1. Management Services, re: Building Electrification Reach Code Replacement Options

a. Motion directing staff to prepare an alternative reach code to replace Section 4.1(b), subsection 4.106.5 and Section 5.106.13 of the local amendments to the California Energy Code

Staff Recommendation: Option 3 – Single Margin Source Energy Code Amendment. Staff recommends looking into requirements for existing buildings be discussed separately, after the

Highlights from Staff Report:

Staff Recommended Option – Option 3:

“3. Single Margin Source Energy Code Amendment – Staff recommend that the city pursue this third option, as the most effective and timely approach to replace the current all-electric component of the ordinance.Cities in California can adopt local amendments to the California Energy Code (Title 24) within certain limits. One of the areas where cities can adopt more stringent requirements than the state code is under the source energy rating (EDR1 for single-family), which is an energy performance metric. In this approach, a single energy efficiency margin, or metric, is established for all energy types. This approach does not specify one kind of energy (gas vs. electric) and is considered compliant with the federal Energy and Policy Conservation Act. Because all-electric buildings meet a much lower source energy rating than mixed fuel buildings, buildings that include gas combustion may need to complete additional energy efficiency actions such as larger solar arrays, battery storage, insulation, and other design strategies in order to achieve the same source energy rating.

The 2022 California Energy Code provides baseline efficiency and building performance standards that a project must meet prior to receiving a building permit. The code provides two pathways: a prescriptive pathway in which developers follow a check list of requirements, and a performance pathway in which developers model energy usage and must stay within a set energy budget. The performance method offers maximum flexibility to trade off the energy performance of different building components to achieve compliance. The efficiency margin is expressed slightly differently for different building types Source Energy Design Rating (EDR1) for single family residential and Total Compliance Margin for multi-family and non-residential. The standard efficiency model includes water heating, space heating, space cooling, indoor air quality (IAQ) fan energy, and solar generation.”

About Cost Effectiveness Standard:

“One of the requirements for California Energy Commission approval of a reach code is that it be cost-effective. To be cost effective, the money saved from the reduced energy costs needs to be enough to cover the initial cost within a reasonable period of time. City staff connected with the Statewide Reach Code Program to develop cost effectiveness studies for the City of Glendale (Exhibits 3-5).”

Regarding Existing Buildings: 

“The report primarily addresses the replacement of the all-electric reach code requirement in new construction. However, the Rincon report also includes information about potential options for the City to consider in relation to existing buildings, such as equipment replacement, energy savings checklists, electric readiness, and other relevant measures.Staff recommend further discussion of these options after the adoption of a new Single Margin Source Energy reach code, such as incorporating them into the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan.”

STAFF REPORT with Sustainability Commission & Staff Recommendations for replacement ordinance in light of the 9th Circuit Court’s decision in the CA Restaurant Association vs. City of Berkley litigation.

RINCON CONSULTANTS REPORT

Note: This item was continued from a previous Council meeting.

OUTCOME: 3:2 Vote – Direction given to move forward with preparation of an ordinance and related studies for Staff recommendation 3, Single Margin Source Energy Code Amendment – with an option to consider what constitutes a “to the studs” rebuild and an option to include those types of rebuilds in the future ordinance (Brotman’s request) and with the inclusion of a staff report containing several additional pieces of information (very specific cost questions for the various types of new builds etc) from Mayor Asatryan. NOT UNANIMOUS. 3 Ayes (Asatryan, Brotman, Kassakhian), 1 Naye (Gharpetian), 1 Abstention (Najarian).