My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2021 06 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2021 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2021 06 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/3/2022 3:32:04 PM
Creation date
2/3/2022 3:26:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
6/10/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Quality Check
2/3/2022
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />June 10, 2021 <br />Page 8 of 15 <br />Brauneis asked if LEED was limited to office buildings or if it was still required for all <br />buildings of a certain size. <br />Zuccaro replied that he believed the current proposal was just office buildings, and <br />Brauneis asked Mr. Baukol to address that in his final comment. <br />Moline asked staff to comment on public notice and certification and the concern that <br />people might not have known about the public comment tonight. <br />Zuccaro stated that when a hearing was continued, the formal notice only took place for <br />the original hearing. After that, an item was continued to a date certain and additional <br />notice was not required because it was assumed that people knew the date of the <br />continuance. It was the Commissions' discretion to reopen public comment at a <br />continuance. <br />Brauneis stated that they reopened comment more than they wanted to, as they <br />generally liked to keep things clean and separate. <br />Zuccaro stated that they had followed proper procedure and if the Commission wanted <br />to request additional public notice they could because of the circumstances. He added <br />that the City wanted the process to be the same for applicants and he thought this <br />process was consistent with what had been done in the past. <br />Brauneis asked for commissioner input on the public comment process. General <br />agreement that the process had been followed and hopes that the public had had the <br />opportunity to voice their opinions. <br />Baukol summarized that their consultants had stated that core and shell industrial was <br />very hard to meet with LEED Silver because the majority of points came from MEP <br />systems. He reiterated that the sustainability commitments applied to all of the buildings <br />on the site and LEED was one way to measure and brand those sustainability <br />commitments. He stated that the GDP aligned with the Small Area Plan and the Comp <br />Plan, that the development would be at the leading edge of sustainability for <br />developments, staff was supporting it, and staff's interests were aligned with the City. <br />Diehl asked about electrification for industrial buildings. <br />Jordan Swisher with the development team said that the process nature and the varying <br />range of the types of uses made electrification difficult. <br />Josh Radoff added that industrial buildings had process uses such as commercial <br />ovens and to ban gas entirely would be a community -wide decision based on uses <br />versus building design. They wanted to maintain some openness of the types of <br />employers that they wanted to see that was why it was left open. <br />Brauneis asked about LEED and industrial buildings. <br />Radoff responded that core and shell was a difficult rating system because even if the <br />tenants were known it was difficult to take credit for anything they do. It was somewhat <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.