PC 062205 - Laserfiche WebLink

8. Program 7.8 AFter discussion, the Commission believed this item should be examined further. The phrase "when feasible and cost-effective" ir~ay be core sidered. 9. Program 7.9 - CJhairperson Maas noted that Ms. Stern would rewrite this Program to conclude "for new construction." 1 O_ Program 7.10 -the revisions were accepted; 1 1 _ Program 7.1 1 -the revisions were accepted; 1 2. Program 8. 1 -the revisions were accepted; ] 3 _ Policy 9 -the revisions were accepted with. the addition of the word "natural" before the word "gas;" 74. Policy 9.3 -Commissioner Blank believed the current language regarding t3nancial incentives for green building was not as strong as he originally stated during the May 25 meeting. Ms. Stern noted that could be strcn gthencd. Commissioner Blank would like to see net zero energy homes or those with cogeneration receive i3nanci al incentives; he did not believe that any green building should received a tree building permit. He believed that the builder of a net zero home should receive a break. Commissioner Arkin would like housing allocation addressed and super-green homes be allocated in the manner that affordable housing is allocated. He would like a statement paralleling Policy 9.3, describing the allocation of growth management for net zero energy homes. 1 5. Program 1 O. 1 -Commissioner Fox suggested that the word "audits" be replaced by the word "reviews." 16. Program 10.2 Commissioner Fox noted that "10.2" should be replaced by "10.2." She suggested that energy efficient lighting be furthered explored for the G'ity buildings as well as for businesses. Ms. Stern noted that the City's progress in changing out traffic lights should. be recognized. 1. 7. Policy 1 1 Commissioner Pearce inquired why Policy 1 1 was struck; she believed there had been confusion regarding its meaning. Mr. Deakin noted that CCA was recently introduced. by CJ arole Migden and permitted by the legislature to allow local authorities to act as energy utilities, instead of PGK.E_ He noted that some communities were interested in that. Chairperson Maas noted that would be seen by City Council, and recalled that Commissioner Roberts believed it was a distraction. 1 8. Programs 1 42 through 14.7 -the revisions were accepted; 19_ Program 22.2 -the revisions were accepted; 20. Program 15.5 -the revisions were accepted; 21 _ Yolicy 17 -Commissioner Blank believed that Yolicy 17 should have included the Commission's discussion on not allowing experimental technology transmission lines by any utility. Ms. Stern noted that the City did not control that kind of technology. G'ommissioner Blank disagreed and believed that the City could disallow experin-tental transmission lines within the City limits. He would like the following language to be included= "Experimental technology shall not be used within the City for the transmission of power, only established technology appropriate for the environment" The Commission concurred. 22_ Policy 18.2 -the revisions were accepted; 23. Policy 19.1 -the revisions were accepted; PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES June 22, 2005 Page 6 of 20