When it came right down to it, the Brighton City Council was not making a decision about renewable energy or the potential for pollution, economic development or fire hazards at their Sept. 5 meeting.

They were simply there to make a zoning decision about Amprius Tech's plans to build a manufacturing plant along Bromley Lane.

“This is not what a zoning hearing is supposed to be,” Councilor Matt Johnston said.

For Johnston, the zoning question was easy to answer: Amprius' plans do not match the neighborhood, he said.

“The discussion needs to be about the zoning of the land, and the zoning of the land has nothing to do with Amprius coming into Brighton,” Johnston said. “I would love it if I could guarantee that Amprius will be in that building but I can't guarantee that and I can't guarantee that this deal won't fall apart a year from now.

“But I can say that if we rezone this, the zoning will stay that way and that change, to industrial uses, is not a small change. Industrial uses for this building puts it into an entirely different classification.”

But Johnston was outvoted after a five-hour public hearing that included testimony from 26 people, evenly split between those in favor and those opposed to the new facility. Councilors approved rezoning the former Sears distribution center by a 4-3 vote on first reading, with Johnston and colleagues Ann Taddeo and Mary Ellen Pollack opposing the change.

Councilor Peter Padilla said he understood the concern but said he thinks the zoning change is warranted. Brighton city staff and consultants have reviewed the project plans and have recommended approval.

“The use of this facility as something besides a warehouse that is falling apart in a critical area of Brighton is important to me,” Padilla said. “We have a creative option in front of us that our professionals tell me has the safety concerns in hand.”

Unused space

The company announced in March its intention to occupy the empty former distribution center on Bromley Lane, setting up their new lithium-ion battery manufacturing facility in the 775,000-square-foot building. Their first phase would create 332 net new jobs in Brighton with an average annual wage of $68,516.

The site is the former location of a Sears/KMart distribution center that contains 1.3 million square feet of space and parking but has been vacant for the past 18 months, according to Dan Vittone of Starboard Realty Partners, the building's owners. Vittone said his group had been in unfruitful talks with Costco, Albertsons and even car dealer Carvana to use the space, to no avail.

“So what we tried to do is A: Lease the building under the existing zoning, but we couldn't do it,” Vittone said. “So, B: We tried to sell the building, but couldn't do it. So now we're here, trying to broaden the uses for the building and get this thing leased.”

The current zoning specifically limits the building's uses to warehouses and distribution centers. Amprius hopes to get the zoning changed to allow industrial, commercial and public uses.

Brighton staff, from planners to utilities to the fire marshal, have reviewed the project, discussed it with paid consultants and have found the project to be sufficiently safe.

Neighbors concerned

The facility would be located at 18875 Bromley Lane, just 600 feet south of Brighton's Mt. Princeton St. and homes in the surrounding Brighton Crossings neighborhood and due north of Brighton's water treatment plant. Brighton's Planning Board advised the City Council to turn down the company's proposal on Sept. 5, citing the project's proximity to neighbors.

That brought out neighbors of the proposed project to the Sept. 5 meeting to argue against it, fearing pollution from the plant and potential dangers if the lithium-ion batteries were to catch fire.

Joe Williams, who lives on Mt. Sneffels St. to the north of the building, said he's worked hard to provide a safe place for his family.

“That's why people move here now, so they don't have to live next to Suncor or the Pepsi company in Denver, down off of Brighton Boulevard,” Williams said. “There are areas that are designated for this kind of thing.”

Neighbor Gilda Ramirez, who lives on Mt. Princeton St. north of the building, said she's worried about traffic in the area if there is a problem. With three schools in the neighborhood, traffic is often at a standstill now.

“If there is an incident, how long would it take to evacuate the residents in the area?” she said. “The statistics always say that if you're not out and safe within a certain period of time, and it's usually a very short period of time, then the percentage of survival is in the single digits. Do we really want to take that kind of chance of an incident when there are three schools there, not just the residents. What about our children?”

But opponents were equally matched in the audience by those who supported the project.

“I, for one, welcome this state-of-the-art facility” said Kevin Barnes of E. 136th Ave. in Brighton. Barnes said he is an engineer who has worked with similar batteries.

“I very much support a rezoning here because I think this can be done safely with tremendous responsibility back to the community,” he said. “We've already gone over the fact that they are going to occupy an underutilized building. They're going to bring in many well-paying jobs to the area and will procure many good locally and that all has a net positive effect on our community.”

Narrow vote

The 50/50 split in opinions continued on to the dais. City Councilor Ann Taddeo said she'd heard from numerous opponents of the project and that swayed her decision.

“It isn't that I don't think there won't be many, many safeguards put into place or that regulations won't be followed,” Taddeo said. “But that does not mean that there won't be problems, things we can't anticipate or that we don't know can happen in the future.”

Councilor Clint Blackhurst said staff's opinion convinced him.

“I have to say this has been a difficult discuss both ways,” Blackhurst said. “I have to admit to being swayed by those people on staff who are experts in their field and the people who know what they are talking about. And I can handle that.”

If councilors vote to approve the zoning change at the final hearing later this year, the company still needs permits from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Company officials said they plan to submit their applications to the state this fall. The company hopes to be operating by the beginning of 2025.