Georgia Engineer Dec 2014 - Jan 2015 by Luke Clark

G E O R G I A

ENGINEER

速

Governmental affairs volume 21, issue 6

December 2014 | January 2015

GPTQ AWARDS ATLANTA STREETCARS 1874-1901

GEORGIA EnGInEER

G E O R G I A

ENGINEER Publisher: A4 Inc. 1154 Lower Birmingham Road Canton, Georgia 30115 770-521-8877 | Fax: 770-521-0406 E-mail: p.frey@a4inc.com Editor-in-chief: Roland Petersen-Frey Managing Editor: Daniel Simmons Art Direction/Design: Pam Petersen-Frey Georgia Engineering Alliance 233 Peachtree Street Harris Tower, #700 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 404-521-2324 | Fax: 404-521-0283 Georgia Engineer Editorial board Thomas C. Leslie, Chair Michael L. (Sully) Sullivan, ACEC Georgia, President Shawna Mercer, ACEC Georgia, Director of Communications & Government Affairs AcEc/Georgia Representatives B.J. Martin, PE Lee Philips

AScE/G Representatives Daniel Agramonte, PE Steven C. Seachrist, PE ASHE Representative Jenny Jenkins, PE GSPE Representatives Tim Glover, PE ITE Representatives Daniel Dobry, PE, PTOE John Edwards, PE ITS/G Representatives Bill Wells, PE Shaun Green, PE Kay Wolfe, PE SAmE Representative Pamela Little, PE SEAOG Representative Rob Wellacher, PE WTS Representative Angela Snyder

The Georgia Engineer is published bi-monthly by A4 Inc. for the Georgia Engineering Al-

liance and sent to members of ACEC, ASCE, ASHE, GEF, GSPE, ITE, SAME, SEAOG, WTS; local, state, and Federal government officials and agencies; businesses and institutions. Opinions expressed by the authors are not necessarily those of the Alliance or publisher nor do they accept responsibility for errors of content or omission and, as a matter of policy, neither do they endorse products or advertisements appearing herein. Parts of this periodical may be reproduced with the written consent from the Alliance and publisher. Correspondence regarding address changes should be sent to the Alliance at the address above. Correspondence regarding advertising and editorial material should be sent to A4 Inc. at the address listed above.

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

ADvERTISEmEnTS American Engineering Inc..............................................................25

Pond Company ..................................................................................31

AMEC ....................................................................................................3

Prime Engineering Inc........................................................................3

Burns & McDonnell .........................................................................25

Reinforced Earth Company............................................................33

Cardno .................................................................................................31

RHD Utility Locating........................................................................32

Columbia Engineering .......................................................................3

ROSSER .................................................................................................8

CROM Corporation............................................................................6

S&ME ...................................................................................................31

Edwards-Pitman Environmental Inc. ...........................................19

Schnabel Engineering ......................................................................31

Engineered Restorations Inc. ...........................................................5

Stevenson & Palmer .........................................................................31

Georgia 811...........................................................Inside Back Cover

STV.......................................................................................................31

Hayward Baker .................................................................Back Cover

Terrell Hundley Carroll Right of Way Services ..........................31

Hazen & Sawyer................................................................................19

T•H•C .................................................................................................28

HDR .....................................................................................................25

TTL .........................................................................................................6

JAT..........................................................................................................6

T. Wayne Owens & Associates, PC.............................................24

Kimley-Horn and Associates Inc. ................................................24

United Consulting..............................................Inside Front Cover

MH Miles Company ..........................................................................6

Vaughn & Melton ...............................................................................4

Nova Engineering ...............................................................................8

Wolverton & Associates...................................................................6

GEORGIA EnGInEER

T a b l e

o f

CONTENTS

GEORGIA ENGINEER December 2014 | January 2015 GPTQ Awards ......................................................................................................7 Atlanta Streetcars 1874-1901 ........................................................................14 Maintaining for Success: considerations for green infrastructure operations & maintenance | part two .....................................................17 Georgia’s stormwater management manual: helping to protect water quality in Georgia ...........................................................................22

Leake mounds Interpretive Trail Tribal Representatives

The crooked yardstick - redefining success...............................................24 2014 Intelligent Transportation Society of Georgia’s Best of ITS Award Winners......................................................................26 Engineering News.............................................................................................28 ACEC Georgia ...................................................................................................34 ASCE Georgia ....................................................................................................36 GSPE Georgia ....................................................................................................38 ITE Georgia ........................................................................................................40

GPTQ AWARDS 7

ITS Georgia ........................................................................................................42 SAME Atlanta ...................................................................................................44 WTS Atlanta......................................................................................................45

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

vISIT uS AT THEGEORGIAEnGInEER.cOm

GEORGIA EnGInEER

FEATURE

GPTQ AWARDS

GRAND AWARD The construction project was ‘let’ in April 2014 to C.W. Matthews for $103 million and will take approximately ﬁve years for DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

acquisition of Right of Way and Construction. The project will improve trafﬁc ﬂow, eliminate multiple at-grade railroad crossings, and increase pedestrian and vehicle safety through downtown Douglasville and SR 92. This project was selected as the Grand Prize winner as it exceeded numerous design criteria categories. Highway Design Urban Criteria were exceeded when the project team successfully developed construction documents for the SR 92 project that included a sixlane (three each direction) urban section

with a 20’ raised landscaped median and urban shoulders. The project includes the construction of SR 92 under the existing SR 5/US 78 Bankhead Highway, Norfolk Southern (NFS) RR, and Strickland Street to create a grade-separated underpass. The gross length of the project is 3.1 miles and includes three new bridges, ten new signals, seven signal modiﬁcations; a preemptive ﬁre station signal, an adjacent multi-use trail along the entire corridor; noise barriers, and LED lighting for pedestrian intersections. 7

The design required three bridges for the grade separations of SR 92 beneath East Strickland Street, Norfolk Southern Railway, and Bankhead Highway. Each of the proposed structures is a single span, roughly 130 feet long, supported by fullheight cantilevered concrete abutments on rock. The railroad bridge will accommodate three tracks and consists of a ballasted concrete deck on steel plate girders. The two vehicular bridges will carry multiple lanes of trafﬁc and consist of concrete decks on PSC Bulb Tee girders. To achieve the required vertical clearance at each bridge, the relocated SR 92 will be depressed below existing grade by a maximum of thirty feet using permanently anchored retaining walls and bridge abutments to retain existing grade. Following is a listing of design elements the design team successfully accomplished which signiﬁcantly exceeded the criteria for Urban Design: • Development of fast track urban road design schedule • Completion of complex bridge designs • Innovative staging for construction • Design approval from the railroads • Public Interest Determination (PID) utility co-ordinations and approvals • Accelerated right-of-way acquisition

door-to-door communications, Web sites (http://gahwy92.com/) and public meetings •

Spanish populations reached by Spanish translators

•

Business community meetings discussed impacts to businesses for both during and post construction

•

The school system helped coordinate staging to reduce impacts to student arrivals and departures

•

Local residents and commuters were engaged to discuss potential

displacements, impacts, and project improvements •

Through the context sensitive design process, solutions incorporated into the ﬁnal plans include:

•

Specially designed noise barriers with brick facades, retaining walls with noise barriers constructed ontop Signalization, and a preemptive ﬁre station signal

Pedestrian enhancements • Landscaping • Lighting • Customized parking at Jesse Davis Park

Context Sensitive Design/Public Participation Criteria were exceeded when, after two years of public coordination in the decision-making process, consensus was obtained from all citizens aﬀected by the relocation of SR 92. Accomplishments included: • All segments of the impacted populations involved through stakeholder meetings, workshops,

GEORGIA EnGInEER

•

Elimination of several at-grade railroad crossings

The Criteria for NEPA, Environmental Protection, Historic Preservation, and Enhancement were exceeded as the EA/FONSI and re-evaluation addressed a wide range of issues concerning the cultural, social, and natural environments within the corridor, including environmental justice, Section 4(f)/6(f) impacts to historic resources and recreational facilities, endangered species, and signiﬁcant impacts to jurisdictional waters requiring an Individual Permit issued through the USACE. Accomplishments included: • Added the listing of the federally protected Indiana bat •

Fish & Wildlife approval without delaying the let date

•

Approvals for the transfer of land from both the Georgia Department of Natural Resources (GADNR) and the National Park Service (NPS) avoiding impacts to the let date.

Other noted accomplishments exceeding criteria include:

CATEGORY 1

SR 11 had experienced severe rutting due to an extremely high percentage of truck traffic. Trucks consist of approximately 15 percent of the total traffic in this corridor. Pre-cast concrete panels were determined to be the most cost effective solution for this road reconstruction. The project consisted of replacing approximately three-quarters of a mile of pavement with pre-cast concrete panels. This was the first use of this technology on a roadway in Georgia. The panels were fabricated by a pre-cast concrete vendor DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

Staging: The project team designed three parallel bridges including the one NFS RR Bridge. To accomplish this, while maintaining traffic on Bankhead Highway and the active NFS RR, the project team designed the relocation of a temporary railroad shoe-fly track and a temporary Bankhead Highway realignment. To complicate construction even further, railroad traffic will be maintained without interruption throughout construction. The staging plans provide access to the school, parks, and businesses throughout the entire construction period. The project also includes several detours along with a comprehensive traffic management plan that was approved by FHWA. Railroad coordination: Bankhead Highway and Strickland Street are both within the NFS RR right-of-way and due to the complex nature of the bridge construction and the staging plans the project, involved intense coordination with NFS RR. The project team met with NFS RR throughout the life of the project and worked diligently to address the railroad’s concerns and requirements.

utility coordination: This is the ﬁrst full utility Public Interest Determination (PID) project that the state of Georgia let. All of the utility reconstructions were included in the construction package for the contractor to construct. This process required intensive weekly utility coordination for the entire project team. Accelerated Right-of-Way Acquisition Within 30 months. The project team acquired 247 parcels, most of which were commercial properties with multiple tenants. Sixty-nine parcels had structures that were demolished to clear the required right-of-way necessary for the project construction. The right-of-way acquisition team successfully met the thirty-month schedule for right-of-way certiﬁcation. The trophy name is: uRS Inc. Team members: • URS - Erick Fry and Nick Castronova, Scott Caples & Patrick Smith •

GDOT - Project Manager, Peter Emanual

in Winder and transported to the project site and installed at night. This allowed a minimal amount of construction related congestion, and the roadway was reopened each day to traffic. The offsite concrete fabrication also allowed the construction to continue, despite record winter weather during the construction period, and the project finished two months ahead of schedule. Lt. Governor Casey Cagle said at the ribbon cutting ceremony: “This is the way roads should be built,” noting the use of innovative road building techniques and the superb aesthetics of the project. The SR 11 project proved not only the successful use of a new product but also a construction technique that delivered the project ahead of schedule while minimizing disruption to motorists. The trophy name is: GDOT-Roadway Design Team member: Eric Rohde 9

Note: Category 2 was eliminated. library on their seven workstations.

CATEGORY 3 •

SR 144 extends through Richmond Hill and southeast Bryan County along the Ogeechee River corridor. This project consisted of reconstructing SR 144 from two travel lanes to four travel lanes with a 20-foot raised median for a distance of five miles including sidewalk and bicycle access. Public involvement was to be a crucial part of the project’s success along with a first submission Draft EA document that would require minimal revisions. Adrian Collaborative was able to accomplish these goals by implementing the following strategies: • nEPA innovations such as producing documents with reader-friendly formats by using simplified language and creative images that considered the local reader’s perspective. •

creative and eﬀective public involvement which included widespread use of social media advertising of the public meetings and new format for handouts. Community engagement including personal discussions with local stakeholders gave the project team

CATEGORY 4

The Georgia Department of Transportation has recently completed a public outreach project associated with the 10

insight on locally important resources and preferred access points for pedestrians. •

Integration of new technology helped enhance the understanding of readers and public meeting participants. Relevant smartphone (QR) codes and URL links were added to the EA pages, bringing social media and online tools into the report itself. An interactive PDF version of the EA was created with cross reference and online hyperlinks. This PDF ﬁle was made available for use at the local

widening of SR 61/SR 113 in Bartow County. This public outreach project was related to the mitigation of a National Register of Historic Places eligible archaeology site, known as the Leake Site. The Leake Site is an American Indian archaeological site that is located along the Etowah River southwest of Cartersville, Georgia. The site contains the remains of an American Indian occupation that lasted from approximately 300 B.C. until 650 A.D. The site was excavated in advance of the widening of State Highway 61/113, with over 50,000 square feet excavated. The Leake Site archaeological investigation revealed that

Protection and enhancement of resources are local priorities and were part of the EA. Examples include protecting not only all eligible historic properties, but also local resources from the unique past of Richmond Hill as a Henry Ford plantation and work community. In addition to preserving historic markers and Ford fencing, the project meets sustainable goals of improving access for walking and biking between neighborhoods and adjacent land uses. Many of the adjacent wetlands and essential ﬁsh habitat will be preserved, while mitigation for unavoidable impacts will be located nearby in the Ogeechee River basin.

The trophy name is: Adrian collaborative Team members: NEPA/Public Involvement, Todd Barker GIS Planner, Martin Rose Public Involvement Analysis, Stenka Vulova and Heather Hatzenbuhler GDOT: Project managers- Matt Bennett (2010-2014) and Michelle Wright (2014present) Public Involvement Support- Maggie Yoder – District 5 Planning and Programming Engineer Environmental Services SupportMichael Murdoch and Paul Alimia this site represents a major center during the prehistoric Middle Woodland period, ﬁguring prominently in the interaction among peoples from throughout the Southeastern and the Midwestern United States. One of the components of this project was the development of an interpretive trail through the Leake Site. The Leake Mounds Interpretive Trail is a 1.5 mile loop that contains 18 interpretive panels and one kiosk which present information on the archaeology of the Leake Site as well as the surrounding natural and GEORGIA EnGInEER

cultural landscape. This project developed out of a unique partnership between federal, tribal, state, and local entities. The trail panels were designed by the University of West Georgia, in consultation with GDOT, FHWA, SHPO, and several federallyrecognized tribes, while the trail itself was developed by the city of Cartersville Parks & Recreation dept. and Bartow County Public Works, with aid from GDOT. The trail is situated on green space owned by Bartow County and the city of Cartersville, a space which is intended to protect remaining portions of the Leake archaeological site from development, as well as provide recreation for local residents. The trail was designed to be context sensitive, using locally sourced, natural stone as gravel, coursing across the natural landscape, and not involving excavation so that archaeologically sensitive subsurface remains were not harmed. In addition, the trail was developed with a mobile Web site component so that addi-

cluding ﬁve of the federally-recognized tribes.

tional information is available to the trail user (via a smart phone or tablet) AND so that the trail can be more accessible to users that cannot make the 1.5 mile journey. The trail was dedicated in October 2013. All project partners were present in-

3) A drilled shaft at Cheshire Bridge was employed to avoid an AT&T duct bank.

CATEGORY 5

The well known congestion at the GA 400 / I-85 interchange was vastly improved by the addition of this project. The project added two ramps which provide connections for I-85 southbound to GA 400 northbound and GA 400 southbound to I-85 northbound. The project also included the construction of a half pedestrian trail. The design-build team of Archer Western Contractors and Heath Lineback Engineers were awarded the project and incorporated several innovative design elements into the project. The design-build team shortened one of the proposed bridges by 650 feet by modifying the geometry of the original design. They also used deck widening, cap extension, and sign pier/beam layout to reduce super structure and sub-structure costs on one of the bridges. DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

The trophy name is: GDOT - Environmental Services Team members: Pam Baughman, GDOT, Project Manager • Dr. Ann McCleary, University of West Georgia Center for Public History • Greg Anderson, City of Cartersville Parks & Recreation • Bryan Tucker, State Archaeologist, Georgia DNR-Historic Preservation Division • Katy Allen, Environmental Team Leader, FHWA • Muscogee (Creek) Nation • Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana • Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas • Thlopthlocco Tribal Town • Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma • United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians

There were signiﬁcant challenges from existing utilities as well. In order to avoid existing utilities, the Archer Western / Heath & Lineback team incorporated: 1) A straddle bent cap with pile footing to avoid an existing sanitary sewer line in Sidney Marcus Blvd. 2) A four-cassion foundation was designed to allow retention of a sanitary sewer line buried deep beneath I-85

The cost savings associated with avoidance of city of Atlanta sewer lines was around $1Million. In all, the project construction came in almost $10 million less than the original estimate. Former mayor of Atlanta and president of the Buckhead Coalition said that “this is an extremely important project for both Buckhead and Atlanta, and there are tremendous beneﬁts that are going to come from it. I think the riding public will be very pleasantly surprised.” The GA 400 / I-85 Connector Ramps project is an outstanding example of superior bridge and structural design that will beneﬁt Atlanta commuters for years to come. The trophy name is: Heath & Lineback Engineers Team members: John Heath and Phil Ravotti GDOT - Loren Bartlett

CATEGORY 6

The Windy Hill Road and Interstate 75 diverging diamond interchange project is a good example of a project that meets the objectives of the traffic safety/intersection design category. Windy Hill Road is a heavily-congested east-west arterial through Cobb County in metro Atlanta. The area around the interchange currently experiences crash rates three times the state average, while injury rates in those crashes are double the state average. Traffic volumes are expected to increase 15 percent in the short term. The Atlanta Braves new stadium and mixed-use development will further increase congestion in the area. The diverging diamond interchange eliminates left turns at traffic signals, and has been shown to be successful at reducing crashes and increasing safety. In this

location, traffic flow is increased with the addition of through lanes, without the need to reconstruct the existing bridge over I-75. The diverging diamond interchange at Windy Hill Road and I-75 is a successful partnership between Cobb County and the Cumberland Community Improvement District. The project will prove to be a cost effective solution to increasing safety and operational efficiency.

Team members: Moreland Altobelli: Buddy Gratton, Brad Hale, Chris Kingsbury, and Joe McGrew Cumberland CID - James Hudgens w/ ARCADIS

With less than standard vertical and horizontal clearances, the bridges were routinely hit and caused bottlenecks on a major north-south corridor in Cobb County. In addition, pedestrians could not travel the area safely due to a lack of facilities and insuﬃcient clearances. The ultimate project solution minimized impacts to adjacent rights of way, maintenance of traﬃc requirements for the roadway and railroad, and railroad operations. Constant coordination, communication, and partnering of the project stakeholders and each partner’s desire to see this critical project come to fruition made this project a success story. Strong GDOT Project Management leadership helped ensure the project ultimately was let on schedule and under budget.

CATEGORY 7

The Canton Road and Georgia Northeastern Railroad over US 41 (Cobb Parkway) project increased safety and mobility for multiple transportation modes in an urban setting. The dense development in the area surrounding this intersection led to a high volume of pedestrian and vehicular traﬃc at this location. The project also corrected substandard and/or functionally obsolete bridges over US 41. Strong coordination among stakeholders was essential to keep the project moving and to ensure that the interest of the various stakeholders were considered and project goals met. The project team streamlined the design process with diligent cooperative input from the Georgia Northeastern Railroad and GDOT.

The trophy name is: moreland Altobelli Inc.

Looking West at the ﬁnished project and showing the roadway and railroad bridges over US 41, the spur and at-grade railroad crossing, and the signalized pedestrian crossing required for the project.

The trophy name is: ARcADIS Team members: Arcadis – Keith Kunst and Shamir Poudel GDOT - PM Kim Nesbit GEORGIA EnGInEER

Bridge over SR 3 was found to be insuﬃcient and the reconstruction of this bridge was added to the project. This led to a complicated phased construction that maintained 75,000 VPD on I-75 and 40,000 VPD on SR 3. The team also performed a Value Engineering Study that resulted in the future lane along I-75 being moved into the existing 44-foot median. This eliminated stream impacts to 15 identiﬁed state waters and wetlands and reduced the linear stream impacts to below the permit threshold. The I-bats survey was completed ahead of the USFWS mandate enabling the project to be constructed on time.

CATEGORY 8

The I-75 Rocky Face interchange is located near Dalton, Georgia. The existing interchange was designed as a partial cloverleaf with a diamond configuration for northbound I-75 movements to SR 3/US 41 and a loop ramp serving I-75 southbound movements. The original design issues were long queues for the I-75 northbound to east SR 3 due to a short ramp with insufficient storage and significant accident history due to high speeds entering the southbound loop ramp. The original concept design called for a barrier separated collector distributor for both northbound and southbound I-75 to move queuing traffic off of I-75 and reduce speeds entering the southbound loop ramp. A new loop ramp was proposed for the northbound to west SR 3 movement

and the addition of a future lane to the outside of both I-75 northbound and southbound. Early in the project design, the I-75

including the completion of all necessary utility coordination and design activities. One key aspect of the phasing plan was a phased Erosion Sediment Pollution Control Plan (ESPCP) and Notice of Intent (NOI)—a first for the department, requiring close coordination with the department and EPD. This practice is now standard in the delivery of Design-Build projects, allowing for schedule savings and earlier open to traffic dates. This particular project was open to traffic nearly one month prior to the contract completion date.

CATEGORY 9

This Design-Build (DB) project constructed an auxiliary lane from Eagles Landing Parkway/Hudson Bridge Road north to I-675 in Henry County. To accommodate the new lane, widening, and future managed lanes, the Walt Stephens Road/Red Oak Road Bridge was replaced. The DB team proposed to move the bridge further north than the RFP provided costing plans to provide separation between it and the existing bridge, thereby reducing the number of construction stages. The overhead utility lines in that area were moved to the south side of bridge and bored beneath the interstate; this required extensive preproposal coordination between the DB team and the aﬀected utility owners. In an eﬀort to get the construction started and meet a tight schedule, the DB team proDEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

The trophy name is: Kimley-Horn & Associates Team Members - Kimley-Horn: Gary Newton,P.E. - Project Director Peter Coakley, P.E. - Project Manager David Stricklin, P.E. - Bridge Design Lead GDOT - Peter Emmanuel Project Manager

posed to phase the project by constructing the interstate portion, which had no utility conﬂicts or right-of-way, ﬁrst. While Phase I was under construction, the DB team worked with the department to get the overpass bridge released for construction,

The trophy name is: moreland Altobelli Inc. Team members: Moreland Altobelli Associates Inc.: Will Sheehan, P.E - Project Manager E.R. Snell Contractor Inc.: Kathy Stansell - Project Manager Billy Franklin – Project Superintendent GDOT - Loren Bartlett – Darryl VanMeter

Atlanta Strtcars 1874-1901

he first operating streetcar in Atlanta was on the West End line of the Atlanta Street Railroad company. George W. Adair and Richard Peters acquired its charter in 1871, after the failure of its previous owners to lay a single rail in the previous two years. The company ran a horse-drawn car on iron rails from Five Points to West End (near where Spellman college now stands) within five months of taking over the company. The West End line coincidentally passed in front of the two owners’ homes. Other lines were completed in 1872 – 1874. In 1874 the Peachtree Street line was extended to what is now Ponce de Leon Avenue and then about a mile east to Ponce de Leon Springs (site of the old Sears building and now being converted to a live-work-play development adjacent to the beltline). unlike most other cases, the streetcar line came first, and Ponce de Leon Avenue followed along its alignment.

GEORGIA EnGInEER

In 1889, Adair sold to Peters, who installed his son Edward C. Peters as General Superintendent. The company had 15 miles of main and leased lines, 50 cars, and 200 horses and mules. The Atlanta Street Railway Company was certainly not the only show in town; it was just the oldest. Between 1872 and 1886, the Georgia General Assembly chartered five other companies, the city of Atlanta awarded them franchises, and they actually built and operated streetcar lines. The Atlanta Street Railroad Company acquired two of them in 1889. An additional six companies were chartered and awarded operating franchises between 1882 and 1888, but they never laid a single rail. Many newly minted street railway companies were less about public transport and more about serving as vehicles for quick profit schemes. The 1880s and early 1890s were a time of unfettered industrialization and capitalism. There were corporate excesses throughout the U.S.: stock manipulation, colluding competitors, monopolies, political bribery, and the absence of any state or federal regulatory structure. It was not until the first of the 20th century that President Teddy Roosevelt began his ‘Trust Busting’ to bring under control the robber barons of the day. In the midst of this business and political setting, two Atlantans stand out as the most influential leaders of the evolving streetcar and electric power industries. Joel Hurt arrived in Atlanta in 1875 as a 25-year old, Alabama-born Civil Engineer with a degree from Franklin College in Athens, Georgia (now the University of Georgia). Hurt was an ambitious, hard-driving entrepreneur. He married Annie Woodruﬀ of Columbus, before her brother, Ernest, became president of the Trust Company of Georgia bank, and before Ernest’s son, Robert became head of the Coca Cola Company. Hurt developed Inman Park, Atlanta’s first suburb, and ran a streetcar to it in 1889 (the Atlanta and Edgewood Street Railroad), which was the first electrified streetcar in Atlanta. The 3.25-mile system was one of the first electrified streetcars in America, and was considered the most financially and technically successful of them. Hurt was the undisputed street railroad magnate of Atlanta for over ten years (1891 – 1901). Like many of his ilk, he was technically and managerially astute and created a very successful business in a new industry, but was unloved by many because they considered him obstinate and highhanded. He is given credit, however, for building the street railway to high technical standards, and his creation was said to be the envy of many American cities of Atlanta’s size. He was highly regarded by his streetcar colleagues throughout the U.S. and served as president of the American Street Railway Association in 1894. On September 21, 1891, Hurt oversaw the merger of five street railway lines into the Atlanta Consolidated Street Railway Company. A sixth line was added in 1892. Fares were five cents. By 1894, Atlanta Consolidated had more than 54

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

miles of operational lines: 44 were electric, 9 had dummy engines,*and one (on Wheat Street) remained mule drawn. The electricity was largely supplied “by a huge dynamo which Hurt built for exactly that purpose,” although some electricity came from the Georgia Electric Light Company, led by Henry M. Atkinson. Henry M. Atkinson was born wealthy of a Boston patrician in 1862 and had a Harvard education. An uncle was a nationally known political economist and strong supporter of Atlanta’s 1881 International Cotton Exposition. He rode with Teddy Roosevelt’s Rough Riders in the Spanish American War. At the urging of this uncle, the 26-year old Atkinson moved to Atlanta in 1888. He soon married May Peters, daughter of Richard Peters, the engineer in charge of building the Georgia Railroad from Augusta to Atlanta in the 1840s. Peters owned hundreds of acres that now encompass much of Georgia Tech and extend East of Peachtree Street. The Georgia Electric Light Company was chartered in 1883 by three Atlanta businessmen (including Edward C. Peters). It obtained a modest contract with the city to provide what amounted to experimental electric street lighting. At the time, the city was a major stockholder in the Atlanta Gas Light Company, and it approached the transition from gas to electric lighting cautiously. In 1891, the company’s original Atlanta investors sold to a group led by Atkinson that had access to Northern money from financial companies and electrical equipment suppliers. In 1891, he also became the

1874 - Streetcar over Clear Creek, near Ponce de Leon and Argonne Avenue

President (and founder) of Southern Banking and Trust Company and was the leader of the Atlanta, West End, and McPherson Barracks Railway. The streetcar company’s name was soon changed to the Atlanta Traction Company, which increased trackage from five miles in 1891 to 25 miles in 1894. Atkinson and Hurt were both of the business and social elite in Atlanta. They had common friends and surely saw each other frequently in an Atlanta with a population of 37,400 in 1880 and 65,500 in 1890. By the mid 1890s, the two men were on a collision course for control of the street railway and electric power systems. The collision became known as the ‘Second Battle of Atlanta’ in both local and national newspapers. At the end of 1891, Joel Hurt was president of a street railway company with electric generation capacity to power most of its streetcars, and Henry Atkinson was president of an electric light company and held interests in a street railway company. Georgia law stipulated that a street railway could “own and operate power plants for commercial purposes beyond their own needs while electric light companies were barred from the operation of streetcar lines.” In brief Hurt was a streetcar operator who needed electric power, and Atkinson was an electric power operator who ran streetcars as a competitive tactic. By the mid-1890s, Hurt had done much damage to his reputation and relationship with city hall and his customers. Two incidents serve as examples. One of Atlanta’s largest and most successful civic endeavors was the 1895 Cotton States and International Exposition. Hurt built a special streetcar line to deliver visitors to the exposition site (now Piedmont Park). Instead of the standard five-cent fare, he charged ten cents. It was considered price gouging and outraged the public and especially Atlanta elites who had worked tirelessly and generously to make the event reflect favorably on their beloved city. Hurt’s name was conspicuously omitted from the lists of committee members in the exposition catalogue. Henry Atkinson was listed as chief of the ‘electricity department’ and a member of the finance committee, which was chaired by Samuel M. Inman, a close friend of Hurt and for whom he named Inman Park. In streets where rails existed, the city required streetcar companies to share in the cost of paving them. Hurt reasoned that by removing the rails, the street paving costs could be avoided, regardless of the inconvenience to customers. In 1896, Hurt ordered the removal of tracks from Capitol Avenue in the middle of the night to avoid what he considered unfair paving requirements. At the time, Capitol Avenue was a very desirable address. Police were called to Capitol Avenue, and they ordered the crew to stop work. After the police left, however, Hurt ordered the crew to continue!

Work was finally stopped when the police returned and confiscated the workers’ tools. By 1897, Hurt’s Atlanta Consolidated Street Railroad Company operated ten routes with 60 miles of rail, which extended beyond the city and into adjacent counties. Three competing companies operated lines with combined trackage of 36 miles, making a total streetcar trackage of at least 102 miles. In 1899, Atkinson and Hurt held secret talks on combining their operations, but they led nowhere. They even flipped a coin to determine who should buy out the other, but their relationship remained rocky. Atkinson sought city approval of new streetcar franchises that would compete directly with Hurt. Hurt changed the name of his Atlanta Consolidated Street Railroad to the Atlanta Railway and Power Company and announced its plans for an ‘up-to-date power plant in central Atlanta,’ including steam heating and air-cooling facilities. Hurt and Atkinson seemed bent on encroaching on the central business interest of the other. By 1899, the Hurt-Atkinson rivalry played out publically in courts, newspapers, city hall, and northern financial centers. An 1899 report by Ford, Bacon & Davis, ‘consulting street railway engineers and experts with oﬃces in New York, Philadelphia and New Orleans,’ assessed Atlanta’s transit system in support of Atkinson’s petition to the city for new franchises. The Atlanta Consolidated Street Railroad Company had 93.4 miles of single track equivalent (composed of 14.3 miles of double track and 79.1 miles of single track). Most lines had 15-minute headways, some as low as five minutes and some as high as 30 minutes. In New York, some downtown streetcars had 15-second headways, and in New Orleans on Canal Street headways were as low as 30 seconds. Atkinson hired the firm to assess Hurt’s operation, so it was no surprise that they concluded, “ . . . the present service is little short of ridiculous.” The Second Battle of Atlanta continued unabated until 1901 when Hurt finally agreed to sell his streetcar and power interests to Atkinson. The successor company that emerged from the combination was the Georgia Railway and Electric Company in 1902. It included the streetcar (with 138 miles of track**), electric light, steam, and (later) gas light companies. The complete monopoly of public utilities in Atlanta was finally achieved (except the cityowned waterworks). This structure remained until the 1940s when the federal Security and Exchange Commission ordered Georgia Power Company to divest itself of gas and transportation interests. v

*Smaller version of a railroad locomotive that was much disliked because it belched smoke and was noisy. **MARTA has 48.1 miles of heavy rail and the Atlanta Streetcar has 2.9 miles of light rail. NOTE: The source of most of this material is Mules to MARTA, Volume I, Jean Martin, 1975, and quotations are from it. Atlanta’s experience follows closely nationwide trends during this time as described in Mass Motorization + Mass Transit, David W. Jones, 2008. 16

GEORGIA EnGInEER

MAINTAINING FOR SUCCESS: considerations for green infrastructure operations & maintenance | part two By Daniel Wible, PE | Water Resources Engineer | CH2M HILL & Susan McDaniels, LEED AP | Water Resources Engineer | CH2M HILL The first part of this article left off discussing O & M procedures and guidelines among GI practices by organizing them into major maintenance areas or functions that will apply to most GI system types. Part 2 of the article will continue that discussion briefly and finish by discussing economic factors such as estimated O & M costs, including financing strategies which support the funding of O & M programs for GI. Typical Operations & maintenance Recommendations for various GI Technologies, continued… Inlet & Outlet Control Device Maintenance Inlet and outlet control devices generally require routine inspection and cleaning. However, their maintenance procedures should be familiar to most maintenance staﬀ responsible for traditional stormwater systems. Typically, these structures

Street inlets connected to GI systems are maintained using familiar tools such as vacuum trucks that are already employed for standard inlet cleaning. DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

should be inspected at least two times per year and in some cases following major storm events. They should be periodically cleaned to remove sediment, trash, and other debris, particularly when they include sumps or inserts for pretreatment of runoff. Maintenance of inlet and outlet strucutres helps to prevent flow restrictions and can be combined with systemwide inspections or with routine street inlet maintenance that may already be a standard part of community maintenance programs. vegetation Vegetation maintenance can vary considerably among different GI practices and is highly dependent on system visibility and planting palette. Typically, planting systems located in highly visible urban and park environments and those with complex planting palettes will be more maintenance-intensive than those that are designed to function as ‘naturalized’ systems in less traveled areas. Typical routine maintenance activities for vegetated systems include: inspection/observations and trash removal, annual mulching/pruning in more visible or intensively planted systems, routine weeding during the growing season and especially during the establishment period, and plant replacement and irrigation during drought periods. Permeable Pavements and Pavers Permeable pavement maintenance is critical for ensuring the long term porosity of the pavement surface and varies depending on the type of surface material installed. Routine maintenance for permeable asphalt and concrete primarily requires that the pavement surface be vacuum swept biannually at a minimum, although more frequent vacuuming may

be required when there is high exposure to debris, sediment, or leaf litter. Permeable pavers should be vacuumed less often to remove debris accumulations without impacting gravel joints typical of most paver varieties. cold Weather considerations Cold weather and associated deicing activities such as plowing and application of deicers (e.g. salts), must be considered during the design phase in order to help mitigate or altogether prevent these activities from reducing the long term performance of GI systems. Often, vegetated GI systems are located adjacent to roadways and parking areas and are used as stockpile areas for plowed snow and as a result can receive particularly heavy salt loadings. Thoughtful design decisions, such as establishing alternative, designated stockpile areas, can help alleviate such cold weather-related concerns. Indeed, such careful design practices, as well as proper plant species selection, has yielded successful GI implementations in various northwest climates exposed to consistently heavy snowfall. On the operations side, maintenance staﬀ are encouraged to consider changes to their typical cold weather protocols, such as using more environmentally benign deicers and adjusting plow blade heights on permeable pavements, in order to minimize negative impacts on GI systems. Operations & maintenance Tasks and Frequencies Many O&M tasks, such as structure inspection and cleaning, are common across the spectrum of GI technologies. However, as one might suspect, some tasks are very speciﬁc to the type of GI system being 17

maintained. In most cases, the frequency of scheduled routine maintenance tasks, such as structure inspection and cleaning, is one to two times per year. Most maintenance activities and frequencies will also vary seasonally, particularly for vegetated surface systems, which typically require more frequent care during the growing season. Table 1 summarizes the recommended O&M tasks and frequencies for seven common GI practices and/or components. Paying for GI Operation and maintenance One of the biggest barriers to GI is the perceived long term cost of implementing a GI maintenance program. However, there are various examples of large-scale GI programs where maintenance has been successfully undertaken on a large variety of GI types and projects, and where the business case for such implementation has been proven beneﬁcial. One such example is in Onondaga County, New York, where implementation of an ambitious GI program (‘Save the Rain’) has also meant rapid deployment of an equally ambitious GI maintenance program. To date, the Save the Rain program has successfully implemented approximately 170 GI projects in streets, parks, schools, libraries, parking lots, and numerous other settings. The program has employed a wide variety of GI technologies, including bioretention, green roofs, and permeable pavements, at varying scales, in order to reduce stormwater

runoff inflows to combined sewers by over 100 million gallons annually. Onondaga County’s maintenance program has been funded through a combination of strategies, including: integration of GI maintenance into the existing infrastructure maintenance regime and CMMS tracking system, utilization of large-scale maintenance contracts which create jobs and healthy market competition, community partnerships to provide low-cost maintenance while providing entry-level jobs and job training, and establishment of incentive programs to offset costs through private implementation of GI and its associated maintenance. Since 2010, Onondaga County’s GI program has been both an environmental and political success story due in large part to its effective maintenance efforts. For more information on this program, please visit:savetherain.us/greenprograms/green infrastructure/maintenance/. The business case for GI maintenance becomes most apparent when looking at the incremental costs of GI maintenance activities compared to those associated with conventional infrastructure or landscape maintenance. In addition, when one considers the multiple benefits of GI over conventional stormwater management, the business case for GI appears even more favorable. For example, the ancillary benefits of GI, such as increased property values, economic stimulus through the creation of new permanent jobs, community enhancement through increased green space, and water quality and other

environmental benefits, far outweigh the benefits of traditional stormwater management. As discussed below, there are various ways to pay for the costs associated with GI maintenance, including community partnerships, novel financing opportunities, and implementation of stormwater utilities. Funding mechanisms Funding mechanisms for stormwater management, whether conventional or GI, and its associated maintenance continue to be a challenge for many communities, especially when competition for such funding is stacked against budgets for schools, libraries, and police departments. While bonds can be used to fund stormwater maintenance, this funding must be repaid over time and as such it can contribute to the community’s overall tax burden. In order to compensate for these challenges and to provide an equitable method of stormwater cost distribution that is linked to impact, many communities are implementing stormwater utility fees. Stormwater utilities can provide dedicated funding for the long term maintenance of stormwater systems and in effect ensure the long term performance of GI and other stormwater systems. They also pair well with crediting programs that can be used to incentivize private investment in GI and its maintenance. Other alternative funding mechanisms include innovative financing options such as public-private partnerships (PPPs),

Table 1 - Routine and non-Routine maintenance Tasks and Frequencies 18

GEORGIA EnGInEER

beneficiary opportunity funds, infrastructure improvement districts, and clean water funds. Partnerships with community groups, such as youth work training programs, can provide economic benefits to the community by providing long term and permanent jobs. Factors Influencing maintenance costs The factors influencing maintenance costs are often based on the type of GI technology, with vegetated systems, such as curb extensions or planters, typically having higher maintenance costs than non-vegetated systems. That being said, maintenance costs among similar GI technologies are largely based on system size, design complexity, location, and public visibility. More frequent and intense maintenance requirements obviously lead to increases in cost. For example, maintenance cost will be higher for a system of permeable pavers and stormwater planters in an urban plaza verses permeable asphalt with bioswales in a community parking lot. While both have similar systems and traf-

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

This award winning GI project in Lancaster, PA provides traffic calming and increases pedestrian safety at a busy intersection while creating an outdoor seating area for the adjacent restaurant. The restaurant’s owner partnered with the city and is partially responsible for the maintenance of the new GI systems. ﬁc uses associated with them, the urban often systems that become community asplaza will likely require more frequent sets and maintenance costs can be incormaintenance since it is more heavily used porated into maintenance budgets which by pedestrians that spend longer amounts already exist. Other factors that may inﬂuence GI of time in the space, increasing the sysmaintenance costs relate to the policy and tem’s visibility and required maintenance. Although more complex and visible GI sys- political factors associated with a particutems require more maintenance, they are lar GI program. In a larger program, where

larger scale maintenance contracts can be implemented (for permeable pavements, for example), there are economies of scale that may help reduce costs. In a community where there is wide public support and the ability to partner with local community institutions and organizations such as schools, park preservation groups, or environmental organizations, there may be an opportunity to oﬀset costs through the use of low-cost or volunteer labor. Although the concept of conducting and paying for the maintenance of numerous new GI systems can be daunting, it is important to note that many of the maintenance activities associated with GI systems are already conducted as part of conventional maintenance programs. For example, regular clean up, weeding, irrigation, mulching, and pruning is already a part of most urban landscape maintenance programs in public and private spaces. Street sweeping programs are widely used in the regular maintenance regime of standard pavements in many communities and could be expanded to include permeable systems. Mowing lawns in and around detention basins and other conventional stormwater systems and inlet/outlet structure cleaning is already being performed by city maintenance crews and private property management groups. The fact is that the maintenance associated with many ‘naturalized’ GI systems (e.g. inﬁltration basins or bioretention in a meadow or wooded area) and other landscape restoration practices can be relatively easily integrated into existing maintenance programs and in some cases can even reduce existing maintenance activities and costs. Examples include a reduced need for mowing and fertilization due to conversions from lawn to native landscapes or a reduction in the need for deicers as permeable pavements sometimes experience less surface icing. Typical GI maintenance costs Comprehensive data on the potential maintenance costs associated with GI is fairly limited but has been documented by some, including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Center for Watershed 20

Protection, and the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), which developed an LID cost tool in 2009. Review of that information reveals a relatively high level of cost variability due to the fact that GI maintenance costs can and will differ based on the numerous factors described above. A survey of communities that are implementing GI programs throughout the United States indicates that annual O&M budgets for these programs can range from approximately $250,000 to over $1 Million. Budgets are directly dependent upon the number of installed facilities, the age of the program, and the number of additional facilities planned. The following chart (Figure 1) of annual maintenance cost ranges for GI projects implemented by the City of Lancaster, PA clearly illustrates the variability in maintenance costs for common GI technologies. The costs (2014 dollars) are based on both ‘low’ and ‘high’ routine maintenance regimes for these GI technologies and their associated labor and material replacement costs. Low and high routine maintenance costs are a function of the assumed complexity of the GI system and exemplify the range of costs that could be associated with a particular GI practice. The chart shows that on average, vegetated systems such as bioretention and tree trenches have higher annual maintenance costs per square foot than non-vegetated and subsurface systems such as inﬁltration trenches or permeable pavements. The obvious conclusion is that

less visibility often translates into reduced costs, at least when comparing costs on the basis of dollars per unit area of GI. However, as illustrated in Figure 2, when typical O&M costs are applied to typical maximum impervious drainage areas for the same GI technologies, the results change. Suddenly, seemingly less cost-effective technologies, from an O&M standpoint, like bioretention, appear more cost-effective since they can accept runoff from more impervious area per square foot of system area than, say, permeable pavements. Indeed, Figure 2 reveals that bioretention and tree trenches, which are typically more resilient to rapid clogging, are just as cost-effective to maintain on an area managed basis as most subsurface systems and are almost two times less expensive than green roofs. Green roofs, which are typically limited to managing direct rainfall and potentially some adjacent roof areas, are shown to have higher maintenance costs per acre of managed area than all other systems. Such insights can help program managers evaluate the cost effectiveness of various GI technologies in the long term; in other words, they can help determine which systems can be deployed to maximize runoff capture while reducing both capital and long term O&M costs. Comparing the costs of GI O&M with conventional drainage practices or landscape improvements has generally proven problematic due to both the lack of data and the inherent challenge of an equitable

Figure 1 – Typical Annual maintenance cost Range for GI (cost per SF of GI area) GEORGIA EnGInEER

7. Conduct ‘gap’ analysis of O&M requirements (i.e. what you are doing now and what needs to change) 8. Educate and train maintenance staff 9. Construct GI projects according to best erosion and sediment control practices 10.Monitor and track effectiveness of O&M efforts over time

Figure 2 – Typical Annual maintenance cost Range for GI (cost per SF of impervious area managed) comparison (i.e. comparing ‘apples to apples’). For example, in order to understand the O&M cost ‘delta’ associated with maintaining bioretention, the question of what does the bioretention replace must be answered. Does the bioretention replace turf grass? Or densely vegetated public gardens? Or pavement? And how ‘complex’ will the bioretention design be? Is the project a retrofit or is it required to achieve regulatory compliance for stormwater management? In 2007, an EPA-funded modeling study on the benefits of trees and green roofs in Washington, D.C. concluded that annual savings of $1.4 to $5.1 million in grey infrastructure maintenance costs could be realized depending on the level of GI implemented. Similarly, in its 2013 report, “Staying Green: Strategies to Improve Operations and Maintenance of Green Infrastructure in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed,” American Rivers presented several case studies comparing green and grey infrastructure O&M costs. The report ultimately concluded that “maintenance for properly designed and appropriately selected GI practices can be less costly than conventional stormwater infrastructure,” but that “more research is needed.” Furthermore, “better tracking of maintenance costs for GI combined with increased research will provide a strong foundation for local governments to make informed choices about their options for cost-effective stormwater management.” DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

conclusions Beyond the obvious environmental benefits, GI is capable of improving communities, benefitting economies, educating the public, and creating more resilient places for people to live and work. However, when politicians or community leaders or even the design community sells the idea of GI implementation to their respective communities, they must also sell the idea of maintaining that GI, of keeping the green. In other words, selling GI implementation is the same as selling 20 or 30 or 40 years of dedicated, effective, and consistent O&M. Without such a ‘sale’ to the public and to stakeholders, successful GI implementation is impossible. Fortunately, as described above, there are numerous tools, strategies, and lessons learned from other communities available to help decision-makers overcome their ‘GI anxiety’ and implement successful programs. In general, the 10 most important considerations for successfully maintaining GI systems are as follows: 1. Commit to implement and maintain GI 2. Identify funding sources for GI implementation and O&M 3. Gain community endorsement 4. Plan and design GI projects for minimal and/or effective maintenance 5. Develop GI standard operating procedures, inspection forms, and related documentation 6. Identify responsible agents for various O&M practices

At the most basic level, both big and small communities interested in such success should consider what they are already doing for maintenance and then determine how to most eﬀectively bridge the gap to full-scale GI maintenance. v References The Green Build-out Model: Quantifying the Stormwater Management Benefits of Trees and Green Roofs in Washington, DC, Casey Trees and LimnoTech, 2007. The Importance of Operation and Maintenance for the Long-Term Success of Green Infrastructure, US EPA. 2013. http://water.epa.gov/grants_funding/cwsrf/upload/Green-Infrastructure-OM-Report.pdf Kinter, Mark. Maintenance and Restoration of Porous Pavement Surfaces White Paper. Elgin Sweeper Company. NC State University Cooperative Extension BMP Inspection & Maintenance Certification. http://www.bae.ncsu.edu/topic/bmpim/overview .html Staying Green: Strategies to Improve Operations and Maintenance of Green Infrastructure in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, American Rivers. 2013. Staying Green and Growing Jobs: Green Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance as Career Pathway Stepping Stones, American Rivers. 2013. Stormwater BMP Maintenance. Chesapeake Stormwater Network. http://chesapeakestormwater.net/training-library/designadaptations/stormwater-bmp-maintenance/ Users Guide to the BMP and LID Whole Life Cost Models, Version 2.0. Water Environment Research Foundation. 2009. 21

Georgia’s stormwater management manual: helping to protect water quality in Georgia By Chris Faulkner | Senior Planner | Atlanta Regional Commission

he 1972 Clean Water Act was an important step toward addressing many of the water quality issues in the United States. Focused primarily on point source discharges, it made great strides in cleaning up waterways that were historically the primary source of water pollution. In 1987, Congress passed amendments to the Clean Water Act that provided additional regulatory controls over nonpoint source pollution, focusing primarily on stormwater runoff. With these amendments came new regulations, affecting many Georgia municipalities. In 1990, regulations addressing stormwater runoff from large municipal areas (population over 100,000 people) (Phase I) were implemented, and in 1999, regulations were expanded to smaller municipalities (Phase II) . These regulations necessitated new tools to facilitate compliance among local governments. In response, the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC) secured funding from the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GAEPD) in 1998 to coordinate the development of a stormwater management guidance tool. In 2001, the first Georgia Stormwater Management Manual (GSMM) was completed. Consisting of two volumes, the GSMM was one of the first statewide stormwater manuals in the country. Volume 1 (the Policy Guidebook) was intended to provide baseline knowledge of stormwater management to local governments attempting to setup stormwater programs. It was also intended to provide a degree of consistency between each local government with a stormwater permit. Volume 1 contains general information on stormwater issues, regulatory requirements, stormwater planning, and implementing operations and mainte22

An example of green infrastructure at Rock Mill Park, Alpharetta, Georgia nance programs. Volume 2 (the Technical Handbook) was, and is, the heart of the GSMM. Containing all the engineering information for designing and building stormwater best management practices (BMPs), Volume 2 focuses on reducing total suspended solids (TSS) by 80 percent from up to the ﬁrst 1.2” of any given storm event. This approach reﬂected the rules and permit language at the time by focusing on stormwater quality as opposed to the current focus on stormwater quantity. Volume 2 also contains extensive information on drainage design as well as supporting information on topics like soils and rainfall curves. In 2009, the Coastal Stormwater Supplement (CSS) was developed in response to the unique conditions within Georgia’s coastal area. This addition to the GSMM marked a shift in stormwater management in Georgia by focusing on infiltration of stormwater as the primary goal with 80 percent TSS reduction being the fall back where infiltration is not pos-

sible. This is also the first manual in Georgia that discussed and referred to the now ubiquitous term of green infrastructure (GI). It is interesting to note that several of the BMPs in Volume 2 of the GSMM are the same BMPs that are now regarded as GI, such as vegetated swales and pervious paving. The CSS also emphasized conserving as much undisturbed area on site as possible to better mimic pre-development hydrology. Volume 3 is the most recent addition to the GSMM. Completed in 2012, Volume 3 serves as the ‘Good Housekeeping Guide.’ It contains helpful practices to prevent potential stormwater pollution. Practices cover a range of topics such as vehicle washes, hazardous chemicals, tool and equipment cleaning, and outdoor manufacturing operations. Volume 3 was aimed at not only municipal stormwater permit holders, but also construction and industrial permit holders. Given the relative newness and focus of Volume 3, it will not be addressed in the update process. GEORGIA EnGInEER

GSmm version 2.0 The original GSMM was an innovative tool for managing stormwater. It has been valuable for engineers, designers, landscape architects, and many other practitioners from all sectors. However, like most nearly 15-year-old tools, it is in need of an update. Slated for completion in the fall of 2015, GSMM 2.0 (as we are calling it for now) will provide necessary updates to Georgia’s primary stormwater management tool. First and foremost, GSMM 2.0 will not be a rigid, prescriptive document. Flexibility will be a key feature of the updated manual to provide maximum usability for anyone who manages stormwater. This will be achieved largely through an integrated approach, meaning BMPs will be able to address either the 80 percent TSS approach or the infiltration/volume approach. An integrated approach recognizes that different local governments and other users have different needs in terms of stormwater management. Having an integrated approach will also allow for users to adapt their approach to stormwater management over time without the need for a different manual. GSMM 2.0 will also include complete updates to Volume 1 and Volume 2. Revision of Volume 1 will include looking at and updating existing sections, removing sections no longer needed, and adding sections that provide more information to local decision makers and other users. Some of the key features of the new Volume 1 will be: • High level cost / benefit analysis of stormwater management; • Case studies of stormwater management; • More discussion on financing options; and • Improved information on operations and maintenance It is expected that putting this kind of information into the hands of decision makers and other stakeholders will result in more informed decisions regarding stormwater management. Updates to Volume 2 will include reviewing existing BMPs in both the existing DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

Gainesville installed an infiltration trench to address stormwater runoff from a road adjacent to their stream restoration of Flat Creek, a tributary to Lake Lanier. Volume 2 and the CSS to determine which are still relevant and what specific information requirements each has. In doing this, the project team will not be adding an abundance of new material, but will instead focus on providing information on each BMP that is useful and has been proven effective. Updates will also incorporate the previously mentioned integrated approach to each BMP. Examples of additional information for inclusion are: • Regional considerations / geographic appropriateness; • Improved soils information; • New development versus redevelopment considerations; • Treatment trains; and • Special requirements for use The updated Volume 2 will also incorporate GI; however, GSMM 2.0 will not just be a GI manual. Again, in an effort to provide maximum flexibility, GSMM 2.0 will also include many of the traditional BMPs users are familiar with. This will help increase the usability and flexibility of the manual. While the updated GSMM 2.0 will not be able to address all situations and conditions, it is expected to build upon the success of the original GSMM and enhance Georgia’s primary tool for

stormwater management. A great team has been assembled to ensure the above statement comes to fruition. The project team, being managed by ARC, consists of: • URS Corporation (Lead Firm); • Center for Watershed Protection; • Hussey, Gay, Bell, & DeYoung; • Center Forward; and • Mendel Designs In addition to the consultant team, a Technical Advisory Group (TAG) has been formed to provide user input and feedback. The TAG consists of representatives from local governments of different sizes within Georgia, state and federal government officials, industry groups, and nonprofits. To ensure maximum feedback, there will also be two larger stakeholder review periods to collect comments from an even wider range of users. Overall, this project promises to provide Georgia with an enhanced stormwater management tool that will ensure that we, as a state, continue to be at the forefront of managing our stormwater. By providing flexibility, enhanced information, and innovation, we hope users will find GSMM 2.0 to be an effective tool for better managing stormwater state-wide. v 23

The crooked yardstick - redefining success By Gerry Sandusky ake inventory of your successes. What comes to mind? The title of your position in your company? How much money you make? The value of your home? An award you won? If you had to measure your success, would you place yourself in the top ten percent? Top ﬁve percent? Did your company or your team meet this quarter’s sales goals? Regardless of which success percentile you stand in, does the nagging sensation that something isn’t quite right tug at you? you’re not alone.

A recent Harris poll shows a downward trend in happiness in America. Only thirty-five percent of Americans say they’re happy—two percent fewer than five years ago. A Gallup poll taken last year shows only thirteen percent of employees in the world feel engaged and invested in their jobs. Abraham Lincoln had a keen insight into happiness. He said, “I reckon most people are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.” The same can be said of success. Ruth McClain, a talented seamstress who grew up an orphan in Philadelphia, used to lose track of time standing at the metal racks in fabric stores that held wooden yardsticks. To the casual observer, they all looked the same. Not to Ruth McClain. She examined them, observing a curve in one, a bow in another, a nick in another.

Asked about her fixation with the yardsticks, she explained once, “If you measure garments with a crooked yardstick, the garment will look right when you finish making it. It will come out the right size, but the person who wears it will feel like something isn’t quite right. They won’t know what it is, but they’ll feel it. When you measure with a crooked yardstick the finished product never feels quite right.” Goals and benchmarks others set for us create a similar effect as measuring garments with a crooked yardstick, because, even if you hit the benchmarks, something still won’t feel quite right. Eventually, like running into the wind, that feeling will fatigue you, overwhelm you—burn you out. Sales goals, income levels, and possessions never fully satisfy us when someone else sets them as a standard of success. Who said you had to become a multi-millionaire, or that your company had to grow by seven percent a year? That the unemployment rate had to go down? If it wasn’t you, then stop using those data points as

measurements! They’re crooked yardsticks. Sure, they reflect something, but they may not reflect what matters to you. Here are four questions that will help straighten out your yardstick: 1. Who are you? Not just your name or your logo but your essence. What are the essential things you want people to remember about you or your organization long after you’re gone? What do you stand for? What really matters? What makes you feel special and fulfilled? 2. Where are you, and how long have you been there? That’s your present and your past. Know it and honor it. Make peace with it. Now stop letting it limit you. It’s just your starting point for the future. To get accurate directions you need to know a starting point and an ending point. Your starting point doesn’t define you.

GEORGIA EnGInEER

3. Where are you going? A lot of people and organizations can’t answer this. Stop until you can. If you don’t know where you want to go, how will you know if you’re on course or off course? You won’t. Instead, you’ll fall for the trap of using goals and measurements set by other people to define your success. Imagine outcomes that feel true, authentic, that feel like wearing a perfect fitting jacket while you walk through the woods on a chilly, fall afternoon. There’s no one else around to see you in that jacket. Just you. Does it feel tailored for your body, warm, just enough to keep you comfortable with your hands tucked into the pockets but not too much to bog you down? Someone made that jacket using a straight yardstick! That’s what success feels like. It can look like a thousand different things. That’s your choice. But make sure your vision of it feels right.

Answer those questions honestly at an individual level and you will quiet the noise caused by exterior expectations or crooked yardsticks. Answer them at a company or organization level and you will unleash purpose and commitment beyond anything you have experienced before because these answers come from a place deeper than the bottom line. Ruth McClain had fewer than five hundred dollars in her checking account when she died at the young age of fifty-eight, but she died happy and she died fulfilled. She died knowing she had given the world something the world didn’t give her: the gift of a mother. She raised a good family, loved her husband and five children. She died knowing the shirts and blouses, the dresses and the drapes she made brought beauty and joy to the lives of others. And she died knowing her life, like those garments, was measured using a yardstick she carefully selected. By many measurements—income, as-

sets, fame, power—Ruth McClain’s life may not look like much of a success, but by her measurement it was as true as a perfect yardstick; a yardstick I keep to this day to remind me of her—my mom—a genuinely happy, successful person. Choose your yardstick carefully. Your success and happiness depend on it. v

4. How will you get there? Probably the same way Ruth McClain did: measuring everything with a straight yardstick. You will remain the product of a crooked yardstick until you have the courage to define success on your terms and measure it only by your terms. No matter how good everything looks, it won’t feel quite right, and achieving more won’t change that.

Gerry Sandusky is the play-by-play voice of the Baltimore Ravens, and a speaker, corporate trainer, and author of The New York Times bestseller, Forgotten Sundays. He is the recipient of two regional Edward R. Murrow and Emmy Awards for his accomplishments in broadcast journalism. Gerry’s energetic and insightful presentations will impart the value of effective leadership techniques and communication on your audience. For more information on Gerry, please visit www.GerrySandusky.com. DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

2014 Intelligent Transportation Society of Georgia’s Best of ITS Award Winners ach year the Intelligent Transportation Society of Georgia recognizes people and projects that exemplify the highest level of achievement in intelligent transportation. In 2014, two projects and two people were singled out for their innovation and achievements.

Project of Significance Award - A project, study, or program undertaken in the previous twelve (12) months with an impact that is quantifiable and directly related to a specific activity/action that reduces congestion, improves safety and security, and enhances mobility in Georgia. Winner: – I-75 South Express Lanes Project - Georgia Department of Transportation and State Road and Tollway Authority. Contractor: C W Matthews, Designer: ARCADIS. I-75 Express Lane Project will add optional reversible tolled lanes for 12 miles along I-75 south of Atlanta, in Henry and Clayton Counties from SR 155 to SR 138. Access to the reversible lanes system will be facilitated by an automated gate system.

ITS President Tom Sever (right) congratulates David Smith winner of the Outstanding Volunteer Award. 26

Traffic in both express lanes and general purpose lanes will be monitored by expanded Georgia Department of Transportation’s NaviGator ITS System. The lanes will be managed by a variable priced tolling system, and drivers will use a Peach Pass to access the lanes. The benefit: The I-75 Express lanes will provide motorists in the corridor with expanded choice and a valuable option for a reliable trip regardless of traffic conditions in the general purpose lanes. The I-75 Express lanes are anticipated to provide an average of ten minutes in travel time savings for users. The Significance: This project is the first such project implemented under the state of Georgia’s policy that any new capacity on Metro Atlanta’s freeway system will be managed. The full electronic tolling feature of the project provides a means to maintain optimal usage and reliable travel time, and therefore, better mobility and accessibility in the corridor. This express lane system is also the first reversible lanes system in Georgia that utilizes automated gates and associated changeable message signs, toll

rate signs, and traffic signals to manage the operations. Innovation: Outside the Box Award – Creative and unique approach or solution by an individual or group to an ITS challenge, or to an issue using ITS as a solution during the previous twelve (12) months. Winner: Variable Speed Limits on I-285 - Georgia Department of Transportation. Contractor: Brooks-Berry-Haynie, Designer: ATKINS, Software: Delcan, Maintenance Support: Serco. The Georgia DOT continues to look for innovative technologies to deal with the ever-increasing traffic on metro Atlanta freeways. A concept proposed by Commissioner Keith Golden has allowed for an increased speed limit on I-285 south of I20 and implementation of a Variable Speed Limit (VSL) system on I-285 north of I20. During times of lighter traffic, this VSL system will allow drivers on this segment of I-285 to enjoy the same 65 mph speed limit that drivers south of I-20 have. However, during times of increasing congestion, the VSL system will display reduced speed limits in ten-mph increments (to a minimum of 35 mph) to slow traffic

Ashlyn Morgan, Whitley Nottage, Bill Gunter and Mark Demidovich receive the 2014 Innovation award from ITS Georgia President Tom Sever (second from right). GEORGIA EnGInEER

Grant Waldrop (left) winner of the Larry R. Dreihaup Award with ITS Georgia President Tom Sever. as it enters a congested area. This VSL system was deployed as a design-build project; the design-build team was led by Brooks-Berry-Haynie with Atkins as the designer. It features a combination of wireline and wireless communications to the 176 VSLs, most of which are solar powered. The VSL are controlled by GDOT’s Navigator II system from the TMC in Grant Park. Larry R. Dreihaup Award – The ITS Georgia Larry R. Dreihaup Award recognizes an individual or an organization who has provided leadership, professionalism, and

dedication in promoting ITS in the state of Georgia during the previous 12 months. Winner: Grant Waldrop, P.E., Georgia Department of Transportation. Grant has served in many roles at ITS Georgia and most recently as board member. He is a dedicated individual that works tirelessly on any initiative that advances ITS and Operations and Maintenance. He led the charge on behalf of ITS Georgia in organizing a very successful and visible ITS 3C Conference along with Gulf Regional ITS and ITS Florida. His efforts at GDOT have garnered attention and respect for Traffic Signal Operation and Maintenance projects by GDOT management and decision makers regionally. Through these efforts, he has propelled the department’s disjointed signal programs into an award winning nationally recognized regional arterial management program. Throughout his career, Grant has strived to improve how ITS is done in Georgia, be it through his mark on the specifications or management of the largest region-wide arterial management program in the southeast. Grant serves as mentor to his colleagues and ITS Georgia membership and has acted as champion for ITS and ICM during a time of transition at the state’s leading ITS agency. Recently, Grant agreed to represent ITS Georgia in securing the Complete Street Symposium, which will be last of the

series. He is a professional in every aspect and a great ambassador of ITS GA. Outstanding volunteer Award - Open to all membership, including Board members and Committee Chairs, who have gone above and beyond to support ITS Georgia during the previous twelve (12) months. Winner: David A. Smith, P.E., Sunbelt Traffic, LLC While serving as a board member, David has assumed several leadership and volunteer roles within ITS Georgia. He helped organize the out of town technical workshop in Columbia County in May 2013, which drew close to 50 participants. He arranged for some of our monthly meeting speakers in 2013, including Greg Najjar, Sprint Networks ( July 2013) and Phil Spicer, Norfolk Southern (October 2013). When the board was looking for a new meeting facility for 2014, David researched various facilities and provided the board with several options. He made full arrangements for us to meet at Petite Auberge Restaurant in February 2014. David is constantly volunteering his time to assist with chapter activities and initiatives, including working with Xuewen Le this year as the board manager for the activities committee. He has gone beyond the call of duty to be worthy of the 2014 Outstanding Volunteer Award. v

ITS Georgia President Tom Sever (second from right) presents the 2014 Project of Significance Award to Bill Gunter, Shubhendu Mohanty, Matt Glasser, Mark Demidovich, Xuewen Le. DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

GEORGIA

ENGINEERING NEWS

EPA P3 Grant for SPSu A team of SPSU students (known as the Sun-Seekers) led by Dr. Bill Diong (Electrical Engineering), Dr. Kevin McFall (Mechatronics Engineering), and Prof. Scott Tippens (Electrical Engineering Technology), has recently been funded by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a new type of solar panel. As part of the EPA’s P3—people, prosperity, and the planet —Phase I program, the team is designing a panel containing sun-tracking cells rotated by a small motor, which can increase daily solar energy capture by at least 25 percent compared to non-tracking solar panels. This team follows in the footsteps of a previous team (see photo below) that developed a version of this panel where the sun-tracking cells were rotated by bimetallic coils—like those found in outdoor thermometers and older thermostats. That panel increased daily solar energy capture by about ten percent. To see it ‘in action’during lab testing, view the video at http://podcasting.gcsu.edu/ 4DCGI/Podcasting/spsu/Episodes/1042 7/486822636.mp4 .v

2013 SPSU Sun-Seekers team: (l-r) Manoj Chaulagain, Alex Daly, Pedro Guevarra, and Teshaun Francis

AuTHOR’S ERRATum We have been informed by ABET that in our enthusiasm we shared too many details relating to our recent ABET visit and accreditation ﬁndings. (Georgia Engineer Volume 21, Issue 5, October | November 2014) by Lance Crimm. The paragraph on page 13 starting with, “Despite the unrest and uncertainty on campus...” until the paragraph’s end violates ABET policy and should be disregarded. We apologize for this oversight. When ABET awards accreditation to a program, the accreditation action indicates only the nature of the next review and is not an indicator of the program’s quality. ~ omas R. Currin, PH.D., P.E., Dean, School of Engineering, SPSU 28

GEORGIA EnGInEER

ITS Georgia chapter Supports through Wayne Shackelford Engineering Scholarship Program The ITS Georgia chapter supports student involvement in the engineering profession and hopes to encourage future Georgia ITS Engineers through the Wayne Shackelford Engineering Scholarship Program. Our 2014 winner of the sixth annual ITS Georgia Wayne Shackelford Engineering Scholarship is Simon Berrebi, a doctoral candidate at Georgia Tech who developed a method that uses real-time information to control buses on a high-frequency routeâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;a technology he hopes to commercialize upon graduation. The question answered by this yearâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s applicants was: What are the top benefits and challenges of implementing autonomous vehicles in metro Atlanta? below is the winning abstract. Recent advancements in sensing and tracking technologies allow shifting the control of vehicles from the driver to the vehicle itself. The paradigm of autonomous vehicle is an old dream: it was presented as the vision for the 1950s at the New York 1939 Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fair. Later, cars came equipped with air bags that automatically detected crashes, and now with automatic-braking systems that avoid collisions. Several companies have started working on prototypes that could operate without a human in the car, and have completed successful tests on the highway network. There is a wide consensus among transportation experts that vehicles in the future will carry out an increasing number of driving tasks. However, it is still unclear what level of autonomation they will achieve in the next ten to thirty years. As technology continually improves, several questions regarding the impact of autonomous vehicles on the transportation eco-system must be addressed. This paper presents some of the main benefits and challenges of implementing autonomous vehicles in metro Atlanta, Georgia. The transportation network is already facing serious challenges in congestion mitigation, safety, infrastructure funding etc. AuDEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

ITS Georgia President Tom Sever (left), congratulates Simon Berrebi, winner of the 2014 Wayne Shackelford Scholarship Winner. tonomous vehicles will relieve some of these issues and aggravate others, while carrying challenges of their own. Many of the transportation challenges facing the metro Atlanta transportation system are caused by human behavior and characteristics. Human drivers take longer than computers to react to changing conditions and to unexpected events, so they drive more slowly and dangerously, while consuming more fuel and space. In addition, many people do not have access to personal mobility because of physical disabilities, visual impairment, or age, and this trend will likely increase with the raising life expectancy. By contrast to human drivers, autonomous vehicles can be programmed to react effectively to changes in their surrounding conditions. Recent prototypes of autonomous vehicles were tested on the highway with a visually impaired passenger, and were found to perform better than human drivers. One of the main benefits of implementing autonomous vehicles in Metro Atlanta is that individual vehicles will drive more safely and more efficiently. In addition, autonomous vehicles will provide access to personal mobility for people

who currently cannot drive. The road network is made for the design driver. The design driver is one of the worst drivers on the road, partly because he or she uses intuition rather than reason to make decisions. Autonomous vehicles can be excellent drivers, because they are programmed to react to their environment, but lack the intuition to adjust their decisionmaking when confronted with an unexpected situation. Unexpected situations are unavoidable on a transportation network where millions of people and vehicles interact on a daily basis with each other and with surrounding infrastructure. The interaction between human drivers and autonomous vehicles can be dangerous because one can misapprehend the behavior of the other. Accidents may occur, for example, when a human suddenly decides to take control of his or her vehicle, or when a human and an autonomous car compete for right of way at an intersection with a broken traffic signal. To prevent these situations, the rules of driving for humans would have to change, and there should be very specific standards to make autonomous driving as predictable as possible. As the need for human involvement in the task of driving will diminish, the cost and the overall burden of transportation will decrease. For-hire rides will become cheaper as the salary of the human driver will be excluded from the price. Autonomous cars will be able to park themselves or to become for-hire vehicles until their owners hail them back. Commuters will be able to multi-task in their car on their way to work. As inexpensive, reliable, and fast transportation solutions that do not require vehicle ownership will arise, the demand for personally owned vehicles will diminish, but the demand for transportation will increase. As the cost of transportation will decrease, people will most likely alter their travel behavior by making more trips, traveling farther, and shifting modes to the automobile. This change in travel patterns 29

will put a strain on the transportation network, which will become more congested and more damaged by the increased demand in vehicular transportation. In addition, it will likely spur changes in land use patterns as commuters will be willing to live farther away from their work. The implementation of autonomous

vehicles in Atlanta will a have deep impact on traffic operations and travel patterns. The autonomous vehicles will be designed to drive more safely and efficiently than human drivers, and they will give personal mobility access to people who cannot drive. There remain, however, technological and legal challenges whereas to the interaction

of autonomous vehicles with humans drivers and the built environment. The implementation of autonomous vehicles will also diminish the cost of transportation in metro Atlanta, and reduce the need for personally owned vehicles, but it will also increase the demand for transportation and put a strain on the road network. v

Georgia Institute of Technology Renovates Residence Halls, clemson university Plans new and Replacement Space within core campus Precinct Stevens & Wilkinson, a full-service architecture, engineering and interior design ﬁrm based in Atlanta and columbia, South carolina, today announced ongoing progress of two new higher education housing development projects. The projects include renovation of the historic Glenn and Towers Residence Halls at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta and a comprehensive redesign of clemson university’s core campus Housing Precinct in clemson, South carolina. Georgia Institute of Technology has retained Stevens & Wilkinson to provide architectural, engineering, and interior design services for a comprehensive renovation of the Glenn and Towers Residence Halls. The firm, in association with VMDO Architects, will completely replace all building infrastructure systems, making the facilities accessible to the disabled and providing new student amenities. A new 8,400-square-foot addition will connect the two residences, fulfilling the original 1940 master plan, and feature a fitness center, multipurpose meeting room, classroom, and small group study rooms. “The 616 residents will enjoy new expanded social and study lounges, restrooms, and laundries on every floor,” said Ron Stang, AIA, LEED AP and chairman for Stevens & Wilkinson, Georgia. “The renovation scope includes incorporating new elevators, converting existing open attic spaces into two new residential floors, and replacing slate roofs and historically accurate windows.” Exterior grounds will also be redesigned to create new outdoor spaces for recreation and entertainment as well as a 30

new accessible route through the sector of campus where the residences are located. The three-year, 125,000-square-foot project is on track to achieve LEED Gold certification from the U.S. Green Building Council. “The renovation of the halls sets the stage for the establishment of enriched student living accommodations that are in keeping with the high level of standards for which Georgia Tech is known,” said Stang. Renovation statistics include 63,259 square feet of floor space and four stories at Glenn Hall, 53,116 square feet and three stories at Towers Hall, and 8,400 square feet at the New East Campus Commons. The Glenn and Towers renovation is targeted for completion in 2015. As part of the Campus Master Plan, a study was conducted to answer the question: “How might forward-looking approaches to housing, academic, dining, and student life programs be combined into an intense, innovative, and dynamic mixed-use center for Clemson University?” To resolve the question, VMDO Architects, the firm directing the design of the 700-bed housing initiative, sought the collaboration of Stevens & Wilkinson in conjunction with Sasaki Associates to develop

a clear and engaging vision for the precinct’s evolution. "The design fits very well with the Campus Master Plan and has embellished it in ways we could never have otherwise articulated,” said Gerald Vander May, director, campus planning for Clemson University. “The program was very challenging, but through innovative problem solving and tireless interaction, the team has taken the complex goals of the university and fashioned a vision that has taken root.” The architecture, engineering, and landscape design services provided by Stevens & Wilkinson will involve 179,000 residential square feet, 76,000 dining square feet, and 5,000 academic square feet, resulting in 260,000 gross square feet of new construction and 700 beds. The Clemson University Core Campus Housing project is scheduled for completion in 2016. “Beyond square footage and new construction, the project aspires to much more, including the design and development of quality campus life for students and new forms of housing that support the university’s desire for a multi-purpose, mixed-use center of living and learning,” said Ashby Gressette, AIA and president of Stevens & Wilkinson.v GEORGIA EnGInEER

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

merrick Welcomes new members to its Geospatial Team Merrick & Company welcomes three new members to the firm’s Geospatial team. “The new additions represents our commitment to grow our market share in Alaska and the lower 48,” said Gary Outlaw, Vice President of Merrick. “With their contributing talents, Merrick will be able to continue growing our surveying and remote sensing offerings.” Scott North, PLS, joined Merrick as the Southeast Regional Survey Manager based in Merrick’s Duluth, Georgia, office. North is a registered professional land surveyor in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia and has 14 years of experience in the survey profession. Additionally, North holds a Certified Federal Surveyor (CFedS) license and is active in several professional organizations. North received his Bachelor of Engineering, Surveying, and Spatial Information Systems from the University of New South Wales, Australia. James (Jamie) W. Young, GISP, joined Merrick as Senior Geospatial Technologist in Greenwood Village, Colorado. Young is a GIS Professional with 20 years of experience in remote sensing and is competent in (light detection and ranging) LiDAR, digital imaging, and GIS applications development. Young is co-chair of the LiDAR sub-committee for the Ameri-

charles barnwell can Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ASPRS) and is often called upon for LiDAR specification review for ASPRS, United States Geological Survey (USGS), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Young holds a Bachelor of Arts in technical geography from the University of Colorado. Charles Barnwell joined Merrick as the Geomatics Regional Manager in the firm’s Anchorage, Alaska, office. Barnwell has 25 years of experience in GIS management, database development, applications design, implementation, management, and specialty systems development in a variety of industries, including natural resources, local

James W. young government, and transportation. Barnwell will lead business development growth in Alaska and has extensive project management experience in GIS, surveying, and mapping (LiDAR). Barnwell received his Master of Science in planning from the University of Alaska and Bachelor of Science in geology from the University of Wisconsin. v

Don’t miss a single issue of the Georgia Engineer magazine! Subscribe today online at thegeorgiaengineer.com

Scott north

GEORGIA EnGInEER

Georgia Tech Appoints William Higginbotham to cEE board ET Environmental President and CEO Begins Three-Year Term The Georgia Institute of Technology has appointed William (Bill) Higginbotham, PE, President and CEO of ET Environmental Corporation, to the School of Civil & Environmental Engineering External Advisory Board (EAB). The EAB meets twice per year for a three year term with the option of a second term. The 2014 fall meeting will be held October 31. Georgia Tech is consistently ranked among the top undergraduate and graduate civil and environmental engineering programs in the country, graduating more students than MIT, Stanford, Berkley, or Illinois. The responsibilities of the EAB are to promote and advocate for the school nationally and internationally; provide advice and strategy to the chair, faculty, and staff leadership; and provide financial

to give something back in return,â&#x20AC;? says Bill Higginbotham, Georgia Tech alumni and Atlanta area resident. Mr. Higginbotham joins 29 distinguished members on this prestigious board.

support individually and through external fund raising efforts. The activities of the EAB have consistently played a significant role in the overall success of the school. â&#x20AC;&#x153;My experience at Tech has been invaluable to my career, and this is my chance

About ET Environmental ET Environmental is an independent design/build firm with in-house professional engineers and construction managers in 14 offices in the US and Canada. The company focuses on design and construction of alternative fueling infrastructure and maintenance facilities as well as all areas of the solid waste industry. Founded in 1993, ET Environmental has blended environmental expertise and construction management systems into a comprehensive design/build service model. Contact: Tina Reed, ET Environmental Corporation, LLC, 602-920-7852, treed@etenv.comv

elor of Science in Industrial Technology from Mississippi Valley State University. PSI provides a wide range of environmental, engineering, and testing services, including: environmental consulting, geotechnical engineering, construction materials testing and engineering, industrial

hygiene services, facilities and roof consulting, NDE, and specialty engineering and testing services. Headquartered in Oakbrook Terrace Ill., PSI operates from 100 US based offices with 2,300 employees and $260 million in annual revenues. v

bill Higginbotham

PSI promotes James Johnson

James Johnson Professional Service Industries Inc. (PSI) is pleased to announce the promotion of James Johnson to project manager of its Kennesaw Environmental/Facilities Department. He was originally hired Aug. 25 as staff architect. Mr. Johnson earned his Professional Master of Architecture from Savannah College of Art and Design in Georgia, his Master of Science of Architecture from Mississippi State University and his BachDEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

AcEc Georgia Darrell K. Rochester, PE Chairman ACEC Georgia (678) 450-5161 dkrochester@ rochesterassoc.com

Ten or more years ago, I decided to get involved with ACEC Georgia because I

News loved my life choice of becoming an Engineer. The problem, I discovered, with the profession I so dearly love, was it is being dumbed down to a commodity. It seemed that many of our clients (or potential clients) seemed only interested in one thing; “How much does it cost?” Rather than “What value do you bring to the table?” Sadly, I found clients making consultant selections based on how cheap their fees are rather than whether the firm is qualified to perform the work. And then the realization of competing firms reverse bidding for work set in. “If he can do it for $1.00, then I will do it for $0.95.” Candidly, this irritated me to the point that I decided I have to do something. So, I asked myself, “Do you want to make a difference? Then

get involved!” I was recently having a discussion with a business associate, and we were talking about the value of ACEC. His concern with becoming a member was related to cost, and I reminded him that “if we don’t look out for our profession, who is going to?” The truth is, we have to look after ourselves because no one else will. If I am not looking out for my business, I certainly cannot expect good things to happen. I have become increasingly aware that the beginning of failure comes when we take our eye off the ball. We have to stay focused on the right things. There will forever be new legislation proposed that can and will have adverse effects on our

Political Advocacy

The Value of ACEC Georgia Serving your firm’s business interests through:

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

Business Development • Providing networking opportunities, meetings, and programs that put you in contact with potential clients, industry peers, and the leaders of the engineering profession. • Hosting the Georgia Engineers Summer Conference, Transportation Summit, P3 Summit, and other programs that expand your professional knowledge and network. • Offering informative and relevant seminars, programs, and webinars with presentations from leaders who affect our industry and community.

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

GEORGIA EnGInEER

businesses. If we are not paying attention, guess what? The proposed legislation will become law, and the next thing you know, it is too late to do anything about it. ACEC is in the business of protecting and advancing the business of engineering. Sully, the staff, and board of directors are looking out for our profession. There are those that do not want to be bothered. They will just let someone else take care of it. What is that about? Laziness? Complacency? Do they think their involvement doesn’t matter anyway? We have to get ready to rumble! Knock some heads! Duke it out! Fight for what is rightfully ours! Otherwise, you can count on your fees getting cheaper and cheaper. You can also get prepared for more government regulation. The best way to avoid complacency is to strive for continuous improvement. Great organizations or companies constantly ask questions, challenge assumptions, and create a sense of urgency. Everyone involved actively works toward making things better. I believe that ‘many hands make light work.’ Imagine if we all chipped in and did our part. I believe we could see great things happen. We would have the opportunity to lift our profession to a new

level. “The tragedy of life is often not in our failure, but rather in our complacency; not in our doing too much, but rather in our doing too little; not in our living above our ability, but rather in our living below our capacities,” said Benjamin E. Mays As I shared in the last issue, we are moving around the state to hear your issues. We met in Macon in September, Greensboro in October, Rome in November, and we plan to be in Columbus in January. From these meetings, we recognize there is a wealth of knowledge and ideas each of you have that needs to be tapped. There is a need to hold focus groups based on your particular area of expertise. One of our longstanding focus groups is the Transportation Forum, which has been tremendously successful. Because of the expressed need in other areas, we will be starting additional forums as soon as we can get enough people engaged to help make it happen. We plan to start or restart the Building Systems Forum (MEP firms), Energy Forum, Environmental Forum, Geotechnical Forum, Land Development Forum, Small Firm Forum, and Structural Engineers Forum. But, here is the deal…Do you want to

make a difference? Do you care about the engineering profession? If you care like I do, you need to “Get in the game!” We need for you to invest some of your time and those great ideas you have locked away in that noggin of yours. We cannot do it alone. We need for you to participate in one of the forums. Our futures are counting on your involvement. If you or your firm is not a member of ACEC, we would like to talk with you about the benefits of membership. If you are a member and you have ideas of how ACEC can better serve your firm or the engineering community, please let us know. Also, if you are a member of ACEC, please consider taking the time to share your personal story about how ACEC has benefitted you and your firm. There is no better way to help others see our value than through the eyes of someone they know and trust. I wish you all a wonderful Christmas and a Happy and Prosperous New Year! Darrell K. Rochester, P.E. Chairman dkrochester@rochester-assoc.com (678) 450-5161 v

ACEC GEORGIA MEMBER FIRMS Board of Directors Darrell K. Rochester, Chairman / Roseana Richards, Chairman-elect / Jay C. Wolverton, Past Chair / Charles Ezelle, Treasurer / John Heath, Secretary / Dave L. Wright, National Director / Jim Case, Vice Chair / Don Harris, Vice Chair / Robert Lewis, Vice Chair / Anita Atkinson, Director / Daveitta Jenkins, Director / Emily Meador, Director / Kevin McOmber, Director / Al Pramuk, Director / Charles ‘Corky’ Welch, Director / Brent Wright, Director / Taylor Wright, Director

Committees Kevin McOmber, Government Affairs/PAC David Wright, ACEC PAC Champion Rob Lewis, Business Development Jim Case & Don Harris, Firm Operations John Heath, Coalitions Doug Robinson, Communications Brannen Butts & David McFarlin, Leadership Development Charles Ezelle, Membership Jay Wolverton, Nominating Jay Wolverton, Past Presidents/Chairmen Scott Gero, Transportation Forum

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

Staff Michael ‘Sully’ Sullivan, President & CEO Jennifer Head, Director of Membership & Programs Brittney Love, Director of Finance & Operations Shawna Mercer, Director of Communications and Government Affairs

Forums Bill Griffin, Building Systems Corky Welch, Environmental Chris Marsengill, Transportation Brannen Butts, Leadership dkrochester@rochesterassoc.com (678) 450-5161 35

AScE Georgia Rebecca Shelton, P.E., President American Society of Civil Engineers, Georgia Section www.ascega.org Rebecca.shelton@gwinnettcounty.com

Activity in the Georgia Section continues to increase. Volunteers continue to step forward to create great programs for our members including informative institute meetings, fun younger member events and extensive student outreach. This year’s Board of Directors is very active in attending events, planning for the future of the Georgia Section and answering member questions. Student Outreach Last year we reached over 12,000 students through our student outreach program, encouraging students to become civil engineers. It’s a tough challenge. Civil engineering just doesn’t sound as cool as biomedical engineering, which is a top pick among engineering students today. But civil engineering is a career where people can make a difference in the world around them and have meaningful work while raising families and being a part of their community. Encouraging future civil engineers is important for the future of infrastructure in our country, and therefore, important to public safety and our future economy. A special thanks to External Director Shaukat Syed and the many volunteers for our student programs.

News Annie Blissit attended with me and it was interesting to see their winning projects and talk about how engineers, landscape architects and architects can better collaborate. While we focus on infrastructure, landscape architects bring a perspective of tying to the natural environment and creating livable communities that should be included in the design process. They are also supporters of transit and transportation enhancements, which the 2014 Georgia Infrastructure Report Card identifies as areas of great need in Georgia. AScE national board Georgia Section Past-President Melissa Wheeler was installed on the ASCE national board of directors in October in Panama City, Panama. The ASCE national organization continues to grow and provide support to sections such as the Georgia Section. It is an honor to have a Georgia Section member on the board. volunteers needed The Georgia Section has a number of committees. We have two committees in desperate need of leadership. The Continuing Education committee coordinates educational activities that provide PDH

credits for civil engineers. The “What Do Civil Engineers Do?” Contest occurs in the spring and gives middle school students the opportunity to learn about civil engineering and receive cash prizes. If you are interested in either of these committees, please contact me. Report card update On September 30, 2014 Internal Director Rick Gurney testified before the Joint Transportation Funding Study Committee on the findings of the 2014 Georgia Infrastructure Report Card. Many GDOT Board members were present, as well as heads of transit and transportation systems in the state. In January the legislative cycle begins again and we will continue to be down at the Capitol talking to our elected officials about infrastructure issues. upcoming Be sure to check out our award winning website at www.ascega.org for upcoming events including Georgia Section meetings, Younger Member events and Institute meetings. On December 16th we are holding the first ever Holiday Party at Red Brick Brewery. This should be a great event with all of the Technical Groups invited. v

collaboration In October I spoke at the American Society of Landscape Architects Gala at Piedmont Park. Younger Member Director 36

GEORGIA EnGInEER

ASCE/GEORGIA SECTION 2014 - 2015 BOARD OF DIRECTORS PRESIDENT Rebecca Shelton, PE Gwinnett County DWR rebecca.shelton@gwinnettcounty.com President-Elect Richard Morales, PE LB Foster Piling rmorales@lbfoster.com Vice President Daniel Agramonte, PE O'Brien & Gere daniel.agramonte@obg.com Treasurer Christina Vulova, PE Arcadis US Inc. christina.vulova@arcadis-us.com Secretary Julie Secrist, PE DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

TY Lin International Group julie.secrist@tylin.com External Director Shaukat Syed Georgia EPD shaukat.syed@dnr.state.ga.us Internal Director Rick Gurney, PE Keck & Wood Inc. rgurney@keckwood.com Technical Director Luis Babler, PE Geo-Hydro Engineers Inc. luis@geohydro.com Younger Member Director Annie Blissit, EIT Gresham, Smith, and Partners ann_blissit@gspnet.com

N.E. Ga. Branch Director J. Matthew Tanner, PE Breedlove Land Planning Inc. mtanner@landplanning.net Savannah Branch Director Chris Rains, PE Chatham County Dept. of Engineering crains@chathamcounty.org South Metro Branch Director Doug Hintz, PE FAA - Retired douglas.hintz@gmail.com Past President Katherine Gurd, PE AECOM katherine.gurd@aecom.com

GSPE Georgia

News abel Engineering, LLC; Silver Sponsors Southern Company, Hydro Generation, and Wolverton & Associates, Inc.; and Bronze Sponsors Integrated Science and Engineering, Prime Engineering, and ARCADIS. Thanks also to Canongate I Golf Club in Sharpsburg for hosting a fantastic event.

Rob MacPherson, P.E., President Georgia Society of Professional Engineers

A famous US president once wrote: “Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.” So, as your president, I will ask those same questions. First, what is GSPE doing for you? Well, we’ve done quite a bit in recent weeks and had a great time in the process! If you were not a part of some of the activities we’ve hosted during the past two months, you are missing out. So what did you miss?

Jason Cooper ( Geotechnical & Environmental Consultants) served as the 2014 MATHCOUNTS Golf Tournament Chair ature was just perfect including a slight cool breeze. The air was crisp. The only thing wrong was my play. Fortunately I had a great group of golfers picking up my slack. We awarded prizes to lots of contestants, but Wayne Cox and Jarred Jackson took the prize as the best golfer in the tournament. We had some magnificent sponsors including: Gold Sponsor Schn-

new PE Recognition Dinner – On Wednesday, October 1 we celebrated the accomplishments of those who recently passed the Professional Engineering exam. This year, 158 men and women passed this difficult test to join the ranks of other highly competent engineers. We celebrated at the Georgia Tech Hotel and Conference Center, enjoying a wonderful dinner followed by an excellent speech from Harve Hnatiuk, President of NSPE. The evening closed with the new PEs’ recitation of the Engineers Creed followed by the Order of the Engineer Ceremony. Congratulations to all 158 engineers who passed this exam during the past year. mATHcOunTS Golf Tournament – On Friday, October 17 – one of the year’s most beautiful days – we played golf. The sun was out in full fall brightness. The temper38

Georgia Secretary of State, Brian Kemp, was the guest speaker at the GSPE Cobb Chapter Meeting in October

PDH Days – Georgia Tech hosted the PDH Days events on Friday, November 7. More than 100 attendees listened to Tom Leslie discuss engineering ethics and Rick Marotte of AMEC described challenges associated with the Savannah Harbor Expansion. We had tracks on forensic engineering and State of Florida rules and regulations. We ended the afternoon with a presentation demonstrating how LinkedIn 3D printing can be used to improve your business. The event also provides an excellent time to network and see old friends. Atlanta chapter – GSPE’s Atlanta Chapter meets the second Monday of each month at the Piccadilly Cafeteria near Northlake Mall in Tucker. I was fortunate to attend the meeting in September. It was a fantastic evening seeing lots of folks and listening to Professor Haiying Huang of Georgia Tech teach us about safety, economic, and environmental issues associated with fracking. If you aren’t attending, you are missing out on some great topics. Roger Grabman, keep up the great work. Relaunch of cobb chapter – GSPE’s Cobb Chapter relaunched its organization in September. The chapter hosted its first meeting in October, with Secretary of State Brian Kemp providing an update on the Professional Licensing Board. In November, John Hancock, Project Manager of the Northwest Corridor Project, gave an excellent overview of the project and its impact on Cobb County. The Cobb Chapter meets the second Wednesday of each month. So now I get to ask, “What can you do GEORGIA EnGInEER

for GSPE?â&#x20AC;? First: Join GSPE. It promotes the ethical and competent practice of engineering, advocates licensure, and enhances the image and well-being of its members (thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s you). Second: Get involved in your local chapter. We have chapters in Northwest Georgia, Atlanta, Cobb, Northeast Georgia, Augusta, Macon, and an upcoming chapter in Columbus. Attend monthly meetings, sign up to help with MATHCOUNTS or E-Week, or just come and hang out. One of our main focuses for GSPE this year is to make MATHCOUNTS in Georgia better than ever. To do so we need your help. If interested in giving back and perhaps encouraging a young man or woman to become an engineer, please call (404) 425-7100 or email me (rmacpherson@prime-eng.com). I look forward to hearing from you. And to all those already involved, you are making a difference. Thank you and keep up the good work. v

1st Place Team Jarred Jackson (integrated Science and Engineering) and Wayne Cox (LOC Engineering)

Prime Engineering Golf Team

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

ITE Georgia Jonathan Reid, PE Georgia Section, Institute of Transportation Engineers

Greetings once again from Georgia ITE headquarters in lovely Egypt, GA (not be confused with that other town Cairo, GA) to all Georgia Engineering Magazine readers! I can’t believe that we have come to the end of 2014 and thus the end of my presidential reign (unless that I can get the Board to agree to that “lifetime” amendment clause…). I was most honored to lead our amazing organization this year, as I have grown a lot personally and have had the opportunity to reflect and think deeply on who we are and where we are going as an organization. Our future is very bright, beginning with the group on the board and extending to the many new and younger members that have joined ITE this year (are they really younger or am I just that much older?…). It has been truly amazing how many younger members have not just joined but become active in the organization. I recall one lunch meeting when I saw a young woman I didn’t recognize working at the registration table and asked how long had she been attending. To which she replied, “this is my first meeting”. Thanks Meridith for engaging (and arm-twisting?) others this year. I am encouraged that we are growing younger and stronger. In preparing a presentation on innovation for our sister organization ASHE (who we are partnering with to offer the 5th Annual Winter Workshop – see advertisement 40

News below), I reflected on how important it is that we as an organization and we as the transportation industry compete for graduating young minds. There are so many career paths available that may seem more “attractive” or at least get more attention than engineering, and thus it must be our constant mission to reach out and show our current and future grads all that our industry has to offer. Yes, it is easy to be pessimistic about current and future transportation funding levels, but it is equally easy to be optimistic about the changes and innovations that are taking place in our industry. The first traffic signal

arrived exactly 100 years ago, and since then we have innovated and created new ways to transport people, goods and services, new and safer vehicles, the national interstate system to name a few – all that required the brightest and best minds in society. Now we are on the verge of incredible changes in vehicle technology, managing roadways for mobility, and innovating construction techniques to name a few – all that will require the brightest and best minds in society. I am more committed now than ever to getting that message out to continue to attract the best engineers for the future of our noble

Past presidents GEORGIA EnGInEER

and important industry. To do so may be as simple as going into the classrooms at schools and universities in our very backyard and showing them some of the great projects, tools and innovations our profession has to offer. Will you help in that cause in 2015? The other event that always leaves a lasting impression on me is our past presidents meeting held in October. This year we had 26 of our past 52 presidents (including our very first president John Edwards) gather together to hear what we have accomplished and what the incoming president and board can do to improve how we serve our members, organization and industry. The focus of the meeting was how to attract new and young members (see a theme here?) and how to expand our committees’ outreach to include the diverse interests and sub disciplines of our members. “Transportation Engineering” casts a wide net, and we hope to make our future meetings, events and initiatives as inclusive as possible to our diverse membership base (no pressure on you Andrew, Mr. Future President). We will also focus on better partnerships with our student chapters and engage in school and community events to get the word out there that there are some great opportunities in being a transportation engineer. ITE does have a bright future and I thank the many board, committee and active members who have served the ITE organization well in 2014. The Institute of Transportation Engineers is an international educational and scientific association of transportation professionals who are responsible for meeting mobility and safety needs. ITE facilitates the application of technology and scientific principles to research, planning, functional design, implementation, operation, policy development and management for any mode of ground transportation. Through its products and services, ITE promotes professional development of its members, supports and encourages education, stimulates research, develops public awareness programs and serves as a conduit for the exchange of professional information. v DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

Board Position President Vice President Secretary/Treasurer Past President District Representative District Representative District Representative Affiliate Director

Member Jonathan Reid Andrew Antweiler Sean Coleman Dwayne Tedder David Low Vern Wilburn Marion Waters Meg Pirkle

E-mail reid@pbworld.com aantweiler@roswellgov.com sean.coleman@kimley-horn.com dwayne.tedder@urs.com dlow@roswellgov.com vwilburn@wilburnengineering.com marion_waters@gspnet.com mpirkle@dot.ga.gov

Phone (404) 364-5225 (678) 639-7540 (404) 419-8700 (404) 406-8791 (770) 594-6422 (678) 423-0050 (770) 754-0755 (404) 631-1025

Committee Activities Activities Annual Report Audio/Visual Awards/Nominations Career Guidance Clerk Comptroller Engineers Week Finance Georgia Engineer magazine Georgia Tech Liaison Historian Host Legislative Affairs Life Membership Marketing/Social Media Membership Monthly Meetings Newsletter Past Presidents Public Officials Education Scholarship Southern Poly Liaison Summer Seminar Technical Web site Winter Workshop

Chair(s) Kate D’Ambrosio David Low Mark Boivin Dwayne Tedder Amy Diaz Elizabeth Scales Jim Pohlman Amy Diaz Charles Bopp Dan Dobry Chris Rome Charles Bopp Meredith Emory Bill Ruhsam Don Gaines Patrick McAtee Sunita Nadella Andrew Antweiler Vern Wilburn Todd Long Scott Mohler Betsy Williams Bryan Sartin Marco Friend France Campbell Vamshi Mudumba Jonathan Wallace

E-mail kdambrosio@dot.ga.gov dlow@roswellgov.com markboivin@alltrafficdata.net dwayne.tedder@urs.com amy.diaz@jacobs.com escales@thompsonengineering.com j.pohlman@icloud.com amy.diaz@jacobs.com charles_bopp@hotmail.com ddobry@croyengineering.com crome@fg-inc.net charles_bopp@hotmail.com meredith.emory@kimley-horn.com bill@jbwr.net dgaines@gcaeng.com pmcatee@thompsonengineering.com sunita.nadella@parsons.com aantweiler@roswellgov.com vwilburn@wilburnengineering.com tlong@dot.ga.gov scott.mohler@urs.com betsy.williams@transcore.com bryan_sartin@gspnet.com marco.friend@jacobs.com france.campbell@aecom.com VamshiM@LAIengineering.com jonathan.wallace@arcadis-us.com

Phone (404) 635-2842 (770) 594-6422 (404) 374-1283 (404) 406-8791 (678) 333-0283 (404) 574-1985 (404) 790-3569 (678) 333-0283 (678) 380-9053 (770) 971-5407 (770) 368-1399 (678) 380-9053 (404) 201-6133 (404) 931-6478 (404) 355-4010 (404) 574-1985 (678) 969-2304 (678) 639-7540 (678) 423-0050 (404) 631-1021 (678) 808-8811 (770) 246-6247 (678) 518-3884 (678) 333-0408 (404) 965-9738 (770) 423-0807 (770) 431-8666

ITS Georgia Tom Sever, P.E. ITS President

The year 2014 was a year of purpose and accomplishment for ITS Georgia. I want to give special thanks to our many hard working volunteers for making it a huge success. Here are some highlights as presented at the 2014 ITS Georgia Awards Banquet: From January through August 2014, we had eight outstanding monthly meetings. I want to thank Xuewen Le and David Smith for their efforts in lining up speakers and arranging the venues. In February, we had the Legislative Reception in partnership with ASCE and ITE. We had a great venue in the Atlanta City Hall atrium and the opportunity to hear from Mayor Reed. I want to thank Will Hurst, Yancy Bachman and World Fiber Technologies for helping to make it a successful evening. In March, the Board members had the opportunity to tour the AT&T Drive Studio in Atlanta to see their concept of a connected vehicle. It was very interesting and

News ITS Georgia mission We believe that ITS is a valuable tool for improved management of any transportation system, regardless of the inherent complexity of the system. ITS can help operate, manage, and maintain the system once it has been constructed. We believe that ITS should be systematically incorporated into the earliest stages of project development, especially into the planning and design of transportation projects. We believe the best way to achieve this systematic incorporation into the process is through a coordinated, comprehensive program to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;get out the wordâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; on ITS to constituencies that might not otherwise consider the relevance of ITS to their transportation system. shed a lot of light on how the connected vehicle will move forward outside of government regulation. I want to thank Scott Bailey for helping to set that up. Then in September, we finally came to the ITS 3C Summit in Mobile, Alabama. After 2 plus years of planning and hard work by many of our members and the folks at ITS Florida and Gulf Region ITS, it was an awesome event. In fact, it was probably the best conference that I have been able to attend. There were excellent technical sessions, cool technical tours and a BATTLESHIP! I want to give my personal thanks to all the volunteers from ITS Georgia and in the other chapters that put in so much time and effort to make the Summit a success.

ITS GEORGIA CHAPTER LEADERSHIP President Tom Sever, Gwinnett DOT vice President Grant Waldrop, GDOT Secretary Jennifer Johnson, Kimley-Horn Treasurer Ashlyn Morgan, Atkins Immediate Past President

Scott Mohler, URS Directors Mark Demidovich, GDOT Eric Graves, City of Alpharetta Winter Horbal, Temple Inc. Keary Lord, Serco David Smith, DeKalb County Transportation Prasoon Sinha, ARCADIS Mike Holt, Parsons Brinkerhoff, Yancy Bachmann, World Fiber, Kenn Fink, Kimley-Horn, Kristin Turner, Wolverton Associates Elect - Derrick Crowder, City of Roswell Elect - Alvin James of Kimley-Horn Elect - Andy Phlegar, Atkins Elect - Eli Veith of Veith Traffic Services

State chapters Representative

Shahram Malek, Arcadis Ex Officio Greg Morris, Federal Highway Administration Andres Ramirez, FTA

OUR 2013/2014 SPONSORS Control Technologies Utilicom Temple Arcadis Atkins World Fiber Technologies 42

Kimley-Horn & Associates Southern Lighting & Traffic Systems Delcan Gresham Smith & Partners Grice Consulting Jacobs

Parsons Brinkerhoff Quality Traffic Systems URS Transcore

GEORGIA EnGInEER

To cap off 2014, we were recognized as the 2014 Outstanding Chapter of the Year by ITS America at the World Congress. In granting the award ITS Georgia was cited for “a superb level of programming, fostering the highest qualities of leadership among its members, advocating for ITS solutions at the state and regional levels, and providing outstanding value overall to its membership.” Our 2014 Awards Banquet, held November 6, was a great success with an entertaining program and recognition for those deserving professionals and projects. You can read more about our winners on page 26. I want to thank outgoing ITS Georgia Board members Kristen Turner, Eric Graves, David Smith and Prasoon Sinha for their invaluable service to the organization over the years. I want to welcome new board members Derrick Crowder, Alvin James, Andy Phlegar and Eli Veith. That sounds like a pretty good year and we could have coasted until January. But, at the request of ITS America, we worked with them to host the Complete Streets Symposium in November. Again, we have had members step up to take leadership roles and make presentations. I will take this opportunity to thank Eric Graves and Shahram Malek for being our cochairs on the planning committee. DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

As we moved through the year, we continued to look to the future. The Board of Directors is looking at ways to increase the value of ITSGA membership to our member organizations. We have selected the Jekyll Island Club to host our 2015 ITS Georgia annual meeting in late September. I am confident that the folks that will be involved with the planning of that meeting will make it both a great learning and entertaining event. ITS Leading the Innovation in Future Transportation – A Look at the big Picture ITS is poised to transform transportation into a connected, dynamic component of the city-as-a-system. Perhaps more importantly, the greater ease in moving about will have a positive impact on quality of life and commerce for residents, visitors and local businesses. “Cities are struggling with transportation today and will struggle even more in the future,” said Bill Ford, Jr., executive chairman of the Ford Motor Company, while addressing the ITS World Congress in Detroit in September 2014. “We need to redefine what mobility is for the coming century.” According to Ford, it is incremental technological advancement that will one day lead to driverless cars.

“By the time we get to full autonomy, the last step won’t seem like such a big deal,” he said. “Even as we put in a lot of these features the driver still has to be vigilant and in control.” “Instead of a bunch of independent systems on the local, national or even global level, ITS creates a transportation network that works like the Internet, where everything is connected, but also open for standards-based communication, which reduces costs and creates value for everyone involved in managing traffic,” said David Pickeral, who leads the Industry Smarter Solutions Team for Transportation at IBM. “The connected vehicle technologies are ready,” said Suzanne Murtha, senior program manager for intelligent transportation initiatives at Atkins Global. “Now it’s a matter of governments capturing and sharing data about real-time, onthe-street traffic conditions so drivers can make better choices.” To support deployment of connected and autonomous vehicles, agencies need to plan for the associated infrastructure required (fiber-optic and supporting networks, traffic management center equipment, and roadside equipment), address staffing needs, and consider data management and privacy concerns. Connected vehicle systems using Dedicated Short Range Communications (DSRC) are specifically designed to protect privacy by not associating data with any particular vehicle or driver; however, privacy advocates are already raising objections. Agencies need to be ready to effectively communicate privacy details and policies. In a recent Governing Institute survey, 78 percent of respondents indicated lack of funding was the key barrier to developing ITS, well ahead of the 45 percent who cited an aging infrastructure as the key barrier. One of the recurring themes of the ITS World Congress was that we’re on the cusp of an extraordinary revolution in transportation, one that may save government billions of dollars by facilitating far better utilization of existing transportation infrastructure. v 43

SAmE Atlanta

Pamela Little, P.E. President, SAME Atlanta Post

SAME Atlanta Post presented the SHARE Military Initiative at the Shepherd Center with a donation for $28,000 at our Shrimp Boil in September. The donation to the non-profit will help former service men and women recover from PTSD and traumatic brain injuries. The shrimp boil is our young members’ signature annual event and we are pleased that over 100 people came to Monday Night Brewing on September 23, 2014 for a mini-tradeshow, networking, barbeque, low-country boil and beer. We were happy to host the new SAME Executive Director, Brig. Gen. Joseph ( Joe) Schroedel, PE, F.SAME, USN (Ret.) at our October luncheon. Schroedel discussed the future plans for the national SAME organization and emphasized that the organization will focus on all work within the public sector, including the nation’s infrastructure and security. Marvin Woodward, Deputy State Property Officer, Acting Deputy Director with GSFIC was our speaker at the November luncheon and reviewed many of the on-going as well as upcoming projects at the Capitol and throughout the state. LTC John ( Jack) Seibert III USA (Ret.), PE, F.SAME received a special honor at the November luncheon. Regional Vice President (RVP) Capt. Bill Bersson USN (Ret.), PE, F.SAME presented Jack with an RVP Medal for his 44

News dedication to and work on behalf of the Exploring Engineering Academy. The Exploring Engineering Academy is a oneweek overnight camp managed by the Boy Scouts of America, Atlanta Area Council that introduces high-school age students to STEM subjects. Jack has been working with the program since its inception in the early 2000’s. SAME Atlanta Post was proud to award $15,000 in GEF Scholarships this year. Stephen Todd, Ophelia Johnson, and Peter Emmanuel each received a $5,000 scholarship from the Atlanta Post.

Awards were made at the November 18 GEF Banquet. An additional $5,500 was awarded from other SAME Posts in Georgia. John Kaffezakis and Matthew Becton each received a $2,000 scholarship. Robert Wainwright received a $1,500 scholarship. Please join us on the second Tuesday of any month (except May and September) at Dunwoody Country Club at 11:30 to enjoy our 2015 programming. We will be holding our annual golf tournament on May 4, 2015 at St. Marlo Country Club. More details on the tournament will be coming soon!v

President Pamela Little, PE, LEED AP

Assistant Treasurer Ronnie Davis

Kaysie Glazer, PE Ray Willcocks, PE, F.SAME

vice President Beth Harris, CPSM

Regional vP Bill Bersson, PE, F.SAME

James Lucas Emeritus chairs Sy Liebman, PE (1994) Jim Gilland, PE (1996) Jack Newhard, PE (1997) Roger Austin, PE (2000) Jack Seibert, PE (2003) Dick Scharf (2006) Steve Premo (2009) Scotti Bozeman, PE (2011) Bill Bersson, PE (2011) Ben Glover, PE (2012)

Past President Ray Ramos, PE, RRC Secretary Sherri Smith, CPSM Assistant Secretary Beth Roby, RID, LEED AP ID+C Treasurer Brian Dance, PE, SE

2013-2015 Directors Howard Ayers Phil McHugh, CP, CMS, GISP Steve Poole, PE Cindy Miller, PE 2014-2016 Directors Bob Marbury, PG Candice Scale

SAME Regional Vice President for the South Atlantic District, Capt. Bill Bersson USN (Ret.), PE, F.SAME, presents LTC John (Jack) Seibert III, USA (Ret.), PE, F.SAME with an RVP Medal on November 11, 2014

April Hodge and Jen Fischer from the Shepherd Center SHARE Military Initiative accepted a $28,000 donation from SAME Atlanta Post presented by Beth Harris and Pamela Little (r-l).

GEORGIA EnGInEER

WTS Atlanta Angela Snyder, P.E. President, WTS Atlanta

Fall was a very busy season for WTS Atlanta. In September, WTS Atlanta hosted a Women’s Empowerment Breakfast, where 45 attendees got up early to come hear moderator, Malika Reed - Wilkins, and panelists Wendy Butler, Monica GlassThornton, and Sophia Duncan. All those present at the breakfast enjoyed the topic and were enlightened by all the speakers. At the end of October, WTS Atlanta hosted another record breaking scholarship luncheon program at the Georgia Aquarium. Over 360 industry professionals were in attendance and there was not one empty seat in the house. The purpose for the luncheon was to celebrate another year of success and to recognize and honor those who have helped to make them happen. We also honored several leaders, both individuals and organizations, who have made marks in the transportation industry and who have lived our mission of advancing women in transportation. But the most important purpose of our luncheon was to award scholarships to five well deserving young women. We were very excited and honored to have Ms. Michelle D. Livingstone with us delivering the keynote speech. Ms. Livingstone is Vice President – Transportation for The Home Depot. She leads a highly talented team that oversees the movement of all inbound and outbound shipments into and within The Home Depot‘s multiDEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015

News channel supply chain, including imports, exports, and store deliveries. She came to Home Depot in 2007 with more than 25 years of transportation supply chain experience. Prior to joining The Home Depot, she served as the Senior Vice President of Transportation for C & S Wholesale Grocers, Vice President of Transportation for JCPenney, and the Senior Director of Transportation for Kraft Foods North America. The WTS mission of transforming the transportation industry through the advancement of women can be realized by encouraging students to further their careers as leaders in the transportation industry. WTS recognizes that transportation is more than simply moving people and goods from one place to another. It is a driver of growth, and an integral part of communities throughout the world. The leadership, skills and perspectives of women are essential to ensure that the transportation systems of the future respond to the needs of all. WTS Atlanta, striving to advance women in transportation, gave away five scholarships at the luncheon. In memory of Helene M. Overly, the first Executive Secretary of WTS, the scholarship is awarded to women pursuing graduate studies in transportation or a related field. The Helene M. Overly Graduate scholarship, valued at $2,000, was awarded to Atiyya Shaw, a first year graduate student in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Georgia Tech. Her current research is focused on modeling the visual search patterns of drivers in complex roadway environments in an effort to inform and impact roadway design. Her goal is to improve the overall safety and stability of transportation systems and infrastructure through interdisciplinary approaches to safety research. Margaret-Avis Akofio-Sowah then won the other graduate scholarship, Leadership Legacy Scholarship. Through the

Leadership Legacy Scholarship, WTS seeks to motivate and reward women who demonstrate leadership in the transportation industry to bring ideas, innovation and new approaches to transportation challenges in the US and beyond. MargaretAvis is a doctoral candidate in civil engineering at the Georgia Institute of Technology with a focus in transportation systems engineering. Her interest in transportation stems from a desire to understand some of the flaws of the transportation system in her home city of Accra, in Ghana, and to investigate how transportation improvements can be leveraged for increased development and economic growth. Margaret’s current research is in the area of transportation infrastructure asset management and asset management implementation in transportation agencies, as it relates to strategic planning and policy. Outside her research, Margaret is passionate about actively encouraging female and minority participation in STEM fields, driven by her own experience as one of the few females in her high school STEM courses. She is actively involved in the Georgia Tech Student Chapter of WTS, having previously served as President and Vice-President, and is currently the CoChair of the WTS Atlanta Transportation YOU Program. The Sharon D. Banks Memorial Scholarship, awarded to women pursuing undergraduate studies in transportation or a related field, Kelly Smulovitz is a senior at Georgia Tech majoring in Civil Engineering. She is currently co-oping at JMT in Baltimore, Maryland in their bridge design group for 2 semesters and construction management department for 1 semester. Last summer, Kelly got the opportunity to work at GDOT in their research department. Part of the WTS goal of fostering the development of women in the transportation field can be realized by encouraging 45

bright new professionals to undertake careers in the area of transportation. The Molitoris Leadership Scholarship is awarded to women pursuing undergraduate studies in transportation or a related field that demonstrate leadership skills, ability, and interest, and that is why Brandie Banner was the recipient of this scholarship. In May of 2015, she will graduate from Georgia Tech with a Civil Engineering degree and certificates in international affairs and social psychology. During her time at Tech, Brandie has served as student body vice president and as an executive member of Tech's orientation program. This past summer, she was in Kenya implementing a sanitation project through funding from the Georgia Tech Inventure Prize competition. Upon graduation, she is interested in pursuing a career in public transportation. Five years ago, President Obama made a call to the science and engineering community to come together to commit to helping build the STEM program in the US (Science Technology Engineering and Math) because he recognized the need for our economy to be competitive within the world. Shortly thereafter, WTS International was called to the table by the former Secretary of the US DOT, Ray LaHood, to join together both of our organizations to create a program that specifically reaches young women to encourage them to enter STEM fields. WTS International organized volunteers eager to help with this initiative at the chapter level, and that’s when Transportation YOU was formed. WTS Atlanta’s Transportation YOU program is currently working with Grady High School in Atlanta to foster a mentorship program. That is where WTS Atlanta met Anya Lomsadze, freshman. Anya is the daughter of Russian immigrants and speaks fluent Russian; however, English is her favorite subject. She is an avid singer in her choir and is a violinist. Anya is an attorney for her mock trial team, a builder in robotics, and a delegate of Model UN. She competitively swims, runs, and plays tennis. Anya was very honored to have won the Transportation You $1,000 scholarship. After the scholarships were awarded, 46

four awards were given out: Diversity Award, Employer of the Year, Member of the Year and Woman of the Year. The Diversity Leadership Award went to Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), Office of Diversity and Equal Opportunity (DEO), responsible for the full array of Diversity and Inclusion (D&I) programs and activities for MARTA. They rank as the 9th largest transit system in the United States, with over 500,000 trips each weekday. Employer of the Year went to the State Road and Tollway Authority (SRTA), a state-level, independent Authority created by the Georgia General Assembly to operate tolled transportation facilities within the State and act as Georgia’s transportation financing arm. As the only tolling entity for the State of Georgia, SRTA is instrumental in developing ways to provide more reliable travel times for Georgia motorists. SRTA Executive Director Christopher Tomlinson was awarded the first WTS Atlanta honorary membership for his support and innovation in the transportation industry in the Atlanta Metro Area. Member of the Year was awarded to Tonya Saxon, MARTA. Serving in many different roles including Vice President of Membership and Vice President of Programs, Tonya worked to increase the number of members that had declined in the years during the recession. She worked tirelessly to plan, prepare and execute very exciting and worth-while programs for the Atlanta chapter. She was responsible for leading her committee, maintaining program budgets, organizing speakers, coordinating logistics, representing the chapter at the events, and following up after events to debrief on lessons learned. Tonya is very pleasant, positive and encouraging of everyone. She is a hard worker and loves to make all feel welcome and appreciated. Woman of the Year went to Rebecca Serna, Atlanta Bicycle Coalition’s Executive Director since 2007. She works with leaders, elected officials and citizens from across metro Atlanta to create a healthier, more livable Atlanta region by making it safer, easier and more attractive to bicycle.

She accomplishes this through advocacy for safe and connected networks of bikeways, better conditions for bicyclists, educating bicyclists and drivers on safety, providing resources to overcome barriers to biking, promoting the bicycle as a viable transportation solution, and organizing community-building events. Her reputation and credibility have not only been critical for women, but also for the success of ABC as a whole. For everyone who attended the luncheon and supported the scholarship fund by making silent auction and raffle item purchases, thank you. To all of our Corporate Partners, thank you for your continued support of our mission to advance women in transportation. As my 2-year term as President is ending, I would like to take one final opportunity to thank all of the current board members that I have been honored to serve alongside for all of their hard work and leadership. And I am pleased to announce the upcoming Board for the 2015-2016 term that begins on January 1, 2015: Regan Hammond, ARCADIS - President Olivia Russell, SRTA – Vice President of Programs beth Ann Schwartz, Michael Baker International – Vice President of Membership Jennifer Lott, T.Y. Lin International Secretary Kirsten berry, HNTB – Treasurer Directors-at-Large: marissa martin, Wolverton & Associates Tonya Saxon, MARTA Helen mcSwain, Atkins malika Reed-Wilkins – SRTA Finally, thank you for allowing me the opportunity to serve as President. v GEORGIA EnGInEER

DEcEmbER 2014 | JAnuARy 2015