Image Is Everything
Beyond
concerns about the environmental stigma that may be associated with a
specific property and the cleanup costs, the potential effects of
environmental conditions on corporate image should be considered. We
have seen several recent projects where corporate decision makers have
been particularly sensitive to the attitudes of the workers who will
inhabit the building. There was a worry that any attempt to leave
contamination in place, regardless of the lack of risk opined by the
environmental experts, would be seen by the employees as management
getting a good deal on a contaminated property at the expense of worker
safety.
In each case, the employees have been highly skilled and
educated engineers and scientists who were in an excellent position to
understand and accept a decision to leave contamination in place.
However, the corporate managers chose to meet a higher cleanup level to
show their commitment to providing the best workplace possible. The
managers were particularly focused on maintaining their corporate image
of environmental stewardship and employee commitment because they use
these differentiators to attract the best employees.
How Much Will it Cost?
Obviously,
the cost of environmental cleanup can be a big variable, affecting the
viability of a redevelopment project. The first question from a
developer, usually well before purchasing the property, is how much
will it cost to cleanup the site? A developer negotiating a real estate
deal usually does not want to hear about the complexities of the issue
- he or she wants an answer. This is when scale and cost sensitivity
are important. A cost difference of $200,000 may be a big issue for a
manufacturing facility that is managing a fuel oil contamination
beneath the building as part of a yearly operating budget; but that
same cost difference may be insignificant when part of a $100 million
redevelopment of the same property.
Cost estimates evolve
throughout the planning process. The goals and limitations of a cost
estimate require careful communication between the environmental
consultant and the client. To evaluate a specific project, an accurate
cost estimate with a high degree of precision may be needed, and a
detailed subsurface investigation of the property, costing $50,000 or
more, may be required to support the cost estimate. But for a project
where less precision is needed, simply reviewing regulatory files to
establish that there is contamination and that it will cost $1,000,000
to remedy may be enough information for the developer to make a "go or
no-go" decision.
Developing cost estimates that are less precise
but still support the decision-making process will cost much less than
developing more refined cost estimates. Selecting the right approach
for any given site or situation requires an in-depth understanding of
the owner/developer's business decision process, cost sensitivity, and
corporate attitudes toward environmental-related issues. By working
with a consultant who understands this, you can reduce upfront costs
while getting the information you need to select the site and cleanup
level that best fits your plans and corporate goals.
Jim
Ash, PE, LSP, vice president at GEI Consultants, has more than 15 years
of consulting experience, concentrating on regulatory compliance
strategies, remedial design, and construction management. Patrick King,
PE, environmental division manager at GEI Consultants, has more than 13
years of experience developing subsurface investigations, evaluating
remediation alternatives, implementing response actions, and managing
contamination during construction. GEI Consultants is one of the
nation's leading geotechnical, environmental, and water resources
engineering firms. For more information, please visit www.geiconsultants.com.
|
