Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Packet 2018-05-07 MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD May 7, 2018 AGENDA 1. Call the meeting to order and Pledge of Allegiance 2. Person to be heard and Board comments 3. Presentation—Form Based Zoning Update 4. Discuss and consider acceptance of the Green Building Policy Report and direct staff to draft Code language for policy recommendations 5. Discuss and consider Ethics Disclosure Forms and any changes to it 6. Discuss and consider authorization for Town Supervisor to sign an agreement with ConsultEcon for further work associated with the Inlet Valley Corridor study 7. Discuss and consider referral of a speed limit reduction for Mitchell St to the County 8. Discuss and consider authorization for Town Staff to proceed with contracting appraisal services for potential agricultural conservation easement at 471 Bostwick Rd 9. Consider Consent Agenda a. Approval of Town Board Minutes b. Town of Ithaca Abstract c. Bolton Point Abstract d. Ratify Highway Superintendent's appointment of a Parks Manager E. Establishment of New York State and Local Retirement Systems Standard Work Day F. Appoint Conservation Board Member —George 10. Review of Correspondence 11. Officials Reports 12. Adjournment 11 5�0FIT TOWN OF ITHACA d 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 F 1821 Office of the Supervisor � Nick Goldsmith, Sustainability Planner W YO Email: ngoldsmith@town.ithaca.ny.us Phone: 607-273-1721 x136 To: Town Board of the Town of Ithaca From: Nick Goldsmith, Sustainability Planner Date: May 2, 2018 RE: Green Building Policy Report The purpose of this memo is to provide background information for the upcoming Green Building Policy discussion at the May 7, 2018 Town Board meeting. In 2016,the City of Ithaca was awarded a $100,000+ grant to study green building policies with the Town of Ithaca. In 2017 the City and the Town began working on the Green Building Policy project with a consultant team led by Stream Collaborative and sub consultants Taitem Engineering and Randall +West Planners. The main deliverable of this project is the Green Building Policy Report, which provides policy recommendations for energy efficiency requirements and related incentives to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings,while emphasizing and supporting affordability. A steering committee made up of Town of Ithaca and City of Ithaca elected officials and senior staff members has guided the project since the grant was awarded. An advisory committee made up of 13 community stakeholders met five times to provide feedback. Town Planning and Codes staff provided input on specific recommendations and implementation. In addition, extensive outreach has been done to reach various stakeholder groups and municipal boards. Feedback received after the completion of the first draft Green Building Policy report informed the second draft report. The second draft was circulated for comments and the project team held a public outreach meeting in late March, as well as dedicated outreach sessions with Cornell and Ithaca College. Through this review process we received over 200 comments from several local organizations and community members. Many comments expressed general support, others stated that the policy recommendations are not strong enough to meet local climate goals. Comments from large institutions expressed concern with elements of the proposed policy and their ability to comply with the requirements. All comments on the second draft, along with responses from the project team, are attached for your review. The final Green Building Policy report, dated April 25, 2018, is attached. The report incorporates changes and clarifications prompted by public comments; all changes are tracked in the document. Page 1 of 2 You can download both the final Green Building Policy report with changes tracked and a clean version of the final Green Building Policy report at the project website: hUp://www.ithacagreenbuilding.com/documents. The attached resolution is to accept the Green Building Policy final report and to direct staff to begin developing code language for a green building policy.A similar resolution will be considered at the May 02, 2018 Common Council meeting. We recognize that additional work, such as research and stakeholder outreach, is needed to provide a level of detail sufficient to develop code language for a green building policy that can be considered for adoption by the Town Board (and the Common Council). However, as documented in the public comments, it is important to stress that the need for careful vetting of any proposed legislation must be balanced with the need to act quickly to address climate change amidst a local building boom.A thorough but swift codification and adoption process will give the Town (and the City) of Ithaca the best chance of meeting their ambitious climate goals and securing Ithaca's reputation as a leader in environmental action. Please feel free to contact me with any questions at ngoldsmith@town.ithaca.n�us or on my cell at 917-270-1683. Attached: 1. Resolution to Accept Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Codify Policy Recommendations for Review and Consideration of Adoption 2. Final Green Building Policy report, dated April 25,2018,with changes tracked 3. Comments on Second Draft Green Building Policy Report(dated 03/09/18) and responses from the project team Page 2 of 2 MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD Monday, May 7, 2018 TB Resolution 2018 - : Accept Green Building Policy Report and to Direct Staff to Draft Code Language for Policy Recommendations Whereas the Town of Ithaca has endorsed sustainability and climate protection as overarching principles to guide long-term decision-making; and Whereas the Town of Ithaca believes that the scale of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reductions required for climate stabilization will require sustained and substantial efforts; and Whereas more than half of the Ithaca community GHG emissions come from residential and commercial buildings; and Whereas the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan states as a guiding principle"The Town enacts and implements policies and regulations that integrate sustainability and climate protection into building and construction practices and land use planning;" and Whereas the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan recommends "Consider adopting a building code to require all new construction projects and major renovations to incorporate green building techniques and achieve specific energy efficiency standards" and "...create,promote and maintain incentives, financing options, and education and outreach campaigns that support energy efficiency in new and existing buildings;" and Whereas with the aid of a consultant team, as part of the Green Building Policy project, the Town and the City of Ithaca have worked together to conduct a comprehensive examination of our existing and future building stock, as well as green building standards for new construction and potential economic, social and environmental impacts of policies which incentivize or mandate those standards; and Whereas the Green Building Policy report provides policy recommendations for energy efficiency requirements and related incentives to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings, while emphasizing and supporting affordability; and Whereas the creation of the report has been assisted by guidance from a municipal steering committee, an advisory committee, and input from many stakeholder groups, including Town Planning and Codes staff and municipal boards; and Whereas additional work, such as research (possibly in conjunction with a technical consultant) and stakeholder outreach, is needed to provide a level of detail sufficient to develop municipal code language for a green building policy; now therefore be it Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca accepts the Green Building Policy report, dated April 25, 2018; and be it further Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca directs staff to perform additional research and stakeholder outreach and then to draft code language for review and consideration of adoption that would implement the policy recommendations contained in the Green Building Policy report. Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Comments Received Regarding Green Building Policy Second Draft(date 03-09-18)and Responses from Project Team Name Page# Comment Response Milton Taam regarding the igbp,how was point value determined?If goal is The point system did involve computer simulation to seek 6- reducing ghg footprint it seems there is a need to quantitively 10%carbon emissions reduction per point. The point system associate ghg footprint reduction with point assignment.the centers around affordability-most of the points either reduce current scheme seems to underated heat loss reduction using construction cost or add very little to it,with a few exceptions design and insulation and overate HP hardware.the points (for example,renewables,without which we cannot reach net- also seem to overrate biofuels significantly without regard to zero energy). Things like insulation,which add to a building's health,climate and harvest consideration. cost,can be done in several ways: 1.The whole building path 2.The"improvement of your choice"in the points path 3.The stretch code,also in the points path. Milton Taam My concern with heat pumps is they become the dominate Since New York State is a summer-peaking state for source of residential heat.HP demand power when solar pv electricity,it is not expected to be winter-peaking for some output is low.Also HP could be hard to demand regulate,both time,even if there is large-scale conversion to heat pumps.By because lack capacity and large cycle time reguired. the time it is winter-peaking,24-hour renewables(such as wind capacity)and/or storage(batteries,thermal,or chemical) are anticipated to assist with winter peaking due to heat pumps. Milton Taam Discounts possibility of renewable methane.Overrated biofuel, This comment is acknowledged. particurky if health effects added to equation. Natural gas hot water better than resistance. Milton Taam Interesting number is what peak electric demand would be on Since New York State is a summer-peaking state for a very cold winter day in the nyiso region if most heating used electricity,it is not expected to be winter-peaking for some hp.Temp diff might be 70-neg 10 or 80f in winter vs 110-75 time,even if there is large-scale conversion to heat pumps.By or 35f in summer.it seems the winter demand delta could be the time it is winter-peaking,24-hour renewables(such as more the twice the summer demand delta,particularly wind capacity)and/or storage(batteries,thermal,or chemical) considering reduced hp performance on very cold days.my are anticipated to assist with winter peaking due to heat understanding is the natural gas system spends the summer pumps. storing gas to meet the winter heating demand. Milton Taam my understanding is a telsa battery is about 100 kwh.that This comment is acknowledged. would be enough energy for my hp for perhaps a cold winter day.the idea of 30 to 100 tesla car battery resources dedicated to a single home heat is undoubtly expensive and a waste or resource.My guess is daily peaks will be filled by batteries but seasonal peaks would use methane,either fossil or renewable synthesized as i think germany is considering.i recall i sent you a paper on the german study. Milton Taam I wonder if electric to hydrogen or renewable methane would This comment is acknowledged. serve as a giant seasonal storage battery.For homeowners like me,a small electric to hydrogen converter and storage tank would be interesting.in europe i understand they are testing blending 10%hydrogen into the natural gas system.i think the idea that the natural gas system is eventually going to be a stranded,outdated asset is likely wrong.the current seasonal storage capacity of the natural gas system is substantial;gas pipelines are more efficient than electricity for long-distance power transmission,and finally creating new right-of-ways for electric power is politically challenging. Buzz Dolph Please mention for me the issues of the(current)code making This policy doesn't change the current Energy Code it unfairly difficult for smaller buildings. Blower door, requirements for air infiltration but one of the benefits of the clearances,and so on. Easy Path is that it acknowledges that smaller residential buildings use less energy than larger buildings.In the context of the proposed Green Building Policy small buildings will be able to comply more easily than large buildings. Joe Bowes As the City and County move forward with the heatpump/all The State Architect says that they have issued waivers for electric/Green initiatives I think it would make sense to check heat pumps.If the local municipality essentially requires a in with our State funders. Below is an email that I sent to the fossil-fuel free building then this will support an application for State Architect who oversee the LIHTC applications. He the use of heat pumps.This is an example of where the local basically says we cannot use heatpumps. I'm wondering if policy should drive the choice and not give in to an older or there is some education around the issue that Tompkins less informed policy at the state level.If it is mandated locally County could bring to HCR? This could be an issue for Tburg then the state will have to address their own policy or issue which is where we were hoping to try out the technology. waivers. 1 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Joe Wilson The standards must be more rigorous.Either require more The standards have been made more rigorous since the first points for a building permit,or shorter time lines to reach the draft.For example,the points required were originally 5,and more rigorous 2030 and 2050 standards,or both. are now 6. As another example,the building size requirements were originally 10%and 20%,and are now 15% and 30%.The standards as proposed are more rigorous than the state Energy Code,the proposed state Energy Stretch Code,and most codes in the nation.The standards then transition to even higher levels in 2025 and 2030,at a pace equal or faster than the some of the most progressive standards in the nation. Incentives are proposed to encourage design and construction at the higher levels starting immediately. A brief transition period is believed to allow a smoother adoption of the proposed policy. Joe Wilson The Policy should include the recommendation that CEQR and We agree that the DEC's guide is a strong document for TEQR be amended to incorporate the DEC's"Guide for assessing GHG emissions,and that GHG should be Assessing Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions in an considered wholistically(including transportation related GHG) Environmental Impact Statement,2009." in CEQR and TEAR. Joe Wilson Fossil Fuel use should be directly discouraged as part of the We feel it is already indirectly discouraged through the point Policy when it is first implemented. system,but agree that it is worth adding explicitly,and propose to make a change by adding wording that states: "Fossil fuels are indirectly discouraged by the policy,through the point system. The City/Town actively urges builders/developers to consider not using fossil fuels." Joe Wilson The City and Town laws which are to be modified to put the Further review and suggested edits to Town and City codes recommended Policy into effect should be specified. will be Phase 2 of the project. Joe Wilson There should be a time line and process described for the The Common Council and Town Board will consider a codification of all provisions of the Policy. resolution to direct staff to perform additional research and stakeholder outreach,and to codify the policy recommendations in May(subject to change). It is unclear how long it will take to codify the chosen policy,or how long it will take the governing bodies to discuss and consider adoption of proposed legislation.We propose adding language similar to this(above)to the report,as well as language stressing the importance of balancing the need for thorough vetting of any proposed legislation with the need to act quickly to addresss climate change amidst a local building boom. Ian Shapiro 1.New York Passive House(based in NY City)asked that we We propose to add Passive House International as an add"Passive House International"to the approved paths. additional whole building compliance path. Passive House International is similar to Passive House U.S., but there are some differences. The end result is regarded to be similar. Both are approved by the New York Stretch Code, for example.Both systems are used in the U.S. Ian Shapiro 2.A mistake was identified in the building shape table.The We propose to correct this mistake. values are mistakenly low by about 10%. Ian Shapiro 3.Since the NEW stretch code(20%better than code)is We propose to change the points for the New York Stretch moving faster than expected and may well be approved before Code to 2,if the new stretch code is adopted. the FIRST stretch code(10%better than code)was approved (which it hasn't been),we may want to reference the new stretch code,and give 2 points(or even 3)for it. Robert M.Fell- 1.What specific actions will be required during site plan review Applicants will need to submit sufficient documentation to DeWalt and application process for building permit to ensure project show compliance with either the speciffic points they choose goals are implemented?What will be expected of the under the easy path,or the whole building path with 3rd party developer/permit applicant to implement these requirements? verification.In most cases this is not expected to be significantly more work than is already required for building permits,however compliance with the policy would need to be considered early in the design process as it is easiest to achieve the points and goals if they are integrated into the project from the most conceptual stages of planning and design. Robert M.Fell- 2.What level of additional responsibility will be required of The building division staff will need to verify documentation for DeWalt Building Division staff during plan review prior to issuance of a compliance with either the whole building path(which would building permit? include documentation from a 3rd party reviewer)or the easy path which can be checked with standard construction documents and caluclations required to be submitted for a building permit review. Robert M.Fell- 3.What specific actions will be required during construction to In order to be feasible for implementation the proposed easy DeWalt ensure project goals are implemented?Will there be a third- path is entirely design focused,it does not involve verification party certification?What level of additional responsibility will of performance,though it should be noted that for many be required of either the developer or the Building Division buildings the current enegy code already requires significant staff to document the project goals are achieved? commissioning. 2 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Robert M.Fell- 4.The proposed Easy Path is just that—it is too easy.No The standards have been made more rigorous since the first DeWalt developer will select the Whole Building Path if they can meet draft.For example,the points required were originally 5,and the requirements of the Ithaca Green Building Policy by taking are now 6. As another example,the building size these baby steps on the Easy Path.The Easy Path should requirements were originally 10%and 20%,and are now 15% require achievement of a minimum of ten or twelve points and 30%.The standards as proposed are more rigorous than instead of the six. the state Energy Code,the proposed state Energy Stretch Code,and most codes in the nation.The standards then transition to even higher levels in 2025 and 2030,at a pace equal or faster than the some of the most progressive standards in the nation. Incentives are proposed to encourage design and construction at the higher levels starting immediately. A brief transition period is believed to allow a smoother adoption of the proposed policy. Robert M.Fell- 5.Make the New York Stretch Code a mandatory requirement The New York Stretch Code generally adds to the cost of a DeWalt for all new construction and major renovations. building.The proposed policy allows equal or greater reductions in carbon without necessarily adding to the cost of a building. Robert M.Fell- 6.Ithaca has a huge inventory of existing building stock—let's The policy requires all renovations to implement energy DeWalt find a way to implement energy saving updates in all except savings,even small renovations. the minor renovation projects.Financial incentives,DIY clinics, "Help Centers"where experienced technicians can be invited to go to a home or business and provide minor energy improvements. Robert M.Fell- 7.Discouraging the use of fossil fuels is not the be-all and end- On a state-wide average basis,heat pumps result in lower DeWalt all for green building policy. carbon emissions. This has been affirmed by all major policy- a.Discouraging or prohibiting fossil fuels shifts the burden of makers(New York State,New York City,NEEP,the national energy supply to power generation plants,many of which rely labs,and more).Heat pumps have been shown to operate on coal or natural gas to generate electricity. well,even at low outdoor temperatures,without any backup b.There are inefficiencies and shortcomings with heat pump heat,by the Canadian government(colder climate than Ithaca) systems that cannot provide satisfactory results for year-round and others,when designed and installed correctly.Occupant usage.Sometimes a well-design HVAC system,using forced- behavior is difficult to reach through building code air or hydronics,can be very efficient and reliable. requirements.We propose to add a recommendation that c.Switching the energy supply does not touch one of the root approaches to behavior,such as education and advocacy,be causes of wasting energy—occupant behavior. considered. Robert M.Fell- 8.Underthe Easy Path,there are some options listed under a.Yes,these are intended to address affordable housing(as DeWalt the title"Affordability Improvements". well as affordability in general). For example,buildings that a.ls this category meant to address the need for affordable are not overlit require fewer light fixtures and so lower housing?How does the selection of these specific options construction cost.As another example,buildings with simpler translate into providing more affordable housing? shapes also reduce construction cost while also reducing heat b.Option A/1 advocates smaller room sizes.This must be loss and so reducing energy and carbon emissions.All of the placed against the backdrop of the City of Ithaca Code improvements in the category called"Affordability Housing Standards and the New York State Uniform Code, Improvements"should reduce both construction cost and both of which have minimum size requirements for specific reduce carbon emissions. In addition,several of the other rooms. points are expected to cost the same or cost less than their comparable approaches. For example,heat pumps have reduced in cost and currently cost about the same as the combination of furnaces/boilers and air conditioning,and are strongly expected to keep reducing in cost to well below the cost of traditional systems.Also,other points,such as building reuse,are expected to cost less. b.Smaller apartment and house sizes have been checked and are comfortably larger than the minimum required by the City of Ithaca and NY State Uniform Code. Carolyn Sarno Document is LEED heavy The policy does not require LEED at all,just the required Goldthwaite, energy points in LEED. In addition,there is an entire non- Director of LEED compliance option. Buildings& Community Solutions, Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships (NEEP) Carolyn Sarno For any publically funded schools why not look at NE CHPS? The focus of the green building policy is only energy(carbon Goldthwaite emissions)and water,not other green aspects.The background for this is provided in the policy. Carolyn Sarno Outreach portion be mindful of the terminology that is used Comment is acknowledged. Goldthwaite with stakeholders Darren Port, 3 Ithaca City and Town goals...[presumably replace"Local"with "Local"here refers more generally to the county,and City and Buildings& "Ithaca City and Town"] portion of the town: The city does have an 80-by-50 goal,but Community the town's is limited to municipal operations. For simplicity,we Solutions plan to leave the text as is. Manager,NEEP Darren Port 3 If a key aspect of the initiative is affordability then LEED is Actual certification is not required. We propose to clarify this contradictory to the goal if actual certification is required. here. 3 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Darren Port 3 Perhaps a few lines here that explain what this doc is and We propose to make these edits. what overall doc is trying to achieve. Darren Port 4 It would be good to show the 2025 and zero-energy The 2025 requirements are in the document,and the net-zero requirements now for planning and if current buildings want to 2030 requirements are recommended to be defined by exceed base requirements. January 1,2024. We propose to add a summary of these to the beginning of the document. Darren Port 4 Showing some of the maps would be interesting.Either here We will consider adding some of these maps. or in an appendix. Darren Port 4 Perhaps existing buildings is covered in more detail,but as the We agree. The scope of the project was new buildings only. report stated above only modest growth is expected so We have included a recommendation that existing buildings be existing buildings seems where the savings need to occur. subject to a similar study and policy development. Darren Port 5 DOE Home Energy Score. At time of sale or a program that We propose to add here: "Examples of benchmarking policies requires buildings of a certain sq ft to get score with in a include a requirement that buildings be evaluated for their certain time frame. So all buildings 5000-7500sq ft have till energy use,either at the time of sale,or on a periodic basis. 2021 to get score,2500-5000 by 2024 etc. This can either be applied for all buildings,or for types of buildings or for buildings of a minimum size.The energy use can be represented either with a full report of energy use,or as some form of simplified score." Darren Port 6 RESNET and WEIRS offer deeper water savings then Water RESNET's HERSH2O index was just released in early 2018, Sense,although Water Sense is a great start. and feels too new/untested to try yet. WERS's requirements (for example,0.8 gallon toilets,1.5 GPM shower heads,etc.) still receive mixed responses from consumers,and feel like too big a jump. Darren Port 6 Is this[heat pump space heating requirement]being coupled Renewables may be selected to contribute to compliance with with renewables or a renewables requirement? either the Easy Path or the Whole Building Path,but is not a standalone requirement. The heat pump requirement is not specifically coupled with a requirement for renewables. Darren Port 6 This seems like it should be a requirement all systems and A foundation of the policy was established early on to include duct work in conditioned space. flexibility.We also did not want to find ourselves in a situation where some specific building type could not be built if we overly restricted design options.And if we set this as a requirement,it could bring construction of retail buildings(big box)to a virtual halt,because those buildings are all designed using rooftop heating/cooling equipment,which are by definition outside the building. Darren Port 6 Provide links to the programs. Was Enterprise Green The Enterprise Green Communities(EGC)program was Communities Program considered? Why was NAHB ICC 700 considered.The green building policy decided to focus only on included but not Green Globes? What about IGCC and energy and water. EGC references EPA's Energy Star 189.1? programs,for example Energy Star for Homes.Energy Star for Homes in turn references the HERS rating,which is one of the proposed compliance paths. IGCC has reportedly only been adopted by"a handful of buildings".And,as with EGC,LEED, etc,the focus of the green building policy has also been limited to energy/carbon and water,and so the non-energy aspects of IGCC and 189.1 do not apply.IGCC and 189.1 are also reportedly in flux as they seek to merge. Darren Port 6 Smaller verse cost,seems more backstops need to be in place Comment is acknowledged. to ensure affordability.If a developer makes a unit smaller but feels it may be less marketable because of size,so puts in granite counter tops,or fireplaces,a jacuzzi bath then is smaller still affordable. Smaller units doesn't mean smaller building. Darren Port 6 Is biomass defined?Is landfill gas permitted? A reference to biomass is provided. We propose to additionally add a definition of biomass in the Glossary. We do not believe there is landfill gas in the City of Ithaca or Town of Ithaca. Darren Port 6 Why nothing on IAQ,or toxicity? This report is focused on energy and reduction of GHG.Future study of additional green building features are recommended. Discussion of this is included in the FAQ at the beginning of the document,and within the report itself. Darren Port 6 There will be three levels of the stretch code 20 and 40 We propose to adjust the points to the standard that ends up percent and zero energy,you may want to offer 1,2 or 3 being released by NYSERDA.We have a scheduled a points accordingly. meeting to discuss with NYSERDA on 4/6/18. Darren Port 6 Just build to the standard or be certified? Requirements are spelled out in the report.Certification is not required. For each whole-building standard,different design documentation is required. 4 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Darren Port 7 Thinking about Boulders approach,build what you want up to We evaluated a wide number of programs,including those of 5500 sq ft but must meet stringent energy requirements. several other cities around the country.The project scope Seems simple and straight forward,no point counting.Code precluded us from examining all emerging programs in the official,plan review,buyers all know what to expect based on country.The proposed policy covers all new buildings,not just year built. buildings up to 5500 SF. The point system has been tested on a wide number of buildings,has been reviewed by many stakeholders,and has been affirmed as being relatively simple,feasible for compliance documentation and review, and fairly unique in its promotion of affordable construction. Darren Port 8 LEED certified and even silver is coming in a cost parity with Requirements are spelled out in the report.Certification is not conventional construction as well as DOE ZERH.Again is required. For each whole-building standard,different design certification required or just built to the standard? documentation is required. Darren Port 8 How will town/city know buildings are performing,is there a The policy recommends that the City and Town separately monitoring component of the program,requiring utility data? consider developing a benchmarking program. Darren Port 8 Is there a plan to create the existing building program within a Development of the new-building policy was funded under a certain time frame of the new program?Seems it should come grant.We are close to completing the work under the grant. very quickly after the new program if not before? There is discussion of proceeding to an existing building policy study and recommendations,but this will need to be funded somehow before it can proceed. Darren Port 8 An EE building is one part of EE,how the building is operated New York State has relatively new commissioning is just as important. Perhaps requiring an O&M manual for all requirements as part of its Energy Conservation Construction buildings with operation info in English and Spanish,and list of Code. replacement components(filters,bulbs,etc)with a schedule for maintenance. Darren Port 8 Perhaps an appendix of applicable programs can be included. The full program requirements are spelled out in detail in the Who will approve the use of a program? policy.This portion of the policy is just an abbreviated FAQ. Darren Port 10 We signed it but maybe withdrawing. However NYS is one of We propose to correct this to clarify that the U.S.is a signatory 14 states that intends to comply. to the Paris agreement,but may be withdrawing,but that NYS is one of 14 states that intends to comply. Darren Port 12 Green buildings reduces flame spread as they are tighter, We propose to make these edits. reduce mold and moisture which preserves health but also building components. Vivien Rose 1.Meeting Described Goals: We propose to make the following edits,discussing Ithaca- These goals were stated on the website:(www. specific needs in the area of planning,design,and ithacagreenbuilding.com) consruction,including needs of a college town,climate-specific a.Lay the groundwork for increasing energy efficient needs(cold climate),geographic constraints of Ithaca development by gaining an understanding of the energy (bounded by the lake and three hills),and needs for affordable standards and policy tools available to and appropriate for housing and transportation. Ithaca Energy standards and policy tools defined.Appropriateness not defined or discussed Vivien Rose b.Understand potential positive and negative social impacts of We propose to add the definition of social impact: "A a green building policy significant,positive change that addresses a pressing social While I recall several small items being discussed in a pro-con challenge. Having a social impact is the result of a deliberate manner,I do not recall a definition of'social impacts'or a set of activities with a goal around this definition." University of summary of positive or negative ones re:green building policy. Michigan,Center for Social Impact,http://socialimpact.umich. Who did the team want to understand?The team?Town/City edu/about/what-is-social-impact/ elected officials? Vivien Rose c.Advance greenhouse gas reduction efforts The policy reccomendations are designed to substantially Define how team wanted to do this and whether successful. reduce carbon emissions from the building sector,which is the biggest contributor to GHG emissions locally(and in many other locations). Vivien Rose d.Lay the groundwork for reducing energy costs and "Lay the groundowork"was meant to indicate"prepare for"and improving public health "enable."This phase of the project involved a comprehensive Perhaps define groundwork?Section 4 was very well done but examination of our existing and future building stock,as well hidden. as green building standards for new construction and potential economic,social and environmental impacts of policies which incentivize or mandate those standards.The policy recommendations,if implemented,will result in buildings with markedly reduced energy costs and reduced emissions, resulting in improved public health. Vivien Rose e.Increase the diversity of active participants in Ithaca We proposed to address this briefly in the report.This goal sustainability efforts was acheived with moderate success.Through the steering This was not evaluated in the report committee and advisory committee,many new voices were incorporated into the local sustainability conversation.Going forward,we would like to see even more broad-based engagement.Progress towards this goal will continue in future phases of the project. 5 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose f.Assess and build support for mandated and/or incentivized We propose to clarify that the proposed policy comprises a set energy standards for new construction of mandated and incentivized new construction standards,in I did not see an assessment of support for mandated and/or the summary at the beginning of the report. We propose to incentivized new construction standards.It is not clear to me clarify that the draft built support through a series of open who is being asked to support new standards,or how the draft meetings of an advisory panel,and a subsequent set of policy built support—perhaps that could be called out outreach meetings,followed by a public comment period, specifically in a section that surveyed various parties to find resulting in these comments,which are being reviewed and out their support,report on any meetings,report on any stated responded to and many of which are being incorporated into support or lack of support. the report. Vivien Rose 2.Use of Data: Comment is acknowledged. The data in section 4 was necessary to understand the proposals and discussion,but it was the last section so I did not see it until after I'd tried to understand the prior sections. On occasion it appeared that policy implications for the reported data had not been analyzed carefully.One example would be the presentation of anomalous demographic data without a consideration of how and why the county had that population or the long term implications of it. Vivien Rose 3.Reliance on Non-Local Technology without Consideration of Place and interactions with ecosystem/neighborhood are Lifecycle Cost recognized through points for density and walkability,based I realize this is a green building policy,but I don't see how on recognized green building approaches.We propose to add buildings can be evaluated without understanding their place text to recognize the benefits of local and renewable materials. in and interactions with the ecosystem/neighborhood.I hoped to see more options for using local renewable materials that grew in the area and could be returned to the earth at the end of the building's life cycle as well as an understanding of the unique features of the two Ithacas'ecosystem that have potential for decreasing use of intensive mass-produced mechanicals for passive air flow/lighting.One source: Alexander Langlands,CRAEFT:An Inquiry into the Origins and True Meaning of Traditional Crafts.NY:VWV.Norton&Co. 2017. Vivien Rose 4.Consideration of relation between the project proposed to Comment is acknowledged. The consultant team had some be incentivized and the local setting.Throughout it seemed trouble understanding the comment. that the team was describing cookie cutter responses to local conditions,sometimes without a bigger picture of where the water and electricity come from or how new construction could complement,increase the value of,and benefit existing common or adjacent site efficiencies i.e.sidewalks,common areas,gardens,parks.An example would be no discussion of whether new construction should receive an incentive or abatement when the project makes adjacent properties' energy efficiency measures obsolete or unworkable. Vivien Rose 5.Human Scale/Nature Scale vs.Auto/Industrial Scale Comment is acknowledged. I think the draft missed an opportunity to reframe climate change as an opportunity to learn to really be in and with the living 3D world in community with other humans again.There is room to develop human dedicated pathways throughout the Ithaca basin,as well as other common outdoor places of play and work like orchards,meeting spots,gardens.In my experience,there is an intelligence about direct connection to the planet that is not intellectual but is very able to work with nature to meet human and nature's needs. The assumptions that building materials are all equal and interchangeable,that bigger/higher is better, that the solution for one lot will be the same for a different one seem to run through this entire draft.There also seems to be an assumption that developers and consultants know what is best for a community without a whole lot of introspection on that point. Re:a sustainable and resilient maker/observer relationship with a local ecosystem,Langlands gets at that.So does Jacobson,Silverstein and Winslow, PATTERNS OF HOME: Ten Essentials of Enduring Design.Taunton,2002 and Philip Ackerman-Leist,A PRECAUTIONARY TALE: How One Small Town Banned Pesticides,Preserved its Food Heritage and Started a Movement.Chelsea Green,2017. 6 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose 6.Friendliness of the Policy: Comment is acknowledged. I have a Ph.D.in history and am used to reading reports.As written this draft seemed unnecessarily dense,over- descriptive and jargon-laden.I suggest it be edited by a non- consultant non-planner non-bureaucrat to a standard of public accessibility that does not require specialized knowledge of planning and does speak simple and clear English. Vivien Rose p.3#1.1:Who is covered by this policy?This appears to As currently proposed this policy does apply to all new apply only to developer driven projects and not to all new buildings and major gut renovations of existing buildings. construction,including new private residences or new additions to existing homes. Vivien Rose #1.2 As a public process with public funds all meetings with The project has included outreach to various stakeholder stakeholders of all kinds should be documented in an groups as well guidance from both a steering committee and appendix.Holding a public meeting the last day of the public an advisory committee.The public information session was comment period has the appearance of neither wanting or advertised in all major media outlets.It is difficult to get people seeking transparency or public dialogue.Thus the date,place, motivated to participate in policy discussions but we feel that name of group and#of people attending meetings alluded to we have been successful which is evident by the number and here should be documented in the appendix to this document quality of thoughtful comments we have recieved since the to demonstrate efforts to reach out to various constituencies second draft of the report was made public.We fully likely to be affected by this policy...which could be people not appreciate that more public input will be needed during the in the development/architect/planner/landscape architect second phase of the effort to write the actual policy language. community. Information about the attendance and notes from meetings will be included in the appendix of the report and/or on the project website. Vivien Rose pp.5#1.4:The recommendation to require owners to track This is a good idea,but confidentiality laws limit what energy energy use is redundant to the metering and billing already providers can provide without permission of owners.Also, done by energy providers and to what is required to sell a multiple energy sources(gas,delivered fuels like oil and property.It would seem that energy providers could provide propane,electricity,biomass like wood chips)makes this information in aggregate for the City and Town of Ithaca. centralized reporting difficult,as each energy source needs to be correlated to addresses and different meters at a single address. Our recommendation is based on standard approaches to tracking energy use,as implemented by NY City and other cities(Philadelphia,Chicago,Boston,etc.). Vivien Rose p.6 Summary Table:The table includes water efficient fixtures All of the water efficiency requirements(fixtures)can be and heating but no rainwater harvesting or built in cistern or achieved without adding cost to a building's design or other means of storing and using unmetered water.Why? construction.Affordability was established as a prime goal of Gutters,cisterns,hand pumps,rain barrels installed at time of the policy.Rainwater harvesting is typically fairly costly when it construction provide alternative water sources for indoor and accounts for freeze-proof water storage,provision for filtering outdoor use without additional electricity for transport.Suggest leaves and other debris,provision for water overflow,provision if policy does not intend to address water beyond heating it for backup city water when rainwater is inadequate(including and low capacity fixtures state that somewhere. float switch or float valve to open this water flow),piping from the roof,piping to water fixtures,access to the storage for cleaning. Storage typically cannot be located where it can be used by gravity,so pumping is also required,including electrical supply to the pump and controls.If the water is to be used for anything other than toilets,disinfection is also required in order to deal with bird feces and other contaminants that are entrained on the roof. All by way of saying that rainwater harvesting adds significantly to a building's cost.The focus of the policy has been affirmed to be: 1.Reducing carbon emissions 2.Affordability 3.Water conservation.Rainwater harvesting does not support reducing carbon emissions,and runs counter to the goal of affordability. Vivien Rose p.7: Reduction in energy use(green line)targets a goal,but Projections for existing buildings assume 25%reduction in do not see a citation for measure of energy efficiency in energy use by 2030 and 50%reduction by 2050.This is just existing buildings. an assumption,to show(a)how important energy use in existing buildings is,and(b)how significant the reductions need to be in existing buildings in order to reduce overall energy use. Vivien Rose p.9:As the focus of this report is energy and water, We propose to add text to the summary at the beginning of the recommend measures to retain and water that are best built in report to recognize the value and cost-effectiveness of energy new construction not a later retrofit be included now,not at a and water efficiency measures at the time of new construction, later date.Also as biomass emits carbon in combustion and rather than at the time of a later retrofit.We propose to define requires water and fossil fuel use to grow,harvest and biomass in more detail,to address how it qualifies to be transport,it should be explained how it qualifies to be included included in the plan,and to promote healthier and carbon- in this plan. neutral biomass approaches. Vivien Rose p.11 #2.2:"Reachable"generally means that the strategies Reachable is recognized as not perfect,although is close to the policy advocates adopting result in the intended change, what we want,and we decided to go with it because it allowed not that no additional work is required to achieve them. us to use the acronym"FAIR",which we feel is helpful. Suggest this be reworked to be"operational"or some other word that means what authors appear to intend. 7 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose "best practices in energy-efficient design and construction": A complete green building policy will need to take all of these From the study,it appears the only best practices to be items into account.The focus of this report is specifically on considered are in the actual build of a structure.The lifecycle operational energy and water use.More work will need to be of the materials required under the policy is not considered, done to look at additional best practices for building green. either in terms of extraction and manufacture,transport, maintenance,and disposal of units recommended,nor in terms of as yet unknown effects of collective or mass use of ground-source and air-source heat pumps on the environment. Nor is the siting of a structure on land to take advantage of solar gain,of rising winds or damps,or any of the ecological functions that ecosystems have.At least not so far. Vivien Rose pp.11-13#2.3:Given the deep study of existing build and new These are actually fairly complex calculations,some of which construction permits in section 4,it would seem that authors may not even have adequate data to support. could draw some specific conclusions about actual data in the study area rather than generic comments,for instance under transportation equity how much carbon has been saved by the new development in Ithaca near bus lines,or in jobs the#of new green jobs anticipated by this policy. Also,some of these generic comments are questionable;e.g.under maintenance costs,the policy does not reward builders for not installing excess wiring,only for using some kinds of equipment.Under transportation equity,the policy incentivizes additional parking for builders who install this equipment. Under security,motion sensors also use electricity for squirrels,birds,and other animals that would not be used if lights were not installed or not turned on. Vivien Rose p.13#2.3.1 Figure 14 and a.:text references 2 points on The two points are identified in the text: One point is the only graph,but there are eight points on the graph.Please identify one with an EUI of 9,the other point is the only one that costs all points and their relevance to the discussion. 10%more. Vivien Rose p.14 Figure 15:given new tariffs on these technologies a We propose to add such a footnote. footnote on future potential costs would be helpful. Vivien Rose Second paragraph reference to https://www.wbdg.org:who Life cycle costing is a tool that highlights the benefit of energy does the lower life cycle cost benefit directly?Is this a social cost savings when contrasted with the first cost of a building, justice issue or has the builder made the money up in rents? encouraging builders/developers to recognize the benefits of the energy savings. It does not comment on the social impacts. Ostensibly,if the life cycle costs are lower,benefits would accrue to all stakeholders. Vivien Rose p.15#5:If certifications do not assure the carbon emission We propose to reword this text to clarify that certifications ARE reduction goals of this policy,how will those goals be assured? intended to increase the chances of meeting carbon emission goals,as follows:"Certifications can be used as a quality control check and so help that project goals are delivered.It is possible for a high-performance building that is not a certified project to get off track and not meet goals,and so certifications provides checkpoints,with third party verification." Separately, we are recommending that the City and Town develop benchmarking policy that will measure energy use,and so allow evaluation of the policy's success,and allow revisions if goals are not met. Vivien Rose #6:Please explain how this is different than all the rest of We propose to revise the wording to state"Environmental these eight points? stewardship through reduced carbon emissions,and reduced impacts on the environment through the extraction, development,and transportation of fossil fuels." Vivien Rose p.16#2.4"In choosing possible certifications": Did the team Yes,the team did review certifications.We propose to add text do this?On whose behalf?Does this mean the policy took to clarify that we reviewed a wide number of certifications, these into consideration as a means of enforcing the policy? compared them to the criteria listed,and chose certifications Or? that best met the program requirements. Vivien Rose p.17:Please give this a figure number and either change the We propose to make these edits. last column title to"Market Penetration/%New Construction"or "Public Adoption"or something that says how successful the measure is or move the descriptive text to above the figure so the member of the general public understands. Vivien Rose p.19#2.6:Please give all the Figures numbers and names. The incentives such as parking waivers or added floors need Please explain why,before there are even designs,parking to be identified in the earliest stages of a design process in waivers and added floors are offered as incentives?As a order for the designers to know what they are going to design. member of the public,I want the benefit given AFTER the A building with additional stories or larger footprint is a builder proves the conditions were met,not BEFORE,with no fundamentally different building so it needs to be known right remedy if they are not. from the very first design meeting.The project would not receive a building permit(last step of a complex and lengthy design process)without demonstrating the building was designed to meet the energy goals. Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose p.19#2.7.3"There is an emerging consensus that we will We propose clarifying this in the report.There is emerging need to electrify our buildings."What does this mean?To this consensus that to meet GHG reduction goals we will need to point in the report there is no indication that buildings are not transition to high-efficiency electric space and water heating being electrified. systems(as opposed to natural gas or other fossil fuels).This is addressed in the proposed point system in the"efficient electrification"section(title may change to"strategic electrification.") Vivien Rose p.20:Suggest consider benchmarking as a pre-condition for Evaluation of benchmarking is being recommended as a additional permitting by same builder,like tax returns for separate program. political candidates.Suggest a law requiring any entity owning or operating more than 10%of City/Town building stock to benchmark. Vivien Rose p.21:Suggest you place this data about INHS buildings in the We do not have incremental cost data with which to do this. figure on p.13. Vivien Rose p.22 and following: I appreciate these summaries.Thank you. This comment has been acknowledged Vivien Rose In addition to the bulleted list on p.22, 1.Siting to take This comment has been acknowledged advantage of rising or pooling air at dawn and dusk;2.Exterior colors that increase or decrease solar gain thus saving heat/cooling costs;3. Exterior thermal mass to increase solar gain;4.Exterior/attached structures for seasonal green cooling (grape arbor;5.No exterior lighting except over entry and on an on/off not motion sensor switch(See Environmental Management Council recommendation for limited lighting and lighting types);6.White or light roof membranes;7.Stick built/long pole wood construction. Vivien Rose p.23#2.10.1:It is very disappointing to see you back away We encourage smaller room and building size by providing a from the conclusions you state in your first paragraph. point in the Easy Path(Al 1) Acceptability of smaller buildings is not an"owner-specific question"that a code or policy cannot address,and promoting "smaller buildings"does not require a generic metric.Your example of TREE(at an internationally recognized ecological housing community)should be referenced here.Here is another example:https://www.nytimes. co m/2018/03/04/technology/dorm-living-g rown-ups-sa n- francisco.html. Foreign nationals live in less sq ft because they live outside much more than US citizens do in buildings that are linked by walking trails to gardens,outdoor drying lines,grape arbors,swimming holes,skiing,hiking,the local p. o.,grocery store,church and school so they do not have to drive. Vivien Rose p.24#2.10.5:This should be incentivized more heavily,and This comment has been acknowledged. also pertain to site lighting.Light pollution from Ithaca can be seen all the way to Newfield and Cayuga Medical Center;an indication that the City and Town of Ithaca have prioritized night lighting over energy efficiency.The Environmental Management Council of Tompkins County has identified lighting as interfering with bird migration.I know it interferes with being able to see the stars and for people over 45(like me)whose pupils do not narrow as quickly after seeing bright lights at eye level,they can be a positive traffic hazard. Vivien Rose This also should apply to lights on all night long in an entire This comment has been acknowledged.Unfortunately this building while under construction or under operation and to policy does not address existing buildings or temporary stadium lights.Cornell's unshielded stadium lights are visible construction of buildings. Both temporary and permanent site from the Cayuga Medical Center on Rt.96 and from Rt.13 lighting can be addressed during the environmental review and coming out of Newfield. site plan approval process. Vivien Rose This discussion does not take into consideration the This comment has been acknowledged.Site lighting is outside considerable light available on many lights when the moon is the scope of this report and requires a separate study and more than half full. policy. Vivien Rose p.25#2.10.6:There is a difference between"daylighting"and Not clear what this comment is referring to.The low window to using windows to provide light rather than electrical lighting,for wall ratio is specifically concerned with energy loss through the instance in staircases that are not used at night. windows.Daylighting and views can be achieved in buildings with less than 20%. Vivien Rose p.26:include in description southern orientation for light and This comment has been acknowledged. solar gain. Vivien Rose p.28#2.11:Are you going to account for the carbon emissions We are indirectly accounting for it,by limiting the number of related to manufacture,transport,maintenance and disposal of points possible for renewables.Fully accounting for it likely renewable energy system? would be too complicated. Vivien Rose p.29 Please number and title all figures.If the figure on this This comment has been acknowledged.The final report will page was created for this report,say so;if not give source. have all figures and tables numbered and titled. Vivien Rose Nyserda link leads to'file not found.' This comment has been acknowledged.URL will be updated. 9 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose p.30:Having explained the necessity for code for widespread The low or no cost compliance only applies to the mandated 6 acceptance of energy efficiency and described means of low points.In order to push developers to"do the right thing"it will or no cost compliance with the proposed Policy,which I hope take more money in a market that already has an extremely will be encoded into law,what is the logic in giving still more high cost for land and construction.The incentives only apply incentives to builders for doing the right thing? to buildings that achieve 12 or more points(effectively net zero energy)until 2025. Vivien Rose p.31:Does not answer third question about what types of We propose to answer the third question.Whether/when net- renewable energy will be allowed.Suggest tighten up zero is required is covered separately in a subsequent section. discussion of whether/when net-zero required. Vivien Rose p.33"where possible":Who decides where it is not possible to The design professional will identify the practicality of including design a'solar ready'roof? solar on the roof based on the orientation of the parcel,impact of adjacent buildings and mature trees,etc.Generally speaking small footprint buildings with more than 3 stories will not provide a large enough roof to generate enough power for the building. Vivien Rose p.34:Explanation of justification for biomass being We propose to add more detail on biomass(both justification allowed/incentivized? and specifics of requirements). Vivien Rose Are other forms of electricity generation incentivized?For Yes.The OP5 Energy improvement of choice allows for instance treadmill or pedal power? complete flexibility for creative alternatives as long as they can be measured and documented. Vivien Rose p.36 right-lighting: Is all of this required?Or is only the"25% We will clarify that all of this is required.Motion sensors save lower lighting power density than the energy code"? significant energy,far more than is currently required by code. Specifically,why are motion sensors required on all exterior We propose to add a requiremenet that an off-switch is also lighting,which animals/birds/bats can trigger?Is it possible to required. Motion detectors use very little electricity,far less require an off switch as well?Don't motion detectors use energy than they save. electricity? Vivien Rose p.37 adaptive reuse:"Maintain at least 50%...of the existing The 50%would be a measurement of floor area and/or surface building structure and envelope."Does what half is saved area of the exterior envelope.Which half doesn't matter matter?Does this point reward maintenance of embodied because this is meant to be an estimate of mebodied energy energy of prior construction?What happens if the envelope but more importantly an incentive to property owners to exceeds the window restriction? choose to adaptively reuse rather than tear down.The window point is not a restriction.All of the points are optional and would only apply if they are relevant so existing windows would not need to be changed if other points can be achieved. Vivien Rose p.39#2.14.4:Significant Elements has taught use of historic This policy does not include the potential bennefits of well windows that matches or exceeds vinyl replacement windows. maintained historic windows. Does this policy encourage that too? Vivien Rose p.40#2.16:"The high bar for incentives and the strong This comment is acknowledged,currently the availability of municipal priority for meeting energy goals should result in a and requirements for tax abatements and other incentives is broad and attractive package of incentives.Projects meeting under consideration,the consultant team believes that strong these ambitious goals are providing a significant community energy performance would be a good metric for determining benefit and deserve recognition and municipal support."Why whether or not a development should recieve incentives. is this?Your report states that net zero is mandatory for reasons that are quite clear.It also documents that even with incentives few developers invested in energy efficiency in their buildings. Recognition,sure.Support:do they not already have tax abatements and are these programs not currently expanding? Vivien Rose I am opposed to more tax dollars being paid for developers to This comment is acknowledged. do the right thing,either in waived or reduced fees or in a tax exemption. I am opposed to a lesser standard of environmental review,and adamantly opposed to a height bonus or area requirement reduction for doing the right thing. Vivien Rose p.42 100%compliance should not be expected":What This comment is acknowledged.Penalties will need to be penalties are proposed for those who break the law?Codify addressed in the next phase of codying the policy. penalties for non-compliance that can be enforced. Vivien Rose Developers who game the system should not be allowed to This comment is acknowledged. build anything new until they have corrected or completed the actions they proposed in exchange for being allowed to build. Vivien Rose p.43#2.21.1:Not clear what is being"examined"—does this We propose to clarify that what will be examined will be the mean scope?Evaluate usefulness of? benefits and costs of a benchmarking policy,referencing experience in other cities. Vivien Rose p.44#2.22: It seems to me that with concern about'gaming Points in the whole building path are based on third party the system'it is important that the points scored are verifiable verification,points in the easy path are based on city/town by a third and disinterested party and that procedures are in building department verification of credit compliance before place to determine liability for/legality of scoring. building permits are issued. Vivien Rose Suggest remove"if that"or"likely"wherever occurs in These words are used because we cannot be certain of the discussion of'stress test'. statements we surmise,without having additional details on the buildings involved. Vivien Rose p.47 and following:define high-performing,not very high- We propose to add definitions of high-performance buildings performing (net-zero or near-net-zero),"somewhat high performing"(for example,LEED certified),and"not high performing"(not net- zero,not near-net-zero,not LEED certified). 10 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose p.49#3.2:Target groups seem to not have involved The stakeholder groups did include renters and advocates for renters/low income,Friends of Stewart Park/Ithaca Gardens low income tennants,including INHS,as well as local business and other local booster groups,parks staff,Cornell Coop owners,it did not involve parks staff or groups as parks were Extension garden,compost,tree,primitive pursuits staff,or not a focus of the policy. business owners of the types of businesses called out in the 'walkable'point.These are all groups actively involved in making Ithaca a more enjoyable place to live.Why were they not considered,if one of the goals was to reach to people not usually involved? Vivien Rose This section is a report out of what was planned for Several outreach meetings were held over the course of the infrastructure rather than a description of the actual education proejct and these will be documented in the final report. and outreach performed.Was any education or outreach performed? Vivien Rose p.53#4:This is a very important section.The prior This comment is acknowledged. recommendations don't really make sense without this review. Suggest you move the"Education and Outreach"part to here and put the overview at the front. Vivien Rose p.53"where workers,and population in general,is An adequate supply of housing can proved the opportunity for increasingly mobile":This would seem to indicate the need for mobility of workers without the housing itself being movable. a green building policy that prioritized housing that could move with workers/population rather than outbuild for temporary population. Vivien Rose p.54#4.3.1 Figure 1:shows 13%of combined Town of The first two figures show land area for a given use,the latter Ithaca/City of Ithaca land vacant or in forest reserve,which two figures show building area(square footage). does not appear to match the sq.ft.measures in Figure 4. Vivien Rose p.58#4.3.3:Does not include campus dorms=cannot assess This comment is acknowledged student need for housing Vivien Rose p.62#4.3.4:These charts are of limited value because the This comment is acknowledged size of the project for each permit is not clear.Percentages of types of permits to total permits issued annually or over the study period would be more helpful in comparing building types as well. Vivien Rose p.63#4.4.1:This section appears to assume that 1-2 person 1-2 person units MAY increase in size per person relative to a units must increase in size due to ADA requirements for 4-5 person family in a modest apartment,due in part to ADA bathrooms.Yet boarding houses with shared facilities are not requirements. Boarding houses and dorms have the potential considered as a potential building type,nor are dorms which to reduce or increase area per person depending on design. would reduce,not increase size/person. Vivien Rose p.64 Figures 7-9:The 15-24 year demographics in these This comment is acknowledged charts should be compared to other counties of similar size. Perhaps such analysis would reveal that the City and Town of Ithaca's housing crisis is a class-driven age-related boom. Given the net-zero goal of this policy,projecting continuing development of outsized apartments for one-two person households through 2050 seems unwise.Far better would be to incentivize the two institutions of higher learning to build dorms for their undergraduates and require them to live on campus.These could be built to net zero standards while cutting down on vehicular traffic through Ithaca,encouraging walking on the two hills,and preserving the 13%of Town/City of Ithaca lands that are vacant or forest for future habitat. Vivien Rose p.65#4.4.2.1:same point to last three sentences of first This comment is acknowledged paragraph. Vivien Rose p.66"We want to encourage more people to live within the This comment is acknowledged city,closer to jobs and services."This appears to be outside the scope of the study and the purpose of the policy.Cornell and Ithaca College have failed to house their students;the poor and lower middle-class have lost housing share because of it;development pressure in and around the colleges is driven by their refusal to house their students;and in general students do not pay taxes.Both Cornell and Ithaca College had major anniversaries in the last three years,successfully fundraised for multiple buildings and their endowments yet still will not house their students.Perhaps focus on what Ithaca can do to meet its net zero goals,including not artificially inflating projected building by looking for 13,000 more residents,not proposing buildings for all Cornell and Ithaca College students,and preserving habitat and carbon capture by not developing everywhere in the two Ithacas'footprint? Vivien Rose p.67"The residential building area...is expected to increase Where development will happen is based largely on zoning, by 13%..."Would this be the 13%of lands that are forests or this policy gives some priority to development in areas where vacant?Does the plan recognized the carbon capture of the there is already significant development rather than greenfield 13%of the two Ithacas that is vacant or in forest lands? sites,but it does not require any particular placement.A 13% increase in building area does not need to equate to 13% increase in developed land,in fact it should not require any increase in developed land area. 11 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Vivien Rose p.68"We expect development to be spread more evenly The policy does encourage density in several ways.As a across the county":In Pulitzer Prize winner E.O.Wilson's most policy directed to reducing carbon emissions in buildings,it is recent book HALF-EARTH:Our Planet's Fight for Life,he puts beyond its scope to address reforestation.We propose to add the cause of the Sixth Extinction in which the planet is now a recommendation to assess the encouragement of living to HIPPO:Habitat destruction,Invasive Species, reforestation as another strategy to mitigate carbon emissions. Pollution including pesticides,Population(that would be humans)and Overhunting.His proposal to save the earth? Half of all landmass back to inviolable reserves.When habitats are overrun with invasives and are cut off from each other, biodiversity drops.It seems to me that in a policy to come to net zero,development should be centrally located and not spread evenly around the county,if carbon capture, reforestation,and habitat preservation are part of the two Ithaca's net zero strategy. Vivien Rose p.71 #4.5.1 second paragraph:"energy demand also depends Corrected. on user behaviour."This is not standard US spelling. Vivien Rose p.74#4.5.1 after Figure 19:Please either provide a We propose copying the graph on page 7 to the section you cumulative chart for all projected energy use for all sectors in referenced. the two Ithacas through 2050 or a narrative summary.This was a lot of data to go through and it is unclear how much energy demand will increase and whether the new policy will adequately address the proposed increase to achieve net zero by 2050. Vivien Rose p.75 first full paragraph:What is in the Town's The Town's goal is to focus growth in new mixed-use Comprehensive Plan that would lead to the conclusion that traditional neighborhood developments(TND)rather than development in the Town will be more like the City between encouraging continued suburban sprawl. now and 2050 than prior years? Vivien Rose p.77 after community services water section:Please provide a We don't believe that a cumulative chart will provide more cumulative projected water use chart or a narrative summary useful information than the three already included on the and explanation of implications.It would be useful to know preceding two pages.The question of where the water will where this water is going to come from. come from is outside the scope of this project. Vivien Rose Last sentence over to p.78 quite awkward. We propose changing to"Data collection should be improved in the areas of building characteristics and individual building energy use benchmarking,particularly the latter,as it is a foundational element of energy management strategy." Vivien Rose p.79 2nd paragraph:several awkward word/phrase/dependent This comment is acknowledged. clause constructions. Vivien Rose Suggest a grand wrap up/summary after this section.It is We propose adding a concluding paragraph sufficient to arguably the most important section for understanding how the provide closure to the document. team came to its conclusions. Public Info Developers have considered LEED an expensive undertaking The policy does not require LEED. It specifically allows you to session and few tackle it for these reasons.WHy would developers choose to document the energy points from LEED,not the now move to go the LEED route? whole LEED system.And it provides for an affordable alternative to LEED(the Easy Path).It is worth noting that almost all LEED Certified housing in Ithaca has been built by affordable housing developer INHS. Public Info If this policy slows or deters development,it will exascerbate We do not anticipate that the policy will slow or deter session the housing shortage. How will we determine ahead of time development,due to the Easy Path for compliance. this will not happen? Public Info What about mixed-use building that both commercial and This is a good point,the final policy will need to spell out a session residential?How do points work? method for allocating points in mixed use buildings that have residential and commercial space.In a typical 3-4+story main- street mixed use building with apartments over retail it would be reasonable for all of the residential easy path points to apply,bypassing the limitations on point numbers that apply to commercial only buildings. Public Info How do restaurants deal with the no gas requirement?Stoves There is not a"no-gas"requirement,until 2030.The session almost always want gas. requirements for 2030 will be established by 2024,and will consider special needs such as gas for restaurant stoves(and industrial uses of gases). Dan Tasman 1) Simple building shape The exterior lines do not need to be simple,just the lines of the thermal envelope.So,it would be possible to add character to It could incentivize monolithic building form. This would buildings through elements that are not part of the thermal make larger buildings--inherently more energy-efficient per envelope: attached unheated spaces,attics and associated cubic foot than a number of smaller buildings--seem rooflines of any kind,canopies,and more. And,with any of physically overbearing. A larger building with some wall the points in the point system,it is not required. articulation,projections,and recesses,appear smaller and more human-scaled,and is more likely to win over skeptical Simple building shape is also a bit of a misnomer and we are neighbors than a"box". Compare some human-scaled INHS considering changing the title of this credit,the actual metric is projects and Maplewood to West Village and Ithaca East the ratio of the exterior wall area to the building floor area. apartments. Using this metric a long thin rectangular building without any articulation would likely not get the point,while a building with the same floor area but laid out in more of a cube shape would be likely to pass,even with some protruding elements like a touret or other facade articulation. 12 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses 1) Simple building shape The details of the requirements are spelled out in the policy. For example,attached spaces,if unheated and outside the How would wings outside the heated building envelope,like thermal envelope,are not part of the shape requirements.If attached garages or solarium/Florida rooms,be treated? still unclear,please let us know. 1) Simple building shape While there are certainly many stock building plans that would be ineligable for this point,there are a great many that would It could greatly limit use of stock building plans,and standard qualify for the point.Encouraging the use of building plans that plans used by larger regional and national homebuilders. make use of this simple and free way of saving energy is a Most houses in the area are built by small mom&pop and goal of the policy. boutique builders. It's one of the reasons why new housing in Ithaca is more expensive than in peer communities-custom build is about 8%more expensive per square foot than the production-built equivalent (Ben Moselle,National Building Cost Manual). Production homebuilding is one way to decrease construction and housing costs in the area. 1) Simple building shape We propose to assess added points for use of party walls. It could consider a duplex or townhouse row with offsets between units less efficient than boxier single family equivalents. Even if there are wings or offsets,shared walls make a duplex or townhouse--and just about every other form of multi-family housing--inherently more energy efficient than a single family house of similar construction. 1) Simple building shape The base building could meet the building shape requirement and still be able to have an addition added in the future.The It doesn't account for additions. Historically,one method of future addition does not impact the base building's ability to making housing affordable was to build for future obtain the building shape point.The addition itself would be expandability. You start off with a small house,and then add eligible for the building shape point,on its own.We propose to on to it over time. In the 1950s,homebuilders throughout make this even more feasible by not counting the party wall(or Upstate New York marketed small Cape Cod and ranch floor above existing heated space)of a new addition as art of houses as"expandables",promoting their affordability and the exposed above-ground wall/roof area. expansion potential. Dan Tasman 2)Window coverage of 20%or less Single pane windows are not allowed by the New York State Energy Code.The newest energy code(2016)requires fairly The policy treats all window coverage equally,regardless of highly efficient windows already. We also do not understand their location or energy efficiency. Cheap single pane or how the policy disincentivizes more efficient windows. external flange(mobile home-style)windows are much less energy efficient than double-or triple-pane windows,or windows with southern exposure. This could disincentivize the use of more energy-efficient windows. 2)Window coverage of 20%or less The 20%allows meeting multiple green building standard requirements for views and natural light.The policy gives a There are many environmental and physiological benefits to point for less than 20%overall,so some spaces(let's say increasing window coverage--solar heat gain,the potential for living rooms and other regularly occupied spaces)can have natural cross-ventilation,and more natural light. Upstate New more than 20%if offset by spaces with less than 20%(for York is one of the cloudiest areas in the United States(http: example,stairways,landings,mechanical/electrical/utility //www.newyorkupstate. spaces,laundry spaces,corridors,etc.). Also,this point is com/weather/2016/11/upstate_ny_cities_among_cloudiest_in_ optional,so for those seeking more natural light,it is not the_us.html),and natural light is at a premium. mandatory. 2)Window coverage of 20%or less Single pane windows are not allowed by the New York State Energy Code.The newest energy code(2016)requires fairly It could incentivize"bunker architecture",where buildings highly efficient windows already,indirectly requiring low-e have limited window coverage or windowless walls. A windows by law due to the efficient requirement,and this "perverse incentive",as an economist would call it--the policy energy code will still be required with the proposed green could consider a prefab or mobile home with little glazing area, building policy. The proposed policy allows further energy cheap single-pane windows,and limited insulation,as savings,beyond the energy code,while maintaining views and "greener"than a site-built house with a larger glazing area,but natural light to meet green building standards.And,as tighter low-e windows and better insulation. mentioned above,this strategy is not a mandatory requirement. 13 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses 2)Window coverage of 20%or less Individual facades can have more than 20%window coverage, as long as the overall building coverage is less than 20%to Traditional neighborhood development,with vibrant,active get this point.Many traditional mainstreet buildings have less Main Streets as a neighborhood focal point,is a major goal of than 20%window coverage,in fact one of the halmarks of the Town's Comprehensive Plan.Building facades and street- traditional/classical architecture compaired to modernist facing storefronts with high window coverage is a critical architecture,is a lower window to wall ratio-generally in the element in creating interesting streetscapes,and good 15-25%range for traditional architecture.One example woudl walkable urbanism. It also enables more"eyes on the street", be a typical mainstreet building as found on the Ithaca the result being a safer neighborhood. Commons,that is 30'wide and 80'deep.The ground floor front facade is likely to be between 50&70%windows,but upper floors on the front facade range from around 20-30%,side facades which are more than half the building's facade area generally have 0%,as they are party walls,and the rear facades have less than 20%. 2)Window coverage of 20%or less This comment is acknowleged. In fine-tuning the final draft of the Green Building Policy, consider the following from"The Philosophy of Sustainable Design:The Future of Architecture"by Jason McLennan. "...the stereotype is that green buildings are less attractive gets some credence as many of today's sustainable design practitioners ignore or diminish the importance of aesthetics while trying to meet environmental goals. Sustainable designers cannot be content to produce good buildings that are only good environmental performers. They cannot be complacent in the development of their craft and rationalize altruistic concerns. Beauty is a requirement in the success of the sustainable design philosophy. ...The goal of architecture is to create shelter for human activities that lift the spirit,and the philosophy of sustainable design maintains this focus while balancing environmental responsibility. Sustainable design demands responsibility to both environment and people." Rick Burgess- As this project continues,we would ask that continual public Pending Common Council and Town Board approval,in the Cornell outreach and time to absorb a substantial,in-progress next phase of the project we plan to perform additional document will be the norm. This is a complex effort that will stakeholder outreach as the policy recommendations are require considerable time to work through and consider codified. thoughtfully. Erik Eshelman- What is the reasoning behind EE2(1 point for water heating There is a net decrease in carbon emissions,even with the Cornell systems that use heat pumps or biomass). Heat increase in heating load during winter. pumps for heating hot water in the northern climate is a poor application of the technology-Most residential applications would involve removing heat in a residences basement(or similarly heated space)resulting in an increased heating load. The technology is typically used in the south where water heaters can be located in unheated spaces without the worry of freezing temperatures affecting the system. Erik Eshelman- WB1—For Commercial include a LEED Cerficaon Path(i. We have extensively discussed non- Cornell e.LEED Gold).The"Easy Path"already opens this Pandora' carbon related green design s Box by including density,walkability,and reuse credits,whic and have had various suggesons for specific non- h carbon related requirements(for recognize the value of reducing embodied energy and operaon example,building deconstrucon,wastewater,and more),and al impact beyond the specific and installed building we decided that the policy should stick to energy and systems. These credits are not available to projects pursuing water. Otherwise,we are opening a very significant Pandora' compliance under the WB-1 path as they appear under s Box,and potentially increasing the cost of compliance. other LEED categories not recognized by this policy(sustainab le sites,materials and resources)and ignores their associated reducon in climate impact and energy use from ope raon. If the focus of this policy should be renamed to remove reference to green buildings and instead reference or energy/carbon efficient design as the direct benefits to human health and wellness,material impacts,and sustaina ble urban design are not being recognized or pursued. Erik Eshelman- WB1 -Why did Energy Points increase from 16 to 17 from the Energy points on WB1 increased from 16 to 17 in order to Cornell last submission? approximately reach 40%better than ASHRAE 90.1-2013. 14 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Erik Eshelman- LEED V.4 does not use ASHRAE 90.1- It is our understanding that 17 points under LEED V.4(with Cornell 2013,it uses the 2010 standard. A 40%reduction ASH RAE 90.1-2010 as the baseline)represents roughly the under LEED V.4 requires only 15- equivalent of 40%reduction relative to the current energy 16 points. Should we be mixing reference standards like this? code.The mention of 17 EA category points was an error,and Please clarify the WB-1 compliance path for LEED v. has been corrected to 17 energy points.We propose to 4. Previous drafts indicated that projects must achieve 17 poin evaluate the possibility of crediting LEED EA points other than is energy points.We need to recognize that the new energy code in the Energy and Atmosphere category. The current table ind already requires a base level of commissioning for larger icates 17"energy points"must be targeted. This could buildings,and that points such as submetering and demand- be variously interpreted as 17 EA category points or 17 points response do not assure reduction in carbon emissions. under Energy and Atmosphere credit EA-2 Opmize Energy Performance. While the pursuit of 17 EA- 2 points would identify efficient design as shown in an energy model, it would ignore the substantial benefits from other EA Category points(such as building commissioning.,submetering, demand- response,and renewable energy installation/purchase—which is identified and recognized as a separate points under the easy path checklist). Erik Eshelman- This decision[referring to firm requirement for 17 Energy We recognize that certain buildings,such as lab buildings,will Cornell Points in LEED,see above]could have substantial have challenges in meeting compliance with 17 LEED V4 economic and opportunity costs if pursued. As noted in the ca energy points.We propose to revisit this requirement for tegory name,pursing the whole building path should buildings with unusually high"process"loads. recognize the substanal energy and climate benefit of all of the Energy and Atmosphere credits,and not create a single focus on a modeling exercise. This could have the pery erse result of an overly complex and expensive design being created,which is then not fully commissioned to ensure t hat it is constructed or is operang correctly. Energy efficiency programs are driven by data,so the opportunity to to ne,adjust and educate users would not be recognized or the opportunity lost by eliminang energy metering credits. It would also ignore the benefit of renewable energy systems where this is recognized as a completely separate an d valued opon in the easy path. Further,not allowing flexibility and requiring 17 energy points in EA- 2 Opmize Energy Performance alone would essenally make it impossible for certain building types from ever being able to co mply. Structures with a high process energy load(such as laboratories or most industrial processes)must apply this Io ad to both the baseline and proposed building in the energy model which the EA- 2 credits are based on. Energy efficiency measures in a propo sed design can only show so much improvement against the baseline if the underlying proce ss energy contained in the facility hides the energy improvements made to the building operang loads. Erik Eshelman- Efficient Electrification -As a category heading this does not a Energy Efficiency is widely used for things like insulation,air- Cornell ncompass the concepts under it. We suggest tightness,etc.We propose to change this term to"Beneficial separang efficiency from supply choices—rename to Energy E Electrification"or"Strategic Electrification",both of which are fficiency gaining currency for the use of heat pumps and general replacement of fossil fuels with efficient electric alternatives. Erik Eshelman- Suggest moving biomass for space heating to Renewable Ene We propose to move biomass for space heating to a section Cornell rgy other than this section,but not to Renewable Energy where it would be subject to a cap. Erik Eshelman- EE3—We disagree with the space heating prerequisite.These We are seeking to strongly encourage electrification in multiple Cornell are desirable for energy efficiency Oust like EE2) ways. and should be incentivized regardless. Erik Eshelman- A14—This point should also apply for Residential. Lawrence Berkeley Labs has data that shows very little Cornell lighting energy use in residential buildings,the average lamp is on for less than 3 hours per day. So we cannot deliver our goal of 6-10%(per point,in other words we cannot deliver even one point) carbon reduction in residential buildings with this point. Erik Eshelman- Please consider points for enhanced building envelope/r- This is possible with either/both the Stretch Code point or the Cornell value. Improvement of Your Choice point,or with any of the whole- building compliance paths. Erik Eshelman- WB1—For Residential include a LEED Energy Points complia I'm checking,but I believe LEED for Homes simply requires H Cornell nce path and a LEED Cerfication Path(i.e.LEED ERS for their energy points,which is Gold) what we are requiring. Regarding a cerfication path,see resp onse above about LEED Gold for commercial buildings. 15 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Erik Eshelman- Easy Path—Why did the minimum number of points increase t Various stakeholders commented Cornell o 6? that buildings could reach 5 points too easily,and oen with so me points that were planned anyway,and so 5 points would not deliver the 40- 50%reduction in carbon emissions that we are seeking.With t he addition of new points,like EE3,it was felt that 6 points is still fair and ach ievable. Erik Eshelman- Easy Path—Why do water efficiency improvements not provid We decided to separate water out as a prerequisite for a few Cornell a points as this is an Energy+Water project? reasons:1.Cold water conservatoon does not reduce carbon emissions. 2.The water conservation require ments(fixtures)do not cost more than conventional fixtures. 3.In many buildings(like office buildings),hot water use is very small and so meeting the requirements does not deliver the 6- 10%reduction in carbon emissions that we are seeking per point. Erik Eshelman- Renewable Energy—Why are the available points capped at 3 This is in adherence with Architecture 2030. The report goes i Cornell if more renewable energy can be installed? nto detail as to why,here is an excerpt from the report,below. THAT SAID,I have been wrestling with this issue a lot myself,worried that things like plug loads will not allow us to get to net- zero,in the future. So I think there is room for discussion here Erik Eshelman- Why not simply allow or require renewable energy to provide a There are several reasons to not just allow renewable energy t Cornell 11 the energy needed by a building,without o meet all a building's energy needs, requiring the building to be energy- without more efficient buildings: efficient,in other words not requiring good insulaon,windows, Renewable energy systems can fail,making a building revert t heang, o relying on non-renewable backup etc.? energy. Renewable energy systems take energy,themselves,to be fa bricated. This"embodied energy" offsets some of the savings of the renewable energy system. Renewable energy systems cost money to maintain,and this c ost offsets some of the energy cost savings. Erik Eshelman- Consider prorating LEED Energy Points and apply to Easy Pat Some LEED points overlap with Easy Path points. Cornell h Points System Erik Eshelman- OP5—Also provide thermal units for reducon in energy use. We have had multiple stakeholders recommend Cornell discouragement of fossil fuels in any way possible,and we agree that we need to move expeditiously to eliminating fossil fuels,so this item("improvement of your choice") is only allowed for buildings that are free of fossil fuels,in order to further discourage them. Erik Eshelman- Regarding the walkability map,we would like to know the criter We agree that the walkability map can be improved,it was Cornell is used to determine walkability. It appears included as a starting point for future discussion in the policy that a buffer was applied to commercial areas,but there may b rather.Measuring walkability in a campus context is quite e more to it. We would recommend that anything within the U- different than a conventional neighborhood,and including 1 Zoning District for the City be considered walkable. Cornell' transit accessibility as well as a lack of parking and longer s campus is among the walk distances may be reasonable.The included map is based most walkable areas in the county with many services and use on 1/4 mile buffers from locations where there is a cluster of s including dining,banking,recreaon, amenities where an average person could complete multiple entertainment,etc. It seems logical that all of campus be inclu errands without a need for a car. ded in the walkability map. Jerone Gagliano 39 Are you allowing double counting of an Easy Path point if In the proposed policy the easy path and the whole building -Independent it was already included in the whole building design to path are completely separate options,buildings choose to Consultant achieve the LEED or HERS points?ASHP,for example. pursue one or the other so there is no chance of"double counting".In 2025,when a combination of whole-building and easy path points are envisioned,provisions are made to avoid double counting. Jerone Gagliano 37 How about limiting the max number of renewable points The policy aligns with Architecture 2030 in limiting the -Independent to 1 or 2 for off site PV contracts?There should be more contribution of renewables to the point system,including off- Consultant specific language about off site PV contracts.What site renewables.The policy is seeking to enforce off-ste happens if a housing developer meets the easy path renewables through a requirement for a 20-year contractual requirements by maxing out the renewable points using commitment.The actual language of the proposed ordinance an off-site contract that then falls through?Will the city will offer an opportunity to tighten this requirement. require them to sign a new contract? Jerone Gagliano 6 Make the name consistent. I think it is called Custom We propose to make the name consistent,as suggested. -Independent Improvements later in this document. Consultant 16 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Jerone Gagliano 38 Need to specify the minimum credentials of the There was some discussion of whether or not the energy -Independent professional.Also,the energy analysis should be modeling would need to be performed by a licensed Consultant specified as energy modeling given the reference to a professional.It was suggested that some building baseline,right? professionals may be well versed in things like Passive House or other tools but may not be licensed engineers.This proposed policy is focused on making any requirements relatively easy to achieve in such a way that it will not require extra project costs such as professional engineers.We recommending creating enough flexibility in the policy to allow knowledgable homeowners to perform their own energy modeling should they choose that path. Jerone Gagliano 33 Should give a few sentences here to tell reader what this We propose to clarify these issues as you suggest. -Independent rough estimate is based on.Also,are 6 points,or the Consultant assund min reduction of 36%equivalent to meeting Passive Haus or LEED parh?Would be helpful to designers. Jerone Gagliano 34 Similar to other points below, MUST SPECIFY minimum We propose to add a requirement that ASHP's comply with -Independent requirements of these equipment.ASHP have very NEEP,as you suggest.For heat pump water heaters within Consultant different efficiencies and capacities heating in our climate the heated space,there are still considerably savings during depending on the model.One option,specify that the the winter,and"full"savings during the summer(plus reduced ASHP must be listed or approved by the list maintained need for air conditioning).Our model shows savings that justify by NEEP for cold climate heat pumps found here http: the one point. //www.neep.org/initiatives/high-efficiency- prod ucts/emerg i ng-technolog ies/ashp/cold-cli mate-air- source-heat-pump HPWH need a lot of specificity as they have elec resistance coil to make up extra demand and need to specify proper location of the water heater. If in the living space,there is little energy savings during the heating season(robbing Peter to pay Paul). NREL recommends basement for our long heating season requirements.The other issue with these is that they have different modes that can be changed by the installer or the homeowner, unless the tank is sized large enough and it is kept in the mode that prioritizes the heat pump,these units will end up running the electric resistance coil much of the time.These units need a lot of airflow and cannot be put in a small mechanical closet. Therefore I do not think they are applicable to multi- family apartment buildings. Unlike air source heat pumps for heating which are more or less a plug-and-play technology that delivers the rated capacity and efficiency,a heat pump water heater is part of a system and therefore the efficiency can vary greatly depending upon the piping layout and the draw demand. Using point of source electric water heaters can end up using less total energy than a heat pump water heater in our climate especially since the water heater would likely have to be in the basement to have sufficient airflow and not cool the conditioned space in the heating season. Therefore, I strongly recommend that heat pump water heaters NOT COUNT as 1 point but instead can be included through the Custom Energy Improvements points. Jerone Gagliano 7 Where does the data for the red line come from?What We propose to add our assumptions. -Independent assumptions were made? Consultant Jerone Gagliano 39 Why have a big jump?We would get a better impact if There is benefit to not frequently changing standards,in terms -Independent the points requirement increased 2 points every 2 years of smooth adoption of changes.Changes in 2025 and 2030, Consultant or one point each year.Think about the number of following changes that might start in the next year or so,will buildings that will go up between now and 2025. already require relatively frequent adaptation to changes. Craig Modisher What about building envelope,insulation? These can be accomodated in several ways: The stretch code,or custom improvement,or whole building path Gary Ferguson Love idea of City and Town doing this together which makes it While this study was developed specifically for the City and more fair.But raises question-can we talk with Village of Town,the policy is designed in such a way that it could be Lansing?The more geographically broad the better. easily addopted in other municipalities in the county and we hope it will be a model across the region. Gary Ferguson How to differentiate between residential and commercial This is a good point,the final policy will need to spell out a (mixed-use)? method for allocating points in mixed use buildings that have residential and commercial space. 17 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Joe Wilson Read the whole document.Very quality work.A lot fo thought This comment is acknowledged. put in.Good info and data.Applicable locally.But needs to be more rigorous,deman more points,advance timeline.Speed of climate change demands faster timeline.Vague when going to be codified-probably 2019 more realistic. Joe Wilson State DEC policy around GHG(SEQR)should be brought into This comment is acknowledged. CEGR/TEAR.Was important for Maplewood. Diane Cohen Wonder if reuse element could be stronger.Even if don't go for This comment is acknowledged.The team discussed this at point,it's good educational tool.Deconstruction,salvage? great length and agrees that reuse and deconstruction are More than just preservation. important tools for reducing the environmental impact of construction and demolition,however,we did not include it in this draft because we found it difficult to craft a point that could be consistently verified by building department staff that would reduce GHG by the 6-10%goal we have for each point. Additional thoughts and research on this topic could be helpful. Denise Katzman Appreciate effort. Historic buildings could use a lot of Only buildings that are designated historic or pursuing encouragement for efficiency.White roof program.Historic designation would be exempt.A policy for existing buildings buildings should not be exempt. needs to be studied separately. Public Info Biomass is not all equal.Wood pellets not as good as some We propose to add more information and requirements session? others.Shouldn't be valued same as heat pumps.Methane in relating to biomass. short term this really pays off-ws that considered in additon to CO2?Should emphasis natural gas reductions more. Sara Hess Climate change couldn't be more evident than this evening, This comment is acknowledged. March 14,when we have more snow arriving because of unprecedented warming in the Arctic. We must take our local goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80%by 2050 seriously,along with the actions to reach them. This proposed new energy code has a very high standard for energy efficiency,perhaps higher than any other municipality in the state. It is in line with leaders across the country,such as California and Vermont who are setting policies of net-zero energy for new residential construction by 2020 or 2030 for commercial. I'm very proud of the forward thinking that led to this policy. I saw two lengthy presentations about the details of the proposed policy when it was in a first draft form and heard about how it was constructed. I am impressed in three ways: 1.The process of developing the code—I believe those on the committee are among the state's most expert on building codes and best energy conservation methods,especially Ian Shapiro,founder and head of Taitem Engineering. I also thank Nick Goldsmith for the two years of careful study and preparation that went into the work. During that time,the committee deliberated and researched myriad best practices and cost-benefits of energy efficient building methods.The result is a code that has multiple options and a lot of flexibility. 2.Balancing development and environmental goals were considered very carefully,with affordability and acceptance by developers as a central criteria. There are many different practical ways the policy tries to meet goals of reducing GHG while encouraging economic development. With expanding R&D in new and better building materials and energy systems, the code requirements are looking to a future of even greater affordability and shorter ROI in the years to come. 3. 1 appreciate that the city and town would be using regulation through codes to mandate changes in addition to using various"carrots"(such as state or federal rebates,tax credits,IDA incentives,etc.)to encourage best practice construction. The anticipated effect of this code with be buildings with as much as 40%lower carbon emissions than the current NYS energy code. That is a remarkable achievement. To reach the 80%by 50 goal,we need to do 100 things--no one policy change is sufficient. We need to be doing much more to reduce energy in existing buildings,for example. However,this code is way out front within NY when it comes to requiring best energy building for new construction or major renovation,so I strongly urge you to pass this code.And I sincerely thank the people who wrote it. 18 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Irene Weiser I do suggest that Site Plan Review laws be reviewed and This comment is acknowledged.We are open to further strengthened to compliment the new code-they can go exploring Site Plan Review. beyond code to make added requirements.Not just guidelines, but actual legal requirements for projects that require SPR (usually larger projects).For example,even if they go w/simple design,point scale option,they might be required to provide energy modeling showing heat pumps vs whatever they have chosen and to justify why they have not chosen heat pumps to the satisfaction of the review committee.They might be required to put in charging stations or other things that could not be justified in stretch code but could be rationalized as reasonable expense or attribute for larger projects. Irene Weiser I have a question about the following: It does apply to heat pumps(but not to ductless heat pumps). 2.10.2 Placing heating/cooling systems within the heated Ducted heat pumps outside the heated space would not be space eligible for this point. (And there are many ducted heat pumps Many heating/cooling systems are placed outside the heated -virtually all ground source heat pumps are ducted,and many space(on roofs,in attics,in unheated air source heat pumps are ducted.) basements,in crawl spaces,etc.),and as a result lose significant energy.Even when an unheated basement is located inside the thermal envelope,losses of 10%or more are typical. I'm not sure I understand this-particular with respect to heat pumps,where compressors are outside,loop fields underground,ductwork or tubing outside(ASHP) or in the basement(GSHP). If this does not apply to heat pump systems-why give it any points at all and encourage/reward non-heat pump options? Just require it. Irene Weiser Also-would you advocate ASH hot water in finished space? Where we locate hot water does not have a big impact on I've thought a lot about this. Yes-it pulls heat from the heated carbon. There might be a small benefit to where it's located, room-but I think managing when it does this is key. They can but each of our points needed to rise to a threshold of saving be programmed to turn on after one leaves for work,or in the over 6%in carbon emissions,and preferably more.So if a evening when all are asleep-typically times when temp particular improvement does not deliver significant reductions setback occurs anyhow. Also,is the amt of heat they'd draw in carbon emissions,it was not included. from the finished space really that significant? I ask about this because some apts or rental cottages have water heaters in the individual apt-in a utility closet or some such. Irene Weiser I appreciate the idea behind the point system and that you It might be hard to.We do not allow right lighting to be used for have revised and added more points for heat pumps,and homes or apartments(or hotels),because it does not deliver more points required overall-and if costs were equal for all enough reduction in carbon emissions for these building types. point options Heat Pumps would be an obvious choice. But Building shape turns out to be fairly hard to get as a point. I'm guessing that it's a lot easier for developers to choose Commercial buildings are not eligible for the building size several cheaper,lower point stuff like"right lighting"than to put points(different than building shape).The case studies give in heat pumps. examples of these.For example,consider a typical retail building on Route 13: Likely will not pursue heating in the heated space(because they all use rooftop systems),not eligible for building size,not eligible for heat pump water heating,difficult to meet the building shape point.So unless they want to spend money on solar or on the stretch energy code,the likelihood that they will choose heat pumps(likely a rooftop heat pump system)is extremely high,if they want to keep the building affordable. And in 2025,when the required points jumps up to 12,it is even less likely. And in 2030 we propose that new buildings be free of fossil fuels. Note also that we do not allow heat pump systems that rely on fossil fuels to get these points. Irene Weiser I dont know enough about the various certified green building Note that the level of LEED required is extremely high,which standards to know whether heat pumps would be>90% is more likely to direct people to the Easy Path,which very certain outcome.What I dont want to see is more of what has strongly discourages fossil fuels in several ways. happened with some recent downtown buildings,like Tompkins Financial,that have gone for LEED certification-but still using gas. Irene Weiser I think the statement about Pros of not using Fossil Fuels(and We propose to add text to further emphasize the importance of perhaps the committee's understanding of what's at stake) not using fossil fuels,and the issue of interconnectedness. needs to be strengthened. Support NYSEG's new pilot project,which has the goal of providing adequate natural gas service to the region without building a new gas pipeline.A big part of this effort is to reduce gas use in current and future buildings. It is much more than this.NYSEG and the Dept of Public Service folks have cautioned that if too much gas is drawn from the system to feed downtown then the compressor solution could fail-and Lansing pipeline will be needed. We are all connected and what the City and Town do has impacts elsewhere. 19 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Irene Weiser I also think the statement about"Cons"of not using Fossil Gas prices unfortunately plummeted by 50%over the past 10 Fuels... years,during which time electricity did not fall nearly as far. If natural gas prices drop or if electricity prices rise,we might Also,as gas demand hopefully continues to drop,its price may risk preventing the lowest-cost heating fuel. unfortunately also drop.And even if the risk is low(which we ...is very low risk because so much of our electricity- may or may not agree with),the statement is still correct that especially peak electricity-is generated from gas. Except in the risk exists.New York City is dealing with this situation in a rare situations,if gas prices change,electric prices will change big way,due to their high cost of electricity. along with them. Irene Weiser I know that for legal reasons you can't come out and say"no As described above,we believe what we are proposing is gas" But really-that's where we've got to be. Our energy intended to do what you are suggesting. Based on prior road map says we have to REDUCE our use of gas by AT feedback,we took additional steps to discourage gas, LEAST 50%to meet our GHG reduction goals. At the very including: 1.Giving a point for fossil-fuel-free appliances,but least,we should not be adding new uses.(unless offset by only if the rest of the building is free of fossil fuels. 2. existing use reduction somewhere..) It troubles me that the Requiring one more point(we used to require 5,not it's 6) 3. policy would allow new gas until 2030. That means that Allowing"energy improvements of your choice"for two points, unless market conditions change significantly by then(and but only if the building is free of fossil fuels. 4. goddess knows I hope they do!)we could have gas furnaces Recommending the big step up in 2025(12 points). 5. going in in 2029! I'd like to see this policy help those market Requiring a further step up in 2030,to net zero and fossil-fuel- conditions occur by doing everything possible to promote heat free. We believe that what the policy proposes is strong. pumps and discourage furnaces. Maybe a way to provide an extra point for developers who try it for the first time(along w/some extra provision of support thru the energy navigator?) Irene Weiser Does the City or Town use design guidelines as partner We propose to consider adding recommendations regarding documents to their site plan review process? This might be such approaches.And/but look at the colorful"carrots/stick" one way to help convey the very strong desire of the table in the report. None of what we might call softer City/Town to not expand use of fossil fuels. At a minimum, approaches comes close to achieving the effectiveness of conversations should be had to inform developers of the cost mandates,in other word firm legal requirements.And a effectiveness of building w heat pumps now-rather than the mandate is what we are proposing. cost of conversion later. Maybe also some bargaining w/in those discussions to allow the developer some other thing that is wanted... And for individual home owners-City/Town must provide educational materials about what are heat pumps and their advantages.Not as part of code change -but City/Town should also make changes to their site plan review laws as we have been doing in Caroline,to add in additional elements- like a requirement that developer provide documentation of energy use study and consideration of heat pump option. (this is required by County 239 review) Irene Weiser I also wonder about not including points for solar. Yeah-I We discussed solar ready rooftops,but solar ready rooftops do know..We need to encourage solar and this is a fine way to do not firmly deliver reductions in carbon emissions. Solar does. it. But the reality is that solar IS happening and accelerating And we cannot get to net zero without renewables. We have and will do so even more as storage starts to happen(and it capped points for renewables so that someone cannot just go is!!) So I'm less worried about solar..The grid overall is getting out and comply just by using renewables-we pretty much greener and will continue to do so. Instead maybe points for followed the lead of Architecture 2030 on this. solar ready rooftops or property-such that at least 50%of energy consumption could be done on site. Irene Weiser Maybe a point for Energy Efficient appliances plus"right Right lighting is only allowed for commercial buildings, lighting"-but not just for right lighting.. many/most of which do not have appliances(think of office buildings,for example). And appliances are typically not addressed in a building design/construction/permitting process. (The policy does have one point that relates to clothes dryers,but that point also requires no fossil fuels to a building that gets this point,which is permit-related.) Irene Weiser How does this policy allow or promote Ecovillage type Much of Ecovillage-style construction is included in this policy- development-with economically built buildings so tight that simpler building shape,modest window-to-wall ratio,no they can be heated with one small baseboard heating unit? heating outside the heated space,and more. This is We should be encouraging this most of all!!! described in the report.Other Ecovillage characteristics,like superinsulation,are possible through the whole-building path, and on the Easy Path with points through the Stretch Code, and through the"improvement of your choice". Irene Weiser Last-I think the thing I most appreciate in this policy doc are We agree. And/but we do not want to let new buildings off the the graphs showing how relatively little impact new hook: If we cannot control the growth of carbon emissions,we construction has vs BAU- yes,it matters some-but where will have a hard time reducing them. So we need this policy, we've really got to focus our efforts is in converting existing even if its impact is not as big as existing buildings. Also,look housing stock!! (we should keep this in mind w/NYSEG RFP carefully at the City projected energy graph,where the impact too!!) of new building growth is bigger than for the Town. Irene Weiser Really last-the other thing I most appreciate about this policy Thank you. is the team that has been working on it-and how open and responsive you have been to constructive criticism. Thanks for all your hard work!! Guillermo Metz The policy allows 10%backup heat by electric resistance, - EE1 should specify some amount of total heat load is met which means a minimum of 90%must be supplied by heat with heat pumps or biomass(ideally,we should require 100%) pumps. 20 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Guillermo Metz - EE2:I suggest we cut out biomass for water heating,and for We propose to eliminate biomass for water heating.We heat pumps require that some amount be met with heat pumps propose to recommend that heat pump water heaters be set (again,100%) on heat-pump-only mode. Guillermo Metz - All:particularly for hotel rooms,how many of the total rooms We propose to clarify that an average of all rooms can meet need to be the requisite size?All? the standard,but not every room needs to. Guillermo Metz - Al2:should stipulate that all heating/cooling systems(except Detailed requirements for this point are spelled out in the full for heat pumps)be inside actively heated spaces policy requirements in the report.The table is just a summary. Guillermo Metz Detailed requirements for this point are spelled out in the full A14:"reducing"by how much? policy requirements in the report.The table is just a summary. Guillermo Metz Based on some concerns from others,the consultants determined that an average of less than 20%for the entire building provides more flexibilty in the design of buildings AI5:in addition to limiting overall VVWR,should the policy which may require one or more exterior walls to exceed even limit any single wall to less than some amount(40%?60%?) 40 to 60%. Guillermo Metz This point would also apply to commercial/retail buildings that exist within any neighborhood with an exsiting or proposed - OP1:what would the policy be for commercial/retail? density level of 7 du/acre. Guillermo Metz Detailed requirements for this point are spelled out in the full OP3:need to define"substantial" policy requirements in the report.The table is just a summary. Guillermo Metz OPS:stipulate that the proposed energy improvement needs We proposed to clarify the requirement for this point to add to be submitted in writing to and approved by ? this level of detail. Guillermo Metz - WE1:"Use"is too vague.Maybe"Exclusively use"or Detailed requirements for this point are spelled out in the full something like that. policy requirements in the report.The table is just a summary. Guillermo Metz Also,in the references section,or separately,I think it would This comment has been acknowledged. be good to list additional resources such as specific NYSERDA and other incentive programs,info about heat pumps including their economics,the County's various energy and emissions reports,if available and able to be made public, the 2030 District market analysis report,etc. 21 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Elmer E.Ewing As a Town of Ithaca resident and patron of Ithaca,thank you This comment has been acknowledged.We feel a major for the huge investment in work and time that you have made component of the proposed policy is to discourage any new on the Green Building Policy.Thank you also for the natural gas infrastructure by rewarding more points for all opportunity to comment on it. I would like to expand on the electric systems. remarks that I made at the Public Outreach event of March 28, 2018. If we want to have a significant impact on slowing climate interruption,our focus should be on immediate results.Why? For a number of reasons,but an important one is the probability that irreversible cycles are being initiated which will accelerate the rate of climate change.One example:as the permafrost thaws in the Arctic,methane is already being released--and the huge quantities present there court disaster. Methane frozen in shallow bodies of water present another potential time bomb.The warmer the Arctic gets,the more methane is released;the more released,the warmer it gets. Thus meeting goals for reduction of greenhouse gases by 2030 are important not only because they mark progress on the road to eventual replacement of all fossil fuels;they are critical because unless we make sufficient progress in the very near future,our goals for what happens by the end of the century may be impossible to achieve! This is why we must stop focusing only on CO2 emissions.If we want to meet our goals for 2030 or earlier,we have to pay major attention to methane(the major component of natural gas).Methane decays more rapidly than does CO2,which persists for centuries. Therefore,in comparing how much the two gases contribute to climate change,the time frame must be specified.In early days of research on this topic, EPA decided on 100 years.This led to a figure for methane of 25 times more powerful than CO2.However,for the shorter time frames crucial to meet our goals,that figure approaches 100 times more powerful than CO2. The gas industry assures us that natural gas is a bridge fuel, and that leakage of gas is a minor issue. Evidence is mounting that leakage is far higher than they claim.Instead of only 1-3%,if we include the entire process from drilling to end usage,gas leakage may well exceed 15%.Yes,CO2 is very important,but the low-hanging fruit is natural gas. It is imperative that the City and Town of Ithaca zero in on switching away from natural gas.Tighter buildings and better insulation are certainly helpful,but heat pumps are a far better answer than natural gas for heating needs.It is true that the electricity for heat pumps is likely to be generated by natural gas,so we must also move toward non-fossil methods of generation.That will be easier to do than to switch away from natural gas as a heating source once gas furnaces have been purchased and new gas lines have been laid.New gas infrastructure is a huge impediment to change;it must be blocked soon! Please bear this in mind as you continue to work on this important policy,and thank you for the chance to comment. Katie Borgella Walkability Map:Clarify how often it will be updated,how We would recommend updating the map an an annual basis. developed,what it is based on. The map is automatically generated using 1/4 mile buffers around all known services as well as targeted development areas identified in the Town's Comp Plan such as King Rd,Rt 13 cooridor and East Hill Plaza.We acknowledge that more GIS data points(such as dining halls on both IC and Cornell) need to be added in order to make the map more accurate. Katie Borgella Density:Have you compared to town/city zoning to see how We have not specifically done this calculation but we don't much of Town/City could get points? believe there are currently any locations within the Town other than Belle Sherman Cottages and Maplewood Redevelopment that would meet the density points.New developments such as Chainworks and East Hill plaza could meet this point.Most of the residential neighborhoods in the City meet this requirement. Katie Borgella Heat Pump Dryer:Could include definition in glossary?Not We propose to add this definition. familiar with it. Katie Borgella Why is heat pump water heating not ok for commercial points? Most commercial buildings(office,retail,etc.)have very low water loads. 22 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Katie Borgella It would be good to include a definition of Residential and We propose to include definitions of residential and Commercial. Does Commercial include apartment buildings commercial buildings,as suggested,and to also include with more than 5 units? clarification for mixed-use buildings. Katie Borgella Why are dorms and hotels called out only for EE2 in the Dorms and hotels are considered commercial buildings,but Summary Table?Are hotels and dorms not considered either some points are available for both residential and these residential or commercial? commercial buildlings. Katie Borgella NYS Stretch code—include explanation of what is in it, We propose to include more description of the NYS Stretch mention some specifics e.g.insulation,air sealing). Code,as suggested. Katie Borgella Summary Table pg.6:Might want to reference other places in We propose to add these references,as suggested. report for more info OR could organize report in same order as table.Right now,it can be hard to find additional information— for example the NYS Stretch code info is kind of buried in the text on page 16. Katie Borgella It is great to see the city and the town taking leadership on this This comment has been acknowldeged. issue.This policy will help to meet City,Town and County GHG reduction goals. Umit Sirt As I mentioned you earlier,we need to make sure and This is clear in some places in the report/policy,but we highlight that this additional simple approach is on top of the propose to highlight this,for clarity,as suggested. current NYS energy code,which is already stringent for the building envelope. Umit Sirt As mentioned,we may want to discourage the fossil fuel even The current approach is to provide one point for each 6-10% more,with putting negative points for any sort of natural gas. reduction in carbon emissions.A negative point would be inconsistent with this accounting. Umit Sirt You affordable zero energy piece(simplified approach)is We propose to consider providing one point for avoiding over- amazingly complimentary with the energy code,based on ventilation. ASH RAE,which really lacks in some areas.One area that I see a HUGE opportunity is to reduce overventilating with the outdoor air.I am seeing more and more,the designer goes over ventilate so that they are not liable.They give resistance to change their practice and goes beyond ASH RAE 62.1-62.2. My suggestion is to give one more point(both commercial and residential)for not over ventilating the building(may be not more than 5%of the ASHRAE values of the overall building.) This will lower the amount of outside air and lower the duct size and also equipment sizes.Therefore,it is an affordable measure,and the impact on energy is substantial,most of the time,more important than building shell. Umit Sirt The same approach with over ventilating can be repeated for We already have a point for reduced overlighting on a space the over lighting.We can use LPD for the whole building.(you by space basis.And the stretch code rewards lower lighting may already have this,just didn't recall) power density than required by code. Ithaca College Recommend an institutional compliance path.Several We propose adding language to the report similar to the additional comments were included in the attached memo. following:We will evaluate an institutional compliance path,in cooperation with large local institutions,as part of the next phase of this project. Ithaca College •The"easy path"can be a challenge as we have a number of We propose to review the Easy Path to see if changes are buildings that share utility services,resulting in regional energy needed to address this issue. plants. An upgrade in one does not always sync up with others. Ithaca College •The"walkability"point would likely be available to IC based We believe this to be true but would like to better understand upon the planned changes to the GIS data base. what services are currently offered on campus.The data points will be added to the GIS map. Ithaca College •The"whole building"scoring system will be synced to the That is the current plan,but it is difficult to commit for what current LEED version 4 regardless of any updates or changes might be done in the future.We could see revisions happening to the LEED system. based on improvements to LEED.Other whole-building paths may also emerge,such as the Stretch Code at higher levels of performance,that may offer broader options,for example for 2025. Ithaca College •We would appreciate the continued discussion around the We can certainly continue to discuss this idea as part of the concept of carbon offsets. Although the elimination of fossil next phase of the project. fuel usage and the concept of"strategic electrification"are the main drivers to the current policy,carbon offsets may still have a potential role. Ithaca College •The Stretch Code is scheduled to be updated with a newer Which version of the NYS Stretch Energy Code is used 2018 version which is likely to be the one recommended for depends on the dates that the 2015 and 2018 Codes are this policy. finalized,as well as the timeline for the development of the Green Building Policy. 23 Ithaca Green Building Policy Comments and Responses Ithaca College •The emergency generator issue needs to be clarified,as they We will explore the emergency generator issue,but we are required by the Life Safety Codes. Fossil fuels for dining anticipate we can find a mutually agreeable solution.The services and commercial kitchen operations will be required for Green Building Policy will not conflict with existing regulations. the foreseeable future. We appreciate your willingness to We recognize that commercial cooking operations may require consider these fossil fuel usages as potential exemptions. the use of gas or other fossil fuel.The use of these is not prohibited under any proposed compliance path for the first iteration of this policy.While we have proposed a mandate for net zero building by 2030,we believe that the global conversation around net zero will lead to some consensus with how to treat things like commercial cooking. Ithaca College •The dialogue around"gut rehab"highlights the need to We propose clarifying the language related to"gut rehab." consider including additional language to help more formally define this item. Ithaca College •Please include additional verbiage to clarify how residential We propose to review definitions of residential and commercial halls will be treated. In the version we reviewed there buildings,and clarify where residential halls fall. appeared to be two different references that offered conflicting guidance. Ithaca College •The 20%offsite renewable cap may be a challenge that ends The cap is on points,and is not a cap on Renewables up negatively impacting the desired intent. Perhaps allowing themselves.However,we do propose to re-examine the cap off site locations within the State or a certain radius to count as on points for Renewables. "on site"may be an acceptable alternative. Ithaca College How will future energy sources such as fuel cell technology be Under the Easy Path,points are available under OP5 for scored if it reaches an acceptable improvements not already included in the Easy Path which level of technical and commercial availability? reduce energy use on site.Additionally,the Whole Building Path allows for more flexibility in design. Ithaca College If carbon capture is developed into a sustainable and The policy can be adapted as necessary in the future to commercially available technology,how will the policy be account for an electric grid which has a smaller carbon adapted? footprint. Ithaca College •Has the team considered incorporating water reclamation There has been discussion of a variety of water conservation systems into the report? strategies.Water was moved to a separate mandatory prerequisite because cold water conservation does not reduce carbon emissions.For now,it is limited to approaches that do not add to construction cost,in order to minimize impacts on building affordability. Ithaca College •There currently appears to be minimal local support and There are a number of operating geothermal systems locally, parts availability for geothermal systems maintenance. and we expect the field to grow with time. Cornell University Would like to see an institutional path. We propose adding language to the report similar to the following:We will evaluate an institutional compliance path,in cooperation with large local institutions,as part of the next phase of this project. 24 Ithaca Green Building Policy Fi n aIII.,D-RAPT F:Iroject FI�,',)ort ,43/2._�Cj �,� /....8 NOIFE:� ]-Ihius cloc.urnEfflIt SI110WS (.I11,31r]IgE,S rn,.K1E,' §1r7[ ME' ChIE' SE('.01r][('1 cliraft GI P ir'E,'lPOirt, (JEAEK1 3/9/18, ]-�11E,' ('fiffE,ir'E,int c.oloir's USE,,cl for trac.khrig(, I iii (10 not §gindfy aunydhihng SlPE'(',u,31, 01E,'y WE,ir'E,, shrnply rna(1E,' Iby (IiiffEir'E,in t EK1 to ir's, Written by: STREAM COLLABORATIVE RMDALL+WEST Aft andsc ap&a,,(16tectrw&d x clitem With support from: ARTNERS OF,r:?, ,P 0 PAI-1- K FOR PLACES 11;21 70; 1A Table of Contents 1 Executive Summary 3 2 Green Building Policy Study and Social Impacts Study 10 3 Education and Outreach 549 4 Building Stock Survey and Development Forecasts 583 5 Glossary 80 Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 IIIN L dG4V-T-Project Report (4ZZ.�3/ /18) - Pg. 2 1 Executive Summary Climate change is a real and significant threat to our community, as it is to the nation and world. Local goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050 are roughly consistent with state, federal, and international goals, even if federal activity is currently weaker. The building sector, responsible for more than half of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions locally, is a critical sector to address. The most affordable and cost-effective time to reduce GHG emissions isaag when a building is built, rather than at a time of later retrofit. Thus, the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca — with assistance from consultants STREAM Collaborative, Taitem Engineering, and Randall + West Planners — have (-oir)d�j(ated__au_(-oiri,)[.Ir,,, ��2ira^.roive _ _____ ____ t Ca, a"In!__f i�'LLL_�U d Ca,?,_"ro'toC_�__a"1L_E __g"ro__ Y�?'�?'C� �"�U _S. Cfl, _,s standards for new In s t ir u C IISkICa aalCflS C 6 tI21Ii _e�C. _I4a"11Ind invT iroiCnIra-Ie inta"t IIIa15�aaC S"ro �k� S��k III les-4-1h--d=-h-IIIInCfQ-°ICS'tIll✓ze o naalr larvate HIluose standards. Ilrl s a aklY�., falYaa!✓Ila a°ro �aaC <; IYakU ICaa and IYe°rouis of Slam studles and Kala"all<'esIYa?coira"11Cala inda"a�lla it s Pfo a lYa a ICa f�U�II a�IIICa u u Illfa Y-duu Il u, ifirk"a--,_irk"--,_----------_"-' 222 u^ ��a�^;^.i------ 1.1 Green Building Policy and Social Impacts Study The project team reviewed current approaches and best practices for green building policies. On the basis of this review, we propose a green building policy that emphasizes affordability, measurably reduces carbon emissions, lends itself readily for compliance review, and provides flexibility and choice to developers. The policy focuses on an approach that would be incorporated into site plan review and the building code, requiring either a certain number of points to be achieved, or whole-building compliance with energy requirements of a third-party certification system such as LEED. The proposed policy comprises a set of mandated and incentivized new construction standards, to be required in addition to compliance to the New York State Energy Conservation C,uufru^.:rod iruuc i.o Code (Bull^%a am frau iY° ;;aaa aalY D:Iran lY aalra^rod l a✓aad liraira tMaaaua The policy was developed through a series of open meetings of an advisory panel, and a subsequent set of outreach meetings, followed by a public comment period., 1.2 Education and Outreach An important part of implementing any new policy is to perform outreach to educate and gather input from key stakeholders. The project team has met with a project steering committee and advisory committee throughout the duration of the project to help guide and inform the process. The team also participated in several presentations with energy and sustainability minded groups as well as town and city committees and boards to present the overall project goals, preliminary findings and recommendations for the implementation of the Green Building Policy. A public information session was held in is beiRg plaRAPPI fer late March 2018 to reach out to members of the general public with special invitations to key stakeholder groups such as developers, landlords, realtors, and architects. Additional Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 IIIN U D.11 Project Report (4ZZ.�3/ /18) - Pg. 3 personal communications between the project team members and interested individuals has been ongoing and suggested feedback has been incorporated into the recommendations. The consultant team established a project website www.ithacagreenbuilding.com to store the core information generated by the project including draft reports, meeting agendas, minutes, presentations, reference materials and case studies. The website is a key tool for sharing information with the news media and any interested member of the City and Town of Ithaca. One goal of the project was to increase the diversity of active participants in Ithaca sustainability efforts. Through the steering and advisory committees, through many outreach sessions, and through individual conversations with stakeholders, new voices were incorporated into the local sustainability conversation. We recommend ongoing efforts in this area. 1.3 Building Stock Survey and Development Forecasts To help the community and our team understand the implications and potential levers for change that can help the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca to achieve energy and water savings goals, Randall + West developed a Survey of Existing Buildings and a Development Forecast. This analysis helps us to understand the context for a Green Building Policy in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca. Our building stock survey detailed the type, location, size, and age of every building in the Town of Ithaca and City of Ithaca. We gathered available local and regional information on building energy and water use, and analyzed the permitting databases used by the City and Town. The trend in permitting and building area show that a Green Building Policy for new construction will be one important component in reducing community level greenhouse gas emissions, and that additional incentives and/or mandates will need to address existing buildings, renewable energy development, and transportation energy use in order to meet the City and Town goals for greenhouse gas emissions. Based on data made available from local, state, and national sources, our projections suggest significant growth and development continuing into the foreseeable future. This projection is based on population and employment growth projections by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., a well regarded economic projection firm, through the year 2050 based on market demand, the competitive position of Ithaca for certain types of development, as well as the City's and Town's respective Comprehensive Plan Future Land use Mas A 7 2.[2j.�^ ions in the Context of Local Plans)... Our projections suggest modest but Maps.............................................................................u........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................). p 1 88 substantial growth and supports the findings of the building stock survey: new buildings are a small but important component of the City and Town wide future building stock. 1.4 Recommendations The project team recommends a combination of energy efficiency requirements, and related incentives, to substantially reduce carbon emissions in all new buildings while emphasizing and supporting affordability. The proposed requirements are in addition to compliance with the New York State Energy Conservation Code. The project team also recommends further study and policy work in the area of existing buildings. Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 11„IN ILD-11 Project Report (4Z .� /9/18) - Pg. 4 The proposed requirements allow developers to either comply with a simple point-based scoring system, or with a whole-building certification. There are underlying mandatory requirements for water conservation. The requirements apply to all new buildings, as well as IraaaaayiY"Ev renovations, and large new additions. Small building additions and limited renovations are proposed to comply with a more modest energy-efficiency standard. Historic buildings are exempt from the requirement._A—sa jirialraaaalYy_2-! �IIa��_��aY������^ro��a�_IY��a�uuiilY��lraaa�Ir�l^ro_li^ro_lilr�a�llu�a���a�_lilrad�Ila��_a�all�II�IY��a✓uaa���a�_daaall�ll��_aairallla��_iraa��d_IC�a� ���. Energy efficiency requirements are proposed to go into effect as soon as possible, af-) -to become more stringent in 2025, and finally to transition to a requirement for net-zero energy buildings in 2030. In order to further reduce carbon emissions and to promote the early adoption of best practices, a variety of incentives are proposed for those buildings that significantly exceed the initial requirements. These incentives will sunset in 2030. Other lraaaaLq[_recommendations deriving from the study include: 1. 9,Consider conducting a similar study and policy for existing buildings. 2. Consider adopting a benchmarking policy to require the tracking of energy usage for existing buildings. 3. Consider evaluating an institutional compliance path, to address such issues as institution-wide renewable energy capacity and district heating systems. ------Develop requirements for buildings with large internal loads (such as labs), which might not be able to comply with the proposed whole-building requirements. �eNVQ e__4�dY-__ '::a'r '.1---+.a��bof.)__°��Ir�r�Yra'r�rN� N�.aVp w_ a r r,m Y w_.II � I aY {C � m •a w_ � � I , I m a lu I I4e---aa441Y-e via e44--�i 4de__4 e•Ik+ •-----Detailed recommendations can be found stak;Rg in Section 2.2044 of the report. .4-1thaca Green Building Policy ® Summary Table To comply with the Ithaca Green Building Policy, all new buildings must meet the requirements of the Easy Path OR the Whole Building Path, AND meet the water efficiency requirement, in addition to still meeting requirements of the New York State Energy Conservation Code. See Chapter 2 for general background. See section 2.14 for detailed requirements, this table is a limited summary. Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 IIIN LD11 Project Report (XYZ .�.3/ /18) - Pg. 5 EASY PATH-Buildings must achieve six points Category Improvement Points Details EFFICIENT ELECTRIFICATION EE1 Heat pumps Ar 2-4 2 points(Commercial)or 3 points(Residential)for air source heat pumps. for space heating 3 points(Commercial)or 4 points(Residential)for ground source heat pumps^gym. EE2 Heat pumps-r 1 1 point for water heating systems that use heat pumps Ar for domestic hot water (Residential). EE3 Electric stove and ventless 1 1 point total for electric stoves AND ventless heat pump clothes dryers heat pump clothes dryer (Residential). Requires EE1 as prerequisite,and no fossil fuels in the building. AFFORDABILITY IMPROVEMENTS All Smaller building/room size 1-2 1 point for building/room size 15%smaller than reference size. (residential/hotel) 2 points for building/room size 30%smaller than reference size. AI2 Heating systems in heated 1 1 point for placing heating/cooling systems and distribution inside space actively heated and finished spaces. AI3 Efflci nt:SJ.•p'e building 1 1 point if exterior surface area divided by gross floor area is less than shape maximum value provided in table. AI4 Right-lighting 1 1 point for reducing overlighting and other lighting improvements (Commercial). AI5 Modest windows with 1 1 point for overall window-to-wall ratio less than 20%(individual spaces views and natural light may exceed 20%). RENEWABLE ENERGY RE1 Renewable energy_(Liqm 1-3 Electric Systems(on-site or remote): 1 point per 1.2 kwh/sf/year bio rna:s):L..�(--' '-a)-r (4-r+e#44, renewable energy capacity(Residential) or per 2.4kwh/sf/year t-4*r=m'i4 systems (Commercial). ( r-°'i' '-'•r=r• r� ��•rj'. Thermal Systems: 1 point per 4.0 kBtu/sf/yr renewable energy capacity (Residential) or per 8.0 kBtu/sf/year(Commercial). RE2 -Renewable energy 3 4 3 points Commercial or 4 points Residential for approved biomass biomass Ispace heating systems. OTHER POINTS OP1 Development density 1 1 point for density of more than 7 dwelling units per acre. OP2 Walkability 1 1 point if the property is on the walkability map. OP3 Adaptive reuse 1 1 point for substantial re-purpose of existing building. OP4 Meet NY Stretch Code 1 1 point for complying with 2015 NY Stretch Energy Code OP5 Custom e€nergy 1--__2 1 point for each 1.2 kwh/sf/year(Residential)or 2.4 kwh/sf/year improvementeF 42, (Commercial) reduction in energy use. Prerequisite: no fossil fuels.-2 WHOLE BUDDING PATH WB1 Comply with recognized N/A Commercial: Passive House OR min. 17 energy points per LEED V4. high performance building Residential: Passive House OR RESNET HERS/ERI max.40 points OR standard National Green Building Standard min.80 energy efficiency points WATER EFFICIENCY REQUIREMENTS WE1 Use EPA Water Sense / N/A All buildings must meet this requirement, regardless of which other efficient fixtures compliance path is used. Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 IIIN L dG� Project Report (4Z .� /9/18) - Pg. 6 T I IE !.zP : ....:..:..... .: .. .... . CrCr.o..Ly.....T . l. . 1.5 Projected Impacts The projected energy impacts of the green building policy are shown in the following graphs. The three lines shown represent business as usual (blue), the impact of the green building policy in new buildings (red), and the impact of both the green building policy in new buildings and energy efficiency in existing buildings (green). get of ti„+ti the g n bu;ld;Rg i9elo ., OR Rew bu;ld;Rgs @Rd eReFgy off,,,,,.,,.., ;iR 0 PQgQ "Business as usual" assumes energy use intensity for new buildings reflects the current energy code. The impact of the green building policy assumes 40% savings for buildings through 2025, 80% savings for buildings built in the period 2025-2030, and zero energy buildings after 2030. The impact of both_the_green building policy in new buildings and energy efficiency in existing buildings (green) as ��r-a ssuming 25% reduction in energy use by 2030 and 50% reduction by 2050. City of Ithaca 2500 2CII r„p d... ----------------------- wW � t 500 7"u �IM� rn 1000 Soo 20:15 2030 20501 �4 `APB PBz,6 Ener 'Eff an.ia r EJ ureI P.ro .................im2. ........o................ ..........................................uilding. .o.l..ic. in Ci............. .......... ............ e.c ...............1 .�c �t ......................... ....2 .........Y.................................Y.....o........f.........Il...t......h.......�.......c.......�..... . Ithaca Green Building Policy II IIIN L -11 Project Report(4Z .� /9/18) - Pg. 7 1200Town of I thaca 600 ILI y 4 00 W 20 C UJ 0 tai 203 0 201,50 —GPB Plus IEE rp/Effid acyl Possible interpretations of these projections include: 1. The green building policy is required to slow the growth of energy use. 2. A separate policy will be required to deliver energy efficiency in existing buildings. 1.6 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) A. Yes. The proposed Ithaca Green Building Policy would Ilg u-a�irrl^�pp emen Code? Q. Is the Ithaca Green Building Policy different from the NYS Ene _a__su I e t to the NYS code that requires a property owner to take steps to lower the overall greenhouse gas emissions of new or renovated buildings in order to help meet the energy goals of the City and Town Comprehensive Plans. The NYS code is a minimum standard and it does not effectively achieve the goals. Q. How do I comply with the policy? A. New construction and substantially renovated existing buildings will need to choose either an `"Easy Path" based on an estimated yet carefully calibrated point system OR the Whole Building Path with third-party verification such as LEED, Passive House or other energy modeling to demonstrate compliance above and beyond NYS Energy Code. Q. How do I get points if I want to use traditional efficiency approaches, such as more insulation? A. Points for more insulation and other traditional efficiency approaches are possible through the NY Stretch Code which is part of the Easy Path. Or the "Custom Energy Improvement"—e# Che+Ee' points may be pursued. Or the Whole Building Path can be used. Ithaca Green Building Policy II IIIN LD.11 Project Report(4Z .� /9/18) - Pg. 8 Q.Will the green building policy make buildings more expensive? A. If the Easy Path is chosen, points can be achieved using improvements that reduce energy use AND reduce construction cost. So it is possible for a building to meet the requirements and cost the same or less than a conventional building. If the Whole Building path is chosen, for wider flexibility in design and construction, we anticipate the added cost might be 5-8% more than a conventional building. We also anticipate that such added costs will continue to come down, as we have seen significant cost reductions in areas such as LED lights, solar energy systems, and other energy-efficient technologies. Q. Do I need a special energy consultant? A. Not if the Easy Path is chosen. If the Whole Building path is chosen, an energy consultant is required. Costs of energy consultants can sometimes be covered through state (NYSERDA) or utility or other energy programs. Q. Can I use fossil fuels in my new building? A. Fossil fuels are discouraged in several ways. But fossil fuels are not prohibited. Q. Are green building approaches such as deconstruction and reused materials, light pollution, indoor environmental quality, gray-water reuse, rainwater harvesting, electric vehicle chargers, solar-ready roofs, and others a part of the green building policy? A. The initial focus of the green building policy is energy and water, as both of these impact carbon emissions and relate to recommendations in the City and Town Comprehensive Plans. We recognize the importance of other green building characteristics and will recommend that these be examined in the future. The initial focus of the policy is limited to energy (and, specifically, carbon emissions) and water. Ithaca Green Building Policy 11 11„IN LD11 Project Report (4ZZ.� /9/18) - Pg. 9 2Green Building Policy Study and Social Impacts Study 2.1 Goals Goals for energy efficiency, renewables, and reductions in carbon emissions are emerging at the national, state, and local levels. Global sustainability efforts are aimed at meeting or exceeding the ambitions of the Paris Climate Agreement s+gRed by ^'ye s except the "^;ted—State-F7, which will require a reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 80%or more by 2050. The U.S. is a signatory to the Paris agreement, but may be withdrawing; however, New York State is one of 14 states that intends to comply with the agreement. Nationally, the voluntary Architecture 2030 Challenge advocates for all new construction and major renovation buildings to be "carbon-neutral" buildings in 2030. Carbon neutral buildings are defined to be buildings that use no fossil fuel, greenhouse gas (GHG) emitting energy to operate. The schedule of targets for Architecture 2030 is: • 70% GHG-emitting, energy consumption reduction below the regional (or country) average/median for that building type. • 80%in 2020 • 90%in 2025 • Carbon-neutral in 2030 (using no fossil fuel GHG emitting energy to operate) New York State has also adopted the goal of decreasing GHG emissions 80% by 2050, as well as the mid- term goal of reducing emissions 40% by 2030. In 2015, New York adopted its important and current "50 by 30" renewable energy goal, which targets 50% of the State's electricity to come from renewable sources like solar and wind power by the year 2030. Other state goals include a 23% decrease in energy consumption in existing buildings from 2012 levels, also by 2030. (https://energyplan.ny.gov/) The state of California's revised Title 24 energy code includes ambitious energy-related performance requirements and goals for residential and commercial buildings. It states that all residential buildings must be zero net energy (ZNE) by 2020 and all commercial buildings must achieve ZNE by 2030. The code applies to retrofit projects that pass certain thresholds. The California Energy Commission and the California Public Utilities Commission jointly released a New Residential Zero Net Energy Action Plan 2015-2020. This plan outlines the path for reaching the residential ZNE goals and key strategies to get Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN L .11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 10 there, including building awareness of value and benefits of ZNE, and aligning regulations, policies, incentives, etc. At the local level, the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca and Tompkins County all have goal of 80% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. The Tompkins County Energy Roadmap was created to evaluate the local energy resources in the area and develop scenarios to meet the county's greenhouse gas emission reduction goal and projected energy needs through 2050. The report recommends constructing new buildings that are extremely energy efficient, aiming for a 70% reduction in energy use compared to the national median for comparable buildings, and increasing to net zero carbon emissions between 2030 and 2050, which is in line with the nationwide goals of Architecture 2030 and the Ithaca 2030 District . Another recommendation is a 35% reduction in energy use in existing buildings through retrofits and upgrades by 2050. 2.2 Criteria of a Successful Green Building Policy In short, a successful green building policy should be FAIR: • Flexible: Allow flexibility and creativity for developers, building design professionals, and builders. • Affordable: Maximize positive social impacts and minimize negative social impacts. Most importantly, but not exclusively, should allow for affordable buildings, to allow home-ownership and affordable rents. • Impactful: Result in buildings that measurably use less energy and reduce carbon emissions. • Reachable: Not add unreasonably to work for City and Town building departments, developers, design professionals, and builders. A successful green building policy should also: • Be adaptable,to change in coming years, as carbon emission goals become more ambitious. • Complement the existing New York State energy code. • Deal with new buildings as well as renovations. • Harmonize with other energy programs, such as NYSERDA, PACE financing, Federal tax credits, etc. • Promote best practices in energy-efficient design and construction, to show the path forward as the energy code itself becomes more challenging, and to serve as a model for other municipalities. 2.3 Social Impacts As we consider options for a green building policy, it is important to keep in mind possible social impacts. Some of these include: Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf L.D.114V­P-Projectject Report (Yh3118) - Pg. 11 • Human Health: Reduced air pollution is good for human health and the health of the planet, in the broadest sense, with benefits ranging from reduced lung disease to reduced impacts of climate change. • Lower energy costs: Lower energy costs are a major benefit of a green building policy. And energy costs are not only those of building owners, but also of tenants in rented spaces. Energy costs are also often borne by building owners who did not develop a building, and so who were not responsible for its first cost. • Construction and Living Costs: Construction costs have generally been viewed as being higher for green buildings, resulting in higher costs of buildings, housing, mortgages, and/or rent for tenants. Interestingly, and importantly, there are a number of energy improvements that also reduce the construction cost of buildings. These are addressed in a separate discussion in this report and are a major component of the proposed policy. • Maintenance costs: Some green building improvements reduce maintenance costs. For example, more efficient lighting can mean fewer light fixtures, and so fewer lamps to replace. Also, LED lamps last longer than other types of lighting, and so replacement labor is reduced. Other improvements, such as solar photovoltaic systems, increase maintenance costs. • Transportation Equity: Locating buildings in urban areas and close to public transportation reduces both the carbon emissions from, and the costs of transportation. • Resilience: In general, green buildings are generally more resilient, in other words they will stand up better to storms, power outages, and other unusual scenarios. Most importantly, energy-efficient buildings will stay warmer for much longer (for example, for days instead of hours) during winter power outages, and will stay cooler for longer during summer power outages. • Security: There are not many links between green building policy and security, but there are a few. For example, motion sensors for outdoor lighting save energy and are viewed as being good to ward away intruders. • Safety: Insofar as green buildings use less fossil fuels, the risk for poisoning from carbon monoxide or explosion from natural gas or other fossil fuels is reduced. Several hundred people die in the U.S. each year from either carbon monoxide poisoning or gas explosions._Gr�ein reduce---------------------------------Hhe YIsk of fl�re s� _� __ _ fItIYa 'dIoIY ___________ ___ _ � _ _ ___ ____ _________ __ _ reduce rn� ld and irs .lYe __�l�i� u is better o uurn� u lrrvlld " and allso_ � ^�i � i__ uljiing- irui , u - � iiuru � )J its a irk ts, • Jobs: Green building creates newjobs in the design and construction industry. Throughout the study, Ithaca-specific needs were at the forefront of considerations, including needs of a college town, climate-specific needs (cold climate), geographic constraints of Ithaca (bounded by the lake and three hills), and well-recognized needs for affordable housing and transportation. Ithaca Green Building Policy If IIIN ILD11 Project Report (Y h /18) - Pg. 12 2.3.1 Do green buildings cost ore? High-performance buildings are estimated to cost between 0 and 15% more than minimally code- compliant buildings. Generally, the higher the energy efficiency (in other words, the lower the energy use), the higher the cost. Examples, drawn from local projects, are shown in Figure 14. Ince ental Cost vs., EneirgyUse Relationship 20w+, A uj urn "'fax ^ 1„' �:N 2 5 30 40 4 5th, t .5% 10^4 Enie gy Use pnte us ty(1 W .,,kBt a/SF/ ear) Fig urp 3:24. Relationship between energy use and incremental construction cost. Buildings meeting high-efficiency passive house standards (approximately 24 EUI) are estimated to cost 2-6% more than conventional buildings. Buildings that are zero-energy (0 EUI) are estimated to cost 10-15% more than conventional buildings. As a reality check, if a conventional building were supplied with 100% of its energy from commercially available solar energy, without any other building improvements the added cost would be 14%, using prices for currently-available solar photovoltaic systems. Added costs for energy-efficient construction continue to drop, for two reasons: a. The above estimates do not account for energy improvements that not only reduce energy use but also reduce construction cost. See the separate discussion of affordable energy improvements. If affordable energy improvements are chosen, their savings in construction cost can be applied to the added cost of improvements that do add cost to a building, but the overall added cost will be less than 10-15% for a zero-energy building. The potential for affordable high-performance design and construction are shown with two points on the above graph. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 13 Ecovillage TREE's 4-story apartment building, with 15 apartments, delivered extremely low- energy performance (EUI = 9, viewed as close to zero-energy) at a construction cost 5% LESS than a typical equivalent building. And a single-family home on Perry City road is operating at zero-energy performance despite costing only 10% more to build than a comparable home. b. The costs of individual components of high-performance buildings are dropping as demand increases. Examples of these are shown in Figure 15. Solar photovoltaic system costs have dropped by over 75% over the past seven years. Air source heat pump costs have dropped by over 60%over the past seven years, and it is strongly believed that costs will continue to drop as demand increases. LED lamp costs have dropped by over 60%in the last four years alone. The Dr ing Costs of Energy Technologies 10.1 9.0 Solar Photovoltaic �„n , ( /watt) LEDLamp($) 7,01 . n 6.01 5.0 Airy4.0 Heat Purnp ,o ($10010/ton) a . �.a,. .. o 0.01 2COS 200,91 2,010 20,11 2011 2, 13 2011 2015 2016 F=agr.�r�:p 4: : . Ih�:p r�.� anq Co.� :A o(energy technologies. (Footnote: The future impact of recentl y r° i F _.��ar c a ro, solar c ai l ��er* /is(J-F4: as yet unknown.) _ars c'!Fe tori s an �,__ With net-zero buildings being built for less than 15% over the cost of than conventional buildings, and with the costs of energy-efficiency and renewable energy still dropping steadily, we predict that net-zero buildings will cost less than 5% more than conventional buildings, as the market for net-zero buildings grows, and could even be built at no additional cost, if attention is directed to affordability through improvements that both reduce energy use and reduce construction cost. Another lens through which costs can be viewed is as life cycle costs, accounting not only for the "first” cost, or capital cost, but accounting also for operating costs, including energy and maintenance. Viewed through this lens, the life cycle cost of energy-efficient buildings is typically shown to be lower than the life cycle cost of conventional buildings. This lens is convincing to some early adopters, but is typically Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ d. Project Report (Y/1 "/18) - Pg. 14 not convincing to most developers. Since the operating costs of buildings typically do not fall on developers, but rather on tenants and on future building owners (either directly or indirectly), the lower life cycle cost of energy-efficient buildings can be viewed as a consumer protection issue, in addition to being an environmental issue. (https://www.wbdg.org/resources/life-cycle-cost-analysis-Icca) 2.4 Certifications The built environment has extensive direct and indirect impacts on our environment. Whether during demolition, construction or operation, either in the residential and commercial sector, all building types use significant natural resources, require embodied energy (energy used in making construction materials), create waste, and, most significantly, use energy during their lifetime. However, one way to urge movement toward a more sustainable building design practice is through green building certifications. These certifications are a set of independent third-party guidelines and criteria against which the design, construction, and/or performance of a building are evaluated. Green building certifications offer several benefits: 1. The criteria and threshold requirements end up guiding local energy codes in the long run or even being integrated (e.g. HERS into the NYS IECC for homes). 2. They serve as high-performance building best practice guidelines. 3. They allow people the opportunity to do better-than-code design and construction, and so obtain a certificate to be proud of, be seen as a model and be used as inspiration. 4. Certifications can be used as mandatory requirements, and have been by such entities as universities or municipalities. For example, the City of Evanston, Illinois, requires that city- owned/city-financed commercial or residential buildings over a certain square footage be LEED- Silver certified. r--a;;p be u-sed .;;-r, a quality eeRtpell eheek @Ad se help that ppejer=t geals are delivered 5 Cer+;ft-iAi ..,s r-- ., be u-sed as a quality eelptrell eheek and S„ help � ire^.rouuire that project foals are delivered. It is possible for a high-performance building that is not a certified project to get off track and not meet goals, and so certifications provides checkpoints, with third party verification. 6. Environmental stewardship through reduced carbon emissions, and reduced impacts on the environment through the extraction, development, and transportation of fossil fuels. ^ ,;r, ,+ s+,,..,aFdship 7. For positive community relations, to show that a developer is a good neighbor and cares about their building. 8. It is common that most of the standards are created through a consensus process and evolve through a three-year development cycle, so they are well-vetted, and periodically update. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 15 While there are plenty of advantages, there are several concerns about green building certifications. Chiefly, the two common criticisms not to pursue a certification (such as LEED) are the perception of increased construction cost and the documentation path is long and arduous. It has also been reported that some owners and developers argue that certifications do not deliver on the results due to the lack of post-occupancy reporting and bridging the gap between design and performance. In some cases, it has even been suggested that plaques should not be issued until a building can prove actual energy usage. The Living Building Challenge certification has taken this step and grants certification after one full year of data has been submitted. There also seems to be a trend of clients wanting "certifiable" projects but not actually wanting to commit to a certification. A lot of the same reasons mentioned above apply in the motivation for not pursuing a certification and cost is always a huge contributing factor. It seems the perception of cost could be misplaced, however. For instance, much of the incremental cost is doing the documentation, energy modeling, etc. which would be necessary to verify performance goals are met regardless of pursuing a certification or not. Meeting and project coordination are also time and money spent, but a necessary requirement for any high-performance building. A certification can keep the project team accountable and on track to help achieve their ultimate performance goals. It could also be the natural tendency of a team to jump into a program checklist with a narrow "checklist mentality' ,and so providing a shortsighted interpretation of requirements and goals. Instead, success can be more deeply achieved if a project team approaches certification from a holistic standpoint, keeping broader goals in mind, and even by defining who they are as an organization and what they want to stand for in their project. Over the past 20 years, there has been a significant number of building certifications and programs that have been rolled out. Some have gained traction and others came and fizzled out. Several certification programs have been more successful, and in fact transformative in the built environment. We have examined many of these certification programs, both for residential and commercial buildings, including LEED, EPA Energy Star, DOE Zero Energy Ready Home, HERS, Passive House, and others. In considering certifications, we also recognize the energy code as a type of certification. Developed by the International Codes Council, the International Energy Conservation Code is the basis for energy code requirements in New York State. The state typically adopts the IECC with minor state-specific modifications. The latest version was adopted in October 2016, and is based on the 2015 version of the IECC.The next IECC version is already due in 2018, and might well be adopted by New York State. In parallel, NYSERDA recently developed a "stretch" energy code (2015), based on the IECC, but even more energy-efficient. Developed in code-ready language, the stretch code is intended to be ready for use by municipalities in New York State to take energy efficiency performance beyond the current code to further reduce the impact of buildings on the environment. The main objective is to produce a model code that is adoptable with minimal changes by local governments and that is one cycle ahead of the current New York State energy code. The final language was originally set to be issued in 2017, but has been delayed. We believe that the stretch energy code will be roughly 10% more energy-efficient than the current energy code. Work has already begun on the next stretch energy code, informally referred to as the 2018 Stretch Energy Code, targeting 20% lower energy use than the energy code. to Fell eut ; GeRju etie the 2919�EEL The stretch energy code has a set of mandatory Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh /18) - Pg. 16 requirements, separate core requirements, and a set of additional energy efficiency options from which one must be chosen. The core requirements are met through either "prescriptive" compliance (for example, additional insulation) or "performance" compliance (meeting specific performance goals on a whole-building basis). In choosing possible certifications, a variety of criteria should be considered: • Ease of compliance • Ease of reviewing/approving compliance • Cost • Use of independent third party verifiers • Impact on design and construction schedule • Energy and water use reductions The_project team reviewed a wide number of certifications, compared them to the criteria listed, and chose certifications that best met the policy's goals. 2.5 Overall Approach There are many options for green building policies. The diagram below somewhat arbitrarily arranges these on a continuum from "carrot" (positive incentives) to "stick" (code requirements, mandates, etc.). "Penetration" indicates the market penetration of various approaches, in other words, the success or adoption rate of the approaches- .- [Approach roach Exam les Penetration 1 12.E penetration for Enerytar V n centivi ze Tax credits,rebates h o m es, 214 penetratI on for sol an Enemy star,t.EEf;�,Architecture 1,( _ �for N.EECr. Reccrnie Uistrilct 2D30 Bulkpurchasing,Solarize, Heat mart, Solarize and Heat5mart ha«,re sofar Encourage model behaviorbytaretinnet-zero for new cit buildins seen market penetration below 1°�f, � 5 Finance PACE,performance con tractin ,other PACE no market penetration yet. Train ing(''contractors,building operators, Support building code officials, others), Cooperative Extension navigators Web sites, Green Buii I dii ng Tou r, Advocate dis¢our e fossil fuels Pressure Re,quireenergyscore tobeshown on listings,bench marking Rle uire Code requirements,ordinances LU,,S, DOE estimates W 9C66 compliance Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 17 Experience with other government and utility energy programs has generally found that a single approach to reducing energy use or carbon emissions is not as effective as a balanced and comprehensive multifaceted approach. For example, code requirements can be ineffective unless combined with training for design professionals, contractors, and code officials. Otherwise, new code requirements are not complied with, even if they are law. Market penetration is important to evaluate and predict for any policies under consideration. It is important to recognize that experience with high-performance buildings, so far, has primarily been on a demonstration basis, targeting "early adopters".We see that LEED, widely regarded to have been a huge success, has nonetheless only seen market penetration in the 2-3% range, for new buildings. By using incentives such as rebates, states have achieved almost 12% average market penetration with the Energy Star program for new homes. Penetration for the Energy Star program for new homes has been higher in a small number of states, as high as 42%in Maryland and 60% in Arizona, but the highest in our northeast climate has only been 12%, in Pennsylvania. The urgency to respond to the effects of climate change is calling for us to move from demonstrations and early adoption to widespread implementation. The only approach that can guarantee broad market penetration is through code requirements. Incentives can be used to supplement mandated code requirements, to accelerate the process and to ease the cost burden. We propose a policy that combines many of the approaches listed above including a strong mandate. 2.6 Timing of Interventions / Processes Another aspect of policy interventions and processes is their timing. For new buildings, options may be visualized as follows. The interventions shown are for example only, and do not represent final recommendations for policies. What is important is that early interventions have the greatest chance of impacting projects. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 18 ISR atrtmentnt commiadded floors:, NYSE,R A 9� f parking waivers incentives f�r w /j g exlpediited �/ tax abatement, f benefitspermpermittingLEGEND � Ix process or pl'uise of a benpfft/ deMp/consprurt on/ :'Y nrrcentN* requkement aro approval recognition Fi. car fir. TiL i12 i��ns 2.7 Fossil Fuels Should fossil fuels be discouraged as heating fuels as part of a city/town policy? A natural question in considering policies to reduce and eventually eliminate carbon emissions in the City and Town is whether to discourage the use of fossil fuels as heating fuels for space and water heating. Fossil fuels used for space and water heating make up a large fraction of the city and town's carbon emissions. Fossil fuels are also higher in carbon emissions than other forms of space and water heating, such as heat pumps, and this difference will only increase as the electric grid is increasingly composed of more renewably-generated electricity. We examine the pros and cons of discouraging fossil fuels for space and water heating: 2.7.1 Pros of Discouraging Fossil Fuels • Reduce carbon emissions • Reduce risk of stranded assets: New fossil fuel infrastructure may well only end up lasting a few decades as a transition to electricity is strongly anticipated. • Consumer protection: As the cost of heat pumps has come down and is now roughly at parity with fossil fuel systems, there is no longer an installed-cost (construction cost) benefit to fossil fuel heating systems. For some fossil fuels, such as fuel oil and propane, consumers suffer significantly increased energy costs, at no benefit in lower construction cost. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf II IN L d. Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 19 • Safety- reduced risk of carbon monoxide poisoning and explosions from gas leaks • Support NYSEG's new pilot project, which has the goal of providing adequate natural gas service to the region without building a new gas pipeline. A big part of this effort is to reduce gas use in current and future buildings. NYSEG and the New York State Department of Public Service have cautioned that if too much gas is drawn from the system to feed downtown Ildlhiaucaao then the non-pipe alternative approach to meeting Lansing's gas needs could fail, and a new pipeline will be needed. We are all connected and what the City and Town do has impacts elsewhere. 2.7.2 Cons of Discouraging Fossil Fuels • If natural gas prices drop or if electricity prices rise, we might risk preventing the lowest-cost heating fuel. 2.7.3 Basis for Discouraging Fossil Fuels Historically, consumer protection has been a widely justified basis for banning or limiting certain heating systems. The energy code, for example, significantly limits the use of electric resistance heat, primarily because it is so expensive for consumers. There is a strong emerging consensus among energy policy-makers at the national, state, a.irid cit such as New York City).p_44f:.)4--4*.ai levels that to meet greenhouse gas reduction goals, we will need to transition to high-efficiency electric space and water heating systems (as opposed to natural gas or other fossil fuels). As a result, New York State has new incentives for both ground source heat pumps and air source heat pumps. This essentially discourages the use of fossil fuels for space heating. Architecture 2030 has set as a goal the elimination of fossil fuels in new buildings by 2030. 2.7.4 Options for Discouraging Fossil Fuels Options for discouraging fossil fuels include: • Providing incentives for non-fossil options, such as heat pumps. • Using a rating system that accounts for carbon emissions, that gives points for non-fossil alternatives such as heat pumps.Therefore, if gas is chosen to be used, a building would need to be measurably more energy-efficient in other ways. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN ILD.11 Project Report (Y h 3 /18) - Pg. 20 Recommendation: We are discouraging fossil fuels through a point system, for which additional points are obtained if fossil fuels are not used. 2.8 Benchmarking Should a benchmarking ordinance be a part of a green building policy? As the old adage goes, "if you can't measure it, you can't manage it." Benchmarking is the collecting, reporting, and sharing of measured energy usage in buildings. This data is typically reported annually through the free online tool EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager, and allows you to compare energy usage against other buildings. The purpose of benchmarking and other transparency policies is to bring awareness of building energy consumption and performance and identify opportunities to help inform building owners/operators and tenants how to make their buildings more efficient. New York City adopted Local Law 84 (NYC Benchmarking Law) in 2010, the first energy benchmarking requirement of its kind. Many other States and municipalities have since adopted a benchmarking and transparency policies as a way to quantify and evaluate building energy usage their building stock. The advantages of a benchmarking ordinance is that it is good for seeing where buildings are, for establishing best practices and "benchmarks", and for encouraging (some would say "shaming") building owners to design and operate more efficient buildings. Another advantage is to provide better data to enable better policy around reducing building energy use. Disadvantages of considering benchmarking as a green building policy include that it is really more of an "existing building" policy, rather than a policy for new buildings, which is the focus of this study. In other words, benchmarking is not something that is captured on design drawings and submitted to the building department for review, in order to get a building permit. Also, a benchmarking program is fairly time-consuming to define and implement. As implemented in other cities, such as New York, benchmarking is only applied to larger commercial buildings. So benchmarking might not be able to be cost-effectively implemented for all buildings. Recommendation: We are not recommending a benchmarking requirement in the green building policy, because it applies to existing buildings more than to new buildings. We strongly recommend that a benchmarking policy be examined separately. 2.9 Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INNS) - New Buildings: Local examples of what is possible and is already being done. Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services (INHS) maintains a unique database of energy performance for their portfolio of buildings. Because INHS builds locally, is committed to high-performance buildings, and Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg. 21 is committed to affordability and other positive social impacts, this dataset can be a helpful reference for the green building policy effort. INHS is a not-for-profit, specializing in affordable housing . INHS recently expanded its service area from the City of Ithaca to all of Tompkins County. Their buildings include a variety of low-rise wood-frame multi-family buildings, as well as medium-rise masonry buildings such as Breckenridge Place. A sample of new buildings from the last 10 years found an average Energy Use Index (EUI) of 44. This is highly energy-efficient, approximately equal to the current energy code, even though the buildings were all designed and built before the new code. EUI's range from 33 to 65. All of the buildings in the sample were designed and built to high-performance standards such as Energy Star or LEED, except one. Interestingly, the one building that was not designed and built to a high-performance standard is the one that has the highest EUI (65), and the EUI for which is measurably higher than all the others: The second-highest EUI is 49. For reference, the current average local multifamily building stock has an EUI of 78, and the average new multifamily building likely, designed to the fairly efficient energy code of 2016, has an EUI of approximately 44. The Passive House standard is approximately 23, and the current Architecture 2030 target(through 2020) is approximately 24. INHS reports that their strategies for green building design and construction include: Air sealing, added insulation, high efficiency heating (better than code), high efficiency appliances (ENERGY STAR), and high efficiency lighting (LED, etc.). Takeaways from this analysis include: 1. High-performance design and construction is feasible locally, and indeed is already being done. 2. INHS's data set confirms that high-performance certifications such as Energy Star and LEED appear to work. And a building by the same reputable developer that was not certified did not deliver the same level of energy efficiency. The best practices and quality control that accompany certifications do appear to deliver energy efficiency. 2.10 Affordability-Driven Energy Efficiency Approach There is an important but perhaps not widely-recognized group of energy improvements to buildings that interestingly (and perhaps counter-intuitively) both reduces construction cost, and reduces energy use. There is another group of improvements that is generally cost-neutral, while, again, reducing energy use. Examples of cost-reducing and cost-neutral improvements include: • Building orientation (optimize for solar gain) Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 22 • Reducing floor area • Reducing surface area (simple shape) • Using ductless air source heat pumps, which appear to be close to parity for construction cost with conventional systems for many types of buildings, and for which prices continue to drop • Using fewer light fixtures due to reduced lighting loads, resulting from optimized design • Combining multiple uses or tenants in one building rather than in several smaller buildings • Reducing window size and quantity (reduce "window-to-wall" ratio). This does not mean eliminating windows, but rather avoiding over-glazing, while maintaining views and daylighting. See discussion below. These affordable energy improvements may not be widely recognized because they are not incentivized by government and utility energy programs, and so are not widely promoted. In fact, it is not possible to incentivize them. How can one provide a tax credit or rebate for something that costs less to install? A small number of these affordable energy improvements have started to find their way into codes and standards. For example, the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code, which serves as the basis for NY State's 2016 energy code, limits the window-to-wall ratio of commercial buildings to 30% (with some exceptions allowed). LEED version 4 provides extra credits for homes that are smaller than a reference (typical) size, which varies by the number of bedrooms, and conversely penalizes homes that are bigger. This requirement also appears in other residential high-performance standards (Energy Star, DOE Zero- Ready Homes, etc.). We increasingly see examples of these affordable improvements in high-performance buildings. For example, the Ecovillage Tree common building, a 20,000 SF four-story with 15 apartments and common areas (common area kitchen, laundry, community area, etc.) was built for a remarkably affordable $124/SF (including foundation, structural, interior finishes, siding, mechanical, electrical including the service/distribution/lighting, plumbing, stairs, elevator, insulation and soundproofing, the common kitchen, doors and windows, sprinkler system, and permits). (See References: Green Energy Incentives, p. 18.)The building adopted a number of these cost-reducing improvements, such as: • Reduced surface area (simple shape) • Smaller apartment size. Studio apartments in TREE are 450 SF, compared to the national average new studio size of 512 SF in 2015; one-bedroom apartments in TREE are 690 SF, compared to the national average new one-bedroom apartment size of 751 SF. • Low window-to-wall ratio (https://www.rentcafe.com/blog/rental-market/us-average-apartment-size-trends-downward/) Benefits of affordability-driven energy improvements include: • Lower energy use • Lower construction cost Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 23 • Complements the energy code and high-performance standards, such as LEED. For example, as the energy code becomes more stringent over time, the affordability-driven improvements deliver additional energy savings. • Promotes best practices • Savings persist well over time • Adapt to energy code changes well over time • Prevent pushback from those who are concerned that reducing energy use drives building costs up. • Innovative—we are not aware of any jurisdiction (federal, state, local) that has tried anything in this area, other than the two examples mentioned earlier (commercial energy code limit of window-to-wall ratio, and LEED's credits for avoiding large homes). A description of improvements that deliver more significant energy savings follows. 2.10.1 educe building size A smaller building uses both less energy and costs less. The impact of smaller buildings on energy use is almost linear, due to energy uses that scale with size: heating, cooling, lighting, etc.: A 10% smaller building is expected to use slightly less than 10% less energy, as some energy uses remain constant regardless of building size. Are smaller buildings acceptable? This is obviously an owner-specific question. For example, the size of the average new American home ballooned from 1,660 SF in 1973 to over 2,600 SF in 2016, before reportedly beginning to become smaller again. Homes overseas are significantly smaller: 1,200 SF in the Netherlands, 1,000 SF in Japan, and 800 SF in the U.K. LEED and other high-performance residential building standards recognize the importance of building size, and provides credits for smaller homes. Promoting smaller buildings is only possible for those building types that have a metric for size: number of bedrooms for homes and apartments, hotel room size, etc. The reference (typical) building size for residential buildings is shown in Appendix B. The reference hotel room size is 330 square feet (https://www.orourkehospitality.com/average-hotel-room-size-is-shrinking/). 2. .2 Placing heating/cooling systems within the heated space Many heating/cooling systems are placed outside the heated space (on roofs, in attics, in unheated basements, in crawl spaces, etc.), and as a result lose significant energy. Even when an unheated basement is located inside the thermal envelope, losses of 10%or more are typical. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 24 2.10.3 educing hot water energy use High-efficiency water fixtures typically do not cost more than regular-efficiency fixtures. EPA's Water Sense program requires water flow rates that are 20% less than required by code for shower heads, and 30% less than required by code for bathroom faucets. Hot water energy savings could be further delivered through requirements for Energy Star ratings for major water-using appliances, such as dishwashers and clothes washers, at modest cost increase. In a simplified analysis of a 2000 square foot house, reducing hot water energy use by 20% reduces the overall building energy use by 8%. This would be more applicable for buildings with significant shower and faucet hot water use (homes, apartments, hotels), and less applicable for buildings with low hot water use such as offices, and so would likely only be offered as an option to applicable buildings (residential and hotels). 2. .4 E icient ;q -rµ w �-ar+.w building shape Buildings with high exterior surface area require more energy to heat and cool, because they have more exterior surface area through which heat is transferred. Such buildings also cost more to build. Reducing a building's ratio of surface area to floor area by 20% is estimated to reduce overall building energy use by 10%. This can be done by avoiding complex shapes, avoiding overly-tall ceilings, and other approaches. 2.10.5 Avoiding overlighting Most commercial buildings are overlit, far exceeding recommendations of the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA). By sizing lighting correctly, on a space-by-space basis, buildings can be right-lit instead of overlit. Right-lighting reduces construction cost by avoiding the installation of more light fixtures than necessary. Right-lighting also reduces maintenance costs over time. Right- lighting also reduces energy costs for air conditioning, and can reduce the construction cost for air conditioning systems as well, by allowing smaller systems. Reducing overlighting by 25% is projected to reduce overall energy use in commercial buildings by 8%. Savings in residential buildings are less because lighting use in homes is far less than in commercial buildings. To be clear, this does not mean reducing lighting below levels recommended nationally by the Illuminating Engineering Society (IES). Rather, it means avoiding overlighting, in full compliance with IES-recommended lighting levels. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN L .11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 25 2.10.6 Modest window-to-wall ratio while retaining views and natural light Windows cost more per unit area than the wall they displace, due to a combination of the window and the framing required around the window. Windows also cause high energy losses due to heat transfer, despite these losses being very modestly offset by gains from daylighting, gains which are themselves being lost due to the development of energy efficient lighting such as LED as well as efficient lighting controls. There are also modest solar gains from south-facing windows, if not shaded, but these accrue only if the south-facing windows are optimally sized. In a small sample survey of new commercial buildings in Tompkins County, high-performance buildings (TREE common house, HOLT Architects new office) were all found to have a window-to-wall ratio less than 20%, and standard code-compliant buildings (a hotel, an apartment building, and an office building) were all found to have a window-to-wall ratio over 30%. In a small sample of residential buildings, findings were the same. To show the power of the window-to-wall ratio, in a simplified analysis of a 2000 square foot house, reducing the window-to-wall ratio from 30% to 20% reduces the overall building energy use by a significant 8%. As mentioned, the new energy code limits commercial buildings to 30% window to wall ratio, with exceptions that allow it to go up to 40%. A frequent concern voiced about lowering window-to-wall ratio is "Will the building be dark? Will it lack in views or daylighting? Will it be unattractive?" Green building standards are clear that, for views, we do not need a window-to-wall ratio of 30% or more, that 20% is sufficient, and that we only need views in regularly occupied spaces. The green building standard BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) defines views as being able to see the sky from desk height, and further defines a "view out" as being a minimum window-to-wall ratio of 20%. And a case can also be made that views do not need to be provided for all types of spaces. Views might be considered optional for spaces such as mechanical rooms, laundry rooms, other utility-type spaces, corridors, stairwells, bathrooms, and more. Similarly, the green building wellness certification system WELL (International Well Building Institute) only requires a minimum 20% window-to-wall ratio, and only in regularly occupied spaces (which would mean an overall minimum window-to-wall ratio less than 20%), in addition to proximity of workstations to windows. Large windows are also not needed for daylighting. Gains from daylighting are offset by window thermal losses, and there is an optimum window size and shape for maximum energy efficiency. With the introduction of extremely high-efficiency lighting such as LED, and artificial lighting increasingly controlled (dimmed or turned off), the optimum window-to-wall ratio for energy efficiency has plummeted, and is likely far below 20%for most spaces. Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh3118) - Pg. 26 Buildings with modest window-to-wall ratios can still have attractive facades. Despite the TREE common house having a modest window-to-wall ratio (approximately 16%), the building has a dramatic and attractive south-facing fagade with significant windows: s Eig.L ..... .........T:�.e Syf.Lo iz.i o b I.e Liv :i. ....0 .,iter... ..t....Eco..Vi;ll. .q.�.... ��cat�:�..... 11 The building achieved a low window-to-wall ratio by locating fewer windows in rooms that do not need windows, and limiting glazing on the north side, east, and west side of the building. Here is a photo of the building's west elevation: Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg. 27 iOff f f1.� re 8.........T�:�.�.... cast ,(.t,�o I ...Li. !.�:i.�.....�:'�.�:�.t.�.�.... .t Eco.Villo�.f.... Many attractive buildings have window-to-wall ratios even lower than 15%. This is common in buildings such as the beautiful brownstones in the cities of the Northeast. Covering our buildings with glazing is relatively recent phenomenon. Consider a brownstone in Brooklyn: r T � , Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 28 Its front facade window-to-wall ratio is 29% (shown above), its two sides have no windows (due to common walls), its rear facade has a window-to-wall ratio of 22%, and its overall window-to-wall ratio is 14%. 2.11 Renewables Renewable energy installed on or near buildings is referred to as on-site or site-located (as distinct from remote-located) and includes, most commonly, solar photovoltaic electricity. Less common is solar thermal energy (mostly solar hot water, but can also include solar-heated hot air). Another option is wind-generated electricity. Renewable energy has been growing rapidly, and is expected to continue to grow. Why not simply allow or require renewable energy to provide all the energy needed by a building, without requiring the building to be energy-efficient, in other words not requiring good insulation, windows, heating, etc.? There are several reasons to not just allow renewable energy to meet all a building's energy needs, without better buildings: • Renewable energy systems can fail, making a building revert to relying on non-renewable backup energy. • Renewable energy systems take energy, themselves, to be fabricated. This is referred to as embodied energy, and offsets some of the savings of the renewable energy system. • Renewable energy systems cost money to maintain, and this cost offsets some of the energy cost savings. In order to address these limitations of renewable energy systems, it is not unusual to encourage a balance of efficient building design and renewable energy. The voluntary Architecture 2030 system, for example, limits renewable energy to 20% of its goal to eliminate fossil fuel use by 2030. The 20% is relative to a baseline of energy use in the early 2000's, for each of a variety of building types, and for different geographic locations. Requiring the use of on-site renewable energy is problematic because not all buildings are suited to on- site renewable energy. Many buildings are shaded by adjacent buildings or other things. As a result, we recommend: 1. Encourage renewable energy systems, but limit the credit given for them, to prevent a building from over-relying on renewable energy. This approach is consistent with most widely-accepted green building certification schemes, such as Architecture 2030 and LEED. 2. Allow either on-site renewable energy or remote renewable energy. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf L.D.114V­P-Projectject Report (Yh39/18) - Pg. 29 Biomass Biomass used for space heating (direct thermal energy) is considered to be renewable. For space heating, the most common forms of biomass are cord wood, pellets, and chips, all of which rely on waste wood from other logging operations. Having a market for the low-grade timber prevents high- grade logging (taking only the very best trees and leaving the rest, which makes for very unhealthy forests). Our forests in NYS are growing at a rate of more than 2.5 times the rate of harvest. Also, in the case_ofpellets, they are made up of roughly 85% waste wood from other lumber operations (sawdust and_offc_uts), which are waste from an existing industry (and pose a fire hazard if left on-site). As referenced in the 1"Oirn[Illaiiia _County_amineir y Road Map, our forests throughout the Northeast and New York State are also, for the most part, fully mature, which means that they are not growing much, and therefore not sequestering nearly as much carbon as managed forests could, with a mix of older and younger forest stands. Woody biomass contributes to improved forest health, carbon sequestration rates, and forest biodiversity; generally keeps energy dollars local; creates a market for low-quality trees; and if offsetting fossil fuels, clearly reduces carbon emissions. One area of legitimate concern is air quality. Older and not-well-operated wood stoves and outdoor wood boilers can produce pollution. Therefore, requirements for biomass systems should include provisions for air quality. Biomass does require energy for harvesting and transportation, but this is a small fraction of its useful energy, even for wood pellets. NYSERDA considers biomass for heating applications to be carbon neutral. 2.12 Incentives Financial incentives are a common way to promote energy efficiency. For example, the federal government gives a 30% investment tax credit for solar energy, and furthermore allows accelerated depreciation for commercial capital investments in solar energy systems. NYSERDA gives rebates for solar energy systems. New York State furthermore gives its own 25%state tax credit for residential solar energy systems,with a cap of$5,000. When considering financial incentives, it is important to target the incentive in such a way as to motivate people to invest in energy savings (incentives need to be sufficient to change behavior) but not so high as to waste taxpayer money. We have seen government and utility programs in which energy efficiency is given away, and yet some people still do not participate. We have also seen programs in which incentives were so small that participation went to zero. The following conceptual graph illustrates these issues. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 30 The, Effect of Financial Incentives on Participation in Energy Programs, There is little incremental benefit to very of 41 Moderate-to-strong incentives work best lk enioiugh,Most people will not participate,and some people will participate even without Financial Incentives(% of Added Cost) As mentioned earlier, even successful incentive programs typically do not achieve deep market penetration rates. For example, the combined incentives for solar photovoltaic systems have exceeded 50Y6 of the installation cost, for over 10 years, and these have been sufficiently attractive to launch the industry in a substantial way (almost 80,000 completed projects in New York State by 2017), but cumulative market penetration is still less than 5Y6 | A specific technology can be supported, such as high efficiency lighting, high efficiency heating, or renewable energy systems. Or incentives can be on a whole-building basis, for example if a building achieves certain LEED score or HERS score. Finally, incentives could be awarded if buildings achieve specific number of points under a custom scoring system. It is also important to consider other incentive programs, where possible, such as those offered by NY3ERDA, New York State government (other than NY3ERDA), the federal government, local utilities such asNY3EG, and others. | Ithaca Green Building Policy F| Z.\ L.D.114VcP-ProjectReport 18) Pg. 31 2.12.1 Reduction or fee waiver of Building Permit and/ r Site Plan Reviewfees Like many municipalities in New York State, both the City and Town of Ithaca, respectively, charge fees for building permits and Site Plan Review (for projects subject to Site Plan Review). These fees are typically established by resolution of the City's Common Council or the Town's Board. The City of Ithaca currently charges $1.50 per $1,000 of construction cost for Site Plan Review as well as $7.00 per$1,000 of construction cost for a building permit. For example, a new seven-story, $11.5M commercial project (approximately 75,000 square feet) adjacent to the Commons paid approximately $80,500 in Building Permit fees as well as another$12,250 in Site Plan Review fees in 2014. 2.12.2 Amend City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and Town Environmental Quality Review (TEQR) Thresholds The Department of Environmental Conservation, charged with overseeing the State's Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) is currently conducting a review of those regulations. Proposed in the new draft regulations (proposed 6 NYCRR §§ 617.5(c)(19)-(22)) is the reclassification of Infill Development (occurring on previously disturbed sites) as a Type II Action. The rationale is that development on sites that have been previously disturbed and that have existing infrastructure would categorically result in significantly less environmental impact than developing undisturbed sites. One action the City and Town could take independently — but complementary to the proposed SEQRA amendments — would be to amend their respective local SEQRA thresholds — the City Environmental Quality Review (CEQR) and Town Environmental Quality Review (TEAR) — to classify smaller projects demonstrating energy and location efficiency as Type II Actions. For example, the City of Ithaca could amend Chapter 176: Environmental Quality Review(§ 176-4 (k) to reclassify 'Construction of 15 or more residential units' from a Type I Action to a Type II Action for projects that meet the following criteria: be located within the Walkable Neighborhoods — Green Building Policy Map'; commit to energy benchmarking; and earn at least a minimum number points on the checklist. Of course, if the project met other listed Type I Action thresholds, such as proximity to a Critical Environmental Area, the action would still be Type I. 2.13 Net-Zero Energy Buildings Net-zero energy buildings use renewable energy to generate as much (or more) energy as they consume, on an annual-average basis. There are already multiple net-zero energy buildings in and near Tompkins County. Several homes in the Ecovillage TREE neighborhood are net-zero. HOLT Architects new office was designed to net-zero, and in practice is reportedly operating close to net-zero. A new home on Perry City Road was designed to net- Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 32 zero and appears to be operating at net-zero. Nearby, Lime Hollow has a new education center that was designed to net-zero and is operating at net-zero. Net-zero buildings using on-site renewable energy depend on the ability to site the renewable energy system. This is not always possible. In most cases, the on-site renewable energy is solar energy, and many buildings do not have either unshaded roof area or unshaded site area for adequate solar energy. In these cases, off-site solar energy is now possible, through community solar or remote net-metering, although these programs and offerings are new relatively new. It might be noted that adequately sized and sited renewable energy systems also do not guarantee net- zero operation. For example, if a renewable energy system fails, then a building might revert to buying energy, and so no longer makes as much energy than it uses. For this reason, efficient buildings are important. Architecture 2030, for example, limits the amount of renewable energy that can be used, on its path to carbon-neutral buildings. Our main questions relating to net-zero were: 1. Should we have a goal for net-zero being required for buildings? 2. If so, by when? 3. And, if so, what types of renewable energy will be required/allowed? A possible guide to answer these questions is the Architecture 2030 program, which targets the year 2030 for carbon-neutral buildings, by incrementally increasing energy efficiency and renewables every five years between the present and 2030. As the number of buildings that are already net-zero increases steadily, and as we see that this is no longer an unreasonable or unaffordable goal, 2030 is clearly realistic as a goal for net-zero. Any net-zero goal must allow remote renewable energy, because not all buildings have access to renewable resources such as on-site solar or wind power. It is inevitable that we will need to end up requiring net-zero energy buildings. As populations grow and communities develop, the only way to control carbon emissions in the long term is with net zero buildings. We take our lead from Architecture 2030, which has set a goal of net zero by 2030, and from the State of California, which is targeting 2020 for net-zero homes and 2030 for net-zero commercial buildings. The Tompkins County Energy Roadmap also strongly affirmed the need for net-zero energy new buildings. What types of renewable energy should be required/allowed? The most common form of renewable energy is solar energy, either photovoltaic or solar thermal. Solar thermal must be located onsite (either roof-mounted_orground-mounted), but photovoltaic systems can be located either onsite or remotely, under provisions of New York State regulations covering remote photovoltaic systems. Wind (electric) systems are another type of renewable energy system, that can be either onsite or remote. Biomass for Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN L .11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 33 space heating is also viewed as being renewable and close to carbon-neutral, even accounting for the energy required to harvest and transport biomass feedstock. 2.14 Pulling it All Together: Recommendations We recommend that a local ordinance be passed requiring that all new buildings, including renovations and new additions, comply with the green building policy. Two compliance paths are provided: 1. The Easy Path emphasizes energy improvements that also reduce construction cost, such as smaller building size. This is a point system. A building must meet 6 points. 2. The Whole-Building Path allows more flexibility in building design. Commercial buildings must obtain a minimum of 17 LEED Energy points, residential buildings must achieve a HERS score of 40 or less, or a minimum score of 80 Energy Efficient points using the National Green Building Standard. Alternatively, all buildings may comply by designing and constructing to the Passive House standard. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 34 All new buildings shall use efficient water fixtures: Fixture Requirement Source Toilet (including tank or flush 1.32-5 gpf TABLE P2903.2 , 2017 valve) _ UNIFORM CODE SUPPLEMENT (New York State)CPa Vl ase Urinal 0.5 gpf EPA Water Sense Shower 2.0 gpm EPA Water Sense 0-64.�R-f—aucetn43 mlig "it Bathroom Faucet 1.5 gpm EPA Water Sense i.iw R � m w ma ai 4=; -Ffi41r-+1 EP/ -W:4 1w-Se i : �. Notes: 1. gpm: gallons per minute gpf: gallons per flush 2. Exception: Unless code requirements are more stringent, such as 0.5 GPM for faucets in public bathrooms. TI .... .:...._ � .. ..... ixo t car .... .. .cai;rr ,ts (It should be noted that aullll.soir 4of the above requirements were recently adopted in the 2017 code supplement. We have decided to keep the requirements, even though some are already mandatory, because awareness of the new code requirements appears to be very low.) In addition to the requirements of this policy, all new buildings shall still comply with the New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code. Where possible, roofs should be designed to be "solar-ready': A. Maximize area available for solar collection systems. For pitched roofs, place roof-mounted components or structures (plumbing vents, exhaust fans, access hatches, etc.) on north-facing roof surfaces, to keep south-facing surfaces available for solar collection systems. Where this is not possible, or on flat roofs, cluster roof-mounted components and structures such as to allow the maximum possible contiguous area for solar collector systems. B. Design roof structures to support future solar collector systems. C. Orient one roof surface to the south, plus/minus 30 degrees, to maximize potential for solar energy. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y h 3 9/18) - Pg. 35 2.14.1 Easy Path A building must achieve a minimum of 6 points, from among the following. Each point represents a reduction of 6-10% in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, very rough ly_ALf _ode and a"o uMuirn_���ir�dted IIo Ball Il�uuiilldiiir_�,��[g��ii�es The points were developed based on simplified energy models, assuming average building characteristics as the "baseline" against which savings are measured. EPA factors are used for calculating greenhouse gas emissions based on energy usage. Six points is estimated to deliver 40-50% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Points ii in H,e_D aa,i �,1.ai_ l dlharvad are Il aall���lllled `"Resira���_ir�diiaall' arval.21.21 d�� aaIIII l�uuiilla�iiir� �^ro a��a✓�rir�a� Illy dlh l\V� X��ir_Ila �irr^roija �rrr�diiaall D ir��air y__ �aj� /�\VDY / VMS irk^roiiaj�rir�diiaall I�uuulla iiir�3^; dllaaad aair� a uuir ^roda irii�"re aair�a Ilan lla� it tII_aaad_aur a �✓ rL _Illy .tlhe New York C"oiri,)rri,)eirr(,iiaall_Eir)eit ly Code,, Points dhat attain Marvall)��IIIIed <"�M��iraairaa�aira iiaull" urar�Ily da"�_�aILII Il�u�uiilla uir� ^ro a a✓rir�a Illy dlla� \V� York Coirnir���eirciiarvall D_ir���it€�� _�a"�a�� Dm�C�]EP irk^;aaj�rir��iiaall Il�u�iilla-irir��ro dll�aal aair� Faru�ir noir°iiia^:ro auir�a Iluii mllu�air . the residential............................................................................................................. ...... L..................................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................................................................L........................................................... . thy^ �uildi.17.. is c2rmm�^rcia�l should I,,)e evaluated ,)a�sed on the criteria for the use that covers a� m�I°gLi y ....................................................................C..A...........................................................................................R..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................N.........................k... of the l,,)Ljildin "s floor Ilf more t17ar7 5th%of the floor area is residential t17er7 the I)uilr,.�ir7..s sl7oulr� I� .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. ........................................................................ scored usir7 r2sir,. entia�l criteria if more than 5th% of the floor area is comercia�l then thy^ I,)uildin sl7oulr� ...................................................................... .......................................................................................................................s............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .............................................. 1,,)e scored iaI criteria. � ....� i �� c... d ed4a~4 2.,i„4.,-1., Points for Efficient Hec„trdfdc„atuon: ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... These points are intended to reward reductions in carbon emissions with the use of efficient electric technologies, which is expected to become increasingly lower in carbon emissions over time as the electric grid becomes more renewable. The cost of these technologies are rapidly dropping, and in many cases are already lower than fossil fuel technologies, or are expected to drop below the cost of fossil fuel technologies. In many cases, higher product costs are offset by lower installation costs (no gas pipe required, no venting required). 3 points (residential), or 2 points (commercial buildings) - use air source heat pumps for space heating. 4 points (residential) and 3 points (commercial) for ground source heat pumps ^• "i^^^@465; heatiRg systenqs. (Water loop boiler/tower heat pumps do not comply, as these heat pumps rely on fossil fuels. Also, packaged terminal heat pumps do not comply, because of their low energy efficiency.) Ventilation must also not be fossil-fuel heated. To allow flexibility for small rooms, electric resistance heat is allowed for up to 10%of the building's projected annual space heating load. Air source heat pumps shall comply with the NEEP Cold Climate requirements. Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINdG Project Report (Yh3118) - Pg. 36 For more information on heat see the Reference section, at the end of this report. 1 point (residential) - heat pump arwater heaters. The heat pump water heaters shall initially be set on heat pump-only mode. 1 point (residential) - use both electric stoves and ventless heat pump clothes dryers (see Glossary). This point requires the use of heat pumps or biomass for space heating, and additionally requires no fossil fuels in the building. 1 point- Building size more than 15% smaller than the reference size. See the table below for residential buildings. The reference size is 330 SF for hotel rooms. Or: 2 points - Building size more than 30% smaller than the reference size—see the table below for residential buildings, or more than 30% smaller than 330 SF for hotel rooms. (Building size points are not available for buildings other than residential or hotels.) For the purpose of this point, multifamily buildings are defined as buildings with two or more units in a single building. For hotels or multifamily buildings, the size is the average of all units or rooms; individual units or rooms may exceed the requirement. Conditioned(heated)floor area of reference home, by number of bedrooms, in square feet. Studio 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 or more Fbor area +600 (square Not V per feet). applicable 1101010 1,600 2,2100 2900 3,40!0 4,000 4,600 addolor"ll mole bedroom Family Fbor area (square NA fed)- 480 7010 090 1160 1360 1'560 1760 1960 applicable Miffriamailfy Family For nriultifamiy biuildi g,s,home size includes onl, in-unit oVace. .Fob .... .:..... esi;dei:it!. I....re. 1 point - Heating systems in the heated space. Place heating/cooling systems inside actively heated and finished spaces. No heating systems, ductwork, or water piping shall be located in unheated or unfinished basements, in unheated attics, in crawl spaces, outdoors, on roofs, in exterior wall cavities, Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 37 above the ceiling of the top floor of a building, or through-wall such as packaged terminal equipment or window-mounted systems. Outdoor units of split system heat pumps may be located outdoors and there are no limitations on the location of refrigerant piping. Examples of where equipment, ductwork, and water piping can be located: In heated spaces, in interior wall cavities, in mechanical rooms that are not in unheated/unfinished basements/attics/outdoors, in closets in finished spaces, above ceilings that are not on the top floor of buildings. 1 point - building shape. Exterior surface area divided by gross floor area is less than the maximum value provided in the table below. For the exterior surface area, include the above-grade exposed insulated surface, typically including above-grade walls, floor of vented attics (or roofline if insulated at the roof), floors above vented crawl spaces. Include windows and doors as part of walls, include skylights as part of roofs. Include exposed floors, such as below a cantilever. Include walls between heated spaces and unheated spaces, such as between a house and an attached garage. The table was developed for a simple rectangular building shape for different ranges of building size (floor area), for an optimum number of stories, assuming a 9 foot floor-to-floor height, with an allowance to give flexibility for slightly more complex shapes or taller ceilings. Gross Ella lmum Gross Maximum Maximum Floor (wall+roof)/"floor Floor (wall+roof)/"floor Gross Floor (wall4roof)/floor Area(SF) area ratio Area ( F') area ratio area ( F) area ratio 100-199 4.7 1500-1599 2.1 10000-14999 1.05 200-299 19 1600-1699 2A 15000-19999 Oa94 300-399 3.5 1700-1799 2.0 20000-299919 0.84 400.499 3.2 1800.1899 2.0 300'010-39999 0.75 500-599 3.0 11900-1999 2.0 1 40000-499919 0.58 600-599 2.8 2000-2499 1.950000-59999 M4 700-799 2.7 2500-2999 1.7 60000-699'9'9 0.61 800-899 2.7 3000-3999 116 70000-79999 Oa 58 900-999 2.6 4000-4999 1.5 80000-8999'9 0.55 1.000.1099 2.5 5000.5999 1.4 900'00-9999'9 0.53 1100-1199 2.4 6000-6999 1.3 100,0010-199,999 0.46 1200-1299 233 17000-7999 1.2 200,000-299,999 039 1300-1399 2.2 8000-8999 1.'2 300,000-399,999 0.35 1400-1499 2,2 9000-9999 1.1 > 400,000 033 Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf II IN L d. Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 38 Gross Max�mum Gross maximum Maximum Area(SF) area ratio Area(SF�)! area ratio Area(SF) area raitiio 100-199 43 1500-1599 10 10000-14999 01 98 200-299 16 1600-1699 1.91 15000-19999 0.8�7 300-399 3,2 1700-1799 119 2,0000-2,9999 O78 400-499 3.0 1800-1899 1191 30000-39999 0.69 500-599 18 1900-1999 18 40000-49999 0,6,4 600-699 2.7 2000-2499 117 50000-59999 0.60 700-799 15 2500-2999 1,6 60000-69999 0.56 800-899 2,5 3000-3999 1,51 70000-79999 0,54 900-999 2A 4000-4999 1A 8�0000-8�9999 0.52 1000-1099 23 5000-5999 13 910000-919999 0.501 1100-1199 12 6000-6999 1,2, 100,000-199,,999 0.43 1200-1299 2A 7000-7999 1,2, 200,000-299,,9919 0,37 1300-1399, 2A 8000-8999 , 1A 300,000-399,,999 0.3�3, 1400-14991 2,0 19000-99991 111 1 > 400,000 0.31 1 point Right-lighting. Commercial buildings only. Reduce over|ighdng (ZS% lower lighting power density than the energy code). Perform photometric lighting design on a space-by-space basis, using the space-by-space lighting power density method (not the whole-building method), designing to the mid-range of |E3NA foot-candle targets unless the building is for primary use by the elderly. Construction documents shall include a table ofspace'by'space lighting power density. Use LED lighting where possible. Use reflective surfaces where possible, with a preferred target reflectance of9UY6for ceilings, 7UY6for walls, and SUY6for floors. Require motion sensors for all exterior lighting, combined with photocells to ensure that lighting stays off during the day. Require motion sensors for interior lighting in the following spaces: offices, conference rooms, kitchenettes, corridors, stairwells, bathrooms, lobbies. Require short off-delay for occupancy sensors (1 minute or less), and commissioning of lighting controls. Provide for manual control to allow lights to be kept off. Both requirements of this section must be met (e.g. reduced overlighting AND lighting controls) in order to obtain the point. 1 point Modest windows with views and natural light. Overall vxindovx'to+ma|| ratio less than 20Y6. Windows in individual regu|ar|y'occupied spaces are allowed to be more than 20Y6. For calculations, include glazed portions of doors in the window area, but not opaque portions of doors. Include glazed portions ofcurtain walls, but not spandrel/opaque areas. | Ithaca Green Building Policy Z.\���VcP-ProjectReport 18) Pg. 39 3 points - Irioirr mll,)ioiri,)aass.renewable energy capacity(4 points starting in 2025): Residential buildings a. 1 point for each 1.2 kwh/sf/year(electric systems, e.g. solar photovoltaic) b. 1 point for each 4.0 kBtu/sf/year (thermal systems, e.g. solar domestic hot water) Commercial buildings a. 1 point for each 2.4 kwh/sf/year(electric systems, e.g. solar photovoltaic) b. 1 point for each 8.0 kBtu/sf/year (thermal systems, e.g. solar domestic hot water) �\Vo—ir)mll)-ii-o lri"iaau^:s-_ lr'enewable energy points are capped at 3 points maximum (4 points starting in 2025). Off-site (remote) lana 2 ulbjl,g...t2_rL lr a _„p,,tira ir'audiiaalra Gila is allowed. Documentation must be provided for contractual commitment to either ownership or long-term (20 years minimum) commitment. [�aklllr� "ro �rklr�"llr�"la IYC Ilan ) aklY rklllr�'�°ro � a"rolla arolr�' Ila )° �Ilrklr�"raQ°ro"ro ,°jjg e ea�Hin °ro °ro�a Ir l°ro �� a 11 11 ale lea oirna�ss ___ _____ __ _______ __ _______ _________ ___ __ _..____________ a__._ __________________ ,�__________ ________- a a uuiila�lria Iran Irrau ^rod aaara"a llywiid II_rl�\YS R��A's�i�ine aalt)Ie II Heat NY ,uuiia�� 11 iiira��^ro_To Ibe � Ilil iill�Il��aaaC�� llll� l °;daaa✓a g114°% IY2ajuce "ro"ro �a lr� Q:? "� a lY�., "ii�IIa to ��_Irrl_II°ro°roll�klr s a�IC�S�_ e akln Hh �'_IPA's IIIst,_a va�Illa t)�e at L jj[ vyvaw e1.jaa_&ry\✓ a irr�aCylllaiaaaraaaa lila°ro _�ICaa a itl.li�li�a a a a ^ro a�✓�^ro / Ilit^rod as Ilii iII�II� Irk^rolia�rolradliaall aalr�a ^roiraaaalLll a aylrr"alta"a�Ira iiaull � IIID d II�a Illy it^ro (IIS°ro^ro dllaaalra iDiD�DQD�D a3,LgJIla) is aavarvalillarvalt)Ie dllair uu Ila dII----------------- a e Iliiiall< at a .JCy°ro fvyvaa fray^rod ira as ira a"aa✓// Il llmj ira iraaira�^ro l ira� Ir aalria^ro/�i�lra� aall� e II eaad _NY lira"aaullll ����Illle D�a�iillei ml]lh Iriyau�uaroa II_rlaan�✓�a_a�a .�Ilrla�Iraraaa�all_aw�))lia_ii��araaay��I aaad_Ila�a�a°roda_ab'�%�_��a�air�.Iia_ualla�ad��_ai�lraali^ro^roliaylr�^ro_aa)_Ilai�°ro°; dllaa�alraiD�D�b�D_IIII��Ira"a_ira"a_D�du��_a�alr�a a�aauar_II�a"alra_Ira"aa"alr�a"a�iia��a_)v;�� �_��Iraali°ro^roli��ira°ro II��°ro^ro dllaaaa_ir�_�' �:D_����ira"a_a�aa_ %�� _�iai�a�u�uiilra�Iriy"aa�Ir�d^ro_Iaylr_Ilaaa_ir,���_ir_����II_Il��d Il���iill�air^ro_aaaaira„ C _ _ ____Y Yap_ C a __ _ ___i °a___ _ __ _a____ ________C____a ........................_ be found arval hll a a aa�.ra aaraia� ry aaaa_/aall_I raa ran �raa raa_raa_> Ra raewaakrla I��a aat I X Maar a (aarnrn rdaal Balla a Ila'ar Il�aa?a�a�alireir�"1a?Irnts for IYa�,°roldeirffia�Q and coirnir�"eir(�IIaaI Cord wood ��akfleiYs can ��a?'lrakU�a Ind a t ________ ------------_-----_____________________ ______..______________________ d .Jfy°ro fvyvaa fray^ro�ara au fray a"a�✓ / Illlmj it iraairr�^ro l iraa�lrallr!Baro/lie�lr)e aall,)leIllleaad _�\VX - dvaairr(_a"�a�_C_a ii'dw od a o��i leiir,, lm`aklY Irk"1aklYa? IIlr�lraklYlr�la�Q'�Ilaklr� aklr� �IIaklr�la�Q°ro°ro °roa�a�'� aa� l�aa�lra�IYa�Ir�C�° °ia�C'�Ilaklr� a�Q�'� aa� a�Ir�a� aklr� aII"ro IYa���aklY�.,, 2",i„ ::.1 � �thei" Eo nt ....................................................................................................................................................... 1 point for lots developed at more than 7 dwelling units per acre density (the threshold to support frequent transit service). Projects should be built at this density or greater to contribute to the existing or future transit accessibility and walkability. Non-residential development can be converted to units by dividing the area of conditioned space, in square feet, by 1000. 1 point for being within 1/4 mile (walking distance) to at least 5 of the following destinations: Jt17ir7 schools, stores, cafes/restaurants/pubs, dentist/doctor's offices, libraries/community services, or..... w Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh3118) - Pg.40 the development priority areas mapped in the walkable neighborhoods map on a , mile 1,,)Ljffer from e is ing 5 ice l,iLjl,,)s where a resident c Ljl.d ac omj, .!.is.lh multijj..� Walkable Neighborhoods - Green Building Policy Map om Miles 1 point adaptive reuse. When building is kept and re-purposed for adifferent use (for example, | when an old school is adapted for use as apartments) AlnakQ[�� renovation of building and re use | '� for the same purpose (e.g. old apartments are renovated) is not eligible for this point. Maintain at least 50% (based on surface area) of the existing building structure and envelope. | 1 point comply with the l{ 15_New York State Stretch energy code. (This will be increased to Z points if/when the next version of the energy code is released, anticipated to be in 2019, when the stretch | code tar�ets2DY6 f**+p�� ener�yreduction`) | | Ithaca Green Building Policy F| Z.\ L-D-114V--P-ProjectReport 18) Pg.41 2 points - Custom Energy Improvement. Can only be applied to buildings that do not use fossil fuels. Reduce energy use by 1.2 kwh/SF/year per point (residential buildings) or 2.4 kwh/SF/year per point (commercial buildings). Cannot be provided by renewable energy savings. Savings must be shown through energy analysis performed by an experienced energy professional. For a baseline, use the NYS Energy Code, latest edition. If the baseline condition is not addressed by the NYS Energy Code, use baseline conditions as defined in ASHRAE Standard 90 Appendix G, or RESNET HERS. Savings must be calculated after applying all other proposed energy improvements to the proposed design. Simplified calculations (e.g. spreadsheet) are acceptable. Multiple improvements may be combined to achieve each point under this improvement. The proposed energy improvement shall be submitted in writing to and approved by the AHJ before proceeding with design. 2.14.2 Whole Building Path In lieu of accruing points, the developer can choose to comply with a recognized whole-building high- performance certification, such as: 1. For commercial buildings, 17 energy points (Optimize Energy Performance) based on LEED Version 4, to be demonstrated either with LEED review/certification or by other third party certification of the energy model, such as NYSERDA. The energy model (printed complete input and output reports) shall be submitted with the design documents with the application for a building permit, with a statement by the energy modeler that the energy model meets the requirements for 17 energy points based on LEED Version 4. 2. For low-rise residential buildings, RESNET HERS/ERI (with a maximum score of 40). Compliance shall follow procedures defined for the ERI compliance path in the New York State Energy Conservation Code. 3. For residential buildings (single-family, multifamily low-rise or high-rise): National Green Building Standard ("NGBS", also known as ICC/ASHRAE 700-2015) with a minimum of 80 NGBS Energy Efficiency points. The professional documenting compliance will provide a statement that the design meets the intent of a minimum 80 Energy Efficiency points per ICC/ASHRAE 700- 2015, and documentation supporting these points. 4. For commercial or residential buildings, Passive House. Submit approved pre-certification from either PHIUS or Passive House International, according to current-version standards of either organizationthe PH'�S4-2®1 ssiv—gui' st " A, ar when submitting construction documents in application for a building permit. This whole building compliance path allows more flexibility, but typically requires more insulation, higher-efficiency heating and cooling, and extensive other energy improvements. Note that for the whole building path, definitions of residential and commercial buildings adhere to definitions in the energy code, unlike the Easy Path in which residential buildings include buildings 4 stories and higher. Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh39/18) - Pg.42 2.14[3 Renovations Additions RCR.44enovations that consist of the removal of interior or exterior finishes for more than 50% of an ha|| comply with the requirements for new buildings (Easy Path or Whole Building Path). dditions shall be treated on their own, and not as part of larger building.- For the window area point, treat the shared wall area (where the addition meets the existing building) as part of the new addition's exterior wall. For the building shape point, the area of the shared. wall (or floor of the addition, if above the existing building) is not counted as part of the exposed above ground wall/roof area. | New additions less than SUU square feet shall comply with the 20156 New York State Stretch Energy Code, inaddition tothe above requirements for water conservation. renovation such as heating system replacement, lighting | replacement, bathroom renovations, kitchen renovations, etc. shall comply with the 20156 New York State Stretch Code, in addition to the above requirements for water conservation. Building owners are encouraged to replace fossil fuel space and water heating systems with heat pump systems. 2.14.4 Exemptions Consistent with the New York State energy code, historic buildings are exempt from the green building policy. In renovation of a historic building, steps to reduce carbon emissions are encouraged that preserve the historic fabric of the building, such as rehabilitation of windows, installation of heat pumps for space and water heating, insulation and air sealing, and high-efficiency lighting where lighting needs tobereplaced. 2.14.4 Future OnJanuary 1, ZUZS, the requirements are proposed tochange to: 1. Easy path: 12 points Z. Whole building path: a. LEED: 17 energy points (LEED version 4) AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy Code and lighting point) | Ithaca Green Building Policy L�114V­P-ProjectReport 18) Pg.43 b. HERS Score Maximum 40, AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy Code and lighting point), OR a HERS Score Maximum 20 c. National Green Building Standard ("NGBS", also known as ICC/ASHRAE 700-2015) with a minimum of 80 NGBS Energy Efficiency points, AND 7 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy Code and lighting point) d. Passive House, AND 3 of the Easy Path points (excluding the Stretch Energy Code and lighting point) On January 1, 2030, the requirements are proposed to further change to net-zero building designs that are free of fossil fuels. The fossil-fuel-free requirement will allow exceptions for commercial cooking and industrial applications for which no electric options are available, such as emergency generators. The standard by which net-zero is defined will be established before January 1, 2024. 2.15 Compliance A successful green building policy is one that does not place a significant burden on those who will review and approve building planning, design, and construction. We propose the following compliance documentation: 1. For the proposed point system, a checklist that shows which points are sought, and support for each point. For example, if a developer is seeking the size credit for a house design, the checklist would show the house area (square feet), number of bedrooms, required house size, and proposed house size, to show that the house meets the size requirement. 2. For the proposed whole-building compliance, a report by an accredited third-party energy consultant, at the time of planning review and again when applying for a building permit. We propose that at the planning review phase, a preliminary green building checklist be submitted, indicating which green compliance items are proposed/planned. This will serve to show the planning department how compliance is planned, but will also serve to bring the green building requirements to the attention of the developer and their design professionals. A final checklist will be required to be submitted with the construction documents, prior to the building department issuing the building permit. 2.15.1 Incentive Package Recommendations In order to receive incentives a new building should meet a significantly higher bar to lead the building community toward the long term goal of net zero energy. The proposed mandatory standards ratchet up in 2025 and 2030. We propose that buildings seeking incentives be required to meet the proposed 2025 minimum level of points or whole building certification levels in the years before 2025, and starting Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg.44 in 2025 buildings would need to meet the 2030 performance level to receive the incentive package. After 2030 incentives for green building would phase out because all buildings would be required to be net zero. In order to receive the incentive package building owners would also commit to sharing energy use data by granting the city or town permission to access energy consumption data through NYSEG that could be tracked in a future benchmarking program or evaluation study. Buildings would also be required to be located within the priority area (see walkability map) and be 100%fossil fuel free. The high bar for incentives and the strong municipal priority for meeting energy goals should result in a broad and attractive package of incentives. Projects meeting these ambitious goals are providing a significant community benefit and deserve recognition and municipal support. Incentives that could be considered in a package include: the NYS Green Building Tax Exemption (more details on this are below), priority application processing, designation as a Type 2 action in CEQRA and TEQRA, permit fee reduction, height bonus, minimum parking reduction, and area requirements reduction (lot size, setbacks, coverage). Another possible incentive is a recognition system, such as an award and associated certificate, perhaps given in conjunction with an existing program, such as the Pride of Ownership award. An administrative fee could be charged for this recognition, in order to cover the costs of administering the awards. 2.16 Harmony With Other Requirements, Incentives, and Programs The proposed green building policy harmonizes with other program requirements as follows: 1. PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy) financing. PACE financing supports renewable energy and energy efficiency improvements with financing that flows through property taxes. The proposed policy would work fine with PACE financing. Affordability-related energy improvements obviously do not require financing, because they lower construction costs instead of adding to them. 2. NYSERDA. NYSERDA provides financial and other support for high-performance design and construction. Homes and other low-rise residential construction meeting NYSERDA's Tier III program would meet the requirements for the whole-building compliance path, and so be eligible for financial incentives. Buildings following the affordable-related energy improvements would not be eligible for NYSERDA assistance but, again, do not need assistance because they reduce construction cost. 3. TCIDA Energy Tax Abatement. The Tompkins County IDA has been offering an energy tax abatement incentive for buildings that qualify for IDA tax abatements for economic development, since 2016. The whole-building requirements for commercial buildings in this proposed Green Building Policy are similarto the IDA requirements. The question arises, "If the green building policy is roughly equal to the TCIDA requirements, why incentivize TCIDA buildings?" Therefore, if this green building policy proceeds as proposed, TCIDA may want to Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg.45 consider raising the bar for its incentives. For example, in the period until 2025,TCIDA may wish to offer its energy tax incentives for projects that achieve the 2025 targets. Similarly, in 2025, TCIDA may wish to again raise the bar to the 2030 targets. And in 2030, TCIDA could consider eliminating the incentive. 4. Solar incentives (Federal Investment Tax Credit, state residential tax credit, NYSERDA incentives). All these programs would assist in paying for renewable energy, if renewable energy is used under the point system. 5. The Energy Code. The Energy Code is a requirement for all new buildings and renovations. The proposed green policy harmonizes well with the Energy Code. Buildings meeting the whole- building requirements would typically automatically comply with the code, and so not need to submit separate compliance documentation. Buildings following the point system would still need to comply with the energy code, but there are no conflicts, and the point system only helps to comply with the energy code in several areas (window-to-wall ratio, water use, etc.). 6. Tompkins County Green Energy Property Tax Exemption. In 2012, the county passed a county property tax exemption for buildings that reach the LEED Silver, Gold, or Platinum certification levels, in alignment with a state law that enables this exemption. Only two buildings have reportedly obtained these exemptions. The proposed green building policy could potentially be aligned with this existing property tax exemption as follows: a. The city and town (and even the school district) could consider adopting the exemption. 2.17 Risks and Obstacles As best practices become common practices, it is possible that developers could choose among improvements they were planning to do anyway. These are considered to be "free riders." However, free ridership also happens with other approaches to energy efficiency, such as mandated requirements (energy code) and incentivized requirements (tax credits, rebates, etc.). Checking for compliance, in addition to the requirements of the energy code, could place an additional burden on code officials, although Town and City code officials have indicated the burden would not be significant. It might be possible for compliance to be self-certified by design professionals, using a checklist, and then the code official only needs to double check compliance. "Gaming" is another risk, in which developers or builders seek to circumvent requirements of the proposed green building policy. For example, low-flow water faucets and shower heads could be replaced with higher flow devices, after a building is built. Some points in the proposed point system can be more easily gamed (for example, water flow), some points can be gamed but at some difficulty and cost (for example, window size), and finally other points cannot be gamed (density/transportation, building shape, building size). Some gaming should be anticipated, and so 100% compliance should not be expected. Gaming is also possible with the regular energy code. The U.S. Department of Energy has observed 80-90%compliance with the energy code. Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh39/18) - Pg.46 2.18 Indoor Comfort and Health Indoor comfort and health are cornerstones of green buildings. If the whole building compliance path is chosen (LEED, Passive House, HERS), provisions are made within those certification systems to ensure indoor environmental quality, even while energy use is reduced. If the point system is used as the compliance path, none of the proposed points put indoor comfort or health at risk, and some points improve comfort and health. For example, heat pumps eliminate risks of poisoning from carbon monoxide, risks of explosion from leaking gas, and environmental hazards from leaking fuel oil or propane. 2.19 Items Not Included in the Green Building Policy The green building field is vast, and areas of green buildings are almost endless. We made a difficult decision to not include many aspects of green buildings in the policy at this time. Priority was given to building improvements that reduce carbon emissions, in support of local, state, and national goals to reduce carbon emissions. For example, some green building certification systems give credit for electric-vehicle chargers and/or for "solar-ready" buildings, buildings which have been designed and built to readily accommodate solar systems in the future. These two items were discussed. While both have merits, it was decided to not recommend either of them at this time, because neither guarantees substantial and actual reductions in carbon emissions, and both add cost to building construction. A wide variety of other possible green building features were discussed, such as wastewater re-use, rainwater harvesting, indoor environmental quality, light pollution, building deconstruction, certified wood, beauty, and many more. Again, for a first green building policy, it was decided to focus on substantial reductions in carbon emissions, while strongly prioritizing building affordability. Other green building features are important and have merit, and could be considered in the future. 2.20 Other Recommendations Other recommendations coming out of this study include: 1. Examine a benchmarking and disclosure policy for the City and Town of Ithaca, specifically with regard to benefits and costs- a. Review experience with benchmarking in other cities: Compliance, costs to administer, benefits, shortfalls. Has benchmarking led to measurable decreases in carbon emissions? Has benchmarking yielded data that facilitated policy or program changes? Examples of a benchmarking policy might include a requirement that buildings be evaluated for their energy use, either at the time of sale, or on a periodic basis. This can Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg.47 either be applied for all buildings, or for types of buildings or for buildings of a minimum size. The energy use can be represented either with a full report of energy use, or as some form of simplified score. b. Develop requirements/recommendations. 2. Undertake a similar study for existing buildings and develop an associated policy for reducing carbon emissions in existing buildings. A possible focus could be on encouraging replacement of heating systems as they reach the end of their useful life, insulating roofs and siding when they reach the end of their useful life, replacing appliances with Energy Star appliances when they reach the end of their useful life, etc. 3. Consider evaluating an institutional compliance path, to address such issues as institution-wide renewable energy capacity (and allocating such capacity to specific new buildings) and district heating systems. 4. Develop requirements for buildings with large internal loads (such as labs), which might not be able to comply with the proposed whole-building requirements.. in cooperation with large local institutions, as part of the next phase of this project. 5. Examine possible approaches to behavior, such as education, advocacy, and maintenance of energy systems in buildings, to supplement the building design and construction requirements of the Green Building Policy, in order to maximize energy savings and promote persistence of savings over time. 6. Examine ways in which to encourage use of recycled, local, renewable, and reusable materials. 7. Examine changing site plan review process to incorporate design guidelines as partner documents. Consider adding in elements such a requirement that developers provide documentation of energy use study and consideration of heat pump options. 8. M;on^:roiia e it aur,. r,. iiin m a referer7ce to the C:::DEC's "Guide Moir Assessiin Ein�;ir Use and Greenhouse _w_E..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................q....................................q..Y............................................................................................................................................ Gas Err issioins in gin Einviiroinrrgin ueal Iln act u,auen ;inu 2009," iin ulhe C i and Iouvin's C,EC iP and I.......................................................................................................................................................................................................Y...................................................................................................................................................... IEC R ire direr..�;inus. .......Ihis a .re of ireview is Qalireead Qallowed uinde e7cisuiin. irul�;s b�u s recific�sll q..........................................................................................................Y.I.....................................................................................................................................Y...........................................................................................................................................�i.....................................a......................................lf.................................................y. irefeireinciin . this . yid ; uvo old Ihel r uo rrrlealke C� C� in reacts ,a n Dire con n Din ire�i�;uv ciriueiriea. .........................q...............................q..........................................................................................................................................................................................................r.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. &Assess other strategies to reduce or offset carbon emissions, such as reforestation. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[JIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y h /18) - Pg.48 2.21 Green Building Policy Point System: Stress Test As we consider a point-scoring system for a Green Building policy, how would recently-designed buildings score on the system? Would the proposed point system work for known high-performance buildings, in other words, would they have passed? Would the point system work for known -non-high- performance buildings, in other words, would they have failed? Would such a point system have impacted designs? Do "better" buildings score higher? Would the point system be unusually cumbersome and costly? We consider some examples. In this discussion, we use the following nomenclature: Net-zero buildings: Buildings that generate as much energy with renewable sources, such as solar power, as is used, over a whole-year measurement period. Near-net-zero buildings: Buildings that use less than 10 kBtu/SF/year. Somewhat high performance buildings: For example buildings that are LEED certified or Energy Star certified, but are neither net-zero or near-net-zero. Not high performance buildings: Buildings that are designed air&—) built to be minimally compliant with the energy code. 2.21.1 Low-Rise Residential Buildings Hemsin House. Completed in January 2016, the Hemsin house is a single-family residence on Perry City Road. It was designed to be net-zero, and so far its performance is reportedly delivering on the net-zero design goal. The house was also reportedly highly affordable. Despite the net-zero design and solar photovoltaic system, the added green features reportedly only cost about 10% more than a code- compliant house. The building scores 3 points for heat pumps (although some electric resistance heat might disqualify these points), 1 point for a heat pump water heater, 1 point for an electric stove and heat pump clothes dryer (with no fossil fuels to the building), 1 point for a modest window-to-wall ratio, 1 point for modest floor area (2240 SF for a four-bedroom house), 1 point for including all heating equipment and distribution within the heated space, 1 point for modest surface area, and 3 points for on-site renewables (6.9 kw), for a total of 12 points (9 points if the heat pumps are disqualified due to the electric resistance heat). It easily passes the threshold of six points, as we would hope it would, and in fact scores very high in points, as we would also hope it does, as a net-zero building. Overlook Apartments. Overlook Apartments (across from the hospital) were built in approximately 2007, as a high-performance project in NYSERDA's Energy Star program. But despite its high-performance design, it likely would not meet the proposed better-than-code whole-building requirement. It might only achieve 1 density/transportation points (if that). Heated with boilers, it would not get the heat pump points. It also would likely not get any of the affordability points (window size, floor area, building Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg.49 shape, etc.). We presume it would end up with perhaps 1 point, and so not come close to meeting the proposed requirements. Demarest Spec House, Spencer Street. Downtown location, 1152 square feet for a 2-bedroom single family house, heat pumps, small window-to-wall ratio, and heating within the heated space all combine to deliver 9 points. It passes easily, and is anticipated to be a highly-efficient house. Ecovillage TREE — Three single-family homes that have proven net-zero performance, and others designed to Passive House standards. Even though they might only get 1 point for density/transportation (if that), they would get one point for windows, likely two points for size, one point for shape, one point for heating in the heated space, and one point for solar energy, for a total of 6-7 points. Heating is electric resistance, so does not qualify for the heat pump points. In short, the buildings pass, as we expect they might, although do not get as many points as we might expect. Several of these buildings would also pass, separately, due to their whole-building Passive House certification, which some of them achieved. Belle Sherman Cottages. Designed to Energy Star at the time, they are reportedly not much better than the current energy code. They use gas furnaces. Their location will likely earn them two density/transportation points, but they would not qualify for any other points, and so would fail. However, with such as heat pumps or a combination of other affordable improvements, they could pass. Double Wide. A typical 55x25 double wide manufactured home, with 3 bedrooms, would get one point for modest windows and two points for modest size. The typical exposed floor (over the crawlspace) prevents such a home from getting the shape point. If it does not get the density points, it would fail, but heat pumps would allow it to pass. 2.21.2 Commercial and Large Multifamily Buildings Ecovillage Tree Common House. This is a 15-apartment, 4-story, 20000 SF building, which has a proven performance of 9 site EUI (extremely low energy). It has 50 kw of solar PV. It would achieve maybe 1 point for density/transportation, 1 point for windows, 1 point for size (possibly two), 1 point for shape, and 2 points for renewables (just short of 3 points), for a total of approximately 6 points, and so would pass the point system. If the building had heat pumps, it would have achieved 9 points. Marriott Hotel. The new Marriott would likely achieve 2 points for density/transportation. But it would likely not get any other points, and so would not pass without design modifications. Carey Building. The Carey Building (multi-story residential above the old Meyers shop) would get 2 points for density/transportation, 3 points for heat pumps, and 1 point for heating within the heated space, so would pass, even though it would likely not get any other points. Its score (6) is not as high as a super-high-performing buildings, and we would also not expect its performance to be as good as these Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 50 buildings. But its downtown location and heat pumps likely will deliver low-carbon operation. This building would not have required any modifications to pass the proposed rating system, from how it was designed/built. Typical Building at Cornell Technology Park. The typical building at the Cornell Technology Park is of interest because it might be typical of commercial buildings in the Town of Ithaca: Single-story, ribbon windows, efficient combustion system or boiler/tower water loop heat pump. Such a building might only qualify for 1 point (building shape), and perhaps 1 density/transportation points, and so would fail unless the design were modified. Possible design modifications would include slightly lower window to wall ratio (1 point), use of heat pumps (2 points for a commercial building), heating within the heated space (1 point), and high-efficiency lighting(1 point). Big Box Retail. As an example, Bed Bath and Beyond. It would get 1 point for window to wall ratio. Almost all big box stores would get this point, automatically. Its current shape does not qualify due to its tall ceilings. It might get 1 point for right-lighting, although there may be corporate standards that would prevent this. The rooftop HVAC could go with heat pumps for 2 points, although would not be eligible for the 1 point within the heated space. Density might get it the points it needs to pass. So the primary design change would be the heat pumps and these would deliver strong reduction in carbon emissions. If it used split heat pumps, it could get the heating-inside-envelope point, although this would need separate rooftop ventilation. This approach could be used for big box stores that do not meet the density requirement. 107 South Albany Street. Under construction. 14 apartments with heat pumps. Same situation as Carey Building — same points, same outcome, and no change to the actual design/construction would be required. It would pass as is. Gateway Commons. Built in about 2006, Gateway Commons was one of the first LEED buildings in the City, achieving a LEED Silver rating, and so is an interesting test case: A high-performance building, but not very high-performance. This building would get 2 points for density/transportation, but likely would not get any other points —the windows are too large, floor area is too large, the heat pumps rely on a boiler so would not qualify, it does not have heat pump water heating, etc. It might get one point for building shape. So, the building would only get 2-3 points, and would not pass. Interestingly, the building was benchmarked in 2012 with an energy use index (EUI) of 47. This confirms that the building is high performing, but not very high-performing. Breckenridge Apartments. 50 apartments in downtown Ithaca. Would get 2 points for density/transportation, and possibly 1 point for floor area. It does use heat pumps, except for ventilation which is gas-fired. The gas-fired ventilation disqualifies the heat pump points, so the building fails, with only 3 points, even though it is LEED Platinum. It would not be difficult to have modified the design to get the building to pass with 3 more points, for example with more modest windows or slightly smaller apartment sizes and/or a heat pump for the ventilation. Breckenridge's actual energy use index Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 51 (EUI) is 45, similar to Gateway Commons. Gateway Commons and Breckenridge confirm that high- performing buildings that are not very-high-performing do not pass the point system. 2.21.3 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, l,��,r&-44-Renovations HOLT Architects . HOLT Architects' .I.q_E.b rehab of a building in the City's west end was designed as a net-zero building, with significant roof-mounted solar energy and other green features. Its performance has not reached net-zero, but has still reportedly been highly-efficient, and we would expect it to pass the rating system. This building would likely get 2 points for density/transportation, 3 points for renewables, 1 point for modest window-to-wall ratio, 2 points for heat pumps, and 1 point for heating within the heated space, for a total of 9 points. It scores well, and this is good because it is a proven high-performance building. 109 S. Albany. 109 S. Albany is a small 1625 SF commercial professional office building. Although not "gut-rehabbed" at one single point in time, extensive energy renovations over 15 years have been the equivalent of a m „Ijgr. rehab, and the building uses 80% less energy than it did when last bought in 2002, with a site EUI of less than 25. It would receive 2 points for density/transportation, 2 points for solar (slightly shy of 3 points), and 1 point for low-energy lighting, and so would just fail pass the scoring system, although barely, with 5 points. This is another example of a high-performing building that fails because it is not very high-performing, and still relies on natural gas. It would pass with additional solar energy, or with heat pumps. 110 S. Albany. Renovated in 2009, it was also converted at that time from an apartment building to an office. It has received LEED Platinum certification. It would receive one fewer solar points than 109 S. Albany, and so would fail with 4 points. It is another example of a LEED Platinum building that does not pass the point system, largely because of its natural gas use, and its energy use index (EUI) of just over 60, which is good but still not very-high-performance. Required changes would include heat pumps, or more solar, in order to reach six points. 2.22 Conclusions/Takeaways The point system as currently proposed appears to pass known high-performance buildings (Hemsin House, Ecovillage TREE homes and common house, HOLT Architects, Demarest house on Spencer Street). The point system fails known non-high-performance buildings (Marriott, typical building at Cornell Technology Park), even if they have modest high-performance features like high-efficiency boilers. The point system fails moderately high-performance buildings if they are not very high-performance (Gateway Commons, Overlook Apartments, Breckenridge, 109 and 110 S. Albany), although the building designs would pass with minor modifications. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf L.D.114V­P-Projectject Report (Yh39/18) - Pg. 52 The point system's most distinctive features are the density/transportation points and points for heat pumps. A residential or multifamily building can pass by primarily just meeting these two requirements (e.g. Carey Building, 107 South Albany Street), and using heat pumps that are located within the heated space. In answer to our initial questions: 1. Would the proposed point system work for known high-performance buildings, in other words, would they have passed? Yes. 2. Would the point system work for known non-high-performance buildings, in other words, would they have failed? Yes. 3. Would such a point system have impacted designs? Yes. We see multiple examples where somewhat high-performance buildings would fail, but by pursuing extra points, could be brought to pass. 4. Do "better" buildings score higher? Yes. 5.:.......Would the point system be unusually cumbersome and costly? No. 2.23 References Green Energy Incentives, Final Report, Tompkins County Planning Department / Tompkins County Industrial Development Agency(TCIDA)/Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD). August 2016. Heat pump references: https://energy.gov/energysaver/heat-pump-systems/air-source-heat-pumps https://enemy.2ov/energysaver/geothermal-heat-pumps Biomass I_ref ereir)(1e:ro: -.https://www.epa.gov/ncc/biomass-heating-and-cooling-technologies d .Jf °re � v v irk ^rod ira as irk ��✓ / Illlmj it iraair��^ro l it aalr��aro �i�lr��vvaall)le II earvat-NY Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf 11"IN" "ILDI1Project Report (Y„ h" 3 /18) - Pg. 53 3 Education and Outreach 3.1 Goals The primary goal of the education and outreach campaign is to explain the process and methodology used to develop recommendations for the proposed green building policy regarding energy and water conservation. Another goal of the campaign is to solicit input and feedback on the draft deliverables and recommendations. 3.2 Target Groups The target groups include the following: 1. Homeowners 2. Landlords 3. Developers 4. Design professionals 5. Builders 6. Community leaders 7. Municipal staff 8. Elected officials 3.3 Strategy The City and Town of Ithaca are in a unique position with a strong vocal community engaged in both green energy and social equity issues. Ithaca has the opportunity to be at the forefront of energy and water conservation policies that exceed the code minimums and push our communities toward a net- zero energy future. Implementing an effective policy will demonstrate leadership and set a positive example for other municipalities. The process of developing the recommendations for a new policy includes regular meetings of the project team with meeting agendas and minutes which will be made available to the target groups. A mailing list of the target groups and any interested parties will allow for regular communications to announce special presentations or events as well as notify people of new content on the website. The mailing list will be a primary method to solicit feedback on draft reports as well as preliminary and final recommendations. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh3118) - Pg. 54 3.3.1 r i g The branding of a campaign can be an important part of effectively communicating the message to the target groups and ultimately achieving the project goals. A campaign need not be flashy or overly complex but it does require consistency. All communications should include a simple masthead with the name of the project and a tagline. A consistent use of font styles and colors will help build confidence and reinforce the underlying message. For this campaign the project team has agreed on the name: Ithaca Green Building Policy: Energy + Water The font used is Calibri with the main name in bold and the Energy and Water regular. The brand joins both the city and town together by just referring to "Ithaca" and the term/color "Green" has historically been used to represent sustainability. In spite of being somewhat overused and perhaps cliche, the term "Green" is simple and commonly understood. The terms "Energy' and "Water" provide focus and avoid any confusion about the policy possibly applying to other common green building practices such as sustainable sites, building materials or indoor air quality. All communications will reference the Ithaca Green Building Policy name with the Energy+Water terms included on more formal documents. 3.3.2 isri ui n Information will be distributed primarily by way of presentations to various stakeholder groups and email announcements. 2 ,i. ebsite ............................................................................................................ A project website draft was ready for team and committee review on 9/22/17 and full launch in November 2017. The website will be the main focus of the marketing strategy with all communications directing people there to review reports, agendas, minutes, resources and to make comments and ask questions through a contact form. 2 2 1.ul°e entatuon .................................................................................................................................................. Some of the public presentations given through the course of this project include the following. A complete list of events „r1cl ucj„1r1g„ „g ncj R tt ncj R „rlcj fjin minutes can be found on the project website at www.ithacareenbuildin .com. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf L-D-114V--P-Projectject Report (Yh9/18) - Pg. 55 City Planning and Economic Development Committee-January 10 City Planning and Development Board -January 23 Town Planning Committee- December 21 Town Planning Board -January 16 TCCPI -January 26 Public Information Session - March 28 The outreach generated well over 200 comments on the draft report. Revisions to the report have been made to reflect the consultant's responses to these comments. The complete list of comments is included as an appendix to this report as well as on the project website. 3.4 Advisory Committee .4.1 Summary of Selection Criteria and Process A preliminary list of possible committee members was generated through a brainstorming activity by the consultant with input from the client at a regular project meeting. The list included known individuals in the community who are active with design, construction, real estate, energy, planning, and social equity issues. Efforts were made to make the list as diverse as possible in terms of gender and race and to include people who are both familiar with green building practices and also those who are not. The list was then sorted into three groups of people who could best represent the three categories of economic development, ecology or social equity. The entire client team and consultants were presented with an anonymous online survey where they were asked to select three possible committee members for each category to ensure a healthy and diverse mix of people. The results of the survey were then discussed by the project team with the nine people receiving the most votes added to the list of finalists. The project team then discussed some of the names who received fewer votes but may have been overlooked as good candidates. Four additional names were added through this discussion. Once the final list of thirteen candidates was established the consultant reached out to each person to ask them if they would be interested in joining the committee. All of the candidates responded favorably with only one candidate suggesting an alternative person due to other commitments (the representative from Cornell University). The following is the list of 13 Advisory Committee Members and the organizations they represent: Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 56 Peter Bardaglio Ithaca 2030 District; Tompkins County Climate Protection Initiative Katie Borgella Tompkins County Department of Planning& Sustainability Kirby Edmonds Building Bridges,The Dorothy Cotton Institute Erik P. Eshelman Cornell University Steve Hugo HOLT Architects Jon Jensen Park Foundation McKenzie Jones City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board Brent Katzmann Warren Real Estate Leslyn McBean-Clairborne Tompkins County Legislature; Greater Ithaca Activities Center Heather McDaniel Tompkins County Area Development (TCAD) Guillermo Metz Cornell Cooperative Extension Scott Reynolds Ithaca Neighborhood Housing Services Frost Travis Travis Hyde Properties .4.2 Agendas, Presentations,, Minutes Agendas, presentations, minutes, and other materials from each Committee meeting can be found in the appendix and on the project website www.ithacagreenbuilding.com. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y hL3 /18) - Pg. 57 4 Building Stock Survey and Development Forecasts 4.1 Introduction In order to evaluate policy options and understand the possible outcome from different policies, it is necessary to first understand the built environment that exists in Ithaca, as well as the associated energy and water use relative to our policy goals. In addition, it is important to have a baseline of expectation for how development will proceed in the future and how the future City and Town building stock could be influenced by policy changes. 4.2 General Approach To help the community understand the implications and potential levers for change that can help the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca to achieve energy and water savings goals, Randall + West has developed the following Survey of Existing Buildings and a Development Forecast to project the future built environment. Identifying the data available locally, reviewing its accuracy and completeness, and performing some basic analysis was the first step for this project. Using data made available by the Tompkins County Department of Assessment, the City of Ithaca Zoning Division, the City of Ithaca GIS Program,the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement Department, and the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission, we have processed and analyzed parcel land use data, local water consumption, and building permits. We have also estimated expected future energy use using data from from the New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG) 2010-2016 Ithaca Community Energy Report, the U.S. Energy Information Administration Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey(CBECS), and the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority (NYSERDA) New York State Residential Statewide Baseline Study(RSBS). After reviewing all available local datasets, local plans, and other projections created for local studies and projects our team decided to base our future assumptions largely on economic and population projections from Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. This firm is well regarded in the field of economic and population projections and has been used locally in reports by TCAD and Tompkins County Planning. Woods & Poole's methodology differs from other projections by modeling the entire national economy as well as individual counties and statistical areas to better understand the interplay between economic conditions and "natural" changes related to birth, death, and aging.The projections include an expected breakdown of the future population based on a number of factors including economic sector, age, and gender. We believe that Woods & Poole's focus on trends within economic markets as predictors of Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg. 58 population change is the best available method for creating a baseline of expectations for future building stock in a world where workers, and population in general, is increasingly mobile. The outcome of any long-term prediction, particularly when working with imperfect data, is not an exact science. The development forecasts, and the land use demands they imply, are subject to variation due to the many factors driving future demand. That said, these projections provide a sense of the magnitude and proportion of change that can be expected in the long-term based on the best available information. 4.3 Building Stock Survey In order to better understand the current stock of buildings, including the mix of uses, ages, sizes, and distribution, Randall+West started with a review and analysis of all pertinent data that the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca were able to provide as well as available datasets from Tompkins County Department of Assessment, New York State Electric & Gas (NYSEG), and the aforementioned regional Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and regional Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). The evaluation of available data provides key insights into the built fabric of our community, the existing building stock, and trends of change over time. These data sources provide a background for understanding Ithaca's buildings; however, the development forecasts, and the land use demands they imply are subject to variation due to the many factors driving demand in the future. These projections are intended to provide a good idea of the magnitude and proportion of change that can be expected over time based on the best available information. 4e e1 Land Use Area Urban land use greatly impacts the energy and water consumption of cities and towns. Data made available by the County Department of Assessment helps illustrate the amount of land dedicated to each of the land use types in the City and Town. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hl 9/18) - Pg. 59 Area(in Percentageacres) of Area Lam� �� un Residential mCommprciM Residential 8263 2EYO =rom111uniwsvwicmw Commercial 708.5 24%' 42%, ~vacant Community Services 569.42 20% is Rea eaimmm Vaivamt 343.12 12% mimdusuial Recreation 330.05 11% =p"Nic Services Umdustriad 52.32 2% Public Services 7135 2% Forest 15.8 1% Tote| 2916.86 100% | Figune2� City 4f/trhaca:Parcel Area Distrributr/on4fLand Uses, � At 28% of the City's total parcel area, residential uses consume more land than any other use in the City of Ithaca, followed by commercial land use, and community services. In ZUUO, U.S. residential and commercial buildings used 73.2Y6 of all electricity produced in the United States'.Thus the future energy and water demand in the City of Ithaca would be driven largely by energy and water needs of the residential and commercial land uses. z�2� Land Use Area(in Percentageof an,unmnua/ acres) Area �v=cm^ Residential 5189.54 31% =*P/m/Wro Vacant 3529.94 21% =cslom""i*swnwce. AgricuUtuno 2596.06 15% �purms' Community Services 2468.58 15% Forest 2261.54 7% Public Services E16.81 S% =aemeawo" Commercial 414,18 2% �/mumo�av Recreation 403.63 Z% Industrial 158.03, 1% Total 16888.31 100% | Figune�3.2 76vun 4f/trhaca:Parcel Area Distrributrjon of Land Uses � |nthe Town of Ithaca, residential land use also occupies the largest parcel area. The energy demand for agricultural and community service land uses remains relatively stable over the years. Therefore the energy and water demand in the Town ofIthaca would be driven largely by its residential land use. Water and energy demand depends not only on the land use, but also the size of parcels and the mix of uses, ages, sizes, and distribution ofbuildings within each land use. In order to predict the energy and z Ithaca Green Building Policy E.� Z.\ .; water requirements of the City and Town of Ithaca, a built area inventory was created to estimate the future development and usage of built space in the City and Town. 4.3.2 jail ing Area Inventory ® Building Use Types While land use area is useful for understanding how the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca have allocated their limited amount of land, to understand the impact of building policies we must understand the buildings that we have now and those we expect to be built in the future. Using County Department of Assessment data we have evaluated the amount of building area in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca, respectively, based on the variety of use categories available. The inventory of building area was derived by processing data from the Tompkins County Department of Assessment 2017 tax year parcel data in ESRI ArcGIS 10.3. The Assessment Department data follows New York State Office of Real Property Services' Property Type Classification Codes, a uniform system used in assessment administration in New York State which includes the following numeric codes in nine categories: • 100-Agricultural - Property used for the production of crops or livestock. • 200 - Residential - Property used for human habitation. Living accommodations such as hotels, motels, and apartments are in the Commercial category(400). • 300 - Vacant Land - Property that is not in use, is in temporary use, or lacks permanent improvement. • 400-Commercial - Property used for the sale of goods and/or services. • 500 - Recreation & Entertainment - Property used by groups for recreation, amusement, or entertainment. • 600-Community Services - Property used for the well being of the community. • 700 - Industrial - Property used for the production and fabrication of durable and nondurable man-made goods. Parcels used for research aimed primarily at improving products are coded as Industrial, while parcels used for marketing research are coded as Commercial. • 800- Public Services- Property used to provide services to the general public. • 900 - Wild, Forested, Conservation Lands & Public Parks - Reforested lands, preserves, and private hunting and fishing clubs Within each of these nine categories are a number of specific uses. For example, within the 200 - Residential use category some of the specific use codes include: 210 - One Family Year-Round Residence; 215 - One Family Year-Round Residence with Accessory Apartment; and 220 - Two Family Year-Round Residence, among others. The Department of Assessment Property Class codes and associated improvement descriptions were used to assign parcels into the aforementioned land use categories used for this study. Once the parcels in the City and Town were identified, we tallied square footage, building area for each type of development directly from the provided parcel data. Three property types make up the vast majority of built area in both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca; these types are Residential, Commercial, and Community Services. At this level of analysis, it is important to understand that some Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL3 9/18) - Pg. 61 uses that most would consider residential are split between the 'Residential' and 'Commercial' land use codes. The 200s Residential use numbers includes one-, two-, and three-family homes, single mobile homes on a lot, and multiple mobile homes on a lot when the lot is not a commercial enterprise. The 400s Commercial land use codes include several housing types including apartments, mobile home parks where the land is leased or rented to mobile home owners as a business, rooming and boarding houses, and fraternity and sorority houses. In addition, it is worth pointing out that Community Services includes three of Ithaca's largest employment sectors -Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (including university owned dorms, but not including fraternity/sorority houses). Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN L .11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg. 62 299 Q t 4 C:rara7n��orfit�Si'vcs Building Area(in sq. wm(P�Ieart-p��rSialenY,ua+SIM Lr�f1d �.I�e�l��e Co mencitell Ft) Residential Community Srvcs 110,055,643 a Indn�a nai (I on-residential) Commercial 5,7.86,263 Public Sen"vi es, Residential 110,,841,450 I'ndu�stt"ial 612,044 Public Sertrices 41,576 Total 26,836,976 Iiq.q.L .....:: 3City pf Ithaca:Buildinq Area by use-type Use-Type-TypeBn ilding Area Qin lie+,i[he!p°rtldu9 sc1,ftp C:fiarrropauurnit^'.Srvd.ro Residential 8,857,51,2, C iaar�uap'anul Co,mmunitySrvcs5,068,479 (Non-rest"dential) rnruaaal' ao'rn Commercial 712,514 u ., f'a�prtae.at�a�n Industrial 278,962, 0a �I .,pesa: Agriculture 50,174 a Publicser'Aos Recreation 32,782. Vacard Forest 14,499 Public Services 11,313 vacant 9,047 Total 1,5,035,382, Fiq. r.ca .....:�:.:�:.. . li.�wn o 'Ithaca:Building Area by use type Residential, commercial, and community services land uses make up the vast majority of building area in both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca. Residential land use makes up one of the largest components of building area in the Town and City of Ithaca.The residential use building area is expected to increase with demand in the coming years. In the next section, we analyze the different kinds of residential uses as each type has a different water and energy requirement. 4.3.3 esi en ial Building Use Types To better understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most people consider to be residential, we have created a sub-analysis of all residential uses including residential uses considered to be "Commercial" under New York State land use classifications. This data does not include dorms on Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 63 university campuses which do not have a different property class to distinguish them from other campus buildings (considered Community Services) and are frequently not on their own parcels. whille re,, 1�9h, *� (1,1111H,111 R111 uso a,Prn Wd 1^,s A.rase Mina kold ouo'N,w ar7uly Re uw 1 Wr,t,�Yvi bid 3 F a rn l y Raer, ,,,it Aged Name •AU-rune W dg •G',onvaor4e y Rea •Mfg 1�...nR pain ■Muft u.urr,bld w R,rY,MuOl+rnVr; Aged Gauaer 3,i I ;'�;Vy, 1 u�^fPrt firo C`�tlnll �ti���iro./�Gcs^riva5�. urc 3„i'am11M A,5_1 Fig2.L .....::. City pf Ithaca:Residential Building Area...20.1 Ro FNu,v,Gf plc, i 7%. 1 hBtarN r &rage 8% 3 Farrccaly IRer,�..,.., I% I raa',1�IIly Res IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIW i i FaMily IR(4 S IVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIII� W,3 FaRrVlylRe s i� rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrll��rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrll(I'u W Apasar'tmenL iConvee`t d Reg ,�'�''"kl'� 'NAS`"� uuuuVllluuuuuuuu uuuuuuuVllluuuuuuuu uuuuuuuVllluuuuuumll Estate; in Res laJll a ll t V pka m�uomi f 1101 11111111 III IIIIIIIII IIIIVV� a Res vv�Cornuse w� RUrral res pp pp pp uuumouppu uoi �i IN Rural res aaiR VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIppVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIppVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIppVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVIVVVVVII lrI tl tl tl ®Ruirl ret,&ripir, 5ew,canal res F iqurf.p:1..76 . 76111 o Ithaca:Residential Building Area ...20..F Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ 14V--P-Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 64 Single-family residential buildings account for more building area than any other residential building type in both the Town of Ithaca and the City of Ithaca, followed by two family residential, and apartments. In the City of Ithaca, while single-family housing comprises more building area than other residential types, at 38% of the total residential building area it is less building area than the sum of the non-single-family residential building area. According to the 2015 Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan Housing section, "Within the City of Ithaca, 73 percent of households are renters, and countywide 44 percent of households rent their homes." In the Town of Ithaca, single-family building area accounts for 72%of all residential building area. 4e e4 Building permits and demolitions Along with the building area of different property use types, the future energy and water demand also depends on the growth rate of the city or the town. In order to be able to make an informed estimate for a city's growth rate, understanding the rate of new construction and demolitions are imperative. In this section, we take an overview of new constructions and demolitions in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca. Both the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca recently changed building permit database systems and are working to improve data entry and data gathering practices. The best analysis for this section would be to compare the building areas for new construction with any demolished building area to understand the net increase each year. Unfortunately, while data on number of demolished buildings is available, data on demolished building area is not and the vast majority of demolished buildings appear to be sheds, garages, and carriage houses. The building area affected by any given permit is also not currently tracked, although there is the potential in each new building permit database system to do so. Given the limited data available, we are able to draw some basic conclusions by tracking simple numbers of permits. P§ftlio%Mvaatons, ft ingg Nmddt9M,Ra raborb 128 IM wu ai imsrtrcu+�'N sr conversums ""ng SO work 60 ..... 'I 40 �3$t34 7f2 42titR• V3 291 , NN um� 01�➢14 �, IIA 1064 Q3r4 IN M2 Stet 27 213 32 319 K4 327 329 434 437 0 334 337 344 347 354 537 334 337 944 97 394 k57 a � 1" r 4 ,a 3 v 'fir a r r dy *" rdr Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ G Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 65 dakGNl[ucumSy PlldArACJaSmn, pqpaks,RmfiN,q, NrTAfimnlS,PdsYlmt t 120 M.znr+UNTst:ratarOnn Heanng SOp ftck 1661 26 561 X24145-424r1 40 2M-Q r2 221 VIII 1111112645.414r3 o1n,,: „y, N1 111111 . . 2. 111111 . - yy ,,. „ III pV,, 4Vuuu oNy 205 Q9 C 1013 IN u02 1% 05 324 316 3218 329 434 437 436 334 344 347 334 333 644 W 654 657 rr; d» ry , � r„p, :m,, rr,� 'fir b' "✓, r r A Add,tians,Altleraud ' Repain,A'.-ting, Demal'itl—,RclucaHiaras IN—C—tuctian Cmn 11 PBeating Site'iF-k 123 16Q X321 „.. 66 2016-2tr1 40 42016-att2 21IIIIII 842016tr3 i„ INW IIIUIII N4 IUV INm�111Y IIIIIIII �,; 01111poll lNw,,.... AN w+m,,. iexry I�m�41NU .»NUP.. ,..,... „2016'at r4 1 llll 103 104 ID5 324 434 437 334 514 347 3�3,4 557 644 647 0.34 653 !..!. . ....:. .:..... :`at �.�f It�2 Building a�2 F��:pr�7rit Data20..1 , 20..15; 20..1 Ithaca Green Building Policy J[I Z.\ .; Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 66 100 90 RO 7'0 60 50 ,40 2016 2 017 1 0 L if IMM INI 1 r 0!11 Ila a I �� n� �, � l�) A A,"? oAx Aw 4� " w 9- R11 qma " A IN TM o'0 All Fi car :......76wn of Ithaca Building Permit Data 20.16 and 20.17(through July 20.17 When data WIC A We find that new construction and demolitions are a small proportion of the total building permits issued over last three years as compared to other types such as additions, alterations, repairs, renovations, etc. While this project specifically focuses on a policy related directly to new construction, future work looking at standards for existing buildings and smaller renovations including roof replacements, and heating/utility upgrades could have a significant impact on overall energy use. 4.4 Building Area Forecast In this section, we estimate the expected building area for residential, commercial, community service, and industrial land use for the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. Building area by land use could be used to determine the energy and water needs of each land use in the City and Town. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 67 To estimate the long-term expected changes for the community, we relied on the 2015 American Community Survey (ACS) for employment and demographic estimates, and Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. employment projections for Tompkins County. Readers should note that there are many unforeseeable events such as natural disasters (drought, earthquake, floods etc.), in-migration, or other significant economic, social, or political changes that could occur in the future. Changes due to these events are difficult to quantify in the present and have not been accounted for in this study. 4.4.1 Resi en ial Development and Market Analysis This section of the report presents the analysis of housing and population growth for 2030 and 2050 based. We first look at the population growth estimates for Tompkins County by Woods & Poole. Using the projected population, total residential building area is calculated for 2030 and 2050 for the City and Town of Ithaca assuming that future residents will use a similar amount of space per person that current residents use. As with any projection methodology we cannot be sure the assumptions will hold far into the future. One influencing factor is the increase of one- and two-person households; despite using smaller units, these tend to have more square feet per person as even the smallest apartment can't shrink certain critical features like the size of bathrooms that have to be ADA accessible. 4.4.2 Popula ion growth We used Woods & Poole' population projections for 2030 and 2050 for Tompkins County. Woods & Poole follow a standard economic approach for their regional demographic and economic projections called the 'export-base' approach. Given the availability of regional data, 'export-based' approach remains one of the most reliable projection approaches. T()7LAL POPULAT2N,ALL AGES(linin HIMIsan ds) �� . w+ 00 ab CL J PO 1,975 2000 2025 2D50 Figure 20. Total Population, Tompkins County, 1975-2050 2 Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. is a small, independent corporation that specializes in long-term county economic and demographic projections. Source: htt�rs:�/data,sa�e�ub,com/sa�estats/html��ublic�WP%20Methodolo�y%202016,�df. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ dG Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 68 I"J R EA J, c,9 YE A R 13 D W Y 4 Y EAR"', i i no r 'PAIR'� 21. 'o'i 4 Y L S 2517 29 Y EA R,' 2 1)to 34 Y PA,P S ,r to D 9 YEARS 4 0 Q)44 YEARS 45 rO 19 VEARS 0 k,54 YEARS to Yp"Q-AHS 6C M I,I Y EA N S F>'to 610 Y FAr!',� M W'74 YEARS 75 10?14 Y F�%R, 8C,'to 04 Y EAR Figurf..�21.......:8. Population Distribution by agf..�, 76mpkins County, 20.17 ....... ER 5'(LARS lo9 Art" 20 to 24 VEARS 25 ki 21)'YFARS iulr'�j I YEARS 3`5 to 39 ,,RS 4U lo 44 Y� 7 AKS 45 M 419 VEARS ,'O lo, tit.'Ak'w ctu to'59YEAR:," To tAYt'ARS i 6SW694'W', 70 lo 7A"EAPS 7 5 to 79 YEARS YEAP� 5 PI"ARS wd OVER D 5 W is 2 Figurf..�.2 2,9. Population Distribution by agf..�, 76mpkins County, 20.30 .......... LINDER I.,ArIk"S in 5 W 9 VEARS t0 to t 4 V FAHI'w I dto 14h VEAK'i to 24 VEAS 25 N,29',EARs 30W1A1(E&RS to 39 Y��M'5 40 M 44,YLAW,n 5�o 49 YEARS I 501LAR� 1p 514 YEARS 64 YEAK, 5W69 YEMts 70 No 74 YEAK 5 to'13 HARI, 80 t"t"4 yEkRS 85 YEARS and CIVE R Figurf..�Z 3.--10. Population Distribution by agf..�, 76mpkins County, 2050 Ithaca Green Building Policy E.I Z.\ .; L-D-114V-T-Project Report (LZ. /18) - Pg. 69 4.5 uouu�n�ur� u�w 3.P> ry 2. ,i 1. 7. 196'9 2050 —41A—PERSONS PER HOLAII-HOLD(ill rlUmber ofpeoptle) 1"01'AL NIJPN IIID of HLOLJSF Hf" DS qua ten thousands) Figu..L.e 2. :�� l...r�. a A�:pl�old number and size cl�ang(...p, ..1969 to 2050. Source: Woods A Poole �=c�.�norrric Inc. We find that the overall population is expected to increase by approximately 10% between 2017 and 2050, resulting in an increased demand for housing, commercial services, water, and energy. The highest proportion of population falls between the age group of 15 to 24 years. The population in this age group is expected to increase by approximately 20% between 2017 and 2050. The 15-24 age group may be a major driver for the residential housing market throughout the region. An increase in the number of households with a decreasing household size indicates an increase in one and two person households. With many individuals in the 15 to 24 years age group as well as seniors living as one and two person households, the expected residential demand for smaller dwelling unit types including studios and apartments is expected to increase relative to large single-family homes. 4.4.2.1., ResidentiaI buNfing area, We first calculated the population growth rate between 2015 to 2030, and 2015 to 2050, respectively, for Tompkins County using Woods & Poole time series data. The population growth rates for 2030 and 2050 were then multiplied with the 2015 population of the City and the Town to estimate the population for 2030 and 2050. Residential building area per capita was calculated for 2015. Residential building area per capita was then multiplied by the population estimates for 2030 and 2050 to project the total residential building area for both the City and the Town for 2030 and 2050, respectively. For the residential building area estimates, we assume that the population growth rate in the City and the Town of Ithaca would remain the same as that of Tompkins County. In recent decades, the population growth in the City of Ithaca has been low despite growth in Tompkins County. In a 2015 interview with Brian Crandall of the Ithaca Voice, Megan Wilson, Senior Planner with the City of Ithaca stated, "In 1950, approximately 50% of Tompkins County residents lived within the city; today (2015), Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 70 that number has fallen to 30%. At the same time, the city remains an employment center, and more than 13,000 people commute into the community every day." We want to encourage more people to live within the city, closer to jobs and services. Population growth rate similar to Tompkins County serves as a goal to maintain a higher population growth rate in the City of Ithaca. In addition, to better understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most people consider to be residential, we have included residential uses considered to be "Commercial" under New York State land use classifications under the residential building area in our analysis.3 To avoid duplication, the area of such property types have been eliminated from the commercial building area analysis. We also assume that the residential area per person would remain the same in the future as it is now. In reality, the building area per person may increase or decrease in the future. For example, as the number of households in the future increases with a decreasing household size, demand for studio and one bedroom apartments is expected to rise, and the demand for large single-family homes is expected to fall. It may appear that this would decrease the residential building area per person. However, new suburban single-family homes tend to be significantly larger than historic homes in urban neighborhoods, and even apartments are trending toward having an increased number of bathrooms relative to the number of bedrooms (this trend exists in student focused apartments as well as luxury apartment markets). The various Housing Needs Assessments performed by the Danter Company for the Downtown Ithaca Alliance, the City of Ithaca, and Tompkins County identifies additional closet space and additional bathrooms as amenities in high demand. Such trends may outweigh any decrease in average unit size. However, these changes in demand and user behavior are unforeseeable, and have not been accounted for in this study. 11,6219,498 11„6ir8„ 12,881,78.6 16„8 C),1q� �9,8'741u 6 8„488,888 8,a868„612 0 ^ a awe 8„866,6'21 „611,„6' 6,500,000 2015 2030 2050 3 Apartments (commercial property use type 411 as per the NYS property use codes) have been included in the residential building area. Sixty percent (60%) of building area of detached row type and attached row type (commercial property use types 481 and 482, respectively) has been included in the residential building area, and the remaining 40%in the commercial building area based on a survey of such property types in the City of Ithaca. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ d. Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 71 i . . .... I. . Projected Residential Building Arf.pa (in Ari. ,fit) The residential building area in the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca is expected to increase by 13% between 2015 and 2050 owing to an increase in the total population of the city and the Town. The rate of employment growth will likely continue to outpace the rates of housing and nonresidential construction. 4.4.3 Non® esi en ial Development and Market Analysis The development forecasts used in this study are based on projections of economic growth from the New York State Department of Labor Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), the New York Regional Economic Analysis Project (REAP), and the 2017 Complete Economic and Demographic Dataset by Woods & Poole Economics, Inc., a proprietary database containing more than 900 economic and demographic variables for every county in the United States for every year from 1970 to 2050. We first looked at the Woods & Poole employment projections for the different economic sectors in Tompkins County. We then use this data to estimate the building area for commercial, community- service, and industrial land use for 2030 and 2050 in the City and the Town of Ithaca, respectively. Historically, the data series shows that total employment in the Ithaca Metropolitan statistical area (MSA)4 took a hit in the 2008-2009 recession, but bounced back to that level in 2016 and is predicted to continue to rise at the rate of approximately 600 new jobs annually through 2050 according to Woods & Poole 2017 projections. We used the Woods & Poole employment projections for 2030 and 2050 for Tompkins County. Woods & Poole follow a standard economic approach for their regional demographic and economic projections called the 'export-base' approach. Given the availability of regional data, 'export-base' approach remains one of the most reliable projection approaches. 4 A Metropolitan statistical area (MSA) is a geographical region with a relatively high population density at its core. MSAs are defined by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and used by the U.S. Census Bureau and other federal government agencies for statistical purposes. 5 Woods & Poole Economics, Inc. specializes in long-term county economic and demographic projections. Source: htt�rs:/`/data,sa�e�ub,com/sa�estats/html/`public/WP%20Methodolo�y%202016,�df. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf L.D.114V­P-Projectject Report (Yh3t9118) - Pg. 72 1.00,()00 90,0oo 70,000 60,,000 so,000 40.mo au1,000 20,000 1.a.t'Pm 2017 2020 2030 2050 Fig.u. 2 61.,....,1-3. 76tol Projected Employment in 76mpkin,County. Source: Woods& Poole The total employment is expected to increase by nearly 27% between 2017 and 2050. The increase in employment acts is an indicator for an overall increase in population of Tompkins County. The rate of employment growth will likely continue to outpace the rate of residential construction. Increased employment means an increased requirement of office, retail, industrial and community service building area. „., �„., „.„ ,,,,,Klon!„-,resi�,�, ,u�,t,, ,I,,,,,aka,! ,,DI,�,�,�,u�, ;,- „�” , ,gr2A± !, This section presents the building area estimates for commercial, community service and industrial land use for 2030 and 2050 for the City and the Town of Ithaca. We first calculated the employment growth between 2015 to 2030 and 2015 to 2050 using the Woods & Poole time series data for Tompkins County. Employment growth expectations were calculated by combining projections for each Bureau of Labor Statistics employment sector category to approximate groupings based on the New York State Land Use Codes that identify the use of every parcel in the County Parcel dataset. We calculated the total number of employees for each sector within each Land Use classification in 2015 for the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca, and applied a growth rate in each industry to arrive at an expected number of employees in 2030 and 2050.The expected number of employees in each Land Use Code was multiplied the by the average 2015 building area per employee in that Land Use Code to arrive at an expected building area in 2030 and 2050. For the purposes of these calculations we assumed that each sector's employment growth rate in the City and the Town of Ithaca would be the same as that sector's growth rate in Tompkins County, this is a necessary assumption as employment projections are only available at the County level. This assumption has not always held true historically, for much of Tompkins County's early history job growth was focused in the Village of Ithaca, and then the City after it's incorporation in 1888, and in the mid-20th century economic development was largely focused outside of the City of Ithaca, however, it is a stated goal of the City,Town, and County to encourage and increase economic development in areas with the most existing infrastructure and recent trends have shown substantial growth within the transit served areas of the City and Town, we expect development to be spread more evenly across the county in future decades based on the County's nodal development scenarios. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ 14V--P-Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 73 For the commercial, community service and industrial land use, projected employment numbers for each economic sector were classified into the most suitable land use category using the NY state land use codes. For each land use, we calculated the building area per capita for 2015. The building area per capita was then multiplied with the employment estimates of 2030 and 2050 to project the total building area of commercial, community service and industrial land use for the City and the Town of Ithaca. The Commercial property use was subdivided into office and retail property use as the two types have significantly different energy and water requirements. We eliminated storage space, parking garage, and parking lots from the commercial building area as these property types do not have significant energy (for example heating, electricity etc.), and water requirements compared to other buildings. As previously mentioned, to better understand the distribution of building area devoted to uses that most people consider to be residential, we have removed residential uses considered to be "Commercial" under New York State land use classifications (apartments) and have incorporated those buildings in the residential building area analysis6. 6,'SOD NX.) 5,987. 2'.8 8a2t�8„ b6 5,5010,0r,* 4„7°86„888 4,800,00-0 2,5 00,t 0,0, 1,500,^� i2 59080'2' 886224. 738'884 II.,,fl�O, � UVWUWWVWN01!W WWWw'i:w MNDW��M➢w9 uouww,wx�'w:yryyw U4 201.5 20M 20,.50 Cve of ftham:a omwawo� [(No n of ltha,,,.a FigLLf?..Z 14. Projected commercial building area (lay Ari. ,fit) Year 20'30 2050 City of Ithaca 11% 25 Town of Ithaca 1110 250 Table 5. Growth rate of commercial building area 6 Apartments (commercial property use type 411 as per the NYS property use codes) have been included in the residential building area. 60%of building area of detached row type and attached row type (commercial property use type 481 and 482 respectively) has been included in the residential building area,and the remaining 40%in the commercial building area based on the author's experience and survey of such property types in the City of Ithaca. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 74 The commercial building area in the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca is expected to increase by 11% by 2030 and 25% by 2050 owing to an increase in employment and demand for office, services, and retail. 80=00 1,6,5659 5850918 5286263 40DOZOO 2 01 0000C NM, ma 0 14,33672 2592294 1794149 22I2B 2030 20,50 —"C',ty of fthaca "omuJauini of�vi)aca FigLLf?.?..3 Projected community-service building area (in sq. ft) Year 2030 2050 City of Ithaca 180 36% Town of Ithaca 18%j 36% 7able 6. Growth rate of community-service building area 7000100 635028 W>0000 612044 568564 550000 ,A)DOW 4500100 T'0000 300000 278962 288271 ............. 244408 200000 2015 2030 2050 FigLLf 2.2...,-.P6. Projected Industrial Building area (in sq. ft) Ithaca Green Building Policy E.IZ.\ L-D-114V--P-Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 75 Year 2030 2050 City of Ithaca % -11% Town of Ithaca °J -12% Table 7. Growth rate o.1'Industrial building area The industrial building area is the only sector where we project a reduction in building area. We project a building area decline in the City of Ithaca of 11%from 2015 to 2050, and a decline of 12%for the Town of Ithaca. This projection is consistent with trends of Ithaca's industrial space being converted to other uses including commercial and residential space. 4.5 Energy and Water Usage 4.5.1 Energy This section of the report presents the analysis of energy demand for 2030 and 2050 for the residential and non-residential uses in the City and Town of Ithaca. To estimate the long-term expected energy requirements of the community, we used the 2015 Residential Energy Consumption Survey (RECS) and Commercial and Business Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) administered by U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) for per foot energy demands of residential, commercial, and community services property types. RECS and CBECS are a nationally representative sample of housing units. For the 2015 survey cycle, EIA used web and mail forms — in addition to in-person interviews — to collect detailed information on household energy characteristics, including the housing unit, usage patterns, and household demographics. This information is combined with data from energy suppliers to estimate energy costs and usage for heating, cooling, appliances, and other end uses for these housing units. We multiplied the building area estimates (from the building area forecast) with the EIA per square foot energy requirement to estimate the total energy requirement for residential, commercial, and community service property use types. Apart from building area, energy demand also depends on user behavior. There are a range of factors that could impact user behavior: stringent energy codes; changing technology; changing energy costs; increased affordability of renewable energy such as solar panels; personal motivation etc. User behavior is extremely difficult to quantify and is not accounted for in this study. In order to compare apples to apples for our baseline future energy use forecast for a business as usual scenario we assume future energy use per square foot to stay the same. In other words, unknowable factors such as change in energy codes, technology, etc. are not factored into this analysis as an expected baseline. The impact of these factors is difficult to account for, especially at the household or independent business level. In addition, changes in energy use due to unforeseeable future events such as natural disasters, in- migration, etc. have not been considered. Overall,the energy demand forecast calculations are based on the assumption that the energy requirement per square foot in the future remains constant. In future Ithaca Green Building Policy J[I Z.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 76 sections of the report possible changes to energy density due to some expected trends will be more fully explored. This section presents the total energy demand by the residential property type in the City and the Town of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. We used the residential building area projections for 2015, 2030, and 2050, and multiplied expected building area by the per foot energy usage for residential property type as per RECS. °f".KX)0 =ti SDOODO 400OX 2015 2030 2050 4,:.., ...:. F=a car .... C ... . Residential =t��:pr Demand r (in million B7 LJ AJ We find that the estimated residential energy demand for the City and the Town of Ithaca in 2015 was approximately 579,000 million BTUs and 456,000 million BTUs respectively. This estimate lines up reasonably with NYSEG's energy consumption data? for the City and Town of Ithaca, i.e. approximately 700,000 million BTUs and 430,000 million BTUs respectively. The Cleaner Greener Southern Tier Regional Sustainability Plan report states that residential property use type makes up for 28% of the total energy end use. As per our estimates, residential energy demand makes up approximately 34% of the total residential, commercial and community service energy demand combined together for both the Town and the City. This means that residential demand would make up close to 30% of the total energy demand of the City and the Town (with energy demand of other sectors such as industrial, public services etc. combined). The residential energy demand is expected to increase linearly between 2015 and 2050 for both the City and the Town. This section presents the total energy demand by the non-residential property types (commercial and community services) in the City and the Town of Ithaca for 2030 and 2050. We used the non-residential building area projections for 2015, 2030, and 2050, and multiplied it with the per foot energy usage for non-residential property types as per CBECS. Community-wide Utility Energy Consumption Report 2010-2015. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 77 As per CBECS, the retail and office commercial spaces have different energy requirements. Thus, we divided the commercial property types into retail and office space depending on the spatial use of the activity. As mentioned earlier, we then multiplied the building area projections with the per foot energy usage for office and retail space as per CBECS. 501000 400000 406,,956 366,214, 00000, 332,952 2 00MO 10000 „111 46,695 52,395 2015 2030 2050 Fig2.L .... .::...: . . Commercial e=nergy Demand(lay million B l Us) Commercial) Energy Consumption (in million BTUs) 2015 2030 2050 Office 86177 96653 112175 Retail 246775 269561 294780 City of thaca Total 332'9'52 366214 406956 Off ic+e 18553 20916 24157 Retail 23557 25779 28238 Town of Ithaca Total 42111 46695 52395 Table 8. Commercial Enerq� i:��:p�rr�nd by .,f:,fice end Ret. it r.�Ae We find that the estimated commercial energy demand for the City and the Town of Ithaca in 2015 was approximately 330,000 million BTUs and 42,000 million BTUs respectively. The Cleaner Greener Southern Tier Regional Sustainability Plan report states that commercial property use type makes up for 17% of the total energy end use. As per our estimates, commercial energy demand makes up approximately 20% of the total residential, commercial and community service energy demand combined together. This means that the commercial demand would make up close to 17% of the total energy demand of the City and the Town (with energy demand from other sectors such as industrial, public services etc. combined). In the City, retail energy demand is a substantially larger component of total commercial energy consumption, while in the Town retail uses only slightly more energy than office space, this difference is directly related to the fact that a significantly higher percentage of commercial building area in the city is retail space. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 78 Community services use the third largest building area in the City, and second highest in the Town. As mentioned earlier, we multiplied the building area projections for community services with the per foot energy usage as per CBECS. 0 000't00 1�O u 0u0Ct 10,61499 � 0 WIDL d00 0 w� 000000 004,080 400000 w 394,528 000400'0 0 201 2030 201001 00f ofthaca 0r.4men rjf ithac.a FigLLf 22 19. Community Services e=nergy is errrand(in million B7Us) Projections of energy use if the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca adopt the proposed green building policy are provided in Section 1.5. 4.5.2 Water This section of the report presents the analysis of water demand for 2030 and 2050 for the residential and non-residential uses in the City and Town of Ithaca. To estimate the long-term expected water requirements of the community, we used the 2015 parcel-wise quarterly water consumption data provided by the City of Ithaca. A major limitation faced with estimating the water demand were incomplete datasets. Water consumption data for many parcels was missing in the quarterly datasets. Keeping this limitation in mind, we were able to estimate the water demand by using annual average water-use per-foot for each property use type. To do this, we considered those parcels that have a built area, and whose water consumption data was complete within a quarterly dataset. We eliminated parcels with -0- building area, negative or -0-water consumption,$as well as outliers where there was a huge variance from the building type's average use (such outliers are likely the result in changes in meter technology or other errors). We calculated the total water usage for residential, commercial and 8 A building cannot have negative water use over a quarter. A-0- or negative water reading may imply an empty building or parcel, or an issue with the water meter. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ G Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 79 community services in each quarter. We then divided the water use for each use type by their building area (given in the dataset) to get the average quarterly water-use per-square-foot for a each property type. Because of issues in the dataset and the way water use data is collected there was not consistent data for every building for every quarter so calculating average use per square foot separately for each quarter was the most accurate method. The average water-use from the four quarters was combined to deduce the annual average water-use per-foot for each building type. A similar process was applied to water consumption data provided by the Town of Ithaca with consumption for 2017, however the town water data was extremely inconsistent with other tested data. For the residential parcels that water consumption data was available for, the average per square foot consumption was about 26 gallons/sgft, while the City of Ithaca's average was just over 50 and national averages are in the upper 50 gallons/sqft. This may be the case for a number of reasons, the average home size per person in the Town is significantly higher than the average home size per person in the city, however none of the tested reasons fully account for the discrepancy. We expect that the majority of future development in the Town, based on the Town's Comprehensive Plan, will be more similar to development in the City than it is to existing development in the Town so we have decided to apply City water consumption rates (that are more in line with regional and national datasets) to the expected future development in the Town. szo zap 60 50 4. 30 210 10 ������������� Residential Retail Office commulifity rrr 01 oioiu(12 im Q13 .<Q4 ig2.L .... ...2.9. Quarterly water e per J(..)Ot in the City Qf lthaca, 20.15 The water demand projections assume that the rate of use relative to building area will be constant, in reality, water usage demand is based more on per capita (per person) consumption than per foot usage. Water demand per foot may change in a number of scenarios; for example, we project that the number of households in the City and the Town are likely to increase with a decreasing household size leading to a higher demand for apartments instead of single-family homes. In such a scenario, if the water use per person remains the same, the water usage per foot would increase if the residential area per person decreased and vice versa. With that said, consumption per square foot of building at the municipal scale is not likely to change substantially and for the use as a simple baseline for scenario comparison this tradeoff is reasonable. Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ G Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 80 .5.2.1., Re identlaI Water E.)eor alnd This section presents the estimated water demand for residential buildings in the City and the Town of Ithaca. We multiplied the residential annual water use per foot use with the estimated residential building area for 2015, 2030, and 2050. arurc.G 577610 6069016, 600000 5391.8 , 500000 495195 52031.1 4000043 462251, 2I00C 11 1 2015, 2030 21150 Fig.u. r..e 3..4.1 2---1. Residential water derrand(in thousand gallons) We find that the residential water demand in the City and the Town is expected to increase linearly for the City and the Town between 2015 and 2050. .. .2.2 Non- Re identlaI Water E.)eor alnd ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... In this section, we present the estimated water demand for commercial buildings in the City and the Town of Ithaca. The water requirements for retail and office spaces are different. We calculated the annual water use per foot for retail and office spaces separately for 2015, 2030, and 2050 based on each uses average water consumption per square foot. 2691.48 250 000 20013esO ' .117,3 150000 1100000 50000 28400 31+612_ 3576 2 015 2030 21050 11 t:ty of tla;awa Town n Of I2%7,raaaa Ithaca Green Building Policy J[IZ.\ . Project Report (LZ. "/18) - Pg. 81 F������. Commercial water derrand(in thousand ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2015 2030 2050 City of Office 76SU 3621117 109449 thaca Retail 124101 135546 159699 Total 200983 221753 269148 Town of Offloe 16553 13M 21W ReWill UM7 12960 14201 Total 2UM 31M 357M Table 9. Commercial Water Demand by qft7oeand Retail use We find that the water demand for the City increases at a higher rate than the Town between 2015 and ZUSU. The water demand in both the City and the Town is driven largely by the increasing retail water demand. For the community services water demand projections, we multiplied the annual water use per foot for community services with its estimated building area for 2015, 2030, and 2050. 400000 oso364995 �� 303000 zsnmnn 200mGO 150000 162'440�m�O - 141365, 119872 somno 8 zms zoan aosn -4 -0vofthaca —m—Townofuhaca | FiqLLf 1.6��. Community Services water dennand(in thousand gaJo�� � ' We find that the water demand for community services buildings in the City increases ata higher rate than that ofthe Town. 4_6 Benchmarking and Data Limitations While there is adequate information to move forward with a Green Building Policy in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca now, to be most efficient such policy will require ongoing monitoring and evaluation | Ithaca Green Building Policy F| Z.\���V--P-ProjectReport 18) Pg. 82 with more complete data than is currently available. Data collection should be improved in the areas of building characteristics and individual building energy use benchmarking, particularly the latter, as it is a foundational element of energy management strateEy. ta-c�a'„eet;� t The City's FileMaker Pro building permitting system has capacity for inventorying basic building characteristic information, including siding materials, foundation, roof, heat type/ BTU, water heaters/ BTU, and electrical system but these values were generally missing in the data, indicating an opportunity area for establishing a protocol for filling in data gaps. The Town of Ithaca uses Municity, an advanced database for processing building permits that has significant capacity for monitoring the size and performance of new and existing buildings but that would require better record keeping and data input for all projects to be as useful as possible for the evaluation of green building related policies. The distributed nature of buildings in addition to perceived and real permitting costs and time requirements for developers make it an especially hard sector to regulate. However, robust and accurate data collection is critical to achieving optimal energy use in the City and Town. Without it, it is difficult to estimate the impact of a proposed green building policy and to assure that the incentives offered by the City and Town, respectively, lead to the optimized energy use and public benefits that are desired. 4.7 Projections in the Context of Local Plans To understand the range of variation between this report's projections for growth and other local long range estimates it is useful to compare the various published expectations. While none of the existing local plans fully describe buildout scenarios in the way that this report attempts to quantify, the context is helpful to understand. The City of Ithaca published Ithaca Planning Influences report9 in 2012 as part of their Comprehensive Plan process. The Planning Influences report references Cornell's Program on Applied Demographics (PAD) projections for Tompkins County. According to this source the population of Tompkins County was expected to grow very slowly from 2011-2020 and then to decrease by 0.8% and 2.3% by 2030 and 2050 respectively. The PAD projections predict the total population of Tompkins County to be 100,893 in 2030, and 98,606 in 2050.The Woods & Poole projections used our baseline expectations of buildings in Ithaca suggest that the population of the County would increase to approximately 112,000 in 2030, and to 118,000 by 2050. The reason for a difference in the projected population for the County are likely a difference in methodology, with Tompkins County's strong economic performance in recent years and the expected growth of major employers we believe planning for more development, rather than less, is the most prudent approach for the Green Building Policy. The Planning Influences Report informed the Comprehensive Plan, however, the Comprehensive Plan does not include any specific targets for 9 https:Lwww.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter/Home/View�170 Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINDdG Project Report (Yh39/18) - Pg. 83 construction, or expected development within any specified timeline. The Planning Influences Report also includes an analysis of infill building potential based on then existing zoning and an extremely conservative metric of assuming buildings would only be torn down for redevelopment if the land under the building was worth more than the improvements, however, with the average building in Ithaca being worth five or six times more than the land it sits on and the recent history of variances and zoning changes, in addition to the significant areas of character change called for in the City of Ithaca and Town of Ithaca comprehensive Plans, we believe that looking at demand for building either housing or space for expected business growth is a stronger predictor of future building expectations. future ����I Use dap w W' 7 3 I 4m w i Uri ^ s 44 r, Leaand .. Fwmru L CV SQ k�tMwFpGCwvdP -�YYM,Hwwde n W r G iK LL flM Poy;N.maN3 1,„:'j Lnrv:reg '�, �.M9 d 6?x L*u PW MM uM rw w.i G V Etl4wralar ✓' ,,� �'�VN'xn%^wI�MA'r urtA.4lwrn �!"ouvw Muw ,le„ IA:IHYMi NAirgml�4➢'N@ F +xnlwu'Y-'�*�rwMlww k 1 R.mmrvlu4p ---turtfi rbd wenT xw t M n Yl$ ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................� Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf IIINdG Project Report (Yh /18) - Pg. 84 The Town of Ithaca's comprehensive plan includes an appendix with some population growth calculations. The Town projected a 2030 population of 22,605, this reports methodology projectes a 2030 population of 21,697. The Town of Ithaca projected a 24% increase in housing units every 10 years with an expectation of 1,029 new housing units by 2030. While our projections are slightly smaller than the Town's internal projection, within the Town of Ithaca's Comprehensive Plan Appendix E Population and housing projections the analyst demonstrates that applying the methodology that they used for the 2030 projection to 2000 census numbers would result in an expected population of 17,972 in 2010 while the census actually found a population of 16,201. Town of Ithaca P r' Future land use/character I P Char.alwrClavi le..land usrer malegorlws. ion /��I J` PPM[w�IfCAVN/ 9 Mfr'R IMd NwgPolMlmbl xW $� P"ll Prmm M o&tkPRtlYd d NDMn9 7 �lqbg DpfmatlPP ��� utiUi!'dp+fM, VIIVIVIV�II mmmp a ax r�rro�� MINIM Pm%IeL'NttrWGMMPVnMp+ �,I)IH°W rm irw Y�CO0"'flYMA�CFF@CN n GI r f / � J „� I tihY�MulltltN rvPry 1 04.uh LWv.A^an.� iu �m9y f i l M MM I C;% i:... U ArowfleAYdMn"nWN RunvupMiwmV� .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................� �rr�.a�o�l�o�r�.ive Plan Future Land U_e a:�. ............................................................................................. ........................................................................ .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................... . According to the 2017 Tompkins County Housing Strategy, there is currently a desire for an additional 1- 200 subsidized senior apartments, 200 new rental units per year through 2025, 300 new single family homes in the $150k and up price range per year through 2025, 80 new condominiums per year, and an existing deficit of 1,400-1,500 purpose built student housing beds, and that does not include the demand for new luxury units. The Downtown Housing Strategy, prepared for the Downtown Ithaca Alliance in 2011, projects that over the next 5 years there is overall housing demand for up to 1,350 units in the Downtown area (consisting of up to 350 for-sale units and up to 1,000 rental units). This equates to an annual demand of as many as 70 for-sale units and 200 rental units per year. As per this report, it is estimated that there will be new 2000 jobs in Tompkins County by 2020, 5000 by 2030, and 10,000 new jobs in the County by 2050, an annual increase of just under 300. The Ithaca Planning Influences report of 2012, estimated a more aggressive 558 new jobs per year from 2012-2022. Ithaca Green Building PolicyJf 11"IN" "LDIG Project Report (Y„ h" 39/18) - Pg. 85 Discrepancies in the various long range projections available should be expected, there are no crystal balls and communities and economies are more complex than any mathematical model can hope to capture. Compared to the various long range plans available for the City, Town, and County,we believe this report's projections to be conservative in terms of not significantly over or under estimating the potential impacts of the proposed Green Building Policy. Conclusion 1Iluli^ro_Ir_r2JCa lr ._Irr2rLYrraro,gnts dllr�u��uAirr"uulruarvadloin o r�rrfrk r��ufrfoinr"ed to date arva^ro ��aalrl �uf Hhe IIdlluarvac arva ��IYu"�en Bu.uiilla�illr� „ �uulliia it ±a �Il��u �lilraall rlliia y irk u����"uirua�uirua as liauiru^ro are based rlr� Hhe d llu�lr �ull�fru"u�riru ^ro uul d lluli^ro re a rlr . m�1lh °roU IY�✓�1(a�� as C aa'0roex11"ro' IIIn UrII S IIIrfl sto < a lma d "�� �IY k �roC rlla r�°ti o �rAtuuIre a�r�l✓�?I�k��lr�")�IC�'� ��lY�kl✓Ila��a�a� ` �9U�sroiness as usuas I" ba"ase III Irae 1Iaaro °ro'd,",ud aa'I' m Y�?'�?'Ira �"a U.a a`� Ira.. °ro'd,",a�Q Ira a`�a�QYa`�°ro �Yaaa✓ a`���'a`� Ira°roll a'd," ra'd,",aa .has aro ra'd,",a�Q �?'C.�asIraas Iran C °roasC.� as --------------------------------------_____ ____.. ___________________ a alp)a"�_e-Ir)—v-i iror)lra_rlr�r)darvall iiia"a aa� ^roa�� a a�Illia ii�u^ro / ru�ll�ua^rod_IC uull�Illia uuuud irk aa� 11"u a lra�uu^ro^ro Irk^rouuirr a dlluaad °ro Ball<�ulluu�Ila uulr iiiruuuuu baa^ro �aau duur� a and iinca"rlr1.12 a�ad�au_iiir to Hhe Priiir�a�all ur�a�Ilii�� rua��iruraira"��indaari��irs. �IIr� iresu.ulldliuu , Ilrlluarvaa_arva Green !314iilla"�iir� __�a Ilii�uy _ Ilali� Ila ii^ro r lruuuuuu^rod a du�_ au �int u effect as soon as 1���^rosfill� e, and to ra�alra"rlu� auuu lrr day iru�ud ��ru�� Il�u.uiilla Ilr� ^ro_II� __�iD �D aalirar^ro dui ra aafllr�daafifru aa�Fuuua aall�iilllid airuaj Ilr fill�iilllid la r dllur aj�uu✓ rll r r rill"uiillur dirarvafrnarvrHcalllly r UUC'IIIr�r? C aalY rlrfl r Irr"aII°ro":roIlr Irr°:ro flroirn new c��klr�strU�IC��rIl�in. / ararlldllaalraaall aaaaalYll<�__a __ z° z ° _a___°_ __'-'___'________IC _ __ �__'___ _____'____II ro U.a a a a Q,ro Y�' 7�'a Q Y a." a;�Ir l a, ro d,",a Q�, a a".� a., �'r Y a".�U.a d,",Y�'a Q a a .7 Ir needed�'a.,�' a., d,",a".� �Y a".��,✓ a., �'r a;� ��,✓� a".�� a., �' ta�Q Ir,,, arouulLiia Il�rfru rar_a�ury---Ilea (.uuaje---Ilaaauu LgYa L2__farlY_alir�u� fru Il�uuiilla iiuu a uullliry dlha t Battu_Ilea_(-oiru^roliderrrau_fo arvaar a rli r� IIr y J.........._Jf _ _ ____ __ __ s-__ ___- _ ___________-_____ __________ d'd aa�Qaaa °7 r Ild �_aaa.alraa fl and �_akwin Board. lwlak�h9�?!✓e IIt Is Illrr �aklY1.ir��'dak °rodlY�roOro°ro'd aa�d d a� Ir���a, 'o C aalY� U.a v �'dlllr� uu aafruy fr ar^ro�ua Il�r a°;Ilan iiuuiru fra"auu^rod II�r Il�aallaafru�uuau urulidllu dllrr Irr�r�ra dui aa�d a uuii� 11<Il dui a-aa"ja11i ess�_Ihirnarvate �_Iluarvalr� 2 a rn Ld-s L as Il ou all_Il-u-uiilla---- � Ilrauauuu"u /� dllu�ufr LJP.11_r_IlLL wro -ft�_a�a"�lih aa-lioin and arvadoj.11f 2iru infrara�u^ro^ro u�iillll uriiu✓u dlluur �arr�fr� and_ aa'_r d,", d,",_aa'__II"�aro"ro'd,",_C_ aa�IraCQ-�°_oI' Ira1ea�''d,",II Ira IIaa2'IIY a�Ira1bIrd,",IIous_C_ Ira1a�d,"e akar °ro_a�_raa.�_"roa�'C_U.aY ra� �d,", aas as Ileaader II Ira cIIIIIrnaa'te aaa�'dllaalra. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y h /18) - Pg. 86 5 Glossary Biomass - "different types of organic material that can be processed and burned to produce energy.... Biomass is considered a renewable resource.... Biomass, however, is not necessarily a carbon-neutral resource. A determination of carbon neutrality requires an assessment of the particular conditions under which a type of biomass (e.g., feedstock) is gEown and consumed." EPA EnergyStar - an energy efficiency program of the U.S. EPA, including certification for energy products, like lighting and appliances, as well as whole-building energy ratings. EUI - Energy Use Index. A measure of the total energy used by a building in a year, per square foot of floor area. All energy uses (including electricity) are converted into units of kBtu/SF/year. Fossil fuels - Fuels derived from fossilized carbon-based sources. For green buildings, these are used primarily for heating. For buildings, fossil fuels most prominently include fuel oil, natural gas, and propane. GBCI - Green Business Certification Inc. is an American organization that provides third-party credentialing and verification for several rating systems relating to the built environment, including most prominently LEED. Heat pumps - An electrically-driven heating and cooling system, that most typically extracts heat from the outdoor air or from the ground in order to heat buildings. HERS - Home Energy Rating System. A scoring index for residential energy efficiency, developed and adminstered by RESNET. IECC- International Energy Conservation Code. LEED - Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design. A green building rating/certification system, developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) and administered by Green Business Certification Inc(GBCI). RESNET - Residential Energy Services Network. Developer and administrator of the HERS index residential energy rating system. Renewable energy - Energy that is produced from sources regarded as renewable, including most prominently solar photovoltaic systems, solar thermal systems (typically hot water), wind-generated electricity, and biomass for heating. Social Impact - "A significant, positive change that addresses a pressing social challenge. Having a social impact is the result of a deliberate set of activities with a goal around this definition." University of Michigan, Center for Social Impact, http://socialimpact.umich.edu/about/what-is-social-impact/ Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD.11 Project Report (Y hL /18) - Pg. 87 Stretch_Energy Code - An energy code recently developed by NYSERDA that can be used by local municipalities to reduce energy use below what is required by the New York State Energy Conservation Code. The 2015 Stretch Energy Code targets 10% lower energy use. A 2018 version is in development that targets 20% lower energy use. The stretch energy code has a set of mandatory requirements, separate core requirements, and a set of additional energy efficiency options from which one must be chosen. The core requirements are met through either "prescriptive" compliance (for example, additional insulation) or "performance" compliance (meeting specific performance goals on a whole- building basis). USGBC- U.S. Green Building Council. Developer of the LEED green building rating system. Ventless heat pump clothes dryer - A type of electric clothes dryer that efficiently removes heat from clothes by condensation, and so does not require a vent. WaterSense-A water conservation program of the U.S. EPA. WELL -A green building wellness certification system, developed and administered by the International Well Building Institute. Ithaca Green Building Policy Jf IIIN LD-11 Project Report (Y h /18) - Pg. 88 MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD Monday, May 8, 2018 TB Resolution 2018 - : Acknowledte receipt of 2018 Ethics Disclosure Forms and review of policy and list of people required to submit said form Whereas the Town Board has established and Ethics Board and requires annual submission of an Ethics Disclosure Form for certain elected and appointed town officials, and Whereas the Town Board has also set forth that the list of officials and the form itself should be reviewed annually, now therefore be it Resolved that the Town Board acknowledges the list of submitted Ethics Disclosure Forms, and wishes to make no changes to the form or the applicable list. Moved: Seconded: Vote: r it TOWN OF ITHACA ETHICS DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Form must be completed and filed with the Town Clerk by April 30th 41 yo For the Calendar Year YOUR NAME HOME ADDRESS(4, Street,Town) PLACE of USUAL EMPLOYMENT w/TITLE TOWN DEPARTMENT or BOARD POSITION Please do not leave any area blank. If there is nothing to list,please write"NONE"in the space provided If an error is made,please draw a single line through it and initial it. Answers must cover the 12-month period Prior to the date you file this form. Updated forms must be submitted within 30 days of any significant change in information. A. Real Estate Ownership: List the address of each piece of property that you or any member of your household own or have a significant financial interest in that is located in Tompkins County. Name I Relationship Property Address Nature of Property Example John,Smith Self 8 Main'St,Newfield Primary'Residence Jack Smith Father 122 East Share Dr;Lansing; Vacation House B. Outside Interests: 1. List the name of any partnership or unincorporated business(located or doing business in the State of New York)or unincorporated association(which does business with the Town of Ithaca)of which you or any member of your Household is a member,partner,officer,or employee,or has a significant proprietary interest in Name Business/Organization Nature&type of Nature of Affiliation Business or Organization (Position,Duties) Exani le,lohn Smith, Goldman Apt Complex Real Estate Corporation , 10% Ownership 2. List the name of any corporation organized for profit or organized not-for-profit(located or doing business in the State of New York)of which you or any member of your Household is an officer,director,employee,or who owns or controls, individually or in combination with you or other members of your Household, more than 10%of the outstanding stock. Name Business/Organization Nature&type of Affiliation Business/Organization (Position,Duties) Example John Smith - Coalition for Healthy ChildrenNon Profit Board Member Adopted 1/7/2013 Page 1 of 3 3. List the name of any municipality or organized not-for-profit located or doing business in the State of New York for whom you have provided contracted or paid services. (Other than for licensed professions and associated services covered under C.) Example Town ofAanadue Municipality Legal consultation/services' 4. List the nature of any self-employment from which you or a member of your Household has derived a gross income of $5,000.00 or more during the previous twelve months. (Omit reference to any not-for-profit entity that has no business dealings with the Town oflthaca.) Name Name Business/Organization Nature&Type of Affiliation Business/Organization (Position,Duties) Example Self Goldman's Produce Partnership—Traduce Farm Owner' C. Licensed Professions: If you practice law,are a NYS licensed real estate broker or agent,practice a profession licensed by the NYS Department of Education,or are involved in a corporation or business described in Subsection B above,please include a general description of the principal subject matters undertaken in the stated practice,including the nature of your clients' businesses. This disclosure shall not include the names of individual clients. Attorneys for the Town must obtain from the Town Clerk a list of corporations or businesses described in Subsection B. above with which the Town contracts for services and disclose to the Town Clerk those for which they also provide services. Your Profession Specialty Nature of Business Name of Employer or Business Description of Business Activities including Nature of Clients' Example Broker Perfect Planning Real Estate', Solicit listings of homes far sale and sale of home D. Interest in Contracts: Describe any interest you,your spouse,household partner,or your children under 18 years of age have in any contract involving the Town of Ithaca(excluding your current employment with the Town of Ithaca)*: Contractor Contract w/Town Nature of business with the Town Example Self ABC Gravel—Gravel Supplier` Supplies gravel materials to the Town E.Relatives Employed: Please list the name,relationship,department and position of any relative employed by the Town of Ithaca Name Relationship Position Held Example John Doe Uncle Secretary; F. Certification Iherehycertify, under penalty of perjury, that the information disclosed on this form is true and complete and that I have read section 32-4, titled "Gifts,"of the Town of Ithaca CODE OF ETHICS Signature Date Adopted 1/7/2013 Page 2 of 3 Definitions a. For purposes of this form, "household" shall include an official's or employee's spouse or equivalent member of a household sharing living expenses,and any of the following,if residing with the official or employee:child,stepchild, brother,sister,parent,dependent. b. For the purposes of this form,"relative"shall include a parent,step-parent,spouse,spouse equivalent,domestic partner, sibling,step-sibling,sibling's parent,siblings spouse,child,step-child,grandparent,parent of spouse or spouse equivalent or domestic partner;including in-laws and members of the household of a Town officer or employee,and individuals having any of these relationships to the spouse or spouse equivalent of the officer or employee. c. 1. Officials,employees,their spouse/equivalents,or any person or entity acting on their behalf may not solicit or accept monetary gifts or loans of any amount or promise thereof,or any gift,including services,entertainment,thing,or promise thereof,having a value of$75 or more,from any person or agent of a person,corporation,partnership, unincorporated association or other entity who the official or employee knows is considering or has had,within the previous 12 months,any business dealing with the Town of Ithaca that involves any discretionary act by the official or employee. 2. Refreshments or meals that are provided as part of an informational presentation in a group setting or as part of a reception shall not be considered gifts under this section. Ethics Disclosure Form Distribution List Town Board Members Planning Board Members Ethics Board Members Zoning Board of Appeals Members Highway Superintendent Town Clerk Town Engineer Town Justice(s) Receiver of Taxes Finance Officer Human Resources Manager Network/Records Specialist Director of Code Enforcement Director of Planning Attorneys for the Town Adopted 1/7/2013 Page 3 of 3 Bates Beach Bosak Brock Carrier-Titti Decker DePaolo Drake Fogarty Goodman Haefeli Hill Howe Hunter Jung Kelly King Klein Krogh Leary Levine Meier-Swain Moynihan-Scmidt Ritter Robinson-Collins Rosa Rosen Rubin Salk Siffrin Solvig Stewart Terpening Vignaux Weber Wilcox Town of Ithaca and ConsultEcon, Inc. Agreement for Services THIS AGREEMENT is made this 17th day of April, 2018 between the TOWN OF ITHACA with offices at 215 N. Tioga St., Ithaca, NY 14850 (hereinafter referred to as the "Town") and ConsultEcon, Inc. whose address is 545 Concord Avenue, Suite 210, Cambridge, MA 02138 (hereinafter referred to as the "Contractor'). The Town and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Services to be Performed. Contractor agrees to perform the following services for the Town and/or to provide the following products to the Town: The services specified in Attachment A, Scope of Services for Economic Development Feasibility Study and Strategic Plan. 2. Fees. The Contractor shall be paid $19,500 Dollars and 00 Cents ($) on a lump sum basis for services provided, including all travel, time and expenses associated with providing these services to the Town. This payment will be made in accordance with the procedures in Section 5 below. 3. Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall be from April 17, 2018 to December 31, 2019 unless earlier terminated by either party. Notwithstanding the term set forth above, this Agreement may be terminated by either party at any time without cause upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party, in which case the Contractor shall be paid pro rata for the satisfactory work performed to the date of termination. This Agreement may be terminated immediately by either party upon the breach of any of its terms by the other party. Termination shall be effected by the breaching party's receipt of a written notice of termination setting forth the manner in which the party is in default. In the event of the Town's termination for Contractor's default, the Contractor will be paid only for services performed in accordance with this Agreement. If it is later determined by the Town that the Contractor had an excusable reason for not performing, such as a strike, fire, flood, or other events which are not the fault of or are beyond the control of Contractor, the Town may allow the Contractor to continue work, or treat the termination as a termination without cause. 4. Quality of Work. The work to be performed hereunder shall be of good workmanship and quality. If this Agreement is for the performance of services, the Contractor shall perform its services using that degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised under similar conditions by experienced, qualified, competent and reputable professionals practicing in the same field in the same or similar locality at the time of performance. 5. Payment for Services. Requests for payments for services shall be submitted on the standard Town voucher, which will list the activities or products, expenses, the 1 dates on which performed, supplied or incurred, and, if applicable, the time spent on each indicated date for which the Town is being billed. Unless otherwise agreed, the vouchers shall be submitted monthly covering services for the preceding month. The vouchers shall be submitted to the Town on a percent complete basis and shall be based upon the percentage of work satisfactorily completed through the date indicated on the voucher. The Town Board will review same and, if acceptable, pay for the services and/or products after submission of the vouchers to the Town Board and approval of same by the Board in compliance with the Town Board's statutory duties to audit claims for payment. In no event will the total payments to Contractor exceed the lump sum stated in Section 2 above. 6. Relationship. The Contractor is, for all purposes (including, without limitation, withholding of income tax, payment of workman's compensation, and payment of FICA taxes) an independent contractor and no employer-employee relationship is intended, implied or created by this Agreement. Contractor shall determine the times and manner of performance of any services for the Town hereunder consistent with the overall obligations to complete the work contemplated by this Agreement. Contractor shall be free to devote such portions of its time not required for the performance of services to the Town in such manner as Contractor sees fit and for such other persons, firms, or entities as Contractor deems advisable, provided that such other services do not constitute a conflict of interest with the interests of the Town. 7. Ownership of Products of Service. A. All instruments of professional service prepared by Contractor and its subcontractors, including, but not limited to, drawings and specifications plans, in any medium including electronic data or files ("Design Materials"), are the property of Contractor. Contractor retains all rights, including the copyright in the Design Materials. Subject to payment by Town of all compensation and reimbursable expenses owed to Contractor, Contractor grants to Town a non-exclusive, fully paid-up, perpetual, irrevocable license to use and to reproduce the Design Materials for Town purposes. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to the completion of the services specified in section 1, the Contractor shall have no liability to Town or to anyone claiming through Town for any claims, liabilities, or damages resulting from the use, misuse, or modification of the Design Materials without Contractor's approval. B. Contractor reserves the right to include representations of the Design Materials in its promotional and professional materials. 8. Insurance Requirements. A. Throughout the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall procure and maintain the insurance described in this Section 8. B. Notwithstanding any terms, conditions or provisions in any other writing between the parties, Contractor hereby agrees to effectuate the naming of the Town as an unrestricted 2 additional insured on Contractor's insurance policies, with the exception of workers' compensation and professional liability. C. The policies naming the Town as an additional insured shall: • Be an insurance policy from an A.M. Best rated "secured" or better, New York State admitted insurer. • Contain a 30-day notice of cancellation, non-renewal or material change. • State that the Contractor's coverage shall be primary coverage for the Town, its Boards, officers, employees, agents and volunteers. • The Town shall be listed as an additional insured by using endorsement CG 2010 or broader. The certificate must state that this endorsement is being used. If another endorsement is used, a copy shall be included with the certificate of insurance. • Be written on an occurrence basis. D. The Contractor agrees to indemnify the Town for any applicable deductibles. E. Required Insurance: • Commercial General Liability Insurance $1,000,000 per occurrence/$2,000,000 general and products/completed operations aggregates. The general aggregate shall apply on a per-project basis. • Automobile Liability $1,000,000 combined single limit for owned, hired and borrowed and non-owned motor vehicles. • Workers' Compensation and N.Y.S. Disability Statutory Workers' Compensation, Employers' Liability and N.Y.S. Disability Benefits Insurance for all employees. • Excess Liability $1,000,000 per occurrence/$2,000,000 aggregate, with the Town named as the additional insured. • Professional Errors and Omissions Insurance $1,000,000 per occurrence/$1,000,000 aggregate for the professional acts of the Consultant performed under this Agreement. F. The insurance producer must indicate whether or not it is an agent for the companies providing the coverage. G. Contractor acknowledges that failure to obtain such insurance on behalf of the Town constitutes a material breach of contract and subjects it to liability for damages, indemnification and all other legal remedies available to the Town. The Contractor is to 3 provide the Town with a certificate of insurance, evidencing the above requirements have been met, prior to the commencement of work or use of facilities. The failure of the Town to object to the contents of the certificate or the absence of same shall not be deemed a waiver of any and all rights held by the Town. H. The Town is a member/owner of the NY Municipal Insurance Reciprocal (NYMIR). The Contractor further acknowledges that the procurement of such insurance as required herein is intended to benefit not only the Town but also the NYMIR, as the Town's insurer. 9. Workers Compensation and Disability Insurance. Upon execution of this Agreement, the Contractor shall present to the Town proof either that the Contractor provides the levels of workers' compensation and disability coverage required by the State of New York or that the Contractor is not required to provide such coverage. 10. Indemnity. The Consultant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Town, its elected officials, public officers, employees, and agents from and against all losses or claims, and costs incidental thereto (including costs of defense, settlement and reasonable attorney's fees) which any or all of them may incur, resulting from bodily injuries (or death) to any person, damage (including loss of use) to any property, other damages, or contamination of or adverse effects on the environment, caused by the negligent acts or omissions of Consultant or Consultant's employees, agents or subcontractors, with respect to this Agreement. To the extent the Town is negligent, Consultant's indemnification shall not extend to the proportion of loss attributable to the Town's negligence. To the extent permitted by law, the Town agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Consultant, its directors, officers, employees, and agents from and against all losses or claims, and costs incidental thereto (including costs of defense, settlement and reasonable attorney's fees) which any or all of them may incur, resulting from bodily injuries (or death) to any person, damage (including loss of use) to any property, other damages, or contamination of or adverse effects on the environment, caused by the negligent acts or omissions of the Town or the Town's elected officials, public officers, employees, agents or subcontractors, with respect to this Agreement. To the extent the Consultant is negligent, the Town's indemnification shall not extend to the proportion of loss attributable to the Consultant's negligence. 11. Contractor May Not Assign. This Agreement may not be assigned by the Contractor without the previous written consent to such assignment from the Town, which consent may be withheld entirely at the discretion of the Town, it being understood that the Town is making this Agreement personally with the Contractor and is not intending that it be performed by any other person or entity. The parties agree that Behan Planning and Design is a subcontractor to Contractor and may perform 4 some of the duties specified in Attachment A Scope of Services without the need for separate written consent by the Town. 12. Binding Nature of Agreement. This Agreement is binding upon the parties, their respective representatives and successors and, when assignment is permitted, assigns. 13. Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Enforcement. This Agreement is made in New York, and shall be construed under the laws of the State of New York without regard to, or the application of, New York State's choice of law provisions. Both parties consent that if any action is brought to enforce this Agreement, it shall be brought in an appropriate Court in Tompkins County, New York, and both parties consent to the jurisdiction of such court. 14. Notices. Any notices or other communications given under or in relation to this Agreement shall be deemed duly given if served personally or by commercial courier service upon the other party at the address set forth above, or, if the mails are operating, mailed by certified mail to the other party at the address set forth above, return receipt requested. All notices shall be effective upon the date of receipt. Either party may change the address to which notices are sent by giving notice of such change in the manner set forth above to the other party. 15. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes any and all prior written or oral agreements, negotiations or understandings, existing between the parties. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by each party. 16. Survival. The rights and obligations of the respective parties under Section 10 (Indemnity), Section 12 (Binding Nature of Agreement), Section 13 (Governing Law, Jurisdiction, and Enforcement), and Section 17 (Claims and Disputes Arbitration) shall survive the expiration or termination (for any reason) of this Agreement and remain in full force and effect. 17. Claims and Disputes Arbitration. The Town may elect to subject disputes arising out of this Agreement to resolution by mediation or arbitration or litigation. This election can be made at any time up until sixty (60) days after the claim or dispute arises in writing. If the Town does not make an election, the dispute shall be subject only to litigation. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties at the time of such election, the rules governing mediation or arbitration invoked by the Town shall be the Commercial Arbitration Rules and Mediation Procedures of the American Arbitration Association. Contractor hereby waives the right to elect the method of dispute resolution and agrees that this waiver is supported by sufficient and appropriate consideration. 18. Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is deemed to be invalid or inoperative for any reason, that part may be modified by the parties to the extent 5 necessary to make it valid and operative, or if it cannot be so modified, then it shall be deemed severed, and the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect as if this Agreement had been signed with the invalid portion so modified or eliminated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year written below. TOWN OF ITHACA CONTRACTOR By: By: William D. Goodman, Thomas J. Martin Town Supervisor President Date: Date- 6 Attachment A SCOPE OF SERVICES Zoning Code Development A. The Consultant will develop initial zoning language,tables, maps and graphics to address the recommendations described in the above-referenced report. The zoning code development will address: a. Permitted Uses. b. Setback,Area &Bulk Requirements. Balance development area and conservation lands. c. Design Guidelines. d. Road/ Street Standards. e. Sign Standards. B. The Consultant will present alternative approaches for amending the zoning district map including modification of existing district(s), new district(s) and/or overlay district. C. This work is intended to advance the work provided in the report to aid in decision- making and to provide technical background for grant applications and other town financing alternatives. The deliverables are not intended to be in a form or level of detail sufficient for adoption. D. The Consultant (and/or Subconsultant) will attend one in-person and three remote video meetings with the Client and will communicate with the Director of Planning via email/telephone as necessary to advance the project. 7 MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD Monday, May, 7 2018 TB Resolution 2018- : Request for Speed Limit Reduction on Mitchell Street Whereas, the Ithaca Town Board, on its own initiative, is requesting a reduction in the posted speed limit on Mitchell Street from 35 mph to 30 mph, and Whereas,new densely developed walkable neighborhoods within the town along Mitchell Street warrant reducing the speed limit to match the posted speed limit within the City of Ithaca portion of Mitchell Street, which is 30 mph, and Whereas, the 474-unit(872-bed) Maplewood Graduate Student Housing project located immediately west of the East Lawn Cemetery is currently under construction and a proposal for creating a new mixed use dense neighborhood in and around the East Hill Plaza area, including along Mitchell Street, is in the planning stage, and both will greatly increase the residential population of the area and bring significantly more activity and pedestrians utilization in and along Mitchell Street, therefore be it Resolved, that the Town Board requests Tompkins County to forward to New York State Department of Transportation Traffic Safety Division the Town's request to reduce the speed limit on Mitchell Street, between Pine Tree Road and the City of Ithaca municipal line, to 30 mph. Moved: Seconded: Vote: TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: TOWN BOARD MEMBERS FROM: MICHAEL SMITH, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: MAY 2, 2018 RE: AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION EASEMENT JOSEPH S MALLON & MARIA D MALLON 471 BOSTWICK ROAD/TAX PARCEL NO. 32.-2-2.2 The Town has recently received an application from Joseph & Maria Mallon to potentially participate in the Town's Agricultural Land Preservation Program. This program was set up by the Town in 1999 to preserve the Town's farmland resources by purchasing the development rights (PDR) on active agricultural lands. The Town purchases the development rights from willing sellers, and the landowner conveys to the Town of Ithaca an agricultural conservation easement. Through this program, the Town has acquired two agricultural conservation easements (Laughing Goat Fiber Farm and Indian Creek Farm). The Mallon's purchased the 51.72 +/-acre property at 471 Bostwick Road in 2003. There is currently a house on the property along with a couple garages/sheds. The property has approximately 390 feet of road frontage on Bostwick Road and is directly adjacent to the Town of Enfield municipal line. The house is served by a private well and septic system. This farm property has been in active agriculture for at least 100 years. A 1938 aerial shows the majority of the property as open active fields. The current owners are not farming the property themselves, but are leasing approximately 17 acres of the property to Forever Green Farms (http://www.forevergreensrus.com/index.php), a tree farm operation growing landscape quality conifer trees. Approximately 5.5 acres of land is also in field crops or inactive farmland and approximately 26.5 acres are woodland. There is a stream along the southern boundary of the property which under the Town's Stream Setback Law, has both a 35' and 50 ' buffer requirement for different sections. This southern area of the property is very steep and is part of the Calkins Road Glen Unique Natural Area (UNA-146). There is also a small pond on the property located to the southwest of the house. The property is currently zoned "Agriculture" and is designated as "Rural/Agricultural" on the Town's "Future Land Use/Character" map (2014). The property is also located in Tompkins County Agricultural District# 2 and is included on the Town's "Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements Target Areas" map (1999, updated 2006) as part of the Policies and Procedures Manual for this program. The soils on this property are very good for farming, with the majority of the soils being classified as "Farmland of Statewide Importance" (approximately 38.7 acres). Statewide important farmland is of particular state importance for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage and oilseed crops. Generally, these farmlands include those that are nearly prime and that produce high yields of crops when treated and managed according to modern farming methods. If conditions are favorable, some may produce as high yields as prime farmland. Below is a table showing the soils present on this parcel and attached is a short description of each soil type as it relates to agriculture. Full Soil Name Acres NY Importance Drainage Bath and Valois gravely silt loam (BgC) 21.5 Farmland of Statewide Well Drained Importance Howard and Palmyra soils(HpQ 6.5 - Well Drained Howard and Palmyra soils(HpF) 7.0 - Well Drained Howard-Valois gravelly foams(HrC) 15.7 Farmland of Statewide Well Drained Importance Langford channery silt loam (LaB) 1.5 Farmland of Statewide Moderately Well Importance Drained The Policies and Procedures Manual outlines the general process for applications to this program. Since the Town has not designated an "Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Committee" in many years, the Planning Committee has most recently been handling any items related to the PDR program. The Planning Committee met on April 19, 2018 to discuss this application and made a recommendation to the Town Board that this parcel warrants further consideration and that a formal appraisal of the property should be authorized. Planning staff has contacted a local appraiser that has prepared this type of agricultural conservation easement appraisal for the Town in the past. North East Appraisals & Management Co. Inc. has provided a proposal (attached) with a cost estimate of$3,750 and the appraisal report to be completed within 45 days. If the Board decides to have an appraisal completed for 471 Bostwick Road, a draft resolution is attached for consideration. There are several maps attached which show the general location of the property, a 2015 aerial image, streams and topography, soil types, and Unique Natural Area. Also attached is a copy of the application provided by the owners. Please let me know if you have any questions prior to the meeting. rah east o appraisals &M4NAGEMEnix CO3W April 16, 2018 Mr. Michael Smith Senior Planner, Town of Ithaca 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 RE: Proposal for the Preparation of an Appraisal— Mallon Property Conservation Easement Dear Mike: I am writing in response to your email of April 9, 2018, requesting a proposal for the preparation of an appraisal for the Mallon property including 51.72 acres of agricultural/recreational land improved with a residence and agricultural buildings on Bostwick Road further identified as Town of IthacaTax Parcel #32.-2-2.2. Type qf'Reporl— I will prepare an appraisal report in accordance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice as well as the reporting requirements and guidelines of the New York State Department of Agriculture& Markets. Objective and Inter dad —The objective of this,appraisal is to estimate the difference between the before value of the property unrestricted and the after value of the property subject to the terms of the conservation easement. The difference between the before and after value is a measure of the value of the rights to be conveyed by the conservation easement. 'rhis report will be prepared for the use of the Town of Ithaca. Alelhodo(o� ,u—The Sales Comparison Approach will be relied upon to estimate the value of the subject property both before and after the consideration of the conservation easement, The Sales Comparison Approach is the most reliable valuation technique for agricultural properties, particularly the valuation of land. Project WorkAsAignment— 1 will be personally responsible for all data collection,analysis and report: preparation necessary for this assignment, Fee Projwsal— To prepare a comprehensive appraisal report my fee would be $3,750. Time Required,'Ibr Cony)letion,—The work on this assignment will commence within 2, weeks ofbeim g authorized to proceed. The appraisal report will be completed within a 45 day tirrieframe, PO Box 48105 Ithaca, NY 14852-48W5 (607) 272-9500 nea95OO@earthlink,.net Page 2 Mr. Michael Smith April 16, ?01'8 1 greatly appreciate being considered for this assignment and the opportunity to submit this, proposal. I hope it receives your favorable consideration and I look forward to the opportunity of working with you again. Very truly yours, NORTH EASTAPP�MISALS& MANAGEMENTCO, INC. kenne b V. Gardner 11 President KVG/vcg notth east appraisals S MAN4GEmEmr co mic REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD Monday, May 7, 2018 TB Resolution No. 2018 - Authorization for Town Staff to Proceed with Contracting for Appraisal Services for Potential Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easement at 471 Bostwick Road Whereas, the owners of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 32.-2-2.2 (471 Bostwick Road)have expressed interest in the potential sale of the development rights to their property through the purchase of an agricultural conservation easement by the Town of Ithaca; and Whereas, on April 19, 2018 the Town's Planning Committee has reviewed the application and property details and has recommended that an appraisal be completed for the property; and Whereas, the Planning Department has solicited a proposal from a qualified appraiser to provide professional appraisal services to determine the potential market value of the agricultural conservation easement on the property at 471 Bostwick Road; and Whereas, the Planning Department has received a proposal from North East Appraisals & Management Co. Inc. that meets or exceeds the criteria for evaluating said proposals, with a total cost of$3,750; now, therefore, be it Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca authorizes the hiring of North East Appraisals & Managements Co. Inc. to prepare the appraisal for the property at 471 Bostwick Road(Tax Parcel No. 32.-2-2.2)which the Town ofIthaca may purchase an agriculture conservation easement on, at a cost not to exceed$3,750, to be allocated from the Open Space Plan Account. Moved: Seconded: Vote: f 1 �4gricultural Pu Town of Ith�a �� pments Rig ��, ui�il ww�iu f� ahi �i I i i I i ' l 'a d d / f r f �J:, g chase of Development Rights ricultural ,Purrr// r ��� J Town of Ithaca Uiif y /�/j O////DO/, a✓„i N� 1' /` //� � �, IPI�/�'fI i� �lol��� "Illi uo. r /oi � r / / y i rr 1 a Agricult�ura1, rchase�of�Development Rights ......, .....:xw . ' Town'of Ithaca treams & 2' Contours ;..: p.......... (4 .. o YOGI C 6�... �" x u ........ x.. n.a.0 "rxx......,"w°x......mw'" x"w""wpM""'•mmmaa � �wwww .... ...�w✓�" $°u .�................. ..... .°. . .... ,..... " AMM...........^.....x' �.. WDM ..°......xx..xx.x....°"... r w„ ....^ 1202 �°' .x.. .. a ” "" �wC ......... xx.....°..rv.m"...m &N 'AW w. . "w''r,.•° µ„..ms""....._..°. .....x x.... wwwx„»"^.••µ^"� xx" "'^�,a,„'"^„„,� .�„��°•;' wkµ ► �.xa `• ;"roux,�^~u���rss��......x�,..,x.. ..,�, w:ud ... •". p ... aa,;; arce d..... •"a.gy..a�a..x .m....�d ................. .. ,u"W. .w..wWw"^ wx""1n,^a y"....„yW bM.... W ✓ "".�•^.`^~.,x"""+a""a».,a"'ax� �^a W"'*u ^v®w "'^aw.M^ �0,'Q" X d ,.. ”" "......... . �.”w.°.�±:.'*a�x�'�''�''�,,����''a„��,'4°"^m'�” wu, �h�rw'+...^.°..„.x..M.w”' W” "'W,WW"" ...... m"".�"�•�^ .a°' a.:M ,®....T" „uawro" rr"r•"�I�n"' °.. ..�.W""W',.�"•'::::::::::::.°",r....,,,. �� a`bra' 'W'V,'�'W��rrgxip"Mw.......".rro"'�w'....�r ✓'""^+xu"°':::.................x...x...w.... q+''•p•,.pn. pp/^ .,x,'�'�'W � x�,^,�"w ai!!...:..�. xx.x.. a„� n.0 W""'ru,�^'ram..x. "'^'**m.^::�::�:•::::::::�"a�h...+ �pk + '" Ww„,"" 'y ”"�'�...."rte„"✓-":„;v;�„ w,� �^ ,x"„ I!IIII•�o�i .. 'W::wwar:::•....n.•'h °W ...�" "•a '"TM*w,✓^x.. 'W" g 4p p.s+e �. ��• `�„" ^�:�.�°.. ,�'�,�^ ,x,ww..^...°.°...°"..^ WWW„°row.,,, � `""„� "."^^"� ....,� �.... :: WW .....�•Mw .....:�..M::��",,`'.:.'�".��„�"�„.m .y ��'^.„:.',.^'•,„.a,�", r ""wW„w„�„ �.,,�'L�la;„"N �;„'Y,'^,'.ry,Y.:.t";,,",'. � "' W��,�" „�','�I.II�II"'.. W.�.WW°wxx,.x_wx.....x..•.^..",�"w�wrva�„„" *,�WWrw„ .° .°.” axxx...� �...."m"µ114 xx„......; r ..."..�.&..,�„.,.° `. ° ........."6... W, a vu G., '�Wa...,�W,, `�$ aa„w"^w„•a k° v. "'�x....x.a IK w.u” r Waw w" px""xp„.�w*.»..:�:� ,.x„ ° rw" 're”" �luv�Y4.'�:� „x"...m^'"•• ha�"WW W awa „w ��.... "•q .. ... "wa•' q '..m'..w^,'�yg'�n... ;�„ ..�w 'W" "u..»..dWa,x �p �..m.... ..P �a^ � a„ � " w M ...;•;.�.�..`..,'„ �Wwa�"'*�,'����;r ,�.d,,n d.^ �,,,o ° „~~ ;M���µ,r"�”°"v � � ?j ...."""a "W,.Ma "�^, ,�° "^`'"";�a°„ "^:.`�"'a".. .�....�", �°" ""W�.....✓ No' �"�•?"���.. � �.0�° �"m�,"W�^ ^,...., rem• ,u;�r "o.u. a-�,��""�v' „�""�,„„ ��".......... �„"" '"^• `","row', '"'°w`'„,� ."1..„' � ,� .......... W"a•�-wx....w, ""a w,W'wW °•:.;i '::a 4E:a „aw,W„,,, ”;„„...:.a.. w",„,.a°""� x ,� aaro� ::•;� ,„... ...m""'" k,'w�W„W'.�W �• '^ 9 !h'I;�c:�::::^"..d�Aj':'�n�,. w ,�..Wu,�y+� ax„,w.",",...;"'w""^au W,.... .. wm.x•yq� \u„�W ,„Wt,„w.x ��� .�u �"„uuwly W�. u'. a�' w ...x.u..`""�"�:::'�:.`�x. j+�""W a. ^...am" Cdt �' � � �4gricultural Purchase�ofbevelopment�Rights '' ����� (� uw�r�mi � i�" i�um�mm�l��IW' a � illruiulrl�Nilll�up � t �� Town��of�lthaca'� ,,� � Uni ue Natural�i4rea � ,� q ����� Bostwick�Rd t �^ �� a. �j� Illlll��llu IIIIIIIIIIII i iu i r 6� i iF%.,�.�.� �.,.. � �i�;......Y i rir , , �"✓��%��1�tai. l i i fik! i Mi (ldRrf(d(�i ' ��� r J r l f L; p��l�l �'iV I ', �� ri '° ;r y„ i ,s it i �I "�� ��lW^Pr'9� � �� �°i� I i If; I �i 0 I� i i �, � ����� ? r � o,;r� fm��� 1 I I i(�, "�y I�Oi i � I r,, Y <; �� �,� � � ���� � I�I �' u i �� ��G !�i � Yi �� �)�li f` f�7; 1, ,;� i 1 u �i �r � J �; i, i,� i�� t � i. �� i, i- yh i ��� r� ����i 21 ��Y �� //// �� � i ii � �. �� �� ;o J//%/ � 1 ,���ji���„ �� 3 �3 i � �� ��� � ,� li i illliY ,, , � �, ,/'�i�, ,%i � y h yy � ��it � i � it � r � ��/ , C� {�y 1 �i �, �'l'%/,%i�� / i ��% �V r ✓�"�/� //i/�� �/ �, / / i/� �y %/viii/�%�j�/�/i�/����� /iii /„ �, /J �rl�� M9ur, I{p ,, i �Vii // lii i✓i/,i �// / ,� //ii �j� %,f�f /�j/ ,r%/ „/,,�� ��"' J�� "� :m- m em m m •.e s m 1 � ,�. a ,m mm mm mm Vim:,, A► ricultural Purchase of Develo ment�Ri hts g TonnW��no,.�,t..��arc�n�ou�wBHnn� p g _ f I haca y��ooaoop0000, 'So i Is Bostwick Rd i II �� I � i I Howard and Palmyra soils (HpE) Ism � c � w `= H Howard and Palmyra soils (HpF) 0 50 0 200 300 Joseph & Maria Mallon—471 Bostwick Road Summarized Soil Descriptions Bath and Valois gravely silt loam (BgQ—5 to 15 percent slopes Farmland of Statewide Importance These soils occupy either moderate uniform slopes or the complex slopes of small knolls. These soils are suited to most crops commonly grown in the county, to pasture, or to forest. These soils have moderate limitations as cropland. Their slope causes moderately rapid runoff and loss of water that crops need in midsummer. Slopes also creates a moderate erosion problem. Adjustment of crop rotation or simple practices are needed to control runoff. Howard and Palmyra soils (HpE)—25 to 35 percent slopes These soils are so steep that the use of power machinery is extremely difficult or impossible. Slope dominates the use capabilities of these soils. The areas can be used for pasture, but most are best used for forest. As pasture, they are relatively unproductive unless they can be limed and fertilized. Applying lime and fertilizer is almost impossible on such slopes, since to be most effective the applications should be made in conjunction with plowing. Howard and Palmyra soils (HpF)—35 to 60 percent slopes This mapping unit consists of very steep areas of Howard and Palmyra soils. The variations result from the mixing of the soils by mass creep downslope when the material is wet, especially when the subsoil is frozen. Accelerated erosion has been slight, because most areas are forested. These soils are suited mainly to forestry, recreation, and wildlife. Howard-Valois gravelly loams (HrQ—5 to 15 percent slopes Farmland of Statewide Importance This unit lies in positions on the sides of valleys or across the uplands where the ice front stood for extended periods. This unit can be used for crops, pasture, or forest. Most of it is better suited to forage crops than to intertilled crops or small grains. Liming is required for even moderate yields. The slopes are strong enough to make the use of machinery moderately difficult and to create a moderate hazard of erosion. If soil is to be conserved, it must be kept in sod-forming crops a large part of the time, or structures and contour practices must be used to control runoff. Langford channery silt loam (LaB)—2 to 8 percent slopes Farmland of Statewide Importance This soil commonly occurs as very slight knolls, or on intervening small, gently sloping areas, in a landscape that slopes gently in one direction. This soil is suitable for crops, pasture, or forest. It is among the better soils of the uplands for crops, even though slightly limited by wetness. This soil has moderate limitations for cropping and needs special management practices (tiling, striperopping, fertilization, liming). Taken from 1965 Tompkins County Soil Survey APPENDIX A TOWN OF ITHACA AGRICULTURAL EASEMENT APPLICATION FORM GENERAL INFORMATION: Name(s): Maria Mallon Address: 471 Bostwick Road, Ithaca NY 14850 Street City State Zip Telephone: (607) 279-0394 Best time to contact: ODen Work Telephone: ( 1 N/A- Best time to contact: N/A Home Address if Different: N A Street City State Zip Total acreage of farmland tract: 51.5 +./- Town Tax Map Parcel Number(s): 32.-2-2.2 Do you own and farm this tract?Yes X No If not,name of tenant fanner: _ N/A Relationship to applicant of tenant fanner, if any: N/A What year was the property first purchased by a family member?.„......,,,.„2003 Are there any utility right-of-ways or easements through this property that you are aware of? Yes If so, what are they? Electric ower line easement, drivewa easement to Tax Parcel 32.-2-2.3 Total acreage offered for easement purchase: 50.0+/- (Please subtract out any exclusion) Reason for exclusion: CIUde a rox. 1 acre around homefarmstead lus area of driveway easement to Tax Parcel 32.-2-2.3 Are you interested in the possibility of donating all or a portion of your conservation easement? Yes No No Possibly, I would like more information Deed Refcrence(s): Book 2510 Page 6313 ; Book Page ; Book Page ; Book Page : Book Page : Book Page Is parcel enrolled in the Tompkins County Agricultural District program?Yes X No Are you aware of any land in your immediate area with an agricultural or other type of perpetual conservation easement? If so, please describe: __ Nelsons Eddy farm Tax Parcel 32.1-18.2 SOIL CONSERVATION PLAN INFORMATION: The applicant is required to request a review of their conservation plan by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. Enclosed with this application are the instructions to request such a review. The NRCS/TCSWCD Acknowledgment Form must be included with this application to deem it complete. FARM DESCRIPTION Please briefly describe your farming operation, Please include any other rented land,etc. This is to give the Town the "overall"picture of your total operation. (Continue on back if needed.) Tree farm operation with approximately_ 17.acres_planted to landscape quality conifer trees under land lease with Forever Green Farms; approx. 5.5 acres in field crops or inactive farmland; approx. 26.5 acres in woodland. The farm is located within an Agricultural Easement Target Area as shown on Map 8 of the Town Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan. Approx. 70% of the property is classes as Farmland of Statewide Importance according to the USDA Web Soils Survey. (map attached) The approx. 26.5 acres of woodland provide important habitat and cover the steep slopes and rock outcrops of a deep ravine. Please complete the following table showing the land use of the farmland tract offered for easement purchase as a part of this application. Cropland or Orchard Pasture "Other" Land Wooded Excluded Total 22.5 ac, plus 0 ac, plus2.5 ac, plus.....,.,26�5............................ac. minus 1.5 ac. 50.0 +�- Please specify what you have categorized as"other land"(land occupied with home site,buildings,ponds, wetlands,etc.): Home with a rox. 1 ac. of lawn; rest in arden, meadow and and "Excluded" land is land which is not being offered for an casement conveyance. Your"Total"amount should equal the total acreage offered for easement purchase, APPRAISAL AND PURCHASE STATEMENT: Applicants,selected by the Town Board in a competitive evaluation among all applications, will be offered an appraisal to determine the development and agriculture values of the property. Those applicants who accept the appraisal offer will be required to complete an appraisal request form. Applicants may accept or reject the Town's appraisal. If rejected,applicants may order another appraisal from a qualified appraiser at their own expense. The Town Board may offer less,but no more,than the appraised value of the property; or the Board may decide not to make an offer after an appraisal has been completed. Applicants reserve the right to accept or reject the offer by the Town. SIGNATURES: It is necessary for ALL owners of the farmland tract to give their approval and consent to this application. Uwe have read and understand the"Appraisal and Purchase Statement"and to the best of my/our knowledge, the information submitted in this application is true and correct. Signed: ; Date: . ,. k, Date; Date: Date: Date: Acquisition of Agricultural Conservation Easement Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.32.-2-2.2 The candidate parcel is a farm tract approximately 51.5 acres in area and located off Bostwick Road in the southwestern corner of the Town of Ithaca. Today it is primarily a tree farm operation with approximately 17 acres planted to landscape quality conifer trees under land lease with Forever Green Farms. Approximately 5.5 acres of land is in field crops or inactive farmland, and approximately 26.5 acres, primarily steeper areas within a major ravine on the southerly boundary of the tract, are woodland. The farm is located within an Agricultural Easement Target Area as shown on Map 8 of the Town Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan. It is adjacent to the Nelson Eddy Farm on the opposite side of Bostwick Road, a portion of which is protected by an agricultural conservation easement held by the Natural Resource Conservation Service. r i �q r �y i 7 • y n�, r Location aerial image. (source:https://orthos.dhses.ny.gov/) 1. The farm has been in active agriculture for at least 100 years and probably longer. Although much of the acreage is no longer being used for field crops, it is a productive tree farm that has capacity to expand. The land has a southerly exposure that is also ideally suited to small scale vegetable crop production and greenhouses.The area north of the house consists of successional growth that has potential for use as woodland pasturage. The approx. 26.5 acres of woodland provide important habitat and cover the steep slopes and rock outcrops of a deep ravine. 41, r � I IIIIIIA� /o N i 2 1 / J rlrr it l r Aerial image from 1938 showing candidate parcel. (Photo courtesy Cornell University Library) Some 70%of the soils that cover the property are classed as Farmland of Statewide Importance according to the USDA Web Soils Survey. (see map below) The Bath&Valois and Howard-Valois soils that cover much of the property represent high quality agricultural soils that do not meet all the criteria for Prime Farmland or Prime Farmland if Drained,generally because of their slope 2 3XI10 3001 2210 3"m 3FIED 3= I< t x rtq,SCHIMt.,usorataeeoaa (B.sxu-J� � � It o or ,m an ser a 3D AM am MW Io.. Mbn Morar 4neruoaalNe V"m rdPk3ztlMtare79tsa581 tMM Conservation 5CFai flaturall Resources Service National Cooperative Sad Surmy Papp t a14 Farmland Classlficalfon—Summary by Map Unit—Tompkins County,New York(NY109} Map unh symbol Map unk name Ratfny Auras In AOI Paroentof AOI Doc � .�. Salb andVok7a9 doffs,5 ranm4armB of stal4fmde ..__..22,5 405% to 15 percent s�pea ptYYp oOzanoe FPprl!F How aml�apam.1 IPafmryn X o prnme farmland A 1 128% =Is,R..5 to 35 Iproment MO ... ................_. .........�..�... .....�......................_..............._...._.......................... I;pF I^lernarard and i�akr�mfrm Not pnme frank.nd til...1 10.3 sorts,35 to 60 pau„roena Mopes ........_......_............._._________.,. .. .._.,_.....,..._..._.._..�,�..... _..._...... .........._�... .._...._.._._._...._... .. Hlr ... How.r d-Valom graraeffyp IF.,wmEnrW of sflateravade 151 273% W,ins,w¢o'tis p orcin pmmpzonsanme Aaapes 11 .... ........................._.. ........... .. .. .,.--.................................................... xk Lar ord�chanr o u &M F avmmlmnvulf of swevwade 4 I T P1 M ham,1 tog percent Rmpvonince slopYes Totals for Area of Interest 5&' 100.0 3 MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD Monday, May 07, 2018 TB Resolution 2018 - : Adopt Consent Agenda Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the following Consent Agenda items: a. Approval of Town Board minutes b. Approval of Town of Ithaca Abstract c. Approval of Bolton Point Abstract d. Ratify Highway Superintendent's provisional appointment of Parks Maintenance Manager e. Establishment of New York State and Local Retirement Systems Standard Work Day f. Appoint Conservation Board Member Moved: Seconded: Vote: ayes: TB Resolution 2018 - a: Approval of Minutes of April 23, 2018 Whereas, the draft Minutes of the April 23, 2018 meeting of the Town Board have been submitted for review and approval, now therefore be it Resolved, that the Town Board hereby approves the submitted minutes as the final minutes of the meeting April 23, 2018 of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca. TB Resolution 2018 - a: Town of Ithaca Abstract Whereas the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for approval of payment; and Whereas the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now therefore be it Resolved that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in total for the amounts indicated. VOUCHER NOS. 569 - 635 General Fund Townwide 83,153.41 General Fund Part-Town 5,333.64 Highway Fund Town Wide DA 2,285.66 Highway Fund Part Town DB 24,387.19 Water Fund 9,790.83 Sewer Fund 10,262.78 1 Ellis Hollow Water Tank—H10 403.92 Fire Protection Fund 45,591.39 Forest Home Lighting District 174.43 Glenside Lighting District 66.18 Renwick Heights Lighting District 75.68 Eastwood Commons Lighting District 168.39 Clover Lane Lighting District 19.54 Winner's Circle Lighting District 65.41 Burleigh Drive Lighting District 66.39 West Haven Road Lighting District 200.85 Coddington Road Lighting District 119.76 Trust and Agency 3,423.01 TOTAL 185,588.46 TB Resolution 2018 — d: Ratification of Highway Superintendent's Provisional Appointment of Parks Maintenance Manager Whereas, there will be a vacancy in the full time position of Parks Maintenance Manager for the Public Works Department, due to the retirement of Richard Schoch in November 2018; and Whereas, the 2018 budget included appointing a successor to shadow Rich Schoch for six months prior to his retirement; and Whereas, the Interview Committee interviewed ten candidates from an open competitive recruitment; and Whereas, the Committee has determined that Joseph Talbut possesses the necessary knowledge and skills to satisfactorily perform the duties of Parks Maintenance Manager; and Whereas, this would be a provisional appointment that requires the appointee to be one of the top three reachable candidates from the next civil service exam for the said position; and Whereas, Jim Weber, Highway Superintendent/Director of Public Works,provisionally appointed Joseph Talbut as Parks Maintenance Manager, effective May 21, 2018; now, therefore be it Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby ratify the provisional appointment made by the Highway Superintendent/Director of Public Works, of Joseph Talbut as Parks Maintenance Manager, effective May 21, 2018; and be it further Resolved, this position is at 40 hours a week, at the hourly wage of$33.84, which is an estimated annual salary of$70,387 from account A7110.100, in Job Classification "VI", with full time benefits; and be it further 2 Resolved, the said appointment is a provisional appointment pending the results from the next civil service exam for this position. TB Resolution 2018 —e: Establishment of NY State and Local Retirement Systems Standard Work Day Whereas New York State and Local Retirement Systems requires municipalities to set a standard work day to report all employees participating in the New York Retirement System; and Whereas the Town last updated the list to the retirement system was in April 2016; now, therefore, be it Resolved the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, location code 30222, does hereby set the following standard work day for the following classifications as required by the NY State and Local Employees' Retirement System for the Town of Ithaca based on a time keeping system or records of activity maintained and submitted by these members: Five days a week, six hours a day: Town Supervisor Members of Planning Board Councilperson Members of Zoning Board of Appeals Justices Crossing Guards. 7.5 hours per day, 5 days a week 8 hours per day, 5 days a week Network/Records Specialist Highway Superintendent Senior Planner Director of Planning Environmental Planner Director of Code Enforcement Planner Finance Manager First Deputy Town Clerk Town Clerk Principal Account Clerk Typist Human Resources Manager Bookkeeper to the Supervisor Senior Civil Engineer Court Clerk Civil Engineer Secretary Senior Engineering Technician Senior Account Clerk Typist En ineering Technician I Deputy Town Clerk Deputy Highway Superintendent Senior Typist Parks Maintenance Manager Keyboard Specialist Water/Sewer Maintenance Supervisor Typist Working Supervisor Account Clerk Typist Senior Heavy Equipment Mechanic Administrative Assistant I(TH) Heavy Equipment Mechanic Administrative Assistant II(TH) Heavy Equipment Operator Administrative Assistant III(TH) Maintenance Worker Administrative Assistant IV (TH) Motor Equipment Operator Project Assistant Automotive Mechanic Assistant Planning Intern Laborer 3 Information Aide(TH) Sr. Code Enforcement Officer Code Enforcement Officer Electrical/ Code Enforcement Officer Keyboard Specialist (PWF) Account Clerk Typist (PWF) Administrative Assistant I(PWF) Administrative Assistant II(PWF) Administrative Assistant III(PWF) Administrative Assistant IV (PWF) Resolved, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby set the following standard work day for the following classifications as required by the NY State and Local Retirement System for Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission: Five days a week, eight hours a day: General Manager Finance Manager Assistant Production Manager Production Manager Assistant Distribution Manager Distribution Manager Water Treatment Plant Operator Assistant Water Treatment Plant Operator Instruments/Control Mechanic/Operator Water Maintenance Specialist Distribution Operator Assistant Distribution Operator GIS/IT Specialist Principal Account Clerk Typist Senior Account Clerk Typist Account Clerk Typist Administrative Assistant I, II, III and IV TB Resolution 2018 - f: Appointment of Conservation Board Member Be it Resolved, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby appoints the following individual to the Conservation Board to fill a vacant seat, the term ending December 31, 2019: Hannah George 108 Maplewood Drive, Ithaca, NY 14850 4