HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-08-28 - AGENDA REPORTS - MC 12 052 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (2)Agenda Item: 20
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
AGENDA REPORT
PUBLIC HEARING City Manager Approval:
Item to be presented by: Jeff Hogan
DATE: August 28, 2012
SUBJECT: MASTER CASE NO. 12-052: CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
RECOMMENDED ACTION
City Council adopt a resolution adopting the Negative Declaration and approving Master Case
12-052, consisting of the Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan.
BACKGROUND
State Legislation
Passed in 2006, Assembly Bill 32 (AB32) requires the State of California to reduce statewide
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. To demonstrate compliance
with AB32, the California Office of the Attorney General (Attorney General) requires the
completion of a Climate Action Plan (CAP) by cities in the process of adopting new general
plans. The City of Santa Clarita received direction from the Attorney General to complete a CAP
as part of the City's new General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council on
June 14, 2011. Staff committed to completing the CAP by January 2013.
The CAP will implement programs to reduce the City's GHG emissions to a level consistent with
AB32. It will also establish a local significance threshold under the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) for review of GHG emissions from proposed development projects.
Consultant and Base Year
A Request for Proposal process was initiated in the summer of 2010. The City received proposals
from seven firms and selected ENVIRON International Corporation as the successful firm. The
contract was approved by the City Council in December 2010, and work began on the CAP in
January 2011.
The initial task of the CAP was to define a base year. The base year is used as the basis for
comparing GHG emissions to the target year of 2020. A base year of 2005 was selected for the
CAP at the recommendation of the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the state agency
responsible for the administration of AB32. The base year 2005 is also consistent with regional
GHG reduction efforts including the Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities
Strategy prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments.
Climate Action Plan Contents
The proposed CAP consists of the following elements:
Inventory: This element includes the quantification of community -wide GHG emissions during
the base year. This quantification includes GHG emissions from all sources within the
community including municipal uses.
Mitigation: This element compares base year emissions to those emissions forecasted for the
target year 2020 and quantifies strategies for reducing GHG emissions to satisfy the state
mandate,
Monitoring: This element establishes strategies for monitoring progress over time approaching
the target year 2020.
Implementation: This element defines how the City will implement the strategies identified by
the CAP.
ANALYSIS
The CAP measures the change in community -wide GHG emissions by comparing the emissions
from the base year 2005 with the projected emissions in 2020. Emissions from the base year and
forecasts for 2020 utilized a variety of data collected from several sources including the General
Plan, local utilities, and municipal operations. Data was then modeled by the consultant using
software and techniques accepted by the State of California.
Inventory
The inventory process determined 1.71 million tons of GHG were emitted during the base year
2005. The vast majority of the total is comprised of vehicle tailpipe emissions (61 percent) and
energy use by residents and businesses (31 percent). Solid waste and its disposal, municipal
operations, and other miscellaneous uses account for the remaining eight percent. This emissions
profile is not uncommon for suburban communities.
Z
An emissions forecast was created for 2020, assuming a growth scenario defined by the City's
previous General Plan, which was the plan in place during the base year 2005. Under that growth
scenario, the forecast projects 1.98 million tons of GHG would be emitted in 2020. The 1.98
million tons of GHG is referred to as the Uncontrolled 2020 Business As Usual (BAU) Scenario.
Mitigation
Three state laws are projected to reduce GHG emissions in Santa Clarita and throughout
California. These include legislation to improve fuel efficiency of cars and light trucks, a
reduction in the carbon content in gasoline and a requirement for power utilities to increase their
overall energy portfolio to 33 percent renewable by 2020. Per state law, anticipated performance
enhancements to the City's municipal recycling rate are also anticipated to reduce emissions. The
cumulative GHG reduction from these four state -required sources was calculated to be
approximately 144,000 tons of GHG. This total can be subtracted from the Uncontrolled 2020
BAU figure, which results in a new total of 1.84 million tons of GHG in 2020. The 1.84 million
tons of GHG is referred to as the Controlled 2020 BAU scenario. This is the amount from which
the CAP will measure its mitigations.
To determine the increase in GHG emissions between 2005 and 2020, the baseline total of 1.71
million tons is subtracted from the Controlled 2020 BAU scenario total of 1.84 million tons:
1,838,210 tons —1,717,684 tons = 120,526 tons
CARB requires cities preparing CAPS to demonstrate GHG reductions back to the level of their
base year. As a result, the difference of 120,526 tons is the amount of GHG the CAP must
mitigate by 2020 to reduce community -wide emissions to a level equal to the base year 2005.
The CAP quantifies GHG emission reductions associated with specific goals, objectives, and
policies included in the City's new General Plan as well as municipal programs implemented
since the base year 2005. These were applied as mitigation measures toward the 120,526 tons of
GHG emissions that must be reduced. Modeling software and techniques accepted by the State
determined these mitigation measures will result in a reduction of 193,021 tons of GHG in 2020.
The following emission reduction is forecast to occur in the following sectors:
Sector
GIR; II'mission Reduction (Tons)
nergy Measures
6,085
ransportation Measures
124,631
Water Measures
21,507
egetation and Open Space Measures
40,798
otal Reduction from All Measures
193,021
Emission reductions from energy measures are derived mainly from the installation of higher
efficiency street lighting and area lighting, higher efficiency traffic lighting, and the
establishment of onsite renewable energy systems, specifically solar power, on new development
and existing residential and commercial structures. Emission reductions from transportation
measures are derived mainly from the development of the new General Plan's land use map,
reliance on mixed use and transit -oriented development, improved access to mass transit
alternatives, and the continued development of alternative transportation options including biking
and walking. Emission reduction from water measures are derived mainly from an increased use
of reclaimed water over time, installation of low -flow water fixtures, and installation of smart
irrigation systems in City parks and LMD areas. Finally, reductions from vegetation and open
space measures are derived mainly from the acquisition and preservation of open space and
planting of trees throughout the community.
The total mitigation of 193,021 tons of GHG achieves a 17 percent reduction from the
Uncontrolled BAU scenario of 1.98 million tons of GHG and is consistent with the emissions
reduction requirements of A1332.
Implementation and Monitoring
The CAP demonstrates emission reduction targets established by AB32 can be achieved by
implementing goals, objectives, and policies contained in the General Plan and continuing to
implement municipal programs that have been in place since the base year 2005. New
development projects consistent with the General Plan will be consistent with the CAP.
Development proposals that require a Zone Change/General Plan Amendment would be required
to demonstrate a 12 percent GHG reduction from the Controlled 2020 BAU scenario to be
consistent with the CAP. This reduction is consistent with the overall reduction expected in the
CAP, not counting the three statewide measures, which are not affected by local development. In
cases where the 12 -percent reduction can not be demonstrated, the project will be deemed as
having a Significant Impact on GHG emissions. Proposed projects that generate a significant
number of vehicle miles traveled or heavy industrial projects may also be required to demonstrate
a 12 percent reduction in GHG.
City staff will continually evaluate mitigation measures based on performance indicators. Every
four years the City will assess the performance of the CAP and prepare a progress report. Every
eight years the performance evaluation will consist of a review and update to the CAP.
General Plan Consistency
The CAP is consistent with the goals and policies outlined within the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. Policy CO 8. 1.1 calls for the creation of a CAP:
"Create and adopt a Climate Action Plan within 18 months of the OVOV adoption date of the
City's General Plan update that meets State requirements... "
v
Further, the CAP promotes implementation of the following goals, objectives, and policies of the
General Plan:
• Transit -oriented development (General Plan Policy C 1.2.1, Objective 5.2, Policy LU
5.2.4);
• Mixed use development (General Plan Goal LU 2);
• Infill development (General Plan Policy LU 1.1.5);
• Increased access to and more efficient public transit services (General Plan Objective C
1.2);
• Promotion of alternative travel options including bicycle riding and walking (General
Plan Policy C 1.1.1);
• Acquisition and preservation of open space (General Plan Goal CO 10);
• Development of alternative energy sources (General Plan Policy CO 8.3.4 and 8.3.5); and
• Energy and water conservation (General Plan Objective CO 1.2).
Data for completed annexations will be included in the CAP as part of the four-year update
process.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
City staff conducted an extensive outreach campaign with the general public and stakeholders
throughout the community. The following public meetings were held:
• Climate Change Open House Meeting — June 13, 2011;
• Climate Change Open House Meeting — June 15, 2011;
• Planning Commission Study Session — September 20, 2011; and
• Community Meeting — May 3, 2012.
Given the nature of the economy, the City also worked closely with the business community
regarding the CAP. Staff made presentations to the Building Industry Association of Southern
California, Los Angeles/Ventura Chapter Government Affairs Board, the Santa Clarita Valley
Chamber of Commerce Government Affairs Committee and the Board of Directors of the Valley
Industry Association in 2011 and 2012.
All public meetings, updates on the CAP process, presentations made by staff, and a copy of the
draft CAP are included on the climate change page of the City's green website,
www.greensantaclarita.com.
Staff conducted several meetings with representatives of the Attorney General's Office between
January 2011 and March 2012. Staff also met with the National Resources Defense Council in
July 2012.
Staff received letters of support for the CAP from the County of Los Angeles Department of
Regional Planning and Valley Industry Association. These letters are attached to the staff report.
W
Planning Commission
The proposed CAP was presented at a public hearing to the Planning Commission at its regularly
scheduled meeting on June 19, 2012. At that time, the Planning Commission approved
Resolution P12-008, recommending the City Council approve the CAP by a vote of five to zero.
NOTICING
All noticing requirements for a public hearing have been completed. A one-eighth page
advertisement was placed in The Signal newspaper on August 7, 2012.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS
An Initial Study was prepared in accordance with CEQA. The Initial Study determined all
impacts related to the proposed modifications are considered to be less than significant.
Therefore, a Negative Declaration was prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of CEQA.
The Negative Declaration and Initial Study were made available during a 30 -day public review
period. Documents were posted in the Permit Center at the City of Santa Clarita City Hall, and
the City of Santa Clarita Library, Valencia Branch.
ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS
Other actions as identified by the City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution
Exhibit A: Climate Action Plan
Negative Declaration
Initial Study
Letters of Support
MR
RESOLUTION 12-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND APPROVING MASTER CASE 12-052, CONSISTING OF THE SANTA CLARTTA
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AS IDENTIFIED IN "EXHIBIT A"
WHEREAS, in 2006, the legislature of the State of California passed Assembly Bill
32 (AB32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006; and
WHEREAS, AB32 requires the State of California to reduce its greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020; and
WHEREAS, in 2010, during the development process for the City of Santa Clarita's
(City) new General Plan, the California Office of the Attorney General (Attorney General)
directed the City to complete a Climate Action Plan (CAP); and
WHEREAS, to satisfy the emission reduction target established by AB32, the City's
CAP must demonstrate a reduction of the community -wide GHG emissions to a level consistent
with the California Air Resources Board's recommended base year of 2005; and
WHEREAS, the City committed to the Attorney General to complete the CAP within
18 months of the approval date of the City's new General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita (City Council) adopted the
new General Plan on June 14, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the proposed CAP demonstrates a community -wide GHG emissions
reduction that is consistent with the targets established by AB32; and
WHEREAS, the proposed CAP achieves the emissions reduction targets established
by AB32 by quantifying Goals, Objectives, and Policies contained in the City's General Plan
without the need to implement new policies or programs not contemplated by the General Plan;
and
WHEREAS, development proposals that demonstrate consistency with the General
Plan, therefore, demonstrate consistency with the CAP; and
WHEREAS, development proposals that are not consistent with the City's General
Plan and/or Unified Development Code (Zone Changes/General Plan Amendments) must
demonstrate a 12 percent reduction in the GHG emissions from the Controlled 2020 Business as
Usual Scenario, to be deemed consistent with the CAP; and
WHEREAS, development proposals that are not consistent with the City's General
Plan and/or Unified Development Code and that can not demonstrate a 12 percent reduction in
GHG emissions from the Controlled Business as Usual Scenario shall be deemed to have a
7
Significant Impact on GHG emissions; and
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2012, the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita
(Planning Commission) conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed CAP. The
public hearing was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard,
Santa Clarita; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fully considered the Draft Negative
Declaration and Initial Study prepared for the proposed CAP; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fully considered all testimony and evidence
regarding the proposed CAP; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission passed a motion adopting Resolution No.
P12-008 recommending the approval of the proposed CAP to the City Council by a count of five
votes to zero; and
WHEREAS, on August 28, 2012, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public
hearing on the proposed CAP. The public hearing was held at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council
Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita; and
WHEREAS, the City Council fully considered all testimony and evidence regarding
the proposed CAP.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita does hereby
resolve as follows:
SECTION 1. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL OUALITY ACT FINDINGS. Based
upon the foregoing facts and findings in the Initial Study prepared for the project, the City
Council further finds and determines as follows:
a. An Initial Study and a Negative Declaration for this project have been prepared in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA);
b. The Initial Study has been circulated for review and comment by affected
governmental agencies and the public, and all comments received, if any, have
been considered. The Negative Declaration was posted and advertised on May 17,
2012, in accordance with CEQA. The public review period was open from May
17, 2012, through June 18, 2012;
C. There is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the
environment. The Negative Declaration reflects the independent judgment of the
City of Santa Clarita;
d. The location of the documents and other material, which constitutes the record of
proceedings upon which the decision of the City Council is the Master Case No.
12-052 project file within the Planning division and is in the custody of the
Director of Community Development; and
e. The City Council, based upon the findings set forth above, hereby finds that the
Negative Declaration for this project has been prepared in compliance with
CEQA.
SECTION 2. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY Based upon the foregoing facts and
findings, the City Council further finds and determines as follows:
a. The Climate Action Plan is consistent with the goals and policies outlined within
the City of Santa Clarita General Plan;
b. The Climate Action Plan is consistent with Policy CO 8. 1.1 of the City of Santa
Clarita's General Plan, which states:
"Create and adopt a Climate Action Plan within 18 months of the OVOV
adoption date of the City's General Plan that meets state requirements...'
SECTION 3. Based upon the testimony and other evidence, if any, received at the public
hearing, and upon studies and investigations made by the City Council and on its behalf, the City
Council hereby adopts the Negative Declaration prepared for the project, and approves Master
Case No. 12-052, consisting of the Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan as identified in "Exhibit
A."
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 28th day of August, 2012.
MAYOR
ATTEST:
INTERIM CITY CLERK
117:1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA)
I, Armine Chaparyan, Interim City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita, do hereby certify
that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita at
a regular meeting thereof, held on the 28th day of August 2012, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
INTERIM CITY CLERK
4 /0
2012
DRAFT REPORT
City of Santa Clarita
Climate Action Plan
Draft Report
Prepared for:
City of Santa Clarita
Community Development Department
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita CA 91355
(661)255-4330
www.greensantaclarita.com
Prepared by:
ENVIRON International Corporation
773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115
Novato, California, 94945
www.environcorp.com
P-415-899-0700
F-415-899-0707
May 9, 2012
E N V I R O N ' I
2012 _ City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ES -1
1.0 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1
BACKGROUND
1
1.2
RELATIONSHIP OF THE CAP TO THE GENERAL PLAN
1
1.3
GREENHOUSE GASES AND CLIMATE CHANGE
2
1.4
FEDERAL ACTIONS AND REGULATIONS
5
1.5
STATE REGULATIONS AND AGREEMENTS
7
1.6
LOCAL REGULATIONS, ORDINANCES AND AGREEMENTS
11
1.7
PROCESS USED TO DEVELOP THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
12
2.0 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY METHODOLOGY 14
2.1 TRANSPORTATION SECTOR 15
2.2 BUILDING ENERGY SECTOR 16
2.3 INDUSTRIAL SECTOR 16
2.4 WASTE SECTOR 17
2.5 OTHERS 17
2.6 2020 BUSINESS -AS -USUAL SCENARIO PROJECTIONS 18
3.0 BASELINE AND 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL GHG EMISSIONS 20
4.0 GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS 25
4.1 SANTA CLARITA PROGRAMS 25
4.2 GHG MITIGATION MEASURES 27
4.3 ESTIMATED REDUCTIONS FROM CONTROL MEASURES 33
5.0 2020 CONTROLLED GHG EMISSIONS 36
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION 40
6.1 ADMINISTRATION AND STAFFING
40
6.2 FINANCING OPPORTUNITIES
41
6.3 TIMELINE AND PRIORITIZATION
49
6.4 PROJECT REVIEW
53
6.5 MONITORING PLAN
53
E N V I R O N
lC;)—
May 2012 _ City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFTREPORT
TABLES
Table 2-1
Global Warming Potential of Different Greenhouse Gases.
14
Table 3-1.
Summary of 2005 CO2e Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for the
City of Santa Clarita.
20
Table 3-2.
Summary of 2020 Business as Usual CO2e Emissions (metric tons/yr)
by Sector for the City of Santa Clarita.
23
Table 4-1.
Control measures and estimated GHG reductions (MTCO2e) in year
2020.
33
Table 4-2.
Annual GHG Emissions Reductions for 2020 from individual Climate
Action Plan (CAP) Measures.
34
Table 5-1.
for the City of Santa Clarita.
36
Table 5-2.
Effects of different control measures in 2020 GHG Emissions.
38
Table 6-1.
Incentive levels by technology type.
42
Table 6-2.
Rebate from Emerging Renewables Program.
44
Table 6-3.
GHG Reduction Measures Included in the CAP Goal for 2020.
51
Table 6-4.
GHG Reduction Measures Included in the Monitoring Plan.
52
FIGURES
Figure ES -1.
Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CAP Target.
ES -2
Figure 1-1.
The Greenhouse Effect (revise title).
3
Figure 3-1.
2005 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source
Category.
22
Figure 3-2.
2005 Municipal Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source
Category.
22
Figure 4-1.
Percent Contribution to total GHG Reductions from CAP measures
by Source Category.
35
Figure 5-1.
2020 Controlled Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source
Category.
38
Figure 5-2.
Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CA Target.
39
Appendix
Appendix A 2005 Baseline Emissions Inventory Emissions Factors, Activity Data, and GHG
Emissions
Appendix B: 2020 Projected Business -As -Usual Inventory Growth Factors and Controls
Appendix C: CAP Measure Emissions Reduction Quantifications
Appendix D: Mitigation Measures and Evaluation, Climate Action Plan (CAP)
ii E N V I RC
/Z
2012
XWOU . r. T *9 1T/ETIT-11in
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
The State of California requires all cities that create a new general plan or update their general plan
document to consider its impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In order to do so, cities
must complete a Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP must achieve the emission reduction goals
outlined by the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). AB 32 requires that statewide GHG
emissions must be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020. The revised AB 32 Scoping Plan adopted on
August 24, 2011 by the California Air Resources Board indicates that California needs to reduce
GHG emissions by approximately 16 percent below Business -as -Usual GHG emissions for year 2020
to achieve the 1990 levels. Measures identified in Santa Clarita's Climate Action plan will not only
meet but exceed the State's AB 32 GHG emission reduction mandate.
In January 2011, the City of Santa Clarita began the process of developing a CAP. The purpose of
the CAP is to measure the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated within the City and to
develop strategies to reduce the emissions in the future. The CAP includes a set of strategies the
City can use to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the community. In
June 2011, the City Council adopted a new General Plan (formerly referred to as One Valley One
Vision) which is intended to guide growth and development within all portions of the Santa Clarita
Valley. The CAP is part of the General Plan process and as such will serve as a component of the
general plan document for the City to address Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions. Using the goals,
objectives and policies of the General Plan as a starting point, the CAP identifies those mitigation
measures that can be quantified and translated into significant reductions in the GHG emissions by
the year 2020. The development of a CAP begins with a premise that establishing a complete GHG
emissions inventory within the city's boundary is the critical foundation for the remainder of the
project. The 2005 baseline year GHG emissions inventory has captured emissions from various
sources. The total emissions of GHG in 2005 were estimated to be 1,717,648 MTCO2e.1 The
emissions are presented separately for community -wide sources and municipal sources. Of this
total, the emissions from on -road vehicles were the main source of GHG emissions for the City in
2005 (60%) followed by residential energy use (18%) and commercial/industrial energy use (13%).
The municipal source emissions make up approximately 2% of the total emissions. This emissions
profile is typical for a City with the characteristics of Santa Clarita.
A large portion of the GHG reductions would be achieved by the decrease in vehicle miles traveled
in the City via changes in land use patterns and a greater emphasis of transit and alternative
transportation programs. Other significant reductions are due to the creation or acquisition of new
vegetated space in line with the goals of the City's Open Space Preservation District and water use
measures. Applying estimated reductions from CAP measures shows that the resulting 2020 net
emissions are expected to be approximately 4% below the 2005 baseline level. The reduction
represents a level that is 17% below the 2020 business -as -usual (BAU) emissions level and is
consistent with the overall Statewide Goals of AB 32. Figure ES -1 shows a comparison of BAU
Projections with the CAP Target.
1 MTCOee represents Metric Tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent emissions.
ES -1 ENV I RON �/1
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
MM
2005 Baseline
.+► 1,987,162
1,645,190
Year 2020
Figure ES -1. Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CAP Target.
The Climate Action Plan not only identifies a reduction target or commitments, but it also sets
forth the complement of goals, policies, measures, and ordinances that will achieve the target.
These policies and other strategies include measures in transportation, land use, energy
conservation, water conservation, and vegetation.
ES -2 ENV I R 0 N
2,000,000
2
♦ Projected 2020 BAU
N a
_
c
1.900,000
tCAP 2020 Target
u_._
E ry
_.... _..
w p
1,800,000
U)
0
~
1,700,000
p
1,717,648
u
f
1,600,000
2005 Baseline
.+► 1,987,162
1,645,190
Year 2020
Figure ES -1. Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CAP Target.
The Climate Action Plan not only identifies a reduction target or commitments, but it also sets
forth the complement of goals, policies, measures, and ordinances that will achieve the target.
These policies and other strategies include measures in transportation, land use, energy
conservation, water conservation, and vegetation.
ES -2 ENV I R 0 N
2012
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
The State of California requires all cities that create a new general plan document to consider
its impacts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In order to address this requirement, many
cities are preparing a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that adheres to the guidelines under Senate Bill
97 (CEQA Guidelines).2 The CAP must achieve emission reduction goals consistent with those
outlined by the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32).3 On a statewide basis, AB 32
requires that greenhouse gas emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by the year 2020.
In January 2011, the City of Santa Clarita began the process of developing a CAP. The purpose
of the CAP is to measure the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated within the City
and to develop strategies to reduce the emissions in the future. The plan includes a set of
strategies the City can use to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the
community. The CAP includes the following components:
• Emissions Inventory — This component includes an inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions for the entire community from all sources. Emissions of GHG generated within
the City of Santa Clarita are primarily from vehicles and energy use.
• Emission Forecasts — This component assesses future year activities within the City to
create future year forecasts of GHG emissions for the Business -as -usual case without any
further GHG emissions reductions.
• Public Outreach —This component includes engaging community stakeholders and the
public to gather feedback on the types of strategies the City can employ to reduce GHG
emissions in the future.
• Mitigation Plan —This component creates the overall plan for mitigating the GHG
emissions based on information from the inventory, the public outreach component and
the goals, objectives and policies of the General Plan developed by the City. The goal is to
reduce GHG emissions to a level that is consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act
of 2006 (AB 32) and Scoping Plan.
• Monitoring Plan — This component of the plan establishes a monitoring program to allow
the City to monitor the progress towards reduction the GHG emissions once the CAP has
been completed.
The following paragraphs describe the relationship of the CAP to the General Plan, a description
of greenhouse gases and why it is important to minimize these emissions, the regulatory setting
for accomplishing the goals and objectives of the CAP and the process used to develop the CAP.
1.2 Relationship of the CAP to the General Plan
The General Plan for the City of Santa Clarita is the foundation for making land use decisions
based on goals and policies related to land use, population growth and distribution,
development, open space, resource preservation and utilization, air and water supply and other
2 Section 15183.5(b). Amendments to CECA Guidelines. December 30, 2009.
3 See http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ab32/ab32.htm
1 E N V I R O N //
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
factors. Recognizing that the City is located within and is an integral part of the greater Santa
Clarita Valley, the City Council and the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors initiated a joint
planning effort which is intended to guide growth and development within all portions of the
Santa Clarita Valley. In recognition of anticipated continuation of growth, the General Plan
focuses on ways to manage the City's growth while addressing the need for improving the
lifestyle of its residents. As part of this effort, the City identified its goals, objectives and
policies that address land use, continued development of efficient, cost-effective and
comprehensive transportation systems, conservation of natural resources and the benefits of
open space preservation.
The CAP builds from the goals, objectives and policies delineated in the General Plan and
develops specific actions to be implemented and monitored to achieve GHG reduction goals.
The City's general plan process developed a number of goals, objectives and policies that
address climate change. Accordingly, the General Plan goals, objectives and policies are
incorporated into the Climate Action Plan's mitigation plan component and to the extent
feasible are translated into measures that result in reductions in GHG emissions. At build out,
compared to the previous General Plan, the new General Plan will:
• Reduce vehicle miles traveled ;
• Include more focus on higher residential and commercial density including transit oriented
development and mixed use development;
• Reduce the valley -wide carbon footprint
The General Plan contains numerous goals, objectives and policies and project features that
would reduce GHG emissions from "business as usual" conditions. Using these goals, objectives
and policies as a starting point, the CAP identifies those mitigation measures that can be
quantified and translated into significant reductions in the GHG emissions by the year 2020.
1.3 Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change
The Earth's surface temperature is a delicate balance between the energy from the Sun and the
energy reradiated back to space. As depicted by Figure 1-1 below, the incoming energy from
the Sun, called short-wave radiation composed of ultra -violet light and visible light, is partly
reflected off the of the atmosphere and off the Earth's surface. The Earth absorbs the
remainder of the energy and then reradiates long -wave, infrared radiation back towards space.
However, if all of this infrared radiation reached space, the Earth's surface would be at sub -zero
temperatures. The Earth's atmosphere traps some of this long -wave radiation emitted from
the Earth's surface and reradiates it back to Earth, providing a blanket effect to keep the
temperature at livable levels. This trapping of some of the long -wave radiation by the
atmosphere is called the greenhouse effect, a naturally occurring process which moderates the
temperature of the earth.
EN V I RON /�I
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Figure 1-1. The Greenhouse Effect.
Greenhouse gases (GHGs) refer to a collection of gases that have the ability to absorb and
reradiate infrared energy. Some of these gases are naturally -occurring, such as carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), and water vapor (H2O); while some are only man-
made and that are emitted through the use of modern industrial products, such as
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). The amount
of GHGs in the atmosphere has fluctuated throughout the history of the planet within a
predictable range, and these have been closely correlated with the observed glacial and
interglacial periods. However, modern day human activities, primarily from fossil fuel burning,
have been introducing more GHGs into the atmosphere, which are accumulating and
intensifying the heat trapping mechanism, resulting in global temperature increases. In
response to climate change concerns, the Kyoto Protocol was entered into force in 2005 as an
international effort to mandate GHG reductions, although the United States did not adopt the
Protocol.
CAPS generally act to reduce six major greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4),
nitrous oxide (N20), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6). The effect each of these gases has on global warming is a combination of
the volume of their emissions and their 100 -year global warming potential (GWP). Global
warming potential indicates, on a pound -for -pound basis, how much a gas will contribute to
global warming relative to how much warming would be caused by the same mass of carbon
dioxide. For example, CH4 and N20 are substantially more potent than CO2, with global
E N V I R O N
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
warming potentials of 21 and 310, respectively. However, these natural GHGs are nowhere
near as potent as sulfur hexafluoride and various HFCs and PFCs. Sulfur hexafluoride has a 100 -
year GWP of 23,900 and PFCs and HFCs have GWPs ranging from 140 to 11,700 4 In emissions
inventories, GHG emissions are typically reported in terms of pounds (Ibs) or metric tons
("tonnes," equivalent to 1000 kilograms) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), which are
calculated as the product of the mass emitted of a given GHG and its specific global warming
potential. In this document, the unit metric ton (MT) is used to report GHG emissions.
The most important GHG in human -induced global warming is CO2. While many gases have
much higher global warming potentials than the naturally occurring GHGs, CO2 is emitted in
such higher quantities that it accounts for 85 percent of the global warming potential of all
GHGs emitted by the United States 5 Fossil fuel combustion, especially for the generation of
electricity and powering of motor vehicles, has led to substantial increases in CO2 emissions and
thus substantial increases in atmospheric CO2 concentrations. In 2005, atmospheric CO2
concentrations were about 379 parts per million (ppm), over 35 percent higher than the pre-
industrial (defined as the year 1750) concentrations of about 280 ppm 6 In addition to the
sheer volume of its emissions, CO2 is a major factor in human -induced global warming because
of its lifespan in the atmosphere of 50 to 200 years.
Concentrations of the second most prominent GHG, CH4, have also increased due to human
activities such as rice production, degradation of waste in landfills, cattle farming, and natural
gas mining. In 2005, atmospheric levels of CH4 were more than double pre -industrial levels, up
to 1774 parts per billion as compared to 715 parts per billion6. CH4 has a relatively short
atmospheric lifespan of only 12 years, but has a higher global warming potential than CO2.
N20 concentrations have increased from about 270 parts per billion in pre -industrial times to
about 319 parts per billion by 20058. Most of this increase can be attributed to agricultural
practices (such as soil and manure management), as well as fossil -fuel combustion and the
production of some acids. N20 has a 120 -year atmospheric lifespan, meaning that in addition
to its relatively large global warming potential its influence is long-lasting, thus increasing its
role in global warming.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), used as refrigerants, and fully fluorinated species, such as sulfur
hexafluoride (SF6) and tetrafluoromethane (CF4), are present in the atmosphere in relatively
small concentrations, but have extremely long life spans of 50,000 and 3,200 years each,
making them potent GHGs. Perfluorocarbons (PFCs) are generated from traditional aluminum
production among other activities, but have very large radiative efficiencies and lifetimes in the
range of 1,000 to 50,000 years. Given their long lifetimes, HFC's, SF6, CF4, and PFC's are
essentially permanent contributors to climate change.
4 See http://www.climateregistry.org/resources/docs/protocols/grp/GRP}.1_January2009.pdf.
5 Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2006, US Environmental Protection Agency. Website:
http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads/08_CR.pdf.
6 Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II, and III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri, and A. Reisinger, Editors). IPCC, Geneva,
ENVIRON In
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Pian
DRAFT REPORT
GHGs differ from criteria pollutants (defined as.those pollutants that are common in the lower
atmosphere as indicators of air quality and health effects) in that GHG emissions do not cause
direct adverse human health effects. Rather, the direct environmental effect of GHG emissions
is the increase in global temperatures, which in turn has numerous indirect effects on the
environment and humans. For example, some observed changes include shrinking glaciers,
thawing permafrost, later freezing and earlier break-up of ice on rivers and lakes, a lengthened
growing season, shifts in plant and animal ranges, and earlier flowering of trees .7 Other, longer
term environmental impacts of global warming include sea level rise, changing weather
patterns with increases in the severity of storms and droughts, changes to local and regional
ecosystems including the potential loss of species, and a significant reduction in winter snow
pack (for example, estimates include a 30-90% reduction in snowpack in the Sierra Mountains.8
Data from this report suggests that in the next 25 years, in every season of the year, California
would experience unprecedented heat, longer and more extreme heat waves, greater intensity
and frequency of heat waves, and longer dry periods.
1.4 Federal Actions and Regulations
When considering potential GHG reductions at the community level, it is important to note that
a number of programs and initiatives at the Federal, State and County levels to reduce GHG
emissions are already occurring and will contribute to reductions at the local level. These
programs and initiatives are discussed further in the following sections. These programs and
initiatives in many cases will create GHG reductions at the local level that are quantifiable. This
CAP has considered these programs and initiatives in the development of its reduction goals
and measures to ensure potential reductions not affected by these regulations are addressed.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards
On December 7, 2009, as a result of the April 2007 Supreme Court Ruling,9 the USEPA
Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of
the Clean Air Act: An Endangerment Finding which establishes that the current and projected
concentrations of the six key well -mixed greenhouse gases — CO2, CH4, N20, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6
— in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations;
and a Cause or Contribute Finding establishing that the combined emissions of these
greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which
threatens public health and welfare. The finding itself does not impose any requirements on
industry or other entities. However, this action was a prerequisite to finalizing the USEPA's
proposed greenhouse gas emissions standards for light-duty vehicles.10
In April 1, 2010, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a Final Rulemaking establishing new
7 "Third Assessment Report (TAR)." Available online at: http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wgl/143.htm and
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc—tar/Wgl/268.htm.
8 2009 California Adaptation Strategy, Public Review Draft, A Report to the Governor of the State of California in Response to
Executive Order S-13-2008, California Natural Resources Agency.
9 Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 549 U.S. 497 (2007)
10 US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Final Rulemaking to Establish Light -Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission
Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Regulatory Impact Analysis. See
http://www.epa.gov/oms/climate/regulations/420rl0009.pdf
5 ENVIRON
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
federal GHG and fuel economy standards for model years (MYs) 2012 to 2016 passenger cars,
light-duty trucks, and medium -duty passenger vehicles. These agencies are now in the process
of developing a rulemaking to set standards for model years 2017 to 2025 passenger cars, light-
duty trucks, and medium -duty passenger vehicles, as well as the first-ever GHG and fuel
economy standards for medium -duty, and heavy-duty engines and trucks. The comment period
has recently ended on February 13, 2012. The proposed MYs 2017-2025 CAFE standards are
projected to require, on an average industry fleet -wide basis for cars and trucks combined, 40.1
miles per gallon (mpg) in model year 2021, and 49.6 mpg in model year 2025. The CAFE
standards for MYS 2012-2016 will require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined
average mile per gallon (mpg) level of 29.7 in model year 2012 and 34.1 in model year 2016.
First enacted by Congress in 1975 as part of the 1975 Energy Policy Conservation Act in
response to the 1973-1974 oil crises, the purpose of CAFE standards is to reduce energy
consumption by increasing the fuel economy of passenger cars and light-duty trucks. The CAFE
regulation requires each car manufacturer to meet a standard for the sales -weighted fuel
economy for the entire fleet of vehicles sold in the U.S. in each model year. Fuel economy,
expressed in miles per gallon (mpg), is defined as the average mileage traveled by an
automobile per gallon of gasoline or equivalent amount of other fuel. The NHTSA of the US
Department of Transportation (USDOT) administers the CAFE program, and the USEPA provides
the fuel economy data. NHTSA sets fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light-duty
trucks sold in the U.S. while USEPA calculates the average fuel economy for each manufacturer.
In response to a U.S. Presidential Memorandum Regarding Fuel Efficiency Standards dated May
21, 2010, the USEPA and NHTSA are taking coordinated steps to enable the production of a new
generation of clean vehicles, through reduced GHG emissions and improved fuel efficiency from
on -road vehicles and engines.
Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 was signed into law on December 19, 2007
and includes provisions covering:
• Renewable Fuel Standard (Section 202);
• Appliance and Lighting Efficiency Standards (Section 301-325);
Building Energy Efficiency (Sections 411-441).
Additional provisions of the Energy Independence and Security Act address energy savings in
government and public institutions, promoting research for alternative energy, additional
research in carbon capture, international energy programs, and the creation of "green jobs."
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2)
The USEPA is responsible for developing and implementing regulations to ensure that
transportation fuel sold in the United States contains a minimum volume of renewable fuel. The
RFS program was created under the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 2005, and established the first
renewable fuel volume mandate in the United States. The second renewable fuel program
(RFS2) lays the foundation for achieving significant reductions of greenhouse gas emissions
from the use of renewable fuels, for reducing imported petroleum, and encouraging the
E N V I R O N
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
development and expansion of our nation's renewable fuels sector." Under RFS2, EPA
proposes updated volumetric targets for each calendar year. RFS2 requires annual increases in
biofuels sold — both biodiesel and bioethanol —from the years 2010-2022. The original RFS
program (RFS1) required 7.5 billion gallons of renewable- fuel to be blended into gasoline by
2012. By year 2022, RFS will require at least 74 billion gallons of biofuel to be sold in the US, as
compared to a current (2010) level of approximately 14.5 billion gallons.
Appliance and Efficiency Standards
The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA)of 2007 amended the Energy Policy
Conservation Act of 1975 establishes energy conservation standards and test procedures for
certain consumer products and commercial and industrial equipment such as residential
electric appliances, lamps, small commercial air conditioning equipment, Class A power
supplies, etc. The US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates that the EISA-prescribed standards
will save approximately 31 Quadrillion Btu (quads) of energy over 30 years (2008 — 2038)
nationwide .12 One quad can be translated into over 8 billion gallons of gasoline and 36 million
metric tons of coal.
Building Energy Efficiency
EISA 2007 (an amendment to the Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975) establishes energy
management goals and requirements while also amending portions of the National Energy
Conservation Policy Act. 13 It sets Federal energy management requirements in several areas,
including establishing an Energy Performance Requirement for Federal Buildings, setting a
percentage reduction of 30 percent by 2015 for federal buildings. For instance, Performance
and Standards for New Building and Major Renovations, establishes that buildings shall be
designed so that the fossil fuel -generated energy consumption of the buildings is reduced by
100 percent in year 2030. Other areas it discusses are Energy Savings Performance Contracts,
Metering, Energy -Efficient Product Procurement, Reporting, etc., all of which have the objective
of reducing energy consumption and thus reducing related greenhouse gases.
1.5 State Regulations and Agreements
California Legislation
California has enacted a variety of legislations that relate to climate change, much of which sets
aggressive goals for GHG reductions within the state. The discussion below provides a brief
overview of the regulatory documents and of the primary legislation that relates to climate
change which may affect the GHG emissions.
Assembly Bill 32 (Statewide GHG Reductions)
The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, widely known as AB 32, requires the
California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and
verification of statewide greenhouse gas emissions. CARB is directed to set a greenhouse gas
11 US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis. See
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420rl0006.pdf
12 US Department of Energy. Technical Support Document. Impacts on the Nation of the Energy Independence and Security Act
of 2007. See http;Hwwwl.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/en_masse_tsd_march_2009.pdf
13 See http://wwwl.eere.energy.gov/buildings/appliance_standards/pdfs/en_masse_tsd_march_2009.pdf
7 ENVIRON
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
emission limit, based on 1990 levels, to be achieved by 2020. The bill sets a timeline for
adopting a scoping plan for achieving greenhouse gas reductions in a technologically and
economically feasible manner. The scoping plan was approved by CARB on August 24, 2011.14
The heart of the bill is the requirement that statewide GHG emissions must be reduced to 1990
levels by 2020. In its original Scoping Plan, CARB established that California needs to reduce
GHG emissions by 30 percent below Business -as -Usual GHG projections by the year 2020. CARB
revised its estimates in August of 2011 based on the recent economic downturn. The revised
Scoping Plan indicates that California needs to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 16
percent below Business -as -Usual GHG emissions for year 2020 to achieve this goal .15 The bill
requires CARB to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the
maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG reductions. Key AB 32 milestones are
as follows:
• January 1, 2010—Adoption and enforcement of regulations to implement the discrete
early action measures.
• January 1, 2011 (and throughout 2011) —Adoption of GHG emissions limits and reduction
measures by regulation.
• Adoption of the Scoping Plan on August 24, 2011.
December 13, 2011, CARB adopted a California cap -and -trade program. The program
started on January 1, 2012, with an enforceable compliance obligation beginning with the
2013 GHG emissions.
• January 1, 2012—GHG emissions limits and reduction measures adopted in 2011 became
enforceable.
Executive Order S-3-05 (Statewide GHG Targets)
California Executive Order S-03-05 (June 1, 2005) mandates a reduction of GHG emissions to
2000 levels by 2010, to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
Although the 2020 target is the core of AB 32, and has been incorporated into AB 32, the 2050
target remains the goal of the Executive Order,
Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)
Executive Order S-01-07 (January 18, 2007) requires a 10 percent or greater reduction in the
average fuel carbon intensity for transportation fuels in California regulated by CARB. CARB
identified the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as a Discrete Early Action item under AB 32, and
the final resolution (09-31) was issued on April 23, 2009.16 On December 29, 2011 a preliminary
injunction against CARB's LCFS was issued by an U.S. court from a lawsuit considering interstate
commerce issues by LCFS which has put a temporary hold on the implementation of the
regulation.
14 See http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm
15 See http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/fed.htm
16 See www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs.htm.
E N V I R O N
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action
DRAFT REPORT
Senate Bill 1368 (GHG Emissions Standard for Baseload Generation)
Senate Bill 1368 (SB1368) prohibits any retail seller of electricity in California from entering into
a long-term financial commitment for baseload generation if the GHG emissions are higher than
those from a combined -cycle natural gas power plant .17 This performance standard applies to
electricity generated out-of-state as well as in-state, and to publicly owned as well as investor-
owned electric utilities.
Assembly Bill 1493 (Mobile Source Reductions)
Assembly Bill (AB) 1493 ("the Pavley Standard") requires automakers to meet GHG emission
reduction standards for new passenger cars, pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles of model
years 2009 to 2016. Manufacturers have flexibility in meeting these standards through a
combination of reducing tailpipe emissions of carbon dioxide (COA nitrous oxide (N10), and
methane (CH4) and receiving credit for systems demonstrated to mitigate fugitive emissions of
hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) from vehicle air conditioning systems.18 When fully phased in, the
near term (2009-2012) standards will result in about a 22 percent reduction in greenhouse gas
emissions as compared to the 2002 fleet, and the mid-term (2013-2016) standards will result in
about a 30 percent reduction These first set of standards are usually referred to as "Pavley I".
The "Pavley II", post-MY2016 standards established under AB 1493 and consistent with Federal
CAFE standards, will further require new model years 2017 to 2025 light duty vehicles to
control greenhouse gas emissions. Pavley II is now part of the Advanced Clean Cars Program
which aims to address reduction in other criteria pollutants as well.
Senate Bills 1078,107 and 2 (Renewables Portfolio Standard)
Established in 2002 under Senate Bill 1078 and accelerated in 2006 under Senate Bill 107,
California's Renewables Portfolio Standard requires retail suppliers of electric services to
increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources by at least 1 percent of their
retail sales annually, until they reach 20 percent by 2010. On April 12, 2011, Governor Brown
signed SB 2 which requires one-third of the state's electricity to come from renewable sources.
The legislation increases California's current 20 percent renewable portfolio standard target in
2010 to a 33 percent renewable portfolio standard by December 31, 2020.
Senate Bill 375 (Land Use Planning)
Senate Bill (SB) 375 provides for a new planning process to coordinate land use planning and
regional transportation plans and funding priorities in order to help California meet the GHG
reduction goals established in AB 32. SB 375 requires regional transportation plans, developed
by Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) relevant to the proposed Project area to
incorporate a "sustainable communities strategy" (SCS) in their Regional Transportation Plans
(RTP) that will achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by CARB. The Southern California
Association of Governments (SCAG) is the federally designated MPO for the majority of the
southern California region, including the City of Santa Clarita. The approved regional GHG
emission reduction targets approved by CARB for SCAG are 8 percent by 2020 and 13 percent
by 2035. SB 375 also includes provisions for streamlined CEQA review for some infill projects
such as transit oriented development. SB 375 will be implemented over the next several years.
17 See http://www.energy.ca.gov/emission_ standards/index.html
18 See http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccros/ccros.htm
9 E N V I R O N
2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
SCAG19 will develop and finalize a sustainable community's strategy as part of its 2012 Regional
Transportation Plan. The City of Santa Clarita participated in the SCS process through formal
collaboration with SCAG. The City also provided SCAG with formal comments on the RTP/SCS
during the comment period in February, 2012.
Assembly Bill 341 (Commercial Recycling)
This bill declared that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75% of solid waste
generated be source reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020. Increasing the
recovery of recyclable materials will directly reduce GHG emissions. This is a goal of one of the
measures in the AB 32 Scoping Plan adopted by CARB in 2008 pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 32,
the California Global Warming Solutions Act (Chapter 488, Statutes of 2006). In particular,
recycled materials can reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from multiple phases of product
production including extraction of raw materials, preprocessing and manufacturing. A co -
benefit of increased recycling is avoided methane emissions at landfills from the decomposition
of organic materials. Use of composted organic materials also provides environmental benefits
such as carbon storage in soils and reduced use of fertilizers, pesticides, and water. As required
by AB 341, CalRecycle adopted the Mandatory Commercial Recycling Regulation on January 17,
2012.
Energy Conservation Standards (Title 24)
Energy Conservation Standards for new residential and commercial buildings were originally
adopted by the California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission in
June 1977 and most recently revised in 2008 (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of
Regulations).20 In general, Title 24 requires the design of building shells and building
components to conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for
consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.
Part it of Title 24, referred to as California Green Building Standards Code, establishes
voluntary standards on planning and design for sustainable site development, energy efficiency
(in excess of the California Energy Code requirements, Title 24 Part 6), water conservation,
material conservation, and internal air contaminants. Some of these standards have become
mandatory in the 2010 edition of the Part 11 Code. The City has adopted the Baseline standards
included in CalGreen into the Santa Clarita Building Code.
Senate Bill 97 (CEQA Guidelines)
SB 97 required that the California Natural Resources Agency (CNRA) coordinate on the
preparation of amendments to the CEQA Guidelines regarding feasible mitigation of
greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Pursuant to SB 97, CNRA
adopted CEQA Guidelines amendments on December 30, 2009 and transmitted the Adopted
Amendments and the entire rulemaking file to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) on
December 31, 2009. The amendments were approved by the Office of Administrative Law on
February 16, 2010, and became effective on March 18, 2010.
19 See http://www.climateplan.org/californias-new-vision/around-the-state/southern-california/
20 See http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/
10 ENVIRON
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
With respect to the significance assessment, newly added CEQA Guidelines section 15064.4,
subdivision (b), indicates:
A lead agency should consider the following factors, among others, when assessing the
significance of impacts from greenhouse gas emissions on the environment:
• The extent to which the project may increase or reduce greenhouse gas emissions as
compared to the existing environmental setting;
• Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency
determines applies to the project;
The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to
implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas
emissions. Such requirements must be adopted by the relevant public agency through a public
review process and must reduce or mitigate the project's incremental contribution of
greenhouse gas emissions. If there is substantial evidence that the possible effects of a
particular project are still cumulatively considerable notwithstanding compliance with the
adopted regulations or requirements, an EIR must be prepared for the project.
The Guidelines (SB 97, 2009) also apply retroactively to any incomplete environmental impact
report, negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or other related documents. The
amendments also provide that lead agencies should consider all feasible means of mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions that substantially reduce energy consumption or GHG emissions.
These potential mitigation measures may include carbon sequestration. If off-site or carbon
offset mitigation measure are proposed they must be part of reasonable plan of mitigation that
the agency itself is committed to implementing. However, no threshold of significance or any
specific mitigation measures have been developed under the CEQA Guidelines to this date.
1.6 Local Regulations, Ordinances and Agreements
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Policies
On December 5, 2008, the SCAQMD Governing Board adopted its staff proposal for an interim
CEQA GHG significance threshold for proposed Projects where the SCAQMD is the lead agency.
Currently, the Board has only adopted thresholds relevant to industrial (stationary source)
projects.21 To achieve a policy objective of capturing 90 percent of GHG emissions from new
residential/commercial development projects and implement a "fair share" approach to
reducing emission increases from each sector, SCAQMD staff proposed in September 2010
combining performance standards and screening thresholds. The performance standards
suggested have primarily focused on energy efficiency measures beyond Title 24 Part 6,
California's building energy efficiency standards, and a screening level of 3,000 tons of CO2e per
year based on direct operational emissions. Above this screening level, project design features
designed to reduce GHGs must be implemented to reduce the impact to below a level of
significance. The CEQA Significance Thresholds Working Group, which includes government
agencies implementing CEQA and representatives from various stakeholder groups, provided
21 See www.aqmd.gov/hb/2008/December/081231a.htm.
11 E N V I R O N
C�
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
input for this effort in the past, but have not met since September 2010 and this threshold was
never formally adopted by SCAQMD. Information on development of the CEQA Significance
Thresholds Working Group can be found on the SCAQMD website .22
1.7 Process Used to Develop the Climate Action Plan
The development of a CAP begins with a premise that establishing a complete GHG emissions
inventory within the city's boundary is the critical foundation for the remainder of the project.
This inventory includes GHG emissions from various sectors within the City of Santa Clarita for
the baseline year of 2005. There are two sub -inventories: (1) municipal inventory, which covers
all sources under the City's municipal operation, and (2) community inventory, which covers the
rest of the sources within the City's boundaries. The sectors for which the GHG inventory was
developed was Building Energy (electricity and natural gas consumption), Transportation (on -
road vehicles, off-road equipment and rail travel), Industrial (combustion and fugitive
emissions from industrial processes, Waste (wastewater treatment and solid waste landfills),
Area lighting (streetlights, traffic lights and other outdoor area lights), Potable Water (electricity
consumed for water supply and conveyance, treatment and distribution), Agriculture
(electricity consumed for agriculture purposes) and Refrigerant Use (blends of
hydrofluorocarbons used for refrigerants).
The results of the baseline inventory for 2005 were then used to develop forecasts. Forecasting
the baseline GHG emissions relied on available data on future year activities within the City
domain. Surrogates were assigned to each GHG emission source category in the baseline to
determine what activity parameter will be associated with each source for purposes of the
projection. For example, community -wide building energy was projected using population as a
surrogate. Other surrogates came from the City's General Plan, specific development plans, or
a combination of these sources. If some utility data were obtained from other agencies (i.e.
wastewater or solid waste), the team contacted these agencies to determine information on
projected activities. The Business -as -Usual (BAU) forecasts were then conducted by creating a
ratio of the projection surrogates in the baseline to their future year values in 2020, and then
applying the ratio to the baseline emissions.
The next step was to engage in a community outreach effort. The City hosted public
workshops in April, May and June of 2011 that presented the inventory results, projections of
emissions, and the need for community action regarding climate change and GHG emissions. A
total of ten meetings were held with the general public as well as the Boards of local business
organizations. The meetings were held throughout the City to elicit more input from interested
and concerned residents. Residents and stakeholders provided valuable input regarding the
direction of the CAP effort and what could be done to do more in this area.
These initial steps set the stage for an informed and defensible Climate Action Plan that can
then accurately consider potential reduction measures in all areas of the city's boundaries in
addition to transportation and land use measures. Although transportation and land use
measures will be primarily used to consider the City's consistency with the final SB 375 targets
22 Available at: www.aqmd.gov/cega/handbook/GHG/GHG.htmi.
12 E N V I R 0 N n
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
set for the SCAG region, other reasonable and achievable reduction measures were identified
to augment the CAP and help the overall case for a plan that is consistent with AB 32 targets.
Section 2.0 of the CAP describes the methodologies, the protocols and the sources of data used
to develop the 2005 Baseline Inventory and to forecast 2020 GHG emissions. Section 3.0
provides detailed results for the 2005 GHG emission level and 2020 Business as Usual (BAU)
GHG emissions forecasts which assumes that no new emission controls and strategies are
adopted. Section 4.0 describes GHGs mitigation measures including the accomplishments of
the current City programs and the specific federal, state, local and City measures that provide
the GHG reductions that are included in this CAP. The resulting 2020 emissions forecasts that
include the reduction measures included in the CAP are presented in Section 5.0. Finally,
Section 6.0 describes the administration of the CAP going forward, the staffing level to
implement and monitor the plan as well as finance and budget considerations relevant to CAP
implementation. Also, included is the timeline and prioritization of the GHG reduction
measures. The measures are grouped into those GHG mitigation measures that are included in
the CAP to meet the GHG reduction goal and could be quantified, measures that are not
quantifiable at this time but will be included in the Monitoring Plan, those measures that will be
considered in future amendments to the CAP and finally those measures that are not
considered a high priority to meet the goals of the City by 2020. Finally, Section 6.0 includes
steps the City will take to effectively monitor and track progress of the CAP are outlined in the
Monitoring Section. Detailed emissions calculations, emissions projections, reduction
quantification from measures, and data sources are included in the Appendices.
13 E N V I R O N
MW
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
2.0 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY METHODOLOGY
The City of Santa Clarita 2005 base year GHG emissions inventory was developed to capture
GHG emissions from various sectors. 2005 is chosen as the base year as established by SB 375.
There are two sub -inventories: (1) municipal inventory, which covers all sources under the
City's municipal operation, and (2) community inventory, which covers the rest of the sources
within the City's boundaries. Since there is no standard inventory protocol, this inventory
methodology was developed based on procedures established in three documents: The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for the National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories, the Local Government Operational Protocol (LGOP), and the Climate Registry
General Reporting Protocol (GRP). The specific methodology used for each emission source is
discussed in detail in the rest of this section. The City of Santa Clarita is aiming to reduce its
emissions to levels below the 2005 baseline level by the year 2020.
Six Greenhouse Gases
There are six main greenhouse gases cited in international and national reporting programs and
are listed in Table 2-1 with their respective global warming potentials (GWPs). The GWP for
each gas is calculated based on its atmospheric lifetime and its tendency to absorb and
reradiate heat and then normalized by that of carbon dioxide. It is a useful indicator of how
potent a gas is compared to carbon dioxide. Some gases such as hydrofluorocarbons,
perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride are used in small quantities, but they are important
in climate science analysis due to their high GWP.
Table 2-1 Global Warming Potential of Different Greenhouse Gases.
Units
In this report, greenhouse gas emissions are reported in metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide
equivalent (COze), which is calculated by multiplying the amount of emissions for each of the
six above GHGs by their respective GWP. Since most of the consumption data associated with
emissions and some emissions factors are reported in English units, conversion factors are
applied in those calculations.
14
ENV I RON C;9
"Global Warming Potential '
Carbon dioxide
CO,
1
Methane
CH,
21
Nitrous Oxide
N20
313
Hydrofluorocarbons
CxH Fz
Various
Perfluorocarbons
CyFy
Various
Sulfur Hexafluoride
I SF6
23,900
Units
In this report, greenhouse gas emissions are reported in metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide
equivalent (COze), which is calculated by multiplying the amount of emissions for each of the
six above GHGs by their respective GWP. Since most of the consumption data associated with
emissions and some emissions factors are reported in English units, conversion factors are
applied in those calculations.
14
ENV I RON C;9
2012
2.1 Transportation Sector
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
The transportation sector includes on -road vehicles, off-road equipment, and rail travel. For the
municipal inventory, on -road vehicles include a fleet of light-duty and heavy vehicles owned
and operated by the City, City-wide buses, the County Sheriff vehicles that operate within the
City, and solid waste hauling trucks. Emissions from these vehicles are determined on either a
vehicle miles travelled (VMT) basis or fuel consumption basis, and these data are provided by
related departments. The emissions factors for each vehicle class in the municipal inventory are
modeled using ARB's EMFAC 2007 version 2.3 or are obtained from the General Reporting
Protocol.
The community -wide inventory of the transportation sector estimates on -road emissions based
on VMT on freeways, arterial roads, and local roads within the City's boundary. The VMT data
are modeled and provided by the City's Traffic and Planning division. ENVIRON then apportions
the total VMT into different vehicle classes according to distribution in the Southern California
Associate of Governments (SCAG) region in order to apply the appropriate emissions factors.
Because the modeled VMT includes all trips within the City boundaries, the community
inventory on -road emissions would already encompass those of the municipal inventory. To
avoid double -counting, the community -wide on -road emissions presented in this report has
subtracted out the municipal on -road emissions. In addition to the in -City emissions, the
community -wide inventory also includes bio -solid hauling truck trips between wastewater
treatment plants and land application in Kern County, as per information provided by Los
Angeles County Sanitation District.23
Off-road equipment covers a wide range of engines and equipment types, such as lawn and
garden, airport service, recreational and marine, industrial, agricultural, logging, construction,
mining, and light commercial equipment. Emissions from off-road sources are estimated based
on fuel consumption and or hours of operation. The City has provided a list of City -owned and
operated off-road equipment and their usage for the municipal inventory. For the community
inventory, ENVIRON has determined that engines used in construction and mining, other
commercial and industrial equipment, transportation refrigeration units, and lawn and garden
equipment are the most significant contributors to the total off-road source GHG emissions in
the City, and these types of equipment are modeled using ARB's OFFROAD 2007 model.
Because the OFFROAD model has resolution at the county level, emissions for the County of Los
Angeles are estimated and then scaled down to the City of Santa Clarita using the appropriate
surrogates. For construction and mining, transportation refrigeration units, and lawn and
garden equipment, the 2005 population ratio between the County and the City is used; for
industrial equipment, the 2000 Census manufacturing employee ratio between the County and
the City is used; and for light commercial equipment, the 2000 Census wholesale and retail
employee ratio between the County and the City is used.
There are two types of rail operations in Santa Clarita which contribute to GHG emissions to the
community inventory. Freight rail trains travel mainly between ports and inland areas, and the
23 Data request communication between David Rothbart of Los Angeles County Sanitation District and ENVIRON.
Biosolids generated from Saugus and Valencia facilities are trucked from Valencia to Kern County for land
15 E N V I R O N
240
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
length of rail lines crossing over Santa Clarita is captured using GIS. The GHG emissions for
freight rail in Los Angeles County were obtained and scaled to the City of Santa Clarita based on
the length of rail lines. The Metro Link is a passenger rail system. ENVIRON has obtained
information about the trains' operation schedule and estimated the annual fuel consumption,
which is then used to calculate the emissions using fuel combustion mass balance and standard
emission factors from The Climate Registry (TCR) General Reporting Protocol.
City-wide transportation analyses for GHG inventories have used two differing methodologies
for determining the total VMT to include in the GHG inventory. The first methodology is the
city boundary methodology, which counts all VMT on all roadway types within the geographic
boundaries of the city. This is the methodology which has been used in this CAP. The second
methodology is the trip generation methodology, which determines the length of all trips
originating or with destinations in the city, and then accounts for all VMT within the city and
50% of VMT outside of the city. The city boundary methodology was selected for Santa Clarita
because it is believed that this methodology allows for an easier integration of results from one
city to another. However, it should be noted that the city boundary methodology does include
VMT related to pass-through traffic which is being counted in the inventory but which may not
be generated by Santa Clarita.
2.2 Building Energy Sector
Building sector emissions include indirect emissions from electricity consumption (for lighting
and appliances) and direct emissions from fuel combustion (for heating, hot water, power
generation, and running portable equipment). Electricity emissions are estimated by
multiplying the consumption data (in megawatt -hour or gigawatt -hour) by the utility -specific
emission factors. Southern California Edison (SCE) is assumed to be the sole electricity provider
for the City of Santa Clarita and thus SCE -specific emissions factors are used to reflect its 2005
fuel mix. Natural gas emissions come from direct burning and are determined by multiplying
the consumption by the standards emissions factors from TCR General Reporting Protocol. The
natural gas consumption data is provided by Southern California Gas (SCG).
There are several types of use of electricity and natural gas. Residential buildings include
single-family houses and multi -family units. Commercial and industrial buildings include office
space, restaurants, food stores, warehouses, retail stores, schools, colleges/universities, hotels,
hospitals/clinics, factories, and some public, governmental, and military services. City -owned
buildings or county -owned buildings serving the City are categorized separately for the
municipal inventory.
2.3 Industrial Sector
There are two categories of emission sources in the industrial sector: (1) fuel combustion for
industrial operations, (2) fugitive emissions from industrial processes. Since electricity and
natural gas use for industrial operation are already captured in the Building Energy sector
discussed above, operational fuel combustion in this section refers to additional fossil fuel use
(e.g. diesel fuel oil) to power industrial equipment or as power generation feedstock. ENVIRON
has obtained a list of industries in Santa Clarita and their fuel consumption data South Coast Air
Quality Management District, which are used directly for emissions calculations. Fugitive
16 E N V I R O N
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
industrial process emissions include a wide range of criteria and toxic pollutants, coming from
facilities for metals processing, chemical preparation, electronic services, painting, oil and gas
exploration, and others. Methane is a common greenhouse gas from these processes and is
usually estimated by a process -specific speciation from TOG. To identify these facilities and
their emissions, ENVIRON has obtained data from the South Coast Air Quality District and
California's Division of Oil, Gas, and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) database. For oil and gas
activities specifically, emissions estimation is based on the number of wells within the City of
Santa Clarita and their production information, and emissions factors are from the Western
Regional Air Partnership (WRAP) GHG Emissions Protocol. Both operational fuel combustion
and process fugitive emissions are categorized under the City's community inventory.
2.4 Waste Sector
The waste sector of greenhouse gas emissions includes two major sources: wastewater
treatment and solid waste at landfills. The two wastewater treatment facilities serving the City
of Santa Clarita are the Valencia Water Reclamation Plant and the Saugus Water Reclamation
Plant, and they are responsible for four types of greenhouse gas emissions: (1) N20 from
effluent discharge, (2) N20 from nitrification / denitrification processes, (3) fugitive CH4 from
septic systems, and (4) CH4 from incomplete combustion of digester gas. The CO2 emissions
from combustion of the digester gas is not counted towards this inventory because the gas is
considered biogenic (produced by life processes) in origin. All of the emissions estimation
methodologies follow those outlined in the Local Government Operation Protocol (LGOP) and
data are provided by the Los Angeles County Sanitation District. All wastewater treatment
related emissions are part of the community inventory.
There were ten landfills serving the City of Santa Clarita in 2005, but the largest two — Chiquita
Canyon Landfill and Sunshine Canyon City/County Landfill — accounted for 82% of the City's
solid waste. Thus ENVIRON focused on estimating the emissions from these two landfills and
then used a scaling method to estimate the remaining emissions. Due to limited data available
on the actual operation of the landfills, a top-down method is applied by obtaining the facility's
2008 GHG emissions as reported to the California Air Resources Board and downscaling by the
ratio of the quantity of solid waste from Santa Clarita in 2005 over the total quantity received at
the landfills. Also, because the reported emissions only include those from stationary
combustion of the captured landfill gas, ENVIRON separately estimated the fugitive CH4
emissions applying standard flare efficiency and landfill gas capture rate factors. Note that
although the solid waste hauling trucks emissions are counted towards the municipal inventory
due to its contracts with the City, the landfills are private entities and their emissions are
categorized into the community inventory.
2.5 Others
• Area lighting (traffic lights, street lights, part of municipal inventory)
GHG emissions associated area lighting refers to indirect emissions of electricity consumed
for streetlights, traffic lights, and other outdoor area lights (e.g. parks). The methodology
is very similar to that discussed in the Building Energy sector, given data provided by SCE.
• Potable water (include electricity consumption relating to water pumping
17 E N V I R O N
0
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFTREPORT
GHG emissions associated with potable water use refer to indirect emissions from
electricity consumed for water supply and conveyance, treatment, and distribution.
Emission estimation is based on Southern California -specific water -energy proxies, which
is the amount of electricity, needed to treat and deliver a unit of water consumed, and
then apply the facility -specific electricity emission factors as discussed in the Building
Energy sector. There are three water companies served the City of Santa Clarita in 2005:
Valencia Water Company, Newhall County Water District, and Santa Clarita Water
Company. All consumption related to municipal accounts and county offices that served
Santa Clarita are grouped into the municipal inventory; all other accounts in the City are
grouped into the community inventory.
Agricultural (include electricity consumption relating to agricultural activities)
Agricultural related GHG emissions in the context of this inventory refer to the indirect
emissions from electricity consumed for agricultural purposes. It does not include the use
of non -electric equipment or fugitive emissions from agricultural practices. Emissions
from electricity consumption are estimated similar to that outlined in the Building Energy
sector, using data provided by SCE. Agricultural emissions are part of the community
inventory.
Refrigerant use (municipal only)
Many refrigerants are blends of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are extremely potent
greenhouse gases due to their high global warming potentials (GWPs). Their emissions are
estimated based on purchase records. The City has provided data on the type and amount
of refrigerant acquisition for municipal buildings and vehicles operations. However, data
on their use in the community were scattered and limited, and thus not included in the
community inventory.
2.6 2020 Business -As -Usual Scenario Projections
Based on the 2005 baseline GHG emissions inventory, the 2020 business -as -usual emissions are
projected by applying several surrogates to the appropriate emission sources. For the
municipal inventory, a population growth factor of 1.19, calculated as a ratio of the 2020 SCAG
population forecast for the North Los Angeles County Subregion over the 2005 census
population data for the City of Santa Clarita, is used for most categories, including electricity
and natural gas consumption for county offices, VMT/ fuel use for City's on -road and off-road
fleet, city buses, county sheriff, and solid waste hauling trucks, potable water consumption for
city and county offices, refrigerant use for the City, traffic and streetlights, and time of use
agricultural electricity demand. However, there are a few exceptions. Municipal office
electricity and natural gas consumption remains at a 2005 level with the assumption that
municipal office size will stay the same even with the growing population of the City. Also, on
top of VMT growth for city buses, the City has also committed to switching the entire bus fleet
to CNG -fueled by 2020; CNG -specific emission factors are applied instead of using those of
diesel as in the baseline.
18 ENVIRON
2012 Citv of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
For the community inventory, residential building energy consumption is expected to grow with
population, as is the case for wastewater, solid waste, water usage, and agricultural electricity
demand. Commercial and industrial energy consumption, industrial fuel use and most process
emissions are projected using a non-residential land usage growth factor provided by the City.
Oil and gas activities are expected to remain at current levels.
The transportation sector is again broken down to three main source categories: on -road
vehicles, off-road equipment, and rail. In the baseline inventory, the City has provided modeled
data for freeway and arterial roads VMT, and the same model is used to project the 2020 VMT
under various city planning assumptions. ENVIRON applies the same method as in the baseline
to estimate the on -road emissions on freeways and arterials roads for 2020 but keeps the same
2005 VMT for local and collector roads as no projections were made. Note again that the on -
road vehicle emissions in the community inventory captures all traffic within the City; thus the
municipal on -road emissions is a subset of, and not an addition to, the community inventory.
For off-road equipment, ENVIRON re -runs the OFFROAD model for calendar year 2020 and
keeps all other assumptions and methodology the same as in the baseline. Rail transport is
again divided into two sources. Metro Link (passenger rail) grows with population, whereas
freight rail is scaled by a projected tonnage throughput in rail transport at the Port of Los
Angeles, which is assumed to be the primary contributor to cargo movement through the City
of Santa Clarita.
In 2008, CARB published its Scoping Plan to meet the targets specified in the AB 32 legislation.
The 2008 forecasts of GHG emissions showed that the California GHG emissions would require
a 30% reduction by 2020 to meet the 1990 GHG emission levels in California. Since 2008, CARB
has updated projected BAU emissions based on more current economic forecasts (i.e., as
influenced by the economic downturn) and reduction measures already in place. Considering
statewide measures already in place (Renewable Portfolio Standard and Pavley I vehicle
regulations), a revised estimate of a 16% reduction below the estimated 2020 BAU levels will be
necessary to return to 1990 levels. Therefore, the 2020 forecasts in the CAP are based on the
revised BAU forecasts for 2020 which include the two statewide measures already in place.
The BAU projections are shown in the following Section.
19 E N V I R O N
2 I
May 2012 _ City of Santa Clarita_ Climate Action Plan
v DRAFT REPORT
3.0 BASELINE AND 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL GHG EMISSIONS
As described in Section 2, the 2005 baseline year GHG emissions inventory has captured
emissions from community -wide and municipal sources. The summary of emissions by source
category is outlined in Table 3-1 below. The emissions are presented separately for
community -wide sources and municipal sources. The municipal source emissions make up
approximately 2% of the total emissions.
Table 3-1. Summary of 2005 CO,e Emissions (metric tons/vr) by Sector for the Citv of Santa
Clarita.
20 EN V I RON
�mir1cto' ryr. .
; it�iififilUlilty W�@,
Toth
-�IkIrnGlj7iilf,Aut�i aI ..."
0
-_ '. .
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
1 1,050,637
J-� 15,081
1 1,065,718
On -Road
Light Duty Vehicles
868,815
-
868,815
81,581
-
81,581
Light Duty Trucks
40,975
-
40,975
Medium Duty Trucks
9,047
-
9,047
Heavy Duty Trucks
25,371
-
25,371
Urban Buses
10
-
10
Motorcycles
City -Owned Fleet (LDVs, LDTs, HDTs)
-
604
604
-
2,733
2,733
County Sheriff Fleet (LDVs)
-
2,717
2,717
Solid Waste Hauling Trucks
-
8,871
8,871
City Buses
3ti5tatal ::.:_:1;025j793
' ,.
tr!i5
Off -Road
Construction and Mining Equipment
3,124
-
3,124
Industrial Equipment
166
-
166
Lawn and Garden Equipment
38
-
38
Light Commercial Equipment
42
-
42
Transport Refrigeration Units
31
-
31
Rail
21,437
-
21,437
Municipal Off -Road Equipment
-
156
156
allILDINGINDUSTRIALSECT0k"
323,582
.e. 8,0291531,611��
Residential
Electricity
147,724
-
147,724
153,134
-
153,134
Natural Gas
300858=
Commercial + Industrial
Electricity
182,760
-
182,760
39,267
-
39,267
Natural Gas
Su6tofal =:
222,D27
0
, 1ii422r027
20 EN V I RON
2012
Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 3-1. Summary of 2005 CO2e Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for the City of Santa
Clarita (continued).
SECTOR.
COze Emissions (metric tons/yr)
Community -wide
Municipal
nity +
=Municipal)
BUILDING and INDUSTRIAL SECTOR
_
Industrial Operations
Other Fuel Use
27
-
27
Industrial Processes
Oil & Gas
Other Processes
670
-
670
0
-
0
Subtotal
- 698
0
698'
Municipal
Electricity
Natural Gas
-
5,862
5,862
-
2,167
2,167
Subtotal -.
0
81029
8,029
OTHERS
108,894
11,425
112,226
Waste
Wastewater Treatment
7,679
-
7,679
Landfills
42,760
-
42,760
Outdoor Area Lighting
Streetlights & Traffic Control
-
8,615
8,615
Agricultural
Electricity
11,619
-
11,619
Water Usage
Water Pumping Unit
46,835 F 2,805
1 49,641
Refrigerant
Refrigerant
-
5
5
TO
_1,683,113
1 34,535
1,717,648
21 E N V I R O N
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Figure 3 presents the distribution of 2005 baseline emissions, showing that on -road vehicles
were the main source of GHG emissions for the City in 2005 (60%).
18%
13%
2%
■ All Municipal operations
■ Energy (Residential)
® Energy (Commercial +industrial)
■Solid Waste
® Transportation (On -Road)
■Transportation (Off -Road)
• Other
Figure 3-1. 2005 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source Category.
The 2005 GHGs contribution of municipal operations is further detailed in Figure 3-2 by source
category.
■Transportation (On -Road)
■Transportation (Off -Road)
X Energy (Municipal)
■ Streetlights & Traffic Control
2 Other
Figure 3-2. 2005 Municipal Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source Category.
22 ENV I RON
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
The projected GHG emissions for 2020 under Business as Usual Scenario (BAU), i.e. without
control applied by the City, are shown in Table 3-2 below. However, in accordance to statewide
goals delineated in California's AB32 Scoping Plan, the 2020 Business as Usual projections
include reductions from two California statewide regulations - Pavley I and the Renewable
Portfolio Standard (RPS). Detailed emissions are presented in Table 3-2.
Table 3-2. Summary of 2020 Business as Usual CO2e Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for
the City of Santa Clarita.
SECTOR
BAU CO,e Emissions (metric tons/yr)
_
Community -wide
Total
(Community+
Municipal Municipal)
TRANSPORTATIONSECTOR
1,241,172
tt 15,7611 1,256,933
On -Road
Light Duty Vehicles
Light Duty Trucks
Medium Duty Trucks
Heavy Duty Trucks
Urban Buses
Motorcycles
City -Owned Fleet (LDVs, L)Ts, HDTs)
County Sheriff Fleet (LDVs)
Solid Waste Hauling Trucks
City Buses
1,011,269 - 1,011,269
90,912 - 90,912
46,261 - 46,261
17,662 - 17,662
37,570 - 37,570
10 - 10
- 608 608
- 2,614 2,614
- 3,189 3,189
- 9,166 9,166
Subtotal
1,203,684 15,576'' 1,219,260
Off -Road
Construction and Mining Equipment
Industrial Equipment
Lawn and Garden Equipment
Light Commercial Equipment
Transport Refrigeration Units
Rail
Municipal Off -Road Equipment
4,369 - 4,369
160 - 160
66 - 66
105 - 105
72 - 72
32,717 - 32,717
- 185 185
Subtotal
37,488 185 37,673:
BUILDING and INDUSTRIAL SECTOR
597,315 7,588 604,903
Residential
Electricity
Natural Gas
141,692
-
141,692
181,519
-
181,519
,Subtotal
- 323,211
0
323,211
Commercial + Industrial
Electricity
Natural Gas
216,033
-
216,033
57,361
-
57,361
Subtotal -
273,393
0
273';393:!
23 EN V I RON
1=�6
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 3-2. Summary of 2020 Business As Usual COZe Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for
the City of Santa Clarita (continued).
SECTOR
BALI CO,e Emissions (metric tons/yr)
'Community -wide
(Community +
Municipal Municipal)
BUILDING and INDUSTRIAL SECTOR
Industrial Operations
Other Fuel Use
40 - 40
Industrial Processes
Oil & Gas
Other Processes
670
- 670
0
- 0
Subtotal
710
0 710
_
Municipal
Electricity
Natural Gas
-
5,373
5,373
-
2,215
2,215
-Subtotal.
0.
7,588
7,588
OTHERS
114,365
10,960
125,325
Waste
Wastewater Treatment
7,611
-
7,611
Landfills
50,687
-
50,687
Outdoor Area Lighting
Streetlights & Traffic Control 8,263 8,263
Agricultural
Electricity 11,144 - 11,144
Water Usage
Water Pumping Unit 44,923 2,691 47,614
Refrigerant
Refrigerant
-
6
6
Total
1,952,852
34,309
1,987,162
24 ENV I RON'34
2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
4.0 GHG EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS
The State of California has set specific targets for reducing GHG emissions from transportation,
energy, industry, waste management, and other activities discussed in the baseline inventory.
These targets call for state-wide emission reductions that will attain 1990 GHG emissions levels
by 2020. This section identifies the GHG emissions reductions that will be achieved by the Plan
consistent with the targets set by California. The reductions include:
• GHG reductions from regulatory actions that have already taken place or are in progress
resulting from federal, state and local regulations, ordinances and incentive programs
• GHG reductions from City actions that have taken place since 2005 as a result of City
programs including building energy installations, tree planting and land acquisition;
• Reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) from high priority transportation and land use
measures; and
• Reductions from other high priority measures where data were available to quantify the
emissions reductions.
4.1 Santa Clarita Programs
In the past the City has undertaken a series of initiatives to reduce energy consumption,
promote conservation and reduce emissions. These actions are summarized below:
Energy Efficiency, Conservation and Renewable Energy
In 2004, the City joined the Community Energy Partnership (CEP), a multi -city collaboration that
provides education and services to promote sustainable and efficient energy practices to many
different individuals and communities including homeowners, renters, business owners, senior
citizens, and cities. Based on accomplishments from this partnership, the National Resources
Defense Council (NRDC) cited a reduction of over 1 million kilowatt hours of electricity and over
9,000 therms of natural gas for the City in 2010, resulting in a savings of over 1 million pounds
of pollutants. The City has established and participated in various funding programs to finance
improvements and retrofitting strategies for existing municipal facilities, city street lighting and
private businesses, through programs such as the Green Energy Partnership and Los Angeles
County PACE Loan Program. In addition, the City actively promotes the benefits of solar power
and local solar retailers and installers on its website, GreenSantaClarita.com. As a result of
these and other factors, the number of solar permits issued has increased significantly over the
past six years. The City is also in the process of revising its current Small Wind -Energy
Ordinance which enables residents and businesses to take advantage of this alternative energy
source.
Water and Waste Water Systems Activity
Electricity used for pumping and treatment of water contributes to the release of GHG
emissions. The City has implemented programs to promote water conservation for its Parks
and Landscape Maintenance District (LDM) areas through the use of "smart' and weather -
based irrigation controllers. The City also complies with federal and state regulations, such as
the Model Water Efficient Landscape ordinance and their National Pollution Discharge
25 E N V I R O N JS
2012 Citv of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFTREPORT
Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater permit, and collaborates with water purveyors and
retailers to support responsible waste water management and conservation of water resources.
Waste Reduction and Recycling Activity
The City has implemented many recycling programs, including mandatory residential and
commercial recycling, that have helped achieve a diversion rate of 56% in 2006. A complete list
of waste reduction and recycling programs and strategies available to the community can be
viewed in the Santa Clarita Green Guide (at GreenSantaClarita.com). The City has committed to
use recycled or reused materials in its capital improvement projects whenever practical; as of
today, five of the City's parks have used recycled tire rubber as playground surface, diverting
5,332 tires from the waste stream. Other waste reduction initiatives taken by the City include
establishing a construction and demolition materials ordinance, franchising a Materials
Recovery Facility to improve the recycling rate and adopting the Environmentally Preferably
Purchasing Policy (EPPP). The goal of the EPPP is to reduce environmental impact by identifying
environmentally friendly products and distribution systems, rewarding vendors with sustainable
practices, and creating a successful model for environmental purchasing.
Green Building Activity
A section of the Environmentally Preferable Purchasing Policy (EPPP) adopted by the City in
2005 requires that all municipal construction projects for new buildings achieve a LEED Silver
certification or equivalent. Since then, one building has been constructed, the Transit
Maintenance Facility which has been certified LEED Gold, as the building is capable of
sustaining 97% of its power needs through onsite solar generation. Among other projects
currently under construction are the Newhall Library, anticipating LEED Silver certification, and
the Newhall Community Center. The City has also made available the Community Character
and Design Guidelines (CCDG) document to guide the creation of new residential and non-
residential developments and give clear direction for the renovation and redevelopment of
built areas including a focus in green building to green site development.
Low -Carbon Fuels and Efficient Transportation Activity
City residents have access to mass transit within the City and surrounding areas of Los Angeles
County from a fleet of 91 buses maintained by the City. In 2010 approximately 3.7 million
riders used Santa Clarita Transit, which resulted in approximately 1.6 million miles travelled
within the City, equivalent to an estimated 34,000 gallons of fuel savings throughout the
community. From the transit fleet, 37 vehicles are powered by compressed natural gas (CNG).
Similarly, 88% of vehicles franchised by the City for waste collection are powered with CNG or
liquefied natural gas (LNG). The City's Transit Maintenance Facility serves as a refueling station
for these vehicles. In addition, 14% of the municipal on -road vehicle fleet (other than the
Transit and Waste Fleet) are powered by alternative fuels, mainly CNG. In 2008, the City
Council approved the Non -Motorized Master Plan (NMMP), which seeks to promote bicycling
and walking as integral modes of transportation and identifies a variety of strategies and
recommendations to improve the quality and use of the City's bicycle and pedestrian network.
26 E N V I R O N 41
2012 Citv of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Land Use, Open Space and Offsetting Carbon Emissions Activity
The City is committed to developing a land use pattern that offers a diverse housing mix,
provides access to a variety of alternative transportation modes, and seeks to reduce vehicle
miles traveled via mixed used and a reduced automobile dependence. The City's new General
Plan, adopted in June of 2011, furthers that commitment by providing more opportunities for
Transit Oriented Development (TOD) in its objectives and policies. Another component of the
General Plan consists of the Conservation and Open Space Element, a policy framework for the
long-term preservation of open space within the planning areas. In 2007, the City formed the
Open Space Preservation District, which helps the City acquire and preserve open space lands in
and around the City. The goal of the District is to form a green belt of land surrounding the City
and preserve the land as open space in perpetuity. Since its inception, the District has assisted
in funding the acquisition of nearly 2,000 acres of open space. In addition, the City has
implemented other practices to offset carbon emissions by establishing the Oak Tree
Preservation ordinance that provides regulatory measures to protect and preserve oak trees in
the City. The City has also been designated "Tree City USA" by the Arbor Day Foundation for 22
years for its efforts towards tree planting. The Urban Forestry Division of the City estimates
that over 50,000 trees exist within the City with approximately 1,000 additional trees planted
each year.
Promoting Community and Individual Action Activity
In July of 2009, the City launched GreenSantaClarita.com, a website dedicated to providing
information to the entire community about sustainability topics such as sustainable practices
for residents, businesses and builders, incentives and rebate programs, local green products,
upcoming environmental related events, trainings and workshops, and a variety of sustainable
programs currently implemented by the City. The website received an "Award of Merit" for
Innovation in Green Community Planning from the American Planning Association in 2010.
Additionally, the City hosts a series of annual events to encourage and emphasize sustainability
issues, such as the Bike to Work Day, Earth/Arbor Day, River Rally, among others. Since launch
the site has received over 50,000 hits from users in 76 countries around the world.
4.2 GHG Mitigation Measures
Statewide Measures
The following statewide measures will have proportional GHG emissions reductions in the City's
GHG emissions inventory:
Renewable Portfolio Standard
The California Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) was established in 2002 and later expanded
to require investor -owned -utilities (IOUs) and other electric service providers in California to
procure at least 33% of renewable energy resources by 2020. Increasing the fraction of
renewable resources in the energy mix reduces the relative amount of fossil fuel use and thus
reduces greenhouse gas emissions. As one of the largest IOUs in the state, Southern California
Edison (SCE) has already committed to using 19.4% renewable resources in their electricity mix
by 2010.24 For the purpose of this inventory and future emissions projections, the 2005
24 Southern California Edison: http://www.sce.com/PowerandEnvironment/Renewables/default.htm
27 ENV 1 11ON //�
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
baseline inventory has incorporated 17.2% renewable resources, as was committed by SCE. 25
The 2020 business -as -usual scenario, which includes the goal of 33% renewables as described in
the revised AB32 Scoping Plan, is developed by first factoring in the increased electricity
demand by 2020 to the 2005 baseline and then factoring in an additional 19.08% to address the
difference in renewable mix between the 2005 actuals and the 2020 goal. Applicable emission
sources include all residential, commercial, municipal, industrial, streetlights, pumping for
potable water and agriculture, as well as electricity use for waste water treatment.
Low Carbon Fuel Standard
The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was signed in as an Executive Order in 2007 and later
became law in January of 2010. The LCFS targets at reducing the life -cycle carbon intensity in
transportation fuels, reducing GHG emissions associated with fuel production, distribution, and
combustion. Emission reductions can be achieved by improving the efficiency of the upstream
production or by using or blending in low -carbon alternative fuels such as ethanol or electricity.
Though currently not being enforced due to a legal challenge, the current goal of the LCFS is to
reduce GHG emissions by 10% by year 2020. To account for this reduction in the controlled
scenario, ENVIRON has applied a 10% reduction to all on -road, off-road, and rail emission
categories.
Pavley, Assembly Bill 1493
As a commitment to a nation-wide program to reduce GHG emissions from passenger cars
between 2012 and 2016, California has adopted the Pavley regulations, also known as the Clean
Car Standard, requiring manufacturers to improve fuel efficiency in new passenger cars and
light duty trucks. There are two timelines to the Pavley regulation: Pavley I is applicable to
vehicle model years 2009 to 2016, and Pavley II is applicable to vehicle model years 2017 to
2025. GHG reductions as a result of Pavley I are factored into the 2020 projected business -as -
usual emissions scenario. The reductions are calculated using the ARB's Pavley I and Low
Carbon Fuel Standard Postprocessor version 1.026 and are applied to the passenger cars and
light-duty trucks emissions categories. However, GHG reductions from Pavley 11 are neither
quantified nor included in this inventory due to the lack of approved quantification tools
available.
Assembly Bill 341—Solid Waste Diversion
Building on the success of AB 939, which requires Cities, Counties, and regional agencies to
achieve solid waste diversion by 50% by 2000, AB 341 directs CalRecycle to increase statewide
waste diversion to 75% by year 2020. This is achieved, via strategic planning, by reducing waste
source and increasing recycling and composting from the residential and commercial waste
streams. By reducing the amount of waste going to landfills directly reduces anaerobic CH4
emissions as well as combustion and flare emissions of landfill gas. Since the City of Santa
Clarita has already met 50% waste diversion in the 2005 Baseline GHG Emissions Inventory, and
ENVIRON has confirmed this based on waste data, the additional fraction of waste diversion
25 California Energy Commission Renewable Energy Program 2008 Annual Report to the Legislature (Table 4), October 2008:
http://www.e ne rgy.ca.gov/2008 pu blications/CEC-300-2008-008/CEC-300-2008-008-CTD. P D F
26 http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/sb375/tools/postprocessor.htm
28 EN VIR0N 4?
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
needed to meet the 75% diversion goal is calculated and applied to the 2020 projected
emissions controlled scenario.
Regional Measures
The following regional measures will have proportional GHG emissions reductions in the City's
GHG emissions inventory:
Senate Bill 375 (SB 375)
SB 375 was passed in 2008 with the aim of reaching the goals established by AB32 for reducing
GHG emissions from cars and light duty trucks through improved transportation planning. To
address these requirements, the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
released the 2012-2035 Draft Regional Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy
(RTP/SCS) in December 2011. This document outlines SCAG's plan to integrate the
transportation network as well as develop a land use pattern to achieve the reduction goals set
by the ARB. The SCS plan for transit -oriented development is to focus the majority of new
housing and job growth in high quality transit areas as well as in existing commercial areas (e.g.
main streets, downtowns). Specifically, the SCS focuses jobs and housing in designated High
Quality Transit Areas, calls for an expanded transit network, and improving transportation
management by increasing capacity and improving efficiency, among others. SCAG estimates
that these measures in the SCS will reduce GHG emissions by 8% by 2020 and 13% by 2035 on a
per capita basis as compared to 2005, achieving the goals set by the ARB .27 The City of Santa
Clarita participated in the SCS process through formal collaboration with SCAG. The City also
provided SCAG with formal comments on the RTP/SCS during the comment period in February,
2012.
CAP Measures
The measures considered for the CAP were from two primary sources. The first was
Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, a Resource for Local Government to Assess
Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, published by the California Air
Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA).28 The CAPCOA report provides methods for
quantifying emission reductions from specified mitigation measures. The measures included in
this report were selected because they are frequently considered as mitigation for GHG
impacts, and standardized methods for quantifying emissions from these measures were not
previously available. Measures were screened on the basis of the feasibility of quantifying the
emissions, the availability of robust and meaningful data upon which to base the quantification,
and whether the measures (alone or in combination with other measures) would result in
appreciable reductions in GHG emissions. The second source of mitigation measures was the
General Plan prepared by the City in partnership with the County of Los Angeles which is
intended to guide growth and development in the Santa Clarita Valley. The General Plan
identified the goals and policies related to land use, transportation, conservation of natural
27 Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The 2012-2035 Draft Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable
Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). Available at: httP:Hrtpscs.scag.ca.gov/Pages/Draft-2012-2035-RTP-SCS.aspx. Accessed 23
January 2012.
28 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), August, 2010.
29 ENV I RON 41L
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
resources among other things. These goals and policies as well as specific GHG Measures
identified as a high priority for the City are included in the list of measures that are analyzed in
this section.
CAP Energy Measures
Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting
Power consumed by lighting sources contributes to GHG emissions. Lamp efficiency and the
amount of lighting produced (lumens) per watt of power supplied vary by light fixture design. A
strategy to reduce GHG emissions is the installation of more efficient public street and area
lights that are able maintain the level of lumens per area while consuming less electricity. In
2010 the City pursued a program funded by the Department of Energy American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (ARRA) to reduce the energy consumption of municipal operations. As part
of the program high pressure sodium and metal halide lights were replaced by energy efficient
induction lighting throughout the City. The program replaced a total of 756 lights from City
bridges, parking lots and parks, resulting in estimated annual savings of nearly 284,000 kilowatt
hours of electricity. GHG reductions from this measure can be calculated by using local utility
emission factors the energy saved from installing efficient lamps.
Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights
Similar to the LE -1 measure, replacing traffic lights with higher efficacy ones, such as light -
emitting diode (LED) traffic lights, can result in a reduction of GHG emissions since they
consume about 90% less energy than traditional incandescent traffic lights. The City's Traffic
and Transportation Planning Division recently completed a five year program which replaced
the old incandescent lamps with LED technology. This effort installed LED modules at 176
signalized intersections in the City. GHG emissions reductions from this measure may be
quantified by multiplying a local utility emission factor to the amount of offset electricity -use
from the installation of LED traffic lights.
Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Power
Electricity generated from photovoltaic (PV) systems is associated with zero GHG emissions29,
thus installation of PV systems in residential or commercial buildings displaces electricity
consumed from local utilities that generally have larger carbon footprints; this translates into a
reduction of GHG emissions. From 2005 through 2011 the City has issued approximately 430
permits for solar installations in residential and commercial sites. The City encourages the use
of solar power through its website GreenSantaClarita.com and is actively looking for additional
funds to continue the Green Energy Partnership which provides incentives for solar projects.
GHG reductions from this measure are quantified by estimating the amount of kilowatt hours
displaced from the grid by PV systems and applying local electricity emission factors.
CAP Transportation Measures
Overall Land Use Transportation Measure
Emission reductions from land use planning are generally achieved by reducing total vehicle
miles travelled (VMT) and improving traffic flow (i.e. reducing idling and low -speed emissions).
29 This measure does not quantify GHG emissions associated with the manufacturing of PV panels.
30 EN V I RON
�s
2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
While many of these are implemented on a project level, for the purpose of a region analysis,
ENVIRON has utilized the in -City VMT projection in the prior City General Plan, which did not
include land -use improvement measures, as well as the valley -wide VMT projections in the new
General Plan, which are modeled to incorporate a mix of land use planning measures. With the
guidance from City Staff, ENVIRON has estimated an overall 10% VMT reduction within City
boundaries by 2020 as compared to the business -as -usual scenario. This reduction
incorporates a mix of measures including, but not limited to, increase density of in -City
development and diversity of urban and suburban developments, increase the location
efficiency, destination and transit accessibility, integrate affordable and below market rate
housing, implement trip reduction programs such as ride -share, improve the transit system by
expanding the transit network and increase service frequency, and improve the flow of traffic
at city intersections and congested roadways. Reductions in VMT by implementing these
programs are directly correlated with reductions in GHG emissions.
Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements
Improving pedestrian access to off-site areas through pedestrian network enhancements is a
strategy to encourage users to walk and bike instead of drive, hence reducing VMT and vehicle -
associated GHG emissions. Enhancements can range from improving interconnectivity by
expanding the pedestrian network to minimizing barriers to pedestrian access such as walls,
landscaping, slopes, or anything that impedes circulation. The City has developed the Non -
Motorized Master Plan (NMMP) to guide future development of bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, paseos and trails and to provide recommendations to improve the quality of current
pedestrian networks. Reductions in VMT by implementing these programs can be translated
into reductions in GHG emissions by applying local on -road vehicle fleet emission factors.
CAP Water Measures
Use Reclaimed Water
Reclaimed water is water treated from a wastewater treatment plant but instead of being
released to the environment is re -used for non -potable purposes. Using reclaimed water
requires less energy to collect and redistribute to their consumption points since it is generated
in local treatment plants, as opposed to fresh water supplies that may be transported over long
distances from its natural sources. Since reclaimed water is less energy intensive, its
consumption has a smaller carbon footprint. The City's demand for landscape water could
partially be met through reclaimed water with the pursuit of this measure. To estimate
associated reductions, GHG emissions are calculated for a baseline scenario without use of
reclaimed water, and a mitigated scenario where part of the non -potable water use is replaced
with reclaimed water. The reduction in GHG emissions will result from the difference in energy
intensity of the type of local water supplied (reclaimed vs. non -potable).
Low -Flow Water Fixtures
Decreasing water use reduces GHG emissions associated with the electricity consumed to
pump, treat and distribute the water. A strategy to reduce indoor water demand is installing
low -flow or high efficiency water fixtures such as low -flow toilets, urinals, showerheads, or
faucets, or high -efficiency clothes -washers and dishwashers in residential and commercial
buildings. For each improved water fixture installed, there is an associated reduction in indoors
31 ENVIRON ��
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
water demand and hence in GHG emissions. To quantify reductions from this measure, GHG
emissions are calculated for a baseline scenario (regular water demand) and a mitigated
scenario, with reduced water demand from the percentile reduction provided by each water
fixture installed. The difference in GHG emissions from both scenarios represents the reduction
achieved by this measure.
Landscape Irrigation Systems
Water consumption for outdoor uses can be diminished by utilizing water -efficient landscape
irrigation systems. Efficient Irrigation techniques, such as "smart" irrigation technology, reduce
water use and its associated GHG emissions. "Smart" irrigation systems relay on weather,
climate and soil moisture information to adjust watering frequency, hence maintaining the
vegetation adequately moist while conserving water. The City's Landscape Maintenance
District installed smart irrigation controllers in 2007, and the City has reached an estimated
annual savings of 200 million gallons of outdoor water of since 2011. Quantification of this
measure can be achieved by calculating the water savings from this technology, multiplying by
the water energy intensity of the local water supply and applying a local utility emission factors
to calculate GHG emissions.
CAP Vegetation Measures
Urban Tree Planting
Carbon dioxide is sequestered in trees during their active growing years (generally their first 20
years30). The species of tree planted will influence the level of carbon sequestration achievable
by this measure. GHG emission reductions from this measure can be estimated based on the
numbers of trees planted multiplied by the default annual mass of CO2 accumulation per tree
which depends on the tree species. The City's Urban Forestry Division has been planting an
average of 1000 trees annually since 2005 and plans to continue planting nearly 1500 per year
through 2020.
New Vegetated Open Space
Vegetated open space serves as natural "carbon sinks", places where carbon dioxide is naturally
sequestered. By creating new vegetated open space, or preventing the transformation of open
space into urban/rural development areas, GHG emissions reductions are achieved by the
amount of carbon dioxide sequestered per acre of preserved land. The amount of carbon
sequestered will depend on the type of vegetated land (forests, croplands, grasslands, etc.) The
City has developed an Open Space Plan that calls for the creation of a "green belt" around the
City, serving as a vegetated buffer between the City and County development. Through this
plan, the City will seek to acquire as much as 9300 acres of open space with the purpose of
saving the land from development threat from other jurisdictions, or for restorative purposes of
the land from contamination where necessary. The GHG reductions associated with this
measure are calculated based on the amount of preserved land (acres) multiplied by the
expected annual CO2 accumulation per acre, which depends on the type of vegetated land.
30 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), August, 2010.
32 EN V I RON
47
2012 City_ of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
4.3 Estimated Reductions from Control Measures
The annual GHG reductions from the application of the statewide measures and the CAP
measures presented in Section 4.2 were estimated for year 2020 and are presented below.
Statewide measure reductions are based on the City's activity projections for year 2020 and the
expected mitigation effects of each measure. Reductions from CAP measures were estimated
using CAPCCA's methodology31 as briefly described per measure in Section 4.2. The input data
used in these calculations were based on the various program accomplishments by the City
since 2005, and activity projections for future or continuing City programs through year 2020.
For example, the City's Forestry Division urban tree planting program that has been planting
nearly 1000 trees annually since 2005 and will continue through 2020. Details of the GHG
reduction calculations from individual CAP measures can be found in the Appendix. Estimated
reductions for year 2020 statewide measures and the sum of quantified CAP measures are
shown in Table 4-1.
in year 2020.
Detailed reductions from individual CAP measures and their overall percent contribution to the
total are presented in Table 4-2 and Figure 4-1.
31 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission
Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association
(CAPCOA), August, 2010.
33 ENVIRON 4—Z
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 4-2. Annual GHG Emissions Reductions for 2020 from individual Climate Action Plan
(CAP) Measures.
j
Measure # a (. CAP Measure Description
2020GHG Emissions
1 Reductions (MT CO,e per
j year)
Energy Measures
LE -1 Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting
83
LE -3 Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights
31
AE -2 Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Power
5,971
Total
6,085
Transportation Measures -
LUT -0 b
Overall Land Use / Location Measures
118,563
SDT-1
Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements
6,068
Total
124,631
Water Measures
WSW -1 Use Reclaimed Water
2,605
WUW-1 Install Low -Flow Water Fixtures
18,256
WUW-4 Use Water -Efficient Landscape Irrigation Systems
646
Total
21,507.
Vegetation Measures
-
V-1 Urban Tree Planting
715
V-2 Create New Vegetated Open Space
40,083
Total
40,798
TOTAL POTENTIAL REDUCTIONS FROM CAP MEASURES
r.` ; 193,020
a. Measure numbers follow the CAPCOA protocol
b. Reductions under LUT -0 are estimated based on a mix of measures including, but not limited to, increase
density of in -City development and diversity of urban and suburban developments, increase the location
efficiency, destination and transit accessibility, integrate affordable and below market rate housing,
implement trip reduction programs such as ride -share, improve the transit system by expanding the transit
network and increase service frequency, and improve the flow of traffic at city intersections and congested
roadways.
32 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), August, 2010.
34 ENVIRON ��
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Figure 4-1. Percent Contribution to total GHG Reductions from CAP measures by Source Category.
A large portion of the reductions would be achieved by the decrease in vehicle miles traveled in
the City from the LUT -0 measure, which is a compilation of land use changes enacted by the
City in their current General Plan to reduce VMT and in turn reduce the emissions from on -road
vehicles, the largest component of the 2020 GHG inventory. Other significant reductions are
due to the creation or acquisition of new vegetated space, in line with the goals of the City's
Open Space Preservation District, and the uptake of low -flow water fixtures in residential and
commercial developments
35 ENV 1 RON 0
Energy
Measures
3%
Vegetation
Measures
21%
Water
Measures
i
11%
Figure 4-1. Percent Contribution to total GHG Reductions from CAP measures by Source Category.
A large portion of the reductions would be achieved by the decrease in vehicle miles traveled in
the City from the LUT -0 measure, which is a compilation of land use changes enacted by the
City in their current General Plan to reduce VMT and in turn reduce the emissions from on -road
vehicles, the largest component of the 2020 GHG inventory. Other significant reductions are
due to the creation or acquisition of new vegetated space, in line with the goals of the City's
Open Space Preservation District, and the uptake of low -flow water fixtures in residential and
commercial developments
35 ENV 1 RON 0
May 2012 _ City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
5.0 2020 CONTROLLED GHG EMISSIONS
The revised AB 32 Scoping Plan adopted by the California Air Resources Board indicates that
California needs to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 16% below the business -as -usual GHG
emissions for year 2020 to achieve the 1990 levels.
The calculated GHG reductions from all statewide and CAP control measures were deducted
from the City's 2020 GHG projected BAU scenario emissions. Statewide controls were
integrated directly in the 2020 emissions inventory calculations, hence resulting in the "2020
Controlled" emissions inventory, which includes reductions from Pavley I, RPS, LCFS and AB341.
The 2020 Controlled emissions are presented in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1. Summary of 2020 Controlled COZe Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for the City
of Santa Clarita.
SECTOR
CO2e Controlled' Emissions (metric tons/yr)
Community -wide
Municipal
.Total
(Community+
Municipal)`
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
1,119,113
14,212
1,133,325
On -Road
Light Duty Vehicles
Light Duty Trucks
Medium Duty Trucks
Heavy Duty Trucks
Urban Buses
Motorcycles
City -Owned Fleet (LDVs, LDTs, HDTs)
County Sheriff Fleet (LDVs)
Solid Waste Hauling Trucks
City Buses
912,006 - 912,006
81,964 - 81,964
41,681 - 41,681
15,893 - 15,893
33,793 - 33,793
9 - 9
- 548 548
- 2,353 2,353
- 2,875 2,875
- 8,269 8,269
Subtotal
14,045.' 1,099,391:'
_1_,085,346
Off -Road
Construction and Mining Equipment 3,932 - 3,932
Industrial Equipment 144 - 144
Lawn and Garden Equipment 60 - 60
Light Commercial Equipment 95 - 95
Transport Refrigeration Units 65 - 65
Rail 29,472 - 29,472
Municipal Off -Road Equipment - 167 167
.Subtotal 33,757 167 33,934"
BUILDING and INDUSTRIAL. SECTOR 597,315 7,588 504,903
Residential
Electricity
Natural Gas
141,692
- 141,692
181,519
- 181,519
:Subtotal
323,211
0 323,21t
Commercial + Industrial
Electricity 216,033 - 216,033
Natural Gas 57,361 - 57,361
'.Subtotal
273,393
0 _ 273,393:
36 ENVIRON �/
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 5-1. Summary of 2020 Controlled CO2e Emissions (metric tons/yr) by Sector for the City
of Santa Clarita (continued).
SECTOR
COze Controlled Emissions (metric tons/yr)
Community -wide
Municipal
(Community+
Municipal)
BUILDING and INDUSTRIAL SECTOR
Industrial Operations
Other Fuel Use 40 - 40
Industrial Processes
Oil & Gas
Other Processes
670 - 670
0 - 0
Subtotal
710 0 710 -
Municipal
Electricity - 5,373 5,373
Natural Gas - 2,215 2,215
Subtotal 0 - 7,588 7,588:
OTHERS 89,022 10,960 99,982
Waste
Wastewater Treatment
7,611
-
7,611
Landfills
25,343
25,343
Outdoor Area Lighting
Streetlights & Traffic Control 8,263 8,263
Agricultural
Electricity 11,144 - 11,144
Water Usage
Water Pumping Unit 44,923 2,691 47,614
Refrigerant
Refrigerant
-
6
6
TOTAL FROM ALL SECTORS
1,805,450
.32,760
1,838,210
For purposes of comparing the reductions with the revised Scoping Plan adopted by CARB,
reductions from two of the statewide measures (RPS and Pavley 1) were included into the 2020
Business As Usual Forecast. Thus, the revised BAU forecast would be 1,987,162 (see Table 3-2).
Table 5-2 demonstrates that by applying additional statewide measures per AB 32 and the
measures identified in Santa Clarita's Climate Action Plan, a 17% reduction will be achieved below
the 2020 BAU projection.
The contribution from each sector to the total 2020 controlled emissions is shown in Figure 5-1.
37 ENVIRON
S�-
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
■ All Municipal Operations
■ Energy (Residential)
■ Energy (Commercial +
Industrial)
■ Solid Waste
■ Transportation (On -Road)
■Transportation (Off -Road)
0. TT
Figure 5-1. 2020 Controlled Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source Category.
The total GHG reductions from the City's CAP measures, 193,020 MTCO2e, are then subtracted
from the 2020 controlled inventory total to generate the 2020 Net Emissions which combines
City and State control measures. The change in the City's 2020 GHGs emission inventory as a
result of the City and Statewide measures is shown in Table 5-2.
Table 5-2. Effects of different control measures in 2020 GHG Emissions.
As mentioned, the 2020 project BAU emissions shown in Table 5-2 already include reductions
from RPS and Pavley I, and this case is used as the basis for estimating GHG reductions needed
by 2020, consistent with the current forecasts by the California Air Resources Board's updated
Scoping Plan which shows a need to reduce GHG emissions by 16% (from a BAU case) to reach
1990 Statewide GHG emission levels. The estimated reductions from LCFS, AB 341, and CAP
measures show the resulting 2020 Net Emissions are expected to be approximately 17% below
the 2020 BAU level, which exceeds the California statewide goal of 16%. In addition, 2020 Net
Emissions are consistent with the City's goal to reduce 2020 GHG emissions below the 2005
38 ENV I RON
�_
"
GHGs Emissiohs h:
`. %Redaction
n
Scenario
Control Measure Applied
(Metric Tons of
-
CO=e per year)
below 2020 AU
2005 Baseline
None
1,717,648
-
2020 Business -as -Usual
RPS and PAVLEY 1
1,987,162
-
Statewide Measures (RPS +
2020 Controlled
PAVLEY I + LCFS +AB 341)
1,838,210
7.50%
Statewide Measures and CAP City
2020 Net Emissions with CAP
Measures
1,645,190
17.21%
As mentioned, the 2020 project BAU emissions shown in Table 5-2 already include reductions
from RPS and Pavley I, and this case is used as the basis for estimating GHG reductions needed
by 2020, consistent with the current forecasts by the California Air Resources Board's updated
Scoping Plan which shows a need to reduce GHG emissions by 16% (from a BAU case) to reach
1990 Statewide GHG emission levels. The estimated reductions from LCFS, AB 341, and CAP
measures show the resulting 2020 Net Emissions are expected to be approximately 17% below
the 2020 BAU level, which exceeds the California statewide goal of 16%. In addition, 2020 Net
Emissions are consistent with the City's goal to reduce 2020 GHG emissions below the 2005
38 ENV I RON
�_
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
GHG emissions level, and are in fact lower than 2005 emissions by approximately 4%. The City's
overall GHG emissions from the 2005 Baseline, the 2020 BAU estimates and the 2020 Net
Emissions with the CAP in place are shown in Figure 5-2 in units of million metric tonnes of
carbon dioxide equivalent (MMTCOze).
2.05
2.00
m
1.95
N �
`o v 1.90
'y, N
N Q
E w 1.85
�+ o
x o 1.80
1.75
c �
a 1.70
c
O
1.65
1.60
1.55
2005
Year 2020
Figure 5-2. Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CA Target.
39 EN V I RON
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
6.0 IMPLEMENTATION
The City recognizes the importance not only of preparing a Climate Action Plan but also the
importance of achieving the emissions reduction targets and how those targets can translate
into concrete actions that will reduce the amount of GHG emissions produced in the
Community. It is important to emphasize that the Climate Action Plan not only identifies a
reduction target or commitment, but it also sets forth the complement of goals, policies,
measures, and ordinances that will achieve the target. These policies and other strategies
include measures in transportation, land use, energy conservation, water conservation, and
other elements. This section describes how the City will implement the goals, policies, GHG
reduction measures and ordinances. Included are a series of tables that identify the measures
in each category that will be implemented. This chapter contains the following five sections:
• Administration and staffing: Describes the city staffing to support and guide the GHG
reduction efforts including the designation of a lead person and staffing for the CAP
implementation and a description of Departments involved and the coordination with
other Departments and Agencies.
• Financing Opportunities: Identifies various rebates, incentives and funding programs in
California and at the federal level that the City can leverage when encouraging its
residents and commercial or industrial projects to implement GHG mitigation measures.
• Timeline and Prioritization: Identifies measures, policies and ordinances that are a high
priority to the City and the timeframe for achieving the targets set in the CAP. In addition,
this section identifies measures that are will be included in the Monitoring Plan, those that
will be considered in the future and those measures that will no longer be considered.
The City's role for each measure is also identified
• Project Review: Identifies and defines the role of the CAP in the City of Santa Clarita's
environmental review of projects under the California Environmental Quality Act.
• Monitoring Plan: Identifies elements of the Monitoring Plan including Performance
indicators, Data Gathering, GHG Emissions Quantification and Progress Reporting. To be
developed upon approval of the CAP by the City?
6.1 Administration and Staffing
An integral part of successful implementation of the CAP will be the designation of a City staff
member as the Project Manager for the CAP. The Manager will have the responsibility of
overseeing the monitoring process and tracking each mitigation measure as it is implemented.
The Manager will coordinate with the departments and/or managers responsible for overseeing
the implementation of each mitigation measure. The responsible person will gather and
document performance and activity data, estimate emissions reductions, evaluate mitigation
measure performance, and prepare progress reports. Recommendations for each step in this
process are provided in the sections below. The process of GHG monitoring will vary by year
depending on the type of performance evaluation required (i.e., performance indicator
evaluation or GHG inventory update).
40 ENV I R 0 N ���
2012
6.2 Financing Opportunities
Financing Opportunities
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
This section provides examples of funding sources for the City to leverage to help finance costs
of implementing GHG mitigation measures. The advances in technology relevant to residential,
commercial and industrial operations have shown the potential for improvements in efficiency
and emissions as well as reductions in costs. When considering GHG mitigation measures, the
City will encourage its residents and commercial and/or industrial projects to identify the best
funding options to pursue. The various rebates, incentives and funding programs in California
and at the federal level provide several opportunities for the City to pursue in its municipal
operations as well as community projects to reduce GHG emissions by improving energy
efficiency, installing on-site renewable energy equipment, or encouraging or assisting
developers, project proponents and residents in their efforts to improve efficiency and save
costs. Potential sources of funding include the following:
• U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
• California Energy Commission (CEC)
• California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC)
• California Solar Initiative (CSI)
• California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I -Bank)
• California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle)
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and Air Resources Board (ARB)
Grants
• Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG)
• Southern California Edison (SCE)
• Southern California Gas Company (SCG)
• EPA Climate Showcase Communities Grants
This section reviews the funding opportunities currently available in California for renewable
energy and energy efficiency projects as well as the substantial Federal and State tax credits
that are available.
California Funding Opportunities
California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank (I -Bank)
As the State's only general purpose financing authority, the I -Bank mission is to finance public
infrastructure and private development that promote economic development in
communities .33 The I -Bank has broad statutory powers to issue revenue bonds, make loans and
provide credit enhancements for a wide variety of infrastructure and economic development
projects and other government purposes. Specific programs include the Infrastructure State
Revolving Fund Program which provides low-cost financing to public agencies for a wide variety
of infrastructure programs, the Revenue Bond Program with provides tax-exempt financing to
33 California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank: http://www.ibank.ca.gov/
41 E N V I R O N
J0
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
nonprofit public benefit corporations for the acquisition and/or improvement of facilities and
capital assets, the Industrial Development Revenue Bond Program, which provides tax-exempt
financing up to $10 Million for qualified manufacturing and processing companies for the
construction and acquisition of facilities and equipment, the Exempt Facility Revenue Bond
Program which provides tax-exempt financing for projects that are government-owned or
consist of private improvements within publicly -owned facilities and the Government Bond
Program. To date, the amount of financing has approached $32 billion in various financing
arrangements.
Self -Generation Incentive Program
The California Public Utilities Commission's (CPUC) Self -Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) is
a statewide program developed to provide incentives for the installation of certain renewable
and clean energy generation. The SGIP was established in 2001 as a peak -load reduction
program seeking to encourage the development and commercialization of new distributed
generation - generation installed on the customer's side of the utility meter. In September
2011, the CPUC improved and streamlined the SGIP to modify its eligibility criteria and incentive
amounts and payment structures for eligible technologies.
Eligibility for participation in the SGIP was to be changed based on greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions reductions. Technologies that achieve reductions of GHG emissions are eligible for
the program, including wind turbines, fuel cells, organic rankine cycle/waste heat capture,
pressure reduction turbines, advanced energy storage, and combined heat and power gas
turbines, micro -turbines, and internal combustion engines.
Participants receive up -front and performance-based incentives (PBI). The incentives apply
only to the portion of the generation that serves a project's on-site electric load. The program
is available to customers of Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Southern California Edison,
Southern California Gas Company, and San Diego Gas & Electric. Table 6-1 below identifies the
incentive levels by technology type.
Table 6-1. Incentive levels by technology type.
Technology Type
Incentive ($/W)
Renewable and Waste Energy Capture
Wind Turbine 1.25
Waste Heat to Power Technologies 1.25
Pressure Reduction Turbine 1.25
Conventional Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
Internal Combustion Engine -CHP 0.50
Microturbine — CHP 0.50
Gas Turbine — CHP 0.50
Emerging Technologies
Advance Energy Storage
2.00
Bio as
2.00
Fuel Cell — CHP or Electric Only
2.25
42 E N V I RON S_,
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
There are no minimum or maximum size restrictions provided that the project meets onsite
load with the exception that wind & renewable -fueled fuel cell projects are limited to 30kW
minimum. Smaller projects may apply to the California Energy Commission's Emerging
Renewables Program described below.
California Solar Initiative (CSI)
All electric customers of Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE), and
San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) are eligible to apply for California Solar Initiative incentives.
This includes residential homeowners, commercial, industrial and agricultural enterprises, and
local governments and non-profit organizations. The day-to-day administrative policy and
activities, including application processing and incentive payment, are handled by a Program
Administrator for each of the three Investor -Owned Utilities mentioned above.
The CSI Program pays solar consumers an incentive based on system performance. The
incentives are either an upfront lump -sum payment based on expected performance, or a
monthly payment based on actual performance over five years. The Expected Performance -
Based Buy -down (EPBB) is the upfront incentive available only for smaller systems. The EPBB
incentive is a capacity -based incentive that is adjusted based on expected system performance
calculated using an EPBB calculator that considers major design characteristics of the system,
such as panel type, installation tilt, shading, orientation, and solar insolation available by
location. The EPBB calculator 34 estimates the expected performance of a solar system based
various factors including the tilt, azimuth, location, PV module type and mounting type of a
specific system.
The Performance Based Incentive (PBI )35 is paid based on actual performance over the course of
five years. The PBI is paid on a fixed dollar per kilowatt-hour ($/kWh) of generation basis and is
the required incentive type for systems greater than 30 kW in size, although smaller systems
may opt to be paid based on PBI. In the beginning of the CSI Program, all systems 100kW and
greater were required to take the PBI incentive. In January 2008, all systems SOkW and greater
were required to take the PBI incentive. As of January 2010, all systems 30kW and greater are
required to take the PBI incentive.
Net Energy Metering
Customers who install small solar, wind, biogas, and fuel cell generation facilities (1 MW or less)
to serve all or a portion of onsite electricity needs are eligible for the state's net energy
metering (NEM) program36. NEM allows a customer -generator to receive a financial credit for
power generated by their onsite system and fed back to the utility. The credit is used to offset
the customer's electricity bill. NEM is an important element of the policy framework
supporting direct customer investment in grid -tied distributed renewable energy generation,
including customer -sited solar PV systems.
34 Expected Performance -Based Buy -Down: http://www.csi-epbb.com/index.aspx.
35 Performance Based Incentive: http://www.gosolarcalifornia.org/csi/rebates.php
36 Net Energy Metering Program: http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/PUC/energy/DistGen/netmetering.htm
43 ENVIRON
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
The vast majority of solar PV customer -generators choose to be on a NEM tariff, with over
40,000 residential and non-residential accounts enrolled in California's NEM program.
NEM allows the customer to size their generation to meet their annual load instead of the peak
demand. This allows for a slightly smaller system to meet the load than would otherwise be
required because of seasonal variation in both the demand for electricity and the solar resource
itself.
NEM also reduces concerns about short term fluctuations in generation. Solar PV generation is
relatively predictable on an annual basis, but shows strong variability, even on an hourly basis,
as passing clouds, inclement weather or other fluctuations in the available solar resource affect
the actual output of the solar system. Since customer load also varies, at any given moment it
is very difficult to determine if a solar PV system will be serving onsite load or exporting energy
to the grid. NEM means that load and generation do not have to be precisely coincident to
return value to the customer.
Emerging Renewables Program
The California Energy Commission's Emerging Renewables Program 37 provides rebates to
consumers who install qualifying renewable energy systems (small wind or fuel cell electricity
systems) on their property. The financial incentive varies according to the system size,
technology, and installation method. Eligible renewable energy systems must be permanently
interconnected to the electrical distribution grid of the utility serving the customer's electrical
load. The site where the system is installed must receive electrical distribution service from
PG&E, SCE, SDG&E, or BVE.
All types of consumers are eligible: residential, institutional (such as schools) commercial,
agricultural, and industrial.
Under this program an eligible consumer can receive the following rebates:
o -z. neoaie rrom
nenewaoies
Fuel Cells using a <30 kW $3.00 per watt
renewable fuel
Wind First 10 kW $3.00 per watt through May 7, 2012
$2.50 per watt beginning May 7, 2012
Increments betweenI $1.50 per watt
k
>10 W and <30 kW
Feed -in Tariffs for Highly Efficient Combined Heat and Power (CHP)
On December 17, 2009, the California Public Utilities Commission adopted a decision
implementing Assembly Bill 1613, the Waste Heat and Carbon Emissions Reduction Act
37 Emerging Renewables Program: http://www.energy.ca.gov/renewables/emerging_renewables/index.html
44 £N V I RON ��
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
(Blakeslee 2007). This Decision approved the rules for a feed -in tariff program for new, highly
efficient and small CHP including the purchase price of power and two standard offer contracts
(SOCs). The decision adopts two separate contracts for the purchase of excess electricity from
eligible CHP systems. A standard contract will be available to all eligible CHP systems up to
20 megawatts (MW) and a simplified contract will be available to CHP systems that export no
more than 5 MW. Investor-owned utilities' (IOUs) offers under the AB 1613 contracts are based
on the costs of a new combined cycle gas turbine, and a location bonus shall be applied to
eligible CHP systems located in high-value areas.
CalRecycle Grant, Payment, and Loan Programs
The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) offers funding
opportunities authorized by legislation to assist public and private entities in the safe and
effective management of the waste stream. 38 Several hazardous waste management grants are
available including Used Oil Grants, Block Grants, Opportunity Grants, Nonprofit Grants
Research, Testing and Demonstration Grant, Household Hazardous Waste Grants and
Coordination Grants. Other grants include Farm and Ranch Cleanup Grants, Solid Waste
Disposal Sites and Codisposal Site Cleanup Grants, Local Enforcement Grants and Reuse
Assistance Grants.
Energy Efficiency Financing
The Energy Conservation Assistance Act (ECAA) is a low interest loan program administered by
the California Energy Commission (CEC). The CEC accepts loan applications on a first-come,
first-served basis for eligible energy projects from all eligible entities including Cities, Counties,
Public Care Institutions, Public Hospitals, Public Schools & Colleges and Special Districts.
Residential and commercial projects and non-profit institution are not eligible for these funds.
Projects with proven energy and/or capacity savings are eligible, provided they meet the
eligibility requirements. Examples of projects include:
Lighting systems
• Pumps and motors
• Streetlights and LED traffic signals
• Automated energy management systems/controls
Building insulation
• Energy generation including renewable and combined heat and power projects
• Heating and air conditioning modifications
• Waste water treatment equipment
Energy efficiency projects must be technically and economically feasible.
Energy Upgrade California
Energy Upgrade California is an alliance among California counties, cities, non-profit
organizations, the state's investor-owned utilities (Pacific Gas and Electric, Southern California
Edison, Southern California Gas Company, and San Diego Gas & Electric Company), and publicly
38 CalRecycle funding sources:http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/grants/
45 EN V I RON
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
owned utilities 39 Funding for this effort comes from the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act (ARRA, also known as federal stimulus funds), California utility ratepayers, and private
contributions. Energy upgrade rebates are administered by participating utilities.
Energy Upgrade California makes available incentives of up to $4,000 to Southern California
Edison and SoCal Gas residential customers with detached single-family homes who complete
qualifying energy-saving home upgrade projects 40 The upgrades include wall insulation, proper
sizing of hot water systems and heating and cooling systems, energy efficient windows, cool
roofs, and other permanently affixed measures. Customers can also receive up to $1,000 in
incentives when upgrades packages include:
• Air sealing
• Attic insulation
Duct test and seal
• Pipe wrap of domestic hot water heater
• Low -flow showerhead with, or in addition to, thermostatic valve control
• Combustion Safety Test
• Low -flow showerhead with or in addition to thermostatic -activated flow restriction flow
device
On January 16th, 2012 Los Angeles County launched a new Energy Upgrade option called Flex
Path which provides a new way to customize upgrades to meet a user's budget needs. This
program offers a $1,500 incentive to owners of detached single family homes. Energy
efficiency measures that can make up a whole -house upgrade are given point values based on
their contribution towards energy savings. To qualify for an incentive, participants must choose
two or more qualifying upgrade measures that provide a combined point value of at least 100,
such as attic insulation and sealing (45 pts) and windows (65 pts), and have them installed by an
Energy Upgrade Participating Contractor.
Energy Upgrade California in Los Angeles County is also offering property owners a 2% fixed
interest rate on eligible residential energy efficiency and solar projects. To qualify, energy
efficiency projects must be enrolled in the Southern California Edison and/or Southern
California Gas Energy Upgrade California incentive program, and the property must be a
residential, single family detached property. Solar projects must be installed concurrently or
after the installation of energy efficiency measures and must be enrolled in the California Solar
Initiative program.
Federal Funding Opportunities
Federal Production Tax Credit (PTC)
The investment tax credit (ITC) and production tax credit (PTC) both provide tax relief to a
renewable energy developer. The PTC41 is tax credit for each unit of energy produced by a
39 Energy Upgrade California: https://energyupgradeca.org/overview
40 http://www.sce.com/residential/rebates-savings/home_upgrade_projects/homeowners/default.htm
41 Federal Production Tax Credit: http://dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?lncentive_Code=U513F
46 ENVIRON b/
2012
of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
renewable energy system. The PTC is not available for all renewables projects, specifically;
solar PV is not eligible for the PTC. Projects using the PTC include landfill gas, biomass,
hydroelectric, geothermal electric and municipal waste. The amount of credit is 2.2 cents/kWh
for wind geothermal, closed-loop biomass and geothermal electric. Other technologies, such
as 'open -loop" biomass (using farm and forest wastes rather than dedicated energy crops),
incremental hydropower, small irrigation systems, landfill gas, and municipal solid waste
(MSW), receive a lesser value tax credit of 1.1 cent per kWh. Systems are eligible for this credit
during the first 10 years of energy production. Renewables project developers must choose
between the PTC and ITC as project cannot apply for both credits.
The PTC for wind, which as the largest producer of renewable energy has the greatest impact
on the budget, is available until the end of 2012. The PTC for incremental hydro, geothermal,
MSW, and bioenergy was extended until the end of 2013. The bill also extends the PTC for
electricity produced by wave and tidal energy through 2013.
The City cannot take advantage of the PTC program directly, as the City does not pay Federal
taxes and hence, does not depreciate equipment. The City can indirectly take advantage of this
incentive if an eligible renewable system is owned and operated by a third party.
Federal Investment Tax Credit (ITC)
The ITC is available to a wide range of renewables projects including solar heat and electric
(PV), wind, biomass, fuel cells and several others 42 In addition, the ITC is available for
cogeneration systems as well as geothermal systems utilizing ground -source heat pumps. The
ITC is not applicable to hydroelectric projects. Under the ITC, the IRS approves a tax credit
equal to 30% of the total project cost amount invested to develop a project (cogeneration and
geothermal projects are limited to a 10% credit). While there are maximum incentives
established for some technologies (fuel cells, micro turbines and wind turbines), solar
technologies do not have a maximum incentive. The tax credit can be claimed when filing
Federal income taxes subsequent to the project going into service. The value of the tax credit
may be sold to other private entities which have a tax interest and see an economic advantage
to partnering on the project. With the tax credit, the private entity never receives cash to help
pay for a project, but rather receives a credit on payments due, thereby producing a net
positive on the company's balance sheet. Renewables project developers must choose
between the PTC and ITC as project cannot apply for both credits. Similar to the PTC, the City
cannot take advantage of the ITC program directly, as the City does not pay Federal taxes and
hence, does not depreciate equipment. The City can indirectly take advantage of this incentive
if an eligible renewable system is owned and operated by a third party.
Businesses and individuals who buy solar energy systems had been previously eligible to receive
an ITC of 30 percent. The ARRA extended this option for solar facilities while in addition
allowing other eligible technologies to receive the ITC in lieu of the PTC. This measure is
designed to promote the development of renewable energy in instances of economic
uncertainty where a PTC is not as enticing to developers as an ITC.
42 Federal Investment Tax Credit: http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?lncentive_Code=USO2F
47 ENV I RON
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction (EECBD)
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) established the Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings
Deduction (EECBD) which allows building owners to take Federal tax deductions for
improvements to building efficiency 43 The level of tax deductions available under the EECBD is
set according to what type of efficiency projects is completed. A full deduction of up to $1.80
per square foot of building space is available for projects that reduce the building's energy
consumption to 50 percent below the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air -
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) standard 90.1-2001 (Energy Standard for Buildings Except
Low -Rise Residential Buildings). Partial deductions of $0.60 per square foot of building space
are available for projects that address a single building system (lighting, HVAC or envelope). To
be eligible for partial deductions, lighting or HVAC projects must reduce building energy
consumption to 20 percent below ASHRAE 90.1-2001, while envelope projects must reduce
energy consumption to 10 percent below ASHRAE 90.1-2001. Whether a full or partial
deduction is taken, the deduction cannot exceed the cost of the projects implemented.
The EECBD can be claimed by the primary (non -tax-exempt) designer of any project. The EECBD
is authorized through the end of 2013.
Modified Accelerated Cost -Recovery System (MACRS)
Another mechanism used to reduce project costs through tax relief is the Modified Accelerated
Cost -Recovery System (MACRS). 44 For non -tax-exempt entities, taxes must be paid on the value
of installed equipment including investments in renewable energy projects. As the equipment
gets older, its value depreciates and tax payments based on value will also depreciate. The IRS
program called Modified Accelerated Cost Relief System (MACRS) establishes a five-year period
after which the equipment depreciation cycle is complete and taxes on value no longer need to
be paid. Similarly to the ITC and PTC, the City cannot take advantage of the MACRS program
directly, as the City does not pay Federal taxes and hence, does not depreciate equipment. The
City can indirectly take advantage of this incentive if an eligible renewable system is owned and
operated by a third party. MACRS is authorized through the end of 2012.
The Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (H.R.
4853) created a special bonus depreciation for projects placed into service before the end of
2011. The bonus depreciation allows for a 100% first year depreciation.
EPA Clean Water State Revolving Fund
Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) programs provided more than $5 billion annually in
recent years to fund water quality protection projects for wastewater treatment, nonpoint
source pollution control, and watershed and estuary management .45 This program offers low
interest rates and flexible terms and includes significant funding for Nonpoint Source Pollution
Control and Estuary Protection. The CWSRF program has assisted range of borrowers including
municipalities, communities of all sizes, farmers, homeowners, small businesses, and nonprofit
43 Energy Efficient Commercial Buildings Deduction:
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive Code=US40F&re=1&ee=1
44 Modified Accelerated Cost -Recovery System: http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?lncentive_Code=US06F
45 Clean Water State Revolving Fund: http://water,epa.gov/grants_funding/cwsrf/cwsrf_index.cfm
48 EN V I RON
62
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
organizations. CWSRFs partner with banks, nonprofits, local governments, and other federal
and state agencies to provide the best water quality financing source for their communities.
Property -Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) Programs
The Property -Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) model is a financing structure that enables local
governments to raise money through the issuance of bonds or other sources of capital to fund
energy efficiency and renewable energy projects46 Land -secured financing districts (also known
as "special tax" or "special assessment" districts) are a familiar tool in municipal finance. In a
typical assessment district, a municipality issues bonds to fund projects with a public purpose
such as streetlights, sewer systems or underground utility lines. The property owners that
benefit from the improvement repay the bond through property assessments, which are
secured by a property lien and paid as an addition to the property tax bill.
The extension of this financing model to energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements
allows a property owner to install improvements without a large up -front cash payment. The
financing is repaid over a set number of years through the "special tax" or "assessment" only on
those property owners who voluntarily choose to attach the cost of their energy improvements
to their property tax bill. The financing is secured with a lien on the property and in the event
of foreclosure; the energy financier is paid before other claims against the property. If the
property is sold before the end of the repayment period, the new owner inherits both the
remaining repayment obligation and the financed energy improvements.
This has been an important and successful finance mechanism, but it has been greatly slowed
since mid -2010 when Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government -backed home mortgage
lenders that control 80 percent of American home mortgages, took exception to PACE loans
and stated they would not accept home mortgages that included the PACE lien. The Federal
Housing Finance Authority is now under court orders to develop rules that will require Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac to accommodate PACE loans. Congress is also considering a bipartisan bill
to address this problem.
6.3 Timeline and Prioritization
The reduction measures in this Plan will be implemented through a menu of options. The goals
of each reduction measure can often be achieved through a variety of means, such as those
related to building energy efficiency. Compliance with the energy efficient building measures
can be achieved through combinations of actions including (but not limited to): installing
energy efficient appliances, lighting, and HVAC systems; installing solar panels and solar water
heaters; siting and orienting buildings to optimize conditions for natural heating, cooling, and
lighting; installing top-quality windows and insulation; and incorporating natural shading,
skylights, and reflective surfaces. For example Measure (CO 4.1.6 calls for the City to amend
building codes to promote energy efficiency when issuing permits for existing buildings that are
being modified. Additionally, Measure OVOV CO 8.2.1 calls for the City to ensure that all new
City buildings, and all major renovations and additions, meet adopted green building standards,
with a goal of achieving the LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Silver rating
or above, or equivalent where appropriate. While many of these measures are considered a
46 Property -Assessed Clean Energy: http://wwwl.eere.energy.gov/wip/solutioncenter/financialproducts/PACE.htmi
49 ENVIRON
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
high priority by the City, the amount of GHG emissions reductions for some of these measures
could not be estimated at this time. For other measures, the specific amount of GHG emissions
reductions could be identified and are included towards the 2020 emissions reduction of the
CAP. An example of these measures is the installation of onsite solar systems. In Santa Clarita,
over 8 Million Kilowatt hours of energy has been produced since 2005 from PV systems
installed in the City resulting in a reduction of nearly 6,000 MMTCO2e of GHG emissions.
GHG reduction measures are grouped into four categories: 1) Those GHG mitigation measures
that are included in the CAP to meet the GHG reduction goal and could be quantified; 2)
Measures that are not quantifiable at this time but will be included in the Monitoring Plan; 3)
Measures that will be considered in future amendments to the CAP; and 4) Measures that are
not considered a priority to meet the goals of the City by 2020.
For those measures included in the CAP, the first category noted above, a qualitative analysis of
each measure was performed to identify the cost, cost-effectiveness, the ability of the City to
implement the measure and the role of the City in implementing each measure. This analysis is
included in the Appendix. The GHG emissions reduction potential for some goals, policies and
measures that are desired for inclusion in the CAP could not be quantified at this time. These
measures are grouped into the second category. For these measures, the City will identify
methods to quantify the GHG emissions for the measure and consider including the measure in
the CAP at a future date.
Other measures which are not considered a priority at this time but have some potential for
cost-effective reductions will be further studied and considered for inclusion in the CAP at a
future date. Lastly, those measures which are not considered a priority at this time or which
may not be cost-effective or implementable at this time are placed in the category of "No
further Consideration". Following is a description of the priority assigned to the measures by
category.
Measures Included in the CAP (High Priority and Quantifiable)
The measures that are considered a high priority and are quantifiable are shown in Table 6-3.
Several of the General Plan measures coincide with these measures and are identified in the
Table below. These measures are described in more detail in Section 4.2 GHG Mitigation
Measures. A qualitative analysis of these measures is included in Appendix D.
Measures Included in the Monitoring Plan
The monitoring plan will consist of three phases: data gathering, GHG quantification and
assessment and progress reporting. As stated earlier, there are several measures that are a
high priority but that cannot be quantified at this time. These measures along with the
measures identified in Table 6-4 for inclusion in the CAP will be included in the Monitoring Plan.
Prior to gathering data, ENVIRON will work with the City to identify the measurement method
or performance indicators that will be used to quantify and assess the measures. In some
cases, these measures will be implemented on a project -by -project basis as new residential,
commercial and industrial development occurs.
50 ENV 1 RON
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 6-3. GHG Reduction Measures included in the CAP Goal for 2020.
Measure Category
Measure Description
Related OVOV Measure2
Building Energy
AE -2: Establish Onsite Renewable Energy
Policy LU 7.1.2
Systems -Solar Power
Policy CO 8.2.3, 8.2.5, 8.3.4, 8.3.5
LE -1: Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and
Policy LU 7.6.1
Area Lighting
Policy CO 8.2.4, 8.3.9
LE -3: Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic
Policy CO 8.2.10
Lights
Transportation
LUT -0: Overall VMT Reduction from High
Priority Measuresl
LUT -1: Increase Density
Policy LU 2.3.3, 2.3.5, 5.2.1
Policy CO 1.5.5
Policy 1.2.1
LUT -2: Increase Location Efficiency
Policy LU 5.2.5
Policy CO 1.5.7
LUT -3: Increase Diversity of Urban and
Policy LU 1.2.13, 2.1.2, 2.3.2,2.3.5, 5.2.4,
Suburban Developments (Mixed Use)
5.2.5
Policy C 1.2.1
LUT -4: Increase Destination Accessibility
Policy LU 2.1.1, 3.2.1, 3.2.2, 5.1.1,5.1.2,
5.2.1, 5.2.4, 5.2.5
Policy C 1.1.2, 1.1.3, 1.1.5, 1.2.3,5.3.1,
6.1.5
LUT -5: Increase Transit Accessibility
Policy LU 1.2.13, 5.1.2 5.2.1, 5.2.4
Policy N 2.1.6
Policy C 1.1.3, 1.1.5, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.4,
4.1.1, 4.1.2, 5.1.1, 5.1.2, 5.1.4, 5.3.1,
6.1.5
LUT -6: Integrate Affordable and Below
Policy C 1.1.2, 1.2.1
Market Rate Housing
LUT -9: Improve Design of Development
Policy LU 2.3.2, 2.3.5
Policy C 1.1.1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.9,
6.1.5
SDT-1: Provide Pedestrian Network
Polity LU 1.2.13, 3.2.1, 3.2.2
Improvements
Policy C 1.1.3, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 2.2.6
Policy CO 1.5.7
Water
WSW -1: Use Reclaimed Water
Policy CO 4.1.8, 4.2.1, 4.2.2
WUW-1: Install Low -Flow Water Fixtures
Policy CO 4.1.5
WUW-4: Use Water Efficient Landscape
Irrigation
Solid Waste
SW -1: Institute or Extend Recycling and
Policy CO 1.3.2, 1.3.3, 4.1.8, 4.2.1,
Composting Services
8.2.11, 8.4.3
Vegetation
V-1: Urban Tree Planting
V-2: Create New Vegetated Open Space
1. Measure LUT -0 combines Measures LUT -1 through LUT -9 into one measure.
2. Policy Designations in OVOV: LU -Land Use Element, C -Circulation Element, CO -Conservation Open Space Element, N -Noise
Element
51 ENVIRON (a�
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Table 6-4. GHG Reduction Measures included in the Monitoring Plan.
Measure Category
Measure Description
Building Energy
BEA: Install Energy Efficient Appliances
BE -5: Install Energy Efficient Boilers
OVOV CO 4.1.6: Amend Building Codes to Promote Energy Eff. When Issuing Permits
Existing Bldgs.
OVOV CO 8.1.4: Public Outreach about Energy Conservation and Climate Change
OVOV CO 8.2.1: Ensure New Bldg. Meet Adopted Green Standards. With Goal to
Achieve LEED.
OVOV CO 8.2.2: Ensure Energy Efficiency of Existing Bldgs. Through Energy Audits,
Repairs and Retrofits
OVOV CO 8.2.3: Support Purchase of Renewable Energy for Public Bldgs.
OVOV CO 8.3.6: Require New Developments to Use Passive Solar in Heating and Cooling
Design
Transportation
TRT -1: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program-Voluntary/Required
TRT -3: Provide Ride -Sharing Programs
TRT -7: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing
TST-1: Transit System Improvements
TST-3: Expand Transit Network
RPT -2: Improve Traffic Flow
VT -3: Utilize Electric or Hybrid Vehicles
OVOV C 1.1.10: Accommodate New Technology to Reduce Trips by Vehicles using fossil
fuels
OVOV C 1.1.12: Implement City's Non -Motorized Trans. Plan for Alt Travel Modes
OVOV C 3.2.1: Adopt Clean Vehicle Purchase Policies for Fleets
OVOV C 3.2.4: Encourage Prioritized Parking for EVs and Alt Fuel Vehicles
OVOV LU 4.2.3: Encourage Job Creation In Closer Proximity to Workforce Housing
Water
WSW -2: Use Gray Water
WUW-2: Adopt a Water Conservation Strategy
WUW-3: Design Water -Efficient Landscapes
WUW-5: Reduce Turf in Landscapes and Lawns
WSW -3: Use Locally Sourced Water Supply
OVOV CO 4.1.5: Promote Low -Flow and/or Waterless Plumbing Fixtures for New Non -
Residential Development
OVOV CO 4.1.6: Amend Bldg. Code to Promote Water and Energy Efficiency Upgrades
for Existing Bldg. Permits
OVOV CO 4.1.7: Apply Water Conservation Policies to All Pending Development Projects
OVOV CO 4.1.8: Discourage Use of Potable Water for Washing Outdoor Surfaces
Solid Waste
SW -2: Recycle Demolished Construction Material
OVOV CO 8.4.2: Adopt Mandatory Recycling for Single and Multi -Family Dwellings
OVOV CO 8.4.3: Allow and Encourage Composting of Greenwaste
OVOV CO 8.4.5: Develop Standards for Refuse and Recycling Receptacles and Enclosures
for All Development
OVOV CO 8.4.6: Assist with Placement of Receptacles for Recyclable Products in Public
Places
Vegetation
OVOV LU 7.1.1: Require Shade Trees within Parking Lots and Adjacent to Buildings to
Reduce HeatIsland Effect
OVOV LU 8.3.7: Encourage Trees and Landscaping To Reduce Heating and Cooling Loads
52 ENV I R 0 N
67
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
6.4 Project Review
The CAP defines a local threshold of significance for GHG emissions for project level submittals that
trigger review by the California Environmental Quality Act. Because goals, objectives and policies
approved under the General Plan are forecast to meet the GHG emission reduction targets
mandated by AB 32, development projects that are able to demonstrate consistency with the
General Plan and zoning ordinance will by association demonstrate consistency with the CAP.
Projects requiring a zone change/General Plan amendment will be required to demonstrate
consistency with the CAP. Some large scale development projects that generate a significant
number of vehicle miles travelled and/or are heavy industrial uses may also be required to
demonstrate consistency with the CAP. Compliance can be demonstrated by performing a
quantitative analysis using approved modeling techniques indicating the proposed zone
change/General Plan amendment or large scale development project can reduce its associated
GHG emissions by 12% below the business -as -usual scenario. This reduction is consistent with
the overall reduction expected in the CAP, not counting the three statewide measures (RPS,
LCFS and Pavley 1) which are not affected by local development. Greenhouse gas reduction
measures for zone change/General Plan amendments and large scale development projects
should be consistent with those measures outlined in the CAP. Such projects that cannot
reduce the associated GHG emissions by 12% below the business -as -usual scenario should be
considered to have a significant and unavoidable impact and require a Statement of Overriding
Consideration as part of any project approval.
6.5 Monitoring Plan
The steps the City will take to effectively monitor and track progress of the CAP are outlined in
this section. An integral part of successful monitoring will be the designation of a City staff
person as the Manager with responsibility for overseeing the monitoring process and tracking
each mitigation measure as it is implemented. The Manager will coordinate with the
departments and/or managers responsible for overseeing the implementation of each mitigation
measure. The responsible person will gather and document performance and activity data,
estimate emissions reductions, evaluate mitigation measure performance, and prepare progress
reports. Recommendations for each step in this process are provided in the sections below. The
process of GHG monitoring will vary by year depending on the type of performance evaluation
required (i.e., performance indicator evaluation or GHG inventory update).
Performance Indicators
An annual mitigation measure performance evaluation will be conducted using performance
indicators. Indicators are metrics that can be readily measured and correlated with reductions
in GHG emissions to help judge the achievement of CAP mitigation measures. The indicator
may be a measure of participation or activity associated with a mitigation measure. For each
mitigation measure, the measured performance indicator will be compared to a predetermined
performance target. The performance target for each mitigation measure is a specified level of
participation or performance required to achieve the CSP's projected GHG reductions. As part
of the implementation process for each mitigation measure in Table 6-3 and 6-4, ENVIRON will
work with the City to develop and finalize the indicator to be used, the process for data
collection, and determine an appropriate performance target.
53 6NV1 RON 6Z
May 2012 City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
DRAFT REPORT
Data Gathering
Data gathering is necessary to evaluate individual mitigation measures and to update the City's
GHG inventory. The process of data collection will be an ongoing requirement of the CAP
implementation and monitoring. For each mitigation measure, it will be necessary to collect
performance indicator data. The City's monitoring manager will determine the most feasible
and cost effective approach for collecting and documenting progress indicator data. If it is
found infeasible to collect or track the recommended progress indicator, an alternative or
surrogate indicator will be identified. To make the data collection process as efficient as
possible, the process should be institutionalized into the regular operations of each department
responsible for collecting the data. A data collection schedule will be established and will
define a deadline for finalizing data collection. To facilitate data sharing between the
implementation and monitoring managers, it is recommended that a central repository for the
data be established (e.g., email address or online database). A standard format for recording
and sharing monitoring data should be mutually agreed on to avoid misinterpretation of data
and ensure that data is provided in a ready to use format.
GHG Emissions Quantification
To evaluate emissions reductions of individual mitigation measures based on performance
indicators, the City will develop a tracking tool(s) to calculate the GHG emissions reductions
based on mitigation measure indicators. The tool(s) will use metrics derived for each
performance indicator which correlate the monitored indicator with GHG emissions levels. The
tool(s) will both expedite and routinize the performance evaluation process. The tool(s) should
be updated with each GHG inventory update to ensure that the most current metrics,
assumptions, and methodologies are being used. For each mitigation measure, performance
will be evaluated based on the estimated emissions reductions and against the mitigation
measure performance targets.
Progress Reporting
The City will begin mitigation measure implementation by focusing on the measures included in
the CAP. In addition, the City will initiate the development of performance indicators for those
measures that will be included in the Monitoring Plan (See Section 6.3 Timeline and
Prioritization). The information from these updates will allow the City to describe progress
towards meeting performance targets and estimated GHG reductions. Every four years the City
will assess the performance of the CAP and will prepare a progress report to document
performance. On an eight-year basis, the performance evaluation will consist of a
comprehensive update of the City's GHG inventory and an assessment of the City's overall
progress as well as the progress of individual mitigation measures. At the four year
performance assessment intervals, results to date or changes in requirements could trigger an
update of the City's CAP. Such triggers could include significant legislative changes to the Global
Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), the Sustainable Communities Planning Act (SB 375),
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or other events that would change the implementation
schedule of the CAP measures. Where it is determined that a measure or group of measures fall
well short of the projected GHG emissions reductions, other measures included in the
Monitoring Plan may be included in the CAP to assure sufficient progress in meeting the overall
goals of the CAP by 2020.
54 EN V 1 RON
6�
2005 Baseline Emissions Inventory Emissions Factors, Activity Data, and GHG
Emissions
GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION RELATED EMISSIONS
FACTORS
Transportation Related Emissions Factors
Table A-1. Default CH4 and NZO EF for HVehicles by model year.'
Vehicle Type and Year
N20 (g(mi)
CHq (g(mi)
Gasoline Passenger Cars
Model Years 1984-1993
0.0647
0.0704
Model Year 1994
0.056
0.0531
Model Year 1995
0.0473
0.0358
Model Year 1996
0.0426
0.0272
Model Year 1997
0.0422
0.0268
Model Year 1998
0.0393
0.0249
Model Year 1999
0.0337
0.0216
Model Year 2000
0.0273
0.0178
Model Year 2001
0.0158
0.011
Model Year 2002
0.0153
0.0107
Model Year 2003
0.0135
0.0114
Model Year 2004
0.0083
0.0145
Model Year 2005
0.0079
0.0147
Model Year 2006
0.0057
0.0161
Model Year 2007
0.0041
0.017
Model Year 2008
0.0038
0.0172
Gasoline. Light Trucks (Vans, Pickup
Trucks, SUVs)
Mode! Years 1987-1993
0.1035
0.0813
Model Year 1994
0.0982
0.0646
Model Year 1995
0.0908
0.0517
Model Year 1996
0.0871
0.0452
Model Year 1997
0.0871
0.0452
Model Year 1998
0.0728
0.0391
Model Year 1999
0.0564
0.0321
Model Year 2000
0.0621
0.0346
Model Year 2001
0.0164
0.0151
Model Year 2002
0.0228
0.0178
Model Year 2003
0.0114
0.0155
Model Year 2004
0.0132
0.0152
Model Year 2005
0.0101
0.0157
Model Year 2006
0.0089
0.0159
Model Year 2007
0.0079
0.0161
Model Year 2008
0.0066
0.0163
Gasoline Heavy -Duty Vehicles
Model Years 1985-1986
0.0515
0.409
Model Year 1987
0.0849
0.3675
Model Years 1988-1989
0.0933
0.3492
Model Years 1990-1995
0.1142
0.3246
Model Year 1996
0.168
0.1278
Model Year 1997
0.1726
0.0924
Model Year 1998
0.1693
0.0641
Model Year 1999
0.1435
0.0578
Model Year 2000
0.1092
0.0493
Model Year 2001
0.1235
0.0528
ENVIRON
71
Vehicle Type and Year
N,O (g/mi)
CHT (g/mi)
Model Year 2002
0.1307
0.0546
Model Year 2003
0.124
0.0533
Model Year 2004
0.0285
0.0341
Model Year 2005
0.0177
0.0326
Model Year 2006
0.0175
0.0326
Model Year 2007
0.0173
0.0327
Model Year 2008
0.0171
0.0327
Diesel Passenger Cars
0.175
0.066
Model Years 1960-1982
0.0012
0.0006
Model Years 1983-1995
0.001
0.0005
Model Years 1996-2007
0.001
0.0005
'.Diesel Light Duty Trucks
0.175
0.197
Model Years 1960-1982
0.0017
0.0011
Model Years 1983-1995
0.0014
0.0009
Model Years 1996-2007
0.0015
0.001
Diesel Heavy -Duty Vehicles
All Model Years
0.0048
0.0051
Notes:
1. Replicate of Local Governments Operation Protocol, Table G.12
Table A-2. Default CH4 and N20 EF for Alt. Fuel Vehicles!
Vehicle Type
Ni0 (g/ml)
CH(g/mi)
Light Duty Vehicles
Methanol
_
0.067
0.018
CNG
0.05
0.737
LPG
0.067
0.037
Ethanol
0.067
0.055
Biodiesel (BD20)
0.001
0.001
Heavy Duty Vehicles'.
'
Methanol
0.175
0.066
CNG
0.175
1.966
LNG
0.175
1.966
LPG
0.175
0.066
Ethanol
0.175
0.197
Biodiesel (BD20)
0.005
0.005
Buses
Methanol
0.175
0.066
CNG
0.175
1.966
Ethanol
0.175
0.197
Biodiesel (BD20)
0.005
0.005
Notes:
1. Replicate of Local Governments Operation Protocol, Table G.13
ENVIRON
7-
Table A-3. Default CH4 and N2O EF for Non -Hwy Vehicles.'
Vehicle Type / Fuel Type
NZO (g / gallon fuel)
CH4 (g J gallon fuel) -„
Ships and Boats
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles
8.71
Residual Fuel Oil
0.3
0.86
Diesel Fuel
0.26
0.74
Gasoline
0.22
0.64
Locomotives
Light Duty Gasoline Trucks (T2)
8.71
Diesel Fuel
0.26
0.8
Agricultural Equipment
0.001
0.002
Gasoline
0.22
1.26
Diesel Fuel
0.26
1.44
Construction:;
0.002
Light Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks (LHDT1)
Gasoline
0.22
0.5
Diesel Fuel
0.26
0.58
Other Non -Highway
-
8.71
Snowmobiles (Gasoline)
0.22
0.5
Other Recreational (Gasoline)
0.22
0.5
Other Small Utility (Gasoline)
0.22
0.5
Other Large Utility (Gasoline)
0.22
0.5
Other Large Utility (Diesel)
0.26
0.58
8.71
0.460
0.050
Jet Fuel
0.31
0.27
Aviation Gasoline
0.11
7.04
Notes:
1. Replicate of Local Governments Operation Protocol, Table G.14
Table A-4. Emissions Factors for Onroad Vehicles by Vehicle Class.
EFs,by Veh Class and Fuel Type
CO2 (kg/gal)
, CH,.(g/mi)
N2O ;mi)
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles
8.71
0.178
0.020
Light Duty Gasoline Trucks (T1)
8.71
0.202
0.022
Light Duty Diesel Trucks (Tl)
10.21
0.001
0.002
Light Duty Gasoline Trucks (T2)
8.71
0.202
0.022
Light Duty Diesel Trucks (T2)
10.21
0.001
0.002
Medium Duty Gasoline Trucks
8.71
0.202
0.022
Medium Duty Diesel Trucks
10.21
0.001
0.002
Light Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks (LHDT1)
8.71
0.460
0.050
Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (LHDTl)
10.21
0.005
0.005
Light Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks (LHDT2)
8.71
0.460
0.050
Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (LHDT2)
10.21
0.005
0.005
Medium Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks
8.71
0.460
0.050
Medium Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks
10.21
0.005
0.005
Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks
8.71
0.460
0.050
Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks
10.21
0.005
0.005
Urban Gasoline Buses
8.71
0.002
0.001
Urban Diesel Buses
10.21
0.032
0.001
Motor Homes Gasoline
8.71
0.202
0.022
Motor Homes Diesel
10.21
0.001
0.002
Motor Cycles
8.71
0.202
0.022
Light Duty Diesel Vehicles
10.21
0.001
0.002
LNG Trucks
4.46
1.966
0.175
Notes:
1. Except otherwise noted, all emission factors are obtained from the Local Government Operations Protocol
ENVIRON
r/J
2. CH4 emission factor obtained from EMFAC model; N20 emission factor obtained from US -EPA Climate Leader Greenhouse
Gas Inventory Protocol Core Module Guidance:
httt)://www.epa.gov/climateleadership/documents/resources/commute travel product.pdf
3. CH4 emission factor obtained from EMFAC model; N20 emission factor obtained from Agoura Road Office Project ISMND:
http://ci. asou ra-hi I Is. ca. us/Mod u les/S howDocument.aspx? docu mentid=8164
Table A-5. Default CO2 Emission Factor for Transport Fuels.'
4�.Gs Cai
.. �,. e ... _ ...
Gasoline 19.15 5.25 1 8.78
Diesel Fuel (Distillate No. 2)
20.17
5.8
1
10.21
Aviation Gasoline
18.89
5.04
1
8.31
Jet Fuel (Jet A or A-1)
19.33
5.67
1
9.57
Kerosene
20.51
5.67
1
10.15
Residual Fuel Oil (#5,6)
21.49
6.29
1
11.8
Crude Oil
20.32
5.38
1
10.28
Biodiesel (B100)
20.14
5.38
1
9.45
Ethanol(E100)
18.67
3.53
1
5.75
Methanol
NA NA
1
4.1
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
NA NA
1
4.46
Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG)
17.18
3.86
1
5.79
Propane
16.76
3.82
1
5.59
Ethane
17.08
4.03
1
6.01
Isobutane
17.7
4.16
1
6.3
nn--Butan�ery
1177..7,7
4.24
1
6.58
uj lei.•i
Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)
14.47
1,028
1
0.054r
Notes:
1. Replicate of Local Governments Operation Protocol Table G.11
E N V I R O N
Municipal On -road Vehicle Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-6. 2005 City -Owned Vehicle Mileage by Vehicle Class and by Fuel Type.
Vehicle Category
Total Number of
Vehicles
VMT in 2005
(miles)
%.Driven within
City boundary
Diesel Passenger Cars:
All Model Years
Diesel Ught Trucks:
Model Years 1960 - 1982
Model Years 1983 - 1985
Model Years 1986 and newer
1
6,150
100
Diesel Heavy Duty Trucks:
All Model Years
10
50,102
100
Gasoline: Passenger Cars:
Model Years 1984 - 1993
Model Year 1994
Model Year 1995
Model Year 1996
Model Year 1997
Model Year 1998
1
4,414
100
Model Year 1999
Model Year 2000
Model Year 2001
Model Year 2002
1
6,598
100
Model Year 2003
Model Year 2004
Model Years 2005 and newer
2
21,838
100
,- asoline Light Trucks (Vans, Pickup Trucks, SUVs)
-
Model Years 1987 - 1993
Model Year 1994
Model Year 1995
Model Year 1996
1
1,000
100
Model Year 1997
Model Year 1998
1
1,911
100
Model Year 1999
5
36,974
100
Model Year 2000
13
66,803
100
Model Year 2001
4
19,674
100
Model Year 2002
13
69,768
100
Model Year 2003
12
76,397
100
Model Year 2004
7
49,006
100
Model Years 2005 and newer
34
217,271
100
Gasoline Heavy Duty Trucks
-
Model Years 1985 -1986
Model Year 1987
Model Years 1988 -1989
Model Years 1990 - 1995
_
Model Year 1996
1
2,900
100
Model Year 1997
Model Year 1998
Model Year 1999
Model Year 2000
E N V I R O N
7s
Vehicle Category
Total Number of VMT in 2005
Vehicles ..(miles)
% Driven within
City boundary
Model Year 2001
Model Year 2002
Model Year 2003
1 11,959
100
Model Year 2004
Model Years 2005 and newer
LNG vehicle:
All Model Years
CNG vehicle:
All Model Years
15 . 96,865_L_100
.Propane vehicle:
All Model Years
Notes:
1. Data provided by the City of Santa Clarita
2. Data shown here represent figures in 2010 backcasted to 2005; these are the numbers of vehicles in 2005 plus any vehicle
purchased later in place of an active vehicle in 2005.
ENVIRON
F)' 4:2
•i N M
V7
x
21
LL
W
W
a
O�
W
N
m
m
y
W
m
6
O
m
m
cXLLLL
�Lo�
mMO�
TOvw
U
N]
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
W
O
0
X
r
Q
W
V1
1,:
V'
X
X
LL
x
x
x
x
x
s 'u
c A
F a
m
U
0
0
0
0
0
vt
N
N
0
0
0
0
ut
ut
O
O
�n
`�°a�ovnnava�vnmmnn
vt
m
vt
Nm
m
m
O
0
ut
m
W
w
N
m
�
N
u_
�
W
d
O
c
u
i
ry
41
d
N
Q
N
N
N
V
Y
y
N
C
d
E
C
d
0
u
O
3
d
Q
U
3
d
3
d
d
3
d
m
d
3
d
3
d
M
d
M
d
NN
UU]
3
d
3
d
Q
a
C
Y
U
O
`
`
z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
LD
u
v
u
u
Q
Z
J
Z
Z
J
J
J
Z
Z
Z
Z
x
x
Z
Z
O
r
U
U
r
r
r
U
U
V
V
V
U
O
Etiti
0
0
E
E
E>_.mi
a
u
V
00
m
m
LL
W
U
I
LL
U
U
U
LL
LL
W
LL
U
U
LL
IL
N
m
m
m
-O
'O
T
V
V>
06
00
o
o
o
d
C
C
LL
LL
lL
LL
LL
LL
LL
'S
S
LL
LL
Ol
O�
O
.-I
N
N
N
V
7
a
�o8000a8So800000
0
0
a
0
m
�a
W
o•+
m
v
m�°maov
viom
S #
mrvrvmmmmm�n
Mn
in
�nnmmoo
d
•i N M
V7
1. Data provided by the City of Santa Clarita
2. Diesel consumption reflects those of on -road vehicles in 2010
3. Unleaded gasoline consumption reflects those by on -road vehicles as well as off-road equipment. The off-road equipment
portion of fuel consumption is calculation separately given HP and hours of operation
Table A-9. 2005 Citv-Owned Onroad Vehicle GHG Emissions.
Table A-10. County Sheriff Onroad Vehicle VMT and Fuel Consumption.
130000 miles/ month
26000 gallons gasoline/ monthl
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Sheriff Department
Table A-11. County Sheriff Onroad Vehicle GHG Emissions.
COTe
2,718 0.278 0.031 2,733
8 E N V I R O N VZ
-2
..... . . ..... M
-H,
,ff Type
aooiD
�Tll
M."
Diesel
118
0.000
0,000
118
Gasoline
430
0.012
0.015
435
CNG
47
0.094
0.007
52
Total On -road Sources
595
0
0
604
Table A-10. County Sheriff Onroad Vehicle VMT and Fuel Consumption.
130000 miles/ month
26000 gallons gasoline/ monthl
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Sheriff Department
Table A-11. County Sheriff Onroad Vehicle GHG Emissions.
COTe
2,718 0.278 0.031 2,733
8 E N V I R O N VZ
Table A-12. Waste Management Solid Waste Hauler VMT and Fuel Consumption.
138,590
gallons LNG
198,601
gallons Diesel
Commuter
832,721
265,480
miles (Residential trash)
122,791
miles (Residential recycle)
116,941
miles (Residential green waste)
123,661
Commercial
Notes:
1. Data provided by Waste Management
Table A-13. Waste Management Solid Waste Hauler GHG Emissions.
ftii551agts[iriet+ttan=
497 0.001 0.001 497
Table A-14. 2005 City Bus Vehicle Miles Travelled.
kjte
Ules I.Y.ear'.
Local
1,852,357
Commuter
832,721
Dial -a -Ride (DAR)
417,155
Total
3,102,233
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Sheriff Department
Table A-15. Citv Bus GHG Emissions.
8,868 1 0.099 0.002 8,871
E N V I R O N
Community On -road Vehicle Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-16. 2005 Community -Wide Vehicle Miles Travelled Distribution and Fuel Economy by
Vehicle Class.
.. .a-
Y
Light Duty Gasoline Vehicles LDA -G
Fuel£�cttom �:1ff1lllT��tr)puNBtf „i
y
20.85 92.23% 52.54%
Light Duty Diesel Vehicles
LDA -D
27.58
0.28%
0.16%
Light Duty Gasoline Trucks (Tl)
LDT1-G
17.11
0.89°%
7.78%
Light Duty Diesel Trucks (Tl)
LDTS-D
29.00
0.04%
0.34%
Light Duty Gasoline Trucks (T2)
LDT2-G
17.19
2.81%
24.43%
Light Duty Diesel Trucks (T2)
LDT2-D
28.59
0.01%
0.05%
Light Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks (LHDT1)
LHDT1-G
11.91
0.22%
1.91%
Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (LHDT1)
LHDT1-D
19.23
0.06%
0.50%
Light Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks (LHDT2)
LHDT2-G
11.98
0.05%
0.39°%
Light Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks (LHDT2)
LHDT2-D
18.57
0.04%
0.32%
Motor Cycles
MCY-G
38.13
0.00%
0.02%
Medium Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks
MHDT-G
11.05
0.03%
0.00%
Medium Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks
MHDT-D
6.67
0.17%
0.00%
Heavy Duty Gasoline Trucks
HHDT-G
11.12
0.02%
0.00%
Heavy Duty Diesel Trucks
HHDT-D
5.28
0.27%
0.00%
Urban Gasoline Buses
UB -G
11.06
0.17%
0.00°%
Urban Diesel Buses
UB -D
3.57
0.52%
0.00%
Motor Homes Gasoline
MH -G
12.56
0.00°%
0.00%
Motor Homes Diesel
MH -D
6.71
0.00%
0.00%
Medium Duty Gasoline Trucks
MDV -G
12.57
1.33%
11.52%
Medium Duty Diesel Trucks
MDV -D
29.06
0.01%
0.05%
Notes:
1. Fuel economy calculated using EMFAC 2007 version 2.3
2. VMT distribution for freeway and arterial roads employed first a general distribution by SCAG model then a finer
distribution using the EMFAC model
3. VMT distribution for local roads determined by the EMFAC model
10 ENVIRON ��
M
O
V
n
Of
N
Qf
O�
N
T
O
N
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
n
Q:
N
n
V
N
N
N
N
V
Of
C
0 +0 0'.,
u
O
u y
= E
m = V
'm rE
0
J
n
amnT
Nn
oo
m
mm
No000000oN
m.�aNmTmoam
.-+m
n
N
WN
N
N
N
ti
�
W
V
O
O
O
a
M
N
N
ti
M
mW
W
N
N
V
O
N
m
m
N
N
N
m
.Oi
.�-�
m
a
U-
00
Ol
mo
w000.�000000.+000000000.�
'? u
a E
00
l0
O
00000
O
O
O�
O
d
N v
M
M
A N
3 E
W
w
LL
N
n
O1
V
N
N
n
OD
O
N
V
0
0
0
a
n
Ol
n
v
'
N
d'
p1
N
C
N
00
N
N
W
n
T
V
1p
a0
lD
N
a
a
N
N
N
M
T
Ol
N
O
0
N
O
O
m
M
0
n
N
01
Ol
M
Ol
V1
H
e
N
L
U�
N
N
N
m
M�
N
�
N
J
O
Y
12
U
Y
UI
U
N
c
c>
c
r
c
F
L9
n
0
w
-
w
O
E
o
N
NN
oa
w
Oc
W
do�
U
0
U
7>
E
E
w
o
nu
U
o
S
wVE
E
E
E'omam°°
'avwwci
°Nvo>
ono
v�>
w
.o
o
w
a'c^
mJ
m
m
J
C
2
C
Lc
w
w
S
0m
1027
to
256750 1 miles/ year J
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Sanitation District
Table A-19. Wastewater Treatment Biosolid Transport GHG Emissions.
AM
Yst1t§,ie�r ,t:i
rx i fir.,t4 e
2,646 1.444 0.133 2,717
12 ENVIRON ��
N
C
VI
LU
C
N
L
3
O
N
m
m
f0
Y
L
v
_a
3
6
w
0
w
y-
0
R
Q
'u_
C
3
W
Z
0
Z
w
v m
LL
tD
LO
m
lO
tO
ID
LO
w
tO
w
lD
10
IO
tD
lD
N
N
Ol
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
u
m
m
T
Illm
T
T
m
m
T
T
T
m
m
T
-� LL
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Jl
IR
Ol
m
N
N
N
In
!n
vJ
N
N
1(1
IA
N
a
N
Ill
O
O
N
1A
N
IA
N
Ifl
N
N
Ill
N
YI
N \ L
O
O
O
O
O
my
a
n
Vl
Ol
O
N
N
et
m
O
m
N
O
m
m
m
T
N
N
N
N
2
Y
N
W
y
c
N
N
N
N
N
N
a
v
v
a
n
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
n
m
m
m
a
v
v
v
a
v
a
v
v
v
a
v
v
v
v
v
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
Z)
D
M
7
>
>
3
3
3
3
7
>
3
3
d)
N
Vf
N
m
H
T
N
N
N
N
H
N
rl
N
S
u
u
u
u
c
u
u
u
c
c
TN
c
c
c
O
y C
y C
L
C
y C
4
Y C
y C
C
to
m
E
m
n
O
d�
d�
m
d
u
U
u
V
u
V
(./
U
U
d
d
6
d
d
d
6
d
d
d
d
d
6
d
d
G
O
a'
a
6 d
N N
N N
N VI
N N
N N
O
O
O
m
m
m
�
N
Y
m
Y
m
S
n
=
S
v
X
a
X
a
X
o
V
o
d O
o
d O
a
m
"
m
m
Ic
m
m
`
Ol
p
Y`
O
O
O
O
O
O
E
>
'-
> uai
3
m
upi >
a O
uoi >
1� In
a O
i
a
l7
U'v
Uv
1T
c
N
a
w
`I
`
W
m
u
u
m
v
v
a
a
c
�
Yl
v
c
c
In
O
0
O
N
.
W
W
N
Y
L
0
L
0
L
0
V
J
U
Q
I
]L
Q
Q
Q
Z
0
Z
w
� �•
'-I
M
e -I
rl
.-i
rl
d m
tL
1p
l0
lO
l0
lD
l0
lO
l0
lD
N
l0
1p
l0
N
lD
lD
l0
lO
u
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
m
O
N
N
N
O
N
N
N
N
Q
m
m
m
m
m
M
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
00
of
ut
N
V1
111
N
N
cs
N
v1
T
V1
V1
N
VI
U d
L
Ip
IA
V1
N
0
Y1
1l1
ll1
U1
�
6
N
Ul
111
ll1
O
to
VI
N
N
1y ^•
� L L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
m a
y
N
1p
1p
M
1p
O1
N
M
m
t0
I�
m
m
N
1p
m
•-I
n
r
1p
I�
m
N
N
N
m
1p
V
h
m
O1
I�
'i
to
M
IA
l S
Y
W
)•
V1
V1
N
M
M
y1
i11
V1
N
lD
M
111
111
m
✓1
VI
N
N
Y •V
C �
� a
m
u
a
a
s
a
a
a
s
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
d
v
N
d
d
N
d
d
d
d
N
d
N
01
01
UI
W
01
c
c
c
C
C
G
c
C
C
E
C
C
C
G
C
C
C
c
C
m
m
m
o
o
ao
o
in
1n
m
o
0
o
m
ao
m
m
m
W
W
W
N
N
W
d
N
W
GI
G
V
U
U
U
U
U
U
u U
U
u
U
u V
V
U
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
•
N
N
N
m
N
N
m
m
%
01
C1
UI
c
d
c
m
O1
d
d
N
C
v
v
Ol
N
d
d
H
`o
C
y_
y c—
y, %
in
ti m
m
m
m
m
m
m
v
m
m
io
'u
m E
n
m
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
in
s 1n
a
a
a
1i
l7 ¢
a
a
a
N
U
V1
U
N
V
N
V
N
U
N
V
u U
u V
N
U
N
V
N
V
N
V
N
U
u V
V1
V
u V
oij
o7{
.66
tz
AI
Qi
eL
46
a
03
025
06
06
.6
.21
06
O.
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
rl
a
a
a
a
s
a
a
a
s
o
v
n1
nt
YC
U
v
mV
ti•
O
O
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
WN
]
m
mm
O
0
m
m
m
m
imO7
{.7
(7
mLLm
LL
(7
(7
U
m LL
U'
(7
(D
(D
(7
(D
(7
d
X
X
X
X
X
y"j
Y
X
X
X
6.
1
1
1p
tp
m
m
a
0
V
C
V
D
2
2
2
O
Q
Q
d
Q
O
O
O0
0
O
O
a
0
N
00
O
O
O
O p
0
0
0
m
m
m
N
N
m
m
N
N
v
U
U'
(
rl
.�
()
0
e
m l7
N N
.N -i
(7
(7
(7
(7 1O
l7 v
U v
l7
m
d
GI
W
W
Ol
N
01
W
d
Ol
N
U1
N
QI
UI
01
v
d
W
Ul
m
N
d
d
v
UI
UI
w
v
o
m
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
m
D
O
D
O
O
O
O
r
f0
E
O
O
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
p
S
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
O
E
E
L
O
L
O
L
O
L
L
L
L
1
F
W
w
O
O
O
O
r
LL
'O O
c-1
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
4fl
N
m
i'i
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
of
N
m
N
m
N
N
m
N
m
N
m
N
N
N
O
O
0 O
O
O
O
0 O
00
0 O
IA
N
YI
01
1/1
IR
Ol
lA
V1
N
Ol
Ol
Ol
in
in
o
Lf!
Lri
in
o
0
0
m s
a
o
ui
v
o
n
ry
ao
n
m
�o
j
m
N
mm
ry
m
o
o
ry
06
.4
x
N
W
),
vl
ut
tl1
O
vi
v1
.y
v1
N
O
b
Y •y
C m
h �
m
v
n
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
d
m
a
m
a
m
a
m
a
m
a
m m
a
m m
a
m m
a
m m
a
m
m
a
m
m
a
3'
W
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
D
n
:3
:3
D
n
7
00
00
00
O
n
n
O
n
n
O
n
O
O
m
m
m
m
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
u
C'
c
c
c
c
C
C
C
C
C
m
C
C
C
,e
mm
a
m
m
LL
m
m
v
m
m
m
LL
G
V
V
U
U
U
v
V
V
m
of
o71
c71
3
z
¢
3
z
ca
3
3
C.
O
O
a
Epp
0
U..
«O0
�
O
O
C
O
O
aV+
p C
C
C
0
0
ci
V1 w
i
CO
G
U
i
�
0
A 0
0
0
O
y
v
a
x
a
x
a
x
o
O.
p
0v
n
n>
N
n
n
X
m x
m X
m x
W
Q
O
Q SO
O
O
U
:vt7v�7a
c7v
n
x
xo_ry
x
x
.n
Y
v
v
v
a
v
v
Y
v
3
v
t
0
o
O
o
o
O
O61
:5
r
r4
N
Q
N
4
f0
H
V
N
H
N
Q
u;
I
°
N SI
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
e•1
G
N
O
.„
N
N
n
t0
o
€
So
u
i
m
N
u1
N
N
a
a
V
c
00
m
ill
M
N
M
M
G
N
O
•Q
T
n
N
E
O
°
N
C
�
m
6
V
m
,•
W
V
M
O
rl:
N
.+v
o.+nomv�c
-
!2f
N
vin
"2
r
MN
n
O
00
N
V
�'1
00
N
AI
m
O
0 Ol
N
N
O
t0
O
0 Vf
O0
N
Vf
n
N
�
co
n
lD
N
M
Ol
n
00
N
N
n
n
M
m a
a
s
ui
vi
vi
v
vi
vi
vi
ui
V
a
N
a c
io
� O
N
m
N
0
1(I
O
n
N
N
V
V
7
N
O
—ov
O
N
an
w
m
2nmmoo
g
m
N
m
M m
m
m
ry
v
m
m
N
N
u1
up
Nj
a
d:
2-Z
E E
'n
E
E
LL
Q
Q
O
a
y
Z
O
F
N
H
N
Q
u;
I
.y
z"
G
N
.„
N
N
n
t0
o
€
So
u
i
m
N
u1
N
N
a
V
00
m
ill
M
N
M
M
G
N
O
•Q
T
N
E
3
°
N
C
�
m
V
m
,•
rl:
-
!2f
"2
a
c
`r
o
�
m
�
C
m
m
Z
O
cr
Z
W
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
00
00
00
S
S
O
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
'..
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
odd
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
m
c
O
0
O
0
O
0
0
0
.ti
0
N
0
N
0
N
0
ry
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
S
S
S
0
0
0
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
p=
0
0
0
d
d
d
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
0
G
G
G
C
C
C
O
C
O
0
0
0
C
C
O
C
u
E
W
N_
t
Ol
�"�
�"�
O
N
C
a
m
N
N
O
O
Ol
N
N
T
N
O
O
rl
N
O
i�
w
I�
"'�
Q'
m
rl
rl
O
O
O
O
O"
T
as
O".
a
1
Yl
"
V
N
S
S
O
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
0
O
0
�"�
0
T
0
S
S
O
0
0
0
0
0
S
0
x
W
ry
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
U
1
i/1
VI
N
N
N
IA
IA
N
N
N
Vl
N
N
tll
N
IA
N
N
N
ll1
ll1
N
N
O
O
Vl
M
VI
1!1
I!1
X
m
g
W.
O
0
t7
b
t7
l7
O
l7
O
t7
W
t7
t7
O
t7
O
t7
t7
d
a+
`w
a
S
E
a
W
�
cw
U
�
v
m
0
E
t
m
N
al
m
N
H
Co
W
`'
E
ii
m.
E
`
m
nay
v
c
Em3
v
E
v
y
a
o.w
m
1O
L
o
=
v
.mc
y
v
W
t-
m
O
m
t
u
t
u
H c
ami
.�
c
�n
r
in
u
O
c7
a
,�,
H
d
�o
c
c
c
cc
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
0
0
0.
a
s
a
c
c
c
c
c
c
e
e
e
e
cc
e
a
v
v
c
W
W
Ol
w
W
W
W
m
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
m
m
le
:c
e
c
as
aa_a
a
'S
_n
_a
e,
o,
c
c
c
e
c
c
3
y
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
m
m
M-0
V
C
C
G
d
d
w
d
d
al
d
'O
d
'O
m
u
•u
C
C
C
C
m
m
•�
?
9
9
9
m
m
m
m
C
C
Q
m
m
m
m
`m
m
m
m
m
aJ
d
G
a
C
C
0
0
W
t7
O
O
O
t7
0
t9
t7
tD
E
E
o
0
0
0
�Ormm
mmmm
mm
m
O
U
vi
in
u�iC
c
c
c
c
cpa
c
c
C
Y
N
N
N
N
U
U
V
�
Z
O
cr
Z
W
W
N
32
00000000000000000000000000
0
0
0
pp
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
8
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o0000000a00000000000000000000000000
3z
a
d
v
c
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
o
0
0
o
a
c
o
0
o
c
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.N
i
w
E
W
Y
N
N
W
mp
0
N
N0
O0
ppNN00O
00O0
0aO
S
Ou
8N
8O
8ti
NN
0
mul
0
mO�
0
"a0
0
0O
0
0
0.ti
0
0W
0
0M
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
0N
O
0a0
0
0N
0
0
«
o
a
0
0
0
.y
0
0
0
0
0
G
O
G
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
C
G
G
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
V
d
N
N
N
ti
N
0
N�
N
N
N
N
N
ti
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
0
N
N
N
N�
Ipl1
N
N
I�
N
I�
Xrl
N
rl
rl
rl
ey
vi
d
::i
N
N
a
Y
C
x_
a
c
d
tp
A
J
y�
E
r
W
d
O'
00
O
N
d
d
pp
E
W
m
u
u
w
a
N
N
F
V
U
V
U
Y
C
C
C
Y
C
Y
C
Y
C
C
C
C
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
a
a
a
a
'S
a
'3
a
a
a
a
'S
'S
'3
'3
v
v
o•
o•
c
v
a
o•
o -
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C
C
C
CC
C
C
'C'E
'E
C
'E
V
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
cc
N
10
d
d
d
d
d
d
N
C
c
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
O
O_
O
O
O_
O_
O_
_O
_O
J
o
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
C
C
C
C
C
C
c
c
C
d
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
U
V
V
V
U
U
V
U
U
W
N
32
Z
O
CC
r
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000
0
0
O
O
8
8
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0060
O
o
0
0
0
0
8
8
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
g
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
06
0
0
0
06
06
0
06
0
0
0
0
0
00000000000000600cc;000000coo;oo0o000
a
v
c
Y�
o
0
8
3
000000
0
0
8
8
8
8
00000000
0
0
`b'
-
o
COD?
0
000000
�^
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
O
0
o
0
o
0
c
0
c
0
pp
0
C
e
0
0
0
0
0
C
O
C
O
O
G
G
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
G
O
G
O
O
C
O
C
G
0
S
�
V
E
w
y
J
ti�
N
M
N
M
V1
N
N
N
N
.y
M
r1
C
N
N
0
1p
O
M
1�
a
M
00
CO
Ed
R
01
N
N
0D
1�
N
n
X
0
0
0
-
0
0
8
0
0
S
G1
O
O
t0
O
0
O
0
000000000000001
0
O
O
.-�
O
O
O
.ti
O
d'
O
O)
O
S
M
tD
V
1�
N
O
O
O
O
O�
N
ti
O
0
O
0
O
0
M
0
N
0
O
60M
O
O
O
G
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
M
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
V
S.
N
O
O
O
N
O
0
0
Vt
Vf
O
O
Vf
Vt
ul
O
ul
ul
ut
O
O
of
O
O
u1
in
ul
O
O
u1
ifl
ul
O
O
I
X
A
N
LL
O
O
O
O
d
Y
C
a
0)
J
N
Q
Q
O
W
L
J
N
rt
Y
Q
Y
m
N
G
y
J
d
0)
O
�_
C
LL
O
0
O
01
C
2
0
O
d
N
N
d
d
V
$
C.
,�
W
oc
x
H
in
�
O
Q
LL
H
O
C
C
Y
C
Y
C
Y
C
Y
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
a
a
a
s
a
a
C
o-
Q
P
P
a
o -
W
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C_
C
Ccc
C_
C
CCC
CC
Y
Y
Y
�.
n
m
m
m
m
e
J
J
J
J
C
C
C
C
C
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
W
W
W
J
J
J
J
J
J
Y
L
L
L
L
L
L
Y
Y
c
C
c
I
I
I
Z
O
CC
r
N
q 0
O
O
O
N
O0
0
0
0
0
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
S
S
S
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
p0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
a
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
r
Z
T
m
C
O
D
N
S
S
S
S
O
O
.-i
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
S
S
S
S
S
'^
o
O
0
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
c
0
c
0
c
0
pp
0
o
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
o
0
o
0
o
aaoa000aaaaaa0a00000a0a0000000aaaa
_
w
Y
N
tD
O
Ol
ill
O0
M0
MN
eCNi
0NO1
0OO0
t0
MN0
ON00
IVO�1
OO�
MMO0M
0O
0O
Ox
VN0
OOOfVO
0
a
00
M
O
OC
WO
N
0
6
0
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
OMOO
0
0
0
0OOl
CMO0
0
0eO01
0O00
0
0
0
0OOll
0
0
u
6
in
O
O
N
Yl
Y/
ul
N
N
an
Vl
N
N
N
N
Vl
Yl
O
N
N
N
vl
N
O
O
N
N�
O
O
N
ul
N
O
X
m
01
a
a
a
a
v
V
V
a
a
v
a
s
a
a
a
LL
U'
U'
U'
o
U'
U'
C7
0
ow
ID
"V
w
l7
l7
C
E
E
12
m
a
^
E
W
u
E
W
�
E
O
O
O
•g
c
c
3
ca
E
m
3
w
.p
c
-p
p_
E
wu
3m
m
o
m
o
v
3
o
0
a
W
O
F'
H
1A
G
lL
N
J
3
U
U
O
U�
c
c
c
c
c
c
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
m
m
m
m
E
EEE
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_a
_y
C
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
w
Ec
c
c
c
c
e
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
CL
m
v
N
v
Gi
v
m
v
m
v
m
v
m
v
w
v
m
v
N
v
N
v
N
v
N
v:
S
m
m
m
`m
`m
`m
`m
m
m
m
m
mm
m
W
Q
0
tD
0
W
W
CD
w
E
v
v
v
v
vv
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
E
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
c
p
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
U
m
C
G
C
C
C
c
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
t
V
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
m
N
q 0
0
0
0
0
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0008800
g
0008080088
O
O
o
0
o
O.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�Z
0
0
000000pp00000pp
S
0
o0000ppop
000Nln.�000..
N
O
O
O
000
0
00000
0
00000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
C 0
0
G O
0=0000000000000000000000000000000000
�
V
W
N
N
n
Ol
H
M
m
m
N
M
N
N
M
W
N
O
M
W
N
n
W
O
m
V
w
O
M
H
a
V
N
t!1
N
V
N
ry
M
I�
OI
t0
v1
tp
a
N
I�
M
pp
�O
M
M
ey
N
O
tD
N
O
N
O
N
O
tlf
.y
00
N
N
at
M
K
N
O
0
O
ti
0
0
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
M
O
O
M
.-I
N
O
O
O
O
O
.-i
O
O
v
n•
�N
N
N
N
N
N
a
N
N
N
N
0
N
N
N
0
H
N
N
N
a
N^
N
n
0
N
1�
10f1
I�
VOl
X
N
N
N
N
N
N
H
N
N
N
H
N
N
�w
a
p
pa
Y_
C
0
Y
10
d
d
N
O
t
w
N
N
E
E
N
d
o
m
0E
E
CL
J
E
U
N
C
p
Y
C
N
W
LL
Q
jd
J
`
1
LO
f
Q
IDL
M
C
C
N
C
C
d
d
d
d
C
d
d
c
•
>>
_a
•�
_a
•t
o
Y
Y
_Ea
c
_a
•C,
w
W
w
W
N
OC,
E
W
w
m
E
E
m
m
•`
•�
•p
Zn
a
`
•`
E
E
E
E
w
w
E
E
m
E
0
0 0
0
E
0
u
u
v
u
h
L
L
t
L
N
C
N
J
N
J
L
i
d
d)
dl
h0
dJ
N
V
9
dl
d)
U
J
J
J
J
F•
C
C
J
J
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0p
0
0p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o8g8�S8S88SSS
p
p000ppBpppS8888SSS
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
ooaaaaaooaaaa000aaaaaoaaaaaooaaaaao
�z
A
a
s
L
0
o888S8SSS888SSSSS888pppoS888SSSS888S
�^
Lp
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.N
=
a
0
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
o
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
0
a
a
a
a
a
o
a
C
U
E
W
N
A
W
N
N
N
M
1�
O
W
00
1p
00
tO
O
O
O1
N
N
Ol
a
N
N
T
N
M
rl
W
O
H
„'�
N
M
N
O\
o
t
T
V
O
O
G O
C
N
ep
l%1
O
O
.ti
N
O
N
Ol
OD
W
N
.ti
n
.i
a
0
0
0
Op
T
O
O
O
o
T
T
Ql
x
ti
.-I
N
.-I
R
R
O
.y
O
O
O
ti
N
o0
.-I
.ti
O<
ut
a
O
C C
Q
N
u
a
n
1!1
O
N
{0
N
I�
lgll
O
N
N
N
Vql
N
r
o
N
1�
N
N
N
n
h
N
N
n
N
ti
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
eY
0S
N
N
N
N
1!1
N
O
n
N
N
H
N
N
N
0
X
If1
rl
Ill
1�
Gt4
C
d
L
w
d
�
�
E
a
c
a
N
O
U
N
N
w
C
m
d
d
U
a
O
ry
O
V
m
J
m
N
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
a
n
n
n
a
E
a
9
c
t
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
G_
C_C
'CL
CCC_
C
*0
V
f
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
A
N
A
R
0
N
G
G
CC
L
C
C
O
•V
O
O
O
12+
Y
YO
Y
U
•Y
yO
Y
U
N
N
N
N
N
V
N
N
N
N
00
u
u
O
u
O
v
O
u
O
u
O
u
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
000000000000000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
88000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
800000
0
0
0
0
0
po0000aaoa0000000a00000aaooa000aoao
\
o
o0
8000008888000000008000000000000
00000
000000.,m
o.+'+.+o
.,000000
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
<000d00000000000000o000000000000000
N
V
E
W
Y
N
N
M
N
W
p
S
O
,G
O
W
O
.�
of
!�
W
V
1�
O
O
0�0
N
O
a
�!1
O
l0
Yl
OTI
S
S
0
0
0
X
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
'+
N
O
O
t0
O
O
O
N
O
O
m
w
�O
w
O
T
n
.-1
t0
Oi
N
0
0
0
0
W
n
0
o
0
0
o
o
0
N
O
O
o
o
o
6
0
0
0)
O)
O
rtf
O
o
0
f
w
a
a
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
u
n
N
n
N
N
N
N
n
N
N
0
N
N
N
08
N
N
0
N
n
m
N
N
N
1lO1
Y�l
O
Y�1
N
Y01
I�
1l1
O
O
n
X'.
N
N
H
N
N
i�
N
N
N
tll
I�
�
N
N
N
tll
1�
•-I
N
A
d
N
N
W
3
x
A
-
r
N
cO
�
�
C
�
C
�
w
H
m
w
V
V
C
c
C
C
C
E
E
E
E
E
a
n
a
a
n
P
P
P
P
P
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
A
A
N
10
C
C
C
C
G
O_
O
O_
O
1'i
ii
1'i
u
_O
'G
Y
O
OO
u
u
u
30
V
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
S
S
O
O
O
O
oa000000000a000000000000a0000a00000
z"
T
N
1
C
YOB
O
0000
O
O
O
S
O.
0
p
0
p
0
0
S
o
S
o
o
ti.
o
p
0
0
0
0
0
S
0
O
p
O
S
S
S~
pp
O
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
co
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
p=
O
a
0
0
C
0
0
0
0
0
G
O
O
C
C
O
0
0
0
C
O
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
G
G
a
0
0
N
V
W
r
N
O
O
n
I�
n
N
m
c{
O
N
M
O
N
Ol
N
t0
I�
N
b
O
n
N
Op
1�
T
N
N
H
V1
M
tp
O
1!1
O
N
N
N
a0
M
a
L
K
O
O
l0
H
N
N
N
1�
N
a
M
<t
1p
O
1t
C
N
�O
01
N
m
O
Ol
M
.-1
ti
a
N
I
oi
W
O
V
O
V
N
N
M
O
t0
N
p1
1�
N
n
m
O
.-I
40
I�
1p
m
O
N
O
O
O
N
O
W
O)
m
O
W
r
0
O
O
O
O
ti
Vf
O
O
N
N
O
O
O
.y
N
N
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
ti
O
N
O
0
0
0
0
N
m
Q
N
0p
N
O
v
�
�
G
0
N
S
N
0
0
0
N
0
0
N
0
0
O
N
N
N
n
_
N
n
N
VOf
N
Ilf
VO1
I�
O01
Ol
VOf
N
1�
N
N
O
lA
VOf
n
N
N
O
Vf
f�
O
N
H
t011
N
O
IA
n
O 1
O\
N
H
N
V1
N
N
N
W❑
❑
D
O
O
O
C
W
p_
N
U
Q
O
A
N
m
~
N
N
L
00
C
~
•a
m
N
J
m
�
w
V
(D
O
U
z
Y
Y
Y
Y
v
d
d
a
d
d
a
a
a
a
E
a
W
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C
C
C
C
_C
C
G
C
C
C
C
m
R
N
R
N
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
O
O
O
O
V
U
U
yO
yO
7
>
>
Y
>
V
>
U
>
Y
N
N
N
N
N
N
0
cg
vp
UO
UO
u°
z
O
z
w
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
OO
00
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00000000000000000000a00000000000000
�Z
A
C
$
.-,0
C,
poa
poN000000.-apppp
.�No.r0000mry
c
pp
0
0
0
0
S
O
0
0
S
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
L=
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
C
O
O
G
O
C
O
0
0
C
G
C
O
0
0
G
G
C
G
v
E
W
N
w
m
T
W
I!)
I�
m
t0
w
m
111
0
m
m
O
M
m
W
M
V
N
N
a
Irl
N
1�
N
1�
W
m
V
N
w
V
'L
N
m
00
m
N
N
O
Ol
I
N
a
Ill
a
N
a
W
O
W
N
0
N
m
m
N
m
N
p
0
W
W
0
p
N
O
X
N
n
N
.y
O
N
rl
tD
s{
O
T
OR
N
t0
O
nY
O
00
<
00
O
N
O0
.-I
IO
M
O
N
N
p1
n
C
O
O
W.
V
N
t0
N
O
O
rI
V
N
0
0
1�
N
O
N
0
O
T
N
N
M
N
N
O
N
N
O
ti
rl
0
M
00
0
0
H
N
W
N
N
Ol
N
V
p
0
Vt
0
O
0
Vl
O
O
O
O
In
N
0
0
N
Vl
O
p
0
0
0
vl
O
p
O
p
8
Ill
O
O
O
N
O
0
0
Vl
Vl
N
S
N
IA
IA
I�
I�
•i
N
N
O
N
N
i�
O
O
Ill
N
n
N
1l1
N
O
1!1
I�
Ilt
N
N
n
N
Vl
N
O
l()
Ill
O
N
Vl
N
N
N
N
1�
N
Yl
N
1!1
O
N
N
N
I!1
n
I�
O
N
u
D
O
D
O
O
O
O
c
v
w
E
o
Y
_a
�
y
h
T
N
10co
W
N
N
y
C
O
H
�
U
00
W
Q
C
O
E`w
u
'�
o
W
K
H
V
ul
O
O
O
L
C
C
C
C
C
C
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
>
>
>
_a
>
_a
>
_L
0
_a
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
c
c
c
c
c
c
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
C
C
L
C
C
C
C
u
u
u°
u
u°
u°
u°
u°
z
O
z
w
ry
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
g$
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
c
o
0
0
d
d
d
d
0
d
d
.:A
Z
a
c
O
o
0
0
0
g
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
g
g
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
g
g
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
g
g
g
g
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
2
000000000000000000000000a000000000
�
V
W
N
�
N
N
lD
N
1p
00
I�
W
N
N
Ol
M
1p
01
1�
H
N
{{
N
I(1
00
1�
n
a
N
M
O1
a
O1
00
O
N
O1
rl
a
0.
Vl
O
tO
O
.ti
0
0p
M
N
.-�
1�
n
N
n
p
M
N
W
a
O
N
a
pppp
a
O
O
N
eM
%
O
O
N
O
O
0
M
0
N
0
0
0
0
rl�g
O
O
q
w
O
O
W
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.ti
N
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
V
1
O
O
n$
N
N
N
O�
h
O
ti
N�
N
n
N
ti
N�
N
n
N
n
x
N
N
Vf
t0li
N
V1
n
N
N
1�
N
N
N
Vl
N
N
rl
rf
t0lf
N
O
u0f
t�
0
O
YOt
N
N
VOl
N
X
A
rl
1!1
'y
N
LL
D
O
O
O
D
c
c
E
E
n
a
S
Q
W
W
N
m
C
N
N
a
y
7
C
a
a
m
a
c
x
h
m
E
J
a
C
fl
y
W
N
N
W
Q
LL
O
O
C
C
C
C
C
E
E E
E
E
a
a
a
a
a
W
W
W
W
W
10
0
0
0
N
N
N
N
N
>
>
7
3
3
m
a
a
v
a
a
c
ry
0
N
I q
00000000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0000000000000000000008
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
00000000000OOOSOOOOOOoBoOOOogOOOO
p
d
o
0
o
d
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
c
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
z
C
0
NC
0
0
0
0
OOO
0
0
o
OOOOO
0S
00000
000000b
pp
S
$gSOOO
SOooSO
O
OO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0O
0
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
0
Ci
a
0
0
0
0
O
0
G
0
0
H
V
W
Y
N
W
M
0
0
0
0
0
0
00
m
O
N
N
N
�D
O
O
00
V1
O
N
V
al
a
b
T
X
ry
m
0
0
0
0
00
N
O
tp
O
O
M
00
N
M
Qf
O
O
m
!�
n
m
N
N
V1
V1
N
m
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
b
W
O
O
v
m
0
m
N
O
O
Vf
O
O
Vt
ut
N
O
N
0
0
0
0
�/1
of
Vf
N
N
N
O
O
tll
0
0
0
Ol
t!1
Vf
0
0
x
O
ti
N
N
N
Yl
I�
Ol
N
m
rn
�
v
c
d
E
c
c
o.
N
d
J
E
E
O
W
C
J
d
C
W
J
CCL
E
Q
N
n
d
F
Vl
m
A
d
J
h
El
W
J
N
V
V
O
l7
d
Y
C
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
E
EL
a
EL
a
ca
n
Pa
P
o
P
Q
3
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
d
d
d
d
d
d
N
9
'p
m
A
R
0
A
0m
W
d
c9
(D
E
E
c
c
c
m
m
3
3
3
3
3
33
m
V
J
J
J
m
-9
N
I q
v
c
a
0
J
O
C
0
m
v
OC
r
a
N
H
c
m
c
v
E
0
W
Ea
N
c
m
c
3
J
N
V
`E
E
E
U
L
MW
N
N
C
Mo.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
o
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
O
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
g
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0000000aa0000000000a000000000
^,
z"
A
0000000000000000000000000008
0
•„
o000000l;00000acsCSCS
aa000a000
u
E
W
Y
N
�
W
V
1�
N
u/
N
O
V
00
V
O
a
N
N
a
Iry
ill
l0
Ol
N
a0
N
O
N
N
1�
N
N
W
Ol
O
O
Ol
M
M
V
1i
W
ti
N
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
N
Vl
t0
x
><
ti
.i
O
O
O
O
q
.-�
00
OR
.-�
N
N
l0
M
0
g
0
0
0
lD
I�
O
CJ
O
O
O
O
O
N
e -I
M
u
N
N
N
N
n
YOl
O
Ot
.-i
N
n
N
O
N
O
ti
VOl
n
VOf
O
ti
N
N
N
N
N
VO1
N
N
Vf
1�
Ol
.-I
N
N
Vl
1�
O
ti
ti
N
V1
rl
"cam,.
Ol
e-1
C
N
u
O
O
O
D
N
0
.Y
N
N
�
N
�
�
3
N
N
d
t
£
�
N
Y
d
E
E
n
a
?
c
g
g
o
v
c
v
m
W
W
W
A
N
A
m
E
E
E
c
O
00
O
u
u
u
o.
N
Y
Y
Y
C
A
m
m
m
V
J
J
J
f
v
c
a
0
J
O
C
0
m
v
OC
r
a
N
H
c
m
c
v
E
0
W
Ea
N
c
m
c
3
J
N
V
`E
E
E
U
L
MW
N
N
C
Mo.
Z
O
d
N
�q
0
0
0
0
0
N
M
N
N
N
O
N
C
a
y
U
� T
A «
N
ti V
uiry
wui�
m
00000
c i
of
n
iri
of
of
O
O
O
O
d
o
E
A �
w A'
z
tJ V
N
p
0
0p
0p
0
0
N
0
0
0
N
N
la
N
N
00
W
a
T
M
la
O
M
M
c<ro
�n
�c
oo
ao
J
m
m
m
wO
08880
d
OO
O
O
O
O
O
0
O0
d
a
N
d
N
p
W
W
•�
y
O
d
�
�
v
E
E
E
o
as
�
O
m
J
Q
b
W
E
?
G
m
C
p
c
a
c
n
a
c
c
o
a
W
A
o
E
y
a°
u
u
m
a
C
o
o
g
o
0
vteC
v
E
C
C
m
0
O
E
V
C
g
J
h
w
d
C
N
'C
j
O
V
m
v
E
m
c
N
�
O
W
E
w
0
-
E
r
m
Z
O
d
N
�q
0
0
0
0
0
N
N
y
U
N
M
00000
v
O
O
O
O
O
d
o
E
N
z
N
p
0
0p
0p
0
0
N
0
0
0
0
0
00
W
a
.n
S
�
V
wO
08880
O
OO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O0
O
4
•�
y
C
�
�
v
E
E
E
o
as
O
N
J
V
W
E
G
m
E
E E
c
a
c
n
y
W
W
A
o
E
y
6
m
N
C
Q
fO
N
Ol
v
E
C
m
0
O
V
C
J
J
Z
O
d
N
�q
Community Passenger and Non -Passenger Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-26. Los Angeles County Non -Passenger Rail Fuel Consumption and CO2 emissions.
Freight Rail Fuel Consumption for West Coast
(gal)CO, Emissions (tpd)
Rail Type Year2008 Year 2005 Year2008 Year 20053
Road Hauling 515 1,337
Switcher 92 239
Total 1,030,065,607 2,673,379,667 607 1,575
Notes:
1. Association of America Rail Roads - Class I Rail Road analysis for 2005 and 2008
2. CO2 emissions reported in short tons per day
3. 2005 emissions scaled by fuel consumption between 2005 and 2008
Table A-27. 2005 GHG Emissions from non -pass ner rail within City of Santa Clarita.
30
E N V I R O N
.Length of Rail lines (miles)
Emissions [metric ton]
Rail Type
within LA within City of
County .Santa C1 rita
CO2 CH, _,. N20.:
CO2e
Road Hauling
16,345 1.31 0.43
16,505
Switcher
2,920 0.23 0.08
2,948
Total
352 13
19,265 1.54 0.50
19,453
30
E N V I R O N
c
N
O G
u p
v m
LL i
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
0ry
O ;^
W E
a �
p m
LL v
0
0
0
0
In
n
a
o
0
0
0
io
n
Vl
m
m
u
a
r
m
�
c
(n
p
O
O
O
O
n
m
10
m
O
O
O
C
_
O
O
O
O
N
a
M
O
O
O
O
L
\
3
N
"
N
m
�p
�p
m
l0
c0
io
m
a
1p
1p
h0
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
�0
ul
In
In
O �
m
m
00
m
m
M
m
00
m
m
m
jp
J O
Vl
m
V1
m
1!1
m
tll
m
Ifl
m
ll1
m
Ill
m
M
m
00
N
m
N
m
N
G N
G O.
a
c
R
M
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
O
p
N
N
1
VJf
i%
VJ1
N
N
Ul
VJf
Vf
N
Vl
VJf
Vf
N
VOl N
N VJl
V1 VJI
O
16
M
Ol l0 M
Cl 1p M
Ol l0 M
W
o0
m
e0
00
N
e0
a0
1p
a0
a0
m
m
00
m
N
CO
m
N
vl
O
O
m �
J N
In
m
ul
T
ul
m
vl
m
vl
m
In
m
ul
m
m
m
n
ry
ao
N
w
N
c a
4 H
G
_
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
LL
C
G
G
c
G
C
C
C
c
C
G
G
C
G
C<
G
C
LL C
LL C
LL C
p
Z y
!p
N
J
N
t0
N
J
N
.
N
N
J
N
G tp
V1
J<
VI
N
m
N
J
Vl
i
N
VI
3
m
G t0
N
J
N
N
N
J
N�
IO J
VI Vl
Ip J
� to N�
tp O
N Vf
b
ti
ti L
ti
6
N
ti16
6
•N'I
m
N
T
M
m
T
T
m
rl
m
O1 L() T
Ol lD M
Ol tp m
p
Y
O
C
D
G
O
\
C
O
C
C
O
C
N
O
a
C
L
c
Q
Q�
J
V'
O
lil
vJ1
vTi
In
Z
ul
�
IL- Q
a
�
N
m
I oc?
d.
O
u
w
tD
�o
V
ui
N
in
V
a
01
�
c
0
0
0
0
0
YI
U
Z
d
G
O a
N
N LJ
WG
d'
Ol
m
m
N
V
r
�
N
Off
Q
rl'
O_
m.
Y
N
N
C
O
C
G
C
(O
Y
fp
u'
N
N
a+
VI
VI
ry
N
d
N
m
I oc?
Building Energy Related Emissions Factors
Table A-30. 2005 Energy Related Emissions Factors.
eGrid WECC California subregion
s�
Southern California Edison
665.72
Ib CO2 / MWh
2005 Carbon Intensity Metric
Natural Gas
53.06
73.15
kg CO2 / MMBtu
kg CO2 / MMBtu
CO2 Emission Factors for Stationary
Combustion z
Distillate Fuel Oil
eGrid WECC California subregion
average
0.03024 Ib CH4 / MWh
WECC California subregion 3
Natural Gas
0.001 kg CH4 / MMBtu
CH4 Emission Factors for Stationary
Combustion °
Distillate Fuel Oil 0.0004 kg CH4 / MMBtu
eGrid WECC California subregion
average
0.00808
Ib N20/ MWh
WECC California subregion 3
Natural Gas
0.0001
kg N20 / MMBtu
N20 Emission Factor for Electric Power DFO
kg N20 /
Distillate Fuel Oil
0.0001
MMBtu
°
Notes:
1. CCAR Utility -Specific Emission Factors
2. General Reporting Protocol v. 3.1, Table C-7
3. eGrid 2007 v. 1.1(2005 data) Table 1
4. General Reporting Protocol v. 3.1, Table C-9
33
E N V I R O N
/0j
Municipal Building Energy Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-31. Municipal Building Electricitv Consumption and GHG Emissions.
AudpslbperD
5ettoT �iaas��it7eitiy3
AGTOU
consiot
t ti( _ -
nt.
46
14
„ - ,
0 0
14
GS -1
227
68
0
0
69
GS -2
2,033
614
0
0
617
STREET LIGHTING
10,787
3,257
0
0
3,273
TC -1
1,035
312
0
0
314
TOU-8
481
145
0
0
146
TOU-GS
2,731
825
0 1
0
829
Total
17,339
5,236
0 1
0
5,261
Notes:
1. Data provided by Southern California Edison
Table A-32. Countv Buildine Electricitv Consumotion and GHG Emissions.
.. .. ...
TREASURER & TAX COLLECTOR
.{ ie
„b�':? , y ,., .. 5 .
Y Sit
3 1 0 0
1
PW-BLDG & SAFETY/LAND DEV
131
40
0
0
40
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
25
8
0
0
8
PUBLIC DEFENDER
13
4
0
0
4
ALTERNATE PUBLIC DEFENDER
2
1
0
0
1
SHERIFF DEPT (16188)
393
119
0
0
119
PROBATION -MAIN
43
13
0
0
13
CONSUMER AFFAIRS (19116)
3
1
0
0
1
SC -STA CLRTA-NO VLY(REV)
293
89
0
0
89
FIRE DEPARTMENT (40204)
261
79
0
0
79
PUBLIC LIBRARY
487
147
0
0
148
SFV CLUSTER (OLIVE VIEW)
110
33
0
0
33
CHILDREN & FAM SV (26224)
179
54
0
0
54
COMMUNITY & SR. CITIZENS
39
12
0
0
12
Total
1,981 1
598
0
0
601
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability
34
E N V I R O N
1 o/I
Community Building Energy Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-33. Wastewater Treatment Plant Electricity Consumption and GHG Emissions.
WastewaterTreatment
Consumption
Emissions [metric ton]
Emissions [metric ton]
Plant
[MW -hr]
CO2 CH, N,O
CC,e
Saugus Water Reclamation
3,299
996 0 0
1,001
Valencia Water Reclamation
18,433
5,566 0 0
5,593
Total
11,733 1
6,563 0 0
6,593
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Sanitation District
Table A-34. Community Electricity Consumption and GHG Emissions.
Community-
Consumption
Emissions [metric ton]
Sector
[MW-hr3,,
_cot
CH, N,O
COZe
Residential
486,911
147,031
7
2
147,724
Commercial + Industrial
602,392
181,902
8
2
182,760
Agricultural
38,296
11,564
1
0
11,619
Traffic Control
1,230
371
0
0
373
Streetlighting
27,165
8,203
0
0
8,242
Total
1,155,994
349,071
16
4
350,738
Notes:
1. Data provided by Southern California Edison
35 ENV 1 RON
/0.�
Municipal Natural Gas Consumption Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-35. Municipal Natural Gas Consumption and GHG Emissions.
11-1- unic"',
,
coi
1 11
tHa
1 2-17, 1
0'.
1
603230200
19,476
103
0
0
104
977208100
1,822
10
0
0
10
220215900
527
3
0
0
3
1250208100
1,956
10
0
0
10
978218600
15,697
83
0
0
83
962209391
3,662
19
0
0
19
559825990
117,528
623
0
0
625
160545515
8,647
46
0
0
46
79927614
2,779
15
0
0
15
1546220500
429
2
0
0
2
1525220500
9,717
52
0
0
52
827707762
6,175
33
0
0
33
793424372
160,735
853
0
0
855
664927980
78
0
0
0
0
663357714
1,826
10
0
0
10
1858577910
178
1
0
0
1
1732217000
5,928
31
0
0
32
14837 12276
161
1
0
0
1
10067 16738
1,642
9
0
0
9
Total
358,963
1,904
0
0
1,909
Notes:
1. Data provided by Southern California Gas Company
Tab ci al Natural Gas Consumption and GHG Emissions.
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability
36
E N V I R 0 N
16b
'A W,,
�, W -
N" 14:,-,
TREASURER & TAX COLLECTOR
oil
L'Nlne M REE
85 0 0
0
0
PW -BLDG & SAFETY/LAND DEV
4,077
22
0
0
22
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
773
4
0
0
4
PUBLIC DEFENDER
388
2
0
0
2
ALTERNATE PUBLIC DEFENDER
57
0
0
0
0
SHERIFF DEPT (16188)
12,224
65
0
0
65
PROBATION -MAIN
1,353
7
0
0
7
CONSUMER AFFAIRS (19116)
79
0
0
0
0
SC -STA CLRTA-NO VLY (REV)
9,132
48
0
0
49
FIRE DEPARTMENT (40204)
2,980
16
0
0
16
PUBLIC LIBRARY
11,227
60
0
0
60
SFV CLUSTER (OLIVE VIEW)
3,420
18
0
0
18
CHILDREN & FAM SV (26224)
13
0
0
0
0
COMMUNITY & SR. CITIZENS
118
1
0
0
1
MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY
2,621
14
0
0
14
Total
48,547
258
0
0
258
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability
36
E N V I R 0 N
16b
Community Natural Gas Consumption Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-37. Communitv Natural Gas Consumotion and GHG
Residential 152,742 14 0 153,134
Single -Family 25,966,851 137,747 13 0 138,100
Multi -Family 2,826,807 14,995 1 0 15,034
Non -Residential 7,383,252 39,166 4 0 39,267
Total 7,383,252 191,909 1 18 0 192,401
Notes:
1. Data provided by Southern California Gas Company
37 EN V I RON
/ oll
Industrial Related Emissions Factors
Table A -AR. Industrial Fuel Emission Factors.
NG
�y A
Natural Gas (mmcf)
M,
54,500
1.028
0.103
kg mmscf
NG -a
Natural Gas - 975 to 1,000 Btu /
Standard cubic foot (mmscf)
53,335
0.988
0.099
kg mmscf
NG -b
Natrual Gas - 1000 to 1,025 Btu Std
cubic foot (mmscf)
53,571
1.013
0.101
kg mmscf
NG -c
Natural Gas - 1025 to 1,050 Btu stcl
cubic foot (mmscf)
55,050
1.038
0.104
kg mmscf
NG -d
Natural Gas - 1050 to 1,075 Btu Std
cubic foot (mmscf)
56,801
1.063
0,106
kg mmscf
NG -e
Natural Gas - 1075 to 1,100 Btu Std
cubic foot (mmscf)
58,421
1.088
0.109
kg mmscf
NG -f
Natural Gas - Greater than 1,100 Btu
Std cubic foot (mmscf)
60,181
1.100
0.110
kg mmscf
NG -g
Natural Gas - Unspecified (Weighted
U.S. Average) (mmscf)
54,500
1.028
0.103
kg mmscf
LPG
LPG, Propane, Butane (1000 gals)
6,085
0.3
0.1
kg gal
LPG -a
LPG (energy use, 1000 gals)
5,790
0.3
0.1
kg gal
DFO
Diesel/Distil late Oil (1000 gals)
10,450
0.4
0.1
kg gal
Gas
Gasoline (1000 gals)
7o350
0.4
0.1
kg gal
Gas -b
Motor Gasoline (1000 gals)
8,780
0.4
0.1
kg gal
Notes
1. CO2 emissions factors obtained from TCR General Report Protocol - Default EF Table 12.1
2. CH4 and N20 emissions factors obtained from TCR General Report Protocol C-8, C-9
Table A-39. Fulzitive Methane Emissions Factor from Oil and Gas %
1.394 0.27
Notes:
1. WRAP GHG Emissions Protocol, ENVIRON
38
flls.
E N V I R 0 N
/02
Industrial Emissions Data Sources and Emissions
Table A-40. 2005 Fuel Use Data and Emissions Related to Industrial Operations.
l Uastriat `OGatfOris ' con'suinp#ion
Emf'ssi64 itetrTctonj wm�.
Fuel Type
;
Diesel Fuel Oil 2.6
27 0 0 27
Natural Gas 72.48
3,950 0 0 3,954
Notes:
2. 2005 fuel use by SIC code for industrial operations in City of Santa Clarita, provided by the South Coast Air Quality
Management District
Table A-41. 2005 Fuel Use Data and Emissions Related to Self -Generation Facilities.
Self Generation Facilities
Consumption -Emissions [metric ton]
Fuel Type
I-_[MMBtu] co,
1
CM,
NZO
_C%e
Natural Gas
1 5287994 280,581
1 5
1
1 280,856
Notes:
1. Consumption data obtained from the California Energy Commission
2. Natural gas related emissions are excluded from the total because they are covered in the Natural Gas Direct Combustion
Emission calculations
Notes:
1. Production data obtained from State of California, Division of Oil , Gas and Geothermal Resources
2. Fuel use data obtained from 2005 fuel use by SIC code for industrial operations in City of Santa Clarita, provided by the
South Coast Air Quality Management District
3. Natural gas related emissions are excluded from the total because they are covered in the Natural Gas Direct Combustion
Emission calculations
39
E N V I R O N
Potable Water Pumping Energy Use Emissions Factors
Table A-43. Potable Water Pumping Energy Consumption Emissions Factors.
Water Supply and Conveyance
'Pro
9,727
kWh / MG
Water Treatment
111
kWh / MG
Water Distribution
1,272
kWh / MG
Wastewater Treatment
1,911
kWh / MG
Regional Total
13,022
kWh / MG
Water Delivery Subtotal
11,110
kWh / MG
Notes:
1. California Energy Commission, 2006. Refining Estimates of Water -Related Energy Use in California:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-500-2006-118/CEC-500-2006-118. PDF
2. Total energy for water delivery includes Water Supply and Conveyance, Water Treatment, and Water Distribution only.
Wastewater treatment related emissions are considered under the "Waste Water Treatment' category of this report
40
E N V I R O N
NO
Municipal Potable Water Pumping Energy Use Data and Emissions
Table A-44. Municipal Potable Water Consurnotion and Pumoine Related GHG Emissions.
Notes:
1. Data obtained from Valencia Water Company
2. Data obtained from Newhall County Water District
3. Data obtained from Santa Clarita Water
Table A-45. County Offices Potable Water Consumption and Pumping Related GHG
Ernksinns.
TREASURER & TAX COLLECTOR
RkNa,
9,724 0
0
0
0
PW -BLDG & SAFETY/LAND DEV
N S ECIALIES r
28,828,668
97
0
J,
0
-A
97
NA -COMMERCIAL'
19,487,644
65
0
0
66
NA -PUBLIC AUTHORITY
532,807,880
1,787
0
0
1,796
NLF-SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL'
1,583,516
5
0
0
5
NLF-COMMERCIAL'
38,534,716
129
0
0
130
NLF-INDUSTRIAL 1
702,372
2
0
0
2
Fire 2
0
0
0
0
0
Landscape
3,602,368
12
0
0
12
Inst Parks 2
17,367,812
58
0
0
59
Inst PublicAuth 2
1,745,084
6
0
0
6
Municipal 3
182,000,000
611
0
0
613
Total
826,660,060
2,773
0
0
2,786
Notes:
1. Data obtained from Valencia Water Company
2. Data obtained from Newhall County Water District
3. Data obtained from Santa Clarita Water
Table A-45. County Offices Potable Water Consumption and Pumping Related GHG
Ernksinns.
TREASURER & TAX COLLECTOR
RkNa,
9,724 0
0
0
0
PW -BLDG & SAFETY/LAND DEV
483,208
2
0
0
2
DISTRICT ATTORNEY
91,256
0
0
0
0
PUBLIC DEFENDER
46,376
0
0
0
0
ALTERNATE PUBLIC DEFENDER
7,480
0
0
0
0
SHERIFF DEPT (16188)
1,451,120
5
0
0
5
PROBATION -MAIN
160,820
1
0
0
1
CONSUMER AFFAIRS (19116)
9,724
0
0
0
0
SC -STA CLRTA-NO VLY (REV)
1,085,348
4
0
0
4
FIRE DEPARTMENT (40204)
489,940
2
0
0
2
PUBLIC LIBRARY
1,356,124
5
0
0
5
SFV CLUSTER (OLIVE VIEW)
406,164
1
0
0
1
Total
5,597,284
19
0
0
19
Notes:
1. Data provided by Los Angeles County Office of Sustainability
41 E N V I R 0 N
III
Community Potable Water Pumping Energy Use Data and Emissions
Table A-46. Community Potable Water Consumption and Pumping Related GHG Emissions.
Community
Consumption
Emissions [metric ton]
-.
Sector
[gal]
`CO,
CH, N,O
CO2e
NA-SIDENTIAL'
RE
2,833,252,708
9,505
0
0
9,550
NA -SPECIAL RES
286,336,644
961
0
0
965
NA -MULTI RESIDENTIAL
378,083,332
1,268
0
0
1,274
NA -COMMERCIAL
956,968,012
3,210
0
0
3,226
NA -INDUSTRIAL
409,058,760
1,372
0
0
1,379
NA -PUBLIC AUTHORITY 1
123,237,488
413
0
0
415
NA -IRRIGATION 1
5,862,824
20
0
0
20
NA -RECYCLED IRRIGATION
7,965,452
27
0
0
27
NA-METRD CONSTRUCTION'
62,788,616
211
0
0
212
NLF-SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL
667,964
2
0
0
2
NLF-COMMERCIAL
24,011,548
81
0
0
81
NLF-INDUSTRIAL
1,456,356
5
0
0
5
LEN -COMMERCIAL 1
60,283,564
202
0
0
203
NLF-MULTI RESIDENTIAL
3,158,804
11
0
0
11
LEN -RESIDENTIAL 1
39,644
0
0
0
0
LEN-METRD CONSTRUCTION
2,992
0
0
0
0
Residential
2,379,662,516
7,983
0
0
8,021
Business 1
129,012,048
433
0
0
435
Industrial 2
26,070,044
87
0
0
88
Public Authority
92,251,588
309
0
0
311
Schools
80,967,260
272
0
0
273
Landscape
403,407,620
1,353
0
0
1,360
Fire 2
135,388
0
0
0
0
Parks
15,571,116
52
0
0
52
Single Family Residential
3,248,287,605
10,898
0
0
10,949
Multi -Family ResidentiaF
579,354,574
1,944
0
0
1,953
Water Mutuals 3
112,096,800
376
0
0
378
Mobile Home Parks 3
232,326,445
779
0
0
783
Commercial
207,021,713
695
0
0
698
Institutional
173,388,633
582
0
0
584
Industrial
27,306,149
92
0
0
92
Construction
119,189,786
400
0
0
402
Fire Services 3
0
0
0
0
0
Landscape Irrigation 3
860,216,750
2,886
0
0
2,900
Parks
55,521,488
186
0
0
187
Total
13,894,962,231
46,615
2
1
46,835
Notes:
1. Data obtained from Valencia Water Company
2. Data obtained from Newhall County Water District
3. Data obtained from Santa Clarita Water
42
E N V I R O N
Municipal Refrigerant Use and GHG Emissions
Table A-47. HFCs Global Warming Potential.
kl�!#QEIUDrOSerboASHFS)
GWP
HFC -23
11,700
HFC -32
650
HFC -41
150
HFC-43-10mee
1,300
HFC -125
2,800
HFC -134
1,000
HFC -134a
1,300
HFC -143
300
HFC -143a
3,800
HFC -152
43
HFC -152a
140
HFC -161
12
HFC-227ea
2,900
HFC-236cb
1,300
HFC-236ea
1,200
HFC-236fa
6,300
HFC-245ca
560
HFC-245fa
950
HFC-365mfc
890
Notes:
1. Data provided by the City of Santa Clarita
43
E N V I R O N
Solid Waste Disposal to Landfill Data and Reported Emissions
Table A-49. 2005 Solid Waste Disposal Summary Reports by Facilities for City of Santa
010
o� w
Mina an
Antelope Valley Public Landfill (TONS) 370,799.00
Azusa Land Reclamation (TONS)
163,639.43
BRADLEY LANDFILL & RECYCLING CENTER (TONS)-
269,544.98
Calabasas Landfill (TONS)
552,892.79
chiquita canyon Landfill (TONS)
1,549,088.03
City of Burbank Landfill #3 (TONS)
41,605.78
Commerce Refuse -to -Energy Facility (TONS)
101,258.07
Lancaster Landfill (TONS)
468,951.00
NU -WAY ARROW RECLAMATION, INC. (up to 2005) (TONS)
722,457.50
NU -WAY LIVE OAK RECLAMATION, INC. (up to 2005) (TONS)
1,624,833.01
Pebbly Beach Landfill (TONS)
3,006.18
Peck Road Gravel Pit (TONS)
5,619.00
Puente Hills Landfill (TONS)
3,913,300.19
San Clemente Landfill (TONS)
715.14
Savage Canyon Landfill (TONS)
91,793.68
Scholl Canyon Landfill (TONS)
452,953.32
Southeast Resource Recovery Facility (TONS)
463,841.71
SUNSHINE CANYON CITY LANDFILL (TONS)
571,186.79
SUNSHINE CANYON COUNTY LANDFILL (TONS)
1,410,658.57
Total
12,778,144.17
Notes:
1. Data obtained from County of Los Angeles Public Works
M
E N V I R 0 N
//4
M
m q
N
U
a.
C C
0 0
O
d
L rL.
zae
v %,W
0 o
N U
(� C
fG
o
U
a.
C C
0 0
c
C tN/1 y N j J
Q
O
2
i
d
n a
d
O
F
�
L
N c N N d
N
>
Y
o mommoi
a` in a`u.�ii
N
o O
a f-
= O
E
— O
o
0
mU
J r
y
C
O E
m
m
T Q
�
m
U 4)
00
v
m
Y
z y
C
C-4
K
L C
V O
`
O
O
o
N
> fA
C
rL
m
J
a
c m
w
N_
y
G
go
d
>
W�
C
T
d
i W
2
E m
C
H
Q
0
t
w=
rn
C
`
'y
N
M B
a
WH
0
j 0
a
OL,
W
N
> >
D
Ln
f
H
w
yE
E
J
E
E
C
m
F
- v
A
F H
LL
¢�
0
0
e
0 0 0 o m
0 0 0 o r
O O O O N
m
A
0 0 0 0 0
9
c
m
c c c
0 0 0
A
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 o d 0 0 0 0
C
W
U
U ❑ �
C C
0 0
C N
C tN/1 y N j J
O
O
2
i
N
arL OF
n a
in �li
A
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O O O O O
O O O 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 o d 0 0 0 0
C
C C
0 0
Q
E
.n
E
O
O ❑
O
F
c
w a
O
N c N N d
N
N
_Q
o mommoi
a` in a`u.�ii
0
o O
a f-
E
J
0 0
o e
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 o n
0 0 0 o n
0 0 0 0 of
e
W
r
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o$ 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 o c
o S o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 o c c c
O O O 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O
O O o 0 0 0 0
o c o 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o T
/o�
o
N
N
a0
o
0
0 0C
0
C
0
C C
0 o
w y
m
Ir
O
Iv
J U
❑
j
`
N
Q
E
N W
O
0 •
a
a 2
w -
d
E
z
U N ry
p
E
Ey
g
E
E
a
n
0
aE o
N
U
0
U ❑
�N
U
U ❑
3
Ful
0 c r
E
r
y
r
00
p
w V •
N
C
N
N
N N N N
C N N N>
J y •
N
C
N
N
N N N y
C N N N)
N
C
0
S]
J (II
J W,
(n ❑
NaJ.
O
V
OVd:.
QN.
O
N
ON c'..
O
N
QN
0:4
m
o
Ao m��'ox-
m
o
mo`m��
n
o
Of
oo`o `w
rv�
in
a`
ma`LL_.LL
rw-
rn
a
m
O
/o�
Solid Waste Direct Combustion and Fugitive Methane Emissions
Table A-52. 2008 Reported Emissions and 2005 City of Santa Clarita Waste Contribution
Adjustment.
Table A-53. 2005 Direct Combustion Emissions of Landfill Gas.
2008 Emissions (metric tons)
2005 Landfill Quantity (tons)
Name of Landfill
CO2.
CH,
N20
Santa Clarita I All Jurisdictions % Contribution
Chiquita Canyon
96,683
0.836
0.093
147186.92 1,549,088.03 9.50%
Sunshine Canyon
158,169
1.368
0.152
7058.55 1,981,845.36 0.36%
All Others
N/A
N/A
N/A
33780.64 N/A N/A
Table A-53. 2005 Direct Combustion Emissions of Landfill Gas.
Table A-54. 2005 Fugitive Methane Emissions from Landfills.
2005 Adjusted Combustion Emissions (metric tons)
Name of Landfill
CO2
CHa
N20
_
CO2e
Chiquita Canyon
9,186
0
0
9,190.74
Sunshine Canyon
563
0
0
563.61
All Others
21135
0
0
2,136.26
Total
11,88S
01
0
11,891
Table A-54. 2005 Fugitive Methane Emissions from Landfills.
47 EN V I RON
CH, biomass
CO2e
_Name of Landfill
Flare %of CHa
Efficiency (%) Captured CHa Biomass
Chiquita Canyon
98%
75%
1136.22
23,861
Sunshine Canyon
98%
75%
69.68
1,463
All Others
N/A
N/A
264
5,546
Total
1,470
30,870
47 EN V I RON
C
C
o
r "O
t0
A d
O
O
n
0
•a
v
ov 0
a
o = o
C
`0 V M
6 v Y1
V
� O
a
i
O r m
a,
m
N
� LL
�
L
JL4'
u
o E
W*'
O
o
= m o
V
LL
Q
v
i
w
O
V
C
o
0 c
c .. o
O
n
0
•a
v
ov 0
m
o = o
`0 V M
6 v Y1
O r m
V W
E u
C O U
rvC
L
u W V
E L
a
W*'
O
o
= m o
V
C
x
— N
d
Q C) m
V
yj
K O
r C
0
U
O N
CY
p 'u
= < 0
U a
o
� > w
env
O
V w
N
L,0 a
o m
o E
E \i u c
C
WN O d
o
m C `a >
p
m
0
m o -O � 'o
E
CN 0 d g q
C
ry
Q m
tp
d
C
d
J d O m m
v
m
a
s
>. _ 0
-o V E -o
m;o E
o-
m ryu, u
,
M v
m M_
n E
> K
to a
z O W." rvi
//�
;
.
�
\
o!
/
E
\\\G
\
ci
§
~
0
7
_M
5CL
-
{tka //
\k\
]kms}
�\\
\\
\\
)
|
42
§f |�
2
§`
:L
\\
\\�\\��
\}
!
--
_
)\]
)\\\
{
j\
Gi
\
{/
/x
))
_
E
\\
)
){
�k
)\E
}�
-
,e
4
t
-_
§
/
/
\)
|{
_
\\\
\\ (
u-
�.
..a=,e!
,,
7)»!w
<J
,;».
w
ew.
w,
//�
APPENDIX B
2020 Projected Business -As -Usual Inventory Growth Factors and Controls
ISD
2020 PROJECTED BUSINESS -AS -USUAL INVENTORY GROWTH FACTORS
AND CONTROLS
Table B-1.. Growth factors from 2005 to 2020.
Notes:
1. 2005 population data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau
2. 2020 population data obtained from SCAG Growth factor forecast for North Los Angeles County Sub -region
3. Data provided by the City of Santa Clarita
4. Data obtained from San Pedro Bay Ports Container Forecast
Table B-2. 2020 CO2 Emission Reductions from Renewable Portfolio Standard (RFS).
CE ettriEiiy ..
2005• '
"•'i24:.
roairtfitatiu
Population '
- 169,659
201,107
1.19
Non-residential Land Usage
Square Feet 28,895,660
42,211,030
1.46
Tonnage through put
TEU 13,983,000 1
21,827,000
1.56
Notes:
1. 2005 population data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau
2. 2020 population data obtained from SCAG Growth factor forecast for North Los Angeles County Sub -region
3. Data provided by the City of Santa Clarita
4. Data obtained from San Pedro Bay Ports Container Forecast
Table B-2. 2020 CO2 Emission Reductions from Renewable Portfolio Standard (RFS).
CE ettriEiiy ..
ifei ewa6le mix
SCE Percent Renewable by 2005
17.20%
SCE Percent Renewable by 2020
33%
Additional Benefits to CO2 Emissions due
to RPS from 2005 to 2020
19.08%
Notes:
1. CEC Renewable Energy Program 2008 Annual Report to the Legislature (Table 4), October 2008
Table B-3. 2020 C07 Emission Reductions from Pavlev I.
llefiw Caleg¢
Aerluctton % ht ity iiu ks• istribs4ti6>t
Light Duty Vehicles
19.43%
Light Duty Trucks (Tl)
17.21% 24.52%
Light Duty Trucks (T2)
12.00% 75.48%
Medium Duty Trucks
12.50%
Notes:
1. Estimated using the ARB LCFS and Pavley I Post Processor
2. Based on onroad emissions; used for applying to general light duty trucks
1
E N V I R O N
1,;,I
Z
O
cc
N
O
}!
�
L
y
C
u
y
O
U
L
O
c
LL
m
0
O
OJ
O
BVI
m
N
L
Y
E
W
O
(4
7
�
D_
Vf
V
Q
cC�
C
VI
C
OO
eqO
N
»
m
m E
O
N
U'
N
I� Q
Z
O
cc
N
v
m
Ca
G
L
O
0
00
O
00
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
0
O
0
oZ
C
E$=
O
O
O
O
o
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
u
N
V
m
N
O
Ol
n
O1
N
t0
01
ti
n
O�
a
e-�
N
t0
N
l0
O
V
M
»
O
O
00
O
00
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W C
.o 0
Z
v U
0
00
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
o
0
o E
v
o0e
m.a-�m
O
m
N
cr
C
O
1p
N
m
N
W
N
O
Y
V
V
t*1
•�
O
0
00
O
0
0
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
O
O
O
E
Z
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
�N
.Z
vi
V
E
W
0
O
io
ry
m
.r
ao
a
.-i
O N
N
p
VI
Vf
N
N
N
N
N
1A
V1
VI
V1
V1
V1
1A
VI
U1
U
vp`_.
ccs
a'
w
m ¢
z
z
s
N
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
c
CC
C
C
L
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
3O'O
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
J
J
d
d
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
(7
D.
o
0
CO
0
0
0
o
O
o
m
O
O
0
O
O
O
Z
Z
m
m
Z
Z
m
m
m
m
a
a
a
a
a
etl
0
~
o< s
oil Z
w
w
Z
¢
H
O
Z
VI.
W !-
00
l7
V1 W
F
K W
J Z
Z
LL W
=)=W
>
J
J
l
m 2
Q
F
VI
0 O
N
VI
H
V
O
O
K Q O>
Q W
:DW
O W=
'�
w
0 LL m
Q H
'0
U
to 7
V-
F-
1-
F H u
a �n min
Q
a 0
Q a 0
�n
a
V Q
a
OC L
m
O
vi
ii �
J
j v u
m
w �
o a m
V 0 w
Z
O
cc
N
m
v
w
N
ry
ry
ti
v
o
m
o
m
m
M
w
ui
ry
ry
m
to
o
o
.ti
N
.y
o+
.-+
u
O
v
u
E
O
O
O
O
6
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
o
O
o
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
C
O
O
N N
Z
_ C
E 3=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
D
4
u
m
w
N
N
N
N
M
O
m
O
m
m
m
O
N
u
1p
N
N
pl
�
a
H
O
N
N
00
N�
a
N
T
S
M
O
U'
N
N
E'^o'
0
0
0
0
0
0000000000000000000
0
w 0
Z
•p a0.
v u
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
a
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
va
=
o E
a '^
U
o
v
v
m
v
v
MOM
OM
mmw�rvrvmmoo.r
ry
m
n
m
w
.+
o.+
2
w.+N
v.+
vi
m
to
o
.+
m
N
p
ti
w
u
W
Ol
N
m
v
N
v
O
m
O
M
m
10
w
tf1
N
N
in
C
o
n
v
r
M
M
N
O
N
�"�
�"�
d0
N
N
w
V
rl
Y1
m
to
00
rl
m
0
Y
U
•0
O'.
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
E
N
z
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
nu
IU
E
W
toOl
n
M
C
N
m
O
m
O
M
0)
m
w
N
N
N
M
t
0
0
N
.ti
N
Ol
O
O
O
O.
n
v
.ti
M
M
N
O
.�
�"�
�"�
m
.-I
N
w
•T
•'1
In
M
m
co
N
M
N
O n
N
G
d
d
O1
O1
d
d
O!
d
N
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
W
d
d
p
N
N
N
N
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
w
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
N
C
C
C
C
C
C
L
O
O
O
O
O
O
0 0
n
-
m
m
-
m
>
l7
n
n
n
p,
a
a
a
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
a
a
a
f
>�>
S
O
O
O
n
m
N W
Z
Z
Z
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
.y
Of
O
O�
to
a
N
N
N
w
N
n
O
ap
v
N
O�
O
m
fm'�f
n
O
W
w
T
Of
t-1
Yl
O
O
n
m
pt
n
n
n
N
O
w
N
U 0C
.ti
G
ti)
1' l7
W a ON
m aac
J W
U
V>1 v
N
H
U
tOvl
N
O
N
N
N
N
O
N
O
N
N
00
v
t!1
n
N
N
w
N
tl1
O
n
N
v
N
m
N
M
N
00
N
N
n
m
n
w
N W
Q
O
GC W H
O
tai
2 Q
O w
O
n
N
N
w
1pl1
b
m
N
N
N
m
tap
w
W
n
a
0
x
G Q O
Z
LL O ._.
1 =i
to O
u W N
U N
w
Q1
N
ey
Ol
01
Vl
N
n
N
N
OD
n
w
w
r'1
N
N
H
F- H U
N
N ^
u'
9 0.
U p o
N V
N u R v
J
J
z i
z up o a
m
•�
N
n
ilt
N
n
N
ti
ry
OV
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Z
✓
O
O
O
G
O
O
O
O
O
C
O
O
O
C
O
W
'1'
�
a
U -
N
N
n
Vl
e-1
n
N
N
N
O
N
�
N
l0
Rl
N
O
n
O�
O
00
Ol
.i
N
O
N
n
N
O
O�
WN
L
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
Q
Z
v
v u
d
E
O Eu
6
N
n
N
N
n
N
N
T
N
�
N
V
N
O
N
n
O
01
1p
O
0p
O
N
O
n
c
V
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
C
O
O
O
O
E
N
z"
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
in
S
:^
V
W
O
N
�
U
O N
C
C
C
C
G
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
L«
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
0 0
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
F
^o
f
0'D
w
w�
wo
Z
o
W
�g
U �'
-w
� W
j>
z
Z
W
zw
N
Q Y
j N
N
N
m W
d-
O
F
U
W
m
U
W J W
m
LL_ 0p
O: O�
Q
IL Z
O
K 1p
M e -I
Z
H
Q S
U K
J Q
U i
C�
LL>
d N❑
LL
LL
W
d
OU
N
7
LL
OV N
m>
O Q
d a
Q d a
V=1
Q�
Z
LL o v
d
U
Z S
U
J
�
0
N
✓1
C
� C
I— O
It
ml
/:-)- 5-0�
m
m
ifl
Yl
N
ai
ry
m
.-i
O
O
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
T
Ol
�!1
lD
M
M
M
ih
VI
V
N
O1
n
N
Ol
M
00
01
lD
N
N
v
0o
ui
00
N
fl
M
N
4� v
o
�
rn
m
in
in
m
m
io
a
m
Oi
M
M
N
O
O
ti
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
a�
O
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
ut
00
N
ti
ti
. i
.y
W
M
trl
rl
O
O
O
O
ti
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
gi?
W
N
N
N
1074
o
orr:
m
Z
Z
a
z
Z
w
r;.:,
5'P ra` r
y,
O
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
0 O
C
O
C
O
C
O
a; a
o.
a
o.
n
n
n
a
a
a
a
.
>:t� ,. �; o
a
o
a
a
a
o
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
a 0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
tyr;`
'`t
C
Q
J J
Q
Ei? "�' H
"' V1
O vt O
O S
O a
V 0
ry U
t0 0
w U
J y m O
U
V ry 0
w Z U
w 1O U
G
t QL
m
O=
DmKYJ
>>
t0
T
L J
t0 U 'n 3
O .]
V1 N
a a
C «
LL a y
LL a y
LL D
^M I': 00 J
a?
Y
00 a O
a J to
— Q
Q W IO
3
a O N m
3
Q= N t0
3
J w N N
J O IO ry
3
J
z�
z u?
z a?
z x
z u?
z?
01
00 _
ml
/:-)- 5-0�
IL
l47-41 �a
i•}
�d
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
f
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
.
f
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
r1
N
N
b
t?
3
VI
a
N
a
to
a
N
a
N
a
N
d
N
a
N
a
N
a
N
a
N
a
V1
a
-.G!:
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
G
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
s�s�=;s��'``•
¢
m
m
N
m
m
m
m
N
m
m
fO
Vg�',
h
J
n
J
o.
0
J
n
0
J
n
0
❑
n
0
J
n
0
J
o.
0
J
o.
0
J
0
J
0
J
0
J
0
a
m
..
'c
a21
z z
Z
o7S Z
w
�
a
Z
a=3
m
3
o�g
}
y
W
wo
Q
W
0
ym'o33
Y-3
f0
V
rW
Z Q
V
LL
w W
Q
••4
m
0
z
(1f0 10
d J VI
Ol J tyif
iI� W J
N d J iI,
J f0
w x J
LL
N
Q] LL
F (11 LL
W
O
3
LL v°'o
b uo o
__ ? uo o
s? u°
v
wr
:°
IL
l47-41 �a
n
p
m
m
d
u
n
E
g
N N
Z'
w
�
Q
V
m
O
m
N
V
rl
O
O
'
W
N
N
O
U
m
101
m
n
y
O
•t
N
ut
N
O
O
l0
N
�
N
O
OQ
n
p
N
V
O
N
E
O
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W Y
z
4
W V
u=
d
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
o E
u
a` y
o
o
a
N
ry
o
o
o
m
N
O
4
n
u
�
o
a
ry
in
.+
o
o
m
m
ry
N
d
Q
n
M
N
�C
V
W
u
•v
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
'
O
O
E
2
C
O
e
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
'
O
O
2
N_
X
(J
E
W
_
00
O
M
N
N
pp
O N
� O
C N
O
d
0
K
K
t N
L
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
L
O
qp
O O
'a
Y
N
V
N
Y
A
N
Y
N
Y
N
10
Y
f0
N
U'
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
i
a
a
K
~
Z
W>.6
r N
Y
N
Y
O
u
�A
U
}
1
Z
Z W
O N
C
N
L
m
O
U
O)
D K l0
Y
Q J
K a
U D:
J W
ff i
N a
F
N
m
Z
Z LL ti
N
w a N
f0 K
U �
N
U
d
U_
Q
0 W
U O
Z
M W�
W O
m
O.
LL 0
2 Q N
U
0 0'
U
d
K
;A,
A
H ....
W ....
N
F-
u
N
m
m a
u
m m
u� 4
�
d
F O 7
V
n
z
O
cic
z
w
M
lig
Ol
C
N
Ol
n
M
'-I
ei
m
m
u
_a
u
o
a
ti
E
°
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
p
o,_H
z
C
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
E
W
V
V
m
M
a
ao
w
b
o
o
N
b
m
o
m
m
CO
N
N
N
•-I
b
V1
V1
O
n
N
n
O
O
~
No
V
m
T
m
In
O
b
V
N
O
m
N
M
e�
N
c
m
ti
Vf
N
b
O
Ol
O
b
VI
N
.-�
b
♦i
'+
V1
N
O
b
V
N
O
r,
w
a
c
0
3
0
0
.n
,�
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.+
N
Z
N
Y
W p
=
Y
O
O
Oa
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
E
E
S
m
a
p
o
o
o
m
N
Ol
N
M
H
N
e -I
b
N
VI
O
n
N
n
m
o
N
o
n
m
n
a
m
o
m
ro
N
N
0
a
0
0
0
0
0
o
O
.r
T
Z
N
'C
c
O£_
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
E
u
m
tm
0
W
N
N
N
N
m
N
m
m
m
O
O
O
m
h
0
m
Ol
O
N
m
�
Vf
m
V
M
b
b
m
Oma.
v
v
v
L. 0 0
j
7
j
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
o
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
c
a
C
N
u
a
a
a
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
~ o — O
^
o
n
m
j O m o H u W
O O
N
W m
p
p
a v c`pv
v v
m
J
O > a m
�N
IO p
Q
C D
N
'O LL t0 Q C' Z .t., O p
V 0 E
7
OY
N
N
a
O m
m
C
O
N
Ti •c
`m
O
U
a
m a
ate.
a
z
V
E
n h0
t
U
Y
Y
10
O
Q
H
a
b9
m?
J
a J
O
J
m
a
J
J r
cc
G Q
S
O C 0-
V 10 W
W
J U' W
0
J V
a
u O
J u
o
0
C
O
O
z
ao;gas
uoi;eUodsuejl
z
O
cic
z
w
M
lig
E
0
W
V
t
0 0
E
0 0
a
Z
�
O
T
O
O
O
O
O
T
O
O
'+
C
}
Z
'C-
O
O
N
O
O
O
m
N
N
tNr1
n
N
WU.
E
�
V
m
ry
N
�
ti
a
O
o
rn
o
m
n
wm
.N -i
V
m
N
C
00
N
N
N
N
V
�
ti
ti
N
r
m
n
.ti
O
O
O
b
n
n
N
n
m
ao
ao
O
N
Ev
❑
O
w
V
O
N
O
m
O
O
O
O
O
M
00
ti
V
N
�
.E N
j
Y
Z
c
w
E
E
u
w
o
o
v
O
O
O
W
V
^
O
O
N
n
O
O
n
N
O
n
m
O
O
N
U
W
N
N
.moi
eT-i
uNj
ti
N
N
w
N
m
�O
tO
N
n
m
a0
l0
.r
m
M.
n
M
N
o
m
m m
ti
u
w
` v
N
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
}
O
Z
�n
"
O
s
J
00
V
O
O
O
O
N
N
E
x
m
w0
v
N
m
V
O
�
N
O
O
O
W
D
O
tMp
l�0
.Ni
d
N
V
d'
N
00
m
N
V
�
c4
ri
rl
F
N
O
w N
N
w
w
W
w
w
T
O N
a
0
d
O
O
O
O
a
O
O
2
a
U
er
Z
K
Z
Z
Z
Z
C
Z
Q
K
aC
°1
`o
— w
o
wL
A m
o
0
00
0_
4+
o.
ncpv
�vv
�vv
2 E
J
O
O
b
Od
0
0 0
0 a
O
o
0
0
0
Z J
Z J
Z J
Z„ a
Z J
a
a
a
s
a
O
m
Y
w Y
m
m
m
to
w E
w E H
`-
u
`w
c
+`•
J
o7f
w u
Yn m
m m u
O
c
y
m
N
W
Z
W
Z
(J 7
O
O a
f W
3 f a
J
W>
J
a
N
A
_
m
E
0«'
N
v
E
v
c
o.
=
o
3
a
m
3 n
ub +
o
_= a
m
ao��as
jopas leuasnpul pue 8uippg
svayao
0
0
E
0
W
V
t
0 0
E
0 0
a
2020 Projected Controlled Inventory Control Factors
Table B-6. 2020 CO2 Emission Reductions from the Low Carbon I
' MIRM)Y.f4u �.. t i '
t� 3,i ,, i.�
Light Duty Vehicles
aD and �r
. , CdUCtlob1'4itll.'-`
10%
Light Duty Trucks
10%
Medium Duty Trucks
10%
Heavy Duty Trucks
10%
Urban Buses
10%
Motor Cycles
10%
iable
1995,
25%
2000
50%
20202
75%
Additional Diversion from 2005
50%
Notes:
1. Assembly Bill 939
2. Assembly Bill 341
uel Standard (LCFS).
Diversion.
Controlled scenario includes the application of statewide measures: Renewable Portfolio
Standard Pavley I Low Carbon Fuel Standard and AB341 Waste Diversion.
10
E N V I R O N
a
v
O
Y
C
O
U
L
c
O
`m
C
41
V
W
0
N
N
c
C
O
C
CU
u
v
•O
O
a`
0
C
O
C
O
(0
O
W
C
O
O
O
N
O
u
.a
w O
� Y
Z
CL
Q
V
O
LL
O
a`+
C
O
U
c
a+
N
t0
y
mY
V
m
O
LL
of
O
C
O
N
0
E
= o
ui
O '-
C
_
O LW
O
i
O t7
a+
N =
C
U
O
�
U
tG
O
N
v C
N
a
F H
a
N
N
v
O
o
0
C
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
w O
� Y
Z
u_
W
S
O �
V
u'
N
u
m
N
N'
l0
.ti
T
l0
n
.ti
m
n
N
n
l0
V
01
N
N
n
V
(A
a
N
M
a
t0
N
N
tD
d)
M
.i
00
N
N
N
V_�
2
d V
y
e
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O £
a
V
0
N
00
V'
m
m
00
0
tD
N
m
N
W
V:
m
Oy
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
•_ c
«
z
E
w `
N d
0
"101
0
O
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
...
o E
=
u
N
v
m
O N
i
c N
UN
o
a
N
a
N
a
N
a
h
a
VI
a
IA
a
N
a
N
a
N
a
u>
a
N
a
N'f
a
N
a
H
a
�
z
z
ac
a
ac
�
ac
z
ac
ac
z
z
ac
rc
N
O
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
O
N
_
m
N
N
1_y0
f_YO
l_YO
N
_O
>
>
❑
�
5
0
0
n
c
c
a
a
0
c
a
a
a
a
a
n
z
z
zm
m
n
n
az
ma
ma
z
oL O
O
r
�G�SKW
J
W
Z
O
w
>
G
W
a W
a
00
Q
V}
QW
m F
y�
m Z
K J Z
W
"lo
MWX Z_
4
V1
O
O
a W
W
J W
S
a' a
O w
a
L3�
r
v
l..i
r
r
r
Q
r r
a v o
o a
a o
< a c
0
a i
u a`
CO %
�
U a
.V
T Z; V
Y
N
j ii
W j
w
d
O n w
u O w
a
N
ti
I Jv
d..
in
is
ry
ry
ry
ti
v
o
m
o
m
m
In
�
In
ry
ry
m
In
o
o
.�
ry
y�
�
0
W
n
cf
N
M
ll1
N
O
N
�"�
�"�
00
•i
N
tp
V
N
Ill
M
N
CO
�"�
M
O
N
V
E
0
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
a °
z
v
Q
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
v
x
o E
u
u`
O
lli
l0
N
N
N
N
m
O
m
O
M
O1
M
ID
ll1
N
N
M
M
O
O
N
H
NO
W
n
m
✓1
.y
O
.-1
N
00
N
�
V
.-�
N
M
S
.-1
M
Q,
�
N
L
N:
tD
a
V1
pp
V
R
O
m
O
M
m
V1
1p
0
N
N
m
IA
O
O
N
N
�
c
O
o
.y
V
N
W C
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
010
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
�
Z
a
d V_
U
d m
a
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
0
0
010
0
0
0
0
� E
v
o
N..
N
a
v
m
v
v
0
a.
o
m
�
m
Ic
.r
O
N
U,
W:.
Ol
O1
Op
m
V
N
O
m
O
M
O1
Ifl
b
VI
N
N
M
Y1
O
O
H
N
Q
N
N
tD
m
V
CO
O
p
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
U
.N C
O
N w
Z
£ u
w
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N
0 E
=
v
u
N
01
O1
n
m
a
N
m
O
M
O
M
01
m
w
O
N
N
m
m
0
0
N
N
0
OD
n
a
M
ul
N
O
N
N
a0
rl
N
�
N
N
M
Vf
N
M
V
N
N
tD
CO
O N
cN
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
v
a
v
v
v
v
v
v
a
Co
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
G
C
C
C
C
C
c
C
c
d
a
a
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
z
v
c
c
c
c
c
c
�
o
0
0
0
0
0
°fl
0
m
m
m
m
m
m
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
C
c
C
C
C
C
C
c
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
G
a
z
z
z
z
z
Z
z
Z
z
z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
ZG
a
a
a
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
.+
o
0
0
N
ry
o
v
o
u
j
w
O ni
N
m
m
m
of
o
o
n
m
m
n
n
n
w
00
I!1
0
O
00
w
O�
Ill
in
w
w
N
N
n<
n
n
n
.i
6
O
�. W O
m
J
G
L
m
n
O
il)
00
N
OI
O
OI
[f
N
n
M
V
T
VI
M
Z
m a
a
0v
U LL
Ou
N
N
H
N
co
lmp
Ic
-I
Iu/1
lL
In
tO
rn
m
m
In
'm'i
n
n
.m+
.n
N'
N
i
U.
Q
Op
m
❑ C
z a
N
ti
I Jv
Z
M
N
JJ
N
ti
Ot
N
10
Vl
N
O
I�
Ol
O
Op
Ol
N
N
O
�
L
p_
,N
O
V
IH
W CQ-
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
c
Z
v
o `
d
0
0
O
O
o
0
o
O
O
O
o
o
O
O
O
O
o E
u
_•
U
ry
N
Q
N
n
N
M
n
N
N
L
Q
O
.N
N
V
W GO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O w
Z
v u_
u`
as a
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
Q E
u
N
ti
Ol
N
t0
Vl
N
O
1�
Ol
O
f�
01
N
N
O
r1
N
U
O
b
n
O
a
N
0
w
O
O
u
oO
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
•0 c
y
Z
E u
W"
of d
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
p E
U=
C
O
V'
O N
N
d
c
O
c
O
a
O
c
O
c
O
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
a
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
c
O
cOw
OU
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
Z
OI.
m;
C
O_
C
O_
C
O
G
O_
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O_
C
O
C
O
C
O
m
N
N
_
N
Y
N
m
N
VN
N
N
N
N
_NJa
N
c
c
J
a
J
a
J
J
a
J
aaa
J
JJJ
a
a
J
a
Z
aaaaaaaaaaaZ
i
m
aJa
0
r
OCZ
G y
U
G
J
O N
O,
F O
m WWmZ
w
OWQ
ia-AiTu
OU
~O
O Q
S a
Q R Q
N
1
Q `�
N Z
u. Oa1
O N
N N
R y
O V
Oi
V
m J W
z u 0 a
Z
M
N
JJ
N
d
n
rl
m
N
N
N
m
n
m
t0
m
Il1
u1
n
n
t0
m
Ol
m
tD
m
N
of
�
•N
N
u
WC
O
O
O
O
O
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
— u
W=
O
o
O
O
n
O
o
O
O
o
o
O
o E
u`
O
No
lD
m
m
.-I
mw
m
m
m
N
0
1n
m
m
m
10
Ln
.y
t!1
p
m
m
oo
n
n
Na
M
O
O
a0
b
lD
N
M
T
00
1l1
W
tl1
N
W
n
O1
N
b
O
O1
m
m
N
O
V
N
N
wCO:
O
O
O
O
.ti
O
o
o
O
o
O
O
'a °
z
a u
U`
a y
a
o
O
O
o
n
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o E
1D
o.+
m
o1
N
n
.-+ 0
~
~
N
O
00
M
m
N
a
ti
N
b
N
to
N
V O:
O
N
n
000
m
N
N
V1
~
O1
t0
N
C NO
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o c
—N
O
N y
Z
E
.0
o E
v
N
a
10
N
n
ao
co
10
v1
n
v1
n
u1
N
a
N J
y J
y J
is
%
LL
lL
%
LL
LL
Vi
V1
V1
Vi
z
m e
d m
a
ro c
d m
U
.�
V
.�
a c
d m
V
�
u
�
d
a'
d
s
d
�
d
z
NI
C
O_
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O_
C
O
C
O
c
O
py1
�
N
N
V
N
Y
_N
i /Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y
R
L
J
J
J
o.
J
o.
7
a
J
o.
J
n
J
n
J
n
J
n
J
n
J
a
h:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
d
d
d
d
6
d
d
d
d
d
d
Q Y
J N
J F
O
N
N N>
N S
O a
U 10
W
m 0
W Z
m
c
u
D O c
d W c
V1 F F
L
L uC>
u
L V c
ry U
Q N
m
00 ` o
a`
u>
W O
u
3
Q a
z? u
z u? u
z Q> u
Z z>
a
Na
N
C
N Y J
ti
134
12
O
ry
N
O
O
N
O
C
Q
ti
O
N
v
E —ZZ
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W C
u «
— V
Z
O
O
O
O
O
O
V
p
�
N
O
N
l0
lO
tD
O
N
O
N
V
G
O
V
N
WC
O
O
O
O
o
O
O
O
O
O
O
iy O
2
v u
o
O
o
0
o
O
o
O
O
N
m
m
o
V
Oi
n
d'
o
N
O
N
On
ti
rl
1p
n
V
d
O
N
O
N
Ol
t0
m
O
N
O
V,
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
W
N Gil
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
o
O
o �
=
v
Nv
O1
N
O
N
GO
l0
N
O
N
O
N
'i
Vf
N
V
O N
i p
C N
N
N
�
C
O
CC
O
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
C
O
O
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
N
m
m
-
J
>
>
n
a
n
n
a
o.
n
n
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
0 0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
0
a
`o
J m
Y
J
_a
(p i
Y
Y
+�+
Y
'�-
coBJ
Z
V>i
a3
L m
m m
m
e-
wGo11Z
>
w .0
H u
_
m
n
n
U Y
r
C
J
J
j
3 m
N
3= '-
in
C Z
c c .m.
0= m
<
w x
>>m LL>
w
tom- O
O
u
O> O
Z U U
Z> O
Z V
._ O
w U 0
m Z O
J U O-
C Z O
V O-
O
U O
3
C Q>
H H
Q
d vt O
V Q
v
m
v,
m c
m > o
O
9 d 7
m
N
omoa
3
a. 0
12
LO
N
13T
o
�n
o
�
N
N
�
� r
Z
_ u
c E
u
o
O
m
ro
N
O
O
t0
N
O
V
N
VI
N
O
O
tD
N
O�
o
O
a
m
.N
N
E p
p
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
W �
'p
Z
U V_
N y
a V
O
O
V1
N
O
V
N
N
N
O
O
N
m
N
Q
M
N
V
W
o N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
_ C
� u
Lplf d
p �
V
N
O
T
N
u
m
O N
N
C
d
p
N
V1
V1
N
N
N
N
VI
VI
N
h
C
V)
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
m
m
A
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
n
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
o.
o.
a
a
a
a
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
z�
a
ortl
>
y
p
Q Q
LL
F
w
i
c W
v
U
m Z
N
W
J W
S ti
a' Q
O LL01,�
U O
C W a
LL O=
Q
O 0C
w
d
U Q -...
Vf Z
'L Q—
U LL
V N
VI
H
y�K
V
N
LO
N
13T
Z
O
C4
n
N
d
m
a
to
m
o
m
O
a_
o
C
2
9 0
}
d
'0
G
A
M
N
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
b
n
O
Ill
Q
E
u.
m
o
�
c
o
u
N
Ol
A
Vl
n
n
N
N
C
@
Ol
pf
O
O
O
O
C
N
N
O
U
LO
CO
O
N
O
M
ry
N
O
W
eNi
Vl
W
N
ei
N
N
N
l!1
N
10
O
O1
O
IO
Vf
N
'-1
1p
n
O1
n
N
IO
N
t0
M
M
.+
t0
t0
IO
O
n
ul
IO
O
N
n
W
�.
H
Y1
N
O
N
C
N
O
Yj
.ti
l0
n
U
Y1
O
Vf
N
[f
m
n
CD
1p
Y1
C
O
y
d
N
' E
3
o
DOvl
.i
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.+
N
o
m
o
W
ulw
Z
9
u
O
4
a
3
O
N
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
Op
n
N
Yf
a
E
..
.i
a E
E
u
N
a`
o
o
N
u
O
1l1
ei
O
rl
O
N
l0
M
O
ti
O1
N
M
Ill
O
Of
N
m
N
N
tO
V1
0
O
n
N
n
Iq
Il1
N
ei
N
O
n
O
m Of
n
m
O%
O
N
O
V
ei
Yl
n
N
O
Yl
N
V
M
n
OD
IO
Ill
N
e1
ey
'I
N
N
M
o
ul
ry
ry
o
e
w
m
N
.r
a
m
e
a
o
n
n
$l
n
m
a
ei
ry
W
m
v
m
w
ul
r
m
le
In
d
Ill
Of
00
N
rl
rl
Ol
d'
n
'i
n
N
N
Q
m
rl
m
n
m
N
m
N
tYl
N
M
0
'w
d
O
Oa
C
.i
coo
O
O
O
O
O
O
.-i
N
O
ry
O
E
;
2
C
N
m
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
N
n
s{
W
O
E
W
U
Ol
V1
l0
0
oN
mN
mO
ON
o
c
a
w
ry
-i
m
o
n
m
.i
' N
O
ei
O
O
ti
a
M
ei
Of
h
N
ei
Of
C N
d a V1
d -O N
d N
LL
V1
✓1
N
N
N
LL
LL
N
d
d
> C
A
1 C
In
1 C LL
A
LL
LL
LL
V1
6
C
0
Vf
O.
C
O
V O N
U
m U
m U
U
N U
V
U
U
U
u
u
U
U
u
U
U
U
u
V
Z
6'
Z
N
iv
F Lr O
wo
n
C
O
j
6
C
0
C
O
dm
N m
T d S
d t'
O
O
y
m
m
p
i w O F O
ry d
=
A h0
N
N
d O
y O
3
N Y y 'O N m> m
O
6
C O
6
6
C
C 9
d-
N V
m
m
NCN
v
1Cp
a
Z J
Z J
Y
C
V
u
u
r?
d
E
y
m
A E
a
v
N
o'S
w
U�
E
o
m
m
W
E
>
0
H
O
O
D>
N
d
d
d
0 m
a
m
K
Y
m
O
C
m
6
V 6
Od_D
m
m
v
a
o
E
a
3:,5
ro 3:
u
u
J
J
cw
2
C
�'
C
y
m
d
jQ
m
L
V C
W
J W
r 1'
6
LL
W
Z
W
Z
n
o
0
N
0
N
o
G
d
d
E
a
E
u
O
O
wu0
c1pc
801J3s
uoi;e),jodsueul
Jopa
1e1jisnpul pue 8uippn
Z
O
C4
n
N
O
R
a
�
o �
_
E
>
O
W
o
3
� rl
e U
m t
m
a i
O d
C L
U C
m` v
O
G y
e
'i
vi
fi
a
ti'
C
U
L C
N
ti
Q
d
O
N �
mYn
a a
9 �
� L
:ti
m a
d
C —
N jp
'^ E
O_ p
O
t c
CO
O O
L
a'
a N
a E
N d
N
w
v 9
m C
J
N
a ou
j u
N �
a
E a
a a
3 t
a d
N a
c
c
O
u E
n d
n�
m N
°
d
y C
N O
d d
a
0
Ou
c
° E
E
3
a
c
N c
a Ec
E
o
o
0 A
a
c a w`
o L n
u F o
v
O
Z N N
u
a
m
m
�
N
O
N
h
O
n r-
U
tp
•i
O
ti
O
O
O
m
n
n
N
n
T
d
b
m
N
l0
n
�n
0
n
.ti
O
m
.n
ry
U
N
rl
Vl
M
C
N
O_
«
T
9
Y
u
y
.a
o
E
E
a`
o
N
n
o
n
ry
^
O
n
v
m
vi
v
N
n
o
o
m
m
o
d
m
N
O
n
t0
00
O
a
O
O
N
O
O
ti
N
T
C
C
O
N
O
O
tp
O
.a
ry
N
o
f
i
m
ti
ne
m
W
m
V
n
o
o
m
o
m
e
m
ry
m
CO
m
. I +
o
Q
Q
CO
V)
l0
N
O
k ri
.a'
.�
io
$
U
e1
f1
V
C
a
0 Nm
C
C
C
C
y
H
u o N
Z
Z
Z
¢
2
Q m¢
m
m m
O
O
0
0
0
m
m
m
m
m
a s
m E a
a v
>>
>>
>
c
N c
a
a
a
a
a
Z e n
Z
a
a
a
a
d
E
m
w
C
N
N
V
o
40
c
V
G
j
a
O
jp C
ry C
T
__
a
E
w E
ry
L
0
.0�
L
0
y y
3
y
3
C
3
o
w
m
3-
w
T
✓c
_
V0
m O
N N
u'1 N
J a
J U
N
V
W
u
v a
a
m
ao
3
a
3
aoi�3s
s,ay�o
0
r
O
R
a
�
o �
_
E
>
O
W
o
3
� rl
e U
m t
m
a i
O d
C L
U C
m` v
'O J
G y
N '}
a Yu
LL d
C y
L C
� 3
3 9
� a
N �
mYn
a a
9 �
� L
m a
C —
N jp
'^ E
O_ p
O
t c
CO
O O
r
a'
a N
a E
N d
N
w
v 9
m C
J
N
a ou
j u
N �
a
E a
a a
3 t
a d
N a
c
c
O
u E
n d
n�
m N
°
d
y C
N O
d d
a
0
Ou
c
3 o 9
3
a
c
N c
a Ec
E
o
o
0 A
a
c a w`
o L n
u F o
v
O
Z N N
APPENDIX C
CAP Measure Emissions Reduction Quantifications
CAP MEASURE EMISSIONS REDUCTION QUANTIFICATION
Greenhouse gas reductions from mitigation measures included in the CAP were quantified
following the methodology in the CAPCOA' report, unless denoted below. Input data and
assumptions for the quantifications of CAP measures are presented below.
CAP Measure: Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting
Table C-1. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA LE -1
measure.
Notes:
1. A 16% reduction is expected for installing metal halide post top lights as opposed to typical mercury cobrahead lights. The
reduction can increase to 35% for metal halide cobrahead or metal halide cutoff lights, and to 40% for high pressure sodium
cutoff lights. In the absence of client input, 16% reduction is used
2. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.caPcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Repo rt-9-14-Fi na I. pdf.
Table C-2. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
$aseRrt
a; :r1tES1U4ttaA
f1IiErrfiss�onsWSth
MRigain���3.
Number of lighting
756
unitless
756 light replacements throughout the City in 2010.
heads
(MT CDz!
Street/Area Lights 216.68
Santa Clarita's Beacon Award Document.
Power rating of
134.09
Average wattage for metal halides and high pressure
public street and
0.23
kW
sodium lamps
area lights (Baseline)
Estimated annual
Estimated electricity savings by the City from this
energy savings from
284000
kWh/yr
measure. Beacon Award Document.
these improvements
Operating hours
12
hrs/day
ENVIRON assumption
Operating days
365
days
ENVIRON assumption
Emission factor -
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B-3 (Note:
0.00029
MT CC,e/kWh
Assuming Southern California Edison as electricity
Electricity
provider).'
Notes:
1. A 16% reduction is expected for installing metal halide post top lights as opposed to typical mercury cobrahead lights. The
reduction can increase to 35% for metal halide cobrahead or metal halide cutoff lights, and to 40% for high pressure sodium
cutoff lights. In the absence of client input, 16% reduction is used
2. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.caPcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Repo rt-9-14-Fi na I. pdf.
Table C-2. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
$aseRrt
a; :r1tES1U4ttaA
f1IiErrfiss�onsWSth
MRigain���3.
Reyctfogsr,
; ,' nt Heduetton
- Mea;pFig ,_ ' (MTO2CIit
.' MT CSS;e yr ,1`yd
''N.
;.01"A
(MT CDz!
Street/Area Lights 216.68
82.60
38°%
134.09
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
1 Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, A Resource for Local Government to Assess Emission Reductions from
Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures, California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA), August, 2010.
1 ENVIRON 00
CAP Measure: Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights
Table C-3 Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA LE -3
measure.
Parameters
- Value
Units
Reference
Number of
Percent Reduction
Measure
Based on 176 incandescent lights being retrofitted in
incandescent lights
176
number of lights
the City. Email communication with the City of Santa
being retrofitted
31.39
93%
Clarita.
Power rating of
incandescent lights
0.15
kW
Based on incandescent lamp power rating of 150 watts.
(Baseline)
Power rating of LED
0.01
kW
CAPCOA (2010). LE -3. Page 122.1
lights (Mitigated)
Operating hours
12
hrs/day
ENVIRON assumption
Operating days
365
ENVIRON assumption
Emission factor -
0.00029
-days
MT CC,e/kWh
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B-3 (Note: Assuming
Electricity
Southern California Edison as electricity provider).
Notes:
1. A 90% reduction is assumed because traffic lights using LEDs consume approximately 90% less power than traditional
incandescent traffic lights.
2. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/u pl oads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Qua ratification-Report-9-14-Fi nal. pdf
Table C-4. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
2
E N V I R O N
141
Baseline
Reductions'
GHG Emissions With
Mitigation'
Reductions
Percent Reduction
Measure
(MT CO2e/yr)
(MT CO,e/yr)
(%)
(MT CO,e/yr)
Traffic Lights
33.63
31.39
93%
2.2420
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
2
E N V I R O N
141
CAP Measure: Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Power
Table C-5. Solar Activity Statistics for City of Santa Clarita and Southern California Edison
Utilitv Provider.
Statistics
Value
Units
Reference
Santa Clarita Solar Capacity
1,089,303,534
kWh/yr
From 2005 EI. Note: Commercial + Industrial. No
demand
5.3
MW
California Solar Statistics. 20111
(2005-2011)
(MT CO2e/yr)
(MT CCiefyr)
Based on City's solar capacity statistics and
SCE Total Capacity (2005-2011)
394.8
MW
California Solar Statistics. 2011
Santa Clarita Contribution to
316,807.43
5,970.91
2%
Emission factor -
1.34
%
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B-3 (Note:
SCE's Total Solar Capacity
Assuming SCE).'
SCE Goals for Additional
410.1
MW
California Solar Statistics. 2011'
Capacity by 2016
Santa Clarita Projected Growth
ENVIRON assumption. Assuming proportional growth
5.51
MW
Capacity
to SCE's capacity goals for 2016.
ty's Solar Projected Electricity
r
1900 kWh/kW-year energy production factor.neration
20,530,251
kWh/yr
by 2016
htt w%vw.enerRysavers.govLyour home electricit
Notes:
1. California Solar Initiative (CSI). http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov/reports/locale_stats/
2. Based on geographic location. Available at http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/electricity/index.cfm/mytopic=10860
Table C-6. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA AE -2
measure.
Parameters
Value
Units
Reference
Total electricity
1,089,303,534
kWh/yr
From 2005 EI. Note: Commercial + Industrial. No
demand
Reductions
Percent Reductio
distinction
Amount of electricity
(MT CO2e/yr)
(MT CCiefyr)
Based on City's solar capacity statistics and
provided by the PV
20,530,251
kWh/yr
projections for 2016 (CSI). '
System
316,807.43
5,970.91
2%
Emission factor -
0.00029
MT COze/kWh
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B-3 (Note:
Electricity
Assuming SCE).'
Notes:
1. A 90% reduction is assumed because traffic lights using LEDs consume approximately 90% less power than traditional
incandescent traffic lights.
2. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/u ploa ds/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Fi na I.odf.
3. California Solar Initiative (CSI). http://www.californiasolarstatistics.ca.gov/reports/locale stats/
Table C-7. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
-
Reductions'
GHG Emissions
With
Baseline
Reductions
Percent Reductio
Mitigation'
Measure
(MT CO2e/yr)
(MT CCiefyr)
(%)
(MT COie/yr)
Commercial/Residential PV
Electricity Generation
316,807.43
5,970.91
2%
310836.51
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
3 ENVIRON L�
CAP Measure: Install Low -Flow Water Fixtures
taoie s_ -a. Lalenaar Year cuzu rroleciea water uenvenes
Water for outdoor
Notes:
1. Low -flow water fixtures apply to residential and commercial water use.
2. Source: 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan. Tables 2-3 to 2-6 from Page 2-5. Available at:
http://clwa.org/publications/2010-urban-water-management-plan.
Table C-9. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA WUW-1
measure-
�' darornet4tis
z : A#slue
Reference
Southern CA
13,022
kWh/Mgal
CAPCOA (2010). WUW-1. Page 348.'
average
Emission factor-
0.00029
MTCO,e/kWh
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B. Page B-3 (Note: Assuming
Electricity
f
ivlea5u
SCE).
Baseline Water
Baseline Water
23,863
Mgal/year
2010 Santa Clarita Valley UrbanWaterManagement Plan.
Usage (indoor)
Tables 2-3 to 2-6 from Page 2-5.
Mitigated Water
Percent
20.20%
percent
ENVIRON assumption z
Reduction
90,375
CAPCOA (2010). Table WUW-1.4 Page 358.
Mitigated
20.2%
72,120
Water Fixtures
Water Usage
19,042.74
Mgal/year
CAPCOA (2010). WUW-1. Page 348.'
(indoor)
Notes:
1. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Fi na I.pdf.
2. Expected percent reduction in water use after installation of low -flow water fixtures. The sample calculation is based on
installing low -flow toilet, showerhead, bathroom faucet, kitchen faucet, and Energy Star dishwasher. Note that there are
two additional methods of calculating mitigated water use due to low -flow fixtures. See CAPCOA (2010) for Methods B and
C, which require additional documentation to support the stated percent reduction.
Table C-10. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
4 ENV I RON A3
k xA'4S{
'
i 'Base1.line EmisYforts,eitucti'ots
Reduction
;rL;3
f
ivlea5u
{1kr13C4e �`
t�%k
.� Hbtii r1 .. ,
tt u
Install Low Flow
90,375
18,255.85
20.2%
72,120
Water Fixtures
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
4 ENV I RON A3
CAP Measure: Use Reclaimed Water
Table C-11. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA WSW -1
measure.
elice
Water Use
Total reclaimed
3050 acre-feet. Projected recycled water demand value. 2010
993.5
Mgal/year
Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan, Page 4-
water use
10.3
Total non-
Used 2020 projected water demand for landscape uses
potable water
4057.5
Mgal/year
(assuming non -potable water use is destined mainly for this).
2010 Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan.
use
Tables 2-3 to 2-6 from Page 2-5.3
Energy intensity of Water Supplied
Southern CA
average
2,100
kWh/Mgal
CAPCOA (2010). WSW -1. Page 333.'
(reclaimed)
Southern CA
average (non-
11,111
kWh/Mgal
CAPCOA (2010). WSW -1. Page 333.1
potable)
Emission factor
0.00029
MT COze/kWh
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B-3 (Note: Assuming SCE ).2
— Electricity
Notes:
1. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Fi nal.pdf.
2. CEC. 2006. California Commercial End -Use Survey (CEUS). Available at: http://www.energy.ca.gov/2006publications/CEC-
400-2006-005/CEC-400-2006-OOS.PDF.
3. 2010 Santa Clarita Valley Urban Water Management Plan. Available at http://clwa.org/publications/2010-urban-water-
management-plan
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation.
ENVIRON
CAP Measure: Use Water -Efficient Landscape Irrigation Systems
Table C-13. Inout Parameters, references and assumptions.
Parameters Value Units Reference
Mitigated Water
Reductions.
Reductions
Percent Reduction
Based on water reduction reported by
Water Savings
200,000,000
gallons/yr
the City from the use of smart irrigation
N/A
646.29
N/A
controllers (email communication).
Energy Intensity of Water
(non -potable). Southern CA
11,111
kWh/Mgal
CAPCOA (2010). WUW-3, Page 366.'
average
Emission factor -Electricity
0.00029
MCOZe%kWh
CAPCOA (2010). Appendix B, page B -3T
t
(Note: Assuming SCE).
Notes:
1. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Qua ntifi cati o n -Report -9-14-F i na I. pdf.
Table C-14. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
Notes:
1. Reductions from this measure were calculated based on water savings reported by the City. Data to calculate
baseline emissions was not available.
6 ENVIRON 14_�'
Baseline
Emissions
Reductions.
Reductions
Percent Reduction
Measure
(MT COze/yr) i
(MT COZe/yr)
N
Water -efficient landscape
N/A
646.29
N/A
irrigation
Notes:
1. Reductions from this measure were calculated based on water savings reported by the City. Data to calculate
baseline emissions was not available.
6 ENVIRON 14_�'
CAP Measure: Urban Tree Planting
Table C-15. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA V-1
measure.
dinFE-
Urban Trees Information
Species of trees
e
planted, if
Miscellaneous
--
ENVIRON assumption
known
i
C�
(:
Based on 6700 miscellaneous trees planted by the City
Number of trees
20,200
trees
from 2005-2011, and projections of 1500 trees/yr from
,� ,{"�
Trees
2012-2020 (email communication with the City)
Growing period
10
Years
ENVIRON assumption
for all trees
Accumulation Information
Annual CO,
accumulation
0.0354
MT CO2/tree/yr
CAPCOA (2010). V-1. Page 403.1
per tree
Notes:
1. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/31/CAPCOA-Quantification-Report-9-14-Fi nal.pdf.
Table C-16. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
r
e
'�^Ml.
"'mss
x G�{n1ilAY `�
i
C�
(:
�i�` • �iiv
=r
gra
, ,"... ,..
;� - �...v.�i?�,.
,� ,{"�
Trees
--
715.08 7150.80
--
Notes:
1. This measure accounts for GHG emissions reduced due to CO2 accumulation related to tree planting. Asa result, there are
no baseline emissions for this measure.
2. Total emissions reduced due to CO2 accumulation associated with tree planting.
7 ENV I RON J L[0
CAP Measure: Create New Vegetated Open Space
Table C-17. Input parameters, references and assumptions consistent with CAPCOA V-2
measure.
u';Par,arrieters -Value Units Reference
Urban Trees Information
Land Use
Grassland
--
Per conversations with the City
Category
Based on 9300 acres of open space acquired by the City.
Open Space --
40,083.00
6100 acres up to date according to Beacon Award
Acres
9300
acres
Application. Plus 3200 acres projected to be acquired by the
City by 2020 (email communication)
Accumulation Information
AnnualCOZ
A function of land use type. COi accumulation for grasslands.
accumulation per
4.31
MT CO2/acre
CAPCOA (2010). V-1. Page 403.
acre
Notes:
1. CAPCOA. 2010. Quantifying greenhouse gas mitigation measures. Available at: http://www.capcoa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-Quantification-Repo rt-9-14-Fi na I. pdf.
Table C-18. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
M5 ff �r m c
A.� a'i �:. ° do
#..
�
'`�?;t"Wit
Open Space --
40,083.00
--
Notes:
1. This measure accounts for GHG emissions reduced due to CO2 accumulation related to tree planting. As a result, there are
no baseline emissions for this measure.
2. Total emissions reduced due to CO, accumulation associated with tree planting.
E N V I R O N
lo
CAP Measure: Overall Land Use Transportation
Reductions from the Overall Land Use Transportation measure were estimated based on
Vehicle Miles Traveled reductions expected from the goals and policies related to land use and
transportation of the General Plan. The reduced WMT was multiplied by the on -road vehicles
(g/mile) emission factors used in the inventory calculations (See Appendix A, Table A-4) to
obtain carbon dioxide equivalent mass emissions (Table C-20).
Table C-19. Input parameters, references and assumptions.
Pan2trfeter5l-' .:-.:: value , '
(}hits
itcr'ttc+ '
Baseline VMT 3,384,253,271
miles/year
Traffic model results provided by City of Santa Clarita Traffic
GHG
and Transportation Planning Department.
Category
Based on prior City General Plan boundaries and used
VMT
o
interpolation from the new General Plan projections;
Reduction 10%
information provided by City of Santa Clarita Traffic and
Reduction j%}
Reductions
Transportation Planning Department.
Table C-20. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation
E N V I R O N
09 V
Baseline
Emissions
Reductions
Mitigated
VMT
GHG
GHG
Category
VMT
Reduced VMT
(MT
Reduction j%}
Reductions
Emissions
(miles/yr)
Emissions
COZe r
/y)
(miles[yr)
(MT COze/yr)
(MT CO3e/yr)
Total
1,185,627
10%
338,425,327
118,562.70
3,045,827,944
1,067,064
Notes:
1. Amount of emissions reduced (i.e., Baseline minus mitigation) due to measure.
2. Total emissions resulting after incorporation of the mitigation
E N V I R O N
09 V
CAP Measure: Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements
Reductions from this measure were estimated based on Vehicle Miles Traveled reductions
expected from the City of Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. The reduced VMT
was multiplied by the g/mile emission factors listed in Table C-21 and the proper global
warming potential in Table C-22 to obtain carbon dioxide equivalent mass emissions (Table C-
23).
Table C-21. Input parameters, references and assumptions for measure.
ii 0 parai➢etet..
�ialue
ilrtits '
ieibren -=„
Client input
1
Methane
CH,
VMT Reduced
11,897,704
miles/year
VMT Reduction Estimation in City of Santa Clarita
Non -Motorized Transportation Plan
GHG Emission Factors
N/A
11,897,704.0 6,067.85
CO2 Emission Factor
1.10
Ib/mile
SCAQMD 12010). Model year 2020.
CH4 Emission Factor
0.02
g/mile
CCAR (2009). Passenger Vehicles.
N20 Emission Factor
0.03
g/mile
CCAR (2009). Passenger Vehicles.
Notes:
1. SCAQMD. 2010. On -Road Mobile Emission Factors. Passenger vehicles, model years 1976-2020. Data for 2020 were used.
2. CCAR. 2009. California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol. Version 3.1. Table CA., pg. 46.
3. VMT Reduction Estimation in City of Santa Clarita Non -Motorized Transportation Plan. Table B-3. Page B-2. Available at:
http://www.santa-clarita.com/index.aspx?page=559
Table C-22. Global Warming Potential of Different Greenhouse Gases.
Table C-23. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
�fl IN
_ ,trt+lical �,��nfttta�
Caktial Wahl" ,
Carbon dioxide
CO,
1
Methane
CH,
21
Nitrous Oxide
N20
313
Table C-23. Baseline emissions and estimated reductions from CAP Measure.
�fl IN
i
n
(Kg5"L�tze
Pedestrian Network
N/A
11,897,704.0 6,067.85
Improvements
Notes:
1. Reductions from this measure were calculated based on VMT reductions projections from the City of Santa Clarita Non -
Motorized Transportation Plan. Data to calculate baseline emissions was not available.
10
E N V I R O N
1Zfq
APPENDIX D
Mitigation Measures and Evaluation, Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Z
O
H
�
v
v
v
�
u
�
�
v
�
u
u
K'---
'--
'-
'-
0
0
a
s
Y
m;
�m�
L
S
L
0
0
0
x
x
x
a
2
2
a:
a,
a VY
�
L
L
L
f0
:1z !0
L
m
L
l0
N
c`
v
=
x
=
s
_
a
0
0=a
0
in
2
V
O
a
m
m
H
m
m
o
o
v
_m
o_m
a
N
�
v
a
bD
In
S
i�•y. yJ
l j
O
E
N
.y
T�
E
Y
'4.3
U
O➢
N
T
0m
K
'O
Y
m
a
O
a
O
.V
K
U
m
T
p
'00
Y*• -O
a
=: E
j
w
ami
z
io
p
o g
p
r
a
p
a
j
m
`o
a>
O
u«
d
C
CL
H
N
T a
V'
111
tD
Ol
H
3>
'y ?
U
0
T
C,
p
7
p
0
p
Z
O
H
Key For Ranking Criteria
Reduction Potential
High - highest relative GHG reduction impact
Moderate - moderate relative GHG reduction impact
Low — small relative GHG reduction impact
Supporting— no or unknown reduction in itself, but would support another measure
Cost
$ - low relative cost
$$ - moderate relative cost
$$$ - high relative cost
Cost Effectiveness
High - most cost-effective measures
Moderate - moderately cost-effective measures
Low - least cost-effective measures
Implement -ability
High —already underway or implementable without
requiring a adoption of new plans or policies.
Moderate— possible or straightforward to implement
Low — difficult to implement
City Role
Policy — City has or will adopt a policy or standard to implement the measure
Project— City will review project to assure it meets City standards and CECW requirements
Joint Planning — City will work with other agencies that have jurisdiction to implement measure
l
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the requirements of
Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[X] CityCouncil [X] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a Negative
Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[X] Are Not Required [ ] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached
JEFF HOGAN, AICP
PLANNING MANA(
Prepared by:
Jeff Hogan, AICP. Planning_ Manager
(Name/Title)
Public
Public
[X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting of Properties [X] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
S:\CD\CURREN7112012\12.052 (IS 12-002 Climate Action Plan)UMSZ Proposed NOI ND 5 14 12.doc
/�3
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
[X] Proposed [ ] Final
MASTER CASE NO:
Master Case No. 12-052
PERMIT/PROJECT NAME:
Conditional Use Permit 12-052, Initial Study 12-002
APPLICANT:
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
PROJECT LOCATION:
Citywide
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The City of Santa Clarita has prepared a Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP,
which is required by the California Office of the Attorney General in response
to State Assembly Bill 32, is being completed pursuant to the City's new
General Plan and will create strategies for the City to reduce community -wide
greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis was conducted by establishing a
baseline year, conducting an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions in the base
year, and then forecasting greenhouse gas emissions through the year 2020,
contemplating the goals, policies and objectives within the new General Plan.
No new development is proposed as a part of this project
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this project, and pursuant to the requirements of
Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City of Santa Clarita
[X] CityCouncil [X] Planning Commission [ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no significant effect upon the environment, and that a Negative
Declaration shall be adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[X] Are Not Required [ ] Are Attached [ ] Are Not Attached
JEFF HOGAN, AICP
PLANNING MANA(
Prepared by:
Jeff Hogan, AICP. Planning_ Manager
(Name/Title)
Public
Public
[X] Legal Advertisement [ ] Posting of Properties [X] Written Notice
CERTIFICATION DATE:
S:\CD\CURREN7112012\12.052 (IS 12-002 Climate Action Plan)UMSZ Proposed NOI ND 5 14 12.doc
/�3
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Public Review Draft
Initial Study/
Negative Declaration
City of Santa Clarita
Climate Action Plan
psi
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Public Review Draft
Initial Study/
Negative Declaration
City of Santa Clarita
Climate Action Plan
Lead Agency:
City of Santa Clarita
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Prepared by:
ENVIRON International Corporation
773 San Marin Drive, Suite 2115
Novato, California, 94945
Contact:
Dave Peterson
Assistant Planner II
(661)284-1406
May 2012
2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................................................1
1.1 PURP05E.............................................................................................................................................1
1.2 REGIONAL SETTING.............................................................................................................................1
1.3 CITY CHARACTERISTICS.......................................................................................................................1
1.4 PROJECT BACKGROUND......................................................................................................................1
1.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES..........................................................................................................................2
1.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................................2
1.6.1 Emissions Inventory, Baseline and Projections............................................................................3
1.6.2 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategies.........................................................................4
1.6.3 Results of Implementation...........................................................................................................5
1.6.4 Potential Environmental Impacts................................................................................................6
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM......................................................................................................7
2.1 AESTHETICS.......................................................................................................................................10
2.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES......................................................................................12
2.3 AIR QUALITY......................................................................................................................................15
2.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES...................................................................................................................17
2.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES.....................................................................................................................21
2.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS.........................................................................................................................23
2.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.........................................................................................................27
2.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS..........................................................................................29
2.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY..................................................................................................33
2.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING..............................................................................................................39
2.11 MINERAL RESOURCES.....................................................................................................................41
2.12 NOISE..............................................................................................................................................43
2.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING..........................................................................................................47
2.14 PUBLIC SERVICES.............................................................................................................................49
2.15 RECREATION....................................................................................................................................52
2.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC............................................................................................................54
2.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS....................................................................................................58
2.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.....................................................................................62
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
1.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
1.1 PURPOSE
The City of Santa Clarita (City) prepared a Draft Climate Action Plan (Proposed CAP) using input from City
staff, consultants, and the public. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the City
has also prepared this Initial Study (IS) to assess the environmental effects of implementing the
Proposed CAP. This IS consists of a project description, followed by a description of the various
environmental effects that may result from implementation of the Proposed CAP. The creation of the
document is identified by the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan. Any future development will be
subject to the City's standard entitlement and building process. Project level environmental review will
be conducted on a case-by-case basis.
1.2 REGIONAL SETTING
The City of Santa Clarita is located in the Santa Clarita Valley. The Santa Clarita Valley is located in
Southern California in the northern portion of Los Angeles County. The Valley is situated at the near the
western boundary of Los Angeles County and the eastern boundary of Ventura County, approximately
35 miles northwest of downtown Los Angeles. The Santa Clarita Valley includes the City of Santa Clarita
and County communities of Stevenson Ranch, Castaic, Val Verde, Agua Dulce, The proposed CAP applies
geographically to the City of Santa Clarita only.
1.3 CITY CHARACTERISTICS
The City of Santa Clarita, located approximately 35 miles north of Los Angeles is a premier community
for raising families and building businesses. The City has committed to maintaining a quality living
environment through long-term planning, fiscal responsibility, community involvement, respect for the
environment, and support for business development. The City encompasses over 52 square miles, with a
2010 population of over 176,000. The number of housing units in 2010 was 62,055.
The City of Santa Clarita is a general -law city operating under a council-manager form of government,
with the City Council acting as the part-time legislative body of the City. Five members are elected to the
City Council at -large on a nonpartisan basis, with members serving four-year terms. Elections are
staggered every two years, with the Council -appointed mayor serving a one-year term and acting as the
Council's presiding officer.
The City supports a strong and diverse economy through cooperation with local businesses, a highly -
skilled labor pool, a variety of transportation facilities, available land and leasable space, available
housing, and a high quality of life. Top employers in the Valley include Six Flags California, Princess
Cruises, HR Textron, Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital and the local colleges and school districts.
Over 125,000 workers participate in the City's labor force, of which over 60 percent are college
graduates. Median household income is over $ 62,642 annually. Almost 20,000 students are enrolled in
the City's three colleges. A diverse array of housing communities meets the needs of City residents,
including family-oriented neighborhoods, executive estates, apartments, condominiums, and senior
communities.
1.4 PROJECT BACKGROUND
The General Plan for the City of Santa Clarita is the foundation for making land use decisions based on
goals and policies related to land use, population growth and distribution, development, open space,
resource preservation and utilization, air and water supply and other factors. The vision of the General
l5
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Plan is that Santa Clarita Valley is an ideal place to live, work, play, grow a business, and raise a family.
The guiding principles implement the vision for the Santa Clarita Valley and are intended to sustain and
enhance environmental resources.
The CAP builds from the goals, objectives and policies delineated in the General Plan and develops
specific actions to be implemented and monitored to achieve GHG reduction goals. The City's General
Plan process developed a number of goals, objectives and policies that address climate change.
Accordingly, the General Plan goals, objectives and policies are incorporated into the Climate Action
Plan's mitigation plan component and to the extent feasible are translated into measures that result in
reductions in GHG emissions. The General Plan will:
• Reduce vehicle miles traveled ;
• Include more focus on higher residential and commercial density including transit oriented
development and mixed use development;
• Reduce the valley -wide carbon footprint.
The General Plan contains numerous goals, objectives and policies and project features that would
reduce GHG emissions from "business as usual" (BAU) conditions. Using these goals, objectives and
policies as a starting point, the CAP identifies those mitigation measures that can be quantified and
translated into significant reductions in the GHG emissions by the year 2020.
1.5 PROJECT OBJECTIVES
In January 2011, the City of Santa Clarita began the process of developing a CAP. The purpose of the
CAP is to measure the amount of greenhouse gas emissions generated within the City and to develop
strategies to reduce the emissions in the future. The plan includes a set of strategies the City can use to
reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced in the community. The CAP includes the
following components:
Emissions Inventory —This component includes an inventory of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for
the entire community from all sources. Emissions of GHG generated within the City of Santa
Clarita are primarily from vehicles and energy use.
Emission Forecasts —This component assesses future year activities within the City to create future
year forecasts of GHG emissions for the BAU case without any further GHG emissions
reductions.
Public Outreach —This component includes engaging community stakeholders and the public to
gather feedback on the types of strategies the City can employ to reduce GHG emissions in the
future.
Mitigation Plan —This component creates the overall plan for mitigating the GHG emissions based
on information from the inventory, the public outreach component and the goals, objectives
and policies of the General Plan developed by the City. The goal is to reduce GHG emissions to a
level that is consistent with the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32).
Monitoring Plan —This component of the plan establishes a monitoring program to allow the City to
monitor the progress towards reduction the GHG emissions once the CAP has been completed.
1.6 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project is the adoption of the Proposed CAP, a document that provides policies and
identifies actions intended to reduce GHG emissions within the City and assist in the fight against
1 sV
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Climate Change. Overall the goal is to reduce Santa Clarita's community -wide GHG emissions below the
2005 baseline emissions by 2020. The Proposed CAP provides general information about climate change
and how GHG emissions within the City contribute to such emissions. In addition, the Proposed CAP
describes baseline GHG emissions produced in the City and projects GHG emissions that would be
expected if the Proposed CAP is not implemented. The strategies, measures, and actions proposed in
the Proposed CAP are described in more detail under "Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduction Measures,"
below.
The Proposed CAP is the result of community outreach and public participation. The City hosted public
workshops in April, May and June of 2011 that presented the inventory results, projections of emissions,
and the need for community action regarding climate change and GHG emissions. A total of ten
meetings were held with the general public as well as the Boards of local business organizations. The
meetings were held throughout the City to elicit more input from interested and concerned residents.
Approximately 20 residents attended the sessions and valuable input was received regarding the
direction of the CAP effort and what City residents could do to do more in this area. Additional
community outreach was held with the community in the spring of 2012.
1.6.1 Emissions inventory, Baseline and Projections
The City of Santa Clarita 2005 base year GHG emissions inventory was developed to capture GHG
emissions from various sectors. 2005 is chosen as the base year and is consistent with the base year
established by SB 375 which addresses regional planning and VMT reductions. There are two sub -
inventories: (1) The municipal inventory, which covers all sources under the City's municipal operation,
and (2) the community inventory, which covers the rest of the sources within the City's boundaries.
Since there is no standard inventory protocol for a community wide inventory, the CAP inventory
methodology was developed based on procedures established in three documents: The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Guidelines for the National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories, the Local Government Operational Protocol (LGOP) covering municipal operations, and the
Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol (GRP).
Sectors evaluated were the transportation sector, the building energy sector, the industrial sector, the
waste sector and others such as area lighting, potable water, agricultural and refrigerant use. The
transportation sector includes on -road vehicles, off-road equipment, and rail travel. For the municipal
inventory, on -road vehicles include a fleet of light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles owned and operated by
the City, City-wide buses, the County Sheriff vehicles that operate within the City, and solid waste
hauling trucks. The Building sector emissions include indirect emissions from electricity consumption
(for lighting and appliances) and direct emissions from fuel combustion (for heating, hot water, power
generation, and running portable equipment). There are two categories of emission sources in the
industrial sector: (1) fuel combustion for industrial operations, (2) fugitive emissions from Industrial
processes. Since electricity and natural gas use for industrial operation are already captured in the
Building Energy sector discussed above, operational fuel combustion in this section refers to additional
fossil fuel use (e.g. diesel fuel oil) to power industrial equipment or as power generation feedstock. The
waste sector of greenhouse gas emissions includes two major sources: wastewater treatment and solid
waste at landfills. The two wastewater treatment facilities serving the City of Santa Clarita are the
Valencia Water Reclamation Plant and the Saugus Water Reclamation Plant. The remaining categories
included area lighting, potable water, agricultural and refrigerant use. The 2005 base line emissions
total 1,717,648 metric tons (MT) of GHG emissions expressed in terms of carbon dioxide equivalency
(CO2e). The distribution of 2005 baseline emissions is shown in Figure 1.
l ��
May 2012
13%
2%
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
■ All Municipal Operations
■ Energy (Residential)
■ Energy (Commercial + Industrial)
■ Solid Waste
■ Transportation (On -Road)
■ Transportation (Off -Road)
■ Other
Figure 1. 2005 Total Greenhouse Gas Emissions Contribution by Source Category.
The projected 2020 GHG emissions for the BALI case (without any mitigation measures) were
determined to be 1, 987,162 MTCOze.
1.6.2 Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategies
The Proposed CAP identifies several strategies or measures to achieve the City's GHG reduction target.
The Proposed CAP measures include the following;
Statewide Measures
Several measures have been adopted at the State level that would achieve significant reductions from
the 2020 projected BALI case described above. These include the California Renewable Portfolio
Standard (RPS), the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), Pavley/AB 1493 and AB 341/Solid Waste
Diversion. While the RPS and Pavley/AB 1493 measures were in place prior to this 2020 emissions
projection estimate and so are included in the BAU case, the other statewide measures (LCFS, AB
341/Solid Waste diversion) will reduce the GHG emissions by 148,952 MTCOze by 2020.
CAP Energy Measures
The Proposed CAP energy measures include Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting,
Replacement of Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights, and Onsite Renewable Energy Systems using
photovoltaic (PV) to generate electricity. Together these measures will reduce GHG emissions by 6,085
MTCO2e.
16D.
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Transportation Measures
Transportation Measures include Overall Land Use Transportation Measures including increasing the
density of in -city development, improving the diversity of urban and suburban developments (e.g.,
residential areas in same neighborhood as retail and office buildings), increasing location efficiency (e.g.,
located in urban area/downtown central business district), destination and transit accessibility(e.g.,
projects located is an area with high accessibility to destinations) , integration of affordable and below
market rate housing, implementation of trip reduction programs such as ridesharing, improving the
transit system by expanding the transit network and increasing service frequency, and improving the
flow of traffic at city intersections and congested roadways. Additional measures include Providing
Pedestrian Network Improvements. Overall, these measures will reduce GHG emissions by 124,631
MTCOze by 2020.
Water Measures
Water measures included in the Proposed CAP include the Use of Reclaimed Water, Use of Low -Flow
Water Fixtures and Water -efficient Landscape Irrigation Systems. Together these measures will reduce
GHG emissions by 21,507 MTCO2e.
Vegetation Measures
The Proposed CAP includes two vegetation measures: Urban Tree Planting and New Vegetated Open
Space. Together these measures will reduce GHG emission by 40,798 MTCO2e by 2020.
1.6.3 Results of Implementation
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in annual community -wide GHG emissions reduction
of approximately 193,020 MTCO2e by 2020. This reduction would exceed the City's goal to reduce Santa
Clarita's community -wide GHG emissions below the 2005 baseline emissions by 2020. In addition, the
reduction would exceed the CARB statewide reduction goal of reducing the 2020 business -as -usual (BAU)
emissions level of 16 percent. Figure 2 below shows a comparison of BAU projections with the CAP target.
Figure 2. Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CAP Target.
l��
2,100,000
i2,000,000
1
1,987,162
9
♦ Projected 2020BAU
'9
11900,000
',. —0—CAP 2020 Target
E N
1,800,000
1,700,000 -{
dr
1,717,648
1,645,190
`
1,600,000..
"
1,500,000
2005 Baseline Year 2020
Figure 2. Comparison of Business -as -Usual Projections with the CAP Target.
l��
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Table 1 below identifies the GHG emissions reductions that would be expected from each proposed
measure.
Table 1. Annual GHG Emissions Reductions for 2020 from Proposed CAP Measures.
INvOINIM
Install Higher Efficacy Public Street and Area Lighting
T
83
Replace Traffic Lights with LED Traffic Lights
31
Establish Onsite Renewable Energy Systems - Solar Power
5,971
Total
6,085
Overall Land Use/ Location Measures
118,563
Provide Pedestrian Network Improvements
6,068
Total
124,631
Use Reclaimed Water
2,605
Install Low -Flow Water Fixtures
18,256
Use Water -Efficient Landscape Irrigation Systems
646
Total
21,507
Urban Tree Planting
715
Create New Vegetated Open Space
40,083
Total
40,798
TOTAL POTENTIAL REDUMCNS FROM CAP MEASURES ' "
-`198 020::
1.6.4 Potential Environmental Impacts.
The overall purpose of the Proposed CAP is to reduce the impact that the community will have on global
climate change and, therefore, benefit the environment. The following paragraphs summarize the
possible impacts that could result from implementation of the Proposed CAP. An analysis of each
potential impact is included in the environmental checklist below.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, policies and objectives of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in lune,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. While these projects could potentially result in changes of the visual character of the City,
the projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as needed.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as needed.
May 2012
2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Project title: City of Santa Clarita
2. Lead agency name and address:
3. Contact person and phone number:
4. Project location:
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
6. General plan designation:
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Climate Action Plan
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
David Peterson
Assistant Planner II
(661)284-1406
Santa Clarita, CA
City of Santa Clarita
Planning Division
23920 Valencia Blvd., Suite 300
Various
7. Zoning: Various
8. Description of project: See Project Background and Description Below
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: See Enclosed Environmental Setting
(Briefly describe the project's Surroundings.)
30. Other public agencies whose approval is required: N/A
(e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
7
1 b3
May 2012 _
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact' as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
❑ Aesthetics
❑ Biological Resources
❑ Greenhouse Gas Emissions
❑ Land Use/Planning
❑ Population/Housing
Transportation/Traffic
❑ Agriculture and Forestry Resources ❑ Air Quality
❑ Cultural Resources ❑ Geology/Soils
❑ Hazards & Hazardous Materials Ll Quality Quality
❑ Mineral Resources ❑ Noise
❑ Public Services
Utilities/Service Systems
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ Recreation
Mandatory Findings of
❑ Significance
® I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or
agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact' or "potentially
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been
addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to
be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures
that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature Date
Printed Name For
8
/64
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately
supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each
question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources
show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project
falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based
on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive
receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate
if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or more
"Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"
to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and
briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures
from "Earlier Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within
the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on
the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from
the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the
project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously
prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or
pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance.
ILs
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.1 AESTHETICS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
I. AESTHETICS — Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
❑
❑
scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited to,
❑
❑
❑
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality of the site and
❑
❑
®
❑
its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
❑
❑
❑
area?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Located in a picturesque valley just north of Los Angeles, Santa Clarita is located approximately 35 miles
northwest of downtown Los Angeles. The City is located in the Santa Clarita Valley which is framed by
mountain ranges, including the San Gabriel, Santa Susana, and Sierra Pelona ranges. Angeles National
Forest land, most of which is undeveloped and protected, surrounds much of the planning area. The
natural topography of the Santa Clara River and its many tributary canyons, in conjunction with the
National Forest holdings, has focused growth in the Santa Clarita Valley on the more central, level areas
between the Valley's two major freeways (the Golden State (Interstate 5) and Antelope Valley (State
Route 14). The Valley's topography is characterized by rolling terrain, canyons, creeks, and the Santa
Clara River. The river flows from east to west for almost 100 miles from its headwaters near Acton to the
Pacific Ocean.
DISCUSSION
A) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista
The Proposed CAP proposes strategies and measures that would aid the City in reducing emissions of
GHG, and thus would not directly lead to development that would affect scenic vistas. However, the
proposed measures encourage the installation of photovoltaic (PV) solar panels and other distributed
renewable energy technologies on homes, businesses and City facilities to provide alternative sources of
energy. PV panels could be placed on rooftops, and though integrated into rooftops could potentially
alter views of the surrounding mountain ranges for homes and businesses located behind the rooftop
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
panels. However, the placement of PV panels for residential or civic use would likely not be large
enough to significantly affect views from other residences located nearby or behind the rooftop panels.
Installation of these panels would require standard building permits from the City and could require the
issuance of entitlements from the City, which would ensure that PV panels would not have a specific,
adverse impact on public health and safety. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in less
than significant impact.
B) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
According to the California Department of Transportation's State Scenic Highway program for Los
Angeles County, a portion of the Interstate 5 (1-5) freeway is designated as an "Eligible State Scenic
Highway". This designated eligible segment of the I-5 Freeway extends from the 1-210 Freeway
interchange to the S.R.126/Newhall Ranch Road interchange. The proposed CAP would not damage any
scenic resources, such as ridgelines, trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings. Therefore there
would be no impact.
C) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
The Proposed CAP recommends measures for new and existing municipal facilities, city street lighting
and private businesses to improve energy efficiency. In addition, the City encourages the use of solar
power through its website GreenSantaClarita.com and is actively looking for additional funds to
continue the Green Energy Partnership which provides incentives for solar projects. The installation of
PV panels on rooftops could result in slight changes to existing visual character. However, rooftop
retrofits would be designed to be compatible with existing development. Installation of PV panels
would be subject to issuance of a building permit by the city and could be subject to the issuance of
entitlements, ensuring that they do not result in a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in a less -than -significant impact.
D) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in the development of major light sources,
although distributed installation of PV panels on homes, businesses, and City facilities is encouraged to
reduce the City's dependence on energy sources that produce GHGs. PV panels are specifically designed
to adsorb, not reflect, sunlight. Thus, their placement and orientation on individual properties would
not adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the area. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would
result in no impact
11 N7
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to
use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest
resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the
state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest
Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols
adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined
in Public Resources Code section
12220(g)), timberland (as defined by
Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland
Production (as defined by Government
Code section 51104(8))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non -forest
use?
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ M ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
12
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
SETTING
Very little farmland exists in the City. Of the total of 1,994 acres of land designated on the State's
Farmland Map for the entire planning area, only 150 acres of farmland are located within the City of
Santa Clarita. The California Department of Conservation (CDC) has designated 128 acres as Prime
Farmland in the City. The City does not include any Farmland of Statewide Importance.
DISCUSSION
A) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Important (Farmland),
as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring
Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
Since the 2006-2008 FMMP mapping cycle, Farmland that was previously designated shows that these
areas have been declassified as Important Farmland designations. Further, land use policy LU 1.17
within the City's General Plan would preserve and protect any important agriculture resources, including
farmland and grazing land that exists in the City. The Land Use Policy Map and proposed Area Plan are
consistent with the non -conversion of Important Farmland, and would be considered no impact.
The Proposed CAP does not include any measures that address possible exposure of (1) future residents
to nuances associated with agricultural operations, or (2) currently established nuisances associated
with adjacent urban uses. The potential development within the City and the possibility that new
development would be located next to agriculturally active lands is unknown at this time. Therefore,
any future individual projects that are developed within the City will be analyzed on a project -by -project
basis, and mitigation measures would be recommended as needed. Therefore, there is no impact.
B) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
Presently, the only Williamson Act contract in the County is for the preservation of open space on Santa
Catalina Island (Los Angeles County 2008). Therefore, there are no Williamson Act contracted lands in
the City. Farmland that is designated under the 2004-2006 FMMP mapping cycle has been approved
and is now urbanized. Therefore, there is no impact.
C) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220 (g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland reduction (as defined by Government Code
section 51104 (g))?
The Santa Clarita Valley land use development has been shaped by the National Forest lands occupying
the mountain ranges to the north, east, and south of Valley communities. The Land Use Maps for the
City's General Plan have reinforced the concentration of urban land uses within central portions of the
Valley by designating significant areas of open space and rural residential uses between more developed
areas and the National Forest lands. The Angeles and Los Padres National Forest are adjacent to the
planning area and the proposed CAP does not contemplate any development that would cause the
rezoning of forest land, timberland. Therefore, there is no impact.
D) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non -forest use?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Therefore, implementation of the Proposed CAP would result have a less -than -significant impact.
E) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature,
could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
The City's General Plan contains a land use policy (LU 1.1.7) to help to conserve existing lands
designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Statewide Importance. The Open
Space designation is intended to identify and reserve land for both natural and active open space uses,
including public and private parks, conservancy lands, nature preserves, wildlife habitats, water bodies
and adjacent riparian habitat, wetlands areas dedicated to open space use, drainage easements,
cemeteries, golf courses, and other open space areas dedicated for public and private uses. Typical uses
include recreation, horticulture, limited agriculture, animal grazing, and habitat preservation. The Rural
Land designation would provide for non -urban lands that are used for low-density residential uses on
large lots, in areas characterized by rural development interspersed with natural open space.
Agricultural lands would be included and used for grazing, horticulture, row, field, and tree crops, and
limited keeping of livestock, horses and other large animals.
The Proposed CAP does not include any measures that would involve changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-
agricultural use. This would be a no impact.
14
1-70
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.3 AIR QUALITY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
III. AIR QUALITY -- Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
❑
❑
❑
quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or
contribute substantially to an existing or
❑
❑
❑
23
projected air quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non -
attainment under an applicable federal
❑
❑
❑
or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
❑
❑
❑
substantial pollutant concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
❑
❑
❑
substantial number of people?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City of Santa Clarita is located in the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB) which is bounded by the Pacific
Ocean and Ventura County to the west, the San Gabriel, San Bernardino, and San Jacinto Mountains to
the north and east, and San Diego County to the south. The South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) has jurisdiction over the basin. The SCAQMD has developed an Air Quality
Management Plan (AQMP) to meet the State and Federal ambient air quality standards. Ventura County
is located in the South Central Coast Air Basin (SCCAB).
Air quality within the SCAB has generally improved since the inception of air pollutant monitoring in
1976. This improvement is mainly due to lower -polluting on -road motor vehicles, more stringent
regulation of industrial sources, and the implementation of emission reduction strategies by the
SCAQMD. This trend towards cleaner air has occurred in spite of continued population growth.
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
The City of Santa Clarita does not contain any major point sources of air pollution, but traffic from City
roadways contribute to both criteria pollutant and GHG emissions. The South Central Coast Air Basin
(SCCAB) lies to the immediate west of the Planning Area. Although wind patterns may have an effect on
air quality, pollutant transport is primarily known to occur between the SCAB and the SCCCAB.
DISCUSSION
A) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality Plan?
The purpose of the Proposed CAP is to reduce GHG emissions within the City to help contribute to global
efforts to reduce the effects of climate change. Elements of the CAP include improving energy efficiency
in buildings, improving energy management, reducing vehicle use, developing bicycle and pedestrian
facilities, enhancing public transit, using renewable energy, increasing water conservation and creating
or preserving open space. In addition to reducing GHGs, each of these elements would help reduce
criteria air pollutants and would not conflict with or obstruct the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management
Plan. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in no impact.
B) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation.
In addition to reducing GHGs, each of the measures in the Proposed CAP would help reduce criteria air
pollutants and would not conflict with or obstruct the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in no impact.
C) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
In addition to reducing GHGs, each of the measures in the Proposed CAP would help reduce criteria air
pollutants and would not conflict with or obstruct the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in no impact.
D) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
In addition to reducing GHGs, each of the measures in the Proposed CAP would help reduce criteria air
pollutants and would not conflict with or obstruct the SCAQMD's Air Quality Management Plan.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in no impact.
E) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
The Proposed CAP does not propose strategies or measures that would directly or indirectly result in the
creation of objectionable odors. Therefore, there would be no impact.
16 1 ��
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations, or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or
C
C
0
0
0
n
C
u
❑ ❑ ® ❑
ordinances protecting biological resources, ❑
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or ❑
other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
4-I
Q41
17 / —`%,3
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Natural areas within the City abut and link to surrounding natural areas of the Valley and general
support a similar suite of species and communities as are found in the Valley. The major natural
features of the Valley are the Santa Clara River, Santa Susanna Mountains, Liebre Mountains, western
San Gabriel Mountains, Castaic Valley, San Francisquito Canyon, Bouquet Canyon, Placerita Canyon,
Mint Canyon, Sand Canyon, and Hasley Canyon. A substantial portion of the area, primarily adjacent to
the City of Santa Clarita, is undeveloped or open space, and still supports a relatively large number of
native plant and animal habitats and communities. Species within the remaining natural areas are
adapted to the Mediterranean climate of the region, in that they thrive in the cool, wet winters, and dry,
hot summers typical of the area.
Major plant and terrestrial communities include coastal and desert scrub, and chaparral vegetation
types. Other vegetation types include bigcone spruce -canyon oak forest, coast live oak woodland, coast
live oak riparian forest, juniper woodland, pinyon -juniper woodland, southern sycamore -alder
woodland, southern cottonwood -willow riparian woodland and forest, southern willow scrub,
freshwater marsh, vernal pools, alluvial fan sage scrub, and native and annual grassland.
The segment of the Santa Clara River passing through the City of Santa Clarita is a dry channel except
during seasonal runoff flows. Regardless of this condition, it supports relatively intact stands of alluvial
sage scrub formations, riparian woodland, and southern riparian scrub. The dry zones are essential to
the continued genetic isolation of the unarmored three-spined stickleback population in the upper
reaches of the River
DISCUSSION
A) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special -status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in a less -than -significant impact.
B) Have substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community Identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulation or by the California
Department of Fish and Game or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
18
/7q
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP contemplates continued acquisition of natural lands within the City and
surrounding the City for preservation as open space in perpetuity.
In the event that riparian habitat or other sensitive communities could potentially be affected by future
actions, project -specific studies and mitigation, if necessary, would be required pursuant to existing
CDFG and/or USFWS requirements. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in a less -than -
significant impact.
C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section
404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP contemplates continued acquisition of natural lands within the City and
surrounding the City for preservation as open space in perpetuity.
In the event that wetlands could potentially be affected by future actions, project -specific wetland
studies and mitigation, if necessary, would be required pursuant to existing Clean Water Act
requirements. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in a less -than -significant impact.
19 � ��
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
D) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP contemplates continued acquisition of natural lands within the City and
surrounding the City for preservation as open space in perpetuity.
In the event that protected wildlife species could potentially be affected by future actions, project
specific studies and mitigation, if necessary, would be required pursuant to existing FESA and CESA
requirements. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in a less -than -significant impact.
E) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting g biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The Proposed CAP does not contain any components that would directly or indirectly conflict with local
policies that protect biological resources including the City of Santa Clarita's Conservation and Open
Space Element of the General Plan, Oak Tree Ordinance, Open Space Acquisition District or other local
plan or policy. Therefore, there would be no impact.
F) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
A Draft Santa Clarita Valley Habitat Plan is under development and a Conservation of Open Space
Element is included in the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. Further protection of locally important
habitats is provided through the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Program, a component of the Los
Angeles County General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element. SEAS are ecologically important land
and water systems that support valuable habitat for plants and animals, often integral to the
preservation of rare, threatened or endangered species and the conservation of biological diversity in
the County. The Proposed CAP does not contain any components that would directly or indirectly
conflict with these plans. Therefore, there would be no impact.
20 / —7(a
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
%11rP1ri I RM119 3 *"91041*'
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
❑
❑
❑
as defined in § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
❑
❑
®
❑
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
❑
❑
M
❑
unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
❑
❑
®
❑
cemeteries?
DISCUSSION
The Santa Clarita Valley Historical Society and the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) list 9
historical properties, sites, and landmarks in the region around the City of Santa Clarita. The locations of
these sites surround the City of Santa Clarita but are not located within the City. Of these sites, one is a
California Register of Historic Resources, five are State Historic Landmarks, and three are national
Register of Historic Places. In addition to these sites, literature surveys prepared for recent studies
identified 69 archaeological sites or isolated artifacts within 0.25 mile of the Santa Clara River as it runs
through the Santa Clarita Valley. Additional sites are likely present, as the river represented a major
resource for Native American groups in the vicinity. These sites generally occur in the same types of
locations as archaeological sites, often (but not always) near resource areas such as watercourses,
drainages, and woodlands.
A) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined
in Section 15064.5?
Current policies adopted by the City related to historic resources would reduce the effects of growth
and development by (1) requiring development proposals be evaluated for the presence of historic
resources and (2) by protecting historic buildings from demolition by undergoing review of appropriate
documentation (i.e., cultural resource reports). The Proposed CAP does not propose any strategy or
measure that would directly result in an adverse change in the significance of a historical resource.
Therefore there would be no impact.
21/77
77
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
B) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to Section 15064.5?
There are no known archaeological resources in the City of Santa Clarita. There is a remote possibility
that ground -disturbing activities that occur as a result of building additional pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure pursuant to the Proposed CAP could uncover previously unknown archaeological
resources. In the event that this occurs, compliance with State regulations pertaining to discovery of
archaeological resources would ensure that the impact is less -than -significant.
C) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
The City of Santa Clarita does not contain any known paleontological or unique geologic features. The
proposed project is implementation of a draft plan intended to reduce community -wide GHG emissions
and does not include any elements that would directly or indirectly destroy these features. There is a
remote possibility that ground disturbing activities that occur as a result of building additional
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure pursuant to the Proposed CAP could uncover unique
paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features. In the event such resources or features
are discovered, compliance with State regulations pertaining to discovery of paleontological resources
would ensure that this impact is less -than -significant.
D) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
There is a remote possibility that ground -disturbing activities that occur as a result of building additional
pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure pursuant to the Proposed CAP could uncover previously unknown
human remains. In the event this occurs, compliance with State regulations pursuing to discovery of
human remains would ensure that the impact is less -than -significant.
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
❑
❑
®
❑
including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake
fault, as delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on
❑
❑
®
❑
other substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
❑
❑
❑
iii) Seismic -related ground failure,
❑
❑
❑
including liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
❑
❑
❑
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
❑
❑
❑
the loss of topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
❑
❑
❑
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
❑
❑
❑
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal
❑
❑
❑
systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
23 / 7q
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Various soil types exist within the City. Erosion is a concern as some topsoil is sandy and varying
topography exists. Generally, the potential for soils to exhibit expansive properties occur in low-lying
areas, especially near river channels. Certain bedrock and soils in City contain sufficient clay content;
thus, the potential for shrink/swell to occur does exist.
The City is located in the vicinity of several known active and potentially active earthquake faults and
fault zones. Several faults fall within or adjacent to the City Planning Area including the San Gabriel
Fault zone which traverses the planning area from northwest to southeast, extending 87 miles from the
community of Frazier Park (west of Gorman) to Mount Baldy in San Bernardino County. The San Gabrie
Fault zone under lies the northerly portion of the community from Castaic and Saugus, extending east
through Canyon Country to Sunland. The San Andreas Fault Zone is located north of the City of Santa
Clarita and extends through the communities of Frazier Park, Palmdale, Wrightwood, and San
Bernardino.
Scientists have identified almost 100 faults in the Los Angeles area known to be capable of a magnitude
6.0 or greater earthquake. The January 17, 1994, magnitude 6.7 Northridge Earthquake, which produced
severe ground motions causing 57 deaths and 9,253 injuries, left over 20,000 displaced from their
homes. Scientists have indicated that such devastating shaking should be considered the norm near any
large thrust fault earthquake in the region. Recent reports from the US Geological Survey and the
Southern California Earthquake Center conclude that the Los Angeles area could expect one earthquake
every year of magnitude 5.0 or more, for the foreseeable future.
DISCUSSION
A) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated of the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.
There is currently an Alquist-Priolo Special Studies Zone that stretches from approximately the
geographic center of the City of Santa Clarita and runs in a northwesterly direction to the approximate
location of the City's northwestern corner.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
24 196
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Any new construction associated with the implementation of the CAP would be required to meet all
local, state and federal regulations regarding seismic activities and be considered on a case-by-case
basis.
Therefore, there would be less -than -significant impact.
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking?
Increases in population, and the development of residential and non-residential development that will
occur upon implementation of the City's General Plan, could result in the increased exposure of persons
and property to ground shaking hazards.
Some components of the Proposed CAP include the development of an expanded network of bike and
pedestrian facilities and retrofitting existing residential and commercial structures to be more efficient.
However, all future projects associated with implementation of the Proposed CAP would be required to
meet engineering and structural requirements and comply with all applicable building codes and seismic
requirements which would ensure that these project components do not expose people or structures to
the risks associated with strong seismic ground shaking. This would be no impact.
Iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Liquefaction has been observed to occur in soft, poorly graded granular materials (such as loose sands)
where the water table is high. Areas in the Valley underlain by unconsolidated alluvium, such as along
the Santa Clara River and tributary washes, may be prone to liquefaction. To lessen the potential for
property loss, injury, or death resulting from liquefaction during earthquake events, policies are
identified in the Area Plan and adopted by the City to reduce these potentially significant impacts.
Similar to Item a) ii), all future projects associated implementation of the Proposed CAP would be
required to meet engineering and structural requirements , as well as applicable building code
requirements. Such compliance would ensure safety to the structure and plan components. This would
be a no impact.
Iv) Landslides?
Areas susceptible to landslides are identified in the City General Plan. In 2004 the City adopted a five-
year Natural Hazard Mitigation Action Plan as a collaborative effort between City staff and citizens,
public agencies, non-profit organizations, the private sector, and regional and State agencies. The plan
provides a list of activities that may assist the City in reducing risk and preventing loss from natural
hazard events, including earthquakes, floods, hazardous material spills, landslides and earth movement,
severe weather, and wildland fires and is currently being updated. However, projects that could occur as
a result of implementation of the Proposed CAP would not add to this risk or include any elements that
would increase the risk of a landslide. Thus the impact would be no impact.
B) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
No future projects resulting from the implementation of the Proposed CAP would directly involve major
movement of topsoil or directly result in substantial soil erosion. Implementation of the City General
Plan policies (CO 2.1.1, CO 2.1.2 and CO 2.2.5) would require review of soil erosion and sedimentation
control plans for activities related to development, promotion of conservation of topsoil on
development sites by stockpiling for later reuse and require that developers use erosion control
techniques during grading and construction in hillside areas. This would ensure a no impact.
25 181
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
C) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on -or Off-sie landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
As stated under Item a) iii), the City has already determined areas of liquefaction and landslides within
the Planning Area, and taken steps to lessen the potential for property loss, injury, or death resulting
from liquefaction during earthquake events. Future projects associated with the implementation of the
Proposed CAP would not cause the ground on which they are located to become unstable and result in
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. This would be a no impact.
D) Be located on expansive soil a defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
As stated in the Environmental Setting, the potential for soils to exhibit expansive properties occur in
low-lying areas, especially near river channels. Certain bedrock and soils within the City contain
sufficient clay content; thus, the potential for shrink/swell to occur does exist. Structures and
infrastructure in these areas can be of risk if they are not engineered and built according to
appropriated building codes. However, all projects that may possibly be developed as a result of
implementation of the Proposed CAP would be subject to applicable engineering and City building code
requirements, which would ensure that they are developed in a way that minimizes the possible effects
of expansive soil. Compliance with existing code regulations would ensure a no impact.
E) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alterative waste
water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water?
There are currently a few areas in the City that use septic tanks and alternative waste water disposal
systems due to the lack of wastewater disposal infrastructure. As of 2005, there were 858 dwellings
that use septic systems that are not under control of the sanitation district. Soils within the City are
capable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks; however, analysis of individual site-specific
developments would be required to conclude that these soils would be supportive of such a system.
Future developments within the City's Planning Area would be required to include an analysis of on-site
soil capability to adequately support the use of septic tanks. Therefore there would be no impact.
26 /eS;)L
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.7 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.- Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
❑
❑
❑
have a significant impact on the
environment?
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Proposed CAP establishes the 2005 GHH emissions baseline inventory for the City. The total
emissions of GHG in 2005 were estimated to 1,709,556 MTCO2e'. The emissions were developed
separately for community -wide sources and municipal sources. Of this total, the emissions from on -
road vehicles were the main source of GHG emissions for the City in 2005 (nearly 60%) followed by
residential energy use (18%) and commercial/industrial energy use (13%). The municipal operations
emissions make up approximately 2% of the total emissions. This emissions profile is typical for a City
with the characteristics of Santa Clarita.
A large portion of the GHG reductions would be achieved by the decrease in vehicle miles traveled in the
City via changes in land use patterns and a greater emphasis of transit and alternative transportation
programs. Other significant reductions are due to the creation or acquisition of new vegetated space in
line with the goals of the City's Open Space Preservation District and water use measures. Applying
estimated reductions from CAP measures shows that the resulting 2020 net emissions are expected to
be approximately 4% below the 2005 baseline level. The reduction represents a level that is 4% below
the 2005 baseline emissions level and is also consistent with the overall Statewide Goals of AB 32 of
greater than 16% reduction below 2020 BAU forecasts. Figure -1 shows a comparison of Business -as -
Usual (BAU) Projections with the CAP Target.
DISCUSSION
A) Generate GHG's either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment?
Implementation of strategies and measures proposed within the Proposed CAP would result in annual
community -wide GHG emissions of approximately 1,645,190 MTCOze in 2020 which would represent a
reduction of approximately 17 percent below the business -as -usual projections in 2020. Table 1 in the
' MTCOee represents Metric Tonnes of Carbon Dioxide equivalent emissions.
27 /
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Project Description identifies the MMT COZe reductions and percentages that would be expected from
implementation of each proposed CAP measure. Thus implementation of the Proposed CAP would both
directly and indirectly reduce community -wide GHGs. There would be no impact.
B) Conflict with any applicable plan, policy or regulation of an agency adopted for the
purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
California has adopted a wide variety of regulations to reduce the State's GHG emission. AB 32, the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 requires California to reduce statewide GHG emissions
to 1990 levels by 1020. AB 32 directs CARB to develop and implement regulations that reduce statewide
GHG emissions. The Climate Change Scoping Plan was approved by CARB in December 2008 and
subsequently revised in August of 2011. The Revised Scoping Plan contains primary strategies California
will implement to achieve reductions that will achieve 1990 levels. Considering the updated statewide
BAU estimate of 507 MMTCO2E by 2020, a 16 percent reduction below the estimated BAU levels would
be necessary to return to 1990 levels (i.e., 427 MMTCO2E) by 2020. GARB encourages local
governments to adopt a reduction goal for both municipal community -wide operations that parallel the
State commitment to reduce GHG emissions.
The Proposed CAP identifies the City's goals and measures that will be implemented to reduce
community -wide and municipal GHG emissions. The measures are being implemented in a manner
consistent with AB32. Implementation of the measures proposed in the Proposed CAP would result in
an annual community -wide reduction in GHG emissions of approximately 193,000 MTCOze by 2020 from
local measures and an additional reduction of approximately 148,952 MTCOZe by 2020 from statewide
measures. This would reduce GHG emissions from the Business -as -usual projections for 2020 by 17
percent. This would exceed the GHG reduction targets of 16 percent established by CARB in its revised
scoping plan. This would also exceed the City's goal to reduce 2020 GHG emissions to a level below the
2005 GHG emissions baseline by 4 percent. There are no regional or local plans or statewide measures
that conflict with the Proposed CAP Therefore, there would be no Impact.
28 1 21
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.8 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant with Significant No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through the ❑ ❑
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
accident conditions involving the release
of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within ❑ ❑ ❑
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code ❑ ❑ ® ❑
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public
or the environment?
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, ❑ ❑ ❑
would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in
the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project result ❑ ❑ ❑
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted ❑ ❑ ❑
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
29 / C55�
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Hazardous materials include any substance or combination of substances which, because of quantity,
concentration, or characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in death or serious
injury, or pose substantial hazards to humans and/or the environment. These materials may include
pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and chemicals, liquefied natural gas, explosives, volatile chemicals,
and nuclear fuels. Hazardous materials are present in all urban environments in one form or another,
including gasoline and diesel, household chemicals, paints, and cleansers. In Santa Clarita, major
generators and users of hazardous materials may include business such as gas stations, dry cleaners,
medical offices, and public buildings. Minor quantities of hazardous materials may also be found in
household chemicals, cleaning products, and paint.
DISCUSSION
A) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would be less -than -significant impact.
B) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
Into the environment?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would likely result in rehabilitation and renovation of older
residential and commercial structure with the City. Structures built prior to 1978 may contain asbestos -
containing building materials and lead paint. If not properly handled and released into the environment
in large enough quantities, these materials could pose a threat to construction workers and public
safety.
30 X/ _
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
h) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
El
❑
❑ 19
wildiands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Hazardous materials include any substance or combination of substances which, because of quantity,
concentration, or characteristics, may cause or significantly contribute to an increase in death or serious
injury, or pose substantial hazards to humans and/or the environment. These materials may include
pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals and chemicals, liquefied natural gas, explosives, volatile chemicals,
and nuclear fuels. Hazardous materials are present in all urban environments in one form or another,
including gasoline and diesel, household chemicals, paints, and cleansers. In Santa Clarita, major
generators and users of hazardous materials may include business such as gas stations, dry cleaners,
medical offices, and public buildings. Minor quantities of hazardous materials may also be found in
household chemicals, cleaning products, and paint.
DISCUSSION
A) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport,
use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would be less -than -significant impact.
B) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and/or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
Into the environment?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would likely result in rehabilitation and renovation of older
residential and commercial structure with the City. Structures built prior to 1978 may contain asbestos -
containing building materials and lead paint. If not properly handled and released into the environment
in large enough quantities, these materials could pose a threat to construction workers and public
safety.
30 X/ _
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
However, these renovations would primarily be small-scale activities, and no single renovation would
likely result in releases large enough to pose a health hazard to the general public. Construction
workers work in close proximity to these materials may have a slight chance of exposure to these
materials. These projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as needed. Compliance
with these processes would ensure a less -than -significant impact.
C) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
Rehabilitation and renovation of older residential and commercial structures would primarily be small-
scale activities. Demolition and construction activities involving hazardous materials removal are heavily
regulated, and construction workers must comply with applicable federal and state safety regulations.
The Proposed CAP would not result in the development or construction of new sources of hazardous
emissions or uses that would handle hazardous materials, wastes, or substances within on -quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school. This would be no impact.
D) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complies
pursuant to Government Code 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review relating to hazardous material sites would occur on a case-by-
case basis as required by law.
There would be a less -than -significant impact.
E) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
Agua Dulce Airport is a public -use airport located 2 miles (3.2 km) east of the central business district of
Agua Dulce. Agua Dulce is located to the Northeast of the City of Santa Clarita and is part of the
unincorporated area of Los Angeles County. The City of Santa Clarita is not located within the
boundaries of an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. In
addition to Agua Dulce, the closest airports in the area are the Bob Hope Airport (BUR) located about 20
miles south of Santa Clarita in the City of Burbank. There would be no impact.
F) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No private airstrips are located in the vicinity of Santa Clarita. There would be no impact.
31
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
G) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan?
The Proposed CAP recommends measures to reduce GHG emissions. It does not include any
recommendations that would physically interfere with the City's Emergency Operations Plan or any
established emergency evacuation plan. There would be no impact.
H) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
There is a potential for wildland fires in areas. As part of the Consolidated Fire Protection District, the
entire planning area, including the City, receives urban and wildland fire protection services from the Los
Angeles County Fire Department. In addition, local fire response resources include those of the Fire
Services mutual aid system, the California Division of Forestry, and the United States Forest Service. This
includes six fire stations within the County which are geared toward providing urban fire protection
services. Others are geared to respond to brush fires along the urban-wildland interface. However, the
Proposed CAP does not recommend GHG reduction measures that would result in any projects that
would increase this risk or place new people or structures in areas susceptible to the threat of wildland
fire. Compliance with existing building codes which require maintenance of fire -safe clearance areas
around existing homes and businesses would ensure no impact.
32
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.9 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant with Significant
No Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY -- Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
❑ ❑ ❑X
❑
waste discharge requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume
or a lowering of the local groundwater
❑ ❑
table level (e.g., the production rate of
pre-existing nearby wells would drop to
a level which would not support existing
land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)?
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
❑ ❑ ®
❑
course of a stream or river, in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or
❑ El ®
❑
substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
e) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage
❑ d ®
❑
systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
f) Otherwise substantially degrade water
❑ ❑
❑
quality?
g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood
hazard area as mapped on a federal
❑ ❑ ®
❑
Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood
33 / ��
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
Insurance Rate Map or other flood
hazard delineation map?
h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard
area structures which would impede or
❑
❑
❑
redirect flood flows?
i) Expose people or structures to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death
❑
❑
❑
involving flooding, including flooding as
a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow?
❑
❑
❑
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Santa Clarita Valley contains many natural streams and creeks that function as storm drain
Channels, conveying surface water runoff into the Santa Clara River. The drainage system, including
natural streams as well as constructed storm drain infrastructure within City, is adequate to handle
normal precipitation in the region. High intensity rainfalls, in combination with alluvial soils, sparse
vegetation, erosion, and steep gradients, can result in significant debris -laden flash floods. With the
rapid urbanization of the Valley since 1960, stormwater volumes have increased due to increased
impervious surface area from parking lots, rooftops, and streets. Flood control facilities have been
constructed to mitigate the impacts of development on drainage patterns throughout the surrounding
area.
The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District provides residents and businesses in the City of Santa Clarita
and surrounding unincorporated areas with high quality wastewater management services while
protecting water quality, public health and the environment. The Sanitation District operates a regional
waste water collection system as well as the Saugus and Valencia Water Reclamation Plants, which
discharge to the Santa Clara River.
DISCUSSION
A) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
The Proposed CAP recommends energy efficiency renovations within existing residential and
commercial structures. Construction associated with these projects could increase erosion and
adversely affect urban runoff.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
34
/ qt/
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
The construction activities that may result in water -borne erosion from grading or stockpiling are
regulated through various techniques called "best management practices." Water quality management
plans and stormwater pollution prevention plans are required for development projects to meet the
requirements of the NPDES Program to maintain water quality. Proper enforcement and compliance
with both the National Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements and the City's Stormwater
Runoff Ordinance will ensure that water quality would not be adversely affected by construction and
renovation activities resulting from the implementation of the Proposed CAP. There would be less -than -
significant impact.
B) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater
recharge such that there would be a net deficit In aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level( e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop
to a level that would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permit have
been granted)?
The Proposed CAP recommends numerous water conservation measures, which may result in reduced
demand for groundwater supplies from the limited number of wells in Santa Clarita. The Proposed CAP
does not recommend any strategies or measures that would require additional water supply that would
be attained from groundwater supplies.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
There would be less -than -significant impact.
35
01
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
C) Substantially alter the existing drainage patter of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial
on -or off-site erosion or siltation?
The Proposed CAP does not recommend any strategy or measure that would directly alter drainage
patterns. No streams or rivers are anticipated to be altered.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Compliance with existing regulations would result in a less -than -significant impact
D) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the
alternation of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount
or surface runoff in a manner which would result in on -or off-site flooding?
The CAP does not recommend any strategy or measure that would directly alter the course of a stream
or river or increase the rate or amount of surface runoff.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would be a less -than -significant impact.
E) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
36 t q!/
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would be a less -than -significant impact.
F) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would be a less -than -significant impact
G) Place housing within a 10 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard
Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Oarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
As a result this would result in a less -than -significant impact.
37
/ /'5
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
H) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood
flows?
Development within a flood plain could cause potential impacts associated with the inundation of
residential and commercial units, if a 100 -year type of flood would occur in these areas. However the
Proposed CAP does not include the types of development that would impede or redirect flood flow.
There would be a no impact.
1) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving
flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
The Proposed CAP does not include a requirement for development that would expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of
the failure of a levee or dam.
This would result in no impact.
J) Result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
The Proposed CAP does not recommend measures that would result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or
mudflow. There would be no impact.
EM
q
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.10 LAND USE AND PLANNING
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
X. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
❑
❑
❑
community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general
❑
❑
❑
plan, specific plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance) adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
conservation plan or natural community
❑
❑
❑
conservation plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The City has compiled growth statistics and projections when preparing the Land Use Map for the
General Plan updates. As of 2010, there were approximately 62,055 dwelling units in the City. The
estimated population of the City in 2010 was approximately 176,000. From these numbers, it is
expected that growth, and the related issues of quality of life, will continue to be pressing for Valley
residents and decision makers in the coming decades.
The General Plan encourages the development of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) thereby
promoting compact, walkable communities centered around high quality train and transit systems,
thereby reducing residents dependence on the automobile. The proposed Land Use Map would ensure
that large acreages of open space are properly buffered from residential, commercial, and industrial
land uses, but, would provide access to these areas for the community to enjoy.
DISCUSSION
A) Physically divide an established community?
The Proposed CAP includes measures to improve connectivity within Santa Clarita and to promote
alternative transportation methods. The Proposed CAP does not recommend any measures that would
physically divide the community. There would be no impact.
39
l q�
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
B) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to, a general plan, specific plan,
local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
The Proposed CAP proposes measures to reduce GHG emissions. The proposed CAP will implement
specific goals, policies and objectives of the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan. The General Plan was
adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June, 2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent
with the General Plan and, hence, all other pertinent local land use plans and programs. For these
reasons, this would be a no impact.
C) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation
plan?
A Draft Santa Clarita Valley Habitat Plan is under development and a Conservation of Open Space
Element is included in the City of Santa Clarita General Plan. Further protection of locally important
habitats is provided through the Significant Ecological Area (SEA) Program, a component of the Los
Angeles County General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element. Implementation of the CAP
contemplates continued acquisition of natural lands within the City and surrounding the City for
preservation as open space in perpetuity. The CAP does not propose any conflicts with these plans and
strategies.
There would be no impact.
M
l q6
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.11 MINERAL RESOURCES
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XI. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would be
❑
❑
❑
of value to the region and the residents
of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally -important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
❑
❑
❑ ❑
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The Santa Clarita Valley contains extensive mineral resources. Gold mining and oil production have,
historically, been the primary mineral extraction activities in and around the Santa Clarita Valley area.
Other minerals mined in the surrounding region include construction aggregate (sand and gravel),
titanium, tuff, and rock. Within the City, areas that have significant mineral aggregate resources have
been designated by a zoning overlay district that permits extraction, along with other compatible uses.
The majority of the existing oil and natural gas fields are located in the western portion of the Valley
some of which are within the City of Santa Clarita. As of 2005 there were 85 oil producing and 9 natural
gas wells within the City. The oil production in 2005 from these wells was 68,198 barrels and the gas
production was 603,451 million cubic feet. Several wells have been abandoned and several are idle
(currently not abandoned or used for production).
DISCUSSION
A) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the
region and the residents of the state?
General Plan policies related to mineral resources ensure that future development in the City would not
have significant adverse impacts on mineral resources.
The City of Santa Clarita has an overlay category that is used to designate areas that have significant
mineral aggregate resource areas as determined by SMARA, and/or oil fields. This latter category, the
Mineral/Oil Conservation Areas (MOCA) is located primarily in the southeastern portion of the City. The
purpose of this overlay is to permit the continuation of the mineral/oil usage while providing
development of the area if specific requirements are met. The proposed CAP will not alter the existing
MOCA overlay. Therefore, there would be a no impact.
41
l97
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
B) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
Proximity of housing units to extraction sites would require the determination of a transition area and
buffer zones from any proposed mining area to the housing area. The proposed CAP will implement
specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's General Plan. The General Plan was
adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June, 2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent
with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result in the construction of photovoltaic
panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building new bike paths and walking
infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-use projects. The projects
would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project specific
environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
There would be a less -than -significant impact.
42
l q'w
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.12 NOISE
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XII. NOISE -- Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation
of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
❑
❑
❑
❑
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation
of excessive groundborne vibration or
❑
❑
O
❑
groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the project
❑
❑
®
❑
vicinity above levels existing without the
project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
increase in ambient noise levels in the
❑
❑
®
❑
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, ❑ ❑ ❑
would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
private airstrip, would the project ❑ ❑ ❑
expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Motor vehicles currently comprise the predominant noise source in the City; aircraft, industrial and
commercial activities are not significant noise sources. As development occurs within the City,
significant construction noise would occasionally occur. There is also potential for significant vibration
impacts during pile driving.
43
iqq
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Motor vehicle noise on freeways and other roadways are the primary noise sources in the City. The
Southern Pacific Railroad, which runs from the southern portion of the Valley to the center of the City of
Santa Clarita and then directly to the east, is also a significant noise source. The Southern Pacific
Railroad line handles two types of trains in the Santa Clarita area: Metrolink commuter rail and freight.
Of the two, freight rail noise is the more dominant noise source.
Based on 2008 train schedules, 24 Metrolink trains traverse Santa Clarita Valley each day. No precise
numbers of daily freight trains could be provided; however, it was estimated that 12 freight trains pass
through the City each day. Although the Agua Dulce Airport is located approximately 20 miles Northeast
of Santa Clarita, sporadic airplane or helicopter operations over the City is not loud and consistent
enough to be significant.
DISCUSSION
A) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in
the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal
standards?
While the Proposed CAP does not recommend any measures that would generate excessive amounts of
noise, construction activity associated with recommended energy efficiency retrofits in residential or
commercial buildings, expansion of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and installation of distributed
renewable energy systems could possibly result in temporary increases in noise levels.
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would result in a less -than -significant impact.
B) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
44
M
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would result in a less -than -significant impact.
C) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
The Proposed CAP includes numerous recommendations designed to reduce the number and length of
vehicle trips in Santa Clarita, which could lead to a decrease in ambient noise levels. The proposed CAP
will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's General Pian. The
General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June, 2011. The CAP is,
therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result in the construction
of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building new bike paths
and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-use projects. The
projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project specific
environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would result in a less -than -significant impact.
D) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project:
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would result in a less -than -significant impact.
450 '
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
E) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No portion of the City of Santa Clarita is within an airport land use plan areas, and there are not airports
within two miles of the City. There would be no impact.
F) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No private airstrip is located within or near Santa Clarita. There would be no impact.
46 ';;� 21;),
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.13 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -- Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth
in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and
❑
7
❑
7
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing housing, necessitating the
❑
❑
❑
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of
people, necessitating the construction of
❑
❑
❑
replacement housing elsewhere?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
As of 2010, the City population was approximately 176,000. The number of housing units in 2010 was
62,055. Top employers in the Valley include Six Flags California, Princess Cruises, HR Textron, Henry
Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital and the local colleges and school districts. Over 125,000 workers
participate in the City's labor force, of which over 60 percent are college graduates. Median household
income is over $ 82,642 annually. Almost 20,000 students are enrolled in the City's three colleges. A
diverse array of housing communities meets the needs of City residents, including family-oriented
neighborhoods, executive estates, apartments, condominiums, and senior communities.
The City of Santa Clarita currently, encompasses the communities of Canyon Country, Newhall, Saugus,
and Valencia. The area of the incorporated City is about 52.6 square miles, and the sphere of influence
includes an additional 29.5 square miles. The City is required to plan for its sphere of influence, which
includes land contiguous to existing City boundaries that may be annexed into the City at some future
date.
DISCUSSION
A) Induce substantial population grow in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)?
The City of Santa Clarita is continuing to experience population growth. Growth was about 0.6 percent in
2008 according to the State Department of Finance. The City of Santa Clarita continues to attract high -
47 � J�
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
paying, high quality jobs to the area to support the growth of the City's population. Many of the City's
residents are traveling to neighboring cities for work, because there are not enough jobs available in the
City matching the skills of residents. To this end, the City of Santa Clarita is focused on creating a quality
jobs/housing balance, attracting companies in the targeted industry sectors to ensure the needs of the
community and its residents are met. However, the policies of the City Plan include the Area Plan
policies to promote urban infill and discourage the introduction of new uses on remote and
undeveloped land. The City's General Plan states that the Land Use Map and the development review
process shall concentrate development into previously developed or urban areas to promote infill
development and prevent sprawl and habitat loss. Additionally, the Area Plan promotes incentives for
infill development and rebuilding to limit impacts on open space and other natural, undeveloped areas
(Policy CO 1.5.5). While these policies are intended to protect natural resources, they also limit the
indirect inducement of future growth.
The Proposed CAP includes measures that seek to reduce GHG emissions. Proposed measures include
encouraging transit- and pedestrian -oriented development within the City and retrofitting existing
residential and commercial buildings to make them more energy efficient. Commercial and residential
energy efficiency retrofits that may occur as a result of the Proposed CAP would update homes already
located in Santa Clarita to make them more efficient and may or may not include additions to make
homes larger and accommodate more people. Although increases in the number of housing units may
result based on the City's promotion of transit -and pedestrian -oriented growth, the growth would not
be a result of the Proposed CAP measures. This would be a less -than -significant impact.
B) Displace substantial numbers of existing home, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
Although Proposed CAP measures encourage energy efficient retrofits for existing homes, such homes
are not expected to be displaced, thus replacement housing would not be necessary because of the CAP.
There would be no impact.
C) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Although Proposed CAP measures encourage energy efficient retrofits for existing homes, the measures
would not result in displacement of substantial numbers of people thus necessitating the construction
of replacement housing elsewhere. There would be no impact.
48 '4y
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.14 PUBLIC SERVICES
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No Impact
XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
❑
❑
❑
significant environmental impacts, in
order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection?
❑
❑
❑
Police protection?
❑
❑
❑
Schools?
❑
❑
❑
Parks?
❑
❑
❑
Other public facilities?
❑
❑
❑
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Fire protection within the City is supplied by the Los Angeles County Fire Department (LACoFD) with six
stations currently located in the County. The LACoFD has several standards to maintain to adequately
meet the fire protection needs of the residents of the County including the City. Joint cooperation
between the County, the City of Santa Clarita, and state and federal agencies contributes to maintaining
adequate response times.
Law enforcement in the City is served by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department which is housed
within the Department's Santa Clarita Valley Station located in Valencia The California Highway Patrol
maintaining jurisdiction over the state highways. The Sheriff's Department, which operates one station
in Valencia and a storefront station in Newhall, has a standard of one officer per 1,000 residents to
maintain effective police protection.
Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital, located in Valencia, is the primary acute care hospital serving
the planning area with 230 beds for inpatient care. The Santa Clarita Convalescent Hospital in Newhall is
a 99 -bed facility specializing in senior care, including physical therapy and rehabilitation. Kaiser
Permanente operates a facility on Tourney Road that offers family medicine, internal medicine,
49
aQ J
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
obstetrics, gynecology, dermatology, optometry, endocrinology, physical therapy, and a pharmacy.
Facey Medical Group is the largest medical care provider, with six facilities throughout the Valley in
Canyon Country, Valencia, Stevenson Ranch and Castaic, with urgent care provided at the Valencia
office.
Seven public school districts serve the Santa Clarita Valley planning area, listed below:
• William S. Hart Union High School District;
• Saugus Union Elementary School District;
• Newhall Elementary School District;
• Sulphur Springs Union Elementary School District;
• Castaic Union School District;
• Acton-Agua Dulce Unified School District; and
• Collages in the City include the west campus of the College of the Canyons (COC) is located on
158 acres in Valencia and contains 664,623 square feet of building space, including a 950 -seat
theater and Masters College located on 100 acres in Placerita Canyon.
DISCUSSION
A) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or
physically altered government facilities, or the need for new or physically altered
government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environment
impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service rations, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the following public services:
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure.or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Fire protection:
As discussed under "Population and Housing' implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to
result in substantial population growth, and thus would not contribute greatly to the need for increased
fire protection services. Thus, implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a need for
additional Fire Department facilities. This would be no impact.
Police protection:
As discussed under "Population and Housing' implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to
result in substantial population growth, and thus would not contribute greatly to the need for increased
police protection services. Thus, implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a need for
additional Police Department facilities. This would be no impact.
Schools:
As discussed under "Population and Housing" implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to
result in substantial population growth, and thus would not contribute greatly to the need for increased
school services. Thus, implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a need for additional
educational facilities. This would be no impact.
50
M
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Parks:
As discussed under "Population and Housing' implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to
result in substantial population growth, and thus would not contribute greatly to the need for additional
park services. This would be no impact.
Other Public Facilities:
As discussed under "Population and Housing" implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to
result in substantial population growth, and thus would not contribute greatly to the need for increased
public services or expanded government facilities. This would be no impact.
51ao7
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.15 RECREATION
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
XV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
❑
❑
❑21
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
❑
❑
❑
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The physical characteristics of the Santa Clarita Valley, in conjunction with the large amount of
undeveloped land, afford Valley residents and visitors a wide array of open space that provide plentiful
passive and active recreational opportunities.
In an innovative partnership, the County teamed with developer Newhall Land to preserve the 6,000
acres of the Newhall Ranch high country, located between the City of Santa Clarita limits and the
Ventura County line. The Newhall Ranch High Country Recreation and Conservation Joint Powers Agency
was formed to maintain this open space land. On March 7, 2007, a property owner's donation of 400
acres in Elsmere Canyon to the Mountains and Recreation Conservation Authority for use as an open
space preserve received final approval. Elsmere Canyon is a natural, riparian area that contains vital links
between the Angeles National Forest, Placerita Canyon Nature Center, and Whitney Canyon for the
wildlife corridor, connecting the San Gabriel, Santa Susana and Santa Monica mountains. The Santa
Clarita Woodlands State Park, a 3,000 -plus -acre state park is located west of 1-5 and may be accessed via
either Lyons Avenue or the Calgrove/The Old Road interchanges
The Conservation and Open Space Element of the City General Plan includes preservation of open space
resources including active and passive parks and natural open areas for resource conservation. It is
anticipated that future dedications of parkland will be made from new developments. These future
dedications and the planned parks listed below would count towards meeting the required standard of 3
acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (Quimby Act) and the goal of the Area Plan standard of 5 acres of
parkland per 1,000 residents. As of October 2007, 15 County maintained parks are proposed for the
County's Planning Area, including nine neighborhood parks and six community parks. Planned parks will
add approximately 162.7 acres to the unincorporated County parkland inventory in the County's
Planning Area.
52 S/
pZd
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
DISCUSSION
A) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP is not expected to result in substantial population growth, and
thus would not result in increased physical deterioration of parks and recreational facilities. Conversely,
the Proposed CAP promotes the expansion of the current network of bike and pedestrian trials, which
could provide additional recreational facilities within the City and possibly lessen wear on existing
facilities. This would result in no impact.
B) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
The proposed CAP will implement specific goals, objectives and policies of the City of Santa Clarita's
General Plan. The General Plan was adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita in June,
2011. The CAP is, therefore, consistent with the General Plan. Implementation of the CAP could result
in the construction of photovoltaic panels or other alternative energy infrastructure or facilities, building
new bike paths and walking infrastructures, retrofitting buildings, and constructing new or infill mixed-
use projects. The projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City.
Any project specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
Implementation of the CAP could also result in short-term construction emissions and noise impacts
from construction activities could potentially occur. Such construction projects could also result in
higher urban runoff and ambient noise levels, and additional temporary needs for services and utilities.
Any projects would undergo the standard entitlement and building process by the City. Any project
specific environmental review would occur on a case-by-case basis as required by law.
This would result in no impact.
53�0�
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.16 TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XVI. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Conflict with an applicable plan,
ordinance or policy establishing measures
of effectiveness for the performance of
the circulation system, taking into
❑
❑
❑
account all modes of transportation
including mass transit and non -motorized
travel and relevant components of the
circulation
b) Conflict with an applicable congestion
management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and
travel demand measures, or other ❑ ❑ ❑
standards established by the county
congestion management agency for
designated roads or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic
patterns, including either an increase in ❑ ❑ ❑
traffic levels or a change in location that
result in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or ❑ ❑ ❑
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency ❑ ❑ ❑
access?
f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or
programs regarding public transit, bicycle,
or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise ❑ ❑ ❑
decrease the performance or safety of
such facilities?
54
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The primary regional roadways serving the Santa Clarita Valley are the Interstate -5 (1-5) and State Route -
14 (SR -14) freeways, passing through the Santa Clarita Valley in the north -south direction, and State
Route -126 (SR -126) expressway, which connects the Santa Clarita Valley to Ventura County.
The 1-5 freeway serves inter -regional travel in the north -south direction from California's southern
border with Mexico to Washington's northern border with Canada. the 1-5 freeway is classified as an
urban interstate. The 1-5 freeway generally consists of four mix -flow lanes in each direction through the
area. Through the SR -14 interchange area, the 1-5 freeway consists of three mix -flow lanes in each
direction along with two dedicated truck bypass lanes which are separated from the mainline lanes. A
truck weigh station facility operated by the California Highway Patrol is located on the northbound side
of the 1-5 freeway just south of the SR -126 interchange. High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes are located
just south of the Santa Clarita Valley.
The SR -14 freeway, which runs from the 1-5 freeway at Newhall Pass to US 395, is one of the four major
north -south corridors serving California. This corridor connects the Eastern Sierra and Western Nevada
regions to the Southern California region. The SR -14 freeway is designated as a Super Truck Route (STR),
and is also part of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) truck network, which provides
freeway access for oversized trucks. Within Los Angeles and Ventura Counties, the SR -14 freeway serves
as a major commuter route between Antelope Valley cities such as Palmdale and Lancaster and the Los
Angeles area. The SR -14 freeway generally consists of three to six lanes in each direction, including one
HOV lane in each direction. From the 1-5 freeway to the Newhall Avenue interchange; there are five mix -
flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction; from the Newhall Avenue interchange to the Golden
Valley Road interchange, there are three mix -flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction; from the
Golden Valley Road interchange to the Sierra Highway interchange, there are four mix -flow lanes and
one HOV lane in each direction; from the Sierra Highway interchange to the Sand Canyon Road
interchange; there are three mix -flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction; from the Sand Canyon
Road interchange to the Soledad Canyon Road interchange, there are two mix -flow lanes and one HOV
lane in each direction; and from the Soledad Canyon Road interchange to the Escondido Canyon Road
interchange, there are three mix -flow lanes and one HOV lane in each direction.
Secondary regional access to Santa Clarita is provided to motorists via SR -126, which extends from the
City of Ventura east to the 1-5 freeway. SR -126 was once designated along portions of Magic Mountain
Parkway and San Fernando Road between the 1-5 and SR -14 freeways; however, these roadways were
turned over to the City in 2002 and no longer serve as a State highway alignment.
Several north -south arterials run through the planning area. In addition several east -west arterials serve
the Santa Clarita Valley and provide access to the 1-5 and SR -14 freeways. Within the Santa Clarita
Valley, connectivity of the street network is interrupted by topographic constraints, including rolling
terrain, canyons, and the Santa Clara River. In addition, due to the prevalent pattern of cul-de-sac
streets with limited connectivity within residential subdivisions, traffic is funneled onto collector and
arterial streets. As a result, regional traffic is concentrated onto a limited number of arterial streets.
The City of Santa Clarita Transit provides connections with services by Metrolink, Antelope Valley Transit
Authority, Metro, and other regional transit providers. City of Santa Clarita Transit provides service on
nine local fixed routes, nine commuter express routes, four station link routes, and supplemental school
day service. Local routes provide service seven days a week while the remaining services operate on
weekdays only. Express buses operate to and from the Antelope Valley, downtown Los Angeles, Van
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Nuys, Westwood/Century City, and Woodland Hills. City of Santa Clarita Transit's regional routes serve
several park-and-ride lots located throughout the Santa Clarita Valley, as well as the Santa Clarita and
Newhall Metrolink stations. The areas generating the highest transit ridership are Newhall and Canyon
Country in the vicinity of the intersection of Soledad Canyon Road and Sierra Highway.
The City of Santa Clarita Transit also provides daily Dial -a -Ride (DAR) service within the Santa Clarita
Valley to provide service to senior citizens and disabled residents. Much of the DAR services are to the
Adult Day Care Center and the Senior Center in Newhall. The updated TDP proposes several operational
improvements to improve efficiency of this program.
The City of Santa Clarita Transit operates local commuter service into and out of Century City,
downtown Los Angeles, the Antelope Valley, and Warner Center. Most of these routes are well used;
use is monitored and adjustments are made to times if necessary to accommodate demand. The busiest
commuter transit stops serve the Metrolink stations and park-and-ride lots. Commuters have identified
the need to increase service to downtown Los Angeles during mid-day hours, and to provide service to
the North Hollywood Metrolink Station, which has service to the Orange and Red Lines. City of Santa
Clarita Transit will continue to expand service to meet customer needs as funding allows. Metrolink
provides commuter service between Santa Clarita and downtown Los Angeles, Glendale, Burbank, Sun
Valley, Sylmar, San Fernando, and the Antelope Valley. The Antelope Valley line operates on the Union
Pacific rail line, which is also used for occasional freight rail service. Metrolink's Santa Clarita station
near Soledad Canyon Road in Saugus, about 2 miles east of Valencia, provides parking for about 500
vehicles, restroom facilities, and a passenger drop-off area. The station also serves as a major transit
center for buses. The Via Princessa station, which opened as a temporary facility in 1994, contains 420
parking spaces. The Jan Heidt Newhall station in Newhall contains 250 parking spaces.
Amtrak rail service does not operate between Bakersfield and Santa Clarita. However, Amtrak operates
an extensive network of daily express buses along the 1-5 freeway that connects throughout Southern
California, to and from the daily San Joaquin trains that originate at the Bakersfield Amtrak station. Of
these connecting Bakersfield buses, a total of 5 daily northbound and 6 daily southbound trips stop in
Santa Clarita at the Newhall Metrolink station.
U]Fidr>,�[�lil
A) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass transit and non -motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation
Implementation of the Proposed CAP measures would increase the availability of transit service for
Santa Clarita residents, add additional bike and pedestrian facilities, and discourage single -occupancy
vehicle use. Achieving each of these goals would result in a reduction in traffic loads, which would
reduce the number of vehicle trips, volume to capacity ration, and intersection congestion within the
City. Furthermore, no proposed measure would conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy
establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system. This would be a
no impact.
56 C,;� /C;�.,
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
B) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not
limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards
established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or
highways?
The traffic analysis conducted for the General Plan based on the traffic model demonstrates at General
Plan buildout (2030-35), there will 5 arterial roadway segments in the City at LOS F, but no intersections
at LOS F. All intersections will operate at LOS E (operating at maximum capacity) or better at buildout.
The Proposed CAP is consistent with the General Plan's Circulation Element and the Congestion
Management Plan, as required by State law. This would be no impact.
C) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a
change in location that results in substantial safety risks?
The closest airport is the Agua Dulce Airport is located approximately 20 miles Northeast of Santa
Clarita. The Proposed CAP does not include any strategy or measure that would directly or indirectly
affect air traffic patterns. There would be no impact.
D) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
The Proposed CAP does not include any measure that would promote the development of hazardous
design features or incompatible uses. Rather, the Proposed CAP promotes the development of new bike
and pedestrian facilities build to current standards, which would provide greater safety for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and drivers. This would be a no impact.
E) Result in inadequate emergency access?
The Proposed CAP recommends measures that would increase safety for drivers, pedestrians, and
bicyclists and seeks to reduce the number of automobiles on City streets, both of which may actually
make access for emergency vehicles easier and more efficient. No measure proposed within the
Proposed CAP would result in the development of uses or facilities that would degrade emergency
access. This would be no impact.
F) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Supporting and increasing access to alternative transportation is a major focus of the Proposed CAP.
The Proposed CAP would enhance adopted policies, plans, and programs supporting alternative
transportation. There would be no impact.
57� ��
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.17 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Less Than
Potentially
Significant
Less Than
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
Significant
with
Significant
No Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
Incorporated
XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS -- Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the applicable Regional
❑
❑
❑
❑
Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing facilities,
❑
❑
❑
IR
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the construction of
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
❑
❑
❑
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project from existing
❑
❑
❑
entitlements and resources, or are new or
expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
❑
❑
❑
N
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
permitted capacity to accommodate the
❑
❑
❑
project's solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
statutes and regulations related to solid
❑
❑
❑
N
waste?
14:Lrl1*3011kTi1411111011114141110
The Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (SCVSD) (a consolidation of Sanitation Districts Nos. 26 and
32) provides wastewater conveyance, treatment, and disposal services for residential, commercial, and
industrial users in the Santa Clarita Valley. The SCVSD operates two WRPs, the Saugus WRP and the
Valencia WRP. These facilities area interconnected to form a regional treatment system known as the
58c;�, 14
May 2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
Santa Clarita Valley Joint Sewerage System (SCVJSS), which optimizes operating efficiencies of the
wastewater treatment plants as solids and excess wastewater from the Saugus WRP are diverted to the
Valencia WRP for treatment and disposal. The SCVISS currently processes an average flow of 20.8 mgd.
As the City reaches buildout, new projects would be evaluated for their potential impact on the capacity
and effectiveness of the wastewater treatment system to treat additional sources of wastewater. The
need for construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities
as buildout occurs would be determined by the Santa Clarita Valley Sanitation District (SCVSD).
Solid waste from Santa Clarita goes to three landfills within or near the City. They include the Chiquita
Canyon Landfill, Antelope Valley Landfill, and the Sunshine Canyon Landfill Nearby landfills are
approaching full capacity for waste disposal and the projected amount of landfill capacity, for the
County's Planning Area, would be in a shortfall of 22,626 tons per day, six days per week in the year
2021. According to the County's OVOV EIR, the impacts from buildout to the solid waste system would
be significant and unavoidable even with the incorporation of mitigation measures.
Southern California Edison (SCE) is the primary provider of electric service to the City. The two most
prevalent energy conservation programs include the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
(LADWP) "Green LA" program and the public education and outreach facilitated by the County Web site:
www.888CIeanLA.com. Other energy conservation programs include Title 24 (California's Energy
Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings) measure enforced by the County's
Building and Safety Division and energy conservation programs promoted by SCE and state agencies.
Natural gas service is provided by the Southern California Gas Company (SCG). SCG operates numerous
natural gas pipelines in the City and County. Gas service lines range in size from 2- to 34 -inch mains. In
the eastern part of the Valley, a 30 -inch gas line runs along the Santa Clara River. In the western portion
of the Valley a 34 -inch and a 22 -inch main cross the river. Most of the transmission and distribution lines
currently serving the City operate at a medium pressure of approximately 30 to 60 pounds per square
inch (psi), except for those located in industrial areas where large natural gas users are prevalent and
require higher -pressure lines.
Telephone service to the City is provided by AT&T and Verizon Communications. As development
continues, the telephone companies would provide additional system capacity and service connections.
There are cellular towers located throughout the Valley.
Cable television service in the City is provided by Time Warner Cable, and AT&T and satellite television
service is provided by DirecTV, and Dish Network. Geographically, the east side of the Valley covering
Canyon Country and parts of Saugus are served by Time Warner Cable. In addition to the cable television
franchise with Time Warner in July of 2006, the Santa Clarita City Council executed a Public Benefits
Agreement with AT&T that allows them to make competitive television service available for Santa Clarita
Valley residents. AT&T began offering television services to the Santa Clarita Valley in 2007 and is
expected to serve up to roughly 30,000 homes in the area.
59
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
DISCUSSION
A) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality
Control Board?
As the City continues to expand, new projects would be evaluated for their potential impact on the
capacity and effectiveness of the wastewater treatment system to treat additional sources of
wastewater. Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in
population. Measures included in the Proposed CAP include the use of reclaimed water, use of low -flow
water fixtures and water -efficient landscape irrigation systems all of which will reduce water demand.
Thus, there would be no increase in demand for wastewater treatment as a result of the Proposed CAP
that would exceed treatment requirements. This would be a no impact.
B) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
As the City continues to expand, new projects would be evaluated for their potential impact on the
capacity and effectiveness of the wastewater treatment system to treat additional sources of
wastewater. Measures included in the Proposed CAP include the use of reclaimed water, use of low -flow
water fixtures and water -efficient landscape irrigation systems all of which will reduce water demand.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in population. Thus,
resulting needs for water and wastewater treatment would not increase as a result of the Proposed
CAP. No expanded or new treatment facilities would be required. This would be no impact.
C) Require or result in the construction of a new storm water drainage facilities or expansion
of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental
effects?
Increases in population due to new development could increase the amount of storm water runoff,
which could necessitate the need for more and larger storm water drainage facilities. However, the
implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in either population or
new development. Measures included in the Proposed CAP include the use of reclaimed water, use of
low -flow water fixtures and water -efficient landscape irrigation systems all of which will actually reduce
water demand. Thus, it is not likely that storm water runoff would increase with the implementation of
the Proposed CAP to the extent that new or expanded drainage facilities would be needed. This would
be a no impact.
D) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and
resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in population. Thus no
new water supplies as a result of the Proposed CAP would be required. In order to maintain flexibility in
identifying the optimum wastewater conveyance management solution and, in turn reclaimed water
production through the planning horizon, the Sanitation Districts will on a case-by-case basis evaluate
the needs of the SCVJSS every two years, through 2015 and take whatever steps are necessary to assure
adequate water supplies. The Proposed CAP recommends numerous water conservation measures,
which could actually reduce the City's water demand. This would be no impact.
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
E) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve
the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand, in
addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Measures included in the Proposed CAP include the use of reclaimed water, use of low -flow water
fixtures and water -efficient landscape irrigation systems all of which will reduce water demand.
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in population. Thus,
resulting needs for water and wastewater treatment would not increase as a result of the Proposed
CAP. No expanded or new treatment facilities would be required. This would be no impact.
F) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs?
Implementation of the Proposed CAP would not result in a significant increase in population. Thus,
there would not be a substantial increase in the City's waste stream or need for solid waste collection
services or landfill capacity as a result of the Proposed CAP. In addition, the Proposed CAP includes
numerous measures designed to promote recycling and decrease the City's overall waste stream,
therefore potentially lengthening the lifespan of the three landfills within or near the Planning Area.
Additionally, AB 371 requires cities, counties, and regional agencies to increase solid waste diversion to
75 percent by year 2020. This would be a no impact.
G) Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
The Proposed CAP does not recommend any measure that does not comply with solid waste
regulations. In fact, the Proposed CAP recognizes the recent adoption and implementation of AB 371 to
increase solid waste diversion throughout the state by 2020 and incorporates this as a measure for GHG
emissions reductions. Accordingly, the Proposed CAP promotes recycling and measures to reduce the
City's waste stream and achieve the statewide goal of increasing solid waste diversion to 75 percent by
2020. There would be no impact.
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
2.18 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑
❑
® ❑
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are ❑ ❑ ® ❑
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial ❑ ❑ ❑
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
DISCUSSION
A) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare or
threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
The purpose of the Proposed CAP is to reduce community -wide GHG emissions in Santa Clarita with the
intention of reduction environmental impacts associated with global climate change. The Proposed CAP
proposes measures to lessen numerous environmental impacts and does not contain any measure that
would either directly or indirectly substantially reduce habitat, reduce wildlife populations, threaten
animal or plant communities, or restrict the range of species. Any CAP related project proposed in close
2012
PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT
proximity to sensitive resources would be subject to project level environmental review in order to
avoid impacts. Continued compliance with the City's established environmental review process would
ensure a less -than -significant impact.
While there are some known prehistoric or archaeological remains in the Santa Clarita Valley, the
Proposed CAP would not have an impact on these remains. The Proposed CAP recommends energy
efficiency retrofits and rehabilitation of potentially historic residential structures, as well as potential for
PV panels or other distributed renewable energy devises to be installed on residential and commercial
facilities, such activities are subject to review by the City which routinely ensures that the historical
integrity of structures is not compromised. Continued compliance with the City's established review
process would ensure a less -than -significant impact to historic and pre -historic resources.
B) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of probably future projects.)
The Proposed CAP would not result in any adverse environmental impacts that are cumulatively
considerable. The project is intended to contribute to a cumulative reduction in GHG emissions which
will have beneficial cumulative environmental effects. Measures within the Proposed CAP that may
result in indirect adverse environmental impacts are evaluated throughout this initial study. However,
as all impacts are considered less -than -significant or no impact, it is unlikely that any impact would
contribute to a significant cumulative impact. This would be a less -than -significant impact.
C) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
The Proposed CAP is a policy document intended to reduce Santa Clarita's community -wide GHG
emissions. This will help cumulatively address the adverse environmental impacts associated with
global climate change, while also protecting and enhancing the quality of life in the City. Its measures
strive to protect the environment, enhance human health and safety, and conserve natural resources,
both within and beyond the City. Adoption and implementation of the Proposed CAP would result in
beneficial environmental impacts, and would not cause substantial adverse direct or indirect effects on
human beings resulting from a change in the physical environment. There would be no impact.
Note: Authority cited: Sections 21083 and 21083.05, Public Resources Code. Reference: Section
65088.4, Gov. Code; Sections 21080(c), 21080.1, 21080.3, 21083, 21083.05, 21083.3, 21093, 21094,
21095, and 21151, Public Resources Code; Sundstrom v. County of Mendocino, (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d
296; Leonoff v. Monterey Board of Supervisors, (1990) 222 Cal.App.3d 1337; Eureka Citizens for
Responsible
Govt. v. City of Eureka (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 357; Protect the HistoricAmador Waterways v. Amador
Water
Agency (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th at 1109; San Franciscans Upholding the Downtown Plan v. City and
County of
San Francisco (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 656.
Revised 2009
63, � .
June 13, 2012
Mr. Jeff Hogan, AICP
Planning Manager
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, #300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Mr Hogan
Over the past year the Valley Industry Association (VIA) Board of Directors received
two presentations at their regularly scheduled Board meetings from City Staff regarding
the proposed Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan (CAP). During the meetings, the VIA
Board asked questions and engaged in a discussion with City staff regarding the purpose
of the CAP, its various elements, implementation and outcomes. The Board has also had
the opportunity to review and discuss the CAP and associated California Environmental
Quality Act documents since the beginning of the public review period on May 17th.
After careful consideration and discussion, the Board has voted to support the proposed
CAP. The Board believes the CAP will further the City's ongoing sustainability goals
and have no significant impact on the local business community.
Should you have questions, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. I can be
reached at (661) 294-8088 or by email: kathy@via.org.
Sincerely,
1
Kathy Norris
CEO/President
Valley Industry Association
of ias
Los Angeles County
Department of Regional Planning
Planning for the Challenges Ahead
�10FONM!"
June 18, 2012
David Peterson
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite 302
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
Dear Mr. Peterson:
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
�f'u9�0.P10k'.
Richard L Bruckner
Director
Thank you for submitting the City of Santa Clarita's Draft Climate Action Plan (CAP) to
the Department of Regional Planning (Department) for review and comment. We do not
have specific comments at this time, but we would like to express our full support for the
CAP.
Our agencies recently completed "One Valley One Vision" (OVOV), a joint planning
effort that resulted in comprehensive updates to the City's General Plan and the
County's Santa Clarita Valley Area Plan, Pursuant to the OVOV effort, our agencies
both agreed to complete a CAP for the areas within our respective jurisdictions.
Therefore, we see the City's CAP as an outgrowth of the OVOV effort that will help
implement the City's newly adopted General Plan. The proposed greenhouse gas
emission reduction goals and measures are ambitious, yet achievable, and their
implementation will benefit stakeholders throughout the entire Santa Clarita Valley.
The Department will be preparing a CAP for all of the unincorporated areas under
County jurisdiction, including those in the Santa Clarita Valley. We will submit the draft
CAP to the City for review and comment, and we look forward to ongoing coordination
and collaboration with the City in the spirit of the OVOV effort.
' ce ly, � je
Richard J, Bruckner., (/}
Director
RJB:JS:MWG:gmc
K AP 061812 L DPETERSON
320 West Temple Street - Los Angeles, CA 90012 • 213-974-6411 • Fax: 213-626-0434 • TDD: 213-617-2292
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING '
PROJECT TITLE: City of Santa Clarita Climate Action Plan
TM
APPLICATION: Master Case Number 12-052, Initial Study 12-002
PROJECT APPLICANT: City of Santa Clarita
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The City of Santa Clarita has prepared a Climate Action Plan (CAP). The
CAP, which is required by the California Office of the Attorney General in response to State Assembly
Bill 32, is being completed pursuant to the City's new General Plan and will create strategies for the
City to reduce community -wide greenhouse gas emissions. The analysis was conducted by establishing
a baseline year, conducting an inventory of greenhouse gas emissions in the base year, and then
forecasting greenhouse gas emissions through the year 2020, contemplating the goals, policies and
objectives within the new General Plan. The CAP will provide a local threshold of significance under
the California Environmental Quality Act for development within Santa Clarita regarding greenhouse
gas emissions. No new development is proposed as a part of this project.
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: On June 19, 2012, the City of Santa Clarita Planning
Commission unanimously recommended the City Council approve the proposed Climate Action Plan.
PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide
A DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION has been prepared for this proposed project and is available
for public review. A copy of the Negative Declaration and all supporting documents are available at the
Planning Division public counter, located in the City Hall Building at 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Suite
140, Santa Clarita, California. A copy of the Negative Declaration is also available at the Santa Clarita
Library, Valencia Branch at 23743 Valencia Boulevard, Santa Clarita, California.
The City of Santa Clarita City Council will conduct a public hearing on this matter on the following
date:
DATE: August 28, 2012
TIME: At or after 6:00 p.m.
LOCATION: City Council Chambers, City Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., First Floor, Santa Clarita, CA
91355
If you wish to challenge the action taken on this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Santa Clarita at, or prior to, the public hearing.
For further information regarding this proposal, you may contact the City of Santa Clarita, Department
of Community Development, 23920 Valencia Blvd., First Floor, Room 140 Santa Clarita, CA 91355;
Telephone: (661) 255-4330, David Peterson, Assistant Planner II.
Dated: August 7, 2012
Sarah P. Gorman, Esq., City Clerk
(IS M002 Climne Action Plm)NCity Comcil\12.052 Public Ibming Notice.doc
Publish Date: August 7, 2012