springfield, Missouri,Moreland Altobelli recommended the designto the PCIDs. The PCIDs then undertooktheir second challenge—getting the designthrough the pipeline for approval.

We had to get acceptance from GDOTand clearance from the Federal Highway Ad-ministration. The DDI was different fromanything that had ever been done in Georgia.Making a business case for the value of theproject was important. We communicatedthe project’s tie to job creation and the move-ment of goods and services. And we com-municated the position of strength thePCIDs brought to the project.

Putting the partnership and equity inplace, the PCIDs applied for and received$800,000 in funding from the Georgia StateRoad and Tollway Authority, and $450,000from DeKalb County HOST Funds for theengineering and design. GDOT funded the$4.8 million cost of construction.

The next challenge was to place a uniquedesign on top of a busy, existing interchangewithout reconstructing the bridge. Specificdesign constraints included I-285 volumesand congestion, the proximity of Hammondand Ravinia Drive intersections, the high vol-ume of traffic on Ashford Dunwoody Road

south of I-285, and signal timing and mod-eling. The closure of the bridge to foot traf-fic for a month in order to construct aprotected bridge median crossing requiredcreating and publicizing pedestrian detours.

And, the PCIDs learned from the expe-rience of other DDIs already installedaround the country that a well-targeted pub-lic education campaign is important in over-coming public confusion, unfamiliarity, andnon-acceptance. A campaign was created in-house by the PCIDs External Affairs Team.The PCIDs in-house team created the con-cept of the unique and eye-catching cam-paign logo and slogan “Can you DDI?—Arrive, Crossover, Drive.”

“We wanted the campaign to deliver acomplete message that could assure thepublic that this would be an easy transi-tion,” said Donna Mahaffey, PCIDs Chiefof External Affairs.

An outside graphics design firm createda campaign logo, slogan, and collateral ma-terials such as postcards, newspaper ads anda large poster distributed to 65 major officebuildings and hotels in the Perimeter marketfor display in lobbies to educate employeesand visitors about the DDI. The PCIDs alsocreated a Web site devoted to the AshfordDunwoody DDI—www.canyouddi.org.

The PCIDs also learned from the Mis-

Public-Private Partnerships Create Results for PerimeterBy Yvonne Williams |President and CEO | Perimeter Community Improvement Districts

Aerial of DDI heading north

17APRIL | MAY 2013

souri Department of Transportation that aninitial emphasis on the windshield-level ex-perience of driving a DDI is more effective inrelaying the advantages of the interchangethan an aerial view. To provide that experi-ence, the PCIDs hosted a well-publicizedand attended test drive in the parking lot ofnearby Perimeter Mall a few weeks before theinterchange opened to crossover traffic. Golfcarts were used on a simulated track and par-ticipants completing the drive received t-shirts with the logo created for the campaign.The city of Dunwoody, which has whole-heartedly embraced the DDI, helped withthe event.

The PCIDs’ two-year campaign also in-cluded the distribution of news releases, ar-ticles for the newsletters and Web sites ofsurrounding cities and neighborhood associ-ations, e-blasts and e-mail by area employersto their workers, informational booths atbusiness and community festivals, and tar-geted radio and newspapers ads. Specificfunding from the PCIDs for the campaignimplementation was $50,000.

The External Affairs Team played amajor role with its GDOT partner in gener-ating extensive media coverage for the DDI.Metro Atlanta TV coverage for the bridgeclosing and crossover of traffic totaled 117separate stories from May 21 to June 5,2012. The coverage was valued at $400,000if air time had been purchased, and the au-dience was 7.44 million. The Atlanta Jour-nal-Constitution ran an article on the frontof the Metro Section June 1 and front pagearticles June 2, 4, and 5. The AssociatedPress released the story statewide and therewas coverage in every major market. Na-tional TV and newspaper coverage includedmajor markets ranging from San Antonio toMinneapolis and Chicago.

While detailed traffic studies and analy-sis won’t be completed until the summer,early reports and commuter feedback indicatethat congestion and accidents are improvingsignificantly. A six month comparison fromJune-November 2011 and the same period of2012 shows a reduction in weekday accidentssince the DDI opening.

The project team worked with the con-tractor E.R. Snell on a fast track. The staffcontinues to work on the issue of weavingthat presented a challenge for drivers head-ing north on Ashford Dunwoody Roadthrough the DDI who sought to turn left onHammond Drive or right on Ravinia Drive.

“Through the Perimeter TransportationOperations Program (PTOP), we haveworked with the city of Dunwoody to im-prove the situation by reducing the amountof time that traffic signals were overlappingand maximizing the synchronization of sig-nals through the DDI and along the AshfordDunwoody corridor,” PCIDs Program Man-ager Jennifer Harper said.

PTOP is a three-year, $2.8 million pro-gram funded by GDOT to upgrade and syn-chronize signals to improve traffic congestionin the Perimeter business district ofBrookhaven, Dunwoody, and Sandy Springs.

DDI pedestrian median 008: Sidewalk in Middle of DDI

Driving through DDI Practice Course

As part of its branding of the Ashford Dun-woody DDI, the PCIDs are now installing a$450,000 ‘signature’ landscaping design.GDOT’s construction budget included basicfunding, and the PCIDs added $300,000more. Eleven unneeded service poles havebeen removed, and the PCIDs are develop-ing a lighting plan with GDOT and GeorgiaPower for the interchange ramps. ThePCIDs now have signage that welcomescommuters with “Congratulations Perime-ter—YOU CAN DDI!”

Thanks to active coordination withGDOT and FHWA, the Ashford Dun-woody DDI project moved from idea tocompletion in record time. The processtook two years from the time the project wasadded to ARC’s Transportation Improve-ment Program until it was open to traffic.

“That is significantly shorter than thetypical plan development process for a de-sign-bid-build project, which is three to fiveyears prior to construction,” said MarloClowers, project manager for GDOT’s Of-fice of Innovative Program Delivery.

“We are excited at how well DDIsaround the country have been performing.We believe the Ashford Dunwoody DDIcarries the largest daily volume of traffic ofany DDI built so far in the U.S. and it isproving the design can handle significanttraffic volumes in a densely-developed set-ting,” said George Merritt, a safety and geo-metric design engineer with FHWA’sResource Center in Atlanta.

The legacy of the PCIDs is a solution-based, results-drive organization, and theAshford Dunwoody DDI public-privatepartnership is an example of that best prac-tice. v

GeorGia enGineer18

has constantly evolved as it has remained the world’s busiest airportfor the past 15 years. In 2012, the airport accommodated more than95 million passengers and more than 930,000 aircraft operations(take-offs and landings). The airport has five runways and aterminal complex that measures 130 acres, or 6.8 million squarefeet. The complex includes the domestic and international terminalsand concourses T, A, B, C, D, E and F. Within these concourses,there are a total of 207 gates comprised of 167 domestic and 40international gates. Despite the very large amount of passengersusing the facility, the design, system, and customer service at theairport has led the Air Transport Research Society to name it theworld's most efficient airport. Hartsfield-Jackson has a directeconomic impact of more than $32.5 billion for the metro Atlantaarea economy.

The last master plan for the airport was completed in 1999 andcontained several large development components including a fifthrunway, a consolidated rental car center and an international ter-minal. The Atlanta Airport opened “the most important runway inAmerica” in May 2006. This fifth runway is south of the existing air-field and crosses over I-285. The Rental Car Center opened in 2009and is connected to the airport by its own elevated people moversystem, the SkyTrain. The international terminal and gates opened

successfully in May 2012 ready to accommodate the expected surgein international traffic.

While these three signature projects have appeared to be thefocus of the Hartsfield-Jackson Development Program, the airportstill is busy with many important planning, design, and constructionprojects. One of the most exciting projects the airport is currentlyundertaking is a master planning effort. This new master plan willdetermine how the airport will evolve in order to continue to meetthe needs of the metro Atlanta area and its other stakeholders forthe next 20 years. The master plan forecasts 120.6 million annualpassengers will use Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airportalong with 1,075,000 annual aircraft operations by the year 2031.The master plan will detail the facility requirements of all airportcomponents and select development projects that will help accom-modate the forecasted demand. The master plan should be com-pleted by the end of 2013.

Some of the most visible ongoing projects at Hartsfield-Jacksoninclude an inbound roadway construction project, expansion of theConcourse D midpoint, new food, beverage, and retail concessions,vertical transportation improvements, Concourse C midpoint ex-pansion and terminal HVAC improvements.

Inbound Roadway ProjectThe Inbound Roadway Project will upgrade the inbound roadwaynetwork from Interstate 85, Camp Creek Parkway and RiverdaleRoad to allow passengers to drive or ride safely and conveniently tothe airport. The project will widen and realign Airport Boulevardand realign connecting ramps and loops to North and South Ter-minal Parkway, improving traffic merging and weaving conditions,increasing decision times, segregating conflicting movements, andextending sight distances.

The project will include the demolishing of many of the formerrental car buildings, building five new bridges and widening one ex-isting bridge, paving 11 lane miles of concrete pavement, building15 retaining walls, improving roadway lighting, and relocating util-ities and FAA equipment. Work began in August 2012 and will becomplete in the fall of 2014. The construction cost is $48,517,511.

Concourse D Midpoint ExpansionConcourse D is the narrowest concourse at the Atlanta Airport andcurrently lacks sufficient concessions and circulation space to ac-commodate the number of passengers that use it. The project willadd or renovate a total of approximately 91,000 square feet of spaceon the three levels. Approximately 60,000 square feet will includenew circulation, concessions, and support space.

The construction of this three-level addition at the center ofConcourse D requires modifications at the apron level to install re-

for Construction at World’s Busiest AirportBy James L. Drinkard, P.E., IAP | Assistant General Manager of Planning & Development | Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport

Time

DOWN

No

Hartsf ie ld-Jackson At lantaInternational Airport

19APRIL | MAY 2013

quired utilities and a building system to sup-port expansion of the concourse level and thenewly-created third floor. The project will in-clude two new escalators for passengers toconnect from the Plane Train system up tothe concourse level. It also will provide threenew elevators to service the facility. In addi-tion to the improved circulation, concessionsareas will be provided on both the second andthird levels for new food and beverage as wellas shopping opportunities. This expandedconcessions and lounge space will more thanquadruple the existing available space. Theestimated cost for this project is $47.6 mil-lion, and it will be completed by July 2013.

Concessions ImprovementsA complete concessions makeover is under-way at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta Interna-tional Airport. The airport is currentlyundertaking one of the largest concessionsconstruction programs in the world as morethan 120 stores in the airport are being re-configured with new businesses. This pro-gram is scheduled to be substantiallycompleted by the end of 2013.

Vertical Transportation Project The airport is beginning the final phase toupgrade and modernize its vertical trans-portation system, encompassing elevators, es-calators and moving walkways. The project

focuses on the equipment that was installedin 1979 and provides for improved safety, re-liability, and greater energy efficiency. The es-calators and moving walkways are beingreplaced with a proprietary system that hasminimal impact to airport operations sincethe modernization can be completed quicklyand without disturbing the building structureor finishes. Phase 1 started in 2009, andPhase 3 will be complete in 2016.

Phase 1 focused on bringing all elevatorsand escalators that were subjected to newcode requirements into compliance. Thatwork was completed in 2009. In 2010, sevenof the most unreliable escalators serving theconcourses and Automated People Mover(APM) levels of the airport were modernized. Phase 2 is underway, and to date, 10 addi-tional escalators, seven elevators and onemoving walkway have been modernized.Phase 2 will be complete in late 2013 whensix additional elevators and one additionalmoving walkway will be modernized.

The Phase 3 contract was awarded inJanuary 2013 and provides for the modern-ization of 15 additional escalators, 14 mov-ing walkways, and approximately 30elevators. Additionally, four elevators andfour escalators serving the lower levels of thenorth and south parking garages will be mod-ernized. The Phase 3 project cost is approxi-mately $40 million, and it is scheduled forcompletion in early 2016.

Concourse D Midpoint Expansion

20 GeorGia enGineer

Concourse C Midpoint Project The Concourse C Midpoint Expansion Proj-ect will substantially improve passenger cir-culation as well as customer service levelswith additional passenger amenities, includ-ing new and larger food and beverage out-lets, and mixed retailing. The totalrenovation/expansion area is approximately52,000 square feet. Two new escalator banksfrom the APM will be included in this proj-ect along with two new elevators to assistwith concession deliveries. It will allow thetwo existing elevators that go between theAPM level and the concourse level to be usedexclusively for passengers. The estimatedproject cost is $51 million, and it is slated tobe complete by late 2014.

Terminal HVAC Project This is a ‘behind-the-scenes’ project that willreplace the 30-year-old heating, ventilating,and air conditioning systems that serve theNorth and South terminals and parts ofConcourse T. Design is complete, and theproject is in the construction bidding phase.Actual construction is expected to begin laterthis summer following the manufacturingand delivery of air handling systems. The es-timated project cost is $81.5 million with acompletion goal of early 2016.

Other projects in the design or con-struction phase include:North Deicing Facility. This project willcreate an aircraft deicing facility to provide aminimum of five unobstructed narrow-bodydeicing positions with capability of deicing10 aircraft per hour. The estimated projectcost is $37.8 million with a completion goalof fall 2014.

Runway 8L/26R Pavement Replacement.This project will replace runway keel sectionand a high-speed taxiway. It will includeconcrete pavement, centerline lights, andsubgrade repair. The estimated project costis $28.5 million with a completion goal offall 2014.

West Crossover Improvement. The projectwill improve functionality of the westcrossover area and bring the finishes up todate, aligning them with the rest of the do-mestic terminal. The project widens the cor-ridor, converts previous rental car space to

concessions, expands the area for meters andgreeters and upgrades the walls at the PlaneTrain Baggage Claim station. The estimatedproject cost is $4.9 million with a comple-tion goal of summer 2014.

Concourse T North Apron Optimization.This project will reconfigure the gate layoutof Concourse T north to accommodate nineaircraft instead of the current six. This designincorporates hold rooms, passenger boardingbridges, new and repositioned fuel pits, andrevised aircraft parking layout plans. Newconcession areas and restrooms will be added.The estimated project cost is $35 million,and completion goal is summer 2014.

Ramp 5 and 6 Pavement Replacement.This project will replace approximately177,800 square feet of concrete pavement onramps around Concourse E. The estimatedproject cost is $11 million and the comple-tion goal is summer 2014.

SummaryEven in what some would consider the ‘leanconstruction years,’ Hartsfield-Jackson At-lanta International Airport is continuallybuilding to improve customer service and ef-ficiency to serve its passengers, tenants andstakeholders. The airport has averaged ap-proximately $400M annually in construc-tion projects since the year 2000 whenimplementation of the 1999 Master Planbegan. It is likely that the over $4B spent onthese major projects represents the largest

public works effort in the state of Georgiaduring that period. Another crowningachievement of this program is the fact thatover 35 percent of the construction dollarshas been awarded and performed by minor-ity and female businesses.

As the airport completes its new MasterPlan to map our course to the year 2031,Hartsfield-Jackson is expected to continue tobe a significant source of future work for ar-chitects, engineers, and contractors, as wellas be the economic catalyst for the entire At-lanta region. v

21APRIL | MAY 2013

The ITS Georgia Chapter supports studentinvolvement in the engineering profession,and hopes to encourage future Georgia ITSEngineers through the Wayne ShackelfordEngineering Scholarship Program.

Our 2012 winner of the fourth annualITS Georgia Wayne Shackelford EngineeringScholarship is Bhargava Rama Chilukuri, adoctoral student at Georgia Tech’s school ofCivil and Environmental Engineering. He iscurrently working on developing optimalramp metering strategies for his disserta-tion. His primary interests include trafficflow theory and simulation. After gradua-tion, he plans to continue to develop newmodels and strategies to alleviate conges-tion in urban areas.

The question answered by this year’sapplicants was: What emerging ITS tech-nologies could be used to reduce congestionin the metro Atlanta area?” Below is thewinning abstract.

Integrated Roadway Operations SystemOperation of arterials and freeways is socomplex in itself that typically each of themis managed by a different agency; arterial sys-tems by cities and freeway systems by thestate DOTs. While these systems regularlyinteract and interfere in each other’s opera-tions, currently there is little integration ofthese two systems for an efficient operationof a regional roadway transportation system. The proposed concept of Integrated Road-way Operations System (IROS) consists ofintegrated control of both freeway systemsand the arterial system surrounding it. IROSis a software based architecture that managesthe integrated operation of freeway and thearterial systems. The IROS system will haveseveral modules such as Freeway Controlmodule, Arterial Control module, Enforce-ment Module, Incident Response module,Surveillance module, Data Archive module,etc. to manage different aspects of the trans-portation operations. However, they willcommunicate and collaborate to makechanges to their respective systems for

achieving efficient transportation operationsin a region. The following paragraphs willbriefly describe some of the critical featuresof IROS.

The Freeway Control module will con-trol ramp meters, changeable message signs,dynamic speed limit signs, HOT-lane pric-ing system, emergency ramp gates, etc. Theramp meters control will have an advancedmetering algorithm that will consider thewhole region as one system and determinesmetering rate for each on-ramp in order tominimize the total travel time of all the trav-elers in the region (this is a superior objec-tive compared to the commonly usedobjective of maximizing freeway through-put). This algorithm will communicate withData Archive module to determine optimalmetering rate for each ramp during eachtime period. When queue spillback is antic-ipated at any location, this module will in-crease the metering rate (not shut down andflush the ramp) so as to minimize disruptionto the freeway. It will also communicate withthe Arterial Control Module to modify thesignal timings of the phases feeding the rampfor an integrated ramp control.

The Arterial Control Module controlsthe signal timings of all the intersections inthe arterial network surrounding a freewaysystem. This module will continuously com-municate with Freeway Control, DataArchive, and Incident Response modules,etc. to modify the signal timings at intersec-tions during infrequent scenarios such asqueue spillback, incidents, flow surges, etc.This module will also dynamically changethe offsets to maintain coordination alongthe corridors.

The Incident Response Module willmanage incidents that occur on both arteri-als and freeways. This module will have sev-eral sub-modules such as First Responders,Alternative Routes, Emergency Mainte-nance, etc. During an incident, the First Re-sponders sub-module will notify andcoordinate the efforts of law enforcement,medical, and roadway assistance teams. Theincident information will be used to trigger

the dynamic speed limit signs to changespeeds at all the upstream locations to pre-vent secondary accidents. During severe in-cidents, the alternative routes sub-modulewill determine alternative routes for the free-way and arterial traffic. It will also notify theArterial Control Module to change signaltimings of the intersections affected. The in-cident and alternative routes informationwill also be notified via the changeable mes-sage signs.

The Data Archival module continu-ously stores traffic data recorded by the VDSand Inductive Loops and also signal timingsimplemented on the arterials into an archivalsystem. This module is the heart of IROSthat provides data to help several other mod-ules make critical decisions. This modulecould feed different algorithms to help auto-matically identify possible occurrence of in-cident, flow surges, and also support travelerinformation system.

The Enforcement Module will have sev-eral sub-modules to help law-enforcementofficials automatically identify and penalizeill-behaved drivers to help maintain effi-ciency and safety on the roadways. This isimportant because ill-behaved drivers eithermotivate other drivers to drive faster or cre-ate panic to make other drivers go slower ul-timately decreasing safety and efficiency ofthe roadways. This module will have moresophisticated algorithms that monitor driverbehavior not only at the detection device lo-cations, but will estimate driving behavior atmid sections.

While some of the modules describedin this essay already exist independently, themain idea is to seamlessly integrate them foran efficient transportation system in a re-gion. This essay also highlights some po-tential improvements to the state-of-the-artimplementation of ramp metering, inter-section control, incident management, dataarchival, and enforcement. These improve-ments in addition to an integration of op-erations could help relieve congestion inmetro Atlanta. v

A Plan for Integrating Roadway Operations is the ITS

Georgia 2012 Wayne Shackelford Scholarship Winner

22 GeorGia enGineer

Practical aPPlication of Water Quality credit

trading for georgia utilities

By Doug Baughman, Senior Environmental Scientist, CH2M HILL | Kristin Rowles, Senior Policy Analyst, Georgia Water Planning andPolicy Center | Rick Brownlow, Senior Consultant, CH2M HILL

There’s been a lot of talk about water quality credit trading (WQT) in Georgia in the last decade but little actual implementation. Between2003 and 2008, a series of studies were completed by the Georgia Water Planning and Policy Center (including researchers from GeorgiaState University, Georgia Southern University, and Albany State University) to evaluate the potential for water quality credit trading inGeorgia. These studies addressed the feasibility of trading in Georgia overall (Rowles, 2005a; Rowles, 2008), the feasibility in the Chatta-hoochee River watershed (Rowles, 2004), the comparative cost of nutrient removal at wastewater facilities (Jiang, et. al., 2005), legal con-siderations (Rowles and Thompson, 2005), and trading in the context of antidegradation requirements (Rowles and Thompson, 2006). Thesestudies clearly identified WQT as a viable, legal, and cost effective approach to assist water quality managers and utilities in meeting over-all goals for water quality improvement.

Pending numeric nutrient criteria and/or TMDLs for chlorophyll-a violations, like this bloom on Lake Jackson in 2007, will driveutilities to look for cost effective solutions to nutrient management. (Photo credit: GA EPD, Watershed Protection Branch)

WWAATT EERR

23APRIL | MAY 2013

Federal agencies are also actively promotingthe use of water quality trading. By 2007, theUS Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) was fully supporting its original WaterQuality Trading Policy (US EPA, 2003) andhad developed a new guidance document forpermit writers on how to incorporate trad-ing in National Pollutant Discharge Elimi-nation Permits (NPDES) to facilitateimplementation of trading (US EPA, 2007).The 2008 Farm Bill directed the USDA tofacilitate the participation of farmers andforesters in markets for environmental serv-ices, including WQT markets, and theagency’s Office of Environmental Marketssupports the development of such markets.

Internationally, interest in the use ofmarket mechanisms to manage water qual-ity and quantity is widespread. Almost 300such programs, including water quality trad-ing, were identified in a recent internationalsurvey, with China leading the way in the useof innovative ‘eco-compensation’ mecha-nisms for water quality. The same report es-timates there were $7.7 million in waterquality trades in 2011, and it projects thatWQT will increase in the US in the comingyears as pollutant loading restrictions tightenand drive new interest in trading mecha-nisms (Bennett et al., 2013).

Recent interest in WQT in Georgia wasevident in discussions of the regional waterplans prepared under the direction of theState Water Plan (GA EPD, 2011). In sev-eral planning regions, water quality trading(primarily nutrient loading) was identified asa possible tool that should be considered toaddress future potential challenges in main-taining water quality in downstream reser-voirs (Coosa North Georgia and UpperOconee Regional Plans) and downstreamriver reaches or estuaries (Savannah-UpperOgeechee and Middle Ocmulgee RegionalPlans). Existing wastewater utilities and in-dustrial dischargers are concerned that pend-ing requirements for further nutrientreductions will be exorbitantly expensive andlead to significant increases in utility ratesand reduced cost competitiveness for re-gional industries. Based on the new water-shed/water quality models developed for theregional planning efforts, many dischargerswere aware of the dominance of non point

source contributions to water quality prob-lems and expressed concern that additionalnutrient reductions will need to be more bal-anced between non point source loadings(both agricultural and urban) and pointsource loadings. Water quality trading is onetool that can help to facilitate that balance.

So why don’t we see active water qualitytrading yet in Georgia? The most importantreason has been the lack of an immediate reg-ulatory driver for trading. In the studies ofWQT in Georgia discussed above, it wasnoted that regulatory limits were not strongenough to drive active trading at that time(early 2000s). However, now interest inWQT is expected to increase due to thepending requirements for numeric nutrientcriteria (NNC) and total maximum dailyloads (TMDLs) in watersheds with existingimpaired waters. In a recently updated draftplan regarding NNC development in Geor-gia, lake standards are projected for develop-ment between 2013 and 2019 while streamsand rivers standards are projected for com-pletion between 2017 and 2020 (GA EPD,2012). In the next few years, TMDLs andrevised lake standards will be immediatedrivers for utilities to consider WQT as a po-tential cost saving practice. Utilities have notime to waste: now is the time to evaluatetheir options for water quality credit tradingand the most cost effective strategies formeeting nutrient reduction requirements.

Frameworks for Implementation The driver for a water quality credit trade isthe difference in treatment costs between theparticipants in the trade. Trades may beamong point sources or between a pointsource and a non point source (or sources),and it is also possible to include stormwaterpermittees, though the latter is not yet a well-established practice. Trades among pointsources are often considered first becausethey are simpler to structure and transact,but trades between point sources and nonpoint sources are becoming fairly common.

Trades can be arranged as simple bilat-eral trades negotiated between two parties,but they can also be transacted through clear-inghouses or exchange markets establishedby a government agency or other party. Forexample, the Virginia Credit Exchange was

established by 73 major discharges to reducethe costs associated with required nutrientreductions to Chesapeake Bay. In some cases,trading takes the form of offsets that pollu-tant sources can purchase to compensate forpollutant loads over a defined amount. Usu-ally, offsets are sold by a single source (gov-ernment or private), though it is possible tohave multiple offset sellers (e.g., carbon off-set programs). In many trades, participantsare required to buy credits at a ratio greaterthan 1:1; that is, if they are seeking to tradefor 100 pounds of phosphorus loading, theymight be required to purchase 200 pounds.When they are used, trading ratios are in-tended to compensate for scientific or tech-nical uncertainty associated with a trade orto equalize the effects of abatement in dif-ferent locations in a watershed.

The form that is most appropriate forWQT depends upon several factors includ-ing the number of potential participants in awatershed and the interest of public agenciesin establishing market infrastructure.Though the transaction costs of a bilateraltrade may be high on a per trade basis, theycan also be simpler and faster and even morecost-effective to transact in some cases.

Accommodating WQT can requiremodification of NPDES permits. In somecases, individual permits are modified to re-flect a trade. However, other approaches arepossible. For example, a watershed or bub-ble permitting approach can allocate a pol-lutant load limit across several sources in thesame watershed. The individual sources maydetermine how to allocate the load amongthemselves, as is the case in the Tar-Pamlicoin North Carolina, or a government agencymay establish rules for compliance, includ-ing possible bonus and penalty payments forover or under compliance, as is the case inthe Connecticut’s WQT program for nitro-gen in Long Island Sound. In both cases, fi-

24 GeorGia enGineer

nancial transactions are used to allocate pol-lutant loading among the various pointsources.

WQT might be established by a stateagency or a regional organization, such as awater management district, but in somecases, the development of WQT is driven bypermit holders with an interest in trading.In Knox County, TN, for example, theStormwater Department developed a water-shed specific trading program to address a

sediment TMDL, a pending nutrientTMDL, and support implementation oftheir stormwater ordinance (Baughman, etal., 2009). In all cases, a successful WQT de-sign and implementation will require en-gagement of the stakeholders in a watershed.

Credit Stacking Provides Additional Incentives Engaging farmers and foresters in WQT islargely dependent on their potential eco-

nomic returns. In some cases, it may not befinancially beneficial to a farmer to take landout of production for a stream buffer forwater quality credit trading alone. However,

a farmer may have greater interestwhen it is possible to ‘stack’water quality and wetland mit-igation credits. ‘Stacking’ envi-ronmental credits is gainingmomentum around the coun-try. Potential credit stackingopportunities include waterquality, wetlands mitigation,

carbon sequestration, and protectedspecies/conservation credits. While some en-tities still question the environmental bene-fits (Fox et al., 2011) versus the risks, there isevidence that environmental organizationsand regulatory agencies are willing to con-sider credit stacking to support implemen-tation of water quality, habitat, and airquality improvements (Cooley and Olander,2011). One example, regionally, is theLouisiana Coastal Protection and Restora-tion Authority (CPRA) program where thestate is considering a carbon sequestrationmarket and a water quality trading programto provide a sustainable funding source tocontinue their coastal restoration program.This approach would provide funding tosupport the expanding coastal wetlandrestoration program, improve water quality,support the reduction of the gulf hypoxiaproblems, and improve air quality in the re-gion (Baughman, et al., 2012).

Strategies for Facilitating Implementation in GeorgiaExisting federal guidance and regulatorypolicies provide sufficient flexibility to allowlocal governments and utilities to implementwater quality credit trading to address re-gional water quality issues. The decision onwhether to consider trading as an option andthe appropriate trading framework should bebased on a number of factors:

e Driver For Action: What is the reg-ulatory impetus for action? For example, isthere a downstream standard—either apending numeric nutrient criteria or existingreservoir loading limitation—that must bemet? Has a specific TMDL been developed?In the former case, there may be more flexi-

e Virginia Credit Exchange saved major dischargers millions in capital improvement costs tocomply with Chesapeake Bay nutrient reduction requirements.

e water quality credit trading framework for Knox County, TN was designed to address awatershed specific nutrient and sediment problem and supported implementation of the countystormwater ordinance (Baughman, et al., 2008).

bility in establishing a trading option thanafter a TMDL has been developed and spe-cific load reduction requirements for pointand nonpoint sources have been defined.

Availability of Water Quality and Water-shed Information: A thorough understandingof the existing water quality conditions, wa-tershed land use, associated non pointsource loadings, and point source dischargesis needed to evaluate the potential feasibilityof trading and the appropriate frameworkfor implementation. The good news is thatGA EPD developed watershed water qual-ity models for much of the state as part ofthe state-wide water planning efforts, andthese models can be used to complete theseevaluations.

Cost-Effectiveness and Market Investment:Are there sufficient differences amongsources in the relative costs of abatement? Ifnot, then credit trading will not be econom-ically viable. Also, if the development of mar-ket infrastructure is envisioned, the potentialscale and scope of the expected credit mar-ket and the expected cost savings should belarge enough to warrant the investment in itsdevelopment and operation.

Equal or Better Results in Water QualityImprovement: It should be expected thatthere will be a need for science-based assess-ments and/or monitoring to document thatWQT leads to equal or better results forwater quality than would have occurred withno trading. These assessments are more read-ily documented for point to point ratherthan point to non point trading, but mech-anisms have been defined in existing pointto non point trading programs that can beused to gain the confidence of the regulatoryagencies and stakeholders that trading pro-vides equal or better results.

So what should a utility or local gov-ernment do to consider whether water qual-ity credit trading is a viable option to helpthem meet pollutant reduction goals? First,stay engaged in your watershed and under-stand the water quality issues and pendingstandards. It will be easier to work with GAEPD to determine options for watershedbased strategies before a TMDL is defined oreffluent limitations are set. Second, considercollaboration with other dischargers in yourwatershed. It’s very likely that other dis-

chargers are facing the same issues, and youmay find an opportunity to share with themin the costs of evaluation and developmentof WQT. This approach was successful inNorth Carolina’s Tar-Pamlico, where dis-chargers worked together to persuade thestate to develop a WQT program. Finally,keep the lines of communication open withwatershed stakeholders. Their understandingand support for WQT in your watershed willbe a key to success.

In summary, WQT is an option that mightallow local governments and utilities to cap-italize on watershed-based strategies and touse a market-based approach to meet antici-pated requirements for reductions in pollu-tant loadings. Many others have paved theway with WQT in other states and providemodels to follow. While WQT could takeseveral forms in Georgia, it is most likely toflourish as a result of the interest of a few per-mittees that stand to benefit. While initialtrades might be simple and small, they canstill offer cost savings and support the devel-opment of policies and market infrastructurethat can offer both financial and environ-mental benefits for decades to come. v

25APRIL | MAY 2013

ReferencesBaughman, Doug, Roy Arthur, Lisa Baconand Rick Brownlow, 2009. Ecological CreditTrading Pilot Study in the Beaver Creek Wa-tershed. Proceedings of the 2009 GeorgiaWater Resources Conference, held April 27-29, Athens, Georgia.

Baughman, Douglas S., Guerry O. Holm,and Charles Killebrew, 2012. SustainableStrategies for Dealing with Coastal Chal-lenges: Examples from Louisiana, USA. Pro-ceedings of the IWA World Congress onWater, Climate, and Energy. Dublin, Ireland,May 2012.

Bennett, Genevieve, Nathaniel Carroll, andKatherine Hamilton, 2013. Charting NewWaters: State of Watershed Payments 2012.Washington, DC: Forest Trends.

Cooley, David and Lydia Olander, 2011.Stacking Ecosystem Services Payments: Risksand Solutions. Nicholas Institute WorkingPaper, NI WP 11-04, Duke University, 26pp.

Fox, Jessica, Royal C. Gardner, and ToddMaki, 2011. Stacking Opportunities andRisks in Environmental Credit Markets.News and Analysis, Environmental Law In-stitute, Washington DC,

Georgia Environmental Protection Division,2011. Georgia’s Water Future in Focus:Highlights of the Regional Water Planning2009-2011.

Georgia Environmental Protection Division,2012. Georgia’s Plan for Adoption of WaterQuality Standards for Nutrients, Version2.0. 48 pp.

Rowles, Kristin, 2008. Water Quality Trad-ing: Recent Developments and Policy Im-plications. Water Policy Working Paper2008-001, Georgia Water Planning and Pol-icy Center.

Rowles, Kristin, 2004. Nutrient Trading inthe Upper Chattahoochee Watershed: AFeasibility Analysis. Water Policy WorkingPaper 2004-015, Georgia Water Planningand Policy Center.

Rowles, Kristin, 2005. An Evaluation ofWater Quality Trading for Georgia Water-sheds. Water Policy Working Paper 2005-003, Georgia Water Planning and PolicyCenter.

Jiang, F., M.B. Beck, R.G. Cummings, andK. Rowles, 2005. Watershed Pollutant Trad-ing: Estimation of Costs of Phosphorus Re-moval in Wastewater Treatment. WaterPolicy Working Paper 2005-023, GeorgiaWater Planning and Policy Center.

Rowles, Kristin and Ben Thompson, 2006.Water Quality Trading in the Context of theAntidegradation Requirements for the Fed-eral and State Water Polices. Water PolicyWorking Paper 2006-010, Georgia WaterPlanning and Policy Center.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,2003. Water Quality Trading Policy. Officeof Water. 11pp.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,2007 (Updated 2009). Water Quality Trad-ing Toolkit for Permit Writers. Office ofWastewater Management. EPA 833-R-07-004.

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 knowledgeresource for information about a facility forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life-cycle; defined as existing from earliest con-ception 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 the3D world architects were exploring and the traditional 2D world engineers and designers are more accustomed to. What started in afield targeting vertical construction slowly made its way into the horizontal world and beyond. The ability to create, store, and shareup-to-date digital information gives architects, engineers, contractors, and owners a better basis with which to make informed decisionsand a clearer vision of a project’s potential.

26 GeorGia enGineer

To BIM and Beyond!

Y

By Mario V. Macrina, P.E. | Director of Transportation Engineering |Wolverton & Associates Inc. | Duluth, Georgia

27APRIL | MAY 2013

Wolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A),and some other consulting firms like us,have been building BIM capabilities by in-vesting in technology that can be used tocreate a ‘one stop shop’ of information forclients. This BIM technology, combinedwith a well- developed process of informa-tion-sharing, project management, andtime management gives clients more de-tailed information that helps them visual-ize and analyze projects in a faster and lesscostly manner. Consulting firms are devel-oping better, quicker, safer, and more costeffective ways to gather this informationstarting from the ground up.

W&A has introduced three dimen-sional (3D) laser scanning techniques to

help augment our ‘traditional’ survey data-bases. Through technology like TerrestrialLaser Scanning, our surveyors can preparewhat is termed as a ‘Point Cloud Model’ ofthe existing conditions. W&A uses a vari-ety of software to extract surface featuressuch as curb lines, pavement crowns, side-walks, architectural building features, andutility structures. These extracted surfacefeatures set the basis for the creation of aDigital Terrain Model used for a variety oftasks such as surface topography develop-ment, culvert and channel analysis, and in-frastructure inspection.

For W&A, 3D laser scanning technol-ogy is becoming a preferred method of gath-

3D Model of a Proposed Tennis Facility

What will it look like? Ideas take form (3D Rendering)

BIM is gaining traction in the horizon-tal world and picking up speed. Wewill need to catch up to the verticalconstruction industry. Are you on-board? Or will you be left behind?

28 GeorGia enGineer

ering millions of points of data to share withdesigners in a fraction of the time versus tra-ditional survey techniques. A Point CloudModel can be used to create a 3D surfacethat would allow designers to develop ren-derings of a proposed facility in order to co-ordinate space, utilities, access, and aestheticswith the facility owners.

So then what? We have created this verypretty (and very useful!) ‘picture’ that de-

signers can use to make a clients’ vision a re-ality, but are we done? Not even close! BIMcan be considered a process as well as a tech-nology based idea. Information that pro-motes interaction among every teammember should be the goal of a BIM project.We have all been accustomed to working ina 2D world and producing ink on paper. Wenow have the ability to build a multi-di-mensional world to better depict our ideas.

What we should strive for is 4D (time), 5D(cost) and even 6D (as-built) dimensions tooffer more information to everyone involved.This is what BIM gives us.

Simply put, by utilizing BIM as the linkbetween ideas, modeling, project manage-ment, schedule, cost, and ultimate projectcompletion, we are becoming better engi-neers and stewards of our trade. Visualizingthe client’s concept and linking all othercomponents of a project will result in a morecomplete product for any stakeholder. Con-sultants will save time and money for theirclients’, experience fewer design errors, im-prove efficiency, and provide a service that isunparalleled in the current market.

BIM is gaining traction in the horizon-tal world and picking up speed. We willneed to catch up to the vertical constructionindustry. Are you on-board? Or will you beleft behind? v

30 GeorGia enGineer

TransportationEnhancementsEnriching quality

of life in Georgia’s

communities

By Liz Rothman

Throughout its history, Georgia has been a state onthe move, from Putnam County’s Rock Hawk Effigy tothe Savannah River’s scenic Ebenezer community,from 19th century railroad depots and stagecoachhouses that served as the nucleus of booming agri-cultural and industrial homesteads to the windingpaths that were the earliest trails for pedestrians andbicycles. The history of Georgia is told along theroads, paths, and tracks that connect its towns andits people. Central to these stories is the effect oftransportation on an evolving Georgia. Transporta-tion Enhancements (TE) bring Georgia’s history to life.They explore our past. They preserve our story.

For information about the Transportation Enhancements pro-gram, please visit www.dot.ga.gov/te.

31APRIL | MAY 2013

ransportation enhancements(TEs) are non-motorized surface

transportation system enhance-ments. They enrich the travel expe-rience of motorists, bicyclists, andpedestrians through community-oriented projects that showcase cul-

tural, natural, and scenic elements in thestatewide transportation network. “TE proj-ects support sustainability in communities,promote economic development and gener-ally improve quality of life. They providewell-designed facilities for pedestrians andbicyclists, preserve historic transportationtreasures, beautify travel corridors, and gen-erate community pride,” says Elaine Armster,special projects chief with the Georgia DOTProgram Delivery Division, which overseesthe TE program at GDOT. “In fact, our fa-vorite day in the life of a TE project is at-tending the ribbon cutting ceremonymarking the completion of construction.”

Extrinsic benefits of the TE program in-clude the revitalization of rural downtowncorridors with completed TE projects andverifiable increases in tourism, Armster ex-plains. New sidewalks, street furniture, andwell-lit pedestrian corridors create an invitingatmosphere to facilitate pedestrian move-ment and encourage central business districtactivity. Additionally, municipalities withTE projects such as the Silver Comet Trailhave reported an increase in tourism and vis-itors with each completed segment.

For 21 years, the TE program has en-riched communities throughout Georgia.Here are a few projects.

St. Simons Island Lighthouse, St. Simons Island, Georgia Built in 1872, the 104-foot tower, with a129-step cast iron spiral staircase and an ad-jacent keeper’s house, was designed by oneof Georgia's most noted architects, CharlesCluskey. To ensure authenticity of moldsused to craft the replacement parts, theoriginal hand-drawn lighthouse plans wereused. The project was completed in recordtime, from turn-off in October 2009 toturn-on in May 2010, in time for Memo-rial Day weekend.

Jeffersonville Streetscape, Jeffersonville, GeorgiaOriginally called Rain’s Store, Jeffersonvilleearned city status in 1828, and boasted apopulation of 1,035 in the 2010 census. This

town—like other small rural towns—neededto revitalize its town center. The streetscapedesign included a park and tree-lined streetsto enhance the attractiveness of the down-town storefronts and encourage pedestrianmovement. With the completion of the TEproject, additional businesses moved to thedistrict and façade transformations weremade on existing storefronts. The project wascompleted in 2011.

Southeastern Railroad Museum, Duluth, GeorgiaThe restored 1870s rail depot houses 90items of rolling stock, including historic Pull-man cars and classic steam locomotives. Thisliving piece of railroad history was completedin 2011.

Silver Comet Trail, Cobb County,Georgia to AlabamaThe paved 61-mile off-road Silver CometTrail runs from northwest Georgia throughCobb, Paulding, and Polk counties to the Al-abama border. It is located on the aban-doned Seaboard Coastline Railroadright-of-way, originally purchased by GDOTas a potential commuter rail corridor. Thepopular trail accommodates pedestrians, bi-cyclists, roller skaters, horse riding, dog walk-ers, and is wheelchair accessible. Aftercrossing the state line, the Silver Comet Trailconnects to the Chief Ladiga Trail, provid-ing multi-state trail connectivity from CobbCounty, Georgia to Aniston, Alabama.GDOT’s TE Program partnered with localmunicipalities and the PATH Foundation tobuild this TE project. The final segment ofthe trail was completed in 2008.

Pine Mountain Streetscape Phase I–IV,Pine Mountain, Georgia Pine Mountain, known as the ‘Gateway toCallaway Gardens,’ completed four phases ofenhancements with the assistance of TEfunding. The TE work includes pedestrianimprovements such as new sidewalks, land-scaping, pedestrian lighting and, concretepavers. Phase I began in 1992 and Phase IVwas completed in 2012.

History of the Transportation Enhancements programSince 1991, federal funding has been avail-able to build and support transportation en-hancements that fall into an eligible category.

Local and state public agencies and universi-ties apply for federal funds to implement aproject. Up to 80 percent of the funds areprovided by the Federal Highway Adminis-tration (FHWA), with the local agency pro-viding the 20 percent match that is used forpreliminary engineering. “Many of these en-hancements would not be possible if com-munities had to rely solely on local funds,”Armster notes.

Since the inception of the GDOTTransportation Enhancements program, ap-proximately 1,100 projects, totaling over$700 million, were awarded to communitiesthroughout Georgia. Eligible entities mayapply for up to $1,000,000 in TE projectfunding during the TE Call for Projects.Since 2005, Georgia has had the distinctionof being the only DOT in the United Statesto design a completely web-based applicationprocess. Initial application submissions, re-views, and project selections are all com-pleted using this innovative process. The30-member TE Advisory Panel—comprisedof subject matter experts from across thestate—ranks the projects, and the StateTransportation Board makes final project se-lections and awards. During the last TE Proj-ect 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 transportationreauthorization bill signed into law in July 2012.Under MAP-21, Transportation Enhancements nowfall under the Transportation Alternatives (TA) um-brella. The federally-funded Transportation En-hancement program was established through theIntermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of1991 (ISTEA). In 1998, it was further refined underthe Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century(TEA-21). While TE was a separately funded pro-gram, under MAP-21, it is now part of a new Trans-portation Alternatives program. TE activities nowcompete for funding alongside two other TA pro-grams - Safe Routes to School (SRTS), administeredby GDOT, and Recreational Trails (RT), administeredby Department of Natural Resources.

“Although MAP-21 changed the funding,” notesGDOT Chief Engineer Russell McMurry, “GDOT iscommitted to delivering all the projects that havebeen selected based on readiness and the availabil-ity of funding."

T

32 GeorGia enGineer

ENGINEERING NEWS

Terracon ~ Alex Goharioon has joined Ter-racon as a senior vice president and seniorprincipal. Goharioon will be the divisionmanager for the Gulf Coast region, includingAtlanta, and will also serve national clients.He brings more than 28 years of experiencein geotechnical engineering and constructionmaterials testing services. Project experienceincludes sport facilities, transportation, air-ports, medical and healthcare facilities, high-rise office buildings, retail, correctionalfacilities, industrial, and higher education.

He has a master’s degree in technologyand a bachelor of engineering technology inmechanical engineering technology and civilengineering technology from Georgia South-ern University.

“We are delighted to have Alex join theTerracon senior management team,” saidDavid Gaboury, P.E., president and CEO ofTerracon. “His many years of proven leader-ship success and service to clients will be agreat addition to the firm.”

Mr. Goharioon can be reached byphone or e-mail: (770) 595-8671 or agohar-ioon@terracon.com.v

Arnold Olender Celebrates Ten Years atHelm of Burns & McDonnell’s SoutheastRegion ~ Decade Marked by Continuous, Pos-itive Revenues, Foresees More Growth AheadIn December 2012, Arnold Olender, vicepresident and regional manager of Burns &McDonnell’s Southeast Regional Office inAtlanta celebrated his 10th anniversary at thehelm of the award-winning firm. Withclients and projects throughout the South-

east, Olender has overseen a decade of posi-tive growth, enviable talent recruitment andretention, and increasing revenues. The re-gional office is part of the full-service engi-neering firm Burns & McDonnell, based inKansas City, Missouri.

Since 2002, under Olender’s leadership,the Atlanta-based team of employee-ownershas grown from less than ten people to morethan 50, a growth of more than 500 percent.With more than 3,000 projects completedthroughout Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama,the Carolinas, and Florida, Burns & Mc-Donnell-Southeast revenue has grown fromless than $1 million in 2002 to more than$15 million this year, a growth of more than1,500 percent over the last decade.

With consistent focus on attracting andretaining top talent to be employee-ownersalong with unparalleled client service, Olen-der and his team built opportunities eventhrough a challenging economic decade.“We’ve been able to use an entrepreneurialposition supported by a 114-year old com-pany and make real, tangible growth hap-pen,” said Olender. “It starts and ends witha commitment to hire the right people,maintain a laser-like focus on client serviceand apply innovative solutions to the mostchallenging projects.”

As one of the fastest growing regions inthe country, Olender anticipates continuedgrowth. “In this part of the country, withrapid population growth, the need for infra-structure, water, power and more, Burns &McDonnell will continue to be a partner ofchoice to meet those needs and deliver whatour clients in the southeast region require.”

Recognized as one of Georgia’s ‘BestPlaces to Work’ by the Atlanta Journal Con-stitution and ‘Best Engineering Firm’ by theAtlanta Business Chronicle, the accolades re-flect the company’s dedication to all of itsemployee-owners and to its clients. Addi-tionally, Burns & McDonnell was rankedNumber 26 on FORTUNE magazine’s an-nual list of ‘100 Best Companies to WorkFor,’ the 2012 ESOP (Employee StockOwnership Plan) Company of the Year fromthe ESOP Association, and one of eight ar-chitecture, engineering, and constructionfirms nationwide to receive the PremierAward for Client Satisfaction from the Pro-fessional Services Management Journal.

Among the numerous awards and hon-ors, Burns & McDonnell is one of FOR-TUNE 100 Best Companies to Work Forand one of six Premier Client Service awardwinners in North America as named by theProfessional Services Management Journal.The Atlanta regional team of more than 50professional engineers and technical staffadds the distinction of being one of the At-lanta Journal & Constitution’s Top Work-places in 2012 and one of Atlanta’s BestEngineering Firms as ranked by the AtlantaBusiness Chronicle. Learn more or start theconversation at www.burnsmcd.com. v

Ivan Liu, E.I. Joins Finley as Bridge DesignerFinley Engineering Group welcomes newstaff member, Ivan Liu, E.I., as Bridge De-signer to its growing bridge design and con-struction engineering firm.

Ivan is a recent graduate of Texas A&M

Terracon Burns & McDonnell Finley Stantec Wolverton & Associates Lord, Aeck & Sargent Urban Collage

Alex Goharioon Arnold Olender Ivan Liu J. Petrozzino-Roche Bryan Lindsey Tim Germaine

GEORGIA

33APRIL | MAY 2013

University where he earned masters and bach-elors degrees in structural engineering. Hisexperience includes on-site structural engi-neering as well as graduate research projectsfor transportation systems.

Ivan will be the Bridge Designer for newFINLEY project, Road 1 Motza Bridge in Is-rael. This $170m cast-in-place segmentalbridge includes two 800-meter bridges withthree lanes in each direction and wide shoul-ders over the Motza Valley on the main TelAviv-Jerusalem highway. There will be three25m spans above the valley floor and the proj-ect will take into consideration the uniquelandscaping and historic value of the area.

“Ivan has a solid understanding of struc-tural engineering design. He’s had the op-portunity to work on-site on a project in Israeland has an understanding of the link betweendesign and construction. While at TexasA&M University, he demonstrated the abilityto work creatively and collaboratively onbridge engineering projects and his SteelBridge Team took first place in the regionalsteel bridge competition. We’re delighted tohave Ivan on our team.” said Craig Finley, Jr.,P.E. President, FINLEY Engineering Group.

Jacqueline Petrozzino-Roche, EI, JoinsFinley as Bridge DesignerFinley Engineering Group (FINLEY) wel-comes new staff member, JacquelinePetrozzino-Roche, EI, as Bridge Designer toits growing bridge design and constructionengineering firm.

Jacqueline earned a Bachelor of Sciencein Civil Engineering from Florida State Uni-versity and is currently pursuing a Master ofScience in Civil Engineering at the Univer-sity of Central Florida. Jacqueline’s experienceincludes steel fabrication estimating andpreparation of steel joist designs. She is amember of the American Segmental BridgeInstitute (ASBI).

Jacqueline will be the Bridge Designeron the $160m I-49 North Segment K (I-220 to Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive) inCaddo Parish Louisiana. This project in-cludes three precast segmental bridgeserected by balanced cantilever method withcranes. FINLEY is providing segmentalbridge design and construction engineeringservices on this project.

Jacqueline will also be working on pre-biddesign and estimating for the Dulles CorridorMetrorail Project Phase Two located in Fair-fax/Loudoun Counties, Virginia. This projectwill extend the Silver Line 11.4 miles north-west, through Washington Dulles Interna-tional Airport to a terminus near Route 772in eastern Loudoun County. FINLEY will beresponsible for the segmental bridge design ofthe rail tracks on elevated (aerial) structureswithin the boundaries of Dulles Airport.

“Jacqueline’s experience in plans andspecifications for steel joist designs will be anasset to our team. Because we work on com-plex bridge design-build projects, we mustprovide designs that fit the contractor’sstrengths, and pre-bid estimating is critical tooptimizing the design.“ said Craig Finley, Jr.,P.E. President, FINLEY. v

Stantec Adds Staff in DuluthEngineer Bryan Lindsey joins transportation teamBryan Lindsey, PE has joined the transporta-tion engineering team in Stantec’s Duluth,Georgia office as a senior associate. A regis-tered professional engineer, Lindsey has morethan sixteen years of experience designing in-tersection improvements, roadway expan-sions, bridge replacements, streetscapes,pedestrian trails, and other transportation in-frastructure projects. He has worked through-out Georgia for the Georgia Department ofTransportation and municipal clients.

At Stantec, Lindsey will provide engi-neering design and project management fora wide range of transportation projects. He

joins a growing team of design professionalsin Duluth, providing engineering for trans-portation improvement projects in commu-nities across the state.

Lindsey is a graduate of Georgia Insti-tute of Technology with a Bachelor of CivilEngineering.

Stantec provides professional consultingservices in planning, engineering, architec-ture, interior design, landscape architecture,surveying, environmental sciences, projectmanagement, and project economics for in-frastructure and facilities projects. We sup-port public and private sector clients in adiverse range of markets at every stage, fromthe initial conceptualization and financial fea-sibility study to project completion and be-yond. Our services are provided on projectsaround the world through approximately12,000 employees operating out of morethan 200 locations in North America andfour locations internationally. v

Wolverton & Associates Inc.Announces New Business Development ManagerWolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A), a Pro-fessional Services Civil Engineering and LandSurveying firm located in Duluth, Georgia,today announced the appointment of TimGermaine to the position of Business Devel-opment Manager. In his new role, Germainewill be responsible for increasing W&A’s mar-ket share regionally in the private commercialsector by developing the firm’s external cus-tomer base with emphasis on new markets.

Germaine brings with him a wealth ofexperience in corporate business development

34 GeorGia enGineer

Lord, Aeck & Sargent and Urban Collage MergeFull-Service Architecture and Planning Ex-pertise. Merger Adds Lexington Office for LAS,Its Fifth.In a move that brings full-service planningexpertise to its already well-established ar-chitecture practice, Lord, Aeck & Sargent(LAS) has merged with Urban Collage (UC),one of the largest urban and campus plan-ning and design firms in the Southeast.Combining these firms’ talents was made of-ficial today. UC plans to retain its name forthe foreseeable future.

The merger adds a fifth geographic of-fice for LAS, since UC, in addition to its At-lanta headquarters office, operates a

Lexington, Kentucky, office. Beyond its At-lanta office, LAS operates from offices inAnn Arbor, Michigan; Austin, Texas; andChapel Hill, North Carolina. “We welcomethe opportunity to enhance our design andplanning services for our clients, such as theUniversity of Cincinnati and the Universityof Louisville, from a closer location,” said JoeGreco, LAS president.

“Urban Collage’s urban design and cam-pus planning expertise will be infused acrossall of LAS’ practice areas, which include mul-tifamily housing and mixed-use, higher edu-cation, science and technology, and historicpreservation ” Greco said. “And Urban Col-lage’s capabilities also will benefit many ofour clients, including private developers, cor-porations and institutions of higher learningas well as federal, state, county and munici-pal governments. This is a great combination

2013 Georgia Engineering Employer of the YearThe Georgia Engineering Alliance, in coordination with the Georgia Society of Profes-sional Engineers announced the establishment of Georgia Engineering Employer of theYear Award that honors the firms and agencies that help build the future. This is thefirst 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 tothe engineering industry through the planning, design, and implementation of criticalprojects, through the cultivation of talented professionals and through the advancementof the profession via community involvement and education.

Employees nominated their firms or a firm they thought deserved to be recognizedfor contributions to the engineering field in Georgia. The award requirements for sizeof the different categories are: Small Business (<50 employees), Mid-size Business (50-100 employees), Large Business (>100 employees), and Public Sector (any public en-tity). The following companies were selected as the first recipients of the GeorgiaEngineering Employer of the Year: Small Business – Prime Engineering Inc.,Medium Business – W.K. Dickson & Company, Large Business – Geosyntec Consult-ants, Private Sector – Columbus Water Works

and is actively involved in the business com-munity. Prior to joining W&A, Germainehas held several leadership positions in busi-ness development for Skanska, Winter Con-struction, and the EMJ Corporation. Hehas served on the local board of directors forCORNET Global and the Georgia Founda-tion for Independent Colleges. Germaineearned a Bachelor of Science in Business Ad-ministration (BSBA) from Wayne State Uni-versity, Detroit, Michigan.

“We are excited to welcome Tim toWolverton & Associates,” said President andCEO, Jerry (Jay) C. Wolverton, Jr., P.E. “Hewill be a valuable addition to our firm. Tim’scontacts and strength in the civil engineeringmarketplace will enable him to lead ourbusiness development efforts and enable usto achieve our corporate goals. Wolverton& Associates vision for growth is based onhaving talented engineers and solid businessexpertise, and we want to make sure that wehave the right leadership in place to do this.”

Wolverton & Associates Inc. (W&A),founded in 1989, is a full service Consult-ing Engineering firm, which offers in-houseprofessional services in civil (land develop-ment) engineering, transportation engi-neering, land surveying, traffic engineering,structural engineering, subsurface utility en-gineering and landscape architecture forboth public and private clients. W&A ex-perience includes and is not limited to fed-eral, state, county, DOTs, municipal, CIDs,parks, educational, and private retail/facil-ity project experience. Headquartered inDuluth, Georgia, W&A also has a branchoffice in Savannah, Georgia. v

of talent that will benefit our entire firm andwill be an invaluable resource for ourclients.”

Greco added that the two firms havebeen collaborating on projects for more thana decade, and their cultural compatibility hasbeen tested. “The merger is a natural exten-sion of what we’ve been doing with UC forquite some time; we know and trust one an-other,” he said.

Added LAS chairman Tony Aeck, “Themerger is representative of our growth strat-egy. Although LAS’ growth is primarily or-ganic, it has also come over the last decadefrom mergers similar to this one.

“Many clients desire to focus on theircore missions and are seeking out designfirms with broader capabilities to help themplan strategically and then design theirbuildings,” Aeck noted.v

In keeping with this issue’s Transportationtheme, think of this article as a ‘roadmap’ for

where we have been and where we areheaded on our journey to a new AmericanCouncil of Engineering Companies ofGeorgia. It has been very satisfying to seehow our newly reorganized ACEC Georgiahas gotten up to speed and covered lots ofground in less than a year.

Reorganization options, ideas, andstrategies had been under discussion forseveral years. The board recognized that firmleaders have many issues competing for timeand resources and multiple alternatives forbusiness-related associations. We recognizedthat an ACEC Georgia that tried to play itsafe was going to lose market share over time.We concluded that for ACEC Georgia to be

relevant in the new economy, we would haveto take a leap of faith and do what needed tobe done to transform ACEC Georgia into amore robust and relevant association. Arange 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 thebook Race for Relevance, by HarrisonCoerver and Mary Byers as a guide for takinga fresh look at where we were and where wewanted to be. It was a great tool forexamining how we govern and manage theassociation and which ‘products’ were trulyof benefit to our member firms. We usedour Value Proposition tripod, Advocacy,

ACEC Georgia

Political Advocacy• Advocating at all levels of government to advance policies that impactthe business of engineering in Georgia.• Monitoring the regulatory issues and government agency actions thataffect engineers.• Working for a more pro-business climate and defending against unfairbusiness practices.• Fighting to protect the professional engineering practice.

Business Development• Providing networking opportunities, meetings, and programs that putyou in contact with potential clients, industry peers, and the leaders ofthe engineering profession. • Hosting the Georgia Engineers Summer Conference, TransportationSummit, P3 Summit, and other programs that expand your professionalknowledge and network.• Offering informative and relevant seminars, programs, and webinarswith presentations from leaders who affect our industry andcommunity.

Firm Operations• Providing a forum for the exchange of business and professionalexperiences.• Offering programs and resources on best business practices formember firms.• Sponsoring the Future Leaders Program to build the next generation ofleaders within member firms and the engineering profession.• We provide executive development training for emerging leaders andfirm management.

The Value of ACEC GeorgiaServing your firm’s business

interests through:

For additional information on ACEC Georgia, please visit our Web site:www.acecga.org or call our office: 404-521-2324.

Edgar G.

Williams, PE

President ACEC

Georgia

News

35APRIL | MAY 2013

36 GeorGia enGineer

ACEC consists of 5,000 firms nationwide andrepresents approximately 500,000 employees. ACEC Georgia consists of 206 firms and representsapproximately 6,050 employees.

ACEC GEORGIA MEMBER FIRMS

Board of DirectorsEddie Williams, Chairman

Jay Wolverton, Chairman-ElectDarrell Rochester, Treasurer / Roseana Richards, Secretary

Charles Ezelle, Vice Chair / John Heath, Vice Chair / David Wright, Vice ChairRick Toole, National Director / Jim Hamilton, Past President

Jim Case / Scott Gero / Don Harris / Rob Lewis / David McFarlin / Richard Meehan / Margie Pozin / Doug Robinson

StaffMichael ‘Sully’ Sullivan, President & CEO

Gwen Brandon, Chief Operating Officer

Kathy Belcher, Member Services Manager

Mia Wilson, Finance Manager

CommitteesDarrell Rochester, Government Affairs/ PACDavid Wright, ACEC PAC ChampionJim Hamilton, NominatingRob Lewis, ProgramsRichard Meehan, SeminarsRob Lewis, Future Leaders ProgramDoug Robinson, A/E/C LeadershipCharles Ezelle, MembershipJohn Heath, CommunicationsRoseana Richards, R. Berl Elder Memorial ScholarshipDon Harris, Technology Enhancement

ForumsBill Griffin,Building Systems

Corky Welch, Environmental

Chris Marsengill, Transportation

Brannen Butts, Leadership

President & CEO, Michael Sullivan(404) 537-1337 sully@acecga.org

Chief Operating Officer, Gwen Brandon(404) 537-1415gwen.brandon@acecga.org

Member Services Manager, Kathy Belcher(404) 665-3539kathy.belcher@acecga.org

Accounting Manager, Mia Wilson(404) 537-1275 mia.wilson@acecga.org

Chair, Eddie Williams Keck & Wood Inc.ewilliams@keckwood.com

Chair-Elect, Jay WolvertonWolverton & Associates Inc.jay.wolverton@wolverton-assoc.com

Treasurer, Darrell RochesterRochester & Associates Inc.dkrochester@rochester-assoc.com

Secretary, Roseana RichardsPond & Companyrichardsr@pondco.com

Vice President, Charles EzelleThomas & Hutton Engineering Co.ezelle.c@thomasandhutton.com

Vice President, John HeathHeath & Lineback Engineers Inc.jheath@heath-lineback.com

Vice President, David Wright, Neel-Schaffer Inc.david.wright@neel-schaffer.com

National Director, Rick TooleW. R. Toole Engineers Inc.rtoole@wrtoole.com

Director, Jim Case, Uzun & Case Engineersjcase@uzuncase.com

Director, Scott Gero, AECOMscott.gero@aecom.com

Director, Don Harris, URS Corporationdon_harris@urscorp.com

Director, Rob Lewis, HNTB Corporationrtlewis@HNTB.com

Director, David McFarlin, Long Engineering Inc. dmcfarlin@longeng.com

Director, Richard MeehanLowe Engineers LLCmeehan@loweengineers.com

Director, Margie PozinSTV/Ralph Whitehead Associatesmargie.pozin@stvinc.com

Director, Doug RobinsonWalter P Moore and Associates Inc.drobinson@walterpmoore.com

Past President, Jim HamiltonSouthern Civil Engineers Inc.jhamilton@sce-atlanta.com

CONTACT US at ACEC GEORGIA (404) 521-2324 acecga.org

37APRIL | MAY 2013

Business Development, and Firm Operationsas the test to evaluate every concept.

As a result of the board’s hard work atthe retreat, we streamlined our committeestructure and separated those functions thatwere just events from those that wereongoing initiatives. Initiatives that did notfit our Value Proposition were eithereliminated or re-purposed by rolling theminto related committees. We resolved to hiretop-notch staff committed to our initiativesand able to navigate for the association betterthan any GPS.

We received some good advice fromothers on which routes to take and which toavoid. At the 2012 National Conference inDC last spring I had the opportunity to getan extended de-brief from my counterpart,President for ACEC New York. While theirjourney had a few potholes, he reported thathis organization was dealing with the

recession very successfully and with greatparticipation. He attributed their success tokeeping programs relevant to the needs ofengineering businesses and to includingopportunities for all practice areas to benefit.He reported that some committees had awaiting list of those eager to participate! Theresults in New York validate our board’scommitment to making ACEC Georgia sorelevant that firm executives are highlymotivated to join and participate, instead ofdoing it just to ‘give back.’

I want to mention a few highlights ofour trip so far because we have had somenotable successes along the way. In terms ofAdvocacy, our Environmental Forumparticipated in the development of thecertification language now used by EPD inpermitting wastewater projects. We were co-signers of a new memorandum ofunderstanding with Georgia Department of

Transportation in the Georgia Partnershipfor Quality Transportation. We engaged thesecretary of state in response to his proposedoverhaul of the licensing process and built agood relationship for participation in futureinitiatives.

November’s Transportation Summitwas a great success for those interested inengineering issues in transportation inGeorgia. It was the first major event that thereorganized ACEC Georgia conducted. It seta new standard for quality and alignmentwith our Value Proposition. Attendeesreceived tremendous value for the cost ofadmission in business development andadvocacy.

ACEC Georgia played a major role inthe 2013 Engineer’s Week Banquet inFebruary. The Engineering ExcellenceAwards included great examples of‘monumental’ projects that will enhance theimage of the business of engineering inGeorgia. The projects included examplesfrom all our practice areas and the StateAwards 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

save

Date!

2013 GeorGia enGineers

summer ConferenCe

The Spa & Lodge at

Callaway, Pine

Mountain, GA

June 13 – 16, 2013

38 GeorGia enGineer

national level. The event gave us anopportunity to congratulate Tom Leslie onemore time and to celebrate his positiveimpact on the business of consultingengineering and the entire engineeringprofession in Georgia. Thanks again, Tom,for putting us on the path to greatness.

Looking ahead to see where we are goingnext, I encourage you to keep alert fornotable roadside attractions. In May we willhost a major event focused on the PublicPrivate Partnership model, AKA ‘P3,’ fordelivery of infrastructure projects. The formatwill be similar to the Transportation Summit.

We recognized the difficulty ofattending monthly lunch meetings formember firms located outside the metro-Atlanta area. To address this, we have beenevaluating technology alternatives for remoteviewing. We will experiment with thisapproach this spring. Depending onparticipation and feedback, this may becomea standard option for the future. It may soonbe possible for a group of firms to gather inAugusta, Tifton, Savannah, or Macon forexample, and conduct a meeting that is

viewed in Atlanta by a similar gathering. Or,a firm CEO anywhere in the state may hosta lunch and learn at his office for his staff.

The Engineer’s Summer Conference atCallaway Gardens in June promises toprovide a full program, touching all threeareas of the Value Proposition. Theconference will be led by ACEC Georgia inpartnership with our sister organizationsfrom the Georgia Engineering Alliance.Callaway Gardens provides a great setting ata good value. The central location and theprogram schedule will provide anopportunity for firms to send severalassociates for at least some of the events andseminars.

The Programs Committee is in the earlystages of planning a Firm OperationsSummit for August. The focus of this eventwill be seminars and roundtable discussionscovering the issues associated with theoperation of a successful engineeringbusiness. This full-day event is expected toinclude topics like: • Financial Management for Future

Leaders

• Banking Relationships and FindingCapital

• 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 hascreated a new level of energy and enthusiasmamong its members. If your firm is alreadyan ACEC Georgia member, but you havenot been actively participating, or if you areconsidering the value of membership,contact me or one of our excellent staff forinformation on the opportunities availableto you. Now is the time to get on the ACECGeorgia train (high speed rail, no doubt)because we are about to leave the station! v

39APRIL | MAY 2013

Greetings!The weather is getting sunny and it’s great tobe a Civil Engineer!

Engineers WeekThe theme for this year’s Engineers Weekwas Celebrate Awesome!! Hopefully, youhad the opportunity to volunteer during E-Week. ASCE members were out and aboutduring the week participating in various op-portunities.

Electronic Billboards at six locationswith eleven designs were up once again thisE-Week celebrating Civil Engineering withalmost 9,000 views. We had several volun-teers that participated in Introduce a Girl toEngineering at Georgia Tech providinghands on learning opportunities for 180

girls. Many volunteers spread out to severalschools to educate students in Civil Engi-neering reaching 375 kids. In the next cou-ple of months, we plan to reach an additional5,000 kids at various events.

Our Toothpick Bridge Building eventheld at the Fernbank Science Center drew 86participants from 11 elementary and middleschools. Our What Do Civil Engineers Do?Contest urges kids to be creative and offers

cash prizes! Winners will be chosen shortlyand will be in attendance at our May meet-ing. ASCE participated in the E-Week Ban-quet and Engineers Day at the Capitol, alongwith our partner GEA societies. We also hadASCE members volunteering their time withMathcounts.

Thanks so much to all of our wonderfulvolunteers for making all of these greatthings happen!

PresidentLisa S. Woods, P.E.JACOBSlisa.woods@jacobs.com

President-Elect Katherine McLeod Gurd, P.E.AECOMKatherine.Gurd@aecom.com

Vice President Rebecca Shelton, P.E.Gwinnett County DWRrebecca.shelton@gwin-nettcounty.com

Treasurer Dan Agramonte, P.E.O'BRIEN & GEREdaniel.agramonte@obg.com

External Director Keith Cole, P.E.keith.cole@mindspring.com

Internal Director Christina Vulova, P.E.URS Corporationchristina.vulova@urs.com

Secretary Ernie Pollitzer, MS P.E.

Sierra Piedmontepollitzer@bellsouth.net

Technical Director Richard Morales, M.Sc., P.E. LB Foster Piling RMorales@LBFoster.com

Younger Member DirectorJulie Secrist, P.E.Lowe EngineersJulie.Secrist@loweengineers.com

Savannah Branch Director C. J. ChanceNE Georgia Branch Director

Matthew Tanner, P.E.Breedlove Land Planning Inc. mtanner@landplanning.net

South Metro Branch DirectorGreg A. Wombough, P.E.Universal Engineering Sciencesgwombough@universalengi-neering.com

Past-PresidentJames R. Wallace, Sc.D., P.E.AMEC (retired)jrwhaw@comcast.net

ASCE/GEORGIA SECTION 2012 - 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

ASCE Georgia

Lisa S. Woods,

P.E., President

American Society

of Civil

Engineers,

Georgia Section

www.ascega.org

News

lisa.woods@jacobs.com

40 GeorGia enGineer

Upcoming Volunteer OpportunityExploring Engineering Academy at GeorgiaTech: June 2-7Needed: Professional Engineer Volunteersand Students in 10th, 11th, and 12thGrades!

The Exploring Engineering Academy(EEA) at Georgia Tech in June is an awesomeprogram put together by the Learning forLife Division of the Atlanta Area Council ofthe Boy Scouts of America and the GeorgiaEngineering Foundation and championed

for ASCE by Richard Morales! ASCE hasbeen honored and excited to participate formany years.

Please contact Richard Morales at 404-275-6430 or RMorales@LBFoster.com formore information.

STEM SchoolsWe continue to reach out to schools thatwould like to partner with us. We are regu-larly visiting schools with presentations andprojects for the kids. Please contact us tohelp out!

Report CardPlease be on the lookout for ASCE’s 2013Report Card for America’s Infrastructure thatwas released on March 19th. Please visitGoogle Play or the App Store to downloadthe free app for your tablet or smart phone!!We are ramping up to begin another updateto our Georgia Infrastructure Report Card,slated for a January 2014 release! RebeccaShelton and Dan Agramonte are leading thiseffort so please contact them if you’re inter-ested in getting involved.

On that note, we are hosting a ‘PR Uni-versity’ in Norcross May 3. This is a work-shop that ASCE National conducts andoffers a hands-on introduction to public re-lations for civil engineers and gives attendeestools and tips for implementing public rela-tions into their local activities and profes-sional work. Contact Keith Cole to sign upand stay tuned for more information!

Remember…Please join us at one of our remaining sec-tion meetings this year! May 3 and June 7.Please check out our new Web site, www.as-cega.org, for more information.

I would like to extend a sincere thankyou to our sponsors—Belgard Hardscapes,JACOBS, Hayward Baker, AECOM, Heathand Lineback, ASCE Region 5, ASCE Foun-dation, LB Foster, Evonik, Applied Technol-ogy Group, and CH2MHILL. Please contactme if you are interested in becoming a spon-sor.

In closing, please e-mail me at any timeif you have questions, concerns, suggestions,or would like to volunteer! Take care! v

41APRIL | MAY 2013

“I know there's a proverb which says 'To err ishuman,' but a human error is nothing to whata computer can do if it tries.” –Agatha Christie

As engineers we have an obligation todo our best when we prepare designs, reportsor other documents for our clients. The cruxof the matter is they depend on us to givethem our best. Through my career, I haveencountered better methods of doing somany of the tasks that I need to complete. Ithink back to my first computer, a Vic-20.It only had 5 kilobytes of memory. Today,you need at least 3 gigabytes of random ac-cess memory to even run some of the com-puter programs. I actually drew my designswith pencil and paper. I was very happywhen I was able to start using AutoCAD somy line weights would be correct. As Imoved on, I was fascinated with multiplepen plotters that could remember where thecircle was to start again in the right place. Itonly took thirty minutes to complete onedrawing sheet. Now, you can plot a wholeset of drawings in that time. If you ever wentthrough the Technical Report 55 hand cal-culations, you are as thrilled as I am that theycreated a program to do that for you. I tookmy engineer-in-training exam with a sliderule. Today, I have a telephone that can takepictures, send text around the world, andeven surf the internet. By now you should begetting the picture. Technology is great! Re-member, the technology comes with a warn-ing. “If we  continue  to develop ourtechnology without wisdom or prudence,

our servant may prove to be our execu-tioner.” -Omar N. Bradley

Now we get to the real heart of the mat-ter. As engineers, we need to use technologywisely. With it we have the potential to dogreat things or we can make bigger mistakesfaster. When I was in school, I took severalclasses that required hand calculations just tofind out that there was already a computerprogram that would do it for me. It took mea long time to realize that the real reason wasnot to make it harder to finish the work. Itwas so that I would know why the computerprogram worked, and so that I could gaugethe correctness of the answer. Today, as Iwork with many younger engineers I try tomake a point of explaining why we use theprogram and what the various componentsmean. I want to be sure that they rememberto check the answer. It is too easy just to be-lieve the answer because the program gave itto us. One example is the answer that isgiven when the rational formula is used tocalculate runoff. If you let the program de-cide your answer, it may be shown to severaldecimal places. Since the assumptions madeto create the answer are not that accurate, theanswer is not either. While this example isunlikely to cause a problem that would en-danger the public, other calculations couldcause injury. For instance, being that carelesswith a calculation for a structure may cause

a catastrophic failure that could not only de-stroy property, but endanger lives. Using thetechnology of today makes our jobs easier,but we need to be sure that we know whatthe results represent. When we do, we arekeeping our promise as professionals to per-form our best work for our clients and thesafety of the public.

I am glad that the technology is there.I enjoy the speed and the precision. How-ever, 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 willbegin to think like men, but that men willbegin to think like computers.” v

GSPE Georgia

David W.

Simoneau, P.E.,.

President

Georgia Society

of Professional

Engineers

News

Greetings from the Georgia Section of the In-stitute of Transportation Engineers (GA ITE).We are already off to an exciting and eventfilled year with our section’s activities. If youhaven’t been involved, I’d like to mention sev-eral of the events taking place soon. In my ar-ticle last month, I emphasized that the eventsand activities are a huge part of making GAITE successful in membership and value, soI’m providing a description of these events toentice you into joining or getting more in-volved in GA ITE if you haven’t already.

I’ll provide some highlights of a coupleof events here because this is your chance toget in on the fun.

The 2013 SDITE Annual Meeting ~ Thismeeting will be held in Charlotte, NorthCarolina this year from April 7th–10th. Thetheme, ‘Partnerships for Vibrant Communi-ties,’ will focus on the changing environmentin which we work to fulfill the new expecta-tions of transportation engineers and plan-

ners. AICP Certification Maintenance Cred-its (CM) and/or Professional DevelopmentHours (PDH) are being offered for attendingthe various technical sessions and tours. Inaddition to the technical program, stickingwith the theme of NCSITE to ‘Make it Fun-ner,’ activities such as a tour of the NASCARHall of Fame have been planned. To getmore information about the meeting andregister please visit the meeting Web site atwww.sdite.org.

2013 ITE Summer Seminar - Save theDate! - It’s never too early to begin prepara-tions for the best statewide ITE seminar inthe country! Save the date - July 21stthrough July 24th. Reserve your rooms nowat the King & Prince Beach & Golf Resort,St. Simons Island, Georgia. These rooms fillup quickly because this seminar is so popu-lar! Make your hotel reservations by calling1-800-342-0212. Registration for the con-ference opened on GA ITE’s website inApril. We hope to see you there!

And now on to GA ITE’s recent eventsand opportunities.

The first monthly meeting of 2013 washeld on Valentine’s Day at Mary Mac's TeaRoom in Midtown Atlanta. The featured

topic was a ‘State-of-the-State and MeetingTomorrow’s Challenges.’ The speaker wasToby Carr, Georgia Department of Trans-portation (GDOT) Director of the PlanningDivision. Toby provided his assessment ofthe current GDOT state of affairs, whatchallenges the GDOT will face in 2013, andwhat issues the Department will focus on inyears to come. GA ITE greatly appreciatesToby speaking to us. We had a good crowdand some Valentine’s trivia for prizes.

The Intelligent Transportation Societyof Georgia and GA ITE sponsored a Legisla-tive Appreciation Reception with GovernorNathan Deal, GDOT Board ChairmanJohnny Floyd, Vice Chairman Jay Shaw, andnumerous other board members and legisla-tors, on Wednesday, February 20th, 2013 atthe Georgia Railroad Freight Depot in At-lanta, Georgia. World Fiber Technologieshelped sponsor the event, which includedhors d’oeuvres, drinks, and tons of network-ing opportunities. Governor Deal providedan overview of transportation in the state in-cluding comments on several high profileprojects. This event has continued to growin popularity and attendance with over 100people in attendance. Members of the Amer-

42 GeorGia enGineer

ITE Georgia

Dwayne

Tedder, PE

Georgia Section,

Institute of

Transportation

Engineers

News

Winter Workshop Attendees at Presentation

43APRIL | MAY 2013

ican Society of Civil Engineers were also inattendance.

On February 21st, 2013, Southern Poly-technic State University hosted their Engi-neers Week event. At the event, GA ITE wasinvited to introduce David Peters as the Stu-dent of the Year in Engineering Technology.David is the President of the Student Chap-ter of ITE at Southern Poly. We are veryproud to have one of our own ITE membersbe awarded this honor. David is a traffic en-gineer intern for Transcore, where for the pastfive months he has assisted engineers in theimplementation of intelligent transportationsystems across the country. David was also amember on the 2012 Southern Poly teamthat beat Georgia Tech in the ITE TrafficBowl and went on to the Southern Districtmeeting in Kentucky for the regional com-petition. Please join me in congratulatingDavid in these accomplishments.

Engineer’s Day at the Capitol was held

on February 22nd, 2013. Several engineer-ing organizations and the Georgia Instituteof Technology were invited to set up displaysand represent Georgia’s engineering commu-nity. Senator Hardie Davis from Augusta wasthe host of the event and is an electrical en-gineer from Georgia Tech. The House andSenate passed resolutions honoring Engi-neer’s Day. After the resolutions, representa-tives from the engineering organizations hadphoto opportunities with the legislators.Also, the engineering organizations displayedinformation about their groups on the lowerfloor of the capitol building.

The Transportation Winter Workshopwas held on February 24th – 25th in Athens,Georgia. This workshop was started a cou-ple of years ago by GA ITE and had a focusas a training opportunity for younger engi-neers. The 2013 conference expanded withan introduction of a partnership between GAITE and the Georgia Chapter of the Ameri-

can Society of Highway Engineers. The suc-cessful partnership this year changed a work-shop that was averaging 40-60 attendees towell over 100 attendees this year in Athens.The workshop this year in Athens was lo-cated at the University of Georgia Hotel andConference Center. David Clark, of Athens-Clarke County, welcomed the attendees.Many thanks and congratulations go toBrian O’Connor of TY Lin, and Larry Overnof Stantec, who co-chaired the event forASHE and GA ITE respectively. This work-shop themed, ‘Delivering the Program,’ pro-vided technical sessions that depicted currentdevelopments at GDOT and the direction ofthings to come, as well as sharing knowledgeof the current state of the industry and re-cent innovations. Technical sessions pro-vided practical, interactive training frompublic agencies and private consultants. Ad-ditionally, a group project (a traffic/highwayengineering related, group problem-solvingactivity) allowed attendees to work togetherto develop the most innovative and benefi-cial solutions to a complex problem whilelimiting the project costs to the client. Tech-nical sessions also included• Plan Development & Project Manage-

ment Processes and Pitfalls• Complete Streets• Signal Timing Innovations & Compre-

hensive Plan Updates• TIA Project Delivery Update• Statewide Freight & Logistics Mobility• Interactive Traffic Signal Laboratory

If you have made it this far in this article, Icommend you for taking the time to readabout what GA ITE is doing. Thanks to allour committees for making these events,training, and learning opportunities possible.And there is still more to come… v

Board Position Member E-mail PhonePresident Dwayne Tedder dwayne.tedder@urs.com 404.406.8791Vice President Jonathan Reid reid@pbworld.com 404.364.5225Secretary/Treasurer Andrew Antweiler aantweiler@roswellgov.com 678.639.7540Past President John Karnowski jkarnowski@foresitegroupinc.com 770.368.1399District Representative David Low dlow@roswellgov.com 770.594.6422District Representative Carla Holmes carla_holmes@gspnet.com 678.518.3654District Representative Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov 404.635.2849Affiliate Director Patrick McAtee pmcatee@thompsonengineering.com 404.574.1985

Committee Activities Chair(s) E-mail PhoneAnnual Report Jim Tolson jtolson@dot.ga.gov 404.635.2849Audio/Visual Mark Boivin markboivin@alltrafficdata.net 404.374.1283Awards/Nominations John Karnowski jkarnowski@foresitegroupinc.com 770.368.1399Career Guidance Brendetta Walker bhargro@bellsouth.net 404.364.5235Clerk Elizabeth Scales escales@thompsonengineering.com 404.574.1985Comptroller Jim Pohlman pohlmanj@bellsouth.net 770.972.9709Engineers Week Steven Sheffield stevenwsheffield@gmail.comFinanceGeorgia Engineer Magazine Dan Dobry ddobry@croyengineering.com 770.971.5407Georgia Tech Liaison Paul DeNard pdenard@dot.ga.gov 404.635.2843Historian Charles Bopp charles_bopp@hotmail.com 678.380.9053Host Vamshi Mudumba vamshim@laiengineering.com 770.423.0807Legislative Affairs Bill Ruhsam bruhsam@maai.net 678.728.9076Life Membership Don Gaines dgaines@gcaeng.com 404.355.4010Marketing Shannon Fain shannon.fain@stantec.com 770.813.0882Membership Sunita Nadella sunita.nadella@parsons.com 678.969.2304Monthly Meetings Jonathan Reid reid@pbworld.com 404.364.5225Newsletter Vern Wilburn vwilburn@wilburnengineering.com 678.423.0050 Past Presidents Todd Long tlong@dot.ga.gov 404.631.1021Public Officials Education Scott Mohler scott.mohler@urs.com 678.808.8811Scholarship Mike Crawford mike.crawford@jacobs.com 678.333.0319Southern Poly Liaison Bryan Sartin bryan_sartin@gspnet.com 678.518.3884Summer Seminar Sean Coleman sean.coleman@kimley-horn.com 404.419.8781Technical/Web site France Campbell france_campbell@gspnet.com 678.518.3952Winter Workshop Larry Overn larry.overn@stantec.com 770.813.0882

Hands-on Activities at Winter Workshop

44 GeorGia enGineer

ITS Georgia has a broad mandate to advancethe state of the art of intelligent transporta-tion solutions in our state and region. Overthe years we have helped to start a new chap-ter in Tennessee, encouraged ITS deploy-ment in the Carolinas and partnered withFlorida on a biennial congress calledTRANSPO.

We pride ourselves in our annual meet-ings, which routinely draw well over 100 par-ticipants. In 2013 the annual meeting andexposition is scheduled for September 14-17at Callaway Gardens. Participants hear and seethe latest in ITS solutions and technology.

An important part of our mission is toreach out to policy makers and let them knowabout the benefits of ITS. For the second yearin a row, we co-hosted a legislative receptionfor state leaders. An estimated 100 people, in-cluding Gov. Nathan Deal, GDOT BoardChairman Johnny Floyd, GDOT BoardMembers, and Members of the General As-sembly gathered in February to talk trans-portation issues facing the state. Sponsoredby ITS Georgia and Georgia Section ITE, theevent was the second annual supported byWorld Fiber Technologies. Chairman Floydintroduced the Governor who spoke about

transportation programs of his administra-tion and the need to come together to sup-port improvements in transportationinfrastructure. After remarks, ITS and ITEmembers networked with state and localtransportation officials and policy makers.

This year we continue to hold monthlymeetings that allow members to network andhear about the latest in ITS solutions. Ourtopics this year have included video analyticssoftware in Buckhead that more accuratelyaccount for vehicle activity at intersections,the latest in big screen display technology,and what type of infrastructure will state andlocal governments need in place to support

the rapidly approaching connected vehiclehighway.

Please join us at our monthly meetingsand bring a friend. We’ll keep you posted ontimes and locations on our Web site and bye-mail. If you are not on our e-mail list, thenvisit www.itsga.org, or scan the QR code andenter your information via smartphone.

Suggest that your organization join ITSGeorgia so that all of your fellow associatesmay enjoy the benefits of membership. v

OUR 2013 SPONSORSControl Technologies

MetrotechTempleArcadis

Gresham Smith and PartnersHNTB

World Fiber TechnologiesAtkinsDelcan

Kimley-Horn and AssociatesSensys

Southern Lighting and Traffic SystemsURS

TelventCambridge Systematics

Grice ConsultingWolverton & Associates

ITS GEORGIA CHAPTER LEADERSHIP

Our monthly meeting dates for theremainder of 2013 are:

ITS Georgia MissionWe believe that ITS is a valuable tool for im-proved management of any transportation sys-tem, regardless of the inherent complexity ofthe system. ITS can help operate, manage, andmaintain the system once it has been con-structed.

We believe that ITS should be systemati-cally incorporated into the earliest stages ofproject development, especially into the plan-ning and design of transportation projects.

We believe the best way to achieve this sys-tematic incorporation into the process isthrough a coordinated, comprehensive pro-gram to ‘get out the word’ on ITS to con-stituencies that might not otherwise considerthe relevance of ITS to their transportationsystem.

ITS Georgia News

Scott

Mohler, P.E.

ITS President

PresidentScott Mohler, URS Corporation

Vice PresidentTom Sever, Gwinnett DOT

SecretaryKristin Turner, Wolverton

and Associates Inc.

TreasurerChristine Simonton, Delcan

DirectorsMark Demidovich, GDOT

Susie Dunn, ARCEric Graves, City of Alpharetta

Carla Holmes, Gresham Smith & PartnersWinter Horbal, Temple Inc.

Keary Lord, Douglas County DOT Michael Roberson, GDOT

David Smith, Dekalb Co. TransportationPrasoon Sinha, ARCADISGrant Waldrop, GDOT

State Chapters RepresentativeKenny Voorhies, Cambridge

Systematics Inc.

Ex OfficioGreg Morris, Federal Highway

AdministrationAndres Ramirez, Federal Transit

Administration

April 25May 23June 27July 25

August 29September 14-17

Annual MeetingOctober 31

45APRIL | MAY 2013

As we continue through the 2013 year atSEAOG, there are a lot of interesting thingsgoing on.

The following membership meetingtopics are planned finishing out our springseason:April 18: Shape-Memory Metal Alloys forStructural UsesMay 16: Design for High Winds and Emer-gency Shelters

Thanks to Wilbur Bragg and the ProgramsSubcommittee for their vital work in organ-izing these opportunities for education.

In addition to the membership meet-ing presentations, SEAOG will begin pro-viding Structural Engineering ExaminationPreparatory Classes for the new 16-hour li-censing exam required for structural engi-neers:Wood Design: March 14, 2013, from 4:00-7:00 pm AASHTO Design: March 20, 2013, from4:00-7:00 pmMasonry Design: April 3, 2013, from 4:00- 7:00 pmClasses will be held at the offices of Uzun &Case Engineers, 201 17th Street NW, Suite1200, Atlanta, Georgia 30363. Each classhas a cost of $99.00 for members and$149.00 for non-members with three PDHhours awarded per class.

SEAOG will also be offering a full dayspring seminar on the major changes in theupcoming ASCE7-10 code. The seminar

will be conducted by Dr. S. K. Ghosh, whois a knowledgeable authority on this topic.This code change will incorporate very sig-nificant changes to the way we calculatewind and seismic loads, so it is an opportu-nity 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 activ-ities in the separate areas of service are:• Structural Engineering Emergency Re-

sponse (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 Conven-

tion (in Atlanta, Sept, 2013)• Awards Program (for winter 2013-

2014)

Each subcommittee includes a member ofthe board and a separate chairman. Subcom-mittee meeting notes, subcommittee pur-pose, and active members can be found onthe SEAOG Web site. Please visit the siteand volunteer !

Mark on your calendars that theNCSEA National Convention will be in At-lanta September 18-21, 2013 at the WestinBuckhead.

In summary, the Structural EngineersAssociation of Georgia of continues to offerquality continuing education and profes-sional networking. We encourage you tokeep tabs on our events and activities atwww.seaog.org. Please consider getting in-volved with one or more of our subcom-mittees. Your involvement will keepSEAOG effective in service to the profes-sional structural engineers of Georgia longinto the future. v

SEAOG Georgia

Rob Weilacher,

PE, SE President

The Structural

Engineers Asso-

ciation of

Georgia

News

USE A COmPAny yOU CAn TRUST

WITh yOUR TRAnSlATIOn PROjECT,

“Gort! Klaatu Borada nikto.”

(770) 521-8877

because a little mistake

in another language

can have unpleasant results.

46 GeorGia enGineer

This is shaping up to be a great year with theWTS Atlanta Chapter! We held our Mem-bership Meeting at the beginning of Februaryand had a great turnout. We exceeded capac-ity on the meeting room and received an over-whelming response to the call for volunteers.Our committees have already started takingon new challenges and engaging more mem-bers of our chapter. Thank you to all of thecommittee members and chairs:Chairs: Daveitta Jenkins (Mentor-Protege),Marsha Anderson-Bomar (Regional Round-table), Helen McSwain (TransportationYOU), Jenny Jenkins (Scholarship Luncheon)Volunteers:  Tina Garbos, Cara Hodgson,Kristin Scurlock, Dametrice Cochran,Melody Butler, Audra Rojek, Katherine ParkStacy Blakley, Alyssa Sinclair, Raymell Shan-non, Charlotte Weber, Sara WoracheckPatti Schropp, Ligia Florim, Courtney Viss-man, Brendetta Walker, Jolene Hayes,Amanda Fox, Sheila Jordan, Susan Joyce, Al-ison Gonzalez

During the Strategic Planning Sessionheld in January, the board discussed the chal-lenges that our chapter is facing and the waysthat we can be sure that we are staying rele-vant in our industry. During that meeting,we determined that one of our main focusesthis year needs to be diversity. We want to besure that we are reaching a broad range of pro-fessionals in the transportation industry. Inorder to achieve this goal, we realize that weneed to work with other organizations to be apartner with them in maximizing our poten-

tial reach. One example of this partnership isthe WTS/COMTO STEM Show and Tell.WTS Atlanta Transportation You andCOMTO STEM Outreach have teamed upto host a STEM Show and Tell Event withthree local high schools (Grady High, Co-lumbia High and South Atlanta High).  Theevent will take place at the MARTA Head-quarters Atrium where the STEM studentswill showcase their projects and provide pre-sentations.

Two other joint events that are comingup in April that may be of interest to a broadergroup of participants are the Happy Hourwith the YPT (Young Professionals in Trans-portation) and the Tennis Tournament Socialwith ASHE (American Society of HighwayEngineers). WTS Atlanta has also been incontact with the GPA (Georgia Planning As-sociation) to assist with their Spring Confer-ence that is to be held in College Park in May.In addition to the joint programs that we areco-hosting with other similar organizations,we have also chosen to continue some of oursignature programs for the year. One of thoseis the Mentor Protégé program. It kicked offin February to provide a lot of exciting devel-

WTS ATLANTA 2013 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Angela Snyder, P.E. President angela.snyder@wolverton-assoc.com Wolverton & Associates Inc.Marissa Martin, P.E. Vice President, Membership marissa_martin@gspnet.comGresham, Smith and PartnersTonya Saxon Vice President, Programs tsaxon@itsmarta.comMARTAKirsten Berry Secretary kberry@hntb.comHNTB CorporationJennifer Stephan, EIT Treasurer Jennifer_stephan@gspnet.comGresham, Smith and PartnersBeth Ann Schwartz, P.E. Director-at-Large baschwartz@baker.comMichael Baker CorporationHelen McSwain, P.E. Director-at-Large hmcswain@matcjv.comAtkinsRegan Hammond Director-at-Large rhammond@arc.comAtlanta Regional CommissionShelley Lamar Director-at-Large Shelley.Lamar@atlanta-airport.comHartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International AirportJennifer King, P.E. Immediate Past President jjking@hntb.comHNTB Corporation

WTS Georgia

Angela

Snyder, P.E.

President, WTS

Atlanta

Newsopment opportunities for both young pro-fessionals in our industry and those who havemore experience. We are also excited aboutthe upcoming DC Youth Summit in June.Transportation You's flagship conference willbe held in Washington, DC from June 26-30.  This annual event provides an opportu-nity for participants from across the countryand their mentors to experience once-in-a-lifetime tours, meet-up with White Houseadministrators, and participate in challengesand breakout sessions.  The Atlanta Chapterwill submit a Big and Little Sister for consid-eration to attend the 2013 summit.

If any of these activities interest you or ifyou have any ideas for WTS Atlanta, pleasereach out to me or any of our Board. We arevery passionate about our mission and strat-egy for growing our membership and out-reach opportunities and welcome yourfeedback and suggestions. We are very thank-ful for those who have been involved withWTS for years and offer history and wisdom,as well as those who are just starting to get in-volved that have a fresh outlook to bring tothe table. v