Last month, the Los Angeles Planning Commission joined the rapidly accelerating "green" movement by approving an ordinance calling for large residential development projects to meet stricter environmental standards.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the City Council can take a bold green step forward by approving this ordinance, which would require developers of buildings larger than 50,000 square feet or containing more than 50 residential units to meet LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certified standards.

Such LEED certified green buildings have proven to offer benefits to safeguard human health and protect the environment.

For instance, Downtown L.A.'s first gold-certified green high-rise residential condo building (Elleven, developed by The South Group, where I am a principal) is annually saving the city 1.2 million kilowatt-hours of electricity, enough to power 114 homes; 6,900 tons of carbon dioxide, equivalent to removing 75 cars from the traffic-impacted roads; and 505,536 gallons of water, equal to 25,277 showers. It also diverted, and recycled, 1,365 tons of construction debris from landfills.

With energy savings like these, what better message can we, as a forward-looking city, send to future generations about the priorities of today's citizens and governments than to construct LEED certified buildings?

The proposed ordinance would strengthen current building codes by establishing even higher environmental standards estimated to cut energy usage by a minimum of 15%.

More importantly, it would secure L.A.'s position as a global green leader committed to significantly raising the bar on sustainable growth and eco-friendly lifestyles. The nation, and the world, will look to our city as a green metropolis that recognizes its buildings stand as a testament to the hopes, dreams and concerns of the present population.

Furthermore, the resulting crop of new green buildings that will sprout up in Downtown and throughout the city will help L.A. attract and retain what social economist Robert Florida calls, in his book Rise of the Creative Class, a new generation of young, affluent, highly educated and innovative people. These residents will bring with them the kind of clean industries, well-paying jobs and supporting retail and service businesses that every city covets.

Even without municipal mandates, many visionary developers are already embracing the green building movement. They've long realized that doing the right thing provides a demonstrable payback to the environment in the long run. Many Downtown L.A. condominium buyers are demanding - and are willing to pay extra for - sustainable design, affording some payback to developers in the short term as well.

Many civic and business leaders say they want to see energy and environmental efficiency in new residential buildings, but they don't want to see it legislated to death with another bureaucratic quagmire.

Some argue that existing Title 24 building codes are green-tinted enough. In fact, many of these codes actually make it very difficult or even impossible for developers to go a deeper shade of green. For instance, why can't grey water (water used in homes for washing dishes, laundry, etc.) be recycled and reused to irrigate landscaping?

Opponents of the proposed ordinance suggest that any additional regulations would make it harder to develop both affordable and market-rate housing, further exacerbating the region's livability. Perhaps incremental tax credits and fast-track permitting processes can be written into the proposed initiative to add further incentives and rewards to building sustainable housing.

Indeed, more dialogue may be needed to address these and other industry concerns, but we should all work diligently together to find a way to pass it, not find reasons to further muddy the issues and sink it.

Is it harder and more costly to build green? If it were cheap and easy, every developer in the nation would already be doing it. But sometimes the role of government is to push people to rethink common practices and leap over high hurdles for the greater good of society. Seat belt, air quality and MPG standards all were met with resistance from major industries when initially proposed by the government. All ultimately prevailed because they were the right things to do. So is adopting a greener standard for certain new buildings and residential projects.

In the early days of the green building movement, many developers were reporting that green buildings cost 10%-15% more to construct than traditional structures. With the proliferation of more green-conscious practices and cost-efficient building materials and systems offered in the marketplace, LEED certification has become more readily attainable and financially feasible.

Factors that affect the cost of achieving LEED certification are development team experience and the scale of the project. However, recent examples right here in Downtown L.A. pencil out to show the additional cost to construct a certified urban infill building can be as low as 1%-2%. The tremendous public goodwill developers get back from having that LEED green stamp is the biggest payback benefit.

The existing Title 24 building codes are an excellent start to achieving the most energy savings and least amount of environmental impact, and L.A. leaders are wise to look at implementing the even higher LEED standards for appropriate large residential projects.

In an environment where resources are diminishing and energy, water and sewer rates continue to rise, the LEED initiative will play a continuous and important role in the green footprint buildings leave in our city. If L.A. wants to be seen as a progressive city, now is the time to take the next bold green step.