June 7, 2023 — Environmental Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] It's a second size, all right. You can go ahead and call them. You need to order them. I've got my sorry they're not. No. oh. not everyone. I call this meeting to forward. And then I, will pull up the meeting protocols. sorry, it's too, many things on one small screen. We have to just go from here. My apologies can't get this to move the joy of technology. Alright, we'll just do this. Hello, everybody. My name is Heather, Sandy, and I'm serving as a technical host for tonight's meeting. Thank you for your grace and patience as we adjust to being back in person. for our board members.

[1:07] So the city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and board commission members as well as democracy. For people of all ages, identities lived experiences and political perspectives for more information about this vision and the community engagement process please visit that week. The following are examples of rules of decorum found in the bold and revised code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be up called. During this meeting all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats, or use other forms of intimidation against any person. obscenity, racial epithet, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise it be the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited.

[2:03] Participants are required to sign up to speak, using the name they are commonly known by the individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio testimony. Testimony is permitted online because we do not have registration for open and public comment. Tonight you can indicate that you would like to participate by using the raise hand function. The raised hands button is in the participant box which can be found in the menu by hovering over the top or the bottom of your screen, and then clicking on the participant icon. When the box opens, you will see the raise hand button at the bottom. By clicking the button you can indicate, you would like to participate and open a public comment. But if you have joined us by phone, you can press 9 to raise your hand. Right that you are not okay. Cool. I eat. Okay. If I send a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. May third, 1, 23. Give me a second.

[3:07] a second. Okay? And so now let's go ahead and do. I don't see any hands up. so just a reminder. If you are interested in participating and speaking tonight, just please indicate that with your hand we have and see all that first. Yeah, I just got soaked farmers market. so landmarks board and Eab, or at the same time. And we just we need solar panels to go on some some landmarked places today. And

[4:05] The interesting thing is that balance between the 2 boards. They almost went to the point where they said, well, we should just make this a staff thing, which is, they always approve the solar panels, and they're always, you know. I would never let them get away with with changing the angle, just for the appearance to the public or anything. so they're, you know, pretty right on to environmentalism. But I mean it seems like a waste to bring it through the Ldrc. But in any case, what I wanted to bring up with the is the need for there to be a coordination with housing, Advisory Board and planning board in that. What what we need to design in boulder and Eab should be right behind. This is housing that accommodates more people. Naturally. what I'm proposing is there should be a minimum of 5 or 600 per square feet per person in a house, and you have 2 refrigerators, or maybe 3 refrigerators. You have one washer dryer. You have one, you know, for

[5:23] having all of this infrastructure, all of this plumbing, all of this electrical, all you know of this expense. It's a huge expense, and we have an affordable housing crisis in the United States. And it's your business as Eab, to to fix this because environmentalism goes right along with how we're managing our population and the way it works is we get all kinds of funding to promote more population. but that just goes up and up. And then we have more and more environmental hazards and problems to deal with. So it's perfect. If that's the situation you want to have, because you want to keep your jobs.

[6:10] but you've got a big enough job already. There's plenty of work to do. What needs to be done is more efficient housing for people per square foot. So you can get more people in a place. For example, parking, parking, restrictions are always lifted at the planning board, because, oh, these 300 square foot places which are too small for person, anyway, those places they aren't going to use a car. Well, guess what people have stuff, and people do use the car, even if it's the Uber. The Uber is crowding the streets, going up to the storage closet. So this it's really critical that we have livable spaces for people so that they're going to the mountains for their commute instead of to the storage closet across town. And the and that affects, you know, the congestion and everything else. And when you have people living in multi-generational multi, generationally in in household units, they work better together for less cars.

[7:16] I don't even have my timer on the screen. So if you guys could do that, that would really help. We can do that. Thanks, Lynn. if you have any additional comments, feel free to email them to the board. All right. Next up we have Karen and Karen. If you could just wait 1 s. I will get that timer up. I don't. I don't want to speak now. I want to speak when you're addressing the revision of goals. I don't think you can do that. I don't believe so. I think it's in the

[8:01] on, on most boards in the city. there's usually a staff presentation and for discussion before a code is taken on A on A, a scheduled agenda item, and I wanted to listen to the staff presentation first, before I make my comment. we don't think both both in this board we're like, we're not a you don't make any recommendations to anyone. according to our guideline. No? Sorry I lost. okay, so it's not. So. It's not possible for me to hear the staff presentation first. You can definitely email Us. after the meeting. well, but by that time you will have made your recommendation right?

[9:04] yes. But there is some following this, according to to our packet. we will have this initial discussion, and I think this will come back to us for a second round. so there will be future opportunity for us to take into account. If you decide to email us any comments that you have. Okay, there will be opportunity for us to take that into account. Thank you. Thanks, Karen. and just to clarify it sounds like she was speaking about some of the big, quasi judicial boards, which maybe it's not But that was a great recommendation. Thank you. Alex. Okay, so there's no more just double check. No, that's all. Okay. so let's move on to the main item today, the production to the 2,004 city of Boulder.

[10:01] And there's a conservation calling development project bye, guys screen. It's okay. Thank you for having us. My name is Edward Stanford and the senior manager planning and development services. I mean, it was serving as the building official until recently, you know, reminded some of the introductions here and helping support this project, especially through the process. I'm with us tonight, is Rob Adrian's on the in down here. He's our new chief building official, and he just yes, So he's quite new new at this point but doing and also joining us. Josh Hansen just joined us in October, is our expert in the energy to energy conservation code, principal energy to a compliance examiner in the Building Services Group. You probably don't care. I'm sure she's appeared in front of you before, I mean, as a joint effort in this project between the Financial Services Department and Climate Initiative, Caroline, that's all. Some survey

[11:09] on the the it works. The vice presentation will be by Josh. thank you very much. one other person I will mention that it's not actually what it's like. As Brad Mueller, he is also on this team. So I just wanted to make sure it may make mention of bread and as we mentioned earlier so the agenda title, really for tonight is an introduction to the 2,024 energy. Go through the city of Boulder As many of you may be aware, the city has a vision to reduce our carbon emissions by 70 by 2030 reach net. 0 carbon emissions by 2,035, and look to be a carbon positive city by 2,040 or another way it is. There are buildings actually to remove more carbon dioxide, and they produce before we really get into this. I wanted to give a quick background on the history of where our energy code came from. and then once we get into some of the updates and and the real substance of the presentation. We'll get it more of what we're looking at proposing for the future update.

[12:07] So starting with the residential energy. energy code map. first and foremost, I want to explain that a residential building consists of really a one in 2 family dwelling, a town home or an R. 3 or an R. 4. Occupancy Our 3 occupancy is a boarding home or a dormitory forority. Our 4 is usually going to be like an existing facility. this energy code, our very first energy code here at the city was actually the 2,017 Quebec And it was one of the very first energy codes to look at pushing the envelope to no unintended to net 0 energy. And so we required that for any buildings that were buildings, any homes that were 5,000 square feet and larger, as you can see from the scale right, the 2,017 requirement. Anything lower than 5,000 would be in a hers of 60, and then the scale would as the home got larger it would get closer to 0 as it got closer to the 5,000 on the square foot number. And so you can see, as it was tracking we were looking at, really, shrinking that number to get closer to that 0. And we'll explain later on that conversation while we're still looking at that. We're looking at different avenues as well to to look at incorporating a reduction in carbon is also

[13:18] just like when you go back, actually looked at reducing this, the square footage down to 3,000 square feet. And one thing to really know here is the majority of the homes that come through the city that are new construction are this 3,000 square feet. So the majority of these films are going to be that 0 that we see. sorry. Another thing we also introduced here is performance back stops and these can be seen in our our values to the envelope for the actual building itself. these values are untradable. So you can't model out of these. and so we're looking at insulation, Ruth. installation and all installation window values, things of that nature. We also introduced solar ready and offset requirements for single-family homes and so offset requirements, anything outside of the home or the dwelling in it, if it was a possible less, be fully offset with renewable energy.

[14:07] And then the last thing that we introduced in this. This most recent version we have now is our ev ready requirements, which requires one of these space for our new construction on the commercial front. A commercial building is really defined as not a residential building. one interesting thing to note here is. it also includes our multi family buildings. And so multi-family is included under our commercial scope, because the multi-family R. 2. Occupancy is included under the international building code, and so therefore it falls under the commercial the commercial guidance for our our our codes. the 2,017 Covid was really where this all started. Okay, we started with having a 30% savings over our ashtray 2,010 baseline. Another way to look at this is this is 2,012 energy code. And so what we did was we looked at that we wanted to do something better than what they were requiring. So we required a 30% savings above that code. Another thing that was introduced with this, the 2,017 Covid was our fully ready requirement. So all commercial new construction was required to have at least 40% of the roof available for solar.

[15:18] and the 2,020 version of our go back as we move the needle forward. We really looked at moving our target. we, we changed our our baseline model for what we're we're modeling everything against from the 2,010 code here to the 2,016 code. And so it's going to have a lot more stringent energy efficiency requirements. As you can see, we require 2025% off savings versus the 30. This is a more stringent code plus if you're in all electric building you, you're allowed to show the 20% reduction in energy. If it's a mixed field building, those 25% reduction, and we'll we'll talk more about that later on, as well as how that factors. In another thing to really know here is this Eui target that we use, which is an energy use index. We were one of the first municipalities in the country to utilize this target similar to if anyone's ever heard of a hers rating or an E ri, it's a it's a it's a similar rating for a commercial bill. So it's miles per gallon for a building really.

[16:12] similar to the residential side. It introduced performance backstops we also require a 5% energy offset for all new construction. So no matter what what project it is they have to do. 5 of their energy used to be offset by solar onsite. and then we also introduced, not just the eb ready requirements, but also ev capable and ebs requirements. So to give everyone a quick snapshot of where we are and where we're headed with this project. Yesterday we actually met with planning board tonight. We're meeting with everyone here. Our next step on this trip is city council study session at the end of the month. and then we're going to be looking at doing stakeholder engagement along with community engagement to get everyone's feedback at the end of this. This is really going to be our code. as a city. Once we have all of that engagement, we're going to be looking at, bringing you back to the planning board and and the Environment and Advisory Board, as well as long as as well as City Council

[17:07] for review, and then looking to have the initial public reading in November. So to really start getting into the meat of kind of this update for our energy code. Here, we have 5 areas of focus in the first 2 areas I wanted to touch on are really going to be focused on our performance targets and looking at energy efficiency and energy savings reduction. the last 3 sections. Kind of pull this this whole circle, our full circle, I would say, and look at electrification natural gas and carbon reduction overall. So, jumping into this, as we mentioned earlier, we had some performance targets that were set for our residential buildings. and what we're looking at doing there is keeping our homes that are larger than 3,000 square feet at net 0. And then for anything that's less than 3,000 square feet revisiting those targets to see what we can do. to help push the envelope for energy efficiency on those those smaller homes as well. so that everyone has the opportunity for that energy efficiency, not just the people that can afford to build the larger notes

[18:07] on the commercial front. We have 3 pathways through energy to for new construction. the first path is our model baseline path. You model the building, or you model a baseline building. You see what your target is, as long as you exceed that target you comply with with the requirement here at the city. What we require in this path is this, is the 25 or 2520 or 25% savings that we were talking about earlier. what we're going to be looking at here is actually updating that number to to keep with the pass of what the city is looking at as we go towards net 0 energy net, 0 carbon. The next path. Here is this fixed baseline path was actually displayed here at the right or the left. Excuse me. And this path really is more of a static path where you have 6 building types. they have the energy use index targets that they have to hit. And so they would model those buildings, and they have to be under those targets. It's a pretty, it's it's a lot simpler. But those targets are going to be a lot more strict as well, and the other limitation is, there is only so many of those building types. and so what we're looking at doing with the updates is updating those those targets as well as looking to add additional building types. So the items in yellow are additional areas that we could look at adding, the additional parts

[19:17] to to just allow more flexibility with the code as we move forward. And then the final item, here is our measured performance outcome. So this is one of our most popular paths, I would say. unfortunately, we haven't had anyone do this pack yet through the city. And so what we're looking at doing with this update is requiring a certain building type to do the measured out the performance outcome. So we can start to gain data and information on this, and see really how these buildings perform. this this target there really is not based off of design, rather how the building performs at the end. And so you would have to gather all your utility data. You would model the building at the end to see what the energies target is and see if it actually marries up with what it's what the design is saying that it should be And so there's other caveats. We're gonna look at that just to help kind of push the envelope. with that that that often in an energy code.

[20:07] The next item I wanted to mention here is a alternative path through residential. And so it's the dly 0 energy ready home. This home is actually or this option. It's been around for the past. I want to say 10 years. There's about 30,000 homes across the country that have been certified in this program and the real strength in this program is that it's grounded in the energy start program as as one of the the key cornerstones for this certification. And it's not grounded in looking at the older version of energy, start this one that we're mentioning is actually 3.2, which wouldn't go into effect till January of next year. But the backbone to this program is 2021, and the energy code envelope. So we're not just looking at going back to like a 2,012 baseline. They're requiring one of the most stringent codes in the country, currently, which is the 2,021 energy code. It also requires energy, star windows, energy star appliances which I didn't mention on the slide.

[21:00] but it also requires a certification through the EPA's indoor or plus, which not only you're getting an energy efficient home, but you're getting a healthy home for your family. some interesting things about this program is you're required to keep your H back system with tied in inside the thermal envelope of the building. And so that's typically we see ducks in addicts or in call spaces. So that's something that'd be a little bit of the ship. What we're used to seeing. it also is one of the first programs to to provide a Pb reading checklist. And then, lastly, it was one of the first programs to look at introducing Ev ready and heat pump water, eating and space seating ready. One of the key things to remember about this program is Last year, when the Inflation Reduction Act was passed, there were a couple of incentives that are going to be carried forward for the next 10 years, and one of them is the 45 l. Tax credit that actually gives incentivizes this program for home models to be able to take it on and upgrade their home to reach the certification level, and then, if not possibly put solar on their home. So they get it. They get it, basically 0 energy ready. And then they take the leap and they have the money to help offset some of that cost for solar.

[22:08] So we just touched on the first 2 areas. really updating our performance targets and allowing for an alternative for our energy code for the residential path, please. the last 3 pieces here are going to be looking at electrification and our move to look at reduct reducing our our carbon emissions. Excuse me. So the first time we're really looking at here, considering is moving towards all electric requirements for new construction and level 4 alterations so level 4 alterations. One way to think of this is you're at a level where the next step really is moving into new instruction. So that's why, it's it's lumped together with new construction and level 4. It also would have electric ready requirements for other appliances like a. So, for example. And then also, we're looking at level 3 alterations and requiring those not requiring but encouraging them to move to electric ready by by enticing them with more of a relaxed target for their ei or their energy modeling to really kind of push the envelope and really help with that. One thing I did want to mention, too, is currently currently crested. But here in the State of Colorado, is the first to have an all electric energy code.

[23:19] Denver is actually following pretty closely behind this, many of you might be aware, as of January one commercial and multi-family will no longer be allowed to install natural gas furnaces or water heating? so this is some things for us to really kind of pay attention to as we as we move in this direction. and just kind of be aware of, because there's a lot of things going on around the country in regards to the the focus and the push for electrification couple of other areas I want to mention real quickly is our ev charging requirements. We're really going to be looking at updating those the Model electric ready and solar ready code for the State was released last week, and 95 of our easy charging is in line with that code. Already we have to up some of the anni for multi-family, and it's an increase of 5, I believe, on the

[24:08] the ev ready side. I remember correctly. It goes from 10 to 15. but we're not just going to be looking at meeting that we're going to be looking at. what depending on the feedback we get if it makes sense to push the envelope and actually move the needle on that and and look at it, requiring more e to be charging another side. That we're looking at also is the electric bike charging in terms of multi-family as it's become one more prevalent across the city. We want to look at a way to not. I don't want to say so much as regulate this, but how to handle it and kind of focus on it, since it's becoming, we're seeing more and more of it throughout the city. So the next area here we all talked about the electrification side. Now we're looking at what we can do to help the environment by limiting fossil fuel and natural gas use. And so we're looking at a hundred offsets of natural gas. So one thing I mentioned real quickly, with residential residential, currently has these net, these offsets in place for anything outside of the home.

[25:02] And so we currently require a hundred percent offset for any fossil fuel heating that's outside of home for a pool or a spot things of that nature. And so what we're wanting to do here is provide some more guidance for some of the different heating options that we see outside of the home be electric, resistant, heating. Maybe, sauna things of that nature that really doesn't have it's it's kind of fall into more of a gray area when we look at it through the the lens of code on the commercial front, we currently didn't have really any offsets for natural gas and buildings. And so the only thing we really had currently was the 5% energy use offset. We're looking to keep that. And then for any buildings that want to use mixed fuel. So basically natural gas and electricity, they'd have to fully offset the natural gas, using the building to help to help do their part to help reduce carbon as one of the city's visuals. So we come back here, basically the full circle where we really look at the embodied carbon reduction here. And so one thing I want to note is buildings in and of themselves, account for about 39 of the greenhouse gas emissions that are out there. A quarter of those gas emissions come from embodied carbon, and so many of us here will we throw around the term carbon so often. It's when we refer to carbon. We're not really referring to carbon in the periodic table. We're referring to Co 2.

[26:18] And so that's one thing I just wanted to make sure that we were all clear on the 2 items that we're going to focus on here is our operational carbon as well as our embodied carbon. And so operational carbon is really what the energy code addresses. It's how the building operates the energy efficiency. And so operational carbon is any carbon dioxide that is going to be put off? as the building is being managed, and processes and things of that nature. the embodied carbon is anything up to the turnover of the building? Really in simplest terms, it's anything from manufacturer extraction, transportation, construction through the final turn of the building. So there's a there's a lot of There's a lot of ability to to look at this, and really kind of do our part and help reduce as much carbon as we can, and just be thoughtful about this.

[27:09] So there are a couple of categories that they've tried to simplify things and make it a little easier to understand. And so these are kind of the biggest categories that have the lowest hanging fruit that we would say in the first 3 really deal with concrete rebar and insulation, and, as you can see, the majority of those, if you were able to follow through those you could have anywhere, from what looks like a on on the low end, probably a 30 to 40% reduction in the bonded carbon. And so this is something that we could look at as a possibility maybe require. Here's 5 options. You have to choose 3 of them or 2 of them and then start moving the needle in the direction that we need to to really kind of focus on this reduction in body carbon. There are tools that are out there that can help help with these these carbon values and these ratings. on the single family side, it's very similar to a hers rating or an ei. It's a carbon rating, it's very new.

[28:00] And then also on the on the commercial side. Some folks may have heard of a life cycle assessment. And so life cycle assessment really looks at how a building impacts its environment. And it looks at from anything, from the materials throughout the whole life of the building to basically deconstruction and how it's going to to end. And and so so yeah, so basically, it's the environmental impact over that process of that. So we really wanted to just give kind of a a. it's a very broad overview. We understand that. And so our intents to come back. after we have more substance from our consultants and our work on this to really present as we move forward with these ideas. And so, just to give you a quick idea of our next steps, we're looking to incorporate this feedback from planning from the Environmental Advisory Board and as well as city council. engage the stakeholders in the community after that point. bring back to the table their feedback and recommendations. Look to add that back in and then look to rough the rough draft for the Quebec should be, I want to say residential is going to be around. September is and then October should be when we get to the the commercial pieces.

[29:09] And then, after all of that, we're going to bring the rep the robot raft back to the the boards and the council to get everyone's feedback and make sure that Is this the vision that we really want, that you guys really envisioning with your help. And then the public reading we're targeting for November of this year. And so what I want to leave you with really, are these questions that We wanted to put forth, and I know they are, Rod. So I apologize. We're just really early on in the process for this project right now. but we figured it's better to get in early on and to get everyone's buy in So the first question really wants to know. Do you agree with the areas of focus that we're looking at here? Is there anything additional that you feel that we should have? And then, lastly, from your experience. is there any good recommendations you might have for community engagement strategies?

[30:00] And I want to say, thank you, everyone, for allowing me to present to you. I can thank you. Yeah, I guess I have a number of questions. But I guess one of them is. it seems like a significant area focus is on building specifically whether it be construction, remodeling and things like that. is that in in your yes, research and knowledge base is that. And the primary goal is focus on buildings. I'm also wondering, you know. if you will get our the dashboard for this. so 38% comes from electricity and 37% from transportation. So I'm wondering if transportation is pretty close is that within the scope of this is that something that can be addressed at all. Or is that a kind of a separate issue? I think that'll probably answered a little bit better. But I would say that's probably outside of the scope of this energy code typically deals with just mainly buildings and structures. but I think that it's valid. And I think that that's something, we definitely would look at it just to be outside of the. So just to clarify a little bit, this is

[31:23] this is just a proposal to update the building. So it's only explicitly for buildings. And this is this is a small component or a contract small. But the overall strategy toward the meeting, the community's goals, and this is been adopted, so we can only, of course, so much for every single piece it's adding together. Ultimately we try to tackle everything in one project. and you have something out there. All this really, hey? Taking that that next step, it's Josh. And this presentation was showing along again, stepping it every 3 years, plus or minus. And that was the goal originally in the process. We talked about how you continue to ratchet it down in this area. There are other things that are my plate. Come on, as I'm sure that's some value in the.

[32:18] And there are other aspects of the project. Maybe the only thing I would add. I think if we look at sectors, buildings, or still about over two-thirds of the community submissions, so it's the to use. And so that's why it's definitely an elevated priority. I think the next is with transportation or a couple of things judge talked about in terms of at least within the building context. removing barriers to, for example, even adoption or mobility strategies, particularly for higher density housing multi-family properties where you don't want people having to take, like the bikes up and share storing apartments and those types of things. So thinking about where that nexus is on, that's when they the breath of transportation.

[33:08] Okay. we're doing. Okay. Okay. yeah. Well, before I to that, I would like to say, Thank you so much for the presentation. I think this is a like, I'm very excited about everything that we talked about. I had some clarifying questions about. I I don't know if you would know some of these statistics. But I'm wondering how many of the homes in Boulder are less than 3,000 square feet so like how larger the energy mix that we tackled in with those requirements. Okay. so I I I don't know off the top of my head on that. But we can. We can definitely get back to you. You might. You might have. You might have a ballwork. IP, and yeah, for new construction. It's almost all over 3,000 square feet, except for like 80 users and maybe some of our smaller, the town home type ones that might be just a little bit smaller. But there is still kind of a as that curve as

[34:15] yeah. So basically, almost all of our and we were roughly have. was of 5,000 square people. But it's not a large number, right? Yeah, I think we have this aspect planning for it. It's maybe like 1% per year relative to our our existing housing stock. So it's yeah, it's not a huge number. But yeah. though, actually also prints up another question. So the user consider, like building constructing an Avo is considered, it's some construction, even if it's like on the same plan. Okay, yeah, that's I'll I'll just think about that for a second that it depends whether it's attached to the main corruption or the part of the overall square footage or a d tag building and then be on its own piece.

[35:14] Yeah, that's yeah. That's that's that's interesting. also to I I guess I'm just thinking out of it to So I guess when you give when you get scores for building, I don't you use The you would have its own score versus the main property right? If it's attached. bye. I guess my question would be, is it possible for somebody who wanted to take a an extreme example. If somebody wanted to skirt some of these requirements, especially for offset could they?

[36:06] run their line of like natural gas pipeline, or that the the gas pipeline or the yeah, let's just say the gas pipeline, because I can't say it from the 80 to the of the original property. and the 80 you the solar and not be required to have those energy upsets. I would share the same data. That's kind of that's kind of my Ross here that you can really see. You know what I mean. It doesn't matter with you, but like one of the small ones that's And

[37:05] yes, I I'm wondering if there are any concerns about these requirements, pushing build building owners to not alter the buildings or to alter less of the building. I mean, we haven't seen much much of that. So currently, what we usually see is people, are they? They come in and they want to talk to us on how they can fly. And so they're doing everything on their their ability to imply And so I that's that was some of the reason kind of we looked at, you know, allowing for maybe an alternative program. And so we had some other suggestions of, you know, looking at a some more stringent programs. And the reason we look to kind of an alternative program along the lines with the 0 energy ready is a lot of the homes are currently doing that. This. It's a little more stringent program. So it help push the needle on where we're looking to go. but I think that yeah, it's sorry. I just yeah. I yeah, I apologize.

[38:18] So I I I think the flight plan requirements are probably more impact on people not doing improvements than ability to, because it triggers things. And and so you either see people do things they shouldn't or not do it. but I do think like Denver's approach, which is on on replacement. So Japan future gas installation get to place installations. after a certain day of replacement. I I do think we have some concerns that people might just keep repairing and so I think there needs to be some compliments to help them make the right choice not just required in code. So I think that's one of the things we're we're really thinking about is how you couple it with incentives or other things to drive successful outcomes. Yeah, Covid alone isn't going to do it. Yeah, yeah. And I think the real nexus is getting the community engaging with the right parties, because then at least, you have everyone's buy in. And they.

[39:18] This is good. It doesn't matter. We stay till midnight. We get everyone's fine. Yup, I know. I know what I'm talking about when your house is 1,359 square feet. You guys are laughing at me. I'm like, what's so funny, you know, like we don't see how it is that small enough like I can. Yeah.

[40:04] My last question. Second of last questions. Alright, I'll be really quick. As I saw also in the written the that there were exceptions for commercial kitchen. So I'm just wondering what is the like particular circumstance around. So currently the way, what I would say is the way that Denver is viewing is possibly how we would do it right now. And so commercial kitchen search. And the reason for that is with a lot that's going on with the Berkeley case out in California and preemption on the table. we're we're looking at different avenues to try and tackle that but it's it's very in touch and go subject. And so At this moment we really don't have a good answer on it, but it's something we're really looking at, considering in all honesty, it looks like, let me go for electrification and try to do all the interpretation. But there are some great offs. Yeah, that's why, you know, you might have certain types of tolerate not to require up and playing cooking in there. It's pretty. I like to find cooking over an electric range. You know some of those thing, and then cultural reasons in that. So you know, it's you're gonna be reasonable when you move forward with things like this.

[41:18] It's the main needle. Slowly. I think there's a couple of building types. There's like laboratories. you know. Yeah, medical facilities chat. It cost effective. And so we we definitely want to encourage, incentivize. Really, a doctor said, if there's going to be But it's I think it's rocks that a little early. So not quite any. If some of us are being conscious. And you know, like the earlier questions of what we may. You know, I have a lot of happen. And then, of course, we we know what I take circumstance. But we don't want to restaurants, but they're making more, because, yeah, that that would be the wrong direction. I could say that for a lot of the tis we're talking about with regards to laboratories, and that they are coming in. They are very energy efficient, too. So they do tip to scale on that. So it's

[42:18] so. There is natural gas, which is kind of the pink out. The the elephant in the room with with regards to that But those those occupancies are are are very efficient, you see in kind of through. So okay, so for like heating not for the actual, the cooking. I can't. This is for like the gas. and that was kind of towards the mentioned back of, you know, having electric running on certain appliances and things that nature versus hackling big equipment like your space and water eating. So yeah. And then my last hopefully, very quick question is and it also looks like us. There was. you are trying to get a baseline for building performance after people who've been like post occupancy. and no projects to to join the pilot. So yes, so on that. So that is a

[43:15] it's a newer option that we've seen And so I think the reason behind it really is there's an unknown. You build a building you. You get out there it performs. You may or may not reach the. There's safeguards you can put in place to make sure that do. But I think it's it's just the fact that it's it's a new path through code. And so we just didn't see anyone that wanted to dip their to in that water and really try. And so with this, update, what we really want to do is kind of nudge them into the water to actually try to see the data. See where these are actually performing? and we do also require I think it's the energy start portfolio manager. have the the the projects have to go in there and actually update your data. They're used to say, tickets every, is it? Every 3 every year, every year? So. but yeah, so there they are, there. There are tools that are available where they are able to to track that

[44:06] that usage. So we also had Covid. And that's sort of whether anybody was. Gonna think creatively through that kind of half point. Well, in that, through that, through the scales completely off, because everyone's home. Now versus being in offices. So that changes kind of that really kind of flip, a lot of energy. Okay. okay, I have a handful of questions. So on that 5% for 45% is that you serve like a far fast number that is like, that is the only feasible thing, or it. I know I'm sort of like national level like it. Codes is that just sort of like the will that the National Building codes have or like, what's the reasoning behind that number? And it didn't come from the natural code. It was something that We chose to introduce to the 2020 k back because we weren't

[45:11] and we got a good question for planning for last side about this as well as well. Still, our access requirements to celebrate a requirements we've had in code for a while, at least break down barriers to putting solar on and the commercial buildings. We weren't seeing a lot of movement on actually installing the solar But if you require a it's all about, you're more likely to see them actually, but more on, which is exactly what we saw. And so we picked a relatively small number and a large incremental cost of construction, but it got them to at least put solar on and Then we were seeing, you know, 2030% installs up. Well, about the 5%. Okay. So so there is actual like it, is it? Just?

[46:00] It's it's starting them. And then once they get there, they're like, Well, where're you right now? Just do 5. We might as well do 20. Okay, they're putting a lot in the building. Yeah, yeah, okay, cool. As if if you were just seeing 5% of work. Let's see that. And then around the incentives for the Us. 0 energy ready. How much of that does that, then, did the incentives actually cover like how much it would be like a bit on. This is on the people like going into that program. So it's hard to tell right now, because of the how the costs have really changed over the past couple of years. but there have been, I mean, there were older there's older reports out there. I want to say one of them was looking. I want to say, Nb, I did one of them that could think of the New Buildings Institute. But it was really when you looked at going from like 0 energy ready to 0 0 0 energy, it was really a drop in the hats to 0, energy ready compared to 0 energy. And so what's the 45 about tax credit? What it did is it?

[47:07] It's incentivize to monitor that if I remember correctly, it's a thousand dollars per home, if you do it as energy star, and you do 5,000 that you do 0 energy ready, and then multi-family, it's available as well. So multi-family, it's $500 a unit for a multi family for 0 energy ready. But if you do prevailing weights on your multi-family product. It's $5,000 for you. And do you know what the like approximate full cost of the your energy ready is. you'd be like over the above. To kind of get there like what the additional incremental cost is to get it with those incentives that are being provided. Is it feasible for lower income families to actually by into that? Or is it a like? You need a $10,000 buy-in, and you get some amount of that pay back. But you need that $10,000 upfront. So that's part of the that's part of some of the research that our consultant is going to be, yeah, yeah. Yeah. And then last question is around the Ev requirements for commercial buildings?

[48:13] so for the commercial parking space with the one space that low number seems, you know, you know the commercials for seems like a really low requirement, especially because so many people like, you know, go to work, and I know a lot of people that like for cool. I I know a number of people that would love an electric carbon. It just like isn't feasible for them to like. Go long distance and like if they took me into work, they can't charge their car at work, and then they, you know, so they cannot like feasibly get in. So is there a way to increase them like numbers of required, easy, ready parking spaces for Commercials Buildings. I'd say there's always the ability to do that honestly. And so the things we try to we out. And it's more I would say for the Ev. But it's the cost associated with those, because The costs are still a little high. They are coming down. but that is one thing that we're trying to, we as well. But but to answer your question absolutely. Yes, we could definitely look at racing those numbers.

[49:13] and I would say generally. one of the areas that we see a lot of opportunity around is an AV capable or or this new chat, we're at the State, which is the ev capable of which is simply in the conduit in. I think if we can just get caught to it and or at least eliminating one of the key barriers, which is the cost of digging up from parking lots, and then especially parking structures underground. just thinking about more build out there. the the real cost comes in in 2 areas, which is like how much pre-wiring you do if it's not actually going to have stations installed. and then the second one is, if you totally service, you have to provide. Okay, and that's a pretty big cost. And so I think that's the thing we would just want to balance, and in both cases, but for sure. I I think

[50:08] I'm like to advocate for at least time away. I mean, the way trends are going. Yeah, more and more people are running larger cars. And so they're like they're going to be needed at some point, anyways. And so it would be nice to just see the building codes reflect that because that will, I mean over costs on those you know, commercial spaces further down when they do actually like, are required to have them, and at those highest number based on their employees. That's right at the level where the state requires this, we have to push the envelope and do more. We're trying to leave that charge. So yeah, absolutely. That is. did you like to call it? I I think that. No, I apologize.

[51:02] Okay. thanks. Again, guys, for your presentation. I have some just clarification questions. is. There is the complexity of writing an energy code for the 3,003 lessons or the same, or their friends, the writing and energy goal that is next 0, but a 5,000. So I I want to say that the square footage of the house is in different. But the net 0 code is going to be. Well, it depends. because some of that 0 codes can be pretty simple because it's pretty straightforward. It's like you have to have 0 for energy use. And so it's like they they they tell you how to get what the goal line is, and you have to get there. Now, there's other codes. I believe the 2021 Icc has a net 0 section in it. Yeah. Ped next, thank you. that it's I think we got a couple of pages. but it's it's very broad on how you do it, because it it kind of leads it up to the home owner. On on discovering their path forward. And so with us, with the energy code. there's other things. I mean, you know, it's when we look at it. Yeah, equity. It's like you can do that 0 across the board for everyone. But that does work for everything. And so.

[52:12] you know, like. what are the reason of not, I imagine, something with equity of what I'm doing for everybody. Yeah. And and that's something that what's it? What's the premium like? What's the cost of the premium like, it's a house x one on the dollars to pay all $3 for the. And what's the premium on that to make a net 0. So maybe the the thing I would offer is what I what I think about our current residential code like, it's just a a outcome. It's for performance outcome. And so it leaves a a great deal of discretion to the designer, and and how to achieve that right? So it could be through passive design, it could be through more efficient appliances than than Energy star. It could be through more solar So they have the greatest amount of flexibility with that, when you move to certification, then it starts to set some more levels of requirements. so there's pros to that. Obviously, because you're not necessarily just using a lot of solar to offset a port recording

[53:12] building but it also. hey, I I think we need to have some pathway that still offers some alternatives or more flexibility to design for for what we maybe aren't anticipating in just like a a certification program offers. So now that that's kind of the way I I think of the the it's it's probably less concerning for the smaller homes. I think when we start to see some of the larger custom phones. They do different things or or or it's not standard designs. We're an energy star standard. Yeah. and appliance necessarily bits within what they're doing within that house. My, so I guess I like to. I guess I go back to my first question. what? What exactly

[54:00] it'll do like again, if you go put a or something like that. We have one. So we do have a we have a performance outcome for what? It's not currently 0. It's it's, it's, it's it's it's it's it's it's so it's basically when you look at me, Ri, it's on a scale of one to, or one to, or 0 to 100 100 is a house that's built in 2,000 really is what that that basis of that code is. And so what we really look at is we want to get it closer to 0, because 0 on that scale is you have 0 energies. You offset all of your energy. And so that's why, like, at 50, typically when you get below like between 40 to 50, that's when you're going to start seeing people have to add solar to it down to 0. And so the real benefit of like the delay the deal is, or when it's you ready. Home is one of the things that you'll hear us quote is it's it's efficient. You can see before renewable. It's focused on the building focus on the systems. Don't use solar as a bandage to fix the problem, because it's not one, too. And so that's why we have backstop in there for, like the the actual envelope and shuttle of the building, to make sure that we could protect certain investments moving forward because systems may change things like that. But the envelope is something that we could safeguard. Really, as we move through our energy go to date. So

[55:13] yeah. I have more questions. so I I remember seeing something about like, if a building wants to use a commercial building was to use gas. they can do offsets, but we have to do us. That's what we're proposing. But you lot about expanding out to residential because we can say that because I just got a really nice guest, though it's not really. it's it's so. It's so hot. But it's like, okay, let's say, you know, obviously, I'm not a grandfather.

[56:05] Let's say I want to remodel my home. I'm building a new phone. I have this, I found this really nice. It's like, is there something I can do to also? you know like, that's a like. I wonder if you will consider expanding this all set for residential? So so typically what we've seen usually is, they do. They'll try and offset the solar. And so that's really what we see it come from with the with natural gas. They try to use it to the end of the day. If even if you're using that 0 home and they have gas use, you still have to offset that gas use with solar or another renewable doesn't have to be slipper. Yeah, I I think. maybe what I'm hearing from this. I I I think yes, we can expand it to. It's sort of there in the way the codes you have to offset. But I think you present a good question, which is more of an alteration. And if we're like, at what level do we require the offset? We can definitely look at. Look at that!

[57:07] Oh, if if there was an option the those submissions. Right? Yeah, I it's it's only the only way to do it. I mean, you can do other. There's other ways for me. But yeah. For example, I have, like a solar company, go to my home to give me a quote they didn't even call me. Just look at it on Google Maps and say, like, you have to many trees. And then they didn't call me so, you know, like, there's no, I can't do it. Yeah, So it's like, okay, let's say, like, Do I go down a tree? Well, no, I wouldn't say that. That's that's that's a so I mean, there, there are other ways. We currently have just to apply with our current codes. some. Some phone numbers have

[58:01] had to also get like Solar guard subscriptions. to meet our code. So there, there's other things you can do to create that offset. So it's not just about the rooftop, and we have pathways there. We're trying not to drive everybody to off site solutions, because that's not necessarily advancing our reasons for having an onsite. But it's definitely a tool that's available. Yeah. yeah, in residential, we have it written in that it is you can use it. But you have. There's a certain level of due diligence that you have to prove on it. And once you're able to check these 3 boxes, then it goes to the chief building official and they have to approve it on commercial. It really does have a path for offsite other than approval through the sheep building official. So yeah. And another, reasonably this superficial. I guess it's like. usually when there's like their big storms they always losing their tracing in my my entire block.

[59:12] It looks like it's like. you guys can be a little more reliable than it. And it's like a look at how to choose or more. Yeah, your gap appliances don't work without electricity. The water, the what we wanted to give an 80% in an old water hit it so if you have a it does not. Unfortunately, my one to yeah. My one was only I need to see efficient, my new ones, 96%. So that's right off, you know. Yeah, most of they don't want them to still work. They don't have electricity. So and don't just try line it. Yeah, your public service that out. Yeah. Yeah. If you smell something, do not like it. But I guess you know. So I'm trying to push for like the notification. Right? Yeah. Technical guts can be more reliable. It could be a little better resilient.

[60:15] Well, it's like, it's hold on to the post. Yeah, yeah, that's so. True. If you live in an urban area. you should have an expectation for my reliability, and that is the standard that we're working towards. You know. I think my last question is building up on the process. the the the incentives, you know. Like I you mentioned the insulation. So I put it to you in my, I have a you know, about like 4 inches of information. And so I I got insulation. and I remember, like the the the rebate from excel of like 100 bucks.

[61:04] but to apply for it you had to get a home inspection to call, which was like 355, and then, like I got to. We make the 3 base for accessible or easier, you know, because of like, what's you have to schedule, you know, like it will have. I didn't do it because it was like 50 bucks. What it would be to be like pulling this company scheduling for me, I'm going to call it. It's like, it's like.

[62:11] So we don't have much of what's so, what? Well, maybe maybe the solution areas that might be excel has some kind of a section to be able to some barrier by that they're going to be doing this rebate. So I mean the the answer. The answer to it is, it. It's since your next call. So they have to take it's it's supposed to be. It's stewards of our So they have to be cost effective and deliberate, just the efficiency. And so they have to make sure that they understand what this net savings is going to be over here. They can credit it. It's appropriately. So. That's why it's designed that way. I understand it doesn't necessarily provide the adoption, because it doesn't balance out the costs, you know, by by then saying, like we need, we need to be verified. We don't know over you for a hundred bucks for a reason for that.

[63:03] I mean capital third party company. I don't know. It just seems it trained in the very. It's okay. It can be well, there, you need this back in. I'm gonna if you're curious about any of this. This hollered me, too, because I can. There's there's there's a website desire that's online that you don't have to.

[64:05] And it's just the. So we have a couple of questions on embodied carbon. And so one You have noted in the packet that we got that there are some incentives using what sound allowance you try to basically incentivize. maintain some of the structure, and capture some of that in body carbon, I guess, similar to real question. you know, where was the 10% number arrived at? Or how do we know if that's a sufficient incentive such that people will actually try to capitalize on that. And why is it only applied to level 4 alterations as opposed to a broader scope? I don't know if you can answer those questions specifically, or to speak to the

[65:03] trying to preserve some of the embodied carbon rather than complete new instructions. Instruction. say you were around. So maybe the way to describe. What we did at the time is we didn't move the bar or for existing structures that remain so. Anything that was a level for or less basic the capital than the 2,017 promise requirements. And we only need a new construction. So it created the the 10% difference that wasn't necessarily outreach supported. It was a upon ours, a signal making it easier to. Because when you go to yeah, that's about, it's kind of a a really good take it's it's really hard to get it.

[66:00] It's better than that. And so this the 60 kind of is, it's a little bit more doable, and I think we were a little bit concerned about like trying to incentivize for serving, and more about not no choice. That's the just great and start over like maybe a little bit more at the time. So I think, there's definitely for things that can be done to incentivize preservation of the existing structure that we can certainly look at And then so in the, in the embodied carbon are there any. maybe not incentives. But are there any convictions regarding their material as sort from to do this work? Obviously, or they're out your reach the higher the body carbon is one. Is that anything that we can have control over to? Is that a discussion point amongst you all at all? I would say it is a discussion point. that's something that we're all going to be doing research on as we're going to be touching on and body carbon. That is an aspect of the Monte Carlo's transportation. And that's one of the key things really is to

[67:08] That might be a real, a little bit of a heavier lift, because there's a lot of stakeholders that are involved in that industry. And so it's having people understand that. And it's getting a lot of other focus on board. as well as we as we look to pursue this, because it's it it takes. This is this, this topic here really will take the village to make sure that we can move the needle on it, because, it. It is the next frontier that we're seeing. And the reason that we looked at, is it? We're leapfrog. Energy. Energy is just one piece of it. It's the operational side. We really want to look at it, you know everything. So that's why I really looked at this. But but yeah, it sorry for the long answer to your question. But yes, we will be looking at some hopefully, that' be careful of us. We can't really, through code, show that nature of everyone

[68:00] we have to. You know, consumer choice is still out there where we have different options and offset opportunities versus being able to say. all my drill can only be within 5 miles, you know, but we also need to be pragmatic, and we have limited resources to actually in boss some of these codes. We're just a little hanging fruit off the tree. Unfortunately, sometimes we've concrete. I mean, because there's so so many other it is now starting to overlay. And so I think we're we're seeing industry build up that. But it's definitely like or a little bit cautious about prescribing things. And we know, like, the only sourcing is is going to worsen this this situation. So I think that's definitely the look to kind of the strategies is

[69:03] it's really plan for that, and be cautious about being too prescriptive and maybe allow for greater flexibility and be prescriptive where we know that we're seeing the original influence that's going to try market here. It's your question with it. so elaborate, more on what you were talking about with concrete. Are you saying that there are more concrete providers in Colorado, or the their more jurisdictions require? Yeah, there's more jurisdictions putting requirement on party content in concrete and And so that means our a great providers here are going to cart sequester currently mix into the the concrete that to meet the lower, the anti- standard for the lower carbon material. Part of how to look at that is, if more users have the same requirement, and then the providers are going to meet it because they they have a market, they really don't have a choice. So if we decide we want to go from, or the main users are up here, we have to determine. Well.

[70:10] will the be provider will I need how you go to there. We don't have enough demand. We don't have enough pieces. Nobody is going to be really the best. We don't want to create a situation where? And says, well, then, for you can not have any concrete, because if you if you don't supply it, it's going to have a a negative consequence, or the only supplied with the price. Yeah. So I I do want to highlight in the. What I'm saying is that I will. I always. It is the actual ability to administer and it for any. So I I it's unfortunately good. I'm I'm not even about these things. It just the performance modeling after we'll see to when we can get the best of enforcement, because when they need that paper, this is their like part by the building that impacts their finances.

[71:07] After that, how many cases do we have a Vp of that's stacked, and it's it becomes a you which then becomes a good question that didn't become to what are the unlimited resources we have eliminated? Resource, especially in give them capital time. that we can put towards things. So what do we want to do there? You don't want to create a situation where it's something that people know, you know. No way. You're never going to it, it it causes them to just respect the entire. I have a a final question. This is more from the equity one. So I really appreciate you guys acknowledging and bring to the discussion that we don't have to those who own the largest homes to read the large benefits But then, I guess

[72:06] with this. a lot of the focus being on residential and incentives there, and and codes for that. Is there a way to wrap into that discussion? Non homeowners unhouse populations as well as you know. What benefits might they see, or there things that we might be missing, that they can benefit from kind of this code planning process that maybe we haven't accounted for, because we're very focused on those who own homes. Obviously, there's a commercial sector involved in this. I guess that's very open-ended question. But, there are things that you or or the board have. It's a different call for rentals, right or not, for the construction. So it's important to point out that you know this is not written towards, whether it's own or occupy rent, or occupy, or some other piece, and, in fact, September, the the residential being built is rental here and has to meet the Us. It's the high to part of the centers, because it's multi family. We don't look at it different. There. The city does have in place on I'll call it the same family.

[73:13] Really, the rental stock that's existing, not on the construction. The smart ranked programs it's called, and it had a compound enough bringing better energy efficiency not to the level you're seeing in these over history, and that 12 years. So it's a smart rate. They're moving some of those. So yeah, there are. There are different effective programs where this is totally so. focus just on instruction. So is there any sort of incentives that can be established for, save. you know, low income housing or things side kind of that, that that it's still on to the scope of new construction, and and maybe I don't know how much incentive he said it before, but

[74:05] under the on that side of, and all slash home ownership. But towards the lower income occupation. I think the one thing I would say is that we have that alcohol. you know, we we structure building codes historically. knowing that we were going to be really aggressive right? And and focusing on the largest structures under the phones are commercial that have the greatest impact, but also could afford any incremental cost and and end up the wrong period of time. Right? It's not the energy requirements that are driving them to be expensive. So let's stop that paradigm and let's provide a community resilience from our purple energy cost for everybody. And I think that's that's really kind of over trying to grow your. The incremental cost of efficiency. 700 $800 is for the construction cost because of other market constraints very small. And so I think that's what you're really hearing from us is, let's let's see

[75:10] not up to doing that bar where the affordable housing. This is going to be built to lesser standard. I think that's first and foremost, and then separate from this from a code perspective. And I think the onus is on us as a city to think about our other dollars. that can further make that more accessible, and that's very much on the horizon. So not necessarily within the code. but definitely parallel as as the I'll mention that with the right and that financial backstop. And we're certainly looking at that, I think, to keep in mind the affordable housing is being built now generally is coming under the commercial. So we don't really see the 3,005 that could be portal housing is not building the individual. And I don't foresee that, you know, changing.

[76:05] Yeah, I can say that equity is really a a key piece for me. I I can say that I've been here since October. I can't afford to live in Boulder. I have a home that's 1,300 square feet. Time is saved, but I have a home, and so it's it does hit home for me on the equity piece, you know, you want to make it available. That's really what we're trying to do is to try to bring that back in a more black and white 75,000 foot view. The building code is a a minimum standard. If we want to buy the same minimum standards, whether you're for or whether it's like, if you look at it, say, by sprinkle system, we don't want to say well, a rich bits. And so we kind of applying the same methodology. The look at, it's our potential side. We really have much happening under 3,000. Yeah, we we get to 0. I think it's the right goal for establishing the vision. Yeah, may it be a little real impact, because something and it can be harder to as you get as the unit gets smaller. We know that from we require

[77:17] infiltration testing. And in single family home multi family, we know that as those units get smaller it becomes harder and harder to hit those targets. So we know that as the the alterations and the homes get smaller, it can become harder and harder, and then back to the point of solar. Well, they may not have space on their site, you know, and so there's certain constraints to that we're looking at. Sorry. So have you ever heard of a blobber door test? Yeah. You'll see people that will throw up like a tarp in the door, and they'll have, and they all they're out the whole. So if I get I used to get to do those so but yeah, you can get some even you don't. But the interesting thing is they don't. Why, it tells you where they leave. It's when it's sorry and they're like, hey? You can't get mad at me. Get out of your door. So instead of that is, you know, so soon.

[78:13] we're gonna move on to providing our recommendations. And I, I like to your areas of focus. I I think I have a lot of merit, and I don't really have any problems with them. So I think that was and has friends. We can thank you for answering all of our questions. So for that piece, I think to me, based on our discussions and our questions, all that did seem to, or they were in compass by your 5. There is a focus. So I didn't really. or any anything in addition to that, and then for the final

[79:03] points or engaging the public, I guess I have a preliminary questions. What are you doing currently to the public and you getting feedback for these. So when we do building codes, there's not generally a broad public engagement around that. So we definitely prioritize. kind of, you know, core stakeholders to your designers. Builders are housing that's already set or or other, you know, regular builders and and folders. So I think that's for sure. Gonna happen as well as our boards. as we're doing here. I think if there is things that we haven't thought of. It's in the traditional or like we flag. That would be kind of our our question is, I mean again, the average.

[80:01] Is it really, and to engage in building code specifically, because it's a little bit hard and tangible for them, I think. but definitely try to hear some of the things we're trying to solve, for we're things that we're hearing from the for other public. So but it's maybe not as correct. Here's what we're thinking about with the building shows. But I think we've certainly been hearing about experiences and challenges when particularly going far with these projects that we're starting to carry forward. That's I think it's back to the practicality point. Right? We take it. We take the code in there. And it could be this level. And after talking with everyone, they may range down to this level. It's like we can't do this. And so it's a lot of good, positive back and forth that we're looking to have, and my apologies for your lady on you. I was like, I

[81:07] this. I don't have any current recommendations. I think one. We can circle back. Yeah, So, as I said before, there's a lot in here that I'm really excited about. And I'm I really liked getting your our focus areas. I am wondering, since I mean I have not Thomas other than this, but a little bit, maybe off topic. But since we're talking about building phones, I think it is important to mention it. We're if we're going to be talking about the models. is there anything in the building code of Oh, Checking for what I

[82:00] and replacing them. Because I think that's not in building, you know, since you know building code trades, materials, if they're legal in the final construction that's still legal. So if you have to live, what is so, we have like that, there is a different project under way right now, because it was like the large service and requirements, the EPA, the state of into the process. It's going through a cap on the determination, and then I'll be up to as a city. Have a replacement plan place, so that is for the line 8 all the way from the main 18 inches into the house, the on that. What's in the house? It's covered in so generally, though we are not, we much of our stock in any. It's like pretty rare, I mean, they they tended to use them back in the day because they've been on roll like copper pipe. Now, that is exactly easy to install. Once they got to the house they would typically transition to steel piping

[83:14] was there. It's time that they change that to the the good standards that they have right now, because I live in a older building. so I'm not sure. What Or are you saying how close is the so it's possible that it could by line it part of the work that we're doing in the utilities? Now it's 1984, I believe, when web was prohibited for use and water distribution. at this point, we don't have a lot of evidence in the city involved in that we have any extensive this point. Watch it all. There's probably more likely some areas that we're like solder, or maybe, you know, actually like to go snacks. That's as we work through. How many more of that? The program itself that's being kicked off the utilities will include a number of

[84:13] actual verification work out there to to try. And is that a lot of data to come up with a probability of it being like or not? Let you know in the okay. I'm sorry I' the most city controls, but once it's into the building, it is very usually not what. and asking even our staff that are out in a lot of different places, as you've seen in the last 10 years. It's on record and stuff what we what we see We do not have a very confidence that we don't have a situation like Detroit or any so in different parts of the Us. But it was a much more prepaid and older. It's not a that so far. By October 2024, you know, we're going to be able to send it much more certainty to a high price.

[85:18] yeah. And so I guess back to the energy code. now, I I saw that retail the hospital and a small book cell weren't included in the You'll be Ecc. even in 2,024, and I'm wondering why not retail or small hospital, or it's a small hotel, right? So so I put those on the that list there because there, there is a lot more that are available. Currently I want to say, when we, when we probably look, set out to do the 2020 k. Back, we were wanting to pick a set amount of buildings, and they probably have a limited number of building types of choose from previously. And so that's why we've joined the we did it. And so in recent years, they've expanded on those. And so that's why, with the sub people looking to see if we can bring more more building types into that that pathway for go

[86:21] also interesting because we, as this board had a presentation earlier about consumption based accounting. And we saw that hospitals with health care for a huge portion of our body carbon and obviously have a lot of different moving parts and obstacles to decarbonization. but yeah. So I'm I guess my question for that would be are there any outreach strategies that you're doing most hospitals with? facility that enter the hospitals for how to decarbonize how you might bring them into the.

[87:08] I don't think we've thought about that, but that's not a bad idea I don't know about. I I would question. We're not building the boss. No, exactly, exactly, exactly, and that's that's kind of why I was. That was my other. They probably left it out because we don't see the obstacles. But but for. But I think what we were doing here. Yeah, all there. Yeah. So yeah, for it's really to gain the design professionals that that handle those buildings. what they've seen and kind of what what they would recommend. I say the people in the buildings wouldn't have a good idea, but their jobs a little different than understanding the materials. And so That's why my thought was just go to the source, maybe with that. But that's a great comment. I didn't even think about that. And that's not really it. It's a difficult stick to all the codes that take precedence of it. It's like that. And we want to make sure that the work we're doing in the energy to the

[88:06] So it's not something, at least. But yeah, the limited resources we have to work on the code. We want to make sure we focus to those things that. Yeah, that that that is True. But the the reason I brought up the presentation we had earlier was because we saw that health care had one of the biggest so I think it is a really important sector to focus on, and so doing that out region, obviously with all the you know, moving parts in in hospitals, but being able to like, understand what they already do. that is different from the rest of the business sector as then being able to work with that. I think it's something that I would put as a priority also. and so they do still have a pathway through it. It's it's a little bit more intensive because they have to model the baseline in that. But but I think, too, like when looking at hospitals. One of the key things, I think, with hospitals is concrete, concrete, one of the lowest hanging through when it comes to early carbon reduction. That's probably what they mentioned on the slide. It's and that's kind of back to our point of they're singly. Yeah, yes, it's a. It's a big deal. Yes, yeah. Good thing. But interestingly, that our our hospitals probably get to be happy to do something

[89:28] I could say, I subject to the State department standard, and it's not there. Oh, okay, well, then. yeah. And that's I don't know. It's also interesting the product that was brought out about concrete. it was pretty recent, actually. But I'm sure people in in circles in the building circles are.

[90:00] yeah, I mean, aware of it. But there was some research that was recently done on a Roman buildings the environment buildings and how they manufactured concrete in a way that was actually less energy intensive, and they added limestone, so that, the concrete could actually regenerate itself. during like race fall and so there is less of a to replace the concrete that's already there. So If we haven't heard about it. I don't. I don't get enough money for it to like that. Well, we are sorry. But yeah, I mean,

[91:02] yeah, it's it. And and especially if we're talking about like C and D waste we would produce like C and D, basically for generating kind of concrete. So it's something that I would love to look into we have 2 more agenda items. I don't think you can. I want to go and get broken. That's all plan to I guess my, my last thing is And we have incentives for developers to turn the house so to make them more passive. And she find the building? and that would also use less energy. be more energy efficient? especially because it flex more light in the winter time. And then.

[92:04] yeah, yeah, so it's gonna I know it's been a discussion for like a few years at least. And again, you can be similar to what we're looking at for level. 3 alterations of trying to encourage. You know, we can reduce the or I target or something like that to where? Yeah, I think it's to reconsider. Just make thoughtful design decisions. Really? Yeah, so yeah. okay, and I think. yeah, maybe have, like, a very small incentive for the for the building. If buildings were to participate in that baseline pilot study what I would suggest. That's it. Well, I don't. I mean, I'm pretty long recommendations. I just as I mentioned earlier, I'd love to see more easy parking requirements and just higher number permits on those And

[93:03] so I guess 5% is fine if we're seeing a lot more. But it would also be great to see higher minimums, because I I'm sure not. All companies are going to both the minimum. And so it'd be great to see a higher minimum for commercial buildings. I know they weren't a huge focus of the presentation tonight, but just in general, I'd love to see more restrictions on commercial buildings than on residential there that, you know, big like conglomerations of carbon emissions, you know, that aren't necessarily viable like this one, the building like code, but, like all the people commuting in it's not necessarily going to be the building code. So it'd be great to see, you know, more offsets in the building code to help offset sort of the the transportation as you're talking about here. and I don't know to what extent that you do when working on building energy heads, but working directly with potential incentives that the city could provide to see where you could heighten parts of the codes and make them more responsible.

[94:04] That might be more like higher cost. But if the city could offer an incentive to sort of mirror, that so that you could have sort of some more efficiency within the codes that is enabled by sort of city incentive. I don't know what extent do that already, but it's it'd be great to see that if it isn't done. My 2 recommendations. thanks for yeah. Do we have any data on the ratio? Us. Vehicles, or. like, you know, to kind of them to buy the parking requirements once in the vehicle that one would say that vehicles the United States electric vehicles and the chance on their vehicles, and so that I think our buildings, our vehicle stock is somewhere in the middle, like 5 6 at this point.

[95:08] Yeah, I mean, we. We still have the highest adoption right in this day. but again, you have to wait for. Yeah, we all want to cycle through. I mean, we have this question during the energy code conversation. Right? I think within a lifetime of these buildings. we're going to be kidding that the same road map of, you know, 60, you know 60% of new sales. And I think it's 30% of stock, those types of numbers. And so I think those are definitely once we should plan for in in terms, because the lifetime of these buildings is certainly it's a lifetime of the the parking services.

[96:06] Yeah. I have one AV and 4 gas cars. I don't know how that makes me look. hey? At least you have. An they're all. It's it's nothing special. Okay? yeah. I agree on the proposed areas of focus. I then there is of interest. there is. There is a focus that should be included. not really, I think just like I said earlier, explored options to the all set of control gas or residential. But in addition to commercial, which is what you already planned.

[97:01] and they also meant some There was a butter about barriers to one side, Sol, or which was like what I was saying earlier. But you know houses are like mine. A couple of trees. it seems like it's something you're exploring. There's no really like. I will say it's important. So you know, little files this year, like, probably one. it'll get a lot of some, maybe. yeah. Those 2 things that we'll say, like, all of the yeah in terms of engagement. I don't really have any. So it's just an ideas, I mean. are you? I think what you're doing is good, you know. targeting the developers to sign this because I don't. I don't think the I mean the public. I don't know. It just seems like it will be. This will be better targeted most developers on sign there and make this building. So

[98:02] yeah, I think that's what? Sorry. Well, thank you guys for coming here. And then. yeah, this is an email from crystal grey. you got it all. If you guys, you guys received it. Yeah, yeah, I would. I would like to say, I agree with And we did for that to Caroline. So would you mind sharing it with Yup, I will for that with the team and appreciate it. So yes, we did receive those and then again to our and from the public also. to feel free to reach out to us on the board. to to that that would be great. One more thing on that note. She asked if we could that for information. The newspapers of public knows what the considerations are. So if there's more outreach that can be done to the community just for educational purposes and awareness.

[99:10] Yes, that is before you guys present to council. You could just send those the one paragraph. a summary of what we discussed today, just to make sure that we're at the place where points of view that will be great. You have a place called report already. Right? Not taking credit for that. That's just a lot of nice things. I don't know what. Thank you again for coming here today.

[100:02] We're going to run away. That's a great meeting every month. Yeah. Have a good night. What do you want it to do? You can like anybody else. Okay. no, not much. We've had a couple of, but they were real. They they would.

[101:01] Okay, like, it's board accounts. Okay. But it's bad. they're raising that per month. That's $50 is for parking outside. Instead of parking in the garage. 55, the pocket of garage $50 to per outside. It's for us a huge difference. Seems like it should be a lot cheaper to pack it up so it seems like it's great it should be. We are on my like. you on a car.

[102:12] Thank you. Everyone. Right, guys, we got 15 min. So this is one of the last 2 items in the agenda The next one is to talk about like the memo, the telephone what is but all the nose it's mostly for us to discuss. If there any items that are up that are coming up before it comes to the next couple of months, we would like to also be in the. So if you go to the last page. page 23 there is these additional counsel items participated. If you see anything that you think we could provide input or I guess

[103:02] anything. But I don't know. What do you guys think one opened up up for discussion. And then. I mean, potentially the just to to any of the housing or the so the university help partial that, or their buildings would be depending on the angles that they're working with. So so that's going to depend, I think, entirely on sort of what the revisions are looking at. Yeah. So those items that so maybe if a little more information on what

[104:01] the agenda will be for those study sessions for the University Hill when it was a hill. Commercial maybe the affordable commercial program development. That's also the same date. okay, 2024. If I should. And then September 14, there's 30 session on the 2024 budget. There's always something we could get some input as well. But yeah, just basically, I think we've got a little more information before we say, like, it's, it's things that could potentially have something that we could, you know, voice in on. But it there isn't that information involved to really know. And then I think I would go similarly about the Golden Junction land. Use math amendments again. Yeah. More information. Just to understand that. That's you know what is the data that that is? September 20. First.

[105:04] it's a public hearing. Okay. what is? We fold our Sbc Update, P and Ds. I just don't know what this is. I'm not sure. Yeah, I can. what's the date of that? that is one of our 22. I just don't know what it is. But if it's planning, it could be related to environmental. Yeah, we're gonna have an environment to it definitely. get more information from you. All all right. The last item of the agenda will be the the next. If I like a device or a meeting schedule for you like pick. I propose that. We moved it to July 12. it's because of it's really just to J like forth. Some people may be on vacation

[106:09] covering from location. So did you guys have any objections to that or what? Okay? So I motion to move the next meeting to July 12, I'm a second and and then the one would be, do we have any agenda for them? I mean, I remember you how you show me a calendar with the I cannot recall at the top of my head. I'm sorry. okay, so I think with that, said, I think we are done so. My motion to conclude the meeting today. and a second good. Thank you.