SR-9-B (32)rr
~
7
r
EPWM:CP:SM:susstaff Santa Monica, California
Council Meeting: Septembar 24, 1994
SEP 2 4 ~
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM; City Staff
SUBJECT: Recommendation to Approve the Santa Manica
Sustainable City Program
INTRQDUCTION
This repart transm~ts for Council review and adoptian the Santa
Manica Sustainable City Program. The Sustainable City Program
has been developed over the course of the past two years by the
City's Task Force on the Environment and presents a comprehensi~e
long-term environmental strategy for the community. This report
describes the principles, goals and specific targets of the
proposed program and discusses its potential impacts on City
operations and policies in bath the near and long term.
BACKGROUIVD
Over the last decade, mounting cancern over enviranmental
problems which threaten the quality of life have led many
communities around the world to examine new approaches to
enviranmental issues. Most of these new approaches address the
same key question: How can communities create acceptable
economic living standards far their citiz~ns while maintaining
SEP 2 ~ ~~
1
1
i
~~
:~
the viability of the natural environment? Agenda 21, the
general blueprint for creating sustainable communities pr~duced
at the 1992 United Natians Earth Summit, calls on local
authorities to develop local Agenda 21 sustainability plans for
each of their communities. Santa Monica~s Task Force on the
Environment, assuming a leadership role in the growinq
sustainable community movement both in the United States and
abraad, began such a process about two years ago. The Santa
Manica Sustainable City Program which has been crafted
encompasses as its key premise the prevailing definition of
susta~nability: a c~mmunity which can meet its current needs
withaut compromising the ability of future generatians to meet
their needs.
The Task Force on the Environment determined early on that its
single mast important priority was the creatian af a Santa Monica
Sustainable City Program which wouid pravide the City a decision-
making framework that addresses underlying causes of
en~ironmental problems rather than symptoms of those problems,
and provides criteria for eva~uating long-term as opposed to
short-term impacts of decisions. It was the desire of the Task
Force that the program address not anly traditional enviranmental
topics of air, water and sail, but also the 155U2S of economic
de~elopment, social equity, and a sense of community. To assess
th~ program's effectiveness, it was strongly felt that benchmarks
and quantifiable targets for measuring progress must be
2
established. In short, the guidance imparted by the Task Force
on the Environment was to create a Santa Monica Sustainabie City
Program which provides a coherent vision far the future, includes
the participation of all segments af the community, encourages
stewardship of our natural resources, and points the way taward
sustainable community and economic dev~lopment decisions.
In April 1993, City Council adopted a resolution supporting the
creation af a Santa Monica Sustainable City Program. The draft
program has since undergone an extensive public review process
and has been revised to reflect the numerous comments and
recommendations received from individual members of the public,
the Housing Commission, Planning Commission, Chamber of Cammerce
representatives, City staff from all departments, neighbarhood
associatians, ~ocal institu~~ons (schoals, haspitals, colleges,
etc.), and various community groups. The culmination of this
extensive and intensive public review process is ex~mplified in
the attached document presented for final Council review and
adoption.
DISCUSSION
The Santa Monica Sustainable City Program is founded on eight
guiding principles that provide the basis from which effective
and sustainabZe decisions can be made. The program states, amang
others, the following principles: The concept of sustainability
will guide City palicy and the long~term impacts af policy
3
choices will always be considered; environmental quality and
economic health are mutually dependent and a healthy environment
is crucial for the long-term prosperity of the City and its
residents; and cammunity awareness, responsibility, involvem~nt
and educatian are the key elements ~f successful
proqrams/policies.
Broad policy goals have been estab~ished for each af four major
policy areas: 1) Resource Conservation; 2) Transportation; 3)
Pollution Prevention and Public Health Protection; and 4}
Community and Economic Development. The policy goals recommend
general strategies to improve and ma~ntain the quality of life
for Santa Monica residents. Sixteen specific targets, or
sustainability indica~ors, have been selected for achievement by
the year 2000 (using 1990 as the baseline year}. These
indicators reflect the current cansensus as to what progress
needs to be achieved in the various policy areas to make the City
more sustainab~e. A number of existing and proposed City programs
relevant to each policy area are a~so listed. These pragrams will
interact synergistically over time to achieve the designated
targets.
As work continues on the Sustainable City Program, it is
envisianed that new indicators wi11 inevitably have to be added
and existing ~ndicators will need to be revised or replaced. This
will occur if it is faund that the indicators eith~r are not
4
sufficiently meaningful measurements of sustainability, are toa
difficult or too expensive ta measure, Qr have been supplanted by
other~ more reZevant indicatars. The Task Farce on the
Environmant and City staff will commit to the preparation and
transmittal to Council of an annual Sustainab~e City Report which
will assess progress made during the past year, evaluate overa2l
program effectiveness, and recommend any program modifications
which might be necessary. Much work remains to be dane by City
staff to complete data collection and de~elop the appropriate
m~thodologies to measure progress taward achievement of the
stated indicators as in sQme cases, measurement is either not
currently done or is not sufficiently accurate.
~ne of the most difficult conceptual challenges in the
formulation of the Sustainable City Program has been the task ~f
merging traditional environmental po~icy cancerns with sometimes
Zess precise community and economic development policy concerns.
Also difficult has been discovering and analyzing the inherent
interconnections between the numerous programs, policies, and
services already offered by the City which will be instrumental
in reaching the indicated targets. An important lesson which has
been learned during the process of crafting th~ 5ustainable City
Program is that although the prograrn document reflects a
significant work effart by many thoughtful individuals, it is
ultimately no mare than a good starting poin~ for the tremendous
amount of additional work which needs to b~ done to carry the
5
program forward and achieve the vision af sustainability which is
charted. The adoption of the program by City Council will
forma~ly endorse this ~ision and set in mation the many concrete
steps necessary ta translate the vision into practice within the
community.
It is strangly believed by the Task Force on the Environmen~ and
many others in the community that City operations the~selves
should be the first to take the practical steps which are
consistent with the concept of sustainability. The City should
therefore serve as a model for ather institutians and
organizations in the community as well as for other cities in the
region and nation. The development of a"sustainability
checklist" for City operations is naw underway. This checklist
addresses three pr~mary areas: procurement, canstruction and
develapment, and programs and ser~ices. The checklist deals with
specific issues such as energy and water efficiency, urban runoff
mitigation, envir~nmentally preferab~e building materials,
recyc~ing of demolition debris, hazardous materials use and
storage, vehicle emissions, local econamic benefi~s, waste
reductian and many other considerations. Along similar lines,
the Planning Cammission has recently formed a subcommittee to
work with staff and the Task Force on identifying innovative
methads far incorporating the SustainablE City goals into a
checklist tha~ could be used in the C~ty's development review
process.
6
A Procurement work Group comprised of City staff and a
representative from the Task Force has also begun th~
categorization af all City purchases, and has thus far completed
the drafting of specific purchasing criteria for paper products
and cleaning supplies. These purchasing criteria detail the
product and performance specifications for these types of
purchases to ensure that they are consi~tent with the Susta~nable
City Program's goals and indicatars. Paper product criteria are
relatively straightforward and include analysis of full Zife
cycle costs, recyclab~lity, percentaqe of post-consumer recycled
content, manufacturing impacts, ~ocal economic benefits, and
existing City purchasing guidel~nes, and cast-effactiveness.
Development of criteria for cleaning products has broken much new
graund and is being closely watched by other agencies such as the
U.S. Environmenta~ Protection Agency and the General Services
Administration. The cleaning products criteria will require
manufacturers to provide chemical analyses, identify impacts an
human health and potential impacts on the enviranment, and prove
compliance with existing state and federa2 regula~ians. This
same level of effort will eventually be extended to all
app~icable City purchases Qnce the program is fully implemented.
Far City departments who contract for outside services, re~evant
sustainability criteria will be incorparated into Requests for
Praposals and actual contract documents to ensure cansistency
with program goa~s and accountability by the respective service
7
provider. Considerable discussian and training will clearly need
to take place within City departments over the next several
months and beyond to ensure that City aperatians adhere as fully
as possible to the Sustainable City Program and the
sustainability checklist which is now being develaped,
The Task Farce an tha Environment has sponsared an extensive
pEriod of public review, community outreach~ and consensus
building related ~o the sustainable City Pragram over the past 1
and 1/2 y~ars. The propased program was initially distributed ta
C~ty Council, City departments, Hausing and Planning
Commissioners, Chamber of Commerce Environment Committee members,
and interested citizens. A formal survey process designed to
identify areas of consensus was then ~nitiated with the
participation of selected community stakehalders. A larger,
community-based public participation process was embarked upon
with the assistance of the NEighborhood Support Center, and a
community-wide meeting held on June 2 generated significant
community participation. Task Force members also made
presentations at the annual and\or board meetings of most of the
City's neighborhood associations.
Following formal adoptian of the program by Council, staff and
Task Force members will continue tfl interface with key
stakehalders and all other interested parties ta develop
partnerships which promote sustainability and bui~d consensus
8
toward the full ~mplementation of the pragram within the
cammunity. Staff and the Task Force will also ensure that the
City, to the maximum extent passible, implements a pragram which
can be used as a model by other major Santa Monica institutions,
such as the Santa Monica/Malibu Unified School District, and
serve as a model program for the region.
BUDGET~FISCAL IMPACT
There are no immediate significant fiscal impacts associated with
the adoption of the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program.
However, many of the proposEd programs which are listed in the
documant entail the future expenditure of City ~unds by variaus
departments, depending on th~ particular program in question.
Some vf these initial expenditures by the City wi~l be
significant and some will be ralatively minar. For each of the
anticipated new programs in which the City wiZl invest, it is
firmly believed that the long-term economic and environmental
benefits will be substantial.
One of the fundamental tenets of the proposed Sustainable City
Program is the use of a long-term perspective on measuring the
costs and benefits of City actians. It is intended by the Task
Force and City staff that each newly-proposed program should be
evaluated as to its averall cost-effectiveness prior ta its
adoption. This would include an examinatian af the full life-
cycle cnsts, environmental impacts, sociaZ costs and benefits,
9
and the other r~levant internal and external impacts from the
praposed program. The focus of this analysis would be an the
long-term as opposed to the short-term outcames of the program.
For example, a program to retrofit toilets requires the
expenditure of substantial sums Qf money in early yea~s, but is
extremely cost effective when future sewage treatment costs,
future water purchase costs, and the direct benefits to the
environment are considered. A"true" cost-effectiveness
methodology will therefore be developed and used by the City in
the eva~uation of these proposed future program investments.
CONCLUSION
ThE formal adoption of the Santa Monica Sustainable City Program
is not an end, but rather the beginning of a critically important
process. Much work and effart lies ahead as the City and the
community put into pract~ce the concapts which the program
embodies. The document which is presented to Council for adoption
leaves many specific questions unanswered. Yet, it represents tha
pivotal initial steps which the City must take if we believe that
future generations have a right to the same quality of life which
we wish for aurselves. As the City's knowledge base expands from
a combination of implementa~ion experiences, teehnological
changes, and feedback from the cammunity, Cauncil will be asked
to periadically update the Program so that its principles, goals
and indicators cont~nue to reflect what is important and relevant
to the entire community.
14
RECOMMENDATZON
It is recommended that City Council adopt the attached Santa
Monica Sustainable City Program.
Prepared by: Craig Perkins, Director af Enviranmental and
Pub~ic Warks Management
Susan Munves, Conservation Coordinator
Attachment
11
SANTA 1410I\ICA SUSTAINABLE CITY PROGRAM
The City of Santa Momca recagnizes that we live in a period of great environmental crisis.
As a commun~ty, v~e need to create the basis for a mare sustainable way af life both locally
and glabally through the safeguard~ng and enhancing af our resources and by preventing
harm to the natural environment and human health. We are resalved that our impact on the
natural environment must not ~eopard~ze the prospects of future generations
To pursue these goals, we adopt the following Guiding Principles:
1. The Concept of Sustainability Guides City Policy
Santa AZon~ca is committed ta meeting its exist~ng needs without comprornising
the ab~l~ty of future generatavns to rneet their own needs. The long-term
impacts of policy choices will be considered to ensure a sustainable legacy.
2. Protection, Preser~atian and Restoratian of the Natural En~ironment is a
High Priarity of the City
Santa Mon~ca is committed to protecting, preserving and restonng t~e natural
environment City dec~sion-maicing will be guided by a mandate to maximize
environmental benefits and reduce or elim~nate negati~e environmental
impacts.
3. Envirorunental Quality and Econamic Health are l~Zutually Dependent
A heatthy en~zronment ~s integral to the long-term economic interests of the
City. In ach~e~ing a healthy en~~iranment, we must ensure that inequitable
burdens are not placed an any ane geographFC or soc~oeconomic sector of the
population
4. All Decisions Ha~~e Environmental Implications
The City w~ll ensure that eaeh of its policy decisions and programs are
interconnected through the common bond of sustainab~lity as expressed in
these guiding pr~nciples. The policy and decision-mak~ng processes of the
C~ty will reflect our environrnentai ob~ectives.
5. Cornmunit~ Awareness, Responsibility, Involvement and Education are
Key Elements of Successful Programs/Poiicies
Indi~idual cit~zens, community-based groups and businesses must be aware of
their impacts on the environment, must take responsibility far reducing or
eiiminating those impacts, and must take an act~ve part in community efforts to
address environmental concerns The City will therefore be a leader in the
1
creat~on and spansorship af environmental education opportunities in
cooperation with schools, colleges and other orgamzat~ons rn the commumty.
b. 5anta h~onica Recognizes Its Linkage r~ith the Regional, Nationat, and
Global Community
Local enviranmental problems arid ameliorati~e actions cannot be separated
from their broader context. Th~s relationship between local issues and
regional, nat~onal and global issues wail be recognized and acted upon in the
Crty's programs and pvlic~es The City's environmental programs and palicies
should therefore be developed as models which can be emulated by other
communities. The City must also act as a strong advocate far the development
and zmplementation af model pragrams and znna~atrve approaches by state
and federal go~rernment which embody the goals of sustainability.
7. Those Environmental Issues l~iost Lnpartant to the Community Shou~d be
Addressed First, and the Most Cost-Effecti~e Programs and Poiicies
Shauld be Selected
The financial and human resQUrces wh~ch are available to tl~e City are limited.
The City and the community should reevaluate its environmental pnont~es and
implemented programs and policies annually ta ensure that ~he best passible
investments ~n the future are being made The evaluation of a program's
cost-effectiveness should be based on a complete analysis of the associated
costs and benefits, ~ncluding environmentai and sacial costs and benefits.
8. The City is Committed to Pracurement Decisians which l~linimize Negative
Environmental and Social Lnpacts
The procurement of products and services by the City results in environmental
and social ~mpacts both in this cvuntry and ~n other areas of the world. The
C~ty must de~elop and ab~de by an environmentally and socially responsible
procurement policy wh~ch emphas~zes long-term values and wil~ become a
model for other public as well as private organizat~ons The adopted
procurement pol~cy w~ll be appl~cable to City programs and servfces fn all
areas.
The Sustainable City Program is exemplitied in four ma~or policy areas These ma~ar palicy
areas represent the focus of bath current and future City programs which ad~ere to the
gu~d~ng pnnc~ples and str~ve to attatn the spec~fic targets whrch are es~abl~s~ed for each area.
Each target represents a citywide ob~ective unless specifically descnbed as the target for the
City as a municipal a~ency. The l~sted programs represent efforts by the City to bec~me
sustainabte in its operations as weil as promote sustainability in the community as a whole
A descnption af each policy area, its targets, and ongoing and proposed programs fallows.
Far eact~ target, the l~ase year is 199~ and the target year is 2000. Qne of the important
2
tasks which will receive focus dunng the program's first year is the development of baseline
data and methodolog~es necessary to measure progress toward achieving the quanaf ed
targets
I. RES4URCE CONSERVATIQN
Policy Goals: Promote the use af conservat~on technologies and practices and reduce
the use of non-renewable resources. Develop local, non-polluting, renewabie energy,
water and material resources, and expand recycling technology in these azeas.
Targets: • Reduce energy usage 16 %
• Reduce potabl~ water usage 20%
• Reduce solid waste volvmes at least 50%
• Achieve SO% a~erage pastconsumer recycled andlor tree-free
content in all City paper purchases
• Convert 75 % of the City vehicie fle~t to reduced-emission fuels
• Reduce wastewater flaws 15 ~
~ Increase total number of trees on public property by 350
Programs. SOLID WASTE
• Curbside Recycling -- single family {ongoin~)
• Recycling Drop-Off Zones (ongoing)
• h7ini Recycling Zanes -- multi-family (ongaing & proposetl}
• Business Recycling (ongoing & praposed}
• Yard Waste Composting (ongoing & propase~)
~ Procurement Policies (ongoing & proposed)
• Vo~ume-Based Rates {ongoing & proposed)
~ Source Reduct~an (ongo~ng & proposed)
• Ad~ance D~sposal Fees (propased}
• Market Develapment (proposed)
• Demolition/Construction Debris Recycling {proposed)
WATER & WASTEWATER
~ Baysaver To~let Retrafit Program (ongo~ng)
• Retrofit Upan Sale Requirements (ongoing)
• No-Net Water Gain fram New De~elopment {ongoing)
• Water Re-tise Pra~ects {ongoing & propased}
• Urban Water Conservat~on Best Mana~ement Pract~ces (ongomg 8c
proposed}
• Financial Incentives for Business Water Canservatiar~ (ongo~ng &
proposed)
• Water Effczent Landscape Requirements (ongoing & proposed}
• Conservation-Based Rate Structure {ongoing & proposed)
3
~ Residential Grey Water Systems (proposed}
• Landscape Water Efficiency Partnership Program {an-going &
propased)
ENERGY
~ C~ty Fac~l~ty Energy Efficxency Retrofits (proposed)
• Public/Pmlate Energy Efficiency Partnersh~p {prapased)
• New Construct~on Energy Effic~ency Incentives {proposed)
• Urban Tree Planting Program {proposed)
• Comprehensive City En~rgy Policy (proposed)
•"Urban Heat Isiand Effect" reduct~vn program (proposed)
• Electnc Veh~cle Public Charging Stataon Program (proposed)
• Trop~cal Rainforest Wood City Purchase Ban {ongoing)
II. TRAs1TSP()RTATIO:~I
Policy Goals Maximize the utilizat~on af alternati~e forms of transgortation,
~ncluding walking, bicyc~ing, pubi~c transit, and car-pools/rideshare Develop
innovati~e traftic polrctes which reduce negat~ve impacts from vehicles and limit
pavement area to the minimum necessary. Implement work schedules which reduce
the number of employee commute days. Advocate for the regxonal development of
public transporEat~on systems.
Targets • Increase r~dershtp on Santa Momca Mun~cipai Bus Lines (including
shuttles) by 10%~
• Achieve average vehicle r~dership of 1 5 for alI employers with
o~er 50 employees
Programs: • City Traffic Management Program ~ncluding 9/80 Work Sche.ciuie
for City Employees (ongoing}
• Business Traffic Management Programs (ongoing & proposed}
• Innovative Public Transit Services including Santa Monica Bus
Lines and Light Rail System (ongo~ng & proposed)
• B~cycle Master Plan (proposed)
• Teie~ommut~ng (proposed)
III. POLLUTION PREVENTION & PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION
Policy Gaals. Protect and enhance env~ronmental health and public health by reducing or
eliminat~ng the use of hazardous and toxic macerials by residents and bus~nesses, minimizing
the 1e~~els of pollutants entering the a~r, so~l and water, and lessening the risks which
enviranmental problems pose to human health Ensure that no one geographic or
socioeconomic ~roup in the City zs being unfairly impacted by envirarimental pollurion.
4
Targets: • Reduce the total ~alume af dry weather stormdrun discharges to the ocean
60%
• Reduce consumption of hazardo~s materials, including pesticides, 1S%
• Cleanup and close 75~ of all l:nawn Underground Storage Tank
contam~nation sites
Programs: • Control of Ozone-Depleting Chemicals (angoing)
• Water, Soil and Air Quality Testing/Monitonng (ongoing & proposed}
• Hausehoid Hazardous Waste and Small Business Hazardaus Waste
Callection (ongoing & proposed)
• Catch Basin Stencil Program (ongoing & proposed)
• Hazardaus Waste Minlmization Programs (ongoing & proposed)
• Illegal Dump~ng Enforcement (angoing & proposed)
• Urban Runoff Poliut~on Cantrol Program (ongoing and proposed)
• NPDES Permkt Best Management Pracnces (ongoing & proposetl)
• Point of Sale Household Hazardous Matenals Labeling {proposed)
• C~ty Tox~cs Use Reduction Policy {proposed)
• Strengthened Hazardous Spill Emergency Response Capabilities {proposed)
• Test~ng, Identificat~on and Mit~gation of Lead, Asbestvs and other
Hazardaus S~bstances ~n the Community [proposed}
• Dry-Weather Urban Runoff Reclamation Facil~ty (proposed)
• Reduced-Emission Fueis Policy for City Fleet {proposed}
• Underground Storage Tank Management Program (on-going)
• Naise Pollution M~tigat~on Program (on-going)
• Environmental Aud~t Program far Public Fac~lities and Ma~vr Institut~ons
(proposed}
IV. CO~g7[.•TtiITY AND ECON4~•ZIC DE`'ELOPI~ZENT
Policy Goals• Encourage the development of carnpact, mixed-use, pedestnan-oriented
pro~ects designe~ to maxirn~ze affordahle ~ousing, encourage walkzng, bicycling, use of
existing and future public transit systems and creatior~ of community gardens Promote the
growth of iocal bus~nesses wh~ch prov~de emplayment opportunfties to Santa Monica
residents, includ~ng Santa Monica youth, and have positi~e environmental and social impacts.
Facilitate education programs which ennch the lives of all members of the commumty.
Targets: • Prov~de 750 additional affordable hous~ng units
• Create 3 new cammunity gardens
• Establish partnership with Iocal schaols to creat~ and implement a
Sustainable Schoals Program
•~ncrease total public open space area by 15 acres
Programs: • Affordab~e Hausing Programs (ongoing)
• Local Economic Develop;nent Programs (ongoing & proposed)
5
• Community Gardens Program (groposed)
• Local Jobs Creation Prograrn (praposed)
• City-Sponsored Demor~5tratian Pro~ects (praposed)
• Enviranmental Educatfon Curnculum De~elopment (on-going)
• City Youth Err-ployment Program {on-going & proposed}
G
Appendix
SANTA MQNICA SUSTAINABLE CiTY PROGRAM: SUMMARY OF INDICATORS,
BASELINE DATA AND TARGETS
SUSTAINABILITY 1990 'i993 2000
IND[CATOR tActual} (Actual) tTARGET}
Energy Usage' 4.0 million 4.0 million 3.36 million
(non-mobite sources) Btuslyear Btuslyear Btuslyear
Water Usage2 "E 4.3 million "~ 2.0 mi[[ion 1'[ .4 million
galtonslday gallons/day gallonslday
Landfi[ted So1id Vllas#e3 '107,000 705,400 62,Q00
tonslyear tonslyear tonslyear
Pastconsumer Unknown Unknown 50%
RecycledlTree Free
Content of City Paper
Product Purchases4
City Flee# Vehicles Unknown 10% 75%
Using Reduced-
Emission FuelsS
Wastewater Flowsg 14.4 million 8.5 million 8.8 million
gat[ons/day gallons/day gallonslday
Trees in P~blic Spaces' 28,000 trees 25,000 trees 28,350 trees
Ridership an Santa "€ 9.0 millian '~ 8.0 miltion 2Q.9 million
Monica Bus Linese
(including shuttles)
Average Vehicle N/A 1.34 AVR '1.5 AVR
Ridership {AVR) of
Employers wath o-rer
50 Employees9
5U5TAlNAB1LITY 1990 't 993 2000
INDIGATQR (Actual) (Actuall tTARGET)
Dry Weather 500,000 350,000 200,OD0
S#ormdrain Discharges gallonslday gallonslday gailo~s/day
to Ocean'o
Use of Hazardous Unknown Unknown 16%
Materials (citywidel" reduction
Known U~derground NIA 25 sites fi sites
Storage Tank Sites
Requiring Cleanup'~
Deed Restrictetf '~,172 units 1,313 units 1,922 units
Affordable Hausing
Units13
Community Garclens14 2 garde~s 2 garder~s 5 gardens
Creation and NIA N!A Imp[emented
Implementatian of a
Sustainable Schools
Program'~
Public Open Space'~ 164 acres 164.8 acres 180 acres
suscity 9/12194
1. The citywide snergy eff~c~ency target is based on preliminary analysis o# overall energy usage
~n Santa Mon~ca ielectnc~ty and natural gas) ~rom all no~-mob~le sources lt is bel~e~ed that the
patent~al cost sav~ngs from energy eff~ciency ta 5anta Mon~ca businesses and res~dents are
substantial As a rESUIt of the development af a comprehens~~e Gity energy pp~icy o~er the next
few months, the 16°k target which +s set fvrth En this document may be modified, based an a
comprehensE~e cost-effectiveness analysis
2. Water usage reduet~an of 20°k 4~y t~e year 2404 is bel~eved to be an aggress~ve yet t~~gf~1y
achievabfe target based on res~lts of existing water effic4ency programs and anticipated impact
from planned programs Currently, the costs assocaated wrth achievang mcreased water efficiency
are about one-half the cast of purchasing the same amount of imported water
3. The 50% solid waste diversian target for the year 2000 is currently mandated by state law
(A6g391. Santa ~llonica ~s already well an ~ts ~nray towards achiauing the mter-m 1995 d{uers~on
target af 25°~
4. A recycled/tree-free content target for City paper purchases is not artic~lated rn any current
policy Therefor~, no data exists perta~n~ng to the actual basel~ne During the first year folfowEng
adopUOn of the 5ustaEnable C~ty Program, a set of pohcies ga~errnng Gity paper purchases wd[ be
rmAlemented and a tracking rnechan~sm deveEoped It is important for the City to promote, through
its own policies, the purchase of recycled and/or tree-free paper to foster development of stronger
markets and more favorable pr~c~s far these environmentally preferable paper prociucts
5. The 75°~ reduced ernission fuels target is based on a preEiminary analysES af the overaN
potenttial w~th~n the current C~ty fleet An aggress~ve con~ers3on target by the C~ty w}{f both reduce
damaging a~r emissions from ffeet veh~cies and demonstrate the C~ty's leadership role ~is a ~is
other agencies/ins#~tutions m the regian The C~ty's current alternative fuels policy, which was
adopted by City Counc~l ~n 1993, will be underga~ng a comprehensive review over the r~ext few
months Once the updated policy is appro~ed by Gouncil, this target will be mod~fied to ensure its
consistency with the comprehensive po~icy
6. The targeted ~ 5% reduct~on m wastewater flows rs consEStent w~th the 20°b reduct~on target
for water usage There is not a one for one correlation between water usage reduct~ons and
wastewater flows s~nce approx~mately 25% of total water use ~s for exter~ar purposes
(landscap~ng, etc 1 The 7 993 actual wastewater flows were unusuafly low due to various non-
recurnng factors The target far the year 20Q0 ks therefore consistent with the anticipated Gmpacts
of current and proposed wastewater flow reduction efforts Reduct~on in wastewater flaws results
~n significant financ~al sa~ings from a~oided sewage treatment casts and avvided costs for
purchase a# additionaE sewage treatment capacity
7. Dunng the next year, it ~s ant~c~pated that the City will strengthen ~ts tree m~entory data
collectian and report~ng capabilit~es In addition, a more complete analysES of the poss~ble sites
a~a~(able far new trees wEEI be undertaken in con~unction wEth a more thorough e~aluatEOn of
patent~al resource allacation impacts from an expanded tree pEanting program for City departments
8. A 10% increase in total ndership by the year 2000 should be achie~able based on current
pro~ections and the City's/reg~on's ~ntense promot~on of public trans~t alternati~es to the use flf
private ~eh~cles The potential for increasing Santa Monica Bus L~nes ridership is currently under
assessment The dip m ridersh~p between T 990 and 1993 ~s bel~eved to be attr~butahle pr~marily to
the econamEC recession
9. No actual data is presented for 1990 as the City`s Transportat~on Management Program
OrdEnance had nat yet been implemented The target for the year 2400 reflects Coc~ncil adapted
ordinance requirements
~0. Th~s mdicator assume5 canstruction and start-up af the City`s proposed dry-weather flow
treatment/reclamatEOn facility whECh w~lf capture and treat dry-weather flows from the Pica Kenter
and Pier storm drains As the feasibdity analys~s for #his treatment facility is corr~pleted over the
next several manths, a more accurate measurement af actual dry weather storm dram flows will be
obtained wh~ch may result in a mod~ficavon af the target. Rede~cing dry-weather storm drain flows
will sign~ficantly decrease t~e dtscharge of pollutants into Santa Monica 8ay
11. Na ~el~able data currently exasts for this indicator Ne~ertheless, ~t is belie~ed that the +nd~cator
cauld be very important an determinmg whether ihe hazardo~s matenals management and
hazardous waste reduct~on programs implemented by the C~ty are ~avmg a tangible im~act in the
community Over the next several months an assessment w~il be carned out to ascertain whether
current data collectaon and analysis d~ff~cult~es can be overcome
12 . Th~s ind~cator perta~ns to underground storage tank {~1~T) sites wh~ch are under the regulatory
lunsd~ction of #he C~ty Since reliable data on the C~ty's UST management program is not a~ailable
for 1990, 1993 will be useci as the base year It ~s ant~cipated tt~at more co~tammated UST s~tes,
m addit~on to the 25 which were known ~n 1993, will be identified between now and the year
2000 Therefore, it ~s expected that by tY~e first year status report to Councif an the Sustamable
C~ty Program a mod~f~ed ~nd~cator on U5T site cleanup wh~ch addresses the dynamic "moving
target" nature of the mdicator will have been developed
13 . 7h~s ~nd~cator is consistent with prev~ously adopted affordabie hous~ng targets for the City
and has been re~~ewed/endorsed by the C~ty's Housing Commission The actual numbers far 199Q
and ~ 993 refer to the inventory of "puhlicly assisted" affordable housing in the City AI1 of these
un~ts are deed-restr~cted An analys~s wdl be undertaken durmg the next several months to identify
any pri~ately de~eloped, deed-restricted affordable hausmg units which have came on line since
1990 and should be inc~uded in the totaEs
14 . The community garden target qertams to the development of gardens on City andlor school
distr~ct s~tes The init~al activities in purswt of t~~s ~nd~cator w~ll include an evaEuation of available
parcels w~th~n the C~ty and outreach/survey efforts to determEne the general le~ef of interest for
community gardens with~n vanous Santa Monica neighborhoods
15 . ft is antici~ated that the Task Force on the Env~ronment, C~ty off~c~als and C~ty staff w~11 play
a role of advising, facditating and supporting the Schoof D~strict in the creation of a 5ustarnable
Schoals Program Although prel~minary discuss~ons have taken place, na official position on this
issue by the school distnct has yet been taken
16. Accord~ng to standards used by the Santa Monica Recreat~on and Parks Comm~ssion, 2 5
acres of open space should be provided far every 1,000 C~ty res~denis Given Santa Monica`s 1990
populatton of $6,9Q5 resEdents, 217 2fi acres of total open space is recomrnended for the C~ty A
180 acre target for the year 20Q0 ~s believed ta be both aggressive and ach~evahle based on the
add~tional open space resources {mcluding the Civic Center) wf~GCh can be made a~a+lable dur~ng the
next f~ve years The tot~l acreage numbers ~nclude ded~cated pubhc open space on private s~tes ~n
the C~ty