Building officials, commissioners debate Nordic Lodge classification and fire-alarm installation; quotes cite $17,000–$20,000 estimate

County building staff told the Board of County Commissioners that the newly constructed Nordic Lodge at Alcova requires further code review because the presence of a kitchen triggers more restrictive occupancy rules and fire-protection requirements.

At issue: whether the building will remain classified as an A3 assembly occupancy (which has fewer fire-protection triggers) or must be classified as A2 because food preparation facilities were added. County staff said that without a fire-alarm system and sprinkler variance the county should limit the building’s occupancy to 99 people; installing a fire-alarm system with an agreed variance could raise allowable occupancy substantially (staff projected a practical occupancy in the 150–175 range and said the engineered capacity could approach 200–250 with further review).

Why it matters: Commissioners and staff said the building’s intended uses (small events, warming/catering kitchen for rentals, occasional larger events such as weddings or school groups) would be constrained by a low occupancy limit. A fire-alarm system would increase permitted occupancy without requiring a full sprinkler and cistern installation, which had shown to be financially and logistically problematic.

Key points from staff and officials - Brian Oliver (staff member) and a county reviewer explained that early plan reviews showed fire-alarm notification devices called out on the plans and asked for fire-alarm plans to be submitted; the final inspection later found no installed alarm system. Oliver said the plans had originally been reviewed when the project had a different permit number and the comments had not carried forward to the final construction permit process. - A county speaker who obtained contractor estimates reported a rough installed cost for the fire-alarm system from Rocky Mountain Fire and an electrician of about $17,000 to $20,000 for the alarm and related installation; final electrician costs were pending. - Brad (staff member) and Brian Oliver recommended classifying the building as A2 for code purposes and using a variance to avoid installing a costly sprinkler system while still requiring a fire-alarm system and related hood suppression for the kitchen.

Commissioners’ responses and next steps - Several commissioners expressed concern that the building—reported to have cost roughly $2.5 million—was completed without the alarm system in place and urged prompt action to install alarm notification. Commissioner Laird said he favored installing the alarm system “right away.” - County staff recommended allowing occupancy and use under the lower-capacity limits while pursuing funding and estimates to install the alarm system, and suggested that special-event cases above the baseline occupancy could be managed through individual approvals and fire watches until the alarm is in place. - The board asked staff to obtain hard contractor estimates and to return with options for funding and schedule; no formal fiscal authorization was taken at the meeting.

Ending County staff will obtain and circulate final electrician bids and an installation schedule. Commissioners favored moving to secure estimates and, where feasible, accelerating installation of a fire-alarm system that staff said would permit a higher event occupancy without installing sprinklers and a cistern.