Monday, January 4, 2010

Meeting minutes 2010_01_04


Meeting Minutes: Jan 4th, 2010

Participants: Awie, Bev, Leah, Lisa, Alyssa, Kirsten,Jim,



Meeting Objective: Reach agreement on strategy for upcoming critical meetings, and outline of a policy document to be created by Wednesday, January 6, 2010. This document to be shared with SFPUC staff and Commissioner(s).


Summary of Discussion:


Schedule:

Jan 12 th: SFPUC MEETING

Jan 8th and Jan 11th: PREVIEW MEETING with Sarah

Weds: Drafted letter with language approved and sent by 5pm


Discussion of Pros and Cons of other cities:

Bev did a review of SFPUC storm water management ordinance and state water board documents and EPA documents. Bev wanted to make sure we are bringing new information information and information is updated. SF green building ordinance research request from Pam is posted on the blog. Research was on waste water fee incentives/approach. Leah did some research and found that residents don't have any connection or are not tied directly to their property for storm water fee structure. Leah also discussed metered ( use X flow rate) linking water to specific

Alyssa is form seattle and has worked on green roofs there and has looked at the SF sustainable financing (SFSF2) special tax district taxed higher of like minded property owners to retro fit their homes and businesses for storm water, green roofs, renewable energy, etc… it is funded by private entities such as (Renewable Funding LLC ) This will effect home owners and each property can be looked at for best use, best sustainability practice for the site. Pam also had contacted a cross over person between SFPUC, SF government and this could be helpful for policy collaboration.

Bev and Pam and Awie had worked on desalinating all the information, research, and current storm water policy . They looked at Chicago, Portland and Toronto. Lisa provided information via charlie miller on Philadelphia as well. Bev liked Toronto's green roof by laws as it had more aggressive policies.


What should our recommendations be to the Public Utilities Comission?


Ideas short and long term:

Look at Toronto’s guidelines for replaces impervious surfaces. They start at 2,000 sq m (Conversion: 2000 m² = 21527.820 ft²). Given the density of SF housing situation, should this be smaller?


Suggestion for a tiered system that progresses over time. For example: First two years, everything over 5,000 sq ft counts and this consistently reduces down to 0 over a course of 10 years. sample matrix


What about incentivizing green roofs through monetary awards? ($5 per square foot?) Look into adding on to the rain barrel program?

Public Utilities can also give grants for installation/education projects.


Driveway program. Impermeable driveway. Advantage loan or tax rebate. Curb appeal – very important.. Permeable paving. Sidewalk programs? City will cost for half the cost of repaving if you include trees. Draining and stormwater.


Stormwater fee? Implementation? Transparency?

At the PUC website – just finding the stormwater link is difficult – need type in wastewater/sewer

No direct link_


LEED silver gets you expedited permitting. What about a green roof project separately?


Comments:

Leah: liked teared system. She feels currently the system is not aggressive enough. Targets for different levels of disturbance


Bev: minimum for teared system: sample matrix, waterfront land use.port of SF, any waterfront property is not exempt, water front/ sensitive properties should meet higher bench mark( jim commented waterfront already regulated)


Jim:what about remodeling up or out? how do you get these additional sq/ footage, % of properties value? Storm water assessment floor area/ ratio


Lisa: reduce baseline to 1000 sq/ft. Increase incentives over time as Sq/ ft disturbance tolerance lessens.




Recommendations for strategy


prioritizing:

actions on the 12th:

1. Pg 5 line 16-18 definition of storm water control. Can we add language for mitigation strategies and describe green roofs more clearly.

2. Reduced sq/ footage ask for 1000 sq/ft first if not 2500 sq/ft or phased approach over time (5 -10 years).


Later actions:

1. education

2. driveway program

3. transparency: home by home impact on storm water issues

4.Storm water fee

7.green roof calculator

8. fast track permitting


Next Meetings:

Friday ( 1/8) Awie, Alyssa, Bev, Leah, Jim, Aaron( SF residents)

Monday(1/11): Awie, Alyssa, Lisa, Bev, Jim, Leah, Aaron( SF residents)

Tues(1/12) 1:30pm CITY HALL : Awie, Lisa, Bev, Jim, Aaron, Leah( we want as many as possible)


Action Items needing to be complete for the 12th:

1.weds 5pm letter complete

2.5000 sq/ft reduction research coordination

3. meter conversion: see above (Conversion: 2000 m² = 21527.820 ft²)

4. Pam contact crossover governmental position who may have influence in several arenas

5. edit and add language for pg.5 pts 16-18

6. Task group for the letter led by Alyssa

7. follow up incentive programs provided by SFPUC




Contact for meeting attendees:


Leah Fessenden, Use Your Roof! Project Intern


Kirsten Schwind, Program Director at Bay Localize/ exp with Berkeley Energy Commission


lisa lee benjamin
970.846.8228 cell
www.evodesign.biz

www.alpineinitiatives.org


Beverley Powell
408.406.3439 mobile
beverly.g.pow...@gmail.com


Awie Smit
Habitat Gardens
(415) 298-3536


Aaron Lehmer
Network Development Director, Bay Localize
"Building Stronger Communities through Regional Self-Reliance"
436 14th Street, Suite 1127
Oakland, CA 94612
www.habitatgarden.com/


Jim Davidge
davidgedes...@gmail.com
Mobile - 415.987.4649


Alyssa Martin

425.761.1330

Alyssa@afiercegreenfire.com


1 comment:

  1. Thanks for getting these up quickly! and thanks to all who participated today...

    I reread some of the sections of the proposed ordinance- especially the definition section. I think it will be important to try to get them to extend the definition of projects impacted from ground surface sq ft to addition and redevelopment of both permeable and impermeable surface area- so that additions that build up but meet the threshold for replacement of the existing impermeable roof area would fall under these guidelines.
    As it exists I don't think ground surface is inclusive of roof areas.

    ReplyDelete