The Archuleta County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) will consider the adoption of multiple building codes at its upcoming meeting scheduled for Tuesday, March 17, at 1:30 p.m. in the commissioners’ meeting room at 398 Lewis St.
During a work session held by the BoCC on March 10, Building Official Randy Betts briefed the BoCC on those codes and what they mean for the community.
Betts explained that the county is currently operating on 2015 international building codes, and that the state is mandating jurisdictions to adopt updated codes this year. That includes an international energy conservation code and the 2025 Colorado Wildfire Resiliency Code (CWRC) for new buildings in high-risk wildland-urban interface (WUI) areas.
“They’ve also stated that we have to be within three code cycles of current code,” Betts said, explaining that the county is currently compliant being on 2015 codes, but new 2027 codes will be released sometime this July or August.
“Once that happens we will no longer be compliant,” he said.
Betts explained that he is proposing to adopt 2024 codes, noting that the 2024 energy code will provide more options for the community.
He indicated that he is proposing a total of 12 codes to be adopted “that will make us compliant for at least the next two code cycles” and the county won’t even need to “start considering” this again until 2030.
Betts explained that he has been working in collaboration with other jurisdictions across the state that have already adopted new codes to figure out the “do’s and don’ts.”
Betts mentioned that the idea behind the CWRC is to reduce risk to people and properties located in WUI areas.
“This code must be adopted by April 1 this year,” he said, explaining that enforcement of the code will begin July 1.
Betts then explained that the CWRC defines three zones of “defensible space” surrounding structures, which are zero to 5 feet from a structure, 5 to 30 feet from a structure and then 30 to 100 feet from a structure.
He noted that the first zone will be required to be a “zero-scaped” area with no vegetation, except for certain species approved by the Forest Service.
The second zone will require “social distancing,” with trees and other vegetation required to be certain distances from each other.
Betts explained the third zone addresses bigger trees, and that the idea behind structural hardening requirements is to prevent the spread of fire from one home to another.
“Fences will be added into this,” he said. “Now that is gonna be monitored as well.”
Betts went on to explain that the county’s Building and Planning departments will still be conducting site plan reviews, but looking for different criteria with the new codes.
He also explained that the state is allowing building officials “to make judgment calls,” mentioning how trimming and removing too many of certain species, such as aspen trees, in one area may cause more environmental harm.
Once the CWRC is adopted by the county, Betts explained he will be responsible for interpreting and enforcing structural hardening as part of the building permit and review process.
He also mentioned that his department is incorporating new inspections into their current roles, indicating that he is not requesting any additional staff at this time.
He noted that the county will start performing inspections required for fencing, siding and roofing.
Betts explained that along with a certificate of occupancy and the energy certification that builders currently receive, a new CWRC certificate will also now need to be issued.
He also mentioned that the new code will not apply to additions on structures that are smaller than a 500-square-foot expansion, or to exterior remodels that are less than 25 percent of the total structure.
Projects that expand an existing building more than 500 square feet or replace 25 percent of the existing siding or roofing will need to have a new permit pulled, he explained.
Betts also clarified that interior projects will not be affected by the new code.
Routine maintenance on structure, like exterior paint, will not need a new permit, Betts added.
Betts also provided information on how parcels are classified, noting that the state provides a geographic information systems map that shows whether a parcel is in a class 1, 2 or 3 risk area, noting that the majority of the county falls in the class 2 and 3 categories.
He explained that Class 1 requirements deal with specific gutter, downspouts and venting designs, and that Class 2 consists of all the class 1 requirements, “and then basically the entire rest of the exterior of the structure.”
Betts then explained what these new code requirements might mean in terms of costs for builders and buyers in the community, noting that the “worst-case scenario” he expects is a 20 percent increase on the price per square foot of a home.
“I believe that’s a lot on the high side,” he said, indicating that he expects an increase closer to 5 to 10 percent for average homes.
He mentioned that “modest homes” could see an increase of $70 to $90 per square foot, while higher-end, custom homes may see an increase of $120 or more per square foot.
In response to a question from Commissioner Veronica Medina, Betts explained that the state is mandating the CWRC code and energy code to be adopted by jurisdictions.
He mentioned that a “carbon-neutral” mandate will be coming down from the state, as well, which would require jurisdictions to go all electric, but that if the county adopts the 2024 energy code, it will not have to adopt the carbon-neutral code at this time.
“So, it’s going to force us to eliminate any gas,” Betts said of the carbon-neutral code, explaining that would mean new builds would have to be fully electric.
“I don’t think that’s a good option,” he added.
In response to a question from Commissioner Warren Brown, Betts clarified that if the county does not adopt the 2024 energy code by April 1, which provides more options than just electric, then the carbon-neutral mandate will force the county to be 100 percent electric.
Betts also responded to another question from Medina, indicating that he has spoken with suppliers that provide products for the local community and has been assured that large amounts of compliant materials are available for builders.
“Everybody’s being very proactive,” he said.
Commissioner John Ranson asked if the adoption of the new codes might help with insurance issues that county residents have started to experience.
Betts noted that he can’t speak for the insurance companies, but indicated that by the county adopting newer codes, and the CWRC, it will help with the “insurability of our residents.”
Ranson commented that the potential of being forced to go all electric is “one of the worst things” he’s ever seen, noting that would affect the already-existing issue of affordability in the community.
Betts commented that other communities around the country have already been forced to go to an all-electric code, cautioning what that could mean when natural disasters happen and electricity is shut off for whatever reason.
“That’s a horrible, horrible idea,” Betts said in regard to going to an all-electric code.
In response to another question from Ranson, Betts explained that the “cut off” on getting permits under the existing code will be at the end of business day on June 30.
He explained that if a permit is issued before then, the structure can be built to the previous code’s standards.
Betts also spoke about how the new codes may affect his department’s ability to be able to perform inspections within 24 hours of plans being submitted.
“It’s creating more inspections,” he said, noting that he is not at this time planning to propose increasing any fees.
Brown provided some additional comments at the end of Betts’ presentation, expressing frustration with the state forcing mandates on rural Colorado.
Brown mentioned that it seems to always be the rural part of the state that is trying to explain “that we’re different.”
“I’m just so sick of the government making sure that they can shut our power on and off no matter what we’re doing if we don’t comply that I just can’t stand it. And while I’m certainly in support of safety and the health issues that come along, this is far too much. It will and already has cost us,” Brown said.
Betts commented that he agrees “wholeheartedly” with Brown, and that he is doing all he can to mitigate the rising cost on the community.
Betts also explained that if the county simply says no to these mandates, then it will likely be at risk of losing other funding sources.
PFPD adopts CWRC
During its regular meeting held on Tuesday, March 3, the Pagosa Fire Protection District (PFPD) Board of Directors unanimously adopted Resolution 2026-02, adopting the Wildfire Resiliency Code.
clayton@pagosasun.com
>