Gary Lee Moore, City Engineer, BOE Prepared by: Deborah Weintraub. AlA, Deputy City Engineer, Arch/Eng Consulting Services Program 5/29/07 Page 1 BUREAU OF SANITATION
FORM GEN. 160 (Rev. 97) CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
DATE: October 3,2007
TO: Honorable Eric Garcetti, President of the Los Angeles City Council
FROM: Cynthia Ruiz, President Board of Public Works
Subject: BUREAU OF SANITATION’S ENVIRNOMENTAL PROGRAMS REPORT
This memo is in response to your request to provide a status report regarding the Bureau of Sanitation’s environmental programs to meet the City Council’s priority policies on the environment.
Introduction: This Environmental Programs Report is prepared to provide an update on the status of a number of issues/projects specific to the Department of Public Works - Bureau of Sanitation. This report will address issues related to the Solid Resources, Wastewater, and Stormwater Programs.
Environmental Programs Status: 1) Solid Resources Programs: a. Recycling Program Goals: The Bureau of Sanitation (BOS) will implement and expand recycling and waste diversion programs to capitalize on opportunities to reach multifamily buildings and the commercial sector. i. Citywide Multi-Family Recycling. The Bureau of Sanitation continues to increase recycling awareness and recycling opportunities for all residents and businesses within the City of Los Angeles. Through September 2007, the Bureau has expanded the Multifamily Recycling Program citywide with over 111,000 multifamily residential units now participating in this very successful program. In addition to meeting and exceeding the Bureau’s goal of 88,000 units participating by September 2007, the Bureau has recently been notified by the State’s Department of Conservation that the City will be receiving a grant totaling $2.3 million to expand this successful program citywide for residents in low-income and underserved communities. ii. Citywide Commercial Recycling. The Bureau continues to expand the Restaurant Food Waste Recycling Program and Commercial Waste and Recycling Assessments. Through September 2007, the Bureau has expanded the Restaurant Food Waste Recycling Program to over 215 restaurants. Through September 2007, the Bureau has also successfully completed 197 commercial waste assessments. In addition to meeting and exceeding the Bureau’s goal of 180 commercial waste assessments due by City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 2 of 12
December 2007, several of the businesses contacted have committed to participating in the Bureau’s Solid Waste Integrated Resources Program or SWIRP. iii. Recycling All Plastics and Expanding Recycling Opportunities for Residents. Effective July 2007, City residents can recycle all clean plastics numbered 1 through 7, including Styrofoam ™ and plastic bags, in their curbside Blue Bins. These are just the newest additions to one of the most comprehensive curbside residential recycling programs in the nation. The Bureau already accepts all clean paper, cardboard, glass bottles and jars, metal cans, metal hangers, and many other items. Bureau staff is continuously working with our recycling partners to find local markets for remanufacturing of our recyclable commodities. iv. Recycling Education and Outreach. Beginning in August 2007, the Bureau commenced anti-litter and blue bin recycling advertisements, through a variety of media, to reach out to residents and businesses in Los Angeles. The anti-litter advertisements were run for a period of four weeks, while the blue bin recycling advertisements were run for a period of eight weeks. The educational advertisement placements are as follows: > CBS Outdoor (200 rear bus ads, 150 bus shelter ads); running August through mid October 2007. Approximately 40 of the 200 rear bus ads will be in Spanish, with another 30 of the bus shelter ads also in Spanish. > Daily News (1/2 pg. full color, twice weekly), ad run August through October 2007. Also includes internet banner ad on Daily News website with links back to Bureau website for more information. > Impacto (full pg. color ad, once weekly); ad run August through October 2007. Also includes internet banner ad on Impacto website with links back to Bureau website for more information. > LA Times (1/4 pg. black & white ad, twice weekly); ad run August through October 2007. Also includes internet banner ad on Impacto website with links back to Bureau website for more information. > Advertisements several times daily on Radio Disney (KDIS AM 1110), August through October 2007, that feature a conversation between Robo Blue and Mr. Recycle on how to recycle the right way using your Blue Bin in the City of Los Angeles. > To compliment the above outreach efforts, the Bureau is also preparing an Authority for Expenditure request to fund blue bin ad placements, as well as multifamily recycling ad placements, in 15 local print publications and seven trade publications. Advertisements will be in English, Spanish, Korean, Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese.
iv. LAUSD Environmental Education and Blue-Bin recycling. > Progress on the initiative is meeting and exceeding goals/targets. Through September 2007, the Bureau has expanded our environmental education and blue bin recycling services to 291 schools out of a goal of 260 schools by September 2007.
2 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 3 of 12
> In September 2007, Bureau staff conducted 36 environmental and recycling presentations to more than 950 students. The goal for this effort, which the Bureau met and exceeded, was 25 presentations to more than 750 students by the end of September 2007. > Cooperation and coordination for environmental education and blue bin recycling services between the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) continues to be a rewarding challenge. There is concern for continued expansion of the environmental education and joint blue bin recycling program with LAUSD. The Bureau continues to be very committed to this effort; however, the commitment is still not there from LAUSD. If LAUSD staff do not cooperate, all efforts may stall or even be reversed. To resolve this potential problem, the Bureau suggests that the Mayor work with the LAUSD Board to get the required commitment. An LAUSD Board mandate for all schools to participate in the joint blue bin recycling program would make the expansion of this program much more efficient/effective. b. Solid Waste Program Goals: The BOS to meet Mayoral goals to build alternative technology facilities to convert 30% of solid waste resources into green energy and to eliminate our dependence on urban landfills. Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan. The Solid Waste Integrated Resources Plan (SWIRP) is a two-phase program with a goal is to develop and implement a 20-year planning document that will lead the City towards achieving zero waste by 2030. Phase I will include developing the City’s guiding principles through an innovative stakeholder driven process that will outline the City’s objectives to provide sustainability, resource conservation, source reduction and recycling, renewable energy, maximum material recovery, environmental protection, and economic benefits.
SWIRP will encompass various Mayoral goals, as well as goals outlined in the RENEW LA Plan (Recovering Energy, Natural Resources and Economic Benefit from Waste for Los Angeles) adopted by Council in February 2006. SWIRP will also look at expanding and/or adding to existing Bureau solid resources programs and infrastructure, and will recommend various policy options as a means of reaching “zero waste”.
A personal services contract with HDR Engineering Inc. was executed in April 2007 for the development of the SWIRP.
Phase I outreach will consist of 100 key constituent meetings, 75 business interviews, 36 grassroots house meetings, 36 regional workshops, and 3 citywide conferences. Phase II will include the development of an Integrated Facilities Plan, Environmental Documentation, Financial Plan, and Policy & Implementation Plan.
Public outreach has included various community organizations, Neighborhood Councils, business organizations, Chambers of Commerce, environmental groups, environmental justice groups, unions, private sector haulers and recycling facility operators, regulators, academia, etc.
3 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 4 of 12
As of October 1, 2007, the Bureau has completed a total of 189 public outreach meetings to hear the voice of a broad section of the City (these include 86 key constituent meetings, 14 ^ house meetings, 75 business interviews, and 14 Regional Workshops). Our first two rounds of 14 SWIRP Regional Workshops were completed in our six wasteshed/collection districts throughout the City, which include West Valley, East Valley, Western, North-Central, South LA, and Harbor district, as well as a centralized downtown meeting. The first Citywide conference is scheduled on October 20, 2007 where each of the seven regional districts come together to share their visions of a zero waste city.
Phase I of SWIRP is scheduled to be completed in April 2008, on Earth Day. For additional information that stakeholders can readily access, a website has been established at: www.lacitv.org/san/srssd/swirp
ii. Alternative Technology Facility. To reduce reliance on urban landfill and to meet the goals outlined by the Mayor and the City of Los Angeles Council’s adopted RENEW LA Plan to have an Alternative Technology Facility operational by 2010, the Bureau is implementing the Alternative Technologies Project for processing of post-source separated residual Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) in the City of Los Angeles. This project will reduce the City’s dependence on urban landfilling, fossil fuel, greenhouse gas emissions, increase the recovery of resources and generation of renewable energy in an environmentally sound manner, while emphasizing options that are energy efficient, socially acceptable, economical, and that will create green jobs locally. Background: In May 2004, the City executed Phase I contract with URS Corporation to study the feasibility of using alternative technologies for processing post-source separated residual MSW. In Phase I, over 250 technologies and technology vendors were evaluated, and 25 technologies/vendors were identified as being viable options for the City to successfully process its post-source separated residual MSW. In 2004, Councilmember Greig Smith, Mr. Enrique Zaldivar, and other City staff participated in a tour of alternative technologies facilities in Europe. Visited facilities included the following: 1. Advanced Thermal Recycling -The MVR plant is located in the South-West of City of Hamburg, Germany, 2. Pyrolysis Facility - MOIIpyrolyseanlage (MPA), City of Burgau, Germany, 3. Gasification Facility - Thermoselect Plant, City of Karlsruhe, Germany, 4. Anaerobic Digestion Facility - Valorga Facility, Barcelona, Spain, 5. Anaerobic Digestion Facility, Brecht II DRANCO, City of Brecht, Belgium,
Phase II, a two-year contract, executed February 28, 2006 was designed to build on the knowledge gained in Phase I. Phase II includes preparation of a Request for Proposals (RFP), distributing the RFP to suppliers, evaluating responses, and preparing an Alternative Technology Facility Siting Report. In addition, public outreach was initiated in this Phase.
Current Status: On February 05, 2007 the Bureau released a RFP requesting proposals for both a commercial facility capable of processing 200 to 1,000 tons per
4 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 5 of 12
day of residual MSW, and an emerging technology facility capable of processing less than 200 tons of MSW per day. A pre-proposal conference was held on March 7, 2007 and was attended by companies within the United States and from all over the world, including Spain, Germany, Israel, and Japan. Proposals were due on August 22, 2007. The Bureau of Sanitation received thirteen (13) proposals. It is anticipated that interviews with top-ranking proposers will be scheduled in early 2008 and a development partner for the City will be selected by mid 2008.
In addition, the City and URS evaluated over 1,000 potential sites, including both City- owned and privately owned sites. The Siting Evaluation Report for potential sites is being finalized and will shortlist the sites to approximately a dozen potential locations within and outside City limits. The final siting report will be submitted to the Board of Public Works for adoption and recommendation to the Mayor and Council for approval.
As part of the public outreach efforts a website was established at www.lacitv- alternativetechnologv.org that posts all pertinent information and links (i.e. brochure, fact sheet, technical report(s), site visit report(s), etc.), with regards to this project). Public outreach meetings are ongoing with community leaders.
To meet the Mayor and Council’s goal of having an Alternative Technology Facility (2010-2011), the Bureau plans to conduct the remaining tasks as outlined in Figure 1.
:igure 1. - Project Schedule (Phases 11 thru VI 2004] 2005 2006 2007 2008/09 2010/11
dentifv Preferred Tech/Suppliers (Phase I) wmm
ublic Outreach (Phases II, III, IV, V, & VI) Evaluate Suppliers (RFP) (Phase II) Contract negotiations, environmental permitting (Ptjase III)
Perform Detailed Facility Design (Phase IV)
Initial Construction (Phase V)
Completion of Construction Start-up/Commei cial Operation (Phase VI) 2011
c. Biosolids Management Diversification Program Goal: Develop a comprehensive strategy to diversify the disposal of the City's bio-solids. i. Terminal Island Renewable Energy (TIRE) Project: In October 2006, the U.S. EPA issued a permit authorizing the City to construct and operate a Class V Experimental biosolids injection facility with one injection well and at least two monitoring wells within the Terminal Island Plant boundaries. In December 2006, a Negative Declaration was issued, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the determination was approved by the City Council. In January 2007, the Harbor
5 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 6 of 12
Department’s Board of Commissioners approved both the Coastal Development Permit and the Project Development Permit. In April 2007, a groundbreaking ceremony for the TIRE project was held and local television and print media covered the proceedings. In June 2007, the well drilling started and in early August 2007 the construction of the first two wells was completed. A contract amendment is drafted to address the increase in budget and scope of work to include 6 months of start-up and testing, the construction of a third well, additional monitoring equipment required by EPA, and to account for increased costs of construction. This amendment is expected to be approved by the Board of Public Works in late October 2007. This project is expected to process up to 400 wet tons per day of biosolids in three (3) phases. Last year, the City’s Hyperion and Terminal Island plants produced approximately 715 wet tons of biosolids per day. Future milestones: Execute contract amendments - Fall 2007: Construct surface equipment - Spring 2007; Construct brine and biosolids conveyance equipment - Spring 2007; Start-up and commissioning of injection process - Summer 2008. ii. Legislation. In January 2007, proposed language for biosolids legislation was submitted to the Mayor's Office and the City's lobbyist. In February 2007, Assembly Member Cameron Smyth introduced proposed bill AB 1207. The City worked with the bill’s author to amend the proposed bill language with regard to preemption and to establish support for the bill. In April 2007, the bill was scheduled for committee hearing; however, the bill author decided to set the bill as a two-year bill and canceled the committee hearing. This bill will be considered in the upcoming Legislative Session iii. Alternative Technologies. A) In August 2006, the Heat Drying Technology Assessment was completed. This report evaluated proven heat drying technologies to be further evaluated for implementation. B) In August 2007, the Concept Feasibility Report to evaluate siting and permitting/EIR issues and project delivery options is in review and revision. Several issues for review include an expanded assessment of on site versus off-site biosolids drying options, project delivery options and the likelihood of public acceptance for the various approaches with rough cost comparisons. iv. Litigation. In August 2007, the U.S. District Court granted the request for final judgment by the City of Los Angeles and others to overturn Kern County’s ban of biosolids and maintain the land application of biosolids on farmland. The Judge ruled that Measure E “demonstrated irreparable harm” as the ordinance violated the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against biosolids from metropolitan Los Angeles and preempted the California Integrated Waste Management Act by conflicting with a statewide policy of recycling solid waste, which by statute includes biosolids. The Judge summarized that “government agencies cannot decide to stop producing biosolids and instead must find ways to manage those that are produced” and the court found “that land application constitutes a ‘beneficial use’ of biosolids, and indeed the EPA explains that it adopted the term ‘biosolids’ so as ‘to emphasize the beneficial nature of this valuable, recyclable resource.’” d. Clean Air Goals: Convert the fleet of refuse trucks to clean fuel vehicles by 2010. Mayor Villaraigosa has set a goal for the Bureau to convert its entire fleet of diesel- powered solid resources collection vehicles to clean fuel by 2010. Following the adoption
6 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 7 of 12
of Clean Fuel Policy by the City of Los Angeles Council in 2000, the Bureau of Sanitation implemented an Alternative Fuel Program and successfully converted its collection vehicles to operate on clean fuel liquefied natural gas (LNG). In addition to achieving significant emission reductions of many toxic air pollutants including particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen, the use of natural gas, a low carbon fuel, also helps to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases. The following highlights some achievements by the Bureau of Sanitation’s Alternative Fuel Program: i. The Bureau successfully placed in service three state-of-the-art liquefied natural gas/compressed natural gas (LNG/CNG) fueling stations for City’s natural gas powered vehicles at the Bureau’s East Valley, West Valley, and South Los Angeles District Yards. In addition, the Bureau operates an LNG fueling station at the Harbor District Yard. The total combined storage volume of LNG at four stations exceeds 150,000 gallons.
ii. Bureau of Sanitation is deploying one of the largest clean fuel solid resources collection fleets in the country with more than 300 LNG-powered vehicles are in operation. In FY 07-08, the Bureau plans to place in service 80 LNG-powered clean fuel vehicles.
iii. Over 15 million dollars in grant funding from various external sources including Carl Moyer Program, Mobile Sources Air Pollution Reduction Committee, the California Energy Commission, the U.S. Department of Energy have been secured for the Alternative Fuel Program. In FY 06-07, nearly 2 million dollars was awarded.
iv. In FY 06-07, the total LNG usage by the Bureau’s clean fuel vehicles exceeded 2.3 million gallons replacing approximately 1.5 million gallons of diesel, a fossil fuel, and achieving significant emissions reduction of 1.3 tons of particulate matter (PM), 46 tons of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and 490 metric tons of carbon equivalent (MTCE) which is a measure of greenhouse gases.
v. Over 1 million dollars is received annually from the Internal Revenue Service as an Excise Tax Credit for the use of clean fuel LNG to power solid resources collection vehicles.
vi. Fueling station construction and collection vehicle deployment for the remaining North Central and Western Districts are currently in the planning.
e. Green LA Action Plan: Mayor Villaraigosa has set a goal for the City to achieve reduction of greenhouse gas emissions 35% below the 1990 levels by 2030. The Bureau is implementing the Mayor’s Green La Action Plan to lead the nation in fighting global warming with the following targets: i. Recycle 70% of trash by 2015, ii. Convert 100% of City solid resources collection vehicles to low-carbon fuel,
7 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 8 of 12
iii. Implement the City’s innovative water and wastewater IRP, and maximize use of recycled water, including capture and reuse of stormwater, iv. Maximize energy efficiency of wastewater treatment equipment, and v. Increase biogas co-firing of natural gas -fired power plants. The Bureau has implemented several measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from mobile sources, including: - Keep the vehicles properly maintained and tuned. - Avoid unnecessary idling, - Close doors and windows when running AC, and - Drivers promptly report and request for service when on-board, energy consuming equipment fail to operate. These measures help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as well as to reduce the operating costs. In addition, the Bureau continues its environmental commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by: • Promoting source reduction, recycling, and composting, • Implementing alternative technologies to process source-separated black-bin municipal solid waste, • Actively exploring and implementing cost-effective emerging technologies to improve the local air quality, and • Increasing deployment of clean low-carbon fuel solid resources collection vehicles.
2) Wastewater Program: Program Goal: Plan and implement programs to meet regulatory requirements by improving the condition of the City's wastewater system to reduce sewage spills. i. Collection System Settlement Agreement (CSSA). The City is in full compliance with the CSSA with Santa Monica Baykeeper, United States EPA and the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The provisions of the CSSA are designed to protect neighborhoods and improve water quality throughout Los Angeles through a comprehensive management program including sewer cleaning, upgrades, repc ' achieved reductions in sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), odors and odor cor addition, a number of supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) mane1 CSSA are progressing, including the North Atwater Creek Restoration Wetland, Hazard Park Creek and Wetlands Restoration, and Inner C Pollution Control and Water Circulation Enhancement projects
ii. Onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) (aka se City is complying with the provisions of a Memorandi1’ City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 9 of 12
the Regional Board to protect water quality through regulating the discharge of wastewater where public sewers are not available. They include conducting an inventory and survey of existing septic tanks in the City, identifying high risk septic tanks by proximity to water bodies, issuing an informational brochure on the proper operation of septic tanks, developing and implementing a policy for permitting septic tanks, and reviewing enforcement procedures. The City may need to adopt an ordinance requiring all properties on septic tanks to connect to a sewer if a sewer is available at the time of sale and to require an operating permit for septic tanks, especially those that are identified as high risk. In addition, a plan to construct sewers in areas that are on septic tanks may be necessary. The biggest challenge is the associated costs.
iii. Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). The City is complying with the requirements of the WDRs for publicly-owned sanitary sewer systems. The WDR requires the reporting of sewer spills online to the SWRCB and to develop a written Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) by November 2008. The City submitted applications for permit coverage under the WDR, acquired online accounts and began reporting sewer spills online as of January 2007. The SSMP is being developed and will be completed on schedule.
iv. Collection System condition assessment and Planning. The Bureau continues with excellent progress the following: 1) Sewer Odor Control Master Plan; 2) Sewer Rehabilitation and Replacement Report; 3) Sewer Capacity Assurance Report; 4) Water Integrated Resource Plan (IRP); 5) forty secondary sewer plans; 6) sixteen primary sewer master plans; 7) the hydrodynamic model for the primary sewer system; and 8) CCTV sewer inspections and assessments. v. Private Sewer Laterals. Root-related overflows from root intrusion from private laterals are a major issue for the City. Although the City has done excellent work in reducing these overflows, there is a need to address the condition of private laterals, especially those that that have root intrusion. The Bureau has developed a brochure informing the public of their responsibilities for maintenance and upkeep of sewer laterals. Some future statewide requirements to require that private lateral be inspected and repaired at time of sale may be proposed. vi. Wastewater Treatment Plants. At a cost of approximately $80 million, the Bureau implemented nitrogen removal process operations at the upstream treatment plants as required by Nitrogen TMDL regulations. As a result, the ability of these plants to take on more flow during wet weather to protect the downstream sewer system from overflowing has diminished. Special operational plans to minimize the risk of overflows have been implemented. In addition, a long term plan to expand or add storage at these plants is under development. > The Los Angeles Glendale Water Reclamation Plant’s Nitrification Denitrification (NdeN) facility has been completed and the process was successfully started on April 30, 2007. The plant is presently in stable operation and meeting all permit limits. > The Donald C. Tillman Water Reclamation Plant’s NdeN facility has been completed and is currently in NdeN start-up mode. The plant is stabilizing its processes and
9 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 10 of 12
improving efficiencies in order to meet permit limits for NdeN. Due to wet weather storage capacity concerns the plant will operate only Phase I in NdeN mode. Phase II will be reserved for storage during the wet weather season.
3) Stormwater Program: Program Goal: Effectively plan and implement runoff control program in an effort to improve receiving water quality and meet regulatory compliance deadlines. a. NPDES and TMDLs Regulatory Compliance. The Bureau of Sanitation is responsible for overseeing the implementation of actions to comply with the Los Angeles County Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (MS4 Permit) and Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs). The City will be subject to more than 60 TMDLs by 2012. Currently, 13 TMDLs have been adopted. i. LA River and Ballona Creek Trash TMDLs. The City is successfully complying with the first and second milestones (20% and 30% trash reductions) of these TMDLs through the implementation of Phases I and II of the catch basin retrofit project. In January 2008, Phase III will begin to retrofit approximately 34,000 catch basins by 2011. ii. Santa Monica Bay Beaches Bacteria TMDL. The City has complied with the summer dry-weather requirements by constructing and operating eight low-flow diversions by July of 2007. The upgrading of these facilities to comply with winter dry-weather requirements is underway for completion by 2009. iii. Marina del Rey Harbor Mother’s Beach and Back Basins Bacteria TMDL. The Bureau and other municipalities in the Marina del Rey watershed prepared the Coordinated Monitoring Plan for the Bacteria TMDL. The plan received the Regional Board’s approval in February 2007. Monitoring activities are continuing. iv. Los Angeles River and Ballona Creek Metals & Estuary Toxic Pollutants TMDLs. The Bureau submitted to the Regional Board the Coordinated Monitoring Plans for both the Los Angeles River and Ballona Creek Metals & Estuary Toxics TMDLs. v. NPDES permit. The City is a co-permittee with the County of Los Angeles and 83 other agencies. Currently, the City is operating under an expired permit. The Regional Board is expected to release a draft permit in the next few months and adopt the new permit later in 2008. The new permit has the potential to include numerical water quality standards that will bring new challenges to the City. The Bureau is actively working with the Regional Board to develop the new permit agreeable to both agencies. b. Program Implementation. The Bureau of Sanitation is working to comply with the Clean Water Act and Total Maximum Daily Load requirements by utilizing and leveraging funds such as Proposition O. i. Runoff Control Programs. In Phases I & II, over 14,000 catch basin screen covers and 7,500 catch basin inserts were installed. Since July 2007, the Bureau has inspected 226 food service establishments. Since July 2007, 34 projects that included infiltration
10 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 11 of 12
best management practices have been approved as meeting Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements. SUSMP projects consider infiltration, street greening, low-impact development, green roofs, and porous pavement options to reduce stormwater runoff from developments. ii. Stream Protection Initiative. The stream protection initiative was introduced by Councilmember Weiss for the purpose of protecting and restoring our remaining one percent of natural streams in the City of Los Angeles. The proposed ordinance is being developed that will protect streams, wetlands, flood plains, riparian and aquatic ecosystems. Since concept inception in August 2006, a stakeholder task force comprised of City departments and environmental groups has met monthly to draft a proposed ordinance. Task force members have conducted reviews of the proposed ordinance as well. Currently, the Departments of Public Works and Building and Safety are obtaining further information on the number of parcels affected by a proposed ordinance. In the next two months, stakeholder input on the proposed ordinance will be expanded to include developers, economic development agencies, community development agencies, homeowner associations, City Attorney’s Office, Los Angeles County Flood Control, and Army Corp of Engineers. iii. Street Greening Initiative. The street greening initiative was introduced by Commissioner Daniels for the purpose of infiltration of stormwater runoff by promoting green streets, tree plantings, community gardens, porous pavement, and other greenscapes to our street infrastructures in the City of Los Angeles. Committees comprising of various departments including Bureaus of Sanitation, Engineering, and Street Services and Department of City Planning had met to develop standards for implementation. Task force members are currently conducting reviews of developed standards from other agencies nation-wide. In 2008, stakeholder input will be solicited to include developers, economic development agencies, community development agencies, environmental groups, community groups, and outside public agencies. iv. Low Flow Diversion (LFD). There are twenty-two LFDs currently in operation within the City, of which eight are owned by the City, two by Santa Monica, and twelve by the County. One LFD is being constructed by the City of Santa Monica, and one is under design by the County of LA for the City of Santa Monica. These two LFDs are expected to be completed by 2008. This will bring the total to twenty-four LFDs. There are eight LFDs scheduled to be upgraded to address winter dry weather flows by November 2009. The total annual summer dry weather flow currently being diverted is 6.5 MGD. v. Proposition O. $462.4 million has been committed to 26 multi-benefit projects that address water quality, habitats, groundwater recharge, water reuse, and open space. Such projects include the Machado Lake Ecosystem Rehabilitation, Echo Park Lake Restoration, Santa Monica Bay Beaches Low Flow Diversions Upgrade, South LA Wetland, and Strathem Pit Multi-Use. vi. Water Quality Compliance Master Plan. A motion was introduced by Council members Reyes and Rosendahl to develop a comprehensive plan to address water quality. In March 2007, the Bureau initiated a stakeholder process to develop a Water
11 City Council Environmental Programs Status Report October 2, 2007 Page 12 of 12
Quality Compliance Master Plan (WQCMP). In June 2007, the Bureau held one workshop and the second workshop took place on August 14, 2007. A draft of the WQCMP will be issued in November and the final report in December of 2007. The WQCMP will consider infiltration, street greening, low-impact development, green roofs, and porous pavement to reduce stormwater runoff. vii. Stormwater Pollution Abatement Charge (SPAC) Increase. Major challenges from regulations (new stormwater NPDES permit and TMDLs) have placed demands on the City’s Stormwater Program to require an increase in funding from the SPAC. The SPAC has remained intact for the past ten years at a fixed rate generating only $28 million. The Bureau is working with the CLA, CAO, and the Mayor’s office to explore an increase in the SPAC by placing it on the ballot during the November 2008 presidential election.
Summary: The Bureau is making significant progress towards achieving the City Council’s policy area on the environment and has delivered on the outcomes required to date. The Bureau has taken the appropriate planning steps to position its resources to address this important policy initiative. The Department of Public Works - Bureau of Sanitation is proud to provide the action necessary to achieve this environmental benefit for the residents in the Los Angeles region. If you have any questions concerning this report, please feel free to contact me at (213) 978-0248 or the Director of the Bureau of Sanitation, Mr. Enrique Zaldivar, at (213) 485-2210.
EZ:SK:WKT: cc: Nancy Sutley Mike Mullin Geraldine Rodriguez Enrique Zaldivar Varouj Abkian Traci Minimide Shahram Kharaghani Neil Guglielmo Omar Moghaddam Adel Hagekhalil SteVe Fan Alex Helou Barry Berggren Mas Dojiri
12 Welcome
—jT ' ’tf' ■t "5 5 ssstsSg a:::: Environmental .... ii..*. J Si::: Programs Update to
City Council i . v - * .t • v^v.
mmmam
- ... - ... -... ^ -i (Talking Points) :<« _ i8
October 9, 2007 : ' ; ^
to s City of Los Angeles Department of Public Works
CITY OF LOS ANGELCS Bureau of Sanitation m\Q\M SANITATION oiPAituinT or PUBLIC WORKS Solid Resources Programs______
Solid Waste Integrated Resources Program: • An innovative stakeholder driven plan that will lead the City towards achieving zero waste by 2030
• Will encompass Mayoral goals, RENEW LA goals, and address policy, program, and facility needs
• Personal Services Contract was executed in April ’07 with HDR Engineering Inc. to develop the SWIRP
• 189 public outreach meetings conducted to date and covered a broad and diverse section of the City
• In April 2008, on Earth Day, the Stakeholder Guiding Principles is to be completed Solid Resources Programs
6?;. Alternative Technology Program:
Alternative Technology Facility to process residual MSW by 2010 Increase the landfill diversion rate to meet the Mayor’s new goal of 70% by 2015 Lessen the City’s dependence on landfill disposal Transform waste into a renewable energy source Reduce greenhouse gas emissions
^ p_ » . ■■ ■ ii':, mm...... v A -
; - *-----
■ -■ ... SsfiEsfc: f fail ' -.'A-wJ&Mi
*. ^ » in *§ .^Us- ;,f m ■ $~J;®: . i ,. .,,■ :■: "i / ;fiSI I? ' Solid Resources Programs Alternative Fuel Program for the Solid Resources Collection Vehicles HTriTi
• Placed in service 3 state-of-the-art LNG/CNG fueling I facilities at EV, WV, and South LA district yards. A LNG —I fueling station is also in operation at Harbor district yard. mmm- • Operating one of the largest clean fuel fleets in the country with over 300 LNG powered solid resources collection vehicle. • Over 1 million dollars is received annually as Excise Tax Credit for the use of LNG to fuel vehicles. •Over 15 million dollars in external grant funding awarded to date. ■,/ • Achieve significant emission reductions of toxic air ' / contaminants (PM, NOx, etc.) and greenhouse gases. Solid Resources Programs______
Recycling Program: Increase in recycling awareness and opportunities for residents, restaurants and commercial businesses in the City.
Citywide Multi-Family Recycling: • BOS goal was 88,000 units participating by Sept’07. • Through Sept 2007 BOS has expanded this Program to over 111,000 multifamily units.
Citywide Commercial Recycling: • Targeting Restaurants and Commercial facilities. • Through Sept 2007 BOS has expanded this Program to over 215 restaurants and conducted 197 commercial waste assessments.
• Several businesses have committed to participating in the Bureau’s SWIRP. Stormwater Program
Major Topics of the Program: 1. Prop O
2. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)
3. Water Quality Compliance Master Plan
4. Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP)
5. Stream Protection
6. Street Greening : : : ' .
7. Stormwater NPDES permit :: . : y Stormwater Program (Major Topics)______1. Proposition O:
- $500M general obligation bond to support TMDL compliance. - Fully allocated for multi-benefit projects (water quality, habitat restoration, ground water recharge, stormwater reuse, and open space). - 26 projects have been approved.
2. Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL): -13 TMDLs are currently adopted. - By 2012 more than 60 TMDLs will be promulgated. - Currently in compliance with all adopted TMDLs. 3. Water Quality Compliance Master Plan:
- Council Motion (#07-0663) by CD 1 & 11 (Reyes & Rosendahl, 3/07). - Prepare Strategic Water Quality Compliance Master plan to meet current and emerging regulations (Long Range Plan). - Will consider infiltration, street greening, Low Impact Development, green roofs, and porous pavement. - On schedule to be completed in December 2007. Stormwater Program (Major Topics)______4. Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP): - Minimize and treat runoff from developments. - Infiltration, street greening, Low Impact Development (LID), green roofs, and porous pavement.
5. Stream Protection: - Stream protection initiative introduced by Councilmember Weiss. - Establish policy to protect and restore natural function of streams. - Promote environmental friendly building of developments.
6. Stream Greening: - Establish policy to infiltrate runoff. - Promote green streets, tree plantings, community gardens, and porous pavements.
7. Stormwater NPDES Permit: '-:v - Currently operating under an expired permit - New permit is expected to be adopted in 2008 and will bring new challenges - Potential need for stormwater fee increase. Green LA Action Plan Bureau of Sanitation is implementing Mayor I Villaraigosa’s Green LA Action Plan to Lead the pP:. Nation in Fighting Global Warming: ..
- • RecycleR<=nvrlp> 70% ofnf trash byhv 2015,901 Fi ■ Convert 100% of City solid resources collection vehicles to low- carbon fuel, Implement the City’s innovative water and wastewater IRP, and maximize use of recycled water, including capture and reuse of stormwater, Maximize energy efficiency of wastewater treatment equipment, and Increase biogas co-firing of natural gas -fired power plants.
BUREAU OF STREET LIGHTING
SOLAR STREET LIGHTING IN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES
The City of Los Angeles has over 200,000 streetlights that light up 2/3rd of the City. These systems are currently powered by electricity with underground conduit installation. The Bureau has followed the solar lighting technology for the past five years to continue to evaluate the progress and reliability of these units to determine the feasibility of their use for roadway lighting.
There are three key areas that are essential for a successful solar street lighting system: battery to retain the solar power, the solar panel and a light output. With the recent improvements in this industry the Bureau is currently testing three different manufactures at various field locations. The Bureau is also pursuing solar products with LED lamps to be included in the pilot program. The testing is ongoing and we are working with the manufactures to continue to improve their products.
In addition, for Fiscal Year 07-08, the Bureau of Street Lighting has programmed a pilot project that will involve at least half-a-dozen manufactures to continue the evaluation process. It is hopeful that this pilot program will continue to accelerate the progress of the solar lighting development to secure a unit(s) that would be available for roadway lighting applications on a large scale.
BUREAU OF STREET SERVICES iFORM GEN. 160 (Rev. 6-80) CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
DATE: October 3, 2007
TO: Gerry F. Miller, Chief Legislative Analyst Office of the Chief Legislative Analyst Attention: Rafac
FROM:^, ^William A. Robertson, Director ■•'■''Bureau of Street Services
SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS - BUREAU OF STREET SERVICES PRO-ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES
In response to Councilmember Eric Garcetti’s September 26, 2007 letter to Board of Public Works President Cynthia Ruiz, the Bureau of Street Services (BSS) is pleased to present an overview of our programs and activities that benefit the environment. While the Bureau does not have environmental mandates per se, we do have a long standing commitment to proactively implement maintenance practices that mitigate environmental impact and continuously seek out new opportunities to enhance the environment.
Cold In Place Recycling (CIR1 The Bureau implemented the CIR technology in July 2005. This all-in-one street reconstruction process allows the existing asphalt roadway to be ground up, pulverized, mixed with emulsion, and paved back in place. The benefits include a reduced number of trucks needed to reconstruct an asphalt street, reduced air emissions, a reduced dependency on virgin materials, and elimination of material taken to landfill. The cost savings have already resulted in an additional 25 miles of city streets being resurfaced.
Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement The Bureau is an industry leader in the recycling of asphalt pavement. Over the past ten years, BSS has recycled more than 1,600,000 tons of material at a cost savings of more than $16,000,000 as part of the annual resurfacing program. The Bureau’s two municipal asphalt plants are currently capable of producing mixes of up to 25% recycled materials. In addition, the Bureau’s contracted vendor produces a 50% recycle mix for City use.
In the 2006-07 budget, the Bureau was funded to construct a replacement asphalt plant capable of a 50% recycle mix, which will significantly cut the cost of purchasing virgin aggregate. In addition, the plant will be capable of producing up to 450 tons per hour while being the “cleanest and greenest” asphalt plant on the West Coast. Operation will begin in fiscal year 2008-09.
Slurry Seal In 1998, BSS implemented a rubberized slurry seal program. Since this program’s inception, 500,000 waste tires have been recycled. BSS is working with the vendor and the General Services Department - Standards Division to pilot and test a new rubberized slurry seal mixture, which contains reclaimed asphalt materials. Gerry F. Miller -2- October 3, 2007 BSS Pro-Environmental Programs and Activities
Concrete Recycling BSS recycles 100% of concrete excavated and removed from its sidewalk reconstruction programs. Currently the material is delivered to a vendor that processes the material, which the Bureau then uses as base material in street and sidewalk reconstruction projects. As part of the 2007-08 budget, the Bureau was authorized to purchase a crusher to process and recycle the material at a significant cost savings.
Concrete forms Form lumber is re-used as often as possible which minimizes the amount of new lumber to be purchased, thereby saving trees. In addition, reusable hard plastic or aluminum slip forms are utilized when feasible.
Contracts - Recycled Plastic & Rubber The reuse of recyclable post consumer plastic materials is being accomplished by specifying in contract specifications that such plastic be incorporated into Bureau operations, traffic barricades, tree well grates, signs and trash receptacles. One accomplishment of note is the increase in the percentage of post consumer recycled plastic used in the Bureau's plastic barricades and signs. The new specification calls for 100 percent recycled content.
Greenwaste Recycling The City of Los Angeles is proud of its recycling efforts in all waste streams. The Urban Forestry Division is particularly proud of the greenwaste recycling center. The recycling center is operated jointly by UFD and the Bureau of Sanitation. UFD annually generates thousands of tons of greenwaste in its maintenance operations. One hundred percent of the material produced by Division personnel is recycled. In addition, hundreds of tons of greenwaste generated by contractors performing street tree maintenance is recycled as well.
The City's greenwaste recycling operation is one of the largest in the world. The operation produces several types and sizes of wood materials that are utilized for different purposes.
Off Grade Gutter / Cross Gutter Repair / Replacement Over the past two years, the Bureau has been funded to repair off-grade gutters and to construct new cross gutters with the goal of eliminating standing water problems, which may be potential sources for breeding mosquitoes carrying the West Nile Virus.
Catch Basin Repair BSS is working closely with the Bureau of Sanitation to help them meet federal mandated deadlines for inserting catch basin screens, which keep trash and debris from entering the storm drain system. The Bureau of Sanitation is finding that 5-10% of catch basins are damaged beyond the point where retrofits are possible. BSS is repairing these catch basins as quickly as possible, in conjunction with Sanitation’s implementation schedule.
Street Cleaning The Bureau’s fleet of motor sweepers are all currently PM 10 certified (particulate matter of size 10 microns and less - a critical air pollutant measurement). The Bureau is working very had with the General Services Department to convert the entire fleet from diesel fuel to alternative fuel (compressed natural gas) by the year 2010. Trash Receptacles Gerry F. Miller -3- October 3,2007 BSS Pro-Environmental Programs and Activities
The Bureau provides 3,000 trash receptacles within the public right-of-way in a proactive effort to reduce litter. Furthermore, BSS is in the process of replacing the existing wire baskets with larger, tamper- resistant “totter” receptacles. The Bureau also administers an Adopt-a-Basket program which provides trash receptacles to organizations that agree to maintain the receptacles and dispose of the waste in a safe and legal manner.
Weed Abatement and Illegal Dumping Cleanup and Enforcement One of BSS ’ major goals is to improve and protect public health and safety as related to the existence of noxious vegetation, trash, debris and public nuisances on both privately and publicly owned parcels. The Bureau eliminates visual blight and enhances environmental safety by clearing, cleaning and removing illegally dumped material, weeds, dirt and waste from areas of the public right-of-way.
The Bureau plays a major role in environmental protection as the primary illegal dumping enforcement agency for the City of Los Angeles. The City currently spends millions of dollars yearly cleaning up illegal dumping. The Bureau of Street Services removed more than 200,000 cubic yards of illegally dumped trash during Fiscal Year 2005-2006. Beginning in January of2003, the Bureau, in cooperation with the Los Angeles Police Department and the City Attorney’s Neighborhood Prosecutor Program, initiated a successful program to apprehend and prosecute illegal dumpers. The Program won the “Protect and Serve” category Productivity Award for 2006 for the use of Bureau Investigators to make custodial arrests and book misdemeanor illegal dumpers. This redirected the use of sworn police officers to handle more serious life threatening crimes while assuring effective enforcement of illegal dumping laws. Maximum effectiveness requires dedicated enforcement in the areas experiencing consistent illegal dumping and most frequently cleaned by city forces. To date the program has resulted in:
• 1,026 arrests • 9,106 notices issued • 1,856 Administrative Hearings and; • 4 Vehicles Seized. ,
Tree Planting Funding is provided for the planting of only about 4,500 trees per year by Bureau forces. The Bureau’s internal goal is 5,000. With the experience and expertise of the Urban Forestry Division (UFD) workforce, several efficiencies and best practices have been learned and implemented through the years. In addition, the UFD conducts training workshops and participates in community fairs in order to get others to participate and contribute. The result is the planting of hundreds, if not thousands, of additional trees that the Bureau would otherwise not be able to accomplish.
Million Trees Los Angeles Initiative BSS has a key leadership role in the implementation of the Mayor’s Million Tree Initiative. This program will serve as a benchmark for other environmentally beneficial programs and policies leading to the goal of the “Greenest Big City in America”. Many of the one million new trees will be planted by City departments in the public right-of-way. Others will be planted throughout the City by individual volunteers, community groups, organizations, and businesses. Successful implementation will be a cooperative effort between the City of Los Angeles, community groups, businesses, and individuals working together to plant and provide long-term sustainability of one million trees planted where they’re needed most. Gerry F. Miller -4- October 3, 2007 BSS Pro-Environmental Programs and Activities
Stormwater Diversion Pilot Projects BSS partnered with the non-profit organization, Northeast Trees, to design and construct a pilot project to capture and divert stormwater runoff into filtered retention basins prior to discharge into the Los Angeles River. This “Streetends Biofiltration” project, located near the intersection of Blake Avenue and Oros Street, was recently completed and is being monitored for water quality effectiveness.
BSS is currently working with the non-profit organizations, Tree People and the Los Angeles and San Gabriel Rivers Watershed Council, to implement another series of pilot projects on aresidential street in the East San Fernando Valley area. BSS will continue to seek out these types of opportunities, given the time to help map out a reasonable design and construction schedule.
If you have any questions of if you need any additional information, please contact Ron Olive, Assistant Director for the Bureau of Street Services, at phone no. (213) 847-3333.
WAR/RRO:rro
cc: Cynthia Ruiz, Board of Public Works Ernesto Cardenas, Board of Public Works PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT OF City of Los Angeles EXECUTIVE OFFICES CITY PLANNING alifornia C S. GAIL GOLDBERG, AICP 200 N. Spring Street, Room 525 Los Angeles, CA 90012-4801 DIRECTOR AND (213) 978-1271 6262 Van Nuys Blvd., Suite 351 RECEIVED - CLA VanNuys, CA 91401 EVA YUAN-MCDANIEL DEPUTY DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING COMMISSION 2001 OCT -2 AH II: 10 (213) 978-1273 JANE ELLISON USHER FAX: (213) 978-1275 president WILLIAM ROSCHEN VICE-PRESIDENT INFORMATION DIEGO CARDOSO (213) 978-1270 REGINA M. FREER ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA www.planning.lacity.org ROBIN R. HUGHES MAYOR SABRINA KAY FR. SPENCER T. KEZIOS CINDY MONTANEZ MICHAEL K. WOO
gabriele"williams COMMISSION EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT (213) 978-1300
October 1,2007
Rafael Prieto Office of the Legislative Analyst City Hall 200 N. Spring Street Los Angeles, CA 90012
RE: Department of City Planning - Highlights of Environmental Initiatives
Dear Mr. Prieto:
This letter is in response to Councilmember Garcetti’s September 26, 2007 request that the Department of City Planning highlight its environmental programs at the October 9, 2007 City Council meeting. It was requested that the report include discussions of the Department’s environmental mandates, the status of Departmental programs, and emerging issues.
Environmental Mandates
The Department of City Planning is mandated to update the City’s General Plan, which includes, among others, the Transportation Element (including the Bicycle Plan) and the Housing Element. Currently, the Department is updating its Transportation Element (to be renamed the Mobility Element) and the Housing Element. The Mobility Element will begin to shift focus from an automobile and traffic congestion focus to a more urban mobility focus, based upon health, sustainability, and livability principles. The new Mobility Plan will promote pedestrian activity, transit, walking and bicycling and develop programs and policies to reduce the use and dependence on the automobile by leveraging the rail and transit infrastructure, creating great, vibrant walkable neighborhoods around stations stops, and integrating conventional and non- conventional modes of circulation to link neighborhoods to transit.
Staff is working with the CRA, the Housing Department, HACLA, and LAHSA to develop a new Housing Element, which must be submitted to the State Housing and Community Development Department in June, 2008. Staff intends to include in the new Housing Element a set of policies and programs to address conservation and
AN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER Recyclable and made from recycled waste. Page 2 October 1, 2007
sustainability in residential development. These new policies and programs will address sustainability in both residential buildings and neighborhoods, and will specif ically address water efficiency, energy efficiency, materials, indoor environmental quality, urban design, and land use.
Departmental Programs
In order to accommodate growth and reduce dependence on the automobile, the Department has commenced planning for 10 Transit-Oriented Districts (TODs) along the Gold Line, the Gold Line Eastside Extension, and the Expo Line. The Department has hired several multi-disciplinary teams of consultants to assist the department in working with each individual neighborhood to develop the plans. These efforts will result in recommendations regarding land uses, density, scale, circulation, urban design, open space, walkability, and parking as well as market studies analyzing the current and future market and absorption rates for each individual neighborhood. The recommendations will then be incorporated into each Community Plan revision process, all of which are currently underway.
The Department’s River Unit is drafting a River Improvement Overlay (RIO) District to implement the recently adopted Los Angeles River Revitalization Master Plan. The proposed RIO incorporates numerous sustainability and water conservation measures that are specifically intended to clean the Los Angeles River. The River Unit is also beginning the development of the Cornfields-Arroyo Seco Specific Plan for an area of Chinatown adjacent to the new State Historical Park and which includes two Gold Line rail station stops. It is anticipated that the Specific Plan will address sustainability, water management, land uses, and numerous other environmental issues.
The Department’s new Urban Design Studio is focused on creating a more walkable and livable city. It has issued a walkability checklist for development to identify and promote site planning and urban design measures that encourage more pedestrian- friendly buildings. The Studio is also working with the CRA, DOT, the Bureau of Engineering, and the City’s Street Standards Committee to modify street sections and dimensions in the Central City to assure that it becomes more pedestrian-friendly as new development is approved.
The Department has also played an active role in the City’s Integrated Resources Plan (IRP) Task Force, the City’s Climate Action Committee, the Los Angeles River Task Force, the Street Standards Committee, and the Mayor’s Sustainability Task Force. Through the work on these various committees, the Department has updated the Los Angeles Municipal Code (L.A.M.C.) to include new technologies and methods of water conservation and alternative transportation methods. The Department is currently in Page 3 October 1, 2007
the process of drafting a green building program for the City that will require large private projects to meet the intent of LEED compliance.
Implementation
Recent L.A.M.C. updates include an ordinance that allows the use of permeable pavement for driveways, minimizes hardscaping in the front yards of single-family homes, and allows mechanical lifts and robotic garages for parking. The Department has also begun to require specific water conservation mitigation measures through the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, such as requiring waterless urinals and smart irrigation. We are looking into procedures to expedite EIRs for private projects that meet LEED silver standards. And finally, the Department is updating its landscaping ordinance to encourage the use of drought-tolerant and native plants.
Emerging Issues
The Department is exploring the possibility of developing a new Open Space/Watershed Element of the General Plan to encourage development that minimizes impacts on the city’s watershed. Additionally, the Department is looking to update our CEQA documentation and analysis to address recent global warming issues and litigation that has occurred regarding this issue.
We look forward to working with the Mayor, the City Council, and all of the City departments to address these and other environmental issues.
Sincerely,
S. GAIL GOLDBERG, AICP Director of Planning
TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT
CITY OF LOS ANGELES INTERDEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE
DATE: October 5, 2007
TO: Office of the Legislative Analyst Room 255, City Hall Attention: Rafael Prieto S. FROM: Rita L. Robinson, General Manager Department of Transportation
SUBJECT: Environmental Initiatives
The Department of Transportation submits a brief summary on its environmental-related programs, in response to Councilmember Garcetti’s letter dated September 26,2007. The programs are presented below:
I. Clean Fuel Vehicles
Alternative energy sources and cleaner burning fuels enable motor vehicles to operate with significantly reduced emissions.
A. Hybrid Vehicles (with decals)
As a City incentive to encourage the use of clean burning vehicles, decaled hybrid vehicles, and electric vehicles are allowed to park for free in zones with parking meters.
B. LADOT Transit Fleet
• LADOT’s transit services, which include Commuter Express (peak period freeway express service), DASH (local circulator) and Cityride (user-side subsidy program for seniors and persons with disabilities), provides a viable alternative to the automobile for residents of the City. Overall, LADOT’s fixed route transit services (Commuter Express and DASH) carry approximately 30 million passenger trips per year. LADOT’s transit fleet, which consists of nearly 400 City-owned transit vehicles. Clean fuel vehicles for LADOT’s transit fleet are summarized below.
• LADOT’s fleet of over 200 DASH vehicles is 100 percent alternatively fueled, primarily by clean burning liquid propane gas (LPG). The Department has the largest fleet of LPG transit services in the country. LADOT is also Office of the Legislative Analyst -2- October 5, 2007
demonstrating new hybrid-electric bus technology as part of its Community DASH program.
• LADOT replaced its entire fleet of diesel powered Cityride vehicles in 2003 with new ultra-low emission vehicles (ULEV).
• LADOT recently purchased three new clean burning compressed natural gas (CNG) buses for its Commuter Express fleet, and has plans to replace its remaining fleet of diesel powered Commuter Express buses with new CNG buses over the next several years.
II. Programs to Reduce Automobile Usage
Programs that increase the attractiveness of alternate modes to automobiles, reduce energy consumption. They are outlined below:
A. Transit Priority
LADOT enables MTA-operated Metro Rapid buses to have signal priority thereby making them more reliable and more attractive as options to automobile travel. Currently, there are 19 Metro Rapid transit priority routes in the City.
B. Bikeway Program
LADOT’s Bikeway program is responsible for implementing bike paths, bike lane segments, administration of bicycle safety education for schoolchildren, and the implementation of bicycle parking. The objective is to provide a bicycle alternative to encourage another mode of transportation and minimize reliance on the automobile. The City has 51 miles of exclusive bike path and 136 miles of on-street bike lanes.
C. Streetscape Enhancements
LADOT is the lead on transportation enhancement projects along major transit corridors. The enhancements include physical infrastructure changes that enhance safety, comfort and the aesthetic experience of pedestrians. The overall objective of this program is to encourage walking and transit use. Office of the Legislative Analyst -3- October 5, 2007
III. Reducing Impacts of Growth
LADOT extracts mitigations measures from developers, whenever feasible, to reduce the impacts of their projects. The impacts fall into the two categories of traffic flow improvements and transportation demand management.
A. Traffic flow improvements may include widening at a bottleneck location or a contribution to an ATSAC system.
B. Transportation demand management strategies include vanpools, ridesharing, and telecommuting programs. On major development projects, such as in Warner Center, Playa Vista and UCLA, LADOT has secured commitments from the developers for implementing these strategies.
IV. Traffic Flow Improvements
Traffic flow improvements reduce delays and stops to traffic on the thoroughfares of Los Angeles. They include a variety of measures.
A. ATSAC
LADOT is proceeding to implement ATSAC City-wide during the next few years, a program that has been underway for three decades. The ATSAC system identifies changes in traffic patterns and responds to those patterns in real time, thereby reducing stops and delays.
B. Operational Improvements
LADOT has numerous ongoing programs to add left turn lanes, left turn arrows, peak period parking restrictions, and numerous other measure to keep traffic flowing. Peak period parking restrictions is one such example.
V. LED Conversion
The City has a five-year program to convert incandescent traffic signal bulbs to light emitting diodes (LEDs) and an ongoing program to replace the aging LEDs with new modules. LADOT is in the second year of the program and has converted one- fourth of the signals in the City to date. LEDs reduce traffic signal energy consumption by 90 percent. Office of the Legislative Analyst -4- October 5, 2007
VI. Community-Oriented Programs
Community-oriented programs are focused on restoring the amenities traditionally associated with neighborhoods, thus improving the quality-of-life and the residential environment. These programs include:
A. Removal of Abandoned Vehicles
LADOT tows away vehicles left abandoned on streets and in yards, thereby reducing blight and public nuisances.
B. Preferential Parking Districts
In areas where commercial parking adversely restricts parking availability on neighborhood streets, preferential parking districts can address this problem. There are over 100 such districts in the City.
C. Neighborhood Traffic Management
Due to the City’s ongoing growth and increasing congestion on its boulevards, commuters are tempted to use narrow, residential streets as bypass routes. Neighborhood traffic management measures discourage the inappropriate use of these streets. The measures include roadway realignments, Stop sign checkerboard patters, traffic circles, and speed humps. There are over 1,400 streets with speed humps in the City.
JEF:jsl
Environmental Initiatives 10-5-07 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Report to City Council on CRA/LA Environmental Efforts______October 1, 2007
By definition, redevelopment is place-based and directed towards particular geographies. As such, we focus on communities with the greatest need: eliminating blight, promoting workforce development, and removing impediments to investment and re-investment. Thus, redevelopment is necessarily a process of working with various stakeholders to create economically and physically sustainable communities in Tos Angeles.
General Policy & Planning Efforts
SI Healthy Neighborhoods Policy (sustainability policy for all redevelopment project areas and CRA/LA’s own internal practices) • Coordinated with City Planning’s GreenLA standards to ensure consistency SI LA River Revitalization • Developed in partnership with City Planning, Bureau of Engineering, Council Offices, and others in the city family SI Industrial Land Use Study (Promoting sustainable industrial development and ‘greencollar’ workforce development) • Close collaboration with City Planning SI Development of Transit Oriented District Projects/Plans • Close collaboration with City Planning and Metro
Specific Tasks/Engagements
► Internal audit of agency practices/facilities to set ourselves on the path to becoming a sustainable model for the community and other agencies ► Case studies with Global Green to ascertain the additional costs of building residential, retail, mixed-use and entire communities to LEED thresholds ► Green Mapping Project to identify locations of Historic Core/South Park where sidewalk extensions, pocket parks and mid block paseos can be created (without taking away any existing lanes of traffic)
RECREATION and PARKS DEPARTMENT
DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION & PARKS
A REPORT ON
SUSTAINABLE PARKS FOR THE 21st CENTURY
City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation & Parks General Manager, Jon Kirk Mukri
October, 2007 VISION & COMMITMENTS-
Environmental Mandates and Responsibilities of the Department of Recreation and Parks
In support of the Mayor’s and City Council’s vision and commitment to sustainability for Los Angeles, The Department of Recreation of Parks (RAP) is developing strategies and guidelines for sustainability. RAP currently applies or is implementing many of the sustainable development principles and recommendations in the vision in many aspects of its daily operations, as well as during its planning and development processes.
Along with our commitment to the Mayor’s and City Council’s vision the Department also satisfies the demands of all environmental rules mandated by all levels of government. These include: • Los Angeles City Municipal Codes including: 1. Landscape Ordinance 2. Oak Tree Ordinance 3. Construction of LEED certified buildings • State and Federal Environmental requirements
Parks are part of the L.A. ecosystem, providing valuable environmental or “ecosystem” services including infiltration of water through porous surfaces such as athletic fields, golf courses and natural open space parks; filtration and cooling of air by turf and vegetation throughout the park; habitat for various native and non-native plant and animal species; and microclimate enhancement by plants and lakes. In addition, the City’s parks often host recreation programs that encourage naturalist learning experiences, and environmental stewardship among its participants, and local residents as well as regional visitors.
The Department currently adheres as much as possible to sustainable and environmentally-friendly design ideals. We are dedicated to environmental planning as well as environmental compliance in order to avoid and prevent as much as possible any impacts to the environment by the Department’s activities. As technology makes advances in the area of environmental sustainability the Department will use those resources to increase it’s commitment to this vision and goal. Partnering with other City departments in a collaborative effort increases our knowledge, resources and our success in this vision. Additional sustainability-supporting activities that could be coordinated through the Department of Recreation Parks are further development of environmental education programs and exhibits at natural parks, more natural parks, more frequent and comprehensive employee training, and coordination of community environmental stewardship and partnering programs with local non-governmental organizations.
Almost equally important to the Department’s City wide sustainable endeavors is RAP’s proactive approach to education both locally and internationally. Through educational programs such as WOW (Wonderful Outdoor World) we are teaching our young adults the benefits of environmental stewardship. Also coming to light is the Department’s notoriety as a cutting edge leader among international communities. At a recent international conference RAP demonstrated the City’s leadership in environment, sustainability and recreation in an impressive manner which surpassed most of the nations in attendance. Taking this as a positive indicator the Department is actively participating in workshops and conferences to both learn and spread the word on the success of our parks, recreational programs and green awareness. OVERVIEW
SUSTAINABLE CONCEPTS & PROGRAMS CURRENTLY IN USE AND MAINTAINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS:
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCEPTS: • Water conservation o Standardization and centralization of smart controller systems throughout the Department’s facilities. o Promotion and avocation for installation of reclaimed water access o Standardization of efficient irrigation equipment. o Continued research on Best Management Practices concepts and materials o Capture and infiltration of runoff on-site o Design & installation of efficient/smart irrigation systems o Use of reclaimed water where available o Collaboration with other City agencies for use of RAP land as water cleansing/infiltration sites o Promotion of low water use plant material o Use of Best Management Practices concepts and materials • Recycling of resources o Use of recycle bins and separation of waste materials o Programs for recycle of tree trimmings o Use of recycled/post consumer products in construction o Use of recycled/post consumer products in office o Implementation of Storm water capture and treatment programs o Green Waste Diversion Program: ■ Green waste grinding/grasscycling ■ Metal Recycling ■ Inert debris sifting/material separation • Conservation of Resources o Reduction of paper usage via electronic files o Use of recycled materials o Incentives for car pooling and use of public transportation by Department employees • Design Practices o Adherence to/or exceeding City’s design ordinances, o Mitigation of natural resources when needed o LEED design for all new buildings when feasible and/or required o Attain to reach the highest level of LEED certification possible, o Incorporate “Green” systems and/or green roofs where feasible o Use of efficient lighting and solar systems when feasible Environmental Stewardship and education o Master planning of parks and park systems o Continuing to update/upgrade Department Design Standards as new products/concepts become available o Development and maintenance of wetlands o Development of nature preserves o Education and nature awareness programs for the public o Continuing education and environmental training programs for staff o Planting, maintaining & reforestation of the City’s open space o Promotion of native and non-invasive plant material o Acquisition of open space for City parks ■ Creating a healthy City through green space via the Mayor’s Open Space Plan o Recycling of poorly used land for parks and open space (landfills, excess DWP property) o Mayor’s Million Tree program o Urban Forestry Program & Guidelines o Integrated Pest Control Management Program ■ Using the safest & least toxic methods available o Park Reforestation Program ■ Long/short range plans for reforestation and healthy trees ■ Pruning for a healthy forest with sensitivity towards forest inhabitants. DEPARTMENTAL PROGRAMS RELATED TO ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
• OPEN SPACE PLAN • WATER CONSERVATION • ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY • NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT • CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT • ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION & INTREPRETATION • RESOURCE CONSERVATION OPEN SPACE PLAN
CREATING A HEALTHY CITY THROUGH GREEN SPACE OPEN SPACE PLAN
PROGRAM: This is a plan envisioned by the Mayor in the Fall of 2006 to create a healthy city through green space by opening new parks at rate of thirty-five parks in five years. The Department has responded by creating a plan of implementation through acquisition, planning & development as well as a tracking system. The benefits of this program include increased green and open space, increased recreational space creating a healthier environment. This ongoing project is highly successful with the Department exceeding its goals.
The following report reflects the Department of Recreation & Parks updated response to the original document which indicates RAP’s strategy, progress and targets for increasing park space within the City.
To: Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa
From: DEPUTY MAYOR OF ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Subject: Open Spaces Plan
Date: July 11, 2006
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this memorandum is to lay out the Mayor’s plan for increasing the amount of open space in Los Angeles to improve the quality of life of City residents. This memorandum covers:
• Theory of change and foundation beliefs for initiative
• Objectives and scope of the open spaces plan
• Performance metrics to evaluate progress and effectiveness of this plan
• Trajectories for each of these metrics over the next five years
• Roles and responsibilities of city departments and other key participants
• Performance management system to track and communicate progress
1 THEORY OF CHANGE
Parks and other green space within urban areas provide a number of benefits for residents. They improve the quality of life of residents by giving them a place to walk, meet their neighbors, and engage in recreational activities. Parks have also been shown to have a number of much more tangible benefits:
• Research by the Centers for Disease Control has demonstrated that Americans living close to parks are more likely to exercise, leading to other corresponding health benefits such as reduced incidence of Type II diabetes.
• Parks raise land values in the surrounding community, according to a number of econometric studies
• Urban trees provide environmental benefits by cleaning the air and reducing storm water runoff
• The Department of Justice reports that juvenile arrests in low-income neighborhoods decline after recreational facilities such as parks are constructed.
However, Los Angeles is a park poor City, with tremendous needs for additional recreation and park land and improved facilities to meet community needs and offer positive alternatives to an increasingly dense and urbanized population. Providing for the recreation and park needs of residents of Los Angeles’ diverse communities is one of the greatest challenges facing the City. This challenge is complicated by ever- changing demands and expectations caused by population growth, increased density, shifting community demographics, and a large youth population.
The City’s Department of Recreation and Parks administers approximately 15,600 acres of park land in neighborhood, community, and regional parks located across the City. However, over 80% of the City’s park land is concentrated in large Regional parks such as Griffith Park, Hansen Dam, Harbor Park, and the Sepulveda Basin. The City needs to acquire additional park land to meet the City’s standard for neighborhood and community park land, 4 acres of parks per 1,000 residents (per the Public Recreation Plan), and provide residents with more accessible, local, public parks and open spaces. At a current estimated population of 4,000,000 residents, there are roughly 0.70 acres of neighborhood and community park land for every 1,000 residents, far below the City’s current standard.
2 Our theory of change is that it is possible to significantly increase the amount of open space in Los Angeles through a combination of immediate actions - providing public recreational access to thirty-five (35) new park sites (including LAUSD joint-use sites) over the next five (5) years, policy changes to increase the amount of open space over the long term, and identifying partnerships with City agencies, LAUSD, non-profits and private organizations for the purpose of conducting long range planning to increase public recreational open space within the City.
1. Immediate actions -Provide public recreational access to thirty-five (35) new park sites (including LAUSD joint-use sites) over the next five (5) years.
2. Policy changes - Longer term policy changes necessary to identify the locations that will be converted into open spaces, capital funding sources to pay for “greening” those areas, operations and maintenance strategies and relative priorities.
3. Partnerships - Establish a stakeholders group made up of City Departments, LAUSD, non-profits and private organizations to meet on a quarterly basis to discuss opportunities, long range planning and funding for public recreational open space within the City.
In implementing this initiative, it is also important to focus on the geographic and social equity component of increasing the amount of open space. An analysis of the City would be conducted based on:
Four (4) key demographic indicators: • Youth under age 18 • Families in poverty • Transit Dependency • Density
The two (2) key park factors: • Number of Parks and Facilities • Acres of Parks / Open Space
And three (3) geographical hierarchies: • Citywide • Council District • Community Plan Area
The results of this analysis will serve as guidelines for establishing high priority areas to focus City resources.
3 OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
Immediate Actions to Increase Open Spaces
This plan calls for the Department of Recreation and Parks to provide recreational access to thirty-five (35) new park or joint-use sites within the next five years. A goal of this plan will be to identify a minimum of 50% of the new park sites in high priority areas to allow for an equitable distribution of benefits.
Policy Changes to Increase Open Space
In addition to these immediate actions, the Mayor’s Office will pursue a number of policy changes to increase the amount of open space in Los Angeles over the longer term. Fundamentally, these policy changes will address two questions:
1. Where are the potential locations for open space development? 2. How will the funding be obtained to pay for purchasing land from the private sector, when necessary, and construct parks?
Identifying potential locations
The first step in increasing the amount of open space in Los Angeles is identifying the locations that can be used for open space. The two actions below will build and codify a shared understanding of potential locations for open space.
• Direct all departments to conduct an inventory of their assets and report back to the Mayor’s Office - Today each department has information on the assets that it owns and open space opportunities within its purview. These opportunities should be centralized and reported to the Department of Recreation and Parks for evaluation. The Mayor’s office should order all City departments to report their unused land any other open space development opportunities they are aware of to the Department of Recreation and Parks, Planning and Development Division. The Department of General Services shall compile a list of potential open space locations currently in private hands, and estimate the cost of acquiring all privately held parcels and transmit that information to the Department of Recreation and parks as well.
• Revise the portion of the General Plan dealing with open spaces - The General Plan is a state mandated plan for how a city will develop over the next 5 10 years. Zoning laws generally require that developments conform to the Plan, so it is an important document. However, the portion of the General Plan dealing with open spaces has not been revised since the 1970s. All City departments should update their parts of the open space component, reflecting the potential sites identified in the inventory described above.
4 Developing funding sources
In order to increase the amount of open spaces in Los Angeles, funding will be crucial to build parks and acquire property. Funding is likely to be the limiting factor in open space development. The following actions will develop additional funding sources for open spaces.
• Leverage partnerships with non-profits, state, and federal agencies to develop alternative funding sources for open space - Taking advantage of other funds available for open spaces, including Proposition 1C and 84, land trusts, California State Parks, conservancies, and the federal Bureau of Land Management, will greatly increase the City’s ability to develop open space. The Department of Recreation and Parks would develop a plan based on collaboration with all of these entities and establish recommendations and priorities to focus funding resources.
• Issue an executive order directing proprietary agencies to allocate mitigation funds to the purchase of open space - The Port of Los Angeles and Los Angeles World Airports each have substantial funding dedicated to mitigating the effect of their activities ([ ] and [ ], respectively). This money can be used to purchase open spaces to the extent that there is a connection between the activity of the proprietary agency and open spaces (e.g. wetlands built on by airport could justify expenditure to buy wetlands in other part of City). The Mayor should order the proprietary departments to direct available funds towards open space to the extent possible. It is estimated that [ ] will be available for open spaces from this source.
• Seek legislative changes to provide greater flexibility in the use of Quimby fees - State Law: State Law authorizes local governments, under the Quimby Act of 1965 to require the dedication of land or to impose in lieu fees for park or recreational purposes as a condition to the approval of a tentative map or parcel map for new residential subdivisions. There have been several unsuccessful attempts in past years to amend this legislation in an effort to change the State Code. However, due to many jurisdictions an inability to agree upon proposed changes to the legislation, concerns about the influence of lobbyists, and the threat of legal challenges, has confirmed the consensus to leave the State Code language intact.
Other funding sources have been proposed and approved, such as Prop 84, Prop 40, and others, to acquire park land and install park and recreation facilities and improvements. The Department uses these funding sources as well as Quimby to improve the existing system of park and recreation facilities.
5 Local Law: The City’s Subdivision “Quimby” Fees Trust and Zone Change Park Fee ordinances require that, as a part of the subdivision or zone change planning process, residential developers dedicate land and/or pay an in-lieu fee for park or recreational purposes. Fees are collected by the Department of Recreation and Parks and are allocated in the Department’s Quimby/Park Fees Expenditure Program each fiscal year for park acquisition, capital improvement, or rehabilitation projects.
The Quimby Task Force, which was created at the request of the City Council (Council File 05-1562), was convened by the Department of Recreation and Park in order to review the requirements regarding the service radius for park acquisition, the uses of Quimby Funds for programs and maintenance, and to recommend to the City Council how the General Plan (Public Recreation Plan), and the Municipal Code could be amended to achieve these goals.
Currently, pursuant to the L.A.M.C, Public Recreation Plan, and Department practice, Quimby fees are generally expended within a two (2) mile radius of a new subdivision and typically remain within the Council District where the fees were collected. The City Attorney has determined that any change to the service radius would require a study of park usage. A component of the 2006-2007 Citywide Community Needs Assessment, which is currently being undertaken by the Department of Recreation and Parks, is to study this issue and determine if there is justification for expanding the service radius of parks and recreation facilities. The Department is also collaborating with City Planning Department to review other specific sections of the Code and recommend possible amendments to modernize the code for current operations.
The legal nexus for fee collection and new development will, to some extent, always be present with the Quimby Program. However, Department practice has been to balance this funding availability with other funding sources (Prop K, Prop O, CIEP, etc.) to acquire parkland, promote equity, do infrastructure rehabilitation and address community needs.
Prioritizing sites
Finally, the City needs to prioritize what areas it will target for open space development given its limited funds. As indicated above, an analysis of key community demographic statistics and available park facilities, park land, and open space will be conducted in order to develop guidelines for establishing high priority areas where resources could be focused to make the greatest impact.
6 The creation of a stakeholder’s group made up of City Departments (Harbor, Airport, DWP, CRA, Housing, Planning, GSD and BOE), LAUSD, non-profits and private organizations is critical for the centralization of information and the formation of a collaborative plan. This plan could then be prioritized based on the aforementioned criteria and funding strategies could then be developed. This collaboration is critical to the success of the City in obtaining our fair share or greater of funding under Propositions 1C and 84 recently passed in November of 2006.
Below is a brief breakdown of the park and open space funding opportunities in Propositions 1C and 84:
1. PROPOSITION 1C: HOUSING AND EMERGENCY SHELTER TRUST FUND ACT OF 2006
• CHAPTER 2 53545 (b) (1MA1 - Regional Planning, Housing, and Infill Incentive Account. $200,000,000 • For infill incentive grants for capital outlay related to infill housing development and other related infill development including funds for park creation, development, or rehabilitation to encourage infill development
• CHAPTER 2 53545 (d) - Housing Urban Suburban Rural Parks Account. $200,000,000 • For housing related parks grants in urban, suburban, and rural areas, subject to the conditions and criteria provided by the Legislature in statute
2. PROPOSITION 84: WATER QUALITY, SAFETY AND SUPPLY. FLOOD CONTROL. NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION. PARK IMPROVEMENTS
• CHAPTER 2 75026 (a) - Integrated Regional Water Management Grants $215,000,000 (LA Sub Region) • For grants for projects that implement integrated regional water management plans and use a multi-benefit approach (including at least one of the required elements)'to project selection and design.
• CHAPTER 5 75050 (d) - California River Parkways $72,000,000 • For projects developed in accordance with the California River Parkways Act of 2004 Chapter 3.8
• CHAPTER 5 75050 (e) - Urban Streams. $18,000,000 • For the Urban Streams Restoration Program pursuant to Water Code section 7048
7 • CHAPTER 7 75060 (a) - Protection of beaches and coastal waters from pollution. $90,000,000 (20% to the SMBRC) • For matching grants for projects developed pursuant to the Clean Beaches Program, Chapter 3
• CHAPTER 7 75060 (b) - State Coastal Conservancy $135,000,000 • For projects developed pursuant to Division 21
• CHAPTER 9 75065 (a) - Urban Greening and Joint Use Projects $90,000,000 • For projects that reduce energy consumption, conserve water, and improve air and water quality. Priority to projects that provide multi benefits, use existing public land, serve communities in need, & facilitate joint use.
• CHAPTER 9 75065 (b) - Local and Regional Parks $400,000,000 • For competitive grants for local and regional parks. Priority to the acquisition and development of new parks and expansion of overused parks that provide park and recreational access to underserved communities & to projects that create parks in neighborhoods where none currently exist.
Strategic planning for locating new parks and expanding existing parks in high need areas near housing developments and public transportation corridors supported with demographic information while implementing sustainable development elements and water quality improvements will likely prove to be most competitive projects under Proposition 1C and 84. Multi-benefit projects will have the most opportunity for leveraging funding under other chapters previously described above in Proposition 1C and 84. Other secured sources of funds such as Proposition 40, K and Quimby should be analyzed as well for leverage against Proposition 1C and 84.
These funding opportunities should prove to be the framework for the prioritization of development and expansion of the City’s parks.
8 Exhibit 1 - Milestones: New Parks scheduled to be complete over the next five (5) years
Activity 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Asset inventory ▲ City department asset inventory completed General plan revisions ▲ I Open space section revised
QMBY legislation Assess feasibility Pass legislation of flexible use (if necessary) of QMBY funds Prioritization plan for use | A I of open space money Plan prioritizing use of open space funding Parks developed 1 __new parks new parks , new parks new parks new parks
9
PERFORMANCE METRICS
The Office of the Mayor will track progress of this plan first and foremost by directly measuring both the number of parks / facilities and the acres of parks / open spaces developed in high priority areas of the City of Los Angeles. These metrics will be analyzed at the City, Community Plan Area, and Council District levels.
1. Number of parks and facilities in Los Angeles located in: a) areas of the City with high populations of youth under age 18 b) areas of the City with high populations of families in poverty c) areas of the City with highly transit dependant populations d) areas of the City with high population density
2. Acres of parks / open spaces in Los Angeles located in: e) areas of the City with high populations of youth under age 18 f) areas of the City with high populations of families in poverty g) areas of the City with highly transit dependant populations h) areas of the City with high population density
Secondarily, the Office of the Mayor will measure progress on policy changes to increase the amount of open space in terms of achieving identified process goals.
The following table (Exhibit 2) lists each of the metrics, its definition, owner, and measurement process, and frequency of reporting to the Office of the Mayor.
Each of the performance metrics described below will have performance targets over the next five years defined as continuous improvement trajectories relative to current performance.
These trajectories have been established consistent with the milestones for project completion previously described.
While it is unlikely that performance will track these trajectories perfectly at all time intervals, any significant, persistent deviation from these trajectories will be the basis for constructive inquiry by both Recreation and Parks management and the Office of the Mayor.
11 - ^
Exhibit 2 - Metrics
1. Quantity of parks, park facilities, and open space
Metric Definition Owner Measurement Frequency process of reporting Number of parks / Number of parks / Recreation Department of Quarterly facilities in LA in facilities within LA, as and Parks Recreation and areas with high defined by Recreation Parks counts up populations of youth and Parks total number of under age 18 parks Number of parks / Number of parks/ Recreation Department of Quarterly facilities in LA in facilities within LA, as and Parks Recreation and areas with high defined by Recreation Parks counts up populations of and Parks total number of families in poverty parks Number of parks / Number of parks / Recreation Department of Quarterly facilities in LA in facilities within LA, as and Parks Recreation and areas with highly defined by Recreation Parks counts up transit dependent and Parks total number of populations parks Number of parks / Number of parks / Recreation Department of Quarterly facilities in LA in facilities within LA, as and Parks Recreation and areas with high defined by Recreation Parks counts up population density and Parks total number of parks Acres of parks / Total number of acres Recreation Department of Quarterly open spaces in LA of parks / open and Parks Recreation and in areas with high spaces within LA Parks determines populations of youth size of each park under age 18
Acres of parks / Total number of acres Recreation Department of Quarterly open spaces in LA of parks / open and Parks Recreation and in areas with high spaces within LA Parks determines populations of size of each park families in poverty
Acres of parks / Total number of acres Recreation Department of Quarterly open spaces in LA of parks / open and Parks Recreation and in areas with highly spaces within LA Parks determines transit dependent size of each park populations Acres of parks / Total number of acres Recreation Department of Quarterly open spaces in LA of parks / open and Parks Recreation and in areas with high spaces within LA Parks determines population density size of each park
12 * 4,
2. Policy changes to increase parks / open space
Metric Definition Owner Measurement Frequency process of reporting Asset inventory Whether or not a Recreation and Mayor’s office Quarterly completed comprehensive Parks evaluated whether asset inventory inventory has been has been completed based on completed all departments identifying participating and opportunities for complete information open space being provided development General Plan Whether or not City Planning Mayor’s office informs Quarterly revised open space Department Recreation and Parks portion, Public when General Plan Recreation Plan has been revised of General Plan has been revised. Code amendment; Quimby Funding from Total dollars from Recreation and Department of Quarterly partners used for non-profits, state, Parks Recreation and Parks open space in and federal interviews partners Los Angeles government used about their for open space investments in open development in space in LA City and Los Angeles tallies results Funding from Total dollars from Recreation and Proprietary agencies Quarterly proprietary DWP, POLA, and Parks report their agencies for open LAWA for open investments to space space Recreation and Parks development development which interviews them to verify Legislation Whether or not Recreation and Mayor’s office Quarterly passed for this legislation Parks determines based on flexibility in use of has been passed identifying legislation QMBY funds by City Council including this change and State that is passed at both Legislature local and state levels Prioritization plan Whether or not Recreation and Mayor’s office Quarterly for use of open City has Parks approves prioritization space money completed plan to plan and notifies completed prioritize use of Department of . open space Recreation and Parks funding
13 TRAJECTORIES
The following (Exhibit 3) shows the overall baselines, trajectories, and targets for the metrics. Additional trajectories will be established consistent with the guidelines for establishing high priority areas as previously described.
Exhibit 3 - Improvement Trajectories
Acres of New Parks Created
1 ■ ■■ ■■ ■ ■■ ■■
I II II II ////////////////////// Time (5 year period)
New Parks
Time (5 year period)
14 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF CITY DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER KEY PARTICIPANTS
Increasing the amount of open space in the City of Los Angeles will require the coordinated action of a number of individuals and City departments. Collaboration between City departments is essential for the City to meet its goal of developing more public parks and open spaces. Policies, goals, and objectives regarding the need to acquire and develop additional park and open space facilities need to be included in the various planning documents developed by the City (e.g. Community Plans, Specific Plans, transportation plans, development agreements, etc.) as well as funding opportunities with various City departments such as BOS (Prop O), Housing (Prop 1C), DOT (TEA funds), etc.
It is critical that a stakeholders group, of City departments and key stakeholders, be developed to meet on a regular schedule to discuss park and open space opportunities, The Interdepartmental Working Group, which is being developed as a part of the Department of Recreation and Parks’ 2006-2007 Needs Assessment, could serve as the basis for such a City department stakeholders group. A representative of the Mayor’s Office could play an important leadership role in that group and help coordinate collaboration between the City departments.
A coordinated, long range, comprehensive planning effort, driven by the Mayor’s Office, is necessary to develop a prioritized plan for the development of additional parks and open spaces across the City.
• Department of Recreation and Parks - The Department of Recreation and Parks will be responsible for building all of the parks / restoring open spaces on property that is owned by the City and has been designated as a potential open space development location. The Department will also select the locations for park construction among the available areas, in consultation with the Mayor’s office.
• Department of General Services- The Department of General Services will be responsible for acquiring property to convert into open spaces and compiling an inventory of all open space opportunities.
• Community Redevelopment Agency - The Community Redevelopment Agency will report on park and open space opportunities in the 32 redevelopment project areas and 3 revitalization areas they currently operate in throughout the City.
• Department of City Planning - The Department of City Planning should be responsible for leading the City’s efforts to update the General Plan and associated Elements (including Public Recreation Plan, Community Plans, and Specific Plans,) as well as any efforts to amend Quimby related sections of the L.A.M.C.
15 These metrics will be the basis for the Performance Management Unit’s semi-annual assessment of progress against this plan, and a subsequent meeting between the General Manager, Deputy Mayor for Energy and the Environment, and Director of the Mayor’s Performance Management Unit, which will take place in July and January.
At the request of the Office of the Mayor, the GM may be asked to present analysis and remediation plans for performance not consistent with the trajectories, such as root- cause analysis and reporting on the projects that support performance against the relevant trajectory, and/or accounting for significant events (e.g., sustained elevated threat levels, actual terrorist events) that might prove disruptive to meeting the anticipated trajectory.
The General Manager will also present a subset of these metrics—at the General Manager’s choosing—at the Mayor’s quarterly meetings with the General Managers.
Department of Recreation and Parks General Manager’s Reviews The General Manager will task his/her staff with preparing a monthly dashboard with the as-current performance versus trajectory for each of the metrics (Note: some metrics may not be updated monthly). The General Manager will forward this monthly dashboard to the Deputy Mayor of Energy and the Environment. The General Manager and Deputy Mayor will meet to discuss this dashboard as they deem necessary.
The General Manager will use this monthly dashboard in discussions with POLA’s executive team, and will endeavor to integrate the performance metrics in this plan into individual performance goals, as the General Manager deems appropriate.
PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT
The key contributors in the preparation of this report have been:
Office of the Mayor • Marcus Allen, Deputy Chief of Staff • Nancy Sutley, Deputy Mayor of Energy and the Environment • Romel Pascual, Associate Director for Environment • Angela Ovalle, Policy Analyst, Education
Department of Recreation and Parks • Jon Kirk Mukri, General Manager • Robert Jensen, Executive Officer • Michael Shull, Superintendent of Planning and Development • Sue Gorney, Landscape Architect II • Camille D. Walls, City Planner • Darryl Ford, Planning Assistant
17 WATER CONSERVATION
SMART IRRIGATION SYSTEMS
RECLAIMED WATER
SYNTHETIC TURF
NATIVE PLANTING WATER CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES
The City of Los Angles is dependent on imported water. In 2005, the City imported almost 90% of its water. This water is transported hundreds of miles to the City via of a system of aqueducts from sources in Northern California and Nevada. Ten (10) percent of the City’s water comes from local ground water sources; and less than 1% comes from recycled water. The City of Los Angles has a very diverse water supply which is transported from hundreds of miles away. Much of southern California is under extreme drought conditions dictating aggressive actions for strong water conservation planning. With the wettest months already past, the National Weather Service has recorded only 2.43 inches (61.7 mm) of rain in downtown Los Angles from July 1,2006 through April 10, 2007.
Los Angeles has historically taken a leadership role in managing its demand for water. Water usage in the City is the same as it was 20 years ago despite an increase in population of over 750,000 people. Nevertheless, the City needs to continue to identify new methods and opportunities to manage and conserve its limited supply of potable water. Increased water conservation will play a significant role in ensuring that the City will meet its future water demands. Water conservation will lessen the City’s reliance on imported water while providing a drought-proof resource that is not subject to environmental restrictions or weather conditions. This increased conservation will need to be realized both through hardware measures and behavioral changes in the water use of City residents.
City of Los Angeles Water Supply Prepared By the Department of Water and Power Currently the City’s park system has annual water use of 11,600 acre feet averaged over a five year period. It is conservatively estimated that approximately 80% of that water usage is for irrigation. The Department of Recreation and Parks has implemented a water conservation plan in partnership with the City’s water service provider, the Department of Water and Power (DWP). The goal is to have a 25%, or 2900 acre-feet, net reduction in the park system’s potable water consumption by July, 2012. The net reduction also accounts for the planned addition of almost 750 acres of new parkland over the same period.
To achieve this goal, the Department of Recreation and Parks is implementing plans to achieve two major objectives in its water management plan; the conversion of our existing irrigation systems to weather smart systems; and, increased use of reclaimed water for turf and landscape irrigation. Additional objectives include the use of synthetic sports fields and native landscaping. SMART IRRIGATION SYSTEMS DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Goal
The Department of Recreation and Parks will provide the City of Los Angeles with the finest park system in the world. Smart irrigation systems are an essential means to this goal.
Smart Irrigation
Smart irrigation systems utilize climate based or sensor based smart irrigation controllers to automatically adjust irrigation schedules in accordance with the local weather and site conditions. Once installed and properly set-up, these controllers should require no additional programming or adjustments, rain or shine.
The installation of just one smart irrigation controller can potentially save as much as one acre foot of water per acre of landscape controlled in one year. This is the equivalent to saving over 2,600,000 sixteen ounce bottles of water per year. By converting the City’s park irrigation systems to weather smart irrigation systems that automatically adjust irrigation schedules in accordance with local weather and site specific data, it is estimated that the City could realize water savings of over 1800 acre feet. These estimated water savings translate to enough water to supply 3600 single family households every year. The Department of Recreation and Parks has currently replaced 147 of 943 controllers citywide; which now irrigate over 360 acres with weather smart controllers. That translates into 360 acre-feet of estimated savings of potable water.
Smart irrigation controllers are the brains of any smart irrigation system, but they are only one component of a comprehensive system. Other essential parts of the system include backflow prevention devices, mainline and lateral line piping, gate, master and remote control valves, flow meters, sprinkler heads, nozzles and fittings. While we can anticipate great savings and realize improvements just by installing smart irrigation controllers, it is through the combined integrity of all the components of the system that the full value of the smart irrigation system will be realized. Improvements or refurbishments to the parks irrigation systems are costly, time consuming, of a massive scale, and as always - a part of our on-going operation and maintenance programs. While all of the project sites listed in this report include at least one smart irrigation controller, when feasible the scope of the project would be expanded to include the upgrading of other system components, perhaps even to the point of an entire new smart irrigation system.
Benefits
The advent of smart irrigation controller technology significantly enhances our ability to achieve the best management practice goals that pertain to the realm of irrigation. Some of the benefits of implementing smart irrigation systems in our parks are water conservation through reductions in water usage and water runoff. Public safety is enhanced by reducing the potential for slips and falls caused by sprinkler over-spraying and soil erosion. These reductions result in improved water quality and less degradation to the roads, pathways and trails within our parks. These reductions also mean that less toxic runoff will be entering waterways and stormwater systems, thus improving public and ecological safety. The City’s cost for labor, energy, water treatment and wastewater treatment are lowered. Our parks, properly irrigated, will be healthier and aesthetically attractive. The landscapes that comprise our complex park network are improved with optimal performance provided by smart irrigation systems.
Interdepartmental Partnering
The Department of Recreation and Parks has partnered with the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power in planning for and implementing most of these projects. LADWP’s Water Conservation Division has pursued grants, helped with research, and worked with our Valley Regional staff in testing out smart irrigation controllers. LADWP Reclaimed Water Division and RAP are working together to expand the reach of reclaimed water to additional parklands. The extensive project funding, both provided and proposed by LADWP management is crucial to the program’s success. LADWP’s breadth of knowledge and enthusiasm in pursuing water conservation within our park system serves to re-enforce their standing as a leader in the fields of water and energy conservation.
Also, the staff at the Bureau of Engineering has and will continue to provide essential technical design and project management services for many irrigation projects. Collaboration with BOE, as at the Hollyhock House Great Lawn Project at Bamsdall Park, will help ensure that the Department’s new, more stringent irrigation requirements are carried out during the construction process.
Finally, we look forward to working with the General Services Department to help provide project construction and to install dedicated landscape water meters that will help decrease water surcharges to the City.
Design
The Department of Recreation and Parks intends to utilize a new list of on-call consultants to augment the irrigation system design work supplied by the Bureau of Engineering. Landscape architectural staff and consultants will develop sustainable smart irrigation systems comprised of the efficient, state-of-the-art irrigation equipment that will be user-friendly and maintainable by our maintenance staff. Construction documentation will reflect our new irrigation standards, such as requiring more finely tuned spray coverage between sprinklers, and using highly efficient sprinkler nozzles. Installation & Youth Employment
To augment the work of the General Services Department, the Department of Recreation and Parks has requested the positions necessary to properly establish a new irrigation installation unit. This team will facilitate the installation of these irrigation projects throughout the City. Team-dedicated supervisory staff will train and oversee the work of the crew to be selected from the City Works program, where youths from all over the City sign up for work experience. This youth at risk age group will be given the opportunity for on-the-job training in learning a trade with the hoped for outcome of becoming a well trained City employee after their one year probationary period.
Maintenance
Smart irrigation controllers are sophisticated instruments and the maintenance and security of these controllers is more important than ever. Staff training in securing these controllers combined with access restricted to only essential, responsible personnel will lessen the opportunity for tampering or vandalism.
Parks with Smart Irrigation
The Department of Recreation and Parks is moving aggressively to install smart irrigation controllers into all City parks as rapidly as possible. And when funding allows, additional irrigation equipment improvements are implemented to enhance the water conservation capabilities of the irrigation system. Of course, all future park sites will be equipped with smart irrigation systems.
The Department’s achievements with installing smart irrigation systems began in our Valley Region with our smart irrigation controller test sites (listed at the end of this document) and our collaboration with the Department of Water and Power.
The Department’s 18 hole golf courses and new parks, such as Welcome Park , Telfair Park and South LA Activity Center are now equipped or in the process of being equipped with smart irrigation controllers.
Smart Irrigation Programs
1. Barnsdall Park - Great Lawn Restoration - CD-13 Funding Total: $195,000 Funding Source: MWD $75,000 Funding Source: DWP and DRP and BOE (In-kind services) $75,000 Funding Source: Quimby $45,000 Description: This project involved the re-design of the Great Lawn area at Hollyhock House into a water conserving landscape of native and low water use plant materials, and in the process used smart irrigation methods and materials. Status: This project was completed in June, 2007. 2. Proposition 13, Weather-based Irrigation Controller Program Funding Total: $87,000 Funding Source: State Department of Water Resources Description: MWD in conjunction with LADWP’s Technical Assistance Program upgraded 49 individual controllers to smart irrigation controllers Status: Installed
The following locations were upgraded to Calsense ET 2000 faceboards for future central control purposes in the San Fernando Valley. The central control radio system and weathe stations are to be installed with the City Park Irrigation Retrofit Program for ’07-’08.
CD-2 Lake View Terrace CD-3 Knapp Ranch Park CD-3 Tarzana Park CD-3 Reseda Park CD-5 Encino Park CD-6 Delano Park CD-6 Hjelte Sports Center (Acclima) CD-6 Woodley Park CD-7 Hansen Dam CD-7 Hansen Dam Lake CD-7 Hansen Dam Sports Complex CD-7 Hubert Humphrey CD-7 Lake View Terrace Library CD-7 Orcas Park CD-7 Pacoima Park CD-7 Roger Jessup Park CD-12 Louise Park
3. Proposition 50, Chapter 7, Los Angeles City Park Irrigation Efficiency Program Funding Total: $1,140,970 Funding Source: State Department of Water Resources $362,000 Funding Source: MWD, LADWP and DRP (In-kind services) $778,970 Description: This project will convert 15 park sites to smart irrigation systems. Status: The tentative project completion is targeted for fall, 2008.
CD-3 Reseda North New System CD-4 Pan Pacific Park Head Replacement CD-5 Bad News Bears (Westwood Park) Head & Backflow Replacement CD-5 Palms R.C. Head Replacement CD-6 Rhodes Greenbelt Head Replacement CD-6 Slavin Park Head Replacement CD-7 Carey Ranch Head Replacement CD-8 Exposition Park Rose Garden Head Replacement CD-I 1 Palisades Park (upper part) New System CD-12 Chatsworth Park South New System CD-12 Dearborn Park Head Replacement CD-12 Wilbur Tampa Park Head Replacement CD-13 Elysian Valley R.C. Head Replacement CD-14 Evergreen Park Head Replacement CD-14 Yosemite Park Head Replacement
4. DWP-RAP ’06 -’07, City Park Irrigation Retrofit Funding Total: $989,500 (’06 -’07) Funding Source: LADWP Description: LADWP is spear-heading this pilot program with DRP to make improvements to parks needing irrigation system up-grades, including smart irrigation systems. Status: BOE - Architecture Division has completed design. The 3 parks are to be completed by the end of fiscal year ‘08.
CD-I Victory Memorial Grove (Elysian Park) CD-8 Mt. Carmel R.C. CD-14 Ave. 64 Park (Arroyo Seco)
5. DWP-RAP ’07 -’08, City Park Irrigation Retrofit Funding Total: $902,300 Funding Source: LADWP Description: These are large scale irrigation refurbishments, including smart irrigation at the following 3 sites.
CD-I St. James Park CD-4 Robert Bums Park CD-9 Vermont Square Park Plus installing 4 weather stations in the San Fernando Valley and completing the radio equipment installation at the Calsense controller upgrade projects started with the Prop 13 funding.
6. DWP-RAP Future Fiscal Years, City Park Irrigation Retrofit Funding Source: LADWP Description: Building on the expected success of the above ’06-’08 projects, LADWP and DRP plan to make large scale irrigation refurbishments, including smart irrigation, at the following 15 sites citywide. Criteria for the selection of these sites are based on existing conditions and usage. CD-I Lincoln Park CD-2 Victory Vineland R.C. CD-3 Knapp Ranch Park CD-4 Bette Davis Park CD-5 Cheviot Hills CD-6 Lake Balboa CD-7 Richie Valens II CD-8 Algin Sutton R.C. CD-9 TBD CD-10 Lafayette Park CD-11 Temescal Canyon CD-12 Balboa Sports Complex CD-13 See Elysian Park below CD-14 Hermon Park (Arroyo Seco) CD-I 5 Angels Gate Park
7. Elysian Park Water Infrastructure Program, CD-I, CD-13 Funding Total: $TBD Funding Source: TBD Description: A phased scope of work is in process of being defined. The first phase will be the replacement of the deteriorated mainline piping in the western side of the park. The parks entire water system, including irrigation, domestic, and future reclaimed water systems as well as fire lines are all being considered for eventual replacement. Status: Developing scope and cost estimate in collaboration w/LADWP and LAFD.
8. Proposition 50, Chapter 7, Large Landscapes - 40 Controllers Funding Total: $204,000 Funding Source: State Department of Water Resources $101,000 Funding Source: LADWP and DRP (In-kind services) $103,000 Description: This project will install 40 smart irrigation controllers at the following parks by the fall of ‘08:
CD-I Sycamore Grove Park CD-4 Griffith Park R.C. & Pool CD-5 Cheviot Hills R.C. CD-8 Martin Luther King R.C. CD-9 Harvard R.C. CD-10 Jim Gilliam R.C. CD-I 1 Del Rey Lagoon CD-14, CD-I San Pasqual Park CD-15 Pt. Fermin Park and Lighthouse 9. DWP/RAP Master Valves & Flow Meters Installation Funding Total: $TBD Funding Source: TBD Description: Goal is to install master valves and flow meters in all parks where these are currently not in use. Program will start by retrofitting parks one acre or more in size. Installation by RAP staff. Status: Conceptual
SMART IRRIGATION CONTROLLER TEST SITES
Facility Name Andres Pico Adobe El Paseo de Cahuenga Park Jesse Owens Park McGroarty Park Parthenia Park Valley One Senior Citizens Center Orcutt Ranch Knapp Ranch West North Hollywood District Maint. Yard Felhaber-Houk Park North Weddington Park Chatsworth South (Upper) Sepulveda R.C.
f RECLAIMED WATER DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES
A significant part of the Department of Recreation and Parks’ water management plan is to convert some of the City’s larger irrigated parks, particularly golf courses, to reclaimed water. The City produces reclaimed water from four wastewater treatment facilities. The distance of many of the City’s parks from these facilities often prevent their conversion to reclaimed water due to the high cost of the required conveyance systems. However, because these treatment facilities are geographically spread across the City, once the necessary conveyance infrastructure is developed it will allow the City to convert many of its larger parks and facilities to reclaimed water.
Some of the City’s Parks and Facilities that are located close to existing water reclamation plants have already been converted from potable water to reclaimed water. The Department uses approximately 30,000 acre-feet per year in reclaimed water for landscape irrigation and lakes; the bulk of which, about 28,500 acre-feet is used to fill several small lakes. The Department of Recreation and Park’s overall reclaimed water use is projected to increase by 10% during the next 5-10 years through the conversion of a number of additional parks and golf courses to reclaimed water.
Urban runoff is another potential source of reclaimed water; one that is currently untapped by the City. By capturing and treating urban runoff and beneficially reusing it, the City could reduce the amount of potable water used for landscape irrigation. Small treatment plants could be placed in locations where dry weather runoff predominates, and near potential sources of demand such as large parks or golf courses. Reusing the dry weather runoff for irrigation reduces pollution that is carried to local rivers and the ocean, while also providing a water supply benefit. While the City currently has not developed this type of urban runoff reuse project, the implementation of such a project in the future (and the use of the resultant reclaimed water) must factor in economics, water quality regulations, and public acceptance. ADDITIONAL WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS CITY OF LOS ANGELES
Synthetic Turf
Additional water savings are being realized through the implementation of synthetic sports fields. The densely populated Los Angles area faces a tremendous challenge in trying to program active recreation areas. The challenge is to provide safe, playable fields, when one game after another is scheduled with little recovery time allowed for the turf. One solution has been to increase the use of synthetic turf fields. Currently the City has six (6) synthetic soccer (football) fields in use, with more than a dozen others in various phases of planning and design.
In addition to their ability to allow for uninterrupted continuous safe play, synthetic turf provides benefits to both water conservation and water supply. It is estimated that synthetic turf fields provide water savings to the City of over 40 million gallons annually per field. Use of synthetic turf fields also eliminates the need to treat the fields with any herbicides, pesticides, or fertilizers; which are potential sources of water pollution.
Native Landscaping
Native landscaping provides water savings through the use of drought tolerant landscaping. Plants that are native to Southern California have adapted to the semi-arid climate and therefore require less water to maintain. Areas that traditionally would have been turf are now being considered for native plants. Diverse native landscaping provides deep roots to retain water and reduce erosion while providing food and habitat for a multitude of birds and insects. Water efficient landscapes benefit water suppliers, water users, and the environment through reduced storm water run-off, overspray of pesticides and fertilizers, and soil erosion; resulting in improved water quality.
Improving landscape water use efficiency is especially important since a major portion of water use in the City is devoted to landscapes. As the City’s sustainability design standards evolve, the Department of Recreation and Parks will continue to evaluate the percentage of native landscaping included in every project. WATER CONSERVATION
STORM WATER DIVERSION CAPTURE & INFILTRATION
ON-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE AND INFILTRATION OFF-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE AND TREATMENT ON RAP SITE OFF-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE, TREATMENT AND INFILTRATION ON RAP SITE ON-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE AND INFILTRATION
PROGRAM: A measurable reduction should be anticipated within the City’s Stormwater collection system due to new infiltration system design and implementation. The Department of Recreation and Parks will require all new and renovated sites to infiltrate when feasible 100% all stormwater and irrigation run-off within the facility site. By using permeable paving, bioswales, and underground infiltration systems this should be accomplishable barring any geotechnical barriers. Benefits include recharging of the water table, more available ground water for plants/trees to access (reducing irrigation), cleaner water in the ground water system due to natural or BMP filtering systems, less burden on the storm water system.
RAP has been implementing this procedure for many years in various forms from drainage sumps and perforated pipe. This has primary been an effort to manage erosion control, keep runoff from entering neighboring property or to avoid overburdening local stormwater systems. With a new environmental awareness and a proactive attitude the Department within the last 5 years has begun efforts to increase on-site stormwater or run-off water management. Examples and methods include: • Permeable paving in parking lots including gravel o Taylor Yard Park (open) o Riverside Park (in design) o Ross Snyder RC Parking Lot (bid & award) o Runyon Canyon Fuller Parking Lot (in design) o South LA Wetlands (in design) o Sepulveda Basin Sports Center (in design) o Orcutt Ranch Improvements (under construction) o Vernon Branch Library Park (under construction) • Vegetated swales (bioswales) in parking lots or other park areas o Blythe Street RC (under construction) o Lanark RC Parking Lot (open) o Taylor Yard Park (open) o Rosecrans RC (in design) o Gilbert Lindsay RC (under construction) o Runyon Canyon Fuller Parking Lot (in design) o Riverside Park (in design) o Field of Dreams, Gaffey St (open) o Sepulveda Basin Sports Center (in design) o Peck Park Canyon Enhancement (in design) • Gravel sumps and infiltration basins o Welcome Park (open) o Field of Dreams, Gaffey St (open) o Orcutt Ranch Improvements (under construction) o Peck Park Canyon Enhancement (in design) Retention basins o Taylor Yard (open) o Rosecrans RC (in design) OFF-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE AND TREATMENT ON RAP SITE
PROGRAM: In collaboration with Bureau of Sanitation(BOS) and the Bureau of Engineering(BOE) the Department is implementing storm water capture and treatment facilities within the parks as a method of diverting runoff collected by the stormwater system, filtering/treating it on site and returning it to the environment in a cleaner state. These may be “invisible” treatment facilities which are placed underground and do not impact above surface facilities or recreational activities. This program has great potential for cleaning the environment as well as recycling a previously contaminated resource and they will collect runoff from off-site from areas encompassing hundreds of acres. These City projects are currently in design and will be implemented as pilot programs.
The stormwater BMP’s (Best Management Practices) projects will effectively reduce pollutant loading in Stormwater runoff diverted from existing large (over 6’diameter) storm drains. Although systems will differ from project to project the basic treatment will include: • Hydrodynamic Separator Unit providing treatment of diverted runoff • Underground detention tank detaining treated runoff • Recirculation system with disinfection of the treated Stormwater • Return treated water to storm system or reused on site as code/policy allows
Some of these systems will be placed underground on park property “hidden” from park users by either athletic field, ball courts, landscaped areas or parking lots. Virtually invisible from the public and RAP maintenance staff the only indication being several access ports. Other systems will incorporate treatment wetlands into the park as a method of increasing the water quality while creating habitat and interpretive areas for park visitors. There area also sites that will have large Stormwater retention basins and wetlands for possible reuse while allowing for recreational use of portions of the site. The BMP’s will be maintained by BOS including water quality testing. The primary funding for these projects is Proposition O and currently are in various phases of design.
Sites include: • Mar Vista Stormwater BMP (under tennis courts) • Garvanza Park Stormwater BMP (under landscaped area) • South LA Wetlands (incorporates on-site wetlands) , • Temescal Canyon Stormwater BMP (under landscaped area) • Penmar Water Quality Improvement & RunoffTReuse Project (under landscaped area) • Strathem Pit Multiuse Project (large retention basins & wetlands) OFF-SITE STORMWATER CAPTURE. TREATMENT AND INFILTRATION ON RAP SITE
PROGRAM: In collaboration with the County of Los Angeles several City parks have been utilized as stormwater capture, treatment and infiltration locations. The County has diverted stormwater from an existing drain to a filtration/treatment unit then to very large underground infiltration basins installed under the parks’ soccer field. These sites have already been installed by the County and are operational at the following locations: • Sun Valley Recreation Center • Mar Vista Recreation Center
Sun Valley RC ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH & SAFETY
• LEAD POISONING PREVENTION
• MOLD CONTROL
• PREVENTING ASBESTOS EXPOSURES
• INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT (IPM)
• STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY
Within an urban setting, many surplus properties that may have been contaminated by historical manufacturing and industrial uses are acquired to expand the City’s parkland and open space. In a commitment to reusing these “Brownfields,” the Department regularly conducts various environmental site assessments and remedial actions to transform these properties into usable parks. At Venice Beach, the former Damson Oil site that had considerable contamination from oil production was cleaned up and returned to a public beach. Through a series of environmental site assessments (Phase I and II), a remedial action plan, site clean up, and groundwater monitoring, the site is planned to be used for a skate park as part of the overall restoration Oceanfront Walk at Venice Beach.
Proposed Skate Park at Venice Beach Lead Poisoning Prevention
■ The Department has a Lead Abatement Program approved by City Council in 1998 aimed at reducing and eliminating lead hazards at its facilities. The program prioritizes facilities based on the amount of deteriorated lead paint at the site and implements a comprehensive survey and remediation program. The Department’s Lead Abatement Program has been highly successful in reducing the risk of lead poisoning in young children that participate in recreational programming at our facilities. The first priority with regard to Department facilities were recreation and child care center where children under 6 years of age are present; this is the age group that is most susceptible to lead poisoning and its adverse health effect. There has been no on-going funding for continued implementation of this program. Mold Control
■ Mold is a naturally occurring organism that produces seed-like spores that are small enough to travel through the air. We are exposed to mold daily in the air we breathe. Exposure occurs through breathing, ingestion, and/or skin contact. The level of airborne molds increase when moisture problems arise in buildings creating mold growth on building materials. The most common health effect of mold is allergic reaction. Molds can cause a variety of health risks dependent on the type and amount of mold present, and the susceptibility and sensitivity of the person being exposed . The objective of the Department is to utilize prevention techniques to minimize the potential for mold and fungal growth, identify, control and remediate areas containing fungal growth, and to protect all park patrons and employees. The The City’s approved Mold Protocol is implemented by the Environmental Management Section in cooperation with the Safety Office. Preventing Asbestos Exposures
Asbestos is a serious health hazard commonly found in our environment today. Asbestos is most hazardous when it is friable. The term "friable" means that the asbestos is easily crumbled by hand, releasing fibers into the air. Once inhaled, they become trapped in the body. Because it is so hard to destroy asbestos fibers, the body cannot break them down or remove them once they are lodged in lung or body tissues. They remain in place where they can cause disease. Sometimes it takes up to 40 years for asbestos-related illnesses to show up. Consequently, the younger people are when they inhale asbestos, the more likely they are to develop asbestos-related diseases. This is why enormous efforts are being made by our Department to prevent children from being exposed. It is important for park users and employees to know where it is likely to be found in our buildings and how to avoid exposure. The Environmental Section surveys many the Department buildings for the presence of asbestos, conducts abatement projects, provides annual notification of asbestos locations to employees, conducts as-needed training, and maintains records for all asbestos project. Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
a The goal of our IPM program is to properly manage pests and the environment, to balance the benefits of control, costs, public health, and environmental safety. Control options include biological, cultural. manual/mechanical, and chemical. Pesticides are used as a last resort. NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION. RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT
White Point Nature Preserve
The Department of Recreation and Parks is the steward for several thousand acres of parkland spanning the diverse geographical areas of the City from the coastal zone and mountainous areas to the inner city. Some of this parkland contains areas that have essential natural resource functions and values. The Department is always looking for opportunities to improve and expand the City’s natural resource base.
One of the most significant opportunities occurred when the Department collaborated with the Palos Verdes Peninsula Land Conservancy (PVPLC) to convert White Point Park in San Pedro, formerly a United States military installation, into a nature preserve. A master plan was developed and project implementation began in 2002. The project was designed to improve the biological diversity and environmental sustainability of the site, and to provide Los Angeles residents and visitors a variety of passive recreational and educational opportunities. Park features include trails, native landscaping and habitat areas, interpretive displays and signs, and the adaptive reuse of some of the military structures. CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CULTURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
The City of Los Angeles has a rich cultural history that began with the first Native Americans that inhabited the Los Angeles River valley, through the mission and rancho era, and into the 20th Century. Many of these historic cultural resources are now part of the City’s parklands. The Department of Recreation and Parks is committed to a.XuX. a,/l. managing these historic resources through the proper identification, documentation, preservation and mitigation. In many cases the historic resource itself is an integral part ■ ****&&!&■ of the park and its programmed activities, which adds to the diverse recreational experience that is the Los Angeles park system. A recent example of this commitment to cultural resource management is the proposed new community building at Brand Park in the Mission Hills community of the City. Located adjacent to the Mission San Fernando Rey de Espana, Brand Park is part of the original grounds of the historic mission, including historic landmarks like the old Tallow Pit used during the mission period starting in 1769. During preliminary project review of the proposed community building, portions of the original Mission’s Granary Building was found within the planned footprint, representing a major archaeological discovery. Through an extensive data recovery process, many important artifacts have been recovered that will add to the understanding of the Mission and its activities. It will also add to the rich history that is Brand Park. ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION & INTREPRETATION Wonderful Outdoor World
For many of us, our first camping experience was one of the most memorable events of our childhood. Through camping and outdoor adventures we learned to pitch a tent, cook on a cook stove, catch fish and watch for shooting stars. Recent studies have shown that this seemingly innocent appreciation of outdoor recreation is actually a strong contributor to overall happiness, health and career success in later adult life.
Unfortunately, changing family structures and declining resources are leaving many of today's young people without an understanding or interest in the world outside their doors. Urban youth in particular are lacking the skills and motivation to actively enjoy the wonders of the natural world. In 1994, a consortium of concerned officials from the private, philanthropic and public sectors convened to address this trend towards indoor isolation. It was determined that an introductory program to prepare urban youth for the vast opportunities in outdoor recreation is needed in urban centers all across the country. In response, a new program was unveiled in the spring of 1995, which aimed to provide urban families with the necessary skills and confidence to safely enjoy outdoor recreational activities. This exciting new program is called WOW (Wonderful Outdoor World).
The Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks WOW program offers camping experiences throughout the city of Los Angeles. With an emphasis on utilizing our neighborhood parks, LA WOW engages 42 youth, boys and girls in a well rounded first time camping experience.
WOW is both a philosophy and a program that at its foundation believes that outdoor recreation plays an important and positive role in American culture. WOW will take a core group of young people ages 8 12 and their families through a one and one-half day camping experience within the heart of their own community (parents will participate during the opening and closing activities). The goals of WOW are to introduce inner-city youth to camping and outdoor recreation through a safe and controlled experience. WOW emphasizes the importance of understanding and respecting urban and wildland ecosystems.
Through WOW young people will learn:
• Enhanced Family Values • Democratic Skills and Team Work • Constructive Self Reliance • Outdoor Skills • Curiosity and the Desire to Work and Do More • Respect for the Outdoor World
In 1996, after the pilot program was completed in Los Angeles, the national sponsors of WOW expanded the program across the U.S. to five additional cities: Albuquerque, New Mexico; Salt Lake City, Utah; Denver, Colorado; Washington D.C., and Phoenix, Arizona. Recreation professionals from the Walt Disney Company, the Bureau of Land Management, the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks, the U.S. Forest Service, the Recreation Roundtable, California State University, Long Beach have designed the elements and methodology of the WOW program.
The planned activities include instruction on
Campsite Set-Up Fishing ' ' "" ' “ Meal Preparation Conservation Basic Camping Skills Character Enrichment General Recreation Skills and Games Leave no trace principals Backpacking Team Building Stargazing Survival Rock Climbing Urban Animals & Reptiles
During each overnight session, campers will undertake a community service project as a testament to their respect for the outdoor environment (i.e. clean ups, tree planting). At the completion of the overnight session, all participants will take home a sleeping bag, flashlight and Goodie Bag to encourage future recreational activities. In addition, campers will receive valuable information, maps and resources on outdoor recreational opportunities and other environmental programs in their area. RESOURCE CONSERVATION
RECYCLED & RENEWABLE RESOURCES RECYCLED AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES:
PROGRAM: The Department of Recreation & Parks make extraordinary efforts to use product that have been made from recycled (post consumer) materials or from renewable resources. As these products become available they are evaluated and specified for use both in construction and for every day operational use. The following are examples of these products currently found in the Parks and Facilities:
• Recycled plastic (HDPE) lumber o Durable plastic rail fencing along walkways, equestrian trails and parking lots. Specified for Griffith Park locations o Facility and Directional Signage. Full color signs currently being evaluated. To be installed at the West Region Headquarters o Backstops for ballfields currently have plastic lumber inserts behind the batters box. This has been specified for all park backstops instead of wood for more than 5 years. o Wheel stops and barricades for parking lots made out of colored recycled plastic have been specified for more that 5 years, o Playground equipment components such as slides, signs, play walls are used in all playgrounds o Recycled plastic grass fibers for synthetic turf athletic fields o Various tables and benches at park facilities
• Recycled Rubber o Resilient surfaces for fall safety under playground equipment o Synthetic turf “crumb rubber” infill
• Rapidly Renewable Resource o Indoor basketball court flooring made from bamboo is being specified for the new gymnasium at Lafayette Recreation Center.
• Recycled Office Products: o Office paper o Ink cartridges
• Composting & Green Waste reuse o The Department has programs in operation to compost and reuse green waste within the parks Greenwaste Recycling Program
Both the biological community and the physical environment are continually interacting, creating a flow of energy and a natural recycling of matter throughout the system. All life within the ecosystem depends on this continuous cycle.
The staff of the City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks Department applies this basic truth to the management of a healthy ecosystem on more than 15,000 acres of parkland. We also recycle 100% of tree trimmings and green waste. Each year, about 10,000 tons (23,800 cubic yards) of tree trimmings from City parks are recycled at a facility at Griffith Park that the Department has operated since 1987. Some of the tree trimmings are shredded into 3" - 5" wood chips, which are then used at the City's 385 parks as organic mulch.
Reference for Report: http://www.laparks.org/dos/forest/trimming.htm DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION AND PARKS RECYCLING PROGRAM - COMMISSION BRIEF 2007
The City of Los Angeles Recreation and Parks Department (RAP) operates more than 350 facilities, which provide recreation opportunities and leisure services to the residents of Los Angeles and surrounding areas. These facilities include staffed recreation centers, neighborhood and regional parks, golf courses, senior citizens centers, day care centers, indoor and outdoor swimming pools, sports complexes, wildlife areas and open space. The Department also operates special facilities such as the Griffith Park Observatory, the Marine Aquarium, Travel Town, and a number of museums, private concession and Historical sites. The Department manages approximately 16,000 acres of land, including 9,000 acres of irrigated landscape, 800,000 trees, 14 lakes, 75 miles of bridle trails and wildlife areas.
In accordance with state law AB939, the Bureau of Sanitation collects and combines reports prepared by each City department into a final report submitted to the State of California. As a result of RAP efforts the Department has achieved a waste stream diversion in excess of 90% annually since 1995. The Mayor is expecting an overall milestone of 70% for the entire City by the year 2015.
DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT PROGRAMS
Source Reduction
• Green Waste Grinding/Grass-Cycling - The Department recycled 100% of the green waste its crews generated. Grass clippings, generated by mowing operations, were grass-cycled on site; tree trimmings were chipped for ground cover; lawn sweeping materials were composted for plant beds; and larger tree trunks and branches were ground for mulching on trails and in planter beds. The purchase and use of tub grinders added about 180 tons of wood chips and grindings to our diversion totals.
• Employee Conservation - The Department implemented a training program to increase employee conservation awareness.
• Inert Debris Sifting and Material Separation - The Department’s program to recycle inert materials (concrete, asphalt, etc.) has been a great success in diverting waste from landfills.
• Metals Recycling - The Department has a longstanding scrap metal recovery program in place, which includes materials from crafts and salvaged equipment.
Market Development
1 • With a grant from the California Department of Conservation, the Department completed a pilot project using recycled-content playground furnishings and equipment at Cabrillo Beach in the Los Angeles Harbor area. Based on the results of this pilot project, the Department has continued to specify the purchase of recycled-content playground materials. Composting
• Griffith Park Co-Composting Project - In a cooperative venture, the Department of Recreation and Parks and the Bureau of Sanitation implemented a green waste co composting facility in Griffith Park. The facility co-composts green waste from City parks, bio-solids from the Hyperion Waste Water Treatment Facility, and manure from the Los Angeles Zoo. The finished product is used in community gardens, in school projects, on Department Landscape and on landfill landscaping. The co-composting facility is the result of a six-year effort. Planning for the facility started in 1990 and was originally scheduled to open in 1992. However, design, permitting, and construction took longer then anticipated. The facility began operation in January 1996.
DESCRIPTION OF SELECTED PROGRAMS - SHORT AND LONG TERM GOALS
The Department of Recreation and Parks’ primary strategy in the medium-term will be to continue the programs it implemented in the short-term and expand and enhance them whenever possible. This will include:
• Expand employee education programs to further encourage source reduction, re-use, recycling, and procurement of recycled-content products. Continue source separation of inert materials.
• Increase efforts on programs tailored to specific Department trade and craft workers. Evaluate the types of materials (wood, paint, and metals) generated by its crafts employees and identify ways to maximize re-use and recycling of those materials throughout the Department.
• Continue procurement of recycled-content products per the City’s Recycled Product Procurement Ordinance. Develop a system to track procurement of recycled-content products and train employees to use this tracking system.
ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS
In addition to the programs identified in the original SRRE, the Department has selected several new programs for implementation:
• Citywide Task Force on Sustainable Design
2 The Department will participate in the Citywide Sustainable Design Task Force to implement source reduction, re-use, and recycling programs for construction, demolition, and land clearing materials generated by its building construction and maintenance activities. It will also address procurement of recycled-content materials and space allocation for recycling on its new building construction projects.
• Soil Re-Use The Department will deliver any excess clean soils that it cannot use for its own facilities to Lopez Canyon Landfill or Toyon Canyon Landfill for post-closure construction until completed.
• Griffith Park Co-Composting The Department has met with other City departments that generate green waste and has evaluated the feasibility of allowing them to deliver materials to the green waste recycling facility at Griffith Park. Other departments are now allowed to take materials there, and our Department uses sites located in other parts of the city.
• Regional Processing Centers The Department planned to develop regional storage and processing centers for recyclable, inert materials. However, development of these sites was not funded. Today, all materials are used at the facilities in the areas they are generated, or trucked to the Griffith processing center
• Department Case Studies Guide With assistance from ISWMO, the Department will compile and publish case studies of waste reduction, re-use, recycling, composting, and recycled-content product procurement for park facilities.
• Recycled-Content Procurement The Department continues to review its purchasing specifications to remove barriers to products with recycled-content and also specifies recycled products whenever feasible. The Department’s market development efforts have been very proactive and will be further expanded through the following activities:
• The Department completed specification analysis and began to purchase steel- reinforced, 100% recycled plastic park benches for its playground areas. Per this specification, the Department (in a project with the Army Corps of Engineers) purchased steel-reinforced, 100% recycled plastic park benches for the playground at the Sepulveda Basin Dam. The Department will purchase recycled plastic park benches for recreation areas whenever feasible.
• The Department’s Golf Division uses recycled-content golf course products for use on its 14 golf courses.
3 • In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Department implemented a program to retro-fit a portion of its play pits with athletic matting made from recycled tire rubber. This material is intended to replace the sand that it currently uses.
ADDITIONAL PILOT PROGRAMS TESTED
At the direction of the City Council, the Department of Recreation and Parks (RAP) and the Bureau of Sanitation (BOS) jointly operated a pilot program to investigate possible increases in the City’s waste stream diversion efforts. The pilot program was conducted at the Department’s Peck Park facility. This program was conducted for a five month period and ended December 14, 2004. Four containers were placed at locations throughout the park. Each container purchased by the BOS held three separate cans for separation of recyclable materials and trash. The following chart reflects the results of this pilot program:
Plastic Bottles Glass Containers Metal Cans Trash* 165 80 37 104 lbs.
By the end of the pilot program, all four of the new containers had their locks damaged by volunteer recyclers collecting materials from our parks. During this same time, the facilities existing yellow recycle beverage containers (located inside the facility buildings) collected the following materials:
Plastic Bottles Glass Containers Metal Cans T rash* 285 92 31 26 lbs.
The above materials are placed in blue containers for curbside pickup by BOS. Expansion of the pilot program would require additional RAP staffing levels to provide for required trash separation and processing.
* Represents the amount of trash placed inside the recycle containers requiring additional staff time to separate.
METHODS FOR DETERMINING VOLUME OF DIVERSION
TONS/ AGENCY AGENCY NAME PROGRAM TYPE NAME CAL YR DOCUMENT/CALCULATION USED Department of Recreation and SOURCE Grinding yards x .75 tons grass DRP Parks NP 11 REDUCTION Grass-cycling 41,310 cycling x 507 Ibs/acre Department of Griffith Park Co Recreation and Composting DRP Parks C7 COMPOSTING Facility/Other 94,345 Weigh by volume x .75 tons per yard Department of Inert Debris Recreation and Separation and Re DRP Parks R31 RECYCLING use or Recycling 3240 Weigh Tickets Department of Recreation and DRP Parks R33 RECYCLING Soil Re-Use 17,480 Yards x 1.5 tons 4 Department of Recreation and DRP Parks R32 RECYCLING Metals Recycling 1230 Weigh Tickets Department of Recreation and SOURCE Green Waste DRP Parks SR 10 REDUCTION Grinding 130,748 Grinding yards x .75 tons
5 INNOVATIVE REGIONAL MAINTENANCE EFFORTS:
Within the Regional operations of the Department great effort is being taken to be both environmentally and economically sustainable. Along with the positive impact on the environment, the fine example being displayed by our employees, the funds saved through sustainable practices may be used for other valuable endeavors. The follow are examples:
• Regional Maintenance program to replace incandescent light bulbs with energy saving florescent fixtures. • Replacing toilets in all facilities with low flush fixtures • Replacing handles on faucets with push button auto-tum off fixtures • Replacing old irrigation sprinklers with new efficient equipment • Metals recycling programs • Ink cartridge recycling • Paper recycling OMKMIllWaWIlOW LOS ANGELES PARKS MODEL ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY IN THEIR CAMP PROGRAMS
City of Los Angeles Department of Recreation and Parks in cooperation with Department of Public Works answers the call for environmental sustainability in parks with innovative purchasing, programming, and waste management practices.
By Peggy Nguyen, Jane Kolb, Kevin Regan, and Michael Harrison
f ■ ^his summer, young campers at the While the Department has made a girls camps were chosen for a pilot pro I City of Los Angeles’Holly wood- commitment to using recyclable, biode gram. After developing and refining the I land Girls Camp and Griffith Park gradable, and plant-derived, non program concept, the Department’s Boys Camp will learn that there is styrofoam diningware products since the Camping and Forestry Divisions more to a spoon than how much food it 1990s, the Department’s current move launched the program in the Girls’ and can hold (or flick © ). Through a new ment toward using more rapidly- Boys’ Camps in January 2007, begin program called CAMPostables, the Los compostable diningware and composting ning first with the use of biodegradable Angeles Department of Recreation and it while educating youth campers about plates and the implementation of a food Parks has made a pledge to environ environmental stewardship began in the waste composting program in the camps mental sustainability in its camping pro last few years. The CAMPostables pro through a cooperation with the City’s gram by 1) using plant-based, biode gram gained momentum after the Depart Bureau of Sanitation, followed by the gradable and compostable plates and ment’s General Manager, Jon Kirk introduction of hot and cold cups, and utensils, 2) diverting biodegradable food Mukri, learned about the Disney Corpo biodegradable utensils by the summer. waste into the Los Angeles Department ration’s use of environmentally-friendly The plant-based biodegradable and of Public Works, Bureau of Sanitation’s paper products in food concessions at the compostable products that the campers food waste recycling program, and 3) Department’s X-Games. Mr. Mukri was are using include hot cups that have in raising the ecological awareness and inspired by this and spearheaded the ner linings made from 100% com in environmental stewardship of the staff adoption of similar techniques by his stead of petroleum, and are made of and youth participating in the camp. Department. The Department’s boys and chlorine free paper from sustainably- harvested trees. Other products being SERVE IT UP! L.A. Campers are using: used are containers made of annually renewable plants such as sugar cane and • Hot cups that have inner linings made Containers made of annually re reeds instead of poly foam, clear corn- from 100% corn instead of petroleum newable plants such as sugar cane based cold cups, plates made of 100% • Hot cups made of chlorine free paper from and reeds instead of polyfoam reclaimed and compostable fibers, and sustainably-harvested trees Plates made of 100% reclaimed utensils made from com. • Utensils made from corn and compostable fibers Waste in the food service and prepa • Clear corn-based cold cups ration areas of the camps is organized into three waste containers: a green bin
DRAFT, 8/27/2007 for food waste and biodegradable prod respectively, and is paid for by the De Food waste bins tjj. J/tfc ■ '■ are used by staff . ucts, a blue bin for plastic bottles and partment of Public Works, Bureau of and campers in . , , aluminum, and a black bin for the re Sanitation’s Restaurant Food Waste the food prepara- A mainder of the trash. The waste gener Recycling Program, which is designed tion and service ! -'*« ated from a typical food service estab to collect and recycle all organic waste areas. lishment is over 76% organic and com from restaurants within Los Angeles. postable; therefore, with proper staff The Department’s CAMPostables ' ""'i and camper training, 70-75% of all program integrates a resource use strat waste should be deposited into the green egy and recycling process that embraces ■ ■» ■ ft! bin. Acceptable items include fruits, an urban ecosystem approach and closes vegetables, meats and bones, seafood, the resource loop by reusing the com poultry, dairy products, bread and posted food waste as a non-toxic agri , 7 life - jpffr. :• if.. grains, coffee grounds, plant trimmings, cultural soil amendment used to grow 53S& soiled paper products, milk cartons, more food. Composting is a natural waxed cardboard, wooden crates, egg process where organic matter is biologi shells, compostable plant-based uten cally decomposed. The food waste is sils, and more. This waste is composted collected by a contractor and taken to a through the City’s food recycling pro processing facility where it is recycled gram with the assistance of an outside into a nutrient-rich compost that can be contractor that picks up the waste and used as fertilizer and mulch by agricul transports it to a composting facility. In tural communities to improve crop pro “The Greenest Big City in America”. addition to waste collection, the con duction, reduce the need for fertilizer One of the dominant threads that make tractor also provides training for De and pesticides, and provide nutrients to up Los Angeles’ public policy fabric at partment staff,as well as, technical as the soil. In the composting facility, this time is sustainability. At the County sistance. Together, the two camps serve composting occurs over the course of of Los Angeles Department of Parks The CAMPostables program assists the City of Los Angeles in meeting its waste diversion goal of diverting 70% of the waste stream by 2015. This composting effort will divert over eighty tons of organic waste from landfills each year.
about 1,000 meals per day in the sum three months, compared to the over 100 and Recreation 5th Annual Parks Sum mertime. years it would take for a plastic fork to mit Program this year, “Green Without The cost of collecting and processing decompose. Envy: Creating Sustainable Parks”, Dr. the food waste from the Girls and Boys The CAMPostables program assists Jennifer Wolch, Director of the Center Camps is $1,100 and $250 per month, the City of Los Angeles in meeting for Sustainable Cities at USC, defined California’s waste diversion require sustainability as “organizing society and ments of diverting 50% of the City’s economy to sustain current and future waste stream, and the City’s goal of needs”. In the economic sphere, she diverting 70% of the City’s waste cited best practices such as socially re stream by 2015. Based on the antici sponsible investments, efficient use of pated number of bins and the frequency resources, valuation of the future in of pick-up, it is estimated that on aver cost-benefit analyses, and self-reliance. age, 11 tons of food waste per month In the societal sphere, best practices will be collected and recycled from the include dealing with poverty and envi camps. The recycling effort will divert ronmental justice, and ensuring access from landfills over eighty tons of food to sustainable livelihoods and decision (organic) waste each year. That is making. In the environmental sphere, equivalent to twelve full trash trucks of best practices are natural resource pro waste not going to local landfills, reduc tection, protection of species diversity ing greenhouse gases by 66 metric tons and ecological health, and having inher of carbon dioxide which is equal to re ent value for the environment. moving 14 cars from local streets and The CAMPostables program contrib highways. utes to the sustainability of the Depart The CAMPostables program is an out ment and the City by addressing all of growth of a number of different threads these spheres. First, by purchasing that have been playing out in Los Ange plant-based biodegradable products that les, CA, over the years, and has gained are compostable, the Department is increased momentum more recently with making a socially responsible invest Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villarai- ment in a sustainable economy, and gosa’s commitment to make Los Angeles reducing the Department’s dependence LL'S CAMBOITABU! fMCMM:
NON-TOXIC COMPOIT I! U!ED >. A! FERTILIZER AND MULCH FOR FOOD CROP! CORN,VEGETABLES AND OTHER FRUIT! ORGANIC WAITE I!TRANIPORTED TO COMPOITING FACIUTIE!
t THEJf! VEGGIE! ARE U!ED CORN, CUM, COMPOSTING A!FOOD AMD TO MAKE , PLANT-BALED DINNERWARE
ORGANIC COMPOITABLE DINNERWARE AND FOOD WAITE I! DINNERWARE I! DIIPOTED OF IN PACKAGED IPECIALTRAIH AND AVAILABLE COMPUTABLE PRODUCT! BIN! AT!TORE! ARE UIED BY CONIUMER!
Resource cycle modeled by L.A.’s camp composting program, the CAMPostables Program. on a tenuous petroleum- and plastic- Hispanics living near a hazardous waste will no longer see just the spoon. In based economy that has always been facility. By investing in environmentally stead, he or she will see a resource loop associated with numerous environmental clean products, technologies, and proc with com fields, factories, compostable/ impacts from hazardous waste and min esses, the Department reduces its contri biodegradable plant-based dinnerware ing. Purchasing socially-responsible bution to these disproportionate toxic available in a retail store, consumers products and supporting a non waste impacts. using the dinnerware, consumers throw petroleum-based sustainable economy Second, by diverting waste away ing the dinnerware in a food composting also has positive environmental justice from landfills into a recycling process, bin, a food-composting facility, com impacts. Minority and low-income the program encourages efficient use of post/fertilizer, and the cornfields, populations experience disproportionate resources, thereby, reducing the need again...and happy, healthy wildlife and health and environmental impacts, with 3 for additional landfill development and humans coexisting together on this great out of every 5 African-Americans and resulting additional greenhouse gas big planet we call home. (methane) production and global warm ing, wildlife impact and habitat loss, Fun Facts and environmental justice impacts (3 Food service establishments out of every 4 landfills are placed near typically generate 76% organic and minority and low-income communities). compostable waste. The program also encourages the local economy’s self-reliance by closing the Sending 80 tons of food waste to a resource loop. composting facility amounts to: Third, the program gives campers and • Twelve trash trucks full of waste staff an opportunity to learn how envi not going into local landfills ronmental protection and stewardship • A reduction in greenhouse gases are part of their everyday decisions. by 66 metric tons of carbon They will see how, as consumers, their dioxide individual decisions affect the sustain • A reduction in emissions equal ability of their lives and environment. to removing 14 cars from local So, the next time one of those youth streets and highways campers looks at a plastic spoon, they LOOKING TO THE FUTURE Implementing greener practices
• LEED Platinum - Angels Gate park * exceeding standards for healthy environments • Waterless Urinals * Each fixture can save on average 45,000 gallons / year! • Pressurized water brooms * Coming Soon! BUILDING and SAFETY DEPARTMENT
GENERAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
City of Los Angeles California ALVIN Y. BLAIN DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL MANAGER general services AND CITY PURCHASING AGENT ROOM 701 City Hall South 111 East First Street Los Angeles, ca 90012 (213) 928-9555 FAX No. (213) 928-9515
ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA MAYOR
October 4, 2007
Honorable Eric Garcetti President, Los Angeles City Council Councilmember, 13th District Room 470 City Hall Los Angeles, CA 90012
Attention: Rafael Prieto
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS AND POLICIES
You requested a report outlining the environmental policies and programs underway in the Department of General Services (GSD). These programs fall in the following areas and were largely developed to meet various environmental mandates as further outlined in the attachment.
• Clean Fleet Program. The City is the leading governmental agency in the region using alternative fueled and advanced technology equipment to operate the cleanest fleet possible. GSD with its client departments is converting the City’s refuse collection, street sweeper and heavy-duty fleet to natural gas. In 2000, all diesel equipment were converted to ultra low-sulfur diesel while fuel emission filters were installed six years ahead of the federal law. The department is also developing a plan to install emission control devices on the City’s diesel off-road, earthmoving, turf and construction equipment.
o Alternative Fuel Infrastructure: In 2002, the Council approved an alternative fuel implementation plan. Under this plan, four alternative fueling sites and four maintenance facilities have been constructed throughout the City. An additional nine fuel stations and four maintenance facilities are in design or construction.
o Hybrid Sedan Fleet: The City has the second largest hybrid fleet in the nation. The City has made hybrid vehicles its standard for passenger sedans, with about 1,000 sedans or 70 percent of the City’s fleet converted to hybrid vehicles.
AN EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY - AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER o Clean Fuel Site Programs: Several mandated programs are in place to prevent petroleum from leeching into the ground or petroleum vapors from escaping into the air.
• Green Purchasing Programs. Working with the Environmental Affairs Department and Bureau of Sanitation, GSD developed an Environmentally Preferred Products policy, which sets environmental standards for product performance, attributes and disposal requirements. This year GSD is initiating a program to identify environmentally preferable purchasing opportunities, establish specifications and contract language, and explore environmental “green faith” ratings for businesses.
• Recycling Programs. GSD operates an accredited materials testing laboratory, which is a recognized leader in this field. GSD’s lab is licensed to provide the technical expertise and quality control needed by departments such as LAX and Harbor. The lab works closely with the Bureau of Street Services in the use of recycled asphalt concrete, rubberized slurry seal program, and cold-in-place recycling.
Other City recycling programs include the City Facilities Recycling Program (CFRP) and the Waste Watchers Program. The CFRP provides recycling bins to almost 400 City-owned buildings, thereby allowing for source separation of recyclable materials and the diversion of 19,500 tons of recyclables from landfills since 1994. The Waste Watchers Program diverts 100 percent of construction and demolition debris to a certified recycling facility and was the winner of a 2006 Productivity Award.
• Green Building. The adoption of green building strategies creates positive economic and environmental benefits for the City. GSD has implemented several programs to further the City's green building efforts. By retrofitting City buildings with energy efficient systems fixtures and installing cool roof coatings, the City saves over $1.3 million in annual energy costs. GSD’s refrigerant recovery and boiler testing programs also contribute to the improvement of local air standards.
I look forward to participating in the October 9th Council meeting on the environment. Please contact me at (213) 928-9580 if you would like additional information.
AYB:TMR:VM Attachment
DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Environmental Mandates, Programs and Policies
A. Clean Fleet Program
The City is the leading governmental agency in the region using alternative fueled and advanced technology equipment to operate the cleanest fleet possible. GSD together with its client departments is converting the City’s refuse collection, street sweeper and heavy-duty truck fleet to natural gas. For those on-road trucks that cannot be purchased in natural gas, the City is using low sulfur diesel and installing the latest emission filters.
The City actually pioneered the use of low sulfur diesel in a joint project with ARCO in 2000. GSD is now developing a plan to install emission control devices on its diesel off-road earthmoving, turf and construction equipment. GSD is also converting the sedan fleet to the most fuel-efficient and cleanest burning gasoline vehicles and hybrids. GSD is engaged with industry, California Air Resources Board (CARB) and South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) in testing the newest advanced technology to keep our fleet on the cutting edge.
Natural Gas Refuse Trucks, Sweepers and Heavy Duty Trucks
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) enacted a series of fleet rules in June 2000, which generally require that diesel refuse trucks, street sweepers and heavy duty trucks be replaced by alternative fueled (natural gas) vehicles.
In 2002, the Council approved an alternative fuel implementation plan that provided the initial roadmap for the City’s alternative fuel refueling infrastructure development and vehicle replacement program.
GSD has focused on converting to natural gas those vehicles that operate daily and use the most diesel fuel, that is refuse trucks and street sweepers. Of 676 refuse collection vehicles (RCV), 302 have been converted and of the 162 sweepers, 57 have been converted to natural gas. The City has earned the distinction of having the largest municipal alternative fueled RCV and Street Sweeper fleet in the nation.
GSD and BOE have also designed and built fuel sites and converted maintenance facilities to support the natural gas vehicles. To date the following facilities have been completed at a cost of $28.3 million:
• Four LNG/LCNG fuel sites 1. East Valley - 60,000 gallon capacity
1 2. West Valley - 45,000 gallon capacity. 3. South Los Angeles - 45,000 gallon capacity 4. Harbor - 6,500 gallon capacity
• Four completed Maintenance Facilities 1. East Valley 2. West Valley 3. South Los Angeles 4. 24th Street
An additional nine (9) fuel stations and four (4) maintenance facilities have been funded and are in design and/or in construction.
Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles
A new CARB mandate approved in December 2005 now requires a(l diesel trucks 1960 through 2006 to be fitted with particulate traps in accordance with a phase-in schedule.
Although the City is committed to purchasing natural gas for its heavy-duty fleet, in some cases diesel vehicles must still be used. In these cases GSD uses emission filters and the cleanest diesel fuel available.
The City piloted ultra low sulfur diesel in 1999-2000 and moved the entire diesel fleet of on and off highway fleet to ultra low sulfur diesel in 2000-01. Because the City was using clean diesel seven years ahead of the rest of the nation, GSD worked with the industry to test the first particulate traps used earlier this decade (traps don't work with dirty diesel). Using a combination of grants and City funds, GSD has installed over 1,000 particulate traps on the fleet. There are approximately 500 units remaining that must be retrofitted by the December 2011 compliance deadline at a total cost of approximately $6.8 million.
Diesel Off-Road Vehicles
CARB adopted regulations requiring off-road equipment meet annual stringent emission standards through 2020. These regulations are expected to receive final approval by the end of this calendar year.
The new regulation affects about 650 units of equipment maintained, everything from construction equipment to lawnmowers. GSD is working with its client departments to develop a program to clean up the City’s off-road fleet and comply with the new regulations. In the first year of this program, the City will be required to purchase and install an estimated 50 particulate traps at approximately $1 million.
2 Hybrid Sedan Fleet
The City is been taking aggressive action to convert the sedan fleet to the most fuel-efficient cleanest burning vehicles available. The City has the second largest hybrid fleet in the nation and in partnership with the Honda Corporation, the City implemented the world's first commercial application of fuel cell vehicles.
Since 2001, the City has made hybrid (gas/electric) vehicles its standard for passenger sedans (about 1,000 sedans or 70 percent of the City's fleet is hybrid). Current Fleet rules require passenger vehicles to be Low Emission Vehicles (LEV) or cleaner. The City has gone beyond the scope of the rule and has been procuring vehicles that are certified as Partial Zero Emission Vehicles (P-ZEV).
Clean Fuel Site Programs
Over the last decade the City has engaged in a series of programs to comply with a variety of air quality and water quality mandates for its diesel and gasoline fuel sites. These programs are designed to prevent petroleum from leeching into the ground or petroleum vapors from escaping into the air.
• Secondary Containment - This program is important to eliminate fuel toxins from entering the soil and eventually the water system. The purpose of the secondary tank is to prevent the release of fuel into the environment in case of an “overfill". City fuel sites all have be converted to secondary containment. The Solid Waste Resources Control Board (SWRCB) requires that secondary containment fuel tanks be periodically tested. GSD tests all systems to determine whether a secondary tank is capable of containing overfill substances until detected and cleaned up.
• Enhanced Vapor Recovery Program (EVR1 - This program reduces the amount of vapors released into the atmosphere during the fueling of vehicles at City fuel stations. In March 2000, CARB approved the EVR program to gain an additional 25 tons/day of emission reductions statewide and increase durability and reliability of vapor recovery systems. GSD is currently working on EVR-II requirements of the program, which has a full compliance deadline of April 1, 2009, By the end of FY 2007-08, GSD will have completed the EVR-II retrofits at 39 out of 81 gasoline dispensing facilities.
• Line Leak Testing - This program is important to eliminate toxins from entering the soil and the water system and is mandated by SWRCB. The regulation requires that pressurized underground piping carrying a hazardous substance shall be equipped with an automatic line leak detector and shall be tested annually. GSD is responsible for inspecting and testing approximately 275 pressurized systems.
3 « Designated Operator Program - This program, which became effective January 1, 2005, is mandated by the SWRCB regulations and required the implementation of the Designated UST Operator Program (DOP). The program requires fuel sites be inspected once monthly to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. GSD is responsible for 140 fuel sites and, as part of the DOP, it is mandatory that GSD correct any violations identified.
B. Green Purchasing
To minimize the environmental impacts of the products the City purchases and uses and support markets for recycled goods, the Mayor and Council adopted a motion directing GSD, Environmental Affairs and the Bureau of Sanitation to develop an Environmental Preferred Purchasing Program. (C.F.03-1354.S1). Several elements of this program are in place as detailed below.
Environmentally-Preferred Product Policy
In response to Mayor and Council direction, the three departments noted above developed an Environmentally Preferred Products (EPP) policy. This policy establishes standards for product performance and environmental attributes such as toxicity and disposal requirements. These standards will be used in establishing guidelines for purchasing environment-friendly products, outreach to vendors that sell these products, and training for City employees on the uses and benefits of buying environmentally preferred products.
Environmentally Preferred Purchasing Program
GSD began initiating an Environmentally Preferred Purchasing (EPP) program in the current year. The EPP Program will be phased-in over two or more years as additional staffing and resources are provided. The first phase will include the following:
• Tracking the development of environmental specifications and contractual language for integration into purchasing specifications, • Developing environmentally preferable purchasing recommendations to clarify departmental responsibilities under the environmental purchasing policy, • Developing a priority list of environmentally preferable purchasing goals and objectives, • Identifying environmentally preferable purchasing opportunities, • Exploring ways GSD could implement a “green faith" environmental rating program for businesses, which will integrate and complement the new EPP Program by giving bid preferences to them during bidding processes.
4 An annual report will be prepared by GSD to document the City’s efforts to buy more environmentally preferable goods and services.
Purchasing Environmentally Friendly/Recycled Products
Buy Recycled Program Last fiscal year the GSD purchased over $24 million in recycled products for City departments. The City will only consider procuring recycled products such as: paper with at least 30% recycled materials, office supplies made of recycled materials such as pens, binders, and toner cartridges, recycled antifreeze, re refined oil, recapped tires, clean fuels, recycled-content carpeting and a variety of janitorial products.
Move to “Greener” Liquid Crystal Display (LCD) Monitors GSD is replacing cathode-ray tube (CRT) monitors with liquid crystal display (LCD) monitors. While CRTs use about two pounds of lead, LCDs only have several grams of lead and are therefore environmentally preferable. Additionally, flat panel displays are easier to recycle, contain fewer packaging materials, and consume 30 percent less power.
GSD’s electronic waste (e-waste) policy requires that unused electronic equipment be posted in CitiMAX for 30 days for other City departments to re-use or recycle before sending equipment such as computers and printers to salvage, thereby diverting e-waste from landfills.
The CitiMax program was implemented by GSD and modeled after the State’s CalMax program. CitiMax is an exchange program that targets surplus, outdated and off-spec supplies and equipment from City departments for re-use by other City departments.
Use of Less Toxic Biodegradable Cleaning Solutions GSD is using H20range2, a biodegradable and safer, cleaning solution to clean Civic Center facilities and Piper Tech. This product is much less toxic than the previous cleaning products, and works well in these areas.
C. Recycling Mandates and Programs
GSD provides a variety of recycling services and quality control for the used recycled construction materials in close partnership with City Departments. In support of the Mayor’s Directive 2001-33 to divert 70% of municipal waste by 2015 and in compliance with CA Assembly Bill 939 (AB939) mandate to divert 50% of waste out of the landfill by 2000, GSD currently implements the following recycling programs:
5 Production of Recycled Asphalt Concrete
For years the Materials Testing Lab has been involved in the design, implementation and quality control of Recycled Asphalt produced by the City owned asphalt plants and contract plant supporting the Bureau of Street Services Programs. The Bureau of Street Services continues to be the national leader in the recycling of asphalt pavement removed from City streets. Over the past ten years, the Bureau has recycled in excess of 1.6 million tons of material at a cost savings of more than $16 million.
Rubberized Slurry Seal Program
Discarded rubber tires are ground up to a fine crumb particle size, and these rubber particles are used as an ingredient in the rubberized slurry seal. Previously, these discarded tires would end up in a local trash landfill. Our landfills are currently at a critical tipping point environmentally, where they are near maximum capacity, and the focus has changed from dumping trash, to ecological control of methane emanation. The Materials Testing Lab provides the technical expertise, develops the formula and provides the quality control for use of this environmentally friendly product.
Cold-in-Place Recycling Program (CIR)
The CIR is an economical and environment friendly way of reclaiming failed existing asphalt concrete pavement and constructing a mixed-in-place asphalt stabilized base course. By estimation made by the Bureau of Street Services, CIR process saves the city 25 percent to 30 percent in construction costs, primarily by eliminating all the trucking required for conventional removal and replacement, hauling out the 100,000 ton of pavement millings, removing the old pavement sub base, and bringing in new base and hot-mixed asphalt. The Materials Testing Lab provides the technical expertise, develops the formula and provides the quality control for use of this environmentally friendly product.
Recycled Asphalt and Portland Cement Concrete (PCC)
GSD’s Materials Testing Lab oversaw and provided quality control for asphalt and PCC to various projects wherein the old concrete is reused for building foundations instead of going to the landfill. Examples of the completed projects are the Bureau of Sanitation's Pendleton Street Maintenance Yard and LAX Remote Aircraft Landing Site where the old concrete was crushed and re compacted.
The Materials Testing Lab conducted a comprehensive study and research for Street Services in the possible use of no-fines concrete (or permeable concrete) for paving the sidewalks and parking lots to significantly reduce the flow of rainwater into the City’s storm drains. The implementation of this project will
6 eventually reduce the flow of water into the storm drains by approximately 25%. Permeable concrete is currently used in bikepaths and parking lots.
Cleaner, Environmentally-Friendly Testing Methods
The Materials Testing Lab uses non-destructive testing methods in its work for environmental friendly purposes and focuses to improve testing operations for safety. For example, the Materials Testing Lab eliminated the use of the hazardous chemical, Tricloroethelyn. Instead, this solvent has been replaced by a series of clean air ignition ovens, avoiding costly hazardous disposal costs as well as promoting a safer and cleaner environment free of poisonous chemicals and fumes.
City Facilities Recycling Program (CFRP)
The CFRP helps support the City’s recycling mandate by providing recycling services to almost 400 City-owned sites, and some leased locations within the City of LA, including libraries, police stations, fire stations, and most recently, City-managed construction sites. (Fifteen of the approximate 400 sites are high- rise buildings.) The CFRP provides yellow, green, and brown recycling bins to these facilities to allow for source separation of recyclable material. The CFRP has diverted 19,500 tons of recyclables from landfills since 1994.
CFRP administers programs related to Electronic waste (E-waste) and batteries, which are Universal Waste items regulated by the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal EPA) and the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), codified in the California Code of Regulations (CCR), and are illegal to dispose of in the trash. CFRP is also a certified collector under the Electronic Waste Recycling Act of 2003, SB 20 & SB 50, (14 CCR 18660.10) and reports annually to the California Integrated Waste Management Board.
In 2007 the CFRP will be conducting a pilot study to test whether the implementation of a Mixed Waste Recycling Program in a business office environment would result in increased diversion. Business Office programs, such as the one that CFRP has operated for the last 20 years, typically source separate their largest commodities, which are the paper streams, and the study will indicate how conversion to mixed waste source collection will impact contamination, user methodologies, diversion and overall cost of the program.
The CFRP will also be developing a proposal in 2008 to collect data on how various City departments manage the expanding list of universal waste commodities such as batteries, lamps, mercury containing devices, and various consumer electronic devices. The goal of the project is to ensure that all City departments are complying with regulations for handling and disposing of universal waste as set forth under the state’s Universal Waste Rules.
7 Waste Watchers Program - Construction Materials
GSD's Construction Forces developed and implemented a recycle and disposal program whereby 100 percent of the construction and demolition debris from construction sites are sent to a Los Angeles Certified Recycling Facility. In 2005, the program helped reduce usage of landfills and divert over 300 tons of construction debris. In 2006-07, this program was a winning entry awarded by the Quality and Productivity Commission.
Forest Stewardship Council Certification
Over 70% of the paper used in Publishing Services annually is PCW (30% Post Consumer Waste). There is currently a shift in the paper industry from recycled paper to Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) Certification. FSC Certification takes a sustainable approach to wood products including paper products. As of June 2007 there were only 181 print shops in the United States that were FSC Certified. Publishing Services is taking steps to determine the feasibility of gaining this credential. Publishing has recently tested Soy inks on a live job and will work further to determine whether we can expand that usage taking into account performance, appearance and financial considerations.
Reduced Print & Paper Volume The Publishing Services Division has reduced print and paper volume by designing electronic forms; aggressively managing the City’s forms warehouse to reduce inventoried forms; and offering variable printing to target mailings, lowering print runs and saving postage and printing costs.
Reduced Toxic Waste in the Dark Room Publishing eliminated 99% of the chemistry used in the Pre-press area (formerly the location of the darkroom) by installing a chemistry-free plate setter and a direct-image offset printing press that eliminated the need for film, which produced a variety of toxic waste. With the used of this technology, GSD was awarded the 2007 Quality and Productivity Award.
Storm-water Interceptor Maintenance Program
GSD is working closely with the Bureau of Sanitation to implement a maintenance schedule for approximately 78 clarifiers, storm water interceptors, and fat, oil & grease interceptors, wherein each of the clarifiers or interceptors will be serviced quarterly in order to keep the equipment in good working order, and in compliance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Storm Water Permit. Effective July 12, 2006, the City was required to maintain storm-water interceptors at water drainage and run-off points to prevent debris and solid waste from passing through to the City’s sewage system.
8 D. Green /Sustainable Buildings
Green or sustainable buildings is the practice of creating healthier and more resource-efficient models of construction, renovation, operation, maintenance, and demolition. Recently several mandates and initiatives are moving the City towards more environmentally sustainable or green buildings. Enviromental policies impacting buildings include mandates/initiatives from:
• California Code of Regulations • South Coast Air Quality Management District • GSD initiatives
Energy Conservation Program
GSD is retrofitting City buildings with energy efficient fixtures, thereby reducing energy consumption. On average, these retrofitted facilities experienced a 17 percent decline in electrical energy consumption. This decrease has a positive effect on the environment by reducing the use and release of fossil fuels into the environment. The Energy Conservation Program saves the City over $1.3 million in annual energy costs and reduced energy consumption by more than 1.2 KWH per year. This equates to 5,637 fewer tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere per year.
In addition to energy efficient lighting, GSD installed variable frequency drives (VFD's) and motors in the exhaust fans of the City Hall parking garage. VFD’s and motors enable the exhaust fans to operate in a range from 10% to 100%, as- needed, to efficiently blow automotive exhaust fumes out of the parking garage. Additionally, VFD’s and motors automatically shut off and conserve energy during non-business hours.
Cool Roofing Coatings
With the enactment of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations in 2005, GSD was required to install elastometric, "cool roof coatings. This highly- reflective coating is a key factor in reducing the energy required to cool City buildings with flat roofs. This reflective coating also prolongs the lives of existing roofs by at least ten years, thereby reducing replacement costs and the resources used to make replacement roof materials. To date GSD has coated 300 roofs out of the 675 buildings with flat roofs. Annual cost savings are estimated to be in excess of $500,000 per year.
Refrigerant Recovery
Air conditioning refrigerants if released into the atmosphere contribute to ozone depletion and global warming. Since 1992, GSD has complied with the EPA
9 requirements for recovering refrigerants when working on air-conditioning and refrigeration equipment. GSD mechanics utilize refrigerant recovery equipment to remove the refrigerants from the air-conditioning and refrigeration systems prior to beginning work, and then return the refrigerants to the equipment after repairs to the equipment are completed.
Mandated Boiler Source Testing and Tune-Ups
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1146 requires annual source testing and semi-annual tune-ups of boilers in building heating systems that are rated at 5,000,000 BTUH or higher. To accomplish this, tune- ups and source testing control emissions of carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide are performed. Boilers are source tested annually, including the City’s larger units at Piper Technical Center, the Central Library, and Civic Center buildings.
Equipment Lifecycle Replacement Program
The building equipment lifecycle program, funded by MICLA, replaces older building equipment with new, energy-efficient equipment. GSD selects the most energy efficient equipment to replace existing building systems when they are scheduled for replacement. In the current fiscal year, there are a total of 13 projects-in-progress, with estimated savings of $4,500 per year.
10 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AGENCY
Gartner Group states that, by 2010, the environment related issues will be among the top 5: IT management SI concerns for more than 50% of state and local ...... I ~ m governments iil SI U.S. EPA states that energy consumption in data centers, has doubled in the past 5 years and is expected to double again in 5. years costing ■aiiBi ill approximately 7.4 billion annuallymm
U,S. EPA states that IT: strategies could reduce data center energy consumption by.an;estimated 25%.
gags IT contributes to the problem:. .., ...... ------» > ------I I------v » - . and air conditioning; equipment not being usedsed fully r ^ , Irees ? pnnt too much paper.. IT systems generate 60 /o of all paper
liSSSif Air Pollution - lae^jh&systerrte that ca| optimize field erpg«tshMn:a,;;. I - Waste Management - electronic equipment disposal haiCbec^me^i::hJjgajen¥irQnm^BI
issue and is continuing to escalate _ mmvdfdk tMMMlffifiSjSSs
** GreenIT sustainable information technology - 2007 ______; - ______------______msmmimmmmmmi i||i||iiiiSlil®ssi|felii|i^f mmmm mrnmmssmmmimmmM Jililiilllmas ...... ,.... IT solves piolil ...''...... \u.... 2 ...... > 1 ...... -.s' r ? ' ...... ’V"- r ,-■ .....v...... :...... ; -• J Energy, deploy Nrd^^njove; , | more to shared services; combine call centers; data ® centers; reduce energy consumption-in. buikjjng&gr using -J
eliminate old wiring ipgjlfgfispaip •> ^ wmmmmmmmm
vehjejes'being-djspatctied^fs^^ngesti^iji^S* programs -.WWi:eimMpg«i»^mal.tirnf5i!;^* traffic/navigation systems .
Waste^Manaaement^procureEehvii^hmehtailytMHBiM 1M hardware; find better ways to^roeycle electronic Slili s equipment, providersystemyoMltirnize waste : sliHi management-- — ±- _ —— - - - ;—i " _ -
B6lcT= Initiatiyes currentjv underway V_ ,V_ iMH '-V ' T :
Ilf; solves problems cont. a®
wmmsm -- . nii Accessibilitv - consolidate department’s call ------7------TT—zr « „ „ II i. J • i centers into the 3-1-1 call center and provide access to the City’s information and services,2...... ,, 24/7 via telephone and internet, ;,llilill mtmm it wmmm Create a mbost^mee^center^witlitjnM_____MMx:____ — “ — = —, zr, ~ — — -E ------~u'ZJ=a * -L. ^ to e-government operations reducing public ; trips to various centers. 7 mmmmrnmmmmmxmmm ■ : ______sasaSaiEss
Bold = Initiatives currently underway
•r—2.2Z2~-E.aaaE mum mammvzsm (0 MW mam mw * * ■MB MMilii ft' Tv # ' fKliMR smis
o 0) co <■'1 I - - '(-*■ 0 l|§§|g| "C XI fN ’<>r.'»t-->y^K.’'.'r-T3 ; CD 0 i E ro (Bfer " ; '*1c :-qQiD ’-..j.' ‘'"TfT ^;1 .11
>4 TT 4 CJ o o C 0 0 D) £ ro .E r— 0 ~ ~ r“ <0 .*: c > ihWffUMM 0) 0 .E o o c 0 2 w a. ■ — m ■
pB lliliiii# ft ‘* s- iasraj^s'SK^wSfejSfEfMi.i ^ - *- - yi
-:i * o*> - v:-. &
- ipf-pi' liififeftl BiflO,®s4 Users IS®S!S SSili®| iifcii
>a ipppi^SailS City Clerk (29,OQ D,0Q0 lines i...... iililiS! 1 . ,: SM - Predictable vqIuj Iliiiliiiliifeiiii . _i: ■mm ■■■■
Mil ■ Contrc month Predictable volume/timeframe , *;' 1> Could utilize other .technologies such as delivering information online to a secure • . . °W ^" ^-* V^ ' - ', , . ' -...... : mm ...... 1 wmmm web-site and employees do self-service' 8 .
4 f *~ I Current Status: Eliminationssill 1 7'' off 3IWffF3„WlrC^ ^ -IP Rl ^ !®t I 3 Q BlilillM ;^£4r’>, Y ,: * "L - -f , ■*. n S8|SjS^||®|ffi!WfflsSlr?i?:! Fifty departments curteatly p«li?» Mainframei printing : services and are assessing their print requirements. iiaaaiiiai ,7; ’ : liSil illlil Eight departments have: eliminated. Mainframe printinginn HiHlii ; (6,000,000 lines/month)him; SSliliS!! . r ianpipi 7 Twenty departments arenear elimination; of Mainframe .
MSBfitSSS.wmwtmfflmMwmimmKMm*mammmmmmmarn /,/-Direct deposits will be^ayaiieble online: and could eliminate up to:40% of our printing.;
|.liBlliB Move more to direct deposte.so paychecks don’t need - taio hooe nrintonpnrueu..1 - ■■■ * — _■ * . ~z_ _- - mmummssm ir£-v= lift ...... ' ...... •••■' v . i§ Hi B ■HP*
menu
■ '■ .;.. .|||i iiliifilliltl n |#M1 NWBHK_ ! mm « I (/)- , •0)i^i- . T- CO 'VCD., ■:m H ;Si "SI CD 1 - 0) ®^:Bi||i|pl®||g^^lt^^^^ip|| m nM^p^SiW ■HI se, fS:l*B«li^^fci^^^iili Hl^pgiJBiiliSS .■—...«] — 7^1 MF H fe .- :. gart-,^: i: iliilPil:1 0 l®_) iM ;r:!:l’:rai:!:;;i:i!si:::!:!': Bjf£ L4.J^BMUBiil^hi^Wl mmmSfe ^#...|Hf.. ." v-^ggtohH tei! Q. 415 Q. _ !: EfflH8HMMM -S^h®mk- Ik ' ^ : T3 »♦_MiPHapniin 'Qf C 0 O' m C. V) +S “■■l ) vVJ M L_ ±Z 11III ^30 1 <5 3 0( _ ny 0 ! c: q. c -a CO ® ® -c m 3 Q. 0) Q. :»t M < wmmmmmm wmmMMmt&m 01 “ / 1 ^ r * I I J, 'I I1 'l; 'nc“’" * ;i( -1 s ;< vl , . §ft®| SiRHIBtl®! fs||®| raSsiiiiSilpiiip IBWSBB"kkkkftk 4* Energy and Pollution: Current
' - Eft . W-'- ■; ■ ...... , ’v'&y *• (Energy, Pollution) IHH MllillHlis j’- ' ^
■ Green Data Center‘ - Initiative iSliiiiilillii laiiiiif ■ Approach; mmm.. lent wth 1 ^ „* i AT & T and the Department of General r\ 1 ■ - i ^ 't-r -r ^ ' ” - 1 SDR/ rOQ ' , v ’ 'smm oervio.e>, , SiNMNHtti, , ;«i¥ Hi ®iS$: Hill aiinii *■■ KMiMBSEgwiS^^ LUS/lJUv, ^ server virtualization mmmmmTOggl p|fp§a®(- r -r-_ - - 1 i mmm mm. Elimination of Mainframe Printingd i iSIlillISS = ~-r.--.- 7T..y ■ ,|. —.--J ■_ Sipil-lliiffl -i5±risi±i235±^ci'£^ii£^i±L'^itB------_ r_------aiat§i.i®s®ii - - :■; amajaaaaaa MSBilliMwMM iililiiiil iiiftliii ^ ^ j L Ni_ Data Center Assesswmmm
... ;...A - ^L*.^w..t, #B§f|ij iilttifiSlsil ...... i. COnt. SffiflftljifsSlp
; r r. , *• * , , (i r Assessments fiveyeaj anticipated ^wth of
the facilities capacity WMMSSBSI ipifipail IKS /P
...... M feed;, single points of failure) capacit
Assessmenfof air .^Q|pft^ncf;eir f| efficiency - wwWiiiiiiii - - -v- -vmmmmmm Assessment oMiFesuDDressiomtechnDlodl Mil Server Virtualization mmmmasimmmam sia
ITA has implemented sixty four (64) Virtual Maehine ®l»lti§ partitions on ten (10) physicalservers. This.translates V
■- 4.less4.1ess racks or 40 So.Sq. feet in server farm space . , , J. . Reduction of 6 times in power consumption ' , | - Reducti0" of 17-PiOOq kW of electricity or $20,000 annually ; - Reduction of heat dissipation of 580 million BTU or $14,000
: :.|nnua(cQQ^pa;:a;.^^a-^viliisrtSiBl^^ '■r^WMm - Savings in GSD electrical - ^ ITA will continue server virtualization throughout the
*next,CA'' fewlvv» vearsyv>ouo • • - _ ~ . ■ ilSHS^Si Mi
ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
Environmental Affairs Department Programs and Initiatives 2007-09
Mission: To preserve, protect and improve the environment of the City of Los Angeles.
Goal for 2008/09: To make the City of Los Angeles the greenest big city in the nation.
Core Functions: Propose policies and programs to the Mayor and City Council, which would improve the quality of the City’s environment.
Assist other City departments in the representation of the City before regional, state and federal regulatory agencies.
Provide environmental advice and information to the public, businesses, City officials, departments and bureaus.
Receive and respond to complaints of the public and business regarding the environmental affairs of the City.
Maintain an environmental affairs information center.
Administer the Mobile Source Air Pollution Reduction Trust Fund.
Act as the Local Enforcement Agency for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, regulating public and private landfills, recycling facilities, municipal recovery facilities and other waste related businesses.
Administration and reporting of the Department’s programs, grants, and human resources.
Divisions: Air Quality Environmental Business and Neighborhood Services Materials and Waste Resources Water and Natural Resources Environmental Affairs Department Priorities for Greening FY 08/09:
■ Lead agency for implementation of the Mayor’s Green LA Plan, which includes the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the City to 35% below 1990 levels by the year 2030 - the most aggressive goal of any large US City. The Green LA Plan identifies over 50 actions to help the City reach this goal, including measures to reduce emissions from municipal operations and community activities. (Workplans (draft) for the implementation of Green LA and other initiatives will be provided at the Budget Strategy Meeting.)
■ Review and assessment of the role and mission of EAD, including development of a Strategic Plan and Reorganization of staff and programs as necessary to establish a leadership role for the City of Los Angeles in Global Climate Change, Urban Greening, Sustainable Development, Water Conservation and reuse, Brownfields mitigation, Resource Protection, and Enforcement.
■ EAD and the Mayor’s Office are Co-Chairs of the Sustainable Practices Cabinet, (which includes City Planning Department, Department of Building and Safety, General Services Department and Bureau of Engineering, in cooperation with the Housing Department, Fire Department, Department of Recreation and Parks, Department of Water and Power, Port of Los Angeles, Los Angeles World Airports, the Community Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority) in the implementation of Executive Directive No. 10 and the development of a Citywide sustainable practices policy for growth and development by January 18, 2008. Implementation of the Plan will continue through 2008/09.
■ EAD is the lead for the City’s Brownfields Resource Team and participates in the Brownfields Executive Team. EAD is assessing opportunities to increase efficiencies within the program and address small, blighted neighborhood sites as well as economic development and to assist redevelopment of Brownfields sites throughout the City.
■ Alternative Fuel Vehicles and Mobile Source Programs comprise a core function of EAD. EAD staff maintains an inventory of the City’s alternative fuel and advanced technology vehicles, including those owned by proprietary departments. EAD chairs the Interagency Alternative Fuels Working Group to distribute information on new technologies, proposed and adopted regulations affecting our fleets, and grant funding opportunities. We support the City’s Clean Fuels Policy and encourage departments to comply with it. EAD also promotes the City’s alternative fuel programs at local and national venues.
2 ■ The EAD Commission and staff will lead a major component of the Green LA Climate Action Plan in the establishment of a Public Participation program to solicit and obtain input from all neighborhoods of Los Angeles on the development of the Plan. EAD will work with a consultant to develop a public participation strategy to ensure full involvement of neighborhoods, in particular those with environmental justice concerns.
■ EAD is working with departments to establish an Annual Greenhouse Gas Inventory for City facilities and operations. This annual inventory will allow the City to track its progress in meeting greenhouse gas reduction goals, and gives the City’s efforts more visibility at the state and national level, through participation in the Climate Registry. The most recent inventory, for calendar year 2004, is being certified prior to final acceptance by the Registry.
■ EAD is co-lead, with the General Services Department, on the development and implementation of a program for Environmentally Preferred Purchasing (EPP.) Through EPP, the City’s purchasing power is directed toward goods and services that result in reduced waste and pollutants and protection of human health and the environment.
■ EAD is an integral part of the Mayor’s Million Trees LA Initiative and works with the Mayor’s Million Trees staff to increase the tree canopy throughout the City by assisting City Departments, Metropolitan Transit Authority (Metro), and community organizations to plant 1,000,000 trees. EAD is also working with the staff of Public Works to design and utilize storm water capture elements in trees planted on City sidewalks.
■ EAD is co-lead of the Green Streets/Un pave LA effort with Public Works Commissioner Paula Daniels, a Citywide effort to increase opportunities for urban greening, environmental/sustainable design, TMDL compliance, storm and urban runoff capture and recycled water infiltration and reuse. Sustainable building techniques can be incorporated into City and private construction projects to capture and use stormwater, utilize porous pavement and the environmental design of street medians, curbs, gutters and parking lots to maximize the capture, storage and reuse of water in the City, thereby reducing the reliance on imported water.
■ EAD will develop a Green Business Certification program to encourage private businesses in Los Angeles to operate in a more environmentally- friendly manner by developing environmental standards that businesses can meet to become certified and advertise as a City of Los Angeles certified green business. The program will increase the number of green businesses committed to operating in an environmentally sustainable manner and increase awareness of environmental issues among the general public.
3 ■ Continue to apply for outside funding to increase the number of City projects through development of Grant Opportunities for multiple City departments including Bureau of Sanitation’s Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) fueling station, fleet of LNG garbage trucks, General Services’ fleet of hybrid and alternative fueled cars, etc. These grants enable the City to invest in projects and programs that reduce air pollution, particulate matter and ozone-forming substances. This reduced air pollution provides substantial health benefits and helps the region meet federal air quality requirements.
■ The Council directed EAD to form and lead a Task Force to investigate the potential to require City facilities to incorporate Green Roofs to reduce the urban heat island effect, provide stormwater retention and pollution reduction, lower building energy demand by maintaining a moderate interior building temperature, increase open space, and restore avian habitats. EAD initiated the Green Roofs project and has applied for grant funding to develop a Green Roof at the City Zoo.
■ School Gardens is an EAD initiative currently supported by SB332 funding distributed by the Bureau of Sanitation. Through the School Gardens program, EAD helps build and plant school gardens, teaching 3,000 students each year in traditionally underserved communities about urban gardening, sustainability and the importance of trees and plants to clean air.
■ The Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) will initiate Beyond Enforcement to ensure that regulated facilities and Brownfields sites achieve not only permit compliance, but the highest environmental standards at all permitted facilities. These efforts will include:
o utilizing community concerns in establishing monitoring requirements o making LEA and the Department’s technical resources available to address issues of air quality, water quality and general business assistance to solid waste and recycling facilities o reusing closed landfills for recreation and habitat o encouraging solar, wind and other alternative energy sources for power generation at permitted solid waste and recycling facilities o and continuing efforts to “green” solid waste and recycling facilities through landscaping, street sweeping and clean up beyond property lines to encourage good relations with neighbors and instill corporate responsibility to the community
■ Development of an Environmental Audits and Investigations Program to fully implement the legislative mandate for EAD.
4 SrfAIIVITTNTT IVXNaWNOHIANa
S7IUK) clrll IXO : £ XH Vd
OTHER CITIES ENVIRONMENTAL INITIATIVE S
CHICAGO
City of Chicago http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction...
Print Version Department Home 2006 Envjronmenta| Actjon Agenda About DOE
Awards Programs innovation within the City of Chicago and reaffirms Mayor Daley’s belief that a healthy Chicago's 013I*3[ki AGENDA® environment is not only consistent with a strong economy and improved quality of life Environmental Code for Chicagoans -- it is essential to both. The Action Agenda commits the City to reduce its use of natural resources, invest in greener buildings, vehicles and materials, save Initiatives & Programs tax payer dollars through wise energy use and resource conserving actions, and improve the quality of life in the City. Permits & Fees ! The 2006 Agenda updates the City’s progress on environmental initiatives since the Press Releases 12005 Action Agenda, which was established as Mayor Daley’s comprehensive plan for public and private environmental innovation. The 2006 Agenda reflects the work of Public Health & Safety over 40 City departments and sister agencies and contains nearly 200 environmental mnm-iMi n- m nan accomplishments, as well as an ambitious set of initiatives and goals for 2006 and Resources ‘ ...... ° * beyond. Taken as a whole, these accomplishments and initiatives show that environmentally smart policies have begun to take root in every aspect of the City’s operations and in the ways that it partners with Chicago citizens and businesses. See Also... To view the entire 2006 Environmental Action Agenda, or to review the entire 2005 Environmental Action ► 2005 Environmental Action Agenda, please download the pdf document at the bottom of this page. Agenda (Complete) To learn about specific topics, please download the section that best addresses your interests. The contents of each section are detailed below.
Contact Info The Executive Summary is an outline of the major environmental initiatives and accomplishments by the City of Chicago, and also contains the Mayor’s Letter and the Acknowledgements page.
The Energy and Green Building section details Chicago initiatives and accomplishments relating to green building, energy efficiency, and renewable energy in both the Public Sector and the Private Sector.
The Mobility section covers City and sister agency initiatives and accomplishments relating to how we move around and how we maintain the vehicles and infrastructure that make this movement possible. This section details the greening of City Fleets, Airports, the Transit system, and Bike Infrastructure.
The Infrastructure and Resource Management section addresses initiatives and accomplishments relating to the management, conservation, and preservation of natural resources in both urban and natural areas. This section contains the environmental work in the areas of Sustainable Infrastructure, Natural Lands, Water Resources, Waste & Recycling, and Procurement.
The Education & Outreach section covers the efforts by numerous City departments and sister agencies to educate the public about environmental issues and what they can do about them.
E 2006 Environmental Action Agenda (Complete) (3461 KB) E 2006 Environmental Action Agenda : Executive Summary (2774 KB) E 2006 Environmental Action Agenda : Energy and Green Building (892 KB) 1 2006 Environmental Action Agenda : Mobility (1719 KB) El 2006 Environmental Action Agenda : Infrastructure and Resource Management (2219 KB)
1 of 2 10/4/2007 1:57 PM City of Chicago http://egov.cityofchicago.org/city/webportal/portalContentItemAction.
2006 Environmental Action Agenda : Education and Outreach (369 KB)
2005 Environmental Action Agenda (4198 KB)
Disclaimer / Privacy Policy / Web Standards / Site Map / Contact Us
2 of 2 10/4/2007 1:57 PM
Thank you for your interest in the City of Chicago’s 2006 Environmental Action Agenda, a comprehensive plan for protecting the environment and improving the quality of life in the city.
Since the first Environmental Action Agenda was published in 2005, the city has
continued to lead by example and made great strides towards our goals. We have worked
diligently with the private sector to improve environmental quality citywide and have conducted extensive energy efficiency retrofits in our libraries and public buildings. All of our new schools, fire stations and police stations are models of efficient, healthy
building technologies. T) Chicago’s growing green fleet has more than 100 hybrid vehicles and numerous
alternatively fueled vehicles. We are using recycled materials as we pave our streets and
are conserving millions of gallons of water a day by replacing our aging water mains. We
have added 60 green roofs to Chicago buildings in the last year alone, and we have
worked extensively to add green space throughout the city with parks, medians and
street trees, simultaneously managing storm water and improving property values.
We are encouraging Chicago citizens to weatherize their homes, build energy efficient
buildings, install renewable energy technologies, bike or take transit instead of driving,
recycle, and volunteer in their communities. The combined efforts of City government
and Chicago citizens not only help the environment but they stretch taxpayer dollars,
save energy and fuel costs, spur private investment in neighborhoods and make the City
a great place to live and visit. I
I am encouraged by our progress and believe that, working together, we can continue to
make Chicago a model of environmental leadership and conserve Chicago for generations
to come. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the spring of 2005, Mayor Richard M. Daley announced Chicago’s first ever Environmental Action Agenda. That Agenda committed the City to a wide range of environmental initiatives with the goals of improving the quality of life in Chicago neighborhoods, conserving and protecting the City’s natural resources, and, through the City’s leadership and example, encouraging more Chicagoans to make healthy, smart and environmentally conscious decisions in their homes and businesses.
In addition to setting the course for the coming year, the 2006 Environmental Action Agenda is an update on the City of Chicago’s progress over the past 12 months. During that time, the City has continued to increase its national reputation for its commitment to the environment. In 2005, Mayor Daley received an Award from Massachusetts Institute of Technology for “Greening the 21st Century City.” The City has also received the Gold Award from Nations in Bloom for livability and the Clean Fuel Fleet award from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, and was named one of the best cycling cities in the country by Bicycling Magazine.
This document contains nearly 200 accomplishments achieved by more than 40 City departments and sister agencies. Taken as a whole, they show that environmentally conscious policies are beginning to take root in every aspect of the way the City does business.
The 2006 Environmental Action Agenda also charts an ambitious course for the next 12 months. It reaffirms Mayor Daley’s strong belief that a healthy environment is not only consistent with a strong economy and improved quality of life for Chicagoans—it is essential to both.
The initiatives outlined in the 2006 Agenda are about much more than doing the right thing for the environment: they are also about improving the bottom line. They help the City stretch taxpayer funds during tight budgetary times. They help residents save money on energy costs. They make the City a great place to live. And they contribute to increased property values for Chicago homeowners.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Environmental Action Agenda contains 188 accom plishments achieved by more than 40 City departments and sister agencies. Following are highlights from 2005: A National Leader in Green Building
The City registered 22 of its buildings for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification, including schools, libraries, and police and fire stations. LEED is the nationally recognized standard for the construction and rehabilitation of environmen tally sensitive buildings managed by the US Green Building Council.
Chicago’s new Green Permit Program, launched in 2005, streamlined and expedited the permitting process for 19 green building projects. This program encourages the private sector to build in ways that will create healthier places to live and work, and to reduce energy costs over the long term.
The Department of Housing funded 237 affordable housing units in environmentally-friendly residential developments.
Twenty Chicago residents received grants of $5,000 each to help fund the installation of green roofs on private homes, apartment buildings, and condominiums.
The Department of Planning and Development required 60 building projects to have green roofs as part of its green building program.
A Common-Sense Approach to Reducing Dependence on Fossil Fuels The City committed $5 million to help residents weatherize their homes and provided them with heating vouchers. This reduced the amount of energy used and lowered residential heating bills for low-income Chicagoans.
Chicago purchased 1.27 MegaWatts of solar panels for heating hot water, the equivalent of heating 17 Olympic sized swimming pools. The panels will be provided to police and fire stations, public pools, local businesses and
3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
affordable housing developers. This will nearly double Chicago’s currently installed solar power capacity.
The number of hybrid vehicles in the City’s fleet grew to 113, with the addition of 13 new hybrid sedans and 57 new hybrid SUVs.
CTA riders took 17.4 million more trips on trains and buses in 2005.
With 11 miles of new on-street bikeways added in 2005, Chicago now has 114 miles of bikeways throughout the In 2005, Mayor Daley announced the Chicago River City. Agenda, a comprehensive vision for improving water quality, protecting wildlife in the river corridor, and A Better Quality of Life through enhancing the neighborhoods along the river with increased open space and public access. Wise Resource Management
The City began a pilot program of collecting recyclables The Department of Water Management continues to con into separate bins. Over 80% of the targeted residents serve more and more water each year, primarily through participated, preventing 23% of the waste stream from investment in infrastructure improvements. Thirty miles entering landfills. of water mains were repaired in 2005.
The Chicago City Council passed the Construction and A total of 440 residents participated in the City’s inaugu Demolition Waste Recycling ordinance, requiring all ral rain barrel program. It is estimated that these barrels general contractors and demolition contractors in the could divert over 760,000 gallons of water from entering City to recycle 25% of their waste in 2006 and 50% in the City's sewer system over the course of a year. 2007. Construction and demolition waste makes up approximately 40% of the City's waste stream. An organic farm in Grant Park provided hundreds of pounds of fresh, organic vegetables to local homeless The City recycled 11,500 Christmas trees into mulch, a shelters. three-fold increase since 2004. The mulch was distributed to and used at city parks. The City committed to preserving over 350 acres of natu ral lands in the Calumet region that will serve as a public nature preserve within City limits.
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY asiaiassis * Vi't.;
Mayor Daley continues to commit the City to a position of environmental leadership through ongoing urban environmental innovation. Key initiatives in progress for 2006 include:
A Continued Commitment to Energy Efficiency and Green Building
At a minimum, all City buildings will be designed to comply with the LEED Silver standard, with a goal of achieving the LEED Gold standard for as many municipal buildings as possible.
The City will conduct lighting retrofits at all 105 Chicago fire stations.
The City will expand the Green Permit Program with a goal of expediting the permits of 40 new projects in 2006.
Forty residents and businesses will receive $5,000 grants Reduced Emissions through from the City for green roof installations, twice as many Renewable Energy and as in 2005. Transportation Alternatives The City will install a locally designed wind turbine on the roof of the Daley Center.
Chicago will further expand solar capacity by providing grants for 600 solar hot water collectors to qualified affordable housing developers, social service organiza tions, laundromats and health clubs throughout the City.
The Chicago Transit Authority will purchase 20 diesel- electric hybrid buses.
A total of 600 school buses serving the Chicago Public Schools will be retrofitted with oxidation catalysts to reduce emissions.
The City will purchase 50 bicycles for use by employees and encourage more City workers to rely on bicycles instead of cars.
Valet bike parking will be provided at 10 large events and festivals to encourage biking and reduce traffic conges tion.
5 sidewalks. In addition to publicly requested street tree planting, over 2,800 trees will be planted on City streets An Increased Commitment to with little to no greenery, at Chicago Public Schools, and in areas designated as having minimal tree canopy and Sustainable Infrastructure high street/sidewalk surface temperatures. With its partners, the City will complete construction of the McCormick Place Convention Center tunnel system Improved Opportunities for which will divert clean stormwater runoff from the roof directly to Lake Michigan, keeping 50 million gallons of Chicagoans to Support the water a year out of the sewer system. Environment The City will expand the “green alleys” program, which The City will launch the Chicago Conservation Corps, a uses alternative construction techniques that allow rain program to provide leadership training and engage water to soak into the ground rather than running into citizens in hands-on, neighborhood-based environmental the sewer system. volunteer work.
The City will explore the possibility of expanding its separate collection recycling pilot.
The City will establish drop-off recycling centers in 15 neighborhoods for the collection of glass, cans, paper and other recyclables.
The City will pilot and implement a comprehensive sustainable street at Cermak Road and Blue Island Avenue, incorporating numerous environmentally friendly elements in the streetscapes, including permeable and reflective paving, native plantings, bioswales, rain gardens and tree filters, stormwater and graywater irrigation, and energy efficient lighting and solar powered pay-and-display parking meter boxes.
The Department of Transportation installed 374 recycled rubber speed humps in alleys in 2005, and an additional 225 will be installed in 2006. The City will use 100% Please review the entire 2006 Environmental Action recycled aggregate in residential street construction and Agenda for a comprehensive description of Chicago's up to 50% recycled aggregate in concrete mix for environmental accomplishments and initiatives.
6 f |gg _ i mSOsMIttiiSS
Over 40 City Departments are involved in the work of the Environmental Action Agenda. Mayor Daleys Green Steering Committee and the additional contributors listed below play key leadership roles in the Agenda’s implementation. ______Mayor Daley’s ______Green Steering Committee
Department of Aviation Department of Streets and Sanitation Pat Harney, Acting Commissioner Michael Picardi, Commissioner
Department of Construction and Permits Department of Transportation Richard Rodriguez, Executive Director Cheri Hera mb, Acting Commissioner
Department of Environment Department of Water Management Sadhu Johnston, Commissioner Brian Murphy, Commissioner
Department of Fleet Management Chicago Park District Howard Henneman, Commissioner Timothy J. Mitchell, General Superintendent & CEO
Department of General Services Chicago Transit Authority Michi Pena, Commissioner Frank Kruesi, President
Department of Housing O’Hare Modernization Program Jack Markowski, Commissioner Rosemarie Andolino, Executive Director
Department of Planning & Development Public Building Commission Lori Healey, Commissioner Montel Gayles, Executive Director
Department of Procurement Barbara Lumpkin, Chief Procurement Officer
Additionai Contributors
Department of Buildings John Knight, Commissioner
Department of Health Terry Mason, MD, Commissioner
Chicago Public Libraries Mary Dempsey, Commissioner
Chicago Public Schools Arne Duncan, CEO
Chicago Housing Authority Terry Peterson, CEO
7 For more information about what the City of Chicago is doing to protect our environment and for PDF copies of the 2006 Environmental Action Agenda, please visit www.cityofchicago.org/Environment/ or call the Department of Environment at (312) 744-7606.
To contact specific departments about the initiatives listed in this Agenda, please visit www.cityofchicago.org or call Chicago’s 311 Helpline.
Printed on recycled paper
DENVER
Greenprint Denver - About - Download the Plan http ://www. greenprintdenver. org/ about/plan.php
4greenprint denver
about greenprint denver
download the plan
Get the Complete Action Agenda
• IS Download the complete Greenprint Denver Action Agenda (4,429K PDF) • £3 Download the Greenprint Denver Brochure (3,587K PDF)
Plan Highlights:
Greenprint Denver outlines the following action items:
Reduce Greenhouse Emissions
Reduce Denver per capita greenhouse gas emissions by 10 percent below 1990 levels by 2011. Work in partnership with other local governments, universities and the business community to develop and implement effective strategies to reduce the risk of and potential consequences of global climate change.
Increase City Forest Coverage
Plant thousands of new trees annually in our parks, natural areas and on private property, thus increasing Denver's tree canopy from 6 percent to a total of 18 percent tree cover, as identified in the Denver Parks Game Plan.
Reduce Waste
Increase Denver's residential recycling by 50 percent in the next year and reduce total landfilled household waste by 30 percent (130,000 tons) over the 2004 baseline by 2011.
Utilize Renewable Energies
Construct solar and methane power plants capable of powering/heating the equivalent of over 2,500 homes, and generating revenues to help support other Greenprint Denver programs.
Increase Green Built Affordable Housing
Increase the incentives for energy-efficient affordable housing to $1,250,000 within five years. Increase the funding available for energy efficiency improvements for low-income residences.
1 r>f9 10/4/2007 2:10 PM Greenprint Denver - About - Download the Plan http://www.greenprintdenver.org/about/plan.php
Implement City Green Building Policy
Require that all new city buildings and major renovations be certified under the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED® Silver standard and meet the EPA’s Energy Star® guidelines.
Expand City's Green Motor Fleet
Expand the city's "Green Fleet" by ensuring that when replacing light-duty vehicles (excluding patrol cars), they are replaced with hybrids or the highest-efficiency vehicles available. Continue the recent progress made in shifting all diesel vehicles to biodiesel B20 fuel.
Promote and Leverage Mass Transit
Decrease reliance on automobiles through increased public transit access and use, transit-oriented development, and bike and pedestrian enhancements. Boost mass transit use by city employees by 10 percent within one year, and increase by 20 percent the new development located within a half mile of existing transit stations by 2011.
Improve, Protect and Conserve Water
Significantly improve water quality in the South Platte River by 2011 through a combination of activities, including maintenance and repair of sanitary and storm sewers, education and outreach, and enhanced data collection, analysis and tracking. Use recycled water for parks and public areas, and promote water conservation in both building and landscape use.
Promote Green Industry Economic Development
Partner with the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation to advance high performance building and energy efficiency in the private sector. Help revitalize 35 acres of formerly polluted lands in Denver (Brownfield redevelopment) to support urban development and environmental equity. Position Denver as a regional center for balanced and renewable energy and green industries by creating 1,000 new training and job opportunities in these areas for metro Denver residents by 2011.
Copyright ©2006 City and County of Denver. All Rights Reserved. Greenprint Denver | City and County of Denver 11437 Bannock Street, Room 350 | Denver, Colorado 80202 Phone: (720) 865-9090 | [email protected] | www.greenprintdenver.org
9 r>f 9 10/4/2007 2:10 PM
CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER MAYOR’S OFFICE
John W. Hickenlooper City and County Building Mavor ] 437 Bannock Street July 12, 2006 Room 350 . Denver, Colorado 80202 Phone: (720) 865-9000 Fax: (720) 865-8787 Dear Friends,
I am pleased to introduce Greenprint Denver, an action agenda for sustainable development for the City and County of Denver that demonstrates local government can be an effective force for innovation and leadership to improve the environment.
As an exploration geologist-turned-small businessman, I have always maintained what I considered a healthy perspective on the need to balance environmental and economic considerations in my decisions. I learned early on in my career in business that the best solutions often combine economic, social and environmental considerations.
Sustainability is a central goal of Denver’s Comprehensive Plan of 2000 and a central value of our administration and our community. In 2005, I launched the Greenprint Denver Initiative to advance and fur ther support the integration of environmental impact analysis into the city’s programs and policies, alongside economic and social analysis.
Denver will track and report on our progress on priority goals through an annual Report Card. We will also , continue to seek new ideas from the city’s employees, citizens and Mayor’s Greenprint Council about how and where Denver can innovate, leverage resources, catalyze new projects and communicate the importance of sustainability as a public value to ensure that we leave the community in as good or better shape than we found it.
Thank you for all that you do on behalf of future generations.
John W. Hickenlooper Mayor greenprint denver plan
Acknowledgements
Greenprint Denver Beth Conover, Director Andrew Wallach, Assistant to the Mayor Cindy Bosco, Urban Fellow •
Department Heads Kim Bailey, Manager, Parks and Recreation Luis Colon, Manager, General Services John Huggins, Director, Office of Economic Development Peter Park, Manager, Community Planning and Development Nancy Severson, Manager, Environmental Health Bill Vidal, Manager, Public Works Turner West, Manager, Denver International Airport Jack Finlaw, Director, theaters and Arenas
Departmental Point People and Theme Group Leaders for Planning Effort Denver International Airport Community Planning and Development Janell Barrilleaux Tyler Gibbs Environmental Health Molly Urbina Cindy Bosco Public Works Steve Foute Amy Mueller • Alice Luhan General Services Gregg Thomas Bill Riedell Celia VanDerLoop Parks and Recreation Economic Development Jude O'Connor Mary Buckley John Overstreet Stacey Eriksen David Ford
Theme Group Participants City Council Economic Development Juiie Connor, District #7 : Liz Alkire Community Planning and Development Susan Foley Alex Abel Ledy Garcia-Eckstein Ellen Ittleson Mary Jeffreys ' v Denver Water Tim Martinez Liz Gardener AnneMarie Neuwirt-Burke Donna Pacetti Katherine O'Connor General Services Abdul Sesay Robert Alson Department of Environmental Health Derek Brown Paul Bedard Dawn Levin Janet Burgesser Candace Lothian Monica Buhlig Jim McIntyre Kurt Schlomberg Bill Sauter ■ : Mayor's Office Stephen Sholler Christian Williss . J.D. Whiteman ■ Five Winds International Darryl Winer : Edmund Ha John Heckman ; Jeff Yorzyk Matrix Design Group Paul Sobiech
3 greenprint denver plan
Public Works Parks and Recreation Terry Baus Susan Baird Robert Castaneda Jill Petrie Tony Cooper Sid Schwarz Nelson Ho Michael Swanson Nancy Kuhn Gayle Weinstein Bob Level I Mark Najarian Tony Ogboli Charlotte Pitt Gary Price Danamarie Schmitt Amy Wiedeman Stu Williams
Greenprint Denver Advisory Council
Community Members Benita Duran, Director of State and Local Governmental Affairs, CH2MHill, Co-Chair Daniel Yohannes, Chairman, New Resource Bank, Co-Chair
Rutt Bridges, Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Bighorn Center for Public Policy Research Jill Cooper, Sustainability Program Director, Colo. Dept, of Public Health and Environment Susan Daggett, Environmental Attorney Peter Dea, President and Chief Executive Officer, Western Gas Resources Mark Falcone, Founder and Managing Director, Continuum, LLC Catherine Greener, Managing Director, Domani, LLC Senator Gary Hart, Wirth Chair Professor, University of Colorado, Denver Happy Haynes, Community Partnerships, Denver Public Schools John Hereford, Hereford Capital Partners Kirk Johnson, Vice President, Denver Museum of Nature and Science Elise Jones, Executive Director, Colorado Environmental Coalition Tom Kaesemeyer, Executive Director, Gates Family Foundation Melissa Knott, Director of Sustainability, Forest City Stapleton Councilwoman Peggy Lehmann, Denver City Council, District 4 Hunter Lovins, Founder and President, Natural Capitalism Solutions Peggy Montano, Partner, Trout, Raley, Montano, Witwer & Freeman Rusty Perry, Co-Founder and Entrepreneur, Revolution Cleaners John Powers, Executive Director Pro Tern, Alliance for Sustainable Colorado Councilwoman Jeanne Robb, Denver City Council, District 10 David Schaller, Sustainable Development Coordinator, Environmental Protection Agency Pete West, Managing Director of Local Affairs, Xcel Energy
City Members Kim Bailey, Manager, Parks and Recreation Tamara Banks, Mayor's Neighborhood Liaison Margaret Browne, Director of Finance . Luis Colon, Manager, General Services Jack Finlaw, Director, Theaters & Arenas John Huggins, Director, Economic Development Peter Park, Manager, Community Planning & Development Nancy Severson, Manager, Environmental Health ’/v Bill Vidal, Manager, Public Works \ .. • .. . . : Turner West, Manager of Aviation, Denver International Airport Jack Finlaw, Manager, Theaters and Arenas ’
Special Thanks to Jim Ottenstein, Graphic Designer, Community Planning and Development, and Lydia Riegle, Greenprint Denver Intern.
4 greenprint denver plan;
Executive Summary ^
In Denver neighborhood forums, in national policy debates and in corporate board rooms, environmental responsibility and sustainable development are suddenly everywhere we look. And, as described recently in Time, The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, The Economist, Wired and other media, "green" development has not only become mainstream, it is increasingly seen as a key strategy for future economic growth and public health.
In order to ensure that Denver remains competitive in a changing world, and protects the environmental quality valued by its citizens for future generations. Mayor Hickenlooper launched the city's sustainable development initiative, Greenprint Denver in 2005, to identify opportunities for the City to lead by example, and to partner with community individuals, businesses, non-profit organizations and cultural institutions to help affect positive change in the community. This action agenda is the first step toward realizing that vision.
While cities cover just 2 percent of the world's surface, they accommodate over 50 percent of the world's population and consume 75 percent of its resources. One of the first actions of the Mayor under Greenprint Denver was to join with 49 other U.S. mayors in a U.S. Conference of Mayors pledge in June of 2005 to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Signatory cities agreed to hold them selves accountable and demonstrate leadership at the local level in seven broad areas: energy, waste reduction, urban design, urban nature, transportation, environmental health and water.
Greenprint Denver will support and further integrate sustainable practices into the city's programs and policies, convene stakeholder groups, catalyze innovation, and communicate the value of sustainable development as a core value to Denver.
In less than a year, in a process involving dozens of city staff, business and community partners, the City has produced an action agenda for sustainable development that is aggressive yet achievable. The Greenprint Denver Action Agenda for 2006 charts the city's course over the next five years and will position the city as a regional leader in the global effort to meet the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future.
5 Highlights of Greenprint Denver Action Agenda:
Through city leadership and partnerships we will:
1. Reduce Denver per capita greenhouse gas emissions by 10% below 1990 levels by 2011. Work in partnership with regional mayors, universities, and the business community to develop and implement effective strategies for adaptation to and amelioration of global climate change. ,
2. Plant thousands of new trees each year, in our parks, natural areas and on private property to increase ■ Denver's tree canopy from six percent to a total of 18% tree cover, as identified in the 2003 Denver Parks Master Plan, Game Plan.
3. Increase Denver's residential recycling by 50% in the next year and reduce total landfilled household waste by 30% (130,000 tons) over the 2004 baseline by 2011.
4. Construct solar and methane power plants capable of powering/heating the equivalent of over 2500 homes, and generating revenues to help support other Greenprint Denver programs, by 2007.
5. Increase the incentives for energy efficient affordable housing to $1,250,000 within five years. Increase the funding available for energy efficiency improvements for low-income residences. T
6. Require that all new city buildings and major renovations be certified under the LEED Silver rating of the U.S. Green Building Council and meet EPA Energy Star Guidelines. . .
7. Expand the City's "Green Fleet" to operate all diesel vehicles entirely on biodiesel (B20) by 2007, and ensure new light duty vehicles (excluding patrol cars), when replaced, will be hybrids or the highest fuel efficiency vehicles available.
8. Decrease reliance on automobiles through public transit use and access, and promote transit-oriented development, as well as bike and pedestrian enhancements. Model the way with a 10% increase in City employee transit ridership in the next year, and increase by 20% the new development located within 1/2 mile of existing transit stations by 2011.
9. Significantly improve water quality in the South Platte River by 2011 through a combination of activities, including maintenance and repair of sanitary and storm sewers; education and outreach; and enhanced data collection, analysis and tracking.
10. Actively pursue emerging opportunities for sustainable economic development, among them: a. Partner with Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation to advance high performance building and energy efficiency in the private sector; b. Realize Brownfields redevelopment on 35 acres in Denver; c. Position Denver as a regional center for balanced and renewable energy and green industries by creating 1000 new training and job opportunities in these areas for metro Denver residents by 2011.
6 Introduction
Denver citizens care about the environment. During the Denver Listens public feedback sessions hosted around the city in 2004 and the Partnership Denver issues forums of 2006, Environmental Responsibility and Environmental Excellence consistently ranked among the top issues of interest and concern in Denver's neighborhoods. ’ ' • . - r • ’ - ' ’• .
This interest extends to increasing awareness and concern at the regional and national level about rising greenhouse gas levels, and related impacts of global Climate change locally on Colorado's snow pack, water supply, native habitat and economic health over the coming decades. Because cities now account for over 50% of the world's population and 75% of all emissions, it makes sense for local government to become more actively involved in understanding and addressing these issues directly.
The concept of Sustainable Development seeks to balance economic, social and environmental impacts of our actions. Greenprint Denver is an effort to fully integrate sustainability as a core value and operating principle in Denver city government.
Mission and Guiding Principles ^ The mission of the Sustainable Development Initiative is to provide leadership and contribute practical solutions to ensure a prosperous community where people and nature thrive.
Guiding Principles % Communicate sustainability as a public value and expanding the concept of the city as a steward of public resources. $ Support sustainability as a core business value to improve efficiencies in resource use, reduce environmental impact and invoke broad cultural changes. $ Incorporate "triple bottom line" analysis (seeking to balance economic, social and environmental considerations) into all city policy and program decisions. % Set clear metrics of success and report on our progress moving forward through annual report cards. * Pursue activities that support environmental equity and health for all citizens. $ Partner with community organizations, cultural institutions and businesses to achieve broad impact. & Lead by example in City practice wherever possible. Strategic Planning To develop a strategic action plan for sustainable development, the city conducted an intensive six-month planning process that included an inventory of city activities, research of best practices nationally and determi nation of priorities and metrics for the next 1 to 5 years. Approximately 50 city staff from seven city agencies, working in five thematic groups (Energy and Emissions; Natural Resource Stewardship; Materials and Waste; Land Use and Transportation; and Community and Economic Development) contributed to the draft action agenda. The Mayor's Greenprint Council, a leadership group comprised of both Department heads and diverse civic/ business leaders from throughout the region, further refined the focus of the effort.
The result, the Greenprint Denver Action Agenda, is a pragmatic and far-reaching plan to reduce Denver's environmental "footprint", to ensure a healthy city for future generations of Denver residents and to create opportunities for new economic development. Greenprint Denver has positioned Denver as a regional leader in the global effort to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. Background : ''.t.-;':-' 'v With help from business and community partners and dedicated city staff, Denver has taken great strides to reduce waste, improve air and water quality, conserve energy and natural resources and promote multi modal, transit oriented land use improvements. ; greenprint denver plan
Though riot widely publicized, the City of Denver has supported innovative sustainable development strategies for many years, and was recognized in 2005 and 2006 by the national group SustainLane as one of the Top 10 cities in the nation for "walking the talk" of sustainable practices. The Greenprint Denver Initiative, launched by Mayor Hickenlooper in April of 2005, is the first comprehansive effort of its kind in Denver and is built on a strong foundation of past accomplishment, including:
% DIA - EMS: Denver International Airport realized precedent-setting and award-winning success in 2004 by becoming the first commercial service airport in the country to attain ISO 14001 standards for its Environmental Management System, which encompasses all activities within the 34,000 acre site.
K- Energy Management and Energy Efficiency programs: Denver is respected as a national leader in Demand Side Management and the use of renewable/ alternative energy sources. We have one of the largest Light Emitting Diode (LED) traffic light inventories in the country - technology that uses a fraction of the power to produce brighter, longer lasting lights, that are less expensive to operate - saving the city over $800,000 per year. Green Fleet program: Denver's fleet of 80 hybrid-electric vehicles is one of the largest in the country. The use of 420,000 gallons of B20 biodiesel fuel in 2005 supported local economies and reduced air pollution and dependence on foreign oil. * Pollution Prevention (P2)/ Hazardous Waste Reduction: Hazardous waste reductions of 83% within the city organization over the past seven years earned a "Most Valuable Pollution Prevention (MVP2) Award" from the National Pollution Prevention Roundtable in September 2005. % Stapleton Redevelopment: State of the art land use planning and strong community involvement turned 4,700 acres of the former Stapleton International Airport into a walkable, green-built community incorporating recycling and water conservation features. Stapleton was recently recognized by Sunset magazine as one of the West's best communities in which to live.
% FasTracks and T-REX: 119 miles of new light rail and commuter rail, 18 miles of bus rapid transit service and 70 new transit stations will transform travel for over half a million riders a day and catalyze transit oriented development throughout the metro area. T-REX (Transportation Expansion Project) will open in the fall of 2006 to relieve the congested southeast corridor.
-’s Wirth Awards: The Greenprint Denver program received special recognition at the UCD Wirth Chair Sustainability Awards on April 12, 2006.
tli National and international forums: Denver has participated in numerous national and international activities over the last 18 months, including the Denver World Oil Forum, the Sundance Summit in Utah, U. S. Conference of Mayors Pledge on Greenhouse Gas reduction, the U. N. Urban Environmental Accords, and the national Plug-In Hybrid Initiative. $ Denver Green Cities Forum: The "Denver Green Cities Forum" in November 2005 brought together leading sustainability officials from Seattle, Washington, Portland, Oregon, Salt Lake City, Utah, Chicago, Illinois and Oakland, California to discuss best sustainability practices and accomplishments with Denver employees and citizens. / ■ . «?- Denver Urban Gardens: In fifty-four diverse community gardens and a community-supported agriculture farm managed by Denver Urban Gardens (DUG), community gardeners collectively assume responsibility to improve their neighborhoods, initiate a sense of pride in their surroundings, and grow : fresh, organic food close to home. ^
Case Study: Denver Green Cities Forum If you were going to develop a world-class sustainability plan, where would you start? . In an effort to draw from the best ideas and practices of other cities nationwide, in 2005 Denver and the Alliance for Sustainable Colorado hosted the first Denver Green Cities Forum. Top officials from leading sustainability programs in Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Salt Lake City and Oakland (above) came to Denver for two days in late November. They met intensively with City staff to discuss and fine tune Greenprint goals and strategies, and participated in a large public forum at the Ellie Caulkins Opera House. In addition to sharing valuable lessons learned. Forum" members benefited‘from meeting one another and.sharing ideas about, common challenges and opportunities. „ ' ■
8 greenprint denver plan
Greenprint Denver Action Agenda
Energy and Emissions: Smart Choices to Decrease Energy Demands and Improve Air Quality
There is widespread scientific consensus that global climate change is a long term problem and its economic, social and environmental impacts may take years to fully unfold. Even as the impacts of this change are still being under stood, it is clear that good government requires that we address and manage the risk of potential impacts through our actions wherever possible. There is likewise consensus that slowing or reversing human contributions to green house gas may take decades, even with immediate and aggressive actions by people worldwide. In Colorado, potential impacts on snow pack, water supply and tourism are cause for concern for industry leaders and policy-makers alike.
Managing risks and ameliorating possible impacts takes vision and discipline. At the local level, transitioning to an energy mix that is dominated by cleaner fuels such as natural gas, wind and solar and implementing higher energy efficiency standards will reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Additional benefits include improved air quality, lower energy bills, and reduced dependence on foreign Oil supplies.
Denver is the balanced energy capital of the west, with an economy focused on both the supply and demand sides of a complex energy challenge. On the supply side, Denver continues to be a world leader in solar research and the hub of natural gas exploration and development throughout the Rockies. More recently it has added wind energy and incentives for individual renewable energy applications through Amendment 37. On the demand side, Denver's business community is beginning to pursue more aggressive energy manage ment and efficiency programs. This balanced approach will Contribute to a sustainable future for our children, while meeting the reliability and use demands of our citizens in this transition period. V -
Cornerstones of the City of Denver's energy management and energy efficiency programs include development and implementation of an updated Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan (GGRP). The GGRP will monitor the emissions impacts of the city's work over time, and support policies for lowering them including adoption of high performance building practices, reducing materials use and waste production, support for growth patterns that deemphasize reliance on cars, and development of more renewable energy sources for the City. It will also address opportunities for emissions reductions throughout the community.
As a member of the international Cities for Climate Protection campaign since the early 1990s, Denver inventoried its greenhouse gas emissions most recently in 1995. Total estimated greenhouse gas emissions in 1995 for Denver were equivalent to 11,754,049 tons of carbon dioxide. Total per capita emissions were equivalent to 24.2 tons of carbon dioxide. Denver's GGRP seeks to reduce citywide per capita GHG emissions by 10% below 1990 emissions within the next five years. An updated inventory in 2006 will allow us to chart our course through the GGRP. ’ ■
9 1995 Denver Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector
Industrial Waste Commercial 13% 6% 34%
Residential Transportation 18% 29%
2007 Goals Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction © Complete updated inventory of greenhouse gases and begin substantial progress toward a 10% reduction in per capita greenhouse gas emissions from the 1990 emission rate by the year 2012, in conformity with the U.S. Mayors Climate Agreement.
Energy Efficiency - ■ ■ ■ ' .. '■ ' ■ . ■ © Require that all new city construction and major renovations meet the LEED Silver standard of the U.S. Green Building Council, and meet Energy Star Guidelines. © Subject to approval by Xcel Energy Corporation, construct a solar power plant capacity capable of powering the equivalent of 1000 homes. © Through partner Waste Management Inc, the contract operator of Denver Arapahoe Disposal Site, begin construction of a 3.2 Megawatt landfill gas-to-energy power plant, capable of powering the equivalent of more than 1500 homes. The plant will use gas naturally created by landfill materials. © Reduce energy use by 1 % per year, measured per passenger at DIA and per building square foot in City government facilities.
Alternative Fuels and Vehicles ■ © All light duty vehicles (excluding patrol cars) replaced in 2007 will be replaced with hybrid powered vehicles where appropriate vehicles are available. Where vehicles required for specific tasks are not available in hybrid form, the highest fuel mileage/lowest carbon emission per mile vehicles available will ■ be acquired. : ' . . . - ’ . ■ ...... - © All City diesel vehicles (including those at Denver International Airport) will utilize B20 Biodiesel in 2007. Biodiesel fuels use vegetable material in place of some portion of petroleum content. This fuel reduces hydrocarbon emissions by more than 20 percent, and particulates (soot) by 18 percent, compared to 100% petroleum diesel fuel. © Attain a 5% reduction in mileage traveled compared to 2005 for all non-direct City service delivery vehicles (excludes patrol cars, trash trucks, etc, includes most passenger cars, field supervisors' trucks, etc). © Increase the number of alternative fuel vehicles at DIA by 20% from 2005 to 40% of the fleet.
10 greenprint denver plan
2011 Goals Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction % Reduce Denver per capita greenhouse gas emissions 10% from the 1990 emission rate, in conformity with the U.S. Mayors Climate Agreement. Preliminary estimates suggest that Denver per capita emissions have increased significantly since 1990. Therefore reductions from current (2006) levels will need to increase commensurately.
Energy Efficiency . ■■ . ■ ' . . .. . ■ ■: 1 " ❖ Reduce energy use by 5 percent from 2006 levels, measured per passenger at DIA and per building square foot in other City facilities. % All new city projects are built and certified to LEED-NC Silver standards. % Fully implement all appropriate LEED-EB principles into City operations and maintenance.
Alternative Fuels and Vehicles & Biological content of diesel fuels used in all diesel vehicles will exceed 20%. & Attain a 15% total reduction in city fleet VMT (vehicle miles traveled). $ Increase the number of alternative fuel vehicles at DIA by 50% from 2005 to 70% of the fleet.
Case Study: High Performance Building Standards for the Justice Center Complex . . When voters approved funding for the construction of a new Justice Center in 2005, they knew it would be a world class facility that would represent the City and its commitment to the values of justice and equality. ' Now, as one of the first major successes of Greenprint Denver and the City's High Performance Building Policy, the project will be built and certified to LEED standards. ’■ v
In what will likely be one of many similar partnerships, the City partnered with the Governor's Office of ' Energy Management and Conservation, and'Colorado State University's Institute for the Built Environment (IBE) to ensure that sustainability was a key factor in the project's design and selection for the architects and contractors. In addition, IBE provided valuable trainings to City employees on both LEED and sustainability.
Building construction and:operation has serious and often negative impacts, on the environment and .human health. Ensuring that the Justice Center is built using proven sustainable design and construction techniques will reduce operating costs, create a better and healthier place to work, and help protect the environment.
Did you know? The way that we design and construct buildings has a profound impact on the environment. In the United States buildings account for: -!i 36% of total energy use/65% of electricity consumption ^ ; ?.'• 30% of greenhouse gas emissions - , $ 30% of raw materials use : : * 30% of waste output/136 million tons annually . ■!' 12% of potable water consumption -
Did you know?: i.1';/-;'' . : :■■■■■:■: . .T: The Webb Municipal Building is a certified Energy Star Building, and is 25% more energy efficient than a conventionally built building. In 2003, this meant $218,000 in energy savings to the city. Did you know? A recent energy efficiency retrofit of the Denver Place towers complex at 18^ and Curtis (as a LEED-EB Gold level building) paid for itself in just 3 years with help from Xcel rebates, and now saves the owners over $300,000 per year in energy costs...... Did you know? ■ In 2005 the City fleet increased its use of biodiesel - expanding from one fueling location to four, and using about 500,000 gallons of the cleaner-burning fuel. All of the city's equipment will operate on B20 biodiesel in 2007.
11 green print denver plan
Natural Resource Stewardship: The City as a Park
Denver's historic park system is one of the most diverse and expansive in the nation, it represents a wealth of natural amenities that continue to draw people here for the opportunities they offer for recreation and enjoyment. The Denver Water Board's supply and distribution system reflects the remarkable vision of Denver's pioneers and the stewardship of the generations that have preceded us. T . . : .■ ’ . ■ - ,
Denver's future rests in the city's ability to protect, care for and enhance its physi cal resources. Denver Parks and Recreation's Master Plan, the Game Plan, calls for a canopy of drought resistant street trees to cool neighborhoods, cleanse the air, and establish a network of public spaces where residents can walk to enjoy a vibrant urban landscape and healthy ecosystem. Denver Water's new Integrated Resources Plan, and the conservation ethic it reflects, is a model for other envi ronmentally conscious communities around the world. Clean waterways, such as the South Platte River that drains the length of the city, are precious amenities that connect land and water, and provide important wildlife habitat.
2007 Goals Enhancing Denver's City Forest We will plant thousands of new trees in partnership with dozens of Denver neighborhoods, schools and community and youth organizations. Trees offer shade, cooling, and beauty to our city and help slow climate change by reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Expanding Natural Landscapes t- Formally designate 100 acres as protected Natural Areas in Denver's Park system. & With substantial support from Denver Water, convert three park and park way sites to native vegetation, which uses as little as 20 percent of the water, no chemicals, and requires few other resources for maintenance. & Design at least one Denver golf course using Audubon Colorado's Wildscape Manual to use native plants and provide habitat for birds and other urban wildlife. * Train 50 volunteers as park stewards for the citizen evaluation program at 30 park sites.
Improve South Platte River Water Quality . ® Take the following actions to improve water quality in the South Platte River: ^ Focus sanitary and storm sewer maintenance on drainage basins with elevated bacteria contributions into the South Platte River. $ Use new GIS (Geographic Information System) capabilities to identify and improve sanitary sewer lines that have potential to contaminate the storm water system. $ Execute and document additional storm sewer maintenance and cleaning to identify illicit discharges, repair inappropriate taps, and remove sediment containing bacteria. * Utilize GIS in combination with water quality data to evaluate pollutant loading sources, intervene appropriately, and develop a process to identify potential point source polluters.
12 greenprint denver plan'
Develop small-scale pilot water quality improvement programs to test innovative approaches. * Complete a microbial analysis to identify contamination sources. $ Complete a local and regional stakeholder process on water quality to develop a common understanding of problems and solutions. $ Implement a concentrated water quality education program to foster behavioral change among residents. $ Add a new water quality program manager to direct and coordinate the overall water quality response.
Conserving Water Resources Denver Water has developed a 10-Year Conservation Plan that, if approved by the Denver Water Board and successfully implemented, wi|l achieve water use reductions of 22 percent from 211 gallons per capita per day (GCD) in the year 2000 to 165 GCD in the year 2016. The 22 percent conservation goal was originally set in the Denver Water Board's 1997 Integrated Resource Plan to be achieved by 2050. Some of the conservation programs proposed, subject to community discussion and input follow. City agencies will set the standard for water conservation, and lead in early adoption of the Denver Water Board's new conservation programs, including: • -- - . . . .
& Time-of-Purchase Retrofits - Requires retrofit of indoor fixtures to meet current efficiency standards in the Uniform Building Code and leak repair for all existing single family and multifamily homes at the time-of-purchase. Many Denver Water rebates would be available to help offset these costs. The program would also include a complete water efficiency check-up for indoor and outdoor uses.
$ New Homes Rating System - This involves expanding the Built Green program of Denver Metro Homebuilders Association to create a point system for water efficiency. Points will be awarded for water efficient practices and efficient water fixtures. New homes will be required to achieve a minimum number of points before service is started.
-',i Commercial and Industrial Incentives - Commercial and industrial customers can receive up to $80,000 for improving efficiency of processes that use water, Each of 60 new contracts per year saves an average of 5%. Projects must meet a minimum savings potential of 300,000 gallons per year in order to qualify.
$ Demonstrate wise water use in City and other public facilities, buildings and parks $ Accelerate progress in bringing City facilities up to state of the science in plumbing fixtures, irrigation systems, cooling towers, kitchen operation, swimming pool operations, laundries and other water uses. % Require City irrigation systems to be maintained for efficiency, and to meet accepted standards for efficiency in water use.
2011 Goals V:-j Expanding Natural Landscapes ^ ^ * Convert an additional 100 acres of bluegrass turf to native vegetation, ultimately reducing water consumption by 4 million gallons annually. - - ■ - @ Designate 1000 acres of parkland as protected Natural Areas in Denver's Park system, ensuring their preservation and value as wildlife habitat, islands of peaceful respite for visitors, and low resource consumption for maintenance. " " ; ^ ^ v Design at least one Denver golf course using Audubon Colorado's Wildscape Manual to use native plants and provide habitat for birds and other urban wildlife. * Train 200 volunteers as park stewards for the citizen evaluation program at 100 park sites.
Improve South Platte River Water Quality ❖ The South Platte River will meet EPA's swimmable and fishable standards.
Conserving Water Resources v Continue and expand implementation of the 10-Year Conservation Plan, with progress toward Denver Water's goal of a per capita customer use of 165 gallons per day by 2016. green print denver p I an
Case Study: Mayor's Water Initiative as an Example of Working in Partnership: Partnership, Collaboration, Synergy - these words highlight the importance of working together to make Denver a city where people and nature thrive, and all applied to the Mayor's Water Initiative in 2005: : ^
'<’« The South Platte River Water Quality Initiative Several Denver's Departments worked together to develop strategies to reduce pollution levels in the South Platte River through aggressive intervention measures, monitoring, regional cooperation, and public education. ‘ •
# Water Speakers Series - The Mayor's Office partnered with the Denver Museum of Nature and Science, Wright Water Engineers and Denver Water to offer a speaker's series on the "Best Ideas in Western Water," highlighting conservation leadership opportunities that will shape the future of the state and the region.
>:< The Community Conservation Gardens Project ■ - ••:•••••• - - - - - In an effort to increase public interest in and awareness of landscape water conservation, a joint effort between the Mayor's Office, Denver Botanical Gardens, Denver Water, Gates Family Foundation, the Denver Office of Workforce Development, Department of Parks and Recreation, Mile High Youth corps, and Green Industries of Colorado helped to convert four prominent public landscapes to model "water- wise" gardens in 2005. . ,
Did you know? A recent study by American Forests found that the urban forest in Denver and seven other cities contribute $3.2 million per year in stormwater management value, $5.3 million a year in the removal of air pollutants sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and carbon monoxide and $4.5 million in air cooling and avoided air conditioning costs.
Did you know? Denver utilizes goats to help eliminate invasive weeds in natural areas in a cost-effective, non-polluting manner.
Did you know? The new Denver Water recycling plant, at full buildout, will deliver over 450 million ..... ; V gallons of recycled water every year, via 50 miles of "purple pipe" for non-potable uses, such.as irrigation and lakes in our parks, golf courses and wildlife preserves. - .. ■ . f ■
Did you know? ^ Parks and Recreation uses 28% less water today in its parks than it did in 2001, by ^ replacing outdated irrigation systems and transforming bluegrass areas into native grasses where appropriate. This summer Denver Water is funding three turf conversions at Ruby Hill Park, Milstein Grove, and the Montbello islands, ultimately conserving around 20 acre feet of water, the same amount used by 40 families in a year, on average. . . ^ greenprint denver plan
Materials and Waste Management Intelligent management of materials and waste is an important way to improve cost efficiencies and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Preventing waste at the source, through thoughtful purchasing, can reduce toxicity or extraneous packaging and decrease the need for raw materials and energy during manufacturing, transportation and disposal.
Recycling and waste reduction means fewer materials enter the landfill, thereby reducing emissions of methane, a landfill and greenhouse gas. For Denver, reducing waste will result in more efficient trash collection services, long term cost savings, extended landfill life, and greater recycling rates and revenues. Denver's new single-stream recycling program has seen a 20% increase in tonnage in the first year. Residents have responded very positively to the easy- to-use single cart system.
Increasing the use of recycled materials in manufacturing processes typically requires less energy than virgin materials and results in less demand for virgin materials. The city will procure cost-competitive products made from recycled materials.
2007 Goals ' . • . ; Waste Minimization w v Increase material recycled in Denver's recycling program by 50% by 2007, from 18,000 tons in 2005 to 27,000 tons. Each ton of material recycled reduces carbon emissions by nearly 3 metric tons, equivalent to 2/3 the emissions of a typical automobile, or the carbon absorbed by planting 76 seedlings grown for 10 years. ^ Establish recycling in one highly-visible city facility such as Red Rocks Amphitheater. At Denver International Airport, decrease the amount of solid waste sent to the landfill by 5% annually from the 2005 baseline number of 0.51 pounds per passenger. Target for 2007 is 0.46 pounds per passenger. * Develop a plan to reduce paper consumption citywide by 20% over the next 4 years.
Eco-Efficient Procurement ❖ Increase the proportion of eco-efficient annual commodity and service bids by 10% per year from 2004 baseline. Use flyash concrete in city infrastructure projects wherever possible. Flyash is a waste product from coal-burning power plants that produces highly durable and less expensive concrete.
2011 Goals Waste Minimization * Reduce landfilled waste by 30% per current customer household through composting, recycling, and modification of collection methods from 2004 baseline. .V'V; :v : ¥ Decrease the amount of airport solid waste disposed in the landfill by 5% annually from the 2005 baseline number of 0.51 pounds per passenger, to 0.26 lbs. per passenger. % Reduce citywide paper use by 20% or more.
Eco-Efficient Procurement ^ Increase the proportion of eco-efficient annual commodity and service bids to 60% from the 2004 baseline.
15 greenprint denver plan
Case Study: Greening of Red Rocks: ' Denver is working to green the world famous Red Rocks Amphitheatre, a naturally formed amphitheatre located 15 miles west of Denver set between two, 300 foot tall monolithic sandstone formations. Red Rocks is world renowned to performers and patrons for its unique environment and natural acoustics. With funding from U.S. EPA and help from the many business and community partners, the city will implement a recycling program both inside and outside of the facility (Red Rocks is known for tailgating). In addition, the effort will educate attendees, performers and vendors; evaluate incoming supplies for recyclable packaging; and consider a composting program for organic waste, with an ultimate goal to achieve as close to zero waste as possible. This program will serve as a model for other local and national venues. ^
Did you know? Mile High Stadium lives on... in the form of steel reused in tracks for the T-Rex light rail expansion. '
Did you know? ■ ■■■ ■ ■ 10 Denver Recreation Centers have added recycling programs in the past year, with future additions planned.
Did you know? : \ ... ' i .■ . ;\ ■. ■■ ■. ■ ■ : .■'■■■■ In 2003, U.S. residents/businesses, and institutions produced more than 236 million tons of municipal solid waste, approximately 4.5 pounds of waste per person every day, and up from 2.7 pounds per person in 1960. In 2004, Coloradoans disposed of a whopping 9 pounds per person per day, one of the highest volumes in the nation. -.
Did you know? Tossing away an aluminum can wastes as much energy as pouring out half of that can's volume of gasoline.
Did you know? The city's expanded recycling program added seven new recyclable materials and sorting is no longer required. Since the program launched in 2005 recycling tonnage has increased by more than 20%.
16 greenprint denver plan
Land Use and Transportation: People-Oriented Development Transportation consumes one-fourth of total U.S. energy supplies, including two-thirds of all oil. Vibrant, livable urban centers that are pedestrian friendly, support mass transit and less reliance on cars are on Denver's Blueprint Denver Plan. Bringing more people within easy access of transit and other multi-modal options will reduce our oil and energy dependence in the future, and provide related air quality and public health benefits. The goal to build TODs (transit-oriented developments) around FasTracks stops will promote bus and light rail stops within walking distance of new housing, offices, and shops. A network of stations ; planned along the Central, East, West, North Metro, Southeast, and Southwest Corridors and along the Gold Line, will create opportunities to live or work near public transportation. 2007 Goals Multi-Modal Transportation Identify and implement priority multi-modal transportation development projects in 11 major corridors throughout the city, including transit, bicycle and pedestrian access, with priority projects to be identified completion of the Strategic Transportation Plan currently underway. $ Prioritize and initiate transit oriented multi-modal connections along one transportation corridor identified in the 2006 Strategic Transportation Plan.
Workplace Commuting $ Increase employee transit ridership by 10% over the 2005 baseline.
2011 Goals Multimodal Transportation & Continue implementation of FasTracks, and Denver Union Station projects, ultimately transporting up to half a million people every day. : ® Complete additional transportation connections that support multi-modal transportation options for more of Denver's citizens. By 2030, 41 % of Denver's job growth (70,000 jobs) and 30% of Denver's population growth (22,000 households) will be located in Denver's new transit zones.
Healthy Communities $ Ensure 100% of Denver Public Schools have bike/walk to school programs. Workplace Commuting & Achieve and retain U.S. EPA's "Best Workplaces for Commuters" award.
Case Study: FasTracks, Union Station and Land Use Opportunities - Denver ranks as one of the mostlivable cities in the country but is also one of the most congested. In November 2004, voters in the Denver Metro Region passed the "FasTracks" initiative to address congestion - and mass-transit's ability to support population growth and travel growth in the metro area. FasTracks, a $4.7 billion regional infrastructure investment, will provide 119 miles of new tracks, more than 50 new transit stations, 18 miles of bus rapid transit service, 21,000 new parking spaces at rail and bus stations and expanded bus service in all areas. Additionally, FasTracks will encourage transit-oriented development or TOD, an impor tant component to urban development. TOD occurs within a half-mile radius, or walking distance, of a transit stop. It usually consists of mixed land uses at various densities. Living in this type of development'encourages res idents to take mass transit or walk to their destinations. - - \
Case Study: Denver Union Terminal . ■ ■ As the cornerstone of the FasTracks plan, the vision for he Denver Union Station Multimodal Transportation Center describes the station as a 24-hour hub,of urban activity. The station's neon slogan, "Travel by Train," will once again ring true as Denver Union Station becbmes the region's connecting point for light rail, commuter rail, and intercity rail, as well as for local, regional, and intercity buses, and other public and private transportation modes. All told; the revitalized Denver Union Station will accommodate many categories of transportation, including light rail, commuter rail, regional and intercity bus, taxis, shuttles, vans, limousines, bicycles, and pedestrians, and offers more than 1 million square feet of new offices, residences, and shops. The Denver Union Station site will provide convenient and safe access to and efficient connections between each transportation mode, helping improve access to jobs, housing, and activity centers throughout the region.
17 greenprint denver plan
Did you know? j: In keeping with the 2002 Bicycle Master Plan, downtown bicycle lanes have ' already been installed along 18th, 19th, Wynkoop, Lawrence, Arapahoe, and Glenarm Streets. The pedestrian/bicycle bridge over the Platte River at 3rd i*.,, . —jgjjip Avenue was completed in 2005, significantly improving safety along the Platte River Trail. The Highland Bike-Pedestrian bridge Over I-25 is scheduled for i completion in 2006 to provide a new connection between North Denver and 7 downtown, and the heart of the FasTracks plan, a revitalized multimodal hub at
18 greenprint denver plan
Community and Economic Development: Thriving and Prosperous Urban Environments A thriving local economy that stimulates balanced growth through job creation, business assistance, development of a skilled workforce, neighborhood redevelopment and housing options, is a priority of the City's Office of Economic Development. Denver economic development groups are developing a rapidly growing network of businesses, univer sities, non-profits, and government agencies to assist one another with a new regional interest and emphasis on sustainable development. This network is expanding in part due to increasing opportunities both within the community but also nationally and internationally, where green development opportunities are growing (i.e. in the City's trade office in China). The City is also developing energy efficiency standards and incentives for new affordable housing, and, through a partnership with Xcel Energy, including permanent efficiency upgrades as part of its LEAP program to assist low income residents with energy bills.
2007 Goals Green Business Development $ Develop 100 new training opportunities and/or jobs for metro Denver residents in the renewable energy industry and other green businesses
High Performance Building ;;’ . , * Convene stakeholders to identify opportunities for the city to facilitate high performance building practices in the private sector and develop strategy. $ In partnership with Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation, attain a 10% annual increase in new, privately-built LEED or Energy Star certified buildings constructed or renovated in Denver over 2005 baseline through construction incentives and support. $ Develop energy efficiency standards for City-supported affordable housing, as part of the Housing Plan process. $ Increase the funding from grant and loan programs for affordable green housing and housing located near transit to $250,000.
Brownfields Redevelopment $ Provide technical support to five Denver "brownfields" projects to assure environmentally sustainable re-use of contaminated or potentially contaminated sites.
19 2011 Goals Green Business Development sfc Develop 1,000 new training opportunities and/or jobs for metro Denver residents in the renewable energy industry and other green businesses
High Performance Building * Partner with Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation's Energy Efficiency Committee to incent commercial building property owners and managers to become more energy efficient through energy audits and improvements, to be paid back through energy savings. In partnership with Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation, attain a 50% increase in new LEED or Energy Star certified buildings constructed or renovated in Denver over 2005 baseline through construction incentives and support. % Add 100 new units of affordable green housing in Denver. % Increase the funding from grant and loan programs for green affordable housing and housing located near transit to $1,250,000.
Brownfields Redevelopment v. Redevelop 35 acres of Denver brownfields sites. % Receive and allocate $2 million in New Market Tax Credits for brownfields redevelopment.
Case Study: Sustainable Development as a Long Term Business Strategy On June 16, 2006, the Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation (MDEDC) announced the publication of its report: "Energy Efficiency — Bottom Line Opportunities for Metro Denver Companies," at an event hosted by The Economist Magazine in Denver. The MDEDC's program focuses on the short and long term savings and operating benefits to businesses of implementing a variety of energy efficiency measures, with the overall goal of making Denver an energy efficiency model. As the world learns to reduce its reliance on fossil fuel sources, a focus on energy efficiency and renewable energy opportunities will help Denver maintain its historical leadership position of dominance as the energy capital of the rocky mountain west.
Did you know? ^ ^ ; . j-/ ■ ' . ' ' . The Metro Denver Economic Development Corporation estimates that many energy efficiency investments by private businesses pay for themselves in 2-5 years, and generate permanent savings thereafter, thereby making Denver businesses more competitive. ;:v\
Did you know? ^ EPA is awarding the City a $200,000 brownfields assessment grant. The grant will be used to assess contamina tion at brownfields sites, with a priority on transportation-oriented development sites. . - . . greenprint denver plan"
Communications A central goal of the Greenprint Denver Action Agenda is to facilitate general communication, public out reach and civic engagement related to sustainability. Goals for the next 1-5 years combine both internal capacity building and external outreach and education.
2007 Goals Training and Capacity-Building Engage 100 city staff in sustainability training related to specific goals. & Conduct annual Green Cities Forum, bringing sustainability leaders from other cities in the United States to present and meet with city staff, Greenprint Council and citizens to continue to develop and refine Greenprint Agenda. Website Development * Launch and continue development of greenprintdenver.org as a premier resource in the region for information about city sustainability resources and programs. Outreach ■ \ & Identify target audiences and reach out to target groups with program information and resources. & Identify opportunities for interested citizens and groups to become engaged and contribute to a more sustainable future. Build on initial partnership with MDEDC to engage business in energy efficiency measures; identify opportunities to engage local businesses to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals. Partner with Cultural Institutions & Build on existing interest in sustainability issues at area museums, gardens and other facilities to conduct public education and engage citizens in specific issues and actions.
2011 Goals ■... . . ' '' " ' ■ ■ " Training and Capacity-Building ■.: ’ '■. % Engage 200 staff annually in sustainability trainings. Identify means to capture employee "best practices" feedback and ideas. & Continue to convene annual Green Cities Forum, bringing sustainability leaders from other cities in the United States to present and meet with city staff and citizens to continue to refine Best Practices. Website Development & Continue development of greenprintdenver.org as a premier resource in the region for information about city sustainability resources and programs. Outreach w Identify opportunities for interested citizens and groups to become engaged in contributing to a more sustainable future. . ' • " v $ Build on initial partnership with MDEDC to interest business in energy efficiency measures; identify ways to engage businesses in new strategies and to track progress (i.e. membership/awards program). Partner with Cultural Institutions ^ Build on existing interest in sustainability issues at area museums, - gardens and other facilities to conduct public education and engage citizens in specific issues and actions.
21 greenprint denver plan
Conclusion This action agenda represents our first steps toward '"walking the talk" of sustainable development - realizing the goals of the Greenprint Denver vision through leadership by example in city practice. By identifying areas where the city and the private sector can realize environmental benefit and economic savings through more efficient use of resources, we are helping to secure the future health of our community. Measuring our progress toward specific goals, using well-defined metrics and annual report card, will allow us to adapt our strategies over time to be more successful. We look forward to working with the citizens of Denver to successfully move this agenda forward and continue to identify ways to make the city an environmentallyi economical ly and socially healthy place in which to live, work and play.
22 NEW YORK
>LANYC 2030 - The Plan http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/plan.shtml
Search ] Email Updates } Contact Us mm llllfSSjs JQW Residents j Business i Visitors j Government I Office of the Mayor II iaiMkv«i
□ HOME D THE CHALLENGE □ WHAT WE HEARD In December 2006, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg challenged New Yorkers to generate ideas for achieving 10 key goals for the city’s D THE FLAN sustainable future. New Yorkers in all five boroughs responded. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY The result is the most sweeping plan to enhance New York’s urban environment in the city's modern history. Focusing on the five key □ GREENYC dimensions of the city’s environment — land, air, water, energy, and □ NEWS & EVENTS__ transportation "" we have developed a plan that can become a model for cities in the 21st century. The combined impact of this D DOWNLOADS plan will not only help ensure a higher quality of life for-generations, of New Yorkers to come; it will also contribute to a 30% reduction in global warming emissions. W
Click on the icons below to learn how we plan to meet our goals
Focusing on the five key dimensions of the city's environment — land, air, water, energy, and transportation — we have developed a plan that can become a model for cities in the 21st century
MORE RESOURCES
Transportation
i _ j? i n//i m\m i • 1 1 PA/I 'LANYC 2030 - The Plan http://www.nyc.gov/html/planyc2030/html/plan/plan.shtml
Energy .... 1" ■ Provide cleaner,,wore reliable, power for every New Yorker by . upgrading'our-energy Infrastructure ^ n • /*. .- V- ■ i
Copyright 2007 The City of New York Contact Us | FAQs | Privacy Statement | Site Map
10/4/9007 7-11 PM fSEEiYC
Thirty years ago, a plan for New York’s This Plan seeks to repel these threats and to future would have seemed futile. extend the gains we've made over the last The city was focused entirely on solving thirty years. It seeks active solutions rather immediate crises. Government flirted with than reactive fixes. The 1970s taught us that bankruptcy. Businesses pulled up stakes. investing in our future is not a luxury, but an Homes were abandoned. Parks were imperative. With that in mind, this Plan seeks neglected. Neighborhoods collapsed. Sub to secure for our children a city that is even ways broke down. Crime spiraled out of con greater than the one we love today. trol. New York seemed unsafe, undesirable, The time for such forward thinking has ungovernable, unsolvable. arrived. Just five years ago, let alone thirty, confronting these challenges would have Today, the city is stronger than ever. been impossible. In the wake of the Septem Transit ridership is at a fifty-year high. Crime ber 11th attacks, we planned for the next is at a forty-year low. We have our best bond day, not the next decade. But our economic rating ever, and the lowest unemployment. rebound has been faster than anyone imag A record 44 million tourists came to visit last ined. And so today, we have an opportunity year. For the first time since World War II the to look further. And we have an obligation average New Yorker is living longer than the to do so, if we are to avoid a repeat of the average American. And our population is decay and decline of the 1970s. higher than it has ever been. The moment for facing up to our respon Moving to New York has always been an sibility for the city’s long-term future is now. act of optimism. To come here you must The city we pass on to our children will be have faith in a better future, and courage to determined in large part by whether we are seek it out; you must trust the city to give willing to seize the moment, make the hard you a chance, and know that you’ll take decisions, and see them through. advantage when it does. You must believe This is not a plan that supplants other in investing in your future with hard work City efforts, such as those we are making and ingenuity. You must, in short, believe in on crime, poverty, education, or social ser accepting a challenge. vices. Here we have focused on the physical city, and its possibilities to unleash opportu This Plan is offered in that spirit. nity. We have examined the tangible barriers The challenges we face today are very differ to improving our daily lives: housing that is ent from those of the 1970s, but they are no too often out of reach, neighborhoods with less critical. Our population will grow to over out enough playgrounds, the aging water nine million by 2030. Much of our physical and power systems in need of upgrades, infrastructure is a century old and showing congested roads and subways. All are chal its age. Even as we have revitalized the five lenges that, if left unaddressed, will inevita boroughs, the quality of our air, water, and bly undermine our economy and our quality land still suffer. And today we face a new of life. threat with potentially severe implications: We can do better. Together, we can create global climate change. a greener, greater New York.
New York City
A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC Growth in New York City New York will continue growing through 2030, but not all the changes are intuitive. While the city's population will reach a new record, only two boroughs (Staten Island and Queens) will surpass their historic highs. Our Challenges Our fastest growing population will be residents over the age of 65, while our number of school-age children will remain Under that mandate, we have identified essentially unchanged. Overall, our residents will average three three main challenges: growth, an aging years older, a result of the baby-boomer generation reaching retirement and lengthening life spans across the city. infrastructure, and an increasingly This means we must concentrate on increasing the number precarious environment. of senior centers and supportive housing as we look ahead. As a result, while the city's overall projections are instructive, important differences exist between each borough. GROWTH
@ INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS AREAS (gp BOROUGH BUSINESS DISTRICTS New York’s population swings have always Q CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICTS been shaped by the tension between the allure of a slower paced life elsewhere and the energy and openness that has drawn new residents from across the United States Manhattan and around the world.
Over the first half of the 20th century, our Manhattan’s population % UNDER 1 OVER population swelled every decade, propelled peaked in 1910, when 18 65 - 37 19.7 B.7 by the consolidation of the five boroughs into its 2.33 million residents 1950 1,6 MIL were piled into 1970 1.54 MIL -21.5 35 21.7 14.0 a single city, the expansion of the subway, tiny apartments with 2000 1.54 MIL -0.1 36 17.2 12.2 and surges of immigration. As a result of extended relatives, 2030 1.83 MIL 18.8 40 15.2 16.1 these forces, between 1900 and 1930, the creating densities in the population soared from 3.4 million to 6.9 mil range of 600 to 800 persons per acre. Today, Population lion people. even the most crowded high-rise blocks can By 1950, the number of New Yorkers claim densities at just one-half that level. As a result, while Manhattan may experience the reached 7.9 million. But after that, the sub second-highest growth rate of any borough urban ideal came within the grasp of many through 2030, its 1.83 million residents in post-war New Yorkers. The pull of new, 2030 will fall far short of its record high. single-family homes in Westchester, Long A significant portion of that growth will come 0.55 Island, and New Jersey was so strong that, from residents over 65, who will increase by nearly 60%. despite continued domestic in-migration our population stagnated. In the 1970s, rising 1950 1970 2000 2030 crime and a plummeting quality of life caused the city to shrink by 800,000 people. We have spent the past three decades painstakingly restoring our city's quality of Staten Island life. As recently as 1993, 22% of New Yorkers cited safety and schools as reasons to leave With abundant open QQ space and relatively New York. When asked those same questions low density, Staten 1950 191,555 - 32 27.9 8.1 Howland Hook/ again in 2006, only 8% of recent movers gave Island has the smallest 1970 295*443 54.2 28 34.4 B7 Bloomfield similar answers. And the opportunities that population of any 2000 443,728 50.2 36 25.4 11.6 lured immigrants to our city from around the borough. But it is the 2030 551j906 24.4 40 22.0 18 7 Staten Island country and around the world continue to do only borough that has Population so. Our city’s resurgence has enabled New experienced growth each decade between 1950 and 2000. This trend will continue, York to burst through its historic population although at a slower pace than between high with 8.2 million people. We are also 1970 and 2010. By 2030, the population will more diverse than ever; today nearly 60% of reach a historic peak of 552,000 people, a New Yorkers are either foreign-born or the 24.4% increase over 2000. As residents stay children of immigrants. longer and settle, the population will age dramatically. In 1970, Staten Island was the Barring massive changes to immigration city's youngest borough; by 2030, it will be policy or the city’s quality of life, by 2010, the oldest. These older residents will push -■■I the Department of City Planning projects the borough's median age to nearly 40 years 1950 1970 2000 2030 that New York will grow by another 200,000 in 2030, a 12-year increase from 1970. people. By 2030, our population will surge _/ INTRODUCTION The Bronx
While the population of the Bronx peaked in 1970, the following decade saw disinvestment in housing, rising crime, and the growing appeal of the suburbs. These conditions precipitated a crisis that resulted in the loss of more than 300,000 people. While New York has largely rebounded from the desolation of that decade, the Bronx was most deeply affected. Eastchester 0 ,y ^ ' By 2030, the borough is projected to pull almost / f) even with its 1970 historical high of 1.47 million. Higher-than-average Population birth rates will The Bronx 2 75 compensate for the out-migration to S 2.2 other boroughs and the suburbs. Larger i families will also help ©Ze-rega i,-, the Bronx remain New York's youngest ©) Hunts Point ' borough, with a 01111 mm mm mm mm median age Of i9so 1970 2000 2030 33 years.
Manhattan steinw,yQ
■ ■■ 1950 1.45 MIL ' - 34 25.6 7.3 ;own 1970 . 1.47 MIL ■M. 30 316 11.6 "»E 2000 1.33 MIL -9.4 31 29.9 10.1 i 2030 1.46 MIL 9-3 33 27.2 11.8 Garment, *Sland C'ty Center- 'O' WF ' \ (0) West Maspeth Greenpoint/ (p)\ ‘ v Williamsburg ^ Q N0rth Brooklyn .. .. ' i'";© Queens
Br»ok|z" Over the past 30 years, Queens has captured an Sttmk- Navy Yards ever-increasing share of the city's population. Although Queens comprised just 19.7% of the population in 1950, this number is projected to climb to over 28% by 2030, when 2.57 million of the city's 9.12 million ©) East New York residents will reside in Queens. The consistent growth ...... •:' in Queens will result in a new peak population for the {"'\ Southwest Brooklyn . - . - borough by 2030. This y>" '§•/ Brooklyn Population growth is fueled by a 0 75 mix of immigrants from more than 100 S 9 2 countries. As a result, the median age in Queens from 2000 to 2030 is expected to Population Brooklyn will near its 1950 population peak of increase by just over 2.74 million, growing 10.3% to reach 2.72 million 2.75 three years. people. Priorto its merger with Manhattan, Brooklyn was thethird largest city in America and continued to grow until 1950. But the Long Island suburbs, 1950 1970 2000 2030 v 1.65 the construction of the Verrazano Narrows Bridge to Staten Island, and the devastation of the 1970s drained the borough's population. Now resurgent, : 1950 1.55 MIL - 34 25.5 7.1 Brooklyn will likely remain the city's largest 1970 1.99 MIL 281 36 261 12.4 borough in 2030. 2000 2.23 MIL 12.2 35 22.8 12.7
1950 1970 2000 2030 2030 2.57 MIL 15.1 38 20.5 14.5 YEAR POPULATION
1950 2.74 MIL - 33 26.2 7.4
1970 2.60 MIL -5.0 30 313 11.1
2000 2.47 MIL -5.3 33 26,8 11.5 Source: NYC Department of City Planning: NYC Economic Development Corporation
2030 2.72 MIL 10.3 3? 23.0 15.1 A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC New York City Projected Revenues From Population and Job Growth NO GROWTH ■ GROWTH
$120------New York City Projected Employment
4,500,000-
3,600,000 548,706 OTHER (within the private setter)
567.988 S LEISURE 6 HOSPITALITY S 2,700,000- 257,416 'educational SERVICES
703,654 HEALTH & SOCIAL ASSISTANCE
1,800,000
9oo,ooo4'3:^ ? "is 1,439,B85...... OFFICE-USING INDUSTRIES
5ource: NYC Economic Development Corporation
City revenue includes State and Federal grants. Revenue sources per job or person assumed to grow at 1.7% annually (growth rate of average compensation under Social Security Intermediate scenario).
past nine million, the equivalent of adding constrain this growth, we predict we will still ways. We reclaimed the parts of our city that the entire population of Boston and Miami exceed 65 million visitors by 2030. had been rendered undesirable or unsafe. In combined to the five boroughs. This growth will also result in enormous short, we have spent the past two decades This growth offers great opportunities. Our revenues. The expansion of our tax base will renewing the capacity bequeathed to us by employment force will grow by 750,000 jobs, impact our economy accordingly. The addi massive population loss. with the largest gains among health care tional jobs, tourists, and residents could But now we have built ourselves back— and education. New office jobs will generate generate an additional $13 billion annually— and we are already starting to feel the pres needs for 60 million square feet of commer money that can be used to help fund some sure. Cleaner, more reliable subways have cial space, which can be filled by the re-emer of the initiatives described in the following attracted record numbers of riders, causing gence of Lower Manhattan and new central pages and to provide the services that our crowding on many of our lines. It's not only business districts in Hudson Yards, Long residents, businesses, workers, and visitors transit. Growing road congestion costs our Island City and Downtown Brooklyn. To pro deserve. (See chart above: New York City region $13 billion every year, according to a tect our industrial economy, which employs Projected Revenues From Population and recent study. By 2030, virtually every road, nearly half a million people, we have cre Job Growth) subway and rail line will be pushed beyond ated 18 Industrial Business Areas. (See chart But the expansion ahead will be funda its capacity limits. above: New York City Projected Employment) mentally different than growth over the last Workers are moving farther and farther Our third-fastest growing industry will be 25 years. out of the city to find affordable housing, fueled by the additional visitors we expect. To revive our city, we tunneled money pushing our commutes to among the lon Tourism has nearly doubled in New York since into maintenance and restoration, invest gest in the nation. Neighborhoods are at risk 1991, when 23 million people visited the City; ing in neighborhoods, cleaning and replant of expanding without providing for the parks in 2006, the city received 44 million visitors. ing parks, sweeping away the litter that had and open space that help create healthy com Even if hotel and airport capacity begins to piled up in our streets and securing our sub munities, not just collections of housing units.
INTRODUCTION New York City Infrastructure Timeline
1840 ^ ' '•1850- — •' •• • 1860 1870 > ■ ■ ■ * 1880 > ; | •• • 1890 '• • ! s 1842 Croton Water 1662 Thomas Edison •* 1 1883 The Brooklyn Bridge 1904 The first subway Supply System switches on the world's first becomes the first bridge line begins service in opens, the city's commercial electric light across the East River New York City first comprehensive system in Lower Manhattan water system
- j 1930 - : . ••• ; 1940 v ‘ 1950
1917 The city's ? 192B Catskill ; 1936 The city's 1944 The Delaware Water 1964 The Verrazano-Narrows first water tunnel : Water Supply j second water tunnel Supply System opens; it is Bridge becomes the last is completed ’ System opens j is completed the city's last major water significant bridge built in supply expansion New York City 1920s Utility companies 1932 The city’s last major begin putting New York's subway expansion opens; parts 1970 Work on the city's electrical grid underground; of the original signaling system third water tunnel begins; parts are still in service today are still used today the second of four stages will be done by 2012 7
INFRASTRUCTURE ENVIRONMENT need of repair. Our two water tunnels, which provide water to every New York City house This growth will place new pressure on an hold, haven't been inspected in more than 70 As our population grows and our infrastruc infrastructure system that is already aging years. We do not have the redundancy in our ture ages, our environment will continue to beyond reliable limits. New Yorkers pioneered system to inspect or make the repairs we need. be at risk. many of the systems that make modern life We have seen the consequences of inad We have made tremendous gains over possible—whether it was Thomas Edison equate investment in basic services: during the past 25 years in tackling local environ switching on the world's first commercial the fiscal crises of the 1970s, our streets mental issues; waters that were unsafe even electric light system in Lower Manhattan, were pocked with more than one million pot to touch have become places to boat, fish planners plotting out the first modern water holes. By 1982, subway ridership fell to levels or swim. Air that could once be seen has network in the 1840s, or thousands of work not seen since 1917, the result of delayed become clear. ers, engineers, and architects building the service and deteriorating cars. Many of the The Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970, but world’s largest bridges four times. But our city's bridges faced collapse. The Williams much of the New York metropolitan area has early innovation means that our systems are burg Bridge was taken out of service when not reached Federal air quality standards for now among the oldest in America. (See chart engineers discovered that the outer lanes ozone and soot, and we suffer from one of above: New York City Infrastructure Timeline) were on the verge of breaking off into the the worst asthma rates in the United States. We are a city that runs on electricity, East River. A truck famously plunged through The Clean Water Act was passed in 1972, yet some of our power grid dates from the Manhattan's West Side Highway. yet 52% of the city’s tributaries—the creeks 1920s, and our power plants rely on out We were reminded again during the and man-made canals that hug the shoreline moded, heavily-polluting technology. Our recent power outage in Queens why reliable and pass through neighborhoods—are still subway system and highway networks are infrastructure matters. That's why even as unsafe even for boating. Although we have extensive, and heavily-used, yet nearly 3,000 our expansion needs assume a new urgency, cleaned hundreds of brownfields across the miles of our roads, bridges, and tunnels, and we must find ways to maintain and modern city, there are still as many as 7,600 acres the majority of our subway stations are in ize the networks underpinning the city. where a history of contamination hinders development and threatens safety.
A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC Global Atmospheric CO Concentrations Global Average Temperature ICE CORE DATA OBSERVED ANNUAL C02 VALUES MAUNA LOA (HAWAII)
390 14.4°C - 57.94°F 380 / 14.3 - 57.74 14.2 - 370 J 57.56 14.1 - §f# 360 / -nrir- 57.38 g 14.0- / -trJv—57.20 S | 350 cn = 13.9 ■ 1^-57.02 I I 340 cn 5 / u 13.8- 56.84 g S U1 — £ 330 .4- UJ S 13.7- —-n------56.66 = cd g 320 UJ -H Q 13.6- _LOJLv - 56.48 ^5 310 13.5------M - 56.30 300 13.4 —- - 56.12 290 13.3---- - 55.94 280 r 13-2 |—|—r i I i i i - 55.76 oinoinogomoiAOu>owou>oigoinounomog oinoinoinoiAOinoiftoinouioinoinoiAOinoin oo oo os O' o o *- t- NNmffisf'tiflifl'O'ONNcoeco^oo coconno>i>0'&0'(>o>o>90i0'^^o>0'0‘0'0<&ooo rrprpppprrrrppprpprpprrpNNccoonno'o'ooo'o'oooo'o'oo'o'o'o'osoo'o'oo Source: Historical CO; Record from foe Vosfo/t Ice Core: Laboratoire de Source: Columbia University Center for Climate Glaciologle et de Geophysique de I'Environnement, Arctic and Antarctic Systems research based on National Center for Research Institute. . Environmental Prediction Reanalysis II Historic*/ CO; Record from the 5iple Station Ice Core: Physics Institute, University of Bern, Switzerland, * S-year averages are plotted
Climate Change ers in the atmosphere and acts like panels in by 2030. (See chart on facing page: Annual a greenhouse, letting the sun’s rays through, Average Sea Level at the Battery, Manhattan) Cutting across all of these issues then trapping the heat close to the earth’s With almost 600 miles of coastline and over is one increasingly urgent challenge: surface. (See chart above: Global Atmospheric half a million New Yorkers living within our cur climate change CO2 Concentrations) rent flood plain, this change is especially dan The evidence that climate change is hap gerous to New York. At our current sea level, In February, the Intergovernmental Panel on pening is irrefutable. Today there is 30% more we already face the probability of a "hundred- Climate Change released a report confirm CO2 in the atmosphere than there was at the year flood” once every 80 years; this could ing that humans have accelerated the effects beginning of the Industrial Revolution. During increase to once in 43 years by the 2020s, and of climate change. As a result, the argument the same period, global temperatures have up to once in 19 years by the 2050s. Accord has shifted: we are no longer debating the risen by nearly two degrees Fahrenheit. ing to one estimate a Category 2 hurricane existence of global warming, but what to do But we don’t need global averages to would inflict more damage on New York than about it. (See chart above: Global Average understand how climate change is already any other American city except Miami. Temperature) affecting our health and future security. It is an issue that spans the entire planet, By 2030, local temperatures could rise Preventing global warming but New Yorkers are already feeling the by two degrees; and our city is affected by Scientists believe that only massive reductions effects. As a coastal city, New York is espe rising temperatures more than the rest of the in worldwide greenhouse gas emissions, on cially vulnerable. Our winters have gotten region because urban infrastructure absorbs the order of 60% to 80% by the middle of the warmer, the water surrounding our city has and retains heat. This phenomenon, known 21st century, will stop the process of global started to rise, and storms along the Atlantic as the "urban heat island effect,’’ means that warming. seaboard have intensified. New York City is often four to seven degrees No city can solve this challenge alone. But And so we took a close look at the potential Fahrenheit warmer than the surrounding sub New York has a unique ability to help shape a impacts of climate change on New York City, urbs. But it is not only our summers that are solution. (See charts on facing page: New York and our own responsibility to address it. getting hotter. In the winter of 2006 to 2007, City's Greenhouse Gas Emissions) there was no snow in Central Park until Janu The sheer size of our city means that A global challenge with local ary 12th—the latest snowfall since 1878. (See our contribution to global greenhouse gas consequences chart on facing page: Annual Average Tem emissions is significant. In 2005, New York Global warming and climate change are perature in Central Park, Manhattan) City was responsible for the emission of caused by increasing concentrations of green We also face the threat of sea level change 58.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide house gases in our atmosphere. Carbon diox and intensifying storms. At the Battery in equivalent (C02e)—roughly 1% of the total ide (CO2), the most common greenhouse gas, Lower Manhattan, the water in our harbor has carbon emissions of the United States, or an is emitted from motorized vehicles, power risen by more than a foot in the last hundred amount roughly equal to that produced by plants, and boilers that burn fossil fuel. It gath years, and could climb by five inches or more Ireland or Switzerland. This figure has been
INTRODUCTION Annual Average Sea Level at the Battery, Manhattan* Annual Average Temperature in Central Park, Manhattan RECORDED :: ESTIMATED RANGE OF GROWTH RECORDED ESTIMATED RANGE OF GROWTH 35------20------
30
25
1900*10 ’20 ’30 ’40 '50 ’60 70 ’80 *90 2000’10 ’20 ’30 ’40 ’50 ’60 70 ’80 Source; Rosenzweig, C., R. Horton, V. Gornitz, and D. C. Major, 2006. Source: Rosenzweig, C., R. Horton, V. Gornitz, and D.C. Major, 2006. Climate Scenarios for the New York City Watershed Region, Technical Report, Climate Scenarios for the New York City Watershed Region, Technical Report, Columbia University Center for Climate Systems Research Columbia University Center for Climate Systems Research
* T 900 sea level used as base
growing at nearly 1% per year, the combined New York City’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions impact of both population and economic Citywide Emissions growth, and the proliferation of electronics —O- HISTORICAL LEVELS 2005 LEVEL and air conditioning. By 2030, without action, BUSINES5 AS USUAL FORECAST FOR 2030 s» 30% REDUCTIONS TARGET FOR 2030 our carbon emissions will grow to almost 74 80 million metric tons Our carbon comes from many sources, but is mainly affected by three factors. One is the efficiency of the buildings we live in, which determines how much heating fuel, natural gas, and electricity we consume. Another is the way we generate electricity, because inef ficient power plants produce far more carbon dioxide than state-of-the-art ones. And a third is transportation, including the amount of driving we do and the truck trips required to haul the freight we need. i i T " i i i i i But our density, apartment buildings, and 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 reliance on mass transit means we are also Source; NYC Mayor's Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability one of the most carbon-efficient cities in the United States; New Yorkers produce 71% less C02e per capita than the average American. Emissions Breakdown, 2005 Total = 50.3 million metric tons Therefore, choosing to live in New York results BUILDINGS: 79% , in a reduction of greenhouse gases. E RESIDENTIAL Slowing the pace of climate change will U COMMERCIAL require concerted action across the world. m INSTITUTIONAL But we also cannot afford to wait until others £ INDUSTRIAL take the lead. Nor should we. New York has TRANSPORTATION: 23% always pioneered answers to some of the m CARS AND TRUCKS most pressing problems of the modern age. It m TRANSIT is incumbent on us to do so again, and rise to Source: NYC Mayor's Office of the definitive challenge of the 21 st century. Long-Term Planning and Sustainability
Figures tota/ to 102% due to carbon absOrbtion by waste and independent rounding A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC OUR PUK
RMiyc Shanghai. Cities around the world are pushing This effort began more than a year ago as an themselves to become more convenient and attempt to develop a strategy for managing the enjoyable, without sacrificing excitement or city’s growing needs within a limited amount of energy. In order to compete in the 21st century land. It quickly became clear that this narrow focus economy, we must not only keep up with the was insufficient. The scale, intricacy, and inter innovations of others, but surpass them. dependency of the physical challenges we face We have not done this work alone. The Mayor’s required a more holistic approach; choices in one Sustainability Advisory Board, composed of some area had unavoidable impacts in another. Each of the city’s leading environmental, business, problem in isolation had many possible solutions. community, and legislative leaders, has helped us But to develop a plan that was not only compre at every step. We have worked with scientists and hensive, but also coherent, we realized that we professors at the Earth Institute at Columbia had to think more broadly. University, New York University, the City University If you seek to solve traffic congestion by building of New York, and elsewhere to understand the more roads or by expanding mass transit, you make policy history, the economics, and the science a choice that changes the city. If you care about behind the issues addressed here. And, over three reducing carbon emissions, that suggests some months from December through March, we energy solutions rather than others. If your concern reached out further. is not only the amount of housing that is produced, What kind of city should we become? We but how it impacts neighborhoods and who can posed that question to New York. Over the afford it, then your recommendations will vary. past three months, we have received thousands That is why in searching for answers, we have of ideas sent by email through our website; we’ve wrestled not only with the physical constraints heard from over a thousand citizens, community New York will face over two decades, but also with leaders and advocates who came to our meetings the fundamental values implicit in those policy to express their opinions; we have met with over choices. We have taken as a basic value that 100 advocates and community organizations, held economic opportunity can and must come out of 11 Town Hall meetings, and delivered presentations growth; that diversity of all kinds can and must be around the city. The input we received suggested preserved; that a healthy environment is not a new ideas for consideration, shaped our thinking, luxury good, but a fundamental right essential to reordered our priorities. creating a city that is fair, healthy, and sustainable. In all our conversations, one core emerged: We have also considered that the world is a the strengths of the city are in concentration, different place today than it was half a century efficiency, density, diversity; in its people, but ago. Our competition today is no longer only cities above all in its unending sense of possibility. like Chicago and Los Angeles—it’s also London and We must reinforce these strengths. The result, we believe, is the most sweeping plan The answers are neither easy nor painless. to strengthen New York’s urban environment in They will require not only substantial resources the city’s modern history. Focusing on the five key but deep reservoirs of will. dimensions of the city’s environment—land, air, In some cases, the key difficulties are administra water, energy, and transportation—we have tive; we must achieve a new level of collaboration developed a plan that can become a model between City agencies and among our partners in for cities in the 21st century. the region. In others, the challenges are legislative. This plan calls for changes at the City, State, and The plan outlined here shows how using our land Federal levels—for transportation funding, for more efficiently can enable the city to absorb energy reform, for a national or state greenhouse tremendous growth while creating affordable, gas policy. sustainable housing and open spaces in every neighborhood. It details initiatives to improve the Finally, there is the need to pay for what we quality of our air across the city, so that every New want. Previous generations of New Yorkers have Yorker can depend on breathing the cleanest air ignored the reality of financing and have suffered of any big city in America; it specifies the actions as a result. We cannot make that mistake again. we need to take to protect the purity of our water For each of our proposals in this plan, we have and ensure its reliable supply throughout the city; described how it will be funded, which in some it proposes a new approach to energy planning in cases is through the city budget, in other cases New York, that won’t only meet the city’s reliability through new funding sources. An underlying needs, but will improve our air quality and save us assumption has been that we should be willing billions of dollars every year. Finally, it proposes to invest in things that we truly need, and which to transform our transportation network on a will pay New Yorkers back many times. scale not seen since the expansion of the subway The growth that prompted this effort in the first system in the early 20th century—and fund it. place will also enable us to pay for many of the answers. By guiding and shaping this growth, Each strategy builds on another. For example, we believe it can be harnessed to make a city of encouraging transit-oriented growth is not only 9.1 million people easier, more beautiful, healthier, a housing strategy; it will also reduce our depen and more fair than our city of 8.2 million today. dence on automobiles, which in turn alleviates congestion and improves our air quality. In December, we posed another question to New York: Will you still love New York in 2030? We have also discovered that every smart choice Above all, this report seeks to ensure that the equals one ultimate impact: a reduction in global answer to that question is an unequivocal, warming emissions. This is the real fight to preserve Yes. and sustain our city, in the most literal sense.
A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC SfaLBUYC Our plan for a grssat; greater New York
finished, and expanding usable hours at Water Network existing fields by installing additional lights We have the luxury of an abundant water and turf fields. supply, but our supply system faces chal We will improve our streets and sidewalks lenges. Critical elements such as aqueducts • Create homes for almost a million by adding new greenstreets and public and water tunnels cannot be taken out of ser more New Yorkers, while making plazas in every community as part of our vice. Development encroaches on the city’s housing more affordable and strategy to create a more inviting public realm. watersheds, so our reservoirs will require con sustainable tinued vigilance. Brownfields • Ensure that all New Yorkers live We must ensure the quality of our water at Our need for land means that we must foster within a 10-minute walk of a park its source by building a new filtration plant the reuse of sites where previous uses have • Clean up ail contaminated land in for the Croton System and continuing our left behind a legacy of contamination. New York City aggressive watershed protection program That’s why we will make existing brown for the Catskill and Delaware systems. field cleanup programs faster, more efficient, As virtually every part of our city grows, one We will create redundancy for the aque and more responsive to New York’s unique piece remains fixed: the supply of land. That’s ducts that carry the water to the city through development challenges. We will develop a combination of water conservation why we must use our space more efficiently, city-specific remediation guidelines, pilot to accommodate growth while preserving, measures, maximizing the use of our exist new time-saving strategies for testing, and and enhancing, the city’s quality of life. ing supplies through new infrastructure create a new City brownfields office to like the New Croton Aqueduct, and eval Housing accelerate redevelopment. uating new potential water sources, To meet the needs of a growing population, We will advocate for eligibility criteria like groundwater: we’ll need 265,000 more housing units by expansions for existing State programs, Finally, we must be able to repair and mod 2030. We have the capacity to accommodate while creating a new City program to over ernize our in-city distribution, which means this growth, but without action our city’s see the remaining sites. We will ask for the finishing Water Tunnel No. 3. housing stock won’t be as affordable or sus State to release community development Water Quality tainable as it should be. grants and incentivize developers to part We are one of the world’s great waterfront That’s why we will expand our supply ner with local communities so neighbor cities, with nearly 600 miles of coastline. potential by 300,000 to 500,000 units to hoods gain a stronger voice in shaping the Waterfront revitalization has been a guid drive down the price of land, while directing direction of their neighborhoods. ing principle of the last five years, across all growth toward areas served by public trans But we can’t clean up all the contaminated five boroughs. portation. This transit-oriented develop land in the city if we don’t know where it is. Now it is time to accelerate the reclamation ment will be supported by public actions to That’s why we will launch a process to iden of the waterways themselves, particularly our create new opportunities for housing, such tify contaminated sites. most polluted tributaries. We will upgrade as ambitious rezonings in consultation with To encourage more widespread testing, our wastewater treatment infrastructure, local communities, maximizing the effi we will create a revolving cleanup fund, while we implement proven strategies such as ciency of government-owned sites, and funded through a partnership with the private greening our streets, planting trees and exploring opportunities with communities to sector. expanding our Bluebelt network. We will create new land by decking over highways Our approach to brownfields will be more also explore other natural solutions for and railyards. comprehensive and inclusive than ever before, cleaning our water bodies through a range We must also pair these actions with tar as we work to ensure that the remnants of our of pilot programs that will be coordinated geted affordability strategies like creative past contribute to a more sustainable future. financing, expanding the use of inclusionary by a new Interagency Best Management Practices Task Force. We will also begin zoning, and developing homeownership to assess the protection our wetlands programs for low-income New Yorkers. WP« receive—our first step toward a broader By expanding these efforts into the future, Ksj tai Water policy. we can ensure that new housing production Through these initiatives, we can restore matches our vision of New York as a city of • Open 90% of our waterways for rec our city’s natural ecology and the recreational opportunity for all. reation by reducing water pollution use of our waterways. Open Space and preserving our natural areas Although we've added more than 300 acres of • Develop critical backup systems for parks in the last five years and set in motion our aging water network to ensure much more, two million New Yorkers, includ long-term reliability ing hundreds of thousands of children, live more than 10 minutes from a park. We have two primary water challenges: to That’s why we will invest in new recre ensure the water we drink is pure and reliable, ational facilities across every borough, and to ensure that the waterways surround opening hundreds of schoolyards as local ing our city are clean and available for use by playgrounds, reclaiming underdeveloped New Yorkers. sites that were designated as parks but never
INTRODUCTION We will continue pressuring the State and Transportation Federal governments to require reduc tions in harmful emissions, while aggressively targeting the local sources we can control. ■ Improve travel times by adding • Provide cleaner, more reliable Transportation is responsible for more than transit capacity for millions more power for every New Yorker by 50% of our local air pollution; that’s why we residents, visitors, and workers upgrading our energy infrastructure will encourage New Yorkers to shift to • Reach a full "state of good repair” mass transit. In addition we will mandate, on New York City’s roads, subways, New Yorkers face rising energy costs, air pol promote, or incentivize fuel efficiency, and rails for the first time in history lution, and greenhouse gas emissions from a cleaner fuels, cleaner or upgraded lack of coordinated planning, aging infrastruc engines, and the installation of anti-idling New York's success has always been driven by ture, and growth. technology. the efficiency and scale of its transportation This will require a two-pronged strategy to We must also address our other major network. But for the last 50 years, New York increase our clean supply and lower our con sources of emissions: buildings and power has underinvested. sumption despite our growth—something plants. That means switching to cleaner fuels that no city or state has done before. Despite dramatic progress, we have not yet for heating and retiring polluting plants. We will encourage the addition of new, achieved a full state of good repair across our Our open space initiatives such as tree clean power plants through guaranteed transit and road networks. More significantly, plantings will move us the rest of the way contracts, promote repowerings of our virtually all subway routes, river crossings, toward achieving the cleanest air of any big most inefficient plants, and build a market and commuter rail lines will be pushed beyond city in America. for renewable energies to become a bigger their capacity in the coming decades—making To track our progress and target our solutions source of energy. This new supply will also transportation our greatest potential barrier we will also launch one of the largest local enable us to retire our oldest, most pol to growth. air quality studies in the United States. We are proposing a sweeping trans luting power plants, cleaning our air and portation plan that will enable us to meet reducing greenhouse gas emissions. our needs through 2030 and beyond. That To reduce demand, we will target our larg includes strategies to improve our transit est energy consumers—institutional build Climate change network, through major infrastructure ings, commercial and industrial buildings, and expansions, improved bus service, an multi-family residential buildings—and accel • Reduce our global warming expanded ferry system and the comple erate efficiency upgrades through a system emissions by 30% tion of our bike master plan. We must of incentives, mandates, and challenges. also reduce growing gridlock on our roads Demand reductions will help all New Collectively these initiatives address the great through better road management and Yorkers by lowering energy prices. est challenge of all: global warming. Scientists congestion pricing, a proven strategy that Together, these strategies will produce a have predicted that unless greenhouse gas charges drivers a daily fee to use the city's reliable, affordable, and environmentally sus emissions are substantially stemmed by the densest business district. tainable energy network. But there is currently middle of the century, the impacts of climate We know what must be done. But essential no entity capable of achieving this goal. That’s change will be irreversible. Coastal cities like transit expansions have been stalled, in some why we will work with the State to create a New York are especially vulnerable. cases for decades. Today, not a single major New York City Energy Planning Board. Almost every action we take—from turning expansion project is fully funded—and over By managing demand and increasing on the lights to stepping into a car—has an all, there is a $30 billion funding gap. supply, New York City’s overall power and impact on the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) That’s why we will seek to create a new heating bill will plunge by $2 billion to released into the atmosphere. regional financing entity, the SMART $4 billion; the average New York house As a result, our climate change strategy is Financing Authority, that will rely on three hold will save an estimated $230 every the sum of all of the initiatives in this plan. funding streams: the revenues from conges year by 2015. All of PLANYC’s strategies—from reducing the tion pricing and an unprecedented commit The result will be not only a healthier envi number of cars to building cleaner power plants ment from New York City that we will ask ronment, but also a stronger economy. to addressing the inefficiencies of our build New York State to match. This authority ings—will help us to reduce emissions. would fill the existing funding gap for crit And we will also make a difference in the ical transit expansions and provide one fight against global warming simply by making time grants to achieve a state of good Air Quality our city stronger: By absorbing 900,000 repair, enabling our region to achieve a new new residents—instead of having them standard of mobility. • Achieve the cleanest air quality of live elsewhere in the United States—we can any big city in America prevent an additional 15.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases from being Despite recent improvements, New York City released into the atmosphere. still falls short in meeting federal air quality We will also embark on a long-term effort to standards. This is most apparent in the per develop a comprehensive climate change sistently high rates of asthma that plague too adaptation strategy, to prepare New York for many neighborhoods. the climate shifts that are already unavoidable.
A GREENER, GREATER NEW YORK PLANYC SAN FRANCISCO
Sustainable City http://www.sustainable-city.org/
Sustainable City Working toward a Sustainable Future for San Francisco
Working through the 5-year Sustainability Plan for the City of San Francisco
Air Quality Human Health
Biodiversity Parks. Open Spaces and Streetscapes Energy, Climate Change and Ozone Depletion Solid Waste
Food and Agriculture Transportation
Hazardous Materials Water and Wastewater
Economy and Municipal Expenditures Economic Development Public Information Environmental Justice and Education Risk Management (Activities of High Environmental Risk) site news local news almanac articles resources bioregion
1 of 1 10/4/2007 1:58 PM 3 Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/PIan/Intro/intro.htm
Ca-C\ o"P Sc^/n Fr^cls
t Sustainable local news forums articles resources actions ' City organizations interviews books sites search
Board of Commission on the Statements by... The Mayor Supervisors Environment
Sustainability Plan / Introduction
Sustainability is a word you have to spell to people over the phone. How can there be a community plan based on a word that is not in common use? While the word itself has not yet come into the vernacular, the idea it represents encompasses an urgent need, recognized by a growing number of people around the globe, to provide for a positive common future. This sustainability plan has come into being because many people in San Francisco are convinced that there is both a self-interested and an ethical obligation to live in a way that considers the rights to livelihood of future generations and of the other living beings on this planet.
Sustainability: A Definition
For simplicity, this planning process has used the UN?s definition of sustainability:
A sustainable society meets the needs of the present without sacrificing the ability of future -I generations to meet their own needs...... ^ ^ „ni,i i • ii -■ i i i ii ■■ ii ~n i —11 Certainly, there?s a good deal to be inferred here, particularly when it comes to social equity within human society and the rights of the earth?s non-human beings. Nonetheless, it was felt that there would be a pretty good consensus among San Franciscans about the direction in which it is important to move without getting hung up on the definitions details. The community process that developed this plan was focused on
1 _ _r o r 10/4/2007 l:3l PM 'Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/PIan/Intro/intro.htm
producing a plan for action, not debating the fine points of the definition.
Sustainability: An Explanation
Ignoring for the moment the ethics of the issue, there are some hard facts underlying the ability of civilization to perpetuate itself indefinitely into the future. For life as we know it to survive here:
1. The physical resources and systems that support life must be maintained:
• They can?t be used up so that there is nothing left; and
• They can?t be made unusable through degradation.
2. The health of plant and animal populations, whether they are considered as the human food chain or as a highly complex system that interacts with physical life-support systems (such as the atmosphere) in ways that aren?t well understood, must be insured.
3. A social structure must be created that will be capable of achieving the preceding two requirements. This means equitable distribution of resources; high quality of life in cities (which, by their density, are conducive to reduced environmental impact); education and affluence that lead to population control; social justice to eliminate the disruptive social upheaval that results from its lack; public education that gives people the tools to improve their interaction with the natural world, and a myriad other social considerations. Social systems without these attributes are unstable and cannot maintain a proper balance with the natural world.
0 nf TS 10/4/2007 1:31 PM 5 lan / Introduction http ://www. sustainable-city. org/P lan/Intro/intro .htm
Human Activity in the Closed System of Planet Earth
The natural systems of the planet have their own rules. Previous to human development, the biosphere evolved in such a way that all its parts were in balance, with waste products of one creature used as building blocks of another.
All human activity interacts with the natural systems of the planet. These activities may not have a negative effect on nature if the quantities of pollutants generated do not exceed the quantities that can be absorbed by natural systems. Habitat modification can be accommodated by animals and plants if it is slow and slight, allowing them to adjust or move elsewhere.
However, the volume of chemicals introduced into the environment today far exceeds the assimilation capabilities of natural systems. This has caused global warming, acidification of forests, and chronic human-health problems, among many other ills.
The reduction of numbers of non-human creatures and destruction of their habitats has exceeded the levels their populations can accommodate. This has resulted in Canada?s eastern seaboard fisheries closing, massive extinctions of species, and the reduction of genetic diversity in many surviving species.
If human activities even slightly exceed the levels acceptable to natural systems, those systems will degrade, sometimes slowly, sometimes — once a critical point has been reached — catastrophically. For almost all systems, the level of disruption that triggers catastrophic decline is unknown.
The obvious, inescapable result of many of our current life practices is the degradation of the systems that support them,
10/4/2007 1:31 PM Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
even if the effects aren?t immediately apparent.
Integrating Environmental, Economic and Social Concerns
A balanced and sustainable social system is not possible without addressing the economic and community-development needs of the City?s residents. Wealth in the economy will enable the City to make the long-term capital investments necessary to create and maintain an environmentally sensitive and esthetically pleasing place to live. An equitable distribution of the community?s wealth will enable all residents to participate in civic life and will maximize the City?s human resource potential. Sustained economic growth and expansion of markets for the City?s goods and services can be achieved in ways that are environmentally benign and socially just.
Society cannot be stable unless the basic human needs of all its members are met. Increased local self-reliance and equity, educational opportunity, and a guarantee of participation and accountability in civic discourse create a strong population of people who have the leisure to plan for their own and society?s best interests in the long run, rather than being forced to continually focus on the most short-term human needs. Social and cultural diversity, attention to environmental justice, and an understanding of the integral connections between humans and the natural world, will create a vibrant community base on which to build a successful long-term culture. Children and youth, representing the ?future generations? that form part of the core of sustainability?s definition, obviously must be better nurtured and prepared to be full participants in a future society where appropriate technology and civic participation play a central role.
1 10/4/2007 1:31 PM 'Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Steps Toward a Solution
This is all very theoretical, and it is often easy to be overwhelmed by the size of the problem. However, there is a clear connection between today?s everyday activities and the quality of life that will be possible for future generations. To construct a sustainable society, one that can provide for the physical and other needs of local residents while reversing the trends of increased pollution and environmental degradation now threatening the quality of urban life and the health of the earth?s other life forms, it is necessary to start changing the conventions of society. Sustainability can be divided into manageable sections, specific strategies can be proposed, and action can begin.
It is important to emphasize that the sustainability plan should be a means, not an end. The plan is only a tool for future action. However, to proceed in a sensible way to change long-standing environmental practices, it?s necessary to come up with some goals, actions, and objectives to be achieved. To begin to fulfill our responsibility to our own futures and that of our children is the aim of this sustainability plan.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. Lao Tsu
However, you must keep moving in approximately the same direction. Common Sense
The Plan?s Sponsors
The sustainability plan, now a City document, was drafted by a community collaboration in which City staff contributed on
10/4/2007 1:31 PM an / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
equal footing with members of other sectors of the community.
In 1993, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors established a Commission on San Francisco?s Environment, charged among other things with drafting and implementing a plan for San Francisco?s long-term environmental sustainability. Knowing they could not produce a plan that would actually be implemented without working with a broad cross-section of the community, several commissioners and others in the community formed Sustainable San Francisco: a collaboration of city agencies, including The City Planning Department, the Bureau of Energy Conservation, the Recreation and Park Department, and the Solid Waste Management Program; businesses; environmental organizations; elected officials; and concerned individuals, to develop a plan for the city?s future.
Nearly 400 people, from every walk of life, have volunteered their time to produce this plan. Sustainable San Francisco structured the drafting process so that people with expertise on the issues covered in the plan could produce a draft in a fairly short time-frame.
This has been an enormous undertaking, with thousands of hours of time committed to discussions, drafts, revisions, and meeting management. The hope was to produce a draft that was comprehensive enough to make a very solid foundation upon which a wider public could make suggestions for improvement. With this broad base of support, the finalized plan has the best chance of being effective.
Structure of the Plan
Volunteers spent the early part of 1995 researching sustainability plans from around the world and created a
s -for 10/4/2007 1:31 PM 3lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
format with the best chance of producing a plan that would really be implemented. This plan uses a ?general goals / specific objectives / actions? approach modeled on the European Community?s Agenda 21 Implementation Plan (for the United Kingdom) (Agenda 21 is the United Nations action strategy for sustainable development). A supplemental section of indicators, which give a measurable sense of whether the city is moving in the right direction, is based on work done by Sustainable Seattle.
For each topic, the plan sets out:
1. Broad, long-term social goals, meant to be very general, that speak to the basic human and ecosystem needs that are to be addressed.
2. Long-term objectives to achieve a sustainable society, describing the state of the City when it reaches sustainability.
3. Objectives for the year 2002, describing the proposed state of the City within five years. These objectives are quantified and meant to be feasible within a five-year time-frame. They include objectives for businesses and individual residents as well as for city programs.
4. Specific actions to be taken to achieve the objectives. They also include actions for all sectors: government, business, the non-profit community and individuals. Some are suggested for specific entities; most are not. These proposed actions are just that — proposals. The City of San Francisco has endorsed the goals and objectives of the plan, and will consider the specific actions in the future as more fleshed-out proposals on which the public have had further opportunity to comment are brought before the Board or the various City Commissions.
A separate section lists indicators for all topic areas. The indicators were designed to be numerical measurements that:
1 AM/Onm 1 -T1 T>\A Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
• Are obvious in what is being measured,
• Can be found at low cost given the current information-gathering machinery,
• Clearly indicate a trend toward or away from sustainability,
• Are understandable to everyone and easily presented in the media.
Topics Addressed in the Plan • Section I - Specific Environmental Topics
• Air Quality • Biodiversity • Energy, Climate Change, and Ozone Depletion • Food and Agriculture • Hazardous Materials • Human Health • Parks, Open Spaces and Streetscapes • Solid Waste • Transportation • Water and Wastewater • Section II - Topics that Span Many Issues
• Economy and Economic Development • Environmental Justice • Municipal Expenditures • Public Information and Education • Risk Management (Activities of High Environmental Risk)
Clearly, several topics are overlapping. While, for instance,
n . for in/4nnm 1 pm 3 lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
nearly every environmental topic section addresses public education, environmental justice, and the other topics from Section II, special groups were formed to focus exclusively on these topics, in order to ensure that they were addressed in depth.
Topics not Addressed in the Plan
Sustainability planning includes equal parts environmental, economic and community planning. The primary focus of this version of San Francisco?s sustainability plan is the environmental component, with a section on sustainable economic development, and one on the social issue of environmental justice. Over the coming months, the mayor?s office will work to broaden the economic and community aspects of the plan.
Even with a focus primarily on the environmental component, some limits had to be set to address an issue as broad as environmental sustainability. This plan addresses primarily the physical systems of the planet that often get short shrift from planners, and the social systems that have a direct impact on them.
Land-use is a vital issue that does not have a separate section; there are land-use implications to almost eveiy section?s proposed actions. It is addressed to the greatest extent in the Transportation, Economy and Economic Development, Food and Agriculture, and Parks sections.
Differing Structures in Different Sections
Anyone reading this plan straight through will notice that different sections have slightly different numbering systems and different ways of addressing their topic. The numbering systems follow the approach that each drafting group took to its proposals, and could not be made uniform without
1 CM A nc\m I'll T>AA an / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
violating the logical structures put forward. The numbering differences reflect the community collaboration nature of the planning process, and is irrelevant to the content of the sections.
What?s the Baseline?
In 1994, the Commission on San Francisco?s Environment published a baseline study of San Francisco?s current environmental situation, the Environmental State of the City Report. (As of this writing, it is out of print.) It provides a baseline for many of the issues covered in the plan. However, some of the topics listed above were not covered in the State of the City report. This sustainability planning effort has been evolving over time, and the topic list has expanded since the report was done. More research will be needed.
Baseline data for the indicators section has yet to be compiled.
The Plan Drafters
In order to produce a draft reasonably quickly, people were recruited for the various topics who already knew a lot about the issues. Volunteers came primarily from the environmental advocacy communities, city agencies, businesses, and the academic community. Members of the general public who contacted Sustainable San Francisco in time to attend all the meetings also participated. Everyone volunteered their time.
Although there was remarkable unanimity among the plan drafters about the basic attributes of a sustainable society, as would be expected in any exercise of this size and scope,
1 (\ia nc\c\n i .q l DM }lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
participants didn?t always agree on the best strategy for achieving it. Some feel strongly that the plan does not go far enough and contains too many compromises; others feel that it has gone too far and is unrealistic. That it is incomplete is beyond doubt. The plan would be incomplete at twice its length, and aspects of it will loose their timeliness as circumstances change every day after its publication. Nonetheless, while not aspiring to be a perfect treatise, the document can provide the rough game-plan that is necessary for a concerted effort to achieve a sustainable society, an effort that has been orchestrated by as broad a cross-section of the community as has been gathered in many years for a common purpose.
The only goal of producing this plan is to begin implementing it.
As large as the drafting group is, it represents only a tiny fraction of the public in San Francisco who must make the plan part of their personal agendas for it to succeed. This draft represents an invitation to all San Franciscans to think about a common future, and an opportunity to make a choice of the routes to that end.
Public Comment
Public comments were solicited in four day-long public hearings in June, 1996, and were accepted in writing throughout the summer. Comments were distributed to all participants in the drafting groups, who finalized this draft in September of 1996. Further opportunities for public comment occurred during consideration of this plan by the advisory Commission on San Francisco?s Environment (October, 1996), the new charter Commission on the Environment (November, 1996) and by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (July, 1997).
1 A I A 1.01 TVK K Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Endorsement of the Plan
The Sustainability Plan became policy of the City and County of San Francisco in July, 1997.
City Planning Department staff are currently working a several-year strategy to update and revise the City?s General Plan. Work will continue to appropriately combine the two documents.
Implementing the Plan
The plan is meant to be a blueprint, but because of its comprehensive nature, implementation of the various actions within it will take a good deal of (choose one or more) formal environmental review, advocacy before the commissions responsible for implementation of that area, legislation, regulation, finding new money, securing public support, and so forth.
A new Department of the Environmental, the first in San FranciscoVs history, was formed over the winter of 1996-7. One of the main responsibilities of this new agency will be to begin implementing the sustainability plan. This central focus within the structure of the city itself will go a long way toward ensuring that the plan is more than a community writing exercise.
The fact that a new agency has been created, however, should not minimize the importance of the work of the City?s older environmental agencies, many of which participated in the
1 o 10/4/2007 1:31 PM 3 lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
drafting process. They are already implementing some of the actions proposed here, and plans for more are in the works. Several of the City?s agencies are on the cutting edge of environmental program leadership, and it is hoped that the focus on sustainability issues provided by this plan will help secure them the resources and support they need to move forward even more aggressively on an agenda for San Francisco?s future, and will make them role models for agencies that have been slower to share this common vision.
A number of the plan?s actions are suggested for the private sector and individuals. Implementation of these actions will be essential for a fundamental change in the way San Francisco interacts with the natural world, and the various advocacy groups, city agencies, and activist individuals involved in drafting the plan will work with the environmental department to ensure that these changes move forward.
Many of the actions suggested in this plan will go nowhere without new sources of funding. It is up to the creativity of our City leadership, including business and the non-profit community, to find this funding through new money and more efficient use of current resources.
Changes of law and regulation must be addressed one at a time, and will take more concerted drafting and public discussion than has been possible in this preliminary drafting process. They will take time and persistence.
This plan is a first step in the long process of changing attitudes that separate humans from the rest of the natural world and ignore the long-term results of human behavior. It is a process of developing the wealth of the community, and strengthening the health and capacities of all the City?s residents. Through vision, persistence, and a plan of action, San Franciscans will be able to create a healthy society that respects the needs of all its members, and the needs of the natural systems of which they are a part.
Beryl Magilavy Director Department of the Environment
inM/?nn7 i pm Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
JL Acknowledgments
Acknowledgments for an effort as large as this one are by necessity woefully incomplete. We greatly appreciate the support and participation of everyone who donated their time to this effort.
This effort has been made possible by the financial support of the City and County of San Francisco, Bureau of Energy Conservation, Columbia Foundation, The Fred Gellert Foundation, San Francisco Foundation, and True North Foundation.
Sustainable San Francisco?s Web page was created and maintained as donations by Nick McBumey and Z Smith.
A special thank-you to Felicia Marcus, regional administrator of the US Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, for encouraging so many of her staff to participate in this process.
We cannot begin to thank all the individuals and institutions who have donated time and expertise to this community effort. However, we would like to specifically mention our steering-committee members (who planned out this effort), coordinators (who recruited the drafting-group participants, kept the meetings together, and often did most of the group?s drafting), facilitators (who were responsible for the meetings running smoothly and for work product being produced), and recorders (who took notes at the meetings and some of whom did most of the group?s drafting):
Jim Aldrich Maggie Johnson Laura Pappas Ann Bartz Warren Karlenzig Barbara Perman Brad Benson Paula Kehoe Maria Rea
1 a _ Xs ^ r mM/onrn i PM 5lan / Introduction http://www.sustainabIe-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Barbara Bemardini Kevin Kelley Arnold Robbins Carter Brooks Carla Jonathan Rubens Calvin Broomhead Kincaid-Y oshikawa Samantha Graham Charles Bill Kissinger Schoenfeld Jean Circiello Natalie Kraft Bob Silver Theresa Cole Vivian Leanio Daniel StandFree Tom Cooper KiviLeroux Howard Strassner Danielle Dowers Lori Lewis Shelley Stump Scott Edmondson Anne Marie Malley Becky Tuden Frank Filice Caroline McNeely Becky Tudisco Kevin Fox Janet Michaelson Holly Van Houten Lisa Gallina Diane Mintz Jim Vreeland Janis Gomes Ross Mirkarimi Isabel Wade Jennifer Greenfeld Page Nelson Hannah Ware Douglas Hall Carol Northrup Tes Welbom Janet Jacobs Paul Okamoto LianeYee Matt Orr Katie Zitterbart
in/zi/onm 1 pm Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Organizational Participants in the City Circles drafting the Sustainability Plan
(The City Circles also Included Many Individual San Francisco Residents)
Access Benefits
Acurex Environmental
Advocates for Parks
Algalita Marine Research Foundation
American College of Traditional Chinese Medicine
American Institute of Architects
American Lung Association
American Red Cross
Applied Development Economics
Architects, Designers & Planners for Social Responsibility
Asian Pacific Environmental Network
Bank of America
Bank of California
Barnes Clarke
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Bay Area Defense Conservation Action Team
Bay Conservation & Development Commission
Bay Keeper
Blue Cross of California
Blue Pearl Press
in/zmnn7 i -7i pm 'Ian / Introduction http://vww.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Brown Enterprises
Brown, Vence & Associates
Building Owners and Managers Association- San Francisco
CAL-OSHA Consultation
California Native Plant Society
California Academy of Science
California Energy Markets
California Food Policy Advocates
California Public Utilities Commission
California State Automobile Association
Center for Marine Conservation
Center for Urban Education about Sustainable Agriculture
Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice
Chamber of Commerce
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.
Chinatown Public Health Center, Health Center 4
Chinese Progressive Association
City College
City Electric
City of San Francisco Agriculture, Weights and Measurements Department
City of San Francisco Board of Supervisors
City of San Francisco City Attomey?s Office
City of San Francisco City Planning Department
m/A/onm 1 pm Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
City of San Francisco Commission on San Francisco?s Environment
City of San Francisco Controllers Office
City of San Francisco Department of Building Inspection
City of San Francisco Department of Parking & Traffic
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, AIDS Office
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, EMF (Electro-magnetic field) Program
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, Bureau of Environmental Health Management
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, Hazardous Waste Program
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, Tobacco Free Project
City of San Francisco Department of Public Health, Water Quality Control Program
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Architecture
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Construction Management
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Engineering
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Environmental Regulation and Management
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Bureau of Street Environmental Services
ln/Annm 1 pm ’Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/PIan/Intro/intro.htm
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Sewer Odor Hotline
City of San Francisco Department of Public Works, Water Pollution Control
City of San Francisco Department of Social Services
City of San Francisco District Attomey?s Office
(City of) San Francisco General Hospital
City of San Francisco Hetch Hetchy Water & Power
City of San Francisco Hetch Hetchy Water & Power, Bureau of Energy Conservation
City of San Francisco Mayor?s Office of Community Development
City of San Francisco Municipal Railway
City of San Francisco Office of the Chief Administrative Officer
City of San Francisco Office of the Chief Administrative Officer, City Employees Commute Assistance Program
(City of) San Francisco Public Library, Wallace Stegner Environmental Center
City of San Francisco Purchasing Department
City of San Francisco Redevelopment Agency
City of San Francisco Recreation & Parks Department
City of San Francisco Solid Waste Management Program
City of San Francisco Solid Waste Management Program, Recycling Program
City of San Francisco Solid Waste Management Program, Hazardous Waste Management Program
m/4/2007 1:31 PM Ian / Introduction http ://www.sustainab le-city. org/P lan/Intro/intro .htm
(City of) San Francisco Unified School District
(City of) San Francisco Water Department
Clean City Coalition
Coalition for Better Wastewater Solutions
Coalition for Urban Concerns
Cole Hardware
Communities for a Better Environment
Community and Environment
Community Environmental Relations
Compass Management & Leasing
Consumer Action?s Lead Poisoning Prevention Project
Eco-Development Associates
Embarcadero Farmer? s Market
Energy Investment, Inc.
Engineers Local 39
Environmental Building Inspections
Environmental Health Network
Environmental Law Community Law Clinic
EQE International
Exploratorium
Eyebright Interactive
Failure Analysis, Inc.
Franklin Environmental Products
Fresh Start Farms
10/4/2007 1:31 PM 3 lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Friends of Islais Creek
Friends of McLaren Park
Friends of Recreation & Parks
Friends of the New de Young
Friends of the Urban Forest
Garden Project
Global Action Plan
Golden Gate Audubon Society
Golden Gate Law School Legal Clinic
Golden Gate National Recreation Area
Golden Gate University
Goodwill
Gottfried Technologies, Inc.
Greenpeace
Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Council Recycling Center
Hastings Environmental Law Journal
Health Access
Hines Corporation
HKIT Architects
HMR Recycling
Indigo Development
Indoor Air Quality Inspections
Institute for Conservation & Health
Institute for Health and Healing: California Pacific Medical
10/4/2007 1:31 PM Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Center
Institute for Sustainable Policy Studies
Integrated Waste Management Consulting
Interaction Associates
Interior Concerns
International Society of Culture and Ecology
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan
Kaiser Permanente
Klienfelder
Ladson Associates
Land Bank, Inc.
Landmark Exchange Management
League of Conservation Voters
League of Women Voters
Living Library
Materials for Acquisition and Gifts in Kind (M.A.G.I.K.)
Materials for the Future Foundation
Macy?s
Marathon US Realties, Inc./Building Owner?s and Managers? Association
Marin Advocates for Transit
Marin Farmers Market
Market Street Development Association
Metro Maintenance
10/4/9.007 11 PM 3 lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Mission Neighborhood Health Center
National Electrical Contractors Association
Natural Resources Defense Council
Norcal Waste Systems
0?Rorke Public Relations and Advertising
Office of Senator Marks
Okamoto Saijo Architecture
Pacific Gas & Electric Company
Parkside Elementary School
Peninou French Laundry & Cleaners
Peninsula Electric Vehicle Association
People Organized to Demand Environmental Rights
Planet Drum Foundation
Port of San Francisco, Environment and Safety Section
Presidio Pacific Center
Redefining Progress
RIDES/Bay Area Commuters
San Francisco Apartment Association
San Francisco Automotive Service Council
San Francisco Bicycle Coalition
San Francisco Community Recyclers
San Francisco Conservation Corps
San Francisco County Transportation Authority
in/4/?nn7 1 pm ’Ian / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Intro/intro.htm
San Francisco League of Urban Gardeners
San Francisco League of Conservation Voters
San Francisco Planning and Urban Research (SPUR)
San Francisco Public Market Collaborative
San Francisco State University, Department of Epidemiology
San Francisco Tomorrow
Sanitary Fill Company
Save Energy Company
Scoma?s Restaurant
Sierra Club
Simon, Martin-Vegue, Winkelstein, Moris Architects
Snappy Lube
South Bayshore Development Corporation
South of Market Employment Center
South of Market Neighborhood Emergency Response Team
Southeast Alliance for Environmental Justice
Students for Environmental Action
Sunset Scavenger Company
Sustainable City
Technosis Consulting
The Gap, Inc.
Ti Couz Restaurant
TODCO
Trust for Public Land/Inner Sunset Parks Group
0/1 m/4/?nn7 i PM 3lan / Introduction http://www.sustainable-city.org/PIan/Intro/intro.htm
UC Berkeley
University of California at San Francisco, Office of Environmental Health and Safety
University of San Francisco, Department of Environmental Science
Urban Ecology
Urban Resource Systems
US Coast Guard, Marine Safety Office
US Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service
US Environmental Protection Agency - Region IX
Warner Insulation
Waste Resource Technologies
West Bay Filipino Multi-Services
West Bay Resources
Weyerhauser Paper Company
YMCA
top
1 0/4/7007 1-71 PM SANTA MONICA
SANTA MONICA SUSTAINABLE CITY PLAN Adopted September 20, 1994 Update Adopted February 11,2003 Revised October 24, 2006
Lonse.fve Today.
WeSL'i*\'e Tomon-ow,
Simla >lIntroduction We live in a time in which increased population growth, high levels of consumption and the desire to feed growing economies have created escalating demands on our resources - natural, human and social - on a local, regional, and global scale. These demands negatively impact the natural environment, our communities and the quality of our lives. In the face of these challenges, people worldwide have developed a growing concern for the environment and a desire to live sustainably.
In 1994 the Santa Monica City Council took steps to address these pressures locally by adopting the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program. The Sustainable City Program was initially proposed in 1992 by the City’s Task Force on the Environment to ensure that Santa Monica can continue to meet its current needs - environmental, economic and social - without compromising the ability of future generations to do the same. It is designed to help us as a community begin to think, plan and act more sustainably - to help us address the root causes of problems rather than the symptoms of those problems, and to provide criteria for evaluating the long-term rather than the short-term impacts of our decisions - in short, to help us think about the future when we are making decisions about the present.
The program includes goals and strategies, for the City government and all sectors of the community, to conserve and enhance our local resources, safeguard human health and the environment, maintain a healthy and diverse economy, and improve the livability and quality of life for all community members in Santa Monica. To check our progress toward meeting these goals, numerical indicators were developed and specific targets were set for the city to achieve by the year 2000 in four goal areas - 1) Resource Conservation, 2) Transportation, 3) Pollution Prevention and Public Health Protection, and 4) Community and Economic Development.
1 Following eleven years of implementation the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program has achieved much success. Many of the initial targets have been met or exceeded and Santa Monica is now recognized as worldwide role model for sustainability. However, we are not “there” yet. While we have made progress in the right direction, Santa Monica’s economy and the activities of its residents, businesses, institutions and visitors continue to negatively impact human health and the environment. And our community does not yet provide for the basic needs of all its members. Many challenges remain before Santa Monica can truly call itself a Sustainable City.
Sustainable City Update Process In reviewing the progress made since the 1994 adoption of the program, the Task Force on the Environment recognized the need to update and expand the Sustainable City goals and indicators to provide a more complete picture of community sustainability, and to develop new indicator targets for 2010. The Task Force felt that a comprehensive update would allow Santa Monica to build on its initial success and to better address the challenges to sustainability that remain.
The update process began in July 2001 with the formation of the Sustainable City Working Group - a large group of community stakeholders that included elected and appointed officials, City staff, and representatives of neighborhood organizations, schools, the business community and other community groups. The Working Group met numerous times over the course of 15 months to discuss the myriad issues related to the sustainability of the community. They evaluated the long-term sustainability of Santa Monica using a framework comprised of three forms of community capital that need to be managed with care in order to ensure that the community does not deteriorate. These include natural capital - the natural environment and natural resources of the community; human and social capital - the connectedness among people in the community and the education, skills and health of the population; and financial and built capital - manufactured goods, buildings, infrastructure, information resources, credit and debt.
The group proposed significant changes to the initial Sustainable City goals and indicators, and assisted with the creation of new indicator targets. Early drafts of the proposed update were revised based on a large amount of public input received during the summer of 2002.
The result of this process is this updated Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan, which represents the community’s vision of Santa Monica as a sustainable city. The change in name from Sustainable City Program to Sustainable City Plan was made to better reflect the long-term comprehensive nature of Santa Monica’s vision and the community’s efforts to become a sustainable city.
Sustainable City Plan Structure The Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan is founded on nine Guiding Principles that provide the basis from which effective and sustainable decisions can be made. These Guiding Principles have been revised and updated from the versions initially adopted in 1994.
2 The Plan has also been expanded to include eight Goal Areas: • Resource Conservation • Environmental and Public Health • Transportation • Economic Development • Open Space and Land Use • Housing • Community Education and Civic Participation • Human Dignity
Within each Goal Area are specific Goals which comprise the core of the community vision and represent what Santa Monica must achieve in order become a sustainable city.
For each goal specific Indicators have been developed to measure progress toward meeting the goals. Indicators are tools that help to determine the condition of a system, or the impact of a program, policy or action. When tracked over time indicators tell us if we are moving toward sustainability and provide us with useful information to assist with decision-making. Two types of indicators are tracked as part of the Sustainable City Plan. System level indicators measure the state, condition or pressures on a community wide basis for each respective goal area. Program level indicators measure the performance or effectiveness of specific programs, policies or actions taken by the City government or other stakeholders in the community.
Many of the goals and indicators measure more than one area of sustainability. A Goal / Indicator Matrix has been included to demonstrate the linkages between these areas. The amount of overlap shown by the matrix demonstrates the interconnectedness of our community and the far ranging impact of our decisions across environmental, economic and social boundaries.
Specific Targets have been created for many of the indicators. The targets represent aggressive yet achievable milestones for the community. Unless otherwise noted, the targets are for the year 2010 using 2000 as a baseline. For some indicators no specific numerical targets have been assigned. This was done where development of a numerical target was determined to be not feasible or where limits on data type and availability made it difficult to set a numerical target. In many of these cases a trend direction was substituted for a numerical target.
Terms throughout this document that may be unfamiliar to the general reader are defined in a Glossary. Words or phrases defined in the glossary are shown in italics the first time they appear in the document.
Leadership, Guidance and Implementation of the Sustainable City Plan The City’s Task Force on the Environment assumed the initial leadership role on behalf of the community for the Sustainable City Program. With the update and expansion of the Sustainable City Plan into new and more diverse goal areas, the Task Force on the Environment recommended the creation of a Sustainable City Task Force (SCTF) that
3 includes broad representation from community stakeholders with expertise in all of the SCP goal areas The Sustainable City Task Force was created in 2003 to provide leadership and guidance for implementation of the SCP.
At the City staff level, an interdepartmental Sustainability Advisory Team (SAT) was created to coordinate existing City activities so they are consistent with the Sustainable City goals and facilitate the future implementation of innovative programs and policies to achieve the goals. Members of this group serve as Sustainable City liaisons to their respective departments.
Between them, the SCTF and the SAT are responsible for developing a comprehensive implementation plan for meeting Sustainable City goals and targets, and for coordinating implementation, both interdepartmentally and between the City and community stakeholder groups.
Reporting Following the City Council adoption of the Sustainable City Plan, the SCTF , SAT and city staff will present Council with a baseline indicators report and a Sustainable City Implementation Plan. The indicators report will be updated and presented to Council annually. The report is intended to provide useful information to City Council, City staff and community members on progress being made toward meeting goals and targets of the Plan, and will provide a basis for decision-making about policies and actions that influence the City’s ability to meet the goals and targets.
4 Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1. The Concept of Sustainability Guides City Policy Santa Monica is committed to meeting its existing needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The long-term impacts of policy choices will be considered to ensure a sustainable legacy.
2. Protection, Preservation, and Restoration of the Natural Environment is a High Priority of the City Santa Monica is committed to protecting, preserving and restoring the natural environment. City decision-making will be guided by a mandate to maximize environmental benefits and reduce or eliminate negative environmental impacts. The City will lead by example and encourage other community stakeholders to make a similar commitment to the environment.
3. Environmental Quality, Economic Health and Social Equity are Mutually Dependent Sustainability requires that our collective decisions as a city allow our economy and community members to continue to thrive without destroying the natural environment upon which we all depend. A healthy environment is integral to the city’s long-term economic and societal interests. In achieving a healthy environment, we must ensure that inequitable burdens are not placed on any one geographic or socioeconomic sector of the population and that the benefits of a sustainable community are accessible to all members of the community.
4. All Decisions Have Implications to the Long-term Sustainability of Santa Monica The City will ensure that each of its policy decisions and programs are interconnected through the common bond of sustainability as expressed in these guiding principles. The policy and decision-making processes of the City will reflect our sustainability objectives. The City will lead by example and encourage other community stakeholders to use sustainability principles to guide their decisions and actions.
5. Community Awareness, Responsibility, Participation and Education are Key Elements of a Sustainable Community All community members, including individual citizens, community-based groups, businesses, schools and other institutions must be aware of their impacts on the environmental, economic and social health of Santa Monica, must take responsibility for - reducing or eliminating those impacts, and must take an active part in community efforts to address sustainability concerns. The City will therefore be a leader in the creation and sponsorship of education opportunities to support community awareness, responsibility and participation in cooperation with schools, colleges and other organizations in the community.
5 6. Santa Monica Recognizes Its Linkage with the Regional, National, and Global Community Local environmental, economic and social issues cannot be separated from their broader context. This relationship between local issues and regional, national and global issues will be recognized and acted upon in the City's programs and policies. The City's programs and policies should therefore be developed as models that can be emulated by other communities. The City will also act as a strong advocate for the development and implementation of model programs and innovative approaches by regional, state and federal government that embody the goals of sustainability.
7. Those Sustainability Issues Most Important to the Community Will be Addressed First, and the Most Cost-Effective Programs and Policies Will be Selected The financial and human resources which are available to the City are limited. The City and the community will reevaluate its priorities and its programs and policies annually to ensure that the best possible investments in the future are being made. The evaluation of a program's cost-effectiveness will be based on a complete analysis of the associated costs and benefits, including environmental and social costs and benefits.
8. The City is Committed to Procurement Decisions which Minimize Negative Environmental and Social Impacts The procurement of products and services by the City and Santa Monica residents, businesses and institutions results in environmental, social and economic impacts both in this country and in other areas of the world. The City will develop and abide by an environmentally and socially responsible procurement policy that emphasizes long-term values and will become a model for other public as well as private organizations. The City will advocate for and assist other local agencies, businesses and residents in adopting sustainable purchasing practices.
9. Cross-sector Partnerships Are Necessary to Achieve Sustainable Goals Threats to the long-term sustainability of Santa Monica are multi-sector in their causes and require multi-sector solutions. Partnerships among the City government, businesses, residents and all community stakeholders are necessary to achieve a sustainable community.
10. The Precautionary Principle Provides a Complimentary Framework to Help Guide City Decision-Makers in the Pursuit of Sustainability The Precautionary Principle requires a thorough exploration and careful analysis of a wide range of alternatives, and a full cost accounting beyond short-term and monetary transaction costs. Based on the best available science, the Precautionary Principle requires the selection of alternatives that present the least potential threat to human health and the City’s natural systems. Where threats of serious or irreversible damage to people or nature exist, lack of full scientific certainty about cause and effect shall not be viewed as sufficient reason for the City to not adopt mitigating measures to prevent the degradation of the environment or protect the health of its citizens. Public participation and an open and transparent decision making process are critical to finding and selecting alternatives.
6 Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan GOALS, INDICATORS AND TARGETS
RESOURCE CONSERVATION
Goals
Across all segments of the community.
1. Significantly decrease overall community consumption, specifically the consumption of non-local, non-renewable, non-recyclable and non-recycled materials, water, and energy and fuels. The City should take a leadership role in encouraging sustainable procurement, extended producer responsibility and should explore innovative strategies to become a zero waste city.
2. Within renewable limits, encourage the use of local, non-polluting, renewable and recycled resources (water, energy - wind, solar and geothermal - and material resources)
Indicators - System Level Targets
Solid waste generation Generation: Do not exceed year 2000 ■ Total citywide generation (also report per levels by 2010 capita and by sector) ■ Amount landfilled Diversion: Increase amount diverted to ■ Amount diverted (recycled, composted, 70% of total by 2010 etc) from landfill
Water use ■ Total citywide use (also report per capita Reduce overall water use by 20% by 2010. and by sector) Of the total water used, non-potable water ■ Percent local vs. imported use should be maximized ■ Potable vs. non-potable Increase percentage of locally-obtained potable water to 70% of total by 2010 ...... ' - Energy use .. ■ Total city wide use (also report per capita (Target pending completion of and by sector) Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy in 2003)
7 Renewable Energy use Percent of city wide energy use from By 2010 25% of all electricity use in Santa renewable and more efficient sources Monica should come from renewable ■ Total renewable energy use (also report sources by sector) By 2010 1% of all electricity use should ■ Total energy use from clean distributed come from clean distributed generation generation sources in SM (also report by sources in Santa Monica sector)
Greenhouse Gas Emissions ■ Total citywide emissions (also report per At least 30% below 1990 levels by 2015 capita, by source and by sector) for City Operations
At least 15% below 1990 levels by 2015 citywide
Ecological Footprint for Santa Monica downward trend
Indicator of Sustainable Procurement Indicator and target to be developed by 2007
Indicators - Program Level Targets
“Green” Construction 100% of all buildings* greater than 10,000 Total number of LEED™ certified square feet eligible for LEED™ buildings in Santa Monica as a percent of certification constructed in Santa Monica new construction in the year 2010 shall achieve LEED™ certification or its equivalent. Of these, 20% should attain LEED™ Silver, 10% LEED™ Gold and 2% LEED™ Platinum certification or equivalent. In addition, 50% of all new, eligible buildings* less than 10,000 square feet constructed in 2010 shall achieve LEED™ certification or its equivalent.
* including all municipal construction
8 ENVIRONMENTAL AND PUBLIC HEALTH
Goals
1. Protect and enhance environmental health and public health by minimizing and where possible eliminating: • The use of hazardous or toxic materials, in particular POPs (persistent organic pollutants) and PBTs (persistent bioaccumulative & toxic chemicals), by residents, businesses and City operations; • The levels of pollutants entering the air, soil and water; and • The risks that environmental problems pose to human and ecological health.
2. Ensure that no one geographic or socioeconomic group in the City is being unfairly impacted by environmental pollution.
3. Increase consumption of fresh, locally produced, organic produce to promote public health and to minimize resource consumption and negative environmental impacts.
Indicators - System Level Targets
Santa Monica Bay 0 warnings and closures at any Santa Number of days Santa Monica beaches are Monica beach location during dry weather posted with health warnings or closed. months Measure for both: ■ Dry weather months (April -October) No more than 3 days with warnings or ■ Wet weather months (November-March) closures at any Santa Monica beach location on non-rainy days during wet weather months (a target for rainy days during these months will be determined in 2003) Wastewater (sewage) generation ■ Total citywide generation (also report per Reduce wastewater flows 15% below 2000 capita, and by sector) levels by 2010
Vehicle miles traveled ■ Total Downward trend ■ Local vs. drive-through (no target for local vs. drive through) Air Quality By 2007 all significant emissions sources Percent and demographic profile of Santa in Santa Monica should be identified Monica residents who live within a 'A mile radius of significant emissions sources
9 Indicators - Program Level Targets
Residential household hazardous waste ■ Total volume of household hazardous 50% cumulative participation rate at the waste (HHW) collected from Santa City’s HHW collection facility by S.M. Monica residents households by 2010 (i.e. by 2010 50% of ■ Number and Percent of Santa Monica all households in the city will have households using the City’s HHW delivered HHW to the facility since 2000) collection facility ■ Cumulative number and percent of Santa Monica households using the City’s HHW collection facility since 2000 City purchases of hazardous materials Volume and toxicity of hazardous material (Target to be developed by City staff by (including POP & PBT containing 2007) materials) purchased by the City Toxic air contaminant (TAC) releases ■ Number of facilities in SM permitted to Complete feasibility study for data release TACs availability and collection by 2007 ■ Total volume of TACs emitted in SM annually Urban Runoff Reduction Percent of permeable land area in the City Upward trend Fresh, Local, Organic Produce Percent of fresh, locally-produced, organic Annual increase over baseline produce that is served at City facilities and other Santa Monica institutions (including hospitals, schools, Santa Monica College, and City-sponsored food programs) Organic Produce - Farmers Markets Total annual produce sales at Santa Monica Annual increase in percent of organically farmers’ markets grown and low-chemical produce sales ■ Percent organically grown over baseline ■ Percent grown using low-chemical methods ■ Percent conventionally grown Restaurant produce purchases Percent of Santa Monica restaurants that Annual increase over baseline purchase ingredients at Santa Monica farmers’ markets Food choices Percent of Santa Monica residents who Annual increase over baseline report that vegetable-based protein is the primary protein source for at least half of their meals
10 TRANSPORTATION
Goals 1. Create a multi-modal transportation system that minimizes and, where possible, eliminates pollution and motor vehicle congestion while ensuring safe mobility and access for all without compromising our ability to protect public health and safety.
2. Facilitate a reduction in automobile dependency in favor of affordable alternative, sustainable modes of travel.
Indicators - System Level Targets
Modal split An upward trend in the use of sustainable ■ Number of trips by type, city wide (bus, bike, pedestrian, rail) modes of ■ Average vehicle ridership (A VR) of transportation Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees AVR of 1.5 by 2010 for Santa Monica businesses with more than 50 employees Residential use of sustainable transportation options Upward trend Percent of residents who have intentionally not used their car but have instead used a sustainable mode of transportation in the past month
Sufficiency of transportation options Percent of residents who perceive that the Upward trend available sustainable modes of transportation in Santa Monica meet their needs
Bicycle lanes and paths ■ Percent of total miles of city arterial 35% by 2010 streets with bike lanes ■ Total miles of bike paths in Santa No net decrease Monica
Vehicle ownership Average number of vehicles per person of 10% reduction in the average number of driving age in Santa Monica vehicles per person by 2010 ■ total number of vehicles per person ■ percent of total that are qualified low Upward trend in % of qualified low emission / alternative fuel vehicles emission / alternative fuel vehicles
11 Indicators - Program Level Targets
Bus ridership ■ Annual ridership on Santa Monica Upward trend Big Blue Bus (BBB) ■ Percent of residents who have ridden Upward trend the BBB in the past year ■ Percent of residents who have ridden Upward trend the Tide shuttle in the past year ■ Annual ridership on MTA routes Upward trend . originating in Santa Monica
Alternative fueled vehicles Percent of the City’s non-emergency fleet (City staff to develop target by 2007) vehicles using alternative fuels ■ Public works vehicles ■ BBB vehicles ■ Non emergency police and fire vehicles
Traffic congestion ■ Number of signalized intersections with Downward trend unacceptable motor vehicle congestion (.LOS D, E or F) during peak hours ■ Level of service (LOS) for sustainable Upward trend modes of transportation at impacted intersections ■ Locally classified streets that exceed Downward trend City thresholds for traffic levels
Pedestrian and bicycle safety Number of bicycle and pedestrian Downward trend collisions involving motor vehicles
Traffic impacts to emergency response Average emergency response times for No upward trend public safety vehicles ■ Police ■ Fire
12 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Goals
1. Nurture a diverse, stable, local economy that supports basic needs of all segments of the community.
2. Businesses, organizations and local government agencies within Santa Monica continue to increase the efficiency of their use of resources through the adoption of sustainable business practices. The City takes a leadership role by developing a plan by 2005 to increase the adoption of sustainable practices by Santa Monica businesses and encouraging sustainable businesses to locate in Santa Monica.
Indicators - System Level Tareets
Economic Diversity Percent of total economic activity/output No single sector shall be greater than 25% by business sector (expressed as a percent of total economic activity/output; and the of total wages) top three sectors shall not be greater than 50% of total economic activity/output.
Business reinvestment in the community Annual increase in reinvestment by (indicator to be developed by 2007) businesses
Jobs / Housing Balance ■ Ratio of the number of jobs in Santa Ratio should approach 1 Monica to the amount of housing ■ Percent of Santa Monica residents Increasing trend employed in Santa Monica
Cost of Living Santa Monica household incomes in (no target) relation to Santa Monica cost of living index (SMCOLI)
Quality Job Creation Number of net new jobs created in Santa Increasing trend Monica that pay greater than or equal to the SMCOLI as a percent of total new jobs created
13 Income Disparity ■ Percent of Santa Monica households (no target) earning less than $25,000/year ■ Percent of households earning more than $ 100,000/year
Resource efficiency of local businesses ■ Ratio of energy use to total economic Downward trend activity by business sector ■ Ratio of total water use to total Downward trend economic activity by business sector
Indicators - Program Level Targets
Local employment of City staff ■ Percent of City employees who live in (no target) SM ■ Distance City employees travel to work
14 OPEN SPACE AND LAND USE Goals
1. Develop and maintain a sufficient open space system so that it is diverse in uses and opportunities and includes natural function/wildlife habitat as well as passive and active recreation with an equitable distribution of parks, trees and pathways throughout the community.
2. Implement land use and transportation planning and policies to create compact, mixed-use projects, forming urban villages designed to maximize affordable housing and encourage walking, bicycling and the use of existing and future public transit systems.
3. Residents recognize that they share the local ecosystem with other living things that warrant respect and responsible stewardship.
Indicators - System Level Targets
Open Space ■ Number of acres of public open space Upward trend by type (including beaches, parks, public gathering places, gardens, and other public lands utilized as open space) ■ Percent of open space that is Upward trend permeable Trees ■ Percent of tree canopy coverage by Upward trend neighborhood ■ Percent of newly planted and total Target to be developed by 2007 trees that meet defined sustainability criteria* *to be developed by 2007 Parks - Accessibility Percent of households and population Upward trend in park accessibility for within 14 and !4 mile of a park by Santa Monica residents neighborhood Land Use and Development Percent of residential, mixed-use projects Upward trend that are within !4 mile of transit nodes and are otherwise consistent with Sustainable City Program goals Regionally Appropriate Vegetation Percent of new or replaced, non-turf, Target to be developed in 2007 public landscaped area and non- recreational turf area planted with regionally appropriate plants
15 HOUSING
Goals
1. Achieve and maintain a mix of affordable, livable and green housing types throughout the city for people of all socio-economic / cultural / household groups (including seniors, families, singles, and disabled).
Indicators - System Level Targets
Availability of Affordable Housing Percent of all existing and new housing in (Target to be developed by City staff in Santa Monica affordable to very low, low, 2008 with the next update of the City’s moderate, and upper income households Housing Element)
Distribution of Affordable Housing Distribution of low income housing by (no target) neighborhood
Indicators - Program Level Targets
Affordable Housing for Special Needs Groups Number of new or rehabilitated affordable Upward trend housing units for families, seniors, the disabled and other special needs groups as a percentage of all new or rehabilitated affordable housing development
Production of “Livable” Housing ■ Number of new housing units in non- Upward trend residential zone districts as a percentage of the total new housing ■ Percent of new units within 'A mile of: Upward trend • transit stop • open space • grocery store
Production of “Green” Housing Percent of new and substantially- Upward trend rehabilitated housing that complies with Green Building Ordinance #1995 as a percentage of the total new and rehabilitated housing
16 COMMUNITY EDUCATION AND CIVIC PARTICIPATION
Goals
1. Community members of all ages participate actively and effectively in civic affairs and community improvement efforts.
2. Community members of all ages understand the basic principles of sustainability and use them to guide their decisions and actions - both personal and collective.
Indicators - System Level Targets
Voter Participation Percent of registered Santa Monica voters Increase SM voter participation to 50% in who vote in scheduled elections. Compare off year elections by 2010 to voter participation rates at the regional and national levels.
Participation in Civic Affairs Percent of Santa Monica residents who Upward trend have attended a city-sponsored meeting of any kind in the past year, including City Council meetings, City Commission meetings, or special-topic workshops
Empowerment Percent of Santa Monica residents who feel Upward trend that they have the opportunity to voice their concerns in the city on major community decisions that affect their lives
Community Involvement Percent of Santa Monica residents who Upward trend attend community events such as the Santa Monica Festival, a summer concert at the Pier, an event at Virginia Avenue Park, a neighborhood block party, a weekly farmers’ market
Volunteering Percent of Santa Monica residents Upward trend volunteering and total hours volunteered in selected City funded public benefit programs
17 Participation in Neighborhood Organizations Upward trend Percent of Santa Monica residents that are active members in recognized neighborhood organizations (by neighborhood)
Sustainable Community Involvement Percent of Santa Monica residents who are - 25% by 2010 aware of the Ecological Footprint for Santa Monica and understand their contribution to it
Sustainable Community Involvement Percent of Santa Monica residents who Upward trend have an understanding of how each Sustainable City goal area is a component of a sustainable community and the extent to which this affects their decisions
18 HUMAN DIGNITY
Goals
Santa Monica will be a community in which:
1. All its members are able to meet their basic needs and are empowered to enhance the quality of their lives; and
2. There is access among community members to housing, health services, education, economic opportunity, and cultural and recreational resources; and
3. There is respect for and appreciation of the value added to the community by differences among its members in race, religion, gender, age, economic status, sexual orientation, disabilities, immigration status and other special needs.
Indicators - System Level Targets
Basic Needs - Shelter ■ Number of homeless living in Santa (no target) Monica ■ Percent of Santa Monica homeless Upward trend population served by the city shelter that transition to permanent housing
Basic Needs - Health Care ■ Percent of residents with health Upward trend insurance ■ Capacity of local health service Upward trend providers to meet the basic health care needs of Santa Monica residents
Basic Needs - Economic Opportunity Percent of Santa Monica residents who Downward trend work more than 40 hours per week in order to meet their basic needs
Basic Needs - Public Safety Crime rate per capita - report by Downward trend neighborhood/reporting district, and by type (property, violent, hate)
19 Residents’ perception of safety Percent of residents who feel that Santa Upward trend Monica is a safe place to live and work
Incidents of Abuse ■ Number of incidents of abuse Downward trend (domestic, child, and elder abuse) ■ Percent of cases prosecuted Upward trend
Incidents of Discrimination ■ Number of reports regarding Downward trend Employment and housing discrimination ■ Number of cases prosecuted Upward trend
Education/Y outh ■ SMMUSD student drop-out rates Downward trend ■ SMMUSD student suspension rates Downward trend * SMMUSD student substance abuse Downward trend rates ■ Percent of SMMUSD students who Upward trend feel safe at school ■ Percent of SMMUSD students that Upward trend enroll in college or university ■ SMMUSD students enrolled in Upward trend advanced placement courses and percent that receive passing grades
Empowerment Women, minorities and people with Upward trend disabilities in leadership positions ■ business ■ local government ■ non-profit organizations Ability to Meet Basic Needs Percent of residents who perceive that Downward trend in all areas needs are not being met for: ■ Individual and family counseling ■ Emergency food, clothing, shelter ■ Employment services and job training ■ Recreation and services for youth ■ Health care ■ Substance abuse treatment / prevention ■ Affordable housing ■ Seniors and people with disabilities ■ Transportation and mobility
20 Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan GOAL / INDICATOR MATRIX
The matrix below lists all of the Sustainable City indicators down the left side and the eight Sustainable City goal areas across the top. For each indicator dots are shown for every goal area that the indicator provides information about. While each indicator was developed to measure progress toward meeting goals in one goal area, this matrix shows that many of the indicators measure the conditions, impacts or effectiveness of our actions in several goal areas. This demonstrates the linkages between each of the goal areas and the impact of our decisions across environmental, economic and social boundaries.______Resource Public Environmental Transportation Development Economic Land Conservation Open Housing Education Civic Community Human
Use Participation Space
Health
Dignity
and
and
and
Resource Conservation Indicators Solid waste generation • • Water use • • • • Energy use • • • • • Renewable energy use • • • • Greenhouse gas emissions • • • • • • Ecological Footprint for Santa Monica • • • • • • Indicator of sustainable procurement • • • “Green” construction • • • • Environmental and Public Health Indicators Santa Monica Bay - beach closures • • Wastewater (sewage) generation • • • Vehicle miles traveled • • • • • Air quality • • • • Residential household hazardous waste • City purchases of hazardous materials • Toxic air contaminant releases • Urban runoff reduction • • • • Fresh, local, organic produce • • • Organic produce - Farmer’s markets • • • Restaurant produce purchases • • • Food choices • • • • Transportation Indicators Modal split • • • • Residential use of sustainable trans. options • • • • • Sufficiency of transportation options • Bicycle lanes and paths • • Vehicle ownership • • • •
21 • • • • • • • • • Human Dignity •
Community • • • • • • • Education and • Civic Participation • • • • • • • • • • • Housing •
Open Space and • • • • • • • • • • Land Use • Economic • • • • • • • • • • • • • Development • • • • • • • • • • • • Transportation • Environmental and • • • • • • • Public Health • tors Resource • • • • • • • Conservation • • Indical
22 Participation groups 1 2
fleet
needs Civic
organizations response
Indicators
City community
businesses
- staff
Indicators
housing housing
and
the
Use
involvement involvement housing special
local safety
in
vegetation
housing
” City
affairs ”
for of of
vehicles emergency
Land
Indicators
to civic neighborhood balance affordable livable bicycle affordable
Development Shelter “ “green
in in and Education -
of
of involvement
Creation
community community
fueled
appropriate
of of housing
and
diversity
and
Development efficiency reinvestment
Indicators
Job
disparity living impacts Dignity congestion
Housing employment employment participation Space - Accessibility
Use Space
of Needs
/
ridership
Traffic Traffic Bus Economic Business Jobs Cost Quality Alternative Pedestrian Resource Local Open Trees Income Land Parks Regionally Availability Distribution Sustainable Sustainable Affordable Production Production Voter Community Volunteering Participation Basic Empowerment Participation Economic Open Community Housing Human • • • Human Dignity • • • • • •
Community Education and Civic Participation • Housing •
Open Space and • Land Use Economic • Development • • • Transportation Environmental and Public Health Resource Conservation 23 .. .
Opportunity safety
Care Safety of
needs
basic
Health Economic Public
- - - abuse discrimination
Youth
perception /
meet
’ of of
to
Needs Needs Needs
Basic Basic Basic Residents Incidents Incidents Education Empowerment Ability Santa Monica Sustainable City Plan GLOSSARY
active recreation: recreational opportunities including sports and other activities that typically require playing fields, facilities or equipment.
affordable housing: any housing that is deed restricted for, and occupied by, households earning less than 120% of the Los Angeles County median family income.
alternative fuel vehicles: vehicles that operate on fuels other than gasoline or diesel. Alternative fuel vehicles include those that operate using compressed natural gas (CNG), liquid natural gas (LNG), propane, electricity, hybrid of gasoline and electricity, and hydrogen.
alternative (and/or sustainable) modes of transportation: for the purpose of this document alternative (and/or sustainable) modes of transportation include transportation by public transit (bus or rail), bicycle, walking, or alternative fuel vehicles.
average vehicle ridership (AVR): a measurement of vehicle occupancy indicating the average number of persons traveling in a measured number of vehicles. AVR is an indicator of the effectiveness of and participation in ridesharing programs
bike lane/path/route: As defined in the City’s Bicycle Master Plan, a bike lane is a signed and striped lane along a roadway for use by bicycles. Other types of bicycle ways in the city are bike paths and bike routes. A bike path is a dedicated bicycle way that completely separates bicycles from motor vehicles. Bike routes are signed routes which bicyclists share with motor vehicles. Bike routes differ from bike lanes in that routes do not include any striping on the roadway - they are only designated by signage.
community: for the purpose of this document, whenever the term community is used it is meant to include the following groups: individuals of all ages, races and abilities; organizations; government agencies; businesses; employers; employees; residents; property owners; renters; visitors; schools; students; public and private service agencies; faith communities; and local media. companion animals: animals kept by residents in their homes, yards, or other properties, for purposes of providing mutual companionship. clean distributed generation: distributed generation refers to generation of electricity at or near the location where that electricity will be used. This differs from traditional electricity generation, which occurs at centralized power plants and is distributed over hundreds of miles to millions of customers through the electricity “grid”. For the purpose of this document, clean distributed generation (in order of preferred technology type) refers to 1) renewable distributed generation, including electricity generated by solar photovoltaic systems, fuel cells (powered by hydrogen generated from solar, wind, or
24 other non-fossil fuel, renewable energy technologies), and small wind generators; 2) electricity generated by high efficiency (i.e., meeting or exceeding efficiency of large natural gas power plants) natural gas generators and fuel cells using hydrogen generated through a natural gas catalyst; and 3) medium scale, high-efficiency co-generation systems (powered by natural gas) serving many properties located within close proximity of each other. Clean distributed generation does not include electricity generated by gasoline or diesel powered generators. diversion: in reference to solid waste, diversion refers to all waste that is kept out of a landfill through recycling, beneficial reuse, composting, or other means. ecological footprint: The ecological footprint is a tool to help measure human impacts on local and global ecosystems. The ecological footprint of a given population (household, community, country) is the total area of ecologically productive land and water used exclusively to produce all the resources (including food, fuel, and fiber) consumed and to assimilate all the wastes generated by that population. Since we use resources from all over the world and affect far away places with our wastes, the footprint is a sum of these ecological areas — wherever that land and water may be on the planet. Thus the ecological footprint of Santa Monica is that area of productive land inside and outside its borders that is appropriated for its resource consumption or waste assimilation. There is a finite area of ecologically productive land and water on the Earth, which must be shared among 6 billion people as well as all of the planet’s other species. The amount of ecologically productive land available globally at today’s current population is approximately 5 acres per person. The ecological footprint of the average American is approximately 25 acres, far exceeding the “fair earthshare”. The ecological footprint is an excellent tool for illustrating the magnitude of the change necessary for our world to become sustainable. It is also useful for evaluating and comparing the total environmental impact of specific activities and in this way, helpful for decision-making. environmentally preferable: a product, service, activity or process that has a lesser or reduced effect on human health and the environment when compared to other products, services, activities or processes that serve the same purpose. extended producer responsibility: responsibility of producers or manufacturers across the entire life cycle of their products, particularly to the post-consumer stage (after products are discarded and become waste). Typically once a product is sold to a - consumer the responsibility of disposing of that product becomes the responsibility of the consumer. Extended producer responsibility requires that the producer of the product maintain responsibility for recycling or proper disposal of the product once it has surpassed its useful life. green: for the purpose of this document, green is used as shorthand to refer to any environmentally preferable product, activity, service or process.
25 green housing: housing that meets or exceeds the requirements of the City's Green Building Design and Construction Guidelines. greenhouse gas (GHG): greenhouse gases are natural and manmade gases in the earth’s atmosphere that allow incoming solar radiation to pass through the atmosphere and warm the earth but trap radiant heat given off by the earth. The radiant heat absorbed by these gases heats the atmosphere. This is a natural process known as the “greenhouse effect” that keeps the earth habitable. The four primary greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). Since the onset of the industrial period, human activities have lead to sharp increases in the levels of GHGs in the atmosphere, enhancing the greenhouse effect and contributing to rising global temperatures. hazardous material: a material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment. hazardous waste: a waste or combination of wastes which, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical or infectious characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in serious, irreversible, or incapacitating reversible illness or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health, safety, welfare or to the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, used or disposed of, or otherwise managed. household hazardous waste (HHW): hazardous waste that is generated by residents through the use of hazardous or potentially hazardous products in the home. Typical household hazardous wastes include spent batteries, cleaning products, pesticides, paints and solvents.
HHW collection facility: a permanent facility maintained by the City for the collection and proper recycling or disposal of hazardous waste generated by Santa Monica residents and small quantities of hazardous waste generated by Santa Monica businesses. This is provided as a free service to Santa Monica residents. The facility is located at 2500 Michigan Avenue. Call (310) 458-8255 for more information.
Income levels: With respect to the indicators of housing affordability the following are definitions of the income levels mentioned in this document: Very low income: annual earnings between 0 and 50% of the Los Angeles County Median Family income (MFI) Low income: annual earnings between 51 and 80% MFI Moderate income: annual earnings between 81 and 120% MFI Upper income: annual earnings above 120% MFI
26 LEEDtm certification (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design): A rating system developed by the United States Green Building Council (USGBC) that sets definitive standards for what constitutes a green or environmentally preferable building. The certification system is self-assessing and is designed for rating new and existing commercial, institutional, and high-rise residential buildings. It evaluates environmental performance of the entire building over the building's life cycle. LEED certifications are awarded at various levels (certified, silver, gold, and platinum) according to a point-based scoring system.
level of service (LOS) : a concept used to describe street intersection operating conditions. It is based on average vehicle delay measurements and/or the volume/capacity ratio of the intersection in question. LOS grades range from A to F with A representing excellent (free-flow) conditions and F representing extreme traffic congestion. For the purpose of this document, LOS grade D represents marginally acceptable levels of traffic and grades E and F represent unacceptable levels. A definition of level of service for sustainable modes of transportation will be developed as part of the update of the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan scheduled for adoption in 2003.
livable housing: housing that is within close proximity to neighborhood serving commercial areas, transit stops and community resources such as parks and open space.
local: the term local has different definitions depending upon the context in which it is used in this document. These are described below: 1) Where local is used in reference to the economy (“local economy” or “local businesses”) it refers to Santa Monica’s economy or businesses located within Santa Monica. 2) Local government agencies refer to any agencies or departments of the Santa Monica city government. 3) Where local refers to food production (“locally produced”) it refers to food grown in the southern half of the state of California 4) Where local refers to resources, it refers to resources obtained or impacted within a 500-mile radius of Santa Monica.
mixed-use projects: developments which incorporate both residential and commercial uses.
modal split: the split in use of various transportation modes including: single passenger vehicles; carpools of more than one passenger; bus; rail; bicycle; and pedestrian modes.
multi-modal transportation system: a transportation system that includes affordable, alternative modes of transportation such as public transit, and infrastructure and access for alternative fueled vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians, in addition to standard vehicular transportation.
27 native species: plant or animal species native to the southern California bioregion.
natural function/wildlife habitat: geographic areas that provide life-supportive functions associated with atmospheric, biological, biochemical and hydrological processes that keep our air and water clean, process waste and support survival and reproduction of plant and animal life. non-renewable resources: natural resources that have a finite availability worldwide. Examples include coal, oil and other petroleum products. open space: for the purpose of this document open space refers to all land uses defined as open space in the Open Space Element of the City of Santa Monica’s General Plan. These include beaches, parks, public gathering places, usable green open space in street medians, scenic highway corridors, gardens, and other publicly accessible land. passive recreation: recreational opportunities that occur in a natural setting which require minimal development or facilities, and the importance of the environment or setting for the activities is greater than in developed or active recreation settings.
PBTs (persistent bioaccumulative toxics): chemicals that are toxic, persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in food chains and, thus, pose risks to human health and the environment. The term PBT is used primarily by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as part of its preparation of a list of such chemicals that will receive special regulatory emphasis in the United States.
POPs (persistent organic pollutants): Organic chemical substances that persist in the environment and bioaccumulate in food chains and pose a risk of causing adverse effects to human health and the environment. The term POPs is commonly used in the context of the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and are subject to international negotiations aiming toward their global elimination. Note: The primary difference between the PBTs and POPs is that the list of PBTs includes non-organic toxins that are not included on the list of POPs. potable: suitable for drinking qualified low emission / alternative fuel vehicles: Vehicles recognized by the State of California as being low emission and/or alternative fuel vehicles. These vehicles exceed the basic standards all new vehicles must meet to be sold in California and include low emission vehicles (LEVs), ultra low emission vehicles (ULEVs), super ultra low emission vehicles (SULEVs) and zero emission vehicles (ZEVs). Additional information about these vehicle designations can be found on the internet at http ://www. arb. ca.gov/msprog/ccbg/ccbg.htm rainy day: for the purpose of this document, a rainy day is any day with recorded precipitation greater than .1” in 24 hours.
28 recognized neighborhood organization: Tax-exempt, non-profit organization representing a commonly recognized neighborhood in Santa Monica.
regionally appropriate vegetation: plant and tree species that are environmentally appropriate for the Southern California region and that do not negatively impact native plants or animals. A specific list of regionally appropriate vegetation for Santa Monica will be developed in 2003.
rehabilitated housing: rehabilitation that increases by 25% or more the after-rehab value of the property; or a rehabilitation in which at least fifty percent of exterior walls have been removed or relocated for any duration of time.
renewable limits: harvesting resources within renewable limits refers to harvesting a renewable resource at a rate that is lower than the rate the resource can replace itself (e.g. catching fish at a rate that will allow the fish population to be maintained over time. If too many fish are caught, exceeding renewable limits, the fish population will decline). The terms renewable limits and sustainable limits are synonymous.
renewable resources: natural resources that have an unlimited supply (such as solar radiation) or that can be renewed indefinitely if ecosystem health is maintained (e.g. fisheries or forests).
routine: for the purpose of this document, routine, when describing generation of hazardous waste by City government operations, refers to regular and consistent operational practices such as vehicle maintenance, regular cleaning procedures, etc. Non routine refers to hazardous waste generated during unanticipated events such as chemical spills or leaks.
Santa Monica cost of living index (SMCOLI): Los Angeles County cost of living for a two-person household adjusted for the cost of housing in Santa Monica. SMCOLI for 2000 is $21,800 (LA County cost of living) x 1.46 = $31,828. The 1.46 multiplication factor refers to the relative cost of housing in Santa Monica as compared to the average for Los Angeles County, based on the Housing Authority Survey of Rents. significant emissions source: sources of toxic air contaminants and other air emissions that pose a threat to human health and the environment. A specific list of significant emission sources within Santa Monica will be developed in the course of tracking this indicator.
SMMUSD: Santa Monica-Malibu Unified School District special needs groups: with respect to affordable housing, special needs groups refers to the elderly, disabled persons, large families, female-headed families, and the homeless.
29 sustainable: sustainable can mean slightly different things depending on the context in which it is used. For the purpose of this document, the following definitions are used: sustainable (in reference to resource use): a method of harvesting or using a resource so that resource is not depleted or permanently damaged. sustainable business: for the purpose of this document, sustainable business refers to a business that provides goods and services, and/or has incorporated into its daily operations practices that result in cleaner air and water, less waste and pollution, conservation of energy and natural resources, less traffic, improved quality of life for residents and workers, and contribute to a strong and viable local economy, sustainable community/city: a community or city that meets its present needs without sacrificing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. More specifically, a sustainable community is one that improves and enhances its natural, social and economic resources in ways that allow current and future members of the community to lead healthy, productive and satisfying lives, sustainable modes of transportation/travel: same as alternative modes of transportation above sustainable procurement: procurement of environmentally preferable goods and services in a way that also takes into consideration social responsibility and sustainable economic development issues in the manufacture, transportation, sale and use of those goods and services. toxic material: a substance that causes illness, injury or death by chemical means. A poison. toxic air contaminants (TACs): air pollutants which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. transit node: a station for public transportation along a regional transit corridor (usually rail or rapid bus) with access routes for buses, taxis, automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians. urban villages: mixed-use developments in walkable, livable and transit-oriented districts that balance the need for sufficient density to support convenient, high-frequency transit service within the scale of the adjacent community. vehicle miles traveled (VMT): one vehicle traveling one mile constitutes a vehicle mile. VMT is primarily an indicator of automobile use. Increasing VMT typically corresponds with increases in traffic and vehicle-related pollution. zero emissions vehicle (ZEV): motor vehicle that produces neither tailpipe nor evaporative pollutant emissions. zero waste: recycling or reuse of all natural and man made materials back into nature or the marketplace rather than sending those materials landfills or similar disposal options.
30 VANCOUVER
VANCOUVER 2010 SUSTAINABILITY REPORT
■ vv- y-C'i silSKt^afeSlis:
'MpasMISSffil §|g||gpjf 2§Sf 'MM s
'fvp'rA' Svs'i^?y4.S’:
j mission*- t To foucti the soul of the nation and inspire the world T' * bycreating and delivering an extraordinary Olympic and , Paralympic experience with lasting legacies
-.r lip VISION at! 4 ” >, „ , -- _ , A slronger Canada vvhose spirit istaised byjtspassipnjfojT > **<. r' sport, culture and sustainability ^ ^ '
VALUES '
Team | Trust | Excellence | Sustainability | Creativity T
OUR DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY
■For VANOC sustainability means managing the social, economic and environmental impacts and opportunities of our Games to produce lasting benefits, locally and globally Vancouver 2010 Vancouver 2010 PARALYMPIC GAME! IfUX PARALTMPIOUU Q8P <1-
What does the word Our Games include a sustainable purchasing program that will align the "sustainability" really mean? purchasing power of the Games with our goal to include groups, such Like many Canadians, until as inner-city residents, who might not typically benefit from hallmark fairly recently I wasn't sure - events. Equally important, we want to show how sport can advance although I knew it was the cause of living more sustainably. important. Working at VANOC, I've had the opportunity I am proud of the fact we are using our sustainability framework to to develop a much better measure progress and accountability for our commitments to our understanding of this powerful Four Host First Nations partners, and to raise awareness of the rich concept and commitment. For contributions being made by Aboriginal people. Canada's 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games, it This is our first Sustainability Report, Both VANOC and the Olympic means managing the social, economic and environmental impacts Movement are on a journey of learning when it comes to making the and, opportunities of our Games to produce lasting benefits, locally Games more sustainable. We have committed to producing this report and globally... and it touches everything we do. annually. Next year we will measure ourselves, as we should, against specific targets. We welcome your comments. Sport, Culture and Environment are the three traditional pillars of the Olympic Movement. The environmental pillar is evolving to include the social and economic aspects of the Games. We are now seeing how ^"1 / climate change, for example, is inextricably linked to human health and economic security. VANOC is uniquely positioned to be the first Organizing Committee to take a fully integrated approach to this pillar. We have accepted the challenge to convene Games that speak to an emerging public value - sustainability - a value so strongly held by our John A. Furlong host communities that they made embracing it a condition of our Bid. Chief Executive Officer June 2007 Staging sustainable Games is all very well in theory. But putting the concept into practice is a daunting task. Many were worried that the cost pressures we face in so complex an endeavour would prevent us from acting upon our sustainability promises. In this reporting period alone (2005-06) we faced many pressures and demands. These included the challenge of defining the scope of our sustainability initiatives while managing expectations both inside and outside the organization. .
I hope that after reading this report you will feel that we have not allowed our sustainability commitments to be put "on the back burner" and that they have become part of how we think, work and measure success at VANOC,
Based on our Bid commitments, accepted international standards and consultations with partners and stakeholders, we established a set of measurable objectives and a management framework for our sustainability program. These will help drive our performance and accountability forward. Today, they enable us to monitor and report on our progress to the public.
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06 £ days cf sport ®:\-:. I,;®;.-’g/Vg/®'C>®®|: ®;::®®®A;®®;®;x; tr' ■ days of (.ocbratbn ®;|;'®|://|;®|:®:®;®®^^
days of Olympic. Winter Games, .including 85 medal events. .
■*■ * ® -1 days of Paralympic Winter Ga.mes, including 64 medal events ■; 5®^ • x >®!|.'££ I®
' Olympic. Garr.es atnletos and team cr'irials
■ ■;ftr^lyrapi®Game®MhJeSps:and®e:ani officials;®
::our.tiiGS participating in Olympic Winter Games
reuntnes pa: ticlpating in Paralympic Winter Games figS$ ssiiiiiiisi IlHSIIfiiiii III * '-v- yi .4
The Vancouvec C.-gcibing CuirriKttee fer .the 2010 Olympic and Paralympc IWihtef ^rfiO§|^isiSG5ds;K^aygOa®^mCf|iS|\Mrt;coy\/er|BfiIisO^®Onfil3ia;:jSariadei; (C9 II Vancouver 2010 Vancouver 2010 PAJULYMPIC CAMES ieux PAtuu.ru rtQUU CL~-
MESSAGE FROM THE CEO 5. ABORIGINAL PARTICIPATION AND COLLABORATION 51
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. Partnerships and Collaboration 53
1. INTRODUCTION 7 B. Sport and Youth 56
A. About this Report 9 C. Economic Development 57
B. Who We Are, What We Do . 10 D. Cultural Involvement 57
C. Our Sustainability Strategy: Making a Difference 12 E. Awareness and Education 59
2 ACCOUNTABILITY . '15 6, ECONOMIC BENEFITS - 61
A. Governance 17 A. Financial Performance 63
B. Sustainability Management 18 B, Sustainable Purchasing, Licensing and Business Development C. Stakeholder Engagement 20
D. Ethical Business Practices 23 C. Sustainable Innovation and Practice 70
7 SPORT FOR SUSTAINABLE LIVING 73 3 ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND 25 I- „ IMPACT REDUCTION - , ' 8 APPENDICES ; ’ -'77
A. Biodiversity and Habitat 27 A. Glossary 79
B. Energy and Climate Change 32 B. Synopsis of Corporate Sustainability Policy 84
C. Air Quality 35 C. Summary of Sustainability-Related Bid Commitments 87
D. Water Quality and Conservation 35 D. Sustainability Attributes of Venues and Villages 88
E. Waste Management 36 E. Inner-City Inclusive Commitment Statement 90
- 4. SOCIAL INCLUSION AND RESPONSIBILITY 39 F. Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) Index 94
A. Community Engagement 42
B. Accessibility 43
C. Economic Opportunity 44
D. Safe Places to Live 45
E. A Good Place to Work 47
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06 Our Bid to host the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter We are also designing our venues and operations for energy conservation, Games included a commitment to make sustainability part of every good indoor air quality, water efficiency and minimal waste. We have thing we do. Environmental and social sustainability features were started tracking our energy use (for buildings and vehicles) and our formally described in the Environmental Section (4.3 and 4.8) of the Bid greenhouse gas emissions. This will help us better understand Books and related documents submitted to the International Olympic our impacts. Committee (IOC) in 2003. As such, this is the first Sustainability Report for us, the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Social Inclusion and Responsibility Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC). In this Report for the period August VANOC and its government partners plan to convene Games that 1,2005 - July 31,2006, we share some of our early progress towards are socially inclusive, accessible and reflect Canada's diversity. The honouring that commitment and discuss how our sustainability strate Vancouver 2010 Bid included a unique commitment, the Inner-City gies will unfold as we prepare to host the Games in 2010. Inclusive Commitment Statement, to ensure avoidance of negative impacts and creation of benefits for socially and economically For VANOC, sustainability means managing the social, economic and disadvantaged groups in Vancouver's three inner-city communities, environmental impacts and opportunities of our Games to produce last ing benefits - both locally and globally. Our sustainability objectives During 2005-06, we worked with our government partners to estab also address our commitments to achieve unprecedented Aboriginal lish a plan for delivering on these commitments. The plan included participation in the planning, hosting and legacy of our Games, and to striking a series of community-based advisory groups to recommend convene Games that are socially inclusive and accessible. how to implement the 37 commitments in the Inner-City Inclusive Commitment Statement. During this reporting period, the first of Accountability these advisory groups was launched. Another element of inclusion is We have made sustainability part of VANOC's structure and practices. ensuring that all Games venues and operations will feature barrier-free As a corporate value and a core strategic performance objective, design. In this reporting period, we conducted a barrier-free review of everyone who works at VANOC has some responsibility for delivering four major venues. on our sustainability commitments. This Report establishes the scope of our sustainability program and describes 28 indicators against which During 2005-06, the VANOC workforce more than doubled. To attract we will measure our performance on an ongoing basis. In this reporting and retain the talented people we need for a project with a limited period, we developed a management and reporting system to ensure lifespan, we provide workplace programs that employees expect - in accountability for our sustainability objectives. health and safety, diversity, training and ethics. We must also develop them in a compressed time frame. We also adopted an Ethics Policy under which a former Chief Justice of the BC Supreme Court was appointed as Ethics Commissioner to advise Aboriginal Participation and Collaboration our Board on enforcement of the Ethics Policy. In 2005-06, VANOC signed an historic agreement with the Lil'wat, Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations - collectively known Environmental Stewardship and Impact Reduction as the Four Host First Nations (FHFN). The 2005 Protocol (Statement Three themes run through all of our environmental programs and of Principles) governing the relationship between VANOC and the Four activities, from selecting sites to designing venues, planning Games- Host First Nations provides the foundation for how we work together. time transportation needs and running our offices. They are: It marks the first time that Indigenous peoples have been recognized • Designing for less environmental impact from the outset as partners in an Olympic and Paralympic Games. ■ Operating in an eco-efficient fashion • Restoring, or offsetting, any environmental impacts we cannot avoid We are collaborating with the FHFN and government partners to use the Games to expand benefits for Aboriginal people in the areas of In planning the competition sites and athlete villages, we worked sport and youth, economic development and culture. Our Games are with our venue partners to create concepts for upgrading existing being designed to build broader understanding of the Aboriginal facilities or designing new ones that met green building criteria. During community in Canada - its diversity, history, talent and skills. Early exam 2005-06, our main activity with potential for environmental impact ples include the work done by Aboriginal companies that were awarded was site clearing for mountain venues. Our focus was on site selection construction contracts at our venues and First Nations participation in and strategies to minimize disturbance to the landscape. the Closing Ceremony of the Torino 2006 Olympic Winter Games.
Executive Summary Vancouver 2010 Vancouver 2010 PARALYMPIC CAUCi QS&> IIUX PARALYMPIQUES
Economic Benefits "Since trie early 90s, the IOC and the The profile of the 2010 Winter Games offers many opportunities to Olympic Movement have progressively take actions that contribute to a more sustainable economy. As we deliver our goal of great Games within a balanced budget, we are taken the environment and sustainability applying our economic leverage to encourage sustainable practices into account throughout the life cvsie with our sponsors, suppliers, licensees and the broader community. O’ ao Olympic Oameo psyecs 7ho During this reporting period, we began to develop a sustainable purchasing program to create targeted social and environmental "Omen Ocmesy' concept m uiaeamemy a benefits while meeting normal business standards, memP' SoCdyeiTom me beSmung 01 -
We expect our suppliers and licensees to provide safe, healthy and rOyp em-mr 10 stage5 on Olympic (tames fair workplaces. During 2005-06, we developed our Licensee Code of O mmyn r.c- tne long-term impact or Conduct to be launched in 2006-07. It requires independent audits for those Omvmo ermnammenta! protection all licensees, with follow-up monitoring when deficiencies are found. ■md, morn importanhy.. sustainability are Sport for Sustainable Living mus s-m-sents cm Ommm cbmuOim ,uid just as sport is a global medium for aspirations of the human spirit, it can also serve as a catalyst for sustainable living. We want to use the 2010 Games to demonstrate the value of sustainability and provide Jacques Rogge, President of the International Olympic Committee examples of how it can be achieved. We will build on growing athlete and public interest in sustainable living - showing how sustainability can be both inspiring and achievable.
Looking Ahead Because we are a young organization, we are still developing our monitoring systems in many areas. We now have baseline data for key performance indicators such as energy, waste and workplace metrics. In this report, we describe our early successes in specific areas and discuss the challenges we faced, In next year's report, look for more quantitative data and comparative results. There will also be more about projects, such as the Cultural Olympiad and the Torch Relay, which showcase Canada's diversity.
In the meantime, we have included information in our Appendices (Synopsis of Corporate Sustainability Policy, Sustainability Attributes of Venues and Villages, Summary of Sustainability-Related Bid Commitments) that, while not completely aligned to this reporting period, should provide useful context for our readers.
Our progress is the result of the efforts of many people, Including our employees, our Board of Directors, our government and Aboriginal partners, our host communities, our corporate sponsors and members of the Olympic and Paralympic Families.
Our accomplishments and insights were also influenced by interested citizens who came forward - as individuals and as groups - to provide advice and remind us of our sustainability commitments.
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06
e
<&P
' ' "• : I':'’’-. - i i’ " i" ’ , . ' . ' :
This first chapter sets the stage for what is to come. It details key We have used the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines of the Global information that is required, both to set the context for this report Reporting Initiative (GRI), an emerging international norm, as our and, in certain cases, to meet specific reporting requirements. This reporting template. We have added performance measures to cover first chapter is organized into the following areas: those issues most relevant and meaningful to our goals and activities.
A. About This Report The GRI is an internationally recognized standard for corporate B. Who We Are, What We Do disclosure and reporting on non-financial performance. It is aligned C. Our Sustainability Strategy: Making a Difference with several worldwide sustainability initiatives including the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the United Nations Develop A. About This Report ment Programme (UNDP) and the Millennium Development Goals. VANOC's Sustainability Report 2005-06 is the first of five public (More information on the GRI is available at www.globalreporting.org.) sustainability reports we will prepare annually between now and 2010. This report covers the period between August 1,2005 and July For this first report, we are applying GRI Level "C" requirements. In 31,2006, in concert with our fiscal year. It sets out our sustainability future reports we will aim for at least a Level “B." Our last report will objectives and describes our plans for achieving them. For the VANOC have the added benefit of third-party assurance. team, the report provides a baseline from which we can measure our progress and make adjustments as necessary. The report offers a In deciding what to include in this report, we applied the principle of window on our activities and serves as a basis for discussion. materiality. This means we include information that is relevant and could reasonably be considered to influence the decisions of VANOC VANOC is a project-based entity. We have a short life cycle that moves and to affect its partners and stakeholders. To define what is material, from creation to termination in just seven years. Despite being at an we looked to reports of other Organizing Committees, referenced early stage in our development, our goal was to build a foundation international standards, consulted with staff from across VANOC and for consistent and transparent reporting. This report contains more considered partner and stakeholder interests. Before we issue our description than hard data. We expect this balance to shift as we move 2006-07 report, we will test our definition of what is material with from the planning stage to operations and, ultimately, Games delivery. our partners and stakeholders.
VANOC LIFE CYCLE
Foundation Planning/ Strategic Detailed Operations Games Organization Building Planning Planning i Operations
WiL- iiurr-g:? i -Lv 0818
BmBigm
I! mrtisif
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06 BOUNDARY SETTING AND SUSTAINABILITY REPORTING: WHAT'S IN SCOPE? ■
Understanding Our Reporting Scope, Where Do We Draw the Line? "WE DESCRIBE" Sustainability is a broad concept. This can make it difficult when setting boundaries on report content. When your mission is to touch the soul of the nation and inspire the world by creating and delivering an extraordinary Olympic and Paralympic experience with lasting legacies, it's especially challenging to know where to draw the line. "WE MEASURE"
At VANOC we collaborate with many partners and stake holders. This makes it confusing for outside observers to know who is responsible for projects that seem connected to the Games. Readers may expect us to take account of, help support or respond to controversy on a broader range of community initiatives or public works projects than we have responsibility for. However, we have drawn our B. Who We Are, What We Do sustainability reporting boundaries around those issues VANOC was established on September BO, 2003, as a not-for-profit and activities where VANOC has direct decision-making company without share capital under Part II of the Canada Corporations authority. Our approach is to measure what we can control Act and registered extra-provincially under the Society Act of British and to describe what we can influence, especially where Columbia. VANOC is entrusted by the International Olympic Committee the impacts are significant For example, we have included to organize and host Games where "athletes from around the world and measured the wood waste generated by our land can compete to the best of their abilities in the spirit of friendship, clearing activities in venues that are being built by VANOC. solidarity and fair play, according to the Olympic Charter." Our mandate, But we did not include any measurement of the construc then, is to support and promote the development of sport in Canada tion-related environmental impact of the Richmond Oval, by planning, organizing, financing and staging the 2010 Olympic and home to speed skating events during the Games, because Paralympic Winter Games. the City of Richmond is building that venue. We do, however, include in our financial summary, a grant VANOC About Our Olympic and Paralympic Venues provided to the City of Richmond towards construction The venues for the 2010 Winter Games stretch over a 120-kilometre costs and describe its development plans. Similarly, we do area, from the shores of Richmond through Vancouver's downtown not include regional infrastructure developments in our centre, north to the snowy peaks of the mountain resort of Whistler. report because they are government projects, not directly Drawing on new and existing facilities, we are creating theatres for related to the Games, that are beyond VANOC's scope. sport that will provide top conditions for athletes and a welcome place for spectators to enjoy the excitement of competition.
In parts of this report, we have inserted "Recognition Statements" to acknowledge issues or eventsTs y that are not within VANOC's decision-making authority but influence public dialogue about the Games. These issues or events raise contextual matters that VANOC must be aware of, and that readers of this report would expect us to understand,
Introduction m
Vancouver20io Vancouver 2010 PAMUTUPIC CAMU ICUXPAMltrMPIQULS <1-
SPORT VENUES AND GAMES INFRASTRUCTURE
|M-fg lifii
ALPINE SKIING ^ SKI ALPIN ‘ 0, -..v ' r;;B)OTHi.0Natafy\p>ySL#lt;5;;i|S^rSiAirMLON’-Sti • - : ... .. BOBSLEIGH . BOBSLEIGH
i gRos^tifoXjntfiy^kiinc ; > : .-V-:;. i'Cl^KrOE FOND-V ■
CURLING . Q CURLING
f.CUSESKA! NC Ll. v Q PATINAGE ARTISTIQUE
^Squamlsh.” FREESTYLE SKIING B| SKI ACROBATIQUE
• ice HOCKEY " . • ' .o'. :i: .• L'3V:H0i^Ey.SoR;C^iT.;.r''t'^'-TyS'O
LUGE B LUGE . 1 NORDIC COMBINED ■>22 COMBINE NORD10UE , SHORT TRACK SPEED SKATING PATINAGE OE VITESSE SUR COURTS PISTE
SKELETON B SKELETON
Is;-.’ ■ ;*V. >• SKI JUMPING = ' sautAski
tCESLEDGf HOCKEY r;\ :T'l;a:'V a!';:;.':". 'ES-HOCKEYSURLUGE .
L*'' -'x -MC-y'' -il SNOWBOARD Q SURF DES NEIGES Cypress Mountain' . v' gmm .SPEEDSKATING 22 PATINAGE OE VITESSE , ‘ 1
WHEELCHAIR CURLING E8 CURLING ENFAUTEUILROULANT
OPENING CEREMONIES PJ CEREMONIES D'OUVERTURE .
MEDAL CEREMONIES „ iftfl CEREMONIES OE REMISE DES MEDAILLES
OLYMPIC VILLAGE , ; ^ VILLAGE OLYMPIQUE T
Paralympic village VILIMEmRAlYM^gUE <_ . * p®
OLYMPIC CLOSING CEREMONY . ||| cSR£MONIE DE CLOTURE OLYMPIQUE : r
PARiYMPIC^tbSNGJ^REMOSY ’ >||^1tEfelii^l|'DECLpryREPARALVMNQUE t
. PRESS CELTS! I ■ Q^CENTREOEPRESSE : . :
!f--INTERNATIONAL.BROADCAS»CENTRE l''”ff.^^;'CENTRf(NIERNAriONAL.'DERAOlO.ET;tEL6viS10Ni’
AIRPORT S3 aEroport
' MAIN HOTEL AREA |[J.ZONE DES PRINCIPAOX HOTELS
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06 C. Our Sustainability Strategy: Making a Difference VANOC's Sustainability Performance Objectives Sport and Culture are the traditional pillars of the Olympic Games. At the Centennial Olympic Congress in 1994, the IOC created a new pillar. 1. Accountability Environment, while establishing a Sport and Environment Commission. • To behave ethically, set measurable performance targets and In 1999 the IOC adopted its own version of the United Nations' communicate openly about our progress and challenges Agenda 21 for Sustainable Development. Called Sport for Sustainable • To consult with external groups affected by our activities Development this statement outlined a program of action for using sport to advance sustainable development. To help implement this 2. Environmental Stewardship and Impact Reduction plan, the IOC established a formal collaboration with UNEP. ■ To conserve natural environments and manage, mitigate and offset negative impacts The Olympic Games version of Agenda 21 has three objectives: • Improve socio-economic conditions in host communities 3. Social Inclusion and Responsibility ■ Improve Garnes-based practices on environmental conservation ■ To convene accessible Games that have a positive impact on • Strengthen the inclusion of women, youth and Indigenous peoples socially and economically disadvantaged groups that otherwise in the Games. would not benefit • To care for our workforce, protect human rights and ensure While sustainability is still a relatively new discipline within Olympic and health and safety Paralympic Organizing Committees, it is arguably a good "fit" with the core values and ideals of the Olympic Movement. 4. Aboriginal Participation and Collaboration ■ To partner with the Four Host First Nations to achieve an In 2005-06, VANOC established a set of six corporate-wide sustain unprecedented level of Aboriginal participation in the Games ability performance objectives. These objectives are based on Bid commitments, best management practices of other Organizing 5. Economic Benefits Committees and input from sustainability experts and key partners ■ To demonstrate that sustainable innovation and practice makes and stakeholders. They are now an integral part of VANOC's strategic good business sense and business plans.
6. Sport for Sustainable Living • To use sport, and growing athlete and public interest in living more sustainably, to inspire action on local and global sustainability challenges
ifeilS
Implementation Documents In planning and staging the Games, VANOC must comply with the Olympic Charter, our Host City Contract and instructions from the Executive Board of the IOC. Other documents relevant to our sustainability commitments include: ■ 2002 - Multiparty Agreement for the 2010 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games ■ 2002-05 - A series of agreements between VANOC and the Four Host First Nations (FHFN) ■ • Inner-City Inclusive Commitment Statement • 2004 - Requirements as per federal and provincial environmental assessment (EA) legislation
Introduction e
Vancouver 2010 Vancouver 2010 PAMUUKlCCAMfS G>9P JtUX PARAlYMnoUU
VANOC's Sustainability Scorecard VANOC's 2005-06 Sustainability Scorecard is comprised of a list of qualitative and quantitative performance areas designed to help monitor, measure and evaluate our sustainability performance. The Scorecard is a work in progress. Going forward, it will be refined to reflect internal and external input and the nature of VANOC's operations and activities in each reporting year.
TABLE 1: 2005-06 VANOC SUSTAINABILITY SCORECARD
Environmental Stewardship and Impact Reduction ‘ •Aboriginal Participation and Collaboration
1. Biodiversity Management 19. Four Host First Nations (FHFN) Protocol Status
2. Direct Energy Use 20. Building Awareness of Aboriginal People
B, Indirect Energy Use 21. Aboriginal Sport Participation
4. Total GHG Emissions Generated 22. Aboriginal Business Development
5. Waste Management 23. Showcasing Aboriginal Culture
6. Environmental Regulatory Compliance Economic Benefits ' •
7. Environmental Impact Mitigation 24. Spending on Local Suppliers
Social Inclusion and Responsibility - 25. Technology Innovation and Showcasing
8. Suppliers and Licensees Screened for Human Rights 26. Ethical Business Practices
9. Application of Barrier-Free Guidelines in Venues and Facilities 27. Economic Value Generation
10. Sustainable Procurement 28. Financial Contribution from Governments
11. Addressing Community Impacts MStfc
12. Number of People Employed
13. Employee Composition
14. Employees and Collective Bargaining Agreements
15. Workforce Engagement
16. Senior Management Local Profile
17. Occupational Health and Safety
18. Health and Safety Management ,Jf!i
VANCOUVER 2010 Sustainability Report 2005-06
