City planners brought a range of bike‑lane options for Second Street to the council, but technical constraints — street width, state lane standards and on‑street parking demand — left members without a clear path forward.

"Second Street from lane width on both sides, you get a total of 37 feet across," Community Development Manager Mike Caruso told council. He said that leaves the city only a few feasible options: narrow travel lanes to the MDOT minimum in urban areas, which is generally 10 feet; install single bike lanes with little or no buffer; or place a two‑way bike lane on one side of the street and reserve the opposite curb for parking.

Caruso summarized tradeoffs the council had to weigh: a conventional bike lane next to parallel parking requires a 5‑foot bike lane; that plus two 10‑foot travel lanes and two 9‑foot parallel parking areas would exceed Second Street's pavement width. "You cannot have parking and bike lanes on each side of the street on Second Street," he said. Another option the staff showed was an eight‑ to ten‑foot two‑way bike lane on one side of the street plus parking on the other; Caruso noted that design can work but said a two‑way lane with no buffer is tight for two riders side‑by‑side.

The city police chief told council he treats e‑bikes as bicycles under Michigan law and that, where allowed, e‑bikes can operate on sidewalks so long as they yield to pedestrians. He and other council members also raised enforcement and safety concerns: narrower lanes can slow motorists but may increase the feeling of tightness when trucks or delivery vehicles pass.

Council members discussed alternatives to a painted bike lane, including improved pavement markings to keep motorists centered in their lanes, parking tees to better delineate parking areas, and a shuttle or trolley service to reduce short car trips from nearby new developments. Several members said they favored addressing sidewalk gaps and maintaining existing infrastructure first; others suggested a pilot or temporary striping treatment to test a configuration before committing to permanent pavement or curb changes.

Clarifying numbers from staff: the city said current as‑built drawings show 37 feet of pavement between curb faces on Second Street; staff measured roughly 113 on‑street spaces between First Street and the beginning of DTN property that could be affected if curbside parking is removed. Council did not vote on an immediate change and asked staff to return with options, a pilot approach and outreach plans, including contacting schools and the DTN development to communicate parking and circulation plans.

Why it matters: Second Street is a primary north–south artery into Brighton's downtown. Any change that removes public parking or narrows traffic lanes will affect residents, businesses and deliveries and could change how visitors access downtown.