Open Space and Ecology Committee

Open Space and Ecology Committee

June 10, 2009

Page 11

OPEN SPACE AND ECOLOGY COMMITTEE

June 10, 2009

COMMUNITY MEETING ROOM, BRISBANE CITY HALL

50 PARK PLACE, BRISBANE, CA 94005

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL

Committee Chairperson Fieldman called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.

Committee Members Present: Fieldman, Gutekanst, Miller, and Whitten-Greenlee

Committee Members Absent: Liu

Staff Members Present: Management Analyst Pontecorvo, Assistant to the City Manager Smith, Principal Planner Swiecki

Guests: Karin Corfee, KEMA; Steve Hall, Universal Paragon Corporation (UPC), Jonathan Scharfman, UPC

Others Present: Tony Attard, Robert Howard, Clara Johnson, Cliff Lentz, Anja Miller, Mike Pacelli, UPC; Carolyn Parker

* MC = Member of Committee

ADOPTION OF AGENDA

MC Miller suggested adding a discussion on climate change under “City Council Matters” and an announcement of a climate change workshop under “Other Committee Matters.”

MC Miller made a motion, seconded by MC Whitten-Greenlee, to adopt the agenda as amended. The motion was carried unanimously.

PRESENATION BY JONATHAN SCHARFMAN, UPC - RENEWABLE ENERGY FOR THE BAYLANDS

Chairperson Fieldman noted that committee members received written materials on the presentation. She invited Jonathan Scharfman, Universal Paragon Corporation (UPC), to address the committee regarding renewable energy for the Baylands.

Mr. Scharfman said that from the early planning stages for the Baylands, the City made clear its desire for a sustainable, energy-neutral project at the Baylands, and the City Council adopted a renewable energy resolution establishing the 100-percent energy-neutral goal. He noted that UPC has listened to the City’s experts and guest speakers and conducted its own research on the subject of renewable energy. He stated that UPC also organized a renewable energy conference and a tour of local sustainable buildings.

Mr. Scharfman reported that UPC obtained five years of wind data collected on the northern portion of the Baylands and augmented this information with a more detailed wind study over the past year. He said the results of the wind study will be available as soon as the City completes its analysis of the data.

Mr. Scharfman advised that the purpose of the presentation at this meeting was to update the committee on KEMA’s preliminary findings regarding the feasibility of energy generation at the Baylands and to discuss next steps in the process. He introduced Karin Corfee, of KEMA, UPC’s consultant on renewable energy.

Ms. Corfee said her presentation would include a review of the goals for the Baylands development; information on KEMA’s work; a discussion of wind, solar, and wave energy generation technologies; projected energy use intensities at the Baylands; and next steps in investigating energy generation in the design of the project’s buildings and facilities. She indicated that KEMA began by assessing baseline energy demands at the site based on land use types, construction types, and the local climate zone, as well as current building standards.

Ms. Corfee noted that the draft specific plan calls for approximately 8 million square feet of developed area. She presented a graph showing baseline energy demand for various uses based on Title 24 building code standards compared with energy consumption if building code requirements are exceeded by 15 percent.

MC Miller said he was surprised at the differences between office buildings, research and development facilities, and parking structures, and he asked why parking structures consumed so much energy. Ms. Corfee responded that ventilation and lighting use the most energy. Mr. Scharfman observed that the graph represents a very conservative view of energy demand. He added that the amount of covered parking is driven by code requirements.

MC Miller noted that the Baylands is a planned development area, so the amount of parking is still negotiable and not restricted by code requirements. He pointed out that this would make a huge difference in the energy analysis. He recommended looking at alternatives with varying levels of parking.

Ms. Corfee acknowledged that reducing the amount of parking on the site would reduce energy consumption. She added that this level of detail will be addressed in a later phase of the planning process.

Ms. Corfee presented a diagram illustrating the daily and seasonal solar resources available at the site. She stated that the consultants looked at the potential for solar thermal energy as well as photovoltaic panels on rooftops, building façades, and on the ground. She pointed out that solar potential varies considerably based on orientation, and rooftop panels appear to be the most efficient way of generating solar energy.

Ms. Corfee showed pictures of different types and sizes of wind turbines. She remarked that local codes and ordinances can pose barriers for wind turbine installations. Committee members commented that height and noise restrictions might be issues. Ms. Corfee observed that some planning departments are unfamiliar with this kind of technology. She offered to investigate this issue in more detail and provide follow-up information.

MC Miller asked the consultants to provide more detailed background information on the findings depicted in the graphs. Mr. Scharfman advised that KEMA’s report will cite references for the study results. Ms. Corfee noted that the 2009 wind data is consistent with the long-term data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Ms. Corfee stated that KEMA analyzed wind energy generation potential from a range of sources, including offshore, small wind turbines, building-integrated wind, and turbines on light posts. She observed that the results indicate that wind energy may not be economically feasible at the site because of size and space constraints. She added that there are also significant concerns about potential impacts on avian species, geophysical issues, and problems with construction and maintenance.

MC Fieldman pointed out that the price of carbon emissions needs to be part of the feasibility equation, and Ms. Corfee agreed. Ms. Corfee said the cost of carbon emissions will likely affect the feasibility analysis in the future. She noted that the costs and permitting required for offshore wind facilities are an obstacle in the U.S. currently; she added that KEMA’s analysis of generation costs indicates that this emerging technology will be more viable within a decade.

Ms. Corfee stated that UPC is considering a portfolio of options for energy generation and conservation. She said that in addition to generating energy from renewable sources, the company plans to exceed building code requirements by 15 to 30 percent and design buildings to maximize energy efficiency. She noted that a solar farm on the site could generate 20 percent of the energy demand for the site, and offshore wind facilities could generate another 20 percent. She stated that UPC will also look for off-site investments to achieve the 100 percent neutrality goal.

Mr. Scharfman emphasized that the portfolio is flexible and the values and feasibility of various options will shift as the costs of technology change. He noted that at the present time, photovoltaic systems are very expensive, and building energy efficiency into projects is far more effective in reducing energy usage than energy generation, so UPC is focusing on energy savings to meet the energy-neutral goal.

MC Fieldman advocated increasing efficiency to reduce the amount of renewable energy that would need to be generated. She recommended investigating the maximum amount of savings possible through efficiencies.

MC Gutekanst encouraged the developer to consider innovative architecture and building design rather than using conventional building and construction types.

Ms. Corfee noted there is considerable activity going on in California now to determine how to meet the state’s goal of 100 percent energy neutrality for all new construction by 2030. She confirmed that energy efficiency is the most cost-effective way of reducing energy usage.

Mr. Scharfman commented that energy efficiency measures will also help the project achieve a higher LEED rating. He said UPC will continue to work with various stakeholders to research these possibilities.

Ms. Corfee stated that UPC will be looking at geothermal heat pumps and passive design features. She observed that technology can accomplish a great deal, but 50 percent of energy conservation is up to the end user. She advocated public education campaigns and utility rebate programs to make individuals aware of what they can do to reduce their energy usage.

MC Miller noted that the staff report discusses passive solar design and site considerations, and he asked Ms. Corfee to elaborate on these issues. Ms. Corfee said both street orientation and building design are important factors UPC will take into consideration.

MC Miller observed that solar thermal systems can be used to heat water in buildings, but the staff report only talks about a solar thermal production facility. Ms. Corfee stated that UPC will consider using solar thermal energy to heat water. She said this point was inadvertently omitted from the staff report.

Mr. Scharfman said California has a number of active solar thermal facilities for electricity generation, and this technology is more feasible for large-scale generation than photovoltaic systems. Ms. Corfee clarified that the Baylands site may be too small to provide adequate storage capacity. She suggested revisiting this possibility because technology costs are decreasing. Mr. Scharfman noted the visual impacts of a large solar thermal plant also need to be considered because these facilities use large industrial-looking mirrors, but he confirmed UPC’s willingness to consider the option.

MC Gutekanst recommended taking comments from members of the public.

Anja Miller, Brisbane resident and member of the Committee for Renewable Energy for the Baylands (CREBL), said her committee has been instrumental in pushing for serious consideration of wind and solar energy facilities for this project. She noted CREBL’s goal is not just energy neutrality, but for the project to generate surplus energy to benefit the community. She stated that although CREBL requested the wind study undertaken over the past year, the placement of the anemometer tower was not ideal because it was sheltered by San Bruno Mountain.

Ms. Miller clarified that most people in the community do not oppose the visual impact of wind turbines. She acknowledged there are concerns about impacts on birds, but cats kill far more birds than wind turbines.

Ms. Miller noted that Copenhagen has successfully used wind turbines to provide energy for the entire country of Denmark, so it should be possible for a wind facility to produce sufficient energy for a small town like Brisbane. She urged the City to focus on what would benefit the community, not just the developer.

Ms. Miller reported that installing a photovoltaic system on her home five years ago has saved 17,000 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. She said her household uses an average of 5 kilowatts per day, and the system produces about 28 kilowatts per day during the summer.

Ms. Miller provided copies of an article she received from John Burr about a company called PacWind that produces efficient vertical wind turbines. She pointed out that this technology is both feasible and affordable, and advances are being made rapidly in this field. She encouraged people to visit the company’s Website for more information.

Ms. Miller urged the committee to recommend to the City Council and Planning Commission that plenty of land at the Baylands be reserved for alternative energy facilities.

Clara Johnson, Brisbane, advocated investigating the possibility of on-shore wind turbines in the area near the Bay Trail and the freeway. She asked where geothermal heat pumps would be sited, and expressed concern about the release of toxic materials from the landfill. She noted that the impacts of off-shore wind turbines on wildlife and habitat need to be considered. She observed that off-shore wind turbines would also have to be approved by the airport to avoid interfering with flight routes.

Ms. Johnson said she was pleased to hear that the applicant will be considering solar thermal energy to heat buildings as well as heating water. She expressed her appreciation to Ms. Miller and the CREBL group for promoting alternative energy facilities at the Baylands. She urged the City to make sure the EIR analyzes these options in sufficient detail.

Mr. Scharfman clarified that geothermal heat pumps would be considered only for the former railyard area, and stated that the developer will work closely with the Regional Water Quality Control Board to determine what controls would be necessary for subsurface uses of this nature. He noted that cogeneration facilities can help lower the carbon footprint of the development, and he said UPC will investigate ways to design a clean-tech campus to generate enough electricity for the entire project. Mr. Scharfman confirmed the developer’s intention of dedicating the eastern edge of the Baylands site for the Bay Trail. He added that the possibility of on-shore wind turbines can be considered for that area.

Ms. Miller commented that one of the chief advantages of installing on-shore wind turbines at the Baylands is its proximity to PG&E’s Martin substation, reducing the need for long-distance transmission.

Robert Howard, Brisbane resident, asked about the actual footprint of solar thermal generation facilities and whether rooftops and sides of buildings would be sufficient to accommodate these installations. He asked what percentage of a building’s energy is used by lighting and how much energy can be saved by using natural light and modern technology. Also, in light of the rapid changes in energy technology, he asked if UPC planned to wait to select contractors for materials and designs.

Ms. Corfee replied that concentrated solar thermal power typically requires more space than would be available on building surfaces, so a central plant would be needed. She estimated that lighting represents 30 to 50 percent of a building’s energy use, depending on the building type. She advised that California has more stringent standards than other states, and daylighting can substantially reduce the need for artificial light. She noted that occupancy sensors, LED lights, and other technologies can also produce significant savings. Ms. Corfee added that UPC will continually adjust to changing technology as more efficient equipment and materials become available.

Mr. Scharfman stated that the timing of contracts and procurement will be determined at a later stage in the process. He commented that financing markets are extremely volatile now, but more definite answers will be available when economic conditions stabilize.

Cliff Lentz, Brisbane, urged the City to pay attention to some of the innovative alternative energy projects underway in Europe. He said the City Council has established a subcommittee to look at sustainability issues at the Baylands. He noted that the group has not yet met and is awaiting more information about the Sonoma Mountain Village project in Rohnert Park, currently going through the EIR process. He stated that this 200-acre project will be a zero-carbon-emissions development, and the developer is working in close conjunction with a company called BioRegional. Mr. Lentz recommended that UPC contact BioRegional for advice and assistance in planning the Baylands.