| 
Kari Hewitt
The charge for climate change resiliency and adaptation planning policies around the world has been led at the local and municipal levels, impacting development for the better. As a result of extreme weather events – rising sea levels, drought, hurricanes, heat island effect – cities have been forced to respond with innovative policies and programs that help developers plan cities of the future that will still be standing 20, 50, 100 years from now.
Here in the U.S., planning successes in cities like Boston, New York and Seattle are pushing policy changes further up the regulatory ladder to state and federal procedures. The Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs is currently reviewing public comments for a draft policy on Climate Change Adaptation and Resiliency under the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act (MEPA). This proposed policy would require a building owner or developer to address the impacts of climate change on a project, including sea level rise, coastal flooding, storm surge and changes in precipitation and temperature. It would also require an assessment how a project could contribute to (or reduce, as applicable) climate change impacts.
At the White House, President Barack Obama recently issued an executive order that establishes a Federal Flood Risk Management Standard. The president’s executive order 13690 gives agencies three options for establishing the flood elevation and hazard area they use in siting, design and construction of federal projects. The new flood standard will apply when federal funds are used to build, or significantly retrofit or repair, structures and facilities in and around floodplains to ensure that those structures are resilient, safer and long-lasting.
These are all steps toward a coordinated defense aimed at protecting our assets and infrastructure against the increasing number of weather-related disruptions that are becoming more frequent.
From a sustainability point of view, this is a positive shift to see the development of regulations around resiliency at the state and federal levels. Especially in Boston, as we are very much aware of the dangers we face with “wicked high tides” and an aging infrastructure. It is going to take more than the leadership at the municipal level to develop policies and programs – and most importantly, provide funding – for the modernization our roads, transportation and buildings need.
For decades, resiliency planning for public and private projects has been done for the most part voluntarily. As new financing mechanisms become mainstream, and returns on investment are squeezed, a cohesive resiliency plan becomes a critical part of an overall asset portfolio. This recognizes that presently billions of dollars are being spent recovering from weather-related destruction.
Conflicting Reports
While support at the federal and state levels is a welcome start, it presents challenges in coordinating what cities are already implementing.
There is some criticism of both of these policies in the lack of specific direction/requirements around the climate change science and projections to be used in development projects. While the policies should allow for some flexibility in approach, they should also provide more explicit direction on what models/projections may be used in order to avoid confusion and promote consistency among developers. A consistent baseline of risk will help to define funding needs and move projects forward.
There are still many other aspects of these new state and federal regulations that must be worked out to ensure long-standing development for decades to come. For engineering and planning firms like VHB, which work with multiple agencies with potentially differing resiliency standards, developers have questions around the reality of how these policies will play out.
Until such guidance is incorporated, our clients will rely on us to help them understand the science and to provide appropriate guidance.
These state and federal initiatives represent unchartered territories in which we must manage different development practices. We welcome the leadership from, and dialogue with, our legislators and regulators, recognizing the importance of planning for resiliency. However, careful consideration and coordination is going to be necessary with practical guidelines for those on the ground developing buildings and infrastructure designed to withstand present and future effects of climate change for decades to come.
