SC 12-19-19 PacketCITY OF CUPERTINO
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
AGENDA
Environmental Education Center, 22221 McClellan Road
Thursday, December 19, 2019
4:00 PM
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1.Subject: Minutes from November 21, 2019
Recommended Action: Approve minutes from November 21, 2019
A - Draft Minutes
POSTPONEMENTS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the commission on any matter not
on the agenda. Speakers are limited to three (3) minutes. In most cases, State law will prohibit the
commission from making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
2.Subject: Update from Environmental Programs Division staff on Household
Hazardous Waste Program and Recology's recycling processing cost increase
Recommended Action: Receive update and provide any feedback
3.Subject: Staff update on Buy Clean California Act policy development and Bay Area
low carbon concrete codes initiatives
Recommended Action: Receive update and provide any feedback
Staff Report
4.Subject: Sustainability Commission Proposals for FY 2020-21 City Work Program
Recommended Action: Provide a list of proposed City Work Program items,
identifying the top three proposals
Page 1
12/19/19
1 of 51
Sustainability Commission Agenda December 19, 2019
Staff Report
5.Subject: Sustainability Speaker Series planning
Recommended Action: Discuss and decide next steps for Sustainability Speaker Series
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), anyone who is planning to attend the
next meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance
should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for
assistance. Upon request, in advance, by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings
distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative
format. Also upon request, in advance, an assistive listening device can be made available for use
during the meeting.
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the members after publication of the agenda will
be made available for public inspection. Please contact the City Clerk’s Office in City Hall located at
10300 Torre Avenue during normal business hours.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.100
written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a
matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written
communications are accessible to the public through the City’s website and kept in packet archives. You
are hereby admonished not to include any personal or private information in written communications to
the City that you do not wish to make public; doing so shall constitute a waiver of any privacy rights
you may have on the information provided to the City.
Members of the public are entitled to address the members concerning any item that is described in the
notice or agenda for this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address the
members on any other item not on the agenda, you may do so during the public comment.
Page 2
12/19/19
2 of 51
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Legislation Text
Subject: Minutes from November 21, 2019
Approve minutes from November 21, 2019
File #:19-6750,Version:1
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 10/16/2020Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12/19/19
3 of 51
1
CITY OF CUPERTINO SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
Environmental Education Center, 22221 McClellan Road
Thursday, November 21, 2019 4:00 p.m.
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
At 4:10 p.m. Vice Chair Latshaw called the meeting to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Gary Latshaw, Meera Ramanathan, Angela Chen, Anna Weber (arrived @ 4:58 p.m.),
Vignesh Swaminathan (arrived @ 5:10 p.m.). Absent: None.
Staff: Gilee Corral, Sustainability Program Coordinator.
Guests: Members of the public.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Draft minutes of October 24, 2019 meeting were reviewed. Commissioner Chen moved and Commissioner
Ramanathan seconded to approve the minutes. The motion carried unanimously with Chair Weber and
Commissioner Swaminathan absent.
POSTPONEMENTS - None.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS – None.
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
Gilee Corral distributed an email related to Subject #6.
OLD BUSINESS
2. Subject: Discuss November 19th City Council Study Session on building electrification policy and
reach codes adoption process
Corral gave a brief update on, and answered questions about, the reach codes adoption process:
- Council First Reading of the Draft Ordinance scheduled for December 17.
- Sustainability Manager André Duurvoort will present the reach codes to a public meeting of the
Chamber of Commerce on Dec. 6; Commissioners are encouraged to attend if interested.
- Commissioners asked for clarification on a Council study session vs First Reading, timing, and about
mandatory waiting periods between Readings. Corral explained that the study session was to explore
the policy options and get feedback, whereas the First Reading is the official Council review of a
proposed ordinance. Corral will forward an updated timeline of the process to the Commission.
NEW BUSINESS
12/19/19
4 of 51
2
3. Subject: Review City of Cupertino Draft Ethics Protocol
No feedback, written or verbal, was received from Commissioners on the Draft Ethics Protocol.
4. Subject: Discuss if limitations can be applied to natural gas usage in nonresidential facilities via a fee
structure or licensing process by the City
Vice Chair Latshaw raised the issue of an increase in natural gas usage reflected in the community greenhouse
gas (GHG) inventory update. He would like the Commission to review the options available to the City to
address this and add it to the Commission’s Work Program. Commissioners Chen and Ramanathan expressed
their support.
Corral reviewed Commission’s FY 2020 Work Program and the status of each item, noting several unfinished
items on the Work Program. She advised the Commission to either drop a current item and swap it for the
natural gas usage item in FY 2020; alternatively, the Commission could add the natural gas usage item to the
FY 2021 Work Program idea list.
The Commission discussed the options and raised other points, including:
- Synergy with the reach code Work Program item and furthering the push for electrification
(Ramanathan).
- Consider alignment with the Sustainability Commission’s purview, potential crossover with the
Planning Commission (Chen).
- Synergy with Climate Action Plan (CAP) methodology Work Program item (Latshaw).
Vice Chair Latshaw moved and Commissioner Chen seconded to add the natural gas usage in nonresidential
facilities item to the FY 2021 Work Program discussion on the December agenda. The motion carried
unanimously with Chair Weber and Commissioner Swaminathan absent.
5. Subject: Discuss Protected Trees Ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 14.18) and staff update
on recent assessment of Cupertino’s tree canopy
Chair Weber arrived at 4:58 p.m. and assumed Chair duties.
Corral gave a brief presentation on the Protected Trees Ordinance and an overview of the recently completed
assessment of Cupertino’s tree canopy.
Chair Weber opened public comment and the following individual spoke:
Elle Van Buren (Cupertino resident) talked about her desire for an update of the Protected Trees Ordinance,
expressed concern of mature redwoods being cut down in her neighborhood.
Commissioner Ramanathan left the room at 5:06 p.m.
Public comment resumed at 5:07 p.m. Elle Van Buren displayed written comments on the screen for the
Commission and expressed a desire for Cupertino to consider updating the Protected Tree Ordinance.
Commissioner Swaminathan arrived at 5:10 p.m.
12/19/19
5 of 51
3
Chair Weber closed public comment. Corral responded to procedural questions about the item and
possibilities. Corral recommended either requesting a presentation on the tree canopy from Public Works staff
or including the item in the Commission’s discussion of potential FY 2021 Work Program items.
The Commission entered a brief discussion with various issues raised, including:
- Numerous activities are still underway in FY 2020 Work Program; could discuss adding it to FY 2021
Work Program (Weber).
- Need to establish a link between the tree canopy and the GHG inventory for it to be relevant to the
Sustainability Commission; otherwise, may be under the Planning Commission purview (Chen).
Commissioner Chen moved and Vice Chair Latshaw seconded to add the Protected Tree Ordinance item to the
FY 2021 Work Program discussion on the December agenda. The motion carried unanimously with
Commissioner Ramanathan absent.
6. Subject: Review submitted applications for 2019 Sustainability Grants for Students program
Commissioner Ramanathan returned at 5:23 p.m.
Corral reviewed the eligibility requirements, grant amount limits, and the Commission’s FY 2020 budget and
year to date approximate expenses. The Commission discussed shifting funds from other projects to
supplement the grant fund.
Vice Chair Latshaw left the room at 5:35 p.m. and returned shortly after.
Corral announced that Silicon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) is accepting applications for a similar grant
program for students, the Education Fund, applications due Jan 31, 2020.
Commission discussed whether to divide the applications into categories, i.e. high school / elementary school,
nonprofit, etc., and whether to request similar projects work together. Chair Weber advised, and the
Commission decided, to consider each project separately and judge each based on its merit and alignment with
the stated goals.
The Commission reviewed each application and briefly discussed each individually. Items reviewed included
feasibility, link to the program purpose, educational element, reduction of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs)
in Cupertino, empowering students, working with school staff, if program will continue after the student
applicant(s) leave their school and graduate, etc.
Commissioner Chen left the room at 6:25 p.m. and returned shortly after.
Commissioners gave their personal top picks:
• Commissioner Ramanathan: top four (not ranked): Lawson Middle “Bring a Fork to School” (App
#108), Montclaire Elementary vegetable planting project (App #103), Monta Vista High off-site
composting project (App #105), Monta Vista High “Smile for Nature” project (App #106). Top two if
only two were chosen (not ranked): #105 and #106. She left the meeting at 6:30 p.m.
• Commissioner Swaminathan: top four (not ranked): same as Ramanathan. Top two if only two were
chosen (not ranked): #108 and #103.
12/19/19
6 of 51
4
• Chair Weber: top four (not ranked): same as Ramanathan and Swaminathan. Top two if only two were
chosen (not ranked): #108 and #105.
• Commissioner Chen: in preference order: Top choice: #105, 2nd place: #103. Runner up: #108, with
reduction in funding to $200.
• Commissioner Latshaw: Top choice: #103.
Chair Weber moved and Commissioner Chen seconded to revise the Sustainability Commission FY 2020
budgeted program amounts as follows: increase amount of funding for Sustainability Student Grant Winners
from $1,200 to $2,000; eliminate $500 from the Sustainability Essay Contest; and reduce School Waste Audits
amount from $700 to $400. The motion carried unanimously with Commissioner Ramanathan absent.
Chair Weber made a motion to award $500 each to applications #103, #105, #106, and #108. The Commission
discussed the motion, noting that the amount was above the request for some of the applicants. The motion
was withdrawn.
The Commission discussed the distribution of reusable forks proposed in #108, raising various concerns.
Corral noted that the Water District may be able to supply reusable forks. There was general agreement that
the Commission wished to fund the posters / promotion part of the project but not the purchase of the forks.
After some discussion, the Commission agreed not to select #106; comments included that the project could
augment the other Monta Vista project or could be expanded to a district-wide approach.
Commissioner Swaminathan moved to award $300 to Montclaire Elementary vegetable planting project (App
#103); $325 to the Monta Vista High off-site composting project (App #105); and $200 to the Lawson Middle
“Bring a Fork to School” project (App #108), with the provision that Commission funds be used for posters and
promotion only. After a brief discussion, the motion was amended to award $240 to the Lawson Middle “Bring
a Fork to School” project (App #108) for supplies for posters and fliers for advertising; $300 to the Montclaire
Elementary vegetable planting project (App #103); and $325 to the Monta Vista High off-site composting
project (App #105). The motion as amended was seconded by Chair Weber and carried unanimously with
Commissioner Ramanathan absent.
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS
Commissioner Swaminathan left the meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Commission updates: Vice Chair Latshaw announced that Churchill Club is having a meeting on Dec. 5 on
California achieving its GHG goals. Latshaw will email staff details for distribution to the Commission.
Staff updates: Staff noted that the City of Sunnyvale has suggested ideas for collaborating on a Sustainability
Speaker Series event; to be discussed at the December meeting.
ADJOURNMENT- 7:05 p.m.
12/19/19
7 of 51
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Legislation Text
Subject: Update from Environmental Programs Division staff on Household Hazardous Waste
Program and Recology's recycling processing cost increase
Receive update and provide any feedback
File #:19-6751,Version:1
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 10/16/2020Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12/19/19
8 of 51
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Legislation Text
Subject: Staff update on Buy Clean California Act policy development and Bay Area low carbon
concrete codes initiatives
Receive update and provide any feedback
File #:19-6752,Version:1
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 10/16/2020Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12/19/19
9 of 51
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting: December 19, 2019
Subject
Staff update on Buy Clean California Act policy development and Bay Area low carbon
concrete codes initiatives.
Recommended Action
Receive update and provide any feedback.
Background
The Buy Clean California Act (AB 262) requires the California Department of General
Services (DGS) to establish maximum acceptable Global Warming Potential (GWP)
limits for “covered materials” used in state public works projects. AB 262 targets
embedded carbon emissions of structural steel, carbon steel rebar, flat glass, and mineral
wool board insulation. Monitoring the state’s Buy Clean policy is part of the
Sustainability Commission’s FY 2020 Work Program and supports CC Resolution No.
19-040 Supporting State Implementation of the Buy Clean California Act of 2017. The
cities of Berkeley and Richmond have adopted similar resolutions.
Discussion
Buy Clean California update:
AB 1817 modified Buy Clean CA to push implementation to July 2021, giving the DGS a
two-year phase-in period to collect EPDs. AB 1817 allowed the DGS to exclude the
fabrication stage from the GWP calculation. State agencies can also develop a list of
exemptions to Buy Clean, such as health and safety, emergency-related projects.
In October, the DGS hosted an External Stakeholder Event on the status of Buy Clean
CA as modified by AB 1817. The webinar provided technical information on the
methodology being considered by the DGS to establish the GWP limit and clarification
on acceptable Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) (presentation attached).
12/19/19
10 of 51
Current timeline of Buy Clean policy implementation (from DGS’s Buy Clean
website 1):
January 1, 2019 – Awarding authorities will request submission of Environmental
Product Declarations (EPDs). Awarding authority means:
• A state agency for a contract for a public works project that is subject to the State
Contract Act (Chapter 1 (commencing with Section 10100) of Part 2).
• The Regents of the University of California for a contract for a public works
project that is subject to Chapter 2.1 (commencing with Section 10500) of Part 2.
• The Trustees of the California State University for a contract for a public works
project that is subject to the California State University Contract Law (Chapter
2.5 (commencing with Section 10700) of Part 2).
January 1, 2020 – Awarding authorities will require submission of EPDs.
January 1, 2021 – DGS will publish the maximum acceptable GWP for eligible materials.
July 1, 2021 – Awarding authorities will gauge GWP compliance of eligible materials
with EPDs.
Bay Area low carbon concrete codes update:
Last year, the County of Marin received a grant from the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD)'s Climate Protection Grant Program to explore local
model policy to address embodied carbon in concrete. Partners of this effort include
StopWaste (Alameda County), Bruce King, Arup, and the Carbon Leadership Forum
and is supported by the City and County of San Francisco, County of Alameda, City of
Berkeley, and Bay Area building industry companies and organizations. The County of
Marin maintains a website 2 to track the Bay Area Low-Carbon Concrete Codes Project
and provide model resources that are updated as the project develops.
On November 19, the County of Marin Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted a
local modification of the County’s Building Code to establish embodied emissions limits
in concrete for projects with new poured concrete. The codes are effective January 1,
2020. The County of Marin Community Development Agency, Planning Division’s staff
report (attached) notes novel elements of the new code:
• Establishes a sliding scale for the maximum amount of cement for different
strength of concrete mixes.
• Includes “an alternate pathway for compliance using limits on embodied
emissions within concrete mixes, which provides flexibility for SCMs and
innovations in cement alternatives.” SCMs are “supplementary cementitious
materials” and include fly ash, slag, glass pozzolans, and other materials.
• Sets emissions limits for “conventional, Portland cement based concrete mixes,
something that has not previously been done in a local building code.”
1 https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Page-Content/Procurement-Division-Resources-List-Folder/Buy-
Clean-California-Act
2 https://www.marincounty.org/depts/cd/divisions/sustainability/low-carbon-concrete-project
12/19/19
11 of 51
The standards were developed with support from a technical consultant and a review
process with a regional stakeholder group established through the BAAQMD grant.
Technical recommendations and feedback were also received via multiple meetings with
expert stakeholders. The project was featured in the Marin Independent Journal and
Engineering News-Record, the latter of which dubbed it the “first low-carbon concrete
code in the US.”
Cupertino Green Building Ordinance:
Cupertino City Council will be holding a public hearing on December 17 on the subject
of electrification and green building local ordinances. Staff is recommending that
Council re-adopt the existing Green Building Ordinance with no changes (Cupertino
Municipal Code chapter 16.58). The Green Building Ordinance has been in effect in
Cupertino since June 2013. Cupertino’s local Green Building Ordinance requires all large
developments to build and certify their projects to the LEED (Leadership in Energy &
Environmental Design) rating system, or otherwise demonstrate their designs meet the
LEED certified standard or better. One advantage of the existing Cupertino Green
Building Ordinance is that the LEED rating system is continually updated to drive
progress in the construction and design industry.
The current LEED rating system (version 4.1) encourages but does not require any GWP
limits in product selection. The Building Product Disclosure and Optimization–
Environmental Product Declarations Credit 3 rewards the selection of building products
with reductions in global warming potential and embodied carbon, as demonstrated in a
product EPD or verified life cycle assessment.
Next Steps
Staff will continue to monitor the development of the County of Marin’s model code and
the implementation of Buy Clean CA.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Gilee Corral, Sustainability Program Coordinator and Staff Liaison
Reviewed by: André Duurvoort, Sustainability Manager
Attachments:
A – Buy Clean California Act External Stakeholder Presentation-10.31.2019
B – Marin County Board of Supervisors Merit Hearing Staff Report and Ordinance-
11.19.2019
3 https://www.usgbc.org/articles/how-leed-v41-addresses-embodied-carbon
12/19/19
12 of 51
Procurement Division, Engineering Branch
AB 262 Implementation Team
Buy Clean California Act
External Outreach Event
October 31, 2019
Attachment A 12/19/19
13 of 51
Agenda
Buy Clean California Act -Update
Maximum Acceptable Global Warming Potential (GWP)
Limit Methodology
Environmental Product Declarations (EPDs) Allowed for
Compliance
Agency Compliance Model
DGS Request to Industry
Questions & Answers
2
Attachment A 12/19/19
14 of 51
Buy Clean California Act –Update (1 of 2)
Assembly Bill 1817 modified Buy Clean California Act
(AB 262):
Extended implementation date by two years, 7/1/2021.
Introduced a two year “phase-in” period to collect facility-specific
EPDs.
Management Memo
Allowed DGS to exclude fabrication stage for GWP calculation.
Allowed Awarding Agencies to develop list of AB 262 exemptions.
3
Attachment A 12/19/19
15 of 51
Buy Clean California Act –Update (2 of 2)
AB 262 Team responded to stakeholder comments and
posted responses on the Buy Clean California Act webpage.
Met with awarding agencies to discuss progress.
DGS reached out to stakeholders to continue discussion on
implementation.
Flat Glass Update.
4
Attachment A 12/19/19
16 of 51
Maximum Acceptable GWP Limit Methodology
(1 of 3)
DGS has revised its approach to determine the maximum
acceptable GWP limit after further discussions with
stakeholders and subject matter experts.
AB 1817 allows the exclusion of emissions that occur during
the fabrication stages.
Producer GWP impacts are typically much larger than a
fabricator for the current materials.
Flat glass and steel Product Category Rules (PCRs) expire
on 3/31/20 and 5/5/20, respectively.
DGS expects that the revised PCRs will align with ISO
21930:2017 which may affect GWP impact results.
5
Attachment A 12/19/19
17 of 51
Maximum Acceptable GWP Limit Methodology
(2 of 3)
Current legislation requires a maximum acceptable GWP to be set
at the industry average of facility specific GWP for each material.
A producer facility-specific EPD identifies the GWP impact to
manufacture a product at a particular facility.
The reported GWP impact from industry-wide production
weighted* EPDs can be influenced by market share rather than
technology improvements.
DGS believes that a GWP limit should be determined by
calculating an average using producer facility-specific EPDs.
However, an industry-wide EPD may be a solution to set the limit
due to the timing of the PCR revisions.
* Market share production weighting among different suppliers
6
Attachment A 12/19/19
18 of 51
Maximum Acceptable GWP Limit Methodology
(3 of 3)
Therefore, at this time DGS is considering two options to
establish the GWP limit:
Use an industry-wide EPD* for an eligible material.
Calculate an average using producer facility-specific EPDs*.
* EPDs should be developed according latest mineral wool PCR and
2020 flat glass and steel PCRs.
A tolerance is still expected to be added accounting for
uncertainty in the life cycle assessment process.
EPDs will be obtained from awarding agencies as well as
those found on publically available databases.
7
Attachment A 12/19/19
19 of 51
Facility-specific EPDs
PCC §3503.(a) “An awarding authority shall require the
successful bidder… to submit a current facility-specific
Environmental Product Declaration…”
Facility-specific Environmental Product Declaration –
Product-specific EPD: the environmental impacts are
attributed to a single manufacturing facility.
Evaluate the environmental performance of a product
manufactured from a single facility.
Averaging masks the environmental impacts between
different facilities.
8
Attachment A 12/19/19
20 of 51
Differentiating Producers vs. Fabricators
Producer
Facility that produces the
base material before it is
sent for fabrication
Steel mill
Rebar mill
Mineral wool board
insulation plant
Flat glass plant
Fabricator
Facility that conducts
additional processing to
base materials
Bending, tempering,
cutting, etc.
May obtain base material
from multiple
manufacturers
9
Attachment A 12/19/19
21 of 51
EPDs Allowed for Compliance
Acceptable
Facility-specific
producer/manufacturer
EPDs
Not-Acceptable
Fabricator EPDs
Industry-wide/industry-
average EPDs
Multiple facility, production-
weighted EPDs from a
single producer or
fabricator
10
Attachment A 12/19/19
22 of 51
EPD System Boundaries for Materials
Structural Steel and Carbon Steel Rebar
Evaluate A1-A3 (product stage)
A1 will be evaluated for producer EPDs if A2 and A3
represent average fabrication data
Mineral Wool Board Insulation (light and heavy Density)
Evaluate A1-A3 (product stage)
Flat glass
Evaluate material acquisition & pre-processing, production,
and packaging / storage (cradle-to-gate)
11
Attachment A 12/19/19
23 of 51
Agency Compliance Model
DGS has been holding workshop meetings with agencies to
develop a compliance framework.
This framework consists of:
Determination which projects are subject to AB 262.
Communicate new policies to support AB 262.
Develop specific guidelines for staff to determine compliance.
12
Attachment A 12/19/19
24 of 51
Where can I find more information?
Information can be found on both DGS’ and awarding
agencies’ websites.
DGS will host answers to general Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs).
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/Page-Content/Procurement-
Division-Resources-List-Folder/Buy-Clean-California-Act
Awarding agencies will host FAQs specific to their department.
13
Attachment A 12/19/19
25 of 51
DGS Request to Industry
Develop facility-specific producer EPDs during the 2019-
2020 phase-in period to allow establishment of a maximum
acceptable GWP limit for each eligible material, and prepare
stakeholders for compliance.
The required Product Category Rules can be found on the
Buy Clean California Act webpage. However, it is
recommended that the 2020 PCRs are used to develop
EPDs for flat glass and steel.
For those facility-specific EPDs not slated for California
public works projects during the 2019-2020 phase-in period,
publish them in recognized databases for EPDs or Program
Operator’s websites.
14
Attachment A 12/19/19
26 of 51
Questions?
15
Attachment A 12/19/19
27 of 51
November 19, 2019
Marin County Board of Supervisors
3501 Civic Center Drive
San Rafael, CA 94903
SUBJECT: Proposed ordinance to add a new subchapter to Marin County Code Title
19 (Building Code) and adopt standards for low embodied emissions in
concrete.
Dear Supervisors,
RECOMMENDATION:
Initiate an amendment to the Building Code by taking the following actions:
1.Conduct public hearing
2.Consider adopting proposed ordinance with an effective date of January 1, 2020
SUMMARY: On November 5, 2019, your Board conducted a first reading of the
attached ordinance and scheduled a public hearing for November 19, 2019 at
10:30AM.
The County of Marin has long been a leader in local green building policies, most
recently demonstrated in the October 2019 adoption of the updated green building
ordinance. To date, these programs have focused on reducing operational energy use
through increased energy efficiency requirements and emphasis on low-emission fuel
sources. These policies are critical to achieving local greenhouse gas reduction
targets. However, standards to date have focused little on reducing the embodied
carbon emissions generated by the processes associated with the production of a
building, including material extraction, transportation and manufacturing.
For older, less energy efficient buildings, the lifetime carbon emissions from electricity,
gas, and other operational energy use exceeds the embodied carbon emissions
generated during construction. This paradigm is shifting, as new construction and
upgraded buildings grow closer to zero net operating energy emissions through
increased energy efficiency and renewable power. With low annual energy use,
embodied carbon emissions from construction represent most of the lifetime emissions
of a building. Because the emissions from material extraction, transportation,
manufacturing, and building construction are already emitted by the time the building
is occupied, there is little potential to mitigate those impacts later in the building’s life,
as is possible with energy efficiency retrofits for operational emissions. The importance
of addressing embodied carbon emissions is heightened by the pressing need to
reduce emissions in the near term to avoid the most catastrophic impacts of climate
change.
Concrete is the most widely used construction material in the world and is responsible
for an estimated six to ten percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from human
activity. Most of these emissions come from Portland cement, the “glue” that binds
aggregate like sand and gravel into concrete, creating artificial rock. The emissions
Attachment B
12/19/19
28 of 51
PG. 2 OF 3 associated with concrete can be reduced by minimizing cement use to the extent
possible while still achieving necessary strength, or by using cement alternatives,
called “supplementary cementitious materials,” or SCMs. SCMs can include but are
not limited to fly ash, slag, and glass pozzolans. The proposed ordinance introduces
innovative yet practical measures to begin addressing embodied emissions in
concrete through modifications to the Building Code.
Based on conversations with local ready-mix suppliers, staff understands these
cement alternatives to be locally available and have cost parity with cement. In cases
where the amount of cement can be minimized without the need for supplements,
there may be cost savings. For projects that need strength quickly, accelerators can
be used to speed curing time without substantial increases in emissions, but these
additions may add cost. As with all the County’s green building policies, hardship and
infeasibility exemptions are written into the code for circumstances where applicants
cannot comply or where it is cost-prohibitive to do so, and specific allowances are
made in the ordinance for projects that need high early strength.
The Countywide Plan includes multiple recommendations for implementing programs
around low-carbon materials in construction, including Program EN-3.d Encourage Fly
Ash in Concrete which directs the County to “consider regulations requiring new
building projects that use a substantial amount of concrete to incorporate at least 25%
fly ash to offset some of the energy use and greenhouse gas emissions associated
with the manufacturing of cement”. To advance this program, staff sought to develop
policies that were current, locally responsive, and regionally replicable. In 2018, the
County partnered with StopWaste, the Embodied Carbon Network, Arup, and Bruce
King of the Ecological Builders Network and was awarded funding the Bay Area Air
Quality Management District’s Climate Protection Grant Program. These funds
supported the development of this proposed ordinance through technical consultants
and coordination and convening of stakeholders. The funds have also supported
County staff time for the policy adoption process, technical assistance for pilot projects,
and outreach and dissemination to promote replication.
The standards were developed with substantial review and feedback by the regional
stakeholder group convened through the grant. Seven meetings with a group of expert
stakeholders, who represented diverse perspectives across academia, the building
trades, the concrete industry, and local government staff provided framing for the
standards and review of technical recommendations. The proposed standards were
developed by the project’s technical consultant but were largely influenced and shaped
through rigorous analysis and debate over the course of a year of project development.
Local stakeholders including ready-mix concrete suppliers, local structural engineers,
and building officials from multiple Marin County jurisdictions were engaged
throughout the process participated in a meeting about the proposed standards and
local barriers in mid-2019.This feedback was used to inform development of the
ordinance.
The proposed standards modify the Building Code to establish a sliding scale of
requirements for the maximum amount of cement used for different strength concrete
mixes. The standards also include an alternate pathway for compliance using limits on
embodied emissions within concrete mixes, which provides flexibility for SCMs and
innovations in cement alternatives. These standards are innovative by setting limits on
the high emissions potential in conventional, Portland cement based concrete mixes,
something that has not previously been done in a local building code. As demonstrated
in national and regional surveys (detailed in Attachment 4), the recommended limits
Attachment B
12/19/19
29 of 51
PG. 3 OF 3 do not change the allowable mix designs but sets a ceiling on potential emissions and
provides opportunities for increased education around the impacts of and alternatives
to cement use.
The proposed standards apply to projects that include new poured concrete.
Enforcement of the standards via the building code may not capture projects that pour
concrete but do not require a building permit, which can include patios, walkways, and
driveways. Ongoing education of the public, building industry, and ready-mix suppliers
will be important to promote the use of low-carbon concretes regardless of local permit
requirements. The proposed standards would also apply to public projects developed
by the County of Marin. Sustainability team staff will work closely with capital projects
staff to apply the appropriate requirements and to gather data about opportunities and
barriers that arise during the implementation of the proposed standards. Lessons
learned during implementation will be used to improve program administration and be
shared with other jurisdictions that are interested in adopting similar policies.
The proposed ordinance is an important step towards more holistically addressing
emissions from building activity in Marin County. The importance of considering the
climate impacts of the entire building process highlights the need to educate the
building community and the general public about the life cycle of climate impacts of
construction. In addition to the these proposed standards, the stakeholder group
developed a draft pathway to zero emission concrete by 2050. Achieving this would
require ratcheting down concrete emissions on an aggressive schedule that both
anticipates and prompts advancements in cements and carbon-storing technologies,
and depends upon zero carbon technologies that do not presently exist. Staff
recommends monitoring the implementation of the proposed standards, if adopted, in
Marin County as well as regionally, as is the goal of the Air District grant.
Implementation of these novel proposed policies will aid staff in developing
recommendations for the 2022 code cycle that continue to lead on innovative climate
solutions while supporting fair and achievable growth within the building community.
FISCAL/STAFFING IMPACT: This action does not impact the General Fund.
REVIEWED BY:
[ ] Department of Finance [ X ] N/A
[ X ] County Counsel [ ] N/A
[ ] Human Resources [ X ] N/A
SIGNATURE: Approved by:
Alice Zanmiller Brian C. Crawford William Kelley
Planner Director Deputy Director
Attachments:
1. Ordinance Adopting Amendments to Marin County Code Title 19 (Building
Code)
2. Sample Residential Specification
3. Sample Nonresidential Specification
4. Study of Limits for Cement and Embodied Carbon of Concrete
5. Low Carbon Concrete Compliance Form (Cement)
6. Low Carbon Concrete Compliance Form (Embodied Carbon)
Attachment B
12/19/19
30 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 31 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 32 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 33 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 34 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 35 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 36 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 37 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 38 of 51
Attachment B12/19/19 39 of 51
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Legislation Text
Subject: Sustainability Commission Proposals for FY 2020-21 City Work Program
Provide a list of proposed City Work Program items, identifying the top three proposals
File #:19-6753,Version:1
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 10/16/2020Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12/19/19
40 of 51
SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
Meeting: December 19, 2019
Subject
Sustainability Commission Proposals for FY 2020-21 City Work Program
Recommended Action
Provide a list of proposed City Work Program items, identifying the top three proposals.
Discussion
In December/January, each Commission will submit proposed ideas for the City Work
Program for the upcoming fiscal year (FY). The Sustainability Commission should
identify its top 3 proposals and limit proposals to no more than 10. These proposals will
be taken into consideration by the Department Head and the City Manager when
developing the proposed City Work Program for City Council’s consideration.
When the proposed City Work Program is brought to Council in March, the proposals
submitted by Commissions will be provided as attachments with indications as to which
proposals are reflected in the proposed City Work Program. Once the City Work
Program is adopted by Council, the Sustainability Commission will then develop its
Work Program based upon the relevant items in the approved City Work Program.
Next Steps
1. Commission selects a proposed list of City Work Program items, identifying its
top three proposals.
2. Department Head and City Manager evaluates the Commission proposals in
February and brings proposals to City Council in March for approval.
3. Commission develops its Work Program in April, based on the City Work
Program.
_____________________________________
Prepared by: Gilee Corral, Sustainability Program Coordinator and Staff Liaison
Reviewed by: André Duurvoort, Sustainability Manager
Attachments:
A – City Work Program Flow Chart
12/19/19
41 of 51
B – Guidance on Commission Proposals for City Work Program
C – FY 2019-20 Sustainability Commission Work Program
D – Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 2.94
12/19/19
42 of 51
City Work Program Flow Chart
• Note:
o If ideas for work program items come up throughout the year, they should be suggested in the following year’s WP
process in Dec/Jan. If the idea/item requires earlier consideration, Council approval would be required.
o Smaller items that do not require staff time or budget may be added to the Commission Work Program even if they are
not part of the larger City WP.
July (Beginning of Fiscal Year)
•Begin implementation of approved
City Work Program (WP) and
commission WPs for the current
fiscal year (FY).
December-January
•Ideas from staff and commissions
for upcoming FY's City WP
due to Departments (Depts.).
•Depts. update Council on
current City WP.
February
•Council prioritizes City goals at
Priority Setting Session.
•With City goals in mind, Depts.
evaluate City WP ideas and develop
a proposed City WP for the Council's
consideration.
March
•Depts. present proposed City WP to
Council at a study session.
•Feedback from the study session is
incorporated and the final City WP is
brought for Council approval.
April -June
•Commissions develop their WPs
based on approved City WP items.
•Commission WPs brought for
Council's approval as consent
items.
Any additional ideas that come
up throughout the year should
be accumulated for submission
in the following Dec/Jan.
Attachment A 12/19/19
43 of 51
GUIDANCE ON COMMISSION PROPOSALS FOR CITY WORK PROGRAM
Overview of the Process
In the December/January timeframe, each Commission will submit proposed ideas for the
City Work Program for the upcoming fiscal year. These proposals will be taken into consideration
by Department Heads and the City Manager when developing the proposed City Work Program
for Council’s consideration. When the proposed City Work Program is brought to Council in
March, the proposals submitted by Commissions will be provided as attachments with
indications as to which proposals are reflected in the proposed City Work Program. Once the City
Work Program is adopted by Council, Commissions will then develop their Commission Work
Programs based upon the items relevant to them in the approved City Work Program. Smaller
items that do not require staff time or budget may be added to the Commission Work Program
at this point in the process. Final Commission Work Programs should be brought for Council’s
approval as consent items before July. For a flow chart of this process, see the City Work Program
Flow Chart.
Guidance on Commission Proposals for the City Work Program
Commission proposals for the City Work Program should be within the purview of the
Commission, have timelines of 12 months or less, and identify projects or deliverables the
Commission would be interested in addressing over the course of the next fiscal year. When
developing proposals, consider constraints related to:
• Staff resources,
• Budget, and
• Demands from routine business of the Commission.
If there are existing City Work Program items that the Commission would like to propose
continuing into the upcoming year, the Commission should include these items in their list of
proposals. Please identify:
• The Commission’s top three proposals to aid in the prioritization process and
• No more than 10 proposals total for submission. There is no minimum number of
proposals required. Please note that not all proposals will be included in the proposed
City Work Program. When the proposed City Work Program is brought to Council, the
proposals submitted by Commissions will be provided as attachments with indications as
to which proposals are reflected in the proposed City Work Program.
Dec/Jan
•Commission
submits
proposals for
City Work
Program
Feb
•Proposals
evaluated by
Dept Head
and City
Manager
March
•City Council
approves City
Work
Program
April
•Commissions
develop their
Commission
Work Programs
based on City
Work Program
Attachment B 12/19/19
44 of 51
GUIDANCE ON COMMISSION PROPOSALS FOR CITY WORK PROGRAM
Suggested steps to develop Commission proposals for the City Work Program:
1.Review the purpose of the Commission as defined by the Cupertino Municipal Code in
Chapter 2.
2.Discuss and outline any priorities established by Council such as from prior City Work
Programs.
3.Brainstorm proposals relating to the Commission and determine the following:
a.Identify potential projects and deliverables relevant to the Commission.
b.Determine the benefit if the project or deliverable is completed.
c.Is it mandated by State or local law or by Council direction/priority?
d.Would the task or item require a policy change at the Council level?
e.Identify resources needed for completion such as staff time, creation of
Commission subcommittees, coordination with other Commissions etc.
f.What is the timeline to completion? (1 year, 2 year, or longer term?)
i.Proposals should be completable within the upcoming fiscal year (within
12 months). If a project or deliverable will take more than a year, it should
be broken up into phases and the proposal submission should only
include what can be accomplished in the upcoming fiscal year.
g.Determine measurement and evaluation criteria. How will you know you are on
track? How will you determine success?
4.Prioritize projects from urgent to low priority.
5.Identify the top three proposals from the Commission that can reasonably be
accomplished or worked on in the coming year.
6.Submit the Commission Proposals for City Work Program Form.
Attachment B 12/19/19
45 of 51
Project/Task Project Objective
Driven by mandate,
law, or Council
priority/direction?
(If yes, please specify)
Resources Needed
(e.g. funding and # of staff
hours)
Estimated
Completion Date
Measurement Criteria
(How will we know how
we are doing?)
Proactive Legislative
Advocacy on Climate and
Sustainability issues in line
with Council Adopted 19/20
Legislative Priorities
Take a more proactive approach to
supporting or opposing climate,
energy and sustainability related
legislation
N/A No Funding needed. Staff
hours depend on level of
analysis needed for
legislation
Ongoing Legislative
Youth Engagement Engage Cupertino students in
sustainability activities and
education. This could include;
Sustainability Student Essay Contest,
Student Green Grants, School waste
audits, presentations at local schools
etc.
N/A Student Essay Contest or
Green Grants: 20 staff hours
each activity, Student
awards are from
Commission funding
Fall 2019 Conduct one Student Essay
Contest or Student Grant
completed
Green Building Code
Update
Determine possible adoption of
Green Building codes more stringent
than State standard Title 24 ( either
Tier 1 or Tier 2), to be adopted by
Council during the regular 2019
building code adoption cycle which
will take effect in January 2020.
Yes- This item is in City
Council Work Program
under Community
Livability.
$35,000- in Proposed FY
19/20 budget for consultant
to evaluate and advise.
About 200 staff hours.
January 2020 Green Building Code
adopted in time for
January 2020
implementation
Monitor the State's Buy
Clean Act Policy
Development and Bay Area
Low carbon concrete codes
project
Staff will provide the Commission
with quarterly updates on State's Buy
Clean Act Policy Development and
Bay Area Low carbon concrete codes
project by Sustainability staff
N/A 5 hours quarterly Ongoing Monitor this issue to
determine if future City
action should be taken
Understand CAP and GHG
methodology to improve
ability to support CAP
implementation
Review GHG Inventory
methodology, receive presentation on
CAP Progress report and determine if
annual GHG inventories should be
completed
In line with Climate
Action Plan
implementation and the
mandate of
Sustainability
Commission resolution
Included in Sustainability
Division staff core duties
Progress Reports:
Annual. GHG
Methodology
presentation /
Work Session: By
end of summer
2019. Decision on
GHG inventory
frequency: by
December 2019
Annual review of CAP
implementation and GHG
inventory helps to
determine if the City is on
track to meet our goals and
targets
Community Outreach &
Education
Explore new ways to education the
local community. This includes
tabling at Earth Day and other
community festivals. Sustainability
Speakers Series
N/A Included in Sustainably
Materials budget. 40 hours
of staff time per event.
Ongoing Complete at least one
Sustainability Speaker
Series event per year
Envision Standards for
Infrastructure
Examine the Envisions standard
process and explore how the City
could adopt Envision standards for
all infrastructure projects, major
developments, and planning projects.
N/A No funding needed. No staff
hours needed.
Commissioners will conduct
analysis and present to the
Sustainability Commission.
June 2020 Presentation to
Sustainability Commission
by June 2020
Sustainability Commission FY 2019-20 Work
Program
Attachment C
12/19/19 46 of 51
12/13/2019 CHAPTER 2.94: SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION xx
library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 1/4
Print
Cupertino, CA Municipal Code
CHAPTER 2.94: SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION
Section
2.94.010 Established–Composition.
2.94.020 Terms of Office.
2.94.030 Members–Vacancy or removal.
2.94.040 Chairperson.
2.94.050 Meetings–Quorum.
2.94.060 Majority vote required.
2.94.070 Records.
2.94.080 Powers and functions.
2.94.090 Compensation–Expenses.
2.94.100 Procedural rules.
2.94.110 Effect.
2.94.010 Established–Composition.
A. The Sustainability Commission of the City of Cupertino is established. The Sustainability
Commission (hereinafter referred to in this Chapter as "Commission") shall consist of five
members as follows:
1. One representative from a Cupertino-based business;
2. One representative from a Cupertino-based primary, secondary, or higher educational
institution;
3.Three community members.
B. Commission members who are representatives of a business or educational institution are
not required to be Cupertino residents, but the business and educational institution must be
located in Cupertino. The three community members must be residents of Cupertino.
C. In selection of community members, the City Council may give priority to:
1. Applicants who represent the target sectors and partners as described in the Cupertino
Climate Action Plan (hereinafter referred to in this Chapter as "CAP").
2. Applicants who are familiar with climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies,
greenhouse gas emissions inventories, resource and utility conservation, sustainability and
behavior change.
Attachment D12/19/19
47 of 51
12/13/2019 CHAPTER 2.94: SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION xx
library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 2/4
3. Applicants who represent non-profit community organizations and environmental interest
groups.
D. None of these representatives shall be officials or employees of the City, nor cohabit with,
as defined by law, nor be related by blood or marriage to any other member of the Commission,
to the City Manager or to any staff person(s) who may be assigned to assist this Commission.
E. Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the City Council.
F.The Sustainability Manager, or his or her designee, shall provide technical assistance to the
Commission.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.020 Terms of Office.
A. Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the City Council. The initial term of office of two of
the members of the Commission selected from among the community members shall be for two
years. The initial term of the remaining Commissioners shall be for a four year period. All
subsequent terms shall be for a four year period. All terms shall end on January 30th of the year
the term is due to expire. No Commissioner shall serve more than two consecutive terms, except
that a Commissioner may serve more than two consecutive terms if he or she has been
appointed to the Commission to fill an unexpired term of less than two years.
B. The appointment, reappointment and rules governing incumbent members of the
Commission are governed by the Resolution of the Cupertino City Council which governs
advisory bodies.
(Ord. 18-2180, § 13 (part), 2018; Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.030 Members–Vacancy or Removal.
Any Commissioner may be removed by a majority vote of the City Council. If a vacancy occurs,
other than by expiration of a term, it shall be filled by the City Council's appointment for the
unexpired portion of the term.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.040 Chairperson.
The Commission shall elect its chairperson and vice-chairperson from among its members and
shall appoint a secretary. Terms of the chair and vice-chair shall be for one year and shall be
complete on January 30th.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.050 Meetings–Quorum.
A. The Commission shall hold regular meetings at least once every three months and at the
discretion of the Commission shall hold other meetings as may be necessary or expedient.
Attachment D12/19/19
48 of 51
12/13/2019 CHAPTER 2.94: SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION xx
library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 3/4
B. A majority of the Sustainability Commission shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of
transacting the business of the Commission.
C. A special meeting may be called at any time by the chairperson or by a majority of the
Commissioners upon notice being given in advance in accordance with the provisions of the
Ralph M. Brown Act or successor statute in effect at the time.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.060 Majority Vote Required.
A majority vote is required to approve a recommendation on any matter that is presented to the
Commission that requires a vote.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.070 Records.
The Commission shall keep an accurate record of its proceedings and transactions, and shall
render such reports to the City Council as may be required. These records shall be filed with the
City Clerk.
(Ord. 18-2180, § 13 (part), 2018; Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.080 Powers and Functions.
A. The powers and functions of the Commission shall be to serve in an advisory capacity to
the City Council to provide expertise and guidance on major policy and programmatic areas
related to the environmental, economic and societal goals noted within Cupertino's CAP and
General Plan Environmental Resources/Sustainability Element.
B. To fulfill their mission, the Commission may involve itself in the following activities:
1. Monitor and update the CAP based upon quantified metrics to measure and evaluate
mitigated impacts and community benefits.
2. Suggest recommendations, review, and monitor the City's General Plan Environmental
Resources/Sustainability Element and its intersections with the CAP.
3. Advise the City Council how to strategically accelerate Cupertino's progress towards
sustainability and recommend priorities to promote continued regional leadership in sustainability.
4. Periodically review policies governing specific practices and programs, such as
greenhouse gas emissions reduction, water conservation, renewable energy, energy efficiency,
materials management, and urban forestry. Illustrative examples include creation of infrastructure
for low emissions vehicles, installation of renewable energy or energy efficiency technologies,
drafting of water conservation or waste reduction policies, delivery of habitat restoration and
conservation programs, design and roll-out of pollution prevention campaigns, etc.
5. Make recommendations regarding the allocation of funds for infrastructure and technology
improvements to elevate operational performance of City facilities, businesses, educational
institutions and homes by reducing costs, improving public health, and serving community needs.
Attachment D12/19/19
49 of 51
12/13/2019 CHAPTER 2.94: SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION xx
library.amlegal.com/alpscripts/get-content.aspx 4/4
6. Accept public input on the subject areas noted above and advise the City Council on ways
to drive community awareness, behavior change, education and participation in City programs
modeled upon the field's best practices.
7. Review and make recommendations to the City Council on Federal, State and regional
policies related to sustainability that have the potential to impact City Council's goals and policies.
8. Pursue any other activity or scope that may be deemed appropriate and necessary by the
City Council.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.090 Compensation–Expenses.
Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation. Commissioners may be
reimbursed for necessary expenses reasonably incurred by them while acting in their official
capacity subject to the approval of the City Manager.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.100 Procedural Rules.
The Commission may adopt from time to time such rules of procedure as it may deem
necessary to properly exercise its powers and duties. Such rules shall be kept on file with the
Chairperson of the Commission, the Mayor, and the City Clerk, and a copy thereof shall be
furnished to any person on request.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
2.94.110 Effect.
Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed as restricting or curtailing any powers of the City
Council or City officers.
(Ord. 2132, § 1 (part), 2015)
Attachment D12/19/19
50 of 51
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Legislation Text
Subject: Sustainability Speaker Series planning
Discuss and decide next steps for Sustainability Speaker Series
File #:19-6754,Version:1
CITY OF CUPERTINO Printed on 10/16/2020Page 1 of 1
powered by Legistar™
12/19/19
51 of 51