Earlier this month, new rules took effect aimed at making homes in fire-prone areas of the city more resilient to wildfires.
Among the requirements is that new homes must have a five-foot buffer of noncombustible material around the structure. Planting junipers, a highly flammable plant, is now banned. And new fences and gates within eight feet of the home must be made of noncombustible materials. The standards currently apply only to new construction and major renovations within Boulder’s designated wildland-urban interface (WUI).
The ordinance is part of a broader push to prevent flames and embers from spreading house to house during a wildfire. Boulder is at a greater wildfire risk than 97% of U.S. communities, according to the U.S. Forest Service. Another wildfire is all but certain to ignite within city limits.
But some councilmembers have said the new rules don’t go far enough. Because the standards apply only to new construction and major remodels, older homes remain unprotected, potentially putting entire neighborhoods, or homes already mitigated for wildfires, at risk.
“It will be more than 100 years before all homes meet the new standards,” Councilmember Mark Wallach wrote in a Hotline post last week. “We need to pick up the pace.”
Councilmember Matt Benjamin said he wants councilmembers next year to consider requiring existing homes to eventually comply with the fire-hardening rules. Benjamin added that he hopes the council will take up the idea at its 2026 retreat.
“Through all this great work, we have a big blind spot in our suite of plans and codes,” he wrote in a recent Hotline post. “We have no plan for how to deal with the hundreds of homes and buildings that are a danger to themselves and a danger to the community as a whole.”
Benjamin has proposed requiring properties deemed a high risk to wildfire under the city’s curbside assessment program to get a more detailed assessment, and if necessary, take steps to reduce the home’s fire risk within a set number of years.
But retroactive enforcement would come at a cost. To implement such a program, a recent city staff memo estimates the city would need about 10 additional full-time employees, including landscape reviewers, code enforcement officers, an inspector and a communications specialist.
Staff say those hires would allow enforcement across all of Boulder’s WUI, not just the highest-risk areas. Most properties in Boulder’s WUI fall into Class 3, the lowest wildfire risk category.
Such staffing increases are unlikely anytime soon. The city manager recently imposed a hiring freeze across all departments due to a projected budget shortfall as sales tax revenue is projected to plateau. “The city’s current budget challenges raise questions about how to proceed in the immediate future,” the city staff memo states.
Under the current rules, officials expect about 200 building permits per year in the WUI to trigger compliance with the new code. If applied retroactively, the rules could affect roughly 1,200 properties annually — 778 through rental license applications and another 491 at the point of sale.
Forget the expense of additional city staffing; what about the expense to homeowners? There’s enough fixed-income homeowners in town who have no chance of affording much in the way of wildfire resiliency. They can barely afford the increases in property taxes and insurance over the last decade. I doubt they will support a mandatory regulation.
Another problem, not addressed by Benjamin or others, is the lack of trades people willing/able to be hired for these “small retrofixes” to existing homes. Based on conversations with others in my neighborhood, no one can find workers who are knowledgeable about fire-resistent materials plus are reliable and willing to work minor jobs that are not worth their time and expertise. Even those of us willing to voluntarily take fire-hardening steps with our existing homes are unable to do so and new laws won’t be able to change that.
I recently had the home I live in assessed for wildfire risk and mitigation steps required. Some of the steps I could take on my own; some required a considerable investment of money. But one of the challenges I’ve been facing is that for a few of the action items, finding the contractors who are knowledgeable and have the staff to perform the mitigations retroactively is challenging. The argument that it’s “too expensive” is understandable, but it is not an excuse for not getting up to code if codes are passed (and I hope they are). What will be needed are mechanisms for implementing the retroactive modifications needed. One option would be for the city itself to do the contracting for the work, and then place liens on those homes where a homeowner or owner cannot pay for the mitigation (because, for example, they may be on a fixed income). But whatever the solution, letting a home or property owner do nothing is not an option. Doing nothing in the face of the risks we face is not an option.
we will look back on this time and ask “Why didn’t we and the city do something sooner?”
Wildfire Mitigation is a good idea. Pass an ordinance with a phased in timeline (Boulder Cedar Roof Removal Program) and Do Not hire any additional City staff. Let social pressure and common sense harden the city wildfire resistance. As far as expense, removing Junipers is something that almost any human is capable of, all it requires is a saw and some work. Replacing Five feet of a wood Fence Fuse to your home is something that most people can figure out how to do. Think of it as exercise. Over Time, we would all be better off than if we do nothing.
One idea would be to let go 30 or more of the 37 public relations staff that the city currently employs so that experts in this important area could take precedence and be hired. I can’t imagine why we need 37 people to communicate to Boulderites why city government is doing so well when there is a very real threat to our welfare staring at us.
This will be the final nail in the coffin for any non-millionaires here. It will drive every working person out, or into an apartment. Climate change is a massive problem, but the city council is terribly out of touch here.
We need to make home prices cheaper!
The solution: Raise Property Taxes, Make sales taxes that were supposed to sunset to be permanent, add to construction costs with more requirements, spend more money on unneeded projects and lawsuits, and vastly increase money spent on homelessness.