Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/03/14 Board of Appeals & Advisors Agenda Packet CITY OF CHULA VISTA BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS REGULAR MEETING AGENDA Monday - 5:15 pm Conference Room #137 (Public Service Bldg 200) March 14, 2011 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 ROLL CALL: Jones Lopez Meservy Sanfilippo Sides 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. DECLARATION OF EXCUSED/UNEXCUSED ABSENTEEISM: 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: October li, 2010 4. NEW BUSINESS: A. Review of Climate Adaptation Strategies Draft Implementation Plans, 5. CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS/REPORTS: 6. BUILDING OFFICIAL'S COMMENTS/REPORTS: Tentative- Review of Fee Study at April 11, 2011 meeting, 7. COMMUNICATIONS (PUBLIC REMARKS/WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE): 8. ADOURNMENT TO REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING ON MONDAY, APRIL il, 2011 AT 5:15 PM IN CONFERENCE ROOM 137. COMPLIANCE WITH AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACi The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities ACf (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a city meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodation at least forty-eight (48) hours in advance for meetings and five (5) days for scheduled services and activities Please contact Rosemarie Rice, Secretary for specifc information (619) 409-5838 or Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) at (619) 585-5647 California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired, ~«~i :~Ar.~ CHULAVI57A Development Services Department Building Division MEMO DATE: March 2, 2011 TO: Board of Appeals and Advisors FROM: Lou El-Khazen, Building Off cial Brendan Reed, Environmental Resource Manager; Public Works Depaztment'~_ SUBJECT: Climate Adaptation Strategies' DRAF I Implementation Plans. Attached axe the DRAFT implementation plans for the Climate Adaptation Strategies which I' were ariginally developed by the City's Climate Change Working Group (CCWG).. The CCWG -comprised of businesses, residents, and community representatives -worked over a 12-month period to identify Chula Vista's vulnerability to expected local climate change impacts (known as climate "adaptation"). Through 1.3 public meetings and forums, the CCWG ultimately chose 11 recommended strategies to reduce future risks and costs from these impacts related to energy and water supplies, public health, wildfires, biodiversity, coastal resources, and the local economy.. In October 2011, the City Council accepted the CCWG's recommendations and j directed City staff to develop implementation plans within 180 days.. The Climate Adaptation Strategies' DRAFT implementation plans, which were developed by a multi-department team, provide a more detailed framework for each strategy's implementation components, timelines, and costs. the plans were developed to ensure that they complement (without being redundant) Chula Vista's current climate "mitigation" measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions„ Also, the plans were designed to build upon existing municipal efforts (rather. than create new stand-alone initiatives or programs) to improve thew implementation feasibility considering the City's current staffing and funding limitations, Finally, the implementation components for each strategy were developed to be flexible enough for fuhue modifications as new climate change impacts data and modeling becomes available to Chula Vista- the DRAFT implementation plans aze being presented to the Board of Appeals and Advisors (BOA&A) in arder to solicit feedback on their general content and structure, The presentation to the BOA&A will focus more on Cool Paving, Cool Roof's and Local Water Supply and Reuse because these strategies will have direct impact on the design and construction of buildings, City staff will also be vetting the plans through other City Commissions such as the Plaxuling Commission, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Commission, and the Resource Conservation Commission. The plans do not provide specific ordinance or policy language fox consideration by the BOA&A (or other City Boards and Commissions) at this time.. Rather, if the plans aze 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 9191D ~ www..chulavisfaca.gov I (619) 691-5272 ( fax (619) 585-568I approved by City Council in April, staff would proceed with implementing the plans based on available funding and develop the specific policy language which would then be presented to the ~ City Boards and Commissions and, ultimately, the City Council for futtue review and consideration. RECOl~IMENDATION: Recommend that City Council adopt the implementation plans and direct staff to implement based on available funding: Attachment (1) 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 wcvw.chulavisfaca..gov I (619) 691-5272 I fax (619) 585-5681 ~PeLISME~' ~ ~S i ~ m _nl edicated to CDr~ltnu~a6) Seimire .,,~-C! 2554 SWEETWATER SPRINGS BOULEVARD SPRING VALLEY CALIFORNIA 91978-2004 9>-F~a~ TELEPHONE: 670-2222 AREA CODE 619 WWw otaywatecgoV March 9, 2011 Mr Jim Sandoval, City Manager City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Dear Mr ~val: the Otay Water District has appreciated the opportunity to work with your staff to develop achievable climate change measures related to water use. Prior to the February 28, 2011 Resource Conservation Committee, we were invited to meet with your staff to discuss any issues and concerns that we may have with your draft Climate Adaptation Strategy Implementation Plans The meeting took place on February 17 and during that meeting, the District had a number of'suggestions that we felt would help improve the implementation of the measures Attached are the District's comments related to Shategy's #4 and #5 of Chula Vista's Climate Change Adaptation Shategies We understand that additional meetings are planned, should the draft Implementation Plans be approved by your City Council Please continue to coordinate future meetings through William Granger the District's Water Conservation Manager, He can be reached at (619) 670-2290 or at wgranger@otaywater gov, i Si rely, M Watton, General Manager ~ cc: Chula Vista Resource Conservation Commission Planning Commission Redevelopment Commission Board of Appeals & Advisors City Council members: Councilmember Rudy Ramirez Councilmember Patricia Aguilar Councilmember Pamela Bensoussan Councilmember Steve Castaneda Mayor Cheryl Cox Rick Hopkins, Director of Public Works , Matt Little, Assistant Director of Public Works Brendan Reed, Environmenta] Resource Manager Attachment: Iechnical Memo #1 Summary of Dishict comments related to Strategies #4 and #5 ~ ~ st to Z m a O m m ~ ~ N W m N n a~ 'o ~~p ° m o A m~=moo a°3~o°'m ~Q;ma m ?i m c ° N C m N N N. N ° ~ = 4ll ~ ~ ~ S O N O - 7 A N m N p N Q~ O' n m ° c m N w R 9 a W N W N W N ,a o- o Cn ?t ~ p F o a a ncn ~ o• ~7 ° p m 3 D ~J'O ° y -I m -i n N CD C O N O~ N S (D O N (D (D ~p O~ X O rn ca N O (D S= S O . S O N C_ C_ 0 0 0 G. ~ rt N O N 0 3 C f0 ° C N N (D O (D eC N ~ N J Q ~ ~ 0 N ~ -n C N ~ O..nn ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ° O a ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ vN,c <°~N~~.°~' mo~~ m., ~p act o~j~'p~v~~ ~'n o ~ ~ m ~m c m Q~..a° ~ ~ c ~ o ° C~ ~ m ~ m ~ ~ 7 -w (D ~ O O7 O < fD (O (D N O N < Cn N O OO-. Uq P. N~° N N O N°< O O Ip N K, ~ ~ N O O a j~ N ~ C ~ y omv°,,, 3o m~v~D~ c.°o ~~D~n~D~sa~ aC T~ O y Q 6l O S CD ~ (D O N 0 0. C C p N N ~ . O ~ y y °y-~ m 3 any o- S° x 3~ m m 'm c ~ o_o_° ~ N o W N 6 O' O v N .C. O S ~ N O~~ _ G N K O 41 (D S ~ ca~ < (Cn ~ N ~ N ~ N cQ .OS.. ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ O (°ii ~ N N N C ~ ~ y m Q' N m'"•-pO -1 in' m o'vOi min `z O~ m O p~ m 'S~ m ~ _m S~ ~ ~ ~ wm -om~ f1 N? O p O i. O O (D ~ N S (D O S O O N O N d O~ v p y ,..J, <°41 cQC ~~n-~c mm ~•~~m~.,~~~DC ay°'N~~a.o n .~'fl ~ o~ m °-o m ~ ~3c ~ m N as m N ~F m.°G < co cAo m ~ o R=~ O~ Ol O G~ f/~ O N ~ n= N d 0 O~° W ~ O. N d. d N N ~ ~w /7 'S l0 N d (O N ill j ti. ~ 'O N O v 0_ O N N Q~~ N n O 'O m O G O ~ m ~ ~ ° oi~ c m N Q 3 'm m m c ~'mc,ap~'~-O° i ~ ~ G~ Hamm o.. °~o ~~pm~ m~ommNm~' moo aom ,wS}~~~,°' w v om~N~ ~m~,O.Na°'m_ ~~a acv c 3~.os N <mm 3o_vco ~~>jcmm any m °i v o ° m ~ ,°»c 3 .~.N p ~,mc° o.m ~ a° na. cn m~a m < ~~m 3 3om `~°~mn~ °='-°i°°^~'a•~na o~ ~ o c ?ao m o.c ° O ate. ~.o ~ ,°°~,o-°° ~ ~ w 0 0 6 0 O O~> 'O N n a O G N (D j. O N "O ~ N N N ~ rd (D J O C N N N J 7 O~ Q _ (D S fn (D 'G ~ (D m 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ a o d ~ ° m m a - m v eve ~ ~ ~ < w ~ v ~ c°i~ ~ oS a'S_~~ m QN~ c _ = N (D (D O. O > > ° m N 7 rq N N ;l7 N O O° ~ N ~ rt D n --I O Z ~~fl/ cln of CHULAVISTA CLIiVIATE ADAPTATION STRATEGIES DRAFT Implementation Plans February 2.011 SUNIlVIARY the City of Chula Vista has long understood the tlueats of climate change to its community and ~ a: has established itself' as a leader amongst municipalities in plannrngk o reduce or "mitigate" citywide greenhouse gas emissions.. However, despite efforts bo~tli'~locally and globally to mitigate emissions, some level of climate change will still occur~and~~fav~ noticeable impacts on ~~°b the San Diego region, In order to manage these likely clima~r~~'ohang~impacts and to reduce future risks and costs, the City of Chula Vista's Climate C;h~1ge Working,Ci~,a~up -comprised of residents, businesses, and community representatives rte- mended 11 sttat~Ggi'as to "adapt" the community to these impacts within energy and Ovate F pply, public health wrl~dfir~~"es, ecosystem management, coastal ixrfrastructure, and the locale _ my sectel~° At City Council's direction, staff has developed moxe'~~tetaled implementation plans for these Climate Adaptation Strategies. Fbr ea ategy, the~s~outline specific implementation components; critical steps, costs, and tunelrr~en -fir order tq gimit the necessazy staffing and funding required to implement the sttategr~the p a'"eve e also' designed to build upon existing ( municipal effarts rather than create s' "1 ~~~iPolicies or programs Initial implementation of all 11 stir c will b~" l"ta~ed m over the next 3 years. and will cost approximately $2,041,879 fires rnitial co ,existing funding sources will allow at least 7 of 11 strategies to be fully~~~p` aally`r ,plemente Ongoing implementation of the 11 sfrategies will cost approximately 80,000 arinna,°~ , and t~be partially covered through existing funding sources as well,. If the° Pr - ate~a` °r at~gies' plans are approved by City Council, staff will implement the measure b"a"sed on available funding and pursue additional external funding sources to su~~~E ~ ng-t~=,:,,implementation. OVER~'~~~W W~'°~ YH sr Since the e~~1990s ~;Ia Vista has been engaged in multiple climate change forums including the reed Nah'~ s Framework Convention on Climate Change, the ICLEI Cities for Climate Protechoi~~am~argn, the California Climate Action Registry, and the U,S, Conference of Mayor's Climate~Pxotec$on Aa Bement and has committed to reduce its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 2.0% below 1990 levels To accomplish this GHG reduction or climate "mitigation" goal, the City adopted a Carbon Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan in 2000 which outlined steps for Chula Vista to reduce energy and fuel use at municipal facilities and throughout the community. In 2008, seven new climate mitigation measures were adopted by City Council to augment past efforts by improving energy and water efficiency, expanding renewable energy systems, converting to more fuel efficient and alternative fuel vehicles, and designing lzansit-friendly, walkable communities, Overall, the City's climate protection programs and policies have helped Chula Vista reduce GHG emissions from municipal j operations by 47% and community per capita emissions by 27% compared to 1990 levels, As a Climate Adaptation Strategies 1 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (Febmary 23, 2011), result, the City has been recognized for its climate-related accomplishments by multiple external organizations such as the US Environmental Protection Agency, ICIEI-Local Governments for ' Sustainability, California Sustainability Alliance, California Center for Sustainable Energy, San Diego Gas & Electric, Siena Club, and Earthworks San Diego. Io complement these climate mitigation efforts, City Council directed staff in October 2.009 to ' reconvene a Climate Change Working Group (CCWG) -comprised of residents, businesses, and ' community representatives - to develop a list of recommended strategies to reduce Chula Vista's vulnerability to expected local climate change impacts ~~own as climate "adaptation") Expected impacts include hotter and drier weather ~linished imported water supplies, more poor air quality/heat wave days, more frequent wtl"dfires, shifts in habitat and species distribution, and increased rates of'sea level rise, Bym3in~g the risks associated with these climate impacts now, future costs and public health-~eoncerncan be avoided and/or minimized ~ t~ ~ ~ the reconvened CCWG, which was established as~a~subco ittee of the C~'i~y's Resource Conservation Commission, included some me. _ ~xs frorxre previous working group augmented with additional members to reflect the~,~o~~s ew'climate adaptation-related focus areas. Stakeholders participating on the CCWG inclrideddxepxesentatives from development companies, bnsirress associations enex ,amend water utrhfi~esenvironxnental organizations, and education ix>stitutions the group he~l-~pubhc-noticed xge~t~ings between December 2009 through August 2010 to review potentialir~mEp~acts'~d~rdhe~tify aver 180 opportunities to reduce these risks,. In addition, the CCWG hosted 2pubhc~slon climate adaptation planning to solicit additional feedback whx~l~u;kattxacted a ~3p0 commumty participants., The CCWG was t+ further supported by regional expax~ts, clim~a~;n scientists, and staff from multiple municipal departments u+ v~ { In October 2010, the CTr~i~te Cha~rgd~*irku~~ coup presented then 11 recommended Climate Adaptation Strategies (Appan~ A) to Crty~Council to address climate change vulnerabilities and solutions.Ia'"te~o ,energn~,d water supplies, public health, wildfires, biodiversity, coastal resources x~an~~d the locaconorrr~ a As a result, City Council directed staff to develop more detarlecJ~~ p ementation plans for'tle'' 11 recommendations which would outline implementation steps, tixs~'~Y;~nes, and costs these detailed plans, which would be created by amulti-department team and~rla~r~e~ed by app~~able City Commissions, would be presented to City Council for future considertatxonwit~,~80 days. ` ~,i"t,,,e=~ This document outhx%e` staff's general approach for implementing the 11 recommended Climate Adaptation Strategies For each strategy, a specific implementation plan has been created which includes the following sections: ' Overview - A review of potential climate change impacts, the original CCWG recommendation to address these impacts, and how it relates to the proposed program/policy Program Strategy - An in-depth description of the programmatic approach for implementing the proposed program/policy to reduce future risks and costs from climate Climate Adaptation Sti'ate~ies 2 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) ' change impacts including outreach activities and required municipal code or regulatory steps Performance Metrics -the metrics which will be tracked and reported to quantify the performance of the program/policy Timeiine - A general timeline of important milestones as the progxaxn/policy is implemented Budget & Financing - the required funding to rmplemen't~e program/policy as proposed by City staff ~ As proposed, initial implementation of all 11 strategies w~x11t'be phased m~er the next 3 years and will cost approximately $2.,041,879, Of these mihalt'e,s, approximate~~c~~;~~u23,379 or 16% will be supported by existing funding sources and wi~1~~Pow at least 7 of 11 strac~~ies to be fully ox partially implemented., Ongoing implementatioxt~o~the 11 ~st_t_"rz"~tegies will cost approximately $380,000 annually and will be partially covered ttir~u~gl~iti~slig funding sources as well. It should be noted that the majority of unfunded implemerifa n costs are associated with a single component of strategy #8 (Open Space I~fan~agement) Ex~l~ng this strategy, existing funding sources axe able to provide approximate)'~-"`~59°~o~~anvd~79% of'~}~necessaxy one-time and annual budgets, respectively, ~ s s i °t«~"~Iz-~ If the CZimate Adaptatzon Strat~~z~s plans at~e~,,~appxoved by~City Council, staff will implement the measures based on av~xl~e fus~n g and will pursue additional external funding sources to suppart full, long-term ir~ii~plementa~ron Poten~~al~extexnal funding sources include federal and state grants, utility p>sibhc good~~ar~s and eenhouse gas offset/mitigation fees. A City Council-approved unp3a~Zntat fan~'w5l~~~sotentially make Chula Vista more competitive in soliciting these funding so ~cr'e``veCause the plans provide a broader framework and an explicit commxtment.~~nc~icn fundrug agencies seek in applicants In addition, City staff will continue to`,~dentify na~~"oppor~irgzties to leverage existing municipal efforts and work plans to cost effectively implementt~he CZzmaZ°eAdaptata'on Strategies, v~; ~-r ~ ~i~ ' ~ ~ a` ~ 4 3 Climate Adaptarion Str•ate~ies 3 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) STRATEGY #l: COOL PAVING OVERVIEW By 2OS0, annual average temperatures in the San Diego region are expected to increase up to 4 5 degrees Fahrenheit with summer temperatures increasing even higher Ihis temperature shift will likely amplify the "urban heat island effect" and its negative community impacts., the urban heat island effect, which was fast recognized in the 19~h century by climatologists who measured differences in cities where natural vegetation and trees had been removed, is a phenomena in which the air in urban areas can be 6-8°F hotter than in surrounding. undeveloped areas.. As natural landscapes are replaced with buildings, rooftops, and pavex~ent"that absorb, store, and then radiate heat, the amount of energy used for cooling purposes concentration of smog, and the general discomfort of residents and visitors within thei c mmumty increases., In areas with tall buildings and nazrow streets, heat can be tra~ed~and a~r~ow reduced between structures In addition, waste heat from air condrtrom g~~,y~vehicles, ana~a dustrial processes contributes fiuther to an urban community's heat loads~',~~`s such, the China e~~F~hange Working Group recommended that the City should develop an (ordinance incorporating refl~e--dive (or "cool paving") into all municipal projects (parking lof~d sttets~and new private parking lot projects over a specific size Cool pavements refertt~,a~~'a{rge of established and emerging paving materials which store less heat and have lowe~~scsur~face temperatures compared with conventional products. r 4 ~ fl Io address these climate change impacts re~i~~edt~~e~ ~n heati~island effect, City staff will (1) perform a comprehensive study to evaluated,d~t~f~mulfiple~'xeflective pavement technologies grid (2) develop options, ha d,o~ the sf~ifc)*~s results, for incorporating cool pavement technologies into mumcipak~~apital i~n~roveme~and development pazking lot standards, ~ ~ ~E ~G ~ PROGRAM STRATE~ ~ . ~ The following sp~ecr~fic actin ~ 1 be pursued by City staff' over the next 24 months: 1 Cool~''Pavzng ~u~& '~est$~,Area - the Public Works Department (Operations & ,lvngmeerrng) will erfoxm~ a pilot project to evaluate multiple reflective or "cool" p~e~rent strategies gg help inform creation of new policies for municipal paving capital impigvement proles sand private pazking lot projects., the project will consider: a ~`~~~ie~currenand future technologies and their applications -possible use of test sifes==vya Flo g term performance measurement b Cost "~~s~sociated with reflective paving j c Ihorough understanding of the benefits/drawbacks of cool paving techniques d. Installation techniques e. Short and long term performance and compazison with current practices f Reflective paving standards g Streets -residential vs arterial and private vs. public facilities h, Parking lots -private vs. public facilities i. Maintenance of existing public and private facilities j Incentives opportunities for private owners to use reflective paving applications/installations Climate Adaptation Strategies 4 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 2.3, 2011) k Benefits of'street and parking lot landscaping (shade trees) 2 Cool Paving Study Results & Standards Options -Based on the study results, staff' will develop options for incorporating reflective pavement into all municipal projects and private parking lot projects over a specific size.. the options will be presented to City Council for review and consideration PERFORitiIANCE METRICS Although the development of specific performance metrics would be informed by the proposed cool pavement study, below ue some potential metrics that could beats eked and reported on an ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Cool Pavemexit~~s~r $~gy: • Temperature reduction of cool versus traditional paving3~aterra~s~~i~n~est areas • Total squaze feet of paved surfaces incorporating co'+'ypaving technolq"gees ~ t asp TIlVIELINE ~3~~ s~ The implementation of this strategy will occur over~a~4 girth period (summarized in figure below) City staff will develop and release a Request foiQ~lifications (RFQ) for consultants to assist in designing and implementing a cadT` movement study ~~een May and Iuly 2.011„ By the end of 2011, the study will begin and last at~lea~s~_-1,~, months:a a"~th the results of the study and ~s ~ field tests, staff will prepare policy optionsi~gt coo11 ~~er~e~ts ' ich will be vetted through the various City commission and presented to C`rC~^~erl for~fmal consideration by March 2012. ~ ~W,~ v ~5 CLIMATE ADAPTAT40f~1 STRf EGY #1: Cool Pavement a~,, r ~Impterrre'nfatton Plan 'Timeline 7~„~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ r=emu ~ ~ ~'i OCf'it July'it )an 't2 i*< -Award contract for ~~~~``;~fdvedise RFQ ~'r study ^Finalize stutly ' ~ s~ <tvy Oct'11 April `12 April'11 May'ti March'i2 Begin development cf RFQ ~ Present study fndings and policy options to City Council " PROGRAM MILESTONES Climate Adaptation Strategies 5 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) BUDGET & FIINANCING the proposed components' initial implementation costs axe estimated to be approximately $115,000 for staffing and consultant fees to further evaluate cool paving opportunities and policy options (summarized in table below). Potential ongoing annual expenses are estimated at $5,000. These costs may be covered partially through existing external founding sources, but additional funding will be required for full implementation, Any cool pavement policy presented to the City Council for future consideration would include a more robust cost analysis for ongoing implementation of the strategy.. s~ ~~i~ Adaptation Strategy#1 -Cool Pavement a City Staff $ 20"$ 5,000 s~ Cool Pavement ~7~' _ Supplies $ ~ n v $ ~ Study & Testing ~I _ Consultant Fees $ 85 000;; ~ - . Cool Pavement City Staff 5 000 - Policy Options ~ ~ phi ~h Report Consultant Fees ~5=® 0~.$ - tt.~?= ,w~'~ 'AL $ ~~sa~~1af5,000 $ 5,000 t UNFUN6ED PORRTI~ON $ °x115,000 $ 5,000 2 t=~ t ~ .t r,, ~ i ~ ~ r" v~ ~ t~~~ t~ Cti H ~ ~~{~j ~ Climate Adaptation Strategies 6 of>9 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) STRATEGY #2: SHADE TREES OVERVIEW As previously described in this report, annual average temperatures axe expected to increase up to 4 5 degrees Fahrenheit with summer temperatures increasing even higher by 2.050.. Ihese higher temperatures, combined with a larger regional population, will cause peak electricity demand to grow by over 70% compared to current levels Shade trees contributing to a robust urban forest are useful in addressing both higher temperatures and energ~idemand by acting as a ~t"frees hel reduce storm natural cooling mechanism fox urban areas. In addition, canopy forxr~l p water runoff; provide habitat for wildlife, and increase property valeu~-;~~s As such, the Climate Change Working Group recommended that Chula Vista adopt~a~shaa~~tree ordinance, so that shade trees aze incorporated into all municipal improvement prplects andat xivate development parking lot projects.. The CCWG also noted that any newgq~ finance shou~ld~bk flexible to adjust to project features such as solaz cazports or other regulations such as the exrstrng r andscape water conservation ordinance. a ~ ' " ~ Io address these climate change impacts related to hr~g ex ~mpexatrrxes and energy demand, r City staff will (1) develop a shade tree policy far futura~G~ Council consideration, (2) amend the Municipal Landscape Manual to be ;c~,q,~srs~tent wrth th~e~nw policy, and (3) ensure that the recently-updated Design Manual is consist~enC~wtfte new pole t~ ~ 4 PROGRAM STRATEGY ~ ~~~I~ the following specific ac ~'`-wr11 Y% ursued~iy7ity staff over the next 12 months: €s~s ~ 1 Municipal Sh~e~~ee Polz~~ ~'~.h~~;L~nd Development Division's Landscape Section will create a new pohc'w,hiol3~ampliasrzesshade trees in all municipal improvement projects a~'~ °r~ and pnvatehdevelopr~r~rif parking lot projects. City staff' has determined that a farmal G ~'%Fa U~"~` Crty~C~aunar~ohicy (rate ,than an ordinance) would be the most effective way to ensure thaffithe use of"srade treE~s,,incoxpoxated into all future projects to help mitigate and ad pt to climate cliasge impacts.. The new policy will be developed as described in the co~ict of Iheme Sb~"~'the Ganeral Plan (FIealthy & Sustainable Environment) and will spe f~~hy addresee species selection, maintenance considerations, water usage, and plantmg~standards=~An approved shade tree list will be incorporated into the policy by refexence`~b~e 3eveloped in partnership with the City's Axboxist and Urban Forestry Divisron A~~anety of related City Council policies will be superseded by adoption of a new shade tree policy: 576-OS - Iiee Preservation Policy 576-09 -Landscaping for City Buildings Policy 576-08 -Median landscapurg Policy 576-07 -Street Iiee Maintenance 576-06 -Palm Iiee Preservation Policy 576-04 -Approved Iree Policy 576-0.3 -Iree Planting Policy Climate Adaptation Strategies 7 of 39 DRAFS Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) 576-01 - Iree and Shrubbery Policy 2. Landscape Manual Update -the Chula Vista Landscape Manual is the City's primary guidance document for all development projects in terms of the design, installation, and maintenance of their landscaped areas. To align the Landscape Manual with the new City Council policy on shade trees (described above), the Land Development Division's Landscape Section will update the manual accordingly., the new shade tree guidance provided in the Landscape Manual will take into consideration limited landscape water budgets, tree maintenance requirements, and available root/canopy,A pace. Ihese updates will also be coordinated with modifications to reflect new s€afe'laws requiring lower water use plant palettes and on-site storm water capture and~wtryeatment. Finally, the new Landscape Manual's shade tree requirements for par ' g ~otprojects may provide exemptions if' cool (see Climate Adaptatzon Stratea~ #I) o orous (see Cltmate Adaptation Strategy #5) pavements axe provided oa~°~~me combinafi'Qn of the three, j~ „ h~~ 3 Design Manual Update -The City's Desigx~t~anual wi~l be revxewe~id updated (if necessary) by the Development Planning D~ axon to b~t.consistent with the new shade tree requirements outlined in the revised Landsca e aixual and new City Council shade tree policy However, it is envisioned that mosf o~~design criteria will be captured in the Landscape Manual, while theDesrgn Manua~rll just reference the Landscape Manual fox compliance guidance ~ ~ ~ PERFORMANCE METRIC~~~= The following metric wrl be ao,ed and~<rpoxted on an ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Sha~d~~`~ees" st~a~~egy a # of'new proje~'t'sarrcorpo~ngathPew shade tree standard TIlVIELINE~~~~'~~ f ~ ~ ~r~ the rmple}~n'tatron o~S stratag~, will occur over an 8-month period (summarized in figure below)~er the draft shade tree po~icy is circulated fox public feedback, staff will present the draft pot ~mto the vanous `~1~' Commissions and, ultimately, to the City Council in July 2011 for revrew axid considerahon~~~ fter City Council's approval of the new policy, the Landscape Manual will be~evlsed ac'c~~"gdingly and presented to City Council for consideration in December 2011. ~G Climate Adaptation Strategies 8 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (Febmary 23, 2011) CLJMAT'E ADAPTAT'ICN STRATEGY #2: Shad Ties MaY 1 i 0 d 11 Dra of the Shade D eft ofthe Lantlsc~e Tree Polcy reatly Far Manualr®tly for pu blb putlic cunm cots Comments s?°~ £a April'11 @t'11 ~ `~e, April '12 July 11 Decuz ~ Shatle Tree Poliy Yo Lai tls: ape ~vLnual to ` C ityC oundl for Clty Co;~forapprc=al efl''~:+ A PProal 'rv~%~3' P R OG RAM M IL E S7 Opt; ~ BUDGET &z FINANCING the proposed components mttial~pnplemen"~ "costs axe estimated to be $40,000 for staffing (summarized in table belo ~ ~lre~~~dcosts w~11~e covered through existing external founding sources. Ihere are no n€~ing addi~t'onal cos~s to the City associated with implementing this climate adaptation strat~~ s~,~.. s Adaptation State 2 SFi~eTrees a e ~g New Shade gee Policy Ci` Staff $ 20,000 $ - SDG&E LGP ~~xw3 ei~~;~M Landscape & Deslg, _ City Staff $ 20,000 $ SDG&E LGP Manual Updates TOTAL. $ 40,000 $ - UNFUNDED PORTION $ - $ - Climate Adaptation Strategies 9 of'39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) STRATEGY #3: COOL ROOFS OVERVIEW - Annual average temperatures axe expected to increase up to 4 5 degrees F ahrenheit by 2.050 with summer temperatures increasing even higher. Ihese higher temperatures, combined with a larger regional population, will cause peak electricity demand to gsow by over 70% compared to current levels. Every house changes the microclimate around it by retaining the sun's heat and contributing to the urban heat island which increases discomfort for everyone, requires an increase in the amount of energy used for cooling purposes, and incr.-eases the formation and concentration of smog Cool roofs, which are made of highly xeflec~e and emissive material that can remain approximately 50 to 60°F cooler than traditional rr~ai,~enals, can help address the problem of heat islands by lowering the ambient tempexattrres ~lxre~arr~d outside of buildings, providing a more comfortable and' healthy environment, a~~educ'in~energy use for air- conditioning As such, the Climate Change Working Gro '%recommended,tFsat the City should require and provide incentives (such as contribuh~n~,, the City's errharic dd energy code requirements) for new residential development with,arr-eonditronuzg systems to i3i's~all ENERGY STAR cool roof technology ~ To address these climate change impacts related to hrghezareratures and energy demand, City staff will (1) further evaluate cool,.. oftng optrons a'x°~opose amendments to municipal building codes to incorporate cool roof's °~ne~2~~srdenhal e~elopments with air-conditioning (AC) systems. Staff will also evaluate g 'ex the~CC,,~7C~ suggestion to provide cool roofmg incentives and will offer recommendations o futuc~ Crty ~o~ ncil consideration x~ ~ ~ I PROGRAM STRATEG~f~ the following specifi~actons wrl~l)flae~g edy Carty staff over the next 9 months: 1 Municipal uzldzng ode Update The Building Division will propose amendments to the CxE~s~ e n Budding, Standards -Chula Vista Municipal Code Chapter 1S 12 - to xe ' e cool roo` ~s~'on rie~C$~ sidential developments with air conditioning Chula Vista ~Iu`~nicipal Code Cfr`~~ptex 152 adopts and amends the 2010 California Green.Building n°,,daazds Cade (C Ga'een) Currently, cool roofing is a voluntary measure in CalGreen, and staff will be pxopsmg to make these measures mandatory.. The CalGreen residential voluntaxneasur,,~es~P, or cool roof's are categorized into two tiers: Tier 1 and Iier 2. Tier 1 standazdsaxreeF~~IgERGY SIAR and California Energy Commission (CEC) minimum specrficahons~for cool roofs, while Iier 2 standards require higher efficiency levels than Tier 1. StafTwill evaluate the cost and benefit of both tiers and, based on staff's findings, will recommend to City Council which standards to adopt. Staff' will also evaluate the cost and benefit of requiring cool roofs on new residential developments without AC systems, Homes built without an AC system may later have a system installed and because cool roof's provide a cooler, more comfortable indoor/outdoor environment, requiring cool roofs on homes without an AC system could potentially negate the need to have an AC system installed in the future by occupants.. Climate Adaptation Strategies 10 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) the majority of all new residential developments in the City, excluding some multi- residential units, will have sloped roof's with concrete or clay file roofing material Based on staff's preliminary research, the majority of concrete and clay file roofing that is locally available meets or exceeds minimum ENERGY STAR specifications at zero to minimal incremental cost compared to traditional "non-cool" products., It also should be noted that many of the existing homes in the City's newer areas have concrete or clay tle roofing that meet minimum ENERGY STAR specifications.. Finally, cool roof products are currently available in a wide vaziety of types, shapes, and colors. Even though staff is not proposing amending the California E~texg5' Code to require cool roofs, the California Energy Commission has informed the City~that the CEC will have to approve any cool roof ordinance before it can take effact~ ~~fxe CEC's involvement is triggered because cool roofing is one of the optons~savailatil~tobuilders under the perfarmance method of compliance with the Ene~y Code and4~~~ys a role in the energy efficiency of buildings. the CEC appr~ ~r process is similar,,~e City's past process with adopting its increased energy ~£Y~ct'ency standards whrch`~~volved a cost- effectiveness analysis, a City Council deter` aeon tl~a~'tfie proposed requirements are cost-effective, and submittal of the prop~ 4.4,~ xa~i menu to the CEC after the ordinance's first reading by City Council.. Ihe~fviial~CEC review and approval process ~~r can take up to three months. ~ PERFORMANCE METRICS ~ a e x ~~s~ The following metrrc wdl heM~tcacked ancf~~e~~.©rted on an ongoing basis to quantify the r~°~iJ~;,~yes~ t.~ performance of the "Coo1~R~)afs stra~gy ~~a • # of new residenftrmts mco~iorating c~1 roof's fi~ TIMELINE ,~_t ~ ~~s~ The unpleme~ntatton,4of~ hrs strategy will occur over a 9-month period (summarized in figure below) di~th`~the he1~~a copsMultant, Building Division staff antcipates having the cost- effechve~ess study completed m NPay 2.011 and a proposed ordinance to City Council in August 2011 af~~r •eing vetted thiattgh various City Commissions.. After City Council's approval of fast readings;taff will sul~ir~`t the proposed requirements to the CEC for approval (antcipated for November'.2Uhi1) After CEC approval, staff will bring the ordinance back to City Council for second xeadirfgaz~dadopton in December 2011.. If approved by City Council, the new ,~v;. , requirements will take}effect in Ianuary 2012. which is 30 days after formal adopton Climate Adaptation Strategies 11 of 39 DRAFT Implementafion Plans (February 23, 2011) CLIMATE ADAPTATION STRATEGY #3: Cool Roofs Implementation Plan Timeline Aug '11 - Ordinance to Council Jan '12 (154 reading) Nov'11 Submit to CEC ~ New requirements take • CEC Approval effect ~i~ April 11 Oct 12 April'12 May'11 ~Dec'11 `r asp, n Begin cost effectiveness •~Gouncil 2^a ~ ass anatysis for cool roof ~~~Teading/approval requirement ¢ k ¢ ~ ~ PROGRAM MILES7NES~;~ cl C~~ y~~F ~ x~ S~3'`~°' Si'W BUDGET & FINANCING ~ Ni~~ ~ t~g.ia~ i the one-time and annual costs ate estimatedto~b " ~9 000 axid $3,500, respectively (summarized `~~g p m~e'~t~the code development costs in table below . the one tr~ra~e~waPq s re xesg ,while the axuiual values represent the eshr}ryted cos~sof ongoxn~ ublic education and outreach efforts Staff anticipates that ongoin~~ revlew~and inspections costs will be minimal and that fees will not need to be updated to r~e~oex the ao~t"~a~hop~=ime and annual costs will be covered tluough exisfing external foundm " ouzues~ Adaptatio Strategy #3 Gaol Roofs< , a + ~ ~~~,+~,CitySt~t' $ 26,000 $ 3,000 SDG&ELGP v h Municipal Bwldmg g'su-X"lies $ 500 $ 500 SDG&ELGP Code Update `.`?~p Consultant Fees $ 2,500 $ - SDG&E LGP 'TOTAL, $ 29,D00 $ 3,500 UNFUNDED PORTION $ - $ - Climate Adaptation Stratea es 12 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) STRATEGY #4: LOCAL WATER SUPPLY & REUSE OVERVIEW By 2050, San Diego County's demand for water is expected to increase by 37% as a result of population and economic gzowth In addition, prolonged droughts exacerbated by climate change could reduce water supplies from imported sources by 20% or more. Ihese climate change impacts could limit imported water availability, increase utility costs for residents and businesses, and lead to higher demand for local water soxxroes As such, the Climate Change Working Croup recommended that Chula Vista should educate rts res~denfs and businesses about the benefits and appropriate uses of local water supplies (including C ~,ycled water; groundwater desalination, and onsite water reuse systems) and further integraferre"c~e~ed water (if available) and onsite water reuse systems into new development and redeelopmene plans., ,4 To address these water-related climate change impactsr~arid reduce future n~ls~and costs, the City, in close coordination with local water districts" dell (1) ealuate and p ap se municipal building code amendments to incorporate single-sdurce~gray wager "stub outs' m new residential h° ~i buildings and indoor recycled water in new commerc~rihb~,>~• drugs, (2) develop an educational uide for the enexal ublic about so ex use of a ~~a`ex s stems, 3 create an incentive g g p P p ~Y~ y (using external funding sources) to promo opsite water ro%'s~e;,~and (4) update the City's water- ram„ related plans to reference and promote reu~y~oted ~~,er and oust e cyater reuse systems, ~i ~ PROGRAM STRATEGY s~~ ~ The following specific a~tfo~s wxl~b~,e puxsu`a~ Crty staff in partnership with Sweetwater Authority and the Otayat r Drstrr~over the nxt~2 years: 1 YPateY Reuse Bualrng ~o°des ~",rS"Cazic~ards -the Building Division will evaluate and propose ecy ordma~'n~e~~~t incorporate gray water plumbing "stub-outs" (all residential prop~rt~5~ +~`a~~du~al pP~mbmg for indoar recycled water use (coxnxnexcial properties in Basin area) for,m~sv dev~~apment projects.. Ihese new codes will contribute to meeting theCrty's Green Building S~ndazds for indoor and outdoor water use efficiency and be complemented by edui~ation and outreach to developers and building permit applicants.. z ~ ,i Based"" ~i skew starregulations, gray water systems, which typically collect water from showers, non^~ood~inks, and clothes washers, can be installed at residences and be used ~-,tA to irrigate lair~"dscaped areas, thus lowering demand for imported water. the proposed strategy will require a simple stub-out for clothes washers on anew home's exterior; so that homeowners can more easily install PVC pipes to water their landscaping. the stub- out requirement will also help ensure that homeowners are properly using asingle-source gray water system, because currently there is no municipal permit needed for this system type. the new standard will be developed to place special emphasis on maintaining proper public health and safety and avoiding any urban runoff concerns Staff also expects that the new standard will take into consideration the residential building type (single-family detached, single-family attached, and multi-family), lot size, soil type, and laundry room location in the new home, Based on information from the City of Tucson Climate Adaptation State~ies 13 of39 DRAF'1- Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) which incorporated a similar requirement in 2008, the incremental cost fox the stub-out during construction is esrimated to be less than $200 per home. Currently, recycled water is provided by the Otay Water District in the eastern section of Chula Vista and used mainly for landscaping on commercial properties, street medians and parkways, parks, and open space districts. Io broaden the use of this dzought- resistant, local water source, the Building Division will evaluate and propose a new standard expanding recycled water to indoor commercial uses. Specifically, the new standard will integrate dual plumbing systems in new corxunercial buildings in Otay Water District's service territory.. the new system will allow.a~ec`ycled water to be used fox indoor plumbing flush fixtures such as toilets and urinalsz?and for mechanical systems such as HVAC cooling towers.. The new standard will be `d eloped to place special emphasis on maintaining proper public health and sa=t~ety~ and~b~eadjusted for different commercial building sizes, uses, and location (r e"~CCess to a rec c)yed water delivery i es . PP ) <~~a 2 Single-Source Gray Water Best Practice~~-,~To hel ommunity members who axe interested in utilizing single-source gray wa{er ~yste~'°`s, the Conservation Division in partnership with the Building Division will devela~ ''"best practices" manual describing proper installation methods fox ins#sallrng the syste~,tsidential properties.. Ihis user- friendly document will address si~tg arso~ure~e~gray wtstems at both new homes (to complement the new stub-out xequ~riemexi~ d`~es,~rrbed abo"ve) and at existing residences. Special emphasis in the guides w+%P1 al,~~be"'`~p~~`ed on maximizing the systems' effecfiveness, pxotectmgs~h'Itn~ian health~a~=rxydording water runoff. The Gray Water Best Practices Guide will ba avar able at the'tCity's Permit Counter and on the CLEAN website and will be distrrbYed to the~ublic at unity events and through landscape-related educational opp`~~unities ,aunh as on srt,°~NatureScape certifications and Composting classes) ~,s:-_ 3 Onstte~ ate~euse ~ utztzve The Conservation Division will collaborate with the local watj~ rstxicts toezeate~a{~r`Onsite Water Reuse Incentive Fund" to provide rebates for k~ x~e water reuse ,{'the fu~i~wi11 specifically target retrofitting existih~ residences and br, esses (which dare not addressed through the new stub-out requirement described abo~ehto maxrmri~"onsite water collection and reuse, thus decreasing reliance on import~twater so des and helping to lower monthly utility costs, Examples ofpotential incentive us~s~~Iude providing rebates for the purchase of rain barrels and single-source ° xi~E' gray water°"~c~lothes washer) conversion kits. Similar to the City's current Home Upgrade, Carbon Downgrade Appliance Exchange Rebate Program, the new rebates could be structured as point-of=sale discounts at local retailers in order to support the local Chula Vista economy and to streamline the participation process for interested residents and businesses. Potential funding sources for the Onsite Water Reuse Incentive Fund could include water efficiency grants, partnerships with non-profit agencies, and/or other funding mechanisms, as available, 4, Zandscape Manual & Water Conservation Plan Guidelines Updates -Outdoor water conservation for new construction and major renovations is guided by a variety of Climate Adaptation Stt'ategies 14 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) municipal documents at various stages in the development approval process. At the sub- area plan stage, development projects with SO or more dwelling units (or equivalent) must complete Water Conservation Plans to outline their strategies for maximizing indoor and outdoor water use efficiency At the permit review stage, new development and redevelopment projects must comply with the City's Landscape Manual which directs project proponents to design and install landscaping (plant palettes and irrigation systems) that meet a designated water budget and design standards, To further promote recycled water and onsite water reuse systems, the Advanced Planning and Land Development Divisions will revise the Water Conservation Plan Guidelines and the Landscape Manual, respectively, to explicitly incorporate an~p omote recycled water and onsite water reuse systems (such as gray water and xar~n3watex harvesting) into the ~'tc , project design and review process.. As part of the revrsronsiZLomeowner Associations' CC&Rs will also be required in the future to include informa6oaonceming onsite water reuse opportunities to help educate new homeowner d lower ther~~,~ xty costs. PERFOI21~4ANCE MEIRICS ~~fl the following metrics will be tracked and reporrt~~o~a~ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Local Water Supply & Reuse" stratee • # of new residential units incoxpor~a'tm~g~a gray water t~b-out • # of new commercial buildin s in~o~ satin. door du'~ lumbing for recycled water • Amount of incentive funds dgtribu~~ for re~~tlrn~x~rrrg buildings with onsite water collection and reuse systems ~ ~~F TIlVIELINE ~ Implementation of the,lgbove xxr~nt~on~dr,com`p~~ro. ents will occur over a 12-month period (summarized in figure b~e~o,~~~weemM'a.~~and October 2011, the new water reuse codes and standards wrll be.~~zafted fort'~rew by various City Commissions, and ultimately for ordinance consrdexatror~r°,they,C~ty~,Cour~c~~1~a,~Likewise, updates to the Water Conservation Plan Guidelines and Lan~~ap'e Manual ~l~be ve~~e~d~through the various City commission prior to City Council consrd~„~aTion Once the ens codes'~and standards are adopted, the Gray Water Best Practices Grade wrll~~~he finalized to an's"ure consistency between documents Finally, between April 2011 , . and April 2`Q1~Crty staff 1 work to develop and seek initial, external financial support far an Onsite Water Reuse Incexl e Fund. ~ wa,I , a r~ Climate Adaptarion Stratea es 1S of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) CLIMATE ADAPTATION STRATEGY #4: Local Water' Su pply & Reuse Implementation Plan Timeline ~ ~luly'11 Nov'1t i~ April'12 •Begin to expla•e seed °Co until consideratbgoflf"~ Secure seed fu nding fund ing forOW RIF newcodes &standardsry+e ~~5yOWRIF ~ ~ ~ Apri '11 Oct 'tt~~~ e~ April 12 May 11 ~fi~,~.D~"''~ 11 • Begin devebpment of New~'"e'cd~ & standards - nev codes & standards ':~i r take effec~.~~ . • Develo framework for i`~ ` 7e 'i~".New Gray W~.Y€F:GUide Ons de Water Reuse ~"'~'z~t&disfr`iF"iyuted ncentive Fund (OWRIF) 6~~ a .~-~~'~,PROGRP. ~FAfLESTONES G1 ~ F~ ti'~ rte i rq ~a es M yr BUDGET:~FINGIIG 47~ t` the pxap~osed componenYs'~~~5~osts are,~estimated to be $112,,000 and $6,500 fox initial and ongoing implemexrt'~tion, xespectroe(summarized in table below). Estimated one-time costs include updating cgd'es and pohc~~~ creating associated guidebooks, developing an incentive fund, training staff`~ar d initial c~aziimunity outreach efforts.. Axmual costs cover ongoing outreach and program admmxsft~iorefforts, As part of the Water Reuse Codes & Standazds component, it should be noted thatian review and inspection costs for dual plumbing axe estimated to be 2-3 hours per project (not including the cost of a potentially xequued annual inspection pxoo am) and development fees would most likely need to be adjusted to recover these additional staff costs Climate Adaptation Strategies 16 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) Adaptation Strategy #4 -Local Water Supply & Reuse e Water Reuse City Staff $ 46,000 $ 4,500 Division Budget Codes & Standards Supplies $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Division Budget ! Cit Staff $ 13,200 $ Division Budget Gray Water' Best y ~='3'~ i Practices Guide " ~5' Printing & Distribution $ 3,500 $ ~~f100 Division Budget Onsite Water City Staff $ 12,300 $ r~ x Division Budget Reuse Incentive Fund Consultant Fees $ 5 000 a ~ ~~,Qi,+vision Budget Landscape . ey Manual & Water City Staff $ 31 000 $ Diuision Budget Conservation Plan Guidelines ~ ~ U dates Consultant Fees $ - Division Budget p : ~s ,t~~ TOTAL`$,~~"~x1~2000 6,500 UNFUNDED PORTION - L a ya,~ i a~~ ~tr~~ w~ ~ ~ ~t t~ { pry. ~ ~ ,F ~ r ~ ~U ~.....::.t`- 4,~: Climate Adaptation Strateges 17 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plzns (Feb*uary 23, 2011) STRATEGY #5: STORM WATER PREVENTION & REUSE OVERVIEW San Diego County's water resources have many beneficial uses and play a major role in the lifestyle and economy of the region By 2.050, climate change will likely alter regional precipitation patterns Ihis precipitation variability will impact watersheds by altering water runoff' and sediment movement flows. Because of urbanization and its associated activities, pollutants axe discharged with these flows into the City's storm dtainagesystems, creeks, rivers, San Diego Bay, and the ocean and reduce the beneficial uses of these~~a•~'er bodies fox the Chula . ~,r Vista community.. As such, the Climate Change Working Group ~a~ommended that Chula Vista revise its storm water regulations and applicable municipal codeto",e~ciently manage higher concentrations of pollutants in urban runoff by minimizing water'waste iis~ing natural landscapes to help drain or reuse runoff, and by ensuring that irxrgat~ ns~systems are popexly installed and maintained, P~~ Io address these storm water-related climate chaxfg~£~m acts,~and reduce future risks and costs, the City will (1) update municipal codes to prohibit'la~da~e'runoff flowmg into storm dzains and receiving water bodies, (2) develop new guidelmes~`~a~xomote the reuse of pipe flushing water at construction sites, (3) create ~`entrves to xewaid- w Impact Development projects which capture and reuse storm water ons~ife~~nd,~~~ vestrgate o~portuxuties for broader reuse of storm water via the City's conveyance sys PROGRAM STRATEG the following specific ae~ns, whxcE~xe above~~`a~1d beyond federal and state regulations, will be pursued by City staff-.rn~ axtnexsh~r~xtl~local v`~}lF"a~er districts and other regional agencies over the next 24 months: ~ :`~53`~ n~ r,~' ~ ~ 1. Lands~a~~e 1atex,YYast~~~Reductions -Currently, Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) Sec~'~on 14,20.1~1~OxempY~ Ian~dscape irrigation, irrigation water, and lawn watering from dr`schaxge prohxbrh`4i' However; testing on samples taken from storm drainage systems t`liro'~ hout the Crty~uring the past few years indicates that nitrate, which is a commonly- ~~a~ used utilizer; xs a p~ersrstent pollutant in urban runoff, Landscape mnoff; a likely source for nrtrat`~ as w~la~ phosphorous and pesticides, is commonly caused by overwatering or impxopei~ ~ctioning irrigation systems.. In fact, the State Water Resources Control Board has c"aI'ducted water sampling and testing in Poggi Creek and Sweetwater River under the Surface Water Ambient Monitoxirrg Program, and has determined that test results warrant placing Poggi Creek and Sweetwater River on the list of impaired water bodies (303(d) list) for toxicity. To implement this strategy, the Storm Water Management Division will update CVMC Section 14.20.110 to remove landscape irrigation, irrigation water, and lawn watering from the list of exempted discharges, Ihis regulatory update will be complemented by public outreach activities to help educate the community about the new guidelines. Climate Adaptation Strategies 18 of 39 DRAF1 Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) 2 Construction Site Water Waste Reductions - As part of construction and grading activities, pipe flushing is a common practice which is conducted after the installation of all water and sewer pipes, It is intended to remove any debris or sediment that may have entered the pipes during construction wank, Currently, the effluent from pipe flushing is allowed to discharge into the City's storm drainage systems and eventually into a receiving water body (such as a creek, river; or bay).. As a result, all debris and sediment that is accumulated in the pipes are discharged to storm drainage systems (in violation of CVMC Section 14.20100) and gallons of potable water; which can be xe-used in construction activities, is wasted. To implement this strategy, Czty staff' will develop a program to encourage developers and contractors to xe nse linx;lt`~hing effluent for dust control, landscape irrigation, ox other potential beneficial uses `ern construction sites.. the I City may partner with the Associated General Contractrp»o~fSan Diego and the local a ~~'a water districts to develop the progzam, 3iv fi 3, Low Impact Development Incentives - WhenE ~ natural parcel of~land~is developed, increased impervious areas alter the site'sf~h~drology such that pealhslow rates and durations are increased (known as hychom~cation) 4a erg with the pollutants that are carried in the storm water. Recent experience~sho~~stsat utilizing natural systems to manage urban runoff; known as Low Impact Dey~e„~1`opment (LID), provides one of the most effective methods fox pxeve ttngdpollutant an sediment discharges to storm water conveyance systems,. Sediment is~oirs'>aed~a polli~'ant=because it clogs fish gills and smothers bottom-dwelling aquatic~hfe ~~ID~t'oneepts rriclude infiltration, bioretention, ~ , vegetated swales and roofs porous pa~vemx~t~; anz~~ravp"harvesting, Currently, the Chul~x~sfa"`D~,~elopmeAtr}Stoxm Water Manual includes requirements for incorporating Lpkv~~'Impact~~evelopxne~~G, features in new development and major redevelopmentr~'Iiowever~~d~~e opexs~ahd consultants generally fail to take fiill advantage of thess~ 's qti~ fi"a4sfo~)~feattrxes because dedicated land is required for such features, costs~a Abe (or perceived to be) higher than traditional methods, and bxeakrngrx~oapast pia ces is not easy, In order to encourage developers to incorporate LZI~~ eatuxes ui~tl eir p oj''~ef designs to the fullest extent possible, City staff will provide ~~a ~ t~ t1nGentroes thxoug=~r~axpedited permitting process or another non-monetazy means to prQg'ec~tpxoponents 4 Ben fi'azdh Storm pater Reuse -Preliminary estimates indicate that on a typical dry summe ~„a~ou 4.30,000 gallons of water flows through the City's storm water conveyance sss~ems Dry weather flow is generated either by urban activities such as landscape over-irrigation and car washing or natural processes such as groundwater seepage which can be exacerbated by landscape irrigation infiltration. Storm water conveyance system flows may have various potential uses, such as irrigation of open spaces, public parks, and golf courses, or cooling, washing, ox other activities related to industrial facilities Urban runoff reuse also contributes to minimizing the community's reliance on imported water and to reducing pollufion in creeks, rivers, and the San Diego Bay the presence of certain constituents such as dissolved salts may, however, require water treatment before reuse. Io implement this strategy, City staff' will conduct a Climate Adaptation Strategies 19 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2.011) feasibility study to determine dry weather flow sources, potential uses, possible site locations, as well as the economic feasibility of various reuse scenarios. PERFORMANCE METRICS the following metrics will be tracked and reported on an ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Storm Water Prevention & Reuse" strategies: • # of construction sites conserving and re-using pipe-flushing water • # of developments taking advantage of incentives to mcorpoxa~e~,LID features in their projects ~~R • # of gallons of urban runoff diverted for reuse 3S ~t • # of properties upgrading or adjusting their irrigation s~sfemsato,prevent over-watering s runoff or over-spray ~ ~ a~ i,~a a~ l TL~ZELIlVE ~ ~ 'ry~~~ ~9 ~9 Implementation of the above-mentioned compd'ii~ents wrl~l ~~y~o"~~'"e~cux over a 24-month period (summarized in figure below),. All municipal code up'dte~,;f'exenced above will be drafted fox ordinance consideration by the City Council after"etng vetted tluough vazious City Commissions., Updates to the Chula Vista Development~~ Water Manual will be made 12 ~t~~~ months after the adoption of the next Natia` al Pollmtal~t Disc~t~'a Elimination System (NPDE'S) ~ tip' Municipal Permit for the San Diego Region ,,~a~ a . t~~4 ~ t ~ ~ e ~ CLIMATE AQAPTATIO~( ST'12AT6GY #5: Storm Water Management Impementatlorr~Ehan Timeline ;spa 3 ~`ur~.=[~'v5 ttm,.~ SI~ 4.~'~'YnA ~E~rkv ~`~i. E.~ry 1j 3 SY r- lan~"I- July'12 lan '13 ~ Pro"~d incentive fa~.~~ ~ Update CVMC • Update CVMC Low Impac>=;Developrnedn 20.12.260 14.20.110 r July'11 ~,v. July `12 July 13 July'11 lan '12 • Contractors to re-use Feasibility study for re- pipeflushingwater use otdry weatherflows PROGRAM MILESTONES Climate Adaptation Strategies 20 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) BUDGET & FINAA'CING the proposed components' initial implementation costs are estimated to be $63,500 for staffing, supplies, and consultant services (summarized in table below). Although the proposed components' tasks could be integrated into the Storm Water Division's existing work plans, annual funding available fox storm water-related inspections and regulatory compliance has been reduced, As such, the funding source for the above costs has not yet been identified. Adaptation Strategy #5 -Storm Water Prevention & Reuse .~`~~a,. - e City Staff $ 6,500 $ ~~,L~' Not Identified rt Landscape 4 tot Identified Irrigation Runoff Supplies $ r Consultant Fees $ ~~~s $ ^r,, Na F entified ~a City Staff $ 12(0 $ ,~~~u~ - Not Identifed Contractors to Re "r Use Pipe Flushing Supplies $ 5 000 - Not Identified Water ~~-,~A Consultant Fees ~~"~u„ $ - Not Identified City Staff $*r~~r ~0000'~$~ - Notldentified t_., .~~v~,A~ Low Impact ~ $ $ - Not Identifed PP r°' ~ Development Su lies , i~, bra;,, Consu~It~nl'Fees ~ $ ~ - $ - Not Identified ~ .x. a ti.„ -air Cit St""ff~ d'w~~r~, - $ - Not Identified y ~ ~ Re-Use of Stream ~ ~ ~ Supplies ~ ~ $ - $ - Not Identified Flows ~xa. µ ~ ~ Consultan Fees $ 20,000 $ - Not Identified ~a T'OTAL. $ 63,500 $ ~ ° ~ ~ T Lr_ UNFUNDEPORT'ION $ 63,500 $ - ~~i~ z.+±., Climate Adaptation Sriategies 21 of 39 DRAFZ Implementation Plans (Feorvzry 23, 2011) STRATEGY #6: EDUCATION & WILDFIRES STRATEGY #7: EXTREME HEAT PLANS OVERVIEW If current trends continue, San Diego County's risk from wildfires will become greater by 2.050. Ihis increased susceptibility to wildfires will be driven by wazmer spring temperatures extending the fire season and drier vegetation conditions (from prolonged drought periods) intensifying available fuel sources, Ihis combination will likely increase up to 20°s'o the number of days armually with ideal conditions for large-scale fires. In addition to wrles, extreme heat days in Chula Vista could triple over the next 40 years, which will leadt'further public safety and health concerns including poor air quality (from ground leveE ozone Viand infectious disease transmittal (from. mosquitoes and rodents) As such the C~Iimate ~1~ e Working Group recommended that Chula Vista actively educate the generaJ~public and the~U smess community ~ i about the impacts of climate change using existrn~g=~r(y and coxrunum tner outreach mechanisms with a special emphasis on making hom"~~~moxe res~l~ent to wrldfires; incorporating poar air quality day notifications, and educating iiirsanesses.a~o employee heat illness risks., Furthermore, the City should include "extreme heat`4~e~x~}rYas a significant emergency in its ' public safety planning efforts with a special emphasrs'~ `~sexving vulnerable populations and supporting a robust network of energy-se,~d~,Coolmg Cen~~z; . Io address these wildfire and public healthy elate ~<~k ate change impacts and reduce future risks and costs, the Crty wrll (1) levexabe munxcrpa~,and pai~ier agencies' outreach mechanisms > to broaden wildfire educatrari ~~~'t e coxnmun~ (2) revise the City s existing Emergency ~ tt Response Plan and the Iylu'!~tr Tuns~ic-tional razard Mitigation Plan to include extreme heat events, and (3) establish xtreme deal and poop ~~r quality notification system for residents and r~ businesses., x,~"v~~~~,~ ; ~ ~d I ~ ~ ~ PROGRAN~~'I`R'A`~EGX ~sv~, The follong specific achons'~vvil~ be pursued by City staff' in close collaboration with T a r ~~t" community partners over fYre~ next 4 years: ( 1 Wtl~cl~ivre,~0utyeach~& Eclucataon - the Fire Department, with assistance from the Conservation Di~fsion, will leverage existing municipal programs and community organrzatron`s"~to=broaden the public distribution of wildfire educational materials to support wrldfire preparedness and prevention Existing outreach venues that will be updated to include the expanded wildfire education component include, but are not ' limited to, Chula Vista Fire Explorers, Chula Vista CERI Program, Southwestern College Work Experience Program, Chula Vista Fire Safe Council, and Conservation ' Division's Home Energy Assessment and NatureScape programs All outreach measures will be designed to provide a cleaz and consistent message to community members about wildfire safety. In addition to traditional marketing approaches (such as community newsletters and brochures), the City will maximize its use of door-to-door canvassing and social media (such as Facebook). f Climate Adaptation Strategies 22 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) 2 Emergency Response Plan & Hazard Mitigation Plan Updates -the City's existing Emergency Response Plan, a component of the Chula Vista Emergency Operational Plan, provides a framework for local public safety response in case of a large-scale emergency.. To help prepare the community for higher frequencies and duration of extreme heat days in the future, the Fire Department will revise the City's Emergency Response Plan to include extreme heat events and the appropriate response actions to mitigate the impacts from the events.. As part of the update process, the City will evaluate the need to expand "cooling centers" in Chula Vista to serve vulnerable populations such as the elderly, young, and sick and to incorporate renewable energy and/or energy.storage fox electricity reliability in case of blackouts. A similar revision will also bte~.~~~c-ompleted for the Multi- lurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan by the Fire Departure "t~uxing its next regularly scheduled update in 2015, This countywide plan idenhfi>~ and ways to minimize damage by natural and manmade disasters through enli,mg ptixc awazeness, creating a decision tool fox management, promoting compl~a"'`ce with Stat~ax~id Federal program requirements, enhancing local policies for hazaid~m~itigation capabrl~~and providing inter-jurisdictional coordination d~ ~ f`~ 3, Poor Air Quality & Extreme Heat Notificatzo~s~ ~„a drtion to health risks from heat exhaustion and heat stroke, exhaust from vehrcl s ~atrd industrial sources cause gzound- level ozone to accumulate at hrgh sq centrahons~'drtng extreme heat events.. These hazmful concentration levels cari`~g`e axxety of~p~ry~ic health problems including ( chest pain and coughing, and can€~ xs n""(friu'~tlsz exn~ ysema, and asthma. Io help t prepare the community for more frec~uen~Ee> fireme~l~"'~at and poor air quality days, the ~r~ Conservation Drvxsrox}s~~rll,gstabhsh~~edure fox notifying residents, businesses, and community oxganrzafr~oxs about these belrts The notification system will build off the n San Diego Aix PnlTution Cont'hol Drstrrct~gs~„air quality monitoring and forecasting system and utilize the-~~ty s Nixl~~, nd,Lyrrs msaging platforms, as well as its social media sites (such as Faeel~nok~`~~~=s~"`}~1~' , ~ s~ ~a PERFO ~ L CE ME~`1tICS `~z~ the folln~ng metrics wit~be tiaeked and reported on an ongoing basis. to quantify the perfoxman° _e~of the "Educatlozx & Wildfire" and "Extreme Heat Plans" strategies: • # o~ld~fire educatr'o-n materials distributed • # of ressdents & businesses subscribed to notification system (tluough Nixle, Lyxis, & other mes gui~~d'stribution methods) TIMELINE Implementation of the above-mentioned components will occur over a 4-year period (summarized in figure below). Between May and October 2011, existing community and municipal outreach efforts will be revised to include wildfire education and aCity-administered notification system for extreme heat and poor air quality days will be established the Emergency Action PIan and Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan will be updated to include extreme heat events by Apri12.012 and Apri12015, respectively Climate Adaptation Strategies 23 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) CL.IMA7 E ADAP TA'TI ON S'TRAT'EGY #6: Education & Wildfir es CL IMATE ADAP TATI ON STRATEGY #7: Exh eme Heat Plans Implementation Plan7imeline Aprilil y~ April'13 April'i5 Oct't1 APnI Y2 Peril t5 , ~s -Complete integral ion of -Finalize upda+ed -~~,'~FinalizeupdatedMUlti- u~ildfireedu~tion Eme-g envy Action Pl an ,-a„~ ,~~u isdictional Hazartl M'~ anon Pl en ~~Develop notification tif~3 sys~m , ,t ,s~ H.~ PROGRAM M Iz~~TONES ~ `tidwb!.~ia c BUDGET & FINANCING ~f ' r The proposed components' costs are estunat`~d to ~~64;~-79~and $46,479 foT initial and ongoing implementation, respectively (sur~mazized mwt~ab~~y'~xelow), The one-time values represent staff 'aM1 ~ 7 ~ e costs and supplies fox xmtia~ `dev"elce}~ment distribution of wildfire education materials, establishment of an air qua~lf nohfi~ation system and updates to emergency action plans, while the annual values rep~eseiit the est~ma~ted cost of going public education and outreach efforts.. Both one-time and ann za;o~gst~s~~`b~e~<'~~~"dl~through existing annual division budgets. - ~ - CItySYa $ 15,000 $ 10,000 Division Budget ~ S Su Ile~f $ 4,500 $ 1,500 Division Budget Wildfire OU~e~ach & PP Educatlort`~~ ~ Prln~Ung~& Mailing $ 15,400 $ 15,400 Division Budget ~ ~x other Commodities $ 17,000 $ 17,000 Division Budget Emergency Plan City Staff $ 10,000 $ - Division Budget Updates Supplies $ 100 $ - Division Budget ' Notification System City Staff $ 2,579 $ 2,579 Division Budget TOTAL $ 64,579 $ 46,479 UNFUNDEDPORi'ION $ - $ - Climate Adaptation Str'ate~ies 24 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (PeStuary 23, 2011) i STRATEGY #8: OPEN SPACE MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW With a rich natural diversity, San Diego County may be home to more plants and animals -many ' of them imperiled -than any other county in the continental United States the region's beaches, canyons, mountains, and deserts support an amazing vaziety of plants and animals, some of which are found nowhere else on the planet.. Ihis great biodiversity is already under stress from human population growth and land use changes that have broken up and~~educed species habitat to fragmented aeeas By 2050, the impacts of climate change ~ge severe and frequent wildfires, extended droughts, sea level rise, higher temperatures,Ian~increased air pollution - will add to the pressures on habitats and their associated species~s aet, the locations where the temperature, moisture, and other environmental conditions` are srsr3table for a particular species will shift.. Chula Vista's open space areas includeJa~idscaped axeass+r~rthin developments, parks and recreation areas, and open space that has be'`~'~` set aside as a p er s~~ for sensitive biological resources In order to assess and reduce impacts associated with clrrrate change on parks and open space and their associated ecos}~s~~er~~rrs they%mate Change Working Group recommended that the City seek opportunities to partn~~ rththe Resource Agencies, non-profit organizations, and/or adjacent public land managers to ~tor and manage/restore ecosystems (as funding becomes available) to ensure=d~~ng,texm habitatcnnectivity, species resilience, and community recreational opportunities, r~~~" n 4 °i ~ Io address these open space-related climat~reha_ng~ruripacGm,"and reduce future risks and costs, the City, in close coordrnati.~t`local p a will (1) update the Otay Ranch Preserve Monitoring and Plans to ac~ely manage and x~~~gate these impacts, (2) amend the Otay Valley Regional Paxk Concep~~an to ensure climate gch~ange impacts aze considered into future park development and manaµgement ail, eont~e the City's transition to low water use landscaping within medi'apar~anfio~e „sp°ace areas PROGRA~STRATE~~ the foIlo-w~ing specrfic actions wrll ~e pursed by City staff in paztnership with the County of San Diego, G>~tof San Drego~ US Frsh and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game Otay~;alley RegronaltPark Citizen Advisory Committee, Otay Ranch Preserve Steward (RECON), TPB D`e~elopxre't, and Otay Land Company over the next 18 months: 1 Otay RancZi~~Preserve Monitoring and Plans (Phase 2) -the Advanced Planning Division will collaborate with the County of San Diego and the Otay Ranch Preserve Steward in the preparation of the Otay Ranch Preserve's annual work plans to document potential vegetation and species diversity changes as a result of climate change.. Ihese annual plans outline the active (such as habitat/species surveys, invasive species removal, and native plant restoration) and passive (such as litter abatement and fencing) management priorities for the given calendar year As part of this climate adaptation strategy, specific management and monitoring actions in response to observed climate changes will also be incorporated into the annual work plans, as necessary, to ensure long-term habitat and species viability.. Finally, the Otay Ranch Resource Management Climate Adaptation Shate~ies 25 of'39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) Plan (Phase 2) will also be revised to incorporate policies and objectives which promote the evaluation of the impacts of climate change on open space and recreational opportunities as these uses are planned in or adjacent to the Otay Ranch Preserve, 2 OVRP Concept Plan & I'raal Design Guidelines -The Otay Valley Regional Pazk (OVRP) Concept Plan & hail Design Guidelines provide a blueprint fox the long-term management of the multi-jurisdictional park and fox the development of its trail network, respectively. As part of this climate adaptation strategy, the Advanced Plaxming Division will work with OVRP paztners to amend the OVRP Concept Plan_~„to include criteria for educafional opportunities in the park such as interpxehve ceders/stations and written materials. All educational materials will incorpoxate~ a formation about climate adaptation programs and opportunities in the OVRP, ~t~e~~=anced Planning Division will also work with the partners to amend the OVRP T~arl"Design gau~idelines to allow for climate adaptation in the design of future tra and active ig~~c~eation areas by incorporating a planting pallet that can withstand~~aried climates from uy rain/flood to drought and alternative access points and trarl~re~outing fax existing and trails in the case of flooding s~~ 3 Open Space Management -Currently, the C`~Fy s~Open Space Division manages a ~{fft~ network of open space aeeas whi~h~"~nclude urban ca,~ons, parkways, and medians.. To address climate change impacts espeeially~rel~ated to extended drought periods, the Open a ~a s Space Division will continue and axid Y"ts~7~erff~oxts to'istall state of the art uxgation ~ systems (i.e. low flow, web-based smart cat~ttioRi'a,~~stex valves, and flow sensors) in ~ these areas. Staff wi-}l~a~so seek ac~dx~ional opportunities to convert turf' and other goundcover matenalsxo"`clro;~~ht toleian~or drought resistant plant materials tluoughout the City's Commuzn~Facrh~'Distrxcts ~(~~'Ds), Finally, lazge-scale mulch applications which can helpaain morstu'~~€ soil and lo.', er water needs will be utilized in some areas, where appropna e=-~;~, ~ ~x,~,~; !k^2 PEF:FORA'NCE MEEtF`RICS~~~~ the fall'o-wmg metrics ~'r~ill_ be tracked and reported on an ongoing basis to quantify the pexfoxma5r ~ ofthe "Open Space Management" strategies: • # f~ us=veys conduc`fe~ within the Otay Ranch Preserve to document potential vegetation and spe`c~,ie diversr - changes as a result of climate change # of rnte ~ etie~c ntexs/stations in the OVRP that include information about climate • adaptatio p grams and opportunities • # of brochures that have been prepared for the OVRP that include information about climate adaptation programs and opportunities • # of linear feet of new state of the art irrigation systems installed within CFD areas • # of low flow, web-based smart controllers, master valves, and flow sensors installed within CFD areas • # of square feet of turf and other gxoundcover materials within CFDs converted to drought tolerant ox drought resistant plant materials. • # of'square feet of mulch applications utilized in CFDs Climate Adaptation Strategies 2.6 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) TIlVIELINE the implementation of this sizategy will occur over an 18-month period (summarized in figure below), In Iune 2.011, revisions to the Otay Ranch Reserve Management Plan's annual work plan process will commence with the new work plans beginning the following month. By the end of 2011, revisions to the OVRP concept Plan and Bail Design Guidelines will also begin and continue through 2.012, CLIMATE ADAPTATION STRATEGY #8: Open Space Managem'e"nt Implementation Plan Timeline ~ S~ y i`.~ ' a ;~,4;a^ luneY1 "`~pec'12 j a t[~ ~ , RMP Annual Wark Plan rt.' a G~omplele RMP and c,~ initiation(ongoing each OVRP Amendments ~r year after) ~ t ~ SF S: Iune 11 June t2 % ~ June '73 ~~;m ar~r luly'it Dec ii • Initiate RMP Amendment • initiate OVRP M PIaNDesign Gmdelir~§5~ Y° y6,.. ~ Amendment ~ •~^~a.,. ~`'o' I PROGI~~~/1 Mt'=Ev,STONES'~"' a ~ ~ ~ BUDGET & FINANCE G ~ ~~Nx the proposed componenIN`t~s'~cos~'are esfrm~at`ed~'to be $1,532,300 and $244,.300 for initial and ongoing implementation ~resp~fively (summazized in table below), the one-time values represent sta€f and a%~nsul~tan~e~osts fox updating the Otay Ranch Work Plans, OVRP Concept Plan and `ARP Trarl~rGu3dehn~c~?as well as staffing and supplies fox installing more water efficrent~~nrgation systems -m open space districts Annual values represent the ongoing admmist~rati~e and mamten nee costs for all proposed components., While a portion of one-time and ongoirig~„cos~ts will b~e~covered by through existing developer fees and division budgets, additional fund~s~ill neeo be identified to fully implement all components, sr r,A ',Y s,~ Climate Adaptation Strategies 2:7 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (F ebruzry 23, 2011) Adaptation Strategy #8 -Open Space Management • - Cit Staff $ 13,000 $ 11,000 Developer Fees/ Otay Ranch Work y Division Budget Plans** Consultant Fees $ 15,000 $ 35,000:; Not Identified fir. OVRP Concept City Staff $ 9,300 $ 9300 Division Budget Plan & T rail s~"~ Guidelines Consultant Fees* $ 5,000 $ f~ , Not Identified Open Space City Staff $ 190 000 ~ 24,000 `-~~Not Identified Management ~ Supplies $ 1,300000.x$ 165,000 I~odentified „~,r~.d' ,~,r y44,300 TOTAL. $ 1,532 Q~ $ ~~r ~~P UNFUNDED PORTION $ 1,510 000) 224,000 ^ ~F *Consultant will only be needed if a biologist' f rTt~he County of Sa ©rego is not available to consult on biological issues `~:*~h-w **Budget assumes 50% funded by~xdCC~~e~[[v.eloper fee~s~and5¢°`/o fundeby Division Budgets Ax'y~M' Y~ ,~"~r~'" 5 6~Y"" S ~ ie ~ ~ ~w= Climate Adzptation Strzte~ies 28 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Places (FeSruzry 23, 2011) STRATEGY #9: WETLANDS PRESERVATION OVERVIEW By 2.050, warmer temperatures and less rain in the San Diego County will keep the region highly vulnerable to prolonged drought periods. Ihis precipitation vaziability will stress riparian wetlands and may alter sediment movement from surrounding watersheds. Along coastline and bays, estuarine wetlands will additionally be impacted by rising sea levels. These impacts from rising sea levels will be exacerbated during storm events. As a result,„tt~e locations where the temperature, moisture, and other envirorunental conditions are surtab'l~eyfor wetlands and their associated species will shift. In order to reduce impacts assocrat d' with climate change on wetlands, the Climate Change Working Group recommended tlpa~whez.rpresexving or restoring coastal and riparian wetlands, the City should take steps taV,aticoxporate~adequate upland or transition habitats to accommodate shifts in wetlands coven~e and help en'sta~~eublic access due to sea level rise and other climate change impactstras~informed by bro~o cal studies and Resource Agency consultation Nix, ~`,W Io address these wetlands-related climate change imp~ct~a~d~reduce future risks and costs, the City, in close coordination with local partners, will (1~~e~aluate the feasibility of monitaring ~F local wetlands species ranges and abundances in respo'ns_ to climate change impacts, (2) incorporate wetlands "migration" in hab~yta~ment and-~storation design criteria in the future Bayfront Natural Resources Management Pl~aixe;~an~d (3r~'evise the Otay Valley Regional v,~ Park's Habitat Restoration Plan and Non- a~`,t~veuit'Reinalsal Guidelines to include strategies F fox climate change adaptation rssuos ~ U F~ ~ ~ ~ w E ~ g PROGRAM STRATEGY the following specific ~t>aonsc~~yill`be pixrse~~by City staff in partnership with South County Land Managers, ~az~t of San~~~ego, Environmental Health Coalition, City of San Diego, County of San Diega, „and the,Otay ~'i~~ley Regional Park Citizen Advisory Committee over the next 18 ~r~~ months ~5 z ~ 1 Rat al Biologtca~s, Monatoring - Currently, the Advanced Plaxming Division col„ja~4rates with gtfier public agencies such as the US Fish & Wildlife Service, Californ~a~Departt`~uent of Fish & Game, and other local jurisdictions to monitor the region wide"~xTe'twoxk of Multi-Species Conservation Plan preserve land. The various agencies coozedinate and standardize their biological monitoring of the abundance and distribution of key habitats and species.. Ihese types of'surveys are typically performed at least annually on preserve lands, As part of this climate adaptation strategy, the City will use this collected data to help gauge the response of'sensitive habitats and species to climate change impacts. In addition, the City will work with its project partners to determine the feasibility of carrelating species distributions to microclimate patterns in order to more robustly track climate change impacts on preserve lands region-wide. 2 Bayfront Natural Resources Management Plan NRMP) Preparation - In collaboration with the Port of San Diego and community stakeholders, the City will prepare a Climate Adaptation Strategies 2.9 of 39 DR4FT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2.011) management plan for the Bayfront development area. The Bayfront Natural Resources Management Plan (NRMP), is being prepared to guide the management of the bayfront's biological resources and to preserve its natural resources from indirect and direct development impacts. As part of its this work effort, the City will also ensure that management strategies are included into the NRMP which promote the resiliency of the bayfront ecosystems against future sea level rise and other climate change impacts. Potential resource management strategies may include incarporating transitional habitats into wetland restoration projects, including buffers between sensitive habitats and development, and protecfing upland areas adjacent to wetlands.. ~r 3 OVRP Habitat Restoration Plan and Non-native Plant Ret~¢y~l Guidelines -The City will work with the other OVRP Partners (City of San Dko~G>_~ounty of San Diego) to amend the OVRP Habitat Restoration Plan Gmdehne~and N"an'~native Plant Removal Guideline to provide for climate change adaptation strategre~~Specifically, the amendments to these guidelines will include pollex, ° to encourage martargement activifies for wetlands and other habitats that are respas~ive to climate change ~'~zyr~acts through restoration designs, non-native species remal~method - d public access planning x \.~fl ~t~~'`~ PERFORMANCE METRICS ~ ~ the following metrics will be ttackedl,~and'~~r~pnsted on~`Zn~going basis to quantify the performance of the "Wetlands Presexvatiori"`strateges,~"~'+~, • # of'suxveys performed to momtox shri~~ ur Iq~al specrevssange and diversity resulting from 2' climate adaptation z~~~ • # of habitat restarahdrt areas withm tir~'e;OVRP where climate change impacts were 5~ incorporated into pto~~ct desrgps~' ' ~ ~ „ csi ~ c i .~.aa tyi T 1MELINE The rmplemer~a~tr"anrof3thrs stregy will occur over an 18-month period (summarized in figure below) I~~7{ebmaxy 2(~„1~~nstaff~vv~~begm preparation of the Natural Resources Management Plan wlrxcl should be finalized by the end of the year.. the OVRP Habitat Restoration Plan and ~ Non natrve~Plant Removal Guidelines' revision process will commence in December 2.011 with final Crty °C~o~uucil revrew aid consideration scheduled fbr December 2012 after being vetted tluough vazrous qty Comrrii~ssxons ,~„r,:~ ~•<u Climate Adzptation Strategies 30 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) CLIMATE ADAPTATION S'T'RAT'EGY #9: Wetlands Preservation Implementation Plan Timeline Dec'11 s'3 Completion of Bayfront NRMP „~s ~ , Feb' 11 Initiate Preparation of ''.r Dec'72 Begin Preparation OVRP Design Guidelines s"" ";~a~,Qdopt OVRP Design of Bayfront NRMP Amendments 'G~~elines Amendments ,ti y~_~~,'' -w.'y' x 3vp.~ ~~iF kht~ lan'73 lan '11 la ~,12.~ ~ °rs Jan 72n~y~~ • Ceuncil consideraho`~ i of Bayfront NRMP fi't' s r~i ` ~ b ~'k,,na"nri. PROGRAM MILE3S`~ONE'~° F^1~f",ty4t t r -4v~~,7 r `tea ~a BUDGET & FINAN(3I1~G ~ 'x The proposed componenxc~ tare estrmated be $30,000 and $61,000 for initial and ongoing implementatron,~e ectrvel}kr s~nmmarized in table below) the one-time values represent staff k ~ ~ ~ ."tA and consultfinY~cosfs'ifo>rtiutegrafipg~wetlands-related climate adaptation measures into the new Bayfront Na[ ral Resour'e~?:Management Plan and the existing OVRP Habitat Restoration Plan and Noir motive Plant Remal G delines, The annual values represent the estimated cost of ~ ,a ongoing rrnp`l~ementatlon a~fthe resource management plans including monitoring activities, While a poi2ran of one trrrx~~and ongoing costs will be covered by tlrxough existing developer fees and divrsion hud~~ts additional funds will need to be identified to fully implement all components Climate Adaptation Strategies 31 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) Adaptation Strategy #9 -Wetlands Preservaton e Regional City Staff $ - $ 4,000 Not Identified Biological Monitoring* Consultant Fees $ - $ 20,000 Not Identified , Baytront Natural Port of SD/ City Staff $ 11,000 $ 3 00 Resource ~:fx Division Budgets Management Consultant Fees $ 5,000 $ ~ pp~@~ Port of SD/ Plan** ~ ~ ~ Division Budgets ~ Developer Fees/ OVRP Plan & City Staff $ 9,000 $ 9,000 Dlvi~sion Budget Guidelines Updates*** Consultant Fees*** $ g 000 g _ Dever Fees/ Division Budget E T'O7AL $ 3Q,OOQ* $ E~*61,000 I~ ~ UNFUNDED PORTION ~II$l 24,000 *Costs include yearly monitoring of NRMP provrs~ons I ~5 **Pending concurrence from the Port of San Die~oa ~ ~ r5„.~ u, iii, ~ **Budget assumes 50% funded~b~de~veloper fees rind 50% funded by Division Budgets ~ m~' ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ i y su. c, ~ ~ Climate Adaptation Strategies 32 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) i STRATEGY #10: SEA LEVEL RISE & LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES OVERVIEW Between 1990 and 2.000, sea levels rose 6 inches on average along San Diego County coastlines and bays. Over the next 40 years, sea level rise rates axe expected to increase with local sea levels 12 to 18 inches higher than their current levels. Higher sea levels can result in increased erosion, more frequent flooding and property damage, loss of wetland habitats, and fewer waterfront public access options These impacts from rising sea leuels~ will be exacerbated during storm events. As such, the Climate Change Working Gxou~„commended that Chula Vista amend its land development codes and CEQA guidelines to_'5corpoxate climate change- related sea level rise into future development and municipal a,~tre projects' design and review. u ~ ~ To address these climate change impacts and xeducej~firture risks and costs, tfi;e Crty will (1) revise its grading ordinance to consider a projects^_r~vtrlnexabil to future sea~~Ievel nse and flooding events, (2) modify its Subdivision M~anval to ensure that storm water/drainage infrastructure can address future sea level nse an~~flo~,durg rmpacts, and (3) ensure that environmental review and CEQA procedures aze consrstent~~ ith these changes. ~s~ ~ ~ PROGRAM STRATEGY the following specific actions wrll be pursued by Gj~1' satf o~ses the next 12 months: ~h 1. Update the Grading°OYdanarl~~`e..- The O~ula Vista Grading Ordinance provides guidance to developers and' wne gineers~~y regula z,g grading, drainage, and erosion control on porprevenawater~ja~ll~ru~h'an'~~ s d3mentatronllof the City'~pwatersesourcesalTo meet the w 1r ,as" ordinance s~tequrrex~xas, project proponents complete and submit a grading plan to demons`„ti~~tejelcx~cori~p?lYance As part of the implementation of Climate Adaptation St~egy #10, P,a`ndDe~~oent Division staff" will update the grading ordinance to req~mre that all hdal~y influenced" projects account for anticipated sea level rise for the next"~50 years (cuxxelrtly projected at 1 5' of'sea level rise) into their project development and grading plans ~~Furthermore, the revised ordinance will require an update to the Subd vrsxon Manual~'every 5 years to account for changes in sea-level rise predictions over tmre~~i~it~lie best available data the revised ordinance will be presented to City Councrl for final review and consideration. 2 Update the City's Sa~bdivision Manual -the purpose of the Subdivision Manual is to provide developers and engineers a guide for land development processing within the City of Chula Vista the Subdivision Manual covers development processes beginning with the filing of a Ientative Map through approval and recordation of Final Maps Io account for increased risk from sea level rise, Land Development Division staff will update the Subdivision Manual to add requirements fox development projects within "tidally influenced" areas fo demonstrate, prior to Ientative Map Approval or grading plan approval, that: ClimatzAdaptationStz'ategies 33of39 DRP.FI Implementation Plans (Fzbruary 23, 2011) a the storm drain system fox the project is designed to maintain at least a dry driving lane in each dixecfion during a 50 year design storm that occurs at the highest high tide with a projected 1.5' feet of'sea level rise b the storm drain system fox the project is designed to prevent any property damage with a 100-year storm occurring at the highest high tide with a projected L.5' of sea level rise. 3. Update the City's Environmental Review Procedures -Fox any project ox activity that could potentially directly of indirectly impact environmental quality, the City is required to review and mitigate the impacts under the Califorma F,x~3r~nmental Quality Act (CEQA). To ensure that environmental review and CEQA pr' "co~`e"dures are consistent with the Grading Ordinance and Subdivision Manual xec~~srd~~ns~'>:xeferenced above, the Advanced Planning Division will review and update (if"cessa'r~~~'~`fhe tlu'eshold language I to the environmental review procedures fox deveF©;~ment prolects~Flocated in "tidally influenced azeas," The thresholds may also be, a ended on a 5 yeat'sasis, so that the thueshold is refined as sea level rise infoxr~af~i'"~i and prediction techn~'gy improves., Initial tlesholds are estimated at an additiott~ 1.5' o~x~op of the highest high tide fox a ~ xo ect with a 50- ear lifes an t~~ ~mx~ P J Y P PERFORMANCE METRICS ~ the following metric will be hacked a`~d rep ite, an ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Sea Level Rise & Land~'evelo"~%rites ' shategy: • # of development prole~ts~~axnplying ~vrttl~tlie new standards ~ ~ F~ e~ f Y~ TheTimplIlementation of"`"t~~i~s~shat~y°v~f~~a~e~cYr"'o'~v''er a 12-month period (summarized in figure below). In May~2Q11, staf~ibegin to develop a revised Grading Ordinance and Subdivision Manual whxchr, Svr~i~zdxsttrl~uted for public comment, Both the Grading Ordinance and Subdxvxsro~~anual will be vetted.ttlxough various City Commissions before being presented to +t"v the City ~ uncil fox revxevv4yand consideration in Iuly and December 2.011, respectively. Finally, CEQA pxo~c-educes will be u~p~dated (if necessary) by April 2012., ~ ~ c~~ ~ .f5 4? M u~ Climate Adaptation Strategies 34 of39 ' DRFI Implementation Plzns (F eomzry 23, 2011) CLIMATE ADAPTATION STRATEGY#10: Sea Level Rise & Land Development Codes May '11 Oct'11 ~Draftofthe revised °Draft of she revi~d Lading Ortl finance Subd ivision Manual available for publE availab le brpublic comment. comment. Oct it ~ April 12 - A ril'11 ,`~~na. July '11 Dec 11 y Pp rll '11 Grading Ordinance Reused Subdiusion a~,~v''~ t1RdaSv~C EQ4 amendment to Cdy Manual to CM1y CO UnefJhfgr ( procedt~25„~as necessary Co until fora pproval approval t ?'r W~ ~i ~m~ ~fa~'"•. .E~g , PROGRAM MILES'[~ONE~'~ ~.i`~r, p BUDGET & FINANCING ~P~~ the proposed components' initial implemex~a`Y~ioxr~g~s~s`ara estimated to be $.30,000 for staffing i (summarized in table below). ,;,,4~'tindin sou ceafor the above one-time costs has not yet been I g & identified.. There are no ox~~ ing'add~honal cosfs to the City associated with implementing this climate adaptaton sixateg,~' ~ ~~`e Adaptation Strategy #10 eS;¢~a~evel Rise & Land Development Codes C~'srading ~ " V~xY~ Ordt a`nee Cdy Staff.. $ 10,000 $ - Amendmerif+; ~ Subdivlsion~,C~y Staff $ 20,000 $ - Manual Revision TOTAL $ 30,000 $ - UNFUNDED PORTION $ 30,000 $ - Climate Adaptation Shategies 35 of 39 DRAFI Implementation Plzns (February23, 2011) STRATEGY #11: GREEN ECONOiVIY OVERVIEW By 2050, Chula Vista and the surrounding legion will likely be impacted by a variety of climate change impacts such as hotter and drier weather; higher sea levels, and more frequent and intense wildfires Climate change impacts create new issues which local communities and, in particular; businesses need to address and prepare for in order to reduce future risks and costs.. These issues can include higher insurance premiums due to greater flooding ox wrldfirexrisks, more expensive utility costs due to higher energy and water demand, lower pxoduct~vi~ue to more employee sick days from frequent extreme heat and poor au quality days As'such, the Climate Change Working Group recommended that Chula Vista should provx~~ ass`ance and non-monetary incentives to help businesses manage climate change asks an`c[~attracf~b~usrnesses that provide "green" products of services into Chula Vista a u s`~ k~: = To address these climate change-related concem~from bt~~inesses, the :pity, in close coordination with local business stakeholders, wrll lu~,~revise theirunicipal purchasing policy to more robustly promote the procurement of "green" pio~uc~ts~axiservices, and to give preference for purchases from local Chula Vista businesses, (2) ~eux§e existing environmental outreach programs to businesses to include recoxrnn~"endations on ho~to reduce future climate change 5-ek~a'~"»~'~m, 'x77-~ risks, and (3) continue to pursue the ~ecruxtr~axtrand retan~r of "green" businesses and manufacturers in Chula Vista. ~ ` ~ ~''s f sLF S,y sky ~3ii" 3 '3 R x°ta1 ~7 3" PROGRAM STRATEGY ~ cur ~ ~q~ the following specific ae 'ons wrll,be pursued'`~~, City staff' in partnership with local business associations over the n~ 6 monthsx ~ r 1. Green Prcacuremen`t~.P,o~licy & Process -the Environmental Services Division, in partne~p~~h'~the CC"i~sexvation Division and the Finance Department, will revise the '+~^+3r< Cr~~ Mumcpnvnovx~ntally Preferable Purchase Policy" to greater emphasize the procurement of a~broader ~3ray of eco-friendly goods and services leveraging Chula Vi'st=~,~s annual suppl;~s and services budget of approximately $14 million. I`he existing policy ich was revised in 2008, encourages City divisions and departments to show a purchasmg~pxefexenee for products and services which incorporate resource efficiency ~ € ,a (i e raw z~na_L,ez~~Is, energy, and water) and pollution prevention into their design, manufactuxixg use, and disposal. However, staff has struggled with tracking the policy's implementation and assessing its efficacy As part of the revision process, the policy will be redesigned to address these concerns and to provide City divisions and departments a more user-friendly tool for complying with the City Council policy.. Finally, the policy will modified to give preference for purchases from local Chula Vista businesses, especially those participating in the City's CLEAN Business program. 2 CLEAN Business & FREBE -Chula Vista offers businesses free assistance to help them become more sustainable, lower their monthly utility costs, and ultimately improve their bottom line allowing them to hire more employees and expand their operations locally.. Climate Adaptation Strategies 36 of 39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) the Free Resource & E'nexgy Business Evaluation (FREBE) program, which is a required component of the annual business licensing process for storefronts and offices, provides businesses an on-site review of their energy and water use, Ilzxough the evaluation, trained City staff are able to identify oppoztunities for participants to improve their energy and water efficiency and take advantage of'special rebate and financing programs.. Annually, over 1,000 evaluations axe completed through the FRE'BE program and approximately 95% of past participants would recommend the program to other businesses the Chula Vista CLEAN Business program builds off of the FREBE; program by recognizing local businesses who have demonstrated leadership in energy and water conservation, pollution prevention, and matenaT~ management. These businesses have voluntarily improved their operations and©~~ facilities to meet high m~~ standards of sustainability and efficiency., Through p ~lesneBt~ation of this strategy component, these business-oriented environmental oufreach effozFs will be revised to include an assessment of a business's "vulnexabzlat~i' to future c~l~a~~change impacts and recommendations to reduce associated futuxe;~s`ks and costs Bus~esses will not be required to implement any of the recornxnendattzlaidenh7d by staff zn ezt~ex program.. 4~E~ ~ . 3 Green Business Recruitment & Retention -4~`Cfreea~Ec4rromrc Development Division will continue to pursue the development of an Eco,lri'c~ustrial/Green Business Park, the physical development would inco~~te green burlda~,g techniques and renewable energy infrastructure, with the ultimate goa"I aFt~ czurhng and~aacting new business operations ( and manufacturing that specializes ~ clea~~fbrr logr~s, products, and services, This project will create a business chmaf~ t~~ at~~~+e to technology companies, by providing the compar~~~ ~th the~ie~gpiged infrastructure, skilled workers, research institutions, and finraniTg rn~~hanrsms,~~; r As part of the~~omic D~~l~o~rnent E~iision's eff' oats to promote local business-to- business txansacltons; staf~,w~~ woxk,~~o,°connect current clean tech-oriented Chula Vista businesses with ea~lz;=ofhex through formal and informal peer networks.. Economic Deve~o~m~ept~taff wr1 ~~oxk with new and existing businesses to identify existing and attca~GM'new busm'~gss seFVices, supply chain, and support services for the business community., FurEhez, staff4~~x11 work with current Chula Vista businesses to identify opp xtunides fox new~`green" product and service development.. w~; s ,r`n PERFORrV1Al\'C~ fiRICS The following metrics'~will be tracked and reported on an ongoing basis to quantify the performance of the "Green Economy" shategies: a # of businesses pazticipating in the FREBE' and CLEAN Business programs axmually e Value of municipal environmentally-prefexredpurchases axmually ® # of businesses which are located in Chula Vista offering "green" products or services TIMELINE Implementation of the above-mentioned components will occur over a 6-month period. Between May and October 2.011, a new municipal "green" procurement policy and process will be Climate Adaptation Sh'ategies 37 of 39 DRAF`I Implementetion Plzns (February 23, 2011) drafted, vetted through various City Commissions, and ultimately presented to the City Council fox review and consideration. Likewise, the FRE'BE and CLEAN Business programs will be updated by October 2.011 in order to incorporate recommendations to help businesses prepaze for climate change impacts Finally, the Economic Development Division will continue working to athact and retain businesses focused on "green" products and services. CLIMATE ADAPTATION ST RATEGY#11: Green Economy Implementation PIanT'imeline Ahoy ~g~~~ t ~ ° z ct 11 ~t~ Councipm~[isderahon of ct~ ~s new pro cure[n~dnhx~licy ~ r~ G~ s n ,fir April 17 luly'11 ~~~y' Oct'11 ~ ~ n- May'11 ~"4~ Sept '11 •Beg in development of ~t?,PA..affi of FR E3E and new procurerre ntpdicy CL2~-'q`BUSiness g reen`Ihusl nessesw ~ ~"°~~~~pt~ ,~ogr"amS ( f~~ PROGRAM MI STONES 'a'"~ kv'~ t...~ ii ~df BUDGET &~FI1~;~iNG x the propose,. componez~fs ~,mrtia~ implementation costs are estimated to be $25,500 and $14,440 for imhal~~ud ongoing implementation, respectively (summarized in table below). Ihese costs are for sta~fmg to developthe new Green Procurement Policy, update the FREBE and CLEAN Business programs, and recrtitt and retain "green" businesses locally Ihese costs will be funded by existing divasop bud~fs~~ K Y Climate Adaptation Strategies 38 of39 DRAFT Implementation Plans (February 23, 2011) I Adaptation Strategy #11 -Green Economy a New Green City Staff $ 24,000 $ Division Budget Procurement Policy FREBE & CLEAN Business Program City Staff $ 1,500 $ Division Budget Updates Green Business „ ry~ Recruitment & City Staff $ $ 14,4`40~~, Division Budget Retention ~ c ~1?a „~a.~ ~ ro._ a TOTAL $ 2~ 5d0 $ 14,440 ~~y~ gac UNFUNDED PORTION $ °~"~~s~ ~ ~ ~i ct~ ti`x'iz~~.. "ice `~~i~4[nS ~r t R„55.. ~x, ~ ~~I.,~' lei Tij F ~a~ +fac~~ Eyi k ~ ~ a v" ~,.Av v 't.:rv ~ ~.-T ''~j J F J~ v Climate Adaptation SRate~ies 39 of 39 DRAFT Implzmentation Phns (February 23, 201 I) APPENDIX A CLIMATE CHANGE WORKING GROUP Recommendations on Climate Adaptation Strategies SUMMARY ' Below are the Climate Change Working Group's final recommendations on climate adaptation strategies that the City of Chula Vista should implement to reduce the community's future risk from climate change-related impacts (numbering does not reflect priorities): 1 Develop an ordinance incorporating reflective paving (or "Cool Paving") into all municipal paving projects (parking lots & streets) and new private parking lot projects (over a spec c size) 2 Develop an ordinance incorporating shade trees into all municipal projects (parking lots & streets) and new private parking lot projects (over a specific size).. The new ordinance should include a deviation for solar carports (or other shade structur'es), be complementary to existing free tree programs, and potentially be incorporated into the existing Landscape Water' Conservation regulations. 3 Require and provide incentives (such as contributing to City's enhanced energy code requirements) for new residential development with air-conditioning systems to install ENERGY STAR cool roof technology. 4 Educate residents and businesses about the benefits and appropriate uses of local water supplies (including recycled water, groundwater desalination, and onsite water reuse systems) and further integrate recycled water (if available) and onsite water' reuse systems into new development and redevelopment plans 5 Revise the City's Stormwater regulations and applicable landscape/building codes to efficiently manage higher concentrations of pollutants in runoff by minimizing water waste, using natural landscapes which help drain or reuse runoff, and by ensuring that irrigation systems are properly installed/maintained. 6 Actively educate the general public and the business community (through community newsletters, websites, public events, and signage) about the impacts of climate change and what the community is doing to address impacts. In close coordination with the Fire Department, special emphasis should be given to using existing outreach mechanisms (Southwestern College's Services Learning program, Americorps/CERT training, and City environmental outreach programs) to expand public education on making homes more resilient to wildfires. 7 Include "extreme heat" events as a significant emergency in Chula Vista's Emergency Response Plan (short term) and its portion of the County's Multi-Jurisdiction Hazard Mitigation Plan (long term), and redefine "extreme heat" events with a special emphasis on serving vulnerable populations, supporting a robust network of "Cooling Centers', incorporating poor air quality day notifications, educating businesses about employee heat illness risks, and integrating renewable energy sources into emergency/cooling centers, 8 In order to assess and reduce impacts associated with climate change on parks and open space and their associated ecosystems, seek opportunities to partner with the Resource Agencies, non-profit organizations, and/or adjacent public land managers to monitor and ' manage/restore ecosystems (as funding becomes available) to ensure long-term habitat connectivity, species resilience, and community recreational opportunities CCWG Final R=commendations on Clima[e Adaptation Strategies 1 of 3 ' 9-27-10 ' 9 When preserving or restoring coastal and riparian wetlands, incorporate adequate upland or transition habitats to accommodate shifts in wetlands coverage and help ensure public access due to sea level rise and other climate change impacts as informed by biological studies and Resource Agency consultation. 10 Use the outcome of the current San Diego Bay Climate Adaptation Study (being sponsored by the San Diego Foundation and ICLEI) to revise the City of Chula Vista's Land Development Ordinances (such as Grading Ordinance) and CEQA Guidelines to incorporate climate change-related sea level rise & other flooding risks into future development and municipal infrastructure projects' design and review 11, Provide assistance and non-monetary incentives to help businesses manage climate change risks and to attract businesses that provide "green" products or services into Chula Vista. If these recommendations are supported by City Council, City staff should develop more detailed implementation plans for' the measures. Within these plans, staff should outline implementation steps, timelines, and cost estimates for each measure.. These detailed implementation plans should be presented to City Council for a fnal decision on whether to move forward with specific measures.. BACKGROUND In October 2009, City Council directed staff to reconvene a Climate Change Working Group (CCWG) -comprised of residents, businesses, and community representatives - to develop a list of recommended strategies for the City to reduce vulnerabilities to expected local climate change impacts (known as "climate adaptation'). Expected impacts include hotter and drier weather, diminished imported water supplies, more poor air quality/heat wave days, more frequent wildfires, shifts in habitat and species distribution, and increased rates of sea level rise. The reconvened CCWG, which was established as a subcommittee of the City's Resource Conservation Commission (RCC), included some members from the previous working group augmented with additional members to reflect the group's new climate adaptation-related focus areas: Focus Area Stakeholder Representatives Water Wil]iamGranger/RhiannaPensa-OtayWaterDistrict Management SueMosburg-SweetwaterAuthotity Energy Robert Friar/L any James -Chula Vista Electric Management Andrea Cook- CA Center for Sustainable Energy Julie Ricks -San Diego Gas & Electric Infrastmcture Nick Lee-Corky McMillin Company Resources Sean Kilkenny - Otay Ranch Company Public Health, LyndaGi]gun(Chait)-Education/RCC Education,& IiishAxsom/TenyDavis-Southwestern College Wildfires Ana Melgoza -Independent Public Health Representative Ecosystems& SergeDedina/KatieWestfall-WiLDCOASI Biodiversity Hany Orgovan -Chula Vista Kayak ' Business & Richard D'Ascoli -Pacific Southwest Assoc of Realtors/Chamber of Commerce Economy Sassan Rahimzadeh -Arya Cleaners/RCC Planning Brian Holland-ICLEI Process Nicola Hedge- San Diego Foundation CCwG Final Recommendations on Climate Adaptation Strategies 2 of 3 9-27-10 The CCWG planning process was facilitated by Conservation & Environmental Services Department staff with technical support from the Fire, Public Works, and Development Services Departments PLANNING PROCESS The CCWG met 11 times from December 2009 through August 2010 in public meetings at various municipal locations. In addition to posting public notices prior to each meeting, an email notice was sent to over 60 additional stakeholder groups and community members to invite them to attend the meetings and provide feedback. T'he majority of these stakeholder groups had been involved in the previous climate mitigation planning process in 2008. A notice was also published through the City's Community Connections newsletter. at the onset of the climate adaptation planning process to help build community awareness about the CCWG effort. To solicit additional public feedback, the CCWG hosted a public forum on June 16, 2010 at the Norman Park Senior Center Over 30 community members attended the "open house' meeting and shared their opinions and priorities ' for climate adaptation strategies. The planning process was split into three phases -information gathering, risk assessment, and strategies selection, During the first phase, the meetings featured presentations from CCWG members and regional experts on the different adaptation topics. These presentations discussed the current state of practices (i.e "business as usual"), the predicted impacts to the San Diego region from climate change based on the best available data, and the vulnerability of municipal operations and the broader community to these impacts.. Staff summarized this information into a Climate Adaptation Planning Matrix for each focus area In the end, the CCWG identified over 180 possible climate adaptation strategies. In phase two, the CCWG assigned risk levels to each identified vulnerability in consultation with researchers from the University of California San Diego Risk was defined as a product of the I likelihood of the climate change impact occurring and the consequence of the impact. Each factor I was scored from 1-5 and overall risk was categorized. as "Low," "Medium," or "High." In addition, various adaptation strategies to address each impact and vulnerability were vetted based on three initial criteria: (1) strategy falls within the City's jurisdiction, (2) strategy is fiscally feasible (i.e does not rely on General Fund support for implementation), and (3) strategy does not duplicate or contradict current climate mitigation measures. In the final phase, CCWG members discussed and prioritized which strategies would be ultimately included in their recommendations. Strategies that could be characterized as "no regret" actions or actions having multiple co-benefits were regarded as high priority measures, The CCWG also worked to combine multiple strategies into a single recommendation to broaden their' positive impact. Community members attending the meetings in this fnal phase were heavily involved in the discussion and prioritization activities. Finally, the CCWG made a presentation to the Resource Conservation Commission at their September 13`h meeting to receive feedback and further inform their final recommendation selection (Appendix A).. The CCWG also received a joint comment letter from the Environmental Health Coalition and San Diego Coastkeeper (Appendix B) NEXT' STEPS The Climate Change Working Group's final list of recommendations to help Chula Vista "adapt" to I climate change impacts are designed to reduce future risk and costs within energy and water supply, public health, wildfires, ecosystem management, coastal infrastructure, and the local economy sectors. 7'he adaptation strategies complement the City's current climate mitigation measures and many strategies will also contribute to lowering citywide greenhouse gas emission levels. Due to the limited resources available to the CCWG, a formal cost analysis for each recommendafion could not be completed. As such, the CCWG recommends that City Council direct staff to develop more detailed plans to better define implementation costs, critical steps, and timelines for future City Council review and consideration. CCWG Final Recommandations on Climate Adaptation Strategies 3 of 3 ' 9-27-10 D°~ MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADVISORS CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA October 11, 2010 Conference Room #137 5:15 PM 276 Fourth Ave.. Chula Vista, CA 91910 MEMBERS PRESENT: Sides, Jones, Sanfilippo, Meservy MEMBERS ABSENT: Jose Lopez (Unexcused) CITY STAFF PRESENT: Lou EI-Khazen, Building Official; Justin Gipson, Deputy Fire Chief/Fire Marshall and Rosemarie Rice, Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: None CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Lou EI-Khazen, Building Official called the meeting to order at 5:20 p m, He informed the committee that Chairperson Jan Buddingh took another position on the Parks and Recreation Commission and had to resign from the Boards of Appeals and Advisors. In addition, Member Bejarano and Vice Chair, Rita Buencamino-Andrews chose not to extend their second term so now there would be three vacancies to fill. Mr. EI-Khazen said the committee would need to elect a Chair and Vice Chair for the new fiscal year 2010-2011, and asked the commission to go through the election first before they go on to other items on the agenda. 1 ROLL CALL: Members present constituted a quorum. , 2, APPROVAL OF MINUTES: September 14, 2009 MSC (LM/AS) (4-0-0-1) Approve the minutes of September 14, 2009 Motion carried with Member Lopez absent i 3 NEW BUSINESS: A Election of Chair and Vice-Chair for fiscal year 2010-11 MSC (TJ/AS) (3-0-1-1) a motion was made to nominate Chuck Sanfilippo as Chairperson Motion , carried with Member Sanfilippo abstaining and Member Lopez absent MSC (AS/TJ) (3-0-1-1) a motion was made to nominate Albert Sides as Vice-Chair. Motion carried with Member Sides abstaining and Member Lopez absent. B. Ordinances adopting the various 2010 building codes and local amendments. Building Official, Lou EI-Khazen, presented the proposed ordinances and amendments outlined in the staff report He stated that the majority of the proposed amendments are currently in the Municipal Code (MC) and are carried over as the City adopts the updated codes.. Mr. EI-Khazen noted that all but two of the 2010 California codes are updated editions to the current codes. The 2010 California Residential Code (2010 CRC) is a completely new code to California and the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code (2010 CGBSC), which was entirely voluntary, now contains mandatory and voluntary requirements for both residential and non-residential projects. Mr. EI-Khazen stated that the 2010 CRC requires all new one and two family dwellings and townhouses (including attached garages) to have fire sprinkler systems. He mentioned this was the first time a State building code has such requirements on one and two family dwellings Board of Appeals & Advisors D D ~ October 11, 2010 Meeting Minutes Mr EI-Khazen said the Deputy Fire Chief, Justin Gipson has been working with the water districts to. see how the cost for additional meters or enlarging the size of the meters could be minimized so tho' the financial impact to the residents and builders is minimized. Justin Gipson stated that he has been working with three water districts (CA American, Sweetwater Authority and Otay Water) In the past what had driven the cost of putting in home sprinklers was a capacity fee. These utility companies have agreed to not charge the additional capacity fee when a sprinkler system is required which will help minimize the cost The building official discussed the 2010 CGBSC. He noted it wasn't a new code but now it has mandatory requirements. He stated that the City's current Green Building Standards (GBS), MC Chapter 15.12 adopted October 2009, are based on the early adoption of the State Housing and Community Development's (HCD) Green Building Standards found in the all-voluntary 2008 California ' Green Building Standards Code (O8 CGBSC), and that they are required on all new residential and non-residential buildings and additions and alterations to existing residential and non-residential buildings, He also stated that the proposed ordinance amends MC Chapter 15.12 by adopting the 2010 CGBSC and local amendments. Member Jones commented that the proposed standards are more stringent than the state's 2010 CGBSC in that the City is amending the scope to include additions and alterations and amending the effective date of the indoor water conservation measures to be 1/1/2011 instead of 7/1/2011, Mr. EI- Khazen explained that these measures are currently required in our MC and the purpose of the proposed amendments is to maintain what is required today. Member Jones stated that essentially he wasn't against the 2010 CGBSC, as he believed in conservation measures and practiced them himself He was concerned about the additional construction cost to additions and remodels, especially in today's economy, and these amendments would only burden the consumer further ultimately affecting the construction industry. Member Jonee'" thought our civic leaders were imposing these standards onto Chula Vista residents unfairly. H~ ' suggested to staff that the amendments be reconsidered, or delayed for one to two years in order to allow the economy time to recover. Mr. EI-Khazen stated that because City Council adopted the current GBS just last year and required them on additions and alterations, it would be Council's ekpectation that they are carried forward when adopting new measures Mr. EI-Khazen offered to include Member Jones' concerns in the staff report to Council. There was discussion amongst the Board on what the outcome to the residential consumer would be if these amendments were passed, Member Meservy acknowledged Member Jones' concerns and commended him for practicing conservation measures However, he didn't feel the majority of the public would be as conscientious and felt the proposed amendments are valid and supported them, Mr. EI-Khazen pointed out that the products required under the mandatory residential requirements are readily available at local home improvement stores and soon may be the only products that can be found on the market. Mr. EI-Khazen also stated that the cost difference between complying and non-complying products is small if any. Member Meservy wanted clarification of consultant services noted in section 102.4, if this was a City of Chula Vista requirement? Mr EI-Khazen stated this amendment is a carryover of what the City currently has in the MC. It is intended to allow the building official to require the opinion of a third- party consultant when complex energy efficiency or green building measures are proposed, and the i City does not have the required expertise to verify compliance at the time of plan review He also stated that the code itself has language that addresses special inspection and third party certifications, Member Meservy said he had to leave, (6:40 p m) however, he had read the material and was willing to leave a standing vote to accept all of the proposed amendments The Chair and Mr. EI-Khazen discussed the pre-plumbing for photovoltaic systems and solar water heaters. Mr. EI-Khazen explained the requirement is to have stubbing from the roof, so at a later time when the owner wants to install this system they are not penetrating the roof, which may void the Board of Appeals & Advisors D D ~ October 11, 2010 Meeting Minutes roofing warranty. The cost to do this is very minor it would run about $200- $300 for material and labor. A similar procedure would apply to solar water heater. The building official and Deputy Fire Chief Gipson presented the proposed ordinance adopting the 2010 California Fire Code and amendments. Member Jones noted the State Fire Marshal's Guidelines was not included in the packets, he actually found it on line He saw nothing wrong with ' the guidelines. His only recommendation to staff would be that this kind of information be provided in the future for any department that wants to come before this committee. This would help the committee make informative decisions about the items being presented before them. Mr. EI-Khazen said that Member Jones made a good point and this kind of information would be provided in the future, Chair Sanfilippo and Deputy Fire Chief Gipson discussed the operational permit for Christmas tree lots The Chair wanted to ensure that the permit addresses the residual of unsold trees and their expedient removal from the lots because of fire hazards. Deputy Chief Gipson stated these conditions could be established in the permit before it is issued. After further deliberation, the Board of Appeal and Advisors unanimously recommended that City Council adopt the various 2010 Editions of the California building codes. MSC (AS/CS) (4-0-0-1) Recommend to City Council adoption of the various 2010 Editions of the California building codes and that staff include Member Jones' concerns with the amendments to the 2010 CGBSC in the staff report to Council Motion carried with Member Lopez absent. 4 MEMBERS COMMENTS/CHAIRMAN'S COMMENTS/REPORTS: Chair Sanfilippo thanked all the committee members for attending tonight's meeting and taking the time to review the information, 5 BUILDING OFFICIAL'S COMMENTS/REPORTS: ' Mr. EI-Khazen stated that possibly in November or December he may be bringing an updated fee study for the Board's consideration Member Jones asked if the building permit fees were going to be raised again Mr EI-Khazen stated that the study addresses current cost recovery rates and the fees in some cases may go up or may go down and that he had not reviewed the final draft, Chair Sanfilippo asked if the City still intended to keep the permit streamline efforts in play. Mr EI- Khazen confirmed and offered to include Chair Sanfilippo to the Oversight Committee. 6 COMMUNICATIONS (PUBLIC REMARKS/ WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCEY None 7 ADJOURNMENT: Chair Sanfilippo adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p m, to a regular meeting on November 8, 2010 at 5:15 p m in Planning and Building Conference Room #137. MINUTES TAKEN BY: ROSEMARIE RICE, SECRETARY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT -BUILDING DIVISION