[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: RE: Questions for Ordinance 8164

cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov
Thu Feb 16 15:34:48 MST 2017


Sender: Tupper, Kendra

Councilman Yates,

Thank you for this question. You raise a good point and it was certainly not the intent to require significant redesign for projects that were already well into the design process.

To address this concern, city staff is amending the ordinance to clarify that these codes changes do not apply to any project which had submitted a complete site review application prior to the date of ordination adoption.

Further, the International Building Code (IBC 104.10) and sections of the proposed 2017 City of Boulder Energy Conservation Code (C102.1 and R102.1), allow staff to consider modification requests on a case-by-case basis for any project that does not require a site review process (e.g. commercial alterations or new residential), and can demonstrate that it's technically impractical to meet some aspect of the new code for their specific building.

All of the other questions submitted by council and the public are answered in the 2nd reading memo, which is included in the final packet for the Feb. 21, 2017 meeting.

Thank you!


Kendra Tupper
Energy Services Manager
[Planning,%20Housing%2]
O: 303-441-3434
tupperk at bouldercolorado.gov<mailto:tupperk at bouldercolorado.gov>

From: Yates, Bob
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 9:15 AM
To: Brautigam, Jane <BrautigamJ at bouldercolorado.gov<mailto:BrautigamJ at bouldercolorado.gov>>; Carr, Thomas <CarrT at bouldercolorado.gov<mailto:CarrT at bouldercolorado.gov>>
Cc: HOTLINE <HOTLINE at bouldercolorado.gov<mailto:HOTLINE at bouldercolorado.gov>>
Subject: Re: Questions for Ordinance 8164


Jane & Tom:



In addition to the questions that Jan has asked, please advise us why the energy conservation and green building requirements are to be applied to buildings for which a site review application is pending or has been approved. Builders presumably submitted site review applications in reliance on our code, as it now exists. Unless there is a compelling reason to give these significant revisions to our code immediate effect, I will advocate that, for buildings for which site review is required, the new code not apply if a site review application has been submitted or approved prior to Council's adoption of the ordinance.



Best,



Bob

________________________________
From: Burton, Jan
Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 6:27 AM
To: HOTLINE
Subject: Questions for Ordinance 8164

Jane,
Following are the questions I have for the second reading of Ordinance 8164, to revise the energy conservation and green building requirements...., as published in the February 7 Council materials, page 84.


1.       Why are we repealing an international code, IECC 2012, to adopt a Boulder specific code (2017 Boulder Energy Conservation Code)? What are the advantages to the city and our residents? What will be the costs to maintain our own code?

2.       In addition to the estimated costs referred to in Attachment B, what is the estimated cost of other requirements (landscaping, etc.), and how will it change the cost of building or additions (estimated percentage)?

3.       Has anyone put a pencil to the total cost increase brought for all of our actions in impact fees, linkage fees, energy codes, etc. (What percentage cost increase will we see, and how will it end up in end user rents?)

4.       What budget will provide early adopter initiatives?

5.       I couldn't find the July 19 memo referred to in the packet as Attachment G. What I would be interested in is the specific stakeholder feedback, and in particular, any feedback about costs of this new code. I am interested in what our architects, contractors, and developers think this code will do to the overall cost of construction, both commercial and residential as well as any thoughts to phase-in timing.
Thanks!

Jan Burton
Member of City Council
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 4985 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.ci.boulder.co.us/pipermail/bouldercouncilhotline/attachments/20170216/06c305b0/attachment.obj 


More information about the bouldercouncilhotline mailing list