My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Building Code Board of Appeals Agenda and Packet 2024 09 25
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF APPEALS
>
2024 Building Code Board of Appeals Agendas and Packets
>
Building Code Board of Appeals Agenda and Packet 2024 09 25
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/25/2024 9:40:58 AM
Creation date
9/25/2024 9:36:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
9/25/2024
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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
Building Code Board of Appeals <br />Agenda <br />September 25, 2024 <br />Page 4 of 64 <br />a. Intention of new proposed IECC ordinance is to replace all prior IECC <br />amendments. <br />b. Appendix PT (Performance Target): the one we are proposing came from <br />the City of Boulder since Denver's was too extensive and the Code <br />Consultants proposed using Boulder's PT program. <br />a. PT is adopted differently with different municipalities. <br />b. Denver has five PT (PT 103) categories: apartment/multi-family=38, <br />hotel/motel=55, office=43, retail=39, restaurant/bar=175 <br />c. Question by Board of how hard is it to meet these numbers? <br />d. Root discussed that he does not know how to meet the numbers or <br />how the numbers were decided. <br />e. Geise pointed out that there are consultant groups that could be <br />hired to do an evaluation for PT compliance and this is what <br />Boulder does; Root agreed that Louisville would need to contract <br />for this work since we do not have the staff or training to check <br />compliance. <br />f. If Board removes the PT compliance then multi -family would need <br />to fall under the IECC code instead of the IBC code. <br />g. Chad explained that the PT is more of an energy auditing system <br />and that City of Boulder has a monitor and escrow that developers <br />and owners have to put in to modify the buildings. <br />h. Board is ok having the PT table be an option, not a requirement. <br />c. Discussed insulation minimums; R-3 for pipes <br />d. Berry brought up that the code is being manipulated but not necessarily <br />for the better. He proposed for the record that the changes being <br />proposed are not necessarily blessed by the Board nor it is making any <br />significant change or improvement. <br />e. EV has been removed from the proposed changes to the 2021 IECC. Not <br />part of energy code and was above the state requirement, so will bring it <br />down to the state code. It was moved to the Land Use code since the <br />charging stations are in the parking lot for commercial/multi-family <br />buildings. <br />f. Berry mentioned that structural changes with roof insulation are increasing <br />snow load on existing buildings. SEAC has a committee studying the <br />effect of added insulation on snow load. Berry suggested to wait until the <br />study is complete before making changes to the insulation values. <br />g. <br />Occupancy R-2 was requested to be part of the Commercial IBC code <br />instead by multi -family developer. <br />h. Commercial buildings can have gas lines and gas appliances installed for <br />heating water and heating spaces; but the electrical conduit must be in <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.