.02 Review Green Building Ordinance process frameworkCITY OF
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
(408) 777-3251
C O P E RT I N O FAX (408) 777-3333
Community Development Department
SUMMARY
Agenda Item No.
SUBJECT
Review Green Building Ordinance process framework.
RECOMMENDATION
Agenda Date: November 5, 2009
Recommend a scope and process for the development of the Green Building
Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
On October 13, 2009, the Planning Commission discussed the Green Building
Ordinance process and directed staff to bring back a refined process framework for
review and consideration.
The main components discussed by the Planning Commission were:
1. Establishing Policy Objectives/Goals
2. Providing Regulatory Background Information
3. Establishing Policy Scope
4. Defining Public Outreach Plan
5. Outlining Process Schedule
This report provides information and recommendations relating to the Green
Building Ordinance review process based on discussions of the Planning
Commission.
Phase II Background
Since 2007, the City of Cupertino has been an active participant in the countywide
Green Building Collaborative (GBC), formed and operated under the direction of
the Santa Clara County Cities Association. In partnership with the Silicon Valley
Leadership Group (SVLG), the goal of the GBC was to help meet climate change
goals, set by the State of CA, by:
• Developing green building policies that are easy to navigate are consistent
2-1
across jurisdictions in the County and
• Assist the public and private sector to adopt green building practices
quickly.
The Phase II policy recommendations (shown in the table below), were adopted by
the Santa Clara County Cities Association's Board of Directors in June 2009. These
were designed by the GBC to integrate permit valuation, square feet and floor area
ratio as thresholds within Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) or Build It Green (BIG) rating systems. The GBC is now encouraging each
city to adopt these green building policy recommendations to achieve regional
consistency.
GBC Phase II Recommendation
New Residential Construction
Single-family, multifamily < 9 homes GPR Rated or LEED Certified
Multifamily >_ 9 homes GRP Rated or LEED Silver
Residential Remodels
Single-family $100,000 permit valuation, BIG's Elements Checklist or LEED
or <500 sq.ft. addition or FAR increase Checklist
<50%.
Single-family w/ $100,000-200,000 BIG's Elements 25-49 or LEED Certified
permit valuation, or 500-1,000 sq.ft.
addition
Single-family w/ $200,000+ permit GPR Rated or LEED Certified
valuation, or 1,000+ addition, or FAR
increase of 50%
Small multi-famil ro'ects (TBD) A licable GPR or LEED Checklist
Large multi-family projects (TBD) Applicable GPR 50 or Applicable LEED
certified
Nonresidential, New Construction
Small, < 5,000 s .ft. LEED checklist
Mid-size, 5,000-25,000 s .ft. LEED certified
Lar e, >25,000 s .ft. LEED silver
Nonresidential, Remodel/ Tenant Improvements
Small ro'ect LEED Checklist
Large w/o HVAC: 2 of four systems are LEED Certified w/o prerequisites
touched + >10,000 sq.ft. + >$1 million
ermit evaluation
Large w/ HVAC: 2 of four systems are LEED Certified
touched, one being HVAC + >10,000
s .ft. + >$1 million erinit evaluation
2-2
The Council work program for FY 2009-10 includes reviewing the Phase II
recommendations of the GBC to create a green building ordinance for Cupertino
including possible incentives for building green.
DISCUSSION
1) PolicXObjectivesfGoals:
a) Provide the community and the Council with a green building policy that
meets the needs of all stakeholders.
b) Enhance public health and welfare of the City tluough the design,
construction, maintenance, operation and deconstruction of buildings
and/or other site development.
c) Demonstrate the City's commitment to environmental, economic, and social
stewardship, yield cost savings to the city taxpayers through reduced
operating costs and provide healthy work and living environments for its
residents, workers and visitors.
d) Implement a green building ordinance to achieve increased energy
efficiency, water and resource conservation and reduced waste generation.
2) Regulatory Context:
Please refer to Attachment 1 for an overview of the Green Building concept,
short excerpts on the various State green assembly bills and a synopsis of green
building efforts in neighboring communities.
3) Green Building Polic~~e~.
The Green Building Policy review scope will include the following:
a) Evaluate the Phase II policy recommendations fiom the Green Building
Collaborative (GBC)
b) Analyze green building policies and programs fiom other comparable cities
c) Consider ordinance alternatives based on community needs and input
including acost/benefit analysis for each alternative
d) Draft a green building ordinance
e) Consider incentives and related funding needs
f) Create guidebooks and other educational material for the public regarding
the new ordinance
4) Public Outreach Plan:
The adoption of a comprehensive green building ordinance will affect the
community at various levels. Therefore, appropriate public outreach as well as
establishing an open dialogue with community stakeholders is essential to a
successful ordinance amendment process.
The public outreach plan should include the following components:
a) Identify list of stakeholders -residents, experts, developers, architects,
designers, engineers, Chamber of Commerce, etc. (see Attachrrtent 2 for a
2-3
complete list)
b) Identify community resources -experts and organizations in the green
building field, City staff involved with the development review process,
staff from adjacent cities involved with green building ordinances,
environmental groups, school districts, etc. (See Attachment 2 for a
complete list)
c) Methods of public outreach will include an initial mailer with the
opportunity to sign up on an email notification list for the City website
updates, newspaper notices, television and radio advertisements, flyers and
notices in the Cupertino Scene (see Attachment 3 for a list of public outreach
methods)
d) Outreach meetings with stakeholders to gather input
e) Educational workshops/study sessions with the Planning Commission
f) Public hearing/workshop to review draft ordinance
g) Public hearings at the Planning Commission and Council
5) Timeline and Schedule:
• November/December 2009 -Planning Commission finalizes Scope of Work
• January 2010 -Council review of Proposed Scope and authorization for
funding
• February 2010 -Selection of Consultant (depending on the final scope)
• March/ April 2010 - Prepare outreach material, website and conduct
meetings with stakeholders
• May 2010 - Conduct an Educational Workshop with the Planning
Commission and stakeholders -the presentation will consist of an overview
of concepts in green building and programs in other cities
• May 2010 -Planning Commission meeting -Overview of LEED and BIG
requirements, Phase II recommendations and how it fits into the City's
development review process
• June 2010 -Review of alternative concepts with pros and cons and possible
incentives
• July 2010 -Planning Commission reviews Draft Green Building Ordinance
and additional Community workshop if necessary
• August 2010 - Planning Commission public hearing on Draft Green
Building Ordinance
• September 2010 -City Council public hearing on Draft Green Building
Ordinance
See attached Green Building Ordinance Draft Flow Diagram (see Attaclunent
4).
6) Funding:
Funding will depend on the final scope of work, which could potentially
include the following components:
a) Consultant -Staff recommends hiring aconsultant/firm with experience in
2-4
preparing green building ordinances. A consultant would have the
expertise to conduct educational workshops, facilitate outreach meetings
analyze alternatives and help create an ordinance customized to the needs
of the City. Staff estimates the cost of the consultant to be about $45,000-
$50,000. Alternatively, a lower cost project could have a more limited
process scope related to the educational workshop and discussion on
alternatives and their costs and benefits. This would include limited
consultant help for facilitation for about $10,000.
b) Public mailings and outreach and workshop materials -Staff estimates a
cost of about $10,000-15,000.
Based on the scope, staff estimates the cost of the project between $55,000-65,000.
A lower cost project without a green building consultant could cost about $25,000.
Prepared by: Gary Chao
Submitted by:
C~ ~~~0
Gar Chao
City Planner
Aarti Shrivastava
Director of Community Development
Attachments
Attaclunent 1: Regulatory Background & Context
Attachment 2: Stakeholder and Resource list
Attachrrtent 3: Outreach methods
Attachment 4: Green Building Ordinance DRAFT Flow Diagram
2-5
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
I. Background CUPERTINO GREEN
Attachment 1
A. What is Green Building?
Green building is the practice of creating structures and using processes that are
environmentally responsible and resource-efficient throughout a building's life-cycle
from site to design, construction, operation, maintenance, renovation and
deconstruction. This practice expands and complements the classical building design
concerns of economy, utility, durability, and comfort. Green building is also known as a
sustainable or high performance building.
B. Why Green Building?
In California's residential sector there are currently over 13 million homes and
apartments and .approximately 9 million of these homes were built prior to the
implementation of the first set of energy efficiency standards (see section D below). This
means that three quarters of homes in the state have never had to comply with any
energy efficiency requirements.
Buildings in the United States account for a greater amount of heat trapping greenhouse
gas emissions than transportation, manufacturing or any other sector. In fact 70% of all
electricity consumption and 40% of all greenhouse gas emissions nationally can be
directly attributed to our nation's buildings. Furthermore, buildings account for
one-sixth of the world's fresh water withdrawals, one-quarter of its wood harvest, and
two-fifths of its material and energy flows.l
Retrofitting and weatherizing an existing building can significantly lower utility
consumption and costs for residents. Lower energy consumption reduces associated
greenhouse gas emissions and lessens stress on the power grid, reducing the
vulnerability to the rolling blackouts Californians experienced in 2000.
According to the California Energy Commission's (CEC) 2005 report "Energy Efficiency
in Existing Buildings" CEC projected that electricity can be reduced 9% and natural gas
6% through cost effective measures which translates to $4.5 billion dollars in consumer
savings. Implementing the CEC's recommended cost effective measures is the
equivalent of removing over 3 million cars from the road for one year.2
Retrofitting and building "green" provides an opportunity to use increasingly finite
resources more efficiently while creating healthier buildings that improve human health,
build a better environment, and provide cost savings. Green buildings may cost more
up front, an average premium is slightly less than 2% or $3-5/ftz, but will save the
property owner and/or tenant by lowering operating costs over the life of the building.3
1 Accessed on 10/22/09 at~ http=//u-~~-«-.ci«-mb.ca.got-iGreenBuildin~/Basics.htmTR.oodman
~ Accessed on 10/21/09 at~ http~!/«-«-«-.-ustainablebusines;.comiinde~.cfm/~o/ne«-s.displa~-/id119053
s Accessed on 10/22/09 at= http=.'h~-«-«-.cap-e.com%e~~ebedit.pro/it.ems~`O~9F3-181.pdf'
1
2-6
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009 ' `
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
On average, green buildings use 30% less energy than
conventional buildings - a reduction, fora 100,000 ft2office building, worth $60,000 per
year, with a 20-year present value of expected energy savings a 5% real discount rate
worth about three quarters of a million dollars. 4
A green building is designed as an integrated system through an approach that applies
a project life cycle cost analysis for determining the appropriate up-front
expenditure. This analytical method calculates costs over the useful life of the asset.
Other benefits of green buildhlgs, not so easy to quantify, include improved occupant
health, comfort, productivity and the reduction of pollution and landfill waste over the
life of the facility or home.
C. Regulatory Requirements
The design, construction and renovation of green building will provide a means for
communities to achieve the following burgeoning regulatory requirements:
1. AB32
In 2006, the Legislature passed and Governor Schwarzenegger sided AB 32, the
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which set the 2020 greenhouse gas emissions
reduction goal into law. It directed the California Air Resources Board (ARB or
Board) to begin developing discrete early actions to reduce greenhouse gases while
also preparing a scopina plan to identify how best to reach the 2020 limit. The
reduction measures to meet the 2020 target are to be adopted by the start of
2011.Within this legislation, green buildings and homes will play a significant and
important role to achieve these established greenhouse gas emissions' benchmarks.
2. AB 758
Signed into law on October 12~~ 2009 AB 758 requires the California Energy
Commission (CEC) to develop an energy efficiency program for existing residential
and commercial buildings. AB 758 requires the California Energy Commission to
establish a regulatory proceeding, by March 1, 2010, to develop a comprehensive
program to achieve energy savings in the existing residential and commercial
building stock that falls significantly below current building standards. For the first
time the CEC will be given the authority to implement such a program.
The bill would also require the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), by
January 1, 2011, to authorize each electrical corporation to provide a targeted number
of low- or no-cost energy efficiency audits each calendar year.
3. AB 811
AB 811 authorizes all cities and counties in California to designate areas within
which willing property owners could enter into contractual assessments to finance
~ Accessed on 10/22/09 at= http~ %«-«-«~ came come«-ebeditLroiit.em,'0~9F3~81.pdf
2
2-7
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009 ' '
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
the installation of distributed renewable generation, as well as
energy efficiency improvements, that are permanently fixed to the property owner's
residential, commercial, industrial, or other real property. These financing
arrangements allow property owners to finance renewable generation and energy
efficiency improvements through low-interest loans that would be repaid as an item
on the property owner's property tax bill. This bill provides a means to help
overcome financial barriers to achieving green building goals including the
installation of energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements to homes and
businesses in California by making it easier for homeowners and businesses to
finance these types of improvements.
However, the eligibility criteria to participate in existing, and likely future,
city/county program is evolving to require property owners to first conduct an
energy and water audit, likely using a HERS Rater paid for by a city/grant funding.
Furthermore, the allocation of funds will follow the utility's loading order of
"efficiency first," emphasizing the importance of green building/resource
conservation actions to enable property owners who would like to use the funding
to implement a renewable energy project.
4. AB 1881- Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO)
Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance AB1881 was approved by the Office of
Administrative Law on September 10, 2009. This ordinance updates those model
water efficient landscape ordinances established in 1990 (AB 325) and 2004 (AB
2717). The updated model ordinance is designed to be consistent with 2008 Green
Building Standards Code (see below). At a recent conference, a Morgan Hill
representative noted that compliance with its existing landscape ordinance, which
includes similar criteria to AB 1881, enables homeowners/developers to achieve 20
BIG points. As such, Morgan Hill adjusted its BIG threshold for certification to 70
points.
5. Executive Order S-20-4
Requires all state buildings to be built to the requirements of the US Green Building
Council's Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) silver rating.
6. Executive Order 13154
The Executive Order, signed October 5, 2009, requires Federal agencies to seta 2020
greenhouse gas emissions reduction target within 90 days; increase energy efficiency;
reduce fleet petroleum consumption; conserve water; reduce waste; support sustainable
communities; and leverage Federal purchasing power to promote
environmentally-responsible products and technologies. It further requires that 95% of
federal buildings must comply with "sustainability requirements." This federal
Executive Order does not specify a green building rating system be achieved, which has
become today's green building policy standard, but rather elects to define its own green
3
2-8
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
federal contracting requirements. The absence of a specific
standard in this EO has lead industry and agency stakeholders to question if this signals
a move away from green rating certifications for more than just federal buildings.
D. Green Building Standards and Codes
1. California Green Building Standards Code
In 2008, the Governor announced the adoption of the country's first statewide Green Building
Standards Code by the California Building Standards Commission. The adopted 2008 code
(California Code of Regulations Title 24, Part 11). is currently a voluntary standard and will
become mandatory in the 2010 code. The adoption schedule for the 2010 CA Building
Standards Code indicates an effective date of January 1, 2011.
2. International Code
The International Code Council has announced it is developing a new code for
commercial buildings entitled the International Green Construction Code, and will
use the current California Green Building Standards Code as a key reference
document. A committee of twenty-nine experts, including Dave Walls, the Executive
Director of the California Building Standards Commission, will meet throughout
2009 to draft the International Green Construction Code which will be presented for
public comment in the Spring of 2010 with publication for adoption in 2012.
3. National Green Building Standard
In 2007 the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) and the International
Code Council (ICC) partnered to form to establish a much-needed and
nationally-recognizable standard definition of what is meant by "Green Building."
A consensus committee was formed to develop this standard in compliance with the
requirements of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The resulting
ANSI approved ICC-700-2008 National Green Building Standard defines green
building for single and multifamily homes, residential remodeling projects and site
development projects while still allowing for the flexibility required for
regionally-appropriate best green practices
4. ASHRAE Standard 189P and 189.1
This American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers
(ASHRAE) standard was developed in partnership with the Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) and the United States Green
Building Council (USGBC). The Standard 189P accreditation (Standard for the
Design of High-Performance Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential
Buildings) provides a baseline for sustainable design, construction, and operations
in order to drive green building into mainstream building practices. It applies to
new commercial buildings and major renovation projects, and addresses key areas
of performance including energy efficiency, greenhouse gas emissions, sustainable
site selection, water usage, materials and resources, and indoor environmental
4
2-9
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
quality.
CUPERTINO GREEN
Currently open for public review, Proposed Standard 189.1, Standard for the Design
of High Performance, Green Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, is
being developed by ASHRAE in conjunction with Illuminating Engineering Society
and U.S. Green Building Council and is expected to be published in early 2010.
Standard provides total building sustainability package, addressing everything from
design and commissioning to plans for high-performance operation.
5. ASHRAE 90.1
Developed jointly by American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and
Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Illuminating Engineering Society of
North America (IESNA), Standard 90.1, Energy-Efficient Design of New Buildings
Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings was first published in 1975 and was
subsequently updated in 1980, 1989, 1999, 2001 and 2004. After 2001, the intention is
to update the Standard every three years. In January 2008, ASHRAE published
90.1-2007, enabling states to adopt it or an amended version of it as their energy code.
Though not specifically a green buildu1g standard, most energy codes in the United
States are based on ASHRAE 90.1 or the International Energy Conservation Code.
State and local governments adopt commercial energy codes to establish minimum
energy efficiency standards for the design and construction of buildings.
6. California Health and Safety Code Section 1838 and 17958
Provide that the Califoriua Building Standards Code establishes building standards for all
occupancies throughout the State. Section 179.58.5 provides that a city may establish more
restrictive building standards if they are reasonably necessary due to local climatic, geological or
topographic conditions. Cities including Palo Alto and Morgan Hill have citied that certain
modifications and additions to the California Building Standards Code established within these
cities green building ordinances are reasonably and necessarily based upon these conditions.
7. California Resource Code Section 25402.1(h)(2)
Authorizes a city to adopt and enforce uzcreased energy efficiency standards,
provided that a determination is made that the local standards are cost effective and
are approved by the California Energy Commission. Morgan Hill adopted the
findings of an energy study prepared for the City of Palo Alto by Gabel Associates,
LLC that demonstrated the cost effectiveness of local amendments to the 2005
California Energy Code, which were successfully submitted and approved by the
California Energy Commission. Morgan Hill was able to adopt the Palo Alto study
fuzdinas into its o~~-n sustainable building ordilzance because it exists within the same
geographic and climatic zone as Palo Alto.
E. Green Building Certification Programs and Rating Systems
There are a variety of private and non-profit green buildu1g certification programs in
the marketplace. In particular, two major green building rating systems are widely used
5
2-10
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
throughout California including- (1) Build It Green's (BIG) Green
Point Rated (GPR) and (2) U.S. Green Building Council's (USGBC) Leadership in
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED®). Both BIG and USGBC are not-for-profit
organizations.
LEED is a national rating system that focuses on all building types, established as a
national consensus standard to enhance the sustainability and efficiency of all the new
construction projects across the nation. In contrast, BIG is a California grown and
community-based program that specifically rates homes performing above standard
practices in the state. In addition, BIG also rates both newly constructed and remodeled
homes, and offer a more accessible point of entry and greater flexibility for builders.
Both rating systems are based on a series of prerequisites, and points obtained through
green building features or strategies. Both systems require performance across different
categories, as verified by athird-party rating process.
Together, these two programs strengthen one another by encouraging increasing levels
of builder participation and greater adoption of green building practices; BIG provides
a credible, yet accessible, point for all the home builders, on the other hand, LEED offers
a national brand targeting at the top 25% of green builders.
According to the research conducted by the city's Green Building Intern, all the adopted
green building policies in the cities in Santa Clara County and City of San Francisco are
based on LEED and BIG. No other existing voluntary standards have been adopted or
integrated into public agency policies. The reason for this is that both LEED and BIG
programs are widely recognized programs, both providing credibility because of the
well-established third-party certification process. In addition both standards require a
process of continuous improvement to allow new technologies to be incorporated.
Figure 1. SIG vs. LEED
BIG USGBC
Rating System Reference Guide
GPR New Home LEED for New Construction
Construction LEED for Core and Shell Green Building Design
LEED for Schools & Construction (2009)
LEED for Healthcare
GPR Home remodeling
LEED for Retail
LEED for Commercial
Interiors
LEED for Retail Interiors
Green Interior Design &
Construction (2009)
.GPR Multifamily
LEED for Existing Buildings
LEER for Existing Schools
Green Buildings
Operations &
Maintenance (2009
G
2-11
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
E. Other Green Building Programs
Figure 2 illustrates the many other green building standards and rating systems that
exist in the United States. However, these standards/rating systems have not yet been
adopted as green building ordinances at city level. Some of the reasons are that the
standards:
Are already based on LEED or GPR certification system
Do not offer a clear evaluation tool
Are not widely recognized
'Thus, two complimentary standards, LEED Rating System by USBGC and Green Point
Rated System by BIG, have emerged as leaders because they are widely recognized and
consensus-based, they have consistent and quantifiable rating criteria, and require
independent 3rd party verification to ensure the standard of performance.
Figure 2.Other Green Building Standards List
Name Authorizing Body Description
Enera~~ar Envirorunental This voluntary/non-regulatory energy efficiency
Building land Protection Agency, US program targets commercial buildings through a
Portfolio four-stage implementation program. Portfolio
'~Zanageri Department of Energy Manager is an interactive energy management tool
that allows tracking and assessment of energy and
water consumption across multiple buildings in a
secure online environment.
High The Collaborative for This standard focuses on design, construction, and
Performance High Performance operation of school buildings.
School Schools
Green Globes Green Building A green management tool that includes an
Initiative assessment protocol and a rating system and guide
for integrating environmentally friendly design into
both new and existing commercial buildings.
liC Berkeley UC Berkeley This baseline is an assessment of our campus
Green Building practices with respect to LEED (version 2.1 at that
Baseline time) and benchmarks where our basic practices met
the LEED requirements.
Material California Integrated Guidelines for product selection criteria, recycling
Selection, Waste Management construction materials including: asphalt, carpet,
Rec,~-cling at $oard (CIWMG) drywall, lumber, and roofing, development of space
construction allocation ordinances.
sites, and
rec~-clin~~ace
allocation guide
Sustainable CIWMG This task force worked to implement the Executive
Building Order S-20-04
Taskforce (not
active anymore)
7
2-12
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
Green Building
Action Plan
Advanced
Enera~ Desi
(,ui~P
Passive
Buildings and
Passivhaus
Zero Net
Ener~• and
High
Performance
Green
Buildings
Sustainable
Design Guide
State of California
ASHRAE, the American
Institute of Architects,
the Illuminating
Engineering Society of
North America, and
USGBC, and DOE
Passivhaus-Institut
Cost Efficient Passive
Houses as European
Standards (CEPHES)
MINERGIE-P
US Department of Enerw
(DOE) Building America
Program
The Research Center on
Zero Emission Buildings
(Norway)
CUPERTINO GREEN
This plan describes the actions that support the
Executive Order S-20-04 including
recommendations for any additional actions,
mandates or legislation that may be warranted to
reduce grid-based energy purchases.
A series of publications designed to provide
recommendations for achieving energy savings over
the minimum code requirements of
ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1-1999.
Refers to the rigorous, voluntazy, Passivhaus
standard for energy efficiency in buildings. It results
in ultra-lov,~ ener~,~~ buildings that require little
energy for space heating or cooling.=' A similar
standard, ~~1I?~-1=RGIE-P, is used in S~~~itzerland.
A building ~vith zero net energy consumption and
zero carbon emissions annually. Zero energy
buildings are autonomous from the energy grid
supply -energy is produced on-site. This design
principle is gaining considerable interest as
renewable energy is a means to cut greenhouse ,as
Pmi~Sinn~_
I50 16000
Los Alamos National It provide a prescriptive path to achieve 30% energy
Laboratory (LANE) savings for small offices and retail buildings,
warehouses, and K-12 schools over the minimum
code requirements of ANSI/ASHRAE/IESNA
Standard 90.1-1999
International This code intends to aid the planning of indoor
Organization for pollution monitoring.
Standardization
F. Other City Approaches
The County of Santa Clara Department of Planning and Development conducted this
summary of green building ordinances and policies. liz addition, the city conducted
research focusing on other cities within the County of Santa Clara to see the general
green building ordinance structure surrounding Cupertino.
Fi>?ure 3. Green Suildin~ Standards in Neighbor Cities for Non-residential
_ City Non-residential Requirements for New Construction Additions & Remodels
Santa Clara Anticipated to be completed in Spring 2009 (per Board
Countv of Supervisor Agenda dated 12.2008) but it could not
be located.
Campbell Green buildi_r~~
~heckills{
Los Altos - 15% over Title 24Part 6, third-party verification Provide verification
8
2-13
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
- Historic exemption available
15 % over Part 6 of Title
24
Los Altos Not addressed in policy Not addressed in
Hills policy
Milpitas - 500 < 25,000 sq. ft., not applicable Not addressed in
- 25,000 < 50,000 sq. ft., LEED certified Policy
- >_50,000 sq. ft., LEED Silver
!Monte Sereno Development applications > 500 sq. ft., LEED Checklist All applications,
(for Site and Architecture Commission) additions not excluded
Morgan Hill (inc. additions) Renovations/TI
>1,000 sq. ft 16 LEED pts. (internal verif.) >$350k 10 LEER Points
>5,000 sq. ft. LEED Silver (internal verif.) (intemal verif.)
>$500k LEED Certified
Palo Alto - 500 < 5,000 sq. ft., (sq. ft./5,000) x 33 points, but not
less than 17 LEED points, self-verification by project
architect, designer or qualified green building
professional
- 5,000 < 25,000 sq. ft., LEED AP Silver equivalent
(sign-off by project LEED AP and city staff LEED AP)
- >_ 25,000 sq. ft., LEED Silver certification (USGBC)
- Historic and hardship exemptions available
San Francisco - 5,000 <_ 25,000 sq. ft., submit checklist & meet specific
LEED credits for commissioning, water efficient
landscaping, water use reduction, storm water
mgmt, construction debris mgmt, and renewable
energy
- 25,000 sq. ft., LEED Silver (2009-2011), LEED Gold
(starting 2012) & required credits
- Verification/documentation provided by Green
Building -Compliance Official of Record
- Credit for retaining historical architectural features
- Alternative standards allowed with director
approval
Santa Clara Checklist required, no point requirement
Saratoga 15% more energy efficient than Part 6 of Title 24
using CA adopted performance method as approved
by the CEC. Prior to issuance of a final occupancy
inspection, applicant submit verification by project
architect or engineer
Sunnj-vale - >_ 500 sq. ft., LEED Checklist
- >_ 5,000 sq. ft., LEED equivalent, LEED AP verifies
required green building components prior to final
inspection
- >_ 50,000 sq. ft., LEED Silver equivalent
- Historic and hardship exemptions available
- Density bonus of 5% FAR for LEED Certification
(internal ver)
>$1.5M LEED Silver
(internal verif.)
Renovation >_ 5,000 sq.
ft. and >_ 50% of
building sq. ft. and >_
$500,000 valuation,
LEED Certified
Other renovation >
$100,000 valuation,
self-verification
LEED requirement
includes renovations/
tenant improvements >
25,000 sq. ft.
Must include LEED
credits for use of low
emitting materials
Not addressed in
Policy
Not addressed in
policy
>_ 10,000 sq. ft., LEED
checklist
>_ 50,000 sq. ft., LEED
Certified equivalent
9
2-14
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009 ' '
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
-Phase 2 and 3 approved by resolution will increase
requirements in 2011 and 2013
Figure 4. Green Building Standards in Neighbor Cities for Residential
City Residential Requirements for New For Additions &
Construction Remodels
CoLUZty of New residence and rebuild >500 sq. ft. -submit
Santa Clara 1,201<3,000 sq. ft. LEED for Homes Checklist checklist
>3,000 sq. ft. Single Family Green Point Checklist or
LEED for Homes Checklist AND 50 points + 1 pt.
per additional 100 sq. ft. beyond 3,000 sq. ft or
LEED Certification
Campbell Not addressed in Policy Subnuttal of checklist
Los Altos 50 BIG pts Verify design
GreenPoint Rating of
50 points+
Los Altos 50 BIG pts or LEED for homes (45pts) Not addressed n
Hills Policy
Los Gatos Hillside area: require sustainable designs if Not addressed n
over 6,000 sq. ft (encouraged if over 3,500 sq. Policy
ft), Non-hillside area: encourage green
building designs (based on BIG rating)
1ylilpitas less than 5 units: not applicable, more than and Not addressed n
equal to 5 units: 50 BIG pts or equivalent in Policy
LEED
Palo Alto 70 BIG pts if over 1,250 sq. ft Not addressed n
Policy
Morgan Hill -less than 2,000 sq. ft. 70 BIG points or LEED Certified Additions
(internal verification) >250 sq. ft 25 BIG points
-greater than 2,000 sq.ft. 70 BIG points + 1 point per (internal verif.)
additiona170 sf (150 pt. max) (internal verification) >700 sq. ft 50 BIG points
(internal verify
Renovations /Remodels
>$100k- 25 BIG points
(internal verif.)
>$250k 50 BIG points
(internal verify
San Tose less than 10 units: Green Point or LEED check Not addressed n
list, more than 10 units: 50 BIG pts or LEED Policy
certified, High Rise Residential (75' or Higher):
LEED certified
San Francisco -Small: 25 BIG Pints Not addressed n
-Midsize: 25 BIG Points Policy
-High-rise: LEED Certified, LEED® a
10
2-15
Planning Commission -November 5, 2009
Green Building Policy Regulatory Back Ground
CUPERTINO GREEN
minimum 50 percent reduction in use of
potable water for landscaping, achievement of
a minimum 20 percent reduction in the use of
potable water, diversion of at least 75 percent
of the project's construction debris
Saratoga 50 BIG points, verified by GPR Not addressed in
policy
Si;nn~-~~ale -Single-Family and Duplex -Single Family and
Less than 1,500 sq. ft GPR Checklist Duplex
Greater than 1,500 sq. ft GPR 70 points; if Greater than $100k
project achieves 100 points with GPR valuation GPR
verification, can increase lot coverage by 5% checklist
-Multi-family -Multifamily
More than three dwellings: 70 GPR points; Greater than $250k
achieve 100 points with GPR verification, GPR checklist
project can increase height by 5', lot coverage
by 5% or 5% density bonus
Figure 5. Green Building Standards in Neighbor Cities for Municipal Buildings
City Municipal Requirements
County of Santa Clara LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.(official registration and
certification through USGBC required if over 25,000 sq.
ft)
Campbell LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.
Los :altos LEED Certified if over 7,500 sq. ft.
Cupertino LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.
Los Gatos LEED Silver if new, LEED EB equivalent if remodeled
Los Altos Hills LEED certified if over 1,000 sq. ft.
?~~~lpitas LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.
?Monte Sereno LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.
Palo Alto LEED Silver if over 5,000 sq. ft.
San FranCL5C0 LEED Silver i_f over 5,000 sq. ft.
San ose LEED Silver if over 10,000 sq. ft.
Sunnwale LEED Silver "design intent" over 5,000 sq. ft new
construction; LEED certified "design intent" if greater than
25,000 sq. ft for major alterations
11
2-16
Attachment 2
Stakeholder List
A list of potential stakeholders is outlined as follows:
a) Residential Stakeholders (all home owners including those that have built
green homes, developers and local architects/engineers)
b) Commercial Stakeholders (all building owners including those that have
constructed green buildings, developers and local architects/engineers)
c) City-sponsored Programs Participants (Neighborhood Block Leaders,
Community Emergency Response Team, Neighborhood Watch)
d) Various Hoene Owner Associations
e) Chamber of Commerce -Legislative Action Committee
School Districts (Cupertino Union School District/Fremont Union High
School District)
g) De Anza College -Kirsch Center for Enviroiunental Studies
Resource List
a) Adjacent Community Green Building Representatives (having recently
completed green building policies)
i. San Jose
ii. Sunnyvale
iii. Morgan Hill
b) Green Building Organizations
i. US Green Building Council (USGBC)
ii. Build It Green (BIG)
iii. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
iv. Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG) - Bay Area Climate
Collaborative
v. Joint Venture Silicon Valley (JVSV) -Sustainable Buildings Working
Group
vi. Santa Clara County Cities Associatioiz (SCCCA) -Green Building
Collaborative USE AS RESOURCES
c) Environmental Organizations
i. Sierra Club Cool Cities
ii. Audubon Society
iii. Acterra
iv. Committee for Green Foothills
2-17
Attachment 3
Community Outreach Methods
Public outreach and noticing shall include the following:
a) Mail
b) Outreach to Chamber of Commerce, Legislative Action Committee and
other larger corporations/developers
c) Newsletters
i. School district
ii. Chamber of Commerce
iii. USGBC Northern California/Monterey Bay Chapter
d) Ads in the Courier, the Scene, local newspapers, City AM radio station, City
TV station
e) Informational materials (brochure) and web page with options for
interested parties to sign-up for electronic notifications (E-lists)
~ Flyers/posters for educational workshops and focus group sessions at city
facilities, library, local businesses
Convene Educational Workshops and Focus Group Sessions
a) Host Educational/Focus Group Sessions welcoming all stakeholders to:
i. Review the Phase II proposal and comparison study on what other
Cities are doing
ii. Gather and provide comments
2-18
Addendum to
Attachment 1
PAZ, ~ ~ ~ / (V E~ W t ~
~O~R P O $'O~ d
~ a eo~~
~ o .City Coancil Approves New Green Building
7 >
(^IA 0
~, Requirements
.1
~LjFOg~ October 2009
"The Council's action provides another important step toward the City's goal to be environmentally
responsible and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Palo Alto aims to be a leader through the
introduction of new energy efficiency measures for existing buildings that will help the City and the
community better understand its energy consumption and how if can be reduced. The changes also
enhance the building community's implementation of the ordinances by providing flexibility for
verification options, and specify green building criteria that more directly relate to a project's energy
system impacts."
Curtis Williams, Planning & Community Environment Department Director
1. Nonresidential new construction applicants must choose the energy January 1, 2010
performance path under LEED, and achieve performance 15% beyond the
California Ener Code, Title 24 Part 6.
2. Nonresidential renovations over 500 sf and over $100,000 in valuation are January 1, 2010
required to receive an Energy STAR Portfolio Manager, Building Energy
Performance Rating prior to building permit issuance.
httpa/www.energvstar.gov/index.cfm?c=evaluate performance bus portfoliomanager rate
3. Residential renovations over 250 sf and over $100,000 in valuation are January 1, 2011
required to receive an Home Energy Rating System (HERS II) rating prior to
building permit issuance.
httpa/www.energv.ca.gov/HERS/index.html
4. Applicant with mandatory green building requirements has the option to January 1, 2010
achieve verification by the City of Palo Alto OR the respective rating system
LEED, BIG GPR ,
5. Large commercial renovations have mandatory green building requirements January 1, 2010
based on the sco a of the ro'ect, rather than valuation.
6. Residential additions and rebuilds greater than 1,250 sf have the option to January 1, 2011
achieve 50 point under the Build It Green, Green Point Rated System OR
achieve performance 15% beyond the California Energy Code, Title 24 Part 6
and et a HERS II ratin .
"This table should only be used as a summary. The attached tables show the changes as approved in more detail and as
enforceable.
Palo Alto Green Building
Website: httpai/vdww.cityofpaloalto.org/depts/pln/green buildingidefautt.asp
Email: greenbuilding(a~cityofpalcalto.com
Phone: 650.329.2189
2-20
On October 19, 2009 the Palo Alto City Council passed revisions to the 2008 Green
Building Ordinance and Energy Efficiency Ordinance.
n
~ n, a a ~ ? ~ y w ~°
~ U U U ~ ~ ~ y yam- °v
raj O O O °c ~
• ~ ° c. ~ n n o
' p„ O
~ q N a
~~
w U
f~ U
W U
W Q 3 ~
~ ~
~ o
u 3 0
~
n
\/ ~ r~~,,
r
\J U •~ _
(~ C w Q Q ~ ~ •y ~ O
*
F
C a
O
C
U
'^
y ~--~
` F U
U>
O
0
N
O
C
w
~
y a~ ~ ti [
7 U
C. o C
v G
n U ~+
t o n
~
C ^U U
.. vi
~ U7 y O' U U .. E O C
L:
v ~ U U
U~ U ~O O ~ a n¢ U i U .^.
w
~
L
yy
_
~
c
~
b U
~°
C
c~ o
y
T
,~
w
~~ GQ >,~
>
CO •= O ' j C U C C U U D
~ U a ° n w ~
Chi L~ N ~"' r1' Z Z o v
O c. w
w h
:Zj
Q n '
- ~ U ~ o ~_
O a c o ~ ~° U ~ o `~
O _. a •
.
/
° ~, °
_ ~ >, a o c >, F
~ ~
' ,
,
U Ll ~ .o r ` o .~ o Q n U a
a C ~ v >, n ~~ ~ U a P c ~'
C U n 4 ^n E ~ U U O
,~ y abi O U- F q U •7 'o v ~o ~ ~ ~
_ ~ e~ ~ U 'o n ~ ~ o ~ •:
, b
b U
_ y U U
~ V] ~ ~ U U ~ w j w0 p •D U ~ yi Op ~ ~ ti U
~
~ Q (~ b Q Q b on n P
" U c o `c' ~ c y y
~ v ~ ~
C W W~ W W 5 y
. .
>
D O ~ 'ti E C Ca o 'o C
E
W W O W W ~ 4 ~- ~ c °' n °' n ~.l ~ .. U
n
~
~ .Y
~
U
a
.-.
O
;D C
.. C ~ =
_ X
'D U 00 ~'
a O >' 00 O U V a a
~ F- ^
ay+ O U U y
U
n
• U ~ r ~ n n ^ o o ~u w
C w a ~ y
~ P a ~ ~ c ~ m
~ _ ~ ,~
Q Q Q ~ ~ ~ °
` o n
w o° Q
~ Q 5
E ~ o °~ ~ ~ U
a > i
c
~
WD U U U U
7, ~ .D
U a; a °
>, °
~ o ..
ih oo
^
E n ~
>,
~ 0.l G~ Ga W cU 'o o U •~ - c o c U^ ~ ~ y o ^
n a
a '
ai Or ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W o o E v o• a ? o o ~ ~ 8 7
~ ~ h
^ ~3 ° ~ c `c. ~ m o v
° ~ v _
o °. o ° ~° o
~ - o
,, v ~ ~ ~
c° .
X 0 0 ~ b c .. T w c n o _~ V ~ y v n o ~ `
c'd O O cd c - n :c n v c
v' y C oq 3
y w
..+ o c .. .-.
o •3 U
a o Q o rn ° m
y ~ ° n~
-•~
u
~
o
O ti
~ :b
^
m C h
r
._ cyni o
U
~¢
^
'~
U~
2 .-
y b
h o
r
w v
~•
U
u
3 ~
G y m
o ti m ~
~
a
,
bn `" O s-' O b ~ o F a n ~ c ~n .ti > kC o -^ _ c U
C
V V1 `~ ~ [~ > O rn h :-' a ° P. ^
C' y a''O ° n n U DD
b b ~~ r r O ~ a ~°. .".. _ ~ o ~ 3 o ,
v U p b ° co. v U °
O bA `*' UO o a~ >, >, ~ cs c". ~ .D ~ ' .= o >- ~ 3 ° -~ ~ en, ,~ •D -° ~,
~ o ~ aqi U bq ti N .`-' o Ca ~ ~ ~ ~ °~ ~ ¢ q
~ C7 0 ~
u a ~'
~ ~ U ~ •
o
/~ I °~ ~
~ C F U ~ ~ = t-] U v c, c, 7 ¢ ° F" U c:1 h c F' c~
n I a~ . C c
~
^ ^
O r N O
j U v C
.
O v~ .
.
O .-.
C ~
c
O> -o N C O w
~ U CQ s-. C~ .
.
o
'~, ~ o
~ >~ •3
O r~
~
v ~ 0 o a
y, c3
~ ~;=
x r
U ^ = a
L ~
°
h >
o
, p,
~ w
'~w`, 0 ~ O '~ ~ ~O h .^' CJ
~ = d'O ~y u ~ C V
O C1 O
7~. U b0 U Cq ~~~ y ~ b
>~, u ~' n O A i U o o d ~'
.
.
~ ~
Z O o U ~
H ~ C3 U •
.
~ O O
3
~ ti . ~
• V ,' 'C. ~ ~
i
~ ~
~ >, pp
i~ a
' c
CL
>' .'-'.
~ : r
N ~ O z Oz
n
~ O p
~ ~ a U o.^
FL"' ~
C. v
=~ o .
n
~ o
o
~ V
q
oQ. C
a `~ ~
•~ L
~
F c
v~ L . ~ C/~ ~ x ~ U q ~ C7 U .7 ~ q n.
2-21
h
0
Cd
.~i
.~
as
v
L
V
00
L
L
Q
U
U
V
._
..
c
O
V
L
C
V
V
~_
0
u
c
0
.~
0
u
..~+n
a,
c
0
v
a
y
U
y
a
b
U
'~
:e
~.
c~
C.
{~.
Q
0
z
C7
0
RS
0
~i
^O
w
U
"~
~~
0
U
C
na
.~
a
CQ
...i
it
a
Sr
w
V
-:i
a
0
~.
w
y
~,
'O
e~
,aio
M
a
~i.r
V
O
d~
O
a
'err
O
U
e~
CC
E"~
`"
,~
ea
u o ~
a, ~ o c
a ~ ~ ~
~ a ^ ~, ¢
~ ~ o. ~ d'
n.
V W U V~ U U V Q~i U V I-y U ~ C:3 U .`rr CC
~~ U
.
r W
~ Q r
~U~ ~
• v ..~ 'O 1^
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
y
~ .
a
•~ ~ ~y 3 ~ ~, i, '+., 'y ~ ~ ~ ~ N
~ ~~ W ~ c
f w '•x i~ ~
w °
°'
~-~'
~'
C~ W eV
~" oa
,
w V ai
0 O
Z
~- ~
n
,
~
~+ ~ W Q
. Q o
-
~ O
s
. F
F
+ Z
_~
'V ~ O U cc2
•~ O
~ ~ r .~.' ~ L'., ~
O C
Q'
V y O ~ ~ i '~ ~ y0 ~ ~ n
'V ~ti (~'~' ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ l'1
~
O ~
~
~
A ^'
O ~~
~ '-' ~'"'
Q ~
N
C ~~
c N
3. ~~ b ~ y ~ O
y~
~'
~n r."~~
W bA
N _
it ~ '
~
OA "d .; ~Q RS ~ C'3
.'a a Q ~ a: ~ a. °
c 3 b E~ v ~ ~ ~
Q . ~~
~~~
~
I~ .
~
U'1 - w~
U .~-~ ~ .
o ~~
I~ + N .,
o ~~•a ~~3 oW`F'
Vl F"
'~
~
'~"
!~
^
N ,,
~ w~
'T'
U
N
,
+
.+ .
.-
. i-
i .
i
O
N ~
O O
Q
• U
~- f3. ~ C..
O ' ~ ~
CD ~
_ q N
L
°" Q C
w ~ ~ Gi F+
A
°
• O
, ~ -d
U
~ >, Y >, ~ o~ o
Q
Q,
-o ~ ~ a~ v o
y W
h ~ ~
~ ~ ~ o
~ U ~= W
. pa
~ ~
~ a ~~ a ~ ~
~ ~
a., ~ ..
o '" oA ~ W ~
n
~
~
C7 ~ ~
C7
V cn
C7
~ o • ~ o : .
v ~
C n w ~ w
ca
l z oa ~ ~ U O w 0 0~ w¢
U w
'~
Q o ; 0 0 o nl
"d N C x
~^.^ v~ a N
~ O~
.~ .
4, ~ ~~ b
~~ ni ~;
~
ni ~
a
o~ c ti
~ 3 a~
' o
°~ b
'h ~
-~-' ~ o
-o ~
GJ O ar ~ " -
O c3 ~ ti ,~ ~ ^
° nl;~°3 ~~ >' ~ `' ~v
° c° 8 ~
~.
O ~ ~ ~
O v =~-. .n ~ ^; ~^
r
rM ~
~ . C O ~ ~~
~ ~ .-..
~ n I
4r .
.
~ O w
v~
~. ~ j
c
b~ y
H b
b
q
'b O C O N
~' Q~ ~ '~ bA
~ I • ~
~
n GHQ ~ S~." A . ~
N O
r
j
~ i
~ fi _,
~ .,
n
~ y ~ ~
~ .
~+
~ .
w Rj m ~ ..O O
Q • ~ ~
.
r ,
.+ . ,
~«. ~
~;,
3 o ^ .~ ~
~ 000 ~ o ~ o
~ ~o ce
w
3
N ~ ~ o
-
°
. o
o
2-ZZ
b=~
O
y
~ C E;, h
OD ~
cD N
'."'
U
Ty U C O t T ._.
p~ h~ ' A C 0. ~ ~ F V C 'O
'n a a p 9 . o n o µ;
w U
C h
C
~
G a :: a
y
~
~
vi U
O Ca - ~ cu ° - b
~ o -o ~
3 3 > V
U
~
'
U a, v o ~ a h s ~ ~ ~? ^
g ~ ~~
c ~ ~ N c q E o o ~ e Q 4°.
F- ~ ~ g h O ~ 'v v `~ ° ~
~ O ' U T ~ ~ h h iy C~ ~ ~ G U
.
a
o ~ ~ " o' U ~ °° ~ yo v 'D y v v
a s . o ~~ ~ ~ n .~'=
~ ~
~ ~
~
~°
t .a
y ~
~-° o
.x
b o ~
D b
F~ O~
U ~ - > >>
~ h y~
. U ~
~
` U
° ~
C 7 ~ ~
^ h ^ ~ a y a
O O:
F,
. ? h~ U .b C On O .b
°
.o
o
°~
~
~
o
~
~
ao V
a ~ ^
h o '~
~
n
~ ~ °
c o o
~
c~
° U
~~
o_
~"
o
U
, ~ 3
~ ~ - o c o c
> o - n. a ~ ~
n c
O
U U in
Y G
U h
C
U y y U
~ 'O '.~
„ a
h t~,
.-J w () U
y
a
`~ ~ C~ -' v' y
n O
'O = h
y p G
O y G i U
"~. C U
U O
n h
?0 'O
oD U
v G _ U C` c~ O . h O
w O '
Woi h U
~ ~' U vOi
~ v r cU3
o
~' y> 'v
a' a? U
~ sh- h ~/
cw G W ~
U v U
c~ c ~
a
~
_
7+ y- w y U C' n' C O' h O ~' Uo
~ ? ~>~
U h
_
U C n
n 0
n O~
O y
~ U ."
.a ..
c ~
O
T Q U O
U ~
j U
y
a C
G
U~ _
W b F~
'
y
~ U~ y
,
w '-J. O
4' w
O U
C
=
U U [~ -~
J ~
j 0 U 0 D
3
'" O ~ V
.
-
~
a .j
~ C
in ~
y~ v
G C>
C
u y ~J^ w
=
~ U W ? o
y
- ~ ~ o n d •-~ ~ y hcn U n '- = r n -
~
y ~~ rJ
C G a0 n~ y C .a.
¢ ~ F ..~., U ~ U ~ C U
~0 c» c
J y U C U V] y
y _~ "U' ~'~ C C O w N h
~ -°
~ o
~ E
y~~ i
o n 3~ U W ~
E
~ fUi °~ N -
o n u
v '9
~ ~
° c .
~ o o ~
a
O h m c= c
W
~ " ~~ ~
o •- ~ o
a ..y
-°
o~ c o
> K
~
c >, o ~
._ co
~
° c a h
c
v>~
U on
5
~ -n. >o w .~
^ p O `~
~ O Q v '^ -u U n ;.o p .cj
~ ° h O W .a
,
=
3 ~ U
U U] ~ w ~ U ~ ~
W y a h ~
q ~ ~ ~ F Y
ra ~~ w. O C O G ..
n y . h Ca E O Q C U y C
~ ° ~ `~ a ~ °' ~ ~ ° = '- ~ h o o o
a
~ ° 3
U v
w a0 y n O id
n C a o~ E ~
~ ~~ N o C c
o
D c,7
~ p >+
. p
O o p ~
T~
U -
.
a o _ O
d y
h o ~ ~
chi '
~
>
~ m o o
_
r
y~ j C
D>~
> F
3~
L; O~
~
~. a O ~
y y
~. ^ V -_
V C
O
, V n~ ~ rn
, r F ,'.' U~ V~ V O V] C S T ~ 0 U G ~ ~D >O
U ^
o ~ a ~ W ~.°~ U E c, a ~:;0 U x'oN c ~ F-vO F ~'
T
.D
l7
`
n
N
U C
0
u
i7.
Q = O
U ~ ~ U
~
U i
:Q
U
i
C
•
p ~ O L 7 U
-Vi u ~ E y
~ CD O
a L' ~ u ~ a~ G v
U o 2 U 'a ~ '~
.~. U ra a
° G O
~
^ y/ fL W o
c ~ a Y m .
~
. a ~ .fl on
~ ~ ~ x ~ ~ A n v x z ° ~ z
2-23