Castle Rock council approves Brickyard mixed‑use project, clears way for 145,000‑sq‑ft sports center

Town of Castle Rock council members voted unanimously Feb. 4 to approve a plan‑development zoning ordinance and a related development agreement for the Brickyard, a proposed mixed‑use redevelopment of the former Acme Brick site that includes a proposed 145,000‑square‑foot sports development center.

The approvals let Confluence Companies move the project into site‑development and construction phases. The development agreement and zoning together commit the developer to construct roads, stormwater infrastructure, trails and parking necessary to support the sports center and the mixed‑use neighborhood, and dedicate roughly 10.36 acres of public land for the sports facility.

Why it matters: Council and staff said the site provides road access, utilities and a scale of land that make the sports center financially feasible; the developer and town also structured revenue sharing and financing steps so the facility’s debt service would not rely solely on the town’s general fund.

The sports center concept presented by town recreation staff would contain competition and recreation gyms, a natatorium sized to host meets, a fitness/weight area, group fitness and meeting space and a mezzanine track. Recreation staff said the building footprint is about 145,000 square feet and that estimated hard costs are roughly $68 million with about $4 million in soft costs (furniture, fixtures and equipment), for a total project cost in the low‑to mid‑$70 million range. Staff and the applicant told council the town would finance roughly $62 million of that amount by issuing certificates of participation (a municipal lease‑style financing). Staff projected annual debt service of about $4.2 million, to be paid from a mix of pledged revenue streams tied to the Brickyard site and other parks funding.

Confluence Companies and its design team described the Brickyard as a phased, mixed‑use district on about 31.6 acres. The PD zoning that passed includes (maximums stated in the zoning request) up to 583 residential units (540 multifamily units and up to 43 townhome units), roughly 49,000 square feet of office, about 16,000 square feet of restaurant space and a “Great Hall” building with retail and market uses. The zoning also allows a hotel and conference facility on the southern portion of the site; the developer’s materials show a hotel program and associated pool deck and parking structure.

Tony DeSimone, CEO of Confluence Companies, told council his team and the town negotiated infrastructure responsibilities to allow the sports center and the mixed‑use buildings to be built together. “We would be able to construct it on their site,” he said, describing cooperation with neighboring property owners on a future road alignment and trail connections.

Council and staff emphasized off‑site transportation work the developer agreed to fund and build: reconstruction of the existing northern segment of Prairie Hawk Drive, required turn‑lane and intersection improvements on Wolfensberger Road, and construction of the east side of the planned Praxis Street (a new connector) to Plum Creek Parkway. The development agreement also obligates the developer to upsize a culvert and reimburse the town for previous drainage and sewer upgrades in the area.

Public finance elements include a proposed revenue‑sharing package that would allocate 60 percent of the town’s 4.0 percent sales tax collected on Brickyard commercial activity to the project for 25 years, and creation of an urban renewal plan that would capture incremental property taxes generated on the site to support developer‑funded public improvements. The developer plans a metropolitan district (special district) to provide local services and repay some public improvement costs; the developer also requested credits against town parks and transportation impact fees to reflect onsite park land and publicly‑funded infrastructure delivered as part of the project. Staff’s financial analysis concluded the combination of project revenues, pledged fees and impact‑fee credits makes the sports center financing feasible while leaving funding for other park projects over the medium term.

Council action: Two separate formal actions were required and both passed unanimously. The first was ordinance 2025‑7 (rezoning/plan‑development plan); the second was the development agreement ordinance 2025‑8 (vesting and contractual obligations tied to the project).

What’s next: Site‑development plans, final building architecture and a public‑finance agreement will return to council on later agendas; staff said additional intergovernmental agreements will be required with the school district, county and other taxing entities if the URA is established. The developer said construction would be phased and that public‑facing retail and lodging uses would follow core infrastructure and the sports center.

A number of residents and business leaders spoke in favor during the public hearing; speakers cited unmet recreation demand, new hotel and conference capacity for the community, and new housing choices for older residents.

Officials urged continued review of parking, traffic phasing and trail connections as the project moves into site‑level permitting.