Brighton City Council Study Session - February 11, 2025

The Brighton City Council held a study session on Tuesday, February 11, 2025, beginning at 6:00 PM. The meeting covered four major discussion items: the Downtown Public Realm Study, the 120th Avenue Corridor Multimodal Study and Assessment, the Economic Development Business Incentive Policy, and a proposed Holiday Lights Display Policy. Council members provided feedback on each topic, with no formal votes taken during the study session.

Downtown Public Realm Study

• Presentation: Emma Lane (Historic Preservationist/Senior Planner), Ryan Soterakis (Dig Studio), and Jennifer Carpenter (Michael Baker International) presented three conceptual options for improving the downtown public realm, focusing on Main Street between Bridge Street and Bush Street.
• Option 1: Maintain two-way traffic, remove on-street parking (16 spaces) to gain 20 feet of pedestrian space on each side, creating a curbless shared street. Estimated low-cost interim option (e.g., planters and seating) at $15,000–$20,000.
• Option 2: Make Main Street one-way toward Bridge Street north of Bridge, and one-way toward Bridge Street south of Bridge, retaining parking on one side and adding a two-way cycle track. This would require no left turns from Bridge Street onto Main, potentially narrowing Bridge Street for wider sidewalks.
• Option 3: Create a one-way couplet with Main Street southbound and Cabbage Street northbound through downtown, requiring realignment of Cabbage and Bridge intersection and a new traffic signal, with about 15 feet of additional pedestrian space on each side.
• Council Feedback: Councilmember Pawlowski emphasized the importance of accessible/disabled parking and pedestrian safety, referencing a prior suggestion for a pedestrian bridge over the railroad. Mayor Pro Tem Padilla favored incremental, low-cost experimentation (citing Arvada's Old Wadsworth approach) rather than large upfront investments. Councilmember Green expressed reluctance to change traffic patterns without input from downtown businesses, noting the need for truck route alternatives. Councilmember Snyder raised concerns about cost magnitude (millions) and suggested focusing on affordable, temporary improvements. Councilmember Taddeo asked about likelihood of cooperation from the railroad and truck route changes. Councilmember Johnston supported the one-way options for traffic simplicity. Mayor Mills noted the importance of connecting parking areas to Main Street and supported option 2.
• Next Steps: Staff will hold a community meeting with downtown businesses and property owners to gather input before finalizing any preferred alternative.

120th Avenue Corridor Multimodal Study and Assessment

• Presentation: Jennifer Carpenter (Michael Baker International) and Greg LeBrie (Adams County) presented the study for 120th Avenue from US 85 to Tower Road, a collaborative effort with Adams County and Commerce City. The study evaluated three alternatives based on 10 criteria including safety, multimodal accommodation, and public support.
• Alternative 3 (Preferred): Includes a bus-only lane (shared with school buses), 10-foot bidirectional cycle paths, 8-foot shared-use paths, protected intersections, raised intersections near schools (Southgate and Salem), and elimination of channelized right-turn lanes where possible. Positive left-turn offsets are incorporated to improve safety.
• Crash Data (2017–2021): Over 100 crashes at US 85 and Sable Boulevard, 30–50 at Chambers and Buckley, 15–25 at Tower, E470, and Peoria. Three fatal crashes occurred (US 85, Sable, and east of Chambers).
• Public Engagement: Two open houses (80–100 attendees each), online survey with 300+ participants and 9,000 data points. Top biking barriers: no bike paths, heavy trucks, speeding cars. 20% of respondents reported walking on the corridor despite lack of sidewalks.
• Funding: Adams County submitted a RAISE grant application on January 30, 2025, and an HSIP grant for the Salem signal. The US 85/120th interchange is at 30% design, led by Commerce City, with a recent FRA grant to advance to final design. Long timeline noted (since ~1999). Councilmember Mills asked about pedestrian access across the I-76 bridge; staff noted a potential temporary sidewalk.
• Council Feedback: Support for safety improvements, raised intersections near schools, and separating bike lanes from traffic. Councilmember Green emphasized the need to coordinate with a developer required to make improvements west of Sable. Councilmember Pawlowski suggested roundabouts were considered but rejected due to right-of-way and bus lane constraints. Councilmember Taddeo asked about fire access; raised intersections were deemed acceptable in school zones with reduced speed (35 mph).
• Next Steps: Third public open house on March 11, 2025; final report expected May 2025. Staff encouraged council to advocate for inclusion of these projects in DRCOG and CDOT plans.

Economic Development Business Incentive Policy

• Presentation: Robin Martinez (Economic Development) and Mike Masciola (Economic Development) presented a draft policy to replace outdated 2014 and 2004 policies. Policy creates a structured, transparent framework for incentives, aligning with council’s principles and taxpayer responsibility.
• Eligibility Criteria: Primary employers must create 50 net new jobs, pay average wage 20% above Adams County average ($69,000 → ~$83,000), and invest at least $1 million. Sales-tax generators need 50 new jobs and $15 million minimum annual sales. Incentives include rebates of up to 50% of unrestricted tax revenue for 5 years (sales, use, and personal property tax). Expedited development review is available.
• Administrative Approval: City manager can approve incentives under $200,000–$250,000 (staff recommended $250,000). Council will be notified of all such approvals.
• Council Feedback: Councilmember Green requested that notification to council be included in the policy; City Attorney Calderon confirmed it can be added to the resolution. Councilmember Green also supported special-case scenarios being brought to council. Mayor Pro Tem Padilla asked that the policy require a “but for” clause—i.e., the incentive must be necessary to attract the business, not just generally beneficial. City Manager Martinez noted the policy is mainly a guiding tool, not a carte blanche. The number of expected deals is 1–3 per year.
• Next Steps: The policy will be brought back to council at the next business meeting (February 18) for a vote, likely on the consent agenda if no further changes are needed.

Holiday Lights Display Policy

• Presentation: City Attorney Calderon explained that the previous prohibition on holiday lights display duration was in the municipal code but was inadvertently removed when the sign code was updated. Staff had been operating under the old rule (lights down by January 15). Councilmember Pawlowski requested a policy to keep lights up through the National Western Stock Show (mid-January).
• Council Feedback: Councilmember Snyder supported keeping lights up longer, noting the low cost (city owns most lights, no extra electricity cost since street lights are flat fee). Councilmember Green questioned the need for a council policy, suggesting it should be an administrative decision. Mayor Pro Tem Padilla agreed it should not be a council policy; council should be generally supportive but not micromanage. Councilmember Taddeo supported the tradition. The discussion was mixed.
• Next Steps: City Attorney Calderon will bring a resolution to the next meeting for council to vote on the policy.

Key Outcomes

• Downtown Public Realm Study: No decision made. Staff will hold a community meeting with downtown businesses before selecting a preferred alternative. Council members expressed interest in low-cost, incremental pilot projects.
• 120th Avenue Corridor Study: No formal action. The preferred alternative (Option 3) continues to be refined. Adams County will submit grant applications. Council members voiced strong support for safety improvements.
• Economic Development Incentive Policy: Staff will incorporate feedback (notification to council for administrative approvals and a “but for” clause) and present a resolution for adoption at the February 18 business meeting.
• Holiday Lights Display Policy: A resolution will be brought for a vote at the next meeting; council opinions were divided on whether a formal policy is necessary.