Feb 09, 2022 Planning and Zoning

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:02]

OKAY. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, I APOLOGIZE.

TIME GOT AWAY FROM ME THERE.

[2. Roll Call NOTE: One or more Commission Members may be in attendance telephonically or by other technological means. DAVID ZIMMERMAN, CHAIR MARIE JONES, VICE CHAIR DR. RICARDO GUTHRIE CAROLE MANDINO DR. ALEX MARTINEZ DR. ERIC NOLAN LLOYD PAUL ]

PLEASE WAIT FOR THE CHAIR TO CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE TIME THE ITEM IS HEARD.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? I DO NOT SEE, SEE ANY.

THANK YOU. THAT BRINGS US TO APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE REGULAR MEETING ON JANUARY

[4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of the minutes from the regular meeting on January 26, 2022]

DO I HEAR A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? DAVE, ALEX MARTINEZ I MAKE A MOTION APPROVE THE MINUTES.

OK, I HAVE A MOTION, OK.

I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION THIS IS CAROLE MANDINO.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, TO APPROVE ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED. BEING NO OPPOSITION, THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2022 ARE APPROVED.

[A. PZ-21-00282: A request by the City of Flagstaff for a Zoning Code Text Amendment to modify the existing Residential Sustainable Building Standards (Division 10-30.70). STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the required findings, make a recommendation to the City Council for approval of the Zoning Code Text Amendment.]

A REQUEST BY THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF FOR A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS.

DO WE HAVE A PRESENTATION FROM THE STAFF? HI THERE, CHAIR ZIMMERMAN AND THE COMMISSION.

THIS IS JENNY NIEMANN WITH THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICE, AND I WILL BE PRESENTING TODAY WITH TIFFANY ANTOL.

Y'ALL HEARD FROM TIFFANY TWO WEEKS AGO, AND SO TODAY I'M GOING TO START US OFF.

I HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION.

IT'S FAIRLY SIMILAR TO LAST WEEK'S, AND THEN TIFFANY WILL END US WITH OUR PROCESS FOR GOING FORWARD. SO AS CHAIR ZIMMERMAN SAID, I AM HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT AN AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE SECTION 10 30 70, WHICH IS KNOWN AS THE RESIDENTIAL SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS. THESE STANDARDS ARE ACTUALLY REALLY AN INCENTIVE WHERE DEVELOPERS OF NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS CAN EARN A DENSITY INCREASE ON THEIR PROPERTY, A DENSITY BONUS IF THEY COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE INCENTIVE.

THIS TODAY CAN GO UP TO A 25 PERCENT DENSITY INCREASE.

THE INCENTIVE REQUIREMENTS FALL INTO FOUR CATEGORIES.

THEY ARE WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION, TRANSPORTATION, AIR QUALITY, WASTE AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY. THIS IS WHERE MOST ENERGY EFFICIENCY IS THE SORT OF BIGGEST REQUIREMENT OF TODAY'S INCENTIVE, AND IT REQUIRES ALL BUILDINGS TO ACHIEVE A HERS 50 RATING, THE HERS 50 RATING HER SYSTEM IS A SYSTEM THAT RANKS BUILDINGS ONE TO 100 BASED ON THEIR ENERGY USE, WHERE 100 IS A STANDARD BUILDING.

SO IN TERMS OF MOTIVATION FOR CHANGE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY SEVERAL DIFFERENT REASONS WE WANTED TO CHANGE THE STANDARD.

FIRST OF ALL, THE BUILDING CODE HAS CAUGHT UP WITH SOME OF THE INCENTIVE REQUIREMENTS.

ON TRANSPORTATION THE BUILDING CODE SINCE 2019 HAS REQUIRED EV READINESS, WHICH REALLY MEANS JUST THE CONDUIT AND THE PANEL CAPACITY FOR FUTURE ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING.

THAT WAS ALSO IN THE STANDARD OR IS IN THE STANDARD AS IT EXISTS TODAY.

[00:05:03]

SO IT'S NOT A VERY BIG LEAP TO GET FROM 61 TO HERS 50.

THE INCENTIVE ALSO HASN'T BEEN COMMONLY USED.

WE'VE SEEN A LITTLE BIT MORE USE OF IT RECENTLY, BUT IT HASN'T BEEN PARTICULARLY SUCCESSFUL IN TERMS OF GETTING BOTH MORE SUSTAINABLE BUILDINGS ONTO THE MARKET, AND IT ALSO CONFLICTED WITH THE INCENTIVE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THIS IS BECAUSE, IN SOME WAYS, BECAUSE THIS INCENTIVE WAS EASIER TO GET.

IT MEANT THAT THE INCENTIVE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS MUCH LESS LIKELY TO BE USED.

WELL, IN TERMS OF OUR PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE STANDARD, WE'RE FIRST REMOVING THE HERS 50 REQUIREMENT AND WE'RE REPLACING IT WITH A REQUIREMENT FOR ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDINGS.

THERE'S THREE DIFFERENT ENERGY EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE ALL THIRD PARTY THAT THE BUILDING CAN ACHIEVE.

WE SEE THE ALL THREE OF THESE AS MORE APPLICABLE AND SORT OF MORE STRINGENT STANDARD.

WE WILL ALSO BE INCORPORATING ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT PROVISIONS.

THIS IS SORT OF THE FEDERAL TERM FOR JUST ACTUALLY INSTALLED EV CHARGING.

WE WILL REVISE THE WASTE REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS AND ALLOW THE PLANNING DIRECTOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND THIS IS REALLY JUST ABOUT THE EXECUTION OF HOW THIS HAPPENS.

SO THE FIRST WE HAVE UPDATED THE PURPOSE TO REMOVE THE REFERENCES TO THE HERS 50 STANDARD AND ALIGN IT WITH OUR PROPOSED REVISIONS.

IN TERMS OF THE DENSITY BONUS BEFORE YOU COULD MAKE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS IN THE DEVELOPMENT, COMPLY WITH THIS AND THEN GET A CORRESPONDING DENSITY BONUS.

WE'VE REVISED THAT, SO IT JUST NEEDS TO BE THE WHOLE PROPERTY.

IT MAKES SENSE TO THE ENTIRE PROPERTY WOULD BE TAKING THESE STEPS AND SO THAT WILL HELP THE DEVELOPMENT TO ACHIEVE OR MEAN THAT DEVELOPMENT ACHIEVES THE FULL 25 PERCENT DENSITY INCREASE. WE'RE ESSENTIALLY NOT GOING WITH INCREMENTS ANY LONGER.

WE'RE ALSO DELETING THE TABLE THAT TALKED ABOUT SORT OF THAT PERCENTAGE OF UNITS AND THEN THE CORRESPONDING DENSITY BONUS.

IN TERMS OF OUR MINIMUM STANDARDS, SO THE WAY THAT THIS ZONING CODE TAX IS STRUCTURED, IT SETS MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR THE FIRST THREE CATEGORIES.

SO WATER RESOURCE PROTECTION, WE UPDATED THIS JUST TO TALK ABOUT ALL BUILDINGS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT. WE DIDN'T REALLY DO ANY OTHER SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THIS.

TRANSPORTATION AND AIR QUALITY.

WE THERE USED TO BE THREE REQUIREMENTS HERE.

IT WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF A TRANSIT STOP LOCATED WITHIN A QUARTER MILE OF A FOOTS TRAIL AND EV READY.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, WE'RE CHANGING EV READY TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE EV CHARGING STATIONS AND WE'VE REMOVED THE PROXIMITY TO A FOOTS TRAIL.

THE REASON IS IS BECAUSE PROXIMITY TO A FOOTS TRAIL DOESN'T EXACTLY ISN'T A REALLY GOOD METRIC FOR WHERE WE WANT DEVELOPMENT TO BE, MAINLY BECAUSE OUR FOOTS TRAILS ARE PROLIFIC IN THE COMMUNITY, RIGHT.

AND EVERYWHERE. BUT THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT IT PROVIDES GOOD TRANSPORTATION AMENITIES BEYOND JUST THAT FOOTS TRAIL, AND THAT FOOTS TRAIL MAY ACTUALLY BE MORE RECREATIONAL IN NATURE.

AND SO WE TALKED WITH MARTIN [INAUDIBLE] THE MULTIMODAL PLANNER AND DECIDED TO GO WITH THESE TWO OPTIONS, SO ESSENTIALLY TRANSIT OR EV CHARGING STATIONS.

AND THEN FINALLY, THE WASTE REDUCTION AND MANAGEMENT PROVISIONS WE'VE REVISED TO REALLY JUST CLEAN THEM UP AND REQUIRE A MATERIALS MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SORT OF THE OPERATIONS OF THE BUILDING ONCE IT'S CONSTRUCTED, MAKING SURE THAT CERTAIN MATERIALS WILL BE RECYCLED AND THEN A CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN, WHICH REALLY MANAGES WASTE DURING CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION IF THERE IS DEMOLITION.

ENERGY EFFICIENCY, AS WE SAID, IS SORT OF THE CORE OF THIS REQUIREMENT, AND NOW WE ARE PROVIDING THREE OPTIONS.

SO ONE, THE THING THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IS THAT WE ARE REQUIRING THE BUILDINGS TO BE ALL ELECTRIC.

THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO THE CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN AND THE CITY COUNCIL'S CLIMATE GOALS. THIS IS BECAUSE ALL ELECTRIC BUILDINGS PROVIDE THE ABILITY FOR THAT BUILDING TO ESSENTIALLY BECOME A 100 PERCENT CARBON FREE BUILDING FOR ITS ENERGY SOURCES AS OUR ELECTRIC GRID BECOMES GREENER.

OUR ELECTRIC GRID WILL BECOME 100 PERCENT CARBON FREE BY 2050.

AND SO IT'S A REALLY EXCITING OPPORTUNITY TO TRANSITION OUR BUILDINGS TO RELYING COMPLETELY ON ELECTRICITY.

[00:10:02]

MANY, MUCH OF THE TIME FOR BUILDINGS TO TODAY IN FLAGSTAFF BE BUILT ALL ELECTRIC STANDARDS, AND WE ARE SEEING MORE AND MORE HOMES IN FLAGSTAFF GOING ELECTRIC ON THEIR OWN. AND SO THAT IS REQUIRED FOR ALL THREE OF THESE OPTIONS UNDER ENERGY.

SO THE FIRST OPTION IS ALL ELECTRIC AND A ZERO ENERGY BUILDING.

ZERO ENERGY BUILDING IS DEFINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AS A BUILDING THAT ESSENTIALLY CREATES AS MUCH ENERGY AS IT CONSUMES.

AND SO THAT WOULD BE A THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATION.

THERE ARE MANY, MANY ORGANIZATIONS THAT CERTIFY BUILDINGS TO BE ZERO ENERGY, OR SOMETIMES IT'S CALLED NET ZERO ENERGY.

ALL ELECTRIC ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILDING.

SO THIS IS CERTIFIED TO THE BRONZE LEVEL OF THE NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD.

THAT'S A THIRD PARTY SORT OF CERTIFICATION THAT BUILDINGS CAN GET.

IT ALSO WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED TO ACHIEVE ENERGY EFFICIENCY THAT'S EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN A 15 PERCENT IMPROVEMENT OVER OUR CURRENT CODE.

AND IT DOES ALLOW A SMALL EXCEPTION JUST FOR ALL ELECTRIC FOR GAS FIREPLACES IN COMMON AREAS. THIS WOULD NEED TO BE APPROVED BY THE SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR, AND THAT'S JUST SORT OF AN EXAMPLE. ONE.

WE JUST NOTICED THAT DEVELOP ONE DEVELOPER LIKE I SAID, THIS IS DEEPLY IMPORTANT TO US AND YOU KNOW, IT'S THE EMISSIONS FROM THOSE APPLIANCES ARE NOT SUBSTANTIAL, AND WE WOULD LOOK FOR THE DEVELOPER TO SAY THAT.

FINALLY, THE THIRD OPTION IS TRIPLE CERTIFICATION, ESSENTIALLY THROUGH THE EPA.

SO THIS IS CERTIFICATION ENERGY STAR CERTIFICATION, WHICH IS AN INCREDIBLY COMMON CERTIFICATION. INDOOR AIR PLUS LABEL.

SO THIS IS ABOUT THE INDOOR AIR QUALITY OF THE HOME AND THEN MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE EPA WATERSENSE CHECKLIST.

WE DIDN'T WANT TO GET THE CERTIFICATION FOR WATER JUST BECAUSE LOCALLY THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF FOLKS WHO PROVIDE THAT THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATION.

AND WE WORKED WITH OUR WATER CONSERVATION TEAM TO UNDERSTAND THIS.

AND SO THIS IS SORT OF AS LONG AS YOU MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AND WE'LL WORK ON KIND OF VERIFYING THAT. SO THAT IS THE THIRD OPTION.

FINALLY, THIS LAST PROVISION IS REALLY JUST TO TALK ABOUT HOW THIS WILL HAPPEN.

THIS WILL HAPPEN THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER ABOUT THE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS, AND THAT THEN ALLOWS THE DENSITY BONUS OF 25 PERCENT.

FINALLY, WE ADDED A DEFINITION THIS IS FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE SUPPLY EQUIPMENT JUST TO ENSURE THAT THAT DEFINITION IS WHERE IT SHOULD BE IN THE ZONING CODE.

IN TERMS OF HOW THIS ALIGNS WITH THE CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN, I MENTIONED THIS A LITTLE BIT. BUT THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO SORT OF OUR WORK FROM THE SUSTAINABILITY SIDE.

WE'RE REALLY EXCITED THAT THIS AMENDMENT WILL ALLOW US TO CHECK A LOT OF DIFFERENT BOXES WITHIN THE CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN.

THESE CATEGORIES THAT I GO THROUGH, WE HAVE NINE DIFFERENT AREAS OF ACTION IN THE CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN, SO I'LL JUST TAKE YOU THROUGH THESE.

THE FIRST IS EQUITABLE SYSTEM.

SO BECAUSE OUR HOUSING FOLKS, YOU KNOW, REALLY SAW THIS CONFLICT AND FELT LIKE THIS, YOU KNOW, IS A IS AN IMPORTANT THING TO THINK ABOUT HOW THESE DIFFERENT INCENTIVE PROGRAMS WORK TOGETHER.

WE ARE WE REALLY FEEL THAT THIS WILL HELP TO INCREASE EQUITY ALSO DENSITY BONUSES AND THEMSELVES. IT'S KIND OF AN INTERESTING THING.

YOU KNOW, DENSITY BONUSES MEAN MORE HOUSING IN THE CITY OF FLAGSTAFF.

WE KNOW THAT WITH CLIMATE CHANGE, WE ARE ALREADY FACING A HOUSING CRISIS AND CLIMATE CHANGE WILL JUST MAKE THAT WORSE.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF RELATIONSHIP TO EQUITY THERE.

IN TERMS OF DECREASE DEPENDENCE ON CARS.

THIS REALLY COMES FROM THE LOCATION TO TRANSIT.

RIGHT. SO BY ENSURING THAT THE THE BUILDING IS EITHER LOCATED CLOSE TO TRANSIT OR PROVIDES ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING, IT SATISFIES EITHER THE REQUIREMENT HERE AND DECREASE DEPENDENCE ON CARS OR THE NEXT ONE HERE IN TERMS OF ELECTRIC MOBILITY.

IN TERMS OF CLEAN ELECTRICITY.

WE IT'S NOT DIRECT, BUT MOST OF THE THIRD PARTY ENERGY EFFICIENCY THINGS CAN BE ACHIEVED BY HAVING CLEAN ELECTRICITY SO THAT MIGHT BE ON SITE OR THAT MIGHT ACTUALLY BE ACHIEVED THROUGH THE PURCHASE OF OFF SITE RENEWABLE ELECTRICITY.

EITHER WAY, THIS DOES SUPPORT CLEAN ELECTRICITY DEVELOPMENT.

BUILDING FUEL SWITCHING. SO THIS IS ABOUT HELPING NEW BUILDINGS TO RELY ON THE ELECTRIC GRID. THIS IS WE ARE PRETTY LIMITED IN THE STATE OF ARIZONA WITH WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THIS FROM A REGULATORY STANDPOINT, BUT WE CAN INCENTIVIZE NEW BUILDINGS TO DO THAT.

AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS A REALLY GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO TAKE AND REALLY FOCUS ON BUILDING ELECTRIFICATION.

FINALLY, REDUCE BUILDING ENERGY USE.

THIS IS REALLY JUST ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE THE STRATEGY HERE IS, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED OUR NEW HOMES TO BE NET ZERO ENERGY HOMES.

[00:15:02]

IT'S GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS WITH OUR BUILDERS, ET CETERA, TO GET THERE.

BUT WHAT THIS INCENTIVE CAN DO IS TO HELP US ENCOURAGE MORE NET ZERO ENERGY HOMES THROUGH PARTICIPATION IN THIS INCENTIVE THAT CAN HELP US LEARN, RIGHT, LEARN FROM BUILDINGS WHO HAVE ALREADY DONE IT TODAY.

THERE ARE SOME IN FLAGSTAFF ALREADY.

THIS HOPEFULLY WILL LEAD TO MORE THAT WE CAN LEARN FROM, AND ALSO THAT WE CAN USE A SORT OF MODELS FOR GOING FORWARD.

FINALLY, SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT, WE BELIEVE THAT THE TWO PLANS REQUIRED IN TERMS OF WASTE MANAGEMENT, BOTH DURING CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONS, WILL HELP US TO DIVERT MORE WASTE FROM THE LANDFILL.

SO NOW I'M GOING TO HAND IT OVER TO TIFFANY.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, JENNY.

SO, TIFFANY ANTOL HERE, THINK JENNY WENT THROUGH THE STANDARDS SO MUCH BETTER THAN I COULD EVER POSSIBLY GO THROUGH THOSE AND WHAT YOU WILL SEE IN THIS PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT. BUT REALLY QUICKLY, I WANTED TO GO THROUGH THE FINDINGS FOR A ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT BECAUSE, OF COURSE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON ANY RECOMMENDATION NEEDS TO TAKE THESE INTO ACCOUNT.

SO THE FIRST FINDING IS IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH AND CONFORMS TO THE OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN, WHICH IS OUR REGIONAL PLAN.

THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS ARE INTENDED TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPERS BY PROVIDING A DENSITY BONUS FOR DEVELOPMENTS CONSTRUCTED IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS.

THE AMENDMENT WILL HELP US TO IMPLEMENT THE REGIONAL PLANS, GOALS AND POLICIES RELATED TO THE PRODUCTION OF ENERGY AND RESOURCE EFFICIENT RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS.

SEVERAL GOALS AND POLICIES WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF SUMMARY.

I WON'T. I WON'T TAKE THE TIME TO READ THROUGH ALL OF THOSE.

BUT IN ADDITION, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT AS JENNY HAS SO WONDERFULLY GONE THROUGH, THAT THESE MODIFICATIONS ALSO ASSIST IN IMPLEMENTING THE CLIMATE ACTION ADAPTATION PLAN, AS WELL AS THE CARBON NEUTRALITY PLAN.

FINDING NUMBER TWO IS THAT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE.

THE AMENDMENT PROVISIONS ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE DETRIMENTAL OR TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR WELFARE.

THE PROPOSED PROVISIONS ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE EFFICIENT RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS THAT MINIMIZE A DEVELOPMENT'S OVERALL ENERGY, AIR, WATER AND WASTE MATERIAL, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND FINDING NUMBER THREE.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT WITH OTHER APPLICABLE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING CODE. SO THIS AMENDMENT IS INTERNALLY CONSISTENT, UTILIZES THE SAME EXISTING FORMAT AND DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH OTHER ZONING CODE PROVISIONS.

IT DOES MAINTAIN THE ZONING CODE'S PURPOSE AS A COMPREHENSIVE, CONTEMPORARY SET OF LAND USES AND REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE STRAIGHTFORWARD, USABLE AND EASILY UNDERSTOOD, BUT THAT IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS.

IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS, LET ME JUST CHECK HERE REALLY QUICKLY, I SEE.

I DIDN'T SEE THE ORDER OF PEOPLE BROUGHT THIS UP, BUT I SEE COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

YES, I JUST HAVE TWO QUESTIONS, AND I THINK JENNY COULD PROBABLY ANSWER THESE, THE EXCEPTION FOR THE GAS FIREPLACES AND COMMON AREAS.

CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OF WHY THE SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR WOULD NOT APPROVE THAT OR UNDER WHAT CONDITIONS THAT WOULDN'T BE APPROVED? SURE. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

AND WHAT WE'RE REALLY LOOKING FOR HERE IS THE IMPACT.

AND SO WHAT IN THE TEXT OF THE AMENDMENT, IT KIND OF SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A SUBSTANTIAL IMPACT THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A VERY LARGE SORT OF ENERGY USE, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

WHAT WE SEE MOST OF THE TIME THAT THESE ARE IN SOME WAYS ESTHETIC RIGHT, THERE FOR SORT OF THE COZY ENVIRONMENT, MAYBE OF A COMMON AREA.

AND SO WE WOULD ASK FOR AND AGAIN, IN THE SORT OF REQUEST FOR THE EXEMPTION, WE WOULD JUST ASK FOR ESSENTIALLY THE SIZE AND THE NUMBER OF THESE FIREPLACES, RIGHT.

THAT WOULD HELP US UNDERSTAND THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THEM AND MAKING SURE THAT IT'S REALLY ALMOST INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

SO COULD YOU INSTEAD AND MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WRITE THAT IN THE CODE AS TO WHAT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR FOR APPROVAL? COULD YOU WRITE IN THE CODE WHAT, YOU KNOW, CAN'T BE A FIREPLACE THAT'S LARGER THAN X Y Z OR YOU CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN ONE IN THE BUILDING OR YOU CAN'T, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING LIKE THAT? YEAH.

[00:20:03]

YEAH. TIFFANY DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY ON THAT? I WAS JUST GOING TO JUMP IN REALLY QUICKLY.

JENNY AND I DID A LOT OF THOUGHTFUL THINKING ON HOW MUCH WE WANTED TO PUT IN THE CODE AND WHAT WE THINK THAT IT CAN DEFINITELY HELP A DEVELOPER WHEN WE'RE VERY SUCCINCT AND SPECIFIC, BUT THAT IT BUT IT CAN ALSO HOLD US INTO TOO TIGHT OF A SPACE.

AND SO IT GIVES US THAT FLEXIBILITY IN WORKING WITH DIFFERENT TECHNOLOGIES BECAUSE TECHNOLOGY AND EFFICIENCY ARE ALWAYS CHANGING.

IT GIVES US THAT ABILITY TO BE MORE FLEXIBLE WITH A DEVELOPER AND MAYBE SOME NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT COMES ALONG THE LINE, RATHER THAN HAVING TO AMEND THE CODE EVERY TIME A NEW TECHNOLOGY COMES UP.

OK, THANK YOU. THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD REASON.

AND THEN MY ONLY OTHER I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A QUESTION OR THOUGHT, IS THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THESE LARGER APARTMENT BUILDINGS GOING UP OR CONDOS GOING UP AND THEY'RE ALL ELECTRIC AND, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S NOT NOW, BUT MAYBE IT'S 10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD THAT WE GET INTO A GRID PROBLEM.

ARE, AND I DON'T RECALL, ARE THESE LARGE APARTMENTS DO THEY HAVE GENERATOR BACKUPS IN CASE OF, YOU KNOW, THE ELECTRICITY GOING OUT AND THERE'S NO OTHER FORM OF HEAT FOR PEOPLE IN A BUILDING? SURE, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER MANDINO, I REALLY APPRECIATE THE QUESTION.

THE GRID OF THE FUTURE IS ABSOLUTELY A CHALLENGE.

IT IS A CHALLENGE THAT MANY, MANY PEOPLE ARE WORKING ON AND APS OUR ELECTRIC UTILITY AS WELL AS PRETTY MUCH ALL ELECTRIC UTILITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE THINKING A LOT ABOUT.

SO I'M GLAD YOU RAISE THAT POINT BECAUSE IT'S DEEPLY IMPORTANT, IN TERMS OF BATTERY BACKUP. THIS WILL REALLY DEPEND ON THE DEVELOPMENT.

WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THAT BECAUSE NATURAL MOST NATURAL GAS SYSTEMS REQUIRE ELECTRICITY TO RUN THEMSELVES, THAT IT DOESN'T REALLY CHANGE IN SOME WAYS THE NATURE OF WHAT THOSE SORT OF HOW A DEVELOPMENT WOULD THINK ABOUT ITS BATTERY BACKUP SYSTEMS. IF THAT MAKES SENSE OR IT'S GENEROUS OR A GENERATOR BACKUP SYSTEMS AGAIN, BECAUSE NATURAL GAS ISN'T, IT IS BEING OPERATED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ELECTRICITY.

WE'RE NOT SEEING THAT ALL ELECTRIC BUILDINGS WOULD REQUIRE A REALLY SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT RESPONSE.

SO ARE THERE ALREADY BUILT INTO THE CODE THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE A GENERATOR BACKUP? I GUESS IS MY QUESTION.

I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

OR THE LARGE APARTMENT.

WELL, SO THE ANSWER IS NO, WE DO NOT REQUIRE GENERATOR BACKUPS, BUT JUST TO REMEMBER THAT THIS ALL ELECTRIC PROVISION IS AN INCENTIVE.

WE'VE ONLY HAD THREE PROPERTIES IN THE LAST SINCE THE CODE WAS ADOPTED OVER 11 YEARS AGO.

WE'VE ONLY HAD THREE DEVELOPMENTS USE THIS AND ONE WAS A DUPLEX.

SO WE HAVEN'T SEEN A HUGE AMOUNT AND WE ACTUALLY ARE OF THOSE PROJECTS.

THEY WERE ALL HERS.

SO WE'RE JUST GETTING TO OUR FIRST PROJECT.

THAT'S GOING TO BE ALL ELECTRIC.

OK. AND THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CONCERN IS THAT, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF THEY WEREN'T ALL ELECTRIC, THAT. BECAUSE OF THE OF THE GRID THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE GENERATOR BACKUPS. SO ON SOME OF THE LARGER PROJECTS LIKE THE HUB AND THE STANDARD, THERE ARE GENERATOR BACKUPS FOR EMERGENCY EXITS AND EMERGENCY LIGHTING.

I KNOW IN IN THOSE PARTICULAR INSTANCES, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S NORMALLY TRIGGERED BY THE BUILDING CODE RATHER THAN THE ZONING CODE.

OK, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I SEE A GUEST OF THE MEETING, MARY NORTON, AND I JUST SAY, I SEE YOU MS. NORTON. LET ME FINISH WITH THE COMMISSIONERS AND I WILL OPEN IT UP TO SOME COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION FOR STAFF? OK MS. NORTON, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT YOU WANTED TO PRESENT? YES, HI. CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES. GOOD AFTERNOON.

I'M ACTUALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO JOINING YOU.

I WAS ONE THAT WAS APPOINTED LAST WEEK BY CITY COUNCIL TO BE ON THE COMMISSION.

SO I HAVE BEEN KIND OF KEEPING TRACK OF THE ACTIVITY AND SAW THE PRESENTATION FROM THE

[00:25:07]

SO I MORE SO JOINING AS A OBVIOUSLY AS A PUBLIC PARTICIPANT TODAY.

AND I DID HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS AND SOME COMMENTS.

MARY SINCE YOU ARE JOINING AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TODAY, YOU CAN JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. SURE, CERTAINLY.

MARY NORTON 969 EAST STIRLING LANE, FLAGSTAFF 86005.

THANK YOU. CERTAINLY, AND I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON TWO OF THE SECTIONS IN THESE AMENDMENTS.

THE DENSITY BONUS AND THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS AND OPTIONS.

I'LL START WITH ONE AND MAYBE WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT AND STAFF CAN ANSWER MY QUESTIONS AND THEN I CAN REVISIT THE OTHER SECTION.

BUT WITH RESPECT, WITH REGARD TO SECTION TWO, THE BIGGEST RED FLAG TO ME WAS SOME NEW VERBIAGE THAT WAS ADDED INTO THE TEXT OF THE OF THE AMENDMENT, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD IT ADDRESSED IN THE PRESENTATIONS FROM TWO WEEKS AGO OR TODAY OR READ IT IN THE STAFF REPORT. BUT IT IS IN THE MARKED UP VERSION WHICH BECOMES THE EXHIBIT FOR THE AMENDMENT, AND IT READS THAT THE INCREASE IN DENSITY CREATED BY THE ADDITIONAL UNITS AND BEDROOMS WILL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS FOR DETERMINING IF A DEVELOPMENT IS CONSIDERED A HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

AND I JUST FEEL THAT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THE COMMUNITY AND CITY STAFF AND ALL THE CITY COUNCILS THAT HAVE SAT IN THOSE YEARS, BASICALLY SINCE THE HUB WORKED VERY HARD TO GET HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING UNDER CONTROL, AND THIS ADDED NEWLY ADDED CLAUSE.

THIS WAS VERBIAGE THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE EXEMPTS AND DISREGARDS THOSE GUARDRAILS THAT HAVE BEEN SET INTO PLACE BY THE HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING PLAN AND CODES.

SO I JUST WANT TO BRING THAT UP AND SEE IF WE THAT COULD BE DISCUSSED AND WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS ARE TO THAT.

I ALSO FEEL THAT THE DENSITY BONUS OF 25 PERCENT IS TOO GENEROUS.

SO MANY BUILDERS ARE ALREADY BUILDING AT ENERGY EFFICIENCY LEVELS THAT ARE EVEN HIGHER THAN THESE REQUIRED AMENDMENTS.

SO BASICALLY FOR DELETING GAS AND ADDING UP TO THREE CHARGING STATIONS AND SOME OF THE OTHER MITIGATIONS, IT SEEMS LIKE A BIT OF AN INEQUITABLE DEAL FOR THE COMMUNITY, AND I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT WHERE THAT ADDED DENSITY ENDS UP COMING FROM BECAUSE IT HAS TO COME, SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE WHEN THERE'S 25 PERCENT DENSITY INCREASE.

WILL IT COME OUT OF BUILDING HEIGHTS OR PARKING SPACES OR TREE RESOURCES, WHICH WOULD BE IRONIC SINCE TREES ARE CONSIDERED A CARBON FILTER? SO THOSE ARE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD ONE OF THEM MY LAST QUESTION ON THAT SECTION SOMEWHAT ANSWERED IN THE NEW INFORMATION IN TODAY'S PRESENTATION WITH REGARD TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I WAS WONDERING IF DEVELOPERS COULD DOUBLE DIP, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

SO JUST MAYBE SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT AS WELL.

SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS, AT LEAST ON SECTION TWO, IF MAYBE TIFFANY AND ALEX COULD COULD ADDRESS THOSE.

OR JENNY? THANK YOU.

CHAIR, I'M HAPPY TO ATTEMPT TO ADDRESS THESE QUESTIONS, SO ON PAGE ONE OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUSTAINABLE BUILDING STANDARDS ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT, IT DOES SPECIFICALLY STATE THAT THE ADDITIONAL UNITS AND BEDROOMS OF THE DENSITY BONUS SHALL NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE CALCULATIONS FOR DETERMINING IF A DEVELOPMENT IS CONSIDERED HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

SO HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IS DEFINED AS ANYTHING THAT EXCEEDS TWENTY NINE UNITS PER ACRE AND THE BEDROOM CALCULATION DIFFERS.

IT CAN BE ANYWHERE UP TO 72.5 I CAN'T REMEMBER THE EXACT NUMBER OF BEDROOMS. THE WAY THAT DENSITY BONUSES WORK IS IS THAT THEY CAN ALWAYS EXCEED THE MAXIMUM OF THE ZONE AND THE USE, SO IT WOULDN'T BE A DENSITY BONUS.

WE GET KIND OF RUN INTO THIS ISSUE A LOT AT THE TIME WHERE IT WOULDN'T BE A DENSITY BONUS IF WE KEPT YOU WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT THE CODE ALREADY PERMITTED.

SO IN THIS CASE, WE'RE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE CERTAIN PROVISIONS THAT ARIZONA STATE LAW

[00:30:03]

SO BUT IF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DOES NOT FEEL THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE, THEY FEEL THAT THE INCENTIVE OR THE BONUS SHOULD COUNT TOWARDS THE STANDARDS FOR HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

IN TERMS OF THE TWENTY FIVE PERCENT, THAT IS THE EXISTING DENSITY BONUS THAT IS PERMITTED IN THE CODE FOR A FAR LESS STRINGENT STANDARD.

SO AT THIS TIME, WE ARE TRYING TO ACTUALLY GET SOMETHING OUT OF THE INCENTIVE RATHER THAN MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT'S SO EASILY ATTAINABLE THAT ANY DEVELOPER COULD USE.

AGAIN IN THE LAST JUST ABOUT 11 YEARS NOW WE'RE ON OUR THIRD PROPERTY THAT WILL BE USING THIS PARTICULAR INCENTIVE.

AND THE THIRD QUESTION IN REGARDS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING, YES, A DEVELOPER CAN DOUBLE DIP, THEY CAN TAKE BOTH INCENTIVES, AND THE MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENT WE HAVE DOES JUST THAT.

THANK YOU. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONAL CONVERSATION THAT ONCE IS FOSTERED FROM THOSE OR IF I SHOULD GO ON TO OTHER CONCERNS ON THE OTHER SECTION.

I DON'T HEAR ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, MARY.

OK, THANKS.

SO I JUST WANTED TO ADD TO THE CONVERSATION REGARDING THE PROGRAMS THAT ARE PART OF THAT SECTION THREE D, THE ENERGY EFFICIENCY COMPONENT IN MY PAST PROFESSIONAL CAREER.

I'VE ACTUALLY WRITTEN CONSUMER MARKETING MATERIALS ON THESE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY AND EPA PROGRAMS FOR ZERO FOR ZERO ENERGY READY HOMES, ENERGY STAR, WATERSENSE, INDOOR AIR PLUS AND THE HOME ENERGY RATING METHODS.

SO UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU KNOW, THE PREVIOUS CODE REQUIRED A HERS 50 THAT AT LEAST IN A NEW HOME, THAT IS A VERY, VERY ENERGY EFFICIENT BUILD.

AND I'M GLAD THAT JENNY EXPLAINED WHAT HOW THE HERS WORKS AND THAT IT'S A TYPICAL CODE BUILT HOMES 100 OLDER HOMES ARE OVER A WELL OVER 100.

SO TO GET A 50 IS A VERY ENERGY EFFICIENT HOME.

AND OBVIOUSLY, THE THE LOWER THE NUMBER, THE BETTER AND IN MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENTS THAT INDIVIDUAL UNITS ARE TESTED.

SO BECAUSE THERE ARE SO SEVERAL BUILDERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY BUILDING AT ZERO ENERGY READY AND EVEN HERS 50, THAT THESE ARE HOMES THAT ARE HAVE A PROJECTED HERS AT THE BEGINNING BEFORE THEY'RE EVEN BUILT, AND THEN THEY'RE TESTED AGAIN AT COMPLETION.

SO MY CONCERN IS ON LIKE OPTION ONE, WHERE IT'S A ZERO ENERGY BUILDING, IF IT ISN'T ZERO BY THE TIME IT'S COMPLETE AND REALLY THE TRUE TEST OF A ZERO BUILDING IS A YEAR LATER AFTER EVERYTHING USAGE AND ENERGY CREATION FROM SOLAR PANELS HAS WASHED OUT.

YOU KNOW WHAT FOLLOW UP AND RECOURSE IS THERE FOR THE CITY IF THAT BUILDING DIDN'T MEET ITS GOALS? SO THAT THAT CONCERNS ME AND I HEARD YOU ADDRESS A LITTLE BIT OF THAT, THAT THE LEGAL TEAM WOULD DEVELOP SOME GUIDELINES FOR THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS.

BUT THAT'S A HUGE CONCERN OF MINE BECAUSE OF ZERO ENERGY BUILDING IS SO AMBITIOUS AND SO DIFFICULT TO GET TO.

GENERALLY, YOU HAVE TO START AT A HERS 50 AND THEN ADD SOLAR PANELS AND HOPE THAT YOU CAN GET TO ZERO.

SO I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE FEASIBILITY AND THE RECOURSE IN OPTION ONE.

AND THEN OPTION TWO AND THREE ARE REALLY MERELY DIFFERENT ROUTES TO CERTIFICATION OF THE ENERGY EFFICIENT, WHICH THEY'RE LOWER THAN THE HERS 50 RIGHT NOW, MEANING HERS 50 WAS A BETTER STANDARD.

I WAS PLEASED TO HEAR TODAY I HADN'T HEARD THIS INFORMATION BEFORE FROM JENNY'S PRESENTATION THAT CURRENT CODE ESTIMATES HERS OF SIXTY ONE.

THAT'S REALLY ENCOURAGING.

MOST OF THE ZERO ENERGY READY HOMES THAT ARE BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW IN FLAGSTAFF ARE RANGING BETWEEN FIFTY TWO AND FIFTY SEVEN.

SO BUT ON OPTION TWO, USING THE NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD, THAT'S TYPICALLY

[00:35:04]

AND I THINK THAT'S A THAT'S A GOOD PROGRAM AND BECAUSE WE HAVE A GENERAL IDEA OF WHAT A HERS RATING IS FOR THAT PARTICULAR OPTION.

OPTION THREE, USING THE ENERGY STAR PROGRAM REALLY JUST REQUIRES 10 TO 20 PERCENT IMPROVEMENT. NO HERS CORRELATION THAT ONE CONCERNS ME.

I'D RATHER SEE ANY BUILDING AT AT LEAST A ZERO ENERGY READY LEVEL.

SO THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF MY THOUGHTS ON SOME OF THOSE OPTIONS.

I DON'T THINK THE THREE OPTIONS ARE EQUITABLE, AND I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME ROOM IN THESE AMENDMENTS FOR SOME RETHINKING AND MORE DETAILING AND CLOSING UP OF SOME LOOPHOLES THAT I THINK COULD BE PROBLEMATIC IN THE FUTURE.

THANKS FOR. THANKS FOR LISTENING TO MY COMMENTS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH MS. NORTON. THAT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION.

MYSELF, I WOULD ASK, I GUESS, STAFF IS THERE ANYTHING THERE THAT.

YOU WANT TO LOOK AT GOING FORWARD OR? CHAIR ZIMMERMAN THIS IS JENNY, AND I CAN OFFER A RESPONSE.

THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU, MARY, FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

I CAN. FIRST, I WANT TO ADDRESS THE THOUGHTS ABOUT THE FIRST ONE.

AS WITH SO [INAUDIBLE] WE WILL BE USING A THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATION.

WHAT WE HAVE LEARNED AND WE'VE LOOKED AT THESE SIMILAR BUILDING STANDARDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, THERE ARE A LOT OF THAT DO THIS FOR EITHER INCENTIVES.

SOME CITIES ACTUALLY DO THIS AS PART OF THEIR CODE REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT? THEY MAY REQUIRE ENERGY STAR OR LEED CERTIFICATION, ET CETERA.

AND WHAT THE INDUSTRY HAS ESSENTIALLY DECIDED ON IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE FEEL REALLY GOOD WITH THAT THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATION AND THAT, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN GET TO AS FAR AS WE CAN IN TERMS OF BEFORE THE BUILDINGS BUILT IN TERMS OF WHAT INFORMATION THAT THIRD PARTY CERTIFIER CAN GET.

WE FEEL CONFIDENT IN THAT PROCESS AND WHAT IT WILL GET US IN TERMS OF RESULTS.

SO THAT AGAIN, WE'RE RELYING ON BEST PRACTICES FROM ACROSS THE COUNTRY, FROM A LOT OF DIFFERENT FOLKS WHO UTILIZE THESE SORTS OF INCENTIVES AND OR CODE REQUIREMENTS AND FEEL FAIRLY CONFIDENT IN WHAT THEY HAVE LEARNED FROM THESE EXPERIENCES AND ALSO IN RESPONSE TO SORT OF THIS SORT OF CONCERN.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE ALSO SEEN THE THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATIONS BECOMING MORE ATTUNED TO THIS AND HOW A BUILDING ENERGY MODEL MAY DIFFER FROM BUILDING ENERGY PERFORMANCE.

AND SO BUT AGAIN, THAT IS WE ARE REALLY RELYING ON THOSE THIRD PARTY SYSTEMS BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE EXPERTISE, BECAUSE THEY CHANGE OVER TIME, RIGHT.

WE, YOU KNOW, AS THOSE STANDARDS ARE UPDATED, ESSENTIALLY THIS GETS STRONGER AS WELL.

AND SO WE FEEL GOOD ABOUT THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THOSE THIRD PARTY CERTIFICATIONS.

BOTH ARE NET ZERO ENERGY AS WELL AS ENERGY STAR, AS WELL AS THE NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS.

IN TERMS OF YOUR OTHER CONCERNS.

THANKS FOR THAT INFORMATION.

YOU KNOW, WE ABSOLUTELY ARE PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT'S ALREADY HAPPENING IN THE FLAGSTAFF MARKET. WHAT I WILL SAY IS, AND PART OF THE REASON YOU KNOW, THAT WE CAME BACK TO LOOK AT THESE STANDARDS AGAIN IS THINKING ABOUT ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND HOW IT HAS GOTTEN BETTER ACROSS THE BUILDING SECTOR AS WELL AS WITH OUR CODES.

BUT KNOWING ALSO THAT THE ALL ELECTRIC REQUIREMENT REALLY SETS A DIFFERENT BAR.

AND SO WHEN YOU'RE COMBINING THE ALL ELECTRIC REQUIREMENT WITH ENERGY STAR, OR IF YOU'RE COMBINING THE ALL ELECTRIC REQUIREMENT WITH NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING CERTIFICATION OR THE NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD, THAT REALLY KIND OF SETS YOU IN A DIFFERENT SORT OF PATH FOR THOSE THINGS.

AND IT IS MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO GET ENERGY STAR WITH ALL ELECTRIC AS WELL AS NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD AND A 15 PERCENT IMPROVEMENT OVER CODE, AND SO THAT HERS IS NOT REALLY WELL ATTUNED TO ALL ELECTRIC YET.

WE'VE TALKED TO NATIONAL EXPERTS THERE, YOU KNOW, HERS IS WORKING ON IT, FOLKS ARE WORKING ON IT, BUT WE'RE NOT QUITE THERE YET.

AND SO THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE HERS STANDARD REQUIRED THE ALL ELECTRIC BUILDING AND REQUIRED THESE THREE DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

OK, THANK YOU.

TIFFANY, DID YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN AS WELL?

[00:40:02]

OK. THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER PAUL.

APOLOGIES, SORRY.

MOUSE MOVED AND MICROPHONE CUT OFF.

YEAH, I WANTED TO ALSO JUST SAY ONE BIG UPSIDE OF USING THE NATIONAL GREEN BUILDING STANDARD PUBLISHED BY THE INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL IS THAT THAT ORGANIZATION IS IN EFFECT, WHO OVERSEES BOTH BUILDING CODES AND ENERGY CODES.

SO, YOU KNOW, IT WAS REFERENCED EARLIER THAT WHEN THE 2018 SUITE OF CODES WAS ADOPTED BY FLAGSTAFF IN 20, I'M GETTING MY YEARS MIXED UP NOW, BUT I BELIEVE IN 2019 OR EARLY 2020.

THIS WILL PROVIDE SOME MECHANISM FOR THOSE TWO CODE OR THREE CODE STANDARDS, REALLY TO KIND OF CIRCULAR REFERENCE ONE ANOTHER SO THAT WHEN ONE IS UPDATED, THE OTHER IS GOING TO BE GENERALLY EASIER TO UPDATE AND KEEP CURRENT SO AS CODES EVOLVE OVER TIME.

THING WE IN THEORY AND HOPEFULLY WILL HAVE TO DO LESS COORDINATION, EFFORT AS WELL.

ANYTHING, EVERYTHING BEING UNDER THE ICC UMBRELLA, I SEE AS A RATHER BIG POSITIVE TO THIS. I'M SPEAKING TO THIS PRIMARILY AS A PRACTICING ARCHITECT, TOO.

SO ANYWAY, I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT AND JUST THANK TIFFANY AND JINNY FOR THE PRESENTATION AS WELL.

IT WAS VERY CLEAR AND CONCISE.

THANKS. OK, THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION OR THE PUBLIC FOR THAT MATTER? OK.

SEEING NONE STAFF RECOMMENDED ACTION.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIRED FINDINGS THAT WE MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT, THAT SOUNDS LIKE AN ITEM THAT REQUIRES A MOTION. SOMEONE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER ONE.

I CAN OFFER ONE. I WOULD MOVE THAT IN THE CASE OF PZ-21-00282 THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION HAVING CONSIDERED THE REQUIRED FINDINGS MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT.

I WILL SECOND THAT MOTION, THIS IS COMMISSIONER MANDINO.

OK, I'VE A MOTION AND SECOND IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION. HEARING NO DISCUSSION.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AYE.

ARE THERE ANY OPPOSED? HEARING NONE, THE MOTION PASSES.

THANK YOU ALL. AND THANK YOU FOR OUR MARY, OUR NEW COMMISSION MEMBER FOR YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL ON THE MATTER.

[6. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO/FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS]

THEY HAVE TO DO THEIR TRAINING BEFORE THEY CAN SERVE.

BUT I'M OPTIMISTIC.

I MEAN, MARY'S, LIKE, JUMPED RIGHT ON IT, SO I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT THAT WILL GET THOSE NEW

[00:45:01]

AND I THINK AT THAT MEETING, I'LL PROBABLY ALSO PUT ON THE AGENDA.

WE SHOULD DISCUSS WHO OUR CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR WILL BE, AS WELL AS FILLING SOME OF OUR OTHER COMMISSION LIAISONS.

WE NEED SOMEONE FOR OPEN SPACE I BELIEVE IS IS THE ONE, BUT YEAH.

WHO IS THE OTHER PERSON THAT WAS APPOINTED? I'M SORRY, I CAN'T I CAN'T THINK OF THE NAME RIGHT NOW.

I APOLOGIZE. LOOK AT THE COUNCIL MEETING.

WELL, IT SOUNDS, YEAH, CAROLE THAT I MAYBE DONE AT THIS POINT.

WELL DONE. I HOPE THAT WE HAVE A GET TOGETHER, MAYBE IN THE SPRING AND THAT WE HAVE PAST COMMISSION MEMBERS INVITED AS WELL.

YES, I WOULD LOVE TO INCLUDE DAVID AND ERIC IN THAT, SO.

AND DAVID, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS ON THIS COMMISSION, IT'S APPRECIATED. DID ERIC COMMISSION EXPIRE AS WELL? YES, IT DID.

YES. OH. OK.

AND AT OUR LAST MEETING, HE SAID HE DID NOT REAPPLY.

SO, OK, JUST SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S OK.

YEAH, SO WELL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY.

I HAVE TO SAY IT'S JUST BEEN A REAL, A REAL PLEASURE.

IT'S A CHALLENGE SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THESE COMMISSIONS, IT'S A LOT OF WORK AND A LEARNING CURVE A LOT OF THE TIME AND STAFF IS, OF COURSE, I THINK, EXCEPTIONAL AND MAKES IT EASIER, MUCH EASIER FOR US JUST IN THEIR THOROUGHNESS AND COMPETENCY.

AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE TO SAY, SO I'LL LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU ALL DOWN THE ROAD.

AND GOOD LUCK GOING FORWARD.

SO IF THERE IS NO OTHER MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO OR FROM STAFF, YOU HAVE ANYTHING.

NO, WE CAN STAND ADJOURNED.

AND THANK YOU ALL AGAIN.

THANK YOU, DAVID. THANKS, DAVID.

THANK YOU. HAVE A GREAT NIGHT.

BYE BYE. BYE BYE.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.