PC 011409 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Seto stated that LEED points, which stands for Leadership and Environmental Energy Design, does not just relate to energy usage but could also be achieved by using recyclable materials such as for carpet, water usage, drought tolerant plants, and landscape irrigation systems. Commissioner Blank inquired what the maximum amount of LEED points is, and Ms. Seto stated that she was not certain. Ms. Amos clarified that LEED points relates to commercial projects and that residential uses green building points. Mr. Babbitt noted that there is a maximum of 350 points for Build it Green. Ms. Amos agreed, stating that one cannot check everything off the list for a building as it is because there could be one LEED point for a certain type of demolition and construction or 50-percent drought-tolerant plants, or you could also have 75-percent drought-tolerant plants and get the credit for that point. She indicated that the maximum a building could have would essentially be about 300 points. Commissioner Blank stated that he felt there was some sort of generic guidance to indicate that a project that has 200 green points creates an overall carbon footprint of "x", and a project that has 50 green points creates "y". He inquired why there would be a system of points in place when there is noway of quantifying the results obtained. Chair Pearce agreed that this was valid but stated that she felt these were in the early stages and that there are guidelines. She asked Commissioner Blank what his position is on the General Plan Amendment. Commissioner Blank stated that it is the same as with the Specific Plan. He noted that he would never say that he would never be open to a General Plan amendment, and this is part of why he needs more information about the green points. He indicated that he likes the idea of redrawing the map lines because there may be a configuration where he would be willing to entertain an amendment to the General Plan and the Specific Plan; however, he does not have enough information to accurately answer that question. He noted that some of the information may need to come from staff on green building and whether the applicant would consider redrawing the lot lines or look at better ways to design this out. He inquired what would happen if one of the lots were eliminated and the rest of the lots made larger. He agreed that it still did not meet the Specific Plan, but one-acre lots sound better to him than .6-acre lots, especially if the homes on the one-acre lots include 200 green point. Chair Pearce stated that she was not generally supportive of Specific Plan amendments; however, she thought the atmosphere was no longer rural nextto the golf course and in-between adjacent developments. She indicated that she would not be opposed to amending the Specific Plan and that she really liked Commissioner Olson's idea of taking a look at the FAR's. She noted that there PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, January 14, 2009 Page 25 of 35