To be as comprehensive as possible, the Vulnerability Assessment looks at physical structures separately from the services or benefits they provide. This is because the effects of climate change on one type of population or asset can be different from the effects on related populations and assets. For example, if a flood damaged or blocked a major highway, such as I-10, it would have a significant impact on public safety services in and around the city. However, the loss of I-10 would not cause physical damage to public safety facilities, such as police or fire stations. Similarly, a drought can have a major effect on water and wastewater services by reducing the amount of water available for water supply and wastewater conveyance, but droughts have little or no physical effect on water and wastewater infrastructure, such as pipelines or pumps.
1869
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
21 Populations
Of the 17 populations evaluated in the vulnerability assessment, 13 are highly vulnerable to at least one hazard type. Populations in Ontario are most vulnerable to extreme heat and flooding. The most vulnerable populations include households in poverty and undocumented persons. The list below summarizes the high vulnerabilities, grouping together populations where similar impacts or adaptive capacity occur.
Households with financial instability, which are households that may have limited incomes or be costburdened (paying at least a third of their gross income on housing costs), are highly vulnerable to all hazards, except agriculture pests and diseases, that will impact Ontario. These persons, especially households in poverty, are more likely to live in older homes with less insulation, less structural stability, or lack of air conditioning, increasing exposure to unsafe living conditions due to mold and mildew damage from flooding, high indoor air temperatures from extreme heat and warm nights, and poor indoor air quality from air pollution and severe weather. Households with financial instability may lack the financial means and health insurance to recover from property damage or illnesses caused by climate change hazards.
Persons that spend an extended amount of time outdoors, including children and outdoor workers, are highly vulnerable to air quality, extreme heat, flooding, human health hazards, severe weather, and smoke from wildfires. Children tend to spend more time outdoors than many adults and may not be aware of the onset of heat-related illnesses, such as heat exhaustion or heat stroke. Reduced air quality from smoke, ozone, or particulate matter can also decrease the ability of young children to adapt to warmer temperatures over time. Outdoor workers are directly exposed to extreme heat, human health hazards, and the poor air quality due to the outdoor nature of their occupations. Outdoor work often involves physically intense work, which can increase the risk of medical complications. Outdoor work can be halted during hazardous conditions, such as severe weather, poor air quality, or flooding, creating economic hardships for outdoor workers. This may also limit the ability of outdoor workers to seek medical attention for heat or air quality-related illnesses.
Persons with existing health conditions or limited mobility, such as seniors, seniors living alone, persons with chronic illnesses, persons with disabilities, and persons without access to lifelines, are highly vulnerable to air quality, extreme heat, human health hazards, severe weather, and wildfire smoke.
Extreme heat, pathogens from human health hazards, and smoke from wildfires can cause cardiovascular and respiratory illnesses, which may be difficult for many people, especially those with compromised immune systems or chronic illnesses, to recover from. According to the Southern California Association of Governments, Ontario’s obesity rate was nearly 40 percent and asthma rate was nearly 13 percent in 2018. Seniors, especially, are usually more susceptible to heat-related illnesses, pathogens, and smoke conditions because they are more likely to have medical conditions that can worsen with extreme heat and poor air quality, and often take medicine that makes it harder for them to stay cool. These individuals may also have difficulty evacuating during emergencies caused by flooding or severe weather. Power outages can also isolate these persons and potentially cause life-support systems to fail if battery backups are not available.
1870
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
22 Persons with language barriers and citizenship uncertainty are highly vulnerable to multiple hazards.
Most of these populations may be hesitant to seek help or may not qualify for financial assistance programs that can help them prepare and recover from a disaster. People with citizenship or immigration concerns, such as undocumented immigrants, are highly vulnerable to nearly all climate change hazards, because this population may not live in structures that adequately shelter from these hazards and they may be required to work in extreme heat or poor air quality conditions. According to the Asian Pacific Environmental Network’s Mapping Resilience Report, these populations may not feel welcome or safe to participate in government-provided support services or assistance programs. If employers halt work because of hazardous conditions, undocumented persons may face financial hardship. These individuals may also live in low-lying areas or in structures that are less resilient to damage, and therefore are highly vulnerable to severe weather and flooding.
Persons experiencing homelessness lack permanent and often temporary shelters, which can leave them directly exposed to high temperatures, poor air quality, flooding, severe weather, and smoke from wildfires. These persons may not have access to cool locations, water, sunscreen, or protective equipment to increase resiliency to poor air quality, extreme heat, and human health hazards. Persons experiencing homelessness are also severely vulnerable to severe weather and may have a challenging time recovering if high winds and intense rain events damage or destroy temporary shelters and personal property.
Persons living in mobile homes are located throughout the city and are highly vulnerable to extreme heat, flooding, and severe weather because mobile homes are generally not as resilient as permanent structured homes, making them more susceptible to damage from intense rain events and high winds.
Mobile homes may have less insulation than permanent structures, causing indoor air temperatures to rise during extreme heat events. Mobile homes can typically be retrofitted to protect against damage from flooding and severe storms; however, persons living in mobile homes may have lower or fixed incomes that can make it more difficult to make appropriate retrofits or repairs and mobile homes may be ineligible for recovery funding due to the home type.
Overcrowded households are highly vulnerable to human health hazards because persons in these households may be living in conditions that increase their chances of catching vector-borne illnesses.
Persons living in overcrowded households may be unable to quarantine if a contagious illness is contracted. These persons may lack financial means to acquire different housing and may not be able to install air filtration devices.
Built Systems and Services
The built system includes vulnerabilities to infrastructure, buildings, and services that the City of Ontario and other organizations provide. The built systems are most vulnerable to flooding and severe weather.
Of the 36 infrastructure, building, and service assets included in the assessment, 18 are highly or severely vulnerable (scored V4 or V5) for at least one hazard.
Public Transit Services and Infrastructure is highly vulnerable to poor air quality, extreme heat, flooding, severe weather, and wildfire, because these hazards create unhealthy conditions for those riding public transit and may disrupt public transit routes. Many of the Omnitrans bus routes and Metrolink railway are also within a flood hazard zone. Flooding and severe weather can prevent buses or other vehicles from 1871
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
23 traveling on certain roadways in the city, causing delays or preventing people from using public transit.
According to a recent survey conducted through Resilient IE, poor air quality, extreme heat, and smoke conditions can cause fewer people to use public transit, since it may be more difficult to wait outside for buses or trains. While there are some alternative roadways buses can use and shade structures can be installed to ensure people can access public transit, delays or negative health outcomes may be unavoidable.
Energy infrastructure and delivery services are highly or severely vulnerable to extreme heat, flooding, severe weather, and wildfire. Energy delivery services are dependent on regional and local overhead power lines and underground natural gas pipelines owned and operated by Southern California Edison (SCE) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas), which are susceptible to extreme heat, flooding, high winds, and wildfire.
Extreme heat can cause power outages due to mechanical failure of electrical equipment, heat damage to the above-ground infrastructure, and a high demand for electricity due to air conditioning units.
Increased electricity usage for air conditioning during heat waves can overtax electrical transmission lines and transformers, which may disfunction or fail, causing power outages. Solar and wind energy production could also decrease due to extreme heat. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, solar photovoltaic panels experience a decrease in efficiency due to excessive heat of converting solar energy to electric energy due to an increase in current but a larger decrease in voltage. SCE and its partners incentivize reducing energy demand during peak-energy usage times of the day, which may help reduce the amount of energy demand on extreme heat days. Severe weather can also have wind speeds that cause transmission lines to sway in close proximity of each other, potentially leading to arcing. This can generate sparks, excessive heat, and damage the lines. High winds from severe weather can also cause SCE to conduct a Public Safety Power Shutoff and turn off electricity to prevent sparks, which disrupts energy delivery to the city. SCE and SoCal Gas can retrofit power lines and other equipment to insulate them against extreme heat events and severe weather, as well as underground utilities to protect them from severe winds and wildfires.
Evacuation route and transportation infrastructure are highly or moderately vulnerable to extreme heat, flooding, and severe weather. Extreme heat and prolonged periods of high temperatures can crack, heave, or deform roadway and railway materials, damaging major roads, transit corridors, and evacuation routes or making them difficult to drive on. Evacuation routes, such as I-10 and SR-60, have sections that are within the 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Floodwaters can cause these major routes, including bridges and underpasses, to become impassable and prevent people from evacuating during an emergency. The Ontario International Airport and Union Pacific railways are also in the 100-year or 500- year floodplain. Flooding can inundate runways, damage terminal buildings, and damage railway tracks, disrupting the regional transportation network. Roadways and railways can be retrofitted with materials with higher temperature thresholds, evacuation-designated roadways can be raised to prevent flooding, and the airport can be hardened to prevent damage to facilities. While Caltrans may have the funds for increased maintenance of roadways, is may be expensive for Ontario to increase maintenance and repairs on repetitive loss roadways.
1872
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
24 Public safety services and buildings are highly vulnerable to flooding, which can cause the facilities supporting the services to be inundated and damaged. Three police stations and six fire stations are within the 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Floodwaters can damage these buildings or cause mold and mildew to grow, causing the space to become unusable and unhealthy indoor air quality. Chronic flooding may make these buildings difficult to maintain. Public safety response services rely heavily on major roads and highways, which can be blocked by floodwaters and prevent personnel from traveling through the city to respond to public safety needs. Alternative routes may be available, but not always the most efficient way to travel to important destinations.
Flood-control infrastructure is highly vulnerable to flooding and severe weather, which have the potential to overwhelm these systems and cause them to fail. During periods of heavy rainfall, flood-control channels and basins have a higher risk of overflowing their banks, causing flooding in residential, commercial, and industrial areas of Ontario. The flood-control systems and storm drains are maintained by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Water Resources, the San Bernardino County Flood Control District, and Ontario Public Works Department; therefore, coordination would have to occur across agencies to maintain adequate flood-control structures.
Homes and residential structures are highly vulnerable to flooding and severe weather. Homes throughout the city are within the 100-year or 500-year floodplains and can be destroyed by large floods or flash floods. If flooding does not destroy a home, it can leave mold and mildew, making the structure uninhabitable without remediation, repair, and replacement. Homes, especially older homes, can also be damaged by high winds and other severe weather. The Community Action Partnership of San Bernardino County and La Cooperativa Campesina de California can help low-income residents and homeowners retrofit their homes and protect them from flooding and severe weather. However, some retrofits may not be economically feasible for all residents that do not qualify for this program.
Freight and shipping services are dependent on roadways and railways, and therefore are highly vulnerable to flooding and severe weather. Freight and shipping services can be disrupted if highways and major roadways become impassable during severe weather or flooding events. Delays in services may last days or weeks depending on the severity. Smaller freight and shipping services can use alternative roadways outside of flood zones to meet deliveries. However, large freight trucks and train cars may not be able to use alternative routes if they require designated truck routes.
Water and wastewater treatment, delivery, and collection are highly vulnerable to drought and flooding.
Flooding can cause a wastewater treatment plant to be inundated with wet weather flows due to higher levels of stormwater, preventing the system from functioning properly. Failure of the wastewater treatment plant could cause sewer collection systems to back up and potentially overflowing raw sewage into streams and water systems. Water and wastewater systems can be retrofitted to prevent damage from flooding and ensure continuity of service. However, wastewater cannot be easily rerouted if the system is damaged or disrupted.
Drought conditions can stress water agencies that provide water to Ontario, as supplies from the State Water Project and groundwater may be significantly reduced due to lack of snowmelt into the system or recharge into the groundwater basins. Water agencies may apply demand-reduction actions, such as water restrictions for non-essential uses, increased use of recycled water, and penalties for violating 1873
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
25 water shortage provisions. Water delivery agencies can also provide water rebate or retrofit programs to help businesses and residents in the area reduce overall water consumption.
Parks and open space are highly vulnerable to drought. Severe drought conditions would require agencies to curtail watering of parks, causing drought stress and plant damage that can limit aesthetic appeal and recreational potential. The City of Ontario has recycled water that can be used to irrigate parks and sports fields with highly treated wastewater. The installation of drought-tolerant plants and low-water use landscaping can also reduce water use and improve drought resiliency. However, these retrofits may be expensive for the city to complete.
Homeless shelters and supportive facilities are highly vulnerable to severe weather, which can be damaged by high winds, hail, and lightning. The services supported by these buildings may be prevented from providing adequate services if the facilities are damaged. Homeless shelters are typically managed by nonprofit or faith-based organizations that may not get financial support from local agencies and may not have the funding for repairs if their facilities are damaged. However, these facilities have the potential to obtain grant funding to be converted into multi-use resilience hubs with resilient energy options and retrofitted structures to minimize disruptions from high winds and flooding events.
Communication services, including phone, cable, and internet, are highly vulnerable to severe weather that includes high winds. This can cause power outages that turn off communication infrastructure, preventing businesses and residents from receiving emergency notifications and evacuation notices.
Communication facilities can be retrofitted to prevent damage and keep communication capabilities on.
However, there may not be many redundancies in the communication system in the city that can be brought online if others fail.
Emergency medical response is highly vulnerable to human health hazards, as an increase in vector-borne and other illnesses may cause the demand to outweigh the capacity of emergency medical response services. There may be shortages of health care facilities, equipment, pharmaceuticals, and personnel if health care workers become sick or if supply chains are disrupted. Local and regional medical centers and providers can strengthen medical supply chains and prepare emergency contingency plans for if or when human health hazards increase in frequency and intensity. However, this may take time and require extensive coordination with multiple agencies and companies.
Economic Drivers
Economic drivers are the main contributors to the economy and employment within the City of Ontario.
Important economic sectors are most vulnerable to extreme heat and flooding. Of the seven economic assets included in the assessment, five were highly vulnerable to at least one hazard.
Outdoor recreation is highly vulnerable to poor air quality, extreme heat, and wildfire smoke. Outdoor recreation can be curtailed due to unhealthy air quality conditions resulting from increased ozone or particulate matter or high temperatures in the region. Intense physical exertion from running or bicycling can be dangerous during poor air quality conditions and extreme heat, and people must stay hydrated to avoid heat and respiratory illnesses. Although parks and open space are not in wildfire-prone areas, visitors and residents could be deterred from traveling to the city if smoke and extreme heat create unfavorable conditions, especially if water stations are not available at outdoor recreation sites. 1874
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
26 Alternative locations for outdoor activities may be available in other parts of San Bernardino County, where temperatures are lower or there is better air quality, but these locations would likely not be in Ontario or nearby cities.
Agriculture, which consists of livestock and crops for livestock in Ontario, is highly vulnerable to drought and extreme heat. Many livestock species, especially cattle, require large amounts of water. The problem is particularly significant for animals raised on feed, as feed crops themselves require large amounts of water. Insufficient access to water can cause livestock growth to slow or stop and may increase the risk of sickness or animal mortality. Temperatures above 100 degrees can create heat stress, increasing the risk of infection, reducing milk production and fertility, and may lead to death, particularly among animals that are already stressed by illness. Livestock facility operators can purchase feed, reduce herd size, wean animals (as applicable) early, and seek assistance through government relief programs. Extreme heat is also highly harmful to livestock animals. Providing shade structures, misters, and making water available can help reduce heat stress. However, these may not be feasible options for all operations.
Ontario International Airport is severely vulnerable to extreme heat and flooding because airplanes may not be able to take off or land during dangerous conditions. During extreme heat events that reach 115o F
to 120o
F, aircraft may be unable to generate enough lift during take-off because of less dense air. This can ground airplanes and cause delays in air services that can last hours. Flooding can create unsafe conditions for planes to take off or land on the airport runways, preventing the airport from functioning properly. These events can delay air services that could last hours or days, depending on the severity.
Visitors and residents that use Ontario International Airport may be able to use alternative airports, but these may not have the same commercial flights or be farther away.
Major employers, warehouses, and logistics centers are highly vulnerable to flooding. Several warehouses and logistics centers on the eastern portion of the city, which include many of the major employers in the city, are within the 100-year or 500-year floodplain. Warehouses can be damaged by floodwaters and impassable roadways, or freight rail, can prevent logistics centers from shipping the goods they need to.
Other major employers may experience a disruption in business from flooding that blocks roadways and damages facilities, preventing the movement of goods, services, and people. Existing levee and flood channel systems prevent flooding of some facilities and roadways in the city. However, employees may not be able to get through major intersections to travel to warehouses, logistics centers, and major employers in the city until the water recedes.
1875
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
27 IMPLICATIONS FOR TOP 2050
Emergency Preparedness and Response
The City is prepared to meet emergency situations, such as fire, medical, or hazardous events. The Ontario Office of Emergency Management, Fire Department, and Police Department conduct emergency preparedness and response activities in Ontario. The Office of Emergency Management leads the update and implementation of the City’s Hazard Mitigation Plan and Emergency Operations Plan, which provides employee and citizen education in preparedness, or CERT programs, and trains City employees in disaster response, management, and recovery. The Ontario Fire Department provides a variety of public safety services, including fire protection, medical aid, rescue, vector control, sandbag distribution, hazardous materials response, and educational safety programs, such as CPR, first aid classes, and Fire Explorers.
Other services include fire code enforcement and regulation, plan reviews, home, and business inspections, and fire code permits. The Ontario Police Department provides evacuation and traffic control during emergencies and disasters.
The Emergency Operations Center (EOC) at Ontario Fire Station No.1, provides a centralized location for emergency management in the event of a major emergency or disaster within the city. The EOC operations are directed by the Office of Emergency Management, emergency management staff (City Department heads), and representatives from organizations who are assigned emergency responsibilities (Red Cross, schools, hospitals, etc.). The EOC is equipped with essential administrative supplies to sustain operations for an extended period. In addition, all necessary forms, i.e., communications message forms, separate journals for each emergency service, shelter registration cards, volunteer registration forms, emergency requisition forms, and damage assessment survey sheets for all possible contingencies, are stocked in the EOC.
The City of Ontario uses AlertOntario, an Everbridge mass notification system, to notify the community and distribute emergency information and instructions before, during, and after a disaster. This system alerts all residents in the area about disasters, major emergencies, and other urgent information via text messages, email, phone, landline, and other means of communication. The Telephone Emergency Notification System is used by the San Bernardino County Sheriff and Fire Departments to quickly communicate information on impending dangers using telephone and text messages.
Other emergency alert systems include the Emergency Alert Systems (EAS) and the Emergency Digital Information System (EDIS). The EAS is a national public warning system commonly used by state and local authorities to deliver important emergency information, such as weather and AMBER alerts, to affected communities. EAS participants include radio and television broadcasters, cable systems, satellite radio, and television providers, and wireline video providers. FEMA, the Federal Communications System, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) National Weather Service work collaboratively to maintain the EAS and Wireless Emergency Alerts, which are the two main components of the national public warning system and enable authorities at all levels of government to send urgent emergency information to the public. EDIS is a wireless emergency and disaster information service operated by the State of California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services and is an enhancement to the EAS. These systems are available in multiple languages. 1876
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
28 MUTUAL-AID AGREEMENTS
The City of Ontario participates in the California Master Mutual-Aid Agreement. The Standardized Emergency Management System have adopted the California Master Mutual-Aid Agreement, and is designed to ensure that adequate resources, facilities, and other support are provided to jurisdictions whenever their own resources are insufficient to cope with the needs of a given emergency. The State Office of Emergency Services Southern Region (Mutual Aid Region I) serves the mutual-aid region that encompasses San Bernardino County. Automatic aid pacts with the San Bernardino County Office of Emergency Services and local fire departments or offices of emergency services in nearby cities provide additional emergency management and response services in Ontario.
EVACUATION NEEDS
With advanced warning, evacuation can be effective in reducing injury and loss of life during a catastrophic event. Primary emergency access and evacuation routes in Ontario, as shown on Exhibit S-11 of the TOP 2050 Safety Element, include I-15, I-10, SR-83, and SR-60; Fourth Street, Holt Boulevard, Mission Boulevard, Riverside Drive, Chino Avenue, and Edison Avenue (east-west roadways); and South Mountain Avenue, Euclid Avenue, Grove Avenue, Archibald Avenue, and Haven Avenue, (north-south roadways). All evacuation routes in Ontario face a potential disruption from a flood or earthquake event, which may block roadways, damage the roadway surface, or collapse overpasses. In the event of widespread disruption to local evacuation routes, remaining evacuation routes may become congested, slowing down evacuation of the community or specific neighborhoods. This issue may be compounded since evacuation routes for Ontario will also likely serve as evacuation routes for surrounding communities, and so potential disruptions may have regional effects. An analysis of the City’s roadway network and parcels conducted as part of The Ontario Plan preparation has determined that there are currently several residential parcels within the city with evacuation constraints, as shown on Exhibit S-10 of the TOP 2050 Safety Element. All parcels within an evacuation constraint are in at least one hazardprone area and most are clustered in cul-de-sac designed neighborhoods that feed into the same roadway. The lack of multiple emergency access points in these neighborhoods limits roadway access for these properties, which may create congestion and difficulties if there is a need to evacuate.
Equity and Uncertainty
When addressing vulnerability and adaptation through TOP 2050 and the associated implementation plan, the Adaptation Planning Guide and General Plan Guidelines recommend consideration of equity and uncertainty.
Equity means that all people are justly and fairly included in society, and that everyone can participate, prosper, and achieve their full potential. Equitable climate adaptation planning involves identifying persons who are most vulnerable to climate change hazards, and ensuring that the planning process, distribution of resources, and efforts to address systematic wrongs are all conducted in an equitable manner. This Vulnerability Assessment identifies 17 vulnerable populations and assesses climate change impacts and the ability of these populations to prepare for, respond to, and recover from climate change hazards (see list in Populations and Assets Section).
Uncertainty is the second component to consider when determining how hazardous conditions may affect Ontario. Climate change is driven by the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, which is 1877
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
29 affected by how our communities use resources and how we regulate those uses through local, state, federal, and international GHG-reduction goals, regulations, plans, and programs. As more action is taken to reduce GHG emissions, the less severe the effects of climate change are expected to be. Climate change models consider the concentrations of atmospheric GHG emissions and the changes in these levels over time to project future extent or intensity of hazardous events.
Even with the extensive modeling, potential impacts are projections of more likely future conditions and are not certain. Similarly, there is also substantial uncertainty about the future state of technology, socioeconomic conditions, and other factors. According to recent studies, the best approach to uncertainty is to prepare and adapt by monitoring how the future evolves and allow for adjustments over time as new climate data and studies are completed. The State and the City have ample evidence to support science-based policy and decision-making.
Adaptation and Resilience Opportunities
Ontario currently experiences a wide range of climate change hazards that are projected to increase in frequency and intensity in the future. While GHG reduction measures will help reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, adaptation strategies will be needed to increase the resilience of residents and businesses in Ontario. The general plan is required to integrate adaptation measures into the update process that will help the community prepare for, respond to, and recover from climate change hazards.
• Safety. Due to the recent update of the California Government Code Section 653029(g) with the approval of SB 379, Safety Elements are required to address climate adaptation and resilience strategies. The Safety Element’s goals, policies, and implementation actions can provide resilience strategies that support both reduced impacts and improved adaptive capacity of the community to climate change-related hazards, along with policies on required hazards, such as flooding, fire, and geologic hazards. Policies within this element can ensure that health, safety, and economic concerns of the community are met, even with an increase in frequency and intensity of climate change hazards. Examples of specific policies or implementation actions could include:
o Create an extreme heat response plan that includes establishment of community cooling centers, weatherization of City buildings, and cooling strategies for persons engaged in outdoor work and persons experiencing homelessness.
o Expand participation of programs and services that provide funding resources for economically disadvantaged households and businesses to conduct water conservation and weatherization retrofits.
o Collaborate with Omnitrans and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority to help in evacuation efforts of seniors, persons with reduced mobility, and people without vehicles during emergency events.
o Provide alerts about potential, developing, and ongoing emergency situations through extensive early-warning and notification systems that convey information to all residents, in multiple languages and formats to ensure it is widely accessible. 1878
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
30 o Focus hazard mitigation planning in in evacuation constrained residential areas identified on Exhibit S-10, Evacuation Constrained Areas, of the TOP 2050 Safety Element. • Mobility. The Mobility Element includes policies for roadway systems, public transit, airport environs, and regional transportation. Transportation and public transit infrastructure are included in the Vulnerability Assessment Results discussion above, and therefore resilience strategies for these systems would be appropriate to add to the Mobility Element goals and policies. Potential policies may include coordinating with regional transit providers to identify alternative routes and stops if normal infrastructure is damaged or closed as a result of flooding; raising or hardening roadways to protect them from flooding; ensuring heat-resistant materials are used on roadways; and implementation of other transportation-related resilience features.
This element can also have evacuation related policies to improve evacuation access throughout the city, including requiring new development to have at least two ingress and egress routes. • Environmental Resources. The Environmental Resources Element discusses water, wastewater, energy, and other utilities assessed as vulnerable in this Vulnerability Assessment. To address these vulnerabilities, policies can include funding efforts to underground electricity lines citywide, create redundances in the communication infrastructure, and provide sustainable back-up power supplies. The City can also encourage or incentivize residential and on-site solar energy systems, especially when paired with battery storage to provide a resilient energy supply for homes. To protect infrastructure and services from flooding, policies can include the promotion of water conservation measures, low-impact development, and green stormwater infrastructure that can help convey stormwater. The Environmental Resources Element can also include policies to increase tree canopy cover, which can have the added benefit of reducing the urban heat island effect and filter out air pollutants.
• Community Design. The Community Design Element discusses the design of buildings, streets, and neighborhoods in Ontario. The design of streets, specifically for evacuation purposes, is included in the Emergency Response and Preparedness section above. To address neighborhood scale evacuation vulnerabilities, the Community Design Element can include policies for new neighborhoods to be designed to ensure at least two ingress and egress route in all new neighborhoods.
• Social Resources. The Social Resources Element includes goals and policies for health, education, community and leisure activities, libraries, and other community facilities. Many of these facilities, or the services they provide, are identified as vulnerable, as described earlier in this report. To address health impacts, the City can add policies to coordinate with San Bernardino County Public Health to ensure emergency and public health services can meet the needs of the population during poor air quality and extreme heat days, as well as human health hazard events.
The Social Resources Element also provides goals and policies for some public facilities, including community centers and libraries, throughout the city. Resilient IE provides a key resilience strategy for public facilities, the integration of physical and virtual resilience hubs. These can serve as centralized locations for resources about climate change, opportunities to reduce emissions, and techniques to increase resilience, showcases for sustainability, energy efficiency, and low carbon building, and to help residents obtain essential resources and information during and after a disaster. Examples of specific implementation actions could include:
1879
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
31 o Identify equitably located existing facilities, outside of flood hazard zones, to serve as resilience hubs and cooling centers that open during emergencies or specific temperature triggers for residents to go to seek refuge from extreme heat days or emergency shelter.
o Coordinate with emergency management services to establish backup power, preferably from renewable energy sources, and water resources at emergency shelters, resilience hubs, and cooling centers in case of power outages.
Resilience in Other Planning Mechanisms
Resilience policies and programs should not be limited to TOP 2050. Adaptation and resilience rely on a cross-department, multi-disciplinary approach to successful implementation. The City should consider how adaptation and resilience can also be incorporated into other City plans, codes, projects, and implementation programs. Addressing climate change hazard events in TOP 2050 can support other essential safety documents, such as the Ontario Annex of the San Bernardino County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Development standards such as residential building codes for buildings in flood zones and development of adequate evacuation routes can be integrated into the Ontario Municipal Code. Policies that focus on emergency response to hazards can be included in an evacuation plan or an emergency operations plan. Adaptation measures that also reduce GHG emissions can be integrated into the Ontario Community Climate Action Plan and may support the Ontario Active Transportation Master Plan. Coordination between the City and its energy providers can incentivize energy-related GHG reduction measures. Policies related to drought and flooding may be integrated into the City of Ontario’s and Cucamonga Valley Water District’s Urban Water Management Plans and the Ontario Storm Drain Master Plan. Furthermore, programs such as the Ontario Municipal Code and Capital Improvement Program can help implement the resilience policies developed in the General Plan through specific projects, development codes, and budgeting.
1880
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
32 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Printed References
Ackerly, David, Andrew Jones, Mark Stacey, Bruce Riordan. (University of California, Berkeley). 2018. San Francisco Bay Area Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number:
CCCA4-SUM-2018- 005.
ARCCA, 2018, From Mountain to Cities: Exploring California’s Urban Connections to Sierra Nevada Ecosystems. https://arccacalifornia.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/08/ARCCA-UrbanRural-Whitepaper.pdf.
Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN). 2019. Mapping Resilience: A Blueprint for Thriving in the Face of Climate Change. https://apen4ej.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/APEN-Mapping_ResilienceReport.pdf Bedsworth, Louise, Dan Cayan, Guido Franco, Leah Fisher, Sonya Ziaja. (California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, California Energy Commission, California Public Utilities Commission). 2018. Statewide Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-013.
California Climate and Agricultural Network. 2019. Cultivating Climate Resilience in Farming: Ensuring California Farms and Ranches Thrive in the Face of Climate Change. https://calclimateag.org/wpcontent/uploads/2019/07/Cultivating-Resilience-August-2019.pdf.
California Office of Emergency Services. 2020. California Adaptation Planning Guide. https://www.caloes.ca.gov/HazardMitigationSite/Documents/CA-Adaptation-Planning-Guide-FINAL-June2020-Accessible.pdf.
Caltrans. 2019. Caltrans Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment Summary Report: District 8. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/transportation-planning/documents/2019-climatechange-vulnerability-assessments/ada-remediated/d8-summary-report-a11y.pdf.
City of Ontario. 2021. City of Ontario 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf.
Cucamonga Valley Water District. 2021. 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.cvwdwater.com/DocumentCenter/View/4741/Final-Cucamonga-Valley-Water-District-2020- UWMP.
Fuscoe Engineering, Inc. 2021. City of Ontario General Plan Infrastructure Report for Hydrology, Sewer, Water, and Water Quality.
Governor’s Office of Planning and Research. 2017. Planning and Investing for a Resilient California. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180313-Building_a_Resilient_CA.pdf. 1881
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
33 Hall, Alex, Neil Berg, Katharine Reich. 2018. Los Angeles Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-007. Los Angeles, California: University of California, Los Angeles.
Pacific Energy Center. 2006. California Climate Zones.
https://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/about/edusafety/training/pec/toolbox/arch/climate/california _climate_zones_01-16.pdf.
PlaceWorks. 2021. Ontario Housing Element Public Review Draft. https://www.ontarioplan.org/wpcontent/uploads/sites/4/2021/10/Ontario-Housing-Element-Update_Public-Review-Draft_October2021.pdf.
San Bernardino County Agriculture/Weights & Measures. 2021. 2020 Crop Report. http://cms.sbcounty.gov/Portals/13/AWM%20CROP%20REPORT%202020%20080521.pdf?ver=2021-08- 05-160649-640.
Southern California Association of Governments. 2019. Profile of the City of Ontario. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/ontario_localprofile.pdf?1606014835 Roos, Michelle. (E4 Strategic Solutions). 2018. Climate Justice Summary Report. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: SUM-CCCA4-2018-012.
Websites
American Community Survey. 2019. American Community Survey, Table B25034, "Year Structure Built." https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Year%20Structure%20Built&g=1600000US0655254&tid=ACSDT5Y 2019.B25034&hidePreview=false accessed February 22, 2022.
California Department of Finance. 2020. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State:
January 1, 2019, and 2020. Data table. http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/E-1/ accessed January 28, 2021.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2021. “FHSZ Viewer.” https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/, accessed November 24, 2021.
California Department of Water Resources. 2021. “Statewide Snowpack Well Below Normal as Wet Season Winds Down.” https://water.ca.gov/News/News-Releases/2021/April-21/Statewide-SnowpackWell-Below-Normal-as-Wet-Season-Winds-Down.
California Energy Commission. 2018. “Extreme Heat Days and Warm Nights.” https://caladapt.org/tools/extreme-heat/, accessed November 24, 2021.
California Energy Commission. 2018. “Annual Averages.” https://cal-adapt.org/tools/annual-averages/ accessed November 24, 2021.
California Energy Commission. 2018. “Extreme Precipitation.” https://cal-adapt.org/tools/extremeprecipitation/ accessed January 29, 2021.
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 2021. “CalEnviroScreen 4.0.” https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40, accessed November 23, 2021. 1882
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
34 FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2018. FEMA Flood Zones (Map Service). https://tpc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=6a010cc179554536ac70a9637db8f245 accessed January 28, 2021.
National Weather Service. 2021. “Climate: NOWData.” https://www.weather.gov/wrh/Climate?wfo=sgx, accessed November 16, 2021.
Native Lands Digital. 2021. “Native Land Digital.” https://native-land.ca/.
U.S. Climate Data. 2021. “Climate Ontario – California.” https://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/ontario/california/united-states/usca2487, accessed November 23, 2021.
U.S. Department of Energy. N.d, “Solar Performance and Efficiency.” https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/solar-performance-and-efficiency, accessed February 23, 2022.
U.S. Drought Monitor. 2021. “California.”
https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/CurrentMap/StateDroughtMonitor.aspx?CA, accessed November 23, 2021.
Western Riverside Council of Governments, San Bernardino County Transportation Authority. 2020. “Resilient IE.” https://wrcog.us/285/Resilient-IE, accessed November 24, 2021. 1883
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
35 LIST OF PREPARERS
Lead Agency
City of Ontario
303 East B Street
Ontario, California 91764
PlaceWorks, Consultant to the City of Ontario
Brian Judd, Managing Principal, TOP 2050 Principal-in-Charge Colin Drukker, Principal, TOP 2050 Project Manager
Halley Grundy, Associate II, TOP 2050 Assistant Project Manager Tammy L. Seale, Principal, Climate Action and Resiliency Jacqueline Protsman Rohr, Associate II, Climate Action and Resiliency Renata Langis, Project Planner, Climate Action and Resiliency Kim Herkewitz, Southern California GIS Manager
Erin Guy, Associate II, GIS Coordinator
1884
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
36 APPENDIX A: LIST OF POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
List of Items to Include in the Ontario Plan Vulnerability Assessment PlaceWorks proposed the following populations and other assets for inclusion in the Vulnerability Assessment. Each list includes a description and source of data needed to support the Vulnerability Assessment.
POPULATIONS
PlaceWorks collected population data from the U.S. Census, the California Healthy Places Index, and Homeless Point-in-Time Count. These populations include:
• Children (under 10)1
• Cost-burdened households: households paying 30 percent or more of their income towards housing expenses2
• Households in poverty: households with an income below the poverty line, which is $26,500 for a household of four in the United States.3
• Immigrants and refugees4
• Linguistically isolated populations: especially Spanish, Tagalog, and Chinese5 • Low-income households: households with an income of 80 percent or less of the median household income. The low-income threshold is approximately $52,037 in Ontario. 6 The State of
California identifies $77,500 as the low-income threshold for a household of four people in San Bernardino County.7
• Outdoor workers (e.g., construction, farmworkers, outdoor recreation workers, landscapers)8 • Overcrowded households: housing units that have 1.0 persons or more per room (excluding bathrooms and kitchens).9
• Persons experiencing homelessness: 2020 point-in-time count reported 28 sheltered and 74 unsheltered (102 total) persons experiencing homelessness in the city.10 • Persons living in mobile homes
• Persons with chronic illnesses
• Persons with disabilities11
• Persons without access to lifelines: Persons without access to a car, transit, or communication systems.12
• Renters13
• Seniors (65+)14
• Seniors living alone15
• Undocumented persons
1885
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
37 INFRASTRUCTURE
PlaceWorks collected infrastructure data from a variety of sources. These infrastructure assets include:
• Airports: Ontario International Airport (Data source: Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics) • Bike routes: City routes, West Cucamonga Creek Trail System (Data source: City of Ontario website: Parks and Street Maintenance)
• Bridges (Data source: Caltrans GIS)
• Communication facilities (e.g., cell phone towers, ham radio antennae, AT&T switching buildings) (Data source: TBC)
• Electrical substations and transmission lines: 11 substations and transmission lines operated by Southern California Edison. (Data source: California Energy Commission) • Electric vehicle charging stations: 27 public stations (Data source: Alternative Fuels Data Center) • Evacuation routes (Data source: Resilient IE, 2020)
• Flood-control infrastructure: levees along Cucamonga Creek and the City’s stormwater management system (Data source: DWR Levee Protection Zones) • Hazardous materials sites (Data source: EnviroStor)
• Major roads and highways: I-10, I-15, SR-60 (Data source: Caltrans) • Natural gas pipelines: Southern California Gas Company (Data source: Cal OES) • Parks and open space: 30 City parks, including Creekside Park and Golf Course, De Anza Park, Guasti Regional Park, Homer Briggs Park, John Galvin Park, Munoz Park, Ontario Soccer Complex, Westwind Park, and Whispering Lakes Golf Course (Data source: Parks Department website) • Power plants: 8 natural gas facilities, 11 solar energy facilities, 1 landfill gas facility, 3 battery energy storage facilities, and small-scale energy generation facilities (Data source: California Energy Commission)
• Railways: Alhambra and Los Angeles railway subdivisions, Metrolink, Amtrak, Union Pacific (Data source: California Active Rail Lines, Amtrak)
• Solid waste facilities and landfills: 8 facilities including Caltrans Upland Maintenance Station, Recycled Wood Products, Ontario Agricultural Commodities, Residual Recovery Group, Beneficial Agriculture Services, Recycled Wood Products Ontario 2, Partida Fertilizer, and Chino Valley Rock, all of which are active. (Data source: CalRecycle)
• Transit stops: Ontario Metrolink Station, East Ontario Metrolink Station, Omnitrans (Data source:
SBCTA)
• Water and wastewater infrastructure: Inland Empire Utilities Agency Regional Water Recycling Plant, City of Ontario
BUILDINGS
PlaceWorks collected buildings data from Google maps, the Ontario Parks & Recreation Department, the City of Ontario land use GIS layer, and the California School Database. These assets include:
• Community centers: Armstrong Community Center, De Anza Community & Teen Center (designated cooling center), Anthony Munoz Community Center, Dorothy A. Quesada Community Center, Ontario Senior Center, Veterans Memorial Community Center, Westwind Community Center.
1886
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
38 • Commercial business, shopping, and entertainment centers: Toyota Arena, Ontario Mills Shopping Center, Ontario Convention Center, Ontario Auto Center, Stater Bros Plaza, Archibald Ranch Town Center, Archibalds Plaza, Pacific Plaza, Ontario Airport Commerce Center, Ontario Business Center, Ontario Center, Prologis Park.
• Homeless shelters: Mercy House Ontario Access Center, House of Ruth, Foothill Family Shelter. • Government buildings: Ontario City Hall and City facilities, San Bernardino Department of Human Services.
• Homes and residential structures
• Libraries: Ovitt Family Community Library (designated cooling center), Lewis Family Branch, South Ontario Library.
• Medical and care facilities: Healthcare Center of Bella Vista, Inland Christian Home, Kaiser Foundation Hospital, Kindred Hospital Ontario, Las Colinas Post Acute, Ontario Dialysis Center, Ontario Healthcare Center, Ontario Holt Dialysis Center, Ontario Mills Dialysis (48 total – only medical facilities with patient capacity of 20 or more listed) • Public safety buildings: City of Ontario Police Department, Ontario Policy Department Mills Station, City of Ontario Fire Department Stations #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9, #10, and San Bernardino County – West Valley Detention Center.
• Schools: Cambridge College, American Career College, Pacific College Inland Empire, Platt Collage, SJVC Ontario, Carrington College, University of La Verne College of Law, 8 private schools, 1 unaffiliated pre‐school, 5 high schools with CJUHSD, 2 elementary schools with CSD, 3 middle or elementary schools with CVUSD, 4 middle or elementary schools with MVSD, 22 middle or elementary schools with OMSD.
ECONOMIC DRIVERS
PlaceWorks determined important economic assets based on the 2020 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and land uses surrounding the City of Ontario. These assets include:
• Agriculture
• Education services
• Major employers: Ontario International Airport, United Parcel Service, Ontario Montclair School District, Niagara Bottling LLC, Chaffey Joint Union High School District, QVC Ontario LLC, Home Depot, ULINE, FedEx, Cardinal Health.16
• Ontario International Airport
• Outdoor recreation (i.e., walking, biking, and court or field sports) • Retail centers
• Warehouses and logistics centers
KEY COMMUNITY SERVICES
These assets are based on typical services provided in cities throughout California, which are supported by the infrastructure and buildings listed above. Key community services include the operation and functions needed to provide and maintain services instead of just the structures that support them. These assets include:
1887
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
39 • Communication services
• Emergency medical response: City of Ontario Fire Department • Energy delivery: Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company • Freight and shipping
• Government administration and community services
• Public safety response: City of Ontario Police Department • Public transit access: Metrolink, Omnitrans, SBCTA
• Solid waste removal: Ontario Integrated Waste Management • Water and wastewater treatment, delivery, and collection: City of Ontario Municipal Utilities Company, Inland Empire Utilities Agency Regional Water Recycling Plan No. 1.
Endnotes for Appendix A
1 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Age and Sex, S0101. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Ontario&t=Age%20and%20Sex&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S0101&hidePreview=fals e.
2 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Financial Characteristics, S2503. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Financial%20Characteristics&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S25 03&hidePreview=false. 3 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Financial Characteristics, S2503. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Financial%20Characteristics&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S25 03&hidePreview=false. 4 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Selected Social Characteristics in the United States, DP02.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Foreign%20Born&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP02&hidePre view=false. 5 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Limited English Speaking Households, S1602. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Language%20Spoken%20at%20Home&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST1Y 2019.S1601&hidePreview=false. 6 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Financial Characteristics, S2503. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Financial%20Characteristics&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S25 03&hidePreview=false. 7 Department of Housing and Community Development. April 2021. State Income Limits for 2021. https://www.hcd.ca.gov/grants-funding/income-limits/state-and-federal-income-limits/docs/income-limits2021.pdf.. 8 American Community Survey. 2018. 2018: ACS 5-Year Estimates, B24011 and B24021. 9 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Tenure by Occupants per Room, B25014. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Occupants%20Per%20Room&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B2 5014&hidePreview=false. 10 County of San Bernardino. 2020. San Bernardino County Homeless Count and Subpopulation Survey Final Report. https://wp.sbcounty.gov/dbh/sbchp/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/04/2020-SBC-Homeless-Count-Report.pdf. 11 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Disability Characteristics, S1810. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Disability&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S1810&hidePreview=f alse.
1888
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
40 12 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Household Size by Vehicles Available, B08201. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Transportation&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08201&hidePre view=false.
13 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Financial Characteristics, S2503. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Financial%20Characteristics&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S25 03&hidePreview=false. 14 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Age and Sex, S0101. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=Ontario&t=Age%20and%20Sex&tid=ACSST5Y2019.S0101&hidePreview=fals e.
15 American Community Survey. 2019. 2019: ACS 5-Year Estimates, Selected Social Characteristics in the United States, DP02.
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?t=Foreign%20Born&g=1600000US0653896&tid=ACSDP5Y2019.DP02&hidePre view=false. 16 City of Ontario. June 2020. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. https://www.ontarioca.gov/FiscalServices/BudgetFinancialReports. 1889
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
41 This page intentionally left blank.
1890
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
42 APPENDIX B: VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT RESULTS MATRIX
POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Populations
Children (Under 10) - High Low High High Medium Medium High Cost-burdened households - Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium Households in poverty - High High High High High High High Immigrants and refugees Low High Medium High High High High High Linguistically isolated
populations - Medium Low Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Low-income households - Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Outdoor workers Medium High Medium High High High High High Overcrowded households - Medium Low Medium Medium High Low Medium Persons experiencing
homelessness - High Medium High High High High High
Persons living in mobile homes - Medium Low High High Medium High Medium Persons with chronic illnesses - High High High Medium High High High 1891
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
43 POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Persons with disabilities - Medium Low Medium High Medium Medium Medium Persons without access to
lifelines - Medium Medium High High Medium Medium Medium Renters - Medium Low Medium Medium Low Low Medium
Seniors (65+) - High Low High High High Medium High
Seniors living alone - High Low High High High High High Undocumented persons Medium High High High High High High High Infrastructure
Airports - - - Medium High - Medium -
Bike routes - - - Low Medium - Low -
Bridges - - - Medium High - Medium -
Communication facilities - - - Medium Low - Low Low
Electrical substations and
transmission lines - - - High High - High Medium
Electric vehicle charging
stations - - - Medium Medium - Low -
1892
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
44 POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Evacuation routes - - - High High - High Low
Flood control infrastructure - - - - High - High -
Hazardous materials sites - - - Low Low - Low -
Major roads and highways - - - High High - High Low
Natural gas pipelines - - - - Low - - -
Parks and open space Low - High Low Medium - Low -
Power plants - - - Medium Medium - Low -
Railways - - - High High - Medium Low
Solid waste facilities and
landfills - - - Low - - Low -
Transit stops - - - - Medium - Low -
Water and wastewater
infrastructure - - Low - Medium - - -
1893
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
45 POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Buildings
Community centers - - - Low Medium - Medium Low
Commercial business,
shopping, and entertainment
centers
- - - Low Medium - Low Low
Homeless shelters - - - Medium - - High Medium
Government buildings - - - Low - - Low Low
Homes and residential
structures - - - Medium High - High Medium
Libraries - - - Low - - Medium Low
Medical and care facilities - - - Medium Medium - Low Low Public safety buildings - - - Low High - Low Low
Schools - - - Medium Medium - Medium Medium
1894
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
46 POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Economic Drivers
Agriculture Medium Medium High High Medium Medium Medium Medium Education services - Medium - Medium Low Medium Low Medium Major employers - Low Medium Low High Low Low Low
Ontario International Airport - Medium - High High Low Medium Medium Outdoor recreation Low High - High Low Medium Medium High Retail centers - Low - Medium Medium Medium Medium Medium Warehouses and logistics
centers - Low - Low High Low Low Low
Key Services
Communication services - - - Low Low - High Low
Emergency medical response - Medium - Medium Medium High Medium Medium Energy delivery - - Low High Medium - High High
Freight and shipping - - - Medium High Low High Low
Government administration &
community services - - - Low Low Low Low Low
1895
CITY OF ONTARIO | THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050 UPDATE
VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT - FINAL
APRIL 2022
47 POPULATIONS AND ASSETS
AGRICULTURE
PESTS &
DISEASES
AIR
QUALITY DROUGHT
EXTREME HEAT
& WARM
NIGHTS
FLOODING
HUMAN
HEALTH
HAZARDS
SEVERE
WEATHER
WILDFIRE
&
SMOKE
Public safety response - - - Medium High Medium Medium Medium Public transit access - High - High High Low High High
Solid waste removal - Medium - Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Water and wastewater
treatment, delivery, and
collection
- - High Medium High - Medium Medium
1896
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN UPDATE TO THE COMMUNITY
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AN IMPLEMENTATION COMPONENT OF THE
ONTARIO PLAN SUPPORTING THE SUPPLEMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (SCH 2021070364) FOR FILE NO.
PADV22-002.
WHEREAS, the City of Ontario (City) Certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for The Ontario Plan and associated Statement of Overriding Considerations, and issued Resolution No. 2010-003; and WHEREAS, the City of Ontario adopted the Policy Plan (General Plan) as part of the component framework for The Ontario Plan on January 27, 2010, and issued Resolution No. 2010-004; and
WHEREAS, on July 17, 2021, the City of Ontario adopted a Municipal Climate Action Plan and issued Resolution No. 2012-055, and on December 16, 2014, The City of Ontario adopted the Community Climate Action Plan and issued Resolution No. 2014- 122, to comply with The Ontario Plan in January 2010. Since the adoption of the Municipal and Community Climate Action, the City has made progress to the 2020 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Target of 30% Below 2020 Business-as-Usual through the implementation of 42 environmental sector measures; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 Update to the Ontario Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) serves as the strategic plan for how the City will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and foster a sustainable community through 2050 and beyond; and WHEREAS, the 2022 CCAP Identifies and updates sources of both municipal and community GHG emissions within the City’s municipal boundaries for the calendar year of 2019 and estimates how these emissions may change over time; and WHEREAS, the 2022 CCAP serves as the programmatic tiering document for review of the climate change impacts of projects under CEQA. The 2022 CCAP is included in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for The Ontario Plan 2050; and
WHEREAS, the 2022 CCAP includes a greenhouse gas inventory baseline for the Year 2019, a future "business-as-usual" projection of greenhouse gas emissions for the Year 2030 and Year 2050, an emissions reduction target consistent with the State's emissions reduction goals and an implementation plan identifying specific measures and a timeline for implementation of said measures to reach the reduction targets for Year 2030 and Year 2050; and
1897
WHEREAS, the SEIR for File Nos. PGPA22-002 and PADV22-002 were circulated for a 45-day public review period and a notice of its availability was published in a local newspaper and posted in the Office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors of San Bernardino County; and
WHEREAS, by way of the 2022 CCAP's Implementation Plan, the City Council directs Staff to implement the 2022 CCAP's measures in phases; and WHEREAS, the Staff has authority to revise and/or adjust said measures as required and provide yearly updates, led by the City’s Sustainability Program Manager; and
WHEREAS, the CCAP meets the functional and legal mandate of a general plan; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the CCAP at which time all persons wishing to testify in connection with the CCAP were heard; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the SEIR and concluded said hearing on that date, voting (7-0) to recommend certification of the SEIR and adoption of Environmental Findings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting to the City Council, issuing Resolution No. PC22-040; and
WHEREAS, on July 26, 2022, the Planning Commission of the City of Ontario conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the CCAP and concluded said hearing on that date, voting (7-0) to recommend approval of an update to the CCAP, an implementation component of The Ontario Plan to the City Council, issuing Resolution No. PC22-043; and
WHEREAS, on August 16, 2022, the City Council of the City of Ontario conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the CCAP at which time all persons wishing to testify were heard and the SEIR was fully studied; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ontario, as follows:
SECTION 1. Environmental Determination and Findings. As the decisionmaking body for the Project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information within Final Supplemental EIR and supporting documentation. Based on the entire record before the City Council and all written and oral evidence presented the City 1898
Council finds the CCAP complies with CEQA (Public Res. Code, § 2100 et seq.), the State CEQA Guidelines (14 CCR § 1500 et seq.), and the City’s CEQA Guidelines. The City Council further finds that the TOP 2050 SEIR is hereby incorporated by this reference and that no substantial new information exists that would show that such impacts would be more significant than determined in the TOP 2050 SEIR.
SECTION 2. Concluding Facts and Reasons. As the decision-making body for the Project, the City Council has reviewed and considered the information within Final Supplemental EIR and supporting documentation and hereby concludes as follows:
(1) The 2022 CCAP meets the requirements of TOP 2050 SEIR and its mitigation measures and identifies goals and strategies to reduce GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050; and (2) The SEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and is consistent with state and local guidelines implementing CEQA; and
(3) The 2022 CCAP serves as the programmatic tiering document for review of the climate change impacts of projects under CEQA.
SECTION 3. City Council Action. Based upon the findings and conclusions set forth in Sections 1 and 2 above, the City Council APPROVES the update to the CCAP as set forth in Attachment “A” (2022 Community Climate Action Plan An Implementation Component of the Ontario Plan).
SECTION 4. Custodian of Records. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings have been based are located at the City of Ontario City Hall, 303 East “B” Street, Ontario, California 91764. The custodian for these records is the City Clerk of the City of Ontario.
SECTION 5. Certification to Adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of the Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of August 2022. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
1899
ATTEST:
_________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
1900
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
CITY OF ONTARIO )
I, SHEILA MAUTZ, City Clerk of the City of Ontario, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that foregoing Resolution No. 2022_ was duly passed and adopted by the adopted by the City Council of the City of Ontario at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022 by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
_________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
The foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2022- duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022. __________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
1901
ATTACHMENT A:
2022 COMMUNITY CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
A COMPONENT OF THE ONTARIO PLAN 2050
1902
Ontario
Community
Climate
Action Plan
Public Review Draft
May 2022
1903
ORANGE COUNTY • BAY AREA • SACRAMENTO • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE www.placeworks.com
Prepared By: PlaceWorks
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, CA 92707
714.966.9220
Ontario
Community
Climate
Action Plan
Public Review Draft | May 2022
1904
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Ontario City Council
Mayor Paul S. Leon
Mayor Pro Tem Alan D. Wapner
Council Member Jim W. Bowman
Council Member Debra Dorst-Porada
Council Member Ruben Valencia
City Manager
Scott Ochoa, City Manager
Darlene Sanchez, Assistant City Manager
City Staff
Scott Murphy, Executive Director, Development Agency
Rudy Zeledon, Planning Director
Kimberly Ruddins, Sustainability Program Manager
Thomas Grahn, Senior Planner
Robert Morales, Assistant Planner
1905
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022
City Climate Action Plan Technical Advisory Committee
Charles Mercier, Principal Planner, Development
Jamie Richardson, Senior Landscape Planner, Development Raymond Lee, Assistant City Engineer, Development
Jay Bautista, Transportation Manager, Development
Choon Lam, Principal IT Analyst, Information Technologies Michael Trani, Facilities Maintenance Supervisor, Public Works Nick Gonzales, Recreation/Community Services Director, Community Life & Culture Shawn Thrasher, Library Director, Community Life & Culture Hector Camacho, Parks and Maintenance Supervisor, Public Works Angela Magana, Community Improvement Director, Development Katryna Gonzalez, Housing Director, Development
James Caro, Building Official, Development
Derrick Womble, Administrator Officer, Development
Doreen Nunes, Assistant Finance Director, Financial Services Michelle Nguyen, Departmental Administrator, Financial Services Jordan Villwock, Fire Administrative Director, Fire Department Sagar Patel, Emergency Manager, Fire Department
Mindy Decker, Human Resources Analyst, Human Resource
Ellie Christov, Innovation Director, Management Services Lilyan Villarreal, Performance and Optimization Manager, Management Services Charity Hernandez, Principal Project Manager, Management Services Dennis Mejia, Utilities Engineering Division Manager, OMUC Claudia Hernandez, Utilities Customer Services Director, OMUC Sergeant Joe Estrada, Police Department
1906
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Abbreviations
Executive Summary...................................................................................................... ES-1 Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Forecast ....................................................................ES-3 Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies ........................................................................ES-5
1. Introduction....................................................................................................................1 Purpose of the Community Climate Action Plan..............................................................1 2014 Community Climate Action Plan...............................................................................1 2022 Community Climate Action Plan...............................................................................2 How to Use This Plan.............................................................................................................3
2. Background ...................................................................................................................5 Community Profile and History............................................................................................5 Sustainability in Ontario .......................................................................................................7 Climate Change and Equity...............................................................................................9 Regulatory Framework.......................................................................................................13
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions........................................................................23 Climate Science.................................................................................................................23 Local GHG Emissions..........................................................................................................25 Community-Wide GHG Inventory.....................................................................................26 Community-Wide Forecast ...............................................................................................41
4. GHG Reduction Targets ..............................................................................................45 Background........................................................................................................................45 2014 CCAP GHG Reduction Targets................................................................................45 State Targets and Recommendations.............................................................................45 2022 CCAP GHG Reduction Targets................................................................................46 1907
Climate Action Plan
Table of Contents
Page ii Public Review Draft, May 2022
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy........................................................47 Introduction ........................................................................................................................47 Calculating Credit .............................................................................................................47 Progress Toward GHG Reduction Goals..........................................................................47 New GHG Reduction Strategies.......................................................................................50 Summary of Total GHG Emissions Reductions..................................................................73
6. Implementation ...........................................................................................................75 Implementation Strategies................................................................................................76 Work Plan ............................................................................................................................77
7. Glossary........................................................................................................................85 Appendix A. GHG Technical Appendix.......................................................................A-1 Community-Wide Forecast .............................................................................................A-1 State GHG Emission Reductions......................................................................................A-5 Technical Data for Existing and Planned Activities.......................................................A-6 TABLES
Table ES-1 Ontario Community-Wide Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019 (MTCO2e) ..................................................................................... ES-4 Table ES-2 Ontario Community-wide GHG Emissions Forecast, 2008 to 2050 (MTCO2e)............................................................................................................ ES-5 Table ES-3 Ontario Community-Wide Emission Reductions from Existing State, Regional, and Local Actions, 2030–2050 ......................................................... ES-6 Table ES-4 List of 2022 CCAP GHG Reduction Strategies................................................. ES-6 Table ES-5 Progress to Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emissions Targets...................... ES-11 Table ES-6 List of Implementation Strategies .................................................................. ES-11 Table 1 Emissions Factors, 2008 to 2019............................................................................ 27 Table 2 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Change, 2019...................... 29 Table 3 Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019.............................. 30 Table 4 Proportions of Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector in 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 31 Table 5 Transportation Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 33 Table 6 Nonresidential Electricity Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019 ......................................................................................................... 33 1908
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 iii
Table 7 Residential Electricity Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 34 Table 8 Nonresidential Natural Gas Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 35 Table 9 Residential Natural Gas Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019 ......................................................................................................... 35 Table 10 Solid Waste Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 36 Table 11 Off-Road Equipment Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019. 37 Table 12 Agriculture Activity and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019 .......................................................................................................... 38 Table 13 Water and Wastewater Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019........................................................................................ 39 Table 14 Land Use and Sequestration Activity Data and GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019........................................................................................ 40 Table 15 Stationary Source GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019................................................. 41 Table 16 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Projection, 2019 to 2050...... 41 Table 17 Forecast Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2019–2050 ................................................ 43 Table 18 Per Capita Targets for Ontario ............................................................................ 46 Table 19 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions, 2019 to 2050 .......................................................................................................... 49 Table 20 Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emission Reduction Potential by Sector......... 73 Table 21 Progress to Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emissions Targets........................... 74 Table 22 GHG Reduction Strategy Implementation Work Plan....................................... 79 Table A-1 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Projection, 2019 to 2050.... A-1 Table A-2 Forecast Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008–2050 .............................................. A-2 Table A-3 Ontario Community-Wide Forecast Activity Data........................................... A-4 Table A-4 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions, 2019 to 2050 ........................................................................................................ A-6 Table A-5 Emissions Factors with State Reductions........................................................... A-7 1909
Climate Action Plan
Table of Contents
Page iv Public Review Draft, May 2022
FIGURES
Figure 1 Map of Ontario..................................................................................................... 11 Figure 2 The Greenhouse Effect ........................................................................................ 23 Figure 3 Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019.............................. 31 Figure 4 City of Ontario Community-Wide Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2019–2050 ....... 44 Figure 5 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emissions with Reduction Strategies, 2019 to 2050 .. 74 1910
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 v
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AB Assembly Bill
ACS American Community Survey
ADC alternative daily cover
AQMP air quality management plan
BRT bus rapid transit
CARB California Air Resources Board
CCAP community climate action plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CH4 methane
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalent
CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
DOE Department of Energy (U.S.)
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.)
EV electric vehicle
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
GHG greenhouse gas
Global Protocol Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories GWP global warming potential
HCD Housing and Community Development Department (California) HFC hydrofluorocarbon
IEUA Inland Empire Utilities Agency
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
IT information technology
kWh kilowatt-hour
LED light-emitting diode
LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
LCFS low-carbon fuel standard
MMT million metric tons
MT metric ton
MTCO2e metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
MSW Municipal solid waste
N2O nitrous oxide
NF3 nitrogen trifluoride
1911
Climate Action Plan
List of Abbreviations
Page vi Public Review Draft, May 2022
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (CONTINUED)
OMUC Ontario Municipal Utilities Company
PFC perfluorocarbon
PV photovoltaic
RPS Renewable Portfolio Standard
RTTAC Regional Transit Technical Advisory Committee
SB Senate Bill
SBCOG San Bernardino Council of Governments
SBCTA San Bernardino County Transportation Authority
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
SCAG Southern California Association of Governments
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SoCalREN Southern California Regional Energy Network
TOP The Ontario Plan
TOD transit-oriented development
U.S. Community Protocol United States Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions
VMT vehicle miles traveled
ZEV zero-emission vehicle
1912
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The 2022 Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) is Ontario’s strategic plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and foster a sustainable community through 2050 and beyond. The Ontario Plan (TOP), the City’s comprehensive plan or general plan, directs the preparation, ongoing implementation, and update of the CCAP, providing the framework for Ontario to reduce its community-wide GHG emissions in a manner consistent with the adopted state reduction target for 2030 and the longer-term goals for 2045 and 2050. The CCAP allows the City of Ontario decision-makers, staff, and community to understand the sources and magnitude of local GHG emissions, reduce GHG emissions, and prioritize steps to achieve GHG emission-reduction targets.
The CCAP is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for Plans for the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (California Code of Regulations Section 15183.5). This allows the 2022 CCAP to support and streamline environmental review of GHG emissions for future development projects in the city. The 2022 CCAP serves as the programmatic tiering document for review of the climate change impacts of projects under CEQA and is included in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for TOP 2050.
The 2022 CCAP is an update of the 2014 Community Climate Action Plan (2014 CCAP), providing updated analyses and background information, an expanded set of GHG reduction strategies, and a planning horizon out to 2050. The CCAP contains an inventory of the community’s GHG emissions from the transportation, energy, waste, off-road equipment, agriculture, water, and wastewater sectors; land use sequestration; stationary sources; and goals, strategies, and actions to address climate change adaptation and GHG emissions. The CCAP also presents a work plan for the City to implement strategies and track progress over time.
The City of Ontario prepared the 2022 CCAP to update the community’s strategic path to reducing GHG emissions beyond 2020, consistent with State requirements and TOP 2050. Specifically, the CCAP does the following:
• Provides an introduction and context for the CCAP in Chapters 1 and 2, including community history and demographics, an overview of the City’s existing actions to address climate change, a discussion of climate change and equity, and the relationship between the CCAP and state and regional planning efforts in.
• Identifies and updates sources of GHG emissions within the City of Ontario’s municipal boundaries for the calendar year of 2019 and estimates how these emissions may change over time (Chapter 3).
1913
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-2 Public Review Draft, May 2022
• Presents the GHG emission reduction targets established by state regulations and guidance and the City’s GHG reduction targets (Chapter 4). Chapter 4 shows where the City currently stands in its efforts to reduce GHG emissions and the GHG reductions required by the 2022 CCAP to meet its targets.
• Provides strategies (see Chapter 5) in various sectors to meet or exceed the state targets of reducing emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, consistent with the direction of the State of California via Assembly Bill (AB) 32, Governor’s Executive Order S-03-05, and California Public Resources Code Section 21083.3.
Chapter 5, GHG Emission Reduction Strategy, has two sections:
− The Existing GHG Reduction Strategies section outlines the existing and planned local and state initiatives that are expected to reduce Ontario’s future GHG emissions and move the community closer to achieving its targets.
− The New GHG Reduction Strategies section outlines the new 2022 strategies that show a viable path for Ontario to reach its established GHG emission reduction targets. This includes goals, strategies, and actions; their impacts on GHG emissions; and the cobenefits they provide to enhance ecological, economic, and social well-being. These strategies include actions that will be led by City staff and actions or project features for inclusion in certain development projects as identified by the strategy. • Provides substantial evidence that the emission reductions estimated in the CCAP are feasible in Chapter 5, with supporting technical detail in Appendix A. • Provides an implementation program (see Chapter 6) and discusses the various outcomes of reduction efforts and how these reduction efforts can be implemented.
The CCAP is summarized in Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050. The measures in this 2022 CCAP are not substantially different than those of the 2014 CCAP, and therefore there is no change in the environmental impacts associated with the CCAP.
The CCAP allows community members, City staff and officials, and other stakeholders to understand Ontario’ existing efforts and strategies to achieve its GHG reduction goals. It builds on the 2014 CCAP and is consistent with the regional San Bernadino County GHG Reduction Plan. 1914
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-3
Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Forecast
A GHG inventory is a summary of the GHG emissions generated by activities that take place within a community. The GHG emissions inventories and the GHG forecast lay the groundwork for the CCAP, which seeks to align the City’s GHG reduction efforts with state-recommended targets. The community-wide GHG inventories, which include both community-wide sectors and municipal operations, assess GHG emissions for the years 2008, 2016, and 2019. The 2022 CCAP update is informed by the latest science in GHG accounting, best practices, and emissions factors.
The community-wide GHG inventory assessed GHG emissions from nine categories of activities, known as sectors.
• Transportation. GHG emissions created by driving on-road vehicles in Ontario, including passenger and freight vehicles.
• Residential energy. GHG emissions attributed to the use of electricity and natural gas in residential buildings.
• Nonresidential energy. GHG emissions attributed to the use of electricity and natural gas in nonresidential buildings.
• Solid waste. GHG emissions released from trash collected from residents and businesses. • Off-road equipment. GHG emissions from equipment that does not provide on-road transportation (excluding agricultural equipment), such as tractors for construction or equipment used for landscape maintenance.
• Agriculture. GHG emissions from various agricultural activities, including agricultural equipment, crop cultivation and harvesting, and livestock operations. • Water and wastewater. This sector accounts for the electricity used to transport every gallon of water to or wastewater from city residents and businesses, as well as direct emissions from processing wastewater.
• Land use and sequestration. Emissions released into the atmosphere from development of previously undeveloped land and GHG emissions absorbed and stored in trees and soils on locally controlled lands as part of healthy ecosystems. • Stationary sources. Emissions from fuel use at major industrial facilities permitted by state and regional air quality authorities. Stationary source emissions are informational and are not included in the community total.
1915
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-4 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Throughout the CCAP, emissions are provided in terms of per capita GHG emissions. Per capita emissions show the average number of emissions per service population, which is the sum of community residents and employees in Ontario. Per capita GHG emissions show changes in emissions over time and are helpful for showing consistency with state-recommended GHG reduction targets. The City’s per-capita emissions targets are 6.0 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e) per capita by 2030 and 2.0 MTCO2e per capita below 1990 levels by 2050.
As shown in Table ES-1, per capita GHG emissions have declined steadily from 2008 levels. Per capita emissions in Ontario decreased from approximately 8.25 MTCO2e in 2008 to approximately
5.55 MTCO2e per person in 2019, a decrease of 33 percent. Transportation was highest-emitting sector, responsible for approximately 55 percent of the city’s total GHG emissions in 2019, followed by the nonresidential and residential energy sectors as the second- and third-largest sources of GHG emissions. The four sectors that experienced the largest decreases in annual GHG emissions between 2008 and 2019 are land use and sequestration, agriculture, water and wastewater, and nonresidential energy, which reduced emissions by 77 percent, 75 percent, 56 percent, and 54 percent, respectively.
Table ES-1 Ontario Community-Wide Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019 (MTCO2e)
Sector 2008 2016 2019 Percentage Change,
2008–2019
Transportation 3.51 3.00 3.04 -13%
Nonresidential energy 2.77 1.80 1.29 -54%
Residential energy 0.72 0.55 0.50 -30%
Solid waste 0.28 0.22 0.27 -4%
Off-road equipment 0.17 0.08 0.21 23%
Agriculture 0.63 0.21 0.16 -75%
Water and wastewater 0.15 0.08 0.06 -56%
Land use and sequestration 0.01 0.00 0.00 -77%
Total annual per capita MTCO2e 8.25 5.95 5.54 -33%
Informational Items
Stationary sources 1.50 0.25 1.05 -30%
1916
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-5
The community-wide forecast is a projection of future GHG emissions based on the results of the 2019 inventory and estimates of future community population and job growth. The CCAP includes a GHG forecast for the calendar years 2030 and 2050, relying on population, housing, and employment projections based on the estimates of future buildout in TOP 2050. As shown in Table ES-2, the city’s forecast per-capita emissions are expected to decrease by approximately 45 percent between 2008 and 2050.
Table ES-2 Ontario Community-wide GHG Emissions Forecast, 2008 to 2050 (MTCO2e) Sector 20081 20161 20191 2030 2050
Percentage
Change,
2008–2050
Transportation 3.51 3.00 3.04 2.84 2.15 -39%
Nonresidential energy 2.77 1.80 1.29 1.30 1.29 -54%
Residential energy 0.72 0.55 0.50 0.53 0.57 -21%
Solid waste 0.28 0.22 0.27 0.27 0.27 -4%
Off-road equipment 0.17 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.21 23%
Agriculture2 0.63 0.21 0.16 0.08 0.00 -100%
Water and wastewater 0.15 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 -56%
Land use and
sequestration 0.01
Less
than
0.01 Less
than
0.01 Less
than
0.01 Less
than
0.01 -81%
Total 8.25 5.95 5.54 5.30 4.56 -45%
1. Data shown for 2008, 2016, 2019 are the actual per capita GHG emissions. The data shown for 2030, 2040, and 2050 are GHG per capita emission forecasts, calculated based on projections from the 2019 inventory.
2. GHG emission projects for the agriculture are based on the assumption that, by 2050, all agricultural land will be developed and converted to other land uses, so agricultural emissions will decrease to zero by 2050.
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Strategies
To evaluate the City’s current progress toward meeting its emissions reductions targets, this CCAP acknowledges existing climate action policies and programs, planned future actions, and actions soon-to-be implemented at the state and local level.
The CCAP quantifies GHG emissions reductions associated with the implementation of these actions. As shown in Table ES-3, with the implementation of existing and planned state and local actions, the community’s GHG emissions are projected to be 3.54 MTCO2e per capita and 1.31 MTCO2e per capita in 2030 and 2050, respectively.
1917
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-6 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Table ES-3 Ontario Community-Wide Emission Reductions from Existing State, Regional, and Local Actions, 2030–2050
Changes in Per Capita Emissions 2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
Forecast per-capita emissions without state actions 5.30 4.56 Emission reductions from existing and planned state actions -1.09 -2.15 Emission reductions from planned local actions without CCAP -0.15 Less than -
0.01 Community-wide emissions with existing and planned state and local actions 4.06 2.40
Though implementation of existing state and local actions will help the City meets its GHG reduction targets, these actions are insufficient on their own. Thus, the CCAP identifies future strategies that, if implemented at the levels specified in the technical appendix, will allow the community to achieve its emissions-reductions targets. Refer to Table ES-4 for a list of the CCAP strategies, explained in more detail in Chapter 5.
Table ES-4 List of 2022 CCAP GHG Reduction Strategies
Strategy
Number Strategy Name Strategy Language
Per Capita
Emission
Reductions
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
1 Building
electrification
Promote and incentivize the phase-out of
gas appliances in new and existing homes
and businesses throughout the community
to advance GHG reductions, increase
energy efficiency, and protect public
safety and environmental health.
0.0257 0.1453
2 Onsite solar
energy for
existing
residential
development.
Continue to support and facilitate
installation of rooftop solar photovoltaic
and onsite solar energy systems in existing
residential development.
0.0051 0.0000
1918
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-7
Strategy
Number Strategy Name Strategy Language
Per Capita
Emission
Reductions
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
3 Onsite solar
energy systems
for
nonresidential
development.
Ensure new large nonresidential
development, including City facilities,
includes onsite renewable energy to
support the site's energy needs by requiring
solar photovoltaic panels or other
appropriate onsite renewable energy
generation systems for the following types
of projects:
• New commercial and office buildings,
or existing commercial and office
building expansions greater or equal to
45,000 square feet in size.
• New industrial or existing industrial
buildings expansions greater or equal to
100,000 square feet in size.
0.0659 0.0000
4 Green roofs
Promote and incentivize residents and
business owners to install green roofs to
conserve energy and reduce surface water
runoff.
0.0000 0.0000
5 Urban cooling
Maintain and expand the city's existing tree
canopy, with a goal of planting 500 trees
annually through 2050 and promote the use
of pervious concrete and cool pavement
for pavement projects.
0.0140 0.0180
6 Energy
efficiency
retrofits for lowincome
households
Promote and incentivize voluntary energy
efficiency retrofits of homes to reduce
natural gas and electricity usage, with the
goal of retrofitting 9,000 low-income homes
by 2050. Partner with community services
agencies to fund energy efficiency
projects, including heating, ventilation, air
conditioning, indoor lighting, water heating
equipment, insulation, and weatherization
for low-income residents.
0.0023 0.0020
1919
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-8 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy
Number Strategy Name Strategy Language
Per Capita
Emission
Reductions
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
7 Energy
efficiency
retrofits
Promote and incentivize voluntary energy
efficiency retrofits to reduce in natural gas
and electricity usage. Partner with regional
agencies to expand access to existing
energy efficiency and conservation
opportunities, incentives, and technical
assistance for residents and businesses.
0.0288 0.0221
8 Smart Growth
and Infill
Encourage revitalization of neighborhoods
through higher-density, mixed-use, infill
development and creative reuse of underutilized sites within the urban core.
0.0000 0.0000
9 TransitOriented
Development
Encourage development of compact,
mixed-use, and transit-oriented
development to improve the regional jobshousing balance, especially on corridors served by high-ridership transit and bus
rapid transit (BRT), such as Holt Avenue.
0.0008 0.0020
10 Increase
Transportation
Ridership
Ensure a reliable and responsive transit
system with dedicated and secure funding
and resources to support increased
ridership.
0.0697 0.0445
11 Traffic signal
synchronization
and roadway
management
Implement traffic and roadway
management strategies to improve mobility
and efficiency and reduce associated
emissions.
0.0000 0.0000
12 Community
vehicle
electrification
Promote and incentivize the adoption of
electric vehicles (EV) citywide, including
light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles, for
municipal, commercial, and residential
uses.
0.1565 0.6584
13 Active
transportation
networks
Work with transit agencies, school districts,
and employers to facilitate an
interconnected transportation system that
allows a shift in travel from private
passenger vehicles to alternative modes,
including public transit, ride sharing, car
sharing, bicycling, and walking.
0.0045 0.0054
1920
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-9
Strategy
Number Strategy Name Strategy Language
Per Capita
Emission
Reductions
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
14 Vehicle idling
Limit idling of heavy-duty trucks. Support
the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAMQD) and ARB anti-idling
requirements and provide signage in key
areas where idling that is not consistent with
SCAMQD or ARB requirements might occur.
0.0049 0.0025
15 Parking policy
and event
parking
Adopt a comprehensive parking policy that
encourages carpooling and the use of
alternative transportation, including
providing parking spaces for car-share
vehicles at convenient locations with
access to public transportation.
0.0056 0.0115
16 Electrification
of construction
and
landscaping
equipment
Promote and incentivize the transition to
electric construction and landscaping
equipment.
0.0120 0.0368
17 Idling
ordinance for
construction
equipment
Limit idling of heavy-duty off-road
construction equipment to reduce air
pollution and GHG emissions from
construction activity.
0.0001 0.0001
18 Methane
capture at
landfills
Support efforts to reduce methane
emissions from regional landfills. 0.0558 0.0812
19 Waste
diversion
Exceed waste diversion goals
recommended by AB 939 and CALGreen
by adopting a citywide diversion target of
at least 75 percent of waste.
0.0361 0.0547
20 Construction
and Demolition
Waste
Recovery
Ordinance
Increase the amount of waste recycled
during construction and demolition of
buildings.
0.0000 0.0000
21 Indoor water
efficiency
Encourage water-efficient retrofits of new
and existing buildings by working with water
providers and regional agencies.
0.0114 0.0036
1921
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-10 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy
Number Strategy Name Strategy Language
Per Capita
Emission
Reductions
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
22 Water efficient
landscapes
and water
recycling
Promote drought-tolerant and fire-wise
landscaping. Encourage increased use of
reclaimed water for landscape irrigation,
agricultural, and industrial use.
0.0085 0.0000
23 Water system
and
wastewater
operations
efficiency
Maximize efficiency at drinking water
treatment, pumping, and distribution
facilities, including development of offpeak demand schedules for heavy commercial and industrial users.
0.0004 0.0000
24 Methane
capture for
wastewater
treatment
Work with Inland Empire Utilities Agency
(IEUA), the local wastewater treatment
provider, to increase methane capture
rate.
0.0024 0.0032
25 Methane
capture for
dairy
operations
Encourage and incentivize local dairy
operations to reduce methane emissions
through methane capture technology.
0.0079 0.0000
26 Climate
change
awareness and
education
Promote climate change awareness and
GHG reduction community-wide through a
variety of mechanisms, including through
support of climate change education in
schools or community colleges.
0.0000 0.0000
27 Carbon
sequestration
Establish a citywide carbon sequestration
project and sequestration goal of 5,000 MT
CO2 per year.
0.0000 0.0000
28 Green jobs
Support green job trainings and
opportunities to create sustainable, living
wage, quality employment opportunities.
0.0000 0.0000
Total GHG emission reductions from all CCAP strategies 0.52 1.09 Community-wide emissions with CCAP 3.54 1.31
In conjunction with existing and planned local and state programs, these updated strategies provide a flexible path to reduce the community’s GHG emissions to meet the City’s 2030 and 2050 emission targets and to support the State’s adopted target for 2030 and its goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. The City’s GHG reduction targets are to reduce emissions to a level below 6.0 MTCO2e per capita by 2030 and 2.0 MTCO2e per capita by 2050 as shown in Table ES-5. Refer to 1922
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page ES-11
Chapter 5 for additional detail on GHG emissions reductions from state actions, existing City actions, and planned City actions.
Table ES-5 Progress to Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emissions Targets Target 2030 Description 2050 Description
Baseline Emissions 8.25 MTCO2e per person 8.25 MTCO2e per person Target 6.0 MTCO2e per person 2.0 MTCO2e per person
Emissions with All Reductions 3.52 MTCO2e per person 1.31 MTCO2e per person Implementing the CCAP will require City leadership to put the CCAP strategies into effect and report progress. To ensure that the implementation process is efficient and transparent, this CCAP includes a work plan that identifies responsible departments, partners, time frames, and relative costs associated with each strategy. Implementation strategies are shown in Table ES-6.
Table ES-6 List of Implementation Strategies
CCAP Implementation Strategies
Implementation Strategy 1. Annually monitor and report progress toward CCAP target achievement.
Implementation Strategy 2. Continue collaborative partnerships with agencies and community groups that support implementation of the CCAP.
Implementation Strategy 3. Secure necessary funding to implement the CCAP.
Implementation Strategy 4. Continue to update the baseline emissions inventory and CCAP every five years.
Implementation Strategy 5. Maintain and update the CCAP to promote greater resilience. 1923
Climate Action Plan
Executive Summary
Page ES-12 Public Review Draft, May 2022
This page intentionally left blank.
1924
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 1
1. INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Community Climate Action Plan
The Ontario Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP) serves as the strategic plan for how the City of Ontario (City) will reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and foster a sustainable community through 2050 and beyond. The Ontario Plan (TOP), the City’s comprehensive plan or general plan, directs the preparation, ongoing implementation, and update of the CCAP, providing the framework for Ontario to reduce its community-wide GHG emissions in a manner consistent with the adopted state reduction target for 2030 and the longer-term goals for 2045 and 2050. This document describes the City’s successes to date in reducing GHG emissions and provides a framework for continued progress. The 2022 CCAP is an update to the 2014 CCAP.
This chapter includes an updated description of the regulatory framework for the CCAP, a community profile, guiding principles for the City’s climate action planning, and a summary of this update process. Subsequent chapters analyze Ontario’s progress to date in meeting its adopted GHG reduction targets and contain new information to achieve more significant and longer-term GHG reductions.
The CCAP is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines for Plans for the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (California Code of Regulations Section 15183.5). This allows the 2022 CCAP to support and streamline environmental review of GHG emissions for future development projects in the city.
2014 Community Climate Action Plan
On December 16, 2014, the City Council adopted the City’s first Community Climate Action Plan (2014 CCAP), which assembled the City’s existing climate action efforts into one centralized plan informed by technical analyses. The 2014 CCAP described specific strategies, actions, and costeffective opportunities for existing and future residents, businesses, and development projects. The 2014 CCAP also served as a qualified GHG reduction strategy under CEQA, streamlining development review.
A key task of the 2014 CCAP was to establish a baseline of community GHG emissions to measure future changes and to inform actions the community could take to reduce emissions by 2020. In April 2012, Ontario developed the 2008 Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory and 2020 Forecast as part of a regional partnership with San Bernardino County, led by the San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (Also referred to as the San Bernardino 1925
Climate Action Plan
1. Introduction
Council of Governments or SBCOG.) The 2008 community-wide inventory report, included as Appendix A in the 2014 CCAP, revealed the major sources of emissions from community activities and gave a basis of comparison for the 2014 CCAP and future assessment reports. The 2014 CCAP also included a GHG emissions forecast that projected future emissions from community activities in 2020.
The 2014 CCAP included 42 measures to reduce GHG emissions across various sector such as new development; building energy; renewable energy; wastewater treatment; solid waste management; on-road transportation; off-road equipment; and water transport, distribution, and treatment. The largest potential reductions in GHG emissions came from strategies in the renewable energy, transportation, and off-road equipment sectors. The City has made continued progress in implementing the measures in the 2014 CCAP.
2022 Community Climate Action Plan
The City of Ontario prepared the 2022 CCAP to update the community’s strategic path to reducing GHG emissions beyond 2020, consistent with State requirements and TOP 2050. Specifically, this CCAP does the following:
• Identifies and updates sources of GHG emissions within the City of Ontario’s municipal boundaries for the calendar year of 2019 and estimates how these emissions may change over time, as presented in Chapter 3.
• Identifies GHG reduction targets in Chapter 4 that are consistent with State targets. • Provides strategies (see Chapter 5) in various sectors to meet or exceed the state target and goals of reducing emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 and in support of the State’s pathway to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, consistent with the direction of the State of California via Assembly Bill (SB) 32, Governor’s Executive Order S-03-05, California Public Resources Code Section 21083.3, and Governor’s Executive Order B-55-18.
• Provides substantial evidence that the emission reductions estimated in the CCAP are feasible in Chapter 5, with supporting technical detail in Appendix A. • Provides an implementation program (see Chapter 6) and discusses the various outcomes of reduction efforts and how these reduction efforts can be implemented. 1926
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 3
The CCAP is summarized in Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for The Ontario Plan 2050. The measures included in this 2022 CCAP are not substantially different than those of the 2014 CCAP, and therefore there is no change in the environmental impacts associated with the CCAP.
How to Use This Plan
The following chapters of the 2022 CCAP provide details of the community’s GHG emissions and strategies to reduce emissions.
• Chapters 1 and 2 provide an introduction and context for the CCAP, including community history and demographics, an overview of the City’s existing actions to address climate change, a discussion of climate change and equity, and the relationship between the CCAP and state and regional planning efforts.
• Chapter 3, Ontario GHG Emissions, provides an introduction to climate science and describes the results of Ontario’s recent-year GHG inventories and forecast GHG emissions for 2030 and 2050. This allows the community to see how its emissions have changed over time and charts progress toward state and local emissions reduction targets, informing emissions reduction strategies.
• Chapter 4, GHG Reduction Targets, outlines the GHG emission reduction targets established by state regulations and guidance and the City’s GHG reduction targets. This chapter shows where the City currently stands in its efforts to reduce GHG emissions and the GHG reductions required by the 2022 CCAP to meet its targets. • Chapter 5, GHG Emission Reduction Strategy has two sections:
− The Existing GHG Reduction Strategies section outlines the existing and planned local and state initiatives that are expected to reduce Ontario’s future GHG emissions and move the community closer to achieving its targets.
− The New GHG Reduction Strategies section outlines the new 2022 strategies that show a viable path for Ontario to reach its established GHG emission reduction targets. This includes goals, strategies, and actions; their impacts on GHG emissions; and the cobenefits they provide to enhance ecological, economic, and social well-being. These strategies include actions that will be led by City staff and actions or project features for inclusion in certain development projects as identified by the strategy. • Chapter 6, CCAP Implementation Strategy, describes the implementation details for the strategies in the CCAP and a potential approach to putting these strategies into effect. 1927
Climate Action Plan
1. Introduction
This page intentionally left blank.
1928
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 5
2. BACKGROUND
Community Profile and History
This section provides an overview of Ontario, highlighting key community characteristics, natural resource use, development patterns, and notable history.
Community History
Ontario is in the west San Bernardino Valley, bordered by the cities of Chino and Montclair to the west, Eastvale and Jurupa Valley to the south, Fontana to the east, and Upland and Rancho Cucamonga to the north. Ontario is well connected to the neighboring counties of Los Angeles, Orange, and Riverside by four major highways—Interstate 10 and State Route 60 traveling eastwest, and State Route 83 (Euclid Avenue) and Interstate 15 traveling north-south—and by Amtrak and Metrolink stations.
Archaeological evidence dating back to 10,000 BC shows that the San Bernardino Valley has been inhabited for over 12,000 years. The Gabrieleno native peoples flourished in the west San Bernardino Valley for 3,000 years. Shortly after Spanish explorers entered the area in the 1770s, pioneers established ranching operations in the valley. Spanish rancher Don Antonio Lugo and his family managed the Rancho San Bernardino, which encompassed the entire valley, between 1842 and 1851. Subsequently, the Mormon Colony acquired the ranch. The discovery of gold in the San Bernardino Mountains initiated a period of gold and silver mining in the 1860s to 1880s.1 Ontario was established in the 1880s based on the founders’ vision of a planned community and guiding principles that including a mutual water company, prohibition of liquor, a grand thoroughfare through the city (Euclid Avenue), and an agricultural college for general education.
Ontario was incorporated in 1891, and in 1903, Ontario was declared the “Model Colony” by an Act of Congress for its establishment of a new standard for urban living.2 The City first developed as an agricultural community, primarily producing citrus and dairy. The town expanded around Euclid Avenue, creating what are now two of Ontario’s historic districts, the Historic Downtown and the College Park Historic District. Ontario’s population grew in the 1950s as the city shifted from an agricultural-based economy to an industry-based economy and manufacturing jobs became increasingly available. Mass production housing was constructed in a grid development pattern, radiating from the city’s historic core, and establishing most of the suburban residential neighborhoods that dominate northwestern Ontario today. 1929
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
Ontario’s rapid job growth continued through the 1980s and 1990s, especially in industrial expansion of automotive plants, air cargo, commerce centers, and housing to match the growing job opportunities. During the 1980s, Ontario was ranked the seventh-fastest-growing city in California. Housing development during this period focused on master-planned communities south of Riverside Drive in the southern and eastern areas of Ontario. Today, these communities are areas of medium and high resources.3
As the Ontario population and economy continues to grow, urban development is transitioning the remaining agricultural land within the city limits. By 2050, all the city’s agricultural land is expected to be converted to urban uses. Western Ontario Ranch (west of Archibald Avenue to Euclid Avenue), which is largely dairy and other farms, is expected to transition into a mixed-use area of residential homes, commercial centers, and industrial and business parks.
Population, Income, and Employment
Ontario is the third most populous city in San Bernardino County after San Bernardino and Fontana, with a population of 178,606 residents in 2019, which is the baseline year of the 2022 CCAP. Approximately 68 percent of the city’s adult residents were below age 44 as of 2019, and nearly 37 percent of all residents were below age 24.4
Ontario, much like California as a whole, is experiencing racial and ethnic diversification. The percentage of non-White residents has increased to 84 percent in 2019 from 79 percent in 2010. The population of Hispanics increased by 14.5 percent between 2010 and 2019, and it is the largest ethnic group in Ontario.5 Based on the 2019 American Community Survey, Ontario’s population is 70 percent Hispanic, 16 percent non-Hispanic White, 7 percent Asian, 5 percent African American, and 2 percent multiracial. Approximately 58 percent of Ontario residents primarily speak a language other than English at home, compared with 42 percent in San Bernardino County.6 In Ontario, the most spoken language at home is Spanish, followed by English, Tagalog, and Chinese.7
According to the American Community Survey (ACS), median household income has increased by 30 percent since 2010, from $57,771 to $75,266 in 2019. 8 The discrepancy in median income between Ontario and San Bernardino County has widened in the past decade. In 2010, the median income in Ontario was only 3.3 percent higher than in the county, but in 2019 the gap in median income between the city and county grew to 10 percent—$75,266 in Ontario compared with $67,903 in San Bernardino County.
1930
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 7
The cost of housing can be particularly vexing for lower-income families, with 56 percent of families paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing. According to data from ACS, citywide median rent increased by approximately 122 percent between 2000 and 2019, outpacing the countywide median rent increase of 110 percent. On a neighborhood level, the eastern and southern areas of Ontario experienced the highest increases in rent in the city (157 and 139 percent median rent increase, respectively).9
Ontario’s economy today is still largely dominated by industrial sectors. The largest economic sector in Ontario is the logistics industry, facilitated by the city’s proximity to major Southern California transportation networks and the Ontario
International Airport. In 2019, the three sectors with the highest shares of employment were transportation and warehousing, waste management and remediation, and retail trade, which made up 17 percent, 13 percent, and 11 percent of jobs in Ontario, respectively.
Sustainability in Ontario
Since adopting the 2014 CCAP, Ontario has made progress in improving energy efficiency and reducing GHG emissions in both municipal operations and community-wide sectors.
To improve energy efficiency of municipal buildings and operations, the City launched the Smart Ontario initiative, which involves an energy audit of City properties,
comprehensive upgrade of municipal utility infrastructure, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment improvements. As of March 2022, the City has retrofitted all city streetlights with light-emitting diode (LED) light fixtures as well as all interior and exterior light fixtures in City buildings (approximately 15,000); has replaced over 100 HVAC
components in City facilities; and replaced 350 thermostats in all City buildings. The City has installed 1.8 megawatts of solar photovoltaic systems at the Ontario Convention Center and the Ontario Police Department, generating 2,571,125 kilowatt-hours of energy in 2019. The Smart Ontario initiative will save an estimated $75 million over the lifetime of the new equipment. To reduce the GHG emissions of newly constructed City buildings, the City
EV CHARGING
STATIONS
The City of Ontario
currently owns 21
electric vehicle (EV)
charging stations. The
City partnered with
Southern California
Edison through the
Charge Ready program
to install EV charging
stations at the Citizens
Business Bank Arena,
Ontario Convention
Center, City Hall,
Library, and the
community center. The
City continues to invest
in expansion of citywide
electric vehicle charging
infrastructure to
promote electric vehicle
use. Through the Smart
Ontario initiative, 4 EV
charging stations are
planned at City
facilities. In downtown,
the City plans to install
17 additional electric
vehicle charging stations
through a partnership
with Tesla funded by the
South Coast Air Quality
Management District.
1931
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
committed to all new municipal buildings achieving Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified by the U.S. Green Building Council.
The City has also implemented numerous projects to reduce GHG emissions from the transportation sector, including installation of 21 EV charging stations, adoption of an Active Transportation Master Plan, synchronization of 30 percent of traffic signals in Ontario, and completion of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure
improvements through Safe Routes to School and Active
Transportation Program grants. Future projects include a citywide e-scooter share program (projected to launch in March 2023), the Multimodal Transportation Center (needs assessment completed in March 2022), and the West Valley Corridor Bus Rapid Transit, a zero-emission bus line (completion expected in 2024).
Since adopting the 2014 CCAP, the City has implemented its GHG reduction measures in new development projects through the Development Review Process. This process involves
documentation of GHG reduction measures incorporated into the design and construction of development projects using “screening tables” that assign point values for each measure that correspond to the minimum emission reduction expected from that measure. The use of screening tables to document
implementation of CCAP strategies ensures that they will be implemented as part of the construction of new developments, helps to reduce GHG emissions in construction of new
development, supports improved monitoring and evaluation of GHG reduction strategies, and ensures compliance with CEQA provisions for evaluating and mitigating climate change impacts. Implementation of the 2022 CCAP will update and continue use of screening tables for eligible projects.
NONRESIDENTIAL
ELECTRICITY
SAVINGS
Between 2008 and 2019,
the city substantially
reduced its GHG
emissions from the
nonresidential electricity
sector, including
commercial and
industrial electricity
use.
Absolute GHG emissions
from thi s sector
decreased by 31 percent,
from 375,540 MTCO2 e in
2005 to 257,820 MTCO2 e
in 2019.
Energy use or activity in
this sector only
decreased slightly
during this period; the
substantial decline in
emissions is attributed
to procurement of more
renewable energy by
Ontario’s energy
providers, in accordance
with State law, and to
greater energy efficiency
in commercial and
industrial facilities and
equipment.
1932
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 9
Climate Change and Equity
Historically and currently, institutions and structural systems drive and perpetuate inequitable distribution of resources, access to opportunities, and poor life outcomes that many frontline communities face. Examples include redlining, exclusionary housing policies, forced removal of Indigenous communities, and Jim Crow segregation. Not only did these policies exacerbate the wealth and income gap between white families and families of color, they also resulted in a greater number of lower-income and communities of color living in areas at greater exposure to environmental pollution and adverse health outcomes.
According to a citywide analysis of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Opportunity Areas, Ontario’s mixture of high-resource, moderate-resource, and low-resource areas have varying urban infrastructure and levels of exposure to environmental pollutants. The State’s Opportunity Mapping is a data-driven approach to measure and map the distribution of resources and opportunity in California communities. It was developed by the California Fair Housing Task Force, a group of independent organizations and research centers convened by the Department of Housing and Community Development and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. The approach measures opportunity through an assessment of positive or negative outcomes related to economic, educational, and health indicators across communities in comparable areas (nine identified regions in California with common economic, political, and geography characteristics), and in specific areas classified as high-poverty, racially segregated areas in which over 30 percent of the population is below the federal poverty line. The aggregate assessment of the indicators and outcomes are converted into composite scores that are used to categorize areas as “high resource”, “medium resource”, and “low-resource”, and they are mapped to show geographic trends. The composite scores and opportunity area maps are used primarily to inform the allocation of lowincome housing tax credits for eligible projects. The maps are also used to inform analyses of fair housing issues in long-term policy and planning efforts such as housing elements.
Ontario neighborhoods can be grouped into three major geographic areas based on the HCD analysis of resource distribution across the city. These areas, listed below and shown in Figure 1, share common socioeconomic characteristics that can be traced back to historical urban development patterns.
• Northwestern Ontario. West of Archibald Avenue, inclusive of Ontario International Airport to the city’s western limits and north of Riverside Drive to the city’s northern limits. • Eastern area/Eastern Ontario. East of the Ontario International Airport and Archibald Avenue to the city limits and north of Riverside Drive. • South Ontario. South of Riverside Drive, bounded by the city’s southern limits. 1933
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
Currently, southeastern Ontario has higher rates of owner-occupied housing and generally higher median incomes than northwestern Ontario. The southeast areas, considered Ontario’s highresource areas, are characterized by good access to employment, higher median incomes, and higher rates of home-ownership than households in northwestern Ontario. Southeastern Ontario includes much of the city’s recent and future planned development, including single-family housing south of Highway 60 in eastern Ontario Ranch and business parks and industrial commerce centers in east Ontario north of Highway 60. By contrast, households in the northwestern area are primarily renter occupied, and more than half of households in this area are considered low resource, with relatively low access to education and employment opportunities.
CalEnviroScreen, a mapping tool developed by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, has identified similar issues. This tool uses environmental, health, and socioeconomic indicators to map and compare community environmental scores on a scale of 0 to 100. A community with a high score has higher levels of pollution and other negative environmental or social indicators. All neighborhoods in Ontario score 50 or higher, meaning that they score higher (i.e., worse) than 50 percent of neighborhoods in the state. In particular, most or all of Ontario scores high for several types of air pollution, releases of toxic materials from major goods movement transportation corridors and industrial facilities, levels of cardiovascular disease, levels of poverty, and limited educational attainment. However, the highest scores in Ontario for these and numerous other factors are concentrated in the city’s low-resource areas, showing that residents of these areas are disproportionately burdened by multiple sources of pollution and socioeconomic inequities. 1934
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 11
Figure 1 Map of Ontario
Source: City of Ontario Draft Housing Element, 2022
1935
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
Although the 2022 CCAP is not a dedicated equity plan, many of the factors that contribute to inequities are related to GHG emissions. For example, many sources of air pollution are also sources of GHGs, so reducing air pollution from these activities often helps to reduce Ontario’s GHG emissions. Additionally, the 2022 CAP recommends numerous strategies to reduce GHG emissions that provide other co-benefits that enhance quality of life in Ontario, including improving inequities and supporting efforts to expand resources and opportunity in low-resource areas.
Through direct reductions in air pollution and indirect improvements to community well-being, the CCAP can contribute significantly in many ways to achieving a more equitable and fair Ontario. CCAP efforts that can address these issues may include:
• Improved transit service can help improve job access, provide greater mobility options for people who are unable to drive, and allow people to meet many of their daily needs at a lower cost than owning a car. Transit also releases less air pollution per rider than a private vehicle, helping to improve air quality.
• Expanded pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure can encourage more active lifestyles and recreational activities. Increased pedestrian and bicycle activity also allows people to reduce their dependencies on private vehicles and associated costs and further improves local air quality.
• Energy efficiency retrofits can result in significant cost savings for homes and businesses and help create more comfortable, safer living and working conditions.
ONTARIO TOGETHER
Ontario Together is a community plan for advancing environmental quality and racial equity in disadvantaged communities in central Ontario. Its mission is to achieve sustainable neighborhood transformation through implementation of various GHG reduction strategies in the project area, a five- square-mile area in the heart of downtown. The strategies include improvements in access to solar energy, public transit, affordable housing, green jobs, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities for residents. Project outcomes include planting 365 trees, distributing 100 free bus passes, and implementing numerous bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements, including five miles of bicycle lanes and three miles of sidewalks along Mission Blvd, and crosswalk installations on Euclid and Holt. Planned projects include Omnitrans Bus service improvements, Workforce Development, Small Business Support, and the Ontario Carbon Farm. The Ontario Carbon Farm is a partnership with Huerta del Valle Community Garden to establish a community composting site that will generate high-quality compost from food waste collected in the city.
1936
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 13
• Green space can encourage recreation, provide shade, and improve neighborhood aesthetics.
• Increased water and energy conservation can improve community resilience to droughts and peak demand energy shortages.
• Increased adoption of solar energy systems can improve community resilience to power outages and power safety shut-off events.
• Increased demand for energy efficiency retrofits, solar and battery energy systems, electric vehicle charging installation, and water-efficient landscaping can provide new job opportunities in the community. These can be well-paying jobs that often can be made available to members of underserved communities, particularly when the community or local agencies provide free or low-cost job-training resources.
Regulatory Framework
California law first directly addressed climate change in 1988, when AB 4420 directed state agencies to prepare a GHG inventory and study the impacts of climate change. Since then, California has adopted several laws to assess climate change, analyze GHG emissions and their effects, reduce emissions, identify climate change impacts, and prepare for the impacts of climate change. Many of these laws and associated regulations affect local governments, although only some create specific requirements for individual communities. In addition to state regulations, there are local and regional planning and regulatory processes that support or direct the reduction of GHGs. These laws and associated regulations are briefly summarized in this section.
The Ontario Plan 2050
TOP 2050 provides direction on how the City will fulfill its strategic vision and manage fiscal sustainability, daily operations, and implementation of the goals and policies during the next 30 years. TOP 2050 is a “business plan” that focuses on conducting technical updates to comply with state law, including regulations that address housing, community health, environmental justice, climate adaption, and mobility. In addition, TOP 2050 focuses on long-term growth and fiscal sustainability and advancing the Implementation Plan’s tracking and feedback component.10 Several TOP policies are relevant to climate change, including policies addressing environmental justice and policies in the Safety Element. Environmental justice policies address inequities in the built environment in compliance with Senate Bill 1000 (SB 1000). SB 1000, approved in 2016, requires local governments to identify disadvantaged communities and address environmental justice in the general plan update through policies that aim to reduce health risks in disadvantaged 1937
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
communities, promote inclusive civic engagement in the planning process, and prioritize improvements that address the needs of disadvantaged communities.11 In compliance with SB 1000, TOP 2050 identifies goals, policies, and objectives that reduce health risks caused by environmental pollution and reduce disparities in access to amenities, prioritizing improvements in disadvantaged communities most affected.
The Safety Element addresses public safety concerns related to the natural and built environment, including climate change, in compliance with SB 379. SB 379, approved in 2015, requires local governments to include a vulnerability assessment in the safety element update that identifies the unique risks to the community caused by climate change and informs policies to protect those vulnerabilities.12 The Safety Element provides information about risks from natural and humanmade hazards and includes goals, policies, and actions designed to protect the community and its property from hazards. Other TOP 2050 elements include policies and actions that affect GHG emission reduction and resilience.
• The Land Use Element encourages infill development, mixed-use development, and development around transit to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT). • The Housing Element encourages development of low-income, moderate-income, and market rate housing at higher densities that meet HCD criteria for each income category. • The Mobility Element addresses improvements in active transportation infrastructure based on the Ontario Active Transportation Master Plan and Transit Priority Areas.
Each of these elements plays a role in enhancing the overall sustainability and resilience of the community.
TOP 2050, which is scheduled for adoption in 2022, will reference the 2022 CCAP, recognizing the City’s climate action planning efforts must be updated on a more regular basis than the General Plan to be responsive to changing regulations, guidance, technology, best practices, and science.
The San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan In 2021, SBCTA adopted an update to the San Bernardino County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan, a regional effort to address statewide greenhouse gas emissions in response to AB 32. The plan assesses existing and projected GHG emissions for all participating communities in San Bernardino County to identify regional and local strategies to reduce GHGs. The regional effort is the product of an informal partnership among 25 jurisdictions, including the City of Ontario, led by SBCTA. The plan includes a 2016 GHG inventory, GHG emissions forecasts for 2030 and 2045, and strategies for reducing emissions in Ontario, including 7 state measures and 27 local measures. The GHG reduction measures have been vetted and adopted by all 25 partnership 1938
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 15
cities. The plan is accompanied by an assessment, monitoring, and implementation tool, called the San Bernardino County GHG Reduction Tool, which allows the City to quantify emissions reductions and measure progress in achieving emissions reductions from state and local measures.
The 2022 Ontario CCAP is consistent with the regional plan and draws from the plan’s GHG reduction strategies.
Title 24: Building Standards Code
Title 24 is the section of the California Code of Regulations that establishes standards to promote energy efficiency, public health, and greenhouse gas reduction standards for the construction of new commercial, residential, and public school buildings. Title 24 includes Part 6, Building Energy Efficiency Standards (also known as the Energy Code), which is focused on reducing energy consumption of new buildings, and Part 11, CALGreen Code, which is focused on reducing environmental impacts and improving public health through mandatory measures in the building sector.13
Title 24 is applied at the local level through the building permit and development review process, implemented through the municipal building code. On November 19, 2019, the City enacted an ordinance to amend the municipal code and adopt by reference the 2019 California Building Standards Code, which includes the CALGreen Code. This ordinance will require compliance with statewide Title 24 standards that improve energy efficiency, public health, and environmental sustainability in new homes and nonresidential buildings, such as high-efficiency electric air and water heating systems, improved ventilation systems, and rooftop solar and battery storage systems.14 This CCAP was prepared with the 2019 standards in effect. The next update, the 2022 Title 24 standards, will go into effect on January 1, 2023.
South Coast Air Quality Management District
The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) is the regional air district responsible for air quality regulation in most of Southern California, including Ontario and the rest of the valley region of San Bernardino County. The SCAQMD’s primary responsibility is to regulate stationary sources and develop plans to achieve and maintain air quality standards.
Released in 2016, the latest update to the SCAQMD’s Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) provides a regional strategy to protect public health and the environment to eliminate health risk disparities from exposure to air pollution among Southern California communities. To make progress toward all state and federal air quality standards, the 2016 Air Quality Management Plan includes a wide range of goals in partnership with other agencies to decrease critical pollutants, greenhouse gases, and toxins as well as improve efficiency of energy use, on-road transportation, and goods movement. The most effective way to reduce air pollution impacts to residents of the 1939
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
Southern California region, especially disproportionately impacted communities along transportation corridors, is to reduce emissions from mobile sources such as vehicles, buses, and trucks. The SCAQMD has partnered with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to update the AQMP to address mobile sources, including transportation control measures developed by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The 2016 plan emphasizes collaboration between agencies to develop new regulations that monitor and control emissions and the pursuit of grant funding and incentives to accelerate the adoption of cleaner technologies in vehicles, buildings, and industrial facilities.
The South Coast Air Basin is classified as an extreme nonattainment area for ground-level ozone under the EPA’s current National Ambient Air Quality Standards, which means that it greatly exceeds the threshold for ozone levels deemed acceptable for human health. The 2022 AQMP is in the process of being updated and will include requirements for meeting the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards. According to the EPA, GHG emissions and ozone levels are correlated because ozone formation in the atmosphere accelerates as temperature increases. Ozone exposure can exacerbate human health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, asthma, and other respiratory diseases.15
Warehouse Indirect Source Rule 2305
On May 8, 2021, South Coast AQMD adopted Warehouse Indirect Source Rule 2305, which includes the Warehouse Actions and Investments to Reduce Emissions (WAIRE) Program and Rule 316. Rule 2305 establishes for the first time in Ontario a regulatory program designed to reduce air pollution (and indirect GHG emissions) caused by warehouse-related activities and is focused on emissions from vehicles that service large warehouses.
State of California Regulations and Guidance
California has adopted several laws to assess climate change, analyze GHG emissions and their effects, reduce emissions, and prepare for the impacts of climate change. These laws and associated regulations are briefly summarized here.
Executive Order S-03-05
In 2005, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order (EO) S-03-05, which established the first statewide GHG reduction goals for California: reduce emissions to 2000 levels by 2010, reduce emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and reduce emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.
1940
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 17
Assembly Bill 32: California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 State of California guidance and targets for reductions in GHG emissions are generally embodied in the Global Warming Solutions Act, adopted with passage of AB 32 by the California state legislature on August 31, 2006. AB 32 follows the 2020 emissions reduction goal established in EO S-03-05. AB 32 includes the major GHGs and groups of GHGs that are being emitted into the atmosphere. These gases include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen trifluoride (NF3).
Through the adoption of AB 32, the California Legislature declared:
(a) Global warming poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources, and the environment of California. The potential adverse impacts of global warming include the exacerbation of air quality problems, a reduction in the quality and supply of water to the state from the Sierra snowpack, a rise in sea levels resulting in the displacement of thousands of coastal businesses and residences, damage to marine ecosystems and the natural environment, and an increase in the incidences of infectious diseases, asthma, and other human health-related problems. (b) Global warming will have detrimental effects on some of California’s largest industries, including agriculture, wine, tourism, skiing, recreational and commercial fishing, and forestry. It will also increase the strain on electricity supplies necessary to meet the demand for summer air-conditioning in the hottest parts of the state.
Climate Change Scoping Plan
The Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan), adopted in 2008 and updated in 2014 and 2017, employs a variety of GHG reduction strategies that include direct regulations, alternate compliance mechanisms, incentives, voluntary actions, and market-based approaches like a capand-trade program. The 2008 Scoping Plan identified local governments as strategic partners to achieving the state goal and translated California’s 2020 GHG reduction goal of returning to 1990 emission levels to a 15 percent reduction of “existing” emissions by 2020 (emissions between 2005 and 2008). On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update (2017 Scoping Plan) to address the 2030 target and 2050 goal for the state. The 2017 Scoping Plan lays out a path to reduce statewide GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
California’s climate strategy outlined in the 2017 Scoping Plan requires contributions from all sectors of the economy, including enhanced focus on zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) and near-ZEV technologies; continued investment in renewables such as solar roofs, wind, and other types of distributed generation; greater use of low carbon fuels; integrated land conservation and development strategies; coordinated efforts to reduce emissions of short-lived climate pollutants 1941
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
(methane, black carbon, and fluorinated gases); and an increased focus on integrated land use planning to support livable, transit-connected communities and conserve agricultural and other lands. Requirements for GHG reductions at stationary sources complement local air pollution control efforts by the local air districts to tighten criteria air pollutant and toxic air contaminant emissions limits on a broad spectrum of industrial sources.
In addition to these statewide strategies, the 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan identified local governments as essential partners in achieving the state’s long-term GHG reduction goals and recommended local actions to reduce GHG emissions. It proposes goals for local governments to reduce their GHG emissions to 40 percent below 2020 levels by 2030 (1,128,580 metric tons of CO2 equivalent [MTCO2e]) and 80 percent below 2020 levels by 2050, consistent with statewide reduction goals. In per capita terms, statewide guidance recommends targets of to 6 MTCO2e per capita by 2030, and 2 MTCO2e per capita by 2050 (376,190 MTCO2e). CARB recommends that local governments evaluate and adopt robust and quantitative, locally appropriate goals that align with the statewide per capita targets and sustainable development objectives and develop plans to achieve the local goals.
As of April 2022, CARB is working on a third update to the Scoping Plan in response to the adoption of Senate Bill 32 in 2016 and the governor’s 2018 goal of achieving statewide carbon neutrality by 2045. The updated Scoping Plan was released for public review in May 2022 and is set to be adopted sometime in late 2022.
California Cap-and-Trade Program
The Cap-and-Trade Program, which took effect in 2012, was originally developed under AB 32 as a market mechanism-based measure to reduce statewide emissions and move the state toward meeting the year 2020 GHG reduction target. In 2017, passage of Assembly Bill 398 extended the program to 2030, which coincides with the year 2030 GHG reduction target set under SB 32. The Cap-and-Trade Program would deliver the additional GHG reductions necessary to ensure that the 2030 GHG reduction target is met.16 Overall, the program covers approximately 85 percent of all emissions in California and covers a variety of emissions sectors, such as electricity generators and large industrial facilities, which include refineries that generate 25,000 MTCO2e or more per year. In addition, the program also covers distributors of transportation fuels and requires fuel distributors to reduce GHG emissions by either supplying low carbon fuels or purchasing pollution permits to cover GHG emissions generated from combustion of conventional petroleumbased fuel the distributors supply.17 1942
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 19
Senate Bill 375: Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 In 2008, SB 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, was adopted to connect the GHG emissions-reductions targets established in the 2008 Scoping Plan to local land use decisions that affect travel behavior. Its intent is to reduce GHG emissions from light-duty trucks and automobiles (excludes emissions associated with goods movement) by aligning regional longrange transportation plans, investments, and housing allocations to local land use planning to reduce VMT and vehicle trips. Specifically, SB 375 required CARB to establish GHG emissionsreduction targets for each of the 18 metropolitan planning organizations. SCAG is the metropolitan planning organization for the Southern California region, which includes the City of Ontario.
Pursuant to the recommendations of the Regional Transit Technical Advisory Committee (RTTAC), CARB adopted per capita reduction targets for each of the metropolitan planning organizations. The reduction targets for the Southern California Association of Governments are to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles and light duty trucks by 8 percent per capita by 2020 and 19 percent by 2035 relative to 2005 emissions levels.18 Executive Order B-30-15
EO B-30-15 was signed April 29, 2015, by Governor Jerry Brown and set a goal to reduce GHG emissions in the state to 40 percent below 1990 levels by year 2030. EO B-30-15 directed CARB to update the Scoping Plan to quantify the 2030 GHG reduction goal for the state and requires state agencies to implement strategies to meet the interim 2030 goal. It also requires the California Natural Resources Agency to conduct triennial updates of the California adaption strategy, Safeguarding California, to ensure climate change is accounted for in state planning and investment decisions.
Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
In September 2016, Governor Brown signed SB 32 and AB 197, making the Executive Order goal for year 2030 into a statewide, mandated legislative target. AB 197 established a joint legislative committee on climate change policies and requires CARB to prioritize direct emissions reductions rather than the market-based cap-and-trade program for large stationary, mobile, and other sources.
Executive Order B-55-18
Executive Order B-55-18, signed September 10, 2018, sets a goal “to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible, and no later than 2045, and achieve and maintain net negative emissions thereafter”. EO B-55-18 directs CARB to work with relevant state agencies to ensure future Scoping Plans identify and recommend measures to achieve the carbon neutrality goal. The goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 is in addition to other statewide goals, meaning that not only should emissions 1943
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050, but that, by no later than 2045, the remaining emissions should be offset by equivalent net removals of CO2e from the atmosphere, including through sequestration in forests, soils, and other natural landscapes.
Executive Order N-79-20
On September 23, 2020, Governor Newsom issued EO N-79-20, which sets a time frame for the transition to ZEVs, including passenger vehicles, trucks, and off-road equipment. It directs CARB to develop and propose passenger vehicle and truck regulations requiring increasing volumes of new ZEVs sold in the California toward the target of 100 percent of in-state sales by 2035, and similar regulations for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles to achieve a target of 100 percent fleet electrification by 2045. In addition, Executive Order N-79-20 provides strategies—in cooperation with other state agencies, the EPA, and local air districts—to achieve 100 percent zero emissions from all off-road vehicles and equipment operations in California by 2035.
State Regulations of GHG Emissions from Medium- and Heavy-Duty Trucks Existing heavy-duty vehicle regulations in California include engine criteria emission standards, tractor-trailer GHG emission reduction requirements, and in-use fleet retrofit requirements, such as the Truck and Bus Regulation. The following state strategies reduce GHG emissions from medium- and heavy-duty trucks:
• CARB’s Phase 1 and 2 Heavy-Duty Vehicle GHG Standards establish emission limits on truck and engine manufacturers and harmonize with the EPA rule for new trucks and engines nationally.
• CARB’s Mobile Source Strategy focuses on reducing GHGs through the transition to ZEVs and low-emission vehicles and from medium-duty and heavy-duty trucks.19 • CARB’s Advanced Clean Fleets regulation, starting in 2025, will require public agencies, drayage operations, and high-priority fleets to prepare for the transition to zero-emission trucks and buses where feasible.
• CARB’s Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, starting in 2025, will require that manufacturers of trucks meet a minimum sales requirement for ZEVs. • CARB’s Sustainable Freight Action Plan establishes a goal to improve freight efficiency by 25 percent by 2030, deploy over 100,000 freight vehicles and equipment capable of zeroemission operation, and maximize both zero-emissions and near-zero emission freight vehicles and equipment powered by renewable energy by 2030.20 1944
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 21
• CARB’s Emissions Reduction Plan for Ports and Goods Movement (Goods Movement Plan) in California focuses on reducing heavy-duty truck-related emissions by the establishment of emissions standards for trucks, fleet turnover, truck retrofits, and restriction on truck idling.
• CARB’s Small Off-Road Engines (SORE) regulation that will require most newly manufactured small off-road equipment, such as leaf blowers and lawn mowers, to meet zero-emission standards by 2024, and portable generators to meet these standards in 2028.
These state regulations would contribute to reducing medium-duty and heavy-duty truck GHG emissions in Ontario.
California Environmental Quality Act
CEQA requires that many proposed development projects conduct an environmental review to identify how the project may impact the environment, including an analysis of GHG emissions from the project and their contribution to climate change. The guidelines encourage the adoption of policies or programs as a means of comprehensively addressing the cumulative GHG emissions and associated impacts of projects (See CEQA Guidelines, Sections 15064(h)(3) and 15130 (c)).
Consistent with the CEQA Guidelines, lead agencies may use adopted GHG reduction plans to assess the cumulative impacts of discretionary projects on climate change. In addition, the CEQA Guidelines provide a mechanism to streamline development review of future projects.
Specifically, lead agencies may use adopted plans consistent with State CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5 to analyze and mitigate the significant effects of GHGs under CEQA at a programmatic level by adopting a plan for the reduction of GHG emissions. Later, as individual projects are proposed, project-specific environmental documents may tier from and/or incorporate by reference that existing programmatic review in their cumulative impact analysis. If a proposed development within the City of Ontario is consistent with the emission reduction strategies included in the CCAP and the programs are developed as a result of the CCAP, the project would have a less-than-significant impact on climate change.
A project-specific environmental document that relies on this 2022 CCAP for its cumulative impacts analysis must identify specific GHG reduction strategies applicable to the project and demonstrate the project’s incorporation of the strategies. Project applicants and City staff will identify specific strategies applicable to each project during project review. If applicable strategies are not otherwise binding and enforceable, they must be incorporated as mitigation strategies for the project. If substantial evidence indicates that the GHG emissions of a proposed project may be cumulatively considerable, notwithstanding the project’s compliance with specific strategies in this 2022 CCAP, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) must be prepared for the project. 1945
Climate Action Plan
2. Background
This 2022 CCAP meets the CEQA Guidelines and commitments, as follows:
• Quantifies emissions, both existing and projected over a specified time period, resulting from activities within a defined geographic area.
• Establishes a level, based on substantial evidence, below which the contribution of emissions from activities covered by the plan would not be cumulatively considerable. The 2022 CCAP builds off the 2014 CCAP’s GHG reduction targets by establishing two new targets for 2030 and 2050, consistent with State guidance, and provides substantial evidence for how Ontario can meet these targets and provide substantial progress toward the State’s statewide goal of carbon neutrality by 2045.
• Identifies and analyzes the emissions resulting from specific actions or categories of actions anticipated within the geographic area.
• Specifies strategies and associated actions, that, if implemented, substantial evidence demonstrates they would collectively achieve the specified future per capita emissions level.
• Establishes a mechanism to monitor the 2022 CCAP’s progress toward achieving specific levels and to require amendment if the plan is not achieving those levels. • Environmental review of the CCAP has been conducted as a component of the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) for The Ontario Plan 2050. As identified in the Draft SEIR, the CCAP is summarized in Section 5.8, Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The measures included in the 2022 update to the CCAP are not substantially different than those of the 2014 CCAP, and therefore there is no change in the environmental impacts associated with the CCAP.
1946
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 23
3. ONTARIO’S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Climate Science
Climate is the long-term average of weather conditions, such as temperature and precipitation.
While it is normal for Earth’s climate system to experience long-term shifts in these average conditions, human activity is causing global climate change at a much faster pace than in the past.
These activities, predominantly the burning of fossil fuels, emit heat-trapping gases called GHGs that build up in the atmosphere. As GHG levels increase, Earth’s atmosphere traps more heat, triggering changes in the global climate system that may have serious and potentially catastrophic impacts on people, community assets, and natural systems.
The heat-trapping effect of GHGs is known as the “greenhouse effect” because the Earth’s atmosphere acts like a greenhouse, warming the planet in much the same way that an ordinary greenhouse warms the air inside its glass walls. This process is shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2 The Greenhouse Effect
Source: Climate Central21
1947
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHGs are naturally occurring gases, such as water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), that absorb heat radiated from the Earth’s surface. GHGs are transparent to certain wavelengths of the Sun’s radiant energy, including visible light, allowing sunlight to penetrate deep into the atmosphere or all the way to Earth’s surface. Clouds, ice caps, and particles in the air reflect about 30 percent of this radiation, but oceans and land masses absorb the remaining 70 percent before releasing it back toward space as infrared radiation. GHGs and clouds effectively prevent some of the infrared radiation from escaping; they trap the heat near Earth’s surface where it warms the lower atmosphere. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that if this natural barrier of atmospheric gases was not present, the heat would escape into space, and Earth’s average global temperatures could be as much as 61 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) cooler.22
The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report summarizes the latest scientific understanding of global climate change and projects future conditions using the most comprehensive set of recognized global climate models. The report, released in 2021, considers all impacts that human activities have on global climate, temperature, natural and managed ecosystems, natural resources, human mental and physical health, human migration, urban infrastructure, and food systems. The report describes the existing impacts of atmospheric warming that are currently being observed as a result of the atmospheric imbalance and projected conditions under different scenarios, depending on the success of climate mitigation on a global scale. The report states that:
... widespread and severe loss and damage to human and natural systems are being driven by human-induced climate changes increasing the frequency and/or intensity and/or duration of extreme weather events, including droughts, wildfires, terrestrial and marine heatwaves, cyclones (high confidence), and flood (low confidence). Extremes are surpassing the resilience of some ecological and human systems, and challenging the adaptation capacities of others, including impacts with irreversible consequences (high confidence).23 Human activities are exerting a major and growing influence on the climate by changing the composition of the atmosphere and by modifying the land surface. Particularly, the increased consumption of fossil fuels (e.g., natural gas, coal, gasoline) has substantially increased atmospheric levels of GHGs. The Sixth Assessment Report projects five different temperature scenarios, all of which project 2021–2040 temperatures 2.16°F to 3.2°F warmer than the 1986–2005 average temperature, and potentially over 10.26°F warmer by 2100 under the highest emissions scenario.
The Sixth Assessment Report notes that if trends remain unchanged, continued GHG emissions above current rates will lead to further changes in the global climate system and pose even greater risks than those currently seen.
1948
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 25
Local GHG Emissions
A community-wide GHG inventory identifies GHG emissions that result from activities of Ontario residents, employees, visitors, and other community members. Examples include residents driving cars, homes using water, and businesses using electricity. A forecast is a projection of these emissions for future years. Preparing the GHG inventory and forecast is the first step in creating a strategy to reduce Ontario’s annual emissions. Determining the annual level of GHG emissions helps the City to establish attainable goals for reducing emissions and develop policies and programs to achieve those goals.
In some cases, the GHG emissions themselves are occurring within the city limits of Ontario, such as emissions from combustion of natural gas used in community homes or businesses. In some cases, the activity occurs within Ontario, but the emissions occur elsewhere, such as GHG emissions from power plants in other communities that generate the electricity used in Ontario. In a few cases, the activity occurs partially in Ontario and partially elsewhere, such as emissions from vehicle trips between Ontario and another community. Overall, the community-wide inventory is an assessment of GHG emissions that are attributed to Ontario, although the emissions themselves or even the activities may not occur within the Ontario city limits.
As part of the preparation of the 2014 CCAP, the City of Ontario and its regional partners and technical consultants prepared community-wide GHG inventories for the calendar year 2008 and a projection of GHG emissions in 2020. The 2014 CCAP identified the year 2008 as the baseline year for emission reductions because this was considered a year with good data availability at the time, consistent with state guidance, and without any unusual factors that might affect GHG emissions.
In 2021, SBCTA prepared a regional GHG inventory for the calendar year 2016 as part of the San Bernardino County Regional GHG Reduction Plan.
As part of the 2022 CCAP, the City prepared a set of new and revised community-wide GHG inventories and forecasts. The project team prepared a new 2019 community-wide GHG inventory, revised the existing 2008 and 2016 inventories to ensure they used the same methods and data sources as the 2019 inventory so they could be accurately compared, and prepared 2030 and 2050 forecasts. The team selected 2019 for the new inventory since 2019 was the most recent year with complete data that was not affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, as the changes in GHG emissions created by the pandemic are expected to be mostly temporary and are not an appropriate basis for long-term GHG emission planning.
This chapter presents the results of the updated and new City of Ontario community-wide GHG inventories and forecasts and a discussion of the methods used to prepare and update the GHG inventories.
1949
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Community-Wide GHG Inventory
Protocols and Methods
A series of guidance documents, called protocols, recommend how to adequately assess GHG emissions. The project team prepared the new GHG inventory and updated the past GHG inventories consistent with the guidance in widely adopted, standard protocol documents. These protocols provide guidance on what activities should be evaluated in the GHG inventories and how emissions from those activities should be assessed. Using standard methods also allows an easy comparison of GHG emission levels across multiple years and communities.
The community-wide GHG inventory uses the United States Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (U.S. Community Protocol), which was first developed in 2012 and updated most recently in 2019. The California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research encourages cities and counties in California to follow the U.S. Community Protocol for community-wide GHG emissions.
The Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories (Global Protocol) was first developed in 2014 for preparing international community-scale GHG inventories. It is mostly consistent with the U.S. Community Protocol, although it contains additional guidance and resources to support a wider range of activities in other countries. The project team used the Global Protocol to assess GHG emissions from sources that are not covered in the U.S. Community Protocol.
GHG inventories are estimates of GHG emissions based on these standard methods and verified datasets. They are not direct measurements of GHG emissions, but when the standard methods in the protocols are used with accurate data from appropriate sources, GHG inventories provide reliable estimates of local emission levels. However, due to potential data limitations, some inconsistencies in methods may remain. Any concerns about inconsistent methods are noted in the appropriate sector discussion.
UNITS OF MEASURE AND EMISSION FACTORS
GHG inventories assess emissions in a unit called carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), which is a combined unit of all GHGs analyzed in the inventory. Because different GHGs have different effects on the processes that drive climate change, CO2e is a weighted unit that reflects the relative potency of the different GHGs. These inventories report amounts of GHGs in metric tons of CO2e (MTCO2e), that is, 1,000 kilograms or approximately 2,205 pounds. 1950
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 27
The project team calculated most of the GHG emissions using data on GHG-generating activities in combination with emission factors. An emissions factor describes how many metric tons of CO2e emissions are released per unit of an activity. For instance, an emissions factor for electricity describes the MTCO2e emissions produced per kilowatt-hour (kWh) of electricity used, and an emission factor for on-road transportation describes the MTCO2e emissions produced per mile of driving. Table 1 shows the emissions factors for 2019. Some sectors do not have specific emission factors, including agriculture and off-road emissions, and were calculated using formulae or models.
Table 1 Emissions Factors, 2008 to 2019
Sector Unit 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Source
SCE electricity MTCO2e/
kWh 0.000295 0.000256 0.000208 -29% SCE
Natural gas MTCO2e /
therm 0.005677 0.007341 0.005272 -7%
US
Community
Protocol
On-road
transportation
(light- and
medium-duty
vehicles)
MTCO2e /
mile 0.000432 0.000363 0.000348 -19%
California
Air
Resources
Board
On-road
transportation
(heavy-duty
vehicles)
MTCO2e /
mile 0.001007 0.001248 0.001256 25%
California
Air
Resources
Board
On-road
transportation
(total)
MTCO2e /
mile 0.000478 0.000430 0.000434 -9%
California
Air
Resources
Board
Municipal solid
waste (MSW)
MTCO2e /
ton 0.296215 0.286062 0.286062 -3% CalRecycle
Alternative daily
cover (ADC)
MTCO2e /
ton - - 0.247191 - CalRecycle
1951
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Sectors
The community-wide GHG inventory assessed GHG emissions from nine categories of activities, known as sectors.
• Transportation. GHG emissions created by driving on-road vehicles in Ontario, including passenger and freight vehicles.
• Residential energy. GHG emissions attributed to the use of electricity and natural gas in residential buildings.
• Nonresidential energy. GHG emissions attributed to the use of electricity and natural gas in nonresidential buildings.
• Solid waste. GHG emissions released from trash collected from residents and businesses. • Off-road equipment. GHG emissions from equipment that does not provide on-road transportation (excluding agricultural equipment), such as tractors for construction or equipment used for landscape maintenance.
• Agriculture. GHG emissions from various agricultural activities, including agricultural equipment, crop cultivation and harvesting, and livestock operations. • Water and wastewater. This sector accounts for the electricity used to transport every gallon of water to or wastewater from city residents and businesses, as well as direct emissions from processing wastewater.
• Land use and sequestration. Emissions released into the atmosphere from development of previously undeveloped land and GHG emissions absorbed and stored in trees and soils on locally controlled lands as part of healthy ecosystems. • Stationary sources. Emissions from fuel use at major industrial facilities permitted by state and regional air quality authorities. Stationary source emissions are informational and are not included in the community total.
Per Capita GHG Emissions
In addition to analyzing absolute or total community-wide GHG emissions, the project team also assessed GHG emissions per capita (per person) in Ontario. Per capita emissions show the average number of emissions per service population, which is the sum of community residents and employees in Ontario, so the service population per capita emissions account for activities of both residents and workers in Ontario. Per capita GHG emissions show changes in emissions over time 1952
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 29
and are helpful for showing consistency with state-recommended GHG reduction targets. Table 2 provides demographic context for the GHG inventory by showing a summary of change in population, households, jobs, service population, and VMT between 2008 and 2019. Throughout this document, the GHG emissions are presented in terms of per capita emissions using units of MTCO2e per person in the Ontario service population.
Table 2 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Change, 2019 Metric 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change
2008–2019
Relevant
Sectors
Population 163,951 172,249 178,606 9% Off-road
equipment
Households 44,673 46,001 48,275 8%
Residential
energy,
off-road
equipment
Residents
per
household
104,233 113,859 128,637 23% None
Jobs 268,184 286,108 307,243 15%
Nonresidential
energy,
off-road
equipment
Service
population 163,951 172,249 178,606 130%
Solid, water
and
wastewater,
off-road
equipment
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
(VMT)
1,969,786,450 1,995,399,670 2,151,423,590 9% Transportation Sources: 2019 demographic numbers are from US Census, the Department of Finance, and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA).
Notes: Service population is the sum of populations and jobs. All numbers except residents per household are rounded to the nearest 10.
1953
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Inventory Results
The 2022 CCAP includes 2008 and 2016 community-wide GHG inventories from the San Bernardino Regional GHG Reduction Plan, with a few additional sources of GHG emissions and some changes to the methods to be consistent with current guidance, and a 2019 community-wide GHG inventory.
Table 3 and Figure 3 show the per capita GHG emissions by sector for the three inventory years.
Per capita emissions in Ontario decreased from approximately 8.25 MTCO2e in 2008 to approximately 5.55 MTCO2e per person in 2019, a decrease of 33 percent. In terms of absolute GHG emissions, Ontario’s community-wide GHG emissions decreased from 2,212,900 MTCO2e in 2008 to 1,703,730 MTCO2e in 2019, a decrease of approximately 23 percent. The sectors with the highest per capita emissions corresponded with the highest-emitting sectors, the transportation and nonresidential energy sectors. Table 4 shows how each of the community’s sectors contributes to annual GHG emissions.
Table 3 Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019 SECTOR 2008
MTCO2e
2016
MTCO2e
2019
MTCO2e
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Transportation 3.51 3.00 3.04 -13%
Nonresidential energy 2.77 1.80 1.29 -54%
Residential energy 0.72 0.55 0.50 -30%
Solid waste 0.28 0.22 0.27 -4%
Off-road equipment 0.17 0.08 0.21 23%
Agriculture 0.63 0.21 0.16 -75%
Water and wastewater 0.15 0.08 0.06 -56%
Land use and sequestration 0.01 0.00 0.00 -77%
Total 8.25 5.95 5.54 -33%
Informational Items
Stationary sources 1.50 0.25 1.05 -30%
1954
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 31
Figure 3 Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector, 2008 to 2019 Table 4 Proportions of Annual Per Capita GHG Emissions by Sector in 2008 to 2019 Sector 2008 Proportion
of Total
2016 Proportion
of Total
2019 Proportion
of Total
Transportation 43% 50% 55%
Nonresidential energy 34% 30% 23%
Residential energy 9% 9% 9%
Solid waste 3% 4% 5%
Off-road equipment 2% 1% 4%
Agriculture 8% 4% 3%
Water and wastewater 2% 1% 1%
Land use and sequestration Less than -1% Less than -1% Less than -1% Total annual MTCO2e per capita 100% 100% 100%
The four sectors that experienced the largest decreases in annual per-capita GHG emissions between 2008 and 2019 are land use and sequestration, agriculture, water and wastewater, and nonresidential energy, which reduced emissions by 77 percent, 75 percent, 56 percent, and 54 percent, respectively. These changes are discussed more in the sector detail discussions below but are likely due to increases in supplies of renewable and carbon-free electricity, declines in natural gas use, and changes in agricultural activities and land use patterns.
0.00 1.00
2.00 3.00
4.00 5.00
6.00 7.00
8.00 9.00
2008 2016 2019
MTCO2e per capita
Transportation Nonresidential energy
Residential energy Solid waste
Off-road equipment Agriculture
Water and wastewater Land use and sequestration
1955
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The only sector that experienced an increase in per capita emissions is the off-road equipment sector. Between 2008 and 2019, emissions from off-road equipment increased by 23 percent. • The transportation sector remains the largest source of GHG emissions in Ontario, and this sector’s share of community-wide GHG emissions has increased over time. Transportation emissions made up 43 percent, 50 percent, and 55 percent of total GHG emissions in 2008, 2016, and 2019, respectively.
• The transportation sector is followed by the nonresidential and residential energy sectors as the second- and third-largest sources of GHG emissions. − The nonresidential energy sector’s share of GHG emissions steadily decreased between 2008 and 2019, from 34 percent in 2008 to 23 percent in 2019. − The residential energy sector’s share of GHG emissions remained constant (9percent) between 2008 and 2019.
• Solid waste is the fourth-largest source of GHG emissions. This sector’s share of GHG emissions increased steadily from 3 percent in 2008 to 5 percent in 2019. Similarly, the offroad equipment sector’s share of GHG emissions increased from 2 percent to 4 percent between 2008 and 2019.
• The agriculture sector’s share of GHG emissions decreased dramatically, from 8 percent in 2008 to 3 percent in 2019. The land use and sequestration sector, the smallest source of GHG emissions in Ontario, remained at less than 1 percent during this period. • The water and wastewater sector’s share of GHG emissions also decreased, from 2 percent in 2008 to 1 percent in 2019.
Sector Details
Transportation
City of Ontario community members drove approximately 1.97 billion vehicle miles in 2008, which increased 9 percent to 2.15 billion vehicle miles in 2019.24 The VMT in 2008 resulted in the release of approximately 942,020 MTCO2e which dropped to approximately 934,590 MTCO2e in 2019, a 1 percent decrease in absolute emissions. In per capita terms, on-road vehicle emissions decreased from 3.51 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 3.04 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 13 percent.
There was a slight decrease in emissions despite an increase in VMT during this period due to the increasing use of fuel-efficient and electric vehicles. Table 5 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita emissions for on-road transportation in the 2008, 2016, and 2019 communitywide inventory. 1956
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 33
Table 5 Transportation Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data (VMT)
Light duty vehicles 1,767,683,550 1,843,389,270 1,945,876,580 10% Heavy duty vehicles 202,102,900 152,010,400 205,547,010 2% Total annual VMT 1,969,786,450 1,995,399,670 2,151,423,590 9% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Light duty vehicles 2.78 2.34 2.20 -21%
Heavy duty vehicles 0.74 0.66 0.84 14%
Total annual MTCO2e per capita 3.51 3.00 3.04 -13%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Nonresidential Electricity
Ontario’s GHG emissions from nonresidential electricity, including commercial and industrial electricity use, decreased by 31 percent, from 375,540 MTCO2e in 2005 to 257,820 MTCO2e in 2019.
In per capita terms, emissions from nonresidential electricity use decreased from 1.40 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.84 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 40 percent. Electricity use only decreased slightly during this period; however, the substantial decline in emissions is likely because of increased procurement of renewable energy by Ontario’s energy providers, in accordance with state law, and increased energy efficiency of commercial and industrial facilities and equipment that largely balances out increased energy use from job growth. Table 6 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita GHG emissions for nonresidential electricity.
Table 6 Nonresidential Electricity Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Nonresidential electricity (kWh) 1,273,004,280 1,275,792,750 1,242,306,720 -2% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Nonresidential electricity 1.40 1.14 0.84 -40%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns. 1957
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Residential Electricity
Ontario’s GHG emissions from residential electricity decreased by 30 percent, from 93,680 MTCO2e in 2008 to 65,690 MTCO2e in 2019, although residential energy use declined less than 1 percent. In per capita terms, emissions from residential electricity use decreased from 0.35 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.21 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 39 percent. As with the nonresidential electricity sector, this is attributed to cleaner sources of electricity and gains in energy efficiency despite a growing residential population. Table 7 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita GHG emissions for residential electricity.
Table 7 Residential Electricity Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Residential electricity (kWh) 317,534,340 309,859,420 316,529,750 Less than -1% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Residential electricity 0.35 0.28 0.21 -39%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Nonresidential Natural Gas
Emissions from the nonresidential natural gas sector decreased by 63 percent, from 368,460 MTCO2e in 2008 to 137,960 MTCO2e in 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from nonresidential natural gas use decreased from 1.37 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.45 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 67 percent. This dramatic decline in GHG emissions is attributed to decreased use and combustion of natural gas, reflected in the proportional decline in nonresidential natural gas activity between 2008 and 2019. Table 8 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita GHG emissions for nonresidential natural gas.
1958
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 35
Table 8 Nonresidential Natural Gas Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019
Subsector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Nonresidential natural gas (therms) 65,367,180 21,861,030 26,168,160 -60% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Nonresidential natural gas 1.37 0.66 0.45 -67%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Residential Natural Gas
Emissions from the residential natural gas sector decreased by 9 percent, from 98,620 MTCO2e in 2008 to 89,340 MTCO2e in 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from residential natural gas use decreased from 0.37 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.29 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 21 percent. Natural gas consumption in the residential sector remained fairly constant between 2008 and 2019. Table 9 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita GHG emissions for residential natural gas.
Table 9 Residential Natural Gas Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Residential natural gas (therms) 16,911,770 14,595,200 16,945,380 Less than 1% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Residential natural gas 0.37 0.28 0.29 -21%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Solid Waste
Ontario’s GHG emissions associated with solid waste come from the decomposition of solid waste thrown away by community members and alternative daily cover (ADC, i.e., material applied at the landfill as pest and erosion control), and emissions associated with combustion of waste (transform tons). Emissions from the solid waste sector increased by 10 percent, from 75,930 MTCO2e to 83,400 MTCO2e, between 2008 and 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from solid waste decreased from 0.28 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.27 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a 1959
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
decrease of 4 percent. Although Ontario community members generated more waste in 2019 than in 2008, the growing population helped offset this increase, resulting in a decrease in per capita emissions from the solid waste sector. Table 10 provides a breakdown of activity and per capita emissions for the solid waste sector.
Table 10 Solid Waste Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data (Tons)
Solid waste 256,328 220,370 287,980 12%
ADC - - 2,670 -
Transform tons - - 1,030 -
Total activity (Tons) 256,328 220,370 291,680 14%
Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Solid waste 0.283 0.220 0.268 -5%
ADC - - 0.002 -
Transform tons - - 0.001 -
Total annual per capita MTCO2e 0.283 0.220 0.271 -4%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Off-Road Equipment
Emissions from off-road equipment in Ontario increased by 41 percent, from 46,500 MTCO2e to 65,480 MTCO2e between 2008 and 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from off-road equipment increased from 0.173 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.213 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, an increase of 23 percent. Of the different types of off-road equipment, the three largest emissions sources are construction and mining equipment, portable equipment (compressors, generators, etc.), and industrial equipment such as forklifts and scrubbers. Increases in emissions from these sectors are at least partly due to an increase in construction and industrial/warehouse equipment use. Note that there is no activity data for this sector because emissions from off-road equipment are estimated from a model developed by CARB rather than from measurable metrics such as fuel consumption. Table 11 provides off-road equipment per capita GHG emissions by subsector. 1960
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 37
Table 11 Off-Road Equipment Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019 Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Agricultural 0.00004 0.00339 0.00020 424%
Airport Ground Support 0.032 0.000 0.031 -1%
Construction and Mining 0.049 0.036 0.075 53%
Industrial 0.026 0.003 0.026 1%
Lawn and Garden 0.001 0.002 0.001 -8%
Light Commercial 0.008 0.003 0.008 1%
Pleasure Craft 0.001 0.022 0.001 31%
Portable Equipment 0.053 0.000 0.059 11%
Recreational 0.004 0.001 0.004 -1%
Transportation Refrigeration Units 0.001 0.006 0.009 1,113% Total annual per capita MTCO2e 0.173 0.077 0.213 23%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Agriculture
Ontario has a small agricultural sector that includes approximately 3,000 acres of land for crop production and a small dairy sector with approximately 11,000 head of dairy cows. The sector includes N2O emissions from nitrogen fertilizer (crop production), CH4 gas emissions from livestock (enteric fermentation), and CH4 emissions from livestock waste (manure management).
The largest source of per capita GHG emissions in the agriculture sector is enteric fermentation, which was responsible for three-quarters of the total emissions for agriculture in 2019 (see Table 12).
Emissions from crop production decreased by 26 percent, from 1,150 MTCO2e to 850 MTCO2e, between 2008 and 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from crop production decreased from 0.004 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.003 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 35 percent. Although crop acreages did not change significantly, less fertilizer was applied in 2019 than in 2008 due to a reduction in the types of crops that require high applications of nitrogen fertilizer. Per capita emissions from enteric fermentation and manure management (methane released from anaerobic decomposition of animal wastes) decreased by 75 percent and 76 percent, respectively, between 2008 and 2019. This dramatic decrease in emissions is the result of a substantial decline in the number of dairy cows in livestock operations within the city limits. According to the San Bernardino County Crop Reports and the USDA Milk Production Report, the number of dairy cows in Ontario decreased by 80 percent between 2008 and 2019. 1961
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Table 12 Agriculture Activity and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Crops (acreage) 3,070 3,180 3,180 4%
Livestock (effective annual population) 53,240 18,900 10,890 -80% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Crop production 0.004 0.003 0.003 -35%
Enteric fermentation 0.471 0.157 0.118 -75%
Manure management 0.158 0.051 0.037 -76%
Total annual per capita MTCO2e 0.633 0.211 0.158 -75%
All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Water and Wastewater
Emissions associated with the water and wastewater sector are counted as indirect or direct emissions. Indirect water emissions refer to emissions created by the electricity required to treat and move water to where it is used. Indirect wastewater emissions refer to electricity needed to move wastewater to water treatment facilities and to process and discharge it. Direct wastewater emissions refer to biological emissions produced directly by decomposition of wastewater solids during the treatment process.
Overall activity and emissions decreased in Ontario’s water and wastewater sector. Emissions from this sector decreased by 49 percent between 2008 and 2019. • Indirect water GHG emissions declined by 53 percent and indirect water consumption decreased by 40 percent between 2008 and 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from indirect water consumption decreased from 0.11 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.04 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 60 percent.
• Indirect wastewater GHG emissions decreased by 70 percent between 2008 and 2019.
Emissions reductions in this sector were likely the result of increased water conservation and recycling efforts. In per capita terms, emissions from indirect wastewater decreased from 0.02 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.01 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 74 percent.
1962
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 39
• Direct wastewater emissions increased by 7 percent from 2008 to 2019. In per capita terms, emissions from direct water consumption decreased from 0.15 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.06 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 6 percent.
The emissions data in Table 13 provides a breakdown of the activity data and per capita GHG emissions for water and wastewater use.
Table 13 Water and Wastewater Activity Data and Per Capita GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data
Water use (million gallons) 17,315 9,757 10,463 -40%
Water electricity use (kWh) 139,120,870 63,020,780 61,387,950 -56% Wastewater electricity use (kWh) 9,735,890 6,806,891 7,672,160 -21% Total activity (kWh) 148,856,760 69,827,671 69,060,110 -54% Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Indirect water 0.10828 0.04851 0.0436 -60%
Indirect wastewater 0.02457 0.01887 0.0064 -74%
Direct wastewater 0.01574 0.01517 0.0147 -6%
Total annual per capita MTCO2e 0.1486 0.0826 0.0648 -56% All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns.
Land Use and Sequestration
GHG emissions from land use and sequestration can be positive (a source of emissions) or negative (removing emissions from the atmosphere, creating what is known as a carbon “sink”). Natural and agricultural lands absorb carbon, storing it in biomass such as wood, plants, and soil. As a result, when these lands are preserved or when more street trees are planted, emissions from this sector are negative because GHGs are being removed from the atmosphere. However, developing natural or agricultural lands or converting them to a different form (for example, replacing forests with crop land) or removing street trees causes carbon to be released, creating GHG emissions.
This sector includes emission sources and sinks from two types of activities: sequestration of GHG emissions in street trees in urbanized areas, and emissions caused by permanently removing vegetation from natural lands or farmlands as a part of development. Carbon sequestration by citywide street trees remained fairly constant between 2008 and 2019 (ranging from -710 MTCO2e to -730 MTCO2e), offsetting some of the emissions caused by urban development. Between 2008 1963
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
and 2019, emissions from the development of agricultural land decreased by 57 percent (from 2,540 MTCO2e to 660 MTCO2e) due to a reduced rate of urban development during this period. In per capita terms, emissions from development of agricultural land decreased from 0.012 MTCO2e per capita in 2008 to 0.005 MTCO2e per capita in 2019, a decrease of 63 percent.
Most of the land developed between 2008 and 2019 was not land used for agricultural production and was categorized “Other Lands” by the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP).
According to FMMP, these lands include low density rural development, heavily forested land, mined land, or government land with restrictions on use. Table 14 provides a breakdown of the land use change and street tree biomass acreage and per capita emissions.
Table 14 Land Use and Sequestration Activity Data and GHG Emissions by Subsector, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Activity data (acres)
Land use change (conversion of
agricultural to urban land) 3,520 1,700 1,700 -52%
Street tree biomass 740 760 760 3%
Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Land use change (conversion of
agricultural to development) 0.012 0.005 0.005 -63%
Street tree biomass -0.003 -0.003 -0.002 -10%
Total annual per capita MTCO2e 0.009 0.002 0.002 -77%
Notes: All absolute numbers are rounded to the nearest 10. Totals may not equal the sum of individual columns. Methodology assumes that all agricultural land was converted into urban land uses and no street trees were removed on those urban lands.
Stationary Sources
Stationary source emissions result from fuel use, such as natural gas or propane, at major industrial facilities in the community permitted by state and regional air quality authorities. In Ontario, stationary sources include an industrial gas supplier, a paper and pulp mill, and Southern California Edison’s Mira Loma Peaker power plant The natural gas use reported as part of these facilities’ fuel use may be included in the nonresidential natural gas use reported above in Table 8.
Table 15 shows the emissions from stationary sources in Ontario. Per capita emissions from stationary sources decreased by 30 percent between 2008 and 2019. There is no activity data with this subsector, and these emissions are presented for informational purposes only; they are not included in the community total.
1964
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 41
Table 15 Stationary Source GHG Emissions, 2008 to 2019
Sector 2008 2016 2019
Percentage
Change,
2008–2019
Emissions (MTCO2e per capita)
Stationary sources 1.50 0.25 1.05 -30%
Community-Wide Forecast
The community-wide forecast is a projection of future GHG emissions from the sources in Ontario’s GHG inventory. The community-wide forecast of GHG emissions is based on the results of the 2019 community-wide GHG emissions inventory combined with Ontario’s 2019 demographics and future demographic projections. These population, housing, and employment projections are based on the estimates of future buildout in TOP 2050. Table 16 shows the demographic projections used to prepare the community-wide GHG emissions forecast.
Table 16 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Projection, 2019 to 2050 Metric 2019 2030 2050
Percentage
Change
2019–2050
Relevant
Sectors
Population 178,610 232,120 410,490 130% Off-road
equipment
Households 48,280 66,680 124,380 158%
Residential
energy, off-road
equipment
Residents per
household 3.70 3.48 3.30 -11% None
Jobs 128,640 169,600 296,000 130%
Nonresidential
energy, off-road
equipment
Service
population 307,240 401,720 706,500 130%
Solid, water and
wastewater, offroad equipment
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
(VMT)
2,151,423,590 2,631,468,770 3,504,276,490 63% Transportation Sources: 2019 demographic numbers are from US Census, the Department of Finance, and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA).
Future demographics are from TOP 2050 buildout projections. Vehicle miles traveled are derived from Fehr and Peers (2019).
Service population is the sum of populations and jobs. All numbers except residents per household are rounded to the nearest 10.
1965
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
In addition to demographic and economic changes forecasted in TOP 2050, land use changes are expected to impact activity and emissions within the city limits. Although the city’s total land area will not change, intensification of land uses in 2050 are listed as follows:
• All agricultural land is projected to be developed with urban uses by 2050, reducing emissions from the city’s agricultural sector to zero emissions in 2050. • Infill development in select areas will intensify commercial and mixed uses in Downtown, Toyota Arena, and Ontario Mills Mall.
• Select commercial and business park uses will be converted to mixed uses, which may contribute to reduced VMT.
• Residential development will intensify to promote higher density housing, especially in Ontario Ranch and southwest Ontario.
• Mixed use and higher density residential development is planned specifically to align with future bus rapid transit services along multiple north-south and east-west corridors throughout the city, which may contribute to reduced VMT. • Land area dedicated to public open space will increase with the development of the Great Park, a 370-acre planned linear park stretching 3.5 miles from east to west in south Ontario.
This forecast is also referred to as the business-as-usual forecast. It assumes that, for most sectors, each person in Ontario will continue to contribute the same amount of GHG emissions to the community total as they did in 2019, so the amount of GHG emissions changes proportionally to the projected change in community demographics. However, some emissions, notably those from on-road transportation, grow at a slower rate due to the nature of the modeling process. The overall community-wide absolute emissions are projected to grow 89 percent from 2019 to 2050, and Ontario’s service population is projected to grow 130 percent over this period. Since the rate of population increase is greater than the rate of GHG emission increase, the per-capita emissions decrease over time. This is a worst-case projection that assumes that no one at any level takes action, including state, regional, and local agencies. This projection also accounts for emission changes from land use and carbon sequestration. Table 17 and Figure 4 show Ontario’s forecast community-wide GHG emissions through 2050.
Ontario’s residential population and worker population are both projected to grow by 130 percent between 2019 and 2050. During the same period, the city’s per capita emissions are expected to decrease from 5.54 MTCO2e to 4.56 MTCO2e per person in 2050, a decrease of 18 percent (see Table 17).
1966
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 43
The forecast assumes emissions scale proportionally to demographic growth, which means most of the sectors grow at a similar rate to the growth in demographics, as seen by comparing the percentage changes in Table 17.
Table 17 Forecast Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2019–2050
Sector 20191 2030 2050
Percentage
Change,
2019–2050
Transportation 3.04 2.84 2.15 -29%
Nonresidential energy 1.29 1.30 1.29 Less than 1%
Residential energy 0.50 0.53 0.57 12%
Solid waste 0.27 0.27 0.27 Less than 1%
Off-road equipment 0.21 0.21 0.21 Less than 1%
Agriculture2 0.16 0.08 0.00 -100%
Water and wastewater 0.06 0.06 0.06 Less than 1%
Land use and sequestration Less than 0.01 Less than 0.01 Less than 0.01 -15% Total 5.54 5.30 4.56 -18%
Stationary Sources3 1.05 - - -
1. Data shown for 2019 are the actual per capita GHG emissions. The data shown for 2030, 2040, and 2050 are GHG per capita emission forecasts, calculated based on projections from the 2019 inventory.
2. GHG emission projects for the agriculture are based on the assumption that by 2050 all agricultural land will be developed and converted to other land uses, so agricultural emissions will decrease to zero by 2050.
3. Stationary sources are informational; they vary significantly from year to year independent of demographic changes, so they are not forecast.
1967
Climate Action Plan
3. Ontario’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Figure 4 City of Ontario Community-Wide Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2019–2050
0.00 1.00
2.00 3.00
4.00 5.00
6.00 2019 2030 2050
MTCO2e per capita
Transportation Nonresidential energy
Residential energy Solid waste
Off-road equipment Agriculture
Water and wastewater Land use and sequestration
1968
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 45
4. GHG REDUCTION TARGETS
Background
Establishing GHG emission reduction targets is a key component of the CCAP to ensure that Ontario has a number to strive toward as it implements GHG reduction strategies. The strategies and actions adopted as part of the CCAP are often quantifiable to ensure that each action the City takes can be measured for its performance in advancing Ontario to the adopted GHG emission reduction goal. Jurisdictions can choose to adopt GHG emission reduction targets that match state guidance or can elect to increase reduction targets to accelerate action at a local level. 2014 CCAP GHG Reduction Targets
As part of the 2014 CCAP, the City adopted a GHG reduction target of 30 percent below the forecast emissions levels in 2020. This target is approximately equal to the state-recommended reduction target of 15 percent below 2005 – 2008 levels by 2020.
In 2019, Ontario reached its 2020 GHG reduction target of 15 percent below 2008 levels, which translates to absolute GHG emissions of 1,880,970 MTCO2e or 7.01 MTCO2e per capita. According to the 2019 GHG inventory conducted as part of the 2022 CCAP update, Ontario’s communitywide emissions in 2019 were 1,707,380 MTCO2e (not including the informational emissions from stationary sources), 23 percent below 2008 levels (as adjusted to be consistent with current protocols as part of this CCAP update). In per capita terms, Ontario’s emissions in 2019 were 5.54 MTCO2e, a 33 percent decrease relative to 2008 levels.
State Targets and Recommendations
As stated in “Regulatory Framework” in Chapter 2, the state has set GHG reduction targets to:
• Reduce 2030 emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels, codified into law by SB 32 in 2016. • Achieve carbon-neutral emissions by 2045, established (and not yet codified into law) by EO B-55-18.
• Reduce 2050 emissions 80 percent below 1990 levels, established (and not yet codified into law) by EOS-03-05.
1969
Climate Action Plan
4. GHG Reduction Targets
The Scoping Plan, also described in “Regulatory Framework” in Chapter 2, recommends that local governments select targets consistent with state targets, in absolute or per-capita form. Per-capita targets establish a level of GHG emissions by a certain year per person. Unlike absolute targets, the total level of GHG emission reductions specified by per-capita targets varies depending on future demographic changes. The Scoping Plan recommends the following per-capita targets:
• Reduce 2030 emissions to 6.0 MTCO2e per capita
• Reduce 2050 emissions to 2.0 MTCO2e per capita
These targets are based on the state targets and goals in SB 32 and Executive Order S-03-05, discussed previously. California’s statewide target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 translates to 260 million MTCO2e. The state is projected to be home to approximately 44 million residents in 2030, resulting in an average of approximately 6.0 MTCO2e per person. Similarly, the statewide goal of 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 translates to 86 million MTCO2e. California is projected to have approximately 49 million residents in 2050, resulting in an average of approximately 2.0 MTCO2e per person.
Since the statewide per-capita targets are based on the statewide GHG emissions inventory that includes all emissions sectors in the state, the Scoping Plan notes that it is appropriate for local jurisdictions to derive evidence-based local per-capita targets based on local emissions sectors and population projections that are consistent with the framework used to develop the statewide percapita targets. The resulting GHG emissions trajectory should show a downward trend consistent with the statewide objectives.
2022 CCAP GHG Reduction Targets
The state-recommended per-capita targets (6.0 MTCO2e per person by 2030 and 2.0 MTCO2e per person by 2050) are relevant and appropriate for Ontario, and they are the targets in this 2022 CCAP. Ontario’s targets are based on the service population in the community (the sum of both residents and jobs), as shown in Table 18.
Table 18 Per Capita Targets for Ontario
Absolute Emissions Target Per Capita Emissions Target
Target MTCO2e Description MTCO2e
2030 target 1,175,390 40% below 1990 levels 6.0 MTCO2e per person (service population)
2050 target 391,800 80% below 1990 levels 2.0 MTCO2e per person (service population)
1970
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 47
5. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION STRATEGY
Introduction
There are several ways in which GHG emissions can be reduced over time. States, counties, cities, regional agencies, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and each individual can work together or separately to run projects and programs that either reduce GHG emissions before they are released or sequester carbon once it is in the atmosphere. This chapter describes Ontario’s path to reducing GHG emissions to meet or exceed its targets, including existing/planned efforts led by state, regional, and local agencies, and new strategies in this 2022 CCAP.
Calculating Credit
This 2022 CCAP uses a process called quantification to determine how much GHG emissions are reduced by each strategy. The foundation for the quantification calculations is the baseline GHG inventories and forecast. Activity data from the inventory, such as VMT or kWh, are combined with participation rates and data about the reduction in activity data from each action to calculate the GHG reduction benefit of each strategy. This approach ensures that the GHG reductions from the 2022 CCAP strategies are tied to current and future activities that are occurring in the community.
Calculations for reduction in activity data come from tools and reports provided by government agencies; these agencies include the U. S. EPA, the California Energy Commission, CARB, the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), and local air districts. If accurate data are not available from these sources, the quantification uses case studies from comparable communities and applicable scholarly research.
The project team was able to quantify GHG reductions for most of the strategies in this 2022 CCAP. However, there are a few that do not have a specific reduction level due to missing data or the lack of a reliable method. These efforts are still expected to reduce GHG emissions, but the level cannot be accurately determined. These strategies are labeled “supportive”.
Progress Toward GHG Reduction Goals
To understand the level of action necessary to achieve the City’s reduction targets, this 2022 CCAP analyzes existing, planned, and future actions. By first looking at past accomplishments, the City can understand progress achieved and outstanding opportunities while looking at state initiatives, which may result in further GHG reductions on a local level. Existing and current efforts provide a 1971
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
foundation for this 2022 CCAP. The GHG reductions from past and current activities help inform the creation of new GHG reduction strategies to reduce GHG emissions even further. These new strategies can further close the gap between projected GHG emission levels and the reduction targets, and guide development and implementation of future programs. Together, these efforts serve as the City’s multipronged strategy to achieve reduction targets.
State Initiatives to Reduce GHG Emissions
Since passing AB 32, the State has enacted regulations and programs to reduce GHG emissions.
Although statewide in scope, these actions affect several sources of Ontario’s emissions, so the local benefits of these State efforts can be “credited” to Ontario even in cases where the community did not need to take any action. This CCAP includes the local benefits from five State policies:
• Renewable Portfolio Standard: The RPS was first established in 2002 and has been amended multiple times, most recently in 2018 by SB 100. It requires all electricity providers in the state to obtain at least 33 percent of their electricity from eligible renewable resources by the end of 2030, and all their electricity from carbon-free (although not necessarily eligible renewable) resources by the end of 2045. This policy reduces GHG emission from electricity use, including electricity used to transport and process water and wastewater, and electricity used for electric vehicles.
• Clean Car Standards: In 2002, California adopted AB 1493, the New Passenger Motor Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards, or Pavley standard. It required a reduction in tailpipe GHG emissions from new vehicles produced from 2009 to 2015. In 2012 CARB adopted an extension of this policy, the Advanced Clean Car Standards, which requires more stringent reductions in tailpipe GHG emissions from vehicles produced from 2016 to 2025. The Clean Car Standards (including the Advanced Clean Car Standards) reduce GHG emissions from on-road transportation vehicles, including commercial and public transit vehicles.
• Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards: California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 6 is California’s energy efficiency standards for new and renovated buildings, applied at the local level through the project review/building permit process. The standards are strengthened every three years. The most recent set of Title 24 standards went into effect on January 1, 2020, although the reductions shown from this policy include past, current, and anticipated future Title 24 standards. This policy will reduce GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas use in new and substantially renovated homes and nonresidential buildings.
1972
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 49
• Local Carbon Fuel Standard: The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) was adopted in 2009 and required a 10 percent reduction in the carbon intensity of all transportation and equipment fuels by 2020. This policy reduces GHG emissions from on-road transportation and from off-road equipment.
• The short-lived climate pollutants law (SB 1383): SB 1383, approved in 2016, proposes a comprehensive strategy to reduce methane and other emissions of short-lived greenhouse gases through regulations on dairy operations and urban landfills, including higher diversion rates of food waste from landfills.
Renewable Energy Emissions Reductions in 2050
As required by the state’s Renewables Portfolio Standard, all electricity sold in California must be carbon free by 2045. Consequently, future GHG reduction strategies that only reduce electricity use or increase renewable electricity supplies will show zero GHG reductions in 2050. Since there will already be no emissions from electricity use in 2050, the City cannot count additional reductions associated with electricity in that year. This 2022 CCAP already credits reductions from the RPS as an existing state program.
Under the business-as-usual forecast in Table 17, per capita GHG emissions in Ontario decrease by 18 percent between 2019 and 2050. However, when state actions are accounted for, per capita GHG emissions decrease by 57 percent between 2019 to 2050. Table 19 shows the per capita GHG emissions reductions resulting from state actions.
Table 19 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions, 2019 to 2050 Sector 2019
MTCO2e
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
Percentage
Change
2019–2050
Per capita emissions without state actions 5.54 5.30 4.56 -18% Per capita emissions reductions from RPS 0.21 1.13 -
Per capita emissions reductions from Clean
Car standards 0.53 0.69 -
Per capita emissions reductions from Title 24 0.19 0.28 - Per capita emissions reductions from LCFS
(off-road equipment emissions) 0.01 0.01 -
Per capita emissions from SB 1383 0.06 0.06 -
Per capita emission reductions from all state
actions 1.00 2.17 -
Per capita emissions with state actions 5.54 4.31 2.39 -57% 1973
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Existing Local Actions to Reduce GHG Emissions
Regional and local initiatives help to further reduce Ontario’s community-wide GHG emissions.
There are various local efforts that are expected to reduce GHG emissions, including:
• Smart Ontario, an initiative to promote energy efficiency through comprehensive municipal utility infrastructure improvements.
• Municipal and residential rooftop solar installations. • Implementation of the Active Transportation Master Plan and synchronization of traffic lights through the City’s Traffic Management Center.
• Use of recycled water from Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) for irrigation, industrial uses, and agricultural uses.
As with the state-level policies, the 2022 CCAP assesses the strategies that have the most direct and apparent benefit to Ontario’s GHG emissions. The City and local partners have also completed other efforts, which are not listed here, that may not directly reduce GHG emissions in a measurable way but still contribute to progress on overall climate action.
New GHG Reduction Strategies
A central goal of the 2022 CCAP is to achieve additional GHG reductions to work toward Ontario’s 2030 and 2050 reduction targets, recognizing that the reduction strategies in the 2014 CCAP are insufficient to meet these reductions. To identify these additional reductions, the 2021 CCAP project team began with the GHG reduction strategies in the City’s 2014 CCAP. Some of these strategies have been fully implemented and do not need to be carried forward into the 2022 CCAP. Others are still applicable and can be revised or expanded to achieve additional GHG reductions. There are also opportunities to add entirely new strategies to address new and emerging issues not covered in the 2014 CCAP.
The project team based the revised and new GHG reduction strategies on several sources, including:
• Past and recent GHG inventories and forecast.
• The existing and planned state, regional, and local accomplishments. • GHG reduction strategies in the 2014 CCAP.
• GHG reduction strategies in the San Bernardino Regional GHG Reduction Plan. 1974
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 51
The project team developed 28 GHG reduction strategies and 106 recommended implementation actions. These strategies include a mix of education and outreach programs to encourage GHG reduction activities, financial subsidies, and other enticements to incentivize GHG reductions, and mandates to require GHG efforts. These 28 strategies are organized into 10 categories:
1. Energy
2. Transportation
3. Off-road
4. Waste
5. Water
6. Agriculture
7. Wastewater
8. Leadership
9. Carbon Sequestration
10. Economic Development
The results of quantifying GHG reduction potential of Ontario’s existing and planned local strategies show that, with successful implementation of the strategies, Ontario can meet its 2030 and 2050 emissions per capita reduction targets. Collectively, local strategies are forecast to reduce emissions by 0.54 MTCO2e per capita by 2030 and 1.08 MTCO2e per capita by 2050 in addition to the reductions achieved by existing State, regional, and local accomplishments.
Each strategy entry includes a description, the anticipated 2030 and 2050 GHG reductions achieved by the strategy at the projected performance level, and the recommended actions necessary to implement it. For each strategy, more details on performance metrics, assumptions, and quantification methods are provided in Technical Appendix A. Recommended actions represent the City’s current understanding of best practices in achieving GHG emissions reductions and community equity, availability of technology, and local regulations as well as the current State and federal regulatory environment. City staff are encouraged to revisit these recommended actions as conditions change and new opportunities become available. 1975
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Energy
Most buildings, both residential and nonresidential, use electricity and natural gas to operate appliances and other pieces of equipment. While sources of electricity have become much cleaner over time and will continue to become cleaner due to State law and utility policies, the GHG emissions associated with using a unit of natural gas have remained mostly constant because natural gas is a fossil fuel. Buildings that receive most or all their energy from electricity instead of natural gas can significantly reduce their GHG emissions. Buildings can be constructed to be mostly electric or all electric, or existing buildings can be electrified as part of retrofit activities.
Retrofits can improve energy efficiency of the building envelope, especially in older buildings. And advances in electric appliances, such as those used for space heating, water heating, and cooking, have helped improve energy efficiency and make electrification more cost effective.
When a building has optimized energy efficiency and maximized energy conservation, it is a good candidate for onsite renewable energy. Most residential buildings are candidates for rooftop solar or a rooftop photovoltaic system, which includes electricitygenerating solar panels mounted on the rooftop of a residential or commercial building or structure. Larger properties or more energy intensive uses can use ground-mounted solar energy systems or a combination of renewable energy technologies to meet all or part of their energy demand.
ONTARIO SHINES
PROGRAM
Ontario Shines is a
project of Ontario
Together whose goal is
to install solar panels
on up to 100 singlefamily homes and
include solar
installations at various
multifamily housing
sites , including the allelectric, LEED gold
standard development,
Vista Verde
Apartments. As of
March 2022, the project
team, in collaboration
with nonprofit partner
GRID Alternatives, has
success fully installed
130 kW of solar arrays
at single family homes
and 250 kW of solar
arrays at multifamily
homes as part of the
Ontario Shines
program.
1976
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 53
Building electrification
Promote and incentivize the phase-out of gas appliances in new and existing homes and businesses throughout the community to advance GHG reductions, increase energy efficiency, and protect public safety and environmental health.
Strategy 1 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 10,310 102,640
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0257 0.1453 STRATEGY 1 ACTIONS:
Support education and outreach to raise awareness and increase participation in electric appliance rebate programs offered by SCE, Southern California Regional Energy Network (SoCalREN), and other providers, with a focus on contractors and residents of older properties (constructed in or before 1975).
Identify and remove any existing code, permitting, or other City requirements that provide barriers to all-electric conversions of existing homes and businesses and assess opportunities to provide incentives, such as permit streamlining or fee reductions, as feasible.
Update the City’s permit tracking system as appropriate to track energy efficiency improvements.
Review City-supported weatherization and energy efficiency programs and requirements, if applicable, to ensure they support all-electric, high efficiency appliances. Support education opportunities for contractors about the opportunities and benefits of converting homes to high efficiency, all-electric appliances. Audit existing City facilities on a regular basis to assess energy use and efficiency, identify energy efficiency improvements that optimize energy performance of buildings and operations, and prioritize energy efficiency improvements. 1977
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 2 ONSITE SOLAR ENERGY FOR EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Continue to support and facilitate installation of rooftop solar photovoltaic and onsite solar energy systems in existing residential development.
Strategy 2 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 2,040 0
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0051 0
STRATEGY 2 ACTIONS:
Conduct outreach to raise awareness about the benefits of solar energy for homes and increase installations of residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems in Ontario. Establish a solar permitting web page on the City's website that summarizes requirements for installing solar PV systems to ensure the information is easily accessible to the public. Update City permit tracking as appropriate to track size and number of renewable energy installations.
STRATEGY 3 ONSITE SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
Ensure new large nonresidential development, including City facilities, includes onsite renewable energy to support the site's energy needs by requiring solar photovoltaic panels or other appropriate onsite renewable energy generation systems for the following types of projects:
• New commercial and office buildings, or existing commercial and office building expansions greater or equal to 45,000 square feet in size. • New industrial or existing industrial buildings expansions greater or equal to 100,000 square feet in size.
Strategy 3 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 26,480 0
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0659 0
STRATEGY 3 ACTIONS:
Provide and support incentives and rebates for solar PV systems for industrial uses to encourage increased local use of renewable energy.
1978
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 55
Conduct outreach to raise awareness about the benefits of solar energy for businesses, including industrial facilities, and increase installations of nonresidential solar PV systems in Ontario.
Assess the feasibility of placing solar on City-owned properties.
STRATEGY 4 GREEN ROOFS
Promote and incentivize residents and business owners to install green roofs to conserve energy and reduce surface water runoff.
Strategy 4 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) Less than 10 Less than 10 Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) Less than 10 Less than 10 STRATEGY 4 ACTIONS:
Provide and support incentives for installation of green roofs in new and existing buildings. Conduct outreach to raise awareness about and increase participation in green roof rebate program.
STRATEGY 5 URBAN COOLING
Maintain and expand the City's existing tree canopy, with a goal of planting 500 trees annually through 2050 and promote the use of pervious concrete and cool pavement for pavement projects.
Strategy 5 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 5,610 12,730
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0140 0.0180 STRATEGY 5 ACTIONS:
Maintain and expand an urban forestry program to manage citywide tree planting, track citywide tree inventory and canopy cover, and monitor tree health to maintain and expand the City's existing tree canopy.
Identify priority areas for tree planting, focusing on environmental justice communities, to mitigate the heat island effect in underserved neighborhoods. Ensure that new and retrofitted large hardscaped areas, such as parking lots, incorporate trees and other green infrastructure appropriate for current and future climate conditions. Explore grant funding opportunities for urban forestry, pervious concrete, and cool pavement.
1979
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 6 ENERGY EFFICIENCY RETROFITS FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS Promote and incentivize voluntary energy efficiency retrofits of homes to reduce natural gas and electricity usage, with the goal of retrofitting 9,000 low-income homes by 2050. Partner with community services agencies to fund energy efficiency projects, including heating, ventilation, air conditioning, indoor lighting, water heating equipment, insulation, and weatherization for lowincome residents.
Strategy 6 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 940 1,440
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0023 0.0020 STRATEGY 6 ACTIONS:
Assist San Bernardino County staff and other partners with their targeted outreach campaigns, including hosting workshops and promoting programs through City communication channels to increase awareness of the benefits of weatherization among low-income households.
Expand and better integrate funding and support for existing programs that support weatherization and increase energy efficiency in low-income households, including through partnerships with SoCalREN and San Bernardino County. Engage with tenants and owners of multifamily homes and promote the SoCalREN multifamily program.
STRATEGY 7 ENERGY EFFICIENCY RETROFITS
Promote and incentivize voluntary energy efficiency retrofits to reduce in natural gas and electricity usage. Partner with regional agencies to expand access to existing energy efficiency and conservation opportunities, incentives, and technical assistance for residents and businesses.
Strategy 7 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 11,570 15,600
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0288 0.0221 STRATEGY 7 ACTIONS:
Assist partners with their outreach campaigns by hosting workshops, promoting programs through City communication channels, promoting programs through interactions with homeowners and contractors, and sharing permitting data to inform targeted outreach. 1980
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 57
Establish a web page on the City’s website that
summarizes permitting requirements, available rebates,
and other information about energy efficiency retrofits to ensure that information is easily available to the public. Support SoCalREN and San Bernardino County efforts to conduct outreach and education with local contractors to ensure they are updated on local code requirements and
energy-efficient appliances and devices.
Encourage owners of existing commercial, industrial, and residential buildings 10,000 square feet or larger to prepare an annual energy and water benchmarking report and
submit it to the City, to help community awareness of
building performance and identify opportunities for
energy- and water-efficiency retrofits.
If Ontario is not on track to meet GHG reduction targets by 2025, develop and implement additional energy efficiency standards for existing buildings. Research, consider, and implement an incentive program to encourage community members to reduce energy consumption.
Transportation
The private automobile has long dominated Ontario’s transportation landscape. While convenient, private vehicle travel releases significant volumes of GHGs, emits air pollutants, degrades roads, and poses safety concerns for the community. Allowing for affordable, accessible, and reliable transportation options available to the Ontario community makes it easier for all residents to participate in public life and gives all community members the freedom to choose transportation modes that promote health, reduce fuel costs and time lost in traffic, and help the City meet its climate action goals. This 2022 CCAP aims to provide viable alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle trips by promoting alternative modes of transportation through high-frequency bus service and expansion of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, especially near schools, business districts, and employment centers. In addition, this CCAP aims to reduce the emissions released by passenger vehicles by promoting electric vehicle adoption through municipal fleet electrification, community-wide EV charging stations, and rebates for EV purchases.
NONRESIDENTIAL
NATURAL GAS
SAVINGS
Between 2008 and 2019,
the City substantially
reduced its GHG
emissions from the
nonresidential natural
gas sector. Emissions
from the nonresidential
natural gas sector
decreased by 63
percent, from 368,460
MTCO2 e in 2008 to
137,960 MTCO2 e in
2019.
1981
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 8 SMART GROWTH AND INFILL
Encourage revitalization of neighborhoods through higher-density, mixed-use, infill development and creative reuse of under-utilized sites within the urban core. This measure is supportive of community-wide GHG reduction goals and does not have directly measurable GHG reductions.
Strategy 8 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
STRATEGY 8 ACTIONS:
Identify opportunities to increase residential density in and around the urban core. Examine the development review process and other zoning approval processes to reduce or eliminate regulations that increase costs for higher density development. Regularly identify underutilized parcels in existing infill areas to support increased housing and business opportunities consistent with the adopted Housing Element.
STRATEGY 9 TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT
Encourage development of compact, mixed-use, and transit-oriented development to improve the regional jobs-housing balance, especially on corridors served by high-ridership transit and bus rapid transit (BRT), such as Holt Avenue.
Strategy 9 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 330 1,440
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0008 0.0020 STRATEGY 9 ACTIONS:
Require that development within the transit-oriented development (TOD) corridor maintains and improves the mobility of people and vehicles along and across the corridor through safety considerations such as separated sidewalks and bike lanes or traffic-calming measures.
Require development within the TOD corridor to protect and improve as needed transportation infrastructure, equitably considering the safety, comfort, and effectiveness of all transportation modes.
1982
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 59
Establish and maintain land use patterns in the TOD corridor that will attract and serve riders of public transit, such as higher-density mixed-use buildings near existing highfrequency transit stops. Revise land use and development standards in the TOD corridor as needed to remove any barriers to appropriate higher-density development.
STRATEGY 10 INCREASE TRANSPORTATION RIDERSHIP
Ensure a reliable and responsive transit system with dedicated and secure funding and resources to support increased ridership.
Strategy 10 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 27,980 31,450
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0697 0.0445 STRATEGY 10 ACTIONS:
Collaborate with LA Metro, Metrolink, and Omnitrans to implement “Smart Bus” technology, global positioning systems (GPS), and electronic displays at all transit stops to provide customers with “real-time” arrival and departure time information. Support efforts to establish dedicated bus lanes.
Collaborate with regional transit operators on programs to increase use of the City’s public transportation system. To the extent feasible, support shorter transit passenger travel time through reduced headways and increased speed. Support efforts by regional transit operators to reduce the average fleet travel time by 5 minutes. In collaboration with transit agencies, support new transit routes, increased transit frequency and operating hours, and other improvements to transit quality. Support citywide outreach campaigns by transit agencies to promote the use of public transit, including fare-free days to encourage mode shifts. Coordinate with large regional employers to establish a shuttle service that connects transit centers to employment centers during commuting hours.
Encourage employers to offer ridership programs, public transit passes, and telecommuting to employees.
1983
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 11 TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYNCHRONIZATION AND ROADWAY
MANAGEMENT
Implement traffic and roadway management strategies to improve mobility and efficiency and reduce associated emissions. This measure is supportive of community-wide GHG reduction goals and does not have directly measurable GHG reductions.
Strategy 11 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
STRATEGY 11 ACTIONS:
Work with the Traffic Management Center to develop an annual signal synchronization program for identified priority corridors to understand changing traffic conditions, including peak hour conditions and traffic congestion patterns; update signal timing to match the specific needs of study corridors; and report on progress in travel time, average speed, and delay to measure effectiveness of the signal synchronization project. Work with the Traffic Management Center to ensure that signal timing is updated on a regular basis to comply with latest State requirements and accommodate pedestrian and bicycle crossing time for roadways with crosswalks and/or bicycle facilities.
STRATEGY 12 COMMUNITY VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION
Promote and incentivize the adoption of electric vehicles (EV) citywide, including light-duty and heavy-duty vehicles, for municipal, commercial, and residential uses.
Strategy 12 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 62,880 465,140
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.1565 0.6584 STRATEGY 12 ACTIONS:
Develop and implement a plan to transition the City’s municipal fleet to low-and zeroemission vehicles, to the greatest extent feasible. Collaborate with Omnitrans to encourage investment in electric buses. Encourage the use of electric vehicles by increasing access to availability of public EV charging stations.
1984
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 61
Work with SCAQMD to participate in CARB’s Proposition 1B–Goods Movement Emission Reduction Program to incentivize investment in cleaner trucks and electrification infrastructure to reduce air pollution emissions from freight activity beyond enforceable requirements.
Incentivize the purchase of electric vehicles by providing EV rebates for Ontario residents and/or facilitating awareness rebates available from public agencies. Provide information about EV rebate programs and other incentives through multiple communication channels to raise awareness about and increase purchases of EVs among residents and business owners, including creating a dedicated web page on the City website with information about purchasing EVs and installing EV chargers.
STRATEGY 13 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORKS
Work with transit agencies, school districts, and employers to facilitate an interconnected transportation system that allows a shift in travel from private passenger vehicles to alternative modes, including public transit, ride sharing, car sharing, bicycling, and walking.
Strategy 13 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 1,800 3,840
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0045 0.0054 STRATEGY 13 ACTIONS:
Encourage local school districts to develop school transit plans to substantially reduce automobile trips to and congestion surrounding schools. Increase pedestrian and bicycle facilities through implementation of the Active Transportation Master Plan, expanding the active transportation network to include 186.7 miles of bicycle facilities and pedestrian safety improvements to promote higher bicycle ridership and walking rates.
Seek funding for active transportation infrastructure improvements. Implement scooter-share pilot program in Ontario Ranch in 2023. 1985
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 14 VEHICLE IDLING
Limit idling of heavy-duty trucks. Support the SCAMQD and CARB anti-idling requirements and provide signage in key areas where idling that is not consistent with SCAMQD or CARB requirements might occur.
Strategy 14 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 1,950 1,780
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0049 0.0025 STRATEGY 14 ACTIONS:
Evaluate the feasibility of an idling ordinance that reduces the legally allowed idling time for heavy duty trucks (greater than 26,000 gross vehicle weight) to 3 minutes. California law currently limits idling time to 5 minutes. Ordinance must include a violation fee and enforcement mechanisms.
Create a public awareness campaign to raise awareness about and increase compliance with idling ordinance.
Install signage regarding new idling limit of 3 minutes in areas designated for industrial uses.
STRATEGY 15 PARKING POLICY AND EVENT PARKING
Adopt a comprehensive parking policy that encourages carpooling and the use of alternative transportation, including providing parking spaces for car-share vehicles at convenient locations accessible by public transportation.
Strategy 15 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 2,230 8,110
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0056 0.0115 STRATEGY 15 ACTIONS:
Establish a market pricing scheme for on-street parking in Downtown Ontario. Designate at least 5 percent of downtown parking spaces as loading and unloading areas for taxis, ridesharing or Transportation Network Companies, buses, and shuttles. Designate a portion of parking revenues that can support City-led GHG reduction projects. Consider establishing policies and programs to reduce onsite parking demand and promote ride-sharing during events at the Ontario Convention Center and other event venues. 1986
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 63
Off-Road
Off-road equipment is used in many important sectors of the Ontario economy, such as construction, landscaping, warehousing and logistics, and others. The use of off-road equipment contributes to community-wide GHG emissions, air pollution, and noise-levels in Ontario.
Construction equipment is also a significant source of air pollution in the heavy-duty off-road equipment sector.25 By encouraging the transition to electric off-road equipment, Ontario can improve quality of life and reduce air pollution while reducing GHG emissions.
STRATEGY 16 ELECTRIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION AND LANDSCAPING
EQUIPMENT
Promote and incentivize the transition to electric construction and landscaping equipment.
Strategy 16 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 4,810 26,020
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0120 0.0368 STRATEGY 16 ACTIONS:
Support state and regional efforts to replace diesel-powered construction and landscaping equipment with electric equipment.
Conduct targeted outreach to local construction and landscaping companies to raise awareness about and increase participation in available electric equipment rebate programs.
STRATEGY 17 IDLING ORDINANCE FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT Limit idling of heavy-duty off-road construction equipment to reduce air pollution and GHG emissions from construction activity.
Strategy 17 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 40 100
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0001 0.0001 STRATEGY 17 ACTIONS:
Evaluate the feasibility of an equipment idling ordinance that reduces the legally allowed idling time for heavy duty construction equipment to 3 minutes. Ordinance must include a violation fee and enforcement mechanisms.
Conduct targeted outreach to local construction companies to raise awareness about and increase compliance with the equipment idling ordinance. 1987
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Waste
Reducing GHG emissions released from community waste can be done by reducing the amount of waste that the community creates and capturing emissions released from landfills. This reduction can take a variety of forms, from reducing the amount of packing used in commercial products to reimagining alternative uses for items that might otherwise be considered garbage. The types of waste produced in Ontario include food waste, construction and demolition waste, household appliances, and single-use plastics. Strategies to reduce waste must be tailored to reflect the unique uses and composition of each of these materials. Waste reduction and reuse measures reduce emissions by reducing the amount of material that would otherwise decompose in a landfill. The emissions from decomposing waste can be captured and used for electricity, offsetting emissions from electricity use for facility operations.
STRATEGY 18 METHANE CAPTURE AT LANDFILLS
Support efforts to reduce methane emissions from regional landfills.
Strategy 18 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 22,410 57,370
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0558 0.0812 STRATEGY 18 ACTIONS:
Encourage efforts to coordinate with regional landfills to install methane capture technology and associated monitoring systems with a goal of increasing the methane capture rate to the highest extent feasible.
Encourage the use of captured methane for generating electricity to offset fossil fuel energy use and reduce GHG emissions.
STRATEGY 19 WASTE DIVERSION
Exceed waste diversion goals recommended by AB 939 and CALGreen by adopting a citywide diversion target of at least 75 percent of waste.
Strategy 19 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 14,490 38,670
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0361 0.0547 1988
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 65
STRATEGY 19 ACTIONS:
Establish a source-reduction program that promotes options to rethink, refuse, reduce, reuse, regenerate, recycle, and recover materials by working with regional partners. Establish sharing, exchange, and reuse program(s), including fix-it clinics, swap events, second-hand markets, and shop-local campaigns, by working with community and regional partners.
Promote awareness of life-cycle emissions of products through public outreach campaigns. Explore options to develop and adopt an ordinance to prohibit specific types of single-use or disposable plastics, particularly for use by restaurants, caterers, and other commercial kitchens.
Engage with businesses using food packaging to determine barriers to switching to biodegradable or compostable food packaging and work to remove those barriers. Provide educational outreach programs to multifamily residents, multifamily property owners, single-family homeowners, and business owners to support composting programs. Increase the share of Ontario residents and business owners that have green compost carts or bins by working with waste haulers.
Provide counter-top compost bins to residents of Ontario by working with regional partners and community-based organizations.
Work with food service facilities to understand barriers to composting and work to mitigate these concerns.
Encourage local restaurants to partner with food rescue organizations to divert food that would otherwise be thrown away to nonprofit organizations for distribution to those in need.
Explore options to develop and adopt an ordinance requiring residences, businesses, and City facilities to practice responsible appliance disposal for all decommissioned units, including refrigerators/freezers, window air-conditioning units, and dehumidifiers. 1989
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 20 CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE RECOVERY
ORDINANCE
Increase the amount of waste recycled during construction and demolition of buildings. This measure is supportive of community-wide GHG reduction goals and does not have directly measurable GHG reductions.
Strategy 20 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) None
(supportive)
None
(supportive)
STRATEGY 20 ACTIONS:
In compliance with AB 939 and CALGreen, implement an ordinance requiring building projects to recycle or reuse at least 50 percent of unused or leftover building materials. Incentivize the recycling of construction debris by working with regional partners. Research and consider providing financial incentives to encourage the recycling of construction debris.
Determine how certain construction materials may be donated and reused to help those in need by working with local community-based organizations and construction companies. 1990
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 67
Water and Wastewater
Increasing water recycling and efficiency of water use reduces emissions by reducing the amount of energy needed to process, heat, and deliver water. In addition to saving energy, water conservation and efficiency helps protect one of California’s most precious resources, and in turn helps the City of Ontario to be more resilient to drought and water shortage. Meanwhile, individual homes and businesses benefit from reduced utility costs. This CCAP also recommends strategies to increase efficiency of water and wastewater treatment processes, which can reduce the amount of electricity required to operate water treatment facilities, further reducing GHG emissions in the water and wastewater sector.
STRATEGY 21 INDOOR WATER EFFICIENCY
Encourage water-efficient retrofits of new and existing buildings by working with water providers and regional agencies.
Strategy 21 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 4,580 2,540
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0114 0.0036 STRATEGY 21 ACTIONS::
Explore establishing a reach code for water efficiency standards applicable to new residential and commercial development.
Explore a target for reduced indoor and outdoor water use in existing buildings. Partner with Ontario Municipal Utilities Company to encourage water conservation at municipal facilities and in the community.
Publicize available incentives and low-cost solutions to water-efficiency retrofits in existing buildings.
Provide incentives for water-efficient appliances, plumbing fixtures, and irrigation systems to encourage improved water efficiency.
STRATEGY 22 WATER EFFICIENT LANDSCAPES AND WATER RECYCLING Promote drought-tolerant and fire-wise landscaping. Encourage increased use of reclaimed water for landscape irrigation, agricultural, and industrial use.
Strategy 22 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 3,400 0
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0085 0.0000 1991
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
STRATEGY 22 ACTIONS:
Develop a native, drought-tolerant, and fire-resistant landscaping list and require new development or redevelopment to use this list in landscaping plans. Enforce, and update as appropriate, the Water-Efficient Landscaping Ordinance to reduce outdoor water use.
Encourage water-efficient landscaping practices through incentives and rebates for residential landscapes.
Reduce municipal outdoor water use through a water monitoring and management system for all City irrigation operations.
STRATEGY 23 WATER SYSTEM AND WASTEWATER OPERATIONS EFFICIENCY Maximize efficiency at drinking water treatment, pumping, and distribution facilities, including development of off-peak-demand schedules for heavy commercial and industrial users.
Strategy 23 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 150 0
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0004 0.0000 STRATEGY 23 ACTIONS:
Work with the Inland Empire Utilities Agency, the local wastewater treatment provider, to upgrade and replace wastewater treatment and pumping equipment with more energy efficient equipment as feasible.
Assess and upgrade City-owned water pumping and treatment equipment, as needed, to increase energy efficiency and save energy costs.
STRATEGY 24 METHANE CAPTURE FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT
Work with Inland Empire Utilities Agency, the local wastewater treatment provider, to increase methane capture rate.
Strategy 24 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 960 2,280
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0024 0.0032 STRATEGY 24 ACTIONS:
Work with Inland Empire Utilities Agency to explore the possibility of generating electricity from captured methane to power various facilities and reduce operating costs. 1992
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 69
Agriculture
Historically, Ontario was an agricultural community with abundant dairy farms. Dairy farms that remain operational in the city limits contribute to the release of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas with approximately 28 times the global warming potential (GWP) of carbon dioxide over a 100-year period.26 This CCAP recommends strategies that involve collaboration with regional partners, agencies, and members of the agricultural community to reduce GHG emissions from the agriculture sector in Ontario.
STRATEGY 25 METHANE CAPTURE FOR DAIRY OPERATIONS
Encourage and incentivize local dairy operations to reduce methane emissions through methane capture technology.
Strategy 25 GHG Reduction Potential 2030 2050
Absolute GHG Reduction (MTCO2e) 3,160 0
Per capita GHG Reduction (MTCO2e per capita) 0.0079 0
STRATEGY 25 ACTIONS:
To comply with SB 1383, work with local dairies to encourage installation of methane digesters to capture methane emissions from decomposing manure.
In addition to the GHG reduction strategies that address specific sources of Ontario’s GHG emissions, this CCAP recommends strategies that help to successfully implement the CCAP but are not currently quantifiable actions. These actions are included to complement the strategies for specific sectors, including climate change education, carbon sequestration, and green jobs. 1993
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Leadership
STRATEGY 26 CLIMATE CHANGE AWARENESS AND EDUCATION
Promote climate change awareness and GHG reduction community-wide through a variety of mechanisms, including support of climate change education in schools or community colleges.
STRATEGY 26 ACTIONS:
Promote educational resources to students and parents each year and encourage community educators to
incorporate clean energy and climate change discussions into their curriculum by partnering with CSU San
Bernardino and school districts.
Use City newsletters to spotlight community members,
including K-12 teachers and students, who are working on climate change or sustainability and who are making a
difference in our community.
Increase energy educational resources in the Ontario
School District and Ontario-Montclair School District by working with the San Bernardino County Office of
Education.
Work with nonprofits and community-based organizations to develop a list of green volunteer opportunities and skills trainings for high school students, such as community
gardening, tree planting, bicycle advocacy, food recovery, and composting.
Promote and support opportunities for Ontario
community members to test appliances and equipment
that support increased energy and water conservation and transitions to all-electric appliances.
TREE PLANTING IN
ONTARIO
Since 2019, the City has
planted 1,000 trees of
five different species :
tulip tree (Liriodendron
tulipifera), pink trumpet
tree (Handroanthus
impetiginosus), London
plane tree (Platanus x
hispanica), Chinkapin
oak (Quercus
muehlenbergii), and
Chinese flame tree
(Koelreuteria bipinnata).
As part of Ontario
Together, 365 native
oak trees were planted
in disadvantaged
communities in Central
Ontario. Trees provide
numerous social and
ecological benefits to
the community—they
provide shade, offer
wildlife habitat, help
purify the air, sequester
carbon, absorb water,
and improve aesthetics
and property values in
neighborhoods and
commercial areas.
1994
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 71
Carbon Sequestration
STRATEGY 27 CARBON SEQUESTRATION
Establish a City-wide carbon sequestration project and sequestration goal of 5,000 MTCO2e per year.
STRATEGY 27 ACTIONS:
Organize citywide tree planting volunteer days, prioritizing public schools and neighborhoods in environmental justice areas, as an extension of the City's urban forestry program.
Conduct public workshops to educate community members about the ecological, social, and economic benefits of trees and provide basic training in tree planting and maintenance. Seek grants in partnership with community-based organizations to fund the carbon sequestration project.
Publicize the carbon sequestration project to raise awareness about the project and recruit volunteers.
Explore opportunities to establish a carbon offset program for development projects, ensuring that offset activities occur in California, and that they occur locally or regionally to the greatest extent possible. GHG reductions from carbon offsets must be real, permanent, quantifiable, verifiable, and enforceable.
1995
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Economy
STRATEGY 28 GREEN JOBS
Support green-jobs training and opportunities to create sustainable, living wage, quality employment opportunities
STRATEGY 28 ACTIONS:
Partner with community colleges, local nonprofits, and community groups to provide green-jobs training for residents.
Provide information about green jobs, especially to people currently or recently working in polluting or extractive industries.
Collaborate with community-based organizations and regional partners to amend the City’s economic development strategy and attract businesses to Ontario that contribute to a sustainable economy.
1996
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 73
Summary of Total GHG Emissions Reductions
Collectively, the strategies in this chapter achieve substantial GHG reductions for the years 2030 and 2050 that amount to 0.541 MTCO2e per capita and 1.092 MTCO2e per capita, respectively.
Table 20 shows the reductions achieved by topic, and Figure 5 shows these reductions relative to Ontario’s community-wide emissions. The three sectors with the greatest potential to reduce community-wide GHG emissions are the transportation sector, energy sector, and waste sector, in that order.
Table 20 Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emission Reduction Potential by Sector Sector
2030
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2050
Emissions
(MTCO2e)
2030 Emissions
(MTCO2e per capita)
2050 Emissions
(MTCO2e per capita)
Transportation 56,950 132,410 0.142 0.187
Energy 97,170 511,760 0.242 0.724
Off-road 4,850 26,120 0.012 0.037
Waste 36,900 96,040 0.092 0.136
Water 11,290 2,540 0.028 0.004
Agriculture 960 2,280 0.002 0.003
Total 208,120 771,150 0.518 1.092
In total, implementation of this CCAP is projected to reduce Ontario’s GHG emissions to 1,414,620 MTCO2e by 2030 and to 926,610 MTCO2e by 2050. This has the potential to reduce 2030 emissions to 49 percent below 2005 levels and reduce 2050 emissions to 83 percent below 2008 levels. The CCAP strategies provide a flexible path to reduce the community’s GHG emissions to meet the City’s adopted 2030 and 2050 emission targets and to support the State’s adopted target for 2030 and its goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Ontario’s 2030 and 2050 GHG reduction targets are 6.0 MTCO2e per capita in 2030 and 2.0 MTCO2e per capita in 2050, as shown in Table 21. 1997
Climate Action Plan
5. Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Strategy
Figure 5 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emissions with Reduction Strategies, 2019 to 2050 Table 21 Progress to Absolute and Per Capita GHG Emissions Targets Target 2030 Description 2050 Description
Baseline Emissions 8.25 MTCO2e per person 8.25 MTCO2e per person Target 6.0 MTCO2e per person 2.0 MTCO2e per person
Emissions with All Measure Reductions 3.52 MTCO2e per person 1.31 MTCO2e per person 1998
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 75
6. IMPLEMENTATION
To ensure the success of the 2022 CCAP update, the City of Ontario will integrate the goals and strategies of this plan into TOP 2050 and other City plans as applicable and prioritize and implement the programs and activities in those plans. As the City moves forward with updating other planning documents, such as the municipal and zoning codes or specific plans, staff will ensure that these documents support and are consistent with the CCAP.
Implementing the 2022 CCAP will require City leadership to execute these strategies and report progress. This CCAP contains a work plan that includes responsible departments/divisions, time frames, and relative costs associated with each measure. Staff will monitor progress on an annual basis and will provide an annual update to City decision-makers.
As part of CCAP implementation, staff will apply some strategies and actions to existing or new development projects through the City’s permit application and review process. A separate and forthcoming supplement to the Implementation Strategy will be screening tables for use by project applicants as part of applicable permit application processes.
The strategies in this CCAP are accompanied by a list of recommended actions selected by City staff and stakeholders. The list of recommended actions represents suggested means of achieving the measure but are not a prescriptive path to implementation. Furthermore, not all the listed actions may be necessary for the City to achieve its GHG reduction target or support Ontario’s GHG reduction goals.
Due to ongoing changes in technology and regulations and the emergence of new best practices and funding opportunities, this approach enables the City to adapt and leverage new opportunities or partnerships without being constrained by a specific implementation pathway.
The City’s Sustainability Program Manager will serve as an ongoing advisor for CCAP implementation. As part of annual progress reports, the Sustainability Program Manager and City staff will evaluate the effectiveness of each measure to ensure that anticipated reductions are occurring. If reductions do not occur as expected, the City can modify and add additional strategies to the CCAP to ensure the reduction target is achieved.
The following strategies and associated actions are designed to guide Ontario in successfully implementing the CCAP.
1999
Climate Action Plan
6. Implementation
Implementation Strategies
Implementation Strategy 1: Monitor and report progress toward Community Climate Action Plan target achievement on an annual basis.
Assign responsibility for facilitating and supporting CCAP implementation to the City’s Community Development Agency.
Identify key staff from each department responsible for supporting the Sustainability Program Manager with information and updates for annual reporting and monitoring. Continue to involve community partners and other key stakeholders in reviewing and recommending CCAP action items.
Prepare an annual progress report on implementation of the recommended GHG reduction strategies for review and consideration by the City Council. When information is available, provide updates on estimated GHG emissions reductions and current GHG emissions levels.
Implementation Strategy 2: Continue collaborative partnership with agencies and community groups that support Community Climate Action Plan implementation. Continue formal membership and participation in local and regional organizations that provide tools and support for energy efficiency, energy conservation, GHG emissions reductions, adaptation, public information, and implementation of this CCAP. As appropriate and at the direction of City Council, commit to formal membership through joint powers authorities or other partnerships to implement high priority strategies from the CCAP.
Provide policy input to partner agencies (e.g., League of Cities) on policy barriers that need to be addressed at the State level.
Implementation Strategy 3: Secure necessary funding to implement the Community Climate Action Plan.
Identify funding sources and levels for reduction strategies as part of annual reporting. Include emissions reduction strategies in department work plans, the capital improvement program, and other plans as appropriate.
Pursue local, regional, State, and federal grants to support implementation. Explore dedicated funding sources for CCAP implementation. Explore opportunities to allocate a portion of revenues from revenue-generating strategies to CCAP implementation.
2000
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 77
Implementation Strategy 4: Continue to update the baseline emissions inventory and Community Climate Action Plan every five years.
Prepare a GHG emissions inventory no later than for the calendar year 2024 that shows GHG emissions after emergency conditions created by the COVID-19 pandemic are expected to have ended.
Update the CCAP within five years of adoption to incorporate new technology, practices, and other options to further reduce emissions.
Implementation Strategy 5: Maintain and update the Community Climate Action Plan to allow for greater resilience.
Coordinate updates of the CCAP, General Plan Safety Element (TOP 2050), and Local Hazard Mitigation Plan cycle to ensure plan alignment and coordination of climate mitigation and adaptation efforts.
Assess the implementation status and effectiveness of CCAP strategies.
Work Plan
The Work Plan contains information to support staff and community implementation of the strategies to effectively integrate them into budgets, the capital improvement program, and other programs and projects. The strategies of success are defined as follows:
Strategy Number: The abbreviation that is used to refer to the strategies in the CCAP and all corresponding workbooks.
Strategy: The language used to guide actions needed for reductions.
GHG Reductions (MTCO2e): Amount of GHG emissions reduced by 2030 and 2050.
City Staff Time: The estimated cost to the City (in staff hours) to complete implementation of the strategy, ranked as:
Low (less than 80 hours)
Medium (80 to 500 hours)
High (more than 500 hours)
Time Frame: The year by which a strategy should be effective by fiscal year’s end. The exact status of a strategy will vary based on its actions, and many strategies will be ongoing through and beyond 2030. An effective strategy is one that will be actively on track to achieve its targeted GHG emissions reductions and performance standards. Performance standards are the level that should 2001
Climate Action Plan
6. Implementation
be met or exceeded to support overall achievement of the community’s GHG reduction. Appendix A includes the performance assumptions and standards for each quantified strategy. For a strategy to be effective, the necessary programs and efforts should be active, and any infrastructure or other capital improvements should be in place. The effective year is not the end year, as many of the strategies are programs that are intended to remain in effect for the foreseeable future, and so they do not have end dates. Time frames for effectively setting up the strategies are described as follows:
Criteria Immediate Short-term Midterm Long-term
Prioritization Highest High Medium Low
Initiation
Timeline
Within one
year Within 3 years
Within 3 to 5 years
(when resources are
available)
Within 6+ years
Completion
Timeline
As soon as
possible
As soon as
feasible
High priority after 3
years and completed
within 8 years
When
appropriate or
possible
Lead Department: The lead City department tasked with implementing the strategy.
Partners: Example local organizations that the City will partner with in implementing the given policy. Additional community partners will be welcome.
Although significant GHG reduction policies and initiatives are already in place, the actions proposed in this plan, by necessity, far surpass the scale of existing efforts. Implementing the plan and ensuring that it results in real, additional GHG emissions reductions will require increased coordination across sectors and institutionalizing climate protection efforts across the community.
The large number of strategies and programs recommended in this plan will take many years to implement, given limitations in both staff time and funding.
This chapter outlines the main components of the process for turning this plan into action and identifies specific actions from earlier chapters that are recommended for short-term implementation. While short-term priorities are illustrated, please note that priorities can and do shift based on funding availability, advances in technology, new and better ideas, and other reasons. The CCAP and this implementation section should be considered a living document. A summary of the implementation work plan for each strategy can be seen in Table 22. 2002
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 79
Table 22 GHG Reduction Strategy Implementation Work Plan Strategy
No. Strategy
2030 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2050 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2030 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
2050 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
City Staff
Time Time Frame
Lead
Department(s)/
Agency
Community Partners
1 Building electrification
Promote and incentivize the phase-out of gas
appliances in new and existing homes and
businesses throughout the community to
advance GHG reductions, increase energy
efficiency, and protect public safety and
environmental health.
10,310 102,640 0.026 0.145 High Short-term Building
SCE, SoCalGas, SoCalREN,
Building Industry Association
of Southern California
(BIASC)
2 Onsite solar energy for existing residential
development
Continue to support and facilitate installation of
rooftop solar photovoltaic and onsite solar
energy systems in existing residential
development.
2,040 0.005 0.000 Medium Short-term Building Public
Works Agency
SCE, SoCalGas, SoCalREN,
Inland Valley Association of
Realtors (IVAR)
3 Onsite solar energy systems for nonresidential
development
Ensure new large non-residential development,
including City facilities, includes onsite
renewable energy to support the site's energy
needs by requiring solar photovoltaic panels or
other appropriate onsite renewable energy
generation systems for the following types of
projects:
• New commercial and office buildings, or
existing commercial and office building
expansions greater or equal to 45,000 square
feet in size.
• New industrial or existing industrial buildings
expansions greater or equal to 100,000
square feet in size.
26,480 0 0.066 0.000 Medium Short-term Building
SCE, SoCalGas, SoCalREN,
Greater Ontario Chamber
of Commerce, Ontario
Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce
4 Green roofs
Promote and incentivize residents and business
owners to install green roofs to conserve energy
and reduce surface water runoff.
Less than
10 Less than
10 0.000 0.000 Low Medium-term
Building
Public Works
Agency
SCE, Summertree Institute,
Greater Ontario Chamber
of Commerce, Ontario
Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce
2003
City of Ontario
6. Implementation
Strategy
No. Strategy
2030 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2050 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2030 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
2050 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
City Staff
Time Time Frame
Lead
Department(s)/
Agency
Community Partners
5 Urban cooling
Maintain and expand the City's existing tree
canopy, with a goal of planting 500 trees
annually through 2050 and promote the use of
pervious concrete and cool pavement for
pavement projects.
5,610 12,730 0.014 0.018 Medium Short-term
Landscape
Planning
Public Works
Agency
Inland Empire Resource
Conservation District
(IERCD), Inland Urban Forest
Council
6 Energy efficiency retrofits for low-income
households
Promote and incentivize voluntary energy
efficiency retrofits of homes to reduce natural
gas and electricity usage, with the goal of
retrofitting 9,000 low-income homes by 2050.
Partner with community services agencies to
fund energy efficiency projects, including
heating, ventilation, air conditioning, indoor
lighting, water heating equipment, insulation,
and weatherization for low-income residents.
940 1,440 0.002 0.002 High Short-term Housing
Building SCE, SoCalGas, SoCalREN
7 Energy efficiency retrofits
Promote and incentivize voluntary energy
efficiency retrofits to reduce in natural gas and
electricity usage. Partner with regional agencies
to expand access to existing energy efficiency
and conservation opportunities, incentives, and
technical assistance for residents and
businesses.
11,570 15,600 0.029 0.022 Medium Short-term Building SCE, SoCalGas, SoCalREN 8 Smart growth and infill
Encourage revitalization of neighborhoods
through higher-density, mixed-use, infill
development and creative reuse of underutilized sites within the urban core. - - - - High Short-term
Planning
Housing
Economic
Development
Downtown Community
Benefit District, Healthy
Ontario, Ontario Together
9 Transit-oriented development
Encourage development of compact, mixeduse, and transit-oriented development to improve the regional jobs-housing balance,
especially on corridors served by high-ridership
transit and bus rapid transit, such as Holt
Avenue.
330 1,440 0.001 0.002 Low Short-term
Planning
Transportation
Engineering
Omnitrans, SBCTA
10 Increase transportation ridership
Ensure a reliable and responsive transit system
with dedicated and secure funding and
resources to support increased ridership.
27,980 31,450 0.070 0.045 Medium Long-term
Planning
Transportation
Engineering
Omnitrans, SBCTA
11 Traffic signal synchronization and roadway
management - - - - Medium Medium-term Transportation SCAQMD, SBCTA 2004
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 81
Strategy
No. Strategy
2030 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2050 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2030 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
2050 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
City Staff
Time Time Frame
Lead
Department(s)/
Agency
Community Partners
Implement traffic and roadway management
strategies to improve mobility and efficiency
and reduce associated emissions.
Engineering
12 Community vehicle electrification
Promote and incentivize the adoption of
electric vehicles (EV) citywide, including lightduty and heavy-duty vehicles, for municipal, commercial, and residential uses.
62,880 465,140 0.157 0.658 Low Medium-term
Public Works
Agency
Planning
SCAQMD
13 Active Transportation Networks
Work with transit agencies, school districts, and
employers to facilitate an interconnected
transportation system that allows a shift in travel
from private passenger vehicles to alternative
modes, including public transit, ride sharing, car
sharing, bicycling, and walking.
1,800 3,840 0.0045 0.0054 Medium Medium-term Transportation Engineering
SCAQMD
SBCTA
14 Vehicle idling
Limit idling of heavy-duty trucks. Support the
SCAMQD and CARB anti-idling requirements
and provide signage in key areas where idling
that is not consistent with SCAMQD or CARB
requirements might occur.
1,950 1,780 0.005 0.003 Low Short-term
Public Works
Agency
Planning
SCAQMD
15 Parking policy and event parking
Adopt a comprehensive parking policy that
encourages carpooling and the use of
alternative transportation, including providing
parking spaces for car-share vehicles at
convenient locations accessible by public
transportation.
2,230 8,110 0.006 0.011 Low Medium-term
Planning
Economic
Development
Greater Ontario Chamber
of Commerce, Ontario
Hispanic Chamber of
Commerce, Ontario
Convention Center, Toyota
Arena
16 Electrification of construction and landscaping
equipment
Promote and incentivize the transition to electric
construction and landscaping equipment.
4,810 26,020 0.012 0.037 Low Long-term
Planning
Public Works
Agency
SCAQMD, Building Industry
Association of Southern
California (BIASC)
17 Idling ordinance for construction equipment
Limit idling of heavy-duty off-road construction
equipment to reduce air pollution and GHG
emissions from construction activity.
40 100 0.000 0.000 Low Medium-term Planning
Building
SCAQMD, Building Industry
Association of Southern
California (BIASC)
18 Methane capture at landfills
Support efforts to reduce methane emissions
from regional landfills.
22,410 57,370 0.056 0.081 Short Medium-term Public Works Barstow Landfill and Rialto Landfill
19 Waste diversion
Exceed waste diversion goals recommended by 14,490 38,670 0.036 0.055 Medium Short-term Integrated Waste San Bernardino County
Waste Management
Division
2005
City of Ontario
6. Implementation
Strategy
No. Strategy
2030 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2050 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2030 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
2050 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
City Staff
Time Time Frame
Lead
Department(s)/
Agency
Community Partners
AB 939 and CALGreen by adopting a citywide
diversion target of at least 75 percent of waste.
20 Construction and Demolition Waste Recovery
Ordinance
Increase the amount of waste recycled during
construction and demolition of buildings.
- - - - Low Medium-term Integrated Waste
Building Industry
Association of Southern
California (BIASC),
Integrated Waste
Management
21 Indoor water efficiency
Encourage water-efficient retrofits of new and
existing buildings by working with water
providers and regional agencies.
4,580 2,540 0.011 0.004 Medium Medium-term
Ontario Municipal
Utilities Company
Public Works
Agency
San Bernardino County
Water Resources Division,
Inland Empire Clean Water
Partnership, Building Industry
Association of Southern
California (BIASC), SCE
Annual Water Conference
22 Water efficient landscapes and water recycling
Promote drought-tolerant and fire-wise
landscaping. Encourage increased use of
reclaimed water for landscape irrigation,
agricultural, and industrial use.
3,400 0 0.008 0.000 Low Medium-term
Landscape
Planning
Public Works
Agency
Summertree Institute
23 Water system and wastewater operations
efficiency
Maximize efficiency at drinking water treatment,
pumping, and distribution facilities, including
development of off-peak-demand schedules for
heavy commercial and industrial users.
150 0 0 0 Low Long-term
Ontario Municipal
Utilities Company
Inland Empire
Utilities Agency
(IEUA)
San Bernardino County
Water Resources Division,
Inland Empire Clean Water
Partnership, SCE Water
Conference
24 Methane capture for dairy operations
Encourage and incentivize local dairy
operations to reduce methane emissions
through methane capture technology.
3,160 0 0.008 0 Low Long-term Planning Local dairies
25 Methane capture for wastewater treatment Work
with Inland Empire Utilities Agency, the local
wastewater treatment provider, to increase
methane capture rate.
960 2,280 0.002 0.003 Low Long-term
Ontario Municipal
Utilities Company
Inland Empire
Utilities Agency
(IEUA)
26 Climate change awareness and education
Promote climate change awareness and GHG
reduction community-wide through a variety of
mechanisms, including support of climate
change education in schools or community
colleges.
- - - - Low Medium-term
Management
Services Agency
Planning
Center for Community
Action and Environmental
Justice (CCAEJ),
Community Climate
Connection Inland Empire,
Huerta del Valle
Community Garden, Platt
College, SJVC Ontario,
2006
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 83
Strategy
No. Strategy
2030 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2050 GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
2030 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
2050 Per Capita
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
City Staff
Time Time Frame
Lead
Department(s)/
Agency
Community Partners
Cambridge College of
Southern California
27 Carbon sequestration
Establish a City-wide carbon sequestration
project and sequestration goal of 5,000 MTCO2e
per year.
- - - - Low Short-term
Landscape
Planning
Public Works
Agency
Center for Community
Action and Environmental
Justice (CCAEJ),
Community Climate
Connection Inland Empire
28 Green jobs
Support green job trainings and opportunities to
create sustainable, living wage, quality
employment opportunities.
- - - - Medium Long-term Economic
Development
San Bernardino County
Workforce Development
Board, Inland Empire Small
Business Development
Center (IESBDC)
2007
City of Ontario
6. Implementation
This page intentionally left blank.
2008
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page 85
7. GLOSSARY
Carbon neutrality: When carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated by sources such as transportation, power plants, and industrial processes are less than or equal to the amount of carbon dioxide that is stored, both in natural sinks such as forests and mechanical sequestration such as carbon capture and sequestration. The State of California’s goal is to achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045.
Climate change: A change in the state of the climate that can be identified by changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties, and that persists for an extended period, typically decades or longer.
Community asset: A valued feature of a community that may be harmed by climate change.
Community assets may include buildings, infrastructure, community services, ecosystems, and economic drivers.
Disadvantaged communities: Areas disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative public health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation, or with concentrations of people that are of low income, high unemployment, low levels of homeownership, high rent burden, sensitive populations, or low levels of educational attainment. Criteria are determined by California legislation. .27,28 Equity: The state in which each individual or group is allocated the resources needed to reach an equal outcome.29
Exposure: The presence of people, infrastructure, natural systems, and economic, cultural, and social resources in areas that are subject to harm.30
Frontline communities: Term used by communities to self-identify as places that experience the impacts of issues such as environmental pollution, climate change, and the economic crisis first and most severely. These communities are most often communities of color and low income.31 Hazard mitigation: Sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property through actions that reduce hazard, exposure, and vulnerability.32 Impact: The effects (especially the negative effects) of a hazard or other conditions associated with climate change.
2009
Climate Action Plan
7. Glossary
Resilience: The capacity of any entity—an individual, a community, an organization, or a natural system—to prepare for disruptions, to recover from shocks and stresses, and to adapt and grow from a disruptive experience. Community resilience is the ability of communities to withstand, recover, and learn from past disasters to strengthen future response and recovery efforts.
Risk: The potential for damage or loss created by the interaction of hazards with assets such as buildings, infrastructure, or natural and cultural resources.
Sensitivity: The level to which a species, natural system, or community, government, etc., would be affected by changing climate conditions.33
2010
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page A-1
APPENDIX A. GHG TECHNICAL APPENDIX
This appendix provides details for the GHG emissions forecast and summarizes the data sources, assumptions, and performance metrics used to calculate the potential for GHG savings from the community-wide reduction strategies in the Ontario Community Climate Action Plan (CCAP).
Chapter 3 of the CCAP provides details of the GHG inventory and forecast. Chapter 5 of the CCAP provides the full list of measures to reduce GHG emissions.
Community-Wide Forecast
The community-wide forecast is a projection of future GHG emissions from the sources in Ontario’s GHG inventory. The community-wide forecast of GHG emissions is based on the results of the 2019 community-wide GHG emissions inventory combined with Ontario’s 2019 demographics and future demographic projections. These population, housing, and employment projections are based on the estimates of future buildout in TOP 2050. Table A-1 shows the demographic projections used to prepare the community-wide GHG emissions forecast.
Table A-1 City of Ontario Community-Wide Demographic Projection, 2019 to 2050 Metric 2019 2030 2050
Percentage
Change
2019–2050
Relevant
Sectors
Population 178,610 232,120 410,490 130% Off-road
equipment
Households 48,280 66,680 124,380 158%
Residential
energy, off-road
equipment
Residents per
household 3.70 3.48 3.30 -11% None
Jobs 128,640 169,600 296,000 130%
Nonresidential
energy, off-road
equipment
Service
population 307,240 401,720 706,500 130%
Solid, water and
wastewater, offroad equipment
Vehicle Miles
Traveled
(VMT)
2,151,423,590 2,631,468,770 3,504,276,490 63% Transportation Sources: 2019 demographic numbers are from US Census, the Department of Finance, and San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). Future demographics are from TOP 2050 buildout projections.
Vehicle miles traveled are derived from Fehr and Peers (2019).
1. Service population is the sum of populations and jobs.
2. All numbers except residents per household are rounded to the nearest 10. 2011
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-2 Public Review Draft, May 2022
The forecast assumes that in 2030 and 2050 each person in Ontario will continue to contribute the same amount of GHG emissions to the community total as they did in 2019, so the amount of GHG emissions changes proportionally to the projected change in community demographics. Table A-2 shows Ontario’s forecast community-wide per capita GHG emissions through 2050.
Table A-2 Forecast Per Capita GHG Emissions, 2008–2050
Sector 20081 20161 20191 2030 2050
Percentage
Change,
2008–2050
Transportation 3.51 3.00 3.04 2.84 2.15 -39%
Nonresidential energy 2.77 1.80 1.29 1.30 1.29 -54%
Residential energy 0.72 0.55 0.50 0.53 0.57 -21%
Solid waste 0.28 0.22 0.27 0.27 0.27 -4%
Off-road equipment 0.17 0.08 0.21 0.21 0.21 23%
Agriculture2 0.63 0.21 0.16 0.08 0.00 -100%
Water and wastewater 0.15 0.08 0.06 0.06 0.06 -56%
Land use and
sequestration 0.01 Less than 0.01
Less
than
0.01 Less
than
0.01 Less
than
0.01 -81%
Total 8.25 5.95 5.54 5.30 4.56 -45%
1. Data shown for 2008, 2016, 2019 are the actual per capita GHG emissions. The data shown for 2030, 2040, and 2050 are GHG per capita emission forecasts, calculated based on projections from the 2019 inventory.
2. GHG emission projects for the agriculture are based on the assumption that, by 2050, all agricultural land will be developed and converted to other land uses, so agricultural emissions will decrease to zero by 2050.
Ontario’s residential population and worker population are both projected to grow by 130 percent between 2019 and 2050. During the same period, the city’s forecast per capita emissions are expected to decrease from 5.54 MTCO2e to 4.56 MTCO2e per person in 2050, a decrease of 18 percent (see Table A-3).
Relative to 2008 levels, the City of Ontario’s absolute community-wide GHG emissions are expected to increase by 89 percent in 2050. This projection accounts for emission changes from land use and carbon sequestration. This is a worst-case projection that assumes that no one at any level takes action, including state, regional, and local agencies. In terms of absolute emissions, the four sectors that are forecast to experience the largest increase in GHG emissions between 2019 and 2050 are the residential and nonresidential energy sectors, solid waste, and water and wastewater.
The growth in emissions associated with residential and nonresidential energy use would result 2012
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page A-3
the expected large increases in the city’s population and number of jobs over the next three decades. Similarly, the growth in emissions forecast for solid waste and water and wastewater are due to the anticipated large increase in the city’s service population—i.e., both residential population and employment.
The only sector that experiences a decrease in GHG emissions in the future is the agricultural sector, a sector that is rapidly disappearing in Ontario due to economic change, population growth, and urbanization. By 2050, all agricultural lands existing within the city limits are expected to be replaced by urban development.
The forecast assumes emissions scale proportionally to demographic growth, which means most of the sectors grow at a similar rate to the growth in demographics, as seen by comparing the percentage changes in Table A-1. However, some emissions, notably those from on-road transportation, grow at a slower rate due to the nature of the modeling process. As noted above, the overall community-wide absolute emissions are projected to grow 89 percent from 2019 to 2050, and Ontario’s service population is projected to grow 130 percent over this period. Since the rate of population increase is greater than the rate of GHG emission increase, the per-capita emissions decrease over time.
As the city grows, changes in activity across different sectors of the economy are also forecasted for 2030 and 2050. The two sectors that are expected to see the greatest increase in activity are residential electricity and residential natural gas. Residential electricity and natural gas use are both forecasted to increase by 158 percent between 2019 and 2050. Table A-3 shows forecast community-wide activity data by subsector between 2019 and 2050. 2013
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-4 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Table A-3 Ontario Community-Wide Forecast Activity Data Subsector Units 2019 2030 2050
Percent
Change,
2019-2050
Residential electricity kWh 316,529,750 437,202,640 815,532,580 158% Residential natural gas Therms 16,945,380 23,405,590 43,659,430 158% Nonresidential
electricity kWh 1,242,306,720 1,637,865,370 2,858,631,210 130% Nonresidential natural
gas
Therms 26,168,160 34,500,270 60,214,690 130%
Light-duty vehicles VMT 1,945,876,580 2,380,798,400 3,171,565,080 63% Heavy-duty vehicles VMT 205,547,010 250,670,370 332,711,410 62% Municipal solid waste Tons 287,980 376,530 662,200 130% Alternative daily cover Tons 2,670 3,490 6,140 130%
Transform Waste Tons 1,030 1,350 2,370 130%
Indirect water energy kWh 61,387,950 80,264,120 141,159,360 130% Indirect wastewater
energy
kWh 7,672,160 10,031,270 17,641,850 130%
Direct wastewater
plant emissions1 - - - - -
Enteric fermentation Head of
livestock 10,890 7,030 0 -100%
Fertilizer application Tons
applied 204 130 0 -100%
Manure management Head of
livestock 10,890 7,026 0 -100%
Off-road equipment
sector2 - - - - -
Land use change
(conversion of
agricultural to urban
land)
Acres 3,520 1,700 1,700 22%
Street tree biomass Acres 740 760 760 14%
All numbers except residents per household are rounded to the nearest 10.
1. There is no activity data for this sector because emissions are not correlated with volume of wastewater produced, but rather the treatment process
2. There is no activity data for this sector because emissions from off-road equipment are estimated from a model developed by the California Air Resources Board rather than from measurable metrics such as fuel consumption.
2014
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page A-5
State GHG Emission Reductions
California has adopted and committed to implementing policies to decrease GHG emission levels statewide, including from several of the major GHG emission sectors present in Ontario. Many of these policies are identified in the State’s Climate Change Scoping Plan (Scoping Plan), which was originally adopted in 2008 in response to the California Global Warming Solutions Act. The Scoping Plan outlines several regulatory and market-based solutions to achieve California’s GHG emission reduction goals. Successive updates to the Scoping Plan in 2014 and 2017 revised these state-level actions and identified additional opportunities for GHG emission reductions, as applicable.
Though the Scoping Plan and related documents lay out several policies to reduce GHG emissions, the 2022 CCAP will focus on the policies that have the most direct and apparent benefits to Ontario. The PlaceWorks team assessed these efforts and their community-wide local GHG emission-reduction benefits to Ontario, allowing the community to receive “credit” for the state’s efforts. These efforts are:
• The Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) requires increases in renewable electricity supplies.
• The Clean Car Standards require increased fuel efficiency of on-road vehicles and decreased carbon intensity of vehicle fuels.
• The updated Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards require new buildings to achieve increased energy efficiency targets.
• The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) mandates reduced carbon intensity of fuels used in off-road equipment.
• The short-lived climate pollutants law (SB 1383) proposes a comprehensive strategy to reduce methane and other emissions of short-lived greenhouse gases through regulations on dairy operations and urban landfills, including higher diversion rates of food waste from landfills.
State level actions have a significant impact on reduction of GHG emissions when analyzed on a per-capita basis. Table A-4 shows the per capita GHG emissions resulting from state actions, both community wide and by sector. Under the forecast presented above, per capita GHG emissions decrease by 18 percent from 2019 to 2050. However, when state actions are accounted for, per capita GHG emissions decrease by 57 percent from 2019 to 2050. 2015
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-6 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Table A-4 Ontario Per Capita GHG Emission Reductions from State Actions, 2019 to 2050 Description 2019
MTCO2e
2030
MTCO2e
2050
MTCO2e
Percentage
Change
2019–2050
Per capita emissions without state actions 5.54 5.30 4.56 -18% Per capita emissions reductions from RPS 0.21 1.13 -
Per capita emissions reductions from Clean
Car standards 0.53 0.69 -
Per capita emissions reductions from Title 24 0.19 0.28 - Per capita emissions reductions from LCFS
(off-road only) 0.01 0.01 -
Per capita emissions from SB 1383 0.06 0.06 -
Per capita emission reductions from all state
actions 1.00 2.17 -
Per capita emissions with state actions 5.54 4.31 2.39 -57% Technical Data for Existing and Planned Activities
Quantification of existing and planned activities are calculations that determine the GHG emission reduction potential of strategies recommended in the CCAP. They are based on four primary types of data and research:
The inventory and forecast of San Carlos’ GHG emissions, as discussed above, and summarized in Chapter 3 of the CCAP.
• The San Bernardino County GHG Reduction Tool
• California Air Pollution Control Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing GHG Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity • Peer-reviewed reports and other credible research documents. • Case studies for similar jurisdictions.
The community-wide inventory and forecast serve as the foundation for the quantification of Ontario’s GHG reduction strategies, supplemented with additional data types and research. The inventory and forecast provide activity data, such as kWh of electricity used, or VMT. The project team combined the activity data with data sources that identify the potential for reduction and performance targets that estimate the level of implementation. This provides the total savings in activity data for the years 2030 and 2050. The project team then multiplied the activity data savings by the relevant emissions factor to determine the total GHG savings from the strategy. 2016
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public Review Draft, May 2022 Page A-7
This section discusses the data sources, methods, and assumptions for the quantification of the existing and planned local activities. Only some existing and planned local activities are quantified. Other activities, not included here, may have GHG reduction benefits but City staff cannot accurately determine the level of reductions.
Table A-5 shows the emissions factors used in the quantification. These emission factors account for the GHG reductions from existing state actions through 2050, such as RPS. Note that the quantification for many strategies, especially those that related to electricity, will use multiple emissions factors. Some sectors do not have specific emission factors, including direct wastewater and off-road emissions, and were calculated using formulae or models.
Table A-5 Emissions Factors with State Reductions
Sector Unit 2008 2016 2019 2030 2050 Source
SCE electricity MTCO2e/
kWh 0.000288 0.000219 0.000208 0.000149 0.000000 SCE
Natural gas MTCO2e/
therm 0.053816 0.007341 0.005272 0.005272 0.005272
US
Community
Protocol
On-road
transportation
(light and
medium-duty
vehicles)
MTCO2e/
mile 0.000421 0.000363 0.000348 0.000277 0.000253
California Air
Resources
Board
On-road
transportation
(heavy duty
vehicles)
MTCO2e/
mile 0.000979 0.001248 0.001256 0.001070 0.000734
California Air
Resources
Board
On-road
transportation
(total)
MTCO2e/
mile 0.001400 0.001611 0.001604 0.001348 0.001400
California Air
Resources
Board
Solid waste
(municipal
solid waste)
MTCO2e/
ton 0.473978 0.532831 0.286062 0.234502 0.473978 CalRecycle Solid waste
(alternative
daily cover)
MTCO2e/
ton - - 0.247191 0.246418 - CalRecycle
2017
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-8 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Existing Activities
Activity 1 Solar PV capacity
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance Standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 310 0 0.0008 0
Residential
installations 35 35 Total residential solar capacity (kW) 3,130 3,130 Nonresidential
installations 2 2 Total nonresidentialsolar capacity (kW) 2,571,130 2,571,130 Sources:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (n.d.). Monthly PV performance data: Ontario, California. PV watts calculator. https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2022.) California Distributed Generation Statistics. https://www.californiadgstats.ca.gov/ National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx 2018
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-9
Activity 2 All electric and zero net energy buildings
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 90 110 0.0002 0.0002 There are no assumptions for this
existing action
Number of allelectric residential
units
100 100
Sources:
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx 2019
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-10 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Activity 3 EV charging stations
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 120 140 0.0003 0.0002 Number of EV
charging stations 30 30 Number of EV charging stations 30 30 Sources:
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
Greenblatt, J.B. (2015, March). Modeling California policy impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Berkeley lab. https://eta.lbl.gov/publications/modeling-california-policy-impacts. 2020
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-11
Activity 4 G Street crosstown bicycle route
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 30 30 0.0001 0
Percent of
community-wide
light-duty VMT on G
St roadway segment
4% 4% Miles of bike lanes
on G Street 18 18
Sources:
City of Ontario. (2015, June 17). G street crosstown bike route and San Antonio avenue bike corridor. City of Ontario. https://ceqanet.opr.ca.gov/2015068332.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2018). California public road data. Caltrans. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/california-public-road-data/prd-2018-a11y.pdf.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
2021
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-12 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Activity 5 Outdoor lighting
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 300 0 0.0007 0
Percentage of
streetlights
retrofitted since
2019
65% 65%
Number of
retrofitted
streetlights
8,130 8,130
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx. 2022
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-13
Activity 6 Energy efficiency retrofits of municipal buildings GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 660 0 0.0016 0 There are no assumptions for this
existing action
Estimated annual
energy savings
from retrofits in
2020 (kWh)
5,571,640 5,571,640
Sources:
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx. 2023
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-14 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Activity 7 Tree planting
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 1,480 1,480 0.0037 0.0021 There are no assumptions for this existing action
Number of trees
planted since
2019
1,000 1,000
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
USDA Forest Service. (2006). I-Tree planting calculator. I-Tree. https://planting.itreetools.org/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx.
Note:
The City currently has plans to plant significantly more than 1,000 trees per year by 2050. The quantification and assumptions for this activity are a minimum threshold and can be exceeded as City and community resources allow. 2024
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-15
Activity 8 Installation of efficient industrial water boilers GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 180 180 0.0004 0.0003 There are no assumptions for this existing action
Number of
industrial boilers
replaced since
2019
6 6
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf. 2025
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-16 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Activity 9 Increased supply of electricity from renewable sources GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 56,140 0 0.1398 0 There are no assumptions for this
existing action
SCE GHG
emissions factor
(MTCO2e/kWh)
0.000119 0.000000
Sources:
Combs, J. S. and Karlstand, C. A. (2020). SCE 2020 Integrated Resource Plan. Southern California Edison (SCE). https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M346/K291/346291781.PDF.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx 2026
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-17
Planned Activities
Strategy 1 Building electrification
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 10,310 102,640 0.0257 0.1453
Penetration rate for
electrification of
existing homes
10% 25% New all-electric
homes 5,520 45,660
Penetration rate for
electrification of
existing nonresidential buildings
5% 12%
Existing homes
retrofitted to be
all-electric
4,830 12,070
Penetration rate for
electrification of new
homes
30% 60%
New all-electric
square footage
for nonresidential
buildings
8,166,530 49,941,430
Penetration rate for
electrification of new
non-residential
buildings
25% 45%
Existing
nonresidential
square footage
retrofitted to be
all-electric
9,158,850 21,981,230
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
2027
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-18 Public Review Draft, May 2022
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx PlaceWorks. (2021). TOP 2050, Buildout Projections: Demographic Forecast. PlaceWorks. 2028
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-19
Strategy 2 Onsite solar energy for existing residential development GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 2,040 0 0.0051 0
Percent of existing
homes with solar
panels installed
5% 25%
Number of existing
homes with solar
panels installed
2,410 12,070
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx National Renewable Energy Laboratory. 2021. “PVWatts.” https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2021. “Emissions & generation resource integrated database (eGRID).” https://www.epa.gov/egrid.
2029
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-20 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 3 Onsite solar energy systems for nonresidential development GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita
GHG reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 26,480 0 0.0659 0
Target percentage of
new industrial roof space
with electric needs met
by on-site solar
90% 90%
kW of solar
panels on new
industrial space
66,660 45,660
Target percentage of
existing industrial roof
space with electric
needs met by on-site
solar
10% 20%
kW of solar
panels on
existing
industrial space
52,290 12,070
Target percentage of
new nonindustrial
nonresidential
development with
electricity needs met by
on-site solar
15% 30%
kW of solar
panels on new
nonindustrial
nonresidential
space
4,520 49,941,430
Target percentage of
existing nonindustrial
nonresidential
development with
electricity needs met by
on-site solar
5% 15%
kW of solar
panels on
existing
nonindustrial
nonresidential
space
11,550 21,981,230
2030
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-21
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG Reduction Tool, GHG Reduction Tool, San Bernardino County GHG Reduction Plan. SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). (2021). “PVWatts.” https://pvwatts.nrel.gov/.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2021). “Emissions & generation resource integrated database (eGRID).” https://www.epa.gov/egrid.
San Bernardino Council of Governments (SBCOG). (n.d.) “SBCOG analysis: Warehouse data.” SBCOG. 2031
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-22 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 4 Green roofs
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Less than
10 Less
than
10 0 0
Target area of
residential green
roofs installed in
Ontario (square
feet)
25,000 50,000
Installed square
footage of
residential
green roofs in
Ontario
25,000 50,000
Target area of
commercial
green roofs
installed in
Ontario (square
feet)
50,000 100,000
Installed square
footage of
commercial
green roofs in
Ontario
50,000 100,000
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan. SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx 2032
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-23
Strategy 5 Urban cooling
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 5,610 12,730 0.0140 0.0180
Total number of
trees planted with
urban forestry
program
4,000 10,000 Number of trees
planted 4,000 10,000
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx USDA Forest Service. (2006). I-Tree planting calculator. I-Tree. https://planting.itreetools.org/. 2033
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-24 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 6 Energy efficiency retrofits for low-income households GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 940 1,440 0.0023 0.0020
Penetration rate for lowincome residential energy
efficiency retrofits
30% 60%
Number of
retrofitted lowincome homes4,630 9,270
Anticipated savings in
electricity energy efficiency
from retrofit activities
20% 20%
Anticipated savings in natural
gas energy efficiency from
retrofit activities
32% 32%
Percent of existing
households in Ontario that
are low income (2019)
27% 27%
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf California Energy Commission (CEC). (2021). “2019 Residential Appliance Saturation Study.” CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/surveys/2019-residential-appliance-saturation-study.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
2034
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-25
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). (2017). Comprehensive Housing affordability Strategy (CHAS). Office of Policy Development and Research (PD&R). https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/cp.html#2006-2017_data. 2035
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-26 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 7 Energy efficiency retrofits
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 11,570 15,600 0.0288 0.0221
Penetration rate for
residential energy
efficiency retrofits
15% 30%
Number of
retrofitted
homes
(excluding
low-income
households)
4,920 9,270
Anticipated savings from
residential energy
efficiency retrofits
25% 25%
Penetration rate for
nonresidential energy
efficiency retrofits
5% 20%
Anticipated savings from
nonresidential energy
efficiency retrofits
40% 40%
Square
footage of
retrofitted
nonresidential
space
7,525,540 30,102,170
Target penetration rate for
residential LED 75% 95%
Target penetration rate for
nonresidential LED 60% 80%
Percent electricity savings
per LED light 75% 75%
2036
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-27
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2021). “2019 Residential Appliance Saturation Study.” CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/surveys/2019-residential-appliance-saturation-study.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL). (2021, August 13). State renewable portfolio standards and goals. NCSL. https://www.ncsl.org/research/energy/renewable-portfolio-standards.aspx U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2020). Adoption of light-emitting diodes in common lighting applications. Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2020/09/f78/ssl-led-adoption-aug2020.pdf. 2037
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-28 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 8 Smart growth and infill
Smart growth and infill is not a quantifiable strategy in Ontario. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf. 2038
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-29
Strategy 9 Transit-Oriented Development
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
PlaceWorks. (2021). TOP 2050, Buildout Projections: Demographic Forecast. PlaceWorks.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 330 1,440 0.0008 0.0020
New TOD
households' share
of new citywide
VMT
3% 5% New housing units in
TOD areas 410 3,200
2039
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-30 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 10 Increase transportation ridership
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 27,980 31,450 0.0697 0.0445
Target participation rate
in Commute Trip
Reduction Program
4% 4% Number of
employees
participating in
commute trip
reduction
Percent of employees 6,780 11,840
eligible for Commute
Trip Reduction Program
or ridesharing
80% 80%
Target participation rate
in ridesharing program in
suburban areas
4% 4%
Annual West
Valley
Connector
ridership
25,927,840 25,927,840
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
U.S. Census. (2019). Home area profile analysis. Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) OnTheMap. https://lehd.ces.census.gov/.
Omnitrans. (2022). Route 83 service frequency. Omnitrans. https://omnitrans.org/routes/route-83/ U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). Means of transportation to work, 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
2040
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-31
Strategy 11 Traffic signal synchronization and roadway management Traffic signal synchronization is not a quantifiable strategy. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy.
There are no assumptions or performance targets.
2041
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-32 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 12 Community vehicle electrification
GHG Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 62,880 465,140 0.1565 0.6584
Penetration rate
for electrification
of municipal fleet
20% 40%
EVs in municipal
fleet 130 260 Estimated
percentage of
municipal vehicle
fleet that is lightduty vehicles
80% 80%
Estimated
percentage of
municipal vehicle
fleet that is heavyduty vehicles
20% 20%
Light-duty EVs
registered in
Ontario
24,510 173,400
Target for eVMT
share of
community wide
VMT (light-duty)
15% 60%
Target for eVMT
share of
community wide
VMT (heavy-duty)
10% 50%
Heavy-duty EVs
registered in
Ontario
1,490 14,450
Target number of
new charging
stations
15 30 Number of new
charging stations 15 30
2042
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-33
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Light-duty vehicle population in California. CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/zero-emission-vehicle-and-infrastructure-statistics/light-duty-vehicle.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). (2018). California public road data. Caltrans. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/research-innovation-system-information/documents/california-public-road-data/prd-2018-a11y.pdf.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
2043
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-34 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 13 Active transportation networks
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 1,800 3,840 0.0045 0.0054
Percentage of
bicycle network
completed by 2030
and 2050
25% 75%
Miles of newlyinstalled bike
lanes
42 127
Miles of newlyinstalled
pedestrian
improvements
4 12
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
City of Ontario. (2021). Ontario Active Transportation Master Plan. City of Ontario. https://ontario-active-transportation-master-plancityofontario.hub.arcgis.com/.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
2044
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-35
Strategy 14 Vehicle idling
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 1,950 1,780 0.0049 0.0025
Compliance rate
with idling
ordinance
0.5 0.5
There are no performance metrics
associated with this strategy
Reduction in idling
time with
ordinance
40% 40%
Percent of total
fuel used when
idling
6% 6%
Reduction in idling
time with
ordinance
40% 40%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
2045
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-36 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 15 Parking policy and event parking
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 2,230 8,110 0.0056 0.0115
Current parking price $0.50 $0.50
Future parking
price $0.75 $1.25 Future parking price $0.75 $1.25
Default percentage of
trips parking on the street 75% 75%
Sources:
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf.
California Office of Planning and Research (OPR). (2018, December). Technical advisory on evaluating transportation impacts in CEQA. OPR. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
Hermann, P. & Hayes, J. (2022). Draft memorandum: The Ontario Plan Transportation Impact Assessment-Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT).
Fehr and Peers.
2046
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-37
Strategy 16 Electrification of construction and landscaping equipment GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 4,810 26,020 0.0120 0.0368
Penetration rate of
electrification of
conventional
construction
equipment
20% 50%
Pieces of
electrified
construction
equipment
320 1,360
Penetration rate of
electrification of
conventional
landscaping
equipment
20% 50%
Pieces of
electrified
landscaping
equipment
1,070 4,120
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
2047
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-38 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 17 Idling ordinance for construction equipment GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 40 100 0.0001 0.0001
Reduction in idling
time with
ordinance
40% 40%
There are no performance metrics
associated with this strategy Compliance rate
with idling
ordinance
50% 50%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2019). Emission Factors model (EMFAC), Emissions inventory tool. CARB. https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory.
2048
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-39
Strategy 18 Methane capture at landfills
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 22,410 57,370 0.0558 0.0812
Current methane
capture rate 75% 75%
Methane capture
rate 80% 85% Target for
methane capture
rate
80% 85%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf. 2049
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-40 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 19 Waste diversion
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 14,490 38,670 0.0361 0.0547
Waste diversion
target (AB 939) 75% 85% Estimated tons of
solid waste
diverted
267,010 532,190
Waste diversion
rate (BAU) 50% 50%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California’s Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle). (2019). Jurisdiction disposal and average daily coverage (ADC) tons by facility. https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/LGCentral/DisposalReporting/Destination/DisposalByFacility.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2018). ARB Landfill Tool v 1.3, MSW Waste Characterization for California. CARB. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/carbs-landfill-gas-tool. 2050
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-41
Strategy 20 Construction and demolition waste recovery ordinance Construction and demolition waste recovery is not a quantifiable strategy in Ontario. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets. 2051
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-42 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 21 Indoor water efficiency
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 4,580 2,540 0.0114 0.0036
Average reduction
in indoor water use
in new buildings
20% 40% Total community
water use
(million gallons,
excluding
recycled water)
10,770 18,630 Average reduction
in outdoor water
use in new
buildings
40% 60%
Average reduction
in water use in
existing buildings
25% 50% Total community
wastewater
generation
(million gallons)
3,880 6,450 Average reduction
in wastewater
generation in
existing buildings
25% 50%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). (2021). Handbook for analyzing greenhouse gas emissions reductions, assessing climate vulnerabilities, and advancing health and equity. CAPCOA. https://www.airquality.org/ClimateChange/Documents/Handbook%20Public%20Draft_2021-Aug.pdf. 2052
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-43
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC). (2020). Urban water management plan. City of Ontario. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf. 2053
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-44 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 22 Water efficient landscapes and water recycling GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 3,400 0 0.0085 0 Percent increase in
recycled water use 72% 145%
Recycled water
use (million
gallons)
4,390 6,240
Sources:
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC). (2020). Urban water management plan. City of Ontario. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf.
California Energy Commission (CEC). (2019). Power content label 2019: Southern California Edison (SCE). CEC. https://www.energy.ca.gov/filebrowser/download/3265.
2054
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-45
Strategy 23 Water system and wastewater operations efficiency GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 150 0 0.0004 0
Efficiency
improvement in
water treatment
and distribution
system
10% 25%
Electricity use of
water treatment
and distribution
system (kWh)
56,533,450 66,745,850
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC). (2020). Urban water management plan. City of Ontario. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf. 2055
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-46 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 24 Methane capture for wastewater treatment
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction (MTCO2e
per person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 960 2,280 0.0024 0.0032
IEUA wastewater
methane capture
rate
70% 85%
Methane capture
rate at IEUA
facilities
70% 85%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
Ontario Municipal Utilities Company (OMUC). (2020). Urban water management plan. City of Ontario. https://www.ontarioca.gov/sites/default/files/Ontario-Files/Municipal-UtilitiesCompany/Final%20Draft%20Ontario%202020%20Ontario%20UWMP.pdf. 2056
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022 Page A-47
Strategy 25 Methane capture for dairy operations
GHG
Reduction
(MTCO2e)
Per capita GHG
reduction
(MTCO2e per
person)
Assumptions Performance standards
2030 2050 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 Description 2030 2050 3,160 0 0.0079 0.0000
Dairies using manure
management
systems with
methane capture
50% 100%
Heads of livestock
on dairies with
manure capture
3,520 0
Methane capture
rate of installed
systems
86% 86%
Sources:
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA). (2021). GHG reduction tool, San Bernardino County GHG reduction plan.
SBCTA. https://www.gosbcta.com/plan/regional-greenhouse-gas-reduction-plan/.
California Air Resources Board (CARB). (2021). Analysis of Progress toward Achieving the 2030 Dairy and Livestock Sector Methane Emissions Target. CARB. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-06/draft-2030-dairy-livestock-ch4-analysis.pdf 2057
City of Ontario
Appendix A - GHG Technical Appendix
Page A-48 Public Review Draft, May 2022
Strategy 26 Climate change awareness and education
Climate change awareness and education is not a quantifiable strategy in Ontario. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy. There are no assumptions or performance targets.
Strategy 27 Carbon sequestration
Carbon sequestration is not a quantifiable strategy in Ontario. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy.
There are no assumptions or performance targets.
Strategy 28 Green jobs
Carbon sequestration is not a quantifiable strategy in Ontario. There are no measurable GHG gas reductions for this strategy.
There are no assumptions or performance targets.
2058
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022
WORKS CITED
1. San Bernardino, County of. n.d. County History. San Bernardino County. https://www.sbcounty.gov/Main/Pages/History.aspx.
2. Ontario, City of. 2022, January. Draft Housing Element.
3. Ontario, City of. 2022, January. Draft Housing Element.
4. U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Age and Sex. 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
5. U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Hispanic or Latino origin by race. 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
6. U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Language spoken at home. 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
7. U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Language spoken at home. 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
8. U.S. Census Bureau. 2019. Median income in the past 12 months. 2019 American Community Survey 5- year estimate data profiles. The Census Bureau. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/.
9. County of San Bernardino. 2015. Analysis of impediments to fair housing choice. San Bernardino County. https://content.sbcounty.gov/uploads/CDH/Analysis-of-Impediments-to-Fair-Housing-Choice-2015- 2020.pdf.
10. Ontario, City of. 2021, June. The Ontario Plan 101. General Plan Workshop. https://www.ontario plan.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2021/07/TOP_336_TOP_WS1_20210628_TOP101_final_English.pdf.
11. California State Senate. 2016, September 24. Senate Bill No. 1000. California Legislative Information. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB1000.
12. California State Senate. 2015, October 8. Senate Bill No. 379. California Legislative Information. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB379.
13. California Air Resources Board. (2022). Building Standards Code: Building Decarbonization. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/building-decarbonization/building-standards -code#:~:text=While%20the%20scope%20of%20the,in%20residential%20and%20nonresidential%20buildings.
14. California Energy Commission. 2021, August. 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards Summary.
California Energy Commission. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2021-08/CEC_2022 _EnergyCodeUpdateSummary_ADA.pdf.
15. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2022, February 15. How Climate Change May Impact Ozone Pollution and Public Health Through the 21st Century. https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/how -climate-change-may-impact-ozone-pollution-and-public-health-through-21st-century. 2059
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022
16. California Air Resources Board. 2017, November. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
17. California Air Resources Board. 2015, February 9. Overview of ARB Emissions Trading Program. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/capandtrade/guidance/cap_trade_overview.pdf.
18. Southern California Association of Governments. 2020, September 3. Sustainable Communities Strategy Technical Report. https://scag.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/0903fconnectsocal _sustainable-communities-strategy.pdf?1606002097.
19. California Air Resources Board. 2017, November. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
20. California Air Resources Board. 2017, November. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan: The Strategy for Achieving California’s 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf.
21. Climate Central. 2014. The Greenhouse Effect.
https://medialibrary.climatecentral.org/resources/the-greenhouse-effect.
22. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2021. “Summary for Policymakers.” In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Edited by V. Masson-Delmotte et.al. Cambridge University Press.
23. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2021. “Summary for Policymakers.” In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC. Edited by V. Masson-Delmotte et.al. Cambridge University Press.
24. Fehr and Peers. 2019. Daily VMT by Vehicle Class (RTAC Methodology).
25. California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2022. Off-road mobile source research. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/off-road-equipment-research.
26. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). n.d. Methane Management: The Challenge. https://unece.org/challenge.
27. California Natural Resource Agency. 2018. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update: California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy, p. 231.
28. California Health and Safety Code, Division 26, Part 2, Chapter 4.1, “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund Investment Plan and Communities Revitalization Act,” Section 39711.
29. George Washington University. 2020. “Equity vs. Equality: What’s the Difference?” Online Master of Public Health Program (MPH@GW). https://onlinepublichealth.gwu.edu/resources/equity-vs-equality.
30. Louise Bedsworth, Dan Cayan, Guido Franco, Leah Fisher, Sonya Ziaja. 2018. “Statewide Summary Report.” In California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment. Publication number: SUMCCCA4-2018-013.
31. California Natural Resource Agency. 2018. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update: California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy, p. 231.
2060
City of Ontario
Climate Action Plan
Public ReviewDraft, May 2022
32. California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services. 2018. California State Hazard Mitigation Plan.
33. California Natural Resource Agency. 2018. Safeguarding California Plan: 2018 Update: California’s Climate Adaptation Strategy, p. 231.
2061
2062
2063
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100
Santa Ana, CA 92707
714.966.9220
www.placeworks.com
2064
Department: Development Administration
Prepared By: Derrick E Womble
Staff Member Presenting:
Scott Murphy, Executive Director Community
Development
Approved By:
Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 29
SUBJECT: A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION TO UPDATE AND
MODIFY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
August 16, 2022
SECTION:
PUBLIC HEARINGS
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider and adopt a Resolution to update and modify the City’s Development Impact Fees (DIF).
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:
Invest in the Growth and Evolution of the City's Economy Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods Invest in the City's Infrastructure (Water, Streets, Sewers, Parks, Storm Drains and Public Facilities)
Ensure the Development of a Well Planned, Balanced, and Self-Sustaining Community in Ontario Ranch
FISCAL IMPACT: The recommended update of the Development Impact Fees (“DIF”) continues to reflect the City Council's direction that new development pays its fair share of the costs for infrastructure and that costs of development in the Ontario Ranch do not impact existing residents.
There is no General Fund impact from adopting the DIF update. The update of the DIF Program is conducted periodically to reflect modifications to specific DIF projects based on changes in projected infrastructure needs, actual costs, revised engineering estimates and updated cost estimates. DIF, assessed on per unit or per square foot basis, is intended to cover the cost of infrastructure improvements needed to support new development. With adoption of the fees as proposed, the City’s DIF Program is estimated to generate approximately $2.97 billion in revenue for infrastructure construction/installation over the buildout of the City.
BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: On July 1, 2003, the City Council adopted Ordinance Nos. 2779 and 2780 to approve Development Impact Fees for the City. The DIF have been updated periodically since 2005. Since its inception, the DIF Program has had separate DIF amounts and funds for what has historically been termed the “New Model Colony” (known as Ontario Ranch) and the “Old Model Colony” (known as General City) areas.
2065
The last comprehensive update of the DIF Program was adopted by City Council in December 2012.
In the DIF updates since 2012, there have been only minimal changes in the scopes and estimated costs of DIF Program projects. The most recent update to the DIF Program was adopted in September 2019.
In support of the revised DIF amounts, Revenue & Cost Specialists, LLC (“Consultant”) prepared comprehensive updates to the Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report (the “DIF Nexus Report”). The completed DIF Nexus Report is on file in the Records Management Department. The report includes the cost details of the changes reflected in the update and schedules used in the calculation of the updated DIF amounts.
The proposed DIF Nexus Report includes adjustments to the land use database reflected within The Ontario Plan 2050 (“TOP 2050”) update. TOP 2050 incorporates changes in land use types and densities which necessitates material revisions to the City’s infrastructure (Streets, Storm Drains, Water and Sewer) Master Plans and DIF Program.
The major changes incorporated in the 2022 update include the following:
The cost per acre for land acquisition has been increased from $585,000 to $700,000.
The individual 2022 project cost amounts in numerous infrastructure categories have been escalated by application of the change in an applicable cost index.
In the Police, Fire, Streets, Storm Drain, Water, Sewer, and Fiber Optic categories, numerous individual project cost estimates have been adjusted to reflect updated engineering estimates and/or actual costs.
In the Police and Fire categories, Staff is recommending a reduction in the fees from the recommendations provided by the Consultant. The proposed reduction is in response to the calls-for-service which were heavily impacted by the Coronavirus pandemic. Subsequently, the allocation (volume) of calls-for-service were significantly higher than the 2019 historical data, causing a higher rate of increase in the fees for 2022. Therefore, an averaging of the 2019 and 2022 fee was used and is incorporated into the proposed resolution for City Council consideration. Staff will reevaluate the calls-for-service in two (2) years as part of the next DIF update.
Outstanding (available) developer held “DIF Credits” in each infrastructure category were added as continued costs for projects that have not necessarily been constructed and/or paid for by the City. Numerous DIF projects were financed or constructed by individual developers and they will ultimately expect repayment for that over-build via the DIF Credits that have been issued by the City. Pursuant to the City’s DIF Program Policies, DIF Credits are available for use at permit issuance to offset (reduce) the fee in the respective infrastructure category for which the DIF Credit was issued. The availability of credits decreases the amount of DIF revenue that the City will ultimately collect. Therefore, any outstanding DIF Credit amount that has been included in this Report’s calculations within the DIF calculation methodology, was done to establish the appropriate DIF fee schedule necessary to finance both the remaining infrastructure costs and total developer’s DIF Credits at General Plan build-out.
The incorporation of the outstanding DIF credits assists the City in recuperating additional DIF 2066
revenues in order to eliminate any City subsidy for the long-term development of the Ontario Ranch area.
Assembly Bill 602 (“AB 602”) became effective January 1, 2022. Per AB 602, if a local jurisdiction adopts a calculation and nexus study report after July 1, 2022, it must calculate its DIF imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development, unless it makes the following findings: A) an explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects; B) an explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development; and C) that other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees. The proposed DIF Nexus Report attached to this agenda report, and incorporated herein by reference, details supportive justifications for the City to continue to impose residential development impact fees in the same manner that additional development service demands are calculated – that is, on a per unit basis (see DIF Nexus Report - Appendix F). The City will not impose development impact fees for residential development projects based on the square footage of proposed units for completing the City's General Plan. The current and proposed set of fees fosters greater accuracy in planning and provides the City with the required level of certainty in impact fee collection.
The attached “Exhibit A” of the proposed Resolution specifies the updated DIF amounts for the General City and Ontario Ranch areas. No changes are proposed to the DIF Program implementation policies or land use categories definitions as part of this DIF Program update.
Staff notified and worked with the Building Industry Association (“BIA”) and NMC Builders, LLC (“NMC Builders”) on this recommended update to the DIF and provided both entities with a copy of the proposed fees and the back-up materials. Several meetings were held with representatives of NMC Builders to provide and exchange cost information related to the proposed modifications to the DIF Program. The BIA and NMC Builders have communicated that they have no further comments on the proposed revisions to the DIF Program and have provided notice to the City indicating that they do not object to adoption of the fees as proposed.
It is important to note that following City Council approval of the proposed DIF Nexus Report, Staff will commence an update to the DIF Master Facilities Plan (MFP). The MFP lists all the DIF projects identified in the DIF Nexus Report and further describes the scope of work, justification, and relationship to the TOP for each DIF project. Staff will present a completed and comprehensive MFP Update at a future meeting.
Under State law, fee increases cannot become effective any sooner than 60 days after adoption by the legislative body. With the proposed increase in the DIF, the BIA and NMC Builders have requested that implementation be effective January 1, 2023, to allow their members sufficient time to prepare for the increases and incorporate them into their project budgets. The delay in implementing the DIF does not have a significant impact on the program and Staff is in support of the January 1, 2023, effective date.
2067
Staff recommends the City Council approve the proposed DIF Nexus Report and adopt the attached Resolution modifying the City’s Development Impact Fees. 2068
Land Use Category Current General
City*
Proposed
General City* Difference Percent Change
Current Ontario
Ranch
Proposed
Ontario Ranch Difference Percent Change
Per Unit:
Residential, Detached $32,623 $28,984 ($3,639) -11.15% $40,376 $43,226 $2,850 7.06% Residential, Attached $24,392 $23,012 ($1,380) -5.66% $27,725 $31,980 $4,255 15.35% Residential, High Density $18,122 $17,787 ($335) -1.85% $20,450 $23,729 $3,279 16.03% Mobile Homes $23,567 $22,561 ($1,006) -4.27% N/A N/A N/A N/A Commercial Lodging $4,888 $3,697 ($1,191) -24.37% $8,886 $11,511 $2,625 29.54% Per Square Foot:
Retail/Services Uses $7.505 $8.534 $1.029 13.71% $17.445 $18.972 $1.527 8.75% Restaurants $7.989 $8.716 $0.727 9.10% $17.929 $19.154 $1.225 6.83% Office Uses $6.351 $5.026 ($1.325) -20.86% $13.134 $14.618 $1.484 11.30% Business Park Uses $6.671 $5.150 ($1.521) -22.80% $11.876 $11.880 $0.004 0.03% Industrial Uses $3.460 $2.968 ($0.492) -14.22% $7.264 $8.552 $1.288 17.73% Institutional Uses $6.557 $7.584 $1.027 15.66% $11.916 $14.234 $2.318 19.45% *Maximum Fee amounts are shown for comparison purposes only. General City Development Impact Fees may be reduced by specified percentages, depending on development category and type of development to encourage affordable housing, multi-story development and construction of structured parking facilities.
2069
RESOLUTION NO. ________
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO,
CALIFORNIA, UPDATING AND MODIFYING DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
FEES.
WHEREAS, on July 1, 2003, the City Council of the City of Ontario (the "City Council") adopted Ordinance Nos. 2779 and 2780 to implement new and modified Development Impact Fees in recognition of the need to finance adequate infrastructure and other public improvements and facilities made necessary by new development in the City of Ontario ("City"); and
WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 2003-039 to establish policies for the implementation of the new and modified Development Impact Fees; Resolution No. 2003-070 to establish additional definitions and policies for the application of Development Impact Fees; and Resolution Nos. 2005-005, 2005-099, 2007-023, 2007-150, 2011-011, 2012-092, 2015-008, 2017-102, and 2019-135 to update and modify Development Impact Fee amounts; and
WHEREAS, City staff and Revenue and Costs Specialists LLC, have reviewed the Development Impact Fee (“DIF”) program and the infrastructure Master Plans and produced an update to the DIF program documents, titled “Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report (the “DIF Nexus Report”) for the City of Ontario, dated July 15, 2022, which includes recommendations and support for updated Development Impact Fee amounts; and
WHEREAS, the Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report, referenced above, complies with Government Code Section 66001 by establishing the basis for the imposition of fees, and the fee amounts for new development. In particular, the Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report:
1. Identifies the purpose of each development fee;
2. Identifies the use to which the fee will be put;
3. Shows a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project upon which the fee is imposed;
4. Shows a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facility and the type of development project upon which the fee is imposed;
5. Shows a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the costs of the public facility or portion of the public facility that is attributed to the development upon which the fee is imposed; and
WHEREAS, Assembly Bill 602 (“AB 602”) became effective January 1, 2022. Per AB 602, if a local jurisdiction adopts a calculation and nexus study report after July 1, 2022, it must calculate its fees imposed on housing development projects proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of each development, unless it makes the following findings:
2070
1. An explanation as to why square footage is not an appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development projects;
2. An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development; and
3. That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report incorporated herein by reference, details supportive justifications for the City to continue to impose residential development impact fees in the same manner that additional development service demands are calculated – that is, on a per unit basis (see DIF Nexus Update Report - Appendix F).
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code Section 66000, et seq. and Assembly Bill 602, a copy of the above referenced Development Impact Fee Calculation and Nexus Update Report has been made available for inspection by the public at Ontario City Hall for thirty (30) calendar days prior to the adoption of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the previously-adopted Ordinance No. 2779 stated that “The Fee Schedule may be amended from time to time by resolution of the City Council, in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act, Government Code Section 66000, et seq.”
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Pursuant to Government Code § 66016.5(a)(5)(B) and in satisfaction of AB 602, the City Council hereby adopts the findings and conclusions set forth in Appendix “F” of the DIF Nexus Report and incorporates them herein by reference.
SECTION 3. The Development Impact Fee Amounts contained in “Exhibit A” of the previous Resolution No. 2017-102 shall be repealed and replaced by “Exhibit A” of this Resolution. The provisions of this Resolution are supplemental to the provisions of previous Resolution Nos. 2003-039, 2003-070, 2005-005, 2005-099, 2007-023, 2007-150, 2011-011, 2012-092, 2015-008, 2017-102, and 2019-135.
SECTION 4. This Resolution, including the updated fee amounts contained in “Exhibit A” attached hereto and incorporated herein, shall be effective for all building permits, and grading permits, when applicable, on January 1, 2023.
SECTION 5. The remaining provisions of Resolution No. 2003-039 and previous resolutions, including previous Exhibits B and C, shall not be affected and shall remain in effect to the extent not inconsistent herewith. 2071
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 16th day of August 2022. _____________________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
ATTEST:
________________________________
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM:
________________________________
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
2072
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
CITY OF ONTARIO )
I, SHEILA MAUTZ, City Clerk of the City of Ontario, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that foregoing Resolution No. 2022- was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Ontario at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022 by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
The foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2022- duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022. _____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2073
"EXHIBIT A"
City of Ontario Development Impact Fee Schedule
General City – Maximum Law Enforcement
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 509/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 502/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 502/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 373/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 358/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.713/S.F.
Office Uses $0.279/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.044/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.029/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.201/S.F.
General City – Maximum Fire Suppression Facilities,
Vehicles and Equipment Development Impact Fees by Land Use Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 523/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 479/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 479/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 548/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 299/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.398/S.F.
Office Uses $0.319/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.036/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.025/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.099/S.F.
2074
General City – Maximum Regional Streets, Signals and Bridges Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $1,223/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 817/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 505/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 637/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 645/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $2.472/S.F.
Office Uses $1.412/S.F.
Business Park Uses $1.470/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.757/S.F.
Institutional Uses $1.614/S.F.
General City – Maximum Local Adjacent Streets, Signals and Bridges Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $1,001/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 668/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 414/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 522/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 528/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $2.022/S.F.
Office Uses $1.156/S.F.
Business Park Uses $1.202/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.620/S.F.
Institutional Uses $1.320/S.F.
General City – Maximum Regional Storm Drainage Facilities Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Fee Per Unit or S.F. Fee Per Acre (NOTE) Detached Dwellings $ 128/Unit -
Attached Dwellings $ 41/Unit -
High Density Dwellings $ 35/Unit -
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 75/Unit -
Commercial Lodging Units $ 21/Unit -
Retail/Services Uses $0.022/S.F. $863/Acre
Office Uses $0.027/S.F. $863/Acre
Business Park Uses $0.065/S.F. $839/Acre
Industrial Uses $0.057/S.F. $911/Acre
Institutional Uses $0.165/S.F. $911/Acre
2075
NOTE: The Storm Drain Fee amount for Retail/Service, Restaurant/Commercial, Office, Business Park, Industrial, and Institutional uses, shall be based on the either the square feet amount or the per acre amount, whichever total fee amount is greater.
General City – Maximum Local Adjacent Storm Drainage Facilities Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Fee Per Unit or S.F. Fee Per Acre (NOTE) Detached Dwellings $2,435/Unit -
Attached Dwellings $ 785/Unit -
High Density Dwellings $ 657/Unit -
Mobile Home Dwellings $1,417/Unit -
Commercial Lodging Units $ 404/Unit -
Retail/Services Uses $0.425/S.F. $16,396/Acre
Office Uses $0.510/S.F. $16,396/Acre
Business Park Uses $1.232/S.F. $15,940/Acre
Industrial Uses $1.075/S.F. $17,306/Acre
Institutional Uses $3.127/S.F. $17,306/Acre
NOTE: The Storm Drain Fee amount for Retail/Service, Restaurant/Commercial, Office, Business Park, Industrial, and Institutional uses, shall be based on the either the square feet amount or the per acre amount, whichever total fee amount is greater.
General City – Maximum Regional Water Distribution
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $2,646/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,811/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,221/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $1,810/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 730/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $1.301/S.F.
Office Uses $0.651/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.524/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.140/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.492/S.F.
2076
General City – Maximum Local Adjacent Water Distribution Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 467/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 320/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 216/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 319/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 129/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.230/S.F.
Office Uses $0.115/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.093/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.025/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.087/S.F.
General City – Maximum Regional Sewer Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 58/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 51/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 43/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 51/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 34/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.026/S.F.
Office Uses $0.028/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.014/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.006/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.016/S.F.
General City - Maximum Local Adjacent Sewer Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $519/Unit
Attached Dwellings $455/Unit
High Density Dwellings $390/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $455/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $302/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.237/S.F.
Office Uses $0.256/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.127/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.050/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.148/S.F.
2077
General City - Maximum Solid Waste Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 704/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 609/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 305/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 609/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 196/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.478/S.F.
Office Uses $0.181/S.F.
Commercial/Restaurants $0.660/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.238/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.131/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.209/S.F.
General City - Maximum General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 303/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 107/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 68/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $ 340/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 51/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.210/S.F.
Office Uses $0.092/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.105/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.054/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.106/S.F.
General City - Maximum Library Facilities and Collection Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $1,302/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,154/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 913/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $1,086/Unit
2078
General City - Maximum Public Meeting Facilities
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $1,856/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,645/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,302/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $1,548/Unit
General City - Maximum Aquatics Facilities
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $112/Unit
Attached Dwellings $100/Unit
High Density Dwellings $79/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $94/Unit
General City - Maximum Park
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $15,198/Unit
Attached Dwellings $13,470/Unit
High Density Dwellings $10,658/Unit
Mobile Home Dwellings $12,678/Unit
Ontario Ranch - Law Enforcement
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 509/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 502/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 502/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 358/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.713/S.F.
Office Uses $0.279/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.044/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.029/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.201/S.F.
2079
Ontario Ranch - Fire Suppression Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $1,102/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,007/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,007/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 618/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.847/S.F.
Office Uses $0.637/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.072/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.051/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.213/S.F.
Ontario Ranch – Regional Streets, Signals and Bridges
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $2,244/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,498/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 927/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $1,183/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $4.534/S.F.
Office Uses $2.591/S.F.
Business Park Uses $2.696/S.F.
Industrial Uses $1.390/S.F.
Institutional Uses $2.961/S.F.
Ontario Ranch – Local Adjacent Streets, Signals and Bridges Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $2,742/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,831/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,133/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $1,446/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $5.541/S.F.
Office Uses $3.167/S.F.
Business Park Uses $3.295/S.F.
Industrial Uses $1.698/S.F.
Institutional Uses $3.618/S.F.
2080
Ontario Ranch – Regional Storm Drainage
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Fee Per Unit or S.F. Fee Per Acre (NOTE) Detached Dwellings $ 562/Unit -
Attached Dwellings $ 213/Unit -
High Density Dwellings $ 179/Unit -
Commercial Lodging Units $ 122/Unit -
Retail/Services Uses $0.259/S.F. $5,345/Acre
Office Uses $0.228/S.F. $5,345/Acre
Business Park Uses $0.224/S.F. $5,196/Acre
Industrial Uses $0.222/S.F. $5,642/Acre
Institutional Uses $0.259/S.F. $5,642/Acre
NOTE: The Storm Drain Fee amount for Retail/Service, Restaurant/Commercial, Office, Business Park, Industrial, and Institutional uses, shall be based on the either the square feet amount or the per acre amount, whichever total fee amount is greater.
Ontario Ranch – Local Adjacent Storm Drainage
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Fee Per Unit or S.F. Fee Per Acre (NOTE) Detached Dwellings $3,182/Unit -
Attached Dwellings $1,209/Unit -
High Density Dwellings $1,017/Unit -
Commercial Lodging Units $ 689/Unit -
Retail/Services Uses $1.469/S.F. $30,287/Acre
Office Uses $1.293/S.F. $30,287/Acre
Business Park Uses $1.267/S.F. $29,447/Acre
Industrial Uses $1.260/S.F. $31,970/Acre
Institutional Uses $1.468/S.F. $31,970/Acre
NOTE: The Storm Drain Fee amount for Retail/Service, Restaurant/Commercial, Office, Business Park, Industrial, and Institutional uses, shall be based on the either the square feet amount or the per acre amount, whichever total fee amount is greater.
2081
Ontario Ranch – Regional Water Distribution
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $7,283/Unit
Attached Dwellings $3,999/Unit
High Density Dwellings $2,122/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $3,060/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $2.391/S.F.
Office Uses $2.162/S.F.
Business Park Uses $1.862/S.F.
Industrial Uses $1.927/S.F.
Institutional Uses $1.754/S.F.
Ontario Ranch – Local Adjacent Water Distribution
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $2,428/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,333/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 707/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $1,020/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.797/S.F.
Office Uses $0.721/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.621/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.642/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.585/S.F.
Ontario Ranch – Regional Sewer Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 903/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 685/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 414/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 527/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.164/S.F.
Office Uses $0.482/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.194/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.237/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.260/S.F.
2082
Ontario Ranch – Local Adjacent Sewer Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 739/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 561/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 339/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 431/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.135/S.F.
Office Uses $0.395/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.159/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.194/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.212/S.F.
Ontario Ranch - Solid Waste Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 704/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 609/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 305/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 196/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.478/S.F.
Office Uses $0.181/S.F.
Commercial/Restaurants $0.660/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.238/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.131/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.209/S.F.
Ontario Ranch - General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 303/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 107/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 68/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 51/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.210/S.F.
Office Uses $0.092/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.105/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.054/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.106/S.F.
2083
Ontario Ranch - Library Facilities and Collection
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $1,302/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,154/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 913/Unit
Ontario Ranch - Public Meeting Facilities
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $1,856/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,645/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,302/Unit
Ontario Ranch - Development Impact Fees Aquatics Facilities Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $112/Unit
Attached Dwellings $100/Unit
High Density Dwellings $79/Unit
Ontario Ranch – Park
Development Impact Fees by Land Use
Residential Land Use Impact Fee Per Unit
Detached Dwellings $15,198/Unit
Attached Dwellings $13,470/Unit
High Density Dwellings $10,658/Unit
2084
Ontario Ranch Only – Species, Habitat Conservation and Open Space Mitigation Development Impact Fees, per Acre
(TO BE PAID BY DEVELOPER AS A CONDITION OF ISSUANCE OF
GRADING PERMIT)
Proposed Land Use Mitigation Impact Fee per Acre
Detached Dwellings $4,320/Acre
Attached Dwellings $4,320/Acre
High Density Dwellings $4,320/Acre
Commercial Lodging Units $4,320/Acre
Retail/Services Uses $4,320/Acre
Office Uses $4,320/Acre
Business Park Uses $4,320/Acre
Industrial Uses $4,320/Acre
Institutional Uses $4,320/Acre
Ontario Ranch Only – Regional Fiber Optic Communication System Development Impact Fees
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $ 411/Unit
Attached Dwellings $ 411/Unit
High Density Dwellings $ 411/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $ 362/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $0.287/S.F.
Office Uses $0.478/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.221/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.143/S.F.
Institutional Uses $0.478/S.F.
Ontario Ranch Only – Local Adjacent Fiber Optic Communication System Development Impact Fees
Proposed Land Use Impact Fee per Unit or S.F.
Detached Dwellings $1,646/Unit
Attached Dwellings $1,646/Unit
High Density Dwellings $1,646/Unit
Commercial Lodging Units $1,449/Unit
Retail/Services Uses $1.147/S.F.
Office Uses $1.913/S.F.
Business Park Uses $0.883/S.F.
Industrial Uses $0.574/S.F.
Institutional Uses $1.910/S.F.
2085
DRAFT
2086
DRAFT
2087
DRAFT
2088
DRAFT
2089
DRAFT
2090
DRAFT
2091
DRAFT
2092
DRAFT
2093
DRAFT
2094
DRAFT
2095
DRAFT
2096
DRAFT
2097
DRAFT
2098
DRAFT
2099
DRAFT
2100
DRAFT
2101
DRAFT
2102
DRAFT
2103
DRAFT
2104
DRAFT
2105
DRAFT
2106
DRAFT
2107
DRAFT
2108
DRAFT
2109
DRAFT
2110
DRAFT
2111
DRAFT
2112
DRAFT
2113
DRAFT
2114
DRAFT
2115
DRAFT
2116
DRAFT
2117
DRAFT
2118
DRAFT
2119
DRAFT
2120
DRAFT
2121
DRAFT
2122
DRAFT
2123
DRAFT
2124
DRAFT
2125
DRAFT
2126
DRAFT
2127
DRAFT
2128
DRAFT
2129
DRAFT
2130
DRAFT
2131
DRAFT
2132
DRAFT
2133
DRAFT
2134
DRAFT
2135
DRAFT
2136
DRAFT
2137
DRAFT
2138
DRAFT
2139
DRAFT
2140
DRAFT
2141
DRAFT
2142
DRAFT
2143
DRAFT
2144
DRAFT
2145
DRAFT
2146
DRAFT
2147
DRAFT
2148
DRAFT
2149
DRAFT
2150
DRAFT
2151
DRAFT
2152
DRAFT
2153
DRAFT
2154
DRAFT
2155
DRAFT
2156
DRAFT
2157
DRAFT
2158
DRAFT
2159
DRAFT
2160
DRAFT
2161
DRAFT
2162
DRAFT
2163
DRAFT
2164
DRAFT
2165
DRAFT
2166
DRAFT
2167
DRAFT
2168
DRAFT
2169
DRAFT
2170
DRAFT
2171
DRAFT
2172
DRAFT
2173
DRAFT
2174
DRAFT
2175
DRAFT
2176
DRAFT
2177
DRAFT
2178
DRAFT
2179
DRAFT
2180
DRAFT
2181
DRAFT
2182
DRAFT
2183
DRAFT
2184
DRAFT
2185
DRAFT
2186
DRAFT
2187
DRAFT
2188
DRAFT
2189
DRAFT
2190
DRAFT
2191
DRAFT
2192
DRAFT
2193
DRAFT
2194
DRAFT
2195
DRAFT
2196
DRAFT
2197
DRAFT
2198
DRAFT
2199
DRAFT
2200
DRAFT
2201
DRAFT
2202
DRAFT
2203
DRAFT
2204
DRAFT
2205
DRAFT
2206
DRAFT
2207
DRAFT
2208
DRAFT
2209
DRAFT
2210
DRAFT
2211
DRAFT
2212
DRAFT
2213
DRAFT
2214
DRAFT
2215
DRAFT
2216
DRAFT
2217
DRAFT
2218
DRAFT
2219
DRAFT
2220
DRAFT
2221
DRAFT
2222
DRAFT
2223
DRAFT
2224
DRAFT
2225
DRAFT
2226
DRAFT
2227
DRAFT
2228
DRAFT
2229
DRAFT
2230
DRAFT
2231
DRAFT
2232
DRAFT
2233
DRAFT
2234
DRAFT
2235
DRAFT
2236
DRAFT
2237
DRAFT
2238
DRAFT
2239
DRAFT
2240
DRAFT
2241
DRAFT
2242
DRAFT
2243
DRAFT
2244
DRAFT
2245
DRAFT
2246
DRAFT
2247
DRAFT
2248
DRAFT
2249
DRAFT
2250
DRAFT
2251
DRAFT
2252
DRAFT
2253
DRAFT
2254
DRAFT
2255
DRAFT
2256
DRAFT
2257
DRAFT
2258
DRAFT
2259
DRAFT
2260
DRAFT
2261
DRAFT
2262
DRAFT
2263
DRAFT
2264
DRAFT
2265
DRAFT
2266
DRAFT
2267
DRAFT
2268
DRAFT
2269
DRAFT
2270
DRAFT
2271
DRAFT
2272
DRAFT
2273
DRAFT
2274
DRAFT
2275
DRAFT
2276
DRAFT
2277
DRAFT
2278
DRAFT
2279
DRAFT
2280
DRAFT
2281
DRAFT
2282
DRAFT
2283
DRAFT
2284
DRAFT
2285
DRAFT
2286
DRAFT
2287
DRAFT
2288
DRAFT
2289
DRAFT
2290
DRAFT
2291
DRAFT
2292
DRAFT
2293
DRAFT
2294
DRAFT
2295
DRAFT
2296
DRAFT
2297
DRAFT
2298
DRAFT
2299
DRAFT
2300
DRAFT
2301
DRAFT
2302
DRAFT
2303
DRAFT
2304
DRAFT
2305
DRAFT
2306
DRAFT
2307
DRAFT
2308
DRAFT
2309
DRAFT
2310
DRAFT
2311
DRAFT
2312
DRAFT
2313
DRAFT
2314
DRAFT
2315
DRAFT
2316
DRAFT
2317
August 8, 2022
Mr. Scott Ochoa
City Manager
City of Ontario
303 E. B Street
Ontario, CA 91764
RE: City of Ontario Master Plan and Development Impact Fee Program 2022 Update Dear Mr. Ochoa:
On behalf of the Building Industry Association of Southern California Baldy View Chapter I would like to express our appreciation to you, Scott Murphy and your staff regarding the collaborative approach taken on the proposed Development Impact Fee increase. As you now, a DIF increase of this scope and magnitude will often result in numerous questions related to the assumptions taken in the methodology.
We appreciate the open and transparent approach taken by city staff throughout our numerous meetings. A special thanks to Derrick Womble for his significant contributions in working with our members and industry partners to help answer our variety of questions related to the cost assumptions associated with the DIF calculations. The burden of these additional costs will ultimately be shifted to those aspiring to own a home or rent in Ontario so we appreciate the mutual interest to ensure the accuracy of the proposed DIF increase.
To this point, as noted by a recent report by the Public Policy Institute of California Click here The housing crisis in California affects residents of all races and ethnicities, but the lack of affordable housing is particularly acute for African Americans and Latinos.
Skyrocketing rents in many California metro areas impose growing financial burdens, limiting opportunities for savings. Combined with rising home prices and interest rates, owning a home has become harder to afford over the past year, even as many saw growth in wages. Given the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on households of color, disparities in homeownership are expected to widen. To address these gaps, policy actions that target the causes of these longstanding inequities are necessary. 2318
2319
LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP.
1156 North Mountain Avenue / P.O. Box 670 / Upland, California 91785-0670 Telephone/Fax: (909) 579-1240
July 26, 2022
Derek Womble, Departmental Administrator
City of Ontario
Finance Department
303 East B Street
Ontario, CA 91764
RE: Non-Objection to 2022 Developer Impact Fee Update
Dear Mr. Womble:
Lewis Management Corp. is in receipt of the Notice and Proposed DIF Comparison tables dated July 15, 2022. We commend the City of Ontario for the thorough and transparent process by which City of Ontario staff have completed this DIF Update. We believe the update is properly reasoned and well supported. Accordingly, Lewis does not object to the Proposed Development Impact Fees that are proposed to take effect on January 1, 2023.
Respectfully,
LEWIS MANAGEMENT CORP.,
a Delaware corporation
By: ______________________
Name: Leon Swails
Its: Authorized Agent
Date:
DocuSign Envelope ID: BB4F6C79-E450-488C-BA19-A77D95B72331 July 27, 2022 | 12:04 PM PDT
2320
Department: Investments & Revenue Resources
Prepared By: Nicole Phillips
Staff Member Presenting:
Armen Harkalyan, Executive Director of Finance
Reviewed By: Cecilia House, Armen Harkalyan
Approved By:
Submitted To: Council/OHA
Approved: _______________________________
Continued To: ___________________________
Denied: __________________________________
Item No: 30
SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF ONTARIO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 57 (NEUHOUSE) SPECIAL TAX BONDS, SERIES 2022, IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $13 MILLION AND
RELATED MATTERS
CITY OF ONTARIO
Agenda Report
August 16, 2022
SECTION:
ADMINISTRATIVE
REPORTS/DISCUSSION/ACTION
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council consider and adopt a Resolution authorizing the issuance of City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse) Special Tax Bonds, Series 2022.
A. Authorize the issuance of special tax bonds for public improvements required to facilitate the development of the Neuhouse project and the Ontario Ranch development; B. Approve the forms of the Indenture, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Continuing Disclosure Agreement, and the Preliminary Official Statement; C. Authorize a negotiated sale of the special tax bonds to Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated in accordance with the terms of the Bond Purchase Agreement; and D. Authorize the execution of the Indenture, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Continuing Disclosure Agreement, a deemed final certification in connection with the Preliminary Official Statement, a final Official Statement and other documents in connection with the issuance of the bonds by the City Manager or the other specified authorized officers.
THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL GOALS ARE BEING ACHIEVED:
Operate in a Businesslike Manner
Focus Resources in Ontario's Commercial and Residential Neighborhoods Ensure the Development of a Well Planned, Balanced, and Self-Sustaining Community in Ontario Ranch
FISCAL IMPACT: The use of Mello-Roos financing for public facilities in the residential development of the Neuhouse project in the Ontario Ranch development is estimated to generate approximately $437,138 per year, at build-out, to fund City services; and approximately $11.8 million in bond proceeds to help fund a portion of the public infrastructure improvements that will serve the project. The Resolution authorizing the issuance of City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 2321
57 (Neuhouse) Special Tax Bonds, Series 2022, and related matters, limits the principal amount of the bonds to $13 million. The City currently expects the bonds to be sold no later than September 2022; however, such schedule could change based on market volatility and market conditions.
Since Mello-Roos bonds are not a direct obligation of the City and are paid from special taxes levied on each taxable parcels in the applicable community facilities district, there is no impact to the General Fund from the issuance of Mello-Roos bonds. Annual approval by the City Council will be required to process the special tax levies necessary to fund the ongoing debt service obligations of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse).
BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS: The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 provides local government, with the requisite consent and approval from the property owners, the authority to establish community facilities districts for the purpose of levying special taxes to fund governmental services and to finance various kinds of public infrastructure facilities. Under the Mello-Roos Act, the initial steps in the formation of a community facilities district to finance public improvements are adopting a Resolution declaring the City's intention to establish a community facilities district and levy special taxes, and a Resolution to issue bonds. On October 6, 2020 the City Council, in accordance with the Mello-Roos Act, took the initial steps in the formation of the District with the adoption of Resolution No. 2020-167, declaring the City's intention to establish the District and to authorize the levy of special taxes, and Resolution No. 2020-168 deeming it necessary for the District to incur bonded indebtedness. On November 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-196 forming the District. Based on a successful property owner election held on November 17, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3174 on December 1, 2020, authorizing the levy of special taxes within the District to finance public improvements related to the Neuhouse project.
On August 17, 2021, the City Council accepted a written petition requesting commencement of change proceedings from LS-ONTARIO II LLC, to consider a change to the Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA) of the existing special tax of Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse) under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, and adopted Resolution No. 2021-142, a Resolution of Consideration to change the RMA of the existing special tax of Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse). At a public hearing conducted by the City Council on September 21, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-150, declaring results of the special election, determining that changes to the RMA of the Existing Special Tax of Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse) are lawfully authorized, and introduced and waived further reading of an amended and restated Ordinance No. 3174 levying special taxes within the District. On October 5, 2021, the City Council Adopted Ordinance No. 3191, amending and restating Ordinance No. 3174, and concluding the change proceeding process for Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse).
The public improvements to be financed by the District are as follows:
Water and Recycled Water System Facilities;
Storm Drain Facilities;
Sewer System Facilities;
Streets and Traffic Circulation System Facilities; and
Fiber Optic System Facilities.
The Neuhouse project addresses the residential development of approximately 30 gross acres 2322
located generally west of Mill Creek Avenue, east of Haven Avenue, south of Chino Avenue and north of Schaefer Avenue. At build out, the projects are projected to include 334 residential units; 100-detached and 234 attached units.
The proposed Resolution references several bond documents and other matters related to the proposed issuance of bonds by City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse).
The documents are listed below and are on file with the Records Management Department:
Indenture;
Bond Purchase Agreement;
Continuing Disclosure Agreement; and
Preliminary Official Statement.
2323
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ONTARIO,
CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF CITY OF ONTARIO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 57 (NEUHOUSE) SPECIAL TAX BONDS, SERIES 2022, IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF NOT TO EXCEED $13,000,000, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF AN INDENTURE, A BOND PURCHASE AGREEMENT
AND A CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, AUTHORIZING THE
DISTRIBUTION OF AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION
THEREWITH AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF NECESSARY
DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATES AND RELATED ACTIONS.
WHEREAS, the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of Ontario (the “City”) has formed City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse) (the “Community Facilities District”) under the provisions of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the “Act”);
WHEREAS, the Community Facilities District is authorized under the Act to levy a special tax (the “Special Tax”) to pay for the costs of certain public facilities (the “Facilities”) and to issue bonds payable from the Special Tax; WHEREAS, in order to provide funds to finance certain of the Facilities, the Community Facilities District proposes to issue its City of Ontario Community Facilities District No. 57 (Neuhouse) Special Tax Bonds, Series 2022 (the “Series 2022 Bonds”), in the aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $13,000,000; WHEREAS, in order to provide for the authentication and delivery of the Series 2022 Bonds, to establish and declare the terms and conditions upon which the Series 2022 Bonds are to be issued and secured and to secure the payment of the principal thereof, premium, if any, and interest thereon, the Community Facilities District proposes to enter into an Indenture with Zions Bancorporation, National Association, as trustee (the “Trustee”) (such Indenture, in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as are made pursuant to this Resolution, being referred to herein as the “Indenture”);
WHEREAS, Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated (the “Underwriter”), has presented the Community Facilities District with a proposal, in the form of a Bond Purchase Agreement, to purchase the Series 2022 Bonds from the Community Facilities District (such Bond Purchase Agreement, in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as are made pursuant to this Resolution, being referred to herein as the “Purchase Agreement”);
WHEREAS, Rule 15c2-12 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Rule 15c2-12”) requires that, in order to be able to purchase or sell the Series 2022 Bonds, the underwriter thereof must have reasonably determined that the Community Facilities District has, or one or more appropriate obligated persons have, undertaken in 2324
a written agreement or contract for the benefit of the holders of the Series 2022 Bonds to provide disclosure of certain financial information and certain listed events on an ongoing basis;
WHEREAS, in order to cause such requirement to be satisfied, the Community Facilities District desires to enter into a Continuing Disclosure Agreement with the Trustee (such Continuing Disclosure Agreement, in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as are made pursuant to this Resolution, being referred to herein as the “Continuing Disclosure Agreement”); WHEREAS, a form of the Preliminary Official Statement to be distributed in connection with the public offering of the Series 2022 Bonds has been prepared (such Preliminary Official Statement, in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as are made pursuant to this Resolution, being referred to herein as the “Preliminary Official Statement”);
WHEREAS, there have been prepared and submitted to this meeting forms of:
(a) the Indenture;
(b) the Purchase Agreement;
(c) the Continuing Disclosure Agreement; and
(d) the Preliminary Official Statement;
WHEREAS, Kitty Siino & Associates, Inc. has prepared and provided to the Community Facilities District an appraisal report, dated July 11, 2022 (the “Appraisal”), providing an opinion of value of the property in the Community Facilities District, which has been submitted to this meeting;
WHEREAS, Section 5852.1 of the California Government Code requires that the City Council obtain from an underwriter, financial advisor or private lender and disclose, in a meeting open to the public, prior to authorization of the issuance of the Series 2022 Bonds, good faith estimates of (a) the true interest cost of the Series 2022 Bonds, (b) the sum of all fees and charges paid to third parties with respect to the Series 2022 Bonds, (c) the amount of proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds expected to be received net of the fees and charges paid to third parties and any reserves or capitalized interest paid or funded with proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds, and (d) the sum total of all debt service payments on the Series 2022 Bonds calculated to the final maturity of the Series 2022 Bonds plus the fees and charges paid to third parties not paid with the proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds;
WHEREAS, in compliance with Section 5852.1 of the California Government Code, the City Council has obtained from CSG Advisors Incorporated, as the Community Facilities District’s Municipal Advisor, the required good faith estimates, which the Municipal Advisor has prepared in consultation with the Underwriter, and such estimates are disclosed and set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto; 2325
WHEREAS, the Community Facilities District desires to proceed to issue and sell the Series 2022 Bonds and to authorize the execution of such documents and the performance of such acts as may be necessary or desirable to effect the offering, sale and issuance of the Series 2022 Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council is the legislative body of the Community Facilities District;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Ontario as follows:
SECTION 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct.
SECTION 2. Subject to the provisions of Section 3 hereof, the issuance of the Series 2022 Bonds, in an aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $13,000,000, on the terms and conditions set forth in, and subject to the limitations specified in, the Indenture, be and the same is hereby authorized and approved. The Series 2022 Bonds shall be dated, shall bear interest at the rates, shall mature on the dates, shall be subject to call and redemption, shall be issued in the form and shall be as otherwise provided in the Indenture, as the same shall be completed as provided in this Resolution.
SECTION 3. The Indenture, in substantially the form submitted to this meeting and made a part hereof as though set forth herein, be and the same is hereby approved.
Each of the Mayor of the City, and such other member of the City Council as the Mayor may designate, the City Manager of the City, the Assistant City Manager of the City, the Executive Director of Finance of the City, the Deputy City Treasurer of the City, and such other officer or employee of the City as the City Manager may designate (the “Authorized Officers”) is hereby authorized, and any one of the Authorized Officers is hereby directed, for and in the name of the Community Facilities District, to execute and deliver the Indenture in the form submitted to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as the Authorized Officer executing the same may require or approve, such requirement or approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Indenture by such Authorized Officer; provided, however, that such changes, insertions and omissions shall not authorize an aggregate principal amount of Series 2022 Bonds in excess of $13,000,000, shall not result in a final maturity date of the Series 2022 Bonds later than September 1, 2053, and shall not result in a true interest cost for the Series 2022 Bonds in excess of 7.00%.
SECTION 4. The Purchase Agreement, in substantially the form submitted to this meeting and made a part hereof as though set forth in full herein, be and the same is hereby approved. Each of the Authorized Officers is hereby authorized, and any one of the Authorized Officers is hereby directed, for and in the name of the Community Facilities District, to execute and deliver the Purchase Agreement in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as the Authorized Officer executing the same may require or approve, such requirement or approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Purchase Agreement by such Authorized Officer; provided, however, that such changes, insertions and omissions shall not result in an aggregate underwriter’s discount (not including any original issue discount) from the 2326
principal amount of the Series 2022 Bonds in excess of 1.50% of the aggregate principal amount of the Series 2022 Bonds. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the sale of the Series 2022 Bonds at negotiated sale as contemplated by the Purchase Agreement will result in a lower overall cost.
SECTION 5. The Continuing Disclosure Agreement, in substantially the form submitted to this meeting and made a part hereof as though set forth in full herein, be and the same is hereby approved. Each of the Authorized Officers is hereby authorized, and any one of the Authorized Officers is hereby directed, for and in the name of the Community Facilities District, to execute and deliver the Continuing Disclosure Agreement in the form presented to this meeting, with such changes, insertions and omissions as the Authorized Officer executing the same may require or approve, such requirement or approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Continuing Disclosure Agreement by such Authorized Officer.
SECTION 6. The Preliminary Official Statement, in substantially the form presented to this meeting and made a part hereof as though set forth in full herein, with such changes, insertions and omissions therein as may be approved by an Authorized Officer, be and the same is hereby approved, and the use of the Preliminary Official Statement in connection with the offering and sale of the Series 2022 Bonds is hereby authorized and approved. Each of the Authorized Officers is hereby authorized, and any one of the Authorized Officers is hereby directed, to certify on behalf of the Community Facilities District that the Preliminary Official Statement is deemed final as of its date, within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 (except for the omission of certain final pricing, rating and related information as permitted by Rule 15c2-12).
SECTION 7. The preparation and delivery of a final Official Statement (the “Official Statement”), and its use in connection with the offering and sale of the Series 2022 Bonds, be and the same is hereby authorized and approved. The Official Statement shall be in substantially the form of the Preliminary Official Statement, with such changes, insertions and omissions as may be approved by an Authorized Officer, such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution and delivery thereof. Each of the Authorized Officers is hereby authorized, and any one of the Authorized Officers is hereby directed, for and in the name of the Community Facilities District, to execute the final Official Statement and any amendment or supplement thereto.
SECTION 8. Based upon the property values within the Community Facilities District reported in the Appraisal and the value-to-lien information set forth in the Preliminary Official Statement, the City Council, for purposes of Section 53345.8 of the Act, hereby finds and determines that the value of the real property that would be subject to the Special Tax to pay debt service on the Series 2022 Bonds will be at least three times the principal amount of the Series 2022 Bonds to be sold and the principal amount of all other bonds outstanding that are secured by a special tax levied pursuant to the Act on property within the Community Facilities District or a special assessment levied on property within the Community Facilities District.
SECTION 9. If and to the extent that any feature or aspect of the Series 2022 Bond structure, the rate and method of apportionment of the Special Tax, the method of 2327
financing the Facilities, the appraisal, the absorption study or other components of the Series 2022 Bond issue approved and authorized hereby is inconsistent or in conflict with any requirement, standard, measure or procedure set forth in the City’s Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 Local Goals and Policies, such requirement, standard, measure or procedure is, to the extent necessary to eliminate such inconsistency or conflict, hereby waived, and the City Council hereby finds and determines that benefit inures to the ultimate property owners, the Community Facilities District and the City as a result of such waiver.
SECTION 10. The City Council hereby approves the execution and delivery of all agreements, documents, certificates and instruments referred to herein with electronic signatures as may be permitted under the California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act and digital signatures as may be permitted under Section 16.5 of the California Government Code using DocuSign.
SECTION 11. All actions heretofore taken by the officers, employees, and agents of the City with respect to the issuance and sale of the Series 2022 Bonds, or in connection with or related to any of the agreements or documents referred to herein, are hereby approved, confirmed and ratified.
SECTION 12. The officers, employees and agents of the City are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions and do all things which they, or any of them, may deem necessary or desirable to accomplish the purposes of this Resolution and not inconsistent with the provisions hereof.
Section 13. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
The City Clerk of the City of Ontario shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 16th day of August 2022. _______________________________
PAUL S. LEON, MAYOR
2328
ATTEST:
_______________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________________________
BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CITY ATTORNEY
2329
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO )
CITY OF ONTARIO )
I, SHEILA MAUTZ, City Clerk of the City of Ontario, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution No. 2022- was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Ontario at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022 by the following roll call vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
_____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
The foregoing is the original of Resolution No. 2022- duly passed and adopted by the Ontario City Council at their regular meeting held August 16, 2022. _____________________________________
SHEILA MAUTZ, CITY CLERK
(SEAL)
2330
EXHIBIT A
GOOD FAITH ESTIMATES
The good faith estimates set forth herein are provided with respect to the Series 2022 Bonds in accordance with Section 5852.1 of the California Government Code. Such good faith estimates have been provided to the Community Facilities District by CSG Advisors Incorporated, the Community Facilities District’s municipal advisor (the “Municipal Advisor”), which the Municipal Advisor has prepared in consultation with Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated, the Underwriter.
Principal Amount. The Municipal Advisor has informed the Community Facilities District that, based on the Community Facilities District’s financing plan and current market conditions, its good faith estimate of the aggregate principal amount of the Series 2022 Bonds to be issued and sold is $12,185,000 (the “Estimated Principal Amount”), which does not include approximately $216,000 of net premium estimated to be generated based on current market conditions. Net premium is generated when, on a net aggregate basis for a single issuance of bonds, the price paid for such bonds is higher than the face value of such bonds. Such Estimated Principal Amount and such estimated net premium amount would produce approximately $12,401,000 of gross proceeds.
True Interest Cost of the Series 2022 Bonds. The Municipal Advisor has informed the Community Facilities District that, assuming that the Estimated Principal Amount of the Series 2022 Bonds is issued and sold, and based on market interest rates prevailing at the time of preparation of such estimate, its good faith estimate of the true interest cost of the Series 2022 Bonds, which means the rate necessary to discount the amounts payable on the respective principal and interest payment dates to the purchase price received for the Series 2022 Bonds, is 5.15%.
Finance Charge of the Series 2022 Bonds. The Municipal Advisor has informed the Community Facilities District that, assuming that the Estimated Principal Amount of the Series 2022 Bonds is issued and sold, and based on market interest rates prevailing at the time of preparation of such estimate, its good faith estimate of the finance charge for the Series 2022 Bonds, which means the sum of all fees and charges paid to third parties (or costs associated with the Series 2022 Bonds), is $406,000.
Amount of Proceeds to be Received. The Municipal Advisor has informed the Community Facilities District that, assuming that the Estimated Principal Amount of the Series 2022 Bonds is issued and sold, and based on market interest rates prevailing at the time of preparation of such estimate, its good faith estimate of the amount of proceeds expected to be received by the Community Facilities District for sale of the Series 2022 Bonds, less the finance charge of the Series 2022 Bonds, as estimated above, and any reserves or capitalized interest paid or funded with proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds, is $11,177,000.
Total Payment Amount. The Municipal Advisor has informed the Community Facilities District that, assuming that the Estimated Principal Amount of the Series 2022 2331
Bonds is sold, and based on market interest rates prevailing at the time of preparation of such estimate, its good faith estimate of the total payment amount, which means the sum total of all payments the Community Facilities District will make to pay debt service on the Series 2022 Bonds, plus the finance charge for the Series 2022 Bonds, as described above, not paid with the proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds, calculated to the final maturity of the Series 2022 Bonds, is $24,359,000, which excludes any reserves or capitalized interest funded or paid with proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds (which may offset such total payment amount).
The foregoing estimates constitute good faith estimates only and are based on market conditions prevailing at the time of preparation of such estimates. The actual principal amount of the Series 2022 Bonds issued and sold, the true interest cost thereof, the finance charges thereof, the amount of proceeds received therefrom and total payment amount with respect thereto may differ from such good faith estimates due to (a) the actual date of the sale of the Series 2022 Bonds being different than the date assumed for purposes of such estimates, (b) the actual principal amount of Series 2022 Bonds issued and sold being different from the Estimated Principal Amount, (c) the actual amortization of the Series 2022 Bonds being different than the amortization assumed for purposes of such estimates, (d) the actual market interest rates at the time of sale of the Series 2022 Bonds being different than those estimated for purposes of such estimates, (e) other market conditions, or (f) alterations in the Community Facilities District’s financing plan, or a combination of such factors. The actual date of sale of the Series 2022 Bonds and the actual principal amount of Series 2022 Bonds issued and sold will be determined by the Community Facilities District based on the timing of the need for proceeds of the Series 2022 Bonds and other factors. The actual interest rates borne by the Series 2022 Bonds will depend on market interest rates at the time of sale thereof.
The actual amortization of the Series 2022 Bonds will also depend, in part, on market interest rates at the time of sale thereof. Market interest rates are affected by economic and other factors beyond the control of the Community Facilities District. 2332