Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Codes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Larkspur forum prepares council for vote on CalGreen reach codes amid cost and retrofit questions
Summary
Larkspur’s Climate Action Forum spent its Aug. 13 meeting preparing residents and staff for a city council second reading on adopting 2022 and 2025 CalGreen tier‑one reach code standards. Members asked for clear staff materials on life‑cycle costs, the 50% remodel threshold, and local data to address public concerns.
Larkspur Vice Mayor and interim forum chair Stephanie Andre said the Aug. 13 Climate Action Forum was focused on ensuring the City Council has the information it needs for a second reading next week on adopting CalGreen reach code standards. "It's not giving advice — it's actually making a decision that's going to be impactful," said Vice Mayor Stephanie Andre, noting the council will consider both 2022 tier‑one provisions and the 2025 standards submitted for state review.
The forum heard staff describe the timeline and legal process. Shannon O'Hare, Larkspur's Assistant City Manager, said the staff report will include supporting materials and cited life‑cycle cost studies used in past code cycles. "The staff report will have that for any interested members of the community or the council," O'Hare said, adding that some 2025 provisions still require energy‑study validation by the California Energy Commission (CEC).
Members and attendees pressed for clearer public messaging. David Muller, founder of the Larks Climate Group, urged the staff report to front‑load the "why": greenhouse‑gas reductions, public health and safety, and long‑term cost savings. "Adopt these only applies to newly constructed buildings and major remodels increasing floor area by more than 50%," Muller said, recommending staff emphasize that typical homeowners will not lose existing appliances unless they undertake major remodels.
Attendees repeatedly raised cost concerns and asked staff to summarize life‑cycle cost findings in plain language. JJ Aubrey recommended including nonpartisan studies, noting recent work from other jurisdictions that shows lower long‑term operating costs for electric‑first construction. Several participants asked staff to provide local data — notably the city's housing element projection of roughly 850 new units — to show the portion of future construction that would face the new standards and how new construction compares to retrofits in emissions reduction and per‑unit cost.
Staff described the city's approach: the council approved a first reading that references the 2022 CalGreen reach standards (tier one) and simultaneously submits the 2025 standards to the CEC; the city is not adopting a local flex‑path model on this expedited timeline because flex‑path requires more local staff integration and time to implement. "We did not adopt any flex path standards," O'Hare said; instead staff recommends moving forward with the state standards and completing required energy studies for 2025 items.
The forum asked staff to include an executive summary for both council and the public that clearly answers common questions: who is affected, what triggers the requirement (major remodel >50% floor area), whether existing appliances are removed (they are not, except when the remodel triggers code), and where to find life‑cycle cost evidence.
The Climate Action Forum planned to forward public comments and suggested materials into the council packet ahead of the Aug. 20 council meeting. The council is scheduled to consider waiving the second reading and adopting the ordinance; staff noted that if any provisions are kicked back by the CEC, the city would address them through the regulatory process or future amendments.
