Rawlins council, board review Title 15 flatwork permit rules and consider rescinding 2020 changes

A Rawlins City Council workshop on amending Title 15’s rules for flatwork — sidewalks, driveways, patios and related concrete work — centered on confusion about permit triggers and whether to revert to pre-2020 rules.

The session, called to order at 6:02 p.m., brought council members and the Board of Adjustments together with city staff to try to produce ordinance language that contractors, homeowners and the city can follow without repeated trips between bodies. Speaker 5 told the group the goal was to “get it to where we have some working documents” so council and the Board of Adjustments would not have to pass the item back and forth.

Why it matters: the ordinance as drafted had been interpreted to require permits for relatively small repairs in some cases, raising concerns that homeowners might need permits to fix minor patio or landscaping work. Speaker 5 recalled the earlier 5-by-5 rule and said the threshold was changed to 25 square feet; that change prompted disagreement over whether the rule applied only to new construction or also to repairs. “We didn't want to limit them to 5 by 5, so it went to 25 square feet and more,” Speaker 5 said.

City rules versus model codes: Several council members and staff discussed relying on the International Residential Code (IRC) and other standards (public works standards and ADA requirements) instead of having a locally more restrictive ordinance. Speaker 4 summarized the practical implication: if the council adopts the IRC and remains up to date on code adoption, “we wouldn't even need this” separate ordinance. Others warned that the ordinance originated from public-works concerns — contractors cutting streets and pouring over utilities — and that some local oversight is needed to protect public infrastructure.

Examples and safety concerns: Speaker 3 highlighted the perceived extremes of the draft language: “If you have a 1 foot by 1 foot hole in in your patio, you cannot fix it. You have to go get a permit to fix it,” a line that helped rekindle the discussion over where to draw the permit line. Speakers also raised retaining-wall height thresholds (4 feet and 5 feet were discussed) and stressed that anything on public right-of-way (curb, gutter, sidewalk abutting the street) generally requires a permit and must meet city/public-works and ADA standards.

Next steps and legal questions: Councilmembers coalesced around two process items rather than taking immediate formal action. Speaker 6 proposed that the city attorney prepare a draft resolution to rescind the November 2020 changes and bring that resolution to the council floor for a vote; Speaker 8 asked whether rescinding would automatically restore the prior ordinance, and Speaker 9 noted a statute governs that process and recommended the attorney check the law. The council agreed it was logical to wait until the Board of Adjustments completes its review and until the attorney confirms the statutory effect of rescission before un-tabling or voting.

No formal vote was taken at the workshop. A staff member read aloud that the Board of Adjustments had met on 10/21/2020 and noted the specific flatwork language added then; councilmembers asked staff and the attorney to produce a clear line-by-line list of changes so the council can verify if any additions should be retained. The workshop recessed and the council moved to its regular meeting at 7:30 p.m.

What to watch for: the city attorney's legal guidance on rescission and a staff-drafted redline (list of changes) from the Board of Adjustments. If the attorney confirms the rescission path, the council may consider a formal resolution to revert to pre-2020 language or to adopt clarified language that relies on the IRC and public-works standards.