Department of Community Development
Reference: Final Reading of Adams Crossing Disconnection (De-Annexation)
To: Mayor Gregory Mills and Members of City Council
Through: Michael Martinez, City Manager
Prepared By: Nick Di Mario, AICP, Senior Planner
Date Prepared: July 10, 2025
INTRODUCTION / PURPOSE
The disconnection (de-annexation) application before the City Council is for an approximately 23.7-acre parcel, including adjacent CDOT right-of-way, located at the northwest corner of 120th Avenue and Chambers Road (the “Property”). Lance Richards and Jason Wedlick of Landmark Development (the “Project Representatives”) are acting on behalf of the landowner, Adams Crossing LLC (the “Applicant”) in the facilitation of this de-annexation application.
This application came before the City Council for initial consideration on May 7, 2024, where City Council approved the ordinance for disconnection. Prior to the ordinance coming back to City Council for its final consideration, it was required of the Applicant to exclude the Property from the Adams Crossing Metropolitan District No. 2 (the “Metro District”) and the Adams Crossing Metropolitan District Nos. 1 - 8 service area (the “Service Area”).
Following the approval of the de-annexation application, it is the intent of the Applicant to annex into Commerce City.
BACKGROUND
As noted in the original staff report provided to City Council in May of 2024, the Applicant’s desire to disconnect the Property from City limits stems from certain cost and development challenges.
In order to develop within the City, a property is required to be served by City water and sewer services. The only available City water and sewer services are located to the northwest of the Property, across Interstate 76, the BNSF Railroad, the Burlington Ditch and the Burlington O’Brian Canal Ditch. As connections to these services would require looping and ‘jack and bore’ construction, the cost to construct these connections would cost upwards of $4,300,000. Furthermore, the City would inherit the long-term maintenance obligations of these connections if the Property were to develop in the City.
This disconnection was anticipated during negotiations for the latest Inter-Govermental Agreement Regarding Annexation Boundary and Planning Cooperation (the “IGA”) with Commerce City. The IGA, which was executed in 2019, addressed annexation boundaries and planning coordination between Brighton and Commerce City.
Due to the reasoning above, staff believes the Property is most appropriate for development outside of the City limits, whether that be under the jurisdiction of Adams County or Commerce City. As such, staff provided a recommendation of approval at the initial consideration of the ordinance, and still maintains said recommendation.
The attached staff report from the initial consideration of the ordinance can provide a more in-depth summary of the request, review criteria and staff findings and recommendation.
SECOND READING UPDATE
This ordinance has taken over a year to come back to City Council for final consideration because of multiple factors.
As noted, the Applicant was required to exclude the Property from the Metro District and Service Area prior to the final consideration of the ordinance. A Motion for an Order for Exclusion (the “Exclusion”) was presented to the District Court of Adams County (the “Court”) in October of 2024; the Court approved the Exclusion.
As mentioned, it has always been the intent of the Applicant to annex into Commerce City following the approval of the ordinance. Since the Exclusion, the Project Representatives have begun the process of annexing into Commerce City, despite the Property remaining in the municipal boundary of the City. To be clear, the Property cannot be annexed into Commerce City until the Property has been officially disconnected from the City. As stated by the Project Representatives, the annexation process with Commerce City has become more complicated than they originally planned for. After the initial submittal of their annexation application, Commerce City required additional reports and studies that were not required with the initial submittal. This included the need for traffic impact studies, storm water drainage studies, etc. One study in particular that caused a delay was the requirement of an additional wetland study. Wetland studies are required for all projects that contain any potential waters of the United States, including wetlands. For reference, there is a wetland type environment in the north portion of the Property between the Burlington O’Brian Canal Ditch and the BNSF Railroad. The wetland study was required in order to determine if the wetland is non-jurisdictional, essentially determining whether or not the wetland falls under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). By the end of the wetland study, it was determined that the wetland is non-jursidctional and not under the jurisdiction of the USACE or the EPA. The abovementioned studies can take a considerable amount of time to complete and as such, caused a delay with the resubmittal of their annexation application to Commerce City.
Prior to disconnecting from the City, the Applicant and Project Representatives desired a clear path forward to annexation with Commerce City. Now that a clear path to annexation into Commerce City has been reached, the disconnection application is ready for final consideration.
ATTACHMENTS
• Draft Ordinance
All documents from past meetings on this topic may be found on the City’s website under the “Government” tab and then selecting “City Council Agendas”. Using the “Search Agendas by:” box, navigate to the May 7, 2024 City Council Agenda. The documents from the initial reading of the ordinance can be found under item 7.A. on page 4 of that agenda.