Agenda packet — Santa Cruz City Council, September 13, 2022 (part 2 of 3)

Additionally, there is a possibility of encountering buried archaeological deposits and human remains throughout the City. Accordingly, potential impacts associated with cumulative developments would be addressed on a case-by-case basis. In addition, future projects in the City,

26.230
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 51
including those associated with implementation of the CAP, would be required to comply with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan policies and programs that require the identification and protection of sites and structures of architectural, historical, archaeological, and cultural significance in order to avoid impacts related to cultural resources. Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to cultural resources.

26.231
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
52 This page intentionally left blank.

26.232
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 53
6 Energy
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in a potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption
of energy resources, during project
construction or operation? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project result in a potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation?
California is one of the lowest per-capita energy users in the United States, ranked 50th in the nation only behind Rhode Island, due to its energy efficiency programs and mild climate (United States Energy Information Administration [USEIA] 2022a). California consumed 279,510 gigawatthours (GWh) of electricity and 2,074,302 million cubic feet of natural gas in 2020 (CEC 2020a; USEIA 2022b). The single largest end-use sector for energy consumption in California is transportation (39.3 percent), followed by industry (23.2 percent), commercial (18.8 percent), and residential (18.7 percent) (USEIA 2022a). Adopted in 2018, SB 100 accelerated the State’s Renewable Portfolio Standards Program, codified in the Public Utilities Act, by requiring electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

The City of Santa Cruz has demonstrated its commitment to energy efficiency and renewable energy through many efforts, as described in the Existing Sustainability Setting section. The City has adopted the California Green Building Standards Code, per SCMC Chapter 18.04, that requires efficiency measures to reduce energy use, and provide energy reduction benefits (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). The City has also completed a communitywide GHG emissions inventory for 2019, which is summarized in Table 1.

As shown in Table 1, on-road transportation was responsible for the highest emissions of GHGs within the Santa Cruz community in 2019. According to the CEC, Santa Cruz County consumed approximately 1,180 GWh of electricity and 51.9 million therms of natural gas in 2020 (CEEC 2020a; CEC2020b).

The CAP is a policy document containing climate action measures to reduce Citywide GHG emissions. The CAP would encourage energy efficiency in existing residential, commercial, and municipal building stock through new policies and educational campaigns as well as new requirements for proposed new buildings. The CAP incentivizes increased renewable energy production within the City. The CAP also attempts to reduce transportation-related energy

26.233
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
54 consumption by increasing active transportation and public transit use and reducing VMT. CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 seek to decrease natural gas consumption in new and existing buildings by enforcing an electrification ordinance for new development and electrifying existing commercial and residential buildings, while CAP Measure BE-5 encourages equitable energy efficiency and in investment in local solar programs. CAP Measures T-1 through T-5 would provide improvements to the active transportation, public transit and EV infrastructure of the City while discouraging single-passenger occupancy vehicles and decarbonizing off-road equipment. CAP Measure W-1 relates to maintaining low per capita water usage while Measure W-2 related to reducing organic and inorganic waste production. Finally, CAP Measure W-4 aims to reduce or capture emissions from wastewater processes.

Removal of existing natural gas infrastructure and implementation of both solar and transportation infrastructure would require small-scale construction. However, energy use for the construction of such projects would be temporary in nature, and construction equipment used would be typical of similar-sized construction projects in the region. In addition, construction contractors would be required to comply with the provisions of California Code of Regulations Title 13 Sections 2449 and 2485, which would minimize unnecessary fuel consumption. Construction equipment would be subject to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Construction Equipment Fuel Efficiency Standard, which would also minimize inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary fuel consumption. Furthermore, per applicable regulatory requirements such as 2019 California’s Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11), future infrastructure projects would comply with construction waste management practices to divert a minimum of 65 percent of construction and demolition debris. These practices would result in efficient use of energy necessary to construct CAP-related projects. Upon completion of construction for any CAP-related infrastructure development and redevelopment, non-renewable energy use would be reduced by increasing renewable energy production and storage and reducing VMT within the City.

The purpose and intended effect of the CAP is to reduce GHG emissions generated in the City to minimize the effects of climate change, including those emissions generated by energy demand and supply. The CAP would not result in the use of non-renewable resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner; rather, it would assist in reducing use of non-renewable energy resources and increasing the production of local renewable energy. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy. b. Would the project conflict with or obstruct a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
Relevant plans and policies that aim to increase energy efficiency and the production of renewable energy include SB 100, the 2019 California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen or Title 24 Part 11), and the 2019 California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 Part 6). SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the State’s Renewables Portfolio Standard Program and requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045. CALGreen (Title 24 Part 11) institutes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of non-residential and residential structures. In addition, the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 Part 6) establishes energy-efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings in order to reduce California’s energy demand. CCR Title 24 (Parts 6 and 11) is updated periodically to incorporate and consider new energy-efficiency technologies and methodologies as they become

26.234
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 55
available. New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the current Building Energy Efficiency Standards through submission and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report to the local building permit review authority and the CEC.

Santa Cruz is part of the Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) community choice aggregate, which provides electricity primarily from clean, renewable sources. Santa Cruz would continue to reduce its use of nonrenewable energy resources as the electricity generated by renewable resources provided by CCCE continues to increase to comply with State requirements through SB 100, which requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.

The CAP includes strategies and actions to reduce electricity use and increase production of renewable energy and would therefore align with the overall intent of SB 100.

In addition, the City of Santa Cruz has adopted CALGreen (Title 24 Part 11) and the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24 Part 6) pursuant to SCMC Chapter 18.04 and Chapter

24.15 (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). Therefore, construction and operation associated with infrastructure projects stemming from the CAP would be designed to comply with the energy source standards of the CALGreen and the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Future projects resulting from implementation of the CAP would be required to demonstrate compliance with the CALGreen and the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards by implementing sustainability and energy efficiency measures such as high-efficiency lighting and HVAC systems, low-flow water fixtures, dual-paned windows, and water efficient landscaping and irrigation systems. Compliance with these regulations would minimize potential conflicts with adopted energy conservation plans.

As discussed under criterion a, above, CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 seek to decrease natural gas consumption in new and existing buildings by enforcing an electrification ordinance for new development and electrifying existing commercial and residential buildings, while CAP Measure BE-5 encourages equitable energy efficiency and in investment in local solar programs. These measures are consistent with the goals and policies established by SB 100, CALGreen, and the California Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Thus, the CAP would not conflict with adopted renewable energy or energy conservation plans and there would be no impact.

Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). Implementation of the CAP would result in reducing use of non-renewable energy resources across the community, in particular with remodeled buildings, new construction, and municipal buildings. Implementation of the CAP would also increase the production of renewable energy within the City. Additionally, the CAP includes measures to increase the use of active transportation and public transit and reduce VMT within the City, which would reduce transportation fuel use. As the City’s population grows and development intensifies in the future, as anticipated under 2030 General Plan buildout, measures contained within the CAP would ensure that new development is constructed in accordance with strict energy efficiency standards and that the City sources its energy from renewable sources. As the CAP would result in decreased non-renewable energy use within the City and would align with existing plans and policies related to renewable energy and energy efficiency, implementation of the CAP would result in no cumulative impact related to energy.

26.235
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
56 This page intentionally left blank.

26.236
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 57
7 Geology and Soils
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Expose people or structures to potentially
substantial adverse effects, including the
risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State Geologist for
the area or based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault? □ □ □ ■

2. Strong seismic ground shaking? □ □ □ ■

3. Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction? □ □ □ ■

4. Landslides? □ □ □ ■
b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil? □ □ ■ □
c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or
collapse? □ □ ■ □
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property? □ □ ■ □
e. Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater? □ □ □ ■
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature? □ □ ■ □

26.237
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
58 a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?

2. Strong seismic ground shaking?

3. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?

4. Landslides?
According to the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, the City is located in an area of high seismic risk due to the close proximity of at least six major seismic faults and fault systems, including the San Andreas, Zayante, Ben Lomond, San Gregorio, Butano, and the Monterey Bay Fault Zones. The closest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault is the San Andreas Fault, located approximately 12 miles east of the City (California Geologic Survey [CGS] 2018). However, there are no formally recognized faults in Santa Cruz. In addition, the City has low potential for landslides, except for the slopes near Moore Creek (City of Santa Cruz 2012).

In 2018, the City of Santa Cruz City Council adopted a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) Five Year Update (2018-2023) to identify and assess hazards and reduce risks prior to a disaster event.

According to the LHMP, past experience has identified the City as being vulnerable to earthquake.

The most active earthquake threat to the City is the San Andreas Fault zone, which is capable of a maximum credible earthquake equal to a magnitude of 8.3. Additionally, the nearby Hayward, Calaveras and San Gregorio faults are all capable of generating earthquakes greater than a magnitude of 7.4 (City of Santa Cruz 2018). As identified in the LHMP, the U.S. Geological Survey has determined that there is a 62 percent probability of at least one magnitude 6.7 or greater earthquake, capable of causing widespread damage, striking the San Francisco Bay region, including Santa Cruz, before 2032. During a previous earthquake event (the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989), extensive liquefaction occurred along the shoreline of the Monterey Bay. Most of the City of Santa Cruz downtown area along the San Lorenzo River is in a liquefaction area (City of Santa Cruz 2018).

The CAP is a policy document containing climate actions and supporting measures to reduce GHG emissions, and is consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, Local Coastal Program, SCMC, LHMP, and other regional regulations. CAP Measures BE-3 may result in new or expanded facilities for the purposes of battery energy storage. However, the CAP does not propose habitable development that could result in exposure of people to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction, or landslides.

Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to seismic- and landslide-related hazards. b. Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The CAP would not involve land use or zoning changes but would promote sustainable infrastructure development and redevelopment. As a policy document, the CAP would not directly require ground-disturbing activities. However, implementation of several CAP measures may result in construction activities that could cause soil erosion or the loss of topsoil during construction. For example, CAP Action BE-2-4 promotes the removal of obsolete natural gas infrastructure, while CAP Action BE-2-5 promotes the deployment of community solar and electrification of existing buildings in residential neighborhoods. CAP Action BE-3-3 supports commercial battery storage installations and business district scale microgrid opportunities. CAP Action-BE 5-1 vows to deliver

26.238
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 59
weatherization, healthy home retrofits, and solar system installs to low-income homeowners and rental units. Additionally, CAP Action T-1-1 will fund, staff, and implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, while Actions T1-2, T-1-3, and T-1-5 describe completing all portions of Rail Trail, planning active and public transportation to the Rail line, ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers, requiring bike parking installation in new commercial developments and existing commercial renovations, and building new infrastructure to ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Action T-4-1 also promotes the installation of at least 1,247 new public EV charging stations.

The CAP could result in construction-related soil erosion and topsoil loss impacts associated with implementation of CAP Measures and Actions. However, CAP projects and actions would be reviewed for consistency with Santa Cruz General Plan policies and other local and State geology and soils regulations prior to final siting and construction. Soil erosion caused by strong wind and/or earth-moving operations during construction would be minimized through compliance with MBARD Rule 400, Visible Emissions, which prohibits visible particulate matter from crossing property lines.

Standard practices to control fugitive dust emissions include watering of active grading sites, covering soil stockpiles with plastic sheeting, and covering soils in haul trucks with secured tarps. In addition, CAP Measure CS-1 would result in the planting of 3,000 new trees within the City by 2030 while CAP Action CS-3-5 would result in the reforestation or afforestation of areas that are currently mowed, both of which would reduce erosion of topsoil.

The potential for CAP-related project construction activities involving soil disturbance to result in increased erosion and sediment transport by stormwater to surface waters would be minimized because future projects would be required to comply with SCMC Chapter 18.45, Excavation and Grading Regulation, and/or a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit, issued by the Central Coast Regional Control Board (CCRWQB), for projects disturbing more than one acre (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). These regulations require best management practices (BMPs) to reduce erosion and topsoil loss from stormwater runoff.

Compliance with the SCMC and/or a Construction General Permit would ensure that BMPs are implemented during construction and minimize substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil.

Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil.
c. Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
d. Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code, creating substantial risks to life or property?
According to the City of Santa Cruz LHMP, the City’s downtown area along the San Lorenzo River is in a liquefaction area. Most of Santa Cruz is characterized by low to no potential for landslides, other than the slopes near Moore Creek. Additionally, the City does not experience risks related to expansive soils, and the risk of subsidence is generally low throughout the City (City of Santa Cruz 2018). The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, SCMC, and CBC contain regulations for structural design and soil hazards in order to mitigate potential impacts related to unstable soils.

The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Some of the proposed policies in the CAP would support small-scale construction projects, such as battery storage installation and EV charging stations. However, CAP projects and

26.239
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
60 actions would be reviewed for consistency with local and State geotechnical regulations prior to final siting and construction. New structures would be required to comply with SCMC Chapter 18.04, Building Code, which adopts the latest CBC, including measures to address unstable soil conditions (City of Santa Cruz 2012). Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to risks associated with location on unstable geologic unit or soil or on expansive soils. e. Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
The CAP would not involve the development of habitable structures and, thus, no use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Therefore, no impact would occur related to soil capability support of alternative wastewater disposal systems. f. Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The CAP would not involve land use or zoning changes that would encourage new development but would instead promote infrastructure development and redevelopment. As a policy document, the CAP would not directly result in impacts related to paleontological resources or unique geologic features. CAP actions that would involve construction activities, such as the policies related to building energy-efficiency, renewable energy retrofits, active transportation and public transit infrastructure, and EV charging infrastructure, would primarily involve work within previously developed and disturbed areas where the likelihood of encountering intact and previously undiscovered paleontological resources would be minimal. Nonetheless, there is a possibility that these small-scale construction projects may expose paleontological resources during ground disturbing activities, including tree planting. To reduce such risks, CAP-related projects would be reviewed for consistency with State geotechnical and paleontological regulations prior to final siting and construction. CAP projects would also be subject to the policies of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, such as HA1.2, which conditions project approvals such that work be halted and resources examined in the event of encountering paleontological resources during construction (City of Santa Cruz 2012). In addition, CAP-related projects would be located and designed strategically to reduce ground disturbance to the maximum extent possible. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-thansignificant impact related to paleontological resources and unique geologic features.

Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). CAP-related projects, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under 2030 General Plan buildout, could expose additional people and property to the seismic and geologic hazards that are present in the region. The magnitude of geologic hazards for individual projects, including those associated with implementation of the CAP, would depend upon the location, type, and size of development and the specific hazards associated with individual sites. Specific geologic hazards associated with individual project sites would be limited to those sites without affecting other areas. Similarly, potential impacts to paleontological resources associated with each individual site would be limited to that site without affecting other areas, and impacts related to these resources would be minimized on a case-by-case basis.

Compliance with existing regulations, including SCMC and CBC requirements, City-issued permit requirements, the Santa Cruz General Plan, and construction general permit requirements, would

26.240
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 61
minimize potential cumulative seismic and geologic impacts. Seismic and geologic hazards would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and would not result in cumulative impacts. Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to geology and soils.

26.241
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
62 This page intentionally left blank.

26.242
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 63
8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either
directly or indirectly, that may have a
significant impact on the environment? □ □ ■ □
g. Conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted to reduce the emissions
of greenhouse gases? □ □ ■ □
a. Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
The greenhouse effect is a natural occurrence that helps regulate the temperature of the Earth. The majority of radiation from the Sun hits Earth’s surface and warms it. The surface in turn radiates heat back towards the atmosphere, known as infrared radiation. Gases and clouds in the atmosphere trap and prevent some of this heat from escaping into space and re-radiate it in all directions. This process is essential to support life on Earth, because it warms the planet by approximately 60°F. Emissions from human activities since the beginning of the industrial revolution (approximately 270 years ago) have been adding to the natural greenhouse effect by resulting in increased gases in the atmosphere that trap heat and contribute to an average increase in Earth’s temperature. Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface, and climate change is the resultant change in wind patterns, precipitation, and storms over an extended period.

GHGs produced by human activities include CO2, methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydroflourocarcons (HFCs), perfluorinated compound (PFC), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6) (see Appendix B for more details related to these GHG gases).2Combustion of fossil fuels (gasoline, natural gas, and coal), deforestation, and decomposition of waste release carbon into the atmosphere that has been locked underground and stored in oil, gas, and other hydrocarbon deposits or in the biomass of surface vegetation. Since 1750, estimated concentrations of CO2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere have increased by over 36 percent, 148 percent, and 18 percent respectively, primarily due to human activity. Emissions of GHGs affect the atmosphere directly by changing its chemical composition.

Changes to the land surface also indirectly affect the atmosphere by changing the way in which Earth absorbs gases from the atmosphere. Potential impacts in California due to climate change include sea level rise, more extreme-heat days and high-ozone days, larger and more frequent 2 The proposed CAP only considers emissions of CO2, CH4, and N2O, because these are the GHGs most relevant to local government policymaking. These gases comprise a large majority of GHG emissions at the community level. The remaining gases (HFCs, PFC, and SF6) are emitted primarily in private sector manufacturing and electricity transmission and are the subject of regulation at the State level.

Therefore, these gases were omitted from the proposed CAP.

26.243
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
64 forest fires, and more drought years.3 Although GHG emissions do not typically cause direct health impacts at a local level, GHG emissions can result in indirect health impacts by contributing to climate change, which can have public health implications. The primary public health impacts of climate change include the following:
▪ Increased incidences of hospitalization and deaths due to increased incidences of extreme heat events;
▪ Increased incidences of health impacts related to ground-level ozone pollution due to increased average temperatures that facilitate ozone formation; ▪ Increased incidences of respiratory illnesses from wildfire smoke due to increased incidences of wildfires;
▪ Increased vector-borne diseases due to the growing extent of warm climates; and ▪ Increased stress and mental trauma due to extreme events and disasters, economic disruptions, and residential displacement.4
The City of Santa Cruz has completed a communitywide GHG emissions inventory for 2019, which is summarized in Table 1. The transportation sector was the largest contributor to Santa Cruz’s GHG emissions. Table 4 summarizes the communitywide GHG emissions forecast under three scenarios for the year 2030 and year 2035: 1) business-as-usual projections, 2) target emissions, and 3) expected emissions with implementation of Statewide Initiatives and CAP Measures and Actions. As shown therein, under the business-as-usual scenario, communitywide GHG emissions are forecasted to increase to approximately 301,102 MT of CO2e (4.17 MT of CO2e per capita) by the year 2030, based on anticipated economic and population growth. However, with implementation of State laws and programs, communitywide GHG emissions would decline to approximately 256,715 MT of CO2e (3.55 MT of CO2e per capita) by 2030. Furthermore, implementation of the CAP alongside State laws and programs would reduce communitywide GHG emissions to approximately 170,002 MT of CO2e (2.35 MT of CO2e per capita) by 2030.

The measures included in the CAP combined with State-wide legislation and initiatives and Countywide transportation programs will enable the City of Santa Cruz to meet its per capita emissions and associated total mass emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Because SB 32 is considered an interim target toward meeting the 2045 State goal of carbon neutrality, implementation of the CAP would be considered substantial progress toward meeting the State’s long-term 2045 goal. Avoiding interference with and making substantial progress toward these long-term State targets are important, because these targets have been set at levels that achieve California’s fair share of international emissions reduction targets that will stabilize global climate change effects and help avoid the associated adverse environmental consequences.

The CAP includes a list of 31 measures, each with individual actions, intended to reduce communitywide GHG emissions. Implementation of the CAP would result in the reduction of communitywide operational GHG emissions, while only generating temporary GHG emissions during construction of infrastructure such as electric vehicle charging stations, bicycle paths, and public transit facilities. Additionally, the CAP would serve as a pathway to reduce GHG emissions and 3 California Air Resources Board (CARB) and California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA). 2009. Environmental Health and Equity Impacts from Climate Change and Mitigation Policies in California: A Review of the Literature. Available:
<http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.386.4605&rep=rep1&type=pdf>. Accessed May 18, 2021. 4 California Natural Resources Energy. 2018. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. Available:
<http://www.climateassessment.ca.gov/state/>. Accessed July 24, 2020.

26.244
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 65
introduce other beneficial environmental and sustainability effects. These benefits include reduction in building energy consumption, reduction vehicle miles traveled (and thus air pollution), reduction solid waste generation, and increase in carbon sequestration due to tree planting and reforestation.

Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to generation of GHG emissions.
b. Would the project conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
The CARB 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan outlines a pathway to achieving the 2030 reduction targets set under SB 32, which are considered interim targets toward meeting the long-term 2045 carbon neutrality goal established by EO B-55-18. The CAP is a policy-level document that sets strategies to reduce GHG emissions within the City in an effort to also comply with State regulations.

As discussed under criterion a, above, the CAP includes measures to assist in reducing City GHG emissions from forecasted business-as-usual levels to approximately 170,002 MT of CO2e (2.35 MT of CO2e per capita) by 2030. The purpose of the CAP is to meet Santa Cruz’s proportionate fair share of the Statewide GHG emissions reduction target set by SB 32 and work toward the State’s longer-term target of carbon neutrality identified in Executive Order B-55-18. The CAP would not conflict with any applicable GHG reduction plans, including the CARB 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. The CAP identifies how the City would achieve consistency with the Statewide GHG emissions limit.

The CAP would serve as a pathway to reduce GHG emissions and introduce other beneficial environmental and sustainability effects. These benefits include reduction in building energy consumption, vehicle miles traveled (and thus air pollution), and solid waste generation. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to consistency with applicable GHG emissions reduction plans, policies, and regulations.

Cumulative projects anticipated under 2030 General Plan buildout that exceed the thresholds discussed above would have a significant impact related to GHG emissions and climate change, both individually and cumulatively. The CAP creates a GHG emissions reduction strategy (consistent with Section 15183.5 of the CEQA Guidelines) for the City of Santa Cruz. The CAP also includes a series of measures and actions that are intended to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, which provides substantial progress toward the City meeting State goals.

As such, the CAP would result in the reduction of GHG emissions rather than generating GHG emissions. Some GHG emissions would occur during construction of CAP-specific infrastructure projects; however, these emissions would be temporary and minor in nature. Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to GHG emissions.

26.245
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
66 This page intentionally left blank.

26.246
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 67
9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials? □ □ ■ □
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment? □ □ ■ □
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an
existing or proposed school? □ □ ■ □
d. Be located on a site that is included on a list
of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment? □ □ ■ □
e. For a project located in an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project result in a safety hazard or
excessive noise for people residing or
working in the project area? □ □ □ ■
f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? □ □ ■ □
g. Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury, or death involving wildland fires? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?

26.247
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
68 b. Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
The CAP is a policy document containing strategies and actions to reduce GHG emissions. The CAP does not involve identified site-specific development and, for the most part, it would not facilitate new development that would involve the routine use of hazardous materials. Implementation of some CAP actions, such as energy efficiency retrofits, installation of EV charging stations, and implementation of active transportation projects, would require construction activities.

Construction would involve the temporary use of hazardous materials such as vehicle fuels and fluids that could be released should an accidental leak or spill occur. However, these types of materials are not considered acutely hazardous, and storage, handling, and disposal of these materials as related to CAP actions, shall comply with any applicable regulations from the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, U.S. EPA, and Occupational Safety & Health Administration. In addition, standard construction BMPs for the use and handling of such materials would avoid or reduce the potential for such conditions to occur. Any use of potentially hazardous materials during construction of projects would comply with all local, State, and federal regulations regarding the handling of potentially hazardous materials, including Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations and Title 22, Division 4.5 of the CCR. Risk of spills would cease after construction is completed. Therefore, construction activities related to CAP actions would not be anticipated to create upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials, and operation of the majority of CAP actions would not involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during operation.

However, CAP Actions BE-2-4, BE-2-5, BE-3-3, and BE-5-1 emphasize increasing local renewable energy production and battery energy storage within the City by encouraging the deployment of local solar and construction of commercial battery storage. Hazardous materials used in battery energy storage systems would generally consist of the lithium-ion batteries. Lithium-ion technology is a common battery storage medium and is considered one of the safest and most efficient methods of energy storage on the market. During normal operation, lithium-ion batteries do not represent a risk to off-site receptors, and safety standards applicable to energy storage facilities and safety certification tests established by independent bodies, such as Underwriters Laboratories, National Fire Protection Association, and International Electrotechnical Commission would prevent any reasonable possibility of a substantial adverse effect on the environment related to the lithiumion batteries. However, in the unlikely event of a fire, there is a risk of the accidental release of hazardous materials associated with battery energy storage systems. Any future proposed battery energy storage facilities would, therefore, be carefully reviewed for appropriate locations, safety measures, and consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, SCMC, and applicable local, State, and federal regulations. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to creating a significant hazard through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials.

26.248
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 69
c. Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? The CAP is a policy document containing strategies to reduce GHG emissions. The CAP does not include site-specific proposals and development, nor would it emit or handle hazardous materials.

Implementing some CAP actions may require future development or improvements, such as active transportation infrastructure, EV charging stations, and building improvements related to energy efficiency. However, CAP-related projects would be reviewed to ensure the appropriate location of projects in relation to existing development in the City and would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz General Plan, SCMC, and applicable local, State, and federal regulations. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to handling of hazardous materials in proximity to schools.
d. Would the project be located on a site included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
The CAP is a policy document containing measures and supporting actions to reduce GHG emissions.

The proposed CAP does not include site-specific proposals and development, but CAP actions could result in projects that could be located on listed hazardous materials sites. However, CAP-related projects would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, SCMC, and would be required to comply with applicable local, State, and federal regulations related to hazardous materials sites. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to location on a listed hazardous materials site.
e. For a project located in an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area? The City of Santa Cruz does not contain any airports. The nearest airport to Santa Cruz is the Watsonville Municipal Airport, which is located approximately 12 miles southeast of the City.

Furthermore, the CAP is a policy document that would not increase airport activity or result in additional habitable development or commercial development that could increase potential exposure of residents and employees to aircraft-related hazards. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to risks associated with location proximate to a public airport. f. Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
The CAP is a policy document intended to reduce GHG emissions. The CAP does not involve sitespecific development, nor would it facilitate new development that would interfere with adopted emergency plans. Implementation of some CAP actions, such as CAP Action T-1-1 which would implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, could involve construction within the local right-of-way. Construction activities have the potential to require lane closures and may impact traffic and vehicle speeds on the affected roadways; however, these impacts would be temporary and access to roadways would be maintained throughout project construction. Furthermore, future projects involving work in the public right-of-way would be required to coordinate with the City to ensure appropriate construction staging and adequate vehicular and pedestrian access on adjacent roadways, pursuant to SCMC Chapter 15.34, Encroachment Permit (City of Santa Cruz 2012). Therefore, the CAP would

26.249
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
70 result in a less-than-significant impact related to impairment or interference with implementation of an emergency response or evacuation plan.
g. Would the project expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
According to the LHMP and Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, wildfire poses a very high risk to the outer portions of Santa Cruz due to the thousands of acres of undeveloped hillsides surrounding the City to the west, north, and east (City of Santa Cruz 2012). The central, urbanized portions of the City are at lower risk of wildfire (City of Santa Cruz 2018). The CAP does not propose specific development, nor does it propose new residential or commercial land uses that could be subject to wildland fire. Furthermore, CAP Action CS-1-3 would require the City to pursue funding to expand forest management that would reduce threat of intense fires. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to risks associated with exposure to wildland fires.

26.250
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 71
10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade surface or
groundwater quality? □ □ ■ □
b. Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the basin? □ □ □ ■
c. Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river or through the addition of
impervious surfaces, in a manner which
would: □ □ ■ □
(i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site; □ □ ■ □
(ii) Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
off-site; □ □ ■ □
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff; or □ □ ■ □
(iv) Impede or redirect flood flows? □ □ ■ □
d. In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation? □ □ ■ □
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan? □ □ □ ■

26.251
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
72 a. Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality? The CAP is a policy document containing measures and actions intended to reduce GHG emissions in the City. CAP Action BE-2-4 promotes the removal of obsolete natural gas infrastructure, while CAP Action BE-2-5 promotes the deployment of community solar and electrification of existing buildings in residential neighborhoods. CAP Action BE-3-3 supports commercial battery storage installations and business district scale microgrid opportunities. CAP Action-BE 5-1 vows to deliver weatherization, healthy home retrofits, and solar system installs to low-income homeowners and rental units. Additionally, CAP Action T-1-1 will fund, staff, and implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, while Actions T1-2, T-1-3, and T-1-5 describe completing all portions of Rail Trail, planning active and public transportation on the Rail Trail , ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers, requiring bike parking installation in new commercial developments and existing commercial renovations, and building new infrastructure to ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Action T-4-1 also promotes the installation of at least 1,247 new public EV charging stations. These actions may result in small scale construction activities in the future that could result in water quality impacts due to soil erosion and ground disturbance, as discussed under Section 7, Geology and Soils, and criterion c, below. In addition, CAP Measure CS-1 would result in the planting of 3,000 new trees within the City by 2030 while CAP Action CS-3-5 would result in the reforestation or afforestation of areas that are currently mowed, both of which would result in ground disturbing activities.

However, CAP-related projects would be reviewed for consistency with local and State regulations, including the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting program which requires implementation of Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans (SWPPPs) and SCMC Chapter

18.45, Excavation and Grading Regulation (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). These regulations require BMPs to reduce water quality impacts from construction activities. Compliance with the SCMC and/or the NPDES permitting program would ensure that BMPs are implemented during construction to minimize potential impacts to surface and groundwater quality. As such, the CAP’s related infrastructure projects would not result in new or different wastewater discharge that would violate water quality standards, waste discharge requirements, or otherwise degrade surface or groundwater quality. Therefore, the CAP would result in less-than-significant impacts related to surface or groundwater water quality in Santa Cruz.
b. Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Implementation of the CAP actions related to infrastructure development and redevelopment, such as electrifying existing buildings, improving active transportation and public transit facilities, and implementing EV charging stations within the City, would not decrease groundwater supplies or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to impedance of sustainable groundwater management.

26.252
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 73
c. Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
(i) Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? (ii) Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
(iii) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? (iv) Impede or redirect flood flows?
Implementation of several CAP measures and action may promote infrastructure development and small-scale construction activities within the City. For example, CAP Action BE-2-4 promotes the removal of obsolete natural gas infrastructure, while CAP Action BE-2-5 promotes the deployment of community solar and electrification of existing buildings in residential neighborhoods. CAP Action BE-3-3 supports commercial battery storage installations and business district scale microgrid opportunities. CAP Action-BE 5-1 vows to deliver weatherization, healthy home retrofits, and solar system installs to low-income homeowners and rental units. Additionally, CAP Action T-1-1 will fund, staff, and implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, while Actions T-1-2, T-1-3, and T-1-5 describe completing all portions of Rail Trail, planning active and public transportation to the Rail line, ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers, requiring bike parking installation in new commercial developments and existing commercial renovations, and building new infrastructure to ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Action T-4-1 also promotes the installation of at least 1,247 new public EV charging stations.

Providing new active and public transportation infrastructure and battery storage facilities may slightly change the City’s existing drainage pattern and amount of impervious surface. Construction of CAP-related projects could also result in erosion, as discussed in Section 7, Geology and Soils.

However, impacts to drainage and water quality during construction would be minimized through the implementation of BMPs as required by the SCMC and NPDES Construction General Permit program. CAP projects would be implemented in accordance with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, which includes goals and policies for the protection and preservation of creeks, streams, and groundwater within the City. (City of Santa Cruz 2012). In addition, CAP Measure CS-1 would result in the planting of 3,000 new trees within the City by 2030 while CAP Action CS-3-5 would result in the reforestation or afforestation of areas that are currently mowed, both of which would reduce the potential for erosion. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to the alteration of existing drainage patterns.
d. Would the project result in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
The City is not located within a designated seiche zone. However, portions of the City, such as the downtown and the beach areas including the core commercial centers, are within a designated tsunami zone (City of Santa Cruz 2018). Additionally, portions of the City are within the 100- and 500-year flood zones as defined by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (FEMA 2021).

However, an existing flood control levee on the San Lorenzo River is designed to hold a 100-year storm. The City is also downstream of the Newell Creek Dam; however, risk of dam failure is unlikely, as it is monitored monthly for seepage, saturation, and visual inspections in accordance

26.253
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
74 with California Division of Safety of Dams requirements (City of Santa Cruz 2012). Additionally, the dam is continuously monitored for earthquakes and annually monitored for settling. Overall, some areas of the City are at risk of inundation. As described in criterion c, above, CAP projects would not impede or redirect flood flows, and as discussed in Section 9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, CAP projects would generally not involve the regular use or storage of hazardous materials with the exception of battery energy storage facilities that include the storage of lithium ion batteries. Future CAP-related projects, such as battery storage facilities, would be reviewed for compliance with the applicable local and State regulations related to flooding and hazardous materials use. Furthermore, any projects associated with implementation of the CAP located in flood-prone areas must comply with SCMC Chapter 24.12, Environmental Management, Part 4, Floodplain Management, which provides standards and requirements for construction within floodplain areas (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to flooding and inundation resulting in release of pollutants.
e. Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The CAP measures and actions would not include activities that would result in the direct extraction of groundwater. The CAP would not interfere with or obstruct implementation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to consistency with a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.

Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). Projects related to implementation of the CAP, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, are not anticipated to contribute to cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts with adherence to applicable General Plan policies, SCMC requirements and applicable local, State, and federal regulations. Implementation of the CAP would not contribute to an increase in growth and development in Santa Cruz but could result in infrastructure development projects, including renewable energy facilities and alternative transportation thoroughfares. As such, implementation of the CAP and other cumulative projects could have incremental impacts related to hydrology and water quality, with potential minor alterations to existing drainage patterns in the City. Overall, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to hydrology and water quality.

26.254
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 75
11 Land Use and Planning
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Physically divide an established
community? □ □ □ ■
b. Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project physically divide an established community? The CAP is a policy document containing measures that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 2030 General Plan and does not include actions or specific development projects that would divide an established community. CAP Measure T-1 would implement programs for active transportation by funding and staffing the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, by completing all portions of Rail Trail, and by ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers. Such actions would help to increase connectivity within the Santa Cruz community. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to division of an established community.
b. Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
The CAP is a policy document containing measures that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and that are designed to reduce adverse environmental impacts associated with climate change. Nonetheless, implementing the CAP would require some modification of existing policies, including developing and implementing new programs, and projects, or modifying existing ones. For example, CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2 and BE-3 include adoption and enforcement of building ordinances to require building electrification for new and existing developments, while Measure BE-5 would implement local solar programs to reform community solar policies and consider rental building energy performance standards. CAP Measure T-1 would implement programs for active transportation, CAP Measure T-2 would implement programs for public transportation, and CAP Measure T-3 would develop programs and policies to discourage driving single passenger occupancy vehicles. In addition, CAP Action W-1-6 would consider an ordinance for installation of greywater for irrigation at new residential construction while CAP Action W-2-1 would explore and potentially develop a regional compost trading program. In order to implement these measures, the City Municipal Code, General Plan, and other applicable documents may need to be amended to reflect new or modified requirements. However, where modifications of existing policies are needed, such as updates to policies related to energy, solid waste, transit, and active transportation, the CAP measures would result in greater avoidance or reduction of environmental

26.255
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
76 effects. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to consistency with current land use plans or policies.

Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). The CAP is a policy document containing strategies that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Nonetheless, implementing the CAP-related projects, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, would require some modification of existing land use policies, including developing and implementing new programs, and projects, or modifying existing ones. The proposed changes are consistent with the intent of the goals and policies established within the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and Municipal Code and would not cumulatively contribute to population growth or the loss of housing. Cumulative projects, including the CAP-related projects, would be required to adhere to City development regulations and existing Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan policies to retain land use character and minimize environmental impacts. Future projects implemented as a result of the CAP would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and other applicable regulatory land use actions prior to approval.

Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to land use.

26.256
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 77
12 Mineral Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state? □ □ □ ■
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site
delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b. Would the project result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan EIR does not identify any mineral resources or mineral resource recovery sites within the City. However, the EIR does identify a designated aggregate location, an approximately 360-acre sand quarry adjacent to and surrounded by Wilder Ranch State Park west of the City within the General Plan’s planning area (City of Santa Cruz 2011). The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan includes Policy NRC3.4 that requires the conservation of agricultural and known mineral resources in the General Plan’s planning area (City of Santa Cruz 2012). The CAP would not conflict with this policy or otherwise impact operations in the quarry area. Furthermore, the CAP would not facilitate additional urban growth or infrastructure development projects within the City that could result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to mineral resource.

26.257
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
78 This page intentionally left blank.

26.258
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 79
13 Noise
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a. Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies? □ □ ■ □
b. Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? □ □ ■ □
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise
levels? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Noise is unwanted sound that disturbs human activity. Environmental noise levels typically fluctuate over time, and different types of noise descriptors are used to account for this variability. Noise level measurements include intensity, frequency, and duration, as well as time of occurrence. Noise level (or volume) is generally measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). Because of the way the human ear works, a sound must be about 10 dBA greater than the reference sound to be judged as twice as loud. In general, a 3 dBA change in community noise levels is noticeable, while 1-2 dBA changes generally are not perceived. Quiet suburban areas typically have noise levels in the range of 40-50 dBA, while arterial streets are in the 50-60+ dBA range.

Normal conversational levels are in the 60-65 dBA range, and ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA can interrupt conversations.

Noise levels typically attenuate (or drop off) at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance from point sources (such as construction equipment). Noise from lightly traveled roads typically attenuates at a rate of about 4.5 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from heavily traveled roads typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance, while noise from a point source typically attenuates at about 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise levels may also be reduced by the introduction of intervening structures. For example, a single row of buildings between the receptor

26.259
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
80 and the noise source reduces the noise level by about 5 dBA, while a solid wall or berm that breaks the line-of-sight reduces noise levels by 5 to 10 dBA.

The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan EIR identifies roadway traffic as the dominant source of noise within the City. In addition, railroad operations, industrial operations, and the Boardwalk also contribute to the noise environment of the City, but in a more localized and limited manner related to locations and times of the day or year (City of Santa Cruz 2011). The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan aims to ensure appropriate noise levels considered compatible for community noise environments (City of Santa Cruz 2012). The City’s General Plan includes goals, policies, and actions that establish an interior noise level of 45 dBA for all residential uses, consistent with State noise insulation standards (CCR Title 24 Part 11). The General Plan policies also target an exterior noise level target of 65 dBA for activity areas associated with new multi-family development. However, the General Plan does not disclose its own standards for normally acceptable community noise exposure for various land uses. Instead, the General Plan references standards as recommended by the State of California (City of Santa Cruz 2011). Such standards are shown in Table 5. In addition, SCMC Chapter

9.36, Noise, establishes noise regulations including curfews, unreasonably disturbing noises, public health and safety, and enforcement (City of Santa Cruz 2021b).

Table 5 State of California Recommended Normally Acceptable Noise Levels Land Use Exterior Noise Exposure (Ldn, dBA)
Residential (Low Density, Single Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes) 60 Residential (Multi-Family) 65
Transient Lodging (Hotels and Motels) 65
Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing Homes 70 Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters 70
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator Sports 75
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks 70
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation, Cemeteries 75 Office Buildings, Business, Commercial, and Professional 70 Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 75
dBA = A-weighted decibels; Ldn = day/night average sound level; n/a = not applicable Source: City of Santa Cruz 2012
The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Some of the CAP actions would support small scale construction projects that could result in temporary noise. These include CAP Action BE-2-4 promotes the removal of obsolete natural gas infrastructure, while CAP Action BE-2-5 promotes the deployment of community solar and electrification of existing buildings in residential neighborhoods; CAP Action BE-3-3, which supports commercial battery storage installations and business district scale microgrid opportunities; CAP Action-BE 5-1, which vows to deliver weatherization, healthy home retrofits, and solar system installs to low-income homeowners and rental units; CAP Action T-1-1, which will fund, staff, and implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update; CAP Actions T-1-2, T-1-3, and T-1-5, which describe completing all portions of Rail Trail, planning active and public transportation to the Rail line, ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers, requiring bike parking installation in new commercial developments and existing commercial renovations, and building new infrastructure to

26.260
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 81
ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure; and CAP Action T-4-1, which promotes the installation of at least 1,247 new public EV charging stations. However, CAPrelated projects would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and SCMC, and construction activities would be required to comply with the provisions of the SCMC Chapter 9.36. Therefore, the CAP would not result in significant construction noise related impacts.

The CAP does not include future projects that would result in substantial operational noise. Rather, the CAP encompasses a suite of GHG-reduction opportunities that affect the transportation sector and its associated noise. For example, CAP Measures T-1, T-2, T-3, T-4, and T-5 would discourage driving single passenger occupancy vehicles and would promote the adoption of EVs, which are quieter than gas-powered alternatives, and facilitate improvements to bicycle and public transit circulation to increase active transportation and transit ridership and decrease VMT. These measures would reduce VMT and traffic-related noise in Santa Cruz. Therefore, the CAP would not generate excessive operational noise levels and would result in a less-than-significant impact related to noise exposure.
b. Would the project result in exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
While people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration. Vibration in buildings, such as from nearby construction activities, may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low-frequency rumbling noise, referred to as groundborne noise (Caltrans 2020). Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people who are outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants and vibrationsensitive land uses.

Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or Root Mean Square (RMS) vibration velocity. The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in/sec). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used in monitoring of blasting vibration because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings. Vibration significance ranges from approximately 50 vibration decibels (VdB), which is the typical background vibration-velocity level, to 100 VdB, the general threshold where minor damage can occur in fragile buildings. The general human response to different levels of groundborne vibration velocity levels is described in Table 6.

Table 6 Human Response to Different Levels of Groundborne Vibration Vibration Velocity Level Human Reaction
65 VdB Approximate threshold of perception for many people 75 VdB Approximate dividing line between barely perceptible and distinctly perceptible. Many people find that transportation-related vibration at this level is unacceptable. 85 VdB Vibration acceptable only if there are an infrequent number of events per day VdB = vibration decibels
Source: Federal Transit Administration (FTA) 2018

26.261
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
82 The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Some of the CAP actions would support small-scale construction projects, such as EV charging station construction and building energy efficiency retrofits that may result in a temporary, minor increase in groundborne vibration. However, CAP-related projects would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and SCMC, and construction activities would be required to comply with applicable local, State, and federal regulations to ensure that temporary construction impacts related to groundborne vibration would not occur. Furthermore, CAP-related projects would not include operational sources of groundborne vibration. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to groundborne vibration. c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Santa Cruz does not contain any airports. The nearest airport to Santa Cruz is the Watsonville Municipal Airport, which is located approximately 12 miles southeast of the City. The City is not within the airport land use plan for the Watsonville Municipal Airport (Watsonville Municipal Airport 2003). Furthermore, the CAP is a policy document that would not increase airport activity or result in additional habitable development or commercial development that could increase potential exposure of residents and employees to aircraft-related noise. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to aviation-related noise exposure.

Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, including Chapter 8, Hazards, Safety, and Noise (City of Santa Cruz 2012). Nonetheless, CAP-related projects, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, would support construction projects, such as EV charging station construction that may result in a temporary increase in groundborne vibration or noise levels. However, cumulative projects, including CAPrelated projects, would be subject to review by the City for compliance with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and SCMC and would be required to comply with applicable State and federal regulations governing construction noise and vibration. Additionally, the CAP encompasses a suite of GHG-reduction opportunities that would decrease traffic and traffic-related noise. As such, implementation of the CAP would not generate permanent, excessive groundborne vibration or noise levels. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to noise.

26.262
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 83
14 Population and Housing
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of roads or
other infrastructure)? □ □ □ ■
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
The CAP does not include measures, policies, or programs that would result in new housing or jobs or that would displace existing residents or housing. In addition, the CAP does not propose new infrastructure, such a roadways or utilities, which could indirectly lead to new population growth or development. Therefore, the CAP would not directly increase the population, indirectly induce additional unplanned population growth, or displace people or housing. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to population and housing.

Specifically, the CAP would not contribute to person or housing displacement in Santa Cruz nor result in population growth beyond that already assumed and planned for in the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and in accordance with Santa Cruz 2030 population projections. Therefore, the CAP would result in no cumulative impact related to population and housing.

26.263
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
84 This page intentionally left blank.

26.264
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 85
15 Public Services
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

1. Fire protection? □ □ □ ■

2. Police protection? □ □ □ ■

3. Schools? □ □ □ ■

4. Parks? □ □ □ ■

5. Other public facilities? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

1. Fire protection?

2. Police protection?

3. Schools?

4. Parks?

5. Other public facilities?
The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Implementation of the CAP and its proposed strategies and actions would not result in increases in population and new employment opportunities would target existing residents and not induce population growth, as discussed in Section 14, Population and Housing. As such, the CAP would not require the construction of new or physically altered governmental facilities to serve additional population, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts.

Rather, CAP measures and actions would help to increase community resiliency and reduce vulnerability to the impacts of climate change within Santa Cruz, thereby reducing the burden on local public services related to such climate impacts and disasters. Furthermore, future projects resulting from implementation of the CAP would be reviewed for consistency with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and other applicable local and State regulations related to public services.

Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to public services in terms of need for the construction of new or altered governmental facilities.

26.265
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
86 Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). Implementation of CAP-related projects, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, would not result in increases in population or induce additional population growth beyond that assumed under the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and in accordance with Santa Cruz’s 2030 population projections. As such, implementation of the CAP would not result in substantial cumulative need to expand public services facilities. Therefore, the CAP would result in a no significant cumulative impact related to public services.

26.266
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 87
16 Recreation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Increase the use of existing neighborhood
and regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or
be accelerated? □ □ □ ■
b. Include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b. Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The City of Santa Cruz is a primarily urbanized community with a variety of recreational facilities.

According to the City of Santa Cruz Parks Master Plan 2030, there are six community parks (181 acres), one regional park (151 acres), seven open spaces (1,315 acres), four primary beaches (33 acres), and a large trail system comprised of approximately 35 total miles of trails within the City, as shown in the Existing Park Coverage Map on Page 20 of the Parks Master Plan (City of Santa Cruz 2020). The Parks Master Plan incorporates four general goals outlined in the City of Santa Cruz General Plan 2030, including Goal PR1, provide ample, accessible, safe, and well-maintained parks, open space, and active recreational facilities; Goal PR2, maintain high-quality, affordable recreational programs, activities, events, and services for all; Goal PR3, provide well managed, clean, and convenient public access to open space lands and coastline; and Goal PR4, develop an integrated system of citywide and regional trails. In addition, the City’s standard for community parks is 2.5 acres per 1,000 people, with a service radius of 1.5 miles (City of Santa Cruz 2020).

The CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, including the recreation and open space policies described above. Additionally, as described in Section 14, Population and Housing, the CAP would not result in substantial population growth or direct land use changes. As such, implementation of the CAP would not result in a substantial physical deterioration of parks or other recreational facilities or result in the need to expand recreational facilities. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to the need for construction of new or altered recreational facilities.

26.267
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
88 Cumulative Impacts
The cumulative projects scenario is buildout of the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan in addition to the projected population, employment, and housing for the City of Santa Cruz through 2030 (75,571 residents, 46,153 jobs, and 28,634 housing units). Implementation of CAP projects, in combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, would not result in increases in population or induce additional population growth beyond that assumed under the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and in accordance with Santa Cruz 2030 population projections.

Therefore, implementation of the CAP would not result in increased demand for parks or substantial cumulative physical deterioration of parks or other recreational facilities or result in the cumulative need to expand recreational facilities. Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in no cumulative impact related to recreation.

26.268
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 89
17 Transportation
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities? □ □ □ ■
b. Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision
(b)? □ □ □ ■
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? □ □ ■ □
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? □ □ ■ □
a. Would the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities? b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
The Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan Circulation Element includes the following goals (City of Santa Cruz 2012):
▪ Goal M1: Implement land use patterns, street design, parking, and access solutions that facilitate multiple transportation alternatives.
▪ Goal M2: Develop a safe, sustainable, efficient, adaptive, and accessible transportation system.
▪ Goal M3: Develop a safe, efficient, and adaptive road system. ▪ Goal M4: Develop a citywide interconnected system of safe, inviting, and accessible pedestrian ways and bikeways.

Additionally, the City adopted the City of Santa Cruz Active Transportation Plan (ATP) in 2017 to identify an integrated network of walkways and bikeways that connect the City of Santa Cruz neighborhoods and communities to employment, education, commercial, recreational and tourist destinations. The ATP was developed through the City’s Planning and Public Works Departments and in coordination with other City Departments. Preparation of the ATP included a review of pertinent planning documents and policies, including the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan (City of Santa Cruz 2017).

26.269
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
90 The CAP is a policy document containing strategies and policies that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and the Santa Cruz ATP. CAP Action T-1-1 would facilitate the funding, staffing, and overall implementation of the ATP. CAP Action T-1-2 would result in the completion of all portions of Rail Trail, while CAP Action T-1-3 would ensure secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers and require bike parking installations in commercial developments and redevelopments. CAP Action T-1-5 would build new infrastructure to ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure throughout the City, while CAP Action T-1-6 would pilot designating streets specifically for bikes only. Additionally, CAP Actions designed to support CAP Measure T-2 would implement programs for public transportation. These CAP actions would advance active transportation and public transit within Santa Cruz and decrease VMT and associated air pollutants and GHG emissions.

The CAP Measures and Actions would be consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and ATP goals related to facilitating multiple transportation alternatives, developing an accessible transportation system, and developing an interconnected system of pedestrian ways and bikeways.

Furthermore, the CAP would seek to reduce VMT within the City through CAP Measure M-4, which would implement a municipal Transportation Demand Management Plan by 2023 and result in consistency with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to consistency with plans addressing the transportation circulation system and CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b).
c. Would the project substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible use (e.g., farm equipment)? d. Would the project result in inadequate emergency access? The CAP is a policy document containing strategies that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and would not facilitate development beyond that allowed under the General Plan.

Implementation of some CAP actions, such as CAP Action T-1-1 which would implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update, could involve construction within the local right-of-way. Construction activities have the potential to require lane closures and may impact traffic and vehicle speeds on the affected roadways; however, these impacts would be temporary and access to roadways would generally be maintained throughout project construction. Furthermore, future projects involving work in the public right-ofway would be required to obtain an encroachment permit to ensure public safety, public convenience, and adequate traffic control pursuant to SCMC Chapter 15.34, Encroachment Permits (City of Santa Cruz 2021b). Compliance with the SCMC would ensure that significant impacts to the circulation system design, including safety impacts and emergency access, would not occur. As such, construction of CAP projects would not create transportation design hazards or result in inadequate emergency access. Furthermore, the CAP would facilitate increased active transportation and public transit use and decreased VMT within Santa Cruz, which in turn would reduce potential transportation hazards and congestion conditions that can hinder emergency response. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to transportation hazards and emergency access.

26.270
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 91
combination with other cumulative projects anticipated under Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan buildout, could result in increases in VMT or changes affecting traffic design safety and emergency access. However, the CAP is a policy document containing programs that are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and does not propose new development that would require the provisioning of new roadways. The CAP measures and actions would promote alternative modes of transportation and reduction of VMT throughout the Santa Cruz community, consistent with goals contained in the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and Santa Cruz ATP (City of Santa Cruz 2012; City of Santa Cruz 2017). Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to transportation.

26.271
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
92 This page intentionally left blank.

26.272
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 93
18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a. Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a
local register of historical resources as
defined in Public Resources Code section
5020.1(k), or □ □ ■ □
b. A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by
substantial evidence, to be significant
pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision
(c) of Public Resources Code Section
2024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in
subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code
Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significant of the resource to a
California Native American tribe? □ □ ■ □
a. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in a Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe and that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code § 5020.1 (k)? b. Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in a Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe and that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 2024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significant of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
On April 27, 2022, the following Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)-identified local Native American tribal groups were formally notified that the City initiated environmental review of the CAP 2.0 and were invited to provide consultation:

26.273
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
94 1. Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista Under AB 52, Native American tribes have 30 days to respond and request further project information and formal consultation. Formal consultation was requested by the tribe and is expected to take place in June 2022. Results of formal consultation will be addressed in this document prior to finalization of this IS-ND.

The CAP would not involve land use or zoning changes that would increase development within the City but would instead promote sustainable infrastructure development within the urbanized area of the City. As a policy document, the CAP would also not directly entail ground disturbing activities.

Implementation of the CAP actions related to electrification of buildings, commercial battery storage installation, EV charging infrastructure, and active transportation and public transit infrastructure may include minor construction activities.

Electrification retrofits associated with CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 may change the physical environment through the need for upgraded service and electrical panels, branch circuit upgrades, and installation of condensate drains to facilitate the installation of electric heat pumps for water and space heating. The physical changes these upgrades would entail are dependent on the year of building construction and location of electrical and service panels and plumbing connection of condensate drains, which sometimes may include modifications to the interior and/or exterior of buildings for wiring and panel replacement and minor excavation for connection of drainage to sewer systems.

Installation of active transportation infrastructure, public transit infrastructure, and EV chargers associated with CAP Measures T-1, T-2, T-3, and T-4 would primarily impact previously disturbed areas within existing parking lots and developments. However, the physical changes these installations and enhancements would entail are dependent on the location of construction, which in some cases may include minor temporary excavation. In addition, implementation of CAP Action T-1-1 and T-1-2, which would implement the Active Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School and the 2030 General Plan update and complete all portions of Rail Trail, could impact some previously undisturbed areas of the City. Furthermore, CAP Measure CS-1 would result in the planting of 3,000 new trees within the City by 2030, which could result in ground disturbing activities in previously undisturbed areas.

Implementation of these CAP actions could impact unknown tribal cultural resources during construction that involves below-grade activities in previously undisturbed soils. However, CAPrelated projects would be located and designed strategically to reduce ground disturbance to the maximum extent possible. In addition, CAP-related projects would be reviewed for consistency with applicable local, regional, and State tribal cultural and archaeological regulations prior to final siting and construction and would be required to implement BMPs in accordance with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan goals and policies and the SCMC. As such, tribal cultural resources would be protected prior to and/or upon discovery and, thus, impacts would be reduced to a minimal level.

Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to tribal cultural resources.

26.274
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 95
to tribal cultural resources are site-specific; accordingly, as required under applicable laws and regulations, potential impacts associated with cumulative developments would be addressed on a case-by-case basis as cumulative project details and locations become known. CAP projects and other cumulative projects would be required to comply with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and SCMC. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to tribal cultural resources.

26.275
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
96 This page intentionally left blank.

26.276
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 97
19 Utilities and Service Systems
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a. Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects? □ □ □ ■
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years? □ □ □ ■
c. Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project’s
projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments? □ □ □ ■
d. Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals? □ □ □ ■
e. Comply with federal, State, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste? □ □ □ ■
a. Would the project require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
The CAP is a policy document that, amongst other objectives, aims to reduce solid waste production, reduce energy consumption, and maintain existing water usage, thereby reducing related GHG emissions throughout Santa Cruz. The CAP does not include site-specific infrastructure designs or project proposals. Implementing the CAP would not result in an increase in population and housing nor would it facilitate growth beyond that anticipated by the Santa Cruz 2030 General

26.277
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
98 Plan. As such, implementing the CAP would not create new demand related to water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas power, or telecommunications utilities.

However, projects resulting from implementation of the CAP could include the development, redevelopment and/or restructuring of infrastructure throughout Santa Cruz. For example, CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 promote the electrification of new and existing commercial and residential buildings while CAP Action BE-3-3 supports commercial battery storage installations. CAP Action BE-5-1 would deliver weatherization, healthy home retrofits, energy efficiency, and solar system installs to low-income homeowners and rental units. CAP Measure T-1 would implement programs for active transportation by implementing the Active Transportation Plan Update, completing all portions of Rail Trail, ensuring secure bike parking near transit and in major activity centers, and building new infrastructure to ensure there is equitable access to safe bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure throughout the City. Additionally, CAP Action T-4-1 would install at least 1,247 new public EV charging stations. Potential impacts related to these measures and actions are discussed further below.

Water Supply Facilities/Infrastructure
The City of Santa Cruz Water Department is the retail water supplier for development within the City limits. Santa Cruz obtains 100 percent of its municipal water supply from local water sources.

According to the City of Santa Cruz Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), 95 percent of the City’s water is supplied by North Coast surface water sources (Liddell Spring and Laguna, Majors, and Reggiardo Creeks), the San Lorenzo River (Felton Diversion, Tait Diversion, and Tait Wells), and the Loch Lomond Reservoir. The remaining water supply is extracted through the Beltz well system from the Santa Cruz Mid-County Groundwater Basin (City of Santa Cruz 2021c). The City Water Department’s distribution system consists of three water treatment plants, including the Graham Hill Water Treatment Plant and two groundwater treatment plants related to the Beltz well system; four raw water pump stations; ten treated water pump stations; 15 distribution tanks with a total maximum capacity of 21.2 million gallons of treated water storage; seven surface water diversions; seven production wells; and approximately 300 miles of treated and raw water pipelines interconnecting the entire system (City of Santa Cruz 2021c).

The City addresses issues of water supply in the Santa Cruz UWMP, which is a long-range planning document used to assess current and projected water usage, water supply planning, and conservation and recycling efforts. According to the UWMP, the City has analyzed three different hydrological conditions to determine the reliability of water supplies: average/normal water year, single dry water year, and multiple dry water year periods. The UWMP indicates that water supplies under the average/normal year and single dry water year hydrological conditions will be sufficient to meet demand through 2045. In an extreme multiple dry water year hydrological condition, the UWMP indicates that the estimated water supply available to the City in the near term (2025) during the fourth year would meet over 99 percent of projected demand, but during the fifth year only 73 percent of projected demand would be met. However, with implementation of planned water infrastructure projects by 2030, along with proposed water rights modifications, the City’s projected water supply would meet projected water demand during all years except for small projected shortages during the fifth year of the extended drought in the 2040 – 2045 timeframe.

During this period in the fifth year of the extended drought, supply is projected to be able to meet 98 percent of demand (City of Santa Cruz 2021c). The also UWMP includes a Water Shortage Contingency Plan.

26.278
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 99
Construction of projects resulting from implementation of the CAP may require minimal water usage for dust suppression purposes. As described above, the City’s projected water supply is expected to meet the projected water demand during all years except for small shortages during the fifth year of an extended drought scenario in the 2040 – 2045 timeframe. However, the CAP would not result in new land uses, such as increased residential or commercial development, that would contribute to an increase in water use compared to existing conditions or that would require relocation or construction of new water infrastructure. Therefore, the CAP would have no impact related to the need for construction or expansion of water supply facilities and infrastructure.

Wastewater Treatment Facilities/Infrastructure
According to the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, Santa Cruz maintains a system of wastewater collection, conveyance, and treatment infrastructure for wastewater within the City. The City’s sewer system consists of approximately 160 miles of sewer and 17 pump stations that convey wastewater to the Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Facility. The Santa Cruz Wastewater Treatment Plant is a regional facility, owned and operated by the City, located along Bay Street within the City limits. Conservatively, the City’s wastewater treatment facility has the capacity to treat up to 17 million gallons of wastewater per day, with an average daily flow of less than ten million gallons per day. The City disposes of its treated effluent into the Pacific Ocean (City of Santa Cruz 2012).

The CAP would not result in new land uses that would generate sanitary wastewater or otherwise contribute to an increase in wastewater treatment requirements. Furthermore, the CAP would not require relocation or construction of new wastewater treatment infrastructure. Therefore, no impact related to need for construction or expansion of wastewater treatment facilities and infrastructure would occur.

Stormwater Drainage Facilities/Infrastructure
The City of Santa Cruz maintains a system of storm drains that collect stormwater runoff from City streets along gutters and through underground pipes to discharge into waterways and ocean. The system is designed for the control of flooding and does not provide any treatment to the storm water runoff. As discussed in Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, implementation of CAP Actions related to building electrification and energy efficiency upgrades, renewable energy production and storage, and transportation may promote infrastructure development that would involve small-scale construction. Construction of projects implemented in accordance with the CAP could result in erosion and potential changes to drainage patterns. However, as described in Section 7, Geology and Soils, and Section 10, Hydrology and Water Quality, CAP-related projects would be required to comply with local, State, and federal requirements during construction that would control stormwater runoff, erosion, and potential impacts to the stormwater drainage system.

Therefore, no impact related to need for construction or expansion of stormwater drainage facilities and infrastructure would occur.

Electric Power Facilities/Infrastructure
Electric power service in the City is provided by Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). Santa Cruz is also part of the CCCE community choice aggregate, which provides electricity from those who opt in within the City primarily from clean, renewable sources. Implementation of CAP Measures BE-1, BE2, and BE-3 promote the electrification of new and existing buildings, while CAP Action BE-5-1 aims to deliver weatherization, healthy home retrofits, energy efficiency and solar system installs to low26.279 City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
100
income homeowners and rental units. In addition, CAP Measure T-4 would increase the adoption of EVs through implementation of new EV infrastructure and charging stations throughout the City.

These CAP measures and actions may slightly alter electricity demand within Santa Cruz. In addition, implementation of the CAP could slightly increase electricity demand within the City during temporary construction activities associated with CAP Measures and Actions. However, the CAP would serve as a pathway to reduce GHG emissions, including emissions related to energy consumption, and other beneficial environmental and sustainability effects. These benefits include a reduction in energy consumption. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less than significant impact related to construction, expansion, or relocation of electric power facilities and infrastructure.

Natural Gas Power Facilities/Infrastructure
PG&E provides natural gas services to the City of Santa Cruz. The CAP would not involve new land uses that require new or additional natural gas service which could result in the construction of new or expanded natural gas facilities. CAP Measures BE-1, BE-2, and BE-3 promote the electrification of new and existing buildings to reduce natural gas consumption within the City. Implementation of these actions could involve minor alterations to existing natural gas infrastructure as natural gas use is reduced. In addition, implementation of the CAP could slightly increase natural gas demand within the City during temporary construction activities associated with CAP Measures and Actions.

However, the CAP would serve as a pathway to reduce GHG emissions, including emissions related to energy consumption, and other beneficial environmental and sustainability effects. These benefits include a reduction in natural gas consumption. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less than significant impact related to construction, expansion, or relocation of natural gas facilities and infrastructure.

Telecommunications Facilities/Infrastructure
The City is served by a variety of existing telecommunications companies, such as AT&T and Comcast. The CAP would not alter existing telecommunications facilities and infrastructure and would not involve new land uses or development that would require new telecommunications infrastructure. Therefore, the CAP result in no impact related to need for construction or expansion of telecommunication facilities and infrastructure.
b. Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c. Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
The CAP is a policy-level document that does not include site-specific infrastructure designs or project proposals, nor does it grant entitlements for development that would have the potential to increase demand for water supply or wastewater treatment. Rather the CAP contains strategies and actions to maintain reduced water use, such as CAP Measure W-1 that aims to maintain gallons per capita water use for the residential sector at a level that is at least ten percent below the State goal of 55 gallons per person per day. Thus, the CAP would result in no impact related to water supply and wastewater treatment.

26.280
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 101
d. Would the project generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
e. Would the project comply with federal, State, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Santa Cruz Municipal Utilities provides solid waste services for residential and commercial uses within Santa Cruz. The City owns and operates a Class III Sanitary Landfill, a recycling drop-off facility, and a recycling processing center at the Dimeo Lane Resource Recovery Facility, located approximately three miles west of the City on Highway 1 (City of Santa Cruz 2012). The Resource Recovery Facility landfill has a maximum permitted throughput of 535 tons of solid waste per day and has a remaining capacity 4,806,477 cubic yards (CalRecycle 2019).

The CAP focuses on sustainable infrastructure development and does not include land use or other policy changes that would result in increased residential, commercial, or other development that would increase solid waste generation within the City. CAP Measure W-2 aims to reduce organic waste by 85 percent by 2030 and reduce inorganic waste by 90 percent by 2035, while CAP Measure W-3 aims to set a long-term target to reduce waste generation growth. These CAP measures align with federal, State, and local regulations aimed at reducing solid waste disposal, such as Senate Bill 1383. Additionally, because the CAP is a policy document that would not facilitate growth beyond that anticipated by the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan, it would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to solid waste.

Rather, implementation of the CAP would reduce solid waste production, reduce energy consumption, and maintain existing water usage. Therefore, implementation of the CAP would result in a less-than-significant cumulative impact related to utilities and service systems.

26.281
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
102
This page intentionally left blank.

26.282
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 103
20 Wildfire
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact No Impact
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project:
a. Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan? □ □ □ ■
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and
thereby expose project occupants to
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? □ □ □ ■
c. Require the installation or maintenance
of associated infrastructure (such as
roads, fuel breaks, emergency water
sources, power lines or other utilities)
that may exacerbate fire risk or that may
result in temporary or ongoing impacts
to the environment? □ □ □ ■
d. Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslopes or
downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire slope instability,
or drainage changes? □ □ □ ■
a. If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?

26.283
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
104
d. If located in or near State responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the majority of the City of Santa Cruz is not located in designated California Fire Hazard Severity Zones; however, the City contains and is adjacent to areas classified as moderate and high fire hazard severity zones of Local Responsibility at the wildland fringes located at the northern and western borders of the City (CAL FIRE 2007). Local Responsibility Areas are incorporated cities and other areas where the local government is responsible for wildfire protection, typically provided by city fire departments, fire protection districts, counties, or by CAL FIRE under contract.

Santa Cruz is a compact city surrounded by greenbelt. According to the LHMP, wildfire poses a threat to portions of the City in several canyons and in the wildland/urban interface. The area’s most vulnerable to wildfires within the City are Pogonip, DeLaveaga, Moore Creek Preserve, Arana Gulch, Arroyo Seco Canyon, and on UCSC land (City of Santa Cruz 2018). The central, urbanized portions of the City are less subject to wildfire risk.

Though there are areas within and surrounding Santa Cruz that are at risk of wildfires, the CAP is a policy-level document that does not propose new residential, commercial, or institutional development that could be at risk from wildfire, nor does it grant entitlements for development that would have the potential to directly cause wildfire. Therefore, the CAP would result in no impact related to wildfire.

26.284
Environmental Checklist
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 105
21 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant
with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Does the project:
a. Have the potential to substantially degrade
the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, substantially reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory? □ □ ■ □
b. Have impacts that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects
of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)? □ □ ■ □
c. Have environmental effects which will
cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly? □ □ ■ □
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The intent of the CAP is to reduce GHG emissions from the Santa Cruz community and municipal operations through implementation of measures and actions related to energy use, water consumption, transportation, solid waste, and community coordination, education, and outreach.

The CAP measures and actions are consistent with the Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan and encourage residents, businesses, and the municipal facilities to reduce energy and water use, fuel use, VMT, and solid waste generation and the associated GHG emissions. The CAP would not facilitate development that would eliminate or threaten wildlife habitats or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Therefore, as discussed in more detail in Section 4, Biological Resources, Section 5, Cultural Resources, and Section 18, Tribal Cultural

26.285
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
106
Resources, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to biological and cultural resources.
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)?
Implementation of the CAP would result in a cumulatively beneficial reduction of GHG and air pollutant emissions across the City of Santa Cruz. In addition, as discussed throughout the respective cumulative impacts discussions within this document, the CAP would not result in significant cumulative impacts. Rather, implementation of the CAP would be consistent with Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan policies aimed at reducing emissions of GHGs and air pollutants, reducing VMT, reducing energy and water supply demands on utilities, and decreasing solid waste generation. Therefore, the CAP would result in an overall less-than-significant cumulative impact related to all CEQA topics addressed within this document. c. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
In general, impacts to human beings are associated with air quality, GHG emissions and climate change, hazards and hazardous materials, noise, and transportation impacts. As detailed in the preceding sections, the CAP would not result, either directly or indirectly, in substantial adverse effects related to air quality, GHG emissions, hazards, and noise. As discussed in more detail in Section 3, Air Quality, Section 13, Noise, and Section 17, Transportation, the CAP could cause temporary construction impacts related to transportation, air quality, and noise that could, in turn, affect human beings but would not result in substantial adverse effects. However, as discussed throughout this document, the CAP would serve as a pathway to reduce operational GHG emissions and would result in other positive environmental and sustainability effects. These benefits include reduction in building energy and water consumption, VMT, and solid waste generation and improved air quality. Therefore, the CAP would result in a less-than-significant impact related to potential for adverse effects on human beings.

26.286
References
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 107
References
Bibliography
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG). 2018a. 2040 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategies. https://www.ambag.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/AMBAG_MTPSCS_Final_EntireDocument_PDFA.pdf (accessed March 2022). _____. 2018b. 2018 Regional Growth Forecast. Technical Documentation. https://www.ambag.org/sites/default/files/2020-01/08-AMBAG_MTPSCS_AppendixA_PDFA.pdf (accessed April 2022).

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf (accessed April 2022). _____. 2009. Environmental Health and Equity Impacts from Climate Change and Mitigation Policies in California: A Review of the Literature.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.386.4605&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed April 2022).
_____. 2017a. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf (accessed March 2022).
_____. 2017b. 2016 State Strategy for the State Implementation Plan. https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/planning/sip/2016sip/2016sip.htm (accessed April 2022).

California Department of Conservation (DOC). 2016. California Important Farmland Finder.

Available: https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/ (Accessed April 2022). _____. 2017. State of California Williamson Act Contract Land. https://planning.lacity.org/eir/HollywoodCenter/Deir/ELDP/(E)%20Initial%20Study/Initial%2 0Study/Attachment%20B%20References/California%20Department%20of%20Conservation %20Williamson%20Map%202016.pdf (accessed April 2022).

California Department of Finance (DOF). 2021. E-5 Population and Housing Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State, 2011-2020 with 2010 Census Benchmark. https://dof.ca.gov/2022/03/15/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-countiesand-the-state-2011-2021-with-2010-census-benchmark/ (accessed March 2022).

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. Santa Cruz County. https://osfm.fire.ca.gov/media/6770/fhszl06_1_map44.pdf (accessed April 2022).

California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). 2019. Natural Community Conservation Plan Summaries. https://nrm.dfg.ca.gov/FileHandler.ashx?DocumentID=68626&inline (accessed April 2022).

26.287
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
108
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2020. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (CT-HWANP-RT-13-069.25.3). https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/environmental-analysis/documents/env/tcvgm-apr2020-a11y.pdf (accessed April 2022).
_____. 2022. State Scenic Highways Map.
https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e 8057116f1aacaa (accessed March 2022).

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2020a. Electricity Consumption by County. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx (accessed April 2022). _____. 2020b. Gas Consumption by County. http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/gasbycounty.aspx (accessed April 2022).

California Geological Survey (CGS). 2018. Seismic Hazards Program. Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones.
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=a1f74ce1577e4e98854df287d 2e84b9d (accessed April 2022).

California Natural Resources Energy. 2019. California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment Statewide Summary Report. https://www.energy.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019- 11/Statewide_Reports-SUM-CCCA4-2018-013_Statewide_Summary_Report_ADA.pdf (accessed April 2022).

CalRecycle. 2019. SWIS Facility/Site Activity Details. City of Santa Cruz Resource Recovery Facility (44-AA-0001).
https://www2.calrecycle.ca.gov/SolidWaste/SiteActivity/Details/1394?siteID=3417 (accessed April 2022).

Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE). 2022. Unifying the Central Coast. https://3cenergy.org/unify-central-coast/ (accessed March 2022).

Climate Data. 2022. Climate Santa Cruz. https://en.climate-data.org/north-america/united-statesof-america/california/santa-cruz-6305/ (accessed March 2022).

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 2021. FEMA Flood Map Service Center. https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=santa%20cruz%2C%20ca#searchresults anchor (accessed April 2022).

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2006. FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. (FHWAHEP-06-015; DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-02).
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook00. cfm (accessed April 2022).

Federal Transit Administration. 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf> (accessed April 2022).

Monterey Bay Air Resources District. 2016. Guidelines for Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act.
https://www.mbard.org/files/b4d8179d3/CEQA+Implementation.pdf (accessed March 2022).

26.288
References
Draft Initial Study – Negative Declaration 109
_____. 2017. Air Quality Management Plan. https://www.mbard.org/files/6632732f5/2012-2015- AQMP_FINAL.pdf (accessed April 2022).

Santa Cruz, City of. 1992. City of Santa Cruz Local Coastal Plan. As Amended: 2007. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/51167/63692496372707 0000 (accessed April 2022).
_____. 2011. City of Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. Draft Environmental Impact Report. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/planning-and-communitydevelopment/long-range-policy-planning/general-plan/draft-eir-for-the-draft-general-plan2030 (accessed April 2022). _____. 2012. City of Santa Cruz 2030 General Plan. As Amended: 2019. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/71130/63745367788530 0000 (accessed March 2022).
_____. 2017. City of Santa Cruz Active Transportation Plan. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/60966/63635300377697 0000 (accessed April 2022).
_____. 2018. Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. Five Year Update. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/77162/63700081215057 0000 (accessed April 2022).
____. 2020. Parks Master Plan 2030.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/82608/63744319732297 0000 (accessed April 2022).
_____. 2021a. Santa Cruz Green Economy and Jobs Analysis: Part 1. Accessed April 2022. ____. 2021b. Santa Cruz Municipal Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruz (accessed April 2022).
____. 2021c. Urban Water Management Plan.
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/87122/63773961153580 0000 (accessed April 2022).
____. 2022. Environmental Impact Report. Newell Creek Pipeline Improvement Project. https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/Home/Components/BusinessDirectory/BusinessDirectory/17 1/2089 (accessed June 2022).

Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce. 2022. Public Transportation in Santa Cruz. http://www.santacruzchamber.org/public-transportation.html (accessed March 2022).

Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission. 2022. 2045 Regional Transportation Plan. https://sccrtc.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Final%20Draft%202045%20RTP.pdf (accessed March 2022).

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2022. Critical Habitat for Threatened and Endangered Species Map.
https://fws.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=9d8de5e265ad4fe0989 3cf75b8dbfb77 (accessed April 2022).

United States Energy Information Administration (USEIA). 2022a. California - Profile Overview. Last modified: March 17, 2022. https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=CA (accessed April 2022).

26.289
City of Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2030
110
____. 2022b. Natural Gas: Natural Gas Consumption by End Use. https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_cons_sum_dcu_SCA_a.htm (accessed April 2022).

Watsonville Municipal Airport. 2003. Watsonville Municipal Airport Master Plan 2001-2020. https://www.cityofwatsonville.org/DocumentCenter/View/987/CM-Resolution-179-03- Airport-Master-Plan-PDF (accessed April 2022).

List of Preparers
Rincon prepared this CAP Initial Study-Negative Declaration under contract to the City of Santa Cruz.

Persons involved in data gathering, environmental impact analysis, quality review, graphics preparation, and document formatting include the following.

RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.

Matthew Maddox, Environmental/Sustainability Principal
Lexi Journey, Senior Environmental Planner
Taylor Freeman, Associate Environmental Planner
Camila Bobroff, Associate Environmental Planner
Debra Jane Seltzer, Document Formatting Specialist
Allysen Valencia, Graphics/GIS Analyst

26.290
Appendix A
Sources, Health Effects, and Typical Controls Associated with Criteria Pollutants

26.291
Sources, Health Effects, and Typical Controls Associated with Criteria Pollutants Draft Initial Study–Negative Declaration A-1
Sources, Health Effects, and Typical Controls Associated with Criteria Pollutants Pollutant Sources Health Effects Typical Controls
Ozone (O3) Formed when reactive organic
gases (ROG) and nitrogen
oxides react in the presence of
sunlight. ROG sources include
any source that burns fuels
(e.g., gasoline, natural gas,
wood, oil); solvents;
petroleum processing and
storage.

Breathing difficulties, lung
tissue damage, vegetation
damage, damage to rubber
and some plastics.

Reduce motor vehicle reactive
organic gas (ROG) and
nitrogen oxide (NOX) emissions
through emission standards,
reformulated fuels,
inspections programs, and
reduced vehicle use. Limit
ROG emissions from
commercial operations,
gasoline refueling facilities,
and consumer products. Limit
ROG and NOX emissions from
industrial sources such as
power plants and
manufacturing facilities.

Carbon monoxide
(CO)
Any source that burns fuel
such as automobiles, trucks,
heavy construction and
farming equipment, residential
heating.

Chest pain in heart patients,
headaches, reduced mental
alertness.

Control motor vehicle and
industrial emissions. Use
oxygenated gasoline during
winter months. Conserve
energy.

Nitrogen dioxide
(NO2)
See Carbon Monoxide. Lung irritation and damage.

Reacts in the atmosphere to
form ozone and acid rain.

Control motor vehicle and
industrial combustion
emissions. Conserve energy.

Sulfur dioxide
(SO2)
Coal or oil burning power
plants and industries,
refineries, diesel engines.

Increases lung disease and
breathing problems for
asthmatics. Reacts in the
atmosphere to form acid rain.

Reduce use of high sulfur fuels
(e.g., use low sulfur
reformulated diesel or natural
gas). Conserve energy.

Respirable
particulate matter
(PM10)
Road dust, windblown dust,
agriculture and construction,
fireplaces. Also formed from
other pollutants (NOX, SOX,
organics).

Increased respiratory disease,
lung damage, cancer,
premature death, reduced
visibility, surface soiling.

Control dust sources,
industrial particulate
emissions, woodburning
stoves and fireplaces. Reduce
secondary pollutants which
react to form PM10. Conserve
energy.

Fine particulate
matter (PM2.5)
Fuel combustion in motor
vehicles, equipment, and
industrial sources; residential
and agricultural burning. Also
formed from reaction of other
pollutants (NOX, SOX, organics,
and NH3).

Increases respiratory disease,
lung damage, cancer, and
premature death, reduced
visibility, surface soiling.

Particles can aggravate heart
diseases such as congestive
heart failure and coronary
artery disease.

Reduce combustion emissions
from motor vehicles,
equipment, industries, and
agricultural and residential
burning. Precursor controls,
like those for ozone, reduce
fine particle formation in the
atmosphere.

Lead Metal smelters, resource
recovery, leaded gasoline,
deterioration of lead paint.

Learning disabilities, brain and
kidney damage. Control metal
smelters.

No lead in gasoline or paint.

Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2)
Coal or oil burning power
plants and industries,
refineries, diesel engines.

Increases lung disease and
breathing problems for
asthmatics. Reacts in the
atmosphere to form acid rain.

Reduce use of high sulfur fuels
(e.g., use low sulfur
reformulated diesel or natural
gas). Conserve energy.

Sulfates Produced by reaction in the air
of SO2, (see SO2 sources), a
component of acid rain.

Breathing difficulties,
aggravates asthma, reduced
visibility.

See SO2

26.292
City of Pleasanton
Pleasanton Climate Action Plan 2.0
A-2
Pollutant Sources Health Effects Typical Controls
Hydrogen Sulfide Geothermal power plants,
petroleum production and
refining, sewer gas.

Nuisance odor (rotten egg
smell), headache and
breathing difficulties (higher
concentrations).

Control emissions from
geothermal power plants,
petroleum production and
refining, sewers, and sewage
treatment plants.

Visibility Reducing
Particulates
See PM2.5 Reduced visibility (e.g.,
obscures mountains and other
scenery), reduced airport
safety.

See PM2.5
Vinyl Chloride Exhaust gases from factories
that manufacture or process
vinyl chloride (construction,
packaging, and transportation
industries).

Central nervous system effects
(e.g., dizziness, drowsiness,
headaches), kidney irritation,
liver damage, liver cancer.

Control emissions from plants
that manufacture or process
vinyl chloride, installation of
monitoring systems.

Toxic Air
Contaminant
(TAC)
Combustion engines
(stationary and mobile), diesel
combustion, storage and use
of TAC-containing substances
(i.e., gasoline, lead smelting,
etc.)
Depends on TAC, but may
include cancer, mutagenic
and/or teratogenic effects,
other acute or chronic health
effects.

Toxic Best Available Control
Technologies (T-BACT), limit
emissions from known
sources.

Source: Compiled by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in October 2021

26.293
Appendix B
Description of Greenhouse Gases of California Concern

26.294
Appendix B
Draft Initial Study–Negative Declaration B-1
Description of Greenhouse Gases of California Concern
Greenhouse Gas
Physical Description and
Properties
Global Warming
Potential
(100 years)
Atmospheric
Residence
Lifetime
(years) Sources
Carbon dioxide
(CO2)
Odorless, colorless, natural gas. 1 50–200 Burning coal, oil, natural gas, and wood; decomposition of
dead organic matter;
respiration of bacteria, plants,
animals, and fungus; oceanic
evaporation; volcanic
outgassing; cement
production; land use changes
Methane
(CH4)
Flammable gas and is the main
component of natural gas.
2895 12 Geological deposits (natural
gas fields) extraction; landfills;
fermentation of manure; and
decay of organic matter
Nitrous oxide
(N2O)
Nitrous oxide (laughing gas) is a
colorless GHG.
298 114 Microbial processes in soil and
water; fuel combustion;
industrial processes
Chloro-fluorocarbons
(CFCs)
Nontoxic, nonflammable,
insoluble, and chemically
unreactive in the troposphere
(level of air at the Earth’s
surface); formed synthetically by
replacing all hydrogen atoms in
methane or ethane with
chlorine and/or fluorine atoms.
3,800–8,100 45–640 Refrigerants aerosol
propellants; cleaning solvents
Hydro-fluorocarbons
(HFCs)
Synthetic human-made
chemicals used as a substitute
for CFCs and contain carbon,
chlorine, and at least one
hydrogen atom.
140 to 11,700 1–50,000 Automobile air conditioners;
refrigerants
Per-fluorocarbons (PFCs) Stable molecular structures and only break down by ultraviolet
rays about 60 kilometers above
Earth’s surface.
6,500 to 9,200 10,000–50,000 Primary aluminum production; semiconductor manufacturing
Sulfur
hexafluoride
(SF6)
Human-made, inorganic,
odorless, colorless, and
nontoxic, nonflammable gas.
22,800 3,200 Electrical power transmission
equipment insulation;
magnesium industry,
semiconductor manufacturing;
a tracer gas
95 The City of Chico used a 20-year Global Warning Potential for methane.

26.295
City of Chico
Climate Action Plan Update
Draft Initial Study–Negative Declaration
B-2
Greenhouse Gas
Physical Description and
Properties
Global Warming
Potential
(100 years)
Atmospheric
Residence
Lifetime
(years) Sources
Nitrogen
trifluoride
(NF3)
Inorganic, is used as a
replacement for PFCs, and is a
powerful oxidizing agent.
17,200 740 Electronics manufacture for
semiconductors and liquid
crystal displays
Source: Compiled by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in May 2021

26.296
1 1 2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP)
Project Review Checklist
The City of Santa Cruz has prepared a 2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP) that establishes 2030 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) targets as well as an aspirational voluntary target of carbon neutrality by 2035. The CAP includes specific actions to achieve the short-term communitywide emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. This is consistent with California’s goal of outlined in Senate Bill 32 and provides substantial progress towards achieving the State’s long-term GHG reduction goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 (Executive Order B-55-18).

The City Council, City staff, and community will continue to develop an approach to the long-term aspirational goal of carbon neutrality.

Over the years, new City programs have been implemented while others have evolved. Plans from a range of departments have been executed and updated. The CAP will be updated every five years with annual reviews of progress on implementation of CAP measures and actions.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, a lead agency may determine that a project's incremental contribution to a cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable if the project complies with the requirements in a previously adopted plan or mitigation program under specified circumstances. In order for the CAP to be considered a qualified GHG reduction strategy and provide for CEQA streamlining of GHG analysis for future development the CAP must identify those measures that are applicable to new development. The CAP includes measures that are applicable to existing developments, municipal government operations, as well as voluntary and mandatory measures to be applied to new development for public and private projects. Mandatory GHG reduction programs that are applicable to new development are summarized in the following CAP Project Review Checklist. This CAP Project Review Checklist identifies applicable regulations, applicability, requirements, and monitoring and reporting required by regulations. The purpose of the CAP Project Review Checklist is to assist with determining project consistency with the CAP and other applicable sustainability-focused regulations and provide a streamlined review process for proposed new development projects that are subject to discretionary review and trigger environmental review pursuant to the CEQA. The checklist can be used when a plan/project is consistent with the existing 2030 General Plan land use and zoning designation(s) of the plan area/project site as identified in the City’s General Plan Land Use Element (adopted in 2012, as amended through 2019).

This CAP Project Review Checklist contains actions that are required to be implemented on a project-by-project basis to ensure that the specified emissions targets identified in the CAP are achieved. Implementation of these actions would ensure that new development is consistent with CAP assumptions for relevant strategies toward achieving the identified GHG reduction targets.

Projects or plans that are consistent with the CAP as determined through the use of this CAP Project Review Checklist may rely on the 2030 Climate Action Plan Initial Study-Negative Declaration GHG emissions analysis for the respective project- and cumulative-level GHG emissions impacts analysis.

Projects that are identified as not consistent with the CAP through the use of this CAP Project Review Checklist must prepare a project-specific analysis of GHG emissions, including quantification of existing and projected GHG emissions.

26.297
2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Project Review Checklist City of Santa Cruz
2 Cumulative GHG emissions associated with construction from a land use development project are generally orders of magnitude lower than the operational emissions from a project, because construction emissions are generally short in duration compared to the project’s overall lifetime, and thus can be assessed qualitatively as part of related CEQA CAP emissions analysis. However, some projects may have long construction periods or entail large quantities of cut and fill that could result in construction-related GHG emissions that may be considered significant. Thus, the City retains the discretion on a project-by-project basis to consider whether a project’s constructionrelated GHG emissions could be cumulatively considerable and require more detailed quantitative CEQA CAP emissions analysis and respective mitigation. This CAP Project Review Checklist may be periodically updated to incorporate new GHG reduction techniques, to comply with later amendments to the CAP or to reflect changes in other sustainability-focused local, State, or federal laws, regulations, ordinances, and programs. At a minimum, this CAP Project Review Checklist will be updated every five years consistent with the timing of the CAP update.

1.1 Application Submittal Requirements
The CAP Project Review Checklist is required to accompany any of the City’s environmental determination application documentation for all projects and plans subject to CEQA review, whether supported by private or government (local of State) funding, proposed within the City limits. The CAP Project Review Checklist is designed to assist the applicant in identifying the minimum sustainability-focused requirements specific to a proposed project or plan. However, it may be necessary to supplement the completed CAP Project Review Checklist with supporting materials, calculations, or certifications to demonstrate compliance with CAP and other applicable sustainability-focused requirements. If not already committed to clearly as part of the CEQA project description, in the CAP Project Review Checklist will be included in the respective project or plan conditions of approval.

26.298
3 Table 1 Project Description and Land Use Consistency
A. Project or Plan Name:

B. Project or Plan Address:

C. Applicant Contact Information
Applicant
Name Company Email Phone
D. Was a consultant retained to complete this checklist? Yes: ☐ No ☐ If yes, please complete the following:

Consultant
Name Company Email Phone
E. Project Information
Size of Project (acres)?
Gross: Net:

F. Is the proposed project’s use consistent with the zoning designation OR,
If the proposed project is not consistent with the existing land use plan and zoning designations, does the project include a land use plan and/or specific plan, master plan or zoning designation amendment that would result in an equivalent or less GHG-intensive project when compared to the existing designations? Yes: ☐ No ☐
For the second option under Question F above, provide estimated project-related GHG emissions under both existing and proposed designation(s) for comparison.

G. Brief Project Description
H. Does the proposed project include residential use, non-residential use, or both? Residential Use Only Yes: ☐ If “Yes”, proceed to Table 2 of the checklist.

Non-Residential Use Only Yes: ☐ If “Yes”, proceed to Table 3 of the checklist.

Both Residential and Non-Residential Use Yes: ☐ If “Yes”, proceed to Table 4 of the checklist.

26.299
2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Project Review Checklist City of Santa Cruz
4 Table 2 Residential Use Only - Project Review Checklist Measure
Action Proposed Project Requirement Status
Please substantiate how the
project satisfies the
question.

Energy
BE1.1. Would the proposed project be constructed as
all electric?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Water, Waste, and Wastewater
W3.1 If a multifamily housing development, would
the proposed project design include the same
number of spaces for appropriate organic waste
collection as the spaces available for trash and
recycling unless an exception applies as per
SCMC 6.12.033?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
W2.7 Would the project provide multi-lingual signage
or directions for waste handling?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Climate Restoration
C1.1a Would the proposed project include at a
minimum 1 native tree per every 1,000 gross
square footage of residential development
planted either on site or off-site (via in lieu of
fee) per the Street Tree Master Plan?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
C1.1b Would the project protect or mitigate the
approved removal of heritage trees on public
and private property (per Ordinance Chapter

26.300
5 Table 3 Non-Residential Use Only - Project Review Checklist Measure
Action Proposed Project Requirement Status Notes
Energy
BE1.1. Would the proposed project be constructed as all electric?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Transportation
T1.3 Does the project include a minimum bike parking of 35% of calculated auto parking requirements even where not
provided, with a minimum of 10% provided as Class I
spaces?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T2.3 If the project includes more than 50 employees, will the lease agreement require the provision of incentives for employees to bike, walk, carpool, or take the bus to work that would result in achieving an 8% reduction in parking as determined in the Parking Reduction Worksheet?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T4.2a Where parking is provided, do 20% of parking spaces have electrical charging stations (EVSE) with a minimum of 2 electrical charging stations (EVSE)? (minimum
number of EV chargers based on Tier 2 CalGreen
requirements)
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T4.2 b Would major retrofits, with either a building permit with square footage larger than 10,000 square feet or
including modification of electric service panels, meet CalGreen requirements for “EVSE installed” charging
spaces and infrastructure consistent with T4.2a above.

Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Water, Waste, and Wastewater
W3.1 Would the proposed project design include the same number of spaces for appropriate organic waste
collection as the spaces available for trash and recycling pursuant to SCMC 6.12.050 unless an exception applies
as per SCMC 6.12.033??
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
W2.7 Would the project provide multi-lingual signage or directions for waste handling?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐

26.301
2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Project Review Checklist City of Santa Cruz
6 Climate Restoration
C1.1a Would the proposed project include at a minimum 1 native tree per 350 gross square feet of Non-residential development or a minimum of 2 native trees per
property planted either on site or off-site (via in lieu of fee) per the Street Tree Master Plan.

Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
C1.1b Would the project protect or mitigate the approved removal of heritage trees on public and private property (per Ordinance Chapter 9.56)?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Is the proposed project consistent with the Checklist? Yes: ☐ No ☐ Please sign below to certify that all data provided is accurate and complete Applicant Name Applicant Signature

26.302
7 Table 4 Residential and Non-Residential Use - Project Review Checklist Measure
Action Proposed Project Requirement Status
Please substantiate how the
project satisfies the
question.

Energy
BE1.1. Would the proposed project be constructed as
all electric?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Transportation
T1.3 Does the project include a minimum bike
parking of:

Residential: one Class I bike parking space per
unit and a minimum of one Class II bike parking
space per four units; and
Non-residential: 35% of calculated auto parking
requirements even where not provided, with a
minimum of 10% provided as Class I spaces?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T2.3 If the project includes more than 50 employees,
will the lease agreement require the provision
of incentives for employees to bike, walk,
carpool, or take the bus to work that would
result in achieving a 8% reduction in parking as
determined in the Parking Reduction
Worksheet.?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T4.2a
For the non-residential related parking spaces,
do 20% of parking spaces have electrical
charging stations (EVSE)?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
T4.2b Would major retrofits, with either a building
permit with square footage larger than 10,000
square feet or including modification of electric
service panels, meet CalGreen requirements for
“EVSE installed” charging spaces and
infrastructure consistent with T4.2a above?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Water, Waste, and Wastewater
W3.1 Would the proposed project design include the
same number of spaces for appropriate organic
waste collection pursuant to SCMC 6.12.050 as
the spaces available for trash and recycling
unless an exception applies as per SCMC

6.12.033 ?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐

26.303
2030 Climate Action Plan (CAP) Project Review Checklist City of Santa Cruz
8 W2.7 Would the project provide multi-lingual signage
or directions for waste handling?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Climate Restoration
C1.1a Would the proposed project include at a
minimum 1 native tree per every 1,000 gross
square footage of residential development and
1 native tree per 350 gross square feet of nonresidential development planted either on site or off-site (via in lieu of fee) per the Street Tree
Master Plan?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
C1.1b Would the project protect or mitigate the
approved removal of heritage trees on public
and private property (per Ordinance Chapter

9.56)?
Yes ☐
No ☐
N/A ☐
Is the proposed project consistent with the Checklist? Yes: ☐ No ☐ Please sign below to certify that all data provided is accurate and complete Applicant Name Applicant Signature
It would be determined that the proejct complies with the 2030 CAP upon successful completion of the CAP Project Review Checklist, including providing any requested supporting documentation, followed by review and approval by City staff.

If you have any questions as you compete this checklist, please reach out to the City Planner overseeing the proposed project review and approval process.

26.304
APPENDIX B:

AMBAG Community and
Municipal Greenhouse
Gas Inventory Review
and VMT Updates

26.305
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
200 Washington Street
Suite 207
Santa Cruz, California 95060
831 440 3899
[email protected]
www.rinconconsultants.com
Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers
July 2, 2021
Project No: 20-10678
Tiffany Wise-West,
Sustainability and Climate Action Manager
City of Santa Cruz, City Manager’s Office
809 Center Street, Room 9/10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Santa Cruz Climate and Energy Action Plan,
Final Progress Report on Climate Action Plan 2020
Purpose
California considers greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the impacts of climate change to be a serious threat to the public health, environment, economic well-being, and natural resources of the state, and has taken an aggressive stance to mitigate the impact on climate change at the state-level through the adoption of legislation and policies. Many cities have developed local climate action plans and aligned goals to correspond with state emissions reduction goals. The two major state GHG-related goals are established by Assembly Bill (AB) 32 and Senate Bill (SB) 32. AB 32 required state agencies to reduce state GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 whereas SB 32 requires a 40 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2030. The goals set by AB 32 were achieved by the state in 20161 and many jurisdictions are completing GHG inventories to quantify progress toward their own 2020 goals as well as develop targets to align with the requirements of SB 32. A long-term goal of carbon neutrality by 2045 for the state was established, but not codified, through Executive Order (EO) B-55-18. While it is not required for jurisdictions to meet this target, many are establishing or exceeding this goal to show alignment with the aggressive decarbonization goals of the state.

As the City of Santa Cruz closes its 2012-2020 Climate Action Plan and develops its 2022-2030 Climate Action Plan, this memorandum provides:
 A consistency review of the City’s community and municipal GHG inventories  The City’s 2020 progress on milestones, indicators, and actions  Information regarding lifecycle/consumption based GHG inventories  Recommendations for the City’s community and municipal GHG inventories going forward Estimating GHG emissions enables local governments to establish an emissions baseline, track emissions trends, identify the greatest sources of GHG emissions within their jurisdictions, and set targets for future reductions. Emissions contained within this memorandum include activities under the jurisdictional control or significant influence of the City of Santa Cruz, as recommended by the 1 California Air Resources Board. California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory. Accessed at:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/inventory.htm. Accessed on July 2019

26.306
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 2 ends

Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP) in preparing Community Protocol and CEQA-compliant inventories2
. The municipal operations inventory is a subset of the community-wide inventory, meaning the municipal emissions are included within the community-wide inventory.

GHG Emissions Goals (AB 32)
California’s major initiative for reducing GHG emissions is outlined in Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32), the “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” which was signed into law in 2006. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires California Air Resources Board (CARB) to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main state strategies for reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions.

Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG baseline and 2020 emissions limit of 427 million metric tons of CO2 equivalent (MMT CO2e). The Scoping Plan was approved by CARB on December 11, 2008 and included measures to address GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among other measures. Many of the GHG reduction measures included in the Scoping Plan (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Advanced Clean Car standards3
, and Cap-and-Trade) have been adopted since approval of the Scoping Plan.

In May 2014, CARB approved the first update to the AB 32 Scoping Plan. The 2014 Scoping Plan update defined CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years and set the groundwork to reach post2020 statewide goals. The update highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan. It also evaluated how to align the state’s longer-term GHG reduction strategies with other state policy priorities, including those for water, waste, natural resources, clean energy, transportation, and land use (CARB 2014).

On September 8, 2016, the governor signed Senate Bill SB 32 (SB 32) into law, extending AB 32 by requiring the state to further reduce GHGs to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). The bill charges CARB to adopt the regulation so that the maximum technologically feasible emissions reductions are achieved in the most cost-effective way.

The 2012 Climate Action Plan identified targets to reduce community-wide greenhouse gas emissions 30% by 2020 and 80% by 2050, compared to 1990 levels.4 The 2020 target is 172,508 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) and the 2050 is 49,288 MT CO2e. These targets are tracked using GHG inventories, which are reviewed below. Overall community GHG emissions have declined steadily since 2005, and the City achieved its 2020 target between 2015 and 2018. 2 Association of Environmental Professionals. 2013. The California Supplement to the United States Community-Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol.
3 On September 19, 2019 the National Highway Traffic Safety Agency (NHTSA) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final action entitled the One National Program on Federal Preemption of State Fuel Economy Standards Rule.

This action finalizes Part I of the Safer, Affordable, Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule. This rule states that federal law preempts State and local tailpipe greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards as well as zero emission vehicle (ZEV) mandates. The SAFE Rule withdraws the Clean Air Act waiver it granted to California in January 2013 as it relates to California’s GHG and zero emission vehicle programs. The Biden Administration’s Infrastructure Bill includes a focus on alternative fuels and technology for zero emission vehicles and supporting infrastructure, which could result in increased opportunities for Low Carbon Fuel Standard and zero emission vehicle infrastructure projects. 4 1990 levels were estimated using state guidance of assuming 1% annual emissions growth between 1990 and 2005.

26.307
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 3 ends

The Climate Action Plan 2030 update will determine the most equitable pathway to carbon neutrality and will set a target year and goal that meets or exceeds the targets set out by AB 32 and SB 32 as well as EO B-55-18. The update will also fulfill the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines § 15183.5(b).

GHG Emissions Inventory Consistency Review
Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) reviewed the City of Santa Cruz’s existing community and municipal inventories as part of the Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 development process to assess and verify the consistent application of appropriate methodologies defined by the by the Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI) U.S. Community Protocol as well as the correct emissions factors and inclusion of all appropriate emission sources. 5 This included a review of the activity data used and emissions calculated in the 2005, 2010, 2015, 2018 and 2019 Community Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventories and 2005, 2010, and 2015 Municipal GHG Emissions Inventories.

The City’s community inventories follow the ICLEI U.S. Community Protocol. The Community Protocol requires a minimum set of five Basic Emissions Generating Activities that must be included in all Protocol-compliant GHG inventory reports:

1. Use of Electricity by the Community

2. Use of Fuel in Residential and Commercial Stationary Combustion Equipment

3. On-Road Passenger and Freight Motor Vehicle Travel

4. Use of Energy in Potable Water and Wastewater Treatment and Distribution

5. Generation of Solid Waste by the Community.

The City’s community inventories include all required sectors listed above. The community inventories are divided into seven sectors, or sources of emissions: residential energy, commercial energy, industrial energy, transportation and mobile sources, solid waste, and water and wastewater. Each of the seven sectors is further categorized into sub-sectors (electricity and natural gas) to provide a more detailed understanding of emissions sources in the City of Santa Cruz.

The Municipal GHG inventories follow the ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol which categorizes direct and indirect emissions into scopes as follows:
 Scope 1: All direct GHG emissions (with the exception of direct carbon dioxide emissions from biogenic sources)
 Scope 2: Indirect GHG emissions associated with the consumption of purchased or acquired electricity, steam, heating, or cooling
 Scope 3: All other indirect emissions not covered in Scope 2, such as emissions resulting from the extraction and production of purchased materials and fuels, transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity (e.g., employee commuting and business travel), outsourced activities, waste disposal, etc.

The Local Government Operations Protocol requires that, at minimum, Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions be quantified. Quantification of Scope 3 emissions is optional. The City’s municipal inventories quantify both Scope 1 and 2 emissions. All of the City’s municipal inventories include emissions from buildings 5 Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI). 2019. U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available: <https://icleiusa.org/us-community-protocol/>. Accessed May 20, 2021.

26.308
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 4 ends

and facilities and streetlights and traffic signals, with most recent inventories including emissions from vehicle fleet and transit fleet.

Although detailed calculations were not available for each sector, changes in methodology between some inventory years were inferred based on the activity and emissions data provided. Activity data, calculated emissions, and emissions factors were checked for inconsistencies. The sections below provide a summary of the findings from the consistency review of the community and municipal GHG emissions inventories, including a review of activity data and calculated emissions for each sector, emissions factors, and recommended next steps. All emissions values are provided in MT CO2e.

Rincon’s review found that the inventories appear to be generally appropriate for the sectors evaluated.

Rincon finds that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Community Protocol and Local Government Operations Protocol. However, the comments and recommendations provided in the following sections are intended to provide an opportunity to improve transparency of the calculations and emissions factors being used and to confirm large changes in emissions between the inventory years.

Community GHG Inventory
Rincon has reviewed the City of Santa Cruz 2005, 2010, 2015, 2018, and 2019 community inventories, activity data, and calculated emissions on ClearPath (ICLEI’s online carbon accounting tool), to evaluate the consistency and accuracy of the data and the application of appropriate methodologies defined by the ICLEI U.S. Community Protocol. Rincon also calculated emissions factors based on the activity data and emissions provided to check that reasonable emissions factors are used, and confirmed the inclusion of all appropriate emissions sources. Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 detail the city’s community GHG emissions by sector, sub-sector, and total emissions for each of the inventory years.

These figures show a steady decrease in total community emissions over time. However, some sectors and sub-sectors show more drastic increases (e.g., commercial energy from 2018 to 2019) and decreases (e.g., transportation and mobile sources from 2018 to 2019). Given that significant changes would not be expected without some notable source, regulation, or infrastructure change, this analysis focuses on evaluating the sectors with substantial increases or decreases between inventory years.

Table 1 highlights these increases and decreases, and identifies potential inconsistencies in methodology found in the community inventories by sector and sub-sector. The table also provides the magnitude of changes found from one year to the next and identifies potential rationale for these changes. ICLEI will be conducting an emissions contribution analysis between 2005 and 2019 to identify the causes for emissions changes and the contribution from each factor. This analysis will be integrated into future deliverables for the Climate Action Plan 2030 project.

26.309
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 5 ends

Figure 1 City of Santa Cruz Community GHG Emissions by Sector (2005-2019) As shown in Figure 1 above, transportation accounts for the largest share of community emissions for each inventory year, followed by commercial and residential energy. Between the 2010 and 2015 inventories, both commercial and residential energy emissions appear to have decreased substantially, with commercial energy dropping lower than residential energy. Commercial energy shows an increase from 2018 to 2019. Industrial energy shows a stark decrease from 2005 to 2010 due to the inclusion of UC Santa Cruz emissions in 2005 and exclusion of these emissions in future inventory years. Solid waste and water and wastewater remain relatively constant, increasing slightly with time. Figure 2 below details sub-sector emissions for each of the community inventory years.

26.310
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 6 ends

Figure 2 City of Santa Cruz Community GHG Emissions by Sub-sector (2005-2019) Figure 2 shows the energy sectors (commercial, residential, and industrial) separated into electricity and natural gas emissions sources.6 Commercial natural gas emissions decrease substantially from 2010 to 2015, and increase slightly post 2015 while commercial electricity emissions decrease substantially post 2010. Similarly, residential natural gas emissions decrease from 2010 to 2015 and increase post 2015 while residential electricity emissions decrease over time. Industrial natural gas emissions show a slight increase from 2005 to 2015, and later decrease while industrial electricity emissions remain low throughout the years. These changes in emissions over the years are analyzed in Table 1 below. 6 The industrial energy (black) line represents UC Santa Cruz, which was reported in 2005 alone. No activity data was provided; therefore it is unclear whether this is natural gas, electricity, or both.

26.311
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 7 ends

Figure 3 City of Santa Cruz Total Community GHG Emissions by Year (2005-2019) Based on the City’s completed community GHG inventories, total community emissions appear to have decreased over time. The City’s emissions dropped approximately 10% from 2005 to 2010, 26% from 2010 to 2015, 19% from 2015 to 2018, and 9% from 2018 to 2019. The City exceeded its 2020 target (245,925 MT CO2e) in 2015. To reach its 2050 target of 70,264 MT CO2e, the City must reduce 2019 emissions by approximately 50%. Changes in emissions over the inventory years are analyzed in Table 1 below, which describes changes in emissions at the sector and sub-sector level and details inconsistencies, magnitude, and potential rationale for these changes.

26.312
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 8 ends

Table 1 Community GHG Inventory Consistency Review
Sector Sub-sector Sector Change Inconsistencies Rationale/Notes Commercial
Energy
Commercial
Natural Gas
57% emissions
reduction from
2010 to 2015
▪ No “Non-Government Climate Smart Natural Gas
Reduction” for 2015.
▪ 24% emissions reduction in City Natural Gas from
2010 to 2015.
▪ 35% emissions reduction in District Natural Gas
from 2010 to 2015.
▪ 59% emissions reduction in Non-Government
Natural Gas from 2010 to 2015.

This reduction in natural gas GHG
emissions is greater than would be
anticipated to occur from efficiency
measures and state legislation. This
could be caused by a large
company/companies leaving Santa Cruz
or ceasing operation in the city, missing
data, or a large company/companies
being left out of the inventory due to the
EDRP 15/20 rule.1 It is recommended
that the City double check PG&E data to
ensure no missing data.
“Non-Government Climate Smart
Natural Gas Reduction” refers to a PG&E
program related to reducing natural gas
use that only occurred in 2010.

Residential Energy Residential
Electricity
93% emissions
decrease from
2018 to 2019
Residential electricity emissions are broken out into
emissions from Central Coast Community Energy
emissions and Pacific Gas & Electric emissions since
these providers have different emissions factors.
▪ 164% emissions increase in Residential Electricity
provided by Central Coast Community Energy –
3CE from 2018 to 2019.
▪ Unable to verify the 3CE emissions factor (unclear
what the opt-out rate is and if that is included).
▪ 95% emissions decrease in Non-Government
Electricity provided by PG&E electricity from 2018
to 2019.

Noted large shift from PG&E to 3CE from
2018 to 2019. Need confirmation that
the substantial increase in 3CE electricity
is based on a large switch of residential
accounts to 3CE, the local CCA, from
2018 to 2019.

Calculated PG&E 2018 and 2019
emissions factor appear reasonable
compared to published data (.000943 MT
CO2e/kWh in the inventory vs 206 lbs
CO2/MWh or .000934 MT CO2e/kWh
published).21
Unable to verify 3CE emissions factors
because they are not published. The data
does not indicate the opt-out rate or if
the opt-out emissions are included in the
reported activity data.

26.313
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 9 ends

Sector Sub-sector Sector Change Inconsistencies Rationale/Notes Commercial
Energy
Commercial
Electricity
74% emissions
decrease from
2018 to 2019
Commercial electricity emissions are broken out into
emissions from Central Coast Community Energy
emissions and Pacific Gas & Electric emissions since
these sources have different emissions factors.
▪ 27% emissions increase in Commercial Electricity
provided by 3CE from 2018 to 2019.
▪ Unable to verify the 3CE emissions factor (unclear
what the opt-out rate is and if that is included).
▪ 99.98% decrease in Commercial Electricity
provided by PG&E electricity use (kWh) and
emissions from 2018 to 2019.

Noted large shift from PG&E to 3CE from
2018 to 2019. Need confirmation that
the substantial decrease in emissions is
based on a reduced emission factor
resulting from the switch of commercial
accounts to 3CE from 2018 to 2019.

Calculated PG&E 2018 and 2019
emissions factor look reasonable
compared to published data (.000943 MT
CO2e/kWh in the inventory vs 206 lbs
CO2/MWh or .000934 MT CO2e/kWh
published).2
Unable to verify 3CE emissions factors
because they are not published. The data
does not indicate the opt-out rate or if
the opt-out emissions are included in the
reported activity data.

Industrial Energy Industrial Energy 90% emissions
decrease from
2005 to 2010
N/A Only UC Santa Cruz was included in 2005
and no activity data are provided, just
emissions data. UC Santa Cruz is not
included in 2010. This accounts for the
full 90% reduction in emissions and is an
inconsistency between 2005 and 2010.
56% emissions
increase from 2010
to 2015
N/A UC Santa Cruz industrial data not
included in 2010 or 2015 because it
failed the 15/15 rule which requires that
any aggregated information provided by
utilities be made up of at least 15
customers, and a customer’s load must
be less than 15% of an assigned category.

For all other industrial data reported, in
2010, only natural gas data provided, and
in 2015, both natural gas and electricity
data provided. This is an inconsistency in
data between 2010 and 2015.

26.314
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 10 ends

Sector Sub-sector Sector Change Inconsistencies Rationale/Notes Industrial Energy Industrial Energy 97% emissions
decrease from
2015 to 2018
N/A UC Santa Cruz not included in 2015,
2018, or 2019.

For all other industrial data reported, in
2018, only electricity data are provided
and in 2019, only natural gas data are
provided. This is an inconsistency in data
between 2015 and 2018.

Transportation &
Mobile Sources
Transportation &
Mobile Sources
15% emissions
decrease from
2018 to 2019
EMFAC3 data shows increasing population and VMT in
the County, however, the City’s 2019 Community
Inventory shows a decrease in transportation
emissions. Rincon is unable to confirm the VMT
calculations with data provided in ClearPath.

Unable to determine the cause without
more detailed calculations data.

However, the decrease appears to be
greater than the expected decrease from
emissions factor reductions alone.

Calculation workbooks needed to
confirm methodology.

Water and
Wastewater
Water and
Wastewater
No change in
emissions from
2018 to 2019
N/A The wastewater treatment facility only
produces an internal inventory every two
years. They produced one for 2018, did
not do one for 2019, and will do one for
2020. The 2020 inventory will be started
July 2021. 2018 values are used as
placeholders for 2019. This presents a
consistency issue and is likely to underestimate emissions. It is recommended that the City scale up these emissions for
2019 based on population growth.

Solid Waste - - None No inconsistencies found.

Note: MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent; kWh = kilowatt hours; lbs = pounds; MWh = megawatt hours; CCA = community choice aggregation 1 California Public Utilities Commissions (CPUC) aggregation rules are intended to protect customer confidentiality by reducing the possibility of identifying customers through the release of consumption information. Residential, Commercial Consumption Data 15/20 Rule: Aggregated over a group consisting of 15 customers in a single customer class. No single customer accounts for more than 20 percent of the total energy consumption in an individual month. 2 Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). 2020. Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability Report 2020. Available:
<https://www.pgecorp.com/corp_responsibility/reports/2020/assets/PGE_CRSR_2020.pdf>. Accessed May 20, 2021. 3 The community inventories use VMT data from the California Air Resources Board EMFAC model, which is based on the vehicle class, model years, speed, and fuel type.

26.315
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 11 ends

As part of the GHG emissions inventory consistency review, emissions factors were calculated by dividing the provided emissions by the activity data. Back calculating the emissions factors helps to reveal potential errors in emissions factors used and any inconsistencies over the years. The average emissions factor used in each sector for each inventory year is provided in Table 2.

Table 2 Community GHG Inventory Emissions Factors (2005-2019) Sector 2005 2010 2015 2018 2019
Commercial Energy – Electricity 0.0002236 0.0002034 0.0001844 0.0000499 0.0000040 Commercial Energy– Natural Gas 0.0053186 0.0053186 0.0053187 0.0053187 0.0053187 Industrial Energy– Electricity1 N/A N/A 0.0001844 0.0000944 N/A Industrial Energy– Natural Gas2 N/A 0.0053075 0.0053074 N/A 0.0053074 Residential Energy– Electricity 0.0002236 0.0002034 0.0001844 0.0000647 0.0000038 Residential Energy– Natural Gas 0.0053186 0.0053186 0.0053186 0.0053187 0.0053187 Solid Waste 0.3105317 0.2775465 0.2743429 0.2861037 0.2861037 Transportation & Mobile Sources 0.0008259 0.0008146 0.0004625 0.0004167 0.0004049 Water & Wastewater 0.3804373 0.2536434 0.2536407 0.2536426 0.2536426 Notes:
1 Industrial electricity is not reported for 2005, 2010, or 2019. 2 Industrial natural gas is not reported for 2005 or 2018.

All electricity emissions factors decrease substantially from 2018 onward as a result of CCA enrollment in the community, while natural gas emissions factors stay constant across the years, as expected. Solid waste average emissions factors decrease and then increase again through 2018 and 2019. It is unclear what the data sources are and how these emissions factors were calculated at this time and although the change is relatively small, it is unclear why this change occurred. Rincon recommends taking a deeper look at the methodology behind these calculations. The average transportation emissions factor decreased approximately 46% from 2010 to 2015, which can be attributed to the change in methodology used to calculate these emissions between the two years. Prior to 2015, transportation emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2001 model. After 2015, these emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2014 and EMFAC2017 model updates. Lastly, water and wastewater average emissions factors decreased approximately 33% from 2005 to 2010, and remained constant post 2010. This is likely due to electricity emissions factor decreasing even as process emissions increased due to population growth.

Recommended Next Steps
Rincon’s review found that the community inventories appear to be generally appropriate for the sectors evaluated. Rincon finds that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Community Protocol. However, the following comments and recommendations are intended to provide an opportunity to improve transparency of the calculations and emissions factors being used and to confirm large changes in emissions between the inventory years. Based on the Community GHG Inventory Consistency Review above, Rincon recommends the following:

26.316
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 12 ends

 Commercial Energy
 Review data from Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to confirm there is no missing data that could be causing the 57% reduction in emissions from the commercial natural gas sub-sector between 2010 and 2015.
 Confirm large shift from PG&E to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE)-provided commercial electricity from 2018 to 2019.
 Request emissions factors and opt-out rates from 3CE to verify electricity inventory results.  Residential Energy
 Confirm large shift from PG&E to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE)-provided residential electricity from 2018 to 2019.
 Request emissions factors and opt-out rates from 3CE to verify electricity inventory results.  Industrial Energy
 The California Air Resource Board (CARB) regulates the GHG emissions associated with industrial stationary combustion through the California Cap-and-Trade Program; therefore, it is recommended that all industrial emission sources be excluded from the community GHG inventories. If the City chooses to keep industrial in the inventories, it is recommended that UC Santa Cruz emissions be either included or excluded for all years, for consistency.  Water and Wastewater
 Rather than using 2018 as a proxy for 2019 wastewater treatment emissions, it is recommended that the City scale up these emissions for 2019 based on population growth by calculating the average emissions per person in previous years and applying it to the 2019 population.  Solid Waste
 Review methodology for calculating solid waste emissions factors to determine why emissions factors decrease and then increase again through 2018 and 2019.

Municipal GHG Inventory
The City of Santa Cruz has completed three municipal inventories: 2005, 2010, and 2015. All of the City’s municipal inventories include emissions from buildings and facilities and streetlights and traffic signals, with the 2010 inventory including emissions from transit fleet and the 2015 inventory including emissions from vehicle fleet and transit fleet. Similar to the community inventories, the municipal inventories also detail sources within the main sectors, separating energy into natural gas and electricity. Rincon conducted a review of the available activity data and calculated emissions to confirm the consistent application of appropriate methodologies defined by the ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol.7 In addition, emissions factors were back calculated using the provided activity data and estimated emissions. This analysis identifies potential methodological changes between years that can be further investigated. Figure 4 and Figure 5 detail the City’s municipal GHG emissions by sector and sub-sector. Figure 6, includes total emissions for each of the inventory years, showing that GHG emissions steadily increase from 2005 to 2015. The largest contributing factor to the increase is the omission of the Transit Fleet or Vehicle Fleet emissions from the 2005 inventory and the omission of Vehicle Fleet emissions from the 2010 inventory. The 2015 municipal GHG inventory includes all sectors 7 Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI). 2010. Local Government Operations Protocol. Available:
<https://s3.amazonaws.com/icleiusaresources/lgo_protocol_v1_1_2010-05-03.pdf>. Accessed May 20, 2021.

26.317
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 13 ends

provided in the previous inventories, including Transit Fleet and Vehicle Fleet emissions. When Transit Fleet and Vehicle Fleet emissions are omitted from all years, municipal emissions decrease over time, as shown in Figure 7. Table 3 highlights large changes in emissions between the inventory years and inconsistencies by sector and sub-sector. The table provides the magnitude of changes found from one year to the next and provides potential rationale for these changes.

Figure 4 City of Santa Cruz Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector (2005-2015) As shown in Figure 4 above, water and wastewater treatment accounts for the largest share of municipal emissions for each inventory year, followed by vehicle and transit fleet. All sectors with data for multiple inventory years showed a decrease in emissions over time. Figure 5 details sub-sector emissions for each of the municipal inventory years.

26.318
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 14 ends

Figure 5 City of Santa Cruz Municipal GHG Emissions by Sub-sector (2005-2015) Figure 5 shows the energy-related sectors (buildings & facilities and water & wastewater treatment) separated into electricity and natural gas emissions sources. Water and wastewater treatment natural gas emissions decreased dramatically from 2005 to 2010 and increased from 2010 to 2015, while water and wastewater treatment electricity emissions increased from 2005 to 2010 and decreased from 2010 to 2015. These changes in municipal emissions are analyzed in Table 1 below.

26.319
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 15 ends

Figure 6 City of Santa Cruz Total Municipal GHG Emissions by Year Figure 7 City of Santa Cruz Total Municipal GHG Emissions by Year (Excluding Fleet and Transit)

26.320
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 16 ends

Based on the City’s completed municipal GHG inventories, total municipal emissions show a 21% increase from 2005 to 2015 (Figure 6). This increase is due to the inconsistencies in emissions reported.

Vehicle fleet emissions were omitted from the 2005 or 2010 inventories and transit fleet emissions were omitted in the 2005 inventory. When vehicle and transit fleet emissions are removed from the 2010 and 2015 inventories, the data show a 36% decrease in municipal emissions from 2005 to 2015 (Figure 7).

Changes in emissions over the inventory years are analyzed in Table 1 below. The table describes changes in emissions at the sector and sub-sector level, when applicable, and details inconsistencies and potential rationale for these changes.

Table 3 Municipal GHG Inventory Consistency Review
Sector Sub-sector Sector Change Inconsistencies/Rationale Vehicle Fleet N/A Not included in 2005 or 2010
inventories. ▪ May be able to back-cast to 2005 based on staffing or some other record for a more
consistent inventory.

Transit Fleet N/A Not included in 2005
inventories. ▪ May be able to back cast to 2005 for a more consistent inventory.

Water &
Wastewater
Treatment
Water &
Wastewater
Treatment
32% emissions decrease from
2005 to 2010.
▪ 62% emissions decrease in natural gas
associated with water and wastewater
treatment between 2005 and 2010. This
decrease is greater than anticipated from
efficiency measures alone and should be
checked with the Water Department and
other relevant City Departments, to
determine the source of the decrease.
▪ Natural Gas emissions from Water Delivery
Pumps- are not included in the 2010
inventory; however, this is only a relatively
small portion of total emissions from the
sector amounting to about 1 to 5 MT CO2e.
▪ 42% emissions increase in electricity
associated with water and wastewater
treatment between 2005 and 2010. This
increase should be checked with the Water
Department and other relevant City
Departments, to determine what caused this
increase in electricity emissions between
2005 and 2010.
▪ 64% emissions decrease in natural gas from
Wastewater DGS Natural Gas from 2005 to
2010. This decrease is greater than
anticipated from efficiency measures alone
and should be checked with the Public Works
Department, to determine the source of the
decrease.

Water &
Wastewater
Treatment –
Electricity
32% emissions decrease from
2005 to 2010. ▪ Associated with electricity emission factors and cleaning up of grid.

26.321
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 17 ends

As previously described, emissions factors were back calculated by dividing the provided emissions by the activity data. Back calculating the emissions factors helps to reveal potential errors in emissions factors used and any inconsistencies over the years. The average emissions factor used in each sector for each municipal inventory year is provided in Table 4.

Table 4 Municipal GHG Inventory Emissions Factors
Sector 2005 2010 2015
Buildings & Facilities – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Buildings & Facilities – Natural Gas 0.0096647 0.0053156 0.0053175 Streetlights & Traffic Signals – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Transit Fleet N/A 0.0047475 0.0049560
Vehicle Fleet N/A N/A 0.0089415
Water & Wastewater Treatment – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Water & Wastewater Treatment – Natural Gas 0.0053156 0.0053156 0.0053175 Notes:
1 Transit Fleet is not reported for 2005.
2 Vehicle Fleet is not reported for 2005 or 2010.

As expected, all electricity emissions factors decrease slightly over time, likely as a result of the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, established in 2002 by Senate Bill 1078, which mandated that 20% of electricity retail sales must be served by renewable resources by 2017.8 In 2015, California’s energy mix was approximately 22% renewable.9 Increasing renewable energy statewide decreases electricity emissions factors. All natural gas emissions factors stay constant across the years, with exception of Buildings & Facilities – Natural Gas. Upon further investigation, it seems the activity data for Inventory Record “Fire-Natural Gas” was incorrectly reported for 2005 in ClearPath as MMBtu rather than therms.

Recommended Next Steps
Rincon’s review found that the municipal inventories appear to be generally appropriate for the sectors evaluated. Rincon finds that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Local Government Operations Protocol. However, the following comments and recommendations are intended to provide an opportunity to improve transparency of the calculations being used and to confirm large changes in emissions between the inventory years. Based on the Municipal GHG Inventory Consistency Review above, Rincon recommends the following:
 Buildings – Natural Gas
 Confirm and update the activity data in 2005 for Inventory Record: “Fire-Natural Gas” from MMBtu to therms.
8 In 2018, Senate Bill 100 increased the RPS to 60% by 2030 and requires all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045. 9 California Energy Commission. N.d. 2015 Total System Electric Generation. Available: < https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electricgeneration/2015>. Accessed June 14, 2021.

26.322
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 18 ends

 Vehicle and Transit Fleet
 Consider back casting emissions to 2005 for a more consistent inventory.  Water and Wastewater
 Coordinate with the Water Department and other relevant City Departments, to determine what changed between 2005 and 2010 to cause a large decrease in emissions.

Emissions Contribution Analysis
ICLEI will be producing an emission contribution analysis to further evaluate the causes of the observed trends in greenhouse gas emissions.

Progress on the 2012 Climate Action Plan
Milestone Indicators + Actions
The City’s 2012 Climate Action Plan set out 12 milestones measured by 13 indicators, each with targets to achieve by 2020 from a baseline year of 2008. Data were not available for all years for all indicators, and, in some cases, data sources changed between years. Moreover, due the lag in or unavailability of 2020 data for some indicators as well as the fact that 2020 represents an anomaly year in terms of emission output, 2019 data were utilized in most cases (and as noted). The City did not track progress on sub-milestones contained in the Plan. Below is a summary of the level of achievement for each milestone and major efforts or conditions that likely contributed toward or impeded progress.

The Climate Action Plan also contains an Appendix of Actions, which includes 256 actions to be completed by 2020 to help achieve each milestone. As of April 2021, out of the 256 actions, 103 actions have been completed and 84 are either ongoing or in progress. Attachment 1 provides a tabular 2021 status summary of each action.

Milestone 1 - Reduce Energy Use in Municipal Buildings by 40% by 2020.

Indicator 1.1 - Municipal energy use in buildings and facilities only - includes buildings, facilities (including wastewater but not water transport or streetlights). 2020 Target – 46,532 MMBtu of Energy Use
2020 Value - 49,406 MMBtu of Energy Use
Progress toward Target– Reduced energy use in municipal buildings by 36.3% between 2008 to 2020 (91% achievement of target) but saw an increase of 6.5% between 2008 and 2019. 2019 was a more typical year for energy use than 2020 due to the covid-19 pandemic, however. Major efforts contributing to progress include the hire of an energy coordinator, several rounds of no to low cost state funding to implement major energy efficiency projects at City facilities, and bringing online methane cogeneration to electricity at the Wastewater Treatment Facility and approximately 1.6 MW of solar PV at municipal facilities.

Milestone 2 - Expand energy efficiency programs to 30% of homes and businesses by 2020.

Indicator 2.1 – Number of household and business buildings participating in the Green Building Program and received service from Central Coast Energy Services, an energy efficiency provider to low income households.

26.323
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 19 ends

2020 Target – 8,912 Households and Business Buildings
2020 Value – 2,234 Households and Business Buildings
Progress toward Target - Expanded energy efficiency programs to 7.5% of homes and businesses between 2008 and 2020 (25% achievement of target). Major efforts contributing to progress include implementation and revision of requirements of the Green Building program and the growth of Central Coast Energy Services and the funding it manages to provide weatherization services to households in Santa Cruz. While data are unavailable for this indicator metric, it is widely acknowledged that roll out of the State Energy Upgrade California program targeted to residential households did not meet expectations and had very little uptake in Santa Cruz due primarily to program design. There are likely other energy efficiency programs that were implemented during the CAP 2020 performance period but were not tracked (e.g., Green Business Program upgrades, Ecology Action’s former Right Lights program).

Milestone 3 – Increase solar to 5,000 residents, 500 businesses and supply municipal buildings with 33% solar energy by 2020.

Indicator 3.1 – Number of household solar photovoltaics 2020 Target – 5,000 household solar photovoltaics
2020 Value – 3,567 household solar photovoltaics
Progress toward Target– Increased solar to 3,567 residents (71% achievement of target). Drivers of progress included state of California rebates, advantageous utility rates, and the federal Investment Tax Credit available throughout the majority of the CAP 2020 performance period. The City provided streamlined solar PV permitting. In 2019, the state required PV on all new homes. Progress may have been impeded by pricing and availability of PV components in recent years as well as anticipated changes to advantageous utility rates for solar PV.

Indicator 3.2 – Number of commercial business solar photovoltaics 2020 Target – 500 commercial business solar photovoltaics 2020 Value – 116 commercial solar photovoltaics
Progress toward Target– Increased solar to 116 commercial businesses (23% achievement of target).

Drivers of progress included state of California rebates, advantageous utility rates, and the federal Investment Tax Credit available throughout the majority of the CAP 2020 performance period. The City provided streamlined solar PV permitting and a one-time technical assistance project for 3 commercial property owners. Progress may have been impeded by commercial property owners’ lack of expertise and capacity to evaluate solar PV, pricing and availability of PV components in recent years as well as anticipated changes to advantageous utility rates for solar PV.

Indicator 3.3 – Renewable energy generation compared with overall electricity consumption by municipal buildings
2020 Target – 33% renewable energy generation
2020 Value – 37% renewable energy generation
Progress toward Target– Increased renewable energy generation by 37% (112% achievement of target).

Drivers of progress included funding Power Purchase Agreements and ownership models to install 1.6 MW of solar PV at City facilities and optimizing use of cogeneration at the Wastewater Treatment Facility. Hire of an energy coordinator and, more recently, the services of an Energy Services Company, enabled rapid evaluation and packaging of many systems installed.

26.324
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 20 ends

Milestone 4 - Partner with UCSC on 25 sustainability and alternative energy research projects by 2020.

Indicator 4.1 – Number of projects and completed
2020 Target – 25 projects
2020 Value – 32 projects
Progress toward Target – Partnered with UCSC on 25 sustainability and alternative energy research projects between 2011 and 2020, by conservative estimate (120% achievement of target). Many of these projects are ongoing or multiple year initiatives. The Climate Action Program likely tracks only a portion of UCSC X City sustainability collaborations. However, strong ties on climate and climate related topics exist that enabled achievement of this target. Some projects implemented during the CAP 2020 performance period include:
 GreenWharf renewable energy testbed
 Bike route quality index
 Kudela Lab LED monitor display at Wharf HQ
 Kudela Lab SCOOP research
 GreenWharf EV charging station
 GreenWharf EcoTour - self guided app/ docent guided
 GreenWharf Green Business Challenge
 Residential solar workshop for students and employees  IDEASS Bike counter technology study
 IDEASS Bike commute workshops for businesses (including City)  IDEASS parking space availability survey along Rail Trail  GreenWharf renewable energy testbed wildlifestudy
 GreenWharf lighting retrofit
 GreenWharf Sanctuary Celebration Event
 Commercial solar PV technical assistance
 GreenWharf solar streetlamp pilot
 UCSC Stakeholder meetings for Wharf Master Plan
 Kudela Lab/Exploratorium Water Quality Exhibit at GreenWharf  IDEASS/City grant and design of stormwater infrastructure improvements at Bayview School  GreenWharf renewable energy testbed dashboard
 CISR/City tree canopy study
 UC Natural Reserves Tree Planting
 ENVS interns / Doris Duke Conservation Scholar Interns  Climate Action Task Force participation
 Grid Alternatives Low Income Solar PV
 Volkswagen EV investment coordination
 UC Natural Reserves Tree Planting
 Climate Adaptation Coastal Science and Policy annual collaborations  Panelist at UC Climate Conference
 Co-instructor of UCSC Staff Sustainability Certificate Courses  Move out waste reduction program
 On campus resource recovery education
Milestone 5 - Ensure the rail corridor supports bike and pedestrian use by 2020 and support establishment of future rail service.

Indicator 5.1 – Percentage of bike path constructed and/or being funded for construction in City limits

26.325
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 21 ends

2020 Target – 100% of bike path constructed and/or funded for construction 2020 Value – 35% of bike path completed and 89% of remaining bike path funded Progress toward Target – Completed 35% of the City’s bike path and secured funding for 89% of bike path. Substantial progress with this milestone is attributable to regional alignment and coordination on this initiative, hiring a transportation planner and aggressive pursuit of funding opportunities by the Transportation Division of the Public Works Department.

Milestone 6 - Maximize water conservation efforts to achieve the goals recommended by the Water Supply Advisory Committee and accepted by the Council and to meet state mandates.

There is no target related to this indicator
Progress toward Target– Reduced residential per capita water use by 22% between 2013 and 2020. The City’s Water Conservation Master Plan adopted in January 2017 describes the historical water conservation programs contributing to progress on this milestone. The Urban Water Management Plan update will be complete by end of year that will summarize water conservation activities since 2017.

There is no target related to this indicator.

Milestone 7 - Achieve 75% total waste diversion and maximize organic waste diversion by 2020.

Indicator 7.1 – Total waste diversion rate
2020 Target – 75% waste diversion rate
2020 Value – 63% waste diversion rate
Progress toward Target – Increased to 63% total waste diversion (83.4% of target) between 2008 and 2020 (with a high of approximately 69.9% in 2013). Progress on this milestone was driven by state mandates, local policy, and increased outreach and education. Progress was impeded by the China National Sword policy, the limitations in expanding infrastructure and conducting sufficient outreach, and increased waste generation from illegal encampments and online ordering. Major projects include the installation of food waste processing systems at the landfill, launch of residential and commercial food scrap collection pilots, and expanded education such as the launch of a “What Goes Where App.” Milestone 8 - Increase bike ridership to 12% of local commutes by 2020 (stretch goal after initial achievement of original goal of 10%).

Indicator 8.1 – Bike mode split
2020 Target – 12% bike mode split
2020 Value– 7.6% bike mode split (high of 10.2% in 2018) Progress toward Target – Decreased bike ridership by 1.7%. Staff noted that there are questions about the validity of the 2019 data and the City should revisit this value when the 2020 data become available.

Progress on this milestone included hiring a transportation planner, aggressive pursuit of funding, integrated design of bike lanes and other bike friendly infrastructure, launch of a bike share, construction of several segments of the Rail Trail, Street Smarts - a successful bilingual multi-media outreach campaign - along with other education and encouragement activities, and the GO Santa Cruz transportation initiative to promote transit, active transportation and carpooling. Departure of the bike share during the covid-19 pandemic and the challenge of improving bike infrastructure within the right of way made progress challenging.

Milestone 9 - Switch 20% of cars to low-carbon fuels by 2020.

Indicator 9.1 –DMV registered low-carbon fuel cars
2020 Target – 12,675 low carbon cars

26.326
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 22 ends

2020 Value – 6,826 low carbon cars
Progress toward Target Indicator 9.1 – Switched 11% of cars to low-carbon fuels between 2013 and 2020 (achievement of 54% of target). While progress may appear low in this milestone, Santa Cruz is second only to San Jose in the number of new vehicle purchases that are electric. Federal, state and local incentives (Monterey Bay Air Resources District, CAL VIP, and Central Coast Community Energy) were leveraged to both procure electric vehicles (EVs), upgrade electrical infrastructure, and install EV chargers in fleet and public spaces. Other drivers of progress include the strong environmental ethic and relative affluence of Santa Cruz residents and growth of EV charging as a private business model. Higher costs and range anxiety continue to be impediments to accelerated adoption.

Milestone 10 - Retain 200 certified Santa Cruz Green Businesses within the City through 2020.

Indicator 10.1 – Number of certified green businesses
2020 Target – 200 certified green businesses
2020 Value – 197 certified green businesses
Progress toward Target – Retained 197 certified green businesses between 2012 and 2020 (achievement of 99% of target). Accelerators of progress included strong environmental ethic of businesses, relationship building and partnership with Ecology Action, business recognition by City Council and mayor, targeted business district campaigns, green business transition grants provided by City’s carbon fund, technical support and the coordination provided by the California Green Business Network on initiatives like the Shop Green App and the Green Business Database. Progress was impeded by the covid-19 pandemic, employee turnover, strengthened measure requirements and insufficient technical assistance for businesses.

Milestone 11 - Maintain and increase the City’s urban tree canopy by 10%.

Indicator 11.1 – Acreage of the urban tree canopy
2020 Target – 10% increase in urban tree canopy (from 38.2% tree canopy to 42%) 2020 Achieved – 2% increase in urban tree canopy
Progress toward Target – Increased tree canopy by 2% between 2009 and 2016 (50% achievement of target), the only year data are available. Several efforts were identified as drivers of progress on this milestone including close collaboration between departments, community groups and utilities to craft policy, secure grants and identify volunteer resources. Progress on this milestone was impeded by limited available space and conditions in urban paved areas for trees and capacity. Major projects contributing to progress include recent CalFIRE grant funded planting of 500 trees, adoption of a Street Trees Plan, ongoing annual planting of about 200 trees including many with community groups and one typically tied into Arbor Day. The Urban Forester continues to provide education and outreach through tree walking tours and other community events.

Milestone 12 - Reduce single occupancy vehicle commutes 10% by 2020.

Indicator 12.1 – Drive alone mode split
2020 Target – 55.6% drive alone mode split
2020 Value – 58.7% drive alone mode split (low of 56.5% in 2016) Progress toward Target– Reduced single occupancy vehicle commutes by 5% between 2009 and 2020 (50% achievement of the target). Progress on this milestone was driven by an approach of “meeting people where they are with many options,” launching the Rail Trail segments, Go Santa Cruz and My511 commute platform. Changes in remote and flexible work policy due to covid-19 pandemic also played a major role in progress.

26.327
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 23 ends

Activity-Based vs. Consumption-Based Inventories
Talk about why the City is investigating different inventory types (accuracy but recognition of resource limitations). After the passage of Assembly Bill 32, which established a mandated state target for reduction of GHG emissions, many cities and counties across the state started inventorying their GHG emissions at the community scale. Developing GHG inventories helps cities and counties to identify opportunities to reduce emissions, and track emissions reductions over time. Generally, there are four main methodologies used for developing community GHG inventories, each of which tracks and assigns responsibility for emissions in different ways:
 Production Based Emissions Inventory (PBEI) accounts for emissions that are generated within the subject jurisdiction and includes emissions for products or services produced locally that will be consumed outside of the community. PBEI approaches assign responsibility for emissions to the producer. PBEIs are generally completed on the national level.  Activity-Based Emissions Inventory (ABEI) blends production-based emissions estimates with partial consumption-based approaches for specific sectors for which emissions commonly occur outside of the subject community, such as electricity generation or wastewater treatment. The City of Santa Cruz uses the ABEI method.
 Consumption-Based Emissions Inventory (CBEI) assigns full responsibility to the end consumer for all lifecycle emissions for goods or services consumed. In consumption-based approaches, household consumption is the primary driver of emissions. The other emissions sources considered for a community-wide consumption inventory are government consumption and business investments in capital and net inventory increase. Consumption-based inventories provide a more global approach to emissions accounting by including lifecycle emissions of consumed goods and services.
 Lifecycle Emissions Inventory includes all upstream emissions of production including embedded emissions in inputs, manufacturing emissions, transport emissions for moving goods to market, use emissions, and final disposal emissions. This is most commonly used for single consumer products, rather than on the city or county scale. Lifecycle inventories help to identify hot spots along the life cycle of a product, material, or service where emissions are large.

Most municipalities in California, including the City of Santa Cruz, currently use the ABEI method for completing their community GHG inventories, however, CBEIs are emerging as an additional tool to use in climate action planning because they can provide a more complete analysis of how a region contributes to global climate change. The key differences between the ABEI and CBEI approaches are summarized in Table 6.

26.328
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 24 ends

Table 6 Key Differences Between ABEI and CBEI Approaches Subject ABEI CBEI
Emissions Covered Emissions produced in jurisdiction and next upstream or downstream emissions for
certain sectors
Life-cycle emissions associated with
generation, transport, and consumption
Allocation Producer and consumer Consumer
Mitigation Focus Jurisdictional activities Jurisdiction consumption Comparability Consistent with state inventory approach Not consistent with state inventory approach Complexity Low-Moderate High
Transparency High Low
Uncertainty Low High
Current Coverage Most current community and municipal
inventories follow this approach
Not in common use and in few U.S. cities to
date
Source: Association of Environmental Professionals, California Chapter, Climate Change Committee. 2017. Production, Consumption and Lifecycle Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Implications for CEQA and Climate Action Plans. Available at:
<https://califaep.org/docs/Draft_AEP_White_Paper_Lifecycle_CEQA_CAPs_082017.pdf>. Accessed June 3, 2021.

The following subsections describe the community GHG emissions inventory trends in climate practice and advantages and disadvantages associated with activity-based and consumption-based emissions inventories.

Trend in Climate Practice
Climate action plans originally used the PBEI approach, consistent with those developed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for national greenhouse gas accounting. However, over time municipalities in California have supplemented their community GHG inventory approach by including activity-based emissions (i.e., electricity use, transportation, waste disposal, and water and wastewater processing) rather than solely production-based. These ABEIs are currently the most commonly used approach at the local and state level in California. Although these inventories do not capture lifecycle emissions of products, the data they require are readily available, and they focus on emissions that municipalities have the most control over.

The CBEI approach was developed over the last decade. This method assigns responsibility to the final consumer for all lifecycle GHG emissions associated with consumed goods and services. Unlike ABEIs, this method accounts for the emissions produced around the world due to local consumption of energy, goods, and services. CBEI has gained some support since its development, for capturing embedded emissions in consumer goods and services, and some CBEIs have been prepared in the United States including in San Francisco, Oakland, Portland/Multnomah, and Seattle. Regulating consumption offers a wider range of opportunities for reducing GHG emissions and can provide a new way of engaging residents in climate action.

Advantages and Disadvantages
There are benefits and costs associated with each GHG inventory method. The advantages and disadvantages of the ABEI and CBEI methods are analyzed below.

26.329
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 25 ends

Reliability of Data
ABEIs use local data including energy use in residential and commercial buildings, solid waste generated, on-road vehicle travel, and energy use in potable water and wastewater treatment and distribution.

These data are readily available, for example, through utility providers and local transportation planning efforts. CBEIs require local consumption data that can be difficult to obtain. In addition, there is great complexity in the number of goods and services consumed in a community. To produce a CBEI, a combination of data types is typically used, including regional economic consumption data, as well as state, national and sometimes international life cycle emissions factors. Local data are less commonly used to develop CBEIs compared to ABEI approaches, which may lead to less accurate emissions estimates at the local level.

Establishing Community Emissions Goals and Reduction Measures In California, State GHG reduction targets set by Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (2006) and Senate Bill (SB) 32 (2016), are tied to production-based emissions inventories. Local climate action plans (CAPs) are required to demonstrate consistency with the State’s targets, and the ABEI approach allows local CAPs to track progress towards, and compliance with, AB 32 and SB 32 reductions targets. ABEI is a wellestablished methodology with accepted protocols outlined in the 2019 Community Protocol Version 1.2 and related sector-specific appendices. For each sector, PBEI or ABEI are the recommended approaches.

Section 1.5 “GHG Accounting and Reporting Principles”, of the 2019 Community Protocol details that the developed methodologies enable meaningful analysis of trends within a community over time, and comparison between communities, and rely on consistent, readily available, and quality data.

Continuing use of ABEI approaches maintains this consistency and comparability required to measure relative emissions and progress towards State emissions reduction targets. Because the State does not currently have a CBEI, it is not possible to accurately track progress towards and demonstrate consistency with State targets solely using a CBEI.

CBEIs, which focus on the embodied emissions of goods and services, are less likely to be useful for establishing emissions reductions measures at the local level than ABEIs. Corporations and individuals have direct control over purchasing decisions and state and federal governments traditionally regulate product and material standards, not local governments. Due to these factors, municipal governments may have limited ability to influence many consumption-related emissions and goals through emissions reduction measures. ABEIs typically include trans-boundary partial consumption emissions data for activities that produce emissions, such as electricity generation, over which local governments have the authority to influence emissions. Due to the inclusion of select upstream emissions, ABEIs can capture the related GHG reductions from local policy.

Accuracy, Cost, and Effort
ABEIs do not capture the full range of emissions that are driven by local consumption patterns and rather cover emissions produced in the jurisdiction and next upstream or downstream emissions for certain sectors (i.e., energy, solid waste, etc.). Unlike ABEIs, CBEIs can capture the global emissions embodied in the multitude of goods and services that contribute to a community’s carbon footprint by calculating lifecycle emissions associated with consumption. Accuracy, cost, and effort of the inventories depends on the data and approaches used. Historically, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) has produced the City of Santa Cruz’s ABEIs with funding from 3CE, however, it is unclear whether they will continue to provide these inventories. Appendix I of the Community

26.330
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 26 ends

Protocol outlines the current methodologies available for developing a CBEI. Current CBEI methods include using UC Berkeley’s CoolClimate Calculator with supplementary local data when available, IMPLAN-based economic modeling, and utilizing household surveys. The methods vary in their cost, accuracy, and ease of use. New methodologies may also be under development, including local government planning tools using consumption-based emissions from the UC Berkeley group that produced the CoolClimate Calculator. The cheapest and lowest-resolution CBEI accounting method utilizes the CoolClimate Calculator to produce an instantaneous estimate of average household consumption emissions. The existing methods for generating CBEIs are summarized in Table 5. Even without the support of AMBAG and 3CE, ABEIs are considered to be more cost-effective than CBEIs because they rely on more readily available data.

26.331
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 27 ends

Table 5 Existing CBEI Methods
Name Description Cost Effort Accuracy
UC Berkeley
CoolClimate
Calculator
Provides an instantaneous
estimate of average
household carbon footprints
for cities in the US.

Free Minimal. For a community
wide consumption-based
estimate, simply multiply the
average household footprint
against the number of
households in the
community.

Too general to use as-is. Cities should supplement with local data where possible. The calculator data are based on averages and is from 2013. Limited to household
estimates.

UC Berkeley
CoolClimate
Calculator with Local
Data
The CoolClimate Calculator
estimate can be updated
with local data.

Use of CoolClimate
Calculator is free
Low effort, quick estimation.

Some calculations to subtract
generalized data and replace
with local data required.

More accurate than the calculator estimates without
local data supplemented. Data based on averages were
not supplemented with local data. Calculator data based on 2013. Limited to household estimates.

IMPLAN-based
approach
Develop a customized model
using macroeconomic data
from a source such as the
IMPLAN economic modeling
software.

Significant Very high, significant
expertise and effort required
to develop, may be
economically out of reach for
many communities.

Model based estimates, accuracy or usefulness may be
diminished if model parameters are not updated
regularly. More accurate than either CoolClimate
Calculator estimates provided in the options above
because it uses a larger number of categories of goods
and services. Can be easily extended to include
government and business capital emissions that will
allow for a full consumption-based community emissions
inventory when summed with household emissions.

Household Survey
Data
Cities collect survey data
from residents in the
community to estimate
annual household purchases
of food, goods and services
and then apply appropriate
emission factors to each type
of purchase.

Extremely costly High level of effort (and
expertise) required to plan,
develop, and carry out survey,
process data, etc.

Most accurate estimate based on local consumption
patterns. Limited to household estimates.

26.332
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 28 ends

For reasons outlined above, most notably to maintain consistency with State methods and the ICLEI Community Protocol and allow for effective development of emissions reduction measures, it is recommended that the City continue to use the ABEI approach for future community GHG inventories.

However, CBEIs can be useful in CAPs as an educational resource and complement to the more established emissions inventory approaches, such as ABEIs. Including CBEI estimates can help to provide a more complete picture of community GHG emissions, which can promote greater public trust.

Recommendations
Rincon’s review found that the inventories appear to be generally appropriate for the sectors evaluated.

Rincon finds that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Community Protocol and Local Government Operations Protocol. However, the following comments and recommendations are intended to provide an opportunity to improve transparency of the calculations and emissions factors being used and to confirm large changes in emissions between the inventory years. Confirm and update completed inventories based on the Community GHG Inventory and Municipal GHG Inventory – Recommended Next Steps subsections of this report and listed below:

Community GHG Inventory Next Steps
 Commercial Energy
 Review data from Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to confirm there is no missing data that could be causing the 57% reduction in emissions from the commercial natural gas sub-sector between 2010 and 2015.
 Confirm large shift from PG&E to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) in commercial electricity from 2018 to 2019.
 Request emissions factors and opt-out rates from 3CE to verify electricity inventory results.  Residential Energy
 Confirm large shift from PG&E to Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) in residential electricity from 2018 to 2019.
 Request emissions factors and opt-out rates from 3CE to verify electricity inventory results.  Industrial Energy
 The California Air Resource Board (CARB) regulates the GHG emissions associated with industrial stationary combustion through the California Cap-and-Trade Program; therefore, it is recommended that all industrial emission sources be excluded from the community GHG inventories. If the City chooses to keep industrial in the inventories, it is recommended that UC Santa Cruz emissions be either included or excluded for all years, for consistency.  Water and Wastewater
 Rather than using 2018 as a proxy for 2019 wastewater treatment emissions, it is recommended that the City scale up these emissions for 2019 based on population growth by calculating the average emissions per person in previous years and applying it to the 2019 population.  Solid Waste
 Review methodology for calculating solid waste emissions factors to determine why emissions factors decrease and then increase again through 2018 and 2019.

26.333
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 29 ends

Municipal GHG Inventory Next Steps
 Buildings – Natural Gas
 Confirm and update the activity data for Inventory Record: “Fire-Natural Gas” from MMBtu to therms.
 Vehicle and Transit Fleet
 Consider back casting emissions to 2005 for a more consistent inventory.  Water and Wastewater
 Coordinate with the Water Department and other relevant City Departments, to determine what changed between 2005 and 2010 to cause a large decrease in emissions.

General Recommendations
 Complete community and municipal inventories in conjunction with each other, at minimum, every five years, starting in 2025, and during the target years (2030 and 2045). This allows the City to measure progress over time and update emissions reduction measures as needed to meet targets.  Continue to follow the ICLEI Community Protocol and the ICLEI Local Government Operations Protocol for completing activity-based community and municipal emissions inventories.  Import historical inventories and add future inventories into a public-facing dashboard, such as CAPDash, to allow for greater transparency and community engagement.  Explore pilot project on utilizing CBEI methods with student groups.

26.334
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
200 Washington Street
Suite 207
Santa Cruz, California 95060
831 440 3899
[email protected]
www.rinconconsultants.com
Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers
July 23, 2021
Project No: 20-10678
Tiffany Wise-West,
Sustainability and Climate Action Manager
City of Santa Cruz, City Manager’s Office
809 Center Street, Room 9/10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Santa Cruz Climate and Energy Action Plan,
Updated Community and Municipal Greenhouse Gas Inventory Results Purpose
This memorandum provides updated community and municipal inventory results for the City of Santa Cruz. These updates are based on recommendations provided in the first memorandum title Final Progress Report on Climate Action Plan 2020.1 Rincon’s review found that the inventories appeared to be generally appropriate for the sectors evaluated. Rincon found that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Community Protocol and Local Government Operations Protocol. However, the comments and recommendations provided were intended to provide an opportunity to improve transparency of the calculations and emissions factors being used and to confirm large changes in emissions between the inventory years. The tables below provide an overview of which recommendations were addressed and how, and the figures show the updated inventory results based on updates described in the tables.

Community GHG Inventories
Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) reviewed the City of Santa Cruz’s existing community inventories as part of the Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 development process to assess and verify the consistent application of appropriate methodologies defined by the by the Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI) U.S. Community Protocol as well as the correct emissions factors and inclusion of all appropriate emission sources. 2 This included a review of the activity data used and emissions calculated in the 2005, 2010, 2015, 2018 and 2019 Community Wide Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Inventories and 2005, 2010, and 2015 Municipal GHG Emissions Inventories. Table 1 provides the recommended updates to the community inventories and describes if and how each was addressed. 1 First memorandum, titled Final Progress Report on Climate Action Plan 2020, provided by Rincon to the City in June 2021. 2 Local Governments for Sustainability (ICLEI). 2019. U.S. Community Protocol for Accounting and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available: <https://icleiusa.org/us-community-protocol/>. Accessed May 20, 2021.

26.335
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 2 ends

Table 1 Community Inventory Updates
Sector Recommendation Updates/Notes
Commercial
Energy
Review data from Pacific Gas &
Electric (PG&E) to confirm there
is no missing data that could be
causing the 57% reduction in
emissions from the commercial
natural gas sub-sector between
2010 and 2015.

Amaury Berteaud, Special Projects Manager at the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) and the City (Tiffany Wise-West) were unable to explain the 57% reduction in natural gas use between 2010 to 2015, which is likely due to a data issue.

Furthermore, the PG&E source data was not consistent with the historic inventories. To address this issue, Rincon re-calculated commercial natural gas use from the source PG&E data. From 2005-2009, industrial natural gas was included in the commercial natural gas use due to the 15/15 rule. After 2010, industrial gas was fully removed. To allow for consistent comparison between years, Rincon calculated the ratio of residential to commercial natural gas use for years in which industrial natural gas was excluded (2010-2019). The average ratio was then applied to the 2005 residential gas use to estimate commercial gas use for 2005.

The data and calculations are provided in Attachment 1 - PG&E Natural Gas Calculations.

Confirm large shift from PG&E
to Central Coast Community
Energy (3CE)-provided
commercial electricity from
2018 to 2019.

No update necessary. Large shift confirmed by the City and AMBAG.
1 In 2018, 3CE service started in March for non-residential accounts and July for residential accounts. The large decrease in electricity emissions from 2018 to 2019 is due to 3CE enrolment as well as the PG&E emissions factor decreasing from 206 lbs CO2/mWh to 2.68 lbs CO2/mWh.

Request emissions factors and
opt-out rates from 3CE to verify
electricity inventory results.

No update necessary. 3CE provided AMBAG with the total
residential load for the city and emissions factors. AMBAG used the data provided by PG&E to breakout the 3CE electricity being reported in the direct access category between residential 3CE usage and nonresidential 3CE usage. AMBAG also has opt-out rate data at the county level as a percentage of load by sector. AMBAG and City confirmed large reduction in commercial electricity emissions.

Residential
Energy
Confirm large shift from PG&E
to Central Coast Community
Energy (3CE)-provided
residential electricity from 2018
to 2019.

No update necessary. Large shift confirmed by the City and AMBAG. In 2018, 3CE service started in March for non-residential accounts and July for residential accounts. The large decrease in electricity emissions from 2018 to 2019 is due to 3CE enrolment as well as the PG&E emissions factor decreasing from 206 lbs CO2/mWh to 2.68 lbs CO2/mWh.

Request emissions factors and
opt-out rates from 3CE to verify
electricity inventory results.

26.336
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 3 ends

Sector Recommendation Updates/Notes
Industrial
Energy
The California Air Resource
Board (CARB) regulates the GHG
emissions associated with
industrial stationary combustion
through the California Cap-andTrade Program; therefore, it is recommended that all industrial
emission sources be excluded
from the community GHG
inventories. If the City chooses
to keep industrial in the
inventories, it is recommended
that UC Santa Cruz emissions be
either included or excluded for
all years, for consistency.

Recommendation addressed. UC Santa Cruz was removed from the analysis.

Transportation EMFAC data shows increasing
population and VMT in the
County, however, the City’s
2019 Community Inventory
shows a decrease in
transportation emissions. Need
information explaining why this
might be the case.

The inventory VMT data is from HMPS and accounts for travel on Santa Cruz’s local roads only, this is therefore an in-boundary methodology as opposed to an origin destination methodology.

AMBAG received a public records act request from Land Watch relating to Monterey County GHG inventories as well as pushback on the idea of cities not using an origin destination methodology as part of their climate action plan.

Following discussions with the City and AMBAG, it is clear that the City is unable to update the VMT methodology to origin
destination for the Climate Action Plan 2030 update. AMBAG is currently updating the VMT model for Santa Cruz County, and they are currently unable to run the model at the city scale.

Additionally, they are unable to back-cast VMT at this time. The current VMT data is the best available data at this point and likely a good proxy for overall VMT. The City should plan to update the VMT methodology in the next update of the Climate Action Plan.

Water and
Wastewater
Rather than using 2018 as a
proxy for 2019 wastewater
treatment emissions, it is
recommended that the City
scale up these emissions for
2019 based on population
growth by calculating the
average emissions per person in
previous years and applying it to
the 2019 population.

This recommendation was not addressed because the Water and Wastewater sector is such a small contributor to overall community emissions. In addition, since population decreased from 2018 to 2019, the current methodology is more
conservative.

Solid Waste Review methodology for
calculating solid waste
emissions factors to determine
why emissions factors decrease
and then increase again through
2018 and 2019.

This recommendation was reviewed with Amaury Berteaud,
Special Projects Manager at AMBAG. Solid waste tonnage data is from CalRecycle, which shows more waste was sent to landfills in 2018 and 2019 than previous years. This may be due to a number of factors, including a lower diversion rate.

Notes: lbs = pounds; mWh = mega-watt hours
1 AMBAG has completed all of the City’s community GHG inventories.

26.337
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 4 ends

Rincon updated the community inventories as described in Table 1, above. Table 2 provides the updated natural gas activity data and Figure 1, Figure 2, and Figure 3 detail the city’s updated community GHG emissions by sector, sub-sector, and total emissions for each of the inventory years.

Table 2 Updated Natural Gas Activity Data
Year Residential Use (Therms) Commercial Use (Therms)
2005 8,446,353 4,455,221
2006 8,983,659 4,738,635
2007 8,820,559 4,652,604
2008 8,824,744 4,654,812
2009 8,680,459 4,578,705
2010 8,923,599 4,421,545
2011 9,271,338 4,670,040
2012 8,866,649 4,642,667
2013 8,713,714 4,440,295
2014 6,902,137 3,894,696
2015 7,123,162 3,912,387
2016 7,460,188 4,006,270
2017 7,652,780 4,083,026
2018 7,671,109 4,148,237
2019 7,967,583 4,184,482

26.338
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 5 ends

As shown in Figure 1, transportation accounts for the largest share of community emissions for each inventory year, followed by residential and commercial energy. Figure 2 below details sub-sector emissions for each of the community inventory years.

Figure 1 City of Santa Cruz Community GHG Emissions by Sector (2005-2019)

26.339
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 6 ends

Figure 2 shows the energy sectors (commercial and residential) separated into electricity and natural gas emissions sources. Commercial and residential natural gas emissions remain relatively constant from 2005 to 2019, as expected.

Figure 2 City of Santa Cruz Community GHG Emissions by Sub-sector (2005-2019)

26.340
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 7 ends

Figure 3 shows the City’s updated community emissions for all inventory years. Based on the City’s updated community GHG inventories, total community emissions have decreased over time. The City’s emissions dropped approximately 4% from 2005 to 2010, 19% from 2010 to 2015, 18% from 2015 to 2018, and 9% from 2018 to 2019. The 2012 Climate Action Plan identified targets to reduce communitywide greenhouse gas emissions 30% by 2020 and 80% by 2050, compared to 1990 levels.3 Based on the updated community inventory data, the 2020 target is 145,123 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) and the 2050 is 41,464 MT CO2e. These targets are tracked using GHG inventories, which are reviewed below. Overall community GHG emissions have declined steadily since 2005, and the City achieved its 2020 target in 2019.

Figure 3 City of Santa Cruz Total Community GHG Emissions by Year (2005-2019) 3 1990 levels were estimated using state guidance of assuming 1% annual emissions growth between 1990 and 2005.

26.341
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 8 ends

The updated average emissions factors used in each sector for each inventory year are provided in Table

3. All electricity emissions factors decrease substantially from 2018 onward as a result of CCA enrollment in the community, while natural gas emissions factors stay constant across the years, as expected. Solid waste average emissions factors decrease and then increase again through 2018 and 2019. It is unclear what the data sources are and how these emissions factors were calculated at this time and the change is relatively small. The average transportation emissions factor decreased approximately 46% from 2010 to 2015, which can be attributed to the change in methodology used to calculate these emissions between the two years. Prior to 2015, transportation emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2001 model. After 2015, these emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2014 and EMFAC2017 model updates. It is recommended that future inventories use the origin destination methodology. Lastly, water and wastewater average emissions factors decreased approximately 33% from 2005 to 2010, and remained constant post 2010. This is likely due to electricity emissions factor decreasing even as process emissions increased due to population growth.

Table 3 Community GHG Inventory Emissions Factors (2005-2019) Sector 2005 2010 2015 2018 2019
Commercial Energy – Electricity 0.0002236 0.0002034 0.0001844 0.0000499 0.0000040 Commercial Energy– Natural Gas 0.0053070 0.0053070 0.0053070 0.0053070 0.0053070 Residential Energy– Electricity 0.0002236 0.0002034 0.0001844 0.0000647 0.0000038 Residential Energy– Natural Gas 0.0053186 0.0053186 0.0053186 0.0053187 0.0053187 Solid Waste 0.3105317 0.2775465 0.2743429 0.2861037 0.2861037 Transportation & Mobile Sources 0.0008259 0.0008146 0.0004625 0.0004167 0.0004049 Water & Wastewater 0.3804373 0.2536434 0.2536407 0.2536426 0.2536426 Notes:
1 Industrial electricity is not reported for 2005, 2010, or 2019. 2 Industrial natural gas is not reported for 2005 or 2018.

26.342
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 9 ends

Municipal GHG Inventories
Rincon reviewed the City of Santa Cruz’s existing municipal inventories as part of the Climate and Energy Action Plan 2030 development process to assess and verify the consistent application of appropriate methodologies defined by the by the Local Governments for Sustainability USA (ICLEI) U.S. Local Government Operations Protocol as well as the correct emissions factors and inclusion of all appropriate emission sources. The City of Santa Cruz has completed three municipal inventories: 2005, 2010, and 2015. All of the City’s municipal inventories include emissions from buildings and facilities and streetlights and traffic signals. Table 4 provides the recommended updates to the municipal inventories and describes if and how each was addressed.

Table 4 Municipal Inventory Updates
Sector Recommendation Updates/Notes
Buildings and
Facilities
Confirm and update the activity data for 2005
Inventory Record: “Fire-Natural Gas” from
MMBtu to therms.

Rincon updated the ClearPath record for “FireNatural Gas” from MMBtu to therms. The cloned inventory with updated record is labeled 2005
Santa Cruz LGOP GHG Inventory – REV 2021.

Vehicle Fleet
and Transit
Fleet
Consider back casting emissions to 2005 for a
more consistent inventory.

Back-casting was deemed unnecessary for this
analysis. Instead, Vehicle Fleet and Transit Fleet
are removed from this analysis for all years. The
updated inventories are labeled: 2010 Municipal
Inventory completed by City staff – REV 2021 and
2015 Municipal Inventory completed by City staff
– REV 2021.

Water and
Wastewater
Coordinate with the Water Department and
other relevant City Departments, to determine
what changed between 2005 and 2010 to cause
a large decrease in emissions.

For the purposes of this memorandum, no
updates were made to the Water and
Wastewater sector. City will investigate the large
decrease in emissions.

26.343
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 10 ends

As shown in Figure 4, water and wastewater treatment accounts for the largest share of municipal emissions for each inventory year, followed by buildings and facilities. Each sector shows a decrease in emissions over time. Figure 5 details sub-sector emissions for each of the municipal inventory years.

Figure 4 City of Santa Cruz Municipal GHG Emissions by Sector (2005-2015)

26.344
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 11 ends

Figure 5 shows the energy-related sectors (buildings & facilities and water & wastewater treatment) separated into electricity and natural gas emissions sources. Water and wastewater treatment natural gas emissions decreased from 2005 to 2010 and increased from 2010 to 2015, while water and wastewater treatment electricity emissions increased from 2005 to 2010 and decreased from 2010 to 2015. This City is investigating the cause of these changes.

Figure 5 City of Santa Cruz Municipal GHG Emissions by Sub-sector (2005-2015)

26.345
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 12 ends

Figure 6 below shows municipal emissions excluding vehicle and transit fleet emissions. The data show a 35% decrease in municipal emissions from 2005 to 2015.

Figure 6 City of Santa Cruz Total Municipal GHG Emissions by Year

26.346
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 13 ends

The updated average emissions factors used in each sector for each municipal inventory year are provided in Table 5. As expected, all electricity emissions factors decrease slightly over time, likely as a result of the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program, established in 2002 by Senate Bill 1078, which mandated that 20% of electricity retail sales must be served by renewable resources by 2017.4 In 2015, California’s energy mix was approximately 22% renewable.5 Increasing renewable energy statewide decreases electricity emissions factors. All natural gas emissions factors stay constant across the years, as expected.

Table 5 Municipal GHG Inventory Emissions Factors
Sector 2005 2010 2015
Buildings & Facilities – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Buildings & Facilities – Natural Gas 0.0053156 0.0053156 0.0053175 Streetlights & Traffic Signals – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Water & Wastewater Treatment – Electricity 0.0002237 0.0002035 0.0001954 Water & Wastewater Treatment – Natural Gas 0.0053156 0.0053156 0.0053175 Conclusion
The updated inventories are appropriate for the sectors evaluated. Rincon finds that the emissions were appropriately calculated using the principles and methods outlined in the Community Protocol and Local Government Operations Protocol. Updates to be considered in the next Climate Action Plan update include:
 Change VMT methodology to origin destination
 Include employee commuting and vehicle/transit fleet in future municipal inventories  Investigate and document the cause of the large decrease in municipal water and wastewater emissions between 2005 and 2010.
4 In 2018, Senate Bill 100 increased the RPS to 60% by 2030 and requires all the state’s electricity to come from carbon-free resources by 2045.
5 California Energy Commission. N.d. 2015 Total System Electric Generation. Available: < https://www.energy.ca.gov/datareports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2019-total-system-electric-generation/2015>. Accessed June 14, 2021.

26.347
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Summary October 27, 2021 Climate Action Plan, City of Santa Cruz Page 1 of 2
Memorandum
To: Tiffany Wise‐West, P.E., PhD
City of Santa Cruz Sustainability & Climate Action Manager From: Chris Gregerson, P.E., T.E., PTOE, PTP
Mike Schmitt, ACIP CTP, PTP, RSP1

Re: Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Summary
Climate Action Plan, City of Santa Cruz
Date: October 27, 2021

This memorandum documents the process undertaken to summarize the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) for the City of Santa Cruz using the Santa Cruz County Travel Demand Model (SCC TDM) for the purposes of inclusion in the City’s Climate Actin Plan (CAP).

Methodology
The SCC TDM was most recently updated to contain a base year of 2019 and future year of 2040. These updates were based on data provided by the County and the incorporated Cities within the County. The data provided included building permits, pending and approved projects (land use and infrastructure), and the County’s previous General Plan. The land use updates were incorporated into the model by updating the information at the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level. There are 696 TAZs within the County, including 171 TAZs within the City of Santa Cruz boundary. In consultation with the SCCRTC and Santa Cruz County, the transportation analysis zone (TAZ) geography for the SCC Model is based on the AMBAG TAZ geography with revisions for Santa Cruz County. The land use updates included updating the households and population information in each TAZ, as well as the employment by category, and number of students in both K‐12 schools and university students.

From the SCC TDM, the daily trip table, which summarizes the number of trips between each TAZ pair for a 24‐hour period, and the peak skim table, which estimates the distance between each TAZ during the commute periods (except for those trips that have one endpoint outside of the County as discussed below), were used to estimate the three types of VMT for 2019 and 2040. The three types of VMT include internal‐internal (trips that both start and end within the City of Santa Cruz), internal‐external (trips that begin within the City, but end outside of the City), and external‐internal (trips that begin outside of the City but end within the City). External‐external trips, trips that both start and end outside of the City, were not included as a part of this analysis. The number of trips between each TAZ pair were multiplied by the distance estimated between each pair using either the skim table or the estimated external trip distance, to determine the VMT for that pair. Note that the internal‐external and external‐internal VMT was divided by two so that only 50‐percent of the VMT will be attributable to the City of Santa Cruz.

External (Outside of Santa Cruz County) Trip Distances
To determine the VMT for those trips that have one endpoint of the trip outside of Santa Cruz County, and thus outside of the area covered by the SCC TDM, the external distance was estimated. The distance was determined using Teralytics, a Big Data aggregator of vehicle trips. Teralytics uses anonymized cell phone data to determine the origin and destination of trips at the Census tract level. The trip distances were determined for each Census tract within Santa Cruz County by taking weighted average of distance of all trips that originate from, or are destined to, locations outside of Santa Cruz County. This distance is then calibrated by using Teralytics to estimate trips that occur within Santa Cruz County and comparing

26.348
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Summary October 27, 2021 Climate Action Plan, City of Santa Cruz Page 2 of 2
them to the trip distance estimated by the SCC TDM. Once a distance is calibrated and the final distance is determined for each tract, all TAZs within Santa Cruz County are then overlayed onto the tracts to obtain the external trip distance for that TAZ. This trip distance is then used to determine the VMT for all trips that have one endpoint outside of the County.

Analysis
The VMT for each of the three types and for the 2019 and 2040 scenarios are summarized in Table 1 below. As shown in Table 1, the daily VMT for the City of Santa Cruz increases from approximately 1.2 million in 2019 to approximately 1.4 million in 2040. In addition to 2019 and 2040, VMT for intermediate years 2025, 2030, and 2035, as well as future year 2045, were also estimated. As the SCC TDM does not contain land use or roadway network information for any analysis year other than 2019 and 2040, the VMT was interpolated or extrapolated as appropriate for the four additional analysis scenarios.

Table 1 – City of Santa Cruz Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Summary 2019 2040 2025* 2030* 2035* 2045*
Internal‐Internal 178,787 205,631 186,457 192,848 199,240 212,023 Internal‐External* 499,968 590,367 525,796 547,319 568,843 611,890 External‐Internal* 494,115 584,074 519,818 541,237 562,656 605,493 Total 1,172,870 1,380,072 1,232,071 1,281,405 1,330,738 1,429,406 Analysis Year VMT Type
Note: Only 50% of I‐E and E‐I VMT is included in this summary table * Value was interpolated or extrapolated using 2019 and 2040 values from the SCC TDM

26.349

26.350
APPENDIX C:

GHG Emissions
Reduction Technical
Evidence

26.351
Climate Action Plan
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence
City of Santa Cruz
City Manager’s Office
809 Center Street, Room 9/10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Contact: Tiffany Wise-West, Sustainability and Climate Action Manager prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
200 Washington Street, Suite 207
Santa Cruz, California 95060
April 2022

26.352
Table of Contents
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence i
Table of Contents
1 Introduction....................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Climate Action Targets........................................................................................................1

1.2 Measures and Actions Organization ...................................................................................2

1.3 GHG Emissions Reductions.................................................................................................4 2 Building Energy Measures ..............................................................................................................8 3 Transportation Measures.............................................................................................................23 4 Water, Waste and Wastewater Measures ...................................................................................46 Figures
Figure 1 Estimated GHG Emissions Reduction Associated with CAP................................................ 6 Figure 2 GHG Baseline-Forecast-Legislative Reduction-Targets-Quantified Measure Reduction.... 7 Tables
Table 1 Population Projections for the City of Santa Cruz................................................................4 Table 2 Estimated GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure..............................................................4 Table 3 Targets Versus GHG Emissions Reductions..........................................................................7 Table 4a Measure BE-1 Reductions.....................................................................................................9 Table 4b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-1 Action 1 ..................................................10 Table 5a Measure BE-2 Reductions...................................................................................................11 Table 5b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-2 Action 1 ..................................................13 Table 6a Measure BE-3 Reductions...................................................................................................15 Table 6b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-3 Action 1 ..................................................16 Table 7 Measure BE-4 Reductions...................................................................................................18 Table 8 Measure BE-5 Reductions...................................................................................................20 Table 9 Measure BE-6 Reductions...................................................................................................20 Table 10a Measure T-1 Reductions.....................................................................................................24 Table 10b Bicycle Network Buildout versus Mode Share ...................................................................27 Table 10c GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-1 Actions 1-3................................................27 Table 11a Measure T-2 Reductions.....................................................................................................29 Table 11b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-2 Actions 1-3................................................32 Table 12 Measure T-3 Reductions.....................................................................................................33 Table 13a Measure T-4 Reductions.....................................................................................................36 Table 13b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-4 Action 1-3 .................................................38 Table 14a Measure T-5 Reductions.....................................................................................................40 Table 14b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-5 Actions 1-2................................................41 Table 15a Measure T-6 Reductions.....................................................................................................42

26.353
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
ii
Table 15b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-6 Action 6.....................................................44 Table 16 Measure T-7 Reductions.....................................................................................................44 Table 17 Measure W-1 Reductions...................................................................................................47 Table 18a Measure W-2 Reductions...................................................................................................48 Table 18b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure W-2 Actions 1-2 ..............................................49 Table 19 Measure W-3 Reductions...................................................................................................51 Table 20 Measure W-4 Reductions...................................................................................................52

26.354
Introduction
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 1
1 Introduction
This appendix presents the technical quantification and evidence supporting the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction potential of the City of Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update.

Section 15183.5(b)(1) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines establishes several criteria which a CAP must meet in order to be considered a “qualified GHG reduction plan” and allow for programmatic CEQA streamlining of project GHG emissions. This document provides the evidence to support the GHG emissions reductions associated with the CAP measures pursuant to Subsection (D) which states, “…measures or a group of measures, including performance standards, that substantial evidence demonstrates, if implemented on a project-by-project basis, would collectively achieve the specified emissions level.” Based on the substantial evidence contained in this technical appendix, the GHG emissions reductions associated with the measures in the CAP are sufficient to exceed the City’s fair share of GHG emissions consistent with the reduction target established by Senate Bill (SB) 32 and make substantial progress towards carbon neutrality consistent with California’s goal established by executive order (EO) B-55-18.

The quantification in this technical appendix is specifically intended to illustrate a viable path to achieving the City of Santa Cruz 2030 climate action targets. As required in CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b)(e), mechanisms to monitor the CAP’s progress toward achieving the GHG emission reductions provided in this technical appendix have been established through the CAP development process. If the CAP monitoring program indicates that the City is not on track to reach its 2030 GHG reduction goals, the CAP will be amended to include altered or additional implementation measures and actions that can achieve the City’s climate action targets.

1.1 Climate Action Targets
The City of Santa Cruz’s proposed climate action targets are intended to be attainable. The City’s targets are more aggressive than California’s goals to reduce GHG emissions to 40% below 1990 levels by 2030 (SB 32) and to attain carbon neutrality1 by 2045 (EO B-55-18). The City of Santa Cruz’s targets are:
▪ Reduce the community’s per capita GHG emissions to 2.5 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) per person, or based on projected population growth through 2030, this is equivalent to reducing the City’s mass emissions to 181,018 MT CO2e by 2030, or 40.1% below the City’s 1990 GHG emissions.
▪ Carbon neutrality by 2035 and maintain through at least 2045.2 1 Carbon neutrality refers to a state of net-zero GHG emissions (in units of carbon dioxide equivalent, or CO2e), where a community’s GHG emissions have been reduced as much as possible, and any remaining GHG emissions arising from community-level activities are offset by GHG emissions sequestration activities and technologies, such as tree planting, compost application, or industrial practices that take GHG emissions out of the atmosphere and sequester them in solid or liquid form. 2 Cities may choose to set a more ambitious target to meet carbon neutrality before 2045. Setting an aspirational target of carbon neutrality by 2035 aligns with Governor Newsom’s recent direction to the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to explore carbon neutrality by 2035. Accessed: https://www.gov.ca.gov/2021/07/09/governor-newsom-holds-virtual-discussion-with-leading-climatescientists-on-states-progress-toward-carbon-neutrality/

26.355
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
2 The use of per capita emission targets is recommended in the California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) 2017 Scoping Plan Update.3 Avoiding interference with and making substantial progress toward the state’s 2030 and long-term 2045 goals is important as they have been set at levels that achieve California’s fair share of international emissions reductions. California’s fair share of international emissions reductions were established by the Paris Agreement and the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and are consistent with an emissions level expected to stabilize global climate change effects and avoid adverse environmental consequences.4 The IPCC Sixth Assessment report indicates that to avoid the most significant effects of climate change, greenhouse gas emissions must be halved before 2030, achieve net-zero emissions before 2050, and maintain global temperature rise at or below 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). 5 1.2 Measures and Actions Organization
As part of the CAP update process, the City of Santa Cruz has developed a comprehensive set of measures reducing community wide GHG emissions in all sectors to achieve the City’s climate action targets. Each measure is supported by a set of actions that provide measurable GHG emissions reduction that is supported by substantial evidence. The City has also developed a set of measures and actions for carbon sequestration. Carbon sequestration measures and actions are not included in the City’s GHG emissions reductions calculations or GHG targets because those are aimed toward achieving Climate Restoration goals and not GHG emission targets. Therefore, they are not included in this technical appendix. Measures and actions are organized according to the following hierarchy:

Sectors define the GHG emissions category in which the GHG reductions will take place and include Building Energy, Transportation, Waste, Water and Wastewater.6 Measures identify specific goals (i.e., activity data targets by 2030 and 2035) to address GHG emissions in each sector. A single measure generally addresses a subsector; for example, three measures may be established under the Transportation sector to address active transportation, shared/public transportation, and single-passenger vehicles subsectors.

Actions identify the programs, policies, funding pathways, and other specific commitments that the City of Santa Cruz plans to implement to accomplish the measures in each sector. Each measure contains a suite of actions, which together have been designed to accomplish the measure. Additional details regarding how the City will accomplish each of the actions is described in the CAP Implementation Plan.
a. Action Criteria. The actions supporting each measure have been designed around a set of criteria. Each criterion plays an essential role in the implementation of the measures.

Because community-focused climate action often requires community-level behavioral changes and buy-in to be successfully implemented, the City must design a suite of actions 3 California Air Resources Board. November 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Accessed at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf 4 As described under EO B-55-18 Section 3.1.3, Potential Effects of Climate Change. See also the IPCC’s report, accessed at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/
5 Net zero emissions refers to achieving an overall balance between greenhouse gases emitted and greenhouse gas emissions taken out of the atmosphere, for example through carbon sequestration in vegetation and soils or through carbon capture and storage technologies.
6 Note that the City’s municipal measures as established in the CAP are not discussed in this document. While the City’s municipal measures are important for reducing to reduce City operations GHG emissions and demonstrate climate action leadership, they contribute make a minor contribution to community-level GHG emissions reductions and are a subset of the community GHG emissions.

For this reason, the GHG emissions reductions expected from municipal measures were conservatively excluded from the analysis in this document and were not quantified as part of the CAP preparation process.

26.356
Introduction
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 3
that support these changes by emphasizing specific needs of the community. The action criteria are Equity, Structural Change, Funding and Financing, Education and Engagement, and Partnerships. In general, the actions under a single measure should collectively address all the action criteria.
7 Identification of the action criteria and their inclusion into the CAP helps plan for implementation.
b. Equity Screening Process. To ensure the City’s CAP is equitable in achieving a just transition for the community from a consumptive-based, extractive economy to a regenerative economy. Special consideration was given to address past harm to frontline communities.

An equity screening process was developed through small group conversations between the City’s Climate Action Task Force, its equity advisors, and the City’s frontline communities. All actions were screened to ensure that the CAP addresses equity considerations and does not negatively impact frontline communities. The equity screening process criteria are:
▪ Affordability
▪ Accessibility
▪ Accountability
▪ Green Jobs
▪ Community Health and Safety
▪ Cultural Vibrancy
Frontline communities are those that experience continuing injustice, including people of color, immigrants, people with lower incomes, people experiencing homelessness or houselessness, differently-abled persons, seniors, and indigenous people. The communities face a legacy of systemic, largely racialized, inequity that influences their living and working places, and quality of their air and water, and their economic opportunities. The equity screening process allowed the City to intentionally prioiritze eaquity and understand the direct and indirect impacts of climate actions in order to avoid exacertbating harm through unintended consequences.

Measures and actions can be either quantitative or supportive, which are defined as follows:
▪ Quantitative measures and actions result in quantifiable GHG emissions reductions when implemented. GHG emissions reductions from these measures and actions are supported by case studies, scientific articles, calculations, or other third-party substantial evidence.

Quantitative measures/actions can be summed to quantify how the City of Santa Cruz will meets its 2030 climate action target and demonstrate progress towards the 2035 target. GHG emissions reductions were calculated using published evidence provided through adequately controlled investigations, studies, and articles carried out by qualified experts that establish the effectiveness for the reduction measures and actions. The estimates and underlying calculations provided in this technical appendix include the substantial evidence and a transparent approach to achieving the City’s GHG emissions reduction targets. ▪ Supportive measures and actions may also be quantifiable and have substantial evidence to support their overall contribution to GHG reduction. However, due to one of several factors – including a low GHG reduction benefit, indirect GHG reduction benefit, or potential for doublecounting – they have not been quantified and do not contribute directly to the expected GHG reduction target and consistency with the state goals. Despite not being quantified, supportive 7 The exception is for measures and actions in the municipal sector because the City has much more leverage to enact changes at a municipal level and may not need to consider each pillar to ensure success during implementation.

26.357
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
4 measures/actions are nevertheless critical to the overall success of the CAP and provide support so that the quantitative measures and actions will be successfully implemented.

1.3 GHG Emissions Reductions
The GHG emissions reductions associated with the City of Santa Cruz CAP’s measures and actions have been calculated and presented in this technical appendix in terms of per capita emissions (in units of MT CO2e/person). The population projection used to develop the City’s GHG emissions forecast (Appendix A) was also used to calculate per capita GHG emissions reductions. Population projections, shown in Table 1, were obtained from the Association of Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) Plan Bay Area 2040 forecasts, consistent with the projections used in the City’s historical GHG inventories.
8 Table 1 Population Projections for the City of Santa Cruz 2019 2030 2035 2045
Population 65,041 72,218 75,257 79,534
A breakdown of the GHG emissions reductions calculated for each measure is included in Table 2 and Figure 1.

Table 2 Estimated GHG Emissions Reductions by Measure
Measure
Number Measure
2030 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
2035 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
2045 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
GHG Emissions Reduction Measures
BE-1 Enforce the City’s new construction
natural gas prohibition ordinance (SCMC

6.100) and inform the community
regarding the available technology and
benefits of electrification

0.085 0.100 0.126
BE-2 Electrify 31% of existing residential
buildings by 2030 and 53% by 2035

0.180 0.298 0.383
BE-3 Electrify 26% of existing commercial
buildings by 2030 and 45% by 2035

0.079 0.133 0.173
BE-4 Maintain Central Coast Community
Energy (CCCE opt-out rates at or below
4% for commercial and 2% for residential
Supportive Supportive Supportive
BE-5 Increase resiliency through equitable
energy efficiency and local solar
programs
Supportive Supportive Supportive
8 Population projections were obtained from the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Plan Bay Area 2040 website; accessed at:
http://2040.planbayarea.org/forecasting-the-future

26.358
Introduction
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 5
Measure
Number Measure
2030 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
2035 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
2045 Anticipated
Reduction/
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
BE-6 Provide inclusive engagement, equitable
process and regional coordination to
maximize building electrification carbon
reduction outcomes and other cobenefits
Supportive Supportive Supportive
T-1 Implement programs for active
transportation (walking and biking) that
achieve 23% of bicycle mode share by
2030 and 30% by 2035

0.051 0.069 0.067
T-2 Implement programs for public
transportation that achieve 8% of public
transportation mode share by 2030 and
12% by 2035

0.002 0.032 0.089
T-3 Implement programs and policies to
discourage driving single-occupancy
passenger vehicles
Supportive Supportive Supportive
T-4 Increase passenger electric vehicle (EV)
adoption to 35% by 2030 and 40% by
2035

0.441 0.449 0.663
T-5 Increase commercial EV adoption to 25%
by 2030 and 35% by 2035

0.077 0.050 0.034
T-6 Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 50%
of off-road equipment by 2030 and 75%
by 2035

0.076 0.116 0.124
T-7 Advocate for remote work policy and
infrastructure.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
W-1 Maintain gallons per capita water use for
the residential sector at a level that is at
least 10% below the state goal of 55
gallons per person per day
Supportive Supportive Supportive
W-2 Reduce organic waste by 75% by 2030
and 90% by 2035; and reduce inorganic
waste by 35% by 2030 and 40% by 2035

0.065 0.078 0.078
W-3 Establish a long-term target to reduce
waste generation growth
Supportive Supportive Supportive
W-4 Reduce or capture GHG emissions from
wastewater treatment
Supportive Supportive Supportive
Total Anticipated Reductions 1.06 1.33 1.74
Reduction Targets
* Would require carbon sequestration, capture, and/or storage measures to achieve since 100% of emissions will not be eliminated.

0.82 3.32* 3.15*

26.359
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
6 Figure 1 Estimated GHG Emissions Reduction Associated with CAP9 Together, the measures and actions in the CAP provide the City of Santa Cruz with the GHG reductions necessary to achieve the City of Santa Cruz’s 2030 target, however the 2035 GHG emissions reductions quantified in this report are not yet enough to meet the City’s long term target of carbon neutrality by 2035 (Table 3). Achieving carbon neutrality will require significant changes to the technology and systems currently in place. The CAP aims to establish substantial progress towards carbon neutrality by the establishing new systems that are resilient and equitable. This includes electrification of building and transportation systems, an increased shift to active and public/shared transportation, continued usage of carbon neutral electricity, increased water use efficiency, waste reduction and diversion, new carbon capture technology, and carbon sequestration.
10 As these measures and actions are implemented, the City will gain more information, new technologies will emerge, and current pilot projects will scale to the size needed to reach carbon neutrality. Furthermore, the state is expected to update state-level regulations and provide additional support to meet carbon neutrality in the future. Future CAP updates past 2030 will outline new measures and actions that the City can implement to achieve carbon neutrality. 11 9
Measures shown in the graph are only for those with calculated GHG emissions reductions. 10 The Climate Action Plan also includes information about behavior choices (plant-based diets and shopping local) in the community that are outside of the City’s control. These behavior choices support climate action but are not quantified in the City’s GHG emissions inventories as they are not under the jurisdictional control or significant influence of the City of Santa Cruz. 11 Association of Environmental Professionals (AEP). 2016. Final Which Paper, Beyond 2020 and Newhall: A Field Guide to New CEQA Greenhouse Gas Thresholds and Climate Action Plan Targets for California. Accessed at: https://califaep.org/docs/AEP2016_Final_White_Paper.pdf

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45
BE-1 New building electrification
BE-2 Existing residential building electrification
BE-3 Existing commercial buidling electrification
T-1 Active transportation
T-2 Public transportation
T-4 Zero-emission passenger vehicle adoption
T-5 Zero-emission commercial vehicle adoption
T-6 Off-road decarbonization
W-2 Waste reduction
Per Capita Emissions Reductions (MT CO2e/person)
2030 2035 2045

26.360
Introduction
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 7
Table 3 Targets Versus GHG Emissions Reductions
Target/Forecast
2030 GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e/person)
2035 GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e/person)
2045 GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e/person)
Business-as-usual Forecast
Adjusted Forecast
Target for Consistency with State Climate
Policy

2.74 1.82 0.00
Figure 2 shows the climate action targets in relation to the City’s GHG emissions after measure implementation. Figure 2 shows GHG emissions in terms of mass emissions (e.g., per capita emissions times the population projection) for better comparison to the 2019 inventory, and forecasts. A complete description of each quantified community measure and its contributing actions is included in the remainder of the technical appendix as substantial evidence to support the City’s qualitifed greenhouse gas reduction strategy.
12 Figure 2 GHG Baseline-Forecast-Legislative Reduction-Targets-Quantified Measure Reduction
12 CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5(b), Plans for the Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions. 0 50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Mass Emissions (MT CO2e)
Year 2019 Baseline
BAU Forecast
Adjusted Forecast
Target for Consistency with State Climate Policy
Emissions After Quantifiable Reductions
2035 City Target -
Carbon Neutrality
02 30 City Target -
81 1,081 MT CO e
(2

4.16 4.12 4.15

3.55 3.32 3.15
GHG Emissions with Full
Implementation of Measures

2.49 1.99 1.41
.74 MT CO2e/p
2 er person)

26.361
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
8 2 Building Energy Measures
The City of Santa Cruz building energy measures are primarily focused on leveraging the renewable energy portfolio provided to the community by Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) through maintenance of low CCCE opt-out rates and electrification13 of the City’s building stock. All-electric buildings are powered 100% by electricity and when coupled with renewable electricity generation, their operational energy footprint becomes GHG emissions-free. Based on this strategy, the CAP’s energy measures consist of the following:
▪ BE-1: Enforce the City’s new construction natural gas prohibition ordinance (SCMC 6.100) and inform the community regarding the available technology and benefits of electrification ▪ BE-2: Electrify 31% of existing residential buildings by 2030 and 53% by 2035 ▪ BE-3: Electrify 26% of existing commercial buildings by 2030 and 45% by 2035 ▪ BE-4: Maintain Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) opt-out rates at or below 4% for commercial and 2% for residential
▪ BE-5: Increase resiliency through equitable energy efficiency and local solar programs ▪ BE-6: Provide inclusive engagement, equitable process and regional coordination to maximize building electrification carbon reduction outcomes and other co-benefits CCCE procures low-carbon renewable energy for the community. Using electricity from CCCE instead of natural gas, propane, or other electricity sources to power buildings reduces the GHG emissions associated with building operations to zero or near-zero. The City of Santa Cruz’s building stock currently relies heavily on natural gas. The City has already adopted an electrification ordinance for new construction (included in the CAP as Measure BE-1) which mandates development of allelectric buildings with no natural gas infrastructure. 14 GHG emissions from existing buildings must
also be reduced to achieve the City’s climate action targets. Measures BE-2 and BE-3 provide frameworks of updated regulations, programs, funding mechanisms, education, and partnerships to drive electrification of existing residential and commercial buildings. Measure BE-4 directs the City to work with CCCE to maintain the already low residential and commercial opt-out rates. Measure BE-5 supports building resilience througn equitable energy efficiency and local solar programs.

Measure BE-6 provides guidance for inclusive engagement, equitable processes, and regional coordination to maximize building electrification carbon reduction outcomes and other co-benefits. 13 Building electrification consists of converting building appliances, such as space heaters, boilers, stoves, clothes dryers, and hot water heaters, that currently run on natural gas or propane to electricity as the primary energy source. This most often consists of retrofitting a building to support more electric capacity and replacing natural gas or propane appliances with electric-powered alternatives. 14 City of Santa Cruz. 2020. Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings. Accessed at:
https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SantaCruz/#!/SantaCruz06/SantaCruz06100.html#6.100.040

26.362
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 9
Measure BE-1 Enforce the City’s new construction natural gas prohibition ordinance (SCMC 6.100) and inform the community regarding the available technology and benefits of electrification Table 4a Measure BE-1 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Enforce the new construction natural gas
prohibition ordinance through the
development of a comprehensive
permitting compliance program that
includes routine training for City staff,
dedicating staff time for building
inspections, charging fees for
noncompliance, providing easy-tounderstand compliance checklists online and with permit applications and
facilitating permitting online.

0.085 0.100 0.126
Measure BE-1 Action 1New Construction Natural Gas Prohibition Ordinance BE-1 Action 1 requires all new buildings in the city to be constructed as all electric and exclude natural gas connections. The ordinance was adopted by the City in 2020 and is included in the CAP to allow the City to take credit for the GHG emissions reductions associated with adopting and implementing the ordinance. Exemptions include existing buildings undergoing alterations, additions, or tenant improvements, restaurants, facilities employing industrial process heat, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs) less than or equal to 750 square feet. These reductions were not captured in the 2019 inventory or the adjusted forecast. The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with this action are shown in Table 4b. The actions under Measure BE-6 (Ensure Provide Inclusive Engagement, Equitable Process and Regional Coordination to Maximize Building Electrification Carbon Reduction Outcomes and Other Cobenefits) provide additional support to address equity, outreach, and funding and financing.

26.363
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
10 Table 4b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-1 Action 1 Inputs and Assumptions
Implementation year for residential development (Code: Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings, Chapter 6.100) 2020
Implementation year for commercial development (Code: Prohibition of Natural Gas Infrastructure in New Buildings, Chapter 6.100) 2020
Natural gas emission factor (MT CO2e/therm)1 0.00532
Convert kWh to therms (kWh/therm) 29.3001
Average increased efficiency of electric appliances over natural gas appliances (%)2
300
Residential natural gas usage in ordinance implementation year - 2020 (therms)
7,967,583
Commercial natural gas usage in ordinance implementation year - 2020 (therms)
4,184,482
Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Residential Reductions
Projected Residential natural gas usage excluding measure BE-1(therms)3 8,577,312 8,707,726 8,889,186 Natural gas saved (therms) 609,729 740,143 921,603
Emissions reduced from natural gas saved (MT CO2e) 3,243 3,937 4,902 Electricity usage from converting to electric (kWh) 5,955,040 7,228,754 9,001,017 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.0000029 0.0000000 0.0000000 Emissions added from converted electricity usage (MT CO2e) 18 0 0 Total residential emission reductions (MT CO2e) 3,225 3,937 4,902 Commercial Reductions
Commercial natural gas usage excluding measure BE-1 (therms) 4,729,113 4,860,737 5,148,359 Natural gas saved (therms) 544,631 676,255 963,877
Emissions reduced from natural gas saved (MT CO2e) 2,897 3,597 5,127 Electricity usage from converting to electric (kWh) 5,319,249 6,604,776 9,413,893 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.0000029 0.0000000 0.0000000 Emissions added from converted electricity usage (MT CO2e) 16 0 0 Total commercial emission reductions (MT CO2e) 2,881 3,597 5,127 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 6,107 7,533 10,028
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e) 0.085 0.100 0.126
1 Appendix A.
2 Pacific Gas & Electric. 2021. Electrification for your home or building. Accessed at:
https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/customer-service/home-services/renovating-and-building/benefits-of-electric-homes-andbuildings/benefits-of-electric-homes-and-buildings.page? 3 Appendix A.

26.364
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 11
Measure BE-2 Electrify 31% of Existing Residential Buildings by 2030 and 53% by 2035
Table 5a Measure BE-2 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated
2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/
person)
Anticipated
2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/
person)
Anticipated
2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/
person)
1 Develop, implement and enforce phased and equitable
electrification ordinance(s) for existing residential buildings by the start of 2023. Maximize permit compliance through
streamlining the compliance process, improving third-party enforcement, and advanced training for enforcement staff.

Steps to be completed to adopt the ordinance(s) are as follows:

Step 1: Work with stakeholders in developing an idea for a reach code electrification ordinance(s)
Step 2: Complete a cost effectiveness study
Step 3: Develop and draft the ordinance(s) and go through the public process, incorporating revisions as necessary
Step 4: Go through the formal adoption process
Step 5: Apply for approval by the California Energy
Commission.

0.180 0.298 0.383
2 Identify and partner with local community based organizations with connections to frontline communities to assist in
development of the equitable existing building electrification strategy.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 By 2024, establish a plan to electrify and improve health and safety of the City's existing affordable housing stock at a neighborhood level by 2035. Provide detailed information on the City website including descriptions of the health and environmental benefits of electrification, links to CCCE and PG&E resources on electrification, up-to-date lists of local contractors that perform electric retrofits, and information about the most cost-competitive residential electrification technologies currently available.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Work with PG&E and CCCE to identify opportunities to remove obsolete natural gas infrastructure, to redirect PG&E funding allocated for pipeline maintenance to electrification retrofit projects instead. Work with PG&E to identify funding, as needed, for the removal of the infrastructure. Consider a pilot to remove obsolete natural gas infrastructure from municipal buildings.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Work with PG&E and CCCE to deploy community solar and electrify existing buildings in residential neighborhoods. Work with partners to incentivize all-electric retrofits through rebates, on-bill financing, and other mechanisms.

Supportive Supportive Supportive

26.365
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
12 Measure BE-2 Action 1Existing Residential Building Electrification Ordinance BE-2 Action 1 commits the City to adopt an electrification ordinance for existing residential buildings by 2023, to be enforced through a comprehensive and equitable permitting compliance program. In 2019, natural gas usage from residential buildings accounted for about 15% of GHG emissions in the City of Santa Cruz. To reduce these GHG emissions, the electrification ordinance bans natural gas line expansion and installation of natural gas heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and hot water heaters, and other appliances starting at the beginning of 2023. HVAC system and hot water heaters are targeted in the ordinance due to their large contribution to residential natural gas end-uses and the cost-effectiveness associated with their replacement using energy efficient electric alternatives.
15 The City recognizes that successful ordinance implementation will require effective permit compliance. Permits are required for many energy efficiency improvements, including hot water heaters, insulation, HVAC systems, duct replacement, and others. However, permit evasion remains an issue in many jurisdictions, with permitted HVAC systems only accounting for 8-29% of total installations.16, 17 Strategies that have proven effective at improving permit compliance in various states and local jurisdictions include streamlining the compliance process, improving third-party enforcement, and advanced training for enforcement staff.18 The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in Table 5b. Emissions reductions were calculated based on the percentage of natural gas attributed to water heaters, and HVAC systems, the average lifespan of each natural gas consuming devices, and the assumption that about 94% appliances would be replaced on burnout.19
15 Energy and Environmental Economics (E3). April 2019. Residential Building Electrification in California: Consumer economics, greenhouse gases and grid impacts. Accessed at: https://www.ethree.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/04/E3_Residential_Building_Electrification_in_California_April_2019.pdf 16 Emily Alvarez and Bruce Mast. BayREN Codes & Standards Program. October 2021. Local Government Policy Calculator for Existing Single-Family Buildings – User Guide. Accessed at: https://www.bayrencodes.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/BayREN-PolicyCalculator-User-Guide_10.29.2021.pdf 17 California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). September 2017. Final Report: 2014-16 HVAC Permit and Code Compliance Market Assessment (Work Order 6) Volume I – Report. Accessed at:
http://www.calmac.org/publications/HVAC_WO6_FINAL_REPORT_VolumeI_22Sept2017.pdf 18 Ryan Meres et al. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). 2012. Successful Strategies for Improving Compliance with Building Energy Codes. Accessed at: https://www.aceee.org/files/proceedings/2012/data/papers/0193-000112.pdf 19 8 to 29% of HVAC projects have historically been permitted, while 100% of energy efficiency requirements are met regardless of permitting status. It was therefore assumed that a permit enforcement program will push the average closer to 100%. Permitted electric HVAC installation in coastal regions is estimated to be 94% according to CPUC’s Final Report: 2014-16 HVAC Permit and Code Compliance Market Assessment (Work Order 6) Volume I – Report, accessed at:
http://www.calmac.org/publications/HVAC_WO6_FINAL_REPORT_VolumeI_22Sept2017.pdf

26.366
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 13
Table 5b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-2 Action 1 Inputs and Assumptions
Ordinance implementation year 2023
Natural gas emissions factor (MT CO2e/therm)1 0.005319
Convert kWh to therms (kWh/therm) 29.3001
Average increased efficiency of electric appliances over natural gas appliances (%)2
300
Average natural gas water heater lifespan in years3 13
Average natural gas HVAC lifespan in years4 21.5
Natural gas usage from water heater (%)5 38
Natural gas usage from heating/cooling (%)6 39
Assumed noncompliance (%)7 6
Residential natural gas usage after new building electrification ordinance is implemented (therms)
7,967,583
GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Percentage of homes with replaced water heaters, assuming 2023 ordinance implementation year, 6% non-compliance, and replacement on burnout (%)
51 87 94
Natural gas reduction from water heater replacement (%) 19 32 35 Percentage of homes with replaced HVAC, assuming non-compliance and replacement on burnout (%)
31 52 94
Natural gas reduction from HVAC replacement (%) 12 20 37 Total natural gas saved (therms) 2,460,458 4,217,928 5,724,003 Emissions reduced from total natural gas saved (MT CO2e) 13,086 22,434 30,444 Electricity usage from converting to electric (kWh) 24,030,557 41,195,241 55,904,619 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.0000029 0.0000000 0.0000000 Emissions added from converted electricity usage (MT CO2e) 71 1 0 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 13,016 22,433 30,444
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.180 0.298 0.383 1 Appendix A.
2 Pacific Gas & Electric. 2021. Electrification for your home or building. Accessed at:
https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/customer-service/home-services/renovating-and-building/benefits-of-electric-homes-andbuildings/benefits-of-electric-homes-and-buildings.page? 3 EIA. 2018. Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Cost and Efficiencies. Appendix C. Accessed at:
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/buildings/equipcosts/pdf/full.pdf 4 Ibid.
5 Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. 2018. Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings. Accessed at:
https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf 6 Ibid.
7 8 to 29% of HVAC projects have historically been permitted, while 100% of energy efficiency requirements are met regardless of permitting status. It was therefore assumed that a permit enforcement program will push the average closer to 100%. Permitted electric HVAC installation in coastal regions is estimated to be 94% according to CPUC’s Final Report: 2014-16 HVAC Permit and Code Compliance Market Assessment (Work Order 6) Volume I – Report, accessed at:
http://www.calmac.org/publications/HVAC_WO6_FINAL_REPORT_VolumeI_22Sept2017.pdf

26.367
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
14 Measure BE-2 Actions 2-3Electrification Strategy
BE-2 Action 2 commits the City to develop and implement an equitable existing building electrification strategy (EEBES) in partnership with local community based organizations with connections to frontline communities. Existing building electrification is relatively untested at a city scale, suggesting that a City of Santa Cruz-specific strategy that investigates the opportunities, barriers, and solutions associated with residential building electrification is key to successful implementation of an ordinance. The EEBES should build off of the best practices used by the City’s Water Department staff to successfully implement water efficiency upgrades at the city scale. This can be done by leveraging staff experience in launching successful education and engagement campaigns, providing rebates, and landscape ordinance enforcement, to promote existing building electrification citywide. Because of the generally high cost of building electrification, developing solutions for potential equity impacts of residential building electrification is key to successful implementation.20 The EEBES is designed to give special consideration to the potential equity impacts of an electrification ordinance by investigating up-front and on-bill costs of electrification to residents, potential impacts to renters, potential impacts to electrical grid resiliency, and by specifically targeting equity groups for feedback on EEBES development.

BE-2 Action 3 commits the City to establish a plan to electrify and improve health and safety of the existing affordable housing stock at a neighborhood level. The City recognizes that outreach to equity groups during policy development processes is often challenging, and therefore, plans to engage local community-based organizations with connections to these groups in an effort to engage more intentionally and transparently.

Measure BE-2 Action 4Neighborhood Electrification
Neighborhood scale electrification consists of electrifying entire neighborhoods rather than individual appliances in individual homes and includes elimination (or pruning) of natural gas infrastructure within buildings and beneath the streets. A neighborhood-scale approach to electrification can be more cost-effective overall. For example, in a neighborhood in which half of the buildings have been electrified while the other half still rely on natural gas, those left on natural gas are left paying for the infrastructure for the entire neighborhood.21 BE-2 Action 4 commits the City to exploring natural gas pruning opportunities. Natural gas pruning would require regulatory changes at the CPUC to allow PG&E the flexibility needed to reallocate funding from natural gas infrastructure projects to electrification projects. In the interest of supporting these changes, the City plans to collaborate regionally on advocating for natural gas pruning. Action 4 also promotes deploying community solar in residential neighborhoods.

Measure BE-2Action 5Funding and Financing
In general, electrification has been found to reduce costs for homeowners over the lifetime of appliances when compared to propane or natural gas-fueled equipment, especially when retrofits are bundled and completed when appliances are already planned for replacement, or when coupled with rooftop solar installation. However, the City anticipates that the residential building electrification ordinance will result in up-front retrofit costs for residents that may be difficult for the community, particularly low-income residents, to bear. The largest barrier to existing building 20 Greenlining Institute. 2019. Equitable Building Electrification: A Framework for Powering Resilient Communities. Accessed at:
https://greenlining.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Greenlining_EquitableElectrification_Report_2019_WEB.pdf 21 City of Berkeley. April 2021. Existing Building Electrification Strategy Administrative Draft.

26.368
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 15
electrification is higher up-front capital costs compared to natural gas. Up-front capital costs of electrification are higher for existing homes currently heated with natural gas because it requires home retrofits to electric space and water heating.22On-bill or financed incentives to offset these costs for the end-user are therefore among the most promising opportunities for electrification.

BE-2 Action 5 commits the City to establishing funding pathways to make existing building electrification possible, particularly for low-income residents of the City. Once up-front costs are financed, long term savings can be used to achieve cash flow positive retrofits and/or acceptable return on investments (ROI’s). Demonstrating cost effective pathways for existing building electrification will be a key step before mandatory requirements can be set.

Measure BE-3 Electrify 26% of Existing Commercial Buildings by 2030 and 45% by 2035
Table 6a Measure BE-3 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Adopt, implement and enforce an
electrification ordinance for existing
commercial buildings by the beginning of
2024.

0.079 0.133 0.173
2 Work with partners to mitigate potential
equity impacts of existing commercial
building electrification ordinance.

Facilitate equitable and inclusive funding
opportunities for commercial building
electrification.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Support commercial battery storage
installations and business district scale
microgrid opportunities.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Establish a building emissions
performance standard for commercial
buildings over 20,000 square feet.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure BE-3 Action 1Existing Commercial Building Electrification Ordinance BE-3 Action 1 commits the City to adopting an electrification ordinance for existing commercial buildings by 2024, to be enforced through the same comprehensive and equitable permitting compliance program described under Measure BE-2 Action 1. Natural gas usage from commercial buildings accounted for about 8% of GHG emissions in the City of Santa Cruz in 2019. To address these GHG emissions, the electrification ordinance bans natural gas line expansion and requires installation of all-electric appliance, such as heat pumps, variable refrigerant flow systems, and hot water heaters at time of major renovation and time of replacement as technologically feasible. The ordinance recognizes that current technology may limit the extent to which commercial natural gas 22 Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI). 2018. The Economics of Electrifying Buildings. Accessed at: https://rmi.org/wpcontent/uploads/2018/06/RMI_Economics_of_Electrifying_Buildings_2018.pdf

26.369
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
16 end uses in the City of Santa Cruz can be electrified. 23 For this reason, some limited exemptions may
be included in the commercial electrification ordinance. The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in the Table 6b below.

Table 6b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure BE-3 Action 1 Inputs and Assumptions
Ordinance implementation year 2024
Natural gas emissions factor (MT CO2e/therm)1 0.005319
Convert kWh to therms (kWh/therm) 29.3001
Average increased efficiency of electric appliances over natural gas appliances (%)2 300 Average natural gas water heater lifespan in years3 10
Average natural gas HVAC lifespan in years4 23
Natural gas usage from water heater (%)5 28
Natural gas usage from heating/cooling (%)6 42
Assumed noncompliance (%)7 6
Commercial natural gas usage after new building electrification ordinance is implemented (therms) 4,184,482 GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Percentage of buildings with replaced water heaters, assuming noncompliance and replacement on burnout (%)56 94 94 Natural gas reduction from water heater replacement (%) 16 26 26 Percentage of commercial buildings with replaced HVAC, assuming noncompliance and replacement on burnout (%)25 45 86 Natural gas reduction from HVAC replacement (%) 10 19 36 Total natural gas saved (therms) 1,083,114 1,876,447 2,589,022 Emissions reduced from total NG saved (MT CO2e) 5,761 9,980 13,770 Electricity usage from converting to electric (kWh) 10,578,447 18,326,696 25,286,200 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh)8 0.0000029 0.0000000 0.0000000 Emissions added from converted electricity usage (MT CO2e) 31 1 0 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 5,730 9,980 13,770
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.079 0.133 0.173 1 Appendix A
2 Pacific Gas & Electric. 2021. Electrification for your home or building. Accessed at:
https://www.pge.com/en_US/residential/customer-service/home-services/renovating-and-building/benefits-of-electric-homes-andbuildings/benefits-of-electric-homes-and-buildings.page? 3 EIA. 2018. Updated Buildings Sector Appliance and Equipment Cost and Efficiencies. Appendix C. Accessed at:
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/buildings/equipcosts/pdf/full.pdf 4 Ibid.
5 Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. 2018. Decarbonization of Heating Energy Use in California Buildings. Accessed at:
https://www.synapse-energy.com/sites/default/files/Decarbonization-Heating-CA-Buildings-17-092-1.pdf 6 Ibid.
7 Assumed roughly equivalent to residential non-compliance due to lack of sufficient data or studies. 8 Appendix A – residential weighted average (PG&E and CCCE) 23 kW Engineering. March 2021. Important Considerations for Electrification of Commercial Buildings. Accessed at: https://www.kwengineering.com/electrification-commercial-buildings-important-considerations/

26.370
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 17
Measure BE-3 Action 2Mitigate Potential Equity Impacts
Existing building electrification in the commercial sector is less well researched than in the residential sector. While some commercial natural gas end uses may be ripe for electrification – about 27% of commercial floor space heated with fossil fuel systems can be electrified today with a simple payback period of less than 10 years – other end uses may not.24 To close the knowledge gap about commercial building electrification and mitigate potential equity impacts in the City of Santa Cruz, BE-3 Action 2 commits the City to engaging with the commercial sector and business community to understand barriers, equity/cost impacts, and opportunities associated with electrification of commercial natural gas end uses. Technologies that currently exist for electrifying HVAC systems and water heaters in the commercial sector range from cost-effective to prohibitively expensive, usually depending on the complexity of the system.25 Additionally, while all-electric HVAC systems and water heaters can be cost-effective over their lifetimes, up-front costs may be substantially higher with payback periods longer than 10 years.26 Financial incentives are needed to make conversion of about 73% of commercial floor space cost effective, not to mention other end uses that are less well studied.27 To meet this need, Action 2 commits the City to both research and facilitating equitable and inclusive funding opportunities for the commercial sector.

Measure BE-3 Action 3Battery Storage
While building electrification is not expected to result in additional strain on the electrical grid,28 commercial-scale battery storage projects present an opportunity to improve the resilience of the electrical grid, city and community facilities, and provide cost savings over the lifetime of the equipment.29 BE-3 Action 3 commits the City to exploring opportunities to support commercial battery storage installations.

Measure BE-3 Actions 4Building Performance Standards
Building performance standards (BPS) require building owners to meet emission performance targets by actively improving their buildings over time.30 This type of standard is particularly useful for existing commercial and multifamily buildings. The standards are designed to improve performance for a variety of building aspects, including energy use, water use, and emissions, and send market signals to encourage investments in energy efficiency and other clean energy technologies and strategies such as increased use of renewable energy, energy storage, and electrification.
31 Potential GHG emissions reduction from mandatory building performance 24 Steven Nadel and Chris Perry. American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE). October 2020. Electrifying Space Heating in Existing Commercial Buildings: Opportunities and Challenges. Accessed at: https://www.aceee.org/press-release/2020/10/reportelectrifying-heating-existing-commercial-buildings-could-cut-their 25 Ibid.
26 Ibid.
27 Ibid.
28 Reem Rayef. National Resources Defense Council. April 2020. California’s Grid is Ready for All-Electric Buildings. Accessed at:
https://www.nrdc.org/experts/merrian-borgeson/californias-grid-ready-all-electric-buildings 29 National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). June 2021. Battery Storage for Resilience. Accessed at:
https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy21osti/79850.pdf
30 State and Local Energy and Environment Program. 2021. Building Performance Standards: Overview for State and Local Decision Makers. Accessed at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021- 02/documents/benchmarking_building_performance_standards_section2.pdf 31 Ibid.

26.371
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
18 standards for commercial buildings are estimated to be, on average, 30%.32 The City will establish a BPS for commercial buildings over 20,000 square feet. To establish a BPS, City will ▪ set the BPS goal(s) using GHG emissions data from the City’s community inventory ▪ select appropriate energy and GHG metrics on which to base compliance ▪ work with stakeholders, particularly potentially affected building owners and tenants, throughout the process to inform the approaches
▪ identify subject properties and exemptions
▪ determine compliance approaches and enforcement mechanisms for noncompliance ▪ provide technical and funding support to subject property owners ▪ develop reporting program mechanisms.

Measure BE-4 Maintain CCCE Opt-out Rates at or Below 4% for Residential Buildings and 2% for Commercial Buildings
Table 7 Measure BE-4 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Support annual analysis of CCCE opt-out
rates in the City and encourage opting
up to CCCE prime 100% renewable
energy option.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Increase uptake of 100% renewable
energy option from CCCE, incentivizing
households in affordable housing units.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Promote benefits of opting in to CCCE
service, particularly those in frontline
neighborhoods, small businesses and
veteran, woman and minority owned
businesses.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure BE-4 Actions 1-3 CCCE Opt-in Rates
Electricity in the City is predominantly supplied by Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE), a Community Choice Aggregation (CCA). CCAs are public, non-profit agencies that procure electricity for a region or community in place of the incumbent utility provider, in this case Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). While CCCE determines how electricity will be procured to meet customer demand, PG&E is still responsible for delivering that electricity to CCCE customers via the existing electrical grid. CCCE offers one 100% renewable electricity option with lower GHG emissions rates than PG&E:
3Cprime, made up of 100% renewable electricity from solar and wind.33 Customers in the City of 32 Steven Nadel and Adam Hinge. 2020. Mandatory Building Performance Standards: A Key Policy for Achieving Climate Goals. Available <https://www.aceee.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/buildings_standards_6.22.2020_0.pdf>. Accessed April 13, 2022. 33 Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE). 2019. Energizing Economic and Environmental Progress for the Central Coast. Accessed at:
https://3cenergy.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/3CE2020-PCL-Postcard-Web-ADA-v7.pdf

26.372
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 19
Santa Cruz are automatically enrolled in CCCE 3Cchoice, 34 but have the option to opt-up to 3Cprime,
or to opt-out to receive electricity directly from PG&E. In 2019, CCCE opt-out rates (non-CCCE usage rates) in the City of Santa Cruz was approximately 4% for residential customers and 2% for commercial customers.

Typical California CCA opt-out rates are 0% for municipal accounts, 5% for residential accounts, and 15% for commercial and industrial accounts.35 Non-CCCE usage rates in the City of Santa Cruz are comparatively low, however, switching customers, to 100% renewable energy option from CCCE reduces electricity emissions in the short term and increases the GHG reduction impact of Measures BE-2 and BE-3, when natural gas end-uses are converted to electricity. Measure BE-4 and its actions aim to maintain non-CCCE usage rates at or below 4% for residential and 2% for commercial customers.

The City will support annual analysis of CCCE opt-out rates (BE-4 Action 1) and encourage opting up to 100% renewable energy option from CCCE (BE-4 Action 2). In general, the City understands that cost is often the deciding factor for residents and businesses when making energy provider choices.36 For this reason, BE-4 Actions 2 and 3 commit the City to focusing outreach and incentives for opting in to CCCE in frontline communities. While the impacts associated with promotional and educational outreach around CCAs have not been well documented, some research has been conducted on the effects of promotion and education on energy. One study in New York showed that out of the 8,991 people who participated in informational programs, 69% implemented the recommended practices.37Another research meta-analysis reviewed dozens of papers covering various energy efficiency, water efficiency, and waste outreach and found that education-only campaigns could produce between 10-12% energy savings.38 The City is committed to tracking the opt-out rate on an annual basis and develop additional actions if the opt-out rate increases. 39 34
In 2019, 3Cchoice had slightly higher eligible renewable content (30.9%) than PG&E (28.5%). Renewable electricity for 3Cchoice comes from a mix of Biomass & Biowaste, Geothermal, Eligible Hydroelectric, Solar, and Wind. Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE). 2019.

Energizing Economic and Environmental Progress for the Central Coast. Accessed at: https://3cenergy.org/wpcontent/uploads/2020/11/3CE2020-PCL-Postcard-Web-ADA-v7.pdf 35 County of Butte. July 2018. Community Choice Aggregation Initial Feasibility Study. Page 18. Accessed at:
http://buttecounty.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=512&meta_id=87147 36 Sara Appel. Civic Business Journal. June 2018. The City of Rancho Mirage Launches Community Choice Aggregation Program with Low Opt-Out Rate. Accessed at: https://www.civicbusinessjournal.com/city-rancho-mirage-launches-community-choice-aggregation-programlow-opt-rate/ 37 Joseph Laquatra. Journal of Extension. December 2009. The Consumer Education Program for Residential Energy Efficiency. Accessed at:
https://archives.joe.org/joe/2009december/a6.php
38 John Green and Lisa A. Skumatz. Skumatz Economic Research Associates, Inc. 2000. Evaluating the Impacts of Education/Outreach Programs: Lessons on Impacts, Methods, and Optimal Education. Accessed at:
https://aceee.org/files/proceedings/2000/data/papers/SS00_Panel8_Paper10.pdf 39 Emissions factors used in this document were generated based on current and projected CCCE emissions factor (see Appendix A).

26.373
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
20 Measure BE-5 Increase Resiliency through Equitable Energy Efficiency and Local Solar Programs
Table 8 Measure BE-5 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Partner to deliver weatherization, healthy
home retrofits, energy efficiency and
solar system installs to low income
homeowners and rental units.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Advocate to reform community solar
policies and rates, enabling residential
and commercial renters to participate in
benefits of local solar.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Establish rental building energy
performance standards to increase
adoption of rebated energy efficiency
and electrification measures.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure BE-5 Actions 1-3Energy Efficiency and Local Solar Programs BE-5 Actions 1 through 3 improve sustainability and resilience in the City (with a focus on frontline communities) by delivering weatherization, healthy home retrofits, energy efficiencies and solar system installs to low income homeowners and rental units (BE-5 Action 1); advocating to reform community solar policies and rates, enabling residential and commercial renters to participate in benefits of local solar (BE-5 Action 2); and establishing rental building emissions performance standards (BPS) to increase adoption of rebated energy efficiency and electrification measures (BE-5 Action 3). These actions support energy efficiency in the community and Measure BE-2, which is to electrify 31% of existing residential buildings by 2030 and 53% by 2035.

Measure BE-6 Provide Inclusive Engagement, Equitable Process and Regional Coordination to Maximize Building Electrification Carbon Reduction Outcomes and Other Co-benefits
Table 9 Measure BE-6 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Define equity metrics for new and
existing building electrification
ordinances' implementation and
enforcement based on feedback from
frontline communities, successful
examples from other jurisdictions, and
structure ordinances and permitting
compliance program to meet these
metrics. Equity metrics should be
designed to prevent displacement and
Supportive Supportive Supportive

26.374
Building Energy Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 21
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
lead to end-user energy costs for lowincome populations that are lower after electrification than before.
2 Partner with CCCE to develop allelectric rates by income-level and incentivize equitable all-electric
retrofits.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Advance new and existing building
electrification as a priority at all scales.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Advocate for state and federal
regulatory changes to enable
neighborhood level electrification,
community solar, natural gas pruning,
and rate stabilization policies.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Conduct a study to evaluate the need
to increase fees to provide outreach,
trainings, and additional staff for
building electrification compliance.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Facilitate equitable access to accurate
and current information about
electrification programs, incentives and
opportunities. Develop induction
cooktop loaner programs.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 Participate in regional workforce
development opportunities for building
electrification.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
8 Work with partners to establish a
Regional Energy Network for energy
efficiency and electrification building
resources, expand education on
subsidized rate programs, code
compliance training and apprenticeship
program.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure BE-6 Actions 1-8Inclusive and Equitable Process and Engagement to Maximize Building Electrification Carbon Reduction Outcomes and Other Co-benefits
BE-6 Actions 1 through 8 provide a suite of equity-centered activities that will support the City’s building energy measures. These actions include defining equity metrics based on feedback from frontline communities; leveraging local and regional partnerships to incentivize equitable all-electric retrofits; advocating for state and federal regulator changes to enable neighborhood level electrification, community solar, and more; facilitating equitable access to accurate and current information about electrification programs, incentives, and opportunities; and working with

26.375
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
22 partners to establish a Regional Energy Network for energy efficiency and building electrification resources.

26.376
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 23
3 Transportation Measures
Reducing transportation emissions and becoming a carbon neutral city means reducing the number of miles driven by fossil fuel-powered vehicles, which account for 69% of GHG emissions in the City of Santa Cruz. The City’s transportation strategy consists of a multi-pronged approach for incentivizing alternatives to fossil fuel-powered vehicle trips, including shifting transportation mode share to active transportation and public transportation options; electrifying passenger and commercial vehicle trips, decarbonizing off-road equipment, and promoting efficient use of urban land resources, for example through infill development. This CAP prioritizes reducing vehicle miles travelled (VMT) first, by improving active and public transportation mode share, then shifting remaining VMT to electric vehicles. While in theory, 100% electrification of all vehicles in the City of Santa Cruz could achieve zero-emissions in the transportation sector without reducing VMT, the City recognizes that cars and roadways carry huge amounts of embodied emissions40 not accounted for in the inventory, over which the City has little control.41 Reducing VMT carries additional benefits outside of GHG emissions reductions as well, including reduced congestion, reduced space needed for roadways and parking, local economic revitalization, and lifestyle improvements.42 Based on this strategy, the CAP’s transportation measures consist of the following:
▪ T-1: Implement programs for active transportation (walking and biking) that achieve 23% bicycle mode share by 2030 and 30% by 2035
▪ T-2: Implement programs for public transportation that achieve 8% public transportation mode share by 2030 and 12% public transportation mode share by 2035 ▪ T-3: Develop programs and policies to discourage driving single-occupancy passenger vehicles ▪ T-4: Increase passenger electric vehicle (EV) adoption to 35% mode share by 2030 and 40% by 2035
▪ T-5: Increase commercial EV adoption to 25% by 2030 and 35% by 2035 ▪ T-6: Electrify or otherwise decarbonize 50% of off-road equipment by 2030 and 75% by 2035 ▪ T-7: Advocate for remote work policy and infrastructure To achieve 23% mode shift to active transportation (Measure T-1), the City plans to provide low stress and convenient infrastructure and prioritize mobility via active transportation. Infrastructure needs include bikeways, sidewalk improvements, and expansions of both kinds of infrastructure to all areas of the City. Once the infrastructure is available and stress/comfort is not an issue, comparison with other cities around the world suggest more people will choose active transportation.

To achieve 8% mode shift to public transportation (Measure T-2), the City plans to improve public and shared programs and infrastructure. This measure prioritizes shared and public transportation in the City, makes public transportation more convenient, and reduces the time it takes to reach a 40 Embodied emissions are associated with energy used in the extraction, processing, and transportation of materials. 41 Mark Mills. August 2021. The tough calculus of emissions and the future of EVs. Accessed at: https://techcrunch.com/2021/08/22/thetough-calculus-of-emissions-and-the-future-of-evs/ 42 Richard Campbell and Margaret Wittgens. March 2004. The Business Case for Active Transportation. Accessed at:
http://thirdwavecycling.com/pdfs/at_business_case.pdf

26.377
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
24 destination via public transportation – important determining factors for shared and public transportation mode share.

Measure T-3 provides the supportive framework for the actions in Measures T-1 and T-2, and TR-3 by creating behavior disincentives for owning a fossil fuel-powered passenger vehicle, such as limited parking options, local taxes to support transit, and congestion charges.

While the City cannot require its residents or businesses to buy electric vehicles, Measure T-4 and T5 will ensure the infrastructure and incentives are present in the City to begin to remove present barriers to passenger and commercial electric vehicle adoption. Measure T-6 establishes a goal of decarbonizing 50% of off-road equipment by 2030, supported by a new City ordinance to ban gas powered small off road engines, and incentives. Finally, Measure T-7 supports remote work policies and infrastructure through regional collaboration and advocacy.

Measure T-1 Implement Programs for Active Transportation (Walking and Biking) that Achieve 23% Bicycle Mode Share by 2030 and 30% by 2035
Table 10aMeasure T-1 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Fund, staff and implement the Active
Transportation Plan Update, Vision Zero,
Safe Routes to School and the 2030
General Plan update.

0.051 0.069 0.067
2 Complete all portions of Rail Trail and
work with partners to plan active and
public transportation to Rail line.
3 Require secure bike parking near public
transportation and in major activity
centers. Require bike parking installation
in new commercial developments and
existing commercial renovations.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Re-establish citywide e-bike share with
explicit consideration of how to make
accessible to frontline groups.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Build new infrastructure that provides
equitable access to safe bicycle and
pedestrian pathways throughout the city,
prioritizing frontline neighborhoods.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Pilot Neighborhood Greenways to slow
traffic and improve walking and biking
and evaluate piloting time based closures
to vehicles primarily in business districts.

Supportive Supportive Supportive

26.378
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 25
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
7 Accelerate housing development and
support commercial and industrial
development in city limits, concentrating
the most intensive growth in transit
corridors and central areas of the city to
promote walking and biking to nearby
jobs, entertainment, goods, services, and
public transportation, through the
General Plan Housing Element Update to
be approved in 2023. Prioritize expansion
of affordable housing stock.

Partner to incentivize 15-minute
neighborhoods, particularly within
frontline neighborhoods communities,
supported by dense housing and
buildings, provision of locally sited
essential services and amenities, and
connected by a network of bike,
pedestrian, and transit services.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure T-1 Actions 1-2Pedestrian and Bicycle Network and Infrastructure In 2019, bicycle mode share in the City of Santa Cruz was 8%, but has been up as high as 12% until recently, see Appendix A: GHG Emissions Forecast of the Climate Action Plan. Studies show that investments in active transportation infrastructure have demonstrated improvements in active transportation mode shifts and GHG emissions reductions.43 The City of Santa Cruz adopted a number of active transportation efforts, including the:
▪ Active Transportation Plan - which identifies programs and projects to improve pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in the City of Santa Cruz.44
▪ Vision Zero policy - with a goal of zero fatalities or serious injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all,
45 ▪ Safe Routes to School - which fund safety improvements around schools and bike and pedestrian education programs in the City,46 and
43 Andrew Glazener and Haneen Khreis. January 2019. Transforming our Cities: Best Practices Towards Clean Air and Active Transportation. Accessed at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40572-019-0228-1 44 City of Santa Cruz. February 2017. City of Santa Cruz Active Transportation Plan. Accessed at:
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/60966/636353003776970000 45 City of Santa Cruz. 2021. Santa Cruz 2018 and 2019 Traffic safety Reports Offer Guide to Engineering and Enforcement Efforts. Accessed at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/Home/Components/News/News/9256/36 46 City of Santa Cruz. N.d. Safe Routes to School. Accessed: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/publicworks/traffic-engineering/bicycle-pedestrian-facilities-and-programs/safe-routes-toschool#:~:text=Safe%20Routes%20to%20School%20Grant,within%20Santa%20Cruz%20city%20limits.

26.379
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
26 ▪ 2030 General Plan update - which includes policies and programs for enhanced public transportation, bicycle, and pedestrian networks throughout the community.47 ▪ GO Santa Cruz – a City program that offers incentives to help downtown employees choose options other than driving to get to work.48
T-1 Action 1 commits the City to expanding efforts already in place through funding, staffing, and implementing the Active Transportation Plan, Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School, and the 2030 General Plan update.

Walking, bikes, e-bikes, and other active transportation modes can have a strong impact on cities’ GHG emissions, with the potential to cut urban transportation emissions up to 11% in cities that make a strong commitment to promoting bicycle travel.49 Nationally in 2017, 16.4% of vehicle trips were one mile or less, a distance easily travelled by foot or bicycle.50 T-1 Action 2 commits the City to improving all portions of the Rail Trail and work with partners to plan active and public transportation to Rail line. The City’s existing Active Transportation Plan identify a number of programs and projects, such as providing a complete bicycle and pedestrian network among residential areas, downtown and major activity centers, sidewalk buildouts, intersection improvements, Safe Routes to School program expansion, and education programs, that will make the active transportation network in the City of Santa Cruz more connected, accessible, and safe.

In order to estimate the mode shift potential associated with T-1 Actions 1 and 2, other cities with similar buildouts (bike network mileage versus road network mileage) were compared. Results from significant investment in bicycle infrastructure in California suggest that bicycle mode share can be increased on par with leading bicycle cities in the state. The City of Davis leads the state with 23.2% bicycle mode share in 2019 followed by the City of Berkeley with 9.7% bicycle mode share in 2019 (see Table 10b). Given that the City of Santa Cruz currently has bicycle mode share similar to that of Berkeley, the second highest leading City in bicycle mode share in the state, a history of reaching bike ridership goals, and a bike network buildout ratio similar to Davis, GHG emissions quantification in 2030 for these actions estimates 23%. The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in Table 10c. 47 City of Santa Cruz. 2030. General Plan. Accessed at :
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/71130/637453677885300000 48 City of Santa Cruz. 2022. GO Santa Cruz. Accessed at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/how-do-i/go-santa-cruz 49 Jacob Mason et al. Institute for Transportation & Development Policy and the University of California, Davis. November 2015. A Global High Shift Cycling Scenario. Accessed at: https://itdpdotorg.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/A-Global-High-Shift-CyclingScenario_Nov-2015.pdf 50 National Household Travel Survey. December 2021. Population Vehicle Trips Statistics. Accessed at: https://nhts.ornl.gov/vehicle-trips

26.380
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 27
Table 10b Bicycle Network Buildout versus Mode Share
City
Bike Network
Length (miles)
Roadway
Length (miles)
Bike Buildout
Ratio
Bicycle Mode
Share (%)
City of Davis, California (2019) 1231 1692 0.72 233
City of Berkeley, California (2019) 51
4 2215 0.23 9.76
City of Santa Cruz, California (2019) 71.37 1368 0.52 8 9 City of Santa Cruz, California (2030) 98 136 0.72 2310 1 City of Davis. 2020. Form 1878 (League of American Bicyclists Bicycle Friendly America Application Form). Accessed at:
https://bikeleague.org/content/about-bfc-application-process 2 Ibid.
3 Wikipedia. November 2021. List of U.S. Cities with Most Bicycle Commuters. Accessed at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_bicycle_commuters 4 City of Berkeley. May 2017. City of Berkeley Bicycle Plan. Accessed at:
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Public_Works/Level_3_-_Transportation/Berkeley-Bicycle-Plan-2017- Executive%20Summary.pdf
5 City of Berkeley. 2003. General Plan Transportation Element Introduction. Accessed at:
https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Planning_and_Development/Home/General_Plan_-_Transportation_Element.aspx 6 Wikipedia. November 2021. List of U.S. Cities with Most Bicycle Commuters. Accessed at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_bicycle_commuters 7, 8, 9 Tiffany Wise-West. May 11, 2022. Personal Communication.

Appendix A

9.Estimated just below the City of Davis mode share in 2019 since the buildout ratio for City of Santa Cruz in 2030 will be equal to Davis’ in 2019.

Table 10c GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-1 Actions 1-2 Inputs and Assumptions
Existing bicycle mode share (%) (2019)1 8
Average bike trip length (miles)2 1.5
GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Bicycle mode share target (%) 23 30 30
Passenger trips/mile3 0.1291 0.1300 0.1324
Mode share increase from 2019 (%) 15 22 22
Passenger VMT4 415,687,575 432,587,184 463,733,351
Passenger trips 53,654,512 56,245,962 61,395,552
New bike trips substituted for vehicle trips (miles) 8,262,795 12,599,095 13,752,603 Passenger VMT reduced with bike trips (Miles) 12,394,192 18,898,643 20,628,906 Passenger emissions factor (MT CO2e/VMT)5 0.00029541 0.00027453 0.00025806 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 3,661 5,188 5,323
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.051 0.069 0.067 1 Appendix A
2 California Air Resources Board (CARB). April 2019. Quantifying Reductions in Vehicle Miles Traveled from New Bike Paths, Lanes, and Cycle Tracks. Accessed at: http://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/auction-proceeds/bicycle_facilities_technical_041519.pdf

26.381
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
28 3 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 4 Appendix A
5 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 Measure T-1 Action 3Bicycle Parking Infrastructure
A bicycle network isn’t complete without secure and convenient bike parking at the end of a trip.

Bicycle parking in the City of Santa Cruz is available at many shopping centers, schools, and parks.

Most bicycle parking is short-term bicycle racks. The City of Santa Cruz must continue to increase the amount of high-quality bicycle parking to improve its Bicycle Friendly Communities designation per the League of American Bicyclists. Improved bicycle parking would increase bicycling by making residents confident that they will have a safe place to leave their bike when they arrive at their destination.51 T-1 Action 3 commits the City to ensuring bike parking near public transportation and in major activity centers.

Measure T-1 Action 4Bike Share
T-1 Action 4 commits the City to re-establish citywide bike share with special considerations for making it accessible to frontline communities. There is good evidence to suggest that bike share programs like e-bike share can reduce VMT and associated GHG emissions. A 2014 study from Utrecht University suggests that the car substitution rate of shared rideables is dependent on what proportion of trips are already taken by car in a city. 52 In the study, Minneapolis and Melbourne had between 70% and 76% vehicle mode share in 2014 and showed high rates of car mode substitution (19% to 21%) after shared rideables were introduced. On the other hand, London and Washington DC had between 36% and 46% vehicle mode share in 2014 and showed much lower rates of car mode substitution where shared rideables were introduced (2% to 7%). Success of shared rideables in replacing vehicle use is not known in Santa Cruz, but a 2019 report from the City of Santa Monica found that 49% of shared rideable trips replaced vehicle trips based on answers to survey questions.53 Santa Cruz and Santa Monica both had high vehicle mode share (73% 54 and 72%
respectively) before shared rideables were introduced, suggesting that the City of Santa Cruz would see a similar if not higher car substitution rate of shared rideables as Santa Monica. Both studies previously mentioned suggest that average trip duration of shared rideable trips is about 2 miles (this is seen consistently across the six diverse cities mentioned above) and appears to be largely independent of other city metrics.

An e-bike ride share program has the potential to be even more successful, as e-bike riders can go longer distances and are more accessible to non-riders. A study in Portland, Oregon found that a 15% e-bike mode share could result in a 12% reduction in transportation-related emissions.55 51 City of Santa Cruz. February 2017. City of Santa Cruz Active Transportation Plan. Accessed at:
https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/home/showpublisheddocument/60966/636353003776970000 52 Elliot Fishman et al. 2014. Bike share’s impact on car use: Evidence from the United States, Great Britain, and Australia. Accessed at:
http://mobility-workspace.eu/wp-content/uploads/Bike-shares-impact-on-car-use-3.pdf 53 City of Santa Monica. 2019. Shared Mobility Pilot Program Summary Report. Accessed at:
https://www.smgov.net/uploadedFiles/Departments/PCD/Transportation/SantaMonicaSharedMobilityEvaluation_Final_110419.pdf 54 United States Census Bureau. 2019. American Community Survey 1-year Estimates. Accessed at:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=2019%20ACS%20transportation%20City%20of%20Santa%20Cruz&tid=ACSDT1Y2019.B08141 55 Michael McQueen. October 2020. The E-Bike Potential: Estimating regional e-bike impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. Accessed at:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920920306696

26.382
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 29
Measure T-1 Actions 5-6Equitable Access
T-1 Actions 5 and 6 integrate equity considerations into project prioritization, based on the understanding that the distribution of pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure is often inequitable.

Equity must be considered as part of the active transportation infrastructure planning process.56 T-1 Actions 5 and 6 commit the City to focusing active transportation infrastructure improvements in frontline communities, increasing the safety of active transportation in those areas. T-1 Action 6 pilots designated streets for bicycles in frontline communities, which helps to prioritize bicycle and pedestrian movement in the City and increase the safety of active transportation in those areas.

Measure T-1 Action 7 and 8? Efficient and Equitable Land Use Planning Efficient land use planning can encourage more walking and biking, thereby reducing GHG emissions from vehicle miles traveled. The City’s Housing Element of the General Plan includes major directives related to land use and transportation that promote efficient land use planning including:
▪ Encourage a mix of commercial and residential uses along transit corridors and in the central core.
▪ Support the proposed higher density along major transit corridors and in the downtown core. ▪ Encourage the development of housing affordable to people with special housing needs such as seniors, people with disabilities, single parent families, college students, and people who are homeless.
▪ Promote affordable housing through ordinances and current inclusionary programs that don’t require significant public subsidy.
▪ Continue the City’s density bonus program, in tandem with the affordable housing ordinance, to allow developers to build additional housing units which help subsidize the inclusion of affordable units in the project.

Action 7 commits the City to continuing efficient and equitable land use planning through the General Plan Housing Element update.

Measure T-2 Implement Programs for Public Transportation that Achieve 8% Public Transportation Mode Share by 2030 and 12% Public Transportation Mode Share by 2035
Table 11aMeasure T-2 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated
2030
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
Anticipated
2035
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
Anticipated
2045
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
1 Support countywide coordination to fund and
implement Bus Rapid Transit. 0.002 0.032 0.089
56 Richard J Lee. September 2016. Understanding the role of equity in active transportation planning in the United States. Accessed at:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01441647.2016.1239660

26.383
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
30 Action
Number Action
Anticipated
2030
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
Anticipated
2035
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
Anticipated
2045
Reduction
(MT
CO2e/person)
2 Support public transportation prioritizing serving major corridors, destinations, and frontline neighborhoods.

Advocate for enhanced and increased public
transportation service with improved customer serving
amenities (e.g., all door boarding, on demand, online
ticketing, Wi-Fi).
3 Require more employers to develop education and
financial incentives for employees to bike, walk,
carpool, or take the bus to work. Require large
employers to subsidize alternative modes.
4 Advocate for METRO to fund and implement a free
public transportation pilot program for students, foster youth, and unhoused youth in the City.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Support funding for public transportation fleet
electrification.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Equitably market and publicize public transportation
improvements and incentive programs as they are
planned and implemented.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 Partner with Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission, Santa Cruz County, and Regional Agencies
to expand citywide transportation communications and
marketing programs to residents commuting outside of
the City for work.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure T-2 Actions 1-3Public Transportation Improvements In general, improvements to public transportation systems reduce VMT and a city’s dependence on fossil fuels. The best ways to improve a public transportation system and reduce driving is to expand its geographic reach and increase the frequency and reliability of public transportation service. Each new car-owner convinced to get on a bus is one less car on the road, reducing personal VMT.

Approximately 1% increase in public transportation frequency saves 0.5% in VMT.57 Further, improving public transportation access has the potential to shift trips from cars to transit, which may reduce vehicle trips, VMT, and GHG emissions, with time spent getting to a public transportation stop being the key indicator of public transportation access.58 Effective implementation of the key actions under Measure T-2 – including designated lanes for public transportation – requires planning and funding. T-2 Action 1 commits the City to support countywide coordination to fund and implement Bus Rapid Transit, which helps to prioritize bus 57 Todd Litman. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. August 2021. Evaluating Public Transit Benefits and Costs Best Practices Guidebook.

Accessed at: https://www.vtpi.org/tranben.pdf
58 California Air Resources Board (CARB). August 2017. Methods to Assess Co-Benefits of California Climate Investments: Vehicle Miles Travelled. Accessed at: http://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/auction-proceeds/carb_vehicle_miles_traveled.pdf

26.384
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 31
movement in the City. This action addressed the need for increased frequency and reliability of public transportation service.

T-2 Action 2 supports public transportation prioritizing serving major destinations and frontline neighborhoods, where those who need public transportation are most likely to work and reside. T-2 Action 3 requires employers to develop education and financial incentives for employees to bike, walk, carpool, or take the bus to work and requires large employers to subsidize alternative modes.

In order to estimate the mode shift potential associated with T-1 Actions 1 through 3, other cities with similar levels and types of public transportation investment were compared. Success in other cities suggests that significant investment in public transportation can increase public transportation mode share on par with those cities. The City of San Francisco leads the state with 26% public transportation mode share in 2017 (pre-COVID).59
,
60 The City of Seattle has documented significant
increases in public transportation mode share to 48% in 2017 (pre-COVID). 61 Key strategies
employed by these cities include significant expansions of public transportation service lines, designated streets or lanes for bus lines to decrease headways, implementation of taxes to support transit, and reduced parking availability. The City of Santa Cruz is following the lead of San Francisco and Seattle by implementing the actions under Measure T-2 and Measure T-3, which include supporting prioritization of service in frontline communities and to major destinations (T-1, Action 1), supporting Bus Rapid Transit on corridors (T-2, Action 2), and reducing parking availability in the City (T-3, actions 3-7). Quantification conservatively estimates 8% public transportation mode share is achievable in 2030, given the barriers to public transportation that the City of Santa Cruz currently faces. The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in Table 11b.
59 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA). December 2021. Sustainable Transportation Mode Share. Accessed at:
https://www.sfmta.com/reports/sustainable-transportation-mode-share 60 Pre-COVID numbers are referenced here with the understanding that public transportation usage during the COVID pandemic were lower than normal and are likely to increase again assuming a return to pre-COVID conditions. 61 Commute Seattle. December 2021. 2019 Mode Split Study Report. Accessed at: https://www.commuteseattle.com/resource/2019- mode-split-study/

26.385
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
32 Table 11b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-2 Actions 1-3 Inputs and Assumptions
Existing public transportation mode share (2019)1 7.7%
Average public transportation trip length (miles)2 3.8
GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Public transportation mode share target (%)3 8 12 20
Passenger trips/mile4 0.1291 0.1300 0.1324
Mode share increase from 2019 (%) 0.3 4.0 12.0
Passenger VMT (miles)5 401,683,748 413,688,541 443,104,445 Passenger trips 51,846,980 53,788,718 58,664,407
New public transportation trips substituted
for vehicle trips
155,541 2,312,915 7,215,722
VMT reduced with public transportation
(miles)
591,056 8,789,076 27,419,744
Passenger emissions factor (MT CO2e/VMT)5 0.00029541 0.00027453 0.00025806 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 174 2,412 7,076
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.002 0.032 0.089 1 United States Census Bureau. 2019. American Community Survey S0801 Commuting Characteristics by Sex. Accessed at:
https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?g=1600000US0669112&tid=ACSST1Y2019.S0801&hidePreview=true 2 See Table 1; average of trip lengths for bus and light rail used.

American Public Transportation Association. December 2018. 2018 Public Transportation Fact Book. Accessed at:
https://www.apta.com/wp-content/uploads/Resources/resources/statistics/Documents/FactBook/2018-APTA-Fact-Book.pdf 5 Commute Seattle. December 2021. 2019 Mode Split Study Report. Accessed at: https://www.commuteseattle.com/resource/2019- mode-split-study/
4 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 5 Forecasted VMT from adjusted forecast (Appendix A) minus VMT reduced from Measure T-1. 5 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 Measure T-2 Actions 4-7Funding and Outreach
The City of Santa Cruz understands that reducing VMT through improved public transportation will require a large behavior shift in the City and in California as a whole. Current public transportation mode share in the City of Santa Cruz is 7.7% (see Table 9 and sources above). Currently, the City of Satna Cruz is expanding the GO Santa Cruz campaign to incentivize downtown employees to choose options other than driving to get to work. In an effort to incentivize more behavior shift, T-2 Action 4 commits the City to advocate for METRO to fund and implement a free public transportation pilot program for students, foster youth, and unhoused youth in the County of Santa Cruz. This action was based on the successful implementation of a similar program in Sacramento, California.62 The City of Sacramento has seen demonstrated success with their program, including increased public 62 City of Sacramento. July 2021. Student Fare-Free Transit Pass Program. Accessed at: https://www.sacrt.com/apps/free-sacramentostudent-fares/

26.386
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 33
transportation ridership, better school access for children, and improved after school transportation. Specifically, the share of students reporting using Sacramento Regional Transit post implementation of a free youth public transportation pass program implemented in 2019 increased from 10% to 15% based on survey results.63
METRO has been actively working to make bus routes in the City of Santa Cruz greener. In 2021, METRO announced adding four electric buses to its fleet and has plans to continue to add electric buses in the future. Electrification of public transportation systems would further reduce community GHG emissions. T-2 Action 5 commits the City to support funding for public transportation fleet electrification. Lastly, T-2 Actions 6 and 7 focus on expanding public transportation marketing and incentives to frontline communities and residents commuting outside of the City for work.

Measure T-3 Develop Programs and Policies to Discourage Driving Singleoccupancy Passenger Vehicles Table 12 Measure T-3 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Partner with community groups to
develop programs, and policies that
discourage single-passenger vehicles
while addressing equity concerns and
tracking through equity metrics.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Explore implementing a local gasoline
and diesel car registration tax with
exemption for low income people.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Discourage single passenger vehicles in
high traffic zones considering a
congestion charge program, limiting
parking options, bans in high traffic
zones or public/multimodal
transportation routes, and rideshare
user taxes.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Reduce off-street parking requirements
for new housing developments close to
frequent public transportation service,
with sensitivity to low income
neighborhoods whose parking is already
constrained.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
63 Alex Karner. University of Texas at Austin. January 2021. RydeFreeRT Evaluation Study: User Demographics, Attitudes, and Impacts on Travel Behavior. Accessed at: https://www.sacrt.com/rydefreert/docs/RydeFreeRT_Evaluation_(FINAL).pdf

26.387
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
34 Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
5 Consider limiting parking options for
single-passenger vehicles in downtown
and other commercial areas of the city
balanced with needs of sustaining
downtown employees, businesses and
tourists.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Adjust parking rates dependent on
demand and supply in all downtown
parking locations and evaluate whether
revenue may be used to fund active
transportation or public transportation
projects.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 After implementing action 4, eliminate
parking minimums citywide and develop
parking maximums, while pricing all
public parking spaces based on available
transportation options, travel demand,
and land use.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
8 Support the City’s tourism economy by
exploring and implementing
neighborhood or zone based parking
solutions and use of electric trolleys in
high traffic and walkable areas.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
9 Remove parking to accommodate
multimodal improvements, including
protected bike lanes and transit
improvements, taking into account
business impacts.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure T-3 Action 1Partnerships and Planning
While incentive-based policies and infrastructure improvements, such as those identified in Measures T-1 and T-2 can be effective in changing community choices around transportation, the impacts of incentive-based policies increase when coupled with disincentives for less favorable choices, such as making it less convenient to drive a gasoline-fueled single passenger vehicle.64 However, disincentive-based policies can be unpopular and place a burden on the community if not implemented carefully.T-3 Action 1 commits the City to partnering with community groups to develop programs and policies that discourage single-passenger vehicles while addressing equity concerns and tracking through equity metrics. Developing equity metrics for the implementation of disincentives ensures potential impacts to equity groups are mitigated.

Measure T-3 Actions 2-3Local Taxes
Institution of local taxes has had demonstrated success in the City of Seattle, which observed an 89% increase in light rail ridership and a decrease in traffic and VMT since 2006 despite a substantial 64 Gabriel Ayobami Ogunkunbi et al. August 2021. Evidence-Based Market Overview of Incentives and Disincentives in Electric Mobility as a Key to the Sustainable Future. Accessed at: https://www.mdpi.com/2673-7590/1/2/17/pdf

26.388
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 35
population increase.65 Public transportation infrastructure improvements in the City of Seattle are paid for by a local sales tax, property tax, and car registration tax. T-3 Action 2 commits the City of Santa Cruz to explore implementation of a local gasoline and diesel car registration tax with exemptions for low-income residents.66 T-3 Action 3 commits the City to consider a variety of tactics for discouraging single passenger vehicles in high traffic zones such as a congestion charge program, limited parking options, bans in high traffic zones and/or public transportation routes, and a rideshare user taxes. The City of San Francisco was given a special variance by the state of California to implement a Traffic Congestion Mitigation tax on private transportation service vehicles. The City of San Francisco now imposes a tax of 1.5% to 3.25% on fares for rides originating in San Francisco that are facilitated by commercial rid-share companies or provided by an autonomous vehicle or private transit services vehicle.67 The tax is filed and paid monthly. The revenues of this tax go to offsetting the emissions from these services through the funding of public transportation and VMT reducing projects.68
Measure T-3 Actions 4-7Parking Restrictions
Reduced parking supply, when combined with other VMT reduction measures such as efficient public transit, land use policies, and urban parking pricing can reduce VMT.69 Reduced parking supply makes driving single-passenger vehicles less attractive and can shift traveler choice to other options. Parking supply can be reduced by decreasing parking requirements for new development (e.g., T-3 Action 4), limiting parking options for single passenger vehicles in downtown and other commercial areas (e.g., T-3 Action 5), adjusting parking rates (e.g., T-3 Action 6) and implementing parking maximums (e.g., T-3 Action 7). T-3 Actions 4 through 6 commit the City to exploring options for implementing these types of parking restrictions in the City of Santa Cruz.

Measure T-3 Action 8Support Tourism Economy
Santa Cruz experiences high volumes of summer traffic and congestion associated with tourism. The City owns and contracts to operate two electric trolleys to transport tourists between downtown, parking and the Main Beach and Boardwalk area. This increased volume requires special consideration to improve the visitor experience, minimize impacts to residents and support local businesses while reducing VMTs. Tourism related traffic and VMTS can be reduced by increasing the use of electric trolleys and exploring and implementing neighborhood or zone based parking solutions in high traffic and walkable areas.
65 Erick Trickey. May 2019. Has Seattle Found the Solution to Driving Alone to Work? Accessed at:
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/05/23/seattle-car-free-transportation-what-works-226935/ 66 The City has a ½ cent sales tax in perpetuity for METRO and a dedicated portion of Measure D going specifically to transit. 67 City and County of San Francisco Treasurer & Tax Collector. 2020. Traffic Congestion Mitigation Tax (TCM). Accessed at:
https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/traffic-congestion-mitigation-tax-tcm 68 City and County of San Francisco Treasurer and Tax Collector. December 2021. Traffic Congestion Mitigation Tax. Accessed at:
https://sftreasurer.org/business/taxes-fees/traffic-congestion-mitigation-taxtcm#:~:text=The%20City%20imposes%20a%20Traffic,or%20private%20transit%20services%20vehicle. 69 Lee Provost. Caltrans Division of Research, Innovation and System Information. March 2018. Pricing and Parking Management to Reduce Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT). Accessed at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-systeminformation/documents/preliminary-investigations/final-pricing-parking-management-to-reduce-vehicles-miles-traveled-pi-a11y.pdf

26.389
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
36 Measure T-4 Increase Passenger Electric Vehicle (EV) Adoption to 35% Mode Share by 2030 and 40% by 2035
Table 13aMeasure T-4 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Install at least 1,247 new public EV
charging stations prioritizing frontline
neighborhood and high usage areas by
2030.

0.439 0.449 0.663
2 Update municipal code to require new
residential multifamily housing and large
commercial building owners to install
chargers in 20% of parking spaces and
secure sufficient electric service capacity
so that >20% of parking spaces are EV
ready.
3 Advocate for programs and incentives for
income tiered residential EV charger
installations and EV purchases.
4 Pursue partnership with affordable EV car
share to serve affordable housing and
multifamily developments in frontline
neighborhoods, while also promoting EV
car share citywide, for example by
requiring car share for certain new
projects.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Partner with CCCE, PG&E, and
community groups to increase adoption
rates of EVs in frontline neighborhoods
by stacking incentives and leveraging onbill financing for EV chargers.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Partner to conduct EV and public
transportation education events in
frontline neighborhoods.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 Engage compensated frontline
communities in regional and local vehicle
electrification strategy development.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure T-4 Actions 1-3Electric Vehicle Chargers
Adding and supporting the addition of electric vehicle chargers within the City of Santa Cruz will be the main mechanism through which the City will encourage electric vehicle (EV) adoption within the community. The state has established a goal of putting 5 million EVs on the road by 2030. However, the recent passing of executive order N-79-20 calls for 100% of passenger vehicle sales to be allelectric by 2035. This new executive order puts the total number of EVs on the road by 2035 at

26.390
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 37
approximately 15 million.70 Based on the current number of vehicles registered in California, 15 million EV’s would account for 35% of total passenger vehicles in 2035. The City has established its own goal in line with this and aims to reach 35% EV adoption by 2030, 5 years ahead of the state, and 40% by 2035. As of 2020, 3% of passenger vehicles in the City of Santa Cruz were EVs. 71 While the City cannot require residents to buy and use EVs rather than gasoline or diesel-powered vehicles, the City will take actions to incentivize this behavior change and support this level of EV adoption. The City’s primary target to achieve this measure is to provide one public electric vehicle charger for every 22 electric vehicles (addressed by T-4 Action 1), as well as ensure as many privately owned chargers are installed in existing buildings and new development as practicable, in line with the leading EV cities in California, such as San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Jose.

T-4 Action 1 commits the City to installing more than 1,247 new EV chargers, prioritizing frontline neighborhoods and high usage areas. The City of Santa Cruz currently (as of December 2021) hosts 96 publicly accessible electric vehicle chargers, putting the City’s EV-to-public charger ratio around

22. 72 1,247 new chargers were calculated to be the minimum number of new publicly accessible chargers that would be needed to support the City’s 2030 goal to achieve 35% passenger EV adoption, based on the City of Santa Cruz’s current ratio of 22 EVs to publicly accessible chargers.

This ratio is also in line with leading electric vehicle cities in the state, including Sacramento and San Francisco. T-4 Action 2 and 3 commit the City to facilitating EV adoption through EV infrastructure for residential and commercial buildings. T-4 Action 2 requires new residential multifamily housing and large commercial building owners to install chargers in 20% of parking spaces and ensure electric service capacity is sufficient so that than 20% of parking spaces are EV ready. T-4 Action 3 commits the City to advocating for programs and incentives for income tiered residential EV charger installations and EV purchases.

The methods and assumptions used to calculate the number of chargers needed by 2030 and 2035, as well as the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in Table 13b. 70 Susan Carpenter. Spectrum News 1. October 2020. What it will take to get 100% EV sales in California. Accessed at:
https://spectrumnews1.com/ca/la-west/transportation/2020/10/05/what-it-will-take-to-sell-100--evs-in-california 71 California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). January 2020. Fuel Type by County as of 11/2020. Accessed at:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/uploads/2020/09/MotorVehicleFuelTypes_City_01012020.pdf 72 PlugShare. December 2021. Best EV Charging Stations in Santa Cruz. Accessed at:
https://www.plugshare.com/directory/us/california/santa-cruz

26.391
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
38 Table 13b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-4 Action 1-3 Inputs and Assumptions
Total registered vehicles in the City of Santa Cruz (2020)1 74,722 Registered EVs in the City of Santa Cruz (2020)2 2,095
EV chargers in the City of Santa Cruz (2021)3 96
2020 population4 64,424
2020 Cars per capita 1.16
Cars needed per public EV charger 22
GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Passenger EV adoption goal (%) 35 40 60
Business-as-usual passenger EV adoption (%)5 8.14 9.63 10.81 EV adoption beyond business-as-usual (%) 26.9 30.4 49.2 Passenger VMT after mode shift to active and shared
transportation (miles)6
401,092,692 404,899,464 415,684,701
Passenger VMT emissions factor (MT CO2e/VMT)7 0.00029541 0.00027453 0.00025806 Emission Reduction from increased EV (MT CO2e) 31,823 33,758 52,770 EV electricity usage (kWh/mile)8 0.369748561 0.369666775 0.369662516 EV electricity usage from increased EV adoption (kWh) 39,831,068 45,455,318 75,591,669 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.000002940 0.000000030 0.000000000 Emissions from electricity usage for added EVs (MT CO2e) 117 1 0 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 31,706 33,756 52,770
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.439 0.449 0.663 Electric Vehicle Charger Count Calculations
Population9 72,218 75,257 79,534
Total registered vehicles 83,762 87,287 92,247
Registered EVs goal 29,317 34,915 55,348
Additional public EV chargers needed to support EV goal 1,247 1,504 2,440 1 California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). January 2020. Fuel Type by County as of 11/2020. Accessed at:
https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/uploads/2020/09/MotorVehicleFuelTypes_City_01012020.pdf 2 Ibid.
3 PlugShare. December 2021. Best EV Charging Stations in Santa Cruz. Accessed at:
https://www.plugshare.com/directory/us/california/santa-cruz 4 Appendix A
5 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 6 Forecasted VMT from adjusted forecast (Appendix A) minus VMT reduced from Measures T-1 and T-2. 7 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 8 Ibid.
9 Appendix A

26.392
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 39
Measure T-4 Action 4EV Car Share
A 2016 study from the Transportation Sustainability Research Center at the University of California, Berkeley shows that car share programs lower vehicle ownership and overall VMT.73While a majority of car share members use the program to add or replace vehicle trips (leading generally to small VMT increases), a minority of members (2-5%) use car share as a replacement for vehicle ownership (leading generally to larger VMT reductions). The net effect is an overall decrease in vehicle ownership, VMT, and GHG emissions. Based on San Diego results from the 2016 car share study approximately one car share vehicle replaces seven to eleven cars and VMT is reduced, on average, between 6% to 16% per car share household assuming one-way usage. People in San Diego reported decreasing their driving due to the car share and the study suggests that car share is having an impact on vehicles owned by members, as well as overall driving.

T-4 Action 4 commits the City to pursuing affordable EV car share to serve affordable housing and multifamily developments in frontline neighborhoods, as a way to bridge the equity gap between low-income residents and renters and EV ownership. The action also commits the City to simultaneously promoting EV car share citywide.

Measure T-4 Actions 5-7Frontline Community and Stakeholder Engagement Frontline community and stakeholder engagement around EV adoption will be critical in helping the City understand existing barriers to EV adoption, and in helping the community share in the benefits of EV adoption. T-4 Actions 5 through 7 commit the City to partnering with community-based organizations to increase adoption rates of EVs in frontline neighborhoods, conduct EV and public transportation education events in frontline neighborhoods, and engage compensated frontline communities in regional and local vehicle electrification strategy development. 73 Elliot Martin and Susan Shaheen. Transportation Sustainability Research Center at University of California, Berkeley. July 2016. Impacts of Car2Go on Vehicle Ownership, Modal Shift, Vehicle Miles Travelled, and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: An Analysis of Five North American Cities. Accessed at: http://innovativemobility.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Impactsofcar2go_FiveCities_2016.pdf

26.393
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
40 Measure T-5 Increase Commercial EV Adoption to 25% by 2030 and 35% by 2035
Table 14a Measure T-5 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Engage with local employers and
business fleet owners in the City to
identify opportunities for accelerated
fleet electrification, prioritizing small
businesses, and veteran, woman or
minority-owned businesses. Provide
information on the requirements of the
Advanced Clean Truck regulation and
available funding sources for fleet
replacements (e.g., Low Carbon Fuel
Standard).

0.077 0.050 0.034
2 Conduct a study of business vehicle
fleets in the City and identify employers
and businesses subject to the Advanced
Clean Truck regulation as well as those
to target for accelerating zero-emission
vehicle adoption. With stakeholder
support, use the results from the study
to develop and implement a plan for
City-supported accelerated fleet
electrification in business and municipal
fleets.
3 Prioritize commercial EVs for loading
zone access and use other curbside
management practices.

Measure T-5 Actions 1-3Private/Commercial Vehicle Fleets Commercial electric vehicle adoption is projected to occur at a slower rate than passenger vehicle adoption, with the greatest electrification success projected in light-duty commercial vehicles.74 However, commercial electric vehicle adoption is increasingly being recognized as a promising pathway to reduce GHG emissions and pollutants. This is evident through California’s Advanced Clean Trucks regulation, which proposes a zero emission vehicle sales requirement for heavy-duty trucks, as well as zero-emission commercial vehicle zones implemented in the Netherlands and other countries.75,76 To accelerate commercial electric vehicle adoption in the City of Santa Cruz and achieve 25% EV adoption in 2030 and 35% in 2035, the City plans to actively identify and engage businesses/employers with vehicle fleets to accelerate EV adoption and promote state incentives 74 Erica Schueller. FleetOwner. July 2021. What it will take to accelerate electric truck adoption. Accessed at:
https://www.fleetowner.com/drivers-seat/article/21167635/what-it-will-take-to-accelerate-electric-truck-adoption 75 IEA. 2021. Policies to promote electric vehicle deployment. Accessed at: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-ev-outlook-2021/policiesto-promote-electric-vehicle-deployment 76 California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2021. Advanced Clean Trucks Fact Sheet. Accessed at: https://www.iea.org/reports/global-evoutlook-2021/policies-to-promote-electric-vehicle-deployment

26.394
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 41
for transitioning to electric commercial vehicle fleets. T-5 Action 1 commits the City to engaging with local employers and business fleet owners in the City to identify opportunities for accelerated fleet electrification, prioritizing small businesses, and veteran, woman or minority-owned businesses. The action also includes providing information to businesses about the Advanced Clean Fleets rule and available funding sources. T-5 Action 2 commits the City to prioritizing commercial EVs for loading zone access and use other curbside management practices. These actions directly contribute to the City’s goal of 25% commercial EV adoption by 2030 and 35% by 2035. The expanded charger network the City has committed to under Measure T-4, Actions 1 through 3 will also help the City achieve this goal. The methods and assumptions used to calculate the GHG emissions reductions associated with these actions are shown in Table 14b.

Table 14bGHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-5 Actions 1-2 GHG Emissions Reductions Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Commercial EV adoption goal (%) 25 35 55
Business-as-usual commercial EV adoption (%)1 6.48 20.13 41.68 EV adoption beyond business-as-usual (%) 18.5 14.9 13.3 Commercial VMT (miles)2 28,959,960 29,178,902 32,270,531 Commercial VMT emissions factor (MT CO2e/VMT)3 0.00103560 0.00086841 0.00062539 Emission Reduction from increased EV adoption (MT CO2e) 5,555 3,769 2,687 EV electricity usage (kWh/mile)4 1.002 1.046 1.063
EV electricity usage from increased EV adoption (kWh) 5,375,249 4,538,442 4,565,596 Electricity emissions factor (MT CO2e/kWh) 0.000002940 0.000000030 0.000000000 Emissions from electricity usage for EV 16 0 0
Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 5,539 3,769 2,687
Population5 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.077 0.050 0.034 1 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at:
https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 2 Forecasted VMT from adjusted forecast (Appendix A) minus VMT reduced from Measures T-1 and T-2. 3 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) EMFAC2021 model, accessed at: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissions-inventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9

4.Ibid.

5.Appendix A

26.395
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
42 Measure T-6 Electrify or Otherwise Decarbonize 50% of Off-road Equipment by 2030 and 75% by 2035
Table 15a Measure T-6 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Explore ways to mitigate equity impacts
of electrifying and upgrading off-road
equipment and harbor vessels.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Engage with small business, women, vet
or minority owners of off-road
equipment fleets and others with
highest decarbonization potential to
promote equitable fleet electrification
through outreach and pursuing grants
or other funding.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Access funding to decarbonize off-road
equipment, including investigating state
funding to decarbonize off-road
equipment as a result of Executive
Order N-79-20 and State Climate
Funding Package.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Support transition of local employers to
zero-emissions off-road equipment.

Provide online resources and a test
demonstration site for landscaping
industry.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Develop an ordinance to phase out gas
and diesel-powered off-road equipment
starting in 2024, partnering to provide
income tiered incentives for small
businesses. Ordinance language to
include allowance for biofuels for
equipment for which zero emission
alternatives are not available.

0.076 0.116 0.124
Measure T-6 Actions 1-2Equitable Off-Road Electrification Decarbonization of off-road transportation and equipment is much farther behind than that of onroad transportation. The off-road sector contributes to GHG emissions and other forms of pollution, such as fine particulate matter (PM), however, the current higher costs of zero-emissions equipment can make it cost prohibitive for businesses to employ these technologies.77 Given these barriers to adopting electric equipment, the City is committing to exploring and mitigating equity impacts of electrifying and upgrading off-road equipment and harbor vessels (T-6 Action 1) and 77 Cleantech Group. 2022. Decarbonizing off-road vehicles: An emerging challenge and opportunity to reach net-zero emissions. Accessed at: https://www.cleantech.com/decarbonizing-off-road-vehicles-an-emerging-challenge-and-opportunity-to-reach-net-zero-emissions/

26.396
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 43
engaging with small business, women, vet, or minority owners of off-road equipment fleets to promote equitable fleet electrification (T-6 Action 2).

Measure T-6 Actions 3-4Funding and Education
Off-road equipment in the City of Santa Cruz accounts for 3% of the City’s GHG emissions. While only a small part of GHG emissions in the City, getting to carbon neutrality will involve decarbonizing the majority of off-road equipment, which currently runs on gasoline, diesel, and natural gas. To support a gasoline and diesel phase-out ordinance for off-road equipment, T-6 Action 3 commits the City to investigating funding for decarbonization of off-road fleets in the City of Santa Cruz. T-6 Action 5 commits the City to supporting the transition of local employers to zero-emissions off-road equipment through online resources and a test demonstration site for the landscaping industry.

Measure T-6 Action 5Off-road Decarbonization Ordinance
T-6 Action 5 commits the City to developing an ordinance to phase out gas and diesel-powered offroad equipment starting in 2024, partnering to providing income tiered incentives for small businesses, for example through promoting and facilitating state commercial and residential rebate programs.
78 While some off-road equipment does not have market-ready zero-emissions alternatives, lawn and garden equipment, light-duty off-road equipment, and portable off-road equipment can generally be electrified or use biodiesel today. It was assumed that implementation of T-6 Action 5 would begin to eliminate gas and diesel usage for off-road equipment in 2025, with potential for greater emissions reduction in the future, as more low- and no-emissions alternative equipment becomes available. Cities across California have started implementing ordinances to ban gas powered small off-road engines. For example, the City of Ojai has started actively looking for people violating their regulation prohibiting the use of gas-powered blowers. Violators of the regulation in Ojai can be fined as much as $200.79 Assembly Bill 1346 requires the California Air Resources Board to set emissions requirements for small off-road engines to zero by 2024 or whenever the California Air Resources Board determines is feasible. The methods and assumptions used to calculate GHG emissions reductions associated with T-6 Action 5 are shown in Table 15b. 78 California Air Resources Board. 2022. Zero-emission Landscaping Equipment Incentive Programs. Accessed at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/zero-emission-landscaping-equipment/zero-emission-landscaping-equipment-incentive 79 VC Star. 2017. Ojai cracking down on gas-powered leaf blowers. Accessed at:
https://www.vcstar.com/story/news/local/communities/ojai/2017/07/22/ojai-cracking-down-gas-powered-leaf-blowers/474374001/

26.397
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
44 Table 15b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure T-6 Action 6 Inputs and Assumptions
Implementation year 2024
Diesel emissions factor (MT CO2e/gallon)1 0.01048
Gasoline emissions factor (MT CO2e/gallon)2 0.00929
Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Off-road diesel fuel usage (gallons)3 479,978 512,358 607,001 Off-road gasoline fuel usage (gallons)4 514,498 540,538 590,307 Off-road liquified petroleum gas usage (gallons)5 207,852 210,232 213,175 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 5,495 8,736 9,840
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.076 0.116 0.124 1 Calculated from Tables 2 and 5 of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Emission Factors for Greenhouse Gas Inventories (March 2020). Accessed at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020- 04/documents/ghg-emission-factors-hub.pdf
2 Ibid.
3 Calculated from data for the County of Santa Cruz from California Air Resources Board’s (CARB) Offroad Emissions model, accessed at: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/emissionsinventory/d7e33b22a7ef163d2dc9fd91182391d41cb025f9 4 Ibid.
5 Ibid.

Measure T-7 Advocate for Remote Work Policy and Infrastructure Table 16 Measure T-7 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Work with the County, the Santa Cruz
County Regional Transportation
Commission, AMBAG, and the City's
larger employers to support remote work
programs, while seeking to address
remote work equity issues such as
internet access.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Participate in regional advocacy for
development of a statewide remote work
policy.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure T-7 Actions 1-2Advocate for Remote Work Policy and Infrastructure Remote work programs can reduce commute and business trips, leading to decreased GHG emissions and improved air quality.80 The City is committed to working with the County of Santa Cruz, AMBAG, and the City’s larger employers to support remote work programs, while seeking to 80 Irwin, Fran. 2004. Gaining the Air Quality and Climate Benefit from Telework. Accessed at: http://pdf.wri.org/teleworkguide.pdf

26.398
Transportation Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 45
address remote work equity issues such as internet access. The City will also participate in regional advocacy for development of a statewide remote work policy.

26.399
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
46 4 Water, Waste and Wastewater Measures
GHG emissions from water were not accounted for separately in the City’s inventory but are 100% attributable to the use of electricity to pump, distribute, and treat water, and are therefore captured in the community’s electricity usage in 2019. While only a small part of the City’s GHG emissions, process efficiency optimization, green construction methods, renewable energy deployment, and water conservation are important aspects of the community’s overall sustainability and resilience. The CAP includes the following water measure:
▪ Measure W-1: Maintain gallons per capita water use for the residential sector at a level that is at least 10% below the state goal of 55 gallons per person per day The City of Santa Cruz’s waste measures focus on reducing solid waste generation and increasing diversion from the landfill. Particular emphasis is placed on reduction of organic waste sent to landfills, as landfilled organic waste is the major source of waste-related greenhouse gas emissions.

The measures in this section also support the City’s overall goal of working toward zero waste of resources, though actions that address inorganic waste have minimal impact toward meeting the city’s communitywide greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals.

The CAP’s waste measures consist of the following:
▪ Measure W-2: Reduce organic waste by 75% by 2030 and 90% by 2035; and reduce inorganic waste by 35% by 2030 and 40% by 2035
▪ Measure W-3: Set a long-term target to reduce waste generation growth Working toward zero waste of resources requires the City address two factors: 1) waste diversion to recycle waste that is generated; and 2) waste reduction, reducing the amount of waste generated regardless of its destination (e.g., landfilling, recycling, composting); Measure W-2 focuses on waste diversion and Measure W-3 focuses on waste reduction.

Actions to reduce organic waste are supported by state law through SB-1383 requirements, which lays out specific programs, policies, and objectives for the City to support the state’s goal to achieve a 75% reduction in organics waste by 2025. While not explicitly modeled, many of these actions support achievement of SB-1383 goals. Actions that address inorganic waste are not quantified in this analysis due to their minimal impact on communitywide GHG emissions reductions.

Wastewater emissions account for a small portion of a community’s GHG emissions, less than 1% of the community’s GHG emissions in 2019. While only a small part of the City’s GHG emissions, decarbonized wastewater treatment through process efficiency optimization, green construction methods, renewable energy expansion (methane to electricity and solar PV) water conservation, greywater reuse, and water recycling; are important aspects of a community’s overall sustainability and resilience. The CAP includes the following wastewater measure:
▪ Measure W-4: Reduce or capture GHG emissions from wastewater treatment

26.400
Water, Waste and Wastewater Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 47
Measure W-1 Maintain indoor Gallons per Capita Water Use for the Residential Sector at a Level that is at least 10% below the State Goal.

Table 17 Measure W-1 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Continue to provide free water
conservation devices and rebates for
water conservation and continue
targeted outreach to frontline
communities.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Continue to promote available City
rebates and educate residents on the
benefits of water conservation and its
connection to climate change benefits.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Expand watershed stewardship school
program to include water
conversation.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure W-1Actions 1-5Public Engagement, Rebates, and Water Conservation W-1 Actions 1-4 commit the City to continuing public engagement and conservation programs, focusing on frontline communities. The City will continue to provide free water conservation devices and rebates for water conservation, developing targeted outreach to frontline communities (W-1 Action 1); to provide rebates or other funding for installing laundry to landscape, rainwater catchment systems, and targeted outreach to low and medium income homes (W-1 Action 2); public engagement campaign to promote available City rebates and educate residents on the benefits of water conservation and its connection to climate change benefits (W-1 Action 3); and expand watershed stewardship school program to include water conservation (W-1 Action 4). The actions provide funding for integrating more water conservation practices into the City’s households, providing more opportunity for lower-income residents to adopt these technologies.

W-1 Action 5 commits the City to evaluating the greenhouse gas emissions impact of expanding non potable water usage to City trees, landscape and bioswales for groundwater recharge and other opportunities as identified in the 2018 Recycle Water Study.

26.401
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
48 Measure W-2 Reduce Organic Waste by 75% by 2030 and 90% by 2035; and Reduce Inorganic Waste by 35% by 2030 and 40% by
2035
Table 18a Measure W-2 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Reduction
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Partner to develop a regional compost
trading program to meet state organic
procurement target.

0.065 0.078 0.078
2 Expand enforcement and implement fee
for incorrectly sorted materials with
sensitivity to shared collection.
3 Pursue funding to conduct detailed
planning of food waste to energy
infrastructure and process to meet state
food waste diversion targets.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Continue to participate in Countywide
Solid Waste Task Force consortium to
plan and pursue funding for
infrastructure beyond state 2025 organic
waste diversion targets.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Conduct waste characterization studies
annually to understand the waste stream
and plan to increase waste diversion and
reduce contamination.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Provide training resources to businesses
and large institutions on organic waste
diversion.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 Continue multi-lingual engagement with
multi-family property owners/managers
and developing waste handling signage
for their properties.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
8 Continue to conduct targeted, multilingual, culturally appropriate, and geographically diverse waste diversion
educational and technical assistance
campaigns.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
9 Expand the Recycling Boot Camp and
Master Recycler's Programs.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
10 Pilot and evaluate emerging technologies
to reduce organic waste by restaurants
and other major food waste producers.

Supportive Supportive Supportive

26.402
Water, Waste and Wastewater Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 49
Measure W-2 Actions 1-2Organic procurement (Senate Bill 1383 Compliance) Emission reductions in the waste sector will be driven by the City of Santa Cruz’s compliance with SB 1383, which sets statewide targets to reduce organic waste disposal by 75 percent relative to 2014 levels. SB 1383 programs also require recovery of 20 percent of edible food by 2025. CalRecycle has provided a suite of activities that jurisdictions are required to complete to achieve these targets, including the following:
▪ Provide organic waste collection services for all residents and businesses and monitor contamination
▪ Implement an edible food recovery program for commercial edible food generators, with compliance beginning between 2022 and 2024.
▪ Procure organic waste (e.g., yard trimmings and food scraps) to meet organic waste product procurement targets, as notified by CalRecycle by 202281 ▪ Conduct education and outreach to businesses, residents, and commercial edible food generators by 2022 and annually thereafter
▪ Ensure there is adequate capacity and collection services to comply with SB 1383 requirements ▪ Adopt enforceable ordinances prior to 2022 encompassing requirements for organics and edible food generators in the city
▪ Monitor compliance beginning in 2022, conduct enforcement beginning in 2024, and maintain records of implementation
Completing these activities is expected to provide the level of composting and food donation that will reduce The City of Santa Cruz’s organic waste disposal by 75 percent by 2025, aligning with SB 1383 state targets.
82 The City of Santa Cruz is expanding the Commercial Food Scrap Collection program and will begin Curbside Food Waste Collection from single family and multi family residences in late Spring 2022, to meet SB 1383 requirements.83 In 2020, the City’s waste diversion was 63% (83.4% of the City’s 2020 target of 75% waste diversion). The City of Santa Cruz is projected to send 74,148 metric tons of solid waste to landfill in 2030 and 76,859 metric tons in 2035, 45 percent of which is estimated to be organic. Calculations assumed that emission reductions would come from diverting that waste to compost or hunger relief, decreasing the methane generation potential of this waste to zero (Table 18b). Actions that address inorganic waste are not quantified in this analysis due to their minimal impact on communitywide greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals.

Table 18b GHG Emissions Reductions from Measure W-2 Actions 1-2 Inputs and Assumptions
Santa Cruz City 2014 waste (tons) 46,787
81 Annual procurement target for the City of Santa Cruz is 4,492 tons of organic waste. Jurisdictions can fulfill their target by procuring any combination of the following recovered organic waste products: compost, mulch, renewable energy (transportation fuel, heat, and electricity) from anaerobic digestion and electricity from biomass conversion. Accessed at:
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/procurement/#:~:text=Beginning%20January%201%2C%202022%2C%20SB,green%2C%20self%2D sustaining%20economy.
82 CalRecycle. SB 1383 Education and Outreach Resources. Accessed at:
https://calrecycle.ca.gov/organics/slcp/education/#:~:text=The%20SB%201383%20draft%20regulations,and%20other%20food%20recove ry%20organizations.
83 City of Santa Cruz. N.d. Food Waste. Accessed at: https://www.cityofsantacruz.com/government/city-departments/publicworks/resource-recovery-garbage-recycling-sweeping/recycling-and-waste-reduction/food-waste

26.403
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
50 California 2014 portion of waste that is organic (%)1 45 SB 1383 2030 diversion goal (tons organic) 15,685
Calculations
Year 2030 2035 2045
Tons of waste forecasted to landfill2 74,148 76,859 81,297 Organics reduction from SB-1383 related programs (%)3 75 90 90 Diverted food waste (metric tons)4 29,752 37,008 39,144 Totals
Total Reductions (MT CO2e) 4,724 5,876 6,216
Population 72,218 75,257 79,534
Per Capita Reductions (MT CO2e/person) 0.065 0.078 0.078 1 Appendix A. Based on CalRecycle's 2014 Disposal-Facility-Based Characterization of Solid Waste in California 2 Appendix A.
3 SB 1383 requires 75% reduction in organic waste from 2014 levels by 2025. 4 Appendix A. Based on CalRecycle's 2014 Disposal-Facility-Based Characterization of Solid Waste in California Measure W-2 Actions 3-5Planning and Funding
The City will pursue funding opportunities to conduct detailed planning of food waste to energy infrastructure and process to meet state food waste diversion targets. The City will also continue to participate in the Countywide Solid Waste Task Force consortium to plan and pursue funding for regional infrastructure projects beyond the state’s 2025 organic waste diversion targets. Lastly, the City will conduct waste characterization studies annually to understand the waste stream and plan to further increase waste diversion.

Measure W-2 Actions 6-9Education and Engagement
While these actions will not lead to direct GHG emission reductions, they are an important component of the strategy behind SB 1383 implementation. For example, education around composting and food waste reduction can provide the information needed by residents to start a home compost pile and/or reduce their overall waste. Providing these materials in multiple languages in a culturally appropriate manner will further the impacts of this action.

Measure W-2 Action 10Pilot Emerging Technologies
Action 10 is to pilot and evaluate emerging technologies like at-source organic waste digestion to reduce organic waste by restaurants and other major food waste producers in the City. This action will contribute to the City’s goal to reduce overall waste generation.

26.404
Water, Waste and Wastewater Measures
GHG Emissions Reductions Technical Evidence 51
Measure W-3 Set a Long-term Target to Reduce Waste Generation Growth Table 19 Measure W-3 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Continue free training and education
program accessible to all residents and
employees to learn about waste
prevention and diversion strategies and
effects of overconsumption.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Work collaboratively and leverage grants
to prevent food waste and rescue edible
food.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
3 Enforce implementation of a fee at point
of use for single-use food ware by food
service providers.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
4 Conduct a consumption-based emissions
inventory and promote a closed-loop
circular economy.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
5 Leverage community activation platform
and community partners to encourage
lifestyle choices that reduce consumption
based emissions including plant based
diets, travel alternatives and local
purchasing. Explore policy options to
increase adoption of plant-based and
plant-strong diets.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
6 Expand edible food recovery program to
all restaurants and food generating
businesses and incentivize small
businesses who otherwise could not
participate.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
7 Evaluate and implement a program for
reusables for restaurant to-go containers.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
8 Explore opportunities to promote a
"circular economy" among local
manufacturers and industry.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure W-3 Actions 1-8Reduce Waste Generation
W-3 Actions 1 through 8 leverage the City’s ability to provide funding and education for reduced waste generation growth, secure grant funding, enforce implementation of fees for single-use food ware, partner with businesses, and conduct studies to explore new, cutting-edge topics, including promoting a closed-loop circular economy. Although these actions do not provide any direct GHG reductions, they are important tools for increasing sustainability and resilience in the community.

26.405
City of Santa Cruz
Climate Action Plan
52 Measure W-4 Reduce or Capture GHG Emissions from Wastewater Treatment
Table 20 Measure W-4 Reductions
Action
Number Action
Anticipated 2030
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2035
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
Anticipated 2045
Sequestration
(MT CO2e/person)
1 Explore opportunities related to methane
capture and conversion to biofuel
through the state's Low Carbon Fuel
Standard (LCFS) program.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
2 Collaborate with surrounding cities and
the County to advocate and support
emissions reduction at wastewater
facilities.

Supportive Supportive Supportive
Measure W-4 Actions 1-2Reduce or Capture GHG Emissions from Wastewater Treatment
Through W-4 Actions 1 and 2, the City plans to explore opportunities to capture and convert methane to biofuel through the state’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) program. The City will also collaborate with surrounding cities and the County to advocate and support emissions reduction at wastewater facilities.

26.406
APPENDIX D:

Engagement Summary

26.407
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Community Engagement Process
The Resilient Together Santa Cruz Initiative unfolded over 2021-2022. The team created a Community Education, Engagement, and Activation Guide for the plan that resulted in over 2,884 touchpoints with community members at over 25 in-person community events, online engagement forums and workshops. Engagement events focused on garnering online participation in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, however some in-person events were held as well that focused on reaching the Beach Flats community. Promotion for each major engagement event included promotion through an online newsletter with 366 contacts, along with text updates, Facebook and Instagram posts, flyers at public locations and events, and partnering with local community groups to share information through their networks. Materials were provided in English and Spanish. This entire process was guided by the City’s Climate Action Task Force (CATF), and the Plan goals and action development was also guided by an Equity Advisory Group consisting of members of frontline communities. All materials for outreach activities were provided in English and Spanish. Further, the team developed an equity screening tool with the community and CATF as an overlay for the Climate Action Plan (CAP).

Outreach was based on the following goals from the Guide:
● Ensure that the community feels authentically engaged in the development of the CAP by understanding and responding to their unique needs and availability to participate in different ways, times, and places.
● Design all engagement and outreach activities with an equity lens, focusing on building relationships and trust to enable inclusive access with frontline, priority communities. ● Ensure that the outreach and engagement activities provide a variety of venues (virtual or physical) and methods to enable participation for all audiences, including frontline communities, visitors, businesses, and people of all ages. ● Adopt clear processes to inform how the city will listen, hear, and record the interests and needs of the community into the CAP. Continually evaluate outreach efforts by providing space for community partners to give feedback.
● Utilize science-based information that is graphically compelling, uses storytelling, and conveys complex concepts in a clear, simple, and concise manner that is accessible to all, and easily translatable into Spanish.
● Develop and foster lasting relationships throughout the city, communities, and stakeholders to lay the foundation for community activation and involvement once the plan is complete. ● Coordinate outreach efforts with other city departments and community partners to leverage multiple opportunities for engagement while reducing duplication and outreach fatigue.

26.408
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Climate Action Task Force
The Climate Action Task Force (CATF) has been involved in the development of the CAP since its inception, even before the project RFP was issued. Prior to CAP development, the CATF cultivated a vision as to how Santa Cruz will address climate change with frontline voices of the Santa Cruz community at the forefront of the vision, and what must be included in the CAP project description. The CATF determined that the City’s engagement plan should pay particular attention to a just transition for those most economically impacted, as well as leadership from those who have been historically overlooked or disproportionately harmed. Public engagement should seek to work through root causes of inequity and commit to uncomfortable conversations when needed. Additionally, the following core principles of the CATF were created to act as an internal guide during the CAP planning process.

Core Principles

1. Careful Planning and Preparation
Parties to the process will ensure that design, organization, and process serve a clearly defined purpose and the needs of all participants.

2. Inclusion and Demographic Diversity
Parties will incorporate diverse people, voices, ideas, and information to lay the groundwork for equitable decision making, equitable outcomes, and democratic legitimacy.

3. Collaboration and Shared Purpose
Parties commit to support and encourage individual participants, government, community institutions, and others to work together for the common good.

4. Transparency, Trust, Openness and Learning
All parties to the planning process should be both clear and open. The City and its Contractors should provide a timely public record of (1) participants, including individual members of the public, City or other organizers, and sponsors; and (2) outcomes, specific ideas, and information or facts that are offered, whether by the public or the City; and how specific ideas, information or facts have been included, modified, or made use of by the City in its final plan, with substantive explanations for these decisions. Parties will listen to one another, explore new ideas, and learn and apply information in ways that generate new options.

5. Sustained Engagement and Participatory Culture
Parties will promote a culture of participation with ongoing programs and institutions that support quality public engagement beyond the CAEP planning year.

26.409
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary

6. Accurately and Concretely Communicate the Risks of Climate Change Parties will convey to the public the full scope and impact of climate change. Accurately and concretely explain the known effects of climate change, including: increasing temperature; more-frequent drought; longer wildfire seasons; shorter, more intense winters; more intense wind storms; more intense rain and flooding; more frequent power outages; more intense storm surges; increasing rate of sea level rise; more frequent disasters; the need for planned retreat, as well as attendant impacts on human health.

7.Accurately and Concretely Communicate the Range of Solutions Parties communicate the full range of solutions and the pros and cons of different combinations of solutions. Promote an understanding of solutions sufficient to (1) rapidly motivate the many communities, talents, and resources of Santa Cruz and (2) help the public focus on fruitful targets.

8. Impact and Action
Contractor ensures that each event or program educates, engages, and empowers all members of the public, likewise seeking to elicit public solutions, initiative and commitment. Contractor clearly and concretely communicates to the public how public input will be used—whether in determining the completed Climate Action and Energy Plan or in motivating ongoing and widespread community action where needed, even beyond the plan itself. City and contractors commit to rigorously evaluate public engagement activities for effectiveness.

9. Comprehensive and Coherent Vision
Seek a shared community vision that is widely arrived at and fully understood and embraced by those essential to or affected by the fulfillment of that vision.

10. Clear Plan of Action
Spell out in advance the specific plan for creating a Climate and Energy Plan. Seek expertise and engagement around the operations and actions necessary to fulfill the vision. Specify responsibilities, timelines, and resource requirements; limitations, risks and contingencies; and outcomes to be measured, by what means and to what level of achievement.

11. Good Faith and Feasibility
Work closely with officials, staff, experts, contractors, volunteers and all others relying on the outcomes of the engagement and planning process to manage expectations and fulfill commitments. Assure that commitments made are (a) understood and accepted by those who will be responsible for carrying them out and (b) are within their resources and authority to carry out (or that they have available to them agreement and access to expansions of resources, alternatives or fall back options as may be required).

12. Action for Climate Empowerment

26.410
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Where consistent with the principles laid out above and where applicable to Santa Cruz, the public engagement envisioned herein should conform to the purposes, principles, and processes of the proposed UN Action for Climate Empowerment [ACE] Framework for the United States.

Outcomes and Accountability Metrics
The CATF created a set of outcomes and accountability and tracking metrics to measure meaningful engagement, whenever possible:

1. Number of people reached

2. Number and kinds of people in attendance, with data disaggregated by race, age, gender identification, education, occupation, neighborhood, and affiliations

3. Number of people recruited for ambassador, docent or other engagement or climate action roles

4. Number of new ideas or facts, solutions, resources, or programs introduced by the public at each event. Four points for each useful new idea or solution, and one point for each fact (or assertion), not previously considered by the City or its consultants. Six points for each proposed solution that is implemented, whether by the City or other entities

5. These new facts, ideas, and resources should be gathered into a designated public website and compiled into a document. The community-generated ideas should be incorporated into the Climate and Energy Plan or otherwise used in climate education, engagement, and empowerment, if feasible as determined through previously developed criteria.

6. Number and kinds of processes, solutions, actions, and on-going engagements initiated, expanded, or continued by individuals or organizations across the sectors and constituencies activated or influenced by the CAP process itself and their estimated impacts on defining goals of CAP

26.411
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Summary of Resilient Together local community outreach and engagement events Event Date Activity
01/12/21 Community Engagement Preferences Survey via Facebook CAM page (309 participants)
01/28/21 Community engagement Pref Survey - UCSC Coastal Science & Policy Program weekly newsletter
02/08/21 Community Engagement Preferences Survey - Email lists, City Manager newsletter, social media channels, community calendars (328 participants) 02/2021
Democratic Women's Club Talk (46 attendees)
02/2021
Sister Cites Committee Talk (15 attendees)
3/9/21 Santa Cruz Sunrise Rotary presentation on Climate Action (60 attendees) 3/25/21
DSA presentation and discussion (12 attendees)
3/31/21 Central Coast Climate Legislative Action Summit - legislative action summit hosted by MBEP & featuring many other cities (130 attendees) 4/26/2021
UCSC SO Student Environmental Justice Ambassadors
4/13/2021 Santa Cruz Public Libraries Conversations for Change: Climate Solutions (40 attendees)
4/14/2021
Sister Cities Climate Resiliency (74 Attendees)
4/20/2021
Mayor's Green Jobs Roundtable Series with a City Council study session on April 20, 2020 to highlight work, support existing and emerging green sectors (20 attendees)
4/26/2021 Climate Action Task Force - All Meetings (165 touchpoints with community members)
4/29/2021
SC County YEA Solidarity for Change Virtual Summit (30) 5/6/2021
Santa Cruz Works Presentation (9 attendees)
5/14/2021 San Juan Batista City Council town meeting which consisted of discussions related to the development of the climate action plan (8 attendees)

26.412
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
6/17/2021 Santa Cruz County Business Council discussion around general updates, and ideas regarding circulation of a green economy (25 attendees) 6/21/21 Summer 2021 Goals events were discussed at the laundromat, library, and Midtown Fridays (200 attendees)
6/21/21 UCSC Shelter Meal Program discussion (175 attendees) 6/21/21 Project FYI’s (updates) inducing handout in Visioning (335 attendees) 6/21/21 Beach Flats discussion (50 attendees)
7/7/2021 Visualization for Climate Action Plan values through online platform, Padlet, which offers direct engagement and input from audience (65 participants) 6/22/21-
7/26/21
Email comments; (60 sets of comments)
6/22/21-
7/26/21
In person engagement events (128 attendees)
7/27/21 Ecology Action Visioning Discussion (10 attendees) 8/2/21 Sustainability Lunch & Learn discussing Santa Cruz Climate Adaptation (22 attendees)
8/21/2021 Tree planting event (30 attendees)
8/21/2021 Beach Flats storm drain mural project discussion and visualization (12 attendees)
8/25/2021 Green economy roundtable (20 attendees)
9/6/21-
10/11/21
Goal setting Survey (328 survey respondents)
09/09/21 KSQD Good News Santa Cruz Interview
10/27/21 Be Safe Be Seen Bike Light Giveaway (50 participants) 10/28/21 Be Safe Be Seen Bike Light Giveaway (50 participants) 10/29/21 Be Safe Be Seen Bike Light Giveaway (50 participants) 11/16/21 Presentation to VWC Board meeting (20 attendees)

26.413
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
11/24/21 Youth Small Group Meeting (2 attendees)
11/29/21 CAP Small Group meeting with UCSC Students (3 attendees) 01/03/22 NAACP Presentation (8 attendees)
Winter 2022 Consider.it online platform for engagement, while allows users to rate their support CAP actions (145 participants)
Winter 2022 Homeless Garden Project Trainee program and discussion (20 attendees) Winter 2022 Benchlands Estuary Stewardship Program / Benchlands Encampment Stewardship team meeting (6 attendees)
Winter 2022 Talk to UCSC Class CLNI 85: Global Action (15 attendees) Spring 2022 Bike Focus Group (10 attendees)
Spring 2022 Student Housing Coalition discussion and meeting (6 attendees) Spring 2022 Cal policy SLO guest lecture (20 attendees) Spring 2022 Business stakeholders focus group (8 attendees) Spring 2022 UCSC Staff Sustainability Certificate Program (20 attendees) Spring 2022 Parking focus group (10 attendees)
Spring 2022 Public transportation focus group discussion (15 attendees) 4/14/2022 Heat pump learning event (28 attendees)
Total 2,884
Connecting Community Engagement, Equity and Climate Data The community engagement did not occur separately from the plan development, but as a central element that informed and guided the development of the climate measures and actions. The graphic below illustrates how the individual elements of the engagement and the equity screening tool were used to shape the final CAP.

26.414
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Visioning
Visioning Engagement Overview
The first phase of engagement focused on gathering community input to craft the Plan vision. To develop this vision, City staff, with support from BluePoint Planning and from Greenlining Institute for equity considerations, led a variety of engagement efforts in the City from June 29-July 29, 2021. This included an online visioning board through the Padlet application – one for the community at large and one for City staff – and 12 in-person visioning sessions, in which community members contributed images and words to posters. In-person visioning sessions were held at a local laundromat (2), the main and midtown branches of the Santa Cruz Library (5), the Beach Flats garden (2), Depot Park (1), a community market event (1), and the Museum of Art and History (1). Overall, an estimated 263 people took part in the in-person visioning activities. Additionally, the Padlet had 221 posts and 169 comments from a total of 134 users. Some community members who were unable to contribute to the in-person poster also submitted comments via email afterward. Those comments are included in this summary as well. The outreach, the Padlet and all materials used in the in-person sessions were offered in English and Spanish. This summary takes into account all comments from in-person visioning sessions, and all Padlet comments dated through the month of July.

26.415
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Padlet
In summer of 2021, the City of Santa Cruz hosted the online “Padlet” platform, asking the City's community members how they envisioned Santa Cruz in 2030. Community members were able to include text, images, and videos on the platform.

Participants were given the following prompt: How do you envision a sustainable and equitable Santa Cruz in 2030?.

There were several categories for participants to address which organized the areas that require environmental improvement: Equity and Justice, Transportation, Waste, Food and Food Systems, Nature, Oceans and Ocean Spaces, Energy, Public Health and Safety, Housing, Buildings and Infrastructure, Jobs and Economy, Water, and Miscellaneous. Participants addressed those areas with suggestions to facilitate a vision for a sustainable and resilient Santa Cruz. The examples below address waste, transportation, and equity, and demonstrate how users provided their feedback to the City.

Participant Responses: Examples from Padlet

26.416
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
In-person Collage
The city additionally hosted in-person visioning consisting of 12 in-person collage exercises in which community members contributed images and words to posters that reflected their vision of Santa Cruz in 2030. (Example visioning images listed below.) This was done, in part, to reach frontline audiences and audiences who may not be readily able to access the Padlet online. Overall, an estimated 263 people took part in the in-person visioning activities. In-person visioning sessions were held at a local laundromat (2), the main and midtown branches of the Santa Cruz Library (5), the Beach Flats Garden (2), Depot Park (1), a community market event (1), and the Museum of Art and History (1).

Visioning Cards used as part of the in-person visioning exercise

26.417
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Visioning Collage outside of Santa Cruz laundromat
Visioning poster with Blended Bridges group, outside of Museum of Art and History

26.418
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Small Frontline Focus Groups
The City also hosted 3 workshops with key frontline groups, which included unsheltered groups, youth, and communities residing in the Beach Flats. These focus groups functioned as visioning sessions and opportunities for these communities to voice their thoughts, which serves to better inform the Santa Cruz 2030 vision.

Summary of Visioning Themes
Below are the categories listed on the Padlet and the number of comments/ ideas received for each category for all forms for visioning outreach. This set of numbers also includes “likes” on Padlet for a specific idea. If there was a single comment that touched on different category areas, each category the comment touched on were attributed to a separate category and assigned a category/ subcategory. A full PDF of all posts from the Padlet and a detailed list of all subcategories and support for each set of ideas is attached.

1. Transportation (368)

2. Housing (156)

3. Energy (148)

4. Open Spaces, Nature, and Ocean (124)

5. Water (86)

6. Public Health and Safety (78)

7. Jobs and Green Economy (70)

8. Waste, Food, and Food Systems (65)

9. Equity and Climate Justice (51)

10. Miscellaneous (104)
Primary Themes
Below are the most salient themes that surfaced through the engagement process. These themes are aggregated concepts built from the broader categories listed above and the community comments.

These themes will be the basis for the Climate Action Plan Community Vision and Goals. Detailed comments are provided below.

1. Create a seamless and safe active transportation network. This includes creating more protected bike lanes and completing the County-wide rail trail to ensure that cyclists of all abilities feel comfortable biking. It also includes increasing walkability throughout the City and promoting pedestrian safety.

2. Create a robust, decarbonized, reliable public transportation system. There is support for reliable, electric buses, as well as an electric rail in the region. This aligns with general support for reducing the number of cars and traffic in Santa Cruz.

26.419
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary

3. Establish more affordable, denser housing. Many comments indicated support for more, and denser affordable housing. Comments also expressed a sentiment against vacant second homes in the City.

4. Foster the unique City of Santa Cruz Community Character. There is support for maintaining the current cohesive building types and density in the City. It is important to ensure that new development considers water supply, traffic, and impact on community character. Comments also indicated the desire for more ADUs to address the need for housing. Safety and resilience are also considered in this theme. This theme needs to be balanced with the Affordable and Denser Housing theme.

5. Support and maintain beautiful and regenerative landscapes and environment. There is great support for planting more trees in Santa Cruz, community gardens, and many people also expressed support for keeping heritage trees in the City. Community members also envisioned healthy, organic regenerative landscapes and agriculture in the City in part through composting programs to reduce food waste, as well as accessible beaches and ocean.

6. Promote clean energy and create resilient energy infrastructure and buildings. There is support for efficient, all-electric buildings, including increasing solar panels on buildings of all types. Many community members also envisioned a stable energy grid, including microgrids, energy storage, and EV charging.

7. Ensure sustainable water use in the City. There is a desire to align the City’s development with the capacity of the water system. There is also a desire for conserving and reusing water through greywater systems and other means.

8. Secure economic, racial, and environmental justice. Community members expressed a vision of economic and racial equity and environmental justice. This includes dedicating space for and centering BIPOC community groups in climate and economic decision-making. This includes decisions around affordable housing, green jobs and good wages, and public transportation and bike and pedestrian infrastructure, among others.

Detailed Comments by Theme
Below are detailed summary comments organized under the themes and general comment categories.

The information is provided with the most common mentioned items down to the least. Some of the comments in the latter part can be considered within the 8 themes and are noted as appropriate.

Transportation (368)
Theme 1. Create a seamless and safe active transportation network throughout the City. “We hope the city creates more open spaces for people and bikes. We envision a city where there are fewer cars on the road and biking to school and work is fun and safe for everyone.” ● More bike lockers
o More bike lockers on the wharf & at the boardwalk
o More lockers downtown near major employers to disincentivize bike theft and encourage biking

26.420
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
● Re-establish bike share
o Support for JUMP bikes
o More bike share parking advertising in the SC Sentinel, Metro Headways, Goodtimes, and CTV.
● More protected bike lanes
o Well-marked, protected bike lanes bike lanes make it safer to get around on bikes and encourage biking
● Countywide rail trail (with UCSC link)
o Complete the Rail/Trail by 2023
o More equity & inclusion thought in the rail/trail
● Use parking department income to fund rebates for eBikes, especially for low-income populations
● Prioritize building sidewalks
o Wider sidewalks
o Sidewalks away from street so there can be green space between moving vehicles and pedestrians
o Create a pedestrian mall on Pacific Ave.
● Better and safer pedestrian crossing
o Install flashing beacons for crosswalks
Theme 2. Create a robust, decarbonized, reliable public transportation system. ● Electric buses
o Expand and electrify bus fleet
● Greater bus service
o Greater service on the Westside and along Highway 1
o Explore bus on shoulder programs
o Have much earlier and much later bus times for Downtown Go program, including a late-night bus route from Watsonville, SLV, Scotts Valley, Capitola & Santa Cruz. o Have an express bus from Watsonville to Scotts Valley. o Add an electrical fleet back-up emergency plan to a feasibility study to consider grid stability
o Establish a light rail
▪ Support and establish an electric light rail from Santa Cruz to Watsonville o Greater alternative transit
▪ Create a park and ride with free shuttle to beach and tourist locations ● Fewer cars
o Reduce traffic
o Stop building of parking garage
Housing (156)
Theme 3. Establish more affordable, denser housing.
“Create high-density housing located near transit and job centers to move away from an auto centric Santa Cruz.”
● High density housing near transit

26.421
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
● Allow single-family lots to be split
● Create low-income apartments for varying size families ● More homes for locals and less vacant vacation homes
o Establish vacancy tax
Theme 4. Foster the unique City of Santa Cruz Community Character. ● Less dense development
o Reduced requirements for ADUs
o No tall buildings over 3-5 stories
o Maintain city’s ambiance
● Less Development
o Stop overdevelopment
▪ Cap growth to what City can sustain
▪ Concern about sustainability of water use
▪ Limit UCSC enrollment
o No more luxury hotels or apartments
Open Spaces, Nature, and Ocean (124)
Theme 5. Support and maintain beautiful and regenerative landscapes and environment. ● Tree filled, shady spaces
o Save heritage trees, don’t build at farmer’s market
o Plant more trees
● Healthy Landscaping
o Encourage lawn removal
o Regenerative landscaping and agriculture
▪ Healthy forestry initiatives
▪ Drought tolerant, native planting
▪ Stop pesticide use
▪ Prohibit gas landscaping equipment
● Healthy Oceans and Beaches
o Accessible for people of all incomes - No parking fees o Healthy ocean ecosystems
● Manage sea level rise
o Managed retreat of West Cliff
o Manage sea level rise
Energy (148)
Theme 7. Promote clean energy and create resilient energy infrastructure and buildings. ● Greater renewable energy
o More solar
▪ Put on new infrastructure

26.422
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
▪ Incentivize solar
o All-electric buildings
▪ Government buildings should be all-electric
● Stable energy grid
o Highly efficient buildings
▪ Construct Passive House buildings
o Reliable energy in blackouts
▪ Battery storage
▪ Establish municipally controlled microgrids
▪ More TOU rates
▪ Vehicle-to-grid charging
● Electric Car Infrastructure
o More electric vehicle charging
▪ Zero carbon electric vehicle charging at city parking lots and garages, powered by municipally-owned solar
▪ Install pay-for-use electric vehicle charging stations on curbs of multifamily buildings
▪ Charging at apartment buildings, grocery stores, restaurants o More electric vehicles
▪ Electrify City fleet
● Clean Energy Homes
o Make old rental units efficient
o Clean energy homes with solar power
● Support for zero carbon goal by 2030
o Ensure City follows up on action plan and implementation o Ban fossil fuel extraction
Water (86)
Theme 6. Ensure sustainable water use in the City.
● Sustainable Water Use
o Stormwater capture
▪ For homes
▪ Use stormwater to water golf course
o Gray water systems
▪ For City buildings
▪ Toilets in residential buildings
▪ Gray water system for Waste Management to wash down recyclables ● Align development with capacity of water system
o Concern over water related to planned development
▪ Division over what water source should be used for growing population o Create a water conservation plan

26.423
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Equity and Climate Justice (51)
Theme 8. Secure economic, racial, and environmental justice. ● Economic Equity
o More diversity in property ownership
o Equitable housing conditions
o Address poverty
▪ Better wages
● Racial Equity
o Anti-racism work
▪ Center BIPOC and traditional ecological knowledge
▪ Symbiotic relationships and collaboration between groups o Diversity
o Remembering the past and healing
● Environmental and Social Justice
o Equitable outdoor spaces
▪ BIPOC can reclaim outdoor spaces
Public Health and Safety (78)
● Safety and Resilience (Connect to Theme 4)
o Safety and security
o Safety in extreme heat
o Resilience
▪ Paid BIPOC leadership to establish resilience hubs
▪ Emergency response plan
o Reduce wildfire risk
o Covid safety
▪ Outdoor dining
▪ Walk-up window for stores/ restaurants
● Good sense of community (Connect to Theme 4)
o Community streets
o Mutual aid
o Community art and murals
o Support and expand the Downtown Streets Team
o Establish a neighborhood liaison team or Equity Department within the City Waste, Food, and Food Systems (65)
● Reduce food waste
o Compost program
▪ Establish compost program for the City

26.424
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
▪ Make more compost bins available
o Divert biowaste for fuel
o Distribute extra food from restaurants
o Create city waste reduction goal
● Greater food access (Connect to Theme 5)
o More community gardens
▪ Support for homeless garden project
▪ Create a Santa Cruz Agricultural Park/ demonstration garden o Public fruit trees
Jobs and Green Economy (70)
● Healthy local economy
o Living wage jobs (Connect to Theme 8)
o Reduce parking requirement for businesses to make City more walkable and increase foot traffic (Connect to Theme 1)
● Create green jobs
o More LEED professionals trained in building systems (Connect to theme 7) o Green job apprentice program (Connect to Theme 8)
● Encourage remote work
o Incentivize working from home to reduce car use
o Encourage employers to allow remote work
Miscellaneous (104)
● Reduce plastic use and waste (Connect to Theme 4)
o Ban single-use plastics
▪ Ban sale of plastic water bottles
▪ Charge $ 0.25 for plastic bags
o Greater recycling
▪ Increase local recycling
▪ Advocate for extended producer responsibility
▪ Recycle bottle caps
● Reduce and enforce littering finds
Creating the CAP Vision

26.425
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
All input from the Padlet, the in-person collages, and the focus groups was collected and organized by theme, with more specific sub-themes generated and listed in order of the number of pieces of input received. From there, the project team generated five initial value statements, listed below:
• Ensure equity in all policies
• Build people-centric transportation infrastructure
• Promote efficient and low carbon/no carbon energy and water usage • Protect and enhance natural resources and urban parks • Eliminate waste and support local food sources
These value statements were part of the following initial vision for the City of Santa Cruz CAP:

These value statements were part of the following initial vision for the City of Santa Cruz CAP to “Rapidly enact climate solutions that support and enhance an equitable community with robust active and public transportation, plentiful housing that is affordable, sustainable, and resilient, and regenerative landscapes.”
Goal Setting
Community Survey
The second phase of outreach focused on setting carbon neutrality targets for the Plan and gathering community feedback on CAP priorities. The project team distributed a community survey during fall of 2021 to assess the community’s opinion on various carbon neutrality targets CAP measure priorities. The survey was developed in English and Spanish and sent out via the City newsletter and social media. Inperson results were gathered in Beach Flats as well and entered into the online survey.

There were a total of 325 participants, with 271 respondents having participated at the time of survey analysis. Respondents were asked to identify their agreement with the areas that the climate action plan would pursue, and to vote on their priorities and the mitigation approaches they believed had the greatest potential to meet proposed goals. This consisted of city residents (76%), respondents who identified as BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) (13%), respondents who were aged 30 or younger (17%), respondents from the Beach Area (2%) and Lower East Side (3%), and 20% of respondents who are city employees.

Respondents from differentiated demographic groups had varied patterns in their responses. In general, frontline stakeholders demonstrated strong agreement with all goal statements, and shared similar priorities compared to the general results of the survey. However, unlike the general survey responses, there was a strong preference amongst the frontline groups for a measured and clear approach to achieve carbon neutrality rather than the bold “moonshot” target. On the contrary, the takeaways from city employees conveyed slightly different priorities than the general respondents; city employees had a greater desire for the City to promote teleworking policies. Furthermore, amongst city employees, there was lower support for City to lead environmental educational efforts (plant-based

26.426
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
diets, material consumption), lower support for promoting resilient neighborhoods, and for creating and promoting resilience in the business district. Another distinction among city employees’ responses was the overwhelming desire for a measured approach to achieve carbon neutrality.

Carbon Neutrality Targets
Results of the survey demonstrated community members’ preference to set a more aggressive target of carbon neutrality by 2035 rather than a “measured and achievable” but less aggressive target of carbon neutrality by 2045 (54% and 46% respectively). However, there were clear divides by various demographic factors. Frontline stakeholders consisted of BIPOC, youth, and Beach Flats (including nearby Lower Eastside) groups, who overall preferred the more measured and achievable approach by 2045, with 65%, 62%, and 64% preferring it, respectively. The results demonstrated a stronger preference for a measured and clear approach to achieving carbon neutrality among the frontline stakeholders.

Below are highlighted results of community preferences for carbon neutrality tradeoffs, separated by different frontline communities.

26.427
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Overall community preference on CAP target setting tradeoffs BIPOC preferences for CAP target setting tradeoffs

26.428
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Youth preferences for CAP target setting tradeoffs
Beach Flats/ Lower Eastside residents preferences for CAP target setting tradeoffs

26.429
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Measure Priorities
Respondents from the community survey were asked to rank the importance of several strategic measures. Ranking measures allowed the city to gauge the priorities of the Santa Cruz community, to guide development of actions to meet the areas of greatest concern. While the rest of the priorities listed will be integrated within the Climate Action Plan, the survey results allow City staff to develop actions based on magnitude of community priority.

The following three measures were prioritized the most by respondents:

1. Transportation (prioritized by 67.90% of participants): Reduce on road vehicles, the number of miles they travel, and traffic in Santa Cruz by equitably improving bike ability, walkability, and public transportation.

2. Building and Development (prioritized by 50.55% of participants): Build dense, mixed residential and business development that is close to public transit and services, filing in existing neighborhoods, rather than extending development into the wildland urban interface and other undeveloped areas.

3. Green Economy (prioritized by 39.11% of participants): Provide better wages to enable workers to live where they work.

The image below shows a longer list of community priority measures. Participants were asked to select the five statements that were most important for the community to address, and the list below shows the top 11 statements.

Survey results: Community Priorities

26.430
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Identifying CAP Actions
The Project team and Climate Action Task Force developed a set of measures and actions to use as a starting point to tailor actions to meet Santa Cruz’ needs. From these preliminary actions, and using input from the community, measures and actions were strengthened and specified.

Developing an Equity Screening Tool
Concurrently, the project team developed a set of equity criteria through which to evaluate each action in the CAP to ensure an equitable Plan. The equity criteria fall into six categories: health, community vibrancy, affordability, accessibility, accountability, and green jobs. Each category of criteria includes multiple questions to assess whether an action will benefit frontline populations or could potentially harm these groups. Any action that could potentially be detrimental to frontline groups had to be rewritten to ensure the action was equitable. The initial set of equity criteria developed by the team were evaluated and edited based on feedback from the City’s Climate Action Task Force (CATF). The full list of criteria can be found here.

Criteria Significance
Affordability Criteria lowers and stabilizes costs related to basic living needs (housing, food, utilities, healthcare, transportation, etc.) for low-income communities, communities of color and other frontline groups.

Accessibility Criteria increases access to housing, transportation, funding, education, healthy foods, a clean environment, and a clean energy economy for low-income communities, communities of color, people of different mobilities and other frontline groups. Action removes barriers through city infrastructure, policy, programs and investments.

Green Jobs
Facilitation and
Creation
Criteria ensures economic justice so that low-income communities, communities of color, and other frontline communities are prioritized in the benefits of the action and are protected from any potential negative consequences.

Community
Health and
Safety
Criteria improves health (physical and mental) outcomes for low-income communities, communities of color, and other frontline groups. The strategy upholds the fundamental human right to clean, healthy and adequate air, water, land, food, education, transportation, safety, and housing.

26.431
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Cultural
Vibrancy
Criteria deliberately and respectfully honors cultural relevance and history to maintain cultural heritage from the past and present for the benefit of all generations.

Accountability Criteria ensures that low-income communities, communities of color, and frontline communities can hold governments and institutions accountable for equitable implementation.

Gathering Input on CAP Actions
In the third engagement phase, the community provided feedback on potential actions that would meet the goals of the climate action plan through Consider.it, an online visualization platform. The project team developed a set of equity criteria to evaluate each action in the CAP that would come to shape the Equity Screening Tool. The equity criteria fell into six categories: health, community vibrancy, affordability, accessibility, accountability, and green jobs. Each area that addressed the equity criteria included questions assessing whether an action would benefit or harm frontline populations. Potentially detrimental actions were rewritten to ensure that these actions did not harm frontline populations.

Actions incorporated in the Climate Action Plan (policies, programs, infrastructure) will address:
• Energy in Buildings (26% of emissions)
• Transportation (69% of emissions)
• Solid Waste, Water, and Wastewater (8% of emissions)
• Carbon Sequestration
The project team used an online engagement forum, Consider.it, to solicit community input on each action. A total of 126 people participated in the Consider.it engagement forum which lasted from February to March 2022. Community members provided their input using the approval rating and comment features, which shed light on general opinion and thought process for determining support for each action. Overall, the community was supportive of all the proposed actions, with approval ranging from 89% to 57%. Comments and approval ratings facilitate incorporating the community's feedback on aspects of the plan that would have otherwise been excluded. The following example images display two strategies geared towards increasing active transportation programs and sustainable energy infrastructure and illustrate the format of Consider.it and community interactions.

26.432
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Increasing Transportation Programs: Consider.it platform

26.433
Santa Cruz Community Engagement Summary
Sustainable Energy Infrastructure: Consider.it Platform

26.434
APPENDIX E:

GHG Emissions
Inventory Update &
Forecast Memorandum

26.435
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
200 Washington Street
Suite 207
Santa Cruz, California 95060
831 440 3899
[email protected]
www.rinconconsultants.com
Environmental Scientists Planners Engineers
December 10, 2021
Project No: 20-10678
Tiffany Wise-West, Sustainability and Climate Action Manager City of Santa Cruz, City Manager’s Office
809 Center Street, Room 9/10
Santa Cruz, California 95060
Via email: [email protected]
Subject: Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan,
GHG Emissions Forecasts Memorandum
As part of Task 3 of the Santa Cruz Climate Action Plan (CAP) Update, Rincon Consultants, Inc. (Rincon) has calculated future greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions forecasts for each sector associated with land use in the City of Santa Cruz. The GHG emissions forecasts are based on the 2019 GHG emissions inventory and utilize Santa Cruz specific demographics projections. The forecasts were developed to better understand how population and job growth in Santa Cruz could affect future GHG emissions in the years 2025, 2030, 2035, 2040, and 2045. The GHG emissions forecast presents two scenarios:
▪ Business-as-Usual Scenario (BAU) that projects GHG emissions levels that scale with population, employment and transportation growth consistent with regional projections, and ▪ Adjusted Scenario (Adjusted) that accounts for GHG reductions expected to occur in response to local and regional compliance with adopted State legislation.

The presentation of these two forecast scenarios allows for an understanding of how GHG emissions levels may evolve without further action and how compliance with State legislation may contribute to reducing future GHG emissions levels.

GHG Emissions Sectors and Sources
The GHG emissions forecasts presented in this paper are based on the 2019 GHG emissions inventory calculated for Santa Cruz. The transportation sector was updated to include off-road emissions using the California Air Resources Board (CARB) OFFROAD2021 model, which were not calculated in the previous GHG inventories. In addition, on-road transportation data was updated by Kimley-Horn using the Santa Cruz County travel demand model (SCC TDM). The models used are widely accepted and regularly updated; this contributes to consistency and replicability of the data for future forecasts. All historical GHG inventories were also updated to include off-road emissions sources and updated on-road transportation emissions to allow for apples-to-apples comparison of inventories. Updates to previous inventories will be described in further detail in the Santa Cruz 2019 GHG Emissions Inventory section.

The GHG emissions sources included in this analysis align with those in the most recent (2017) California Climate Change Scoping Plan, which includes GHG emissions sources related to land use and

26.436
City of Santa Cruz
Climate and Energy Action Plan

Page 2 ends

Santa Cruz City CouncilSeptember 13, 2022

Santa Cruz City Council
September 13, 2022