Developer seeks rezoning of two Great Western Park tracts from employment to residential; council holds concept review

BROOMFIELD — City staff and an applicant team presented a concept review Thursday proposing to amend the Great Western Park planned unit development to change two northern tracts from employment uses to residential uses, and the City Council and dozens of residents weighed in at a study session.

Planning manager Brandon Rowe told the council that “There will be no decision made this evening regarding this proposal.” The concept review is an early step; if the applicant files a formal application it would require additional public hearings before the Land Use Review Commission and City Council.

The proposal would change Tracts N3 and N4, about 42 acres north of Walnut Creek and east of the Great Western open area, from employment to a mix of medium‑density and high‑density residential with roughly nine acres set aside as open land. The applicant’s materials describe N3 as medium density (15 dwelling units per acre, “approximately 440 units at its maximum intensity”) and N4 as high density (32 units per acre, “potential max of 330 units”). The applicant said income‑aligned housing would be provided on‑site: about 35 for‑sale units in the medium‑density area and about 64 rental income‑aligned units in the high‑density area.

Why it matters

Staff told council the conversion would shift roughly 40 acres that were originally planned for commercial employment into residential uses and estimated a significant fiscal change: “The proposed development of up to 820 residential units would result in an estimated negative $1,300,000 annual fiscal impact,” language the staff memo used to summarize its long‑range financial plan analysis. Residents and council members raised concerns about that projection, the loss of future commercial space and the effect on municipal services and Jefferson County Schools.

What staff and the applicant said

Brandon Rowe summarized the PUD history: the original Great Western Park PUD was approved in 2001, amended in 2008 and later renamed portions of the roadway now called Skystone Parkway. He emphasized that the concept review was limited to the use change and that no site plan — parking, architecture or exact unit counts — had been submitted.

Carolyn White, land use counsel for the applicant, and developer representatives said market conditions drove the proposal: Eric Roth of CBRE told the council the local office market shows high vacancy (27%–32% in the northwest submarket) and construction costs that make new office speculative. White said the development teams the applicant is talking with are proposing attainable for‑sale product and on‑site income‑aligned units. “So as was already presented by staff, what we're here tonight for is to present to you in concept review, opportunity for feedback and questions, our proposal to rezone a portion of the existing Great Western Park PUD from the existing employment designation to a residential designation,” White said.

Traffic and emergency access

Traffic and access were central topics. Kimley‑Horn traffic engineer Curtis Rowe told council the proposed residential use would generate substantially less traffic than the employment buildout: the applicant’s analysis shows a 78% reduction in daily trips compared with the previously envisioned office development and a 71% reduction in the afternoon peak hour. Rowe described proposed traffic‑calming measures on SkyStone Parkway, including raised crosswalks and a chicane over a box culvert, and summarized them to council: “traffic calming will be provided.”

North Metro Fire and several council members stressed emergency access. Staff and the applicant said Skystone Parkway’s right of way and earlier approvals mean the metropolitan district has already submitted construction drawings for the Parkway extension; staff and the City Attorney clarified that the Parkway’s prior approvals do not preclude council from providing new direction. Staff said the Metropolitan District (and the developer) would pay for construction of the Parkway; the district has submitted construction drawings that are under review and that neighborhood meetings are planned.

Airport, firing range, transit and services

Staff and Rocky Mountain Metropolitan Airport comments flagged noise as a concern: the site sits in a high‑volume flight path even though it is outside airport critical zones. The airport staff warned council that approving residential development “will likely lead to additional aircraft‑related noise complaints to both the airport and Broomfield.” Staff also listed the outdoor firing range used by the Police Department as a nearby noise source and noted that the project area is outside RTD service and is several miles from the closest public library, recreation facility and health department services.

Public comment

Dozens of residents — many SkyStone homeowners — spoke in opposition during the public comment period. Common themes included fears that the Parkway extension would split SkyStone, increase vehicle volumes and endanger pedestrians and older residents; impacts on private SkyStone amenities; noise from the airport and a nearby firing range; school district and cross‑jurisdictional public‑safety concerns; and fiscal worries. SkyStone residents pressed council for alternatives to an open through‑road and for protections for SkyStone amenities if the rezoning proceeds.

Developer history and unit assumptions

Developer Greg Bradbury noted the site's long marketing history for employment uses and the prior approvals and developers that shaped Great Western Park, including the SkyStone active‑adult development. The applicant said earlier staff and applicant estimates differ on total unit counts; staff’s memo referenced as many as 820 units and an estimated fiscal impact, while the applicant told council it expects a lower buildout “in the neighborhood of 500 units.” The applicant also said it had an “enhanced” public‑notice radius (2,000 feet plus additional SkyStone notice) and hosted a neighborhood meeting that drew about 148 attendees.

Next steps and council direction

No formal action or vote was taken. Staff said if council wants alternatives or new direction on Skystone Parkway staff will regroup with the Metropolitan District and the applicant and return to council with options at a future study session. If the applicant submits a formal PUD amendment application it would trigger site‑plan review, traffic analysis and public hearings before the Land Use Review Commission and council.

The study session record

The concept review generated detailed technical and policy questions about fiscal effects, transportation, public safety and compatibility with nearby airport operations. Council directed staff to continue community outreach and to bring options on the SkyStone Parkway alignment and access if council requested that follow‑up. The applicant said it would consider the feedback before any formal application.

Ending

Council did not vote on the rezoning at the concept stage. Staff and the applicant said they would use the comments in deciding whether to pursue a formal application; residents asked the council to prioritize alternatives that would preserve SkyStone’s character and limit traffic through that neighborhood.