01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan questioned whether cities are required to go through the third party verification process for those requiring LEED and green point rated systems. Mr. Sullens said it is a mix; less than half require official certification. Alameda County unincorporated areas allow an alternative or equivalent. However, if one wants incentives or a boost, they can go through a third -party verifier. Pam Hardy, Ponderosa Homes, said she served on the original Builders Council for Stopwaste.org and were part of the stakeholder's group that developed the checklist for the green point rated system 11 to 12 years ago. Through her experience with Ponderosa Homes, they are living the green building ordinance, have had many trials, have come to understand the Build It Green process, and they like the third party verifier system. When the green system began, there were not many available manufacturers or products, it was not cost - effective, and the market did not respond well to them. Over time, the industry has changed. They support the Cal Green adoption with Tier 1 because their main goal is for predictability and consistency. They like the option of having the ability to have the third party rated, as it is the best system that has worked for them. To Councilmember Sullivan's comment, Ms. Hardy said this is not a step back; they are building the most efficient houses in the country. With new requirements under Title 24, they are 30% more efficient than they were 3 to 4 years ago and this work has been folded into the new standards. They are practicing what they preach, doing the best they can, said she has had a lot of discussion regarding cost. The additive cost to going to Tier 1 was stated as $13,000. If they did the cost comparisons overall, it costs them about $38,000 to $40,000 per house which does not include all of their on -site preparation costs. And, in a new home builder situation, it will be passed along to the home buyer. She said they are auditing their solar payback on their model complex, are providing PV on all homes at the new Village at Ironwood development, and want to see what the payback period will be. To Councilmember McGovern regarding the waste stream, Ms. Hardy said she can understand the confusion on the 75% versus 50 %. If a goal of 75% waste stream reduction exists for the City, this is different from construction and waste debris diversion. At this point, builders are building so efficient that evert to get to the 50% reduction is pretty tough. To get to 75% reduction, they would have to order more supplies just to be able to recycle them. She likes the incentives for Tier 2, would love to see incentives developed sooner than later, and they particularly like the streamlined process because it is less time - consuming for them. Most notably, they want to encourage the Council to not allow local amendments to the ordinance on a project -by- project basis, as this would add additional requirements onto the Tier 1, and they want predictability and consistency. If there are incentives, this would possibly make it equitable for them. Mayor Hosterman closed the public hearing. Councilmember Cook- Kallio questioned if the City had other green ordinances that do not relate to this that are being removed and asked Mr. Sullens for clarification. Mr. Sullens said he was referring to the Energy Code which he confirmed is already required and will remain in place. There are things one can do to comply with it, one of which is radiant barriers for roofs. City Council Minutes Page 10 of 15 January 4, 2011