Charlotte City Council
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
COMMITTEE AGENDA TOPICS
I.
Subject:
Follow-up to Land Preservation Presentation
No action.
II.
Subject:
Briefing and Discussion: Energy and Resource Conservation
No action.
III.
Subject:
Next Meeting:
June 19, 2006 at 3:30 p.m. in Room 280
Staff to bring back compliance, proactive and leadership environmental
statements for air quality, water quality, land preservation; and energy and
resource conservation for the Committee to review, discuss and comment.
COMMITTEE INFORMATION
Present:
Time:
Anthony Foxx, Pat Mumford, Susan Burgess, Nancy Carter, and
Don Lochman
2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Agenda Package
2. Presentation: City of Charlotte Energy and Resource Conservation
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 2
DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTS
Committee Discussion:
I.
Follow-up to Land Preservation Presentation
Julie Burch advised the Committee that at the conclusion of the last meeting, Council
member Foxx requested land preservation policy statements from other communities for
review similar to the air and water quality statements. These statements continue to be
provided as information at this point. They are just sample statements that have been
adopted in other cities. At the conclusion of this meeting, we would like to have
additional conversation with the Committee regarding moving forward to draft principles
for Charlotte.
II.
Briefing and Discussion: Energy and Resource Conservation
Jim Schumacher began the presentation on energy and resource conservation (copy
attached).
Carter:
On your list of upgrades, you don’t mention water conservation.
Schumacher: That would be reflected in design or with retrofits.
Rutledge:
We do buy water saving toilets and urinals in this building and tested
some at Spratt Street.
Carter:
With the remodeled Solid Waste building at Ott Street, did we look at
those measures?
Schumacher: In a new facility, we look at that as part of the design.
Carter:
Will that be more on the radar screen in the future?
Rutledge:
We always look at ways to be more efficient.
Lochman:
You mentioned $2.5M in cumulative savings. That seems relatively
minor compared to the size of the expenditure. I’m not suggesting it is not
good, I’m just asking if we need to pursue these things for small savings
benefit.
Schumacher: 3.5M square feet of office space is only a portion of our total power bill.
We also have traffic lights, power at the waste water treatment plants – we
are working around the edges.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 3
Johnson:
CDOT has been retrofitting traffic lights and we are seeing a significant
reduction in the power consumed.
Lochman:
I just want to have a perspective of the true cost.
Carter:
I recently attended a conference in Boston where we talked about green
buildings, energy conservation, and new energy sources. MIT, Harvard
and Cambridge are even challenging each other in these areas. Harvard is
broken up into schools and each school is given X number of dollars to
run their business. They would gladly give us a free exchange of
information. They recently retrofitted City Hall by restoring an historic
building. We might want to extend an invitation to UNCC or the State to
work with the University system here. One other area they were looking
at was geothermal energy.
Schumacher: I would love to see any material you have. We are always looking for
new ideas. In Ms. Rutledge’s shop, we have a certified energy manager
who works closely with NC State and is always analyzing. The idea of
LEED certification is also very popular. We have not specifically tried to
make LEED certification, but we do try to illustrate things that are energy
efficient and sustainable. LEED certification does not always make a
good business case. There is some value in certification though. The
Committee and ultimately City Council can discuss if they want to push
sustainable design that way.
Foxx:
I think this would be a good place to allow David Waggoner to briefly
discuss his project with the multi-modal station.
Mr. Waggoner described his development that should be Gold LEED certified once
complete. (Currently, there are no gold certified buildings in North Carolina.)
Essentially the development is a 6-story parking garage with the Greyhound Bus
Terminal. The garage will be covered with self-sustaining vegetation. 90% of the energy
sources are renewable and after year 15 the building will run by itself.
Foxx:
Mr. Schumacher, in terms of evaluating construction or replacing items, is
the environmental impact on utilities, materials, etc. accounted for in the
process?
Schumacher: Not directly.
Rutledge:
The decisions quite frankly are mostly based on economics.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 4
Garner:
But, when we look at something like HVAC replacement, we are looking
for the most efficient model. Or, when we look at replacing toilet fixtures.
We can specify what we want – the highest efficiency that is cheaper in
the long run.
Carter:
But, you try to be innovative?
Garner:
We try. We are lucky we have 120 buildings where we can try new
technology. We can test market in a few places to find what works.
Foxx:
Council member Mumford, I’m curious when Wachovia is making
decisions about construction, how does the environmental policy enter in?
Mumford:
There has been an evolution from Corporate Real Estate looking at just
efficiency to looking at the corporate goals of carbon emission reduction
and looking at footprint impact and how can we neutralize that. A lot of
companies say they are carbon neutral because they are offsetting some
way by establishing tree farms, etc. I think we need to look at a broader
policy for the City, not just an economic policy. There is an economic
value to the public side, with public relations and overall environmental
benefit. Chicago is leading the way and we could look at their example.
We need to look at the economic benefit. The Bank is sensitive to all of
that and also the impact of volatile weather changes. Some folks would
argue if we stop emissions we are still going to have problems because of
the global weather patterns. Some of these things we can’t control. It is
intriguing for a municipality to be involved in this. We need to not be
reactive but get a good background and think bigger as we really discuss
these issues.
Burch:
Also included in your packet today are energy and resource conservation
statements from other cities. I think that was a good opening statement for
next steps for this Committee.
Susan Johnson began the fleet presentation.
Mumford:
Does the rolling stock account for police officers on bicycles?
Johnson:
We also have officers on motorcycles.
Foxx:
I imagine you are faced with some of the same questions of efficiency
versus environmental impact. How do you evaluate hybrid versus cheaper
non-hybrid vehicles?
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 5
Johnson:
We did some mass buying two years ago and determined in the total life
cycle the hybrid vehicles cost about $3,000 more than the traditional
vehicles (i.e. Civics). It pays back though in under five years. We look at
economics when we are making decisions, but if the business case works,
we will make clean purchases.
Foxx:
To this point has this been a staff driven process?
Johnson:
City Council approved the funding for the hybrids.
Lochman:
What percentage is hybrid?
Johnson:
There are more hybrid choices available this year. The Police Chief has a
Ford Escape and indicates it has great performance and mileage.
Lochman:
But, is it 10% or 15%?
Johnson:
I’ll get to that later in the presentation.
Lochman:
But, the end of five years is the key. What is the mileage on the police
vehicles?
Johnson:
We can get that information back to you.
Carter:
Would it be helpful if we had a policy that mandated anti-idling and lateday fueling rather than using a voluntary process?
Johnson:
I think it would be difficult to mandate. We have good participation.
Burch:
We don’t want ozone/air quality to affect emergency operations. I don’t
think we need a policy; we have been successful with voluntary
compliance.
Carter:
Some cities do have policies.
Johnson:
We work with the Fuel Man System now and they are able to determine
time of day vehicles are refueled and we tracked that for a period of time
last summer.
Burgess:
In the May issue of Southern City, there was an article about efforts in
North Carolina to use alternative fuels, but it mentioned the price was
about $3.50/gallon.
Johnson:
It’s about 5% to 10% higher. We’re not seeing prices quite that high here,
but we have large terminals. Gastonia is actually testing using cooking oil
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 6
in four of their school buses.
Foxx:
What are we doing to reduce our dependence on our fleet?
Johnson:
There are a number of efforts to reduce the dependence on our fleet. One
is electronic meter reading. It would allow us to read more meters per
hour. A lot of businesses are using video cameras which reduce police
patrolling parking lots. With the crunch on budgets, each department has
been looking at ways to keep mileage down.
Carter:
Do we still supply school buses with an additive for their fuel?
Johnson:
I can get you a status on that.
Carter:
I’ve heard some areas are looking at sugar based versus corn based fuels.
Burch:
Some technology makes some services more efficient or less dependent on
use of vehicles. However, some services are just more hands on, like
Police, Housing Inspectors, and in those types of services, use of cameras
just will not do it. There is a trade off when you use technology, so we
need to look at everything because it might not be what we want.
Carter:
One alternative could be for the Fire Department to use smaller vehicles to
cap hydrants instead of using the trucks.
Schumacher: The crew comes with the truck.
Carter:
But, couldn’t you have one truck that went all over the city capping
hydrants?
Burch:
You could, but each company knows each hydrant best.
Burgess:
We need to get more people on the bus. I received a notice that Friday,
June 9 is a national day to ride the bus. Are we promoting that?
Tober:
That’s the first I’ve heard of it.
Burgess:
I think that is something we should do in the future.
Presutti:
I saw an ad a week or so ago.
Tober:
APTA sponsors something in May.
Burgess:
I just think it would be good for us to promote in the future.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 7
Ms. Johnson continued the presentation on Green Procurement.
Carter:
Do we do computer recycling?
Johnson:
Yes, we have a giant surplus operation that handles computers, office
furniture, etc. City and County staff have access to the warehouse and we
also sell to the public. So, we have good reuse. The rolling stock, fire
trucks, etc., we sell at auction. Some of the computers we turn over
directly to the school system.
Burgess:
There is a new program through Goodwill for training that just got
announced. They have a partnership with Dell.
Mumford:
Has there been any investigation on capturing methane as an alternative
energy source?
Schumacher: Not that I am aware of.
Mumford:
It would be interesting to know if there is an opportunity for an economic
development incentive for companies making environmental choices with
their operations.
Foxx:
This was a good presentation. I would like to have more information on
total energy consumption breaking it down by departments. For example,
what is CDOTs impact on energy use? I would also like to track
environmental impacts. I think that is very important to understanding
these issues. If Council decides to take a carbon neutral position, we need
to know how much we emit. We can examine what is going on in the
private sector and track environmental impacts on energy.
Where do we go from here?
III.
Next Meeting:
Foxx:
We have had presentations on air quality, water quality, land preservation,
and now energy and resource conservation. The Committee is tasked with
taking principles to the full Council.
Lochman:
We have looked at four general subjects. We should go back and look at
them from three perspectives. Are they technically feasible, what the
payback is and what the impact on the environment is.
Foxx:
As a policy?
Lochman:
We need some individual set of actions that have a positive result.
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 8
Carter:
So, you’re looking for positive payback?
Lochman:
Well, economic primarily. What we do sets an example to the public
sector.
Carter:
But, you have some flexibility?
Foxx:
Before we establish principles, we need to take a realistic look at our
capacity.
Lochman:
Our capacity now and our future objectives.
Foxx:
Is there a way to take the four areas and look at them on a continuum of
compliance, proactive and leadership?
Burch:
We did that with your framework in January. The compliance showed the
minimum of what you could do, in some cases you were already taking a
proactive or leadership role. It depends on the initiative.
Foxx:
Could staff then take the policy framework and prepare some
environmental statements for each on the continuum of compliance,
proactive, and leadership for us to reach to under each category? I think
that would give us a frame of reference.
Burgess:
That sounds logical to me. It is important for us to work with
Mecklenburg County and COG.
Burch:
We are definitely doing that on a staff level. We have a lot of interaction
with both Mecklenburg County and COG as well Clean Cities. I think
staff would suggest that you have a principle that addresses regional
cooperation and interdependence.
Mumford:
I agree. I don’t think the principle has to set the level though. We don’t
have to be leaders on everything. We might be a leader in water quality
over land preservation but the principle behind it might hold us
accountable to both. We should support the environment and economic
development, but we don’t want to obligate ourselves long-term. We need
a broad strategy because we might not be able to fund everything, i.e.
transportation.
Burgess:
I agree we need broad principles, but we also need to ask our employees
for their good ideas. They probably have some of the best ideas.
Burch:
The Environmental Cabinet is a staff group with representatives from a
Environment Committee
Meeting Summary for June 5, 2006
Page 9
number of our key businesses. They helped develop the framework and
they will help draft the principles. So, we have employee/staff input. I
think it would be premature to solicit other ideas now. The policies still
need to be defined.
Burgess:
I think it is an important step though. There is universal interest in this
and everyone wants to play a part.
Carter:
Do we have a sense of what the State is doing with environmental
practices? Is there a way to get a sense of anything negative?
Burch:
We are monitoring the State and Federal legislation, but I think that would
be a good goal for the focus area plan and could stem from the principles.
Another aspect of the Committee’s role is to determine our corporate role
like with fleet management. How can we walk the walk? You may wish
us to bring back ideas on that.
Foxx:
I think regional cooperation is incredibly important. There is a lot going
on regionally and at the State level and we don’t have direct control over
many of those things. We can support resolutions, but we need to
determine the appropriate role for Council.
Burch:
You currently only have one meeting scheduled in June (June 19). I think
you might want another meeting before September.
The Committee agreed to bring their calendars to the June 19 meeting to set one at least
one other summer meeting.
Julie Burch reminded the Committee the Sierra Club would be making a presentation at
the Workshop on Clean Cars.
The next meeting is Monday, June 19 from 3:30 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. in Room 280.
Environment Committee
Monday, June 5, 2006 – 2:00 p.m.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Government Center
Room 280
Committee Members:
Anthony Foxx, Chair
Patrick Mumford, Vice Chair
Susan Burgess
Nancy Carter
Don Lochman
Staff Resources:
Julie Burch
Debra Campbell
AGENDA
I.
Follow-up to Land Preservation Presentation – Julie Burch
As requested at the May 15 meeting, attached are examples of Land Preservation
policy statements from other jurisdictions. This information is provided as
background to the Committee for any guidance they may wish to provide to staff in
drafting environmental principles.
II.
Briefing and Discussion: Energy and Resource Conservation – Jim Schumacher
and Susan Johnson
Staff will provide an overview on Energy and Resource Conservation and its
importance to Charlotte and the region. Attached for information are examples of
policy statements from other jurisdictions.
This will be an interactive presentation in which Committee members are encouraged
to ask questions and engage in discussion throughout. Staff will be asking the
Committee for preliminary guidance for drafting of the environmental principles.
III.
Next Meeting:
June 19, 2006 – 3:30 p.m. in Room 280
Distribution:
Mayor/City Council
Mac McCarley
Environmental Cabinet
Jim Schumacher
Pamela A. Syfert, City Manager
Leadership Team
Keith Henrichs
Brenda Freeze
Environmental GDP Stakeholders PCCO Stakeholders
Susan Johnson
Land Preservation Statements of Other Cities
Examples of references to land preservation
in local policies, principles and goal statements
Mecklenburg County Environmental Leadership Policy
•
•
The Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners desires that County government operate in
a manner that conserves and protects our air, water and land resources, become a model of
environmental stewardship for local governments, business and industry in our region, and
use and apply the County's existing and future resources wisely for the benefit of its citizens.
Acquire, maintain and preserve land to protect the natural environment.
Raleigh
•
•
•
•
The City of Raleigh will protect, conserve and manage wisely its valuable natural resources in
order to maintain a pleasing and healthy environment.
Assure that Raleigh’s growth is compatible with its natural form, vegetation, topography and
drainage ways.
Develop a transportation system which lessens single-occupant automobile dependency and
its associated environmental impacts.
Preserve natural open space in order to enhance the cultural and aesthetic quality of life.
Seattle
•
•
The City of Seattle wishes to adopt regulations to promote safe, stable, and compatible
development and to protect critical areas . . .
(This Environmentally Critical Areas Ordinance) is intended to promote safe, stable, and
compatible development that avoids adverse environmental impacts and potential harm on the
parcel and to adjacent property, the surrounding neighborhood, and the drainage basin.
Portland
•
•
•
•
•
Protect the quality of the air, water, land and other natural resources.
Conserve native vegetation, fish, wildlife habitat and other ecosystems.
Minimize human impacts on local and worldwide ecosystems.
Recognize unique land qualities and adopt specific planning objectives for special areas.
Encourage and develop connections between environmental quality and economic vitality.
Promote development that reduces adverse effects on ecology and the natural resource capital
base and supports employment opportunities for our citizens.
Vancouver, Washington
•
•
Environmental protection and enhancement, based on the “best available science,” will be
important factors in Vancouver’s land use planning, zoning and development regulations.
Development that cannot reasonably avoid critical areas will include mitigation of potential
impacts to prevent a net loss of environmental function.
1
Land Preservation Statements of Other Cities - 2
Santa Monica
•
•
Santa Monica is committed to protecting, preserving and restoring the natural environment.
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.
Denver
•
•
(“Blueprint Denver”) is an integrated land use and transportation plan that will assist in
managing growth in a responsible, sustainable manner.
Specifically, it will result in more mixed uses to: reduce the number and length of trips by car;
move people through its streets by balancing autos with pedestrians, cycling, and transit; and
improve the connections with amenities.
Chicago
•
•
•
•
Promote infill development and redevelopment where transportation facilities and utilities
already exist in order to minimize the development of open land . . . encourage development
that is compact and contiguous to existing community infrastructure.
Locate and plan new development in ways that protect natural resources and habitat and
provide buffers between sensitive natural areas and intensive use areas.
Use the development process to enhance and restore streams, wetlands and lakes, and to
enhance their potential as recreational and aesthetic amenities.
Preserve permanent open space as an integral part of new development . . . create open space
linkages to adjacent and regional natural areas.
Minneapolis
•
Increase the tree canopy in the City of Minneapolis. Trees reduce air pollution, provide
habitat for wildlife, control water run off and actually cool the city. Increasing the number of
trees planted is an important step for our environment now and for future generations.
Louisville
•
•
•
Minimize the impact of changing land use on natural features and ecosystems.
Utilize site plan review guidelines and standards to identify the location of and potential
impacts on environmental resources, e.g. geological features, sensitive soils, steep slopes and
stream corridors.
Promote development that is sensitive to existing topography and minimize land disturbance
and major reshaping of geologic features.
Richmond
•
•
Protection of environmentally sensitive lands will improve water quality and preserve special
features that have other important environmental or cultural values.
Trees are a valuable environmental and asethetic resource (and) provide a number of tangible
and intangible benefits.
Tampa
•
The City shall continue to review all land development applications and to apply land
development regulations to ensure the protection of the attributes, functions and amenities of
Land Preservation Statements of Other Cities - 3
•
•
•
the natural environment in a manner that continues to ensure a net environmental benefit
under all projected scenarios.
The City of Tampa shall require the conservation of its valuable soil resources and shall
require that they be utilized in a manner best suited to their particular capabilities.
The City will protect significant and essential wildlife habitats throughout the city with
comprehensive regulations to protect designated areas from the negative impacts of
development.
The City shall continue to seek acquisition of ecological valuable land through environmental
land acquisition programs.
Toronto
•
•
Anticipate and prevent pollution of air, land and water.
Regenerate and naturalize degraded habitats and linked green spaces.
Ottawa
•
•
The City will protect natural features and functions in the urban and rural area by designating
in this Plan forests, wetlands and other natural features which perform significant natural
functions . . . and the City will determine how these lands should best be protected or
managed to ensure their environmental health.
The City will ensure that land is developed in a manner that is environmentally-sensitive and
incorporates design with nature principles through the requirements of the development
review process, including studies of environmental systems and development practices
intended to maintain and enhance these systems, and the integrated environmental review.
■ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Environmental Stewardship Action Plan
• Protect the physical environment and enhance the character, quality and livability of the
community by preserving the natural environment as an integral part of the development
process.
Land Use Action Plan
• Develop residential areas that are environmentally sensitive, pedestrian friendly and
encourage a mix of compatible uses.
Land Preservation and Restoration
• Preserve and restore the land by using innovative waste management practices and cleaning
up contaminated properties to reduce risks posed by releases of harmful substances.
Healthy Communities and Ecosystems
Protect, sustain or restore the health of people, communities and ecosystems, using integrated
and comprehensive approaches and partnerships.
•
Energy and Resource Conservation Statements
of Other Cities
Examples of references to energy and resource conservation
in local policies, principles and goal statements
Mecklenburg County Environmental Leadership Policy
•
•
•
•
•
. . . use and apply the County's existing and future resources wisely for the benefit of its
citizens.
Practice energy conservation in all County facilities.
Practice waste minimization and recycling in all County facilities.
Purchase the lowest-emission vehicles practical to meet County needs.
Include environmental considerations in purchasing decisions for goods and services.
Seattle
•
•
Make waste reduction, pollution prevention and recycling integral parts of how City
government and others in the city conduct their daily business.
Reduce the emission of greenhouse gases to control the impact of climate change globally and
locally.
Portland
•
•
•
•
•
The City of Portland will promote a sustainable future that meets today’s needs without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs. (note: this statement is
common to most local environmental policies)
Use resources efficiently and reduce demand for natural resources, like energy, land and
water, rather than expanding supply.
Purchase products based on long term environmental and operating costs and find ways to
include environmental and social costs in short term prices. Purchase products that are
durable, reusable, made of recycled materials, and non-toxic.
The City of Portland shall incorporate green building principles and practices into the design,
construction and operations of all City facilities, City-funded projects, and infrastructure projects to the fullest extent possible. (note: this 2001 policy was amended in 2005 to “require
that all new, City-owned facilities construction projects meet LEED Gold certification.”)
Furthermore, the City will provide leadership and guidance to encourage the application of
green building practices in private sector development.
Santa Monica
•
•
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.
1
Energy and Resource Conservation Statements of Other Cities – 2
Long Beach
•
•
•
The City of Long Beach shall adopt Green Building Policy goals and incorporate green
building principles and practices into the planning, design, construction, management,
renovation, operations and disposal of all City facilities that are constructed and owned by the
City.
The City shall adopt the LEED Building Rating System as the green building design standard
for its ongoing and future program areas, and incorporate this system into all City facility
projects that are constructed and owned by the City.
The City shall provide leadership and guidance to encourage the application of green building
practices in private sector planning, design, construction, management, renovation, operations
and disposal of buildings by promoting the voluntary application of the LEED rating system.
Scottsdale
•
•
The Scottsdale City Council hereby declares that all new, occupied city buildings, of any size,
will be designed, contracted and built to achieve the LEED Gold certification level, and to
strive for the highest level of certification (Platinum) whenever project resources and
conditions permit.
All future renovations and non-occupied city buildings will be designed, contracted and built
to include as many principles of both the LEED program and the City’s Green Building
Program as are feasible.
Denver
•
•
•
Resources, both renewable and non-renewable, should be conserved and preserved to the
maximum extent possible.
Waste should not be thrust into the environment any faster than nature can absorb it.
Renewable resources should not be used faster than they are recharged, replenished or
restored by the environment.
Chicago
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Provide technical assistance, model projects and incentives to build energy efficient, smart,
healthy and green residential buildings.
Identify and eliminate barriers to green building practices in the City’s building codes.
Provide incentives to local businesses, developers and contractors to build or rehabilitate
efficient, resource conserving buildings.
Educate both children and adults about the benefits of environmentally sound, daily routines
such as recycling, water and energy conservation and pollution reduction.
Provide recycling programs and infrastructure to citizens and businesses in order to reduce
waste generated in the city.
Commit to build all public buildings following the guidelines of the Chicago Standard, a
green building protocol developed by the City.
Use innovative, resource efficient materials and technologies in the construction and operation of our public places, roads, streets and neighborhoods.
Continue to grow our fleet of alternative fuel vehicles.
Develop the infrastructure to support and encourage the use of alternative forms of transportation.
Energy and Resource Conservation Statements of Other Cities – 3
Minneapolis
•
•
Reduce energy use at City facilities.
Reduce environmental impacts from City fleet operations.
Columbus
•
Buy Green products by adopting changes to our procurement code to assure that when
practical we are purchasing materials that are recycled and that can be recycled.
Atlanta
•
Well-designed, resource efficient buildings reduce energy and material use; provide healthier,
more productive indoor environments for their occupants; and have lower lifecycle costs,
resulting in net savings for the City and taxpayers. (The City adopted the LEED system in
2003 and resolved to “strive to achieve Silver certification for all appropriate City facilities.)
Charlottesville
•
•
•
•
Promote conservation. Actively explore, create and communicate environmentally sound
practices that emphasize the enviroinimental management herarchy of pollution prevention
(source reduction), reuse, recycling, treatment and environmentally safe disposal in order to
conserve and protect our region’s natural resources.
The conservation principle includes assessing the effect on the environment of City acitivities,
products and services throughout their life cycles.
Promote the implementation of policies and practices that contribute to the reduction of
petroleum consumption in city vehicles.
Facilitate the introduction of alternative fuels and vehicles, leading to increased fuel
efficiency, as well as hybrid-electric vehicles.
Boston
•
•
The development of high performance buildings is accomplished by integrating sustainable
design methods and resource efficient technologies and materials into every aspect of a
project’s development and operational life cycle . . . the results will conserve limited natural
resources, provide for a healthy work and living environment, and increase the long-term
value of a project.
The three “R”s – Reduce, Reuse, and Reycle – are important components of our ultimate goal
of protecting our environment, preserving our natural resources and safeguarding our public
health.
Toronto
•
•
•
Conserve our environmental capital and live off the interest.
Reduce Toronto’s “ecological footprint” and strive for greater self-sufficiency by conserving
energy, water and resources; reducing waste; using local materials, foods and products; and
using materials in continuous cycles.
The City shall adopt, as a long-range goal, the development of a Sustainable Energy
Infrastructure for Toronto that supports the efficient production, transmission and use of
energy from renewable sources.
Energy and Resource Conservation Statements of Other Cities – 4
Vancouver
•
•
•
Resources must be used fairly and efficiently without compromising the sustainability of one
community for another.
Using renewal resources is encouraged and supported, while the use of non-renewable
resources should be minimized.
The Vancouver economy should move forward from its dependence on non-renewable carbon
based fuels, particularly for transportation, which are likely to fluctuate dramatically in price
and supply.
■ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Reduce Solid Waste
Source reduction (waste prevention) can conserve resources, reduce pollution, and help cut waste
disposal and handling costs. Because source reduction actually prevents the generation of waste
in the first place, it comes before other management options that deal with trash after it is already
generated. After source reduction, recycling is the preferred waste management options because
it reduces the amount of waste going to landfills and conserve resources.
May 2006