HomeMy WebLinkAbout8B - Public hearing and discussion of changes to Title 10 "Structures" CITY Oh BOULDER
LANDMARKS BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 1, 2008
AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and discussion of changes to Title 10, "Structures,"
B.R.C. 1981, on the following proposed ordinances:
1. An Ordinance amending Section 10-7-2, "Energy Conservation and Insulation
Code" by Adding an Additional Energy Efficiency Requirement for Commercial
Buildings, and setting forth related details.
2. An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-7.5, Green Building and Green Points
Program," B1Z.C. 1981 Adding Requirements Related to Energy Efficiency
Thresholds for Remodels and Additions, Demolition, Boilers, and Windows; and
setting forth related details.
3. An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-5, "Building Code," B.R.C. 1981, to Adopt
Minor Changes to the International Building Code Related to the Expiration of
Pernlits and setting forth related details, and
4. An Ordinance amending Chapter 10-6, "Electrical Code", B.R.C. 1981 Adopting
by Reference the 2006 International Electrical Code" with Local Amendments
and setting forth related details.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENTS:
Maureen Rait, Executive Director of Public Works
Neil Poulson, Cl>1ef Building Official
Kirk Moors, Senior Plans Examiner/Assistant Building Official
Jonathan Koehn, Environmental Affairs Manager
Elizabeth Vasatka, EnvirotuTtental Coordinator
PURPOSE:
A significant portion of development activity in Boulder involves residential remodels
and additions. Consideration of changes to the Green Building and Green Points program
resulted in the development of Ordinance 7570 and the ordinance was considered at a
Frst reading in Nov. 2007. However, concerns about potential unintended consequences,
such as encouraging more building demolition, resulted in direction to staff to evaluate
alternative approaches.
AGENDA ITEM # 8I3 PAGE 1
This item requests Landmarks Board review of proposed changes to 'T'itle 10,
"Structures," B.R.C. 1981 involving amendments to the residential Green Building and
Green Points (GBGP) program. Additionally, other building code changes being
recommended at this time are included for Landmarks Board review.
BACKGROUNll:
Boulder periodically updates its construction codes. This effort is done in a coordinated
and integrated manner in order to maintain a practical balance between safety and costs to
protect life and property while advancing b
•ecn building objectives pertaining to
sustainable development.
Building Regulations and Climate Action Plan Goals
The city has adopted the goal of following the Kyoto Protocol to reduce carbon emissions
seven percent below 19901evels by 2012. It is staff's intent to open the discussion with
City Council on goals beyond 2012, which will assist staff in understanding what the next
phase is in relation to reducing energy use and carbon emissions. More aggressive
greenhouse gas goals are being developed by industry and stakeholder groups across the
country identifying the next step in creating a sustainable energy future. In order to align
code adoptions with Climate Action Plan (CAP) priorities, the proposed plan outlines a
path to achieve eventual carbon neutrality in buildings, pursuant to the 2030 Challenge.
Details of the plan are outlined in the July 24, 2008 Weekly Information Packet item:
http://www.bouldercolorado. Gov/files/City%20CounciUWIPS/2008/07-24-
08/itcnl 2d.pdf A summary of the plan highlighting potential changes to building
regulations (from 2008 - 2030) is provided as Attachment C.
Council Feedback
At the Jan. 25, 2008 City Council retreat, council members identified goals including
enhancing the energy performance of new commercial construction in the short term and
developing a comprehensive commercial code by year's end.
On April 8, 2008, a City Council study session was held on the CAP. Strategies to
reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were discussed. Council generally supported the
development and implementation of a commercial green building program and
acknowledged the importance of implementing an above-code energy efficiency
requirement. Council acknowledged. that any commercial code should consider future
IECC updates and that work should be carefully coordinated with local developers,
building professionals and staff. Council also urged caution and sensitivity in
developing a commercial Green Building Code that might impact the business
community or economic vitality. Council also expressed a desire to include
requirements for energy efficiency fox residential remodels and additions in the Green
Building Code. The summary of the April 8, 2008 study session was accepted by the
City Council on May 20, 2008.
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGE 2
Energy Code Adoption
The 2006 IECC became effective Jan. 2, 2008 for commercial projects constructed within
the city of Boulder. The 2006 IECC simplified the methods for designing projects but did
not substantively enhance the overall energy efficiency requirements for commercial and
industrial buildings from the previous code.
Green Building and Green Points
Additional code changes were implemented Feb. 1, 2008 for residential construction
when the updated Green Building and Green Paints {GBGP) program became effective.
Depending on the square footage of a residential structure, the percentage above the
currently adapted 2006 IECC varies from a minimum of 30 to a maximum of 75 percent.
While the GBGP is a residential progxatn, the residential portions of mixed-use
developments have also been required to attain energy efficiency compliance 30 percent
above than the baseline 20061ECC.
The Green Points component remains similar to the prior program requiring a specific
amount of points (determined by project type and size) that are obtained by choosing
green point options outlined in a menu of green practices, teclulologies and products in
the Green Points Guidelines booklet.
Since a significant portion of development activity in Boulder involves residential
remodels and additions, as part of the 2007 Green Points adoption process, council
requested that staff evaluate an amendment to the Green Building Codes to respond to the
concern that some threshold of additions and remodels should be evaluated as new
construction for the purpose of applying energy efficiency requirements. In this
evaluation, staff was also directed to review the Boulder County threshold for new
construction.
Council requested that the ordinance be scheduled for the Nov. 13, 2007 meeting as a
public hearing and first reading. Green Building Green Points (GBGP), Ordinance #7570
(2007) was considered at the council first reading, but concerns about potential
unintended consequences, such as encouraging more existing building scrape-offs,
resulted in direction to staff to evaluate alternative approaches and bring them back to
council at a later date. Ordinance 7570 is included as Attachment E.
Boulder County BuildSmart Program
The county BuildSmart program establishes three categories of additions and remodels,
which are minor, moderate and major. Like the city's GBGP program, BuildSmai~t
requires the use of the Home Energy Rating System (HERS) index score to project and
measure the energy efficiency of new residential construction. The HERS undex score
has a theoretical range of 0 to 500. HERS ranges from zero to 100 for the baseline
International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). Zero relates to a carbon neutral
building and 100 is minimum energy code compliance.
The BuildSmart ~ninor• category is described as an addition limited to 500 square feet.
'i'he minor category does not require a HERS, but does require an energy audit. The
AGENDA ITEM # 8B T'AGE 3
energy efficiency requirements are according to the baseline energy code requirements
referenced in chapter 11 of the International Residential Code (IRC).
The moderate category is described as an addition of greater than 500 square feet and is
limited to a total area of the existing structure ,plus the proposed addition of 3,000 square
feet. A HERS score of 85 is required to show energy efficiency compliance.
The major category is described as an addition/remodel of greater than 500 square feet,
which results in a total area of the existing structure plus the proposed addition of 3,001
square feet or more. Depending on the total size of the building the HERS score required
varies from 40 to less than 10.
Boulder County is currently revising its moderate and major remodel and renovation
categories.
PROPOSED AMMENllMENTS AND ANALYSIS:
Commercial Energy Code Amendments
In response to council's direction to develop an above-code program for commercial
construction energy efficiency, staff has been researching the requirements of other cities
that are also actively developing sustainable building regulations such as Portland, Ore.;
Chicago, Ill.; San Francisco, Calif.; and Albuquerque, N.M. Standards such as
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (I,EED), Green Globes, and the United
Kingdom's program I3REEAM (an environmental assessment method) were also
considered in concert with the Boulder County Consortilun of Cities' development of a
green building code, which is meant to facilitate the consistent adoption of green building
requirements for Boulder County jurisdictions.
Staff has developed the code language required to amend the 2006 IECC to meet a 30
percent commercial energy improvement (Attachment F). If adopted, the commercial
components of the typical mixed-use development will attain a level of energy efficiency
compliance 30 percent above the IECC. Attaining this Ievel of efficiency will eliminate
the current discrepancy that exists between. the energy efficiency required for commercial
and residential occupancies in mixed-use buildings. The 30 percent above-code energy
efficiency requirement is also consistent with most of the above-code development to
date.
An important consideration for developing an above-code prolnam is establishing a
consistent baseline reference. Most of the above-code energy efficiency standards that
have been developed reference the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-
Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard 90.1-2004. This is also the design standard
referenced by the 2006 IECC. When a percentage above code is referenced through the
rest of this document, the baseline considered is ASHIZAI~ 90.1-2004.
AGENDA ITF,M # 8I3 PAGE 4
The research done by staff suggests that compliance with the commercial 30 percent
above-code energy efficiency level can be attained through the criteria detailed in
Chapter S of the 2006 IECC which includes:
1. ASHRAE/IESNA Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for Buildin sg_Except for
Low-Rise Residezitial 13uildin~s.
2. United States Department of Energy, building energy requirements calculated
through the ComCheck computerized design program, most current version,
www.doe.gov.
3. Staff would also accept alternate design methods that could detai130 percent
better than code such as ASHRAE standard 189.1 and the ASHRAE
Advanced Energy Design Guides.
Staff also recojnmends that commercial. buildings over 20,000 square feet be required to
provide energy modeling analysis verifyuig 30 percent above-code compliance. Energy
modeling is also a feature of the above-code program developed by Albuquerque, N.M.
for buildings that are over 20,000 square feet.
For above-code energy efficiency compliance for core and shell types of development,
the proposed program allows the above-code energy efficiency requirement to be shared
between the core and shell and tenant finish portions of the project. For example, if a
new core and shell building was proposed, the core and shell portion. of the structure
would be required to show energy eff ciency improvement of 20 percent more than the
base energy code. The tenant finish applicant would then be required to show
compliance with the remaining above-code energy efficiency requirement (10 percent).
Due to the various uses that must be accommodated within core and shell types of
projects, the proposed requirements will allow the applicant to propose alternate
percentages, which must be justified through written documentation.
Staff s proposed commercial Green Building code is crafted in such a way that it will
allow as much desigtl flexibility as possible. Both prescriptive and total performance
based designs could be allowed as long as compliance could be shown to exceed the
minimum 2006 IECC design criteria by 30 percent. This flexibility could include
ASHRAE, 90.1, the final version of ASHRAE 189.1, ASHRAE Advanced Energy Design
(three modules), LEED certification or other approved design criteria.
While the proposed commercial energy efficiency requirements do not mandate LEED
certification like the recently adopted San Francisco program, LEED certification can be
used to provide energy compliance documentation for the proposed city of Boulder
commercial energy efficiency requirements.
An alternate proposal was presented to the council from local stakeholders that suggested
adopting ASHRAE 189.1 (206 pages long, including 20 pages of amendments) as part of
the city of Boulder commercial Green Building Code. This standard has just come out of
a second public comment period and will not be ready for adoption until early 2009. Staff
will include the review of this document in the 2009 IECC review and adoption process.
AGENDA ITEM # SB PAGE 5
When this design standard is completed by ASIIRAE, it could. be used as an alternate
design acceptable through the adoption of the 2006 IECC 30 percent above-code
program.
Green Building and Green Points Program changes involving Residential Remodels
and Additions
In order to address Council's request to develop thresholds and criteria for applying new
construction requirements to large-scale additions and/or remodels without increasing
incentives for demolition of existing housing, several new features are proposed for
remodels and additions within the GBGP.
These features include tiered above-code energy efficiency requirements, air sealing
requirements, and criteria for determining when the scale of an addition warrants energy
efficiency compliance as new construction. (At~taehment Cr)
Currently, remodels and additions over 500 square feet are required to receive an energy
audit, install efficient lighting into the existing structure and select green points options to
satisfy the point requirements determined by the type and size of the project. The
proposed amendments feature tiered above-code requirements based on the size of the
building.
Remodels or additions that result in a total conditioned space of 3,000 square feet or less
would require addition-only energy efficiency to be 15 percent better than code or to have
a HERS of 100 or less for the entire structure.
Remodels and/or additions that result in a total conditioned area between 3,001 and
5,000 square feet would require addition-only energy efficiency to be 30 percent more
efficient than the 2006 IECC or to have a HERS of 85 for the entire structure.
Remodels and/or additions larger than 5,001 square feet require addition-only energy
efficiency to be 50 percent better than the 2006 IF,CC or to have a HERS of 70 for the
entire structure.
New Air Sealing Requirement
During the public input process, the importance ofair-sealing existing construction was
emphasized by energy raters and building professionals. Adding air sealuig is a low cost
item that can reduce energy loss. If an applicant proposes to show compliance through
the HERS process, air sealing is already addressed. However, if the applicant chooses to
show energy efficiency compliance for the addition ozily, the compliance method will
need to demonstrate that infiltration in the existing structure is reduced. Staff has
proposed an amendment to the (mandatory requirement) energy audit section of the
Green Building and Green Points (GBGP) program that requires air sealing to be
performed and verified through a separate blower door test at the end of the project. Staff
contacted local HERS raters for input on what would be an acceptable level of air leakage
for existing construction and reached a consensus of .5 air changes per hour.
AGENDA ITEM # A13 PAGE 6
Criteria for When to Regulate Additions as New Construction
Another coneem identified by council and at the public input meetings relates to
establishing criteria for when an addition is so large in relation to the existing structure
that new construction requirements should be met for the project. In order to provide the
most equity, different percentages of existing floor areas were developed for the new
construction square footage tiers already established in the GBGP program. For projects
that are 3,000 square feet or less, the addition category is limited to increases equal to 100
percent of the existing area. A building permit applicant proposing to construct an
addition greater than 100 percent of the existing square footage would be required to
meet the stricter new construction requirements. For projects that are between 3,001 and
5,000 square feet, the addition category is limited to SO percent. Projects larger than
5,000 square feet have an addition. category limit of ZS percent. Projects proposed that
are greater than the addition limit are allowed, but must meet the code requirements for
new construction.
Exemption from Energy Efficiency Requirements Added
In response to feedback from building permit applicants and from the public meetings,
staff is also proposing an exception to the energy efficiency requirements for remodels
that does not affect the building components that separate heated or conditioned space
from unconditioned space. For example, if an applicant proposed to remodel their
kitchen without affecting the outside walls, ceiling or windows, then the work proposed
would not affect any energy efficiency related components of the structure. The
exception relieves the applicant of showing energy efficiency compliance if the project
will not result in any changes in the energy efficiency of the structure.
Residential Amendments Summary
The above proposal improves energy efficiency requirements for additions and remodels
without incorporating issues related to having a mandatory HERS requirement for
existing construction conditions and possibly increasing the incentive to demolish
existing houses. Whether the applicant chooses to go through. the HERS process or an
energy audit, information is provided for how to improve the performance of the existing
structure. By incorporating compliance paths featuring the United States Department of
Energy's ResCheck (residential computerized design program} and HERS, higher
efficiency is attained and enough flexibility is provided to make the requirements more
easily applied to a wide range of existing construction.
Maintaining the character of existing neighborhoods, conserving embodzed energy and
attaining higher energy efficiency levels are often conflicting issues. The changes
proposed are an attempt to strike an optimum compromise between them.
International Building Code Administrative Changes
The administrative changes to the 2006 International Building Code (IBC) are related to
removing an amendment that repealed the IBC requirement for construction prolness
inspections at six-month intervals to avoid having the building permit lapse (Attachment
H). Enforcement issues experienced since the amendment went into place has led to this
change back to standard code language.
AGENDA 1"1'EM # 8B PAGE 7
Another administrative 2006 IBC change relates to how the time is measured for when a
building permit application expires. The current code amendment for permit application
expiration requires that the time be measured from when the application is received and
approved for review. This means that the time spent in city review counts against the
time limit for keeping a permit application active. The proposed amendment does not
start measuring the time allowed for maintaining a permit's active status until the xeview
• comment letter is generated.
National Electrical Cade Adoption
The 2008 National Electrical Code (NEC) is also being proposed to the City Council for
adoption. The state adopted this newest version of the electrical code a couple of months
ago. Some of the more notable changes include:
1) A clarification that Ground fault Circuit Interrupters (GFCI) are required for
cozrlmercial kitchen and outdoor locations (NEC art. 210.7).
2} A requirement for all residential circuits to be protected by Arc Fault Circuit
Interrupters (AFCI}. The previous electrical code only required this level of
protection for bedroom circuits (NEC 210.12).
3) Anew table has been developed for addressing the concerns of heat for
conductors that are routed over roofs (NEC art. 310.15 (B) 2 and Table 310:15
(B) (2).
4) Anew requirement for tamper-proof receptacles has been added for residential
occupancies (NEC 406. ] 1).
In addition, amendments in the previously adopted NEC related to expanding the use of
NM cable (romex) into larger stzuctures is not proposed to be carried over into the new
code adoption in order to meet minimum state of Colorado Electrical Board requirements
(Attachment I).
BOARD & CONLIYIISSION FEEllBACK:
The proposal for the Green Building Codes was presented to the Environmental Affairs
Board (EAB) on Aug. 13, 2008 and will be presented to the Planning Board on Oct. 2,
2008.
The FAB appreciated the approach of coordinating the CAP goals and building
regulations. An earlier version of the proposed amendments were based on the size of the
addition and the board expressed concern that the energy efficiency table should be based
on the total area of the structure or additional tiers should be developed.
While the board considered it an improvement to be adding above-code energy efficiency
requirements for remodel and/or additions, it still expressed a need for criteria that limits
how big an addition can be within the addition rules. They recommended that additions
larger than the addition Limit determined should be regulated as new construction.
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGE S
Conflicting input was received from different members of the board as to whether the
proposed program was too restrictive or should go further in requiring higher energy
efficiency for remodel and/or addition types of projects. .
The board also discussed the importance of incorporating a feasibility threshold with
adoption or requirements for existing buildings where energy efficiency requirements are
initiated through a process other than a building permit such as rental licensing or point
of sale. The difficulty and possible legal ramifications of developing requirements for
existing buildings was also discussed. The EAB meeting summary is provided as
Attachment B. The analysis discussed at the EAB meeting is included as Attaehnnent
D.
PUBLIC FEEDBACK:
The proposal for adoption of the Commercial and Residential Green Building Codes and
the adoption of the 2008 National Electrical Code (NEC) was presented to the public for
feedback at two residential and two commercial meetings. Additionally, a group
comprised of two large-scale residential remodeling contractors, an architect, a HF.,RS
rater, a Boulder County representative and city staff met to formulate ideas related to the
proposed residential remodels and additions green building procedures.
The following public meetings were held to solicit public feedback:
Residential Green Building Code Changes, 2006 IBC administrative changes and
adoption of the 2008 NEC (Aug. 13 and 27, 2008)
Residential Green Building Code Changes Aug. 21, 2008 (invited constriction remodel
and addition specialists for feedback)
Commercial Green Building Code Changes, 2006 IBC administrative changes and
adoption of the 2008 NEC (Aug. 20 and Sept. 3, 2008)
Comments and questions offered at the public meetings are summarized in Attachment
A. Several of the same issues discussed during the EAB meeting were also raised during
the public input meetings. In addition, several program issues were also discussed
including:
1) A concern that the program would be difficult to apply to remodel work that is not
affecting the exterior of the building such as a kitchen remodel.
2) The modeling application to large-core and shell-type of structures was also
discussed.
3) A suggestion was made to use cost-to-benef t analysis to determine the level of
above-code energy efficiency requirements.
4) The importance ofair-sealing was also emphasized.
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGE 9
Public input fzom the various meetings resulted in changes to proposed ordinance
language.
City staff has also been participating in the Boulder County Consortium of Cities
Commercial Codes group to obtain feedback from that process. The process is currently
moving forward in a parallel path with the city of Boulder proposal as noted earlier in this
memo. The city has also reviewed information from Boulder County for ideas that could
be incorporated into proposed city regulations.
STAFF RF,COMMENllATIONS;
Staff requests Landmarks Board feedback on the proposed recommendations to the City
Council for changes to Title 10, "Structures," B.R.C. 1981.
It is recommezided that the 2006 IBC and 2008 NEC code updates go into effect on
January 5, 2009 and that the energy efficiency requirements based on the 2006 IECC
going into effect March 2, 2009. The proposed adoption date of the residential and
commercial energy cifzciency requirements is to allow the development community
additional time to incorporate the changes into their business process, and to allow for
adequate preparation and training time for Planning and Development Sezvices staff to
facilitate a smooth transition. The City of Albuquerque, N.M. provided a 180 day
implementation time period for its code changes in response to public feedback.
NEXT' STEPS:
After the Landmarks Board and Planning Board meetings, staff will incorporate
necessary revisions into the proposal and present it to the City Council for a first reading
on Oct. 21, 2008. The City Council second reading is scheduled for Nov. 12, 2008. As
noted, these proposed code changes are planned for implementation during the first
quarter of 2009.
In June 2009, staff will begin the adoption process for several model codes that will be
published by ICC and will also be reviewing the GBGP prognam for a possible change
over to the ICC/NAHB Green Building Code. Commercial addition and remodel
requirements are covered under the new building requirements of the IECC and are
proposed to be 30 percent above code. Staff will be reviewing the commercial energy
effciency requirements as part of the 2009 code review process for new core and shell
buildings, tenant f Wishes and additions. The codes slated for passible adoption in 2009
are outlined in Attachment C.
ATTAC>FiM P;N 1'S:
A. Summary of Residential Building Code Public Meetings
B. Summary of Aug. 13, 2008 Environment Advisory Board Meeting
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGF. 10
C. 2008 - 2030 Proposed Green Building Code Adoption Schedule
D. Lightly Treading Residential projected Energy Rating Report & Architectural
Energy Corporation Commercial Energy Research
E. Ordinance #7570 (2007)
1'. Ordinance amending Section 10-7-2, "Energy Conservation and Insulation Code"
by Adding an Additional Energy Efficiency Requirement for Commercial Buildings,
and setting forth related details.
G. Ordinance amending Chapter 10-7.5, Green Building and Green Points Program,"
13.R.C. 1981 Adding Requirements Related to Energy Efficiency Thresholds for
Remodels and Additions, Demolition, Boilers, and Windows; and setting forth
rclated details.
H. Ordinance amending Chapter 10-5, "Building Code," B.R.C. 1981, to Adopt
Ytinor Changes to the International Building Code Related to the Expiration of
Perniits and settinb forth rclated details, and
I. Ordinance amending Chapter 10-6, "Electrical Code", B.R.C. 1981 Adopting by
Reference the 2006 International Electrical Code" with Local Amendments and
setting Forth related details.
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGE 11
AT'I'ACHiYIENT A
Residential Green Building and 2008 NEC Code Proposals
Public Questions and Comments
Questions:
• Is the 2006 IECC a good guide?
• Does the GHG pie chart apply to the city of Boulder?
• Relating to the matrix, why was the 2030 date picked for the schedule?
• Can the public attend the Planning Board and City Council meetings and provide
input?
• What is the current growth rate in the city of Boulder?
• Wi11 the city adopt the 2030 challenge?
• Will the Green Points program be eliminated?
• When will the 2006 IF.,CC be updated?
• Does the city use the 2006 IECC as a benchmark?
• How do HERS index numbers tie to energy efficiency?
• Do remodels need to meet Green Points?
• Is there a proposal to limit square footage of residences?
• How can the city get landlords on board with energy efficiency without raising
rents?
• Can old studs be used to get green points?
• Are other jurisdictions taking these big jumps in energy efficiency requirements?
• Do you anticipate that other municipalities will follow this path?
• If people have to pay 20-40% more for a house in Boulder will people start
moving outside Boulder?
• How will landmarked buildings be required. to comply with new regulations and
what will it look like?
• How will we get to net zero?
• What does it cost to comply vs. scrape?
1f I remodel and decide to move in 6 months, will I get a break from having to
comply with point of sale requirement?
• Are theix proposed changes to scrapes for recycling management, demolitions,
etc.?
• Will boulder look to LEER certifications`?
• Will the city adopt the 2008 codes in 2009?
• How much does it cost for an energy audit?
• How long does a HERS rating last -one year, indefinitely?
• Are quality checks being done for HERS raters?
Comments:
• The city should try to keep waste out of the landfill.
• The city should mandate energy efficiency for apartments.
• Single pane windows have no energy value but are sometimes required to be kept
in older homes
AGENDA ITEM # 8B PAGE 12
The cost of doing business in Boulder is skyrocketing for new construction
• Rental properties need to be brought up to code if new construction and remodels
need to comply
• Proposed definition 10-7.5-3 should be more clearly defined
• Homeowners may not be able to afford to bring their homes into compliance
before point of sale
• Don't deny people from being able to sell their homes, make a profit and be able
to afford retirement -don't limit their opportunities
• Need to develop a plan of how rental properties will be required to comply with
new regulations, especially for those who own several rental. properties in
Boulder. This could be a financial hardship.
• Consider an exemption for real financial hardship.
• Need to educate on cost versus value -what improvements have greatest return
• Some of the energy efficient technology doesn't hold up very well.
• Develop criteria whether to remodel or buy new -where do you get the most
points (volume vs. weight. People will find artificial weight.
• Need to work on point scores.
AGENDA ITEM # SB PAGE 13
Attachment B
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY
NAME OF BOARD/COMMISSION: Enviromnental Advisory Board
DATE OF MEETING: August 13, 2008
NAME/TELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPARING SUMMARY: Kellc Karp, 303-441-1940
NAMES OF MEMBERS, STAFF AND INVITED GUESTS PRESENT:
Environmental Ad«sory Board Members Present: Brian Vickers, Bill Roettker, Francoise
Poinsatte ,Leah Kukowski Martinson and Suzaru~e Jones
Board Members Absent:
Staff Members Present: Kirk Moors, Planning & Development Services and Jonathan Koehn, Offzce
of Environmental Affairs
Public Present: None
OUTLINE OF AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER. The meeting was called to order at 6:08 p.m. by chair Francoise Poinsatte
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES. July's meeting minutes were not approved. Suzanne Jones
requested edits be made to her comments on the Greenways Advisory Commission update.
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. None
4. UPDATE. Jonathan informed the board that council will review the Climate Action Plaai (CAP)
work plan at the September 9 study session. The goal of this study session is for council to revisit their
top five priorities and CAP is one of those. Staff drafted a CAP work plan for the remainder of 2008
and 2009, which includes many regulatory and policy items. The CAP work plan will thc;n go back to a
council study session in October, at which time staff will have 2007 & 2008 emissions data and will
discuss any necessary course coz-rections to the work plan. (Note, the September 9 study session will
focus on policy items related to the CAP work plan and the October study session will focus on
programmatic items related to the CAP work plan.) Jonathan further informed the board that the
Boulder County Clean Energy Options Local Improvement District (commonly known as the Berkeley
Model) for energy efficiency financing will be presented to council on September 2. The community
will have a chance to vote on the item in November, and after that time staff will return to council to
discuss the outcome. The city is collaborating with the county on this item.
5. MAIN AGENDA ITEMS. Jonathan reminded the board that 1:Iizabeth Vasatka, Office of
Environmental Affairs (OEA), presented the Green Building work plan at the June Environmental
Advisory Board mmeeting, and at that time the board discussed developing a resolution for an interim
commercial green building code. Staff then asked the board to table the resolution as they determined
the work plan needed to be reviewed in more depth. Now, staff has retunied to the board to get more
input on the green building work plan before they present to the Planning Board on October 2 and then
council on October 21. Staff asked the board to give their input again on an interim commercial code,
the finalizing of residential remodels and additions, and on the 2030 challenge (achieving net zero
building by 2030). Staff is looking to set a major goal such as the 2030 challenge, and then they will
set benchmarks to measure their success along the way. The work plan involves two elements that are
codes and programs. Planning & Development Services (P&DS) oversees the codes and OEA
oversees the programmatic elements that support the codes. Staff is striving to wrap up the code pieces
(commercial and finalizing residential remodels and additions) in October and November, and then
begin working more aggressively on the Residential Energy Conservation Ordinance (RECO). Kirk.
Moors with P&DS presented on staff s Green Building code proposals. Kirk began his presentation by
noting that the purpose of the green building code is to coordinate with CAP goals to further reduce
carbon emissions from the commercial sector. Staff is educatin the ublic on the link between the
Approved:
1
Francoise Poinsatte, Chair Date
~~n~u £ . `6~~.--~ ~'~~~c 4 cl
amount of greenhouse gases emitted from the commercial sector and its drive toward iimplementing
these commercial building codes. The board asked for claritication on how the codes will lead to net
zero buildings. Kirk responded that if a building is 100% above code or if the 1-IERS index score is
between 0-10 then it is net zero. For example, a building can have a HERS index score of 300, which
is extremely energy inefficient, so the goal is to get our building as close to 0 as possible. Currently,
the most widely used commercial code standards are based on the 1999 and 2004 American Society of
Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASI-IKEA) standards, and many other
municipalities set their codes to be 30% above the ASHREA standard (ire our discussion we refer to the
• 2004 ASHREA standard). Kirk continued the presentation showing the adoption schedule for
residential and commercial Green Building codes out to 2030. For commercial building, staff is
recommending that council adopt code 30% above the ASHREA standard for 2009 and then go
another 24% in the 2011/2012 time frame. Jonathan added that staff recognizes the importance to
frontload the work plan trajectory so that we do not have to spike it up later. For residential building,
council adopted codes for new building construction back in February but still needs to determine
codes for additions and remodels. The difficulty in establishing codes for additions and remodels is
determining when it should be considered new constriction, and not causing scrape-offs. With these
sensitivities in mind, staff is recommending that additions and remodels be required to show energy
efficiency compliance with a Home Energy Rating Score (HERS) for the entire structure or meet the
required percentage above code International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) standard for the entire
structure. The current HTRS and percentage over IECC for new construction in the residential sector
is in a three tiered format broken up by square footage (up to 3000 square feet, 3001 to 5000 square
feet, and 5001 square feet and up), with increases in square footage requiring increases in energy
efficiency. Staff is also looking at how to deal with existing buildings in the city and getting them
above code for both commercial and residential. Ideas for identifying and triggering energy efficiency
requirements on these existing structures are point of sale, rental license renewal, change of use, and/or
site plan review. The board asked if other communities have point of sale triggers for their existing
building stock. Jonathan indicated that four other communities nationwide have RECOs but they are
not very aggressive. The board asked if staff has a sense of how this will impact homeowners.
Jonathan stated that staff does not know the expected impact on homeowners, but we recently hired
consultants to perform analysis on this topic. The board stressed that the rental housing sector is
especially important, and that staff needs to enforce the renewal of the rental license process and use
that as a potential trigger for energy efficiency upgrades. In addition, staff needs to make sure to
provide incentives to landlords for making the upgrades. Jonathan informed the board that staff is
engaged in conversation with the rental housing association, and that they are beginning to endorse
staff's efforts. The board then asked how and where Multi Fanuly Units (MFU) fit into the picture,
and what staff would propose as a trigger on these buildings. Kirk informed the board that at a
minimum MFUs get safety checks and inspections on furnaces and wiring, and that they are suppose to
get their rental license renewed as well. Jonathan added that many MFUs are part of the low income
housing model and that it is really difficult for developers to build above code MFUs because they
have to cut the price on a certain number of units for affordable housing. Staff attempts to educate the
tenants on energy efficiency through the MFU Audit program and continue to follow up with
educational materials. Kirk brought the discussion back to determining the commercial code, noting
that the reason staff suggests 30% above ASHREA is because it is similar to other language in the
building codes and again staff does not want to inadvertently incentivize scrapes and tear downs. With
respect to finalizing codes for remodels and additions, the goal is to look at the combination of the
addition and final house square footage for determining the level of energy efficiency required. We
also have to take into consideration historic buildings where homeowners can make additions and arc
only re uired to achieve the mandated HERS index for the addition's s care foota e. Staff is tryin to
Approved:
2
Francoise Poinsatte, Chair 1)atc
create a wide range of options for all of the different building types, and would like the boards'
thoughts on different triggers for different building types. Staff is also requiring energy audits on
remodels and additions as an education component, and starting in 2009/2010 they will be used to
determine if additional energy efficiency improvements need to be made on the home. Kirk noted on
the work plan and its time line that current residential requirements are 30-75% above code and that
every couple of years they will ratchet up by 10% to ultimately meet the 2030 challenge of net zero.
Kirk also highlighted that staff is looking to mandate renewable energy requirements for 2015/2016,
and these mandates will piggy back on the code requirements as they are needed to get beyond the
50% range. The board agrees that a commercial code of 30% above 2004 ASHIZEA needs to be
adopted as soon as possible, and that a little more work needs to be done to finalize the remodel and
addition piece for the residential sector. This work would include considering a fourth tier to the
square footage requirements (breaking up the "up to 3000 square feet" tier), triggers for additions that
are 100% or more of the oz-iginal structure, adding a cap for triggering the right kind of building
permit, and address any needed feasibility components.
Jonathan updated the board on the current status of Valmont Butte, and asked for their opinion on
alternative uses of the site. Jonathan showed the board a map of the site highlighting the different
types of land use on the property, which includes the solar analysis done by Bella for this site. If the
city chooses to install a solar system it would generate 6 Mega watts. Staff is currently in discussions
with Xcel as they own 150 acres of land right next to Valmont Butte and are also looking to put in a
large scale solar system that will feed into the Valmont Power Plant. Tz~ust for Public Lands is looking
to buy the property from the city to preserve it in its current state. If council decides to sell the
property, then they would have to decide which portions to sell and which to keep. Based on that
decision, they may still be able to install a solar system on the remaining property. The board thinks it
is a good idea to push forward with the solar system, but agreed that they would be better equipped to
support or oppose ideas after touring the site. Jonathan agreed to set up a tour for the board.
6. MATTERS FROM STAFF. None
7. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD. The board asked about the status of the curbside composting
prograzm, and Jonathan informed them that he would be presenting it at council again on the 19th
8. ADJOURNMENT. The meeting adjourned at 8:17 p.zm.
9. TIME & LUCA'TiON OF NEXT MF,ETING: Wednesday, September 3, 2008, 1300 Canyon
Blvd, 6 .m.
Approved:
3
Francoise Poinsatte, Chair Date
Cammordal and Residential Green Building Cale Adoption Schedule
July 24, 2Cv"E
rr: rr• r r r r r r r r r r r
1, New IRC Residential
Brrlldings
(Duplex, 7mvnl~oma, SPR) HERS ratirg~`Gmcu Pang Adop12009'000, maintain I'~RS rating 10% Imprcvuninrl n ecoryy f U% Imp•ovcmunt in Adopt ?0151ECC Nel zero
goal
CHiciency energyufficiency
•30.75°/ above ;ECG Replace the Green Building Green Points program Adopt 20121ECC Renewable energy
based on: requlremenls development
(efleclive 2108) •20001ECC (Solar, wind goo-;hermal;
• NAHDIICC Green Building Ccde
•RESNETlHERS
2. IRC Rosldontlal
RemalelslAdditions HERS rating;i;~een Pants Second rcadirg c o;d nonce #)510 Adopt 2009IECC HERS ;ale total struc!ure 10% Imorovemenf i.~ Adopl201S ILCC Carbon
Neutral
(lrlgger threshdd fa applying new energy efficiency
2006 IECC compliance construction standards to remodels and Envelope remediel'an per audit t0% Improvement in energy Adopt 20121ECC Renewable energy
additbns) tktlNov 08 eMkiency requlremenls development
(effective 2108) Replace the Green Butlding Green Pants program (Solar, w1nd, geo-thermaq
based on:
•20091ECC
• NAHBIICC Green Bu'dina Gode
•RESNETMERS
3. Eiclating IRC Residential
BullAings
(Nlilh no pcnnr, ac:ivi'y) Envelope remedlaliou par aud'r. 1~ ; Irprovemerl In Adopt 20151ECC Carbon Neutral
energy efficiency
•SFR • polo! of solo Adopt 1012 ILCC
•Rontal Ilcense renewal
d. New IBC Commercial!
Rosldontlal
20061ECC 30% bv;lo~ Ilan 20U51ECC, Adopt .0091ECC - maintain 30% above U:de Sustalnabil~ly Program 50%above code Adop12Ui51ECC Carbon Neutral
(Commercial) (Commercial)
(effective 1108) Wodeling buildings over 20K square feel Review Boulder County commercal censo~ticm Adopt 2012 IECC Renewable energy
(Commercial) proposal for possible 2009 adoption. requirements development
OctlNov 08 Renewable components (Solar, vnnd, geo-thennaq
Sustainable tenlpplenls
S. New IBC Commercial)
Rosldontlal
RemodelslAdditions 2006 IECC 30% better than 2oC6 IECC (Commercial) Adopt 20091ECC • maintain 30% above code Susloinabrlity Program 50% above code Adop120151ECC Carbon
Neutral
(Commerciaq
(eHective1108) OcUNov08 Review Boulder County commercialconsatlum ;,dop120121ECC Renewable energy
proposal fa possible 2009 adcpfon. requlremenls development
Energy Star reting ;c~aar, vrnd, geo Ihcrrnal)
Renewahlo components
Suslalnablo components
~ 8. Existing IBC Commercial! Y
Rosldontlal ~
(Wllh no permit ar.llvilyi Adop120091n1emalSonal Prope'ty'vlal•denance Envelope nenodlalio~r per audit 30°l° above code Adupl 20151ECC Carbon Neutral n
Adopl2.0091nlernallonal Eaistiny Buildirg Code •Pant of sale Adop120121ECC ?
Rental license renewal
A
Change of use p
-Bile Plan review
n
Attachment D
Projected Energy (HERS) Rating Report January 5, 2008
Llghtiy Treadlrtg, InG. To: City of Boulder
Energy & Design From: Clayton Bartczak and Paul Kriescher, Lightly Treading, Inc
RE: 1102 Portland Way, Boulder
4303 Brighton Blvd #3
Denver, CO 80216
303-733-3078 (phone)
303-295-2661 (fax)
After compiling a full energy rating on the home at 1102 Portland Way in Boulder, CO for the
Energy Home Makeover Contest (sponsored by the city of Boulder and Xcel Energy), we found it to
be the lowest (worst) scoring house we have ever tested with a HERS (Home Energy Rating
System) index score of 383 (an index of 100 represents a typical new house, an 85 is Energy Star
house, and an index of 0 represents a net-zero energy house). It also had the highest air leakage
number we have ever seen with a score of 3.0 Natural Air Changes per Hour (NACH) whereas a
new home built tightly is usually about 0.40 NACH or below (the lower the number, the tighter the
house).
It has been a pleasure to complete further projected energy ratings on this house using various
computer modeling scenarios, all of which assume the house has twice the square footage of the
existing house. We assumed that we added 520 ft2 of basement and then 520 ft2 of first floor and
the same on the second floor. We are happy to report that making the improvements outlined
below would greatly increase the energy efficiency and thereby decrease the utility costs and
environmental impacts of this house and other similar houses built in the city of Boulder.
Please see below for the different house specifications used to complete the computer models as
well as our recommendations.
• Table 1 identifies building specifications for the existing structure, makeover upgrades, and
additional energy efficiency improvements and solar domestic hot water system upgrades
to reach lower HERS scores.
• Table 2 is the same models with incorporating a 2.9 kWh photovoltaic system.
• Table 3 Appliance Specifications
• Table 4 is the same building specifications as Table 1 but with associated costs to the
specific upgrades and the total costs of reaching the HERS rating with recommended
energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements.
Table 1: Building Specifications
Existing House
(after energy
makeover
House Model Existin House u rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
S uare Feet Total ft2 =1553 Total ftz =1553 Total ftz =3113 Total ft' = 3113 Total ft2 =3113
Orientation «Same Front=North «Same «Same «Same
20.6 (1.5" of
polyurethane
Crawl wall foam and R-11
insulation none fiber lass bait «Same «Same «Same
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Existing House
(after energy
makeover
House Model Existin House a rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
R-10 on
Basement R-13 fiberglass R-13 on exterior exterior and R-
insulation on interior of of foundation 10 on inferior
addition N/A N/A foundation walls walls side of walls
• R-20.6 (1.5" of
polyurethane R-28.6.(1.5" of
foam and R-11 R-20.6 (1.5" of polyurethane
Rim/Band none fiberglass batty polyurethane foam and R-18
Joist in crawlspace & foam and R-11 fiberglass Batt)
insulation type R-0 between 1s~ fiberglass batty (addition and
8~ R-value & 2nd floor addition existin home «Same
Existing = R-18
(2x4 walls with
blown cellulose
Existing = R-13 & R-5 on
Existing = R-13 (2x4 walls with interior-side of
(2x4 walls with blown cellulose) existing walls)
blown cellulose) & R-24.8 & R-35.8
& R-19.8 Addition= (2x6 Addition= (2x6
R-13 (2x4 walls Addition= (2x6 walls with walls filled with
Wall type & Uninsulated with blown walls with cellulose ~ R-5 polyurethane
insulation studs cellulose cellulose sheathin foam
Window U-
value (all
except the
south wall of
the addition 0.90 0.35 «Same «Same 0.29
Window SHGC
(all except the
south wall of
the addition 0.65 .37 «Same «Same 0.27
Window U-
value {south-
side of N/A
addition NIA 0.39 0.41 0.41
Window SHGC
(south-side of
addition N1A N/A 0.55 0.69 0.69
R-40 -blown R-50 -blown R-60 •-blown
Attic Insulation R-9 rockwool cellulose «Same cellulose cellulose
Solar water
Solar water Solar water heating (8
heating (2 panels heating (3 panels - 240 ftZ
- 60 ftz with 108 panels - 90 ft2 with 500
Water heater (2)Gas 58% 7ankless -0.82 gallons of with 160 gallons gallons of
make/ model EF stora e of stora a storage)
Furnace model ? Lennox «Same «Same «Same
F;(;sn:,1~ Carr - ~S L~ . P?^ ~
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Existing House
(after energy
makeover
House Model Existin House u rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Solar water
heating (8
panels - 240 ftz
with 500
gallons of
60% storage) to
feed afan-coil
to pre-heat the
Furnace/boiler forced-air
AFUE 94% unit «Same «Same heatin
Standard
No cooling Evaporative
cooling (15 Cooferado (40
Coolin - 10 SEER AC SEER SEER) unit No coolin
Air leakage
estimate
NACH 3.0 0.4 0.3 0.25 0.15
UltimateAir
Mechanical Panasonic bath RecoupAerator
ventilation fans on timers to (HRV) that
system make! none meet ASHRAE meets ASHRAE
model none 62.2 62.E «Same
Mech. Vent.
rated flow N/A Meets ASHRAE Meets ASHRAE Meets
CFM N/A 62.2 62.2 ASHRAE 62.2
83% sensible 83% sensible
HRV efficient N/A N/A NIA efficient efficient
Gas or electric
stove? Gas Gas «Same «Same «Same
Gas or electric
clothes dr er? Gas elect. Gas «Same «Same
Solar PV
(electric) None 2.9 KW (Sharp
s stem None anel -330 ft2 None None
Energy-Star
Appliances models
(including (Refrigerator =
refrigerator & 444 KWH &
clothes Standard Dishvrasher =
washer Standard a liances 0.62 EF «Same «Same
All CFLs (20 % All CFLs (20
30%CFL All pin-type & 80 % CFL & 80
Li htin incandescent CFL in-t e) «Same
HERS Index 383 86 61 51 42
For each of the scenarios we modeled installing a 2.9 kWh solar photovoltaic system. The table
below shows how much better the HERS Index can be just from this improvement.
n ~ -
Lightly Treading Energy 8~ Design Consulting
Table 2: Each of the above models with 2.9 kWh hotovoltaic s stem
Existing House (after
energy makeover
u rades Modell Modell Model3
HERS Index 60 49 38 25
Because of probable problems with trees and neighboring houses shading the solar PV panels, it is wise to
focus on how significant the energy efficiency improvements are from the improvements done for the Energy
Home Makeover Contest that don't include installing solar. Reducing the HERS index of this house from 383
to 86 (an Energy Star house has an index of 85) will be the largest improvement on a house we've ever
tested if the final testing matches the estimated performance levels. With the square footage of the house is
doubled by constructing an addition on the south side of the house and the above improvements of Model 3
are utilized, the house could potentially achieve a HERS index as low as 42.
Upgrades
We modeled homes with various upgrades, which are discussed below.
Furnace:
The 94% efficient furnace purchased through the Energy Home Makeover Contest is a very
efficient choice. This would be our recommendation for space heating even when using the solar
hot water panels to augment heating as in the above Model 2.
Insulation:
Drilling and dense-packing the walls with cellulose of the existing house are a significant
improvement (R-0 to R-13) but if the addition is built at least with 2x6 walls that are filled with
cellulose insulation, adding R-5 insulated sheathing or even going to filling the walls with blown
polyurethane foam can greatly enhance the performance of the house. If this is complimented with
raising the attic insulation to at least R-40 or even as high as R-60 the house can optimize its
performance and be well defended against rising energy prices. For the crawlspace walls, we
recommend achieving an R-20.6 insulation value by using 1.5" of polyurethane foam in addition to
R-11 fiberglass batts.
Air Leakage:
Air leakage is the wildcard in the computer model because it is difficult to predict accurately. Good
air-sealing efforts should be able to yield a NACH (Natural Air Changes per Hour) of 0.40. The
model with the most improvements (Model 3) achieves a very tight level of 0.15. This is normally a
challenging level to achieve, but if certain steps are taken, the likelihood of getting to this level
increases. These include:
• Using polyurethane spray foam for at least askim-coat of insulation (1" to 2") in the walls
and at typically leaky rim and band joist areas. This will likely provide a very substantial
air-sealing benefit. Batt insulation can be used over the foam, or the foam can be
sprayed to a full 3" to 4" (if using the CLOSED CELL version of the foam). These spray
foams are available in a soy-based form as well as the traditional petroleum-based form.
• Seal all bottom plates in the new addition to the sub floor with foam/caulk.
• Follow all air sealing strategies listed in the Energy Star Thermal Bypass Checklist -this
includes using ICAT-rated recessed lighting enclosures with air-tight trim gaskets (or
eliminating can lights completely), using sealed combustion fireplaces and boiler, and
ensuring that bath fan dampers operate properly after installation.
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Mechanical Ventilation;
In order to get full credit for building units that are tighter than 0.35 NACH (Natural Air Changes per
Hour), the ASHRAE 62.2 ventilation standard must be met. The most energy-efficient way to meet
this standard is with the use of heat recovery ventilators (HRVs). The UltimateAir RecoupAerator
is an excellent choice because of its high level of efficiency.
1. Since the HERS energy rating process penalizes Tor too much ventilation as well as too
little, we recommend having an HVAC contractor match the fan's output to the
required flow per ASHRAE 62.2.
2. Permanently label the mechanical ventilation fan switch per ASHRAE 62.2. The label
should say something to the effect of, "Whole house mechanical ventilation: Leave
switch on". The intent of this requirement is that the label should last for the life of the
house, in order to provide benefit beyond the original owners.
The ventilation flow rate that is required to meet ASHRAE 62.2 for this house is 61CFM, 24 hours
per day. We can help you to calculate other flow rate/CFM combinations if you like.
Crawlspace:
We recommend using a 10 mil plastic vapor barrier over the dirt, sealed to the walls. Any organic
materials including wood should be removed from below the vapor barrier, to decrease available
food sources for mold. This upgrade is not listed in the table, and has no effect on the score, but
could potentially improve the health and safety of the occupants.
Appliances 8~ Lighting:
Improving the efficiency of appliances improves the score by two points. We have included the
following detailed specs for appliances in the upgrade model:
Table 3: Appliance Specifications
Refrigerator Energy Star compliant, 444 kWh
Dish Washer Energy Star compliant, 0.62 EF (Energy Factor)
Clothes Dryer Gas
We modeled the house using either 80% compact fluorescent lighting and 20% pin-based
fluorescent and using 80% pin-based fluorescent lighting and 20% CFLs. Either lighting option
earns an additional score improvement of 4 points, and would have an excellent return on
investment.
Solar:
We modeled a 2.9 KW photovoltaic system and found it earned the house an extra 26 points on
the HERS index in the first Upgrade scenario! We also modeled several sizes of solar hot water
collectors. The score improvements were impressive. The first solar hot water system (60 ftz of
panels and 108 gallons of water storage) earns the house an additional 7 points. The second
system (90 ftz of panels and 160 gallons of storage) also earns an additional 7 points. The third
system which uses solar for domestic hot water and space heating (240 ft2 of panels and 500
gallons of storage) earns the house an additional 26 paints.
Energy Costs and Environmental Impacts:
The~following tables show the reduction in energy costs and CO2 emissions associated with the
various upgrade models ("After EHMO" refers to the house after the Energy Nome Makeover
improvements).
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
The Energy Makeover improvements result in an enormous reduction in the utility bills and
environmental impact of the house by cutting both by 250%! If the homeowner were to follow our
recommendations in Model 1 for the addition as well as the upgrades to the existing house, the
house's utility bills and environmental impact can still be cut by 186% even though the house's size
has been more than doubled. It all the improvements were done from Model 3 the house is
reduced in it utility bills and environmental impact so significantly that the foot-print of the house
ends up being less than 1/3 of what it was originally; this would be the same as reducing vehicle
miles driven in a year by a typical car in Colorado by 53,162 miles every year!
Annual CO2 emissions
Ibs/ ear Annual Energ Costs
After After
Existin EHMO Reduction Existin EHMO Reduction
61,472 24,480 36,992 $ 3,289 $ 1,175 $ 2,114
Annual CO2 emissions Annual Ener Costs
Existing Modell Reduction Existin Modell Reduction
61,472 28,426 33,046 $ 3,289 $ 1,336 $ 1953
Annual CO2 emissions Annual Energy Costs
Existin Modell Reduction _Existing Modell Reduction
61,472 25,228 3G,244 $ 3,289 $ 1184 $ 2105
Annual CO2 emissions Annual Ener Costs
Existing Model3 Reduction Existin Model3 Reduction
61,472 18,942 42,530 $ 3,289 $ 880 $ 2,409
We look forward to discussing the results of the report. Please feel free to call with any questions.
Take care,
Clayton Bartczak and Paul Kriescher, (303) 733-3078
Table 4: Building Specifications /Associated Costs for Energy Efficiency Upgrades
To: Citv of Boulder
Consultants: Clayton Bartczak and Paul Kriescher, Lightly Treading, Inc
Ty Melton, IVlclton Construction
RE: 1102 Portland Way, Boulder
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existin house U rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Notes
S uare Feet 1,553 1,553 3,113 3,113 3,113
Orientation Front=North «Same «Same «Same «Same
R-20.6 (1.5" of
pclyurethane
foam and R-11
Crawl wall insulation none fiber lass ball «Same «Same «Same
$1,279 $1,279 $1,279 $1,279
R-10 on
R-13 fiberglass R-13 on exterior exterior and R-10
on interior of of foundation on interior side of
Basement insulation addition NIA NiA foundation walls walls walls
$0 $0 $1,138 $1,316
R-20.6 (1.5" of
polyurethane R-28.6 (1.5" of
foam and R-11 R-20.6 (1.5" of polyurethar:e
fiberglass Batt) in polyurethane foam and R-18
crawlspace ~ R-0 foam and R-11 fiberylass ball)
RimlBand Joist insulation type behveen 1st & fiberylass batty (add;tion and
8 R-value r.cr•e 2nd floor addition) existin home «Same
$398 $569 $591 $591
S:1CRA010EA`•,Cata\G:een Poi^ts\Plann(na Bcard 2008\Portland estimate .for city 9-`,0-09_ti~ai
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existin house U rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Notes
Existing = R-18
(2x4 wails with
Existing = R-13 blown cellulose &
Existing = R-13 (2x4 walls with R-5 on interior-
(2x4 walls with blown cellulose) side of existing
blown cellulose) & R-24.8 walls) 8, R-35.8
& R-19.8 Addition= (2x6 Addition= (2x6
R-13 (2x4 walls Addition= (Zx6 walls with walls filled with
Uninsulated tivith blown wails with cellulose & R-5 polyurethane
Wall a 8~ insulation studs cellulose) cellulose sheathing) foam)
At existing house, cut holes in, drywall
and blow in from house interior. Cculd
possibly be done from the exterior,
depending on the siding, at a lower
$3,490 $3,490 $4,201 $6,346 price.
Window U-value (all except
the south wall of the addition) 0.9 0.35 «Same «Same 0.29
Includes demo of old windows &
disposal; new windows; drywall repair;
Vinyl windows $24,105 S24,105 $24,105 527,050 new ainted trim; paint touch up
. Includes demo of c!d windows &
disposal; new windows; drywall repair;
Wood windows 531,469 $31,469 $31,469 $35,886 new ainted trim: aint touch u
Window SHGC (all except the
south wall of the addition 0.65 0.37 «Same «Same 0.27
Window U-value (south-side
of addition NIA N!A 0.39 0.41 0.41
Includes demo of old wir.do~vs &
disposal; new windows; drywall repair;
Vinyl windows SO 512,975 $12,975 $12,975 new ainted trim; paint touch up
V`
Includes demo of old windows 8
disposal; new windows; drywall repair;
Wood windows $0 $17,229 517,229 $17,229 new painted trim: paint touch up
~ S:1CMOlOEAldatalGreer Point5lPlanning t3oard 20081Portland estimate for city 9-1 G08_`nal
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existin house U rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Notes
Window SNGC (south-side of
addition N;A N/A 0.55 0.69 0.69
R-4C blowr, R-50 blown R-60 -blown
Attic Insulation R-9 rockwool cellulose «Same cellulose cellulose
Add blown cellulose to existing
5910 5910 $1,047 $1,138 insulation
Solar avater Solar water Solar water
heating (2 panels heating (3 panels heating (8 panels
- 60 ft~ with 108 - 90 ft2 with 160 - 240 ft2 with 500
Tankless -0.82 gallons of gallons of gallons of
Water Heatert e (2'iGas 58 ;o EF story e story e story e
For tankless heater, eve assume no
0 $4,550 S9,226 $11,302 S15,600 u rade of as line is necessa
Furnace model ? Lenrox «Same «Same «Same
Solar vdater
heating (8 panels
- 240 ftz with 500
gallons of
storage) to feed
a fan-coil to pre-
heatthe forced-
Furnace/boiler AFUE 60% 94'/° unit «Same «Same air heatin
Includes demo & removal of existing
furnace. Note that the price for the
system with heating col! tied into solar
hot water is a WAG; we haven't done
0% 55,850 55,850 $5,850 $5,850 this before.
Standard
Evaporative
cooling (15 Coclerado (40
Coo{in - None 10 SEER AC SEER) SEER unit No coolir.
0 $4,329 $5,330 $8,190 SO Includes electrical for new unit
Air leakage estimate
(NACH=Natural Air Changes
er hour 3.0 0.4 0.3 0.25 0.15
We assurrie it will be pretty difficult to
make such a leaky house really tight;
0 53,028 $4,328 55,628 $8,228 hire ever HERS rater ($500-$800)
S:' CP.40',CEA''.datalG-een ?oi ;ts.Planning Board 2C~081Portlanc estimate `or city 9-':)-GS_ fi~,a.
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house U rades Model 1 Modet 2 Model 3 Notes
Panasonic bati~ UltimateAir
fans on timers to RecoupAerator
Mechanical ventilation system meet ASHRAE (HRV) that meets
makelmodel none none 62.2 ASHRAE 62.2 «Same
Meets ASHRAE Meets ASHRAE Meets ASHRAE
Mech. Vent. rated flow CFM NA NA 62.2 62.2 62.2
Heat Recovery Ventilator 83°/• sensible 83% sensible
HRV efficienc NA NA NA effciency efficiency
Required for NACH below .35. Assumes
we use existing combustion air
0 $0 $910 $4,680 $4,680 pipes/ducts for HRV
Gas or electric stove? Gas Gas «Same «Same «Same No netiv stove
Gas or electric clothes d er? Gas Elec Gas «Same «Same
If electric: new Kenmore
dryer+electrical+tax *install;
if gas: new Kenmore dryer+tax+instali;
new gas line to dryer location (we're
really guessing at how long a run this
$958 51,673 $1,673 $1,673 will be)
2.9 KW (Sharp
Solar PV electric s stem None None panel -330 ft' None Nor.c
This is before rebates, tivhich have been
$0 $30,065 $0 SO as much as 62%.
S:\OA4O'~O~A\da:a`•,Green Points\Planni^g Beard 2008\Portland estirnale for city °-1G08_`inal
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house U rades Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Notes
Energy-Star
models
(Refrigerator =
444 KWH &
Appliances (including Dishwasher =
refri erator ~ clothes washer Standard Standard U.62 EFl «Same «Same
Standard = r,o new appliances; New
Kenmore fridge + tax + install (no ice
maker); New Kenmore dishwasher + tax
$0 $2,043 $2,043 $2,043 + install
All CFLs (20% All CFLs (20%
pin-type & 80% CFL & 80% pin-
Li htin 30% CFL All incandescent CFL t e «Same
$3 x 50 + tax + install (Bulbs + tax +
$323 $323 5323 $323 install
HERS Index 383 86 61 51 X12
Project Management, Project
Wra U , Clean U $2,464 $2,464 $2,464 $2,464
Total Price, vin 1 windows $0 $51,684 5105,541 $87,488 $91,555 Not includin solar rebates
Total Price, wood windows SO 559,047 $117,158 $99,105 $104,645 Not includin solar rebates
S:`,Ch50'~,OEAldata\Green Pcints\Plann:ng Board 2COII1Po;aa.^.d estiTate fcr cty 9-1C-08_=inal
Projected Energy (HERS) Rating Report February 19, 2008
Lightly TreCJding, Inc. To: City of Boulder
Energy ~ Design From: Clayton Bartczak and Paul Kriescher, Lightly Treading, Inc
RE: 2871 LaGrange Circle, Boulder
4303 Brighton Blvd #3
Denver, CO 80216
303-733-3078 (phone)
303-295-2661 (fax)
After compiling a full energy rating on the home at 2871 LaGrange in Boulder, CO for research
purposes, we found it to have a HERS (Home Energy Rating System) index score of 189 (an index
of 100 represents a typical new house, an 85 is Energy Star house, and an index of 0 represents a
net-zero energy house). It also had an air leakage number of 0.61 Natural Air Changes per Hour
(NACH) whereas a new home built tightly is usually about 0.40 NACH or below (the lower the
number, the tighter the house).
It has been a pleasure to complete further projected energy ratings on this house using various
computer modeling scenarios, all of which assume the house has twice the square footage of the
existing house (4690 ft'). In order io build the computer models, we assumed that the addition
added 782 ftZ to the basement, 782 ft2 to the first floor, and 782 ft' to the second floor. We are
happy to report that making the improvements outlined below would greatly increase the energy
efficiency and thereby decrease the utility costs and environmental impacts of this house and other
similar houses built in the city of Boulder.
Please see below for the different house specifications used to complete the computer models as
well as our recommendations.
• Table 1 identifies building specifications for the existing structure, makeover upgrades, and
additional energy efficiency improvements and solar domestic hot water system upgrades
to reach lower HERS scores.
• Table 2 is the same models with incorporating a 2.9 kWh photovoltaic system.
• Table 3 Appliance Specifications
• Table 4 is the same building specifications as Table 1 but with associated costs to the
specific upgrades and the total costs of reaching the HERS rating with recommended
energy efficiency and renewable energy improvements.
Table 1: Building Specifications
Existing
House after
House Existing Makeover
Model house U rades Model 3 Model 4 Models Model 6
Square
Feet 2345 2345 4690 4690 4690 4690
Orientation East _ East East East_ _ _ East East
Slab
Insulation R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0
Basement
insulation R-0 R-11 R-11 R-11 R-11 R-11
f ~ . - ~ ~~29-
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Existing
House after
House Existing Makeover
Model house U rades Model 3 Model 4 Models Model 6
Rim/Band
Joist
insulation
type & R-
value FG R-11 FG R-11 FG R-11 FG R-11 FG R-11 FG R-11
Addition
Rim/Band
Joist
insulation
type 8~ R-
value NA NA FG R-19 FG R-19 FG R-19 FG R-19
Wall type 8. 2x4, R-13 2x4, R-13 2x4, R-13 2x4, R-13 2x4, R-13
insulation 2x4, R-11 G3 G1 G1 G1 G1 G1
Addition
Wall type & 2x6, CE R- 2x6, CE R- 2x6, CE R- 2x6, CE R-
insulation NA NA 19.8 G1 19.8 G1 19.8 G1 19.8 G1
Window U»
value (all
except the
south wall
of the
addition 0.65 0.2 0.2 02 0.2 0.2
Window
SHGC (all
oxceptthe
south wall
of the
addition 0.66 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22
Window U-
value (90 ftZ
of windows
on south-
side of
addition 0.65 0.2 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
Window
SHGC (90
ftZ of
windows
on south-
side of
addition 0.66 0.22 0.65 U.65 0.65 0.65
Attic
Insulation R-19 R-37 R-37 R-37 R-37 R-37
Addition
Attic
Insulation NA NA R-50 R-50 R-50 R-50
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Existing
House after
House Existing Makeover
Model house U rades Model3 Mode14 Mode15 Mode16
Solar water Solar wafer Solar water
heating (2 heating (3 heating (8
panels - 60 panels - 90 panels -240
ft' Gvith 108 ftz with 160 ftz with 500
Water gallons of gallons of gallons of
Heater t e 40 allon Gas OD stora a stora a stora a Gas OD
Water
heater EF 0.55 0.82 NA NA NA 0.82
Furnace 1
BTU 80k 80k 80k SOk 80k 80k
94% (with
heating coif
tied into
Furnace 1 solar hot
AFUE 65% 94% 94% 94% water 94%
Furnace 2
BTU 40k NA NA NA NA NA
Furnace 2
AFUE 65% NA NA NA NA NA
ASHP tons NA 36k NA NA NA NA
ASHP
efficient NA 9 HSPF NA NA NA NA
3 ton, 8.5 3 ton, 17
Coolin - SEER SEER Coolerado Coolerado Coolerado Coolerado
Duct
leaks a TO 70 cfm 65 cfm 60 cfm 60 cfm 60 cfm 60 cfm
Ai r leakage
estimate
NACH 0.61 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2
Mechanical
ventilation
s stem NA NA HRV HRV HRV HRV
Mech. Vent.
rated flow
CFM NA NA 78 78 78 78
HRV
efficient NA NA 83% 83% 83% 83%
Gas or
electric
stove? Elec Elec Gas Gas Gas Gas
Gas or
electric
clothes
dryer? _ Elec Elec Gas Gas Gas Gas
2.9 KW
Solar PV (Sharp
(electric) panel) -330
s stem NA NA NA NA NA ft2
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Existing
House after
House Existing Makeover
Model house U rades Model 3 Model 4 Mode15 Model 6
Solar water Solar water Solar water
heating (2 heating (3 heating (8
panels - 60 panels -90 panels -240
ft2 with 108 ftI with 160 ft' with 500
Solar Hot yaltons of gallons of gallons of
Water NA NA stora a stora e stora e NA
Fridge
kWh/ r 775 444 444 444 444 444
Dishwasher
EF 0.46 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62
all 20% pin, 20% pin, 20% pin, 20% pin, 20% pin,
Li htin incandescent 75% cfl 75% cfl 75%cfl 75% cfl 75% cfl
HERS
Index 189 78 61 57 50 47
For each of the scenarios we modeled also installing a 2.9 kWh solar photovoltaic system (except
Model 6 which already includes the 2.9 kWh PV system). The table below shows how much better
the HERS Index can be just from this improvement.
Table 2: Each of the above models with 2.9 kWh photovoltaic system
Existing
Home after
Existing makeover
Home u rades Model 3 Model 4 Mode 5
HERS
Index 167 55 51 47 39
Because of possible problems with trees and neighboring houses shading the solar PV panels, it is
wise to focus on how significant the energy efficiency improvements are from the improvements
done for the Energy Home Makeover Contest that don't include installing solar. Reducing the
HERS index of this house from 189 to 78 (an Energy Star house has an index of 85) will be great
improvement on the house (assuming the final testing matches the estimated performance levels).
When the square footage of the house is doubled by constructing an addition on the west side of
the house and the above improvements of Model 5 are utilized, the house could potentially achieve
a HERS index as low as 50.
Upgrades
We modeled homes with various upgrades, which are discussed below.
Furnace:
The 94% efficient furnace is a very efficient choice. This would be our recommendation for space
heating even when using the solar hot water panels to augment heating as in the above Model 3.
When replacing the 65% AFUE furnace with an 84% AFUE furnace, the home earns an extra 16
HERS index points and would result in approximately $363 in energy savings each year.
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Cooling:
We found that upgrading the cooling system from 3 ton, 8.5 SEER air conditioning unit to a very
efficient Coolerado evaporative cooler, the house would earn an additional 8 HERS index points
and could save up to $100 per year.
Insulation:
. Because the existing house already had insulation filling the wall cavities, we did not mode!
retrofitting those cavities with new insulation. In the subsequent models with double the square
footage, we assumed 2x6 studwalls with 5 % inches of cellulose insulation at R-19.8. If this is
complimented with raising the attic insulation to at least R-40 or even as high as R-50 the house
can optimize its performance and be well defended against rising energy prices. Improving the attic
insulation form R-19 to R-40 earns the home an additional 2 HERS index points and would save
approximately $44 per year on energy costs. We also recommend raising the rim joist insulation to
R-19 by using fiberglass batts.
Air Leakage:
Air leakage is the wildcard in the computer model because it is difficult to predict accurately. Good
air-sealing efforts should be able to yield a NACH (Natural Air Changes per Hour) of 0.40. The
model with the most improvements (Model 6) achieves a very tight level of 0.20. This is normally a
challenging level to achieve, but if certain steps are taken, the likelihood of getting to this level
increases. These include:
• Using polyurethane spray foam for at least askim-coat of insulation (1" to 2") in the new
walls and at typically leaky rim and band joist areas. This will likely provide a very
substantial air-sealing benefit. Bati insulation can be used over the foam, or the foam can
be sprayed to a full 3" to 4" (if using the CLOSED CELL version of the foam). These
spray foams are available in a soy-based form as well as the traditional petroleum-based
form (due to the relatively high cost associated with filling 2x6 tivall cavities with spray
foam in an entire house, we did not model this scenario).
• Seal all bottom plates in the new addition to the sub floor with foam/caulk.
• Follow all air sealing strategies listed in the Energy Star Thermal Bypass Checklist -this
includes using ICAT-rated recessed lighting enclosures with air-tight trim gaskets (or
eliminating can lights completely), using sealed combustion fireplaces and boiler, and
ensuring that bath fan dampers operate properly after installation.
Mechanical Ventilation:
fn order to get full credit for building units that are tighter than 0.35 NACH (Natural Air Changes per
Hour), the ASHRAE 62.2 ventilation standard must be met. The most energy-efficient way to meet
this standard is with the use of heat recovery ventilators (HRVs). The UltimateAir RecoupAerator
is an excellent choice because of its high level of efficiency.
1. Since the HERS energy rating process penalizes for too much ventilation as well as too
little, we recommend having an HVAC contractor match the fan's output to the
required flow per ASHRAE 62.2.
2. Permanently label the mechanical ventilation fan switch per ASHRAE 62.2. The label
should say something to the effect of, "Whole house mechanical ventilation: Leave
switch on". The intent of this requirement is that the label should last for the life of the
house, in order to provide benefit beyond the original owners.
The ventilation flow rate that is required to meet ASHRAE 62.2 for this house is 78 CFM, 24 hours
per day. We can help you to calculate other flow rate/CFM combinations if you like.
Lightly Treading Energy & Design Consulting
Appliances & Lighting:
Improving the efficiency of appliances improves the score by two points. We have included the
following detailed specs for appliances in the upgrade model:
Table 3: Appliance Specifications
Refrigerator Energy Star compliant, 444 kWh
Dish Washer Energy Star compliant, 0.62 EF (Energy Factor)
Clothes Dryer Gas
We modeled the house using 75% compact fluorescent lighting. This lighting option earns an
additional HERS index score improvement of 3 points, and would have an excellent return
on investment.
Solar:
We modeled a 2.9 KW photovoltaic system and found it earned the house an extra 23 points on
the HERS index for the existing home scenario (please see Table 2 above). We also modeled
several sizes of solar hot water collectors. The score improvements were more impressive as the
area of solar hot water collector increased. The first solar hot water system (60 ft2 of panels and
108 gallons of water storage) earns the house an additional 3 points. The second system (90 ftz of
panels and 160 gallons of storage) earns an additional 9 points. The third system which uses solar
for domestic hot water and space heating (240 ft2 of panels and 500 gallons of storage) earns the
house an additional 16 points.
We look forward to discussing the results of the report. Please feel free to call with any questions.
Take care,
Clayton Bartczak and Paul Kriescher
Lightly Treading, Inc.
(303) 733-3078
.i -
'Table 4: Building Specifications /Associated Costs for Energy Efficiency Upgrades
To: City of Boulder
Consultants: Clayton Bartczak and Yaul Kriescher, Lightly Treading, Inc
'Ty Melton,lVlelton Construction
RE: 2871 LaGrange Circle; Boulder
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house Upgrades Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Notes
Square Feet 2345 2345 4690 4690 4690 4690
Orientation East East East East East East
Stab Insulation R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0 R-0
Basement insulation R-0 R-11 R-11 R-11 R-11 R-11
$915 5915 S915 $915 $915
Rim/Band Joist
insulation type & R-
value FG R-1 i FG R-i 1 FG R-' ; FG R-11 FG R-11 FG R-11
Addition Rim/Band
Joist insulation type &
R-value NA NA FG R-19 FG R-19 FG R-19 FG R-19
Wall type ~ insulation 2x4, R-11 G3 2x4, R-13 G1 2x4, R-13 G1 2x4, R-13 G1 2x4, R-13 G1 2x4, R-13 G1
Cut holes in drywall and
blow in from house interior.
Could possibly be done from
the exterior, depending on
54,318 $4,318 54,318 $4,318 54,318 the siding. at a lower price.
Uj
~
S:\C\40\OEA\data\Green Points\Pianr.ing Board 20081LaGrange estimate for city 9-t0-OS_final
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house Upgrades Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Notes
Addition Wall type $ 2x6, CE R-19.8 2x6, CE R-19.8 2x6, CE R-^. 9.8 2x6, CE R-"9.8
insulation NA NA G i G1 G1 G1
Difference between R-19
$0 $716 $716 $716 $716 bolts & blown cellulose
Window U-value (alt
except the south wall
of the addition) 0.65 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Includes demo of old
windows & disposal; vinyl
windows; drywall repair; new
$5,519 $5,519 $5,519 $5,519 $5,519 painted trim; paint touch up
Window SHGC (all
except the south wall
of the addition) 0.66 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22 0.22
Window U-value (90 ftz
of windows on soufh-
side of addition) 0.65 0.2 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34
Includes demo of old
windows 8~ disposal; new
vinyl windows; drywall repair;
new painted trim; paint touch
$8,105 $8,105 $8,105 $8,105 $8,105 up
Window SHGC (90 ft=
of windows on south-
side of addition) 0.66 0.22 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65
Attic Insulation R-19 R-37 R-37 R-37 R-37 R-37
Add R-37 blown cellulose to
$876 $876 $876 $876 $876 existing insulation
No price difference between
Addition Attic R-38 Batts & R-50 blown
Insulation NA NA R-5C R-50 R-50 R-50 cellulose.
S:'•,CPtO\OEA\datalGreen PointslP!ann.ing BoarC 2008\l.aGrange estimate for city 9-10-08_final
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house Upgrades Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Notes
Solar water Solar water Solar water
heating (2 panels heating (3 panels heating (8 panels
- 60 ftl with 108 - 90 ft2 with 160 -240 ftz with 500
gallons of gallons of gallons of
storage) storage} storage)
Water Heater type 40 gallon Gas tankless Gas OD
For tankless heater, we
assume no upgrade of gas
$4,550 $9,226 $11,302 $15,600 $4,550 line is necessary.
Water heater EF 0.55 0.82 NA NA NA 0.82
Furnace 1 BTU 80k 80k 80k 80k 80k 80k
94% (with
heating coil tied
into solar hot
Furnace 1 AFUE 65% 94°!~ 94°0 94% water) 94%
Includes demo 8~ removal of
existing fumace. Note that
the price for the system with
heating coil tied into solar
hot water is a UVAG; we
$5,590 $5,590 $5,590 S5,590 $5,590 haven`t done this before.
Leave this furnace as-is, but
Furnace 2 BTU 40k NA NA NA NA NA not in use.
Furnace 2 AFUE 65% NA NA NA NA NA
ASHP (air source heat
pump) tons NA 36k NA NA NA NA
- , $8,190 $0 SO $0 $0 Includes electrical
ASHP efficiency NA ° HSPF NA NA NA NA
Cooling - 3 ton. 8.5 SEER 3 ton. 17 SF_ER Coclerado Coolerado Coolerado Coolerado
Includes electrical for new
$8,190 $8,190 $8,190 $8,190 $8,190 unit
Duct leakage TO 70 cfm 65 cfrn 60 cfm 60 cfm 60 cfm 60 cfm
Includes some drywall
$260 $1,300 $1,300 $1,300 $1,300 patching & paint touch up
S:1Civ1O\OEAldata\Green Points\Planning Board 20081LaGrange estimate for city 9-10-U8_final
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house Upgrades Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Notes
Air leakage estimate
(NACH=Natural Air
Changes per hour) 0.6 i 0.4 C.3 0.3 0.3 0.2
hire energy HERS rater
$3.049 54,308 $4,308 $4,308 $4,958 (5500-5800)
Mechanical ventilation
system NA NA HRV HRV HRV HRV
Mech. Vent. rated flow
(CFM) NA NA 78 78 78 78
Heat Recovery
Ventilator (HRV)
efficiency NA NA 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
Required for NACH below
.35. Assumes we use
existing combustion air
$0 $4,290 $4,290 $4,290 $4,290 pipeslducts
Gas or electric stove? Elec Elec Gas Gas Gas Gas
New Kenmore range +
tax+install; run gas line to
range location (we're really
guessing at how long the
$0 51,743 51,743 51,743 $1,743 new gas line will be).
Gas or electric clothes
dryer? Elec Elec Gas Gas Gas Gas
New Kenmore
dryer+tax+install; run gas
line to dryer location (we're
really guessing at how long
50 $1,673 $1,673 $1,673 $1,673 the new gas line will be).
~~M
I ~
k~
S:1C~~4010EA1data`~,Green Pcints\?tanning Board 2008\LaGrange estimate for city 9-10-OS_final
Existing House
after Makeover
House Model Existing house Upgrades Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6 Notes
Solar PV (electric) 2.9 KW (Sharp
system NA NA NA NA NA panel) -330 ft2
This is before rebates, which
$0 $0 $0 $0 $30,065 have been as much as 62%.
Solar water Solar water Solar water
heating (2 panels heating (3 panels heating (8 panels
- 60 ft' with 108 -90 ft2 with 160 -240 ft= with 500
gallons of gallons of gallons of
Solar Hot Water NA NA storage) storage) storage) NA
0 S See water heater above $
Fridge kWh/yr 7l5 441 444 444 444 444
New Kenmore fridge + tax +
0 $1,364 $1,364 $1,364 $1,364 $1.364 install: no ice maker
Dishwasher EF 0.46 C.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62
New Kenmore dishwasher +
0 $679 5679 $679 $679 $679 tax + install
All CFLs (20 % All CFLs (20 % All CFLS (2U `/o All CFLs (20 % All CFLs (20 %
pin-type & 80 % pin-type & 80 % pin-type & 80 % pin-type & 80 % pin-type ~ 80
Lighting all incandescent CFL) CFL) CFL) CFL) CFL)
$3 x 50 + tax + install (Bulbs
0 $323 5323 S323 $323 $323 + tax + install)
HERS Index 189 78 61 57 50 47
Project Management,
Project Wrap Up, Clean
Up $2,464 $2,464 $2,464 $2,464 $2,464
Total Price $54,391 $61,599 $63,675 $67,973 $87,638 Not including solar rebates
I~
a
w
S:`,CM ~'~,(lEA'uaia`~Greer. Noicls'~~?lan~'.n~ C3oard ZOL'i'~1 ai~~vnye eslirnate for city ~-:G-O8_(ina~
2008 Commercial Building Energy Efficiency Study
The city is currently working with local energy consultant, Architectural Energy
Corporation (AEC) to develop a baseline and above-code energy efficiency matrix for
commercial buildings affected by a potential increase in a commercial energy efficiency
requirement.
The matrix will detail energy use in typical commercial buildings in Boulder and Boulder
County. Additionally, AEC will establish the buildings' profiles and model the energy
efficiency improvements, energy savings and greenhouse gas reductions. This
information will inform the Boulder County Consortium of Cities development of a
regional commercial energy efficiency code. 'The data will also detail the relationship
between increased energy efficiency requirements above ASHR.AE 90.1 2004 will impact
the Climate Action Plan's greenhouse gas reduction goals.
It is the city's intent to use AEC to assist with outlining prescriptive requirements to meet
30 percent above ASHRAE 90.1 2004 for building less than 20,000 sq. ft. Current
research suggests a 30 percent above code energy efficiency requirement for new
commercial construction dramatically impacts energy use in commercial buildings.
AEC will also assist with compliance requirements and verification for meeting new
requirements.
AEC will also utilize existing experience and data obtained from Xcel Energy's Energy
Design Assistance (EDA) program. This program provides data on the performance of
buildings constructed in the region and state, energy savings and costs for eiilianced
design strategies and results from energy efficiency upgrades.
The AEC Study is scheduled be completed in October 2008. Staff will report back to the
Planning Board on the data received from this study.
Apad~ Ilem ~ ~ M ~ ~
Attachment E o~~ G ~
Co.~,~c.~ ~
ORDINANCE NO. ~~~I 3
X75
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10-7.5, "GRE _
BUILDING AND GREEN POINTS PROGRAM," B.R.C 1981,
ADOI'1BD PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. 7565, ADDING
REQUIREMEN`1'S RELATED TO ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND
GREEN POIN'T'S PROVISIOI`TS RELATED TO DEMOLITION,
ADDI!'IONS, REMODELS, BOILERS AND WINDOWS, AND
SETTING FORTH RELATED DETAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Paragraph 10-7.5-2 (a)(2), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
10-7.5-2 Scope and Administration
(a) Scope. The provisions of this chapter apply to the following:
(1) I~jew construction, remodels, or additions to a dwelling, including without
]imitation single-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings, and dwellings within mixed
use developments.
(2) Any two or more building permits for the same structure that are applied for in
any 12 month period shall be considered, as one application for the purpose of
b meeting the reauirements of Sections 10-7.5-3.
_ _ "Mandatory Green Buildins? Reauirements." and 10-7.5-4. "Resource___ _ _ _ _ _
Conservation-Green Points." B.R.C. 1981.
Section 2. Section 10-7.5-3, B.R.C..1981, is amended to read:
10-?.5-3 Mandatory Green Building Requirements
(a) Ener Efficiency. An applicant for athe followins building permit at~plication~,~
ea.v~v~elli-ngshall demonstrate that the building is more energy efficient than a
building that meets the minimum requirements of Chapter 10-7, "International Energy
.Conservation and Insulation Code," B.R.C. 1981.
.U Anew dwell_ins;: or
12) Ar.~addition or remo~eLt a dwelling that nronoses to increase the floor area o_f
the existing bui ldin~ by more than 100 vercent.
Table 1 lists the minimum energy efficiency requirements.
TABLE 1 -Tiers for Energy Efficiency Thresholds
Type of Project Square Footage Energy Efficiency Thresholds Above Code
New Construction
K:~PL3 [1o-green point amendment to ord no ?565. ] i9.doc
Agenda Item # X13 Page
Up to 3,000 30 percent more energy efficient than 2006 IECC
3,001-5,000 50 percent mare energy efficient than 2006 IECC
5,001 and up 75 percent more energy efficient than 2006 IECC
Multi-unit Dwellings Applies to all 30 percent more energy eff dent than 2006
IECC*
* The city mar:ager is authorized to develop a HERS rating sampling protocol for multi-
dwellingprojects to ensure compliance with this section.
(b) Energy Efficiency -HERS Index Rating. Anew dwelling shall be evaluated using the
Home Energy Rating System (HERS). The HERS rating will be used for the verification
of energy performance of new construction. A TIERS rating shall he performed by a rater
accredited by the Residential Energy Services Network (RESNET).
(c) Ener Audit. An applicant for a building permit for an addition to a dwelling or a
' remodel of a dwelling shall be required to obtain an energy audit. The applicant shall
provide proof of the completion of the energy audit with a building permit application.
The energy audit of the house shall quantify the annual energy performance of the
building according to generally accepted standards for energy audits approved by the city
manager. An energy audit or an optional HERS rating report will indicate how efficiently
the building is operating and where inefficiencies are occumng.
(d) Li~htina Efficient Prior to final inspection for an addition to a dwelling or a remodel
of a dwelling the applicant shall install energy efficient lamps (light bulbs) with a
luminous efficacy of 401umens per watt or above in at least 50 percent of the existing
home's light fixtures.
- - - - (e)- ---Direct Vent Furnace-When-the scope-of the work of an-addition-to-a-dwelling or-a-- - - -
remodel of a dwelling requires replacement of a furnace, the furnace shall be replaced
with a direct vent unit that has a minimum 90 percent AFUE.
(f) Direct Vent Boiler. When the scone of the work of an addition to-a_dwelline or a
remodel of a dwelline requires replacement of a boiler the boiler shall be replaced with a
direct vent unit that has a minimum 85 percent AFUE.
~ Construction Waste Rec clip An applicant for a building permit for a new dwelling or
an addition to a dwelling shall demonstrate that a minimum of 50 percent of construction
waste is recycled. Waste diversion calculations and tracking spreadsheet form must be
provided at project completion which shows that the rninimurn recycling requirements
have been met. No person shall fail to complete the diversion calculations and tracking
spreadsheet or recycle construction waste as required by this section.
(gh~ Demolition Management. An applicant proposing to demolish the dwellin~,_as that term
is defined ir~Section 10-7.5-7. "Definitions." B.R.C. 1981i~ere-tkan-38-p~r~err~e€
a~t~~=~o~,~ls shall demonstrate through a deconstruction plan that at least 6S percent of
material by weight from deconstruction of the existing structure, including concrete and
asphalt, will be diverted from the landfill: Verification of deconstruction plan
compliance must be provided prior to final inspection. No person shall fail to follow or
otherwise implement an approved deconstruction plan
K:U'LBAo-green point amendmcrt to ord no 7565.1'79.doc Agenda Item i~ AF PagC
Section 3. Subsection 10-7.5-4(a), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
10-7.5-4 Resource Conservation -Green Points
(a) Schedule for Green Points. Residential building permit applicants are required to earn
green points according to the schedule in Table 2. anplicant~ro~osin~ to increase the
oor area of the existine building by more than 100 percent shall be required to eam the
amount of Breen points required for the new construction of a new dwelling of the same
she of the existine dwelling with such addition.
TABLE 2 - Gree~o~nts Re.Quirem~nts.
Project Description Square Footage Green Point
Thresholds Requirementsi z
New construction of single unit dwellings 1,501-3,000 20
3,001-5,000 40
5,001 and up 60
Additions to a dwelling 500- 1,000 15
1,001- 2,000 20
2,001 3,000 30
3,001 and up 45
Interior remodels of a dwelling 500 -1,000 10
1,001- 2,000 15
2,001- 3,000 20
3,001 and up 30
Multi-unit Dwellings: final tenant finish 1,001- 2,000 20
of a unit in a multi-unit dwelling
2,001- 3,000 20
3,001 and up 30
1 One green point is awarded for each HERS rating score below the HERS index rating
requirement.
z The green point values listed in Subsections 10-7.5-4(e) and (f) only apply to those projects that
are not required to have a HERS index rating.
3 Each dwelling in a multi-unit dwelling shall be required to meet the green point requirements
separately.
K:~PLBi~o•gtnen point amendment to crd no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item # A r~ Page
Section 4. Subsection 10-7.5-4(e), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
(c) Ene~y Efficienc .
(1) Insulation. Points will be awarded according to the following:
(A) Minimum R-19 cavity plus R-5 sheathing wall insulation: 2 points.
(B) Minimum R-49 ceiling: 2 points.
(C) Exterior minimum R-10 insulation installed for the full height of a
basement or foundation wall: 2 Points
(U) Insulated Pre-cast Concrete Foundation: 2 points
(E) Insulated Concrete Forms: 2 points
(2) Windows: Up to 10 points. New windows or replacement windows installed as
part of a remodel or an addition. Points will be awarded as follows:
(A) National Fenestration Rating Council (NFRC): Up to 5 points. Rated
Window with Maximum U Value of9:3~-for lower:.5 point for each
window, up to 5 points. .
(B) NFRC Rated Window with Maximum Solar Heat Gain Coefficient
(SHGC) of 0.55: .5 point for each window, up to 5 points. Exception:
South facing glass.
(3) Air Scaling of an Existing Building. Points will be awarded when a HERS rating
is applied to the existing structure preconstruction, then a post rating after
construction showing:
- - - - - -(A)- ~ Ten percent net increase-in-initial HERS rating*:-2-points - - - - -
(B) No net increase in initial HERS rating*: 3 points
(C) Decrease in initial HERS rating*: 5 points
*Because of the variability of existing construction, projecting flee final HERS
rating can be difficult and planning for contingencies if the planned HERS rating
is not achieved shuuld be done.
(4) Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning (HVAC) Systems. Points will be
awarded according to the following:
(A) HVAC Commissioning: 3 points. Testing for duct leakage, firing rate, and
refrigerant charge.
(B) Ground Source Heat Pump: Up to 10 points. Points will be awarded
according to the following:
(i) 30-39% calculations from cheating/ cooling load bin analysis:
4 points
(ii) 40-49% calculations from cheating/ cooling load bin analysis:
6 points
(iii) 50-59% calculations from cheating/ cooling load bin analysis:
8 points
K:\PLBI~o-green point n:nerdrocnt to ord no 7555.179.da. Agenda Item # `~t~~ Page
(iv) 60'69% calculations from aheating/ cooling load bin analysis:
IO points
(C} Direct Vent Combination Space/Water Heating System: 2 points
(€~-Zoned, Hydronic Radiant Heating: 2 points
(F~ Passive Cooling: 2-5 points (one point per item). Points will be awarded
for passive cooling systems using any two or more of the techniques
described below:
(i) Exterior vertical shading devices for east and west facing glass.
(ii) Reflective films or glass on east and west facing windows.
(iii} Radiant, hea#-reflective barriers installed in the attic space.
(iv) Landscaping that shades east and west-facing glazing during the
cooling season (June to September).
(v) South window overhang sized to effectively shade the window
during the cooling season (June to September) from June to
September.
(6~ Whole House Fan: 2 points
(H~ Evaporative Cooling: 3 points
(5) Water Heater.
(A) Tank-less Water Heater.: 2 points
(B) Point-of--Use Water Heater: 2 points
(6} Lighting, Appliances, and Electricity.
(A) ENERGY STAR Advanced Lighting Package (ALP): S Points. The ALP
shall meet the following minimum specifications.
High-Use Rooms Kitchen, Dining Room, Living 50% of Total Number of Fixtures
Room, Family Room
Bathroom(s), Hall(s)/Stairway(s)
Medium/Low-Use $edroom, Den, Office, Basement, 2S% of Total Number of Fixtures
Rooms Laundry Room, Garage, Closet(s)
and all other rooms
Outdoor Lighting Axed to the
Outdoor structure or Free-Standing Pole(s) SO% of Total Number of Fixtures
F,xcept for landscape and solar including all flood lighting
lighting
KaPLBno-gecn point amrndment to ord no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item Page ~1
(B) Efficient Light Controls: iJp to 2 points, Efficient lighting controls include
occupancy sensors, dimming controls, and automatic daylight dimming
controls.
(i) 4 control devices: 1 point
(ii) 6 control devices: 2 paints
(C) Energy-Efficient Appliances: Up to 6 Points. Points are awarded
according to the following:
(i) EN'ERGY STAR rated refrigerator: 2 points
(ii} ENERGY STAR rated clothes washer: 2 points
(iii) ENERGY STAR rated freezer: 1 point
(iv) ENERGY STAR rated dishwasher: 1 point
Section 5. Subsection 10-7.5-4(i), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
(i) Sustainable Products.
(1) FSC-Certified Tropical Woods or No Tropical Wood: Up to 6 Points. Points will
be awarded as follows:
(A) 2 BF of FSC lumber per SQ/1~' of floor area (2 BF/SQ.1~T.): 2 points
(B) 3 BF of FSC lumber per SQ/FT of floor area (3 BF/SQ. FT.): 4 points
(C) 50% or more of dimensional lumber in total BF is FSC, excluding
engineered wood products: 6 points
- - - - - - - - - (2) - -Environmentally Preferred-Materials: -Up to-10 Points: Points-will be awarded - -
environmentally preferred materials as follows:
(A) Recycled content: 2 points
(B) Reclaimed: 2 points
(C) Eio-based: 2 points
(D) Agricultural residue: 2 points
(E) Low or no Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) emissions: 2 points
(3) Locally Sourced Materials: Products that are environmentally preferable andlor
extracted, processed, and manufactured within 500 miles of the city are
considered local. A maximum of 1.5 points can be earned for any single
component listed in the Environmentally Preferable Products Chart regardless of
the amount by which a minimum perfonna~~ce threshold is exceeded. A "recycled
content" product must contain a minimum of 25%post-consumer recycled
content exeep# as noted otherwise above. Post industrial (pre-consumer) recycled
content is counted at half the rate ofpost-consumer content. Points will be
awarded as shown on the EnvironrnentaIly Preferable Products Chart below:
K:\PLF311o-green point amendment to ord no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item # Page
ENVIRONMENTALLY PREFERABLE PROllUCTS CHART
Assembly Component Product Specification Types (see Note 1)
Specifications Emission Specifications Local
Exterior Framing FSC-certified X
Wall
Exterior Framing Finger- X
Wall jointed studs
(vertical use
only for
structural
components)
Exterior Siding or Recycled X
' Wall masonry content or
FSC-certified
Floor Flooring Linoleum, Carpet & pad: comply with Carpet and X
cork, Rug Institute's Green Label Plus
bamboo, Program
FSC-certified
or reclaimed
wood, sealed
concrete,
recycled- -
content
- - - - _ . - _ . flooring, or
combination
in 45% of
home's floor
area.
Floor Flooring BONUS 1/2 BONUS 1/2 for N0 carpet in home
for 90% of
home
Floor Framing FSC-certified X
FEie~r legate X
Foundation Cement Fly ash or X
slag as
replacement
for, not
addition to,
cement
content (min.
K:~Pl.Bno-green point amendment to ord no 7565.179.d°c Agenda Item # Page
30%)
Interior Framing FSC-certified X
Wall
Interior Framing Finger- X
Wall Jointed,
(vertical use
only for
structural
components)
Interior Gypsum Recycled X
Walls board content
AND
ceilings
Interior Paint Comply with Green Seal Standard GS-
WaI1s 11, Paints, First Edition, May 20, 1993
AND
millwork
Interior Wood VOC concentrations of 150 gpl or less
Walls finishes
AND
millwork
Landscape Decking or Recycled X
patio content or
- - - - . - -material- . _...FSC=certified- - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O#her Cabinets Recovered, Woodand/or agrifiber products with no X
recycled added urea-formaldehyde resins
content, or
FSC-certified
Othex Counters Recycled Wood and/or agrifiber products with no
content added urea-formaldehyde resins
Other Doors (not Recycled Wood and/or agrifiber products with no X
incl. content or added urea-formaldehyde resins
garage) FSC-certified
Other Trim Recovered, Wood and/or agrifiber products with no
recycled added urea-formaldehyde resins
content, or
FSC-certified
Other Adhesives VOC concentrations of 70 gpl or less
and
sealants
K:\PLBI\o-green point amendment to ord no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item # Page ~ D
Other Windows Recycled X
content or
FSC-certified
Roof Framing FSC-certified X
Roof Roofing Recycled X
content or
vegetated
(min. 200 sf)
Roof AND Insulation Recycled Comply with State of California, DHS, X
floor AND content (min "Practice for Testing of VOCs from
wall 20%) Building Materials using Small
Chambers"
Roof, Sheathing Recycled X
floor, wall content or
(2 of 3) FSC-certified
Section 6. Section 10-7.5-7, B.R.C. 1981, is amended by a new definition and changes to
othez~ definitions, to read:
"Addition" An extension or increase in floor area of a building or structure of 500 sq. fi:. or
greater.
_ _ "Demolition" or "demolish" means an act or process which removes one or more of the _ _ _ _ _ _ _
followine. The shaded area illustrates the maximum amount that m_ ay be removed without
constituting demolition.
riftypercent or more of the roof ar_~a_as_m__e_~~~ur~d iii plan view (see dia~raml:
. , ~
K:U'LBrio-green point amendment to ord no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item # Pagc v/
l'~ iftv percent or more of the exterior walls of a building_as measured contiguously around
the "building coverage" as defined in this section sec dia• am • or
A wall shall meet the following minimum Standards to be considered a retained
e~cteriQr
wall:
(A) The wall shall retain studs or other stnictural elements, the exterior wall finish.
and the fully framed and sheathed roof above that portion of the remaining
building to which such wall is attached;
Bl The wall shall not be covered or otherwise concealed by a wall that is nronosed to
be vlaced in front of the retained wall• and
(C) Each Hart of the rglained exteriory,~alls shall be connected contiguously and
without interruption to eye er n~rt of the retained exterior w~l]~
"Remodel" means an interior reconfiguration or upgrade of an existing structure of 500 sq.ft. or
greater and the work required to complete the reconfiguration or upgrade requires a building
permit.
Section 7. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 8. The city council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title
only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for
public inspection and acquisition.
EC:~PLSno-~e~ poim amendment co ord ~o ~s6s.»9.ao~ Agenda Item # Page X27
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this 20th day of November, 2007.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this 4th day of December, 2007.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director ~of Finance and Record- ~ - ~ - - - - - - -
K:U'LBIb•green point amendment to and no 7565.179.doc Agenda Item # D 1=~ Page 7~_
Attachment F'
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 10-7, "ENERGY
CONSERVATION AND INSULATION CODE," B.R.C. 1981
BY ADDING AN ADDITIONAL ENF,RGY EFFICIF,NCY
REQUIREMENT FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS, AND
SETTING FORTH RELATED DF,TAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Section 10-7-2, "Energy Conservation Code," B.R.C. 1981 is amended by the
addition of a new subsection 10-7-2(h) as follows:
(hl Section 501.1 The requirements contained in this chanter are applicable to commercial
uildings. or nortions~f com~e~cj~L><iui~~,s. These commercial buildings sl~al~meet at
least 30% more energy efficient e r ~irements of ASHRAE/1E$~ tan and
90.1
E~terev
Standard for Building Excei~t for Low-Rime Residential Buildings or oth~~proved deli en
. cnteria•
Exceptions:
1. Buildings of 20.000 square feet or less maybe designed to a~>gscrintive standard as
detailed in this chapter or through other measures that result in a buildin to
.hat i~tbast
0% more energy efficient.
2. Commercial core and shell buildings that have 50 percent or less finished floor area may
divide the 30 percent energy e~ciencv requirement Uetween the core and shell building
design and the future interior tenant finish design. The energy e~ciencv savings
percentages assitnied to each element of the building shall be desi~iated at the time of the
submittal of the bui dine tiermit for the core and shell permit..
Section 2. This ordinance shall be effective at 12:01 a.m. on March 2, 2009. It shall be
applied to building permit applications submitted after the effective date. Building permits
applied for before the effective date shall be considered under the program in effect at the time of
application.
Kaplbilo-amend 10-7 Energy Conservation Codc- 179.doc
Agenda Item # g/~' Page ~v~--
Section 3. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 4. The council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title only
and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for public
inspection and acquisition.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this day of , 2008
:Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this _ of , 2008.
Mayor
Attest:
Ciry Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
K:~plb'b-amend 10J Energy Coruervation Code- 179.doc Agenda Item # Page
Attachment G
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CIIAP'I'ER IU-7.5, "GRF,F.N
B[JII,DING AND GREEN POINTS YKOGRAM," B.R.C. 1981
ADDING KF:QUIItF.MENTS RELA1'l~,D TO ENERGY
I:FI~ICIF.NCY "I'HRESI-IOLDS FOR RE'MODE'LS AND
ADDITIONS, DI;MOLI'l'ION, BOILL:RS ANll WINDOWS;
AND SET'1'iNG FORTI [ RE;I,ATED DETAILS.
BE I'I' ORDAINED BY "l'H1; CITY COUNCIL Op' 'I`HE CITY OF BOUI,DI?R,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Paragraph 10-7.5-2 (a)(2), B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
lU-7.5-2 Scope and Administration.
(a) Scope. The provisions oI'this chapter apply to the following:
(I) New construction, remodels, or additions to a dwelling, including without
limitation single-unit dwellings, multi-unit dwellings, and dwellings within mixed
use developments.
(2) Any two or more building permits for the same structure that are applied for in
,my 12 month period shall be considered as one application for the purpose of
^r°°•, r^:,,*~~mectin ~ [he re uiremcntti o~t~ons_ 10-7.5 _;i,
- --i.'---~ - - -
`~Ma~a~toi Green I3uildin~ tq
iirements," aitcl 1()_7.5-4. "resource
('c~nservati~n -Green Points," B.1Z.C. 19S 1.
Sccticn~ 7.. Subsection 1.0-7.5 3, 13.RC. 1981, is ameudal to read:
1 U-7.5-3 Mandat~?ry Creen Buildin[; Requirements.
(a) h:nergy I~,1"ii~•ieucy -New Dwcllin~ l'nits. An a~~~~licant f"or a building hcrnrit f<~r carte
new d~ti~cllin~, shall dcmonsirate that the building is tn~~rc cri~•r~~v rf~licicnt than a }~iril~lrn~~ that
meets the minimum requirements of Chapter 10-7, "International Energy Conservation and
Insulation ('ode," I3.R_.C. 1981. Table 1 lists the minirnum energy efticiency requirements.
~ - ~
K''~PIJ I. -~;i1r'~li~~niirv~I~,ra~lilinrc;:uui ~;rn~rlcl~- I;'~ lr'~Ju,- l~,'~'Ill~a ~lCrll;; ~~L~~ ~'~i;~~~' ~
~I~~\I~LL 1:1 - ~l~icrs ti)r I:ncr~y~ 1! f~ficicnr~~ 'I lirc.;l~ul~i~~
"Type ol• Project tiduare hoota;;c lnergv Efficiency •l'hresholds :hove (.'ode ~
i
iVew ConsU•uction l.Jp to 3,000 30 percent more: encr~;y cf~ficicnt than 20U(, IL:CC
' 3,001-5,000 ~O 1)ca•CCllt Il1UCe enel'~y el•f icicnt than 2000 I I:CC I
5,001 and up percent more energy efficient than 2006 IECC
Multi_iJnit Dwellings ~ Applies to all l30 percent more energy efficient than 2006 1P.CC*
*The city manager is authorized to develop a HERS rating sampling protocol for multi-dwelling
projects to ensure compliance with this section.
b "1'1tre~J~o_I~i~zAt~~licatiott c~fN~w Co_nstructiol~
~tz~lar~ls to l:ntlt~l3ttildin • s
Result of an~lcidiiQtt.
Anv
additio~~_~vhicll Exceeds the tliresholcls de~i_t~cc1_bEl.Qw will
rewire thtitllu:_eon.ciitioned area of
entire buildir~_b~tii~r_Elded to utles~Ltapw c_ _s_ ~ti_c?n
_ ~datd~ fttretiergysfticiency_inSubsecti~n 10-7. -3 a H._R.C~9$1..
T}~e additic~t~s_ I OQ hcrcet~tyl_more than the_exi~tin~; structu?•c and will_havc
~t
~~al rc>>.~.~h_tac~nod aret~~(~thc adcl_iti_cin to the dwcfli_o.g_tinit is ~p t~~. 3.,000 si1,~it].
s~~,
~2) _ fl'hc addition is SO l_cr 100_L~crc_ent larger- tltati the c~istin~;_structurc aril will_I~~avc a
total conilitiotl~~l_ai•ca alter the a<ldltl(_nt0 the C1WC1IlIlf; llnlt_t$_FI'~lm 3,pO~ tc~ 5000
~~1, ft in ~ir~.
(3~_ _I~h~_;tclclitiim i~__?5 tc~ SU ~crrertt_ I
tt~~cr than the c;xistin~~ s_li'tis'_turc aril w'1111t<<ycr
total conili(ic~aacti_area at_ter the addition to t~iw~llit~g~tt~it is. giver to 5(~_l_,sc
In SI%C.
~c) 1_ _ner ~ l Iciency -Additions and Remodels. An applicant for a building nennit_(~r a
remodel or an addition t~ a _wellin~shall demonstrate that that it meets the cncr~y_
cfficien~y rcc»ircmcn f this 5cction_A uildirt.~i~ermit for an additi_Qlt.t_o pr a_r~nQdcl
of'a dweliit~g unit shad meet one of the tollowinQ
standards:
(l 1Z.~sfuircmettt_if ui~grading the i;nerweffcienc~ the en_tirc stru~tu?'e.__"I'hi;
aJJIIIC~rl1t tales (ICltlOnStCatC', t lat the entire buildins~n~ect~ the I_II_~,IZS rcdu.~t~~~ts
that arc dcscrihc~l in 'fable I [3 hel~w: or
Rc:ituirclnent for the new additi2n_or the_area of the_I~iruse that istt~~jcct_to a
r~nr~.~dcl. 'I'h~ applic;~utt may clenumstrate that the adilit~n_ctr t t • •t _c~t_c~f the
huilclin~; suhju~t to a remi~dcl meets the recluir~~ment. of thc_ Il?C'(' fc~r the_rcntocicl
K'~.PLLi[''~~-i~7(1 i~l(cm:u~~r t,~t ,~~I~liln~u~.;in~l r.~ci~nl:l~ I'„~ 17~i ~i~~~. ~~~CIICI~I IICIII l~ilrt ~
area car addition as drscrihed itt~~le 1.13. bclow._f3uildin~ permits undrr this
r~•~iui~~cn~cul ~li,ill ;ilsn n~ect the f~ll~~~,~~i~~~~;_
(A)_ ~n _letc_fi
~Ic~~~_4C cl~c~r test tefyr_c__1p.1?~ic~ti_~ti _fQr the k~~lcliltg.~~7nit to
deter7t>_inc ~~~hcthcr the t~uildin_~f
.~..a fresh_~ir inf Itr-~~tc~n_r~~te cif »omcL
than 0-~ nat~n-al_air c}zat~~es~hc?ut--LvnC'H1 com iaitcc; rating._J~111.i~
standard-i_~ cxsecdc~, tl~en~lae an_hlicant ~It<<Ilmeet the r~~cht.ire(t~~nt_ct1'
l~ara~?~~~?
(I3~Im~ve, rcj~air and seal the clwclling unit, verified b~~+ sub~.equent
blower ~~r_tc~t armed prior t a cci-tilicate cif ~ccupanc~ur cottihlctiQn that
~nonstrate.~! tat th~~uildin~ as an stir ~ - t anon rate e>f nc~t greater that
0.5 natural stir-Chan es cr-how~~('II) compliance rat_iii;;.
TnBLF_1131;nergy Ef~~enc~h_eslt~~lds.l~?r.Rcrnodel:5 a.t~~l Additic~ti_s
`T'otal Con ~tioaed~rea FIRS Rates 11LCrcaSeS~ ci~licicn~~y_af~_ v• c Ir~~
to 3,000 1(lQ 15 Ltcrcent
x_,001-5
_ ()00 h 5 ~(~erccnt _
5_,001 arxi u~? 70 50 ncrcent
Rcmc~dcl_s - I,II111tahUll~_ CeI110dt;L_1112ttShCS I101_~1lt7Sta»_t_ialJ r~n~yv_c the
interior lir1i5h s~C fire tlL4lttt~rl ~1~clcihe is_n2t r-cc1 rite to meet the etter_by_
cffic~c~ec~iremct~t,~_of Table_
(#~d) 1?nergy Efficiency - I IERS Index Rating. A new dwelling shall be evaluated using the
1 Tome Gncrgy Rating System (I IERS). The HERS rating will he used for the verification
of energy performance of new construction. A I II;RS rating shall be performed by a rater
accredited by the >lesidcnti~rl I~:n~=rgy Services Netwurl< (RESNI;'C).
(ee) Energy i~udit. 11n applicant liar ~r building permit for an addition to a dwcllinz; or a
remodel of a dwelling shall be required to obtain an energy audit. The applicant shall
provide proof of the completion of the energy audit with a building permit application.
The energy audit of the house shall quantify the annual energy performance of the
building according to generally accepted standards for energy audits approved by the city
manager. An energy audit or an optional HERS rating report will indicate how efficiently
the huildinfr is operating and where inef-ficiencics arc occurring.
(c#[j Li<a,hUn~, I•fficicncy. Prior to final iir.pcctiun fur an addition to a dwcllin~ nr ~r rrrnu~iel of
a dwelling the applicant shall install energy efficient lamps (light bulbs) with a luminous
e1~f icacy of 40 lumens per wait or above in at least 50 percent of the existing home's light
fixturrs.
c%' J/
K1~Lk31'~o "'S7O i~!Icncilrvc fur a~:dfLiuns end i;auo~lr~.ti 179 179 doe ~~~enda ItClll i% ~ 1'agc h U7
(e~~l Direct Vent Furu;icc_ ~1~hen the scope of the work uC~+ir aci~htiun to a ~l~~ell~n~, ur a
remodel of a dwelling requires replacement of a furnace, the furnace shall be replaced
with a direct vent unit that has a minimum 90 percent AFUE.
~li_~_I~irect Vent 13~~i(er. When the scope of~the~rk_of~an ~idclition tc~ a d~~-clliitg_or a
remodel a dwelling t-c:quirc~ replaccn~en~f a bc~ilcr, the hcrilcr shrill h~ rc:pllced_with a
direct vct~unit that}gas a~nimurn 8S nereer t h1JI?.
Construction Waste Recycling. An applicant for a building permit for a new dwelling or
an addition to a dwelling shall demonstrate that a minimum of 50 percent of construction
waste is recycled. Waste diversion calculations and tracking spreadsheet form must be
provided at project completion which shows that the minimum recycling requirements
have been met. No person shall fail to complete the diversion calculations and tracking
spreadsheet or recycle construction waste as required by this section.
(g) Demolition Management. M applicant proposing to demolish the dwellin ._as that term.
is defined i~ction 10-_7.5-Z}"pefinitions," B.R.C. 198.1,
°~*°ri~r shall demonstrate through a deconstnrction plan that at least 65 percent of
material by weight from deconstruction of the existing structure, including concrete and
asphalt, will be diverted from the landfill. Verification of deconstruction plan compliance
must be provided prior to final inspection. No person shall fail to follow or otherwise
implement an approved decor.~str-uction plan.
Section 3. Subsection 10-7.5-4(a), f3.R.C. 1981, is amended to read:
10-7.5-4 Resource Conservation -Green Points
(a) Schedule for Green Points. Residential building per-rnit applicants are required to earn
green points according to the schedule in Table 2. Ana licat~t sin = to increa~~tj~
floor area of the, c~i.~t,r~uildin~ by more than 10 ~ercent_sL~llk~e required to_earn the
amount of ~reer~
noints_requircd fir the new_construction of a new dwelling of the same
~17e 11'.~ ~.Al~lllis' ~1~1'l'~~lil;! \V~ll}~_~U~h :'ljill~llll'._ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'1'ARI.1~ 2 _ Urccn Points. hequiremcnls
Project Description Square Footage Green Point
Thresholds Regttirementsr z
New construction of sinl;le unit dwellings 1,501-3,000 20
3,001-5,000 40
One green point is awarded for each HERS rating score below the HERS index rating
requirement.
The green point values listed in Subsections 10-7.5-4(e) and (f) only apply to those projects that
arc not required to have a Til?ItS index rating.
. I': - -~r_~..-ir, r•r a,:~li', ,i .::i i ~ -i; ~,L! I I ~.u. l~~enda I1C111 Page ~ ~J
_ - s,oo l and ~tl~ ~o_
Additions to a dwelling 500- I ,000 15
1,001- 2,000 20
2,001 - 3,000 30
3,001 and up 45
Interior remodels of a dwelling 500 - 1,000 10
1,001 - 2,000 15
2,001 - - 3,000 20
3,001 and up 30
Multi-unit: Dwellings:' final tenant finish 1,001 - 2,000 10
of a unit in a multi=unit dwelling
2,001 - 3,00() 20
3,001 and up 30
ticction 4. Section 10-7.5-7, B.R.C. 1981, is amended by a new deCurition and changes to
otter definitions, to read:
"Addition" An extension or increase in floor area of a building or structure of 500 sq. ft. or
greater.
"1)crt~cZ~iti~" Ur "~enu~li~h"~reans ati apt or process wl~l rear it oves.~~o~tn_ox~ t e
f~IlQwit ~ The~dea ~_il_lustrates the maximum arnc~un.Lt~t m ese?n ve with~u~
rc~nstittttin~~ demolition.
Duch dwelling in a multi-unit dwelling shall be required to meet the green point requirements
~cparatcly.
IK`,PI.I31\o 7570 Altcmativc lot addiliotts and rcmorcls 179 1"19 doe. A,f;Cild3 ItC[Tl # / ~ 1'agC ~
(a) 1~ i_f~t~•_p~rcent ur n+~.+rc +~I~ tltc roof aru+ a~ mea~urrd _u+_plan view sec dia~ram~,
~
~
Fifty
ncrcer~l~ ttiores?f_tl~e_exterior walls of_a I~
+u•Iding as me~surocLc~.ti.~;uc~u~l~ ~ r and
t~e_"buildi.n~ covct~a~c" as defined its th~_seclion see dia~;~~ll>~_~or
A w111
~fis1~1_J~tc~t tlic ii+Iluw__ii~g_tt~ini+»tim st~incla+:ds to be cc~n5i_4lerccl a rc;tai+~.~d ext~ri~r
walla
(_I j_ '('hc wall shall rctaittstuds c~r_
other_st+l+cttiral eleii~etals, the cxtcrit~~_w111 finish.
atul th~_l'ully_fran~ed ~tnd sheathes roof above that~articm of-the remainin .
l~uildin~tc~ which such wall is attached;
(2) I~he wall_shnll nUt.he covered ~r otherwi_se conceal~tl_~y_1 wall chat is proposed tp
i~c j,l,~r~;1 ii: ?~r~"~' ~~t~,l r:-_'.~i~~~_~d dl._n,l
( j I•;ach part c+f the rrtainrd extcri~~r wal_l_ti shall. be cut~pc_cied c<~nti~uo+tsly_and
withc~ut_ interruhticm to every_~the?-~~art_of the retained eate~c~r walla
"Reu~odel" means an interior reconfiguration or upgrade of an existing structure of 500 sq.ft. or
greater and the work required to complete the reconfiguration or upgrade requires a building
permit.
Section This ordiuanec shall be effective at ] 2:01 a.m. on March 2000. It shall be
ahplicd to building pcn+iit applications subni?ttcd after the ci~f~cctive date. Building pc+7nits
K`PLi~Io-~S~Q ~~ltcrn.a~ _ ,nr a~i~liii~~n~. atui t.nua1 I I I,'~ ~l~.r .~~~enCl;l Itt',111 i? l~itt_`C
applied for before the effective dale shall be considered under the program in effect ill the tune of
application.
Section 6. Phis ordinance i5 necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 7. The city council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title
only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for
public inspection and acquisition.
INTRUI)UCED, READ ON hIRS`l' I~;AD[NCI, AND ORDERI~D PUI3LISHLD B~Y
TITLE: ONLY this _ day of _ 2008.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director ~f Finance and Record
}ZIiAD ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED
Pt:I3LISHt;D 131' T1TT,1~, O\Ll' this day of_ _ _ 2008.
Mayor
,~ttcst:
City Clcrh on h~half ~~f~the
D1reGT01" lif I~in~uicc and Record
K~\PI.RIIo 7~?U ~11~cnrWVC for aid~iihons au~l rcrn~xl~l; I 17'~ Inc /~L!l'nda ttCm ~ 1'alL?C i<J
attachment H
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10-5, "BUILDING
COD);," B.R.C 1981, TO ADOPT MINOR CHANGES TO THE
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE RELATEll TO THE
EXPIRATION OF PERMITS AND SETTING FOR'T'H
RELATED DETAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Section 10-5-1, "Legislative Intent," B.R.C. 1981 is amended to read:
1Q-5-1 Legislative Tntcnt.
The purpose of this chapter is to protect the public health and safety by regulating the
installation, alteration, or repair of or addition to electrical conductors or equipment installed
within or on any structure in the city. The city council hereby adopts the 2005 edition of the
National Electrical Code with certain amendments and deletions thereto found to be in the best
interests of'the residents of the city. Buildings shall beheld to t_he ssandarr.~ of tl~e code under
which it was issued.
Section_2. Anew subsection is, between subsections 10-5-2 (1) and (m)Section 10-5-2(j),
B.R.C. 1981, amending Section 106.3.2, "Previous Approvals," to read:
This code shall not require changes in the construction documents, construction or designated
occupancy of a structure far which a lawful permit has heretofore issued or otherwise lawfully
authorized, and ,and the constraints of which has been pursued in good faith within 180 days
after the effective date of this code and has not been abandoned. No ncrsoon shall tail to comply
with all of the conditions of such a building Hermit and the provisions of the building code under
which such building Hermit has been issued.
Section 3. The local amendment in Section 10-5-2(j) Section 105.3.2, "Time Limitation
oCApplication," B.R.C. 1981 is repealed and reenacted with the language for said section of the
2006 International Building Code, to read:
.(j)
=105.3.2 Time limitation of application. ^ ~ ~ ^ r:~ ~ ^ ~r^~^°°a •
~t t,° ,1°~,,,°a t,
~T~}3e-per-m-i ~~^:^1 ; ,,.T,^-:,°a
w, ° +1,.,,, f„ of°„~;^r^ ° ^aa;+; .,}..~se~s--rtet~xsee,a;
^lcr:-ii v~ict°.iisimi~i •,il 1° r°~'csc°'S•t~~,d-_n_'Tr~-x-riii;.,b 1~.°~ ° ~1,., .,t:.,,, .a.,r., .,.a ~+:~.,l.To
e-:ruse-t~emeT3si+ate~-:An_ar~nl_i_cation for a Uermit fir anvl~ro_t~~seci_~vcirk shall be deemed
K:\p:o;`o-ar,.er,d 10-> ibc:uaccd.n:nts 179.doc
Agenda Iten? ~ Page ~
to have becn abandonecl_one hundred
ei~h-ty days after the datc of tiline. unless stlcl~
application has been_pursued in food faith or a Hermit has been issued except that t 1c
building off eial is authorized to grant one or mare cxtensi_~nsof time for additional
~cl•iods not exccedine ninety days each. The extension shall e r_e4uested in w_r__itin_ g and
'ustifiable cause demonstra ed.
Section 4. Section 10-5-2(k) Section 105.5, "Expiration," B.R.C. 1981 is repealed and
reenacted with the language for said section in-the 2006 International Building Code, to read:
(k) -Section 105.5 Expiration. ;;may hc~ ~ °a ;Ia;„n > ~a°r +k°
eft:la~ede-s#al~l~-x~i~e-b~-Ilrr}itzit~on-~^a~ol-ne-x~~l-arid-void-i-f-tl~c~-ba~ldfng-er
war-k
• >
E~E~i~w,•~cr~-ri
n•~rn~h~-azEscr-iSS~laiT6Ei6h-t~iE~G~-a-EIE
_ „I; ..I,,,It ~ ~ „r .,cx~ii-applic-ai~et3-the
r b -iai3e~e-to-tlie-cede-i~3~f€c-e~t-at-tl~ie-tia3e-tku
rlc-tl3at pig-d-~n-tl3e
~~ri.~zv'c'~ p~.i-rrirt-ciza~vv17~71=JI~~ •'•-I nn~° :F+1..~. ..*:n ~n Anil
vr~.u uu iiivec
f
E6~31L't2~ ~~~f~~$-~el:
Yr1i°c-~iuci-c°ci'i~izc°c~.~i=r'Rin7°c-"~ai'cI=rzzisi
1-ia~a + ~ Everv permit issued shall become invalid unle s the work
on the site authorized by such Hermit is commenced within 180 days after its issuance or if
t}~e work authorized on the site by such Hermit is suspended or abandoned foI- a period of 180
cia er the time the work is commenced. The builc(in~ o~~c1a1 is authorized to grant in
writi i . one or more extensi_Qns of-time fo~eriods not m~re_than 1$0 days each. The
~xte_ nsion shall be rcauested i writing and iustifiable cause demo~.~ ated Everv Hermit
issued by the buildinzl official under the provision of this c de shall expire by limitation and
become null and void if the buildine or work authorized by such pennit is not completed and
ap roved for occupancy within three years from the date~be permit was issued The permit
fce for renewals may be prorated ased on the amount of work completed and approved
under the previous -permit..
Klpibi\n-amend IQ-~ ibc a:rcidments-179.doc l~geIlda 1tC111 Page Ci'~
Section 5. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 6. The council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title only
and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for public
inspection and acquisition.
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this _ day of , 2008
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance aiui Record
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this of , 2008.
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance azld Record
K:`;olbi\o-amcr.d 10-5 icc zr.:en~me~:s-I"19 dog Agenda Itelil l~a~C ~
Attachment I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 10-b,
"ELECTRICAL CODE," B.R.C. 1981 BY ADOPTINU BY
REFERENCE THE 2008 EDI"PION OF THE NATIONAL
ELECTRIC CODE WITH MODIFICATIONS, AND SETTING
FORTH RELATED DETAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOIJLDER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Section 10-6-2, "Adoption of the National Electrical Code with
Modifications," B.R.C. 1981 is amended as follows:
a) The 289-2008 edition of the National Electrical Code of the National Fire Protection
Association is hereby adopted by reference as the City of Boulder Electrical Code or electrical
code and has the same force and effect as though fully set forth in this chapter, except as
specifically amended by the provisions of this chapter.
(1) The first sentence of section 334.10(2) is amended to read:
(2) Multifamily dwellings permitted to be of tTypes II,-III, IV and V construction except
as prohibited in 334.12.
(m) The first sentence of section 334.10(3) is amended to read:
(3) Other structures permitted to be of Types TT>?~ TT7>?~ T~7I? n.,,l vrz TIT. IV, and V
construction excea?t as brohibited in 334.12..
(p) Subsection 518-4(B), concerning Non-rated Construction, is repealed and reenacted to read:
7~, ni-orl n+« ..f;., TAT.. i ,-.,°x,.11:,. nL, utYt~cE2~1~P.,--Ti-`y'1"'TV-rr.Q'••nlc~lv~-f'~8'C-~cr~r^ccsz-zzv"rr-
°4nlli^ +„1~;,,~ „ri ,-,.,:.a „ ofnll:., „ ,-,.a,.~
i1LV LLLFT , n ^ juCi
JLiV LLV11
r°^'~^^ ' n«` In addition to the wiring methods of 518.4(A~norunetallic-sheathed
cable~Type AC cable, clech-ical nomnetallic tubing. and 1-i~id nonmetallic conduit shall
K:\plbi\0- amend 10-6-electrical code-179.doc
Agenda Item # Page ~
~uermitted to be installed in those buildinl7s or poI•tions thereof that are not required to
be of fire-rated construction by the applicable building
code.
Section 2. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of
the residents of the city, and covers matters of local concern.
Section 3. The council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title only
and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the ofFice of the city clerk for public
inspection and acquisition.
INTRODUCED, READ UN FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this _ day of , 2008
Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED, ADOPTED, AND ORDERED
PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this of , 2008.
Mayor
Attest: 1
City Clerk on behalf of the
Director of Finance and Record
K:\plbi\0-amend IO-6-electrical code-[79.doc Agenda Item # Page J ~