01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Regarding the Climate Action Plan, Mr. Dolan reported that analysis is being done on greenhouse gas emissions and ultimately the City will probably have to adopt some programs and regulations to achieve the goals. He stated staff will consider outcomes of this analysis and coordinate accordingly between the two processes. Mr. Dolan reported payback information is outlined in Attachment 10 which notes the payback for a 2,000 square foot, single family home is 10 -13 years; a 1 -story office building of 10,000 square feet is 7 to 13 years; a 5 -story office building is 2.5 to 3.8 years. Staff conducted an exhaustive public outreach effort and received support from each group visited. There was general support from the Planning Commission for the transition and while the vote was 3 -2, the 2 commissioners who voted against the motion were specific about why they did not vote for the motion. They thought the PV -ready requirement should be mandatory as opposed to being an elective. Staff's opinion is that it is not necessarily the best solution in all cases, and to make it mandatory is somewhat self- defeating. Procedurally, Mr. Dolan asked that Council consider staff's recommendation, consider discussing additional local amendments beyond those recommended such as the PV- ready, and stated a CEQA finding would have to be made that this is statutorily exempt from CEQA. The Council would thereby introduce the ordinance amending the Pleasanton Municipal Code to adopt the California Green Building Standards Code with local amendments. Mr. Dolan pointed out two corrections to the staff report on page 5 of 10. Under footnote #5, the second to the last line states, "include" which should state "excludes ". Reference is also made to the fact that Stopwaste.org provides third party review, which they do not provide. Lastly, staff received feedback from Stopwaste.org who had concerns with the verification procedures for some of the requirements presented in Tiers 1 and 2. Staff is not proposing Tier 2 at this time and therefore, their concerns would affect Tier 1 only. They do not believe the State has provided adequate guidance on how to verify some of the measures. Staff believes it can provide verification and has much more experience than most communities, and have certified staff members who verify everyday. And while staff acknowledges their concerns, Mr. Dolan suggested the following options: 1) Do not abandon the Build It Green system and move forward with the CalGreen for commercial only; and 2) continue to use the Build It Green system for a period of six months until the adequate guidance is provided by the State. Councilmember Sullivan referred to the verification process and said his understanding is that commercial requirements were released two days ago. He asked for more information about the verification process as proposed by the State as compared to what the City is currently doing. Dennis Corbett noted there is a requirement for commissioning of new buildings over 10,000 square feet in the CalGreen rnandatory measures. Initial regulations only indicated that they shall be commissioned and unclear was who did it and how should it be done. On November 9, 2010, the Building Standards Commission released a 32 -page guide on how to do this, which provides for a certain amount of flexibility. The current Energy Code requires acceptance testing for lighting controls and for certain heating and air conditioning measures, which is currently done by either the mechanical engineer that designed the system or by the installer. On the commissioning side, they indicated there was a lot of discretion in who the City decides is appropriate for this. It can be those same parties or a separate independent party such as what is similarly done for inspections for welding under the Building Code. City Council Minutes Page 7 of 15 January 4, 2011