As my engineering firm conducts business around this country, I am still amazed when developers say things like “no one is doing low-impact around here”.  Recently, as I sat down with my staff to introduce a new project in a state that our firm had not previously worked in, it became apparent to me that what our firm assumes as today’s sustainable-development standards are not the case in each state – and far from becoming ­universal.

As an example, our firm assumes that infiltration, while it may not be required, would surface as a stormwater best management practice.  Yet we see constantly that only minimal attention is paid to the handling of stormwater. In many cases, engineers are still using the mentality of “put it in a pipe and get it to a pond.” This does meet the requirements of many states, but I question how sustainable it is. Is it really best for the people? Does it bode well for the planet? Is it contributing to the developer’s profit?

Who will step up?
Recently Terry Mock, executive director of SLDI, and I had a philosophical ­discussion regarding impacting development trends as we were formulating plans for upcoming training opportunities through SLDI. Terry felt strongly that developers need to change their business model to demand sustainability. I on the other hand, challenge that engineers need to step up to stop providing “safe” and unimaginative products for their customers. Ultimately, we agreed that we were both right. This is a team-based industry requiring all members of the team to step up their efforts.

We learn best from failure
Our best teacher can be failure—our own as well as the failures of others. The “let’s not ever do that again,” or “note to self” lessons are great learning tools. Imagine if no one was willing to take a chance on trying new approaches, techniques, and products where we might be. Terry and I agreed that simply stretching the design team’s willingness to look beyond its comfort zone would be a huge step forward.

Leadership for the future
Engineers need to lead the charge of designing and building more sustainable neighborhoods. We have the ability to analyze the options and fit the proper methods to obtaining a sustainable outcome. You will not lose your license (the largest fear within the psyche of an engineer) trying to be innovative. Engineers lose their license over other issues—not being licensed in the first place, practicing outside their license restrictions, etc. Professional review boards do not have an enforcement action for creativity that does not work out the way the engineer envisioned.

So many options, so little time
Every project has a deadline. Time is money for all projects. The development team cannot afford to learn on the project. A team must continue to educate itself to be well versed in multiple, sustainable-design techniques, anticipating it may need to be ready to utilize that knowledge. Without this drive to stay well versed on sustainable solutions, an engineer may try to force fit a square peg in a round hole.

What if other professions were to act like the development ­industry?
Doctors quit using blood letting as a method of treatment quite awhile ago. When we seek the advice of a healthcare professional, we expect that we will be treated with the latest equipment, medication, and techniques available. If we need a surgical procedure, we expect the latest, least-invasive techniques to be part of our care.
Why then doesn’t the development team look at a site with the same thought process? The innovation and use of cutting-edge technology we expect from others, we should also expect from ourselves. The developer needs to ask for a change of approach on their project and the engineer has to provide options.

When I look at the definition of engineer, what I find is:
“Engineers gather information on the environmental consequences of proposed actions and assess the effects of proposed actions to assist society and policy makers in the decision-making process. Some consider this profession to be the link between art and science.”
I believe many in the engineering field have forgotten the “link between art and science” part of the definition.  

Push the envelope
Remember that proper sustainable ­design must include people, planet, and profit—compromising one of them is not an option. Our firm often is asked to re-engineer a project that is heavy on people and planet, but ignores profit.  

Engineers, please challenge yourselves, as well as your developer ­customers, to move forward in providing sustainable neighborhoods. Provide ­options, thoughts, expertise, and passion in moving the development industry­ ­forward. SLDT