Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPackets - Council Packets (878) AGENDA ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL STUDY SESSION JULY 25, 2007 ORO VALLEY TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 N. LA CANADA DRIVE STUDY SESSION - AT OR AFTER 5:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL NARANJA TOWN SITE - DISCUSSION OF GENERAL OBLIGATION �' BOND ELECTION PROCESS Design)n DISCUSSION LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental D g ) 2. ADJOURNMENT POSTED: 7/18/07 4:00 P.M. cp with Disabilities Act (ADA). The Town of Oro Valley complies withIf anyperson the Americans , e notifythe Town Clerk's Office at anytype with a disability needs of accommodation, pleas (520)229-4700. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION STUDY SESSION DATE: July 25, 2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCIL FROM: Stacey Lemos, Finance Director SUBJECT: Naranja Town Site Election Considerations — General Bond Election Overview BACKGROUND: At the June 27, 2007 Council study session regarding the Naranja Town Site public outreach and education effort, the Mayor and Council directed staff to invite bond counsel and our financial advisor, Mark Reader, to this study session to provide a general bond election overview in preparation for calling a November, 2008 election requesting voter approval to construct the Naranja Town Site and authorizing a secondary property tax to pay for construction. Part of the discussion will also focus on the possibility of a May election to request voter approval for a primary property tax to fund the operations and maintenance (O&M) costs if it is decided that the park components will be built all at once, rather than phased in over a longer time period. This evening, Keith Hoskins, bond counsel with the law firm of Gust Rosenfeld, and Mark Reader and Josh Ormiston, the Town's financial advisors with the firm of Stone and Youngberg, willp resent information on the following topics: • The considerations relating to structuring the ballot question as a single question or multiple questions and discuss sample ballot language for each • Required legal ballot language and truth in bonding requirements • What Town staff and Council Members can and can't do in educating the public about the election issue • Timing and strategy for holding a May primary property tax election for O&M funding • Briefly review property tax implications of constructing all at once or taking a phased approach Both Mr. Hoskins and Mr. Reader have had extensive experience and involvement in many successful bond elections authorizing the construction and funding of many similar recreational facilities around the State. SUMMARY OF PROJECT COSTS: The following tables summarize the estimated project costs and O&M costs by component as they were presented to Council on February 28, 2007: G:\STACEY\Council Communic\NTSLocalBonding7-25-07.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 2 OF 4 Project Costs: Park Components Estimated Total Cost Earthwork & Infrastructure $ 20,563,474 Outdoor Recreation, Playfields, Courts, Support & Parking $ 24,543,489 Community Center& Parking $ 68,842,149 Aquatics Center $ 6,876,873 Music Pavilion I & Parking $ 12,372,410 Music Pavilion II $ 17,302,979 Total Facility $150,501,374 A more detailed breakdown of these various component totals are included in Exhibits B through E attached to this communication. The following table summarizes very preliminary annual 0 & M costs and potential user fee revenue associated with each component as provided to the Town by cost consultant, Ken Ballard of Ballard King and Associates: O & M Costs: Component Estimated Expenses Estimated Revenues Remaining Difference Outdoor Recreation & Open Space (Playfields, Courts) $ 1,700,000 $ 500,000 $ 1,200,000 Community Center $ 1,800,000 $ 1,300,000 $ 500,000 Aquatics Center $ 700,000 $ 600,000 $ 100,000 Performing Arts/Music Pavilion $ 1,400,000 $ 700,000 $ 700,000 Total Facility $ 5,600,000 $ 3,100,000 $ 2,500,000 G:\STACEY\Council Communic\NTSLocalBonding7-25-07.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 3 OF 4 FUNDING SCENARIOS: As discussed at the February 28th study session on the funding strategy for the Naranja Town Site, staff proposed two different funding scenarios as summarized below: • "All At Once Scenario" whereby the Town would request voter authorization to complete the entire project with a series of three (3) general obligation (GO) bond sales over a three-year timeframe totaling $151,810,000; or • "A La Carte Scenario" which offered a menu of four different construction options whereby each option could be constructed independent from the others so long as the Earthwork and Infrastructure option (Menu Option #1) was included with any of the remaining 3 options. The estimated property tax implications associated with the "A La Carte Scenario" are shown in the table below: A La Carte Scenario Maximum Average Maximum Secondary Secondary Primary Tax Tax Rate (per Tax Rate (per Rate for O&M Project $100 assessed $100 assessed Annual Net (per$100 Menu Option Components Costs value) value) O&M Costs assessed value) 1 Earthwork & $20,563,474 $0.23 $0.13 $0 Infrastructure $0 Playfields, 2 Courts, 1 $24,543,489 $0.27 Support & $0.15 $ 200000 $0.21 Parking Community Center, 3 Aquatics $75,719,022 $0.83 $0.46 $600,000 $0.11 Center& Parking Music 4 Pavilion & $29,675,389 $0.33 $0.18 $700,000 $0.12 Parking TOTAL $150,501,374 Using the average secondary tax rates shown above for each menu option, the estimated average monthly cost to a residential homeowner with a $500,000 home would be the following: • Menu Option #1 — Earthwork & Infrastructure = $4.60/month • Menu Option #2 — Playfields, Courts, Support & Parking = $5.31/month • Menu Option #3 — Community Center, Aquatics Center & Parking = $16.29/month • Menu Option #4 — Music Pavilion & Parking = $6.37/month G:\STACEY\Council Communic\NTSLocalBonding7-25-07.DOC TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION PAGE 4 OF 4 Therefore, if it was determined that the earthwork, infrastructure, playfields, courts, support and parking (Options 1 & 2) be constructed first, the average monthly cost impact to a homeowner with a $500,000 home as specified above would be approximately $9.91 per month ($4.60 + $5.31) over 25 years. Dedicate Bed Tax Revenues to Fund O&M Recent projections of the Town's 6% bed tax revenues indicate that sufficient funds would be available from this revenue source to pay for the individual annual O&M costs of each of the menu options in the A La Carte Scenario. More specifically, the dedication of 2/3 of the Town's 6% bed tax revenues (4% out of the 6% total rate) would provide approximately $1,200,000 annually for O&M, rather than seeking a primary property tax to fund O&M costs. Staff anticipates having a more detailed discussion and presentation on estimated property tax rates and monthly cost impacts to Oro Valley homeowners at a future study session on this topic. Mr. Reader and Mr. Hoskins will address more of the procedural and legal aspects surrounding bond elections in their presentation. A copy of the power point presentation is attached as Exhibit A. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Exhibit A — General Bond Election Information Power Point Presentation 2. Exhibit B — Project Component Cost Totals 3. Exhibit C — Site Cost Breakdown 4. Exhibit D — Community Center Cost Breakdown 5. Exhibit E —Aquatic Facility Cost Breakdown AOIN Stacey Le os Finance Director 0, a David L. Andrews Town Manager G:\STACEY\Council Communic\NTSLocalBonding7-25-07.DOC EXHIBIT A GENERAL BOND ELECTION PRESENTATION N r_zi 2 ..e. , 4 ...,.....„ 11"1 V E--( -1 ...i. 10 • IV -----. ,.., .:1 . w .rimik, 04 1■14 g4 .(--, w,e., .,,z2 , All 0 4.1 Co) 4 C.7 •rii.4 Z t--- .. w c.2 Po C\1 r-c L.L4 Z Z g4 0 L,) 44 1-4 Lr) 4-i V) • 0 F.1114 44 P--i -.-.--) micitilmiiH, (:1) (11101 111111111 Ct 4 Z = Z c't cit w ... Z 4 4.1 Fal t Cr >I* O N 00 ti ti ti d" O d" r CO V' O CO C) - ti CO CO N CO N N a) co CO O m- ,:r N. N. O O •-, }' N N LO 00 CO CO CO LC) O s- O Tr 00 CO N Na. O 4) CL N N CO - - O b.!) rct Pl- 0) CO 0) N C) CD CO N V• CO (0 N C) N CO CO• M CO C) C) N 0) 0) Lcn C) O CO N O CO O 0 .) CO COCOCD N- COC0 0 N- +•+ coCO ti '- CO N 0) CO 0) 0 0 O N N CO N CO (05 6F} €e 6F} 6F} Eft CF} 69t 69- Cl, • a O�t N-C) 0°) O N-O NtM �O CflO CO O 0 CD N N CO CO 1 ._ (0 CD CON 0) 0 C - N- 1' N- (.0 O 1' N Clil) (.) tt N CO O CO CO V Cfl CD L.0 O C) CO N _ �- r- �— 0 x-- 0 CM) 6F} 609- 6A- 69t (301- 6F} 609- EA- (11) • 0 oC.) _ ( U 41.14 L... Ali C I- o o 0 0 o o co E E E ca U — w co co co 0o 4'4 NCO O O ,- O x- r- N- "- O O C O 0 0 (N (Ncit O 4..; ON , N N N 0 • E >' Z .- W >' > o C� ''"IE L azo Cl) .°,,,,; rnO E_ o o _ (N 40 O D 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 N (1) N (N (N N N • > E .cD >, >, a..� >' '�l C6 a) = U Ca lie ;..4 ,q,. O 414 CO N-69- 0 �c L II CL U 06 0 i = ' On) N Sc Cy)a as •_ r-- N w _ O L > °� a Z 4z to O L V.J RS O vi oa U N z LL. 69. II () II o e } c U O �— OU O O W4(1) o6730 ' O O L = 0cam V L I,j„ `t L.. O C 2C) - E }, '5, E 2 •— •— co ...z ,• , .., , .•• t• pca 'e.. — O 0 O r-- N a) to ct 0) (1) o 0 a., C 0 o o 0 o O C o0 0 0 0 CD CLS L- o 0 0 o p E (1) 0 0 0 ILO 4) r N ckOea ta 09- (a te (I) 4-4 C,) o D u) 0 0 C.) O O o p o 0 0 .� o • � p o 0 0 p CD c o o 0 0 E 4)17) O poLo 0 0o 0 o - > co oo 609- ta cti% */ W CC 63 . 0 Ct D o 0 0 0 4) (1) o o C O 0 - . y c o o o 0 E E q,) 0 0 00 N. 609- 0 o --- 0_ 1-- � � r co r r CO Pati ■■�I UJ UJ 03 CD 4.4 PaN4 .0 ILl E Q _ E cL ca— 0- u) AS 0 o U) n 0 E ,,c Lil- U (1S O to 4- O > •a n a_ O cr O ca 0 00 0 Q o0_ I- Cr)= >1.4 (lill) I)111•14 bA CIIt: Ri /011111114 CZ 00 00 M 00 O© M N 711 4 opo O N N CD 1 0 cin _ 00 re; q) .O co ... ,1- CI) c oho N O CJS M O O O 4 N COD o O o o 00 !!' M O 4° /10111111 o 000 tet' a/ CI) N N r~ N M IN ON OU 1:$ a � -Z CO) o M >, 0 CZ oN '1 Cli) lEft ..>-'O a4 a N u. 0.1Cle Ct) CC N 6. 4? > 69 — JJ - CA L "d = �C 0 0o O = Cd c,',1; p OQ •v, O y4 - N U CZ: 41)1 1 0 00 71- O N 01 01 cdv, cdCO)O Ii oci h °' yogiI 1 I Z 0 O O CD O CD O O OO O O OO O O,rM N --� 41110 CZ g4"'e i'afr9S y4 tO ( N r oo O' a N M M M 4 7z3 7r N M ,O 00 00 O• -•O t-- `O N M a) <o �o o� 00 `n O O � � N EA t 00 M 00 U z < EA cd "C C al N c�3 O t• `O a 0 = Oh N 0 v al N N 00 O N 00 �O N N O [- M l� O CA . < VI• ^'-, O ,,,°,9, O O� igiao b U MFS oo M O >, O — t.M LA}:4 L. w Cg _-ci: IZ 41) • U� 0 u. E O 0 Z Q c)• �' N `O N U `N 0 Ch C •� ani Q Q+ U M N N- --, V) Cle E „, Q , II = •,_. o .� v o 0 0 0 U v, • a `o O O o 0 � O = (11) ...., ''' ° < •i�'' tt CI) � � -0 Cit •...ke lit: PP 0 •.•-, 0. U 0 .�X C.:-') a) clit :a.' •8 �'' U •�y > O [Mil 0 o 0 CD 7z$ ct c O O°0 `O =cizt c o ., _o u u ,--. "� ,c c� 7z$c� a� C) N ::L. ct -0 E -' 7') Q U r24 0 01a) a) ct U o 4., .'1 G) 01) 0.1)• o 4t � H 4� N M • 4) • U O a CAct cf) ,c; N 0 h itottr;7-1,:!! UM 00 00 ; 0 .1- c 00- t-- h- N M `O `p c: �a: c.) O 00 L tn V1 N ab � 00 � ct 0 U •'mai U 4-1 C.) alr=1, v-ti O (11 cA •—, a: -(.4,7i a4 u cu ra., •rte-+ O Cil 0 4. F;). —,..- ''' U .i., cu - a$ _. J. cd t cut cu EH 0 to .5 iz,bk ;z6, ci) cu '.c •- ,4z,'zi.) C) :e U o Z A 'a{) -ttie, °,.,) 4 •°-) v) .O A4 riCt c) ct c4 .4-' ,-- v, Z Z Z iF4 '- '-c cti i O ,L -4 ;:-' Q I •V 0 Cq 0 -4., Cq ct CI) o 0 ct •1%4 A � 00 'Z a o .a.0 O z o t CZ rV o ‹) O `o bskZ M o 0 O M M •viol %) 't , oo O O oo c-1 ch lin ......, •,.,t Z v) N 0 •,.40 tr)00 M EA M LI '%ie A4 V)- vi--1 4 CZ o of lil0 4.4 aCD -cil .o = 0cl, 0 ,coo (1.) U '6 •— C7 Q 0(11111 .5 alctJ. 0 vD U • O 0 Q .2 ril ;_, -45 cid "0 0 -4-, C) Ca 0 0 O o U .� o Ct CA Q Q U till x 14 co l'Iso cm * 2 N N > E f: w- Q '_ 4 6: Z F-4 w >0 -16 412 0 Z X ci)o 0 Tu 0 c5- Z 0 = , s Qo 4 040 1;14 (4) 41 a) (13' *a) C4 (/) cy) .--. ' co2 44 ;,L1 � C.) z > (..) x (A- < a) as rummi ci) i— g4 Z 41 (i) 0 E * i—i 11-4 E 2 cu ON gA C..) ."R 0 fI ,--: cu o � 603N iill 4t. 2 P g14 al � o III p o 11-4. W o CO U 'Li; 1,..:44 riLi z,-, 0) 064.1 g cn (----:= c W t). a) � a� 2 0- 5 a_ E 2 0 0 U 1..V a 00 (19000N • •• • 00 oo o (4 c„, ii VJ r: a) Cl N '0 ^ kr, M A 01 4 oe U < U N CZL, 0 7.1 .�'CC'S C14 1• 4 v d4 a.) ca o — o L v� o FajilW cA W c▪ C W 'c ° c CA 6,Ooo V• p a O «t v > -et ^� N [� ^ _ L• �, o to VS 6T.CA CA W • - "C o - . Q Q O a = • A v,G9 �-i • 0 o � o O �' O o Z ^C NM o p., , O O = a) W O O .0 E# c 3 o C) o o o a) a) o o a4 o -v ; C3, O U vi N o N O M N o O sZ > 2 cd t Z f°) 44 04 LT4 0 g > N o N 6,- o0 0 O o oo o ° cct ' O C4 4 FHj ° s~ U , , W o Q F-� ,. -: :- _, CI) c") J 40) i-ci ‘-i ct 00 0 ci) tn ct P. CD ‘-I E cit oo © --(-(t ci.) cn g ‘.i ra_i 4..c2 © N (47-ji ct 4- 0 ,ZD ct - -.) 74 E E ct 7-1 41 '-7 a) ;-. cf) 4--i 0 © 0 cn •,--( N , 0 N ct ci) ,_. © • I a) (4-i CLi CD ,..0 0 E N a) = ct ct 0 B C1-4 0 ._, cu „c) A__) ‘-i •imi -,—' .4::), ct +me •,-4 0 E 4_•.) ct 0 ci) cit v__, p_i •._, (1) E cit ct '77 ,-D u A--) ct u a) cr 4-I Cl) 4) V E H 4-i © o 7F.J 0 4..i (11 N C+4 (1) L4--4 0 H ct = '-C • .7-' 4_i ,-..-i la* 4-i -4-) •.-1 itij ,n U r -4 rE 0 <4-4 _1_, 4—i 0 0 E (-71 B c.) co o 4-i ct o 0 0 04 ct Ln c.) ‘.i u cn (/) •� c.4 ¢., Ucry W U cry U ,r0::,-'-',; -;:, )7.:,,,t, *-c'1) O 0 °, to •rig U ct isse CCS E �' � ct,m ctcit 0 0 ''' ‘-i t+.1 •,--, P---i 4—i Z 0 '7 4 czt ONO cu -1—J .,4,_ a) r7 = 4--) A—) 771 0 4-i u-6:44 'Ti) 00 U •limi .,--1 .-• © 44 4.) Cf) a-i © © U 4.) E N ,--i U 7S ci) "......4 4.-i 0 4—i44 Ci) 0 0� 4-1 r:)- a) ric, 41, ora-i E(,) .. 4_, ,,,., o N c) = ct 0 cu ct 0 N "--' 0 cn Li-4 '6 ,-7 E ci) z u cu v, c_, u '-in ,_, .,, gA ,-c ‘., 4-i ,-- E-4 7,1 Li--4 `;' 0 = _,.J o c_, ,c.) •,, L4_, co ct ci) a ,,, ‘, pq 4_, ,_, 00 -_, A...., (.74, ci, <4_, (i) © c,, ,0 •,...1 t_4_, ,.., ,,i, •,_., .,_, ..i..J 0 --le., ‘_, ,., o © , v a: a) v-- r, 1 a) a) — •:4:14 <4-4 v.4 N ,_ "7: e, ,---i ,_r_t bk. 4—) u cn t-4--i 4...) Ct ,--1 4-1 ..0 CL) U ;-8 4-i ci) 5 I-4 -7t- —0 czt cu —..--) ,..d 0 ,..,C) Lr) _i__) crl a, t_4_i ,.., ci) _ .J u '' ' cA pq •,i ct 0 -7i- cn 1 c.) u ct 4_, •,--4 4..i 4..i ,,,.0 zyi 4-1 cn 0 Lf) ‘-i cf) 0 p.,ct .11 u ci, 0 '"c t-4--i a: cam, � '"D •1-1 � Cli v O ;NO O E 4-i 4-1 (I) 0 ci-) Cl.) = (1) CU C ii '7J (1) c9i 0 t r_1(1) 'if) E CO u = „ ' U 7: (1) i-I U 4) ,-i- 4—) 1-L-1 r_11) 0 E ,,, c, _i_, = - (,) u . ct ct ci) .4--i co --T2 X 0 , , c4 t u 4 4 0 . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 'TY r.t;) c cf) 4.) cu i- � �v0 1.10 is 4.) ii 4•4�' a� CL) � N•1.4 Cli --) CO t) 0 tO � � C64-4 c/3 � . (.)0 :...a ,-- -4.0 c4 0 '73 V 0 0 V ”ej cf) ,_. -0 .44 g C/3 .4.. VS Cfl, Cn 0 '-(7 .s..J .".4 0 V VS V v.0 4.) 0 ,4 a 0 ct .1-4 -3-e E .S '7: 4-0 4) rn v 0 g 1"4 0 �+ ,---14-i 0 1.4,4 Ct 0 ,z2 -2 0 4 ci) u u Z cn E = CO � vs cid 45 Ivig CA 0 4) CI . '1.45 1 rS24 76 4.) (4 4.) r•O te 4-i A--) ct 0 7:3 • 7-t)jo ' 4 rt; cu 2 •.-i '4-) C4-4 71 4.4 0 40) N _IN 0 ct ci) (I) 0 0 (= (a ..-S 1"4 at C) (4) 0 w c/3 4.4 0 V 4-4 c6 .4-J 4:1-4 gN cl. (74 CA .-. 45 c)r., -4'-'1 ,. cu x ct cd 0 4 (t. . v ,(.4-4 cig, C4-4 ot . w 4)C6 '4.4.4 (1_. 0 E 0 C4 4-4 rTi c6 v) .4-e ti) CA ,..,.0 0 at ci ,—•1 -4:2 "7: cl_. ›.,,, C/3 4.) "i Ct 0 7, V 0 cz ''"t ci) ,c) 7, "V cf) 7.1 v ti 6 cn 4) 4as Z 0 U 0 V CI) 4) I.) cc2 . c/) r-I, (,) 0 Ct t -4-) CO ""� V � 7:j 4.4 Cl) 03) 0 = 4.04-e•.-1 -I-) 0 Cd ..i 0 Ct 6 u 4j0 0 -.--1 s.« O .,.5 , aiii 4.4 .,. = a.«114 ct EIP . (1) 7-4--0 ”g co ,..0 4,4 CD •--� � .-� ''�y � CI) '� cs riLr-) v cu 44 -4—' 'V a, (6 cit cu (z) CL) 0 5 4':e0 •-. 1 - -1..) 4) 4.) N t'* clth) N cf) 44 r., cii) o 0 _i_) 174 •vi4 c6 til C4-4 i-z t'b ct ,-- c u cd &)- O 0 4.4 I 0) a v ci) " .;_f 2 4 0 `cf3 :-- ,_ i cL. o el , -4° 0 ,c). ct n 4n'-- .4-4 r-CY ct -'- C:L .-6-' •,,,1 ”C) clj ,--7 0 4„..15 SS., co •ii-t .,i iii...)..v.,.4 0 lis,v'S 11 t-t) 4 CI (i.) 1.4.4 el 5, 4-4 0 4) 4,) ii.-4 R. . , ci) Q clq0 .zg .p., u tsc ”015, . (,) 9,.‘ E I cut .,_) 0 _ cf)cf) (1) Is sq .z. ,c( „,(I) � o Ok I') g ; v-ii3 4) ti tj r. etz '4 +4 'c'i)) „'-) -4-e ° 0 CI) ,4 0 4 "0 Z cit ,-5 ,-(/7i- . `1 go 0 ”C) 4_, ,..c6 8 oct , , ,c) 4.,..t ,I.iv ,t 0 ,,,,, I4 ° = 0 d\ 0 = -4.- 4.4 -4-0 .-• 0 v.-4 CI) ' PC1 CI 0 ,.. CD 0 _i_) Ln ,- V = 4.4 r4 0 '"454 'fill , i„, 4_, ,z, 4) -4- 41) 0 Z .4 L.) 75) 0 - •v.4 tC ,CL4 ct 4,„,) >4 "S ric, :,.., 0 „.0 •,--i O c% cu 0 N- OcL) -,. 0 9."• 4.) E ,,, _. 16, 3 c„ (-,_. ,.4_4° iviJ . •. 4, ,t . •. -1.-) A, -,--", ,..Cci) ""mg E S 0 (.7, ,i„, ,--, -'-'' 0 0 v, co c6 r-c; .,,, (1) 44 („3 ...0 ,..0 0 0 -1.4 e. _,_, m, c„ ,,, u , , . .0 v p-, ,L, c„ ,., , ,... , CD CD IS Cs7 CO (11) 4—) cu 0 0 IS N C, c> 44 ,c) *" • E cd "0 0 E ° (1) 0 ' --- 4.) c1 cl vacs V) r.C) -i-) 4.mo 0 "En S2 CL) tC 0 •.-I -1--) C9 PI'*6 Z •,-( .,..,-,- (Is ,..g ,-• 4-4 '4 .5_, 0 vs u v -zz (z) T-4 u 4.4 ct, ct ct ct t 4) --c: 0 4.) 4) -- cz) Qiw Q 0 �co , ./; 4-4 v 4) .49 fi e ."g - - � � ,s, ecu, � � i s..► 0 tC ct 0 ci) ,- 4.4 (6" ° 6 4-4 4-i ,-5-1 .'-. •riii -4..• (I) "t; •'I (1-. .5 ct ..i ii4,4 6 ,,, ci) a) v u,-- 464 mo � 0 --4 (iii) -i-J 4..0 , w .g N 0 L4—i ,S "a" U Ct CD 4.4 (1) (:).4"--4 4-4 0 ti 00 LL-i E 8 ).-4 T--i c'' V v, cD cu 0 0 0,›. , ,., ,., . P ,-4(1) N 154 v C.) •,I ...- 4.,,, " e-i 4_i "...N.N1, 1,-, ,i,._t __C ,,,i CC'it) I (6 '4'4 . 4 a+ ' t "5 - 44 *At cu '- c) 75 — ,-0 g 0 u''' '-'4 ,0 cu cu .-- 4.4 —5 cz) .4 ,,c.c 0 E '� r 7:1 � N �'� a cu 0oo `� 0 = 4-1 r � • F"'4 ..L1 ,-.0� 4-.) .yam � vs —i cel � A.,;- :',5,, v:-,,, k'e R. T' fie° C/) #011°N+4 N 4* 4) tO 0 '--4 v) 4 w a4 v, ra., „, _i__ ,-t ,+.4 0 ci) 4) CL) C) (SI) c�E >c ;.. CA r -i'" CA .. 4) cA U O 1-- as o C bA p O '� O p•- r:). - v) CIJ p4 O O ..c › '-i 4) 4) = N cam,c) O ,3 0 c,, ° O — ,_ a:1) c5 r:1, c) ;-,,„., .� '� ,,‘ y) ,.. Z P.1 C N C) cci4 •-4 E ;.., C) .,_, CU +-) >. ,.., E ,A e 11 O f' i.l: ,E, t "6 4) 7.24 r) 0 4 0 0 E, E t) -v) "R ' ct '.z r:1, z) ;- 0 E „, u 8 2 cid v) (I) (1) ,-,: (,_, .4._ -4-.) C a) 2 ct ci) -ia' . 0 ,i?, c.) 4) :4;4 bi) .-- -u , ' ,!i' •_2 ,-1 j E--1 o cd t 'c) Ct E-1 cr) cd • ct ›, U = E V.4 W E4 C-4 2 T.: LI) ttiV-g Ct ,_ _, -1-2, 0 O O cam, 4) U •- O ca., -4- U E-1 0 4 Z •-4 ,e. . cd 7:4 4) 4) '"C ' R , bp,c1.3- CD 1) ,c ct '' — •174 v- ,---4 CA ›, 2 PL.i t r-c-t -4-' :— t ist, cd t N%N., *4 ›; ,,,t ct (1) ;- Clt Cicij R ;-' ,-7 0 E 8-4 *4 C > ,14) ,__1— -a-' —4.' C) '-' '17;', 0 C) (ZO r:11 Ci) 411 0 P4 — ,t ct ct cz - ;.. u cl, cl., - A-e ,_, •- A., ,,_, Z = = *4 4 p-, > .r:1 ct _,?, L. i- 4.1 '-c: — CA r., '-C34 Z i ' Cl) c) E 6 0 ,_ 0 ct v) ,.., „e ;. oL_, 4.:,. ,__,-- (L) ;-. ct v) (1., — •,--. 0 <t -tt ,_, _ e„. ..„ ,..t 0 * , •=7 _,"- ,7, enCA ;-4 •41) r-1 Cd (1) :-t $:). ,--, , Ni.. e., . ,_ E •rori U 4 Z (.4. ,-& 0 .,,z •;724 Na° E ,.., c9 c,2 E_, cr o (I) a) 404 1-4 - 0 ct i Ell i-' - v� v ,_ •-' ;I: PI* ct o ' `- 4 • CA 4 ot; 5 T't o E.', c)(1 t. 0 :7-_1 o l O O -t ° ct 'U '-c O O ct , U *-- O E1 E-+ cl (I) , .,_,v) ct rl .., O 4):)., ct4) c� g '� 17: 0 5 L.) 4 U c--) „E, 0 E 5 ,_ o ,.._, . .-c to ci) CY P=.4 p4 *4 6,4 di. E--' '-- ,..? u 64q .,, — .5. 0 , c,-, ci, ,i, - (+, N ct 8 ,_, ,-,: ,., 0 ,„ bz c c, — , ...e ci) p4 = . .,_ „,- 5 c::1 ,..e v) v) ,..., c, ,_ +.4 Z •i, ,,, › •_4_ o 6 ,-z: E -8 0 A 4 P=4 -t 0 0 -*-e — n ci) . 0 ;,.-.; fl., • cil ,-, '-c "'c •,= c) 0 ct,-4 ,_cd O i-c El c cl) 'Ft' ,-° E Ft' 0 4 ci 7%)ct i s :8 ,_c,.;: .,..i,,,, .E. ta) ,61) ki) ucq ,,, .,---:,— = C cit ,:,:, c E- a) 0 -- i u 0 ,i, ›, „(1) ,.4 14 ,„ , t,0 u ..c ,:-.-2, . 7:, , ,t.-.., 0 ,,,tt 4 a..( .ci4 8 .4:14 ,i (1) ;. ›,,,, (L) CC; >") (.1 (.1_1 _, *0 C ›. Cd C) '---' tl) CZCC i—' 't 0 ”rj U O .. .. c� .t4 O �' E U E .5 4) ' yr D w 4tt Z ,_c ct v) -_,_, >c cl) .5 Lf.,-4 J O c) 7:3 (i) 0 "ENO Ci.i 4 ci) Z 0 0 ,(2 .2 a • C S •.—, . 4) U O .�' ,.� c.� A ON . . .. O DI 0 — 6' (1) (1) -0 -(19 i c) 6 ,° v) ci;_1 — EC ,. E — ,4 ,/) 0 .. t — E ;-, w -C CA 2 8 H .4i ' E1-4., -8 ,c ,(i-A) CZ rtown 42.7' 442 J,l-i, CA M ti4 r-+ a) bA ct 0 >17 '—' ci) ^ () ,._,^ CI) 014 W -,--9 (i) E ,--, ;.., cl.) 0 0 '7, ' ..0 .T:4 ;-' E *4 = , E 0 U v) 0 ;""4 ia' L-.4) ''Z &;---44 ct ct ^ 0 '", CI) al) ct t) "1-6 (1) I) -, c, 60t . O • �-' U;. cg-, u ^ o ct 7:) E u '''a4 C 2 ,2 — c, -c i- rt:) "=-' — (1) u = = ci--0 , ,4 --i ct - ct 0 cA ,-t: Ct = = 'Ft' u ci) U CC ,.., = ct 41-4) , E (1) ;'' ''S 0 0 75, '—e r` ' Fii F'l cit bi) ,A Ct ,--4 0 75, ,4(2 .,--4 o 6 - 0 +NO ct 5 ,_ . _p_, (1.) ct --a = ;-4 0 ,, 0 O4 .2 a: C az v-c c.) 'a' —4 CI +, A--. 8 OU c0 (+-i al-t4 NE o -t E *F E to L) •— 0 ca, -4-, • 7.-- 'a' 8 TE 2 ci) -ci i 0 0 ci) ,.c ct Q .- -,..0 -s = ,, ,,-',/,) •....,.# ,— g=4 E g § ;24 ') %.,., •._. „, ,cgc, C4 Ae 0 ct ct - ct 0 'T., ci.e, ,2 ,'1) Z1 g-' cu = CI: = $-4 .,.., (7)* 0 u '- Cl.) 0 E 6 0 ,, ct E v) a) - — 0 -t -e 4E4 Wo r---'4 -4—a '''' 7 LA Q CA 6T* 4 06 4 Ct 0 U T.0 $4 C .inv..4 t O O O O v, O O Ct i...e 4� 0 1) = 4-1 E- 5 •Ectocc— ct „ .., ,i — — C) cA C:%' r a Ct ;"' "' 0 6 Z E* " C) c__, cA' (1 ,01- 0 48 u CY W p4 W W S o (i) al to ,-, &)1),-c c. N c t ,-,5_, ''Z o=, ,-' •- ,- co .-O v, v, c� ,c.) '- 4 ;-, 75, _!-.1 ,-4 +-, . cu r•c E E � 8 o :1., v) o cu ,0 t .4.0 A -t v) E ,. zz.! 0 0 "z -,7J 0 0 — ,-.4 0 4 w 0 ,7:1 .,_ „, „_, o ,+. omx ,szE mo AAO c ,cU° '-':'= ,-7 ,- + •�' E t � � � �, � c a t A (1) 8 C 1- 0 'Fizs t E 7477 ;:73 cn i-, c+. . Cit 1-4 -t 4 ,-. P-4 ' O ',7c,4' '' 0 75 1 ' Et.rzi .4 7--J 'rj o cA = ** C w• 4't Z wee E—I. • 2 , c,9 e P. ,,, ,-5 '5 g4e,_, 8 73 1) 2 4.) 0. 4 c A Z (1) (:) - bi) —4 ° '- '-f:) ctX '''' CA O .O •7) . o.64 N o .-4 .-4 c4;-:44 4•-b N •2 - CC1icl)O rimosi t ° :=1 cit ) H . -E, •-c 0 aci ce 6 2 ,, -`a) 6 lai c r:4 A E 74-) c, tg 2 ',.') ,, 1 0 .`-,'.. z te E sb" E4.1 't rz. 't cA t)O 2 .5 a) 0 E--0 .4 E c). ,- rn c1) ct CID t , r-, a) Wl ct 1 - (1) ;Ng W4) CZ • `- ° - w U 4tt cd U � vd 0 s. d 0 a, 0 o O p co (i) to.- ,� cE; U cA -0 •� O CZ g ,-c, -0 014 C .- E "c' 0O - ' O ;@o __ •.—I CI) E a 2', ,,' .- c,' (-8 4) •�ill 4 _ 0 o ° 0 t4.7... cp. ic.L1 2)., 0 ,..) — F.; ,c, al cA U "0 _,2 -c-'t 0 13 e--1' g 0 ›, u,;^C11) Ufa. U0 0 ,-,: 61,- O U U t ,.. ,13, ',, -,:) � 0 = w E.- ci) ..0 .-- c)., :a„ ct . ,„ cu a.) (:), ›,ti E a.)`7 1 61) ! 1 LI 0 C cl (4_, = ,...0 L___, ,-4 ,4 ;.., (1) 8 4...t •♦y 04 O ,as 7 �, 2-: 0 = ;-, i-, '7i 8 a, 0 • . ms CA aa = › 0 •-z O ct 0 . -t,-zi 0 = '5 ‘- :L.) 0 ct ,-,;:)•— _ = 'l—' X 0 1, EA (11) ,- 4 O ,4 ;_, .,-. ,c) cid ,i. ."g' 0 >, t cid Z (..) 4 'i ,4 E ° :1-: "2 " (14, ,a, cc4 0 -' . 0 i5 tb-- . ;-, E ct ct ,_, .� ct .� . O - •s — ••- c 72 ,,., 0 0 cam, t acl CY wo 4 oc; 41, 2 ct ›, -4E g 2 > ›, ci -,5. "2 ,C, .9. w +NO E* fl Cd ct t-7-o• 8 .1 2 • •- 71 . 8 r-, 7--, „c?, rz4 "g "g CZ: CD W g ›, 4) O �O tom, ,� p 0 � � U . � C,—. CA CA C1) i .� — c � _, 0 = .4 ;.,4 W A4 e) g ;,_:: .5 = Cr o aD•' oE 0 0 , c� C 0 0 ° o W CZ A v, , � �' E c� a ct E .; o� E w 4 P.T4 t", g 1-7; E 2 "2 . rte Pq (..) 4- .',7, ,p2t — ct ,) - E E 'cs) — ct g E E E v, r..0 c›,:- s-, c)' (1.) .4 u, 0 :6a, PU o o o . . 0 "5 O p �1..0 U c " ct = a, a) CD a O a, ;-. P4 4t 4; '~ o o 8 O O ,�E • 8 W W ao A. 4 .� o Q EO v� N ° p � °' ,4• ' w P.T.Cit c. H • CA •14:y. h�, V /111114• 414 a) th 1ct -4 0 Cii) --. ci) ci)' •—. ci) ct •—. cip •-c: ct a) '- a) "—, -6.4 0..) •- , c) — -(7 r, OQ ,, O .• p ct 10 . ,.. 6 v) a. .,.., 4.0 — p O p O p .O CZ -c) 7, u ,-c •,- c) (:),- ;-.. (1.) c:5' cl) c:C > CIII) N ..��, O ct O p �. •O p AL.( CZ as 74 E c,9 ct E E -5 ') ct 0'4 v) c) ,- ,m ci) ceil r=4 ci ,.. 2 c.) ,sz ,.. 4 ct H • ,,--, Z o tom, oa O O o c, o 'Li ct "t" < O t> ›, E •F, U N -4—. P.. .;72, < O < O i (4 0Q, Ct ct < -, E ct a� ct 4 •r----'4 >> E ,c71 a� ct Z = P4 P-4 > .b:14 4 a > . ctfai :- 5 5 > .F,.".FL.,, R.4 O0 o ci., c):i.i �' 4 q-, ci, 4 ,.. c) , ,,, -1.4 0 o (1) cu ,4 ,1: E -t o c.) ,i_b (1) r-1 ct P., ,c .5 ,4 C 19 4 .... ,_ „, E--( v) ct •... ''' Uc) O WOc•_:, , E° - 5 OoCD a) '-4 4 E. .4 E • ° ,_, o 019 8., t u ' "c' 4 ,.. 6 c,9 — .4_, > •,_ 0 c4-1 0 cl) Z 0 i. ..1)_, u>. c'''' ''-8 "61) 7.)- 72 'Ell — .,- > ct •5 ,,-. 0 — 0 (4.), :1 8 c. .4 ,... - 0 1) 6 E '--4 < , > .- 75 q-, 0 ,- • 0 ' ra., < . :1-1 "4- c/) al,,77 PL.1 CA e. Ct ci) U •- '5 U E c, U U414 0 ,-c .. o E o ,-c7 = 2 0 '-� c,,.c .4-- ,.. ,-t:) ,c, .4-- , = < o al ET, 2p-, 0,D. 8 . -I-, -1.-, 0 Ct ' ' L.) ,'S ;. .2 (1) ,_, :-,=, VI 8 ..° -',, c.as CZ ..., v) cz: c., p ct bA O �..,, p ct b1J O U p ctc) c) 7) _ 0 .,_,- .,_, - "c 0 •-, ›, ct 7,4, o '4-' C4 c..) Cr) U PC Q .- Z W E:-; ;:c1 u v'TZ W E--; Z W EL :72, ,.• .2 0 Co) t) 0 ,_„— ,,;34 ci'J '' g,' u ° = cit 'Ll ,- t ‘-4' ° = ct ,;) cl E ''' g 4.2 E ' tis. ”ca ,i9 Clii a �ci) ! ,''' ° A\ c9 .c9 çe) ! ,'.) ° 5).,c- •E ',6 ! 1.) ° . .,;) ,`• ip.......4 ago ° U a, ' v) aA ° a a < v) aA ° .5 ct C,) I1 4- I1CD C ‘51 ..c cu ‹, a) . 9— a) -.6ti) c,1 c RS a) > _c o P. O "aS- E a) N (1) 0)4,-. -ri, -C ma) - a) 0 fi E 45 0 0 CU c a) 0 3a) CI . .4E ga a) . ... ...., 10 " E/2 47: L... •..... CI 11 a) uo_ c 0C7 CD a) .0 - g CT c o .... _ a)•-- cn c o_ o o E CD 2 cc,3 ca. 0. " a) v. a) cn ca. 0 •...... a) _ 5 _ _c a) ed • • (7! N- a_ -1C3c .2 CA )''4 76 L- 9- QC - x) E I te •1-4 •vi..1 CU LO *E3 CI _ o E 8 be ..c '45 a) = o c cn•- +.0 E4 t5 0)4-- a) c cn cz a) c a) •.... c E -I- ca) a) = 2 a) 0 o Lo cn 0 o 1 tu 2 cn si.1? = 75_ C3 0 6- Lo C (1) 0 CD 43•r•I 73 — -17-, _C 0T a) , 4.4 ( 3 c > a) CCS •vii..4 CO CI 15 4-3' 0 5 :E6 to E c co4cii cf) ow cs c al .cl-7:3 Z-31 a) -r_ 5 a) < 45 s) ii 1.1.1 co U- E t: A A A "li • cn 00 Ma 4- a) 41.5 N C-1 ____ > a) (xi a) C .... -0 0 (1) th'u ct E --- c ca. ...,-,- 0 ,.., o_ cz o ai a-c5 (n (13 •- •- C • , o_a) cy- co o o - , .- = .2 (I) - +.0 _;.-: a) 2 6 E •_.... Z > W W "Z--,- o 2 E 4- CI 0 0 C C >, CZ ai _.. cn " < •- .- L.. 2 0_ 8 st:$ 0 CO -a CO CO so CD as fn 0. O. Ca. ra. .112 "5 "5 IT; -00 .E L.- E "E *E c "E" L- (13 (Dm 1E z = C o-) 2 E E o E 42 0" ca..cl _ 4- 4- -17-; 4- CO >' c COG) c7) 0 a_ ..... cn o o > L- c cy) CO -(-6 CO o ova ocuti a) (.4 o_45 CL (1) •CD - (1) 7; (n ...0 >, '3 4" (/) (0 C (/) 4-' 0 Cc .- CD = = D D t Ca -0 CD CU sa) C raR4 a) 0E a) cS_I am-i 5 8 0 :tt ..c ..0 E _c a -.--, > > 0 >, E F- E- 0 I— D cit3 < "0 Z CC • • • • (.) • u) c • CO • COO Ci) C t-rCO•r■ilTz ow 0_ c •IF-4 c 4-- .-E •_, 0 •_ a) c,o CO N (1) (j) . Q. •...... C D CD a) (3) cf, 4...) co .rrz :42-2 C a) E CO c 7-C-5 0 ca) a) CD 5 as a) CD "-;:--‘ C C6 , 45C a) x >, 5 › ) ›, a) 1.--0 cl C.) .„..4 limo > co .> C 't;° c -. ii_p_ < (0 cn >, ..0 a9 CO CO (/) a) C (,) _. _a o co co a. CD E .a...5 (1) '6 COC (,) o c ."- ; , E >, > >, > a 5 I CY 44 CD >,--,-.. .1...0 0 lf,.• " '' 0.) E CO „, co (13 .4-__ (1) E r- E >, ,_ - "5 2_as 2 S' :tt 6- CD CD -0 • a) :47...- p CO 4- •CD- -1"-' LI -4-im C CO >' CD ° a- T6 (n- "E- (1) TT3 0 9-- C s.... (13 O 0 ca. a) m E 0._ 0 5 .2 o .- .....• .- - .E -'-' >, a) > 0 cz EC .0_ Ea, = -5, --as , •...... C0 a) :4"-LI EV) 2 5_ .> C X3 2 -o F- . 2 2 no" < 0(9) L_. a. c I • co • (1) • 4;--- • ._ 0.S • CO . \ \ \ \ ..©' \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ sr .Riik CA +6 t. N Cl t - Cl d- 00 Cl 1--+ cr VD O 00 C ,--+ 00 O OT r--+ O 00 O M N M M M M vri M d- M N O 44 > `O `O `O `O o0 r- r `O 00 `O v r `O ..1.4o0 a) Z ›-, a) CA ,:3') g P. te g :w = ,/, ci c4 cA ci) cA v) cA cA cA cA cA cA cA v) cA cA c cA cA ct Q 41., a P. a a a a a a a a a a P. a a a a a as .- +No O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N C.) O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 d- 411) , 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O ---i- O O O O -71-- C) O O kr) 0 0 0 0 - 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O P* M 00 d- N O 00 00 O O O o0 O 00 O O M 411 O d- '--.: r O O O M O 00 r-:' 00 Cl O O O 00 `o `O r- 00 00 ON d- in - ,- 1 M M Cl d- '-. M ,-- M - ,--i ,--, Cl ,--i te UP) CI (:10) > 411.1 4) c� Cii) i-c. -. CA 71, = (It - P4 ao XE-1 0 � vo 00000000000 � 0000 (NI VSC. C. , -, Fill ,.,. � � � d- � � � � 71- d- i- 'r 'r v <:;, r-- 0 0 00000000000000000000 ' 00 00 00 00 000 00 t- t� N N N 00 00 00 1 VD -,-, U ,-, ,--, - -, - - "CI cc 4u � C C ,--, -, ,--0 M -- -, ,---, --' ,--, ,•--, ,--, In v ,--- 0 PC1 -,U .� = 71- ,, +, O • ,-, 0 ...- o Cal) CA .v--' ....,V) C) .+_,'"C.' t Z rn 'a CA CZ '' 0-4 . .- O O ,+-, Z N a •U ;I: E . ›, >, ,4_,, ›, ›, ›, u v, 0 •,7- >, ;_. cA , ›, ›, cz! -la' •ry o 0 0 0 0 0 O c u o Q o o O Aii U U U U U U a '� U U 2 't EXHIBIT B PROJECT COMPONENT COST TOTALS u, Nw N0 0) •tiN- r vOv� COv0) CO _ i(0 0) v N co-ti 0 0 UO cci(D N F- O O N N W e- e- I .115.). 7,-, Cl. F°- UU.....EA U) CCO CO ID OD O 0) N O) CO _ N- CO o�0• CO N• CO O~) cv . co co N• T N• CO N O T CO a� Q U) . ..EA ..Efl EH r O f` N CO cc T CO ' >1 (O (O CO N O) TO , O ti O CO (3) O O) N A-- . _ N f- co-O) T N N a1 c N co cc co o M ti C O T T co- T T _ = T 3 o O 0 EA.in. . ce. N9 co N 00 N O T T .4- f-- O co O) T O) N T N N co O) '1 T N Cco N co lto to O) Cr) N o T T (n T T r' T QEA EA EH EH EH EH EA . O O O O o to a to W v to 06 ate+ co 000 co O V o--) (n co a0 N co O) co O to ✓ N N co-CO co-N- CO OT O UT.. O) O) , CO T CO T ,A T T ( T T O w d LL ( EH (,).... EH co CO o0 N O) A-- O ,- -t N CO N � 10 ++O CO CO LO l0 0) CO N T T (n T T T 3 ......(F) . , N O N Cr) V CO T CO CO N cc0 N 0c0 M = 0000 , CO O CO-CON CO O N CO v v (n 0) 1 cd coN N-CO- Lti N U W 0 ....... c/U 70 0 00 0 o y o O O CO (O Z f` T w N N N N CO CO v _ O -CU)U) -C N U) U) ,E01 O O C O C C C = .E O ca E O E E E a) 0 i T U) co T CO CO 00 V O L N CO O O O T - T T _c T O O T O O EN �._ . O LL a) ? Z O p, a-: O E 0 O O T No V (n O • T- 2 T T T T = i W O cv U N 0 0 0 0 .E C• V. cab . xi >, -V (6 0 0 U) ti O o O 000000 0 Q. O N CO O O O CO N T ,C COO co CO .00 Om) (n CO N Otn_T CO , O_ (n 0 CO CO-V t co-0) N C O — T T tT 0) 0 O O oN o c = o ON :d9 c U 03..EH. cf) O Cl) iii C o O Y o I- 6: co RS °5 c .-, as r v1 cv E c O .' c u7 IN- ., d a c7) Y a) O CO o E Q a L > N O6 a re N Z cn o in Lm 06 _ _ V. >+ C r L - - N - - 0c' c c Tii >►= 4 06 0 0 U a) o o 0 > > v°) CO > aa) ` ce -o = y (v (c w U) °a t 2 ° E cts . . L11 RS O as E t (n E . i u) 1703 o _) o a6 WOaUQM � Z EXHIBIT C SITE COST BREAKDOWN _, $ut,-, 4 Lvii***110w _ - Fsp 7 :,...---44, -'''''. ‘.1., .41,,, ., ii,,.., ' ♦k r�"4r, tit _ - 4 qt., k''.11°' ' ' a. 4 ‘ k:,, '.:' ::, f.s t V 4. 1.'; _ , '''''''' '''41°‘'' 'S. ,.,::::::.!',,,'' ' .:*. '"tit.bitilifii* ''',,.,, ' ' OE1 C' rr, Town of Oro Valle . .. -, . . . , . . .. . ,, . , ,, _. Site Costs Oro Valley, Arizona Concept Construction Estimate January 24, 2007 Earthwork $4,783,900 Sewer, Water& Electrical Power $3,018 700 Site Lighting (excluding sports lighting) $750,000 Site Drainage $396,750 Access Road Improvements $221,330 Spine Road $803,280 Pedestrian Walks/Plaza/Trails $1,933 270 Buildings(Tennis Center, RR/Concession/Ramadas) $1,561,000 Maintenance Building/Yard $1,010,000 Fields& Courts (Including Lighting) $4,468,800 Playground $390,000 Site Amenities (BMX, Skate, Dog, Par Course, Site Furnishings) $820,800 Landscape $740,000 Irrigation $313,000 Site Subtotal $21,210,830 Contingency 15% $3,181,600 Total Site $24,392,430 as I . 1 :76,,, xY 4 a * k 7 < it IMF W - *`•y..+:. ' i 1 , t a IN. f ‘, 'tel , * AlIP M1 ' ; r/r' ..., , ,., a 'T J ,x ,,,. r mt,,, ,, At -1' & --...r......- ,- er''-44*"-,,,k ' * 7 -IiiN '7,1? ' r-Qt AVDEC4 - i JNR IIF". 4 _ ;a ! 'm'f�'.:;VF°'. '': n: <. 7.:' -'--. r• M ' is X<" �+ r own of Oro .Valle :‘ Site Costs Oro Valley, Arizona Site Breakouts May 8, 2007 Item Quant. Unit Unit Cost Sub Cost Source Earthwork $ 4,783,900 Grading 755,000 CY $ 4.00 $ 3,020,000 Stantec Rip Rap 27,500 SF $ 4.00 $ 110,000 Stantec Retaining Walls 3,700 LF $ 447.00 $ 1,653,900 Stantec Utilities $ 3,018,700 8" Sewer 5,125 LF $ 75.00 $ 384,375 Stantec Manhole 30 EA $ 7,500.00 $ 225,000 Stantec 6" Sewer 5,725 LF $ 65.00 $ 372,125 Stantec 8"Water 8,770 LF $ 80.00 $ 701,600 Stantec 12" Water @ Spine Rd 5,500 LF $ 100.00 $ 550,000 Stantec 8" Reclaimed Water 1,420 LF $ 80.00 $ 113,600 Stantec 12" Reclaimed Water 3,720 LF $ 100.00 $ 372,000 Stantec Site Power 1 LS $300,000.00 $ 300,000 Hy-Lite Site Lighting (excl. sports lighting) 1 LS $750,000.00 $ 750,000 $ 750,000 Hy-Lite Site Drainage $ 396,750 30" CMP 1,100 LF $ 90.00 $ 99,000 Stantec 36" CMP 150 LF $ 125.00 $ 18,750 Stantec Box Culvert 465 CY $ 600.00 $ 279,000 Stantec Offsite Access Road Improvements $ 221,330 Naranja Earthwork 3,120 CY $ 4.00 $ 12,480 Stantec Naranja Paving 3,120 SY $ 19.00 $ 59,280 Stantec Tangerine Earthwork 6,400 CY $ 4.00 $ 25,600 Stantec Tangerine Paving 3,630 SY $ 19.00 $ 68,970 Stantec Curb 2,200 LF $ 25.00 $ 55,000 Stantec Spine Road $ 803,280 50' Spine Road Paving 24,275 SY $ 30.00 $ 728,250 Compusult/McGann Curb 8,827 LF $ 8.50 $ 75,030 Compusult/McGann Walks/Plaza/Trails $ 1,933,270 Concrete Sidewalk 301,624 SF $ 4.25 $ 1,281,902 Compusult/McGann AC Path 289,497 SF $ 2.25 $ 651,368 Compusult/McGann Earthwork& Infrastructure Subtotal $11,907,230 Contingency 15% $1,786,100 Total Earthwork &Infrastructure $13,693,330 Buildings(Tennis Center, RR/Concession/Ramadas) $ 1,561,000 Tennis Center 900 SF $ 150.00 $ 135,000 Stantec/McGann Restroom/Concession 3 EA $ 90,000.00 $ 270,000 Stantec/McGann Ramada 22 EA $ 24,000.00 $ 528,000 Stantec/McGann Group Ramada 3 EA $ 60,000.00 $ 180,000 Stantec/McGann Restroom 4 EA $112,000.00 $ 448,000 Stantec/McGann Maintenance Building/Yard $ 1,010,000 Yard 30,000 SF $ 3.50 $ 105,000 Compusult/McGann Office 3,000 SF $ 175.00 $ 525,000 Compusult/McGann Garage 10,000 SF $ 38.00 $ 380,000 Compusult/McGann Fields& Courts w/ Lighting $ 4,486,800 Baseball Field 2 EA $215,000.00 $ 430,000 Stantec/McGann Baseball Field Lighting 2 EA $175,000.00 $ 350,000 Hy-Lite Softball Field 6 EA $145,000.00 $ 870,000 Stantec/McGann Softball Field Lighting 6 EA $105,000.00 $ 630,000 Hy-Lite Tennis/Basketball 19 EA $ 36,000.00 $ 684,000 Stantec/McGann Tennis/Basketball Lighting 19 EA $ 18,000.00 $ 342,000 Hy-Lite Soccer Field 4 EA $115,000.00 $ 460,000 Stantec/McGann Soccer Field Lighting 4 EA $170,000.00 $ 680,000 Hy-Lite Volleyball Court 4 EA $ 9,000.00 $ 36,000 Stantec/McGann Tetherball 4 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 4,800 Stantec/McGann Playground $ 390,000 Fencing, Surfacing & Curbing 5 EA $ 18,000.00 $ 90,000 Stantec Play Structure 5 EA $ 60,000.00 $ 300,000 Stantec Site Amenities $ 820,800 Dog Park 1 EA $ 30,000.00 $ 30,000 Stantec Dog Obedience 1 EA $ 12,000.00 $ 12,000 Stantec Skate Park 1 EA $360,000.00 $ 360,000 Stantec BMX Park 1 EA $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000 Stantec Par Course Stations 20 EA $ 840.00 $ 16,800 Stantec Drinking Fountains 20 EA $ 1,800.00 $ 36,000 Stantec Picnic Tables 50 EA $ 960.00 $ 48,000 Stantec Barbecue Grills 25 EA $ 360.00 $ 9,000 Stantec Benches 75 EA $ 600.00 $ 45,000 Stantec Bicycle Racks 20 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 24,000 Stantec Signage 1 EA $180,000.00 $ 180,000 Stantec Landscape $ 740,495 Tree Salvage/Transplant 50 EA $ 1,200.00 $ 60,000 Stantec Cacti Salvage/Transplant 100 EA $ 240.00 $ 24,000 Stantec 36" Box Tree 100 EA $ 600.00 $ 60,000 Stantec 24" Box Tree 200 EA $ 360.00 $ 72,000 Stantec 15 Gal. Tree 500 EA $ 120.00 $ 60,000 Stantec 5 Gal. Shrub 750 EA $ 90.00 $ 67,500 Stantec Seed 10 AC $ 5,200.00 $ 52,000 Stantec Turf Grade (non-fields) 304,920 SF $ 0.06 $ 18,295 Stantec Turf Plant (non-fields) 304,920 SF $ 0.50 $ 152,460 Stantec Decomposed Granite 435,600 SF $ 0.40 $ 174,240 Stantec Irrigation $ 312,900 Meters& Backflow Preventers 1 EA $120,000.00 $ 120,000 Stantec Control System 1 EA $ 24,000.00 $ 24,000 Stantec Turf Irrigation (non-fields) 435,600 SF $ 0.25 $ 108,900 Stantec Drip Irrigation 1 EA $ 60,000.00 $ 60,000 Stantec Playfield Parking (Pavilion & Community Center Parking w/ Buildings) $ 624,775 Paving 26,239 SY $ 19.00 $ 498,541 Compusult/McGann Vertical Curb 14,851 LF $ 8.50 $ 126,234 Compusult/McGann Support Building 8,115 SF $ 175.00 $ 1,420,125 $ 1,420,125 Burns Wald-Hopkins Playfields, Courts& Parking Subtotal $11,366,895 Contingency 15% $1,705,000 Total Playfields, Courts & Parking $13,071,895 EXHIBIT D COMMUNITY CENTER COST BREAKDOWN I � A`fir-.; Y Rt pr, , . . ii, i . ,,-,- . w Y Ifø n4.. _ 1- 4***k a,. w • 4 -L,-. '-'41* ,` - '''' . ii : 1k, i ..........,------- ge: ':r. , r40,4 -, .,- 'tJtV d kyr.' il'F_4 ' v ar s ....... .... Town of 0 AP Va11ey , r Community Center Oro Valley, Arizona Concept Range Estimate January 22, 2007 Total GSF 147,726 Total GSF 147,726 Total GSF 147,726 Summary of Project Costs Low Range High Range Proposed Building Building Building Building Building Building Cost Cost/SF Cost Cost/SF Cost Cost/SF 1. Substructure $960,219 $6.50 $2,289,753 $15.50 $2,142,027 $14.50 2. Superstructure $1,846,575 $12.50 $3,693,150 $25.00 $3,693,150 $25.00 3. Exterior Closure $2,363,616 $16.00 $5,909,040 $40.00 $5,909,040 $40.00 4. Roofing $664,767 $4.50 $1,107,945 $7.50 $1,034,082 $7.00 5. Interior Construction $812,493 $5.50 $1,772,712 $12.00 $1,551,123 $10.50 6. Interior Finishes $1,403,397 $9.50 $2,363,616 $16.00 $2,068,164 $14.00 7. Building Specialties $36,932 $0.25 $184,658 $1.25 $184,658 $1.25 8. Equipment $812,493 $5.50 $1,181,808 $8.00 $886,356 $6.00 9. Furnishings $0 $0.00 $110,795 $0.75 $36,932 $0.25 10. Special Construction $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 11. Conveying Systems $0 $0.00 $295,452 $2.00 $162,499 $1.10 12. Plumbing $369,315 $2.50 $664,767 $4.50 $443,178 $3.00 13. Fire Protection $369,315 $2.50 $539,200 $3.65 $443,178 $3.00 14. H.V.A.C. $3,249,972 $22.00 $5,170,410 $35.00 $4,431,780 $30.00 15. Electrical $1,403,397 $9.50 $3,693,150 $25.00 $3,397,698 $23.00 IA. Building Construction $14,292,491 $96.75 1$28,976,455 $196.15 I$26,383,864 $178.60 I B. S i tework $1,214,900 $8.22 $5,795,300 $39.23 $3,957,600 $26.79 C. Subtotal $15,507,391 $104.97 I $34,771,755 $235.38 I $30,341,464 $205.39 1 D. Contingency 15.00% of Line C $2,326,100 $15.75 $5,215,800 $35.31 $4,551,200 $30.81 E. General Conditions 11.00% of Line C + D $1,961,700 $13.28 $4,398,600 $29.78 $3,838,200 $25.98 F. Contractor's Fee 6.00% of Line C+D+E $1,187,700 $8.04 $2,663,200 $18.03 $2,323,900 $15.73 G. Bonds& Insurance 3.00% of Line C+D+E+F $629,500 $4.26 $1,411,500 $9.55 $1,231,600 $8.34 H. Subtotal $21,612,391 $146.30 I $48,460,855 $328.05 I $42,286,364 $286.25 I. Taxes 4.27% of Line H $923,000 $6.25 $2,069,500 $14.01 $1,805,800 $12.22 IJ. Subtotal w/o Escalation $22,535,391 $152.55 I$50,530,355 $342.05 I$44,092,164 $298.47 I Exclusions: Escalation Basic Building System Assumptions: Substructure-Shallow foundations (spread footings&slab on grade, no hard rock or dewatering is assumed for both high and low ranges.The low includes short stem walls and no retaining situations or basement wall. Superstructure-Steel structure with concrete and metal deck second floor and metal deck at the roof.The low range includes single story structure while the high range is multiple stories. Exterior Closure-The low range would include EIFS on steel studs, exterior sheeting and batt insulation with minimal glazing. The high range includes masonry and tile or stone accents with more higher performance glazing systems. Additionally,the higher range building will have more fenestration and perhaps colonnades. Roofing -The low range will include low slope roofs with BU or single ply membrane roofing. The higher range will include pitched roofs with standing seam or tile roofs and skylights and or clerestories. Interior Construction - In both scenarios typical walls will be gypsum wallboard on metal studs. Interior doors will typically be hollow metal frames with solid core wood doors and commercial grade hardware. The high range includes more partitions and therefore more doors also. Interior Finishes-Wall finishes will be painted gypsum wall board. Ceiling finishes will be 2'x4' acoustic ceiling tiles at offices and support spaces, 2'x2' tegular ACT at corridors and public spaces and gypsum board ceilings at restrooms. High range ceilings will have more soffiting and special ceilings finishes. Floor finishes will be carpet and VCT at offices and conference rooms. Floors will be hard (ceramic or quarry tile)at the food areas and restrooms. Recreation areas will have wood or synthetic sports flooring. High range costs will have higher grades of these materials. Specialties- Includes an allowance for marker and tack boards, bath accessories, toilet partitions,etc. Equipment-Includes athletic equipment, stage and kitchen equipment. Bikes,cardio machines, etc. by others. Furnishings- Blinds at windows and entry mats included in high range. All other furnishings are in an F,F &E budget. Special Construction - No special construction in this project. Conveyance-Two new two stop passenger elevators are part of this project. Mechanical -New wet sprinkler fire protection system. Plumbing varies depending on the level of quality. HVAC to be provided by central system with air handlers,VAV boxes and digital controls. Low range would include rooftop package units. New exhaust and hoods will be provided at kitchen area. Electrical- Power and lighting will vary depending on level of quality. Parabolic lens will be provided at office and computer areas. A fire alarm system is included but only rough-in for special systems is included in the low range. Site Development- Includes earthwork, hardscaping, landscaping, paved parking, site furnishings and site utilities. I EXHIBIT E AQUATIC FACILITY COST BREAKDOWN •*4,441 quaDesigP International ' 'f i a 1-19-07 Burns and Wald-Hopkins 261 N. Court Tucson,AZ. 85701 RE: Naranja Town Center Aquatic project The revised budget for"A" and"B"list items as follows: A list items Lap Pool 8 lane 25 yard length $ 555,000 Beach Pool w/beach entry and water slide $1,200,000 Lazy River 400' long $ 250,000 Splash Pad 50' diameter $ 150,000 58,000 SF deck $ 522,000 Fencing 1,200' $ 45,000 Budget $2,722,000 B list items Therapy Pool $ 125,000 Diving Pool as separate structure $ 315,000 Flowrider Pool $1,000,000 Budget $1,440,000 Pricing utilizes current construction dollars; one could expect a 5-6%increase per year. Quote does not include budget for shade structure, spectator seating and overhead lighting. Budget based on the revised concept drawing dated 1-19-07. Sincerel , Da .. Acklin 7534 N. La Cholla Blvd., Tucson, Arizona 85741 Phone: 520-219-8929 Fax: 520-219-9438 www.aquadesign.net REVISED COMMUNICATION FOR ITEM 2 JULY 25, 2007 STUDY SESSION TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 1 of 3 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: July 25,2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM: ' ,_-..�.:.�� R ; -�-��L Sarah S. More, FAICP, Planning and Zoning Director `�- ^l. : r=: -�: SUBJECT: Study Session — Discussion of Proposed Resolution to establish Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) as the building standard for Town Projects. SUMMARY: On January 17, 2007, the Mayor and Council directed staff to prepare a resolution establishing LEED Silver, or its equivalent, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, be scheduled for discussion and direction. The LEED criteria are generally accepted as the benchmark for "green building". The Council Communication of January 17th (Attachment 1) describes the LEED standard in greater detail. Since that time additional information has been requested regarding the fiscal and practical implications of establishing the LEED standard for Town projects. Staff has invited several experienced professionals in the field of "green building" to address the Town Council. DISCUSSION OF ISSUE: The Town of Oro Valley has a long commitment to environmental preservation and excellence. The growing international understanding of climate change and acceptance of the need to take action now to start addressing the issue has lead local governments around the nation to adopt revised building practices. Much of the discussion regarding impacts on the environment focuses on transportation — pollution and fuel consumption by single occupant vehicles. It is important to understand that buildings have a very significant impact as well. Pima County and the City of Tucson have adopted the LEED Silver standards for their building projects. Pima County is one of only three jurisdictions in the nation to take part in a US Green Building Council (USGBC) pilot project — Pima County will be able to certify local LEED projects without paperwork being sent to USGBC. They will certify the plans based on plans and site inspections. It might be possible to establish an intergovernmental agreement between the Town and Pima County that would provide for Pima County to certify our building plans. This would reduce some of the administrative costs around LEED certification. A significant component of the LEED standards is energy conservation, but the standard also includes consideration of site selection and site design, water efficiency, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation in design. See Attachment 2, LEED for New Construction Registered Project Checklist (for new commercial projects and expansions). As shown on the checklist, a total of 69 credits or points are available for different elements of the project. Silver certification is achieved at 33 — 38 points. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 2 of 3 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: July 25,2007 The draft resolution prepared to date for Town Council consideration does differ from the City's and the County's. The City resolution (distributed at the January study session) refers to the Sustainable Energy Code. That Code has not been adopted by the Town as a part of our building codes. The County's resolution refers to an exception for construction of new buildings or additions that are less than 5,000 square feet. While the Town is contemplating two significant construction projects in the near future, the Town is much smaller and our building projects might also be smaller, so such an exclusion is not included in the draft resolution. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS: Pima County's sustainability resolution (Attachment 3) goes well beyond establishing the LEED standard for Pima County construction. It establishes a green purchasing and waste reduction program, establishes goals for reducing water consumption, establishes a program to encourage green building in the private sector, and creates new sustainability coordinator and energy manager positions (from existing staff) to focus Pima County on sustainability efforts. The City of Tucson has adopted a LEED standard and established an Office of Sustainability, housed with the Department of Urban Planning and Design (Attachment 4). Their purpose is broader than green building. The City General Services department actually supervises the construction of City buildings. City of Tucson architect/project manager Bruce Woodruff is also invited to the study session to share his experiences. The Town Council may want to consider, for future discussion, broadening the Town's approach to sustainability to include purchasing, fleet vehicles, operations and maintenance, as well as establishing incentives to encourage private sector green building. As I mentioned in the January communication, Scottsdale has adopted such a program. And, the Town could cooperate with other local jurisdictions to establish similar programs. FISCAL IMPACT: The attached copy of text from a memorandum from the Yves Khawam, Pima County Building Official to the Board of Supervisors (Attachment 5) addresses the issue of fiscal impact very well. If there are costs above the typical construction, there are benefits to LEED building in terms of reduced operations and maintenance, improved productivity, and to the community at large by lessening the impact on the environment. One of our invited guest speakers at the study session, Jerry Yudelson, is a well-known consultant with an expertise in the area of green building. He can make a good case for the economics of green building. Mr. Khawam has also been invited to the study session. All of the architects, consultants and government officials that I have spoken to indicate that the cost of LEED certified development can vary. One of the primary factors in keeping the cost low is deciding well in advance of design that LEED certification is desired. Attempting to "add" LEED considerations after or well into design adds to the cost. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Page 3 of 3 COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: July 25,2007 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Town Council Communication, dated January 17, 2007 2. LEED standards checklist 3. Pima County Board of Supervisors Memorandum and Resolution 4. City of Tucson Office of Sustainability Report 5. Memorandum from the Pima County Building Official regarding cost issues 6. Draft Town Resolution CONCLUSION: Staff is prepared to bring back a Resolution (draft, Attachment 6) for Town Council adoption regarding the implementation of LEED standards for new Town buildings and additions. The Town Council should provide direction on any modifications to the resolution at this time. The Town Council may wish to pursue an incentive program for private sector LEED development and/or a more in-depth approach to Town sustainability practices. Staff requests that the Town Council provide preliminary direction now, before the Planning and Zoning work program is developed. / ZYI(g1.5L S.rah S. More, Planning and Zoning Director (104Le-- --9Yt- Jerene Watson, Assistant Town Manager /(7) C.,41/14-41 C*;1.1'1‘1\44-4.-- David Andrews, Town Manager ATTACHMENT " 1 " TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION MEETING DATE: JANUARY 17,2007 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR& COUNCIL FROM: Sarah S. More, FAICP, Planning Director SUBJECT: Green Building, LEED, and Sustainable Design BACKGROUND: The Mayor and Council requested that the subject of LEED, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design, be scheduled for discussion and direction. The LEED criteria are generally accepted as the benchmark for"green building". WHAT IS LEED?: The LEED certification program was established by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). (Please see www.usgbc.org and the attached materials from the website.) It is a voluntary program that provides a "roadmap for measuring and documenting success in a whole-building approach to sustainability by recognizing performance in five key areas of human and environmental health." The five criteria are: Sustainable Sites, Water Efficiency, Energy and Atmosphere, Materials and Resources, and Indoor Environmental Quality. Innovation and Design Process is an additional criterion for new construction. These criteria are rather broad. Within each of the criteria there are several subcategories that are rated. Points are assigned to each of the subcategories. The end result of the LEED review process is projects are either basically certified or ranked as Silver, Gold, or Platinum certified, depending on the amount of points awarded overall. DIFFERENT TYPES OF LEED CERTIFICATION: LEED provides a roadmap for measuring and documenting success for every building type and phase of a building lifecycle. The LEED certification programs for commercial buildings have been in existence for over a decade. Other programs, such as those for homes and neighborhood development are still in draft form. Specific LEED programs include: • New Commercial Construction and Major Renovation projects • Existing Building Operations and Maintenance • Commercial Interiors projects • Core and Shell Development projects • Homes • Neighborhood Development • Guidelines for Multiple Buildings and On-Campus Building Projects USGBC is also developing LEED for Schools, LEED Retail for New Construction, LEED Retail for Commercial Interiors, and LEED for Healthcare. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 2 Last September, I attended a conference session on Green Building in New Haven, CT. One of the projects highlighted was for an artist's studio and teaching facility for Artists for Humanity in Boston. The project was Platinum certified (53 points out of total 69 max)—only one of ten Platinum certified in the United States. The non-profit building the project was constrained by budget considerations. One of the key points for affordability was using known methods, not cutting edge, and then reviewing, making decisions on design choices based on cost/benefit (See attached commercial points checklist). The building is new, but built on a former industrial site, infill development. It is a three-story, zero lot line building with a 1.5 floor area ratio to site area. It incorporates a green courtyard for water harvesting. Artists for Humanity received a grant to use photovoltaic energy and are now able to sell back unused energy to the utility company. An interesting point is that the building has no air conditioning system. A whole building fan is relied upon to bring colder air into the building at night, and windows are kept open and fans circulating air during the day in warm weather. Lots of natural light is utilized for artist studios thus reducing demand on electricity. LEED for Homes LEED for Homes is a voluntary rating system that promotes building "green" homes. A green home uses less energy, water, and natural resources; creates less waste; and is healthier and more comfortable for the occupants. Benefits of a LEED home include lower energy and water bills; reduced greenhouse gas emissions; and less exposure to mold, mildew and other indoor toxins. The net cost of owning a LEED home is comparable to that of owning a conventional home. USGBC also has published a list of 16 Ways to Green Your Home as a resource for homeowners (see attached). Generally, the site location is judged by whether it is a redevelopment or infill site (positive) or a"greenfield" site. Homeowner awareness is important to the long-term success of the program and is typically met through providing an"owner's manual." The landscape design should include water harvesting and low water use plantings. Higher densities are rated higher. Points are given if the house is below average size for number of bedrooms. How stormwater, wastewater, and solid waste are handled is also judged. Reductions in wastewater and solid waste are a positive factor. The LEED for Homes pilot rating system is available as a pdf online. While the principals behind the rating system are fundamental to good planning and environmental design, an indicator of the complexity of program is that the document is 138 pages. This program is in the pilot stage, and public comment period is expected in the Spring of 2007 with a launch in Summer 2007. Many local homeowners and builders are currently implementing green building practices, but they are not yet LEED certifiable. Many of the Southern Arizona AIA chapter Architecture Week tours have focused on green building and sustainable design. The homes on these tours generally have been in the "more expensive" category. The US Green Building Council has started an initiative for affordable green home building. Neighborhood Development The U.S. Green Building Council, the Congress for the New Urbanism, and the Natural Resources Defense Council three organizations which represent the nation's leaders among progressive design professionals, builders, planners, developers, and the environmental community have come together to develop LEED for Neighborhood Development. The rating system will integrate the principles of smart growth, urbanism, and green building into the first national standard for neighborhood design. Whereas other LEED products focus TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 3 primarily on green building practices, with only a few credits regarding site selection, LEED for Neighborhood Development will emphasize smart growth aspects and neighborhood design of development while still incorporating a selection of the most important green building practices. Guided by the Smart Growth Network's ten principles of smart growth and the Charter for New Urbanism it will include compact design, proximity to transit, mixed use, mixed housing type, and pedestrian- and bicycle- friendly design. In short, LEED for Neighborhood Development will create a label which could serve as a concrete signal of, and incentive for, better location, design, and construction of neighborhoods and buildings. While each individual action can make a difference, sustainable neighborhood development holds promise for future Oro Valley development, particularly if the Town chooses to annex state trust land to the north of the town limits. Oro Valley has done a very good job protecting environmental resources, but the other aspects of sustainable development are also important. Smart Growth and New Urbanism are terms that are often used to describe sustainable design. The principles of new urbanism (attached) are the basis for many of the LEED criteria for neighborhood development. The following list summarizes the criteria that are reviewed for neighborhood developments. • Transportation—alternate modes available: Walkable, Bike, Mass Transit • Infill—make use of existing infrastructure • Redevelopment - points for brownfield development; reuse of existing buildings • Points for Mixed Use • Smart Location— Site Selection • Green Building—reuse of building materials, renewable materials, non-toxic, recycle building materials, and management of construction waste • Energy—microclimate, reduce heat island effect; "green"roofs; energy saving building design • Site Design—open space preservation; limited stormwater runoff; use of water harvesting • Housing Diversity—a range of housing types, sizes, and costs, including affordable housing • Regional Connections This program is also in the pilot stage, and public comment period is in 2007 with a launch in 2008. Civano, a development on the east side of Tucson, is an internationally recognized example of new urbanist development. (The Civano neighborhood website http://www.civanoneighbors.com/ and, The PAD are good resources about this development http://www.tucsonaz.gov/planning/plans/redevelopment/civanopadall.pdf.) It is planned for residential, commercial and industrial development with a town center, walkable neighborhoods, and energy efficient homes. The Houghton Area Master Plan (HAMP) was adopted by the City of Tucson for almost 17 square miles of state trust land. It may be a useful resource for Oro Valley in the future, see http://www.tucsonaz.gov/planning/plans/arealhamp.pdf. GENERAL PLAN POLICIES: The 2005 General Plan does encourage preservation of the environment, but also includes several policies that might be in conflict with the principles of sustainable development or new urbanism. Among them are the desires to maintain a low-density community, lack of encouragement for connectivity between neighborhoods, lack of support for mixed-use development, etc. If the Town Council agrees that new urbanist principles or green building are important, it will be important to consider amending some General Plan policies. The same can be said regarding zoning code requirements. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 4 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: Cost There is no "rule of thumb" for additional cost in doing LEED development. There is a cost to go through the certification process itself, and that would be in addition to increased design cost. Locally, it is possible to build to meet the basic LEED certification without an increase in cost of construction over typical building, because much of the Tucson area construction is already geared towards energy efficiency and water harvesting. There is not a large body of data on the long-term cost benefit of green building, but there is a general understanding of the benefits to the building owner of lower ongoing costs and to the environment through reduction in consumption. Some studies have also shown an increase in productivity by employees in commercial LEED certified buildings. The local firm Burns Wald-Hopkins, OV Library architects and project managers for the Naranja Town site planning, have several examples of LEED construction that may be shared with the Town Council, if you are interested. I have not been able to find a local government that has adopted a green building standard applicable as a requirement for private sector projects. Any steps towards such a program should start with applicability to the Town itself. Unfortunately, the Town is not always able to conform to basic zoning requirements (landscaping of parking lots, for example) in Town projects. Until such time as the Town has the resources to commit to meeting codes and LEED standards it may not be equitable to apply them to private development. Applicability to Private Sector Development The City of Scottsdale has established a green building program in 1998 within its Planning Department and a Green Building Advisory Council. In March, 2005, Scottsdale became the first city in the nation to adopt a LEED Gold standard for new city buildings and remodels. Generally, local governments apply the requirement to their own buildings and encourage or"incentivise" green building in the private sector. Scottsdale also has an incentive program. (See attached.) This may be an appropriate direction for the Town to explore. Sustainability While LEED standards are an important component of sustainability, the American Planning Association policy guide, Planning for Sustainability, recommends an even broader, more holistic approach. Instead of just looking and land use and building, that policy recommends that cities and towns address sustainability in transportation and other infrastructure systems, economic development, recreation and open space, watershed and floodplain management, as well as community commitment to recycling, use of renewable energy, and reduction in use of chemicals and synthetic substances. Community education and awareness are an important part of such an effort. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page 5 Work Plan The development of a program for the Town to adhere to and/or an incentive program for private sector development will take considerable staff resources. At this time, this item is not in the Planning and Zoning Work Plan, and work on such a program could not begin until next fiscal year and only then if the Town Council agrees to postpone other work. The Planning and Zoning Commission discussed this very topic in making a recommendation to the Town Council on the P&Z Work Plan. They agreed with staff that it is an important topic, but one that is not pressing. Development in the Arroyo Grande planning area, state trust land to the north of existing town limits, is years away. TOWN COUNCIL ACTION: Should the Mayor and Council be interested in pursuing a LEED or green building program, staff suggests that direction be provided to further research the Scottsdale program and local LEED designs and bring back to the Town Council for consideration. Planning and Zoning Director Acting Assistant Town Manager Town Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Commercial Project LEED Checklist 2. 16 Ways to Green Your Home 3. LEED for Neighborhood Developments Rating System—Table of Contents 4. City of Scottsdale Green Building Program 5. Principles of New Urbanism SSM/Green Building TC 011707 ATTACHMENT "2" n0v�4i s, LEED for New Construction v2.2 Z Registered Project Checklist ,EE. USGec . Project Name: Project Address: Yes ? No Sustainable Sites 14 Points Prereq 1 Construction Activity Pollution Prevention Required Credit 1 Site Selection 1 Credit 2 Development Density&Community Connectivity 1 Credit 3 Brownfield Redevelopment 1 Credit 4.1 Alternative Transportation, Public Transportation Access 1 Credit 4.2 Alternative Transportation, Bicycle Storage&Changing Rooms 1 Credit 4.3 Alternative Transportation, Low-Emitting& Fuel-Efficient Vehicles 1 Credit 4.4 Alternative Transportation, Parking Capacity 1 Credit 5.1 Site Development, Protect or Restore Habitat 1 Credit 5.2 Site Development, Maximize Open Space 1 Credit 6.1 Stormwater Design,Quantity Control 1 credit 6.2 Stormwater Design,Quality Control 1 Credit 7.1 Heat Island Effect, Non-Roof 1 Credit 7.2 Heat Island Effect, Roof 1 credit 8 Light Pollution Reduction 1 Yes ? No Water Efficienc5 Points Credit 1.1 Water Efficient Landscaping, Reduce by 50% 1 Credit 1.2 Water Efficient Landscaping, No Potable Use or No Irrigation 1 Credit 2 Innovative Wastewater Technologies i Credit 3.1 Water Use Reduction, 20% Reduction 1 Credit 3.2 Water Use Reduction, 30% Reduction 1 ,.........._._._... W......... ,.;,, i , t Energy &Atmosphere 17 Points v ';" Prereq 1 Fundamental Commissioning of the Building Energy Systems Required , Prereq 2 Minimum Energy Performance Required Prereq 3 Fundamental Refrigerant Management Required *Note for EAc1:All LEED for New Construction projects registered after June 26°',2007 are required to achieve at least two(2)points under EAc1. I I Credit 1 Optimize Energy Performance 1 to 10 10.5% New Buildings or 3.5% Existing Building Renovations 14% New Buildings or 7% Existing Building Renovations '' 17.5% New Buildings or 10.5% Existing Building Renovations 21% New Buildings or 14% Existing Building Renovations 4 24.5% New Buildings or 17.5% Existing Building Renovations 5 28% New Buildings or 21% Existing Building Renovations 6 31.5% New Buildings or 24.5% Existing Building Renovations 7 35% New Buildings or 28% Existing Building Renovations 8 38.5% New Buildings or 31.5% Existing Building Renovations 9 42% New Buildings or 35% Existing Building Renovations 10 Credit 2 On-Site Renewable Energy 1 to 3 2.5% Renewable Energy 7.5% Renewable Energy 12.5% Renewable Energy Credit 3 Enhanced Commissioning 1 Credit 4 Enhanced Refrigerant Management 1 Credit 5 Measurement&Verification 1 Credit 6 Green Power 1 continued... Yes ? No Materials & Resources 13 Points Prereq 1 Storage&Collection of Recyclables Required Credit 1.1 Building Reuse, Maintain 75% of Existing Walls, Floors& Roof 1 Credit 1.2 Building Reuse, Maintain 100%of Existing Walls, Floors&Roof 1 Credit 1.3 Building Reuse, Maintain 50% of Interior Non-Structural Elements 1 Credit 2.1 Construction Waste Management, Divert 50%from Disposal 1 Credit 2.2 Construction Waste Management, Divert 75%from Disposal 1 Credit 3.1 Materials Reuse, 5% 1 Credit 3.2 Materials Reuse,10% 1 Credit 4.1 Recycled Content, 10% (post-consumer+ 1/2 pre-consumer) 1 Credit 4.2 Recycled Content, 20% (post-consumer+ 1/2 pre-consumer) 1 Credit 5.1 Regional Materials, 10% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regior 1 Credit 5.2 Regional Materials, 20% Extracted, Processed & Manufactured Regior Credit 6 Rapidly Renewable Materials Credit 7 Certified Wood Yes ? No i Indoor Environmental Quality 15 Points I E i Prereq 1 Minimum IAQ Performance Required Prereq 2 Environmental Tobacco Smoke(ETS)Control Required Credit 1 Outdoor Air Delivery Monitoring 1 Credit 2 Increased Ventilation 1 Credit 3.1 Construction IAQ Management Plan, During Construction 1 Credit 3.2 Construction IAQ Management Plan, Before Occupancy 1 Credit 4.1 Low-Emitting Materials, Adhesives&Sealants 1 Credit 4.2 Low-Emitting Materials, Paints&Coatings 1 Credit 4.3 Low-Emitting Materials, Carpet Systems 1 Credit 4.4 Low-Emitting Materials, Composite Wood &Agrifiber Products Credit 5 Indoor Chemical &Pollutant Source Control 1 Credit 6.1 Controllability of Systems, Lighting 1 Credit 6.2 Controllability of Systems, Thermal Comfort 1 Credit 7.1 Thermal Comfort, Design 1 Credit 7.2 Thermal Comfort,Verification 1 Credit 8.1 Daylight&Views, Daylight 75% of Spaces 1 Credit 8.2 Daylight&Views, Views for 90%of Spaces Yes ? No • Innovation & Design Process 5 Points Credit 1.1 Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title Credit 1.2 Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title Credit 1.3 Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title 1 Credit 1.4 Innovation in Design: Provide Specific Title 1 Credit 2 LEED®Accredited Professional 1 Yes ? No Project Totals (pre-certification estimates) 69 Points Certified: 26-32 points, Silver: 33-38 points, Gold: 39-51 points, Platinum: 52-69 poi ATTACHMENT "3" Board of Su ervisors Memorandum \-t4ilovit* May 1, 2007 Resolution In Support of New County Sustainability Initiatives Background The current drought, rising fuel prices, and climate change, are topics discussed daily in our news. Without action, all three have the ability to dramatically change our current lifestyles. That said, our community is known for rising to the occasion and supporting progressive changes. Whether it be coming together to finally pass a regional transportation plan that contains significant funding for transit improvements, or showing great conservation ethic and leadership by supporting the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. Many in this community enjoy a high quality of life, and we continue to implement initiatives in the areas of health, safety, education, job assistance, affordable housing, and neighborhood reinvestment, to assist those in need. We need to continue to sustain and improve the quality of life of this community, without jeopardizing the ability for future generations to do the same. A sustainable and livable community requires investments in the environment, the economy, and the social fabric. We can continue this ethic by focusing efforts on the built environment, lessening our impact on non-renewable resources, and joining forces with other communities confronting global climate change. As one of the largest employers in Southern Arizona, Pima County can be a leader in this effort. The County designs and constructs buildings as part of our voter- approved bond programs, and is therefore also one of the largest builders in Southern Arizona. This includes facilities like community centers and libraries within our cities and towns. In addition, through our development approval process, the County has the ability, through incentives, education, and regulation, to impact the private development process in unincorporated Pima County. As you know, the topic of this year's State of the County event on May 4, 2007, is "Sustaining a Livable Community". In preparation for this event, I've placed the attached resolution on the Board's addendum for May 1 , 2007. If approved, the resolution would commit Pima County to new initiatives in the areas of alternative fuel vehicles for our County fleet, energy conservation, water conservation, waste reduction, and green purchasing. This memorandum describes these new initiatives and how the County can continue its commitment to fostering sustainability. The Honorable Chairman and Members, Pima County Board of Supervisors Resolution In Support of New County Sustainability Initiatives May 1 , 2007 Page 2 Water, Energy, and Climate Change Water resources are inextricably related to other resources such as energy. Each kWh of thermoelectric generation requires approximately 25 gallons of water with additional amounts used for operating pollution control devices. The United States Geological Survey estimates that in 2000, 346 billion gallons of freshwater were used per day for energy production in the United States accounting for approximately 39 percent of total freshwater withdrawals. While only 9 percent of these withdrawals are actually consumed by the generation process, they still account for approximately 38 billion gallons per day in 2006. Hence buildings with inefficient energy use, and the manufacture of building materials requiring large amounts of energy, contribute indirectly to taxing our water resources. In addition, the built environment has complex and potentially devastating impacts on the biosphere. While only representing 8 percent of the United States gross domestic product, the construction industry consumes 40 percent of raw materials extracted or harvested in this country and generates about half a ton of waste per person each year. Regarding impacts on greenhouse gases, buildings account for 40 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions, with transportation accounting for another 33 percent. Expansion of the built environment has resulted in: lower land carrying capacity, loss of biodiversity, rise in air quality toxicity, water supply shortages, and greater energy requirements. Our long-term survival in the Sonoran Desert depends upon our ability to reduce transportation emissions and move toward green or sustainable building. Alternative Fuel Vehicles Motor vehicle use is a major contributor to air pollution and global climate change. At the same time, we are facing higher and higher fuel prices at the gas pump. The County has over a thousand vehicles in its fleet, excluding patrol vehicles and heavy trucks. By approving this resolution, the County would be committing to an aggressive timetable to phase those vehicles to alternative fuel vehicles. Waste Reduction and Green Purchasing Emphasis will also be placed on moving the County toward waste reduction and green purchasing to include Energy Star equipment and materials of low embodied energy and of recyclable content whenever possible. Energy Star is a joint program of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy, which certifies appliances, office equipment, light fixtures, home electronics, and other products as meeting certain energy efficiency standards. The EPA estimates that in 2006 alone, the Energy Star program has saved Americans $14 billion on their utility bills and has avoided greenhouse gas emission equivalent to that generated by 25 million automobiles. Materials of low embodied energy are those that require little energy to produce, manufacture, and transport to their destination. The Honorable Chairman and Members, Pima County Board of Supervisors Resolution In Support of New County Sustainability Initiatives May 1 , 2007 Page 3 Water Conservation Through implementation of the riparian element of the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, and amendments underway to the Water Resources Element of our Comprehensive Plan, the County is already making significant efforts to conserve our limited water resources. Approval of this resolution would take these efforts further by making commitments to reduce water consumption in County facilities, increase our use of effluent, and maximize the water resources we do have to protect our natural environment. Green Building and LEED Standards The most prominent green building standard in use today is produced by the United States Green Building Council under the name of LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). The LEED rating system provides obtainable points in six distinct categories: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation & design process. Depending on the number of points obtained, buildings can be built and maintained meeting LEED certified, silver, gold, and platinum in escalating levels of performance. Approval of this resolution means that Pima County will adopt LEED silver, already adopted by the City of Tucson and the State of Arizona. Since the County builds many facilities for other jurisdictions through voter-approved bond programs, this is a very significant commitment region wide. Building to LEED has seen capital cost increases of over 10 percent a decade ago recently drop to below 0 percent in certain projects as designers and builders have become savvy in taking an integrative approach to sustainable construction. A 2003 study by Gregory Kats reported that the average construction premium for 33 LEED buildings across the country was 1 .84 percent. The following year, Matthiessen and Morris of Davis Langdon Consulting compared 45 buildings attempting LEED certification to 93 conventional buildings, finding that there was no difference in costs per square foot. The United States General Services Administration reported that LEED silver federal courthouses cost premiums range from a negative 0.03 percent to 4.4 percent compared to their conventional counterparts. The low numbers are typically attributable to larger buildings and the high ones to small ones. While it is clear that there will be some initial capital cost increases to the County until such time that greater expertise in green building is obtained, these will be quickly offset through energy savings, and increases in productivity. The United States Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and other organizations have compared the cost/benefit of investing in high performance commercial The Honorable Chairman and Members, Pima County Board of Supervisors Resolution In Support of New County Sustainability Initiatives May 1 , 2007 Page 4 buildings. Although a few years old, and therefore capital cost increases have since dropped, findings generally reflect the following patterns: • While capital costs increase in the order of 2 percent or $2 to $5 per square foot for silver/gold rated LEED buildings, the total net present value (TNPV) of the energy savings over a 20-year life cycle is $5.79 per square foot. • Additional per square foot savings for reduced emissions ($1 .18), water ($0.51), and operations and maintenance savings from proper building commissioning ($8.47) bring the aggregate TNPV to $15.95 per square foot. Added to this number are yet further potential savings gleaned from improvement of interior environments. • More efficient and healthy interiors reduce medical costs and produce a gain in productivity estimated by researchers as high as $36.89 TNPV per square foot for a certified/silver and $55.33 for a gold/platinum rated buildings. It is in the best interest of the County to adopt LEED silver for its facilities. While initial capital costs may increase slightly, this amount would be rapidly recovered simply in terms of energy saved, not counting the large savings resulting from increased productivity, quality of life, and environmental benefits. Additional Energy Conservation Commitments In addition to committing to a LEED silver standard for County built facilities, adoption of this resolution will also commit the County to constructing one medium size building with a net zero energy consumption, to ensuring that 15 percent of County facilities' electrical energy consumption come from renewable resources, and that the County maximize renewable resources from the production of methane in County wastewater treatment land landfill operations. Green Building, Energy and Water Conservation and the Private Sector The County has the ability to pursue strategies to further conservation practices on private property in unincorporated Pima County through the County's development approval processes. Among these strategies is the development of green building programs currently in the planning stage. Pima County proposes to endorse green building standards by providing incentives to builders who select to build to recognized standards. Opportunities will also be sought to incorporate solar elements into County planning to take advantage of our greatest local energy resource. These will include requiring that a minimum of 50 percent of homes constructed after 2010 include direct solar assisted energy through solar hot water or photovoltaic elements. Adoption of the resolution will also commit the County to amending land use The Honorable Chairman and Members, Pima County Board of Supervisors Resolution In Support of New County Sustainability Initiatives May 1, 2007 Page 5 regulations to require all new housing discharging to septic systems also be provided with a grey water reuse system. In addition, a draft memorandum of understanding is being negotiated with the United States Green Building Council whereby the County would be one of three national pilot jurisdictions with authority to certify structures to LEED within both the County and its incorporated jurisdictions. LEED certification could thus be provided to the community at lower cost by reducing the paperwork documentation effort through field verification of construction conformance to the target design. The pilot program would also provide an opportunity for large-scale educational promotion of sustainable development to designers, builders and the public at large by way of the building permitting process. Finally, this effort would allow the County as well as regional American Institute of Architects and United States Green Building Council groups to play a critical role in establishing procedures and methods to be deployed at a national level. Organizational Approach In conclusion, departments and organizational units within Pima County will be identified to contribute to these efforts and an organizational structure facilitating the coordination of efforts established. This group will seek opportunities to further sustainable goals, while looking to resolve current procedural and code requirements which conflict with sustainable practices. Pima County will also continue to work with other jurisdictions to strive for consistent policies and programs so as to maximize the potential for success, which can only be truly realized on a regional level. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board adopt the attached resolution in support of these new County sustainability initiatives. Respectfully submitted, r C.H. Huckelberry County Administrator (April 26, 2007) Attachments RESOLUTION NO. 2007- A RESOLUTION OF THE PIMA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN SUPPORT OF NEW COUNTY SUSTAINABILITY INITIATIVES WHEREAS, sustainability is often defined as improving the quality of life for current generations without compromising the resources needed for future generations; and WHEREAS, Pima County has supported past initiatives to improve and sustain a livable community, including initiatives in the areas of land and water conservation, air quality improvements, cultural resource preservation, urban development guidelines, recreation, public health, affordable housing, and neighborhood reinvestment; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Sonoran Desert Conservation and Comprehensive Land Use Plan in 2001; and WHEREAS, since 1974, Pima County voters have approved over $230 million in bond funds for land purchases to conserve our natural and cultural heritage; and WHEREAS, since 1974, Pima County has purchased over 45,000 acres of open space property, and grazing leases for 86,000 acres of open space, which property is managed by the County for conservation purposes; and WHEREAS, Pima County has begun collecting environmental enhancement fees as a percentage of revenues from particular development projects in order to mitigate development impacts to conservation areas; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted Pima County Resolution 2003-88 supporting Congressional designation of the Santa Cruz National Heritage Area to promote regional conservation of our natural and cultural heritage areas, and to sustain tourism as a key sector of our regional economy; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted revisions to the Riparian Mitigation Ordinance in 2005 to avoid and minimize impacts to riparian vegetation on local washes; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors amended the golf course ordinance to require new golf courses to be irrigated with directly-served effluent, reclaimed water or Central Arizona Project (CAP) water; and WHEREAS, in 2006 the Board of Supervisors directed staff to begin an update to the Water Resources Element of the Comprehensive Plan to better address land use and water resource planning, and to provide additional information to the Board on riparian resource issues during the review of developments; and Page 1 of 5 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors approved Resolution 2005-124 and 2007-15 opposing mining in biologically important areas of the County that would degrade water quantity and water quality, negatively impact key tourism sites, and compromise quality of life for surrounding residents; and WHEREAS, Pima County uses effluent, storm water, and reclaimed water for riparian rehabilitation and restoration efforts, as well as recreational facilities; and WHEREAS, in 2007 the County Administrator directed staff to add energy guidance into this year's update of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has adopted regulations to prevent and reduce air pollution, protect public health, and restore and preserve the quality of the outdoor air in Pima County; and WHEREAS, in January, 2007 Pima County was the first county in the state to adopt a Transfer of Development Rights program permitting willing sellers of land with conservation value to sell development rights to owners of land more suitable for more intense development; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Recreation Areas in Residential Subdivisions Ordinance in 2003 to require recreation areas within new subdivisions and to collect fees to benefit the regional park system; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors in 2007 approved a concept for partnering with Native Seeds/SEARCH to promote the health benefits of eating native foods and the benefits of reduced energy consumption by growing or purchasing locally grown food; and WHEREAS, voters approved the issuance of a combined total of $25 million in bonds since 1997 to fund Neighborhood Reinvestment projects in high stress areas of Pima County, such as traffic mitigation devices, street lights, park improvements, sidewalks, walking paths, pedestrian bridges, sports facilities, and community buildings, which neighbors report have positively benefited their communities; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors in 2005 adopted an affordable housing fee to be required for certain new subdivisions that, when combined with $15 million of bond funding approved by voters in 1997 and 2004, provides revenues to an Affordable Housing Trust fund to expand the supply of affordable housing in Pima County; and WHEREAS, Pima County recognizes that the scientific community has developed a consensus that increasing emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere is affecting the Earth's climate; and Page 2 of 5 WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors recognizes and accepts its responsibility to continue implementing and promoting sustainable practices that protect the County's natural and built environment; and WHEREAS, new sustainable development initiatives for Pima County must address the environmental, economic, and social characteristics of our community; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT: 1. The Pima County Board of Supervisors supports sustainable development and the continual emphasis on sustaining a livable community. 2. The Pima County Board Of Supervisors supports implementation of a green building initiative and other sustainable initiatives regarding county facilities and vehicles, including the following goals and aspirations: a) Shifting to more environment-friendly alternative fuels for its vehicular fleet such that: twenty-five percent (25%) or a minimum of one hundred (100) vehicles of the County's fleet of vehicles, excluding Sheriff patrol vehicles, shall consist of Alternative Fuel Vehicles by 2008. This percentage shall increase to thirty percent (30%) by 2009 and fifty percent (50%) by 2010. b) Applying a green purchasing and waste reduction emphasis to all County facilities. c) Maximizing County water resource assets including groundwater rights, surface rights and production and use of effluent to sustain and protect the County's natural environment. d) Reducing water consumption by fifteen percent (15%) in all County facilities by 2025. Water reduction strategies will include conducting water audits, replacing high water-use fixtures and replacing high water-use decorative landscaping with drought tolerant native landscaping. e) Doubling the number of County parks served by reclaimed water by 2018, subject to voter approval of bond funds to extend reclaimed water lines. 0 Designing and building all new occupied County buildings, including additions over 5000 square feet, for which design is initiated after July 1, 2007, to achieve a minimum of LEEDTM Silver certification level. g) Maintaining All LEEDTM certified County facilities under LEEDTM for Existing Buildings and attempting to apply the same standard to all existing facilities. h) Applying the above LEEDTM criteria to all projects funded through County bonds as a condition of funding and regardless of jurisdictional project sponsorship. Page 3 of 5 i) Designing and constructing at least one medium size County building with a net zero energy consumption. j) Adhering to the Renewable Energy Standard adopted by the Arizona Corporation Commission such that fifteen percent (15%) of all County facilities' electrical energy consumption shall be generated from renewable resources by 2025. k) Maximizing renewable energy resources from the production of methane in County wastewater treatment and landfill operations and use them to offset non- renewable energy needs. 3. Pima County will encourage the construction of new residential, commercial, and industrial facilities employing green building concepts throughout the county by embracing a sustainable development emphasis and by considering: a) The creation of incentive-based green building residential and commercial programs. b) The incorporation of solar systems, solar orientation of structures, solar access, and smart growth principles into County development planning including exploring the possibility of requiring that that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of homes constructed after 2010 include direct solar assisted energy through solar hot water or photovoltaic elements. c) The amendment of land use regulations to require that all new houses discharging to septic systems also be provided with a grey water reuse system. d) The revision of design and construction standards to capture and mitigate storm- water generated on-site for purposes of water harvesting and the incorporation, into the pavement of parking lots and roads, of light-colored permeable materials to reduce heat-island effects, water runoff, and dust emissions. 4. In order to maintain an emphasis on sustainable development initiatives organizationally the County Administrator is hereby directed to: a) Appoint a sustainability coordinator from existing staff to identify departments and organizational units within Pima County that contribute to sustainability efforts, establish an organizational structure that facilitates the coordination of efforts between departments and organizational units, and coordinate sustainable policy and initiatives with other jurisdictions. 5. Appoint an Energy Manager from existing staff to produce a comprehensive County facilities energy plan, track progress of County energy programs, and help facilitate LEEDTM implementation. Page 4 of 5 Passed and adopted by the Pima County Board of Supervisors this day of May, 2007. Chairman, Pima County Board of Supervisors ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: IPA? - ' / e Clerk of the Board Deput C+ my Attorney Page 5 of 5 44 4" U -=..'-''''''''';:--1,i--Iiii4gi.111-',iiii.ittit',Iii... .1,1.:1S-•.•-•::'.•.-: - . ........':.:7:-...--.'...-.:'...-'1,1"t':,:laillatiiill'.*4-ir,,F,R-4.' - -',,';..--',-51f2fl-ii-ilft,';,41.41-..:,'P.,,:f7.,;,...,.:-,:::4,:lY.',....---..:.-'.: - . •..,,....1::-:::-.'-',...s. ;','....,..V:it.g.l.iltite-,*-V-6,-;t:':C4i.--r:i'.. ...., ..-- ...,,-,,,,,,,,,..1-4--,-.7,-,...'-',,,,,,,,,,,,,,,....-•---.-:-,,-;."....,:.!,,,,--•.---- .. :•..--:,...-.--,...,E::'.::,.......:'.4'...:....:4'..4.-f.31-8.4-11C:-Pit*.a-V44.i.....-ii;AfZ', _-...._,....-.. .. • .,--- .:--,-...,,,,,,,,,, CITY OF —R--- . N 0 I he Offi(e of (01'lerV(1t101-1: ' all • ,,......,........„....;:......„,.....„.„--.......„;....„,....::.--.„ .-.:,..::,-..,...,.._..............., ; TUCSON (111(1 ,,,stit(-111-1(-11)le Dewlo )iiieli I. vi,. ,,,..„_.,,„.„.„..,....„,....,„.„:„:„.,..,,,,,,,,„„.„.,....:,.,...,...,,,,...,,,,,,,..,,,::„..,,,..„„:.....,.....,....,.„.„,„.„,„... .,...;,.:,,,,::,„”.„,„..........:.,„,.....,,..,...,.........,.._,,,,,-...._,..„...,,,.. ,......,,,......„._____.„,_:„.:„.........,_„.„.;, .,,.,. ,. .,._.,, , , ., ,.. Sustainability Report 2006-200 ' ----- -- „..... ..„,,. ....,,,, ,,.. „ ...,,,, ,.., .„.:.. GREEN BUILDING , 1 .,-..,.' tNERGY TRANSPORTATION WATER :TA WASTE REDUCTION :,.,..: URBAN DESIGN . .,. ...,„,. .„, URBAN NATURE • , ,,.,...,. ;..,,...,-,...„.„ . .,_,,.,....... ::, ...., , :,,,,,,.....„......„,..:,.,...„..._,..,:,....„.....,........„:„,,,,...,_.,..„.,._,,,,,,,,,,,,,,--;,,,,,:i.,,,.'..,,,,',,...,:...A:,..,..,,,,:.,:,0,,,,,..,..-•;,..”..j'"...,,,.,,,:':',..'i..,;;',....,,,,,lit,',Tg,..4;t:.;!..:;;:::'..,i',,,,,,..;,,,'. ..,:;''''','.'fql...7.'i::,iit:I.Z4'..4.;:1:,','Pl-,;:,:',,:,-4.,:sg),::,;::;:::..1',',';i;:;.:;ga.,X;,:i.',H,,r::;:":' giF'Zi-5-1 3.iii: .f...,A:,;.,.,,.,Eft.,,iklz-kivi$c',:'.;:V.e.i..',:q,-,.,--,,•. .:..., .,,;..,.. -1 4 , ,,” ,,,,I i I .', ,, ,,,,,, _,'.-'• ',i`.'',.,,V.-,",.:..,,,, . „, .. ...;... ''''.. -.. ... • - .. - 4 - .. . ._. ,.. .. . ,. r ,. . .._ ---, .,.. ,A. •.-... ..... , . ,. .....,, ',:-:,-•. , .. .. .,.. . ..,....,....... • •,_, . •• •. ,• . . : ,. .. ..„,._,:.., , ,, . . .h. • -,4tri- '*41661#' ' ' . • 1 .,.. -,' ' ' - ' v...,-....- A. , .• .., - . , ''',' ... . -......... r. :•,..,.,...., -,s ,. . ,- „._ ,, ,, . •••• .4,..-•,...4 ..:..-, _. ,,. , ..„.,„.:„.,,,,,,,.. .••-..,,,..‘..-.,........,..-...•,..,..s, '.,C ' , . . . --'S. „lip* . : i '- , ..,,,,,, i=', .---'-r--•-• .'..: *Z--'' , ,.:It-' ‘1,-.'„,7"'.. ', ,..: ' Fi 'k-o'-'--05,'.- %...,,,,,,,, -•t .-, :.., ' : ' ff.„-..... ,.,., ,,.,.... ,.„.........., ':'‘.k*.,,.,',',3i4f,igo..-.,, •,:,.: .‘." ..':.,..„.,:.• f ...., Ilk _ ,•,.,.,,,.. „.;:. -, . ...,, lirti 1. .„.,;:.,....... •'.,.!/ .: .-,,..:2..t,..t.::it..,.:. -,.. ..r. ,- ,.-.„...---- ' . .],,. . ''' ''''''''''%:i'2;'-----''r---.,:s.,.::.-._:::-._:,.-.:-.-.:.•.:.,:::'_,..:, _:. .. ',07,,--:*-. '' ..,, , ,..„,..„.....„..,.....„_.,..,,,.... .....____., ,',..2,,,,,,,,,•:,...:;',,,,...,-,',4,,,,,,,e,.,.....,,,,,,...„..:,..,,,.„. ,....... , 7.*- • ....lit 5,7 ''''' • ,...---,,,,,,,-,.,..,,,,,, --,,y,.,,',..„'";:';''...-t,.,"„t,-17,'....-..-',..'-...'...'''',.';',;7'...:::,'-.1-'..7;.:,'''';'.::7;-.-•:-7-':-.'.,..',';',,17,',7,4%.':,.'!;:f--..,,.:',,;-'.•,:'.-:!--',..,:..7--7.:-,-:.:7;7"..',.'7,.,..'-..,---'.-.:''.','..:;;;;;7.::',.'.:';:„,...z.l':.---;..., 11,i4i2;P:i.'44§,,,4',/,i01,4, '.•,•,,,.'''''''"-''''',',-.,..i.',.",:‘..-..'•.;'''', ''''''''..'-- ' ',., , -: . i#04,to..,,,,,,,,,:,,ffi,,,,,,,,,",././ii,f.,,,.',;.-y,f..',,,,,:,,.„,,'hy,,,,.''..,/,,,t,,,..,....iv-,.,-,,,,,,,,.:,,..,,,,,,.,.,,oprtr,;rtirf;o4,,,...,„,,..,,,,..:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,t.,,..00'f,,!.-r-:,,,,,,,,,,,..-.i...,.-.--.'-m.,..,n'.' /iViSZI,I ''''''''';'''''''''''''''''t;'''fi'''''ill#1.1g.":;7:.?:;:;',,:,:l':::,i;61',',41,4,11:101.114$0411/101',',.01.,,.",,Z,,,i;',,,.:,',;:e.tig,t,',,i;..':7;'.',.' to, '\ ,-,,,;,.,1,il101e:1 .'00;`'..AQ1'%?4?;;.?:-.(iii,.;''1/1),?f//ki,.. . .,V1;flitli11111. ,1011111,Y.i(#4,lif;#1,:i '...'•''''''4iNil'iliikilfillitt . ,:•:-•/•,..;/,,,..,,,;,,/,/r4,4),,,,,,,,,f1A"q7!,....:,;,,,,,,N3.',,,...:;:,,,E,,,,,,•04,/,14,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i,m;,„,/,„.„,f„,,,„,:,:,„„(•.,,,,,,,,,,,,,-;,,,...,/,;„,„0,,iiii.04,0,,iiii,itifkik, •- ,,..,- •,;,:•;.':;..',:::,,/,',,,fil.,,z.,,,,,,L-:;,,,,,:z;,-,..,..4 ,p,,/,'!,::',...,...7,..f:',-,.:::./,,,V7,,,!',k$:,,, ,,.'i,i',,51.tag..7,'..!4.'f.,..,;g0.,0447041-,,mo'ifiisna,,,,,,,;;,,;,,.....,4,,,,,,:ri,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,;„, .'-,:•':!;,,,...,3.4(10/0,. 11/;,/,16',',...1,/,,;::,),,,I,..T:Isl/.;?';',4:',.,..::)ii:',"1,!,11111,41 '4;:1;4'::,...'',.'illti%":01111,foc01•'';.::,,illgtili,,,'„•,,..,,..,•,,••:.••,.„.....-• . ' .'!..',z,...i•:-/;:::Sio.i,),,ftgi. ,,-...I.J.,:,,,,,. ,„ , , ••••,44,:',3;•;.,:,,.,,,r,.....?„..,:;„:::::,,:,,,,,..:,,.,,,,, .,..6.:(...4,.,, ,,,,,(fiithrt',:,..,.;;.,:,.:..,41:.:::%;;:k.'110§,fitlill'a,'5',g4Pvi;:(7:44'.:ir;904,,,,110000,,01/::,,ki,•::',-.40.,,,...,.•.h.,,,,,I,:i.,::::;,/,.:,.,..„,:,•,,f,.......:...y,„.......: .. .,-..,;,,1•0,;,,,,,,,,t/4,,,,A,,,,,o,,,,'",?;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,i,,,,,a;;;,/i/y",,,::,';„,4„:;;„,6.c.,,..;.•;;:,:.;-;:,.:'iii.:.•4,,,,,,,,,,,,,;,;;;;•,;:ti:Er.,,,,,-..e?.;,..,;,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,:,,,,i;,:,:::,-.,,,,,,,:,,...;z1,,::,.:1;,:;.•;,...,;-,.-4.,::,,,o,ii,,,,iii,j.;•,,,,gy'r.:.',;y,,,,,,,P::•,,,,.:.,..:.;,;!,,,,i,,,,,,-;,.;.,;5•:•,,,:•Q4,:id.'e,,,,,,-.,..,,,o/fi:o;;',40,,loci,',,.:-,:;,;,'„,,,:,:,,,,,,.),Ic,•:.:,::$4,,,,,..§....,./?1",vt,,,q/9.:-...;;;•..i.:,igi-.P;..5ogo,fgo.",,,,,,,s9,t;:f4f,o/;,,,,,R,;';',A,:oftzi ,,!.;ii;,,.S.'„:14,,,,47',40.Alllt.inii,i,t,4:•,,.'k;z:,..,'..,.,..i,..:...,- ''''''',411ifti'141471MVefid14/01p44,;;{0;;,,,,•„.,•;:.;,.:',..,::,,,;h;..,,,,,,,,,,v.;:ii/.,,,:,::-.:../... .,,,,;;,0;0,,,;:e,goi,:.,.;[.::...:-.,;,.:.).:,...,•:::::;:;.:c!„i7,•;,',.,,,...,/,': ,.:',/,4,-45,,,s1,?if•;,,,,,...,,,,,./,,,,,e,".•:4,•:::',„;(,./. ;:.!;::;:„.'4.i.;Emt.',:ii;;;K:,''..E.',..'/..,,,o',$/7;-':.,;•';'/{/.li'iz:::',0"', 'iiir.-;:'''''/'/.g4''43'0Allof0414475tio2:)':''"-:'"7':14/44ixifi441,0•Pi',,-;(vvA,,amo',Ntafi,..',:.•:.5,1..:•.:,',;'-'•';.• •:7?:;,•:?...,070,004#40737/4.1,0001;,pik,...,;:;,!,;:::„;, ,,,,,,,,Jit/i,:0;;,;,t'..',,,e94§;:foga;-....:.•,•::;,•::,,g:,..:,.....ry..,•:t.,:i,,,,,,,,,,-,;:','..:-..,•,;:,„':;',,,,../,':',g.,..,:iii:1!,,./p.;:.::::,:,.:::',:',.....",,,.,:?:::'::.;':4,,o4',/.,,,...:'',...;-'•:4;.r.,•:•;.,,,!://:,,,r,,/,.,'o;•.1,„-1,,„;:•:,,::/.:,•::;••••;::::.4.-.,.;;,/iii,,,,,,,,:,,:b,;:::...',:-,.'../.;;;:of',./ii,,fixit.-...,,:'/,',,Y.,2-ili,',:.:.,,:;;,:miol:litfi4t,,,,,ligioiii,,,,,',,,....,.',.;•:4ei..;:,:,,,,',,,',:,4:,ii. ,i,eieorf.:,:',•4..0..thoolokti.,:;:i.:;;,,f;',....:;•.•••;;.;,.,;;;:-,':::-....•., : •••,,,,,,,,,,,,,o,g,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„46,„4",,,,4,,,,,;;;,,,,,,,..,.....,;:.;,..„;,,,.„.,,..,:,..,..„:„...„,;;;:,,i7,,,i.:,,fi,:;..,...::::;„,„:,..,:i.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,;:p.:,,:::,,.:•,,,,,:,.„..,:•,....,.....',.-,•:i.:•:,•y,„;;;,;.......,... ...,;„.,;4.,,,,',,,,';,;:',..„,:;iii,,,,..:,,,„,..:,.•,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,..,.,..;;„;„,,,,,,,„:„.•...:,,,•,..„.••,,,.„,;;;;;,„,,,,,,,,,,.•,,;„„,;.,.;•,,„./..!,,,,,•,,,.„,",,...•,-...„...,,,,,,,,,,,,;:,„..,...,,...„:„.:„..,•,,,:,.„.,..,,,,,,..„,,...........:„.„„:„.•„„,„„.,:,„„:•„.„,,,„,,,..,,.,•..• ,•„....•,..„,-•,„•...-.,-• ''-• 0 ice of Conservation and Sustainable Development 345 E. Toole Ave. 2nd Flibr 520-791-4675 .,..,.._...,,..„—..., ''' Ail'/Sfi,*:AA:iOkpe.:yi:l:,,44;:/,:.0:1ii y o u cso n - _,2------:----'-'11'-'-a14''' ���' z.y. -;,-4:,-'!--I-5-t-:::;.1117;fel!f---..,'-,,,,-.. 2006 - 2007 SustainabilityReport CITY COUNCIL „ ,,, ,,,,: a,.. . ..,,,,,, ,,,,,,, , ,„,.: ,, --,u, , , :40 7, ,„, ,,* .,. ,...„..., ' —.,,k, ,. . ...,„ v.,if'#)' ,,,,, i j q '''''',4, it,,, , ,,, ,,, IP dl HONORABLE JOSE J. IBARRA CAROL W. WEST KARIN UHLICH ROBERT E. WALKUP WARD 1 WARD 2 WARD 3 MAYOR foil) ..., fel ,,,,,?.- 110 ,4 ,, ._ , „ TIM SHIRLEY C. SCOTT STEVE LEAL NINA J. TRASOFF WARD 4 WARD 5 WARD 6 CITY ADMINISTRATION MIKE HEIN City Manager MICHAEL D. LETCHER Deputy City Manager LIZ RODRIGUEZ MILLER KAREN MASBRUCH Assistant City Manager Assistant City Manager LESLIE LIBERTI '-:-4,sit:`: Director Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development ,i,:',-`,;;ti,::: CUY Ofi.:,,,,,,iit As,TUCSON 1 Leslie Liberti Director _,-,_-__;-_------:_-_-.---- ----- _,,,,,„_,,__________ ,_-___ __,„___ _- -its____---- ,_______„ „,_-_, .... ,,___-_-_,,,:,____- This April 22, the 37th annual Earth Day event,was a time to reflect on the status of our local and global environments and the role we are playing as individuals in protecting the future of our homes, our community, our planet. Reports on the environment are bringing alarming news an increase in numbers and severity .vilifrw „,. A' of storms, threats to water supplies caused by declining snow packs and extend- e,i , d drought, and dramatic declines in species ranging from polar bears to honey bees all point to the beginnings of a major breakdown in our global systems. In February, the scientific community declared in a report from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)that"warming of the climate system is ,iunequivocal." t Ff t,b', J Closer to home,while the greater Tucson region has relatively good air quality, a strong focus on water conservation, and increasing use of alternative fuel vehi- cles, regional vehicle miles traveled now exceed 22 million miles per day on average,which equates to daily consumption of around 1 million gallons of petroleum, and nearly 60 percent of commuters drive alone to work. Community recycling rates result in the diversion of only about 14 percent of waste from the landfill,just a small fraction of local energy is produced from renewable sources, and underlying these and other environmental issues is a regional population growth rate that is one of the highest in the nation. We are all part of the problem, now we all must be part of the solution. The warnings in the IPCC report underscore that change is needed and the outlook that has been forecasted requires that both governments and individuals stop delaying and act. The City of Tucson has stepped up to the challenge and stands out as a national leader in promoting sustain- ability. In March of this year, the Earth Day Network released environmental rankings for the 75 largest cities in the country. Tucson not only came out in the top 30% among all cities surveyed,but ranked 4th among those cities with a population between 500,000 and 1 million. What makes Tucson such a leader? There is a global movement toward "sustainable development" and Tucson has assumed a leader- ship role in promoting economically, environmentally, and socially sustainable urban living. This 2006-2007 Sustainability Report highlights many of the efforts the City of Tucson has made to pro- mote sustainability. Smart growth, integrated transportation and land use planning, safe vibrant neighborhoods, city core renewal, water conservation, green building, waste reduction, pollution prevention, and protection of important habitats and ecosystem functions all issues typically associated with urban sustainability are part of day-to-day management at the City of Tucson. What does the future promise? In June 2006, the City made a commitment to ensure that sustainability remains a key focus in its programs and operations through the creation of the Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development(OCSD). The creation of OCSD makes Tucson one of just a few cities in the nation with an office dedicated to promoting sustainability. The mission of OCSD is to 1)promote contin- ued City leadership by helping Departments find more ways to implement sustainability principles in their activities;2)help the City and the community develop a clear vision that recognizes the importance of both global issues, such as climate change, and a high quality of life for all residents; 3)support the efforts of residents and businesses to become more sustainable in their own activities; and 4)through outreach and education,help the entire community understand that the future of our city the health, security, and quality of our lives now and in the future is in our collective hands. 1 - -----) 1 iIPA " 1 iet 6-at. Leslie F. Liberti Director, Office of Conservation and Sustainable Development 2 US Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement to address climate disruption:expected to occur as a result of human-caused green house gas emmissions into the atmosphere. The agreement sets a goal of reducing global warming pollution levels to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012. The Kyoto Protocol went into effect on February 15, 2005 in the 141 countries that had ratified the agreement. In response to the United States government's failure to sign on to the Kyoto Protocol, mayors from around the nation signed the U.S. Mayors' Climate Protection Agreement urging the federal and state govern- ments to enact policies and programs to meet or beat the Kyoto reduction target. The Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement also urges the U.S. Congress to pass bipartisan greenhouse gas reduction legisla- tion that includes a flexible market-based system of tradable credits among emitting industries. On September 6, 2006 the Tucson Mayor and Council adopted the Mayors' Climate protection Agreement, becoming one of more than 400 cities that have signed on to date. Besides Tucson, only two other cities in Arizona have endorsed the agreement—Buckeye and Flagstaff. The signatory cities agree to take action in their own operations and communities toward meeting or exceeding Kyoto Protocol targets for reducing global warming pollution, including efforts to: Inventory global warming emissions, set reduction targets and create an action plan. Reduce sprawl, preserve open space, and create compact,walkable urban communities. Promote transportation options to single-occupant car use. Increase the use of clean, alternative energy. Improve municipal energy efficiency. Purchase only Energy Star equipment and appliances for City use. Practice and promote sustainable building practices, such as through the LEED program. Reduce fossil fuel consumption by the municipal fleet. Increase pump efficiency in water systems. Increase recycling rates. 111 Maintain urban green space and promote tree planting to increase shading and to absorb CO2. III Educate others about reducing global warming pollution. In February 2007, Earth Day Network released a new comprehensive environmental report card that ranks 72 U.S. cities according to more than 200 environmental,health and quality of life indicators. The new report evaluates indicators in seven environmental and health categories: Toxics and Waste; Air Quality;Drinking and Surface Water;Quality of Life; Parks and Recreation Opportunities; Human and Public Health; and Global Warming and Climate Change. According to the Earth Day Network President, "this study is the first of its kind,not only because of the sheer quantity of environmental data analyzed,but also because it refines 'environment' to include public health, poverty, education, and other quality of life issues." How did Tucson score? Tucson's overall score was 3.35 (1 is best, 10 is worst) Tucson ranked 21st overall Tucson ranked 4th among the cities with a population between 500,000 and 1,000,000. The complete Urban Environment Report with methodology, interactive maps and city-by-city data can be viewed at http://www.earthday.net/UER/report. 3 Urban Environmental Accords t--141%.1s�. �M The United Nations Urban Environmental Accords (Accords)were signed by 50 cities worldwide on World Environment Day 2005 in San Francisco. By implementing the Urban Environmental Accords, signatory cities aim to realize the right to a clean,healthy, and safe environment for all members of society. The City of Tucson endorsed the Accords on November 15,2005. The 21 actions that comprise the Accords are proven first steps toward environmental sustainability. To achieve long-term sustainability,cities will have to progressively improve performance in all the- matic areas. The call to action set forth in the Accords will often result in cost savings as a result of diminished resource consumption, as well as improvements in the health and general well-being of city residents. The 21 Accords include actions to: 1. Increase the use of renewable energy to meet 10% of the city's peak electric load by 2012. 2. Reduce the city's peak electric load by 10%by 2012. 3. Create a citywide greenhouse gas reduction plan that outlines steps to reduce emissions by 25% by 2030. 4.Achieve zero waste to landfills and incinerators by 2040. 5.Reduce the use of disposable, toxic,or non-renewable products by at least 50% by 2012. 6. Implement"user-friendly" recycling and composting programs to reduce per capita solid waste disposal by 20% by 2012. 7. Mandate a green building rating system standard that applies to all new municipal buildings. 8. Promote higher density, mixed use, walkable,bikeable and disabled-accessible neighborhoods. 9. Create environmentally beneficial jobs in slums and/or low-income neighborhoods. 10. Provide accessible public park or recreational open space withina half-kilometer of every city resident by 2015. 11. Inventory existing canopy coverage in the city and maintain canopy coverage in at least 50% of all available sidewalk planting sites. 12. Protect critical habitat corridors and other key habitat characteristics from unsustainable development. 13. Expand affordable public transportation coverage to within one-half kilometer of all city residents by 2015. 14. Reduce particulate matter and smog-forming emissions from the city fleet by 50% by 2012. 15. Reduce the percentage of commute trips by single-occupancy vehicles by 10% by 2012. 16. Reduce or eliminate the use,by municipal government,of one product,chemical,or compound that represents a risk to human health. 17. Promote locally grown organic foods and ensure that 20% of all city facilities serve locally grown and organic food by 2012. 18. Reduce the number of days categorized as having"unhealthy" or"hazardous" air quality by 10% by 2012. 19. Reduce water consumption by 10%by 2015. 20. Protect the ecological integrity of the city's primary drinking water sources. 21. Expand the use of recycled water. 4 Green �� otliri lhowasameivitaliimr:+ 0.N 6 C'„ 'C'''6 The following proects were designed , Q , „ �► to meet the SES and are currently ` rt cyi Y4144.411%., , ,” under construction: 3. 77 #, ' 1.ui �r s-`: +meq. e • Fi,. JL... r,,, t'�'� ,.• .. * . I - I The 20,000 square foot Pima t,- «,� *-• Building at 149 N. Stone. •• The renovation of the 69,000 So Green, it is Platinum... A _ The Reid Park " .. square foot Westside Police Station. The renovation of the 70,000 Zoo has just In 1998, the City adopted the square foot Police Evidence broken ground on 4011101111111111- Sustainable Energy Standard(SES) Building. the Conservation for all new City buildings.The SES Learning Center, consisted of a modification to the The following projects are under which has been Ri. P3J�ZQQ International Energy Conservation design or construction at the LEED designed to Code (IECC) and requires that build- Silver level or higher: achieve a LEED Platinum rating. ing energy efficiency be improved by Project features include solar power at least 50 percent over the IECC • The 15,000 square foot Fire panels to produce energy for the guidelines. On April 18,2006 the Station#22 and Battalion Chief building, highly efficient heating and Mayor and Council adopted a resolu- Headquarters, scheduled for cooling systems, recycled and tion directing that City buildings and completion in July 2007, will sustainable construction materials, renovations of greater than 5,000 feature a solar water heating and water harvesting. Completion is square feet should comply with the system and energy efficient air scheduled for December 2007. The requirements of the Leadership in conditioning systems. building will be 10,000 square feet and Energy and Environmental Design • The 67,000 square foot Fire will demonstrate the best in (LEED)rating system at the Silver or Central building, which will sustainable construction techniques to higher level. By applying the LEED co-locate three critical Fire Zoo guests. standard, the City has expanded green Department functions: building requirements for City build- Administration, Fire Prevention }; ings to include not just energy effi- and Fire Station #1. . �+ t ciency, water conservation, and waste The 25,000 square foot Tucson .: „ reduction, but also consideration of Water Department Eastside sustainable site design, indoor air Satellite Facility,which in -*1"'":- .,---- v - quality, and use of recycled and sus- addition to being designed to 01y ... . : j ' 1 ,�,,, reit{# ..-, LEED Silver standards, will �' 0�, >.,. .i11ri�,,, ,$ taina e materials. , provide work space for �'''� '�' ---. ..-.: 7.7 1.-t- - LEED RatingSystem: approximately 55 field staff + . y � tl�I . Platinum primary �.U . L. , ,; : " whose rimar work areas are on it' ��-.�� " ���, 4 .. Tucson's east side. This will Gold significantly reduce drive time Silver and fuel consumption currently used to commute from Water's Looking Ahead... 4 Certified west side operational center. There is a growing recognition of p the need for and benefit of more The Green Garage sustainable building design. In late The Pennington Street Garage was 2006, local architects,builders, 1 In 2005 and 2006, the followingbuild- g developers, government officials, built using innovative, sustainable and other interested formed ing projects were constructed in accor- technology to minimize impact on p dance with the SES: Tucson's sensitive desert environment. a Southern Arizona branch of the The garage is an exemplaryproject for U.S. Green Building Council. In I foot Fire its use of innovative addition, local developers and The 11,085 square o ative technology and builders are voluntarilycreating Station 20. 'green' building principles.As the • The 11,085 square foot Fire "green" projects—acknowledging q largest municipally-owned solar-pow- not onlythegrowingmarket Station 21. ered facility in the State of Arizona, • The 24,600 square foot Clements demand for green buildings, but q the Pennington Street Garage has also the responsibility we all share Activity Center,which features a become a model for green building— 4 kilowatt solar systemto be stewards of our environment. r - Y particularly green buildingin the ub ■ The 9,200 square foot El Pueblo p In order to support the efforts of q lic sector. The garage is a mixed-use these ers develo and others who Senior Center. facility with approximately 750 cov- developers, are interested inreen building, • The 17,000 square foot Northwest ered parking spaces and 12,000 square g Mansfield Recreation Center feet ofground floor office and restau- the City is planning to initiate a green building program in 2007. Expansion. rant space. 5 oi ,,„ b�r Energy „r , s ��k F ,,.. ...,,,ir.:,,,,,, The City is working to improve the energy Light color roofs are now in the City Teaching Energy efficiency of City buildings and operations, design and construction standards. Conservation increase the City's use of solar energy, As another part of the Cool The City recently complet- and promote energy conservation. The Communities Program, the City ed work under a four-year city is also utilizing the input of assists Tucson Clean and Beatutiful in _: grant to teach energy con- energy sector experts to identify additional the Trees for Tucson Program. servation design and con- opportunities to reducing community-wide struction practices in energy use. �i -�- �#���:� x, kg: Tucson's residential and commercial '-'1'i'' :- x building sectors. City staff received { assistance from the Arizona Energy Improvements in Energy is Office to implement this grant from Efficiency p the U. S. Department of Energy. The City participates in the Energy Star Program, sponsored by the U.S. Ex ert In ut Environmental Protection Agency. =�� .- - - p p Facilities Management staff provide This program, which began as the ,., y support for the jointly appointed and "Green Lights Program,” encourages funded Tucson-Pima County energy improvements through light- Metropolitan Energy Commission ing, mechanical, and control retrofits. (MEC). The MEC's mission is "serving During 2005 and 2006,energy efficien- Solar Poweras a catalyst for the City of Tucson cy improvements at city facilities such Since 1999, the City has built up an and Pima County to build a more sus- as the Main Library, Thomas O. Price impressive inventory of solar energy tainable energy future in the region." Service Center, Ward 3, Woods and utilization systems. Funding for the MEC was instrumental in developing Valencia Libraries, and Clements solar energy system installations the City's Sustainable Energy Fitness Center, resulted in approxi- comes from the innovative 1% for Standard (SES) and the Greater mately$60,000 per year in energy Solar Program.As the basis for this Tucson Strategic Energy Plan. The savings. The City is presently program, the avoided electricity costs Greater Tucson Strategic Energy Plan, investing over$400,000 annually in from the July 1999 Tucson Electric while still under development, pro- energy efficiency upgrades. Power 1% rate reduction were direct- motes the use of safe, secure, reliable, ed to be used for the installation of efficient, sustainable and clean energy City traffic signal indica- solar energy systems in city facilities. resources. (1, tion units have been Under this program, the City has '' converted from installed 7 solar energysystems 5 The City of Tucson has created the incandescent lamps to solar water heating systems, solar- Davis-Monthan Air Force Base higher-efficiency light powered remote data acquisition sys- Alternaive Energy Solutions Task 4, emitting diode (LED) tems, and solar-powered emergency Force to identify a secure independent technology. This fire signals and flood warning signals. alternate energy source for Davis conversion is resulting in an Monthan AFB. The primary driver for estimated electricity saving of Over two hundred state-of-the-art this concept is to enable DMAFB to $420,000 annually. For this program, solar illuminated advertising bus shel- generate their own energy to reinforce the City of Tucson received the ters have been installed in the City of Homeland Security measures on mili- Governor's Award for Energy Tucson. tary bases. Efficiency in 2004. Through the Industrial Development Methaneas generated from the Los The City has been apartner in the Authority (IDA), the City has received g authorization to issue, in 2007 Reales Landfill is pumped to Tucson Cool Communities Program for aElectric Power's (TEP)Irvington plant number of years. Cool Communities approximately $7.7 million in Clean and burned toenerate 6,000 kilo- projects include the use of light color Renewable Energy Bonds(CREBS) g to fund the installation of photovoltaic watts of electricity per year, enough roofing material, light colored paving, p energy to power 5,500 Arizona homes and strategic tree planting to reduce (PV)systems on City buildings. These annually. This project allows TEP to the amount of energy needed to cool bonds will fund seven City projects Y replace approximately 20,000 tons of buildings. Through a 2001 demonstra- totaling 1.2 megawatts (MW)of gener- coalper year with an associated tion project at the Thomas O. Price ating capacity. reduction in emissions of 21,103 tons Service Center, the City determined Citystaff are exploring the feasibilit of CO2 and 127 tons of SO2 annually. that it is cost effective to install highly p g y The Cityis planningmethane-to-ener- reflective white roof coatings over air- solara 5 MW distributed generation solar project at the Central Avra Valley gy projects at Vincent Mullins and conditioned spaces. Since 2001, ener- Stora e and RecoveryProject Harrison landfills as well. gy savings at Thomas O. Price Service g Center directly resulting from the (CAVSARP). installation of the reflective roof has been approximately$24,000. 6 Transportation .,� „_„ The city has invested in planning for and On May 16, 2006, Pima County voters implementation of transportation approved a half-cent sales tax to fundBicycle Friendly t Community - Gold improvements that promote a livable transportation improvements. Over '' Level rating.communit . These improvements more the next 20 years, the Regional environmentally sensitive in design and Transportation Authority(RTA)Plan In 2006, the entire offer greater alternative transportation will dedicate nearly$533 million for /' Tucson/Eastern Pima p �� options. The City has also committed to transit enhancements, including County region received a reducing fossil fuel consumption by expanded hours of service,new serv- gold level rating as a bicy- increasing the use of alternative fuels in ice areas, greater weekday frequen- cle friendly community from the City fleet and buses and by educating cies, more express service, and a fleet the league of American the community about the need for and expansion to 280 buses. Sun Tran bicyclists. The gold level rating can availability of alternative transportation implemented the first RTA-funded only be "topped"by options. fixed-route improvements in fall 2006, a platinum rating. when additional buses deployed on The platinum level 1,0 (fi'i' keyroutes helped to relieve a portion rating is coveted, t / p and serves as a °s s ° �� 4 t � fal Transportation Improvements of the overcrowding. In 2007, later ;- The Stone Avenue Corridor Project weeknight service on 21 routes and strong impetus for , ;A } Tucson to continue 4004 addressed the different elements that expanded weekend service hours ,•O. contribute to making a corridor more along15 routes areplanned for imple- to improve 4 .Y:. livable, such as streetscape beautifica- p bicycling-related •a p mentation. In addition to fixed route ; 1 tion, economic development, urban improvements, the RTA funds ex an- services. �;; p p p � ,s. k - 3 #, design, historic preservation and pub- sion of Van Tran, the city's paratransit lic art. This$2.4 million enhancement system;increased neighborhood project, which began in January 2006, circulators;and development of a Transportation Planning consisted of new curbs and sidewalks modern streetcar route to enhance The City's Transportation and Urban along Stone Avenue between First and mobility between the downtown and Planning and Design Departments Sixth streets, a reduction in side street university areas. have been working to create standards widths, reconfigured parking, replace- for major streets and routes that uti- ment of the existing continuous center The RTA Plan also includes$45 lize Context Sensitive Design turn lane with landscaped islands and million for Wildlife Linkages that will Solutions for urban thoroughfares. textured pavement treatments, new help alleviate the potential for new These standards will promote walka- landscaping, and improvements to the roads to act as barriers to wildlife and ble communities, where the "green" existing irrigation system and street reduce the impact of existing roads on and "grey" infrastructure is integrated lighting. wildlife. to provide movement and access choices to the community. The Oracle Corridor Project focuses In 2005, Sun Tran's on encouraging reinvestment andb g g yi, � maintenance facility redevelopment in an older,high crime m 5 p g 4 became the first in the area of the city. Visioningworkshops Y o p s{,_ U.S. certified as com- with neighbors,business, community f pliant with the 4 lin � ! and developers have revealed - _,... 4- groups, p requirements of ISO , .,,. . an interest in "new urbanism" princi- k 14001, the ` international . � �. les such asgreen buildingdevelop- " ``°�°� ���� � � 'ro{ p standard for an ment, mixed uses,better pedestrian Environmental Management and transit access to downtown and System (EMS). The EMS devel- the community college campus, and oped by Sun Tran contains opera- The City of Tucson Major Transit use of water harvesting methods in tional procedures that assure corn- Investment Study is identifying conjunction with landscaping. pliance with federal, state, and potential transit solutions to connect local environmental regulations, as major activity centers in the central The Campbell Road Enhancement well as facilitate environmental core. A modern streetcar was recom- Project will similarly improve the stewardship. Sun Trans EMS iden- mended as the locally preferred alter- "Main Street" portion of Campbell tifies four significant aspects of native and received unanimous through better mixed-use develop- environmental management: storm approval from the City of Tucson ment and pedestrian-oriented water, wastewater, hazardous Mayor and Council in January 2006. enhancements. waste, and coolant. Van Tran is The project is currently in the environ- currently implementing its own mental assessment phase of the study, The City's Neighborhood Traffic EMS, with goals established to which is scheduled for completion in Management program improves the improve energy conservation and Summer 2007. quality of neighborhoods by using materials recycling. The Van Tran street trees and landscaping as part of EMS is anticipated to become ISO the traffic control system. 14001 certified this year. 7 _,-,_ -_-,,,:- ,,„ Transportation _,_:=_-,,___ _-_,,,,_-_,,- s , =� iii%% Fleet Services Division implemented Education and Outreach the use of 8-20 biodiesel in October An annual Bike to Work Day, coordi- - � ` 2006 after a very successful four- nated with major employers through- , hrough- - ; 4, month pilot program that began in out region, promotes the use of alter- Air .,..-.. July of 2005. To date, the City has nate modes of transportation to sup- . used 220,764 gallons of B-20 in its fleet port clean air, reduce traffic conges- i of 400 diesel powered vehicles and tion, and encourage healthy lifestyles. ro fi equipment. Since switching to At this public event, City staff provide biodiesel, the City has reduced foreign training, outreach materials, and oil consumption by approximately information to encourage bike com- '�"" L'it;;,,, 44,000 gallons, reduced diesel vehicle muting by employees. The event, �` a emissions, and realized a cost savings held in downtown Tucson, also offers a, of approximately$34,000 in fuel costs. safety devices, demonstrations, class �3 In the first six months. sign ups, and a free continental break- 1 r :,m;;;;.;.44. 4' fast. a f . --lid AI, , The City has also entered into an ' i'i} agreement with the Universityof ', a' g "" `` Arizona for the purchase of E-85 o ethanol for use in the city's 79 flex fuel 41*--'-' (gasoline and E-85 ethanol)fleet vehi- "` cies. As the fleet of flex fuel vehicles x increases, Fleet Services plans to mod- ,04 y if existinggasoline pumps to dis- . ". _ .� Yp p ,� f � � In November 2006, the Department of pense E-85. E-85 ethanol is a"home , f Urban Planning and Design complet- grown"renewable energysource y ; jr tii'4 ed the 2007-2011 Short Range Transit made primarily from corn, which j: Report(SRTR). The SRTR summa- reduces our dependence on foreign _ ii. - _;� rizes current transit service condi- oil, reduces vehicular emissions, tions,provides a brief overview of improves vehicle performance, and = , - '..-., V":_ • -s �` planned improvements scheduled for still costs about the same as regular 4 the next five years, serves as an inter- gasoline. im basis for the planning of transit services, and provides detailed data An Annual Clean Air Days event pro- for future planning efforts. The SRTR -� �. ,._..r, vides activities related to and informa- will help coordinate local transporta- — tion on topics such as car pooling, tion and use planning efforts through- w ,t :.. reducing pollution activities, using the out the Tucson Region. ...„;,._ - is-s+, v.__. .{{.' t bus to get to work, clean fuels, and if ia. bicycle commuting. Alternative Fuels I Currently, 90 percent of Sun Tran's . fleet is powered by clean-burning fuel technologies. In fall 2005, Sun Tran added 38 new replacement buses to its fleet. The 40-foot low-floor coaches are fueled with biodiesel City of Tucson EPA award for Best Workplaces for Commuters which, like compressed natural gas, ki ��- p °. Best Workplace for Commuters is a voluntary business-govern- emits significantly fewer particulates ment program that distinguishes and provides national recogni- than traditional diesel-fueled vehicles. Another 136 buses are either dedicat- tion to employee s _-_ offering outstanding :','7,,,64.-.„4: xw ed compressed natural gas (CNG)or dual-fueled buses. Sun Tran will take commuter benefits. ,. - deliveryof 12 additional biodiesel The City of Tucson pro- replacement buses in vides the following 2007. services to ,h " encourage alternate modes of E .� i .. t Ninety-seven percent of Van Tran's transportation: low cost bus :;:;;;;117:-.1 :774-..,. ;'':'`3 TM '--- S active fleet runs on clean-burning passes, carpool matching, _dT. - 1111"" ' _;:Y6. v fuels. Of the 119 vehicles, 115 vans Rideshare, Telework k r ,t". (by special �,� , ..,,R w ,��< � � � ��„ �,,,, a ..� lies operate on biodiesel. 3 ( , ` w ; -- permission only), Vanpool, and ::.. --, -- 4 � r. participation in the annual a Travel Reduction Survey. 8 sus z 4y sms : „ , Water ,a„,,„,;,, s The City's commitment to smart water In November 2006, Mayor and Stormwater Management management involves comprehensive Council approved a Drought The City adopted the Stormwater planning to meet the long-term water Preparedness and Response Plan Quality Ordinance in October 2005. supply needs of the community, coupled that establishes indicators for poten- The Ordinance provides authority to with a strong water conservation pro- tail drought impacts on city water inspect industrial facilities and con- gram. The City's water conservation supplies that would trigger special struction sites to evaluate their com- efforts include actions to reduce City drought response measures. pliance with federal and state water use and targeted water conserva- stormwater quality requirements. tion education for both the general public Water Conservation and for landscaping and nursery profes- A Community Conservation Task sionals. The protection of local water sup- Force (CCTF)was empanelled in TDOT administers the plies also requires effective management 2005. Stakeholders representing aCity of Tucson of stormwater quantity and quality. wide variety of residential, business, 4 Stormwater National education, environmental and other Pollution Discharge interests worked together on develop- YI ., Elimination System Planning Long-term ing a list of conservation strategies "' y Tucson Water has initiated a dialogue that have the potential to permanent- (NPDES)program,which with the community regarding the ly reduce water use per capita. The dust received an water resource challenges which CCTF recommendations will go to outstanding rating from the EPA. must be addressed in the coming Mayor and Council in Spring 2007. years. This dialogue is centered around the goals of the Water Plan The Reid Park Zoo uses lots of water Outreach and Education 2000-2050, which are to meet future to keep animal exhibits and night The Water Harvesting Guidance demand for water resources in a houses clean, and to keep the vegeta- Manual was adopted in October of manner that is environmentally tion lush. Highly treated wastewater, 2005. Implementation of water har- sound and cost effective, meet State or "reclaimed" water, is used for many vesting techniques is a water conser- regulatory requirements, and provide of the cleaning and irrigating needs. vation measure that can also enhance water that is acceptable and afford- natural habitats. This manual pro- able. TDOT's improvements for Harrison vides information and design ideas to Road, Speedway Boulevard to Old developers, engineers, designers, con- ' Spanish Trail, currently under con- tractors and the general public. struction, includes extensive use of IIP rainwater harvesting to reduce the For decades, Tucson Water has use of irrigation water for landscaping. worked with customers to promote Y' �. ke. 1641 .y water conservation through a variety P� Virtuallyall of the Cit "s roadside of innovative programs.As a result, ,,, � ���� Y p g and median landscaping utilizes Tucson is recognized throughout the reclaimed water for irrigation. world as a leader in water efficiency with one of the lowest per person By expanding the use of Colorado A Water Loss Control Program water usage rates in the western River water, the City can reduce the began in 2006 with the goal of reduc- United States. over-drafting of finite groundwater ing unaccounted for water. This des- resources. The City currently ignation generally includes water lost Some of Tucson Water's most popular recharges Colorado River water at the through system leaks, community fire and effective conservation programs Clearwater facility, also known as the protection water, water which flows are: Central Avra Valley Storage and through a customer meter but is Recovery Project (CAVSARP). In under registered water lost through Wate rS m a rt Workshops 2006, recharge capacity at the main breaks or used to flush mains, or These workshops are geared toward Clearwater facility was increased by other water which is pumped from homeowners. Topics include Drip 33 percent, from 60,000 acre-feet per the ground but does not generate rev- Irrigation Design and Maintenance, year to 80,000 acre-feet per year. In enue. Plant Selection, Irrigation Timer Use, 2007, construction of Clearwater and Rainwater Harvesting. Phase 2, also known as the Southern In response to the Drought Preparedness Avra Valley Storage and Recovery and Response Plan, the City will initi- Beat the Peak Project (SAVSARP)begins. Up to ate a comprehensive water audit pro- For more than 25 years, Pete the Beak, 45,000 acre-feet per year of recharge gram in 2007. This program will the utility's duck mascot, has remind- will be possible at that facility by examine all city water use and ideniti- ed generations of Tucsonans to Turn 2008. fy water-saving and water efficiency off the Tap, Group their Greens, Fix measures for all city facilities, land- their Faucets, and Beat the summer- scapes, and equipment. time Peak. 9 „___.„-,-_ _..... ____ ___ ,_,_ „,.._ __ Water � _ ss�fSgVmss Conservation Speakers Our Water, Our Future Teacher Internships Bureau Activities are designed for 5th- Twenty-five motivated High School Our conservation experts regularly graders, this five-unit classroom teachers are offered a two-week paid speak to business and service groups, curriculum and in-class presentation internship at Tucson Water. In turn, homeowners associations, youth designed for 5th graders, teaches stu- they develop lesson plans that use groups and others about the need to dents about the water cycle, water what they've learned about water. reduce our use of water and become a supply, and water quality. water efficient community. Wetlands Program Tucson Toolkit Tours of Tucson Water's constructed SmartScape Workshops 7th and 8th grade students work wetlands and classroom presentations This series offers landscape through a five-unit curriculum give students a hands-on experience professionals and property managers designed to teach about the water of wastewater treatment, recharge, a high-quality training course and cycle, water quality, and water conser- and conservation. prepares them to be certified as a vation.An optional home-audit class- specialist in water efficient landscape room research project is available. Sweetwater Wetlands practices. Guidebook ' M {`, ,,, A combination nature field guide and 'Da Drops r` I activity booklet, this innovative addi- Designed to teach 3rd-grade students . lion to Tucson Water's student out- about the water cycle, groundwater, reach made its debut in 2006. and water distribution. Students view F: a video, conduct water saving activi- Za nj a ro Program ties, and interact with "Dr. Faucet” High School Program Tucson Water customers can make an during an interactive classroom pres- Designed to bring water studies out- appointment for a free Water Audit entation. side the 'science class' environment. designed to maximize water conserva- tion potential around the home. Waste Reduction Waste reduction requires a multi-pronged types of scrap metal sold for recycling in collection rates. In Fiscal Year approach involving a reduction in the include mixed steel, copper, alu- 2005/2006, approximately 700 tons of amount of waste that is generated and minum (including printing plates and waste was collected through these sent for landfilling, the use of recycled film from Procurement's programs, 98% of which was reused materials in city operations, and educa- Reprographics Division),brass, and or recycled. This included more than tion and outreach efforts increase commu- cast iron. This process not only pro- 180,000 pounds of batteries, about nity recycling rates in City operations. vides revenue to the City,but also 234,000 pounds of latex paint, and results in a positive environmental over 507,000 pounds of used oil. impact. The metals are recycled into The City has initiated a pilot green raw material that is used for other waste composting project. This pilot products. Environmental Services also ' '". t . .- _`t has demonstrated that a fertilizer can diverts scrap metal that has been , ° - ° - $ , be produced by combining herbivore received at the landfill. They have . �e waste from the Zoo with green waste; diverted and recycled approximately ,5�-, - -,NirkF 4 both creating a marketable product 9 million pounds of scrap metal to ,` `"j ,, and extending the life of the landfill. date,with more than 1,500 tons recy- ��" The initial outcomes of the pilot have cled in Fiscal Year 2006. ,*,- been promising enough that the prof- I -q. ect is being expanded. Environmental Environmental Services has joined Services receives approximately 5,500 with Pima County to provide a tons of green waste per year based on Household Hazardous Waste pro- Use of Recycled Materials volumes measured through January gram where both residents and small The benches used in both bus shelters 2005. In addition to being used in the businesses can bring hazardous items and for the street furniture program in green waste composting program, this for recycling, exchange, or safe dis- Tucson are made substantially from material is chipped to produce mulch posal. The program provides for one recycled plastic and sustainable which is used for erosion control on main site and three outreach sites. In wood products. The legs and slats in the landfill sideslopes. addition, Los Reales Landfill has these benches are made exclusively established a location for residents to from 100% recycled plastic parts man- The Procurement Department is bring in antifreeze,batteries, oils and ufactured by Plastic Recycling of Iowa responsible for disposal of scrap paints. This site was opened in March (PRI). PRI currently processes over metal generated by the City. The 1998, and it has seen steady increases four million pounds of plastic that 10 _:,,,,,-- ------- WasteReductionContinued __-_--,--._:_,,,,,_-:„-_-i--,-..-------;-_---t-;4-1-t--- ",- --:=_-__--1,. , :t-_,,-_-____ ___ _ would otherwise be diverted to land- ers purchased by the City must children in kindergarten through 3rd fills. There are approximately 7 milk include at least 10 persent post-con- grade.Teachers may contact Tucson jugs and 4 two-liter soda bottles to a sumer recycled plastic. The City has Clean&Beautiful to schedule a pound of finished product. Each bus also implemented the Environmental performance. bench contains approximately the Protection Agency's guidelines for all equivalent of 1500 milk jugs and 850 trashcan liners,which requires a mini- The City offers information to apart- two-liter soda bottles. mum of ten percent of post-consumer ment managers who would like to material.As part of another creative educate their residents about the The Tucson City Code requires that program, the Tucson Police Neighborhood Recycling Centers recycled materials, as long as they Department uses remanufactured as well available for their use in Tucson. conform to specifications, will be pur- as new ammunition. Remanufactured Environmental Services staff is also chased if the price is within 10% of a ammunition is produced using available to present recycling informa- low bid non-recycled material. The expended brass from spent ammuni- tion to tenant groups or to work Code also allows for the purchase of tion. Annually, the Police Department directly with apartment managers to recycled material,even if it is more uses more than 1 million rounds of evaluate their recycling options. than 10% of the low bid non-recycled remanufactured ammunition. option, as long as substantial budget ._ i VI VA RECI CLAJE!provides enhanced impacts will not result. "" °`. . services in waste reduction and recy- ' �€ � s.---_,--',40i---7,-.-. �'i. 1. ; __ . cling education to Tucson's Hispanic The Citycurrentlyutilizes a wide . ' Y population. To motivate community44 p range of products made from recycled .-- i - participation, Environmental Services materials. The Cityonlystocks offers bilingual recycling education envelopes made from recycled materi- ..1/4 resources to neighborhood associa- al.All City letterhead, stationery, and ,,V ;„` tions, schools, club, and any other business cards are printed on recycled "' organization. Bilingual staff and vol- paper; the City also uses recycled '' unteers can make presentations about copy paper. The recycled paper that is waste reduction and recycling,help purchased has a minimum of 30% Education and Outreach teachers assemble displays, train bilin- recycled product.By using recycled Since 1994, the City has sold over gual (Spanish)participants to be copy paper alone, the City saves an 9,800 compost bins to the public Master Recyclers, coordinate field estimated 260 trees per month. through annual truckload sales events. trips to Los Reales Landfill and local Home composting results in the diver- recycling centers, and provide dis- The City also uses recycled paper toi- sion of an average of 1,500 pounds of plays or information booths at a vari- let tissues, napkins, and hand towels waste per household per year from the ety events. exclusively.All polyethylene contain- landfill. Master Recyclers are specially-trained The City of Tucson offers a range of volunteers who give presentations .� recycling outreach and education pro- about recycling to civic, neighborhood 40/ je grams,which include the following: and other community groups, and rt who help staff at outreach events.A ��};� Tucson Clean&Beautiful offers Master Recycler is a trained expert on e 'Sx 1P"��j3'"O'4� ,,; cs`.:p "E Pluribus Re-THINKs-lt�" an enter-• recycling in Tucson and is a valuable taining and educational play for asset to Tucson and the planet. Urban Design _ __ _,--,,,,,,,,,„ ______,,_;___,, ___ ___ __,,_,_ ___, ,,,,_ - :--,-,-,:,„„____ _ _ The City has many policies and programs Planning for Future land and include provisions for the in place or under development that Development preservation of washes based on the advance compact, mixed use, walkable, In 2005, Mayor and Council M identification of ecological envelopes. bikeable and accessible neighborhoods. The adopted the HoughtonThis protects not only the riparian efforts focus on both the advancement of Area Master Planvegetation in the channel but also smart growth principles in large-scale (HAMP). The HAMP is 4 44 associated overbank vegetation. planning undevelo ed lands p g p along the an area plan for 10,800 I 4 fringe of the City and also the improve- acres of mostly undevel- City staff are working with the ment of existing neighborhoods and other oped land on the south- Arizona State Land Department to urban areas within the core of the City. east side of the city. The it help identify basic land use patterns, HAMP policies call for master planning areas, priority con- master planning of theservation areas, and transportation v� corridors in the Southlands vicinity. 11 Design stUrban �� ,-Rs t , �-rt ; i -' ,„,„„,,,,,,,,,, _-_--2,::::,, The Planned Community District ries for the PRO Neighorhoods pro- Proposed zones, such as the (PCD)zone is designed to facilitate gram was the use of grant funding to Neighborhood Preservation Zone and the public review and approval allow three neighborhoods to come the Mixed Use Zone, and designa- process for master planned communi- together to plan and implement tions like the Residential Cluster ty developments. Adoption of the improved pedestrian/bicycle facilities Project, are among the tools being new zone will require amendments to along Park Avenue. developed to address these concerns. the City Land Use Code and to City Development Standards, review by The recently adopted Rio Nuevo The goal of the Design Strategy the Planning Commission, and Overlay District and the Area Infill Program is to create a set of guide- approval by the Mayor and Council. Incentive District provide tools to sup- lines and development standards that port development opportunities in the support good design and allow flexi- m p rov i n g Existing downtown area as part of the revital- bility for creative design. A local Neighborhoods ization project. Studies analyzing the community focus group is working g downtown area's ability to absorb with city staff to identify themes of City neighborhood plans have not been u dated for several decades. In various land uses will be performed, development for major southwest p the Neighborhood Plan Prototype as will an economic analysis to ascer- cities that apply to our community. ram, the Miramonte and Jefferson taro the impact of the State's recent These themes will set the framework program, approval of a twelve-year extension of for a manual that complements, sup- Park neighborhoods have been select- ed as pilot ro'ects that will be used State Tax Increment Financing (TIF) plements, and interprets the City's p funding. design standards. as template for updating other area plans. This process included several The Brownfields charrettes in both neighborhoods to • g �(�`y.nfje�d Program encour- develop "new and improved"neigh- - _: _ . __ t �Nr��J,�., S ; , , ages infill through borhood plans. For example neigh- _I k bors strongly emphasized the need to �__ II2006 the redevelopment � �' of Brownfield sites. make their neighborhoods more walk- _ :___,1:1- Brownfields rede- able byincorporating sidewalks or decomposedgranitepaths, safer ►':` velopment spurs economic benefits, p ar --k revitalizes surrounding areas, and pedestrian crossings, and shade. reduces development pressure on h i Staff from the Departments of Urban . '� ��--- undisturbed desert areas. With the : . revital- Planningand Designand Transportation City's continued downtown The Infill Incentive District will modi- ization efforts,brownfields sites are have designed a project that will f development regulations and fees remediated, infill is accomplished, strengthen the pedestrian nature of Y p g p Grande Avenue. This avenue is the through the development agreement historic roots are revitalized, while heart of the Barrio Holl wood neigh- process. Such a district would providing a healthy sustainable envi- Yaddress barriers to downtown infill ronment. borhood, the location of a number of verypopular local restaurants, and a development such as inadequate , ''''''''. ,',11q;,fd �13 p p infrastructure, lengthy permit process- navi navigational trainingarea for students � `''� ,,� g es, obsolete development standards, .,r ;; -i from the Arizona School for the Deaf p ,. ''" difficult parcel assembly, and environ- ri and Blind, which lies at the northern # �� » 4r 5 mental clean-up issues. This is the end of the project. . � beginning of a larger effort to ensure The Avenida del Convento Clearwater that entitlement processes are pre- 1 Road currentlyunder construction will dictable and efficient, and regulatory Road _ -� ' • are unambi u- - serve new development on the west- codes and standardsg .ittLAYP pi. .zas.,....;—..: .�a, r.-4-i.-- side. The project includes landfill remediation and new streetlighting The Infill Program can have implica- The Vacant and Neglected and landscaping. These investments tions for neighborhoods such as the Structures(VANS)program involves will also serve to mitigate existing compatibility of new structures with the survey of properties with adverse traffic impacts on the Menlo the surrounding historic and natural residential structures, an assessment Park neighborhood. environments and the type of activi- of the structures state of neglect, and ties infill brings to the neighborhoods. contact property owners to advise Strengthening the Urban Core Working together with reprentatives them of their responsibility to restore PRO Neighborhoods grants are gen- of both public and private interests, or remove the neglected structures. erally used to support improvements staff is developing tools to address Expansion of this program to com- in neighborhoods in areas such as these potential issues. mercial properties is planned in 2007. walkability or shade availability, as a way of sustaining and strengthening neighborhoods. One of the sucess sto- 12 _, _____ __________ __ _ Nature __L___ _ _ - Urban „.„. ______ ___ iii - __ __i _ __ f_, , Promotingand maintaining "urban The City has plans for additional park The U.S. Fish&Wildlife Endangered "involves Painted S ecies Act empowers jurisdictions to nature efforts ranging projects in 2007including p providing accessible parks and recreation Hills Natural Resource Park,Arroyo create conservation programs unique facilities to preservation of important nat- Chico Linear Park,Atterbury Linear to their region that protect species ural habitats. Protecting urban green Park, creation of an urban pathway that are threatened by human activi- space requires maintaining the quality of along Julian Wash between Kolb Road ties. The City's Draft Habitat natural areas and restoring areas that and Rita Road, and expansion of the Conservation Plan (HCP)will have become degraded over time. The City Rio Vista Natural Resources Park. address future water supply projects also provides assistance to community that may be developed on City- groups, ity- rou s developers, businesses, and other w - owned lands in Avra Valley and g p ' '� �`��w� .��•`#'��� �� '-= � future urban development in the organizations indeveloping projects to _ . ?-7:*, . preserve or enhance natural areas. # c� -�. , _ largely undeveloped Southlands, �.; a ::* which lies south of I-10. This process +� ;' ` _ involves extensive coordination with '.,1- ' . ,'` S= county, state and regional overn- New and Planned Parks _ , y g g A number of new parks were created ,,iti-, ,A ` ',`~: ' :' . ment agencies and has been support- in 2005 and 2006 includingMiramonte r' • #t. .- ed by an a technical advisory commit- Natural ` `' •' ' .' " tee, whichprovides scientific uid- Natural Resource Park, KeelingDesertg Resource Park,Vista Del Rio Cultural I ance and recommendations, and a Resource Park, Barrio San Antonio The Sonoran Desert Park project stakeholder advisory committee, Park, and Rio Vista Natural Resources includes long-range planning for the which provides direction on imple- Park. restoration of natural desert landscape mentation and funding options. at the base of"A" Mountain, landfill Ultimately, implementation of an The Keeling Desert Resource Park, mitigation,restoration of Santa Cruz approved HCP would allow appro- an approximately 1/3-acre neighbor- River riparian habitat, and park priate development to proceed in the hood pocket park east of Glenn Street, amenities. Completion of this project study areas without jeopardizing sen- highlights additional values of parks will complement the Origins Heritage sitive plant and animal species. by using harvesting to promote water Park and create a unique community conservation and by showcasing asset. r sculptures created by artists selected {"� k , 'r through the Tucson/Pima Arts Habitat Preservation and 1 Council. Restoration 4 On November 7, 2006, A�; � • - 'TINSw � V� Y ` ,,' -,- , , the Tucson Mayor and . w ' 14,1 IT w c Council adopted an .. a b 3� ,. ,�.$� _�a � � �y � InterimI ,% �. Watercourse u Preservation Po y - : s _ ._ _ � _ � . Policy ,��.�F .� , . ,a.", : .`' 3 and Development 4'4.4' -,-, r. --� �a►�j.,__,..iii*,I.- 'Ate Standard. The policy , : -.�- ' ' iiii - ''...".' ..." 1,4 illi;it- )-,_ - • and development stan - � _______ -- j- dard reaffirm the City's7:--'„! , � 4Tw . commitment to watercourse protec- A.L. '` - ; `�-: .,` tion and provide greater clarity and consistency to the implementation of The City of Tucson is a partner in two The Vista Del Rio Cultural Resource the three City riparian habitat preser- federally sponsored river restoration Park preserves one of the few remain- vation ordinances-the Watercourse projects along the Santa Cruz River. ing undisturbed pieces of a 1,000-year Amenities,Safety, and Habitat The two projects, El Rio Medio and old Rincon-phase Hohokam village. (WASH),Environmental Resource Tres Rios del Norte, aim to restore The four-acre site contains a very high Zone (ERZ), and Floodplain regula- riparian habitat along an almost 23- concentration of artifacts including 15 tions. In 2007,the City will continue mile stretch of the river. El Rio Medio, pit-houses, 12 pits,2 thermal features to work towards improved wash pro- which includes that portion of the and at least 4 cremations. The Parks tection regulations through the consol- river between Congress and Prince &Recreation Department has devel- idation of the three existing riparian roads,is particularly important for oped the site to preserve and protect habitat ordinances into a comprehen- the City in that it will address habitat the artifacts, as well as provide oppor- sive Environmentally Sensitive Lands restoration, flood control, and recre- tunities for the citizens of Tucson to Ordinance. ation needs through downtown learn more about the early inhabitants Tucson.A public outreach event will of this area. be held later in 2007 to solicit commu- nity feedback and input on potential restoration approaches. 13 / //y i - r an Nature ii__ ___�i ... _____ _ ___ „,„,_ ,___,,______ -------„,________„_____,.. Maintaining Urban The Trees for Tucson program pro- and many other considerations. Greenspace vides low-cost trees for residents to Sustainable design is intended to The City is in the process of develop- use to shade buildings. Shade trees improve site efficiency,productivity, ing a city-wide Urban Landscape reduce, energy usage in homes, partic- and comfort,while reducing energy Management Plan that will provide ularly for summer cooling, as well as and water use. One project that staff direction and management practices provide urban habitat for wildlife. assisted with in 2006 is the Linda for the City's'green urban environ- Avenue community center site in ment'. The plan will be defined In 2005, the first Urban Heat Island Menlo Park Neighborhood. through assessment of current workshop was held to educate City resources within government, review staff about the issues of urban heat Another aspect of the technical sup- of current City practices, research on islands and how staff can individually, port offered by city staff is callabora- the best practices employed by other and as a City government, implement tive discussions with developers and jurisdictions, and input from focus mitigation measures.A second work- homebuilders regarding design solu- groups. As part of the Plan, the City shop is planned for 2007. tions to help reconcile development is currently assessing the value of with habitat protection. Results can street trees as an asset in order to The City has plans to begin the devel- enhance habitat conditions and determine future resource needs for opment of a Green Infrastructure improve quality of life for Tucsonans, the care and maintenance of these Plan in 2007.Just as communities while allowing for growth.The City trees. approach planning of their streets, also assists neighborhood groups with sewers, electrical, telecommunication issues related to open space and wash �,� , ' '',sr The Camino Del systems and other'grey' infrastruc- protection and restoration. In 2007, the `i AI, - Cerro Roadside ture in a comprehensive and deliber- City will pursue Arizona Water ,., a_ afrr, Beautification and ate manner, the concept of'green' Protection Fund grant money to sup- ', y `hii," Demonstration infrastructure planning uses the same port a community-driven riparian ,, ; - �F staff, workingtogeth- restoration planningeffort alongthe A Project involves re- principles. City g . .. ' ' A �M '` vegetation to pro- er with surrounding jurisdictions, will Atterbury Wash. ..Ti*;..40'' vide a visual screen- develop a green infrastructure map, 1\-' , +'' d` plan, andpolicies to improve avail- -� s, ,:„ ing for the sewage p p ;q, �'---:,,'"*,f1:-� ' ofgreen space in under-served . . ponds. During re- ability p �k 1{ 'NI/ '�- ,4:: vegetation, the City areas,provide better access to recre- °:�, ;7,a ation opportunities, and create link- x },,t f `, f will evaluate several pp • ages where discontinuitybetween -� k�¢ -ii Buffelgrass is an aspects of plant establishment done g ��_�� ��'� �r { � �� k°; invasive,non-native without the installation of an irriga- urban habitate exists. ,.�"l, K , tions stem. The four elements of this ���`" -;,_,„-,,k ��� plant species that is studyinclude: 1)evaluation of a wide Outreach and Education e4,' .F' �. }-�' *' rapidly expanding range of drought tolerant plants;2) City staff offer rainwater harvesting into the Sonoran the use of water harvesting;3)the use design consultations on request.Water Desert.The spread of buffelgrass is of of water trucks for supplemental harvesting presentations are available concern because the plant tends to watering; and 4)the installation of to help the community understand "crowd-out"existing plant species DriWater. The project will be closelyconcepts and techniques they can and once established,serves as a monitored and evaluated for two implement at public, commercial and source of fuel for fires. Fire in the years. private sites.Technical assistance and Sonoran desert is not natural and will education wasp rovided to a wide destroy native species,e.g., cactus, The City expecting ecting begin bin con- range of groups during 2006 and 2007 and, once destroyed by fire, the struction of the Park Avenue including Blenman Elm nativespecies have a difficult time Detention Basins in 2007. This ' ro- Neighborhood,Tucson Medical reestablishing. Buffelgrass,however, p � is encouraged by fire,which.is natu- ect will include a 42-acre urban open Center,Tucson Organic Gardeners, natu- spacegreenbeltpark and a federally and Pima County Natural Resources, ral to its native ecology. Eventually, p funded habitat restoration project. and Parks Recreation staff. areas that become infested with buf- felgrass will become transformed, The El Paso and Southwestern Staff are also available to assit with with buffelgrass becoming the domi- Greenway will create recreational the development of sustainable nant plant.On Feb. 9,2007, the City linkages from South Tucson through concept designs for public, commer- of Tucson, along with over 120 g g munityleaders and scientists, corn- downtown Tucson and will include cial and neighborhood sites.During partici- infrastructure and p landscape improve- facilitated workshops, staff help par- pated in a "Buffelgrass Summit" focused on promotingurgent and ments and the installation of public ticipants consider various factors g furnishings and art as fundingper- which, depending on site goals, may concerted action to respond to the g mits. include solar orientation, solar tech- growing threat posed by buffelgrass. nology,water harvesting design,use The Summit was a successful event of native vegetation, natural building that resulted in renewed focus and materials,LEED building guidelines, energy directed to this challenge. 14 4 � F ^+c f sem,.:,�,{i+'" r�- bb4r ry i y 1 L•(('t r?�L dNry l4 )�Fy 3F Office of rz7�fif� Conservation and Sustainable Development ryr 2 06 J�� 5 ht E F „, nr „,, 2007 sustainabilityreport l'll/AZ'Sfa M+ 11 r,rt r r l�rflNAi��'� 7r1 .. i � l.. .,. t ....r .. 8b;°m �� '':A,i a"JJ�'*„df...,,!W,7 i,,.h,..:s r:.:r..,.0 r nf�'!&1.R¢:�`vn�Ns"J%;"+�,,:r Jf,.Ir.: '�u r.. a�d r_.. rs.,, w . d A k���1, h7d ��+l .... 1 Al l,lad.., ”{ l�4"1'�"y4° d"�.,.r,Aln. e��;� ✓ � " � x'.,r�'�" ,:, nr.. �rr,�.�"'PM� .�.,1';:A°'nre �1 ", ,�1�, ATTACHMENT "5" ATTACHMENT "5" Pima County Building Official Memorandum This document responds to your request to address the Facilities Management Director's March 12, 2007 memorandum pertaining to LEED silver costs for the facilities building program. While the estimated construction premium of 2 to 5 percent will be addressed below, it warrants to state that even if these numbers were accurate, they would still be a bargain for the County as this premium would quickly be offset through energy/water savings and increases in productivity. The US Department of Energy's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory(NREL) and other organizations have compared the cost/benefit of investing in high performance commercial buildings, findings of which generally reflect the following patterns: While capital costs increase in the order of 2 percent or$2 to $5 per square foot for silver/gold rated LEED buildings, the total net present value (TNPV) of the energy savings over a 20-year life cycle is $5.79 per square foot. Additional per square foot savings for reduced emissions ($1.18), water($0.51), and operations and maintenance savings from proper building commissioning ($8.47) bring the aggregate TNPV to $15.95 per square foot. Added to this number are yet further potential savings gleaned from improvement of interior environments. More efficient and healthy interiors reduce medical costs and produce a gain in productivity estimated by researchers as high as $36.89 TNPV per square foot for a certified/silver rated building. As such, studies have found that LEED buildings are more profitable on a variety of fronts: • Green buildings enjoy reduced liability risk. The Firemen's Fund was the first U.S. Insurance company to offer a discount for LEED buildings. • The industrial sector, including Toyota and Honda, are citing large gains in productivity and reductions in employee absenteeism by converting to LEED facilities. • Children in green schools perform better on standardized tests based on daylighting alone, and with additional gains stemming from environmental quality (total net present value of LEED schools have been estimated at $71 per square foot over their conventional counterparts). • Patients in LEED hospitals have higher customer satisfaction(up to 99 percent) and heal faster than in conventional facilities. • LEED retail stores have average sales increases of 40 percent over their conventional counterparts. • LEED office building space command rents 25-50 percent higher than conventional market rates. Now in order to address the capital premium associated with LEED silver buildings, it should first be stated that costs continue to fall as more designers/contractors become knowledgeable in LEED and more green materials become available. Hence the cost/benefit numbers cited above estimating capital increases at 2 percent or$2-$5 per square foot for LEED silver/gold buildings are presently over-inflated since the study covers data prior to 2003. It also cannot be stressed enough that competency is key to low cost LEED building as a very experienced team can actually bring a LEED project to conclusion with total capital costs falling below that of traditional construction. This occurs since the integrated process forces efficiency of design, resulting in the use of passive systems which contribute to lowering costs associated with large equipment. Engineers typically oversize systems for their own protection, including structural and mechanical. Designing for efficiency while requiring more work, is facilitated by the philosophy present in the LEED standards. Turning to Mr. Tuinstra's memorandum, the first item addressed is that LEED shall require additional commissioning costs of 1 percent of construction. However, large County projects already include commissioning. Furthermore, a study conducted by Evan Mills reviewing 224 buildings in 21 states found that commissioning costs for existing buildings were $0.27 per square foot of which the payback was less than nine months. For new buildings, the costs were 0.6 percent of construction with a payback of 4.8 years. Based on these numbers in context, we can state that there should be no additional cost for the commissioning of large County buildings and 0.6 percent for small ones. The next item addressed is energy modeling, which is also already provided for large County buildings. Mr. Tuinstra appropriately notes that the smaller the project,the greater the LEED-related capital increases requisite for the project. This brings to light that the larger premiums for LEED construction always pertain to small projects which account for lesser total costs within the facilities building program. Mr. Tuinstra also states that a major consultant has indicated that Facilities Management standards are extremely close to producing a LEED facility. I have to strongly disagree with this statement. While Facilities Management have certainly made some great efforts in the area of energy by requiring modeling and commissioning for large buildings as well as more efficient systems, not only is there much room for pursuing further opportunities in this category but entire other construction categories such as environmental quality and waste management are largely not addressed by current standards. In regard to LEED eligibility for County facilities potentially located in the 100 year flood plain, these are all eligible. The LEED penalty for building in such a location is the inability to obtain 1 point for site selection out of a total of 69 LEED points (of which 33 points are required for silver). Appended to Mr. Tuinstra's memorandum were three documents, one from the Sonoran Institute urging the County to adopt LEED silver, an article from Healthcare Design showcasing green construction, and a GSA LEED cost executive summary report. The Healthcare Design article provides two case studies, one of which is for the ALG Hospital Patient Care Tower in Illinois. This $201 million project showed a 0.25% premium for"LEED-associated components" demonstrating the low cost of LEED for large projects (note that LEED capital premium within this memorandum always includes energy modeling, commissioning, and certification process documentation). The U.S. General Services Administration study was based on modeling two building types over different LEED alternative points. Construction costs for silver ranged from negative 0.03 percent to a high of 4.4 percent. However, as the study cautions,this does not necessarily reflect a realistic range in that it looked at all LEED point options in the modeling process. This included such increases as $600,000 for certified wood which would not otherwise be required if a different LEED point were pursued. Pima County would select the most cost effective LEED points having the most impact to the Sonoran Desert environment, hence bringing the construction costs down nearer to the lower end of this range. The report also indicates that soft costs for LEED which include design, construction and documentation, ranged from $0.38 to $0.44 per square foot (for a 306,600 square foot building). This latter premium for LEED soft costs are commensurate with those of other studies and are far less than those represented to Facilities Management by their present consultants. Mr. Tuinstra incorrectly states that"A LEED consultant will be needed on the project through its completion to have it certified." In fact the GSA modeling study found that LEED soft costs for office buildings are reduced by using an experienced design team approach in lieu of an expert consultant approach. Hence on a national level, building to LEED has seen capital cost increases of over 10 percent a decade ago recently drop to below 0 percent in certain projects as designers and builders have become savvy in taking an integrative approach to sustainable construction. A 2003 study by Gregory Kats reported that the average construction premium for 33 LEED buildings across the country was 1.84 percent. The following year, Matthiessen and Morris of Davis Langdon Consulting compared 45 buildings attempting LEED certification to 93 conventional buildings, finding that there was no difference in costs per square foot. On a more local level, a brief symposium occurred earlier this month where professionals addressed advantages, disadvantages and cost of LEED with County Facilities Management personnel. Among these were Dave Burns and Arthur Stables of Burns Wald-Hopkins Architects, who have designed the most LEED buildings built in Arizona; Phil Swaim of Swaim Associates Architects, who are currently building the LEED platinum Conservation Learning Center at Reid Park Zoo; Richard Franz, Facilities Director for Pima Community College who have adopted LEED since 1998 and who oversaw the building of the first LEED certified building in the State; and Doug Crockett, Energy Manager and Bruce Woodruff, both of the City of Tucson who have also adopted LEED silver for their facilities. For local buildings already erected by the participating professionals, we saw that obtaining LEED silver certification resulted in total capital increases ranging from 0.1 percent for large buildings to a high of 3.2 percent for very small ones. Equally interesting, however, was that the Martha Cooper Library completed this year carries a premium of 2.6 percent for green features even though this building will not be LEED certified. This attests to the fact that Pima County is already paying limited green-related premiums for small buildings which will decrease additional projected premiums for LEED silver. The examples presented by the group reinforced that while there are increased capital costs associated with LEED, most of these are due to energy modeling and commissioning which the County is already providing on large projects. These projected increases included the LEED documentation process, relegated in all instances to the design firms. It should also be noted that by moving to LEED, Facilities Management will benefit from certain cost savings such as no longer needing to maintain its own design standards. In summary, initial capital cost premiums for LEED silver should be no more than 2 percent for very small buildings and 0.5 percent for large ones (since the County is already providing limited green features on small buildings and energy modeling and commissioning on its larger ones). However, and while national data indicate that the above premiums can be further reduced through selection of the appropriate design and construction team, it is important to note that one does not accomplish these sort of reductions by taking what is otherwise a conventional building and adding a few green features. Low cost success will require an entire philosophy shift to new standards from within Facilities Management including an integrative approach to design and construction. An option would be to hire a LEED accredited energy manager who could oversee the transition to the new standards and bring costs down to or below that of conventional construction. While there still might be a small net increase for LEED soft costs,this amount will be rapidly recuperated in terms of energy and water saved; increased productivity and quality of life; and environmental benefits. References Building Better Buildings:An Update on State Sustainable Building Initiatives. Blue Print 2003. State of California Sustainable Buildings Task Force. Building Momentum: National Trends and Prospects for High-Performance Green Buildings. February, 2003. U.S. Green Building Council. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States. 1999. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration. Fisk, William J. November 2000. "Health and Productivity Gains from Better Indoor Environments and Their Relationship with Building Energy Efficiency." Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, vol. 25, pp.5 3 7-5 66. Fisk, William J. and Rosenfeld, A.H. 1998. "Potential Nationwide Improvements in Productivity and Health from Better Indoor Environments." Proceedings of ACEEE, vol 8, pp.85-97. "Green Buildings and the Bottom Line". A Supplement to Building Design & Construction. November, 2006. Kats, Gregory. Greening America's schools: Costs and Benefits. Capital E Report. October, 2006. Kats, Gregory. October 2003. The Costs and Financial Benefits of Green Buildings:A Report to California's Sustainable Building Task Force. Capital E, Department of Health Services, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory. Available at www.usgbc.org/docs/news/news477.pdf Kats, Gregory. 2003 "Green Building Costs and Financial Benefits." Written for the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative. Available at www.cap-e.com. Making the business case for High Performance Green Buildings. 2003. U.S. Green Building Council. Mills, Evan, Hannah Friedman, Tehesia Powell,Norman Bourassa, David Claridge, Tudi Haasl, Mary Ann Piette, The Cost-Effectiveness of Commercial-Buildings Commissioning, published by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Report 56637, Dec. 15, 2004, available at http://eetd.lbl.gov/Emills/PUBS/Cx-Costs-Benefits.html. Syphers et al. "White Paper on Sustainability: Managing the Cost of Green Buildings." November, 2003. Building Design & Construction. ATTACHMENT "6" RESOLUTION NO. (R) 07- A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF ORO VALLEY, ARIZONA,AUTHORIZING THE REQUIREMENT FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE LEADERSHIP IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN (LEED) PROGRAM AT THE SILVER CERTIFICATION LEVEL OR HIGHER TO TOWN BUILDINGS, ADDITIONS, MODIFICATIONS AND RENOVATIONS. WHEREAS, The Mayor and Council recognizes and accepts its responsibility to promote and implement sustainable building practices to protect the Town's natural and built environment; and WHEREAS, The Mayor and Council wish to require that all new Town buildings, additions, modifications and renovations be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program; and WHEREAS, the Town desires to meet the certification requirements of LEED at the Silver Certification Level and to achiever higher levels for certification, Gold and/or Platinum, whenever project resources and conditions permit; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the Town to adopt the policy hereby all Town buildings, additions, modifications and renovations comply with the requirement of LEED at the Silver Certification Level and the Gold and/or Platinum level whenever project resources and conditions permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Oro Valley that: 1. The Mayor and Council authorize and approve the Town requiring compliance with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program, silver certification level, for all new Town buildings, additions, modification and renovations. 2. The Mayor and Council authorize and approve the Town requiring compliance with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program Gold and/or Platinum certification level whenever project resources and conditions permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor and other administration officials are hereby authorized to take such steps as are necessary to fulfill the obligations for all new Town buildings, additions, modifications and renovations be in compliance with the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Program PASSED AND ADOPTED Mayor bythe Ma or and Council of the Town of Oro Valley this day of , 2007. TOWN OF ORO VALLEY Paul H. Loomis, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Kathryn E. Cuvelier, Town Clerk Melinda Garrahan, Town Attorney Date: Date: F:\INDIVID\Sarah\LEED Resolution.doc Town of Oro Valley Attorney's Office/ca/060707 r GREEN BUILDING ...,...,,,,,. .., ,,...::,....,._.,„„., • :i,,,,..„.,;,:,..,,,,,, ; p •„,-, t, „ .. /4111 r N . ....„..........,...;,..„,, •:r_. •,_,..•.,•r.........,___,,...„".,, _ , _ y r,y w ,,sM vb�p r ytu„„ r.f y ,.,,,,,,,,,, . r',.;;;4.P:A nr ''r',. - r,,,,,,,:„. 9 ,,,, t ,t,.,,..,„ ,,,,� ,),, Jer~ry� Y pr req.,rl / ,` I t�> "'Y� , y k �) ,/- r•:,',/,,,,,,, •.,..„,— — •- : ,. ' • . .•. , , , , ... . �Sqr . , `�1IF SI .�L' ; f„, -.,-, ,..„ , , (.r . , , , ,,,_,,.. ' ,„.„-- � ( 9 t_..,v 1. ,r ,,- ,.. ... lN.;:,--::•_;:::',',,f,*,:--- 'hy�C� v a r r w' "'".,".4.,::,",5.,:;.,;, / f,4 r J 9)7 �`c :: i s .:;',,,,,,l,,,/ r,.,,,,,c,,,,,,;:7;::: ¢{... i l t ' x . r J S _,,,.,,,- , , ., , 4. .:::_,,, ......, "...„-- ,.,... , , , . ,,,,, „ . c . ..,, ___,....,,,,,....„ „,.....,,,,,„,,,,,.„,,,..,.;.._,..•.r.:...''.'','':.'' ' . '''. ,,,, _ ..,,,,„,,,-,:.:..,,,:.s_.,,,,,,,:,,,--_,,*,,,,,,,,,..„,:.:‘,„tti,.„,,ti,.,...,.?,,z:.,:i,,,,47„..,.,,,..,,i,.:,,,,,:;,;,,,,,,...,,,..".,,,,,..-,,4 ., , .,,f..;:41:4:,i'll::, ''' ''' .,,,'..*0.0,1:,':. ,,,, :,,:,2,7 II.;6 ., SP*, '''''' i .'. ''. "C:j-,i''''''.:.':::''' '':Iti.. f.',4 fel° 4.0'.. A .fir ... i j 11r I.:, „..,_,.,:,„,,,Al , ,4', -0.../. .t....::. -„ -... ' --.4i* f . , A.” , --_—_,A "I' • ''''''''''''''''''''' • „.L ..,., e.Yw t M .. wrrA s 'S: • F. Foreword by S. Richard Fedrizzi, CEO, ir ,. . U.S. Green Building Council ----r-T--:i The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Excerpt from: The Green Building Revolution,2007,Island Press(forthcoming, October),by Jerry Yudelson Chapter 3. The Business Case for Green Buildings The business case for commercial green buildings in 2007 is simply stated: if your next project is not a green building,one that's certified by a national third-party rating system, it will be functionally outdated the day it's completed and very likely to underperform the market as time passes.' That bold statement was echoed by a well known real-estate expert, who bluntly claimed that trillions of dollars of commercial property around the world would soon drop in value because green buildings are going mainstream and would render those properties obsolete." In a meeting in Sydney,Australia, in February 2007,the head of Australia's Property Council, representing the entire development industry, claimed that no large developer in that country would ever start another project that wasn't going to be at least LEED Silver(Australia 4 Green Stars) certified.'' Within two years,the business case for green buildings is going to be part of"business as usual."Jerrold Lea of the large Houston-based developer Hines, a strong proponent and developer of Energy Star and LEED buildings, says, "I think sustainable is here to stay. I think the definition of`Class A' buildings very soon will include sustainable design and probably LEED certification.""'Richard Cook, a prominent architect in New York City, says,"In five years, it will be clear that buildings not reaching the highest standard of sustainability will become obsolete.' Incentives and Barriers to Green Development Still,there are barriers to the widespread adoption of green building techniques,technologies and systems, some of them related to real-life experience and the rest to perception in the building industry that green buildings still add extra cost. This is surprising because senior executives representing architectural/engineering firms, consultants, developers, building owners, corporate owner-occupants and educational institutions have held positive attitudes about the benefits and costs of green construction for some time, according to the 2005 Green Building Market Barometer, a survey conducted by Turner Construction Company.`'' When asked to compare green buildings with traditional construction,the respondents agreed that green construction yields greater benefits in terms of: • occupants' health and well-being(88 percent); ■ building value (84 percent); ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 2 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt • worker productivity(78 percent)and • return on investment(68 percent). Fifty-seven percent of the 665 executives surveyed said their companies were involved with green buildings; 83 percent said their green building workload had increased since 2002; and 87 percent said they expected green building activity to continue. Thirty-four percent of those not currently working with green construction said their organization would be likely to do so over the next three years. Given these positive views, it is surprising that the top obstacles to widespread adoption of green building approaches cited in the survey are perceived higher costs(68 percent)and lack of awareness regarding the benefits of green construction(64 percent). Other factors discouraging green construction are the perceived complexity and cost of LEED documentation(54 percent), short-term budget horizons(51 percent)and long payback(50 percent),the difficulty in quantifying the benefits(47 percent), and the more complex construction involved(30 percent). Overcoming Barriers to Green Buildings Architects,engineers,builders and developers are working hard to bring costs into line with benefits, in four specific ways. Chapter 4 shows the many ways in which design and construction decisions influence the costs of green buildings. Over the next three years, everyone in the green building industry will be focused on lowering that key barrier. 1. Working aggressively to lower the costs of building green through accumulating their own project experience and a strengthening their focus on integrated design approaches that might lower some costs(such asHVAC—heating,ventilating and air-conditioning—systems)while increasing others(such as building envelope insulation and better glazing), but with a net positive cost-reduction impact. 2. Developing communication and marketing strategies that make good use of available research that demonstrates the benefits of green buildings,to justify the economic and market risks inherent in trying something new. We'll see some of that research in what follows. 3. Finding ways to finance green building improvements to reduce or eliminate the first-cost penalty that often frightens away prospective buyers, using incentives from electric utilities, utility"public purpose"programs, and local, state and federal governments to maximize points of ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 3 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt leverage. There are also a growing number of third-party financing sources for energy-efficiency and renewable energy investments in large building projects. 4. Study and try to duplicate successful project results for institutional buyers who represent about half of the current market for LEED-registered buildings. This means documenting the full range of green building benefits so that building owners with a long-term ownership perspective can be motivated to find the additional funds to build high-performance buildings. 5. Use good project management and cost management software to show the benefits of various green building measures in real time. Decisions about green building measures are often made quickly, during project meetings that can last all day. Having good information about costs, benefits and return on investment can be critical to keeping good green measures under consideration, instead of losing them to strictly cost considerations. Paul Shahriari is the developer of the leading software for green project cost management, Ecologic 3."He developed this project management product because of his experience with advising dozens of green building projects, where cost was the only consideration ever placed on the table. He says, "We've created web-based collaborative software that allows a team to attribute certain cost savings or premiums associated with each LEED credit. They can also attach a cost impact profile to each LEED credit. The tool combines the soft costs of design, consulting and engineering and the hard-cost component(construction)and presents a life cycle benefit structure. "It shows you when the project will break even and then—the powerful thing—it shows when that green building will starting generating additional income in terms of reduced operating costs, electricity, water, O&M, maintenance, etc. It shows that green buildings are the only kind of buildings that can product more revenue for clients as opposed to traditional buildings that costs the owner money to operate. So far, for every project that's in the system right now,the average payback period is less than five years for certified projects. Some of the return on investment calculations of individual credits have over 1,000% return on investments by doing something environmentally friendly and green. Our philosophy is that we want to harness economic value from the environmental performance of a project. We show people that there is money to be had by greening their ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 4 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt project. The most important thing I discovered is that prior to having an economic framework with which to discuss LEED, I had a lot of projects that never went forward. I've never had a client that's seen the output from the software decide not to build a green proj ect. Benefits That Build a Business Case The business case for green development is based on a framework of benefits: economic, financial, productivity, risk management,public relations and marketing, and funding."Table 3.1 (end of chapter)presents an outline useful for understanding the wide-ranging benefits of green buildings, which are examined in detail in the following section. Economic Benefits Reduced operating costs. With the real price of oil likely to stay above $50 per barrel for the next 20 years," natural gas prices at record levels and peak-period (typically summer air- conditioning times) electricity prices rising steadily in many metropolitan areas, energy-efficient buildings make good business sense. Even in "triple-net" leases(the most common type) in which the tenant pays all operating costs, landlords want to offer tenants the most economical space for their money. For a small additional investment in capital cost, green buildings will save on energy operating costs for years to come. Many green buildings are designed to use 25 percent to 40 percent less energy than current codes require; some buildings achieve even higher efficiency levels. Translated to an operating cost of$1.60 to $2.50 per square foot for electricity (the most common fuel),this energy savings could reduce utility operating costs by $0.40 to $1.00 per year. Often these savings are achieved for an investment of just$1.00 to $3.00 per square foot. With building costs reaching $150 to$300 per square foot,many developers and building owners are seeing that it's a wise business decision to invest one to two percent of capital cost to secure long- term savings, particularly with a payback of less than three years. In an 80,000-square-foot building,the owner's savings translates into $32,000 to $80,000 per year,year after year. Reduced maintenance costs. More than 120 studies have documented that energy-saving buildings properly commissioned at$0.50 to $1.00 per square foot of initial cost(equal to one year of savings)show additional savings of 10 percent to 15 percent in energy costs. They also tend to be much easier to operate and maintain."'By conducting comprehensive functional testing of all energy-using systems before occupancy, it is often possible to have a smoother-running building for years because potential problems are fixed in advance. A recent review of these ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 5 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt studies by Lawrence BerkeleyNational Laboratory showed that the payback from building commissioning in terms of energysavings alone was about four years,while the payback fell to about one year when other benefits were considered, such as fewer callbacks to address thermal comfort problems. Increased buildingvalue. Increased annual energy savings also create higher building values. Imagine a building that saves$37,500 per in costs versus a comparable building built year energy to code(this g g savings might result from saving only $0.50 per year per square foot for a 75,000- square-foot building). At capitalization rates of eight percent to 10 percent,typical today in commercial real estate,green building standards would add$375,000($5.00 per square foot)to $468,750 ($6.25 per square foot)to the value of the building. For a small upfront investment, an owner can reap benefits that typically offer a payback of three years or less and a rate of return exceeding 20 percent. Tax benefits. Many states have begun to offer tax benefits for green buildings. Here are three examples,two based on tax credits,the third based on property and sales tax abatements. Oregon p � and New York offer state tax credits, for example. Oregon's credit varies based on building size and LEED-certification level attained. At the Platinum level,a 100,000-square-foot building can expect to receive a net-present-value tax credit of about$2.00 per sq.ft."" This credit can be transferred from public or nonprofit entities to private companies, such as contractors or benefactors, making it even more beneficial than one that only applies to private owners.'" New York's tax credit allows builders who meet energy goals and use environmentally preferable materials to claim up to $3.75 per square foot for interior work and $7.50 per square foot for exterior work against their state tax bill. To qualify for the credit, a building must be certified by a licensed architect or engineer, and must meet specific requirements for energy use, materials selection, indoor air quality, waste disposal, and water use. In new buildings,this means use cannot exceed 65 percent of use permitted under the New York State energy code; in energy rehabilitated buildings, energy use cannot exceed 75 percent."'" Passed by the Nevada legislature in 2005,the state offers a property tax abatement of up to 50 ercent for upto ten years for private development projects achieving a LEED Silver p certification. Assuming property the tax is one percent of value,this could be worth as much as five cost,typically percentof the building far more than the actual cost of achieving LEED Silver on a project.large As a result, a large number of Nevada projects are pursuing LEED certification, includingthe world's largest private development project,the $7 billion, and 17- ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 6 Y , The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt p � million-sq.ft. "City Center"project in Las Vegas (see Chapter 11.)"The Nevada law also provides for sales tax abatement for green materials used in LEED Silver-certified buildings. The 2005 federal Energy Policy Act offers two major tax incentives for aspects of green buildings: a tax credit of 30% on both solar thermal and electric systems and a tax deduction of up to $1.80 per square-foot for projects that reduce energy use for lighting,HVAC and water heating systems by 50 percent compared with a baseline standard."In the case ofg overnment projects,the tax deduction may be taken by the design team leader, typically the architect. Productivity Benefits In the service economy, productivity gains for healthier indoor spaces are worth anywhere from one to five percent of employee costs, or about$3.00 to $30.00 per square foot of leasable or usable space. This estimate is based on average employee costs of$300 to $600 per square foot per year(based on $60,000 average annual salary and benefits and 100 square feet to 200 square feet per person).xvil With energy costs typically less than$2.50 per square foot per year, it appears that productivity gains from green buildings could easily equal or exceed the entire energy cost of operating a building. Here's an example: Median productivity gains from high-performance lighting of 3.2 percent in 11 studies were reported by Carnegie-Mellon University in Pittsburgh, or about$1 to $2 per square foot per year, an amount equal to the cost of energy.x\m This is in addition to a reported average savings of 18 percent on total energy bills from proper lighting. For corporate and institutional owners and occupiers of buildings,that is too much savings to ignore. Look at it this way. If a building owner could get a ten percent improvement in productivity from a green building, or about$30 to $60 per square-foot increase in output, it would always pay for that company to build a new building and put its employees to work there. In other words,the productivity increase could pay for the building! Even a five percent improvement in productivity would pay for half or more of the rent or cost of the new green building. What,then,you might ask, is the business case for a"brown building,"one that doesn't have these benefits? From another ground-breaking study of the costs of green buildings, Table 3.2 (end of chapter)shows the 20-year"net present value"of the various categories of green building benefits.X'X Productivity and health gains provide more than two-thirds of the total benefits of green buildings in this analysis. ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 7 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Risk Management Benefits Green buildingcertification can provide some measure of protection against future lawsuits through third-party verification of measures installed to protect indoor air quality,beyond just p 1`ty meeting code-required uired minimums. With the national focus on mold and its effect on building q occup ants developers and building owners are focusing considerable attention on improving and maintaining indoor air quality. Fasterp ermitting or special permit assistance can also be considered a type of risk mitigation. In Chicago, for example,the city government has created the position of green projects green administratorand is allowing projects to receive priority processing. For large projects, above minimum requirements,the city waives fees for independent code consultants. Projects with high-level green goals are promised a 15-day permit review.XX In Austin,Texas,the g city fast-tracked the development reviews for a large big box retailer, so that it was able to open 12 months ahead profitgain of schedule; the resulting paid for the $2.8 million building!XX' Another risk management benefit of green buildings in the private sector is the faster sales and leasing of such buildings,compared to similar projects in the same town. Green buildings tend to be easier to rent and sell,because educated tenants increasingly understand their benefits. Green buildings are also seen as less risky by insurers. In September of 2006,Fireman's Fund, a major insurance company, announced it would give a five percent reduction in insurance premiums for green buildings. The insurer also announced its"Certified Green Building Replacement and Green Upgrade"coverage.XXi' Health Benefits Of course, a key element of productivity is healthy workers. By focusing on measures to improve indoor environmental quality such as increased ventilation, daylighting,views to the outdoors and low-toxicity finishes and furniture, people in green buildings show an average reduction in symptoms of 41.5%on an annual basis. Since most companies are effectively self-insured(i.e.,your health insurance costs go up the more claims you have) and most government agencies and large companies are self-insured in reality, it makes good economic sense to be concerned about the effect of building design on people's health. In addition, given what we know about the health effects of various green building measures, a company might be inviting lawsuits if it didn't take all feasible measures to design and building a healthy building. By having the building certified by an independent third- ©2007 007 JerryYudelson. All Rights Reserved 8 02 g The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt party and by designing well above code-required minimums, it is possible that a company might have a better defense against employee lawsuits for sick building syndrome and other ailments. Public Relations and Marketing Benefits Stakeholder relations and occupant satisfaction. Tenants and employees want to see a demonstrated concern for their well-being and for that of the planet. Savvy developers and building owners are beginning to realize how to market these benefits to a discerning and skeptical client and stakeholder base, using the advantages of green building certifications and other forms of documentation, including support from local utility and industry programs. This is more than just"greenwashing," it is a positive response to a growing public concern for the long- term health of the environment. A good indication of how corporations have embraced this concept is the explosion in green building projects and associated public relations in 2006 and 2007;you can sign up to receive Google Alerts,put in "green buildings"as a keyword, and you will be inundated with six to 12 news stories almost every day from the nation's press. Environmental stewardship. Being a good neighbor is appropriate not just for building users, but for the larger community. Developers, large corporations, universities, schools, local government and building owners have long recognized the marketing and public relations benefits(including branding) of a demonstrated concern for the environment. Green buildings fit right in with this message. As a result, we expect to see major commitments by corporate real estate executives for greening their buildings and facilities. A good example is Adobe Systems, Inc., a major software maker based in San Jose, California. In 2006, Adobe announced that it had received three LEED-EB Platinum awards for its headquarters towers; not only did it reap great publicity,but the firm showed that it had garnered a net present value almost 20 times its initial investment.XX»> Many larger public and private organizations have well-articulated sustainability mission statements and are understanding how their real estate choices can both reflect and advance those missions. Writing in Urban Land magazine, developer Jonathan F. P. Rose notes that"having a socially and environmentally motivated mission makes it easier for businesses in the real estate industry to recruit, and retain,top talent. Communities are more likely to support green projects than traditional projects, and it is easier for such projects to qualify for many government contracts, subsidies, grants and tax credits. The real estate industry can prosper by making environmentally responsible decisions."X"'v ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 9 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Green buildings also reinforce a company's brand image. A consumer products company such as Wal-Mart, Starbucks,PNC Bank or Aveda can improve or maintain their brand image by being associated with green buildings, and so they are moving in this direction. Large corporations, includingthose that issue sustainability reports every year—and there are more than g 1,000 of them—are beginning to see the benefits of building green to demonstrate to their employees, shareholders and other stakeholders that they are"walking the talk."In fact, as mentioned in the Introduction,the first large building to be built at Ground Zero,the World Trade Center site, Seven World Trade Center, was certified LEED Gold. In September of 2006, Governor George Pataki of New York announced that the Freedom Tower, World Trade Center Office Towers 2, 3, and 4, as well as the World Trade Center Memorial and Memorial Museum will all be designed to achieve LEED Gold certification requirements.' More competitive product in the marketplace. Speculative commercial and residential developers are realizing that green buildings can be more competitive in certain markets, if built on a conventional budget. Green buildings with lower operating costs and better indoor environmentalq uality are more attractive to a growing group of corporate, public and individual buyers. Green-ness will not soon replace known real-estate attributes such as price, location and conventional amenities, but green features will increasingly enter into tenants' decisions about leasing space ace and into buyers' decisions about purchasing properties and homes. We've already seen anecdotes from developers using the pre-certification available from the LEED for Core and Shell rating system stem to attract tenants and financing for high-rise office towers, in such places as Chicago and Atlanta. One such project mentioned earlier, 1180 Peachtree in Atlanta, by Hines, was votedg reen development project of the year in 2006 for NAIOP,the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties.X""' Recruitment and Retention Benefits One often overlooked aspect of green buildings is their effect on people's interest in joining or staying with an organization. It costs$50,000 to $150,000 to lose a good employee, and most organizations experience 10 to 20 percent turnover per year, some of it from people they didn't want to lose. In some cases, people leave because of poor physical environments(as well as the "boss from hell.") In a workforce of 200 people, turnover at this level would mean 20 to 40 people leavingyear. What if a green building could reduce turnover by five percent, for pper example, one to two people out of the 20 to 40?Taken alone,the value of that would be $50,000 toossibl as much as $300,000,more than enough to justify the costs of certifying a building P y ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 10 The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt project. If a professional service firm, say a law firm, lost just one good attorney,typically billing $400,000 per year, with $250,000 gross profit,that would more than pay for the extra cost of a green building or green tenant improvement project that would keep that lawyer at the firm. What about the impact of a healthy work environment on employees' belief that their employer really cares about their well-being? Table 3.3 (end of chapter)confirms the growing shortage of people to serve the needs of the U.S. economy. Owing to an aging labor force, in 2014 there will be 2.6% fewer people in the 35 to 44-year-old age group than in 2005,typically the leadership group in most organizations: managers, executives, experienced employees and senior technical people,typically at the peak of their career. Getting and keeping them will tax the ingenuity and resources of most companies; green buildings can demonstrate that the company or organization and the key employees share the same values. Working in a company that rents or owns green buildings give employees another reason to tell their friends and spouses why they are staying with an organization. Financing Green Projects Whether you are a private developer or a nonprofit school or organization,raising money for projects is always an issue. For private developers, raising both debt and equity capital is their challenge. The rise of socially-responsible property investing promises to reward those developers who build green. For example, a large property developer in Portland, Oregon, Gerding Edlen Development, built nearly $1 billion of new projects in 2006>The firm has a strong commitment to building LEED Silver or better buildings in each project.""`'ii Investing in green buildings has begun to attract considerable attention as a form of socially responsible investing,a practice which is growing faster than overall investing. One expert, Professor Gary Pivo at the University of Arizona,puts it this way: "We have yet to see the first real estate investment fund squarely committed to green real estate. But until such funds are created,there are some other options worth considering. One is to acquire shares in companies that commonly own Energy Star—labeled buildings or have been recognized by Energy Star for their conservation efforts.""viii Among publicly-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) investing in green buildings, Liberty Property Trust and Corporate Office Properties Trust(COPT)both develop LEED Silver buildings on a speculative or build-to-suit basis for corporate tenants. They say that green buildings are better investments because they are cheaper to operate, lease up faster and attract better tenants. ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 11 r► The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Corporate Office Properties developed 318 Sentinel Drive in the National Business Park p in Annapolis Junction,Maryland;this project received the 2005 NAIOP green development award. The project is a four-story, 125,000 square-foot office building, fully leased during construction. The Sentinel property earned a LEED Gold rating and is one of 12 projects p currently under development that COPT intends to certify under the LEED-CS program; it earned g a LEED Gold rating. A companion project at 304 Sentinel Drive received a LEED-CS Silver rating. 318 Sentinel Drive incorporates tenant design and construction guidelines to promote green practices during tenant build outs,promoting LEED-CI project certification. The building had a$2.84 per square foot green construction premium, with an estimated $0.70- per-square-foot annual energy savings. However,the company's analysis showed a six- month q month return on investment, once extra green costs were offset by energy savings, waste reduction charges, stormwater management(site development) savings and other green practices.XXX In 2006,New York developer Jonathan Rose created the Rose Smart Growth Investment Fund to invest in green building projects. The $100 million limited partnership focuses on acquiring existing properties near mass transit. The fund expects to make green improvements to q g thero erties and hold them as long-term investments."'"The focus on transit-centric P P developments takes into account the energy savings from enabling people to use mass transit. The fund's first project is in downtown Seattle, Washington, a renovation of the 1920s- era Joseph Vance and Sterling buildings, a total building area of about 120,000-sq.ft.,with ground-floor retail and office space above."" According to the developer,the office buildings wereP urchased for$23.5 million and are undergoing $3.5 million worth of practical green renovations,to improve energy efficiency and environmental performance. According to the Fund, it is"re-branding these buildings as the `greenest and healthiest' historic buildings in the marketplace,to increase market awareness of the buildings, attract and retain tenants." For nonprofits and for private colleges and universities,the funding issue is vastly different. They are dependent on private donors to fund most of their new buildings. Many nonprofits have successfully used greening their buildings to attract funds for renovation projects. The Ecotrust organization in Portland, Oregon,received a major gift from a single donor to renovate a 100-year-old, two-story brick warehouse into a three-story, 70,000-square-foot modern building with two floors of offices above ground-floor retail. The Jean Vollum Natural Capital ©2007Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 12 Jerry g Mb • The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Center was only the second LEED Gold-certified project in the U.S. when it opened in 2001.X"" In 2003, the Natural Resources Defense Council completed one of the first LEED Platinum- certified projects in the world when it opened the Robert Redford Building in Santa Monica, California. Over the next few years, there is no doubt that many private colleges and universities will find that their green buildings draw donors like honey attracts flies. To accelerate this process, since 2003,the Kresge Foundation's Green Building Initiative has been giving grants of up to $100,000 to nonprofits that will use an integrated design process to build a green building. Kresge also offered a"bonus grant"challenge program for projects that became LEED certified. By February 2006, the Initiative had awarded 64 planning grants totaling $4,146,000, averaging about$70,000 each. One early success was Herman Hipp Hall at Furman University near Greenville, South Carolina, a liberal-arts university with about 2,600 students; Hipp Hall was the first LEED Gold-certified project in higher education in the U.S. The bonus grant program is now closed, with $7,200,000 committed to 42 nonprofit organizations, an average grant of $171,000.X""' ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 13 ti11M. M r The Green BuildingRevolution Chapter 3 Excerpt Table 3.1 Business Case Benefits of Green Buildings 1. Utility savings savin s for energy and water,typically 30%to 50%, along with reduced "carbon footprint"from energy savings 2. Maintenance cost reductions from commissioning and other measures to improve and assure proper systems integration and performance 3. Increased value from higher Net Operating Income(NOI) and better public relations 4. Tax benefits for specific green building investments 5. More competitive real estate holdings for private sector owners, over the long run 6. Productivity improvements,typically 3%to 5% 7. Health benefits, reduced absenteeism,typically 5%or more 8. Risk management, including faster lease up and sales and lower employee exposure to irritating or toxic chemicals in building materials 9. Marketing benefits, especially for developers and consumer products companies 10. Public relations benefits,especially for developers and public agencies 11. Recruitment and retention of key employees and higher morale 12. Fund-raising for colleges and nonprofits 13. Increased availability of debt and equity funding for developers 14. Demonstration of commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship; shared values with key stakeholders Source: Yudelson Associates ©2007 JerryYudelson. All Rights Reserved 14 g The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt p rp Table 3.2 Financial Benefits of Green Buildings(per sq.ft.); Kats study (33 buildings)""""' Productivity and health value $36.90 to$55.30(70%to 78%of total benefits) Operation and maintenance savings $ 8.50 Energy savings $ 5.80 Emissions savings (from energy) $ 1.20 Water Savings $ 0.50 Subtotal Savings $52.90 to $71.30 Table 3.3 The Aging Labor Force, 2014 vs. 2005, in millions""" Age Group 2005 2014(estimate) Percent Change 25-34 32.5 36.8 +4.2 35-44 35.9 33.3 -2.6 45-54 34.2 35.5 +1.3 55 & older 24.1 34.3 +10.2 ' There are buildings that may have green elements, but do not pursue formal certification. My estimate is that these represent less than half the green building market at present and will decline rapidly over the next three years as a share of all green buildings. As is often said, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." The case for certification of buildings is made elsewhere. When people tell me this, I say "prove it." The fact is that most people who claim to be doing green design but don't bother to certify the project through an independent third-party are practicing self-deception, since without certification as a goal; many of the green elements are cut from most projects for budget reasons. " "As Green as the Grass Outside," Charles Lockwood, Barron's, December 25, 2006, http://online.barrons.com/article/SB 116683352907658186.html?mod=9_0031_b_this_weeks_ma gazine_main, accessed March 6, 2007. "' Peter Verwer, CEO of Australian Property Council, presentation to Green Cities 07 Conference, February 13, 2007, www.gbcaus.org.au. iv Interview with Jerrold Lea, Hines, March 2007. Richard Cook, Cook+Fox Architects,New York City, interview, March 2007. v' Available at: www.turnerconstruction.com/greensurvey 05.pdf, accessed March 6, 2007. `'"www.ecologic3.com. Interview with Paul Shahriari, Green Mind, Inc., March 2007. '"U.S. Green Building Council,Making the Business Case for High-Performance Green Buildings(Washington, D.C.:U.S. Green Building Council, 2002), available at: www.usgbc.org/resources/usbec_brochures.asp, accessed March 6, 2007. See also Environmental Building News, 14, no. 4(April 2005), available at: www.buildinggreen.com, accessed March 6, 2007. " See www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/key.html, accessed March 6, 2007, for the November 2006 forecast. ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 15 M � The Green Building Revolution Chapter 3 Excerpt xi See the recentby meta-studyLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, The Cost-Effectiveness of Commercial-Buildings Commissioning, available at http://eetd.lbl.goviemills/PUBS/Cx-Costs- Benefits.html. Benefits.html. This research reviewed 224 studies of the benefits of building commissioning and concluded that based on energysavings alone, such investments have a payback within five years. X" www.oregon.gov/ENERGY/CONS/BUS/docs/SustainableAp.doc,a ov/ENERGY/CONS/BUS/docs/SustainableAp.doc, accessed 3/6/07. ww .ore onw .g ov/ENERGY/CONS/BUS/BETC.shtml, accessed March 6,2007. g XIV www.nrdc.org/cities/building/nnytax.asp, accessed March 6, 2007. X`' communication, Lynn Simon, Simon & Associates,February 2, 2007. Also see Personal Y www.eere.energy.gov/states/news_detail.cfm/news_id=9149,_detail.cfm/news_id=9149, accessed March 6, 2007 and http.•//ww .wle .state.nv.us/22ndSpecial/bills/AB/AB3_EN.pdf, accessed March 6, 2007. g Xvi www.energy.gov/taxbreaks.htm, accessed March 6, 2007. XVII Eleven case studies have shown that innovative daylighting systems can pay for themselves in less than one yearenergy due toand productivity benefits. Vivian Loftness et al.,Building Pp Investment Decision Support BIDSTM) (Pittsburgh: Center for Building Performance and Diagnostics, Carnegie Mellon University,n.d.), available at http://cbpd.arc.cmu.edu/ebids, accessed March 6, 2007. XVIII Carnegie Mellon University, http://cbpd.arc.cmu.edu/ebids/images/group/cases/lighting.pdf, accessed March 6, 2007. XIX www.cap-e.com/ewebeditpro/items/059F3303.ppt#2, accessed March 6,2007. XX"Speedy PermittingHas Developers Turning Green in Chicago,"Building Design& Construction,November 2005,p. 28; www.BDCnetwork.com, accessed March 6,2007. xxi Personal communication, S. Richard Fedrizzi, CEO,U.S. Green Building Council. XX" www.buildingonline.com/news/viewnews.pl?id=5514, accessed March 6, 2007. XXiii g x?ID=2783 accessed March 6, 2007. www.usgbc.orgNews/PressReleaseDetails.aspx?ID=2783, "The Business Case for Green Building," Urban Land,June 2005, p. 71; www.uli.org. XXV www.us bcor /News/PressReleaseDetails.aspx?ID=2590, accessed March 6, 2007. g . g "vi www.naiop.org. Gerding EdlenDevelopment,Develo ment, www.g erdingedlen.com; story in the Portland Daily Journal of Commerce,February 26, 2007,p. 4. "Viii www.uli.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=GreenTechl &Temp late=/MembersOnly.cfm&ContentlD=37654, accessed December 31, 2006. XXIX www.copt.com/?id=162, accessed March 6, 2007. XXX New York Times, January 10, 2007. XXX' www.rose-network.com/projects/index.html, accessed March 6,2007. XXX" www.ecotrust.org/ncc/index.html, accessed March 6, 2007. XXX"' or. www.kresg e /content/displaycontent.aspx?CID=7, accessed March 6, 2007. 'iv g Gregory Kats, Financial Costs and Benefits of Green Buildings, available at www.cap-e.com. XXXV Bureau of Labor Statistics,cited in Investor's Business Daily, March 6, 2007,p. 1. II I ©2007 Jerry Yudelson. All Rights Reserved 16 N Consent Agenda Item # 6-D • CITY Of .gli l'it'&4,- MAYOR & COUNCIL COMMUNICATION 4.. TUCSON April 18, 2006 Subject: Sustainable Energy Standard —Adopting An Updated Page: 1 of 2 Green Building Policy for City Building Construction Projects (City-Wide) Issue— Consider the adoption of a policy(resolution attached) that states that all new City buildings and major building renovations over 5,000 sq. ft. in size be designed and constructed to meet the requirements of the Sustainable Energy Standard by meeting the certification requirements of the Leadershipin Energyand Environmental Design (LEEDTM) Program at the q Silver Certification Level and to achieve higher levels for certification (Gold or Platinum) whenever project resources and conditions permit. Should the project team determine through analysis that such certification is not in the best interest of the City (excessive cost, unsuitability, etc.) the team will refer their findings in writing to the City's Energy Manager and the Director of General Services for evaluation and recommendation to the City Manager. Recommendation —It is recommended that the Mayor and Council adopt the attached Resolution. Background — Since the early 1990's, the City of Tucson has promoted sustainable design, sometimes called "Green Building," in a variety of ways. These include initiatives such as Life- Cycle costing and building to the Sustainable Energy Standard. In April 1999, Mayor and Council directed staff to continue to pursue comprehensive and coordinated approaches to sustainable design and construction of public facilities. The City has constructed a number of new facilities that incorporate elements of sustainability, including: solar energy utilization, energy management and control systems, and reflective white roofs. These include the Adaptive Recreation Center, El Rio Adult Education Center, and Midtown MultiService Center-- all Governor's Energy Award winners. The SES standard adopted in 1998 for the community of Civano was recently updated. The latest version of the SES allows for compliance through one of two paths. One path requires the building to use 50% less energy than the ANSUASHRAE Energy Efficiency Standard 90.1 — 2001 version without amendments. The other path allows for compliance if the building is registered to be LEEDTM Silver. Discussion —The Mayor and Council per resolution 18082 of July 6, 1998 applied the SES to new City buildings and additions/modifications. The resolution was specific to the 1998 version of the SES. The SES was updated in July 2005. City staff has researched the updated SES and suggests that City buildings should be designed and constructed to the SES by meeting the requirements for the LEEDTM Silver Certification. LEEDTM certification ensures compliance with the rating system criteria. Legal Considerations— The attached resolution was prepared by the City Attorney's office. APRIL18-06-188 MAYOR AND COUNCIL COMMUNICATION Page: 2 of 2 "Sustainable Energy Standard. . ." Financial Considerations— Studies indicate that with initial integrated design, sustainable buildings have an average 0— 2% (or less than $3 - $5/sq.ft, 2% of$150 to 250/sq.ft. construction cost), increase in design/construction costs over their conventional counterparts, with overall, long-term financial benefits due to reduced operating, maintenance and other costs, exceed the additional design/construction costs by a factor of 10 to 1. Data from existing LEEDTM certified projects indicates that there is an almost immediate payback on any additional design/construction costs. A LEEDTM certified building should payback any additional design/construction cost in 1 — 5 years, and then continue to return many years of savings over the useful life of the building. In some cases there are reduced construction costs due to integrated design practices as required for LEEDTM certification. For example peak building cooling loads are reduced if energy efficient lighting and white reflective roofing are installed, often saving construction costs for air conditioning equipment. Respectfully submitted, ./..10 4,04( Mik etcher Dep ty City Manager ML:RONLEWIS:vh:kp General Services Department APRIL18-06-188 Attachments: Resolution ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 20322 RELATING TO SUSTAINABLE ENERGY STANDARDS: AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING APPLICATION OF THE SUSTAINABLE ENERGY STANDARDS TO CERTAIN CITY BUILDINGS, ADDITIONS, MODIFICATIONS AND RENOVATIONS AND REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LEADERSHIP IN ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN PROGRAM AT THE SILVER CERTIFICATION LEVEL OR HIGHER; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUCSON, ARIZONA, AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. It shall be the Policy of the City of Tucson that the Sustainable Energy Standard (SES) shall be used for new City buildings and major building additions, modifications, or renovation projects in excess of 5,000 square feet by complying with the certification requirements of the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) program at the Silver Certification level. SECTION 2. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1, and only where project resources and conditions permit, it shall be the policy of the City of Tucson that new City buildings and major building additions, modifications, or renovation projects in excess of 5,000 square feet shall meet the certification requirements of LEED at the gold or platinum certification level. SECTION 3. The City Manager is authorized to waive the requirements of Section 1 and Section 2 based upon a finding of factors including, but not limited to, excess cost or unsuitability to the project. If a specific project team determines through appropriate alternative analysis (such as life-cycle cost analysis, technical feasibility, or other) that SES compliance or LEED Silver Certification is not in the City's best interest, the project team A0013 210.DOC/ shall make written findings and shall refer them to the City Energy Manager and Director of General Services for evaluation and recommendation to the City Manager. After consideration of the written findings, the City Manager shall determine if a waiver is appropriate. SECTION 4. City projects for the construction of new City buildings, major building additions, modifications or renovation projects in excess of 5,000 square feet with established, firm, fixed budgets on the effective date of this resolution are exempt from the requirements of Sections 1 and 2 of this resolution. SECTION 5. The various City officers and employees are authorized and directed to perform all acts necessary or desirable to give effect to this resolution. SECTION 6. WHEREAS, it is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the City of Tucson that this resolution become immediately effective, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUCSON, ARIZONA, . MAYOR ATTEST: CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: REVIEWED BY: 174e/2______ CITY ATTORNEY CITY MANAGER pW K FK:tme 04/07/2006 2:32 PM A0013210.DOC/2