Gainesville chosen to participate in 2024 LEED for Cities leadership program
Press release from City of Gainesville
GAINESVILLE, Fla. – The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has selected the City of Gainesville as one of 12 city governments nationwide to participate in its 2024 LEED for Cities Local Government Leadership Program.
The program helps local governments, in their pursuit of earning LEED certification, set goals, collect data, and validate performance against sustainability and quality-of-life metrics using the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) for Cities rating system.
“Embracing sustainability is not just about enhancing our surroundings, it’s about setting a standard for the future,” said Gainesville Chief Climate Officer Dr. Dan Zhu. “As we join the LEED for Cities Leadership Program, we are not merely aiming for certification but for a transformation that embeds resilience and quality of life into the very core of our community,” she said.
LEED certification helps local governments attract new economic activity, reach global climate goals, improve air and water quality, and enhance quality of life for all.
“Local governments are leading the way in finding solutions to address the climate crisis, and LEED for Cities helps local leaders accelerate progress that improves the health of people and our planet,” said Peter Templeton, USGBC president and CEO. “The 12 local governments selected to participate in this year’s cohort are committed to accountability and will use LEED as a tool to ensure they are on a path of continuous improvement,” he said.
LEED for Cities and Communities is a key component of regional climate action plans. Program participants evaluate access to green spaces, public health indicators, climate action and resilience, and environmental justice.
In addition to Gainesville, the 2024 cohort includes four Florida cities – Boca Raton, Coral Springs, Jacksonville, and St. Petersburg – as well as Carrollton, TX; El Paso, TX; Gary, IN; La Crosse, WI; New Orleans, LA; Overland Park, KS; and Philadelphia, PA.
The USGBC is the leading authority on green building and the global developer of the LEED green building program. More than 100 local governments have validated processes on sustainability, resilience, and equity goals since its inception.
Creating a sustainable community by addressing climate change, reducing Gainesville’s carbon footprint, and designing new developments based on sustainability concepts are key elements of the City’s strategic plan.
They obviously omitted the mistake initiated by that other idiot Mayor Hanrahan when they submitted the application.
Seems to be something involving BOA to keep the ESG score up
“Through Bank of America’s support of the LEED for Cities program, more than 100 local governments have validated processes on sustainability, resilience and equity goals since its inception.”
https://www.usgbc.org/articles/usgbc-announces-2024-leed-cities-leadership-program-cohort
Gainesville has a Chief Climate Officer? Is “environmental justice” part of the job description? Will property owners lose the right to use their land as they had planned?
Will this make building codes even more expensive? Seems at odds with the affordable housing goals.
“LEED certification helps local governments… reach global climate goals…” Who sets the global climate goals? Pretty sure that’s not hard-working citizens of independent, sovereign nations.
State residential codes – which we are under – changed significantly and for the better after Hurricane Andrew which hit south Florida in 1991, creating severe damage on homes built using standard practices of that time. Studies on that damage by engineers resulted in structural changes, some of which cost relatively little but are common sense (added tie down strapping, proper bracing and connection of gable ends) and others more costly (sheathing entire house with plywood on frame homes). Masonry homes require more vertical steel reinforcement. All buildings must be analyzed by an engineer or architect for it’s resistance to estimated maximum wind loads (most of our area requires designing for sustained – 1 hour – 130 MPH winds) and who calculate for specific practices to resist those forces. Those changes add to the cost of homes by maybe $4-7k and engineering fees are part of that. You’d be foolish to not want your new home to comply with these requirements and you don’t have a choice.
There have been no other significant costly changes to the code we are under. Most make sense and a few safety oriented codes have changed to be more loose, though some harder.
Codes affecting energy usage have changed, requirements increasing over the last 30 years, but none that are unreasonable in my opinion – except a pet peeve.
We cannot use aluminum windows in our area anymore – they’re allowable down state – because of energy concerns. Yes, aluminum is a good conductor of heat and cold – bad – but the area windows frames present to the exterior is small enough to have very limited affect on building energy use. I’m old school and I like aluminum windows – especially for modern buildings – and think this fairly recent ruling silly. I use them – the only alternatives are costly wood or fiberglass – but still have questions about the longevity of “vinyl” windows after long term sun exposure. Hopefully my concern on this is misplaced.
Our local government has been infiltrated with UN agenda…it was UN agenda Kyoto protocol that Hanrahan pushed biomass and ruined GRU.