HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-17-2026 Study Session Agenda PacketSTUDY SESSION AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
Monday, August 17, 2026
6:30 p.m.
This meeting will be conducted as a virtual meeting, and in person, at: 7500 West 29th
Avenue, Municipal Building, Council Chambers.
City Council members and City staff members will be physically present at the
Municipal building for this meeting. The public may participate in these ways:
1. Attend the meeting in person at City Hall. Use the appropriate roster to sign
up to speak upon arrival.
2. Provide comment in advance at www.wheatridgespeaks.org (comment by
noon on August 17, 2026)
3. Virtually attend and participate in the meeting through a device or phone:
Click here to pre-register and provide public comment by Zoom (You must
preregister before 5:00 p.m. on August 17, 2026)
4. View the meeting live or later at www.wheatridgespeaks.org, Channel 8, or
YouTube Live at https://www.ci.wheatridge.co.us/view
Individuals with disabilities are encouraged to participate in all public meetings
sponsored by the City of Wheat Ridge. The City will upon request, provide auxiliary
aids and services leading to effective communication for people with disabilities,
including qualified sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices, documents
in Braille, and other ways of making communications accessible to people who have
speech, hearing, or vision impairments. To request auxiliary aid, service for effective
communication, or document in a different format, please use this form or contact
ADA Coordinator, (Kelly McLaughlin at ada@ci.wheatridge.co.us or 303-235-2885) as
soon as possible, preferably 7 days before the activity or event.
Public Comment on Agenda Items
1. Regulation of E-Mobility Vehicles
2. Regulation of Drones
3. Staff Report(s)
4. Elected Officials’ Report(s)
ITEM NO. 1
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Chris Murtha, Chief of Police
Patrick Goff, City Manager
FROM: Eric Kellogg, Division Chief of Police
DATE: August 17, 2026
SUBJECT: Regulation of E-Mobility Vehicles
ISSUE:
The City of Wheat Ridge has experienced a noticeable increase in the use of e-mobility
devices, including e-scooters, e-bikes, self-balancing devices, and other electric
personal transport devices. This rapid growth presents challenges related to public
safety, pedestrian/vehicle interaction, regulation of device operation, and enforcement
of consistent standards. At present, Wheat Ridge lacks a comprehensive ordinance specifically addressing e-mobility device operation, permitted areas, speed restrictions,
and responsibilities of both riders and vendors. PRIOR ACTION:
None
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is currently no financial impact to the city. Any ordinance regulating e-mobility devices is expected to have limited financial impact. Potential costs may include:
• Minor expenditures associated with public education campaigns, signage, and communication materials.
• Minimal additional enforcement time by the Police Department, though these
duties can largely be absorbed into existing patrol responsibilities.
BACKGROUND:
E-mobility devices have grown rapidly in popularity across Wheat Ridge and the broader
Denver metro area, offering affordable, convenient, and environmentally friendly
transportation options. Their rise, however, has outpaced existing municipal regulations,
creating uncertainty for residents, businesses, city staff, and law enforcement. This gap
raises concerns about citizen safety and about maintaining regulatory consistency with
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 2
neighboring jurisdictions that have already adopted e-mobility ordinances.
The issues facing Wheat Ridge are part of a broader national trend. The U.S. Consumer
Product Safety Commission (CPSC) reported in April 2026 that 533 micromobility-
related fatalities were reported nationally from 2017 through 2024, including 310
involving e-bikes. CPSC also reports that micromobility-related emergency-department
injuries have increased substantially over the period studied. These data reinforce the need to address not only where devices may operate, but also device speed, rider
behavior, equipment, and enforcement.
A clear understanding of e-mobility device classes is essential, as Colorado statute and
local municipal codes distinguish between e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, one-wheels, electric mopeds, and ADA-related mobility devices. These devices vary considerably in
speed, operating characteristics, and safety requirements. E-bikes, especially Class 1 and Class 2 models, appear to be the most commonly used in Wheat Ridge, but faster
and more complex devices such as one-wheels or electric unicycles present unique
challenges. Without defined rules, riders often use these devices in areas or ways that create conflicts with pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists.
As the number of e-mobility users increases, Wheat Ridge and regional municipalities
have reported several recurring issues. These include high-speed travel on multi-use
paths, sidewalk conflicts in dense areas, unpredictable roadway behavior, underage riders, nighttime operation without lights, and distracted riding. Enforcement ambiguity
compounds the problem, as outdated or vague code language restricts officers’ ability to address unsafe operation. The region has also seen more crashes and injuries, often
involving devices traveling above posted speed limits or riders not using protective
equipment.
Other jurisdictions in the Denver metro area have responded by implementing comprehensive regulations to improve safety and clarify expectations. Denver enforces
speed limits, operating zones, and vendor responsibilities; Lakewood restricts certain
devices on trails; Arvada focuses on sidewalk use and speed control; Golden manages
device use in high-pedestrian areas; and Westminster regulates operation through park
and traffic rules. These cities report that clear rules reduce collisions, improve compliance, and create predictable environments for residents and visitors alike.
Taken together, the regional trend points toward adopting consistent, enforceable
e-mobility regulations. Without similar guidelines, Wheat Ridge risks falling behind
neighboring jurisdictions. Establishing clear definitions, operating rules, and enforcement authority would help ensure safety, reduce conflicts, and promote a more
predictable and accessible mobility network for all users.
E mobility devices present valuable transportation options but introduce safety
considerations requiring clear guidelines. Municipalities across the region have
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 3
implemented ordinances to address usage, safety, and vendor operations. Wheat Ridge
has an opportunity to adopt similar measures to enhance public safety, reduce conflict between users and pedestrians, and maintain consistency with neighboring
jurisdictions.
Staff stands ready to conduct additional research, draft ordinance language, and
support Council’s efforts to create a safe and effective regulatory environment.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the issues outlined above, staff recommends that City Council direct staff to
develop a comprehensive e-mobility ordinance and implementation program incorporating the following:
1. Updating and Clarifying Definitions
a. Should Wheat Ridge update definitions of e-mobility devices to align with
state statute and common metro practices to provide clarity for users and
enforcement personnel?
b. Should the City should distinguish compliant Class 1, 2, and 3 e-bikes from
devices that exceed those classifications and not allow non-compliant high-
speed devices to be treated as ordinary bicycles?
2. Trail and Sidewalk Management
Should Wheat Ridge:
a. Establish, clearly post and enforce speed limits for all mobility devices on
multi-use trails including parks and the Clear Creek Trail?
b. Restrict use of high-speed devices on multi-use trails?
c. Strengthen rules requiring all riders to yield to pedestrians?
3. Safety Equipment Requirements
a. Should Wheat Ridge require minors and Class 3 ebike users to wear helmets?
b. Should Wheat Ridge require lighting or reflective gear after dusk?
4. Age and Speed Restrictions
a. Should Wheat Ridge establish a minimum age for certain classes of devices
would help reduce unsafe operation by minors?
b. Should Wheat Ridge hold guardians accountable for knowingly allowing
minors to operate non-compliant e-bikes or e-motos?
5. Public Outreach and Education Campaign
a. Should Wheat Ridge collaborate with Jefferson County Schools, Jefferson
County Public Health, bicycle advocacy organizations and community
partners to educate the community to improve safe, e-mobility use?
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 4
Prepared by E. Kellogg
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Outline of e-mobility vehicle classes
2. Outline of how other jurisdictions are approaching e-mobility vehicles
1
ATTACHMENT 1
E-MOBILITY VEHICLE CLASSES
Colorado statute (CRS 42-1-102) and regional municipal codes typically classify
e-mobility devices into several categories. A clear understanding of these classes is
essential for crafting enforceable regulations.
Electric Bicycles (E-Bikes)
Colorado recognizes three classes of e-bikes:
Class 1: Pedal-assist only; motor cuts off at 20 mph.
Class 2: Throttle-capable; can propel without pedaling; limited to 20 mph.
Class 3: Pedal-assist; motor cuts off at 28 mph; may include speedometer requirement. Riders must be 16+ in many jurisdictions.
E-bikes appear to be the most common e-mobility device used within Wheat Ridge.
Electric Scooters (Stand-Up Scooters)
These devices use an electric motor to reach speeds typically between 15–20 mph. In
many cities, shared fleet scooters remain popular, though privately owned scooters are
increasingly more common. They are frequently used on sidewalks, multi-use paths, and
roadways, often leading to conflicts with pedestrians.
Electric Skateboards and Longboards
Riders operate these devices using wireless handheld throttles. Speeds range from 15–25 mph. Because they are smaller and less visible than scooters, they pose unique
visibility challenges for motorists.
One-Wheels and Electric Unicycles (EUCs)
These emerging devices can reach speeds of up to 30 mph or more, depending on the model. They are popular among recreational riders and commuters alike. Their speed
capability, maneuverability, and lack of clear classification under older municipal codes
create enforcement challenges.
Electric Mopeds and Low-Speed Electric Motorcycles
Some devices resemble bicycles but exceed the speeds or power limits of e-bikes,
placing them in a different regulatory category. These often require registration,
insurance, and licensing, though riders frequently operate them as if they were bicycles due to confusion about legal requirements.
2
ATTACHMENT 1
Mobility Devices (ADA-related)
Although not the focus of this memo, Wheat Ridge must ensure that any e-mobility
regulation does not unintentionally restrict ADA-compliant devices such as powered
wheelchairs or mobility scooters.
1
ATTACHMENT 2
OTHER JURISDICTIONS APPROACH TO E-MOBILITY
Municipalities throughout the Denver metropolitan area have adopted varying degrees
of regulation, typically focused on safety, speed limits, sidewalk use, and vendor
responsibilities. Examples include:
City and County of Denver
Denver has enacted comprehensive micro-mobility regulations that govern both
personally owned devices and commercial fleet operators. Rules address speed limits
(generally 15 mph), where devices may operate, parking requirements, and the
obligation of commercial companies to manage device placement and retrieval.
Enforcement includes administrative penalties and vendor accountability.
City of Lakewood
Lakewood regulates e-mobility devices within trail systems and prohibits certain
devices on specific pedestrian corridors. Their municipal code provides clear direction
on where e-scooters may operate and establishes expectations for riders regarding right-of-way and pedestrian interaction.
City of Arvada
Arvada maintains ordinances addressing sidewalk operation and speed regulation, with
emphasis on mitigating conflicts between pedestrians and riders. Arvada also has adopted rules regarding vendor permits for companies wishing to deploy shared
devices within city limits.
City of Golden
Golden restricts e-mobility operation in high-density pedestrian tourist zones. They also utilize public safety campaigns and signage to enhance rider awareness.
City of Westminster
Westminster regulates e-mobility devices through a combination of traffic codes and
park-use rules. Policies cover speed, permitted routes, and nighttime operations.
ITEM NO. 2
Memorandum
TO: Mayor and City Council
THROUGH: Chris Murtha, Chief of Police
Patrick Goff, City Manager
FROM: Eric Kellogg, Division Chief of Police
DATE: August 17, 2026
SUBJECT: Regulation of Drones
ISSUE:
As drone use increases across commercial, recreational, and public-safety fields, the City of Wheat Ridge currently relies solely on FAA regulations to guide operation within
city limits. With the growing presence of drones—and emerging concerns around
privacy, nuisance behavior, wildlife impact, and public safety—the adoption of a local
drone ordinance may be necessary to uphold community values, protect citizen rights,
and provide clarity for operators. Staff seeks Council direction regarding potential ordinance creation.
PRIOR ACTION:
The City of Wheat Ridge reviewed this topic during study sessions in May and
November 2025. At that time, the State of Colorado was considering legislation that would establish regulations for drone operations within the state. City Council directed
staff to pause further action until the State Legislature finalized its decision. No action
was taken by the State.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact associated with the review or consideration of potential drone regulation at this time.
BACKGROUND:
Drone use has grown rapidly due to lower costs, ease of operation, and expanded applications across many industries. While originally used for military reconnaissance,
drones now play an important role in agriculture, filmmaking, delivery services, environmental monitoring, infrastructure inspection, and public safety.
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 2
In March 2024, the Wheat Ridge Police Department launched its drone program to
enhance situational awareness, improve response times, and provide tactical support to
first responders. Personal drones are routinely seen in neighborhoods and parks, and
commercial drones are frequently used for aerial photography, videography, and
marketing.
Federal Regulations
The FAA governs all Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) operations in the United States. Core requirements include:
• Registration for drones weighing more than 0.55 lbs.
• Maintaining visual line of sight
• Maximum altitude of 400 feet • Avoidance of airports, military bases, emergency scenes, and crowds
• Part 107 certification for commercial operations • Compliance with airspace restrictions and pre-flight safety checks
Other Municipalities Approach to Drone Regulation Many municipalities focus on restricting drone operations in parks, open spaces, and
other city-owned facilities. Cities such as Lakewood, Denver, Louisville, Colorado Springs, Charleston, and Los Angeles prohibit or heavily limit takeoffs, landings, and
flights in public parks unless specifically designated areas or conditions are met. Some
cities identify particular locations where recreational flying is allowed, while others impose blanket prohibitions with limited exceptions, such as emergency use by law
enforcement. These regulations commonly emphasize protecting public gatherings, schools, and sensitive facilities, often enforcing buffer zones ranging from several
hundred feet to a quarter mile.
A second common regulatory approach involves permit systems tied to commercial or
event-related drone activity. Denver and Los Angeles require film permits that include
insurance, pilot certifications, and compliance with FAA rules. Littleton and Arvada
mandate production permits for commercial, nonprofit, or student filming while allowing
personal recreational use without permits. New York City uses a centralized permit
system through NYPD for all takeoffs and landings, ensuring strong oversight in dense
urban areas. Some jurisdictions also require operators to register both with the FAA and
the local government and, in certain cases, provide flight plans or obtain property-owner
authorization.
Finally, several cities add operational restrictions to enhance privacy, safety, and
accountability. Orlando and Charleston prohibit drone use for voyeurism, harassment,
flying near large public assemblies, schools, or entertainment venues. Minimum
distance requirements around people, animals, vehicles, buildings, and critical events
are common. Los Angeles and others reinforce FAA standards such as visual line-of-
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 3
sight, altitude limits, and daylight-only operations. Across these municipalities, penalties
for violations vary, with some imposing fines up to $1,000 and requiring operators to
remain at the scene of any incident or crash. Overall, the regulatory landscape reflects a
balance of promoting responsible drone use while protecting public safety and privacy.
Legal Preemption
Federal law limits the authority of municipalities to regulate drone operations. Cities cannot regulate altitude, visual line of sight, airspace access, airworthiness, aircraft
certification, or pilot licensing. Aviation safety remains exclusively under FAA jurisdiction. Cities may regulate takeoff/landing locations, privacy, nuisance behavior,
and operations occurring on city-owned property.
Community Impact Areas
Increasing drone activity has led to several community concerns:
• Citizen privacy and harassment issues
• Noise and nuisance impacts • Wildlife and domestic animal disturbance
• Safety hazards over events, roads, and emergency scenes • Potential misuse for voyeurism or abusive behavior
The City’s Disorderly Conduct Ordinance may offer enforcement options when drone
operations disturb public peace or involve threatening or abusive conduct.
Options for Local Regulation
• Restrict drone takeoff and landing on city-owned property • Prohibit drone-based surveillance that violates privacy laws
• Apply noise or nuisance ordinances to drone activity • Restrict commercial drone use through zoning
• Regulate or restrict drones over permitted events or large gatherings
• Require police notification for certain high-risk operations • Establish fines and penalties for violations
• Require permits for commercial filming or special operations • Temporarily restrict drone use during emergencies RECOMMENDATION:
Staff requests Council direction regarding preferred next steps.
Prepared by E. Kellogg
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Outline of specific municipalities’ approach to drone regulation 2. Memo from City Attorney Gerald Dahl, dated June 23, 2026
Date: August 17, 2026
Page 4
3. Draft Ordinance
1
ATTACHMENT 1
Lakewood, Colorado
• Permit required for takeoff, landing, or operation in city facilities, parks, and open
space
• Designated flying areas include East Reservoir, Hutchinson Park, and Wright
Street Park
• Drone use prohibited at Bear Creek Lake Park and William F. Hayden Park
Denver, Colorado
• Drone operations prohibited in all park facilities unless designated
• Event-related drone use requires a Film Permit along with insurance, pilot
certification, and registration
• Recreational drone use prohibited at permitted events
• Fines range from minor penalties up to $1,000
Louisville, Colorado
• All FAA regulations apply
• Launching, landing, or operating drones prohibited in all city parks and open
space
• Emergency exceptions permitted for law enforcement
Littleton, Colorado
• Film/Video/Drone Production Permit required for any commercial, nonprofit, or
student filming
• No permit required for personal, non-commercial recreational use
Arvada, Colorado
• Follows Littleton’s model: permits required for commercial/student/nonprofit
filming
• No permit required for personal, non-commercial use
2
ATTACHMENT 1
Cherry Hills Village, Colorado
• Requires FAA and city registration
• Drone flights over city property require written authorization
• Flights over private property require owner consent
• Operators may be required to provide a flight plan and proof of registration
Colorado Springs, Colorado
• Recommends a minimum altitude of 25 feet
• Restricts drone launching from city-owned facilities, parks, and open space
• Permits required outside designated flying areas
Orlando, Florida
• Prohibits drones within 500 feet of large public assemblies, schools, parks,
government buildings, detention centers, and major entertainment venues
• Drone use for voyeurism or harassment prohibited
• Operators must remain at the scene of any crash
Charleston, South Carolina
• Prohibits drone use within one-quarter mile of schools in session, hospitals,
parks, playgrounds, sporting events, races, festivals, fireworks shows, stadiums,
or other public gatherings
• Camera-equipped drones must maintain a 200-foot distance from people,
vehicles, buildings, or structures
• Owner name and address must be affixed to aircraft
• Drone use prohibited in city parks
New York, New York
All drone takeoffs and landings require a permit issued by NYPD in coordination with
the Department of Transportation
Los Angeles, California
• Hobbyist drone use near airports requires air traffic control authorization
• Must maintain visual line of sight, fly only during daylight, stay below 400 feet,
and keep at least 25 feet from individuals
• Commercial operations must comply with FAA authorization
3
ATTACHMENT 1
• Drone use prohibited in city parks unless specifically designated
• Film permits required for commercial operations
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
Through: Police Chief Murtha; City Manager Goff
From: Gerald Dahl
Date: June 23, 2026
Re: Options for City regulation of drones (UAS) ______________________________________________________________________
Background:
This memo follows up on the Council’s study sessions in May and November 2025, when the Council directed staff to move forward with case law research and possible options based on reasonableness and the degree to which any City regulation of drones would be challenged. This memo summarizes that research and attaches a draft
ordinance on the elements the Council favored at the November study session.
Drone technology over the last 15 years for civilian use has exponentially increased the number of unmanned ariel systems (UAS) flying over our municipalities. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates for 2020 put annual drone sales at 7 million units. This has created environmental, safety, and privacy concerns for citizens, some
of whom will look to the City for a solution. Many cities and towns across the country
have attempted to regulate drone activity, with varying success.
The overall guidance from Council in November was to be conservative and risk-adverse in identifying elements of a drone ordinance for the City. The attached ordinance follows that direction.
Existing regulations
Federal: The federal government, through the FAA, controls the use of aircraft in “navigable airspace” which covers “airspace at and above the minimum flight altitudes prescribed by . . . [FAA regulations], including airspace needed for safe takeoff and landing.” Drones qualify as aircraft and thus their operation is largely controlled by
existing federal legislation and FAA regulations.
The FAA distinguishes between drones being used purely for recreational purposes by hobbyists, and those used for business or commercial purposes, such as surveying. Drones flown for recreation must be registered with the FAA if they weigh between 0.55
ATTACHMENT 2
Drone regulations and ordinance June 23, 2026 Page 2 of 3
(approx. 9 oz) and 55 pounds1 and the registrant must be at least 13 years old. Recreational “flyers” must comply with the FAA’s “Exception for Limited Recreational Operations or Unmanned Aircraft” issued May 17, 20192 which imposes eight operational guidelines, including a visual line-of-sight requirement on the operator or
spotter. Commercial UAS users must apply for and receive a Remote Pilot Certificate
and comply with all regulations for pilots found in 14 CFR part 107.
Given Congress’ intent to give exclusive authority over aircraft flight and airspace safety to the FAA, any attempts at local regulation must be fairly limited to avoid being preempted by federal law. However, the FAA has recognized that local governments
have valid concerns about the operation of this technology as it impacts citizens3 and
has acknowledged that “laws traditionally related to state and local police power, including land use, zoning, privacy, and law enforcement operations, generally are not subject to federal regulation.”
State: Colorado has not attempted comprehensive legislation on drones. Current law
makes it unlawful to track or harass wildlife with a drone, and current regulations
prohibit the use of drone flight in Colorado state parks, unless specific permission is obtained.
Municipal: Municipal regulation of drones would appear to be a matter of local concern, and many municipalities have enacted regulations to address local safety and privacy
concerns. Also, as a constitutional home rule municipality, the City has broad discretion
in enacting nuisance, land use and zoning restrictions.
Suggested Action
Any local drone regulation by the City involves some risk of challenge from the FAA or private drone operators. Ordinances that regulate commercial drone operation, as
opposed to recreational operation, are more likely to be challenged given the existing
federal requirements for commercial drones. The following elements of a drone ordinance most likely to be upheld, are recommended and appear in the attached draft, which establishes a new Article X within Chapter 16 of the Wheat Ride Code of Laws:
• Nuisance and privacy: The draft ordinance addresses trespass, nuisance,
voyeurism, harassment, or privacy violations, so as to include actions by drone operation, incorporating unlawful visual observation: Code section 16-128; trespass: Code section 16-46; and nuisance, Code sections 15-5 through 15-12.
1 Drones weighing less than 0.55 lbs are generally indoor toys called nano-drones, having about a 100 ft range, a 10-minute flight time or less, and are unregulated by any governmental jurisdiction. 2 Codified at 49 USC 44809
3 FAA Press Release, July 20, 2018, “Federal vs. Local Drone Authority”
Drone regulations and ordinance June 23, 2026 Page 3 of 3
• Location: The ordinance restricts where the takeoff, landing, and operation of drones may occur. This type of ordinance cannot result in the complete prohibition of drones anywhere in the City. Instead, it applies in certain areas,
e.g., public rights-of-way, City parks and property, and schools, where
restrictions may be appropriate for safety reasons and to address personal expectations for privacy.
• Enforcement: Via the existing municipal court procedures.
• Emergency authority: Allows the Chief of Police to restrict drone use during emergencies.
ATTACHMENT 3
CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO
INTRODUCED BY COUNCIL MEMBER Council Bill No.
Ordinance No. Series 2026
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING A NEW ARTICLE X OF CHAPTER
16 OF THE CODE OF LAWS TO REGULATE THE USE OF UNMANNED
AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS
WHEREAS, the City of Wheat Ridge (the “City”) is a home rule municipality having all powers conferred by Article XX of the Colorado Constitution; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to its home rule authority and C.R.S. § 31-23-101, the City, acting through its City Council (the “Council”), is authorized to adopt ordinances for the protection of the public health, safety or welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Council has determined that unregulated use of unmanned aircraft systems (“UAS”) also known as ”drones,” within the City is detrimental to the personal safety, privacy rights, public health and welfare of the residents and visitors of the City and is otherwise detrimental to the City’s ability to control and regulate such use and activities occurring on land owned by the City; and
WHEREAS, UAS are evolving from military and government use into civilian, commercial, and recreational uses among a range of residents and visitors of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Council is aware of a number of reported incidents of trespassing on private property by UAS operated within the City limits and other uses of drones which
unreasonably affect public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the Council determines it is in the best interest of its residents and visitors to regulate and enforce UAS operations within the boundaries of the City.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF WHEAT RIDGE, COLORADO:
Section 1. Recitals incorporated. The above and foregoing recitals are incorporated herein by reference and adopted as findings and determinations of the
Council.
Section 2. Code amended. Chapter 16 of the Code of Laws is hereby amended by establishment of a new Article X concerning unmanned aircraft systems to read as follows:
ARTICLE X. UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS.
Sec. 16-217. Legislative intent.
The purpose of this Chapter is to establish regulations pertaining to any unmanned aircraft system operating within the jurisdictional borders of the City. It is the intent of this
Article to be interpreted in conformance with any existing or future federal and state laws or regulations that address the operation of unmanned aircraft systems.
Sec. 16-218. Definitions.
The following words, terms, and phrases, when used in this Article, shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a
different meaning:
Aircraft means any contrivance invented, used, or designed to navigate or fly in the air.
City airspace means and includes all airspace above the jurisdictional boundaries of the City, to the full extent such airspace can legally be regulated by the City.
City Manager means the City’s Manager or the Manager’s designee.
Drone means an unmanned aircraft that operates without a human pilot onboard and flown autonomously remotely by an operator on the ground using pre-programmed routes, onboard computers, GPS, and sensors.
Model aircraft means an unmanned aircraft capable of sustained flight in the
atmosphere, flown within a visual line of sight of the person operating the aircraft, and flown for hobby or recreational purposes.
Operate means to fly, use, launch, land, employ or navigate an unmanned aircraft system.
Person shall have the same meaning as set forth in Section 16-1 of this Code.
Privacy of any person means the reasonable expectation of privacy held by a
person on their privately owned real property that they are not observable by persons located at ground level in a place where they have a legal right to be, regardless of whether they are observable from the air with the use of a drone.
Unmanned aircraft system or UAS means an aircraft powered aerial vehicle, model
aircraft, drone, or other device without a human pilot on board, the flight of which is controlled either autonomously by on-board computers or by remote control of a pilot operator on the ground or in another vehicle or aircraft, and all associated equipment and apparatus.
Sec. 16-219. Operating requirements.
Except as otherwise provided in this Article, person operating a UAS in City airspace shall comply with the following regulations:
(a) Without the express prior written authorization from the City Manager, no person may operate a UAS on or over any City property inclusive of public streets, alleys, bridle paths, trails, playgrounds, parks, open space, parking lots,
and public buildings.
(1) Such prior written authorization shall not be unreasonably withheld and it remains the intent of this Section to ensure UAS operations do not interfere with the public’s enjoyment and use of public property.
(b) No person shall enter, hover, launch, or land an unmanned aircraft system on or over another person’s property without the prior consent of the property owner. Such unauthorized entry onto another’s property shall be deemed an unlawful trespass as defined in Section 16-46 of this Code, and unlawful visual observation as defined in Section 16-128 of this Code.
(c) No person shall operate a UAS in a reckless or careless manner so as to endanger, harass, harm, or injure any person, pedestrian, bicyclist, motorist, or animal.
(d) Operation of a drone in a manner prohibited by this Sections is also a “nuisance” within the scope of Sections 15-5 through 15-12 of this Code.
Sec. 16-220. Exception; Authority of City Manager and Police Chief.
The City Manager may grant exceptions to this Article for commercial drone operations for specific time and place-limited activities, including drone inspection of facilities of public utilities. The Police Chief may order a cessation of all drone activity throughout the City, or in certain areas of the City, for specific public safety purposes.
Sec. 16-221. Enforcement and penalties.
It shall be unlawful to violate any provision of this Article. Any person who is convicted of a violation of any provision of this Chapter shall be punished in accordance with Sections 1-5 and 16-4 of this Code. In addition, any UAS operated in violation of this Chapter may be immediately impounded in the interest of public safety pending the payment of any
City imposed penalty. Law enforcement officers are authorized to disable any UAS operating within the City airspace that poses an imminent threat to public safety.
Section 3. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen (15) days after final publication, as provided by Section 5.11 of the Charter.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ADOPTED on first reading by a vote of ___ to ___ on
this ____ day of ____ 2026, ordered published in full on the City’s website as provided by the Home Rule Charter, and Public Hearing and consideration on final passage set for _________ _______, 2065, at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers, 7500 West 29th Avenue, Wheat Ridge, Colorado.
READ, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED on second and final reading by
a vote of ___ to ___, this _____ day of ______ 2026.
SIGNED by the Mayor on this _____ day of ____________, 2026.
Korey Stites, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________________
Janeece Hoppe, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Gerald E. Dahl, City Attorney
First Publication: Second Publication:
Effective Date:
Published: Jeffco Transcript and www.ci.wheatridge.co.us