PC 06-24-08
CITY OF CUPERTINO
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
CITY OF CUPERTINO PLANNING COMIVIISSION
AMENDED MINUTES
6:45 P.M. June 24, 2008 TUESDAY
CUPERTINO CONIMUNITY HALL
The regular Planning Commission meeting of June 24, 2008, was called to order at 6:45 p.m. in
the Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California, by Chairperson Mariy
Miller.
SALUTE TO THE FLAG
ROLL CALL
Commissioners present: Chairperson: Marty Miller
Vice Chairperson: Lisa Giefer
Commissioner: David Kaneda
Commissioner: Jessica Rose
Commissioner Absent: Commissioner: Paul Brophy
Staff present: Community Development Director: Steve Piasecki
APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
Minutes of the May 27, 2008 Planning Commission meeting:
Corrections: Vice Chair Giefer: Page 19: The sentence implies that Peak Physical Therapy is
no longer in the center; edit the context to show they are still in the center.
MoHon: Motion by Vice Chair Giefer, second by Com. Kaneda, to approve the
May 27, 2008 Planning Commission meeting minutes as amended. (Vote: 4-0-0;
Com. Brophy absent)
Minutes of the June I0, 2008 Planning Commission meeting:
Motion: Motion by Com. Kaneda, second by Com. Rose, to approve the June 10, 2008
Planning Commission meeting minutes as presented. (Vote: 4-0-0; Com. Brophy
absent)
WRITTEN COMMiTNICATIONS: Steve Piasecki noted receipt of newspaper articles relative
to the agenda items.
POSTPONEMENTS/REMOVAL FROM CALENDAR: None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:
Cupertino Planning Commission 2 June 24, 2008
Darrel Lum, Cupertino resident:
• Said he attended the June 10, 2008 Planning Commission meeting and complimented the
Planning staff and Planning Commission for their actions on the residential project and hotel
project. The conditions of approval put into the model resolution were both constructed and
necessary.
CONSENT CALENDAR: None
PUBLIC HEARING• None
NEW BUSINESS: None
Chair Miller moved the agenda to Report of the Planning Commission.
REPORT OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Environmental Review Committee:. No meeting.
Housin~ Commission: No report given.
Mavor's Monthlv Meeting with Commissioners:
Com. Kaneda reported:
• City Council passed the General Fund budget;
• Various Commissioners from other commissions provided updates.
• Parks and Rec Commission discussed the design of Villa Sena Park which came up several
months ago. The project is in design and moving forward.
• The Chair of the Public Safety Commission is resigning for health reasons.
Economic Develonment Committee: No meeting.
REPORT OF THE DIItECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
Steve Piasecki reported:
• The City Council approved the budget.
• The housing element update process has begun; invitations are being mailed to ever~
stakeholder group who may be interested in participating in a process beginning July 10 .
Citywide mailings regarding upcoming projects have also been mailed out.
• There was a recent newspaper article about a Superior Court judge who has been appointed for
the receivership of Cupertino Square.
• Relative to summer meeting schedule, the July 8~ Planning Commission meeting agenda is
full; July 22°d has one pending item for the agenda. First meeting in August may be the
appropriate meeting to consider canceling.
Chair Miller moved the agenda back to Item 1.
OLD BUSINESS:
1. Discuss methods to encourage the installation of photovoltaic systems in the
Cupertino. PG&E rep, staff from other cities in attendance.
Cupertino Planning Commission 3 June 24, 2008
Chair Miller:
• Said that he researched city records for electricity expenses for a year period from May 2007
to April 2008 for the five largest energy consuming buildings owned by the city; City Hall,
Senior Center, Quinlan Center, Sports Center and the Community Center.
• Pointed out that the more electricity that the city uses, the lower the city's rate; which is the
opposite of how the residents are treated, which appeared to be counter-productive in terms of
helping to reduce energy costs.
• He said that each building was metered separately and treated separately with a different rate
based on usage, as opposed to one large bill for the city.
Papya Gamblin, Govt. Relations Rep., Pacific Gas & Electric:
• Said she was eager to have a discussion and get some feedback from the Planning Commission
on the types of things they are looking for. She said she would review the website with the
Commissioners which has useful information.
Chair MiAer:
• Said that the objective was to promote solar; not just solar, but green in general and energy
reduction strategies in general; and in doing so, be more energy efficient. There are many
things that can be done, not only with solar, but also in terms of better insulation and other
methods.
• He referred to the data he collected, and said that it seems that the rate structure for the city is
the more electricity used, the lower per kilowatt chazge, which is different than residential.
The other interesting comment was that each building is metered separately; each street light is
metered separately.
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said she would look into the issue of street light metering, since her understanding was that
there was a general rate available for street lights in general, the LC2 rate for streetlights. The
LC2 rate is a type of wattage used and there is a calculation on the number of inventory that
we have of street lights within the jurisdiction, and a total dollar amount calculated. She said
she would verify if Cupertino has metered street lights.
Chair Miller:
• For traffic lights, when they switched to LEDs they didn't notice any change in their electricity
bill; is that because there is a flat rate and it doesn't matter what you use; is it based on the
tarifF? '
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said it was based on the tariff and there are some LED experimental rates out there; we went
through with the PUC an exercise to allow for a separate LED rate which would be applicable
to the street lights. I don't know where those pilots are being performed, and if we are in a
phase of that pilot implementation where we can choose a city to participate in; if that is the
case, perhaps Cupertino can participate in that.
• The rate was approved by the PUC, which would be applied to the inventory available with the
city; because it will be a different rate or augmented rate from the normal rate, I think less by a
significant amount, from a year to year during a pilot, it will be a 12 month pilot, you can
compare that from your one at the old rate and the new rate. The PUC wants to look at that
and see what that is like. I will see where that is in the process, and if we cannot extend it
now, that is something we can have in your future plan.
Cupertino Planning Commission 4 June 24, 2008
Chair Miller:
• Said he read that the state had an objective for PG&E of providing 20% of its electricity from
alternative sources in a short timeframe of 3 to 5 years; the requirement that PG&E has to
generate 20% of its electricity for renewable sources. He asked how Cupertino could help
achieve that objective.
Ms. Gamblin:
- • Where there is funding allocated specifically for jurisdictions to be able to use that to develop
wind or solar or whatever renewable that's accessible from the city, there are dollars available
for you to invest in infrastructure so that you can participate in that way. There is funding
allocated through our company that helps with that. It is just connecting the dots and figuring
out what is going to be feasible. Can it be partnered with another part of what overall
objective you are trying to work on? Caitlin Hing, with our Solar Generation Group manages
that and said that is something the city could entertain. We will provide more information and
further that discussion.
Vice Chair Giefer:
• Are those funds separate from PG&E grants, and if one were to apply for that type of
jurisdictional funding, could one also apply for grant funding?
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said the funds were sepazate; according to Ms. Hing, that is more infrastructure dollars, and
there are capital investrnent dollars. The grant funds would then be used more for
administrative programmatic, and in theory could be used for those dollars. There are dollars
that can help create the infrastructure and one to support it.
• She answered questions about the application process and implementation process.
Vice Chair Giefer:
• Relative to the residential permit process, for the Cal Solar Refunds it states that an energy
audit by PG&E is needed. She asked if one has recently remodeled their home and has a Title
24 report, less than 24 months old; is that acceptable vs. an energy audit?
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said it was acceptable because the audit is derived from the Title 24 guidelines; if using
HERS or you are remodeling, it is also a derivative of Title 24, primarily used in custom built
homes; but it depends on what residential, depending on the footprint of the home; usually
HERS is used for homes in the 2500 sq. ft. + range, and those do qualify.
Com. Kaneda:
• Asked for a general discussion of the residential rebate program.
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said that www.PG&E.com\solar provides residential information on solar incent
• ives and programs; there is a solar energy guide which walks you through what it takes to put
solar panels on your home; what that interconnection means; what the meter looks like, what
are benefits of your meter that you get. Many times people with solar want that immediate
information; how much they are generating far that day and what does that mean relative to
making the investrnent. One of the benefits of the meters that PG&E installs, is that it provides
Cupertino Planning Commission 5 June 24, 2008
information almost live, virtually 24 hours delay; you will know how much you generated the
next day for the prior day.
• Said she liked the Smart Meter concept; more information on that technology will be available
in future months. Santa Clara County implementation will be in 2009 where meters will be
switched at homes so they can remotely communicate with us; part of that will also be live
information on your usage. When you install a solar panel on your home with PG&E that
meter communicates in that fashion from the interconnection.
• The rebates available are two-fold. One is for the installation and also one upon the
connection.
• Said she did not have accurate information on the amount of residential rebates as it was based
on a variety of factors.
Chair Miller:
• Said he would like more information on that structure; because it is perfect from a business
standpoint; you want to give discounts to people who buy a lot of product. However, if you
aze trying to encourage a reduction in use, that is counter- productive.
Ms. Gamblin:
~ That is why you will find that PG&E promotes the energy efficiency as we do. We don't want
people to use more power; we want them to think about how they are using their power and
implement energy efficiency, so that they are not having to pay more on their bill.
Chair Miller:
• But you are not providing a financial incentive to do that. You are providing a financial
incentive for them to use more. The government is trying to offset by providing subsidies to
install solar; but for the residents it is clear, if you put solar on your roof, then you are going to
drop down to a lower usage rate and your bill is going to show a significant decline; but for a
business when you drop down to a lower usage rate, you are paying a higher per kilowatt fee.
To some extent, it reduces the benefit that the government is providing with the 30% discount
or rebate for the price of the system.
Ms. Gamblin:
• Said that with energy efficiency, there are incentives built into that to save money; it is a direct
link to saving money. Although the rate structure doesn't feed into that energy efficiency
component, the energy efficiency programs and all of the incentives that it provides does help
reduce costs, and that is why they promote them and implement them at the level they do.
Vice Chair Giefer:
• Clarified that PG&E does give incentives to homeowners as they provide some discount for
using less gas throughout the winter months. She said Chair Miller is correct that having the
same rate pay structure is increased as your usage increased for businesses might provide more
incentive, but I presume that PG&E is trying to use the carrot method by providing incentives
to businesses to cut their power usage and be more energy efficient. She said sometimes
businesses don't own their building; the property owner doesn't really care because the
occupant is paying the PG&E bill, which results in two components working against each
other.
Chair Miller:
• Said just looking at the fact that a building owner installs solar, it is hard to see the payback;
however, part of it might be an issue of education because there is a cost to maintain the
Cupertino Planning Commission 6 June 24, 2008
building and the operation of the building, and part of that cost is electricity, and if that cost
goes down, the landowner can in effect ask for higher rents that offset that benefit.
• If the property owners are educated to the fact that there really is a benefit, it is not a benefit
that they may necessarily achieve in the short term, because many of the buildings are tied into
leases, and the large deals are tied into longer leases; for the period of a particularly lease, it is
hard to see the benefit. But for those buildings that are on short leases or longer ones are about
to terminate, there is a clear benefit to reducing energy costs because the building owner can
claim those savings in terms of charging the tenants a higher rent and it is justified because
their utility costs will be lower. The tenants' net cost per month can be the same, and yet the
building owner can achieve a higher rent. If the building owner achieves a higher rent, all
these commercial properties; their value is based on their income, and if the income goes up,
then the value of the building goes up, and that is a real and strong incentive for building
owners to go ahead and become more energy efficient. However, making that connection may
be difficult; it has a lot to do with how we educate them.
Ms. Gamblin:
• Relative to the education of Cupertino and all their service areas, there are account managers
for large businesses such as Semantec and Apple. Each has its point of contact for energy
efficient questions, rebate programs, questions about their bill, they want to make an
improvement in their facility; they are making upgrades.
• There are many rebates available for businesses and REC has account managers working with
the businesses in this community, one-on-one on bringing the rebates to them so that they see
some direct benefit when they are looking at expansions; or when they are just looking at
doing their day-to-day business.
• That level of intimate contact with the business community happens regularly and is taken a
step further with having small to medium size businesses also receive that level of customer
service whether it be the facilities person at Semantic or the business owner at a bakery; they
have a point of contact specifically available to talk about energy savings and what can be
used for them today.
• Said they were working with the Chamber of Commerce to expand the knowledge that it is
free; they are trying to make it as painless and easy as possible for the businesses to
participate. By building on that educational standpoint, the more they can make businesses
aware that these services are built into the overall rate structure that is not an additional cost,
and if anything, they may as they participate, see revenue or rebate to them for doing some
simple things that long term will use less energy and help their bottom line.
Com. Kaneda:
• Asked Ms. Gamlin to address that different city-owned buildings are metered separately;
which he understood was standard practice. He also understood that if the city put photo
voltaics on the roof of such a building as City Hall, and they put on more than is being
consumed by City Hall, at that point they will be giving power back to PG&E; and there is no
way for them to transfer the excess kWh that they are generating to another account that is
another city building.
Ms. Gamblin:
• She said the scenario was accurately described. If using less that what is generated, that is net
zero. The technical side is helpful to understand; it is important to understand why it doesn't
transfer or how it does feed into the overall picture of the grid and what that can mean for a
building and why would you want to do it.
Cupertino Planning Commission 7 June 24, 2008
Marni Kamzen, REC Solar:
~ Said she thought the CSI rebate level was $1.90 per watt; when she did her program in San
Jose, it was $2.20 per watt. It is descending; the more people sign on, the lower the rebates get
and that is one of the issues they are dealing in the Cool Cities Program, which is a residential
program.
• REC Solar does have a governmental sales consultant, who was unable to make tonight's
meeting.
• Read the following statement: "I am here as part of the Cool Cities Program that is being
kicked off in Cupertino. REC Solar is honored to have been chosen as a preferred solar
integrator by Cool Cities Cupertino (CCC) which is endorsed by the City of Cupertino. CCC
reviewed and compared numerous vendors before inviting REC to participate in this program.
In support of the project, REC is offering residents of Cupertino significant discounts on solar
electric installations starting now and continuing through September 15, 2008. REC is
recognized as the nation's premier solar company and we have installed more solar systems in
the USA than any other company in the nation. We offer professional designs and clean
installations for home owners and businesses and our turnkey solar installation includes
designing, engineering, permitting, rebate filing and financing options as well as ongoing
customer support after the installation. Statistics show that most California residents view
solar power as a desirable alternate energy source, but some still believe it is cost prohibitive.
However, the rising cost of electricity and other fuel costs have increased interest in renewable
energy, especially recently. This increased interest has given rise to new progressive fmancing
programs that can significantly cut the upfront cost of converting to clean renewable energy.
The average homeowner now has financing options that weren't available even a year ago;
these products recognize the fact that instead of decreasing in value over time, solar systems
generate power that becomes more valuable with each year that passes, and solar panels have a
25 to 35 year life expectancy. Solar electric systems are a commodity generating asset.
Because of this value preposition systems are now available to consumers with very little
money down and low monthly payments. REC partners with Sun Run, a financing
organization that promotes solar power instead of solaz panels, through guaranteed power
purchase agreements for homeowners. They are known as PPAs; they are also available on
the commercial side, but we are focusing on residential presently. This option has been
recognized as one of the fastest growing and most progressive new ways to buy solar. With
the cost of electricity rising every year, rebates decreasing, and the federal t~ credit
potentially going away forever by 2009; homeowners are able to participate in the Cool Cities
Cupertino pac~hiership with REC Solar and take advantage of community discounts available
for a limited time. Solar electricity is good for the environment, reduces energy bills and fixes
your cost of power forever.
• I would like to invite you and the entire community to our kickoff event and learn more about
this community program and the Cool Cities Cupertino group; and learn about discounts with
REC Solar and Sun Run. The first meeting will be held on July 9, 2008 at 7 p.m. at the
Quinlan Center, 10195 No. Stelling Road, Cupertino. I also have some web addresses, some
URLs for more information about REC, Sun Run."
• Said in residential, there are multiple tiers of payments, going from baseline, depending on the
city, around 11 cents, which is a ballpark number, up to 36 cents per kwh. What the average
homeowner is going to do when installing a solar system, is try to eliminate their top tiers of
usage. The goal is to keep in your baseline because that is affordable; the baseline is also
tariffed by the CPUC which does not raise very much from year to year, but the other tier
levels do rise. The average is 6% per year, recently it has gone up much more than 5% per
year, which is another reason why solar is being looked at as an investment now. It is
something we try to communicate to people in their presentations.
Cupertino Planning Commission 8 June 24, 2008
She provided a synopsis of her participation and progress relative to the PPAs for residential.
• In 2007 she organized a group of her neighbors in downtown San Jose to form a group to look
into different solar companies, to choose who they wanted to work with, and negotiate for
community discounts, which is essentially the program they are offering to the Cupertino
community.
• The neighborhood formed a committee and looked at four different integrators who were
asked to look at the same three houses and get proposals for those three houses. It was
narrowed down to two vendors and then went into a written response to questions that they
had to do. We chose one vendor; and one of the reasons we chose the vendor was they were
partnering with Sun Run, which is a residential power purchase agreement (PPA) company,
the first PPA agreement company. In our community, our mandate was to get solar on as
many homes in our community as possible and the PPA works in a way where you are putting
up 50% of the money that you would have to put up if you bought a system.
• With a PPA, you do not own the panels on your roof, Sun Run owns the panels and you are
paying for the electricity that they generate; in the process of doing that you have a guarantee
for 18 years that those panels will produce X amount of electricity; it is spelled out in the
contract. If your panels are not producing that amount of electricity, they will refund you.
Their money comes from selling you electricity; they are going to make sure the panels are
producing. If the panels need to be washed because they are not producing up to the
guaranteed level, they will send somebody out to wash them. In year 10, 12, 15 you will need
to replace your inverter; that is the only part of your solar installation that is going to need
attention; that is included in the cost of your agreement with Sun Run. If you move or sell
your house, they have options on how to deal with that; they have considered all options.
They are responsible for the maintenance of the system the entire 18 years you have it; you
have fixed your cost of electricity.
• She reviewed REC's participation in the San Jose Mayor's challenge. Their goal is to have as
many different options for people as possible; they partner with New Resource Bank which
only funds solar projects. In order to get a zero down through REC, you would work with
New Resource Bank and get a competitive loan from them, fixed rate, over the course of the
loan and then choose to either buy direct from REC or you could use that as a down payment
for the PPA and get all the benefits of the PPA. One of the things noticed in some of the
leases that aze available now, there is a tiered interest rate. One of our competitors says they
start at zero for the first year and the next year is 4.5% and every year it goes up 4.5%.
Steve Piasecki:
• Noted that the recent newspaper article featured various solar leasing programs, including:
www.freesolar2008.com; www.~osolarnow.com; www.needaroof.com;
www.solutionsforpower.com; www.recsolar.com; www.re igr~;
www.sunpowercorp.com; www.solarci . .com; www.stablsolar.com.
Chair Miller:
• Said it did not look good for a renewable t~ credit presently, and if that goes away, is that
going to be a big impact or little impact?
Ms. Kamzen:
• Said the federal ta~c credit for individuals is $2,000, only for families or homeowners who
don't pay AMT. She suggested consulting an accountant for more information on the tax
credits available.
• The commercial taac credit is 30% of the cost which is what Sun Run is doing. If interested in
doing a commercial PPA on the city, that is the 30% tax credit which is going to go away
December 31, 2008. The other wrinkle here is not that you have to have your solar system
Cupertino Planning Commission 9 June 24, 2008
installed by December 31, 2008; you have to go through the interconnect with PG&E by
December 31, 2008 in order to get either of those credits. You will hear from many different
solar companies, if you are interested in solar, you really want to do it now; you have rebates
that are continually going down as more people adopt, and you have the federal tax credit
which is going to make a huge different to the cost of systems and the financing of systems
after December 31. You really want to contract and get your system by early November at
the latest because PG&E has 30 days to interconnect, and if they are slammed by a lot of
projects, if that goes to 45 days, you don't want to be in a position where the financial model
on which you had based your installation is no longer available to you.
• She said the further extension of the tax credit has been denied twice this year.
Chair Miller:
• Expressed concern that the California Solar Initiative is declining and the federal t~ credit
may be going away. You have to wonder what is going to happen to these industries next year
if they are not ready to make it on their own without assistance.
Ms. Kamzen:
• Said the California credit will still be there; the playing field will be level. More people are
interested in solar, especially as energy costs are rising. PG&E announced that they are going
to be increasing residential rates 6% before January lst. This is not going to stop.
Vice Chair Giefer:
• Explained that Cool Cities, is an offshoot of the Sierra Club; they meet the second Monday
each month and it is a citizens' group who specifically wants to help reduce energy
consumption within the city as well as other green projects, make progress within our
community.
• We looked at two different solar vendors in earnest and specifically we had the same concern
that Chair Miller brought up; is what happens if the federal tax credit goes away; what happens
if the California rebates go away; so we wanted to look at organizations that had greater
financial stability as part of our criteria, because we saw what happened when the 70s tax
credits went away; Jimmy Carter era of solar and hot water heaters and you couldn't find
anyone to fix them. That was a very large part of the criteria; how many installed sites do they
have; what is their financial; and if you will, in case there is a hiccup, in case the federal credit
goes away for awhile, that is part of why REC and the other vendor selected was Solar Cities
who has also been promoting their product actively in Cupertino.
Com. Rose:
• Asked for a recap of what will occur at the community meeting in July.
Ms. Kamzen:
• Referenced the www.cupertino.org/ een website.
• The meeting is scheduled for July 7`~ at 7 p.m.; Go to
www.solar.cunertino.blogspot com click on a link and it will have the information you need to
RSVP.
• Call 888-oksolar (888-657-6527) if you know you want more information and you cannot
come to the meeting. Free estimates with a consultant are offered; we look at your bill so we
can talk to you about how large a system you would need; are you thinking of adding more
appliances and are you having children; are children moving out; we can talk to you about the
present needs, and also your anticipated future needs and help you size an appropriate system
for the next 35 years.
Cupertino Planning Commission 10 June 24, 2008
Chair Miller closed the public hearing.
Summer Recess/Cancellation of One Meetin :
• The possible cancellation of the July 22°a meeting was discussed. Concern was expressed
about the full agenda for July 8, which might spill over to the July 22 meeting. Consideration
was given to cancellation of the August 12 Planning Commission meeting.
Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Giefer, second by Com. Rose, to cancel the August 12, 2008
Planning Commission meeting. (Vote: 4-0-0; Com. Brophy absent)
Adiournment: The meeting was adjourned to the next regular Planning Commission meeting
scheduled for July 8, 2008 at 6:45 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted:; ~ ~
; Eliza e ecor in S e
;
Approved as amended: July 8, 2008