Built Safe, Built VA | Reaffirming the Industry’s Commitment to Jobsite Safety

By Eric S. Cavallo - Licensed Commercial Building Contractor, Virginia | Member, International Code Council (ICC) | Appointed Board Member, Virginia Beach Board of Zoning Appeals (2025–2029) | Advisory Committee Member, Virginia DHCD – SB195 Code Reform | Founder & CEO, Earthly Infrastructure® Building and Infrastructure Development Inc.

Jobsite safety remains one of the most critical obligations within the construction industry—not merely as a matter of project performance, but as a legal requirement, an ethical imperative, and a professional benchmark. In Virginia, construction safety expectations are governed by a combination of federal and state oversight, including the Virginia Occupational Safety and Health (VOSH) Program, OSHA standards under 29 CFR Part 1926, and enforcement mechanisms contained within the Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC). These frameworks exist to ensure a uniform minimum standard for safe practice across every licensed construction activity in the Commonwealth.

However, the successful implementation of safety measures is not accomplished by regulation alone. It is achieved through the culture, planning, and day-to-day decisions of builders, subcontractors, project managers, and trade partners. Effective safety programs demand more than posted signage and required PPE—they require comprehensive pre-task planning, documented job hazard analyses, qualified supervision, and transparent chains of responsibility. When these systems fail, the consequences are not theoretical: injuries, litigation, insurance exposure, and long-term reputational harm become very real.

In Virginia’s rapidly growing markets—particularly in the multifamily, commercial, and infrastructure sectors—the complexity of projects compounds risk. Overlapping scopes of work, dense scheduling, and limited staging areas introduce unique safety challenges that cannot be deferred or overlooked. From excavation support systems and fall protection plans to confined space entry and material handling protocols, each phase of construction demands a risk-aware approach. The firms that compete successfully in today’s industry understand that incident prevention is not separate from business strategy—it is central to it.

Furthermore, jobsite safety is not confined to the physical boundaries of the construction zone. Projects that fail to manage public interface—through improperly secured perimeters, unmarked hazards, or insufficient traffic control—can jeopardize public welfare, invite enforcement action, and erode confidence in the construction profession. Safety, therefore, is not merely internal compliance—it is a signal of professionalism to the broader community, including municipalities, neighbors, and end users.

The Built Safe, Built VA initiative was developed to promote a statewide culture of safety-conscious construction, grounded in law and reinforced by ethical practice. In today’s regulatory environment, it is no longer acceptable to treat safety as a temporary campaign or a check-the-box obligation. It must be embedded into the operational DNA of every contractor and design professional licensed to build in Virginia. When we build safely, we protect lives, uphold our licenses, and elevate the industry as a whole.

I invite fellow professionals, regulators, and stakeholders to share their perspectives on how we can continue strengthening safety practices across Virginia’s construction sector. Your insights are welcome as part of this ongoing conversation.

Adaptive Reuse in Virginia: A Regulatory Framework for Reviving Retail Sites

By Eric S. Cavallo
Virginia Licensed Contractor (Commercial Building); Board Member, Virginia Beach Board of Zoning Appeals; Advisor, Virginia DHCD – Single‑Stair Exit Reform Stakeholder Committee; International Code Council (ICC) Member; Founder & President, Earthly Infrastructure®

The decline of regional shopping malls across the Commonwealth has introduced a complex land use dilemma for municipalities, planners, and policymakers. Once considered cornerstones of suburban economic development, many of these properties now stand largely vacant, structurally outdated, and commercially obsolete. However, their location, scale, and infrastructure access position them as high-potential candidates for adaptive reuse—if approached through a framework of legal clarity, regulatory flexibility, and long-term community value.

Adaptive reuse, in this context, is not limited to architectural retrofitting. It encompasses the comprehensive reclassification of land use purpose, including the integration of mixed-income housing, municipal services, civic space, and environmentally resilient infrastructure within sites previously designated for single-use retail. Such conversions require thoughtful zoning interpretation, updated comprehensive planning language, and in many cases, negotiated variances to enable economically feasible and legally compliant redevelopment outcomes.

Virginia’s Uniform Statewide Building Code (USBC) and local zoning ordinances can either inhibit or facilitate these efforts depending on the jurisdiction’s posture toward reclassification, density allowances, and parking requirements. Municipalities seeking to lead in this area may consider adopting overlay zones or special exception pathways that support flexibility while preserving core safety, access, and land use compatibility standards. Additionally, state-level incentives—such as Industrial Revitalization Fund (IRF) grants—may offer valuable financial support when paired with public-private implementation agreements.

From a governance standpoint, transparency in permitting, clearly defined site plan review procedures, and early interdepartmental coordination are essential. Localities must balance the interests of economic development with long-term land use resilience, ensuring that reactivated mall sites serve broader public objectives. Successful projects are those that integrate transportation connectivity, code compliance, and meaningful community benefit—whether through affordable housing units, public space commitments, or green infrastructure performance.

Ultimately, the adaptive reuse of Virginia’s vacant malls is not simply a design challenge—it is a test of public leadership, legal adaptability, and professional resolve. As demographic patterns shift, greenfield development diminishes, and infrastructure costs escalate, the value of repurposing these properties becomes both practical and imperative. What becomes of these spaces will reflect not only local economic priorities, but also our collective capacity to govern with foresight. Communities that approach this process with legal precision, policy clarity, and long-term public interest in mind will not just reclaim space—they will redefine it for generations to come.