HomeMy WebLinkAboutAir Quality Advisory Board - Minutes - 03/24/2008171
E
AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
DATE: Monday, March 24, 2008
LOCATION: 200 West Mountain — Suite A — Conference room.
TIME: 5:30 -8:00 P.M.
Dinner is served starting at 5:15
For Reference: Eric Levine, Chair - 493-6341
David Roy, Council Liaison - 407-7393
Brian Woodruff, Staff Liaison - 221-6604
Board Members Present: Eric Levine, Nancy York, Dale Adamy, Katrina Winbom, David
Dietrich, Kip Carrico, and Greg McMaster
Also present — Council liaison David Roy
Staff Present: Brian Woodruff, Alexis Hmielak
Guests:
None
Opportunity for Public Comment
None
Eric Levine called the meeting to order at 5:37
Approve February 26, 2008 minutes
• Dale Adamy's name should be substituted for Alan Apt on Page 1 motion to
approve January minutes.
• Eric Levine asked that, on Page 3, "before March" be deleted in the bullet with
his statement..."failure to report the chemicals you are emitting..."
• Katrina Winbom asked that on Page 3, "oil and gas companies" be removed and
"the state" be inserted to read,"The state is proposing to lower the thresholds for
reporting and permitting."
Dale Adamy moved and Nancy York seconded a motion to approve the February 26, 2008
minutes with the above changes.
Motion approved unanimously
Building Code revisions
Felix Lee, Director of Neighborhood and Building Services introduced Russ Hovland,
Plans Analyst, Building Code Administration Division, who was present tonight to make
a presentation to the AQAB regarding the proposed amendments to the new International
Commercial Building code, including radon -resistant new construction requirements for
multi -family buildings.
As background, Russ Hovland explained the purpose of the IBC is so builders and
architects across the country in multiple jurisdictions only need to learn one body of
codes. The new 2006 International Building Code ('06 IBC) will be going to City
Council for adoption. First reading of the ordinance takes place on Tuesday May 6, 2008.
It will replace the current 1997 Uniform Building Code adopted in 1998.
• The IBC is the latest nationally recognized standard and the most heavily adopted
building code in the nation. It establishes minimum requirements for construction
of everything except single-family houses, duplexes and single family attached
dwellings.
o In response to a question from Nancy York, Russ stated the current,
adopted 2003 International Residential Code (IRC) is the code for single-
family residences. It will remain in place for remainder of the year will
probably be updated with the 2009 code.
• Regarding the frequency of building code updates, Russ said that in his
experience the City updates about every six years. Generally, the model codes
update every 3 years. However, because adopting a code takes a lot of work, most
jurisdictions skip a cycle or two. In the case of Fort Collins, it has skipped two to
three cycles.
• A local committee composed of architects, builders, a Larimer County Building
Department employee, several firefighters from Poudre Fire Authority and City
staff was convened in 2006 to review, amend and move to adopt the new building
code. Initially, the committee agreed to amend the 1997 IBC as little as possible
for consistency across jurisdictions.
o Russ explained that the committee compared the sixty local amendments
they were proposing to the 1997 UBC to the `06 IBC and saw that half of
their recommended amendments regarding safety and other issues were
already taken care of in the new code.
o The committee took the proposed amendments to a Council work session
in April 2007. Council asked the committee to do more study on the code
and radon reduction, to survey contractors and jurisdictions, to review the
2006 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) and the 2007
supplement to IBC and to do some additional public outreach.
o The administration that creates the building codes is called the
International Code Council (ICC). It is comprised of many committees
that study the codes and write a new model code every 3 years. Every year
they come out with a supplement, which contains amendments that will
appear in the next edition.
o The local committee researched the '07 supplement and saw many things
they liked which fixed the `06 amendment and which will eventually come
out in the `09 IBC. They added these revised items to the local '06 edition
by amendment, effectively making the 06 amendments similar to the '09
code that will be coming out next year.
2
0 •
o The committee also reviewed radon reduction systems and decided a
passive system should be required in new multi -family dwellings.
o the `06 International Energy Conservation Code, which is the companion
energy code with `06 IBC, was also reviewed
Change in philosophy from UBC to IBC
o The UBC had a passive approach to fire: i.e. to delay the fire in order to
evacuate the people.
o The IBC takes a more active approach: i.e. stopping the spread of fire by
using a fire suppression system (sprinklers).
■ Occupancies are better defined and exterior wall ratings are based
on use and not occupant load
■ This code gives you more area and higher buildings because it
doesn't require special construction using the fire retardant
materials and materials that are less energy intensive to produce.
• A sprinkler system is required in all multi -family buildings, tri-
plex and larger.
■ Ceiling height for egress has been increased to 7 feet 6 inches
minimum.
Guardrail height of 42" is required in all occupancies.
■ Handrails are required on both sides of stairs except dwelling units.
■ Exits are closer together and egress widths are smaller because of
sprinkler systems.
Eric Levine asked if sprayed fire-resistant materials would put toxicity into the
air. Felix Lee responded no, they would be water-soluble.
Per instruction from the AQAB, Russ Hovland skipped to the portion of the new
code that addresses radon.
o Passive radon reductions systems will be required in multi -family
dwellings using the existing radon standards for single-family dwellings
where living space is at or below grade. It will not be required if
residences are all 2"d story and above.
o Because multi -family buildings have a larger footprint than single-family
residences, two to three 3"- 4" radon riser systems may be necessary.
o Nancy York asked who determines whose responsibility it is to activate it.
Russ responded this is a complicated issue and they are still working out
the details.
o Greg McMaster questioned, in a 3,500 square foot three-plex system with
basements that have three passive radon reduction systems, if one unit
decided to install a fan, if that fan would affect the flow of radon in the
other units. Russ responded that in theory there would be enough
separation because of the full basements, however, it might not be a factor.
Russ will investigate and get back to him.
o Felix Lee pointed out there are certain requirements in the current
standards that define how much area you can serve with a single riser. It
would be looked at as one building and if it were over 4000 sq ft you'd
have to have more than one riser. Russ stated it is very common for
builders to not pay for more than one system.
The 2006Energy Code — IECC/ASHRAE 90.1 2004
o Russ stated the state of Colorado has mandated that all jurisdictions will
adopt the 2003 IECC or equivalent by July 2008. Fort Collins will comply.
o Russ pointed out that AHRAE 90.1 is the alternate energy code created by
the American Society of Heating and Mechanical Engineers, which has
more detail than the IECC. The IECC says you can use either code.
o The IECC chapter 5 — regulates commercial buildings.
o Increased Insulation values are increased from R8 to R13 in walls and
from R-18 to R-20 in the roof and window glazing will meet a U value of
.55 minimum.
■ In response to a question from Nancy York, Russ Hovland stated
the residential insulation values have also been increased in the
new code. Felix Lee stated that Fort Collins was ahead of the
energy requirements in local codes in 2004.
o In response to a question, Russ pointed out LEED [Leadership in Energy
and Environmental Design] accreditation is a different building concept
which encourages sustainability in commercial buildings. However, the
committee did not include it in the new building code because it is very
difficult to codify, very time consuming and expensive.
■ Dennis Georg stated Austin Texas has adopted LEED building
parameters in the local building code and asked what the
incremental cost to the city would be to move to LEED
requirements.
■ Eric Levine thought he had read in a previous study that some of
the LEED standards in some City buildings were paid back within
10 —18 months.
■ Russ Hovland pointed out all city buildings are required to meet
LEED requirements, however he only found a few jurisdictions in
the country that required LEED compliance as part of the building
code. Some gave financial incentives to help pay for the cost of
LEED.
■ Nancy wondered if the amount of insulation in this code compared
to LEED. Felix pointed out insulation specifications aren't really
addressed by LEED. Russ stated it is not prescriptive, but more of
a formula.
■ Russ informed the group that many buildings are using LEED
standards, but are not applying for the certification in order to save
money. Regarding commercial building in Fort Collins, using
LEED standards is completely voluntary right now.
• Back to the new building code, Russ explained it has increased the efficiencies for
walls, windows, and roofs and also increased insulation on ductwork R-6.5 to R-
8.
• Decreases for lighting allowances in watts per square foot has not been popular.
Sample for office building is 1.3 watts/sq. ft.
13
A local amendment requires foundation slab insulation as a result of a study that
showed lots of heat leaks from foundations. Requirements are: R-8 (unheated) R-
10 (heated) slabs.
Russ Hovland stated the committee unanimously approved the 2006 IBC with
amendments and the 2006 IECC as now being proposed to council. His
department has made this presentation to many Fort Collins advisory boards.
May 6 will be the first reading at City Council, with July 1 being the second
reading.
The AQAB discussed Russ' presentation and proposed new building code.
• In response to a question by Katrina Winborn, Russ stated he researched 20
different jurisdictions and discovered that many cities are offering financial
incentives for buildings to be built to LEED standards; half had a voluntary
approach to LEED and only 2 cities required LEED certification. It is difficult
to require LEED right now because of the cost. Encouraging LEED without
certification is a political issue.
• Dennis stated his research on the Internet showed lots of cities are doing just
that. Also, the emissions coming from construction and buildings as almost as
significant as from transportation. He felt the City needs to take the next step
how we build buildings and go where we need to be. It's complex but is an
opportunity for Fort Collins to move toward the LEED style of building
construction.
• Eric Levine agreed with Dennis and stated the Climate Task Force is about to
introduce 2020 and 2050 greenhouse reduction standards and any building
built now will be around to comply with those standards. The only way this
will happen is to start now to build for the future. The pay back doesn't take a
long time.
• Dennis stated the Poudre School District is getting an impressive pay back on
their new buildings. The City needs to think about the occupant and citizen
benefit to buildings, rather than the building itself and to consider LEED type
programs more aggressively.
• Russ stated they did research on LEED but are not going to require LEED
requirements. They will be looking at this in the future.
• Brian Woodruff asked about the evolution of building code standards and
what do they envision in the next 10 years. Are energy standards going to
tighten?
o Felix Lee stated it is bound to happen. They update the model code
every 3 years. Council drives it and can decide to do anything.
• Greg McMaster thought the reality is there will be more pressure to do these
things, but we'll always be behind the curve if we do the minimum. He
applauds this code is moving in the right direction, but his opinion is it is
moving too slowly.
• Eric stated he would like to see the carbon footprint of buildings and see them
under the proposed codes. If the codes are updated every 3 years, the next
review would be 2011, and we skipped a few cycles, so the new code would
be changing something that's 8 years old.
o Felix pointed out they are trying to synchronize the residential and
, multi-family/commercial codes. Their goal is every 3 years.
Eric stressed this item is potentially one of the largest impacts on climate
change that we could have. Energy efficiency is the way to go and easier than
upgrading power transmission and changing energy systems. If you look at
life cycle of building that would be a huge impact.
Dale Adamy wondered if they have goals and objectives with metrics for how
successful those codes are to achieving your goals and objectives. He would
like to see on the amendment a statement to quantify a decrease in the carbon
footprint down by X factor.
o Felix stated life safety, and to satisfy an imminent flood insurance
problem, are their primary goals and the secondary goal is energy
savings. However, they don't have any benchmark way to get that
data. One option is to stop the process and look at carbon footprint
and be progressive — then we'd have to sell Council on that.
o Dale suggested they ask Council for more than the minimum with
several options regarding reducing the carbon footprint of buildings.
o Dennis suggested to take an integrated approach, looking at the
'building code alongside other programs, and that the City needs an
integrated process to meet the City's sustainability goals for 2010. He
felt they have a good proposal, especially radon, but they also need to
take the steps to look at the city holistically regarding energy
improvements. His suggestion is a 3-step process: adopt, integrate
and re -adopt sooner than three years.
o Felix stated organizational integration is already taking place. Their
service area now includes Planning, Development and Transportation.
o Greg offered help from the AQAB and Eric pointed out that direction
from three members of City Council and city staff can start
momentum.
o Dale suggested this plan be available for review on the city website
with the ability for input from citizens. He also shared that he altered
a passive radon mitigation pipe with a turban fan and was able to
evacuate more radon. Something like this could be incorporated into
the new code as a way a citizen could increase radon reduction.
In summary, Eric Levine asked the group whether they wanted to move to approve the
new code at this meeting or in April, because it goes before Council in May. The group
agreed to email with any other questions or comments and to formally address this at the
May meeting.
Conversation with Council Liaison David Roy
At the invitation of the AQAB, David Roy attended the meeting for a conversation about
the Board's work and current issues.
Eric Levine asked David Roy to give input to the Board regarding how effective the
AQAB is and give them any advice to increase effectiveness of the board and boards
in general.
0
• David Roy commented he enjoys talking to people about things that are possible.
However, as a member of Council he is not to direct or influence the work of the
board.
As constructive input, David stated that, when the board receives a presentation like
the one tonight from Felix Lee and Russ Hovland, it is not the presenter's job to
create policy and take that policy to Council. Rather, staff does what the Council
asks. Therefore, members of the boards as citizens or board members are more
effective to discuss policy changes directly with Council members. It takes three
Council members to bring a possibility and four to make it real.
o Eric thanked David for his input and explained the board has been
frustrated how to be more effective when there is a short the timeline prior
to adoption, that only allows the board to make a recommendation but
does not provide enough time for them to interface with the process and
offer input and alternatives.
o Dennis asked David to help the board understand the policy Council has in
mind when a presentation, such as the one tonight, comes before a board
for recommendation, and where that policy direction is articulated so the
board could have gotten involved earlier.
David suggestLd if the AQAB has ideas about policy it makes sense to tell Council
members at a work session so they can interact. In work sessions he is looking for
ideas.
o Regarding tonight's presentation, Dennis asked where did the policy or
tactical goals given to the Building Department for this project start.
• David Roy stated it was a staff initiative to alert the Council that it
was time to update the codes. Felix and his group are charged to
keep the City current with building codes but tweaking needs to
come from Council not from staff. However, in terms of LEED
certification requirements or policy, that type of issue can easily be
introduced as ideas and if four council members buy into the idea,
they can make it real.
o Dennis asked for clarification where the staff should take an initiative and
where Council takes initiative on policy. He also thought it might be wise
to employ the best of all staff and to suggest dialogue and provide
technical leadership.
• David explained that as government, unfortunately, this is not
entirely a free market situation. Felix does a great job. His key job
is compliance and his responsibility is safety of citizens regarding
to buildings.
Greg McMaster stated the AQAB has been frustrated with the timeliness of things
they could have reviewed and advised Council about. Eric elaborated that he was also
interested in determining how the board could have prior notice on issues so there is
time for the AQAB to weigh in on them. That way Council would have time to
consider their input and recommendations early, rather than have to take an item off
the agenda and give staff direction late in the process.
o David pointed out that any ideas that are presented at first reading are
more difficult politically than those presented at a work session. Perhaps
reviewing the six-month calendar would be helpful to the Board to weigh
iq early on an item.
o Eric stated that with regard to a department making presentations to
several boards, he has tried to make the discussion and recommendations
of one board available as an input to the next board. So if we could
present that to Council, then Council would have enough time to do its
work.
o Nancy York thanked Felix for coming to the AQAB, because there have
been other issues that the AQAB was not included in.
o Eric voiced his opinion that he would like to meet with other board and
commission chairs to discuss issues. Brian stated that certain board chairs
have met informally and irregularly in the past. If regular inter -board
meetings are needed, that probably needs to be formalized as a policy.
• Nancy stated board and commission chairs coming together and
suggesting procedure is a valuable citizen resource that should be
utilized.
o Eric also referred to a list he had made where the AQAB had been out of
the loop for local issues such as hookah bars, RTA, uranium mining,
ozone, green building and dial -a -ride. Nancy York also pointed out
locating shopping centers on interstate is air quality issue.
• David Roy pointed out if something comes to Council he has no
way of knowing if AQAB saw it.
o David stated that any citizen, whether or not on a board, could contact
council 24n. If the AQAB writes a memo or white paper on an issue, that
paper has a lot of competition for the Council's attention. He encouraged
them to call, come to meetings, write letters to editors or soapboxes, etc.
If someone is driven to have the conversation with City Council there are
many ways to engage that conversation — it is a simple thing to do. The
single most important aspect is to have citizens contact him. Then it's
real. David stated the Council appreciates work from the deeply
committed citizens on the boards and commissions.
o Dennis asked how recommendations to Council could be distinguished
from the other packet materials. Greg stated the AQAB was concerned
that when they send a recommendation to Council, it gets lost.
• David reiterated that sending an email and showing up at council is
better than a sheet of paper in the Council packet.
• Eric stated he understood the system, but thought it's a city process
that needs to be revamped. For example the original Climate Task
Force submitted a year and a half s worth of work to Council that
seemed to get buried.
• Greg suggested the recommendations be separated from the stack
so the Council knows they are important. Eric agreed that
recommendations need to be separated and prioritized.
o David pointed out other boards have voiced similar
frustration, but asked the AQAB to trust what they're doing
will be a seed for fruit. There were a few years when the
boards and commissions weren't as important as they are
now on purpose, but that has now changed.
• As an answer to a question from Greg McMaster, David Roy stated
it would also be helpful for a member of the AQAB to publicly
address the Council and read the recommendations during the
public comment period at Council meetings. Eric felt the 3
minute comment period wasn't enough time to discuss the
recommendations and suggested the board and commission
members be part of the staff presentation to council so they are
granted more time than the public to present their information with
staff present at the table.
• Dennis suggested the boards and commissions join with staff to
make presentations in a public forum that would effectively raise
the importance of the board's recommendation to the Council.
David agreed this could work and that the board needs to talk to
three other council members for their agreement to change this
procedure and frustration level.
• Greg asked David Roy if the Air Quality Advisory Board should move their meeting
date from Tue§day night, when Council meets, so David could be available for some
AQAB meetings and the AQAB would be available to present to Council.
• David stated the board is free to do as it chooses on that, however he reiterated that
personal narrative at the Council meetings is more powerful for him. He also
reminded the group that he does value the AQAB's list of goals.
• Nancy York mentioned the AQAB is up for periodic review. In the AQAB charter it
says they are to work with Transportation and Planning and Zoning boards. However,
it is not in their charters to work with the AQAB. She stated the AQAB reached out
previously but the other boards weren't interested in this arrangement.
• David suggested one way to change that is to come and talk to Council for 3 minutes.
• Greg asked why does Council review the boards, and were there any specific things
they are concerned about. He also asked if, in the review process, it would be
appropriate for the AQAB to bring up some of the issues discussed tonight.
o David replied that the review process is done every 6 years to evaluate
whether any boards and commissions are no longer useful.
o The review process is informal and Council members ask questions to
allow the board to continue sharing its story. David does not like why the
review process was started, but it's not a bad thing.
• Katrina asked if the review process could help to correct the AQAB charter. Eric felt
it could.
• Dennis asked how could the boards be more efficient from a Council perspective.
o David's personal opinion is that giving vitality and voice is important. He
pointed out the AQAB is an advisory board. The Council works with difficult
issues and finds their advice helpful.
o In that light, Dennis wondered if the AQAB has been too timid about its
recommendations
• Greg asked David if he had any thoughts on how AQAB is perceived by Council that
would be helpful.
o David responded the board might be perceived a little anonymous and soft.
(81 on a scale of 100).
o David reminded the board he and other Council members are easy to
communicate with— call or email him at Droy@afceov.com. If a Council
member gets an email, it is easier to reply. A paper communication is passive.
o David congratulated the AQAB for doing valuable work
• Greg stated another frustrating issue is when to put recommendations on more than
one page.
o David responded, "when it's appropriate", however he liked Eric's idea for a
reading from boards and commissions with staff. If it takes 2 pages, go for it.
Contact a council member personally.
o David also stated the AQAB is an important board and many issues such as
highway interchange have air quality issues.
• Dennis asked where air quality falls in importance to City Council.
o David stated a majority of Council member's interests align with
sustainability and air quality. However, sustainability is easier to support. Air
quality is a little more complicated, but it is a core issue. It could be moved
further up.
o David complimented the AQAB on the comments made tonight with Felix
Lee such as... "anything we don't do today is expensive, and everything we
can do today and afford takes political will."
In summary, David Roy stated every Council member appreciates the time spent and
work done by boards and commissions. Citizens being involved in the process is
important, even if that is not clear to them. It does make a difference. Share letters.
Email him at Drovgfc og v.com. Thanks for the opportunity to take the time for this
dialogue.
Mobility Management
o Staff apologized that the recommendation before the board inadvertently omitted
substantial revisions by the Mobility Management Committee. Chair Dave
Dietrich suggested the recommendation be resent and discussed at the April
meeting.
Greg McMaster moved and Nancy York seconded a motion to
The meeting was adjourned at 8:22
Submitted by Alexis Hmielak
Administrative Secretary I
/ Approved by the Board on � , 2008
Signed ?
' Date
Administrative Secretary I Extension: 6600
10