Agenda packet — Atherton City Council, January 17, 2024 (part 2 of 2)

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 7 of 17 Date
building area. These ADUs may encroach into side and rear yard setbacks by not more than twenty percent (20%) of the required setback.

4. A newly constructed detached ADU that has a floor area greater than 800 square feet and no more than 1,200 square feet shall be located maintain the setbacks for accessory buildings.

5. A newly constructed detached ADU shall maintain the required separation distances between the proposed or existing main residence, accessory buildings and accessory structures as required in the accessory structures section of the zoning code, unless necessary to accommodate an ADU of 800 square feet ADU or less.

6. Existing Structure. No setback shall be required for an existing living area or accessory structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure that is converted to an ADU or to a portion of an ADU. A setback of at least four feet from the side and rear lot lines is required for an accessory dwelling unit that is not converted from an existing structure or a new structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.

7. For double frontage and corner lots, the front yard is the yard that is adjacent to the designated front property. The rear yard shall be the yard adjacent to the property line on the opposite side of the property from the designated front property line. The address for the ADU shall be on the street adjacent to the front yard.

G. Entrance Requirements. Any new attached ADU or JADU that is incorporated into a proposed or existing primary residence shall have a separate entrance facing the side or rear yard, where feasible. Any new detached ADU shall have a separate entrance facing towards the interior of the lot.

H. Height.

1. A maximum height of 16 feet is allowed for a detached ADU on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family or multifamily dwelling.

2. A maximum height of 18 feet is allowed for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one-half of one mile walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor. An additional two feet in height to accommodate a roof pitch on the accessory dwelling unit that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit is also allowed.

3. A maximum height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling.

Page 158 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 8 of 17 Date

4. A maximum height of 25 feet or the allowed height of the zoning district, whichever is lower, is allowed for an accessory dwelling unit that is attached to a primary dwelling.

5. Accessory dwelling units are limited to 2 stories.

6. A maximum height of 25 feet is allowed for a detached ADU located above a garage, provided that:
a. The total height is inclusive of the garage,
b. The garage complies with the accessory structure setback requirements of the Zoning Code, and,
c. The ADU is accessed through a ground level entry vestibule and an interior stair.
d. The roofline shall be consistent with the style of the main residence. For example, a gabled roof form on the main residence shall require a gabled roof form on the ADU above garage.
e. If the second story floor area accommodating the ADU is less than the ground floor area, the residual roofing above the ground floor shall not accommodate a roof deck or balcony.

I. Heritage Tree Ordinance.

1. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.2(a), ADUs up to 800 square feet and JADUs up to 500 square feet are exempt from the Heritage Tree Ordinance. However, if state law changes and enables the application of the Heritage Tree Ordinance to ADUs that are 800 square feet or less and JADUs that are 500 square feet or less, this exemption will cease immediately. In all other cases, the Heritage Tree Ordinance applies. The main residence and all other accessory buildings/structures are subject to the Heritage Tree Ordinance.

2. Detached ADUs that are greater than 800 square feet may seek administrative exceptions to the Tree Protection Zone for a distance up to 6x in the R1-A zoning district. The Town Arborist will review such requests for ADUs, concurrently with review by Planning staff.

3. Any tree removal permitted by the Town in relation to the construction of an ADU must occur after the issuance of a related building permit. Such building permit must then adhere to time limits set forth in Atherton Municipal Code (AMC) Section 15.40.180. Penalties and remedies pursuant to AMC

8.10.070(B) may result in cases where trees are removed in relation to the approval of an ADU and the ADU is not constructed.

4. Expansion to Existing ADUs. If an existing ADU was previously exempt from the Heritage Tree Ordinance due to its square footage and therefore, resulted

Page 159 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 9 of 17 Date
in the removal of a heritage tree; then any expansion to the subject ADU must provide a replacement planting consistent with AMC Chapter 8.10.

J. Privacy, Screening and Landscaping.

1. New ADUs constructed above the ground floor shall also be designed to reasonably preserve the privacy of adjacent property owners. Appropriate design techniques to preserve privacy include obscured glazing, the use of clerestory windows that are above eye level, screening treatments, locating windows toward the existing on-site residence, or providing no windows on facades facing adjacent properties.

2. Landscape screening for the ADU shall be installed to the greatest extent feasible.

3. New ADUs constructed within 10-feet of the subject property’s side (interior) or rear property lines, or are constructed above a detached accessory garage, must provide an 8-foot-high fence for screening. The required fence shall extend along the entire side or rear property line adjacent to the new ADU. If the property line is already adequately screened with landscaping installed subject to Atherton Municipal Code Chapter 17.50, then no new fencing is required.

4. No sidewall height limitations apply to ADUs.

K. Lighting Restrictions. Any lighting associated with an ADU or JADU shall be shielded or downlit and shall not shine onto adjoining properties, while meeting the minimum Building Code.

L. Parking Requirements.

1. No parking is required for a JADU.

2. Unless subject to one of the exceptions immediately below, each ADU shall have assigned to it one parking space per ADU. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway.

3. No additional parking shall be required if one of the following conditions applies to the ADU:
a. The ADU is located within one-half mile walking distance of public transit. b. The ADU is located within an architecturally and historically significant district.
c. The ADU is part of a proposed or existing primary residence or an existing accessory structure.
d. On-street parking permits are required but not offered to the occupant of the ADU.
e. A car share vehicle is located within one block of the ADU.

Page 160 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 10 of 17 Date
f. When a permit application for an ADU is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the ADU or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this paragraph.

4. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or converted to an ADU, off-street parking spaces do not need to be replaced.

5. A demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an ADU shall be reviewed with the application for the ADU and issued at the same time.

M. ADU Rental. An ADU or JADU may be rented separate from the primary residence but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.

Rentals of any ADU or JADU must be for longer than thirty days.

N. Owner Occupancy. The owner occupancy requirements detailed in this section shall apply to all lawfully permitted ADUs and JADUs within the Town on a singlefamily lot:

1. ADUs and JADUs permitted before January 1, 2020. The owner-occupancy requirements applicable to the ADU or JADU at the time of its permitting shall apply.

2. For ADUs and JADUs permitted on or after January 1, 2020, no owneroccupancy requirements shall apply.

O. Passageways and Internal Connections.

1. No passageway, as defined in California Government Code Section 65852.2, that is unobstructed clear to the sky and extends from a street to one entrance of the ADU, shall be required in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or JADU.

2. Internal connections are allowed for attached ADUs and JADUs.

3. Internal connections are not allowed for detached ADUs to other accessory buildings, unless the connection facilitates an interior stairwell that provides access to a detached ADU located above a garage.

P. Compliance with Applicable Requirements. ADUs and JADUs shall meet all applicable zoning and fire regulations and shall comply with local building codes.

Fire sprinklers shall not be required for the ADU if they are not required for the primary residence. The construction of an accessory dwelling unit shall not trigger a requirement for fire sprinklers to be installed in the existing primary dwelling.

Q. Nonconforming conditions. Nonconforming zoning conditions do not need to be corrected as part of an ADU or JADU approval. An ADU shall be approved regardless of nonconforming zoning conditions, building code violations, or

Page 161 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 11 of 17 Date
unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.

R. Impact Fees. No impact fees will be charged on an ADU less than 750 square feet.

Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.

S. Utility Connections. A new ADU where there is an existing main residence shall not be required to have separate utility connections. A new ADU combined with a new house shall have separate utility connections. The connection may be subject to a connection fee or capacity charge that shall be proportionate to the burden of the proposed accessory dwelling unit, based upon either its square feet or the number of its drainage fixture unit (DFU) values, as defined in the Uniform Plumbing Code adopted and published by the International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials, upon the water or sewer system. This fee or charge shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing this service.

T. A certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit will only be issued after a certificate of occupancy is issued for the primary dwelling.

U. In enforcing building standards pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 17960) of Chapter 5 of Part 1.5 of Division 13 of the Health and Safety Code for an accessory dwelling unit described in paragraph (1) or (2), the Town of Atherton upon request of an owner of an accessory dwelling unit for a delay in enforcement, shall delay enforcement of a building standard, subject to compliance with Section 17980.12 of the Health and Safety Code:

1. The accessory dwelling unit was built before January 1, 2020.

2. The accessory dwelling unit was built on or after January 1, 2020, in the Town of Atherton that, at the time the accessory dwelling unit was built, had a noncompliant accessory dwelling unit ordinance, but the ordinance is compliant at the time the request is made.

17.52.050 Application Review.

A completed application for an ADU or JADU that complies with the provisions of this chapter shall be considered ministerial, without discretionary review or a public hearing, within sixty days after receiving a complete application unless either:

A. The applicant requests a delay, in which case the 60-day time period is tolled for the period of the requested delay; or
B. If a permit application for an ADU or JADU is submitted along with a permit application to create a new primary residence, the Town may delay acting on the permit application for the ADU or JADU until the Town acts on the permit application to create the new primary residence. At such time the permit application for such ADU or JADU

Page 162 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 12 of 17 Date
is considered, it will still be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a public hearing, regardless of its having been submitted along with an application for a new primary residence.

Section 4. AMENDMENTS TO ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 17.36 Chapter 17.36 is hereby amended to include Accessory Dwelling Units as a land use permitted by right as follows:

17.36.030 Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements.

Table 17.36.030-1 (Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for PFS District) identifies the allowed uses in the PFS district subject to the development standards of this chapter and all other provisions of this title. Allowed use provisions are symbolized in the table as follows:

P = Land use permitted by right
CUP = Land use permitted with
approval of a conditional
use permit
L/ER = Land use permitted with
location and environmental
review
Table 17.36.030-1. Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements for PFS District Zoning
District
Land Use
PFS
Public library P
Public school P

Page 163 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 13 of 17 Date
Zoning
District
Land Use
PFS
Town corporation
yard
P
Town hall and
associated
community uses
P
Accessory Dwelling
Unit in conjunction
with multifamily
residential uses
P
Emergency shelters P4
Churches and places
of worship
CUP
Convents CUP
Country clubs CUP
Residential
associated with
primary
nonresidential use of
property on same
site1
CUP
Multiple-family
residential uses that
could accommodate
housing for very lowand low-income
households
L/ER5

Page 164 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 14 of 17 Date
Zoning
District
Land Use
PFS
associated with
primary
nonresidential use of
property on same site
Private schools CUP2, 3
Public utilities and
facilities, uses, and
structures
CUP
Transportation
terminal facilities
CUP
Notes:
1 Examples include dorms or teacher housing associated with school site, convent when associated with religious institutions, etc.
2 Where a master plan for a private school has been prepared and filed with the town for public record, any application for a conditional use permit shall be compared to the master plan for consistency with that document. All building and/or faculty changes, improvements, or new construction shall require a conditional use permit. To that end, all conditional use permit applications shall include the following:
a. Maps and diagrams showing the proposal in relation to the master plan layout; b. History of student and faculty growth and projections of future growth, including an analysis of that growth’s consistency with the master plan projections; c. A traffic and parking analysis of the proposal and comparison to the master plan projections;
d. A circulation plan showing how the traffic and pedestrian circulation will function upon implementation of the proposals; and
e. Other information that might be required for specific proposals, such as noise analyses, lighting plans, landscape screening plans, heritage tree locations, and other similar information.
3 In addition to other conditions of approval, the planning commission shall require the following items where relevant:

Page 165 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 15 of 17 Date
a. Identification of the approved uses and hours of operation; and b. Clustering of high intensity or noise-intense structures and uses (such as gymnasiums, theaters, athletic facilities) away from neighboring residential uses, where possible.
4 Emergency shelters shall be permitted only when located within the Town Civic Center property; defined as Lots 1, 2, 24, 25 and 26, Watlinton Park RSM (Resubdivision Maps) 5/8.
5 Where a master plan for a private school has been prepared and filed with the town for public record that includes multifamily residential uses that could accommodate housing for very low- and low-income households, such multifamily residential uses shall be subject to planning commission public hearing and review of the location, size, proximity to heritage trees and environmental aspects of the project but shall not result in the denial of the use.

Section 5. AMENDMENTS TO ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER

17.60 Chapter 17.60 is hereby amended to the definition of "Kitchen" and add the definition of "Efficiency Kitchen,” as follows:
“Kitchen” means any room or area intended or designed to be used or maintained for the cooking, storing, and preparation of food and includes facilities for cleaning, preparation, and storage of food and cooking and eating utensils. A standard kitchen shall have the following:

1. A cooktop, oven, hood vent

2. A refrigerator that has the following minimum dimensions 28 inches wide and 61 inches tall

3. Sink 24 inches wide with at least a 1.5 inch drain

4. Dishwasher

5. Food preparation counter or counters that total at least 20 square feet

6. Storage cabinets that total at least 40 square feet of shelf space

7. Kitchen area of at least 80 square feet
“Efficiency Kitchen” means a kitchen that includes each of the following:

1. A cook top, oven, and hood vent

2. Sink that is at least 18 inches wide with at least a 1.5 inch drain

3. Food preparation counter or counters that total at least 10 square feet in area.

4. Storage cabinets that total at least 30 square feet of shelf space.

5. Kitchen area of at least 50 sq. ft.

Page 166 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 16 of 17 Date
Section 6. SEVERABILITY & REVIVAL OF PRIOR TOWN ADU ORDINANCE If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. To the extent that prior Town ordinances governed any portion of this Ordinance held invalid, such prior Town ordinances shall again become effective if any portion of this Ordinance is held invalid.

Section 7: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall be posted in at least three public places according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.

Town of Atherton, a municipal corporation
MAYOR: __________________________________

BILL WIDMER
ATTEST: __________________________________

ANTHONY SUBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________

ANDREAS BOOHER, CITY ATTORNEY

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SS:

TOWN OF ATHERTON
I, Anthony Suber, City Clerk of the Town of Atherton, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance had its first reading and was introduced during the public meeting of the City Council on the __th day of _________, and had its second reading and was adopted and passed during the public meeting of the City Council on the ____st day of _______, 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Page 167 of 309 ends

Attachment 2 (Changes in Red)
Ordinance ______ Page 17 of 17 Date
ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: __________________________

ANTHONY SUBER
City Clerk

Page 168 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 1 of 17 Date
DRAFT ORDINANCE _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ATHERTON TO REPEAL AND REPLACE CHAPTER 17.52 AND AMEND CHAPTERS 17.36 AND

17.60 OF THE ATHERTON MUNCIPAL CODE REGULATING ACCESSORY

DWELLING UNITS AND JUNIOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
WHEREAS, the Town of Atherton has historically regulated the construction of accessory structures within zones designated for residential use in a manner that is consistent with the character of the Town and that values the privacy of the Town’s residents, and
WHEREAS, California has a shortage of housing and particularly affordable housing and the State Legislature has in recent years undertaken a number of measures to incentivize the construction of additional housing stock to address this shortage, and WHEREAS, the City Council supports the construction of additional housing stock throughout the state but strongly opposes the State Legislature’s approach to incentivizing such construction where that approach usurps local land use control, and WHEREAS, the City Council opposes the changes in state law that take away local land use control over the development of accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units, and makes conforming changes to the Atherton Municipal Code under protest.

The City Council of the Town of Atherton does hereby ordain as follows:

Section 1. TITLE
This Ordinance shall be known as the Town of Atherton ("Town") Accessory Dwelling Unit Ordinance. This Ordinance shall be applicable in the incorporated territory of the Town.

Section 2. PURPOSE & AUTHORITY
The purpose of this Ordinance is to adopt regulations governing the development of accessory dwelling units ("ADUs") and junior accessory dwelling units ("JADUs]") in accordance with the changes made to State ADU laws found at Government Code section 65852 et seq. by various Senate and Assembly Bills, including SB 13, AB 68, and AB 881.

Section 3. AMENDMENTS TO ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER

17.52 Chapter 17.52 is hereby deleted and re-enacted to read as follows:

Page 169 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 2 of 17 Date
Chapter 17.52

ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
Sections:

17.52.010 Purpose.

17.52.020 Zones Allowed.

17.52.030 Definitions.

17.52.040 Development Standards and General Requirements.

17.52.050 Application Review.

17.52.010 Purpose.

The purpose of this chapter is to regulate accessory dwelling units in residential zoning districts and on residential property consistent with state law (California Government Code Section 65852 et seq.). Implementation of this chapter is intended to provide for additional housing opportunities by increasing the number of units available within existing neighborhoods while maintaining the character of the area. The City Council of the Town of Atherton adopts this chapter to comply with SB 13, AB 68, AB 881, AB 2221, and AB 2097 under protest, as it is the Council’s position that in enacting these laws, the legislature has improperly usurped local land use authority.

17.52.020 Zones Allowed.

Junior accessory dwelling units shall be allowed in all areas zoned to allow single-family residential and accessory dwelling units shall be allowed in all areas zoned to allow singlefamily residential and multifamily residential uses in compliance with the development standards set forth in section 17.52.040 (Development Standards and General Requirements) of this Chapter.

17.52.030 Definitions.

A. “Accessory dwelling unit” or “ADU” means a building or portion of a building designed for use and occupancy by people living independently of the occupants of the main residence building. The ADU shall be on the same lot as the main residence. An ADU can be an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing single-family or multifamily development. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking, and sanitation. An accessory dwelling unit also includes the following:

1. An efficiency unit.

2. A manufactured home, as defined in Section 18007 of the Health and Safety Code.

Page 170 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 3 of 17 Date
B. “Attached accessory dwelling unit” means a newly constructed unit that is connected to the primary single-family home by at least one wall.

C. “Detached accessory dwelling unit” means an accessory dwelling unit that is not structurally attached to the main residence.

D. “Efficiency unit” means a living unit which includes all the following:
• Size of at least 150 square feet.
• For units that are not accessible or adaptable, a partial kitchen with a sink (minimum 18 inches wide), a permanently installed two or more burner cooktop and oven, hood vent, and refrigerator (minimum 10 cubic feet), each having a clear working space of not less than 30 inches in front of the counter. o Food preparation counter or counters that total at least 20 square feet. o Storage cabinets that total at least 30 cubic feet of shelf space o A separate closet.
• Compliance with light and ventilation requirements of the Atherton Building Code. • A separate bathroom containing a water closet (toilet), lavatory (bathroom sink) and bathtub and/or shower.

E. “High-quality transit corridor” pursuant to Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code means a corridor with fixed route bus service with service intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours. A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor if all parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent of their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.

F. “Junior Accessory dwelling unit” or “JADU” means a unit that is no more than 500 square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family residence. A junior accessory dwelling unit shall include an efficiency kitchen, which shall include all of the following: a cooking facility with appliances and a food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure.

G. “Living area” for the purpose of this chapter, means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit, including basements and attics, but does not include a garage or any accessory structure.

H. “Major Transit Stop” pursuant to Sections 21064.3 and 21155 of the Public Resources Code, means a site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute period, or major transit stops that are included in the applicable regional transportation plan. A project shall be considered to be within one-half mile of a major transit stop if all parcels within the project have no more than 25 percent of their area farther than one-half mile from the stop or corridor.

Page 171 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 4 of 17 Date
I. “Public transit” means a location, including, but not limited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on fixed routes, and are available to the public. Pursuant to Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.

17.52.040 Development Standards and General Requirements.

Unless otherwise stated in Section 17.52.050 of this Ordinance, ADUs and JADUs are permitted, provided the following standards and requirements are incorporated and met.

A. Accessory Dwelling Use. All ADUs and JADUs shall be located on the same lot with an existing or proposed dwelling and considered an accessory residential use to the primary residence. ADUs and JADUs do not count towards the allowable density for the lot upon which it is located.

B. Maximum Number of ADUs and JADUs per lot.

1. One ADU and one JADU per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if all of the following apply:
a. The ADU or JADU is within the proposed space of a single-family dwelling, existing space of a single-family dwelling or in an accessory structure. The ADU may include an expansion of not more than 150 square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as an existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of an existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress. b. The space has exterior access separate from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling.
c. The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. d. The JADU complies with the requirements of Section 65852.22.

2. One detached, new construction, ADU that does not exceed 800 square-feet, complies with the height restrictions in this section, and provides a minimum of four-foot side and rear yard setbacks for a lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling. The accessory dwelling unit may be combined with a JADU.

3. On lots that allow single-family dwellings and are a minimum of two (2) acres, the property owner may have up to two (2) detached ADUs provided that one of the two units is deed restricted as low-income for a period of 15 years or more.

4. Lots that allow multifamily dwellings.
a. Multiple accessory dwelling units are allowed within the portions of existing multifamily dwelling structures that are not used as livable space, including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics,

Page 172 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 5 of 17 Date
basements, or garages, if each unit complies with state building standards for dwellings.
b. At least one ADU is allowed within an existing multifamily dwelling. The total number of ADUs allowed is up to 25 percent of the existing multifamily dwelling units.
c. Not more than two ADUs that are located on a lot that has an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling, but are detached from that multifamily dwelling and are subject to applicable height limits and a four-foot rear and side setbacks.
i. If an existing multifamily dwelling has a rear or side setback of less than four feet, no modification of the existing multifamily dwelling is required as a condition of approving an ADU.

C. Floor Area Requirements.

1. No ADU or JADU may be smaller than the size required to allow an efficiency unit pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1, which is 150 square feet. The maximum size of an efficiency unit is 500 square feet.

2. The maximum size for a JADU is 500 square feet.

3. The maximum size for an ADU is 1,200 square feet.

4. The floor area of an attached ADU shall not exceed fifty percent of the existing floor area of the main residence, unless necessary to accommodate at least an 800 square foot ADU.

5. Garage and accessory structures ancillary to an ADU are not considered part of the ADU living area and are not included in the ADU floor area calculations.

D. Exemptions from Maximum Floor Area Limitations.

1. The first 800 square feet of floor area of each ADU, attached and detached, and up to five hundred square feet for each JADU shall be excluded from maximum floor area calculations.

2. Additional floor area for each ADU may be excluded from maximum floor area calculations where staff determines the following conditions are met:
a. If a detached ADU meets and/or exceeds the minimum side and rear setbacks of Chapter 17.40 Accessory Buildings and Structures, then the ADU will be allowed an additional floor area exemption beyond the first 800 square feet of floor area, up to a total of 1,200 square feet. b. If an attached ADU is located in the main buildable area and encroaches into the side and rear yard setbacks by not more than twenty percent (20%) of the required setback, then the ADU shall be allowed an

Page 173 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 6 of 17 Date
additional floor area exemption beyond the first 800 square feet of floor area, up to a total of twelve 1,200 square feet.

3. No floor area limitation shall be required for any conversion of an existing legal non-conforming building to an ADU.

4. Interior stairs are exempt from floor area calculations if the stairs accommodate access to a new ADU located above an existing or proposed detached garage that complies with accessory structure setback requirements.

E. Basements.

1. Habitable basements are allowed under detached ADUs; however, these basements shall count toward the floor area of the ADU. An internal connection from the ADU to the habitable basement is required. No special structures permit is required for these basements.

2. Habitable basements are allowed under attached ADUs; however, these basements shall count toward the floor area of the ADU if located outside the main building area setback. An internal connection from the ADU to the habitable basement is required.

3. Habitable basements are allowed under a JADU; however, these basements will be considered as the basement for the main residence and will not count toward the square footage of the JADU. No internal connection from the JADU will be allowed into the basement. Basements accommodating JADUs must be within the main building area.

4. Non-habitable basements under ADUs are only allowed outside the accessory structure setback and are subject to the Heritage Tree Ordinance. Exterior access to the non-habitable basement shall be located outside the accessory structure setback.

5. The floor area of an attached ADU or JADU does not count toward the basement allowance under 17.44.030.A.

F. Setback Requirements. Except as specified below, all ADUs and JADUs shall comply with the setback requirements of the zone in which a unit is to be located.

1. JADUs shall have the same setbacks as required for the main residence.

2. A newly constructed detached or attached ADU that is 800 square feet or less must be located at least 4 feet from a side or rear property line. This type of ADU does not have a front yard setback.
a. No decks or mechanical equipment are allowed in the four-foot side and rear setback.

3. A newly constructed attached ADU that has a floor area greater than 800 square feet and no more than 1,200 square feet shall be located in the main

Page 174 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 7 of 17 Date
building area. These ADUs may encroach into side and rear yard setbacks by not more than twenty percent (20%) of the required setback.

4. A newly constructed detached ADU that has a floor area greater than 800 square feet and no more than 1,200 square feet shall be located maintain the setbacks for accessory buildings.

H. Height.

1. A maximum height of 16 feet is allowed for a detached ADU on a lot with an existing or proposed single-family or multifamily dwelling.

3. A maximum height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily, multistory dwelling.

Page 175 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 8 of 17 Date

4. A maximum height of 25 feet or the allowed height of the zoning district, whichever is lower, is allowed for an accessory dwelling unit that is attached to a primary dwelling.

5. Accessory dwelling units are limited to 2 stories.

I. Heritage Tree Ordinance.

8.10.070(B) may result in cases where trees are removed in relation to the approval of an ADU and the ADU is not constructed.

4. Expansion to Existing ADUs. If an existing ADU was previously exempt from the Heritage Tree Ordinance due to its square footage and therefore, resulted

Page 176 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 9 of 17 Date
in the removal of a heritage tree; then any expansion to the subject ADU must provide a replacement planting consistent with AMC Chapter 8.10.

J. Privacy, Screening and Landscaping.

2. Landscape screening for the ADU shall be installed to the greatest extent feasible.

4. No sidewall height limitations apply to ADUs.

K. Lighting Restrictions. Any lighting associated with an ADU or JADU shall be shielded or downlit and shall not shine onto adjoining properties, while meeting the minimum Building Code.

L. Parking Requirements.

1. No parking is required for a JADU.

2. Unless subject to one of the exceptions immediately below, each ADU shall have assigned to it one parking space per ADU. These spaces may be provided as tandem parking on an existing driveway.

Page 177 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 10 of 17 Date
f. When a permit application for an ADU is submitted with a permit application to create a new single-family dwelling or a new multifamily dwelling on the same lot, provided that the ADU or the parcel satisfies any other criteria listed in this paragraph.

4. When a garage, carport, or covered parking structure is demolished in conjunction with the construction of an ADU or converted to an ADU, off-street parking spaces do not need to be replaced.

5. A demolition permit for a detached garage that is to be replaced with an ADU shall be reviewed with the application for the ADU and issued at the same time.

M. ADU Rental. An ADU or JADU may be rented separate from the primary residence but may not be sold or otherwise conveyed separate from the primary residence.

Rentals of any ADU or JADU must be for longer than thirty days.

N. Owner Occupancy. The owner occupancy requirements detailed in this section shall apply to all lawfully permitted ADUs and JADUs within the Town on a singlefamily lot:

1. ADUs and JADUs permitted before January 1, 2020. The owner-occupancy requirements applicable to the ADU or JADU at the time of its permitting shall apply.

2. For ADUs and JADUs permitted on or after January 1, 2020, no owneroccupancy requirements shall apply.

O. Passageways and Internal Connections.

2. Internal connections are allowed for attached ADUs and JADUs.

P. Compliance with Applicable Requirements. ADUs and JADUs shall meet all applicable zoning and fire regulations and shall comply with local building codes.

Page 178 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 11 of 17 Date
unpermitted structures that do not present a threat to public health and safety and are not affected by the construction of the accessory dwelling unit.

R. Impact Fees. No impact fees will be charged on an ADU less than 750 square feet.

Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.

T. A certificate of occupancy for an accessory dwelling unit will only be issued after a certificate of occupancy is issued for the primary dwelling.

1. The accessory dwelling unit was built before January 1, 2020.

17.52.050 Application Review.

Page 179 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 12 of 17 Date
is considered, it will still be considered ministerially without discretionary review or a public hearing, regardless of its having been submitted along with an application for a new primary residence.

Section 4. AMENDMENTS TO ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 17.36 Chapter 17.36 is hereby amended to include Accessory Dwelling Units as a land use permitted by right as follows:

17.36.030 Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements.

Page 180 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 13 of 17 Date
Zoning
District
Land Use
PFS
Town corporation
yard
P
Town hall and
associated
community uses
P
Accessory Dwelling
Unit in conjunction
with multifamily
residential uses
P
Emergency shelters P4
Churches and places
of worship
CUP
Convents CUP
Country clubs CUP
Residential
associated with
primary
nonresidential use of
property on same
site1
CUP
Multiple-family
residential uses that
could accommodate
housing for very lowand low-income
households
L/ER5

Page 181 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 14 of 17 Date
Zoning
District
Land Use
PFS
associated with
primary
nonresidential use of
property on same site
Private schools CUP2, 3
Public utilities and
facilities, uses, and
structures
CUP
Transportation
terminal facilities
CUP
Notes:
1 Examples include dorms or teacher housing associated with school site, convent when associated with religious institutions, etc.
2 Where a master plan for a private school has been prepared and filed with the town for public record, any application for a conditional use permit shall be compared to the master plan for consistency with that document. All building and/or faculty changes, improvements, or new construction shall require a conditional use permit. To that end, all conditional use permit applications shall include the following:
a. Maps and diagrams showing the proposal in relation to the master plan layout; b. History of student and faculty growth and projections of future growth, including an analysis of that growth’s consistency with the master plan projections; c. A traffic and parking analysis of the proposal and comparison to the master plan projections;
d. A circulation plan showing how the traffic and pedestrian circulation will function upon implementation of the proposals; and
e. Other information that might be required for specific proposals, such as noise analyses, lighting plans, landscape screening plans, heritage tree locations, and other similar information.
3 In addition to other conditions of approval, the planning commission shall require the following items where relevant:

Page 182 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 15 of 17 Date
a. Identification of the approved uses and hours of operation; and b. Clustering of high intensity or noise-intense structures and uses (such as gymnasiums, theaters, athletic facilities) away from neighboring residential uses, where possible.
4 Emergency shelters shall be permitted only when located within the Town Civic Center property; defined as Lots 1, 2, 24, 25 and 26, Watlinton Park RSM (Resubdivision Maps) 5/8.
5 Where a master plan for a private school has been prepared and filed with the town for public record that includes multifamily residential uses that could accommodate housing for very low- and low-income households, such multifamily residential uses shall be subject to planning commission public hearing and review of the location, size, proximity to heritage trees and environmental aspects of the project but shall not result in the denial of the use.

Section 5. AMENDMENTS TO ATHERTON MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER

1. A cooktop, oven, hood vent

2. A refrigerator that has the following minimum dimensions 28 inches wide and 61 inches tall

3. Sink 24 inches wide with at least a 1.5 inch drain

4. Dishwasher

5. Food preparation counter or counters that total at least 20 square feet

6. Storage cabinets that total at least 40 square feet of shelf space

7. Kitchen area of at least 80 square feet
“Efficiency Kitchen” means a kitchen that includes each of the following:

1. A cook top, oven, and hood vent

2. Sink that is at least 18 inches wide with at least a 1.5 inch drain

3. Food preparation counter or counters that total at least 10 square feet in area.

4. Storage cabinets that total at least 30 square feet of shelf space.

5. Kitchen area of at least 50 sq. ft.

Page 183 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 16 of 17 Date
Section 6. SEVERABILITY & REVIVAL OF PRIOR TOWN ADU ORDINANCE If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the Ordinance and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby. To the extent that prior Town ordinances governed any portion of this Ordinance held invalid, such prior Town ordinances shall again become effective if any portion of this Ordinance is held invalid.

Section 7: EFFECTIVE DATE
This Ordinance shall be posted in at least three public places according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.

Town of Atherton, a municipal corporation
MAYOR: __________________________________

BILL WIDMER
ATTEST: __________________________________

ANTHONY SUBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM: __________________________________

ANDREAS BOOHER, CITY ATTORNEY

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SS:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

Page 184 of 309 ends

Attachment 3 (Clean)
Ordinance ______ Page 17 of 17 Date
ABSTAIN:

ATTEST: __________________________

ANTHONY SUBER
City Clerk

Page 185 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Atherton City Council Meeting
Encouraging Electrification through a
Source Energy Reach Code
January 17, 2024
TRCcompanies.com

Page 186 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Today’s Objective
 Discuss reach code approaches to encourage building electrification  Provide staff direction regarding potential reach code pathways

1. Background of Reach Codes

2. Source Energy Compliance Path

3. Overview of Options for New Construction

4. Opportunities for Existing Buildings

5. Wrap Up / Questions
Agenda
Featured photo: Located in Portola Valley, Tah Mah Lah, was recognized by PCE for being Zero Net Energy – all-electric estate and vehicles are fueled by both on-site solar and geothermal sources of energy.

Page 187 of 309 ends

Page 188 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 4
Atherton’s Building Electrification Journey
Jan 2024
City Council
adopts the 2023
Update to the
Town’s Climate
Action Plan
charting a path
to a carbon
neutral future by
2045.

The Plan outlines
strategies to
encourage
building
electrification
through a variety
of strategies
including policy,
education, and
incentives.

Oct 2023
Atherton
suspends
enforcement of
the City’s allelectric new
building
requirements
May 2023
The City of
Berkeley filed an
appeal.

The appeal is not
likely to be
resolved in a
timely manner.

There are no
imminent
statewide fixes
for the problem.

May 2023
California Restaurant
Association v. City
of Berkeley ruling
said that a
Berkeley ordinance
requiring all-electric
buildings was preempted by the
federal Energy
Policy and
Conservation Act of
1975 (EPCA) and
was therefore
invalid.

April 2023
Atherton adopts
an all-electric
new building
reach code
through
Ordinance 656
Nov 2022
The Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals
declined to have the
Berkeley case reheard by the full panel
of Ninth Circuit Court
judges.

Staff recommends
amending Ordinance
656 to remove
electrification
requirements to bring
the Ordinance in line
with the Ninth Circuit
ruling.

Page 189 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 5
The Bay Area and California’s
Upcoming Electrification Changes
California
Achieves
Carbon
Neutrality
Statewide gas piping
projected
decommissioning
date
2045
CARB Low NOx
Standards
Gas water heaters and
space heaters no
longer sold,
statewide
2030
BAAQMD Low
NOx space
heater
requirements
Gas furnaces no
longer sold in Bay
Area
2029
BAAQMD Low
NOx water
heater
requirements
tank-type gas water
heaters no longer
sold in Bay Area
2027
CA State Energy
Code Update
Replacements of air
conditioning systems
in existing buildings
will be heat pumps
2026

Page 190 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 6
Overview of Reach Codes
California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Efficiency Standards) & California Green Building Standards
(CALGreen)
• Set by the California Energy Commission (CEC) .
• Increase energy conservation and reduce energy costs in buildings • Adopted every three years.

Building Reach Code
• Increases building code requirements above the current Efficiency Standards.
• Can be adopted at any time.
• Must meet CEC’s cost effectiveness standards.

Page 191 of 309 ends

1. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line
with the Town’s Climate Act Plan;

2. Providing financial benefits related to lowercost electric construction;

3. Supporting public health by decreasing air
pollution emissions and exposure.

Page 192 of 309 ends

CEC & CBSC
Attachments CEC CBSC
1: Cover letter Recommended Required
2: Staff report Required Required
3: Signed Ordinance Required Required
4: Copy of cost effectiveness studies Required -
5: Notice of Exemption from the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Required -
6: Letter from Chief Building official Required - Page 193 of 309 © TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Source Energy
Compliance Path
How Compliance Works
9

Page 194 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 10
Summary of Approach
Homeowner/Developer
(New construction)
All-Electric Mixed-Fuel
(Methane Gas and Electric)
Electric space and water heating.

No additional measures required.

Gas space and/or water heating.

Increased efficiency, solar, and
battery storage are required.

Dream home supportive of health, safety, & climate!
Compliant with Title 24, Part 6
and reach code.

Compliant with Title 24, Part 6
and reach code.

Page 195 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 11
Approaches to Compliance
Performance Path: Current
 In order to pass, a score of “0” or higher is required on all of the three EDR Compliance Margins.

Page 196 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 12
Approaches to Compliance
Performance Path: Source Energy
9  In order to pass, a score of 9 or higher is required for the EDR1 Compliance Margin.  EDR2efficiency & EDR2total do not change and still must achieve a score of “0” or higher to pass.

Page 197 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Regulated Appliances
What’s included
 Space heating
 Water heating
What’s not included
 Stoves
 Laundry
 Pools
 Fireplace/pit

Page 198 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 14
Electric Readiness for Single Family New Construction
• Heat pump space heater
• Heat pump water heater
• Electric cooktop
• Electric clothes dryer
• For future installation, these require:
• Dedicated wiring installed within 3 ft of the gas-fired appliance. • Reserved electrical breaker space provided for the future installation of these systems and appliances. • A heat pump water heater also requires:
• Space large enough to install it • Plumbing for a condensate drain and hot and cold water.
 There is an opportunity to require electric readiness for pools for new construction
Energy Code Existing Requirements
Source: Energy Code Ace

Page 199 of 309 ends

Page 200 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Gas Furnace
Standard
Design
Building
Building
Envelope
House Illustration source: Southern California Edison 14 Example 1

Page 201 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Building
Envelope
House Illustration source: Southern California Edison 15 Source
Energy
(EDR1)
One Option:

Change Gas
Furnace to a
Heat Pump
Example 1
Fuel Type:

Electric

Page 202 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Gas Furnace Building
Envelope
House Illustration source: Southern California Edison 16 Standard
Design
Building
Example 2

Page 203 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved
Gas Furnace Building
Envelope
House Illustration source: Southern California Edison 17 Another Option:

Keep Gas Furnace
and add a Battery
Storage System
Source
Energy
(EDR1)
Example 2
Fuel Type:

Mixed

Page 204 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 20
Approaches to Compliance
Performance Path: Source Energy
4  In order to pass, a score of 4 or higher is required for ADU’s in the EDR1 Compliance Margin.  EDR2efficiency & EDR2total do not change and still must achieve a score of “0” or higher to pass.

Page 205 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 21
ADU Considerations
 ADU definition
− New construction, detached ADU’s
− Atherton’s current ADU size requirement is 800sqft to 1200 sqft
 ADUs can be included in the requirement
 ADUs would be covered at a lower Source
Energy Compliance requirement as compared to
Single Family homes.
 ADUs need a lower margin because:
− The smaller floor area affects the modeling results;
for example, ADUs won’t have an on-site PV system.
− Having the same EDR1 margin for SF and ADUs
would add undue baggage to smaller homes.

Page 206 of 309 ends

Page 207 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 23
Existing Building Electrification Policy Approach
Time of Permit Reach Code policies require that
applicants, when they are already pulling a permit for a renovation project, abide by certain electric-ready
requirements.

These policies avoid missed opportunities to incorporate electric readiness at little additional cost. These
requirements can help avoid retrofit costs once
BAAQMD and CARB standards take effect.

Electric readiness does not mandate a specific
appliance/fuel be used. These existing building
requirements would build on new construction electric
readiness requirements from Title 24, Part 6.

Page 208 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 24
Time of Permit - Electric-Readiness Reach Code
An exception could be offered for situations where as a result of these requirements, an increase in capacity for an electrical panel, feeders, transformer, or electrical service (that is not part of the appliance upgrade scope) is needed.

Retrofit Category Details
Heating, Ventilation
and Air Conditioning
For alterations and additions that include an HVAC system, the Town could require an outlet for a future electric heat pump.

Water heating For alterations and additions that include a water heating system, the Town could require an outlet for a future water heater heat pump.

Pool and Spas For alterations and additions that include pool or spa equipment, the Town could require an outlet for a future electric pool pump.

Installing 240V outlet
when renovating the
following areas:

Laundry room (an outlet for a future electric clothes dryer) Kitchen (an outlet for future electric oven/stove)
Panel When planning an electrical panel replacement and electrical panel upgrade, the Town could require the electrical panel to include panel capacity and breaker space for future electrification of building systems.

Photos: Energy Code Ace

Page 209 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 25
Example Code Language
Based on San Mateo Ordinance
 4.106.5.3 Existing one- and two-family dwellings.
− 4.106.5.3.1 Alterations and additions that include space heating appliances shall have a 240 volt, 30 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of appliance location.
− 4.106.5.3.2 Domestic water heater appliance alterations and additions shall have a 240 volt, 30 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of appliance location. Water heater appliance upgrades for pools and spas shall have a 240 volt, 50 ampere circuit and receptable installed within 6 feet of the appliance location.
− 4.106.5.3.3 Kitchen alterations shall include a 240v, 50 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of the cooktop, oven, and/or range location.
− 4.106.5.3.4 Alterations to areas designated for the installation of laundry equipment shall include a 240v, 30 ampere circuit and receptacle installed within 6 feet of clothes drying appliance location. − 4.106.5.3.5 Alterations or additions that include or require an increase to the capacity of electrical panels or transformers as part of the scope shall include reserved physical space for circuit breakers on the electrical panel, and reserved electrical capacity on transformers, as calculated per California Electric Code Section 220 for the following current or proposed appliances as applicable to the project site:
̵ Electric water heaters meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code. ̵ Electric space heater and air-conditioner meeting the requirements of the California Energy Code. ̵ Electric pool and/or spa water heater.
̵ Electric clothes dryer.
̵ Electric cooking equipment.
̵ Electric vehicle charger.
̵ Solar photovoltaic array
Green font indicates modified for Atherton Source: San Mateo

Page 210 of 309 ends

Page 211 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 27
Menu of Options
 Adopt Source Energy Compliance, giving builders a choice between mixed fuel or all-electric building − Mixed fuel buildings will need to do additional energy measures to pass modeling including increased efficiency, solar, and battery storage
− All-electric buildings will pass modeling with code minimums for efficiency and solar (with a market-baseline heat pump water heater)
 Adopt Electric Readiness Requirements for New Construction (where readiness is not already required by the State code):
− Pools
 Adopt Electric Readiness Requirements for Remodels, Additions, Renovations, and Equipment Replacements − Pools
− Laundry Room
− Kitchen
− HVAC
− Water Heating
− [If already upgrading] Panel Capacity for future electrification

Page 212 of 309 ends

© TRC Companies, Inc. All rights reserved 28
Recommendation
 It is recommended that the Council consider the options of energy reach codes and give guidance to either move forward with presenting a first reading of approaches heard today at a future meeting, modifications to approaches, further study, or taking no action.

It is recommended that the Council consider various options in support of energy reach codes and provide feedback and direction to staff for the next steps.

Page 213 of 309 ends

Page 214 of 309 ends

Page 215 of 309 ends

Prepared by:

Frontier Energy, Inc
Misti Bruceri & Associates, LLC
Prepared for:

Kelly Cunningham, Codes and Standards Program, Pacific Gas and Electric Last modified: 2023/06/20
Revision: 1.1
2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study:

Single Family New
Construction

Page 216 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Legal Notice
This report was prepared by Pacific Gas and Electric Company and funded by the California utility customers under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission.

Neither PG&E nor any of its employees makes any warranty, express or implied; or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any data, information, method, product, policy or process disclosed in this document; or represents that its use will not infringe any privately-owned rights including, but not limited to, patents, trademarks or copyrights.

Acronym List
2023 PV$ – Present value costs in 2023
ACH50 – Air Changes per Hour at 50 pascals pressure
differential
ACM – Alternative Calculation Method
ADU – Accessory Dwelling Unit
AFUE – Annual Fuel Utilization Efficiency
B/C – Lifecycle Benefit-to-Cost Ratio
BEopt – Building Energy Optimization Tool
BSC – Building Standards Commission
CA IOUs – California Investor-Owned Utilities
CASE – Codes and Standards Enhancement
CBECC-Res – Computer program developed by the California Energy Commission for demonstrating compliance
with the California Residential Building Energy
Efficiency Standards
CFI – California Flexible Installation
CFM – Cubic Feet per Minute
CO2 – Carbon Dioxide
CPAU – City of Palo Alto Utilities
CPUC – California Public Utilities Commission
CZ – California Climate Zone
DHW – Domestic Hot Water
DOE – Department of Energy
DWHR – Drain Water Heat Recovery
EDR – Energy Design Rating
EER – Energy Efficiency Ratio
EF – Energy Factor

Page 217 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction GHG – Greenhouse Gas
HERS Rater – Home Energy Rating System Rater
HPA – High Performance Attic
HPWH – Heat Pump Water Heater
HSPF – Heating Seasonal Performance Factor
HVAC – Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
IECC – International Energy Conservation Code
IOU – Investor Owned Utility
kBtu – kilo-British thermal unit
kWh – Kilowatt Hour
LBNL – Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
LCC – Lifecycle Cost
LLAHU – Low Leakage Air Handler Unit
VLLDCS – Verified Low Leakage Ducts in Conditioned Space MF – Multifamily
NEEA – Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
NEM – Net Energy Metering
NPV – Net Present Value
NREL – National Renewable Energy Laboratory
PG&E – Pacific Gas and Electric Company
POU – Publicly-Owned-Utilities
PV – Photovoltaic
SCE – Southern California Edison
SDG&E – San Diego Gas and Electric
SEER – Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio
SF – Single Family
SMUD – Sacramento Municipal Utility District
SoCalGas – Southern California Gas Company
TDV – Time Dependent Valuation
Therm – Unit for quantity of heat that equals 100,000 British thermal units Title 24 – Title 24, Part 6
TOU – Time-Of-Use
UEF – Uniform Energy Factor
ZNE – Zero-net Energy

Page 218 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Summary of Revisions
Date Description Reference (page or section)
9/12/2022 Original Release N/A
6/20/2023 Minor revision to content, no change to results 1, 42

Page 219 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................ 3 2 Methodology and Assumptions............................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes..................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Modeling ....................................................................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.2 Cost-Effectiveness ........................................................................................................................................................ 4

2.1.3 Utility Rates................................................................................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Energy Design Rating........................................................................................................................................................... 7 3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs............................................................................................................ 8

3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs ........................................................................................................................................... 10

3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries ............................................................................................................................. 10

3.3.2 All-Electric................................................................................................................................................................... 16

3.4 Measure Packages ............................................................................................................................................................. 22 4 Results......................................................................................................................................................................24

4.1 2022 Metrics and Compliance............................................................................................................................................. 24

4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum Results..................................................................................................................................... 26

4.3 All-Electric Plus Efficiency, PV, and Battery Results........................................................................................................... 29

4.4 Mixed Fuel Results ............................................................................................................................................................. 31

4.5 CARE Rate Comparison..................................................................................................................................................... 34

4.6 Utility Infrastructure Cost Sensitivity.................................................................................................................................... 36

4.7 Greenhouse Gas Reductions.............................................................................................................................................. 38 5 Summary ..................................................................................................................................................................41 6 References ...............................................................................................................................................................44 7 Appendices ..............................................................................................................................................................46

7.1 Map of California Climate Zones......................................................................................................................................... 46

7.2 Utility Rate Schedules......................................................................................................................................................... 47

7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric.................................................................................................................................................. 47

7.2.2 Southern California Edison ......................................................................................................................................... 53

7.2.3 Southern California Gas.............................................................................................................................................. 57

7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric............................................................................................................................................ 60

7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities.............................................................................................................................................. 65

7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only)................................................................................................. 68

7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions...................................................................................................................................... 69

7.3 Summary of Measures by Package .................................................................................................................................... 70

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 6 Table 2: Prototype Characteristics........................................................................................................................................................ 8 Page 220 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes .......................................................................................................................... 9 Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC) ................................................................................................................................ 10 Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................. 13 Table 6. Single Family IOU Natural Gas Main Distribution Line Extension Costs............................................................................... 17 Table 7. Residential IOU Gas Line Extension Appliance Allowances ................................................................................................. 17 Table 8. Single Family IOU Natural Gas Service Line Extension Costs ............................................................................................. 17 Table 9. Single Family IOU Other Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs................................................................................................... 17 Table 10. Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs1 ................................................................................................ 18 Table 11. Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs .............................................................................................. 18 Table 12. ADU Utility Infrastructure Costs .......................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 13: Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures ............................................................................. 19 Table 14. Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs...................................................................................................... 21 Table 15. ADU All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs.................................................................................................................... 22 Table 16. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum............................................................................................ 27 Table 17. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum.......................................................................................................... 28 Table 18. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery ............................................... 29 Table 19. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery ............................................................. 30 Table 20. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery............................................................................ 31 Table 21. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery ......................................................................................... 32 Table 22. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Packages ................................................................................................... 33 Table 23. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Packages ................................................................................................................. 34 Table 24. On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum ......................................................................... 35 Table 25. On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency+ PV+ Battery Package ............................................ 36 Table 26. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs: All-Electric Code Minimum ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 37 Table 27. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness On-Bill Impact of CPUC Proposed Design on Gas Line Extension Allowances: AllElectric Code Minimum....................................................................................................................................................................... 38 Table 28: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) .................................................................................................. 39 Table 29 ADU Greenhouse Gas Savings (metric tons) ...................................................................................................................... 40 Table 30. Summary of All-Electric Efficiency EDR2 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness ........................................................................ 42 Table 31. Summary of Mixed Fuel Efficiency EDR2 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness........................................................................ 43 Table 32: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone.......................................................................................................................... 48 Table 33: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)..................................................................................................................................... 48 Table 34: PG&E Monthly CARE (GL-1) Gas Rate ($/therm)............................................................................................................... 48 Table 35: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ............................................................................................................................ 54 Table 36: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ................................................................................................................... 58 Table 37: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .............................................................................................................................. 58 Table 38: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone ....................................................................................................................... 60 Page 221 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Table 39: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm) .................................................................................................................................. 60 Table 40: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)..................................................................................................................................... 66 Table 41: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions................................................................................................................... 69 Table 42: Single Family Efficiency Package Measures ...................................................................................................................... 70 Table 43: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Package Measures............................................................................ 71 Table 44: ADU Efficiency Package Measures .................................................................................................................................... 71 Table 45: Single Family All-Electric Code Compliant Efficiency Measures......................................................................................... 72 Table 46: ADU All-Electric Code Compliant Efficiency Measures....................................................................................................... 72

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Single Family All-Electric Home Compliance Impacts ......................................................................................................... 24 Figure 2: ADU All-Electric Home Compliance Impacts ....................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 3: Single Family Four Gas Appliance Home Compliance Impacts........................................................................................... 25 Figure 4. Map of California climate zones........................................................................................................................................... 46

Page 222 of 309 ends

Page 223 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Executive Summary
1 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Executive Summary
The California Codes and Standards (C&S) Reach Codes program provides technical support to local governments considering adopting a local ordinance (reach code) intended to support meeting local and/or statewide energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction goals. The program facilitates adoption and implementation of the code when requested by local jurisdictions by providing resources such as cost-effectiveness studies, model language, sample findings, and other supporting documentation.

This report documents cost-effectiveness analysis results for traditional new detached single family and detached accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types. It evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs). Packages include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.

The following summarizes key results from the study:
x All-electric packages have lower GHG emissions than mixed-fuel packages in all cases, due to the clean power sources currently available from California’s power providers. x The Reach Codes Team found all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost effective based on TDV in all cases. In many cases all-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in utility costs and is not cost-effective On-Bill. Some exceptions include the SMUD and CPAU territories where lower electricity rates relative to natural gas rates result in lower overall utility bills. x The 2022 Title 24 Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage allelectric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off. This compliance benefit for all-electric homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes. Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity, as well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team recommends that jurisdictions adopting an all-electric reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency requirement with EDR2 margins consistent with the all-electric code minimum package.
x The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single family prototype and code compliance can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units. As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend an additional efficiency requirement for all-electric ADU ordinances. x Electrification combined with increased PV capacity results in utility cost savings and was found to be On-Bill cost effective in all cases. These results were based on today’s net energy metering rules and do not account for future changes to utility agreements, which are expected to decrease the value of PV to the consumer. x For jurisdictions interested in a reach code that allows for mixed fuel buildings, the mixed fuel efficiency, PV, and battery package was found to be cost effective based on TDV in all cases. Cost effectiveness was marginal because of the high cost of the battery system. EDR2 margins ranged from 7 to 30 for the costeffective packages. x Applying the CARE rates has the overall impact to increase utility cost savings for an all-electric building compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness.

This report presents measures or measure packages that local jurisdictions may consider adopting to achieve energy savings and emissions reductions beyond what will be accomplished by enforcing minimum state requirements, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Part 6), effective January 1, 2023.

Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. Reach codes that amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the Page 224 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Executive Summary
2 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission. Although a cost-effectiveness study is only required to amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code, this study provides valuable context for jurisdictions pursuing other ordinance paths to understand the economic impacts of any policy decision. This study documents the estimated costs, benefits, energy impacts and greenhouse gas emission reductions that may result from implementing an ordinance based on the results to help residents, local leadership, and other stakeholders make informed policy decisions.

Model ordinance language and other resources are posted on the C&S Reach Codes Program website at LocalEnergyCodes.com. Local jurisdictions that are considering adopting an ordinance may contact the program for further technical support at [email protected].

Page 225 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Introduction
3 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 1 Introduction
This report documents cost-effective combinations of measures that exceed the minimum state requirements, the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards, effective January 1, 2023, for newly constructed single family buildings. This report was developed in coordination with the California Statewide Investor-Owned Utilities (CA IOUs) Codes and Standards Program, key consultants, and engaged cities—collectively known as the Reach Codes Team.

The analysis considers traditional detached single family and detached accessory dwelling unit (ADUs) building types and evaluates mixed fuel and all-electric package options in all sixteen California climate zones (CZs). 1 Packages include combinations of efficiency measures, on-site renewable energy, and battery energy storage.

The California Building Energy Efficiency Standards Title 24, Part 6 (Title 24) (California Energy Commission, 2021a) is maintained and updated every three years by two state agencies: the California Energy Commission (Energy Commission) and the Building Standards Commission (BSC). In addition to enforcing the code, local jurisdictions have the authority to adopt local energy efficiency ordinances—or reach codes—that exceed the minimum standards defined by Title 24 (as established by Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)2 and Section 10-106 of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards). Local jurisdictions must demonstrate that the requirements of the proposed ordinance are costeffective and do not result in buildings consuming more energy than is permitted by Title 24. In addition, the jurisdiction must obtain approval from the Energy Commission and file the ordinance with the BSC for the ordinance to be legally enforceable.

The Department of Energy (DOE) sets minimum efficiency standards for equipment and appliances that are federally regulated under the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, including heating, cooling, and water heating equipment (E-CFR, 2020). Since state and local governments are prohibited from adopting higher minimum efficiencies than the federal standards require, the focus of this study is to identify and evaluate cost-effective packages that do not include high efficiency heating, cooling, and water heating equipment. High efficiency appliances are often the easiest and most affordable measures to increase energy performance. While federal preemption limits reach code mandatory requirements for covered appliances, in practice, builders may install any package of compliant measures to achieve the performance requirements.

1 See Appendix 7.1 Map of California Climate Zones for a graphical depiction of climate zone locations.

Page 226 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
4 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 2 Methodology and Assumptions

2.1 Analysis for Reach Codes
This section describes the approach to calculating cost-effectiveness including benefits, costs, metrics, and utility rate selection.

2.1.1 Modeling
The Reach Codes Team performed energy simulations using software approved for 2022 Title 24 Code compliance analysis, CBECC-Res 2022.1.0.

The general approach applied in this analysis is to evaluate performance and determine cost effectiveness of various energy efficiency upgrade measures, individually and as packages, in single family buildings. Using the 2022 baseline as the starting point, prospective measures and packages were identified and modeled in each of the prototypes to determine the projected energy (therm and kWh) and compliance impacts. A large set of parametric runs were conducted to evaluate various options and develop packages of measures that met or exceeded minimum code performance. The analysis utilized a Python based parametric tool to automate and manage the generation of CBECCRes input files. This allowed for quick evaluation of various efficiency measures across multiple climate zones and prototypes and improved quality control. The batch process functionality of CBECC-Res was utilized to simulate large groups of input files at once.

2.1.2 Cost-Effectiveness

2.1.2.1 Benefits
This analysis used two different metrics to assess cost effectiveness of the proposed upgrades. Both methodologies require estimating and quantifying the incremental costs and energy savings associated with each energy efficiency measure. The main difference between the methodologies is the manner in which they value energy and thus the cost savings of reduced or avoided energy use:

Utility Bill Impacts (On-Bill): Customer-based lifecycle cost (LCC) approach that values energy based upon estimated site energy usage and customer utility bill savings using today’s electricity and natural gas utility tariffs. Total savings are estimated over a 30-year duration and include discounting of future costs and energy cost inflation.

Time Dependent Valuation (TDV): Energy Commission LCC methodology, which is intended to capture the total value or cost of energy use over 30 years. This method accounts for long-term projected costs, such as the cost of providing energy during peak periods of demand and other societal costs, such as projected costs for carbon emissions, as well as grid transmission and distribution impacts. This metric values energy use differently depending on the fuel source (natural gas, electricity, and propane), time of day, and season. For example, electricity used (or saved) during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity used (or saved) during off-peak periods due to the less inefficient energy generation sources providing peak electricity (Horii, Cutter, Kapur, Arent, & Conotyannis, 2014).

This is the methodology used by the Energy Commission in evaluating cost effectiveness for efficiency measures in Title 24, Part 6.

2.1.2.2 Costs
The Reach Codes Team assessed the incremental costs of the measures and packages over a 30-year lifecycle.

Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacements, and maintenance costs of the proposed measure relative to the 2022 Title 24 Standards minimum requirements or standard industry practices. Present value of replacement cost is included for measures with lifetimes less than the evaluation period.

In calculating On-Bill cost effectiveness, incremental first costs were assumed to be financed into a mortgage or loan with a 30-year loan term and four percent interest rate. Financing was not applied to future replacement or maintenance costs. In calculating TDV cost effectiveness, incremental first costs were not assumed to be financed into a mortgage or loan.

Page 227 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
5 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

2.1.2.3 Metrics
Cost-effectiveness is presented using net present value (NPV) and benefit-to-cost (B/C) ratio metrics.

NPV Savings: The lifetime NPV savings is reported as a cost-effectiveness metric, Equation 1 demonstrates how this is calculated. If the net savings of a measure or package is positive, it is considered cost-effective. Negative savings represent net costs.

B/C Ratio: Ratio of the present value (PV) of all benefits to the present value of all costs over 30 years (PV benefits divided by PV costs). The criteria benchmark for cost effectiveness is a B/C ratio greater than one. A value of one indicates the NPV of the savings over the life of the measure is equivalent to the NPV of the lifetime incremental cost of that measure. A value greater than one represents a positive return on investment. The B/C ratio is calculated according to Equation 2.

Equation 1
ݐݏ݋ܿ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ െ ݐܾ݂݁݊݁݅ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ = ݏ݅݊݃ݒܵܽ ܸܰܲ Equation 2
ݐܾ݂݁݊݁݅ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ = ݋݅ݐܴܽ ݐݏ݋ܥ െ ݋ݐ െ ݐ݂݁݊݁݅ܤ
ݐݏ݋ܿ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ
Improving the efficiency of a project often requires an initial incremental investment. In most cases the benefit is represented by annual On-Bill utility or TDV savings, and the cost is represented by incremental first cost and replacement costs. However, some packages result in initial construction cost savings (negative incremental cost), and either energy cost savings (positive benefits), or increased energy costs (negative benefits). In cases where both construction costs and energy-related savings are negative, the construction cost savings are treated as the ‘benefit’ while the increased energy costs are the ‘cost.’ In cases where a measure or package is cost-effective immediately (i.e., upfront construction cost savings and lifetime energy cost savings), B/C ratio cost effectiveness is represented by “>1”.

The lifetime costs or benefits are calculated according to Equation 3.

Equation 3
௧)ݐܾ݂݁݊݁݅ ݎ݋ ݐݏ݋ܿ ݈ܽݑ݊݊ܣ)෍ = ݐܾ݂݁݊݁݅ ݎ݋ ݐݏ݋ܿ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ (1 + ݎ(௧
௡
௧ୀ଴
Where:
x n = analysis term in years
x r = discount rate
The following summarizes the assumptions applied in this analysis to both methodologies. x Analysis term of 30 years
x Real discount rate of three percent
TDV is a normalized monetary format and there is a unique procedure for calculating the present value benefit of TDV energy savings. The present value of the energy cost savings in dollars is calculated by multiplying the TDV savings (reported by the CBECC-Res simulation software) by a NPV factor developed by the Energy Commission (see (Energy + Environmental Economics, 2020)). The 30-year residential NPV factor is $0.173/kTDV kBtu for the 2022 code cycle.

Equation 4
ݎ݋ݐ݂ܽܿ ܸܰܲ כ ݏ݅݊݃ݒܽݏ ݕ݃ݎ݁݊݁ ܸܦܶ = ݐܾ݂݁݊݁݅ ݅݉݁ݐ݈݂݅݁ ݂݋ ܸܲ ܸܦܶ

Page 228 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
6 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

2.1.3 Utility Rates
In coordination with the CA IOU rate team (comprised of representatives from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E)) and two Publicly-Owned-Utilities (POUs) (Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD) and City of Palo Alto Utilities (CPAU)), the Reach Codes Team determined appropriate utility rates for each climate zone in order to calculate utility costs and determine On-Bill cost effectiveness for the proposed measures and packages. The utility tariffs, summarized in Table 1, were determined based on the most prevalent active rate in each territory. Utility rates were applied to each climate zone based on the predominant IOU serving the population of each zone, with a few climate zones evaluated multiple times under different utility scenarios. Climate Zones 10 and 14 were evaluated with both SCE/SoCalGas and SDG&E tariffs since each utility has customers within these climate zones. Climate Zone 5 is evaluated under both PG&E and SoCalGas natural gas rates. Two POU or municipal utility rates were also evaluated: SMUD in Climate Zone 12 and CPAU in Climate Zone 4.

First-year utility costs were calculated using hourly electricity and natural gas output from CBECC-Res and applying the utility tariffs summarized in Table 1. Annual costs were also estimated for customers eligible for the CARE tariff discounts on both electricity and natural gas bills. Appendix 7.2 Utility Rate Schedules includes details of each utility tariff. For cases with PV generation, the approved NEM2 tariffs were applied along with minimum daily use billing and mandatory non-bypassable charges. Future changes to the NEM tariffs are likely and the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has issued a proposed decision with suggested changes that is expected to be finalized in 2022. 2 The ADU was assumed to have separate electric and gas meters from the main house.

Table 1. Utility Tariffs Used Based on Climate Zone
Climate Zones Electric / Gas Utility Electricity Natural Gas IOUs
1-5,11-13,16 PG&E / PG&E E-TOU Option C G1
5 PG&E / SoCalGas E-TOU Option C GR
6, 8-10, 14, 15 SCE / SoCalGas TOU-D Option 4-9 GR
7, 10, 14 SDG&E / SDG&E TOU-DR-1 GR
POUs
4 CPAU / CPAU E-1 G-2
12 SMUD / PG&E R-TOD (RT02) G1
Utility rates are assumed to escalate over time according to the assumptions from the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. See Appendix 7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions for details.

2.2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The analysis reports the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission estimates based on assumptions within CBECC-Res. There are 8,760 hourly multipliers accounting for time dependent energy use and carbon based on source emissions, including renewable portfolio standard projections. There are two strings of multipliers—one for Northern California 2 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/nemrevisit

Page 229 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Methodology and Assumptions
7 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 climate zones, and another for Southern California climate zones. 3 GHG emissions are reported as average annual metric tons of CO2 equivalent over the 30-year building lifetime.

2.3 Energy Design Rating
The 2019 Title 24 Code introduced California’s Energy Design Rating (EDR) as the primary metric to demonstrate compliance with the energy code for single family buildings. This EDR was based on the hourly TDV energy use from a building that is compliant with the 2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) as the Reference Building. The Reference Building has an EDR score of 100 while a zero-net energy (ZNE) home has an EDR score of zero. While the Reference Building is used to set the scale for the rating, the Proposed Design is still compared to the Standard Design based on the Title 24 prescriptive baseline assumptions to determine compliance.

In the 2022 Title 24 Code a second new EDR metric was introduced based on hourly source energy. The two EDR metrics are described below:
x EDR1 is calculated based on source energy.
x EDR2 is calculated based on TDV energy.

Furthermore, EDR2 is composed of two components for compliance purposes. The Efficiency EDR2 which represents the energy efficiency features of a home. The PV/Flexibility EDR2 includes the effects of PV and battery storage systems. Total EDR2 combines both the Efficiency and PV/Flexibility impacts. While the Efficiency EDR2 does not include the full impact of a battery system, it can include a self-utilization credit for batteries if certain conditions are met.

For a new, single family building to comply with the 2022 Title 24 Code, three criteria are required:

1. The Proposed EDR1 must be equal to or less than the EDR1 of the Standard Design, and

2. The Proposed Efficiency EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Efficiency EDR2 of the Standard Design, and

3. The Proposed Total EDR2 must be equal to or less than the Total EDR2 of the Standard Design.

This concept, consistent with California’s “loading order” which prioritizes energy efficiency ahead of renewable generation, requires projects meet a minimum Efficiency EDR2 before PV is credited but allows for PV to be traded off with additional efficiency when meeting the Total EDR2. A project may improve on building efficiency beyond the minimum required and subsequently reduce the PV generation capacity necessary to achieve the required Total EDR2.

However, it may not increase the size of the PV system and trade this off with a reduction of efficiency measures.

Results from this analysis are presented as EDR Margin, a reduction in the EDR score relative to the Standard Design.

EDR Margin is a better metric to use than absolute EDR in the context of a reach code because absolute values vary based on the home design and characteristics such as size and orientation. Referencing the margin results in similar requirements across a variety of designs. This approach aligns with how compliance is reported for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 Code. The EDR Margin is calculated according to Equation 5.

Equation 5
ܴܦܧ ݅݃݊ݏ݁ܦ ݁݀ݏ݋݌݋ݎܲ െ ܴܦܧ ݅݃݊ݏ݁ܦ ݀ݎܽ݊݀ܽݐܵ = ݃݅݊ݎܽܯ ܴܦܧ
3 CBECC-Res multipliers are the same for CZs 1-5 and 11-13 (Northern California), while there is another set of multipliers for CZs 6-10 and 14-16 (Southern California).

Page 230 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
8 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 3 Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
This section describes the prototypes and the scope of analysis drawing from previous 2019 Reach Code research where necessary.

3.1 Prior Reach Code Research
In 2019, the Reach Codes Team analyzed the cost-effectiveness of residential single family new construction projects for mixed-fuel and all-electric packages (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019). Using this analysis, several cities and counties in California adopted local energy code amendments encouraging or requiring that low-rise residential new construction be all-electric. As there were few changes to the single family requirements, this analysis for the 2022 code cycle leveraged the work completed for the 2019 reports. Initial efficiency packages were based on the final packages from the 2019 research and were revised to reflect measure specifications and costs based on new data.

3.2 Prototype Characteristics
The Energy Commission defines building prototypes which it uses to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of proposed changes to Title 24 requirements. For the 2022 code cycle the Energy Commission used two single family prototypes, both of which were used in this analysis. Additional details on the prototypes can be found in the Alternative Calculation Method (ACM) Approval Manual (California Energy Commission, 2018).

Additionally, a detached new construction ADU prototype was developed to reflect recent trends in California construction related to the high cost of housing (TRC, 2021). ADUs are additional dwelling units typically built on the property of an existing single-family parcel. ADUs are defined as new construction in the energy code when they are ground-up developments, do not convert an existing space to livable space, and are not attached to the primary dwelling. The evaluated prototype is not representative of an attached ADU constructed as an addition to an existing home.

The Reach Codes Team leveraged prior research to define the detached ADU baseline and measure packages. The house size and number of bedrooms were based on data from a survey conducted by UC Berkeley’s Center for Community Innovation (UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation, 2021). The survey found that the average square footage for new ADUs statewide is 615 square feet and that the majority (61 percent) of new ADUs have one bedroom.

Table 2 describes the basic characteristics of each prototype. The prototypes have equal geometry on all walls, windows and roof to be orientation neutral.

Table 2: Prototype Characteristics
Characteristic Single Family
One-Story
Single Family
Two-Story ADU
Conditioned Floor Area 2,100 ft2 2,700 ft2 625 ft2
Num. of Stories 1 2 1
Num. of Bedrooms 3 31
Window-to-Floor Area Ratio 20% 20% 20%
The Energy Commission’s protocol for the two single family prototypes is to weight the simulated energy impacts by a factor that represents the distribution of single-story and two-story homes being built statewide. This study assumed 50 percent single-story and 50 percent two-story. Simulation results in this study are characterized according to this ratio, which is approximately equivalent to a 2,400-square foot (ft2) house. 4 ADU results are presented separately. 42,400 ft2 = (50% x 2,100 ft2) + (50% x 2,700 ft2)

Page 231 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
9 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 The methodology used in the analyses for each of the prototypical building types begins with a design that precisely meets the minimum 2022 prescriptive requirements (zero compliance margin). Table 150.1-A in the 2022 Standards (California Energy Commission, 2021a) lists the prescriptive measures that determine the baseline design in each climate zone. Other features are consistent with the Standard Design in the ACM Reference Manual (California Energy Commission, 2022), and are designed to meet, but not exceed, the minimum requirements. Each prototype building has the following features:
x Slab-on-grade foundation.
x Vented attic.
x High performance attic in climate zones where prescriptively required (CZ 4, 8-16) with insulation installed at the ceiling and below the roof deck per Option B. (Refer to Table 150.1-A in the 2022 Standards.) x Ductwork located in the attic.

Table 3 describes additional characteristics as they were applied to the base case energy model in this analysis. In a shift from the 2019 Standards, the 2022 Standards define a prescriptive fuel source for space heating and water heating establishing a heat pump baseline. In each climate zone one heat pump is prescriptively required. In most climate zones the prescriptive base case includes a heat pump water heater and a natural gas furnace for space heating. In Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14 this is reversed, where the base case has a heat pump space heater and natural gas tankless water heater.

Table 3: Base case Characteristics of the Prototypes
Characteristic Single Family ADU
Space
Heating/Cooling1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Natural gas furnace, split
AC 80 AFUE, 14 SEER, 11.7 EER
CZs 3-4,13-14: Split heat pump – 8.2 HSPF,
14 SEER, 11.7 EER
Same as single family
Water Heater1,2
CZs 1-2,5-12,15-16: Heat pump water heater
(HPWH) UEF = 2.0 located in the garage
CZs 3-4,13-14: Natural gas tankless –
UEF = 0.81
Same equipment type as SF
except HPWH is located inside
the conditioned space with the
supply air ducted from outside3
Hot Water
Distribution
Code minimum, all hot water lines insulated
CZs 1,16: Basic compact distribution credit Same as single family Drain Water Heat
Recovery Efficiency CZ 16: 65%, equal flow to shower & water heater Same as single family Cooking Natural Gas Same as single family
Clothes Drying Natural Gas Same as single family
PV System
Sized to offset 100% of electricity use for space
cooling, ventilation, lighting, appliance, & other
miscellaneous electric loads. Size differs by
climate zone ranging from 2.64 kW to 5.33 kW,
see Table 4.

PV is not required when the PV
system size required based on the
prescriptive calculations is less
than 1.8 kW, as is the case in
Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and

16. In the other climate zones the
PV size ranges from 1.74 kW to

2.56 kW, see Table 4.4
1 Equipment efficiencies are equal to minimum federal appliance efficiency standards. 2 AFUE = annual fuel utilization efficiency. SEER = seasonal energy efficiency ratio. EER = energy efficiency ratio.

HSPF = heating seasonal performance factor. UEF = uniform energy factor. 3 This version of CBECC-Res used in this analysis did not have the capability to directly model ducted HPWHs even though this configuration is called out as the Standard Design in the 2022 ACM (California Energy Commission, 2022). This was modeled by indicating that the tank is located within the conditioned space with the compressor unit located outside. 4 Exception 2 to Section 150.1(c)14 states that “no PV system is required when the minimum PV system size specified by section 150.1(c)14 is less than 1.8 kWdc.” In this analysis this exception is applied based on the sizes calculated per Equation150.1-C of Section 150.1(c)14. The performance software sizes the PV system based on the estimated energy use, which differs slightly from the prescriptive sizing. As a result, the baseline PV capacity from the performance software for Climate Zone 10 is less than 1.8 kWdc. Page 232 of 309
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
10 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 4 summarizes the PV capacities for the base case packages.

Table 4: Base Package PV Capacities (kW-DC)
Climate
Zone
Base Package
Single
Family ADU
CZ01 3.54 0
CZ02 2.99 0
CZ03 2.81 0
CZ04 2.90 0
CZ05 2.62 0
CZ06 2.64 0
CZ07 2.84 0
CZ08 3.13 0
CZ09 2.97 0
CZ10 3.19 1.74
CZ11 3.91 2.07
CZ12 3.12 0
CZ13 4.08 2.11
CZ14 3.16 0
CZ15 5.33 2.56
CZ16 2.90 0

3.3 Measure Definitions and Costs
Measures evaluated in this study fall into two categories: those associated with general efficiency, onsite generation, and demand flexibility and those associated with building electrification. The Reach Codes Team selected measures based on cost-effectiveness as well as decades of experience with residential architects, builders, and engineers along with general knowledge of the relative consumer acceptance of many measures.

The following sections describe the details and incremental cost assumptions for each of the measures. Incremental costs represent the equipment, installation, replacement, and maintenance costs of the proposed measures relative to the base case. 5
Replacement costs are applied for roofs, mechanical equipment, PV inverters and battery systems over the 30-year evaluation period. Maintenance costs are estimated for PV systems, but not any other measures.

Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. All costs are provided as present value in 2023 (2023 PV$).

The Reach Codes Team obtained measure costs from distributors, contractors, literature review, and online sources such as Home Depot and RS Means. Contractor markups are incorporated. These are the Reach Codes Team best estimate of average costs statewide. However, it's recognized that local costs may differ, and that inflation and supply chain issues may also impact costs.

3.3.1 Efficiency, Solar PV, and Batteries
Following are descriptions of each of the efficiency, PV, and battery measures evaluated under this analysis and applied in at least one of the packages presented in this report. Table 5 summarizes the incremental cost assumptions for each of these measures.
5 All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the incremental costs. See Section 2.1.2 for details.

Page 233 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
11 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Reduced Infiltration (ACH50): Reduce infiltration in single family homes from the default infiltration assumption of five (5) air changes per hour at 50 Pascals (ACH50) 6 by 40 percent to 3 ACH50. HERS rater field verification and diagnostic testing of building air leakage according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.8 (California Energy Commission, 2021b).

Lower U-Factor Fenestration: Reduce window U-factor to 0.24. The prescriptive U-factor is 0.30 in all climates.

Higher SHGC Fenestration: Increase solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) to 0.50 in climate zones where heating loads dominate. The baseline solar heat gain coefficient (SHGC) applied in the Standard Design is 0.35 in Climate Zones 1, 3, 5, and 16.

Cool Roof: Install a roofing product that’s rated by the Cool Roof Rating Council to have an aged solar reflectance (ASR) equal to or greater than 0.25. Steep-sloped roofs were assumed in all cases. The 2022 Title 24 specifies a prescriptive ASR of 0.20 for Climate Zones 10 through 15.

Increased Ceiling Insulation: Increase ceiling level insulation in a vented attic to R-49 or R-60 insulation.

Slab Insulation: Install R-10 perimeter slab insulation at a depth of 16-inches. This measure doesn’t apply to Climate Zone 16 where slab insulation is required prescriptively.

Low Pressure Drop Ducts: Upgrade the duct distribution system to reduce external static pressure and meet a maximum fan efficacy of 0.35 Watts per cfm. This may involve upsizing ductwork, reducing the total effective length of ducts, and/or selecting low pressure drop components such as filters. Fan watt draw must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b).

Buried Radial Duct Design: Bury all ductwork in ceiling insulation by laying the ducts across the ceiling joists or inbetween ceiling joists directly on the ceiling drywall. Duct design is based on a radial design where individual ducts are run to each supply register. This allows for smaller diameter ducts, reducing duct losses and more easily meeting fully or deeply buried conditions. 7 Duct burial and duct system design must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.1.4.1.5 and RA3.1.4.1.6 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This applies to the single family prototypes only.

R-8 Duct Insulation: Increase duct insulation to R-8 in the climate zones where R-6 insulation is prescriptive.

Ductless Mini-Split Heat Pump: In the ADU prototype replace the ducted split system with a ductless mini-split heat pump with three indoor heads. The system is evaluated as meeting the criteria for the variable capacity heat pump (VCHP) credit, introduced in the 2019 code cycle, which must be verified by a HERS rater according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA3.4.4.3 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). This credit requires verification of refrigerant charge, that all equipment is entirely within conditioned space, that airflow is directly supplied to all habitable space and that wall mounted thermostats serve any zones greater than 150 square feet.

Compact Hot Water Distribution: Design the hot water distribution system to meet minimum requirements for the basic compact hot water distribution credit according to the procedures outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices RA4.4.6 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). In many single family homes this may require moving the water heater from an exterior to an interior garage wall. CBECC-Res software assumes a 30% reduction in distribution losses for the basic credit.

Solar PV: Installation of on-site PV is required in the 2022 residential code unless an exception is met. The PV sizing methodology in each package was developed to offset annual building electricity use and avoid oversizing which would 6 Whole house leakage tested at a pressure difference of 50 Pascals between indoors and outdoors. 7 The duct systems in the Central Valley Research Homes Project Final Project Report are illustrative of this approach (Proctor, Wilcox, & Chitwood, 2018).

Page 234 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
12 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 violate net energy metering (NEM) rules. 8 In all cases, PV is evaluated in CBECC-Res according to the California Flexible Installation (CFI) assumptions.

The Reach Codes Team used two options within the CBECC-Res software for sizing the PV system, described below.

The first option, “Standard Design PV”, was applied in the base case simulations and packages where the PV system size was not changed from the minimum system size required. For the PV packages, the second option was used with a scaling of 100 percent. The Reach Codes Team evaluated an all-electric single family and ADU home with a PV system sized to offset 100 and 90 percent of the total calculated electricity use. Sizing to 100 percent proved to be more cost-effective based on customer utility bills in most cases. As a result, the PV packages were sized to offset 100 percent of electricity use.
x Standard Design PV – the same PV capacity as is required for the Standard Design case9 x Specify PV System Scaling – a PV system sized to offset a specified percentage of the estimated electricity use of the Proposed Design case
One exception to the PV requirement is when the minimum PV system size required is less than 1.8 kWh. This exception applies to the ADU models in Climate Zones 1-9, 12, 14, and 16. For these cases no PV system is required by code and no PV system was modeled in the base case simulations.

Battery Energy Storage: A battery system was evaluated in CBECC-Res with control type set to “Advanced Demand Response Control” and with default efficiencies of 95% for both charging and discharging. The “Advanced Demand Response Control” option assumes the battery system will charge or discharge depending on the needs of the grid. To qualify for the Advanced Demand Response Control the battery system must meet the requirements outlined in the 2022 Reference Appendices JA13.3.3.2 (California Energy Commission, 2021b). 8 NEM rules apply to the IOU territories only.
9 The Standard Design PV system is sized to offset the electricity use of the building loads which are typically electric in a mixed fuel home, which includes all loads except space heating, water heating, clothes drying, and cooking.

Page 235 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
13 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 5: Incremental Cost Assumptions
Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Non-Preempted MeasuresReduced Infiltration

3.0 vs 5.0
ACH50 $591 $362 $0.115/ft2 based on NREL’s BEopt cost database plus $250 HERS rater verification.

Window U-factor 0.24 vs 0.30 $2,280 $285 $4.23/ft2 window area based on analysis conducted for the 2019 and 2022 Title 24 cycles (Statewide CASE Team, 2018). Window SHGC 0.50 vs 0.35 $0 $0 Based on feedback from Statewide CASE Team that higher SHGC does not necessarily have any incremental cost (Statewide CASE Team, 2017). Cool Roof

0.25 vs 0.20
aged solar
reflectance
$219 $53
$0.07per ft2 of roof area first incremental cost for asphalt shingle product based on the 2022 Nonresidential High Performance Envelope CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020a). Total costs assume present value of replacement at year 20 and residual cost for remaining product life at end of 30-year analysis period. Higher reflectance values for lower cost are achievable for tile roof products Attic Insulation
R-49 vs R-30 $872 n/a
Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).

R-60 vs R-30 $1,420 n/aR-60 vs R-38 $1,096 n/a
Slab Edge Insulation R-10 vs R-0 $651 $449 $4 per linear foot of slab perimeter based on internet research. Assumes 16in depth.Low Pressure Drop Ducts

0.35 vs 0.45
W/cfm $99 $49
Costs assume one-hour labor for single family and half-hour for the ADU. Labor rate of $88per hour is from 2022 RS Means for sheet metal workers and includes a weighted average City Cost Index for labor for California.

Buried Ducts Buried, radial design $281 n/a No cost for laying ducts on attic floor versus suspending, in some cases there will be cost savings. Neutral cost for radiant design versus trunk and branch design. A $250 HERS Rater verification fee is included.Duct Insulation R-8 vs R-6 $201 n/a Based on costs from the 2022 Residential Additions & Alterations CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020b).

Page 236 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
14 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Ductless MiniSplit Heat Pump
Ductless system
meeting the
VCHP credit vs.
ducted split heat
pump
n/a $1,571
Costs were developed based on data from E3’s 2019 report Residential Building Electrification in California (Energy & Environmental Economics, 2019) and the 2022 AllElectric Multifamily CASE Report (Statewide CASE Team, 2020c). Equipment costs are from the CASE Report for the 10-story multifamily prototype assuming similar sized equipment between the multifamily dwelling unit and the ADU. Thermostat, wiring, electrical, and ducting costs are from the E3 study. A $250 HERS Rater verification fee is also included. Where this measure is applied to the mixed fuel home with a gas furnace, this cost is in addition to the cost difference for a heat pump versus a gas furnace/split AC reported in Section 3.3.2.

Compact Hot Water Distribution
Basic credit –
homes with gas
tankless
$196 $0
For single family homes with a gas tankless water heater (mixed fuel homes in Climate Zones 3,4,13,14) assumes adding 20-feet venting at $14.69 per linear foot to locate water heater on interior garage wall, less 20-feet savings for PEX and pipe insulation at $5.98 per linear foot. Costs from online retailers. For single family homes with a HPWH there is an incremental cost savings from less pipe being required. For the ADU it is assumed the credit can be met without any changes to design and there is no cost impact.

Basic credit –
homes with
HPWH
$-134 $0
PV + BatteryPV System
First Cost $3.21/W $3.21/W
First costs from LBNL’s Tracking the Sun 2021 costs (Barbose, Darghouth, O'Shaughnessy, & Forrester, 2021) and represent median costs in California in 2020 of $3.90/WDC for residential systems. The first cost was reduced by the solar energy Investment Tax Credit of 30%.2 Costs are presented as the average of 2023, 2024, and 2025.

Inverter replacement cost of $0.14/WDC present value includes replacements at year 11 at $0.15/WDC (nominal) and at year 21 at $0.12/WDC (nominal) per the 2019 PV CASE Report(California Energy Commission, 2017). System maintenance costs of $0.31/WDC present value assume $0.02/WDC (nominal) annually per the 2019 PV CASE Report (California Energy Commission, 2017).

Inverter
replacement $0.14/W $0.14/W
Maintenance $0.31/W $0.31/W

Page 237 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
15 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Measure
Performance
Level
Incremental Cost
(2023 PV$)1
Source & Notes
Single
Family ADU
Battery
First cost $617/kWh $617/kWh
Costs are based on research conducted for the 2021 Batteries in Single Family Homes reach code report (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021a). $1,000/kWh first cost in 2020 based on Self-Generation Incentive Program (SGIP) residential participant cost data. To estimate the first cost in future years this was reduced by 7% annually based on SDG&E’s Behind-theMeter Battery Market Study (E-Source companies, 2020). The first cost is reduced by the solar energy Investment Tax Credit of 30%.2 Costs are presented as the average of 2023, 2024, and 2025. No SGIP incentives are included.

Replacement cost at year 10 and 20 was calculated based on the 2023 cost reduced by 7% annually over the next 10 years for a future value cost of $389 (present value of $290 in year 10 and $216 in year 20).

Replacement
cost $505/kWh $505/kWh
1All first costs are assumed to be financed in a mortgage and interest costs due to financing are included in the incremental costs. See Section 2.1.2 for details.

Interest costs were not included for calculating TDV cost-effectiveness. 2As part of the Inflation Reduction Act in August 2022 the Section 25D Investment Tax Credit was extended and raised to 30% through 2032 with a step-down beginning in 2033. https://www.seia.org/sites/default/files/2022-08/Inflation%20Reduction%20Act%20Summary%20PDF%20FINAL.pdf

Page 238 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
16 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

3.3.2 All-Electric
This analysis compared a code compliant mixed fuel prototype, which uses natural gas for three appliances (cooking, clothes drying and either space heating or water heating), with a code compliant all-electric prototype. In these cases, the relative costs between natural gas and electric appliances, differences between in-house electricity and natural gas infrastructure and the associated infrastructure costs for providing natural gas to the building were included.

To estimate costs the Reach Codes Team leveraged costs from the 2019 reach code cost-effectiveness studies for residential new construction (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019) and detached accessory dwelling units (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021b), 2022 RS Means, PG&E data, published utility schedules and rules, and online research.

Incremental costs for natural gas infrastructure to a single family building are presented in Table 6 through Table 11.

These costs are applied as cost savings for an all-electric home when compared to a mixed fuel home. This is the component with the highest degree of variability for all-electric homes. These costs are project dependent and may be significantly impacted by such factors as utility territory, site characteristics, distance to the nearest natural gas main and main location, joint trenching, whether work is conducted by the utility or a private contractor, and number of dwelling units per development. All gas utilities participating in this study were solicited for cost information. The CA IOU costs for single family homes presented are based primarily on cost data provided by PG&E.

Table 6 presents assumed gas main distribution line extension costs within gas CA IOU territory. Total distribution line extension costs are based on cost data provided by PG&E for new greenfield development. Total costs are reduced to account for deductions per the Utility Gas Main Extensions rules. 10 These rules categorize distribution line extensions as “refundable” costs, which are offset or subsidized by all other ratepayers. Refundable costs are first subsidized by appliance allowances, which are defined in Table 7. If there are additional costs in excess of the allowances, the developer has the option to either be refunded for the remaining amount over ten years or receive a 50 percent discount at time of application. The latter discount option is assumed in this analysis and is more commonly used by developers (California Public Utilities Commission, 2022). Two scenarios are presented in Table 6 since the appliance allowances differ by type of appliance. One is for the base case home with a prescriptive heat pump space heater which assumes a gas water heater, gas cooking, and gas clothes dryer (Climate Zones 3, 4, 13, and 14). The second is for the base case home with a prescriptive heat pump water heater which assumes a gas furnace, gas cooking, and gas clothes dryer. and a natural gas furnace for space heating (Climate Zones 1, 2, 5 through 12, 15, and 16).

The costs less the deductions were applied under the On-Bill cost-effectiveness methodology. The total costs before the deductions were applied under the TDV cost-effectiveness methodology to better reflect the full cost of gas main extensions since the deductions are subsidized by ratepayers and recovered via revenue from customers. This follows the analysis approach in the 2019 reach code study (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2019) and was based on input received from the Energy Commission and agreement from the Reach Codes technical advisory team that the approach is appropriate. TDV cost savings impacts extend beyond the customer and account for societal impacts of energy use. Accounting for the full cost of the infrastructure upgrades was determined to be justified when evaluating under the TDV methodology.

The CPUC issued a Proposed Decision in August 2022 that recommends eliminating the subsidies effective July 1, 2023. At the time of publishing this report there had been no ruling on this decision and therefore this analysis assumes the existing rules will remain in place through the 2022 code cycle. A sensitivity analysis of how the results would change if the Proposed Decision were adopted is included in the results of this report. 10 PG&E Rule 15: https://www.pge.com/tariffs/assets/pdf/tariffbook/GAS_RULES_15.pdf.

SoCalGas Rule 20: https://www.socalgas.com/regulatory/tariffs/tm2/pdf/20.pdf.

SDG&E Rule 15: https://tariff.sdge.com/tm2/pdf/GAS_GAS-RULES_GRULE15.pdf.

Page 239 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
17 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 6. Single Family IOU Natural Gas Main Distribution Line Extension Costs Total
Less Gas Extension Rule
Deductions1
PG&E SoCalGas SDG&E
Gas Water Heater Base $1,020 $0 $13 $0
Gas Space Heater Base $0 $0 $0
1After Utility Gas Main Extension Rule deductions.

Table 7. Residential IOU Gas Line Extension Appliance Allowances Appliance PG&E SoCalGas SDG&E
Water Heating $1,391 $682 $1,138
Space Heating $987 $818 $987
Oven/Range $84 $152 $201
Dryer Stub $24 $160 $289
Total - Gas Water Heater Base $1,499 $994 $1,628
Total – Gas Space Heater Base $1,095 $1,130 $1,477
Table 8 presents costs for the extension of service lines from a main distribution line to the home within gas CA IOU territory. These costs are based on data provided by PG&E excluding trenching. Costs are presented separately for a new subdivision in an undeveloped area as well as an infill development. The service extension is typically more costly in an infill scenario due to the disruption of existing roads, sidewalks, and other structures. For this analysis an average of the new subdivision and infill development costs was used, representing 80 percent of the new subdivision and 20 percent infill.

Table 8. Single Family IOU Natural Gas Service Line Extension Costs New
Subdivision
Infill
Development
Average
(80% New, 20% Infill)
$1,300 $6,750 $2,390
Table 9 presents other relative costs within gas CA IOU territory including gas meter installation and IOU plan review.

These costs are based on data provided by PG&E.

Table 9. Single Family IOU Other Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs Meter $300
Plan Review $850
Table 10 presents total costs including distribution and service line extensions, meter installation and plan review for the three gas CA IOUs for the two base case scenarios. Costs are based on the average service line extension costs from Table 8. For the single family analysis, based on the Reach Codes Team's conversations with the industry it is assumed that no upgrades to the electrical panel are required and that a 200 Amp panel is typically installed for both mixed fuel and all-electric homes.

Page 240 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
18 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 10. Single Family IOU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs1 Total Less Gas Extension Rule
Deductions2
PG&E SoCalGas SDG&E
Total - Gas Water Heater Base $4,560 $3,540 $3,553 $3,540 Total - Gas Space Heater Base $3,540 $3,540 $3,540
1Based on average service line extension costs from Table 8. 1After Utility Gas Main Extension Rule deductions.

CPAU provides gas service to its customers and therefore separate costs were evaluated based on CPAU gas service connection fees. 11 Table 11 presents the breakdown of gas infrastructure costs used in this analysis for CPAU. There is no main distribution line component since Palo Alto has little greenfield space remaining and most of the development is infill.

Table 11. Single Family CPAU Total Natural Gas Infrastructure Costs Item Cost
Service Extension $5,892
Meter $1,012
Plan Review Costs $924
Total $7,828
Table 12 presents incremental costs for natural gas infrastructure for the detached ADU. These costs are directly from the 2019 detached ADU reach code report (Statewide Reach Codes Team, 2021b) and were obtained from interviews and RS Means. For the ADU scenario it’s assumed that natural gas already exists on the lot and is being extended to the location of the ADU typically at the back of the lot. There are incremental cost savings for an all-electric ADU from not extending the natural gas service; however, there is also a small incremental cost for upgrading the electric service to accommodate the additional electrical load. The Reach Codes Team found that a new detached ADU would require that the building owner upgrade the service connection to the lot in both the mixed-fuel ADU design and the all-electric design. The most common size for this upgrade is to upsize the existing panel to 225A, which would not represent an incremental cost from the mixed-fuel project to the all-electric project. Feeder wiring to the ADU and the ADU subpanel will need to be slightly upgraded for the all-electric design. 11 CPAU Schedule G-5 effective 09-01-2019: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/utilities/utilitiesengineering/general-specifications/gas-service-connection-fees.pdf

Page 241 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
19 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 12. ADU Utility Infrastructure Costs
Mixed Fuel Measure Mixed Fuel
Cost All-Electric Measure All-Electric Cost
All-Electric
Incremental Cost
Site natural gas service
extension $1,998 No site natural gas service $0 ($1,998) Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500
Site electrical service
connection upgrade 225A $3,500 $0
100A feeder to ADU with
breaker $933
125A feeder to ADU with
breaker $1,206 $273
100A ADU subpanel $733 125A ADU subpanel $946 $213
Totals $7,164 $5,652 ($1,512)
Equipment lifetimes applied in this analysis for the water heating and space conditioning measures are summarized in Table 13. The lifetime for the heat pump, furnace, and air conditioner are based on the Database for Energy Efficient Resources (DEER) (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021b). In DEER, heat pump and air conditioner measures are assigned an effective useful lifetime (EUL) of 15 years and a furnace an EUL of 20 years. The heating and cooling system components are typically replaced at the same time when one reaches the end of its life and the other is near it. Therefore, it is assumed that both the furnace and air conditioner are replaced at the same time at year 17.5, halfway between 15 and 20 years. For HVAC system costing, air-conditioning is included in all cases in both the base case and proposed models. Present value replacement costs are included in the total lifetime incremental costs.

Table 13: Lifetime of Water Heating & Space Conditioning Equipment Measures Measure Lifetime
Gas Furnace 17.5
Air Conditioner 17.5
Heat Pump 15
Gas Tankless Water Heater 20
Heat Pump Water Heater 15
Appliance incremental costs are shown in Table 14 and Table 15. Replacement costs are applied to HVAC and DHW equipment over the 30-year evaluation period. Costs were estimated to reflect costs to the building owner. All costs are provided as present value in 2023 (2023 PV$). Costs due to variations in furnace, air conditioner, and heat pump capacity by climate zone were not accounted for.

The Reach Codes Team determined that the typical first installed cost for electric appliances is similar to that for natural gas appliances. Cost differences include equipment cost and installation, costs for natural gas piping from the meter to the appliance, and costs for electrical wiring to service the appliances.

Space Heater: Typical HVAC incremental costs were based on material costs from the AC Wholesalers website and labor costs from 2022 RS Means. In most cases the Reach Codes Team found that the material costs were slightly higher for the heat pump, but the labor costs were slightly higher for the gas furnace/AC installation. Costs were calculated for capacities ranging from a 2-ton to a 5-ton and the incremental costs used in this study were based on a weighted average of the expected nominal capacities from CBECC-Res autosizing results for the 2,100 square foot prototype. Incremental replacement costs for the heat pump are based on a 17.5-year lifetime for the gas furnace and air conditioner and a 15-year lifetime for the heat pump. Residual value of the gas furnace/AC at the end of the 30-year analysis period was accounted for to represent the remaining life of the equipment. Page 242 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
20 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Water Heater: Various cost sources were reviewed and the Reach Codes Team determined that installed first costs for a garage installed tankless gas water heater and HPWH are very similar and no incremental cost was applied for the equipment and installation (see below for details on costs for gas piping and electrical wiring). This accounts for slightly higher equipment costs for the HPWH but lower installation labor due to the elimination of the combustion gas venting.

Incremental replacement costs account for a 15-year HPWH lifetime and a 20-year lifetime for the gas tankless water heater. Residual value of the gas tankless at the end of the 30-year analysis period was accounted for to represent the remaining life of the equipment. For the ADU analysis the water heater is evaluated within the conditioned space with the supply air ducted from the outside. An HVAC contractor provided a cost estimate for supply air ducting through the wall in an ADU where the water heater is in an interior room adjacent to an exterior wall. The estimated total cost for this was $652.

A high efficiency HPWH that meets the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA) 12 Tier 3 rating was also evaluated. HPWHs certified to meet NEEA Tier 3 or Tier 4 are the dominant product on the market today. According to NEEA all major HPWH manufacturers are represented in NEEA’s qualified product list 13 and there are only 11 listed products certified as Tier 1 or Tier 2. 14 While the Reach Codes Team evaluated a HPWH that just meets the federal minimum efficiency standards of close to 2.0 UEF to satisfy federal preemption requirements, the Reach Codes Team is not aware of any 2.0 UEF products that are available. The Reach Codes Team was unable to find any of the Tier 1 or Tier2 HPWHs for sale online and was unable to find any products for sale online that were not NEEA Tier 3 or Tier 4 certified. As a result, no incremental cost is assumed for a NEEA Tier 3 product versus a federal minimum efficiency product.

Clothes Dryer and Range: After review of various sources, the Reach Codes Team concluded that the cost difference between gas and electric resistance equipment for clothes dryers and stoves is negligible and that the lifetimes of the two technologies are also similar.

Electric Service Upgrade: The 2022 Title 24 Code requires electric readiness for gas appliances; as a result, the incremental costs to provide electrical service for electric appliances are minimal. The incremental costs accounted for in this study are calculated as the cost to install 220V service for the electric appliances less the cost for the electric ready requirements and for installing 110V service for the comparable gas appliance. Incremental costs are applied for the space heater, water heater, and cooking range. Based on builder surveys, it’s assumed that in a typical mixed fuel home both electric and gas service are provided to the dryer location and therefore no incremental costs for the dryer were applied. Costs assume 50A service for the range and 30A service for the space heater and water heater. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single family and ADU analyses.

In-House Natural Gas Infrastructure (from meter to appliances): Installation cost to run a natural gas line from the meter to the appliance location was estimated at $580 per appliance. These costs were based on material costs from Home Depot and labor costs from 2022 RS Means. The material costs were about 1/3 higher in RS Means than Home Depot, so the Reach Codes Team used the lower costs from Home Depot. The Reach Codes Team conducted a pipe sizing analysis for the two single family and one ADU prototype homes to estimate the length and diameter of gas piping required assuming the home included a gas furnace, gas tankless water heater, gas range, and gas dryer. Total estimated costs were very similar for each of the three prototypes and an average cost per appliance of $580 was determined. Costs are assumed to be the same for the single family and ADU analyses. 12 Based on operational challenges experienced in the past, NEEA established rating test criteria to ensure newly installed HPWHs perform adequately, especially in colder climates. The NEEA rating requires products comply with ENERGY STAR and includes requirements regarding noise and prioritizing heat pump use over supplemental electric resistance heating.
13 https://neea.org/success-stories/heat-pump-water-heaters 14 https://neea.org/img/documents/residential-unitary-HPWH-qualified-products-list.pdf

Page 243 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
21 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 14. Single Family All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs Measure
Incremental Cost (2023 PV$)
First Cost Replacement
Cost
Total Lifetime
Financed
Heat Pump vs Gas Furnace/Split AC
Equipment & Installation ($151) $703 $533
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $0 $49
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($688) $703 ($69)
Heat Pump Water Heater vs Gas Tankless
Equipment & Installation $0 $652 $652
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $0 $49
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($537) $652 $49
NEEA Tier 3 HPWH vs Federal Minimum HPWH
Equipment $0 $0 $0
Total $0 $0 $0
Electric Resistance vs Gas Cooking
Equipment & Installation $0 $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $100 $0 $113
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($480) $0 ($539)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Clothes Drying
Equipment & Installation $0 $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $0 $0 $0
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($580) $0 ($651)

Page 244 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
22 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 15. ADU All-Electric Appliance Incremental Costs
Measure
Incremental Cost (2023 PV$)
First Cost Replacement
Cost
Total Lifetime
Financed
Heat Pump vs Gas Furnace/Split AC
Equipment & Installation ($151) $703 $533
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $0 $49
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($688) $703 ($69)
Heat Pump Water Heater vs Gas Tankless
Equipment & Installation $652 $652 $1,384
Electric Service Upgrade $43 $0 $49
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total $115 $652 $781
NEEA Tier 3 HPWH vs Federal Minimum HPWH
Equipment $0 $0 $0
Total $0 $0 $0
Electric Resistance vs Gas Cooking
Equipment & Installation $0 $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $100 $0 $113
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($480) $0 ($539)
Electric Resistance vs Gas Clothes Drying
Equipment & Installation $0 $0 $0
Electric Service Upgrade $0 $0 $0
In-House Gas Piping ($580) $0 ($651)
Total ($580) $0 ($651)

3.4 Measure Packages
The Reach Codes Team evaluated three packages for mixed fuel homes and five packages for all-electric homes for each prototype and climate zone, as described below.

1. All-Electric Code Minimum: This package meets all the prescriptive requirements of the 2022 Title 24 Code. In some instances, the prescriptive minimum package did not comply with code and efficiency measures were added to meet minimum compliance requirements. The added efficiency measures can be found in Table 45 and Table 46.

2. Efficiency Only: This package uses only efficiency measures that don’t trigger federal preemption issues including envelope and water heating or duct distribution efficiency measures.

3. Efficiency + NEEA (Preempted): This package was evaluated for the all-electric homes only and shows an alternative design that applies water heating equipment that is more efficient than federal standards meeting the NEEA Tier 3 rating. The Reach Codes Team considers this more reflective of how builders meet above code requirements in practice.

4. Efficiency + PV: Using the Efficiency Package as a starting point, PV capacity was added to offset most of the estimated electricity use. Page 245 of 309
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Prototypes, Measure Packages, and Costs
23 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

5. Efficiency + PV + Battery: Using the Efficiency & PV Package as a starting point, a battery system was added.

For mixed-fuel homes the package of efficiency measures differed from the Efficiency Package in some climate zones to arrive at a cost effective solution.

Page 246 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Results
24 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 4 Results

4.1 2022 Metrics and Compliance
The Reach Codes Team evaluated the compliance impacts of a prescriptive all-electric home as well as a traditional mixed fuel home with four gas appliances (space heating, water heating, cooking, clothes drying). Compliance is relative to the 2022 prescriptive base case home with three gas appliances. The impacts for the single family home and the ADU are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2, respectively. The all-electric single family home prototype is code compliant with both EDR1 (source energy) and efficiency EDR2 (TDV energy) in all climate zones except Climate Zones 15 and 16. In addition to this climate zone, the all-electric ADU is also not compliant in Climate Zones 4 through 10 and 13 through 15. The four gas appliance single family home is presented in Figure 3. This case is not code compliant in any climate zone.

This analysis illustrates a couple of interesting points. One is that the new 2022 compliance metrics are important drivers encouraging electrification. The compliance penalties assessed the four gas appliance home scenarios are significant and will require deep efficiency measures to overcome. Another is that the 2022 Title 24 Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage all-electric construction, providing a compliance benefit, at least in larger homes, that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off and still comply when using the performance method.

Figure 1: Single Family All-Electric Home Compliance Impacts -5
0 5
10 15
20 25
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 EDR Margin
All-ElĞĐƚriĐ WrĞƐĐriƉƟǀĞ
Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 EĸciencǇ)

Page 247 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction Results
25 localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Figure 2: ADU All-Electric Home Compliance Impacts
Figure 3: Single Family Four Gas Appliance Home Compliance Impacts -6
-4
-2
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 EDR Margin
All-Elecƚric WreƐcriƉƟǀe
Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 EĸciencǇ)
-18
-16
-14
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0 2
CZ01 CZ02 CZ03 CZ04 CZ05 CZ06 CZ07 CZ08 CZ09 CZ10 CZ11 CZ12 CZ13 CZ14 CZ15 CZ16 EDR Margin
MiǆeĚ Fuel WreƐcriƉƟǀe, 4 Gas Appliances
Source (EDR1) TDV (EDR2 EĸciencǇ)

Page 248 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 26 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

4.2 All-Electric Code Minimum ResultsTable 16 shows results for the single family all-electric code minimum case compared to the 2022 baseline. This package reflects the prescriptive minimum requirements except in Climate Zones 15 and 16, where efficiency measures were added to meet minimum code compliance. Utility cost savings are negative, indicating an increase in utility costs for the all-electric building, in all cases except in CPAU and SMUD territories. In all cases the incremental cost is negative, which reflects a cost savings for the all-electric building due to eliminating the gas infrastructure costs. The package is cost effective based on TDV in all cases; however, it’s only cost-effective On-Bill in Climate Zones 4 in CPAU territory, 6, 8, 9, 12 in SMUD territory, and 15.

Table 17 shows the all-electric code minimum case results for the ADU. This package reflects the prescriptive minimum requirements except in Climate Zones 4 through 10 and 13 through 16, where efficiency measures were added to meet minimum code compliance. The conclusions related to cost-effectiveness are similar for the ADU as for the single family analysis.A summary of measures included in each package is provided in Appendix 7.3 Summary of Measures by Package. The efficiency measures added to the allelectric package to meet minimum code requirements are described in Table 45 and Table 46.

Page 249 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 27 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 16. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Average
Annual GHG
Reductions
(metric tons)
Utility Cost Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 8.3 -4,628 400 1.5 ($721) ($10,848) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.5 ($5,614) >1 $5,566 CZ02 PGE 5.7 -3,170 247 0.8 ($581) ($10,060) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.5 ($4,826) >1 $5,390 CZ03 PGE 4.7 -2,413 171 0.7 ($510) ($9,954) ($5,136) ($5,116) 0.5 ($4,838) 63.5 $4,414 CZ04 PGE 3.7 -2,233 163 0.7 ($455) ($8,756) ($5,136) ($5,116) 0.6 ($3,641) >1 $4,929 CZ04 CPAU 3.7 -2,233 163 0.7 $21 $3,274 ($9,424) ($9,931) >1 $13,205 >1 $9,217 CZ05 PGE 1.1 -2,123 133 0.4 ($452) ($8,930) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.6 ($3,696) 2.5 $2,776 CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.1 -2,123 133 0.4 ($455) ($9,027) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.6 ($3,793) 2.5 $2,776 CZ06 SCE/SCG 2.5 -1,481 84 0.3 ($269) ($5,120) ($5,288) ($5,234) 1.0 $115 3.2 $3,142 CZ07 SDGE 2.3 -1,328 69 0.2 ($456) ($10,904) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.5 ($5,670) 3.1 $3,081 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.6 -1,331 67 0.2 ($249) ($4,864) ($5,288) ($5,234) 1.1 $371 2.8 $2,951 CZ09 SCE 1.2 -1,513 85 0.3 ($269) ($5,109) ($5,288) ($5,234) 1.0 $126 3.3 $3,179 CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.1 -1,777 107 0.3 ($307) ($5,720) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.9 ($486) 3.5 $3,285 CZ10 SDGE 1.1 -1,777 107 0.3 ($657) ($15,474) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.3 ($10,239) 3.5 $3,285 CZ11 PGE 3.5 -2,934 227 0.7 ($444) ($7,106) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.7 ($1,872) >1 $5,135 CZ12 PGE 4.0 -2,751 213 0.7 ($437) ($7,213) ($5,288) ($5,234) 0.7 ($1,979) >1 $5,002 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.0 -2,751 213 0.7 $58 $4,526 ($5,288) ($5,234) >1 $9,761 >1 $5,002 CZ13 PGE 2.1 -2,099 154 0.6 ($383) ($7,136) ($5,136) ($5,116) 0.7 ($2,021) >1 $4,904 CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.6 -2,301 159 0.6 ($411) ($7,590) ($5,136) ($5,116) 0.7 ($2,475) >1 $4,493 CZ14 SDGE 1.6 -2,301 159 0.6 ($914) ($21,350) ($5,149) ($5,130) 0.2 ($16,219) >1 $4,506 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.6 -944 53 0.2 ($165) ($3,084) ($5,407) ($5,369) 1.7 $2,285 10.3 $4,247 CZ16 PG&E 6.0 -4,314 404 1.5 ($545) ($6,642) ($3,257) ($2,954) 0.4 ($3,687) >1 $3,139

Page 250 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 28 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 17. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Average
Annual GHG
Reductions
(metric tons)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.0 -1,832 114 0.4 ($346) ($6,791) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.4 ($3,834) 1.2 $489 CZ02 PGE 0.4 -1,380 75 0.2 ($353) ($7,539) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.4 ($4,582) 1.2 $403 CZ03 PGE 0.0 -1,665 123 0.5 ($384) ($7,667) ($2,457) ($2,106) 0.3 ($5,560) 2.0 $888 CZ04 PGE 0.2 -1,591 118 0.5 ($351) ($6,970) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.4 ($4,013) 15.9 $2,395 CZ04 CPAU 0.2 -1,591 118 0.5 $42 $3,285 ($3,260) ($2,957) >1 $6,242 15.9 $2,395 CZ05 PGE 0.4 -1,031 49 0.1 ($268) ($5,966) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.5 ($3,009) 1.2 $460 CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.4 -1,031 49 0.1 ($226) ($4,656) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.6 ($1,699) 1.2 $460 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.2 -909 38 0.1 ($215) ($4,435) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.7 ($1,478) 1.4 $666 CZ07 SDGE 0.4 -879 37 0.1 ($384) ($9,528) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.3 ($6,571) 1.4 $771 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.6 -864 36 0.1 ($212) ($4,397) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.7 ($1,489) 1.5 $876 CZ09 SCE 0.6 -901 38 0.1 ($190) ($3,861) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.8 ($953) 1.6 $896 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.4 -962 43 0.1 ($184) ($3,663) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.8 ($755) 1.7 $1,055 CZ10 SDGE 0.4 -962 43 0.1 ($404) ($9,951) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.3 ($7,043) 1.7 $1,055 CZ11 PGE 0.2 -1,322 71 0.2 ($297) ($6,281) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.5 ($3,324) 1.5 $843 CZ12 PGE 0.3 -1,283 69 0.2 ($298) ($6,354) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.5 ($3,397) 1.4 $716 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 0.3 -1,283 69 0.2 ($75) ($1,053) ($3,260) ($2,957) 2.8 $1,904 1.4 $716 CZ13 PGE 0.1 -1,594 112 0.4 ($296) ($5,748) ($3,260) ($2,957) 0.5 ($2,791) 11.3 $2,330 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.4 -1,658 115 0.4 ($282) ($5,107) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.6 ($2,199) 12.6 $2,313 CZ14 SDGE 0.4 -1,658 115 0.4 ($455) ($10,294) ($3,216) ($2,908) 0.3 ($7,386) 12.6 $2,313 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.3 -783 36 0.1 ($146) ($2,872) ($3,216) ($2,908) 1.0 $35 2.3 $1,408 CZ16 PG&E 0.1 -1,807 122 0.4 ($348) ($6,698) ($2,640) ($2,261) 0.3 ($4,437) 1.0 $22

Page 251 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 29 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

4.3 All-Electric Plus Efficiency, PV, and Battery ResultsTable 18 and Table 19 compare cost-effectiveness results for the all-electric packages for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. In all cases the packages are cost effective based on TDV. On-Bill cost effectiveness generally improves with the addition of efficiency measures, improves significantly with an upsized PV system, and then declines again once batteries are added.

Table 18. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All Electric Efficiency All Electric Efficiency + NEEA All Electric Efficiency + PV All Electric Efficiency + PV + Battery On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.7 ($1,256) >1 $8,122 4.0 $2,407 >1 $10,497 2.8 $22,471 1.9 $9,517 1.5 $11,220 1.4 $9,062 CZ02 PGE 0.6 ($1,957) >1 $7,579 1.1 $236 >1 $8,957 3.5 $16,261 2.9 $10,678 1.3 $4,955 1.9 $13,716 CZ03 PGE 0.5 ($3,826) >1 $4,674 0.6 ($1,851) >1 $6,023 3.5 $10,584 2.9 $7,145 0.96 ($685) 1.6 $9,058 CZ04 PGE 0.5 ($3,085) >1 $5,328 0.7 ($1,599) >1 $6,220 3.7 $9,560 3.7 $8,348 0.9 ($1,607) 1.8 $10,519 CZ04 CPAU >1 $12,524 >1 $9,616 >1 $13,328 >1 $10,508 >1 $13,692 >1 $12,636 1.4 $3,815 2.6 $14,807 CZ05 PGE 0.6 ($2,601) 12.6 $3,140 1.1 $363 >1 $5,239 4.9 $11,566 3.3 $6,058 1.0 $583 1.6 $7,976 CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.6 ($2,698) 12.6 $3,140 1.1 $266 >1 $5,239 4.8 $11,469 3.3 $6,058 1.0 $486 1.6 $7,976 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($500) 21.3 $2,785 1.2 $554 >1 $3,582 5.3 $6,705 4.9 $5,331 0.96 ($530) 1.6 $7,663 CZ07 SDGE 0.4 ($5,221) 6.1 $2,929 0.5 ($3,795) >1 $3,706 13.2 $11,129 7.2 $4,840 0.97 ($355) 1.5 $6,158 CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.0 $129 8.8 $3,006 1.4 $1,028 >1 $3,618 10.2 $6,404 10.7 $5,797 0.99 ($82) 1.8 $8,401 CZ09 SCE 0.996 ($14) 102.1 $3,357 1.3 $959 >1 $4,073 8.5 $7,052 8.7 $6,238 1.1 $626 1.9 $10,710 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($403) >1 $3,475 1.2 $668 >1 $4,260 5.5 $7,389 5.5 $6,432 1.1 $1,597 1.7 $7,804 CZ10 SDGE 0.3 ($9,171) >1 $3,475 0.3 ($7,637) >1 $4,260 8.4 $12,063 5.5 $6,432 1.0 $514 1.7 $7,804 CZ11 PGE 1.1 $356 >1 $6,751 2.9 $1,988 >1 $7,863 3.9 $15,570 3.1 $9,509 1.3 $4,736 1.8 $12,035 CZ12 PGE 0.8 ($923) >1 $5,727 1.4 $840 >1 $6,925 3.8 $14,386 2.9 $8,684 1.2 $3,221 1.8 $11,629 CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $8,792 >1 $5,727 >1 $9,445 >1 $6,925 3.2 $11,636 2.9 $8,684 1.1 $1,351 1.8 $11,629 CZ13 PGE 1.0 ($134) >1 $6,391 1.7 $1,204 >1 $7,315 4.5 $12,333 3.9 $8,944 1.1 $1,808 1.9 $12,609 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.96 ($226) >1 $6,168 2.6 $1,429 >1 $7,337 3.5 $11,205 3.8 $10,769 1.4 $6,530 1.9 $13,315 CZ14 SDGE 0.2 ($12,027) >1 $6,181 0.2 ($8,562) >1 $7,350 4.2 $14,424 3.8 $10,782 1.2 $2,882 1.9 $13,328 CZ15 SCE/SCG 3.2 $2,088 >1 $4,185 10.7 $2,739 >1 $4,639 >1 $5,871 >1 $5,572 1.2 $2,471 1.7 $7,367 CZ16 PG&E 0.3 ($2,843) >1 $3,675 0.5 ($1,291) >1 $4,277 3.1 $22,017 1.9 $8,576 1.5 $10,722 1.6 $11,922

Page 252 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 30 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 19. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: All-Electric Energy Efficiency + Additional PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
All Electric Efficiency Only All Electric Efficiency + NEEA All Electric Efficiency + PV All Electric Efficiency + PV + Battery On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.3 ($2,010) >1 $1,155 2.5 $610 >1 $3,162 2.2 $16,861 1.2 $2,976 1.2 $5,286 1.0 $168 CZ02 PGE 0.2 ($4,208) 3.3 $481 0.3 ($2,696) >1 $1,403 2.5 $15,218 1.5 $4,707 1.2 $3,791 1.3 $6,522 CZ03 PGE 0.1 ($6,115) 14.1 $325 0.1 ($4,828) >1 $1,206 2.3 $12,653 1.5 $4,249 1.1 $1,285 1.2 $4,720 CZ04 PGE 0.0 ($5,883) 20.7 $992 0.0 ($4,940) 34.2 $1,672 2.3 $13,081 1.7 $6,179 1.1 $1,797 1.4 $6,977 CZ04 CPAU >1 $3,951 20.7 $992 >1 $4,509 34.2 $1,672 1.7 $6,738 1.7 $6,179 0.8 ($4,973) 1.4 $6,977 CZ05 PGE 0.3 ($4,141) 0.6 ($698) 0.3 ($2,912) 1.3 $222 2.9 $15,238 1.5 $3,921 1.2 $3,903 1.2 $3,473 CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.3 ($2,831) 0.6 ($698) 0.5 ($1,602) 1.3 $222 3.1 $16,548 1.5 $3,921 1.3 $5,212 1.2 $3,473 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.4 ($2,272) 0.996 ($5) 0.5 ($1,672) 1.7 $444 2.6 $11,941 1.8 $5,275 1.1 $2,134 1.3 $5,984 CZ07 SDGE 0.2 ($6,766) 1.0 $4 0.2 ($5,978) 1.7 $435 3.8 $22,595 1.6 $4,364 1.6 $11,005 1.2 $3,943 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.4 ($2,380) 0.98 ($23) 0.4 ($1,832) 1.4 $334 2.5 $12,446 1.9 $6,579 1.2 $2,991 1.4 $7,829 CZ09 SCE 0.4 ($1,858) 1.1 $53 0.5 ($1,255) 1.5 $367 2.6 $12,699 1.9 $6,334 1.2 $3,232 1.5 $9,406 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.5 ($1,556) 1.4 $280 0.6 ($800) 4.9 $828 2.7 $3,430 2.1 $2,156 0.6 ($5,734) 1.2 $2,118 CZ10 SDGE 0.2 ($7,442) 1.4 $280 0.2 ($6,395) 4.9 $828 3.1 $4,264 2.1 $2,156 0.5 ($7,385) 1.2 $2,118 CZ11 PGE 0.3 ($2,749) >1 $1,115 0.4 ($1,634) >1 $1,901 2.1 $3,811 1.8 $2,577 0.5 ($7,415) 1.3 $4,046 CZ12 PGE 0.2 ($3,692) 3.1 $430 0.3 ($2,597) >1 $1,320 2.6 $16,095 1.6 $5,047 1.2 $4,800 1.3 $6,745 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 3.1 $645 3.1 $430 >1 $1,076 >1 $1,320 1.4 $4,399 1.6 $5,047 0.7 ($6,294) 1.3 $6,745 CZ13 PGE 0.0 ($3,425) 17.9 $1,657 0.0 ($2,455) 25.7 $2,419 1.7 $2,505 1.9 $3,158 0.4 ($8,653) 1.4 $5,829 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.0 ($3,402) 4.0 $1,280 0.0 ($2,270) 6.0 $2,097 2.4 $13,741 2.0 $8,807 1.2 $5,041 1.5 $10,045 CZ14 SDGE 0.0 ($7,519) 4.0 $1,280 0.0 ($5,884) 6.0 $2,097 3.8 $28,555 2.0 $8,807 1.8 $16,912 1.5 $10,045 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.0 ($47) >1 $1,212 1.3 $204 >1 $1,264 3.5 $3,155 2.9 $2,387 0.6 ($5,030) 1.3 $3,480 CZ16 PG&E 0.3 ($3,414) 9.9 $748 0.3 ($2,658) >1 $1,580 2.8 $19,246 1.7 $6,200 1.4 $7,856 1.4 $7,321

Page 253 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 31 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

4.4 Mixed Fuel ResultsTable 20 and Table 21 show results for the Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package compared to the 2022 baseline for Single Family and ADU, respectively. This package is cost-effective based on TDV everywhere for the single family prototype. It’s TDV cost-effective in most cases for the ADU with the exception of Climate Zones 1 and 10. The package is cost-effective On-Bill for the single family home only in Climate Zone 1. For the ADU the package is costeffective On-Bill in Climate Zones 1, 2, 5, 7, 9, 12 in PG&E territory, 14, and 16. For the climate zones where there is no PV requirement in the base package, the addition of a new PV system substantially reduced utility costs and the high cost-effectiveness of the PV measure helped to offset the high cost of the battery system.

Table 20. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Average
Annual GHG
Reductions
(metric tons)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 30.0 1,577 118 1.1 $710 $18,829 $9,845 $17,192 1.1 $1,636 1.4 $5,664 CZ02 PGE 13.5 1,264 35 0.7 $419 $10,499 $8,951 $15,899 0.7 ($5,400) 1.4 $6,396 CZ03 PGE 11.2 1,073 7 0.6 $295 $7,072 $7,718 $14,333 0.5 ($7,261) 1.2 $2,956 CZ04 PGE 8.4 912 6 0.5 $244 $5,862 $8,056 $14,763 0.4 ($8,902) 1.2 $3,219 CZ04 CPAU 8.4 912 6 0.5 $159 $3,839 $8,056 $14,763 0.3 ($10,925) 1.2 $3,219 CZ05 PGE 16.8 1,186 43 0.8 $416 $10,571 $8,517 $15,361 0.7 ($4,790) 1.3 $4,171 CZ05 PGE/SCG 16.8 1,186 43 0.8 $394 $9,850 $8,517 $15,361 0.6 ($5,512) 1.3 $4,171 CZ06 SCE/SCG 9.2 894 6 0.5 $370 $8,721 $8,097 $14,780 0.6 ($6,059) 1.2 $3,134 CZ07 SDGE 8.3 841 4 0.5 $358 $9,129 $8,029 $14,709 0.6 ($5,579) 1.1 $1,612 CZ08 SCE/SCG 9.5 783 2 0.5 $381 $8,924 $7,494 $14,074 0.6 ($5,150) 1.3 $3,991 CZ09 SCE 8.6 839 3 0.5 $390 $9,148 $7,509 $14,094 0.6 ($4,946) 1.5 $5,914 CZ10 SCE/SCG 8.3 854 2 0.5 $416 $9,733 $7,139 $13,724 0.7 ($3,990) 1.2 $2,863 CZ10 SDGE 8.3 854 2 0.5 $314 $7,983 $7,139 $13,724 0.6 ($5,741) 1.2 $2,863 CZ11 PGE 11.0 1,034 27 0.7 $398 $9,903 $8,478 $15,286 0.6 ($5,383) 1.4 $5,505 CZ12 PGE 11.0 1,107 23 0.6 $364 $9,006 $8,733 $15,626 0.6 ($6,620) 1.4 $5,074 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 11.0 1,107 23 0.6 $252 $6,354 $8,733 $15,626 0.4 ($9,272) 1.4 $5,074 CZ13 PGE 9.6 1,168 5 0.6 $407 $9,736 $8,713 $15,536 0.6 ($5,801) 1.4 $5,562 CZ14 SCE/SCG 11.2 1,737 6 0.7 $663 $15,570 $9,664 $16,695 0.9 ($1,125) 1.4 $5,435 CZ14 SDGE 11.2 1,737 6 0.7 $403 $10,291 $9,664 $16,695 0.6 ($6,404) 1.4 $5,435 CZ15 SCE/SCG 8.5 532 2 0.5 $486 $11,372 $7,170 $13,536 0.8 ($2,164) 1.3 $3,451 CZ16 PG&E 22.6 1,235 115 1.2 $571 $15,439 $10,780 $18,007 0.9 ($2,568) 1.5 $8,024

Page 254 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 32 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 21. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Efficiency
EDR2
Margin
Annual
Elec
Savings
(kWh)
Annual
Gas
Savings
(therms)
Average
Annual GHG
Reductions
(metric tons)
Utility Cost
Savings Incremental Cost On-Bill TDV
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
First Year
Lifecycle
(2022$)
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 24.3 3,642 79 0.8 $1,211 $29,946 $15,209 $25,617 1.2 $4,329 0.9 ($1,365)CZ02 PGE 14.5 3,451 40 0.6 $1,028 $25,019 $12,944 $22,587 1.1 $2,431 1.2 $4,938 CZ03 PGE 12.1 2,750 2 0.4 $715 $16,948 $11,077 $19,325 0.9 ($2,377) 1.1 $1,349 CZ04 PGE 12.2 2,860 2 0.4 $759 $17,992 $11,523 $19,837 0.9 ($1,845) 1.1 $2,417 CZ04 CPAU 12.2 2,860 2 0.4 $316 $7,490 $11,523 $19,837 0.4 ($12,347) 1.1 $2,417 CZ05 PGE 7.8 3,293 14 0.5 $959 $22,944 $11,409 $20,621 1.1 $2,324 1.1 $1,409 CZ05 PGE/SCG 7.8 3,293 14 0.5 $952 $22,711 $11,409 $20,621 1.1 $2,090 1.1 $1,409 CZ06 SCE/SCG 9.8 3,292 3 0.5 $815 $19,093 $11,028 $20,110 0.9 ($1,017) 1.2 $3,650 CZ07 SDGE 9.1 3,306 1 0.5 $1,172 $29,683 $11,381 $20,583 1.4 $9,100 1.1 $1,603 CZ08 SCE/SCG 10.1 3,527 1 0.5 $887 $20,746 $11,594 $20,867 0.99 ($121) 1.3 $4,990 CZ09 SCE 8.9 3,512 3 0.5 $883 $20,676 $11,361 $20,556 1.0 $120 1.4 $6,682 CZ10 SCE/SCG 9.0 729 7 0.4 $244 $5,806 $7,005 $14,720 0.4 ($8,914) 0.96 ($473)CZ10 SDGE 9.0 729 7 0.4 $206 $5,312 $7,005 $14,720 0.4 ($9,408) 0.96 ($473)CZ11 PGE 13.1 870 36 0.5 $277 $7,182 $8,022 $15,995 0.4 ($8,813) 1.1 $2,192 CZ12 PGE 12.6 3,589 33 0.6 $1,063 $25,738 $12,806 $22,393 1.1 $3,345 1.2 $4,771 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 12.6 3,589 33 0.6 $591 $14,577 $12,806 $22,393 0.7 ($7,816) 1.2 $4,771 CZ13 PGE 12.8 359 1 0.4 $77 $1,846 $7,009 $13,789 0.1 ($11,943) 1.2 $2,069 CZ14 SCE/SCG 14.2 3,624 2 0.5 $909 $21,262 $12,054 $20,466 1.0 $795 1.2 $4,545 CZ14 SDGE 14.2 3,624 2 0.5 $1,292 $32,729 $12,054 $20,466 1.6 $12,263 1.2 $4,545 CZ15 SCE/SCG 11.2 546 0 0.4 $252 $5,891 $6,588 $14,077 0.4 ($8,186) 1.1 $964 CZ16 PG&E 16.2 3,652 87 0.8 $1,178 $29,323 $13,234 $23,007 1.3 $6,316 1.2 $4,937

Page 255 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 33 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 22 and Table 23 compare cost-effectiveness results across all the mixed fuel packages for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. The single family Efficiency Only package and Efficiency + PV package are cost effective based on On-Bill and TDV under most scenarios. The trends are similar for the ADU except the Efficiency Only package is not cost effective in many climate zones.

Table 22. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Packages ClimateZone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Mixed Fuel Efficiency Only Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 2.8 $3,619 2.7 $3,160 2.4 $8,979 1.6 $3,526 1.1 $1,636 1.4 $5,664 CZ02 PGE 2.0 $1,940 2.5 $2,664 2.2 $5,608 1.8 $3,565 0.7 ($5,400) 1.4 $6,396 CZ03 PGE 1.1 $226 0.97 ($56) 1.6 $2,688 1.2 $602 0.5 ($7,261) 1.2 $2,956 CZ04 PGE 0.8 ($379) 1.1 $107 1.4 $1,493 1.2 $862 0.4 ($8,902) 1.2 $3,219 CZ04 CPAU 0.5 ($1,159) 1.1 $107 0.8 ($910) 1.2 $862 0.3 ($10,925) 1.2 $3,219 CZ05 PGE 1.4 $516 1.3 $300 2.1 $4,449 1.4 $1,359 0.7 ($4,790) 1.3 $4,171 CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.2 $303 1.3 $300 2.1 $4,235 1.4 $1,359 0.6 ($5,512) 1.3 $4,171 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.6 ($696) 0.9 ($180) 1.5 $1,950 1.2 $757 0.6 ($6,059) 1.2 $3,134 CZ07 SDGE 1.3 $395 0.97 ($36) 2.9 $5,981 1.3 $697 0.6 ($5,579) 1.1 $1,612 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.8 ($238) 1.1 $103 1.7 $2,013 1.4 $1,099 0.6 ($5,150) 1.3 $3,991 CZ09 SCE 0.9 ($148) 1.2 $250 1.8 $2,266 1.5 $1,229 0.6 ($4,946) 1.5 $5,914 CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.0 $5 1.2 $263 1.7 $2,323 1.4 $1,140 0.7 ($3,990) 1.2 $2,863 CZ10 SDGE 1.6 $960 1.2 $263 2.6 $5,010 1.4 $1,140 0.6 ($5,741) 1.2 $2,863 CZ11 PGE 2.0 $2,242 2.1 $2,187 2.2 $5,142 1.8 $2,824 0.6 ($5,383) 1.4 $5,505 CZ12 PGE 1.4 $949 1.6 $1,207 1.9 $4,150 1.5 $2,039 0.6 ($6,620) 1.4 $5,074 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 1.1 $131 1.6 $1,207 1.2 $933 1.5 $2,039 0.4 ($9,272) 1.4 $5,074 CZ13 PGE 1.5 $1,236 1.5 $1,160 2.0 $4,442 1.5 $1,821 0.6 ($5,801) 1.4 $5,562 CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.3 $981 1.5 $1,290 1.9 $4,917 1.6 $2,877 0.9 ($1,125) 1.4 $5,435 CZ14 SDGE 2.3 $4,109 1.5 $1,290 1.9 $4,753 1.6 $2,877 0.6 ($6,404) 1.4 $5,435 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.7 $1,534 1.7 $1,444 1.7 $1,653 1.7 $1,465 0.8 ($2,164) 1.3 $3,451 CZ16 PG&E 1.8 $3,124 2.2 $4,123 2.2 $8,324 1.9 $5,419 0.9 ($2,568) 1.5 $8,024

Page 256 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 34 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 23. ADU Cost-Effectiveness: Mixed Fuel Packages
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Mixed Fuel Efficiency Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 1.6 $1,228 1.3 $616 2.1 $15,985 1.2 $2,051 1.2 $4,329 0.9 ($1,365)CZ02 PGE 0.7 ($634) 1.1 $148 2.3 $13,934 1.4 $3,499 1.1 $2,431 1.2 $4,938 CZ03 PGE 0.6 ($666) 0.7 ($475) 2.2 $9,045 1.3 $1,856 0.9 ($2,377) 1.1 $1,349 CZ04 PGE 0.5 ($941) 0.7 ($515) 2.1 $9,487 1.4 $2,679 0.9 ($1,845) 1.1 $2,417 CZ04 CPAU 0.3 ($1,507) 0.7 ($515) 0.99 ($115) 1.4 $2,679 0.4 ($12,347) 1.1 $2,417 CZ05 PGE 0.7 ($456) 0.2 ($1,141) 2.5 $13,761 1.3 $2,473 1.1 $2,324 1.1 $1,409 CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.5 ($689) 0.2 ($1,141) 2.5 $13,528 1.3 $2,473 1.1 $2,090 1.1 $1,409 CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.3 ($976) 0.6 ($638) 2.1 $9,282 1.5 $3,477 0.9 ($1,017) 1.2 $3,650 CZ07 SDGE 0.4 ($830) 0.5 ($717) 3.3 $20,716 1.3 $2,676 1.4 $9,100 1.1 $1,603 CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.3 ($1,069) 0.4 ($819) 2.1 $10,035 1.5 $4,415 0.99 ($121) 1.3 $4,990 CZ09 SCE 0.3 ($1,024) 0.5 ($780) 2.1 $10,242 1.5 $4,195 1.0 $120 1.4 $6,682 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.4 ($1,004) 0.5 ($750) 1.4 $1,118 1.0 $71 0.4 ($8,914) 0.96 ($473)CZ10 SDGE 1.5 $721 0.5 ($750) 1.7 $2,230 1.0 $71 0.4 ($9,408) 0.96 ($473)CZ11 PGE 1.0 ($11) 1.2 $316 1.6 $2,473 1.3 $1,064 0.4 ($8,813) 1.1 $2,192 CZ12 PGE 0.6 ($761) 0.9 ($224) 2.4 $14,704 1.4 $3,458 1.1 $3,345 1.2 $4,771 CZ12 SMUD/PGE 1.0 ($70) 0.9 ($224) 1.3 $2,975 1.4 $3,458 0.7 ($7,816) 1.2 $4,771 CZ13 PGE 0.6 ($850) 1.1 $206 0.6 ($807) 1.1 $240 0.1 ($11,943) 1.2 $2,069 CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.0 $20 1.0 $107 2.2 $10,862 1.6 $4,977 1.0 $795 1.2 $4,545 CZ14 SDGE 1.5 $1,310 1.0 $107 3.7 $23,840 1.6 $4,977 1.6 $12,263 1.2 $4,545 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.2 $411 1.1 $205 1.4 $916 1.2 $388 0.4 ($8,186) 1.1 $964 CZ16 PG&E 0.7 ($456) 1.0 $52 2.6 $17,779 1.4 $4,505 1.3 $6,316 1.2 $4,937

4.5 CARE Rate ComparisonTable 24 and Table 25 present a comparison of On-Bill cost-effectiveness results for CARE tariffs relative to standard tariffs. The all-electric code minimum package for the single family and ADU prototypes is shown in Table 24. Applying the CARE rates lowers both electric and gas utility bills for the consumer and the net impact is lower overall bills for an all-electric home and improved cost-effectiveness relative to the standard tariffs. The opposite trend occurs for the mixed fuel packages shown in Table 25 where the CARE rate lowers utility cost savings and the benefit-to-cost ratios decline.

Page 257 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 35 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 24. On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: All-Electric Code Minimum Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.5 ($5,614) 0.8 ($997) 0.4 ($3,834) 0.7 ($1,505)CZ02 PGE 0.5 ($4,826) 0.8 ($1,281) 0.4 ($4,582) 0.6 ($2,146)CZ03 PGE 0.5 ($4,838) 0.8 ($924) 0.3 ($5,560) 0.4 ($2,733)CZ04 PGE 0.6 ($3,641) 0.96 ($215) 0.4 ($4,013) 0.7 ($1,465)CZ04 CPAU >1 $13,205 >1 $9,931 >1 $6,242 >1 $2,957 CZ05 PGE 0.6 ($3,696) 0.9 ($647) 0.5 ($3,009) 0.7 ($1,158)CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.6 ($3,793) 1.1 $444 0.6 ($1,699) 1.1 $243 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.0 $115 1.6 $1,984 0.7 ($1,478) 0.97 ($98)CZ07 SDGE 0.5 ($5,670) 0.8 ($1,636) 0.3 ($6,571) 0.5 ($3,441)CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.1 $371 1.7 $2,073 0.7 ($1,489) 0.95 ($139)CZ09 SCE 1.0 $126 1.6 $2,001 0.8 ($953) 1.1 $261 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($486) 1.5 $1,703 0.8 ($755) 1.2 $433 CZ10 SDGE 0.3 ($10,239) 0.5 ($4,330) 0.3 ($7,043) 0.4 ($3,645)CZ11 PGE 0.7 ($1,872) 1.1 $568 0.5 ($3,324) 0.7 ($1,344)CZ12 PGE 0.7 ($1,979) 1.1 $457 0.5 ($3,397) 0.7 ($1,395)CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $9,761 >1 $12,640 2.8 $1,904 >1 $4,281CZ13 PGE 0.7 ($2,021) 1.2 $783 0.5 ($2,791) 0.7 ($991)CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.7 ($2,475) 1.1 $505 0.6 ($2,199) 0.9 ($222)CZ14 SDGE 0.2 ($16,219) 0.4 ($7,861) 0.3 ($7,386) 0.5 ($3,249)CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,285 2.6 $3,330 1.0 $35 1.5 $927 CZ16 PG&E 0.4 ($3,687) 0.8 ($825) 0.3 ($4,437) 0.5 ($2,157)

Page 258 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 36 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 25. On-Bill Cost-Effectiveness with CARE Tariffs: Mixed Fuel Efficiency+ PV+ Battery Package Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Standard CARE Standard CARE
B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 1.1 $1,636 0.7 ($4,574) 1.2 $4,329 0.7 ($6,549)CZ02 PGE 0.7 ($5,400) 0.4 ($8,958) 1.1 $2,431 0.7 ($6,728)CZ03 PGE 0.5 ($7,261) 0.3 ($9,524) 0.9 ($2,377) 0.6 ($8,471)CZ04 PGE 0.4 ($8,902) 0.3 ($10,706) 0.9 ($1,845) 0.6 ($8,329)CZ04 CPAU 0.3 ($10,925) 0.0 ($14,763) 0.4 ($12,347) 0.0 ($19,837)CZ05 PGE 0.7 ($4,790) 0.5 ($8,377) 1.1 $2,324 0.7 ($6,030)CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.6 ($5,512) 0.4 ($8,540) 1.1 $2,090 0.7 ($6,067)CZ06 SCE/SCG 0.6 ($6,059) 0.3 ($9,638) 0.9 ($1,017) 0.6 ($8,203)CZ07 SDGE 0.6 ($5,579) 0.5 ($7,676) 1.4 $9,100 0.96 ($836)CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.6 ($5,150) 0.4 ($8,775) 0.99 ($121) 0.6 ($7,852)CZ09 SCE 0.6 ($4,946) 0.4 ($8,642) 1.0 $120 0.6 ($7,580)CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.7 ($3,990) 0.4 ($7,862) 0.4 ($8,914) 0.2 ($11,587)CZ10 SDGE 0.6 ($5,741) 0.5 ($7,396) 0.4 ($9,408) 0.3 ($10,388)CZ11 PGE 0.6 ($5,383) 0.4 ($8,671) 0.4 ($8,813) 0.3 ($11,145)CZ12 PGE 0.6 ($6,620) 0.4 ($9,617) 1.1 $3,345 0.7 ($6,094)CZ12 SMUD/PGE 0.4 ($9,272) 0.1 ($14,636) 0.7 ($7,816) 0.1 ($20,989)CZ13 PGE 0.6 ($5,801) 0.4 ($9,016) 0.1 ($11,943) 0.1 ($12,502)CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($1,125) 0.6 ($6,889) 1.0 $795 0.7 ($7,099)CZ14 SDGE 0.6 ($6,404) 0.5 ($8,940) 1.6 $12,263 1.1 $1,271 CZ15 SCE/SCG 0.8 ($2,164) 0.5 ($6,384) 0.4 ($8,186) 0.2 ($10,846)CZ16 PG&E 0.9 ($2,568) 0.6 ($7,747) 1.3 $6,316 0.8 ($4,356)

4.6 Utility Infrastructure Cost SensitivityTable 26 compares cost effectiveness results for the three natural gas service line extension cost scenarios presented in Table 8. The average cost scenario reflects the costs applied in the results presented in the prior sections (Table 16). The gas infrastructure cost savings are lower for the new subdivision case and higher for the infill development case. For the latter, the all-electric home is On-Bill cost-effective in all climate zones except Climate Zones 1, 2, 10 in SDG&E territory, and 14 in SDG&E territory. Table 27 presents the impact on On-Bill cost-effectiveness if the subsidies currently allowed under the utility gas main extension rules were removed per a recent CPUC Proposed Decision (see discussion in Section 3.3.2). If the subsidies were removed On-Bill cost-effectiveness improves but only enough to change the outcome in one case, Climate Zones 10 in SoCalGas territory.

Page 259 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 37 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 26. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness Comparison with Range of Natural Gas Utility Infrastructure Costs:

All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Average New Subdivision Infill Development
On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV On-Bill TDV
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV CZ01 PGE 0.5 ($5,614) >1 $5,566 0.4 ($6,838) >1 $4,476 0.9 ($718) >1 $9,926 CZ02 PGE 0.5 ($4,826) >1 $5,390 0.4 ($6,050) >1 $4,300 1.0 $70 >1 $9,750 CZ03 PGE 0.5 ($4,838) 63.5 $4,414 0.4 ($6,062) 48.1 $3,324 1.0 $57 125.3 $8,774 CZ04 PGE 0.6 ($3,641) >1 $4,929 0.4 ($4,865) >1 $3,839 1.1 $1,255 >1 $9,289 CZ04 CPAU >1 $13,205 >1 $9,217 >1 $13,205 >1 $9,217 >1 $13,205 >1 $9,217 CZ05 PGE 0.6 ($3,696) 2.5 $2,776 0.4 ($4,920) 1.9 $1,686 1.1 $1,200 4.9 $7,136 CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.6 ($3,793) 2.5 $2,776 0.4 ($5,017) 1.9 $1,686 1.1 $1,103 4.9 $7,136 CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.0 $115 3.2 $3,142 0.8 ($1,109) 2.4 $2,052 2.0 $5,011 6.2 $7,502 CZ07 SDGE 0.5 ($5,670) 3.1 $3,081 0.4 ($6,894) 2.3 $1,991 0.9 ($774) 6.0 $7,441 CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.1 $371 2.8 $2,951 0.8 ($853) 2.1 $1,861 2.1 $5,266 5.5 $7,311 CZ09 SCE 1.0 $126 3.3 $3,179 0.8 ($1,098) 2.5 $2,089 2.0 $5,022 6.4 $7,539 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($486) 3.5 $3,285 0.7 ($1,710) 2.7 $2,195 1.8 $4,410 6.9 $7,645 CZ10 SDGE 0.3 ($10,239) 3.5 $3,285 0.3 ($11,463) 2.7 $2,195 0.7 ($5,344) 6.9 $7,645 CZ11 PGE 0.7 ($1,872) >1 $5,135 0.6 ($3,096) >1 $4,045 1.4 $3,024 >1 $9,495 CZ12 PGE 0.7 ($1,979) >1 $5,002 0.6 ($3,203) >1 $3,912 1.4 $2,917 >1 $9,362 CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $9,761 >1 $5,002 >1 $8,537 >1 $3,912 >1 $14,656 >1 $9,362 CZ13 PGE 0.7 ($2,021) >1 $4,904 0.5 ($3,245) >1 $3,814 1.4 $2,875 >1 $9,264 CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.7 ($2,475) >1 $4,493 0.5 ($3,699) >1 $3,403 1.3 $2,421 >1 $8,853 CZ14 SDGE 0.2 ($16,219) >1 $4,506 0.2 ($17,443) >1 $3,416 0.5 ($11,323) >1 $8,866 CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,285 10.3 $4,247 1.3 $1,061 7.9 $3,157 3.3 $7,181 19.8 $8,607 CZ16 PG&E 0.4 ($3,687) >1 $3,139 0.3 ($4,911) >1 $2,049 1.2 $1,208 >1 $7,499

Page 260 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 38 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 27. Single Family Cost-Effectiveness On-Bill Impact of CPUC Proposed Decision on Gas Line Extension Allowances:

All-Electric Code Minimum
Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
No Allowances
With Allowance No Allowances
B/C
Ratio NPV B/C Ratio NPV
CZ01 PGE 0.5 ($5,614) 0.6 ($4,469)CZ02 PGE 0.5 ($4,826) 0.6 ($3,681)CZ03 PGE 0.5 ($4,838) 0.6 ($3,693)CZ04 PGE 0.6 ($3,641) 0.7 ($2,495)CZ04 CPAU >1 $13,205 >1 $13,205 CZ05 PGE 0.6 ($3,696) 0.7 ($2,551)CZ05 PGE/SCG 0.6 ($3,793) 0.7 ($2,647)CZ06 SCE/SCG 1.0 $115 1.2 $1,260 CZ07 SDGE 0.5 ($5,670) 0.6 ($4,524)CZ08 SCE/SCG 1.1 $371 1.3 $1,516 CZ09 SCE 1.0 $126 1.2 $1,271 CZ10 SCE/SCG 0.9 ($486) 1.1 $660 CZ10 SDGE 0.3 ($10,239) 0.4 ($9,094)CZ11 PGE 0.7 ($1,872) 0.9 ($726)CZ12 PGE 0.7 ($1,979) 0.9 ($834)CZ12 SMUD/PGE >1 $9,761 >1 $10,906CZ13 PGE 0.7 ($2,021) 0.9 ($875)CZ14 SCE/SCG 0.7 ($2,475) 0.8 ($1,329)CZ14 SDGE 0.2 ($16,219) 0.3 ($15,088)CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.7 $2,285 2.1 $3,430CZ16 PG&E 0.4 ($3,687) 0.6 ($2,542)

4.7 Greenhouse Gas ReductionsTable 28 and Table 29 present greenhouse gas reductions for the single family and ADU prototypes, respectively. Savings represent average annual savings over the 30-year lifetime of the analysis. Greenhouse gas reductions are greatest for the all-electric Efficiency + PV + Battery package in all cases. For the single family homes, the all-electric code minimum case reduces greenhouse gas emissions as much or greater than the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package in Climate Zones 1 through 4, 11, 12, 13, and 16. The trend differs for the ADU where the mixed fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery package results in more greenhouse gas savings than the all-electric code minimum in all climate zones except Climate Zones 3, 4, and 13.

Page 261 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 39 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 28: Single Family Greenhouse Gas Reductions (metric tons) Climate
Zone
Single Family All-Electric Single Family Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency
+ NEEA
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.2 0.4 0.5 1.1CZ02 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.7CZ03 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.6CZ04 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.8 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.5CZ05 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.8CZ06 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.5CZ07 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.5CZ08 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.5CZ09 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.5CZ10 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.5CZ11 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.7CZ12 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.6CZ13 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.8 1.3 0.1 0.1 0.6CZ14 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.4 0.2 0.2 0.7CZ15 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.5CZ16 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.3 0.7 0.8 1.2

Page 262 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 40 Results
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 29 ADU Greenhouse Gas Savings (metric tons)
Climate
Zone
ADU All-Electric ADU Mixed Fuel
Code
Minimum
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency
+ NEEA
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
Efficiency
Only
Efficiency
+ PV
Efficiency
+ PV +
Battery
CZ01 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.4 0.5 0.8CZ02 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.2 0.3 0.6CZ03 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 0.1 0.1 0.4CZ04 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.0 0.1 0.4CZ05 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.5CZ06 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.5CZ07 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.5CZ08 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.5CZ09 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.7 0.0 0.2 0.5CZ10 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.1 0.4CZ11 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.5CZ12 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.1 0.3 0.6CZ13 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.4CZ14 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.5CZ15 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.4CZ16 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.0 0.4 0.5 0.8

Page 263 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 41 Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 5 Summary
The Reach Codes Team identified packages of energy efficiency measures as well as packages combining energy efficiency with solar PV generation and battery storage, simulated them in building modeling software, and gathered costs to determine the cost-effectiveness of multiple scenarios. The Reach Codes Team coordinated with multiple utilities, cities, and building community experts to develop a set of assumptions considered reasonable in the current market. Changing assumptions, such as the period of analysis, measure selection, cost assumptions, energy escalation rates, or utility tariffs are likely to change results.

Table 30 (all-electric) and Table 31 (mixed fuel) summarize results for each prototype and depicts the efficiency EDR2 compliance margins achieved for each climate zone and package. Because local reach codes must both exceed the Energy Commission performance budget (i.e., have a positive compliance margin) and be cost-effective, the Reach Codes Team highlighted cells meeting these two requirements to help clarify the upper boundary for potential reach code policies. All results presented in this study have a positive compliance margin. x Cells highlighted in green depict a positive compliance margin and cost-effective results using both On-Bill and TDV approaches.
x Cells highlighted in yellow depict a positive compliance and cost-effective results using either the On-Bill or TDV approach.
x Cells not highlighted depict a package that was not cost effective using either the On-Bill or TDV approach.

Following are key takeaways and recommendations from the analysis. x All-electric packages have lower GHG emissions than mixed-fuel packages in all cases, due to the clean power sources currently available from California’s power providers. x The Reach Codes Team found all-electric new construction to be feasible and cost effective based on TDV in all cases. In many cases all-electric code minimum construction results in an increase in utility costs and is not cost-effective On-Bill. Some exceptions include the SMUD and CPAU territories where lower electricity rates relative to gas rates result in lower overall utility bills. x The 2022 Title 24 Code’s new source energy metric combined with the heat pump baseline encourage allelectric construction, providing an incentive that allows for some amount of prescriptively required building efficiency to be traded off. This compliance benefit for all-electric homes highlights a unique opportunity for jurisdictions to incorporate efficiency into all-electric reach codes. Efficiency and electrification have symbiotic benefits and are both critical for decarbonization of buildings. As demand on the electric grid is increased through electrification, efficiency can reduce the negative impacts of additional electricity demand on the grid, reducing the need for increased generation and storage capacity, as well as the need to upgrade upstream transmission and distribution equipment. The Reach Codes Team recommends that jurisdictions adopting an all-electric reach code for single family buildings also include an efficiency requirement with EDR2 margins consistent with the all-electric code minimum package results in Table 30. x The code compliance margins for the ADU all-electric code minimum package are lower than for the single family prototype and code compliance can be more challenging for smaller dwelling units. As a result, the Reach Codes Team does not recommend an additional efficiency requirement for all-electric ADU ordinances. x Electrification combined with increased PV capacity results in utility cost savings and was found to be On-Bill cost effective in all cases. These results were based on today’s net energy metering rules and do not account for future changes to utility agreements, which are expected to decrease the value of PV to the consumer. x For jurisdictions interested in a reach code that allows for mixed fuel buildings the mixed fuel efficiency, PV, and battery package was found to be cost effective based on TDV in all cases. Cost effectiveness was marginal because of the high cost of the battery system. EDR2 margins ranged from 7 to 30 for the costeffective packages as is shown in Table 31. x Applying the CARE rates has the overall impact to increase utility cost savings for an all-electric building compared to a code compliant mixed fuel building, improving On-Bill cost-effectiveness. Page 264 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 42 Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Local jurisdictions may also adopt ordinances that amend different Parts of the California Building Standards Code or may elect to amend other state or municipal codes. The decision regarding which code to amend will determine the specific requirements that must be followed for an ordinance to be legally enforceable. Reach codes that amend Part 6 of the CA Building Code and require energy performance beyond state code minimums must demonstrate the proposed changes are cost-effective and obtain approval from the Energy Commission.

Table 30. Summary of All-Electric Efficiency EDR2 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
Code Min EE EE+PV EE+PV/B Code Min EE EE+PV EE+PV/B
CZ01 PGE 8.3 18.8 18.8 29.6 0.0 15.1 15.1 24.6
CZ02 PGE 5.7 13.5 13.5 19.1 0.4 9.5 9.5 14.6
CZ03 PGE 4.7 10.5 10.5 15.8 0.0 5.7 5.7 10.5
CZ04 PGE 3.7 8.6 8.6 13.5 0.2 6.3 6.3 10.8
CZ04 CPAU 3.7 8.6 8.6 13.5 0.2 6.3 6.3 10.8
CZ05 PGE 1.1 6.1 6.1 14.3 0.4 2.4 2.4 7.9
CZ05 PGE/SCG 1.1 6.1 6.1 14.3 0.4 2.4 2.4 7.9
CZ06 SCE/SCG 2.5 7.8 7.8 11.6 0.2 6.2 6.2 9.8
CZ07 SDGE 2.3 7.0 7.0 9.9 0.4 6.3 6.3 9.1
CZ08 SCE/SCG 0.6 4.0 4.0 10.4 0.6 3.6 3.6 10.0
CZ09 SCE 1.2 4.6 4.6 9.9 0.6 3.7 3.7 8.8
CZ10 SCE/SCG 1.1 4.6 4.6 10.1 0.4 3.8 3.8 9.1
CZ10 SDGE 1.1 4.6 4.6 10.1 0.4 3.8 3.8 9.1
CZ11 PGE 3.5 8.4 8.4 14.1 0.2 7.7 7.7 13.2
CZ12 PGE 4.0 8.5 8.5 14.7 0.3 6.8 6.8 12.6
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 4.0 8.5 8.5 14.7 0.3 6.8 6.8 12.6
CZ13 PGE 2.1 6.8 6.8 12.0 0.1 6.8 6.8 11.9
CZ14 SCE/SCG 1.6 7.9 7.9 13.2 0.4 7.3 7.3 12.4
CZ14 SDGE 1.6 7.9 7.9 13.2 0.4 7.3 7.3 12.4
CZ15 SCE/SCG 1.6 4.2 4.2 8.6 1.3 6.5 6.5 11.1
CZ16 PG&E 6.0 9.7 9.7 18.1 0.1 8.8 8.8 16.4

Page 265 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 43 Summary
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 31. Summary of Mixed Fuel Efficiency EDR2 Margins and Cost-Effectiveness Climate
Zone
Electric
/Gas Utility
Single Family ADU
EE EE+PV EE+PV/B EE EE+PV EE+PV/B
CZ01 PGE 12.0 12.0 30.0 14.9 14.9 24.3
CZ02 PGE 8.8 8.8 13.5 9.4 9.4 14.5
CZ03 PGE 5.7 5.7 11.2 6.3 6.3 12.1
CZ04 PGE 4.8 4.8 8.4 6.7 6.7 12.2
CZ04 CPAU 4.8 4.8 8.4 6.7 6.7 12.2
CZ05 PGE 4.8 4.8 16.8 2.3 2.3 7.8
CZ05 PGE/SCG 4.8 4.8 16.8 2.3 2.3 7.8
CZ06 SCE/SCG 6.1 6.1 9.2 6.1 6.1 9.8
CZ07 SDGE 5.5 5.5 8.3 6.3 6.3 9.1
CZ08 SCE/SCG 3.5 3.5 9.5 3.6 3.6 10.1
CZ09 SCE 3.6 3.6 8.6 3.7 3.7 8.9
CZ10 SCE/SCG 3.7 3.7 8.3 3.8 3.8 9.0
CZ10 SDGE 3.7 3.7 8.3 3.8 3.8 9.0
CZ11 PGE 5.7 5.7 11.0 7.5 7.5 13.1
CZ12 PGE 5.3 5.3 11.0 6.8 6.8 12.6
CZ12 SMUD/PGE 5.3 5.3 11.0 6.8 6.8 12.6
CZ13 PGE 4.7 4.7 9.6 7.2 7.2 12.8
CZ14 SCE/SCG 6.2 6.2 11.2 8.5 8.5 14.2
CZ14 SDGE 6.2 6.2 11.2 8.5 8.5 14.2
CZ15 SCE/SCG 4.3 4.3 8.5 6.6 6.6 11.2
CZ16 PG&E 14.9 14.9 22.6 8.7 8.7 16.2

Page 266 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 44 References
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 6 References
Barbose, G., Darghouth, N., O'Shaughnessy, E., & Forrester, S. (2021, October). Tracking the Sun. Pricing and Design Trends for Distributed Photovoltaic Systems in the United States 2021 Edition. Retrieved from https://emp.lbl.gov/tracking-the-sun
California Energy Commission. (2017). Rooftop Solar PV System. Measure number: 2019-Res-PV-D Prepared by Energy and Environmental Economics, Inc. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/getdocument.aspx?tn=221366 California Energy Commission. (2018). 2019 Alternative Calculation Method Approval Manual for the 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2018/2019-alternativecalculation-method-approval-manual-2019-building-energy California Energy Commission. (2021a). Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to 2022 Title 24, Part 1 and Part 6.

Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21-BSTD-01 California Energy Commission. (2021b). Final Express Terms for the Proposed Revisions to the 2022 Energy Code Reference Appendices. Retrieved from https://efiling.energy.ca.gov/Lists/DocketLog.aspx?docketnumber=21- BSTD-01
California Energy Commission. (2022, Feb). 2022 Single-Family Residential Alternative Calculation Method Reference Manual. Retrieved from https://www.energy.ca.gov/publications/2022/2022-single-family-residentialalternative-calculation-method-reference-manual California Public Utilities Commission. (2021a). Utility Costs and Affordability of the Grid of the Future: An Evaluation of Electric Costs, Rates, and Equity Issues Pursuant to P.U. Code Section 913.1. Retrieved from https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/office-of-governmental-affairsdivision/reports/2021/senate-bill-695-report-2021-and-en-banc-whitepaper_final_04302021.pdf California Public Utilities Commission. (2021b). Database for Energy-Efficient resources (DEER2021 Update). Retrieved April 13, 2021, from http://www.deeresources.com/index.php/deer-versions/deer2021 California Public Utilities Commission. (2022). Proposed Decision of Commissioner Rechtschaffen: PHASE III DECISION

ELIMINATING GAS LINE EXTENSION ALLOWANCES, TEN-YEAR REFUNDABLE PAYMENT OPTION, AND FIFTY PERCENT DISCOUNT PAYMENT OPTION UNDER GAS LINE EXTENSION RULES.

E-CFR. (2020). https://www.ecfr.gov/cgibin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM L#se10.3.431_197. Retrieved from Electronic Code of Federal Regulations: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgibin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=8de751f141aaa1c1c9833b36156faf67&mc=true&n=pt10.3.431&r=PART&ty=HTM L#se10.3.431_197
Energy & Environmental Economics. (2019). Residential Building Electrification in California. Retrieved from https://www.ethree.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf Energy + Environmental Economics. (2020). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Efficiency Standards: 2022 Time Dependent Valuation (TDV) and Source Energy Metric Data Sources and Inputs.

E-Source companies. (2020). Behind-the-Meter Battery Market Study. Prepared for San Diego Gas & Electric.

Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/behind-meter-battery-market-study?dl=1582149166 Horii, B., Cutter, E., Kapur, N., Arent, J., & Conotyannis, D. (2014). Time Dependent Valuation of Energy for Developing Building Energy Efficiency Standards.

Proctor, J., Wilcox, B., & Chitwood, R. (2018). Central Valley Research Homes Project. California Energy Commission.

Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342135376_Central_Valley_Research_Homes_Project_-- _Final_CEC_Report Page 267 of 309
Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 45 References
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Statewide CASE Team. (2017). Residential High Performance Windows & Doors Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2019 California Energy Code. Retrieved from http://title24stakeholders.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/09/2019-T24-CASE-Report_Res-Windows-and-Doors_Final_September-2017.pdf Statewide CASE Team. (2018). Energy Savings Potential and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High Efficiency Windows in California. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://www.etcc-ca.com/reports/energy-savingspotential-and-cost-effectiveness-analysis-high-efficiency-windows-california Statewide CASE Team. (2020a). Nonresidential High Performance Envelope Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Energy Solutions. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/2020-T24-NR-HP-Envelope-Final-CASEReport.pdf Statewide CASE Team. (2020b). Residential Energy Savings and Process Improvements for Additions and Alterations Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://title24stakeholders.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/SF-Additions-andAlterations_Final_-CASE-Report_Statewide-CASE-Team.pdf Statewide CASE Team. (2020c). Multifamily All-Electric Codes and Standards Enhancement (CASE) Initiative 2022 California Energy Code. Prepared by TRC.

Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2019, August). 2019 Cost-effectiveness Study: Low-Rise Residential New Construction.

Prepared for Pacific Gas and Electric Company. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from https://localenergycodes.com/download/800/file_path/fieldList/2019%20Res%20NC%20Reach%20Codes Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021a). Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Batteries in Single Family Homes. Prepared by Frontier Energy. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/930/file_path/fieldList/Single%20Family%20Battery%20Costeff%20Report.pdf Statewide Reach Codes Team. (2021b). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling Units. Prepared by TRC. Retrieved from
https://localenergycodes.com/download/760/file_path/fieldList/2019%20New%20Detached%20ADUs%20Co st-effectiveness%20Report.pdf
TRC, P. E. (2021). 2020 Reach Code Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Detached Accessory Dwelling Units.

UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation. (2021). Implementing the Backyard Revolution: Perspectives of California’s ADU Owners.

Page 268 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 46 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 7 Appendices

7.1 Map of California Climate Zones
Climate zone geographical boundaries are depicted in Figure 4. The map in Figure 4 along with a zip-code search directory is available at: https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/maps/renewable/building_climate_zones.html Figure 4. Map of California climate zones.

Page 269 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 47 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2 Utility Rate Schedules
The Reach Codes Team used the CA IOU and POU rate tariffs detailed below to determine the On-Bill savings for each package. The California Climate Credit was applied for both electricity and natural gas service for the IOUs using the 2022 credits shows below. 15 The credits were applied to reduce the total calculated annual bill, including any fixed fees or minimum bill amounts.

7.2.1 Pacific Gas & Electric
The following pages provide details on the PG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 32 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.0362 / kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between April 2021 and March 2022.
15 https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/natural-gas/greenhouse-gas-cap-and-trade-program/californiaclimate-credit

Page 270 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 48 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 32: PG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ01 V
CZ02 X
CZ03 T
CZ04 X
CZ05 T
CZ11 R
CZ12 S
CZ13 R
CZ16 Y
The PG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis for the 12-month period ending August 2021 according to the rates shown in Table 33. The corresponding CARE rates are shown in Table 34.

Table 33: PG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
Jan 2022 $0.76338 $1.33589 $1.79545 $2.09927 $2.55883
Feb 2022 $0.73412 $1.33589 $1.79545 $2.07001 $2.52957
Mar 2022 $0.61773 $1.33589 $1.79545 $1.95362 $2.41318
Apr 2021 $0.22304 $1.19868 $1.68034 $1.42172 $1.90338
May 2021 $0.21063 $1.19868 $1.68034 $1.40931 $1.89097
June 2021 $0.21778 $1.20019 $1.68243 $1.41797 $1.90021
July 2021 $0.19109 $1.20019 $1.68243 $1.39128 $1.87352
Aug 2021 $0.22551 $1.20019 $1.68243 $1.4257 $1.90794
Sept 2021 $0.44379 $1.20019 $1.68243 $1.64398 $2.12622
Oct 2021 $0.68120 $1.20019 $1.68243 $1.88139 $2.36363
Nov 2021 $0.81218 $1.20019 $1.68243 $2.01237 $2.49461
Dec 2021 $0.82555 $1.20019 $1.68243 $2.02574 $2.50798
Table 34: PG&E Monthly CARE (GL-1) Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month CARE Discount Total CARE Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
Jan 2022 ($0.41947) ($0.51139) $1.67790 $2.04554
Feb 2022 ($0.41362) ($0.50553) $1.65449 $2.02214
Mar 2022 ($0.39034) ($0.48226) $1.56138 $1.92902
Apr 2021 ($0.28372) ($0.38006) $1.13490 $1.52022
May 2021 ($0.28124) ($0.37757) $1.12497 $1.51030
June 2021 ($0.28297) ($0.37942) $1.13190 $1.51769
July 2021 ($0.27764) ($0.37408) $1.11054 $1.49634
Aug 2021 ($0.28452) ($0.38097) $1.13808 $1.52387
Sept 2021 ($0.32818) ($0.42462) $1.31270 $1.69850
Oct 2021 ($0.37566) ($0.47211) $1.50263 $1.88842
Nov 2021 ($0.40185) ($0.49830) $1.60742 $1.99321
Dec 2021 ($0.40453) ($0.50098) $1.61811 $2.00390

Page 271 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 49 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 272 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 50 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 273 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 51 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 274 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 52 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 275 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 53 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.2 Southern California Edison
The following pages provide details on are the SCE electricity tariffs applied in this study. Table 35 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.03339 / kWh was Page 276 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 54 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between April 2021 and March 2022.

Table 35: SCE Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ06 6
CZ08 8
CZ09 9
CZ10 10
CZ14 14
CZ15 15

Page 277 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 55 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 278 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 56 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 279 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 57 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.3 Southern California Gas
Following are the SoCalGas natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 36 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone.

Page 280 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 58 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 36: SoCalGas Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ05 2
`CZ06 1
CZ08 1
CZ09 1
CZ10 1
CZ14 2
CZ15 1
The SoCalGas monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis for the 12-month period ending August 2021 according to the rates shown in Table 37. Historical natural gas rate data was only available for SoCalGas’ procurement charges. 16 To estimate total costs by month, the baseline and excess transmission charges were assumed to be relatively consistence and applied for the entire year based on January 2021 and April 2021 costs.

CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the GR tariff.

Table 37: SoCalGas Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
Jan 2022 $0.83569 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.66056 $2.07446
Feb 2022 $0.60655 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.43142 $1.84532
Mar 2022 $0.55921 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.38408 $1.79798
Apr 2021 $0.31373 $0.80599 $1.20562 $1.11972 $1.51935
May 2021 $0.35684 $0.80599 $1.20562 $1.16283 $1.56246
June 2021 $0.39460 $0.80599 $1.20562 $1.20059 $1.60022
July 2021 $0.42622 $0.80599 $1.20562 $1.23221 $1.63184
Aug 2021 $0.44599 $0.80599 $1.20562 $1.25198 $1.65161
Sept 2021 $0.44425 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.26912 $1.68302
Oct 2021 $0.57580 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.40067 $1.81457
Nov 2021 $0.63799 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.46286 $1.87676
Dec 2021 $0.65129 $0.82487 $1.23877 $1.47616 $1.89006
16 The SoCalGas procurement and transmission charges were obtained from the following site:
https://www.socalgas.com/for-your-business/energy-market-services/gas-prices

Page 281 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 59 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 282 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 60 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.4 San Diego Gas & Electric
Following are the SDG&E electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. Table 38 describes the baseline territories that were assumed for each climate zone. A net surplus compensation rate of $0.04174 / kWh was applied to any net annual electricity generation based on a one-year average of the rates between April 2021 and March 2022.

Table 38: SDG&E Baseline Territory by Climate Zone
Baseline
Territory
CZ07 Coastal
CZ10 Inland
CZ14 Mountain
The SDG&E monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis for the 12-month period ending August 2021 according to the rates shown in Table 39. CARE rates reflect the 20 percent discount per the G-CARE tariff.

Table 39: SDG&E Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Month Procurement
Charge
Transportation Charge Total Charge
Baseline Excess Baseline Excess
Jan 2022 $0.83668 $1.43201 $1.70577 $2.26869 $2.54245
Feb 2022 $0.60727 $1.43201 $1.70577 $2.03928 $2.31304
Mar 2022 $0.55988 $1.43201 $1.70577 $1.99189 $2.26565
Apr 2021 $0.31401 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.75865 $2.02133
May 2021 $0.35719 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.80183 $2.06451
June 2021 $0.39498 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.83962 $2.10230
July 2021 $0.42663 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.87127 $2.13395
Aug 2021 $0.44642 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.89106 $2.15374
Sept 2021 $0.44468 $1.44464 $1.70732 $1.88932 $2.15200
Oct 2021 $0.57637 $1.38238 $1.63573 $1.95875 $2.21210
Nov 2021 $0.63862 $1.38238 $1.63573 $2.02100 $2.27435
Dec 2021 $0.65194 $1.38238 $1.63573 $2.03432 $2.28767

Page 283 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 61 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 284 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 62 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 285 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 63 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 286 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 64 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 287 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 65 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.5 City of Palo Alto Utilities
Following are the CPAU electricity and natural gas tariffs applied in this study. The CPAU monthly gas rate in $/therm was applied on a monthly basis for the 12-month period ending August 2021 according to the rates shown Page 288 of 309 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 66 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 in Table 40. The distribution charge was $0.4835/therm for Tier 1 and $1.0426/therm for Tier 2. The monthly service charge applied was $10.94 per month per the G-1 tariff in effect at the time of the analysis.

Table 40: CPAU Monthly Gas Rate ($/therm)
Effective
Date
Commodity
Rate
Cap and Trade
Compliance
Charge
Transportation
Charge
Carbon
Offset
Charge
G1 Tier 1
Volumetric
Totals
G1 Tier 2
Volumetric
Totals
Jan 2022 $0.77140 $0.04860 $0.15000 $0.04000 $1.53900 $1.83144 Feb 2022 $0.53600 $0.04860 $0.15000 $0.04000 $1.30360 $1.81874 Mar 2022 $0.53700 $0.04860 $0.15000 $0.04000 $1.30460 $1.8565 Apr 2022 $0.59750 $0.07680 $0.14404 $0.04000 $1.38734 $1.8363 May 2021 $0.39010 $0.04860 $0.12200 $0.04000 $1.10450 $1.8889 June 2021 $0.39820 $0.04860 $0.12214 $0.04000 $1.11274 $1.89714 July 2021 $0.48000 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.22034 $2.04394 Aug 2021 $0.54920 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.28954 $2.11314 Sept 2021 $0.52170 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.26204 $1.78012 Oct 2021 $0.71750 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.45784 $1.83222 Nov 2021 $0.75050 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.49084 $1.83472 Dec 2021 $0.63210 $0.04860 $0.12274 $0.04000 $1.37244 $1.80442

Page 289 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 67 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

Page 290 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 68 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.6 Sacramento Municipal Utilities District (Electric Only) Following are the SMUD electricity tariffs applied in this study.

Page 291 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 69 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.2.7 Fuel Escalation Assumptions
The average annual escalation rates in Table 41 were used in this study. These are based on assumptions from the CPUC 2021 En Banc hearings on utility costs through 2030 (California Public Utilities Commission, 2021a). Escalation rates through the remainder of the 30-year evaluation period are based on the escalation rate assumptions within the 2022 TDV factors. No data was available to estimate electricity escalation rates for CPAU and SMUD, therefore electricity escalation rates for PG&E and statewide natural gas escalation rates were applied.

Table 41: Real Utility Rate Escalation Rate Assumptions Statewide Natural
Gas Residential
Average Rate
(%/year, real)
Electric Residential Average Rate
(%/year, real)

PG&E SCE SDG&E
2023 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2024 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2025 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2026 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2027 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2028 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2029 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2030 4.6% 1.8% 1.6% 2.8%
2031 2.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2032 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2033 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2034 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2035 1.9% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2036 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2037 1.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2038 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2039 2.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2040 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2041 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2042 2.2% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2043 2.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2044 2.4% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2045 2.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2046 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2047 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2048 1.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2049 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2050 1.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2051 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%
2052 1.8% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

Page 292 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 70 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20

7.3 Summary of Measures by Package
Table 42 provides the details of the measures in each of the efficiency package by climate zone and case. Table 43 presents the measures for all the single family efficiency + PV + battery packages. Table 44 presents the measures for all the ADU efficiency packages.

Table 42: Single Family Efficiency Package Measures
Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab Attic

0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance

0.24 U-Factor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows

0.35 W/cfm Buried Ducts
Basic
Compact Hot
Water Credit
1X R-60 vs R-38 X
2X R-60 vs R-38 XX X
3 R-60 vs R-30 XX X
4X R-60 vs R-38 XX X
5 R-49 vs R-30 XX X
6 R-60 vs R-30 XX X
7 R-49 vs R-30 XX
8 R-60 vs R-38 XX X
9 R-60 vs R-38 XX X
10 R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
11 X R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
12 X R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
13 X R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
14 X X R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
15 X R-60 vs R-38 X XX X
16 R-60 vs R-38 XX X

Page 293 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 71 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Table 43: Single Family Mixed Fuel Efficiency + PV + Battery Package Measures Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab Attic

0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance

0.24 UFactor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows

0.30 UFactor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows

0.35 W/cfm
Buried
Ducts
Basic
Compact
Hot Water
Credit
1X X X
2X R- 49 vs R-38 XX X
3 R-38 vs R-30 X XX
4X R-49 vs R-38 XX X
5 R-49 vs R-30 X XX
6 R- 49 vs R-30 XX X
7 R-49 vs R-30 XX
8 R- 49 vs R-38 XX X
9 R- 49 vs R-38 XX X
10 X X X X
11 X R-49 vs R-38 X XX X
12 X R- 49 vs R-38 X XX X
13 X R- 49 vs R-38 X XX X
14 X X R- 49 vs R-38 X XX X
15 X R- 49 vs R-38 X XX X
16 R- 49 vs R-38 X XX
Table 44: ADU Efficiency Package Measures
Climate
Zone
3 ACH50
R-10
Slab

0.25 Roof
Solar
Reflectance

0.24 U-Factor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows
Ductless
VCHP
Basic
Compact Hot
Water Credit
1X X
2 X XX
3 XX
4 X XX
5 XX
6 XX
7 XX
8 XX
9 XX
10 X X X
11 X X X X
12 X X X X
13 X X X X
14 X X X X X
15 X X X X
16 X X

Page 294 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 72 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 The efficiency measures added to the All-Electric prescriptive package in Climate Zones that were not compliant are shown in Table 45 and
Table 46.

Table 45: Single Family All-Electric Code Compliant Efficiency Measures Climate
Zone

0.24 U-Factor / 0.50
SHGC Windows
Basic Compact Hot
Water Credit
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 X
16 X
Table 46: ADU All-Electric Code Compliant Efficiency Measures Climate
Zone
3 ACH50 R-49 vs R-38
Attic
Insulation

0.30 U-Factor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows

0.24 U-Factor /

0.50 SHGC
Windows
Improved HVAC
Fan Efficiency:

0.35 W/cfm
Basic Compact
Hot Water Credit
1 2
3 4 X
5X X
6 X
7 X
8 XX
9 XX
10 XX
11 12
13 X
14 XX
15 XX
16 X X X X

Page 295 of 309 ends

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Single Family New Construction 73 Appendices
localenergycodes.com California Energy Codes & Standards | A statewide utility program 2023-06-20 Get In Touch
The adoption of reach codes can differentiate jurisdictions as efficiency leaders and help accelerate the adoption of new equipment, technologies, code compliance, and energy savings strategies.

As part of the Statewide Codes & Standards Program, the Reach Codes Subprogram is a resource available to any local jurisdiction located throughout the state of California.

Our experts develop robust toolkits as well as provide specific technical assistance to local jurisdictions (cities and counties) considering adopting energy reach codes. These include cost-effectiveness research and analysis, model ordinance language and other code development and implementation tools, and specific technical assistance throughout the code adoption process.

If you are interested in finding out more about local energy reach codes, the Reach Codes Team stands ready to assist jurisdictions at any stage of a reach code project.

Visit LocalEnergyCodes.com to
access our resources and sign up
for newsletters
Contact [email protected]
for no-charge assistance from expert
Reach Code advisors
Follow us on Twitter

Page 296 of 309 ends

Item No. 8
Town of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – PRESENTATION
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: RACHAEL LONDER, MANAGEMENT ANALYST II
DATE: JANUARY 17, 2024
SUBJECT: PROVIDE FEEDBACK ON REACH CODE APPROACHES TO

REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FROM BUILDINGS

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Council consider various options in support of energy reach codes and provide feedback and direction to staff for the next steps.

BACKGROUND
The Town first established a strategic framework for reducing greenhouse gas emissions through the 2016 Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP outlined various strategies to reduce energy consumption from residential buildings, one of the Town's largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions. In implementing the CAP, the Council adopted Ordinance 656 in November 2022, amending Chapter 15.19 of the Atherton Municipal Code through the adoption of the 2022 California Green Building Code amended with a local reach, with exceptions, standard requiring new buildings to be all-electric. On April 17, 2023, a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley, that a Berkeley ordinance requiring all-electric new buildings was pre-empted by the federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA) and was therefore invalid. In May 2023, due to the Ninth Circuit Court’s ruling, the Town suspended enforcement of the all-electric building requirement for new buildings. On January 2, 2024, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to have the case reheard by the full panel of Ninth Circuit Court judges.

Staff have continued monitoring the situation and observed a lack of timely resolution in the Berkeley case and a lack of imminent statewide resolution (e.g., the California Energy Commission updates the California Energy Code on a triennial basis, and any future updates made by the California Energy Commission to the statewide code that might be more favorable for lowemissions buildings would have to wait until the effective date of the 2025 California Energy Code, which wouldn’t be enforceable until January 1, 2026). Going forward, the City of Berkeley’s only option is petitioning the United States Supreme Court to overturn the Ninth Circuit decision from April 2023. Should a subsequent ruling be issued overturning or otherwise vacating the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision, enforcement of Ordinance 656 amending Chapter 15.19 would resume. As this is unlikely, Staff recommends amending Ordinance 656 to remove electrification

Page 297 of 309 ends

January 17, 2024

Page 2 of 6 ends

requirements to provide clarity to developers and bring the Ordinance in line with the Ninth Circuit ruling.

With enforcement paused, the Council adopted the 2023 update to the Climate Action Plan and committed to exploring policy levers to encourage electrification. Based on the lack of resolution in the Berkeley case and the targets set by the updated Climate Action Plan, staff recommends exploring interim solutions to reduce emissions from buildings to continue forward motion on the Town’s Climate Action Plan requirements. Staff identified local amendments to the California Energy Code (also known as a “reach code”) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in new buildings as the preferred alternative approach.

ANALYSIS
The California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley ruling limits how the City can reduce emissions from new buildings. Staff is providing a menu of reach code measures that seek to move building electrification, electric readiness, and energy efficiency forward in a manner that does not pre-empt EPCA. This analysis will describe each measure in the context of the California Energy Code. The California Energy Code establishes whole-building efficiency requirements, which account for a building’s water heater, HVAC (heating, ventilation, and air conditioning) system, solar generating system, and insulation, among other things. However, it does not account for cooking equipment, laundry dryers, pools, or other unregulated energy uses. As such, the proposed reach code measures do not regulate cooking equipment, laundry dryers, or other energy uses not addressed by the California Energy Code.

California Energy Code Energy Evaluation Metrics
The 2022 California Energy Code provides baseline efficiency and building performance standards that a project must meet before receiving a building permit. The California Energy Code provides different metrics for different types of buildings and is organized. The metrics for single-family residential buildings are as follows:

A new single-family residential building must meet or exceed “Energy Design Rating” (EDR) scores. There are three EDR score categories:
1) EDR1 (Source Energy) – EDR1 is a score representing a building’s energy efficiency expressed in terms that serve as a proxy for greenhouse gas emissions. 2) EDR2 (Efficiency) – EDR2 is a score representing a building’s energy efficiency expressed in terms of the value and cost of energy consumed at different times of the day and year.
3) EDR Total (Total Energy Design Rating) is a score representing the building’s total energy expressed in terms of the value and cost of energy consumed at different times of the day and year while also factoring in solar and energy demand flexibility.

Proposed Energy Performance Enhancements for New Construction Public Resources Code Section 25402.1(h)(2) and Section 10-106 of the Building Energy Efficiency Standards establish a process that allows local adoption of energy standards that are more stringent than the statewide standards. Under this process, the CEC requires any local Page 298 of 309 January 17, 2024

Page 3 of 6 ends

amendments to the California Energy Code that affect energy use in regulated buildings to be costeffective and use less energy than the standard requirements. Staff recommends that the Council explore cost-effective local amendments (reach codes) to the California Energy Code to increase the required EDR1 score for single-family residential buildings by at least 9 points. An EDR1 compliance margin of 9 reflects a cost-effective baseline achievable by an all-electric code minimum new construction with a market-baseline heat pump water heater, that is also technically feasible by a mixed-fuel building with appliances efficiencies at minimum federal requirements.

Because of how the EDR1 and Source Energy scores are calculated in the 2022 California Energy Code, the higher standards proposed in the reach code would incentivize new buildings to include electric measures while allowing mixed-fuel buildings pathways to compliance using efficiency, photovoltaic (PV) solar, and battery measures. The enhanced performance requirements would apply equally to mixed fuel and all-electric buildings and are cost-effectively achievable through the energy code’s performance pathway without requiring appliances that exceed federal efficiency standards.

Electric Ready Requirements for Renovations, Remodels, and Additions The 2022 California Energy Code requires the construction of new mixed-fuel buildings to include “electric ready” components, including electric outlets near natural gas appliances, specifically, clothes dryers, cooktops, gas-fueled furnaces or gas-fueled water heaters, appropriate ventilation for future heat pump appliances, and reserved and labeled breakers in the electrical panel for a future electric appliance. However, the current code does not require electric-ready components for renovations, remodels, and additions. The Town could adopt a reach code requiring the installation of electric-ready components when appliances are being changed out, or specific spaces are being remodeled or added to the building. Opportunities for future-proofing homes that install gas equipment include:
▪ Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning: The Town could require an outlet for a future electric heat pump for alterations and additions, including an HVAC system. ▪ Water heating: The Town could require an outlet for a future water heater heat pump for alterations and additions, including a water heating system. ▪ Pool and Spas: The Town could require an outlet for a future electric pool pump for alterations and additions that include pool or spa equipment. ▪ Installing 240V outlet when renovating the laundry room (an outlet for a future electric clothes dryer) and the kitchen (an outlet for a future electric oven/stove) ▪ Panel
▪ When planning an electrical panel replacement and electrical panel upgrade, the Town could require the electrical panel to include panel capacity and breaker space for future electrification of building systems.
▪ No electric readiness requirements for equipment replacements.

An exception could be offered, whereas, as a result of these requirements, an increase in capacity for an electrical panel, feeders, transformer, or electrical service (not part of the appliance upgrade scope) is required.

Practical Effect of the Reach Code
Because the Town is working within the confines of the California Energy Code, the description of the proposed approach above is inherently technical. This section illustrates the practical effect Page 299 of 309 January 17, 2024

Page 4 of 6 ends

of the proposed approach by providing a simplified example of how a single-family home designer would comply with the reach code.

A building designer working on a single-family home built to the code minimum would likely include high-efficiency LED lighting, rooftop solar, an electric heat pump hot water heater, a natural gas furnace, insulated walls, an insulated attic, and efficient windows, among other things.

The designer would load the building design into a computer model and estimate its energy performance. The energy modeling software would provide standard reporting metrics, including an EDR1 score. The designer would then compare the EDR1 score to a standard design building.

In this case, the designed building’s EDR1 score would be equal to the standard design building’s EDR1 score and would comply with that part of the California Energy Code.

With the reach code in place, the designer would now need to achieve an EDR1 score that is 9 points better than the standard design building. If this building designer replaced the gas furnace with a commonly available heat pump HVAC system, the building would achieve a score of 9 EDR1 points better than the code minimum and consistent with the proposed reach code requirements. Alternatively, the building designer could keep the gas furnace and install a battery storage system, which would also result in an increase of more than 9 EDR1 points. The building designer also has the option to develop a package of efficiency and solar measures; so long as the measures lead to an increase of 9 or more EDR1 points better than the code minimum, it is consistent with the reach code.

Cost Effectiveness
The California Energy Commission requires any local amendments to the California Energy Code that affect energy use in regulated buildings to be cost-effective and to use less energy than the standard requirements. The CEC requires the local agency to adopt a determination that the energy standards are cost-effective at a public meeting. The determination must subsequently be filed with the Energy Commission. One way to illustrate cost-effectiveness is through the “Time-Dependent Valuation” or “TDV” metric. The TDV metric is what the California Energy Commission uses in evaluating cost-effectiveness for efficiency measures in the California Energy Code and includes the onsite costs and savings of the proposed energy measures, as well as the energy system costs and benefits of the energy measures. The metric is “time-dependent” because energy use has different costs and impacts depending on the day and season. For example, electricity saved during peak periods has a much higher value than electricity saved during off-peak periods. In support of reach code development, the California Energy Codes and Standards Statewide Utility Program, which includes the State's Investor-Owned Utilities (PG& E, SDG&E, and SCE, under the auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission), developed and published the 2022 CostEffectiveness Study: Single Family New Construction Study (Attachment 2) and the associated cost-effectiveness data. The studies and the associated cost-effectiveness data include a calculated benefit-to-cost ratio for various measures, building types, and climate zones. A benefit-cost value of “1” or greater illustrates that the measures save more than they cost and are therefore “costeffective.” Based on these studies, staff find the proposed local amendments to the 2022 California Energy Code cost-effective and consume less energy than Title 24, Part 6. In short, using the California Energy Commission’s TDV metric, the proposed amendments save more than they cost to implement. Page 300 of 309
January 17, 2024

Page 5 of 6 ends

Summary of Reach Code Policy Options
▪ Adopt Source Energy Compliance, giving builders a choice between mixed fuel or allelectric building. − Mixed fuel buildings will need additional energy measures to pass modeling including increased efficiency, solar, and battery storage. − All-electric buildings will pass modeling with code minimums for efficiency and solar (with a market-baseline heat pump water heater)
▪ Adopt Electric Readiness Requirements for New Construction (where readiness is not already required by the State code):
− Pools
▪ Adopt Electric Readiness Requirements for Remodels, Additions, Renovations, and Equipment Replacements
− Pools
− Laundry Room
− Kitchen
− HVAC
− Water Heating
− Panel Capacity
While the measures in the menu are less effective at reducing greenhouse gas emissions than the all-electric new building requirements codified in Municipal Code Chapter 15.19, the options provide the best and most timely opportunity to continue pursuing the Council’s adopted climate action goals within the existing legal framework. One or all measures may be further studied or presented for a first reading at a future City Council meeting.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal Area F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed, and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The City Council adopted an update to the Climate Action Plan (CAP) at the October 4, 2023, Study Session, providing a strategic plan to reduce emissions in the Town by 49% by 2030 and 100% by 2045. The CAP’s strategies include exploring policy pathways to encourage building electrification at the time of new construction and remodels, additions, and equipment changeout.

While the Town does not seek to require fuel type, reach codes are a policy lever that can be used to encourage electric buildings powered by on-site solar or by the County’s official electricity provider, Peninsula Clean Energy, which provides 100% clean electricity. The Council’s policy discussion should revolve around the adoption of a reach code to encourage electrification. Page 301 of 309 January 17, 2024

Page 6 of 6 ends

PUBLIC NOTICE
Public notification was achieved by posting the agenda, with this agenda item listed at least 72 hours before the meeting in print and electronically. Information about the project is also disseminated via the Town’s electronic News Flash and Atherton Online. There are approximately 1,700 subscribers to the Town’s electronic News Flash publications. Subscribers include residents as well as stakeholders –including, but not limited to, media outlets, school districts, Menlo Park Fire Protection District, service providers (water, power, and sewer), and elected officials.

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
This item has not been before a Town Committee or Commission

ATTACHMENTS

1. 01172024 Council Meeting Presentation

2. 2022 Cost-Effectiveness Study for Single Family New Construction

Page 302 of 309 ends

Item No. Town
of Atherton
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – REGULAR AGENDA
TO:

FROM:

DATE:

SUBJECT:

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL

RACHAEL LONDER, MANAGEMENT ANALYST II
-$18$R<, 202
$33529$/2)($57+'$<:25.3/$1$1'%8'*(7
$65(&200(1'('%<7+((19,5210(17$/352*5$06
&200,77((
(3&

RECOMMENDATION
,WLVUHFRPPHQGHGWKDWWKH&RXQFLOUHYLHZSURYLGHFRPPHQWDQGDSSURYHWKH(DUWK'D\ (YHQW:RUN3ODQDQG%XGJHWDVUHFRPPHQGHGE\WKH(QYLURQPHQWDO3URJUDPV&RPPLWWHH

(3&

BACKGROUND
(YHU\\HDULQ$SULOWKH7RZQFRPHVWRJHWKHUWRKRQRU(DUWK'D\7KH(QYLURQPHQWDO3URJUDPV &RPPLWWHH
(3&
DVVLVWVVWDIILQSODQQLQJDQGIDFLOLWDWLQJDQ(DUWK'D\(YHQWGHVLJQHGWR HQJDJHDQGHGXFDWHWKHFRPPXQLW\RQVXVWDLQDELOLW\DQGFOLPDWHUHODWHGWRSLFVDQGSURPRWHWKH 7RZQ¶V&OLPDWH$FWLRQ3ODQ
&$3
JRDOV,QWKH(3&FROODERUDWHGZLWKQHLJKERULQJ MXULVGLFWLRQVDQGFRPPXQLW\EDVHGRUJDQL]DWLRQVWRKRVWWKH/RYH2XU(DUWK)HVWLYDODW0HQOR $WKHUWRQ+LJK6FKRROZKLFKLQFOXGHGYHQGRUVDQGRYHUDWWHQGHHV6WDIIUHYLHZHGWKH /RYH2XU(DUWK)HVWLYDOGXULQJWKH2FWREHU&LW\&RXQFLO5HJXODU0HHWLQJ ZKHUH&RXQFLOJDYHGLUHFWLRQWRGHYHORSD(DUWK'D\:RUN3ODQIRUDVFDOHGGRZQHYHQW KRVWHGDW7RZQRZQHGIDFLOLWLHV

ANALYSIS
7KH(QYLURQPHQWDO3URJUDPV&RPPLWWHH(DUWK'D\6XEFRPPLWWHHKDVZRUNHGZLWK7RZQVWDII DQG ORFDO KLJK VFKRRO VWXGHQWV WR SURSRVH D ZRUN SODQ DQG EXGJHW IRU WKH &LW\ &RXQFLO WR DXWKRUL]H7KHSURSRVHGHYHQWZLOOEHKRVWHGDW+ROEURRN3DOPHU3DUNRQ6XQGD\$SULOIURP
$0
30 7KH JRDOV RI WKH HYHQW SURSRVHG VFKHGXOH DQG VSHDNHUV DFWLYLWLHV H[KLELWRUVYROXQWHHUDSSURDFKDQGEXGJHWDUHLQFOXGHGLQ$WWDFKPHQWIRUUHYLHZDQGDSSURYDO 7KH(3& UHFRPPHQGVPDLQWDLQLQJWKH7RZQ
V EXGJHW RI OHYHUDJLQJ XSWRDQDGGLWLRQDO
IURPVSRQVRUVIRUDQHYHQWQRWWRH[FHHG

Page 303 of 309 ends

Earth Day 2024
October 18, 2023

Page 3 of 4 ends

FISCAL IMPACT
The Fiscal Year 2022 Budget includes funding for an Earth Day event in the amount of $5,000.

Any materials, efforts, or staffing resources associated with an Earth Day event that exceed this existing $5,000 budget would need to be authorized by the Town Council.

GOAL ALIGNMENT
This Report and its contents are in alignment with the following Council Policy Goals:
• Goal F – Be Forward-Thinking, Well-Managed and Well-Planned

POLICY FOCUS
The EPC is charged under Resolution 2018-11 to “provide the City Council with recommendations, outreach programs, and education on environmental issues facing the Town’s natural and built environment.” Acting in an advisory capacity, the EPC has the following powers and duties:
a. Upon request, make recommendations (programmatic and legislative) to the City Council on all matters pertaining to the Town’s natural and built environment and the Town’s regional role and responsibilities as one of the communities on the San Francisco Bay Peninsula. b. Pursuant to established City Council programs and policy, assist staff in the creation of proactive community engagement programs for residents, commercial and public enterprises active within the Town’s jurisdiction.

Historically, the Town’s EPC has been the primary body in creating and supporting an annual Earth Day event for the Town, as approved by the Council. Considering costs, staff time, and YDFDQFLHVRQWKH(3&DQGLQWKH&RPPLWWHH¶VDGYLVRU\UROHWKH(3&LVSURSRVLQJD FROODERUDWLYHDSSURDFKWRFHOHEUDWLQJ(DUWK'D\ZLWKDQHYHQWE\EXLOGLQJRIISDUWQHUVKLSVDQG VXFFHVVHVIURPWKH/RYH2XU(DUWK)HVWLYDO)XUWKHUDVDQDGYLVRU\&RPPLWWHHWKH(3& ZRXOGRQO\EHDOORZHGXSWRDVEXGJHWHGIRU)LVFDO<HDUZLWKWKRVHIXQGV GLVEXUVHGWKURXJKVWDII$VDSROLF\PDWWHULWZRXOGEHDSSURSULDWHIRUWKH&RXQFLOWRUHYLHZDQG SURYLGHGLUHFWLRQRQWKH(DUWK'D\(YHQWDQGXVHRIWKHEXGJHW Earth Day 2024
January 17, 2024

Page 2 of 3 ends

Earth Day 2024
October 18, 2023

Page 3 of 4 ends

Page 304 of 309 ends

(DUWK'D\
-DQXDU\
3DJHRI

PUBLIC NOTICE
3XEOLF QRWLILFDWLRQ ZDV DFKLHYHG E\ SRVWLQJWKH DJHQGD ZLWKWKLV DJHQGDLWHP EHLQJOLVWHG DW OHDVW KRXUV SULRU WR WKH PHHWLQJ LQ SULQW DQG HOHFWURQLFDOO\ ,QIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH SURMHFW LV DOVR GLVVHPLQDWHG YLD WKH 7RZQ¶V HOHFWURQLF 1HZV )ODVK DQG $WKHUWRQ 2QOLQH 7KHUH DUH DSSUR[LPDWHO\VXEVFULEHUVWRWKH7RZQ¶VHOHFWURQLF1HZV)ODVKSXEOLFDWLRQV6XEVFULEHUV LQFOXGH UHVLGHQWV DV ZHOO DV VWDNHKROGHUV ±WR LQFOXGH EXW EH QRW OLPLWHG WR PHGLD RXWOHWV VFKRRO GLVWULFWV 0HQOR 3DUN )LUH 3URWHFWLRQ 'LVWULFW VHUYLFH SURYLGHV ZDWHU SRZHU DQG
VHZHU
DQG UHJLRQDO HOHFWHGRIILFLDOV

COMMISSION/COMMITTEE FEEDBACK/REFERRAL
7KLVLWHP;KDVRUBBKDVQRWEHHQEHIRUHD7RZQ&RPPLWWHHRU&RPPLVVLRQ BBBB$XGLW)LQDQFH&RPPLWWHH
PHHWVHYHU\RWKHUPRQWK

BBBB&LYLF&HQWHU$GYLVRU\&RPPLWWHH
PHHWVDVQHHGHG

B;BB(QYLURQPHQWDO3URJUDPV&RPPLWWHH
PHHWVHYHU\RWKHUPRQWK

BBBB3DUNDQG5HFUHDWLRQ&RPPLWWHH
PHHWVHDFKPRQWK

BBBB3ODQQLQJ&RPPLVVLRQ
PHHWVHDFKPRQWK

BBBB7UDQVSRUWDWLRQ%LF\FOHDQG3HGHVWULDQ6DIHW\&RPPLWWHH PHHWVHYHU\RWKHUPRQWK

ATTACHMENTS
$WKHUWRQ(DUWK'D\)HVWLYDO3URSRVHG:RUN3ODQDQG%XGJHW

Page 305 of 309 ends

Proposed 2024 Atherton Earth Day Festival Work Plan and Budget The Environmental Programs Committee proposes an Earth Day Festival as follows:

Atherton Earth Day Festival
Sunday, April 21, 2024, from 11:00 AM to 3:00 PM at Holbrook Palmer Park The goals of this event include:

1. Educate residents on the importance of taking care of our planet and inspire individual action.

2. Foster community by bringing residents, local service providers, and vendors together to celebrate the environmental work that has been accomplished and share resources.

3. Raise awareness of the impact of climate change, specifically in San Mateo County, and educate residents on the Town’s Climate Action Plan, progress, and next steps.

4. Provide a meaningful opportunity for the town’s youth to participate in climate action, protect biodiversity, and learn about innovations in sustainability.

This plan will be executed by:
● The Environmental Programs Committee’s Earth Day Event Planning Subcommittee ● Town staff
● High school student interns from Design Tech High School in Redwood Shores and Menlo-Atherton High School under staff direction
● Additionally, Woodside Priory High School, Menlo School, and Sacred Heart School have been contacted to identify additional students interested in getting involved.

Partners and Sponsors:

The following sponsors and partners, that specifically serve or provide utility service to Atherton residents, have been invited to contribute to this event:
● Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE)
● CalWater
● GreenWaste Recovery
● Bay Area Air Quality Management
District
● Peninsula Humane Society
● SamTrans
● San Mateo County Office of
Sustainability
● San Mateo County Libraries -
Atherton Library
● Atherton Disaster and
Preparedness Team (ADAPT)
● Atherton Arts Foundation
● Atherton Tree Committee

Page 306 of 309 ends

Exhibitors
Besides the sponsors and partners, we have contacted an additional 180 different exhibitors to host a booth or activity representing schools and activities for all ages, clean energy & building electrification, water conservation and pollution prevention, waste reduction, landscaping, emissions reduction, plant-based food, and transportation. Exhibitors from the 2022 and 2023 Atherton Earth Day events and additional organizations of interest were contacted.

The proposed date and time have been shared with neighboring jurisdictions and community-based organizations to avoid having multiple Earth Day events on the same day. It is likely that Menlo Park, East Palo Alto, 350 Silicon Valley, and other partners will proceed with a Love Our Earth Festival in 2024.

Proposed Schedule and Speakers
● To invite: Rep. Eshoo, Senator Padilla, CA State Senator Becker, CA Assemblymember Berman, and Supervisor Mueller
● Mayor to give remarks and serve as emcee
● There are currently no plans to host a speaker panel due to low participation in 2023, lack of interest from a community survey, and interest in hosting a speaker series outside of the Earth Day Festival
● A speaker series could be planned for raising awareness of sustainability topics throughout the year.

Activities
● Confirmed:
○ Stephanie Dole, Beetle Lady: Pop-Up Bug Museum with displays of real arthropods from around the world, living bugs, banners, and interactive exhibits. ○ ADAPT: Climate resiliency and emergency preparedness demonstrations including emergency gas shut-off, putting out a fire station, and display of emergency information including air quality, evacuation, and emergency alerts. ● Invited/Pending:
○ E-Bike and Bike Test Rides
○ Environmental Art Exhibit and Sewing Repairs with Atherton Arts Foundation ○ Arbor Day Tree Planting and Tree Walk with Tree Committee and Town Arborist ○ Kids’ friendly activities hosted by the Riekes Center, the Atherton Library, and the local elementary schools
○ Interdepartmental/agency leaf blower competition
○ Waste Sorting Game
○ Inter-Agency Competition
○ Fix-it Clinic for repairing broken items and mending clothing

Page 307 of 309 ends

Plant-Based Food
Having sufficient food available for attendees and volunteers has been a consistent challenge across Town events. In order to better serve our residents and set expectations, volunteers will not be offered free meals and will be encouraged to bring food or patron one of the local food trucks in attendance.

Staff proposes moving forward with having plant-based food from local food trucks. Food trucks have their own health permits. Serving food in tents requires a separate permit, close access to handwashing, electricity, and a bathroom. To avoid a separate permitting process and fees, Atherton staff proposes to have only permitted food trucks present. The following will be invited to sell plant-based food:
● The Bite (Mediterranean)
● Malibu’s Burgers (Fast Food)
● Taqueria La Veganza (Mexican)
● Senor Sisig (Filipino)
● Casita Vegana (Mexican)
● Daniel’s Kitchen (Gourmet Latinx
Cuisine)
● Zaida’s Kitchen (Mexican)
● Vegan Mob (Barbeque)
● Pop Nation (Popsicles)
Additionally, staff intends to explore plant-based, induction cooking demonstrations or hands-on cooking activities.

Day-of Volunteers
We will rely on a pool of volunteers to assist on the day of the Earth Day Festival - April 21.

Our volunteers play an important role in helping us direct attendees, lead activities, teach attendees how to sort their trash, check in vendors, and promote the event. Volunteers are required to attend an hour-long training prior to the event. It is anticipated that we will have up to 50 day-of volunteers helping to ensure a smooth event. Local high schools have been contacted as well as Tesla for corporate volunteers based on their availability in 2023.

Page 308 of 309 ends

Proposed Budget
Budget (Total Requested: $5,000)
Item Description Proposed Amount
Sponsorships Anticipating:
● CalWater ($500)
● GreenWaste
Recovery ($500)
● Peninsula Clean
Energy ($500)
● CalRecycle Grant
Funds ($500)
-$2,000
Printing Printing marketing materials
including banners for HPP
and Marsh/Middlefield and
day-of-navigation signs
$1,500
Marketing Posting advertisements in the
Almanac
$400
Equipment Rentals Table, chair, and canopy
rentals
$900
Entertainment Beetle Lady $1,200
Bike Valet Bike Parking Valet through
Silicon Valley Bike Coalition
$2,000
Day-of Support Public Works Staffing
Resources
$1,000
Total Budget (NTE) $5,000

Page 309 of 309 ends

Atherton City CouncilJanuary 17, 2024

Atherton City Council
January 17, 2024