Saticoy & Wells Community Plan & Development ... - City Of Ventura

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and Code EIRSection 5.0 Growth Effects and Other CEQA Sectionswww.climatechange.ca.gov and http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/cc.htm.Local Regulations and CEQA Requirements. GHG emissions and their contribution toglobal climate change have only recently been addressed in CEQA documents, such that CEQAand case law do not provide guidance relative to their assessment. Quantitative significancethresholds for this topic have not been adopted by the State of California, or any particular airpollution control district, including the SCAQMD. The Office of Planning and Research (OPR)is directed under SB 97, to prepare, develop, and transmit to the Resources Agency guidelinesfor the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions through CEQA byJuly 1, 2009. Those guidelines may recommend thresholds, but no adopted thresholds areavailable at this time. OPR will develop guidelines, and the California Resources Agency(Resources Agency) will certify and adopt amendments to the guidelines for the feasiblemitigation of GHG emissions or the effects of GHG emissions implementing the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines), on or before January 1, 2010, pursuant to SenateBill 97 (Dutton, 2007). These new CEQA Guidelines will provide regulatory guidance on theanalysis and mitigation of GHG emissions in CEQA documents. In the interim, in an effort toguide professional planners, land use officials and CEQA practitioners, the OPR prepared CEQAand Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).CEQA and Climate Change offers informal guidance regarding the steps lead agencies should taketo address climate change in their CEQA documents. This guidance was developed incooperation with the Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency(Cal/EPA), and the California Air Resources Board (ARB).Climate Change Impact Analysis. The information provided in this section is based onrecently established California goals for reducing GHG emissions as well as a project-specificemissions inventory developed for the Project. Determining how a proposed project mightcontribute to climate change, and what the overall effect of an individual project would bebased on that contribution is still undergoing debate at this time. As previously discussed, noapproved thresholds or methodologies are currently available for determining the significanceof a project’s potential cumulative contribution to global climate change in CEQA documents.An individual project (unless it is a massive construction project, such as a dam or a newfreeway project, or a large fossil-fueled fired power plant) does not generate sufficient GHGemissions to directly influence global climate change; therefore, the issue of global climatechange typically involves an analysis of whether a project’s contribution towards a cumulativeimpact is cumulatively considerable. “Cumulatively considerable” means that the incrementaleffects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects ofpast projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.The following is a good faith effort at disclosing the nature of the Project’s potential effect withregard to GHG emissions, and suggest measures as appropriate to reduce potential GHGemissions.Methodology. This analysis is based on the methodologies recommended by theCalifornia Air Pollution Control Officers Association [CAPCOA] (January 2008) CEQA andClimate Change white paper and is consistent with the methodologies identified in the draftCEQA Guidelines Amendments released by OPR on April 13, 2009 (See discussion above inCalifornia Regulations subsection). CAPCOA conducted an analysis of various approaches and5-11City of Ventura
Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and Code EIRSection 5.0 Growth Effects and Other CEQA Sectionssignificance thresholds, ranging from a zero threshold (all projects are cumulatively considerable)to a high of 40,000 – 50,000 metric tons CDE per year. For example, assuming a zero threshold andthe AB 32 2020 targets, this approach would require all discretionary projects to achieve a 33%reduction from projected “business-as-usual” emissions to be considered less than significant. Azero threshold approach could be considered based on the concept that climate change is a globalphenomenon, and that not controlling small source emissions would potentially neglect a majorportion of the GHG inventory. Another method based on a market capture approach that requiresmitigation for greater than 90% of likely future discretionary development would use aquantitative threshold of greater than 900 metric tons CDE/year for most projects, which wouldgenerally correspond to office projects of approximately 35,000 square feet, retail projects ofapproximately 11,000 square feet, or supermarket space of approximately 6,300 square feet.Another potential threshold of 10,000 metric tons was considered by the Market AdvisoryCommittee for inclusion in a GHG Cap and Trade System in California. A 10,000 metric tonsignificance threshold would correspond to the GHG emissions of approximately 550 residentialunits, 400,000 square feet of office space, 120,000 square feet of retail, and 70,000 square feet ofsupermarket space (CAPCOA, January 2008). This threshold would capture roughly half of newresidential or commercial development (CAPCOA, January 2008). The basic concepts for thevarious approaches suggested by CAPCOA are used herein to determine whether or not theProject’s GHG emissions are “cumulatively considerable.”Calculations of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), and nitrous oxide (N 2 O)are provided for fulldisclosure of the magnitude of potential project effects. The analysis focuses on CO 2 , N 2 O, andCH 4 as these are those GHG emissions that the Project would emit in the largest quantities, ascompared to other GHGs (such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]). Calculations were based on themethodologies discussed in the CAPCOA white paper (January 2008) and included the use of theCalifornia Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol (March 2007).Indirect Emissions. Operational emissions of CO 2, associated with space heating andlandscape maintenance were quantified using the California Air Resource Board’s URBEMIS 2007(version 9.2.4) computer model. Nitrous oxide (N 2 O) and methane (CH 4 ) emissions werequantified using the California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol (March 2007)indirect emissions factors for electricity use (see Appendix B for calculations). The calculations andemission factors contained in the General Reporting Protocol were selected based on technicaladvice provided to the Registry by the California Energy Commission. This methodology isconsidered reasonable and reliable for use, as it has been subjected to peer review by numerouspublic and private stakeholders, and in particular by the California Energy Commission, and isrecommended by CAPCOA (January 2008).Direct Emissions from Mobile Combustion. Emissions of CO 2 from transportation sourceswere quantified using the California Air Resource Board’s URBEMIS 2007 (version 9.2.4) computermodel. N 2 O and CH 4 emissions were quantified, using the California Climate Action RegistryGeneral Reporting Protocol (March 2007) direct emissions factors for mobile combustion (seeAppendix B for calculations). Total daily mileage was calculated in URBEMIS 2007 andextrapolated to derive total annual mileage. Emission rates were based on the vehicle mix output,generated by URBEMIS, and the emission factors found in the California Climate Action RegistryGeneral Reporting Protocol.5-12City of Ventura
Page 5 and 6:
Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216: Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
Page 229 and 230: S a t i c o y & WellsCommunity Plan
Page 265: Saticoy & Wells Community Plan and
show all

Saticoy & Wells Community Plan & Development ... - City Of Ventura

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?