Brighton council adopts ordinance allowing duplexes, townhomes on limited R‑1 parcels adjacent to commercial zones

Brighton City Council on July 8, 2025 adopted Ordinance No. 608, an amendment to Chapter 98 of the City Code that adds two permitted uses in the R‑1 single‑family zoning district where an R‑1 parcel shares a border with a C‑2 commercial district: duplexes and townhomes (subject to townhome regulations).

Community Development Manager Andrew Caruso told the council the change is not a rezoning but a change in permitted uses. Caruso said the amendment applies to 13 parcels citywide — 12 along Northeast Street and one each on Kossain and O'Doherty — and that one of the O'Doherty parcels is already a duplex. "There is only 13 parcels in the city where that happens," Caruso said during the council discussion.

The amendment follows several years of Planning Commission review and repeated references in the city's master‑plan process. Caruso said the Planning Commission concluded the change was consistent with long‑standing future land‑use guidance for part of Northeast Street and intended it as a low‑impact way to encourage selective redevelopment.

During the meeting, resident Kelly Janai of 202 Northeast Street urged the council to include both sides of her block in any change. "If you're gonna rezone a neighborhood and everything that I look at, then just include me," Janai said during public comment. Janai and another nearby resident, Walter Barrett, said portions of their block are in disrepair and that selective redevelopment has affected who would be likely buyers for single‑family homes.

Council members debated whether to approve the changes at this meeting or return the matter for further study. Several members — including Mayor Pro Tem Bone and Council member Gibson — argued approving the amendment for the listed parcels would not foreclose future consideration of adding other parcels. Council member Robert (last name on file) said he preferred waiting for a full council but did not propose a specific change.

Mayor Pro Tem Bone moved to adopt the proposed ordinance; Council member Gibson seconded. Clerk Brown called the roll: Gibson — yes; Mayor Toby — yes; Council member Schmank — yes; Council member Albert — yes; Mayor Pro Tem Bone — yes. The motion passed unanimously. Council members Gardner and Pettengill were excused earlier in the meeting.

Caruso and City Attorney Gavis later noted that any further amendment to include parcels on the opposite side of Northeast Street could be inconsistent with the city's current future‑land‑use map unless the master‑plan language is revised to match any zoning changes. Caruso said residents may petition the Planning Commission to reexamine additional parcels; he reported the city mailed notices within 300 feet of the affected parcels and received three public responses (two in favor and one that did not endorse the proposal).