PC 030806 - Laserfiche WebLink

Paee 6-B - 78B There were no comments. Paee 9-B Commissioner Roberts inquired whether a duet with each half measuring 1,200 square feet would be subject to the green building requirement. Mr. Roush noted that a covered project was defined as "construction of any multi-family residential project." He did not see any exception under "a non-covered project" and would read Commissioner Roberts's case as being covered. Paees 10-15B There were no comments. Paee 16B Commissioner Peazce pointed out a typo in the following language: "Afrer five yeazs of occupancy of any..." and noted that there was nothing after "any." Commissioner Blank inquired whether a "good-faith effort to comply" was equivalent to "commercially reasonable efforts" as seen in a contract. Mr. Roush confirmed that was the same general concept and was not as stringent as "best efforts." ~'"~ In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Arkin regazding who the Green Building Compliance Official might be, Ms. Decker replied that it is the Planning Director, as identified in "Definitions." Paee 17-18B Commissioner Blank inquired whether "hardship" and "infeasibility" were defined and was concerned that it may be subject to a broad interpretation. Ms. Decker noted that they were not defined. Mr. Roush noted that page 19-B discussed circumstances such as "availability of market for materials to be recycled, availability of green building materials and technologies." He suggested that may be the kind of thing the Green Building Official would look at to determine whether or not it was a hazdship. Chairperson Arkin suggested that hardships come before the Planning Commission. Commissioner Roberts believed that would be embarrassing to the applicant. Commissioner Maas suggested the phrase "unable to comply." Commissioner Blank suggested that those terms be defined more specifically to curb potential abuse. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Mazch 8, 2006 Page 17 of 22