HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 927-10TO: HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: CITY MANAGER
DATE: SEPTEMBER 27,2010
REPORT: STUDY SESSION
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT
CMR: 355:10
SUBJECT: Proposed Changes to the City's Green Building Program to Integrate the
City's Requirements with the California Green Building Code and Add 0
Criteria for Sustainable Neighborhood Developments.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The California Green Building Code, known as CALGreen, becomes effective in January of
2011. Staff proposes using CALGreen as the referenced green building standard for
nonresidential projects in the City, as well as a tool for streamlining existing sustainability
regulations. Staff recommends continued use of Build It Green (BIG) for residential projects,
however staff also proposes to expand the existing scope of green building regulations to include
provisions for performance review of energy and water use on existing sites and incorporate
requirements for sustainable neighborhood design for area planning and large developments.
RECOMMENDATION
The purpose of this Study Session is to provide the Council with an overview of the California
Green Building Code, and to receive comments on proposed changes to the City's Green
Building Program. No action is required or may be taken.
BACKGROUND
Existing P AMC Chapter 18.44 and Green Building Program
In June 2008, the City Council adopted a Green Building Ordinance adding Section 18.44, Green
Building Regulations, to the Palo Alto Municipal Code (P AMC), to implement building
strategies that are environmentally and socially responsible, and to improve occupant health.
The .ordinance became effective in July 2008 and the Green Building Program (Program) was
established in the Fall of 2008. In the Fall of 2009, the Ordinance was updated to provide more
emphasis on existing buildings, to adjust the proj ect types covered based on lessons learned, and
to allow City verification as an option. In general, the Program requirements include that any
new construction or ·major renovations comply with either LEED (Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design) or BIG GPR (Build It Green, GreenPoint Rated) requirements.
In 2009, the Program covered 431 building permits, totaling nearly $104,700,000 of construction
and over 772,000 square feet (sf) of building area. The City currently has over 100 residential
CMR: 355:10 Page 1 of8
projects under construction or completed meeting the BIG GPR requirements and over 30
nonresidential proj ects under construction or completed meeting the LEED requirements.
All completed projects that were subject to Program requirements achieved or exceeded the
minimum required number of green building points. Applicants of nonresidential proj ects subj ect
to mandatory requirements have proposed or achieved, on average, a green building "score"
under LEED that is 15% higher than required by the City. Applicants of residential projects are
proposing to achieve, on average, a GPR green building score that is 21 % higher than required
by the City.
The following table shows Program performance highlights for the completed green building
projects constructed in the 2009 calendar year.
Table 1. Program Performance Indicators
Indicator Result
Dollars spent on green construction. $16,605,010
Square feet of green construction in the City. 174,051 sf
Employees and/or residents housed in green facilities. >900
Average energy efficiency savings beyond the CA State Energy Code. 21%
Electricity savings per year. 21,526 kwh
Natural gas savings per year. 535 therms
Indoor water use savings per year. 286,389 gallons
Outdoor water use savings per year. 50,000 gallons
Money expended on environmentally preferable building materials. >$700,000
Waste diverted from the landfill. 16,122 tons
Green house gas emissions saved. 5,800 C02 metric tons*
* Energy, water and waste emissions were included in this indicator. As the ability and affordability of obtaining
life cycle assessments improves for building materials and products, these will also be included.
The following successfully completed commercial green building proj ects are the following
properties:
145 Addison Avenue Dostart Development Office LEED-NC Gold
3431 Hillview Avenue Roche Env. Health and Safety Building LEED-NC Certified
525 University Palo Alto Office Center LEED-EB Gold
260 Homer LEED-CS Gold
325 Lytton LEED-CS Gold
450 Cambridge Palo Alto Weekly LEED-NC Gold
3921 Fabian Way Taube-Koret Campus for Jewish Life LEED-NC Silver
3000 El Camino Real MAP Realty LEED-CI Certified
More information on the program can
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pln/green building/default.asp
be found at:
CMR: 355:10 Page 2 of8
California Green Building Code
On January 12,2010 the California Building Standards Commission adopted the first mandatory
statewide Green Building Code (known as CALGreen) which will go into effect statewide on
January 1,1 201 1. Many of the measures in CALGreen duplicate provisions in current City
Ordinances relating to energy and water efficiency, fireplaces, stormwater and waste reduction.
The CALGreen requirements closely resemble the LEED and BIG GPR green building rating
systems currently being used by the City for its Program not only in types of requirements, but in
that it has both mandatory and voluntary requirements. The building department is be responsible
for enforcing the mandatory requirements of CALGreen when it becomes effective in 2011, and
local governments are encouraged to use CALGreen's voluntary requirements to create local
standards that exceed mandatory minimums. The entire CALGreen code can be downloaded at:
http://www.bsc.ca.gov/CALGreenidefault.htm
DISCUSSION
Key Policy Questions
The implementation of CALGreen requires California cities to reexamine their existing green
building programs. For Palo Alto the following key questions have been identified:
• Where is the appropriate location in the Palo Alto Municipal Code (P AMC) for green
building regulations, given that they are now in the California Building Code?
• What is the least complicated and most cost effective path towards achieving the City's
desired level of green buildinglsustainability?
• How can we ensure consistency and reduce redundancy across City sustainability
requirements and policies?
• How can we address sustainability in every aspect of the building life cycle?
• How can we promote/require sustainable neighborhood developments?
Proposed Changes
Where is the appropriate location in the P AMC for green building regulations, given that they
are now in the California Building Code?
Staff proposes to repeal most green building regulations in P AMC Chapter 18.44, and adopt
equivalent requirements as part of the Green Building Code, which will be located in State
requirements, and provide greater consistency, and uniformity for building professionals. This
approach to section 18.44 will instead include a reference to the new green building requirements
in Title 16, and necessary documentation for planning review, as well as requirements for large
developments (LEED for Neighborhood Development) as described below.
What is the least complicated and most cost effective path towards achieving the City's desired
level of green building / sustainability?
There are different solutions for residential and nonresidential proj ects to provide the most
efficient path to the City's desired level of sustainability.
CMR: 355:10 Page 3 of8
For residential projects, staff recommends continued use of BIG as opposed to CALGreen:
• BIG is able to more easily adapt to regulatory changes since it is a California based
program that focuses solely on homes.
• BIG has updated its rating system effective January 1, 2011 to include all mandatory
measures in CALGreen. This makes it simple for local jurisdictions to continue to use
BIG.
• The City of Palo Alto building community over the last two years has embraced BIG and
has a well established GreenPoint Rater community which aids in the success of
completing green home proj ects throughout the City.
• GreenPoint Raters provide effective, on-site, and personal assistance throughout the
project at a reasonable cost.
• Using GreenPoint Raters reduces the need for additional staff in the building department
to cover green building review for the large volume of residential projects the City
oversees with green requirements (60% residential and 40% nonresidential).
• BIG has a system that encourages and rec'ognizes projects to go beyond the minimum
required performance.
For nonresidential projects, both private and public, staff recommends use of CALGreen, as
opposed to LEED:
• Palo Alto has a manageable volume of nonresidential projects to provide a high quality of
enforcement locally.
• Palo Alto has staff dedicated to enforcing green building requirements.
• CALGreen is an opportunity to bring together many City ordinances and objectives in
one simple code.
• CALGreen can be easily amended to reflect local requirements.
• Using CALGreen with amendments will be easier for applicants to understand than
asking them to comply with both LEED and CALGreen, or trying to amend LEED to
reach our sustainability goals.
• The future of green building regulation is to embody requirements in building codes. The
sooner cities embrace green building locally, as typical methods of building, the less
reliance will be necessary on outside rating systems.
• The LEED certification process can be expensive and time intensive.
Attachment A shows the proposed green building standards based on project type. To ensure
equivalency with the Program's current standards, staff recommends adopting mandatory
comparable measures in CALGreen's Tiers, or "enhanced measures," as local amendments to
the California Green Building Code. Adoption of such an amendment would ensure that existing
City standards are maintained, while transitioning to the CALGreen format for green building.
Attachment B explains the Tiers and includes the recommended locally amended non-residential
checklist of CALGreen.
It is difficult to make a comparison between LEED and CALGreen since there are mandatory
measures in CALGreen that are not in LEED, or may be chosen voluntarily in LEED. In
addition, measures may be defined or applied differently between the two. Staff performed an
exercise to determine rough equivalency, and found that if a project met CALGreen Tier 2
requirements as locally amended, and chose elective measures that were the easiest and cheapest
CMR:355:10 Page 4 of8
to the owner, they would achieve a rating approximately at the LEED Silver level. In Attachment
B, staff has highlighted examples of how CALGreen is different from LEED and where local
sustainability policies influenced amendments.
How can we ensure consistency and reduce redundancy across City sustainability requirements
and policies?
Using CALGreen provides the opportunity to promote consistency and predictability for building
professionals because CALGreen will establish uniform green building standards throughout the
State. In addition, staff proposes incorporating the requirements of the City's Water Efficient
Landscape, Stormwater, Construction and Demolition Debris, Recycled Water, and Energy
Efficiency Ordinances into the Green Building Code as local amendments to CALGreen. This
approach will eliminate redundancy and streamline the City's internal requirements by allowing
for greater coordination between all building and landscape requirements and greater ease of
understanding for both customers (residential and business) and their contractors.
There are a few existing sustainability regulations that staff will propose as more stringent local
amendments in CALGreen than currently exist in the P AMC. They are as follows:
• The construction and demolition debris diversion requirement of 75% is proposed to
increase to 80%. to be consistent with the levels offered in CALGreen. CALGreen's
levels are set at 50%, 65% and 80%.
• Equivalent landscape requirements have been included as amendments in CALGreen to
incorporate elements of the State mandated (2006, AB 1881) Model Water Efficient
Landscape Ordinance and current City Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The Bay
Area Water Supply & Conservation Agency (BA WSCA) and Santa Clara County Cities
Association have provided recommended regulations that increase requirements for
nonresidential proj ects and extend outdoor water reduction requirements to residential
projects. Therefore staff is also recommending more stringent requirements as follows:
o A site's water use is limited to no more than 60% or 55% of reference
evapotranspiration (ETo) for the total landscape area, as opposed to 70% under
the current regulations. This places limitations on using high water plants such
as turf grass. Landscape submetering is required for landscapes over 1,000 sf as
opposed to 1,500 sf under the current regulations. This latter requirement is a
mandatory feature of CALGreen and may not voluntarily be increased by the
City.
o Residential projects would be required to use the BIG rating system to achieve
the desired level of outdoor water savings, as opposed to adopting separate water
efficiency requirements for residential projects. This includes requiring projects
to achieve a certain number of points, or water efficiency measures, in the
landscaping section of the rating system to achieve an equivalent level of water
efficiency.
How can we address sustainability in every aspect of the building life cycle?
The City has limited sustainability requirements for the operation of existing buildings and sites.
Staff proposes to amend the code to provide the City with the authority to require performance
reviews on the energy use of buildings greater than 10,000 sf, and the water use of sites greater
CMR: 355:10 Page 5 of8
than one acre to ensure they comply with their energy and/or water budgets. An energy budget is
calculated, or modeled, under the State Energy Code, and a water budget is calculated under the
State Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Performance reviews will be conducted
randomly and ensure that buildings and sites operate as their designs intended and the energy and
water savings continue over the life of the project. Inclusion of a water performance review is
required by the California Department of Water Resources, however the energy review
requirement will be unique to Palo Alto.
How can we promote/require sustainable neighborhood developments?
The City's current green building standards are focused on characteristics within a project's site
boundary. There has been increased interest from Council members, Commission members and
the community regarding requirements to ensure individual projects can together form a
sustainable community, particularly focused on how a project can provide infrastructure for a
well connected, mixed use and walkable neighborhood. To achieve this outcome, staff is
working to incorporate ideas from the LEED for Neighborhood Development (LEED-ND) rating
system int9 area plans and the Comprehensive Plan update. In addition, staff proposes to require
use ofLEED-ND for development greater than one acre (or some other threshold) as follows:
"Developments with a project boundary greater than (one) acre are required to use the
LEED for Neighborhood Development rating system sections for Smart Location and Linkage
and Neighborhood Pattern and Design. The project is required to comply with the pre-requisites
of these sections and achieve 25 points."
The LEED ND requirements would be reviewed and enforced during a projects planning
entitlement phase, and placed in P AMC Section 18.44, where the existing green building
regulations are located. A copy of the LEED-ND checklist is provided as Attachment C, so
Council members may review the items covered in the sections listed above and discuss the
proposed code language and potential difficulty of meeting the prerequisites and achieving 25
points. The 25 point level was chosen because that is the number at which a project would meet
the LEED Certified recognition level in those two sections. The complete document can be
downloaded at: http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=148
Commission, Board and Stakeholder Comments and Regional Recommendations
On July 29, 2010, the Architectural Review Board (ARB) had a study session on the proposed
changes discussed in this report. The ARB expressed concerns about the new requirement related
to water and energy monitoring of existing building and sites. Staff will address this concern to
the extent possible given that ongoing water monitoring is a state requirement. The use of the
term "audit" has been replaced with "performance review."
On July 30, 2010, a public stakeholders meeting was held to discuss these proposals. Attendees
focused on the water efficient landscape requirements for new homes. Attendees requested
flexibility based on the scope of the proj ect in cases where landscaping is not installed or part of
the proj ect. Several in attendance supported the City using CALGreen and suggested that the
City provide review and enforcement by Building Department staff, as opposed to the use of
CMR: 355:10 Page 6 of8
outside rating systems. Attendees included approximately 10 architects, engineers, and green
building consultants.
On September 1, 2010 the Planning and Transportation Commission (P&TC) conducted a study
session on this topic. Minutes from the P&TC meeting are provided as Attachment D. Multiple
commissioners commented that they would like to see the threshold for requiring LEED-ND
lower than one acre, and that using construction size or tying to City zones should be explored.
On September 1, 2010 the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) conducted a study session on
this topic. While minutes from the UAC meeting are still being transcribed, the Commission
focused on the water and energy efficiency requirements, and recommended approval of the
proposal.
The Bay Area Climate Collaborative (BACC) released the following recommendations for
localities:
• Prioritize education and enforcement of the CALGreen mandatory provisions.
• Where a local leadership standard is desired, continue to apply GreenPoint Rated and the
LEED rating systems.
• Should a local government adopt a CALGreen Tier, also accept third-party certified
LEED or GreenPoint Rated in lieu of the Tier requirements.
The complete recommendation can be found here:
http://builditgreen.org/ files/GovReIIBACCIBACC CalGreen Recommendations.PDF
The Green Building Codes Educational Collaborative, including the AlA California Council,
AlA-SF, StopWaste, City of San Francisco, Simon and Associates, and Build it Green, have
released a summary comparison of CALGreen, LEED and GreenPoint Rated which can be
downloaded here:
http://www . usgbc-ncc.orglindex.php ?option=com content&task=view &id=40 1 &Itemid=90
NEXT STEPS
Subsequent to comments received from Council, staff intends to return to PTC and Council with
an ordinance adoptitig the California Green Building Code with local amendments, reflecting the
approaches discussed at this study session.
October 13, 2010:
November 1,2010:
PREPARED BY:
CMR: 355:10
PTC review and recommendation ofPAMC Chapter 18.44 changes.
City Council review and adoption of ordinance.
~~
'KRISTIN P ARINEH
Sustainability Planner
Page 7 of8
DEPARTMENT HEAD:
Director ofPlamllng and Community Environment
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Green Building Standards by Project Type
Attachment B: Excerpts from CALGreen (Tiers Explanation and Nonresidential Checklist)
Attachment C: LEED ND Checklist
Attachment D: September 1,2010 Planning and Transportation Commission Draft Minutes
CMR: 355:10 Page 8 of8
Attachment A
Attachment A: Green Building Standards by Project Type
Residential Standards
Project Type Project Scope Green Building Requirements
Design and 1. All new construction Build It Green, Green Point Rated minimum requirements and achieve 70 points.
Construction of and • Additional measures that must be claimed under the rating program:
Multi-Family renovations or alterations 2: 50% • A. SITE 2.c. Divert 100010 of Asphalt and Concrete and 80% (by weight) of Residential of the existing unit sf and that Remaining Materials.
include replacement or alteration • C. LANDSCAPE -When the landscaped area is greater than 2,500 sf, the
of at least two of the following: project must claim 15 points in this category when landscape is included in the
HV AC system, building project scope.
envelope, hot water system, or
The following CALGreen measures from the nonresidential requirements are lighting system. mandatory based on project scope:
• A5.106.2.1 Storm water runoffrate and quantity only when the project
includes the creation or replacement of 10,000 square feet or more of
impervious surface on a currently developed site.
• A5.106.2.2 Storm water runoff quality only when the project includes the
creation or replacement of 1 0,000 square feet or more of impervious surface.
Design and 2. All new construction and • Build It Green, Green Point Rated minimum requirements for new construction
Construction of additions 2: 1,250 sf. and achieve 70 points + 1 point per additional 70 sf over 2,550 (150 points
Single and (excludes new garages and maximum). The minimum for Additions is 50 points.
Two-Family accessory structures less than 250 • Additional Mandatory Measures
Residential square feet} • A. SITE 2.c. Divert 100010 of Asphalt and Concrete and 80% (by weight) of
Remaining Materials.
• C. LANDSCAPE -When the landscaped area is greater than 2,500 sf, the
project must claim 15 points in this category if landscape is included in project
scope.
Design and 3. Any project not covered under · The following CALGreen measures from the nonresidential requirements are
Construction of project scopes 1. and 2 above 2: mandatory based on project scope:
All Residential $25,000 valuation AND physical • A5 .408.3 .1Enhanced Construction Waste Management 80% required for all
site changes that require Palo projects regardless of scope.
Alto major or minor
• A5.304.4.1 Potable Water Reduction 60% ETo only when a landscaped area Architectural Review not covered
under project scopes 1. 2. or 3. greater than 1,500 sf is included in the project scope.
• A5.1 06.2.1 Storm water runoff rate and quantity only when the project includes
the creation or replacement of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface on a
currently developed site.
• A5.106.2.2 Storm water runoff quality only when the }roject includes the creation
or replacement of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface.
• If the project is over $100,000 in valuation:
• Complete an existing home green remodeling checklist.
• Complete a HERS II Rating.
Residential Standards Cont.
Project Type Project Scope Green Building Requirements
Residential 4. Buildings over 10,000 square • The City reserves the right to conduct a performance review to evaluate the
Operations feet buildings energy use to ensure that resources used at the building and/or site do not
*effective only for projects that exceed the maximum allowance set forth in the rehabilitation or new construction
applied for building permit after design. Energy use reviews may be initiated by the Building Department or as a
1/1/2009. coordinated effort between the City's Utilities Department and/or its designated
contractors. Following the fmdings and recommendations ofthe review, the City
may require adjustments to the energy usage or energy-using equipment or systems
if the building is no longer compliant. Renovation or rehabilitation resulting from
such audit activity shall be consid~red a project, and shall be subject to applicable
document submittal requirements of the PAMC.
5. Sites greater than one acre • The City reserves the right to conduct performance reviews to evaluate water use
to ensure that resources used at the building and/or site do not exceed a maximum
allowance set forth in the rehabilitation or new construction design. Water use
reviews may be initiated by the Building Department, as a coordinated effort
between the City's Utilities Department and the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(SCVWD), or as part ofSCVWD's established water conservation programs.
Following the fmdings and recommendations of the review, the City may require
adjustments to irrigation usage, irrigation hardware, and/or landscape materials to
reduce consumption and improve efficiency. Renovation orrehabilitation resuhing
from such audit activity shall be considered a project, and shall be subject to
applicable document submittal requirements of the PAMC.
Residential 6. Demolitions • The following CALGreen measures from the nonresidential requirements section is
Demolitions mandatory :
• A5.408.3.1Enhanced Construction Waste Management 80%.
• A5.105.1.3 Salvage.
Nonresidential Standards
Project Type Project Scope Green Building Requirements
Design and 1. All new construction over • CALGreen Mandatory Measures.
Construction 1,000 square feet. • CALGreen Voluntaty Tier 2.
2. Tenant improvements, • CALGreen Mandatory Measures as applicable to project scope.
renovations, or alterations 2: • Outdoor water efficiency requirements are only required when a landscaped
S,OOO sf that include replacement area greater than I,SOO sf is included in the scope. Some additional measures are
or alteration of at least two of the required for landscapes greater than 1,000 sf.
following: HV AC system,
• CALGreen Voluntary Tier 1 as applicable to project scope. building envelope, hot water
system, or lighting system.
3. Any project not covered under • CALGreen Mandatory Measures as applicable to project scope.
project scopes 1. and 2 above 2: • Outdoor water efficiency requirements are on1y required when a landscaped
$2S,000 valuation AND physical area greater than 1,500 sf is included in the scope. Some additional measures are
site changes that require Palo required for landscapes greater than 1,000 sf.
Alto major or minor The following measures are mandatory bag::d on project scope: Architectural Review not covered
under project scopes 1. 2. or 3. • AS.408.3.lEnhanced Construction Waste Management 80% required for all
projects regardless of scope.
• AS.304.4.1 Potable Water Reduction 60% ETo only when a landscaped area
greater than I,SOO sf is included in the project scope.
• AS.l 06.2.1 Storm water runoff rate and quantity only when the project includes
the creation or replacement of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface
on a currently developed site.
• AS.l 06.2.2 Storm water runoff quality only when the project includes the
creation or replacement of 10,000 square feet or more of impervious surface.
· If the project is over $100,000 in valuation: . Energy STAR Portfolio Manager Rating
Operations 4. Buildings over 10,000 square • The City reserves the right to conduct a performance review to evaluate the
feet buildings energy use to ensure that resources used at the building and/or site do
*effective only for projects that not exceed the maximum allowance set forth in the rehabilitation or new
applied for building permit after construction design. Energy use reviews may be initiated by the Building
1/1/2009. Department or as a coordinated effort between the City's Utilities Department
and/or its designated contractors. Following the findings and recommendations of
the review, the City may require adjustments to the energy usage or energy-using
equipment or systems if the building is no longer compliant. Renovation or
rehabilitation resulting from such audit activity shall be considered a project, and
shall be subject to applicable document submittal requirements of the PAMC.
S. Sites greater than one acre • The City reserves the right to conduct performance reviews to evaluate water use
to ensure that resources used at the building and/or site do not exceed a maximum
allowance set forth in the rehabilitation or new construction design. Water use
reviews may be initiated by the Building Department, as a coordinated effort
between the City's Utilities Department and the Santa Clara Valley Water District
(SCVWD), or as part ofSCVWD's established water conservation programs.
Following the fmdings and recommendations of the review, the City may require
adjustments to irrigation usage, irrigation hardware, and/or landscape materials to
reduce consumption and improve efficiency. Renovation or rehabilitation
resulting from such audit activity shall be considered a project, and shall be
subject to applicable document submittal requirements of the PAMC.
Demolitions S. Demolitions • Comply with AS.408.3.1Enhanced Construction Waste Management 80% and
AS.l OS .1.3 Salvage.
Attachment B
Attachment B: Excerpts from CALGreen (Tiers Explanation and Nonresidential Checklist)
APPENDIX AS
NONRESIDENTIAL VOLUNTARY MEASURES
DIVISION As.6 VOLUNTARY TIERS
SECTION A5.601 [8SC]
CALGreen TIER 1 AND TIER 2
A5.601.1 Scope. The measures contained in this appendix are not mandatory unless adopted by local government as
specified in Section 101.7. The City of Palo Alto requires use of CALGreen Tier 1 and/or Tier 2 based on the project
scope as defined at the beginning of Chapter S. The provisions of this section outline means of achieving enhanced
construction or reach levels by incorporating additional green building measures. In order to meet one of the tier levels
designers, builders, or property owners are required to incorporate additional green building measures necessary to meet'
the threshold of each level.
A5.601.2 CALGREEN TIER 1
A5.601.2.1 Prerequisites. To achieve CALGreen Tier 1 status, a project must meet all of the mandatory measures in
Chapter S, and, in addition, meet the provisions of this section.
A5.601.2.2 Energy performance. For the purposes of energy efficiency standards in this code the California Energy
Commission will continue to adopt mandatory building standards.
Using an Alternative Calculation Method approved by the California Energy Commission, calculate each
nonresidential building's TDV energy. and C02 emissions, and compare it to the standard or "budget" building.
A5.601.2.3 Tier 1. Exceed California Energy Code requirements, based on the 200B Energy Efficiency Standards, by
1S%. Field verify and document the measures and calculations used to reach the desired level of efficiency following
the requirements specified in the Title 24 Nonresidential Alternative Calculation Method Manual.
A5.601.2.4 Voluntary measures for CALGreen Tier 1. In addition to the provisions of Sections AS.601.2.1 and
AS.601.2.3 above, compliance with the following voluntary measures from Appendix AS is required for Tier 1:
1. From Division AS.1,
a) Comply with the designated parking requirements for fuel efficient vehicles for a minimum of 10% of parking
capacity per Section AS.1 06.S.1 and Table AS.1 06.S. 1.1.
b) Comply with thermal emittance, solar reflectance, or SRI values for cool roofs in Section AS.1 06.11.2 and
Table AS.106.11.2.1.1
c) Comply with one elective measure selected from this division.
2. From Division AS.3,
a) Comply with the reduction for indoor potable water use in Section A5.303.2.31.
b) Comply with the reduction in outdoor potable water use in Section AS.304.4.1.
c) Comply with one elective measure selected from this division.
3. From Division AS.4,
g} Comply with recycled content of 10% of materials based on estimated total cost in Section A5.405.4.
Ql Comply with the BOoo% reduction in construction waste in Section AS.40B.3.1.
ill Comply with one elective measure selected from this division.
4. From Division AS.5,
g} Comply with resilient flooring systems for BO% of resilient flooring in Section AS.S04.4.7.
Ql Comply with thermal insulation meeting 2009 CHPS low-emitting materials list Section AS.504.4.B.
ill Comply with one elective measure selected from this division.
S. Comply with one additional elective measure selected from any division.
A5.601.3 CALGREEN TIER 2
A5.601.3.1 Prerequisites. To achieve CALGreen Tier 2 status, a project m
Chapter S, and, in addition, meet the provisions of this section.
A5.601.3.2 Energy performance. For the purposes of energy efficiency sta
Commission will continue to adopt mandatory building standards.
Using an Alternative Calculation Method approved by the California Energy
Amended to comply with Energy
Efficiency Ordinance, to not be
overly burdensome, and
encourage greater performance.
nonresidential building's TDV energy and C02 emissions, and compare it to t udget" building.
A5.601.3.3 Tier 2. Exceed California Energy Code requirements, based on the 200B Energy Efficiency Standards, by
1§W%. Field verify and document the measures and calculations used to reach the desired level of effiCiency
following the requirements specified in the Title 24 Nonresidential Alternative Calculation Method Manual. For each
additional 5% the California Energy Code is exceeded beyond the 15% minimum required the project can decrease
one elective measure required under any section under A5.601.3.4 below. For example, a project that exceeds the
California Energy Code by 25% can decrease the required elective measures below by two.
AS.601.3.4 Voluntary measures for CALGreen Tier 2. In addition to the provisions of Sections A5.601.3.1 and
A5.601.3.3 above, compliance with the following voluntary measures from Appendix A5 and additional elective
measures shown in Table A5.601.3.4 is required for Tier 2:
1. From Division A5.1,
ill Comply with the designated parking requirements for fuel efficient vehicles for a minimum of 12% of parking
capacity per Section A5.1 06.5.1 and Table A5.1 06.5.1.2.
Ql Comply with thermal emittance, solar reflectance, or SRI vall\les for cool roofs in Section A5.1 06.11.2 and
Table A5.106.11.2.2.1
.Q} Comply with three elective measures selected from this division.
2. From Division A5.3,
ill Comply with the reduction for indoor potable water use in Section AS.303.2.3.2 .
. Ql Comply with the reduction in outdoor potable water use in Section AS.304.4.2 .
.Q} Comply with three elective measures selected from this division.
3. From Division AS.4,
ill Comply with recycled content of 1S% of materials based on estimated total cost in Section AS.40S.4.1.
Ql Comply with the 80% reduction in construction waste in Section AS.408.3.1 .
.Q} Comply with three elective measures selected from this division.
4. From Division AS.S,
ill Comply with resilient flooring systems for 90% of resilient flooring in Section AS.S04.4. 7 .1.
Ql Comply with thermal insulation meeting 2009 CHPS low-emitting materials list and no added formaldehyde
in Section AS.S04.4.8.1 .
.Q} Comply with three elective measures selected from this division.
S. Comply with three additional elective measures selected from any division.
AS.601.4 Compliance verification. Compliance with Section AS.601.2 or A5.601.3 shall be as required in Chapter 7 of
this code. Compliance documentation shall be made part of the project record as required in Section S.410.2 or S.41 0.3.
1 Cool roofis required for compliance with Tiers 1 and 2 and may be used to meet energy standards in Part 6, exceed
energy standards by 1S or 30 %, and to mitigate heat island effect.
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects . based on llroiect scolle.
CALGREEN CAL GREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
project meets all of the requirements of Divisions S.1 through S.S. ~ D D
~~RJ9.;NNJNG·~ANDiDESI.GNI~~%~tl;'~'~Yl~t4?A~~4,~if:(;i1?g~;'~1~;;k\iM¥~~~~~:t;;tfti\~;~~tf~~f*jf;;1;~Hti;~~i~~J?~~
SITE.SELECTION . . ...................
AS.103.1 Community connectivity. Locate project on a previously
developed site within a 112 mile radius of at least ten basic services, listed D D
in Section AS.1 03.1.
AS.103.2 Brownfield or greyfield site redevelopment or infill area
development. Select for development a brownfield in accordance with
Section AS.1 03.2.1 or on a greyfield or infill site as defined in Section D D
AS.102.
AS.103.3.1 Brownfield redevelopment. Develop a site documented
as contaminated and fully remediated or on a site defined as a
brownfield.
SITE PRESERVATION ..' .
" ..... . ..........
AS.104.1.1 Local zoning requirement in place. Exceed the zoning's
open space requirement for vegetated open space on the site by 2S%. D D
AS.1 04.1.2 No local zoning requirement in place. Provide vegetated
open space area adjacent to the building equal to the building footprint
area. D D
AS.104.1.3 No open space required in zoning ordinance. Provide
vegetated open space equal to 20% of the total project site area.
D D
DECONSTRUCTION AND REUSE OF EXISTING STRUCTURES ,',
AS.10S.1.1 Existing building structure. Maintain at least 7S% of
existing building structure (including structural floor and roof decking)
and envelope (exterior skin and framing) based on surface area. D D
Exceptions:
1. Window assemblies and non-structural roofing material.
2. Hazardous materials that are remediated as a part of the project.
3. A project with an addition of more than 2 times the square footage
of the existing building. Amended to comply with the AS.1 OS.1.2 Existing non-structural elements. Reuse existing interior
non-structural elements (interior walls, doors, floor coverings and salvage requirements in our
ceiling systems) in at least SO% of the area of the completed building Construction and Demolition
(including additions). Debris Ordinance. Exception: A project with an addition of more than 2 times the
square footage of the existing building. ~ I AS.10S.1.3 Salvage. Salvage structural and non-structural aeeitisRal
items in good condition such as wood light fixtures, plumbing fixtures,
0 . and doors for reuse on this project in an onsite storage area or for I salvage in dedicated collection bins. Document the weight 9f-and Amended to comply and number of the items salvaged.
. SITE DEVELOPMENT .......••.........•••. > ">< ....... ...•...... .•..... be consistent with City -
-f .106.1 Storm water pollution prevention plan. ] 1 Develop a Storm Storm water Regulations.
\~ater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that has been desiqned to
c ddress conditions specific to its site includinq erosion and sedimentation /-~ ~ ontrols dust/oarticulate matter air oollution best manaqement oractices
end non-stromwater discharqe controls. For sites that result in one acre or
r~ore of soil disturbance also comolv with all requirements of the State ~
c torm water NPDES Construction Permit or local ordinance .. The City of
F alo Alto has additional stormwater information in Palo Alto Municipal
~ ode Chapter 16.11 Stormwater Pollution Prevention. gevels~ a StSFFA
\, ,/,,+or Dnll"+i,,,n n. DI~ {<"" II Innn +h""+.b...,c-hoon +'" ,~.~ ~,~ .. ~ ~ "':n~~" +'" if" ';;+n ;",,,1 /,~';:::,., ;:::"'~;::: ~ ~:~'::1':~ , .~ ',.j,.j .. n .", ..
.~~ 'f' .~ nv v, ''''' ';::} '" vv,v
,,,,,,,+,.,,1,, ,.j, 01...,+.0 I'Y>-:o.±io,. ..,i,. ... ",11, ,+i",n h.oc-+ ,
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
based on {!,roiect scol2.e. Nonresidential Private and Public Projects CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
I .... rl "'" .... ,.."",tr",l" t:",r "ito" th",t ro" lit in "no ..,,..,.0 ",.
.~ ~ ~ .. ~ .. ~.~ ~.~~ '~.~~ ~~ ... ~,~, ~ ~ .~~ .,,~ ~ ~ ,~~~ ~ ~
.~ ,~ ~f ~~il rli~+, ... h ........ ~~ .... I ... ~ ~~"" .... h "i+h .... 11 .. ",." ' r +h~ c+ .... +~
.~ ~ , 'I'" 'J '1
(f+~ .. "" ,..,+~ .. I\lont:c (',... .... "'+,., ,,,+i,... .... Oo,.rni+ ,...,. 1,...,.. .... 1 Th,., ('ih .... f
r'''' , .... ,'" ~~~ ~~ .~" .... ~ .. ~ '" .. ~, .~~~ ~O:'I~~"'I:""~n, '':' :-..... ',~ ~
[, ... 1" .11.1+" h..,,, . , , r
I~'~ ... ~ .~~ ~ .... , .. ~ ,~, ~.~ ~.~ ~ ,~,,~ ,~ "I'""~'
rI,... ('h ........ +,... .. '1 Co '1'1 '" 0,...11,.+;,... .... n,
J S.10S.2 Storm water design. Design storm water runoff rate and
( uantity in conformance with Section A5.1 06.3.1 and storm water runoff 0.
(uality by Section A5.1 06.2.~.2, or by looal requireR1ents, whiohever are
~iffieteF·
AS.10S.2.1 Storm water runoff rate and quantity. Implement a storm
water management plan resulting in no net increase in rate and quantity
of storm water runoff from existing to developed conditions. Only 0. D D
mandatory if the Rroject is on a currently develoRed site,
Exception: If the site is already greater than 50% impervious,
implement a storm water management plan resulting in a 25%
decrease in rate and quantity.
AS.10S.2.2 Storm water runoff quality. Use post construction
treatment control best management practices (BMPs) to mitigate 1Zl g g
(infiltrate, filter, or treat) storm water runoff in accordance with the
reguirements contained in Palo Alto MuniciRal Code ChaRter 16,11
Stormwater Pollution PreventionJroR1 the 8§!l'i t3eroentile 24 hour runoff
event ~fer voluR1e baseEl BMPs) or the runoff t3roEluoeEl by a rain event
equal to tv~o tiR1es the 8§1fl t3eroentile hourly intensity ~fer flow baseEl
BMPst.-
AS.10S.3 Low impact development (Lib). Reduce peak runoff in
compliance with Section 5.106.3.1. Employ at least two of the following
methods or other best management practices to allow rainwater to soak D D
into the ground, evaporate into the air, or collect in storage receptacles for
irrigation or other beneficial uses. LID strategies include, but are not Mandatory in limited to those listed in A5.1 06.4
5.10S.4 Bicycle parking and changing rooms. Comply with Sections CALGreen but not in r--
5.106.4.1 and 5.106.4.2; or meet local ordinance, whichever is stricter. [gI LEED.
S.10S.4.1 Short-term bicycle parking. If the project is anticipated to
generate visitor traffic, provide permanently anchored bicycle racks
within 200 feet of the visitors' entrance, readily visible to passers-by, for
5% of visitor motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one [gI
two-bike capacity rack.
S.10S.4.2Long-term bicycle parking. For buildings with over 10
tenant-occupants, provide secure bicycle parking for 5% of tenant-
occupied_motorized vehicle parking capacity, with a minimum of one [gI
space.
AS.10S.4.3 Changing rooms .. For buildings with over 10 tenant-
occupants, provide changing/shower facilities in accordance with Table D D
A5.106.4.3, or document arrangements with nearby changing/shower
facilities.
AS.10S.S.1 DeSignated parking. Provide deSignated parking for any
combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van pool
vehicles as shown in:
Table A5.1 06.5.1.1 for Tier 1 at 10% of total spaces [gI
Table A5.1 06.5.1.2 for Tier 2 at 12% of total spaces [gI [gI
S.10S.S.2 Designated parking. Provide designated parking for any [gI combination of low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and carpool/van pool
vehicles as shown in Table 5.106.6.2.
AS.10S.S.3.1 Electric vehicle supply wiring. For each space
required in Table A406.1.6.2.1, provide one 120 VAC 20 amp and
one 208/240 V 40 amp, grounded AC outlets or panel capacity and D D
conduit installed for future outlets and as shown in Table
A5.106.5.3.1
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
AS.106.6 Parking capacity. Design parking capacity to meet but not
exceed minimum local zoning requirements.
AS.106.6.1 Reduce parking capacity. With the approval of the
enforcement authority, employ strategies to reduce on site parking area •
by
1. Use of on street parking or compact spaces, illustrated on the site
plan, or
2. Implementation and documentation of programs that encourage
occupants to carpool, ride share, or use alternate transportation.
AS.1 06.7 Exterior walls. Meet requirements in the current edition of the
California Energy Code and select one of the following for wall surfaces:
1. Provide vegetative or man-made shading devices for east-, south-,
and west-facing walls with windows.
2. Use wall surfacing with minimum SRI 25 (aged), for 75% of opaque
wall areas.
S.106.8 Light pollution reduction. Comply with lighting power
requirements in the California Energy Code and design interior and
exterior lighting such that zero direct-beam illumination leaves the building
site. Meet or exceed exterior light levels and uniformity ratios for lighting
zones 1-4 as defined in Chapter 10 of the California Administrative Code,
using the following strategies:
1. Shield all exterior luminaires or use cutoff luminaires.
2. Contain interior lighting within each source.
3. Allow no more than .01 horizontal fc 15 ft. beyond the site.
4. Contain all exterior lighting within property boundaries.
Exception: See Part 2, Chapter 12, Section 1205.6 for campus lighting
requirements for parkinQ facilities and walkways.
AS.106.9 Building orientation. Locate and orient the building as follows:
1. Long sides facing north and south
2. Protect the building from thermal loss, drafts, and degradation of the
building envelope caused by wind and wind-driven materials.
S.106.10 Grading and Paving. The site shall be planned and developed
to keep surface water away from buildings. Construction plans shall
indicate how site grading or a drainage system will manage all surface
water flows.
AS.106.11 Heat island effect. Reduce non-roof heat islands, and roof
heat islands as follows:
AS.106.11.1 Hardscape alternatives. Use one or a combination of
strategies 1 through 3 for 50% of site hardscape or put 50% of parking
underground.
1. Provide shade (mature within 5 years of occupancy).
2. Use light colored! high-albedo materials
3. Use open-grid pavement system.
AS.1 06.11.2 Cool Roof. Use roofing materials having solar reflectance,
thermal emittance or Solar Reflectance Index (SRI)3 equal to or greater
than the values shown in:
Table A5,1 06.11.2.1 -Tier 1
or Table A5.106.11.2 -Tier 2
!:fENERGM;EI7FICIEN~Yclll~tl~}t~~;t~l~tJiIN~I~~~lijf~tlri1t~;*~!i~)1j~\~s~~1?:li;1f,~f~~t}I%~ft%~'
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENTS: .... .. • •.............•.•..........•••.....•....•..•••••..•.•
Mandatory
D
D
S.201.1 Scope The California Energy Commission will continue to adopt
mandatory building standards. 1 ~
AS.20l.1 Energy performanc~ Using an Alternative Calculation Method
approved by the California Energy Commission, calculate each
nonresidential building's TDV energy and C02 emissions, and compare it
to the standard or "budget" building.
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on project scope.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
AS.203.1.1 Tier 1. Exceed California Energy Code requirements,
based on the 2008 Energy Efficiency Standards, by 15%.
AS.203.1.2 Tier 2. Exceed California Energy Code requirements, I based on the 2008 Energy Efficiency Standards, by .1.QW%.
PRESCRIPTIVE MEASURES •.•.••.••.....•.•.. /\ .. ... ..... .....••••.. . ......... J.>
AS.204.1 ENERGY STAR equipment and appliances. All equipment
and appliances provided by the builder shall be ENERGY STAR labeled if
ENERGY STAR is applicable to that equipment or appliance
AS.204.2 Energy 'monitoring. Provide sub-metering or equivalent
combinations of sensor measurements and thermodynamic calculations, if
appropriate, to record energy use data for each major energy system in
the building.
AS.204.2.1 Data storage. The data management system must be
capable of electronically storing energy data and creating user reports
showing hourly, daily, monthly and annual energy consumption for each
major energy system.
AS.204.2.2 Data access. Hourly energy use data shall be accessible
through a central data management system and must be available
daily.
AS.204.3 Demand response. HVAC systems with Direct Digital Control
Systems and centralized lighting systems shall include pre-programmed
demand response strategies that are automated with either a Demand
Response Automation Internet Software Client or dry contact relays.
AS.204.3.1 HVAC. The pre-programmed demand response strategies
should be capable of reducing the peak HVAC demand by cooling
temperature set point adjustment.
AS.204.3.2 Lighting. The pre-programmed demand response
strategies should be capable of reducing the total lighting load by a
minimum 30% through dimming control or bi-Ievel switching.
AS.204.3.3 Software clients. The software clients will be capable of
communicating with a DR Automation Server.
RENEWABLE ENERGY>i> ...... • ..... . ...... .
AS.211.1 On-site renewable energy. Use on-site renewable energy for
at least 1 % of the electrical service overcurrent protection device rating
caltulated in accordance with the 2007 California Electrical Code, or
1 KW, whichever is greater, in addition to the electrical demand required to
meet 1 % of natural gas and propane use calculated in accordance with
the 2007 California Plumbing Code.
AS.211.1.1 Documentation. Calculate renewable on-site system to
meet the requirements of Section A5.211.1. Factor in net-metering, if
offered by local utility, on an annual basis.
AS.211.3 Green Power. Participate in the local utility's renewable
energy portfolio program that provides a minimum of 50% electrical
power from renewable sources. Maintain documentation through utility
billings.
AS.211.4 Pre-wiring for future solar. Install conduit from the building
roof or eave to a location within the building identified as suitable for
future installation of a charge controller (regulator) and inverter.
AS.211.4.1 Off grid pre-wiring for future solar. If battery storage is
anticipated, conduit should run to a location within the building that is
stable, weather-proof, insulated against very hot and very cold weather,
and isolated from occupied spaces.
! ELEVATORS ESCALATORSi.ANDOTHER EQUIPMENT
AS.212.1 Elevators and escalators. In buildings with more than one
elevator or two escalators, provide controls to reduce the energy demand
of elevators and reduce the speed of escalators. Document the controls
in the project specifications and commiSSioning plan.
Mandatory
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on project scope.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
o o
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects based on groject seoge.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
/ENERGYEF:FICIENTSTEEbFRAMING ;, '.> ........ /i;i.
AS.213.1 Steel framing. Design for and employ techniques to avoid
thermal bridging. D D
i§;WATEg!;eIf-EleIENC'!f;ffi.ND~'C,ONSERVATIONt1~1€(1!g't1f,\~r}fjili~;I:(f~tf;;i{~;~:i~;:~k{¥~"ti~~[?[~~~4
INDOOR,WATERUSE . ' ............. , .
5.303.1 Meters. Separate meters shall be installed for the uses
described, in Sections 503.1.1 through 503.1.3.
S.303.1.1 Buildings in excess of SO,OOO square feet. Separate r
submeters shall be installed as follows: Mandatory in
1. For each individual leased, rented, or other tenant space within ~ CALGreen but not in the building projected to consume more than 100 gal/day.
2. For spaces used for laundry or cleaners, restaurant or food LEED.
service, medical or dental office, laboratory, or beauty salon or
I
barber shop projected to consume more than 100 gal/day.
AS.303.1.1.1 Outdoor potable water use. For new water service ~ D 0
I
not subject to the provisions of Water Code Section 535, separate
meters or submeters shall be installed for indoor and outdoor ~
water use for landscaped areas between 500 square feet and 1000
square feet.
S.303.1.2 Excess consumption. Any building within a project or
space within a building that is projected to consume more than 1,000 ~
gal/day.
S.303.2 20% Savings. A schedule of plumbing fixtures and fixture fittings
that will reduce the overall use of potable water within the building by 20% ~
shall be provided.
(Calculate savings by Water Use Worksheets.)
S.303.2.1 Multiple showerheads serving one shower. When single
shower fixtures are served by more than one showerhead, the
combined flow rate of all the showerheads shall not exceed the ~
maximum flow rates specified in the 20% reduction column contained in
Table 5.303.2.2 or the shower shall be designed to only allow one
showerhead to be in operation at a time.
AS.303.2.1 Tier 1 -30% Savings. A schedule of plumbing fixtures and
fixture fittings that will reduce the overall use of potable water within the ~
building by 30% shall be provided.
AS.303.2.2 Tier 2 -3S% Savings. A schedule of plumbing fixtures and
fixture fittings that will reduce the overall use of potable water within the ~ ~
building by 35% shall be provided.
AS.303.2.2 40% Savings. A schedule of plumbing fixtures and fixture
fittings that will reduce the overall use of potable water within the 0 0
building by 40% shall be provided.
(Calculate savings by Water Use Worksheets.)
S.303.4 Wastewater reduction. Each building shall reduce the
generation of wastewater by one of the following methods: As applicable
1. The installation of water-conserving. fixtures or ~
2. Utilizing non-potable water systems ~
AS.303.3 Appliances.
1. Clothes washers shall have a maximum Water Factor (WF) that will 0 0
reduce the use of water.
2. Dishwashers shall meet the criteria in A5.303.3(2)(a) and (b). 0 0
3. Ice makers shall be air cooled.
4. Food steamers shall be connection-less or boiler-less. 0 0
5. The use and installation of water softeners shall be limited or 0 0
prohibited by local agencies.
D 0
AS.303.S Dual plumbing. New buildings and facilities shall be dual
plumbed for potable and recycled water systems 0 0
S.303.6 Plumbing Fixtures and Fittings. Plumbing fixtures (water
Voluntary
I APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
based on Il.roiect scoll.e. Nonresidential Private and Public Projects CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
closets and urinals) and fittings (faucets and showerheads) shall comply
with the requirements listed for each type in Items listed in Table 5.303.6. As applicable
1. Water closets (toilets) -flushometer type IZI
2. Water closets (toilets) -tank type IZI
3. Urinals IZI
4. Public lavatory faucets IZI
5. Public metering self-closing faucets IZI
6. Residential bathroom lavatory sink faucets IZI
7. Residential kitchen faucets IZI
8. Residential shower heads IZI
9. Single shower fixtures served by more than one showerhead IZI
'OUTDOORWATER USE ......./ :. . '. " .
. ..•...
5.304.1 Water budget. A water budget shall be developed for landscape
irrigation use.1 IZI
~ .304.2 Outdoor petable water use. For new water service, separate
r ~eters or submeters shall be installed for indoor and outdoor ~
IZI \j ater use for landscaped areas between greater than 1000 square feet."
... t::f'\f'\f'\ ... ,., ,.., .. '" f",,,,~ Backflow grevention devices shall be installed on
Each water line servina the orooerty.
~ .304.3 Irrigation design. In new nonresidential projects with between
( reater than 1000 and 2500 square feet of landscaped area (the level at
I'h:(;h the r.~!..O ~ppl:e~), design the system and install irrigation hardware
{&.,....controliers.l.--aR€i-sensors1 which include the following criteria, and
meet manufacturer's recommendations.
5.304.3.1 Irrigation controllers. Automatic irrigation system Amended to be
controllers installed at the time of final inspection shall comply with the compliant and replace following:
1. Controllers shall be weather-or soil moisture-based controllers that the City Water Efficient
automatically adjust irrigation in response to changes in plants' IZI Landscape Ordinance
needs as weather conditions change. and State WELO 2. Weather-based controllers without integral rain sensors or
communication systems that account for local rainfall shall have a As applicab requirements.
separate wired or wireless rain sensor which connects or
communicates with the controller(s). Soil moisture;"based controllers
are not required to have rain sensor input. IZI
5.304.3.2 Irriaation efficiency.
1. The irriaation system must meet an efficiency level of 70%.
2. Subsurface and/or low volume irriaation must be used in all areas ~
that exhibit any of these characteristics: less than 8 feet in width
with a sloge greater than 25% setback area within 24 inches of a
non-germeable surface.
5.304.3.3 Water waste reaulations. The irriaation svstem must be
~esianed and installed to orevent water waste due to oversorav, low
head drainaae or other conditions where water flows onto adiacent
brooertv non-irriaated areas walks roadways oarkina lots or ~
structures.
A5.304.4 Potable water reduction. Provide water efficient landscape
:r,igation design that reduces by the use of potable water. Do not install
i vasive olant soecies.
A5.304.4.1 Tier 1 -Reduce the use of potable water to a quantity that
does not exceed 60% of ETo times the landscape area. IZI
A5.304.4.2 Tier 2 -Reduce the use of potable water to a quantity that
does not exceed 55% of ETo times the landscape area. IZI ~ Methods used to accomplish the requirements of this section shall
include, but not be limited to, the items listed in A5.304.4. IZI ~ I A5.304.4.3 Verification of compliance. QA-ealculations and glans
demonstrating the applicable potable water use reduction required by
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR esc Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects based on Il.rolect scol1.e.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
this section shall be provided.
A5.304.5 Potable water elimination. Provide a water efficient landscape
irrigation design that eliminates the use of potable water beyond the initial
nquirements for plant installation and establishment. All applications for D 0 . r ermits within the recycled water project area and all applications for
r rojects with landscaoe area areater than 1 000 sauare feet shall include
i frastructure and olans for recvcled water use when available.
Methods used to accomplish the requirements of this section shall
include, but not be limited to, the items listed in A5.304.4.
) 5.304.6 Restoration of areas disturbed by construction. Restore all
c reas disturbed during construction by planting with local native and/or 0 0
r on-invasive vegetation. If the landscape will be graded, then the grading
s hall be desianed to minimize soil erosion runoff and water waste.
A5.104.7 Previously developed sites. On previously developed or
graded sites, restore or protect at least 50% of the site area with native D 0
and/or non-invasive vegetation.
A5.304.B Graywater irrigation system. Install graywater collection
system for onsite subsurface irrigation using graywater. 0 0
I'i\ \IATER~RE()SE;SYSTEMS~$!~ij~I~~~~t~j~~~~~}tjfi!;%*I!\t~'i:!f@~!i:f,,>;,·";t,;;, >\-(~~ :;<::·\{:\cf1~?;;u·\ :?ijj~r<fi;~~;J
f .305.1 Recvcled water use for irriaation.
5.305.1.1 For new construction if the project is within the boundaries of L8l
any recvcled water oroiect area as defined bv the City of Palo Alto it
hall include the followinq: Amended to be 1. Plans demonstratina that recvcled water will be used when available
or all irriaation. compliant and replace
2. Consideration of olants suitable for irriaation with recvcled water. Recycled Water
3. The installation of the on-site infrastructure necessary to connect the
rriaation system to the city's recvcled water suoolv when it becomes Ordinance
available. requirements for
5.305.1.1 All aoolications for land use oermits buildina permits and other construction.
discretionary actions for projects other than sinqle family homes in L8l
qeoqraohic areas not within the boundaries of a recvcled water oroiect
area where the total landscape area exceeds 1 500 square feet filed
after the adoption of this chapter shall include the followina:
1. Plans demonstratinq that recycled water will be used when available
or all irriqation.
2. Consideration of plants suitable for irriqation with recycled water.
3. The installation of on-site infrastructure necessary to connect the
site's irriaation system to the city's recycled water supply when it
becomes available.
f .305.2 Recvcled water use for toilet and urinal flushin~ and floor ~
t ao orimina.
1. All aoolications for buildinq permits for new or remodeled buildinqs or
qroups of buildinqs within the boundaries of a recycled water project
area filed after the adootion of this chaoter where the buildinq square
ootaae total includinq both the oriqinal square footaqe and any addition
s qreater than 10 000 sauare feet or where installation of twenty-five or
more toilets and urinals is proposed shall incorporate dual plumbinq in
he desiqn of the facility to allow the use of recycled water when it
becomes available for flushina toilets and urinals and orimina floor
raos. Dual plumbinq requirements shall not apply to sinqle family
~
2. All applications for buildinq permits for new or remodeled buildinqs or
brouosof buildinas in qeoqraphic areas not within the boundaries of a
ecycled water project area filed after the adoption of this chapter where
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
he buildina sauare footaae total includina both the oriainal sauare
ootaae and any addition is areater than 100 000 sauare feet or where
nstallation of 100 or more toilets and urinals is proposed shall
ncomorate dual olumbina in the desian of the facility to allow the use of
ecycled water when it becomes available for flushinq toilets and urinals
and orimina floor traos. Dual olumbina reauirements shall not aoolv to .
sinale family homes.
3. When dual olumbinq reauirements are triqqered by remodelinq. only
hose restroom facilities located within the remodel prolect area shall be
eauired to incoroorate dual olumbina.
MATERIALi;CONSERVATION<AND RESOURCE EFFICIENCY<i> 'Pt;:>"":!,,
AS.404.1 Wood framing. Employ advanced wood framing techniques, or
OVE, as permitted by the enforcing agency.
MATERIAL SOURCES .. ,' ". "'< ....••. ' .
AS.40S.1 Regional materials. Select building materials or products for
permanent installation on the project that have been harvested or
manufactured in California or within SOD miles of the project site, meeting
the criteria listed in AS.40S.1.
AS.40S.2 Bio-based materials. Select bio-based building materials per
Section AS.40S.2.1 or AS.40S.2.2.
AS.40S.2.1 Certified wood products. Certified wood is an important
component of green building strategies and the California Building
Standards Commission will continue to develop a standard through the
next code cycle.
AS.40S.2.2 Rapidly renewable materials. Use materials made from
plants harvested within a ten-year cycle for at least 2.S% of total
materials value, based on estimated cost.
AS.40S.3 Reused materials.' Use salvaged, refurbished, refinished, or
reused materials for at least S% of the total value, based on estimated
cost of materials on the project.
AS.40S.4 Recycled content, Tier 1. Use materials, equivalent in
performance to virgin materials, with post-consumer or pre-consumer
recycled content value (RCV) equaling at least 10% of the total value,
based on estimated cost of materials on the project. Provide
documentation as to the respective values.
AS.40S.4.1 Recycled content, Tier 2. Use materials, equivalent in
performance to virgin materials, with post-consumer or pre-consumer
recycled content value (RCV) for a minimum of 1S% of the total value,
based on. estimated cost of materials on the project. Provide
documentation as to the res~ective values.
AS.40S.S Cement and concrete. Use cement and concrete made with
recycled products and complying with the following sections:
AS.40S.S.1 Cement. Meet the following standards for cement:
1. Portland Cement shall meet ASTM C 1S0.
2. Blended Hydraulic Cement shall meet ASTM C S9S.
AS.40S.S.2 Concrete. Unless otherwise directed by the engineer, use
concrete manufactured with cementitious materials in accordance with
Sections AS.40S.S.2.1 and AS.40S.S.2.2, as approved by the enforcing
agency.
AS.40S.S.2.1 Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs). Use
concrete made with one or more of the SCMs listed in Section
AS.40S.S.2.1
AS.40S.S.2.1.1 Mix design equation. Use any combination of one
or more SCMs, satisfying Equation A4.S-1.
Exception: Minimums for concrete products requiring high early
Mandatory
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on project scope.
CALGREEN CAL GREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
D D
D D
D D
D D
D D
D D
D D
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
strength may be lower as directed by the engineer.
AS.40S.S.3 Additional means of compliance. Any of the following
measures may be employed for the production of cement or concrete,
depending on their availability and suitability, in conjunction with
A5.405.5.2.
AS.40S.S.3.1 Cement. The following measures may be used in the
manufacture of cement.
AS.40S.S.3.1.1 Alternative fuels. Where permitted by state or
local air quality standards, use alternative fuels.
AS.40S.S.3.1.2 Alternative power. Use alternate electric power
generated at the cement plant and/or green power purchased from
the utility meeting the requirements of A5.211.
AS.40S.S.3.1.3 Alternative ingredients. Use inorganic processing
additions and limestone meeting ASTM C 150.
AS.40S.S.3.2 Concrete. The following measures may be used in the
manufacture of concrete,
AS.40S.S.3.2.1 Alternative energy. Use renewable or alternative
energy meeting the requirements of Section A5.211.
AS.40S.S.3.2.2 Recycled aggregates. Use concrete made with
one or more of the materials listed in Section A5.405.5.3.2.2.
AS.40S.S.3.2.3 Mixing water. Use water meeting ASTM C1602,
either recycled water provided by the local water purveyor or water
reclaimed from manufacturing processes.
ENHANCED DURABILITY AND REDUCED MAINTENANCE .. ......• ..
AS.40S.1.1 Service life. Select materials for longevity and minimal
deterioration under conditions of use.
AS.40S.1.2 Reduced maintenance. Select materials that require little,
if any, finishing.
AS.40S.1.3 Recyclability. Select materials that can be re-used or
recycled at the end of their service life.
WEATHER RESISTANCE AND MOISTURE MANAGEMENT> ....... .
S.407.1 Weather protection. Provide a weather-resistant exterior wall
and foundation envelope as required by California Building Code Section
1403.2 and California Energy Code Section 150, manufacturer's
installation instructions, or local ordinance, whichever is more stringent.1
S.407.2 Moisture control. Employ moisture control measures by the
following methods;
S.407.2.1 Sprinklers. Prevent irrigation spray on structures.
S.407.2.2 Entries and openings. Design exterior entries and openings
to prevent water intrusion into buildings.
CONSTRUCTION WASTE REDUCTION;. DISPOSAL AND RECYCLING
S.40S.1 Construction waste diversion. Establish a construction waste
r~anagement plan. All debris generated by job site that is not salvaged
fpr reuse must be delivered to an ADD roved Facilitv as defined in Chaoter
~ .24 of the Palo Alto Municioal Code. or meet 10Gai ordinanGe, whiGhever
S.40S.2 Construction waste management plan. Submit plan per this
section to enforcement authority.
b.40S.2.1 Documentation. Provide documentation of the waste
management plan that meets the requirements listed in section 5.408.2
items 1 thru 4, and the plan is accessible to the enforcement authority.
~.40S.2.2 Isolated jobsites and exemptions. The enforcing agency
may make exceptions to the requirements of this section when jobsites
~re located in areas beyond the haul boundaries of the diversion facility.
I=xemotions may be aranted when immediate or emeraencv demolition is
Mandatory
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on I:l.roiect scoll.e.
CALGREEN
Tier 1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
CALGREEN
Tier 2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
o
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects based on I2.rolect scol2.e.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
eauired to protect the public health safety. or welfare as determined bv
he chief buildinq official' or on the qround of impracticabilitv or
moossibilitv. includina but not limited to where the scope of the covered
broiect is unusual (Le. larae mechanical eauipment installation). and/or
he amount of reusable material or recvclable debris is neqliqible.
5.408.3 Construction waste. Recycle and/or salvage for reuse a
Tinimum of §.eO% of non-hazardous construction and demolition debris.:. ~
Ir ,..,....00+ In".., I . ,~ .• ~ i~ n"lnro . '1' ~~ ,~~~ ~ ~ ,~, ~~, ~ ,~ ~ .~ ~ ~~" '~~
Exceptions:
1. Excavated soil and land-clearing debris.
2. Alternate waste reduction methods developed by working with local Amended to be
agencies if diversion or recycle facilities capable of compliance with compliant and replace
this item do not exist. Construction and A5.408.3.1 Enhanced construction waste reduction. Divert to
recycle or salvage non-hazardous construction and demolition debris Demolition Debris
generated at the site in compliance with one of the following: Ordinance I Tier 1. At least a 80§e% reduction. requirements. Tier 2. At least an 80% reduction.
A5.408.3.1.1 Verification of compliance. A copy of the completed
waste management report shall be provided. Supporting ~
documentation shall be provided consisting of original receipts and
weight tags or other records of measurement from the approved
facility which document the address of the project or project permit
number and documentation of how the material was processed.
Photocopies will be accepted if the permit number and/or project
address is recorded on the receipts provided by an approved facility.
In the case of reuse or salvage of material, a description of reused or
salvaged materials and an estimate of the weight or volume of
material reused or salvaged shall be provided. Photographs of
reused or salvaged materials may also be used to document
compliance.
Exceptions: I 1. Excavated soil.>. aR€i-land-clearing debris and insert solids.
2. Alternate waste reduction methods developed ~y working with local
agencies if diversion or recycle facilities capable of compliance with
this item do not exist.
5.408.4 Excavated soil and land clearing debris. 100% of trees,
stumps, rocks and associated vegetation and soils resulting primarily from ~ I~nd clearing and inert solids such as concrete and asphalt shall be
reused or recycled.
I.···. LIFE CYCLE ASSESSMENT , . .. ' ..... . .' .: . . '..'
A5.409.1 Materials and system assemblies. Select materials
assemblies based on life cycle assessment of their embodied energy 0 0
and/or green house gas emission potentials. See A5.409.1.1 and
A5.409.1.2 for available tools.
BUILDINGMAINTENANCEANDOPERATION<» •.........••. : ....•.. :: ..... : ...•..•..•.•....... ...... .
5.410.1 Recycling by occupants. Provide readily accessible areas that
serve the entire building and are identified for the depositing, storage, and
collection of non-hazardous materials for recyclinq.1
~
5.410.2 Commissioning. For new buildings 10,000 square feet and
over, building commissioning for all building systems covered by T24, Part
6, process systems, and renewable energy systems shall be included in ~
the design and construction processes of the building project.
Commissioning requirements shall include items listed in 5.410.2.
5.410.2.1 Owner's Project Requirements (OPR). Documented before
the design phase of the project begins the OPR shall include items
listed in 5.410.4. ~
5.410.2.2 Basis of Design (BOD). A written explanation of how the
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
design of the building systems meets the OPR shall be completed at
the design phase of the building project and updated periodically to
Mandatory
cover the systems listed in 5.41 0.2.2. ~
5.410.2;3 Commissioning plan. A commissioning plan describing
how the project will be commissioned shall be started during the design
phase of the building project and shall include items listed in 5.410.2.3.
5.410.2.4 Functional performance testing shall demonstrate the ~
correct installation and operation of each component, system, and
system-to-system interface in accordance with the approved plans and
specifications.
5.410.2.5 Documentation and training. A Systems Manual and ~
Systems Operations Training are required.
5.410.2.5.1 Systems manual. The Systems Manual shall be
delivered to the building owner or representative and facilities ~
operator and shall include the items listed in 5.410.2.5.1.
5.410.2.5.2 Systems operations training. The training of the
appropriate maintenance staff for each equipment type and/or system ~
shall include items listed in 5.410.2.5.2.
5.410.2.6 Commissioning report. A complete report of commissioning
process activities undertaken through the design, construction and ~
reporting recommendations for post-construction phases of the building
project shall be completed and provided to the owner or representative.
5.410.3 Testing and adjusting. Testing and adjusting of systems shall
be required for buildings less than 10,000 square feet.
5.410.3.2 Systems. Develop a written plan of procedures for testing
and adjusting systems. Systems to be included for testing and
adjusting shall include, as applicable to the project, the systems listed
in 5.410.3.2.
5.410.3.3 Procedures. Perform testing and adjusting procedures in
accordance with industry best practices and applicable national
standards on each system.
5.410.3.3.1 HVAC balancing. Before a new space-conditioning
system serving a building or space is operated for normal use, the
system should be balanced in accordance with the procedures
defined by national standards listed in 5.410.3.3.1.
5.410.3.4 Reporting. After completion of testing, adjusting and
balancing, provide a final report of testing signed by the individual
responsible for performing these services.
5.410.3.5 Operation and maintenance manual. Provide the building
owner with detailed operating and maintenance instructions and copies
of guaranties/warranties for each system prior to final inspection.
5.410.3.5.1 Inspections and reports. Include a copy of all
inspection verifications and reports required by the enforcing agency.
I FIREPLACES
5.503.1. Install only a direct-vent sealed-combustion gas or sealed wood
burning fireplace, or a sealed woodstove, and refer to residential
requirements in the California Energy Code, Title 24, Part 6, Subchapter
7, Section 150.
5.503.1.1 Woodstoves. Wood stoves shall comply with US EPA Phase
II emission limits.
POI£I..:.UTANTCONTROL:> -"-...........••.•.........•........•....••..•..•......•...•..•
A5.504.1 Indoor air quality (IAQ) during construction. Maintain IAQ
as provided in Sections A5.504.1.1 and A5.504: 1.2.
A5.504.1.2 Temporary ventilation. Provide temporary ventilation during
construction in accordance with Section 121 of the California Energy
As applicable
~
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on project scope.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
o o
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR BSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects based on llrolect scolle.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
Code, CCR, Title 24, Part 6, and Chapter 4 of CCR, Title 8, and as listed
in Items 1 through 4 in A5.504.1.2.
AS.S04.1.3 Additional IAQ measures. Employ additional measures as
listed in Items 1 through 5 in A5.504.1.3: D D
AS.S04.2 IAQ post-construction. Flush out the building per Section
A5.504.2 prior to occupancy or if the building is occupied. D D
AS.S04.2.1 IAQ Testing. A testing alternative may be employed after
all interior finishes have been installed, using testing protocols
recognized by the United State Environmental Protection Agency (US
EPA), and in accordance with A5.504.2.1.2~ Retest as required in D D
A5.504.2.1.3.
AS.S04.2.1.1 Maximum levels of contaminants. Allowable levels of
contaminant concentrations measured by testing shall not exceed the
following:
As As applicable 1. Carbon Monoxide (CO): 9 parts per million, not to exceed outdoor
levels by 2 parts per million; applicable D
2. Formaldehyde: 27 parts per billion; D
3. Particulates (PM10): 50 micrograms per cubic meter; D
4. 4-Phenylcyclohexene (4-PCH): 6.5 micrograms per cubic meter; D D
and D
5. Total Volatile Organic Compounds (TVOC): 300 micrograms per D
cubic meter. D
AS.S04.2.1.2 Test protocols. Testing of indoor air quality should D
include the elements listed in Items 1 through 4. D
AS.S04.2.1.3 Non-complying building areas. For each sampling D
area of the building exceeding the maximum concentrations specified D
in Section A5.504.2.1.1, flush out with outside air and retest samples
taken from the same area. Repeat the procedures until testing D D demonstrates compliance.
S.S04.3 Covering of duct openings and protection of mechanical
equipment during construction. At the time of rough installation, or
during storage on the construction site and until final startup of the heating
and cooling equipment, all duct and other related air distribution ~
component openings shall be covered with tape, plastic, sheetmetal or
other methods acceptable to the enforcing agency to reduce the amount
of dust or debris which may collect in the system.
S.S04.4 Finish material pollutant control. Finish materials shall comply
with Sections 5.504.4.1 through 5.504.4.4.
S.S04.4.1 Adhesives, sealants, caulks. Adhesives and sealants used
on the project shall meet the requirements of the following standards.
1. Adhesives, adhesive bonding primers, adhesive primers, sealants,
sealant primers, and caulks shall comply with local or regional air
pollution control or air quality management district rules where ~
applicable, or SCAQMD Rule 1168 VOC limits, as shown in Tables
5.504.4.1 and 5.504.4.2.
2. Aerosol adhesives, and smaller unit sizes of adhesives, and sealant
or caulking compounds (in units of product, less packaging, which do
not weigh more than one pound and do not consist of more than 16
fluid ounces) shall comply with statewide VOC standards and other
requirements, including prohibitions on use of certain toxic ~
compounds, of California Code of Regulations, Title 17, commencing
with Section 94507.
S.S04.4.3 Paints and coatings. Architectural paints and coatings shall
comply with Table 5.504.4.2 unless more stringent local limits apply.
S.S04.4.3.1 Aerosol Paints and Coatings. Aerosol paints and
coatings shall meet the Product-Weighted MIR Limits for ROC in ~ section 94522(a)(3) and other requirements, including prohibitions on
I
Voluntary
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR SSC Mandatory Required in Palo Alto
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects based, on groiect scoge.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
use of certain toxic compounds and ozone depleting substances (
CCR, Title 17, Section 94520 et seq).
S.S04.4.3.2 Verification. Verification of compliance with this section
shall be provided at the request of the enforcing agency. [gJ
S.S04.4.4 Carpet systems. All carpet installed in the building interior
shall meet the testing and product requirements of one of the standards
listed in 5.504.4.4.
S.S04.4.4.1 Carpet cushion. All carpet cushion installed in the
building interior shall meet the requirements of the Carpet and Rug [gJ
Institute Green Label program.
S.S04.4.4.2 Carpet adhesive. All carpet adhesive shall meet the
requirements of Table 804.4.1. [gJ
S.S04.4.S Composite wood products. Hardwood plywood,
particleboard, and medium density fiberboard composite wood products
used on the interior or exterior of the building shall meet the [gJ
requirements for formaldehyde as specified in Table 5.004.4.
AS.S04.4.S.1 Early compliance with formaldehyde limits. Where [gJ
complying composite wood product is readily available for non-
residential occupancies, meet Phase 2 requirements before the
compliance dates indicated in Table 5.504.4.5 (Tier I), or use
composite wood products made with either CARB-approved no-[gJ
added formaldehyde (NAF) resins or CARB-approved ultra-low
emitting formaldehyde (ULEF) resins (Tier II).
S.S04.4.S.2 Documentation. Verification of compliance with this [gJ
section shall be provided as requested by the enforcing agency.
Documentation shall include at least one of the following. As applicable D
1. Product certifications and specifications. [gJ
2. Chain of custody certifications. [gJ
3. ather methods acceptable to the enforcing agency. [gJ D D
S.S04.4.6 Resilient flooring systems. Comply with the VaC-emission
limits defined in the 2009 CHPS criteria and listed on its Low-emitting [gJ
Materials List (or Product Registrykor certified under the FloorScore
program of the Resilient Floor Govering Institute.
AS.S04.4.6.1 Verification of compliance. Documentation shall be
provided verifying that resilient flooring materials meet the pollutant
emission limits. [gJ
AS.S04.4.7 Resilient flooring systems, Tier 1. For 80% of floor area
receiving resilient flooring, install resilient flooring complying with the
VaC-emission limits defined in the 2009 CHPS criteria and listed on its
Low-emitting Materials List (or Product Registry), or certified under the ~
FloorScore program of the Resilient Floor Covering Institute.
AS.S04.4. 7.1 Resilient flooring systems, Tier 2. For 100% of floor
area to scheduled to receive resilient flooring, install resilient flooring
complying with the VaG-emission limits defined in the 2009 CHPS
criteria and listed on its Low-emitting Materials List (or Product
Registry), or certified under the FloorScore program of the Resilient ~ ~
Floor Covering Institute.
AS.S04.4.7.2 Verification of compliance. Documentation shall be
provided verifying that resilient flooring materials meet the pollutant
emission limits.
AS.S04.4.8 Thermal Insulation, Tier 1. Comply with Ghapter 12-13 in ~ ~
Title 24, Part 12 and with the VaG-emission limits defined in 2009
GHPS criteria and listed on its Low-emitting Materials List.
AS.S04.4.8.1 Thermal insulation, Tier 2. Install No-Added ~ ~
Formaldehyde thermal insulation in addition to meeting A5.504.4.8.
AS.S04.4.8.2 Verification of compliance. Documentation shall be
provided verifyinQ that thermal insulation materials meet the pollutant ~ ~
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR esc
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
emission limits.
AS.S04.4.9 Acoustical ceilings and wall panels. Comply with
Chapter 8 in Title 24, Part 2 and with the VOC-emission limits defined
in the 2009 CHPS criteria and listed on its Low-emitting Materials List
(or Product Registry).
AS.S04.4.9.1 Verificatlon of compliance. Documentation shall be
provided verifying that acoustical finish materials meet the pollutant
emission limits.
AS.S04.S Hazardous particulates and chemical pollutants. Minimize
and control pollutant entry into buildings and cross-contamination of
regularly occupied areas.
AS.S04.S.1 Entryway systems. Install permanent entryway systems
measuring at least six feet in the primary direction of travel to capture
dirt and particulates at entryways directly connected to the outdoors as
listed in Items 1 through 3 in A5.504.5. 1.
AS.S04.S.2 Isolation of pollutant sources. In rooms where activities
produce hazardous fumes or chemicals, exhaust them and isolate them
from their adjacent rooms as listed in Items 1 through 3 in A5.504.5.2.
S.S04.S.3 Filters. In mechanically ventilated buildings, provide
regularly occupied areas of the building with air filtration media for
outside and return air prior to occupancy that provides at least a MERV
of 8.
AS.S04.S.3.1 Filters. In mechanically ventilated buildings, provide
regularly occupied areas of the building with air filtration media for
outside and return air prior to occupancy that provides at least a
MERVof 11.
S.S04.7 Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) control. Prohibit
smoking within 25 feet of building entries, outdoor air intakes and
operable windows where outdoor areas are provided for smoking, and in
buildings; or as enforced by ordinances, regulations, or policies of any
city, county, city and county, California Community College, campus of
the California State University, or campus of the University of California,
whichever are more stringent.
INDOOR MOISTURE AND RADON CONTROLi·i .•...... .... ......•... ....... ....<
S.SOS.1 Indoor moisture control. Buildings shall meet or exceed the
provisions of California Building Code, CCR, Title 24, Part 2, Sections
1203 and Chapter 14.1
AIRQUALITY?ANDEXHAUST ...•... ...... .......... .····».i·.···
S.S06.1 Outside air delivery. For mechanically or naturally ventilated
spaces in buildings, meet the minimum requirements of Section 121 of the
California Energy Code, CCR, Title 24, Part 6 and Chapter 4 of CCR, Title
8, or the applicable local code, whichever is more stringent.1
S.S06.2 Carbon dioxide (C02) monitoring. For buildings equipped with
demand control ventilation, C02 sensors and ventilation controls shall be
specified and installed in accordance with the requirements of the latest
edition of the California Energy Code, CCR, Title 24, Part 6, Section
121(c).1
ENVIRONMENTAL COMFORT ..••.. .............. ·.i><
AS.S07.1 Lighting and thermal comfort controls. Provide controls in
the workplace as described in Sections A5.507.1.1 and A5.507.1.2.
AS.S07.1.1 Single-occupant spaces. Provide individual controls that
meet energy use requirements in the 2007 California Energy Code by
Sections A5.507.1.1.1 and A5.507.1.1.2.
AS.S07.1.1.1 Lighting. Provide individual task lighting and/or
daylighting controls for at least 90% of the building occupants.
Mandatory
o
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on project scope.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR esc
Nonresidential Private and Public Projects
AS.S07.1.1.2 Thermal comfort. Provide individual thermal comfort
controls for at least SO% of the building occupants by Items 1 and 2 in
AS.S07.1.1.2.
AS.S07.1.2 Multi-occupant spaces. Provide lighting and thermal
comfort system controls for all shared multi-occupant spaces.
AS.S07.2 Daylight. Provide daylit spaces as required for toplighting and
sidelighting in the 2007 California Energy Code. In constructing a design,
consider Items 1 through 4 in AS.S07.3.
AS.S07.3Views. Achieve direct line of sight to the outdoor environment
via vision glazing between 2'6" and 7'6" above finish floor for building
occupants in 90% of all regularly occupied areas.
AS.S07.3.1 Interior office spaces. Entire areas of interior office
spaces may be included in the calculation if at least 7S% of each area
has direct line of sight to perimeter vision glazing.
AS.S07.3.2 Multi-occupant spaces. Include in the calculation the
square footage with direct line of sight to perimeter vision glazing.
S.507.4 Acoustical control. Employ building assemblies and
components with STC values determined in accordance with ASTM E90
and ASTM E413.
5.507.4.1 Exterior noise transmission. Wall and floor-ceiling
assemblies making up the building envelope shall have an STC of at
least SO, and exterior windows shall have a minimum STC of 30 for any
of the building locations listed in Items 1 through 3 in S.S07.S.1.
5.507.4.2 Interior sound. Wall and floor-ceiling assemblies separating
tenant spaces and tenant spaces and public places shall have an STC
of at least 40.
OUTDOORAIRQUALITY .•...••...•......•...•.•.........•. > .......,> '.. . .... . .,. . .............. < > .
S.508.1 Ozone depletion and global warming reductions. Installations
of HVAC, refrigeration, and fire suppression equipment shall comply with
. Sections S.S08.1.1 and S.S08. 1.2.
5.508.1.1 CFCs. Install HVAC and refrigeration equipment that does
not contain CFCs.1
5.508.1.2 Halons. Install fire suppression equipment that does not
contain Halons.1
A5.S08.1.3 Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). Install HVAC and
refrigeration equipment that does not contain HCFCs.
A5.508.1.4 Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Install HVAC complying with
either of the following:
1. Install HVAC, refrigeration and fire suppression equipment that do
not contain HFCs or that do not contain HFCs with a global
warming potential greater than 1S0.
2. Install HVAC and refrigeration equipment that limit the use of HFC
refrigerant through the use of a secondary heat transfer fluid with a
global warming potential no greater than 1.
Mandatory
0
0
0
As applicable
0
0
1 Note: These measures are currently required elsewhere in statute or in regulation.
Voluntary
Required in Palo Alto
based on 1l.rolect sco1l.e.
CALGREEN CALGREEN
Tier 1 Tier 2
0 ,
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
LEED 2009 for Neighborhood Development
Project Scorecard
Prereq 1 Smart Location
Prereq 2 Imperiled Species and Ecological Communities
Prereq 3 Wetland and Water Body Conservation
Prereq 4 Agricultural Land Conservation
Prereq 5 Floodplain Avoidance
Credit 1 Preferred Locations
Credit 2 Brownfield Redevelopment
Credit 3 Locations with Reduced Automobile Dependence
Credit 4 Bicycle Network and Storage
Credit 5 Housing and Jobs Proximity
Credit 6 Steep Slope Protection
Credit 7 Site Design for Habitat or Wetland and Water Body Conservation
Credit 8 Restoration of Habitat or Wetlands and Water Bodies
Credit 9 Long-Term Conservation Management of Habitat or Wetlands and Water Bodies
Prereq 1 Walkable Streets
Prereq 2 Compact Development
Prereq 3 Connected and Open Community
Credit 1 Walkable Streets
Credit 2 Compact Development
Credit 3 Mixed-Use Neighborhood Centers
Credit 4 Mixed-Income Diverse Communities
Credit 5 Reduced Parking Footprint
Credit 6 Street Network
Credit 7 Transit Facilities
Credit 8 Transportation Demand Management
Credit 9 Access to Civic and Public Spaces
Credit 10 Access to Recreation Facilities
Credit 11 Visitability and Universal Design
Credit 12 Community Outreach and Involvement
Credit 13 Local Food Production
Credit 14 Tree-Lined and Shaded Streets
Credit 15 Neighborhood Schools
Prereq 1 Certified Green Building
Prereq 2 Minimum Building Energy Efficiency
Prereq 3 Minimum Building Water Efficiency
Prereq 4 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention
Required
Required
Required
Required
Required
10
2
7
Required
Required
Required
12
6
4
7
1
2
1
2
2
Required
Required
Required
Required
Project Name:
Date:
Yes No
Green Infrastructure and Buildings, Continued
Credit 1 Certified Green Buildings
Credit 2 Building Energy Efficiency
Credit 3 Building Water Efficiency
Credit 4 Water-Efficient Landscaping
Credit 5 Existing Building Use
Credit 6 Historic Resource Preservation and Adaptive Reuse
Credit 7 Minimized Site Disturbance in Design and Construction
Credit 8 Stormwater Management
Credit 9 Heat Island Reduction
Credit 10 Solar Orientation
Credit 11 On-Site Renewable Energy Sources
Credit 12 District Heating and Cooling
Credit 13 Infrastructure Energy Efficiency
Credit 14 Wastewater Management
Credit 15 Recycled Content in Infrastructure
Credit 16 Solid Waste Management Infrastructure
Credit 17 Light Pollution Reduction
2
4
3
2
2
111111 Innovation and Design Process 6 Points
Yes No
Credit 1. 1 Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
Credit 1.:1 Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
Credit 1.~ Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
Credit 1.~ Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
Credit 1.~ Innovation and Exemplary Performance: Provide Specific Title
Credit 2 LEEDII) Accredited Professional
111111 Regional Priority Credit 4 Points
a
Yes No
Credit 1.1 Regional Priority Credit: Region Defined
Credit 1.i Regional Priority Credit: Region Defined
Credit 1.~ Regional Priority Credit: Region Defined
Credit 1.~ Regional Priority Credit: Region Defined
IIBII Project Totals (Certification estimates) 110 Points
Certified: 40-49 points, Silver: 50-59 points, Gold: 60-79 points, Platinum: 80+ points ~
~
()
p0-e
CD g
n
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Attachment D
PLANNING& TRANSPORTATION
COMMISSION
MINUTES
==-MEETINGS ARE CABLECAST LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 26,===
Special Meeting of Wednesday, September 1,2010
6:00 PM, Council Conference Room, Civic Center, 1st Floor
250 Hamilton Avenue
ROLL CALL: 6:03 PM
Commissioners:
Samir Tuma -Chair
Lee Lippert -V-Chair
Susan Fineberg
Eduardo Martinez
Arthur Keller
Lee 1 Lippert
Greg Tanaka
Dan Garber
AGENDIZED ITEMS:
Palo Alto, California 94301
Staff:
Curtis Williams, Planning Director
Melissa Tronquet, Sr. Deputy City Attorney
Amy French, Current Planning Manager
Zariah Betten, Admin Associate
Kristin Parineh, Sustainability Planner
Russ Reich, Senior Planner
Larry Perlin, Chief Building Official
1. Green Building Study Session
2 610 Los Trancos Road:
3. Appointment of Liaison to Rail Corridor Study Task Force.
Chair Tuma: Welcome to the Special meeting of the September 1 Planning and Transportation
Commission. Would the Secretary please call roll? All present, thank you.
Before we get started I just want to remind the Commissioners obviously we are in this
conference room and shuffling of papers and things like that make it difficult for the
transcription. So if we could try and much as we can to keep that to a minimum that would be
great.
This is the point in our agenda where if there is anybody who would like to address the
Commission on items that are not on the agenda tonight may do it. I don't have any cards, so
seeing that we will move onto our first item.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS. Members of the public may speak to any item not on the agenda
with a limitation of three (3) minutes per speaker. Those who desire to speak must complete a
speaker request card available from the secretary of the Commission. The Planning and
Transportation Commission reserves the right to limit the oral communications period to 15
minutes.
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS. The agenda may have additional items
added to it up until 72 hours prior to meeting time.
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 10/51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Chair Tuma: The first item is the Study Session on the Green Building Regulations. As I said in
the pre-Commission memo out to everybody we have an hour or so with a few minutes to fudge,
of our Planner's time on this. Then she has to go next door to the Utilities Advisory
Commission. So if we could, with that in mind, try to focus and try to get through this thing in
an hour. If we don't get it done we could continue it after the meeting next door later on, but if
we could get it done let's try to do that. So with that to Staff for a presentation.
NEW BUSINESS.
Study Session:
1. Green Building Study Session: Discuss changes to the P AMC Section 18.44, Green
Building Regulations, to reflect the release of the California Green Building Code
(CALGreen) and to include sustainability requirements for large development projects.
Ms. Kristin Parineh, Sustainability Planner: Great. I am going to give a high-level presentation
for five minutes or so, and then if I am too high let me know. With your questions I will
probably have a feel for that.
Our Green Building Program has been running for about two years. We didn't anticipate coming
back to the PTC with changes for at least another three years until the building code cycle went
through again. Then we were surprised this last January when the State of California came out
with the California Green Building Code. The State put green building concepts into building
regulations. Essentially they took rating systems like LEED and Build It Green and put it into
code and made it the responsibility of the Building Department to enforce it.
This caused cities to reflect on their current green building ordinances and decide now that it is
in building code, what the most appropriate policy position is moving forward. So what we
ended with was some key polic)' questions which are on page 3 of the Staff Report today.
Essentially now that the Green Building Regulations are in the Building Code, staff felt it was no
longer appropriate for us to continue to have them in our Zoning Regulations. One of the Staff s
recommendations is to move our local Green Building Regulations into the Building Code with
the California Green Building Code where state now has them. .
Our second policy-driving question was how can we ensure consistency and reduce redundancy
of sustainability policies across the city? One thing that we found was that CALGreen did a
great job of including all of the different sustainability policies we have for the built
environment, or at least a lot of them. We have different sustainability policies across the city.
We have a separate C&D ordinance, a separate energy efficiency ordinance, and a separate
water-recycling ordinance. I could go on and on. What we found was there was a lot of overlap
with those separate existing ordinances in CAL Green, so the goal was how to make sure they
are consistent, reduce confusion and overlap, and try to streamline the process or at least the
green sustainability process for applicants. We took the existing ordinances and provided local
amendments in CALGreen as a way to address them.
Our next policy-driving question was what is the least complicated and most effective path
towards reaching our sustainability goals? That was when we were looking at should we
continue to use LEED and Build It Green or should we use the state's Green Building Code? A
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 2 of 51
1 group of Staff have been meeting for months to talk about this. We have had public meetings
2 regarding it. We have determined for the time being it is most appropriate for us to stick with
3 Build It Green on the residential side. Our volume of residential construction is much larger than
4 nonresidential construction. Our residential customers have gotten very used to using Build It
5 Green and using Green Point Raters. The system has been working pretty well. Continuing to
6 use Build It Green on the residential side makes the most sense.
7
8 On the nonresidential side Staff is proposing to use CALGreen. There is a smaller volume of
9 projects, which is more manageable for the City to enforce for one. Then second, probably our
10 largest complaints about the Green Building Program come from commercial project owners
11 who are concerned with cost and time and going through the LEED process.
12
13 Then finally, we are trying to prepare ourselves as a city for when green building regulations are
14 really seen as just part of the Building Code, and we are enforcing it in the Building Department,
15 and not relying on outside rating systems anymore.
16
17 The last policy-driving question is how we can affect buildings and developments at every point
18 of their lifecycle? Currently we have really great regulations for design and construction of
19 buildings, but we are weak on the operation of those buildings,. Also, how we affect large
20 developments and how those developments interact beyond their site boundaries.
21
22 Staff is recommending for the operation side of things that we have the ability to require
23 performance reviews of buildings that come through our program to monitor their energy and
24 water use after they come through to see if they are actually still maintaining their energy and
25 water budgets. The water side of this is actually required by the state for us to be able to conduct
26 these performance reviews. The energy side of it is something that would be unique to Palo
27 Alto. We are not required by the state to do that.
28
29 On the neighborhood development side, Staff is recommending that we use LEED for
30 Neighborhood Development as a tool when applications come to the PTC for their entitlement to
31 determine how the project is relating to the sites around it. The project would not be required to
32 go through LEED, but it would be reviewed by you all and Staff to determine whether it is
33 meeting LEED-ND and is considering neighborhood sustainability characteristics. Therefore,
34 LEED-ND would actually become the new Chapter 18.44 in zoning regulations, and the existing
35 Green Building Regulations would go into the Building Regulations.
36 That is a big overview. If you want me to dive into something let me know. I would be happy to
37 do that.
38
39 Chair Tuma: Okay, great. At this point we will go to the public. We have only one card so if
40 anybody else wants to speak on this item our first speaker will be Diane Bailey and you will up
41 to five minutes.
42
43 Ms. Diane Bailey. Natural Resources Defense Council: Hi I just wanted to make a quick
44 introduction. My name is Diane Bailey. I am with the Natural Resources Defense Council. I
45 sent a memo I think several weeks ago outlining our interest.
46
47 First I want to thank you all and give you credit for your leadership in this area of Green
48 Building. I think there has been a lot of great work in this city, and we are looking at Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 3 of 51
1 potentially as a model to take around to other municipalities to see if we can get other cities
2 excited, can we get great policies introduced at the state level, and we are looking at are there
3 other additions we can make to the Green Building policy to sort of round it out and really finish
4 it off as a model that we want to take around. So we are taking a look at these proposed changes
5 and trying to figure out if there is anything that we can do to push the envelope in an area where
6 in climate change the mitigation practices might overlap with adaptation practices and green
7 building is really sort of fertile ground for that overlap between mitigation and adaptation.
8
9 So we are not looking to blow up the process here or anything like that. Weare looking to work
10 with Staff, work with this body, and try to see if we can move the ball forward and make any
11 improvements. Then really just give you props for a very good policy on green building.
12 Thanks.
13
14 Chair Tuma: Thank you. I think Commissioner Fineberg has a question for you.
15
16 Commissioner Fineberg: You mentioned that you had sent a letter. Was that something to City
17 Staff or to the Planning Commission?
18
19 Ms. Bailey: I sent it to the Planning Commission. It had a very brief memo with a few points
20 about what can be done on cement, which is pretty carbon intensive, so that the cement and
21 concrete side of green building. Then a few things on urban heat islands. I can resend that.
22
23 Chair Tuma: That would be great. I think anybody on the Commission has it. Oh, you did get
24 it? Thanks for that. So with that we will bring it back to the Commission. We are going to
25 obviously combine comments and questions. So I say we just go around as people are ready to
26 with five minutes each and we will see if we can get it done in one round. If not, we will go
27 multiple rounds. Commissioner Garber.
28
29 Commissioner Garber: Actually Diane, if you would pick up your microphone I have a couple
30 of things. I am not necessarily looking for a response here but I shared your letter with four or
31 five different structural engineers, and had conversations with them about a number of these
32 issues, many of which have been active in my practice and their practice. There were a number
33 of things in there that are good things to start pursuing. I will just simply also add I am
34 impressed that the NRDC is pursuing this. It is an organization that I have a lot of respect for in
35 terms of having you guys weighing in on this particular topic is good news.
36
37 The first thing I was going to mention, and I don't have your letter here in front of me otherwise
38 I would share it, but I believe there was an initial comment that was talking about capturing all of
39 the concrete and the reuse of concrete, etc. It is important to recognize that Palo Alto is already
40 doing that through its own construction program. So we have great data there and it is a
41 program that is giving us tremendous benefits even now.
42
43 The proposed optimization of specifications for the use and where you are locating the various
44 uses of concrete I suspect will be hard to legislate necessarily, other than legislating a customized
45 versus a descriptive use in much the way that some of the energy codes are used. In the industry
46 the economics of concrete are leading us that way anyway, because we don't want to use the
47 same amount of concrete for the basin as we do, for the walls and floors, etc., and you can change
48 the specification and therefore change the intensity of use, etc. depending upon those uses. So in
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 4 of 51
1 the projects that I am involved with we are already working that way. Now that is for a certain
2 type of project that can afford to invest in the design time to do that versus simply saying it is
3 concrete and then letting the contractor go about designing a building themselves. So I don't
4 know exactly where that threshold is and where it would benefit the city or not. That would take
5 some additional effort to do. Rather than using up more time here let's rotate, I have many more
6 comments regarding these suggestions, but I will do them iteratively here.
7
8 Chair Tuma: Okay. Commissioner Fineberg.
9
10 Commissioner Fineberg: As a high-level comment I think at this stage that it is reasonable to
11 move the Green Building Regulations from Title 18 to Title 16. One question that could be
12 answered tonight or down the pike is once the Green Building Regulations are in Title 16 who
13 then has purview to amend them or change them? Is it no longer a Planning Commission item?
14 What happens in the future if let's say we have a Republican Governor who repeals every
15 environmental law, if we lose ground at the state level, what protections will Palo Alto have that
16 we an retain the progress we have made if we are then migrating over to state standards if they
17 regress? So that is one concern I have. As long as the state doesn't knee jerk into something less
18 than where we are I think it belongs in Title 16.
19
20 Most of my comments tonight I want to focus on the bottom of page 3 of 4 in our Staff Report in
21 the proposed new language for Chapter 18.44 where it talks about the adoption of the LEED-ND
22 criteria. I have lots of specific questions. I don't know whether we want to take time to have
23 Staff answer them tonight or just note them and they will be dealt with later.
24
25 Where it talks about the possible language being "Developments with a project boundary greater
26 than one acre are required to use LEED for Neighborhood Development," I'll stop there. As a
27 matter of semantics 'project boundaries greater than one acre,' boundaries are lines, lines don't
28 have area. So it needs to be 'project areas greater than one acre,' or change your words to
29 project boundaries that contain or whatever your wording is. But boundaries don't have area.
30
31 Then the substance of that I do not believe that one acre is the correct threshold for the size of the
32 project where LEED-ND should be applied. It took me hours to get my little printer to do it, but
33 I downloaded the LEED 2009 for Neighborhood Development Guidelines. I actually sat down
34 and read as much of them as I possibly could. On page XIV it says, "There is no minimum or
35 maximum size for LEED-ND project. The core committee's research had determined that a
36 reasonable minimum size is at least two habitable buildings and that the maximum area that can
37 be appropriately considered a neighborhood is 320 acres or half a square mile. So why ~re we
38 starting to use LEED-ND at one acre, which would probably exclude the majority of projects that
39 happen?
40
41 Then that word that those projects are 'required to use' that is not consistent with what you said,
42 which is optional. So we need a clarification of would they be required or.is this a nice extra
43 optional thing? Then where it talks about getting the 25 points what does it mean if they are
44 required? Does it mean that they lose their entitlements if they don't have the 25 points? Or do
45 we just say oh gosh, you didn't get it but that's okay because this isn't a requirement? So we
46 need to have that really well defined. Right now, if you guys are telling me it is a requirement
47 does that mean we don't approve a project? I don't know. From what we have right now I don't
48 know where that is going to take us.
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 5 of 51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
I question whether 25 points is the correct threshold. I sat down and read how they determine,
and we have the checklist, and to use just for discussion purposes an example. When it talks
about for instance where you get points for proximity to workplaces, to job centers there is an
entire chapter with multiple paragraphs that defines exactly how you calculate that. It is X
numbers of jobs for X numbers of houses within X distance. So I would like to understand if we
are really going to apply those criteria exactly as LEED-ND says or are we going to just say
well, we will leave it to Staff s discretion, are we going to craft our own criteria, or strict
application to LEED-ND' s? Also just as a last thing on that is we need to consider whether or
not we exclude Stanford and Stanford lands within the city. It specifically says that LEED-ND is
not designed as a rating system for existing campuses, and it uses for examples colleges and
military bases because they have their own things going on.
14 t There is one other super quick thing. I win go next round.
15
16 Chair Tuma: Okay.
17
18 Ms. Parineh: Can I ask a clarifying question?
19
20 Chair Tuma: Sure.
21
22
23 1
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
Commissioner Keller: Are you on the microphone?
Ms. Parineh: Oh, sorry. I didn't introduce myself. I am Kristin Parineh with the City of Palo
Alto Planning Department. I work on the Green Building Program.
When you were talking about your comments on the one-acre issue I thought you were implying
that you would like to see it lower than one acre, but were you implying that based on your
description of two buildings on a property as the minimum size, w or were you implying you
would like to see it higher?
Commissioner Fineberg: Okay. What I read about the minimum size should be two habitable
acres. That was a direct quote. I am sorry, two habitable structures was the direct quote out of
the LEED-ND book. I would be more inclined to agree with their criteria rather than -unless
someone can explain why one acre. Is there something subjective about one acre that makes it
more applicable for us? My gut reaction, and-this is without tremendous study, is that one acre
would exclude from consideration most of the projects we see. I believe that LEED-ND is a
great tool that would benefit the city so why adopt something that we are going to exclude most
of our development from? We would be better served if it were more inclusive.
Chair Tuma: Great. Commissioner Keller.
Commissioner Keller: Thank you. The first thing is that I am hoping that when the Green
Building Ordinance is moved to Chapter 16 it references a specific version of the CALGreen
standard so that if the CALGreen standard changes and is watered down we are still referencing
the current version. If it is increased then we will have to review it anyway and at that time we
can reference the new version so it doesn't become automatic in some sense. That is usually
how these enabling ordinances I believe are done. That is done with respect to LEED and Build
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 6 of 51
1 It Green. Weare making reference to a particular version of that and when they change I believe
2 we have to change that as well. That is pretty easy to do.
3
4 The second thing is with respect to LEED-ND. It is not clear why 25 points is a magic number.
5 I would suggest that when this comes before us that an evaluation be done about the major
6 developments that have happened in Palo Alto, let's say those of20 units or more in the last ten
7 years, and give us how many points each of them would be. For example Classic Communities,
8 Vantage, Echelon, Hyatt Rickey's, Elk's Club, the stuff downtown south of Forest, Stanford
9 West, those major developments. I think that 20 units gives you a reasonable threshold so you
10 don't catch all the little ones. Maybe 20 units is not right but something that gives you an idea of
11 the kind of thing "":'basically probably somewhere on the order often or 15 such developments
12 that we are talking about, and see how many points it is.
13
14 It seems to me that the smart location linkages and neighborhood pattern design have a lot to do
15 with the siting of these projects as opposed to necessarily how the projects are laid out. So these
16 should be in some sense mandatory in terms of siting.
17
18 The interaction of this and the Housing Element is interesting because if we create locations in
19 the Housing Element that seem feasible but they are actually infeasible based on being able to
20 get the number ofLEED points for LEED-ND that is kind of an interesting issue. That may call
21 into question our Housing Element.
22
23 So now I am going to get to the biggest issue that I want to bring up, which is with respect to the
24 question in Attachment B on the bottom, Options 1, 2, and 3. What is interesting to me about
25 this is the rationale. I have trouble telling the difference between the rationale of why use BIG
26 and the rationale for not using LEED. I am looking at them and they seem pretty parallel and I
27 don't really understand that. It seems the biggest issue is not stated here is that LEED is
28 expensive and BIG is cheap. That is not stated at all.
29
30 Interestingly enough that leads, pun intended, to the question of operations because that is
31 something that I have brought up in the past. That is one of the things that LEED Certification
32 gives us is provisioning for which operations are provided for, namely that there is a third-party
33 certifier of the operations at least when the building is put into use. It is according to the plan
34 and design for the facilities that have been put into it. So all the systems are tuned properly and
35 all of that. What I am wondering is how does the operations that the City reserves the right,
36 which seems like optional, and if it is enforced as well as the public benefits for PCs meaning it
37 won't get enforced, so I am wondering what is this? It sounds very optional. It sounds like it
38 might not happen. It sounds like it is -first of all, will it happen and secondly, if it does happen,
39 how is it different from the LEED Operations commissioning process?
40
41 Ms. Parineh: Can I ask a clarification question? When you are talking about operations, are you
42 talking about the operational requirements for ongoing energy and water monitoring or are you
43 talking about commissioning?
44
45 Commissioner Keller: Well, you have a section here called Operations. I would like to
46 understand the difference between what you have for Operations and what is the difference
47 between what you are proposing and what the commissioning process involves.
48
City 0/ Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 7 a/51
1 Ms. Parineh: Do I answer that?
2
3 Chair Tuma: Go ahead.
4
5 Ms. Parineh: So the Operational requirements are more for ongoing building maintenance. This
6 is after commissioning has already happened. Every building is required to get commissioned no
7 matter what. It is required by the California Green Building Code. It is required by our local
8 amendments. Every building that comes through this process will be commissioned after
9 construction. Then it has another 50 years of life or however many years of life. What that the
10 Operational requirements are for is that we can go back five years, ten years, 15 years later and
11 make sure that it is still operating to the way it was supposed to be commissioned and the way it
12 was supposed to be performing right when the doors opened the first day. Commissioning has
13 not been left out of this.
14
15 Commissioner Keller: Well, in the current one commissioning wasn't necessarily there because
16 if we didn't require LEED Certification it is not necessarily that there is commissioning. Are
1 7 you saying that CALGreen goes require commissioning? That commissioning is mandatory and
18 that there is some verification that the systems are working?
19
20 Ms. Parineh: Yes. There are two levels of commissioning just like LEED. There is the
21 fundamental level and then there is a higher level of more intensive commissioning. I don't
22 know how far to get into it, but it is the same in CALGreen~ There is a mandatory level of
23 commissioning and then there is optional additional commissioning levels you could do
24 electively.
25
26 Commissioner Keller: It would be helpful if when this comes back to us you could explain that
27 to us. Thank you.
28
29 Chair Tuma: Okay. Next is Commissioner Tanaka. The beeper apparently is not working on
30 the timer. The light will tum yellow when there is a minute left and red when your time is up.
31
32 Vice-Chair Lippert: I will try to remind you when there is a minute left.
33
34 Chair Tuma: Commissioner Tanaka.
35
36 Commissioner Tanaka: The first question is how many other cities use, or are planning to
37 continue to use Build It Green now that we have CALGreen?
38
39 Ms. Parineh: We have been meeting regionally for the last couple of months with Santa Clara
40 County City's Association, the Bay Area, and a lot of them are where we are. They are just
41 starting to propose their plans, because they are all reflecting on CAL Green. I would say that
42 there has been consensus around continuing to use Build It Green for the cities that are already
43 using Build It Green. If they had no green building policy in place, I would say they are tending
44 towards using CAL Green because they didn't have anything to begin with, but most of them are
45 going after Build It Green. We are also seeing a tendency now towards using CALGreen on the
46 nonresidential side, except for large cities, like San Jose and San Francisco, who are still looking
47 at LEED, I think primarily because of volume. They have no capacity to do review in-house so
48 they use that enforcement option then.
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 8 a/51
1
2 Commissioner Tanaka: I see. So how many cities currently use Build It Green?
3
4 Ms. Parineh: I don't know an exact number. The Build It Green website lists all the cities with
5 policies. San Jose, San Francisco, Berkeley, Emeryville, Morgan Hill there are tons. More than
6 50 definitely.
7
8 Commissioner Tanaka: Okay. I guess where I am going on this is, and I think we are headed in
9 the right direction in terms of being the leader in green building practices. That is the right
10 direction. I also want to make sure that there are efficiencies in terms of let's say a lot of
11 construction work is happening in San Jose there are contractors that also can carry that skill or
12 knowledge in Palo Alto, and vise-versa. So there are economies of scale that have to happen. So
13 I just want to make sure that we are not going to be the only ones and that there is a sufficient
14 number. Or how do you see the long-term? Do you see the conversion? There could be three
15 standards CALGreen, Build It Green, and then LEED, all three of these. It would be nice to have
16 one.
17
18 Ms. Parineh: Yes, it would be nice to have one. I think that the intent of CALGreen is to have
19 one. I think the state saw the need to have it in building code for the common good and that the
20 future of it would be one. The building community and also other states and cities that have not
21 adopted green building ordinances are all in different places. Also, this is all new. A lot of these
22 things are new to building departments. F or example, our Building Inspectors currently are not
23 looking at VOC levels in paints. So how different building departments can cope with the
24 increased requirements is also an issue. While it would be nice for every city to use the same
25 code or standard or whatever it is for now, for the next couple of years it is going to be a little
26 difficult because of the different sizes and building department's capacity.
27
28 Commissioner Tanaka: So do you foresee that most cities will go with CALGreen or are people
29 going to stick with Build It Green for a while?
30
31 Ms. Parineh: My personal opinion is that I think people will continue to use Build It Green for a
32 while. The other benefit of using Build It Green is that it is a state-based program so they can
33 easily adjust to state changes and state code changes as they already have. Whereas the LEED
34 isn't as responsive to California because they have 49 other states to manage. So I think we will
35 continue to see other cities use Build It Green for the short-term, but for long-term I think Code
36 is the answer.
37
38 Commissioner Tanaka: So CALGreen?
39
40 Ms. Parineh: Yes.
41
42 Commissioner Tanaka: Maybe we should be leaders again then and start with that. That is a
43 good tool to get a lot more.
44
45 So for CALGreen are our inspectors going to be able to actually conduct those inspections or do
46 you have to have third-party people to do those inspections?
47
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 9 of 51
1 Ms. Parineh: Well, we already have been doing quite a few inspections similarly, because
2 currently nonresidential projects can choose to have their LEED projects verified through the
3 City as opposed to going through the USGBC. Therefore, we already do have some experience
4 verifying LEED proj ects and this is a very similar process to what would be used for CALGreen.
5 One thing we looked at carefully was volume. Our nonresidential volume is pretty reasonable.
6 It is only 30-40 percent of the total projects that come through. Therefore, it is pretty reasonable
7 as compared to takingon all the residential projects, which I am not sure that as of this year with
8 our staffing changes would be manageable.
9
10 Vice-Chair Lippert: Thirty seconds.
11
12 Commissioner Tanaka: So that is another thing, contractor efficiency in terms of knowing the
13 different codes, but there are also inspection efficiencies. We have commercial as one and
14 residential as another that means our inspectors have to know both eventually or you lose an
15 efficiency. I am just wondering whether it makes sense to standardize on one so you have
16 efficiencies both with contractors, architects, as well as with our own inspections, and there is
17 not as much relearning that has to happen.
18
19 Ms. Parineh: Well, currently when we use Build It Green it is verified by outside parties. So our
20 inspectors are not currently having to learn it or enforce it. So if we were ever to change in the
21 future they would be learning CAL Green for residential and they wouldn't be learning Build It
22 Green necessarily for residential.
23
24 Commissioner Tanaka: Okay, thank you.
25
26 Chair Tuma: Commissioner Martinez.
27
28 Commissioner Martinez: Yes, thanks. Kristin, I really support the idea of going to CALGreen
29 for our inspectors and Building Department are used to working from Building Code and I think
30 they would adapt to it quite quickly. On the planning side, I wanted to ask besides the LEED-
31 ND are there other planning implications in the CALGreen or in this ordinance change that we
32 should be looking at since we are going through this Comprehensive Plan process right now?
33
34 Ms. Parineh: Well, definitely while we are looking at our Comprehensive Plan Amendment. The
35 LEED-ND tool has been used as a way to look at wording changes, and policy changes.
36
37 Within CALGreen there is definitely still planning related issues. It talks about stormwater
38 regulations. It talks about site placement, proximity to public transportation. Those things are in
39 CALGreen. So there are in a sense some planning issues. To also get back to some of the first
40 questions, we had imagined that LEED-ND would be required, but it would be reviewed both by
41 Staff and by all of you when a project came here, and that they wouldn't get approval unless they
42 complied with LEED-ND as reviewed by you and Staff. We would review whether or not they
43 achieved 25 points. So it wouldn't be a voluntary exercise for those projects, it would be
44 mandatory. We set it at one acre because we are trying this out and we didn't want to be too
45 stringent from the get-go, so that is why we set it at one acre. Then we looked at projects that
46 came to you that fell in that threshold, like JJ&F and how they would apply it and would it be
47 practical and not overly burdensome for our first year of implementation.
48
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 10 of 51
1 Commissioner Martinez: I kind of agree with Commissioner Fineberg that we may be setting
2 that site size a little bit high for some of the things that we should be looking at.
3
4 Ms. Parineh: Okay.
5
6 Commissioner Martinez: What about other planning issues like density and sort of compact land
7 use, and smart land us, and like that? Is that incorporated into what we are looking at for this
8 Comprehensive Plan change related to sustainability?
9
10 Ms. Parineh: Yes, it definitely is and it is also incorporated in LEED-ND. So that would be an
11 issue that you looked at in terms of site density. It is not in CALGreen though so this would be
12 one area either in the Comprehensive Plan or adopting LEED-ND to require some type of
13 minimum density size, and also mixed use buildings.
14
15 Commissioner Martinez: Then finally in the chart that you gave us, I think that is the second
16 time we saw the projects in the last year, are there substantial sustainable qualities that we are
1 7 seeing or is it this sort of random include a car charger and bicycle parking and stuff like that?
18 Are we really getting things that make the quality of the environment better in your estimation?
19
20 Ms. Parineh: Definitely. Every project has been slightly different. There are standard points
21 that are claimed for all projects because they are the cheapest, easiest ones like installing a bike
22 rack. But definitely, I think once applicants find that they have to do green building they are
23 going above and beyond. Projects typically are going anywhere from 15 to 25 percent higher in
24 terms of the green building measures than we are even requiring. So we are seeing more people
25 adopting solar systems, gay water systems, water efficient landscaping requirements that we are
26 not requiring. So we are definitely seeing innovative things going on and people going above
27 and beyond, not just doing the minimum amount of things.
28
29 Commissioner Martinez: Thanks you.
30
31 Chair Tuma: Vice-Chair Lippert.
32
33 Vice-Chair Lippert: I want to begin by saying first of all that moving our Green Building
34 requirements from Section 18 to 16 takes something that is a discretionary review process and
35 moves it into something that is ministerial. So if we are actually going to be moving it into
36 Section 16 then these things should be almost automatic in terms of review. You make the
37 points and you make whatever the requirement is automatic. It is not subject to review by any
38 Boards or Commissions here. That is particularly important I think in terms of monitoring and
39 being able to have a professional review of an implementation of this.
40
41 So right now the Green Building Ordinance really was spearheaded originally by the
42 Architectural Review Board. They were the group that really promoted this and pushed this.
43 They pushed it as part of their 16 measures or 16 items of review. So now it is being moved into
44 something that is automatic and it should be automatic. It should not be something that is subject
45 to any Board.
46
47 The next thing I wanted to say here is with regard to unit size or acreage. We already have
48 triggers for when things begin to get into the discretionary review process. I think it is three or
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 11 of 51
1 more units it automatically is reviewed by the Architectural Review Board. If it is a group of
2 houses that are being developed it would be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board. So
3 that might be something that might be the trigger by which we look at the neighborhood that the
4 LEED neighborhood standards are based on.
5
6 Also, we currently zone for a variety of the uses throughout the city and those uses come with
7 their entitlements. Well, what happens is with the LEED-ND you begin to say well you really
8 can't have that use in that zone even though you zoned for it because it can't make the points, or·
9 it can't make the findings. So what we really need to do is begin to look at an analysis of how
10 current zoning is going to be able to work seamlessly with the LEED-ND. Maybe what happens
11 is when zoning changes or a Planned Community comes into play that is when some of the
12 LEED-ND requirements begin to also come into play.
13
14 Lastly, I guess what I want to say here also is that we have LEED, which is a national
15 organization, Green Building Council. We have state law, which mandates how we are going to
16 be reducing our carbon footprint. Some of the ways that we do that are through SB 375, AB 32,
17 and the Housing Bonus Density law. So in the LEED neighborhood standards I think it is
18 important to look at how those state laws relate specifically to the LEED-ND standards. That is
19 something that has not been analyzed here. That is particularly important because that is going
20 to set the parameters of how the city grows. I see an apparent conflict, which is that neighbors or
21 citizens in Palo Alto are going to say no, no I don't want that density next to my house when in
22 fact the green thing to do is to build that density. So we need to have some way of looking at
23 that in advance.
24
25 I have a minute left here so I will just sum up by saying one last thing, which is that I agree with
26 my fellow Commissioners in terms of too many standards LEED, Build It Green, and
27 CALGreen. I think we need to look at how CAL Green translates into those other standards and
28 begin to incorporate those, and maybe it requires that we adopt a tier one, tier two standards in
29 order to be able to get us there. But we only use one codebook. We don't use both the UBC and
30 the California Building Code. We don't use the I Code and the California -it is the California
31 interpretations of the I Code. So in this case we are going to use CALGreen we really need to
32 see how LEED and Built It Green fit into that.
33
34 Chair Tuma: I just have a few comments. One is to give you direct feedback on the things that
35 you had asked about. I am generally in agreement with the approach moving Chapter 16.
36 Option 2 as identified on Attachment B also makes sense to me. I very much would associate
37 myself with the comments several Commissioners have made starting with Commissioner
38 Fineberg about criteria, the one acre, and the 25 points. I think what is important is when this
39 comes back to us that whatever, as you reexamine those thresholds, that there is some rationale.
40 I am sure you guys have these discussions but I think it would be beneficial to us to see some of
41 it and then also to see by way of example what kinds of projects would fall into those categories.
42 I am sure it is more rational than it appears but it appears somewhat random.
43
44 The only other comment that I have is more of a general comment about our standards as
45 opposed to specifically about checkpoints but it would be part of Chapter 16. It did strike me
46 that people are sort of quite easily exceeding what we are requiring. I know we have had some
47 discussions about this in the past about kind of wanting to ease people into it and that sort of
48 thing. I think we don't want to miss the opportunity given the predisposition of a lot of people in
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 12 of 51
1 this community to want to do more to kind of not take advantage but catalyze that a little bit and
2 give them the opportunity to get more credit for it if you will, and raise the bar a little bit. We do
3 have a community that values these things. We do have a community to some extent that has the
4 ability financially to meet some of these requirements and maybe make them a little bit higher
5 than where we are right now. So I think we should push the envelope.
6
7 Okay, so I think we have about another 20 minutes or so. Can I get a show of hands of those
8 who would a second go around? Okay, so let's do it at about three minutes apiece and that
9 should take us right to the finish. Commissioner Garber.
10
11 Commissioner Garber: Thank you to Commissioner Fineberg for calling out the topics. I think
12 what is important here though, because the reality is that what is important to the City aren't all
13 the elements it is just the first two, the linkages, and the neighborhood pattern design. I think
14 what is important for us to recognize and to Chair Tuma's point is it is probably worthwhile for
15 us to. go through those various bullet points that in those first few chapters and pull out
16 specifically which ones are of true value to us. Because Palo Alto and the zoning code does
17 address any number of these things. I think LEED for Neighborhood, what it does is it has
18 become sort of a shortcut for us to focus on these values, let's draw those out. It is probably
19 worth it for us not to just simply refer to it but refer to what is it about it that makes it important
20 and something for us to refer to, if that makes any sense.
21
22 You are not looking for a motion just input. I will just mention a couple of quick things
. 23 regarding the concrete again. There is a lot of question --the use of volumetric trucks makes
24 sense. It is not used generally in the industry. It wasn't clear to any of the four or five structural
25 engineers who work not only in California but work in Nevada, Washington, Oregon, etc. if
26 there were in this particular region enough trucks that could make it viable for us to require that.
27
28 In terms of alternate design for materials, a lot of discussion around the geo-polymers, relatively
29 unknown. They have been used in a variety of projects. Some of the geo-polymers use as much
30 slag and other materials that do have heavy metals in them, etc., and it is not clear to anyone
31 whether they have more or less than concrete themselves. There is a portion of the industry that
32 is developing very rapidly so it hard again to sort of create rules around that.
33
34 The reduce displacement techniques, again all very valid things. Some caution around the word
35 'walthamat' because especially in expansive soils you can't really use that. This area of Palo
36 Alto is all about expansive soils.
37
38 There is a lot of uniform sensitivity to basements being non-critical. They never are by clients
39 and some careful consideration about how those two concepts are put together.
40
41 There is general agreement that the future of the industry is creating low-carbon cement. No one
42 knows quite how to do that yet. There is a lot of experimenting going on. Calera, if that is
43 correct, clearly seem to be in the forefront. The downside to them is that they won't share their
44 proprietary formulas so no one can check it through a third party yet. There are some intents to
45 do that later but I think everyone believes that is, not their particular formula, but that particular
46 approach is the future of the industry, but how we get there.
47
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 13 of 51
1 Finally, a lot of these things are great things to do but somebody has to pay for them all.
2 Whether that money is back-ended back into the applicants or the City ends up in some strategic
3 partnerships with, for instance, resellers of concrete, the way that Portland has some strategic
4 partnerships with some companies that resell the trees that have been taken down across the city,
5 and then find ways of profiting off of that. There probably are a variety of ways to imagine it but
6 again it requires research to figure that out and set that up.
7
8 Chair Tuma: Commissioner Fineberg followed by Keller.
9
10 Commissioner Fineberg: So I have a couple of real basic questions about California Green
11 Building Code. I am not an architect so I understand that my level of expertise is not as great as
12 some of my fellow Commissioners, but I would venture to guess that my level of knowledge is
13 more approximate to members of the public who are clueless about a lot of the finer details on
14 this. So I ask this not just for myself but so when this moves forward if my questions could be
15 answered in our Staff Reports so that the public could be informed.
16
1 7 In our Staff Report it talks about the California Building Standards Commission adopted the first
18 mandatory statewide Green Building Code, known as CALGreen, which will go into effect
19 statewide on January 1. So if that will be the statewide building code is it optional? Could
20 someone in Palo Alto building a home or commercial business ignore it or can the City ignore it
21 and do something different?
22
23 Ms. Parineh: No, we will have to implement it. It is mandatory, so all the mandatory measures
24 in the building code would have to be enforced by the Building Department. So they would not
25 be able to get out of it. The thing that we are adding onto it is the Tiers in CALGreen. Are you
26 familiar with the LEED rating system? If so, you can think of the mandatory measures in
27 CALGreen like the LEED prerequisites. They have mandatory things that every project has to
28 do and then you have elective things that you can choose from. The state has said the
29 prerequisites are mandatory for all projects throughout the state but there are all these elective
30 things that cities can choose to adopt and make mandatory if they so choose. Does that make
31 sense?
32
33 Vice-Chair Lippert: Tier one and tier two.
34
35 Ms. Parineh: Tier one and tier two.
36
37 Commissioner Fineberg: So that would mean in effect for the residential we are going to make
38 the residential projects jump through additional hoops for Build It Green, but we are not going to
39 make commercial jump through extra hoops.
40
41 Ms. Parineh: It won't be extra hoops, because the nice thing about Build It Green is that they are
42 local so they actually adopted into their program all of the mandatory measures in CALGreen.
43 So they in a sense won't be using CALGreen, they will be using Build It Green and
44 simultaneously meeting the building code. So they won't be using both things. By meeting
45 Build It Green they will meet the building code.
46
47 Commissioner Fineberg: Okay. This is a matter of comment. For the items in Attachment B
48 where Staff is recommending consideration of discussion, in my opinion those kinds of things
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 14 of 51
1 justified as concepts for discussion should be within the text of the Staff Report not buried in an
2 appendix.
3
4 Then I have a question about LEED-ND. Commissioner Garber led into this. We are only going
5 to be using the two sections smart location linkages and the neighborhood pattern design, and we
6 are not going to be looking at the infrastructure and buildings, or the innovative design. Can we
7 use two out of the five criteria and still call it LEED-ND or are there proprietary copyright
8 process issues, or can we pick and choose and still say we are applying criteria?
9
10 Ms. Parineh: That is definitely an issue for Melissa to look into. I definitely know other cities
11 that have picked and chosen from LEED. I think their goal as a nonprofit is to get these things in
12 use however they are in use. So I think they would be okay with it.
13
14 Really quickly I just want to note, because the 25-point thing has come up, it was set at 25
15 points because that is essentially equivalent to meeting LEED Certified, which is the base level
16 of LEED. If you were going to just minimally meet it it is LEED Certified and you would have
1 7 to get 25 points in those two sections to get to the minimum level of compliance.
18
19 Chair Tuma: Okay. Commissioner Keller.
20
21 Commissioner Kel,ler: Thank you. So there are a bunch of things going on in this. For the
22 architects in this room obviously they seem to be much more knowledgeable about what is in
23 CALGreen, I probably a lot closer to Commissioner Fineberg in my knowledge of this.
24 Although I get it by osmosis because my brother is LEED AP so I get these things from him.
25
26 So let me get a preliminary thing out of the way. I just want to understand, putting the Green
27 Building Code in Chapter 16 means that as Vice-Chair Lippert said it becomes a ministerial act
28 as opposed to a discretionary act. I presume that the Amendment to Chapter 16 is still the
29 purview of the Planning Commission. Is that correct, madam attorney?
30
31 Ms. Melissa Tronquet, Senior Deputy City Attorney: The Building Code is within the purview
32 of the Planning Commission. It is Building Code now and so the Building Code is not within the
33 purview of the Planning Commission.
34
35 Commissioner Keller: So whose purview is that?
36
37 Ms. Tronguet: The City Council.
38
39 Commissioner Keller: Okay, so basically the Planning Commission will no longer have a say
40 over that.
41
42 Ms. Tronquet: Right.
43
44 Commissioner Keller: That is interesting. That is something that is a little different from the
45 review of projects, because we no longer have review of code. That is a different story. So
46 interesting distinction.
47
City of Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 15 of 51
1 The second thing is that it is sort of a standard practice in Palo Alto to be above the minimum.
2 So it is interesting this idea of tier one and tier two, which was not in the Staff Report I just hear
3 it from the architects in this room. I think that understanding of the tier one and tier two, the
4 extent to which we should adopt more than the minimum in terms of that is actually worthwhile.
5 The interesting thing about Build It Green is that Build It Green requires an increasing -there is
6 a sliding scale. The bigger the project is the more points it requires. It is not clear how that
7 relates to CALGreen. So in some sense it is not clear. What I would like to know is what is this
8 thing about CAL Green ties? I don't know anything about it. What is in Built It Green that is
9 over and above CAL Green? So what do we get in terms of increased sustainability, increased
10 green building features by having Build It Green over and above CALGreen? That is not really
11 explained to us. I don't understand. Similarly, what is in LEED that is over and above
12 CALGreen if we were to require LEED Certification as I guess we had some sort of a thing
13 before that, what do we get for that?
14
15 Ms. Parineh: I think that will be part of the Staff Report and give you more details on that in the
16 Staff Report next time. Probably the most important thing to understand is that really what we
1 7 are doing here is just taking the existing green building requirements that we have and moving
18 them into Title 16. So the requirements themselves really are not changing they are just
19 following a different format, and it is a state format. Weare hoping that will streamline the
20 process and understanding the rules.. So our requirements essentially are not changing at all.
21
22 Commissioner Keller: Well requirements for commercial, for nonresidential, is changing
23 because we are reducing the reliance on LEED. So that is a difference.
24
25 Just a final point, in response to Commissioner Garber is that Calera is a calcium carbonate
26 rather than calcium oxide. My understanding is concrete is cut primarily in calcium oxide.
27
28 Ms. Parineh: Ijust want to make one point. I think the clarification needs to be made in the
29 reason why we put the information in the appendix. It is because it was our understanding that
30 the PTC's approyal was purely going to be on the changes to 18.44, and that review of
31 CALGreen and LEED was not what you were approving. You were approving use of LEED-ND
32 and what was a new point in the zoning regulations, and not what was going to be in the Building
33 Code. So that is why we didn't extensively go into Build It Green and LEED and the differences
34 and all of that stuff. Correct?
35
36 Chair Tuma: Okay, but I think having that context would be helpful when you come back with
37 the ordinance.
38
39 Ms. Parineh: Okay.
40
41 Chair Tuma: Commissioner Tanaka.
42
43 Commissioner Tanaka: Thank you. I have a few quick points. I was listening to the
44 conversation in regard to the right number of points that we should have,and maybe this is a
45 moot point at this point, I don't know. I think rather than mandating a certain point level maybe
46 what makes sense is to have incentives to do more. I think that tends to work better then
47 mandating a certain level. So if the project can afford it then sure, no problem.' You don't have
48 to have more than you are, maybe perhaps these are accelerated, or perhaps plan checks could
City of Palo Alto September 1,2010 Page 16 of 51
1 happen quicker. I don't know. There could be a lot of incentives created. That is a suggestion
2 of another way of looking at it versus having a mandated minimum.
3
4 I was looking at the chart you have on the last page and in the nonresidential operations it is
5 talking about sites greater than one acre, or buildings over 10,000 square feet. Ten thousand
6 square feet probably makes a lot of sense. Sites greater than one acre I think for the reasons we
7 were just discussing about whether LEED-ND makes sense for one acre. I don't know if that is
8 a ....
9
10 Ms. Parineh: Where are you looking?
11
12 Commissioner Tanaka: Sorry, the last page, the chart.
13
14 Commissioner Keller: Number 5.
15
16 Ms. Parineh: Number 5.
17
18 Commissioner Tanaka: Yes, number 5, for sites greater than one acre. For the very reason we
19 have been discussing here does one acre makes sense or not, I don't know. It is something to
20 consider.
21
22 My last comment is I think if we do a review of operations, and I think you are going to the UAC
23 right after this, right? I think it actually makes a lot of sense to tie that together with the Utilities,
24 which I am sure you are going to be doing. So thank you.
25
26 Chair Tuma: Vice-Chair Lippert.
27
28 Vice-Chair Lippert: The point I was trying to make is that the CALGreen mandatory measures
29 we have to adopt regardless of what we are doing here. It is really the tier one and the tier two
30 that is important here. The point is that currently we follow Build It Green and we follow LEED,
31 and what we really need to know is what the equivalencies in CAL Green are and then move over
32 to what the CAL Green regulations are.
33
34 Ms. Parineh: Right.
35
36 Vice-Chair Lippert: That is really where we need to go. As for going into Section 16 versus 18 I
37 think it is important to understand the subtleties and nuances before the Commission or the ARB
38 releases itself and says put it over there and it becomes ministerial.
39
40 With regard to the neighborhood development standards, the LEED-ND, underlying zoning is
41 primary. Somebody knocks down a house there is reason to re-qualify it as LEED-ND. They
42 are replacing a house with a house, and the same thing with an office building. However, where
43 the subtlety or the distinction comes in I believe is when you begin to look at it in terms of
44 increased density. That is where the rub is and that is where we are going to get the pushback.
45 So LEED-ND in terms of or as far as us doing the green positive thing is going to meet pushback
46 in terms of what surrounding neighborhoods are going to see in terms of increased density, or
47 "impacting the environment." So in that point of view, when I am talking about environment I
48 am talking about quality and character, which is what the Architectural Review Board deals with.
City 0/ Palo Alto September 1, 2010 Page 170/51
1
2 Also, I guess another corollary of that is if you build it they will come. So as far as some of the
3 transit standards that are there if you don't have the density VTA and SamTrans are not going to
4 bring the transit in there for you to benefit from that. So the question is which is more important
5 here? Ifwe increase and allow for higher density in certain areas then VTA is going to say you
6 have more people per acre or more units per acre yes we can begin to look at improving transit in
7 that area.
8
9 Chair Tuma: Okay. I think we at this point need to release Kristin to go next door. Do the
10 Commissioners feel like we are done with this item or would you like her to come back after
11 next door?
12
13 Commissioner Garber: I would say we are done. We are going to see you again in October.
14
15 Chair Tuma: Yes, with the actual ordinance.
16
1 7 Commissioner Keller: I think we are done. I think it would be helpful to even though
18 . technically the things that are in Chapter 16 mayor may not be within our purview, I think
19 considering it is replacing something that is within our purview that the full analysis of that
20 should be reviewed particularly since it is useful with respect to the tier one and tier two issues.
21
22 Chair Tuma: Okay.
23
24 Vice-Chair Lippert: I have one minor comment. Today the Council came out with their urban
25 . green plans for sustainable communities and it was funding recommendations. They each
26 represent $250,000. There were probably about two dozen communities. Los Angeles cleaned
27 up and got the most. They got a couple of million. There were some smaller communities in
28 here like Watsonville and I am just wondering why weren't we considered? Why didn't we
29 submit anything for these grants? I will just pass these along and you can answer us at a future
30 date.
31