Loading...
109-H. October 26, 2010 Planning Commission staff report.pdfATTACHMENT H OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CITY HALL 10300 TORRE AVENUE • CUPERTINO, CA 95014-3255 (408) 777-3308 • FAX (408) 777-3333 • planning@cuperdmo.om PLANNING I I T Agenda Item No. Agenda Date: October 26, 2010 Application: MCA-2010-04 Applicant: City of Cupertino Location: Citywide APPLICATION SUMMARY Municipal Code Amendment to adopt a Green Building Ordinance (Continued from October 12, 2010) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the proposed draft Green Building Ordinance in accordance with the Model Ordinance (See Attachment 1) with additional changes as recommended by the Commission. BACKGROUND On October 12, 2010, the Planning Commission reviewed the draft ordinance (See Attachment 2, October 12 staff report) and conducted the public hearing. The Commission discussed various components of the draft ordinance, including the threshold levels for new construction and renovations/additions, verification options, LEED EBOM (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design for Existing Buildings: Operations and Maintenance) and incentives. The Commission recommended that staff provide additional information and responses to questions that were raised, and continued the public hearing to October 26, 2010. DISCUSSION A summary of the Commission's comments and questions are provided below with additional information and responses provided by staff and the consultant. Responses are provided in italics. Also, each section (as applicable) has a recommendation on changes to the draft ordinance for the Planning Commissions consideration. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 2 Planning Commission Comments/Questions on Reference Standards 1. How are points accumulated for higher density/smaller unit buildings? Points in the rating systems are accumulated per the GPR checklists for single-family residential and multiple family residential projects. You may access these checklists on Build It Green's website at www.builditgreen.org/guidelines--checklists. In terms of the benefit that density provides, for example, a project of over 15 units per acre would get 10 points in the multi family rating system. Being close to transit and services provides another 3 points. And multi family units are inherently more energy efficient than a single-family house, so they would likely earn approximately 10 additional points in the energy category. 2. Provide more information about LEED EBOM (LEED for Existing Buildings: Operations and Maintenance) (See Attachment 3 for more details on LEED EBOM), and clarify what the difference is between EBOM and other certifications, and what the benefits are to allow Us (tenant improvements) in an EBOM certified building without separate certifications for each TI project. Are the certification costs the same or different than other LEED certification costs? LEED for Existing Buildings: Operation and Maintenance is a rating system specifically developed for buildings that are already built and, in most instances pre -date the LEED rating system. The focus of LEED EBOM is putting in place practices and procedures to meet the goals of the LEED rating system, which are to reduce resource consumption and provide healthy working and living environments. In comparison, the LEED rating systems for Building Design and Construction, Commercial Interiors, and Core and Shell are focused on the selection of design strategies, buildings systems, and materials that will achieve the same goals, once the building is completed and placed in service. To earn a LEED EBOM certification a project must have at least one year of operation data, which is used to establish performance benchmarks against which prerequisites and credits are measured. The LEED EBOM certification is valid for a five-year period. Key parts of LEED EBOM are establishing procedures for reducing energy and water use in existing buildings through systems upgrades and fixture replacement. An optional credit (Materials and Resources Credit 3) specifically addresses tenant improvements by requiring that owners establish tenant improvement standards and criteria that are consistent with LEED criteria. Any future tenant improvement projects must be consistent with these standards and criteria for the building to maintain its LEED EBOM certification. The benefit of allowing building owners to conduct a LEED EBOM precertification is that the owner would be reducing the impact of the entire project, not just the area of individual tenant improvements. This approach is also more comprehensive than the piecemeal approach of addressing individual tenant improvements over multiple years. The costs for LEED EBOM are slightly lower than for LEED for New Construction or Commercial Interiors. The main savings is in the certification fees from GBCI (Green Building Certification Institute is the certification organization under the U.S. Green Building Council for LEED). For example a 50,000 square foot new construction project would be charged $2,000, while the same building in EBOM would be charged $1,500. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 3 3. What is the flow chart difference if a development went through LEED exterior versus LEED EBOM? Informal Certification The development process for a LEED New Construction project involves the following: a) submit LEED checklist with building permit application, c) submit green review fee, d) drawings and LEED checklist reviewed by City consultant, e) project determined to meet the intent of the applicable LEED rating system, fl building permit issued, g) project built per the construction documents and consistent with the LEED checklist, g) conduct commissioning during and at the completion of the construction process (LEED prerequisites and required by Cal Green for projects over 10,000 sq. ft.), h) receive permit "final" and certificate of occupancy. The City inspectors could check that the built project is consistent with the plans, as they could for all of the City Determination projects. Formal Certi 'cation The development process for a LEED New Construction project involves the following: a) register the project with GBCI, b) submit registration and LEED checklist with building permit application, c) submit refundable deposit, d) building permit issued, e) build the project per the construction documents and consistent with the LEED checklist, J) conduct commissioning during and at the completion of the construction process, g) receive permit "final" and temporary certificate of occupancy, h) complete and submit LEED certification, i) receive certification, j) release of refundable deposit. EBOM Precertiflcation for Tenant Improvement Projects The EBOM process involves the following: a) include evidence of active EBOM certification with building permit application and demonstrate that the proposed TI is consistent with the TI standards established in the EBOM certification, b) building permit issued, c) TI inspected by City staff at final permit/Certificate of Occupancy issued. The City inspectors could check that the built project is consistent with the plans, as they could for all of the City Determination projects. Staff Recommendation on Reference Standards Staff recommends providing LEED EBOM as an alternative to LEED requirements for renovations/additions with Informal Verification. The LEED EBOM requirement can be achieved at the same levels as the LEED requirements (e.g. LEED EBOM Certified, etc.). On Alternate Reference Standards (Section 19.78.050), the draft ordinance clarifies that the decision maker of the application will determine whether a project may use an alternate reference standard that is equivalent to the minimum or exemplary standards per the requirement chart in Section 19.78.060. This was not clarified in the draft ordinance the Commission reviewed on October 12. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 4 Planning Commission Comments on Residential New Construction 1. Consider a threshold level based upon the square footage for residential projects and require additional points for homes over a certain size since larger homes have the potential to create greater greenhouse gas impacts than smaller homes. 2. Consider using one rating system (i.e., Green Point Rated) and a uniform point requirement to simplify the requirements. Staff Recommendation for Residential New Construction: In response to the Commissions request, staff suggests using the following thresholds for new residential construction: • Single-family homes (R-1, RHS and A-1 zones) - require 75 GPR points for homes or projects with an average home size of 5 2,500 square feet and 100 GPR points for homes > homes or projects with an average home size of 2,500 square feet. • Multi -family homes - require 75 GPR points for projects with an average unit size of S 800 square feet and 100 GPR points for units > 800 square feet. For multi -family projects with multiple units, the requirement will be based upon the average size of the units in the project. • This system would not use a threshold based on the number of units in a project. • Continue to provide flexibility of either the GPR or LEED standard. As shown in Attachment 4, three cities in Santa Clara County (Morgan Hill, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale) use tiers/thresholds based on square footage. Thresholds used by cities range from 1,500 square feet to 2,550 square feet. Palo Alto and Morgan Hill also include a tiered system that requires an additional point for every 70 square feet over the square footage threshold. GPR uses a threshold of 1,850 square feet for 3 bedroom homes and 2,600 square feet for 4 bedroom homes. GPR grants an additional point or two for homes that fall below these thresholds. Staff suggests a threshold system similar to Sunnyvale's to keep the process simple. The unit sizes suggested by staff are based on the typical size of a single-family home and a multi -family, two -bedroom apartment. Planning Commission Comments on Non-residential New Construction 1. Lower the threshold level to 25,000 square feet versus 50,000 square feet for the higher certification requirements. Modify the table to show projects with >_ 10,000 square feet - 25,000 square feet as a mid -size project, and all projects over 25,000 square feet as a large project. 2. Provide the % of recent new constructions in the City above and below 25,000 square feet in size. The Commission felt that the draft ordinance threshold of 50,000 square feet was too high and would not capture a significant number of buildings that could considerably add to the green house gas impacts in the region. Attachment 5 provides MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 5 data over the past five years and indicates that about 31 % of new construction projects are above 25,000 square feet and 21 % are above 50,000 square feet. 3. Consider Formal Verification requirement only for the projects over 50,000 square feet; consider Informal Verification requirement for all other projects (this was one Commissioner's suggestion). 4. Consider Formal Verification requirement for all new construction projects; not comfortable with the Informal Verification for new construction projects (this was one Commissioner's suggestion). 5. Consider Informal Verification for all projects; start at the lower level requirements that the Informal Verification offers rather than the mandatory requirements of Formal Verification (this was one Commissioner's suggestion). Staff Recommendation forNon-ResidentialNew Construction: Based on the Commissions comments, staff is suggesting the following changes to the draft ordinance: • Reduce thresholds for non-residential new construction to 25,000 square feet. Based on this change, non-residential new construction projects < 10,000 square feet would require CALGreen Mandatory, >_ 10,000 - 25,000 square feet would require LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Certification, and >25,000 square feet would require LEED Silver certification. • Require Formal Verification requirement for new construction projects above 50,000 square feet. Planning Commission Comments on Non-residential Renovations/Additions 1. Consider lowering the square footage threshold for non-residential renovations/ additions to 10,000 square feet (rather than the previously proposed 25,000 square feet) to capture renovation/addition projects that could considerably add to green house gas impacts and to be consistent with the Phase II recommendations 2. For the threshold of three out of four building systems, require that one shall be the HVAC system. 3. Provide the % of commercial TIs below and above 25,000 square feet. Attachment 6 provides data over the past five years and indicates that about 12 % of renovations/additions are above 25,000 square feet and 7% are above 50,000 square feet. The data does not provide details on building systems involved in the renovations/additions. 4. Consider Informal Verification requirement for all renovation projects. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 PaLre 6 Staff Recommendation for Non -Residential Renovations/Additions: Based on the Commissions comments, staff is suggesting the following changes to the draft ordinance: • Reduce threshold to 10,000 square feet as recommended by the Commission. Based on this change, non-residential minor renovations/ additions would require CALGreen Mandatory, and non-residential major renovations/additions (over 50% of total existing floor area, and at least 10,000 square feet of renovation/ addition, and replacement or alteration of the HVAC system and two of the following: building envelope, hot water system, or lighting system) would require LEED Certified. • For building systems, require that for three out of four systems, one shall be the HVAC system. • Require Informal Certification for all renovations/additions. Planning Commission Comments on Scope and Applicability: 1. Consider providing a grace period of either 3 months or 6 months for the effective date after adoption of the ordinance. 2. No exemptions from the ordinance for planning projects that have received entitlements, since such projects would not be exempt from the upcoming Cal Green building codes. Staff Recommendation on Scope and Applicability: Based on the Commissions comments, staff is suggesting the following changes to the draft ordinance: • Consider the effective date to be 30 days from the adoption of the ordinance, but provide language in the ordinance that says the ordinance requirements on building permits will not become effective until six months after adoption of the ordinance. This essentially shortens the time frame for anyone to mount legal challenges to the ordinance to 30 days, and still allows for the "grace period" of six months from the date of adoption before the ordinance takes effect on building permit submittals. Staff feels that a six month period will allow applicants adequate time to prepare building permit documents after being notified of the new ordinance requirements. • Do not provide exemptions from the ordinance for previously approved planning projects that submit for building permits after the effective date of the ordinance. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 7 Planning Commission Comments on Verification 1. The verification process should be streamlined and should not add building permit plan check or construction time due to a required certification. Staff Recommendation on Streamlining the Verification Process: Based on the Commissions comments, staff is suggesting the following change to the draft ordinance: • For projects that require Formal Certification - Grant final building approval/occupancy (instead of temporary occupancy) if all other city requirements have been met except for certification and a Green Building deposit has been paid per ordinance requirements. Planning Commission Comments on Fees & Deposits 1. Consider a Green Building deposit amount similar to the City of San Jose that is least onerous, and allows for flexible methods of deposit such as use of a line of credit rather than bond to fulfill the deposit requirements. Staff Recommendation on Fees/Deposits • Green Building Deposit - Staff is seeking the Planning Commissions guidance on the best approach. The City of San Jose's refundable Green Building deposit is $0.30 per square foot, up to a maximum of $30,000 per building or shell permit. However, it has been found that the deposit amount is less than the cost of certification and is not an incentive to encourage applicants to follow through with certification. The amount recommended in the draft ordinance is higher but commensurate to the cost of certification. Both approaches have their advantages and disadvantages. • Allow for flexible methods of deposit, such as use of a line of credit, or other means as acceptable to the Director of Community Development. Planning Commission comments on Incentives for Exemplary Projects 1. Consider express building plan check processes as an incentive for exemplary standard projects requiring certification. 2. Consider incentives to encourage certification and exemplary projects. 3. For zoning code adjustments to Floor Area Ratio and off-street parking under "Incentives," would this be determined and be decided upon under the public hearings for ASA approval? Staff Recommendation on Exemplary Standards/Incentives • Staff does not recommend offering expedited plan checking as an incentive for exemplary projects, particularly since staff currently makes it a point to move every MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 8 project forward as expeditiously as possible in the interest of providing excellent customer service. Staff also believes it would not send the right message to applicants about the City's customer service if their plans were held back even if their application was submitted earlier. Therefore, staff does not recommend this approach. The City currently offers over-the-counter "express' plan checks for minor projects and five-day "express" plan checks for some smaller projects that do not require extensive review, where applicants pay a higher fee. Such express plan checks will continue to be offered to projects that qualify. • Staff additionally recommends the following changes that have been incorporated into the draft ordinance to clarify the incentives process: o Amend the purpose statement to note that the City wishes to encourage projects that meet or exceed the ordinance requirements o Provide findings for projects to qualify for incentives o Consider a tiered systems for incentives The following section provides additional detail on the changes: • Staff recommends adding the following language to the Purpose and Intent section of the ordinance (Section 19.78.010): "The City also wishes to encourage applicants to voluntarily adopt practices that are more environmentally friendly than the minimum required by this ordinance by providing incentives for such buildings and structures." • Staff recommends adding the following findings in Section 19.78.080 (Voluntary Requirements to Obtain Incentives) to be adopted by the decision maker to clarify when projects may qualify for incentives: Findings: 1. The project greatly exceeds the minimum amounts required to meet the exemplary standards. 2. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding community. 3. The project will greatly advance the goals of this Chapter. 4. The project will serve as a model for future green construction; will be harmonious. 5. The project is consistent with, and will advance the goals of, the General Plan. • Staff recommends adding the following language in Section 19.78.080 (Voluntary Requirements to Obtain Incentives): An applicant for a building permit may voluntarily opt to meet or exceed the exemplary standards, and to fulfill the applicable verification requirements. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 9 A. Automatic Incentives. If the applicant does so, in all cases, the applicant shall obtain a reduction in applicable building permit fees by an amount set by a resolution by the Council as part of the fee schedule. B. Discretionary Incentives (to be granted by the final approval body for the planning application). a. In addition to obtaining the automatic incentive listed above, the applicant can request at the time of the submittal of the planning application that City authorize the issuance Of one (and only one) of the following discretionary incentives: i. A 10 % increase to the maximum floor area ratio (FAR) authorized by the Municipal Code. ii. A 10 % reduction in the amount of off-street parking required by Municipal Code Section 19.100. • Staff is requesting the Planning Commissions preference on Incentives. Alternatives include: o Automatic Incentives ■ Building permit fee reductions (included in the draft ordinance) - Recommended range 2-5%. The amount shall be set by the Council annually based on available funding. OR ■ Matching grants to offset the cost of certification application (based on funding availability) - Recommended amounts - up to $250/single family, $500 for multi -family and $1000 for non-residential. The amount shall be set by the Council annually based on available funding. o Zoning Incentives ■ Increase to maximum floor area ratio (FAR) - Recommended range 5-10% ■ Reduction in amount of off-street parking -Recommended range 5-10 % The draft ordinance includes a 10 % increase/reduction in both cases. MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 10 Comparison Table of the October 12, 2010 Draft Ordinance and Recommended Amendments based on the Planning Commission Discussion Project Type October 12, 2010 Draft Ordinance Recommended Amendments based on PC Discussion Thresholds Verification Thresholds Verification New Construction Single -Family & Multi- < 5 homes Formal Verification Average home size Minimum: Family Residential (Option 1) or 2,500 SF or less, or Informal. • GPR min. 75 pts. Informal Multi -Family Exemplary: Formal or LEED certified Verification homes (all other (Option 2) residential zones) average home size Formal Verification 800 SF or less for Exemplary • GPR min. 75 points or LEED Certified Average home size >_ 5 homes Formal Verification more than 2,500 Minimum: or Informal SF, or Informal. • GPR min. 100 pts. Verification Multi -Family Exemplary: Formal or LEED Silver homes (all other Formal Verification residential zones) for Exemplary average home size more than 800 SF • GPR min. 100 points or LEED Silver Non -Residential < 10,000 SF Informal < 10,000 SF Minimum: Verification . CAL Green Informal. • CALGreen Mandatory Formal Verification Mandatory Exemplary: Formal for Exemplary Formal Verification Minimum: >_ 10,000 — 50,000 SF or Informal 10,000 — 25,000 SF Informal. Verification Exemplary: Formal p • LEED certified Formal Verification . LEED Certified for Exemplary Minimum: 25,001 — 50 000 SF — > 50 000 SF Formal Verification 25,001 or more SF or Informal ' Informal • LEED Silver Verification • LEED Silver Formal Verification 50,001 or more for Exemplary SF — Formal Exemplary: Formal MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 11 Project Type October 12, 2010 Draft Ordinance Recommended Amendments based on PC Discussion Thresholds Verification Thresholds Verification Renovations/Additions Single -Family &Multi- Single-family Informal Single-family. Minimum: family Residential residential >:50% of Verification Renovations and/or Informal. total existing floor additions over areas Exemplary: Formal area Formal Verification that comprise at for Exemplary least 50% of the • CALGreen total existing floor Mandatory area • CALGreen Mandatory Multi -Family (minor Informal Multi family Minimum: renovation) Verification (minor). Informal. Renovations and/or Exemplary: Formal ® CALGreen Formal Verification additions over areas Mandatory (as for Exemplary that comprise at applicable to scope) least 50% of the total existing floor area, but do not meet the higher thresholds for "major renovations and additions" in the cell below. • CALGreen Mandatory Minimum: Multi family Multi-Familymajor (major Formal Verification (major). Informal. renovation) or Informal Verification Renovations and/or Exemplary: Formal additions that • LEED Certified Formal Verification comprise at least for Exemplary 50% of the total existing floor area, are at least 10,000 square feet, and replace or alter the HVAC system and at least two of the following: building envelope, hot water system, and lighting system. • GPR min. 75 pts or LEED Certified or LEED EBOM MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Page 12 Project Type October 12, 2010 Draft Ordinance Recommended Amendments based on PC Discussion Thresholds Verification Thresholds Verification Certified • Alternate Reference Standard per Section 19.78.050 Renovations/Additions, Minor Renovation Informal Minor. Minimum: Non -Residential Verification Renovations and/or Informal. CALGreen additions that do Exemplary: Formal p Mandatory Formal Verification not meet the higher for Exemplary thresholds for "major renovations and additions" in the cell below. • CALGreen Mandatory Major Renovation Formal Verification Major. Minimum: (over 50% of total or Informal Renovations and/or Informal. floor area, and at least Verification additions that Exemplary: Formal 25,000 SF of comprise at least renovation/addition, Formal 50% of the total and replacement or Verification for existing floor area, alteration of 3 of the 4 Exemplary are at least 10,000 following systems: square feet, and HVAC, building replace or alter the envelope, hot water HVAC system and system, or lighting two of the system) following: building envelope, hot water • LEED certified system, and lighting system. • LEED Certified or LEED EBOM Certified • Alternate Reference Standard per Section 19.78.050 MCA-2010-04 Green Building Ordinance October 26, 2010 Paee 13 Environmental Consideration The draft Green Building Ordinance is considered categorically exempt per Section 15308 Class 8 (Actions by Regulatory Agencies for Protection of the Environment) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, no further environmental review is necessary to adopt this ordinance. Next Steps Staff will incorporate the Planning Commissions comments into the draft ordinance. The Planning Commissions recommendation will then be presented to the City Council for a final decision. Prepared by Aki Honda Snelling, AICP, Senior Planner Reviewed by: Approved by: a ao Aarti Shrivastava ity Planner Community Development Director ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 Model Resolution & Model Ordinance Attachment 2 October 12, 2010 Planning Commission staff report Attachment 3 LEED EBOM/LEED Cl Comparison by Global Green Attachment 4 Comparison Table (Sunnyvale, Morgan Hill, Palo Alto) Attachment 5 % of New Construction data over 25,000 SF Attachment 6 % of Tenant Improvement data over 25,000 SF G:\P1anning\PDREPORT\pc MCA reports \ 2010 \MCA-2010-04, Oct. 26.doc