My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
11 ATTACHMENTS 6 TO 13
City of Pleasanton
>
CITY CLERK
>
AGENDA PACKETS
>
2011
>
010411
>
11 ATTACHMENTS 6 TO 13
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/28/2010 1:45:31 PM
Creation date
12/28/2010 1:45:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
AGENDA REPORT
DOCUMENT DATE
1/4/2011
DESTRUCT DATE
15Y
DOCUMENT NO
11 ATTACHMENTS 6 TO 13
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
63
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The following is the assessment of each of the comparison exercises: <br /> 1. LEEDTM compared to CALGreen: <br /> LEEDTM requires a 40 point minimum. <br /> The comparison showed that: CALGreen BASIC: 15 points <br /> CALGreen T -1: 46 points <br /> CALGreen T -2: 59 points <br /> Elective measures within CALGreen could generate approximately 1 -6 additional <br /> points for Tier 1 and 2 levels when compared to the LEEDTM program. <br /> 2. BUGTM Single Family compared to CALGreen: <br /> BIGTM SF requires a 50 point total and category minimums. <br /> The comparison showed that: CALGreen BASIC: 18 points <br /> CALGreen T -1: 51 points <br /> CALGreen T -2: 84 points <br /> Elective measures within CALGreen could generate approximately 1 -21 additional <br /> points for Tier 1 and 2 levels when compared to the BIG TM program. <br /> 3. BIG TM Multi- Family compared to CALGreen: <br /> BIGTM MF requires a 50 point total and category minimums. a <br /> The comparison showed that: CALGreen BASIC: 18 points <br /> CALGreen T -1: 53 points <br /> CALGreen T -2: 84 points <br /> Elective measures within CALGreen could generate approximately 1 -21 additional <br /> points for Tier 1 and 2 levels when compared to the BIGTM program. <br /> Other Reviews <br /> In July 2010, the State -wide code was formally adopted and staff reviewed the original <br /> comparison findings to ensure that staffs initial findings were still valid. Staffs second review <br /> confirmed the appropriateness of staffs recommendation to pursue a code amendment to <br /> incorporate CALGreen as the City's reference standard. <br /> In August 2010, staff began a series of meetings with various stakeholders based on our <br /> comparison findings. <br /> In August 22, 2010, the Bay Area Climate Collaborative (BACC) published their <br /> recommendation on the topic to be able to provided data for local jurisdictions to consider. In <br /> summary, the letter recommended that local jurisdictions prioritize education and <br /> 2 category minimums (Energy 30 points, IAQ 5 points, Resources 6 points, and Water 9 points). <br /> category minimums are achieved with the application of the selected available electives in CALGreen. <br /> 4 category minimums (Community 6 points, Energy 30 points, IAQ 5 points, Resources 6 points, and Water 3 points) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.