HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 02242020 - Sustainability Cte Min PktCONTRA COSTA COUNTY
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
An Advisory Body to the Board of Supervisors
February 24, 2020
5:00 P.M.
30 Muir Road, Martinez
Howdy Goudey, Chair, At-Large, Community
Group
Nick Despota, Vice-Chair, Member, District 1
Shoshana Wechsler, Alternate, District 1
Victoria Smith, Member, District 2
Ryan Buckley, Alternate, District 2
John Sierra, Member, District 3
Mike Moore, Alternate, District 3
Wes Sullens, Member, District 4
Travis Curran, Alternate, District 4
Charles Davidson, Member, District 5
Reneé Fernandez-Lipp, Alternate, District 5
Harry Thurston, At-Large, Community Group
Russell Driver, At-Large, Business
Nicholas Snyder, At-Large, Business
Doria Robinson, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Sarah Foster, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Kim Hazard, At-Large, Education
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the
Committee
1.Call to Order and Introductions
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Public Comment
4.APPROVE Record of Action for December 9, 2019 meeting.
5.ELECT OFFICERS for the Sustainability Commission for 2020.
6.ADOPT CALENDAR for 2020.
7.RECEIVE UPDATE on Development of Building Electrification Reach Code.
8.PROVIDE INPUT to Climate Emergency Resolution.
9.RECEIVE REPORT on update to the County’s Tree Ordinance.
10.RECEIVE UPDATE on Climate Action Plan Goals and Strategies.
11.RECEIVE Reports from Sustainability Commission members and alternates, and PROVIDE
DIRECTION as needed.
12.RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Coordinator.
13.RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Commission Chair and IDENTIFY TOPICS for next
report to Ad Hoc Committee on Sustainability.
14.The next meeting is currently scheduled for April 27, 2020.
15.Adjourn
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 1 of 108
The Sustainability Commission will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities planning to attend
Commission meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72 hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and distributed by the County to a
majority of members of the Commission less than 96 hours prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 30 Muir
Road, Martinez, CA during normal business hours. Staff reports related to items on the agenda are also accessible on line at
www.co.contra-costa.ca.us.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day prior to the published
meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact: Jody London, Commission Staff jody.london@dcd.cccounty.us
Phone (925) 674-7871 · Fax (925) 674-7250
Glossary of Acronyms, Abbreviations, and other Terms (in alphabetical order): Contra Costa County has a
policy of making limited use of acronyms, abbreviations, and industry-specific language in meetings of its
Board of Supervisors and Committees. Following is a list of commonly used abbreviations that may appear
in presentations and written materials at meetings of the Ad Hoc Sustainability Committee:
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACA Assembly Constitutional Amendment
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District
BAYREN Bay Area Regional Energy Network
BGO Better Government Ordinance (Contra Costa County)
BOS Board of Supervisors
CALTRANS California Department of Transportation
AO County Administrative Officer or Office
CAP Climate Action Plan
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCA Community Choice
CCE Community Choice Energy Aggregation
CCWD Contra Costa Water District
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CSA County Service Area
CSAC California State Association of Counties
DCC Delta Counties Coalition
DCD Contra Costa County Dept. of Conservation &
Development
DPC Delta Protection Commission
DSC Delta Stewardship Council
DWR California Department of Water Resources
EBEW East Bay Energy Watch
EBMUD East Bay Municipal Utility District
EIR Environmental Impact Report (a state requirement)
EIS Environmental Impact Statement (a federal requirement)
FTE Full Time Equivalent
FY Fiscal Year
GHG Greenhouse Gas
GGRF Greenhouse Gas Reduction Funds
GIS Geographic Information System
HSD Contra Costa County Health Services Department
IPM Integrated Pest Management
JPA/JEPA Joint (Exercise of) Powers Authority or Agreement
LAMORINDA Area of Lafayette-Moraga-Orinda
MAC Municipal Advisory Council
MBE Minority Business Enterprise
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOE Maintenance of Effort
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
NACo National Association of Counties
NEPA National Environmental Protection Act
PDA Priority Development Area
PV Photovoltaic
PWD Contra Costa County Public Works Department
RDA Redevelopment Agency or Area
RFI Request For Information
RFP Request For Proposals
RFQ Request For Qualifications
SB Senate Bill
SGC Strategic Growth Council
SR2S Safe Routes to Schools
TWIC Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee
U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
WBE Women-Owned Business Enterprise
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 2 of 108
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
4.
Meeting Date: 2/24/2020
Subject: APPROVE Record of Action for December 9, 2019, Sustainability Commission
Meeting.
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter: Jody London, DCD
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
County Ordinance (Better Government Ordinance 95-6, Article 25-205, [d]) requires that each County
Body keep a record of its meetings. Though the record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect
the agenda and the decisions made in the meeting.
Referral Update:
Any handouts or printed copies of testimony distributed at the meeting will be attached to this meeting
record. Links to the agenda and minutes will be available at the Committee web page, to be announced.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff recommends approval of the attached Record of Action for the December 9, 2019, Sustainability
Commission Meeting with any necessary corrections.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A
ATTACHMENT(S)
December 9, 2019 Draft Record of Action
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 3 of 108
DRAFT
Record of Action
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
An Advisory Body to the Board of Supervisors
December 9, 2019
5:00 P.M.
30 Muir Road, Martinez
Howdy Goudey, Chair, At-Large, Community
Group
Nick Despota, Vice-Chair, Member, District 1
Shoshana Wechsler, Alternate, District 1
Victoria Smith, Member, District 2
Ryan Buckley, Alternate, District 2
John Sierra, Member, District 3
Mike Moore, Alternate, District 3
Wes Sullens, Member, District 4
Travis Curran, Alternate, District 4
Charles Davidson, Member, District 5
Reneé Fernandez-Lipp, Alternate, District 5
Harry Thurston, At-Large, Community Group
Russell Driver, At-Large, Business
Nicholas Snyder, At-Large, Business
Doria Robinson, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Sarah Foster, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Kim Hazard, At-Large, Education
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference of the
Committee
Present: Howdy Goudey, Chair, At-Large, Community Group
Nick Despota, Vice-Chair, Member, District 1
Shoshana Wechsler, Alternate, District 1
Victoria Smith, Member, District 2
John Sierra, Member, District 3
Mike Moore, Alternate, District 3
Wes Sullens, Member, District 4
Travis Curran, Alternate, District 4
Charles Davidson, Member, District 5
Reneé Fernandez-Lipp, Alternate, District 5
Russell Driver, At-Large, Business
Harry Thurston, At-Large, Community Group
Sarah Foster, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Absent: Ryan Buckley, Alternate, District 2
Nicholas Snyder, At-Large, Business
Doria Robinson, At-Large, Environmental Justice
Kim Hazard, At-Large, Education
Staff Present: Demian Hardman, Senior Energy Planner, Department of Conservation and Development
Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator, Department of Conservation and Development
Cindy Cortez, Climate Corps Fellow, Department of Conservation and Development
Dom Pruett, Office of Supervisor Andersen
Attendees: Linda Flower
1.Call to Order and Introductions
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Public Comment
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 4 of 108
There was no public comment.
4.APPROVE Record of Action for August 26, 2019 meeting.
Motion: Victoria Smith. Second: Sarah Foster.
Vote: 12 Aye, 1 Abstention (Despota).
5.REVIEW and Possible ADOPTION of 2019 Annual Report and 2020 Work Plan
Commission members discussed the Annual Report and Work Plan. Members requested that the report be
amended to reflect work the Commission anticipates in 2020 on building electrification, carbon- neutral
building materials, a climate emergency resolution, and increasing resiliency to climate-related disasters and
incidents.
The Annual Report and Work Plan were adopted unanimously.
Motion: Wes Sullens
Second: Nick Despota
6.REVIEW and Possible ADOPTION of Climate Action Plan Progress Report for 2019.
The Commission discussed the draft Progress Report on the Climate Action Plan (CAP), which is usually
submitted with the Commission’s Annual Report and Work Plan. Commissioners made suggestions for the
final report, if feasible:
Provide an explanation for why the reported energy efficiency projects for non-residential buildings
were lower than those for residential buildings.
Provide data on where energy efficiency and rooftop solar projects are located geographically.
Provide information on the obstacles and challenges departments encounter in trying to achieve the
CAP goals.
Provide context for the Progress Report in the introduction of the Report.
Commissioners expressed interest in better understanding what is viable for CAP goals, where the
Commission can assist, context for CAP goals, etc. The Commission directed sub-groups to meet with key
County staff in the areas of transportation (Russell Driver, Sarah Foster) and water (Sarah Foster, John
Sierra, Reneé Fernandez-Lipp).
The Commission asked whether the energy financing opportunities will be expanded. Some observed that
Property Assessed Clean Energy programs are not designed for all income brackets or available to all County
residents. The Commission discussed whether future CAP Progress Reports can include an equity statement
for every measure.
Victoria Smith moved adoption of the CAP Progress Report for 2019, with the provision that the comments
and additional information discussed by the Commission be included. Nick Despota provided a second. The
Progress Report was approved unanimously.
7.RECEIVE Update on Draft Goals and Strategies for the Climate Action Plan.
Jody London reported that Sustainability staff are working with other County staff to develop CAP goals and
strategies, working off the ideas developed by the Sustainability Commission and in the community meetings
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 5 of 108
held in September and October. The Commission discussed a possible presentation on the Commute Survey
for County employees at its February 2020 meeting.
Sustainability Commissioners provided the following specific suggestions:
Include phase out of fossil fuels.
Include fire danger and power shutoffs.
Track the number of electric vehicle charging stations.
Under education, include education on electric vehicle rebates.
Track the number of electric vehicles in bus fleets and other forms of public transportation.
It will be important to be able to rank CAP measures in terms of their effectiveness and to consider the
capacity of County staff to do the work.
The Commission also discussed the letter from a number of environmental groups included in the agenda.
Specific to the recommendation VIII. “Initiate plans for how an orderly phase out of fossil fuel refining will
occur in the County,” Commission observed that should include brown fields. They also observed that
“managed decline” is broad language, and that the County should be considering a gradual stepping down of
oil production in the County, staying ahead of a potential crisis and not throwing the workforce into disarray.
8.DISCUSS Climate Emergency Resolution, as May Be Requested by Board of Supervisors
Sustainability Committee
Howdy Goudey provided an update on the discussion about a Climate Emergency Resolution that occurred that
morning at the Sustainability Committee of the Board of Supervisors. The Committee directed staff to take a
first cut at the resolution. Goudey said the Committee appears to be more interested in discrete actions than a
broad vision, and there was comment and discussion at the meeting on the merits of each approach.
Commissioners observed the resolution provides an opportunity to change how the County works on these
topics. For example, every staff report to the Board of Supervisors could include a climate action statement,
similar to how reports now include a children’s impact statement. Some think the resolution should provide
guiding principles and vision. The County of Los Angeles Our County plan was cited as an example of a
visionary document. Commission members would like to see the Board of Supervisors make a statement that
they will take action on climate issues.
9.RECEIVE UPDATE on Low-Carbon Concrete Codes
Nick Despota provided an update on this issue, as documented in the attached written report. Despota
observed that low-carbon concrete codes would allow the County to use its procurement power to purchase
different concrete aggregates. Marin County recently issued a report on this that outlines different concrete
mixes for different applications.
The Commission discussed whether the Sustainability Commission should recommend that the Board consider
using low-carbon concrete in County projects, and/or consider adopting the same model codes that Marin
County has adopted. Some noted that the Marin approach is prescriptive for residential projects, broader for
larger projects. There are other ways to produce the concrete aggregate.
Jody London observed that developing new codes is a time-consuming process for staff, even when there are
models from other jurisdictions. Staff must perform due diligence, bring new codes and policies through the
legislative process, consult with a range of stakeholders, etc. The County has limited resources to devote to the
many actions included in the Climate Action Plan.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 6 of 108
The Commission discussed whether this could be considered in the context of other reach codes, such as codes
calling for buildings to operate entirely on electricity. It might be that a number of reach codes could be
included in the Climate Action Plan, and prioritized for action over time.
10.RECEIVE Reports from Sustainability Commission members and alternates, and PROVIDE
DECTION as needed.
There were no updates.
11.RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Coordinator.
Jody London reviewed the report included in the agenda.
Demian Hardman reported on energy efficiency work. Hardman said the Bay Area Regional Energy Network
(BayREN) in recent months has hosted a series of energy retrofit workshops for homeowners in Contra Costa
County. Hardman reported that BayREN will have a new focus and target market in the new year, with the
multi-family program focusing more on low-income properties. BayREN also provided in-house training for
County building and permitting staff on the new building code that goes into effect in 2020. Hardman is
working with the County Health Department to build out the Green and Healthy Homes program, which focuses
on providing medical and energy retrofit and weatherization services households with high asthma rates.
Hardman also reported that the California Public Utilities Commission approved the fuel substitution
proceeding, which allows energy efficiency implementers such as BayREN, to develop new incentives to
encourage customers to switch from electricity to natural gas.
12.RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Commission Chair and IDENTIFY TOPICS for next report to Ad
Hoc Committee on Sustainability.
Howdy Goudey reported that the Sustainability Committee had a very full meeting that morning, discussing
topics that include enrolling County accounts in MCE’s Deep Green program, the County employee commute
survey, the climate emergency resolution, and possible participation with MCE in the CALeVIP electric vehicle
infrastructure program. Items on building electrification and the federal Green Act had to be held over to the
January meeting because the Committee ran out of time.
13.The next meeting is currently scheduled for February 24, 2020.
14.Adjourn
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 7 of 108
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
5.
Meeting Date:
Subject:
Department:
2/24/2020
ELECT OFFICERS for the Sustainability Commission for 2020 .
Conservation and Development
Presenter: Jody London, Department of Conservation and Development
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
On August 28, 2017, the Sustainability Commission adopted Bylaws. These Bylaws were
approved by the Board of Supervisors on September 26, 2017. Section IV.A of the Bylaws
regarding Organization states: “The Commission shall annually at its first meeting in the
calendar year elect its Chair and Vice-Chair.” The duties of the Chair are defined in the
Bylaws as conducting meetings, developing agenda, and serving as the official spokesperson
for the Commission. The duties of the Vice-Chair are defined as acting for the Chair in the
Chair’s absence.
Referral Update:
The February 24, 2020, meeting is the first meeting in the calendar year of the Sustainability
Commission. It is therefore the meeting at which the Commission should elect its officers for
2020.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ELECT OFFICERS for the Sustainability Commission for 2020.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A.
ATTACHMENT(S)
N/A
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 8 of 108
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
6.
Meeting Date:
Subject:
Department:
2/24/2020
ADOPT CALENDAR for 2020.
Conservation and Development
Presenter: Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
N/A
Referral Update:
The Sustainability Commission meets on the fourth Monday in the months of February, April,
June, August, October, and December. In the alternate months, the Sustainability Committee
of the Board of Supervisors holds its meetings. The Sustainability Committee has the option
to modify a meeting date. Given the winter break, staff recommends the attached meeting
calendar for 2020. The calendar lists potential topics for meetings, with room for the calendar
to evolve as the year progresses.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ADOPT CALENDAR for 2020
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A.
ATTACHMENT(S)
Sustainability Commission 2020 Calendar
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 9 of 108
Contra Costa County Sustainability Commission2020 CalendarMeeting Date TopicAction and Next StepsFebruary 24, 2020 Elect Officers for 2020Set Meeting Dates for 2020Building Electrification Climate Emergency Resolution Climate Action Plan Goals and StrategiesCounty Tree OrdinanceApril 27, 2020 General Plan updateEmployee Commute SurveyClimate Action Plan UpdateTransportation Update (?)Green Benefits Districts (?)June 22, 2020 Climate Action Plan UpdateAugust 24, 2020 Climate Action Plan UpdateOctober 26, 2020 Climate Action Plan UpdateDecember 14, 2020Review and Adopt 2020 Annual Report and 2021 Work PlanTopics identified in 2020 Work Plan:• General Plan Update•Climate Action Plan update• Integrating equity and environmental justice into the Climate Action Planand related documents and projects• Identifying and pursuing opportunities to develop green benefits districts throughout the County• Electric Vehicle Readiness Blueprint implementation• Advocacy on issues related to the Climate Action Plan• Potential health impacts of climate change• Building electrification• Carbon-neutral building materials• A climate emergency resolution• Increasing resilience to climate-related disasters and incidents, including the Adapting to Rising Tides studies for Eastern Contra Costa County and the Ba1 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 10 of 108
Contra Costa County Sustainability Commission2020 Calendar• Outreach and education on sustainability to Contra Costa County residents and businesses• Other issues in the Climate Action Plan, including water conservation and drought; land use and public transportation, including pedestrian and bicycle acc2 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 11 of 108
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
7.
Meeting Date: 2/24/2020
Subject:
Department:
Presenter:
RECEIVE UPDATE on direction provided by the Board’s Sustainability.
Committee on Building Electrification.
Conservation & Development (DCD)
Demian Hardman, DCD
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
The Sustainability Commission has had recent interest in building electrification and has
identified it as a potential strategy to include in the update to the County’s Climate Action Plan.
Referral Update:
On September 23, 2019, the Board’s Sustainability Committee requested that staff provide a
report on building electrification, including its benefits to existing homeowners.
On February 3, 2020, DCD staff provided a report to the Board’s Sustainability Committee about
the various jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area that have adopted new all-electric or electric-
preferred building code ordinances for new construction. The Sustainability Committee
requested that staff prepare building electrification building code options to consider at their next
meeting on March 27, 2020. Attached is the report presented to the Board’s Sustainability
Committee.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE UPDATE on direction provided by the Board’s Sustainability Committee on Building
Electrification
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None at this time. This activity is funded through DCD Energy Efficiency Programs.
ATTACHMENT(S)
02-03-20 Sus-Cmte Report on Building Electrification.pdf.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 12 of 108
SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
Meeting Date:02/03/2020
Subject:RECEIVE REPORT on Building Electrification and PROVIDE DIRECTION
re: same.
Submitted For: Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Department:Conservation & Development
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: N/A
Presenter: Demian Hardman, DCD Contact: Jody London (925)674-7871
Referral History:
On September 23, 2019, the Sustainability Committee requested that staff provide a report on
building electrification, including its benefits to existing homeowners. Building electrification has
also been an item of recent interest by the Sustainability Commission and has been identified as a
potential strategy to include in the update to the County’s Climate Action Plan.
Referral Update:
Department of Conservation and Development (DCD) staff has completed some initial research
on various jurisdictions throughout the Bay Area that have adopted new building electrification
ordinances for new construction. Attached are a list of jurisdictions throughout the State that have
either adopted all-electric or electric-preferred ordinances. Also included are reports from the
cities of Oakland, San Jose, and San Mateo that provide some information on the benefits of
building electrification.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE REPORT on benefits of building electrification and PROVIDE DIRECTION as
appropriate.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A
Attachments
Jurisdiction Building Electrification Matrix
City of Oakland Memo
City of San Jose Staff Report
San Mateo Building Electrification Agenda Item
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 13 of 108
Building Electrification Active Reach Code Local Government Efforts Building Decarbonization Coalition Code Comparison Matrix as of 11/25/2019 http://www.buildingdecarb.org/active‐code‐efforts.html 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 14 of 108
Building Electrification Active Reach Code Local Government Efforts Building Decarbonization Coalition Code Comparison Matrix as of 11/25/2019 http://www.buildingdecarb.org/active‐code‐efforts.htmlAll-electric only:BerkeleyBrisbaneMenlo Park^Morgan HillMountain ViewPacifica^Palo AltoSan JoseSanta RosaSaratogaWindsor^Electric Clothes Drying, Space and WaterHeating Required, Non-Residential All ElectricRequirementElectric-Preferred:County of MarinDavisMill ValleyMilpitasSan JoseSan MateoSan Luis ObispoSanta MonicaOther Approaches:Carlsbad (Electric Water Heating)Sunnyvale (Density Bonus)Oakland (Electric Vehicles) 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 15 of 108
INTER OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: ECAP ad hoc Community Advisory Committee FROM: Daniel Hamilton
SUBJECT: Building Electrification Information DATE: July 23, 2019
________________
Foundation: IPCC Report for Policy Makers: Climate change caused by greenhouse gas
emissions is significantly impacting the livability of the planet, and urgent action is needed to
ensure the long-term viability of cities and nations. The 2018 IPCC report finds that limiting
global warming to 1.5°C would require “rapid and far-reaching” transitions in land, energy,
industry, buildings, transport, and cities. The majority of reductions in GHG emissions must
occur by 2030 to avoid the most serious impacts of climate change. Globally, this translates to a
reduction in emissions of 45% between 2010 and 2030.
In addition to the global analysis above, the State of California, through the California Energy
Commission (CEC), has provided strong evidence of the need for building electrification to be a
foundational piece of the State’s climate change strategy. The CEC has published reports that all-
electric building requirements are beneficial to all utility customers, will improve the electricity
grid, and significantly improve both GHG reductions and resident health. Multiple long-term
strategy reports from the CEC indicate that all-electric buildings will be required Statewide in the
future, and that leading cities are needed to demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach.
GHG Emissions in Oakland: Across the city, the majority of emissions in Oakland come from
the burning of gasoline and diesel to power vehicles, as well as burning natural gas to provide
heating and cooking for homes and businesses. With the creation of East Bay Community
Energy, Oakland is now served with electricity that is more than 85% carbon free; expected to
reach 100% carbon free within the next 10 years. With an abundant supply of clean green
electricity, transitioning all remaining fossil-fuel based energy systems to electric alternatives
becomes the City’s most impactful and cost-effective strategy for meeting the deep GHG
reductions necessary to meet this global challenge and protect our community from deeper
impacts of climate change. For newly constructed buildings, this memo provides a summary of
the analysis demonstrating that all-electric buildings are a viable policy solution today.
Cost Effectiveness: Staff and stakeholders have been conducting analysis over the past several
years to identify the most cost-effective ways to transition these building and transportation
systems to electric alternatives. Working with the City, Bloomberg Associates prepared a Cost
Effectiveness Study for Reducing GHG Emissions in Oakland. This study concluded that
electrifying the buildings and vehicles in Oakland are both cost-effective and critical items for
the City to pursue, particularly the electrification of newly constructed buildings in the near term.
This study is the most robust local government analysis ever undertaken to ascertain the costs
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 16 of 108
To: ECAP ad hoc Community Advisory Committee
Subject: Building Electrification Information
Date: July 23, 2019 Page 2
and benefits of such a policy, and conclusively demonstrates that Oakland is a prime location for
requiring all newly constructed buildings to utilize electricity for all energy systems.
In addition to the Bloomberg Analysis, the Rocky Mountain Institute, a think tank focused on
energy issues, prepared an analysis of the costs and benefits of electrifying buildings for four
cities, including Oakland. This analysis came to a similar conclusion that all-electric buildings in
Oakland are both cost-effective to build and to operate. The report concluded that the City
should “Recognize and encourage all-electric new construction buildings as both a cost-reducing
and carbon-reducing measure through new building codes”. The report also focused on the
benefits of ending the construction of gas infrastructure in new residential buildings,
documenting that the City should “Limit or stop further expansion of the natural gas distribution
system to service more homes. Electric space and water heating is likely to provide the same
service to customers for less cost and carbon emissions, and avoid the risk of stranded gas
distribution assets”.
Health Benefits: Requiring all-electric buildings not only reduces the cost of both construction
and lowers utility bills for residents and businesses, there are also significant health benefits for
people using these buildings. Research into the impacts of natural gas systems in homes has
been occurring across the medical and community health fields, documenting significant risks
and impacts associated with natural gas cooktops, leaking natural gas from appliances, and
poorly ventilated kitchens. Studies by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the National
Institutes of Health, California Energy Commission, and Johns Hopkins University have
documented unhealthy levels of nitrous oxides (NOx) in homes with gas cooktops, particularly
noting the disproportionately negative impact on inner city African American children. The
Johns Hopkins University study calls for interventions to reduce exposure to natural gas to
reduce asthma symptoms and morbidity in African American children, a critical policy
consideration in considering whether to require gas-free buildings.
Regional and National Action to Electrify Buildings: Oakland is among more than 50 cities
actively considering policies to reduce or eliminate the use of natural gas systems in buildings.
In July 2019, the City of Berkeley became the first City to ban natural gas systems in all new
construction, garnering a unanimous vote of Council following public support for the policy
from residents, developers, the California Energy Commission, and PG&E. More than 30 cities
in the Bay Area, in addition to cities along the central coast of California and in the Los Angeles
area, have indicated that they are actively considering building codes that will eliminate natural
gas systems from some or all building types. East Bay Community Energy (EBCE), in
coordination with multiple other community choice energy providers, has provided cost-
effectiveness studies for cities to use in considering this policy solution. EBCE has provided the
City of Oakland with analysis of all-electric buildings in our climate zone, concluding that all-
electric buildings are cheaper to build and will result in lower utility bills for all building types.
This analysis was done in coordination with the standards set forth by the California Energy
Commission, and can serve to meet the regulatory requirements of any Council action to
eliminate natural gas options in newly constructed buildings. Similar studies have been
completed for the peninsula and south bay, documenting similar results. These combined
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 17 of 108
To: ECAP ad hoc Community Advisory Committee
Subject: Building Electrification Information
Date: July 23, 2019 Page 3
analyses will enable dozens of Bay Area cities to consider all-electric building codes during the
fall and winter of 2019.
Technologies for All Electric Buildings: Developers and contractors, as well as interested
residents, have sought to learn whether there are appropriate technologies to replace the natural
gas systems. Developers tend to focus mostly on replacements for gas furnaces, while residents
tend to care most about gas cooktops. Staff in Oakland and elsewhere, including PG&E and
other utilities, have been preparing materials to help interested parties learn about the wide range
of technologies currently available for use in all-electric buildings. Electric heating systems such
as heat pumps are available from many manufacturers, in sizes and configurations for any
residential or commercial building type. Cooking systems for both homes and businesses have a
variety of options, including induction cooktops for homes, that are not only more energy
efficient, but also far superior in cooking times and temperature control to natural gas cooktops.
Working with other cities and industries, the Building Decarbonization Coalition has helped to
demonstrate that all residential, commercial, and specialty building types can be designed as all-
electric without any disruption to the ways residents and businesses currently use their homes
and offices.
Conclusions: The City of Oakland is in an excellent position to reduce GHG emissions, decrease
construction costs, lower utility bills, and improve the health of all residents through the
elimination of natural gas systems in newly constructed buildings in Oakland. There is sufficient
evidence of the cost effectiveness of the approach, market availability of technologies, and
understanding within the impacted industries to ensure that the policy can be implemented as
intended. Following the recent natural gas ban in Berkeley, multiple other cities in our region
will be considering similar policies to this for these reasons. The cumulative impact of these
policies will further aid rapid market transformation in the construction industry, and help
Oakland take another major step forward in protecting the community from climate impacts.
City staff are conducting workshops with relevant stakeholders throughout the summer, and the
proposed all-electric building code is tentatively scheduled to be publicly considered by the
Community and Economic Development Committee on October 22nd. Full City Council
consideration could then occur as early as November 5th.
Sincerely,
Daniel Hamilton
Oakland Public Works
Acting Manager, Environmental Services
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 18 of 108
T&E AGENDA: 09/09/19
ITEM: d(3)
CITY OFSANlOSE
CAPITAL OF SILICON VALLEY
Memorandum
TO: TRANSPORTATION AND
ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE
FROM: Kerrie Romanow
Rosalynn Hughey
SUBJECT: BUILDING REACH CODE DATE: August 21, 2019
FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION
Accept the report and refer to the full City Council on September 17 for consideration of:
1. Approval of an Ordinance amending various sections of Title 24 (Technical Codes) to
adopt Provisions of the 2019 California Green Building Standards and California
Building Energy Efficiency Standards with certain exceptions, modifications, and
additions which serve as a reach code to increase building efficiency, mandate solar
readiness, and increase requirements related to electric vehicle charging stations; and
2. Acceptance of findings related to local modifications based upon local geographical,
topographical, and climatic conditions and cost effectiveness; and
3. Authorization for the City Manager to submit a reach code submittal package to the
California Energy Commission for its approval as required by law.
OUTCOME
City Council approval of a San Jose Reach Code Ordinance for new construction will further
community-wide progress on meeting the goals of the following Climate Smart San Jose
strategies:
• Strategy 1.1: Transition to a renewable energy future
• Strategy 2.2: Make homes efficient and affordable for our residents
• Strategy 2.3: Create clean, personalized mobility choices
• Strategy 3.2: Improve our commercial building stock
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 19 of 108
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The effects of climate change are devastating and increasing. To do its part to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions and address climate change, the City adopted Climate Smart San Jose (“Climate
Smart”) which sets aggressive goals around electric vehicle (EV) adoption, solar installation, and
zero net energy/carbon (ZNE/ZNC) buildings. The proposed reach code is designed to lower and
eventually eliminate greenhouse gas (GE1G) emissions from new construction.
The California Energy Commission (CEC) updates the California Building Energy Efficiency
Standards every three years. The 2019 California Code will go before City Council in October
2019 for approval, with an effective date of January 1, 2020. Jurisdictions may also adopt “reach
codes” that require development projects to exceed the minimum Building Energy Efficiency
requirements. A proposed reach code would need to be approved by City Council in September
2019 in order to submit to the CEC in time for an effective date of January 1, 2020,
corresponding with the effective date of the new 2019 California Code.
As part of its American Cities Climate Challenge (ACCC) commitment, the City agreed to
pursue adoption of a “reach code” for new residential and commercial construction, aligned with
Climate Smart goals. To this end, the Environmental Services Department (ESD) and Planning,
Buildings and Code Enforcement (PBCE) Departments co-led the development of the proposed
reach code with the New Buildings Institute (NBI), a technical partner that specializes in
building codes and ZNE buildings. Staff reached out to over 250 stakeholders and conducted
seven public meetings and several individual meetings to get community and developer input on
a potential reach code. Several considerations influenced the scope of the proposed reach code
including: input from various City departments; input from external stakeholders; impact on
GE1G emissions; the economic impact on development projects; regional reach code efforts; and
alignment with the State’s longer term decarbonization efforts.
The proposed reach code will apply only to new residential and non-residential construction in
San Jose. It incentivizes all-electric construction, a cost-effective construction option for all
building types. It also requires increased energy efficiency and electrification-readiness for those
choosing to maintain the presence of natural gas, a fossil fuel and powerful GHG, and construct
mixed-fuel buildings. It requires that non-residential construction include solar readiness. It also
requires additional EV charging readiness and/or electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE)
installation for all development types.
The reach code will provide many benefits including: significant GHG emissions reductions;
financial benefits related to lower cost electric construction, facilitate the transition to EVs, and
avoidance of significant EV charging retrofit costs; and public health benefits by reducing both
indoor and outdoor air pollution. All of these benefits are specifically pertinent to San Jose’s
low-income communities, which are inordinately impacted by the negative environmental and
financial impacts associated with natural gas in buildings and gasoline-powered vehicles.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 20 of 108
BACKGROUND
The climate challenges of this century directly affect the quality of life of all residents in San
Jose. Over the past two years, across California, the United States, and worldwide, there have
been more frequent and disruptive flooding events, degraded air quality from massive wildfires,
and record-breaking extreme heat events. San Jose has been no stranger to such occurrences.
Coyote Creek flooded in February 2017, affecting adjacent neighborhoods and causing an
estimated $73 million in property damage to San Jose homes and businesses, and forcing 14,000
residents to evacuate, some even by boat1. Flooding and displaced residents, particularly in
coastal zones, may also become a familiar site, according to a new study that declared tens of
thousands of Bay Area homes are at risk of flooding from rising sea levels by 20502. This
summer, the world experienced the hottest month (July 2019) ever recorded in human history3.
Furthermore, the Bay Area experienced a record heat wave first in June 20194 and then again in
July 20195, a trend that seems to be exacerbating rather than diminishing, considering that 2018
was previously dubbed the hottest year on record worldwide6. San Jose has been impacted by
these events which affect the health of residents and visitors, the safety of neighborhoods, the
success of businesses and institutions, and the viability of local plants and wildlife.
In response to the experienced and potential impacts of climate change, the City of San Jose was
one of the first U.S. cities to adopt a Paris Climate Agreement-aligned climate action plan,
Climate Smart San Jose. Approved by City Council in February 2018, Climate Smart includes
the following goals and milestones to ensure the City can reduce GHG emissions on target:
• All new residential (by 2020) and commercial (by 2030) buildings as ZNE1,7, in
alignment with the State of California’s ambitious ZNE goals8.
• 100 percent carbon-free base power from San Jose Clean Energy (SJCE) by 2021.
• 1 GW of solar installed in San Jose by 2040.
• 61 percent of passenger vehicles are EVs by 2030.
• Reimagining the “Good Life 2.0,” that harnesses the benefits of sustainable actions and
improves our quality of life.
In 2018, the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 1477 with strong support from the City.
SB 1477 authorizes $50 million in Cap and Trade funds for two pilot programs, the Building
Initiative for Low Emission Development (BUILD) and Technology and Equipment for Clean
Heating (TECH) programs, which will enable California to lead the way toward decarbonization
of new and existing building stock. The California Public Utilities Commission is currently in
proceedings to establish the parameters for providing this funding throughout California.
The CEC updates the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards every three years, in
alignment with the California Code of regulations. Title 24 Parts 6 and 11 of the California
Building Energy Efficiency Standards and the California Green Building Standards Code
* As defined in Climate Smart, a ZNE building is one which is zero net carbon emissions, meaning that it would
need to be all-electric with a clean energy source (i.e. via the grid and/or on-site renewable energy).
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 21 of 108
(CALGreen) address the need for regulations to improve energy efficiency and combat climate
change.
California State law and the Building Energy Efficiency Standards require new construction to
meet certain energy efficiency and renewable energy criteria which is documented in the
Building Code. There are two pathways, prescriptive and performance set forth in Section
100.0(e)2 of Part 6, to demonstrate compliance with the Building Code. The prescriptive path
relies on employing specific measures to achieve compliance whereas the performance pathway
is based on an energy budget allowance.
The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards apply to “residential” and “non-residential”
building types. The residential category covers low-rise residential buildings with three or fewer
habitable stories. The non-residential category covers all non-residential occupancies, as well as
hotels/motels and high-rise residential buildings with four or more habitable stories. The 2019
California Building Energy Efficiency Standards includes some substantive changes to increase
the energy efficiency of buildings and encourage the installation of solar and heat pump water
heaters in low-rise residential buildings. PBCE staff will separately present the 2019 California
Codes, with any related amendments, for Council adoption in October 2019 in order to allow for
a January 1, 2020 implementation date.
Jurisdictions also have the authority to adopt “reach codes” that require development projects to
exceed minimum requirements established in the 2019 California Energy Code’s Building
Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6). In order to be approved by the CEC, a reach code
must: 1) be at least as stringent as the statewide code; 2) be cost effective as defined by standards
set by the CEC; 3) be submitted to and approved by the CEC; and 4) not preempt federal
appliance regulations.
Nineteen cities, including eight in the Bay Area (e.g. San Francisco, Oakland, and Fremont),
adopted reach codes in the current (2016) code cycle to encourage or require building
electrification, increased building energy efficiency, the installation of electric vehicle
infrastructure (EVCI), and/or solar installation. According to the CEC, over 50 cities are
considering reach codes, with a focus on encouraging or requiring building and transportation
electrification, for implementation in the 2019 building code cycle. In the Bay Area alone, more
than 45 jurisdictions are pursuing a reach code including eight in Alameda County, 19 in San
Mateo County, 14 in Santa Clara County, the City and County of San Francisco, and five in
Sonoma County. Many cities, including San Jose, have been coordinating to support and
encourage consistency of reach codes, particularly among those located in the same geographic
area.
At the February 26, 2019 City Council meeting, City Council approved the City’s scope of work
in its ACCC memorandum of understanding, which included a support package of in-kind
services valued at $2.5 million over a two-year period concluding at the end of 2020. As part of
its ACCC commitment, the City agreed to pursue adoption of a reach code for EY and solar
readiness in new residential and commercial construction, aligned with Climate Smart goals. In
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 22 of 108
order to advance this initiative, the City has partnered with the NBI through the ACCC to
facilitate the reach code development process, including stakeholder engagement.
In May 2019, staff included an update on the City’s reach code initiative at the Transportation
and Environment (T&E) Committee meeting (May 6, 2019) and a City Council meeting (May
21, 2019) as part of the Climate Smart semi-annual update. In addition, ESD and PBCE staff
presented an update on the reach code work completed to-date at the June 24, 2019 Community
and Economic Development Committee meeting.
ANALYSIS
There are several factors influencing: 1) whether San Jose should adopt a reach code, 2) what
San Jose’s reach code should consist of, and 3) when San Jose should adopt a reach code. The
following sections provide context informing staffs proposed reach code.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Benefits
One of the reasons why moving away from natural gas would have such a large impact on
greenhouse gas emissions in San Jose is because natural gas is made up primarily of methane, a
super pollutant that is 84 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than CO2 over
the short term9.
In order to further San Jose’s Climate Smart GHG reduction goals, new construction in San Jose
will need to be designed to exceed the requirements of the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency
Standards and CALGreen Building Standards. Based on the City’s latest five-year development
forecast10, San Jose can conservatively expect approximately 350 single-family new residences,
2,400 new multi-family residences, and 2.4 million additional square feet of
commercial/industrial construction per year over the next three years. If these buildings use
natural gas, an estimated increase of 897,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions would result over
the expected life of the buildings (50 years for residential and 50 years for commercial). This
equates to almost 300,000 Metric Tons of CO2 emissions per year, equivalent to 1.7 trillion car
miles11, as shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1. Projected New Construction Development in San Jose and CO2 Impact10
Building Type Sq. Ft COz/Yr.X Units/Yr,x Years in
service
Total tons of
COz
Single-Family 2,700 2 tons X 350 X 50 105,000 tons
Multi-Family 1,000 1 ton X 2400 X 50 360,000 tons
Commercial/
Industrial
100,000 120 tons X 24 X 50 432,000 tons
Total CO2:897,000 tons
Graph 1 compares the potential GHG emissions offset by San Jose’s proposed reach code when
compared with the Title 24 Base Code (based on the development forecast as shown in Table 1).
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 23 of 108
The graph looks at the emissions impact for each building category for mixed fuel and all
electric buildings. It is important to note that this graph assumes 100 percent of electricity is
carbon neutral and begins in 2021, in accordance with SJCE’s scheduled delivery plans. The
emissions offset by mixed fuel buildings come from increased efficiency requirements as
required by the reach code. The graph shows emissions if no reach code is implemented (blue), if
50 percent (orange) and 90 percent (gray) of all new construction is all-electric. Emissions from
all-electric buildings are zero or negligible and therefore are not shown. The emissions impact of
the proposed reach code will largely depend on how much it incentivizes all-electric new
construction, but it is estimated that staffs recommendation will reduce emissions from new
construction to at least 1,500 MTCCVyear.
Graph 1: Carbon Impact from Reach Code in Mixed Fuel vs All-Electric New
Construction12
Annual Emissions of Projected New Construction
with a San Jose Carbon-Free Grid
(MTC02/yr - SJCE in 2021)
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000' ll- II. I. I. Ill
Single Family Multi-Family Office Retail Total
■ No ■ Moderate Reach Code ■ Stringent Reach Code 100% All Electric
Reach Code with 50% AE with 90% AE = Zero Emissions
Based on the City and State goals to reduce GHG emissions, electrification retrofits will be
necessary and ultimately required for existing buildings. Addressing electrification now in new
buildings avoids hardships and retrofit costs for building owners in the future and acknowledges
the GHG impacts of taking no action, particularly considering the benefits of building and
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 24 of 108
transportation electrification when paired with carbon-free electricity that will be provided by
SJCE.
Promoting EV adoption and solar infrastructure represents further opportunity to reduce GHGs.
Since EVs are powered by electricity, they have the potential for zero tailpipe emissions and,
therefore, represent a significant potential to reduce GHGs in San Jose. SJCE purchases
renewable energy from sources such as solar and wind, helping reduce GHG emissions
dramatically from the electricity sector and reduce energy costs for consumers. Solar heating and
cooling systems can provide about 80 percent of the energy used for space heating and water
heating needs13, as well as provide clean emissions-free energy sources to charge EVs.
Financial Benefits
Adding additional amenities (e.g. conduit, wiring, breaker space) to accommodate building
electrification or Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure (EVCI) during initial construction is
more efficient and significantly more cost effective than retrofitting a building after it is
constructed. There are three different levels of EVCI: 1) EV Capable: a parking space with
conduit sized for a 40-amp, 208/240 Volt dedicated branch circuit and sufficient physical space
on the service panel, 2) EV Ready (full circuit): a space with conduit and wiring for a 40-amp,
208/240 Volt circuit, electrical service capacity, and outlet, 3) Electric Vehicle Service
Equipment (EVSE): a parking space with electric vehicle supply equipment capable of supplying
current at 40amps at 208/240 volts. The amount of EVCI needed in each building will depend
primarily on the type of building and occupant use. The importance of adding the right level of
EVCI at the time of new construction is critical. The Graph 2 shows the EVCI cost differences in
new construction (NC) versus building retrofits for EV Ready (essentially plug and play) and EV
Capable (conduit and breaker space only) parking spaces. One of the reasons why requiring
electrification-ready spaces at the time of new construction is so important is because the retrofit
cost is often a barrier to installing EVSE.
Graph 2. Cost of EVCI/ Space - New Construction versus Retrofit14
$7,000.00
$5,000.00
$1,000.00
$2,000.00
$3,000.00
$6,000.00
$4,000.00
$-
$490
EV Ready EV Ready (NC)
(Retrofit)
EV Capable
(NC)
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 25 of 108
Providing EVCI encourages the uptake of EVs and EVs offer owners a lower operating cost
versus standard vehicles, which is particularly significant to our lower-income communities as
detailed in the following section.
Benefits to Low-Income Communities
Promoting electrification of buildings and EV charging access is expected to have positive
economic and health-related effects on low-income communities. A recent study by U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientists shows that low-income communities,
particularly those of color, are disproportionately affected by air pollution15. It is therefore
imperative that clean fuel options (i.e., electric) are incorporated into San Jose’s low-income
community housing to promote the reduction of indoor and outdoor air pollution.
EV charging can be perceived by some as incongruent with low-income housing needs, however
recent studies suggest otherwise. EVs are becoming more affordable to purchase and their fuel
costs are considerably lower than fossil fuel powered vehicles. While price point has traditionally
been a barrier for low-income communities to purchase EVs or hybrids, recent market research
suggests that prices are falling at a dramatic rate due to lowering battery costs and government
rebate programs16. According to a recent CB Insights Report, the general industry consensus is
that EVs will reach price analogy with fossil fuel vehicles within the next decade, possibly as
soon as 202111. Further lowering upfront costs, the California Clean Vehicle Rebate Project
offers rebates of up to $4,500, with additional rebates for low-income buyers, for the purchase or
lease of new, eligible battery electric vehicles18. In terms of operational costs, compared with
$2,550 per year for similar fossil fuel vehicles19, an EV will save the average user an estimated
$10,000 in fuel costs over the course of 10 years at current fuel and SJCE utility rates. For these
reasons, EV charging access, which would be facilitated by the proposed reach code, is therefore
just as relevant if not more critical to low-income housing projects as market-based or
commercial projects.
Public Health Benefits
Moving toward all-electric buildings will result in reduced GHG emissions and better indoor and
outdoor air quality. When emissions from natural gas are compared with those from PG&E’s
electricity fuel mix, emissions from natural gas are almost double.
Another concern with using natural gas as a fuel source involves leaks associated with
transmission. Since the majority of natural gas (84 percent) used in California is imported from
other states and Canada, interstate pipelines must be operated in order to deliver natural gas to
California20. The EPA currently estimates the national methane leakage rate to be 1.4 percent21.
Elowever, a study conducted by the Environmental Defense Fund shows the methane leakage
rate at 2.3 percent22. Recent studies exposing the leaks coming from the State’s natural gas
pipelines predict emissions to be a lot higher, about double, when accounting for the leaks23.
In recent years, issues over natural gas safety have caused growing concern. In 2010, an
underground gas pipe explosion killed eight people and destroyed or damaged more than 100
homes in San Bruno, California. The largest natural gas leak in U.S. history occurred just a few
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 26 of 108
years ago in Southern California at the SoCalGas Aliso Canyon Gas Storage Facility site.
Between 2015 and 2016, a natural gas leak at Aliso Canyon was responsible for approximately
100,000 MT of methane and forced the evacuation of more than 8,300 households for more than
100 days24.
Statewide Cost Effectiveness Study
The California Statewide Codes and Standards Program completed cost effectiveness
residential25 and non-residential studies26 for use statewide in the current building code adoption
cycle to justify the cost effectiveness of certain types of reach codes for new construction.
Jurisdictions may also develop additional cost effectiveness studies, if needed, to proceed with
their specific reach code. San Jose’s proposal is based on data in the existing studies, so
additional studies were not needed. EVCI requirements going beyond building code do not need
a cost effectiveness study or separate CEC approval since they are not directly related to a
building’s energy efficiency.
Regional Reach Code Efforts
Current regional reach code efforts are generally focused on both residential and non-residential
new construction and EVCI, and incentivize or require:
1. All-electric buildings for new construction; or
1. Mixed fuel (i.e. natural gas and electric) buildings, when allowed, go above building
energy code (up to maximum limits set by existing cost effectiveness studies) and include
electrification readiness in order to incentivize all-electric buildings; and
2. Additional EVCI requirements for all building types to further and prepare for current
and anticipated future EV uptake.
While it is important to consider San Jose’s unique building development characteristics, there is
also a clear benefit on both the City implementation and development customer side to align as
much as possible with regional reach codes for consistency. The proposed San Jose reach code
built off of the draft reach code language released by regional partners representing jurisdictions
in the rest of Santa Clara County and in San Mateo County27. City staff also communicated with
other California jurisdictions outside of the region to vet reach code options. Regional
collaboration offers local municipalities the opportunity to collectively encourage building
electrification that will be similarly implemented across Silicon Valley and/or the State, therefore
reducing the risk of competitive disadvantage between municipalities. For reference,
Attachment A explains the components and shows the current known status of reach codes
planned or under consideration in the 2019 building code cycle by a variety of California
jurisdictions. Based on the information that City staff has been able to obtain to-date, Image 1
and Graph 3 below provides visual summaries of the level of San Jose’s proposed building and
EVCI reach code requirements versus other California cities.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 27 of 108
Image 1. San Jose Proposed Building Reach Code Requirements versus Other California
Cities
City Reach Codes - Building Electrification
No reach code
Electric readiness
(no increased
efficiency)
Mixed fuel
option with an
increase in
efficiency
compliance
margin above
Code
Mixed fuel
option with high
efficiency
compliance
margin above
Code
Electric
requirementfor
specific
appliances
Gas Ban
(select building
sectors)
San Diego
Less
stringent
San Jose
San Francisco
Mountain View Oakland
Berkeley More
stringent
San Mateo Palo Alto Cupertino Alameda
Santa Clara Gilroy Hayward
Santa Monica Los Altos
Los Altos Hills
Menlo Park
Milpitas
Monte Sereno
Morgan Hill
Petaluma (Non-residential: Exempt)
Note: All information in this chart is tentative, based on information obtained to date.
Graph 3. San Jose Proposed EVCI Reach Code Requirements versus Other California
Cities
City Reach Codes - EVCI
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Multi-family
San Diego offices
(Proposed) Retail
Multi-family
San Francisco offices
(Expanding) Retail
Multi-family
Oakland offices
(Adopted) Retail
Multi-family
San Jose offices
(Proposed) Retail
■ Conduit only ■ EV Capable ■ EV Ready ■ EVSE
Note: All information in this chart is tentative, based on information obtained to date.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 28 of 108
Stakeholder Input
Throughout the reach code development process, PBCE and the ESD staff informed and
coordinated with other City departments including the Departments of Community Energy,
Housing, Public Works, San Jose Mineta International Airport, Department of Transportation,
and the Office of Economic Development. With the assistance of various City departments, City
staff developed a stakeholder engagement list including:
• Over 65 stakeholders, including developers, contractors, environmental and
transportation or energy non-profits, industry organizations, business associations, realtor
organizations, labor groups, technical experts, educational groups, EV and solar
companies, construction management and engineering firms, and utilities.
• More than 200 Neighborhood Associations for all ten City Council Districts.
Reach code stakeholder engagement activities included:
• Four stakeholder engagement workshops covering:
o Introduction to San Jose ’s reach code development process (May 29, 2019)
o New non-residential construction focus (June 4, 2019)
o New residential construction focus (June 25, 2019)
o Final input on draft reach code language (July 10, 2019), with an extended public
comment period through July 23, 2019.
• Presentation at the Silicon Valley Organization Housing & Development Policy
Committee meeting (June 13, 2019)
• Presentation at the City’s Developers and Construction Roundtable (June 21, 2019)
• Presentation to the City’s Community and Economic Development Subcommittee (June
24, 2019)
• Individual meetings, as requested, with organizations representing the affordable housing
and market-rate development community
• City Reach Code webpage (www. sani oseca. gov/reachcode) to keep the public informed
about the City’s reach code development process and timeline, including key meeting
dates, agendas and content for stakeholder meetings, and draft reach code language.
Cost Concerns
The primary concern raised by external stakeholders and other City departments is whether there
is a cost increase to build and/or operate all-electric buildings. According to the statewide cost
effectiveness studies, all-electric buildings offer savings on “first” construction cost for all
building types when compared to mixed fuel buildings. Table 2 shows the first, annual utility,
and life-cycle costs for all-electric buildings and mixed fuel buildings under a reach code
compared to base code, and demonstrates that beyond the costs inherent to base code
compliance, all-electric construction has no added costs for San Jose’s proposed reach code. The
cost effectiveness studies do however show an increase in the annual utility costs for all electric
buildings, which is the primary reason why lifecycle costs for all electric buildings show an
increase in certain building types. The life cycle costs in the table below include annual utility
costs (over a 30-year period), maintenance, and the Net Present Value of building equipment. It
is important to note that the costs presented below do not account for the projected change in fuel
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 29 of 108
costs for electricity and natural gas. These projections are based on the notion that a considerable
amount of gas infrastructure is nearing the end of its life and will need to be replaced and/or
seismically retrofitted. For example, in 2018, SoCalGas requested a rate increase from the CPUC
on the cost of natural gas28. If approved, SoCalGas ratepayers will see an increase of 19% in
2019, 8.1% in 2020 and 6.1% in 2021, which will be used to replace existing infrastructure,
increase safety and cover transportation costs. If these factors are accounted for, the LCC and
annual utility costs are reduced, relative to increasing gas costs, for all electric buildings.
Table 2. Costs of Reach Code All-Electric and Mixed Fuel Buildings over 2019 Base Code25,
26
Costs of a Reach Code All-
Electric Building over 2019
Title 24 Base Code
Costs of a Reach Code Mixed Fuel Building"
over 2019 Title 24 Base Code
First
Cost
Annual
Utility Life-Cycle First Cost Annual Utility Life-Cycle
Single
family $0/unit $0/unit $0/unit +$5,434/unit -$17.43/unit +$4,911/unit
Low-Rise
Multi
family
$0/unit $0/unit $0/unit +$2,429/un it -$9.60/unit +$2,141/unit
Office $0/sf $0/sf $0/sf +1.24/sf -$0.10/sf -$1.78/sf
Retail $0/sf SO/sf SO/sf +$0.23/sf -$0.10/sf -$2.85/sf
Small
Hotel $0/sf SO/sf SO/sf +$0.51/sf -$0.02/sf -$0.06/sf
Other recent studies found lower upfront and/or lifecycle costs for both residential and non-
residential all-electric buildings29 30. Multi-family, affordable housing, and non-residential
development projects in California (including several in San Jose) are already building all
electric (see Attachment B for examples all-electric development projects in the Bay Area).
In terms of EVCI, increased construction costs will be incurred by requiring new construction to
provide additional charging infrastructure. Table 3 provides a hypothetical scenario to illustrate
how additional EVCI requirements could impact first construction costs under the proposed
reach code. The costs represented in Table 3 are for a multi-family building and a commercial
11 Figures are based on the highest Energy Design Rating and compliance margins possible for mixed fuel buildings
while still maintaining cost-effectiveness.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 30 of 108
office building each with 100 parking spaces. The incremental costs are projected to be less than
one percent of total project costs.
Table 3. EVCI Additional Construction Costs for Multi-family and Non-Residential
Buildings Scenarios12
Multi-family
2019 Base Code
Multi-family
Reach Code
Non-Res
2019 Base Code
Non-Res
Reach Code
EV Capable Spaces 0 50 0 40
EV Ready Spaces 10 0 10 0
EVSE Spaces 0 10 0 10
Total Cost of EV Capable
(w/SA capacity)$$ 49,500 $$ 39,600
Total Cost of EV Ready1 $ 13,300 $$ 13,300 $
Total Cost of EVSE $$ 23,300 $$ 23,300
Total EVCI Cost $ 13,300 $ 72,800 $ 13,300 $ 62,900
2Total Project Cost $ 23,000,000 $ 30,000,000
Incremental Cost of reach code
over 2019 base code 0.26%0.17%
1. Pike, EdP.E., (2018, June 20). Opportunities to Support PEVAdoption, Roadmap 11, Portland, OR. Energy
Solutions [PowerPoint Slides] Retrieved from http://roadmaDforth.or2/Dro2ram/presentationsl8/EdPike.pdf
2. Assumed $250/sffor a 92,000 sf MF development and $300/sffor a 100,000 sf non-res development.
San Jose Reach Code Components
Considering stakeholder input and the various benefits that can be achieved through a reach
code, San Jose updated the draft reach code language (see Attachment C for a redlined version).
The proposed reach code, codified in the San Jose Reach Code Ordinance (Attachment D),
includes the following:
1. Incentivizes all-electric buildings by requiring that mixed-fuel buildings achieve a higher
energy efficiency (demonstrated through a higher Energy Design Rating or compliance
margin111) and be electrification ready for all building types;
2. Requires additional electric vehicle charging infrastructure requirements across all
building types; and
3. Requires solar readiness for non-residential buildings.
The specific components of San Jose’s proposed reach code are summarized in Table 4.
Compliance Margin, applicable to non-residential buildings, is the percentage difference between the energy use
of the proposed building project over the baseline requirement. An Energy Design Rating, applicable to low-rise
residential projects, is a way to express the energy consumption of a building as a rating score index from 1-100
wherein a score of 0 represents a building that has zero energy consumption.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 31 of 108
Table 4. Proposed Reach Code Components
Proposed Reach Code Compliance Pathways
Occupancy Type All-Electric*Mixed Fuel*
Cl
Single-family & Low-Rise Multi-family
fn if]
Efficiency: To code Efficiency: Energy Design Rating <10,
electrification-ready
JELHigh-rise Multi-family & Hotel WWW
JOEL.
Efficiency: To code
EVCI: Same as mixed fuel
Efficiency: 5% (compliance margin),
electrification-ready
EVCI: 10% EVSE; 50% EV Capable
Non-Residential jSj
Efficiency: To code
EVCI: Same as mixed fuel
Efficiency: 10% office/retail, 0%
industrial/manufacturing, 5% all other
occupancies, electrification-ready
EVCI: 10% EVSE, 40% EV Capable
* Solar-readiness required for all buildings.
Both the mixed fuel building and EVCI requirements were reduced in response to concerns
raised by other City departments and external stakeholders around construction costs. A
comparison of the proposed components versus the draft components is included in Attachment
E.
Reach Code Implementation
City staff intended for the reach code implementation timing to be aligned with the City’s
implementation of the 2019 California Code, which will go into effect on January 1, 2020. Due
to the CEC’s review and approval period for a reach code, the ordinance for the San Jose Reach
Code should be approved by City Council and submitted to the CEC no later than September
2019, in order to align with the January 1, 2020 implementation date.
This implementation timing will allow for:
1. Simultaneous implementation of the updated California Code and the reach code
requirements, streamlining the process for both City staff and for those submitting
development projects;
2. An efficient process that maximizes the implementation period of the reach code since a
reach code needs to be re-approved with each code update;
3. Maximization of the impact of the reach code by ensuring it applies to development in
San Jose as soon as possible; and
4. City fulfillment of its commitment to the ACCC and furtherance of its Climate Smart
goals.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 32 of 108
Next Steps
Pending City Council approval of the proposed reach code, the reach code would be
implemented with existing staff and resources with the following next steps:
1. Submit reach code to the CEC for review and approval.
2. File the CEC-approved reach code with the California Buildings Standards Commission.
3. Work with NBI and regional cities to develop implementation resources, such as
trainings and checklists, for City staff.
4. Implement San Jose ’s reach code starting January 1, 2020.
5. Continue to provide building and transportation electrification educational opportunities
to both City staff and the public.
6. Pursue funding opportunities to incentivize all-electric buildings and transportation in
San Jose, such as the SB 1477 BUILD program funding for decarbonization efforts in
new construction.
7. Collect and document data on the reach code impact to consider for future reach code
updates
EVALUATION AND FOLLOW-UP
Staff will provide progress updates to T&E Committee and City Council on Climate Smart San
Jose activities, including the reach code, on a semi-annual basis.
POLICY ALTERNATIVES
Alternative #1: Adopt a reach code that requires all-electric buildings while maintaining all
other proposed reach code provisions.
Pros: An all-electric building requirement would significantly reduce GHG emissions from new
construction and supports the State and City GHG emissions reduction goals. All-electric new
construction is also supported by the State’s cost effectiveness studies. There would be no
incremental costs associated with efficiency performance requirements since all-electric
buildings would not be required to go further than the base 2019 Building Code.
Cons: This approach would rapidly transition construction to all-electric with no flexibility.
Reason for not recommending: This approach would offer less flexibility for development as it
continues to transition to all-electric in a still emerging and developing marketplace.
Alternative #2: Adopt a reach code that increases energy efficiency requirements for non-
residential mixedfuel buildings to the maximum allowable under the 2019 Non-residential
New Construction Cost Effectiveness Study and increases EVCI requirements for non-
residential and multi-family developments while maintaining all other proposed reach code
provisions.
Pros: Increased energy efficiency requirements for non-residential mixed fuel buildings would
have a greater impact on GHG emissions due to increased efficiency. Requiring increased energy
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 33 of 108
efficiency requirements for mixed fuel buildings would also send a stronger signal to more
rapidly transition to all-electric buildings.
Cons: This would result in an increased construction cost for mixed fuel buildings.
Reason for not recommending: There are concerns about increasing construction costs for
mixed fuel buildings.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
The City established its Reach Code webpage (www.sienvironment.org/reachcode) in May 2019,
which includes FAQs as well as a pathway to receive updates and to sign up for stakeholder
meetings. City staff reached out to over 250 stakeholders and presented at seven public meetings
since May 2019.
This memorandum will be posted on the City’s website for the September 9, 2019 T&E agenda
as well on the September 17, 2019 City Council’s Agenda website.
COORDINATION
This memorandum has been coordinated with the City Attorney's Office, the Department of
Transportation, Department of Community Energy, Housing Department, Office of Economic
Development, and Public Works.
FISCAL/POLICY ALIGNMENT
The reach code components align with the Climate Smart San Jose strategies and the City’s
Envision 2040 General Plan approved by City Council.
CEOA
Categorically Exempt, File No. PP19-067, CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, Actions by
Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment.
/s/ /s/
ROSALYNN HUGHEY KERRIE ROMANOW
Director, Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Director, Environmental Services
For questions, please contact Ken Davies, Deputy Director, at (408) 975-2587.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 34 of 108
Attachments:
Attachment A - Reach Code Efforts in Other Jurisdictions
Attachment B - Bay Area All-Electric Development Projects
Attachment C - Redlined Draft Reach Code Components
Attachment D - San Jose Reach Code Ordinance
Attachment E - Summary of San Jose Reach Code Components
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 35 of 108
References
1 Smith, Kathryn Exon. (2018, May 31). After Coyote Creek, Is San Jose Ready for Future Floods? San Francisco
Bay Area Planning and Urban Research Association. Retrieved from https://www.spur.org/news/2018-05-31/after-
coyote-creek-san-iose-readv-future-floods
2 D’Souze, Karen. (2019, July 31). $50 billion worth of Bay Area homes at risk of rising seas by 2050, says report.
Mercury News. Retrieved from https://www.mercurvnews.com/2019/07/31/5Q-billion-worth-of-bav-area-homes-at-
risk-of-rising-seas-says-report/
3 Harvey, Chelsea. (2019, August 6). July was the Hottest Month in Recorded History: After a record-breaking heat
wave in Europe and the Arctic, last month edged out July 2016. E&E News. Retrieved from
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/iulv-was-the-hottest-month-in-recorded-history/
4 May, Patrick. (2019, June 10). Which Bay Area cities are setting new records for high temperatures? Mercury
News; Retrieved from https://www.mercurvnews.eom/2019/06/10/these-bav-area-cities-settiiig-new-records-for-
high-temperatures/
5 Angst, Maggie. (2019, July 26). Excessive heat watch issued for the Bay Area this weekend. Near record heat is
expected on Saturday and Sunday. Mercury News. Retrieved from
https://www.mercurvnews.com/2019/07/26/excessive-heat-watch-issued-for-the-bav-area-this-weekend/
6 Freedman, Andrew. (2018, Aug 21). Global heat waves animation shows records broken in 2018. Axios. Retrieved
from https://www.axios.eom/heat-records-temperature-climate-change-map-f82a017b-4383-43d0-ae52-
42517138bl08.html
7 City of San Jose. (2018, February 27). Climate Smart San Jose - A People-Centered Plan for a Low-Carbon City.
Retrieved from http://www.sanioseca.gov/ClhnateSmartSanJose
8 California Public Utilities Commission, (n.d.). Energy Efficiency Strategic Plan. Retrieved from
https://www.cpuc.ca. gov/General.aspx?id=4125
9 Environmental Defense Fund. (n.d.). Methane: The other important greenhouse gas. Retrieved from
https://www.edf.org/climate/methane-other-important-greenhouse-gas
10 City of San Jose. (2019, February). Development Activity Highlights and Five-Year Forecast (2020 - 2024).
Table 2, page 5. Retrieved from http://www.sanioseca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/83502
11 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2018, December). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. Retrieved
from https://www.epa.gov/energv/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator
12 Denniston, Sean. New Buildings Institute. Personal communication. August 9, 2019
13 Solar Energy Industries Association. (2019). 1.3 billion trees store as much carbon as the emissions reduced by
the U.S. solar industry. Retrieved from https://www.seia.org/initiatives/climate-change
14 Pike, Ed, Kido, Cassidee, and Goldsmith, Hannah. (2019, May 14). Driving Plug-in Electric Vehicle Adoption
with Green Building Codes. Forth Webinar. Retrieved from https://www.slideshare.net/eimnaline742/driving-
plugin-electric-vehicle-adoption-with-green-building-codes-by-ed-pike-cassidee-kido-and-hannah-goldsmith
15 Mikati, Ihab, Benson, Adam F., Luben, Thomas J., Sacks, Jason D., and Richmond-Bryant, Jennifer. (2018,
April). Disparities in Distribution of Particulate Matter Emission Sources by Race and Poverty Status. American
Journal of Public Health. 108, 480-485. Retrieved from https://doi.org/! 0.2105/AJPH.2017.304297
16 Searle, Stephanie, Pavlenko, Nikita, Lutsey, Nic. (2016, September). Leading Edge of Electric Vehicle Market
Development in the United States: An Analysis of California Cities. International Council on Clean Transportation.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 36 of 108
Retrieved from https://theicct.org/publications/leading-edge-electric-vehicle-market-development-united-states-
analysis-califomia
17 CBInsights. (2019). Research Report: The Race For The Electric Car. Retrieved from
https://www.cbinsights.eom/research/report/electric-car-race/#8
18 Clean Vehicle Rebate Project. (2019). Center for Sustainable Energy. Retrieved from
https://cleanvehiclerebate.org/eng/about-cvrp
19 Loveday, Steven. (2018, July 05) What Is MPGe? US News and World Report. Retrieved from
https://cars.usnews.com/cars-trucks/what-is-mpge
20 Committee on Energy Futures and Air Pollution in Urban China and the United States; National Research
Council; National Academy of Engineering, Policy and Global Affairs, Development, Security, and Cooperation; in
association with the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Chinese Academy of Engineering. (2008). Energy Futures
and Urban Air Pollution: Challenges for China and the United States, page 287.Washington, D.C. The National
Academy Press. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/initiative/committee-on-energy-futures-and-air-pollution-in-
urban-china-and-the-united-states
21 Gas Research Institute and Environmental Protection Agency National Risk Management Research Laboratory.
(1996, June). Methane Emissions from the Natural Gas Industry Volume I: Executive Summary (DCN: 96-263-081-
17). Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-08/documents/1 executiveummary.pdf
22 Marchese, Anthony J. and Zimmerle, Dan. (2018, July 4). The U.S. natural gas industry is leaking way more
methane than previously thought. Science. Retrieved from https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/the-u-s-natural-
gas-industry-is-leaking-way-more-methane-than-previously-thought
23 Alvarez, Ramon A., Araiza, Daniel Zavala, Lyon, David R., Allen, David T., Barkley, Zachary R, Brandt, Adam
R., Davis, Kenneth J., Herndon, Scott C., Jacob, Daniel J., Karion, Anna, Kort, Eric A., Lamb, Brian K., Lauvaux,
Thomas, Maasakkers, Joannes D, Marchese, Anthony J., Omara, Mark, Pacala, Stephen W., Peischl, Jeff, Robinson,
Allen L., Shepson, Paul B., Sweeney, Colm, Townsend-Small, Amy, Steven C. Wofsy, Steven C., Hamburg, Steven
P. (2018, July 13). Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. Science, 361(6398),
186-188. Retrieved from https://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6398/186
24 Kaiser Health News. (2019, May 20). Source Of California Gas Leak That Caused Mass Health Issues,
Evacuations Identified By Investigators. KHN Morning Briefing: Summaries of health policy coverage from major
news organizations. Retrieved from https://khn.org/moming-breakout/source-of-califomia-gas-leak-that-caused-
mass-health-issues-evacuations-identified-by-investigators/
25 California Energy Codes and Standards. (2019, March 15). Title 24, Parts 6 and 11, Local Energy Efficiency
Ordinances: Cost-effectiveness Study: Low-Rise residential. Retrieved from
http://www.sanj oseca. gov/DocumentCenter/V iew/85691
26 California Energy Codes and Standards. (2019, March 18). Title 24, Parts 6 and 11, Local Energy Efficiency
Ordinances: 2019 Nonresidential New Construction Reach Code Cost Effectiveness Study. Retrieved from
http ://www. sani oseca. gov/DocumentCenter/V iew/8 5690
27 Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE), Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) and the San Mateo County Office of
Sustainability (OOS) (n.d.). 2019 Building Electrification and EV Infrastructure Reach Code Initiative. Retrieved
from https://peninsulareachcodes.org/
28 California Public Utilities Commission. (2018, May). Public Participation Hearing: Southern California Gas
company General Rate Case (A.17-10-008). [Fact Sheet]. Retrieved from
https://www.toaks.org/home/showdocument?id= 18807
29 Billimoria, Sherri, Guccione, Leia, Henchen, Mike, Louis-Prescott, Leah. (2018, June). The Economics of
Electrifying Buildings. Rocky Mountain Institute. Retrieved from https://rmi.org/insight/the-economics-of-
electrifying-buildings/
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 37 of 108
30 Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. (2019, April). Residential Building Electrification in California:
Consumer economics, greenhouse gases and grid impacts. Retrieved from https://www.ethree.com/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential Building Electrification in California April 2019.pdf
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 38 of 108
CITY OF SAN MATEO
Regular Meeting Agenda
September 3, 2019
7:00 PM
City Hall Council Chamber
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Diane Papan, Mayor
Maureen Freschet, Deputy Mayor
Rick Bonilla
Joe Goethals
Eric Rodriguez
AGENDA ITEM
4.Local Amendments to the California Energy and Green Building Code – Ordinance Adoption
Adopt an Ordinance to amend San Mateo Municipal Code Chapter 23.24, “Energy Code,” and an ordinance to
amend Chapter 23.70, “Green Building Code,” to make local amendments to the State Energy and Green Building
Codes.
Ordinance Introduced on August 19, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agendas are posted on the City's website on the Friday preceding each Council Meeting. Background material can
be viewed at City Hall or on the City's website www.cityofsanmateo.org.Any supplemental material distributed to the
Council after the posting of the agenda will be available for review in the City Clerk's Office.
City Council meetings are broadcast live at 7:00 p.m. on Cable Channel 27 for Comcast, Channel 26 for Astound,
and Channel 99 for AT&T customers. For transmission problems during the broadcast, please call (650) 522-7099.
For all other broadcast comments, call (650) 522-7040, Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, those with disabilities requiring special accommodations to
participate in this meeting may contact the City Clerk's Office at (650) 522-7040 or polds@cityofsanmateo.org.
Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure
accessibility to this meeting.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 39 of 108
CITY OF SAN MATEO
ORDINANCE NO. 2019-__
AMENDING CHAPTER 23.24, “ENERGY CODE,” OF TITLE 23, “BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION,” OF THE SAN
MATEO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 EDITION, WITH LOCAL
AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of
Regulations has been released by the State and needs to be adopted by local jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, The City’s Climate Action Plan recommended that the City review local amendments to the
California Energy Code to promote increased energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources; and
WHEREAS, The City has completed an analysis and has determined that the requirements of the local
amendments to the California Energy Code would provide a positive cost benefit to new construction within the
City of San Mateo; and
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Section 17958 requires that the City, in order to make
local amendments, find that the local amendments are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geographical,
or topographical conditions; and
WHEREAS, The City’s Section 17958 findings are attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO CALIFORNIA ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Chapter 23.24, Energy Code,” of the San Mateo Municipal Code is hereby amended to read:
Chapter 23.24 – Energy Code
Sections:
23.24.010 Adoption.
23.24.020 Local Amendment to Definitions.
23.24.030 Local Amendment Regarding Mandatory Solar Installations.
23.24.040 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Buildings or Energy Efficiency Standards for Mixed-Fuel
Office Use Buildings.
23.24.050 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Buildings or Energy Efficiency Standards for Mixed-Fuel
Single Family and Duplex Buildings.
23.24.060 Modifications.
23.24.070 Expiration.
23.24.010 Adoption
(a) The California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, as
adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called “Energy Code,” is adopted as the rules,
regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter modified or amended
for so long as the 2019 Edition of the Building Code is in effect;
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 40 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 2 of 7
1
4
6
2
(b) One copy of the Energy Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.
23.24.020 Local Amendment to Definitions
Subchapter 1, “All Occupancies – General Provisions,” Section 100.1(b), of the state Energy Code is amended to
include the following definitions:
All-Electric building or all-electric design is a building or building design that uses a permanent supply of
electricity as the only source of energy for space conditioning (including heating and cooling), water heating
(including pools and spas), cooking appliances, and clothes drying appliances, and has no natural gas or propane
plumbing installed at the building.
Mixed-fuel building or mixed-fuel design is a building or building design that uses natural gas or propane as fuel
for space heating, water heating (including pools and spas), cooking appliances or clothes drying appliances or is
plumbed for such equipment.
Accessory building, shall have the meaning set forth in Section 27.04.010 of the City of San Mateo Municipal
Code.
23.24.030 Local Amendment Regarding Mandatory Solar Installations
Subchapter 5—“Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance and
Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency,” Section 140.0(b), of the state Energy Code
is amended to include:
A. Solar photovoltaic systems shall be installed as follows:
1. New residential buildings four stories or more shall provide a minimum of a 3-kilowatt
photovoltaic system.
2. New non-residential buildings with less than 10,000 square feet of gross floor area shall
provide a minimum of a 3- kilowatt photovoltaic system.
3. New non-residential buildings greater than or equal to 10,000 square feet of gross floor area
shall provide a minimum of a 5-kilowatt photovoltaic system.
Exception to Section A: As an alternative to a solar photovoltaic system, all of the building types listed above
may provide a solar hot water system (solar thermal) with a minimum collector area of 40 square feet.
23.24.040 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Buildings or Energy Efficiency Standards for Mixed-
Fuel Office Use Buildings
(a) All-electric buildings with office use are required to meet the established energy efficiency standards
in Subchapter 5, “Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance
and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency,” of the state Energy Code.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 41 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 3 of 7
1
4
6
2
(b) Mixed-fuel buildings with office use shall comply with increased energy efficiency standards.
Subchapter 5, “Nonresidential, High-rise Residential, and Hotel/Motel Occupancies – Performance
and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches for Achieving Energy Efficiency,” of the state Energy Code is
amended to require increased energy efficiency standards in the performance or prescriptive
compliance approaches as follows:
(1) Performance Approach: Energy Code Section 140.1 “Performance Approach: Energy Budgets” is
amended to include the following performance standards for mixed-fuel buildings with office
use:
A newly constructed mixed-fuel building complies with the performance approach if the energy
budget calculated for the Proposed Design Building under Subsection (b) has a compliance margin
exceeding the energy budget calculated for the Standard Design Building under Subsection (a) of at
least the value specified for the corresponding occupancy type in Table 140.1-A below.
Table 140.1-A Mixed-fuel Building Energy Budgets Adjustments
Occupancy Type Compliance Margin Exceeding
State Code
Office 10%
All Other occupancies 0%
(2) Prescriptive Approach: Energy Code Section 140.2 “Prescriptive Approach” is amended to
include the following prescriptive standards for mixed-fuel buildings with office use:
(A)Install fenestration with a solar heat gain coefficient no greater than 0.22.
(B)Limit the fenestration area on east-facing and west-facing walls to one-half of the average
amount of north-facing and south-facing fenestration.
(C)Design Variable Air Volume (VAV) box minimum airflows to be equal to the zone ventilation
minimums.
(D)Include economizers and staged fan control in air handlers with a mechanical cooling
capacity ≥ 33,000 Btu/h
(E)Reduce the total lighting power density (Watts/ft2) by ten percent (10%) from that required
from Table 140.6-C.
(F)Improve lighting without claiming any Power Adjustment Factor credits:
(i) Control to daylight dimming plus off per Section 140.6(a)2H, and
(ii) Install Occupant Sensing Controls in Large Open Plan Offices per Section 140.6(a)2I,
and
Perform Institutional Tuning per Section 140.6(a)2J.
23.24.050 Local Amendment Regarding All-Electric Buildings or Energy Efficiency Standards for Mixed-
Fuel Single Family and Duplex Buildings
(a) Accessory buildings and low-rise multifamily buildings are required to meet the established energy
efficiency standards in Subchapter 8, “Low-rise Residential Buildings – Performance and Prescriptive
Compliance Approaches,” of the state Energy Code.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 42 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 4 of 7
1
4
6
2
(b) All-electric single-family and duplex buildings are required to meet the established energy efficiency
standards in Subchapter 8, “Low-rise Residential Buildings – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance
Approaches,” of the state Energy Code.
(c) Mixed-fuel single family and duplex buildings shall comply with increased energy efficiency standards.
Subchapter 8, “Low-rise Residential Buildings – Performance and Prescriptive Compliance Approaches,”
of the state Energy Code is amended to require increased energy efficiency standards in the
performance and prescriptive compliance approaches as follows:
(1) Performance Approach: Section 150.1.b. “Performance standards” is amended to include the
following performance standard for mixed-fuel single family and duplex buildings:
The Energy Efficiency Design Rating calculated for the Proposed Design Building shall be at least 2.5
EDR points less than the Energy Efficiency Design Rating calculated for the Standard Design Building.
(2) Prescriptive Approach: Section 150.1.c. “Prescriptive standards/component packages” is amended
to include the following prescriptive standards for mixed-fuel single-family and duplex buildings:
(A)Duct System Sealing and Leakage Testing. The duct systems shall exceed the minimum
mandatory requirements of Section 150.0(m)11 A and B such that the total duct system
leakage shall not exceed 2 percent of the nominal system air handler air flow.
(B)Slab floor perimeter insulation shall be installed with an R-value equal to or greater than
R10. The minimum depth of concrete-slab floor perimeter insulation shall be 16 inches or
the depth of the footing of the building, whichever is less.
(C)The hot water distribution system shall be designed and installed to meet minimum
requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the
procedures outlined in the 2019 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6.
(D)Central Fan Integrated Ventilation Systems. The duct distribution system shall be designed
reduce external static pressure to meet a maximum fan efficacy equal to:
(i)Gas Furnaces: 0.35 Watts per cfm
(ii)Heat Pumps: 0.45 Watts per cfm, according to the procedures outlined in the 2019
Reference Appendices RA 3.3.
(E)For buildings with either space heating or water heating systems fueled by gas or propane,
also include:
(i)5 kWh battery of battery storage, OR
(ii)A solar water heating system with a minimum solar savings fraction of 0.20.
23.24.060 Modifications
If an applicant for a Covered Project believes that circumstances exist that make it infeasible to meet the
requirements of this Chapter, the applicant may request a modification as set forth in Section 23.06.015 of the
Municipal Code. In applying for the modification, the burden is on the Applicant to demonstrate infeasibility to
the City’s Building Official.
23.24.070 Expiration
These local code amendments shall sunset when the California Energy Code, 2019 Edition, is no longer in effect.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 43 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 5 of 7
1
4
6
2
Section 2. The Council adopts the findings supporting the local amendments to the California Energy Code, 2019
Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. Environmental determination. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, adoption of this
Ordinance is categorially exempt from CEQA, because it imposes stricter energy efficiency requirements and is a
regulatory action authorized by state law and intended to protect the environment.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City
Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence,
clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses
or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 5. Publication. This ordinance shall be published in summary in the San Mateo Daily Journal, posted in
the City Clerk’s Office, and posted on the City’s website, all in accordance with Section 2.15 of the City Charter.
Section 6. Legislative history and effective date. This ordinance was introduced on August 19, 2019, and
adopted on Click or tap to enter a date., and shall be effective on January 1, 2020
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 44 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 6 of 7
1
4
6
2
Exhibit A
FINDINGS SUPPORTING LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO
CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, 2019 EDITION
Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the
provisions in the uniform codes that are published in the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5
and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions in
the uniform codes and published in the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for
human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change
is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City
prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the
Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council
prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need
no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation,
including amendments made only for administrative consistency, do not require findings.
Code: California Energy Code
Section(s) Title Add Deleted Amended Justification
(See below
for keys)
Subchapter 1,
Section 100.1
Definitions and Rules of
Construction
X A, B
Subchapter 5,
Section 140.0
Performance and
Prescriptive Compliance
Approaches
X X A, B
Subchapter 8,
Section 150.1
Performance and
Prescriptive Compliance
Approaches for Low-Rise
Residential Buildings
X X A, B
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 45 of 108
Energy Code Amendments Page 7 of 7
1
4
6
2
Key to Justification Supporting Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations
A. This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. Failure to address and significantly
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could result in rises in sea level, including in San Francisco Bay,
that could put at risk City homes and businesses, public facilities, and Highway 101 (Bayshore Freeway),
particularly the mapped Flood Hazard areas of the City. Energy efficiency and the use of renewable
energy sources are key components in reducing GHG emissions, and construction of more energy
efficient buildings with dedicated renewable energy installations can help the City of San Mateo reduce
its share of the GHG emissions that contribute to climate change. The burning of fossil fuels used in the
generation of electric power and heating of buildings contributes to climate change, which could result
in rises in sea level, including in San Francisco Bay, that could put at risk City homes and businesses,
public facilities, and Highway 101.
B. Energy efficiency enhances the public health and welfare by promoting the environmental and
economic health of the City through the design, construction, maintenance, operation and
deconstruction of buildings and sites by incorporating green practices into all development. The
provisions in this Chapter are designed to achieve the following goals:
(a) Increase energy efficiency in buildings;
(b) Increase resource conservation;
(c) Provide durable buildings that are efficient and economical to own and operate;
(d) Promote the health and productivity of residents, workers, and visitors to the city;
(e) Recognize and conserve the energy embodied in existing buildings; and
(f) Reduce disturbance of natural ecosystems.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 46 of 108
CITY OF SAN MATEO
ORDINANCE NO. 2019-__
AMENDING CHAPTER 23.70, “GREEN BUILDING CODE,” OF TITLE 23, “BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION,” OF THE
SAN MATEO MUNICIPAL CODE TO ADOPT THE CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, 2019
EDITION, WITH LOCAL AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the California Green Building Standards Code, 2019 Edition, Title 24, Part 11 of the California
Code of Regulations has been released by the State and needs to be adopted by local jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Climate Action Plan recommended that the City review local amendments to the
California Green Building Standards Code to promote clean transportation fuels and increase electric vehicle
adoption; and
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code Section 17958 requires that the City, in order to make
local amendments, find that the local amendments are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geographical,
or topographical conditions; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Section 17958 findings are attached as Exhibit A to this Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MATEO CALIFORNIA ORDAINS AS THAT:
Section 1. Chapter 23.70, “Green Building Code,” is hereby amended to read:
Chapter 23.70 -Green Building Code
23.70.010 Adoption
23.70.020 Local Amendments to Definition
23.70.030 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New One- and Two-family Dwellings
and Town-houses
23.70.040 Local Amendment Electric Vehicle Charging for New Multifamily Residential
23.70.050 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New Non-Residential
23.70.060 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Space Design Requirements
23.70.070 Modifications
23.70.080 Expiration
23.70.010 Adoption
(a) The California Green Building Standards Code, 2019 Edition, Title 24, Part 11 of the California Code of
Regulations, as adopted and amended by the State of California, hereinafter called "Green Building Code," is
adopted as the rules, regulations and standards within this City as to all matters therein except as hereinafter
modified or amended;
(b) One copy of the Green Building Code shall at all times be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.
23.70.020 Local Amendments to Definitions
(a) The definitions contained Chapter 2, “Definitions” of the state Green Building Code are adopted.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 47 of 108
Green Building Code Amendments Page 2 of 6
1
4
6
1
(b) The most commonly used definitions are set forth below:
Electric Vehicle (EV). An automotive-type vehicle for on-road use, such as passenger automobiles,
buses, trucks, vans, neighborhood electric vehicles, electric motorcycles, and the like, primarily powered
by an electric motor that draws current from a rechargeable storage battery, fuel cell, photovoltaic
array, or other source of electric current. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) are considered electric
vehicles. For purposes of the California Electrical Code, off-road, self-propelled electric vehicles, such as
industrial trucks, hoists, lifts, transports, golf carts, airline ground support equipment, tractors, boats,
and the like, are not included.
Electric Vehicle Charging Space (EV Space). A space intended for future installation of EV charging
equipment and charging of electric vehicles.
Electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). The conductors, including the undergrounded, grounded, and
equipment grounding conductors and the electric vehicles connectors, attachment plugs, and all other
fittings, devices, power outlets, or apparatus installed specifically for the purpose of transferring energy
between premises wiring and the electric vehicle.
(c) Chapter 2 “Definitions,” Section 202 of the state Green Building Code is amended to include the
following definition:
Level 2 EVSE. An EVSE capable of charging at 30 amperes or higher at 208 or 240 VAC. An EVSE capable of
simultaneously charging at 30 amperes for each of two vehicles shall be counted as two Level 2 EVSE.
23.70.030 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging For New One- and Two-Family
Dwellings and Town-Houses
(a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.1, “New one- and two-family dwellings and town-houses with
attached private garages,” is amended to require the Tier 1 and Tier 2 requirement per Section
A4.106.8.1 and A4.106.8.1.1 of the Green Building Code as follows:
(1) Tier 1 and Tier 2. For each dwelling unit, a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit shall be
installed in the raceway required by Section 4.106.4.1. The branch circuit and associated
overcurrent protective device shall be rated at 40 amperes minimum. Other electrical
components, including a receptacle or blank cover, related to this section shall be installed in
accordance with the California Electrical Code.
A4.106.8.1.1 Identification. The service panel or sub-panel circuit directory shall identify the overcurrent
protective device designated for future EV charging purposes as “EV READY” in accordance with the California
Electrical Code. The receptacle or blank cover shall be identified as “EV READY."
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 48 of 108
Green Building Code Amendments Page 3 of 6
1
4
6
1
23.70.040 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging For New Multifamily Residential
Construction
(a) Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2, “New multifamily dwellings,” is amended to require the
Residential Voluntary Tier 1 Measure for EV charging space calculation per Section A4.106.8.2, “New
multifamily dwellings,” as follows:
Tier 1: 15 percent of the total number of parking spaces on a building site, provided for all types of
parking facilities, but in no case less than one, shall be electric vehicle charging spaces (EV spaces)
capable of supporting future electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE). Calculations for required number
of EV spaces shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.
Requirements related to EV spaces for multifamily residential projects can be found in Green Building Code
Sections 4.106.4.2.3 “Single EV space required” and 4.106.4.2.4 “Multiple EV spaces required.”
23.70.050 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Charging for New Non-residential Construction
(a) Green Building Code Section 5.106.5.3.3, “EV charging space calculation,” is amended to require
increased standards for new non-residential buildings with ten parking spaces or more as follows:
(1) Ten percent of the total number of parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities shall be
EV spaces capable of supporting future EVSE. Calculations for the required number of EV spaces
shall be rounded up to the nearest whole number.
(2) Five percent of the total number of parking spaces provided for all types of parking facilities shall be
equipped with Level 2 EVSE. Calculations for the required number of spaces with Level 2 EVSE shall
be rounded up to the nearest whole number.
Requirements related to EV spaces for nonresidential projects can be found in Green Building Code Sections
5.106.5.3.1 “Single charging space requirements” and 5.106.5.3.2 “Multiple charging space requirements.”
23.70.060 Local Amendment Regarding Electric Vehicle Space Design Requirements
Green Building Code Section 4.106.4.2, “New multifamily dwellings,” and Section 5.106.5.3.3, “EV charging space
calculation” are amended to require EV space design requirements as follows:
For all projects subject to Title 24, Part 2, Chapter 11B, construction documents shall indicate how many
accessible EV spaces would be required under the California Code of Regulations Title 24, Chapter 11B, if
applicable, in order to convert EV spaces to include EVSE. Construction documents shall also demonstrate that
the facility is designed such that compliance with accessibility standards, including Chapter 11B accessible
routes, will be feasible for the required accessible EV Space at the time of EVSE installation. Surface slope for any
area designated for accessible EV Space shall meet slope requirements in Chapter 11B and vertical clearance
requirements in Chapter 11B at the time of original building construction.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 49 of 108
Green Building Code Amendments Page 4 of 6
1
4
6
1
23.70.070 Modifications
If an applicant for a Covered Project believes that circumstances exist that make it infeasible to meet the
requirements of this Chapter, the applicant may request a modification set forth in Section 23.06.015 of the
Municipal Code. In applying for the modification, the burden is on the Applicant to show infeasibility. The
Building Official may grant a modification to exempt the applicant from these requirements if he or she makes
either of the following findings:
1. Where there is insufficient electrical supply.
Where there is evidence substantiating that additional local utility infrastructure design requirements, directly
related to the implementation of these requirements, may have a significant adverse impact the construction
cost of the project.
23.70.080 Expiration
These local code amendments shall sunset the when the California Green Building Standards Code, 2019 Edition,
is no longer in effect.
Section 2. The Council adopts the findings supporting the local amendments to the California Green Building
Standards Code, 2019 Edition, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. Environmental determination. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15308, adoption of this
Ordinance is categorically exempt from CEQA because adoption of these green building standards is authorized
by the state and is intended to assure the protection of the environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City
Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence,
clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses
or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 5. Publication. This ordinance shall be published in summary in the San Mateo Daily Journal, posted in
the City Clerk’s Office, and posted on the City’s website, all in accordance with Section 2.15 of the City Charter.
Section 6. Legislative history and effective date. This ordinance was introduced on August 19, 2019, and
adopted on Click or tap to enter a date., and shall be effective on January 1, 2020..
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 50 of 108
Green Building Code Amendments Page 5 of 6
1
4
6
1
Exhibit A
FINDINGS SUPPORTING LOCAL AMENDMENTS TO CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODE, 2019
EDITION
Section 17958 of the California Health and Safety Code provides that the City may make changes to the
provisions in the uniform codes that are published in the California Building Standards Code. Sections 17958.5
and 17958.7 of the Health and Safety Code require that for each proposed local change to those provisions in
the uniform codes and published in the California Building Standards Code which regulate buildings used for
human habitation, the City Council must make findings supporting its determination that each such local change
is reasonably necessary because of local climatic, geological, or topographical conditions.
Local building regulations having the effect of amending the uniform codes, which were adopted by the City
prior to November 23, 1970, were unaffected by the regulations of Sections 17958, 17958.5 and 17958.7 of the
Health and Safety Code. Therefore, amendments to the uniform codes which were adopted by the City Council
prior to November 23, 1970, and have been carried through from year to year without significant change, need
no required findings. Also, amendments to provisions not regulating buildings used for human habitation,
including amendments made only for administrative consistency, do not require findings.
Code: California Green Building Standards Code
Section(s)Title Add Deleted Amended Justification
(See below for
keys)
Chapter 4, Section
4.106.4.1
New one- and two-family
dwellings and town-
houses with attached
private garages
X A
Chapter 4, Section
4.106.4.2
New multifamily dwellings X A
Chapter 5, Section
5.106.5.3.3
EV charging space
calculation
X A
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 51 of 108
Green Building Code Amendments Page 6 of 6
1
4
6
1
Key to Justification Supporting Amendments to Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations
A. This amendment is justified on the basis of a local climatic condition. Failure to address and significantly
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions could result in rises in sea level, including in San Francisco Bay,
that could put at risk City homes and businesses, public facilities, and Highway 101 (Bayshore Freeway),
particularly the mapped Flood Hazard areas of the City. Electric vehicle charging infrastructure is a key
component in reducing GHG emissions, and EV charging installations can help the City of San Mateo
reduce its share of the GHG emissions that contribute to climate change. Electric vehicle charging
infrastructure will contribute to the reduction of GHG emissions by supporting the demand for electric
vehicles and the associated EV chargers. The burning of fossil fuels used in the generation of electric
power and heating of buildings contributes to climate change, which could result in rises in sea level,
including in San Francisco Bay, that could put at risk City homes and businesses, public facilities, and
Highway 101. However, electric power will become cleaner over time as utilities achieve more stringent
Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements, and translate the clean energy benefits to electric vehicles.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 52 of 108
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
8.
Meeting Date:
Subject:
2/24/2020
PROVIDE INPUT to Climate Emergency Resolution.
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter:
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Referral History:
At the October 21, 2019, Sustainability Commission meeting, the Commission recommended
that the Board of Supervisors adopt a Climate Emergency Resolution. At its November 19,
2019 meeting, the Board referred this issue to the Sustainability Committee. The referral from
the Board notes the actions the Sustainability Commission identified that could be included in
a climate emergency resolution:
(1) Establishing an advisory group that will help the County anticipate and plan
for an economy that is less dependent on fossil fuel extraction and processing, and
plan for a transition from a fossil-fuel dependent economy. As the State of
California adopts policies and goals for reducing pollution and addressing climate
change, the County should consider what this will mean for County revenues,
jobs, health, and infrastructure.
(2) Directing the County Administrator to establish an interdepartmental task
force that will focus on implementing the County’s Climate Action Plan and
identifying additional actions, policies, and programs the County can undertake to
reduce and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate.
(3) Identifying potential resources to support work in Contra Costa County to
reduce and adapt to a changing climate.
At the December 9, 2019 Sustainability Committee meeting, the Committee directed the
Sustainability Coordinator to develop a draft climate emergency resolution that would be
reviewed by the Sustainability Commission and come back to the Committee.
Referral Update:
Staff has been researching climate emergency resolutions adopted by other jurisdictions. The
attached matrix summarizes the issues that other jurisdictions have included in their
resolutions, either as “whereas” clauses (statements about the problem and/or actions already
taken) or “be it resolved” clauses (actions to be taken). Staff would like input from the
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 53 of 108
Sustainability Commission on whether there are additional topics that should be included in a
climate emergency resolution beyond those identified above. At the December 9, 2019
Sustainability Committee meeting, the Committee expressed support for the approach taken by
the State of California (see Attachment F).
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
PROVIDE INPUT to Climate Emergency Resolution.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A.
ATTACHMENT(S)
Attachment A: Adopted Climate Emergency Resolutions Chart
Attachment B: Sonoma County Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment C: Austin, TX Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment D: San Mateo County Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment E: City of Alameda Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment F: State of California Climate Executive Order
Attachment G: Richmond, CA Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment H: Hayward, CA Climate Emergency Resolution
Attachment I: Tacoma, WA Climate Emergency Resolution
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 54 of 108
Climate Emergency Mobilization Adopted ResolutionsSonoma, CA (2018) Alameda, CA (2018)Austin, TX (2019) San Mateo, CA (2019)State of California (2019)Richmond, CA (2018)Hayward, CA (2019)Tacoma, WA(2019)Adopt a Climate Action Plan (CAP) ✓✓✓✓ ✓✓✓Implement resiliency strategies✓✓✓ ✓✓✓Increase waste diversion targets✓✓Increase renewable energy use ✓✓✓✓✓Establish Net zero GHG emissions targets✓✓✓✓✓✓✓Establish carbon neutrality goals ✓✓✓✓✓✓✓Actions to conserve water resources✓✓Implement emergency preparedness strategies ✓✓✓✓✓Actions to address transportation's role in climate change✓✓✓✓Provide leadership in climate action✓✓✓✓✓✓Accomplish GHG reduction targets of 80% by 2050 ✓✓✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓Implement carbon sequestration methods✓✓✓✓✓✓✓ Engage local and regional collaboration ✓✓✓✓✓✓✓✓Promote equity✓✓✓✓✓✓Promote climate change education and awareness✓✓✓✓✓✓Enable food security✓✓Increase mitigation strategies✓✓✓✓✓✓✓✓Increase energy efficiency in buildings✓✓See next page for descriptions 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 55 of 108
Climate Emergency Mobilization Adopted ResolutionsDESCRIPTIONSClimate action plan (CAP)Resilience goalsZero waste targetsIncrease renewable energy use Net zero GHG emissions targetsIntegrated water resource planEmergency preparedness strategies Strategic mobility planFleet vehicle electrificationLeadership in climate actionGHG reduction targets 80% by 2050 aligned with CA targets) Carbon sequestrationSea‐level rise Vulnerability AssesmentCoordinated local/regional collaboration General PlanEquity* Climate change education and awarenessAgricultural preparedness and food securityBuilding efficiency strategiesMitigation strategiesIncluding building electrification, fleet vehicle electrification. Including green infrastructure, carbon sequestration, carbon offsetting through tree planting, urban heat island mitigation. A recent report, Rising Seas in California, projects a conservative estimate of between 1 and 3.4 feet of sea level rise in the San Francisco Bay by 2100Health, socio‐economic and racial equity considerations are to be included in policymaking and climate solutions at all levels and across all sectors as the consequences of climate change have significant impacts onIncluding the mainstream use of climate projections, educating about climate change in its current and future state. Including transiƟons to regeneraƟve agriculture and enabling food sovereignty. Including resilience hubs.Including reducing travel demand through smart growth. The State of California has adopted policy targets to reduce GHGs by 40% from1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050. Rapidly and safely draw down or remove all the excess carbon from the atmosphere.Including reporting progess on implementation of CAP.Climate resilience plan, resilience strategies, food security, sustainable agriculture. Including increased waste diversion targets. Establishing community choice aggregations, adopting building efficiency goals. AcƟons to aƩain carbon neutrality and reduce emissions in advance of the State of California’s 2045 goal.Including water conservation and efficiency, waste‐water infrastructure efficienct, increased recycled water and greywater use, and use of renewable energy in water and wastewater systems. 02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 56 of 108
County of Sonoma
State of California
THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT IS A
CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
ON FILE IN THIS OFFICE.
ATTEST. MAY 0 8 2018
~~E~~etary ~'.!ECfiETARY
Item Number: 25
~~~~~~~~~
Date: May 8, 2018 Resolution Number: 18-0166
r 3/5 Vote Required
Resolution Of The Board Of Supervisors Of The County Of Sonoma, State Of California, Reaffirming Its
Intent To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions As Part Of A Coordinated Effort Through The Sonoma
County Regional Climate Protection Authority And To Adopt Local Implementation Measures As
Identified In Climate Action Plan 2020 and Beyond
Whereas, climate change is a real and increasingly urgent threat that demands action at
every level of government; and
Whereas, actions taken by local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
(GHGs} provide multiple benefits by providing energy and cost savings, air quality and
public health improvements, local job creation, resource conservation, climate
resilience, and enhanced equity; and
Whereas, the State of California has adopted policy targets to reduce GHGs by 40% from
1990 levels by 2030 and by 80% from 1990 levels by 2050; and
Whereas, the Sonoma County General Plan 2020 includes a section on Energy which
includes strong policy language related to the reduction of GHGs; and
Whereas, Sonoma County participates in a coordinated, countywide collaboration to
address climate change via the Sonoma County Regional Climate Protection Authority
(RCPA); and
WHEREAS, the success of the RCPA depends on the participation of and collaboration
with all local jurisdictions, and a commitment to pool resources towards common goals;
and
WHEREAS, the RCPA has adopted the same GHG reduction targets as the State of
California; and
WHEREAS, the RCPA has established twenty goals to reduce GHG emissions and nine
goals to prepare for local climate impacts; and
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 57 of 108
I '·
Resalution:#18·0166.
Date: May 8, 2018'
Page 2
",'il,1
WHEREAS~.t.h~ RCPA ;;i,n9 Sonoma County collaborated through the Climate Action Plan
. 2029,~n,d ~ey~n~ p,r,ojed to develop Measures specific to Sonoma County that will
result in the reduction of GHG and result in substantial environmental and community
benefits.
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that Sonoma County agrees to work towards the RCPA's
countywide target to reduce GHG emissions by 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80%
below 1990 levels by 2050; and
Be It Further Resolved, that Sonoma County adopts the following goals to reduce
GHG emissions, and will pursue local actions that support these goals:
1. Increase building energy efficiency
2. Increase renewable energy use
3. Switch equipment from fossil fuel to electricity
4. Reduce travel demand through focused growth
5. Encourage a shift toward low·carbon transportation options
6. Increase vehicle and equipment fuel efficiency
7. Encourage a shift toward low·carbon fuels in vehicles and equipment
8. Reduce idling
9. Increase solid waste diversion
10. Increase capture and use of methane from landfills
11. Reduce water consumption
12. Increase recycled water and greywater use
13. Increase water and waste·water infrastructure efficiency
14. Increase use of renewable energy in water and wastewater systems
15. Reduce emissions from livestock operations
16. Reduce emissions from fertilizer use
17. Protect and enhance the value of open and working lands
18. Promote sustainable agriculture
19. Increase carbon sequestration
20. Reduce emissions from the consumption of goods and services; and
Be It Further Resolved, that Sonoma County will continue to work to increase the
health and resilience of social, natural, and built resources to withstand the
impacts of climate change; and
Be It Further Resolved, that Sonoma County has the goal of increasing resilience
by pursuing local actions that support the following goals:
1. Promote healthy, safe communities
2. Protect water resources
3. Promote as sustainable, climate·resilient economy
4. Mainstream the use of climate projections
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 58 of 108
Resolution #18-0166
Date: May 8, 2018
Page 3
5. Manage natural buffer zones around community resources
6. Promote agricultural preparedness and food security
7. Protect infrastructure
8. Increase emergency preparedness and prevention
9. Monitor climate change and its effects.
Be It Further Resolved, that Sonoma County will support these goals through its
own actions and through collaboration with other local governments through the
efforts of the Regional Climate Protection Authority; and
Be It Further Resolved that Sonoma County intends to implement its local
measures from the Climate Action Plan 2020 and Beyond planning project.
THE FOREGOING RESOLUTION was duly adopted this eighth day of May 2018, by the following vote:
Supervisors:
Gorin: Aye Rabbitt: Aye Zane: Aye Hopkins: Aye Gore: Aye
Ayes: 5 Noes: 0 Absent: 0 Abstain: 0
So Ordered.
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 59 of 108
Austin, Texas
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 60 of 108
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 61 of 108
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 62 of 108
02-24-20 Sustainability Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 63 of 108
09-12-19 Sustainabiltiy Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 60 of 167
09-12-19 Sustainabiltiy Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 61 of 167
09-12-19 Sustainabiltiy Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 62 of 167
RESOLUTION NO. .
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
* * * * * *
RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE DECLARATION OF A CLIMATE EMERGENCY IN
SAN MATEO COUNTY THAT DEMANDS ACCELERATED ACTIONS ON THE
CLIMATE CRISIS AND CALLS ON LOCAL AND REGIONAL PARTNERS TO JOIN
TOGETHER TO ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE
______________________________________________________________
RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Mateo, State of
California, that
WHEREAS, according to the Intergovernmental Plan on Climate Change
(IPCC), increasing greenhouse gases (GHG) will cause global temperatures to rise 1.5
degrees Celsius by as early as 2030; and
WHEREAS, for San Mateo County, rising global temperatures will cause sea
levels to rise (up to six feet or more by 2100 under certain scenarios), contribute to
increasingly extreme weather including intense rainfall, storms and heat events, and
heighten risk of large wildfires; and
WHEREAS, the consequences of climate change pose risks to life, safety and
critical infrastructure in San Mateo County and throughout the world, and threaten
physical, social and mental well-being; and
WHEREAS, climate change impacts will be most acutely felt by children, the
elderly, those with preexisting physical and mental health conditions, low income or
communities of color, and residents with unstable economic or housing situations; and
Adopted September 2019
09-12-19 Sustainabiltiy Commission Mtg - Agenda Packet, Page 63 of 167
WHEREAS, the County of San Mateo Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment
indicates that in the County over 160,000 children under the age of 18 years, and over
100,000 older adults, are vulnerable to risks posed by sea level rise; and
WHEREAS, the County has taken a number of actions to address climate
change, including: helping to launch Peninsula Clean Energy; facilitating the Regional
Integrated Climate Action Planning Suite (RICAPS) program that brings together the
County and its 20 cities to plan and implement measures to reduce GHG emissions;
launching Climate Ready SMC to better prepare San Mateo County for the changing
climate; and facilitating the formation of the Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District
in partnership with the City/County Association of Governments; and
WHEREAS, in 2015 the County reduced GHG emissions by 21.8% below 2005
levels; and
WHEREAS, the current pace of climate actions may still fall short of reducing
the projected harm to people and places and accelerated actions need to be taken to
reduce our GHG emissions and implement solutions to prepare and protect our
communities; and
WHEREAS, by declaring a climate emergency, the County of San Mateo will
join the City and County of San Francisco, County of Santa Clara, other Bay area cities,
including Berkeley, Alameda, Richmond, Santa Cruz, Hayward and Oakland, and over
1,000 national, international and local jurisdictions with similar declarations that are
committed to reducing GHG emissions and planning for climate change; and
WHEREAS, the County invites all cities and other local jurisdictions and
agencies to also approve a Climate Emergency Declaration to create a unified
Countywide voice around climate change and to strengthen the call for state and federal
actions and funds to address the economic, social, public health, and national security
threats posed by the climate crisis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of the
County of San Mateo declares a climate emergency that threatens the economic and
social well-being, health and safety, and security of the County of San Mateo.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County will continue to educate
residents about the seriousness of climate change, invest in climate solutions, and
address the current and future impacts of climate change .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that health, socio-economic and racial equity
considerations should be included in policymaking and climate solutions at all levels and
across all sectors as the consequences of climate change have significant impacts on
all County residents, but especially the young, the elderly, low income or communities of
color, and other vulnerable populations.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that County commits to completing the
Government Operations and Unincorporated Area Climate Action Plans that will include
measurable climate-related goals and actions to attain carbon neutrality in advance of
the State of California’s 2045 goal.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the County will develop and enact resiliency
policies and plans to ensure continuous operation of County services and facilities.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County will achieve its climate action
and resiliency goals through cross departmental partnerships within the County.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County will collaborate and coordinate
with the 20 cities in the County, and other local partners like Peninsula Clean Energy
and the Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District, to achieve carbon neutrality
throughout San Mateo County and to implement other actions to address climate
change.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board directs the Office of Sustainability
to report annually to the Board, starting in April 2020, on progress towards meeting
resiliency goals and achieving carbon neutrality in advance of 2045.
* * * * * *
CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO.______
ENDORSE DECLARATION OF A CLIMATE EMERGENCY AND
REQUEST REGIONAL COLLABORATION ON AN IMMEDIATE JUST
TRANSITION AND EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION EFFORT TO
RESTORE A SAFE CLIMATE
WHEREAS, as of February 2019, 194 United Nations member governments
recognized the threat of climate change and the urgent need to combat it by signing the
Paris Agreement, agreeing to keep warming "well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels"
and to "pursue efforts to limit the temperature increa se to 1.5°C"; and
WHEREAS, the death and destruction already caused by global warming of
approximately 1°C has increased and intensified wildfires, floods, rising seas, diseases,
droughts, and extreme weather, and
WHEREAS, national and international security experts have identified climate
change as a significant threat to the security of the United States and the stability of the
international community, and
WHEREAS, the State of California Ocean Protection Council, in its 2018 Rising
Seas in California report, projects an increase between a medium-high risk aversion
scenario of 6.9 feet of sea level rise in the San Francisco Bay by 2100 and an extreme
risk aversion scenario of 10 feet; and
WHEREAS, restoring a safe and stable climate requires an emergency
mobilization to reach zero greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors, to rapidly and
safely draw down or remove all the excess carbon from the atmosphere, and to implement
measures to protect all people and species from the consequences of current fa cts and
projections of additional, abrupt climate change; and
WHEREAS, core to a socially just response is ensuring equity is centered in
climate actions in a framework that ensures sustainability for present and future
generations and supports self-determination and the maintenance of culture, tradition,
and deep democracy, while supporting the belief that people around the world have a
right to clean, healthy and adequate air, water, land, food, education, and shelter, as well
as living wages and the attainment of basic human needs for all; and
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda and community members including Community
Action for a Sustainable Alameda (CASA) have begun a robust process to create a newly
revised and expanded Climate Action and Resiliency Plan (Plan) that identifies
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets for 2030 and 2050 that meet or
exceed legislated federal and California objectives and targets; and
WHEREAS, the City of Alameda, as the Bay Area’s largest island city, faces an
existential crisis from sea-level rise and must act as a global and regional leader by
transitioning to an ecologically, socially, and economically regenerative economy and by
acting at emergency speed in a unified regional climate adaptation and mobilization effort.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Alameda declares that a
climate emergency threatens our city, region, state, nation, civilization, humanity and the
natural world; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Alameda commits to citywide action
that is rooted in equity, self-determination, culture, tradition, deep democracy, and the
belief that people locally and around the world have right to clean, healthy and adequate
air, water, land, food, education and shelter; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that an urgent global climate mobilization effort to
reverse global warming is needed as quickly as possible towards zero net emissions no
later than 2030, and that the City of Alameda should actively participate in an effort to
safely draw down carbon from the atmosphere, and accelerate adaptation and resilience
strategies in preparation for intensifying climate impacts; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Alameda commits to educating our
residents about the climate emergency and wo rking to catalyze a just transition and
urgent climate mobilization effort at the local, state, national, and global levels to provide
maximum protection for our residents to include Alameda’s unhoused population,
indigenous, low-income, and/or communities of color specifically, as well as all the people
and species of the world; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Alameda underscores the need for
full community participation, inclusion, and support, and recognizes that the residents of
Alameda, community organizations (including CASA), faith, youth, labor, business,
academic institutions, homeowners' associations, and environmental, economic, science-
based, racial, gender, family and disability justice and indigenous, immigrant and
women's rights organizations and other such allies will be integral to the leadership of the
mobilization effort; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Alameda acknowledges that there is
still time to act and that as a city, known to come together in support of large efforts and
committed to addressing this crisis, we can work together to make the necessary change
in order to do so; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Alameda joins a nationwide call for
a regional just transition away from fossil fuels and urgent climate mobilization
collaborative effort focused on transforming our region, enacting policies that dramatically
reduce heat-trapping emissions, and rapidly catalyzing a mobilization at all levels of
government to restore a safe climate; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alameda City Council supports the City’s
ongoing development of a Climate Action and Resiliency Plan, including the development
of measurable climate-related goals for 2030 and 2050;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alameda City Council recognizes that in
order to meet these goals, the City must continue to formulate and implement subsequent
phases of mitigation and resiliency plans as soon as practicable, alo ng with priority
programs and projects both locally and with regional partners to secure a sustainable
environment, infrastructure, commerce and living conditions for all residents; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Alameda City Council directs the Interim
City Manager to work with the Department of Public Works to identify, within the Climate
Action and Resiliency Plan, a Climate point person and appropriate internal structure to
support ongoing climate action and accountability and identify a reporting timeline and
process for identifying progress in meeting the plan’s goals, including adding a Climate
Impacts section to all council staff reports that provides meaningful information on how
proposed actions will impact GHG reduction efforts.
* * * * *
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda in regul ar meeting
assembled on the 19th day of March, 2019, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
IN WITNESS, WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the offi cial
seal of said City this 20th day of March, 2019.
___________________
Lara Weisiger, City Clerk
City of Alameda
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
______________________
Michael H. Roush, Interim City Attorney
City of Alameda
ATTACHMENT II
HAYWARD CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION NO. 19-____
Introduced by Council Member __________
RESOLUTION ENDORSING THE DECLARATION OF A CLIMATE EMERGENCY
AND REQUESTING REGIONAL COLLABORATION ON AN IMMEDIATE JUST
TRANSITION AND EMERGENCY MOBILIZATION EFFORT TO RESTORE A SAFE
CLIMATE
WHEREAS, In April 2016 world leaders from 175 countries recognized the threat of
climate change and the urgent need to combat it by signing the Paris Agreement, agreeing
to keep warming “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and to “pursue efforts to limit
the temperature increase to 1.5°C”; and
WHEREAS, The death and destruction already caused by global warming of
approximately 1°C demonstrates has increased and intensified wildfires, floods, rising seas,
diseases, droughts, and extreme weather; and
WHEREAS, Climate change and the global economy’s conflict with ecological limits
are contributing to mass extinction of species, which could devastate much of life on Earth
for the next 10 million years; and
WHEREAS, A recent state report, Rising Seas in California, projects a conservative
estimate of between 1 and 3.4 feet of sea level rise in the San Francisco Bay by 2100; and
WHEREAS, The range of projections in the state report includes the possibility of up
to 10 feet of sea level rise in the San Francisco Bay by 2100, a scenario consistent with
rapid Antarctic ice sheet mass loss that would be catastrophic to Hayward and every other
coastal community; and
WHEREAS, The United States of America has disproportionately contributed to the
climate and ecological crises and has repeatedly obstructed global efforts to transition
toward a sustainable economy, and thus bears an extraordinary responsibility to rapidly
solve these crises; and
WHEREAS, Restoring a safe and stable climate requires an emergency mobilization
to reach zero greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors, to rapidly and safely draw down
or remove all the excess carbon from the atmosphere, and to implement measures to
protect all people and species from the consequences of abrupt climate change; and
Page 2 of 4
WHEREAS, Justice requires that frontline communities, which have historically
borne the brunt of the extractive fossil-fuel economy, participate actively in the planning
and implementation of this mobilization effort at all levels of government and that they
benefit first from the transition to a renewable energy economy; and
WHEREAS, Fairness demands a guarantee of high-paying, good-quality jobs with
comprehensive benefits for all and many other tenets of a Green New Deal effort as the
mobilization to restore a safe climate is launched; and
WHEREAS, The term “Just Transition” is a framework for a fair shift to an economy
that is ecologically sustainable, equitable and just for all its members; and
WHEREAS, Just transition strategies were first forged by a ‘blue-green’ alliance of
labor unions and environmental justice groups who saw the need to phase out the
industries that were harming workers, community health and the planet, while also
providing just pathways for workers into new livelihoods; and
WHEREAS, Just transition initiatives shift the economy from dirty energy to energy
democracy, from funding highways to expanding public transit, from incinerators and
landfills to zero waste, from industrial food systems to food sovereignty, from car-
dependent sprawl and unbridled growth to smart urban development without
displacement, and from rampant, destructive over-development to habitat and ecosystem
restoration; and
WHEREAS, Core to a just transition is equity, self-determination, culture, tradition,
deep democracy, and the belief that people around the world have a fundamental human
right to clean, healthy and adequate air, water, land, food, education and shelter; and
WHEREAS, The City of Hayward’s Climate Action Plan, updated with the adoption of
the Hayward 2040 General Plan in 2014, includes GHG emission reduction targets of 61.7%
by the year 20430 and 82.5% by 2050 using the year 2005 as the baseline; and
WHEREAS, The City of Hayward can act as a global leader by both converting to an
ecologically, socially and economically regenerative economy, and by catalyzing a unified
regional just transition and urgent climate mobilization effort.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council, the City of Hayward
declares that a climate emergency threatens our city, region, state, nation, civilization,
humanity and the natural world.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward commits to a citywide just
transition and urgent climate mobilization effort to reverse global warming, which, with
appropriate financial and regulatory assistance from the County of Alameda and State and
Federal authorities, reduces citywide GHG emissions as quickly as possible towards zero
net emissions, immediately initiates an effort to safely draw down carbon from the
Page 3 of 4
atmosphere, and accelerates adaptation and resilience strategies in preparation for
intensifying climate impacts.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward commits to educating our residents
about the climate emergency and working to catalyze a just transition and urgent climate
mobilization effort at the local, state, national, and global levels to provide maximum
protection for our residents as well as all the people and species of the world.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward underscores the need for full
community participation, inclusion, and support, and recognizes that the residents of
Hayward, and community organizations, faith, youth, labor, business, academic institutions,
homeowners’ associations and environmental, economic, science-based, racial, gender,
family and disability justice and indigenous, immigrant and women’s rights organizations
and other such allies who will be integral to and in the leadership of the mobilization effort.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward commits to keeping of the
outcomes to vulnerable communities central to all just transition and urgent climate
mobilization effort planning processes and invites and encourages such communities to
actively participate in order to advocate directly for their needs.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward joins a nation-wide call for a
regional just transition and urgent climate mobilization collaborative effort focused on
transforming our region, enacting policies that dramatically reduce heat-trapping
emissions, and rapidly catalyzing a mobilization at all levels of government to restore a safe
climate.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Hayward calls on the State of California, the
United States of America, and all national and sub-national governments and peoples
worldwide to initiate a just transition and urgent climate mobilization effort to reverse
global warming by restoring near pre-industrial global average temperatures and
greenhouse gas concentrations, that immediately halts the development of all new fossil
fuel infrastructure, rapidly phases out all fossil fuels and the technologies which rely upon
them, ends human-induced greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as possible, initiates an
effort to safely draw down carbon from the atmosphere, transitions to regenerative
agriculture, ends the potential for a sixth mass extinction, and creates high-quality, good-
paying jobs with comprehensive benefits for those who will be impacted by this transition.
Page 4 of 4
IN COUNCIL, HAYWARD, CALIFORNIA _______________________, 2019
ADOPTED BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
MAYOR:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ATTEST: ______________________________________
City Clerk of the City of Hayward
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________________
City Attorney of the City of Hayward
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
9.
Meeting Date: February 25, 2020
Subject: Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Update, Division 816 – Trees
Department: Conservation and Development
Presenter: Jamar Stamps, AICP, Senior Planner
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
Referral Update:
The County Conservation and Development Department is in the process of comprehensively
updating Division 816 – Trees (“Tree Code”) of the County Ordinance Code. The current Tree
Code is over 25 years old and has never been updated. Goals of the Tree Code update include:
Create provisions easier for the general public to understand and County staff to administer
Clearer criteria and definition for what is a “protected tree”
Streamline tree permitting in development review
The updated Tree Code will also propose establishing an in-lieu fee program. The purpose of the
in-lieu fee program is to provide an alternative to tree replacement where new plantings are deemed
infeasible, or when proposed replacement plantings will not provide equivalent aesthetic quality
because of the size, age or other characteristics.
County staff welcomes the Commission’s input on the Tree Code Update, potential or dinance
provisions, and examples of other successful tree codes and in-lieu fee programs. Specifically, the
general concept of an in-lieu fee program, its administration and how in-lieu fees should be
allocated.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ACCEPT report and provide direction to staff as appropriate.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
The Tree Code update is funded by the Conservation and Development Department.
ATTACHMENT(S)
Current Tree Code (Division 816 – Trees)
Division 816 - TREES
Chapter 816-2 - —TOV TREE OBSTRUCTION OF VIEWS COMBINING DISTRICT
Article 816-2.2. General
816-2.202 - —TOV combining district.
All land within a land use district combined with a —TOV tree obstruction of views combining district
shall be subject to the provisions in this chapter.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.204 - Purpose and intent.
The purpose of this chapter is to provide a method for private property owners to gain restoration of
views and sunlight lost due to tree growth by another private propert y owner as defined in Article 816-2.4.
It is not intended by this chapter to create any greater right to a view or access to sunlight than existed at
the time any claimant purchased his property.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.206 - Objectives.
The objectives of, and the justification for, this chapter are to:
(1) Preserve and promote the aesthetic benefits provided by trees, views of surrounding locale, and
access to light;
(2) Preserve and promote the beneficial use and enjoyment of privately owned land within the
county;
(3) Preserve, maintain, and enhance property values within the county;
(4) Discourage the maintenance of trees that provide excessive shade and unduly diminish desirable
views.
(Ord. 84-3).
Article 816-2.4. Definitions
816-2.402 - General.
Unless otherwise specifically provided, or required by the context, the following terms have these
meanings for the purposes of this chapter.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.404 - Claimant.
"Claimant" means any owner of real property who believes in good faith that the growth, maintenance
or location of trees situated on the property of another diminishes the beneficial use, economic value and
enjoyment of this property, and who files a view claim under Section 816-2.424.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.406 - Obstruction.
"Obstruction" means any blocking or diminishing of a view by tree growth, maintenance or location.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.408 - Thinning.
"Thinning" means the selective removal of entire branches from a tree so as to improve the tree's
structural condition.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.410 - Topping.
"Topping" means the removal of the upper portion of a tree's trunk or primary leader.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.412 - Trimming.
"Trimming" means the selective removal of portions of branches from a tree so as to modify the tree's
form, shape or profile and/or improve the tree's appearance.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.414 - Tree.
"Tree" means any woody perennial plant, usually with one main trun k, attaining a height of at least
eight feet at maturity.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.416 - Tree owner.
"Tree owner" means the owner of real property on which are situated tree(s) whose growth,
maintenance or location allegedly diminishes the beneficial use, economic value and enjoyment of the
property of another.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.418 - Tree removal.
"Tree removal" means the destruction of any tree by cutting, girdling, interfering with the water supply,
applying chemicals, or regrading around the base of the trunk.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.420 - View.
"View" means a range of sight including pleasing vistas or prospects or scenes. Views include, but are
not limited to, the sight of geologic features, bays, oceans, sky lines, bridges and distant cities.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.422 - View arbitrator.
"View arbitrator" means any person mutually agreed to by the claimant and tree owner, a landscape
architect registered and licensed by the state of California or other selected in accordance with applicable
Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Ass ociation.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.424 - View claim.
"View claim" means the claimant's verified written basis for arbitration or court action under this
chapter, which clearly establishes all of the following:
(1) The precise nature and extent of the all eged view obstruction and particulars of the manner in
which it diminishes the beneficial use, economic value and enjoyment of the claimant's property,
including all pertinent corroborating physical evidence available;
(2) The exact location of all trees alleged to cause a view obstruction, the address of the property
upon which the trees are located, and the present tree owner's name and address. This
requirement may be satisfied by the inclusion of tree location, property address and tree owner
information on a valid property survey or plot plan submitted with the view claim;
(3) Any mitigating actions proposed by the parties involved to resolve the alleged view claim;
(4) The failure of personal communication between the claimant and the tree owner to resolve the
alleged view obstruction as set forth in this chapter. The claimant must provide physical evidence
that written attempts at conciliation have been made and filed. Such evidence may include, but is
not limited to, copies of and receipts for certified or registered mail correspondence.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.426 - Windowing.
"Windowing" means the creation of a limited horizontal viewing plan through the head of a tree or
trees.
(Ord. 84-3).
Article 816-2.6. Standards
816-2.602 - General.
Unless otherwise specifically provided, the provisions of this article are to be utilized to resolve view
claim disputes.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.604 - Rights.
A claimant has no right greater than that which existed at the time of the claimant's acquis ition of the
property involved in the view claim, and shall provide evidence to prove the extent of that original view and
right.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.606 - View character.
The character of a view shall be determined by evaluating:
(1) The vantage point(s) from which the view is obtained;
(2) The existence of landmarks or other unique features in the view; and
(3) The extent to which the view is diminished by factors other than the tree(s) involved in the claim.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.608 - Obstruction.
The character of the view obstruction shall be determined by evaluating:
(1) The extent of the alleged view obstruction, expressed as a percentage of the total view, and
calculated by means of a surveyor's transit or by photography or both; and
(2) The extent to which landmarks or other unique features in the view are obstructed.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.610 - Benefits and burdens.
The extent of benefits and/or burdens derived from the alleged view obstruction tree(s) shall be
determined with consideration given to the tree(s)' contribution to the following factors:
(1) Visual screening;
(2) Wildlife habitat;
(3) Soil stability, as measured by soil structure, degree of slope and extent of tree(s) root system;
(4) Energy conservation and/or climate control, and/or interference in efficient operations of
claimant's solar energy systems;
(5) Effects on neighboring vegetation;
(6) Visual quality of the tree(s), including but not limited to species characteristics, size, f orm, texture,
color, vigor and location;
(7) The economic value of the tree(s), as measured by the criteria developed by the American
Society of Landscape Architects; and
(8) Other tree-related factors, including but not limited to indigenous tree spec ies, specimen tree
quality, rare tree species, and historical value.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.612 - Restoration evaluation.
Any restorative action shall be evaluated based on the standards of this article and consideration of
the following:
(1) The effectiveness of the restorative action in reducing the view obstruction;
(2) Any adverse impact of the restorative action on the benefits derived from the tree(s) in question;
(3) The structural and biological effects of the restorative action on the tree(s) in question; and
(4) The cost of the restorative action, as determined by consultation with licensed landscape
architects.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.614 - Restoration limits.
Restorative actions shall be limited to the following:
(1) Trimming;
(2) Thinning;
(3) Windowing;
(4) Topping;
(5) Tree removal with necessary replacement planting; and/or
(6) No action.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.616 - Restoration implementation.
All restorative actions shall be undertaken subject to the following:
(1) Restorative actions must be consistent with all applicable statutes, ordinances, and regulations.
(2) Where possible, restorative actions shall be limited to the trimming and/or thinning of branches;
but, when is not a feasible solution, windowing is the preferable solution.
(3) When thinning, trimming and windowing of branches is not a feasible solution, topping shall be
considered.
(4) Tree removal shall only be considered when all other restorative actions are judged to be
ineffective and shall be accompanied by replacement plantings of appropriate plant material
necessary to restore the maximum level of benefits lost due to tree removal. Replacement
plantings can be required on the tree owner's or the claimant's property.
(5) In those cases where tree removal eliminates or significantly reduces the tree owner's benefits
of shading, visual screening, or privacy, replacement screen plantings shall, at the tree owner's
option, be established prior to tree removal; notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (4) of
this section, the tree owner may choose tree removal with replacement plantings as an alternative
to trimming, thinning, windowing, or topping.
(6) All trimming, thinning, windowing, topping or removal required under this chapter mus t be
performed by a qualified tree trimmer or as approved by the view arbitrator.
(Ord. 84-3).
Article 816-2.8. Procedure
816-2.802 - Initial reconciliation.
A claimant who believes in good faith that the growth, maintenance, or location of trees si tuated on
the property of another diminishes the beneficial use, economic value and enjoyment of views naturally
accruing to the claimant's property shall notify the tree owner in writing of such concerns. The submission
of said notification to the tree owner should be accompanied by personal discussions, if possible, to enable
the claimant and the tree owner to attempt to reach a mutually agreeable solution to the alleged view
obstruction in accordance with the provisions of this chapter.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.804 - Arbitration.
Where the initial reconciliation process fails, the claimant and the tree owner may elect binding
arbitration pursuant to this chapter to resolve the alleged view obstruction. The view arbitrator shall be fully
qualified under this chapter and shall be agreed to by both the claimant and the tree owner, who shall
indicate such agreement in writing and with the arbitrator's consent. The arbitration agreement may provide
for employment of experts representing the parties or may be li mited to an investigation of the view claim
conducted by the view arbitrator. The view arbitrator shall follow the terms and conditions of this chapter to
reach a fair resolution of the view claim, and shall submit a complete written report to the claimant and the
tree owner. The report shall include the view arbitrator's findings with respect to all standards listed in Article
816-2.6 and a complete listing of all mandated restorative actions. All mandated restorative actions shall
be implemented within thirty days of the delivery of the arbitration report to the claimant and the tree owner,
or within such other period recommended by expert advice to be required by seasons of the year, type of
tree, etc. The findings of the view arbitrator shall be final.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.806 - Costs.
The costs of arbitration and all mandated restorative actions and/or replacement plantings shall be
apportioned between the claimant and the tree owner as mutually agreed to, or in the absence of agreement
as follows:
(1) The claimant and tree owner shall each pay fifty percent of such costs in those cases involving
any tree planted by the tree owner subsequent to March 1, 1984.
(2) In all other cases, the claimant shall pay one hundred percent of such costs.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.808 - Litigation.
In those cases where the initial reconciliation process fails to resolve the view claim and binding
arbitration is not chosen by the parties, civil legal action may be pursued by the claimant.
(Ord. 84-3).
Article 816-2.10. Liabilities and Enforcement
816-2.1002 - Liabilities.
The issuance of an arbitration report pursuant to this chapter does not establish any public use or
access not already in existence with regard to the property for which the arbitration report and decision are
issued, and does not create any liability for the county, any other public agency or entity, or the arbitrator
with regard to any restorative actions or replacement plantings to be performed.
(Ord. 84-3).
816-2.1004 - Enforcement.
Violations of this chapter are not misdemeanors or infractions. Enforcement of this chapter shall be by
the involved private parties. Any claimant may seek to enforce any restorative action mandated pursuant
to this chapter through ordinary legal proceedings.
(Ord. 84-3).
Chapter 816-4 - HERITAGE TREE PRESERVATION (HTP) DISTRICT
Article 816-4.2. General
816-4.202 - HTP district.
All land within Contra Costa County shall be subject to the provisions in this chapter.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.204 - Intent and findings.
(a) Among the features that contribute to the attractiveness and livability of the county are its heritage
trees growing as single specimens, in clusters or in woodland situations. These trees have significant
psychological and tangible benefits for both residents of and visitors to the county.
(b) Heritage trees contribute to the visual framework of the county by providing scale, color, silhouette
and mass. Heritage trees contribute to the climate of the county by providing shade, moisture and wind
control. Heritage trees contribute to the protection of other natural resources by providing erosion
control for the soil, oxygen for the air, replenishment of groundwater, and habitat for wildlife. Heritage
trees contribute to the economy of the county by sustaining property values and reducing the cost of
drainage systems for surface water. Heritage trees provide landmarks of the county's history, and a
critical element of nature in the midst of urban settlement.
(c) For all these reasons, it is in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare of the county to
regulate the removal of heritage trees, to require adequate protection of trees during construction, and
to promote the appreciation and understanding of heritage trees.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.206 - Regulations.
(a) The community development department, after consulting with and considering the recommendations
of the building inspection, public works and agriculture department, may from time to time propose to
the board of supervisors regulations to establish procedures to implement this chapter and to make
more specific the standards and guidelines prescribed in this chapter. Such regulations as are
approved by resolution of the board of supervisors shall have the force and effect of law unless
otherwise indicated.
(b) Regulations may be promulgated to set forth criteria for granting and denying destruction permits and,
among other things, to govern the marking of heritage trees and the prevention of excessive pruni ng.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.208 - Arboricultural expertise.
All departments engaged in decisions regarding heritage trees may utilize such qualified arboricultural
expertise as is required to implement this chapter in accordance with their current budget accounts.
(Ord. 88-83).
Article 816-4.4. Definition and Designation
816-4.402 - Heritage tree definition.
"Heritage tree" means:
(1) A tree seventy-two inches or more in circumference measured four and one -half feet above the
natural grade; or
(2) Any tree or a group of trees particularly worthy of protec tion, and specifically designated as a
heritage tree by the board of supervisors pursuant to the provisions of this chapter, because of:
(A) Having historical or ecological interest or significance, or
(B) Being dependent upon each other for health or survival, or
(C) Being considered an outstanding specimen of its species as to such factors as location,
size, age, rarity, shape, or health.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.404 - Designation.
(a) The county or regional planning commission for its territorial area of jurisdiction shall receive
nominations through the county community development department from any person for the
registration of heritage trees on any property. When any property's owner has not joined with or
consented to a nomination, that owner shall be provided timely notice of the date and time at which
the planning commission and/or board will consider the nomination.
(b) If the planning commission approves the nominated trees, this decision shall be forwarded to the
board for its consideration. If the board approves the heritage tree designation as recommended, then
the tree shall be officially registered by resolution and thereafter a permit shall be required for its
removal.
(c) If the planning commission does not approve a heritage tree nomination, its decision is final unless
appealed to the board pursuant to and otherwise regulated by the special permit provisions of Chapter
26-2.
(d) The planning commission or board in designating a heritage tree shall consider the criteria of Section
816-4.402.
(e) All designated heritage trees shall be appropriately marked with the permission of involved property
owners so as to provide continuing notice to the public of heritage tree status.
(f) A nomination fee of one hundred dollars shall be imposed per application. An appeal fee of fifty dollars
per appeal shall be assessed.
(Ord. 88-83).
Article 816-4.6. Destruction or Removal
816-4.602 - Prohibition.
Except as provided in this chapter, no person shall destroy or remove any designated heritage tree
unless a permit has been obtained therefor. This chapter does not require a permit for nor prevent trimming,
pruning, or maintenance of a heritage tree where such does not result in destruction nor substantially
change the tree's form or shape.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.604 - Emergency destruction.
In case of an emergency caused by any designated heritage tree being in a hazardous or dangerous
condition requiring immediate action for the safety of structures or human life, such tree may be removed
with the permission of the zoning administrator or bu ilding inspector if designated by the zoning
administrator, without formal application. The zoning administrator may request certification from a tree
expert as to the immediate need for action if the need is not clearly apparent.
(Ord. 88-83).
Article 816-4.8. Preservation
816-4.802 - Encroachment, construction or excavation.
When proposed developments or construction encroach into the drip line or a radius of twelve feet
from the trunk of any designated heritage tree, whichever is greater, special construction to allow the roots
to breathe, obtain water and nutrients shall be required, as determined necessary by the building inspection
department to minimize damage to such tree visible above ground level. Excavation, cuts, fills or
compaction of the existing ground surface within the drip line or a radius of twelve feet from the trunk of a
designated heritage tree, whichever is greater, shall minimize such damage to the root system so as to
result in least damage to such tree. Permission is required prior to back filling. Tree wells may be used
where approved by the building inspection department. The cost of required pruning or other treatment to
compensate for root damage and/or cost of removal shall be at the expense of the involved developer
and/or contractor but may be shared by the owner. Such pruning as is done shall not cause permanent
injury or destroy any designated heritage tree.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.804 - Storage and dumping.
No person shall store or dump any oil, gas, or chemicals that may be harmful to trees, nor place heavy
construction machinery or construction materials in the open within the drip line of any designated heritage
tree or within a radius of twelve feet from the trunk of such tree, whichever is greater.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.806 - Burning.
Burning of any material within or near the drip line of any designated heritage tree shall not be done
where such will injure the tree.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.808 - Attachments.
No person shall attach any wire (except as needed for support) or sign (other than approved tree
identification signs) to any heritage tree where such wire or sign may damage such designated heritage
tree.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.810 - Damage notification.
The contractor, developer or owner or any agent thereof shall notify the building inspection department
without undue delay of any damage that occurs to any heritage tree during construction. The cost of repair
of the damage or tree replacement shall be at the expense of the responsible party and the repair work
done according to standards approved by the building inspection department.
(Ord. 88-83).
Article 816-4.10. Permits
816-4.1002 - Application.
(a) Any application for a permit to destroy, cut down or remove a designated heritage tree sh all be
submitted to the community development department by the owner or his authorized agent
(satisfactory evidence of such authorization to be submitted with the application) on the form provided
by the community development department together with any specified fee.
(b) The application shall contain the location, number, species, size, and heritage designation of the tree
to be destroyed, cut down or removed and a statement of reasons for the proposed action, together
with such other information as may be required by the community development department.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.1004 - Procedure.
Before issuing a permit, the zoning administrator shall have inspected or cause to be inspected, the
property, the heritage tree that is the subject of the permit, and the surrounding area. A permit shall be
granted, modified, conditioned, or denied based upon the following factors:
(1) The health, damage, danger of falling of the designated heritage tree that is the subject of the
permit and whether said heritage tree acts as a host for plants or animals parasitic to other trees
which are endangered thereby.
(2) The presence of public nuisance factors, and the proximity to or interference with utilities, or
interference with existing buildings to the extent that a tree or trees cannot be trimmed or
buttressed to fit the site.
(3) The prevention of development as a result of heritage tree protection and preservation.
(4) The pursuit of good professional practices of forestry or landscape design.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.1006 - Appeal.
The zoning administrator's decision on the permit application is final unless appealed to the planning
commission having territorial jurisdiction pursuant to and otherwise regulated by the special permit
provisions of Chapter 26-2.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.1008 - Development coordination.
(a) An application for a permit to destroy, cut down or remove any designated heritage tree in connection
with any development, shall be submitted and combined with the initial application for approval of the
development and shall be considered together with the review and decision on the de velopment.
(b) The proposed development shall indicate on its plan all trees designated as heritage trees. The
heritage trees shall be evaluated and their individual treatment considered with respect to the land use
and proposed development.
(c) The involved planning agency division may grant, grant with modifications or conditions, or deny the
requested heritage tree application.
(d) Any appeal of a decision made by a planning agency division on the requested heritage tree
application shall be made in the same manner and subject to the same procedure as a decision on
the involved combined planning or subdivision entitlement for the development.
(Ord. 88-83).
816-4.1010 - Priority.
In the case of any conflict between the provisions of this chapter and those of Chapter 816-2, the
provisions of this Chapter 816-4 shall prevail.
(Ord. 88-83).
Chapter 816-6 - TREE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION
Article 816-6.2. Title and Purpose
816-6.2002 - Title.
This chapter shall be known as the "tree protection and preservation ordinance" of Contra Costa
County.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.2004 - Purpose.
This chapter provides for the preservation of certain protected trees in the unincorporated area of this
county. In addition, this chapter provides for the protection of trees on private property by controlling tree
removal while allowing for reasonable enjoyment of private property rights and property development for
the following reasons:
(1) The county finds it necessary to preserve trees on private property in the interest of the public
health, safety and welfare and to preserve scenic beauty.
(2) Trees provide soil stability, improve drainage conditions, provide habitat for wildlife a nd provide
aesthetic beauty and screening for privacy.
(3) Trees are a vital part of a visually pleasing, healthy environment for the unincorporated area of
this county.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.2006 - Coordination.
This chapter's requirements are intended to be in addition to those otherwise required by this code. In
the case of any conflicts, the director shall determine the requirements applicable and the director's decision
shall be final in the absence of a timely filed appeal pursuant to Ch apter 26-2.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Article 816-6.4. Definitions
816-6.4002 - Generally.
The definitions in this article govern the construction of this chapter, unless the context otherwise
requires.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4004 - Arborist.
"Arborist" means a person currently certified by the Western Chapter of the International Society of
Arboriculture, as an expert on the care of woody trees, shrubs and vines in the landscape, a consulting
arborist who satisfies the requirements of the American Society of Consulting Arborists or such other
arborist who, after review by the director, is determined to meet the standards established for certified or
consulting arborists hereinabove described.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4006 - Arborist report.
An arborist report is a report prepared by an arborist on:
(1) The possible impact of development on trees or existing tree condition;
(2) The impact of any alteration; and/or
(3) Restorative or other remedial action that might be feasible to address tree alterations.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4008 - Department.
"Department" means the community development department.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4010 - Development.
"Development" means any modification of land for human use from it s existing state which requires a
discretionary entitlement for its establishment or a building and/or grading permit involving a protected tree
or trees.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4012 - Development application.
A development application is an application for development (as defined in this article) requiring either
ministerial or discretionary approvals including design review, use permits, subdivisions, rezoning
applications, building and/or grading permits.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4014 - Director.
"Director" means the director of community development or his/her designee.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4015 - Riparian.
Riparian vegetation is found along creeks and streams. Runoff streams that only c arry runoff during
the rain seasons in this area are known to support significant riparian vegetation.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4016 - Routine pruning.
"Routine pruning" means the removal of dead or dying, diseased, weak or objectionable branches of
a tree in a reasonable and scientific manner which does not structurally harm the tree.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4018 - Topping.
"Topping" is the removal of the upper twenty-five percent or more of a tree's trunk(s) or primary leader.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4020 - Tree.
"Tree" means a large woody perennial plant with one or more trunks, branches and leaves, not
including shrubs shaped to tree forms.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4022 - Tree removal.
"Tree removal" means the destruction of any protected tree by cutting, regrading, girdling, interfering
with water supply, applying chemicals or by other means.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.4024 - Undeveloped property.
"Undeveloped property" is:
(1) A parcel of private land which is vacant or a developed parcel which has remaining development
potential;
(2) A parcel of land which can be further divided in accordance with zoning regulations of the county;
(3) A parcel of land on which the structures are proposed to be demolished or relocated.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Article 816-6.6. Protected Trees
816-6.6002 - Prohibition.
No person shall trench, grade or fill within the dripline of any protected tree or cut down, destroy, trim
by topping or remove any protected tree on private property within the county without a tree permit, except
as provided for in Section 816-4.1002.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.6004 - Protected trees.
A protected tree is any one of the following:
(1) On all properties within the unincorporated area of the county:
(A) Where the tree to be cut down, destroyed or trimmed by topping is adjacent t o or part of a
riparian, foothill woodland or oak savanna area, or part of a stand of four or more trees,
measures twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately 6.5 inches in diameter)
as measured four and one-half feet from ground level, and is included in the following list of
indigenous trees: Acer macrophyllum (Bigleaf Maple), Acer negundo (Box Elder), Aesculus
califonica (California Buckeye), Alnus Rhombifolia (White Alder), Arbutus menziesii
(Madrone), Heteromeles arbutifolia (Toyon), Juglans Hindsii (California Black Walnut),
Juniperus californica (California Juniper), Lithocarpus densiflora (Tanoak or Tanbark Oak),
Pinus attenuata (Knobcone Pine), Pinus sabiniana (Digger Pine), Platanus Racemosa
(California Sycamore), Populus fremontii (Fremont Cottonwood), Populus trichocarpa (Black
Cottonwood), Quercus agrifolia (California or Coast Live Oak), Quercus chrysolepis (Canyon
Live Oak), Quercus douglasii (Blue Oak), Quercus kelloggii (California Black Oak), Quercus
lobata (Valley Oak), Quercus wislizenii (Interior Live Oak), Salix lasiandra (Yellow Willow),
Salix laevigata (Red Willow), Salix lasiolepis (Arroyo Willow), Sambucus callicarpa (Coast
Red Elderberry), Sequoia sempervirens (Coast Redwood), Umbellularia californica
(California Bay or Laurel);
(B) Any tree shown to be preserved on an approved tentative map, development or site plan or
required to be retained as a condition of approval;
(C) Any tree required to be planted as a replacement for an unlawfully removed tree.
(2) On any of the properties specified in subsection (3) of this section:
(A) Any tree measuring twenty inches or larger in circumference (approximately six and one -
half inches diameter), measured four and one-half feet from ground level including the oak
trees listed above;
(B) Any multi-stemmed tree with the sum of the circumferences measuring forty inches or
larger, measured four and one-half feet from ground level;
(C) And any significant grouping of trees, including groves of four or more trees.
(3) Specified properties referred to in subsection (2) of this section includes:
(A) Any developed property within any commercial, professional office or industrial district;
(B) Any undeveloped property within any district;
(C) Any area designated on the general plan for recreational purposes or open space;
(D) Any area designated in the county general plan open space element as visually significant
riparian or ridge line vegetation and where the tree is adjacent to or part of a riparian, foothill
woodland or oak savanna area.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Article 816-6.8. Applications
816-6.8002 - Permit requirement.
Any person proposing to trench, grade or fill within the dripline of any protected tree or cut down,
destroy, trim by topping or remove any protected tree shall apply to the department for a tree permit, not
less than ten days prior to the proposed tree removal or tree alterations.
Persons who would be eligible to apply for three or more individual tree permits under provisions of
this chapter may apply for a collective tree permit for the site.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8004 - Application.
In addition to any other applicable requirements of this code and county ordinances, the application
shall include the following information and items:
(1) The number, size (including height and diameter measured four and one-half feet above ground),
species, location, dripline and condition of each tree proposed to be altered or removed;
(2) The reason(s) for alteration or removal;
(3) A plot plan showing the approximate location of all trees on the site, including those proposed to
remain;
(4) Proposed method of tree alteration or removal;
(5) Information indicating the effect of tree alteration or removal on soil stability and erosion if located
on a steep slope or near any creek;
(6) The signature of the property owner or if the permit is requested by someone other than the
owner, a written authorization from the owner;
(7) Photographs of the tree/s to be affected by grading or trenching, topping or removal;
(8) A list and set of stamped envelopes addressed to adjacent property owners and other individuals
and organizations as may otherwise be indicated by the director of community development. Such
envelopes, with no return address, shall be required for notification of the tentative decision to
grant a tree permit;
(9) Additional information as may be required by the county upon review of the above information;
(10) Application and permit fees.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8006 - Review and site inspection.
Prior to making a decision, the director or his designee shall review the application using the criteria
and factors specified in this article. Application review may include a site visit.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8008 - Arborist or forester report.
If the reasons for alteration or removal relate to the health of the tree or if grading, trenching or filling
is proposed under the dripline of an existing tree, or the review is of a collective tree permit and the director
determines that more technical expertise is necessary to make the decision, a report prepared by an
arborist may be required, to be paid for by the applicant.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8010 - Factors.
In granting or denying the tree permit the following factors shall be considered:
(1) General.
(A) The proximity and number of other trees in the vicinity;
(B) The relationship of the subject property to general plan open space or open space plans
and policies.
(2) For Approval.
(A) The arborist report indicates that the tree is in poor health and cannot be saved;
(B) The tree is a public nuisance and is causing damage to public utilities or streets and
sidewalks that cannot be mitigated by some other means (such as root barriers etc.);
(C) The tree is in danger of falling and cannot be saved by some other means (such as pruning);
(D) The tree is damaging existing private improvements on the lot such as a building foundation,
walls, patios, decks, roofs, retaining walls, etc.;
(E) The tree is a species known to be highly combustible and is determined to be a fire hazard;
(F) The proposed tree species or the form of the tree does not merit saving (i.e., a tree stunted
in growth, poorly formed, etc.);
(G) Reasonable development of the property would require the alteration or removal of the tree
and this development could not be reasonably accommodated on another area of the lot;
(H) The tree is a species known to develop weaknesses that affect the health of the tree or the
safety of people and property. These species characteristics include but are not limited to
short lived, weak wooded and subject to limb breakage, shallow rooted and subject to
toppling.
(I) Where the arborist or forester report has been required, and the director is satisfied that the
issuance of a permit will not negatively affect the sustainability of the resource.
(3) For Denial.
(A) The applicant seeks permission for the alteration or removal of a healthy tree that can be
avoided by reasonable redesign of the site plan prior to project approval (for nondiscretionary
permits);
(B) It is reasonably likely that alteration or removal of the tree will cause problems with drainage,
erosion control, land stability, windscreen, visual screening, and/or privacy and said
problems cannot be mitigated as part of the proposed removal of the tree;
(C) The tree to be removed is a member of a group of trees in which each tree is dependent
upon the others for survival;
(D) The value of the tree to the neighborhood in terms of visual effect, wind screening, privacy
and neighboring vegetation is greater than the hardship to the owner;
(E) If the permit involves trenching or grading and there are other reasonable alternatives
including an alternate route, use of retaining walls, use of pier and grade beam foundations
and/or relocating site improvements;
(F) Any other reasonable and relevant factors specified by the director.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8012 - Decision.
The director shall grant or deny tree permits in accordance with this chapter and code. If a permit is
granted, the director may attach conditions to insure compliance with this chapter and code. These
conditions may include a requirement to replace any or all trees on a comparable ratio of either size or
quantity. Single tree permits shall be valid for a period of ninety days and may be renewed for additional
periods by the director upon request by the applicant. Collective tree permits shall be valid for a period of
time to be determined by the director based upon individual circumstances.
If a permit is denied, the director shall state the reason for denial. Notice of decision shall be mailed to
the applicant.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.8014 - Appeals.
Any person may appeal the director's decision within ten calendar days of the director's decision to
the planning commission having jurisdiction in accordance with Chapter 26 -2. Further appeals may be
made as provided by Chapter 26-2. Appeals shall be made in writing and state the specific reasons why
the decision does not meet the criteria and factors for granting or denial of a permit as stated in this chapter.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Article 816-6.10. Permit Exceptions
816-6.1002 - No permit.
A tree permit is not required for the following situations:
(1) Hazardous Situation. Any tree whose condition creates a hazardous situation which requires
immediate action as determined by the director, building inspector, sheriff, involved fire district or
a utility company to protect its facilities. During off-hours, when officials described above are
unavailable, the hazardous situation may be corrected and a report of the incident and description
of the hazard shall be submitted to the director within ten days of the incident.
(2) Prior Approval. Any tree whose removal was specifically approved as a part of an approved
development plan, subdivision, other discretionary project or a building permit.
(3) Routine pruning not involving topping or tree removal.
(4) Commercial plantings. Planting, removal and harvesting in connection with Christmas tree farms,
orchards and nurseries.
(5) Rangeland Management. Normal activities associated with range management and the
disposition of wood incidental to rangeland management on agriculturally zoned properties (with
each parcel containing at least twenty acres but also including properties in adjacent common
ownership interest of at least twenty acres), will not require a tree permit. "Rangeland
management activities" are defined as including but not limited to the c learing and thinning of
trees for purposes of reducing fire risk or enhancement of forage production, removing obstruction
to stormwater runoff flow, maintaining adequate clearance on range roads and fire trails, fencing
maintenance and protecting equipment and constructions.
(6) Public Agencies/Utilities. Trimming and clearing within public agency or utility easements and
rights-of-way for maintenance of easement or right-of-way will not require a tree permit. Lands
owned by public utilities and used for administrative purposes or uses unrelated to the public
service provided by the utility are not exempted under this provision.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.1004 - Proposed development.
(a) On any property proposed for development approval, tree alterations or removal shall be considered
as a part of the project application.
(b) All trees proposed to be removed, altered or otherwise affected by development construction shall be
clearly indicated on all grading, site and development plans. Except where the director otherwise
provides, a tree survey shall be submitted as a part of the project application indicating the number,
size, species and location of the dripline of all trees on the property. This survey shall be overlaid on
the proposed grading and development plans. The plan shall include a tabulation of all trees proposed
for removal.
(c) The granting or denial of a tree removal program which is a part of a development proposal covered
by this section shall be subject to Sections 816-6.8008 and 816-6.8014. A separate tree removal permit
shall not be required.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Article 816-6.12. Tree Protection
816-6.1202 - Tree protection.
Except where otherwise provided by the involved development's conditions of approval or approv ed
permit application, on all properties where trees are required to be saved during the course of development,
the developer shall follow the following tree preservation standards:
(1) Prior to the start of any clearing, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction, paving or change
in ground elevation on a site with trees to be preserved, the applicant shall install fencing at the
dripline or other area as determined by an arborist report of all trees adjacent to or in the area to
be altered. Prior to grading or issuance of any permits, the fences may be inspected and the
location thereof approved by appropriate county staff.
(2) No grading, compaction, stockpiling, trenching, paving or change in ground elevation shall be
permitted within the dripline unless indicated on the grading plans approved by the county and
addressed in any required report prepared by an arborist. If grading or construction is approved
within the dripline, an arborist may be required to be present during grading operations. The
arborist shall have the authority to require protective measures to protect the roots. Upon
completion of grading and construction, an involved arborist shall prepare a report outlining further
methods required for tree protection if any are required. All arborist expense shall be borne by
the developer and applicant unless otherwise provided by the development's conditions of
approval.
(3) No parking or storing vehicles, equipment, machinery or construction materials, construction
trailers and no dumping of oils or chemicals shall be permitted within the dripline of any tree to be
saved.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.1204 - Deposit conditions.
Prior to the issuance of any grading or building permit for a property where trees are required by this
chapter to be saved, the owner or developer shall deposit cash or other acceptable security with the
department on a per tree basis in the amount established by the involved development's conditions of
approval or approved applications.
As required, the county may hold the deposit for a two-year period to guarantee the health of the trees
for a two-year period upon completion of construction. In addition, the applicant or developer may be
required to enter into a tree maintenance agreement secured by said deposi t/bond by which they agree to
maintain said trees in a living and viable condition throughout the term of the agreement. This agreement
may be transferred to any new owner of the property for the remaining length of the agreement.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.1206 - Construction tree damage.
A development's property owner or developer shall notify the department of any damage that occurs
to any tree during the construction process. The owner or developer shall repair any damage as determined
by an arborist designated by the director.
Any tree not approved for destruction or removal that dies or is significantly damaged as a result of
construction or grading shall be replaced with a tree or trees of equivalent size and of a species as approved
by the director to be reasonably appropriate for the particular situation.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
816-6.1208 - Violations.
Violations of this chapter are punishable and may be corrected in any manner provided by this code or as
otherwise allowed by law. Each tree damaged or removed in violation of this chapter shall constitute a
separate offense.
(Ords. 94-59, 94-22).
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
10.
Meeting Date: 2/24/2020
Subject: RECEIVE Update on Draft Goals, Tools, and Measures of Effectiveness for the Climate
Action Plan
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter: Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Contact: Jody London, (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
The Sustainability Commission has been advising staff since last year on draft goals and strategies for the
update to the County’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). Commission members helped facilitate four community
engagement meetings specific to the Climate Action Plan in September and October, 2019.
Referral Update:
Staff continues to revise the draft goals, tools, and measures of effectiveness for the CAP update.
Sustainability staff are in discussion with PlaceWorks, the consultants on the CAP update, and County staff
across departments, as well as staff with the Contra Costa Water District and East Bay Municipal Utility
District, to identify the goals, tools, and measures of effectiveness that will provide the greatest impact in
reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The current working version is attached.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE Update on Draft Goals, Tools, and Measures of Effectiveness for the Climate Action Plan
Fiscal Impact (if any):
N/A.
ATTACHMENT(S)
Draft Goals, Tools, and Measures of Effectiveness for the Climate Action Plan
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
1 Clean and Efficient Built
Environment Homes, workplaces, and businesses in Contra Costa County run on clean energy
· Building electrification · Adopted electrification reach code Conservation and
Development Health
· Energy Efficiency and weatherization
programs
· Participation in energy efficiency and
weatherization programs by residential and
commercial buildings (including County
facilities), with attention to participation in
frontline communities
· Establish Green and Healthy Homes Initiative
Conservation and
Development
Health
MCE Health
Bill Savings
· Energy storage · # of buildings with energy storage systems,
including County facilities
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
· Carbon Neutral County Buildings
· Energy efficient lighting and other appliances
and mechanical systems
· Green building certifications
Public Works
· Solar water heating · Reach code requiring solar water heating (?)Conservation and
Development
· Increase participation in MCE Deep Green
program by County facilities and residents
and businesses
· # and percent of County and community
accounts enrolled in MCE Deep Green
Public Works (for
County facilities)MCE Health
Bill Savings
· Install more renewable electricity in
Contra Costa County
· MW rooftop and parking lot solar installed in
unincorporated County, including County
facilities and frontline communities
· MW wind installed in unincorporated County
Public Works (for
County facilities)
Solar Developers and
and installers
MCE
Renewable energy
developers
Health
1.1
Increase the number of carbon
neutral (or resilient?) buildings in
Contra Costa County
1.2 Replace fossil fuel electricity with
renewable electricity
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 1 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
2 Resilient Communities and Natural
Infrastructure Contra Costa County will increase resilience to climate hazards and foster community health
· Develop feasibiilty analysis and
implementation plan for siting community
resilience hubs across the County, with
attention to frontline communities
· Adopted plan for community resilience hubs
· # community resilience hubs
· # permits issued for battery storage projects
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Office of Emergency
Services
· Identify opportunities for battery storage
projects at County facilities.· # battery storage projects at County facilities Public Works
County Fire Department
Health Dept.
Office of Emergency
Services
· Emergency response plans include climate-
induced disasters such as wildfires, sea
level rise/flooding and drought, focusing on
equitable recovery, especially for
undocumented residents.
· Updated emergency response plans
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Office of Emergency
Services
Bay Conservation and
Development Cmsn.
County Office of Justice
and Re-entry
· Carbon farming on public and
private lands
· Feasibility study for carbon farming in Contra
Costa County
· Pilot carbon farming project(s)
Conservation and
Development Rescape
· Track number of native trees planted by
County and public and private partners
· # trees planted on County property
· # tree permits issued for projects in
unincorporated County
Conservation and
Development
· Install green infrastructure
· Progress report on implementation of County's
green infrastructure plan for County facilities
· [how to measure for green infrastructure on
private property?]
Public Works
· Increase use of pervious paving · Miles or square feet pervious paving installed
in County projects Public Works
2.3 Address impacts of heat islands · Increase number of cool roofs · # permits for cool roofs, both private and
County
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Health Dept.
2.1
Establish and maintain community
resilience hubs with microgrids,
education, and training opportunities
2.2 Sequester carbon in natural lands in
Contra Costa County
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 2 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
3 No-Waste Contra Costa Contra Costa County generates no more solid waste than 2.25 pounds per person per day (PPD)
· Implement source separated organics
collection service for residential and
commercial customers in County controlled
franchise areas.
· % of County controlled Franchise areas with
source separated organics collection for
residential customers
· Number and percentage of County
(owned/maintained or controlled?) buildings
with organics collection
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Solid Waste Haulers
· Encourage and support wastewater
agencies potential acceptance of food
waste or other acceptable organic materials
for processing in on-site anaerobic
digesters (to maximize existing capacity or
potential expansion).
Conservation and
Development
· Implement 3-stream recycling at all
County (owned, maintained, controlled,
occupied?) facilities.
· # County facilities with 3-stream recycling
· Tonnage, by type, of recycled materials, by
facility
Public Works
· Implement source separated organics
collection service at offices/facilities
occupied by County departments.
Public Works
· Increase amount of organic waste
generated composted material created by
County occupied (owned & leased?)
facilities that gets composted or converted
into energy
Public Works
· Update and implement County
environmentally preferable purchasing
policy
· Recycled content of County purchases
· Requirements for County vendors and
contractors to adopt and implement
environmentally preferable purchasing policies
Public Works
· Ensure all County facilities have and use
composting and recycling options
· Food waste, recycling, composting at County
facilities Public Works
· Use low-carbon content building and
paving materials
· Conduct feasibility study of low-carbon content
building and paving materials
· Bay-friendly landscaping practices
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Increase amount of organic waste
generated by County residents and
businesses and at County facilities
that gets composted or converted
into energy
3.1
Reduce waste from County
operations, including contracts for
services and products.
3.2
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 3 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
4 Reduce Water Use and Increase
Drought Resilience Contra Costa County uses less water and communities are prepared for drought
· Promote water conservation
· Reduction in overall water use as reported by
water companies
· Reduction in water use at County facilities
Water is important
because pumping
water uses
electricity, which
contributes to
climate change
unless it is clean
electricity
· Increase acreage of drought tolerant
landscaping, including at County facilities
· square footage of drought tolerant projects at
County facilities
· # drought tolerant permits issued by County
· # participants in Contra Costa Water District
Lawn to Garden program
· Offer BayREN water bill savings program
through Contra Costa water purveyors
· # water districts participating in BayREN water
savings program
· # customers participating in program
Conservation and
Development (?)
Public Works
· Encourage greywater/rainwater
catchment systems, including at County
facilities
· # gray water systems installed at County
facilities
4.1 Reduce water use in unincorporated
County and in County facilities
East Bay Municipal
Utility District
Contra Costa Water
District
Other water suppliers
Central Sanitation
District?
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 4 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
5 Clean Transportation System and
Infrastructure
Contra Costa County's transportation
system provides safe and accessible options
for walking, biking, and transit.
If residents and workers are driving, they are in
electric vehicles.
· Implement Complete Streets and Vision
Zero policies
· Miles bike lane installed annually in
unincorporated County, for all Classes and by
Class (Class 1 = shared use bike path, Class 2 =
marked bike lane, Class 3 = wider, marked bike
lane, Class 4 = protected bike lane)
· % of unincorporated County in which low-stress
bikeway network is completed (CCTA 2018 plan)
· Miles bike lane installed annually in frontline
communities in unincorporated County, for all
Classes and by Class
· Miles sidewalk and trail installed annually in
unincorporated County
· # multi-modal transportation corridors
For County operations;
· [need way to measure whether employees
carpool to in-person meetings]
· # online meetings or conference calls held in
lieu of in person meetings, where appropriate
· Administrative Bulletin supporting
videoconferencing and conference calls, where
appropriate
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority
Transit providers
Health
Quality of life
· Increase transit service and ensure transit
is safe and affordable
· Ridership on shuttles, other forms of public
transit from BART to County offices and other
large employment centers
· Transit ridership in County service areas
· Identify strategies and funding to
implement recommendations in 2019
Employee Commute Survey for County
employees
· Update and implement County telecommuting
policy
· # and percentage of County employees using
pretax commute benefit
Reduce vehicle miles traveled in
Contra Costa County by increasing
number of people who bike, walk,
and take public transit.
5.1
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 5 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
· Encourage electric vehicle adoption by
County residents and businesses · # of EVs registered in unincorporated County Conservation and
Development
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority
DMV records
CA rebate data (where
available)
· Enforce County vehicle purchasing policy · # EVs purchased annually for County fleet
· Percentage of County fleet that is all-electric
Public Works
CAO
· Ensure adequate EV charging infrastruture · # of electric vehicle chargers installed at County
facilities, both for County fleet and public use
Conservation and
Development
Public Works
County Administrator
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority
MCE (# customers on EV
time of use rate)
6 Climate Equity The CAP will mitigate environmental
factors leading to health disparities,
promote safe and livable communities,
and promote investments that improve
neighborhood accessibility.
· Evaluate CAP strategies for equitable
benefits for frontline communities.
· Include environmental justice and climate
issues in County Racial Equity Action Plan
· Funds spent by County departments on
weatherization and other services in
disadvantaged communities compared to non-
disadvantaged communities
County Administrator
Conservation and
Development
Health
· Ensure every County department is
including climate solutions in services to
residents
???All departments
· Engage communities most impacted by
climate change in developing and
implementing the solutions
???
6.2 County investments support climate
equity.
Implement best practices in Environmental,
Social, and Governance considerations as
CAP is implemented
· Adopted guidance on best practices
· Advocate for Contra Costa Employees
Retirement Association to use ESG in its
investment priorities
County Administrator
Conservation and
Development
Click here for CalPERS
Sustainable
Investments Program
Increase percentage of electric
vehicles in Contra Costa County;
County fleet is 100% electric by 2030,
community fleet is 10% electric by
2030
5.2
All residents live in clean, healthy
homes and neighborhoods, have
access to parks, open space, and
fresh food, and can easily move
through the County.
6.1
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 6 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
6.3 Increase access of County residents
to parks and open space
· Adopt 10 Minute Walk goal (to a park or
open space) for all residents of
unincorporated County
· # residents in unincorporated County, including
those in frontline communities, located within a
ten-minute walk of a park or other green space ??
East Bay Regional Parks
District?
Save Mt. Diablo?
Health
· Facilitate creation of more farmer's
markets
· # regular farmers markets in all communities
and in frontline communities ???
· Adopt and implement policy designating
parcels for urban gardens
· # permits issued for urban gardens in all
communities and in frontline communities (if
permits are required by policy)
Conservation and
Development
Health Department
Chambers of Commerce
Contra Costa Resource
Conservation District (?)
Health
· Provide recommendations to responsible
permitting agencies regarding permits for
fossil-fuel based industries/point sources
· # comment letters submitted
County Administrator?
County Counsel?
Conservation and
Development?
· Track data on fossil fuel products
produced and/or transported in and
through Contra Costa County
· Establish a method by which the
quantity and type of fossil and bio-fuels
produced, refined, stored in, and
distributed through the County can be
determined, and periodically
reported. Further establish a method to gather
information on specific fossil fuel facilities in
Contra Costa County, including changes of
ownership, mergers and acquisitions, investor
presentations and reports, or any other public
information that may indicate a facility’s interest
or intent to expand in the future, taking into
account broader market trends in oil and gas
refining and export in the Bay Area. (example
City of Tacoma)
County Counsel
Conservation and
Development
Health Department
Increase access of County residents
to local, fresh food6.4
Large industrial facilities will be good
neighbors. [placeholder]6.5
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 7 2/18/2020
Note: this is a work in progress.
Goal Tools Potential Measure(s) of Effectiveness Lead County
Department(s)
Potential
Partners Co-Benefits Estimated
Costs Estimated Savings
Note: the Climate Action Plan pertains to County Operations and County facilities, and the unincorporated communities in the County. Cities develop their own Climate Action Plans, at their discretion.
Frontline communities are the communities that have been and will continue to be hit first and worst by the impacts of the changing climate, and are the least able to adapt, resist, or recover from those impacts.
7 Leadership Contra Costa County is a model for how local government can take action on climate issues.
· Establish a cross-departmental task force
that collaborates on equity and climate
issues
· Establishment of task force.
· Ongoing work products from task force.
Conservation and
Development
County Administrator
All County Departments
· Incorporate Climate Action Plan goals in to
ongoing work
· Reports to Board of Supervisors include
sustainability impact statement
· Annual report on conditions placed on
discretionary projects to ensure support of
Climate Action Plan goals
Conservation and
Development
County Administrator
All County Departments
· All County departments participate in
County's Green Business Program
· Number of County departments certified by
Green Business Program Health Department
· All County departments participate in
EBMUD Water Smart Business program
· Number of County departments certified
through Water Smart Business program EBMUD
7.2 Contra Costa County takes action to
address the climate emergency
Adopt a climate emergency resolution that
includes actions the County will take.
· Adopted climate emergency resolution
· Actions taken to implement climate emergency
resolution
Board of Supervisors
All departments
7.1
Contra Costa County is a leader
among local governments on how it
addresses climate issues
Climate Action Plan DRAFT Page 8 2/18/2020
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
11.
Meeting Date: 2/24/2020
Subject: RECEIVE reports from Sustainability Commission members and alternates, and
PROVIDE DIRECTION as needed.
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter: Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Contact: Jody London (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
This is a standing item of the Commission.
Referral Update:
Commission members and alternates will provide updates to the full Commission.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE reports from Sustainability Commission members and alternates, and PROVIDE DIRECTION as
needed.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None.
ATTACHMENT(S)
No file(s) attached.
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
12.
Meeting Date: 2/24/2020
Subject: RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Coordinator
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter: Jody London, Sustainability Coordinator
Contact: Jody London (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
This is a standing item of the Commission.
Referral Update:
This report provides an update to the Sustainability Commission on the work of the County’s Sustainability
staff since the Committee last met on December 9, 2019. Key activities during this period are listed below.
Sustainability staff continue to refine the draft goals, tools, and measures of effectiveness for the Climate
Action Plan. The Sustainability Coordinator has been meeting with County staff as well as the Contra
Costa Water District, East Bay Municipal Utility District, and City of Tacoma, WA. Sustainability staff
also are supporting the General Plan update, where appropriate.
The draft solar overlay zoning ordinance was approved by the Planning Commission on January 22 and
will be presented to the Board of Supervisors on February 25. This was a recommendation from the
2018 Renewable Resource Potential Study.
The Board of Supervisors on February 4, 2020 accepted the Employee Commute Survey, developed as
part of the Climate Action Plan update. Transportation Planning staff are working to implement some of
the recommendations of the Employee Commute Survey and anticipate bringing an update to the
Sustainability Commission in April.
The Board of Supervisors accepted the Sustainability Commission 2019 Annual Report and 2020 Work
Plan at its January 21, 2020 meeting.
Staff from Public Works and the Department of Conservation and Development provided on quick
turnaround a proposal to MCE for potential locations for community resilience hubs. MCE has
authorized a Community Resilience grant program and solicited locations at which it can research and
develop distributed energy resource projects at 5 critical facilities (at least 1 in each of the counties MCE
serves). With this new program, MCE aims to mitigate the impacts of grid outages threatening the safety,
reliability, health and welfare of our customers and communities by piloting advanced energy technology
such as battery + storage and small-scale community-based islanded locations to retain essential power
supply during PSPS events and other outages - all while minimizing the use of carbon-emitting
generators. County staff recommended the Pinole Library, the El Sobrante Library, and the Ygnacio
Valley Library (in Walnut Creek).
The County has initiated preparation of an Active Transportation Plan (ATP) to guide the
implementation of the bicycle and pedestrian transportation networks in unincorporated Contra Costa
County. The ATP will be funded by Sustainable Communities Grant (SCC, State); Transportation
Development Act, Article 3 (TDA, Local); and Local Road Funds (Gas Tax, Local).
The primary goals of this plan include:
Create a database of Active Transportation Infrastructure Projects that will allow the County to
prioritize its active transportation investments according to factors such as collision history,
location in disadvantaged community, location near major destinations, construction cost, and
other factors
A shift in trip mode by Contra Costa residents from motor vehicles to active modes, such as
walking or biking, in efforts to create a more sustainable community and reduce Green House Gas
Emissions.
Provide actionable data and plans to help all engineers and planners working on grant applications
select bicycle and pedestrian projects with the highest benefit
Provide a cohesive document to County Departments and to the public to identify the future active
transportation infrastructure for each of the arterials and collectors within the unincorporated road
network. This will assist in future planning related to private development, County capital projects
and maintenance efforts.
This plan will provide a guide for the County to complete its bicycle and pedestrian networks while
prioritizing projects in disadvantaged communities and in locations with the highest potential to shift
people from driving to bicycling and walking. This mode shift will reduce transportation costs, reduce
Green House Gas Emissions, and improve public health, which will in turn accelerate progress towards
regional and state planning goals.
The Bay Area Regional Energy Network (BayREN), in which Contra Costa County plays a leadership
role, was approved by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for ongoing funding, meaning
it is no longer a pilot program. In approving the BayREN and other regional energy networks, the CPUC
cited that RENs’ “may be able to utilize funding from multiple sources to deliver more comprehensive
and holistic programs, especially to hard-to-reach customers.” Contra Costa County will receive
$287,270 in baseline funding each year for BayREN for the next three years, for a total of
$861,810. County-wide BayREN program offerings include energy efficiency incentives for upgrades to
residential and commercial buildings as well as other resources to city/county building departments on
State energy code improvements and compliance.
Contra Costa County received a second technical assistance grant through the Green and Healthy Homes
Initiative to explore the feasibility of how the state health care billing system could potentially provide
long-term funding to the County to implement a comprehensive home-based asthma program. A final
report will be completed at the end of the grant term (9 months). This effort builds upon the first grant,
which developed a business plan for the home-based asthma program.
Public Works is proceeding with the installation of solar arrays on 10 County facilities.
Coordinated with CCTA and MCE on opportunities for funding to support implementation of the
Electric Vehicle Readiness Blueprint. The Board of Supervisors authorized a Letter of Intent to
participate in the California Energy Commission’s CALeVIP grant program at its February 11, 2020
meeting.
In December, the Board approved an ordinance that streamlines permitting for installing electric vehicle
chargers in the unincorporated County, in compliance with AB 1236.
Continue to administer the Cleaner Contra Costa Challenge.
Staff works with Sustainability Commission members on specific issues and questions.
Collaborated with County staff working on topics including land use and transportation, hazardous
materials, green business program, the County’s state and federal legislative platforms, economic
development, health, codes, solid waste, energy, and related.
Participated in regional activities.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE report from Sustainability Coordinator.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None.
ATTACHMENT(S)
No file(s) attached.
Contra Costa County
Sustainability Commission
13.
Meeting Date:
Subject:
12/9/2019
RECEIVE Report from Sustainability Commission Chair and IDENTIFY
TOPICS for next report to Ad Hoc Committee on Sustainability.
Department: Conservation & Development
Presenter: Howdy Goudey, Chair
Contact: Jody London (925) 674-7871
Referral History:
This is a standing item of the Commission.
Referral Update:
The Sustainability Commission Chair provides an update at each meeting to Commission members on the
administration of the Commission, meetings of the Board of Supervisors Ad Hoc Committee on
Sustainability, and other issues of interest to the Commission.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
RECEIVE report from Sustainability Commission Chair.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
None.
ATTACHMENT(S)
No file(s) attached.