Montrose County staff outline wildfire resiliency code, aim to adopt model code by April deadline

Montrose County planning staff and the county building official presented the proposed wildfire resiliency code at a Board of County Commissioners work session on Tuesday, Feb. 24, outlining which new buildings and qualifying alterations in wildland‑urban interface areas would need to meet new construction, materials and defensible‑space standards.

"We're here to discuss the wildfire resiliency code tonight," said Talmadge, the county's planning and development director, who described the meeting as informational and said no adoption would occur that night. He said the state requires counties to adopt the model code or a stricter version by April 1 under the law staff referenced as Senate Bill 23‑166. Staff told the board they plan to present the code for potential adoption consideration on March 18 and noted the law allows a three‑month delay on enforcement, meaning an April 1 adoption could be enforced beginning July 1.

Why it matters: The code would apply to new construction and to alterations that create occupiable or habitable space in areas designated by the state's WUI (wildland‑urban interface) map. That could change build materials, design and permit requirements for homes and nearby accessory structures in parts of Montrose County.

Jack Northrup, the county's building official, summarized the code's construction‑hardening standards by hazard class. For low‑hazard (yellow) areas, requirements focus on roofing, roof‑valley flashing, gutters, downspouts and vents; roofs must meet Class A ignition‑resistant assembly standards and vents must meet specified performance or be covered by appropriately screened metal. In moderate and high hazard (orange and red) zones the code adds eave protection, ignition‑resistant exterior wall coverings or rated assemblies, treated or heavy‑timber framing for exposed structural members, and closer attention to flashing and gap closures.

Northrup also described details inspectors will check: decking surfaces that meet Class A or Class B composite standards, exterior glazing that must be tempered or dual‑pane or be a rated assembly, exterior doors that must be fire‑rated or meet solid‑core specifications, and garage door perimeter closures limited to an eighth‑inch gaps with ignition‑resistant weatherstripping or metal flashing.

Staff described defensible‑space rules around structures in three zones: 0–5 feet (noncombustible ground surfaces only; no plantings except specified ignition‑resistant species), 5–30 feet and 30–100 feet (removal of dead fuel, trimming and canopy spacing to reduce fire spread). Talmadge said aspens growing in natural bunches are handled differently—bunches must be separated from other groups rather than forcing separation between stems in a naturally clustered stand.

Exemptions and technical processes: Talmadge listed several exemptions the county expects will affect many Montrose properties: historic structures, certain HUD‑regulated premanufactured homes on first installation, detached non‑habitable accessory structures under 120 square feet, accessory agricultural buildings more than 50 feet from a dwelling, and parcels larger than 35 acres with a single house that do not abut residential or commercial zoning. He explained a landowner who believes a parcel is incorrectly mapped into a WUI zone can request "ground truthing" by providing technical data—topography, fuels within 300 feet, local weather patterns and fire‑behavior data—so the code official and fire professionals can reconsider the designation.

Residents pressed staff on several points during a public Q&A. Judy Ann Fildes asked whether the code applies on sale of a house; Talmadge replied it does not: transfer of ownership alone does not trigger code requirements. Jim Hausness asked what remodeling percentage triggers the code; staff said replacement or repair affecting 25% or more of a roof or of exterior cladding typically requires bringing that element up to the new standard and meeting five feet of defensible space around the structure. A participant asked whether landscaping alone triggers the code; staff answered no—landscaping changes by themselves do not trigger the building‑code requirements.

Builders and contractors raised cost and technical concerns. Casey Heaster, who said he builds in nearby counties, said siding, decking and window changes can be a substantial cost increase; Northrup and Talmadge acknowledged some gray areas remain and encouraged early outreach during design and pre‑submittal review. On insurance, staff said state and insurer groups are modeling cost impacts but insurers use their own proprietary risk maps and criteria; those insurers described the state code as a first step that could improve availability of insurance over time but do not automatically base rates on the state's WUI map.

Staff also said some manufactured homes built under the IRC and approved by the Colorado Department of Housing already comply with the wildfire code, while HUD‑regulated manufactured homes on first installation are exempt. Permits pulled before an enforcement start date would remain exempt if issued before that date.

Enforcement and next steps: Talmadge said the county will not run patrol enforcement of defensible space but will incorporate the requirements into building permits and inspections; because defensible‑space conditions can change (for example, when wind deposits debris), the county plans to provide informational packets at certificate of occupancy describing maintenance expectations. The county scheduled another informational meeting for March 10 and said it expects to bring the code forward for potential adoption consideration on March 18 to meet the state timeline.

The meeting ended with staff asking stakeholders to submit specific technical concerns by email and to meet with planning staff for parcel‑level questions. The board closed the session and reminded the public of the March meetings.