3. Staff memo to council re: Environmental Investment Plan — original pdf

Backup

M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor and Council Members THROUGH: Susana Carbajal, Chief of Staff FROM: Zach Baumer, Chief Sustainability Officer DATE: May 21, 2024 SUBJECT: Response to Environmental Investment Plan (Resolution No. 20240215-025) On February 15, 2024, the Austin City Council passed Resolution No. 20240215-025, directing the City Manager to “solicit community input and prepare options and associated costs of capital improvements or programs that would reduce carbon emissions, decrease water usage, improve water quality and water detention, advance the sustainability of City operations, and improve community resilience.” The resolution also called for a public hearing of the Joint Sustainability Committee to gather public input and recommendations. Over the past three months, staff from the Office of Sustainability convened numerous City departments and facilitated meetings and discussions across the organization on this response. Staff began by analyzing 13 existing City of Austin plans across multiple departments to catalog all the goals and strategies within each plan. Department representatives reviewed their plans and goals to identify gaps and potential new projects. The Office of Sustainability then convened the departments to discuss their findings and facilitated workshops to consolidate and refine all department proposals. Summary Attachment A includes the full list of potential new projects and investments and is summarized below. The list is a result of cross-departmental collaboration, deepening connections and alignment across City-wide work areas, and offers a snapshot of major initiatives that would fill gaps and advance areas in climate sustainability and community resilience. A comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of these potential environmental investments in comparison with other City priorities has not yet been completed and is necessary. Staff has also not yet evaluated the long-term approach to addressing funding gaps and implementation. The potential new projects have been categorized into 4 topic areas Page 1 of 4 summarized below. Items marked “JSC” indicate alignment with Joint Sustainability Committee recommendations. Carbon Emissions Potential projects would reduce emissions from energy and transportation and reduce waste. Total summarized needs: $455 million Project Department ARR Transfer Station + EV Charging Network CE12 CE13 CE14 Recycling and Reuse Drop Off Facility (could be combined with Transfer Station) Weatherization and EV Charging Programs for Low and Moderate-income Customers Facilities to Process Compost, Reuse Materials, and Recycle Construction Debris CE6 CE10 CE15 CE16 CE17 CE7 Matching Funds for Federal Clean Energy/Resiliency Grants ARR ARR AE ARR Transportation Demand Management and Safety Programming CE1 - CE5 CE8 Solar at ARR FM 812 Landfill CE11 Commercial Building Energy Audits CE9 Pilot "Virtual Power Plant" Project Cost Estimates $100M+ $100M $55M $45M JSC JSC JSC AE TPW, Fleet, AE $40M $23M AE, ARR $16.9M JSC AE AE $5M $1.3M JSC Water Quality, Quantity, and Land Potential projects would acquire and manage lands for public benefits and increase community resilience. Total summarized needs: $1.1 billion Project Department WL3 Land Acquisition of 20,000 acres AW, OOS, PARD, WPD WL6 Food Hub WL7 Farm Incubator OOS OOS WL1 Tree Assessment, Inventory, and Management ARR, AW, AFD, DSD, PARD, WPD WL5 Austin Civilian Conservation Corps EDD, PARD $5M/year WL4 Citywide Green Infrastructure Plan / Natural Resource Management WL2 Climate Change & Natural Systems Analysis ARR, AW, AFD, DSD, OOS, PARD, WPD ARR, AW, AFD, DSD, Housing, OOS, PARD, Planning, WPD Cost Estimates $1B $50M $20M $10M $5M $5M JSC JSC JSC JSC Page 2 of 4 Community Resilience Potential projects would increase resilience for the community and for City assets. Total summarized needs: $233 million Project CR7 Enhance City-owned Community Facilities Community Resilience Programs for Residential & Commercial that support fire resilience, water use reduction, battery storage, and more Fallwell Lane Improvements Decker Dam Improvements Decker River Water Pump Upgrade Climate and Health Investments Climate Health Assessment Department Cost Estimates $100M JSC AE, PARD, APL, APH AW, AFD, HD, WPD $100M $18.2M $14M $500K $500K $250K AE AE AE APH APH City Operations Potential projects would allow the City to lead by example and build community resilience. Total summarized needs: $90 million Project Unified COA Facilities Operation, Maintenance, and Improvement Plan, including resilience, electrification, energy and water use reduction, and more Advance Decarbonization of City Fleet and Community-wide EV Infrastructure Fleet Department PARD, APH, APL, BSD, AE, all facility owners Cost Estimates $60M+ $28M + $800K/year JSC JSC Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendations The Joint Sustainability Committee held a public forum on March 27, shared initial feedback with staff on April 24, and approved its final recommendations on April 30. Thirty-three recommendations were adopted, encompassing cross-sector needs, energy and water conservation, consumption and waste reduction, natural systems, and transportation and land use. The Joint Sustainability Committee’s complete list of recommendations is included as Attachment B. Next Steps Staff will continue developing these project proposals by specifying scopes of work, analyzing costs, and quantifying environmental benefits. Additionally, further analysis is necessary to identify the impact on taxes, rates, and fees for Austin residents. Staff will continue to work with the City Manager’s Office and during the budget process to identify potential funding sources for these projects, including the exploration of a “Climate Fee” that would create annual dedicated funding for climate and environment projects. CR6 CR4 CR3 CR5 CR2 CR1 CO1 CO2 CO3 CO4 CO5 CO6 Page 3 of 4 cc: T.C. Broadnax, City Manager CMO Executive Team Department Directors Assistant Directors Attachments: Attachment A: Staff Recommendations List Attachment B: Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendations Page 4 of 4 Project Cost + Savings Department(s) Plan / Goal / Strategy Funding  Source(s) Timeline  (fiscal year) Notes $200,000 General Fund TPW Short to Long Attachment A: Carbon Emissions CE1 CE2 Vision Zero Safety Program: Implement safety policies and  programs, including: ‐ Safety Education Campaigns ‐ Seasonal Campaigns, such as Distracted Driving Awareness Month  in April, and Darker Evening Commutes in the fall ‐ Community Engagement ‐ Safety policies Land Use Regulations: These programs are responsible for Land  Development Code Amendments and other regulatory  requirements. Including: ‐ LDC Amendments ‐ Criteria Manual Updates ‐ Process and Procedures improvements ASMP Goal ‐ Safety: The goal of the Vision Zero  Safety Program is to create safe mobility options  to allow our city to make a cultural shift towards  sustainable modes and therefore reduce carbon  emissions. ASMP Goal ‐ Land Use and Regulations: Realizing  the Imagine Austin Growth Concept, providing  more housing in proximity to transit, and allowing  a mix of uses within our neighborhoods will  unlock the city’s ability to be less auto  dependent. Over time, providing more housing  and housing options will facilitate this cultural  shift allowing people to live and work where it’s  convenient without a car. TBD General Fund TPW, PD, HD, EDD, WPD Short to Long Additional staffing will be required CE3 $23 million General Fund TPW Transportation Demand Management: Scale behavior change  programming across a variety of modes by offering incentives for  commuters and other travelers, expanding low‐income discounts,  conducting outreach including on‐the‐ground LIDAC engagement,  and building accessible public‐facing resources. The project will  serve as a bridge, priming residents to become users of the transit  system improvements currently under construction that will come  online in the next decade. The budget is reasonable to offer 700 low income transportation subsidies and 70,000 commuter incentives  annually, conduct both a comprehensive LIDAC outreach campaign  and a complete regional communications campaign, and implement  a coordinated regional mobility platform. ASMP Goal ‐ Transportation Demand  Management: Changing travel behavior through  TDM programming is paramount to actualizing  the benefits of changing infrastructure to be  more safe and less auto dependent. This cultural  shift has to be encouraged and incentivized. Short (2024 ‐ 2025) The TDM program has both capacity limitations  due to its small staff and resource limitations  for providing robust behavior change  incentives to community members. The TDM program is made up of four FTEs and  has an annual budget of $1.4M derived from  the Transportation User Fee (TUF) to deliver  TDM programming for both the City of Austin  workforce and the community. The current  program budget comprises 1/3 staff salaries  and 2/3 in contracts to educate and incentivize  people to take non‐drive‐alone trips in the city.  TDM funding is being pursued through a  Climate Pollution Reduction Grant (CPRG) for  $48M to fund behavior change and incentive  programming. Should this grant be awarded in  July, the City would have a TDM funding source  for five years, but would be unfunded beyond  that.  Transit Service ($17,500,000) Mobility Infrastructure ($7,140,668) Behavior Change ($22,625,000) Attachment A: Carbon Emissions Environmental Strategies: Implement strategies intended to  address the negative externalities of transportation, as a means to  mitigate their impacts, and the systemic barriers to implementing  projects and programs with the greatest benefit. This includes the  transition to Electric Vehicles and fleet replacement to reduce the  use of fossil fuel as well as city administrative barriers such process  improvements and aligning budgets around improvements that will  have the greatest environmental impact. Connecting People to Services that already exist and developing  new services yet to be implemented. Including: ‐ Special transit service ‐ Guaranteed Basic Mobility Program ‐ Transportation Subsidy programs ‐ other mobility services Expand Weatherization Assistance Program: Austin Energy's  Weatherization Assistance Program is a cost‐effective program for  reducing electricity demand and improving affordability of  electricity service for low‐income customers. Weatherization  includes energy efficiency improvements to a home such as  weather stripping, caulking, air sealing, attic insulation, solar  screens, duct repair/replacement, health and safety upgrades,  HVAC tune up, and a smart thermostat. This leads to lower GHG  emissions from coal and natural gas‐fired power plants with  reduction of AE's total load from lower A/C usage. Other benefits  include cost savings from lower "4CP" peak demand events in  summer that keep overall electricity rates lower and significant  utility bill savings and quality of life improvements for customers. CE4 CE5 CE6 CE7 COA Grant Match for Federal Clean Energy/Resilience Grants: AE  is currently in the process of applying for various Federal grants. A  Matching Fund for Grants would provide matching funds for those  potential projects. The Matching Fund for Grants would include, but  not be limited to proposed projects listed below, but any Federal  grant effort that would help address resilience of our energy  systems and needs matching funds pool to reference in an  application. ‐ Resilience Hubs:  6‐7 commercial‐scale battery storage systems at  community facilities (Up to 1MW/4MWh) integrated with a device‐ agnostic distributed energy resource management system (DERMS)  ‐ Smart Grid Enhancements: End‐to‐end feeder rehabilitation and  automation effort that will harden and enhance the resilience of  Austin Energy’s distribution system. $40 million Savings depend  on which projects  are chosen.  Match unlocks  significant grant  funding. TBD Bond, General  Fund TPW, Fleet, AE ASMP Goal ‐ Environmental Strategies: The goal  is to address the negative externalities of  transportation, as a means to mitigate their  impacts, and the systemic barriers to  implementing projects and programs in an  Environmental Investment Plan. Short to Long TBD General Fund TPW Short to Long ASMP Goal ‐ Connecting People to Services: The  goal is to create “Complete Communities” by  providing services and connecting people to  those services. Complete communities are less  auto dependent. Additional staffing to implement action items Additional funding for programs that engage  with the community Additional funding for the community  Short Term (0‐2 years):  Mid Term (2‐5 years):  Long Term (6‐10 years):  Full Build (10+ years):   $40 million over  5 years (cost) $51.7 million in  savings over 10  years, 8.2 year  simple payback  Utility Rates AE Climate Equity Plan, Sustainable Buildings G1S1:  Ensure benefits flow to low income and  communities of color; AE Gen Resource Plan:  25% of CES program participation is limited  income Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Utility Rates AE AE Gen Resource Plan: Local Battery Storage;  Climate Resilience Action Plan: Harden Critical  Infrastructure Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Attachment A: Carbon Emissions Solar at ARR FM 812 Landfill: Austin Energy is working with Austin  Resource Recovery to potentially build a new solar PV system on  top of the closed FM 812. 10MW of solar panels will be installed  with a ballasted racking system to avoid any penetration or  disturbance of the landfill cap. The electricity from this project will  be earmarked for the AE Community Solar program and AE will  contract with an "Engineering, Procurement and Construction  (EPC)" firm to deliver the project. AE will own it, taking advantage of new Direct Pay provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act to offset  30% or more of the capital cost. The project will include an  educational kiosk for student groups and visitors to see how a utility scale solar installation works Pilot 'Virtual Power Plant' Project: A Virtual Power Plant (VPP) is a  group of distributed energy resources (DERs) that can be controlled  as a single entity to provide services to a utility or to the grid. This  pilot project would deploy 1MWh of battery energy storage  systems behind the meter at AE/COA facilities and/or participating  customers aggregated as a VPP. The batteries would be controlled  by AE to reduce total electricity load on the grid during potential  "4CP" peak demand events. Batteries would be charged during off‐ peak/lower cost/lower GHG hours and discharged during on‐ peak/higher cost/higher GHG hours. Customers receive lower  overall electricity bills and improved resilience, AE reduces its costs,  and overall GHG emissions are reduced. AE will use the pilot to test  telemetry protocols between DERMS and devices and evaluate the  safety, technical and economic performance of the VPP to inform a  longer term strategy on how to optimize deployment of VPPs in the  AE service territory.  EV Charging Infrastructure for LMI Customers: Low and Moderate  Income customers  may not have the option or funds to install  dedicated charging infrastructure; this project will leverage public‐ private partnerships and federal incentives to fund the most cost‐ effective solutions currently available for providing EV charging  services to LMI customers. Main environmental benefit is reduction  in GHG emissions through replacement of gas‐powered vehicles  with electric vehicles for segment of population currently  underrepresented in EV ownership. Commercial Building Energy Audits: Funding for energy audits and  technical assessments for local commercial and multifamily  properties.  Work to ensure all city/government, non‐profit, and  small/medium businesses have received an energy audit or EE  upgrades every 10 years.  Austin Energy will administer an audit  program  (in‐person or virtual) and link audit results to energy  efficiency funding for target buildings. CE8 CE9 CE10 CE11 $16.9 million  (cost) Utility Rates AE, ARR AE Gen Resource Plan: Supports both local solar  and carbon‐neutral goals; 25% of CES program  participation is limited income Short (2024 ‐ 2025) $1.28 million cost  (after 30%  Investment Tax  Credit) for 2 years $650,000 in  savings over 10  years Utility Rates AE AE Gen Resource Plan: 225 MW Economic  Demand Response by 2030 Short (2024 ‐ 2025) $15 million over 5  years Utility Rates AE Climate Equity PlanTransporta(cid:415)on Electrifica(cid:415)on  G2: By 2030, Austin has a compelling and  equitably distributed mix of level 1, 2 and DC fast  charging infrastructure to accommodate 40% of  total vehicle miles traveled in the city Mid (2025‐ 2027) $5 million Utility Rates AE AE Gen Resource Plan:Building Efficiency Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Long (2027  and beyond) CE12 Austin Transfer Station: Facility where trash, recycling, and  compost are temporarily held to hauler to landfills or processing  facilities. This also enables fleet electrification. $100 million  (estimate, could  be colocated with  Recycling and  Reuse Facility) Utility Rates ARR 2023 ARR Comprehensive PlanChapter 8 Attachment A: Carbon Emissions CE13 CE14 EV charging network: Conduct study in partnership with Austin  Energy (and other departments with electric fleet) to map existing  heavy vehicle charging stations at City properties and identify future expansion options to support electrification of fleet Austin Recycling and Reuse Drop Off Facility: Provide residents  with convenient household waste and hard‐to‐recycle drop‐off  opportunity similar to existing south RRDOC.  TBD Utility Rates ARR 2023 ARR Comprehensive PlanChapter 8 Utility Rates ARR 2023 ARR Comprehensive PlanChapter 8 CE15 City Collected Compost Processing Facility to process organic  material. Utility Rates ARR Climate Equity Plan Food and Product  Consumption Goal 3; Urban Forest Plan S‐2  Wood Utilization CE16 Deconstruction Reuse Warehouse to hold reusable material  salvaged from deconstructed buildings until reuse opportunities can  be found. $15 million  (estimate) Utility Rates ARR 2023 ARR Comprehensive PlanChapter 13 CE17 Construction Debris Recycling Facility (Open to 3rd Party Haulers).   City owned or public‐private partnership. Utility Rates ARR 2023 ARR Comprehensive PlanChapter 13 $100 million  (estimate, could  be colocated with  Transfer station) $15 million  (estimated cost if  existing City land  utilized at closed  landfill) $15 million  (estimated cost if  existing City land  utilized at closed  landfill) Long (2027  and beyond) Long (2027  and beyond) Long (2027  and beyond) Long (2027  and beyond) Long (2027  and beyond) Project Cost + Savings Department(s) Plan / Goal / Strategy Funding  Source(s) Timeline  (fiscal year) Notes Attachment A: Water Quality, Quantity, and Land WL1 WL2 WL3 WL4 WL5 WL6 Tree Assessment, Inventory, and Management   Tree inventory: Conduct a comprehensive geospatial inventory of  all trees including street trees and wildfire risk Comprehensive Urban Forest Planting and Maintenance Plan:  Proactive tree planting and care: implement the Comprehensive  Urban Forest Planting and Maintenance Plan, including reforest the  floodplains, wildfire mitigation and wood reuse strategies Climate Change & Natural Systems Analysis Include data analytics for predictive modeling, gray infrastructure  impacts such as comprehensive parking (Lot) assessment, etc.  Develop a framework for land acquisition Assess land to acquire and bank for future community needs (parks,  stormwater management, affordable housing, agriculture, health  centers, libraries, etc. )  Land Acquisition Acquire and bank land for future community needs through fee  simple, lease agreements and other means Preserve and restore open space ecosystem services and food  production in the East Austin/blackland prairie land conservation  and restoration area Preserve and restore the Lower Colorado River Basin drinking water  watershed land conservation Citywide Green Infrastructure Plan / Natural Resource  Management Increase resources for land management to address climate  resilience, fire management,  and flooding on existing public lands  Include Stormwater Resilience Include food production: Community Gardens, Food Forests, Farm  Incubator Program, etc.  Austin Civilian Conservation Corps  Expand engagement including Ambassadors/Green Workforce  Development Food Hub Develop a central aggregation, processing, and distribution facility  (Food Hub) to supply institutional purchasers with local agricultural  goods.  Support a regional food system network to facilitate and coordinate  large‐scale pro‐health, pro‐climate food purchasing and distribution  from regenerative agricultural producers.   $10 million General Fund ARR, AW, AFD, DSD,  PARD, WPD,  CEP NS Goal 3: Achieve at least 50% citywide tree  canopy cover by 2050, focusing on increasing  canopy cover equitably. Short (2024 ‐ 2025) $5 million General Fund ARR, AW, AFD, DSD, HD,  OoS, PARD, PD, WPD  $1 billion  Bond AW, OoS, PARD, WPD CEP NS Goal 1: By 2030, legally protect an  additional 20,000 acres of carbon pools on  natural lands and manage all new and existing  natural areas (approximately 70,000 acres total),  focusing on resilience.   Short (2024 ‐ 2025) CEP NS Goal 1: By 2030, legally protect an  additional 20,000 acres of carbon pools on  natural lands and manage all new and existing  natural areas (approximately 70,000 acres total),  focusing on resilience.   CEP NS Goal 2: By 2030, protect 500,000 acres of  farmland from development in the five county  region* through legal protections or regenerative  agriculture programs.  Long (2027  and beyond) Food system plan ‐ Preserving Farmland  Strategy 1.1 $5 million General Fund ARR, AW, AFD, DSD,  OoS, PARD, WPD CEP NS Goal 4: By 2030, include all City‐owned  lands under a management plan that results in  neutral or negative carbon emissions and  maximizes community co‐benefits. Mid (2025‐ 2027) $5 million General Fund EDD, ARR, AW, AFD,  DSD, OoS, PARD, WPD $50 million Bond OoS Mid (2025‐ 2027) Long (2027  and beyond) Food System Plan ‐Food Hub  ‐ Strategy 5.1: Develop a central aggregation,  processing, and distribution facility (Food Hub) to  supply regional institutional purchasers with local  agricultural goods.  Attachment A: Water Quality, Quantity, and Land WL7 Farm Incubator  Create a local farm incubator program to support farmers who  practice regenerative agriculture through the first 3‐5 years of  business with a focus on reducing barriers for underrepresented  farm owners and workers, including offering beginning farmer  training. $20 million General Fund OoS Food System Plan ‐Farm Incubator Program ‐ Strategy 2.3: Create a local farm incubator  program. Mid (2025‐ 2027) Attachment A: Community Resilience Project Cost + Savings Department(s) Plan / Goal / Strategy Funding  Source(s) Timeline  (fiscal year) Notes Climate Heath Assessment In‐depth climate change vulnerability health study, gap analysis, and modeling  Relationship between climate change impacts and social  determinants of health Current and projected vectors borne disease. Number and locations of energy‐burdened households: lack air  conditioning, using ventilators, etc. Recommendations for equitable programs that support and  strengthen community resilience. $250,000  General Fund APH Climate + Health Investments Health resource for acute and chronic climate impacts Broader communication, portable/potable water, charging stations,  etc. $250k Short term Funding for a public health Climate Program $250k/yr long term $500,000  General Fund APH Austin Public Health 2020‐2025 STRATEGIC PLAN Goal 3. Minimize the public’s exposure to  environmental hazards, infectious diseases, and  foodborne Illness KPI 3.1 Percent of retail and  food service fixed establishments that are  substantially compliant in their routine  inspections Target: 90% Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Austin Public Health 2020‐2025 STRATEGIC PLAN Goal 6. Promote health equity, eliminate  disparities, and assist people in achieving  wellness, stability, and self‐sufficiency KPI 6.1    Percent of households receiving homeless  services that move into housing TARGET: 82% Goal 7. Use science, data, and a prevention‐ focused approach to guide and support health  and racial equity KPI 7.1  One epidemiologist per  100,000 population employed by Austin Public  Health TARGET: 1 per 100,000 Population Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Decker Dam Improvements: Replace key infrastructure at the  Decker Dam to bring the dam into compliance with current  standards, improving resiliency of City infrastructure against  extreme weather and flood risk Fallwell Lane Improvements Ph A & B: Citywide project to improve  the embankment along Fallwell Lane for flood resilience  improvement at Sand Hill Energy Center Decker River Water Pump Upgrade: modernized traveling water  screens, new pump discharge check valve. A new pump gland  sealing system and improvements to the river inlet cistern Community Resilience Projects for Residential & Commercial  Increase community resilience by combining initiative and  increasing incentives for Firewise, stormwater capture, landscape  transformation, greywater reuse ($500k for 25 or more homes),  battery back up and other resilience upgrades Support home repairs for LMI households to ready homes for  participation in weatherization, energy efficiency, solar programs Enhance City Owned Community Facilities  As part of the Resilience Hub Network program, design and  implement improvements at Recreation Centers, Health Centers  and Library Facilities including solar, site updates, signage and other  hardening updates.  Capital improvement project for resilience updates to city facilities  include solar/battery backup, supportive infrastructure, and other  resilience upgrades. Estimate based on 20 facilities @ $5 million  each.  $14 million  Utility rates AE Climate Resilience Action Plan: Harden Critical  Infrastructure Mid (2025‐ 2027)  $18.2 million  Utility rates AE Climate Resilience Action Plan: Harden Critical  Infrastructure Mid (2025‐ 2027) $500,000  Utility rates AE Climate Resilience Action Plan: Harden Critical  Infrastructure Short (2024 ‐ 2025)  $100 million  AW, AFD, HD, WPD General funds,  utility rates Mid (2025‐ 2027)  $100 million  Bonds AE, PARD, APL, APH,  Climate Resilience Action Plan: Strengthen  Emergency Response, Optimize Coordination of  Disaster Response Resources, Design for  Resilience PARD Long Range Plan SEG6: Pursue  sustainability and resilience goals at all PARD  parkland and facilities Short (2024 ‐ 2025) Related to upgrades in the Unified City of  Austin Facilities Operations, Maintenance, and  Improvement Plan, but focused on Resilience  Hubs in particular. CR1 CR2 CR3 CR4 CR5 CR6 CR7 Attachment A: City Operations Project Cost + Savings Department(s) Plan / Goal / Strategy Timeline  (fiscal year) Notes Unified City of Austin Facilities Operations, Maintenance, and  Improvement Plan: Real‐time facility energy and water‐use  monitoring, poor performance alerts Unified City of Austin Facilities Operations, Maintenance, and  Improvement Plan: Regular facility assessments at all buildings  every 5 years $300,000 + utility  bill savings TBD General  funds PARD, APH, APL, BSD,  AE, all facility owners Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buidings Goals 1  and 4 Short (2024 ‐ 2025) $60 million over 5  years General  funds PARD, APH, APL, BSD,  AE, all facility owners Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buidings Goals 1,   2, and 4 Mid (2025‐ 2027) Unified City of Austin Facilities Operations, Maintenance, and  Improvement Plan: Dedicated funds for maintenance and upgrades  identified through assessments TBD PARD, APH, APL, BSD,  AE, all facility owners Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buidings Goals 1,   2, and 4 Long (2027  and beyond) CO1 CO2 CO3 CO4 Advance Decarbonization of City Fleet and Community‐wide EV  Infrastructure: Transition to R99 renewable diesel $800,000 annually Fleet Services Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification  Mid (2025‐ 2027) CO5 Advance Decarbonization of City Fleet and Community‐wide EV  Infrastructure: Procure an additional 2,200 Evs by 2040 $13 million Fleet Services Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification  Goal 1  Mid (2025‐ 2027) CO6 Advance Decarbonization of City Fleet and Community‐wide EV  Infrastructure: Fleet and public (when feasible) charging  infrastructure $15 million Bonds Fleet Services Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification  Goal 2 Mid (2025‐ 2027) Funding  Source(s) General  funds,  bonds,  utiity rates General  funds General  funds Would improve efficiency of everyday  operations, decrease utility bills, and identify  malfunctioning equipment rapidly To identify priority maintenance and upgrades  to support carbon emission reductions, water  conservation, and community resilience Maintenance and upgrades to include resilience  hardening, electrification, energy efficiency,  water conservation and reclamation,  refrigerant management, more. Includes an  estimated $1.5 million for conversion of three  cooling towers from potable to reclaimed  water. R99 renewable diesel is an existing zero‐carbon  drop‐in replacement for traditional vehicles and  is a good solution for fleet applications that are  difficult to electrify While the upfront investment in transitioning to  BEVs is significant, our analysis suggests that  over time, the operational and maintenance  cost savings will offset this initial expense.  While the upfront investment in transitioning to  BEVs is significant, our analysis suggests that  over time, the operational and maintenance  cost savings will offset this initial expense.  Attachment A: Other Project Cost + Savings Department(s) Plan / Goal / Strategy Funding  Source(s) Timeline  (fiscal year) Notes O1 Sidewalks: Build new sidewalks and rehabilitate existing sidewalks  at high‐priority locations throughout the city. This work will  complement transportation investments that increase accessibility  to, and comfort using, the sidewalk system.  $810 million Bond TPW ASMP Goal ‐ Active Transportation  Infrastructure: The goal of the Sidewalks program  is to fund 810 miles of new sidewalks at absent  locations throughout the city. Short‐Long O2 O3 Shared Streets: Build shared streets as a potential alternative for  improving pedestrian access in existing neighborhoods that were  developed without sidewalks; and shared streets may be a  preferred alternative for aesthetic, social, or environmental  reasons, or where construction of sidewalks would be particularly  difficult. $93 million Bond TPW ASMP Goal ‐ Active Transportation  Infrastructure: The goal of the Shared Streets  program will be to fund 740 miles of shared  streets at absent locations throughout the city. Short‐Long Bicycle Network: Install bicycle facilities that create an all ages and  abilities (AAA) bicycle network in high priority areas throughout the  city. This network will require proactive capital investments to  engineer and construct: ‐ Physically protected bicycle lanes  ‐ Off‐street bikeways  ‐ Shared use paths  ‐ Bridges or tunnels  ‐ Signals ‐ Traffic calming infrastructure  ‐ Utility relocation $1.15 billion Bond TPW Short‐Long ASMP Goal ‐ Active Transportation  Infrastructure: The goal of the Bikeways program  will be to fund 800 miles of the entire remaining  AAA bicycle network as defined in the 2023 Bike  Plan and upgrade Bikeways to medium and full  build quality.  Unless a significant new source of funding is  identified by the end of 2024 construction will  start slowing down in mid‐2025 and will come  to a near halt (relative to current levels) by mid  2026.  The Sidewalk program of projects faces  staffing and workforce capacity constraints  that limit the ability to deliver projects on an  annual basis. Additional funding toward  workforce development and staffing would  accelerate the program's ability to meet annual  targets. Additional funding is needed for  consultant support and additional staffing and  funding is needed for operations and  maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years): $124,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $248,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $682,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): $810,000,000 The Shared Streets program is a new program  with staffing and workforce capacity  constraints that limit the ability to deliver  projects on an annual basis. Additional funding  toward workforce development and staffing  would accelerate the program's ability to meet  annual targets. Additional funding is needed  for consultant support and additional staffing  and funding is needed for operations and  maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years): $5,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $13,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $25,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): $93,000,000 The Bicycle program of projects faces staffing  and workforce capacity constraints that limit  the ability to deliver projects on an annual  basis. Additional funding toward workforce  development and staffing would accelerate the  program's ability to meet annual targets.  Additional funding is needed for consultant  support and additional staffing and funding is  needed for operations and maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years): $15,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $50,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $140,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): $1,150,000,000 Attachment A: Other O4 Vision Zero Safety Improvements: This project will include various  engineering countermeasures on the High‐Injury Network and  visibility improvements (lighting, markings, vegetation removal,  etc.). $70 million Bond TPW Short to Long ASMP Goal ‐ Safety: The goal of the Vision Zero Safety Improvement  program of projects is to create safe mobility  options to allow our city to make a cultural shift  towards sustainable modes and therefore reduce  carbon emissions. O5 $51 million Bond TPW Short to Long Local Transit Enhancements:  Design and construct transit  infrastructure improvements at high‐priority locations throughout  the city. These include:  ‐ Transit access improvements , such as adding pedestrian crossings  (crossing islands, PHBs, etc.) at new and existing bus stops, filling  first/last mile gaps (missing sidewalks, SUPs, etc.) near transit, and  building multimodal bus stops. ‐ Transit operations improvements , such as transit priority lanes,  intersection and signal modifications, and bus queue jump signals. ‐ Safety improvements for transit , such as access management,  turn modifications, and curb management near transit facilities. ‐ Transit only lane feasibility studies. ASMP Goal ‐ Transit: The goal of the Transit  Enhancement program's Long‐term project is to  fund design and construction for all projects  identified in the 2023 Transit Enhancement  Infrastructure Report. The Transit Enhancement  program will improve mobility and access to  opportunity for Austin residents and visitors by  fostering collaborative relationships with public  transit providers, working directly with  communities to understand needs and  opportunities, and systematically enhancing  areas of the built environment to support transit. ASMP Goal ‐ Transit Partner with Capital Metro to plan for and  implement the Project Connect Long Term Vision  Plan. O6 Project Connect System Plan: Implement the Project Connect Long  Term Vision Plan TBD TPW, CDS, ATP,  CapMetro Long (2027  and beyond) 2020 Proposition A only funded an initial  investment. Short Term estimates reflect spending at a  peak projected spend rate (~$24 million per  year) for two additional years beyond current  projections. The Vision Zero program of projects faces  staffing and workforce capacity constraints  that limit the ability to deliver projects on an  annual basis. Additional funding toward  workforce development and staffing would  accelerate the program's ability to meet annual  targets. Short Term (0‐2 years): none Mid Term (2‐5 years): $34,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $70,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): unknown The Transit Enhancement program of projects  faces staffing and workforce capacity  constraints that limit the ability to deliver  projects on an annual basis. Additional funding  toward workforce development and staffing  would accelerate the program's ability to meet  annual targets. Short Term (0‐2 years): $5,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $32,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $51,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): Unknown Attachment A: Other O7 $502 million Bond TPW Pedestrian Crossings: Design and construct the following  transportation infrastructure at high‐priority, non‐signalized  crossing locations throughout the city: ‐ Signals ‐ Crosswalks ‐ Bulb outs ‐ Crossing islands ASMP Goal ‐ Active Transportation  Infrastructure: The goal of the Pedestrian  Crossing program is to design and construct Very  High and High priority crossings ready for  implementation in the next ten years. Crossings  are located along the Pedestrian High Injury  Network (HIN), and/or within 1/4 mile of all  identified schools, public transit stops and  stations, and parks. They shall be provided  frequently to ensure safe pedestrian crossings,  avoid crossing delay, discourage unsafe and  illegal crossings, and promote walking as a  chosen mode of transportation. Short to  Medium ASMP Goal ‐ Transportation Demand  Management: The goal of the Mobility Hubs  project will be to plan and implement priority  locations in the next five years. This project will  create family‐friendly multimodal mobility hubs,  including park‐and‐rides, adjacent to transit stops  to offer a variety of first‐ and last‐mile mobility  options and a complete trip experience.  Incorporate community‐knowledge sharing,  maintenance programming, and integrate civic  space where strategic. The locations will include  underutilized and disadvantaged communities as  outlined by the Equity Analysis Zones GIS Map,  which may qualify the associated projects for  various federal grants.   The identified need is $502M to address high  and very high priority gaps ‐ nearly 2,000  priority crossing locations identified from  Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets plan  (adopted November 2023). To meet these  goals, pedestrian crossings would be delivered  using multiple funding sources, including large  CIP, Corridor Program, and the Vision  Zero/Safety Program. However, the core  program would be responsible for the majority  of crossings and thus requires additional  funding. Other constraints include in‐house ability to  build and maintain infrastructure. For example,  Signs and Markings Division and Arterial  Management Division both need additional  capacity and tools/resources. Additional  funding is needed for consultant support and  additional staffing and funding is needed for  operations and maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years): $10,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $25,000,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $50,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): $502,000,000 This project is utilizing existing staff time. The  scope of work has not been developed as the  project is in the research portion of the  planning phase.   Possible constraints: potential sites are  unavailable; conflicting timelines for CapMetro  updating transportation network vs COA  updating of network via Project Connect and  other upcoming priorities; Project Connect, I‐ 35 expansion and other large initiatives may  affect potential locations and extend timeline;  community outreach and stakeholder  involvement will take time; hiring consultants  to help with particular elements of planning  and community outreach. Additional funding is needed for consultant  support and additional staffing and funding is  needed for operations and maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years): $4,100,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $10,500,000 Long Term (6‐10 years): $21,300,000 Full Build (10+ years): unknown O8 Mobility Hubs & Placemaking: Planning and implementation of  transit Mobility Hubs. This work will expand access to transit  opportunities and increase community engagement at select  locations. Mobility Hubs include additional amenities and uses such  as concentration of employment, housing, shopping, and/or  recreation. $21.3 million Bond TPW Short to Long Attachment A: Other Green Infrastructure: Plan, procure, and install trees and construct  associated infrastructure at select locations throughout the city.  These locations will be based on ongoing transportation projects  that lack trees and related infrastructure as part of their  engineering and/or construction. The engineering and construction  will include excavation, irrigation, site preparation, drainage, and  installation. Such factors will be based on the Corridor Program  Office Tree Reference Manual, which updates tree installation  specifications to modern day standards and ensures optimal health  of the tree in context of the urban environment. O9 $10 million Bond TPW CEP Natural Systems Goal 4 Strategy 2:Reclaim  public space and prioritize green infrastructure O10 Urban Trails: Fund engineering and construction of Tier I urban  trails and connections to existing transportation infrastructure. It  also includes designing and constructing trail connections that  overcome barriers of the city's active transportation network. $860 million Bond TPW ASMP Goal ‐ Active Transportation  Infrastructure: The goal of the Urban Trails Full  Build project would design and construct all Tier  1 trails identified in the Urban Trails Network  after existing bonds are spent down in the next  five years. Long (2027  and beyond) O11 TBD Bond TPW Short to Long Climate Change Integration: Integrate climate change  considerations into decision making for capital investments.  Including: •Design for resilience to address climate change and other stressors  using strategies such as enhancing designs where there is a higher  risk of damage •Designing roadways and sidewalks for weak soils and expansive  clays •Armoring bridges and roadways in flood prone areas •Making trails along creeks durable for the long term ASMP Goal ‐ Environmental Strategies: This  program of projects would be responsible for  integrating climate change considerations into  decision making for capital investments.  Including: Design for resilience to address climate  change and other stressors using strategies such  as enhancing designs where there is a higher risk  of damage; Designing roadways and sidewalks for  weak soils and expansive clays; Armoring bridges  and roadways in flood prone areas; Making trails  along creeks durable for the long term.  Refer to recent Council Resolution No.  20240321‐039 on Green Infrastructure/Trees Short Term (0‐2 years): $5,000,000 Mid Term (2‐5 years): $10,000,000 The Urban Trails program is funded with 2016,  2018, and 2020 Mobility Bonds. The program is  estimated to spend remaining bonds in FY2028‐ 2029. Urban Trail project delivery is  constrained by conflicts with existing projects  from other city departments. In addition, these  projects are located in environmentally  sensitive areas and require protracted design  and environmental clearance. These  constraints slow down the pace at which  projects reach full design and implementation.  Additional funding is needed for consultant  support and additional staffing and funding is  needed for operations and maintenance. Long Term (6‐10 years): $76,000,000 Full Build (10+ years): $860,000,000 Additional staffing to implement action items Additional capital funding Additional funding is needed for consultant  support  Additional staffing and funding is needed for  operations and maintenance. Short Term (0‐2 years):  Mid Term (2‐5 years):  Long Term (6‐10 years):  Full Build (10+ years):  Attachment A: Other O12 O13 O14 Major Capital Improvements will address unfunded needs for large  scale capital improvement projects in the following programs:  •Corridor Construc(cid:415)on Program  •Roadway Capacity (SIF) •Substandard Streets •Roadway Infrastructure •Bridge Management •Signalls Stormwater Resilience CIP High priority CIP projects to reduce impacts of flooding, erosion,  and water pollution and improve drainage infrastructure. Stormwater Resilience Projects and Programs Projects and programs to enhance community resilience, reduce  impacts of flooding and erosion, improve water quality and  environmental health. Funding estimate based on existing Strategic Plan needs assessment  currently under revision via Rain to River (anticipated 2026) to  update community priorities and strategies. Major capital improvements require a lot of  time and a lot of money to create an outcome  that accomplishes all of our goals. If left  underfunded, elements like trees and drainage  improvements are removed to keep costs low  undermining the desired outcome. If left  unfunded, they take decades to realize if ever  at all. The Street Impact Fee provides a small  revenue source for eligible vehicle capacity  projects, but it has to be leveraged with other  funds to make any progress. This is a direct  reflection of the 2016 Mobility Bond Corridor  Construction Program. $3.8 billion Bonds TPW, CDS Short to Long Goal ‐ Congestion Management: The goal of the Major Capital Improvement  program will be to address unmet engineering  and construction needs of large scale capital  projects.   $400 million  Bonds WPD WPD Strategic Plan  $1.5 billion +  Bonds, other WPD WPD Strategic Plan, Climate Equity Plan Mid (2025‐ 2027) Long (2027  and beyond) Attachment B: Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendations BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Joint Sustainability Committee Recommendation 20240430-002: Environmental Investment Plan Funding Needs List of Funding Needs Cross-Sector Funding Needs ......................................................................................................................... 2 Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives ............................................................ 2 Austin Civilian Conservation Corps .............................................................................................. 3 Energy and Water Conservation Funding Needs .......................................................................................... 4 Expand Austin Energy’s energy efficiency programs ................................................................... 4 Expand Austin Energy’s demand response programs ................................................................. 5 Invest in battery energy storage.................................................................................................. 5 Utility-owned or contracted rooftop solar .................................................................................. 6 Shut down/retire AE’s portion of Fayette coal plant .................................................................. 7 Air sealing task force and training program ................................................................................ 8 Passive House incentive program ................................................................................................ 8 10. Decarbonizing municipal buildings .............................................................................................. 9 11. Water leak detection programs................................................................................................... 9 12. Improve rebates for residential and commercial landscape conversions ................................. 10 Consumption & Waste Reduction Funding Needs...................................................................................... 11 Circular economy & waste reduction programs ........................................................................ 11 Low-carbon concrete fund ........................................................................................................ 12 Pro-climate, pro-health foods ................................................................................................... 12 Sustainable purchasing and carbon accounting ........................................................................ 13 City-owned composting facility ................................................................................................. 13 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 1 Natural Systems Funding Needs ................................................................................................................. 14 18. Preservation of existing agricultural land .................................................................................. 14 19. Revolving loan fund for Working Farms Fund pilot ................................................................... 15 20. Energy and water dashboard for city facilities .......................................................................... 15 21. Comprehensive public tree inventory for the city of Austin ..................................................... 16 Transportation and Land Use Funding Needs ............................................................................................. 17 22. Austin Resource Recovery Fleet Electrification ......................................................................... 17 23. Austin Resource Recovery Transfer Station .............................................................................. 17 24. Expand All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network, Urban Trails, Sidewalks, and Shared Mobility 18 25. Extend Pickup Service Zones ..................................................................................................... 20 26. Downtown High-Frequency Circulator ...................................................................................... 21 27. Neighborhood E-Circulators ...................................................................................................... 22 28. Heat Resilience Infrastructure ................................................................................................... 23 29. CityLeap ATX Plan: convert travel lanes on arterial roads to protected bike or bus lanes ....... 24 30. Establish a city-owned all-electric carshare service .................................................................. 25 31. Low-cost, accessible charging stations at City of Austin owned facilities ................................. 26 32. Install charging stations at multi-family homes with priority in low and moderate income communities ....................................................................................................................................... 27 33. E-mobility solutions pilot program ............................................................................................ 28 Cross-Sector Funding Needs 1. Outreach and Engagement for Sustainability Incentives Details: The City of Austin has numerous sustainability incentive programs aligned with the goals of the Climate Equity Plan. However, many of these programs are underutilized, especially among low-income households. A part of the challenge is awareness. The city should host a user-friendly website that consolidates information on all sustainability incentives offered by the City of Austin (i.e., home weatherization and repair, water conservation, rainwater collection, landscape and green infrastructure programs), as well as state and federal incentives that align with the goals of the Austin Climate Equity Plan and other city sustainability plans. Additional community outreach by the city and trusted organizations can increase the effectiveness of these programs. A new Community Engagement Specialist FTE in the Office of Sustainability is needed to coordinate community outreach and partnership activities 2 associated with promoting sustainability incentives, with a focus on building relationships with low-income communities, communities of color, and related organizations and service providers. This employee would manage grants, contracts and stipends for community leaders and community-based organizations to do direct outreach to promote sustainability incentive programs in targeted Austin communities, in partnership with the Office of Sustainability. Benefits: GHG reduction, water conservation, more equitable participation in programs Cost: $500,000/year to the Office of Sustainability for: • one additional Community Engagement Specialist FTE • outreach grants, contracts, and stipends • website construction and maintenance Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan; Water Forward Plan; Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 2. Austin Civilian Conservation Corps Details: Funding should be allocated to support the continuation and expansion of the Austin Civilian Conservation Corp (ACCC) program. The following tracks should be fully funded: • Natural Systems (protecting critical ecosystems on preserves and parkland) • Environmental Education • Zero Waste (should be expanded beyond computer refurbishment) • Clean Energy (solar, energy efficiency, demand response, batteries) • Digital Media Providing permanent funding to support and expand these programs is important in order to train people to provide needed environmental services in Austin. The ACCC should connect program participants with relevant programs at Austin Community College whenever possible for continuing education. This includes the solar technology program and sustainable agriculture program. Benefits: The Austin Civilian Conservation Corp invests in people and projects that have a direct impact on climate justice and builds more equitable pathways to employment, organizational leadership, entrepreneurship and strengthens networks of support for those most impacted by a changing climate 3 Cost: $3.93 million/year: $570,000/year for 6 FTE Program Specialists; $160,000 to support temporary staff and $3,200,000/year to support the programming and training and partnerships with external organizations. $80,000 one time for access to a truck. Plan Alignment: Climate Equity Plan; Austin Resource Recovery Comprehensive Plan; Parks and Recreation Department Land Management Plan: Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 Energy and Water Conservation Funding Needs Additional investments in energy efficiency, demand response, local solar, batteries and coal retirement are needed to meet the carbon-free by 2035 goal in the Austin Energy Resource Generation and Climate Protection Plan and the greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals in the Austin Climate Equity Plan. These are the resources that are locally available and cost effective for decarbonizing the energy sector. Decarbonizing the energy sector is doubly important because it is the lynchpin for decarbonizing transportation, buildings and other activities. Decarbonizing city buildings and improving water conservation will also yield greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and other co-benefits and aligns with the Water Forward plan. 3. Expand Austin Energy’s energy efficiency programs Details: More investment is needed to improve building envelopes and air sealing and install efficient heat pumps for heating and cooling and hot water production, as well as LED lighting and other energy efficiency appliances. Additional community outreach is needed to inform the community about available local, state and federal incentives. Building performance should be measured and ranked to enable focused attention on buildings with the highest need. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), affordability/bills reduction (for program participants and non-participants), improved health and safety of buildings and their occupants, increased building life (reduced embedded GHG emissions), greater equity in energy bills and home comfort, improved grid resilience Cost: AE budget is $13.6 million/year for existing programs. This amount should be doubled to $27.2 million/year ($13.6 million/year increase). An additional 14-20 FTEs should be allocated to run energy efficiency programs, costing $1.68-2.4 million/year. These costs will be offset by reduced AE energy purchases, ancillary services purchases, and transmission costs. 4  Plan Alignment: Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategies 1 and 3 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 4. Expand Austin Energy’s demand response programs Details: Expanded price-based demand response programs, including to the residential, commercial, industrial, and transportation sectors is needed. “Demand response ready” should be well defined and enforced. Demand response should be automated as much as possible. Electric hot water tank programs, thermostats, home energy managements systems, commercial and residential battery storage, electric vehicle smart chargers, smart meters Benefits: GHG reduction, affordability/reduced bills (reduce peak demand costs for AE), improve grid resilience Cost: AE budget is $3.6 million/year for existing programs. This amount should be quadrupled to $14.4 million/year ($10.8/year increase). An additional 11-16 FTEs should be allocated to run demand response programs, costing $1.32-1.92 million/year. These costs will be offset by reduced AE energy purchases when ERCOT prices are high. Plan Alignment: Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategies 1 and 3 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 5. Invest in battery energy storage Details: Battery storage is an important part of a decarbonized grid. Austin Energy must invest in utility scale and distributed battery storage to enable the retirement of its fossil fuel power plants and flatten the demand curve and avoid local electric grid price spikes that increase bills. Decentralized batteries on resilience hub buildings, school and supportive housing can be used as a virtual power plant (VPP) to help with load shifting during normal use and provide critical resiliency backup energy during outage events. Longer term heat batteries can decarbonize 5 industrial facilities throughout Austin by soaking up excess solar and wind during curtailment and putting energy into those industrial uses, or even storing it to later export to the grid, which allows much higher penetration of renewables. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), affordability/bills reduction (for program participants and non-participants), improved grid resilience Cost: For utility scale batteries: Using the average cost of 4-hr duration batteries provided by AE ($1,168/kW), 200 MW would cost $233.7 million. Using the average cost of 8-hr duration batteries provided by AE ($1,992/kW), 400 MW would cost $797 million. Using the average cost of 100-hr duration batteries provided by AE ($2,150/kW), 100 MW would cost $215 million. The combined 700 MW battery investment would cost $1,245.7 million. These costs would be recovered by earnings in the ERCOT energy and ancillary services markets. Heat battery pilots could be funded as public/private partnership with local industrial facilities and piggyback on federal funding currently flowing to these companies. Plan Alignment: Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 6. Utility-owned or contracted rooftop solar Details: Austin Energy needs a considerable expansion of local solar to meet energy needs and keep bills affordable (by avoiding price separation from remote resources). Land is expensive, so rooftop solar is the best locally available clean renewable energy source. New programs are needed to allow the utility to invest directly in this local rooftop solar (different from current programs that require customer investment). Under this structure, AE would pay for installation of residential rooftop solar. The utility or a third part would own the installations for the first 15 years (est.) and the customer would pay a tariff that is less than the Value of Solar credits they earn on their bill. After 15 years, ownership would flip to the customer. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), affordability/bills reduction (for program participants and non-participants), more equitable access to solar, reduced land use for energy production Cost: Assuming $3/watt current solar cost and $2.70/watt solar cost starting in 2024 and getting the solar ITC and domestic content incentives and recovering cost over 15 years via tariff, $74.46 million could establish a revolving fund that could support 5 MW installation per year. $223.38 million could establish a revolving fund that could support 15 MW installation per 6 year. The 5 MW program would also need approximately 3 FTEs, costing approximately $360,000/year, and the 15 MW program would need 6 FTEs, costing approximately $720,000/year. These costs will be offset by reduced AE energy purchases, ancillary services purchases, and transmission costs. Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategies 1 & 3; Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 7. Shut down/retire AE’s portion of Fayette coal plant Details: Austin Energy and LCRA co-own two coal-burning units at Fayette. Austin Energy’s portion accounts for about 25% of the entire Austin Energy’s scope 1 and 2 emissions (current GHG inventory). It is impossible to reach near, medium or long-term GHG reduction goals without closing Austin Energy’s portion of Fayette. LCRA has demanded payment from Austin Energy for changing the contract so AE fully owns one unit and can shut it down. We don’t know the exact amount, but it was rumored to be in the 100’s of millions. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), water pollution reduction (and health benefits and liability), long-term affordability improvement Cost: $100-300 million. Because of the large amount of GHG emissions from Fayette, this cost is still much less than the social cost of carbon (cost of contribution to climate change) from AE’s portion. Based on AE’s share of Fayette emissions in 2022 (2,710,000 metric tons) and the EPA social cost of carbon with a 2% discount rate1, the cost of AE’s Fayette GHG emissions will be $563.68 million in 2024, $574.52 million in 2025, $582.65 million in 2026, and $593.49 million in 2027, and $604.33 million in 2028. Thus, the cost over the coming three years (2024-2026) is approximately $1.72 billion and the cost over the coming five years (2024-2028) is approximately $2.92 billion. Plan Alignment: Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Vote: 13-0 1 Pg. 154, https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-12/epa_scghg_2023_report_final.pdf 7 Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin 8. Air sealing task force and training program Details: According to RMI and DOE air sealing is the lowest cost path to lowering operational carbon. Air sealing is a sequencing and trade knowledge problem, not a technical or product problem, so training up our trade base is the best way to ensure higher quality, more air sealed buildings. Under this new program, Austin Energy would publish air sealing results of all new buildings and retrofits and host trainings for trades on how to execute tight building envelopes. Research grants and federal funds for trainings and air sealing knowledge and skills Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), affordability/bills reduction (for program participants and non-participants), improved indoor air quality, improved grid resilience Cost: $2 million There is a lot of federal money for this type of training. Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategies 2 & 3; Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 9. Passive House incentive program Details: As directed by City Council on April, 18, 2024, create a program that offers cash incentives to affordable housing projects in Austin that certify as Passive House buildings. Use the Massachusetts Passive House Challenge Program as a model for this program. This program will reduce energy use costs for affordable housing providers while also creating a market shift - helping local design and construction teams learn how to build much more energy efficient buildings. As these projects are completed the added cost comes down through a learning curve that has been seen in other markets using this strategy, eventually allowing for smaller incentives and code mandates of more efficient buildings. Passive House buildings can play a critical role in the energy transition as well due to their low load and ability to load shift to help with peak demand curve reduction and resilience. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction (and health benefits), affordability/bills reduction (for program participants and non-participants), improved health and safety of buildings and their occupants, increased building life (reduced embedded GHG emissions), greater equity in energy bills and home comfort, improved grid resilience 8  Cost: $8 Million would fund 2,000 units of housing at $4,000/unit. This also piggybacks on IRA funding as any project doing this would also be eligible for $5k/unit of 45L tax credits. Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategies 1, 2 & 3; Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 10. Decarbonizing municipal buildings Details: Retrofitting existing municipal buildings to reduce energy use, decarbonize them and make them more resilient will benefit the City budget and the services offered to the community. In addition to energy efficiency upgrades to meet suggested 2030 EUI reduction, all buildings should have solar installed (where appropriate), be equipped to participate in demand response programs, utilize 100% electric appliances, include rainwater harvesting and utilization for landscaping irrigation, which should be minimal, and should utilize sustainable and low-embodied carbon materials. Energy modeling and life cycle assessments should be done for all retrofits and new construction for municipal buildings. Benefits: GHG reduction, long-term benefit for city budget; more resilient community; serve as a reference for sustainable buildings in the commercial sector - laying the ground to replicate high-performance, low embodied carbon, all-electric buildings in the commercial sector Cost: For 10 buildings: $45 million Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 1, Strategy 3; Austin Energy Resource, Generation and Climate Protection Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 11. Water leak detection programs Details: In 2023, Austin Water loss 8,678,000,000 gallons of water which equates to a 21.68 gallons per capita per day of water loss. While this loss is within the acceptable loss for water 9 utilities as set by the American Water Works Association (AWWA), there is a lot of room to make significant improvements. Benefits: water conservation; GHG reduction (Reducing water loss in the water will preserve this water for productive use and will reduce energy use for pumping and treatment.) Cost: Austin Water should, at a minimum, triple its current leak detection budget from $1.14 million/year to $3.42 million/year ($2.28 million/year increase). Plan Alignment: Water Forward Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 4, Strategy 1 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 12. Improve rebates for residential and commercial landscape conversions Details: During summer months, the use of water dramatically increases, mainly due to the watering of landscapes. Turf areas in particular require the most water per square foot in any landscape. While ordinances for new construction can help reduce the amount of turf areas, existing properties don’t have requirements to adapt their landscapes to conserve water. Reducing the amount of turf grass that requires a lot of water to survive will help conserve water. Austin Water should offer more substantial and accessible rebates for landscape conversions. Currently, Austin Water offers a landscape conversion rebate of $100 per 100 square feet, up to a maximum rebate of $3000. Most conversions will be smaller areas and thus, the currently offered rebate amounts don’t incentivize many customers to implement landscape conversions. In 2023, only 19 rebate applications were submitted to Austin Water. Austin Water should implement a tiered rebate structure that offers more rebate money for smaller areas of landscape conversion and should substantially increase the maximum rebate offered. As suggested by the Get Fertilizer Wiser campaign, there should also be incentives that are more easily accessible to individuals who may not need to fully remove turf grass in order to reduce or eliminate watering. Benefits: water conservation; GHG reduction (Reducing water use for landscaping irrigation will preserve this water for productive use and will reduce energy use for pumping and treatment.) Cost: $400,000/year 10 Plan Alignment: Water Forward Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goal 4, Strategy 1 Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 Consumption & Waste Reduction Funding Needs 13. Circular economy & waste reduction programs Details: A recent greenhouse gas inventory conducted by the Office of Sustainability indicates that Scope 3 emissions (emissions that result from the production and transportation of the products and services we use) are larger than the Scope 1 and 2 emissions that have traditionally been part of the GHG inventory. The Austin Resource Recovery has several programs to address this issue by encouraging reducing and reuse and use of more sustainable materials, but these programs are funded at such a low level they are essentially pilot projects. Considerable additional investment is needed to address this outsized source of emissions from the Austin community. • Zero Waste Business Incentives and Rebates: This program provides incentives to businesses to reduce waste, including switching from plastic or Styrofoam containers to reusable or compostable. The current program provides a one time incentive up to $3,000 and is only providing about $5,000/year. The incentive should be restructured to help businesses address ongoing costs (multi-year incentive) and funding should be allocated for additional staff to do outreach to businesses (including all restaurants) ($1 million/year). • ARR zero waste education: Expand to reach the full Austin community, not just ARR customers, including with a paid canvassing team. (increase from $410,000/year to $4 million/year) • Furniture collection for Reuse Warehouse: Current plan is for drop-off only. Funds are needed to enable pick-up to increase diversion from landfill. ($400,000) • Deconstruction Warehouse: To divert salvaged construction materials from the landfill. ($10-15 million) • Fix-it Clinics: Expand and host more ($500,000/year) • Circular Austin Accelerator and Circular Austin Showcase competition: Expand outreach and an increased number and value of awards for competition winners would increase effectiveness in building a circular economy in Austin. (increase award from a total of $12,000 to $100,000/year) • MoveOutATX: Increase the number of events from 1 to 4 per year. ($50,000/year) 11  Benefits: GHG reduction, plastic pollution reduction, reduce need for new landfill, local economic development, save on ARR tipping fees Cost: $10.4-$15.4 million one time and $5.35 million/year Plan Alignment: Austin Resource Recovery Comprehensive Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Food and Product Consumption Goal 2, Strategy 4 and Goal 3, Strategies 1 & 5 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 14. Low-carbon concrete fund Details: Concrete represents the largest of Austin’s purchasing emissions, with potential surcharges for truly carbon neutral cement ranging as high as an additional $18/cubic yard, but with costs falling as new technology scales up. This fund would pay for additional testing, program fees, and surcharges to cover both city and non-city owned buildings of 1.1 M cubic yards of concrete. Benefits: GHG reduction: 200,000 MT of CO2/year Cost: $2 million/year Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Sustainable Buildings Goals 1, 2 & 3 (and overarching goal of ACEP); City Council Resolution No. 20230420-024 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 15. Pro-climate, pro-health foods Details: Replacing animal products with plant-based foods is one of the most cost effective ways to reduce GHG emissions. Funds would be used to provide education and incentives to the Austin community to enable better choices, including 2 FTEs to help implement programming. 12  Benefits: GHG reduction, air and water pollution reduction, water use reduction, improved public health Cost: $1 million/year Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Food and Product Consumption Goal 1, Strategies 1, 2 & 3; Austin/Travis County Food Plan Goal 8 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Recuse: Charlotte Davis Vote: 12-0 16. Sustainable purchasing and carbon accounting Details: Austin can’t get to net-zero without measuring our progress. Today, staff make tradeoffs between doing the work and accounting for that work. Additional staff, consultant, and software money can add capacity and speed up this critical work. Benefits: Unlocks GHG reduction Cost: $1 million Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 17. City-owned composting facility Details: Emissions from Austin’s waste like methane and nitrous oxide decay quickly in the atmosphere, but have a large short-term impact. Looking at waste using 20-year global warming potential puts landfill waste as our 3rd largest source of emissions (right behind energy & transport), or well over 1 million metric tons of CO2e. Purchasing and operating a municipal composting facility will help avoid the landfilling of organic waste and save money. Benefits: GHG reduction, air pollution reduction, reduced costs: 66,130 MT CO2E (1.3 metric tons CO2E/ton of feedstock) 13 Cost: $1.5M for startup costs with savings of $1,222,980 / year for 51,000 tons of waste Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 Natural Systems Funding Needs 18. Preservation of existing agricultural land Details: Funding is needed to preserve existing agricultural land and increase the amount of farmland using practices that improve soil health through land trusts, land banks, conservation easements and/or other legal or financing mechanisms. Develop an inventory of available farmland in Austin/Travis County, conduct appraisals, fund conservation easements for farmers adopting regenerative agricultural practices (TBD but may include cover cropping, crop rotation, no/low-till, mulching, compost application, elimination/ reduction of synthetic pesticide and fertilizer use, etc.) Benefits: Slows the loss of local farmland; improves the quality of locally produced food and protects soil carbon pools. Soils with healthy levels of organic material increase water retention, improve water quality, protect biodiversity, sequester carbon and mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Cost estimate: $200,000 for inventory and appraisals (one time); and $25.25 million/year: $25,000,000/year to fund easements (assuming 5,000 acres protected per year at $5,000 per acre); $250,000 for operating expenses (annual). Leverage federal funding where available such as the Agricultural Conservation Easement Program of the USDA. Plan Alignment: Food Plan Goal 1; Austin Climate Equity Plan Natural Systems Goal 2 Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 14 19. Revolving loan fund for Working Farms Fund pilot Details: Establish a revolving loan fund to preserve agricultural land in Austin/Travis County through a pilot program that provides a path to ownership for a new generation of farmers and increases the amount of farmland acting as carbon pools. A collaboration with the Conservation Funds Working Farms Fund and local agricultural nonprofits will acquire and permanently protect small to mid-sized farms, and provide a pathway for underrepresented farmers to own their own farms Benefits: Slows the loss of local farmland, improves the quality of locally produced food, protects carbon pools, and serves as a template for program replication. Cost estimate: $5.5 million/year: $5.25 million/year to establish a revolving loan fund; $250,000/year for operational expenses Plan Alignment: Food Plan Goal 1; Austin Climate Equity Plan Natural Systems Goal 2 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 20. Energy and water dashboard for city facilities Details: Create a consolidated energy and water dashboard to automate data collection and track real-time. Consolidate disparate data sources throughout the City’s operations to reduce complexity, streamline management and conservation Benefits: Advances the sustainability of City operations by enabling near real-time response to leaks, solar panel outages etc. and improving management of water and electricity usage in City parks, pools and buildings. Cost: $350,000 one time/ and $15,000/year for operational expenses (maintenance, licensing etc.) Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Natural Systems Goal 4 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Vote: 13-0 15 Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin 21. Comprehensive public tree inventory for the city of Austin Details: Ensure full funding for City Council resolution 20240418-051 to support a comprehensive public tree inventory for the city of Austin on all city-owned property. Collect data on Austin’s urban forest, which will allow the city to commit to coordinated and comprehensive urban forest management across city departments in support of ongoing implementation of the Urban Forest Master Plan. Collecting this data will allow the city’s Urban Forester to complete a comprehensive urban forest management plan, including a robust tree planting and tree replacement plan. Data collection methods should follow nationally recognized best management practices in acquiring vegetation information for the purposes of maintenance, planning, canopy goal establishment, and other comprehensive urban forest management efforts, and should be done in collaboration with federal, state, regional, and local governmental jurisdictions, community nonprofits, and the private sector where appropriate. Data should be stored in formats that can be easily shared across departments and stakeholders. Benefits: Urban forests serve as carbon sinks that promote climate mitigation efforts, but at present the city does not have a comprehensive tree inventory that would allow for effective urban forest planning and maintenance. Developing and maintaining a robust data catalog of existing trees is a necessary first step to ensuring that the city can maintain the health of the overall tree ecosystem, as outlined in the Urban Forest Master Plan, and also supports the increase of our overall tree canopy footprint to the 50% goal proposed in the Climate Equity Plan. Cost: $6.25 million one time: $6 million for the initial tree inventory; $250,000 for the development of a comprehensive tree planting and tree replacement plan based on inventory data Plan Alignment: Urban Forest Master Plan and the Climate Equity Plan Natural Systems goal 3 (50% citywide tree canopy) Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 16 Transportation and Land Use Funding Needs 22. Austin Resource Recovery Fleet Electrification Details: Replace all 300 heavy duty Austin Resource Recovery vehicles (flatbed trucks and refuse trucks) with electric vehicles. Install appropriate heavy-duty charging infrastructure to charge these vehicles. Benefits: Nearly 1 million (968,400) tons CO2 emissions avoided; air pollution reduction (health benefits); reduced maintenance; lower heat exposure for ARR workers (better AC during hot weather) Cost: $204.5 million for trucks and $60 million for chargers to be phased in over 8 years. Funding is available from TCEQ now, and prices are likely to decrease over time, but the city needs to apply for TCEQ grant funding now to get started before funds are depleted. May be biannual (every other year) opportunity in the future. Plan Alignment: Austin Resource Recovery Master Plan; Austin Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 23. Austin Resource Recovery Transfer Station Details: A transfer station is needed to reduce truck rout lengths and host electric truck chargers is necessary to enable full ARR fleet electrification Benefits: Unlocks GHG and air pollution reduction from transportation electrification Cost: $100 million Plan Alignment: Austin Resource Recovery Comprehensive Plan, Austin Climate Equity Plan Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 17 24. Expand All Ages and Abilities Bicycle Network, Urban Trails, Sidewalks, and Shared Mobility Details: Expand the number of Metro Bike stations and to build out the All Ages and Abilities (AAA) Bicycle Priority Network, the Tier One Urban Trails network, and sidewalks and shared streets as recommended in the Urban Transportation Commission's "Climate Equity Investment" Recommendation 20240305-006. • $48,960,000 to build out an additional 148 miles of the AAA Bicycle Priority Network and meet the 2023 Bicycle Plan Goal of 380 miles built out by 2026. Projects should be selected using the project prioritization model in the 2023 Bicycle Plan, which scores projects based on equity, destinations & travel demand, connectivity & safety, and cost. Relevant plan sections: Austin Strategic Mobility (ASMP) Bicycle Policy 2, Austin Climate Equity Plan (ACEP) Transportation and Land Use (TLU) Goal 3, and 2023 Bicycle Plan Item 4.7.la. • $22,600,000 to build out an additional 200 Metro Bike Stations to reach the 2023 Bicycle Plan goal of 300 stations by 2025. The investment should prioritize new stations in low-income areas with high mobility needs and connections to CapMetro's existing high-frequency bus and Metro Rail network. Relevant plan sections: ASMP Shared Mobility Policy 1, ACEP TLU Goal 3, and 2023 Bicycle Plan Item 4.7.2. • $75,826,000 to build out 15.6 miles of Tier One Urban Trails by 2028 and put COA on track to reach the 2023 Urban Trails goal of building all 94 miles of Tier 1 trails by 2043. City Manager should also consider investments to ensure "the Urban Trails Plan is deliver[ing] projects on an accelerated timeline" as the Urban Trails Plan notes doing so is "dependent on increasing internal City of Austin capacity across supporting departments concerning staffing, systems, and the processes for permitting" Urban Trails Plan Section 3.5). Relevant plan sections: See ASMP Urban Trails Policy 2 & 3, ACEP TLU Goal 3, and 2023 Urban Trails Plan Section 3.5. • $64,000,000 to build out 136 miles of new sidewalks and 80 miles of shared streets per year through 2028, putting Austin on track to address all "Very High" and "High" priority sidewalks and shared streets within 10 years. Projects in the highest Equity Analysis Zones should be prioritized for funding, per the Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets Plan. Relevant plans: ASMP Pedestrian Network Policy 1 & 2, ACEP TLU Goal 3, and 2023 Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets Plan Section 2.3.4) Benefits: Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction from reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in single-occupancy vehicles (SOVs). The estimated reduction for #1, added bikeways, is 1000- 2000 metric tons of CO2-equivalent per year, and for #2, added MetroBike stations, is 84 to 336 metric tons of CO2-equivalent per year. (We lack data to calculate #3 and #4.) More trips within 18 Austin will use modes split between public transit, bicycles, walking/wheelchair, carpooling, or shared mobility, or will be avoided altogether. Public health benefits include improving air quality by reducing vehicle CO2 emissions along with co-pollutants such as nitrous oxide (NOx) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) as well as encourage more active transportation for overall wellbeing. Equity benefits include increasing the variety and accessibility of modes of transportation besides SOVs which are significantly more expensive. Building out this infrastructure in under resourced zones will increase these benefits for low-income and communities of color. Community benefits of greater cohesion from using public spaces and infrastructure and being better connected to the city. Greater land availability for uses other than car and parking infrastructure, which can aid with heat mitigation if drought-tolerant tree plantings are prioritized along bikeways and sidewalks per Council Resolution 20240321-039. Jobs creation. Cost: $211.39 million: • $48,960,000. 2023 Bicycle Plan estimates the average protected bike lane costs $600k/mile. The total cost to reach the 2026 goal is $88,800,000. The 2016 and 2020 Mobility Bonds have a total of $39,840,000 in unspent bikeways funds (as of December 5th, 2023) • $22,600,000. MetroBike received $11.3 million from the Texas Department of Transportation's Transportation Alternative Set-Aside grant program. Those funds will build 100 new stations, including replacing 83 existing stations, and 800 new electric bicycles. An additional $22.6M is required to achieve the goal of 300 stations total. • The Urban Trails Plan uses the assumption of $10 million per mile. To build out all Tier 1 trails by 2043, Austin needs to average $52 million in Urban Trails spending per year. The 2016, 2018, and 2020 Mobility Bonds contain a total of $80,174,000 in unspent funds for Urban Trails (as of December 5th, 2023) • $64,000,000. The Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets Plan notes the city currently has "less than half the estimated funding required to meet plan goals through 2028". Those goals are spending $32 million for 34 miles of new sidewalks and 20 miles of shared streets annually. Over four years that amounts to $128,000,000. Plan Alignment: ACEP TLU Goal 3; ASMP Bicycle Policy 2, Shared Mobility Policy 1, Urban Trails Policies 2 & 3, Pedestrian Network Policies 1 & 2; 2023 Urban Trails Plan Section 3.5; 2023 Bicycle Plan Strategies 4.7.la & 4.7.2; 2023 Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets Plan Section 2.3.4 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Vote: 13-0 19 Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin 25. Extend Pickup Service Zones Details: CapMetro (CM) should invest to extend the service area for the CM Pickup ride hailing and ridesharing service. Pickup launched in 2017 and serves 11 zones in Austin and the surrounding areas. Ridership is projected to increase 26.8% in FY2024 compared to FY2023; this follows a 200% increase over FY2022. On April 1, 2024, it passed the 1 millionth passenger mark. This milestone and the projected increase in riders attest that Pickup fulfills an unmet need in under resourced transit areas. It expanded to Dove Springs in January 2024 and plans to extend to Decker Lake. We recommend CM pursue the Decker Lake zone and also study user data and rider surveys through an equity lens to identify where it's needed most and expand into 1-2 additional zones by May 2025. Possible zones include Del Valle and Montopolis. We also endorse CM's planned initiative to pilot an electric Pickup fleet by the end of 2024. Benefits: Contributes to ACEP's overarching goal of "equitably reaching net-zero community- wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040" and specifically Transportation and Land Use (TLU) Goal 3, "By 2030, 50% of trips in Austin are made using public transit, biking, walking, carpooling, or avoided altogether by working from home." Pickup reduces VMTs by connecting riders to services and amenities in their zone, including school, work, shopping, recreation, and medical clinics and hospitals. It also solves the "first/last mile" problem in transit accessibility and utilization by connecting riders to transit stops that may be prohibitively far away and therefore especially improves transit access for the disabled, elderly, and riders with children who may not be able to use e-bikes, scooters, and other solutions for short trips and the "last mile." Given Austin's extreme temperatures and paucity of shade corridors, eliminating the first/last mile is essential to encouraging transit ridership. Provides community cohesion by connecting people to the services and amenities they need. Cost: up to $5 million/year: Based on CapMetro's FY2024 Operating Budget, we estimate the annual cost of adding 1-2 new zones will be $3-5 million per year. Plan Alignment: CM's FY2024 budget lists extending Pickup service areas as one of its priorities (p. 91); ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategies 1, 3; if fleet is electrified, ACEP TE Goal 1, Strategy 5; ASMP Shared Mobility Policies 1-3, 5, 6; Public Transportation Policies 1 & 6; Air & Climate Policy 1 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Vote: 13-0 20 Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin 26. Downtown High-Frequency Circulator Details: CoA and CapMetro (CM) invest up to $7 million per year to resurrect a high-frequency, free or low-fare downtown circulator along the routes proposed by the Downtown Austin Alliance in a June 2020 report. We also propose the addition of the Long Center and Barton Springs/Zilker Park to address 2023 Urban Trails Plan Policy 3, "Pursue opportunities to connect to and expand the Urban Trails System." This service should be free or <$1/ride, thereby addressing ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategy 2 to "promote free transportation options," as well as Strategy 1 ("Expand and improve public transportation"). The circulator should also run frequently, i.e., with stops serviced every 15 minutes or less, which is one of the highest predictors of public transit usage according to a 2016 study. We also recommend the circulators be electric vehicles to reduce CO2 emissions and co-pollutants in the downtown area, thereby addressing ACEP Transportation Electrification (TE) Goal 1, Strategy 5. Reviewing and updating the DAA analysis for present conditions and drawing best practices from the models examined there will facilitate design and implementation. Benefits: Contributes to ACEP's overarching goal of "equitably reaching net-zero community- wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040" and specifically Goal 3, "By 2030, 50% of trips in Austin are made using public transit, biking, walking, carpooling, or avoided altogether by working from home." Circulators reduce VMTs and the associated environmental and public health damages of SOV travel. They also reduce reliance on expensive and dangerous ride- hailing services filling high-congestion downtown zones. Ride-hailing cars idle and block bike, bus, and car lanes, creating dangerous conditions for everyone on the roads. Reduce congestion and therefore emissions and co-pollutants. Though the Circulator routes do not serve low-income or under resourced neighborhoods, additional free transportation options can reduce the transportation cost burden for low- income residents traveling within the downtown core for work, services, and leisure. Cost: $7 million/year Motion: Charlotte Davis Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Second: Haris Qureshi Vote: 13-0 21 Off Dais: Yure Suarez 27. Neighborhood E-Circulators Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Details: CoA and CapMetro should implement high-frequency, free or low-fare electric circulators serving neighborhoods across Austin, especially those neighborhoods facing significant mobility barriers (e.g., neighborhoods with a high percentage of low-income households, households with children, elderly residents, residents facing disabilities, etc.). We propose starting with three (3) neighborhoods, with a focus on neighborhoods underserved by transit. This service should be free or <$1/ride, thereby addressing ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategy 2 to "promote free transportation options," as well as Strategy 1 ("Expand and improve public transportation"). The circulator should also run frequently and connect neighborhood residents with essential community services, including health clinics, grocery stores, cultural and recreation centers, parks and trails, libraries, and other community centers and amenities. We also recommend the circulators be electric vehicles to reduce CO2 emissions and co-pollutants threatening public health in these neighborhoods, thereby addressing ACEP Transportation Electrification (TE) Goal 1, Strategy 5. Benefits: Contributes to ACEP's overarching goal of "equitably reaching net-zero community- wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040" and specifically Goal 3, "By 2030, 50% of trips in Austin are made using public transit, biking, walking, carpooling, or avoided altogether by working from home." Circulators reduce VMTs and the associated environmental and public health damages of SOV travel. They also reduce reliance on expensive and dangerous ride- hailing services. Ride-hailing cars idle and block bike, bus, and car lanes, creating dangerous conditions for everyone on the roads. Reduce congestion and therefore emissions and co- pollutants. These Circulator routes should provide an equity benefit by providing free transportation options in low-income and under resourced neighborhoods. Cost: $10 million per year Plan Alignment: ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategies 1, 2; if fleet is electrified, ACEP TE Goal 1, Strategy 5; ASMP Shared Mobility Policies 1, 3, 5, 6; Public Transportation Policies 1 & 6; Air & Climate Policy 1; 2023 Urban Trails Plan Policy 3 Motion: Charlotte Davis Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Second: Amy Noel Vote: 13-0 22  28. Heat Resilience Infrastructure Details: Building off JSC Recommendation 20240228-014, we further recommend that CoA invest $30 million in building shade and cooling interventions, green infrastructure, and other resilient infrastructure projects. These measures mitigate the effects of extreme heat, increase water conservation, increase carbon sequestration, encourage transit usage and active transportation, and improve flood control through water retention. Council's approved resolution 20240228-014 directs the City Manager to improve and build out green infrastructure - including drought-tolerant trees, plantings, rain gardens, and bioswales - along new roadways, transit lines, in the right-of-way, and around utilities. We endorse these directives and further request the following allocations for green infrastructure development: • $25 million to design, build, and maintain curb extensions and neighborhood roundabouts along new bikeways as a traffic calming measure and a space for green infrastructure. The projects should use the equitable prioritization methods of the ASMP and related plans to equitably distribute these projects in neighborhoods throughout the city. • $5 million in recurring annual funding for shading and cool corridors to address urban heat island effects and the needs of key neighborhood sites. Identify priority mobility corridors to serve as “cool corridors” with natural and engineered shade and cooling solutions to provide safe, climate-resilient connectivity on core pedestrian and transit routes. These corridors should (1) prioritize benefits in low-income neighborhoods facing high heat vulnerability, (2) address gaps based on the City’s existing heat vulnerability analyses, and (3) be developed in consultation with community-based organizations. Initial locations to prioritize for cool corridors should include the Rundberg area and the St. Johns, Montopolis, Franklin Park, and Dove Springs neighborhoods, due to high heat vulnerability as measured by various socioeconomic and heat exposure indicators. Priority project include research, design, installation, and maintenance of heat resilient infrastructure at new and existing transit stops, including shade structures (with solar panels, where feasible) and fan misters at high-traffic stops; research, design, installation, and maintenance of shade structures and shaded drinking fountains in parks, recreation centers, trails, and other community spaces/facilities adjacent to cool corridors. Benefits: Summer 2023 was Austin's and the planet's hottest summer on record, and future summers are expected to bring more extreme heat. Mitigating heat through increased shade provision and urban cooling strategies reduces the negative health effects of heat, especially for children, the elderly, low-income populations, communities of color, and outdoor workers. As 23 ACEP emphasizes, "Low-income communities and communities of color are the most impacted by extreme weather and pollution despite having contributed least to the drivers of climate change and pollution." Reduce VMTs in SOVs by making public transit, trails, sidewalks, and bikeways more comfortable and safer in the face of extreme heat. Jobs creation. Traffic calming promotes safer streets for all forms of mobility, serving ASMP Bike System Policy 1 (Make streets safe for bicycling). In addition to local cooling and carbon reduction benefits, green spaces have aesthetic benefits that can increase neighborhood satisfaction and make the public transit and active transportation experience more comfortable for all users, serving ASMP priorities. Providing shade and cooling in public spaces serves several other ASMP Policies (e.g., Public Transportation System Policy 5, Improve the public transportation experience) and ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategies 1 (Expand and improve public transportation), 3 (Enhance transit stations and stops), 4 (Prioritize bicycle networks), and 6 (Improve sidewalks, urban trails, and crossings) and Natural Systems Goal 3, Strategy 3 (Increase community tree planting) and Goal 4, Strategy 2 (Reclaim public space and prioritize green infrastructure). Cost: $30 million Plan Alignment: ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategies 1, 3, 4, 6; ACEP Natural Systems Goal 4, Strategy 3; ASMP Pedestrian Network Policy 2; Public Transportation System Policy 5; Bicycle System Policy 1; Land Use Policy 5; Land and Ecology Policy 2; 2023 Urban Trails Plan Goals 4-7; 2023 Bicycle Plan Chapter 2, Shade & Green Infrastructure; 2023 Sidewalks, Crossings, and Shared Streets Plan Strategies 1-3 Second: Haris Qureshi Motion: Anna Scott Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 29. CityLeap ATX Plan: convert travel lanes on arterial roads to protected bike or bus lanes Details: JSC recommends the Smart Streets Austin CityLeap ATX Plan. On all City-owned arterial roads of 4 or more lanes (approx. 100 miles), one or more travel lanes should be converted to either dedicated bus lanes or two-way protected bicycle lanes and protected intersections as appropriate. This should occur within 5 years of EIP approval using "quickbuild" materials. Examples of arterial roads include Burnet, William Cannon, W. 45th, Menchaca, and Oltorf, among others. This proposal serves ACEP TLU Goal 3 (50% of trips in Austin are made using 24 public transit, biking, walking, carpooling, or avoided altogether by working from home) and ASMP's overall goal of achieving a 50/50 mode share (50% drive-alone, 50% taking transit, riding a bicycle, walking, carpooling, or teleworking) by 2039. Benefits: Equity benefits of expanding the public transit system to be affordable, reliable, accessible, safe, and comfortable and expanding the bicycle network on major arteries throughout the city, making bikeways accessible to public transit and other services and amenities. Climate benefits of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions reduction from reducing VMT in SOVs as more trips within Austin will use modes split between public transit and bicycles. Public health benefits include improving air quality by reducing vehicle CO2 emissions along with co- pollutants such as nitrous oxide (NOx) and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) as well as encourage more active transportation for overall wellbeing. Significant transportation modeshift in the shortest time by converting Austin’s most direct routes to bike and bus lanes. Dedicating more lanes to space-efficient transportation will also move more people faster and reduce commuter delay, which reduces emissions and co-pollutants and improves public health and urban liveability. Safer streets for all forms of mobility. Jobs creation. Cost: $38.5 million. Assumes half (55 miles) of lane conversions will be bus lanes ($100K/mile) and half will be protected bike lanes ($600K/mile). Estimate does not include protected intersections or other measures. Plan Alignment: ACEP TLU Goal 3, Strategies 1 & 4; ASMP Overall Goal; Air & Climate Policy 1; Bike System Policy 1 & 2; Shared Mobility Policy 1; Public Transportation Policy 1; 2023 Bicycle System Plan Strategy 2 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 30. Establish a city-owned all-electric carshare service Details: Establish a City of Austin-owned all-electric carshare service with at least 200 vehicles within the City of Austin by December 2025. This program has already been proven to be successful in St. Paul, Minnesota, where the city launched the largest publicly owned, renewably powered, electric car-sharing program in the nation called Evie Carshare. Therefore, the Evie Carshare should be used as an example for best management practice to establish a successful program. Service areas should be prioritized in low-income and marginalized 25 communities and lower fees to use the vehicles should be considered to COA's Customer Assistance Programs (CAP) customers. Benefits: Based on Evie Carshare program, each carshare vehicle put into service reduces 71,540 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) in Single Occupancy Vehicles (SOVs) annually, or 196 VMT per day. For 200 cars that would be 14,308,000 VMT. If we assume the average passenger vehicle emits about 400 grams of CO2 per mile, that would be equivalent to displacing 5,723 metric tons of CO2e annually from internal combustion engines. In addition, by reducing VMT in Single Occupancy Vehicles (SOV) and replacing Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicle trips with Electric Vehicle (EV), the project will significantly reduce harmful criteria pollutants, including Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrous Oxides (NOx), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). Benefits also include residents being able to drive an electric vehicle without the cost of having to purchase one. Cost: $10 million: Assuming each car costs approximately $30,000, total cost for 200 all-electric vehicles would be $6 Million. At least $4 Million toward application development and support, customer interface development, management of fleet and service. Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification Goal 1, Strategy 4 Motion: Christopher Campbell Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Second: Lane Becker Vote: 13-0 31. Low-cost, accessible charging stations at City of Austin owned facilities Details: City of Austin (COA) will be conducting an assessment to identify city facilities where charging stations can be installed. This assessment is focused on COA properties to support fleet, workplace, and public charging needs. Funding is needed for the installations of the charging stations once they are identified in COA’s assessment. Service areas should be prioritized in low-income and marginalized communities. In addition, the funding should prioritize city buildings near local small businesses to increase their revenue potential to benefit Austin’s small business local community economy. Installations of charging stations should be completed no later than July 2026. Benefits: Assuming at $10k per installed port (level 2 - 7.2kW) that would be 1,000 ports so roughly 7.2MW of installed load for EV charging. That would be equivalent to approximately 26 3,154 MWh/year of potential load to EV vehicles. Assuming a 0.321 kWh/mile EV fuel economy and an Average Port Utilization Rate of 20%, that would be equivalent to displacing approximately 39,500,000 miles of internal combustion vehicles. Assuming, an average passenger vehicle emits approximately 400 grams/mile of CO2, the CO2 reduction would be as follows: CO2e reduction = 39,500,000 miles/year x 400 grams CO2/mile x 1,000,000 grams/metric ton = 15,800 metric tons of CO2 per year. In addition, by reducing VMT in Single Occupancy Vehicles (SOV) and replacing Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicle trips with Electric Vehicle (EV), the project will significantly reduce harmful criteria pollutants, including Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrous Oxides (NOx), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), improving local air pollution. Cost: $10 Million for the installation of the charging stations, prioritizing areas of low-income and marginalized communities and local small businesses. Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification Goal 2, Strategy 1 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 32. Install charging stations at multi-family homes with priority in low and moderate income communities Details: Charging BEVs at home is the most affordable way to charge your vehicle. However, a significant portion of the population in Austin lives in multi-family homes where in most cases charging stations are not available. Therefore, the JSC recommends $10 million be provided to supplement existing EV rebates for multifamily properties in low- and moderate-income communities for the installation of electric vehicle charging stations by December 2024. Benefits: Assuming at $10k per installed port (level 2 - 7.2kW) that would be 1,000 ports so roughly 7.2MW of installed load for EV charging. That would be equivalent to approximately 3,154 MWh/year of potential load to EV vehicles. Assuming a 0.321 kWh/mile EV fuel economy and an Average Port Utilization Rate of 20%, that would be equivalent to displacing approximately 39,500,000 miles of internal combustion vehicles. Assuming, an average passenger vehicles emits approximately 400 grams/mile of CO2, the CO2 reduction would be as follows: CO2e reduction = 39,500,000 miles/year x 400 grams CO2/mile x 1,000,000 grams/metric ton = 15,800 metric tons of CO2 per year. In addition, by reducing VMT in Single 27 Occupancy Vehicles (SOV) and replacing Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicle trips with Electric Vehicle (EV), the project will significantly reduce harmful criteria pollutants, including Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrous Oxides (NOx), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), improving local air pollution. Cost: $10 Million for the installations of the charging stations, prioritizing areas of low-income and marginalized communities Plan Alignment: Austin Climate Equity Plan Transportation Electrification Goal 2, Strategy 1 Motion: Anna Scott Second: Haris Qureshi Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Kaiba White, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Charlotte Davis, Lane Becker, Heather Houser, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel Off Dais: Yure Suarez Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Vote: 13-0 33. E-mobility solutions pilot program Details: The City of Austin should develop an E-mobility Solutions Program to address transportation barriers faced by residents, social service providers, non-profit and community- based organizations, and businesses in underserved communities. The Pilot Program should fund community-driven e-mobility solutions, including the establishment of all-electric carshare programs, electric vans or shuttles for social service providers (e.g., elderly care services, after- school youth programs, childcare services, food access programs, healthcare services, etc.), local mini-bus services or on-demand rideshare services for underserved populations, e- mobility solutions for local small businesses, mobile health clinics or food pantries, or similar programs. Service areas should be prioritized in low-income and marginalized communities. Benefits: Contributes to ACEP's overarching goal of "equitably reaching net-zero community- wide greenhouse gas emissions by 2040". E-mobility will replace internal combustion vehicles and therefore reduce GHG emissions. In addition, by reducing replacing Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vehicle trips with Electric Vehicle (EV), the project will significantly reduce harmful criteria pollutants, including Carbon Monoxide (CO), Nitrous Oxides (NOx), and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC). Cost: $10 Million Motion: Rodrigo Leal Second: Haris Qureshi Vote: 10-2 28 Yes: Chris Maxwell-Gaines, Haris Qureshi, Anna Scott, Diana Wheeler, Jon Salinas, Melissa Rothrock, Lane Becker, Rodrigo Leal, Chris Campbell, Amy Noel No: Charlotte Davis, Heather Houser Off Dais: Yure Suarez Attest: Absent: Bertha Delgado, Alice Woods, Larry Franklin Abstain: Kaiba White Rohan Lilauwala, Staff Liaison 29