My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2007 11 15
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2000-2019 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
2007 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Minutes 2007 11 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 2:00:22 PM
Creation date
4/7/2008 10:34:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BCBOAMIN 2007 11 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Building Code Board of Appeals <br />Minutes <br />June 16, 2005 <br />Page 3 of 5 <br /> <br />change anything at anytime. February 2008 we will review the program again. <br />Basically, you give the contractors more points for doing what you want them to <br />do. Additionally, it looks like Boulder copied the City of Austin's program. <br /> <br />MJ asks if there were any more questions from the Board? <br /> <br />Matthew Berry asked if anything was mandatory? <br /> <br />CA says there are some mandatory issues in Boulder that are backed up with an <br />ordinance. Otherwise, it is hard without an ordinance. <br /> <br />RO asks for clarity on the start date needed? <br /> <br />CA states their program has only been out since September 2007. Basically they <br />have it set so that a builder has to get to a set amount of points before he can get <br />a perm it. <br /> <br />Paul Wood askes if a 3rd party inspector holds up work? <br /> <br />CA answers they probably would not hold up the process. One has to really look <br />at what you are getting with every program rather that just a piece of paper. <br /> <br />MP says they do have the flexibility to say whether any residential program that <br />is built should be considered. <br /> <br />Board of Appeals Comments - <br />MJ says he agrees we have the opportunity to say what fits and does not fit. Staff <br />is looking for direction from the Board. He thinks we can go from "Yes, we <br />support this program" or "recreate the wheel". There is no budget for the second <br />option. Those are the 2 ends of the spectrum. We can also wait for IBC to come <br />up with a program, have 3rd party inspectors, or plagerize Longmont's or another <br />local program. Those are your options as a group. We can recommend to council <br />what their level of commitment to us will be. It is up to the Board of Appeals. This <br />is an Advisory Council. We do not take any final action. <br /> <br />PW ways at the council level, mayor Sisk has a high priority to do something in <br />2008. Personally, Paul predicts that over the next 2-3 years Louisville should be <br />able to address Green Built. It isn't fair to the builder to retro actively tag them. <br /> <br />MJ states Markel is committed to meet Boulder's Green Built program, as per <br />their representative, Chad. We have had 2 meetings about their products from <br />Markel. It will be about 100 permits per yeat that will impact our department. <br /> <br />Chris leave the meeting to drive home to Fort Collins. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.