My New Blog

‘BuildSmart,’ Boulder County’s green building codes adopted last year that apply to new construction and expansions/remodels are acknowledged as the most restrictive in the country. Now, county officials are asking the public to comment on how they are working; or not. BuildSmart regulations focus on 1) deconstruction—salvaging and recycling material from existing building that are demolished; 2) energy conservation—new houses of different sizes must meet energy use reductions based on the Home Energy Rating Scale (HERS); 1000SF/HERS of 85, 1001-3000SF/HERS of 60, 3001-4000/HERS of 40, 4001-5000SF/HERSo of 25, 5001 or larger/HERS of 10; 3) outdoor energy use—regulates energy use of pools, spas, ice melt systems, patio heaters, etc.; 4) water conservation—requires use of low flow toilets, and that showers and faucets must have a 2 gallon per minute flow or less. Part of the county review will consider changes to passive solar design rules and whether to reconsider how basement space is counted. For more information and to view the regulations go to www.bouldercounty.org/lu/buildsmart. Comments on BuildSmart regulations should be sent to Doug Parker, at dgparker@bouldercounty.org or at 303.441.3930.

I never spoke to anyone who designed and built a home in the County that wasn't driven to the edge of going "Postal" on the whole department by the time they were finished (if they even were allowed to build).  The process is confusing, costly, inconsistent, arbitrary and frustrating.  It will cost you between $50,00 and $250,000 extra dollars because of these programs.

The City’s consultants held an open house to unveil recommendations regarding proposed regulations designed to address ‘neighborhood incompatibility,’ which was defined as new construction or additions that are larger than neighboring homes, impacting the privacy of adjacent lots or creates a loss of mature trees or vegetation. The consultants suggest a strategy that would 1) “Adjust floor area ratio (FAR) to fit different zoning districts and lot size categories; 2) Articulate building mass to reduce perceived scale, using limits on the length and height of side walls at the minimum set-back and 3) Increase protection for rear yard open space with a maximum building coverage or minimum rear yard open space percentage. Importantly, the strategies came with a strong warning that they all must be employed as recommended to successfully address the compatibility issue. It will be difficult for many Council Members to resist changing portions of the strategies since they are consistently delving into minute regulatory details.

SYNOPSIS:  Less home, more money, longer time frame, more BS at the building department.

The Compatible Development project is in the process of completing the second step, "Develop a Strategy." Winter and Company used the information collected from a community survey and neighborhood meetings to craft strategies to address community concerns. The strategy report was presented to the community on Jan. 12. The strategy is being refined incorporating feedback collected at community-wide workshops held on Jan. 14 and 15. A Study Session packet will be released on Feb. 13 and will include the revised strategy recommendation based on community feedback and staff and consultant team review.

SYNOPISIS: Not in my back yard!

I don't know what to say about all of this other than it will again increase the cost and agitatiion of building in Boulder.  I suppose it is good to implement regulations against uncontrolled design and building in neighborhoods like the Newlands, Uni Hill or Table Mesa but don't confuse the "Consultants" recommendations with what the City will implement.  The City is simply looking for someone else to do the dirty work and they hired a consultant who drafted a survey which was mailed to targeted groups with pointed questioning e.g. "Do you think it is bad to tear down a home, cut down mature trees, build a new home on the lot that encroaches its neighbors privacy and blocks their view".  We all know the answer before it is mailed out. 

I don't know about you but, "Neighborhood Character" means different things to different people.  Some like the new architecture and homes replacing the dilapidated homes built in the early and mid 1900's.  Imagine all the energy savings created by rebuilding these old homes (watch out here comes the Historical Society demanding you keep those old single pane windows).   

Many people like the little old grandmother homes down town.  I think they are cute and quaint as well.  But is neighborhood character about the homes and architecture or the people who liver there?  A family certainly cannot comfortably live in a 2 bedroom, 1 bath, 1000 square foot home.  So our neighborhoods drive families out to the suburbs creating more traffic and more pollution.  Just look at Denver.  Plenty of evidence that these small home neighborhoods attract Yuppies and singles without children.  That is fine but is that what they mean when they talk about "preserving neighborhood character"?

CITY TO FOCUS ON FOUR GOALS THROUGH 2009

The Boulder City Council gathered with staff and interested citizens January 23and 24 to determine a narrow set of 2009 goals. At the end of the exercise four goals were selected and prioritized.

1) Move forward to make progress on the city’s Climate Action Plan (CAP). The CAP are a set of actions designed to lower the community green house gas emissions that are funded with a fee imposed on energy bills.  

Just in case your energy bills are not high enough!

2)   A Blue Ribbon Commission was appointed to conduct a comprehensive review of city revenue and expenditures and to recommend strategies.

Their primary proposals for stabilizing revenue based upon recommendations from their "Blue Ribbon Commission" is to increase taxes and fees.  I don't find this surprising since the Commission and planning departments earn their living from these tax dollars.

3) Implement ‘social sustainability’ measures. It is not clear how this is accomplished and some action’s cause and effect are a bit fuzzy.

What is "social sustainability"?  It sounds like a creative word for "social engineering".  I am happy for this because if government doesn't tell us how to live then we wouldn't know what to do.

And, 4) Address several planning issues including density/mixed-use development, compatible development in neighborhoods and building height. Council members began the process of defining programs and actions need to accomplish these four goals on Tuesday, January 27.

Finally they found something that city governments are supposed to do.  Not that the others are not important but they demonstrate where City Councils head is when it comes to priorities. 

What is amazing in Boulder is that everyone you talk to despises our City Council yet they vote them into office term after term.  We don't know how they make it to meetings because it would require them leaving their fantasy land bubble to go out into the real world.  What is most concerning is the hypocrisy amongst the bunch as they feel the irrepressible urge to tell us how to live yet when you examine their life style and home sizes it is evident they don't practice what they preach. 

Someone please tell me how Crystal Gray is about to become the mayor when just 18 months ago she was fired from Adams County Parks and Rec because the 9 News followed her and found she spent most of her day shopping and getting her hair dressed while collecting a pay check from Adams County?   Oh, I remember.  That is the way all government works. 

    Where do I begin my rant?  Boulder County is at least reviewing their "Build Smart" program to see what works and what doesn't.  Forget the politics and spin - the answer is simple!  The program costs YOU tens of thousands of dollars and massive headaches.  Don't let the commissioners tell you how it is working, go ask those who have been through it.  I know of several homeowner's designing their projects who have been subjected to as much as $40,000 in additional "consultant" expenses to get their plans right and the process has added as much as $300,000 of expense to homes larger than 5000 square feet.  
    I know that is an extreme case but let us look at the owner of a 1970's home (we know how poorly these are built in the first place) who wants a new basement finish permit.  Guess what? The county wants them to upgrade the whole home to meet today's standards.  This is great for the environmentalits but it will cost the homeowner exta thousands of dollars to replace windows and add solar.  You can guess what the owner did - finished the basement without a permit!  
    Anytime government regulations create an excessive financial burden (Look to the tax burdens of our European neighbors) it creates a black market.  In this case people look for work arounds such as no building permit.  I don't advocate this course of action but I don't blame them either.  
    Another crazy thing.  If we are working to improve our "Green" footprint then why don't we encourage remodeling or rebuilding older homes?  Have you ever been in a 1950's to 1970's home?  You might as well leave the windows and doors open.  Wouldn't it make more sense to encorage the remodel of these homes with reasonable requirements that don't cost prohibit the work?  I think any improvement would be a net gain even if it isn't creating a Net-Zero Energy use home. 

 INTEREST RATES: 

Long term rates rose this week, mortgages up to 5.25% even with a 1% origination fee. Refinance demand, fear of massive sales of Treasury bonds ahead, and a new banking freeze combined to do the damage.
     Refinance demand is big, but not comparable to 2003. Yes, the industry is 75% smaller, but this time only the very best applicants have access to good rates. Treasury cash-raising may be a problem, but spreads to mortgages are still very wide, near the 2008 record 3.00%, and the Fed will begin buy Treasurys shortly.
     I think the central cause of the mortgage rate rise is the new deterioration among banks. Rates rose simultaneous with news late last week that Citi and BofA are toast. By late fall, banks looked as frozen as frozen can be, but never underestimate the ability of frightened bankers to find new ways not to lend money. 

BANKING AND FINANCE:

  Sometime between now and Valentine’s Day, in a Treasury conference room Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Sheila Bair (FDIC), Christina Romer (Council of Economic Advisors), Peter Orslag (OMB), Perfesser Bernanke, and Paul Volcker will decide how -- not if -- to “go nuclear.”
     For the youth set, in the Cold War going nuclear (Prior Occupant: “newkewler”) was your last resort if you lost the conventional-weapon preliminaries. We had lost the conventional part of this financial combat even before Lehman’s collapse in September.
    Tim Geithner to Congress this week: “In a crisis of this magnitude, the most prudent course is the most forceful course.” He made clear his frustration with the incremental and ad hoc measures taken last year.
    The go-nuclear choice of weapons will have only academic and theoretical basis. Nearly everyone in the group will have a different preference, yet all will have to agree, then take the deal to Mr. Obama who will probe and test the preparation, and then take the deal to a TARP-burned Congress.
     No one will ever know if it was the best or even right choice -- nothing will matter except that it works.

    Events have overtaken the time for extraction of bad assets. Old bad ones? The ones we just found? Assets okay now but certain to go bad by the 4th of July? Or by Christmas? I think we’re going to nationalize (might not use the word) some to several banks, and the test of nuclear success will be to get credit flowing immediately. 

THE ECONOMY:

     The economy is in free-fall, headed for one-million-per-week layoffs. Bank stocks have lost half their remaining value since January 2. Real estate has entered a new level of weakness, commercial and residential: home construction is on the lowest track ever measured; two months of 5.00% mortgages failed to increase purchase demand; and even non-hysterical measures of home prices show steepening decline (OFHEO, down 1.8% in November). 
    

INTERESTING NOTE:

      FHFA this week announced that by the end of this year, every home loan will be permanently tagged with the identity of the individual originating banker and employing company, and the name of the field and supervisory appraisers, together with the licensing status of all players. Individual histories will be tracked.
     Fantastic! Borrowers and investors can look forward to vastly better performance. Nothing like sunshine to drive out the bad guys, and sharpen even the best