PC 092910 - Laserfiche WebLink

review and the green building measure be reviewed at the building permit stage. In conclusion, Mrs. Rondash presented a timeline of the tentative meeting schedule. She stated that the item will come before the City Council between November and December, and staff will be undergoing training at the same time in preparation for the CalGreen Building Code implementation in January 2011. Commissioner Blank stated that he was not at the special Commission meeting when this item was first discussed and asked for examples of cool roof requirements. Mrs. Rondash replied that for commercial buildings, a cool roof would achieve a Solar Reflectance Index (SRI) of .9 or less, which is a measure that reflects heat off of the roof. She noted that this would typically be white or a special type of sealant. With respect to residential roofing, she indicated that there is a special type of shingle which is currently a little harder to get hold of but that other materials should come onto the market as the Code and the industry progress. Mr. Corbett advised that cool roof requirements are already in the energy regulations for the State for residential projects. He added that cool roofs are measured in terms of solar reflectives as well as thermal emittance which indicate how much heat radiates back into the attic. He indicated that cool roofs establish a higher threshold. Commissioner O’Connor inquired if this could also be accomplished by some type of membrane placed between the roof sheeting and the roof itself versus the shingle. Mr. Corbett replied that cool roof requirements refer to the roofing materials themselves and that there are requirements for a radiant barrier underneath the roof. He added that they have been required for commercial buildings for about four years now but have been added in to residential requirements just this past year. Commissioner Blank referred to the costing slide and inquired what causes the variation between $1.67 and $2.14. Mrs. Rondash replied that the variation was due to the different types of products selected. As an example, she pointed out the range of toilet costs from $100 to $250 and up, depending on the type of toilet. Commissioner Blank stated that he with the exception of infill projects, he could not recall a stand-alone single-family home of less than 3,500 square feet in area. He inquired how the 2,100-square-foot number was arrived at. Mrs. Rondash replied that this is the threshold selected in the study prepared for the California Building Industry Association (CBIA). She indicated that homes of other sizes were also reviewed, but this is the size closest to the City’s current threshold of 2,000 square feet. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, September 29, 2010 Page 9 of 21