Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Energy Codes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Littleton staff brief board on required Colorado model electric, EV‑ and solar‑ready code; adoption slated this summer
Summary
City building officials told the Environmental Stewardship Board that Colorado's model electric and solar‑ready code must be adopted following the state's timetable; the presentation outlined EV‑ready and solar‑ready requirements, waivers and an adoption schedule, and board members raised questions about costs, enforcement and grid capacity.
Tim Simon, Littleton’s chief building official, and Greg Lang, the city electrical inspector, told the board that Colorado’s model electric and solar‑ready code will be adopted by municipalities in the current code cycle and that Littleton is preparing to implement it.
Simon told the board: “This is coming, and we're not getting out of adopting this code,” and provided a schedule that would include study sessions and a planned adoption window in the summer code cycle.
What the briefing described - Scope and timing: The staff presentation explained that the state model and associated appendices (for electric, solar‑ready and related energy codes) are scheduled to be included in the next municipal code adoption cycle. Staff said building permits issued after the local adoption date will be required to comply; staff cited a target adoption date discussed in the presentation for early August. - EV‑ and solar‑ready elements: For new single‑family homes and townhomes with dedicated parking, the code requires at least one EV‑ready space; staff described EV‑ready as conduit/branch‑circuit work terminating at a receptacle or junction within proximity of the parking space to reduce retrofit costs. The presentation also described a “solar‑ready zone” requirement for roof area on new residential buildings intended to ease later installation of rooftop solar. - Waivers and thresholds: Presenters noted a waiver mechanism that allows applicants to satisfy requirements by spending a specified share of a project’s mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP) budget on EV‑ready infrastructure; staff displayed illustrative tables showing higher percentage requirements for certain commercial and multifamily projects, but emphasized waivers and appeals are part of the administrative process.
Questions and concerns Board members asked about the likely costs and who bears them (owners vs. first tenants in new commercial shell projects), enforcement capacity and whether grid capacity could constrain implementation. Simon and Lang said larger projects already anticipate solar and electrification, but added that the city will need to balance code adoption with enforcement resources and that the code contains waiver and appeal options for projects that demonstrate practical constraints.
No final local adoption action was taken at the meeting; staff invited board members to a forthcoming study session (as scheduled by the presentation) where the full code package and any proposed local amendments will be discussed in more detail.
Ending: Staff recommended the board review the detailed code language in the posted materials and raise concerns at the study session so any local amendments or enforcement planning can be coordinated before formal adoption.
