Atlanta’s green-building ordinance tabled until September
July 29, 2009 at 3:22 pm by Thomas Wheatley in NewsWhen we first reported on the city’s proposed sustainable building ordinance, a monster piece of legislation that would require most new construction in Atlanta to be more eco-friendly, word was that it was expected to sail through. After all, what better time than one of the worst development markets in recent memory to push for a policy that’s poised to make the city more green and help future residents save cash on their energy bills?
Well, things changed. At yesterday’s Atlanta City Council Community Development and Human Resources committee meeting, councilmembers decided to table the legislation.
The basic line we’re hearing from sources is that there were some provisions in the ordinance that stakeholders wanted to “review.” That’s code for “wait a gosh darn minute, we’ve got some concerns!”
Word is that trade groups representing developers and restaurants — industries that would have to pay more to meet the proposed energy-efficiency and water-saving standards — have asked for more time to examine the ordinance. Sources tell us they’d prefer the city allow it to be voluntary with incentives. (We’ve asked for comment from several trade groups involved and officials who worked on the ordinance. We’ll update when we hear word back.)
Those are basic concerns that often keep industries and homeowners from pursuing environmentally friendly construction. The upfront cost is more, but you save money in the end.
If everyone can come to an agreement by the next committee meeting on Sept. 1, the ordinance will get another hearing.
August 2nd, 2009 at 9:06 pm
I certainly hope that wisdom prevails here. Atlanta had a chance to be a very forward-thinking city in terms of green development. Let’s hope that the delay is only temporary; some of the provisions of the bill are excellent.
August 7th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Atlanta is already a nationally-recognized leader in green development (No. 3 city in the country for green buildings, according to SustainLane.com).
Why do we need an ordinance — with its accompanying red tape and cost increases — to mandate what is already a market-driven success?