Laramie council advances building- and housing-code changes after contractors warn of sprinkler costs

Laramie City Council on Sept. 2 approved amendments to sections of the municipal building code and advanced a separate package of housing-related text changes while hearing public pleas from local contractors about construction costs. The council approved an amendment to Title 15.24 (ordinance No. 2107) on second reading by a 7-0 vote with two members absent, and approved first reading of a broader set of housing code changes (ordinance No. 2110) by the same margin; the council later approved a related ordinance on nonconforming uses (ordinance No. 2111).

The changes before the council alter multiple sections of the municipal code tied to the city—s adopted building code and zoning rules. Planning staff described a series of revisions designed to expand housing options and streamline review, including allowing modular-home communities in more residential districts, clarifying multifamily permissions in business zones, increasing the threshold for minor administrative modifications from 20% to 25%, expanding on-street parking to count toward required spaces, and adjusting city cost-sharing on oversized collector and arterial street improvements.

Those technical and procedural changes drew public comment from several local builders who warned the council that certain building-code requirements could have large, immediate cost impacts for homebuilders and homeowners. Michael Cisneros, a resident who addressed the council during public comment, said his review of the proposed building-code language suggested it could force widespread installation of residential fire-sprinkler systems. "If we accept this code without taking some of this stuff out of there ... we are saying that every single house that is built in Laramie will require a fire sprinkler system," Cisneros said, and he gave cost estimates including "about $45,000" for a 2,000-square-foot house and roughly "$93,000" to sprinkler a three-unit building, figures he attributed to local bids.

Johnny Vasquez, owner of J. Vasquez Construction, backed those concerns and said the added costs could push some work out of the city: "If somebody wants to remodel ... the requirement's probably gonna be that we also gotta put a sprinkler system now in your house," he said, adding that homeowners could face unexpectedly large bills for additions or upgrades. John Ruffoni ("Dino"), owner of Gents Gem City Roofing and the applicant for a separate nonconforming-use amendment later on the agenda, told council the proposed changes represented a sensible step forward but supported more stakeholder discussion.

Councilors and staff signaled they heard the concerns and agreed to schedule targeted follow-up. Councilor Matt Lockhart suggested holding a work session open to contractors; Councilor Matt O'Doherty and others noted the code amendments before the council now largely reflect the state-adopted building code and municipal corrections, and that detailed building-code changes would need conversations involving the city—s building and fire officials. Planning director Derek Teany said the city intends to follow the same review process used for prior code changes and would convene stakeholders for more focused discussion.

Formal actions at the meeting included approval of ordinance No. 2107 (second reading) and ordinance No. 2111 (change to legally nonconforming structures) and the first-reading passage of ordinance No. 2110 (housing code text amendments). The council and staff said they expect additional stakeholder meetings and at least one more council hearing on housing-related code changes, with the council—s third reading of housing code changes scheduled for Oct. 7.

The council—s votes leave the technical code amendments in place while staff arranges the promised contractor-focused work session so builders, planning staff and fire officials can discuss the practical costs and safety trade-offs of any future building-code adjustments.