Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout!Ch 05.10 GHG 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-1 City of Chula Vista November 2013 5.10 Global Climate Change This section describes the existing setting related to global climate change and evaluates the potential for GHG emission impacts due to implementation of the project. As stated in Section 2.3, Purpose and Legal Authority, this EIR tiers from the 2013 GPA/GDPA SEIR (09- 01). This analysis tiers from the program-level Global Climate Change Analysis prepared by RECON Environmental, Inc (2012) in support of the SEIR for the GPA/GDPA (SEIR 09-01). The GPA/GDPA area consists of Village 8 West, Village 9, and the RTP. RECON’s Global Climate Change Analysis is included as Appendix H1. The program-level Global Climate Change Analysis concluded that implementation of the land uses proposed in the GPA/GDPA would not result in significant GHG emissions. The analysis uses the same generation rates and reduction estimates as the program-level RECON report to determine the project-level GHG emissions that would be generated by Village 8 West. The project specific calculations are provided as Appendix H2. 5.10.1 Existing Conditions A. Regulatory Framework 1. Federal a. GHG Emissions Intensity Reduction Programs The GHG Emissions Intensity is the ratio of GHG emissions to economic output. In 2002, the U.S. GHG Emissions Intensity was 183 metric tons per million dollars of gross domestic product (EPA 2007). In February 2002, the United States set a goal to reduce this GHG emissions intensity by 18 percent by 2012 through various reduction programs. A number of ongoing voluntary programs have thus been instituted to reduce nationwide GHG emissions. These include the Energy Star program, which was established in 1992 by the EPA and became a joint program with the U.S. Department of Energy in 1996. Energy Star is a program that labels energy efficient products with the Energy Star label. Energy Star enables consumers to choose energy efficient and cost saving products. b. Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards The federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards determine the fuel efficiency of certain vehicle classes in the United States. In 2007, as part of the Energy and Security Act of 2007, the CAFE standards were increased for new light-duty vehicles to 35 miles per gallon (mpg) by 2020. In May 2009, President Obama announced further plans to increase CAFE standards to require light duty vehicles to meet an average fuel economy of 35.5 mpg by 2016. With improved gas mileage, fewer gallons of transportation fuel would be combusted to travel the same distance, thereby reducing nationwide GHG emissions associated with vehicle travel. 2. State a. Executive Order S-3-05 – Statewide GHG Emission Targets Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 signed by Governor Schwarzenegger on June 1, 2005, established the following GHG emission reduction targets for California: ■ by 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels; 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-2 City of Chula Vista November 2013 ■ by 2020 reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels; and ■ by 2050 reduce GHG emissions to 80 percent below 1990 levels. This order also directs the secretary of the CalEPA to oversee the efforts made to reach these targets, and to prepare biannual reports on the progress made toward meeting the targets and on the impacts to California related to global warming, including impacts to water supply, public health, agriculture, the coastline, and forestry. With regard to impacts, the report shall also prepare and report on mitigation and adaptation plans to combat the impacts. The first Climate Action Team Assessment Report was produced in March 2006 and has been updated biennially. b. Assembly Bill 32 – California Global Warming Solutions Act In response to EO S-3-05, the California legislature passed AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which was signed by the governor on September 27, 2006. It requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to adopt rules and regulations that would reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. The CARB is also required to publish a list of discrete GHG emission reduction measures. Some of the key requirements of AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, require CARB to: ■ Establish a statewide GHG emissions cap for 2020, based on 1990 emissions by January 1, 2008. In December 2007, CARB approved a 2020 emission limit of 427 million metric tons of CO 2 equivalent (MMT CO2e). ■ Adopt mandatory reporting rules for significant sources of GHGs by January 1, 2009. In December 2007, CARB adopted regulations requiring the largest industrial sources to report and verify their GHG emissions. ■ Adopt a plan by January 1, 2009 indicating how emission reductions will be achieved from significant GHG sources via regulations, market mechanisms and other actions. A Climate Change Scoping Plan was approved on December 12, 2008. c. Climate Change Scoping Plan As directed by AB 32, the Climate Change Scoping Plan prepared by CARB in December 2008 includes measures to reduce statewide GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. A list of these measures is included in Appendix H1 and includes implementation of the programs described below, such as the Pavley Standards. CARB identified these reductions as necessary to reduce forecasted business-as-usual (BAU) 2020 emissions by approximately 174 MMT CO2e. CARB will update the scoping plan at least once every five years to allow evaluation of progress made and to correct the plan’s course where necessary. The majority of the reductions are to come from the two sectors that generate the most GHG emissions statewide: transportation and electricity generation. Transportation-related GHG emissions account for approximately 38 percent of the forecasted BAU 2020 emissions and over 36 percent of the targeted total reductions. Energy-related emissions (including those from electric power generation, commercial and residential energy use, and industrial oil and natural gas refineries) account for approximately 48 percent of the forecasted BAU 2020 emissions and more than 29 percent of the targeted total reductions. Transportation accounts for the largest share of the state’s GHG emissions. Accordingly, a large share of the reduction of GHG emissions from the recommended measures comes from this sector. To address 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-3 City of Chula Vista November 2013 emissions from vehicles, CARB is proposing a comprehensive three-prong strategy: reducing GHG emissions from vehicles, reducing the carbon content of the fuel these vehicles burn, and reducing the miles these vehicles travel. The majority of these reductions in transportation-related and energy-related GHG emissions are to be achieved through statewide regulatory mandates affecting vehicle and fuel manufacture, public transit, and public energy utilities. The remaining reductions are to be achieved through direct regulation and price incentive measures affecting oil and gas extraction industries, forestry practices (including increased tree planting programs), landfill methane capture, and restrictions on high global warming potential gases (used in select industries). CARB lists several recommended measures which will contribute toward achieving the 2020 statewide reduction goal, but these reductions are not (for various reasons, including the potential for double counting) additive with the other recommended measures. These include state and local government operations measures, green building, mandatory commercial recycling and other additional waste and recycling measures, water sector measures, and methane capture at large dairies. d. Assembly Bill 1493 – Pavley Greenhouse Gas Vehicle Standards AB 1493 (Pavley) enacted July 2002, directed CARB to adopt vehicle standards that lowered GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks to the maximum extent technologically feasible, beginning with the 2009 model year. CARB planned to adopt a second, more stringent, phase of the Pavley regulations, termed Pavley II, sometime in late 2010; however, to date this has not occurred. CARB estimates that implementation of Pavley I and II would reduce 2020 statewide emissions by 31.7 MMT CO2e or nearly 18 percent of the total reductions needed. e. Executive Order S-01-07 – Low Carbon Fuel Standard This executive order signed by Governor Schwarzenegger in January 2007 directed that a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels by at least 1 0 percent by 2020 through a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). CARB adopted the LCFS as a discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32 in April 2009 and includes it as a reduction measure in its scoping plan. The LCFS is a performance standard with flexible compliance mechanisms intended to incentivize the development of a diverse set of clean, low-carbon transportation fuel options. Its aim is to accelerate the availability and diversity of low-carbon fuels such as biofuels, electricity and hydrogen, by taking into consideration the full life cycle of GHG emissions. A 10 percent reduction in the intensity of transportation fuels is expected to equate to a reduction of 16.5 MMT CO2e in 2020. However, in order to account for possible overlap of benefits between LCFS and the Pavley GHG standards, CARB has discounted the contribution of LCFS to 15 MMT CO2e (CARB 2008). f. Scoping Plan Regional Transportation-Related GHG Targets This measure included in the scoping plan identifies policies to reduce transportation emissions through changes in future land use patterns and community design, as well as through improvements in public transportation that reduce vehicle miles traveled and corresponding GHG emissions. By CARB expects that this measure will reduce transportation-related GHG emissions by about 5 MMT CO2e or 4 percent of the total statewide reductions attributed to the capped sectors. Specific regional reduction targets established through SB 375 will determine more accurately what reductions can be achieved through this measure. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-4 City of Chula Vista November 2013 g. Senate Bill 375 – Regional Emission Targets SB 375 was signed in September 2008 and requires CARB to set regional targets for reducing passenger vehicle GHG emissions in accordance with the scoping plan measure described above. Its purpose is to align regional transportation planning efforts, regional GHG reduction targets, and land use and housing allocation to reduce GHG emissions by promoting high-density, mixed-use developments around mass transit hubs. To help achieve the goals of AB 32, SB 375 requires the metropolitan planning organizations in California to update their regional transportation plans to adopt a SCS or alternative planning strategy that prescribes land use allocations which promote smart growth development. Enhanced public transit service combined with incentives for land use development that provides a better market for public transit will play an important role in the strategy. CARB, in consultation with SANDAG, released a staff report on the proposed reduction target for San Diego County, which was subsequently approved by CARB on September 23, 2010. The San Diego region will be required to reduce GHG emissions from cars and light trucks 7 percent per capita by 2020 and 13 percent by 2035 (SANDAG 2010b). The reduction targets are to be updated every 8 years, but can be updated every 4 years if advancements in emissions technologies affect the reduction strategies to achieve the targets. Once reduction targets are established, SB 375 requires the metropolitan planning organizations to demonstrate how the region will meet its GHG reduction targets through integrated land use, housing, and transportation planning. After the SCS is adopted by the planning organizations, the strategies will be incorporated into that region's federally enforceable regional transportation plan. SANDAG has completed work on the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan, the first such plan in the state that includes an SCS (CARB 2010c; SANDAG 2010b). CARB is also required to review each final SCS to determine whether it would achieve the GHG emission reduction target for its region. If the measures in the SCS do not meet the region’s target, the SANDAG would need to prepare a separate alternative planning strategy to meet the target. h. Renewables Portfolio Standard The renewables portfolio standard promotes diversification of the state’s electricity supply. Its purpose is to achieve 33 percent renewable energy mix statewide; providing 33 percent of the state’s electricity needs met by renewable resources by 2020. The portfolio standard is included in the CARB scoping plan list of reduction measures. Increasing the portfolio standard to 33 percent is designed to accelerate the transformation of the electricity sector, including investment in the transmission infrastructure and systems changes to allow integration of large quantities of intermittent wind and solar generation. Renewable energy includes (but is not limited to) wind, solar, geothermal, small hydroelectric, biomass, anaerobic digestion, and landfill gas. Increased use of renewables would decrease California’s reliance on fossil fuels, thus reducing emissions of GHGs from the electricity sector. CARB estimates that full achievement of the portfolio standard would decrease statewide GHG emissions by 21.3 MMT CO2e. i. Million Solar Roofs Program This program was created in 2006 and includes the California Public Utility Commission’s California Solar Initiative and California Energy Commission’s (CEC) New Solar Homes Partnership. It requires publicly owned utilities to adopt, implement and finance solar incentive programs to lower the cost of solar systems and help achieve the goal of installing 3,000 MW of new solar capacity by 2020. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-5 City of Chula Vista November 2013 j. Senate Bill 1368 – Public Utility Emissions Standards SB 1368, passed in 2006, requires the CEC to set GHG emission standards for entities providing electricity in the state. The bill further requires that the California Public Utility Commission prohibit electricity providers and corporations from entering into long-term contracts if those providers and corporations do not meet the CEC’s standards. k. Title 24, Part 6 – California Energy Code By reducing California’s energy consumption, emissions of statewide GHGs may also be reduced. Originally enacted in 1978 in response to legislative mandates, CCR Title 24, Part 6 establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings in order to reduce California’s energy consumption. The code is updated periodically to incorporate and consider new energy efficiency technologies and methodologies as they become available. The most recent amendments to the code, known as Title 24 2008, or the 2008 Energy Code, became effective January 1, 2010. Title 24 2008 requires energy savings of 15 to 35 percent above the former Title 24 2005 energy code. At a minimum, residential buildings must achieve a 15 percent reduction in their combined space heating, cooling and water heating energy compared to the Title 24 2005 standards. Incentives in the form of rebates and tax breaks are provided on a sliding scale for buildings achieving energy efficiency above the minimum 15 percent reduction over Title 24 2005. The reference to Title 24 2005 is relevant in that many of the state’s long-term energy and GHG reduction goals identify energy saving targets relative to Title 24 2005. New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the current energy code through submission and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report to the local building permit review authority and the CEC. The compliance reports must demonstrate a building’s energy performance through use of CEC-approved energy performance software that shows iterative increases in energy efficiency given selection of various HVAC, sealing, glazing, insulation, and other components related to the building envelope. Title 24 governs energy consumed by the built environment and by the major building envelope systems such as space heating, space cooling, water heating, some aspects of the fixed lighting system, and ventilation. Non-building energy use or “plug-in” energy use (such as appliances, equipment, electronics, plug-in lighting) is independent of building design and not subject to Title 24. l. Title 24, Part 11 – California Green Building Standards In 2007, Governor Schwarzenegger directed the California Building Standards Commission to work with state agencies on the adoption of green building standards for residential, commercial and public building construction for the 2010 code adoption process. The CalGreen standards took effect January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of commercial, low-rise residential and state-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. The mandatory standards require: ■ 20 percent mandatory reduction in indoor water use relative to baseline levels; ■ 50 percent construction/demolition waste must be diverted from landfills; ■ Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; and ■ Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring and particle boards. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-6 City of Chula Vista November 2013 The voluntary standards require: ■ Tier I – 15 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 65 percent reduction in construction waste, 10 percent recycled content, 20 percent permeable paving, 20 percent cement reduction, cool/solar reflective roof; and ■ Tier II – 30 percent improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures, 75 percent reduction in construction waste, 15 percent recycled content, 30 percent permeable paving, 30 percent cement reduction, cool/solar reflective roof. Similar to the compliance reporting procedure described above for demonstrating energy code compliance, compliance with the CalGreen water reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms for both commercial and low-rise residential buildings. The water use compliance form must demonstrate a minimum 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in C alGreen or a reduced per-plumbing-fixture water use rate. 3. Local a. ICLEI Cities for Climate Protection In 1992, the City of Chula Vista participated in the Cities for Climate Protection Program which was aimed at developing municipal action plans for the reduction of GHGs. This program was sponsored and developed by the International Council of Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) and the United Nations Environment Program in response to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, while recognizing that all local planning and development has direct consequences on energy consumption and cities exercise key powers over urban infrastructure, including neighborhood design, and over transportation infrastructure such as roads, streets, pedestrian areas, bicycle lanes and public transport. b. Chula Vista Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Reduction Plan Each participant in the ICLEI program was to create local policy measures to ensure multiple benefits to the city and at the same time identify a carbon reduction goal through the implementation of those measures. The carbon reduction goal was to fit within the realm of international climate treaty reduction goals. In its Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan, developed in 1996 and officially adopted in 2000, Chula Vista committed to lowering its carbon dioxide emissions by diversifying its transportation system and using energy more efficiently in all sectors. To focus efforts in this direction, Chula Vista adopted the international carbon dioxide reduction goal of returning to pre-1990 levels by 2010. In order to achieve this goal, eight actions were identified, which when fully implemented, were anticipated to save 100,000 tons of carbon dioxide each year. As a result of the 2005 GHG Emissions Inventory Report, in May 2007 staff reported to City Council that citywide GHG emissions had increased by 35 percent (mainly due to residential growth) from 1990 to 2005, while emissions on a per capita basis and from municipal operations decreased by 17 percent and 18 percent, respectively. The City Council directed staff to convene a climate change working group to develop recommendations to reduce the community’s GHGs in order to meet city 2010 GHG emissions reduction targets. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-7 City of Chula Vista November 2013 c. Climate Change Working Group The Climate Change Working Group, which is composed of residents, businesses, and community organization representatives, helps the city in developing climate-related programs and policies. In 2008, the group reviewed over 90 carbon reduction measures and ultimately chose seven measures to recommend to City Council, which the council subsequently adopted. The measures were designed to reduce or mitigate climate change impacts by reducing GHG emissions within Chula Vista to 20 percent below 1990 levels in keeping with its Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change goals. In October 2009, the City Council directed the group to evaluate how the city could adapt to potential climate change impacts. The group met throughout 2011 to develop recommendations based on the city’s vulnerabilities and risks to climate change. In May 2011, the group adopted the Climate Adaptation Strategies – Implementation Plans, described below. d. Chula Vista Climate Adaptation Strategies – Implementation Plans The Climate Adaptation Strategies – Implementation Plans document developed by the Climate Change Working Group includes eleven strategies to adapt Chula Vista to the potential impacts of global climate change related to energy and water supply, public health, wildfires, ecosystem management, coastal infrastructure, and the local economy sectors. The strategies include cool paving, shade trees, cool roofs, local water supply and reuse, storm water pollution prevention and reuse, education and wildfires, extreme heat plans, open space management, wetlands preservation, sea level rise and land development codes, and green economy. For each strategy, the plans outline specific implementation components, critical steps, costs, and timelines. In order to limit the necessary staffing and funding required to implement the strategies, the plans were also designed to build upon existing municipal efforts rather than create new, stand-alone policies or programs. Initial implementation of all eleven strategies is intended to be phased in over a three year period from plan adoption. e. Chula Vista Climate Adaptation Strategies – Implementation Plans The Climate Adaptation Strategies – Implementation Plans document developed by the Climate Change Working Group includes eleven strategies to adapt Chula Vista to the potential impacts of global climate change. For each strategy, the plans outline specific implementation components, critical steps, costs, and timelines. In order to limit the necessary staffing and funding required to implement the strategies, the plans were also designed to build upon existing municipal efforts rather than create new, stand- alone policies or programs. Initial implementation of all eleven strategies is intended to be phased in over a three year period from plan adoption. f. Chula Vista Climate Protection Measures On July 10, 2008, the City Council adopted implementation plans for seven climate protection measures to reduce GHG emissions to 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. The implementation plans outline the detailed strategy for initiating, funding, and tracking the following measures: 1. Clean Vehicle Replacement Policy for City Fleet: When city fleet vehicles are retired, they will be replaced through the purchase or lease of alternative fuel or hybrid substitutes. In addition, the city fleet will begin to pursue installing new fuel tanks to allow heavy-duty vehicles to convert to biodiesel fuel immediately. 2. Clean Vehicle Replacement Policy for City-Contracted Fleets: As contracts for city-contracted fleet services (such as transit buses, trash haulers and street sweeper trucks) are renewed, the 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-8 City of Chula Vista November 2013 city will encourage contractors to replace their vehicles with alternative fuel or hybrid substitutes through the contract bid process. In addition, the city will pursue implementing two hydrogen vehicle demonstration projects. 3. Business Energy Assessments: Although not mandatory, businesses will be encouraged to participate in a no cost energy assessment of their facilities to help identify opportunities for them to reduce monthly energy costs. The business assessment will be integrated into the existing business licensing process and codified through a new municipal ordinance. 4. Green Building Standard: Chula Vista will implement a citywide, mandatory green building standard for new construction and major renovations. The new standard will have three main components: 1) a minimum energy efficiency (carbon equivalent) requirement of 15 percent above the 2005 Title 24, 2) the early adoption of the new California Green Building Standards for all residential and commercial projects, and 3) a carbon offset fee available for projects not meeting the 15 percent above Title 24 threshold. 5. Solar and Energy Efficiency Conversion Program: The city will create a community program to provide residents and businesses a streamlined, cost effective opportunity to implement energy efficiency improvements and to install solar/renewable energy systems on their properties. The city will develop a funding mechanism to allow program participants to voluntarily choose to place the improvement costs on their property’s tax rolls, thereby avoiding large upfront capital costs. In addition, the program will promote vocational training, local manufacturing, and retail sales opportunities for environmental products and services. To help stimulate the private- sector renewable market and lower the cost for installing renewable energy systems on new homes, the city will require all new residential buildings to include pre-wiring and pre-plumbing for solar photovoltaic and solar hot water systems, respectively. 6. Smart Growth Around Trolley Stations: The city will continue to implement the smart growth design principles, which promote mixed-use and walkable and transit-friendly development, particularly in and around the E, H, and Palomar trolley stations. These principles were emphasized in the revised Chula Vista General Plan and the Urban Core Specific Plan. In particular, the city will initiate site planning, design studies and specific area plan development to further support smart growth development that complements GHG reductions. 7. Turf Lawn Conversion Program: The city will create a community program to provide residents and businesses a streamlined, cost-effective opportunity to replace their turf lawns with water- saving landscaping and irrigation systems. Some municipal turf lawn areas (such as medians, fire stations and non-recreational park areas) will also be converted to act as public demonstration sites and to reduce monthly water costs. The city will establish the model for water-wise landscaping for new development through an update of the Chula Vista Municipal Landscape Ordinance and WCP guidelines. g. Chula Vista Green Building Standards Consistent with measure 4 of the Chula Vista Climate Protection Measures, the City Council adopted the Green Building Standards (GBS) Ordinance (Ordinance No. 3140) on October 6, 2009, which became effective November 5, 2009. The GBS ordinance includes standards for energy efficiency, pollutant controls, interior moisture control, improved indoor air quality and exhaust, indoor water conservation, storm water management, and construction waste reduction and recycling. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-9 City of Chula Vista November 2013 Building permit applications are required to indicate on project construction plans and specifications the GBS measures that comply with the ordinance. Prior to final building approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy the Building Official reviews the information submitted by the applicant and determines whether the applicant has constructed the project in accordance with the permitted plans and documents, and whether the plans are in compliance with the GBS. h. Chula Vista Increased Energy Efficiency Standards On January 26, 2010, the City Council adopted the Increased Energy Efficiency Standards Ordinance (Ordinance No. 3149). This ordinance became effective February 26, 2010 as Section 15.26 of the municipal code. Permit applications are required to comply with these energy efficiency standards. CVMC Section 15.26.030 requires permit applications to comply with increased energy efficiency standards that achieve 15 to 20 percent greater efficiency than the requirements of the Title 24 2008 standards, depending on climate zone. The city falls within two climate zones, Zone 7 and Zone 10. The Village 8 West project site is within Zone 7. For Zone 7, the code requires: ■ All new low-rise residential building or additions, remodels or alterations to existing low-rise residential buildings where the additions, remodels or alterations are greater than 1,000 square feet of conditional floor area, shall use at least 15 percent less energy than the 2008 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards allow; and ■ All new non-residential, high-rise residential or hotel/motel buildings, or additions, remodels or alterations to existing non-residential, high-rise residential or hotel/motel buildings where the additions, remodels or alterations are greater than 10,000 square feet of conditioned floor area, shall use at least 15 percent less energy than the 2008 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. No city building permit shall be issued unless the permit application demonstrates to the Building Official compliance with the requirements of Section 15.26.030. Compliance is to be demonstrated based on a performance approach, using a CEC-approved energy compliance software program, as specified in the Title 24 2008 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. i. City of Chula Visa Mandatory Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling Ordinance Section 8.25.095 of the CVMC requires that 90 percent of inert materials and a minimum of 50 percent of all other materials be recycled and/or reused from certain covered projects. Covered projects include: ■ Any project requiring a permit for demolition or construction, which has a project valuation of $20,000 or more. ■ Housing subdivision construction or demolition and/or any sequenced development will be considered a project in its entirety and not a series of individual projects. ■ Individually built single-family homes. ■ All city projects. Covered projects must submit a waste management plan to the Chula Vista Public Works Department, Environmental Services Division, which must be reviewed and approved prior to the issuance of a demolition or building permit. The waste management plan will indicate how the applicant will recycle and/or reuse 90 percent of inert materials and at least 50 percent of the remaining construction and demolition debris generated from the project. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-10 City of Chula Vista November 2013 B. Existing GHG Conditions 1. Understanding Global Climate Change Global climate change is an alteration in the average weather of the earth, which can be measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation, and temperature. The earth’s climate is in a state of constant flux with periodic warming and cooling cycles. For most of the earth’s geologic history, these periods of warming and cooling have been the result of many complicated, interacting natural factors. However, since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution around 1750, the average temperature of the earth has been increasing at a rate that is faster than can be explained by natural climate cycles alone. With the Industrial Revolution came an increase in the combustion of carbon-based fuels such as wood, coal, oil, natural gas, and biomass. Industrial processes have also created emissions of substances that are not found in nature. This in turn has led to a marked increase in the emissions of gases that have been shown to influence the world’s climate. These gases, termed GHGs, influence the amount of heat that is trapped in the earth’s atmosphere. Because recently observed increased concentrations of GHGs in the atmosphere are related to increased emissions resulting from human activity, the current cycle of “global warming” is generally believed to be largely due to human activity. 2. Greenhouse Gases of Primary Concern GHGs include water vapor, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), ozone (O3), nitrous oxide (N2O), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Carbon dioxide is the most abundant GHG in the atmosphere. GHGs are the result of both natural and anthropogenic activities. Methane and nitrous oxide are also produced by both natural and anthropogenic sources. The remaining gases occur solely as the result of human processes. Forest fires, decomposition, industrial processes, landfills, and consumption of fossil fuels for power generation, transportation, heating, and cooking are the primary sources of GHG emissions. Hydrofluorocarbons are synthetic, man-made chemicals used as substitutes for ozone-depleting chloroflourocarbons in automobile air conditioners and refrigerants. Perfluorocarbons are used primarily in aluminum production and semiconductor manufacture. Sulfur hexafluoride is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment. These gases are not of primary concern to the project. Carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide are the GHGs of concern in this analysis. Carbon dioxide would be emitted by uses allowed under the SPA Plan during the combustion of fossil fuels in vehicles, from electricity generation and natural gas consumption, and from solid waste disposal. Smaller amounts of methane and nitrous oxide would be emitted from the same sources. More information on the background of global warming and GHGs can be found in the Global Climate Change Analysis, included as Appendix H1. The atmospheric lifetime of the GHG is the average time the molecule stays stable in the atmosphere. Most GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes, staying in the atmosphere hundreds or thousands of years. The potential of a gas to trap heat and warm the atmosphere is measured by its global warming potential. Table 5.10-1 identifies the potential and atmospheric lifetimes of the GHGs of primary concern in this analysis. The reference gas for global warming potential is carbon dioxide. GHG potential and emissions are compared in relation to carbon dioxide. The carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a consistent methodology for comparing GHG emissions since it normalizes various GHG emissions to a consistent measure. Carbon dioxide has a global warming potential of one; by comparison, the global 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-11 City of Chula Vista November 2013 warming potential of methane is 21. This means that methane has a greater global warming effect than carbon dioxide on a molecule per molecule basis. Table 5.10-1 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes Gas Atmospheric Lifetime (years) 100-year Global Warming Potential 20-year Global Warming Potential 500-year Global Warming Potential Carbon Dioxide 50-200 1 1 1 Methane 12 ± 3 21 56 6.5 Nitrous Oxide 120 310 280 170 Source: RECON 2012 3. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories a. Global Worldwide anthropogenic emissions of GHG in 2006 were approximately 49,000 MMT CO2e, including ongoing emissions from industrial and agricultural sources and emissions from land use changes (i.e., deforestation, biomass decay) (IPCC 2007). Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel use account for 56.6 percent of the total emissions of 49,000 MMT CO2e. All carbon dioxide emissions are 76.7 percent of the GHG total. Methane emissions account for 14.3 percent and nitrous oxide emissions for 7.9 percent of GHG (IPCC 2007). b. United States The EPA publication, Draft Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2009, provides a comprehensive emissions inventory of the nation’s primary anthropogenic sources and sinks of GHG. Overall, total emissions in the United States had risen by 13 percent from 1990 to 2008, while the gross domestic product had increased by 65 percent over the same period. Emissions decreased from 2008 to 2009, decreasing by six percent to 6,640 MMT CO2e. Gross domestic product also decreased by three percent from 2008 to 2009. The publication indicated that the following factors were primary contributors to this decrease: 1) a decrease in economic output resulting in a decrease in energy consumption across all sectors; and 2) a decrease in the carbon intensity of fuels used to generate electricity due to fuel switching as the price of coal increased, and the price of natural gas decreased significantly (EPA 2011). c. State The state of California is a substantial contributor of GHG as it is the second largest contributor in the United States and the 16th largest in the world. According to the CARB, California generated 478 MMT CO2e in 2008 (RECON 2012). Table 5.10-2 provides CARB data on California GHG emissions by sector in 2008. GHG emissions in California are mainly associated with fossil fuel consumption in the transportation sector (37 percent). Electricity generation is the second-largest source of GHG emissions (24 percent). Industrial processes, agriculture, forestry, commercial, recycling and waste, and residential activities comprise the balance of California’s GHG emissions. Emissions of GHG were offset slightly in 2008 by the sequestration (intake) of carbon within forests, reducing the overall emissions by 3.98 MMT CO2e, resulting in net emissions of about 474 MMT CO2e. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-12 City of Chula Vista November 2013 Table 5.10-2 State of California GHG Emissions by Sectors in 2008 Sector Total Emissions (MMT CO2e) Percent of Total Emissions Agriculture 28.06 6 Commercial 14.68 3 Electricity Generation 116.35 24 Forestry (excluding sinks) 0.19 <1 High Global Warming Potential Emitters 15.65 3 Industrial 92.66 19 Recycling and Waste 6.71 1 Residential 28.45 6 Transportation 174.99 37 Total (Gross) Emissions 477.74 100 MMT CO2e = Million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent Source: RECON 2012 d. Regional A San Diego County regional emissions inventory was prepared by the University of San Diego that took into account the unique characteristics of the region. The 2006 emissions inventory for San Diego County is duplicated below in Table 5.10-3. The sectors included in this inventory are somewhat different than those in the statewide inventory. Similar to the statewide emissions, transportation- related GHG emissions contributed the most GHG emissions countywide, followed by emissions associated with energy use. Table 5.10-3 County of San Diego GHG Emissions by Category (2006) Sector Total Emissions (MMT CO2e) Percent of Total Emissions Agriculture/Forestry/Land Use 0.7 2 Waste 0.7 2 Electricity 9 25 Natural Gas Consumption 3 8 Industrial Processes & Products 1.6 5 On-Road Transportation 16 45 Off-Road Equipment & Vehicles 1.3 4 Civil Aviation 1.7 5 Rail 0.3 1 Water-Borne Navigation 0.127 0.5 Other Fuels/Other 1.1 3 Total 35.5 100 MMT CO2e = Million metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent Note: Numbers may not total to 100 percent due to rounding Source: RECON 2012 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-13 City of Chula Vista November 2013 e. Local As part of monitoring its progress in attaining the goals of its Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan, discussed below under Regulatory Framework, the City of Chula Vista inventoried citywide GHG emissions in 2005 and 2008. The 2005 GHG Emissions Inventory was the first formal evaluation of the city’s progress in reaching its emissions goals, and the 2008 GHG Emissions Inventory was the second formal evaluation (City of Chula Vista 2005d, 2008b). In 2008, community GHG emissions in the city totaled 934,630 MT CO2e. Transportation and mobile sources accounted for approximately 44 percent of this total. This is 29 percent higher than 1990 levels and 17 percent higher than 2005 levels citywide and is attributed to population growth. f. Existing Village 8 West SPA GHG Emissions Village 8 West is located in the south central portion of the Otay Ranch GDP area. The Otay Ranch GDP area is former agricultural ranch land historically used for ranching, grazing, and dry farming. It is currently vacant of development and is thus not a source of anthropogenic GHGs. 4. Climate Change Effects Statewide GHG emissions are projected to increase over 23 percent (from 2004) by 2020 given current trends (RECON 2012). The 2008 University of San Diego School of Law Energy Policy Initiative Center study predicts a countywide increase to 43 MMT CO2e or roughly 20 percent (from 2006) by 2020, given a BAU trajectory. Global GHG emissions forecasts also predict similar substantial increases, given a BAU trajectory. The potential consequences of global climate change on the San Diego region are far reaching. The Climate Scenarios report, published in 2006 by the California Climate Change Center, uses a range of emissions scenarios to project a series of potential warming ranges (low, medium or high temperature increases) that may occur in California during the 21st century. Throughout the state and the region, global climate and local microclimate changes could cause an increase in extreme heat days; higher concentrations, frequency and duration of air pollutants; an increase in wildfires; more intense coastal storms; sea level rise; impacts to water supply and water quality through reduced snowpack and saltwater influx; public health impacts; impacts to near-shore marine ecosystems; reduced quantity and quality of agricultural products; pest population increases; and altered natural ecosystems and biodiversity. 5.10.2 Thresholds of Significance Climate change is a global phenomenon which is cumulative by nature, as it is the result of combined worldwide contributions of GHG to the atmosphere over many years. Therefore, the discussion of the project’s potential global climate change impacts can only be addressed as a cumulative impact. The project would result in a cumulatively considerable impact related to global climate change if it would: ■ Threshold 1: Conflict with or obstruct goals or strategies of the California Global Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) or related executive orders. To conform to AB 32 and related executive orders, a project would have to provide the same proportional reduction relative to BAU that the Climate Change Scoping Plan identifies for implementation of its quantifiable measures. The BAU scenario represents GHG emissions that 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-14 City of Chula Vista November 2013 would occur without the implementation of GHG reduction measures. As discussed in greater detail in the Climate Change Analysis prepared for the GPA/GDPA SEIR, the Climate Change Scoping Plan measures would reduce statewide emissions by approximately 20 percent compared to projected BAU emissions. Therefore, according to the city’s threshold, a project would be considered to result in a less than significant impact related to GHGs if it would result in a 20 percent reduction in the project’s overall GHG emissions compared to its BAU scenario emissions. ■ Threshold 2: Result in substantially increased exposure of the project from the potential adverse effects of global warming identified in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). 5.10.3 Impact Analysis A. Threshold 1: Conflict with or obstruct goals or strategies of the California Global Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) or related executive orders. The following analysis incorporates the methodology of the Global Climate Change Analysis prepared for the 2013 SEIR (EIR 09-01). A more detailed description of methodology and compete list of assumptions utilized in the Global Climate Change analysis are available in Appendix H1. Emission estimates were calculated for the three GHGs of primary concern (CO2, CH4, and N2O) that would be emitted from the construction of Village 8 West, and five sources of operational emissions: on- road vehicular traffic, electricity generation, natural gas consumption, water usage, and solid waste disposal. The method of quantifying GHG emissions was based on methodologies recommended and used the SCAQMD and CARB. To evaluate the projected emissions from development in Village 8 West relative to the BAU forecast for the proposed land uses, emissions of each source of GHGs were estimated first for a project-equivalent under BAU conditions. The BAU forecast was consistent with the Climate Change Scoping Plan and assumes building energy efficiency in accordance with the 2005 Title 24 energy code, water conservation in accordance with the current plumbing code, and solid waste disposal quantities in accordance with current statewide legislation. A 20 percent reduction of this amount was then calculated in order to identify the targeted cap in GHG emissions attributable to Village 8 West. Lastly, emissions of each source of GHGs were estimated for the proposed land uses assuming building energy and water efficiencies required in city ordinances and general plan policies. The analysis included full buildout of Village 8 West, including 2,050 residential units and 300,000 square feet of office and commercial uses. The emission factors used to calculate vehicle, electricity, and natural gas GHG emissions are shown in Table 5.10-4. Emissions estimated for each of the emission sources are summed and expressed in terms of total MMT CO2e. Vehicle emissions were estimated using emission factors developed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and EPA that takes into consideration engine fuel consumption expressed in units of pounds of GHG per gallon of transportation fuel; the total quantity of fuel consumed per year; and the global warming potential of each GHG. In this analysis, annual fuel consumption is based on the traffic study prepared for the 2013 GPA/GDPA SEIR (LLG 2010) to be consistent with the methodology in the Global Climate Change Analysis for the SEIR. This traffic analysis is conservative compared to the traffic analysis prepared for Village 8 West because it does not take into account the trip reductions that would occur as a result of smart growth development in Village 8 West. The traffic study for the 2013 GPA/GDPA SEIR (EIR 09-01) estimates that the proposed buildout of 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-15 City of Chula Vista November 2013 Villages 8 West would generate 43,564 ADT (LLG 2011). Based on the regional average trip length of 5.8 miles and an average fuel economy of 18.80 mpg for 2020, a total of 252,671 vehicle miles would be traveled each day and 13,440 gallons of vehicle fuel would be consumed each day under BAU conditions. Construction emissions were estimated by multiplying the proposed residential and commercial quantities by annual construction emission rates of 0.077 MT CO2e per dwelling unit and 0.006 MT CO2e per square foot of commercial. These values were obtained through review of other project-level analyses completed for the city of San Diego. GHG emissions associated with electricity use were calculated by multiplying the total number of dwelling units, commercial, and industrial square footage by average electricity use rates obtained from the U.S. Energy Information Administration and by the electricity generation emission factors contained in Table 5.10-4. Statewide monthly average natural gas consumption rates were obtained from the Energy Information Administration and SCAQMD to calculate BAU emissions. Table 5.10-4 GHG Emission Factors Gas Vehicle Emission Factors (pounds/gallon gas) Electricity Generation Emission Factors (pounds/MWh) Natural Gas Combustion Emission Factors (pound/million ft3) Carbon Dioxide 19.564 1,340 120,000 Methane 0.00055 0.0111 2.3 Nitrous Oxide 0.0002 0.0192 2.2 Source: RECON 2012 The GHG emissions associated with water use result from the energy required to transport water to the project site. As discussed in Section 5.15, Public Utilities, Village 8 West would result in a water demand of approximately 0.8 mgd. Energy estimates from water use were obtained from the California Energy Commission. The energy use was then converted to GHG emissions using the emission factors shown in Table 5.10-4. A countywide average waste disposal rate obtained from the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) was used to estimate solid waste generation. Generation rates of 8.6 pounds per unit per day for residential and 0.046 pounds per square foot per day for office/commercial and industrial uses were used to determine the total volume of waste by weight. These values were then multiplied by emission factors used in the EPA Waste Reduction Model. The Village 8 West GHG emissions from solid waste are based on the proportion attributable to the project compared to total generated by buildout within the entire SEIR project area. For the landfill estimates, landfill gas recovery for energy was assumed, and for both the landfill and recycling estimates, a truck haul distance of 20 miles and frequency of once per week. Local recycling and disposal (to landfill) percentages (of total waste generated) were also obtained from CalRecycle and reflect current waste disposal practice in accordance with the statutory 50 percent diversion mandate. 1. Business-as-Usual Village 8 West Emissions As noted earlier, the BAU condition represents a standard development scenario that does not incorporate any features that would result in reduction of vehicle trips or utility demand. The BAU scenario does assume compliance with adopted statewide programs to reduce GHG emissions, such as the Title 24 energy efficiency requirements; the national CAFE Standards which would increase average 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-16 City of Chula Vista November 2013 vehicle fuel economy to 35 mpg by 2020; the state Pavley GHG Vehicle Emissions Standards which set increasingly stringent emission limits on vehicles, requiring improvement in vehicle engine technologies; and the state LCFS which reduces the carbon content of vehicle fuels. Based on the methodology described above, BAU emissions for the development proposed in the project are summarized in Table 5.10-5. As shown in this table, BAU emissions associated with buildout of Village 8 West is 88,639 MT CO2e. The greatest source of emissions would be from transportation, accounting for approximately 45 percent of the total. The second greatest source is electricity, accounting for approximately 39 percent of BAU emissions. Table 5.10-5 Annual Business-as-Usual Village 8 West GHG Emissions Emission Source BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) Percent of Total Emissions Transportation 43,696 45 Electricity 22,790 39 Natural Gas 7,459 <1 Water Use 1,589 2 Solid Waste 1,504 2 Construction(1) 11,601 12 Total 88,639 100 (1) Total construction impacts (not annual). MT CO2e = Metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent. Source: Atkins 2012 2. Village 8 West Emissions with Project GHG Reduction Features A number of features included in the SPA Plan result in reduced GHG emissions compared to the BAU scenario. For example, a mix of residential, commercial, and recreational uses would be provided within Village 8 West. The proximity of the different uses would encourage walking and biking and relatively short local vehicle trips. Measures listed in Appendix B of the Village 8 West SPA Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, include the following that would reduce vehicular emissions: 1. Provide shower and locker facilities at offices with more than ten occupants to encourage bicycle use. 2. Design parking lots to promote use of mass transit and car pools. 3. Synchronize the traffic lights included as part of an individual development project with previously installed traffic lights in order to reduce traffic congestion. SANDAG was able to determine a trip length for Village 8 West that was shorter than the regional average (RECON 2012). Compared to the regional average daily vehicle trip length of 5.8 miles, the ADT length for Village 8 West would be 4.62 miles. Buildout of the SPA Plan and TM would be subject to the CVMC GBS and Increased Energy Efficiency ordinances. The following measures listed in Appendix B of the Village 8 West SPA Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, would assist development in Village 8 West in achieving the GBS and Increase Energy Efficiency standards: 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-17 City of Chula Vista November 2013 1. Utilize solar heating technology as practical. Generally, solar panels can be cost-effectively used to heat water for domestic use and for swimming pools. Advances in solar technology in the future may make other applications appropriate. 2. Enhance energy efficiency in building designs and landscaping plans. These two ordinances would achieve a 30 percent reduction in electricity and natural gas use compared to BAU assumptions and a 20 percent reduction in potable water consumption (and associated embodied energy) compared to BAU assumptions (RECON 2012). Emissions would likely be lower due to the implementation of renewable energy portfolio standards; however, emission reduction quantification is not available at this time. While construction in Village 8 West would implement lumber and other materials conservation in accordance with the city GBS and likely generate less landfill waste than BAU, these savings cannot be estimated at this time. Therefore, Village 8 West was considered to generate the same amount of waste and associated GHG emissions as that under BAU. Construction emissions were also assumed to remain unchanged from the BAU condition. The estimated GHG emissions for Village 8 West shown in Table 5.10-6 take into consideration the project-specific features described above that result in GHG reductions associated with transportation and utility efficiencies. Based on the estimated annual BAU emissions of 88,639 MT CO2e each year, the development proposed in the SPA Plan and TM would be required to reduce annual GHG emissions to below 70,911 MT CO2e each year in order to reduce GHG emissions by 20 percent or more compared to BAU. Therefore, the land uses proposed in the SPA Plan and TM were considered to be consistent with the Climate Change Scoping Plan and AB 32 Year 2020 goals if the total annual GHG emissions resulting from electricity, natural gas/water use, solid waste disposal, and construction activities, would be equal to or less than 70,911 MT CO2e. As shown, emissions associated with buildout of Village 8 West including the project-specific reduction features would be 59,915 MT CO2e. The greatest source of emissions would be from transportation, accounting for just under half of emissions. The second greatest source would be electricity, accounting for approximately 40 percent of project emissions. Table 5.10-6 Annual Village 8 West GHG Emissions with Reduction Features Emissions Source Buildout Emissions (MT CO2e) Percent of Total Emissions Transportation 24,364 38 Electricity 15,953 40 Natural Gas 5,221 <1 Water Use 1,271 2 Solid Waste 1,504 2 Construction(1) 11,601 18 Total 59,915 100 (1) Total construction impacts, not annual. MT CO2e = Metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent. Source: Atkins 2012 Estimated annual BAU and project GHG emissions are compared in Table 5.10-7. As shown, the project would result in annual GHG emissions that are reduced by 32 percent compared to BAU. Therefore, GHG emissions for Village 8 West are consistent with AB 32 and would result in a less than significant impact. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-18 City of Chula Vista November 2013 Table 5.10-7 Village 8 West Annual GHG Emissions Comparison Emissions Source BAU Emissions (MT CO2e) Village 8 West Emissions with Reduction Features (MT CO2e) Percent Reduction Compared to BAU Transportation 43,696 24,364 44 Electricity 22,790 15,953 30 Natural Gas 7,459 5,221 30 Water Use 1,589 1,271 20 Solid Waste 1,504 1,504 0 Construction(1) 11,601 11,601 0 Total 88,639 59,915 32 (1) Total construction impacts, not annual. MT CO2e = Metric tons carbon dioxide equivalent Source: RECON 2012; Atkins 2012 B. Threshold 2: Result in substantially increased exposure of the project from the potential adverse effects of global warming identified in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). As discussed above under Threshold 1, the estimated GHG emissions from the project would be consistent with the goals of AB 32. Therefore, GHG emissions as a result of the project would not substantially increase the risk of potential adverse effects of global warming. However, buildout of the SPA Plan and TM would have the potential to result in other environmental impacts that exacerbate the adverse effects of climate change. Additionally, new development on Village 8 West would have the potential to result in increased exposure to adverse effects. The potential for the project to increase exposure to hazards related to climate change are addressed below. 1. Exacerbation of Air Quality Problems The San Diego Air Basin is currently in non-attainment for ozone, as discussed in Section 5.4, Air Quality. As discussed in Section 5.4 under Threshold 1, operation of the project would have the potential to exceed the significance thresholds for ozone precursors (nitrogen oxides or reactive organic gases), particularly as a result of vehicular emissions. The applicable mitigation measures of the 1993 Program EIR for the GDP (EIR 90-01), 2005 GPU EIR, and 2013 SEIR for the GPA/GDPA (EIR 09-01), such as provision of bike lanes, providing services near residences, and provid ing transit support facilities such as bus stops, have already been incorporated into the project to reduce vehicle trips and are accounted for in the projected ADT for the project. There are no other feasible mitigation measures available at the project level to reduce vehicular emissions other than reducing vehicle trips. The project trip generation rates account for the approximately 40 percent reduction in vehicle trips that would occur as a result of the mixed-use areas, transit use, and availability of pedestrian and bicycle facilities proposed as part of the SPA Plan. Some measures cannot be implemented at the SPA level, such as providing video-conference facilities in work places or requiring flexible work schedules. There are no feasible mitigation measures currently available to reduce area sources of emissions without regulating the purchases of individual consumers. Therefore, it cannot be guaranteed that emissions of ozone precursors would be reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, implementation of the project would have the potential to result in additional ozone in the basin that would contribute to increased exposure to ozone-related ailments. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-19 City of Chula Vista November 2013 2. Reduction in the Quality and Supply of Water As discussed in Section 5.9, Public Services and Utilities, climate change due to global warming creates uncertainties that may significantly affect California’s water resources over the long term. However, the OWD prepared a WSAV for Village 8 West based on the most recent water supply information available. The WSAV is provided in Appendix K1. The WSAV determined that sufficient water supplies are planned for and are intended to be available over a 20-year planning horizon, under normal conditions and in single-dry and multiple-dry water years to meet the estimated demand of Village 8 West and the existing and other planned development projects to be served by the OWD. The Chula Vista Landscape Water Conservation Ordinance calls for greater water conservation efforts and more efficient use of water in landscaping. The requirements of this ordinance would be implemented into the design of the SPA Plan. In addition, through implementation of the project’s WCP, the project would promote water conservation by implementing mandatory and non-mandatory conservation measures. These include, but are not limited to, the use of low water use plumbing fixtures and recycled water for the irrigation of parks, open space slopes, schools, parkway landscaping, and the common areas of multi-family residential and commercial sites; the installation of pressure-reducing valves; and the use of recycled water. Therefore, implementation of the project would not substantially increase potential water supply shortages or result in increased exposure to water supply shortages. 3. Rise in Sea Levels Village 8 West is located approximately 10 miles inland and separated from the Pacific Ocean and San Diego Bay by hilly topography. Ground elevations within the project site range from 300 feet AMSL to 600 feet AMSL. Therefore, Village 8 West would not be inundated by an increase is sea level rise and buildout of the project would not result in increased exposure to sea level rise. Additionally, the project would not result in a significant contribution to sea level rise. As discussed under Threshold 1, the project would result in annual GHG emissions that are reduced by 32 percent compared to BAU and are consistent with AB 32. The project would not result in significant GHG emissions that would increase the likelihood that a rise in sea levels would occur due to global warming and associated climate change effects. 4. Damage to Marine Ecosystems and the Natural Environment As discussed in Section 5.11, Hydrology and Water Quality, runoff from Village 8 West would ultimately discharge to San Diego Bay. However, the project would minimize impacts on water quality by incorporating post-construction BMPs into project design, including LID site design, source control, and treatment control. Implementation of the SPA Plan and TM is subject to site design and source control BMPs that apply to the entire project area, as outlined in Section 3.6.2 of the Development Storm Water Manual. Mitigation measures 5.11-1 and 5.11-2 would require implementation of planning area-specific measures to ensure that water quality impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial increase in damage to marine ecosystems. Additionally, as discussed in Section 5.6, Biological Resources, with implementation of mitigation measures 5.6-1 through 5.6-19, all impacts to biological resources associated with buildout of the project would be reduced to a less than significant level, including compliance with the MSCP Subregional Plan. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial increase in damage to the natural environment. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-20 City of Chula Vista November 2013 5. Increase in the Incidences of Health Problems Vector-borne diseases are most likely to increase in areas with high humidity or stagnant, polluted water (EPA 2010b). The climate of southern California is predicted to become increasingly drier, not more humid (CEC 2009). Village 8 West is not located adjacent to a stagnant body of water and does not propose any new bodies of water that would be stagnant and attract disease-carrying insects. Several water quality and drainage basins are proposed as part of the project. However, the water in these basins would not be stagnant; it would evaporate or flow off the site to the Otay River and continue downstream. Therefore, project would not result in increased exposure to vector-borne diseases. Cases of dehydration, heat stroke/exhaustion, heart attack, stroke, and respiratory distress caused by extreme heat would also be expected to increase due to rising temperatures associated with climate change. However, the homes developed within Village 8 West would be designed to stay cool and protect residents from rising temperatures. The Non-Renewable Energy Conservation Plan for Village 8 West, a SPA component, discusses features that would reduce energy demand. The SPA Plan proposes street trees and narrow street width. Narrow street widths and the resulting reduction in pavement area reduce the heat absorption and radiation from pavement and thus the demand for air conditioning. The street tree program provides shade that enhances the reduction of heat from roadways. The Town Center would be oriented primarily on a north-south and east-west axis to take advantage of solar orientation. Passive solar design including the orientation of buildings can take advantage of the sun’s warmth in winter to assist with heating as well as minimize heat gain in summer months to assist with cooling. Therefore, the project would not result in a significant increase in exposure to heat-related ailments. 5.10.4 Level of Significance Prior to Mitigation A. Compliance with AB 32 No significant impacts related to compliance with AB 32 have been identified for implementation of the project. B. Potential Effects of Global Climate Change The project would have significant impacts related to regional and local air quality resulting from vehicular emissions of ozone precursors. The project would result in a less than significant impact regarding water supply, marine and natural environment, sea level rise, and human health hazards. 5.10.5 Mitigation Measures A. Compliance with AB 32 No mitigation measures are required. B. Potential Effects of Global Climate Change The applicable mitigation measures from previous EIRs have already been incorporated into the project to reduce emissions and energy consumption that would contribute to global climate change. However, some measures cannot be implemented at the SPA level, such as providing video-conference facilities in work places or requiring flexible work schedules, as discussed under Exacerbation of Air Quality Problems under Threshold 2. There are no feasible mitigation measures currently available to reduce 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-21 City of Chula Vista November 2013 area sources of emissions without regulating the purchases of individual consumers. Therefore, emissions of ozone precursors that would potentially exacerbate air quality problems would be significant and unavoidable. 5.10.6 Level of Significance After Mitigation A. Compliance with AB 32 Impacts related to compliance with AB 32 would be less than significant without mitigation. B. Potential Effects of Global Climate Change The potential to exacerbate air quality problems as a result of ozone precursor emissions remains significant. No mitigation measures are available to reduce this impact to below a level of significance without regulating the habits and purchases of individuals. This impact remains significant and unavoidable. 5.10 Global Climate Change Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page 5.10-22 City of Chula Vista November 2013 This page intentionally left blank.