[00:00:02]
GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE OCTOBER 2ND MEETING OF THE CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION.
[CALL TO ORDER]
WOULD THE CLERK PLEASE TAKE THE ROLL CALL? COMMISSIONER HUBINGER HERE.PRESENT. COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
PRESENT. ALL COMMISSIONERS ARE PRESENT.
PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE LED THIS EVENING BY COMMISSIONER MEENES.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS FOR APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 4TH MEETING.
[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
YEAH. ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THE MINUTES OF THAT MEETING? YES, SIR.I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD TO AFTER THEIR NAME, NOTE THE ORGANIZATION IN WHICH THEY REPRESENT THEIR LIKE PRESERVE CALAVERA, THE CARLSBAD RESEARCH CENTER OWNERS, NAIOP JUST A NUMBER OF THEM. I DIDN'T WRITE THOSE DOWN.
BUT YEAH, THEY'RE IN THAT SECTION.
I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT ADDITION.
IF YOU IF YOU WANT, I CAN HELP WRITE THOSE OUT I JUST DIDN'T BRING IT WITH ME SO.
YEAH. IS THAT POSSIBLE TO BE DONE? THANK YOU.
ANY OTHER ADDITIONS? ANY OTHER ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THOSE MINUTES.
SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL AS ANNOTATED.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MEENES.
HOW ABOUT A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MERZ.
OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIES 5 TO 0, WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS OF MYSELF AND COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY, WHO WERE ABSENT. LET'S MOVE ON TO THE APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 21ST, 2024 MINUTES.
ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONS OR CORRECTIONS TO THOSE MINUTES? GOOD. SEEING NONE, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE AUGUST 24TH, 2024 MINUTES.
SO MOVED. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STINE.
HOW ABOUT A SECOND? THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MERZ.
AGAIN, THE MOTION PASSES FIVE ZERO, WITH TWO ABSTENTIONS MYSELF AND MR. DANNA. THANK YOU ALL.
THE FOLLOWING PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING PROCEDURES ARE IN EFFECT.
WE WILL REQUIRE A REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM FOR ALL ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, INCLUDING PUBLIC HEARINGS.
REQUEST TO SPEAK MUST BE TURNED INTO THE MINUTES CLERK PRIOR TO THE ITEM COMMENCING.
PLEASE FILL THEM OUT NOW AND GIVE THEM TO OUR CLERK.
AGAIN, REQUEST TO SPEAK FORMS MUST BE TURNED IN BEFORE THE ITEM COMMENCES.
THIS WILL ALLOW SPEAKER TIME TO BE MANAGED IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.
ALL SPEAKERS WILL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES UNLESS THAT TIME IS REDUCED BY THE CHAIRPERSON.
SPEAKERS MAY NOT GIVE THEIR TIME TO ANOTHER SPEAKER.
GROUP TIME WILL BE PERMITTED FOR ITEMS LISTED ON THE AGENDA.
THOSE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF A GROUP HAVE TEN MINUTES, UNLESS THE TIME IS CHANGED BY THE CHAIRPERSON.
NOW I HAVE TO READ SOMETHING ELSE ABOUT THE BROWN ACT.
THE BROWN ACT ALLOWS ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA.
PLEASE TREAT OTHERS WITH COURTESY, CIVILITY AND RESPECT.
[00:05:01]
ALL OTHER NON-AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE HEARD AT THE END OF THE MEETING.IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT NO ACTION CAN OCCUR ON THESE ITEMS. AND AGAIN, WE ASK THAT YOU REFRAIN FROM CLAPPING OR EXPRESSIVE BEHAVIOR DURING THE BUSINESS SECTION OF THE MEETING, STARTING WITH NON-AGENDA PUBLIC ITEMS. THIS WILL MAKE SURE THE PEOPLE'S BUSINESS CAN BE CONDUCTED EFFICIENTLY, AND THAT THIS CHAMBER IS A PLACE WHERE ALL POINTS OF VIEW ARE WELCOME AND RESPECTED.
MADAM CLERK, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER SLIPS? FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? YES.
THANK YOU. SEEING NONE, WE'LL BEGIN WITH TONIGHT'S HEARING.
[1. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN (CAP) UPDATE]
IF EVERYONE WILL DIRECT THEIR ATTENTION TO THE SCREEN, I WILL REVIEW THE PROCEDURES THE COMMISSION WILL BE FOLLOWING FOR THIS EVENING.THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE OPENED, STAFF WILL MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION.
THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS ON THE STAFF PRESENTATIONS.
THE APPLICANTS MAY MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION AND RESPOND TO CLARIFYING QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSIONERS.
THEY WILL HAVE TEN MINUTES FOR THEIR PRESENTATION.
THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY WILL THEN BE OPENED.
A TIME LIMIT OF THREE MINUTES IS ALLOTTED TO EACH SPEAKER.
THE APPLICANT AND STAFF WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO ISSUES OR QUESTIONS RAISED.
THE COMMISSIONERS WILL THEN DISCUSS THE ITEM AND THEN VOTE ON IT.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE CLOSED.
CERTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION DECISIONS ARE FINAL BUT MAY BE APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
YOU CAN FIND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PLANNING PROCEDURES ON THE BACK OF TONIGHT'S AGENDA.
I'LL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE.
WELL, I STARTED TO I WAS DOING SOME RESEARCH.
I WAS TRYING TO FIND, YOU KNOW, MARGIN OF ERROR STUFF.
SO THANKS. WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR HONESTY.
ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? NO. GOOD.
MR. LARDY, WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THIS ITEM? YES. THANK YOU.
IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION IS THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
HERE TO GIVE THE STAFF PRESENTATION IS SENIOR PROGRAM MANAGER FROM PUBLIC WORKS, KATIE HENTRICH.
GOOD EVENING CHAIR, VICE CHAIR AND COMMISSIONERS I'M KATIE HENTRICH PRONOUNS SHE/HER.
AND SCOTT ANDERS FROM THE ENERGY POLICY INITIATIVE CENTER AT THE UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO, WHO IS ONE OF THE CONSULTANTS FOR THIS EFFORT, IS ALSO HERE TONIGHT AND AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS AFTER THE PRESENTATION.
THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE ADDENDUM IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING AND I'M GOING TO READ THESE NOW AND I WILL SAY THAT I WILL GO OVER THEM AGAIN IN MY PRESENTATION LATER.
SO THE FIRST A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE, EXCLUDING THREE MEASURES TO MEET THE REQUIRED 2045 REDUCTION TARGET, ALSO KNOWN AS OPTION ONE.
OR A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE EXCLUDING ONE MEASURE, MEASURE E 3.2, WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 200 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT.
OR A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE EXCLUDING ONE MEASURE, MEASURE E 4.2, WHICH WOULD EXCEED THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 4000 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, OR OH SORRY, KNOWN AS OPTION THREE.
[00:10:06]
APPROXIMATELY 6000 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, ALSO KNOWN AS OPTION FOUR.AND AGAIN, I'LL BE GOING OVER THESE MORE LATER ON IN MY PRESENTATION.
DISCUSS WHY THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IS REQUIRED.
SUMMARIZE MEETING VERSUS EXCEEDING THE REDUCTION TARGETS IN THE PLAN.
DIG INTO THOSE OPTIONS THAT I JUST HIGHLIGHTED.
HERE'S WHAT WAS COVERED AT THE SEPTEMBER 4TH PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
I PRESENTED INFORMATION ON THE GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, GAVE AN OVERVIEW OF THE STATE TARGETS THAT ARE REQUIRED, SUMMARIZED THE PROJECTIONS THAT WERE DONE TO DETERMINE FUTURE EMISSIONS.
HIGHLIGHTED THE POTENTIAL MEASURES IN THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
FIRST, ON APRIL 6TH, 2021, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CITY'S HOUSING ELEMENT, INCLUDING LAND USE CHANGES TO MEET THE REGIONAL HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR CARLSBAD.
IN THIS REPORT, STAFF DISCUSSED THE NEED TO UPDATE THE CITY'S CLIMATE ACTION PLAN TO ACCOUNT FOR THE LAND USE AND GROWTH CHANGES INCLUDED IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS AND THE ASSOCIATED GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACTS.
BY ACCOUNTING FOR THE GREENHOUSE GAS IMPACTS OF THE HOUSING ELEMENT AMENDMENTS IN THE UPDATED CLIMATE ACTION PLAN THE CITY MAY CONTINUE TO RELY ON ITS CLIMATE ACTION PLAN FOR STREAMLINED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WITHIN THE CITY.
ON JUNE 8TH, 2021, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED FUNDING FOR A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE TO THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, OR CAP, AS PART OF THE FISCAL YEAR 2021-22 BUDGET. ON SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2022, THERE WERE CHANGES IN STATE LAW ESTABLISHING MORE AGGRESSIVE GREENHOUSE GAS TARGETS.
SPECIFICALLY, THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNOR SIGNED INTO LAW ASSEMBLY BILL 1279, THE CALIFORNIA CLIMATE CRISIS ACT, WHICH REQUIRES THE STATE TO ACHIEVE NET ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE AND TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN CALIFORNIA BY 85% COMPARED TO 1990 LEVELS BY 2045. THE CALIFORNIA, OR THE CLIMATE CRISIS ACT DOES NOT REPLACE NOR SUPERSEDE THE STATE'S PREVIOUS GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION TARGET OF 40% COMPARED TO 1990 LEVELS BY 2030, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY SENATE BILL 32.
LAST, ON JANUARY 30TH, 2024, THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED RESOLUTION 2024-14, WHICH CERTIFIED THE FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENERAL PLAN, LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT.
THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INCLUDED MITIGATION MEASURE GHG ONE, UPDATE CITY OF CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, REQUIRING THE CITY TO DRAFT AND THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CLIMATE ACTION PLAN WITHIN 12 TO 18 MONTHS OF ADOPTION OF THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.
AS SUCH, THE PERIOD FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT AN UPDATED CLIMATE ACTION PLAN IS BETWEEN JANUARY 30TH, 2025 AND JULY 30TH, 2025. WHEN COMBINED WITH THE FEDERAL AND STATE MEASURES WITHIN THE LEGISLATIVELY ADJUSTED BUSINESS AS USUAL PROJECTIONS, THE MEASURES IN THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE ARE PROJECTED SO THAT THE CITY WILL SURPASS ITS 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 6000 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, OR APPROXIMATELY 0.68% OF THE TOTAL GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS IN THE PLAN FOR THE YEAR 2045.
PREPARING A SUITE OF MEASURES THAT SURPASSES THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET FULFILLS COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM INDIVIDUAL CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AT THE NOVEMBER 7TH, 2023, CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
[00:15:05]
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL.STAFF HAVE PROVIDED FOUR OPTIONS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO CONSIDER.
THE DIFFERENCE IN THESE OPTIONS DEPENDS ON WHETHER THE PLANNING COMMISSION WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE MEET OR EXCEED THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGETS ESTABLISHED BY THE STATE.
OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO START WITH OPTION ONE.
IN OTHER WORDS, IT ADOPTS THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE BUT EXCLUDES THE FOLLOWING THREE MEASURES E 3.2 NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY UPDATED REACH CODE, E 3.3 NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY SOLAR CARPORTS AND E 4.2 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY.
BENEFITS TO THIS OPTION ARE THAT IT MEETS THE TARGET COMPLETION DATE FOR MITIGATION MEASURE GHG ONE IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE HOUSING ELEMENT REZONE EFFORT.
DRAWBACKS TO THIS OPTION ARE THAT IT IMPLEMENTS A SMALLER SUITE OF MEASURES TO MEET THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET, WHICH PROVIDES LESS FLEXIBILITY FOR CLIMATE ACTION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, AND THAT IT DELAYS IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE TO REVISE THE DOCUMENTS, WHICH WOULD TAKE APPROXIMATELY 1 TO 2 MONTHS. MOVING ON TO OPTION TWO.
OPTION TWO RECOMMENDS ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE THAT EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 200 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, OR APPROXIMATELY 0.02% OF THE TOTAL REDUCTIONS FOR 2045.
THIS WOULD MEAN ADOPTING THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE, EXCLUDING ONE MEASURE MEASURE E 3.2 NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY UPDATED REACH CODE.
BENEFITS TO THIS OPTION ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE OF OPTION ONE.
A DIFFERENT BENEFIT IS THAT INSTEAD OF MEETING THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET, OPTION TWO EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY THAT APPROXIMATE 200 METRIC TON AMOUNT.
DRAWBACKS TO THIS OPTION ARE THE SAME AS THOSE FOR OPTION ONE.
OPTION THREE, OPTION THREE RECOMMENDS ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE THAT EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 4000 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, OR 0.45% OF THE TOTAL REDUCTIONS FOR 2045.
THIS WOULD MEAN ADOPTING THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE, EXCLUDING ONE MEASURE MEASURE E 4.2 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY UPDATED REACH CODE.
AGAIN, BENEFITS TO THIS OPTION ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE OF OPTIONS ONE AND TWO.
THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS THAT OPTION THREE THERE'S A BENEFIT THAT IT EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY AN EVEN HIGHER AMOUNT THAN OPTION TWO, THAT APPROXIMATELY 4000 METRIC TON AMOUNT.
AND THE DRAWBACKS TO THIS OPTION ARE THE SAME FOR THOSE AS OPTIONS ONE AND TWO.
LAST, WE HAVE OPTION FOUR, THIS OPTION WOULD RECOMMEND ADOPTION OF THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE THAT EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY APPROXIMATELY 6000 METRIC TONS OF CARBON DIOXIDE EQUIVALENT, OR 0.68% OF THE TOTAL 2045 REDUCTIONS.
IN OTHER WORDS, THIS WOULD MEAN ADOPTING THE PUBLICLY POSTED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE AS IS.
AGAIN, BENEFITS TO THIS OPTION ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THOSE OF THE PREVIOUS OPTIONS.
THE MAIN DIFFERENCE IS THAT OPTION FOUR EXCEEDS THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET BY THE LARGEST AMOUNT OF THE FOUR OPTIONS, OR THE 6000 METRIC TONS, THE BULLET ABOUT, YOU KNOW, MIRRORING SOME COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD DURING PUBLIC INPUT IS REMOVED FROM THIS BENEFIT. AND THEN DRAWBACKS TO THIS OPTION ARE THAT IT DOES INCLUDE A REACH CODE MEASURES THAT INDUSTRY STAKEHOLDERS HAVE OBJECTED TO, INCLUDING ON THE BASIS THAT THE REACH CODES HAVE NOT BEEN STUDIED FOR COST EFFECTIVENESS.
[00:20:01]
HOWEVER, PRIOR TO PROVIDING APPROVAL, THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION DOES REQUIRE THAT LOCAL JURISDICTIONS DEMONSTRATE THAT A REACH CODE SAVES MORE ENERGY THAN CURRENT STATEWIDE ENERGY STANDARDS AND IS COST EFFECTIVE.THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE HAS BEEN DESIGNED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH A NUMBER OF STATE AND LOCAL POLICIES, STARTING WITH STATE GUIDANCE AND REGULATIONS FROM THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD AND CALIFORNIA'S LEGISLATURE.
THE CITY OF CARLSBAD GENERAL PLAN INCLUDES SEVERAL GOALS AND POLICIES RELATED TO SUSTAINABILITY ACROSS MULTIPLE GENERAL PLAN ELEMENTS, AND THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE DIRECTLY SUPPORTS THESE GOALS AND POLICIES, AS WELL AS GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND CORE VALUES EMBEDDED IN THE GENERAL PLAN.
THE 2015 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN WAS INCLUDED AS A MITIGATION MEASURE IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, TO MITIGATE IMPACTS TO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
MORE RECENTLY, THE HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INCLUDED THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE AS A MITIGATION MEASURE, WHICH I DISCUSSED PREVIOUSLY.
LAST, THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IS DESIGNED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CLIMATE CHANGE EMERGENCY DECLARATION APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN SEPTEMBER 2021, AS WELL AS THE FIVE YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN OCTOBER 2022.
THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IMPLEMENTS GENERAL PLAN GOALS AND POLICIES, MITIGATES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM OTHER CITY PROGRAMS, FULFILLS STATE REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, INCORPORATES BEST AVAILABLE DATA, AND FURTHERS THE COMMUNITY'S GOAL OF PROMOTING A SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT.
AGAIN, THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS ARE SPLIT INTO TWO COMPONENTS.
SO THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE ADDENDUM IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT IMPLEMENTATION AND PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE AND THE RECOMMENDED ACTION FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION ADOPT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS LISTED ON THIS SLIDE.
I WON'T SPARE YOU VERY WITH ME READING THEM ALL OUT LOUD AGAIN.
BUT THAT'S MY PRESENTATION I WILL NOW TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, ARE THERE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS AND WHO'D LIKE TO BEGIN? COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER MERZ.
SURE. SO IN ONE OF THE LAST SLIDE ON OPTION FOUR, AND THEN ALSO IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT FROM THE LETTER FROM THE INDUSTRY TRADE ASSOCIATION, FOLKS HAVE BOTH SAID THAT THE, THE COST ON THE NON-CITY PARKS WERE NOT ANALYZED, BUT ALSO SAID THEY DID A GOOD JOB OF MENTIONING THE COST TO THE CITY OF IMPLEMENTATION.
I DIDN'T I MUST HAVE MISSED IT.
BUT DO THEY HAVE THE COST SOMEWHERE IN THERE I MUST HAVE MISSED IT OR I DIDN'T SEE IT.
YEAH. THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.
THAT IS APPENDIX DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER MEMORIZED, SO BEAR WITH ME.
LET ME FLIP THROUGH MY BINDER THAT IS APPENDIX E IN THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
IT'S THE IMPLEMENTATION COST ANALYSIS.
OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US THE PAGE THAT'S ON AND WHAT NUMBER? I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A PAGE NUMBER ON IT ON MY BINDER THAT IS.
BUT IN SUMMARY SO THE IMPLEMENTATION COSTS ANALYSIS SPLITS OUT WHAT IT LOOKS AT BY PROGRAM TYPE.
SO THERE ARE A LOT OF MEASURES IN THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE, SORRY, THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE THAT ARE EXISTING THAT ARE THINGS THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING THAT BY ADOPTING A CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
IT WOULDN'T CHANGE THAT WE'RE DOING THOSE.
SO THOSE COSTS ARE KIND OF IN ONE BUCKET.
THE OTHER THING TO KEEP IN MIND IS THAT WE ONLY LOOKED AT THE FIRST FIVE YEARS OF IMPLEMENTATION.
GETS A LITTLE HARD TO PROJECT COSTS BEYOND THAT.
SO AND THEN WE ALSO SPLIT IT OUT BY WITHIN THOSE NEW AND EXPANDED PROGRAMS FUNDED VERSUS UNFUNDED.
[00:25:03]
MILLION. AND THEN NEW AND EXPANDED PROGRAMS IS 7% OF THAT.AND THE COST CATEGORIES WE LOOKED AT ARE STAFF TIME I KNOW FOR SURE.
CAPITAL. CAPITAL, STAFF, AND YEAH CONSULTANT TIME.
SO IN THE STAFF REPORT, ONE OF THE MENTIONS IN THERE WAS THE IN DETERMINING THE THE [INAUDIBLE] IS THE LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL NUMBER. RIGHT.
IN THAT ONE GRAPH THAT SHOWED THE THE START WAS BASED ON 2016 NUMBERS AND HAD 981,000 METRIC TONS. RIGHT. BASED ON 2016 NUMBERS AND AS AND I THINK THE EXACT TERM OF THE REPORT WAS THE LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL NUMBER.
SO SO THE QUESTION I HAD, AND IT KIND OF CAME BACK TO EX PARTE, WAS TO SAY IS IS THERE A INDUSTRY STANDARD MARGIN OF ERROR ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S OBVIOUS IT'S AN ESTIMATE, RIGHT? SO IS THERE A KIND OF AN INDUSTRY STANDARD WHERE WE SAY AS A MARGIN OF ERROR ON SOMETHING LIKE THAT? THAT IS A GREAT QUESTION.
IF YOU'D LIKE TO? YEAH, IF YOU'D LIKE TO, BECAUSE I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, IT DOES.
YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THIS IS BASED ON USING IT AS A BASELINE WITH THOSE GRAPHS.
SO IT'S KIND OF IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S OUR YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF RANGE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT HERE IN TERMS OF MARGIN OF ERROR. GOOD EVENING.
I'M SCOTT ANDERS, DIRECTOR OF THE ENERGY POLICY INITIATIVE CENTER BASED AT UNIVERSITY OF SAN DIEGO.
WE SUPPORTED THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
SURE. SO BUSINESS AS USUAL IS SORT OF THE DO NOTHING SCENARIO.
SO IF IF NOTHING HAPPENED AFTER 2016 EXCEPT FOR POPULATION GROWTH, ECONOMIC CHANGES, EMISSIONS WOULD THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO EMISSIONS. SO IT'S SORT OF A NO POLICY OPTION, RIGHT.
WHICH SHOWS 1,000,024 METRIC TONS BY THE 2045 DATE.
YEAH. I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBER. I'VE GOT IT.
SO, FOR EXAMPLE, THE STATE HAS A RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD TO REACH 100% BY 2045, OR THERE ARE FEDERAL AND STATE VEHICLE STANDARDS THAT GET ACCOUNTED FOR.
AND SO IF YOU TAKE TAKE THAT ALL INTO CONSIDERATION, THAT'S WHAT THE LEGISLATURE I'M SORRY.
THAT'S WHAT'S IN THE CHART. I THINK IT'S A LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL NUMBER.
SO THE SO JUST FOR KICKS, I PUT THE 981,000 METRIC TONS IN A SPREADSHEET AND JUST STARTED PUTTING MARGIN OF ERROR 0.5% ALL THE WAY UP TO 4%.
RIGHT. SO THE OPTION FOUR SHOWS THAT WE WOULD, IN 21 YEARS FROM NOW, HAVE A 0.68 REDUCTION IN TOTAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
RIGHT. OR 6 OR 6000 METRIC TONS.
CORRECT. OR WE WOULD I'M SORRY, WE WOULD EXCEED THE TARGET BY 6000 METRIC TONS.
I'M SORRY. WE WOULD EXCEED IT BY 6000 METRIC TONS.
RIGHT. SO JUST JUST FOR KICKS, YOU KNOW, I PUT MARGIN OF ERROR AT FIVE, YOU KNOW, HALF OF 1% ALL THE WAY UP TO 4% IF IT SAYS THERE'S A 4% MARGIN OF ERROR THAT THAT THAT MARGIN IS ABOUT 39,000 METRIC TONS.
SO I GUESS THE QUESTION I ASK IS, SO WE'RE TRYING TO EXCEED WE'RE LOOKING AT SOME PRETTY EXPENSIVE COSTS EXCEED THE STATE MANDATE, WHICH LOOKS LIKE BASED AT 21 YEARS OUT BASED ON ESTIMATE IS 6000 METRIC TONS.
RIGHT? WELL, I GUESS MY QUESTION, AND WITHOUT TRYING TO BE TOO TECHNICAL HERE.
IS THAT SO SAY WE WENT WITH THE LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS USUAL NUMBER, RIGHT? FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, WE FOUND OUT THAT ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, THE MARGIN OF ERROR IS 4% WERE ACTUALLY A LOT LOWER THERE.
WE WOULD HIT OUR NUMBERS WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING.
DO YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING WITH THAT? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YEAH.
SO I MEAN ONE, ONE, ONE THING IS THAT THE STATE GUIDANCE AND, AND KATIE PUT UP SOME OF THE GUIDANCE, INCLUDING THE STATE LAWS AND THE AND THE CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD GUIDANCE.
THAT IS A FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE, IT IS A IT IS A A MASS EMISSIONS NUMBER.
IT DOESN'T SAY GET WITHIN 25% PLUS OR MINUS OF THIS NUMBER.
[00:30:01]
WE MET THE TARGET WITHOUT ACTUALLY DEMONSTRATING THAT YOU COULD MEET THE TARGET.SO I MEAN, AGAIN, IT'S THE OTHER THING I WOULD SAY IS THAT YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.
EVERY FIVE YEARS THE CAP WILL BE UPDATED.
SO EVERY FIVE YEARS IT WILL BE THERE'LL BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO NEW CAP.
BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE CAP.
I CAN'T RECALL WHAT THE CAP SAYS OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
BUT CITIES USUALLY UPDATE THEIR CAP, THEIR INVENTORY TO MONITOR PROGRESS EVERY TWO YEARS.
AND IF YOU FIND THAT YOU'RE MEETING THE TARGET WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING, THEN, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU CAN ADJUST ALONG THE WAY, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT'S INTERESTING, BECAUSE IN THE PUBLIC COMMENT, LIKE ONE OF THE SIERRA CLUB OR COASTERS MENTIONED, ONE OF THE CONCERNS THEY HAD WAS IS THAT THE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL NUMBER THERE WAS BASED ON 2016 NUMBERS, WHICH ARE ABOUT ABOUT EIGHT YEARS OLD, AND THOSE ARE ESTIMATES.
SO IT JUST SEEMS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHY MY QUESTION WAS THE COST.
AND, YOU KNOW, IT JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST FROM A STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT WE'RE TALKING AND BEATING THE NUMBERS BY 6000 METRIC TONS 21 YEARS FROM NOW BASED ON AN ESTIMATE [INAUDIBLE].
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THERE'S JUST LITTLE THINGS THAT COULD MAKE A HUGE SWAY IN THAT OVER TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE ARGUMENT SEEMS TO BE MADE THAT YOU COULD NOT JUST JUST STAY AT OPTION ONE AND JUST BUY THINGS LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, 50% OF THE CHD IS TRANSPORTATION, RIGHT? JUST SO IT SEEMS LIKE LITTLE CHANGES IN THAT CAN MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE.
I MEAN, I MEAN, SURE, I MEAN OKAY, OKAY.
NO. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. I DON'T KNOW IF I DON'T MEAN TO BE FUNNY.
PEOPLE ARE LAUGHING AT ME. I WASN'T TRYING TO BE FUNNY SO.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER HUBINGER.
YEAH, I THINK MY QUESTION WAS JUST ANSWERED MY, MY MY QUESTION WAS PROCESS.
IS THAT SORT OF THE PLAN? YEAH. GREAT QUESTION.
AND SO THAT LOOKS AT ALL OF THE MEASURES IN THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN.
AND LIKE MR. ANDERS JUST MENTIONED, WE TYPICALLY CONDUCT THOSE EVERY OTHER YEAR.
SO ONE ANNUAL REPORT MAY HAVE THE INVENTORY FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR.
AND THEN ONE INVENTORY REPORT MAY HAVE THE MOST RECENT INVENTORY.
SO TOGETHER, THOSE TWO THINGS GIVE A PRETTY GOOD SNAPSHOT OF HOW THINGS ARE GOING.
BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO TELL WITH THE INVENTORY, ARE WE STILL MAKING A LINE THAT GOES DOWN? IS THE LINE LOOKING LIKE IT'S LEVELING OUT? IS IT GOING UP? SO YEAH.
AND THEN TYPICALLY THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT TO DO SO.
BUT IT'S BEST PRACTICE TO UPDATE THE PLAN EVERY FIVE YEARS JUST BECAUSE YOU KNOW LIKE ALL PLANS THINGS CHANGE SO RAPIDLY AND THE PLAN BECOMES REALLY OUTDATED.
AND WELL YEAH, I'M LOOKING AT 40 YEARS AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN PREDICT THE WEATHER TOMORROW.
SO I STRUGGLE WITH THE WHOLE 40 YEARS OUT AND I WILL PROBABLY BE DEAD.
THE OTHER THING, THOUGH, IS THAT IF YOU HAVE AN ANNUALIZED LOOK AT THIS, THEN YOU CAN ADJUST TO BE MORE AGGRESSIVE WITH THE WITH THE ADDITIONAL INITIATIVES OR MORE NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO IS TECHNOLOGY TURNS OVER EVERY 18 EVERY EVERY THREE MONTHS IN THE BUSINESS I'M IN.
SO THINGS THAT WE ARE NOT EVEN ANTICIPATING NOW WILL HAPPEN NEXT YEAR.
THAT WILL SEVERELY IMPACT THESE NUMBERS.
MOSTLY FOR THE POSITIVE, I WOULD SAY.
SO I'M JUST I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, MAKING THE CASE THAT THE FORECASTING THERE'S ADJUSTABLE PERIODS EVERY YEAR WHERE WE CAN BE MORE AGGRESSIVE IF WE'RE NOT HITTING OUR NUMBER.
I GUESS AN EXAMPLE TO SHARE OF WHAT COMES OUT OF THIS ANNUAL REPORTING EFFORT IS WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THE EXISTING CLIMATE ACTION PLAN WAS AMENDED IN 2020, BECAUSE BY DOING THESE INVENTORIES AND KIND OF ASSESSING WHERE WE'RE AT, AND THIS HAPPENED BEFORE I WAS AT THE CITY, BUT STAFF REALIZED THAT THERE WAS A CALCULATION ERROR IN THE PLAN.
BUT YEAH, IT'S A DYNAMIC FORECAST.
[00:35:02]
YEAH, I GUESS.THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER STINE.
I HAVE KIND OF A BIG PICTURE QUESTION.
BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DETAILS OF THE VARIOUS OPTIONS FROM YOUR PRESENTATION AND FROM MY READING, IT SEEMS TO ME WE HAVE A THRESHOLD ISSUE HERE, AND THAT IS WHETHER TO JUST BARELY MEET.
IN OTHER WORDS, DO THE MINIMUM NOT MUCH MORE.
OR DO WE WANT TO GO BEYOND THAT MINIMUM IN TERMS OF THE STATE TARGETS THAT TAKE US OUT TO 2025? SO BARE BONES VERSUS MORE AGGRESSIVE, THAT PRODUCES MORE REDUCTION IN GREENHOUSE GASES.
MY QUESTION HAS TO DO WITH I WANT TO GET A HANDLE ON THE IMPETUS FOR GIVING US THESE OPTIONS THAT GO BEYOND THE BARE BONES.
WAS THAT A COUNCIL DIRECTIVE? DID WE LISTEN TO CITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY? DID WE LOOK TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT SAY, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO DO JUST THE BARE BONES? LET'S THINK OF SOMETHING THAT WILL EXCEED THE STATE MINIMUMS. HOW DID THAT COME TO PLAY? YEAH. THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
JUST FLIPPING TO THAT PART OF MY STAFF REPORT.
OKAY. SO YOU MAY RECALL FROM MY PRESENTATION LAST MONTH THAT I COVERED THE DIFFERENT PHASES OF PUBLIC INPUT THAT WE HAD FOR THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE.
SO OUR SECOND PHASE OF PUBLIC INPUT WAS LAST FALL, AND THIS IS WHEN WE SHARED THE PROPOSED MEASURES.
SO IT WASN'T ALL WITHIN THIS, YOU KNOW, GLOSSY VERY LONG PLAN.
BUT DURING THIS PHASE OF INPUT, WE SHARED THESE MEASURES, OBVIOUSLY WITH THE PUBLIC.
WE HAD INFORMATION ON OUR WEBSITE, THE WEEKLY CITY MANAGER EMAILS.
WE HAVE A STAKEHOLDER EMAIL LIST THAT WE SHARED IT WITH.
WE HAD A SURVEY, SO WE HAD FEEDBACK GATHERED THAT WAY.
AND THEN TO YOUR POINT ABOUT CITY COUNCIL DURING THIS TIME PERIOD, WE PRESENTED TO CITY COUNCIL ON THIS INFORMATION. SO IT WAS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM, THERE WAS NO VOTE, BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL PROVIDED THEIR COMMENTS DURING THIS PUBLIC INPUT PHASE SO THEY COULD SEE WHAT THE PROPOSED MEASURES WERE.
SO YEAH, WE HEARD COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AND FROM THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO ADD IN MORE MEASURES SO THAT THE TOTAL EMISSIONS REDUCE ARE HIGHER THAN THE 2045 REDUCTION TARGET.
BUT THAT'S REALLY HOW THAT CAME ABOUT.
SO I'M UNDERSTANDING CAME FROM BOTH THE PUBLIC AND DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL.
DON'T JUST LOOK AT THE BARE BONES TO GET BY AND MEET THE STANDARD, BUT NOTHING MORE.
LOOK AT OPTIONS THAT GIVE US MORE REDUCTION IN THE GREENHOUSE GASES.
THAT'S THAT'S HELPFUL TO KNOW.
THE OTHER THING ON THAT LINE IS I WOULD WELCOME SOME BIG PICTURE INPUT ABOUT WHAT OTHER PUBLIC ENTITIES, PARTICULARLY CITIES OR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, ARE DOING HERE, DOING IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS [INAUDIBLE] I WANT TO GET A SENSE OF WHETHER MOST OF THEM ARE SAYING, LET'S JUST DO THE MINIMUM AND BE DONE WITH IT, AND REDUCE ANY ADVERSE ECONOMIC IMPACT THAT MAY BE ON OUR COMMUNITY VERSUS LET'S BE REAL AGGRESSIVE.
THIS IS A CRISIS WE NEED TO DO A LOT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR, I'M PAZ GOMEZ, THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER FOR PUBLIC WORKS.
AND I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THE THE RESPONSE WITH REGARDS TO COUNCIL DIRECTION.
TO US FROM A STAFF PERSPECTIVE, COUNCIL DIRECTION IS WHEN COUNCIL VOTES AND THEY THEN AT LEAST THREE OF THEM VOTE IN SUPPORT OF SOMETHING TO DIRECT STAFF TO DO THIS.
THAT TO ME IS COUNCIL DIRECTION AS MISS HENTRICH EXPLAINED, IT WAS AN INFORMATIONAL INFORMATION OR PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 7TH OF 2023.
[00:40:02]
SO ALL OF THEIR INPUT WERE ALL TAKEN BY STAFF.WE TOOK NOTES. WE TOOK THAT INTO CONSIDERATION.
IT WAS NOT VOTED ON SO IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY A CITY COUNCIL DIRECTION.
ABSOLUTELY. SO OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD SO YOU MAY RECALL IN MY SLIDES, LET ME JUST PULL IT UP.
WHERE'D IT GO? IT WAS IN MY SPEAKING POINTS.
BUT SO THIS SEPTEMBER 16TH, 2022 ROW WHEN ASSEMBLY BILL 1279 WAS SIGNED INTO LAW.
PART OF THAT LAW ALSO SPEAKS TO THE STATE GETTING TO NET ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SO THAT'S REALLY EVEN MORE ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT 85% BY 2045 REQUIREMENT.
SO SOME JURISDICTIONS IN THE REGION ARE LOOKING TO THIS NET ZERO GOAL FOR THEIR CLIMATE ACTION PLAN.
SO THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO IS PROBABLY THE LARGEST JURISDICTION, AN EXAMPLE THAT I CAN THINK OF.
AND THEY ADOPTED THEIR MOST RECENT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, I BELIEVE, IN 2022.
IT WAS LAST MONTH I THINK MAYBE THE SAME WEEK THAT WE HAD OUR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING.
THEY, SIMILAR TO THIS PROPOSED DRAFT PLAN, IS JUST LOOKING AT THE 85% BY 2045 TARGET.
OKAY. SO DO WE REALLY HAVE ANY JURISDICTION THAT'S ACTUALLY ACTED? DONE THE UPDATE FORMALLY APPROVED THE UPDATE, AND IF SO, AT WHAT LEVEL ARE WE TALKING ABOUT? OR ARE THESE STILL KIND OF IN THE WORKS RIGHT NOW? RIGHT. THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO HAS ADOPTED THAT NET ZERO FOR 2022.
CORRECT. THEIR 2022 CLIMATE ACTION PLAN HAS A NET ZERO GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTION TARGET.
AND I WANT TO SAY THAT IT'S BY 2035 BUT I WILL DOUBLE CHECK THAT FOR YOU.
NOW NET ZERO WHICH MEANS NO GREENHOUSE GASES.
WHOA! YEAH! YES! WHOA! AND THAT'S BY 2045, THE SAME DATE THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT.
RIGHT. CAN I INTERJECT SOMETHING? SURE. NET ZERO IN THE DEFINITION OF THE WAY WE'RE LOOKING AT IT IN AN ARCHITECTURAL STANDPOINT, BECAUSE I THINK THIS CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND MAYBE THIS WAS AN EX PARTE CONCERN, BUT BECAUSE I'M A LICENSED ARCHITECT IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WE HAVE TO HAVE FIVE HOURS OF ACCESSIBILITY TRAINING FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION AND FIVE HOURS OF NET ZERO TRAINING FOR CONTINUING EDUCATION.
AND NET ZERO MEANS THAT YOU ARE NOT YOU YOUR BUILDING DOES NOT EMIT MORE GREENHOUSE GASES THAN IT CONSUMES.
SO IT'S BASICALLY IT'S NOT THAT THERE'S NO GREENHOUSE GASES, BUT THE OPPORTUNITY THAT THE BUILDING USES ONLY THE AMOUNT THAT IT CAN USE AS OPPOSED TO EMITTING MORE EXCESS.
SO SO IT'S I'M NOT DESCRIBING IT INCREDIBLY WELL.
I WISH I WAS A BETTER EXPERT AT THIS, BUT BUT IT'S AN EVENING OUT OF THE EMISSIONS AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, SO THE IDEA THAT YOUR SOLAR OFFSETS A CERTAIN PORTION OF YOUR ENERGY AND IT IS EQUIVALENT IN THE BUILDING WITHIN THE BUILDING, YOU KNOW, SO IT EVENS IT OUT.
IT IT CREATES AN EQUILIBRIUM IS WHAT HAPPENS.
IT'S NOT A ZEROING COMPLETELY OUT OF GREENHOUSE GASES, BUT THE IDEA THAT YOUR BUILDING DOESN'T USE MORE GREENHOUSE GASES OR EMIT MORE GREENHOUSE GASES IS THE WHOLE CONCEPT TO NET ZERO.
SO IT'S NOT AN INCONCEIVABLE PROBLEM.
[00:45:02]
STOVES TO ELECTRIC AND GAS DRYERS, TO ELECTRIC AND CHANGING, MAKING THESE TYPES OF CHANGES.SO SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY ELIMINATING IT, BUT IT IS REDUCING THE EXCESS.
IN OTHER WORDS, EVERYTHING WOULD BALANCE OUT.
IS THAT FAIR TO SAY? AND THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF IT AS WELL.
SO THE IDEA WHERE YOU BUILD A NEW BUILDING AND YOU'RE EMITTING A WHOLE BUNCH OF GREENHOUSE GASES BECAUSE YOU'RE USING ALL THIS EQUIPMENT TO BUILD THESE NEW BUILDINGS, BUT THE OFFSET OF THE BUILDING OF THAT EMISSION HAPPENS WITHIN THE BUILDING ENVELOPE ITSELF, EVEN AFTER THE FACT. OKAY.
SO AND THAT'S WHY SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS ARE BUILDINGS THAT ACTUALLY ARE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT YOU CAN RETROFIT BECAUSE YOU ALREADY HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND YOU DON'T HAVE THAT WHOLE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION START UP CHARGE BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION.
SO THEREFORE THEY'RE MORE SUSTAINABLE.
ANYWAY, SO SO IT'S IT'S IT'S MORE COMPLICATED THAN WHAT I'M DEFINING, BUT I'M TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, HELP THE CONVERSATION A LITTLE BIT.
SO I UNDERSTAND THEN CITY OF SAN DIEGO SEEMS TO ME IS VERY AGGRESSIVE IN THIS AREA.
MUCH MORE AGGRESSIVE THAN ANY OF OUR OPTIONS HERE.
AND I DID CONFIRM THAT THEY HAVE THE TARGET OF NET ZERO BY 2035, 2035.
AND THAT IS THE 85% BY 2045 GOAL.
OKAY, 85% I'M HAVING TROUBLE PUTTING THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US.
85% WOULD BE WHAT? THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE.
THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT THE DRAFT HAS IN IT.
YES. OH THAT WOULD BE OPTION FOUR RIGHT.
YES. YEAH. PUT IN THE WHOLE SHOULD MATCH.
THAT'S WHAT. HOW ABOUT OTHER CITIES IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY? PERHAPS SOME SIMILAR IN SIZE TO CARLSBAD.
DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT OTHER CITIES? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO THE 2045 TARGET SINCE THAT GOT SIGNED INTO LAW IN 2022.
WE'RE KIND OF, YOU KNOW, ON THIS CYCLE OF OTHER JURISDICTIONS, HAVE MAYBE ADOPTED THEIR CLIMATE ACTION PLAN MORE RECENTLY THAN CARLSBAD HAS.
OTHERS ARE JUST STARTING TO WORK ON DRAFTS TO THEIR UPDATES.
SO WE'RE, YOU KNOW, JUST IN THE CYCLE OF CLIMATE ACTION PLANNING.
AND I'M MAKING A CIRCLE BECAUSE IT'S VERY CYCLICAL.
WE'RE SLIGHTLY OUT IN FRONT TIMING WISE JUST WITH WHERE OUR UPDATE IS AT.
SO I CAN'T THINK OF ANY OTHERS.
OUR NEIGHBOR TO THE NORTH, OCEANSIDE OR SOME SIMILAR I DON'T BELIEVE THEY HAVE A 2045 TARGET IN IT.
OKAY. AND IF THEY DON'T, THEY DON'T.
BUT I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR KIND OF A REFERENCE BIG PICTURE TO SEE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE NOT GOING AS FAR.
IS THAT IS THAT FAIR? SORRY, THAT WAS ME RUDELY TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT OCEANSIDE'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS GOAL WAS.
COULD YOU REPEAT THAT? OKAY, SO SO WHAT I'M UNDERSTANDING, UNLESS I'M MISSING THE POINT HERE, THAT IF WE ADOPT OPTION FOUR, WHICH IS THE MOST AGGRESSIVE AND GIVES US THE MORE THE MOST REDUCTIONS IN EMISSIONS WE'RE KIND OF IN THE BALLPARK OF WHAT THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO IS GOING TO DO, REAL CLOSE TO THAT 85%. BUT WE'RE NOT NEARLY AS AGGRESSIVE AS THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO.
IS THAT FAIR? I THINK THAT'S FAIR.
THAT'S ALL. COMMISSIONER DANNA, THANK YOU.
YES. SO IF IN THIS VERY SLIDE YOU HAVE THE ASTERISKS, WHERE AT THE END IT SAYS SAVES MORE THE ENERGY COMMISSION REQUIRES THAT A LOCAL JURISDICTION DEMONSTRATE THAT THEIR LOCAL ORDINANCE OR REACH CODE SAVES MORE ENERGY THAN CURRENT STATEWIDE ENERGY STANDARDS AND IS
[00:50:06]
COST EFFECTIVE. CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT IT MEANS IN TERMS OF COST EFFECTIVENESS AS WE ARE YOU KNOW, AS I HEAR THE CONCERNS FOR INCREASE IN BUILDING COSTS.IS THAT THE SAME OR IS THAT A SIMILAR POINT, OR IS THAT COST EFFECTIVENESS SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT? THANK YOU. YEAH.
SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DID IN 2019 WHEN WE PASSED OUR LAST KIND OF REACH CODE PACKAGE.
BUT YEAH, YOU NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS, YOU KNOW, A BENEFIT TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING AND THE, THE, THE, THE LIFESPAN OF THE EQUIPMENT IN THE BUILDING AS WELL.
DID I MISS ANYTHING? OKAY. SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE UPFRONT COST OF THE UPGRADES WOULD BE PAID OFF OVER THE OVER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME AS THE BUILDING OPERATES IN A MORE EFFICIENT MANNER.
IS THAT WHAT THE IDEA IS? YES. OKAY.
AND MY SECOND QUESTION IS, IS THERE REQUIRED REPORTING TO THE STATE OF THE ANNUAL CLIMATE ACTION PLAN STATUS? OR IF YOU DON'T MEET CERTAIN TARGETS, YOU ARE I'M THINKING HOUSING ELEMENT, RIGHT? WHERE IF YOU DON'T MEET YOUR [INAUDIBLE] NUMBERS, YOU MIGHT HAVE A MID-CYCLE UPDATE THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE TO DO.
BUT IS THIS SIMILAR? LIKE, IS THERE CERTAIN PARAMETERS THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH? I'LL AGAIN, I'LL START AND PERHAPS OTHER PEOPLE COULD BACK ME UP IF I'M MISSING ANYTHING.
BUT THERE IS NO STATE REQUIREMENT RELATED TO THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN.
SO OUR ANNUAL REPORTS ARE JUST SOMETHING THAT I GIVE TO CITY COUNCIL, BUT I DON'T HAVE TO FILE ANYTHING WITH A STATE AGENCY, SINCE TECHNICALLY THE STATE DOES NOT REQUIRE JURISDICTIONS TO ADOPT CLIMATE ACTION PLANS.
BECAUSE WE HAVE THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND NOW THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN UPDATE IN OUR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORTS AS MITIGATION MEASURES THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THAT, SHOWING THAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, MEETING OR DEMONSTRATING THAT WE'LL BE MEETING OUR EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS TARGETS, BUT THERE'S NO STATE REQUIREMENT. SO IT'S BASICALLY A FUNCTION OF COMPLYING WITH THE EIR PREPARED FOR THE GENERAL PLAN.
THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER MEENES.
COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE NET ZERO.
TO MOVE OFF ON THAT A LITTLE BIT CURIOUS, YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT CONSTRUCTION.
NEW CONSTRUCTION? WHAT ABOUT ON EXISTING STRUCTURES.
YOU HAD MENTIONED THAT AS WELL.
WOULD THE NET ZERO BE APPLICABLE FOR EXISTING STRUCTURES AS WELL? TYPICALLY, YOU COULD ACHIEVE IT FASTER BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE THE UPFRONT CONSTRUCTION COST.
THE WHOLE ENERGY MODELING SYSTEMS THAT ARE BEING USED THESE DAYS, VERY HIGHLY SOPHISTICATED MODELING SYSTEMS. TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND WHAT A BUILDING EMISSIONS IS, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, WE UNDERSTAND THE TRAFFIC WE HAVE IN CARLSBAD IS VERY SIGNIFICANT.
BUT THE BUILDINGS MAKE UP ABOUT 40% GLOBALLY OF EMISSIONS.
SO THIS IS WHY THE ARCHITECTS AND THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS HAVE TAKEN A PROACTIVE STANCE STANCE SINCE THE EARLY 90S, WHERE THEY HAVE A 2030 COMMITMENT.
AND THE IDEA THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE CREATED THESE SEVERAL PUBLICATIONS THAT TALK ABOUT HOW EXISTING BUILDING INFRASTRUCTURE IS ACTUALLY A GREENER SOLUTION TO COMBATING CLIMATE CRISIS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS ALREADY THERE.
AND REALLY WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS RETROFITTING AND ADDING, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, THE SOLAR OFFSET TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE THE THE DIFFERENTIAL BETWEEN THE USE ENERGY USE OF THE BUILDING AND THE AMOUNT OF ENERGY PRODUCTION THAT THE BUILDING NEEDS.
SO SO IT IS A GREENER WAY OF TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE MORE PROACTIVE
[00:55:09]
MITIGATION MEASURES FOR CLIMATE ACTION, YOU KNOW, SO THAT'S THANK YOU.FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, ANOTHER SECOND SECONDARY QUESTION IN LOOKING AT THE OPTIONS OF ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR EACH ONE OF THEM HAS KNOW, I GUESS YOU COULD SAY THERE'S DOES NOT INCLUDE.
AND THEN FOR EXAMPLE WITH OPTION TWO DOES NOT INCLUDE NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY.
OPTION THREE THERE ARE TWO NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY, NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY, SOLAR CARPORTS, UPDATED REACH CODES, ETC.. HOW DID STAFF MAKE THE DETERMINATION ON THE OPTIONS AS TO WHAT WAS EXCLUDED AND WHAT WAS NOT? THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.
SO AT THAT TIME, THE COMBINATION OF MEASURES THAT WE SHARED MET OUR 2045 REDUCTION TARGET.
EXACTLY. SO RECEIVING THE COMMENTS AT THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING TO ADD IN ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO EXCEED OUR TARGET FOR 2045.
SO IT REALLY IT WAS AS SIMPLE AS LOOKING AT THE THREE MEASURES THAT, YOU KNOW, WE ADDED IN AND THEN REMOVING THEM SO WE COULD STILL MEET OUR TARGET. I WISH I HAD A MORE SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION.
NO, BUT YOU ANSWERED. YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION.
THANKS, KATIE. DO ANY DO ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.
THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.
I APOLOGIZE FOR MISSING THE LAST ONE.
THE BIGGEST QUESTION I HAVE WELL, AGAIN NET ZERO TO ME ISN'T REACH CODE, I GUESS, YOU KNOW.
SO, YOU KNOW, AND YOU SORT OF PICTURED THE REACH CODE MEASURES AS A DRAWBACK, WHICH I'M KIND OF SURPRISED BECAUSE I'M LOOKING AT PAGE 3-3 IN THE REPORT OR PAGE 37 OF 518.
NOW, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS CHART CORRECTLY ON YEAH, 3.2 AND 3.3, YOU HAVE 29 MEASURES AND 15 OF THEM ACTUALLY STILL INCREASE BY 2045.
IS THAT WHAT I'M READING IS CORRECT.
SORRY 330, 3-3 IN THE ACTUAL DRAFT.
SO 3.2 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION REDUCTION QUANTIFICATION ANALYSIS.
GOT IT. SO LET ME ASK YOU A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
OKAY. ARE YOU ASKING IF THE MEASURES REDUCE HIGHER AMOUNTS OF EMISSIONS.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THIS CHART.
AND SO BASICALLY THE 2035 NUMBER IS EITHER HIGHER OR LOWER THAN THE 2045 NUMBER.
RIGHT. SO CAN YOU JUST CLARIFY WHAT THAT MEANS.
BECAUSE BASICALLY I'M SEEING 15 OUT OF 29 BEING HIGHER.
GOT IT. OKAY I THINK I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.
THAT'S WHAT I'M ASKING GOOD OR BAD.
THAT'S TYPICALLY BECAUSE OF THAT LEGISLATIVELY ADJUSTED BUSINESS AS USUAL.
SO SOME OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE EXPECTING THAT THEY'LL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE.
WE MAY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE NOW, BUT THEY'LL BE SHIFTING AS WE MOVE FORWARD.
SO A GREAT EXAMPLE OF THAT MR. ANDERS SHARED EARLIER IS THE ADVANCED CLEAN CARS TWO LEGISLATION.
SO AS WE EXPECT MORE AND MORE ELECTRIC VEHICLES TO BE DRIVEN AS GASOLINE CARS ARE NO LONGER ALLOWED TO BE SOLD IN THE STATE, YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THE TRANSPORTATION RELATED MEASURES THE NUMBERS GO DOWN.
THAT'S REALLY JUST BECAUSE OF HOW THAT PROJECTION IS WORKING.
AND THEN ANOTHER EXAMPLE IS SOME OF BUT NOT ALL OF THE RENEWABLE ENERGY MEASURES, ESPECIALLY THOSE THAT RELATE TO OUR COMMUNITY CHOICE ENERGY PROGRAM WITH CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE, SINCE THEY HAVE A TARGET OF WHEN THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THEIR EMISSIONS REDUCED THAT'S WHY YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THOSE
[01:00:05]
THOSE MEASURES DECREASE AS WELL.NOW, TO GO TO THE MEASURES THAT START WITH A LOWER NUMBER IN 2035 AND THEN HAVE A HIGHER NUMBER IN 2045, THAT I GUESS IS REALLY JUST THE REVERSE OF WHAT I JUST SAID THERE.
THOSE MEASURES DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY, YOU KNOW, STATE OR FEDERAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW THAT WE THINK WOULD BE IMPACTING THEIR ABILITY TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
HOPEFULLY I ANSWERED YOUR QUESTION.
SO BASICALLY SO BASICALLY THAT HIGHER NUMBERS ARE ACTUALLY INCREASED GREENHOUSE GAS.
REDUCTIONS. INCREASED GREENHOUSE GAS REDUCTIONS.
THESE ARE THE REDUCTIONS. IT'S A GOOD THING NOT A BAD THING.
A HIGHER NUMBER MEANS HIGHER EMISSIONS REDUCED.
OKAY. THAT'S A GOOD THING BECAUSE THAT MEANS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THEM ARE GOING DOWN.
THAT'S GOOD. I JUST NEEDED A CLARIFICATION ON THAT.
AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE YOU KNOW, REACH CODE MEASURES.
AND I THINK THAT THERE'S REALLY IMPORTANT ELEMENTS.
I WONDER IF THERE WAS ANY CONSIDERATION IN THIS.
AND I DON'T WANT TO CHANGE ANYTHING RIGHT NOW.
I THINK IT CAN BE AN AUGMENTATION TO THIS, BUT WAS THERE ANY CONSIDERATION TO BUILDING REUSE AT ALL? AND AS FAR AS NET ZERO CONSUMPTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT WHEN YOU'RE RENOVATING? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
I THINK THAT AT LEAST FOR THE UPDATED REACH CODES, GIVEN THE NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION THAT HAPPENED, WAS THAT ONLY LAST YEAR? YEAH. LAST YEAR THAT COMBINED WITH WE HAD I THINK IT WAS THREE DIFFERENT ITEMS AT CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSING REACH CODE UPDATES.
THE FIRST ONE THAT WE HAD WAS MERE WEEKS AFTER THE NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION DROPPED.
SO HENCE WHY THERE WERE TWO OTHER FOLLOW UP ITEMS. BUT I THINK GIVEN WHAT WE HEARD AT THOSE MEETINGS THAT'S WHY WE PUT FORWARD WHAT IS IN THE PROPOSED DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND THEN WHY BUILDING REUSE DIDN'T MAKE IT IN.
CAN YOU CLARIFY THE NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION? YES. PERHAPS OUR CITY ATTORNEY COULD.
BUT I BUT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING REUSE.
YEAH. SO YEAH, THE STATE OF THE LAW, THE STATE OF THE LAW NOW IS THAT THAT WE CANNOT HAVE AN ORDINANCE THAT EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATES GAS IN BUILDINGS.
THERE IS SOME OPPORTUNITY TO CREATE INCENTIVES FOR BUILDING FOR USING ELECTRIC INSTEAD, BUT THOSE TYPE OF REACH CODES STILL HAVE TO CLEAR THE HURDLE OF BEING COST EFFECTIVE.
SO SOME CITIES ARE LOOKING AT, INSTEAD OF BANNING NATURAL GAS ENTIRELY AND LOOKING AT ORDINANCES THAT MIGHT INCENTIVIZE THE USE OF ELECTRICITY, AND THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO ESTABLISH THAT THOSE INCENTIVES DO MEET THE COST EFFECTIVENESS REQUIREMENT TO BE APPROVED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION.
SO THE GAS LOBBY IS VERY POWERFUL, IS WHAT THAT'S TELLING ME, RIGHT.
SO ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY GINA HERRERA, THAT JUST JOINED MISS HENTRICH UP THERE.
SHE'S MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE ON THIS TOPIC THAN I AM.
IT SEEMS SHE HAS SOMETHING TO ADD.
SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WITH THE REACH CODE.
ONE, THAT AT A MINIMUM, IT SATISFIES THE STATE OBLIGATIONS.
TWO, IT'S COST EFFECTIVE, WHICH I THINK YOU ASKED ABOUT EARLIER.
[01:05:01]
AND THEN AS THE CITY ATTORNEY SAID, A MORATORIUM IS OFF THE TABLE, OBVIOUSLY, BUT YOU CAN IMPLEMENT ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, WHICH IS WHAT KATIE AND I PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL LAST YEAR ON THIS ISSUE.AND YOU CAN DO THAT EITHER THROUGH SPECIFIC MEASURES.
SO WATER HEATERS IS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE YOU HAVE TO HAVE ELECTRIC WATER HEATERS.
OR YOU CAN DO IT THROUGH A WHOLE BUILDINGS KIND OF LIKE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT WITH THE BUILDING ENVELOPE WHERE YOU HAVE WHOLE BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS. AND AND YOU CAN APPLY THOSE TO NEW CONSTRUCTION OR TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION SPECIFICALLY, YOU CAN TRIGGER THEM WITH RETROFITS. I ONLY KNOW OF ONE OTHER CITY IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT THAT DOES THAT.
SO A RETROFIT THAT MEETS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS TRIGGERS THOSE REACH CODE REQUIREMENTS.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS COMMISSIONERS REGARDING THIS MATTER? GOOD. LET'S NOW OPEN PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
MINUTES CLERK WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL THE FIRST TWO SPEAKERS? FIRST TWO SPEAKERS. OKAY.
PAIGE DECINO, MICHAEL MCMAHON.
AS OUR FIRST SPEAKERS APPROACH THE PODIUM.
LET ME EXPLAIN THE COMMISSION'S PROCEDURES FOR PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
EACH SPEAKER WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO MAKE THEIR COMMENTS.
TO HELP SPEAKERS STAY WITHIN THE TIME LIMIT THE MINUTES CLERK WILL ACTIVATE THE LIGHTED TIMER.
YELLOW MEANS YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE REMAINING, AND BLINKING RED LIGHT MEANS YOUR TIME HAS EXPIRED.
PLEASE SPEAK INTO THE MICROPHONE AND CLEARLY STATE YOUR NAME.
OKAY. HI, I'M PAIGE DECINO, A CARLSBAD RESIDENT FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS, I'M A CARLSBAD REPRESENTATIVES ON THE CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND SOMEONE WHO'S BEEN FOLLOWING THE CITY'S CLIMATE CHANGE FOR ALMOST TEN YEARS.
LAST MONTH YOU RECEIVED A REPORT FROM THE CITY STAFF ON THE UPDATED CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, OR CAP.
I WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND, BUT I DID WATCH THE VIDEO AFTER THE FACT AND MUST ADMIT, I WAS PRETTY ALARMED BY THE LACK OF CONCERN THAT I PERCEIVED ABOUT THE COMMISSIONERS THAT ARE PRESENT, THEIR CONCERN ABOUT CLIMATE EMERGENCY.
I SAT THERE THINKING IF I WAS A YOUNG PERSON, I WOULD BE A LITTLE UPSET THAT THE ESTABLISHMENT WHO WERE I INCLUDE MYSELF IN THAT HELPED GET US IN THIS MESS, ALBEIT OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, ARE NOW KIND OF KICKING THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD.
BY ANY MEASURE FROM PEOPLE THAT WORK IN THIS FIELD, CLIMATE CHANGE, THE WORLD'S NOT DOING ENOUGH.
SO WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN AT EVERY LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT.
THE TABLE ON PAGE 16 OF YOUR AGENDA PACKET I TAKE ISSUE WITH.
AND I DIDN'T SEE IT IN IN THE PRESENTATION TONIGHT.
BUT THEY SAID THAT THOSE OPTIONS, 1, 2, 3 THAT WERE TAKING THE REACH CODES OFF THE TABLE, WERE DOING SO FROM BECAUSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT AND STAKEHOLDERS SUPPORTED THIS.
AND I JUST WONDER IF YOU WERE LISTENING TO THE BUILDING INDUSTRY MORE THAN YOUR RESIDENTS.
AS YOU'VE HEARD TONIGHT FROM BOTH KATIE AND OUR OTHER ATTORNEY THE REACH CODES DO NEED TO BE COST EFFECTIVE.
THE CEC WON'T ACCEPT THEM OTHERWISE.
AND I MEAN, I HEARD THIS LAST TIME, THEY DO NEED TO BE COST EFFECTIVE.
AND THE NINTH CIRCUIT BERKELEY DECISION THAT DISALLOWS THE BAN OF NATURAL GAS IN BUILDINGS.
I KNOW THAT'S IN IN EFFECT, AND THAT HAS A LOT OF IMPACT ON SOME OF OUR DECISIONS.
BUT IN LIEU OF THE CITIES LIKE SAN LUIS OBISPO HAVE PASSED.
[01:10:04]
AND THEY DID THIS BEFORE THE FINAL DECISION WAS EVEN MADE.ELECTRIC PREFERRED ORDINANCES, WHICH WERE REFERRED TO HERE THAT DON'T DO ALLOW GAS.
BUT THERE ARE OTHER MEANS THAT YOU CAN TAKE.
SO I THINK WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING TO, TO MAKE CARLSBAD A CITY THAT OUR RESIDENTS CAN BE PROUD OF, SHOW THAT THEY CARE ABOUT THE CLIMATE, ENVIRONMENT. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.
IN A GLOBAL CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, PLEASE.
I'M A RESIDENT OF CARLSBAD FOR ABOUT 12 YEARS.
SO IN ALL THIS IS RELATED TO A CLIMATE CHANGE.
AND LAST MONTH WE WERE HERE AND REVIEWED THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, CONTAINING SOME OF THOSE CRITICAL MEMBERS MEASURES TO REDUCE THE CITY'S GREENHOUSE GASES. AND AND FOR THAT UPDATE AND THESE GASES ARE GOING TO HAVE TO MEET OUR FUTURE 10 AND 20 YEAR GOALS AS PRESENTED TONIGHT.
SO FOR THAT UPDATE, OUR CITY HAS DONE A LOT OF OUTREACH TO STAKEHOLDERS IN THE COMMUNITY THROUGH OUR SURVEYS AND PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS ABOUT WHAT TO INCLUDE IN THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND ONE OF THE FOUR MAIN COMMENTS AND IT'S IN THE PACKET TONIGHT IS THAT IT CAME WHEN IT CAME BACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AND WAS ALSO REITERATED BY HER CITY COUNCIL WAS TO ADD MEASURES TO ENSURE THAT WE WE HAVE GREEN, WE WE DELETE GREENHOUSE EMISSIONS OR HAVE EMISSIONS RESTRICTIONS HIGHER THAN OUR 2045 TARGET.
SO TONIGHT, THIS COMMISSION WE'RE GOING TO DECIDE ONE OF FOUR OPTIONS.
THAT'S EITHER GOING TO EITHER MOVE FORWARD IN THE PROGRESS OF OUR CITIES IN DETERMINING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, OR REMOVE ONE OR MORE OF THESE MEASURES DESIGNED TO HELP US REACH OUR GOALS.
WHICH WILL CAUSE DELAY AND GIVE US LESS CAP OPTIONS AND TOOLS IN THE NEXT TWO DECADES.
AND THE FIRST WORDS OF THAT SAY THAT THEY REFLECT PUBLIC COMMENT.
THE CORRECTION TONIGHT WAS IT REFLECTS SOME PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH IS CRITICAL TO THIS, BECAUSE REMOVING REACH CODES DID NOT REFLECT THE MAJORITY OF THE WISHES OF MANY GROUPS IN THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS THAT TOOK THE TIME AND WENT TO MEETINGS AND PROVIDED COMMENT ON THE CRITICAL GASHOUSE ISSUE FOR OUR CITIES.
SO I'D LIKE YOU TO PLEASE ADOPT OPTION FOUR THAT INCLUDES ALL THE REACH CODES.
HOW MANY? HOW MANY MORE SPEAKERS ARE THERE? HOW MANY MORE? YES, TEN.
ALL RIGHT. LET'S WHY DON'T YOU CALL THE NEXT THREE.
LINDA DANIELS, BARBARA DIAMOND, KATHY PARKER.
HELLO, MY NAME IS LINDA DANIELS AND SINCE I WAS HERE LAST MONTH, I HAD MY SHOULDER REPLACED.
SO I'M HERE BECAUSE I CARE ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT.
I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF CARLSBAD FOR 11.5 YEARS.
I WAS HERE LAST MONTH AND LISTENED TO SOME BUSINESS PEOPLE SPEAK.
I DON'T THINK THEY UNDERSTAND SOME THINGS MAYBE THEY HAVEN'T GONE ONLINE OR GOOGLED THINGS LIKE I HAVE, OR TALKED TO KB HOMES OR THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DOING DEVELOPMENTS HERE IN CARLSBAD.
THERE'S ONE CALLED LAGUNA ROW, IT'S ALL ELECTRIC.
THE OTHER ONE IS MARJA ACRES THAT IS ALL ELECTRIC.
AND DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THEY SAVE BY GOING ALL ELECTRIC.
$100,000 TO $200,000 PER UNIT ON LAGUNA ROW.
OKAY. AND THE 248 UNITS THAT ARE ON MARJA ACRES.
[01:15:05]
OKAY. $4,000 A UNIT.THAT'S $1 MILLION THAT THEY SAVED BY DOING THE TOWNHOMES AND CONDOS THERE.
ALL RIGHT. ELECTRIC HOMES ARE CHEAPER TO BUILD AND REDUCE ENERGY BILLS.
THANKS TO THE INCREDIBLE EFFICIENCY OF APPLIANCES SUCH AS HEAT PUMP WATER HEATERS.
NOW, I'VE GONE ALL ELECTRIC IN MY HOUSE FOR A COUPLE OF REASONS.
OKAY. AND WHEN I TOOK OUT ALL OF MY GAS STUFF.
SO I'M VERY HAPPY THAT I HAVE NO LONGER HAVE ANY GAS IN MY HOUSE.
BUT I GET HOW PEOPLE ARE ATTACHED TO GAS STOVES.
CAN YOU TELL? ANYWAY, SO WHEN? WHEN I MOVED TO NORTH COUNTY, THE FIRST THING I DID IN MY FIRST HOME WAS I TOOK OUT THE ELECTRIC STOVE AND I PUT IN A GAS STOVE, AND I HAD TO SPEND LIKE $600 TO RUN THE GAS LINE SO IT WOULD DO IT, BUT I WANTED GAS.
THEN WHEN I FOUND OUT AND DID MY RESEARCH ABOUT IT WAS HURTING ME, YOU KNOW, THEN I STARTED SAYING, WELL, WHAT ABOUT THE THE VENTILATION? AND THE VENTILATION IS TERRIBLE.
THERE'S JUST THIS LITTLE TINY VENT UNDERNEATH YOUR MICROWAVE, USUALLY.
SO PEOPLE NEED TO REALLY VENTILATE THEIR HOMES IF THEY KEEP GAS STOVES.
ANYWAY THE LAST THING I WANT TO SAY I BORROWED AN INDUCTION COOKTOP, AND YOU CAN TOO FROM THE DOVE LIBRARY FOR THREE WEEKS AT NO CHARGE AND TRY OUT INDUCTION COOKING.
AND ONCE I TRIED THE INDUCTION COOKING.
OH MY GOSH. I MEAN, IT'S SO FAST AND IT'S SO EVEN I LOVE IT.
I'M BARBARA DIAMOND, A RESIDENT OF CARLSBAD FOR OVER 25 YEARS.
SO I'VE WITNESSED A LOT OF CHANGE AND MUCH OF IT IS CLIMATE.
AS WE CONSIDER IMPLEMENTING THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CAP MEASURES, IT'S CLEAR THAT THERE ARE MANY COMPETING, COMPETING INTERESTS AT PLAY.
BUSINESSES, FOR INSTANCE, OFTEN PRIORITIZE THEIR BOTTOM LINE AND MAY OVERLOOK LONG TERM COST SAVINGS AND BROADER BENEFITS OF A CLEANER ENVIRONMENT.
SOME RESIDENTS RESIST CHANGE, PREFERRING THE STATUS QUO, WHILE OTHERS BELIEVE THERE'S NO URGENCY ADVOCATING FOR CAUTIOUS INCREMENTAL STEPS.
THERE ARE ALSO THOSE WHO HOLD ON TO THE HOPE THAT TECHNOLOGY WILL RESCUE US, PERHAPS WITH A FUTURE INVENTION THAT WILL REMOVE GREENHOUSE GASES FROM THE ATMOSPHERE.
BUT THAT'S A RISKY BET WE CANNOT AFFORD TO MAKE.
THEN THERE ARE PEOPLE LIKE MYSELF, CONCERNED CITIZENS, WHO FEAR THAT CONTINUING CONTINUED DELAYS WILL LEAD TO DIRE CONSEQUENCES FOR OUR PLANET AND FOR OUR COMMUNITY.
I URGE YOU TO ADVISE THE COUNCIL TO ADOPT THE REVISED CAP, WHICH PROVIDES MOST PROTECTION FOR THE ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT WEAKENING ANY OF ITS MEASURES, AND TO PRIORITIZE SWIFT ACTION.
MANY OF THE PROPOSALS, SUCH AS EXPANDING SOLAR INSTALLATION ON MUNICIPAL PROPERTIES PROVIDING INCENTIVES TO REPLACE OUTDATED EQUIPMENT AND APPLIANCES WITH ELECTRIC ALTERNATIVES ARE PROMOTING THE GRID STABILITY THROUGH THROUGH LOCAL BATTERIES OKAY, I'LL GO BACK AND PROMOTING GRID STABILITY THROUGH LOCAL BATTERY INSTALLATIONS AND ENHANCING LOCAL BUS ROUTES THAT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE NEAR FUTURE.
I EAGERLY AWAIT YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, MEANINGFUL ACTION.
HI, I'M KATHY PARKER, CITIZEN OF CARLSBAD FOR 48 YEARS I'VE BEEN AROUND A WHILE.
I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE STATE WE WILL BE LEAVING THE WORLD IN FOR MY CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN IF WE AREN'T MORE PROACTIVE ABOUT PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT. I'LL BE BRIEF, I'M ADDRESSING YOUR UPDATE ON THE CAP ITEM 3.3 TO ELIMINATE NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY SOLAR CARPORTS, IT MAKES NO SENSE TO DO THIS.
[01:20:09]
RECORD FROM THE CALIFORNIA COMPANY SUNNY STICKS GIVING THE CITY FREE ENERGY AFTER THAT TIME.ADDITIONAL BENEFITS WOULD BE A FUTURE MICROGRID COULD SELL LOCALLY GENERATED ELECTRIC ELECTRICITY TO OUR CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE, THUS INCREASING CARLSBAD CARLSBAD RESILIENCE TO SDG&E POWER OUTAGES.
THE CARPORTS WOULD PROVIDE SHADE AND ELIMINATE HEAT THAT WOULD BE GENERATED BY RADIATING BLACKTOP, AND THIS WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO MEETING OUR SUSTAINABILITY GOALS FROM OUR COMMUNITY VISION.
MARY HASSING, CRAIG BENDETTO, MELANIE WOODS.
HELLO, MY NAME IS MARY HASSING.
WHEN THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVED THE CLIMATE EMERGENCY RESOLUTION IN 2021, I WAS SO RELIEVED TO KNOW THAT THEY WERE PRIORITIZING THE HEALTH OF THE ENVIRONMENT. WE ARE FACING AN EMERGENCY.
AS RESIDENTS, MY HUSBAND TOM AND I ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN.
WE OPTED FOR 100% CLEAN ENERGY FOR THE CLEAN ENERGY ALLIANCE OF COURSE.
OUR HOME IS ALMOST 40 YEARS OLD.
WE DRIVE A HYBRID RIGHT NOW AND WE USE OUR ELECTRIC BIKES AROUND TOWN.
IN THE FUTURE, WE HOPE TO DO SOLAR AND SWAP OUT OUR GAS OVEN FOR INDUCTION.
SO THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DO AS RESIDENTS.
YOUR DECISION TODAY AFFECTS ME, MY NEIGHBORS, OUR QUALITY OF LIFE.
THIS CAP UPDATE IS OUR CHANCE TO IMPLEMENT THE COST EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT STRATEGIES THAT WE KNOW CAN PROTECT OUR ENVIRONMENT AND THE HEALTH OF ALL OF US WHO CALL CARLSBAD HOME.
SO I ASK YOU TO APPROVE OPTION FOUR OF THE CAP UPDATE.
MY NAME IS CRAIG BENEDETTO AND I'M HERE TONIGHT REPRESENTING NAIOP SAN DIEGO AND BOMA SAN DIEGO.
AS NOTED AT THE LAST HEARING ON THE CAP UPDATE, OUR MEMBERS ARE LEADERS IN SUSTAINABILITY, AND PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS SPECIFICALLY HAVE MADE THE LARGEST INVESTMENTS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
THAT SAID, THERE IS A BALANCE THAT MUST BE FOUND BETWEEN SOME OF THE VERY ONEROUS AND EXPENSIVE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU'RE FACED WITH TODAY AND THE WILLINGNESS OF JOBS, CREATORS AND RESIDENTS TO ABSORB THESE COSTS.
WE DID SUBMIT A COALITION LETTER, WHICH WAS HANDED OUT TONIGHT BY THE CLERK.
THEIR PERSPECTIVE IS JUST AS IMPORTANT AS EVERYONE ELSE'S HERE TONIGHT.
IN SHORT, OUR COALITION WOULD RESPECTFULLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT FOR OPTION ONE.
FEASIBILITY IS COST, AND COST DOES MATTER.
OUR MEMBERS DO NOT SUPPORT A NEW REACH CODE AND DO NOT SUPPORT ELECTRIFICATION MANDATES.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THEY CAN'T HAPPEN THROUGH INCENTIVES, BUT WE DON'T SUPPORT THE MANDATES.
AND AS YOU'VE HEARD FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY, THEY ARE ILLEGAL UNDER THE NINTH CIRCUIT DECISION.
AND TO BE CLEAR, OPTION ONE IS NOT A DO NOTHING OPTION.
AND IN FACT, UNDER THAT OPTION, THE CITY WILL CONTINUE TO FOLLOW THE LEAD OF THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN SPENDING A LOT OF MONEY TO THE TUNE OF 70 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. THE OTHER THING I WOULD NOTE IS THE STATE IS DOING MORE.
THEY JUST ADOPTED THEIR LATEST TRIENNIAL TRIENNIAL CODE UPDATE, WHICH CONTINUES TO RATCHET UP THE REQUIREMENTS IN NEW CONSTRUCTION AND TENANT IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS.
[01:25:09]
ACHIEVE IN MEETING YOUR STANDARDS IN 2035 AND 2035 AND 2045.ONE COMMENT ABOUT CONSEQUENCES INVESTMENT CAPITAL, WHETHER IT'S FOR JOB CREATION OR HOUSING PRODUCTION, CAN MOVE, OR, LIKE THE GENTLEMAN AT THE LAST HEARING NOTED, HE WAS A REPRESENTATIVE FROM ONE OF YOUR BUSINESS HOAS.
THEY'RE AVOIDING TENANT IMPROVEMENT INVESTMENT BECAUSE OF THE COST OF THE CURRENT CAP UPDATE.
YOU DO NOT WANT YOUR YOUR BUSINESS STOCK TO CONTINUE TO DETERIORATE BECAUSE OF THAT.
BASICALLY, YOU NEED A THOUGHTFUL AND BALANCED DECISION HERE TONIGHT.
TAKE YOUR A, DON'T SHOOT FOR A+ AND HURT YOURSELF BY DOING IT.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND YOUR SUPPORT FOR OPTION ONE.
I'M MELANIE WOODS, VICE PRESIDENT AT THE CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION.
WE REPRESENT OVER 3000 MEMBERS IN SAN DIEGO WHO PROVIDE HOMES TO NEARLY 65,000 FAMILIES.
BEFORE I LAUNCH INTO IT, I WAS CHATTING WITH A WELL KNOWN LAND USE ATTORNEY LAST NIGHT AND MENTIONED THE CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND SHE SAID, OH NO, THAT DOESN'T AFFECT ME.
WE MAKE SURE TO NOT DO BUSINESS IN CARLSBAD OR ENCINITAS.
I THINK IT'S DISAPPOINTING THAT CARLSBAD HAS THAT REPUTATION, AND I HOPE YOU ALL DO TOO.
ALL RIGHT. THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN LACKS DETAIL ON EXACTLY HOW THESE NEW GOALS WILL BE ACHIEVED, WHICH MASKS THE TRUE COSTS AND CHALLENGES WITH IMPLEMENTING THESE NEW STANDARDS.
YOUR MEASURE RELIES ON 12,000 HOMES VOLUNTARILY ELECTRIFYING BASED ON EXISTING INCENTIVES AND PROGRAMS. I CAN TELL YOU THAT NO SUCH PROGRAM EXISTS TO COVER THE COST TO ELECTRIFY A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY.
WHILE NO MANDATE IS INCLUDED, STRICTER POLICIES WILL BE NECESSARY DOWN THE ROAD TO MEET THESE GOALS.
$70 MILLION IS JUST THE COST TO YOU AS THE CITY TO IMPLEMENT THESE.
THE COST TO YOUR RESIDENTS AND YOUR BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE MANY, MANY MILLIONS MORE.
AS ONE COMMISSIONER MENTIONED, TECHNOLOGY IS CHANGING RAPIDLY.
WE HOPE TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH YOU AS THIS CLIMATE ACTION PLAN MOVES FORWARD.
DIANE NYGAARD, LAUREN CASAREZ.
GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS VANESSA FORSYTH.
I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT HERE FOR 25 YEARS.
I HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING THE CLIMATE CRISIS ISSUE AS IT IMPACTS CARLSBAD SINCE I THINK IT WAS 21 WHEN I WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO WANTED TO GET PAST THE RESOLUTION OF THE CLIMATE CRISIS.
I DIDN'T MENTION THAT I AM WITH THE CLEAN EARTH FOR KIDS.
I'M A RETIRED SCHOOL NURSE, AND MY CONCERN IS ABOUT WHAT ENVIRONMENT WE ARE PROVIDING FOR THE YOUTH TODAY AND TOMORROW. I BELIEVE THAT, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE SAW HAPPEN ALREADY IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, IT
[01:30:10]
DOESN'T MEAN THAT EVERYTHING IN IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT IT REQUIRES THE COUNCIL TO TAKE ACTION TO DO ORDINANCES AND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, IT CAN BE 5%, YOU KNOW, MORE, OR IT COULD BE 5% LESS.YES, WE ONLY HAVE MODELS WE CAN'T PREDICT.
BUT I CAN TELL YOU, AS A SCHOOL NURSE, I SAW WORSE ASTHMA.
I SAW KIDS COMING IN WITH HEATSTROKE.
YOU KNOW, WE HAD LANDSLIDES HERE.
EXTREME WEATHER GOES WITH THE CLIMATE CRISIS.
I THINK WE REALLY DO HAVE TO LOOK AT REACH CODES THAT ARE GOING TO IMPACT, YES, BUILDING, BUT ALSO THE FUTURE OF THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR SUSTAINABILITY AND PEOPLE WANTING TO COME TO CARLSBAD.
DIANE NYGAARD REPRESENTING PRESERVE CALAVERA.
OUR MISSION IS TO PRESERVE, PROTECT AND ENHANCE THE NATURAL RESOURCES OF COASTAL NORTH COUNTY.
WE WERE ABLE TO ACQUIRE TWO PARCELS THAT WERE ON THE CITY'S TOP PRIORITY OPEN SPACE ACQUISITION LIST, 134 ACRES AT THE BUENA VISTA CREEK ECOLOGICAL RESERVE AND 60 ACRES AT VILLAGE H.
WE'RE NOW INTO YEAR EIGHT OF A RESTORATION ON RANCHO LA COSTA LAND.
WE ARE INVESTED IN THIS COMMUNITY.
OVER HALF THE SPECIES ON EARTH WILL BE AT RISK OF EXTINCTION BY THE TURN OF THE CENTURY.
IT'S HOW CARLSBAD DOES ITS FAIR SHARE TO ADDRESS THESE GLOBAL EMISSIONS.
AND THESE ARE INVESTMENTS, AS MRS. HENTRICH TALKED EARLIER, THESE CODES HAVE TO BE COST EFFECTIVE, THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE THE INVESTMENTS IN MAKING THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, THEY'RE GOING TO SAVE MONEY OVER THE LIFE OF THOSE BUILDINGS.
WE SUPPORT OPTION NUMBER FOUR, AND WE ACTUALLY ASK YOU TO MAKE SOME FURTHER IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT.
THESE COULD BE IN THE FORM OF LIKE JUST RECOMMENDATIONS OF THINGS FOR THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER.
YOU CAN REALLY DO THAT SOONER AND THAT IS A WAY TO ENCOURAGE OTHER BUSINESSES TO DO THAT AS WELL.
AND TO LOOK AT IMPROVING SOME OF THE BENCHMARKS, THINGS WHERE THE CITY REALLY HAS CONTROL OVER IT.
THE PARKING PLAN FOR THE VILLAGE HAS BEEN POSTED.
THAT'S FOUNDATIONAL TO MEANINGFUL TDM PROGRAMS. SO LET'S HAVE THE CITY CONTINUE TO BE PROACTIVE, BE A LEADER, BECAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE IS ALREADY DISRUPTING THINGS ALL OVER THE WORLD.
WE URGE YOU NOT TO WAIT EITHER.
GOOD EVENING, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS AND STAFF.
MY NAME IS LAUREN CASAREZ, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
WE REPRESENT OVER 2200 MEMBER BUSINESSES AND 300,000 THOUSAND JOBS IN THE REGION.
OUR MISSION IS TO MAKE THE SAN DIEGO REGION THE BEST PLACE TO LIVE AND WORK.
AND AS YOU'VE HEARD, WE'RE HERE ALONGSIDE SOME OF OUR MEMBER BUSINESSES, EMPLOYERS, BUILDERS AND OWNERS WHO ARE ALREADY REDUCING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE HERE IN CARLSBAD OR IN THE REGION.
[01:35:03]
REDUCING EMISSIONS DOES MATTER.TODAY FOR THE FIFTH YEAR IN A ROW, SAN DIEGO WAS AWARDED THE GREENEST BIG CITY IN THE NATION AWARD.
AND YES, CARLSBAD ACTIONS DO MATTER, BUT MANY OTHER CITIES AND STATES IN OUR COUNTRY ARE WHERE THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCES CAN BE MADE IN REDUCING GHG EMISSIONS AND HELPING TO HALT CLIMATE CHANGE.
THE CHAMBER AND OUR PARTNERS, SOME OF WHOM ARE HERE THIS EVENING, ARE SUPPORTIVE OF OPTION ONE BECAUSE THE OPTION IS TO ADOPT THE DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, EXCLUDING THESE REACH CODES FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL.
WE DO HAVE A FEW CAVEATS, HOWEVER.
AS CURRENTLY DRAFTED, EVEN WITH CONSIDERATION FOR OPTION ONE, THE DRAFT WOULD INCLUDE THE REQUIREMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO BE FULLY ELECTRIC, WHICH IS NOT YET FEASIBLE FOR MUCH OF THAT EQUIPMENT, AND THE EXPANSION OF TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT, WHICH WILL HARM BUSINESSES AND THEIR EMPLOYEES.
ADOPTING OPTION ONE WITH THESE CHANGES ACHIEVES YOUR 2035 GOALS AND KEEPS THE 2045 TARGETS ON TRACK.
AGAIN, THESE COSTS TO BUSINESSES DO TRICKLE DOWN TO YOUR RESIDENTS AS WELL.
WE ASK THAT YOU CONTINUE TO DO SO BY ADOPTING OPTION ONE WITH OUR SUGGESTED AMENDMENTS TONIGHT.
THIS APPROACH WILL ALSO MITIGATE LEGAL RISKS FROM IMPLEMENTING A REACH CODE.
THANK YOU. OUR LAST SPEAKER IS LORI PFEIFFER.
GOOD EVENING, CHAIR, AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
JUST ONE PIECE OF CLARIFICATION THE COUNTY VOTED FOR THEIR CLIMATE ACTION PLAN A COUPLE WEEKS AGO, AND THEY VOTED FOR THE VMT EFFICIENT FIRE SAFE ALTERNATIVE, WHICH VIRTUALLY ELIMINATES ANY ABILITY TO BUILD HOUSING IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA.
WE BUILD THE CLEANEST HOUSING IN THE WORLD HERE IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA.
WE ARE SUPPORTIVE OF ITEM ONE AND THE LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS WITH AMENDMENTS.
WE ALSO ASK YOU TO REJECT ITEMS THREE, FOUR AND FIVE.
OUR VERY NATURAL CONCERN IS THAT ANY ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS THAT INCREASE THE COST OF HOUSING PRODUCTION WILL ONLY CONTINUE OR EXACERBATE OUR CURRENT HOUSING CRISIS.
INSTEAD OF MOVING FORWARD WITH ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, THE CITY SHOULD WAIT FOR THE COMPLETION OF THESE CODE UPDATES TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE IMPACT OF GHG REDUCTION REDUCTIONS.
RECOMMENDATION ITEMS ONE AND TWO ALLOW THE CITY TO REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS, WHILE ALSO BALANCING THE COST AND CONSEQUENCES TO YOUR RESIDENTS AND BUSINESSES. IN REGARDS TO OUR REQUESTED AMENDMENTS, WE ARE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF MANDATING THE ELECTRIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.
IT TAKES A LOT OF POWER TO DO ALL THAT GRADING.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? THERE ARE NO MORE SPEAKERS.
WE'LL NOW CLOSE PUBLIC TESTIMONY.
WOULD STAFF LIKE TO RESPOND TO ANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE RAISED? I DON'T THINK SO.
DO ANY COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? COMMISSIONER MERZ FIRST.
[01:40:03]
THANK YOU, CHAIR KIM AND SHARON.SO ONE OF THE PUBLIC PRESENTERS, LORI HOLT PFEIFFER, AND ALSO, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T CATCH YOUR NAME, BUT THE ONE WITH THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOTH MENTIONED CONCERNS IN SUPPORT THEY'RE IN SUPPORT OF OPTION ONE, BUT THEY MENTIONED SOME CONCERNS.
A LIST OF AMENDMENTS, ONE BEING ELECTRIFICATION OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.
I GUESS COULD YOU DO YOU HAVE A SUMMARY OF WHAT THOSE ARE, OR COULD YOU GO OVER THOSE WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS? ARE THEY REQUESTED? OF COURSE. SO THIS IS MEASURE OR OR-2 INCREASE RENEWABLE OR ALTERNATIVE FUEL CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.
IT WOULD NOT BE AN ALL OUT ALL EQUIPMENT MUST BE ALL ELECTRIC REQUIREMENT.
THAT'S I THINK AN IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION.
SO THE PRIMARY ACTION IN THAT MEASURE IS TO DEVELOP, ADOPT AND IMPLEMENT AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING CERTAIN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, NOT ALL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS, TO USE ELECTRIC POWERED OR ALTERNATIVELY FUELED CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO REDUCE 50% OF EMISSIONS FROM PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. THEN THERE'S SOME SUPPORTIVE ACTIONS RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, EXEMPTIONS FROM THIS TYPE OF REQUIREMENT THAT COULD BE MADE, OUTREACH, OF COURSE, SEEKING FUNDING. YOU'LL SEE THAT IN PRETTY MUCH EVERY SINGLE SUPPORTIVE ACTION THROUGHOUT THE PLAN.
AND I WILL HIGHLIGHT THAT THIS IS ONE OF OUR LONG TERM MEASURES.
SO THIS MEANS THAT IMPLEMENTATION WOULD BE COMPLETE IN 2045 AND NOT BEFORE THEN.
SO SOME OF THE MONITORING BENCHMARKS FOR THIS MEASURE ARE BEGINNING IN 2035.
SO THIS IS ONE OF THOSE MEASURES THAT WORK WOULD LIKELY NOT START ON FOR SEVERAL YEARS.
I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THOSE EXIST, LIKE ELECTRIC POWERED GRADING EQUIPMENT.
IS THAT WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE? YEAH, I THINK SO.
YEAH. OKAY. YEAH. SO, I MEAN, I'M NOT EVEN SURE THAT EVEN.
YEAH. THAT'S HARD FOR ME TO IMAGINE.
YEAH. I'M SORRY. WHAT YOU WERE SAYING? NO, NO. SO. YEAH. OKAY.
I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
COMMISSIONER MEENES, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? NO. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE.
LET'S OPEN UP COMMISSION DISCUSSION.
WHICH COMMISSIONER WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS ITEM FIRST? COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER MERZ.
YEAH. SO I GUESS I'LL TAKE THE ENVY OR UNENVIABLE POSITION OF GOING FIRST ON THIS ONE.
SO I THINK NUMBER ONE IS, YOU KNOW, I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE STAFF SUPPORT STAFF'S WORK ON THIS AND ALSO TWO THE THE PUBLIC INPUT ON THIS TOO ALWAYS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION.
SO AS WE GO BACK TO THE THE STAFF REPORT, YOU KNOW, OUR BASELINE, YOU KNOW, THE LEGISLATIVE BUSINESS AS USUAL. AGAIN THAT'S AN ESTIMATE BASED ON 2016 DATA OKAY.
AND SO THE HIGHEST MOST AGGRESSIVE OPTION FOR IS A .68 INCREASE OVER OPTION ONE, YOU KNOW.
AND THAT IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER 25 OR 21 YEARS FROM NOW.
AND SO IT GOES BACK TO ONE OF THE MR. BENEDETTO SAID THAT, YOU KNOW, THE A VERSUS THE A PLUS ALSO TOO AS WE ARE, WE'RE FACING A HOUSING CRISIS.
AND SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S BASED JUST ON TENANT IMPROVEMENT COSTS AS IT AS IT HITS THOSE NUMBERS, A LOT OF THINGS ARE, YOU KNOW, JUST A DEMOLITION OF TIS WOULD WOULD COUNT TOWARDS THAT COST.
[01:45:07]
SO SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE COULD FIND THAT FOR EXAMPLE, THAT THE GREENHOUSE GASES IS MET WITH TECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENTS, FOR EXAMPLE.SO WE'RE BASED ON 2016 NUMBERS.
JUST THINK WHAT THAT 50% OF THE CTH IS TRANSPORTATION.
I MEAN MY DAUGHTER IS A WORK FROM HOME.
SHE YOU KNOW, AS COMPARED TO GOING TO AN OFFICE, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW JUST WE COULD FIND THAT JUST WE'RE WORKING WITH NUMBERS ARE EIGHT YEARS OLD AND 50% OF THAT IS TRANSPORTATION. SO IT JUST SEEMS LIKE SOME SOME OF THIS JUST DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME.
SO I GUESS WHAT I'VE COME DOWN IN LISTENING TO THE PUBLIC TESTIMONY LOOKING.
AND THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, IN LOOKING AT SOME OF THESE ACTUAL QUANTITATIVE NUMBERS AND JUST THROWING SOME SIMPLE MARGIN OF ERROR NUMBERS IN THERE, I JUST HAVE SOME CONCERNS WITH IT. AND SO I CANNOT SUPPORT THE REACH CODES.
AND I FEEL IT WOULD BE IRRESPONSIBLE TO GO ANYTHING BEYOND THE OPTION NUMBER ONE ON THAT.
SO I AND I THINK THE OTHER THING TOO, IS THAT BECAUSE OF THE HOUSING CRISIS THAT WE'RE FACING RIGHT NOW, WHEN WE HAVE TESTIMONY FROM THE BOMA, THE BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION, THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, THE CALIFORNIA APARTMENT ASSOCIATION, THE SAN DIEGO NORTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, THE RENTAL HOUSING ASSOCIATION, AND THEN THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL CONTRACTORS AND NAIOP, WHICH I BELIEVE MY COMPANY IS A MEMBER OF NAIOP.
THAT'S SIGNIFICANT WHEN THAT MANY PEOPLE COME TOGETHER AND HAVE ISSUES, THAT'S A PROBLEM.
SO THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THEIR LETTER SAYS THAT THEY WOULD SUPPORT ITEMS ONE AND TWO ON THAT.
AND AND BECAUSE THAT THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SUPPORT ALSO.
THANK YOU. WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THIS NOW? COMMISSIONER STINE.
YES. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING COMMISSIONER MERZ SAID.
I WANT TO OFFER A LITTLE DIFFERENT KIND OF BIG PICTURE PERSPECTIVE.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN ISSUE HERE, CLIMATE CHANGE, WHICH IS VERY REAL.
IT'S REAL. IT'S HAPPENING NOW.
AND WE'RE SEEING THE IMPACTS OF THAT.
MANY OF US HAVE SEEN THE HORROR OF THE HURRICANE ON THE EAST COAST, HURRICANE HELENE AND WHAT'S THAT DOING? I HEARD ONE COMMENTATOR SAY WE PROBABLY HAVE THAT HURRICANE, EVEN IF THERE WASN'T CLIMATE CHANGE.
BUT THE INTENSITY OF THAT HURRICANE IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVEN'T SEEN IN MANY DECADES.
SO CLIMATE CHANGE IS A PROBLEM.
BUT THE POINT I'M MAKING IN A LONG, ROUNDABOUT WAY.
WE ALL BREATHE THE SAME AIR AND THE CLIMATE DOES THE WINDS AND EVERYTHING GOES AROUND THE GLOBE.
SO WITHOUT LEADERSHIP ON A GLOBAL LEVEL, INTERNATIONAL LEVEL, IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO FOR US TO DO MUCH ON A LOCAL LEVEL IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD MAKE US, MAKE US FEEL GOOD, MAKE US FEEL THAT'S FINE.
WE ALL WANT TO CONTRIBUTE, BUT WE NEED THAT LEADERSHIP ON A NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.
THAT'S THAT'S AN OPEN QUESTION.
SO THAT'S A WAY OF BACKGROUND WE HAVE WE HAVE A SERIOUS CLIMATE CRISIS.
BUT MY POINT IS, WHAT WE CAN DO ON A SITTING LEVEL IS VERY, VERY SMALL.
IT'S LIKE A HANDFUL OF SAND ON A WIDE BEACH.
IT'S VERY, VERY SMALL, VERY, VERY LIMITED.
AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC IS THAT WE'VE HEARD A SERIES OF TESTIMONY, AS WE DID DURING THE LAST HEARING ON THIS MATTER, FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE VERY SERIOUS AND VERY CONCERNED ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AND, AND CLIMATE CHANGE AND REDUCING GREENHOUSE GASES, I HEAR YOU. WE HEAR ON THE OTHER END FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, THE CONSTRUCTION COMMUNITY, NOT THEY'RE INSENSITIVE TO THAT.
THEY ARE SENSITIVE TO THAT, BUT THEY'RE LOOKING AT MORE PRACTICAL ECONOMIC AND BUSINESS IMPACTS.
AND WHAT THEY'RE SAYING TO US IS THAT WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE IMPACTS OF THE OPTIONS, PARTICULARLY FOUR WOULD BE OR THREE WOULD BE THE MORE DRASTIC MEASURES THAT WERE TAKEN, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DONE A STUDY OF THE IMPACT ON THE PRIVATE
[01:50:05]
SECTOR CITIES.WE'VE DONE SOME STUDIES THERE, BUT ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR, WE DON'T KNOW.
AND I AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE ALL OUR MY COLLEAGUES HERE ON THE COMMISSION TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS LETTER THAT WE HAVE DATED OCTOBER 1ST FROM I THINK IT'S ABOUT TEN DIFFERENT BUSINESS AND CONSTRUCTION ORGANIZATIONS.
SOME OF WHOM REPRESENTATIVES HAVE COME HERE TONIGHT.
I THINK THEIR CONCERNS ARE WELL STATED.
THEY'RE NOT ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE, INSENSITIVE, EXCUSE ME.
THEY ARE SENSITIVE, BUT THEY ARE PRACTICAL.
AND WE'RE LOOKING AT NOT ONLY WE HAVE A CLIMATE CRISIS, BUT WE ALSO HAVE A HOUSING CRISIS THAT'S VERY REAL AND VERY TANGIBLE, SUCH THAT SO MANY PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY YOUNG PEOPLE, CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE HERE, CANNOT AFFORD TO COME HERE EVEN THOUGH THE JOBS ARE HERE AND WE HAVE TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT.
WE CONTINUE TO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE LACK OF FINANCIAL IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION.
STAFF WASN'T GIVEN DIRECTION OR BUDGETS FOR THAT.
BUT WITHOUT THAT ANALYSIS, WITHOUT THAT ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS ON PARTICULARLY ON HOUSING AND ON THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY, BUT PARTICULARLY ON HOUSING, BECAUSE WE KNOW WE HAVE A CRISIS THERE.
I AM VERY RELUCTANT TO APPROVE A MORE AGGRESSIVE APPROACH, SUCH AS OPTIONS FOUR OR THREE.
OPTION ONE IS, AS ONE OF OUR OUR SPEAKERS SAID, IT IS NOT A DO NOTHING PROPOSAL.
SO WE'RE NOT PUTTING OUR HEAD IN THE SAND.
AND IN FACT, WITH THAT OPTION, WE ARE MEETING THE STATE STANDARDS.
SO IT'S A QUESTION DO WE GO THE EXTRA MILE AND ADD SOME MEASURES, ADDITIONAL MEASURES THAT MAY IN FACT, AND I WOULD EXPECT WOULD HAVE AN ADVERSE IMPACT ON OUR HOUSING COMMUNITY AND TO AN EXTENT, THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.
AND WITHOUT THOSE NUMBERS AS TO THOSE IMPACTS, I AM NOT READY TO SUPPORT ANY OF THE OTHER OPTIONS, WHETHER THAT'S TWO, THREE OR FOUR. SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M ALIGNED WITH COMMISSIONER MERZ.
MY SUPPORT WOULD BE FOR OPTION NUMBER ONE.
THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER HUBINGER? I, I KIND OF AGREE WITH BOTH OF MY COMMISSIONERS THAT HAVE SPOKEN HERE.
IT'S THESE ARE COMPLEX PROBLEMS THAT BIG BANG THEORIES DON'T WORK.
I MEAN, WE CAN DO PRACTICAL, PRACTICAL, YEAR ON YEAR IMPROVEMENTS, MEASURE RINSE AND REPEAT YEAR AFTER YEAR, MAKE ADJUSTMENTS AND WE WILL HIT OPTION ONE.
AND WE'LL PROBABLY GO WAY BEYOND OPTION ONE.
SO WE'RE WE'RE BEING ASKED TO TO TAKE A LEAP OF FAITH INTO THE YEAR 2043.
AND WE DON'T I DON'T THINK IT I DON'T THINK IT'S RESPONSIBLE FOR US TO TAKE A LEAP INTO 2043.
I, I FEEL VERY STRONGLY WE SHOULD BE TAKING A LEAP INTO 2025, 26 AND 27.
SO I AM I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE IMPACT ON THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.
AND BECAUSE THE LAWS OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES.
SO WHAT I'M ADVOCATING IS OPTION ONE, AND I'M ADVOCATING A RELOOK AT THE PROCESS WHERE WE WE SET UP AN ANNUAL GOAL, WE ASSESS, WE REASSESS, WE MEASURE AND WE MAKE ADJUSTMENTS.
AND ALSO THERE'LL BE OBVIOUSLY TECHNOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS THAT COULD CHANGE THAT.
AND I THINK WE'RE WELL ON OUR WAY TO PROBABLY EXCEED OPTION ONE WITHOUT THE, THE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY WHO ARE RIGHT NOW NOT BEHIND THE THE OTHER OPTIONS.
COMMISSIONER MEENES, YES, I WANT TO THANK THE PUBLIC THAT SHOWED UP THIS EVENING.
YOUR INPUT WAS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT FOR TO HEAR YOUR PERSPECTIVES.
[01:55:03]
ALL THE RESEARCH THAT WAS DONE BY CITY STAFF, ETCETERA.BUT LOOKING AT YOU KNOW, COMMENTS MADE BY MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, REACHING OUT TO 2045 IS VERY, VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT 2 OR 3 YEARS, LET ALONE 2045.
I OVER THE LAST WEEK OR SO AND ANALYZING EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE HERE AS TO THE STAFF REPORT, TOYING BACK AND FORTH AS TO SHOULD WE BECOME MORE AGGRESSIVE REGARDING THE METRIC TONS OF AND FOR EXAMPLE, OPTION THREE FOR 1000 METRIC TONS AS TO THAT CAPABILITY.
AND THEN LOOKING AT THE METRIC TONS IN OPTION TWO IS 200 METRIC TONS.
BUT YET ONE OF THE OTHER THINGS I LOOKED AT THAT TO ME WAS IMPORTANT WAS IN REGARD TO THE IMPACT ON THE NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING ENERGY, AND THAT IN LOOKING AT THAT, YOU'RE LOOKING AT NUMEROUS OTHER YOU KNOW, BE IT R&D, YOU'RE LOOKING AT ALL THE OTHER VARIOUS BUILDINGS THAT ARE OUT THERE OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL.
AND THAT'S WHY I ASKED THE QUESTION EARLIER ABOUT WHAT IS AN EXCEPTION VERSUS NOT AN EXCEPTION.
BUT WITH THAT IN MIND I ALSO AM LOOKING AT OPTION ONE AS A MUCH MORE REASONABLE APPROACH AT THIS TIME, KNOWING THAT WE WOULD BE COMING BACK POSSIBLY IN THE NEXT YEAR FOR AN UPDATE.
AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE'RE LOOKING AT YEAR FIVE AND LOOKING AT THAT MUCH MORE SERIOUSLY AS WELL.
SO OPTION ONE IS ONE THAT I'M SUPPORTING AT THIS MOMENT IN TIME.
THANK YOU. SO AS I HEAR THIS AND YOU KNOW, I IN MY HEART, I'M ALL FOR OPTION FOUR. BUT IN MY BRAIN, IT'S IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.
I'M LOOKING AT THE BENEFIT OF OPTION FOUR, WHICH IS 0.68 OF AN, I GUESS AN INCREASE OR A BENEFIT VERSUS OPTION ONE. AND THE UNKNOWNS AND THE POTENTIAL COSTS AND EFFECTS ON PRODUCTION OF LOW INCOME HOUSING IS CONCERNING TO ME.
LIKE SOME OF MY I AGREE WITH SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS HAVE MADE, AND ESPECIALLY REVISITING THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. IN A MORE OFTEN, MORE OFTEN THAN SETTING IN 2045, ESPECIALLY SEEING THAT THERE'S SO MANY UNKNOWNS. I DO THINK THAT THIS CLIMATE ACTION PLAN MISSES A LOT OF LOW HANGING FRUIT THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED INTO IT, WHICH I BELIEVE WOULD MAKE A LITTLE BIT BETTER PACKAGE.
AND I WOULD I WOULD LOVE TO DISCUSS THIS WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS TO I HAVE A LIST OF A SHORT LIST OF ITEMS I THINK WE CAN COMMUNICATE TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AND AS THEY LOOK AT THIS ISSUE AND I'M HAPPY TO GO OVER THOSE RIGHT NOW OR IF YOU WANT TO.
PLEASE, I THINK THAT'D BE A GREAT IDEA.
SURE. SO AS FAR AS THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SECTION OF THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN I BELIEVE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO LIMIT THE SITE AREA THAT IS PERMITTED TO HAVE HIGH WATER USE PLANTINGS SUCH AS LAWN AND GRASS.
THAT WOULD BE A FAIRLY EASY SAVINGS IN THE IN FRESH WATER USE.
I THINK THE REACH CODES COULD BE USED WHEN YOU HAVE A PROJECT THAT PROPOSES AN ADDITION OR INTENSIFICATION OF USE, BUT NOT NECESSARILY A TI.
THOSE ARE FAIRLY MINOR, AND I COULD SEE HOW THAT WOULD AFFECT BUSINESSES NEGATIVELY.
THERE NEEDS TO BE COORDINATION BETWEEN THE CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE CARLSBAD EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION TO ANALYZE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SCHOOL BUSSING.
THAT WILL CREATE THAT WILL BRING IN TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES THAT WILL REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS
[02:00:07]
FROM PEOPLE JUST IDLING IN TRAFFIC, WAITING TO DROP OFF OR PICK UP THEIR CHILDREN.AND ON TOP OF THAT, IT WILL INCREASE SAFETY.
LIKEWISE WITH TRANSPORTATION, THERE SHOULD BE COORDINATION BETWEEN CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT AND NCTD TO ENHANCE THE EXISTING HIGH SCHOOL ROUTES. I BELIEVE ROUTE 623 RIGHT NOW HAS COMES FROM OCEANSIDE, GOES INTO CARLSBAD HIGH AND THEN ON TO SAGE CREEK HIGH SCHOOL. BUT IT DOESN'T GO THE OTHER WAY.
SO IF YOU LIVE IN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF CARLSBAD, YOU CAN'T GET TO SCHOOL ON A ON A CITY BUS UNLESS YOU WALK A LARGE PORTION OF THAT ROUTE. THEN AS FAR AS MUNICIPAL, MUNICIPAL TDMS THERE SHOULD BE AN ESTABLISHMENT OF A WORK FROM HOME POLICY FOR THE CITY TO ALLOW EMPLOYEES TO THE OPTION TO NOT HAVE TO DRIVE TO WORK THE ENTIRE, YOU KNOW, THE 5 OR 4 DAYS A WEEK THAT THEY COME INTO THE OFFICE.
AND THEN ALSO FOR TDMS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE CITY LOOK INTO PAY TO PARK IN THE VILLAGE TO DISINCENTIVIZE THE USE OF CARS.
AS FAR AS THE OFF ROAD EQUIPMENT, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LEAF BLOWER BAN TO BE EXTENDED TO ALL LAWN EQUIPMENT. THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF TECHNOLOGY OUT THERE THAT AND PRODUCTS, ELECTRIC POWERED LAWN EQUIPMENT THAT IS NOT OVERLY EXPENSIVE OR PROHIBITIVELY EXPENSIVE, THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED.
WHAT A SURPRISE. I'M THE OUTLIER AGAIN.
I WAS SURPRISED AT THE SEPTEMBER 4TH MEETING THAT MOST OF THE MOST OF THE COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS CIRCLED AROUND BENEFIT COST ANALYSIS AND THE COST.
I UNDERSTOOD THIS PROJECT TO BE A MITIGATION MEASURE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT, WHICH MEANS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THE MEET THESE CERTAIN DEADLINES TO BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH OUR HOUSING ELEMENT AND CREATE MORE HOUSING.
IS THAT ISN'T THAT THE UNDERSTANDING THAT I HAVE, OR AM I MISSING SOMETHING? THAT IS ACCURATE. IT IS A MITIGATION MEASURE.
IN MITIGATION MEASURE GHG ONE.
I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW IT RELATES TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND HOW IF WE DELAY THIS DECISION WHAT HAPPENS TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT? SO I'LL START AND THEN MISS HENTRICHS OR MR. LARDY CAN ADD ON.
SO ONCE THIS CAP IS APPROVED, IF IT'S APPROVED, IT WOULD BE A DOCUMENT THAT COULD BE USED BY PROJECTS THAT COME AFTER IT, RIGHT? IF IT'S NOT APPROVED, IT CAN'T BE USED AS A DOCUMENT FOR PROJECTS THAT COME AFTER IT, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO ANALYZE THEIR GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS INDIVIDUALLY PROJECT BY PROJECT.
SO THAT'S ITS MAIN IT'S ITS FUNCTION IS NOT ONLY TO GUIDE THE CITY'S SUSTAINABILITY EFFORTS, BUT IT'S IT'S A USEFUL DOCUMENT IN TERMS OF PROJECTS COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR APPROVAL.
SO OUR EIR OR SEIR FOR THE HOUSING ELEMENT REQUIRES THIS ADDENDUM TO BE DONE BY JULY 2025.
SO IF THIS PLAN WASN'T APPROVED, DOES IT COST STAFF MORE TIME WITH THESE PROJECTS OR LESS TIME WITH THESE PROJECTS? IT WOULD LIKELY INHIBIT OUR ABILITY TO TEAR OFF OF THE EIR.
AND THERE'S DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO THAT.
THIS ACTION ITSELF IS AN EXAMPLE OF TEARING OFF THE EIR WITH THE PREPARATION OF AN ADDENDUM.
[02:05:01]
THOSE PROJECTS WOULD LIKELY BEAR ADDITIONAL COSTS AND NEED TO GO THROUGH ADDITIONAL LEVELS OF CEQA REVIEW.SO BY APPROVING THIS CAP, WE ACTUALLY CAN EXPEDITE OUR HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS.
IS THAT A CORRECT ASSUMPTION? YES. THERE'S PROJECTS WHETHER THEY'RE IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT OR JUST CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, COULD QUALIFY FOR STREAMLINING UNDER CEQA WITH RETENTION OF THIS CAP AND RETENTION OF A MITIGATING EIR.
SO UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS A 20 YEAR PLAN RIGHT NOW.
RIGHT. AND UNDERSTANDING THAT COST SEEMS TO BE THE MAJOR CONCERN.
AND YET WE JUST HEARD THAT COST WOULD BE A BIGGER CONCERN IF WE PICK THIS APART OR DON'T APPROVE IT FOR POTENTIAL HOUSING. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS WHO BUT THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO MEET THESE GOALS AND UNDERSTAND HOW TO HELP US BETTER THAN PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY IN THE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT SEEMS REALLY DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A PRACTICAL DELAY THAT WOULD HAPPEN FROM THE STAFF FROM THE HOUSING IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS.
SO SO IT SEEMS THAT WE MAYBE NEED TO START IN OUR BACKYARD.
I THINK IT'S NOT A GLOBAL PROBLEM I ACTUALLY THINK, COMMISSIONER, THAT IT'S OUR BACKYARD PROBLEM.
YOU KNOW, THESE WONDERFUL PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY ARE TRYING THEIR BEST TO HELP OUR COMMUNITY BE AS RESILIENT AS POSSIBLE WITH THESE RESTORATION PROJECTS THAT THEY HAVE IN PROGRESS.
I DON'T SEE THAT AS FRIVOLOUS OR INCONSEQUENTIAL.
I SEE THAT AS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT WORK THAT THIS ONE DOCUMENT, MINIMAL AS IT IS, AND IT WILL BECOME A MINIMUM STANDARD BECAUSE AGAIN, SACRAMENTO HAS DIFFERENT IDEAS ABOUT THIS.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF CONTROL OVER SACRAMENTO, BUT WE DO HAVE CONTROL OF OUR COMMUNITY.
AND I THINK THAT IF WE WANT RESPONSIBLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, WE NEED ALL OF THESE MEASURES TO BE ABLE TO PROCEED, BECAUSE NOT ALL OF THEM WILL BE ABLE TO BE REALIZED IMMEDIATELY.
BUT BY THE TIME 20 YEARS PASSES, HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE ABLE TO EXCEED SOME OF THESE OPPORTUNITIES.
AND THE COST OF DELAY ON ANY MEASURES WILL COST MORE, REALLY COST MORE.
SO, YOU KNOW, TO APPROACH THIS HOLISTICALLY IS TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT THIS 20 YEAR PLAN AND NOT PICK IT APART, BUT ACTUALLY LEAVE ALL THE ACTION ITEMS ON THE AGENDA AND, YOU KNOW, LOOK AT MORE PARTICULAR THINGS ONCE WE GET THIS APPROVED, BECAUSE, AGAIN, WE'RE DELAYING OUR HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS.
SO I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT DELAYED.
I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY OF THESE ISSUES GOING AWAY.
AND YOU KNOW, I THINK MINIMUM STANDARDS ARE NOT ENOUGH.
WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT OUR COMMON HOME, AND WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT ALL OF THESE MEASURES.
AND THE IMPLEMENTATION WILL HELP OUR CITY EXPEDITE HOUSING.
SO I DON'T SEE WHY WE'RE TRYING TO PICK IT APART WHEN WE DON'T KNOW THE IMPLICATIONS AND THE COST IS NOT REALLY QUANTIFIABLE UNTIL WE HAVE A DISASTER.
AND I THINK A DISASTER IS WHERE WE'RE GOING.
SO I'M DISAPPOINTED TO HEAR THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PICK IT APART.
AND I REALLY ADVOCATE THAT YOU RECONSIDER OPTION FOUR.
THIS IS A COMPLEX, COMPLICATED ISSUE.
I'M LEANING STRONGLY FOR OPTION FOUR.
YOU KNOW, WE CAN WE CAN QUESTION ANYTHING IF WE JUST CONCENTRATE ON COST.
YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE EASIEST THING TO DEFEAT.
JUST SAY WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST.
WE THEREFORE, WE CAN'T ACT ON IT.
I MEAN, I THINK WE ARE IN AN EMERGENCY SITUATION.
YOU SAW WHAT HAPPENED ON THE EAST COAST, A 450 MILE WIDE SWATH.
[02:10:03]
YOU KNOW, THAT'S LIKE HAVING A HURRICANE STRIKE BETWEEN TIJUANA AND YOU KNOW, HALFWAY UP THE COAST.I THINK THAT JUST HAVING FEET OF CLAY IN THIS SITUATION DOES NOT HELP.
I MEAN, I THINK THE TIME IS RIPE FOR SOME ACTION THAT THAT NEEDS TO OCCUR.
AND I'M SORRY THAT MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS ARE TAKING A CAUTIOUS APPROACH, WHICH I APPRECIATE, BUT SOMETIMES I THINK EVENTS REQUIRE BOLDER ACTION.
SO I WOULD BE OPPOSED TO OPTION ONE, AND I WOULD WANT AT LEAST 2 OR 3 AS AN OPTION.
ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION THEY WANT TO MENTION? YEAH, JUST A QUESTION.
SO SOME COMMISSIONERS ARE IN SUPPORT OF ONE.
SOME COMMISSIONERS ARE SUPPORTIVE OF OPTION SUPPORTIVE OF OPTION FOUR.
SO IF IF THIS ITEM FAILS IN OTHER WORDS THERE'S NOT FOUR VOTES FOR EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER.
WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP? I COUNT FIVE COMMISSIONERS THAT SAID THEY WERE IN FAVOR OF OPTION ONE.
YEAH. COMMISSIONERS, WHAT I THINK WE NEED TO DO AND, MR. LARDY, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.
BEFORE WE GET INTO THE DESIGN AND THE OPTIONS, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE ON EXHIBIT ONE.
EXHIBIT ONE COVERS ALL FOUR OF THE OPTIONS.
SO IT WOULD NEED TO BE TAKEN UP BEFORE OR WITH ANY OTHER OPTION SELECTED.
THAT'S A CEQA ISSUE OR CEQA RESOLUTION, RIGHT? CORRECT. EXHIBIT ONE NUMBER ONE IS RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF ADDENDUM ONE TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT SUPPLEMENTAL EIR.
COMMISSIONER MEENES, I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ADDENDUM ADDENDUM NUMBER ONE.
RECOMMENDATION. CERTIFICATION.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? COMMISSIONER MERZ.
I'LL SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR SHALL WE VOTE? WE'RE READY TO VOTE.
ALL RIGHT, LET'S VOTE. THANK YOU.
NOW MR. LARDY, MY THOUGHT IS WE SHOULD PROBABLY NOW GO TO A MOTION REGARDING ONE OF THESE OPTIONS.
OKAY. WHO WANTS WHO WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION FOR THE FIRST, PERHAPS LAST VOTE.
YES. I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE RESOLUTION.
IT'S NUMBER TWO IN OUR STAFF REPORT, BUT IT'S OPTION NUMBER ONE FOR THE CLIMATE ACTION PLAN.
ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE A SECOND TO CLARIFY THAT? I'M SORRY. IS THAT OPTION ONE ON YOUR.
COMMISSIONER STINE, CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION, PLEASE? CERTAINLY. I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT.
I'M LOOKING AT THE STAFF REPORT HERE PAGE 1 OF 157.
I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT ITEM NUMBER TWO ON THAT STAFF REPORT, WHICH IS MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE APPROVAL OF OPTION NUMBER ONE.
SECOND. OKAY. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? AND COMMISSIONER MERZ HAS SECONDED.
ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STINE AND WE HAVE A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER MERZ.
ANY DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT, LET'S TAKE A VOTE.
COMMISSIONER STINE, MEENES, MERZ AND HUBINGER VOTE IN FAVOR.
COMMISSIONER KAMENJARIN, LAFFERTY AND DANNA VOTE NO.
[02:15:02]
WE'LL NOW CLOSE THIS.WE'LL NOW CLOSE THIS PUBLIC HEARING.
MIC] LET'S GO TO DEPARTMENTAL REPORTS.
OKAY. SORRY, I'M JUST ANXIOUS.
[PLANNING COMMISSIONER REPORT]
COMMISSIONER HUBINGER, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU'D LIKE TO MENTION? COMMISSIONER LAFFERTY.COMMISSIONER STINE. A COUPLE OF THINGS.
ONE, I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER MEENES FOR HIS WORK IN MY ABSENCE.
DID A GREAT JOB AS CHAIR IN OUR UNRULY GROUP.
YOU KNOW, I PARTIALLY STAYED AWAY BECAUSE I HAD WHAT COULD BE DESCRIBED AS LEGIONNAIRE'S DISEASE.
THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS THE MATTER WITH ME.
THEY JUST PUMPED ME UP WITH ANTIBIOTICS.
A NUMBER OF THINGS. AND I STAYED AWAY THE MOST RECENT TIME, BECAUSE I WAS MOST CONCERNED.
I DIDN'T WANT TO GIVE THIS TO ANY OF YOU WHO WAS CONTAGIOUS, PARTICULARLY MR. LARDY WITH THE INCIPIENT BIRTH OF HIS FIRST CHILD.
SO I'M SORRY I WAS ABSENT, BUT I'D LIKE TO THINK IT WAS ALTRUISTIC.
I CAN REMEMBER GOING THERE WITH MY DAUGHTER BEFORE SHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WEIGHT.
WE WOULD GO THERE FOR THE THREE EGG ALL YOU CAN, ALL THE MEAT YOU CAN EAT BREAKFAST.
WE'D BE THERE FOR LIKE, THREE HOURS, YOU KNOW, EATING LIKE HALF A POUND OF BACON AND HAM, ETC..
AND MR. HILEMAN, WHO DIED LAST YEAR, WAS A REAL COMMUNITY SUPPORTER.
LET'S HOPE WE HAVE MORE LIKE HIM.
I REMEMBER THERE WAS A CHARITY AUCTION WHEREBY MY WIFE WAS GOING TO AUCTION OFF FOR ONE OF THEIR CHARACTERS IN HER ONE OF HER BOOKS THAT WAS COMING OUT, AND HE WAS THE HIGH BIDDER.
HE BUILT HE BID SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS.
SO THE BOOK WAS PUBLISHED AND SHE GAVE HIM A COPY.
AND. HE WAS DISAPPOINTED BECAUSE THE CHARACTER HE WAS ASKED TO BID ON WAS NOT A BUTCHER.
BUT BUT ANYWAY, HE WAS A GREAT MAN, AND I THINK WE ALL MISS HIM.
BILL I'M HAPPY THAT YOU MENTIONED THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW EVERYONE USED TO REFER TO.
HIM AS BIG JOHN AND GOOD OLD BIG JOHN HE WOULD ABSOLUTELY PROVIDE TO ALL SO MANY. SOCIAL EVENTS IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD AND DONATE FOOD FOR THE EVENT FREE OF CHARGE.
JUST TO ASSIST WHATEVER THAT EVENT HAPPENED TO BE AND WHATEVER THE CAUSE WAS.
YEAH, HE WAS QUITE A COMMUNITY LEADER.
[CITY PLANNER REPORT]
CITY PLANNER REPORT.WELL, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, MR. KAMENJARIN, BUT GOOD TO SEE YOU BACK.
THANK YOU. WE HAVE TWO ITEMS SCHEDULED FOR THE OCTOBER 16TH MEETING, ONE PRIVATE PROJECT AND ONE CITY INITIATED PROJECT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT RELATED TO PALOMAR AIRPORT. IF I'M NOT ABLE TO MAKE THAT MEETING OR SUBSEQUENT MEETINGS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR MIKE STRONG WILL BE UP HERE IN MY PLACE.
HE WAS UP HERE IN BETWEEN DON NEW AND MY APPOINTMENT AS CITY PLANNER.
WE OFTEN CANCEL THE 2ND DECEMBER MEETING.
OKAY. COULD YOU EMAIL TO US BASICALLY THE TENTATIVE CALENDAR THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR? YES WE WILL. THANK YOU.
ANY REPORT FROM THE CITY ATTORNEY?
[CITY ATTORNEY REPORT]
NO. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME TONIGHT AND MISS FROST WILL BE WITH YOU AT YOUR NEXT MEETING.WELL. THANK YOU. WE'RE ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.