_DEIR - Laserfiche WebLink

City of Pleasanton—Hidden Canyon Residences and Preserve Draft EIR Greenhouse Gas Emissions FirstCarbon Solutions 3.7-15 https://adecinnovations.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicationsSite/Shared Documents/Publications/Client (PN-JN)/2148/21480016/EIR/3 - Draft EIR/21480016 Sec03-07 GHG.docx Impact Analysis As noted above, the proposed project is consistent with the CAP 2.0. The proposed project would also be constructed in conformance with then-current CALGreen and Title 24 Building Codes, which require high-efficiency water fixtures, water efficient irrigation systems, and compliance with current energy efficiency standards. Compliance with these standards ensures compliance with State and federal plans, policies, and regulations applicable to GHG emissions. In addition, the proposed project will be all-electric in design, which supports the State’s longer-term goal of decarbonization. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact. Level of Significance After Mitigation Less than significant impact. Mitigation Measures None. 3.7.8 - Cumulative Impacts The geographic scope of the cumulative GHG emissions analysis is the SFBAAB, which covers all or portions of the nine counties that surround San Francisco Bay: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, southwestern Solano, and southern Sonoma counties. In a larger sense, however, the relevant geographic area is the entire Earth, as explained by the California Supreme Court in Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish & Wildlife (2015) 62 Cal.4th 204, 219, “because of the global scale of climate change, any one project’s contribution is unlikely to be significant by itself.” “With respect to climate change, an individual project's emissions will most likely not have any appreciable impact on the global problem by themselves, but they will contribute to the significant cumulative impact caused by greenhouse gas emissions from other sources around the globe. The question therefore becomes whether the project’s incremental addition of GHG emissions is ‘cumulatively considerable’ in light of the global problem, and thus significant.” (Ibid., quoting Crockett, Addressing the Significance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Under CEQA: California's Search for Regulatory Certainty in an Uncertain World (July 2011) 4 Golden Gate U. Envtl. L.J. 203, 207– 208)). The proposed project would emit new GHG emissions, as would other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects within the Air Basin. The GHG emissions impact analysis above constitutes a cumulative analysis, in that it considers global, Statewide, and regional GHG emissions, as well as the contribution of the proposed project to GHG emission impacts. Therefore, the significance conclusions reached above for the project-level GHG impact under GHG-1 and GHG-2 also constitutes the significance conclusions in this Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) with respect to cumulative GHG emissions impacts. Therefore, because GHG emissions generated by the proposed project in conjunction with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable projects in the Basin and around the world would not