A checklist of environmental considerations that would indicate site suitability and can ultimately affect cost and timing of development, function of the proposed facility and future expansion capabilities includes:

• Presence of pine or hardwood as an indicator of prior site use; pines may indicate recent agricultural use and prior site disturbance

 • Flora and fauna characteristics, presence of rare, threatened and endangered species and natural forested buffers

• Natural drainage characteristics, locations of streams and ponds, local policy and regional storm water retention opportunities or constraints, i.e. a Best Management Practice (BMP) facility required to reduce post-development runoff can occupy 10 to 12 percent of the site area

• Riparian buffers, floodplains and watershed protection programs, such as the Chesapeake Bay areas in Virginia, Maryland and Delaware 

• Wetlands, preliminarily identified from the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) maps, preliminary wetland investigations and jurisdictional determination, field flagged and delineated, and confirmation by regulatory agencies

• Soils and geotechnical evaluation, suitability/limitations on construction, erodability of soils

• Slopes, magnitude of earthwork required to develop as planned

• Elevation and views, natural view shed protection measures, visual buffer, and view shed requirements

• Hazardous materials, underground storage tanks (UST’s) on site and in vicinity

• Archaeology and historic sites, and cultural resource protection requirements

Phase I ESA A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), which addresses in varying degrees many of the above environmental elements, consists of four components of study: record review, site reconnaissance, interviews and report. At a minimum, this level of study should be accomplished prior to site selection. 

A Phase I ESA will also include recommendations for further study as necessary.

Environmental conditions identification accomplished through an ESA Phase I process and the resultant permitting requirements at a federal, state and local level can place unanticipated constraints on a site selected for investigation of development potential. Environmental regulations cannot be avoided, only minimized by careful, complete, and early analysis of the factors affecting site development. 

Environmental permitting can add anywhere from three months to three years to a development process. Based on careful review and analysis, innovative solutions may often be developed to address environmental site findings, shortening the time and cost involved in addressing environmental impacts.

Local watershed management guidelines can often be interpreted in a proactive manner that allows placement of storm water and water quality detention facilities in a natural setting utilizing a buffer or unused area of the site. 

Historic and cultural resource issues can be studied and cataloged prior to development, making available valuable acreage for future development. 

With creative layout, wetland impacts can be avoided and minimized to a level that will allow regulatory approval. 

Wetland impacts often require mitigation of the impacts in a 2:1 or 3:1 replacement ratio. These mitigated impacts can often be settled with creative solutions such as purchase of credits in a federally-approved mitigation bank. 

This purchase of credits relieves the future liability of the client for impacts at time of purchase. 

Storm water can often be dealt with by obtaining rights or credits in a regional facility within the same watershed developed for private use. 

Forest buffers can often be reduced with purchase of forest rights from preapproved forest banks as an acceptable replacement for loss of forested areas. 

The bottom line Environmental due diligence is an important part of any site selection, and long-term management of environmental issues will allow future development to be more cost effective.