Worried About a Greener Economy, Council Sends Back Green Building Ordinance

A proposed “green building ordinance” that was stronger than state standards for ecologically responsible building proved too aggressive in light of the economy for Cupertino City Council members Tuesday night, who said they wanted a scaled-back version to vote on later.

The council voted 3-2 to send the ordinance back to staff to dial back some of the requirements that would have required developers and homeowners to pay for a greater number of green building materials and methods, as well as higher plan check fees to the city.

“Yes, this council is very forthcoming in supporting green sustainability here in Cupertino, but our concern is … how can we be a green city and also how can we balance economics with environmental concerns,” said Mayor Gilbert Wong.

The council heard from real estate and building professionals who said the proposed ordinance would go too far above the state’s Cal Green building code that went into effect Jan. 1. The new code requires builders to use “green” materials and building methods, and promote energy, water and resource efficiency.

“Your proposed ordinance is totally out of sight,” said Myron Crawford from the building firm of Berg and Berg. “It is a bad thing to do to put this through."

A representative from the Silicon Valley Association of Realtors told the council, “It’s the most aggressive ordinance we’ve seen” among local cities.

New homeowner Ricky Shen, who said he wants to add 1,000 square feet to the 814-square-foot home he purchased, said the ordinance would “make my project impossible for the next three years.” He said he received an estimate that the proposed rules would add $50,000-$60,000 in added expenses.

One major concern was how many “points” builders would need to accumulate for their projects, using two rating systems: LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), developed by the U.S. Green Building Council, and GPR (Green Point Rated), developed by an organization called Build It Green.

Under the proposed ordinance, a builder would need to show that a project was using enough sustainable products and practices to equal 85 points on the rating scale. An alternate plan, called the Phase II Recommendations, would only require 50 points.

A comparison of three local cities provided by Cupertino staff showed that Palo Alto, Sunnyvale and Morgan Hill all require 70 points.

There was almost no support on the council for 85 points; most members seemed more comfortable with requiring closer to 50 points.

Another major issue was the addition of deposits and verification fees that would be on top of fees builders already have to pay to the city.

There are two types of verification—formal and informal. Formal verification would require seeking an official LEED or GPR certification. Informal verification would require a consultant verifying that a project meets certain green building standards 

For example, a single-family home project seeking formal verification would require a $2-per-square-foot deposit, up to $2,000. The money would go toward paying a consultant who would make the certification. Informal verification would require a $900 deposit; that money would be returned once verification is made.

For commercial projects, it would cost a developer $70,000-$150,000 for a formal verification deposit. The deposit for informal verification would be $1,500.

A consultant hired by the city to help craft the ordinance, Walker Wells, showed the council figures that showed a savings over time in energy and water costs when green building materials and methods are used. He also noted that there is an overall environmental benefit to the community and world when green standards are followed.

Former planning Commissioner David Kaneda, one of three out of five commissioners who voted in favor of the ordinance in November, encouraged the council to “take on a leadership role” and pass the Green Building Ordinance as proposed.

Despite the recommendations to pass it as is, Wong and two council members, Orrin Mahoney and Kris Wang, voted to send the ordinance back to staff to be scaled back. Councilman Mark Santoro wanted the council, not staff, to make the tweaks. He was joined in voting “no” by Barry Chang.

There was no date set on when the matter would come back for a vote.