The URL can be used to link to this page

Sustainability Attach 2-4APPENDIX E; MUNICIPAL MEASURES Measure Cost Implementation Number Measure Text Effectiveness Schedule TR -1 Implement programs and provide incentives to encourage reduced emissions from employee commute, including telecommuting, alternative work schedules, carpooling / vanpooling, and active High 2012 -2015 TR -2 Provide bicycle lockers and showers at Town offices, as well as Unknown 2015 -2020 education about bicycle commuting. TR -3 Provide bicycles for short trips by Town employees. Unknown 2015 -2020 TR -4 Provide preferential parking for low- emissions vehicles at Town Unknown 2012 -2015 offices. 1111-0 Adopt a policy to limit idling in 'Town vehicles consistent with High 2012 -2015 public safety standards. TR -6 Regularly maintain Town fleet vehicles to maximize efficiency (e.g. High 2012 -2015 �L Ll 1t-UuL age dil , iew ruunrcipai ouriaings ana racinties to meet at least High 2012 -2015 LEED Gold certification standards. GB -2 Utilize all available rebates and incentives for energy efficiency and Unknown 2012 -2015 distributed generation installations, such as State public good programs (i.e. funding for energy efficiency from a "public good" fee on utility bills) and solar programs. GB -3 Train all plan review and building inspection staff in green building Unknown 2012 -2015 materials, techniques, and practices. REA Conduct a solar feasibility study and install solar panels on High 2012 -2015 appropriate Town facilities. RE -2 Install tankless and /or solar water heating at appropriate Town High 2012 -2015 facilities. 1cr, -,3 Where technologically feasible and consistent with public safety Unknown 2012 -2015 standards, convert the Town's vehicle fleet to hybrid, compressed natural gas, biodiesel, electric, hydrogen fuel cells or ethanol RE4 Establish a fuel conservation program for the Town vehicle fleet High 2012 -2015 and require Gas Cap driver training for all employees who use fleet vehicles. EC -1 Conduct, with assistance from Pacific Gas & Electric Company, a High 2012 -2015 thorough energy audit of all Town facilities to identify cost - effective opportunities for conservation. EC -2 Install reflective roofing on Town facilities. High 2015 -2020 EC -3 Establish energy efficiency standards for Town facilities and High 2012 -2015 provide employ -ees with guidelines, instructions, and requirements for efficient use of facilities. I APPENDIX E; MUNICIPAL MEASURES Measure Cost Implementation Number Measure Text Effectiveness Schedule ECA Participate in peak electricity demand reduction programs and High 2012 -2015 professional service agreements, or grants, request that proposals or undertake peak demand reduction measures at Town facilities. applications include information about the sustainability practices _ EC -5 As outdated electronic appliances and office equipment are phased High 2012 -2015 out of Town facilities, replace them with energy- efficient models, P -3 EC -6 Continue to retrofit street lights and traffic lights to light- emitting High 2012 -2015 diodes (LED). energy- efficient products. WATER AND.WASTEWATER CA -1 WW -1 Install water - conserving fixtures in all Town facilities. High 2012 -2015 WW -2 Use drought - tolerant native landscaping at Town facilities. High 2012 -2015 WW -3 Use recycled water or graywater for Town landscaping, including Unknown 2015 -2020 parks and medians, where appropriate. SOLID WASTE SW -1 Train an existing staff member from each Town department to be a Unknown 2012 -2015 recycling coordinator for their department. SW -2 Require all Town departments and facilities to reuse office supplies, Unknown 2012 -2015 furniture, and computers before buying new materials. When buying new materials, require Town departments and facilities to purchase products that are made with high levels of post- consumer recycled content and have limited packaging. OPEN SPACE OS -1 Develop a Town program for maximizing carbon sequestration on Unknown 2015 -2020 municipal Drooertv through tree Dlanting. ,PURCHASING P -1 Develop a Town program to require or encourage the Town to Unknown 2015 -2020 hire locally for its contracts and services. P -2 When requesting proposals or applications for contracts, Unknown 2015 -2020 professional service agreements, or grants, request that proposals or applications include information about the sustainability practices of the organization, and use such information as a partial basis for proposal evaluations. P -3 Incorporate a "life - cycle costing" approach into Town purchasing Unknown 2015 -2020 considerations that takes into account long -term cost savings from energy- efficient products. COMMUNICATION ACTION CA -1 Continue to operate a townwide green business program, Unknown 2012 -2015 CA -2 Train an existing Town staff member to be a sustainability Unknown 2015 -2020 coordinator for the Town. CA -3 Reward local businesses that hire local residents and allow Unknown 2015 -2020 telecommuting by, for example, recognition on the Town website or in Town newsletters, or preference in Town purchasing. 2 s°41 " 0 TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT cos a os Meeting Date: August 22, 2012 PREPARED BY: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner jsavage@losgatosca.gov APPLICATION: Sustainability Plan LOCATION: Town -wide APPLICANT: Town of Los Gatos CONTACT: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner APPLICATION ITEM NO: 6 DESK ITEM SUMMARY: Consider adoption of a Sustainability Plan to serve as the Town's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan and satisfy the 2020 General Plan Action ENV -13.1. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and an Addendum to the 2020 General Plan EIR is recommended. REMARKS: Since the consultant is unavailable to attend the meeting of September 12, staff requests that this matter be continued to the meeting of September 26, 2012. ,_ V- 1Q (;�VzZ4,6L Pr pared b . Jennifer L. avage, AICP Associate Planner TC:JS:ah rco Y, Bos A roved y: To purso Acting Director of Community Development CC: The Planning Center DC &E, 1625 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 300, Berkeley, CA 94709 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS \2012 \SustainabilityPlan. l.desk.docx ATTACHMENT 2 This Page Intentionally Left Plank Asir °F TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT rs`CA ".1 Meeting Date: August 22, 2012 PREPARED BY: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner jsavage @losgatosea.gov APPLICATION: Sustainability Plan LOCATION: Town -wide APPLICANT: Town of Los Gatos CONTACT: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner APPLICATION ITEM NO: 6 SUMMARY: Consider adoption of a Sustainability Plan to serve as the Town's Greenhouse Gas (GIIG) Emissions Reduction Plan and satisfy the 2020 General Plan Action ENV -13.1. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and an Addendum to the 2020 General Plan EIR is recommended. RFI\ifARK.C- Staff requests that this platter be continued to the meeting of September 12, 2012 to allow the Planning Commission additional time to review the plan. Q_�_ D_" 6 Pre liar d by: Jennifer L. Savage, AICP Associate Planner WRR:JS:ct Approved by: Wendie R. Roon t)Tru-Ctor of Community Develo Q) CC: The Planning Center DC &E, 1625 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 300, Berkeley, CA 94709 N: \DEV \PC REPORTS \2012 \SustainabilityPlan.1.docx ATTACMIENT 3 This Page Intentionally Left Blank °" i °F TOWN OF LOS GATOS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT cos °paSOS Meeting Date: August 8, 2012 PREPARED BY: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner jsavage@losgatosca.gov APPLICATION: Sustainability Plan LOCATION: Town -wide APPLICANT: Town of Los Gatos CONTACT: Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner APPLICATION ITEM NO: 4 SUMMARY: Consider adoption of a Sustainability Plan to serve as the Town's Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan and satisfy the 2020 General Plan Action ENV -13,1. No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and an Addendum to the 2020 General Plan EIR is recommended. RECOMMENDATION: Forward a recommendation to the Town Council for adoption of the Sustainability Plan. CEQA: No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and an Addendum to the 2020 General Plan EIR was prepared. ACTION: Forward a recommendation to the Town Council for adoption of the Sustainability Plan. EXHIBITS: 1. Excerpt of December 5, 2011, Town Council Minutes 2. Excerpt of June 4, 2012, Town Council Minutes 3. Sustainability Plan without Appendices 4. EIR Addendum STAFF REMARKS: In September 2010, the Town Council adopted the 2020 General Plan, Action ENV -13.1 directs the Town to develop a GHG Emissions Reduction Plan. Action ENV -13.1 directs the Town to adopt a GHG Emissions Reduction Plan within 24 months of adoption of the 2020 General Plan. The action requires that a GHG Emissions Reduction Plan be in place prior to the adoption of any specific plan. ATTACIMNT 4 Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 2 Sustainability Plan and EIR Addendum August 8, 2012 The Town has developed a Sustainability Plan that identifies how the community can reduce GHG emissions. The Plan identifies a GHG target, strategies, and specific measures for both municipal operations and the larger community. The Plan positions the Town to increase energy efficiency and conservation. The Plan also helps address recent changes to the State and Federal regulatory environment, pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32), Senate Bill (SB) 375, and other related legislation. The Sustainability Plan would serve as the Town's GHG Emissions Reduction Plan and satisfy the 2020 General Plan Action ENV - 13.1. On June 8, 2011, the Town authorized the execution of an agreement with The Planning Center DC &E to prepare the Sustainability Plan. The consultants have completed the following tasks: • Established a GHG Emission baseline year • December 5, 2011, Town Council Study Session • January 30, 2012, Community Workshop • Completed the Town and Community GHG inventory • Refined the list of Sustainability Plan measures • Quantified emissions reductions through refined Sustainability Plan measures • Created implementation schedule • June 4, 2012, Community Open House • June 4, 2012, Town Council Study Session CEQA DETERMINATION: No significant environmental impacts have been identified as a result of this project and an Addendum to the 2020 General Plan EIR was prepared (.Exhibit 4). The Addendum serves to meet environmental review requirements for the Sustainability Plan. The Sustainability Plan, directed by the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan, is a project under CEQA. However, the adoption and implementation would not result in new potentially significant impacts beyond those identified in the 2020 General Plan Certified EIR Therefore, pursuant to CEQA, an Addendum to the EIR was prepared. The deciding body does not need to make a finding related to the Addendum. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments were received through the public review process and are available at the Community Development Department for review. Planning Commission Staff Report - Page 3 Sustainability Plan and EIR Addendum August 8, 2012 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: A. Conclusion The Town Council held two thorough study sessions for the Sustainability Plan. Specifically, the Council completed a comprehensive review of the Sustainability Plan measures before and after public input. The changes recommended by the Council during those study sessions have been incorporated into the Sustainability Plan. The attached Sustainability Plan (Exhibit 3) would serve as the Town's GHG Emissions Reduction Plan and satisfy the 2020 General Plan Action ENV -13.1. (Due to the length of the Appendices, they are not included as an exhibit but are available on the Town's website.) Staff anticipates the plan to be scheduled for adoption by the Town Council in September 2012 which will enable the Town to meet the requirement to adopt a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction Plan within 24 months of adoption of the 2020 General Plan. B. Recommendation Forward a recommendation to the Town Council for adoption of the Sustainability Plan. Prep red by: Jennifer L. Savage, AICP Associate Planner 'v VRR:JS:ct Wi�r Approved b Wendie R. R ley Director of Community Development CC: The Planning Center DC &E, 1625 Shattuck Avenue, Suite 300, Berkeley, CA 94709 N:\DEV\PC REPORTS \2012 \Sustainabilit3,Plan,docx This Page Intentionally .Left Blank Council /Agency Meeting 12119/11 Item #8b MINUTES CP THE TOWN COUNCIL /PARKING AUTHORITY /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING DECEMBER 5, 2011 The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Special Meeting on Monday, December 5, 2011 at 5:30 P.M. TOWN COUNCIL /PARKING AUTHORITY /REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY SUSTAINABILITY STUDY SESSION HELD AT 5:30 P.M. Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Joanna Jensen and Nicole Vermilion, consultants from The Planning Center DC &E, presented the report. Council Questions - Questioned the timeline for adopting a sustainability plan. - Questioned whether more micro -level actions should be considered. - Questioned the degree to which the plan should reflect realistic goals that can be accomplished with limited resources and the degree to which the plan should reflect idealistic goals. - Questioned what "intensification" means in context of the Sustainability Plan and as compared to other local communities with higher growth rates. - Questioned the source of housing projection numbers. - Questioned the changing status of S13 375 and its application to the proposed Sustainability Plan. Ms. Jensen and Ms. Vermilion - Commented that the General Plan provides for a two year timeline to adopt the specific Sustainability Plan. - Commented that additional measures may be included at Council's direction. - Commented that the document reflects implementation goals that will actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. - Commented that some measures are easier to quantify than others, but an example of intensification is whether projects with certain densities are being approved. - Commented that the housing projection numbers come from the General Plan. - Commented that SS 375 describes how the locations of employment and housing affect greenhouse gas emissions. Pa 0e 7. EXH0VT 1 i Sustainability Study Session — Continued Greg Larson, Town Manager - Commented that staff seeks feedback from Council on the sustainability measures, which will later be presented to members of various commissions and the public. Council Comments - Questioned the relationship between the sustainability plan and the possibility of CEQA challenges. Ms. Jensen - Commented that this process and plan provides protection under CEQA. The Town Council provided feedback after considering each of the following measures: ® Green Building Transportation ® Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels Energy Conservation o Water and Wastewater ® Solid Waste © Open Space m Purchasing f ® Community Action MEETING RECONVENED AT 7:00 P.M. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Steve Rice, Vice Mayor Barbara Spector, Council Member Steven Leonardis, Council Member Diane McNutt, and Council Member Joe Pirzynski. Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Lynsey Chiala from Blossom Hill Elementary led the Pledge of Allegiance. The audience was invited to participate. TOWN COUNCIL MATTERS Council Member Steven Leonardis - Commented that Town Staff and volunteers successfully hosted the Holiday Parade. Page 2 Council /Agency Meeting 6118112 Item #1 MINUTES OF THE TOWN COUNCIL /PARKING AUTHORITY STUDY SESSION JUNE 4, 2012 The Town Council of the Town of Los Gatos conducted a Study Session and Town Council Meeting on Monday, June 4, 2012. STUDY SESSION CALLED TO ORDER ® 5:15 P.M. Sustainability Plan Study Session - Jennifer Savage, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. - Joanna Jensen from The Planning Center DCE presented a Summary of Measure Reductions and Implementation. Council Discussion The Town Council reviewed the refined list of Sustainability Plan Measures and provided feedback to staff and consultants for the completion of the Sustainability Plan. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER a 7:00 PM ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Steve Rice, Vice Mayor Barbara Spector, Council Member Steven Leonardis, Council Member Diane McNutt, and Council Member Joe Pirzynski. Absent: None PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Max Saunders, from Blossom Mill Elementary School, led the Pledge of Allegiance. The audience was invited to participate. PRESENTATIONS Benjamin Baranovsky, Youth Commission Chair, presented the 2012 Youth Friendly Business of the Year award to Los Gatos Meats. Page 1 EXHIBIT Z This Page Intentionally Left Blank HE Tit is Page Intentionally { Left .dank Los Gatos Sustainabilify Plan July 25, 2012 Prepared For; The Town of Los Gatos 'his Page Intentionally Left Blank TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... ............................... 1 -1 2. EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY.. 2 -1 3, 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL AND ADJUSTED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY ............................................ ............................... 3 -1 4. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION TARGET ... ............................... 4 -1 5. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION MEASURES 5 -1 6. IMPLEMENTATION MONITORING .............................. 6 -1 I Appendices Appendix A: Community Workshop Summary Appendix B: Inventory and Forecast Modeling Files Appendix C: GHG Emissions Reductions Measures Modeling Data Appendix D: Transportation and Land Use Measures Modeling Summary Appendix E: Summary of Measure Reductions and Implementation r T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N TABLE OF CONTENTS Figures Figure 1 -1 The Greenhouse Effect ............................... ............................... 1 -3 Tables Table 2 -1 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary.................. ...................................... ............................... 2 -2 Table 2 -2 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Sources .................................. ............................... 2 -2 Table 2 -3 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from ResidentialLand Uses .................................... ............................... 2 -4 Table 2 -4 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Non - Residential Land Uses ........................... ............................... 2 -4 Table 2 -5 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from WasteDisposal ............................................... ............................... 2 -7 Table 2 -6 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from ? Water Use and Wastewater Generation ........ ............................... 2 -7 Table 2 -7 Baseline Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from OtherEmissions .......................................... ............................... 2 -10 Table 3 -1 Existing and 2020 Population, Employment, and Housing Projections..................................................... ............................... 3 -2 Table 3 -2 Baseline and Forecast Year 2020 Business as Usual Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary ............. 3 -2 Table 3 -3 Baseline and Adjusted Forecast Year 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Summary ........... ............................... 3 -4 Table 3 -4 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transportation Sources .................................. ............................... 3 -8 Table 3 -5 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Residential and Non - Residential Land Uses .. ............................... 3 -8 Table 3 -6 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Water Use and Wastewater Generation ................... ............................... 3 -9 Table 3 -7 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Waste Disposal........................................................ ............................... 3 -11 Table 3 -8 2020 Communitywide Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Other Emissions..................................................... ............................... 3 -11 Table 4 -1 Target and Gap Analysis ............................... ............................... 4 -3 Table 5 -1 Communitywide GHG Emission Reductions by Sector ............. 5 -3 1 INTRODUCTION Los Gatos is a charming, vibrant community that has achieved enviable suc- cess in balancing its location in the bustling Silicon Valley with a friendly, small -town atmosphere. Through thoughtful planning over the 125 years since incorporation in 1887, Los Gatos has managed to grow and evolve while maintaining respect for its beautiful natural setting and preserving its historic character and a distinct sense of place. Throughout its history, and as it moves into the 215` century, the residents and leaders of Los Gatos have rec- ognized that a healthy and prosperous community must weigh economic, environmental, and social goals when planning for the future. In 2010, under the leadership of the Town Council and with substantial input from an engaged and passionate community, the Town adopted an updated 2020 General Plan that focused on promoting sustainability. The 2020 Gen- eral Plan defines sustainability as "using resources in the present in a manner that does not compromise the choices and quality of life of future genera - tions." The 2020 General Plan recognizes that sustainability goals can be met several ways, including increasing alternative modes of transportation, main- taining a healthy local economy, and preserving open space. This Sustainability Plan is a key tool in implementing the 2020 General Plan. It is a detailed, long -range strategy to achieve sustainability in transportation and land use, energy, water, solid waste, and open space. Collectively, ad- dressing community development and conservation through these lenses will help Los Gatos remain attractive, prosperous, and adaptive to social, political, and environmental changes, This Sustainability Plan addresses the major sources of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Los Gatos and sets forth a detailed and long -term strategy that the Town and community can implement to achieve the GHG emissions reduction target. Implementation of this Sustainability Plan will guide Los Gatos' actions to reduce its contribution to global warming and will support ambitious emission reduction targets adopted by the State of California. The Sustainability Plan will also be utilized for tiering and streamlining of future development within Los Gatos pursuant to California Environmental Quali- 1 -1 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N F t ty Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15152 and 15183,5. The Sustainability Plan serves as the CEQA threshold of significance within the town for the effects of GHGs, by which all applicable developments within the town will be re- viewed. This chapter provides background information about the effects of GHGs, existing Sustainability efforts in Los Gatos, and public participation in the Town's sustainability planning processes. A. Effects of Greenhouse Gases The earth's atmosphere is composed of naturally - occurring and anthropogen- ic (i.e. induced by human activity) GHGs that trap heat in the atmosphere and regulate the earth's temperature. This phenomenon, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for maintaining a habitable climate on earth, GHGs present in the earth's lower atmosphere play a critical role in main- taining the earth's temperature as they trap some of the longwave infrared radiation emitted from the earth's surface which otherwise would have es- caped to space, as shown in Figure 1 -1. Water vapor and carbon dioxide are the most abundant GHGs in the atmos- phere. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to anthro- pogenic global warming are carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, methane, hydro - fluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. While human ac- tivity results in the release of some GHGs that occur naturally, such as car- bon dioxide and methane, other gases, like hydrofluorocarbons, perfluoro carbons, and sulfur hexafluoride, are human-made. The combustion of fossil fuels and deforestation release carbon, in the form of carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere that historically has been stored un- derground in sediments or in surface vegetation. With the accelerated in- crease of fossil fuel combustion and deforestation since the industrial revolu- tion of the 19th century, concentrations of GHGs have increased exponential- ly in the atmosphere. Increases in the atmospheric concentrations of GHGs 1 t 1 -2 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N INTRODUCTION in excess of natural ambient concentrations contribute to the enhancement of the natural greenhouse effect. FIGURE I - I THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT ��• ��. �n�L- rirenoai, nttp : / /maps.grida.no /go /graphic /greenhouse_effect, This enhanced greenhouse effect has contributed to global warming, which is an increased rate of warming of the earth's surface temperature. Specifically, increases in GHGs lead to increased absorption of longwave infrared radia- tion by the earth's atmosphere and warm the lower atmosphere further, thereby increasing evaporation rates and temperatures near the surface. Warming of the earth's lower atmosphere induces large -scale changes in ocean circulation patterns, precipitation patterns, global ice cover, biological distri- butions, and other large -scale changes to the earth system. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change JPCC) was established by the World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment 1 -3 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N E Programme to assess scientific, technical, and socioeconomic information relevant to the understanding of climate change, its potential impacts, and options for adaptation and mitigation, The IPCC estimates that the average global temperature rise between the years 2000 and 2100 could range from 1. 1 °C, with no increase in GHG emissions above year 2000 levels, to 6.4 °C, with a substantial increase in GHG emissions.' Large increases in global tem- peratures could have massive deleterious impacts on the natural and human environments, The prevailing opinion among scientists is that most of the change in temperatures observed in the last 50 years is the result of human activities.Z Scientific studies, best represented by the IPCC's periodic reports, demon- strate that climate change is already occurring due to past GHG emissions. Forecasting of future growth and related GHG emissions under business as usual (BAU) conditions, which are discussed further in Chapter 3, indicates �. large increases in those GHG emissions accompanied by an increasing severi- ty of changes in global climate. Thus, the best scientific evidence concludes that global emissions must be reduced below current levels, B. Regulatory Action Related to Greenhouse Gases As GHGs gain increasing attention, government agencies and organizations are working to develop and implement solutions to control GHG emissions 1 IPCC, 2007, Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, Contribution off Work- ing Groups I, Hand III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A.(eds,)], IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland. 2 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, "Summary for Policy - makers" in Climate Change 2007.' The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USAL; Cambridge University Press, page 10. 1 -4 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S LI S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R o D U C T 1 o N and slow their effects on natural ecosystems, The major efforts are described in this section, 1, Federal Laws and Regulations The United States has relatively limited federal regulations and policies relat- ed to GHG emissions. However, in December 2009, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that elevated concentrations of the six key GHGs in the atmosphere, which are discussed further in Section A, endanger the public health and welfare of current and future generations. These find- ings were consistent and in compliance with the 2007 US Supreme Court de- cision in Massachusetts vs. EPA, which found that the EPA can regulate GHG pollution under the Clean Air Act. While the EPA's endangerment finding does not automatically impose any requirements, it allowed EPA to finalize GHG emission standards for light -duty vehicles in May 2010 and heavy -duty vehicles in August 2011, which were developed in collaboration with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Additionally, on January 2, 2011, the EPA announced that it would regulate GHG emissions from major stationary sources of GHGs, including oil refineries and fossil fuel burning power plants, through modifications to the existing Clean Air Act permitting programs. 2. State Laws and Regulations California has been a leader among states in passing legislation to reduce GHG emissions. Major laws and regulations are described below. a. Energy Efficiency Standards (1978) Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations, Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, was established in 1978 to address a legislative mandate to reduce the State's energy consump- tion. The standards are updated roughly every three years to incorporate new energy efficiency goals, methods, and technologies. The 2008 standards went into effect on January 1, 2010, and require buildings to be approximate- ly 15 percent more energy- efficient compared to the 2005 standards. These standards are also discussed in Chapter 3. 1 -5 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N b. Clean Car Regulations (Assembly Bill 1493, 2002) Assembly Bill (AB) 1493, Clean Car Regulations (commonly known as the "Pavley law "), directed the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt regulations to decrease GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles and light duty trucks beginning with the 2009 model year, Implementation of these fuel efficiency standards, known as the "Pavley standards," was uncertain for years due to EPA's denial of California's request for a waiver of Clean Air Act Section 209(a), which was necessary to implement the Pavley standards. However, in June 2009, the EPA granted California the authority to imple- merit the standards. These standards are discussed further in Chapter 3. c. Executive Order S -3 -05 (2005) In 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive Order S -3 -05, which established the goals of reducing emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, . to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. The Executive Order identified the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal /EPA) as the lead coordinating State agency for establishing GHG emission reduc- tion targets in California, and designated a "Climate Action Team," a multi - agency group of State agencies, to implement Executive Order S -3 -05. GHG emission reduction strategies and measures to reduce global warming were identified by the California Climate Action Team in 2006. d. Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32, 2006) In 2006, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, into law. The Act requires that California cap its GHG emissions at 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 also requires that CARB iden- tify discrete early actions to reduce emissions that could be implemented im- mediately and develop a statewide scoping plan to identify how to meet the emissions reduction targets. CARB identified a list of nine early actions, including landfill methane gas capture, the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) that is discussed further in Section B,2,e below, and a tire pressure program. CARB's Climate Change Scoping Plan, adopted in December 2008, outlines regulations, market mech- 1 -6 TOW N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P LA N INTRODUCTION anisms, and other actions to achieve the maximum technologically - feasible and cost - effective reductions in GHG emissions by 2020. The Scoping Plan recommends achieving a statewide energy mix with 33 percent from renewa- ble energy sources, developing a California cap- and -trade program that will be part of a regional carbon market through the Western Climate Initiative, and expanding and strengthening existing energy efficiency programs and building and appliance standards. e. Executive Order S -01 -07 (2007) Executive Order S- 01 -07, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in 2007, estab- lishes a LCFS for transportation fuels sold in California. This standard, which is also discussed in Chapter 3, will reduce the carbon content of pas- senger vehicle fuels in California by at least 10 percent by 2020.3 f. Regional Transportation and Land Use Planning Efforts (SB 375, 2008) In 2008, California enacted Senate Bill (SB) 375 to augment AB 32 by promot- ing efficient land use patterns and curbing sprawl. SB 375 establishes emis- sions reduction goals for which regions can plan; encourages metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to integrate their housing, transportation, and regional land use plans with GHG reduction goals; and provides incentives for governments and developers to implement compact and efficient growth patterns, Under SB 375, the 18 MPOs in California must prepare a "sustaina- ble communities strategy" to reduce the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in their regions and demonstrate their ability to reach the CARB targets. SB 375 also includes incentives to create walkable and attractive communities and to revi- talize existing communities. The legislation also allows developers to stream- line environmental reviews under CEQA if they build projects consistent with the new sustainable communities' strategies. SB 375 enhances CARB's 3 On December 29, 2011, the US District Court for the Eastern District of California issued several rulings in federal lawsuits challenging the LCFS, One of the court's rulings preliminarily enjoins CARB from enforcing the regulation during the pendency of the litigation, In January 2012, CARB appealed the decision and on April 23, 2012, the Ninth Circuit Court granted CARB's motion for a stay of the injunction while it continues to consider CARB's appeal of the lower court's decision. 1 -7 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N ability to reach the AB 32 goals by directing the agency in developing region- al GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from the transportation sector for 2020 and 2035, g, Heavy Duty Vehicle GHG Emissions Reduction Measure (2008) In December 2008, CARB adopted the Heavy Duty Vehicle GHG Emission Reduction Measure, which requires long -haul truckers to retrofit their trailers with fuel efficient tires and aerodynamic devices. This requirement will im- prove the fuel economy of heavy duty vehicles, reducing GHG emissions. h. Sulfur Hexafluoride Emissions Reductions Measures In February 2010, CARB adopted regulations to reduce sulfur hexafluoride emissions from semiconductor applications, and in January 2011, CARB be- gan implementation of measures to reduce emissions of sulfur hexafluoride from non - semiconductor applications, These measures include reporting and reduction requirements for semiconductor operations as well as new re- strictions on the use and sale of sulfur hexafluoride, 3. Regional Policies and Measures The Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) initiated the regional Climate Protection Program in 2005. The Program includes a varie- ty of measures, including outreach, data collection, and technical assistance, among others, in an effort to move toward GHG reductions. In May of 2008, BAAQiVID adopted a first of its kind program to charge large stationary sources for their GHG emissions. All pollution sources for which an air qual- ity permit is required are now also required to estimate their GHG emissions and pay a fee of $0,042 per metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). Consistent with SB 375, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) have undertaken efforts to link land use and transportation to GHG emission reduction goals through a sustainable communities strategy. MTC has committed the Bay ME TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N Area region, including Los Gatos, to a 15- percent reduction in GHGs by 2035. 4. Town Policies and Measures In 2007, the Town formalized its commitment to take action to significantly reduce global warming pollution by signing the "US Mayors Climate Protec- tion Agreement." This Agreement, passed unanimously by the US Confer- ence of Mayors, calls for taking action to meet or beat the GHG emissions reduction target of 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012, In 2008, the Town passed a resolution adopting the Cities for Climate Protec- tion Campaign (CCP) led by the International Council for Local Environ- mental Initiatives (ICLEI) Local Governments for Sustainability. The CCP helps local governments and communities to reduce GHG emissions and their associated environmental impacts, Jurisdictions that join the CCP commit to a five -step process: 1. Measure emissions of GHGs; 2. Commit to an emissions reduction target associated with a specific target year; 3. Adopt specific measures or take specific actions, described in a local plan, to reach the reduction target; 4. Implement the local plan; and 5. Monitor emissions reductions achieved by implementing the plan.4 This Sustainability Plan is Los Gatos' plan to accomplish the five steps above. 4 ICLEI Mitigation Programs, as described at http: / /Www.iclei.org/ index.php?id = 10828, accessed May 3, 2012. 1 -9 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N C, Sustainability Challenges The effect of GHGs is one of the most critical challenges facing society today. Overcoming these effects will require substantial efforts from government, organizations, and individuals. Meeting Los Gatos' reduction target will re- quire both persistence and adaptability. The Town needs to prioritize ac- tions; mobilize residents, business owners, and staff; and work with neighbor- ing jurisdictions and regional agencies to create workable solutions. Like other communities in California and around the world, the Town of Los Gatos faces a number of sustainability challenges, including the effects of GHGs, This section describes sustainability challenges related to the sectors covered in this Sustainability Plan. 1. Transportation and Land Use During the second half of the 20' century, transportation and driving pat- terns in the US shifted dramatically, with per- capita VMT increasing by around 140 percent between and 1956 and 1998.5 This growth in VMT is the result of increasing car trips and increasing average trip length, These increas- es have been driven by a variety of factors, including changes in de- mographics, land use, urban design, and public transportation systems, As the proportion of two- income households grew and as jobs shifted to areas further from the traditional urban core, lengthy car commutes became in- creasingly common. This has been true of Los Gatos, as more residents work farther afield in Silicon Valley and San Francisco. Over this same time peri- od, changes in land use and in building and streetscape design likewise con - tributed to increased car trips. Emphasis on the separation of uses and driver convenience often came at the disadvantage of pedestrians and other non - automotive users, As commercial areas became more disconnected from resi- dential neighborhoods, it became less convenient to reach these destinations by means other than a car. Auto - oriented designs, which can be unpleasant, 5 Puentes, Robert and Adie Tomer, 2008, The Road,..Less Traveled: An Analy sis o£ Vehicle Miles Traveled Trends in the U.S., Brookings Institution, Washington D. C, 1 -10 TOW N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S LI S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N intimidating, or even dangerous for non - drivers, have made non - automotive transportation modes more difficult and less appealing to use. Additionally, public transit systems have seen their coverage decreased and their services cut, and in some cases they been removed completely. Because of the impediments created by development and design, driving is often the only viable mode of transportation. Consequently, residents have fewer opportunities for physical activity, and those who cannot drive, includ- ing children, seniors, and disabled people, can have trouble accessing services. 2, Energy Energy production is a major economic, security, and environmental chal- lenge at the local, national, and global levels. Although Los Gatos receives its energy from Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG &E), which provides an energy mix that is much cleaner than what many other US utilities provide, it still relies on fossil fuels - coal, oil, and natural gas - for about half of its ener- gy. s The US imports approximately 60 percent of its petroleum and 15 percent of its natural gas from foreign countries, a dependence that makes our economy and security vulnerable to political and resource instability in other parts of the world. The combustion of fossil-fuels to produce heat or electricity, or to power in- ternal combustion engines, is a main contributor to GHG emissions and oth- er environmental problems. Because fossil fuels are found deep in the ground, they must be extracted and transported to provide energy. Surface and groundwater pollution can occur during extraction, storage, and transpor a- tion. Land subsidence can result when oil and gas are removed from below ground with nothing left to support the land above. There is also the poten- ° Pacific Gas and Electric website, http : / /wAw.pge.com /myhome/ environment /pge /cleanenergy /, accessed on May 1, 2012, 1 -11 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N tial for storage tank leakage and oil spills during transportation, causing wide- spread pollution and requiring costly cleanup efforts, There are numerous strategies to reduce fossil fuel dependence and decrease carbon emissions, which generally fall into three main categories: o Energy Conservation. This is a quick and cost - effective strategy to re- duce GHG emissions and decrease dependence on non - renewable sources of energy. Strategies include land use patterns that increase walking and bicycling, reducing electricity consumption, and efficient technologies such as ENERGY STAR products that use less electricity, natural gas, and water. o Renewable and Alternative Energy Sources. These sources include so- lar, wind, geothermal, biomass, and alternative vehicle fuels. In recent years, increased research and development has been devoted to expanding the supply and increasing the deployment of these sources. o Carbon Capture and Storage. Carbon capture and storage includes technological strategies to sequester carbon emissions from large pollu- tion sources so that they don't enter the atmosphere. 3. Water Though the 2010 -2011 water year brought some relief to drought conditions in California, the winter of 2011 -2012 marked the fourth year of dry condi- tions within the past five, The year 2009 featured the driest spring and sum- mer on record, low water content in the Sierra snowpack, and a historic low in the State's reservoir levels. In 2008, the Sacramento and San Joaquin River systems that provide a large portion of the State's reservoir inflow were classi- fied as Critically Dry. As of early 2009, the drought had damaged crops and prevented farmers from planting or replanting 100,000 acres Of agricultural land, causing agricultural revenue losses of more than $300 million,' Such drought conditions also threaten aquatic ecosystems, increase the risk of wild- fires, increase food prices, and harm livelihoods dependent on agriculture, ' Office of the Governor, State of California, February 27, 2009, Press Re- lease, Gov, Sc&varzenegger Takes Action to Address California's Water Shortage. 1 -12 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N natural resources, and tourism. Responding to these wide - ranging impacts, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger proclaimed a State of Emergency in Feb- ruary 2009, calling for an immediate 20 percent reduction in water use by urban water users and the use of efficient water management practices by ag- ricultural users.8 4. Solid Waste The production and transport of consumer products creates large amounts of GHGs. A large percentage of these products are disposed of after only one use, requiring more raw materials to be extracted to replace these products. Making new products or buildings from raw materials generally requires more energy, uses more water, and creates more air and water pollution than reusing materials or making the same product from recycled materials, there - by increasing GHG emissions. Once in the landfill, solid waste continues to emit GHGs, most notably me- thane, which is approximately 21 times more potent than carbon dioxide in terms of its global warming impacts.' Landfills also release harmful contami- nants such as vinyl chloride and benzene. In addition, the combination of rainwater and other liquids with layers of solid waste at landfills produces leachate, a harmful substance that contains contaminants such as benzene and volatile halocarbons.10 Leachate causes soil, surface water, and groundwater contamination. Poor management of solid waste operations can increase dis- ease vectors and creates nuisances related to odor, litter, and dust. The GHG emissions and other environmental problems associated with solid waste can be reduced through increased diversion from landfills by reducing consumption, reusing, and recycling. The Town of Los Gatos has made sig- 8 Office of the Governor, State of California, February 27, 2009, Press Re- lease, Gov, Schwarzenegger Takes Action to Address California's Water Shortage. 9 US Environmental Protection Agency website, http: / /www.epa.gov/ outreach /scientific.html, accessed on May 1, 2012. io US Environmental Protection Agency website, http: / /www.epa.gov/ waste /nonhaz/ municipal /landfill /bioreactors,htm, accessed on March 1, 2010. 1 -13 T O W N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N i R O D U C T 1 0 N nificant strides in the area of waste diversion by exceeding State standards and diverting 56 percent of its solid waste in its most recent certification by CalRecycle. The Town has achieved these high diversion levels through a variety of programs, such as recycling, including Downtown recycling recep- tacles; construction waste salvage and reuse; and e -waste collection efforts. By continuing these efforts and by implementing new programs, Los Gatos stands to continue to make significant reductions to waste disposal. 5. Open Space Los Gatos has approximately 1,940 acres of woodland /forestland in the hillsides surrounding the Town, and 75 acres of agricultural land, including orchards, The largest proportion of farmland acreage in the town is in the North Forty area,11 which contains orchard trees, including walnut Vuglans sp.) and fruit trees. These open space areas can store carbon in the trees and plants. Conversion of these open space lands to development can release GHGs into the atmosphere.12 Development of forests or orchard land can result in the release of nitrous oxide emissions from soil oxidation and carbon dioxide emissions from removal of plant materials that store carbon. D, Existing Sustainability Efforts in Los Gatos The Town of Los Gatos has already initiated many plans and programs that will improve sustainability in the town; this section describes these efforts. 1. Los Gatos 2020 General Plan The Los Gatos 2020 General Plan has a strong emphasis on sustainability, In particular, the Environment and Sustainability Element guides the Town in making decisions that will conserve resources, reduce waste, and protect and enhance natural resources and the environment by promoting the sustainabil- 11 There is a Specific Plan application for the North Forty area that is currently being reviewed by the Town. 12 International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, and IPCC, 2000, Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 1 -14 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N ity of resources and the Town's natural ecology for both current and future generations. This Element also contains goals, policies, and actions designed specifically to reduce GHG emissions, including Action ENV -13.1, which directs the Town to prepare this Sustainability Plan. 2, Local Programs The Town of Los Gatos has implemented a wide variety of programs to in- crease sustainability. The Sustainability Plan would seek to create new pro- grams as well as strengthen existing ones, The following is a partial list of Los Gatos's sustainability efforts, with an emphasis on some of the most impact - ful initiatives: ® International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives ( ICLEI) Mem- bership: In 2008, the Los Gatos Town Council voted to join ICLEI, By becoming an ICLEI member, the Town committed to efforts to quantify, monitor, and reduce its GHG emissions as part of the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign, ® City Solar Award: In 2007, the Town of Los Gatos was honored with the City Solar Award for its leadership and achievements in photovoltaic so- lar installations. ® Waste Reduction: As mentioned above, the Town has exceeded State standards by diverting 56 percent of its solid waste, per the Town's most recent review by CalRecycle. ® Green Building: In 2008, the Town of Los Gatos adopted LEED and GreenPoint rating systems as its green building standards and adopted a LEED Silver standard for municipal construction and renovations. ® Biodiesel: All of the Town's heavy -duty, diesel - fueled vehicles and equipment run on Biodiesel. 0 CaliforniaFIRST: Los Gatos participates in this statewide program that helps finance residential and commercial energy- efficiency improvements. ® Green Business Certification: Through the Town's formal efforts to conserve resources, prevent pollution, and minimize waste in its opera- tions, Los Gatos is certified as a Green Business by Santa Clara County. 1 -15 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U C T I O N 4 PG &E's ClimateSmart Program: The Town's participation in this pro- gram allowed it to offset all of its identified GHG emissions from munic- ipal facilities, through support of forest planting and preservation. How- ever, as of publication of this Sustainability Plan, this program recently ended. Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance: First adopted by the Town in 1992, and since updated to comply with the State's Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, this ordinance promotes conservation and efficient use of water. Wood Burning Ordinance: This ordinance restricts the sale and use of fireplaces and other wood - burning appliances that do not meet federal EPA standards. E, Public. Outreach and Participation The Town has adopted multiple strategies to incorporate public participation in various sustainability efforts, including the development of this Sustainabil- ity Plan as described in this section. 1. Los Gatos Growing Greener Together Campaign The Los Gatos Growing Greener Together Campaign seeks to provide the public with news regarding the Town's sustainability efforts, information on how citizens can participate and contribute, and tips for making green choices in their own lives and activities. The campaign publishes a regular newsletter to publicize this information, 2. Sustainability Plan Community Workshop and Public Comment Period The Town held a Community Workshop on January 30, 2012 to discuss draft sustainability targets and measures for this Sustainability Plan, The work- shop included a formal presentation to acquaint participants with the princi- ples of sustainability planning. Participants were given the opportunity to view and comment upon comprehensive lists of potential communitywide } -16 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N INTRODUCTION and municipal measures for GHG reduction, as well as to suggest other po- tential measures. These comments served to influence which measures were emphasized and included in the Sustainability Plan. Notes from the work- shop are included as Appendix A. Following this workshop, the Town initiated a three -week public comment period during which members of the public could comment on the prelimi- nary measures and suggest other measures. Suggestions received during this comment period were incorporated into this Sustainability Plan. 1 -17 T O W N OF L O S G A T O $ L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I N T R O D U G T 1 O N t' 1 -18 - 2 EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY This chapter summarizes existing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the Town of Los Gatos resulting from the following sectors: transportation, resi- dential and non - residential energy use, solid waste disposal, water and wastewater, and other sources. Los Gatos' baseline GHG inventory was compiled as a three -year average (2006 to 2008) using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), pursuant to the recommendations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD).' Between 2006 and 2008, Los Gatos's average annual communitywide GHG emissions were 381,640 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). The results of the inventory are shown in Table 2 -1, Appendix B provides the technical documentation for this inventory. A. Transportation Emissions Transportation sources of GHG emissions are a result of fuel combustion from the burning of fossil fuels, including gasoline and diesel, and from on- road mobile sources (e.g. passenger vehicles and trucks). Transportation emissions are based on trips generated by land uses within Los Gatos. Trans- portation emissions exclude "through trips" that have no origin or destination within the town because the Town cannot affect the choices of these drivers. Vehicle mile traveled (VMT) was compiled by Fehr & Peers for the Town of Los Gatos for 2005, GHG emissions from the transportation sector are as- sumed to be similar for year 2005 through 2008. GHG emissions from VMT generated by land uses within the town were compiled using the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) Emissions Factors 2011 (EMFAC2011) pro- gram and are shown in Table 2 -2. I Because energy use and water use fluctuate, BAAQMD recommends obtain- ing a three -year average for these categories. This inventory reflects a three -year aver- age for natural gas and purchased energy use, but three years of data was unavailable for water use. A three -year average was also compiled for waste disposal. 2 -1 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREE NIHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 2 -1 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS SUMMARY GHG Emissions Percent _ (MTCO2e /Year) of Total Transportation' 248,150 65% Residentialb 69,170 18% Non-Residential' 47,380 12% Solid Waste Disposal` 10,060 3% Water /Wastewater' 3,210 1% Other Emissions' 3,670 1% Total 381,640 100% Notes: Emissions rounded to the nearest tens place. EMFAC2011 based on VMT provided by Fehr & Peers. i b Natural gas and purchased energy provided by PG &E. ` LGOP Landfill Gas Estimator Version 1.2 based on waste disposal obtained from CalRecy- cle. ''LGOP Version 1.1 based on water /wastewater use in the town. C Estimate of stationary .equipment use for agricultural, lawn and garden, light commercial, and construction equipment using OFFROAD2007. Source: The Planning Center I, DC &E, 2011, TABLE 2 -2 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES Vehicle Miles Traveled GHG Emissions Daily Annual MTCO2e /Year 1,766,310 519,080,770 248,150 Notes: Daily VMT is multiplied by 347 days /year to account for reduced traffic on weekends and holidays, consistent with the CARB methodology within the Climate Change Scoping Plan Measure Documentation Supplement. Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place. Source: EMFAC2011, 2 -2 a TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY B. Residential Emissions Residential land uses generate GHG emissions primarily from purchased elec- tricity and natural gas used for heating and cooking.' Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG &E) provided residential purchased energy use and natural gas use for years 2006 to 2008. This data is shown in Table 2 -3. C, Non Residential Emissions The non - residential category includes GHG emissions associated with com- mercial, office, and industrial land uses. Non - residential land uses generate GHG emissions primarily from purchased electricity and natural gas used for heating and cooking (e.g. restaurants). PG &E provided data on non- residential purchased energy use and natural gas use for years 2006 to 2008, as shown in Table 2 -4. D. Solid Waste Disposal Emissions Treatment and disposal of solid waste produces a significant amount of me- thane. In addition, solid waste disposal sites produce biogenic carbon dioxide. However, biogenic sources of GHG emissions are not included as part of a communitywide GHG inventory pursuant to the methodology of BAAQMD. Waste reduction, recycling, and reuse are the primary means by which waste disposal can be reduced. Most operating landfills in California also implement a landfill gas recovery system as a common way to reduce methane emissions from solid waste disposal. The California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecy- cle) maintains a disposal reporting system (DRS) to document waste disposal ' Burning wood is considered a biogenic source of carbon dioxide (a GHG) be- cause the carbon is associated with recently living organic material, Biogenic sources of GHG emissions are not included as part of a communitywide GHG inventory pur- suant to the methodology of BAAQMD, 2 -3 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N E X I S T I N G GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 2 -3 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL LAND USES GHG Emissions Source Energy Usage MTCO2e /Year Residential Building Purchased Energy 96,708,760 kWh 25,520 Residential Building Natural Gas 6,864,462 therms 43,650 Total 69,170 Notes: Based on the three -year average energy use from 2006 to 2008. Excludes properties owned by another governmental entity that are outside the land use authority of the Town of Los Gatos (e.g. County or State jurisdiction). Based on PG &E's third -party verified GHG emission factors. Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place. "kWh" = kilowatt hours. Source: PG &E, 2011, GHG Inventory Report for the Town of Los Gatos, Provided' by John Joseph, Green Communities and Innovator Pilots Program. TABLE 2 -4 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM NON-RESIDENTIAL LAND USES GHG Emissions Source Energy Usage MTons CO2e /Year Non - Residential Building Purchased 106,638,269 kWh 28,180 Energy Non - Residential Building Natural 3,018,720 therms 19,200 Gas Total 47,380 Notes: Based on the three -year average energy use from 2006 to 2008. Excludes properties owned by another government entity that are outside the land use authority of the Town of Los Gatos (e.g. County or State jurisdiction). Based on PG &E's third -party verified GHG emission factors. Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place, "kWh" = kilowatt hours. Source: PG &E, 2011, GHG Inventory Report for the Town of Los Gatos. Provided by John Jo- seph, Green Communities and Innovator Pilots Program. by jurisdiction and facility; this system was used to identify GHG emissions from solid waste generated in Los Gatos. The system tracks solid waste dis- posal and alternative daily cover (ADC) that is used as a temporary overlay 2 -4 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A S I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY on an exposed landfill face to reduce insects and vermin. Typical ADC mate- rials include green materials, sludge, ash and kiln residue, compost, construc- tion and demolition debris, and special foams and fabric; these materials con- tribute to the total solid waste disposal documented for Los Gatos. GHG emissions generated from solid waste disposal are estimated based on methodology described by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This method assumes that emissions of methane from waste deposit- ed in a landfill are highest in the first few years after deposition, and then gradually decline as the degradable carbon in the waste is consumed by the bacteria responsible for the decay.' The Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) Landfill Emissions Tool, Version 1.2 was used to calculate average annual GHG emissions from communitywide waste disposed in a given year. Pursuant to BAAQMD's methodology, a three -year average (2006 to 2008) was compiled. Between 2006 and 2008, Los Gatos disposed of an average of 22,666 tons of solid waste and 8,045 tons of ADC, for a total disposal of 31,711 tons of solid waste. The vast majority (approximately 75 percent) of solid waste generated by the town is disposed at the Guadalupe Landfill, which has an active landfill gas collec- tion and closed flare system .4 A landfill gas control efficiency of 75 percent was assumed based on the default value recommended by the LGOP. How- ever, most large landfills, such as the Guadalupe Landfill, have clay or ge- omembrane covers, which have a gas collection efficiency of 85 to 90 percent, respectively.' Therefore, GHG emissions estimates for Los Gatos from waste disposal are conservative. Table 2 -5 shows total GHG emissions from waste disposal for the town. 3 International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006, IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 4 The Newby Island Landfill, which receives approximately 22 percent of the waste from Los Gatos, also has a landfill gas capture system, Other landfills receive less than 3 percent of the town's waste, ' BAAQMD, April 2008, Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Landfill Gas and Industrial, Institutional, and Commercial Boilers, Steam Generators and Process Heaters. Prepared by URS Corporation. 2 -5 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY E. Watei /Wastewater Emissions Water demand and wastewater generation in Los Gatos result in indirect GHG emissions associated with the energy required to convey, treat, and distribute potable water and .fugitive emissions of methane and nitrous oxide from wastewater treatment. Table 2 -6 shows GHG emissions from the town's water use and wastewater generation. Wastewater treatment processes produce fugitive GHG emissions. Under anaerobic conditions, microorganisms biodegrade soluble organic material in wastewater during both nitrification and denitrification and generate nitrous oxide emissions, These are shown in Table 2 -6 as Fugitive Emissions, The majority of households and businesses in Los Gatos are connected to the West Valley Sanitation District's sanitary sewer system. Wastewater connect- ed to the sanitary sewer system in Los Gatos is treated at the San Jose /Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant MIPCP). The San Jose /Santa Clara WPCP is treated with an advanced tertiary system. Treated water is dis- charged as fresh water through the Artesian Slough and into the South San Francisco Bay. A smaller portion of households in the hillsides are on sepa- rate septic tank systems; emissions from septic tank systems are also included in Table 2 -0 F, Other Emissions Other sources of GHG emissions include the combustion of fossil fuels for stationary equipment (e.g. agricultural equipment and landscaping). This cat- egory represents GHG emissions from off -road equipment exhaust; the calcu- lation of emissions from this category is based on guidance from BAAQMD. CARB's OFFROAD2007 model calculates these stationary sources of 6 For the purpose of this inventory, the percentage of residents connected to septic tanks is assumed to represent no more than 10 percent of all housing units in the town. 2 -6 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 2 -5 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM WASTE DISPOSAL Methane Fugitive Methane GHG Generated Not Captured Emissions (Metric Tons /Year) (Metric Tons /Year)a (MTCO2e /Year) 1,917 479 10,060 Notes: Blogenic carbon dioxide is not included. Highest emissions occur approximately three years after disposal. An aggregated three years of emissions was used to account for cumulative disposal (waste -in- place), Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place. 3 Assumes a landfill gas control efficiency of 75 percent based on the LGOP. Source; CARB, 2010, Landfill Emissions Tool, Version 1.2, TABLE 2 -6 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM WATER USE AND WASTEWATER GFNFaATInnI Energy Energy Fugitive Total GHG (Megawatt Emissions Emissions Emissions Hours/ (MTCO2e/ (MTCO2e (MTCO2e Land Use Year)a Year)b /Year)' /Year) Residential 7,222 1,890 860 2,760 Non - Residential 734 190 260 450 Total 7,957 2,090 1,130 3,210 Notes: Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place; emissions do not always add up due to rounding. a Energy associated with water conveyance, treatment, and distribution, and wastewater treat- ment. n Based on GHG emission factors provided by PG&E. ` CARB, May 2010, LGOP, Version 1.1, Assumes 10 percent of the town is on septic (resulting in higher GHG emissions from anaerobic decomposition). Source: Based on water demand and wastewater generation estimated in the Town of Los Gatos General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report (March 2010). emissions on a countywide level. Pursuant to BAAQMD guidance, station- ary emissions for the Town of Los Gatos are estimated based on the percent- age of the Santa Clara County inventory that represents the Town's GHG emissions, as described below. 2 -7 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY 1. Agricultural Equipment Agricultural activities generate emissions from fuel used in off -road equip- ment used in agricultural production, nitrogen added to managed soils, and emissions of carbon dioxide from lime and urea - containing fertilizers. GHG emissions from agricultural equipment use within the town were estimated based on the acres of existing agricultural land use identified in the Town of Los Gatos 2020 General Plan compared to the total amount of land under agricultural production in Santa Clara County. The General Plan indicates that there are currently about 75 acres of farmland in Los Gatos, Due to the small amount of area dedicated to agricullltural production and the limited intensity of the agricultural operations, GHG emissions from nitrogen and carbon dioxide emissions from fertilizer application are nominal and are as- sumed to represent less than 0.1 percent of the town's communitywide GHG emissions inventory. Therefore, these GHG emissions are not included in the inventory. However, an estimate of GHG emissions from the use of sta- tionary equipment for agricultural areas is provided. GHG emissions from agricultural off -road equipment exhaust were estimated using CARB's OFFROAD2007 program. GHG emissions are based on the proportion of farmland acres in the town compared to farmland acres in San- ta Clara County in 2008. Farmland acreage for Santa Clara County is based on the County Department of Agriculture's 2010 Santa Clara County Agri- cultural Report. Farmland acreage in Los Gatos is approximately 0.03 per- cent of the total acreage under agricultural production in Santa Clara Coun- ty. 7 2, Lawn and Garden Equipment Landscaping equipment used within Los Gatos generates stationary sources of GHG emissions. GHG emissions from landscaping and garden off -road equipment exhaust are estimated using CARB's OFFROAD2007 program, 7 County of Santa Clara, Department of Agricultural Resources, 2011. 2010 Santa Clara County Agricultural Crop Report. 2 -8 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY GHG emissions are based on the proportion of residential units in Los Gatos compared to residential units in Santa Clara County in 2008.8 3. Light Commercial Equipment Commercial land uses may generate GHG emissions from stationary equip- ment, including generators, pressure washers, welders, and pumps. GHG emissions from light commercial stationary equipment are estimated using CARB's OFFROAD2007 program. GHG emissions are based on the pro- portion of all employment in Los Gatos compared to all employment in San- ta Clara County in 2008.9 4. Construction Equipment Construction activities in Los Gatos generate GHG emissions from fuel used in off -road equipment. GHG emissions from construction equipment ex- haust are estimated using CARB's OFFROAD2007 program. GHG emis- sions are based on the proportion of residential building permits issued in Los Gatos compared to residential permits issued in Santa Clara County in 2008.10 5. Summary Other sources of GHG emissions in Los Gatos based on CARB's OF- FROAD2007 program summarized above are shown in Table 2 -7. G. Sectors Not Included 1. Industrial GHG Emissions Los Gatos does not have major industrial stationary point or area sources of GHG emissions. Pursuant to a phone conversation with BAAQMD, the 8 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2009, San Francisco Bay Area Housing Data, http: / /www,abag.ca. gov /pdfs /2009_Housing_Data.pdf. 9 Caltrans, 2008, Santa Clara County Economic Forecast, http : / /www.dot.ca, gov /hq /tp p/ offices /ote /socio_economic_files /2008 /Santa_Clara, pdf, 10 Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), 2009. San Francisco Bay Ar- ea Housing Data, http: / /www.abag.ca. gov /pdfs /2009_Housing_Data.pdf, Assumes non - residential building permits to be a similar percentage to residential permits. 2 -9 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 2 -7 BASELINE COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM OTHER EMISSIONS GHG Emissions Source (MTCO2e /Year) Agricultural Equipment 10 Lawn & Garden Equipment 690 Light Commercial Equipment 400 Construction Equipment 2,560 Total 3,670 Notes: Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place; emissions do not always add up due to rounding. Source: CARB, Off -Road 2007. Based on the emissions inventory for the County of Santa Clara, Year 2008. only stationary sources of emissions permitted by BAAQMD in the Town of Los Gatos include gas stations, which are typically accounted for in the GHG inventory's commercial (non - residential) sector." Consequently, this sector is not included in the town's GHG emissions inventory. 2. Carbon Stock /Carbon Sequestration The carbon stock /carbon sequestration sector is traditionally included as "other emissions." As described in Chapter 1, Los Gatos has approximately 1,940 acres of woodland /forestland and 75 acres of agricultural land, including orchards. li Young, Abby, Principal Environmental Planner, Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD), Planning and Research, Air Quality Planning. Phone conversation with Nicole Vermillion, The Planning Center I DC &E, Septem- ber 8, 2011. 2 -10 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S LOS GATOS SUSTAINABILITY PLAN EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY Perennial woody vegetation, such as forests and orchards, can store significant carbon in long -lived biomass." Development of forests or orchard land can result in the release of nitrous oxide emissions from soil oxidation and carbon dioxide emissions from removal of plant materials that store carbon. If future projects result in the removal of a significant amount of biomass that is not planned for in the General Plan, then the net loss of such materials should be accounted for or described in the project's GHG emissions inventory. How- ever, future projects that are consistent with the General Plan and Sustainabil- ity Plan would not be required to account for removal of biomass in the pro- ject's inventory; only projects that are not consistent with the General Plan (e.g. development in an area that the General Plan designates as open space) would be required to account for biomass removal. Moreover, the amount of biomass stored in forested and orchard areas of the town, including the North Forty area, does not constitute a substantial portion of the town's GHG emissions. Therefore, carbon stock from agricultural biomass is not included in this GHG emissions inventory. Inventories typically quantify carbon sequestration from forestlands when identifying GHG emissions benefits that would result from protecting or managing those forests. In the Town of Los Gatos, this sector does not repre- sent a source (generator) of GHG emissions and specific information neces- sary to calculate the GHG emissions benefits from the existing carbon stock, such as the number and age of trees in the forests, is not known. However, the vast majority of woodland /forestland in Los Gatos is in the hillsides and is not proposed for development, meaning that it would remain unchanged at buildout of the General Plan. Minor changes in vegetation from buildout of the General Plan would be nominal. This sector is not included in this base- line inventory, nor in the future GHG emissions forecast included in Chap- ter 3, because adequate data is not available and because there would be no change in carbon sequestration from forestlands in the foreseeable future. 12 International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2006. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, and IPCC, 2000, Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gaslnventories. 2 -11 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N EXISTING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY 3, Municipal Emissions Emissions from Town government operations are a very small percentage of the overall emissions within the border of Los Gatos, Therefore, the focus of this Sustainability Plan is on the communitywide GHG emissions and on measures to reduce those communitywide emissions, While this Plan in- cludes measures that the Town will implement in order to reduce the emis- sions from its municipal operations, such reductions will not significantly affect the overall amount of GHGs emitted in Los Gatos, and the GHG emis- sions reductions were not quantified, Because the reductions from municipal measures were not quantified, the baseline municipal GHG emissions were not quantified, 1 t 2 -12 3 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL AND ADJUSTED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY This chapter summarizes forecasted greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the year 2020 in the Town of Los Gatos generated by the GHG sectors included in the baseline emissions inventory. This chapter discusses two forecast year scenarios: business as usual (BAU) conditions and conditions after adjusting for known State and federal regulations and standards that will be in effect by the year 2020. In its Scoping Plan, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) defines BAU as emissions levels that would occur if California continued to grow and add new GHG emissions, but did not adopt any measures to reduce emissions. Projections for each emission- generating sector for the town were compiled and used to estimate emissions for 2020 based on 2008 emissions intensities. Under CARB's definition of BAU, new growth in the town is assumed to have the same carbon intensities as 2008. Los Gatos' projected population, housing, non - residential building square footage, and employment in 2020 were identified in the 2010 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR), as shown in Table 3 -1. Technical documentation for the BAU and adjusted forecasts is provided in Appendix B, A. Business As Usual Forecast Table 3 -2 identifies the baseline communitywide GHG emissions inventory and 2020 BAU emissions projection for the town based on the assumptions for the individual GHG emissions sectors described in Section C. B. Adjusted Forecast State and federal regulations have been adopted that will require reductions in GHG emissions from a wide range of activities, including how energy is gen- erated and how vehicle fuels are formulated. These GHG reductions will occur regardless of any measures that the Town of Los Gatos implements in its Sustainability Plan. Therefore, the BAU forecast can be adjusted to reflect these reductions, which helps to demonstrate the extent of additional GHG 3 -1 TOWN O F LOS G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L A N D A D J U S T E D G R E E N HO USE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY d Y ' TABLE 3 -1 EXISTING AND 2020 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING PROJECTIONS 2008 2020 Change From Baseline Forecast Existing Population 28,810 32,600 3,790 Housing 12,130 13,730 1,600 Non - Residential SF 4,081,350 5,024,560 943,2.10 Employment 18,820 21,480 2,660 Notes: SF = square feet. Source: Town of Los Gatos, March, 2010, General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report, Table 3 -4 Housing, Population, and Job Growth Under the Draft 2020 General Plan. TABLE 3 -2 BASELINE AND FORECAST YEAR 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS `- SUMMARY — 2008 2020 Increase Baseline GHG BAU GHG From Emissions Emissions Baseline (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) Transportation' 248,150 290,180 42,030 Residential' 69,170 78,300 9,130 Non - Residential' 47,380 58,320 10,940 Solid Waste Disposal` 10,060 11,470 1,410 Water /\Wastewater° 3,210 3,580 370 Other Emissions' 3,670 3,820 150 Total 381,640 445,670 64,030 3 EMFAC2011 based on VMT provided. by Fehr & Peers. 'Natural gas and purchased energy provided by PG &E. ` LGOP Landfill Gas Estimator Version 1.2 based on waste disposal obtained from CalRecycle, LGOP Version 1.1 based on water /wastewater use in the town. Estimate of stationary equipment use for agricultural, lawn and garden, light commercial, and construction equipment using OFFROAD2007. Source: The Planning Center I DC &E, 2011. 3 -2 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL AND ADIUSTE D GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY emissions reductions required by Town actions to achieve the Town's target, as discussed further in Chapter 4. Table 3 -3 identifies the adjusted forecast year 2020 GHG emissions inventory based on State and federal GHG regulations and programs currently in place. This adjusted forecast accounts for GHG reductions from the State and feder- al regulations described below. 1. Pavley I — Clean Car Standards and Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards CARB adopted amendments to the "Pavley" standards (Assembly Bill [AB] 1493) on September 24, 2009 to reduce GHG emissions from light duty vehi- cles and trucks. The Pavley amendments affect passenger vehicles from 2009 to 2016 and require manufactures to achieve higher fuel efficiency standards, The Pavley regulation is anticipated to reduce GHG emissions from new pas- senger vehicles by 31.4 percent for the 2016 model year,' On April 1, 2010, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in line with the Pavley regulation, adopted federal Corporate Average Fuel Econo- my (CAFE) standards for model years 2012 through 2016. On January 24, 2011, the US EPA, the US Department of Transportation, and the State of California announced a single timeframe for proposing the fuel economy and GHG standards for model years 2017 to 2025 passenger vehicles. However, these additional reductions are not accounted for in the adjusted forecast be- cause they are not yet adopted by CARB or EPA. 2. Low Carbon Fuel Standard CARB identified the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) as an early action item in its Climate Change Scoping Plan, and adopted the LCFS regulation on April 23, 2009; it became law on January 12, 2010. The LCFS requires a 1 Based on a California fleet mix of 70 percent passenger cars and light duty trucks (LDTl) and 30 percent light duty trucks (LDT2) as stated in CARB's 2008 Comparison of Greenhouse Gas Reductions under CAFE Standards and CARB Regu- lations Adopted Pursuant to AB 1493, 3 -3 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L A N D A D J U S T E D I i GREENHOUSE GAS EI \/IISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 3 -3 BASELINE AND ADJUSTED FORECAST YEAR 2020 COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS SUMMARY 2008 2020 Baseline GHG Adjusted GHG Decrease Emissions Emissions from Baseline (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) Transportation' 248,150 222,060 -26,090 Residential' 69,170 57,890 -11,280 Non - Residential' 47,380 36,090 - 11,290 Water /Wastewater` 3,210 2,440 -770 Solid Waste Disposald 10,060 6,700 -3,360 Other Emissions' 3,670 3,440 -230 Total 381,640 328,620 - 53,020 ' EMFAC2011 based on VMT provided by Fehr & Peers. ' Natural gas and purchased energy provided by PG &E, ' LGOP Version 1.1 based on water /wastewater use in the town. d LGOP Landfill Gas Estimator Version 1.2 based on waste disposal obtained from CalRecycle. j Estimate of stationary equipment use for agricultural, lawn and garden, light commercial, and j construction equipment using OFFROAD2007. Source; The Planning Center I DC &E, 2011. reduction of at least 10 percent in the carbon intensity of California's trans- portation fuels by 2020. 3, Renewable Portfolio Standard A major component of California's Renewable Energy Program is the renew- able portfolio standard (RPS) established under Public Utilities Code Article 16, Chapter 2.3, Part 1, Division 1 (Senate Bills [SB] 1078) and Public Utilities Code Article 9, Chapter 3, Part 1, Division 1 (SB 107). Under the RPS, cer- tain retail sellers of electricity were required to increase the amount of renew- able energy each year by at least 1 percent in order to reach at least 20 percent by December 30, 2010, CARB has now approved an even higher goal of 33 I 3 -4 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS USUAL A N D A D J U S T E D GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY percent by 2020. Renewable sources of electricity include wind, small hydro- power, solar, geothermal, biomass, and biogas. The increase in renewable sources for electricity production will decrease indirect GHG emissions from development projects because electricity production from renewable sources is generally considered carbon neutral, According to CARB, Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG &E) served 15,9 percent of their electricity sales with renewable power in 2010. 4. Smart Grid The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has initiated a rulemak- ing (R.08 -12 -009) to California investor -owned electric utilities to develop a smarter electric grid in the state. Pursuant to SB 17, the CPUC developed requirements for a Smart Grid deployment plan. In July 2011, California utilities, including PG &E filed ten -year Smart Grid deployment plans with the CPUC. New Smart Meters provide real -time electricity use information to consumers. 5, California Building Code Energy conservation standards for new residential and nonresidential build- ings were adopted by the California Energy Resources Conservation and De- velopment Commission in June 1977 and most recently revised in 2008 (Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Title 24 requires that the design of building shells and building components conserve energy. The standards are updated periodically to allow for consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods. The 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency standards are approximately 15 percent more energy- efficient than the 2005 Building and Energy Efficiency standards, which were in place at the time of CARB's Scoping Plan. The California Energy Commission anticipates that future code cycles (2014 and beyond) may require a 30 percent increase in energy efficiency compared to the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency Standards, However, these future cycles are not included in the adjusted forecast because they are not yet codified. 3 -5 M T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L AN D A D J U S T E D G R E E N H O U S E GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY The 2006 Appliance Efficiency Regulations (Title 20, CCR Sections 1601 through 1608) were adopted by the California Energy Commission on Octo- ber 11, 2006, and approved by the California Office of Administrative Law on December 14, 2006. The regulations include standards for both federally regulated appliances and non - federally regulated appliances. On July 17, 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation's first green building standards. The California Green Building Stand- ards Code (proposed Part 11, Title 24) was adopted as part of the California Building Standards Code (Title 24, California Code of Regulations), known as CALGreen. The 2010 edition of the code established voluntary standards on planning and design for sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, ma- terial conservation, and internal air contaminants. The mandatory provisions of the code became effective January 1, 2011. CALGreen includes references to the mandatory Building and Energy Efficiency Standards and includes vol- untary Tier 1 and Tier 2 programs for cities and counties that wish to adopt more stringent energy efficiency requirements that are 15 percent and 30 per- cent more energy efficient than the 2008 standards, respectively. In addition, CALGreen includes mandatory increases in indoor and outdoor water effi- ciency for new building construction, 6. Waste Reduction The adjusted forecast includes waste reductions from the Town's waste reduc- tion and diversion programs that are required by Assembly Bill 939, the Cali- fornia Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, The percent reduction from BAU is based on average annual historical reductions in waste disposal over the last five years, C Sector Emissions This section describes the assumptions for the individual GHG emissions sectors. 3 -6 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L A N D A D J U S T E D GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY I. Transportation Emissions Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was compiled by Fehr & Peers for the Town of Los Gatos for 2008 and 2020. GHG emissions from VMT generated by land uses within the town were compiled using CARB's EMFAC2011 program and are shown in Table 3 -4. The adjusted scenario includes GHG emissions reductions from the Pavley fuel efficiency standards and the LCFS, which are fuel and vehicle efficiency standards required by the State. 2, Residential and Non - Residential Emissions The anticipated increase in residential and non - residential natural gas and en- ergy use within the town is proportional to the anticipated increase in resi- dential units and non - residential square footage by 2020, In order to estimate the increase in GHG emissions in this sector, average energy per dwelling unit and square foot was calculated based on existing energy demand for pur- chased electricity and natural gas; this average energy per dwelling unit and square foot was applied to the additional units and square feet projected in 2020. Table 3 -5 shows anticipated BAU and adjusted GHG emissions for residential and non - residential uses in 2020. The adjusted scenario includes GHG emissions reductions from the RPS, Smart Grid, and the Title 24 up- dates. 3. Water /Wastewater Emissions The increase in water demand and wastewater generation within the town is based on projections of water demand and wastewater generation in 2020. Table 3 -6 shows anticipated BAU and adjusted water demand and wastewater generation and associated GHG emissions in 2020. The adjusted scenario includes GHG emissions reductions from the RPS. 4. Solid Waste Disposal Emissions The increase in solid waste disposal in the town is based on the projected in- crease in residential and non - residential development in 2020. The General Plan EIR forecasts a 13- percent increase in residential units and a 23- percent increase in non - residential square footage. Existing waste from residential and non - residential uses in the town is assumed to be proportional to the acreage 3 -7 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL AND ADJUSTED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 3 -4 2020 COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM TRANSPORTATION SOURCES Vehicle Miles Traveled 2020 BAU 2020 Adjusted GHG Emissions GHG Emissions Daily Annual (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) 1,765,370 612,583,390 290,180 222,060 Notes: Daily VMT is multiplied by 347 days /year to account for reduced traffic on weekends and holidays, consistent with the CARB methodology within the Climate Change Scoping Plan Measure Documentation Supplement. Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place: Source: EMFAC2011. TABLE 3 -5 2020 COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM RESIDENTIAL AND NON - RESIDENTIAL LAND USES 2020 BAU 2020 GHG Adjusted GHG Emissions Emissions Source (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year)' Residential Buildings 78,300 57,890 Non- Residential Buildings 58,320 36,090 Total 136,620 93,980 Notes: Excludes properties owned by another governmental entity that are outside the land use authority of the Town of Los Gatos (e.g. County or State jurisdiction), Based on PG &E's third - party verified GHG emission factors. Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place. 'Based on PG &E's forecasted GHG emission rates in 2020. Source: PG &E, 2011, GHG Inventory Report for the Town of Los Gatos, Provided by John Jo- seph, Green Communities and Innovator Pilots Program, dedicated to residential and non - residential (i.e. commercial, office, and indus- trial) uses in the town. The BAU communitywide inventory does not take into account reductions in waste disposal from an increase in waste reduction and diversion programs implemented by the Town. However, the adjusted forecast includes a decrease in waste disposal in the Town based on historical trends documented by CalRecycle from the Town's reduce, reuse, and recycle 3 -8 c� cn C O N O O O �1 y a oz) o ® � ® N 3 o 2 W a Po O U LW 7 0. 0 O IdJ o to o N. F- z CV O W ® > y "all N M•q a�'i o P-. N � W Q (� •vf ° co 000 C +� g % WL of N ® O [7 1) v ¢ 3 o N N H a 2 o ® °' o N co c w ra a N ® � ® CD Q Q O o o a E ® A m 2 J co m ro o 0 cL G 7 O d. 6U Q y N O N M [ v >. F- 0 ® N N a 7 _ C W o g _ 3 v OZ= N O U ®yN ® to n .�i H- 5 CD p Zpm c� o o h J N z JO p U •� N c� cn III T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L A N D A D J U S T E D GREENHOUSE GAS EV.ISSIONS INVEN T OP,Y programs. Table 3 -7 shows anticipated BAU and adjusted waste disposal and associated GHG emissions in 2020, 5. Other Emissions Projections for 2020 for other emission sources are based on the estimates of population and employment growth that are included in the General Plan. m Agricultural Equipment. No increase in agricultural equipment use is assumed. o Lawn and Garden Equipment. Landscaping equipment use is assumed to be proportional to population growth. © Light Commercial Equipment. Stationary equipment from non- residential land uses, including generators, pressure washers, welders, and pumps, is assumed to be proportional to employment growth. m Construction Equipment. The 2020 BAU forecast assumes similar use of construction equipment as baseline conditions. The BAU and adjusted forecast for other emissions is summarized in Table 3 -8. The adjusted forecast includes reductions from the LCFS. 3 -10 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2020 BUSINESS AS USUAL AND ADJUSTED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY TABLE 3 -7 2020 COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM WASTE DISPOSAL 2020 2020 2020 2020 BAU BAU GHG Adjusted Adjusted GHG Waste Emissions Waste Emissions Disposal (MTCO2e/ Disposal (MTCO2e/ Land Use (Tons) Year) (Tons) Year) a Residential 31,597 17,311 Non - Residential 3,443 1,886 Total 35,040 11,470 19,197 6,700 Notes: Assumes a landfill gas control efficiency of 75 percent based on the International Panel on Climate Change's Local Government Operations Protocol. Biogenic carbon dioxide is not included, Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place, 5 Based on the trend in waste reduction from reduce, reuse, and recycle efforts in the Town of Los Gatos from 2007 through 2010. Source: CARB, 2010, Landfill Emissions Tool, Version 1.2. TABLE 3 -8 2020 COMMUNITYWIDE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM OTHER EMISSIONS 2020 BAU 2020 Adjusted GHG Emissions GHG Emissions Source (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) Agricultural Equipment 10 10 Lawn and Garden Equipment 780 710 Light Commercial Equipment 460 410 Construction Equipment 2,560 2,310 Total 3,820 3,440 Note: Emissions are rounded to the nearest tens place; emissions do not always add up due to rounding. Source: CARB, OFFRoad 2007. Based on the emissions inventory for the County of Santa Clara, Year 2008, proportioned for the Town of Los Gatos and projected based on the in- crease in employment and population growth. 3 -11 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N 2 0 2 0 B U S I N E S S AS U S U A L A N D A D J U S T E D GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INVENTORY 3 -12 4 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION TARGET Pursuant to the greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets of Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District's (BAAQMD) recently adopted California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, a GHG reduction strategy, such as this Sustainability Plan, must establish a communitywide GHG emissions target that meets one of the following op- tions, which are based on AB 32's goals: 0 Reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. ® Reduce GHG emissions by 15 percent below baseline (2008 or earlier) emissions by 2020. 0 Meet the plan efficiency threshold of 6.6 metric tons of GHG emissions per service population per year. A. Los Gatos Target This Sustainability Plan uses the second option presented by the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines: reduce GHG emissions by 15 percent below baseline (2008 or earlier) emissions by 2020. Because accurate data on emissions in 1990 is not available, the target option that references 1990 levels is not ap- propriate for this Plan. Although the third target option, which establishes a per capita threshold, would be an acceptable target for this Sustainability Plan, other documents and agencies lend support to the chosen option. The California Air Resources Board's (GARB) Scoping Plan cites the target to reduce GHG emissions by 15 percent from baseline conditions as a recom- mended target. In addition, the California Attorney General and other agen- cies and environmental groups have stated that a GHG reduction goal should be measured in absolute magnitude of reductions, rather than a per capita efficiency metric. B. Target and Gap Analysis This Sustainability Plan contains a range of measures in Chapter 5 that will enable the Town to close the "gap" identified between 2020 adjusted emis- 4 -1 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N G R E E N H O U S E G A S E M I S S I O N ' S R E D U C T I O N T A R G E T sions forecast described in Chapter 3 and the GHG emissions reduction tar- get, For communities utilizing the target to reduce emissions by 15 percent from baseline conditions, BAAQMD recommends that the baseline year be 2008 or earlier in order to coincide with the targets of AB 32, In Los Gatos, this tar- get means that the Sustainability Plan should include measures that will re- duce GHG emissions by 57,250 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions (MTCO2e)' from baseline 2008 conditions by 2020, resulting in 324,390 MTCO2e2 in total emissions in 2020. As described in the adjusted forecast in Chapter 3, State and federal regula- tions will result in GHG emissions reductions, regardless of actions by the Town. The adjusted forecast includes reductions associated with the Pavley Clean Fuel Standards, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Renewable Portfolio (, Standard, Smart Grid, California Building Code, and the Town's waste diver- sion and reduction programs. These existing GHG reduction programs and regulations reduce GHG emissions from business as usual (BAU), As shown in Table 4 -1, in order to achieve the GHG emissions reduction target, this Sustainability Plan must include measures that will reduce BAU emissions by 4,230 MTCO2e, in addition to what would be required by State and federal regulations. I This number was calculated by multiplying the baseline emissions described in Chapter 2 (381,640 MTCO2e) by 0,15. 2 This number was calculated by subtracting the emissions reduction needed (57,250 MTCO2e) from the baseline emissions (381,640 MTCO2e). 4 -2 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION TARGET TABLE 4 -1 TARGET AND GAP ANALYSIS 2020 BAU 2020 Adjusted GHG Emissions GHG Emissions (MTCO2e /Year) (MTCO2e /Year) Target (15% below baseline GHG emissions) 324,390 Total GHG emissions 445,670 328,620 Gap 121,280 4,230 Jource: The Planning Center I DC &E, 2012, 4 -3 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIO NS REDUCTION TARGET L_d 5 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTION MEASURES This chapter presents the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction measures that the Town of Los Gatos will implement in order to achieve the emissions reduction target for the year 2020. These measures were developed with community involvement, including a Community Workshop held on January 30, 2012 and a public comment period on the draft measures, during which members of the public provided ideas for additional measures to in- clude in the Sustainability Plan. Each measure is based on careful considera- tion of the emissions reductions needed to achieve the reduction target, the distribution of emissions revealed in the emissions inventory, existing priori- ties and resources, and the potential costs and benefits of various potential emission reduction projects. The measures are divided into Communitywide and municipal sections, and then further divided into the following topics: ® Transportation and Land Use Green Building ® Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels ® Energy Conservation 0 Water and Wastewater 0 Solid Waste ® Open Space o Purchasing ® Community Action The measures were modeled using several models, including the Emissions Factors 2011 Model (EMFAC2011), the Off -Road Emissions 2007 Model (OFFROAD2007), the California Air Resources Board's (CARB) Landfill Gas Emissions Tool (Version 1.2), and CARB's Local Government Opera- tions Protocol (LGOP). A. Comm unitywide Measures and Emissions Reductions Achieved The sectors that are discussed below include measures that will reduce GHG emissions from Communitywide activities. In total, implementation of the 5 -1 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N G R E E N H O U S E GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES communitywide measures will reduce GHG emissions by 8,310 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) from the 2020 business as usual (BAU) forecast. As discussed in Chapter 4, after adjusting for State and feder- al measures, the Town would need to reduce its total GHG emissions by 4,230 MTCO2e by 2020 in order to meet the GHG reduction target. The communitywide measures together exceed the reduction target. A sum- mary of the reductions by sector is provided in Table 5 -1. The technical doc- umentation for the modeling is provided in Appendices C and D. Appendix E provides a summary of the measures and the key information about the GHG emissions and VMT reductions presented in this chapter, along with the implementation information presented in Chapter 6. In the sections below, many measures are reported to have no measureable reduction in GHG emissions beyond the other- measures that were modeled. This is because: o The measure is simply not quantifiable (e.g. Measure RE -7, Community Choice Aggregation, for which there are a number of unknown varia- bles). o The measure would result in no measureable benefit or the benefit is too small to be accurately calculated by modeling software. There is another measure that is already quantified that achieves a similar purpose. For example, Measure GB -1 requires that buildings be con- structed to be 15 percent more energy- efficient than required by Title 24, and there is a quantified GHG reduction associated with that measure, Measure GB -3 provides incentives for LEED Silver certification, but this alone would not increase the GHG emissions reduction that would result from Measure GB -1, so no additional benefit is reported. Throughout this chapter, the quantification for reductions is based on the maximum achievable benefit. 5 -2 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S LOS GATOS SUSTAI NABILITY PLAN GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES TABLE 5 -1 COMMUNITYWIDE GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS BY SECTOR Total Reduction Percent VMT in 2020 of Total Sector Reduction (MTCO2e) Reductiona Transportation and Land Useb TR -1 Support for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and Transit. 6,179 18 %` TR -2 North Forty Area Land Uses 10,592 32 %' TR -3 Fixed -Route Shuttle 929 3 %a1 TR -4 Bicycle Facilities and Programs 1,677 5 %01 TR -5 School Pool Program TR -6 Commute Trip Reduction Program TR -7 Student Transit Outreach 14,091 42 %` TR -8 Vehicle Circulation, Parking, and Idling Reduction Programs Total 33,468 4,210 50% Green Building GB -1 Green Building Ordinance 2,210 93 % GB -2 GreenPoint Rated Building Guidelines 170 7% Total 2,380 29% Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels RE -1 Alternative Energy Development Plan 10 1% RE -2 New Solar Homes Partnership 470 53% RE -3 Renewable Energy Generation in Projects 330 37% RE-4 Leaf Blower Ordinance 80 9% 5 -3 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S LI S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES TABLE 5 -1 COMMUNITYWIDE GHG EMISSION P.EDUCTIONS BY SECTOR (CONTINUED) Sector Total Reduction VMT in 2020 Reduction (MTCO2e) Percent of Total Reduction' Total 890 11% Energy Consen ation EC -1 Energy- Efficient Appliances and Lighting 10 o 3 /o EC -2 Promotion of Energy Conservation 30 9% EC -3 Energy- Efficient Outdoor Lighting 280 88% Total 320 4% Water and Wastewater j WW -1 Water Use and Efficiency Requirements 70 14% _ WW -2 Water Efficiency Retrofits and Water Conservation Pricing 440 86% Total 510 6% Solid Waste 0% Open Space 0% Community Action - 0% All Sectors Total 8,310 Target Reduction 4,330 For each measure, the percent of the total GHG emissions reductions for that sector is provid- ed. For each sector, the percent of the total GHG emissions reductions for the all local measures in the Sustainability Plan is provided. b Certain measures interact or are grouped with one another; therefore this reduction reflects the impacts from multiple measures; no reductions are double - counted for the total. CAPCO A caps VMT reductions for particular measures or groups of measures. Therefore, individual percent- reductions for Transportation/Land Use measures are only approximations. Note: - indicates that there are no measurable reductions from the measures in this sector, Source: Fehr & Peers and The Planning Center j DC &E, 2012. 5 -4 TOWN O F LOS GAT OS L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES 1. Transportation and Land Use As shown in Table 5 -1, the transportation and land use measures would re- duce GHG emissions in Los Gatos by a total of 4,210 MTCO2e. Because the transportation and land use measures are interrelated and support one another, an independent GHG reduction value cannot be calculated for a single individual measure. Therefore, this analysis presents only the total GHG reduction value for all of the measures in the transportation and land use sector. However, the approximate contribution of a measure or a group of measures to the total VMT reduction value for this sector can be estimated based on model outputs. Therefore, each measure is followed by an estimated reduction in VMT, with a note indicating if that particular measure was con- sidered in conjunction with others. VMT reductions were calculated using a VMT reduction estimation tool that utilizes data available in a 2010 report by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association ( CAPCOA) titled Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures: A Resource for Local Gov - ernment to Assess Emission Reductions from Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures. CAPCOA also sets maximum VMT reductions from particular measures or groups of measures. Because many measures work together to reduce VMT, these VMT- reduction maximums serve to avoid double - counting GHG reductions and account for decreasing marginal reductions as additional, overlapping measures are implemented. For this reason, the per- centage contributions of each measure to the sector total are approximations. TR -1 Support for Pedestrians, Bicyclists, and Transit Promote walking, bicycling, and transit through the following; a. Require all new buildings, excluding single- family homes, to include a principal functional entry that faces a public space such as a street, square, park, paseo, or plaza, in addition to any entrance from a parking lot, to encourage pedestrian foot traffic, b. Require new projects, excluding single- family homes, to include pedestri- an or bicycle through- connections to existing sidewalks and existing or future bicycle facilities, unless prohibited by topographical conditions. 5 -5 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURE S c. Seek grant funding to establish a Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program to increase more student walking and biking trips. The program may in- clude: conducting school walking audits, improving nearby pedestrian and bicycle facilities, implementing nearby traffic - calming measures, im- plementing school bus, vanpool, and carpools to school, implementing walking buses to schools, coordinating school schedules to not overlap with peak commute times, conducting traffic studies for specific schools for more efficient drop -off and pick -up activity at schools (e,g, staggered schedules, changing on- street parking to loading zones, and more), and increasing speed enforcement around schools. d. Design and implement affordable traffic - calming measures on specific streets to dissuade Highway 17 cut- through traffic and attract pedestrian and bicycle traffic. e. Implement transit access improvements through sidewalk /crosswalk safe- ty enhancements and bus shelter improvements. VMT Reduction: Approximately 6,179 miles per year Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 18 percent TR -2 North Forty Area Land Uses Require a variety of local- serving commercial uses and encourage mixed -use development in the North Forty area, reducing VMT. VMT Reduction: Approximately 10,592 miles per year Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 32 percent TR.3 Fixed -Route Shuttle Provide a fixed -route shuttle system to the downtown area from key residen- tial areas, employment and commercial centers, Vasona Light Rail, and Vasona Park. VMT Reduction: Approximately 929 miles per year 5 -6 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 3 percent TR -4 Bicycle Facilities and Programs Provide for new bicycle facilities and programs through the following: a. Install new bicycle facilities throughout the existing Town street network to close bicycle network gaps, as identified in General Plan. b. Require 'bicycle parking facilities and on -site showers in major non- residential development and redevelopment projects. Major development projects include buildings that would accommodate more than 50 em- ployees, whether in a single business or multiple tenants; major redevel- opment projects include projects that change 50 percent or more of the square footage or wall space. c. Install high - quality bicycle - parking facilities Downtown in centralized, safe, and secure areas. d. Encourage non - profit or volunteer organizations in creating a bicycle - sharing program. VMT Reduction: Approximately 1,677 miles per year Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 5 percent TR -S School Pool Program Implement a School Pool Program that helps match parents to carpool stu- dents to school. VMT Reduction: Approximately 14,091 miles per year (in combination with TR -6, TR -7, and TR -8) Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 42 percent (in combination with TR -6, TR -7, and TR -8) TR -6 Vehicle Circulation, Parking, and Idling Reduction Programs Support trip reduction and the use of electric vehicles through the following: 5 -7 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES a. Implement a voluntary Employer Commute Trip Reduction Program for new and existing development. This would be a multi - strategy pro- gram that encompasses a combination of individual measures, such as ride -share programs, discounted transit programs, end -of -trip facilities (e.g. showers and lockers), encouraging telecommuting, and preferential parking permit programs. As part of this program, encourage employers to allow commuters to pay for transit with pre -tax dollars. b. Encourage new non - residential development to include designated or preferred parking for vanpools, carpools, and electric vehicles. c. Encourage non - profit or volunteer organizations in creating or providing a car - sharing program. VMT Reduction: Approximately 14,091 miles per year (in combination with TR -5, TR -7, and TR -8) Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 42 percent (in combination with TR -5, TR -7, and TR -8) TR.7 Student Transit Outreach Coordinate with local school districts on marketing, promoting, and educat- ing students about the benefits of using public transit as a anode of travel. VMT Reduction: Approximately 14,091 miles per year (in combination with TR -5, TR -6, and TR -8) Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 42 percent (in combination with TR -5, TR -6, and TR -8) TR -8 Vehicle Circulation, Parking, and Idling Reduction Programs Reduce vehicle circulation associated with parking and reduce vehicle idling through the following: d. Provide better wayfinding and smart parking strategies with attractive signage to reduce vehicle circulation searching for parking spaces in the C -2 /Central Business District Zone. TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES e. Encourage non - profit and volunteer organizations in conducting out- reach to reduce car idling around schools during pick -up and drop -off times. VMT Reduction: Approximately 14,091 miles per year (in combination with TR -5, TR -6, and TR -7) Approximate Percentage Contribution to VMT Reductions in this sector: 42 percent (in combination with TR -5, TR -6, and TR -7) 2. Green Building As shown in Table 5 -1, the green building measures would reduce GHG emissions in Los Gatos by 2,380 MTCO2e. a. Quantified Measures GB -1 Green Building Ordinance Develop a Green Building Ordinance that requires energy- efficient design, in excess of Title 24 standards, for all new residential and non - residential build- ings. When developing the Ordinance, consider development -level thresholds for when certain requirements are triggered. 0 Require 30 percent above the 2008 Building and Energy Efficiency stand- ards in Title 24 to coincide with the Voluntary Tier 2 standards of the California Green Building Code (CALGreen). ® Encourage the use of cement substitutes and recycled building materials for new construction. GHG Emissions Reduction: 2,210 MTCO2e per year GB -2 GreenPoint Rated Building Guidelines Require all new and significantly remodeled homes to follow the Town's adopted GreenPoint Rated Building Guidelines. Significantly remodeled homes include remodels of 50 percent or more of the square footage or wall area of the home, and additions of 50 percent or more of the square footage or wall area of the home. GHG Emissions Reduction: 170 MTCO2e per year 5 -9 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N G R E E N H O U S E GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES b. Non- Quantified Measures The following measures (GB -3 through GB -6) would not result in a measure - able reduction in GHG emissions in Los Gatos beyond the other measures modeled in this sector. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town's overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. GB -3 Incentives for Green Building Certification Allow greater development flexibility and other incentives (e.g. permitting - related) for LEED Silver certification or equivalent GreenPoint rating, for example, by giving green projects priority in plan review and processing. GB.4 Solar Orientation Require measures that reduce energy use through solar orientation by taking advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping, and sun screens. GB-5 Removal of Barriers to Green Building Identify and remove regulatory or procedural barriers to implementing green building practices in the town, by updating codes, guidelines, and zoning. GB -6 Regional Green Building Programs Coordinate with other local governments, special districts, nonprofits, and other public organizations to share resources, achieve economies of scale, and develop green building policies and programs that are optimized on a regional scale. 3. Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels As shown in Table 5 -1, the renewable energy and low carbon fuels measures would reduce GHG emissions in Los Gatos by 890 MTCO2e. a. Quantified Measures RE -1 Alternative Energy Development Plan In partnership with Pacific Gas and Electric and local alternative energy com- panies, develop an Alternative Energy Development Plan that includes townwide measurable goals and identifies the allowable and appropriate al- ternative energy facility types within the town, such as solar photovoltaic 5 -10 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S LI S T A I N AB I L I T Y P L A N GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES (PV) on urban residential and commercial roofs. Propose phasing and timing of alternative energy facility and infrastructure development. Provide the de- velopment review process list /worksheet to new alternative energy projects and conduct a review of Town policies and ordinances to address alternative energy production. Identify optimal locations and the best means to avoid noise, aesthetic, and other potential land use compatibility conflicts (e.g. in- stalling tracking solar PV or angling fixed solar PV in a manner that reduces glare to surrounding land uses). Consider further reducing permitting fees for alternative energy development. GHG Emissions Reduction: 10 MTCO2e per year RE -2 New Solar Homes Partnership Require that residential projects of six units or more participate in the Cali- fornia Energy Commission's New Solar Homes Partnership, which provides rebates to developers of six units or more who offer solar power in 50 percent of new units and is a component of the California Solar Initiative, or a similar program with solar power requirements equal to or greater than those of the California Energy Commission's New Solar Homes Partnership. GHG Emissions Reduction: 470 MTCO2e per year RE -3 Renewable Energy Generation in Projects Require that new or major rehabilitations of commercial, office, or industrial development greater than or equal to 20,000 square feet in size incorporate solar or other renewable energy generation to provide 15 percent or more of the project's energy needs. Major rehabilitations are defined as remodel- ing /additions of 20,000 square feet of office /retail commercial or 100,000 square feet of industrial floor area. Remove regulatory barriers to incorporat- ing renewable energy generation. GHG Emissions Reduction: 330 MTCO2e per year 5 -11 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS RIDU'CTIONS MEASURES RE -4 Leaf Blower Ordinance Adopt an ordinance to ban the use of two- stroke engine leaf blowers. As part of this ordinance, establish planting and maintenance guidelines to reduce maintenance needs. GHG Emissions Reduction: 80 MTCO2e per year b. Non - Quantified Measures The following measures (RE -5 through RE -7) would not result in a measure - able reduction in GHG emissions in Los Gatos beyond the other measures modeled in this sector. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town's overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. RE -5 Solar Ready Features Where feasible, require that all new buildings be constructed to allow for the easy, cost - effective installation of future solar energy systems, "Solar ready" features should include: proper solar orientation (i.e. south facing roof area sloped at 20° to 550 from the horizontal); clear access on the south sloped roof (i.e. no chimneys, heating vents, or plumbing vents); electrical conduit installed for solar electric system wiring; plumbing installed for solar hot wa- ter system; and space provided for a solar hot grater storage tank. RE -6 Solar Energy Systems at Schools Work with the local school districts to encourage the use of solar energy sys- tems at school facilities. RE -7 Community Ch. oice Aggregation Support and participate in regional efforts to study the feasibility and interest in establishing community choice aggregation in Los Gatos. As noted above, this measure would not result in a measureable reduction in GHG emissions, mainly because there are a number of unknown variables that would affect the outcomes of this measure. If Los Gatos were to partici- pate in a community choice aggregation program, depending on the portfolio 5 -12 TOWN OF LOS G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES of the energy provider, potential GHG emissions reductions could be signifi- cant. 4. Energy Conservation As shown in Table 5 -1, the energy conservation measures would reduce GHG emissions in Los Gatos by 320 MTCO2e. a. Quantified Measures EC -1 Energy- Efficient Appliances and Lighting Require new development to use energy- efficient appliances that meet EN- ERGY STAR standards and energy- efficient lighting technologies that exceed Title 24 standards by 30 percent. GHG Emissions Reduction: 10 MTCO2e per year EC -2 Promotion of Energy Conservation Partner with Pacific Gas & Electric and other appropriate energy providers to promote energy conservation, including the following, which would be pri- marily funded by the energy providers: ® Promote the purchase of ENERGY STAR appliances. o Distribute free compact fluorescent light (CFL) bulbs and /or fixtures to community members. o Offer a halogen torchiere lamp exchange to community members. ® Promote energy efficiency audits of existing buildings to check, repair, and readjust heating, ventilation, air conditioning, lighting, water heating equipment, insulation, and weatherization. ® Partner with the Silicon 'Valley Association of Realtors to encourage en- ergy audits to be performed when residential and commercial buildings are sold. Energy audits will include information regarding the opportu- nities for energy efficiency improvements, and will be presented to the buyer. m Commercial buildings to be "benchmarked" using the U.S. Environmen- tal Protection Agency's (EPA) ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager Tool, 5 -13 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES consistent with Assembly Bill (AB) 1103, which requires disclosure of commercial buildings' energy efficiency rating, 4, Promote individualized energy management planning and related services for large energy users. 6 Fund and schedule energy efficiency retrofits or "tune -ups" of existing buildings. A Pursue incentives and grants for energy conservation. GHG Emissions Reduction: 30 MTCO2e per year EC -3 Energy - Efficient Outdoor Lighting, Require outdoor lighting fixtures to be energy- efficient. Require parking lot light fixtures and light fixtures on buildings to be on full cut -off fixtures, ex- cept emergency exit or safety lighting, and all permanently installed exterior lighting shall be controlled by either a photocell or an astronomical time switch. Prohibit continuous all night outdoor lighting in construction sites unless required for security reasons. Revise the Town Code to include these requirements. GHG Emissions Reduction: 280 MTCO2e per year b. Non - Quantified Measures The following measures (EC -4 through EC -12) would not result in a measure - able reduction in GHG emissions in Los Gatos beyond the other measures modeled in this sector. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town''s overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. EC -4 Kill-A- Watt Electricity Usage Monitor Program Continue the Kill -A -Watt Electricity Usage Monitor program, through which residents can check out a device from the library that can be plugged in- to household electronics to see how much electricity they require. EC-5 Low - Income Weatherization Seek funding to implement a lour-income weatherization program. 5 -14 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES EC -6 Quality Insulation Installation Provide links to and /or contact information on the Town's website for edu- cation and outreach by outside organizations that promote quality insulation installation (QII), which eliminates gaps in buildings. EC-7 Energy Audit Funding Sources Compile a list of funding sources that local residents, businesses, or the Town could potentially access to fund energy audits to inform homeowners and businesses of opportunities to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and buildings. EC-8 CaliforniaFIRSTProgram Continue participation in the CaliforniaFIRST program, which provides in- novative, low - interest financing for energy efficiency projects for existing and new development. EC -9 Heat Island Mitigation Plan Develop a "heat island" mitigation plan that requires cool roofs, cool pave- ments, and strategically placed shade trees. Amend the applicable Design Guidelines to integrate this requirement. Evaluate and balance tradeoffs be- tween solar access and landscape tree shading in Design Guidelines. EC -10 Heat Gain Reduction Require all new development and major rehabilitation (i.e. additions or re- models of 20,000 square feet of office /retail commercial or 100,000 square feet of industrial floor area) projects to incorporate any combination of the fol- lowing strategies to reduce heat gain for 50 percent of the non -roof impervi- ous site landscape, which includes roads, sidewalks, courtyards, parking lots, and driveways: shaded within five years of occupancy; paving materials with a Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) of at least 29; open grid pavement system; and parking spaces underground, under deck, under roof, or under a building. Any roof used to shade or cover parking must have an SRI of at least 29. 5 -15 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES EC -11 Programmable Thennostats Encourage the installation of programmable thermostats in existing residen- tial and commercial buildings. EC -12 Energy Conser-dation through Design Outreach Form a volunteer committee of local design professionals to create a brochure to educate citizens on how to save energy through design. 5. Water and Wastewater As shown in Table 5 -1, the water and wastewater measures would reduce GHG emissions in Los Gatos by 510 MTCO2e. a. Quantified Measures WW-1 Water Use and Efficiency Requirements For new development, require all water use and efficiency measures identified as voluntary in the California Green Building Standards Code, and consider more stringent targets. California Green Building Standards Code require- ments include: 1) reduce indoor potable water use by 20 percent after meeting the Energy Policy Act of 1992 fixture performance requirements, and 2) re- duce outdoor potable water use by 50 percent from a calibrated mid - summer baseline case, for example, through irrigation efficiency, plant species, recy- cled wastewater, and captured rainwater. Establish Town requirements for discretionary projects regarding watering timing, water- efficient irrigation equipment, water- efficient fixtures, and offsetting demand so that there is no net increase in imported water use. Include clear parameters for integrating water conservation infrastructure and technologies, including low -flush toilets and low -flow showerheads. As appropriate, partner with local water conser- vation companies On the development and implementation of this measure. GHG Emissions Reduction: 70 MTCO2e per year WW-2 Water Efficiency Retrofits and Water Conser-uation Pricing Promote water efficiency and conservation through the following: a. Adopt a water efficiency retrofit ordinance that requires upgrades as a condition of issuing permits for renovations or additions. Work with lo- 5 -16 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES cal water purveyors to achieve consistent standards and review and ap- proval procedures for implementation. b. Work with the San Jose Water Company {SJWC) and Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) to adopt water conservation pricing, such as tiered rate structures, to encourage efficient water use. As part of this measure, the water districts would conduct the following: 0 Provide notices in each billing to accounts with water use budgets showing the relationship between the budget and actual consumption. 0 Encourage wholesale water suppliers to provide financial incentives to their retail water agency customers that encourage water conservation efforts. 0 Work with SJWC to meter with commodity rates for all new connec- tions, and retrofit existing connections. 0 Create accounts with dedicated irrigation meters, or develop and im- plement a strategy targeting and marketing large landscape water use surveys to commercial /industrial /institutional accounts with mixed - use meters to help monitor landscaping water use. GHG Emissions Reduction: 440 MTCO2e per year b. Non - Quantified Measures The following measures (WW -3 through WW -6) would not result in a measureable reduction in GHG emissions in Los Gatos beyond the other measures modeled in this sector. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town's overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. WW-3 Bay Friendly Landscaping Require new development to use native plants or other appropriate non- invasive plants that are drought- tolerant, as described in the Bay Friendly Landscaping Guidelines, available at StopWaste.org and BayFriendlyCoali- tion.org. 5 -17 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N AB I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES WW-4 Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Update Review and update the Town's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance with improved conservation programs and incentives for non - residential customers that are consistent with the Tier 1 water conservation standards of Title 24. WW-5 Water Audit Programs In collaboration with efforts by the San Jose Water Company (SJWC) and the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD), promote Rater audit programs that offer free water audits to single - family, multi- family, large landscape ac- counts, and commercial customers. Collaborate with purveyors to enact con- servation programs for commercial, industrial, and institutional (CII) ac- counts and create programs to install ultra- low -flush toilets in facilities. WW-6 Rainwater Collection Policy Adopt a residential rainwater collection policy and update the Zoning Code as needed to support permitting and regulation of residential rainwater sys- tems. 6. Solid Waste As described in Chapter 3, the adjusted 2020 forecast includes waste reduc- tions from the Town's waste reduction and diversion programs that are re- quired by AB 939, the California Integrated Waste Management fact of 1989. Through continued implementation of these programs and compliance with this legislation, GHG emissions from solid waste generated in Los Gatos are projected to decrease by 4,770 MTCO2e from 2020 BAU. The solid waste measures included in this section will support these programs, but will not further reduce GHG emissions from solid waste generated in Los Gatos beyond what was estimated in the adjusted forecast. SW-1 Construction Waste Diversion Revise the existing construction and demolition ordinance to require at least 50 percent diversion (i,e. reuse or recycling) of non - hazardous construction waste from disposal. 5 -18 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES SW-2 Recycling Areas in Multi-Family Developments Require all new and significant redevelopments /remodels of existing multi- family developments to provide recycling areas for their residents within ex- isting trash areas. Significant redevelopments and remodels include those that add or change 50 percent or more of the square footage or wall area. SW-3 Salvaged, Recycled- Content, and Local Construction Materials Encourage the use of salvaged and recycled- content materials and other mate- rials that have low production energy costs for building materials, hard sur- faces, and non -plant landscaping. Require sourcing of construction materials locally, as feasible. SW-4 Food and Green Waste Work with public and private waste disposal entities to keep food and green waste out of landfills. SW-5 Recycling and Composting Incentives Work with public and private waste disposal entities to incentivize recycling and composting. SW-6 Downtown Recycling Containers Continue to provide recycling containers in the Downtown area. SW-7 Waste Reduction Outreach Expand educational programs to inform residents about reuse, recycling, composting, waste to energy, and zero waste programs. SW-8 Plastic Bag Ordinance Adopt an ordinance to ban the use of plastic bags in Los Gatos, SW-9 Purchasing of Recycled Materials Develop policies, incentives, and design guidelines that encourage the public and private purchase and use of durable and nondurable items, including building materials, made from recycled materials or renewable resources. 5 -19 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES SW-10 Additional Waste Diversion Aim to achieve the 75 percent waste diversion goal established by AB 341. 7. Open Space The open space measures would not result in measureable reductions in GHG emissions in Los. Gatos. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town's overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. OS -1 Community Garden and Urban Farm Sites Inventory identify and inventory potential community garden and urban farm sites on public easements, Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG &E) easements, right - of- ways, and schoolyards, and develop a program to establish community gardens in appropriate locations. OS -2 Garden Areas in New Development Encourage significant new residential developments over 50 units to include space that can be used to grow food. OS -3 Community Garden Process Establish a process through which a neighborhood can propose and adopt a site as a community garden. OS -4 Los Gatos Fa7mers'Marhet Continue to support the Los Gatos Farmers' Market as a source for locally - grown food. OS -5 Public Food Benefits at the Farmers'Marleet Encourage the Los Gatos farmers' market to accept food stamps and other public food benefits. OS -6 Wildla.nd Fire Prevention Continue to actively pursue wildland fire prevention in forested areas of Los Gatos to avoid loss of carbon sequestration. F 5 -20 TOWN OF LOS GAT OS L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES S. Community Action The community action measures would not result in measureable reductions in GHG emissions in Los Gatos. However, they are important in helping to reach the Town's overall goal of improving sustainability in Los Gatos. CA -1 Local Business Participation Develop and implement an outreach plan to engage local businesses in GHG emissions reduction programs. CA -2 Sustainability Information Center Establish and maintain a "sustainability information center" at the Town Hall or Library to inform the public and distribute available brochures, and pro- vide information on sustainability on the Town's website. Emphasize online outreach materials to minimize paper consumption, CA -3 Los Gatos: Growing Greener Together Campaign Continue the Los Gatos: Growing Greener Together Campaign, which pro- vides Town employees and community members with a newsletter featuring green tips and best practices for home and at work. Expand this program to provide best practice information at public venues, such as the farmers' mar- ket, CA -4 Support for Local Businesses Continue economic vitality programs aimed at supporting local business by encouraging residents to shop locally, CA -5 Support for Voluntary Programs Support voluntary programs to improve sustainability in Los Gatos. B, Municipal Measures The measures that are discussed below include measures that will reduce GHG emissions from Town operations, However, because the Town's oper- ations represent such a small percentage of the total GHG emissions in Los 5 -21 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES Gatos, as discussed in Chapter 2, the overall GHG emissions reductions would be minimal, and were therefore not quantified. Although these measures would have a minimal reduction in GHG emissions in Los Gatos overall, they demonstrate that the Town is committed to action on climate change. Los Gatos is proud of the emission reduction efforts implemented to date and is committed to building on those efforts by increasing fleet fuel effi- ciency, increasing energy efficiency and conservation in municipal buildings, and other actions described below. 1. Transportation and Land Use TR -I Reduced Emissions from Employee Commute Implement programs and provide incentives to encourage reduced emissions from employee commute, including telecommuting, alternative work sched- ules, carpooling /vanpooling, and active transportation. l s TR -2 Support for Bicycle Commuting Provide bicycle lockers and showers at Town offices, as well as education about bicycle commuting. TR.3 Bicycles for Use by Town Employees Provide bicycles for short trips by Town employees, TR.4 Incentives for Low- Emission Vehicles Provide preferential parking for low - emissions vehicles at Town offices. TR -5 Idling in Town Vehicles Adopt a policy to limit idling in Town vehicles consistent with public safety standards. TR -6 Efficiency in Town Fleet Vehicles Regularly maintain Town fleet vehicles to maximize efficiency (e.g. tire pres- sure). t 5 -22 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES 2. Green Building GB -1 LEED Certification in Municipal Buildings Encourage all new municipal buildings and facilities to meet at least LEED Gold certification standards. GB -2 Rebates and Incentives for Energy Efficiency Utilize all available rebates and incentives for energy efficiency and distribut- ed generation installations, such as State public good programs (i.e. funding for energy efficiency from a "public good" fee on utility bills) and solar pro- grams. GB -3 Green Building Training Train all plan review and building inspection staff in green building materials, techniques, and practices. 3. Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels RE -1 Solar Energy for Town Facilities Conduct a solar feasibility study and install solar panels on appropriate Town facilities. RE -2 Solar Water Heating at Town Facilities Install tankless and /or solar water heating at appropriate Town facilities. RE -3 Town Fleet Conversion Where technologically feasible and consistent with public safety standards, convert the Town's vehicle fleet to hybrid, compressed natural gas, biodiesel, electric, hydrogen fuel cells, or ethanol. RE -4 Fuel Conservation Program Establish a fuel conservation program for the Town vehicle fleet and require Gas Cap driver training for all employees who use fleet vehicles. 5 -23 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES 4. Energy Conservation EC -1 Energy Audit of Town Facilities Conduct, with assistance from Pacific Gas & Electric Company, a thorough energy audit of all Town facilities to identify cost - effective opportunities for conservation. EC-2 Reflective Rooftng on Town Facilities Install reflective roofing on Town facilities. EC.3 Energy Efficiency Standards for Town Facilities Establish energy efficiency standards for Town facilities and provide employ- ees with guidelines, instructions, and requirements for efficient use of facili- ties. EC.4 Peak Electricity Demand Reduction Participate in peak electricity demand reduction programs and undertake peak demand reduction measures at Town facilities. EC -5 Energy- Efficient Appliances and Office Equipment As outdated electronic appliances and office equipment are phased out of Town facilities, replace them with energy- efficient models, EC -6 Street and Traffic Light Retrofits Continue to retrofit street lights and traffic lights to light- emitting diodes (LED) . 5. Water and Wastewater WI'W- -1 iX/ater- Conserving Fixtures in Tow?a Facilities Install eater- conserving fixtures in all Town facilities. br/W 2 Landscaping at Town Facilities Use drought- tolerant native landscaping at Town facilities, 5 -24 TOWN OF LOS GAT OS L O S G A T O S S U S T A I NAB I L I T Y P L A N GREEN HOUSE GAS EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS MEASURES WW-3 Irrigation for Town Landscaping Use recycled water or graywater for Town landscaping, including parks and medians, where appropriate. 6. Solid Waste SW-1 Recycling Coordinators Train an existing staff member from each Town department to be a recycling coordinator for their department. SW-2 Reuse and Recycled Content Materials Require all Town departments and facilities to reuse office supplies, furniture, and computers before buying new materials. When buying new materials, require Town departments and facilities to purchase products that are made with high levels of post- consumer recycled content and have limited packag- ing. 7. Open Space OS -1 Tree Planting on Municipal Property Develop a Town program for maximizing carbon sequestration on municipal property through tree planting. 8. Purchasing P -1 Local Hiring Develop a Town program to require or encourage the Town to hire locally for its contracts and services. P -2 Sustainability Criteria in Proposal Selection Process When requesting proposals or applications for contracts, professional service agreements, or grants, request that proposals or applications include infor- mation about the sustainability practices of the organization, and use such information as a partial basis for proposal evaluations. 5 -25 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N G R E E N H O U S E G A S E M I S S I O N S R E D U C T I O N S M E A S U R_ S P -3 Life -Cycle Costing Approach in Purchasing Incorporate a "life -cycle costing" approach into Town purchasing considera- tions that takes into account long -term cost savings from energy- efficient products. 9. Community Action CA -1 Green Business Program Continue to operate a townwide green business program. CA .2 Sustainability Coordinator Train an existing Town staff member to be a sustainability coordinator for the Town. CA -3 Incentives for Sustainable Business Practices Reward local businesses that hire local residents and allow telecommuting by, for example, recognition on the Town website or in Town newsletters, or preference in Town purchasing. f 5 -26 6 IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING The previous chapters present and analyze reduction measures that will ex- ceed the Town's target of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Los Gatos by 15 percent below baseline levels by 2020. These measures represent the hard work and initiative of the Town of Los Gatos to go above and be- yond normal practice by proactively addressing the effects of GHGs. This chapter outlines how the measures will be implemented, as well as financing and monitoring mechanisms to implement the measures. A. Measure Implementation This section presents implementation information for each measure, includ- ing action items, responsible parties, cost effectiveness, and a schedule for im- plementation. In cases where an individual measure includes many different components, such as many of the transportation and land use measures, im- plementation information is provided for each component separately. The quantitative reduction effects, as reported in Chapter 5, serve as the standards by which performance towards achievement of the reduction target will be measured. The implementation schedule separates reduction measures into two main time periods for implementation: 2012 to 2015 and 2015 to 2020. Phases indi- cate when implementation of the measure begins. Overall maintenance of the program will extend well beyond the allotted phase. The implementation schedule prioritizes reduction measures based on their effectiveness at reduc- ing GHG emissions, cost - effectiveness, and /or feasibility. Some reduction strategies are expected to be implemented on a later timeline due to obstacles of available data, technology, or finances. Appendix E provides a summary of the measures and the key information about the GHG emissions and VMT reductions presented in Chapter 5, along with the implementation information presented in this chapter. 6 -1 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING M 1, Communitywide Measures a. Transportation and Land Use TR -la Emphasis on Pedestrian Entrances Measure TR -la requires all new buildings, excluding single - family homes, to include a principal functional entry that faces a public space such as a street, square, park, paseo, or plaza, in addition to any entrance from a parking lot, to encourage pedestrian foot traffic. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code and Design Guidelines to include this requirement. New residential and non- residential development, except for single - family homes, will be subject to this requirement, incorporating it either into the project design or as mitiga- tion in the applicable environmental document pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition, the Community Devel- opment Department will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure. ii, Cost Effectiveness.' Moderate to High Staff -time costs of measure TR -la are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinances. Since measure TR -la would apply only to new structures, pedestrian- serving entrances could be incorporated into buildings during their design phase. Incorporating such an entrance or otherwise orienting a building to meet this requirement would therefore impose little to no additional cost for most developments. In rare instances, additional entrances could cause reductions in usable floor or wall space, or generate greater security or climate - control demands; however, es- timating these possible costs would be highly speculative, Cost savings from this measure could stem from reduced parking needs or from increased vitali- ty in the Town's commercial districts, but these also are highly speculative. While it is not possible to reliably quantify direct GHG reductions from this individual measure, the measure greatly increases convenience for pedestrians and potentially cyclists, thus encouraging alternative forms of transportation and reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Though its individual reductions 6 -2 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING are not precisely quantifiable, the measure's benefits would likely be readily observable and, most notably, its costs are anticipated to be minimal. There- fore this measure is deemed to have a moderate to high degree of cost - effectiveness. M. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -1 b Pedestrian or Bicycle Connections Measure TR -lb requires new projects, excluding single- family homes, to in- clude pedestrian Or bicycle through- connections to existing sidewalks and existing or future bicycle facilities, unless prohibited by topographical condi- tions. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code and Design Guidelines to include this requirement. New residential and non- residential development, except for single - family homes, will be subject to this requirement, incorporating it either into the project design or as mitiga- tion in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addi- tion, the Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. fl. Cost Effectiveness: Moderate to High Staff -time costs of measure TR -lb are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinances. The costs of this measure will vary depending on the individual site characteristics and intended layout of new developments. Even for developments with low con- nectivity, the amount of land needed to provide such connections would rare- ly exceed 1 percent of the total development area, and could be considerably 6 -3 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTA ION AND MONITORING lower.' If properly incorporated during the design phase, this requirement would result in negligible increases to development costs. While it is not pos- sible to reliably quantify direct GHG reductions from this individual meas- ure, the measure greatly increases convenience for pedestrians and cyclists, thus encouraging alternative forms of transportation. Though its individual reductions are not precisely quantifiable, the measure's benefits would likely be readily observable and, most notably, its costs are anticipated to be mini- mal, Therefore this measure is deemed to have a moderate to high cost- effectiveness. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, TR -I c Safe Routes to School Measure TR -lc directs the Town to seek grant funding to establish a Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Program to increase student walking and biking trips. I Action Items and Responsible Parties- - To implement this measure, the Town and school districts will apply for grant funding for a SR2S program, and if accepted, develop and implement the program by constructing pedestrian and bicycle improvements and in- stalling signage and lighting, il, Cost Effectiveness, High Direct costs for measure TR -lc are expected to be low and would stem from staff time devoted to the pursuit and administration of pertinent grant fund- ing, See the discussion for Measure TRAa for information about the costs associated with bicycle facilities. Costs associated with pedestrian facilities are ' This estimate is based on example from a low- density, suburban neighbor- hood in Austin, Texas, where a pedestrian /bicycle throughway provided access be- tween two low- connectivity streets. At 20 feet across, the right -of -way was relatively wide. The total footprint of the throughway was 4,300 square feet, or about 0.7 per- cent of the total 600,000 square foot area of the blocks it directly served. 6 -4 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING highly dependent upon the types and extent of new pedestrian infrastructure, so it is impossible to accurately predict the total costs of the improvements that would be included. However, plan costs from other Bay Area municipal- ities can be instructive. Santa Rosa estimated the cost of implementing its planned pedestrian improvements to be approximately $4.3 million total. It is presumed that all costs of any SR2S Program would be largely or fully cov- ered by awarded grants, such as the following federal grant programs: Trans- portation Enhancement Program, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program, and Highway Safety Improvement Program, Though the individual reductions from this measure are projected to be low, given its low anticipated costs, this measure is deemed to be moderately to highly cost- effective, ill, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -1 d Traffic- Calminba Measures Measure TR -ld directs the Town to design and implement affordable traffic - calming measures on specific streets to dissuade Highway 17 cut - through traf- fic and attract pedestrian and bicycle traffic. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will design traffic calming measures and construct them as appropriate. fl, Cost Effectiveness: Low Measure TR -ld would result in relatively high staff -time costs for program development and administration, as well as considerable costs from construc- tion and maintenance of infrastructure as part of measure implementation. In its 2012 Climate Action Plan, the City of Walnut Creek estimated the costs of traffic calming measures at approximately $83,000 per 10 miles of roadway, with costs split between the City and private developers.Z Total costs for Los z City of Walnut Creek, 2012. City of Walnut Creek Climate Action Plan, Page A3 -15. 6 -5 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A D I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G Gatos will depend on the traffic calming methods used, the extent of their implementation, and the proportion of costs assigned to developers, Signifi- cant direct cost - savings for the Town are not anticipated; however, the Town could potentially experience indirect benefits or savings from reduced air pol- lution and increased pedestrian comfort and safety. Given the measure's high anticipated cost and relatively low projected VMT reduction, it is deemed to have low cost - effectiveness, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, TR -1 e Transit Access Improvements Measure TR -le directs the Town to implement transit access improvements through sidewalk /crosswalk safety enhancements and bus shelter improve- ments, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will construct pedestrian safety and other improvements to transit access, fl. Cost Effectiveness, Low Measure TR -le would result in moderate staff -time costs for program devel- opment and administration, as well as considerable costs from construction and maintenance of infrastructure as part of measure implementation, Vari- ous estimates are available for potential measure costs. The 2011 Sustainabil- ity Action Plan for the City of Tracy estimated a cost of $5,000 to $8,000 per shelter for transit -stop upgrades and $6 per square foot of new sidewalk.3 In its 2012 Draft Climate Action Plan, the City of Santa Rosa estimated a citywide program cost of between $200,000 and $500,000. San Ramon esti- mated citywide costs ranging between $15,000 and $75,000.4 Implementation costs for Los Gatos will depend on the number and type of transit -stop up- grades performed, While the Town is not anticipated to experience direct 3 City of Tracy, 2010. City of Tracy Sustainability Action Plan 4 City of San Ramon, 2011. City of San Ramon Climate Action Plan. 6 -6 t T O W N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G cost - savings as a result of measure implementation, indirect benefits and sav- ings could potentially be realized through decreased congestion and air pollu- tion, and increased rider safety. Given this measure's high anticipated cost and relatively low projected VMT reduction, it is deemed to have a low cost - effectiveness. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -2 North Forty Area Land Uses Measure TR -2 requires a variety of local- serving commercial uses and encour- ages mixed -use development in the North Forty area. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will work with the North Forty de- velopment team to ensure that local - serving commercial uses are included, and to encourage mixed -use development. The North Forty development project will amend the land use plans, as appropriate, to comply with this measure. fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Staff -time costs of measure TR -2 are expected to be low and would stem from the need to coordinate with the North Forty development team to ensure consistency with this measure. Measure TR -2 is particular to Los Gatos and would not impose any direct additional implementation costs on the Town. Any costs associated increased provision of municipal infrastructure or ser- vices would likely be offset by increased property and sales tax receipts and /or covered by developers. Developers could be faced with higher total development costs given requirements for more intense land uses, but these are anticipated to be consistent with construction costs for other similar de- velopments, Moreover, more intense development in this area could help to defray costs for both the Town and developers by providing for greater over- all efficiency and economies of scale. Overall, the low costs of this measure would likely be more than offset by increases to revenue and by the public 6 -7 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S LO S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G benefit of additional housing, jobs, and services. Given its potential for both increased Town revenue and VMT reduction, this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule Assuming that the North Forty Specific Plan process continues to move for- ward, the Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -3 Fixed -Route Shuttle Measure TR -3 directs the Town to provide a fixed -route shuttle system to the downtown area from key residential areas, employment and commercial cen- ters, Vasona Light Rail, and Vasona Park. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and implement a fixed - route shuttle system. fl, Cost Effectiveness.-Low Costs stemming from measure TR -3 would largely depend on its specific im- plementation, with staff -time costs dependent .upon how shuttle system de- sign and roll -out are approached. With contracted or Santa Clara Valley Val- ley Transportation Authority (VTA) -run services, staff -time costs would be dramatically lower than in the unlikely event that the Town were to design and /or manage its own system. VTA provides contracted corporate shuttle services between light -rail stations and key employers at a cost of about $44,000 per year as of 2012,5 These services, however, are dissimilar from typical, fully public shuttle -bus services serving transit stations and down- town areas. The City of Walnut Creek estimated in their 2012 Climate Ac- tion Plan that providing Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) shuttles would car- ry a City cost of $6 million.' Shuttles in Los Gatos would likely be similar to 5 Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, 2011. Adopted Biennial Budg- et: Fiscal Years 2012 & 2013. City of Walnut Creek, 2012. City of Walnut Creek Climate Action Plan. 6 -8 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S LOS GATOS SUSTAI NABILIT.Y PLAN I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G those of Walnut Creek and carry costs of a comparable magnitude. Given that this measure carries a relatively high cost and that its VMT reduction, though measurable, is very small, it is deemed to have a low cost - effectiveness. M. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -4a New Bicycle Facilities Measure TR -4a directs the Town to install new bicycle facilities throughout the existing Town street network to close bicycle network gaps. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will construct new bicycle facilities. ii. Cost Effectiveness: Low Planning and administration for the installation of new bicycle facilities under measure TR -4a could carry low to moderate staff -time costs. The total cost of new bike facilities would depend on the number and type of facilities in- stalled. The cost discussion for TR -4b includes information on estimated cost ranges for different types of bicycle parking. For its Bicycle Master Plan, the City of Santa Rosa made cost estimates for various classes of bikeway. Class I bicycle routes consist of trails exclusively for bicycles and /or pedestrians; these carry estimated construction costs of $550,000 per mile, with annual maintenance costs of $10,000 per mile. Class II bicycle routes comprise dedi- cated bike lanes along existing roadways; these carry estimated construction costs of $30,000 per mile, with annual maintenance costs of $2,000 per mile. Class III bicycle routes are characterized by shared roadways with bicycle route signage and sometimes pavement stencils; these carry construction costs of $2,500 per mile, with annual maintenance costs of $1,000 per mile. These costs do not include additional infrastructure such as bike signals, crossings, and loop detectors, and vary considerably by specific location. The estimated total cost to implement the bicycle portion of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Mas- .• TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G ter Plan for the City of Santa Rosa was $38.9 million.''' Alternatively, the City of Lafayette, which is of a similar size to Los Gatos, had higher average per -mile costs for the various types of bikeways it planned to construct. The total cost of implementing Lafayette's Bicycle Master Plan was estimated at $12.7 million (in 2006 dollars), with an additional ten -year maintenance costs of $832,659 annually (in 2016 dollars).9 The Town of Los Gatos would not likely see direct cost savings as a conse- quence of implementing this measure; however, indirect savings could be real- ized through decreased congestion and air population from resultant trans- portation mode trips, A precise quantification of such benefits, however, is not feasible. Given this measure's high anticipated costs and relatively low projected VMT reduction, it is deemed to have a low cost- effectiveness. iii: Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -4b Bicycle Facilities in Development Projects Measure - TR- 4b- requires. bicycle- parking facilities and on -site showers in ma- jor non- residential development and redevelopment projects. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to include this requirement, Significant new non - residential development and redevelopment will be subject to this requirement, incorporating it either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. 7 City of Santa Rosa, 2010. City of Santa Rosa Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. 8 All costs from Santa Rosa Plan are in 2008 dollars, 9 City of Lafayette, 2006. Lafayette Bikeways Vaster Plan. i 6 -10 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G li. Cost Effectiveness: Low Drafting and adopting requirements under TR -4b could carry low to moder- ate staff -time costs, The costs of bicycle parking and facilities vary greatly depending on the number and type of parking installations. In a relatively secure office or building, it may be possible to provide unsecured bicycle parking or racks at per -space costs ranging from $50 or less to greater than $200, Secure bicycle lockers are considerably more expensive, with per -space costs ranging from $950 to $2500,10 The total cost of installing shower facili- ties for bicycle commuters is estimated to range from $13,000 to $30,000, de- pending on the configuration and number of shower stalls.11 Cost savings from the installation of bicycle facilities are not readily quantifiable; however, possible reductions in the need for car parking and potential increases in worker health and productivity could yield indirect cost savings. If bicycle parking and facilities were used in lieu of or as a replacement for automobile parking, then savings would far exceed costs." Given that the anticipated costs of this measure are high relative to its projected VMT reduction, it is deemed to have low cost - effectiveness as a GHG reduction strategy at present, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -4c Bicycle Parking in Downtown Measure TR -4c directs the Town to install high - quality bicycle- parking facili- ties Downtown in centralized, safe, and secure areas. 10 Benjamin, Matthew T., 2003, Bicycle Parking.• A Plan for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Author, tJ 11 Commuter Connections: How to Support Biking to Work, http : / /Www.mwcog. org / commuter2/ employer / employer _how_to_support_biking_t o_work.htm, accessed on April 5, 2012, 12 Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2012. Transportation Cost and Benefit Analysis II - Parking Costs, 6 -11 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E 10 E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will construct new bicycle - parking facilities in the Downtown. it Cost Effectiveness: Low Planning and administration for the installation of new bicycle parking facili- ties under measure TR -4a could carry low to moderate staff -time costs. The materials and installation costs for high - quality bike parking could range from $50 -200 per space for bike racks, to $950 -2,500 for secure bike lockers. Since it is not anticipated that such facilities would replace car parking, measure implementation would not offer any direct cost savings, Other indirect cost savings could be realized through reduced congestion or increased commercial activity generated by bicycle trips, but these are speculative and cannot readi- ly be quantified. Given the relatively high anticipated cost and generally low projected VMT reduction from this measure, it is deemed to have a low cost- effectiveness, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, TR -4d Bicycle - Sharing Program Measure TR -4d directs the Town to encourage non-profit or volunteer Organ- izations in creating a bicycle - sharing program. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will encourage efforts of non - profit and volunteer organizations to create bicycle - sharing programs, such as by providing information on the Town's website. ii. Cost Effectiveness: High Town costs from measure TR -4d are expected to be low and would stem from the materials and staff -time needed to support and coordinate with relevant organizations. No other costs are anticipated from this measure. Though this measure is not likely to result in direct cost savings, the Town or resi- dents could potentially realize long -term benefits from bicycle sharing; these f 6 -12 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G include lower transportation costs, decreased congestion, and improved air quality. The magnitude or value of such benefits, however, will depend on program implementation and participation levels; any estimate of these bene- fits would be highly speculative. Though the projected VMT reduction from this measure would be modest, the measure is anticipated to carry low costs, present opportunities for cost savings, and would rely primarily upon work done by volunteer or non - profit organizations. Therefore this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective. M. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -5 School Pool Program Measure TR -5 directs the Town to implement a School Pool Program that helps match parents to carpool students to school. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town and school districts will develop the School Pool Program and conduct related outreach. A Cost Effectiveness; High Costs for measure TR -5 would stem mainly from the use of Town and school district staff time and technical resources for program implementation, and are expected to be low. Though the Town is not expected to experience di- rect cost savings from this measure, it could result in significant transporta- tion- related savings for parents with school -aged children. Additionally, the Town could experience indirect savings through reduced traffic and conges- tion, and subsequently improved air quality. Given that this measure is likely to result in substantial cost savings and is projected to result in significant VMT reductions, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 6 -13 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G TR -6a Employer Commute Trip Reduction Program Measure TR -6a directs the Town to implement a voluntary Employer Com- mute Trip Reduction Program. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop the voluntary programs described above, New and existing non- residential development could both participate on a voluntary basis. ii, Cost Effectiveness: High The drafting and adoption of an Employer Commute Trip Reduction pro - gram under measure TR -6a could result in moderate to high staff -time costs. Programs costs would vary depending on the specific provisions of the adopt- ed program. A 2001 study found that commuter trip reduction programs had an average gross cost of $156 per employee per year; however, the majority of i businesses spent less, at a range of $33 to $89 per employee per year.13,14 Ad- justed for inflation, the average annual per - employee cost of a trip reduction program Would be $202. Though this cost may seem high, commuter trip reduction programs have frequently resulted in substantial overall cost savings for both employers and workers.15 Direct cost - savings come mainly from the reduced need for parking or parking subsidies. Additionally, telecommuting... has enabled some companies to reduce their need for office space, Indirect savings have been realized through improved worker productivity, morale, and health, For employees, savings arise primarily from reduced needs for vehicle maintenance and fuel. Indirect municipal and community benefits are realized through decreased congestion, air pollution, and infrastructure costs, Since commuter trip reduction programs typically recoup their costs and have a substantial potential to reduce VMT when coupled with other strategies, measure TR -6a is deemed to be highly cost - effective. 13 Pollution Probe, 2001. North American Workplace -based Trip Reduction Pro- grammes, 14 Costs in 2001 dollars. 15 Pollution Probe, 2001, North American Workplace -based Trip Reduction Pro- grammes. 6 -14 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S LOS GATOS SUSTAI NABILITY PLAN I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -6b Preferential Parking Measure TR -6b encourages designated or preferred parking for vanpools, car- pools, and electric vehicles in non - residential development. I Action Items and Responsible Parties New non - residential development will be encouraged to incorporate designat- ed parking into the project design. To this end, the Community Develop- ment Department will discuss with project applicants the possibility of creat- ing designated parking spots as part of proposed developments. The Town will also recommend this strategy to businesses as appropriate (e.g., when businesses seek to resurface or otherwise modify existing parking areas). A Cost Effectiveness., High As a voluntary measure, implementation of TR -6b would carry very low staff -time costs. Assuming that employers and businesses do not opt to create additional parking to replace such designated spaces, additional direct costs from implementation of this measure would be minimal, relating primarily to signage, pavement striping, and, potentially, enforcement. These costs would be incurred by businesses. If the provision of designated spaces leads to in- creased vehicle pooling, cost savings could be realized through overall de- creases in parking needs; however, precise estimates of such cost savings would be speculative. Given that this measure carries a very low cost and would contribute to substantial projected VMT reductions, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, TR -6c Car - Sharing Program Measure TR -6c directs the Town to encourage non - profit or volunteer organ- izations in creating or providing a car - sharing program. 6 -15 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will encourage the efforts of non- profit and volunteer organizations to create car- sharing programs, such as by providing information on the Town's website. fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Town costs from measure TR -6c are expected to be low and would stem from the materials and staff -time needed to support and coordinate with relevant organizations. No other costs are anticipated from this measure. Though this measure is not likely to result in direct cost savings, the Town or resi- dents could potentially realize long -term benefits from car sharing; these in- clude lower transportation costs, decreased congestion, and improved air quality. The magnitude or value of such benefits, however, will depend on program implementation and participation levels; any estimate of these bene- fits would be highly speculative. Given that this measure is anticipated to carry low costs and is projected to contribute to substantial VMT reductions, It is deemed to be highly cost effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -7 Student Transit Outreach Measure TR -7 directs the Town to coordinate with local school districts on marketing, promoting, and educating students about the benefits of using public transit as a mode of travel. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with the school dis- tricts to market, promote, and educate students and their families about trans- it benefits. ii, Cost Effectiveness: High Costs of measure TR -7 would stem from additional staff time for coordina- tion activities with the school district and are anticipated to be low. Addi- tional costs would result from the development, production, and distribution 1 6 -16 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING of outreach and educational materials. While no direct cost - savings are antic- ipated, the Town would likely experience indirect benefits from reduced traf- fic and congestion, and subsequently improved air quality. Given the low anticipated costs of this measure and its projected significant VMT reductions, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR-8a Vehicle Circulation for Parking Measure TR -8a directs the Town to provide better wayfinding and smart parking strategies with attractive signage to reduce vehicle circulation related to searching for parking spaces in the C -2 /Central Business District Zone. 1, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will design and install signage and oth- er strategies to reduce vehicle circulation related to searching for parking in the Downtown. A Cost Effectiveness: Low Staff -time costs for measure TR -8a would depend upon whether improve- ments under the measure are carried out by the Town itself or through a pri- vate firm contracted to implement a comprehensive program. In 2010, work- ing with a consultant, the city of Alexandria, Virginia (population 150,000) initiated a comprehensive wayfinding program in its Old Town district. Phase I of this program was projected to cost a total of approximately $250,000. It is anticipated that the total costs of such strategies in Los Gatos would be less, proportional to the town's lower population and smaller busi- ness district; however, actual costs would depend on program specifics. The Town is not expected to experience direct cost savings from the implementa- tion of this measure, but indirect savings could be realized through decreased congestion and air pollution, and through potential increases in business pat- ronage. Given the relatively high anticipated costs and low projected VMT 6 -17 TOW N OF LOS G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING reductions resulting from this measure, it is deemed to have low cost - effectiveness. Ili, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -8b Idling Reduction Measure TR -8b directs the Town to encourage non - profit and volunteer or- ganizations in conducting outreach to reduce car idling around schools during pick -up and drop -off times, 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will encourage efforts of non - profit and volunteer organizations to reduce car idling around schools, such as by providing information on the Town's website and other outreach. t ii. Cost Effectiveness.-High Town costs from measure TR -8b are expected to be low and would stem from the materials and staff -time needed to support and coordinate with rele- vant organizations. No other costs are anticipated from this measure. Though this measure is not likely to result in direct cost savings, the Town or residents could potentially realize long -term benefits from reduced car idling; these include lower fuel spending and improved air quality. The magnitude or value of such benefits, however, will depend on program implementation and publicity efforts; any estimate of these benefits would be highly specula - tive. Though the projected VMT reduction from this measure would be low, the measure is anticipated to carry low costs, present opportunities for cost savings, and would rely primarily upon work done by volunteer or non- profit organizations. Therefore this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 6 -18 T O W N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G b. Green Building GB -1 Green Building Ordinance Measure GB -1 directs the Town to develop a Green Building Ordinance that requires energy- efficient design, 30 percent in excess of Title 24 standards to coincide with the Voluntary Tier 2 standards of the California Green Build- ing Code (CALGreen), for all new residential and non - residential buildings. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt a Green Build- ing Ordinance. New development will be subject to this ordinance and in- corporate its requirements either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to the CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure. fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Measure GB -1 is anticipated to have high staff -time costs due to the need to draft and adopt a detailed ordinance for green building requirements. Devel- opment costs associated with this measure stem mainly from increased mate- rials and construction costs. It should be noted that irrespective of costs or Town action, Title 24 standards are part of a State initiative that will establish increasingly stringent building energy efficiency standards. While the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG &E) provides detailed cost and cost - effectiveness analyses for green building standards at 15 percent over Title 24, such calculations are not readily available for standards at 30 percent over Title 24. PG &E has provided such analyses for the City of San Mateo, which is located 26 miles to the northwest of Los Gatos and in the same state climate zone. Estimated additional building costs for compliance with stand- ards 15 percent over Title 24 in San Mateo range from $0.50 to $1.91 per square foot for studied residential building types, and from $1,64 to $2.75 per square foot for studied non - residential building types, For all building types, simple payback times ranged from 9.4 to 27.9 years. PG &E's report subse- quently concluded that standards at 15 percent over Title 24 were cost- 6 -19 TOWN OF LO S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMiPLEMENTATION AN D MONI T ORING effective for all studied building types, While these results do not make it possible to extrapolate building costs for standards at 30 percent over Title 24, they can offer a ballpark figure, It can be presumed that long -term energy savings with standards at 30 percent over Title 24 would be even greater than with standards at 15 percent over Title 24, though increased development costs could lead to longer payback periods, As reported in Chapter 5, this measure is expected to result in significant emissions reductions. Given the anticipated long -run cost savings and significant emissions reductions, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. GB -2 GreenPoint.Rated Building Guidelines Measure G13-2 requires that all new and significantly remodeled homes follow the Town's adopted GreenPoint Rated Building Guidelines, i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate the GreenPoint requirements. New and significantly remodeled homes will be subject to these requirements, incorporating them either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure, ii. Cost Effectiveness: High Measure G13-2 is anticipated to have moderate to high staff -time costs due to the need to draft and adopt implementing ordinances for GreenPoint re- quirements, Similar to measure GB -1 above and measure G13-1 in the munic- ipal measures section, development costs associated with this measure will stem from increased materials and construction costs. However, as with the comrnunitywide and municipal measures G13-1, measure G13-2 is likely to result in substantial long term cost - savings from reduced energy and water use, and potentially from improved human health. (See the cost analyses for 6 -20 TOW N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I NAB] L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N AN D M O N I T O R I N G these measures for a quantification of similar green building costs and discus- sion of potential cost savings.) While formal cost analyses are not available for GreenPoint Rated Building Guidelines, it can be reasonably assumed that the costs and cost - effectiveness of these standards will be similar to those oth- er green building requirements. As reported in Chapter 5, this measure is expected to result in modest emissions reductions. However, given the antic- ipated long -run cost - savings, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective, iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. GB -3 Incentives for Green Building Certification Measure GB -3 provides incentives for LEED Silver certification or equivalent GreenPoint rating, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish incentives for LEED Silver certification or equivalent GreenPoint rating. As noted in Chapter 5, this measure anticipates permitting- related incentives, such as priority in plan review and processing. The Community Development Department will re- view development project applications to consider whether projects meet the incentives' certification /rating requirements, and will then follow through with the incentives (e,g. by prioritizing the project above others that do not meet the incentive's requirements). In order to utilize the incentives, devel- opment project applications would demonstrate the LEED Silver certification or equivalent GreenPoint rating. ii, Cost Effectiveness; High Staff -time costs to draft and adopt incentives are anticipated to be low to moderate. Additional costs of measure GB -3 will depend on what incentives are developed and how they are implemented. Streamlined permitting or other ministerial incentives may impose staff -time or other administrative resource costs upon the Town. These costs, however, are expected to be low and may be offset through the eventual benefits of increased green building. 6 -21 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N AND M O N I T O R I N G Alternatively, streamlined regulations or procedures could result in reduced staff costs over time. At present, precise estimates of the costs, benefits, and emissions impacts of this measure would be highly speculative. However, given the measure's anticipated low costs and likely financial returns, it is deemed to be a highly cost- effective GHG reduction strategy. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. GB -4 Solar Orientation Measure GB -4 requires that development reduce energy use through solar orientation by taking advantage of shade, prevailing winds, landscaping, and sun screens. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New development will be subject to this re- quirement, incorporating it either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review development project ap- plications for consistency with this measure. A Cost Effectiveness.' Moderate Measure GB -4 is anticipated to have moderate to high staff -time costs due to the need to draft and adopt implementing ordinances for solar orientation requirements. Other development costs from this measure would stem pri- marily from increased compliance costs during development design. Any additional construction or materials costs would likely be minimal. All of these costs, however, could be partially or entirely offset by resultant energy savings, though it is not feasible to determine the absolute amount or relative magnitude of such potential cost savings. Though there is evidence to suspect that this measure would pose little to no long -term costs, the savings potential and GHG benefits of this measure are highly uncertain. Therefore, this measure is deemed to have a moderate cost - effectiveness. 1 6 -22 T O W N O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AN D MONITORING ill. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, GB -5 Removal of Barriers to Green Building Measure GB -5 directs the Town to identify and remove regulatory or proce- dural barriers to implementing green building practices in the town by updat- ing codes, guidelines, and zoning. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will review existing codes, guidelines, and zoning to identify regulatory or procedural barriers to green building practices. Based on the results of this review, the Town will update any codes, guidelines, and zoning documents to remove such barriers. ii. Cost Effectiveness: Moderate Measure GBA is anticipated to have moderate to high staff -time costs for analysis and streamlining of regulations and procedures. If removal of barri- ers involves streamlined permitting, reduced fees, or other ministerial chang- es, this measure may impose additional staff -time or other administrative re- source costs upon the Town. These costs, however, are expected to be low and may be offset through the eventual benefits of increased green building. Alternatively, streamlined regulations or procedures could result in reduced staff costs over time. At present, precise estimates of the costs, benefits, and emissions impacts of this measure would be highly speculative. Though there is evidence to suspect that this measure would pose little to no long -term costs, the savings potential and GHG benefits of this measure are highly un- certain. Therefore, this measure is deemed to have a moderate cost - effectiveness. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, GB -6 Regional Green Building Programs Measure GB -6 directs the Town to coordinate with other local governments, special districts, nonprofits, and other .public organizations to share resources, 6 -23 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M EN T A T I O N AN D MO N I T O R I N G achieve economies of scale, and develop green building policies and programs that are optimized on a regional scale, i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate, as applicable, with other agencies for regional green building initiatives. fl. Cost Effectiveness; High Costs of measure GB -6 would stem from additional staff -time for coordina- tion activities and could range from high to low, depending on the approach taken, Successful achievement of regionally optimized policies and economies of scale could offer significant cost- savings to the Town and to regional busi- nesses who must navigate multiple public processes. However, any estimate of cost savings or of GHG emissions reductions from this measure would be highly speculative, and it may not be feasible to precisely quantify measure impacts. Nevertheless, such coordination would typically be considered a planning best practice. Despite its inherent uncertainties, the potential for long -term efficiencies and GHG reductions make this measure a highly cost- effective strategy. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. c, Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels RE -1 Alternative Energy Development Plan Measure RE -1 directs the Town to develop an Alternative Energy Develop- ment Plan in partnership with PG &E and local alternative energy companies. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with PG &E to devel- op the Alternative Energy Development Plan, As part of this process, the Town will identify which types of alternative energy facilities are appropriate in Los Gatos and where, identify means to address potential land use compat- ibility conflicts, and establish a development review process for new alterna- tive energy projects. Town staff will also review and update existing Town 6 -24 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING policies and ordinances to address alternative energy production and the find- ings of the Alternative Energy Development Plan. A Cost Effectiveness: Low Costs for measure RE -1 would stem mainly from staff -time and /or consultant assistance needed to carefully draft and implement the Alternative Energy Development Plan in cooperation with PG &E. Creation of such a plan would likely represent a large undertaking with a long project timeline, espe- cially given the various directives listed within this measure. After the plan is adopted, on -going implementation and administration needs would create long -term measure costs. On the other hand, implementation of this measure is not anticipated to create significant costs for local residents or businesses, and could lower costs associated with the approval of alternative energy facili- ties. Since information regarding other similar types of plans is largely una- vailable and since costs and savings from this measure would depend on its particular provisions, it is not possible to provide a quantified cost estimate of this measure. Given the measure's low GHG reduction potential reported in Chapter 5 and relatively high costs, it is deemed to have a low cost - effectiveness. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. RE -2 New Solar Homes Partnership Measure RE -2 requires that residential projects of six units or more participate in the California Energy Commission's New Solar Homes Partnership, which provides rebates to developers of six units or more who offer solar power in 50 percent of new units and is a component of the California Solar Initiative, or a similar program with solar power requirements equal to or greater than those of the California Energy Commission's New Solar Homes Partnership. 6 -25 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New residential projects that include six or more units will be subject to the requirement, and will therefore need to offer solar power in 50 percent of the new units. This could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental doc- ument pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development De- partment will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure, ii, Cost Effectiveness: High Since the enabling ordinance for the requirement in measure RE -2 would be relatively simple to draft and implement, staff -time costs are anticipated to be low. The most significant costs would be borne by developers and by PG &E, who would provide rebates for solar installations, (For a discussion of the cost of photovoltaic solar systems, see the discussion for measure RE -3, be- low,) Solar installation costs borne by developers could be passed on to resi- dents through rents or home prices; however, it is anticipated that the energy cost savings of solar systems would offset such costs relatively quickly, as ex- plained for measure RE -3. Though the projected GHG reductions from this measure are modest, as reported in Chapter 5, given its anticipated net cost savings, this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective, iii, Implementation Scbedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE -3 Renewable Energy Generation in Projects Measure RE -3 requires that new or major rehabilitations of commercial, of- fice, or industrial development greater than or equal to 20,000 square feet in size incorporate solar or other renewable energy generation to provide 15 percent or more of the project's energy needs. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New or major rehabilitations of commercial, office, or industrial development will be subject to the requirement, which 6 -26 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure. fl, Cost Effectiveness.- High Since the enabling ordinance for the requirement in measure RE -3 would be relatively simple to draft and implement, staff -time costs are anticipated to be low. The cost of photovoltaic solar installation in the Los Gatos area is esti- mated to be approximately $5.75 per watt of system capacity. 16 Total materi- als and labor costs would vary by site, and by system characteristics and size. It is also estimated that energy savings from photovoltaic systems in Los Ga- tos allow system cost recovery after approximately five to six years of opera- tion. 17 Anticipated system lifetimes of 20 years or more and low maintenance costs enhance the long -term savings from photovoltaic systems.18 Though the projected GHG reductions from this measure are modest, as reported in Chapter 5, given the potential long -term cost savings of photovoltaic installa- tions, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE-4 Leaf Blower Ordinance Measure RE -4 directs the Town to adopt an ordinance to ban the use of two - stroke engine leaf blowers. 16 The National Renewable Energy Laboratory, The Open PV Project, http: / /openpv.nrel.gov /, accessed on Apr 10, 2012. 17 FindSolar Solar Calculator, http : / /www.findsolar,com /index.php? page = rightforme, accessed on April 10, 2012. 18 Barbose, Galen, et al., 2011. Report: Tracking the Sun IV: An Historical Summary of the Installed Cost of Photovoltaics in the United States from 1998 to 2010, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 6 -27 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt an ordinance to ban the use of two- stroke engine leaf blowers in place of electric and other non- electric devices. Residents and businesses in Los Gatos will be subject to this new ordinance, fl. Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Staff -time costs of measure RE -4 would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement the enabling ordinance and guidelines, and are expected to be moderate, Additional measure costs would include those associated with the replacement of disallowed equipment and from potential home upgrades to include exterior or garage electrical outlets, Electric leaf blowers currently cost $30 —$60 per unit; the costs of potential outlet installation would vary from home to home and it is uncertain how many homes might require such retrofits. Given this uncertainty and a lack of information on the prevalence l of electric or gasoline leaf blowers, it is not feasible to determine a precise per - household or overall cost estimate. Given this lack of information and gen- eral uncertainty, the cost - effectiveness of this measure cannot reasonably be determined. iii; Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, RE -5 Solar Ready Fea tures Measure RE -5 requires that all new buildings be constructed to allow for the easy, cost - effective installation of future solar energy systems, where feasible, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New development will be subject to the re- quirement, which could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review architectural plans for consistency with this measure. y TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Measure RE -5 is anticipated to have moderate to high staff -time costs due to the need to draft and adopt implementing ordinances for "solar ready" re- quirements. Since retrofits for existing structures would not be required, costs from this measure would stem primarily from increased compliance costs during development design and from increased construction costs. Var- ying estimates are available for per -home costs of solar - readiness, ranging from $280 -$380 to $500 41;000. These costs, however, would serve to defray future costs if a household elects to install solar energy systems. This measure would not in and of itself result in measurable GHG reductions, but rather would serve to enhance the implementation and cost effectiveness of other measures. Since this measure would serve to decrease costs and enhance the effectiveness of other measures, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Imp'ementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE-6 Solar Energy Systems at Schools Measure RE -6 directs the Town to work with the local school districts to en- courage the use of solar energy systems at school facilities. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate, as applicable, with local school districts to encourage solar energy at school facilities. A Cost Effectiveness: High Costs of measure RE -6 would stem from staff -time costs for school district coordination activities and are anticipated to be very low. Any estimate of GHG emissions reductions from this measure would be highly speculative and it is not feasible to precisely quantify measure impacts. Nevertheless, given that this measure has very low anticipated cost, could result in cost sav- ings to the school district (see the cost analysis for measure RE -3), and offers potential GHG reductions, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. 6 -29 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O RI N G i iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE -7 Community Choice Aggregation Measure RE -7 directs the Town to support and participate in regional efforts to study the feasibility and 'interest in establishing community choice aggrega- tion in Los Gatos, I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will participate, as applicable, in re- gional efforts to study the feasibility of establishing community choice aggre- gation. ii. Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Staff -time costs of measure RE -7 are expected to be low to moderate and t. would stem from the need for staff to conduct research, and provide adminis- trative and material support for efforts related to community choice aggrega- tion. Since any sort of participation would be voluntary, this measure would impose no direct costs on businesses or community members. This measure is not anticipated to result in direct cost savings. In the event that Los Gatos took part in the implementation of a community choice aggregation program, the Town, residents, and businesses could experience either savings or addi- tional costs, depending on subsequent changes to electricity rates, Predicting such rate changes, however, would be speculative. It is likewise infeasible to precisely project GHG emissions reductions that would result from this measure. Such reductions would depend on what, if any, alterations are made to the energy generation portfolio of Las Gatos's electric provider, Since it is not practical to precisely quantify the costs, savings, or GHG reductions re- sulting directly from this measure, its specific cost - effectiveness cannot rea- sonably be determined. iii. Implementation Schedule This measure is somewhat dependent on the actions of other agencies in the region. However, to the extent that regional efforts are underway, the Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 6 -30 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G d. Energy Conservation EC -1 Energy - Efficient Appliances and Lighting Measure EC -1 requires new development to use energy- efficient appliances that meet ENERGY STAR standards and energy - efficient lighting technolo- gies that exceed Title 24 standards by 30 percent. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New development will be subject to the re- quirement, which could be incorporated either into the project design or as a mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review develop- ment applications for consistency with this measure. A Cost Effectiveness: High Staff -time costs of measure EC -1 are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinances. Requirements for ENERGY STAR appliances and fixtures are expected to potentially add an estimated $1,280 to the base cost of outfitting a typical home with conven- tional appliances and fixtures. t9 However, over the lifetime of these items, the total value of energy savings would be expected to more than repay addi- tional purchase costs.20 Though the measurable projected GHG reductions are minimal, as reported in Chapter 5, given its low costs to the Town and overall net savings, this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective. 19 Each house is assumed to have the following appliances, with the attendant extra costs from ENERGY STAR compliance: AC unit, $556; washer /dryer, $258; refrigerator, $30; dishwasher, $12; ten indoor light fixtures, $32 each; two outdoor light fixtures, $17 each; and 25 total lightbulbs, $2,80 apiece. This results in a total added cost of $1280 per house. All of these estimates are based on appliance cost esti- mates provided by the ENERGY STAR program (see following footnote). 20 EnergyStar Potential Savings Calculation Spreadsheets, 2009 -2011, http:// www. energystar. gov/ index. cfm? c= bulk_purchasing.bus_purchasing, accessed April 10 2012. 6 -31 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S LO S G A T O S S U S T A I N AB I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC-2 Promotion of EnerDl Conservation Measure EC -2 directs the Town to partner with PG &E and other appropriate energy providers to promote energy conservation. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties . To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with PG &E to pro- mote various existing PG &E programs that conserve energy, as well as to develop new PG &E programs. In addition, the Town will partner with the Silicon Valley Association of Realtors to encourage energy audits at the time of residential and commercial building sales, ii. Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Town costs from measure EC -2 are expected to be low and would stem pri- marily from material and staff -time costs to create promotional materials and conduct public outreach. Other costs from this measure could include mate- rials costs for light -bulb giveaways or torchiere exchange programs, which is anticipated to be funded through PG &E's incentive programs. Estimating such costs at present, however, would be speculative. The promotion of EN- ERGY STAR appliances for existing residential units, however, does have quantifiable costs and benefits (see footnote for measure EC -1). Given EN- ERGY STAR's anticipated energy cost savings and projected GHG reduc- tions, this particular provision of measure EC -2 would be highly cost - effective, Nevertheless, for most of the provisions under this measure, it is not readily possible to quantify costs or GHG reductions. Therefore the measure's overall cost - effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. iil, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -3 Energy - Efficient Outdoor Lighting Measure EC -3 requires that outdoor lighting fixtures be energy - efficient. 6 -32 T O W N OF LOS G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate the lighting efficiency requirements. New development will be subject to the requirements, which could be incorporated either into the pro- ject design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursu- ant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development and Parks and Public Works Departments will review lighting plans for consistency with this measure. fl. Cost Effectiveness., High Staff -time costs of measure EC -3 are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinances. Energy- efficient lighting often uses light- emitting diode (LED) technology, and costs for LED technology continue to fall precipitously; LED streetlights are now available at $200 per unit and life -cycle costs are now less than those of conventional lighting technology. 21,22 Despite offering low projected GHG reductions, as reported in Chapter 5, given its anticipated net cost savings, this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -4 Kill -A -Watt Electricity Usage Monitor Program Measure EC -4 directs the Town to continue the Kill -A -Watt Electricity Usage Monitor program, through which residents can check out a device from the library that can be plugged into household electronics to see how much elec- tricity they require. 21 Science Daily, March 8 2010, LED Streetlights Best Buy for Cities, Researchers Report, http : / /www.sciencedaily.com/ releases /2010/03/100308132136.htm, accessed April 19, 2012, 22 Linbaugh, Kate, April 9 2012, LED Streetlight's Price Cut in Half, Wall Street Journal. 6 -33 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITOP.ING i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will ensure long -term continuation of the existing Kill -A -Watt electricity Usage Monitor program. ii. Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Town costs from measure ECA are expected to be low and would stem from the cost of new or replacement meters, and from staff -time costs to administer the on -going program. It is anticipated that there would be no other costs from this measure. While this measure has very low costs, it is not possible to quantify resulting CHC emissions reduction. Therefore this measure's cost - effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. s 3 EC -5 Low - Income Weatherization Measure EC -5 directs the Town to seek funding to implement a low- income weatherization program. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town -will investigate funding opportunities for weatherization of properties owned by low - income residents. ii. Cost Effectiveness; High Town costs from measure EC -5 are expected to be low and would stem from staff -time costs to seek relevant funding. Assuming the Town identifies and obtains full weatherization program funding, it is anticipated that staff -time would be the only source of net costs for the Town from this measure. While this measure has very low anticipated costs, it is not possible to quantify re- sulting CHC emissions reduction. Therefore the measure's cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted, however, that federally administered weatherization programs typically apply treatments which pro- 6 -34 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING vide savings commensurate with their costS.23 If any local weatherization program pursuant to this measure were to follow similar guidelines, such a program could in itself be highly cost - effective, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -6 Quality Insulation Installation Measure EC -6 directs the Town to provide links to and /or contact infor- mation on the Town's website for education and outreach by outside organi- zations that promote quality insulation installation (QII), which eliminates gaps in buildings. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will provide links and /or contact in- formation on the Town's website as directed above. fl. Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Town costs from measure EC -6 are expected to be very low and would stem from staff -time costs to update the website. It is anticipated that there would be no other costs from this measure. While this measure has very low antici- pated costs, it is not possible to quantify the resulting GHG emissions reduc- tion, in part because the measure contains no requirements Or regulations. Therefore, the measure's cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted, however, that energy savings from improved insulation could render such installations highly cost - effective in and of themselves. ili, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 23 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, National Retrospective Evaluation of the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), http : / /weatherization.ornl.gov/ evaluation_nr.shtml, accessed on Apr 25, 2012. 6 -35 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MiONITOKING EC -7 Eneicy Audit Funding Sources Measure EC -7 directs the Town to compile a list of funding sources that local residents, businesses, or the Town could potentially access to fund energy audits to inform homeowners and businesses of opportunities to improve the energy efficiency of their homes and buildings, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will research and compile a list of po- tential funding sources for energy audits and energy efficiency upgrades for homes and businesses. The Town will also conduct outreach to make this information available to homes and businesses. A Cost Effectiveness: Unknown Town costs from measure EC -7 are expected to be low and would stem from staff -time costs to compile relevant information and distribute it to home- J owners and businesses, It is anticipated that there would be no other costs from this measure. While this measure has very low anticipated costs, it is not possible to quantify resulting GHG emissions reductions, Therefore the measure's cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined, iil. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -8 CaliforniaFIRST Program Measure EC -8 directs the Town to continue participation in the Californi- aFIRST program, which provides innovative, low - interest financing for ener- gy efficiency projects for existing and new development, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue to participate in the Cal - iforniaFIRST program, ii. Cost Effectiveness; Unknown Town costs from measure EC -8 are expected to be low and would stem from staff -time costs to administer the on -going program. It is anticipated that E -3o i l TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION A N D M O N I T O R I N G there would be no other costs from this measure. While this measure has very low anticipated costs, the GHG emissions reductions are unknown, Therefore the measure's cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted, however, that other jurisdictions have deemed participa- tion in CaliforniaFirst to be a locally cost - effective means of promoting ener- gy savings.Z4 iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -9 Heatlsland Mitigation Plan Measure EC -9 directs the Town to develop a "heat island" mitigation plan that requires cool roofs, cool pavements, and strategically placed shade trees. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop the heat island mitigation plan, and amend the Municipal Code and Design Guidelines to integrate the heat island mitigation requirements. New development will be subject to the heat island requirements, which could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. ii, Cost Effectiveness: High Measure EC -9 would be expected result in high staff -time costs for the devel- opment and adoption of the heat island mitigation plan as well as enabling ordinances for plan requirements. Costs for residents and businesses would stem from the materials, installation, and maintenance costs for cool roofs and pavements, as well as trees, The Environmental Energy Technologies Division at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has estimated that cool roofing cost premiums range from no additional cost to an additional $0.20 per square foot, depending on the slope and size of the roof area, as well 24 County of San Diego, December 8 2009, Board of Supervisors Agenda Item 30, 6 -37 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G as the type of cool roof installed. However, this group has also estimated that cost savings from cool roofs range from $0,16 to $0.77 per square foot and that cool roofs would be cost effective in the vast majority of California's climate zones, including that of Los Gatos.25 Cool roofing offers these cost savings through reductions in both building heat gain and urban heat island effects, thereby decreasing energy use; additional cost savings can be realized through longer roof lifetimes due to reduced heat - stress on materials. In its cool pavement documentation, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) notes that it is difficult to make cost comparisons between conventional and cool pavement options, but does provide estimated cost ranges. Inexpensive cool pavement options such as asphalt using light- colored aggregates can cost as little as $0,10 to $1.50 per square foot, while more du- rable or aesthetically pleasing options such as vegetated or un- vegetated pav- ing blocks may cost anywhere from $1.50 to $10.00 per square foot. Other E surfacing options such as microsurfacing or ultra -thin white- topping can cost anywhere between $0.35 and $6.50 per square foot. Despite these variations in its cost estimates, the EPA stresses that benefits of such pavement systems include lowered heat gain, decreased stormwater runoff and pollution, and in some cases longer pavement lifetimes; the long -term savings from these bene- fits can often outweigh -the added costs of nonconventional paving systerns.26 Additionally, recent studies have indicated that higher - reflectivity pavements could significantly offset global warming.Z' 25 Levinson, Ronnen, et al., December 2002, Inclusion of Cool Roofs in ATonresi- dential Title 94 Prescriptive Requirements, Heat Island Group - Environmental Energy Technologies Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA. " US EPA, Reducing Urban Heat Islands.' Compendium of Strategies Cool Pave- ments. 27 Akbari, Hashem, et al., 2012, The Long -Term Effect of Increasing the Albedo of Urban Areas, Environmental Research Letters. 6 -38 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING In regard to trees, studies have found that every dollar invested in urban trees can result in returns of $1.37 to $3.09,28 Additionally, urban tree planting has been found to reduce GHG emissions through cooling and shading effects .29 While this measure is not predicted to reduce GHG emissions beyond the reductions anticipated by Title 24 standards, its benefits could potentially be substantial. Although the local costs and savings of a comprehensive heat - island mitigation plan cannot be precisely estimated, the available evidence strongly indicates substantive long -term cost savings from these programs, Therefore, given its strong potential for cost savings and other benefits, this measure is deemed to be highly cost- effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -10 Heat Gain Reduction Measure EC -10 requires all new development and major rehabilitation pro- jects to incorporate strategies to reduce heat gain for 50 percent of the non - roof impervious site landscape. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New development and major rehabilitation projects will be subject to the requirement, which could. be incorporated ei- ther into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. 28 McPherson, Greg, et al., 2005, Municipal Forest Benefits and Costs. 29 McPherson, Greg, 2007. Urban Tree Planting and Greenhouse Gas Reduc- tions, Arborist News, 6 -39 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S LOS GATOS SUSTAINABILITY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING ii. Cost Effectiveness: Unknown The requirements of measure EC -10 would already be met through compli- ance with Title 24; therefore, measure EC -10 would itself impose no addition- al costs. The GHG reductions resulting from measure EC -10 are accounted for in estimated reductions from State Title 24 standards. Since neither its costs nor GHG reductions are individually estimated, this measure's individ- ual cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -I1 Programmable Thermostats Measure EC -11 directs the Town to encourage the installation of program- mable thermostats in existing residential and commercial buildings. t i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will conduct outreach to encourage the installation of programmable thermostats in existing buildings. In addi- tion, to comply with Title 24 requirements, the Town will require replace- ment of thermostats when approving permits requiring heating /cooling sys- tem renovation. fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Staff -time costs for measure EC -11 are expected to be low and would stern from promotional materials, public education efforts, or Town guidelines to promote installation of programmable thermostats. Since installation would be voluntary, no additional costs would be imposed. Programmable thermo- stats cost approximately $100 with installation costs generally between $50 and $100. Residents who choose to install programmable thermostats could, however, experience energy savings of about 10 percent per year.30 Tools available from the federal ENERGY STAR program estimate that for areas of 30 US. Department of Energy, Energy Savers webpage, http: / /www.eneruy savers.gov /your_ home / space_ heating cooling /index.cfm /mytopic= 12720, accessed on April 26 2012. • a 6 -40 { TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G central California, yearly savings could total $55.31 Since this measure is vol- untary, it is not feasible to precisely quantify resultant GHG emissions reduc- tions. Though individual emissions reductions for the measure cannot be quantified, this measure has the potential to result in net cost savings. There- fore, this measure is therefore deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -12 Energy Conservation through Design Outreach Measure EC -12 directs the Town to form a volunteer committee of local de- sign professionals to create a brochure to educate citizens on how to save en- ergy through design. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will spearhead the creation of a volun- teer committee to create the brochure. ii, Cost Effectiveness; Unknown Town costs from measure EC -12 are expected to be low and would stem from staff -time costs to convene and facilitate the resultant committee, as well as printing costs for the brochure. It is anticipated that there would be no other costs from this measure, The measure has very low costs, but it is not possi- ble to quantify resulting GHG emissions reductions. Therefore the measure's cost effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 31 ENERGY STAR Potential Savings Calculation Spreadsheets, 2009 -2011, http: / /www.energystar.gov/ index. cfm? c= bulk_purchasing.bus_purchasing, accessed April 10 2012. 6 -41 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G e. Water and Wastewater WWI Water Use and Efficiency Requirements Measure WW -1 requires all water use and efficiency measures identified as voluntary in the California Green Building Standards Code for all new devel- opment. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code.to incorporate these requirements, New development will be subject to these requirements, incorporating them either into the project design or as mitiga- tion in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addi- tion, the Community Development Department will review development project applications for consistency with this measure. ii. Cost Effectiveness: Unknown i Staff -time costs of measure WW -1 are expected to be moderate to high and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement enabling ordinanc- es. Costs to developers or homeowners will vary depending on what steps are taken to meet these requirements. These requirements also overlap consider- ably with the provisions of statewide water conservation initiatives, compli- cating any quantification of direct measure costs. As reported in Chapter 5, the GHG reductions from measure WW -1 are measurable, but quite modest; its direct costs cannot be precisely quantified; and its provisions overlap con- siderably with State requirements. Given these uncertainties, the cost - effectiveness of measure WW -1 cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as an im- portant component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. 141'W2a WaterEffciencyRetrofits Ordinance Measure WW -2a directs the Town to adopt a water efficiency retrofit ordi- nance that requires upgrades as a condition of issuing permits for renovations G -42 `' TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING or additions, and to work with local water purveyors to achieve consistent standards and review and approval procedures for implementation. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt a water effi- ciency retrofit ordinance. Applicants for permits for renovations or additions will be subject to this ordinance and incorporate its requirements either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review permit applications for consistency with this measure. ii. Cost Effectiveness: Unknown Staff -time costs of measure WW -2a are expected to be moderate to high and would stem from the need to coordinate with water purveyors, and draft, adopt, and implement enabling ordinances. Costs and savings for homeown- ers and businesses will vary depending on what requirements are established and what steps are taken to meet them. These requirements also overlap con- siderably with the provisions of statewide water conservation initiatives, complicating any quantification of direct measure costs or benefits. Although this measure contributes to modest CHC reductions, as reported in Chapter 5, its direct costs cannot be precisely quantified. Given these uncertainties, the cost - effectiveness of measure WW -2a cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted, however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as an important component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. WW-2b Water Conservation Pricing Measure WW -2b directs the Town to work with the San Jose Water Compa- ny (SJWC) and Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) to adopt water conservation pricing. 6 -43 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with SJWC and SCVWD to encourage them to adopt water pricing that promotes conserva- tion. fl. Cost Effectiveness; Unknown Staff -time costs of measure WW -2b are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to coordinate with water purveyors to achieve conserva- tion pricing goals. Costs and savings for homeowners will vary depending on what rate structures or other conservation methods are adopted, and what actions individual homeowners take. The effects of this measure also overlap considerably with those of statewide water conservation initiatives, compli- cating the quantification of direct costs or benefits. Although this measure contributes to modest CHC reductions, as reported in Chapter 5, its direct costs cannot be precisely quantified. Given these uncertainties, the cost - effectiveness of measure WW -2b cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted', however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as an im- portant component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. WW 3 Bay Friendly Landscaping Measure WW -3 requires new development to use native plants or other ap- propriate non- invasive plants that are drought- tolerant. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New development will be subject to the re- quirement, which could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review landscape plans for consistency with this measure. o -44 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S L I S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G fl. Cost Effectiveness.' High Staff -time costs of measure WW -3 are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinances. Other costs from this measure would stem from the additional expense of selecting and planting appropriate plants. Costs for water- efficient landscaping vary, with multiple estimates, including $3.50 to $10 per square foot, $1.37 to $1.93 per square foot, and $1,500 to $15,000 for an entire project. 32,33,34 Installation costs could be lower, however, for yards which substitute in native plants, but are otherwise conventional. Maintenance costs of xeriscaping vary and may be either higher or lower than those of conventional lawns, Studies of xeriscaping have indicated that simple payback times for conversion projects range from two to six years.35 Since this measure would only apply to new developments, costs would be lower than for retrofits, potentially improving payback times. However, since overall water savings from implementation of this measure cannot be reliably predicted, CHC emissions reductions from this measure cannot be precisely quantified. Nevertheless, since installation of low -water and drought - tolerant landscaping would lead to net cost savings, this measure is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. WW-4 Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance Update Measure WW -4 directs the Town to review and update the Town's Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance with improved conservation programs and 32 Wardell, Sean, February 6 2012. Xeriscape business blooming, Killeen Daily Herald. 33 Caldwell, Elizabeth, July 17 2007. WithXeriscaping, Grass Needn't Always Be Greener, USAToday. 34 Southern Nevada Water Authority, 2005. Xeriscape Conversion Study Final Report. 35 Southern Nevada Water Authority, 2005. Xeriscape Conversion Study Final Report. 6 -45 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G incentives for non - residential customers that are consistent with the Tier 1 water conservation standards of Title 24. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will periodically review the existing Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, and update it to include improved con- servation programs and incentives to maintain consistency with State man- dates. New development will be• subject to the updated landscape require- ments and incentives, ii, Cost Effectiveness.' Unknown Staff -time costs of measure WW -4 are expected to be low to moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement ordinance updates. Other costs from this measure will depend on what programs and incentives are developed and how they are implemented. (See cost analysis of WW -3 for discussion of costs and savings of water efficient landscapes,) While overall costs of this measure are anticipated to be low, it would not reduce GHG emissions beyond State requirements. Given the uncertainty regarding both measure costs and resulting GHG reductions, the cost effectiveness of this measure cannot reasonably be determined. It should be noted however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as a potentially necessary individ- ual component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. WW-5 Water Audit Programs Measure WW -5 directs the Town customers to promote water audit programs that offer free water audits to single - family, multi- family, large landscape ac- counts, and commercial customers, in collaboration with efforts by SJWC and SCVWD, It also directs the Town to collaborate with purveyors to enact conservation programs and create programs to install ultra - low -flush toilets in facilities. 6 -46 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S LI S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will conduct outreach to promote water audit and other programs of SJWC and SCVWD. The Town will also collaborate with these agencies to create new water conservation programs. A Cost Effectiveness: Unknown Staff -time costs of measure WW -5 are expected to be low to moderate and would stem from material and staff -time costs to promote water audit pro- grams and work with water purveyors. Costs and savings for homeowners and businesses will vary depending on the results of individual audits and what actions are subsequently taken. The effects of this measure also overlap considerably with those of statewide water conservation initiatives, compli- cating any quantification of direct costs or benefits. GHG emissions reduc- tions from this measure have already been accounted for by measure WW -2. Since it is not practical to quantify the costs, benefits, or GHG reductions resulting directly from this measure, its specific cost - effectiveness cannot rea- sonably be determined. It should be noted, however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as an important component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. WW -6 Rainwater Collection Policy Measure WW -6 directs the Town to adopt a residential rainwater collection policy and update the Zoning Code as needed to support permitting and regu- lation of residential rainwater systems. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop the rainwater collection policy and amend the Municipal Code to incorporate it. Existing and new residential development may develop a rainwater collection system through this new permit procedure. 6 -47 'TOWN OF LOS GATOS L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G ii. Cost Effectiveness: Unknown Staff -time costs of measure WW -6 are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement enabling ordinances and zoning code updates, Costs and savings for home and business owners would depend on program participation and Town requirements. Any effects of this measure would overlap considerably with those of statewide water conserva- tion initiatives, complicating any quantification of direct costs or benefits. Since it is not practical to quantify the costs, benefits, or GHG reductions resulting directly from this measure, its specific cost - effectiveness cannot rea- sonably be determined, It should be noted, however, that the content of this measure may be viewed as an important component of a broader strategy for water -use reduction, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. f, Solid Waste As reported in Chapter 5, the solid waste measures included in this section will support the Town's waste reduction and diversion programs that are re- quired by State law, but will not further reduce GHG emissions from solid waste generated in Los Gatos beyond what was estimated in the adjusted fore- cast, Since these measures will not reduce GHG emissions beyond what is already required by State law, it is generally not practical to provide estimates of cost - effectiveness for those measures. Some solid waste measures, however, present clear -cut cost saving opportunities, and it is possible to automatically classify such measures as highly cost- effective, irrespective of resulting GHG reductions. All solid waste measures with cost savings potential and therefore high cost - effectiveness are analyzed below. For all other solid waste measures, the cost - effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined; however, the content of these measures may be viewed as an important component of a broader strategy for waste reduction. 6 -48 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G SW -1 Construction Waste Diversion Measure SW -1 directs the Town to revise the existing construction and demo- lition ordinance to require at least 50 percent diversion of non - hazardous con- struction waste from disposal. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will revise the existing construction and demolition ordinance to include this requirement. Construction and demolition activities in Los Gatos will be subject to this requirement, and Town staff will review construction and demolition permit applications to ensure compliance with this measure, fl. Cost Effectiveness: High Staff -time costs of measure SW -1 are expected to be moderate and would stem from the need to draft, adopt, and implement enabling ordinances for the measure's requirements. Construction costs or savings from this measure would depend, in large part, upon the specific circumstances and characteris- tics of any particular project. Despite this variability, CalRecycle offers gen- eralized estimates for the cost of recycling various construction materials. Additionally, Build It Green estimates that recycling or reuse of demolition and construction wastes can save between $0,10 and $1.00 per square foot.36 Because measure SW -1 is anticipated to result in net savings in itself, it is deemed to be highly cost- effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. SW 2 Recycling Areas in Multi - Family Developments Measure SW -2 requires all new and significant redevelopments and remodels of existing multi - family developments to provide recycling areas for their residents within existing trash areas. 36 Built It Green, 2006, Construction & Demolition Waste Diversion, http: / /www, builditgreen. org/ attachments /wysiN�yg /3 /CD- Waste - Diversion, pdf, accessed Apr 12, 2012. 6 -49 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will amend the Municipal Code to incorporate this requirement. New and significant redevelopments will be subject to the requirement, which could be incorporated either into the pro- ject design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursu- ant to CEQA. In addition, the Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. A Cost Effectiveness: High Staff -time costs of measure SW -2 are expected to be moderate and would stern from the need to draft, adopt, and implement enabling ordinances for the measure's requirements. Other costs for this measure could arise from the need for increased space, management, or number of receptacles to accom- modate recycling. These costs, however, are anticipated to be very low rela- tive to overall construction or remodeling costs, Because this measure is an- ticipated to result in very low costs and would support the Town's waste di- version goals, it is deemed to be highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. SW -3 Salvaged, Recycled- Content, and Local Construction Materials Measure SW -3 encourages the use of salvaged and recycled- content materials and other materials that have low production energy costs for building mate- rials, hard surfaces, and non -plant landscaping, and requires sourcing of con- struction materials locally, as feasible, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop informational materials and outreach to encourage the use of salvaged and recycled materials, and will amend the Municipal Code to require the sourcing of construction materials locally as feasible, Construction projects will be subject to the requirement, which could be incorporated either into the project design or as mitigation in the applicable environmental document pursuant to CEQA. In addition, the 6 -50 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND 'MONITORING Community Development Department will review development applications for consistency with this measure. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. SW -4 Food and Green Waste Measure SW -4 directs the Town to work with public and private waste dis- posal entities to keep food and green waste out of landfills. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with its waste disposal company to encourage acceptance of food and green waste for curbside pick- up. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. SW -5 Recycling and Composting Incentives Measure SW -5 directs the Town to work with public and private waste dis- posal entities to incentivize recycling and composting. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with its waste disposal company to develop incentive programs for recycling and composting. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. SW -6 Downtown Recycling Containers Measure SW -6 directs the Town to continue to provide recycling containers in the Downtown area. 6 -51 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IM ?! - 110ENTA ION AN D MONITORING 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will replace recycling containers in the Downtown, as needed, and install new containers as appropriate. fl, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, SW -7 Waste Reduction Outreach Measure SW -7 directs the Town to expand educational programs to inform residents about reuse, recycling, composting, waste to energy, and zero waste programs. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will expand educational and outreach programs about waste reduction, h Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, SW-8 Plastic Bag Ordinance Measure SW -8 directs the Town to adopt an ordinance to ban the use of plas- tic bags in Los Gatos. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt an ordinance to ban the use of plastic bags in Los Gatos. Retail stores will be subject to this ordinance, and the Community Development Department will review use permit applications to ensure compliance with this measure. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. SW-9 Purchasing of Recycled Materials Measure SW -9 directs the Town to develop policies, incentives, and design guidelines that encourage the public and private purchase and use of durable l 6 -52 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING and nondurable items, including building materials, made from recycled ma- terials or renewable resources. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop policies, incentives, and guidelines to encourage the purchase of items made from recycled or renewa- ble resources. ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. SW -10 Additional Waste Diversion Measure SW -10 directs the Town to aim to achieve the 75 percent waste di- version goal established by AB 341. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop policies and incentives to encourage the additional waste diversion, ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, g. Open Space As noted in Chapter 5, the open space measures would not result in measure - able reductions in GHG emissions in Los Gatos. Since projected GHG emis- sions reductions from individual open space measures are not available, it is generally not practical to provide estimates of cost- effectiveness for those measures. Some open space measures, however, present clear -cut cost saving opportunities, and it is possible to automatically classify such measures as highly cost - effective, irrespective of resulting GHG reductions. All open space measures with cost savings potential and therefore high cost - effectiveness are analyzed below. For all other open space measures, the cost - effectiveness cannot reasonably be determined. 6 -53 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G OS -1 Community Garden and Urban Farm Sites Inventory Measure OS -1 directs the Town to identify and inventory potential commu- nity garden and urban farm sites, and develop a program to establish commu- nity gardens in appropriate locations. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will conduct an inventory of potential community garden sites and develop the associated community garden pro- grams, ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, 05-2 Garden Areas in New Development Measure OS -2 encourages significant new residential developments over 50 units to include space that can be used to grow food, I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop informational materials and conduct outreach during the project review process to encourage devel- opment applicants to include garden areas in large residential projects, ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. OS -3 Community Garden Process Measure OS -3 directs the Town to establish a process through which a neigh- borhood can propose and adopt a site as a community garden. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop a process for the estab- lishment of new community garden sites. Neighborhoods could take ad- vantage of this new program to create new community garden sites, if inter- ested. 6 -54 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. 05-4 Los GatosFarmers'Market Measure OS -4 directs the Town to continue to support the Los Gatos Farm- ers' Market as a source for locally -grown food. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue to support the Farmers' Market through outreach and institutional support. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. OS-5 Public Food Benefits at the Farmers'Market Measure OS -5 encourages the Los Gatos farmers' market to accept food stamps and other public food benefits. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with the organizers of the Los Gatos' Farmers Market to encourage acceptance of public food bene- fits. ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. 05-6 Wildland Fire Prevention Measure OS -6 directs the Town to continue to actively pursue wildland fire prevention in forested areas of Los Gatos to avoid loss of carbon sequestra- tion. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue its wildland fire preven- tion efforts in forested areas, including outreach to residents of these areas about wildland fire prevention. 6 -55 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L _ M F NT A i I O N A N D M O N I O R I N G fl, Cost Effectiveness: Hjgh Costs to the Town from measure OS -6 are expected to be low to moderate and would stem from materials and staff -time to conduct public Outreach and education regarding wildfire prevention strategies, Sources of additional di- rect and indirect costs to residents could include, but are not limited to, fire- resistant building materials, defensive landscaping, and burn restrictions. Such costs would vary depending on what preventive actions are required or voluntarily taken, and cannot be precisely predicted.. However, the Town and residents alike could potentially realize substantial savings through avert- ed loss of life and property and reduced fire- fighting costs. While it is not possible to precisely project such savings, fire prevention education efforts alone have been shown to provide marginal benefits at anywhere from 10 to 95 times their cost. 31 While wildfires make significant contributions to GHG emissions,38 it is infeasible to precisely model impacts to GHG emissions from this measure. GHG emissions from wildfires vary widely, and it is un- realistic to speculate how many wildfires in the Los Gatos area may be pre- vented or made less severe by implementation of this measure. Though it is not practical to precisely quantify the costs, savings, or GHG reductions re- sulting directly from this measure, wildfire prevention has been shown to be in itself highly cost - effective. Therefore, this measure is deemed to be a high- ly cost - effective GHG reduction strategy, iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. h, Community Action As noted in Chapter 5, the community action measures would not result in measureable reductions in GHG emissions in Los Gatos. Since projected GHG emissions reductions from individual community action measures are 3' Presterrion, Jeff P„ et al., 2010. Net Benefits of Wildfire Prevention Education Efforts, Forest Science 56(2). 38 Bonnicksen, T„ Ph, D., 2008. Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Four California Wildfires: Opportunities To Prevent and Reverse Environmental And Climate Impacts, Forest Carbon and Emissions Model. 6 -56 TOWN O F L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N AB IL I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N AN D M O N I T O R I N G not available, it is not practical to provide estimates of cost - effectiveness for those measures. CA -1 Local Business Participation Measure CA -1 directs the Town to develop and implement an outreach plan to engage local businesses in GHG emissions reduction programs. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and implement an out- reach plan for local businesses. Local businesses could engage in GHG emis- sion reductions programs on a volunteer basis. A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. CA -2 Sustainabilitylnformation Center Measure CA -2 directs the Town to establish and maintain a "sustainability information center" at the Town Hall or Library to inform the public and distribute available brochures, and provide information on sustainability on the Town's website. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop outreach materials, estab- lish and maintain the sustainability information center, and regularly update the Town's website with sustainability information. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. CA -3 Los Gatos: Growing Greener Together Campaign Measure CA -3 directs the Town to continue and expand the Los Gatos: Growing Greener Together Campaign. 6 -57 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T .4 I O N AN D M O N I T O R I N G I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue this existing program, and expand it to provide information at public venues, such as the farmers' market, A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. CA -4 Support for Local Businesses Measure CA -4 directs the Town to continue economic vitality programs aimed at supporting local business by encouraging residents to shop locally. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue existing economic vitali- ty programs, such as the "Second Saturday" campaign, 4 ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. CA -5 Supportfor Voluntary Programs Measure CA -5 directs the Town to support voluntary programs to improve sustainability in Los Gatos. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will offer support, such as providing information on the Town's website and conducting other outreach, to volun- tary programs that improve sustainability. A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. 2. Municipal Measures As noted in Chapters 2 and 5, municipal operations represent a very small fraction of total GHG emissions in Los Gatos, In part for this reason, the GHG reduction measures for Town operations have not been individually MS. TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AND MONITORING modeled. Some municipal GHG reduction measures will, however, serve to reduce emissions from Town operations. Since projected GHG emissions reductions from individual municipal operations measures are not available, it is generally not practical to provide estimates of cost - effectiveness for those measures. Some municipal operations measures, however, present clear -cut cost saving opportunities for the Town. It is possible to automatically classify such measures as highly cost - effective, irrespective of resulting GHG reduc- tions, All municipal measures with cost savings "potential" and therefore high cost effectiveness include "cost effectiveness analysis below." For all other municipal operations measures without an analysis, the cost - effectiveness could not reasonably be determined. a. Transportation and Land Use TR -1 Reduced Emissions from Employee Commute Measure TR -1 directs the Town to implement programs and provide incen- tives to encourage reduced emissions from employee commutes, including telecommuting, alternative work schedules, carpooling /vanpooling, and ac- tive transportation. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop programs and incentives to reduce commutes from Town employees, ii. Cost Effectiveness.- High The Town could realize savings through reduced employee parking and transportation costs, A 2001 study found that commuter trip reduction pro- grams had an average gross cost of $156 per employee per year; however, the majority of businesses spent less, at a range of $33 to $809 per employee per year 39,40 Adjusted for inflation, the average annual per - employee cost of a trip reduction program would be $202. Though this cost may seem high, commuter trip reduction programs have frequently resulted in substantial 39 Pollution Probe, 2001, North American Workplace -based Trip Reduction Pro- grammes. 90 Costs in 2001 dollars, 6 -59 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEIVI °_ NTA T ION AND MONITORING 1 overall cost savings for both employers and workers. 91 Direct cost - savings come mainly from the reduced need for parking or parking subsidies. Addi- tionally, telecommuting has enabled some companies to reduce their need for office space. Indirect savings have been realized through improved worker productivity, morale, and health. For employees, savings arise primarily from reduced needs for vehicle maintenance and fuel. Indirect municipal and community benefits are realized through decreased congestion, air pollution, and infrastructure costs. Commuter trip reduction programs typically recoup their costs and have a substantial potential to reduce VMT when coupled with other strategies. Additional staff costs to implement this measure for the Town are anticipated to be very low. Given low costs and substantial poten- tial savings for the Town, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, TR -2 Support for Bicycle Commuting Measure TR -2 directs the Town to provide bicycle lockers and showers at Town offices, as well as offer education about bicycle commuting. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will purchase and place bicycle lockers and construct shower facilities for bicycle commuters at Town offices. The Town will also conduct education and outreach to Town employees about bicycle commuting. ii• Implementation Schedule 'The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, TR -3 Bicycles for Use by Town Employees Measure TR -3 directs the Town to provide bicycles for short trips by Town employees. 41 Pollution. Probe, 2001. Norrb American Workplace -based Trip Reduction Pro- grammes, 6 -60 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G 1, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will purchase and maintain bicycles for use by Town employees, and establish a program and policies for bicycle use. ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. TR -4 Incentives for Low- Emission Vehicles Measure TR -4 directs the Town to provide preferential parking for low - emissions vehicles at Town offices. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will restripe and provide signage for parking lots at Town offices to provide preferential parking for low- emissions vehicles. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -5 Idling in Town Vehicles Measure TR -5 directs the Town to adopt a policy to limit idling in Town vehicles consistent with public safety standards, i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt a policy to limit idling in Town vehicles. Town employees will be subject to this new policy. ii. Cost Effectiveness; High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be very low and would stem from the need to draft and implement the appropriate operating policies. Since the Town could experience substantial cost savings through reduced fuel use, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. 6 -61 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMP:EMENTA T IC N AND MONITOP.ING iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. TR -6 Efficiency in Town Fleet Vehicles Measure TR -6 directs the Town to regularly maintain Town fleet vehicles to maximize efficiency (e.g. tire pressure). I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish policies as needed to ensure maximum vehicle efficiency through proper maintenance. fl, Cost Effectiveness; High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be very low and would stem from the need to draft and implement the appropriate operating policies. Similar to measure TR -5, measure TR -6 could result in lower fuel costs for the Town, as well as lower life -time maintenance costs for Town vehicles, Given these potential substantial cost savings, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, b. Green Building GB -1 LEED Certification in Municipal Buildings Measure GB -1 encourages all new municipal buildings and facilities to meet at least LEED Gold certification standards. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will consider the feasibility of pursu- ing LEED Gold certification when planning new municipal buildings and facilities, and pursue this certification as appropriate, ii. Cost Effectiveness.' High Staff -time costs to potentially draft and adopt implementing language for this measure would be very low. Building to LEED standards has generally been 6 -62 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION A N D M O N I T O R I N G shown to add $3 to $5 per square foot to building costs. For LEED Gold certification specifically, overall building costs are on average 1.96 percent higher than for a similar, conventional building. It has been found, however, that these costs are far outweighed by quantifiable financial benefits accrued over the lifetime of a LEED- certified building. For energy use alone, the av- erage 20 -year net present value of a LEED building is $5.79 per square foot, which is greater than the increase in per - square -foot cost.92 Even greater cost savings would likely accumulate over the anticipated lifetime of a LEED building, which extends well beyond 20 years, In addition to the more pre- cisely estimable savings from reductions in waste, energy needs, and water use, worker productivity and health gains add to the cost savings associated with LEED buildings. Given its overall net cost savings this measure is deemed highly cost-effective .43 iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. GB-2 Rebates and Incentives for Energy Efficiency Measure GB -2 directs the Town to utilize all. available rebates and incentives for energy efficiency and distributed generation installations I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will research and pursue rebate and incentive programs, such as State public good programs, ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. Energy- related 20 -year net present value (NPV) refers to the overall value of energy savings over 20 years of building life, accounting for inflation and interest rates. Positive NPVs indicate investments that have positive returns and are thus worth making. 43 Kats, Greg, 2003, Report: The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings 6 -63 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G GB -3 Green Building Training Measure GB -3 directs the Town to train all plan review and building inspec- tion staff in green building materials, techniques, and practices. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will either provide training for its plan review and building inspection staff or send such staff to training programs held by outside agencies, ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. c. Renewable Energy and Low Carbon Fuels RE I Solar Energyfor Town Facilities Measure RE -1 directs the Town to conduct a solar feasibility study and install i solar panels on appropriate Town facilities. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will conduct the solar feasibility study, and based on the results of that study, install solar panels on appropriate Town facilities, ii. Cost Effectiveness; High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be moderate and would stem from the need to either undertake or commission a solar feasibility study. Should the Town opt to have such a study performed by a third party, this could represent an additional cost. However, by identifying optimal lo- cations, a feasibility study would serve to improve the cost effectiveness of solar installations. This would ensure that those solar panels which are in- stalled offer the greatest return on investment, thus offering long -run cost savings to the Town. Therefore, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective, (For a discussion of the cost - effectiveness of solar installations, see the cost analysis for communitywide measure RE -3,) 6 -64 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G ili. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE-2 Solar Water Heating at Town Facilities Measure RE -2 directs the Town to install tankless and /or solar water heating at appropriate Town facilities. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will install tankless and /or solar water heating at appropriate facilities, fl. Cost Effectiveness.' High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be low and would stem from the need to initiate the installation of tankless or solar water heating systems, According to evaluations conducted by consumer reports, tankless water heaters usually do not represent a cost - effective alternative to storage water heaters.94 However, solar water heaters offer greater potential for cost- effectiveness. 41 Costs for solar water heating systems in an institutional set- ting vary greatly depending upon the size of the building served and antici- pated demands on the system. For reference, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that costs for domestic solar water heating systems range between approximately $2,200 and $5,850. Despite the high initial cost, solar water heaters in institutional settings have been demonstrated to result in long -term cost savings. 46 Given potential long -run cost savings to the Town, this measure is deemed highly cost- effective. 44 Consumer Reports, 2008,. Tankless water heaters.' They re efficient but not nec- essarily economical, http : / /www.consumerreports.org /cro /appliances /heating- cooling- and- air / water - heaters /tankless- water - heaters /overview / tankless- water- heaters -ov. htm, accessed on April 18 2012. 45 EnergyStar, Save Money and More with ENERCYSTAR Qualified Solar Water Heaters, http: / /www.energystar -gov/ index .cfm ?c= solar_Wheat.pr_savings_ benefits, accessed on May 1 2012. 46 Federal Energy Management Program, 2004, Heating Water with Solar Ener- gy Costs Less at the Phoenix Federal Correctional Institution. 6 -65 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L = M E N T A T i O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G f ili, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase, RE -3 Town Fleet Conversion Measure RE -3 directs the Town to convert the Town's vehicle fleet to hybrid, compressed natural gas, biodiesel, electric, hydrogen fuel cells, or ethanol, where technologically feasible and consistent with public safety standards. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish a policy directing all departments to replace vehicles in the Town fleet with vehicles that use these fuel types as appropriate, fl. Implementation Schedule The Toren will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. RE -4 Fuel Conservation Program Measure RE -4 directs the Town to establish a fuel conservation program for the Town vehicle fleet and require Gas Cap driver training for all employees who use fleet vehicles. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop the fuel conservation program. In addition, to promote fuel efficiency, the Town will develop a training program for all employees who use fleet vehicles, fl. Cost Effectiveness, High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be low and would stem from the need to draft and implement the appropriate operating policies, as well as train Town employees. Similar to transportation measures TR -5 and TR -6, measure RE -4 could result in lower fuel costs for the Town. Given these potential substantial cost savings, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. 6 -66 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N AN D M O N I T O R I N G iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. d. Energy Conservation Since the energy conservation measures would all serve to reduce energy use related to municipal operations, they all have the potential to be highly cost effective. However, without precise estimates of measure costs or, more im- portantly, energy savings, it is not feasible to conclusively establish the cost- effectiveness of these measures, Nevertheless, given the level of cost effec- tiveness generally demonstrated by most energy conservation measures, it is predicted that implementation of all of the energy conservation measures would be highly cost effective. EC -1 EnergyAuditof Town Facilities Measure EC -1 directs the Town to conduct, with assistance from PG &E, a thorough energy audit of all Town facilities to identify cost- effective oppor- tunities for conservation. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will coordinate with PG &E to con- duct energy audits of Town facilities. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -2 Reflective Roofing on Town Facilities Measure EC -2 directs the Town to install reflective roofing on Town facili- ties. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will install reflective roofing on Town facilities. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 201 -2020 phase. 6 -67 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G EC -3 Ener Bl Efficiency Standards for Town Facilities Measure EC -3 directs the Town to establish energy efficiency standards for Town facilities and provide employees with guidelines, instructions, and re- quirements for efficient use of facilities. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties TO implement this measure, the Town will develop and adopt energy effi- ciency standards for Town facilities and educate Town staff on efficient use of facilities. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -4 Peak Electricity Demand Reduction Measure EC -4 directs the Town to participate in peak electricity demand re- duction programs and undertake peak demand reduction measures at Town facilities. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will reduce electricity demands in peak periods and participate in peak electricity demand reduction programs. A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -5 Energy- Efficient Appliances and Office Equipment Measure EC -5 directs the Town to replace outdated electronic appliances and office equipment with energy- efficient models, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish a policy to replace appli- ances and equipment with energy- efficient models when existing equipment becomes outdated and requires replacement. 6 -68 TOWN OF LOS GATOS LO S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLEMENTATION AN D MON ITORI NG A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. EC -6 Street and Traffic Light Retrofits Measure EC -6 directs the Town to continue to retrofit street lights and traffic lights to light- emitting diodes (LED). 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue to retrofit street and traffic lights. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. e. Water and Wastewater WWI Water - Conserving Fixtures in Town Facilities Measure WW -1 directs the Town to install water - conserving fixtures in all Town facilities. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will install water- conserving fixtures in Town facilities. ii, Cost Effectiveness; High Staff -time costs for this measure are anticipated to be low and would stem from the need to initiate and manage the installation of water- efficient fix- tures. In other institutional settings, water - conserving fixtures have been shown to result in substantial cost savings which can offer simple payback times of as little as 2.12 years —as in the case of the Portland, Oregon Veter- ans' Affairs Medical Center. While overall Town operations in Los Gatos can generally be expected to have lower water use than a typical medical facility, the success of the Portland conservation program nonetheless indicates a strong potential for long -term savings for the Town. Therefore, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective, .ff TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N IMPLtMENT4TION AND MONITORING iii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. WW2 Landscaping at Town Facilities Measure W "1 -2 directs the Town to use drought- tolerant native landscaping at Town facilities, i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish a policy to use drought - tolerant native landscaping at Town facilities. it Cost Effectiveness: High As with communitywide standards for drought tolerant landscaping or xeri- scaping, the Town could potentially experience significant savings from land - scaping that is less water intense. Given that such landscaping has strong po- tential to result in Iona-term cost savings for the Town, this measure is deemed highly cost - effective. iii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. WW 3 Irrigation for Town Landscaping Measure MN -3 directs the Town to use recycled water or graywater for Town landscaping, including parks and medians, where appropriate. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will install necessary infrastructure and use recycled water or graywater for Town landscaping where appropri- ate. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. 1 6 -70 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G f. Solid Waste SW -1 Recycling Coordinators Measure SW -1 directs the Town to train an existing staff member from each Town department to be a recycling coordinator for their department. 1. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will train a staff member from each department to be a recycling coordinator. A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. SW -2 Reuse and Recycled Content Materials Measure SW -2 requires all Town departments and facilities to reuse office supplies, furniture, and computers before buying new materials. When buy- ing new materials, products must be made with high levels of post- consumer recycled content and have limited packaging. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will establish a reuse and purchasing policy regarding recycled content and packaging. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. g. Open Space OS -1 Tree Planting on Municipal Property Measure OS -1 directs the Town to develop program for maximizing carbon sequestration on municipal property through tree planting. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop a tree planting program. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. 6 -71 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N AN D M O N I T O R I N G h, Purchasing P -1 Local Hiring Measure P -1 directs the Town to develop program to require or encourage the Town to hire locally for its contracts and services. i. Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop a local hiring program for contracts and services. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. P -Z Sustainability Criteria in Proposal Selection Process Measure P -2 directs the Town to request that proposals or applications in- clude information about the sustainability practices of the organization, and ' use such information as a partial basis for proposal evaluations. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will develop a proposal and applica- tion requirement to include information about the sustainability practices of the organization, and will incorporate such information into the evaluation criteria. ii, Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. P -3 Life -Cycle Costing Approach in Purchasing Measure P -3 directs the Town to incorporate a "life -cycle costing" approach into Town purchasing considerations that takes into account long -term cost savings from energy- efficient products, I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will incorporate a life -cycle costing approach into purchasing policies, 6 -72 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G A Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. L Community Action CA -1 Green Business Program Measure CA -1 directs the Town to continue to operate a townwide green business program. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will continue to operate the green business program. fl. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2012 -2015 phase. CA -2 Sustainability Coordinator Measure CA -2 directs the Town to train an existing staff member to be a sus - tainability coordinator for the Town. I Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will identify and train the staff mem- ber to be a sustainability coordinator. ii. Implementation Schedule The Town will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase. CA -3 Incentives for Sustainable Business Practices Measure CA -3 directs the Town to reward local businesses that hire local res- idents and allow telecommuting by, for example, recognition on the Town website or in Town newsletters, or preference in Town purchasing. i, Action Items and Responsible Parties To implement this measure, the Town will identify local businesses that meet the measure's criteria, and develop a reward system, 6 -73 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L_- M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G ii. Implementation Schedule The Toren will begin implementing this measure during the 2015 -2020 phase, B. Implementation Funding One of the main barriers to seeing through an implementation plan is lack of available funds. There are multiple grant and loan programs through State, federal, and regional sources to combat the effects of GHGs. With the estab- lishment of this Sustainability Plan, Los Gatos is in a position to apply for funding to implement the supporting measures in a timely fashion. Funding sources may include the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), as a well as State and federal agencies with similar programs. One federal funding source is the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). As part of this program the Department of Energy admin- istered Energy Efficiency Conservation Block Grants, and in September 2010, Los Gatos received a $162,712 allocation for a project to install energy - efficient lighting in municipal parking lots and parks. In January 2012, the Town Council authorized an. application for Phase 2 funding from this pro- gram, which would enable the Town to recapture unused program funds for street light conversion projects. While another federal stimulus package is not anticipated in the near future, the Department of Energy or another fed- eral department may continue to occasionally offer funding or grants for sim- ilar projects. Other federal funding may be available through the EPA, which offers a wide selection of grants at varying time intervals. Some grants which Los Gatos could potentially seek during their respective application periods include: 0 Non - Construction Market -based Approaches to Reducing GHG Emis- sions through Energy Efficiency in Homes & Buildings grants, 4 Community Action for a Renewed Environment (CARE) grants. 6 -74 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M O N I T O R I N G ® Solid Waste Assistance grants. t, Source Reduction Assistance grants. California State departments, such as CalRecycle and the California Energy Commission, have at times offered grants or other funding for climate or sus - tainability programs. Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 1754, the California Alter- native Energy and Advanced Transportation Financing Authority offers pro- grams that, among other things, support distributed generation of renewable energy, as well as energy or water efficiency improvements. Additionally, California's implementation of GHG Cap and Trade programs could offer new sources of funding, While it remains uncertain how program revenues would be allocated, some proposals, such as that to create a GHG Reduction Account, could lead to funding availability for local governments. Also at the State level, Assembly Bill (AB) 2466 mandates that local governments be paid for the excess renewable energy they generate, offering another potential rev- enue stream. Beyond the grants and programs offered by the State, there are also a variety of local or regional agencies and programs that have the potential to offer additional funding or support. As part of its regional planning efforts, MTC provides multiple grant opportunities under its Climate Initiatives Program. There may also be opportunities to pursue funding through private charitable organizations, such as the Hewlett Foundation, which offers grants through its Bay Area Communities and Energy & Climate programs. With the funding from federal programs, current State legislation and pro- grams, and grant opportunities like those above, Los Gatos is likely to receive assistance in seeing through its climate action goals and measures. C, Plan Adaptation, Re- Inventory, and Monitoring This Sustainability Plan represents Los Gatos' communitywide response to the effects of GHGs as of the time of this documents preparation. The field 6 -75 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S L O S G A T O S S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y P L A N I M P L E M E N T A T I O N A N D M G N I- O R I N G of climate action planning is rapidly evolving. Over the next decade, new information about the effects and risks of GHGs is likely to emerge, new GHG reduction strategies and technologies will be developed, and State and federal legislation are likely to advance. Therefore, in order to remain rele- vant and to be as effective as possible, the Sustainability Plan must evolve over time, The Town will be responsible for continually monitoring the Town's pro- gress towards meeting the GHG emissions reduction target, The Sustainabil- ity Plan, as a whole, will be reviewed and modified every three years to evalu- ate implementation and achievement of measure reductions and to identify potential plan update needs. As part of the monitoring evaluation, the Town will re- inventory their GHG emissions. The process of conducting a re- inventory will allow the Town to t 1 monitor progress and report results toward local emissions reduction targets and identify opportunities to integrate new or improved measures into the emissions reduction plan. If forecast target reductions are not being met, the Department will determine which measures are not achieving the target and which measures are exceeding the target, As new technology comes online each year, the Department will consider improvements to climate science, explore new opportunities for GHG reduction and climate adaptation, and determine what innovations can be implemented to help reduce emissions to reach reduction targets. 6 -76 JULY 25, 2012 -i 4%+5��'c�t..... s " `n; > rt u:T ,lrsY� ey .. . � 5`3{r�?tilz' : ' rYd.rtd Y d "4 ,gYf?t� r +�?%fP g- � rt1: . TOWN " CATO` t 2020 GENERAL PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM EXHIBIT 4 Th is Page .Intentionally Left Blank i 6 JULY 25, 2012 TOWN OF L_� S G ATO S 2020 GENERAL PLAN FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT REPORT ADDENDUM THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS I Orange County o Northern California e Los Angeles/ Downtown o Los Angeles/West m Inland Empire • San Diego 1625 Shattuck Avenue, Sulte 300 1 Berkeley, Callfornla 94709 1 510 848 3815 1 510 848 4315 (f) www,planningcenter,com pl is Page Intentionally Lqft Blank TABLE OF CONTENT'S INTRODUCTION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 1 ANALYSIS,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, 9 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M TA3'_E OF CONTENTS ,t List of Figures Figure 1 -1 Regional Location Map, Town of Los Gatos 4 INTRODUCTION This chapter discusses the purpose and content of this report and describes the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan, as well as its municipal and legislative con- texts. A. Background In 2010, the Los Gatos Town Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 (General Plan), which guides all development within the Town. The Sustainability Plan and all of its provisions are entirely consistent with the vision, goals, and policies of the General Plan. The Sustainability Plan would offer new guidelines to make new and existing development in the Town more sustainable —all within the framework of the General Plan's poli- cies and the allowed levels and types of development on the adopted General Plan land use map. The Sustainability Plan includes measures to reduce vehi- cle miles traveled (VMT), decrease water use, increase energy efficiency, and promote alternative energy generation, among others. Completion of the Initial Study checklist in Chapter 2 of this document has led to the conclusion that the adoption and implementation of the Sustaina- bility Plan, which was anticipated and directly stipulated by the General Plan 2020, would not result in new potentially significant impacts beyond those already identified in the 2010 Certified EIR. Given this finding, an Adden- dum to the existing EIR has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15162, described below. B. Purpose The primary purpose of this report is to conduct an Initial Study of the pro- posed Sustainability Plan to determine whether an EIR Addendum or Sup- plemental EIR should be prepared. Chapter I presents an introduction and description of the Sustainability Plan and how it relates to the Los Gatos T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T I O N General Plan 2020. Chapter II presents a discussion of relevant CEQA stat- utes in Sections 15162 and 15164, as well as the Initial Study checklist analysis of environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Sustainabil- ity Plan, Because the Initial Study focuses solely on additional impacts result- ing from implementation of the Sustainability Plan, and since the Sustainabil- ity Plan was found to cause no new significant impacts, no summary table of impacts has been included. In connection with the significant impacts previously identified in the EIR, a supplemental EIR is not required unless there is substantial evidence to sup- port a determination that the Project changes will require major revisions to the EIR based on a substantial increase in the severity of these impacts. Un- der CEQA, substantial evidence includes facts, reasonable assumptions predi- cated upon facts, and expert opinion supported by facts. Unless the facts support a conclusion that the Project changes would substantially increase the severity of the previously- identified significant and unavoidable impacts in a way that requires major revisions to the EIR, a supplemental or subsequent EIR is not required. Furthermore, Section 15164 of the 2012 CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. A review of the provisions set forth in Section 15162 and 15163 confirm that none of the conditions apply that would trigger the need for a subsequent EIR or a supplement to an EIR. As previously stated and as determined through the more detailed analysis provided in Chapter II of this Addendum, the proposed modifications do not constitute substantial changes or involve new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Therefore, this adden- dum to the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 EIR is sufficient. F, TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 FE I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T I O N C. Area Covered The Sustainability Plan will apply to all areas covered by the Los Gatos Gen- eral Plan 2020. 1. Regional and Local Location The Town of Las Gatos is part of the Bay Area region and lies approximately 8 miles to the southwest of San Jose, the region's largest city. Nestled against the foothills of California's Coast Range, Los Gatos sits perched on the Bay Area's southwestern urban edge. Figure 1 -1 shows the location of Los Gatos in a regional context. Los Gatos is situated 8 miles southwest of San Jose and 45 miles southeast of San Francis- co, The Town sits along and is accessed by State Highway 85 and State Highway 17, the latter of which cuts through the town on its way toward Santa Cruz and the Monterey Bay region. For a more detailed description of the Town of Las Gatos and its setting, see Chapter 1 of the Los Gatos General Plan 2020, as well as Chapters 1 and 3 of the General Plan 2020 EIR. D. Project Description 1. State Legislative Context Six years ago, California adopted Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 set a statewide goal to reduce Cali- fornia's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. AB 32 also established a legislative short -term (2020) mandate for state agencies, in order to put the State on track to achieve the long -term GHG reduction goal of Executive Order S- 03 -05, which seeks to stabilize carbon dioxide (CO2) emis- sions by 2050. Los Gatos's Sustainability Plan aligns the Town's goals, poli- cies, and implementation measures with the State's 2020 GHG reduction tar- get as laid down in AB 32. The Sustainability Plan also ensures that these goals, policies, and implementation measures are undertaken during imple- mentation of the Town's General Plan, to guarantee progress toward achiev- ing the long -term goal identified by the State. To achieve the Town's GHG 3 Source: Town of ! os Gatos; DC &E GIS, 2008 and 2012. TOWN OF LOS GATOS GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM INTRODUCTION .J Oregon Yolo I 1 Sacramep to No SOlano Sari FranuS o wn \\ To of California Los i' F'arfftc �� OCR Contra Costa San Joaquin i Cruz "dam I I Stanislaus Alameda a Santa Clara Monterey Merced Fresno San Benito FIGURE 3 -1 REGIONAL LOCATION MAP, TOWN OF LOS GATOS r TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T I O N reduction target, the Sustainability Plan considers both mandatory standards and programs from State and regional agencies, as well as local measures that could be adopted by the Town of Los Gatos. Z. Regional Requirements and Tiering Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, (Section 15183.5, Tiering and Streamlining the analysis of Greenhouse Gas Emissions) adoption of a GHG emissions reduction plan that meets defined criteria would allow for future development projects that are consistent with the GHG reduction measures outlined in the Sustainability Plan the ability to "tier off" the Plan for analysis of CEQA impacts. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District ( BAAQMD) refers to plans that meet the standards out - lined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 as "qualified" plans. Necessary plan elements to qualify for this level of CEQA streamlining include: 6 Quantification of "existing" GHG emissions from a defined geographic area; ® A GHG reduction target identifying emissions that would not be cumu- latively considerable; o Quantification of "future" GHG emissions from a defined geographic ar- ea; ® GHG reduction measures — including performance standards —which can be demonstrated to collectively achieve the GHG emissions target, if im- plemented project -by- project; o A mechanism to monitor the plan's progress toward achieving the GHG emissions target; o Adoption through a public process following environmental review. Performance of these steps is necessary to clearly and convincingly show BAAQMD that implementation of Los Gatos's Sustainability Plan would enable the Town to meet State and regional GHG reduction goals; and there- fore, be considered a "qualified" plan. Without a qualified Plan, projects 9 T O W N O F LO S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T I O N would be required to complete their own individual GHG analysis under CEQA. 3. Los Gatos Sustainability Plan Contents Pursuant to State and regional guidelines, the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan includes the following components, described below: a. GHG Emissions Inventories and-Forecast Inventories Communitywide GHG emissions inventories for Los Gatos encompass all emissions sources over which the Town could exercise direct or indirect con- trol, such as through land use and building intensity, transportation measures, or through particular building or energy- efficiency standards, The communi- tywide GHG emissions inventories were prepared in accordance with BAAQMD's guidance for preparing community GHG emissions inventories for cities and counties, entitled "GHG Plan Level Quantification Guidance (2011)." Three different communitywide emissions inventories were prepared for the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan: o Baseline (2008) Inventory: The purpose of this inventory is to quantify to the total GHG emissions in Los Gatos for a representative year rela- tively close to the present day, Other, future inventories are extrapolated from this baseline and its constituent data. m 2020 Business -as -Usual Inventory (BAU): Using projected growth and various State and regional standard emissions factors, the 2020 Business as Usual inventory is extrapolated from the baseline inventory. The BAU inventory predicts theoretical GHG emissions using growth projections from Los Gatos under the assumption that no GHG reduction measures are adopted at the local, State, or federal levels. The 2020 GHG emis- sions targets for Los Gatos are derived from the results of this inventory, pursuant to the reduction goal options offered by BAAQMD. 2020 Adjusted Business as Usual (Adjusted BAU) Inventory: This in- ventory is derived from the 2020 BAU inventory, which is "adjusted" to the reflect the impact of federal and State GHG reduction programs, as well as the additional impact of selected, local GHG reduction measures. i 6 TOWN OF LOS G ATOS G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T I O N These adjustments are made by modeling the impacts of State /federal ac- tion, and of selected local GHG reduction measures. This inventory is then compared against the 2020 GHG target to determine if the Town has met its GHG reduction goals. All GHG inventories are measured in Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equiv- alent (MTCO2e). Since CO2 is the most common GHG, emissions of other non -0O2 GHGs are converted to CO2- equivalent (CO2e) to reflect the global warming potential of these gases relative to CO2. b. 2020 GHG Emissions Target BAAQMD offers several approaches for setting communitywide GHG emis- sions targets. In the case of Los Gatos, achieving 2020 GHG emissions levels 15 percent below those of the projected 2020 Business as Usual scenario was determined to be the best available target option. By comparing the estab- lished target to the results of the 2020 Adjusted BAU scenario, it is possible to determine whether the GHG emissions target will be met. In the event that the target is not met through State and federal action alone, this comparison helps determine what additional local -level reductions may be necessary, c. GHG Reduction Measures In order to achieve the 2020 GHG targets and to demonstrate the Town's commitment to taking action in regard to climate change, the Sustainability Plan includes an array of GHG reduction measures across a variety of sectors. These measures represent the central policies of the Sustainability Plan, and would prompt action from the Town, developers, residents, and /or business- es. d. Implementation and Monitoring The Implementation and Monitoring section of the Sustainability Plan pre- sents implementation information for each measure, including action items, responsible parties, cost effectiveness, and a schedule for implementation. 7 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M I N T R O D U C T 1 O N Performance of the GHG emissions inventories and the establishment of the GHG emissions target would not in themselves have the potential to result in significant environmental impacts. It is only through the implementation of the GHG reduction measures that the Sustainability Plan could potentially result in environmental impacts. However, due to the measures' consistency with the General Plan 2020 and through their potential to improve environ- mental outcomes, the GHG reduction measures in the Sustainability Plan would not result in new significant impacts. This determination is discussed above and analyzed in greater detail in the following chapter. z 8 ! 11 ANALYSIS This chapter considers the provisions of Sections 15162 and 15164 of the CEQA statutes, and discusses how an addendum to the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 EIR is appropriate for the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan. The chapter then applies the CEQA Appendix G checklist to demonstrate that the Sustainability Plan would not result in new or exacerbated environmental impacts. A. CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15164 in the CEQA statutes provide, respectively, detailed information on when subsequent EIRs must be prepared, and direction on when and how to instead issue an addendum to an EIR. This section address- es the stated requirements and instructions for the preparation of such docu- ments, and demonstrates why the preparation of an addendum to the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 EIR is appropriate for the analysis of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan. 1. 15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations The most applicable CEQA Guideline regarding analysis of the modified pro- ject and the appropriate level of review is from Section 15162, which pro- vides: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency deter- mines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following.* (a)(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major re- visions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previ- ously identified significant effects; The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 anticipated and directly stipulated the crea- tion, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan. W T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S This is consistent with General Plan Goal ENV -13, which aims "To promote a sustainable community that protects environmental resourQes and the cli- mate to prevent negative impacts to future generations." Subsequent to ENV - 13, Action ENV -13.1 directs the Town to 'Develop a Greenhouse Gas Emis- sions Reduction Plan and /or Climate Action Plan to control and reduce GHG emissions." Though the Toren has elected to refer to this document as a Sustainability Plan, it nonetheless meets all of the objectives and requirements found under General Plan Action ENV -13.1. For the purposes of satisfying General Plan directives and fulfilling State and regional mandates, the Sustainability Plan is regarded as indistinguishable from a Climate Action Plan. All of the GHG reduction measures which comprise the Sustainability Plan are consistent with General Plan 2020. None of the Sustainability Plan measures would create or exacerbate significant environmental effects beyond those analyzed for the General Plan. Furthermore, many of the measures in the Sustainabil- ity Plan would potentially serve to decrease environmental impacts that might otherwise result from implementation of the General Plan. Therefore the Sustainability Plan does not represent a substantial change in the ap- proved project, and it would not require revisions to the General Plan EIR. (a)(2) Substantial changes occur witli respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase In the severity of previously identified significant effects; or No substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which General Plan 2020 was crafted and adopted. Therefore, there are no new or substantially increased environmental effects under the plan, to which the Sustainability Plan would contribute. (a)(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise ofreasonable diligence at the time the 10 S TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM A N A L Y S I S previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (a)(3)(A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (a)(3)(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more se- vere than shown in the previous EIR; (a)(3)(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasi- ble would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more sig- nificant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (a)(3)(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents de- cline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Since the adoption of General Plan 2020, no new, previously - unknown infor- mation of substantial importance to the mitigation measures or alternatives within the General Plan has come to light. Though information about the local and global environment is constantly evolving, there is no known infor- mation to indicate that any previously- identified mitigation measures from General Plan 2020 merit replacement or are otherwise inadequate. In fact, the Sustainability Plan uses what new information is available to create additional or more targeted measures which may actually serve to further reduce envi- ronmental effects identified by the General Plan EIR. (b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subdivision (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation. 11 TO W N O F L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S Since the findings Linder Section 15162 subdivision (a) indicate that it is not necessary to prepare a subsequent EIR, the lead agency has determined that it is appropriate to prepare an addendum for the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 EIR. (c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is completed, unless further discretionary approval on that project is required. In- formation appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approv- al. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions described in subdivision (a) occurs, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall only be prepared by the public agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this situation no other responsible agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted. The acting public agency, in this case the Town of Los Gatos, will be seeking to offer discretionary approval for adoption of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan (the Project). However, since none of the conditions described in subdi- vision (a) were present, it therefore unnecessary to reconsider General Plan 2020 EIR or to prepare a subsequent EIR for the Sustainability Plan. (d) A subsequent EIR or subsequent negative declaration shall be given the same notice and public review as required under Section 15087 or Section 15072, A subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed. Since the project (adoption of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan) would re- quire no subsequent EIR, as described above, it is not necessary to provide the notice or provide for the public review referenced in subdivision (d). 2. 15164. Addendum to an EIR or Negative Declaration (a) The lead agency or responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previous- ly certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the condi- tions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. 1 12 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos Sustainability Plan represents an anticipated implementing action called for in Los Gatos General Plan 2020; this EIR addendum pro- vides additional information specifically relevant to the Sustainability Plan, As discussed above and substantiated below, none of the conditions from Sec- tion 15162 which would require a subsequent EIR are present. (b) An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only mi- nor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions de- scribed in Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR or nega- tive declaration have occurred. The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 was the subject of a full EIR, not a negative declaration, therefore subsection (b) does not apply. (c) An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declaration. Acknowledged. (d) The decision making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adopted negative declaration prior to making a decision on the project. Acknowledged. The Town Council will meet to consider this Addendum and act of the Sustainability Plan on Tuesday, September 4, 2012. (e) A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be sup- ported by substantial evidence. The preceding discussion and the analysis below serve to explain the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR and to demonstrate, with substantial evi- dence from the CEQA Appendix G checklist, why a subsequent EIR is not required. 13 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S t B. Appendix G Checklist The following analysis uses the CEQA Initial Study Checklist to demonstrate using substantial evidence, that adoption and implementation of the Los Ga- tos Sustainability Plan would not create new environmental impacts, or oth- erwise exacerbate those discussed in the Los Gatos General Plan 2020 EIR. Since the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan serves as a companion document to the Los Gatos General Plan 2020, the conclusions in the checklist are based, in large part, on the findings of the EIR for the General Plan. 1. Aesthetics b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect X day or nighttime views in the area? 14 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Changein Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact AESTHETICS: Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse X effect on a scenic vista? b. Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock X outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or X quality of the site and its surroundings? d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect X day or nighttime views in the area? 14 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M ANALYSIS The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use and building intensity, that relate to or could impact the aesthetic character of Los Gatos, Though certain facilities or equipment installed pursuant to the Sustainability Plan could potentially have a certain degree of Aesthetic effect, all structures, pro- grams, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes envisioned by the General Plan and established within the municipal code. Implementation of the Sus- tainability Plan would therefore neither cause new aesthetic impacts, nor ex- acerbate any existing ones. The General Plan EIR found no significant im- pacts in regard to aesthetics, and no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the require - ments of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 2, Agriculture Resources 15 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact AGRICULTURE RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farm- land of Statewide Im- portance (Farmland), as X shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring 15 T O W N O F L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos SUStaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations or allowed site uses that relate to or could impact agricultural lands or resources within we No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact Program of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b. Conflict with existing zon- ing for agricultural use, or a X Williamson Act contract? c. Conflict with existing zon- ing for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code sec- i tlon 12220(8)), timberland (as defined by Public Re- X sources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Tim- berland Production (as de- fined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest X land to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or na- ture, could result in conver- X sion of Farmland, to non- agricultural use or conver- sion of forest land to non - forest use? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos SUStaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations or allowed site uses that relate to or could impact agricultural lands or resources within we TOWN O F L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM ANALYSIS Los Gatos or its vicinity. All structures, programs, and projects pursued un- der the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes envisioned by the General Plan and established within the municipal code. Since little agricultural land remains in Los Gatos, The General Plan EIR ad- dressed agricultural impacts under other subject headings. The EIR found one significant impact related to agriculture under the topic of Land Use and Planning. It was determined that the conversion of Unique Farmland to oth- er uses in the North Forty Specific Plan Area would constitute a Significant and Unavoidable impact, which would fall under threshold a., and that no feasible mitigation measure existed. Adoption and implementation of the Sustainability Plan would not alter or substantially worsen this or any other agricultural resource impact, nor would it would result in new impacts to agricultural resources. Additionally, no new or previously - unknown infor- mation has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR in regard to agricultural resources and thus necessi- tate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed, 3. Air Quality No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required 17 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air 17 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S No Additional Environmental Subsequent or Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an ap- plicable federal or state am- X bient air quality standard (including releasing emis- sions which exceed quantita- tive thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concen- X trations? e, Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial num- X ber of oeoole? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene 18 t Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct Implementation of the appli- X cable air quality plan? b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute sub- stantially to an existing or X projected air quality viola- tion? c. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an ap- plicable federal or state am- X bient air quality standard (including releasing emis- sions which exceed quantita- tive thresholds for ozone precursors)? d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concen- X trations? e, Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial num- X ber of oeoole? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene 18 t TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M ANALYSIS any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations or allowed site uses that relate to or could impact air quality in Los Gatos or in the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes that are envisioned by the General Plan, established within the municipal code, or otherwise administered by federal, State, and regional air quality monitoring agencies. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of General Plan 2020 would have a significant and unavoidable impact under air quality threshold a. Though the General Plan itself would contain a variety of provisions to re- duce VMT, these provisions would be insufficient to reduce the impact to less than significant. It was further determined that there was no feasible mitiga- tions measure for this significant impact. Adoption and implementation of the Sustainability Plan is not anticipated to substantially worsen this or any other air quality impact. Rather, implementation of the Sustainability Plan would serve to further decrease VMT or otherwise prevent air pollution. While it cannot be assumed that implementation of the Sustainability Plan would mitigate the previously discussed impact to less -than- significant, the Plan's provisions are deemed likely to reduce this impact to some degree. Additionally, no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR in regard to air quality, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the re- quirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. IN TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S 4. Biological Resources No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural' community Identified in local or regional plans, X policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. 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 X not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 20 V . Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact 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 X s. 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, X policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. 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 X not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? 20 V . TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required f. Uonflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or pre- construction review that could or increase development in natural areas or otherwise affect biological resources. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and regulations that are envisioned by the General Plan; established within the municipal code (including the Tree 21 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or X migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree X preservation policy or ordinance? f. Uonflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation X Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or pre- construction review that could or increase development in natural areas or otherwise affect biological resources. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and regulations that are envisioned by the General Plan; established within the municipal code (including the Tree 21 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S Protection Ordinance); and /or otherwise required by state and Federal stat- utes, including those for endangered species protection. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts to biologi- cal resources, nor exacerbate any existing impacts. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to biological resources, and no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental •EIR is needed, 5. Cultural Resources 4 e 22 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Changein Changein Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact CULTURAL RESOURCES; Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X a historical resource as de- fined in § 15064.5? b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of X an archaeological resource pursuant to § 1506 c. Directly or indirectly de- stroy a unique paleontologi- X cal resource or site or unique feature? _geologic d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred out- X side of formal cemeteries? 4 e 22 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FE I R ADDENDUM ANALYSIS The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including historic preservation, pre - construction review, land -use, and /or building intensity, that could cause increased potential to impact cultural resources. Though certain facilities or equipment installed pursuant to the Sustainability Plan could potentially have a certain degree of effect on cultural resources, all structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes envisioned by the General Plan and established within the municipal code. Additionally, projects carried out un- der the Sustainability Plan would continue to be obligated to cease construc- tion or other activities, and report any discovery of potentially significant cultural, paleontological, or Native American resources. Such discoveries would also continue to be subject to the jurisdiction of anthropological or tribal experts, who would be responsible for inspection and potential reloca- tion of discovered cultural resources. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts to cultural resources, nor exacerbate any existing impacts. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to cultural resources, and no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or con- clusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 23 TOWN O F LO S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S 6, Geology and Soils I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as de- Y_ No Additional cent Alquist - Priolo Subsequent or Earthquake Fault Zon- Environmental ing Map, issued by the Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required X area or based on other substantial evidence of a Less Than known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Significant tion 42. New Impact/ shaking? Substantial Substantial Information No Changes X Changeln Changein Showing or New b. Result in substantial soil Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact _ GEOLOGY & SOILS; Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial ad- verse effects, including the X risk of loss, injury, or death I. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as de- Y_ lineated on the most re- cent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zon- ing Map, issued by the State Geologist for the X area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publica- tion 42. ii. Strong seismic ground X shaking? iii. Seismic - related ground failure, including lique- X faction? iv, Landslides ? X b. Result in substantial soil X erosion or the loss of topsoil? _ 24 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required f. Expose people or structures to potential substantial ad- verse effects, including the X risk of loss, injury, or death The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or pre- construction review that address geology- and soils - related im- pacts. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and 25 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring. Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact 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 X off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, lique- faction or collapse? d. Be located on expansive soil, — as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code X (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of ade- quately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems X where sewers are not availa- ble for the disposal of waste f. Expose people or structures to potential substantial ad- verse effects, including the X risk of loss, injury, or death The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or pre- construction review that address geology- and soils - related im- pacts. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and 25 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM A N A L Y S I S standards that are envisioned by the General Plan, established within the mu- nicipal code, and /or otherwise required by the California Building Code. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new geological /soils impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones, The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to geology or soils, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 7. Greenhouse Gas Emissions The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR directly stipulated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan. In fact, the General Plan EIR cited the adoption of a SLstainability Plan as a mitiga- 26 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental _ Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact _ GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS; Would the project a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or Indirectly, that may have a X significant impact on the en- vironment? b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of X reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR directly stipulated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustainability Plan. In fact, the General Plan EIR cited the adoption of a SLstainability Plan as a mitiga- 26 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM ANALYSIS tion measure for greenhouse gas emissions impacts, The Sustainability Plan would actively serve to reduce GHG emissions to below levels set by adopted State legislation; thus its impact would not merely be less than significant, but demonstrably positive. Additionally, no new or previously- unknown infor- mation has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR in regard to greenhouse gas emissions, and thus ne- cessitate a new environmental analysis, For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supple- mental EIR is needed. B. Hazards and Hazardous Materials D. create a signiticant hazard to the public or the environ- ment through reasonably foreseeable upset and acci- X dent conditions involving the release of hazardous ma- terials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, sub- stances, or waste within one- X quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 27 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact HAZARDS & HAZARD- OUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environ- ment through the routine X transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? D. create a signiticant hazard to the public or the environ- ment through reasonably foreseeable upset and acci- X dent conditions involving the release of hazardous ma- terials into the environment? c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, sub- stances, or waste within one- X quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? 27 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S 1 P 28 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues ReAsions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazard- ous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government X Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the pub- lic 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 X public use airport, would the project result in a safety haz- ard 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 X safety hazard for people re- siding or working in the pro- ject area? g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response X plan or emergency evacua- tion plan? h, Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, Injury or death involving wildland fires, including X where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? 1 P 28 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM ANALYSIS The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures that address hazards and hazardous materials. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envisioned by the General Plan, established within the mu- nicipal code, and /or otherwise required by the State /federal regulations. Ad- ditionally, the provisions of the Sustainability Plan would serve to enhance wildfire protection for buildings and the public. Implementation of the Sus - tainability Plan would therefore neither cause new hazards /hazardous materi- als impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to hazards and hazardous materials, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would un- dermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus neces- sitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 9. Hydrology and Water Quality 29 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change In Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No HYDROLOGY & WATER Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact QUALITY: Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge X requirements? 29 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S d. Substantially alter the exist- ing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, X or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? 30 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or in- terfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net def- icit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local X groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would ,Y drop to a level which would not support existing land us- es or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? _ c. Substantially alter the exist- ing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the X course of a stream or river, in a manner which would re- sult in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site d. Substantially alter the exist- ing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, X or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? 30 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR AD DEN DU M A N A L Y S I S h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect X flood flows? f. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving X flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? J, Inundation by seiche, tsu- nami, or mudflow? X The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site 31 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental FIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact e. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drain- X age systems or provide sub- stantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? X g. Place housing within a 100 - year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood X Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation h. Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect X flood flows? f. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving X flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? J, Inundation by seiche, tsu- nami, or mudflow? X The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site 31 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S uses, or oversight procedures that address hydrology and water quality. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envisioned by the General Plan, established within the mu- nicipal code, and /or otherwise required by the State /federal regulations. Im- plementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new hydrology or water quality impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. In fact, by promoting development which is more compact and uses less water, im- plementation of the Sustainability Plan could offer appreciable benefits in regard to hydrology and water quality. The General Plan EIR found no sig- nificant impacts in regard to hydrology and water quality, and no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 10. Land Use and Planning 32 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact LAND USE & PLANNING; Would the project; a. Physically divide an estab- X lished community? b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or reg- ulation of an agency with ju- risdiction over the project X (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, 32 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan or of other adopted plans, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures. All structures, pro- grams, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envi- sioned or established by the General Plan, other applicable plans, or the mu- nicipal code. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore not lead to new impacts that divide the community, conflict with any land use plans, or conflict with any habitat plans. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of General Plan 2020 would have a significant and unavoidable impact in regard to the conversion of unique farmland, which would conflict with existing land uses. It was fur- ther determined that there was no feasible mitigation measure for this signifi- cant impact, Adoption and implementation of the Sustainability Plan is not anticipated to substantially worsen this or any other land use or planning related impact; it would neither serve to divide an established community, 33 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact or zoning ordinance) adopt- ed for the purpose of avoid- ing or mitigating an envi- ronmental effect? c, Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conser- X vation plan? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan or of other adopted plans, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures. All structures, pro- grams, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envi- sioned or established by the General Plan, other applicable plans, or the mu- nicipal code. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore not lead to new impacts that divide the community, conflict with any land use plans, or conflict with any habitat plans. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of General Plan 2020 would have a significant and unavoidable impact in regard to the conversion of unique farmland, which would conflict with existing land uses. It was fur- ther determined that there was no feasible mitigation measure for this signifi- cant impact, Adoption and implementation of the Sustainability Plan is not anticipated to substantially worsen this or any other land use or planning related impact; it would neither serve to divide an established community, 33 T O W N O F LO S G A T O S GENERAL P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S conflict with any land use plan, nor conflict with any conservation plans. Additionally, no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR in regard to land use and planning, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 11. Mineral Resources The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures that address mineral resources. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are 34 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information j Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact _ MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availabil- ity of a known mineral re- source that would be a value X to the region and the resi- dents of the state? b. Result in the loss of availabil- ity of a locally important mineral resource recovery X site delineated on a local gen- eral plan, specific plan or other land use elan? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures that address mineral resources. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are 34 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M ANALYSIS envisioned by the General Plan, established within the municipal code, and /or otherwise required by the State /federal regulations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new mineral resource impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to mineral resources, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environ- mental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 12, Noise b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or X groundborne noise levels? c, A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X above levels existing without the prolect? 35 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact NOISE: Would the project: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards estab- lished In the local general X plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other b. Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or X groundborne noise levels? c, A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity X above levels existing without the prolect? 35 T O W N O F L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM A N A L Y S I S f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose X people residing or working in the project area to exces- sive noise levels? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, noise limits, or other restrictions that address noise impacts, Though certain facilities or equipment installed pursuant to the Sustainability Plan may potentially be noise - generating, all structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envisioned by the Gen 36 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental _ Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vi- X cinity 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 X public use airport, would the project expose people resid- ing or working in the pro- ject area to excessive noise f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose X people residing or working in the project area to exces- sive noise levels? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, noise limits, or other restrictions that address noise impacts, Though certain facilities or equipment installed pursuant to the Sustainability Plan may potentially be noise - generating, all structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envisioned by the Gen 36 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL PLAN 2020 FEIR ADDENDUM A N A L Y S I S eral Plan, established within the municipal code, and /or otherwise required by the State /federal regulations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new noise impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. In fact, as vehicular traffic represents a significant source of noise in Los Gatos, the VMT- reducing provisions of the Sustainability Plan have the po- tential to reduce or prevent increases to ambient noise levels. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to noise, and no new or pre- viously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 13. Population and Housing b, Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessi- tating the construction of re- X placement housing else- where? 37 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact POPULATION & HOUSING; Would the project; a. Induce substantial popula- tion growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for X example, through extension of roads or other infrastruc- b, Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessi- tating the construction of re- X placement housing else- where? 37 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation Of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could impact population and housing. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zoning desig- nations, Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new population and housing impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to population and housing, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. T No Additional Subsequent or Environmental _ Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact c. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the X construction of replacement housine elsewhere? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation Of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could impact population and housing. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zoning desig- nations, Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new population and housing impacts, nor exacerbate any existing ones. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to population and housing, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. T TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M ANALYSIS 14. Public Services a. Fire protection? x No Additional X Subsequent or Environmental d. Parks? Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required X Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Changein Changein Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physical- ly altered governmental facil- ities, need for new or physi- cally altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objec- tives for any of the public a. Fire protection? x b. Police protection? X c. Schools? X d. Parks? X e. Other public facilities? X The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could impact demand for Town services. All struc- 39 T O W N OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S tures, programs, and projects pursued tinder the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zon- ing designations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts in regard to provision of Town services, nor exac- erbate any existing ones, The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to provision of public services, and no new or previously - unknown Information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or con- clusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements Of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed, 15. Recreation RECREATION: a, Would the project increase the use of existing neighbor- hood and regional parks or other recreational facilities X such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerat- ed? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or re- quire the construction or expansion of recreational fa- X cilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 40 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change In Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact RECREATION: a, Would the project increase the use of existing neighbor- hood and regional parks or other recreational facilities X such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerat- ed? b. Does the project include recreational facilities or re- quire the construction or expansion of recreational fa- X cilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 40 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M ANALYSIS The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could affect demand for recreational facilities or pro- grams in the Town. All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zoning designations. Implementation of the Sustain- ability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts in regard to recrea- tional opportunities /facilities, nor exacerbate any existing ones. Additional - ly, the Sustainability Plan would serve to create new opportunities for recrea- tion through its provisions to encourage the creation of community gardens. As part of its public services evaluation, the General Plan EIR found no sig- nificant impacts in regard to recreation, and no new or previously- unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or con- clusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 16. Traffic 41 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact TRAFFIC: Would the project: a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy es- tablishing measures of effec- tiveness for the performance X of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation in- 41 TO W N OF LO S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S e. Result in inadequate emer- x ¢encv access? 42 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Changein Changein Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact cluding mass transit and non - motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersec- tions, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bi- cycle paths and mass transit? b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand x 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 ei- ther an increase in traffic x levels or a change in location that results In substantial safety risks? d. Substantially increase haz- ards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dan- x gerous intersections) or in- compatible uses (e.g., farm e. Result in inadequate emer- x ¢encv access? 42 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan or of other adopted plans, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures. All structures, pro- grams, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envi- sioned or established by the General Plan, other applicable plans, or the mu- nicipal code. Additionally, all road projects would continue to be subject to Caltrans standards and Caltrans would maintain its current jurisdiction over particular roadways. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would there- fore not create or exacerbate conflicts with any adopted plans policies or pro- grams, including congestion management plans, nor would it result in altered flight patterns, reduced emergency access, or increased hazards. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of General Plan 2020 would have a significant and unavoidable impact in regard to traffic and trans- portation. The General Plan EIR identified a set of roadway improvements that were necessary to mitigate potentially significant traffic impacts; howev- 43 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact T Conflict with adopted poli- cies, plans, or programs re- garding public transit, bicy- cle, or pedestrian facilities, X or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan. The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan or of other adopted plans, including land -use designations, allowed site uses, or oversight procedures. All structures, pro- grams, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would continue to be subject to the oversight and review processes, and standards that are envi- sioned or established by the General Plan, other applicable plans, or the mu- nicipal code. Additionally, all road projects would continue to be subject to Caltrans standards and Caltrans would maintain its current jurisdiction over particular roadways. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would there- fore not create or exacerbate conflicts with any adopted plans policies or pro- grams, including congestion management plans, nor would it result in altered flight patterns, reduced emergency access, or increased hazards. The General Plan EIR found that implementation of General Plan 2020 would have a significant and unavoidable impact in regard to traffic and trans- portation. The General Plan EIR identified a set of roadway improvements that were necessary to mitigate potentially significant traffic impacts; howev- 43 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S er, at the time of the EIR, there were insufficient funds to undertake those projects. Since these modifications were not certain to take place, the impact remained significant and unavoidable, as of the time of General Plan adoption, Adoption and implementation of the Sustainability Plan is not anticipated to substantially worsen this or any other traffic or transit related impacts. In fact, because the Sustainability Plan includes steps to reduce driving and VMT, implementation of the Plan could serve to decrease traffic and trans- portation impacts. While the Sustainability Plan would not mitigate these impacts to less - than- significant, the Plan's provisions are deemed likely to re- duce overall impacts to some degree. Additionally, no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR in regard to transportation and traffic, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis. For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 17. Utilities and Service Systems No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required 44 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions — Revisions _....._. Effects of an EIR Impact UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS: _Would the project: a. Exceed waste water treat- ment requirements of the X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? 44 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facili- X ties, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water sup- plies available to serve the project from existing enti- tlements and resources or are X new or expanded entitle- ments needed? e, xesurt in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to X serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commit- ments? r. tse served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the pro- X ject's solid waste disposal needs? 45 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change In Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Issues Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact b. Require or result in the construction of new water or waste water treatment fa- cilities or expansion of exist- ing facilities, the construc- X tion of which could cause significant environmental ef- c. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facili- X ties, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d. Have sufficient water sup- plies available to serve the project from existing enti- tlements and resources or are X new or expanded entitle- ments needed? e, xesurt in a determination by the waste water treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to X serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commit- ments? r. tse served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the pro- X ject's solid waste disposal needs? 45 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 FE I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could impact demand for utility services. All struc- tures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zon- ing designations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts in regard to provision of utility services, nor exac- erbate any existing ones. Moreover, by promoting conservation of both wa- ter and energy, implementation of the Sustainability Plan could serve to re- duce demands upon and impacts to utility services. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to provision of utility services, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would un- dermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus neces- sitate a new environmental analysis, For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 46 No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Major EIR Significant Preparation No Issues Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact _ g. Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regula- tions related to solid waste? The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities that could impact demand for utility services. All struc- tures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zon- ing designations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts in regard to provision of utility services, nor exac- erbate any existing ones. Moreover, by promoting conservation of both wa- ter and energy, implementation of the Sustainability Plan could serve to re- duce demands upon and impacts to utility services. The General Plan EIR found no significant impacts in regard to provision of utility services, and no new or previously - unknown information has come to light which would un- dermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus neces- sitate a new environmental analysis, For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the requirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed. 46 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S GENERAL P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E i R A D D E N D U M A N A L S I S 18. Mandatory Findings of Significance No Additional Subsequent or Environmental Supplemental EIR Required Analysis Required a. noes me project have the potential to degrade the qual- ity of the environment, sub- stantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife popu- lation to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the ma- jor periods of California his- tory or prehistory? b. Does the project have im- pacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the Incremental effects of a pro- ject are considerable when X 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 envi- ronmental effects which will cause substantial adverse ef. X fects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 47 Less Than Significant New Impact/ Substantial Substantial Information No Changes Change in Change in Showing or New Project Circumstances New or Information Requiring Requiring Increased Requiring Major EIR Issues Major EIR Significant Preparation No Revisions Revisions Effects of an EIR Impact MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE; a. noes me project have the potential to degrade the qual- ity of the environment, sub- stantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife popu- lation to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate im- portant examples of the ma- jor periods of California his- tory or prehistory? b. Does the project have im- pacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the Incremental effects of a pro- ject are considerable when X 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 envi- ronmental effects which will cause substantial adverse ef. X fects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 47 TOWN OF L O S G A T O S G E N E R A L P L A N 2 0 2 0 F E I R A D D E N D U M A N A L Y S I S The Los Gatos General Plan 2020 and its EIR anticipated and directly stipu- lated the creation, adoption, and implementation of the Los Gatos Sustaina- bility Plan, The provisions of the Sustainability Plan would not contravene any aspects of the General Plan, including land -use designations and allowed building intensities, that would lead to increased population or development, impacts to wildlife, or other substantial environmental effects, All structures, programs, and projects pursued under the Sustainability Plan would adhere to the vision by the General Plan and all subsequent land use and zoning desig- nations. Implementation of the Sustainability Plan would therefore neither cause new impacts in regard to these environmental tops, nor would it exac- erbate any existing impacts. The General Plan EIR made no finding of signif- icant impacts in regard the topics, and no new or previously - unknown infor- mation has come to light which would undermine the analysis or conclusions of the General Plan EIR, and thus necessitate a new environmental analysis, For these reasons, this addendum to the General Plan EIR satisfies the re- quirements of CEQA, and no supplemental EIR is needed, 43