Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Melissa Holmes, a Greenbriar Homes representative, voiced her concern about the <br />proposed ordinance. She preferred guidelines, as Greebriar has included many pre-title 24 <br />requirements in its developments and is being trapped by the new point system. She said <br />current developments offer green building and solar options but due to the costs there options <br />are not being sold. She believed the new Title 24 requirements are inflexible. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky asked if there were a certain number of points Greenbriar would accept or <br />it does oppose to the whole process. <br /> <br />Ms. Holmes responded it was the whole process. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan asked if Greenbriar Homes reviewed other strategies to achieve the 50 <br />points. <br /> <br />Ms. Holmes responded the proposed ordinance needs flexibility. <br /> <br />Mr. Iserson stated as far as the building industry association is concerned, the 50-point <br />requirement was achievable. <br /> <br />Kevin Close, a Happy Valley resident believed the threshold number of points for a <br />2,000 square feet house should be lowered. <br /> <br />Mayor Hosterman closed the public comments. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan asked Ms. Sumner if she could provide additional information on changes to <br />the requirements. <br /> <br />Ms. Sumner responded Title 24 set the certain requirements and anything below that is <br />not legal. That is why the Authority is unable to give points for items that the builder is legally <br />required to do. If Greenbriar wanted to review the points, she believed there would be points <br />that could be clarified. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan stated it was his understanding that those were the reasons the guidelines <br />were adjusted, in order to compensate for those changes. <br /> <br />Ms. Sumner responded it would increase costs to comply with the new Title 24 <br />requirements. <br /> <br />Mr. Sullivan asked Ms. Sumner what kind of feedback has been received from <br />developers during this process. <br /> <br />Ms. Sumner responded that the developers believe the points are attainable and each <br />measure and point wase reviewed. The developers, using their current projects, used the <br />checklist to see if 50 points was a reasonable threshold and concurred the points were <br />attainable. <br /> <br />Mr. Brozosky asked what Title 24 guidelines had been changed. <br /> <br />Pleasanton City Council <br />Minutes <br /> <br />16 <br /> <br />03/21/06 <br />