Draft Environmental Impact Report - East Bay Municipal Utility District

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Estates Reservoir Replacement Draft Environmental Impact ReportGreenhouse GasesTiered Approach with Quantitative Threshold Based on Market CaptureThe goal of a tiered threshold is to maximize reduction predictability while minimizingadministrative burden and costs. This would be accomplished by prescribing feasiblemitigation measures based on project size and type, and reserving the detailed review ofan EIR for those projects of greater size and complexity. This approach may requireinclusion in a General Plan or adoption of specific rules or ordinances in order to fullyand effectively implement it. (CAPCOA 2008)A tiered CEQA significance threshold could establish different levels at which todetermine if a project would have a significant impact. The tiers could be establishedbased on the gross GHG emission estimates for a project or could be based on thephysical size and characteristics of the Project. This approach would then prescribe a setof GHG mitigation strategies that would have to be incorporated into the Project in orderfor the Project to be considered less than significant. The framework for a tieredthreshold would include (CAPCOA 2008):Disclosure of GHG emissions for all projects;Support for city/county/regional GHG emissions reduction planning;Creation and use of a “green list” to promote the construction of projects that havedesirable GHG emission characteristics;A list of mitigation measures;A decision tree approach to tiering; andQuantitative or qualitative thresholds.CEQA guidance that allows multiple methodologies to demonstrate GHGsignificance will facilitate the determination of significance for a broad range ofprojects/plans that would otherwise be difficult to address with a single noncompoundmethodology. Results of analysis would yield one of three results(CAPCOA 2008):- Tier 1 Projects - A net reduction of GHG emissions (Less than Significant or NoImpact)- Tier 2 Projects - A net increase of GHG emissions but mitigated to zero(Significant but Mitigable)- Tier 3 Projects - Mitigation is infeasible due to the cost or lack of availableoffsets to reduce net emissions to zero (Significant and Unavoidable)A single quantitative threshold was developed in order to ensure capture of 90 percent ormore of likely future discretionary developments. The objective was to set the emissionthreshold low enough to capture a substantial fraction of future residential andnonresidential development that will be constructed to accommodate future statewidepopulation and job growth, while setting the emission threshold high enough to excludesmall development projects that will contribute a relatively small fraction of thecumulative statewide GHG emissions (CAPCOA 2008):sb09_001.doc 3-8.10 7/22/2009
Estates Reservoir Replacement Draft Environmental Impact ReportGreenhouse Gases The GHG emissions associated with 50 single-family residential units and 30,000square feet of office were estimated and were found to be 900 metric tonnes and800 metric tonnes, respectively. Given the variance on individual projects, a singlethreshold of 900 metric tonnes was selected for residential and office projects. A 900 metric tonnes threshold was also selected for non-office commercial projectsand industrial projects to provide equivalency for different projects in othereconomic sectors. The industrial sector is less amenable to a unit-based approach given the diversityof projects within this sector. One option would be to adopt a quantitative GHGemissions threshold (900 metric tonnes) for industrial projects equivalent to that forthe residential/commercial thresholds described above. Industrial emissions canresult from both stationary and mobile sources.CARB estimates that their suggested reporting threshold for stationary sources of 25,000metric tonnes accounts for more than 90 percent of the industrial sector GHG emissions.If the CARB rationale holds, then a 900 metric tonnes threshold would likely capture atleast 90 percent (and likely more) of new industrial and manufacturing sources.(CAPCOA 2008)Alameda County Climate Change Leadership Strategy ResolutionThe Estates Reservoir Replacement Project site is located in Alameda County. OnJune 6, 2006 the Alameda County Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted aresolution establishing a County Climate Change Leadership Strategy. This resolutioncommits the County to reduce its contribution of climate-changing gases such as carbondioxide. In adopting this resolution, the County encourages other local governmentsthroughout the county to take on the challenge of global warming. Key elements of thestrategy include:Conduct a GHG emissions inventory and forecast;Establish County GHG emissions reduction targets;Develop an implementation plan to meet the County GHG reduction targets;Implement the plan;Monitor and review progress;Require a collaborative cross-agency approach to develop and implement plans toachieve greenhouse gas reduction targets and to prepare for future effects of globalwarming;Provide administrative oversight for the effort and establish the cross-agencySustainability Executive Committee a cross-agency Climate Action Team;Require that agencies and associated entities should actively participate in meetingGHG reduction targets;Require that global warming mitigation and adaptation strategies will be integratedinto key County planning processes, budgeting, and training when possible orappropriate;Require that the County of Alameda share urgent concerns and key learnings withbusinesses, the public, and other government agencies (e.g., EBMUD); andsb09_001.doc 3-8.11 7/22/2009
Page 1:
Estates Reservoir ReplacementDraft
Page 4 and 5:
TABLE OF CONTENTSEstates Reservoir
Page 6 and 7:
Estates Reservoir Replacement Draft
Page 8 and 9:
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONSABABAGAPC
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
SUMMARYS.1 IntroductionThis Draft E
Page 14 and 15:
Estates Reservoir Improvements Draf
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Chapter 2Project Description2.1 Ove
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Chapter 3Environmental Setting, Imp
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
3.5 Cultural Resources3.5.1 Approac
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127: 3.6 Traffic and Circulation3.6.1 Ap
Page 128 and 129: Estates Reservoir Replacement Draft
Page 218 and 219: CHAPTER 5Cumulative Impacts, Growth
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
Page 230 and 231:
CHAPTER 6Report Preparers6.1 Lead A
Page 232 and 233:
APPENDIX APublic InvolvementPublic
Page 234:
APPENDIX BNotice of PreparationAUGU
Page 238 and 239:
Dingee Pressure Zone Improvement Pr
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
FIGURESDingee Pressure Zone Improve
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280:
show all

Draft Environmental Impact Report - East Bay Municipal Utility District

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

Delete template?

Save as template?