Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Measurement And Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission presses staff on how 'toxic or hazardous' will be measured
Summary
Commissioners repeatedly asked how staff will measure and enforce limits on hazardous inputs and emissions in the new ID‑6 district; staff and consultants said they expect to use development‑plan submissions, building standards, outside expertise, and testing methods, but left numerical thresholds unspecified.
Commissioners pressed staff and the consultant team for concrete methods to determine whether proposed ID‑6 uses would meet the code’s goal to 'limit toxic or hazardous raw inputs,' repeatedly asking who defines thresholds and how the city will enforce them.
Commissioner: 'I'm worried about measurement... you're giving me a lot of staff discretion.' Staff responded that the code intentionally allows some discretion to accommodate evolving technologies and business models, and that decisions would rely on a suite of criteria in the development‑plan review, building and engineering expertise, and retained outside consultants as needed. The consultant Greg Dale said, 'There is discretion... but I wouldn’t characterize it as broad discretion… we’ve looked at definitions all over the place.'
Commissioners proposed moving language about 'currently acceptable methods of testing' into the intent statement and into development‑plan requirements so applicants must submit testing data demonstrating no measurable increase in hazardous emissions. Staff agreed to incorporate a testing requirement as a recommended condition and to lean on building department and outside experts where appropriate.
