Amid a push to adopt the first Outdoor Energy Use code in Routt County created in 2021, county and city officials and employees are faced with a decision on snowmelt systems.

Promoted by the Routt County Climate Action Plan Collaborative — a group composed of community members with expertise in energy-efficient design and construction, energy-use modeling, utility management and other areas in the energy field — the hope is to implement the code in 2024.

This is in an effort to meet the goals laid out by the Climate Action Plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions countywide by 35% by 2030 and 74% by 2050.

---

---

The group says if fossil fuel snowmelt systems are not greatly restricted, it could be impossible to meet the carbon-reduction goals established in the Climate Action Plan.

The group contends that snowmelt systems are a gross misuse of energy and utilize three times as much energy per square foot as interior spaces such as inside buildings and residences.

---

---

In its arguments, the group cites a recent analysis done for the Urban Redevelopment Authority Advisory Committee that showed plowing and hauling snow emits 0.12 pounds of CO2 per square foot while gas-fueled snowmelt emits 10 pounds of CO2 per square foot.

The Climate Action Plan energy sector working group has come up with three different strategies to lessen the impact of snowmelt systems. One of the strategies involves eliminating them entirely. Under this strategy, snowmelt systems would only be allowed if they are completely powered by carbon-free energy. 

The second strategy would put regulations in place through the energy code that would limit when snowmelt systems are allowed to run.

The third strategy would place an emphasis on older and larger buildings in the county and take the focus away from snowmelt systems. This strategy would develop programs, funding and codes to make improvements and updates to heating and cooling appliances and other equipment in these buildings, thus helping to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Building Official Todd Carr approached Routt County commissioners at their June 26 meeting and will next approach Steamboat Springs City Council with these options to consider. 

The recommendation from the Routt County Building Department and the Climate Action Plan energy sector working group is to go with the first option. 

“We survived for decades living in the snowy regions without having an outdoor snowmelt system installed,” Carr told commissioners. “We believe these systems are not needed, but rather an amenity versus necessity.”

Howver, Commissioner Sonja Macys expressed concern over the equity of the first strategy, saying that Routt County’s upper class might be the only people who can afford snowmelt systems that are 100% carbon free.

“In this option, we would be disallowing these systems from anybody who can’t afford to pay a higher cost for their system,” Macys said. “From an equity and fairness standpoint, is this really what we want?”

Commissioner Tim Corrigan added to Macys’ point by drawing attention to the fact that this may be unfair to individuals who may be elderly or handicapped and need this kind of system but can’t afford one that’s 100% carbon free.

While an exemption for people with disabilities would not be permitted for residential buildings — as there are no legal requirements for accessibility for residential buildings — the requirements are different for commercial buildings. 

In terms of considering the implementation of this code for commercial buildings, requirements exist under the American with Disabilities Act that could provide exemptions to the rule.

For commercial buildings, the ADA requires that there must be a designated accessible route from the accessible parking spaces to the building. Because of this, a snowmelt system would be allowed in order to meet the required width for the accessible route per code.

A public survey of people who want to allow heated snowmelt systems that produce carbon but feel maximum square footages should apply to residential homes indicated that 31% feel there should be a 250-square-foot maximum, 5% favored 300 square feet, 5% favored 350 square feet, 9% favored 400 square feet and 15% favored 450 square feet. 

Survey results for commercial buildings’ maximum square footage demonstrated that 38% of respondents favored a 1,000-square-foot maximum, 2% favored 1,250 square feet, 2% favored 1,500 square feet and 22% favored 1,750 square feet. 

The county generally updates and reviews its energy-use codes every three years, hence the push to implement the code created in 2021 by 2024.

Carr told commissioners he hopes to be back in front of them sometime in late August or September for a first reading on the proposed Outdoor Energy Use code.