HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC_2012-10-16_AgendaPacket
http://www.facebook.com/planningatascadero
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA
Regular Meeting
Tuesday, October 16, 2012 – 7:00 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance
Roll Call: Chairperson Ward
Vice Chairperson Schmidt
Commissioner Bentz
Commissioner Colamarino
Commissioner Cooper
Commissioner Dariz
Commissioner Wingett
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
PUBLIC COMMENT
(This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Commission on any matter not
on this agenda and over which the Commission has jurisdiction. Speakers are limited to three minutes.
Please state your name for the record before making your presentation. The Commission may take action
to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.)
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
CONSENT CALENDAR
(All items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and non-controversial by City Staff and will
be approved by one motion if no member of the Commission or public wishes to comment or ask questions.)
1. APPROVAL OF ACTION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING ON AUGUST 7, 2012.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, October 16, 2012
Page 2 of 4
http://www.facebook.com/pages/City-of-Atascadero-Planning/175544509158142
PUBLIC HEARINGS
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Prior to a project hearing Planning Commission Members must disclose any communications they have had on any
quasi-judicial agenda items. This includes, but is not limited to, Tentative Subdivision Maps, Parcel Maps,
Variances, Conditional Use Permits, and Planned Development Permits. This does not disqualify the Planning
Commission Member from participating and voting on the matter, but gives the public and applicant an opportunity
to comment on the ex parte communication.
(For each of the following items, the public will be given an opportunity to speak. After a staff report, the Chair will open the public
hearing and invite the applicant or applicant’s representative to make any comments. Members of the public will be invited to provide
testimony to the Commission following the applicant. Speakers should state their name for the record and can address the
Commission for three minutes. After all public comments have been received, the public hearing will be closed, and the Commission
will discuss the item and take appropriate action(s).)
2. PLN 2099-0243, AMENDMENT TO CUP 2000-0014 FOR 900 EL CAMINO REAL,
HOTEL AT HOME DEPOT CENTER
Property Owner: Atascadero 101 Associates, c/o Westar Associates, 2925 Bristol St., Costa Mesa, CA
92626
Applicant: Westar Associates, 2925 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Project Title: PLN 2099-0243 / CUP 2000-0014 Amendment – Hotel at Home Depot Center
Project
Location:
900 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 049-045-020, 019, 018, 017 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
Description:
An application has been submitted to amend the Master Plan of Development for Phase
II of the Home Depot Center (CUP 2000-0014). The site plan is proposed to be amended
to include a 130 room hotel facility and two (2) freestanding retail buildings at 8,000 and
10,000 square feet each. The proposed uses are consistent with the Planned
Development 9 overlay zoning. The Planning Commission will review the proposed
project design and make recommendations for approval
General Plan Designation: Commercial Park (CP)
Zoning District: Commercial Park, Planned Development 9 overlay
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission find the proposed CUP Amendment in
compliance with the original Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared and approved for
the phased development of the project site.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, October 16, 2012
Page 3 of 4
http://www.facebook.com/pages/City-of-Atascadero-Planning/175544509158142
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
3. BUILDING PERMIT 2011-09876, 5185 VENADO UPDATE – SINGLE-FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ADDITION
Property Owner: Randall Kenney, 5185 Venado Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Applicant: Travis Kenney, 5185 Venado Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
Project Title: BLD 2011-09876, 5185 Venado Ave. Single-Family Residential Addition
Project
Location:
5185 Venado Ave., Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 030-251-005 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
Description:
Update to Planning Commissioners on the status of PLN 2009-1323 and the issuance of
Building Permit 2011-09876 permitting the construction of a 3,075 square foot residential
addition with a deed restricted oversized attached garage.
The Planning Commission will not take any action on this permit.
4. PLN 2010-1361, AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
Applicant: City of Atascadero, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422 / San Luis Obispo
County Air Pollution Control District
Project Title: PLN 2010-1361 – SLO APCD Climate Action Plan
Project
Location:
Citywide
Project
Description:
The City Council has designated the Planning Commission to act as the “Steering
Committee” for the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District’s (APCD)
Countywide Climate Action Planning project. Staff to present an update on status and
progress of the project. The purpose of a Climate Action Plan is to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions within the City of Atascadero. The Planning Commission will be providing
direction and feedback on progress to date.
No decisions or approvals will be considered at the meeting.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
ADJOURNMENT
There will be no meeting on November 6, 2012. The next regular meeting of the Planning
Commission is scheduled for November 20, 2012, at City Hall, Council Chambers, 6907 El
Camino Real, Atascadero.
Please note: Should anyone challenge in court any proposed development entitlement listed
on this Agenda, that person may be limited to raising those issues addressed at the public
hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning
Commission at, or prior to this public hearing.
City of Atascadero Planning Commission Agenda Regular Meeting, October 16, 2012
Page 4 of 4
http://www.facebook.com/pages/City-of-Atascadero-Planning/175544509158142
City of Atascadero
WELCOME TO THE ATASCADERO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
The Planning Commission meets in regular session on the first and third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at City
Hall, Council Chambers, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero. Matters are considered by the Commission in the order
of the printed Agenda.
Copies of the staff reports or other documentation relating to each item of business referred to on the Agenda are on
file in the office of the Community Development Department and are available for public inspection during City Hall
business hours at the Front Counter of City Hall, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, and on our website,
www.atascadero.org. An agenda packet is also available for public review at the Atascadero Library, 6850 Morro
Road. All documents submitted by the public during Commission meetings that are either read into the record or
referred to in their statement will be noted in the minutes and available for review in the Community Development
Department. Commission meetings are audio recorded, and may be reviewed by the public. Copies of meeting
recordings are available for a fee. Contact the City Clerk for more information (470-3400).
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in a City
meeting or other services offered by this City, please contact the City Manager’s Office or the City Clerk’s Office,
both at (805) 470-3400. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will
assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or
service.
TO SPEAK ON SUBJECTS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Under Agenda item, “PUBLIC COMMENT”, the Chairperson will call for anyone from the audience having business
with the Commission to approach the lectern and be recognized.
1. Give your name for the record (not required)
2. State the nature of your business.
3. All comments are limited to 3 minutes.
4. All comments should be made to the Chairperson and Commission.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any
other individual, absent or present.
This is when items not on the Agenda may be brought to the Commission’s attention. A maximum of 30 minutes will
be allowed for Public Comment Portion (unless changed by the Commission).
TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEMS (from Title 2, Chapter 1 of the Atascadero Municipal Code)
Members of the audience may speak on any item on the agenda. The Chairperson will identify the subject, staff will
give their report, and the Commission will ask questions of staff. The Chairperson will announce when the public
comment period is open and will request anyone interested to address the Commission regarding the matter being
considered to step up to the lectern. If you wish to speak for, against or comment in any way:
1. You must approach the lectern and be recognized by the Chairperson.
2. Give your name (not required).
3. Make your statement.
4. All comments should be made to the Chairperson and Commission.
5. No person shall be permitted to make slanderous, profane or negative personal remarks concerning any
other individual, absent or present.
6. All comments limited to 3 minutes.
If you wish to use a computer presentation to support your comments, you must notify the Community Development
Department at 470-3402 at least 24 hours prior to the meeting. Digital presentations brought to the meeting on a
USB drive or CD is preferred. Access to hook up your laptop to the City's projector can also be provided. You are
required to submit to the Recording Secretary a printed copy of your presentation for the record. Please check in with
the Recording Secretary before the meeting begins to announce your presence and turn in the printed copy.
The Chairperson will announce when the public comment period is closed, and thereafter, no further public
comments will be heard by the Commission.
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 10-16-12
PC Draft Action Minutes of 8/7/12
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF ATASCADERO
PLANNING COMMISSION
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Regular Meeting – Tuesday, August 7, 2012 – 7:00 P.M.
City Hall Council Chambers
6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero, California
CALL TO ORDER - 7:02 p.m.
Chairperson Ward called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and Commissioner Bentz led
the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners Colamarino, Cooper, Dariz, Wingett, Vice
Chairperson Schmidt, and Chairperson Ward
Absent: Commissioner Bentz (non-excused absence)
Others Present: Recording Secretary Annette Manier
Staff Present: Community Development Director, Warren Frace
Associate Planner, Callie Taylor
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
MOTION: By Commissioner Dariz and seconded by Vice
Chairperson Schmidt to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll-call vote.
PUBLIC COMMENT
None
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 10-16-12
PC Draft Action Minutes of 8/7/12
Page 2 of 4
PLANNING COMMISSION BUSINESS
None
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF ACTION MINUTES OF THE REGULAR PLANNING
COMMISSION MEETING ON JUNE 19, 2012.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Schmidt and seconded by
Commissioner Colamarino to approve the agenda.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll-call vote.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORTS
NONE
PUBLIC HEARINGS
2. AMENDMENT TO COLONY SQUARE MASTER PLAN OF DEVELOPMENT
Property Owner: Colony Square, LLC, 205 E. Carrillo St., Suite 205, Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Project Title: PLN 2099-0904, Conditional Use Permit 2004-0127 Amendment
Project
Location:
6905 El Camino Real, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 029-361-042 (San Luis Obispo County)
Project
Description:
The proposed project consists of an amendment to Conditional Use Permit 2004 -0127
(Master Plan of Development) for the Colony Square development. The proposal
includes removing the second and third floor residential space from buildings B, C, F, G,
and H, changes to the elevations and square footage, modifications to the site plan, and
an amendment to the conditions of approval. The proposed changes are intended to
create a project which is can be leased and financed for construction in the current
market.
Zoning: Downtown Commercial (DC)
General Plan Designation: Downtown (D)
Proposed
Environmental
Determination:
Consistent with Certified Mitigated Negative Declaration 2005-0020
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 10-16-12
PC Draft Action Minutes of 8/7/12
Page 3 of 4
DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS:
Chairperson Ward – He heard this meeting at the Design Review Committee
(DRC) level; he is involved in sponsoring the American Heritage Monument
project, which does not involve anything that goes by Planning Commission,
DRC, or City Council.
Commissioner Schmidt – None
Commissioner Colamarino – None
Commissioner Cooper – He heard this project at DRC. Other than that, no ex
parte communication.
Commissioner Dariz – None
Commissioner Wingett - None
Associate Planner Callie Taylor gave the staff report. She said that the architect has
provided revised elevations. The DRC reviewed this project on June 21, 2012. The
architect has added a water feature in the front. Round Table Pizza would like to leave
their building as-is. Staff and DRC are recommending approval as proposed.
PUBLIC COMMENT
The following person spoke during public comment: Thom Jess, Project Architect, and
Peter Hilf, Property Owner. Mr. Jess and Mr. Hilf spoke about the project and said with
these proposed changes, the project will now be buildable and fundable. Mr. Jess and
Mr. Hilf answered questions from the Commission.
Chairperson Ward closed the Public Comment period.
MOTION: By Vice Chairperson Schmidt and seconded by Commissioner
Colamarino to adopt PC Resolution 2012-0019 approving an
Amendment to CUP 2004-0127, Colony Square Master Plan of
Development on APN 029-361-022, 036, 037, 038, 039, 041, 042,
043, 044, and 045, 6901-6917 El Camino Real subject to
conditions of approval and mitigation.
Motion passed 6:0 by a roll-call vote.
ITEM NUMBER: 1
DATE: 10-16-12
PC Draft Action Minutes of 8/7/12
Page 4 of 4
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS
None
DIRECTORS REPORT
Director Frace announced that the August 21, 2012, meeting may be cancelled
due to a lack of agenda items.
Director Frace gave an update on project activity, including the APCD
presentation coming up for the next DRC meeting, Dove Creek, Las Lomas,
Oakhaven, People’s Self Help Housing, Walmart, Designer Outlet Store, and the
99 Cent Store. He said there has been an increase in permitting activity.
Commissioner Schmidt asked about the carwashes taking place across from the
El Camino Car Wash business and Director Frace answered his questions.
ADJOURNMENT - 8:13 p.m.
The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled for August 21,
2012, at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall, Council Chambers, 6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero.
MINUTES PREPARD BY:
_____________________________
Annette Manier, Recording Secretary
Adopted
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment for Proposed Hotel
CUP 2000-0014
900 El Camino Real
(Westar Associates)
RECOMMENDATION:
Design Review Committee Recommends:
Planning Commission adopt Resolution PC 2012-0020 to approve Amendments to the
Home Depot Master Plan of Development Phase II (CUP 2000-0014) based on findings
and subject to conditions of approval.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF:
The proposed project consists of an application for a Conditional Use Permit
Amendment to make modifications to Phase II of the Home Depot Master Plan of
Development. The previously approved gas station and retail buildings would be
replaced with a 130 room hotel and two (2) smaller retail buildings, with modifications
to the conditions of approval.
The Design Review Committee discussed the proposed project amendment at their
meeting on September 27, 2012. The Committee asked questions of staff and the
applicant, and recommended conditions of approval and minor site changes as
incorporated in the attached resolution. The DRC was supportive of the proposed
hotel use and site plan changes and recommends Planning Commission approve the
amendment as conditioned.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
DISCUSSION:
Situation and Facts:
1. Owner/Applicant: Atascadero 101 Associates
c/o Peter Koetting, Westar Associates
2925 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626
2. Project Area: 6.37 acres (Phase II parcels only)
3. Address: 900 El Camino Real, Atascadero
4. APN: 049-045-020, 019, 018, 017
5. General Plan Designation: Commercial Park (CPK)
6. Zoning District: Commercial Park (CPK)
With Planned Development Overlay #9
7. Existing Use: Vacant graded pad
8. Environmental Status: Consistent with the previous environmental
documents for the Home Depot Plan, Phase II
Background
In March 1999, the Planning Commission approved a Master Plan of Development,
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Planned Development 9 overlay to allow the
phased construction of 239,000 square feet of commercial buildings on 27 acres at the
north end of El Camino Real. The center included a Phase I on the east side of El
Camino Real, and a smaller Phase II on the west side of El Camino Real adjacent to
Highway 101. The PD-9 Overlay Zoning District is site specific to the Home Depot
Center, allowing for a variety of commercial uses to be developed in conjunction with a
Master Plan of Development. The Master Plan of Development and PD-9 designation
apply to both sides of El Camino Real.
In August 1999, the MPD was amended to include ±128,000 sq. ft. Home Depot and a
13-lot parcel map. The majority of Phase I of the center has been constructed per the
August 1999 approval, although several subsequent amendments were processed over
the years to make minor modifications to the site plan. One vacant building pad
remains in Phase 1 adjacent to the Staples building.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
August 1999, Home Depot Center Master Plan of Development
Phase 1
Phase 2
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Master Plan of Development Amendments were approved in 2000 and 2008 for Phase
II of the center; however, no buildings have been constructed yet on this 6.37 acre site
on the west side of El Camino Real. The majority of the off-site circulation
improvements, utilities, and onsite grading were completed on the site as part of Phase
I construction. The Phase II site is currently approved for three separate commercial
buildings totaling 55,300± square feet, plus a gas station with 5 pump islands. The car
wash facility and drive-thru were eliminated with the Amendment in 2008. Architectural
elevations and a master site landscape plan are included in the approvals.
Phase II Master Plan of Development, as approved September 2000
In December 2007, the City Council approved a Zone Text Amendment to add “Hotels,
Motels” to the list of conditionally allowed uses in the Planned Development 9 Overlay
District. This enables a proposed hotel to be permitted on the site through the
Conditional Use Permit process.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Analysis
The current Amendment to the Master Plan of Development for Phase II of the Home
Depot Center proposes to modify the size and location of the retail buildings, remove
the gas station use and add a 130 room, four-story hotel facility on site. Per the 2007
Zone Text Amendment, hotels are a conditionally allowed use in the PD 9 overlay
zoning district, and therefore Planning Commission approval of the proposed use and
site design is required. The first level of the hotel includes a large reception area, a bar,
dining area, a meeting room, and a 5,000 sq. ft. exhibit space for events or conferences.
The dining area and event space are adjacent to an outdoor patio (pre-event space), a
pool, and a fire pit with seating and decorative trellises. Provisions will be included in
the CUP to allow the event space to be enlarged up to 7,500 sq. ft. to hold up events for
up to 500 people if the applicant choses to modify the plans during the building permit
process.
Proposed Site & Landscape Plan: Phase II
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
In addition to the hotel, two (2) stand alone, one-story retail buildings are proposed on
the Phase II site. The retail buildings are proposed at 8,000 sq. ft. and 10,000 sq. ft.
each. There are three access points to the site from El Camino Real, with driveways
designed to line up with the Home Depot Center across the street. As shown in the
parking calculations on the site plan, there are 255 parking stalls provided on site for the
130 room hotel, 18,000 sq. ft. of retail, and a 5000 sq. ft. exhibit space. This proposed
parking layout exceeds the Municipal Code parking requirements for these uses by 24
spaces.
The site will be well landscaped with drought tolerant plants and wide landscape
islands. Decorative concrete sidewalks, drive aprons, and a circular entry feature with a
fountain at the primary entrance are proposed. The parking lot is designed as a series
of smaller parking areas, each separated by landscaped walkways and medians. The
parking layout does not include the standard 6 foot wide landscape fingers every 8
spaces as required by the Atascadero Municipal Code; however, given the nonlinear
design of the parking lot and the surplus of wide landscaped areas and decorative
walkways throughout, DRC is recommending that the landscape be permitted as
proposed.
Proposed Elevations:
The hotel is designed with a Mediterranean influence and includes tile roofs, stone
accents, and yellow, beige, and brown toned stucco walls. A covered portico with stone
columns is located at the front entrance. Iron railings, awnings, trellises, decorative
façade reliefs, and roof line variations have been incorporated. The hotel rooms are
located in an L shaped four-story structure on the left-hand side of the building, and the
one-story exhibit space is located on a separate wing on the right-hand side of the
building.
The hotel would be 4-stories tall, with a total height of 59± feet. The maximum height in
the Commercial Park zone is 45 feet; however, exceptions can be approved through the
Conditional Use Permit process. Findings have been included in the attached
resolution to allow the height of the hotel as proposed.
Hotel: Front Elevation Facing Parking Lot
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
The standalone retail buildings are one-story, with similar architectural elements. The
back of the buildings face Highway 101, and are enhanced with trellis features and
stone pop out elements and columns.
2 Stand Alone Retail Buildings: Front Elevations Facing Parking Lots
Proposed Signage:
Signage for the Phase II site is included with the proposed CUP amendment. Signs
shall be compatible with Home Depot Phase I, per conditions in the CUP amendment.
Wall Signs: The two standalone retail buildings may install wall signs on any elevation
facing HWY 101, a parking lot, or a public frontage, as shown on the attached
elevations. The size of the wall signs shall be compatible with Home Depot Phase I
minor tenant signage criteria. Each wall sign may be permitted up to 60 square feet in
size, with either two or three signs per building depending on the number of elevations
facing public frontages or parking lots. Wall signs shall be made of individual channel
letters or exteriorly illuminated (no cabinet signs permitted).
Signage for the hotel is identified on the proposed elevations. There are four (4) wall
signs on the building located under the parapet on the tower elements. The signs
shown on the elevations are approximately 50 sq. ft. each, with 2 foot tall letters.
Conditions of approval will allow each sign to be permitted up to 60 sq. ft. with a
maximum of four (4) wall signs on the hotel building.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Freeway Pylon Sign: There is currently one
existing pylon sign constructed on site for
Phase I of the Home Depot center. A
second freeway pylon sign was approved
with the Phase II Master Plan Amendment
in 2000. Modifications to the design of this
second pylon sign are currently proposed.
The pylon sign is well designed with
decorative tile and stone elements to match
the architecture of the center.
Conditions are included in the CUP to
require that the height and sign area of the
pylon sign be consistent with the existing
Home Depot freeway sign, as well as the
Mission Oaks signs and the future Walmart
& Annex freeway pylon sign. The
consistent size for freeway pylon signs in
Atascadero is 50 feet in height, with a
maximum of 200 sq. ft. of sign area per
side. Per DRC direction, a condition has
been added to allow the Phase II Home
Depot pylon sign to be increased to 60 feet
in height if the additional height is required
for visibility from HWY 101. Further
exploration of the site visibility shall be
conducted during building permits to see if
the additional height is warranted.
Monument Sign: Two small monument signs are
proposed on El Camino Real at the first two site
entrances. Each monument sign is designed at
approximately 6 feet in height, with 28 sq. ft. of signage
on each side. Conditions are included in the CUP to
allow the monument signs to be increased in size up to
10 feet in height with 60 sq. ft. of sign area, consistent
with the Atascadero sign ordinance allowances. This
additional height will create a more visible business
names, and allow room for landscaping at the base of
the sign.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Project Conditions of Approval:
An updated traffic generation analysis has been submitted by the applicant. The report
states that the proposed 130-room hotel facility and two smaller retail pads will result in
a significant reduction in traffic generated at the center when compared to the 55,000
sq. ft. of retail space that was originally approved for Phase II. The study shows that the
number of vehicle trips will be reduced by 830 trips per day, for a 28% decrease from
the original plan. Based on this information, as well as the original 1999 traffic repor t
and the Walmart EIR which studied this intersection, the City Engineer has determined
that a traffic signal at the intersection of San Ramon Rd. and El Camino Real is not
warranted. The 2000 amendment condition which required the traffic signal to be
installed by the developer during Phase II will be removed.
At the September 27 DRC meeting, the Committee requested that the gas station on
retail Pad A remain as an approved alternative in the Phase II Master Plan of
Development. This alternative site design has been included in the attached resolution
per Condition 29 and Exhibit O. If the gas station is proposed for construction, it will be
required to fulfill conditions of approval of Resolution PC 2000-047 and Resolution PC
2008-0012 which relate to the gas station. Updated traffic analysis, parking
calculations, and Design Review Committee approval shall be required prior to building
permit issuance of a gas station. The traffic signal at San Ramon and El Camino Real
is required to be installed if the gas station is constructed.
Frontage improvements on El Camino Real, including sidewalks, curb and gutter shall
be installed with construction of the first building on the Phase II site. A minimum 10
foot wide landscape planter shall be installed between the parking areas and El Camino
Real. Street trees shall also be installed. These items were conditions of approval of all
earlier versions of the Master Plan of Development and are important to provide
circulation in the vicinity. Striping of El Camino Real shall be revised to provide better
access to the main hotel entrance and bike routes, subject to City Engineer approval.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Site drainage and final grades shall be reviewed by the City Engineer during building
permits. Bioswales to filter parking lot and roof runoff shall be incorporated in to the
landscape where feasible to filter the runoff prior to entering the creek system.
Prior to completion of the hotel, an 8-foot wide, paved Class I bikeway connection and
trail shall be installed within the existing trail easement from San Ramon Road to the
existing bikeway under the railroad trestle. This segment was conditioned will all
previous Master Plan approvals for the site, as well as the original 1999 MND which
required the trail for air quality and circulation mitigations. The installation of this portion
of Class 1 trail would complete the De Anza project requirements for a trial system. The
developer shall connect to the previously completed section of trail on the west side of
the project, and shall dedicate easements where necessary to coincide with the as-built
location of the trail and bikeway.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Additional conditions shall address the following:
City Planning and Public Works staff recommend that the driveway entrance and
parking areas on the north eastside of the hotel be revised to provide simplified
circulation and minimize duplicate drive aisles.
A Lot Line Adjustment shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance so that
buildings are not constructed over lot lines.
A photometric plan shall be submitted with building permits to ensure there is no
off-site glare.
The Fire Department has included conditions to install fire hydrants and provide
ladder access to the rear of the building. Truck access is not required behind the
building.
A will serve letter shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company
to ensure adequate flow rates and water service is available.
Public Works has requested that the applicant also analyze the impact of the
hotel’s wastewater flow on Lift Station 13 and make any improvements needed to
the lift station to accommodate the hotel’s wastewater flow.
Proposed Environmental Determination
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was originally prepared for the phased
development of the Home Depot commercial center, and the document was certified by
the Planning Commission on March 16, 1999. The CEQA document analyzed 239,000
square feet of new commercial buildings on 27 acres. The MND includes a
comprehensive list of mitigation measures to address any potential impacts to air
quality, traffic, biological resources, aesthetics, noise, drainage, and other
environmental factors. Prior amendments and site plan changes to the Home Depot
center were found to be consistent with this 1999 CEQA document.
On December 11, 2007, the City Council certified Negative Declaration 2007-0024,
which analyzed a zone text change to add “hotels and motels” as conditionally allowed
uses in the Planned Development 9 overlay district. The CEQA document found that
the proposed hotel use would not have a significant effect on the environment.
The currently proposed site plan amendments on the 6.37 acre Phase II site are in
conformance with the original 1999 and 2007 CEQA documents and would not have
significant impact on the environment with the incorporated mitigation measures. The
applicant has submitted a traffic generation analysis to compare the currently proposed
hotel and retail uses with the previously approved project for larger retail and a gas
station. The updated traffic report shows that vehicle trips would be reduced 28% by
the proposed amendment, thereby lessening the impacts on circulation and air quality
as compared to the previous project approval. The area of the building footprints is
consistent with previous site approval and the 1999 CEQA review. The site has been
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
previously graded and no additional tree removals are proposed with the amendment.
All site construction will remain within the previous limits of grading. The mitigation
measures of the original 1999 CEQA document mitigate any potential impacts in this
phase of the development and shall remain in place for the revised project.
Conclusion
The proposed Master Plan of Development Amendment is consistent with the
General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance, including applicable provisions of the
Planned Development #9 Overlay Zone. The proposed modifications to the site will
allow a 130 room, four-story hotel and two (2) smaller retail buildings. The proposed
project has been discussed by the Design Review Committee and is recommended
for approval, as conditioned.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Commission may make modifications to the conditions of approval for the
project.
2. The Commission may determine that more information is needed on some
aspect of the project and may refer the item back to the applicant and staff to
develop the additional information. The Commission should clearly state the type
of information that is required and move to continue the item to a future date.
3. The Commission may deny the project. The Commission should specify the
reasons for denial of the project and recommend an associated finding with such
action. If the proposed amendment is denied, the previously approved Master
Plan of Development will remain in effect.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Aerial Photo of Home Depot Shopping Center
Attachment 2: Draft Resolution 2012-0020
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 1: Aerial Photo of Home Depot Center: Phases I & II
Subject Site:
900 El Camino Real
Phase II Home Depot Center
Hotel Proposed
Phase I
Home Depot Center
(No changes proposed)
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ATTACHMENT 2: Draft Resolution PC 2012-0020
DRAFT RESOLUTION PC 2012-0020
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO, CALIFORNIA APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO CUP 2000-0014 TO MODIFY THE APPROVED SITE
PLAN AND ALLOW A 4-STORY HOTEL
ON APN 049-045-020, 019, 018, & 017
(Westar Associates)
WHEREAS, an application has been received from Peter Koetting, Westar Associates
2925 Bristol Street, Costa Mesa, CA 92626, (Owner and Applicant) to consider a project consisting of
an Amendment to Conditional Use Permit 2000-0014 (Home Depot Phase II Master Plan of
Development) to allow a four-story hotel plus modifications to the site plan and conditions of approval
for a on a 6.37 acre site located at 900 El Camino Real (APN 049-045-020, 019, 018, and 017); and,
WHEREAS, the site’s current General Plan Designation is Commercial Park (CPK);
and,
WHEREAS, the site’s current zoning district is Commercial Park with a Planned
Development Overlay #9 (CPK/PD9); and,
WHEREAS, the commercial center is subject to a Master Plan of Development approved
in the form of a Conditional Use Permit; and,
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are consistent with the previously certified 1999
Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project and the 2007 Negative Declaration
approved for the zone text change for the hotel use; and,
WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the preparation and public notice of
environmental documents, as set forth in the State and local guidelines for implementation of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) have been adhered to; and,
WHEREAS, a timely and properly noticed Public Hearing upon the subject application
was held by the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero at which hearing evidence, oral
and documentary, was admitted on behalf of said Master Plan of Development Amendments;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, at a duly noticed
Public Hearing held on October 16, 2012, studied and considered amendments to CUP 2000-
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
0014, after first studying and considering the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared
for the project; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero takes the
following actions:
SECTION 1. Findings for Approval of CUP 2000-0014 Amendment. The Planning
Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed project or use is consistent with the General Plan and the City’s
Appearance Review Manual; and,
2. The proposed project or use satisfies all applicable provisions of the Title (Zoning
Ordinance) including provisions of the PD-9 Overlay Zone; and,
3. The establishment, and subsequent operation or conduct of the use will not, because
of the circumstances and conditions applied in the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or persons residing or working in
the neighborhood of the use, or be detrimental or injurious to property or
improvements in the vicinity of the use; and,
4. That the proposed project or use will not be inconsistent with the character or the
immediate neighborhood or contrary to its orderly development; and,
5. That the proposed use or project will not generate a volume of traffic beyond the safe
capacity of all roads providing access to the project, either existing or to be improved
in conjunction with the project, or beyond the normal traffic volume of the
surrounding neighborhood that would result from full development in accordance
with the Land Use Element; and,
6. The Master Plan of Development standards or processing requirements will enhance
the opportunity to best utilize special characteristics of an area and will have a
beneficial effect on the area, and the benefits derived from the Master Plan of
Development amendment and PD-9 overlay zone cannot be reasonably achieved
through existing development standards or processing requirements; and,
7. The proposed 59-foot high hotel building will not result in substantial detrimental
effects on the enjoyment and use of adjoining properties and the modified height will
not exceed the lifesaving equipment capabilities of the Fire Department.
SECTION 2. Findings for Approval of Height Exception. The Planning Commission
finds as follows:
1. The proposed hotel project includes a 4-story, 59-foot tall building that will not result
in substantial detrimental effects on the enjoyment and use of adjoining properties
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
and that the modified height will not exceed the lifesaving equipment capabilities of
the Fire Department.
SECTION 3. Approval. The Planning Commission of the City of Atascadero, in a
regular session assembled on October 16, 2012, resolved to repeal and replace the existing Phase
2 Master Plan of Development with the following amendments to Conditional Use Permit 2000-
0014:
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
EXHIBIT B: Mitigation Monitoring Program
EXHIBIT C: Site Plan (Phase II Overall)
EXHIBIT D: Landscape Plan
EXHIBIT E: Perspective Drawing: Hotel
EXHIBIT F: Elevations: Hotel
EXHIBIT G: Hotel Site Plan
EXHIBIT H: Floor Plans: Hotel (floors 1-4)
EXHIBIT I: Color and Materials: Hotel
EXHIBIT J: Elevations & Floor Plan: Retail Pad A
EXHIBIT K: Elevations & Floor Plan: Retail Pad B
EXHIBIT L: Color and Materials: Retail Buildings
EXHIBIT M: Monument & Pylon Signage
EXHIBIT N: Bike Path Extension Plan
EXHIBIT O: Gas Station Alternative for Pad A
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
On motion by Commissioner _____________________, and seconded by Commissioner
_________________________, the foregoing resolution is hereby adopted in its entirety by the
following roll call vote:
AYES: ( )
NOES: ( )
ABSTAIN: ( )
ABSENT: ( )
ADOPTED:
CITY OF ATASCADERO, CA
______________________________
Chuck Ward
Planning Commission Chairperson
Attest:
______________________________
Warren M. Frace
Planning Commission Secretary
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT A: Conditions of Approval
Conditional Use Permit 2000-0014 Amendment 2012
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
Planning Services
1. This Conditional Use Permit Amendment shall apply to modifications on the
Home Depot Center Phase II Master Plan of Development regardless of owner.
Ongoing PS
2. The revised Phase II Master Plan of Development, replaces the previous Phase II
Master Plan of Development and shall conform with all of the conditions of
approval and mitigation measures adopted for the original Home Depot Master
Plan of Development approved by Planning Commission Resolution 1999-011 for
the Master Plan of Development for PD-9 as approved on March 16, 1999, and
as amended on August 3, 1999, unless specifically noted or superseded by this
resolution and attached Exhibits.
GP / BP PS
3. The approval of this use permit shall become final and effective for the purposes
of issuing building permits fourteen (14) days following the Planning Commission
approval unless prior to the time, an appeal to the decision is filed as set forth in
Section 9-1.111(b) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Ongoing PS
4. The Community Development Department shall have the authority to approve the
following minor changes to the project that (1) modify the site plan project by less
than 10%, (2) result in a superior site design or appearance, and/or (3) address a
construction design issue that is not substantive to the Master Plan of
Development. The Planning Commission shall have the final authority to approve
any other changes to the Master Plan of Development and any associated
Tentative Maps unless appealed to the City Council.
BP PS, CE
5. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit Amendment shall be valid for twenty-four
(24) months after its effective date. At the end of the period, the approval shall
expire and become null and void unless the project has received a building permit
or a time extension.
BP PS
6. The applicant shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of Atascadero
or its agents, officers, and employees against any claim or action brought to
challenge an approval by the City, or any of its entities, concerning the
subdivision.
Ongoing
7. All subsequent Tentative Map, Lot Line Adjustments and construction permits
shall be consistent with the Master Plan of Development contained herein.
FM / BP PS, CE
8. All exterior elevations, finish materials, and colors shall be consistent with the
Master Plan of Development as shown in attached EXHIBITS subject to the
BP PS
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
following provisions:
All exterior material finishes shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with the
architectural appearance.
All trash storage, recycle storage, and air conditioning units shall be screened
from view behind architecturally compatible or landscaped enclosures.
Thematic mission/Mediterranean style lights shall be added to all building entry
features.
Any exterior light fixtures shall be compatible with building design, subject to staff
approval.
Final color selection shall include compatible earth toned colors, subject to staff
approval.
9. All roof-mounted equipment shall be screened from view in all directions. All roof-
mounted equipment which generates noise, solid particles, odors, etc., shall
cause the objectionable material to be directed away from residential properties.
BP / FO PS
10. All ducts, meters, air conditioning equipment and all other mechanical equipment,
whether on the ground, on the structure or elsewhere, shall be screened from
public view with materials architecturally compatible with the main structure and
painted to match the color of the surrounding building area. Gas and electric
meters, electric transformers, and large water piping systems shall be completely
screened from public view with approved architectural features and/or landscape
plantings.
BP / FO PS
11. All outdoor storage facilities and trash enclosures will be constructed of decorative
masonry materials and have solid metal gates. The perimeter of all such facilities
shall be landscaped when visible to the public.
BP / FO PS
12. All site work, grading, and site improvements shall be consistent with the Master
Plan of Development as shown in EXHIBIT C, D, G, and N, with the following
modification:
Decorative concrete banding shall be installed at the north & south driveway
entrance to match the roundabout entrance
GP / BP PS, BS, CE
13. A final landscape and irrigation plan shall be approved by the City prior to the
issuance of building permits and shall be included as part of site improvement
plan consistent with EXHIBIT D, and as follows:
A minimum 10-foot wide landscape planter shall be provided along the entire
project street frontages.
Large canopy London Plane Tree (Plantanus acerifolia) street trees will be
BP PS, BS
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
planted along the El Camino Real street frontages at 30-feet on-center.
All exterior meters, air conditioning units, and mechanical equipment shall be
screened with landscape material.
All areas shown on the landscape plan shall be landscaped by the developer
prior to the final of the first building permit on-site.
All landscaping shall be drought tolerant. Turf areas shall be minimal and
used only for recreation or event area purposes only. Low-lying drought-
tolerant ground cover shall be used in parking areas & frontages in place of
turf.
The plant palette shall include only species which have a high rate of survival
in Atascadero’s climate zone. No thorny materials shall be placed adjacent to
the bike trail.
Parking lot trees are required to have large canopies and good shading
characteristics
Native variety oak trees shall be incorporated into the landscape plan.
All parking lot planter areas will include a reasonable combination of trees,
shrubs and ground cover plantings
All slopes in excess of 2:1 shall be planted with slope stabilizing plant
materials and installed with jute or nylon mesh.
The rear retaining wall shall be landscaped and irrigated.
14. The developer and/or subsequent owner shall assume responsibility for the
continued maintenance of all landscape and common areas, consistent with
EXHIBIT D.
GP / BP
PS
15. All building and/or free standing site signs will be consistent with Master Sign
Program (AUP 2000-0001) and attached EXHIBIT F, J, K & M subject to the
following modifications:
Retail buildings: W all signs may be installed on up to three sides, only on
elevations facing HWY 101, a parking lot, or a public frontage, as shown on
the attached elevations (Exhibits J & K). Each wall sign may be permitted up
to 60 square feet in size
Up to four (4) wall signs may be installed on the hotel building. Signs shall
be located under the parapet on the tower elements, as shown in Exhibit F.
Each sign may be permitted up to 60 sq. ft.
All wall signs on retail or the hotel buildings shall be made of individual
BP PS
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
channel letters or exteriorly illuminated (no cabinet signs permitted).
A new pylon sign shall be permitted to be installed, with a maximum height of
50 feet and a maximum of 200 sq. ft. of sign area per side. The pylon sign
shall be located within an appropriately sized landscaped area. The pylon
sign may be increased to 60 feet in height if the additional height is required
for visibility from HWY 101. Further exploration of the site visibility shall be
conducted during building permits to see if the additional height is warranted.
Two (2) monument signs may be permitted up to 10 feet in height with 60 sq.
ft. of sign area per side, consistent with the Atascadero sign ordinance
allowances. Landscaping shall be installed at the base of the base of the
sign.
16. A 8-foot wide Class 1 pedestrian and bikeway connection shall be constructed
within the existing easement area. The bike path shall be constructed to connect
the existing pathway facility at the railroad trestle at Graves Creek with the
sidewalk along the San Ramon Rd frontage. The bike path shall be completed
prior to final occupancy of the first building on the subject site.
The applicant shall explore the option of splitting the bike trail around the tree to
avoid the need for removal. If this is not feasible due to design constraints, as
decided by the City Engineer, this approval shall include the approval of the
removal of an 8” live oak tree within the bike easement area. The removal of the
tree shall be mitigated with replanting as specified in the Atascadero Native Tree
Ordinance. The Planning Commission encourages replanting with 15-gallon
trees.
The gate located at the existing terminus of the bike path shall be unlocked, and
shall remain so, once the extension has been constructed.
An easement shall be dedicated to coincide with the final as-built location of the
trail.
FO /
Ongoing
PS
17. A photometric plan shall be submitted with building permits to ensure compliance
with Municipal Code standards. All wall and pole mounted lights shall use fully
shielded, cut-off lights to prevent off site glare.
BP PS
18. A bicycle storage racks with capacity for four bicycles shall be provided in a
convenient and secure location near the front doors of each Building in Phase II.
BP PS
19. Landscape maintenance within the street medians shall be the responsibility of
the applicant. The applicant shall enter into a landscape maintenance agreement
with the City for the medians and any other offsite landscaping. The form of the
agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and City Engineer.
FO CA
CE
20. All existing native trees on site shall be preserved and protected during
construction. Tree protection plans shall be submitted with all grading and
BP PS
Certified
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
building permits. Trees that cannot be preserved shall be mitigated per the
requirements of the Native Tree Regulations.
The applicant shall retain a certified arborist to monitor tree protection and on-site
construction within the vicinity of native oak trees. In no case shall construction
occur with tree protection fences without the arborist being present.
Arborist
21. The site retaining walls located along both the west and northern property lines
shall be constructed of decorative, split face “Keystone” type wall systems.
Irrigated landscape pockets shall be provided for every 5-feet of vertical wall. The
color, finish and design of the wall system shall be approved by the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of grading permits.
GP PS
22. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the first building, the project
sponsor shall provide mail receptacles for the commercial units as required by the
U.S. Postmaster. Location and appearance of mail receptacles subject to City
approval prior to installation
BP / FO PS
23. The project shall comply with all applicable District regulations pertaining to the
control of fugitive dust (PM-10) as contained in section 6.4 of Air Quality
Handbook. All site grading and demolition plans notes shall list the following
regulations:
A. All material excavated or graded shall be sufficiently watered to prevent
excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice daily with
complete coverage, preferably in the late morning and after work is
finished for the day.
B. All clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation activities shall cease
during periods of high winds (i.e. greater than 20 mph averaged over one
hour) so as to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
C. All material transported off-site shall be either sufficiently watered or
securely covered to prevent excessive amounts of dust.
D. The area disturbed by clearing, grading, earth moving, or excavation
operations shall be minimized so as to prevent excessive amounts of
dust.
E. Permanent dust control measured identified in the approved project
revegetation and landscape plans shall be implemented as soon as
possible following completion of any soil disturbing activities.
F. Exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater
than one month after initial grading shall be sown with fast-germinating
native grass seed and watered until vegetation becomes established.
G. All disturbed areas not subject to revegetation shall be stabilized using
approved chemical soil binders, jute netting, or other methods in
advance by the APCD.
H. All roadways, driveways, sidewalks, etc. to be paved shall be completed
as soon as possible. In addition, structural foundations shall be
completed as soon as possible following building pad construction.
I. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph for any unpaved
surface.
J. All unpaved areas with vehicle traffic shall be watered at least twice per
GP / BP PS
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
day, using non-potable water.
K. Streets adjacent to the project site shall be swept daily to remove silt
which may have accumulated from construction activities so as to
prevent excessive amounts of dust from leaving the site.
L. Wheel washers may be required when significant offsite import or export of
fill is involved.
24. The project sponsor shall submit a Transportation Demand Management
Program to the City of Atascadero, per the 1999 Mitigation Measure. The
program shall include, but not be limited to, ride share programs, carpool
incentives for employees, bus passes for employees, etc.
FO PS
BS
25. Low flow plumbing devices shall be installed where possible in buildings. BP PS
26. The parking area on the north east side of the hotel and entrance to the hotel
shall be modified to provide simplified circulation and minimize duplicate drive
aisles. Circulation between the hotel and restaurants/retail buildings shall be
considered. The final design of the parking areas and drive aisles shall be
subject to Planning staff and City Engineer approval.
BP PS / CE
27. A Lot Line Adjustment shall be submitted prior to building permit issuance so that
buildings are not constructed over lot lines. Easements shall be provided for
drainage and circulation throughout the subject site as needed.
BP PS
28. A will serve letter shall be obtained from the Atascadero Mutual Water Company
to ensure adequate flow rates and water service is available.
BP PS / BS
29. The gas station approved in the 2000 Phase II project and the 2008 project
amendment shall remain as an allowed alternative on retail Pad A in the Master
Plan of Development. Updated traffic analysis, parking calculations, and Design
Review Committee approval shall be required prior to building permit issuance of
a gas station. The 2000 & 2008 Conditions of Approval which are specific to the
gas station would be required to be fulfilled. The traffic signal at San Ramon and
El Camino Real is required to be installed if the gas station is constructed.
BP PS
30. The event space in the hotel may be enlarged up to 7,500 sq. ft. to hold up events
for up to 500 people if the applicant choses to modify the plans during the building
permit process. Up to 24 parking spaces can be eliminated and the exterior site
may be modified to provide for this additional event space.
BP PS
31. The property owner shall consider installing awnings, shades. Or larger roof
overhangs on the southwest elevation to keep the interior cool. The owner shall
consider installing energy efficient upgrades such as card reader in each room to
help reduce electricity use.
Public Works Department Conditions
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
1. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit plans and
supporting calculations/reports including street improvements, underground
utilities, erosion control and grading/drainage plans prepared by a registered civil
engineer for review and approval by the City Engineer.
GP / BP CE
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit calculations to
support the design of any storm water structures or pipes. Closed conduits shall
be designed to convey the 10-year flow with gravity flow, the 25-year flow with
head, and provide safe conveyance for the 100-year overflow. Storm water
collection system shall include provisions for capturing fuel spills using methods
acceptable to the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
GP / BP CE
3. Drainage basins or underground structures, if proposed, shall be designed to
desilt, detain and meter storm flows as well as release them to natural runoff
locations in accordance with the City of Atascadero Engineering Department
Standard Specifications and Drawings or as directed by the City Engineer.
GP / BP CE
4. Applicant shall submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) if
greater than 1.0 acres is disturbed. The Regional Water Quality Control Board
shall approve the SWPPP.
GP / BP CE
5. All public improvements shall be constructed in conformance with the City of
Atascadero Engineering Department Standard Specifications and Drawings or as
directed by the City Engineer
GP / BP CE
6. Project shall include construction of curb, gutter and sidewalk along El Camino
Real.
GP / BP CE
7. The Project applicant shall submit plans showing the class I path connection from
the corner of El Camino Real and San Ramon Road to the connection at the
north end of the property. The Class I path shall be designed to the City
Engineer’s satisfaction.
GP / BP CE
8. Alignment and design of any modification to existing frontage improvements shall
be approved by the City Engineer. Frontage improvement modifications shall
include but are not limited to curb, gutter sidewalk, striping, signage, curb or
driveway ramps and the sidewalk extension to, and connection with, the existing
sidewalk at the railroad bridge. Left-turn pocket and related striping / pavement
marking will be required. Frontage improvements shall be completed prior to final
of the first building in Phase II.
GP / BP CE
9. The applicant shall enter into a Plan Check / Inspection Agreement with the City if
required by the City Engineer.
GP / BP BD
10. The applicant shall be responsible for the relocation and/or alteration of all
existing utilities which interfere or conflict with proposed improvements.
GP / BP CE
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
11. The applicant shall install all new utilities underground. GP / BP CE
12. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall pay all sewer annexation
and connection fees.
GP / BP CE
13. Prior to issuance of building permits the applicant shall submit a grading and
drainage plan prepared by a registered civil engineer for review and approval by
the City Engineer. All existing and proposed easements and all existing and
proposed utilities shall be shown on the plans.
GP CE
14. Prior to the final inspection, the applicant shall submit a written statement from a
registered civil engineer that all frontage improvement, grading and drainage work
has been completed and is in full compliance with the approved plans, City Codes
and Standards and the Uniform Building Code (UBC) as applicable.
FO CE
15. The applicant has submitted a letter update to the June 3, 1999 project specific
Traffic Study (Traffic Study). The Traffic Study indicated that a traffic signal at the
San Ramon El Camino Real intersection was not warranted based on the
cumulative + project + existing traffic volumes. The hotel project traffic ADT and
PM peak hour traffic will be 830 and 103 ADT and Trips less than initially
calculated in 1999. Therefore, the conclusion of the traffic report that a signal at
San Ramon and El Camino Real is not warranted is still valid. The City’s 2006
Master Facilities Plan and Development Impact Fee Update Report identifies this
intersection as being signalized in the future. Therefore, a portion of this project’s
Traffic Impact Fee will be applied towards the eventual signalization of this
intersection.
If project uses change from what is shown in the 2012 traffic report update, then
the installation of the signal shall be revisited and may be required to be installed
by the applicant.
Ongoing CE
16. The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from Caltrans for all work
within the State right-of-way.
GP / BP CE
17. No structures shall be constructed over any storm drainage facilities or
easements.
BP CE
17. Applicant shall pay a proportional share of the cost of public sewer facilities
constructed by others. Cost calculation will be established by a reimbursement
agreement filed with the City by those constructing the public sewer facilities.
GP / BP CE
18. LID features such as bioswales shall be incorporated into the parking lot and
onsite frontage landscape areas as feasible to filter the run off drainage before it
leaves the site.
GP / BP CE
19. The applicant shall analyze the impact of the Hotel’s wastewater flow on Lift
Station 13 prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant shall be
responsible for any liftstation upgrades needed to accommodate the hotel’s
GP / BP CE
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
Conditions of Approval
Home Depot Phase II
Master Plan of Development Amendment 2012
CUP 2000-0014 Amendment
Timing
BL: Business License
GP: Grading Permit
BP: Building Permit
FI: Final Inspection
TO: Temporary
Occupancy
FO: Final Occupancy
Responsibility
/Monitoring
PS: Planning Services
BS: Building Services
FD: Fire Department
PD: Police Department
CE: City Engineer
WW: Wastewater
CA: City Attorney
wastewater flow at Lift Station 13. Upgrades shall be completed prior to Building
Department Final of the Hotel.
20. Bike lanes shall be included with the frontage improvements and restriping of El
Camino Real, subject to City Engineer approval and permitted the bike lanes fit
within existing right-of-way. If Class 2 bike lanes do not fit within the right-of-way,
Class 3 lanes with “share the road signage” shall be installed
BP CE
Fire Department Conditions
1. The entire back side of the hotel shall be designed to be ground ladder
accessible. Any gates which are located along the back or sides of the
building shall be accessible by the Fire Department
BP FD
2. One additional fire hydrant shall be added on-site. Location to be
determined by the Fire Marshall.
BP FD
3. Fire Lane locations to be determined by the Fire Marshall. Fire lanes to be
designed for proper width for truck access. Red curb or no parking signs to
be installed.
BP FD
4. Access roads and turning radiuses must meet ladder truck access
standards.
BP FD
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT B: Mitigation Monitoring Program
Per Mitigated Negative Declaration Certified March 16, 1999
For the Home Depot Commercial Center Phase I & II
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT C: Site Plan (Phase II Overall)
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT D: Landscape Plan
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT E: Perspective Drawing: Hotel
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT F: Elevations: Hotel
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT G: Hotel Site Plan
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT H: Floor Plans: Hotel (floors 1-4)
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT I: Color and Materials: Hotel
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT J: Elevations & Floor Plan Retail Pad A
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT K: Elevations & Floor: Retail Pad B
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT L: Color and Materials: Retail Buildings
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT M: Monument & Pylon Signage
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT N: Class 1 Bike Path Extension Plan
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
EXHIBIT O: Alternative Gas Station Option for Retail Pad A
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 2
DATE: 10-16-12
September 2, 2003
Page 1 of 20
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report - Community Development Department
Alfredo R. Castillo, AICP, Assistant Planner, 470-3436, acastillo@atascadero.org
PLN 2009-1323 / BLD 2011-09876
Conditional Use Permit 2009-0240
Oversized Accessory Structure
5185 Venado Road
(Kenney)
SUBJECT:
This is an update to the Planning Commission regarding the status and issuance of a
building permit to allow for conversion of an unpermitted 4,575 square foot oversized
detached accessory structure into a 3,075 square foot residential addition, with an
attached 1,500 square garage in the Residential Single-Family (RSF-Z) zone.
RECOMMENDATION:
This report is for informational purposes only. No action will be taken.
Situation and Facts
1. Applicant: Travis Kenney, 5185 Venado Avenue, Atascadero, CA
93422
2. Property Owner: Randall Kenney, 5185 Venado Avenue, Atascadero, CA
93422
3. Project Address: 5185 Vendado Avenue, Atascadero, CA 93422
APN 030-251-005
4. General Plan Designation: Single-Family Residential (SFR-Z)
5. Zoning District: Residential Single-Family (RSF-Z)
6. Site Area: 1.85 acres
7. Existing Use: Single-Family Residential
ITEM NUMBER: 3
DATE: 10-16-12
DISCUSSION:
Background
In October 2006, staff received a code violation compliant alleging that a building shell
and foundation were being constructed at 5185 Venado Ave. City Staff verified that no
construction permits had been issued, and on October 27, 2006 issued a Stop Work
Notice to the property owner to cease all work on the building due to lack of permits.
In November 2006, City staff met with Travis Kenney (the applicant and tenant) to
discuss the Stop Work Order and how to bring the structure to compliance. The
applicant submitted a building permit (BLD 2006-6916) for permission to finish
construction of a 4,575 sf accessory storage building. City staff issued corrections and
requested additional information including the requirement for a CUP. Due to the lack of
progress in remedying the situation, Staff filed a Notice of Non-Compliance and placed
a lien on the subject property due to the lack of submitted building plans or action to
remove the structure.
The applicant formally submitted for a Conditional Use Permit in March of 2009. Staff
reviewed the application and deemed it “incomplete” due to the lack of information
needed to process the application. In June 2009, the applicant met with City staff on
moving forward based on comments provided by staff.
Image of the accessory structure shell that constructed without
permits at the time of the stop work order
In May 2011, the City received a code compliant alleging that the applicants had
finished the exterior of the building during the 2011 Memorial Day Weekend. In addition
to finishing the building, in violation of the Stop Work Order, the complaint alleged
regular tow truck traffic bringing wrecked vehicles to the subject property’s driveway that
effect neighborhood traffic creating traffic hazards. On June 1, 2011, City staff placed an
“Unsafe and Unlawful” placard on the unpermitted structure that was completed as
alleged in the complaint during a site visit.
In late July 2011, the City filed a nuisance abatement petition with San Luis Obispo
County Superior Court. The City was seeking abatement and remedies for violating the
City’s Municipal Code. On August 2, 2011, the Planning Commission held a public
hearing for the Conditional Use Permit. The Planning Commission denied, without
prejudice, the request to allow for an oversized accessory structure on a 6-0 vote. At
that time the Planning Commission requested that staff provide an update to the
Commission of any additional information regarding this project when it became
available.
Negotiation to legalize structure:
Following the Planning Commission denial, Travis Kenney met with City staff regarding
how to move forward with the project. In the following months, staff met with Mr. Kenney
and his project team multiple times exploring his options and negotiating a settlement to
the nuisance abatement litigation.
In November 2011, Mr. Kenney submitted a revised permit application to Staff (BLD
2011-09876), connecting the oversized structure to the existing house to create an
Image of the proposed accessory structure recently finished without permits in May 2011
enlarged single-family residential home with an attached garage, consistent with the
Atascadero Municipal Code (AMC) 9-5.020(h).
AMC Code Section 9-5.020 (h) Residential Additions
(h) Residential Additions. Residential additions (additions) are defined as an increase of
habitable floor area to a primary residential unit. Additions shall have a continuous, logical
internal connection of conditioned space that provides for access to all portions of the primary
unit and addition. Doors may not be used to create two (2) separate living spaces.
The addition shall not have a secondary kitchen; however, a wet bar is permissible as defined by
Section 9-5.020(j). Additions must have a minimum ten (10) feet of shared common wall. A
breezeway or similar roof connection of unenclosed or unconditioned space, regardless of length,
shall not be considered a residential addition.
Mr. Kenney’s permit proposed to convert approximately 2,800 square feet of the
existing, oversized accessory structure into a habitable, residential addition. The project
would create a 4,736 square foot single-family residence with a 3,000 square foot
attached garage, which would be consistent with the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
Area of Connection
These proposals met the criteria established by the City’s Zoning Code. City staff and
the applicant continued to work through the City’s permit process to move the project
along to avoid further litigation and reach a settlement. The City reached a settlement
with the Kenney’s. On August 20, 2012, the City issued a building permit to Mr. Kenney,
subject to the following conditions as a part of the building permit issuance and part of
the lawsuit settlement.
Building Permit Conditions:
Receive a building permit associated with proposed addition and renovation of a
portion of the illegal accessory structure and convert it into habitable space (BLD
2011-09876);
Fire Sprinklers are required in both the existing residential home and the new
addition created, consistent with the California Building Code;
Pay all outstanding plan check fees from submitted building plans for the
originally planned oversized accessory structure (BLD 2006-6916);
Record the Lot Line Adjustment for the structure built over an existing lot line
prior to the issuance of the permit (PLN 2011-1405);
Provide frontage improvements along Venado Road from lot line to lot line
including slurry seal of roadway, consistent with the Atascadero Municipal Code;
Provided bond for potential Tree Removals and Native Tree Mitigation;
Sea-train, inoperative vehicles and outdoor storage exceeding 200 square feet
will be required to be removed prior to issuance of occupancy, consistent with the
Atascadero Municipal Code;
A deed restriction is to be signed by the property owner disclosing that the
attached garage is to be used for hobby purposes only, and no auto-dismantling
or automotive repair is to be located on the premise;
Adherence to a construction schedule with completion of the remodel/addition in
2013.
CONCLUSION:
The applicant has redesigned the project into a single-family residence with an attached
garage, consistent with the City’s Municipal Code. The applicant will proceed to
renovate the accessory structure and create a large addition to the existing residence.
The remainder portion of the accessory structure will be converted to a garage. As a
part of the settlement with the City, the applicant must adhere to a construction
schedule with a timely completion of the structure in 2013.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan, and Zoning
Attachment 2: Aerial Photo
Attachment 3: Approved Site Plan
Attachment 4: Approved Floor Plan
Attachment 5: Approved Building Permit Card
Attachment 1: Location Map, General Plan and Zoning
Zoning: Residential Single Family (RSF-Z)
General Plan Designation: Single Family Residential (SFR)
Project Site
5185 Venado Avenue
Attachment 2: Aerial Photo
Project Site
5185 Venado
Attachment 3: Approved Site Plan
Garage
Residence
Attachment 4: Approved Floor Plan
Attachment 4: Approved Floor Plan
Attachment 5: Approved Permit Card
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Atascadero Planning Commission
Staff Report – Community Development Department
Callie Taylor, Associate Planner, 470-3448, ctaylor@atascadero.org
PLN 2010-1361
Central Coast Greenhouse Gas Reduction Planning
& Local Climate Action Plan
Overview and Update
SUBJECT
The City of Atascadero is currently working with the San Luis Obispo County Air
Pollution Control District and the Cities of Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach,
Morro Bay, and Pismo Beach to develop a toolbox of measures to reduce greenhouse
gases in compliance with California State Assembly Bill 32. Through this grant funded
process, a Climate Action Plan will be developed for each of the participating cities.
Atascadero’s individual Climate Action Plan will be presented to the City Council at the
end of the process for possible adoption. The Planning Commission has been
appointed by the City Council to act as the “Steering Committee” during the
development of the Climate Action Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Planning Commission receive the report and provide Staff
direction as needed.
DISCUSSION
Background:
A $400,000 grant has been made available through PG&E, SoCal Gas and the San Luis
Obispo Air Pollution Control District (SLOAPCD) for the Cities of Paso Robles, Arroyo
Grande, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, Pismo Beach and Atascadero to collaborate on
preparing individual Climate Action Plans. The project is known as the "San Luis
Obispo County Regional Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan." A model "toolbox" of action
measures will be developed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Participating cities
will work with the project consultant to choose which reduction measures from the
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
“toolbox” would work for their jurisdiction. The measures would be complied into an
individual Climate Action Plans which would be presented to each City Council for
consideration and possible adoption.
In March 2012 the Atascadero City Council agreed to participate in the countywide grant
for the Central Coast Greenhouse Gas Planning project. At the March meeting, the
Atascadero City Council appointed the City’s Design Review Committee (DRC) to act as
a Steering Committee during development of the regional “toolbox” of measures and
Atascadero’s individual Climate Action Plan. The City Council stated that local public
input and participation is a vital component of this process and is necessary to ensure
that Atascadero’s unique environment and local viewpoints are considered.
On August 16, 2012, the Atascadero DRC met to discuss the Central Coast
Greenhouse Gas Reduction Planning project. The consultant’s public outreach
coordinator, Kendall Flint, gave a brief presentation regarding the process. City staff
discussed the preliminary analysis completed by the consultant, and the DRC gave staff
and the consultant direction regarding the project priorities. At the meeting, the DRC
recommended that the Planning Commission take over as the designated Steering
Committee. The DRC felt that the evening Planning Commission meetings, which could
be televised, would enable better public participation. The City Council agreed with the
DRC’s recommendation and appointed the Planning Commission to act as the Steering
Committee for the development of the GHG Reduction Plan toolbox and the local
Climate Action Plan.
What is a Climate Action Plan?
“Climate Action Plans” or “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plans” are policy documents
intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, improve energy efficiency and integrate
sustainability into municipal and community-wide planning and operations. In order to
comply with California State Assembly Bill 32, the City must reduce greenhouse gas
emissions to 1990 levels (an estimated 15% reduction from today’s levels) by the year
2020. A Climate Action Plan lays out how the City intends to reach that target.
The Central Coast GHG Reduction Plan grant includes three primary components:
1. Model GHG Reduction Plan toolbox of reduction measures
2. Regional public engagement program
3. Individual Climate Action Plans to be developed for each participating city
Through regional collaboration, the consultant will develop a model “toolbox” or list of
action measures designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The reduction
strategies will be developed for both municipal and community wide operations. Each
measure will be presented along with potential costs, savings, an estimate of GHG
reduction impacts, and co-benefits (benefits in addition to reducing GHG emissions).
The draft measures will be reviewed by the community, including residents, business
owners, City staff from various departments, decision makers, community groups, etc.,
to provide input on the measures. Once the model toolbox is developed, each city
would then choose which action measures are appropriate for their city, and those
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
measures would be incorporated into an individual local Climate Action Plan for that
city. At the end of the process, the City Council would have the option to adopt the draft
local Climate Action Plan if the City is satisfied with the end product.
Similar to a General Plan or a Downtown Revitalization Plan, a Climate Action Plan is a
policy document with goals and a work plan which are intended to be implemented over
time. Most action measures identified in the Climate Action Plan do not all go into effect
immediately; programs take time to be implemented and may require adoption of
ordinances or policies prior to seeing any actual changes take place.
If the City of Atascadero choses to adopt a Climate Action Plan at the end of this
process, then the City will be able to demonstrate compliance with AB 32.
Improvements to City facilities, grants for communitywide energy audits, and other
funding to reduce GHG emissions may be opened up for the City. According to
SLOAPCD’s recently adopted CEQA GHG thresholds, development projects that are
consistent with an adopted and qualified Climate Action Plan are presumed to not have
significant GHG emission impacts and the project would be streamlined through the
CEQA process.
What has been completed so far?
In March 2012, Rincon Consultants and their team of associates were chosen by a
Selection Committee and contracted by the APCD to complete the project. In April a
kick-off meeting was held and Rincon made a presentation to the cities to layout the
process and provide a draft timeline (see Attachment 2). Over the next several months,
Rincon began work on the background research and data analysis, including the
following project components:
1. Update of 2005 Baseline Inventory
In 2010, a baseline greenhouse gas emissions inventory was completed for the
City of Atascadero. A baseline inventory calculates GHG emissions from City
operations and within the overall community. The year 2005 was used by all
cities in San Luis Obispo County as the baseline year for collecting data. The
baseline inventory establishes a level for which future reductions can be
measured. It also helps the City to identify the greatest opportunities for
emissions reductions, and which strategies will be the most cost effective for the
local community.
Rincon reviewed the previously completed inventory for accuracy, completeness
and consistency with current protocols. Some changes were made to the
communitywide portion of Atascadero’s 2005 Baseline Inventory report. Pass-
through trips on HWY 101 were removed from Atascadero’s GHG Inventory, and
only vehicle trips with an origin or destination in the City were counted. Due to
these changes and other updates to comply with current protocols , Atascadero’s
communitywide 2005 baseline emissions decreased by 30,165 metric tons of
carbon dioxide equivalent gas emissions (CO2e) compared to the April 2010
inventory. This resulted in a 2020 forecast decrease by 40,186 metric tons
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
CO2e. No changes were made to government operations section of the baseline
inventory. See Attachment 3 for compete updated report.
2. Actions Completed by the City to Reduce GHG Emissions
One of the first steps in the GHG planning process is to determine how much the
City has done to reduce GHG emissions to date. City Staff has identified a list of
policies, programs and improvements which have been implemented since the
2005 baseline year and would have the effect of reducing GHG emissions. See
Attachment 4 for the complete list of actions.
The City of Atascadero has become a front runner in the County in obtaining
grants for new equipment and finding cost savings for City operations and
improvements. With the downturn in the economy, the City has been
continuously looking for opportunities to cut costs while still moving forward to
improve our local community. Major improvements to the Downtown, City
facilities, tree planting projects and good community planning have continued to
make Atascadero an enjoyable place to live, and have had the co-benefit of
reducing GHG emissions at the same time.
3. Draft Gap Analysis & GHG Reduction Target
Next, the project consultant was able to use the City’s list of previously
implemented measures, along with the updated 2005 baseline inventory, to
quantify the GHG emissions reductions to date. This data is calculated based on
current industry protocol formulas. A preliminary “Gap Analysis” and “GHG
Reduction Target” were developed based on the percentage of emission
reductions already completed and the emissions which still need to be reduced
for compliance with AB 32. This draft document is provided as Attachment 5.
The Draft Gap Analysis document was released the week of the August 16, 2012
DRC meeting and was discussed briefly at the meeting. City Staff prepared a
response letter to the APCD and the project consultant regarding the reduction
target and amount of reduction credit given for various completed actions (See
Attachment 6). Atascadero City staff met with the APCD and the project
consultant in August to discuss the document and the City’s questions. Further
analysis, information, and examples of reduction measures are needed before
the City’s reduction target can be finalized. The draft Gap Analysis & GHG
Reduction Target document remain as preliminary informational tools which will
require further review and refinement through the Climate Action Planning
process.
4. Public Outreach
The project scope for the Central Coast GHG Planning project includes an
extensive public outreach component. In August, the project’s Public Outreach
Coordinator contacted several local community groups to set up informational
presentations. Next, a countywide public workshop and Kick-off meeting was
held on Thursday, August 23, 2012 at Cuesta College to introduce the project
and the process. The meeting was well attended by residents and City Council
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
members from Atascadero. Attendees voiced their concerns about new
regulations and brainstormed ideas for what type of actions may be accepted by
the local community.
A Countywide project website (www.CentralCoastGHGPlanning.com) has also
been set up by the project consultant so that the community can keep track of the
project’s progress. Information specific to the City of Atascadero’s GHG Steering
Committee meetings will be posted on the City’s website.
Next Steps:
Recently, Rincon has begun to develop a preliminary list of potential greenhouse gas
reduction measures to be incorporated into the Countywide toolbox. City staff has
reviewed the preliminary list and identified measures which should be removed or not
pursued. Measures which would cause substantial cost burden for residents, business
owners, or the City were recommended to be removed from the list. Rincon will
incorporate comments from staff and complete the draft toolbox of GHG reduction
measures to release for public comment this November. The toolbox will include the list
of measures, as well as calculations for the GHG reduction potential, associated costs,
and possible co-benefits for each measure. This complete analysis is intended to
provide the public and the decision makers the information needed to determine if a
toolbox reduction measure is suitable for their community. Public input will be sought
and revisions will be made to the draft measures prior to finalizing the toolbox or
beginning the individual Climate Action Plans.
The next Public Workshop is tentatively scheduled for the evening of November
29, 2012, at the Cuesta College campus in Paso Robles. This meeting will be to
discuss the draft toolbox of GHG reduction measures, which is expected to be
completed shortly before the meeting date. There will be two meetings simultaneously
held on November 29, one for North County and one for South County. The North
County meeting will be focused on residents and interested parties in the cities of
Atascadero and Paso Robles. Specific time and location will be advertised in local
newspapers and on the City website and the project website
(www.CentralCoastGHGPlanning.com) in the weeks before the meeting.
CONCLUSION
The Atascadero Planning Commission will act as the appointed Steering Committee
and will receive updates throughout the planning process. The Atascadero City Council
and the local residents have clearly expressed that any Climate Action Plan proposed
for the City of Atascadero will need to respond to Atascadero’s unique needs and
community identity. Since the City will ultimately be able to create its own individual
Climate Action Plan, the project should reflect Atascadero’s unique values, environment
and community goals. The Climate Action Plan clearly needs to be focused on cost-
effectively reducing greenhouse gas emissions, with measures which improve the
quality of life for residents while reducing costs for individuals, businesses and City
operations.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Project Facts and Questions (www.centralcoastghgplanning.com)
Attachment 2: Project Schedule
Attachment 3: 2005 Baseline Inventory Update
Attachment 4: Actions Completed by Atascadero to Reduce GHG Emissions
Attachment 5: Draft Gap Analysis & GHG Reduction Target
Attachment 6: City Comment Letter on Draft Gap Analysis
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 1: Project Facts and Questions (from http://www.centralcoastghgplanning.com)
Q: What is a Climate Action Plan?
A: A climate action plan is a detailed and strategic framework for measuring, planning,
and reducing greenhouse gas emissions and anticipated climatic impacts. Local
governments design and utilize climate action plans as customized road maps for
making informed decisions and understanding where and how to achieve the largest
and most cost-effective emissions reductions that are in alignment with other municipal
and community goals. Climate action plans generally include an inventory of existing
and projected greenhouse gas emissions, a reduction goal or target, measures or
actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, an analysis of each measure’s reduction
potential, costs and savings, and an implementation and monitoring strategy that
identifies required resources and funding mechanisms.
Q: Why are the climate action plans being prepared?
A: Assembly Bill 32 establishes a target to reduce statewide greenhouse gas emissions
to 1990 levels by 2020. In order to achieve this target, the California Air Resources
Board calls on local governments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 15 percent
from 2005 levels by 2020, consistent with the statewide commitment. Senate Bill 97
requires lead agencies to analyze greenhouse gas emissions and mitigate climate
change impacts under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). These laws
together create a framework for greenhouse gas emissions reductions and identify local
governments as having a vital role to play in assisting the state in meeting California’s
reduction target. Recognizing the important role and responsibility that local
governments have in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and mitigating their potential
impacts, the central coast cities are working together to prepare individual climate action
plans to increase the effectiveness and efficiency of greenhouse gas reduction efforts,
demonstrate consistency with Assembly Bill 32, and mitigate their greenhouse gas
emissions impact.
Q: What are the benefits of climate action plans?
A: In addition to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, implementation of the climate
action plans will help achieve multiple community goals such as lowering energy costs,
reducing air and water pollution, downtown revitalization, supporting local economic
development, and improving public health and quality of life. The climate action plans
would also support the streamlining of the environmental review process for future
projects within the cities in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15152 and
15183.5.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Q: How will the greenhouse gas reduction goals of each climate action plan be
achieved?
A: The goals of each climate action plan will be achieved through a series of
greenhouse gas emission reduction measures that will be outlined in the document. The
measures will build on and maintain consistency with the cities’ existing planning
documents and be selected based on careful consideration of local conditions, public
input, potential costs and benefits, existing opportunities and resources, and emissions
reduction potential. Some measures may include incentive programs for individuals and
businesses to increase efficiency and reduce costs. Categories that the reduction
measures may fall into include energy efficiency and conservation, renewable energy,
transportation and land use, solid waste reduction, and water and wastewater
efficiencies. Public participation will be very important in development of the greenhouse
gas emission reduction measures and throughout the development of the climate action
plans. Please refer to the Get Involved section of this website to find out how to
participate in the development of the greenhouse gas reduction measures and climate
action plans.
Q: Who is involved in developing the CAP?
A: A consultant team led by locally based Rincon Consultants under contract to the
APCD will lead the preparation of the climate action plans with regular input from the
Stakeholder Committee. Public input from residents, businesses, community
organizations, and elected officials will be solicited throughout the process to ensure
that each plan is crafted to meet the unique needs and goals of each city, with final
decision-making regarding measure selection and climate action plan adoption up to
each of the City Councils.
Q: What happens if the City Council doesn't adopt the climate action plan?
A: It is ultimately the local City Council’s decision whether to adopt the climate action
plan. It is important to note that the plans will be prepared with extensive local public
input, as well as input from decision makers and stakeholders. There are no penalties if
a local jurisdiction fails to adopt its climate action plan; however, the City would not be
able to demonstrate it is comprehensively mitigating greenhouse gas emissions
consistent with Assembly Bill 32 and Senate Bill 97. In addition, project applicants would
not benefit from the CEQA streamlining opportunities provided by a climate action plan.
Additionally, co-benefits of climate action plan policies, including reduced energy costs,
may not be realized.
Q: How does the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments' (SLOCOG) Senate Bill
375 Sustainable Communities Strategy process relate to this effort?
A: Senate Bill 375 (2009) requires the California's Air Resources Board to develop
regional reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions, and prompts the creation of
regional plans to reduce emissions from vehicle use throughout the state. California's 18
Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), including SLOCOG, have been tasked
with creating "Sustainable Community Strategies" (SCS). The MPOs are required to
develop the SCS through integrated land use and transportation planning and
demonstrate an ability to attain the proposed reduction targets by 2020 and 2035.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Greenhouse gas reduction measures in the climate action plans related to
transportation and land use would help the region meets its SB 375 target.
Q: How can I get involved?
A: To find more about how to get involved in the planning process, visit the Get
Involved section of this website. Also, you are invited to join our eNews list to receive
project updates and announcements.
Q: What is the anticipated schedule for the project?
A: This project will be completed in approximately 12 months with the Final Climate
Actions Plans due to be presented to the cities for adoption in Spring 2013. Please refer
to the Schedule section for additional details.
Q: How is preparation of the climate action plans being funded?
A: Preparation of the climate action plans is funded through the Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (PG&E) Green Communities Program, Southern California Gas Company,
and the APCD’s mitigation grant funding.
Q: How will the climate action plan impact my business, house, and/or way of
life?
A: The climate action plans will be designed to provide incentives and flexible options to
reduce GHG emissions, whether you are a homeowner, business owner, or both. The
climate action plans will not infringe upon private property rights or limit the
development potential of properties. Measures that rely on regulatory or financial
incentives would reduce costs and existing regulatory barriers. The climate action plans
will identify measures that provide ways for individuals and businesses to reduce costs
by taking action if desired.
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 2: Project Schedule
See Attached
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 3: 2005 Baseline GHG Emissions Inventory Update
See Attached
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 4: Actions Completed Since 2005 by City of Atascadero to Reduce GHG
Emissions (List Compiled by City Staff)
See Attached
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 5: Draft Gap Analysis & GHG Reduction Target
See Attached
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Attachment 6: City Comment Letter on Draft Gap Analysis
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
ITEM NUMBER: ITEM NUMBER: 4
DATE: 10-16-12
Central Coast GHG PlanningProposed ScheduleTask April May June JulyAugustOctober November December JanuaryAprilProject Initiation (PI) PI.1: Project Kickoff Meeting PI.2: Complete Final Project Management Plan PI.3: Pre-Program Survey and ResultsTask 1: GHG Inventory Update and Forecast 1.1: Draft GHG Inventory Update and Forecast20 31 1.2: Final GHG Inventory Update and Forecast8Task 2: Policy Gap Analysis and GHG Reduction Target Refinement 2.1: Draft Policy Gap Analysis and GHG Reduction Target Refinement10 17 2.2: Final Policy Gap Analysis and GHG Reduction Target Refinement24Task 3: GHG Reduction Measure Evaluation Toolbox 3.1: Initial Draft List of GHG Reduction Strategies and Measures724 3.2: Draft GHG Reduction Measure Evaluation Toolbox10 22 3.3: Public Draft GHG Reduction Measure Evaluation Toolbox523Task 4: Stakeholder Meetings and Public Engagement 4.1: List of Stakeholder Committee Members and Schedule of Committee Meetings30 4.2: Draft Public Engagement Plan30 14 4.3: Final Public Engagement Plan25 4.4: Draft Materials for Workshop #1 1523 4.5: Draft Material for Workshop #2 4.6: Draft Material for Workshop #326 14/15 4.7: Draft Material for Workshop #43130Task 5: Climate Action Plans 5.1: Administrative Draft GHG Reduction Plans28 18 5.2: Public Draft GHG Reduction Plans627 5.3: Final Draft GHG Reduction Plans13 5.4: Draft Implementation Plans28 18 5.5: Final Implementation Plans13Task 6: Adaptation 6.1: Adaptation Section for Each of the Cities Climate Action Plans28 18 627 13Task 7: CEQA Review 7.1: Prepare CEQA Documents 22 5 2422 31Task 8: Invoicing and Reporting 8.1: Monthly Reports and InvoicesXXXX XX X XXXXXXX 8.2: Draft Post-Program SurveyX 8.3: Final Program Report24 31Staff Meetings (6; does not include kickoff meeting covered under Project Initiation)20152228166Stakeholder Hearings (7)Work in ProgressAPCD/Stakeholder Committee ReviewPublic ReviewMeeting/WorkshopXMonthly ReportMarchSeptemberFebruary March May June
CITY OF ATASCADERO
Community-Wide and Government Operations
2005 Baseline Greenhouse Gas
Emissions Inventory Update
Prepared for:
SAN LUIS OBISPO AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF ATASCADERO
Prepared by:
1530 MONTEREY STREET, SUITE D
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
UPDATED JULY 2012
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero
Credits and Acknowledgements
Report prepared by PMC in April 2010 and updated by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in July 2012 for
the San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District on behalf of the City of Atascadero.
2012 GHG EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE PROJECT TEAM
Richard Daulton, Principal, Rincon Consultants
Joe Power, Principal, Rincon Consultants
Shauna Callery, Project Manager, Rincon Consultants
Rob Fitzroy, Assistant Project Manager, Rincon Consultants
Chris Bersbach, Assistant Project Manager, Rincon Consultants
Christina McAdams, Associate, Rincon Consultants
WITH ASSISTANCE FROM:
Air Pollution Control District
Larry Allen, Air Pollution Control Officer
Aeron Arlin Genet, Planning & Outreach Manager
Melissa Guise, Air Quality Specialist
Dean Carlson, Air Quality Engineer
City of Atascadero
Warren Frace, Director, Community Development
Callie Taylor, Associate Planner
Geoff English, Deputy Director, Public Works
Rachelle Rickard, Administrative Services Director
Justin Black, Chief Plant Operator, Public Works
Lori Brickley, Finance
Amanda Muether, Dispatch
County of San Luis Obispo
Janice Campbell, Agriculture Department
Atascadero Waste Alternatives
Mike LaBarbara, Municipal Marketing
Pacific Waste Services, Inc.
Jim Wyse, President
PG&E
Jillian Rich, Program Manager
Southern California Gas Company
Paulo Morais, Energy Programs Supervisor
ICLEI
Jonathan Strunin, Program Officer
Allison Culpen, Program Associate
IWMA
Peter Cron, Analyst
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8
1.1 Purpose of a GHG Inventory ..................................................................................... 8
1.2 Legislative Background ............................................................................................10
1.3 The Cities for Climate Protection Campaign ............................................................12
1.4 Local Sustainability and Climate Change Mitigation Activities ..................................13
1.5 Inventory Update .....................................................................................................15
2. Community and Government Operations Inventory Methodology ........................................16
2.1 Baseline and Forecast Years ...................................................................................16
2.2 The Two Inventories: Community-wide and City Government Operations ...............17
2.3 Data Collection and Methodology ............................................................................18
2.4 Data Sources ...........................................................................................................20
2.5 Data Limitations .......................................................................................................21
3. Community GHG Inventory Results .....................................................................................25
3.1 Community-Wide Emissions by Scope ....................................................................25
3.2 All Scope Emissions by Sector ................................................................................27
3.3 Transportation .........................................................................................................29
3.4 Off-Road Vehicles and Equipment ...........................................................................30
3.5 The Built Environment (Residential, Commercial, Industrial) ....................................32
3.6 Solid Waste .............................................................................................................34
3.7 Wastewater..............................................................................................................35
3.7 Community Emissions by Source ............................................................................36
3.8 Per Capita Emissions ..............................................................................................37
4. City Government Operations GHG Emissions Inventory Results .........................................38
4.1 City Government Operations Inventory Results .......................................................38
4.2 Building Sector ........................................................................................................39
4.3 Vehicle and Transit Fleet .........................................................................................40
4.4 Employee Commute ................................................................................................41
4.5 Streetlights and Traffic Signals ................................................................................43
4.6 Water and wastewater .............................................................................................43
4.7 Solid Waste .............................................................................................................45
4.8 City Emissions by Source ........................................................................................45
5. Forecast ..............................................................................................................................48
6. Conclusion and Next Steps .................................................................................................50
2005 BASELINE GREENH OUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page ii City of Atascadero
List of Figures
Figure ES-1: Community GHG Emissions by Sector,2005 ......................................................... 3
Figure ES-2: City Government Portion of Community-Wide GHG Emissions ............................. 4
Figure ES-3: City Government GHG Emissions by Secto, 2005 ................................................. 4
Figure ES-4: 2020 and 2025 Business-as-usual GHG Emissions Forecast ................................ 6
Figure ES-5: Business-as-usual Forecast in Relation to State-Recommended Target ............... 7
Figure 1-1: The Greenhouse Effect ............................................................................................ 8
Figure 1-2: California Climate Change Emissions and Targets ................................................11
Figure 1-3: The Five-Milestone Process ....................................................................................13
Figure 2-1: Relationship Between Community-wide and City Government Inventories..............18
Figure 2-2: GHG Emissions Scopes ..........................................................................................19
Figure 3-1: Community GHG Emissions by Scope, 2005 ..........................................................26
Figure 3-2: Community GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ..........................................................28
Figure 3-3: Community GHG Emissions by Fuel Source ...........................................................29
Figure 3-4: Off-Road GHG Emissions by Equipment Type ........................................................31
Figure 3-5: Off-Road GHG Emissions by Fuel Type ..................................................................31
Figure 3-6: Built Environment GHG Emissions by Sector ..........................................................32
Figure 3-7: Built Environment GHG Emissions by Source .........................................................32
Figure 3-8: Residential GHG Emissions by Source ...................................................................33
Figure 3-9: Commerical/industrial GHG Emissions by Source ...................................................33
Figure 3-10: Waste GHG Emissions by Type ............................................................................35
Figure 3-11: Community GHG Emissions by Source, 2005 .......................................................36
Figure 4-1: City Government Contribution to Community-Wide GHG Emissions .......................38
Figure 4-2: City Government GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ................................................38
Figure 4-3: Building GHG Emissions by Source ........................................................................39
Figure 4-4: Vehicle Fleet Fuel Consumption per Year by Type .................................................41
Figure 4-5: GHG Emissions from Wastewater Treatment Plant ................................................44
Figure 4-6: City Government GHG Emissions by Source, 2005 ................................................47
Figure 4-7: City Government GHG Emissions by Sector with Wastewater Treatment Plant
Removed ..................................................................................................................................47
Figure 5-1: 2020 and 2025 Projected Growth in Community-wide GHG Emissions ...................48
Figure 6-1: GHG Forecast in Relation to Reduction Targets .....................................................51
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page iii
List of Tables_Toc330560969
Table ES-1: Community GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ......................................................... 3
Table ES-2: City Government Operations GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ............................. 5
Table 2-1: Data Sources for Community Analysis, 2005 ...........................................................20
Table 2-2: Data Sources for City Government Operations Analysis, 2005 .................................21
Table 3-1: Community GHG Emissions Sources by Scope and Sector, 2005 ...........................26
Table 3-2: Community GHG Emissions per Sector per Scope, 2005 .........................................27
Table 3-3: Community GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ..........................................................28
Table 3-4: Transportation GHG Emissions by Fuel Source .......................................................29
Table 3-5: County-wide Equipment Type Indicators ..................................................................30
Table 3-6: Off-Road GHG Emissions by Equipment Type .........................................................31
Table 3-7: Off-Road GHG Emissions by Fuel Type ...................................................................32
Table 3-8: Residential GHG Emissions by Source ....................................................................33
Table 3-9: Commercial/Industrial GHG Emissions Sources.......................................................34
Table 3-10: Waste GHG Emissions by Waste Type ..................................................................35
Table 3-11: Community GHG Emissions by Source ..................................................................37
Table 4-1: City Government Operations GHG Emissions by Sector, 2005 ...............................39
Table 4-2: Building Sector GHG Emissions by Source, 2005 ....................................................40
Table 4-3: Days of City Employee Travel by Commute Mode ...................................................42
Table 4-4: Employee Commute VMT by Vehicle and Fuel Type ...............................................43
Table 4-5: City Government Operations GHG Emissions by Source ........................................46
2005 BASELINE GREENH OUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page iv City of Atascadero
Appendices
Appendix A: CACP2009 Detailed Report for Community-Wide Emissions, 2005
Appendix B: CACP2009 Detailed Report for City Government Operations Emissions, 2005
Appendix C: Detailed Methodology for Community-Wide Inventory
Appendix D: Detailed Methodology for City Government Operations Inventory
Appendix E: City Employee Commute Survey, 2009
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 1
Executive Summary
A greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions inventory identifies the
major sources and quantities of GHG emissions produced by
community activities and City government facilities and
operations within a jurisdiction‟s boundaries for a given year.
Estimating GHG emissions enables local governments to
establish an emissions baseline, track emissions trends, identify
the greatest sources of GHG emissions within their jurisdiction,
set targets for future reductions, and create an informed
mitigation strategy based on this information.
This Inventory includes a 2005 baseline inventory of GHG
emissions from community activities and City government
facilities and operations within the city1, and a 2020 and 2025
business-as-usual forecast of how emissions in Atascadero
would change if no further actions are implemented to reduce
those emissions. It is important to note that the City government
operations inventory is a subset of the community inventory,
meaning that the city government‟s emissions are included within
the community inventory.
The community inventory is divided into six sectors, or sources of
emissions: transportation, residential energy use, commercial
and industrial energy use, solid waste, off-road vehicles and
equipment, and wastewater. The City government inventory
provides a more detailed analysis of emissions resulting from
City-owned or -operated buildings, fleet vehicles, and lighting;
water and sewage transport; City-generated solid waste; and employee commute travel.
INVENTORY UPDATE PURPOSE
In 2010, PMC prepared an inventory of Atascadero‟s 2005 community-wide and City
government emissions. Changes to GHG accounting protocols have prompted an update to the
1 In this report, the term “city” refers to the area inside the jurisdictional boundary of the City of
Atascadero, whereas “City government” refers to those activities which are under the operational control
of City agencies.
What are Greenhouse Gas
Emissions (GHGs)?
Gases that trap heat in the
Earth‟s atmosphere are called
greenhouse gases, or GHGs.
GHGs include carbon dioxide,
methane, nitrous oxide, and
fluorinated gases. While
many of these gases occur
naturally in the atmosphere,
modern human activity has
led to a steep increase in the
amount of GHGs released
into the atmosphere over the
last 100 years. Collectively,
these gases intensify the
natural greenhouse effect,
thus causing global average
surface temperatures to rise,
which in turn affects global
climate patterns. GHGs are
often quantified in terms of
CO2 equivalent, or CO2e, a
unit of measurement that
equalizes the potency of
GHGs.
Source: Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change (IPCC),
2007
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 2 City of Atascadero
emissions inventory and in 2012 Rincon Consultants conducted a peer-review and update to the
Inventory. This Inventory is the updated assessment of GHG emissions in Atascadero.
Rincon updated the Inventory methodology, emissions coefficients, and data for consistency
with current protocols, including the Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) version 1.1
(May 2010), for the city government inventory, and the Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP) California Community-wide GHG Baseline Inventory Protocol (AEP
Protocol) (June 2011) and ICLEI International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis
Protocol (IEAP) (October 2009), for the community-wide inventory. Rincon also updated the
Inventory to include all emissions sectors within the discretionary action authority of the City.
The primary additions and revisions to the updated Inventory include the following:
Calculation of emissions from additional off-road vehicle and equipment categories (lawn
and garden equipment, construction equipment, industrial equipment, and light
commercial equipment) for the community-wide inventory.
Incorporation of improved emissions factors from the LGOP version 1.1.
Incorporation of a refined methodology for on-road transportation emissions. The 2012
methodology estimates vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based on an origin-destination
approach using the regional travel demand model and excludes vehicle trips that pass
through the city. Transportation-related GHG emissions were then calculated using the
California Air Resources Board Emissions Factor 2011 (EMFAC2011) software.
Corrections to baseline electricity and natural gas consumption data, and waste stream
profile data.
Inclusion of updated population and employment projections using the San Luis Obispo
Council of Governments‟ (SLOCOG) 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast
(August 2011).2
As a result of this Inventory update, Atascadero‟s community-wide 2005 baseline emissions
decreased by 30,165 metric tons CO2e and 2020 forecast decreased by 52,437 metric tons
CO2e compared to the April 2010 inventory.
2 SLOCOG‟s 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast includes population, housing, and
employment projections developed based on an analysis of historic growth and economic trends. See
San Luis Obispo County 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast (August 2011) for details.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 3
COMMUNITY-WIDE GHG INVENTORY RESULTS
The community of Atascadero emitted approximately 146,069 metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO2e) emissions in the baseline year 2005. As shown in Figure ES-1 and Table
ES-1, the transportation sector was by far the largest contributor to emissions (41.4%),
producing approximately 60,445 metric tons of CO2e in 2005. Transportation sector emissions
are the result of diesel and gasoline fuel used in
vehicles traveling on local roads and state
highways within the jurisdictional boundaries of
Atascadero. Emissions from electricity and
natural gas consumed in the residential sector
were the next largest contributor (27.9%),
producing approximately 40,690 metric tons of
CO2e. Electricity and natural gas consumed in
the commercial and industrial sector accounted
for a combined 13.9% of the total. Emissions
from solid waste comprised 9.1% of the total,
and emissions from off-road vehicles and
equipment comprised 5.9% of the total.
TABLE ES-1: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
2005
Community
Emissions
by Sector
Residential Commercial/
Industrial Transportation
Off-
Road Waste Waste
water TOTAL
CO2e
(metric tons) 40,690 20,271 60,445 8,686 13,320 2,657 146,069
Percentage of
Total CO2e 27.9% 13.9% 41.4% 5.9% 9.1% 1.8% 100.0%
FIGURE ES-1: COMMUNITY GHG
EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 4 City of Atascadero
CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS GHG INVENTORY RESULTS
City government operations and facilities produced approximately 4,130 metric tons of CO2e in
2005. As displayed in Table ES-2 and Figure ES-2, this represents approximately 2.7% of total
community-wide emissions in the city. City government emissions result from waste, energy
consumption from water and wastewater facilities, buildings, streetlights and other facilities, fuel
consumption by the vehicle and transit fleet and employee commutes, and miscellaneous
equipment. The largest contributor to the City‟s emissions (70.8%) was from the wastewater
facilities producing 2,923 metric tons of CO2e. The vehicle fleet was the second largest
contributor to the City‟s emissions (9.7%), producing 402 metric tons of CO2e (refer to Figure
ES-3 and Table ES-2).
City government operations emissions are a subset of the total community-wide emissions as
outlined above. However, similar to the way in which businesses and factories perform their own
facility-scale GHG Inventories, this Inventory analyzes City emissions separately to identify
opportunities for cost-savings and emissions-reductions in the future. The methodology for
estimating emissions from local government operations is guided specifically by the LGOP
version 1.1 developed by the California Air Resources Board, ICLEI – Local Governments for
Sustainability, and the California Climate Registry.
FIGURE ES-3: CITY GOVERNMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY
SECTOR, 2005
FIGURE ES-2: CITY GOVERNMENT
PORTION OF COMMUNITY-WIDE
GHG EMISSIONS
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 5
TABLE ES-2: CITY GOVERNMENT GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
2005
Emissions
by Sector
Buildings
&
Facilities
Vehicle
Fleet
Transit
Fleet
Employee
Commute
Street
Lights &
Traffic
Signals
Water
Delivery
Waste-
water
Facilities
Solid
Waste TOTAL
CO2e (metric
tons) 316 402 214 185 40 1 2,923 49 4,130
Percentage
of CO2e 7.6% 9.7% 5.2% 4.5% 1.0% <0.0% 70.8% 1.2% 100.0%
DATA LIMITATIONS
This Inventory captures the major sources of GHGs caused by activities within the city per
standard practice. However, it is important to note that some likely emission sources were not
included in the Inventory, either because of privacy laws, lack of data, or a lack of reasonable
methodology for calculating emissions. It is estimated that the sources not included in the
inventory comprise less than 5.0% of total emissions in the city. It is likely that as GHG
inventories become more common, methodology and accessibility to data will improve.
The sources that could not be included due to privacy laws, lack of data availability, and/or a
reasonable methodology include the following:
Refrigerants from City government operations, facilities, and vehicles, and the
community-at-large
Freight and passenger trains;
Propane, wind or solar energy consumed by the community-at-large; and
Residential septic tanks systems.
These limitations are explained further in this document.
BUSINESS-AS-USUAL FORECAST
The GHG emissions forecast provides a “business-as-usual estimate,” or scenario, of how
emissions will change in the year 2020 and 2025 if consumption trends and behavior continue
as they did in 2005, absent any new federal, state, regional, or local policies or actions that
would reduce emissions. The year 2020 was selected for the forecast in order to maintain
consistency with AB 32. As shown in Figure ES-4 and Figure ES-5, if consumption trends
continue the pattern observed in 2005 emissions (i.e., under business-as-usual conditions) will
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 6 City of Atascadero
reach 175,210 metric tons of CO2e by 2020, or a 20.0% increase over 2005 baseline levels
(projections based on population and employment growth). By 2025 emissions will reach
187,184 metric tons of CO2e, or a 28.1% increase over 2005 baseline levels.
FIGURE ES-4: 2020 AND 2025 CITY OF ATASCADERO
BUSINESS-AS-USUAL GHG EMISSIONS FORECAST
With this information, the City can make an informed determination regarding a reduction target.
Conformance with the State of California‟s recommended reduction of 15% below present levels
by 2020 would require a 29.1% reduction below the city‟s business-as-usual emissions (refer to
Figure ES-5).3
3 AB 32 Scoping Plan, page 27 states that the California Air Resources Board encourages local
governments to “move toward establishing similar goals for community emissions that parallel the State
commitment to reduce GHG emissions by approximately 15 percent from current levels by 2020.”
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 7
FIGURE ES-5: BUSINESS-AS-USUAL FORECAST IN RELATION TO
STATE-RECOMMENDED REDUCTION TARGET
Business-as-
usual forecast
175,210 metric
tons CO2e by
2020; 187,184
metric tons
CO2e by 2025
2005 baseline
levels =
146,069 metric
tons CO2e
15% below 2005
baseline levels =
124,159 metric
tons CO2e by
2020
Actual
Reduction
= 51,051
metric
tons CO2e
(29.1%) by
2020
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 8 City of Atascadero
1. Introduction
This section introduces the Inventory, defines key terms used throughout the Inventory, and
provides an overview of climate change science and regulation in California.
1.1 PURPOSE OF A GHG INVENTORY
This Inventory represents completion of the first step in the City‟s climate protection process.
Quantifying recent-year emissions is essential to establish: (1) a baseline against which to
measure future emission levels, and (2) an understanding of where the highest percentages of
emissions are coming from, and, therefore, the greatest opportunities for emissions reductions.
This Inventory presents estimates of GHG emissions in 2005 resulting from the community as a
whole.
Climate Change Background
Scientific consensus holds that the world‟s
population is releasing GHGs faster than the
earth‟s natural systems can absorb them.
These gases are released as byproducts of
fossil fuel combustion, waste disposal,
energy use, land-use changes, and other
human activities. This release of gases,
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O), creates a
blanket around the earth that allows light to
pass through but traps heat at the surface
preventing its escape into space (Figure 1-
1). Known as the greenhouse effect, models
show that this phenomenon could lead to a
2oF to 10oF temperature increase over the
next 100 years. The Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns that most of the warming observed over the last 50
years is attributable to human activities.4
Although used interchangeably, there is a difference between the terms “climate change” and
“global warming.” According to the State, climate change refers to “any long-term change in
4 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group I. 2007.
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis, Summary for Policy Makers.
FIGURE 1-1:
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT
Source: Tufts University
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 9
average climate conditions in a place or region, whether due to natural causes or as a result of
human activities.5 The use of the term “climate change” is becoming more prevalent because it
encompasses all changes to the climate, not just temperature. Additionally, the term “climate
change” conveys temporality, implying that climate change can be slowed with the efforts of
local, regional, state, national, and world entities.
Changes in the earth‟s temperature will have impacts for residents and businesses in the City of
Atascadero. Some of the major impacts to the Central Coast expected to occur include the
following, separated by sector.6 7
Coastline: The San Luis Obispo County coastline could face inundation as a result of
sea level rise and global warming. As temperatures rise, the ocean waters rise as well
due to thermal expansion and the melting of glaciers and snowpack. The state‟s 2009
Climate Change Impacts Assessment (the 2009 Scenarios Project) estimates that sea
levels will rise by 12 to 18 inches by 2050 and 21 to 55 inches by 2100. This level of sea
rise has the potential to negatively affect groundwater salination as well as the size and
attractiveness of local beaches, which could affect property values and the tourism
industry in the county;
Reduced Water Supply: The 2009 Scenarios Project estimates a decrease in
precipitation of 12 to 35% by 2050. In addition, more precipitation will fall as rain rather
than snow, which will cause snow to melt earlier in the year and not in the warmer, drier
months when water is in higher demand;
Agriculture: Climate change could cause a shift in the type and location of agriculture in
the area. As saltwater intrudes into coastal aquifers and groundwater resources
decrease, it is possible that some crops will be forced out of the area, which affects the
local economy and food supply. Water supplies to agriculture may be 20 to 23% below
demand targets between 2020 and 2050;
Public Health: Climate change could potentially threaten the health of residents of
Atascadero. Heat waves may have a major impact on public health, as will decreasing
5 California Natural Resources Agency. 2009 California Climate Adaptation Strategy Discussion Draft.
August 2009.
6 California Climate Change Center. Our Changing Climate: Assessing the Risks to California (2006),
www.climatechange.ca.gov
7 Governor‟s Office of Planning and Research. Proposed CEQA Guideline Amendments for Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. April 2009.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 10 City of Atascadero
air quality and an increase in mosquito breeding and mosquito-borne diseases. There is
also expected to be an increase in allergenic plant pollen and an increase in the
frequency of wildfires.
Although climate change is a global issue, local governments can make a positive impact
through cumulative local action. Cities and counties have the ability to reduce GHG emissions
through effective land use and transportation planning, wise waste management, and the
efficient use of energy. The City can achieve multiple benefits including lower energy bills,
improved air quality, economic development, reduced emissions, and better quality of life
through:
Energy efficiency in City facilities and vehicle fleet;
Sustainable purchasing and waste reduction efforts;
Land use and transportation planning; and
Efficient management of water resources.
This Inventory serves as a baseline measurement for implementing and tracking the
effectiveness of these efforts.
1.2 LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND
California continues to be a leader in addressing climate change in the United States and in the
world. In June of 2005, Governor Schwarzenegger issued a landmark Executive Order
establishing progressive GHG emissions targets for the entire state. Executive Order (EO) S-3-
05 makes the following goals:
By 2010, reduce GHG emissions to 2000 levels;
By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels;
By 2050, reduce GHG emissions to 80% below 1990 levels.
To support these reduction targets, the California legislature adopted Assembly Bill (AB) 32 (the
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006). The law requires the California Air Resources
Board to develop regulatory and market mechanisms that will reduce GHG emissions to 1990
levels by 2020 as shown in Figure 1-2 below. To achieve this goal, the California Air Resources
Board developed a set of early action measures in 2007 for priority implementation in 2010.
These early action measures became part of the AB 32 implementation plan, or Scoping Plan,
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 11
approved in December 2008. The Scoping Plan identifies a variety of GHG reduction activities
including direct regulations, monetary and non-monetary incentives, voluntary actions, market-
based mechanisms such as a cap-and-trade, and an implementation fee regulation to fund the
program. The Scoping Plan also identifies local governments as “essential partners” and calls
for cities and counties to adopt GHG reduction targets consistent with AB 32.
FIGURE 1-2: CALIFORNIA CLIMATE CHANGE
EMISSIONS AND TARGETS
In support of the AB 32 reduction targets, California adopted Senate Bill (SB) 97 in August
2007, which formally acknowledges that climate change is an important environmental issue
that requires analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In response to SB
97, the Governor‟s Office of Planning and Research submitted their proposed amendments to
the CEQA Guidelines for GHG emissions in April 2009. The amendments provide guidance to
public agencies regarding the analysis of mitigation and the effects of GHG emissions in CEQA
CAT Report Emissions
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
1990 2000 2010 2020 2050
YearMillion Metric Tons (CO2 Equivalent)1990 Emission Baseline
80% Reduction
~341 MMTCO2E
~174 MMTCO2E Reduction
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 12 City of Atascadero
documents. The Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the amendments in
December 2009.8
At the same time, the State is working to form regional approaches to reducing GHG emissions
in response to the passage of SB 375. SB 375 aims to reduce GHG emissions by linking
transportation funding to land use planning. It also requires Metropolitan Planning
Organizations, including the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments, to include a Sustainable
Communities Strategy (SCS) in their Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) for reducing VMT.
The bill also creates incentives for implementation of SCSs and sustainable transportation
plans.
Additional efforts are underway for the overall transportation sector by mandating fewer
emissions from vehicles, including Assembly Bill 1493, signed into law in 2002, which will
require carmakers to reduce emissions from new passenger cars and light trucks beginning in
2009. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) approved the new emissions standards
in June 2009.
The State is also preparing for climate change resiliency in order to adapt to the inevitable
effects of climate change. In November 2008, Governor Schwarzenegger signed Executive
Order S-13-08 which asked the Natural Resources Agency to identify how state agencies can
respond to rising temperature, changing precipitation patterns, sea level rise, and extreme
natural events. The order requires the Natural Resources Agency to develop a Climate
Adaptation Strategy to analyze climate change impacts to the state and recommend strategies
to manage those threats. The Natural Resources Agency released the Climate Adaptation
Strategy in 2009.
1.3 THE CITIES FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION CAMPAIGN
The Cities for Climate Protection (CCP) campaign provides a framework for local communities
to identify and reduce GHG emissions, organized along five milestones as represented in
Figure 1-3 below:
8 Governor‟s Office of Planning and Research. Proposed CEQA Guideline Amendments for Greenhouse
Gas Emissions. April 2009.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 13
FIGURE 1-3: FIVE-MILESTONE PROCESS
This report represents the completion of the first CCP milestone, and provides a foundation for
future work to reduce GHG emissions in the City of Atascadero.
1.4 LOCAL CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION ACTIVITIES
Many of the air pollution programs already in place throughout San Luis Obispo County reduce
ozone forming pollutants and toxic emissions, but they also have ancillary benefits and reduce
GHG emissions. The County, cities, and the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) implement
rules and regulations, clean fuels programs, CEQA mitigation measures, grants, the
Transportation Choices Program, pollution prevention activities, energy efficiency and
conservation measures, water conservation programs, partnerships, and general public
outreach that directly or indirectly address climate change and reduce GHG emissions.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 14 City of Atascadero
The APCD Board approved the first report or plan to address climate change in the county. The
plan, (Options for Addressing Climate Change in San Luis Obispo County (2005)) identifies the
following seven actions that could be implemented to specifically address GHGs at the local
level:
1) Prepare a countywide inventory of GHG emissions;
2) Target a percentage of mitigation grant funds for GHG emission reductions;
3) Evaluate and quantify the GHG reduction benefits from existing district programs;
4) Develop public education and outreach campaigns on climate change;
5) Encourage and provide support for local governments to join the Cities for Climate
Protection program;
6) Develop partnership with Cal Poly for addressing climate change; and
7) Join the California Climate Registry and encourage local industry participation.
As of November 2008, the APCD has initiated, promoted, or supported all of the implementation
actions to address climate change and reduction of GHG emissions in the county. The APCD
joined the California Climate Registry and conducted its GHG emissions inventory in the fall of
2008. The APCD facilitates regular meetings of Climate Change Stakeholders, a local group of
city and county representatives that shares resources to address climate change. To encourage
and support local GHG emissions inventories, the APCD is providing technical assistance to all
of the incorporated cities to assist or perform GHG government operations and community-wide
emissions inventories, similar to this Inventory, for all of the incorporated cities in San Luis
Obispo County.
The APCD also coordinates the Central Coast Clean Cities Coalition (C5). C5 is a partnership of
public/private entities whose goal is to promote the use of alternative fuels vehicles (AFV) on the
Central Coast. By working with area fleet operators, C5 sponsors training seminars, public
events, and grant funding workshops related to use of alternative fuels.
The City of Atascadero has been pursuing energy efficiencies through measures such as:
Construction of new and improvement of existing bike lanes and sidewalks through the
Safe Routes to School Program to encourage walking and biking to schools (ongoing);
The construction of bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and multi-use trails throughout the City
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 15
Adoption of Native Tree Ordinance (1998);
Native tree reforestation projects at various sites throughout the City;
Partnership with SLO Green Build to promote energy efficiency in new development;
Joined PG&E‟s Climate Smart Program to purchase carbon credits to offset emissions
from City Hall;
Replacement of high pressure sodium light bulbs with energy efficient light emitting
diodes (LED) bulbs in street and traffic lights;
Development of a solar financing district through AB 811 to encourage the installation of
solar panels and reduce dependence on traditional energy sources (ongoing); and
Development of a Water Conservation Landscape Ordinance (2009).
1.5 INVENTORY UPDATE
In 2010, PMC prepared an inventory of Atascadero‟s 2005 community-wide and City
government emissions. Changes to GHG accounting protocols have prompted an update to the
emissions inventory and in 2012 Rincon Consultants conducted a peer-review and update to the
Inventory. This Inventory is the updated assessment of GHG emissions in Atascadero.
Rincon updated the Inventory methodology, emissions coefficients, and data for consistency
with current protocols, including the Local Government Operations Protocol (LGOP) version 1.1
(May 2010), for the city government inventory, and the Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP) California Community-wide GHG Baseline Inventory Protocol (AEP
Protocol) (June 2011) and ICLEI International Local Government GHG Emissions Analysis
Protocol (IEAP) (October 2009), for the community-wide inventory. Rincon also updated the
Inventory to include all emissions sectors within the discretionary action authority of the City.
The primary additions and revisions to the updated Inventory include the following:
Calculation of emissions from additional off-road vehicle and equipment categories (lawn
and garden equipment, construction equipment, industrial equipment, and light
commercial equipment) for the community-wide inventory.
Incorporation of improved emissions factors from the LGOP version 1.1.
Incorporation of a refined methodology for on-road transportation emissions. The 2012
methodology estimates VMT based on an origin-destination approach using the regional
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 16 City of Atascadero
travel demand model and excludes vehicle trips that pass through the city.
Transportation-related GHG emissions were then calculated using the California Air
Resources Board Emissions Factor 2011 (EMFAC2011) software.
Corrections to baseline electricity and natural gas consumption data, and waste stream
profile data.
Inclusion of updated population and employment projections using the San Luis Obispo
Council of Governments‟ (SLOCOG) 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast
(August 2011).
As a result of the Inventory update, Atascadero‟s community-wide 2005 baseline emissions
decreased by 30,165 metric tons CO2e and 2020 forecast decreased by 52,437 metric tons
CO2e compared to the April 2010 inventory. This decrease was a result of the refined
methodology for calculating on-road VMT and transportation emissions.
2. Community and Government Operations Inventory
Methodology
The first step toward reducing GHG emissions is to identify baseline levels and sources of
emissions in the city. This information can later inform the selection of a reduction target and
possible reduction measures to be included in a climate action plan.
This section outlines the methodology used to calculate the community and City government
operations9 inventories, including the difference between the two inventories, and the data
collection process, data sources, GHG emission scopes, data limitations, and means of
calculation.
2.1 BASELINE AND FORECAST YEARS
The year 2005 was selected as the baseline year for the Inventory due to the availability of
reliable data and consistency with other cities in San Luis Obispo County. The State of
California uses 1990 as a reference year to remain consistent with the Kyoto Protocol, and also
because it has well-kept records of transportation trends and energy consumption in that year.
However, cities and counties throughout California typically elect to use 2005 or 2006 as a
9 In this report, the term “city” refers to the incorporated area (the jurisdictional boundary of the City of
Atascadero), whereas “City” refers to those activities that are under the operational control of City
agencies. “Community-wide” or “community” refers to all activities within the city (as defined above),
including those from businesses, industrial processes, residents, vehicles, and City government
operations.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 17
baseline year because of the more reliable recordkeeping from those years and because of the
large amount of growth that has occurred since 1990.
This Inventory uses a forecast year of 2020 to be consistent with the State of California GHG
Inventory10 forecast year and AB 32 target, both of which reference 2020. In addition, it is likely
that any forecast considerably beyond 2020 would have a significant margin of error because of
unknown population growth rates and new technology. The business-as-usual forecast has also
been extended to 2025 in consideration of the City‟s General Plan Horizon.
2.2 THE TWO INVENTORIES: COMMUNITY-WIDE AND CITY GOVERNMENT
OPERATIONS
This Inventory is separated into two sections, community-wide and City government operations.
It is important to note that the City government operations inventory is a subset of the
community inventory, meaning that all City government operations are included in the
commercial/industrial, transportation, waste, or “other” categories of the community-wide
inventory. The City‟s government operations inventory should not be added to the community
analysis; rather it should be looked at as a slice of the complete picture as illustrated in Figure
2-1. Although City operations are a small contributor to the community‟s overall emissions
levels, an inventory allows the City to track its individual facilities and vehicles and to evaluate
the effectiveness of its emissions reduction efforts at a more detailed level.
10 California Greenhouse Gas Inventory, http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/inventory.htm
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 18 City of Atascadero
FIGURE 2-1: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN COMMUNITY-WIDE AND
CITY GOVERNMENT INVENTORIES
Once completed, these inventories provide the basis for policy development, the quantification
of emissions reductions associated with proposed measures, the creation of an emissions
forecast, and the establishment of an informed emissions reduction target.
2.3 DATA COLLECTION AND METHODOLOGY
Creating the community and City government operations emissions inventories required the
collection of information from a variety of sources. Sources for community data included the
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E), the Southern California Gas Company, Caltrans, the
California Air Resources Board, Cal-Recycle, and the County of San Luis Obispo. City
government operations data sources included PG&E, the Southern California Gas Company,
Atascadero Waste Alternatives, and documentation from multiple City departments including
Planning, Public Works, Finance, Police, Fire, and more. Data from the year 2005 were used in
both inventories, with the following exceptions:
A subset of waste data by type was not available for 2005, therefore this study utilizes a
California statewide waste characterization study conducted in 2003-2004;
City employee commuting trips were calculated using an employee survey conducted in
2009; and
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 19
Propane, wind and solar power used in both the community-wide and City government
inventories.
For community activities and City operations, emissions sources are categorized by scope.
Scopes help us identify where emissions originate from and what entity retains regulatory
control and the ability to implement efficiency measures. The scopes are illustrated in Figure 2-
2 and defined as follows:
Scope 1. Direct emissions sources located within the community, mostly from the
combustion of fuels. Examples of Scope 1 sources include use of fuels such as gasoline
and natural gas.
Scope 2. Indirect emissions that result because of activities within the community,
limited to electricity, district heating, steam and cooling consumption. An example of a
Scope 2 source is purchased electricity used within the community. These emissions
should be included in the community-wide analysis, as they are the result of the
community's electricity consumption.
Scope 3. All other indirect emissions that occur as a result of activity within the
community. Examples of Scope 3 emissions include methane emissions from solid
waste generated within the community which decomposes at landfills either inside or
outside of the community.
FIGURE 2-2: GHG EMISSIONS SCOPES
Source: NZBCSD (2002), The Challenge of GHG Emissions: the “why” and “how” of accounting and reporting for GHG
emissions: An Industry Guide, New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development, Auckland.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 20 City of Atascadero
Appendices A and B of this report separate the community and City government operations
emissions by scope. Each sector is labeled with a 1, 2, or 3 that corresponds to the scopes
above.
2.4 DATA SOURCES
The data used to complete this Inventory came from multiple sources, as summarized in Tables
2-1 and 2-2. Utility providers supplied electricity and natural gas consumption data associated
with commercial, industrial, residential, and City government buildings in 2005. Vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) was provided by Fehr and Peers and calculated using SLOCOG‟s Regional
Travel Demand model. These data sources are further explained in the sector-specific
discussions of this document.
TABLE 2-1: DATA SOURCES FOR COMMUNITY ANALYSIS, 2005
Sector Information Unit of
Measurement Data Source
Residential
Electricity consumption kWh PG&E
Natural gas
consumption Therms Southern California Gas
Company
Commercial/Industrial
Electricity consumption kWh PG&E
Natural gas
consumption Therms Southern California Gas
Company
Transportation VMT excluding pass
through trips
Average Weekday Daily
VMT Fehr & Peers
Off-Road Vehicles
and Equipment
Emissions from off-road
equipment
Tons/year of N2O, CO2,
and CH4
California Air Resources
Board OFFROAD2007
model
Solid Waste
Solid waste tonnage
sent to landfill from
activities in City of
Atascadero
Short tons
San Luis Obispo
Integrated Waste
Management Board
Wastewater
Treatment
Methane and nitrous
oxide released in the
wastewater treatment
process
Tonnes
Public Works
Department Data
Records
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 21
TABLE 2-2: DATA SOURCES FOR CITY GOVERNMENT ANALYSIS, 2005
Sector Information Unit of
Measurement Data Source
Buildings & Facilities
Electricity consumption kWh PG&E
Natural gas
consumption Therms Southern California Gas
Company
Vehicle Fleet
Diesel consumption and
corresponding vehicle
type
Gallons Billing Records
Gasoline consumption
and corresponding
vehicle type
Gallons Billing Records
Employee Commute Sample of employee
commuting patterns Annual VMT Commuter Survey (June
2009)
Streetlights Electricity consumption kWh PG&E
Water/Sewage
Electricity consumption kWh PG&E
Methane and nitrous
oxide released in the
wastewater treatment
process
Tonnes
Public Works
Department Data
Records
Waste Annual waste tonnage
sent to landfill Short Tons Atascadero Waste
Alternatives
2.5 DATA LIMITATIONS
It is important to note that calculating community-wide GHG emissions with precision is a
complicated task. The ICLEI Clean Air and Climate Protection (CACP2009) software relies on
numerous assumptions and is limited by the quantity and quality of available data. Because of
these limitations it is useful to think of any specific number generated by the model as an
approximation of reality, rather than an exact value. The city‟s actual 2005 GHG emissions are
likely to be slightly greater than what are reported in this document due to three main factors: (1)
data limitations, (2) privacy laws, and (3) a lack of a reasonable methodology to collect or model
emissions data. The following paragraphs highlight emissions that cannot be included in a GHG
Inventory under current science and policy direction, or due to lack of reliable data.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 22 City of Atascadero
Data Limitations
Lack of available data prevented the calculation of emissions from community-wide freight and
passenger trains, off-road vehicles and equipment, propane use, and City government
operations refrigerants. For rail and port, as well as equipment emissions, the California Air
Resources Board OFFROAD 2007 software provides emissions data; however, these numbers
are aggregated for the entire San Luis Obispo County area, including incorporated,
unincorporated, and state or federally owned land.
Lack of data availability also prevents the calculation of emissions from propane (liquefied
petroleum gas, or LPG) created within the city‟s boundaries. Propane is basically an
unregulated fuel in California (except for storage and safety issues which are regulated).
Because it is an unregulated commodity, no data is collected by the state on propane sales or
usage. Another sector that was excluded from the inventory is City government operations
refrigerants.
The City of Atascadero made a best effort to gather data on the amount of refrigerants
consumed by fleet vehicles, HVAC systems, and City government operations facilities; however
City records were not suited to this purpose. It is recommended that the City look into amending
its record keeping so that the amount of refrigerants purchased and consumed within a year is
recorded.
Privacy Laws
This Inventory does not separately analyze site-level emissions from specific sources such as
refineries or large industrial emitters. The emissions from industrial energy consumption and
related transportation are included under the commercial/industrial category, but will not be
analyzed independently as part of this Inventory for two reasons:
1) State privacy laws prevent us from obtaining site-level energy consumption data from
utility providers. Notably the California Public Utilities Commission 15/15 rule11 prevents
us from analyzing industrial emissions separately from commercial emissions.
2) It is the responsibility of the emitter, whether it is a large refinery or household, to
perform its own energy audit and subsequent reduction process. Efforts to require site-
level energy audits and GHG emissions reporting are being continually expanded and
11 Commercial and Industrial Electricity and Natural Gas were combined into one section due to the
California 15/15 rule. The 15/15 rule was adopted by the California Public Utilities Commission in the
Direct Access Proceeding (CPUC Decision 97-10-031) to protect customer confidentiality.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 23
required by the California Climate Action Registry, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, and California Air Resources Board.
Lack of a Reasonable Methodology
There is a lack of reasonable methodology for estimating life cycle emissions for the community
and, therefore, emissions associated with the production and disposal of items consumed by a
community are not included in the Inventory. For instance, a life cycle assessment would
estimate the emissions associated with the planning, production, delivery, and disposal of each
car currently in the city. In contrast, this analysis only captures how much that car drives within
the city.
Despite these limitations, the CACP2009 software12 and ICLEI methodology provide the best-
available snapshot of the city‟s GHG emissions. Additionally, the CACP2009 tool is utilized to
promote consistency among municipalities throughout the country and the world. Sector-specific
data limitations or methodological issues are explained thoroughly in Appendices C and D.
However, it is important to note that the emissions identified in this report are primarily GHGs
that the community has directly caused and has the ability to reduce through implementation of
conservation actions, a Climate Action Plan, or corresponding efforts.
2.6 CLEAN AIR AND CLIMATE PROTECTION SOFTWARE 2009
The City government operations and community-wide inventories use the CACP2009 software
package developed by ICLEI in partnership with the National Association of Clean Air Agencies
(NACAA) and Torrie Smith Associates. This software calculates emissions resulting from energy
consumption, vehicle miles traveled, and waste generation. The CACP2009 software calculates
emissions using specific factors (or coefficients) according to the type of fuel used.
CACP2009 aggregates and reports the three main GHG emissions (CO2, CH4, and N2O) and
converts them to equivalent carbon dioxide units, or CO2e. Equalizing the three main GHG
emissions as CO2e allows for the consideration of different GHGs in comparable terms. For
example, methane (CH4) is 21 times more powerful than carbon dioxide on a per weight basis in
12 The CACP2009 software 2009 was developed by the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program
Administrators and the Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials (SAPPA/ALAPCO), the
International Council for Local Environmental Issues (ICLEI), and Torrie Smith Associates.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 24 City of Atascadero
its capacity to trap heat, so the CACP2009 software converts one metric ton of methane
emissions to 21 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents.13
The emissions coefficients and quantification method employed by the CACP2009 software are
consistent with national and international inventory standards established by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (1996 Revised IPCC Guidelines for the
Preparation of National Inventories) and the U.S. Voluntary GHG Reporting Guidelines (EIA
form1605).
13 The potency of a given gas in heating the atmosphere is defined as its Global Warming Potential, or
GWP. For more information on GWP see: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Working Group I, Chapter 2,
Section 2.10.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 25
3. Community GHG Inventory Results
The City of Atascadero contains primarily residential and commercial land uses. In the 2005
baseline year, there were approximately 25,940 people, 8,550 jobs, and 10,505 households in
the city.14 The following section provides an overview of the emissions caused by activities
within the jurisdictional boundary of the city and analyzes the emissions in terms of scope,
sector, source, and population.
3.1 COMMUNITY-WIDE EMISSIONS BY SCOPE
Although there are countless items that can be included in a
community-wide emissions inventory, as discussed in Chapter
2, this Inventory includes Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3
sources from the following sectors, consistent with the ICLEI
protocol:
Residential
Commercial / Industrial
Transportation
Waste
Wastewater
Off-Road Vehicles and Equipment Emissions.
Table 3-1 summarizes the scopes of each sector in this analysis.
14 Baseline population, household, and job data for the year 2005 was obtained from SLOCOG‟s Long
Range Socio-Economic Projections (Year 2030), prepared by Economics Research Associates (July
2006 Revision).
What are Scopes?
The key principles to
remember are that Scope 1
emissions are caused by
activities within the city and
emitted within the city (fuel
combustion), while Scope 2
emissions are caused by
activities within the city, but
most likely are emitted
outside of the city (electricity).
Scope 3 emissions are
indirect emissions, such as
waste decomposition.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 26 City of Atascadero
TABLE 3-1: COMMUNITY-WIDE GHG EMISSIONS SOURCES BY SCOPE
AND SECTOR
Sector Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3
Residential Natural Gas Electricity ---
Commercial/Industrial Natural Gas Electricity ---
Transportation Gasoline & Diesel --- ---
Off-Road Vehicles and
Equipment
Gasoline, Diesel &
Compressed Natural
Gas
Waste --- --- Methane from
Decomposition
Wastewater Methane from Water
Treatment Processes
Including all sectors and scopes, the community
emitted approximately 146,069 metric tons of
CO2e in 2005. As shown in Figure 3-1 and Table
3-2, the majority of community GHG emissions
were Scope 1 (70.9%), with Scope 2 (20.0%) and
Scope 3 (9.1%) constituting the remainder.
The largest portion of Scope 1 emissions came
from the transportation sector (refer to Table 3-2
and Figure 3-1). These emissions qualify as
Scope 1 because they involve the direct
combustion of fuel within the jurisdictional
boundary of the city. The second largest source of
Scope 1 emissions was residential natural gas
use. Residential uses also generated the largest
percentage of Scope 2 emissions. Emissions from
waste operations account for the whole of Scope 3
emissions.
FIGURE 3-1: COMMUNITY GHG
EMISSIONS BY SCOPE, 2005
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 27
TABLE 3-2: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
AND SCOPE, 2005 (METRIC TONS OF CO2E)
Sector Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 Total
Residential 24,778 15,912 40,690
Commercial/Industrial 7,030 13,241 20,271
Transportation 60,445 60,445
Off-Road 8,686 8,686
Waste 13,320 13,320
Wastewater 2,657 2,657
TOTAL 103,596 29,153 13,320 146,069
Percentage of Total
CO2e 70.9% 20.0% 9.1% 100.0%
3.2 ALL SCOPE EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
As noted above, the community emitted approximately 146,069 metric tons of CO2e in calendar
year 2005. In addition to analyzing the data by scope, it can also be aggregated by sector. As
depicted in Figure 3-2 and Table 3-3 below, the transportation sector was the largest emitter
(41.4%) in 2005. Emissions from the residential sector were the next largest contributor
(27.9%), while the commercial and industrial sectors accounted for a combined 13.9% of the
total. Emissions from solid waste comprised 9.1% of the total, and emissions from other sources
such as agricultural equipment comprised 5.9% of the total.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 28 City of Atascadero
FIGURE 3-2: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
TABLE 3-3: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
2005
Community
Emissions
by Sector
Residential Commercial/
Industrial Transportation
Off-
Road Waste Waste
water TOTAL
CO2e
(metric tons) 40,690 20,271 60,445 8,686 13,320 2,657 146,069
Percentage of
Total CO2e 27.9% 13.9% 41.4% 5.9% 9.1% 1.8% 100.0%
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 29
3.3 TRANSPORTATION
Transportation accounted for 41.4% of
the City‟s emissions in 2005. Emissions
from traffic resulted in 60,445 metric tons
of CO2e. Of the total emissions in the
transportation sector, an estimated 93.2%
was due to gasoline consumption, with
the remaining 6.8% coming from diesel
use (see Figure 3-3 and Table 3-4).
TABLE 3-4: TRANSPORTATION GHG EMISSIONS BY FUEL SOURCE
Transportation Fuel
Emissions Sources 2005 Gasoline Diesel TOTAL
CO2e (metric tons) 56,335 4,110 60,445
Percentage of Total CO2e 93.2% 6.8% 100%
Using origin-destination analysis and the SLOCOG Regional Travel Demand Model, three types
of vehicle trips were tracked in the city:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning
in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in
the city
Fehr & Peers calculated VMT for each of the three types of vehicle trips using the
recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for
Senate Bill 375 target setting. VMT from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 (see above) were counted
FIGURE 3-3: COMMUNITY GHG
EMISSIONS BY FUEL SOURCE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 30 City of Atascadero
100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated VMT.15 The VMT results are
summarized in Appendix A and C. Annual VMT was then analyzed to determine GHG
emissions from vehicle travel using the EMFAC2011 software developed by the California Air
Resources Board. EMFAC2011 uses emissions rates for different types of vehicles in
conjunction with travel activity statistics to calculate vehicle based emissions in metric tons per
day. For a detailed description of the methodology used to estimate transportation-related
emissions, please see Appendix C.
Emissions that resulted from the air and rail travel of city residents were not included in the
transportation sector analysis. As science and data collection methodology develop it is likely
that the GHG emissions from air, rail and boat travel could be estimated as a Scope 3 items.
Please see Appendix C for more detail on methods and emissions factors used in calculating
emissions from the transportation sector.
3.4 OFF-ROAD VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT
Gasoline, diesel, and compressed natural gas fuel are used to power off-road equipment in the
City of Atascadero. Off-road equipment incorporated in this inventory includes agriculture, lawn
and garden, construction and mining, light commercial equipment, and industrial equipment.
Off-road vehicles and equipment accounted for 5.9% of the City‟s emissions in 2005. The
California Air Resources Board‟s OFFROAD 2007 software provides emissions data for off-road
equipment by county. The countywide data was attributed to city based on the indicators
presented in Table 3-5.
TABLE 3-5: COUNTY-WIDE EQUIPMENT TYPE INDICATORS
Equipment Type Allocation Indicator
Agricultural Equipment Acres of cropland
Construction and Mining Equipment Construction and mining jobs
Industrial Equipment Industrial jobs
Lawn and Garden Equipment Households
Light Commercial Equipment Service and commercial jobs
15 Since external-external VMT is the result of vehicle trips that pass through the city without
originating or ending in the city, they are excluded from the inventory as the City is unable to
directly impact these VMT.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 31
Approximately 80.0% of off-road equipment emissions in 2005 came from construction and
mining equipment, while 8.7% were the result of light and commercial equipment. The
remaining off-road equipment activities included in this Inventory include lawn and garden
equipment, agricultural equipment, and industrial equipment, making up the remaining 11.3% of
emissions collectively (see Table 3-6 and Figure 3-4). Total emissions from off-road equipment
for 2005 are estimated to be approximately 8,686 MT CO2e. Of the total emissions in the off-
road sector, an estimated 84.1% was due to diesel consumption, with the remaining 15.9%
coming from gasoline and compressed natural gas use (see Table 3-7 and Figure 3-5).
TABLE 3-6: OFF-ROAD GHG EMISSIONS BY EQUIPMENT TYPE
Equipment
Type
Emissions
Sources
2005
Agricultural
Equipment
Construction
Equipment
Industrial
Equipment
Lawn and
Garden
Equipment
Light and
Commercial
Equipment
TOTAL
CO2e (metric
tons) 148 6,950 108 722 758 8,686
Percentage
of Total CO2e 1.7% 80.0% 1.3% 8.3% 8.7% 100%
FIGURE 3-4: OFF-ROAD GHG
EMISSIONS BY EQUIPMENT TYPE
FIGURE 3-5: OFF-ROAD GHG
EMISSIONS BY FUEL TYPE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 32 City of Atascadero
TABLE 3-7: OFF-ROAD GHG EMISSIONS BY FUEL TYPE
Off-Road Fuel
Emissions Sources
2005
Gasoline Diesel
Compressed
Natural Gas TOTAL
CO2e (metric tons) 1,095 7,303 288 8,686
Percentage of Total CO2e 12.6% 84.1% 3.3% 100%
3.5 THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT (RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL)
With all scopes aggregated, 41.8% of total community-wide emissions in the year 2005 came
from the “built environment.” The built environment is comprised of the residential, commercial,
and industrial natural gas and electricity consumption. This analysis does not include emissions
from other types of energy such as propane, solar, and wind due to lack of reliable sales,
construction, or consumption data. The commercial and industrial sectors are combined in this
Inventory due to the mandatory aggregating of commercial and industrial data by PG&E
previously referenced.
In 2005, emissions from the built environment were split roughly 66.7-33.3% between the
residential sector and the commercial/industrial sector (see Figure 3-6). All of the emissions
calculated from the built environment were the result of local natural gas consumption (Scope 1)
and local consumption of electricity generated outside of the city (Scope 2). Overall, natural gas
consumption (52.2%) was slightly higher than electricity consumption (47.8%) as the cause of
emissions from the built environment in 2005 as shown in Figure 3-7.
FIGURE 3-6: BUILT ENVIRONMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
FIGURE 3-7: BUILT ENVIRONMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 33
Approximately 60.9% of emissions in the residential sector resulted from combustion of natural
gas for heating and cooking (see Figure 3-8 and Table 3-8), while 34.7% of emissions in the
commercial/industrial sector came from natural gas usage (see Figure 3-9 and Table 3-9).
TABLE 3-8: RESIDENTIAL GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
Residential Emission
Sources 2005 Electricity Natural Gas TOTAL
CO2e (metric tons) 15,912 24,778 40,690
Percentage of Total CO2e 39.1% 60.9% 100%
Energy Use (MMBtu) 242,839 465,783 708,622
FIGURE 3-8: RESIDENTIAL GHG
EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
FIGURE 3-9:
COMMERICAL/INDUSTRIAL GHG
EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 34 City of Atascadero
TABLE 3-9: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL GHG EMISSIONS SOURCES
Commercial / Industrial
Emission Sources 2005 Electricity Natural Gas TOTAL
CO2e (metric tons) 13,241 7,030 20,271
Percentage of Total CO2e 65.3% 34.7% 100%
Energy Use (MMBtu) 202,065 132,159 334,224
3.6 SOLID WASTE
Solid waste disposed of at managed landfills was responsible for 9.1% of total emissions for the
community. The CACP2009 software calculates methane generation from waste sent to landfill
in 2005, and accounts for the reported methane recovery factors among the two utilized landfills
(Cold Canyon and Chicago Grade), which have a 60% weighted average. The Chicago Grade
Landfill accepted approximately 99% of the community‟s solid waste, while less than 1% went to
Cold Canyon. The methane recovery factors of the landfills are well documented by the San
Luis Obispo County APCD based on the system operations at that time. For more information,
please see detailed methodology in Appendix C.
Waste emissions are considered Scope 3 emissions because they are not generated in the
base year, but will result from the decomposition of waste generated in 2005 over the full 100-
year+ cycle of its decomposition. In 2005, the community sent approximately 31,122.52 tons of
waste to landfill. The 2004 California Statewide Waste Characterization Study provides standard
waste composition for the State of California. Identifying the different types of waste in the
general mix is necessary because during decomposition various materials generate methane
within the anaerobic environment of landfills at differing rates. Carbonaceous materials such as
paper and wood would actually sequester the methane released in managed landfills, thereby
offsetting some or all of the emissions from food and plant waste. However, GHG sequestration
at the landfills has been set to zero, based on guidance in the LGOP version 1.1, which
recommends eliminating the effect of landfill sequestration for both government operations
inventories and community inventories, to be consistent with the principle that local government
operations and community inventories should not account for emissions sinks. Figure 3-10 and
Table 3-10 show the estimated percentage of emissions coming from the various types of
organic, methanogenic waste.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 35
FIGURE 3-10: WASTE GHG EMISSIONS BY TYPE
TABLE 3-10: WASTE GHG EMISSIONS BY TYPE
Waste Emissions
Sources 2005
Paper
Products
Food
Waste
Plant
Debris
Wood /
Textiles
All Other
Waste TOTAL
CO2e (metric tons) 5,071 1,989 533 1,490 4,237 13,320
Percentage of Total
CO2e 38.1% 14.9% 4.0% 11.2% 31.8% 100%
Energy Use
(MMBtu) n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
3.7 WASTEWATER
The wastewater treatment plant consists of four aerated lagoons and provides a cost effective
way to treat water. However, aside from the aeration of these lagoons, the City does not use
additional processes to treat the influent. As organic matter is broken down through the process
of lagoons, methane is released into the atmosphere. Methane emissions released during
wastewater treatment processes were responsible for 1.8% of total emissions for the
community. Natural gas and electricity emissions associated with wastewater treatment facilities
operations are accounted for within the commercial/industrial sector.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 36 City of Atascadero
3.7 COMMUNITY EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
In addition to viewing emissions by sector and by scope, policy and programs development can
benefit from an analysis of emissions according to their raw fuel or waste source. Figure 3-11
and Table 3-11 below demonstrates that 39.3% of all community emissions come from the
consumption of gasoline on local roads and highways. Natural gas (22.0%) and electricity
(20.0%) consumption are the next most significant figures, with the remainder coming from
diesel, methane from wastewater treatment processes, and various waste products.
FIGURE 3-11: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE, 2005
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 37
TABLE 3-11: COMMUNITY GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE, 2005
Community GHG
Emissions 2005 by Source CO2e (metric tons) CO2e (percent of total)
Electricity 29,153 20.0%
Natural Gas 32,096 22.0%
Gasoline 57,430 39.3%
Diesel 11,413 7.8%
Methane from Wastewater
Treatment Processes 2,657 1.8%
Landfilled Solid Waste 13,320 9.1%
TOTAL 146,069 100.0%
3.8 PER CAPITA EMISSIONS
Per capita emissions can be a useful metric for measuring progress in reducing GHGs and for
comparing one community‟s emissions with neighboring cities and against regional and national
averages. Currently it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons between local inventories
because of variations in the scope of inventories conducted. For instance, this Inventory takes in
to account emissions from agricultural off-road vehicles, which many inventories like the
Sonoma County GHG Inventory do not. Only when ICLEI, the California Air Resources Board,
and other organizations adopt universal reporting standards will local inventories be prepared in
a consistent manner and therefore be comparable.
Simply dividing total community GHG emissions (146,069 metric tons of CO2e) by city
population in 2005 (27,596) yields a result of 5.30 metric tons CO2e per capita.16 It is important
to understand that this number is not the same as the carbon footprint of the average individual
living in the City of Atascadero, which reflects a wider scope of emissions. It is also important to
note that the per capita emissions number for the city is not directly comparable to every per
capita number produced by other emissions studies because of differences in emission
inventory methods.
16 Baseline population data for the year 2005 was obtained from SLOCOG‟s Long Range Socio-
Economic Projections (Year 2030), prepared by Economics Research Associates (July 2006 Revision).
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 38 City of Atascadero
4. City Government Operations GHG Emissions Inventory
Results
In 2005, the City of Atascadero government employed 128 people and was comprised of seven
departments: City Manager, Administrative Services, Police and Fire Services, Community
Development, Community Services, and Public Works. This chapter reviews the results of the
City government operations inventory by sector, including employee commuting emissions.
4.1 CITY GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS INVENTORY RESULTS
City government operations and facilities produced approximately 4,130 metric tons of GHG
emissions in 2005. As displayed in Figure 4-1, government operations emissions would equate
to approximately 2.7% of total community-wide emissions. City government emissions result
from waste, energy consumption from wastewater facilities, buildings, streetlights and other
facilities, fuel consumption by the vehicle and transit fleet and employee commutes, wastewater
treatment processes, and miscellaneous equipment. The wastewater facilities and processes
were the largest contributor to the City‟s emissions (70.8%) with 2,923 metric tons of carbon
dioxide equivalent. The vehicle fleet (9.7%) was the second largest contributor to the City‟s
emissions with 4,023 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. (Refer to Figure 4-2 and Table
4-1 below)
FIGURE 4-2: CITY
GOVERNMENT GHG EMISSIONS
BY SECTOR, 2005
FIGURE 4-1: CITY GOVERNMENT
OPERATIONS CONTRIBUTION TO
COMMUNITY-WIDE GHG EMISSIONS
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 39
As mentioned in the Introduction, these emissions are a subset of the community emissions
inventory discussed in Chapter 3. The City‟s government operations emissions are separately
analyzed in this section in a manner that is similar to how an industry or business would
produce a facility-scale GHG audit. The LGOP, version 1.1 developed by the California Air
Resources Board, The Climate Registry, the California Climate Action Registry, and ICLEI
guides the methodology for estimating emissions from local government operations.
TABLE 4-1: CITY GOVERNMENT GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR, 2005
2005
Emissions
by Sector
Buildings
&
Facilities
Vehicle
Fleet
Transit
Fleet
Employee
Commute
Street
Lights &
Traffic
Signals
Water
Delivery
Wastewater
Facilities
Solid
Waste TOTAL
CO2e
(metric tons) 316 402 214 185 40 1 2,923 49 4,130
Percentage of
CO2e 7.6% 9.7% 5.2% 4.5% 1.0% <0.0% 70.8% 1.2%
100.0
%
4.2 BUILDING SECTOR
The building sector includes GHG emissions from
energy consumption in facilities owned and
operated by a municipality but does not included
facilities located at the wastewater treatment
plant. Electricity consumption in facilities located
at the wastewater treatment plant is included in
the Wastewater Facilities Sector. The facilities
included in this analysis include City Hall, fire and
police Stations, recreation facilities, Charles
Paddock Zoo, parks, and numerous other
facilities. As depicted in Figure 4-3 and Table 4-
2, the majority of emissions resulted from
electricity consumption (78.5%).
FIGURE 4-3: BUILDING GHG
EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 40 City of Atascadero
It should be noted that the historic Administration Building has been unoccupied since 2004. In
2004, an earthquake damaged the historic building and forced the City to move its government
offices to another building in downtown. Subsequently, this Inventory does not include energy
consumption in the historic Administration Building. Estimated emissions for City Hall are from a
more energy efficient building where government offices were located in 2005.
The City has been working with the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) to
obtain the necessary funding to restore the building to pre-earthquake condition. Once the
building has been repaired to pre-earthquake condition, the City plans to upgrade the building.
These upgrades will likely increase the efficiency of the Administration Building; however,
baseline emissions were not calculated for this building as part of this inventory and; therefore,
the amount of increase in efficiency is unknown. The City plans to move its government offices
back to the Administration building within the next couple of years. The relocation is likely to
affect the business-as-usual forecast.
TABLE 4-2: BUILDING SECTOR GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
2005 City Government
Operations Emissions by Sector Electricity Natural Gas Total
CO2e (metric tons) 248 68 316
Percentage of Total CO2e 78.5% 21.5% 100%
Energy Use (MMBtu) 3,780 1,283 5,063
These emissions and associated consumption data will be useful in designating priority facilities
for energy efficiency retrofits and conservation outreach.
4.3 VEHICLE AND TRANSIT FLEET
City-owned and -operated vehicles emitted approximately 616 metric tons of CO2e, or 15.0% of
total City government emissions. This sector includes gasoline and diesel consumption from all
departments in the City operating vehicles, including the Fire and Police Departments,
Community Services, Public Works, and Community Development. This sector also includes the
transit fleet operated by the City. This estimate is based on 2005 fuel billing record data
provided by the Finance Department for most departments. The Police Department provided
their own fuel consumption data as their records are were more complete than the fuel billing
records.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 41
The majority of fuel used by the City –
vehicle and transit fleets combined – is
gasoline (63%), with the remainder diesel
(37%) (see Figure 4-4). When compared
to the total emissions per fuel type, diesel
emissions actually produce less CO2e for
the vehicle types used by the City.
However, there are other, non-CO2e
emissions from diesel-like particulate
matter that make such a comparison
misleading to the reader. The trend for
diesel to emit less CO2e in this case does
not necessarily mean that the City should
aim to convert more vehicles to
conventional diesel. There are multiple
clean and alternative fuel options available, including biodiesel conversion, electric vehicles,
hybrid vehicles, smaller vehicles, and shared vehicles.
4.4 EMPLOYEE COMMUTE
This sector estimates GHG emissions from City employees traveling to and from work in 2005.
The estimate is based on a June 2009 online survey conducted by the City, a blank version of
which is included as Appendix F. Approximately 69 employees responded to the survey with
usable information, meaning that all essential questions were answered. This results in
approximately a 58% response rate, the results of which were applied to the City employment
total for 2005.
The online survey found that most City employees travel to and from work by car. Employees
were asked how many days of the week they travel by each commute mode, including driving
alone (which includes motorcycles), carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling, walking,
telecommuting, and other. The results show that employees get to and from 77.4% of their
workdays by personal vehicle. The second most popular mode of transportation was bicycling
(10.7%), followed by walking and other means such as skateboarding with a combined 7.2% of
the total.
FIGURE 4-4: VEHICLE FLEET FUEL
CONSUMPTION PER YEAR BY TYPE
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 42 City of Atascadero
TABLE 4-3: DAYS OF CITY EMPLOYEE TRAVEL BY COMMUTE MODE
Mode of Travel Days traveled by
Commute mode % of Total
Drive Alone 12,792 77.4%
Carpool 468 2.8%
Vanpool 52 0.3%
Public transit 260 1.6%
Bicycle 1,768 10.7%
Walk 520 3.1%
Other 676 4.1%
Total 16,536 100%
These figures for commute mode were combined with each respondent‟s travel distance to
work, car model (if any), and fuel type (if any). The results show VMT annually per vehicle type
and fuel type (see Table 4-4). These VMT numbers were then adjusted for the total employee
population in 2005 and entered into the CACP2009 software to obtain CO2e.
Driving patterns were assumed to be constant for the purposes of this study; therefore, the 2009
sample was applied directly to the 2005 employee population. Only one modification to the
sample data was made in order to account for the large increase in hybrid car sales between
2005 and 2009. The proportion of hybrid to traditional vehicles was roughly two-thirds less in
2005 than in 2009, according to State sales data.17
The 2009 survey results, adjusted for 2005 employee totals, resulted in an estimate of 185
metric tons CO2e in 2005 from commuter travel to and from work. This figure comprises 4.5% of
total GHG emissions released from City government operations. The calculation does not
include employee business travel or travel during lunchtime hours.
17 www.hybridcars.com
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 43
TABLE 4-4: EMPLOYEE COMMUTE VMT BY VEHICLE AND FUEL TYPE
Vehicle Group 2009 Survey results Adjusted for 2005
Annual VMT Fuel Type Annual VMT Fuel Type
Light Truck/SUV/Pickup 56,197.86 Gasoline 120,997.07 Gasoline
313.08 Diesel 544.76 Diesel
Large Truck 22,620.03 Gasoline 39,358.85 Gasoline
16,843.70 Diesel 29,308.04 Diesel
Passenger Vehicle 138,885.77 Gasoline 183,403.96 Gasoline
Motorcycle 208.72 Gasoline 363.17 Gasoline
Total 235,069.16 373,975.86
Employee business travel is usually included in a City government GHG Inventory per protocol;
however, we could not include it in this baseline analysis due to data limitations. The City
maintains financial records of when employees travel by air or vehicle to conferences and other
events; however, it does not keep records of business travel destinations. As such, this
Inventory could not accurately account for GHG emissions from employee business travel. A
minor adjustment to City recordkeeping would allow the data to be included in the next City
government operations GHG inventory.
4.5 STREETLIGHTS AND TRAFFIC SIGNALS
The electricity consumed by City streetlights and traffic signals in calendar year 2005 resulted in
approximately 40 metric tons of CO2e, or approximately 1.0% of total City government
emissions. This Inventory accounts for approximately 289 streetlights and 9 traffic signals.
4.6 WATER AND WASTEWATER
The City of Atascadero does not provide potable water to its residents. The Atascadero Mutual
Water Company provides residents with drinking water and; therefore, the City does not have
regulatory control over the distribution of potable water within the City. Emissions associated
with the pumping and distribution of potable water are included in the commercial/industrial
portion of the energy sector of the community-wide section of the Inventory.
The City is responsible for the collection, treatment, and disposal of wastewater. Approximately
half (50%) of the community is served by sewer and the other 50 percent on septic. Due to a
lack of methodology for calculating emissions resulting from septic systems, these emissions
are not included in the Inventory. In 2005, electricity consumption from wastewater facilities in
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 44 City of Atascadero
the City emitted approximately 266 metric tons of CO2e, or 9.0% of total emissions related to
wastewater (see Figure 4-5). This category includes energy use at the Wastewater Treatment
Plant and the numerous lift stations and pumps necessary to convey effluent to the treatment
plant. Point-source emissions that arise from the wastewater treatment system due to
fermentation of discarded biomass in the lagoons resulted in an additional 2,657 metric tons of
CO2e, increasing the percentage of total emissions attributed to wastewater facilities to 70.8% of
government operations emissions.
FIGURE 4-5: GHG EMISSIONS FROM
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
The wastewater treatment plant consists of four aerated lagoons and provides a cost effective
way to treat wastewater. However, aside from the aeration of these lagoons, the City does not
use additional processes to treat the influent. As organic matter is broken down through the
process of lagoons, methane is released into the atmosphere. While this Inventory identifies
methane from the wastewater treatment plant as the major contributor to the government
operations emissions, emissions from other sectors and sources within government operations
should not be overlooked entirely. This Inventory is meant to identify the sources of emissions
from the City‟s operations. It does not recommend or mandate improvements or upgrades to the
wastewater treatment plant. Upgrading the wastewater treatment plant to reduce GHG
emissions would likely require a complete redesign of the wastewater treatment plant and be
very costly. Emissions associated with government operations are broken down further in
Section 4.9.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 45
4.7 SOLID WASTE
Similar to the Community-Wide analysis, waste produced by City facilities was calculated using
the methane commitment method. The CACP2009 calculates the methane expected to be
released from this landfilled waste over the course of its lifetime. Unlike other sectors analyzed,
the emissions from waste disposed of in 2005 will occur over multiple years as the waste breaks
down over time. Atascadero Waste Alternatives estimates that in 2005, City facilities sent a total
of 168.65 tons of waste to landfill, producing 49 metric tons of CO2e, or 1.2% of total emissions.
This category includes only those emissions generated by waste produced at City facilities and
does not include the total emissions released from the landfill.
4.8 CITY EMISSIONS BY SOURCE
It can also be helpful to view overall City government emissions by source. As shown in Table
4.5 and Figure 4.6, the majority of emissions are from methane produced at the wastewater
treatment plant during the treatment of wastewater (66.5%). Gasoline (12.9%) consumption by
the vehicle and transit fleets is the second largest source of emissions. Electricity consumption
in City-owned buildings, streetlights, and water and wastewater facilities account for 12.6% of
government operations emissions and natural gas, miscellaneous equipment, diesel and solid
waste contributed in decreasing amounts to the remaining 8.0% of the overall City GHG
emissions.
Since the majority of GHG emissions are associated with the wastewater treatment plant and
water treatment processes and strategies to reduce emissions at the treatment plant would
require an expensive redesign of the plant, Table 4.5 also breaks down emissions by source
with emissions from the wastewater treatment plant and water treatment processes excluded.
Viewing emissions without the wastewater treatment plant (see Figure 4.7) will aid the City in
identifying other sources of emissions within their operations that are equally as important in
reducing the City‟s overall GHG emissions.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 46 City of Atascadero
TABLE 4-5: CITY GOVERNMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE, 2005
City Emissions
2005
by Source
All Sectors
Emissions from the
Wastewater Treatment Plant
Processes Removed
CO2e (metric
tons)
CO2e (percent
of total)
CO2e (metric
tons)
CO2e (percent
of total)
Electricity 555 13.4% 555 37.7%
Natural Gas 68 1.6% 68 4.6%
Gasoline 567 13.7% 567 38.5%
Diesel 234 5.7% 234 15.9%
Solid Waste
Decomposition
(Methane)
49 1.2% 49 3.3%
Wastewater
Treatment Processes
(Methane)
2,657 64.3% n/a n/a
TOTAL 4,130 100% 1,473 100%
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 47
FIGURE 4-6: CITY GOVERNMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE, 2005
FIGURE 4-7: CITY GOVERNMENT
GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR WITH WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT REMOVED
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 48 City of Atascadero
5. Forecast
The emissions forecast for the City of Atascadero represents a business-as-usual prediction of
how community-wide GHG levels will change over time if consumption trends and behavior
continue as they did in 2005. These predictions are based on the community inventory results
included in this report and statistics on job and population growth from the SLOCOG 2040
Population, Housing & Employment Forecast (August 2011). The analysis shows that if
behavior and consumption trends continue as business-as-usual, emissions will reach 175,210
metric tons of CO2e by 2020, or a 20.0% increase over 2005 baseline levels (see Figure 5-1).
By 2025 emissions will reach 187,184 metric tons of CO2e, or a 28.1% increase over 2005
baseline levels.
FIGURE 5-1: 2020 AND 2025 BUSINESS-AS-USUAL PROJECTED
GROWTH IN COMMUNITY-WIDE GHG EMISSIONS
The forecast does not quantify emissions reductions from State or federal activities including AB
32, the renewable portfolio standard, and SB 375. Additionally, it does not take into account
reduction activities already underway or completed since 2005, the results of which likely put the
community‟s emissions on a track well below the business-as-usual linear projection.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 49
Forecasts were performed by applying job and population growth rates to 2005 community-wide
GHG emissions levels. Baseline data and estimated growth were obtained from the San Luis
Obispo Council of Governments report, "San Luis Obispo County 2040 Population, Housing &
Employment Forecast" prepared by AECOM in August 2011. The “mid-range” cases for
population and job growth were used in this forecast estimation. Baseline data from this report is
consistent with the San Luis Obispo County APCD‟s GHG thresholds.
City government operations emissions are not separately analyzed as part of this forecast due
to a lack of reasonable growth indicators for the City government sector. However, a significant
increase in emissions is not expected for existing facilities and operations in the City
government operations sector.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
Page 50 City of Atascadero
6. Conclusion and Next Steps
The City of Atascadero has made a formal commitment to reduce its GHG emissions. This
report lays the groundwork for those efforts by estimating baseline emission levels against
which future progress can be demonstrated.
This analysis found that the community was responsible for emitting 146,069 metric tons of
CO2e in the base year 2005, with the transportation sector contributing the most (41%) to this
total. As a component of the community-wide analysis, City government operations produced
4,130 metric tons of CO2e, or 2.7% of the total. In addition to establishing the baseline for
tracking progress over time, this report serves to identify the major sources of city emissions,
and therefore the greatest opportunities for emission reductions. In this regard, the emissions
inventory will inform the focus of the City‟s Climate Action Plan. If no action is taken, this report
found that business-as-usual (worst case scenario) emissions will likely rise by 20.0% by 2020
and 28.1% by 2025.
It is important to note that in order to remain consistent with GHG reduction methodology, all
future quantifications of reduction activities must be subtracted from this „business-as-usual‟
line. Not doing so would be assuming that emissions remain at constant 2005 levels while
reduction activities are underway. In reality, the City‟s climate action efforts will be working
against a rising emissions level due to job, population, and household growth. Figure 6-1 below
shows the business-as-usual emissions forecast in relation to 2005 baseline levels and the 15%
reduction below 2005 levels recommended by the State Attorney General and Air Resources
Board. 18
The difference between the business-as-usual forecast and the reduction targets is actually
29.1% in 2020.
As the City moves forward to the next milestones in the process, including designation of
emission reduction targets and development of a Climate Action Plan, the City should identify
and quantify the emission reduction benefits of projects that have already been implemented
since 2005, as well as the emissions reduction benefits of existing General Plan policies. The
benefits of existing strategies can be tallied against the baseline established in this report to
determine the appropriate set of strategies that will deliver the City to its chosen emissions
reduction goal.
18 The AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan Document prepared by the Air Resources Board calls for
reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by cutting approximately 30 percent from business-as-usual
emission levels projected for 2020, or about 15 percent from today‟s levels.
2005 BASELINE GREENHOUSE GAS
EMISSIONS INVENTORY UPDATE
City of Atascadero Page 51
FIGURE 6-1: GHG FORECAST IN RELATION TO REDUCTION TARGET
Business-as-
usual forecast
175,210 metric
tons CO2e by
2020; 187,184
metric tons
CO2e by 2025
2005 baseline
levels =
146,069 metric
tons CO2e
15% below 2005
baseline levels =
124,159 metric
tons CO2e by
2020
Actual
Reduction
= 51,051
metric
tons
(29.1%) by
2020
APPENDIX A:
CACP DETAILED REPORT FOR COMMUNITY-
WIDE EMISSIONS, 2005
Detailed Report
Page 17/30/2012
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO 2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
Residential
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 SoCal Gas Company Residential Natural Gas
Natural Gas 24,778 17.3 465,78324,714 47 2,329
24,778 17.3 465,783Subtotal 1 SoCal Gas Company Residential Natural Gas24,714 47 2,329
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246, Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
provided by Southern California Gas Co for San Luis Obispo area.
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
provided by Southern California Gas Co for San Luis Obispo area.
2 PG&E Residential Electricity
Electricity 15,912 11.1 242,83915,782 355 968
15,912 11.1 242,839Subtotal 2 PG&E Residential Electricity 15,782 355 968
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
California.
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
California.
40,690 708,62228.4Subtotal Residential 40,496 402 3,297
Commercial
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 SoCal Gas Company Commercial Natural Gas
Natural Gas 7,030 4.9 132,1597,012 13 661
7,030 4.9 132,159Subtotal 1 SoCal Gas Company Commercial Natural Gas7,012 13 661
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246, Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
provided by Southern California Gas Co for San Luis Obispo area.
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
provided by Southern California Gas Co for San Luis Obispo area.
Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs, Southern California Gas Co. (213) 244-3246,
pmorais@semprautilities.com <mailto:pmorais@semprautilities.com>, May 2012.
CEC Emission Factor for Natural Gas - RCI Average Set from Local Government Operations Protocol version 1.1 (LGOP v1.1). Fuel CO2 set
provided by Southern California Gas Co for San Luis Obispo area.
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 27/30/2012
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO 2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
2 PG&E Commercial + Industrial Electricity
Electricity 13,241 9.2 202,06513,132 295 806
13,241 9.2 202,065Subtotal 2 PG&E Commercial + Industrial Electricity13,132 295 806
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
California.
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
California.
Electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com <mailto:jillian.rich@pge.com> and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com
<mailto:ghgdatarequests@pge.com>, PG&E.
The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as update
on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry (CCAR)6
(2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). Criteria air pollutant emission factors for electricity were obtained from the LGOP v1.1 for
California.
20,271 334,22314.1Subtotal Commercial 20,144 309 1,466
Waste
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
3 Community Solid Waste - Chicago Grade Disposal Method - Managed Landfill
Paper Products 5,067 3.500241,287
Food Waste 1,987 1.40094,629
Plant Debris 533 0.40025,393
Wood or Textiles 1,489 1.00070,890
All Other Waste 4,234 3.000201,626
13,310 9.3Subtotal 3 Community Solid Waste - Chicago Grade0 0 633,824
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste 1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Notes:
1. Waste Type data not collected by landfill. State average waste characterization data is used for residential, commercial, and self haul waste.
1. Total waste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Notes:
1. Waste Type data not collected by landfill. State average waste characterization data is used for residential, commercial, and self haul waste.
2. Emissions Factors from LGOP v1.1
3 Community Solid Waste - Cold Canyon Disposal Method - Managed Landfill
Paper Products 4 0.000199
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 37/30/2012
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO 2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
Food Waste 2 0.00078
Plant Debris 0 0.00021
Wood or Textiles 1 0.00059
All Other Waste 3 0.000167
11 0.0Subtotal 3 Community Solid Waste - Cold Canyon0 0 523
Source(s):Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Notes:
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Notes:
Source(s):
1. Total aste tonnage for the City in 2005 provided by the 2005 Disposal Quarterly Reports prepared by San Luis Obispo County Integrated Waste
Management Authority on 6/17/05, 9/27/05, 12/27/05 and 3/6/06, provided by Peter Cron, pcron@iwma.com.
2. Percentages of waste share by type for landfill tonnage provided by CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study.
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097
3. Chicago Grade landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Chicago Grade total gas generated = 157.47 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred =
94.48 mmcf/yr.
4. Cold Canyon landfill reports a methane recovery factor of 60%. Cold Canyon total gas generated = 700 mmcf/yr. Total gas transferred = 420
mmcf/yr.
Notes:
1. Waste Type data not collected by landfill. State average waste characterization data is used for residential, commercial, and self haul waste.
13,321 9.3Subtotal Waste 0 0 634,347
Other
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 - On-Road Transportation
Carbon Dioxide 60,445 42.160,445 0 0
60,445 42.1Subtotal 1 - On-Road Transportation 60,445 0 0
Sources:Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
•Using the recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for Senate Bill 375 target setting,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 were counted 100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
•Using the recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for Senate Bill 375 target setting,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 were counted 100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated
VMT.
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
•Using the recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for Senate Bill 375 target setting,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 were counted 100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated
VMT.
•Transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2011 software. EMFAC2011 provides carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide emissions according to the unique vehicle composition of each county in California. Of the total on-road
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
•Using the recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for Senate Bill 375 target setting,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 were counted 100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated
VMT.
•Transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2011 software. EMFAC2011 provides carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide emissions according to the unique vehicle composition of each county in California. Of the total on-road
transportation emissions 93.2% are the result of gasoline consumption and 6.8% are the result of diesel fuel consumption.
Sources:
•Average weekday vehicle miles traveled (VMT) were provided by Fehr & Peers, July 2012, using the San Luis Obispo Regional Travel
Demand model.
•Transportation-related GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) were calculated using California Air Resources
Board's Emissions Factor (EMFAC2011) software and converted to CO2e.
Notes:
•Using origin-destination analysis, three types of vehicle trips were tracked separately for AM and PM peak periods in the City:
1. Internal-Internal: Vehicle trips that remained inside the city
2. Internal-External and External-Internal: Vehicle trips that have an ending or a beginning in the city
3. External-External: Vehicle trips that pass through the city without originating or ending in the city
•Using the recommendation of the Regional Target Advisory Committee (RTAC), the body responsible for Senate Bill 375 target setting,
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from trips of type 1, 2, and 3 were counted 100%, 50%, and 0% respectively toward jurisdiction-generated
VMT.
•Transportation-related greenhouse gas emissions were calculated using the EMFAC2011 software. EMFAC2011 provides carbon dioxide,
methane, and nitrous oxide emissions according to the unique vehicle composition of each county in California. Of the total on-road
transportation emissions 93.2% are the result of gasoline consumption and 6.8% are the result of diesel fuel consumption.
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 47/30/2012
Community Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO 2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
1 - Off-Road and Agricultural Equipment
Carbon Dioxide 8,686 6.18,686 0 0
8,686 6.1Subtotal 1 - Off-Road and Agricultural Equipment8,686 0 0
Off-road vehicle and equipment emissions obtained from the California Air Resources Boards' OFFROAD2007 software. Emissions were calculated Off-road vehicle and equipment emissions obtained from the California Air Resources Boards' OFFROAD2007 software. Emissions were calculated
for construction equipment based on the city's share of countywide construction jobs, lawn & garden equipment based on the city's share of
countywide households, industrial equipment based on the city's share of countywide industrial sector jobs, light commercial equipment based on the
Off-road vehicle and equipment emissions obtained from the California Air Resources Boards' OFFROAD2007 software. Emissions were calculated
for construction equipment based on the city's share of countywide construction jobs, lawn & garden equipment based on the city's share of
countywide households, industrial equipment based on the city's share of countywide industrial sector jobs, light commercial equipment based on the
city's share of countywide commercial sector jobs, and agricultural equipment based on the city's share of countywide agricultural land. Household
Off-road vehicle and equipment emissions obtained from the California Air Resources Boards' OFFROAD2007 software. Emissions were calculated
for construction equipment based on the city's share of countywide construction jobs, lawn & garden equipment based on the city's share of
countywide households, industrial equipment based on the city's share of countywide industrial sector jobs, light commercial equipment based on the
city's share of countywide commercial sector jobs, and agricultural equipment based on the city's share of countywide agricultural land. Household
and job data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau and agricultural data obtained from County GIS files.
69,131 48.2Subtotal Other 69,131 0 0
Total 143,413 1,042,846100.0129,772 710 639,111
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
APPENDIX B:
CACP DETAILED REPORT FOR CITY
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS EMISSIONS,
2005
Detailed Report
Page 17/19/2012
Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy Cost
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO
($)
2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
Buildings and Facilities
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
All Buildings and Facilities
Electricity 248 16.8 3,780 0246615
Natural Gas 68 4.6 1,283 06806
316 21.5 5,063 0Subtotal All Buildings and Facilities 314 6 21
Revised Inventory Notes:Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). N2O and CH4 emissions factors from LGOP v1.1
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). N2O and CH4 emissions factors from LGOP v1.1
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). N2O and CH4 emissions factors from LGOP v1.1
Original Inventory Notes:
Electricity data recieved from PG&E (ghgdatarequests@pge.com). Natural gas data retrieved from The Gas Company billing statements. Billing
Revised Inventory Notes:
Updated natural gas data provided by Paulo Morais, Customer Programs Environmental Affairs (213) 244-3246, pmorais@semprautilities.com, May
2012.
Update electricity data provided by Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E, May 2012.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E CO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009). N2O and CH4 emissions factors from LGOP v1.1
Original Inventory Notes:
Electricity data recieved from PG&E (ghgdatarequests@pge.com). Natural gas data retrieved from The Gas Company billing statements. Billing
statements were provided by the Finance Department Richelle Rickard (805-470-3428).
316 5,063 021.5Subtotal Buildings and Facilities 314 6 21
Streetlights & Traffic Signals
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
All Streelights and Traffic Signals
Electricity 40 2.7 613 4354012
40 2.7 613 435Subtotal All Streelights and Traffic Signals 40 1 2
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Original Inventory Notes:
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Original Inventory Notes:
Data recieved from PG&E (ghgdatarequests@pge.com).
40 613 4352.7Subtotal Streetlights & Traffic Signals 40 1 2
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 27/19/2012
Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy Cost
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO
($)
2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
Water Delivery Facilities
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
Water Delivery Facilities
Electricity 0 0.0 2 0000
0 0.0 2 0Subtotal Water Delivery Facilities 0 0 0
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Original Inventory Notes:
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Original Inventory Notes:
Data recieved from PG&E (ghgdatarequests@pge.com).
0 2 00.0Subtotal Water Delivery Facilities 0 0 0
Wastewater Facilities
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
Wastewater Facilities
Electricity 266 18.1 4,059 0264616
Natural Gas 0 0.0 5 0000
266 18.1 4,064 0Subtotal Wastewater Facilities 264 6 16
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
2. Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morias at SoCalGas.
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
2. Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morias at SoCalGas.
Source: Jillian Rich, jillian.rich@pge.com and John Joseph, ghgdatarequests@pge.com, PG&E.
1. The "PG&E California" electricity coefficient set is based on the 2005 PG&E eCO2 emission factor of 0.489 lbs/kWh of delivered electricity as
update on June 27, 2011 and provided by PG&E. PG&E's third-party-verified GHG inventory submitted to the California Climate Action Registry
(CCAR)6 (2003-2008) or The Climate Registry (TCR) (2009).
2. Natural gas data provided by Paulo Morias at SoCalGas.
Original Inventory Notes:
Data recieved from PG&E (ghgdatarequests@pge.com). Service ID# 4949700205
266 4,064 018.1Subtotal Wastewater Facilities 264 6 16
Solid Waste Facilities
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
3 - All Facilities
Carbon Dioxide 49 3.3 0 04900
49 3.3 0 0Subtotal 3 - All Facilities 49 0 0
Data provided by Mike LaBarbera (805.466.3636) at Atascadero Waste Alternatives.
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 37/19/2012
Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy Cost
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO
($)
2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
49 0 03.3Subtotal Solid Waste Facilities 49 0 0
Vehicle Fleet
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 ComDev
Gasoline 14 1.0 207 4,2501411
14 1.0 207 4,250Subtotal 1 ComDev 14 1 1
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Community Development assigned gas cards to specific vehicles. This information was provided by Annette
Manier, Community Development Department, (805-470-3470). Light Trucks MY 1999 includes 2 - Ford Rangers. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 -
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Community Development assigned gas cards to specific vehicles. This information was provided by Annette
Manier, Community Development Department, (805-470-3470). Light Trucks MY 1999 includes 2 - Ford Rangers. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 -
Ford Explorer.
1 Fire Dept.
Diesel 60 4.1 829 14,5376000
Gasoline 12 0.8 172 2,2981211
72 4.9 1,001 16,835Subtotal 1 Fire Dept.72 1 1
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Fire Department assigned gas cards to specific vehicles; however, the fleet has changed since 2005 and it
was difficult to match present card information with specific vehicles in 2005. It was assumed all diesel consumption was by firetrucks and unleaded
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Fire Department assigned gas cards to specific vehicles; however, the fleet has changed since 2005 and it
was difficult to match present card information with specific vehicles in 2005. It was assumed all diesel consumption was by firetrucks and unleaded
gasoline by the remaining fleet vehicles. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the six vehicles. Gas card information was provided by
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Fire Department assigned gas cards to specific vehicles; however, the fleet has changed since 2005 and it
was difficult to match present card information with specific vehicles in 2005. It was assumed all diesel consumption was by firetrucks and unleaded
gasoline by the remaining fleet vehicles. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the six vehicles. Gas card information was provided by
Ellen Perkins, Fire Department, (805-470-3300). Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles (All MY) includes - Vehicle Numbers 501, 502, 503, 507, and 574. Light
Trucks MY 19987 to 1993 includes 2 - Chevy Blazers. Light Trucks MY 2001 includes 2 - Ford F250. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 - Chevy Tahoe
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Fire Department assigned gas cards to specific vehicles; however, the fleet has changed since 2005 and it
was difficult to match present card information with specific vehicles in 2005. It was assumed all diesel consumption was by firetrucks and unleaded
gasoline by the remaining fleet vehicles. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the six vehicles. Gas card information was provided by
Ellen Perkins, Fire Department, (805-470-3300). Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles (All MY) includes - Vehicle Numbers 501, 502, 503, 507, and 574. Light
Trucks MY 19987 to 1993 includes 2 - Chevy Blazers. Light Trucks MY 2001 includes 2 - Ford F250. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 - Chevy Tahoe
Fire Command Vehicle.
1 Parks
Gasoline 24 1.6 342 02332
24 1.6 342 0Subtotal 1 Parks 23 3 2
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1- 1980 Cushman Scooter, 1- 1986 Ford Ranger, 1- 1980 Chevy
Truck, 1- 1990 GMC Truck. Heavy Duty Vihicles MY 2002 includes 1- 2002 Dodge Truck 3/4 Ton dump bed.
1 Police Department
Diesel 1 0.1 11 0100
Gasoline 132 9.0 1,910 013076
133 9.0 1,922 0Subtotal 1 Police Department 131 7 6
All vehicle gas consumption data provided by Terry Buckley, Police Department (ext. 3258). The Police Department tracks vehicle fuel consumption. All vehicle gas consumption data provided by Terry Buckley, Police Department (ext. 3258). The Police Department tracks vehicle fuel consumption.
Police Department personnel use government credit cards in addition to assigned gas cards to purchase fuel. These purchases do not show up in the
gas card billing statements provided by the Finance Department. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the 23 vehicles. Passenger Cars
All vehicle gas consumption data provided by Terry Buckley, Police Department (ext. 3258). The Police Department tracks vehicle fuel consumption.
Police Department personnel use government credit cards in addition to assigned gas cards to purchase fuel. These purchases do not show up in the
gas card billing statements provided by the Finance Department. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the 23 vehicles. Passenger Cars
MY 2005 includes 3 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - BMW Motorcycle. Passenger Cars MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY
All vehicle gas consumption data provided by Terry Buckley, Police Department (ext. 3258). The Police Department tracks vehicle fuel consumption.
Police Department personnel use government credit cards in addition to assigned gas cards to purchase fuel. These purchases do not show up in the
gas card billing statements provided by the Finance Department. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the 23 vehicles. Passenger Cars
MY 2005 includes 3 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - BMW Motorcycle. Passenger Cars MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY
2003 includes 1 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - Dodge Intrepid. Passenger Cars MY 1999 includes 2 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - Ford Taurus.
Passenger Cars MY 2001 includes 3 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY 2000 includes 2 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY 1998
All vehicle gas consumption data provided by Terry Buckley, Police Department (ext. 3258). The Police Department tracks vehicle fuel consumption.
Police Department personnel use government credit cards in addition to assigned gas cards to purchase fuel. These purchases do not show up in the
gas card billing statements provided by the Finance Department. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the 23 vehicles. Passenger Cars
MY 2005 includes 3 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - BMW Motorcycle. Passenger Cars MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY
2003 includes 1 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - Dodge Intrepid. Passenger Cars MY 1999 includes 2 - Ford Crown Victoria and 1 - Ford Taurus.
Passenger Cars MY 2001 includes 3 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY 2000 includes 2 - Ford Crown Victoria. Passenger Cars MY 1998
includes 1 - Ford Taurus. Passenger Cars MY 1997 includes 2 - Dodge Intrepid. Passenger Cars MY 1995 includes 2 - Ford Crown Victoria.
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 47/19/2012
Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy Cost
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO
($)
2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
Passenger Cars MY 1984 to 1993 includes 1 - 1955 Chevy. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Expedition. Light Trucks MY 1987-1993 includes Passenger Cars MY 1984 to 1993 includes 1 - 1955 Chevy. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Expedition. Light Trucks MY 1987-1993 includes
1 - 1989 Jeep. Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles includes 1 - 1981 Chevy Bus.
Passenger Cars MY 1984 to 1993 includes 1 - 1955 Chevy. Light Trucks MY 2004 includes 1 - Ford Expedition. Light Trucks MY 1987-1993 includes
1 - 1989 Jeep. Diesel Heavy-Duty Vehicles includes 1 - 1981 Chevy Bus.
1 PW Building Maintenance
Gasoline 7 0.4 94 1,827610
7 0.4 94 1,827Subtotal 1 PW Building Maintenance 6 1 0
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the three vehicles. Light Trucks MY 2002 includes 1 - Ford
F150. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 - Chevrolet (C-11).
1 PW Operations
Gasoline 1 0.1 11 319100
1 0.1 11 319Subtotal 1 PW Operations 1 0 0
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Light Trucks MY 2005 includes 1 - Ford Explorer.
1 PW Streets
Gasoline 6 0.4 88 1,922601
6 0.4 88 1,922Subtotal 1 PW Streets 6 0 1
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline is evenly distributed between the nine vehicles within the fleet. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY
1985 to 1986 includes 1 - 1980 3/4 Ton Chevy Utility Truck, 1 - 1981 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, 1 - 1982 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, and 1 - 1984 1 Ton
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline is evenly distributed between the nine vehicles within the fleet. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY
1985 to 1986 includes 1 - 1980 3/4 Ton Chevy Utility Truck, 1 - 1981 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, 1 - 1982 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, and 1 - 1984 1 Ton
Chevy Service Truck. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 1990 to 1995 includes 1 - 1990 GMC 1 Ton Service Truck. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 -
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline is evenly distributed between the nine vehicles within the fleet. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY
1985 to 1986 includes 1 - 1980 3/4 Ton Chevy Utility Truck, 1 - 1981 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, 1 - 1982 5 YD Ford Dump Truck, and 1 - 1984 1 Ton
Chevy Service Truck. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 1990 to 1995 includes 1 - 1990 GMC 1 Ton Service Truck. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 -
1973 Chevy 1/2 Ton, 1 - 1989 1/2 Ton Chevy Pick-up, and 1 - 1990 1/2 Ton GMC Pick-up. Light Trucks MY 2002 includes 1 - 1/2 Ton Dodge Pick-up.
1 Wastewater
Diesel 125 8.5 1,717 012500
Gasoline 12 0.8 178 01211
138 9.3 1,894 0Subtotal 1 Wastewater 137 1 1
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Diesel fuel was distrubeted evenly between the Front End Case Loader and Aquatech Sewer Jet Truck.
Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the remainder of the fleet. Diesel Heavy Duty Trucks All MY includes 1- Front End Case Loader
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Diesel fuel was distrubeted evenly between the Front End Case Loader and Aquatech Sewer Jet Truck.
Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the remainder of the fleet. Diesel Heavy Duty Trucks All MY includes 1- Front End Case Loader
and 1- Aquatech Sewer Jet Truck. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 - 1984 Chevy truck and 1 - 1992 GMC medium duty with crane. Light
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Diesel fuel was distrubeted evenly between the Front End Case Loader and Aquatech Sewer Jet Truck.
Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the remainder of the fleet. Diesel Heavy Duty Trucks All MY includes 1- Front End Case Loader
and 1- Aquatech Sewer Jet Truck. Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 - 1984 Chevy truck and 1 - 1992 GMC medium duty with crane. Light
Trucks MY 1999 includes 1 - Ford F250. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2003 includes 1 - Ford F550 Super Duty. Light Trucks MY 2003 includes 1 - Dodge
Ram.
1 Zoo
Gasoline 8 0.5 113 2,302811
8 0.5 113 2,302Subtotal 1 Zoo 8 1 1
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
Detailed Report
Page 57/19/2012
Government Greenhouse Gas Emissions in 2005
(%)
Energy Cost
(tonnes)(MMBtu)
Equiv CO
($)
2CO
(tonnes)
N O
(kg)
CH
(kg)
422
maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the four vehicles.Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1 maintained by individual Departments. Unleaded gasoline was distributed evenly between the four vehicles.Light Trucks MY 1987 to 1993 includes 1
- 1979 Chevy Luv 4x4, 1 - 1985 Dodge Sedan, 1 - 1990 Chevy S-10, and 1 - Isuzu Trooper.
403 5,672 27,45627.4Subtotal Vehicle Fleet 398 15 13
Employee Commute
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 Employee Commute
Diesel 48 3.2 652 04801
Gasoline 137 9.3 1,969 01341015
185 12.6 2,621 0Subtotal 1 Employee Commute 181 10 16
Passenger Cars Alt. Method includes motorcycles.
185 2,621 012.6Subtotal Employee Commute 181 10 16
Transit Fleet
San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA
1 Dail-A-Ride
Gasoline 119 8.1 1,712 26,72511683
119 8.1 1,712 26,725Subtotal 1 Dail-A-Ride 116 8 3
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Transit Fleet information was provided by Amanda Muether, Dispatch, (805) XXX-XXXX. Heavy Duty Vehicles
MY 2002 includes 1 - Chapion Type III Bus. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2005 includes 1 - Eldorado Aerotech Bus. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2003
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Transit Fleet information was provided by Amanda Muether, Dispatch, (805) XXX-XXXX. Heavy Duty Vehicles
MY 2002 includes 1 - Chapion Type III Bus. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2005 includes 1 - Eldorado Aerotech Bus. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2003
includes 2 - Ford Type III Bus. Heavy Duty Vehicles MY 2000 includes 1 - Eldorado Champion Bus
1 North County Shuttle (Fixed Route)
Gasoline 95 6.4 1,361 26,9509273
95 6.4 1,361 26,950Subtotal 1 North County Shuttle (Fixed Route)92 7 3
All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are All vehicle fuel consumption records provided by the Finance Department. Records consisted of gas card billing statements. Gas cards are
maintained by individual Departments. Transit Fleet information was provided by Amanda Muether, Dispatch, (805) 461-5000. Heavy Duty Vehicles
MY 2003 includes 1 - Ford Type III Bus with Graphics.
213 3,073 53,67514.5Subtotal Transit Fleet 209 14 6
Total 1,473 21,107 81,566100.01,455 53 75
This report has been generated for San Luis Obsipo APCD, CA using ICLEI's Clean Air and Climate Protection 2009 Software.
APPENDIX C:
DETAILED METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY-WIDE INVENTORY
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page C-1
Detailed Methodology for Community-Wide Inventory
This appendix provides the detailed methodology and data sources used for calculating GHG
emissions in each sector of the community-wide inventory.
OVERVIEW OF INVENTORY CONTENTS AND APPROACH
The community inventory methodology is based on guidance from ICLEI International Local
Government GHG Emissions Analysis Protocol (IEAP) (October 2009) and the Association of
Environmental Professionals California Community-wide GHG Baseline Inventory Protocol (AEP
Protocol) (June 2011). The community inventory identifies and quantifies emissions from the
residential, commercial/industrial, transportation, off-road, and solid waste sectors. Emissions
are calculated by multiplying activity data—such as kilowatt hours or gallons of gasoline
consumed—by emissions factors, which provide the quantity of emissions per unit of activity.
Activity data is typically available from electric and gas utilities, planning and transportation
agencies and air quality regulatory agencies. Emissions factors are drawn from a variety of
sources, including the California Climate Action Registry, the Local Governments Operations
Protocol (LGOP) version 1.1 (May 2010), and air quality models produced by the California Air
Resources Board.
In this inventory, all GHG emissions are converted into carbon dioxide equivalent units, or CO2e,
per guidance in the LGOP version 1.1, AEP Protocol, and IEAP. The LGOP provides standard
factors to convert various greenhouse gases into carbon dioxide equivalent units; these factors
are known as Global Warming Potential factors, representing the ratio of the heat-trapping
ability of each greenhouse gas relative to that of carbon dioxide.
The following sections describe the specific data sources and methodology for calculating GHG
emissions in each community sector.
RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL SECTORS
All residential and commercial/industrial sector emissions are the result of electricity
consumption and the on-site combustion of natural gas. Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(PG&E) and Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas Co.) provided residential electricity
and natural gas consumption data. Specifically, data was provided by:
Jillian Rich, Program Manager with PG&E Green Communities and Innovator Pilots
(jillian.rich@pge.com), and John Joseph, PG&E GHG Data Requests
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
Page C-2 City of Atascadero
Paulo Morais, Energy Programs Supervisor with Southern California Gas Company,
Customer Programs (pmorias@semprautilities.com)
The raw data received from PG&E and SoCal Gas Co. is summarized in Tables 1 and 2 below.
This raw data was input into the CACP2009 software in kWh and therms. PG&E provided a
2005 carbon dioxide (CO2) coefficient for electricity use and SoCal Gas Co. provided a carbon
dioxide (CO2) coefficient for natural gas (see “electricity and natural gas coefficients” section).
Emissions coefficients for methane (CH4) and nitrogen dioxide (N2O) emissions were provided
by the California LGOP version 1.1 and were converted into carbon dioxide equivalents and
added to the CO2 emissions to obtain carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions.
All commercial/industrial sector emissions are the result of electricity consumption and the on-
site combustion of natural gas. Commercial and industrial electricity were combined into one
section by PG&E due to the California 15/15 Rule. The 15/15 Rule was adopted by the
California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in the Direct Access Proceeding (CPUC Decision
97-10-031) to protect customer confidentiality. The 15/15 Rule requires that any aggregated
information provided by the utilities must be made up of at least 15 customers. A single
customer's load must be less than 15% of an assigned category. If the number of customers in
the complied data is below 15, or if a single customer's load is more than 15% of the total data,
categories must be combined before the information is released. The rule further requires that if
the 15/15 Rule is triggered for a second time after the data has been screened already using the
15/15 Rule, the customer must be dropped from the information provided. As a result, PG&E
aggregated commercial and industrial energy consumption into one report, whereas SoCal Gas
Co. separated commercial and industrial gas usage (shown in the chart below) into two reports.
It would have been misleading to present an “Industrial” category for only natural gas emissions;
therefore, the SoCal Gas Co. emissions were aggregated with commercial as well.
TABLE 1: RESIDENTIAL ENERGY USE
2005 Residential
Energy Emissions Scope Input Data
Metric Tons
Metric Tons CO2e
per year
PG&E Electricity 2 71,151,775 kWh 15,912
SoCal Gas Co. Natural Gas 1 4,657,834 Therms 24,778
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page C-3
TABLE 2: COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ENERGY USE
2005 Commercial /
Industrial Energy
Emissions
Scope Input Data Metric Tons CO2e
per year
PG&E Commercial +
Industrial Electricity 2 59,204,973 kWh 13,241
SoCal Gas Co. Commercial +
Industrial Natural Gas 1 1,321,587 Therms 7,030
To make the Inventory more accurate and representative of the city’s real impact on climate
change, tailored coefficient sets were obtained from PG&E and the LGOP version 1.1. Sources
and coefficient values are summarized in the table below.
TABLE 3: ELECTRICITY COEFFICIENT SETS
Coefficient Set Unit Value Source
Average Grid
Electricity Set Lbs / MWh
489 CO2
0.011 N2O
0.03 CH4
Jillian Rich, Program Manager with PG&E Green
Communities and Innovator Pilots
(jillian.rich@pge.com), and John Joseph, PG&E
GHG Data Requests (ghgdatarequests@pge.com )
and LGOP version 1.1
TABLE 4: NATURAL GAS COEFFICIENT SETS
Coefficient Set Unit Value Source
Fuel CO2 (Natural
Gas) Set kg/MMBtu 53.06 CO2 Coefficient set provided by LGOP version 1.1
RCI Average Set –
Residential kg/MMBtu 0.0001 N2O
0.005 CH4 Coefficient set provided by LGOP version 1.1
RCI Average Set –
Commercial +
Industrial
kg/MMBtu 0.0001 N2O
0.005 CH4 Coefficient set provided by LGOP version 1.1
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
Page C-4 City of Atascadero
TRANSPORTATION SECTOR
On-road transportation emissions were derived from local jurisdiction vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) data and regional vehicle and travel characteristics. The transportation analysis,
conducted by Fehr & Peers, utilized the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
Regional Travel Demand model to develop transportation-related GHG emissions data and
VMT for trips that have an origin and/or destination in the city.
The SLOCOG Travel Demand Model was recently updated and validated to reflect 2010
conditions and to comply with the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) guidelines on
implementation of Senate Bill 375 (SB 375). The update included expanding the times of day,
calibration of multiple modes, and reflecting the auto and of non-auto RTP transportation
system, all beneficial when quantifying potential GHG reduction strategies. A 2005 land use
scenario was developed by extrapolating 2035 and 2010. Similarly, a 2020 land use scenario
was developed by interpolating between 2010 and 2035. See Summary for the San Luis
Obispo Council of Governments Model Improvement Project to Meet the Requirements of
California Transportation Commission Guidelines for Regional Transportation Plans in
Response to SB375 (February, 2012) for details on model calibration and validation.
Using the model, Fehr & Peers allocated vehicle trips and VMT to each of the cities in San Luis
Obispo County and the unincorporated county by weighting trips based on their origin and
destination. The VMT summarized for land use with each of the incorporated cities and
unincorporated county includes:
a) All of the VMT associated with trips made completely internally within each jurisdiction;
b) Half of the VMT generated by jobs and residences located within each jurisdiction but
that travels to/from external destinations (this is consistent with the recent SB 375
Regional Targets Advisory Committee (RTAC) decision that the two generators of an
inter-jurisdictional trip should each be assigned half of the responsibility for the trip and
its VMT); and
c) None of the responsibility for travel passing completely through the jurisdiction with
neither an origin point, or a destination within the city (also consistent with RTAC
decision).
The gateways exiting the model area were included in the VMT calculation. This means that a
jurisdiction will be held responsible for some VMT occurring outside of the model borders. For
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page C-5
example, if a household in Pismo Beach travels across the Santa Maria Bridge to Santa
Barbara, or through San Luis Obispo City to reach King City.
To capture the effects of congestion, the model VMT for each time period were summarized by
speed for each time period and then aggregated to daily. The VMT results are summarized in
Table 5 for the baseline year (2005) and Table 6 for 2020.
TABLE 5: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED PER JURISDICTION, 2005
Vehicle Miles Traveled per
Jurisdiction, 2005
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Average Weekday Daily Average Annual1
Arroyo Grande 228,694 79,356,818
Atascadero 379,385 131,646,595
Grover Beach 111,910 38,832,770
Morro Bay 182,436 63,305,292
Paso Robles 424,926 147,449,322
Pismo Beach 476,060 165,192,820
San Luis Obispo 2,224,058 771,748,126
Unincorporated County 2,625,379 911,006,513
Total 6,652,848 2,308,538,256
1 Average Annual VMT was calculated by applying a multiplier of 347 to average weekday daily VMT to account
for the total number of weekdays in one year based on the recommendation from Caltrans.
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
Page C-6 City of Atascadero
TABLE 6: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED PER JURISDICTION, 2020
Vehicle Miles Traveled per
Jurisdiction, 2020
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
Average Weekday Daily Average Annual1
Arroyo Grande 265,964 92,289,508
Atascadero 490,742 170,287,474
Grover Beach 153,364 53,217,308
Morro Bay 212,901 73,876,647
Paso Robles 567,135 196,795,845
Pismo Beach 586,947 203,670,609
San Luis Obispo 3,256,895 1,130,142,565
Unincorporated County 3,343,755 1,160,282,985
Total 8,877,703 3,080,562,941
1 Average Annual VMT was calculated by applying a multiplier of 347 to average weekday daily VMT to account
for the total number of weekdays in one year based on the recommendation from Caltrans.
The EMFAC2011 model developed by the California Air Resources Board was then used to
calculate emissions from the VMT figures above. EMFAC defaults for San Luis Obispo
County include regionally-specific information on the mix of vehicle classes and model
years, as well as ambient conditions and travel speeds that determine fuel efficiency. Types
of emissions accounted for include: running exhaust, idle exhaust, starting exhaust, diurnal,
resting loss, running loss, and hot soak. The model estimates carbon dioxide, methane,
and nitrous oxide emissions from these factors and inputted vehicle activity data.
WASTE SECTOR
Emissions from the waste sector are an estimate of methane generation from the decomposition
of landfilled solid waste in the base year (2005). The methane commitment method embedded
in CACP2009 is based on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Waste Reduction Model
(WARM) model for calculating life cycle emissions from waste generated within the jurisdictional
boundary of the city in 2005. The analysis does not use the waste-in-place method, which
calculates emissions from all waste generated in 2005 and all waste already existing in the
landfill before the baseline year.
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page C-7
The waste sector only takes into account the waste sent to landfills from city residents,
businesses, and institutions. It does not calculate emissions from the total amount of waste sent
to county landfills (Paso Robles, Cold Canyon, and Chicago Grade) in 2005 since those landfills
accept waste from the unincorporated county and incorporated cities.
Solid waste tonnage data per jurisdiction was provided by:
“2005 Disposal Report” by quarter, prepared by the San Luis Obispo Integrated Waste
Management Board on 3/6/06. Document provided by Peter Cron, San Luis Obispo
County Integrated Waste Management Authority (pcron@iwma.com).
Since the composition of waste sent to landfill in 2005 is unknown for the city, the following
statewide average waste composition study was utilized:
CIWMB 2004 Statewide Waste Characterization Study,
http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/default.asp?pubid=1097.
The waste characterization study’s distribution of waste by type was then converted into the five
categories included in the CACP2009 software, which resulted in the following waste
characterization:
Paper products: 21.0%
Food waste: 14.6%
Plant debris: 6.9%
Wood/textiles: 21.8%
All other waste: 35.7%
The CACP2009 software does not have the ability to assign an individual methane recovery
factor to each landfill; therefore, we took a weighted average (60%) based on the portion of
waste in each landfill. The methane recovery factors of the landfills are well documented by the
San Luis Obispo Air Pollution Control District based on the system operations at that time.
Table 7 includes the methane recovery factors for the Chicago Grade and Cold Canyon
landfills. Emissions factors were obtain from the LGOP version 1.1.
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
Page C-8 City of Atascadero
TABLE 7: COMMUNITY GENERATED WASTE, 2005
Methane
recovery and
indicator
inputs, 2005
Methane
Recovery
Total gas
generated
(mmcf/yr)
Total gas
transferred
(mmcf/yr)
Data Source
Waste
Tonnage
from city,
2005 (tons)
Chicago Grade 60% 157.47 94.48 APCD 2005
Inventory 31,097
Cold Canyon 60% 700.00 420.00 APCD 2005
Inventory 26
OFF-ROAD VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT SECTOR
Off-road emissions were obtained from the California Air Resources Board’s
OFFROAD2007 model. The model was run using default equipment population, usage, and
efficiency data for San Luis Obispo County. Emissions outputs were scaled to the local
jurisdiction level by indicators identified in Table 8. Results were converted from short tons
per day to metric tons per year. Methane and nitrous oxide emissions were converted to
carbon dioxide equivalent units based on the Global Warming Potential factors from LGOP
version 1.1.
TABLE 8: COUNTY-WIDE EMISSIONS INDICATORS
Equipment Type Allocation Indicator Source
Agricultural Equipment Acres of cropland San Luis Obispo County, GIS shape files
Construction and Mining
Equipment
Construction and mining jobs U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic
Studies, On the Map Tool
Industrial Equipment Industrial jobs U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic
Studies, On the Map Tool
Lawn and Garden
Equipment
Households Economics Research Associates. (July
2006). SLOCOG Long Range Socio-
Economic Projections. 2005 baseline data
Light Commercial
Equipment
Service and commercial jobs U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic
Studies, On the Map Tool
APPENDIX C: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
COMMUNITY -WIDE INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page C-9
The OFFROAD2007 software calculates emissions from other sources of off-road equipment as
well, including recreational vehicles and watercrafts; however these emissions were not
included because there was no feasible methodology for separating these emissions per
jurisdiction within the county. Population is proven to not be an accurate indicator of
consumption rates. To remain consistent with protocol and practice, emissions must be
separated in a spatial manner, similar to how highway emissions are determined by road
segment length within each jurisdiction. It should also be noted that many location-sources of
off-road emissions, such as recreational vehicle emissions, occur in state parks or beaches
outside of the jurisdiction of each city or the county.
2020 AND 2025 FORECAST
The GHG emissions forecast provides a “business-as-usual estimate,” or scenario, of how
emissions will change in the year 2020 and 2025 if consumption trends and behavior
continue as they did in 2005, absent any new federal, state, regional, or local policies or
actions that would reduce emissions. The year 2020 was selected for the forecast in order
to maintain consistency with AB 32 and the year 2025 was selected in order to maintain
consistency with the General Plan planning horizon.
The 2020 and 2025 forecasts calculate business-as-usual growth based on population and job
growth rates obtained from the San Luis Obispo Council of Governments report, "San Luis
Obispo County 2040 Population, Housing & Employment Forecast" prepared by AECOM in
August 2001. Mid-range estimates of growth were used in both instances (Figures ES-5 and 6-
1). Specifically population growth rates were applied to residential, waste, off-road, and
wastewater sectors; job growth rates were applied to the commercial/industrial sector. For the
transportation sector, Fehr & Peers provided VMT estimates for the year 2020 as shown in
Table 6 above, which was extrapolated for the year 2025.
It should be noted that these forecasts do not take into consideration any planned or actual
efficiency or conservation measures after 2005. For example, the State Renewable Energy
portfolio has advanced significantly since 2005, but the forecast calculates 2020 energy
emissions by assuming constant emissions factors.
APPENDIX D:
DETAILED METHODOLOGY FOR CITY
GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS INVENTORY
APPENDIX D: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
GOVERNMENT OPERATION S
INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page D-1
Detailed Methodology for Government Operations GHG
Emissions Inventory
The municipal operations inventory follows the LGOP version 1.1, which was adopted in 2010
by CARB and serves as the national standard for quantifying and reporting GHG emissions from
local government operations.
BUILDING SECTOR
The building sector includes all emissions from natural gas and electricity consumed in City-
owned and - operated buildings and facilities. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) and
Southern California Gas Company (SoCal Gas Co.) provided municipal electricity and natural
gas consumption data respectively. Specifically, data was provided by:
Jillian Rich, Program Manager with PG&E Green Communities and Innovator Pilots
(jillian.rich@pge.com), and John Joseph, PG&E GHG Data Requests
Paulo Morais, Energy Programs Supervisor with Southern California Gas Company,
Customer Programs (pmorias@semprautilities.com)
This raw data was input into the CACP2009 software in kWh and therms. PG&E provided a
2005 carbon dioxide (CO2) coefficient for electricity use and SoCal Gas Co. provided a carbon
dioxide (CO2) coefficient for natural gas. Emissions coefficients for methane (CH4) and nitrogen
dioxide (N2O) emissions were provided by the California LGOP version 1.1 and were converted
into carbon dioxide equivalents and added to the CO2 emissions to obtain carbon dioxide
equivalent (CO2e) emissions (see Appendix C, Tables 3 and 4).
VEHICLE FLEET SECTOR
The vehicle fleet sector includes gasoline and diesel vehicles from the following City
departments:
Community Development
Community Services
Fire
Police
Public Works
Gasoline and diesel consumption for calendar year 2005 was obtained from fuel billing
statements provided by the Finance Department. The Police Department provided their own fuel
APPENDIX D: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
GOVERNMENT OPERATION S
INVENTORY
Page D-2 City of Atascadero
usage data as there record keeping was more complete. Specific sources of data within each
organization are outlined in the notes of Appendix B. Emissions were calculated using the
EMFAC software for the San Luis Obispo region, consistent with the community methodology
described in Appendix C.
EMPLOYEE COMMUTE SECTOR
Employees were surveyed in June 2009 using an online survey instrument. The questions,
attached as Appendix E, asked employees about their current commuting patterns. Of those
questions, we used the following for our analysis:
What is your approximate one-way distance to work (in miles)? Please indicate the most
direct distance to work, discounting midway destinations that would be taken whether or
not you drove to work each day (i.e. dropping off children at school).
Please indicate the type of transportation you take to work each day in your average
work week. Please note that there are two types of carpooling.
Drive alone
Carpool with fellow City
employees
Carpool with drivers not
employed by the City
Vanpool
Public transit
Motorcycle
Bicycle
Walk
Telecommute
Other
What type of vehicle do you drive?
What type of fuel does your vehicle use?
If you carpool with fellow City employees, how many City employees ride with you? If
you carpool with a different number each day, please indicate the average.
Approximately 69 employees responded to the survey with usable information, meaning that all
essential questions were answered. Answers with mileage left blank or with highly inconsistent
APPENDIX D: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
GOVERNMENT OPERATION S
INVENTORY
Page D-2 City of Atascadero
data (ex: saying they walked three days to work, biked two, and drove five) were omitted. In
addition, if a respondent did not describe their ‘other’ category of transportation, the entry was
omitted.
To perform this analysis, we took the following steps:
1) Separate entries by what type of vehicle they own and operate (compact, midsize car,
full-size car, small truck, medium-small truck, large truck, motorcycle or “don’t drive”).
Within each new group, separate the entries by diesel, gasoline or hybrid.
2) For each group of entries with the same vehicle type and technology, multiply the
number of miles to work by 2 (to get round-trip estimate) and then by the number of
‘drive alone’ days for each entry. Multiply the number of miles to work by the number of
‘carpool’ days (half of the ‘drive alone’ emissions). Note: If a respondent entered that
they motorcycle to work, but own a car as well, the motorcycle miles were moved to the
motorcycle category). Adjust for hybrids (see below).
3) Add all miles per vehicle type and technology and multiply by 52.18 work weeks/year.
4) Calculate the multiplier to adjust survey response data to the entire 2005 employee
population. In 2005, there were 128 employees. This, divided by the 69 survey entries,
gives us our multiplier of 1.74.
5) Multiply the mileage per vehicle per technology type by the multiplier.
6) Divide the number of hybrid miles by 2.2 and add the difference to the ‘passenger car’
category. This is to account for the large increase in hybrid sales between 2005 and
2009 (Source: Hybridcars.com sales statistics).
7) Manipulate the vehicle classes to fit the CACP2009 software categories.
8) Enter final miles into the CACP2009 software per vehicle type and fuel.
APPENDIX D: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
GOVERNMENT OPERATION S
INVENTORY
City of Atascadero Page D-3
TABLE 1: 2009 EMPLOYEE COMMUTE SURVEY
Vehicle Group 2009 Survey Results Adjusted for 2005 Annual VMT Fuel Type
Light Trucks 56,197.86 Gasoline 107,536.92 Gasoline
313.08 Diesel 6,645.64 Diesel
Large Trucks 22,620.03 Gasoline 19,750.03 Gasoline
16,843.70 Diesel 34,785.80 Diesel
Passenger Vehicle 138,885.77 Gasoline 34,785.80 Gasoline
Motorcycle 208.72 Gasoline Gasoline
Total 306,621.16 Gasoline 610,176.11 Gasoline
20,819.82 Diesel 41,431.44 Diesel
The CACP2009 software does not provide a method of calculating emissions from hybrid cars.
As a result, these emissions were divided by 2.20 based on the difference between average fuel
economy of a 2005 Toyota Prius and the average fuel economy included in the 2005 SLO
EMFAC data and then entered into the CACP2009 software under 'passenger vehicle' (Source:
www.fueleconomy.gov).
STREETLIGHT SECTOR
PG&E provided electricity usage from streetlights in kWh for 2005. The total kWh were entered
into the CACP2009 software using the electricity coefficients identified in Appendix C.
WATER / SEWAGE
This sector calculates emissions from energy consumption associated with City-owned and
operated water and wastewater facilities and point-source emissions that arise due to
fermentation of degraded biomass in the wastewater lagoons. The Finance Department
provided the electricity consumption for each of the water facilities. Operational data provided by
the Wastewater Treatment Plant Manager was utilized to determine total methane and nitrous
oxide emissions using ICLEI’s Wastewater Emissions Data tool. Both of these sources are
outlined in Appendix B. These totals were entered into the CACP2009 software with the
electricity and natural gas coefficient sets outlined in Appendix C.
APPENDIX D: DETAILED
METHODOLOGY FOR
GOVERNMENT OPERATION S
INVENTORY
Page D-4 City of Atascadero
WASTE
Atascadero Waste Alternatives reported solid waste tonnage produced by City operations. The
City produced 168.65 tons of waste in 2005 that was sent to managed landfill. The waste
composition was unknown for the city; therefore, the California averages provided by the 2004
California Integrated Waste Management Board Waste Characterization Report were used. A
weighted average methane recovery factor of 60% was used in this analysis, as outlined in
Appendix C.
APPENDIX E:
CITY EMPLOYEE COMMUTE SURVEY, 2009
APPENDIX E: CITY EMP LOYEE
COMMUTE SURVEY, 2008
City of Atascadero Page E-1
City Employee Commute Survey, 2009
1) What is your approximate on-way distance to work (in miles)? Please indicate the most
direct distance to work, discounting midway destinations that would be taken whether or
not you drove to work each day (i.e. dropping off children at school).
___________________
2) Please indicate the type of transportation you take to work each day in your average work
week. Please note that there are two types of carpooling.
Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5
Drive Alone
Carpool with fellow City employees
Carpool with other drivers not
employed by the City
Vanpool
Public transit
Motorcycle
Bicycle
Walk
Telecommute
Other
3) What type of vehicle do you drive?
Compact/Sub-Compact car (Civic, Corolla, Focus, Neon, Cavalier, Jetta or similar)
Mid-size car (Accord, Camry, Passat, Monte Carlo, Sable, Sebring or similar)
Full-size car (Impala, Intrepid, Taurus, Crown Victoria, Bonneville, Town Car or similar)
Small Truck/SUV/Pickup (RAV4, Chev S10, Pickup (4 cylinder), PT Cruiser or similar)
Medium-Small Truck/SUV/Pickup (Minivan, Sonoma Pickup Truck or similar)
Medium-Large Truck/SUV/Pickup (Durango, Safari Cargo Van, Ford F150 or similar)
Large Truck/SUV/Pickup (Suburban, Expedition, Navigator, Ford E250/350/450 or similar)
Motorcycle
I don’t drive alone or drive a carpool
APPENDIX E: CITY EMP LOYEE
COMMUTE SURVEY, 2008
Page E-2 City of Atascadero
4) What type of fuel does your vehicle from question 3 use?
Gasoline
Diesel
Biodiesel
Hybrid
Electric
I don’t drive to work or drive a carpool
Other (Specify): ___________________________________
5) If you carpool or vanpool with fellow City employees, home may City employees ride with you? If
you carpool with a different number each day, please indicate the average. If ‘not applicable’,
please enter “0”.
Enter # of people: ___________________________________
City of Atascadero
6907 El Camino Real
Atascadero, CA 93422
Sustainability and Energy Efficiency Efforts
Activity Purpose Description Date
Alternative Transportation & Fuel Reduction
Public Transportation Carbon
Reduction
City expanded public transportation system to include hourly transportation along major
shopping, education, health service and housing corridors
Buses equipped with bicycle racks and connect to regional and national bus service and rail for
expanded multi-modal opportunities
Ongoing since
2011
Atascadero Bicycle
Transportation Plan
Carbon
Reduction
Eco Tourism
Healthy
Communities
Plan provides a blueprint for the development of a comprehensive bicycling system to facilitate
bicycle transportation and encourage recreational cycling
Developed through public workshops to gather input on routes, connections, bicycle tourism,
enhancements & facilities
Adopted plan will allow for the City to be eligible for State and Federal grants to construct bike
routes
Bike Plan
adopted
November 2010
Atascadero Trail
System
Carbon
Reduction
Eco Tourism
Healthy
Communities
“Atascadero Creek Trail Enhancement Project” constructed along HWY 41 from San Gabriel to
Portola, and design in process to connect El Camino Real to the Colony Park Community
Center & Stadium Park
Portions of Salinas River trail constructed
Ongoing work with ALPS to establish trails throughout City parks & help acquire additional land
for open space and future trails
Trail plan
approved
2006
Installation of
trails ongoing
North County Regional
Trail System
Carbon
Reduction
Eco Tourism
Healthy
Communities
Currently working with SLOCOG on the “North County Regional De Anza Trail Master Plan,”
funded by a Caltrans planning grant
Regional effort to create a safe and fully integrated off‐highway, multiuse trail system for
recreationalists and commuters; will connect all communities in North County, from San Miguel
to Santa Margarita, along the Salinas River & De Anza Trail
Adopted plan will allow for the City to be eligible for State and Federal grants to construct
multiuse trails
Grant received
2012
Master plan in
process
Sidewalks & Bike Lanes
Installed
Carbon
Reduction
Healthy
Communities
Bike lanes & sidewalks installed on El Camino Real & Traffic Way to connect major commercial
and residential corridors
“Safe Routes to School” bike lanes, striping, signage & sidewalks installed near Atascadero
High school, San Gabriel & Santa Rosa Schools
Ongoing since
2008
Ride Share Programs Carbon
Reduction
Public Park & Ride lots located off HWY 101 at Santa Barbara Road & San Luis Ave. Bike
lockers installed at both Park & Ride lots
Worked with Topaz Solar Farm to establish Park & Ride lot to facilitate bus transportation to
Carrizo Plain during project construction
Park & Ride
expansion 2009
Solar farm lot
est. 2012
Bridges & Pedestrian
Connections
VMT Reduction
Healthy
Communities
Lewis Ave. Bridge constructed with sidewalks and bike lanes. Provides much needed
connection to reduce travel time, and creates dual circulation system in downtown with non-
vehicular travel options
Pedestrian tunnel enhancements to connect High School and residential neighborhoods to
downtown through accessway under HWY 101
Currently working on design of pedestrian bridge which will connect the new movie theater to
the Sunken Gardens to create a walk able downtown district
Lewis Ave.
bridge 2006
Ped tunnel 2010
Ped bridge in
process
Bike Racks Carbon
Reduction
Bike rack installation required with all new retail & public projects
Bike racks installed at all existing parks, City facilities and schools
Ongoing
Bike Month VMT Reduction
Healthy
Communities
Partnership with SLO Bicycle Coalition to sponsor events to increase awareness & ridership
during Bike Month each May.
As a result of engaged staff and Council members, participation increased from 30 to over 300
riders in 2012, with more events planned
Annual events
City Facility Upgrades
Facilities Energy
Retro-fit (Phase 1)
Energy
Conservation Nine (9) City facilities received light retrofit projects to potentially decrease energy
consumption by 37,000 kWh hours per year, which is up to $6,100 in annual energy cost
savings
2009
Fire Stations Energy,
Resource &
Water
Conservation
Efficiency and conservation updates at Fire Stations 1 & 2:
Installation of tinted engine bay windows & exhaust extraction system and
Standby generators replacement with propane or natural gas instead of electric
Efficient refrigerators and washers/dryers & low flow toilets/showers/bath faucets
2008/2009
EECBG Grant for
Municipal Energy
Efficiency Retro-fits
Resource &
Energy
Conservation
California Energy Commission (CEC) completed energy audit using AARA funds to determine
what projects would provide the best payback
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant (EECBG) funded $152,644 in energy
efficiency retro-fit projects
Included upgrades at Fire Station 1, Police Station, Pavilion, Police Station, Waste Water
Treatment Plant and Public Works Corp Yard
- 17 High SEER replacement HVAC units - 17 programmable thermostats
- 564 florescent tube lamps 28watt - 119 Low watt T8 ballasts
- 18 LED parking lot lights Retrofit kits - 28 Induction wall packs 40watt
Dec 2009
Staples Direct Install
(Funded by PG&E)
Resource &
Energy
Conservation
Staples Direct Install program for Municipal Facilities; energy savings opportunity made
available through the Energy Watch Partnership
77 separate projects completed at five (5) facilities, with an estimated annual energy
savings of 51,200 kWh
Upgrades such as occupancy sensors, new light fixtures and light bulb replacements
completed at the current City Hall building, Pavilion, Public Works Yard, Wastewater
Treatment Plant and Indoor Skate Park
Aug 2011
Wastewater Treatment
Plant Upgrades
Resource &
Energy
Conservation
Continual redesign and improvement of sewer system to reduce energy requirements by taking
advantage of gravity flow; two lift stations have been eliminated & a third is slated for elimination
Inefficient pumps & aerators replaced with more efficient models; those not being replaced are
being re-wound with more efficient wiring
Ongoing since
2009
Colony Park
Community Center
Energy,
Resource &
Water
Sustainable construction practices such as use of compressed recycled paper for bathroom
partitions and counters, recycled plastics for flooring and counters, and recycled rubber for the
sports court
Constructed
2006
Conservation Building is designed to be low maintenance to reduce water, power, and chemical use
Charles Paddock Zoo
Restroom Facility
Public
Education
Energy,
Resource &
Water
Conservation
New public restrooms incorporate green building features such as:
Rainwater collection & daylighting (no electric lights needed during the day)
Passive ventilation and thermal walls (no HVAC needed)
Straw bale constructed walls & renewable materials throughout
Low flow toilets & faucets
Constructed
2011
Historic City Hall
Restoration
Energy,
Resource &
Water
Conservation
The historic restoration of this 1914 City landmark includes m ajor upgrades for energy efficiency
which will result in huge savings in ongoing operating costs:
New high efficiency HVAC units with individual temp controls for every room
Energy efficient light fixtures with occupancy sensors
Energy efficient appliances in break rooms
Low flush water closets and urinals
Added insulation on the 4th floor
Construction to
be completed
2013
Green Parking Lot at
Lake Park
Public
Education
Stormwater
Demonstration project at Lake Park, funded by Urban Greening Grant Program
Replace an existing dirt parking lot with a low impact development parking lot
Designed to mitigate the stormwater runoff and pollutants which enter Atascadero Creek
Construction in
Process
City Facility Policies Energy & Water
Conservation Directive from the City Manager outlining Citywide Energy Conservation Measures issued in
September 2008 in order to cut City budget and operation costs
It is the City’s policy to always purchase energy efficient equipment and appliances
10% reduction in combined usage of all City buildings shown between 2009 and 2011,
with many facilities showing an energy reduction of 20% or more based on City
operations and facility upgrades in just the past few years
2008
Building Operator
Certification Course
Education
Energy,
Resource &
Water
Conservation
Two (2) City employees completed Building Operator Certification Course
Staff was trained to evaluate and improve operational efficiencies in municipal facilities and cut
down on energy usage (lighting, thermostats & more)
Operator awareness alone has cut energy use at the Community Center by 20%, and this is a
brand new building with modern and energy conscious construction!
Shows that investing in new technologies isn’t enough; well-trained operators make the
difference in reducing energy use and costs
2010
Energy Tracking Energy
Conservation
Education
Currently benchm arking energy performance and water usage of Municipal Facilities to manage
overall energy use and identify where the energy consumption hogs are
Monthly usage date within individual buildings & across entire building portfolio is automatically
measured and tracked through Portfolio Manager
Will be able to identify new opportunities to save, where to focus energy efficiency
efforts, and what rebates and funding sources City is eligible for
Data input &
setup in process
Energy Efficiency
SLO Energy Watch
Partnership
Energy
Conservation
Education &
Outreach
A joint partnership of PG&E, SoCal Gas, Economic Vitality Corporation, SLO County and
participating municipalities
Partnership has provided extensive training, outreach, and energy-saving opportunities for the
City as well as for local businesses and property owners
The City of Atascadero has taken full advantage of this partnership, becoming a leader in
SLO County in obtaining energy grants & upgrading City facilities
Participation
since 2009
SLO Green Build
Partnership
Energy,
Resource & City works with SLO Green Build to host community workshops and seminars for homeowners,
builders, and the general public
Ongoing since
2005
Water
Conservation
Education &
Outreach
Workshops have included: grey water systems, sustainable landscaping, photovoltaic systems
and alternative energy production, and green building technologies
City staff meets quarterly with SLO Green Build to discuss how City can encourage sustainable
design
A SLO Green Build public information kiosk is located at the City Hall front counter
Building Code Energy
Conservation
Water
Conservation
California Green Building Code became effective January 1, 2011
Title 24 energy requirements are strictly enforced for all new construction in the City, including
significant energy efficiency standards for lighting and appliances
New code
adopted 2011
PV System
Expedited Permits &
Reduced Fees
Energy
Conservation
The City of Atascadero has the lowest permit fees for solar in the County, and building permits
for PV system installation receive expedited processing
This policy and staff dedication ensures safe installation of PV systems while removing
perceived road blocks associated with permitting process
Ongoing
Affordable Solar Home
Program (SASH)
Energy
Conservation
The Single-family Affordable Solar Homes (SASH) Program is a comprehensive low-income
solar program made available by California Public Utilities Commission
City staff has been collaborating with Grid Alternatives on outreach and eligibility
As part of the SASH program, PV systems will be installed on 24 new affordable units being
constructed next year by People’s Self Help Housing, and hopefully on many more affordable
single family homes currently existing throughout the City
SASH is a first-of-its-kind solar program, structured to promote or provide energy efficiency for
low income families, workforce development and green jobs training opportunities, and broad
community engagement
Currently in
process
Greenhouse Gas Reduction
U.S. Mayors Climate
Protection Agreement
Carbon
Reduction Encourages policies and programs to create well planned communities and improve the urban
forest
Adopted 2005
SLO Air District GHG
Stakeholder Group
Carbon
Reduction
Education
In 2007, the APCD convened a committee of city and county agency stakeholders to initiate a
discussion of climate change, including science, policy, funding, mitigation, adaptation, and
public engagement
Bimonthly meetings are held to share information, identify funding sources, and develop local
programs, policies, and activities that to reduce GHG emissions
Ongoing since
2006
Local Governments for
Sustainability (ICLEI)
Conservation
Carbon
Reduction
Atascadero joined ICLEI and agreed to participate in the Cities for Climate Protection Campaign
ICLEI provides technical consulting, training, and information services to share knowledge and
support local government in the implementation of sustainable development at the local level
2009/2010
ICLEI member
Greenhouse Gas
Inventory
Carbon
Reduction Grant funded Greenhouse Gas Inventory identifies major sources of emissions within City
Measures progress made in reducing GHG from City operations and community wide and
forecasts how emissions will grow if no behavioral changes or improvements are made
Completed
2010
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Plan
Carbon
Reduction
Grant funded regional planning project in collaboration with SLOAPCD, PG&E, and the Cities of
Paso Robles, Arroyo Grande, Grover Beach, Morro Bay, and Pismo Beach
Development of a local plan to reduce GHG emissions and improve energy efficiency
Recognize local needs and perspectives and focus on practical, implementable solutions
Grant Received
2012
Development In
process
PG&E Climate Smart
Program
Carbon
Reduction First city in the County to join PG&E program to make energy use at City facilities carbon neutral
Climate Smart program designed to make people aware of the challenges posed by climate
change while also helping establish the infrastructure for a low carbon economy in California
Since 2005
City Vehicles Emissions City vehicle idling policies in place to reduce emissions City Operations
Reduction Filters installed on heavy duty diesel engines and old diesel vehicles retired to reduce emissions
Fire Department tests all engines and command vehicles for emissions; two new engines
exceed the 2007 EPA specs for trucks and heavy equipment
Ongoing
Electric Vehicle
Charging Stations
Emissions
Reduction Partnership with APCD to obtain grant funding to install more charging systems in the City
City staff involvement in program to make California Plug-in Electric Vehicle ready
2012 & Ongoing
Land Use & Development
Atascadero
General Plan
Resource
Conservation
Carbon
Reduction
The City’s General Plan is based on the Smart Growth Principles of encouraging infill and reuse
of existing land and infrastructure:
o Encourage mixed-use infill development & revitalization of the Downtown Core
o Preserve & protect the oak woodlands, creeks & wetlands
o Minimize hillside grading & preserve a greenbelt around Atascadero
Adopted 2002
Mixed Use, Retail & job
development
Reduce Vehicle
Miles Traveled City Office of Economic Development created to encourage retail, job development, and infill in
the downtown & urban core. Providing services and shopping within Atascadero will reduce
vehicle miles traveled for residents who currently have to drive for goods and employment
Mixed use promoted, simplified permit process, City and staff support with development projects
Redevelopment Agency funding provided to new businesses and downtown affordable housing
Better jobs to housing balance created so that residents can work, shop and live in the City
High Density Residential areas upzoned in 2011 to increase density in the urban core
City Services
Ongoing
South El Camino Real
Corridor Visioning
Study
Planning for
Sustainable
Communities
Plan to envision how to integrate housing, economic development, jobs and transportation with
a complete street concept for El Camino Real for people, bicycles, transit and automobiles
Collaboration with SLOCOG through a grant from the Department of Conservation; plan will help
City to obtain additional grants for infrastructure and improvements along El Camino Real
Pilot project that will be used to illustrate how cities can integrate a mix of land uses and
densities, alternative forms of transportation and complete streets
2012
Recycling & Waste Reduction
Cold In-Place Road
Recycling
GHG Reduction
Resource
Conservation
Waste
Reduction
City road surface repair project where existing asphalt road is crushed and mixed it with
additives then immediately used to repave road in a single process
Innovative road reconstruction process which is a fast, cost-effective alternative to more
traditional methods of rebuilding asphalt roadways
“Cold In-Place Recycling” eliminates hundreds of asphalt and gravel truck trips which would
traditionally be required to carry out the old asphalt, and carry in new asphalt
2012
City Operations
Recycling Program Resource
Conservation
Waste
Reduction
City collaboration on programs with Atascadero Waste Alternatives
Semiannual “Citywide clean-up days” for residents to recycle household waste at no cost
Free curbside co-mingled recycling program and “green waste” recycling program
Atascadero became the first municipal agency in SLO County to reach targeted 50% diversion
of citywide trash going to landfill
Ongoing
Urban Forestry
Native Tree Ordinance
& Replanting Sites
Carbon
Reduction Ordinance requires protection of native trees and replanting or mitigation fees for removals
Tree mitigation funds used to plant almost 1000 new native trees throughout the City, with an
additional 500 native trees given to private property owners
Tree and habitat survey completed with GIS and work with biologist to study Atascadero’s oak
forest and success of the tree replanting sites
Ongoing
since1999
Tree City USA & Carbon Recognized as a Tree City member for 24 years Ongoing
Atascadero Native Tree
Association (ANTA)
Reduction
Education
Atascadero Native Tree Association creates tree planting areas and does educational programs
and outreach which focus on the care and renewal of native forest
Downtown Streetscape
Projects & Tree
Plantings
Reduces urban
heat island,
City Facilities
Pedestrian and operational improvements including bulb outs, landscaped medians, street trees,
street furniture and lighting for the Downtown according to the RVC Plan
Trees planted with the recent upgrades to the waste water facility & corporation yard to create
shade and reduce the urban heat island
Public Works
2006 & Ongoing
Updates to Landscape
Ordinance
Reduces urban
heat island
Citywide
Landscape standards adopted for multifamily & commercial developments, plus parking lots to
establish minimum requirements for landscape coverage, decorative planting and shade trees
Adopted
September
2005
Water Conservation
Water Conservation
Landscape & Irrigation
Ordinance
Water
Conservation
Citywide &
City Operations
Limits high water use landscapes with new commercial and residential development
Encourages drought tolerant plants that are well suited for Atascadero’s dry climate
Limitations on the amount of turf lawns and spray irrigation
Adopted By City
Council
Jan. 2010
City Facility Operations
& Landscape Water
Conservation Measures
Water
Conservation
City Operations
Cost Savings
Irrigation control systems, with sensors to respond to weather conditions, installed at City parks
Solar panels installed to power the irrigation controller for the landscape areas at Las Lomas
Areas of underutilized turf removed at Atascadero Lake Park, Paloma Creek Park & Fire Station
Drought tolerant and low maintenance landscaping installed in Downtown Streetscape project
City water analysis shows a 25% reduction in water use at City facilities in the past 3 years
City Operations
Ongoing since
2008
Washing Machine &
Toilet Retrofit Programs
Water
Conservation
Citywide
Rebates
692 rebates have been distributed by Atascadero Mutual Water Company to customers
$90,300 of equipment installed, including high-efficiency & ultra-low flow toilets, high-efficiency
clothes washers, plus cooling tower conductivity meters
AMWC
2005 & Ongoing
Landscape Rebate
Program
Water
Conservation
Citywide
Rebates
214 landscape rebates have been distributed by Atascadero Mutual Water Company
$33,123 in rebates have been distributed to customers for turf conservation, lawn aeration, rain
sensors, weather-based irrigation controllers, soil moisture sensors, multi-stream rotary nozzles
and rainwater harvesting
AMWC
2005 & Ongoing
Annual Garden Tour &
Sustainable Landscape
Workshop Series
Education
Water and
Energy
Conservation
Citywide
Atascadero Mutual Water Company hosts the annual garden tour where residents can gather
ideas for beautiful drought tolerant landscapes
Workshops which about irrigation types and plant selection suited to our local climate
Community members learn how to create beautiful outdoor landscapes which use native plants
which are water efficient and require minimal maintenance, thereby saving time, reducing the
need for fertilizers, pesticides, and use of power equipment
AMWC
2010
Home Water Survey
Program
Water
Conservation
Citywide
Cost Savings
The highly successful Home Water Survey Program is free to customers and helps them
conserve water by learning how to manage landscape irrigation more efficiently
AMWC’s water conservation staff helps property owners create a site-specific irrigation
schedule, recommended irrigation system improvements for the, and checks for leaks
AMWC
2009
Page | 1
Date: August 13, 2012
To: Aeron Arlin Genet
Organization: San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution Control District (APCD)
From: Richard Daulton
cc: Melissa Guise, Shauna Callery
Re: City of Atascadero Gap Analysis and Target Refinement
SUMMARY
This memorandum evaluates and quantifies the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction
potential of State and local measures that have been implemented, adopted, and/or
programmed since the 2005 baseline inventory year. It also estimates the impact that these
measures will have on Atascadero’s 2020 business-as-usual forecast, which allows for
determining the remaining gap in emissions reductions that will need to come from new local
measures to meet the 2020 target. This memorandum identifies a number of additional
opportunities to further reduce Atascadero’s GHG emissions to help meet the 2020 target that
may be developed into measures and actions as part of the Climate Action Plan.
Based on this evaluation and analysis, State measures will reduce Atascadero’s GHG
emissions by 24,775 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MT CO2e) and local measures
will reduce GHG emissions by 273 MT CO2e, for a combined reduction of 25,048 MT CO2e. To
meet the 2020 reduction target, Atascadero will need to reduce GHG emissions by an additional
26,003 MT CO2e through new measures that will be detailed in the Climate Action Plan. Based
on our review of measures implemented by other jurisdictions in the region, several potential
measures in the categories of energy, transportation and land use, waste, water, and trees,
parks and open space are identified at the end of this memorandum.
We are committed to the successful completion of the Gap Analysis and Reduction Target
Refinement, and are available to discuss this memorandum in more detail with you at your
earliest convenience. We would request any questions or comments on this memorandum
be sent to Shauna Callery at scallery@rinconconsultants.com by Monday, August 20.
Page | 2
INTRODUCTION
The City of Atascadero Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Update (July 2012) includes a
2005 baseline greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and a business-as-usual forecast of how
emissions in Atascadero would change in the year 2020, absent any new policies or actions that
would reduce emissions. It also establishes a reduction target consistent with Assembly Bill
(AB) 32 for the year 2020.
Since the 2005 baseline inventory year, however, several State and local measures have been
implemented, adopted, and/or programmed that will reduce Atascadero’s GHG emissions and
help the City meet its reduction target by 2020. This document estimates the impact that these
measures will have on the 2020 business-as-usual forecast. Accounting for these reductions in
a “2020 Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast” scenario provides a more accurate picture of
future emissions growth and the responsibility of Atascadero in reducing its emissions
consistent with AB 32. The difference between the 2020 adjusted business-as-usual forecast
and the city’s GHG emissions reduction target represents the “gap” to be closed through further
measures identified in this document and to be developed as part of the Climate Action Plan.
IMPACT OF STATE MEASURES
The AB 32 Climate Change Scoping Plan (2008) identifies several State measures that would
reduce GHG emissions within Atascadero. These measures require no additional local action. A
brief description of each of these State measures is provided below and the local reduction in
GHG emissions is summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1: SUMMARY OF GHG EMISSIONS
REDUCTIONS FROM STATE MEASURES IN 2020
State Measure 2020 Reduction
(MT CO2e)
Clean Car Standards – Pavley, AB 1493 -10,830
Low Carbon Fuel Standard -7,064
Title 24 -265
Renewable Portfolio Standard -6,616
Total Reduction from State Measures -24,775
CLEAN CAR STANDARDS – PAVLEY, ASSEMBLY BILL 1493
Signed into law in 2002, AB 1493 (Pavley I standard) requires vehicle manufactures to reduce
GHG emissions from new passenger vehicles and light trucks from 2009 through 2016.
Regulations were adopted by the California Air Resources Board in 2004 and took effect in
2009 when the U.S. EPA issued a waiver confirming California’s right to implement the bill. The
California Air Resources Board anticipates that the Pavley I standard will reduce GHG
Page | 3
emissions from new California passenger vehicles by about 22% in 2012 and about 30% in
2016, while simultaneously improving fuel efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs.
Reductions in GHG emissions from the Pavley I standard were calculated using the California
Air Resources Board’s EMFAC2011 model for San Luis Obispo County. To account for this
standard, EMFAC2011 integrates the reductions into the mobile source emissions portion of its
model.1 As shown in Table 1 above, the Pavley I standard is expected to reduce transportation
sector emissions in Atascadero by approximately 13.3% in 2020 compared to business-as-usual
levels.
LOW CARBON FUEL STANDARD
The Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) requires a reduction of at least 10% in the carbon
intensity of California’s transportation fuels by 2020. Measured on a lifecycle basis, the carbon
intensity represents the CO2e emitted from each stage of producing, transporting, and using the
fuel in a motor vehicle. Based on the EMFAC2011 model results, this translates to an
approximately 8.7% reduction in Atascadero’s transportation sector GHG emissions in 2020
compared to business-as-usual levels.
TITLE 24
Although it was not originally intended specifically to reduce GHG emissions, California Code of
Regulations Title 24, Part 6: California’s Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and
Nonresidential Buildings, was first adopted in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to
reduce California’s energy consumption, which in turn reduces fossil fuel consumption and
associated GHG emissions. The standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and
possible incorporation of new energy-efficient technologies and methods. The latest update was
the 2008 Title 24 Energy Efficiency Standards. The California Energy Commission estimates
that the 2008 standards reduce consumption by 10% for residential buildings and 5% for
commercial buildings, relative to the previous standards. These percentage savings relate to
heating, cooling, lighting, and water heating only and do not include other appliances, outdoor
lighting that is not attached to buildings, plug loads, or other energy uses.
The 2008 Title 24 requirements went into effect after the baseline inventory year and, therefore,
were not included in the business-as-usual forecast. To account for reductions from the 2008
Title 24 requirements for growth after the baseline year, a 10% reduction in residential energy
use covered by Title 24 and a 5% reduction in commercial energy use covered by Title 24 were
applied to the emissions projections.2 The calculation and 2020 GHG emissions forecast
1 Additional details are provided in CARB’s EMFAC2011 Technical Documentation (September 19, 2011),
available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/msei/emfac2011-documentation-final.pdf
2 Reductions for the 2008 standards are provided in the California Energy Commission’s Impact Analysis,
2008 Update to the California Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings
(2007), available at http://www.energy.ca.gov/title24/2008standards/rulemaking/documents/2007-11-
07_Impact_Analysis.pdf. This calculation follows the methodology detailed in the Statewide Energy
Efficiency Collaborative’s report, Greenhouse Gas Forecasting Assistant (October 2011).
Page | 4
assumes that all growth in the residential and commercial/industrial sectors is from new
construction. As shown in Table 1, the post-2008 Title 24 requirements would reduce emissions
by approximately 265 MT CO2e in 2020.
The AB 32 Scoping Plan calls for the continuation of ongoing triennial updates to Title 24 that
will yield regular increases in the mandatory energy and water savings for new construction.
Future updates to Title 24 standards for residential and non-residential alterations are not taken
into consideration due to lack of data and certainty about the magnitude of energy savings that
will be realized with each subsequent update.
RENEWABLE PORTFOLIO STANDARD
The State of California Renewable Portfolio Standard requires investor-owned utilities, electric
service providers, and community choice aggregators to increase the portion of energy that
comes from renewable sources to 20% by 2010 and 33% by 2020. Pacific Gas and Electric
(PG&E) is the electricity provider in Atascadero. In 2005, approximately 12% of PG&E’s
electricity came from qualified renewable sources.3 Therefore, this regulation is expected to
result in a 21% reduction in GHG emissions resulting from electricity consumption compared to
2020 business-as-usual levels.
SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES AND CLIMATE PROTECTION ACT – SENATE BILL 375
Senate Bill 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Action of 2008, enhances
California’s ability to reach its AB 32 target by aligning regional transportation planning efforts
with land use and housing allocations in order to reduce transportation-related GHG emissions.
SB 375 requires the ARB to set regional GHG emissions targets for passenger vehicles and
light trucks for the years 2020 and 2035 for each of California’s 18 metropolitan planning
organizations (MPOs). Each MPO is required to prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy
(SCS) as part of its next Regional Transportation Plan that demonstrates how the region will
meet its GHG reduction target. The San Luis Obispo Council of Governments (SLOCOG)
adopted targets for 2020 and 2035 to achieve an 8% reduction in per capita GHG emissions
from passenger vehicles.
While the outcome of SB 375 in terms of a reduction in vehicle miles traveled per capita is
specified by the State, achievement of the target is dependent on regional and local actions and
activities that are not regulated by the State. Many of these actions and activities will be
inextricably linked to the local climate action plans and including them in the adjusted business-
as-usual scenario would likely result in the double counting of emissions reductions. Therefore,
SB 375 has not been included as a State measure that would reduce GHG emissions within
Atascadero.
3 PG&E 2005 Renewables Portfolio, available at
http://www.pge.com/b2b/energysupply/wholesaleelectricsuppliersolicitation/renewables2005.shtml
Page | 5
IMPACT OF LOCAL MEASURES
In addition to the State measures described above, the City of Atascadero has implemented,
adopted, and/or programmed a number of local measures since the 2005 baseline inventory
year that will reduce the community’s GHG emissions. A brief description of each of these local
measures is provided below by topic area and the local reduction in GHG emissions in 2020 is
summarized in Table 2 (see Attachment A for supporting details).
Many GHG reduction measures that can be readily quantified to determine their GHG reduction
potential; however, not all measures can be quantified with the information and/or tools that are
currently available. In addition, in some cases a measure may support or strengthen another
measure, but not result in additional reductions, in which it is identified as a “support measure.”
When sufficient information and tools were available, the GHG reduction potential of a given
measure was quantified to determine its 2020 reduction potential. Quantification followed
standardized methods for estimating emissions detailed in the California Air Pollution Control
Officers Association’s (CAPCOA) report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures
(August 2010).4
4 California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association’s (CAPCOA) report Quantifying Greenhouse Gas
Mitigation Measures available at http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/CAPCOA-
Quantification-Report-9-14-Final.pdf
Page | 6
TABLE 2: SUMMARY OF GHG EMISSIONS
REDUCTIONS FROM LOCAL MEASURES IN 2020
Local Measure 2020 Reduction
(MT CO2e)1
Energy
Solar Energy Installation (Residential, Commercial, and Municipal) -161
Municipal Building Energy Efficiency Improvements -28
Transportation and Land Use
Diversity and Density of Land Uses Not Quantified2
Transit Improvements -7
Park and Ride Facilities Not Quantified2
Bicycle Network Improvements -14
Electric Vehicle Charging Station Not Quantified
Waste
Green Waste Program Not Quantified
Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion -41
Water
Water Conservation Programs to Meet SB 7 Target -4
Trees, Parks, and Open Space
Streetscape Improvements -18
Total Reduction from Local Measures -273
1 Supporting information pertaining to the reduction calculations is provided in Attachment A to this document.
2 The reductions associated with General Plan density and diversity of land uses were included in the
business-as-usual forecast of transportation-related emissions. See Attachment A for additional information.
ENERGY MEASURES
During the last five years, approximately 624 kilowatts (kW) of solar photovoltaic systems and
hot water heaters were installed on or in homes, businesses, and City property in Atascadero.
These installations will reduce emissions by 236 MT CO2e in 2020.
In addition, since 2005, the City has implemented energy efficiency improvements, such as
lighting retrofits, HVAC upgrades, and the installation of programmable thermostats and
occupancy censors. These improvements would reduce electricity use by approximately
169,200 kW in 2020 and are expected to reduce emissions by 28 MT CO2e in 2020.
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE MEASURES
Transportation and land use measures, including density and diversity of land uses, bicycle
network improvements, and recent transit improvements, are expected to reduce vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) and enhance non-automobile mobility. Although density and diversity of land
uses based on the existing General Plan and improvements to park and ride facilities prior to
2011 are already captured in the business-as-usual forecast of transportation-related emissions,
recently implemented bicycle network and transit improvements are projected to reduce
emissions by approximately 21 MT CO2e in 2020. In addition, the electric vehicle charging
Page | 7
stations have been installed at one location within the City, and are planned to be installed at
two additional locations.
SOLID WASTE MEASURES
As of 2010, the California Green Building Code requires all local jurisdictions to ensure that 50%
of all non-hazardous construction and demolition solid waste is diverted from landfills. Within
Atascadero, this would reduce emissions by an estimated 41 MT CO2e in 2020. The City of
Atascadero also maintains a “green waste” recycling program with a locally contracted trash
hauler; however, the data to necessary to estimate the GHG emission reduction potential from
this measure is not currently available.
WATER MEASURES
The City has implemented a number of measures to reduce water consumption, including a
water efficient landscape and irrigation ordinance, toilet and washing machine rebate program,
and landscape rebate program. In addition, the City has implemented several water
conservation measures at City facilities. These improvements and programs have reduced
emissions by approximately 4 MT CO2e.
TREES, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE MEASURES
Between 2006 and 2011, approximately 1,500 trees were planted throughout Atascadero, which
are estimated to sequester 18 MT CO2e in 2020.
ADJUSTED BUSINESS-AS-USUAL FORECAST AND REDUCTION TARGET
As shown in Table 3, state and local measures will reduce GHG emissions in Atascadero by an
estimated 25,048 MT CO2e by 2020 (14% below the 2020 business-as-usual forecast). Table 4
and Figure 1 demonstrate the gap that will need to be closed between the 2020 adjusted
business-as-usual forecast and the State-recommended GHG reduction target of 15% below
baseline emissions by 2020, which is equivalent to 26,003 MT CO2e. As shown in Table 4, the
City would be responsible for reducing this gap of 26,003 MT CO2e by 2020 through measures
identified in the Climate Action Plan.
TABLE 3: SUMMARY OF REDUCTIONS FROM STATE AND
LOCAL MEASURES AND 2020 GHG EMISSIONS
GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2020 Business-as-Usual Forecast 175,210
2020 Reduction from State Measures -24,775
2020 Reduction from Local Measures -273
Total Reduction from State and Local Measures -25,048
2020 Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast 150,162
Page | 8
TABLE 4: ATASCADERO’S GHG EMISSIONS,
TARGET, AND REDUCTION NECESSARY TO MEET TARGET
GHG Emissions
(MT CO2e)
2005 Baseline Emissions 146,069
2020 Adjusted Business-as-Usual Forecast 150,162
Target (15% below 2005 levels by 2020) 124,159
Remaining Gap Necessary to Meet 2020 Target 26,003
FIGURE 1: SUMMARY OF ATASCADERO’S
GHG EMISSIONS AND REDUCTION TARGET
FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES TO MEET TARGET
Based on the review and analysis of local measures implemented to date, this section identifies
current policy gaps and additional opportunities in the areas of energy, transportation and land
use, water, waste, and trees, parks and open space to help Atascadero meet its reduction target
by 2020.
ENERGY
Energy emissions result from the combustion of fossil fuel, primarily coal, oil and natural gas,
which is used to heat, cool and provide power to residential, commercial and industrial buildings
and other facilities. Factors affecting energy related emission in buildings include building
design and the efficiency of technology and electronics in buildings. Energy emissions
reductions can be achieved by changes to both energy supplies and energy demand. Future
policy opportunities to reduce energy emissions may include the following:
120,000
130,000
140,000
150,000
160,000
170,000
180,000
2005 2020GHG Emissions (CO2e) Business-as-
Usual Forecast
2005 Baseline
Adjusted
Business-as-
Usual Forecast
State
Recommended
Reduction
Target
26,003
MT CO2e
Page | 9
Incentivize or mandate energy efficiency upgrades for existing residential and non-
residential buildings
Install additional solar or other renewable energy systems on municipal buildings
Promote incentives and financing programs (e.g., California Solar Initiative) for
renewable energy installations
Promote incentives and financing programs for (e.g., PG&E incentives and Energy
Upgrade California) for energy efficiency improvements
Educate the community about the PG&E Smart Meter program
Continue to replace standard lights with LED or other energy efficient lights
Implement strategies to reduce the urban heat-island effect, such as establishing “cool-
roof” requirements or incentives
Continue to improve the efficiency of municipal buildings, facilities, and lighting
Work with local green building organizations, such as SLO Green Build, to promote
education and outreach programs.
TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE
Transportation-related emissions comprise the largest portion of emissions. Factors affecting
GHG emissions from transportation include the number vehicle miles traveled, fuel economy,
and the type of fuel used. The number of vehicle miles traveled is also influenced by the
geographic distribution of land uses, people, and the density of development and zoning.
Future policy opportunities for transportation and land use include the following:
Fully implement the 2010 Bicycle Transportation Plan
Implement pedestrian network improvements and Safe Routes to School
Develop a commute trip reduction program that encourages and incentivizes the use of
public transit
Develop and offer incentives for high density and/or mixed use development such as
reduced parking requirements or expedited permitting processes
Implement a transportation demand management program for city employees
Continue to replace older municipal vehicles with zero or low emissions vehicles
Establish maximum rather than minimum parking requirements
Implement or expand on-street public parking pricing
SOLID WASTE
As solid waste decomposes in landfills, it releases methane, a GHG 21 times more potent than
carbon dioxide. As such, waste management is an importation action that can reduce GHG
emissions. Waste management can be achieved by reducing the amount of trash and other
waste that is sent to landfills by recycling containers, products, building materials, and
construction materials. Future policy opportunities for solid waste include the following:
Institute or extend recycling and/or composting programs
Mandate higher diversion rates for construction activities
Increase the city-wide solid waste diversion rate (e.g., work to achieve consistency with
the State’s goal of 75% by 2020 identified in AB 341)
Page | 10
Create an environmentally responsible City purchasing policy
Provide recycling receptacles at all City facilities
Require recycling at public events
WATER
Water conveyance and treatment consumes electricity and natural gas. Reducing water
demand can be an effective way to reduce emissions associated with water treatment and
conveyance. Future policy opportunities for water include the following:
Work with the Atascadero Mutual Water Company to complete an Urban Water
Management Plan consistent with the requirements of SB 7
Expand reclaimed water infrastructure and distribution
Expand the use of grey water systems
Adopt CalGreen Tier 1 standards for water efficiency and conservation in new
development
Expand reclaimed water distribution facilities
Expand the use of grey water systems
TREES, PARKS AND OPEN SPACE
Vegetation, such as trees and other landscapes sequester GHGs. Plating native, drought
tolerant trees and landscapes within the City can increase the sequestrations potential of the
urban forest, while supporting the water conservation measures listed above. Future policy
opportunities for vegetation include the following:
Develop or enhance a native urban tree planting program
Create new vegetated open spaces, landscaped with native and drought tolerant plants
and trees
REGIONAL
Partnering with other neighboring jurisdictions within the County and community organizations is
an important aspect of reducing GHG emissions, as it can increase the effectiveness of a
measure and reduce costs by leveraging resources. Listed below are existing and potential
regional programs, partnerships, and measures that may be expanded upon or implemented to
reduce emissions.
Expand participation in and promotion of San Luis Obispo Energy Watch to reduce
community-wide and municipal energy use
The County’s EnergyWise Plan calls for the formation of a countywide energy
collaborative that includes cities, the County, and state and local agencies. Support this
effort to provide renewable funding and financing
Support the Renewable Energy Secure Communities for San Luis Obispo County (SLO-
RESCO) project. SLO-RESCO is a regional partnership working to identify the best mix
of resources for clean, secure and affordable energy. SLO-RESCO’s efforts and will
help the public and decision makers consider their research results.
Page | 11
Continue participation in Electric Vehicle Community Readiness planning and
implementation
Work with other jurisdictions in the region to evaluate the feasibility of a regional
Community Choice Aggregation program to procure electricity from renewable
resources5
Expand participation in and promotion of Central Coast Clean Cities Coalition (C5)
Collaborate with regional organizations, such as SLOCOG’s Regional Rideshare and
San Luis Obispo County’s Bicycle Coalition on outreach and education events, and to
expand programs and projects, such as Safe Routes to School
Coordinate with SLOCOG to implement the next Regional Transportation
Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Partner with regional organizations to create volunteer opportunities for native tree
planting, trail work, habitat restoration, and open space maintenance
5 Assembly Bill 117 (2002) enables California cities and counties, either individually or collectively, to
supply electricity to customers within their jurisdiction by establishing a community choice aggregation
(CCA) program. Unlike a municipal utility, a CCA does not own transmission and delivery systems, but is
responsible for providing electricity to residents and businesses. The CCA may own electric generating
facilities, but more often, it purchases electricity from private electricity generators. The primary benefits
offered by a CCA are local control over the energy sources used within the community, the ability to
provide electricity to customers at lower overall cost, and greater use of renewable energy. Through a
CCA, a jurisdiction can choose to structure a supply portfolio that achieves cost efficiencies, fuel and
technological diversity, environmental improvements, and/or cost stability. A CCA would facilitate
implementation of a program to increase use of renewable energy resources and promote improved
energy efficiency.