My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
PC 092910
City of Pleasanton
>
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS
>
PLANNING
>
MINUTES
>
2010-2019
>
2010
>
PC 092910
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/10/2017 3:14:47 PM
Creation date
4/19/2011 3:30:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITY CLERK
CITY CLERK - TYPE
MINUTES
DOCUMENT DATE
9/29/2010
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. Corbett stated that there are significant advantages for a business to do this <br />because there are different rates for domestic and irrigation waters. He noted that <br />water use is a common measurement for sewer capacity and use, and by separating <br />out irrigation, it portrays a more accurate picture of the true sewer usage of a building. <br />He added that the connection fees for two smaller meters are typically significantly less <br />than the fee for one larger meter. <br />In response to Commissioner O’Connor’s inquiry regarding connection fee costs, <br />Mr. Corbett replied that a connection cost is paid for each meter but that there are <br />different rates are for domestic water and irrigation water. <br />Commissioner O’Connor inquired if staff was requiring only non-residential projects and <br />not residential projects to meet Tier 1 standard. <br />Mr. Corbett replied that there are different requirements for residential and for <br />non-residential projects and that the requirement for separate meters is only for <br />non-residential projects. <br />Commissioner O’Connor inquired if staff envisions eventually requiring separate meters <br />for residential projects for having grey water or recycling water for irrigation. <br />Mr. Corbett replied that the City has had one large home in town where the owner <br />installed a separate meter for irrigation purposes because irrigation water rates were <br />much less expensive. <br />Mrs. Rondash added that the City’s Utilities Division indicated that if a residential project <br />owner wanted to propose separate meters, they would potentially have lower bills and <br />other fees may not be tacked on; however, this would be the property owner’s option <br />rather than a CALGreen requirement. <br />Commissioner Blank inquired what future incentives might be provided for residential <br />homes utilizing separate meters for irrigation and landscaping purposes. <br />Mrs. Rondash referred the question to Ms. Stern who handles the City’s Climate Action <br />Plan. <br />Ms. Stern stated that this would be a good question for the Climate Action Plan and the <br />Energy and Environment Committee to consider as part of the Plan. <br />Commissioner Blank inquired if there were cities that offer incentives for Tier 1. <br />Ms. Stern replied that she did not know whether other cities had enough experience or <br />were already offering any incentives. <br />Commissioner Blank stated that it struck him that the City would limit green building <br />requirements to commercial buildings greater than 20,000 square feet. He indicated <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, September 29, 2010 Page 11 of 21 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.