Does Colorado Need More Safety Regulations for Older Buildings? 

Older buildings, including those in Colorado, represent a dichotomy for lawmakers. Preserving older buildings provides a continuous glimpse into the past. By the same token, older buildings that are not taken care of become inherent safety risks. One possible solution to the safety issue is more regulation supported by strong enforcement. But is that the right way to go? 

An Abandoned Sugar Mill in Longmont 

The impetus for this post was a March 2025 fire at an abandoned sugar mill near Longmont. The privately owned property sits mostly unused, even though a couple of its silos are still active. For firefighters, the issue with the property is that there are some hazardous materials still on-site. Fear of exposure to those materials forced firefighters to let the fire burn itself out. 

One fire of this nature is enough to be concerned about. But local firefighters have responded to this particular property 338 times over the last five years. That is a huge number by any measure. And every call brings fresh concerns for firefighters who don’t really know what they are dealing with. 

Making matters worse is the fact that investigators cannot go into the rubble to figure out what caused the fire. It’s simply not safe. The best they can do is rely on firefighters to contain any future blazes that might break out. Therein lies yet another dichotomy. Should the state or county force the property owner to demolish the buildings? Should there be any consequences for so many calls for service in such a short amount of time? 

Building Regulations Vary by State 

One of the challenges facing Boulder County – and every other county across Colorado – is the nature of building and fire regulations. Generally speaking, building and fire regulations are administered at the state level. But in many states, local jurisdictions develop and enforce their own codes and standards. 

States tend to adopt versions of the International Building Code (IBC) developed by the International Code Council. That’s good. However, some versions can vary significantly from the most current version. In addition, adopting the codes doesn’t change the fact that there is no means of uniform federal enforcement. States, counties, and local municipalities still handle enforcement. 

Colorado tends to follow the ‘home rule’ principle. This means that each city or county develops its own building and fire codes. Some adopt the International Code Council’s standards but make amendments to them. Others develop their own codes from scratch. 

If Building and Fire Codes Were Standardized 

How different would things be if building and fire codes were standardized across the country? We need to look no further than the UK. The UK system is not entirely uniform because of differences between England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Each country has its own set of standards. However, the standards in Scotland are consistent throughout. Likewise for Northern Ireland, Wales, and England. 

Uniformity creates reasonable expectations among UK property owners and businesses. It also opens the door for an entire industry dedicated to safety concerns. You can see on the Seton UK website evidence of this very thing. Seton customers can not only purchase safety equipment from the company, but they can also get information on safety requirements. 

The downside is that local authorities have less control despite what can be varying conditions from one region to the next. And in fact, that’s why so many U.S. states insist on home rule. Denver’s environment is different from Boulder’s in more than one way. And what applies in Boulder may not be applicable in Fort Collins. 

Hold Property Owners Accountable 

Rather than coming up with new rules and regulations, perhaps a better way to handle situations like the abandoned sugar mill in Longmont is to hold property owners personally responsible for every call to the local fire department. Likewise for police calls, utility company responses, etc. 

Property owners are best held accountable through financial means. Require that they pay for services when abnormal conditions prevent firefighters from doing their jobs. Levy substantial fines against any and all nuisance properties. And if property owners cannot pay the fines, seizure and sale would both settle the fines and get seized the properties into the hands of more responsible owners. 

Safety Should Never Be Compromised 

Plenty of Colorado residents have no appetite for further rules and regulations. The state is already highly regulated in so many other ways. Yet at the same time, safety should never be compromised by that small number of property owners unwilling or unable to maintain their properties. 

Older people are found throughout the state. They add to our rich history and cultural heritage. For that reason, preserving them is a noble endeavor. But doing so at the risk of jeopardizing first responder safety during an emergency isn’t good. Safety must count first. If that means more rules and regulations to protect both first responders and historical properties, maybe they are worth it.