The PDF packet for the session is available here. The video replay is available here. Click on the agenda item in the right-hand menu to go to that part of the video.
Future Public Hearings Related to 2/18 Session
- March 18, 2025 Planning Commission public hearing for Articles 1, 2, 8, 10, and 12 of the city’s development code
- April 8, 2025 City Council public hearing for those same articles.
Session Summary
1st Agenda Item: 2025 Non-Profit Event Sponsorship Requests
In exchange for sponsoring a non-profit entity’s fundraising event (e.g., dinners, galas), the city’s name/logo will be recognized in the event materials and the event host will provide the city with a limited number of gratis tickets to the event to allow council members or other city representatives to attend.
13 requests have been received as of 2/11/2025.
The council will decide whether to sponsor events.
Mayor Pro Tem Bigelow recounts discussion from last year about the city sponsoring only one event for groups that have multiple events and then purchasing tickets for any other events from that group.
Bigelow notes that the city has not been able to fill tables they’ve been provided as sponsors in the past. She says that purchasing tickets would allow city staff to attend and avoid having Thornton tables sitting with empty chairs. There is no discussion on that point.
The council selected which event to sponsor among the multiple submissions from single organizations and plans to purchase tickets for the other events.
2nd Agenda Item: Repealing and Replacing C.D. No. 2022-009 Regarding the City’s Regional and Subregional Transportation Priorities
CDOT and the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) are updating long-term plans, so now is a good time for the city to reconsider its priorities for regional projects in which it is involved.
Council will vote on the update in the next council meeting.
3rd Agenda Item: Review of Development Code Update Draft – Articles 10 (Subdivision Standards) and 12 (Noncomforities)
The purpose of Article 10 includes the promotion of orderly growth.
Material from current Article 10 is being moved to other articles, such as transportation and accessibility standards.
Major changes include requiring detached sidewalks on all public and private local streets (currently they are required only on collector and arterial streets).
Homebuilders expressed concern over costs and maintenance of xeriscape strip between road and sidewalk.
Council Member Unrein is not in favor of requiring local street sidewalks.
The street and neighborhood where Unrein lives has attached sidewalks.
Council Member Ayala notes that maintenance is an issue as is evident in older neighborhoods; however, it is important to have detached sidewalks on streets leading to parks and schools for child safety.
Council Member Martinez asks who is responsible for maintenance of the strip. Staff answers that it will be HOAs or metro districts (except for rare instances without HOAs/districts).
Martinez acknowledges costs and maintenance concerns, but there is value in requiring detached sidewalks in parks and school streets. It would be good to encourage families to walk
Two council members say that the code should require schools to be responsible for the sidewalks and strip maintenance on their property (36:25). (Audio/video quality makes it unclear who is talking on those points.)
Martinez asks for clarification on city vs. school district enforcement, including what the city can require schools do with their property.
There is some cross-talk about school responsibility for sidewalks and question about whether the city has asked schools to put in sidewalks (40:30 in the replay video).
New standards are being proposed for for green court configuration for 1-4 unit dwellings, max number of units either 16 or 24 with limits on the length of the court.
New standards are also being proposed for motor court: motor courts limited to 25% of a subdivision and a limit of 6 dwellings per motor court, but homebuilders requested 8 units with guest parking. Council agrees to 8 with no discussion.
Changes to Article 12 Nonconformities are mostly to revise for plain English phrasing.
Next steps include March 18, 2025 Planning Commission public hearing for Articles 1, 2, 8, 10, and 12 and a City Council public hearing for those same articles on April 8, 2025.
4th Agenda Item: Natural Medicine Uses (Psilocybin)
Staff provides a recap on the state’s regulatory framework (Prop 122).
Current city code can regulate one of the four places where psilocybin use and production is allowed under state law: medical facilities (psilocybin healing centers). The city does not yet have code to regulate cultivation, manufacturing, or testing facilities. Staff recommends ordinance to address these uses.
Questions from a council member that raise concerns about how medical facilities use (1:01). Staff says that state law does not allow cities to prohibit use as provided under state law. Thornton can do time, place, manner regulations.
Staff says according to research, effects of psilocybin last 3-5 hours and regulations prohibit the user from leaving before effects have worn off as well as require a plan for safe transportation after the session.
A council member notes that all marijuana facilities in Thornton have been broken into, some multiple times (1:02:15). Staff reports that state law limits amount of product on premises.
A council member compares psilocybin dosing to edible marijuana dosing (1:03:40).
Staff reports that other municipalities are imposing limited hours of operation restrictions, requiring distances between facilities, and forbidding location in residential zones.
Council is drawing on marijuana comparisons, but it is unclear how comparable the recreational marijuana sector is to the therapeutic psilocybin sector.
Council wants staff to draft a list of most restrictive options for the ordinance.
5th Agenda Item: Sex Offender Residency Restrictions
Staff gives a presentation on options for the city to address sex offender residency ordinance.
State law does not address residency restrictions. Municipalities can set their own restrictions.
Residency restrictions have not been shown to reduce recidivism.
Areas for the council to consider:
- Which sex offenders to regulate (e.g., age, type of offense)
- Distance restrictions (e.g., residence distance to schools, parks, etc.)
- Household groups (number of sex offenders in a single household group)
There is a question about the different types of sex offenders. The police representative explains that those are described in state law.
Council Member Martinez asks for citations to support the presentation’s claim that sex offenders have higher recidivism rates than other offenders given that the council received communication from a resident that cites sources to counter that claim.
City staff representative pushes back on the idea of providing citations given how much information they are communicating to council (1:33:40).
Council Member Ayala expresses a concern that policies do not concentrate sex offenders into certain neighborhoods.
A state residential facility planned for Northglenn was canceled due to public pressure. Ayala notes that people in some neighborhoods don’t have the time and resources to mount such a campaign to oppose proposals for their neighborhood.
Council Member Acunto lists recidivism statistics, but he does not respond directly to questions raised in the citizen communication Martinez referenced.
Martinez asks the police representative what regulations would be most helpful. Representative describes sexually violent predators as a priority focus. Acunto did not address different types of sex offenders.
According to the police representative, the majority of reported Thornton sex crimes are committed by those who are known to their victims. From a safety perspective for new regulations, he says that the focus is best on sexually violent predators.
Several local municipalities have a focus on sexually violent predators for their ordinances.
Council expresses consensus to draft an ordinance focused on sexually violent offenders within 1000 feet of areas to be determined.
Council requests a map to show distances showing current vs. proposed restrictions.
Council expresses consensus to move ahead with a draft and public hearing for a free-standing ordinance.
Discussion Items
Council Member Sandgren: Thursday night pickleball at Carpenter is overloaded. Could this be expanded? When will the council be lobbying? June date yet to be set.
Council Member Ayala: Considering March resolutions (women’s history, child abuse awareness). Could we do World Hearing Day for last Feb. meeting of the council? Could we get an update on the hot team and the work they’ve been doing to assist unhoused along with a breakdown of partnership with the county.
Staff: April planning session will discuss the unhoused support resources.
Council Member Martinez: Also asked for reports on usage of Margaret Carpenter Rec Center as warming center. Deputy Fire Chief reports on number of individuals served.
Martinez also mentions an email from constituent regarding lack of youth sports football practice fields. Could the Carpenter fields be opened for youth sports?
Sandgren mentions a long, contentious history with that league that should be discussed.
Bigelow move public hearings up in the council meetings first after comments and before any other agenda items. Bigelow invites input from the council. Sandgren suggests moving it up even before comments. Martinez voices agreement as does Unrein. Consensus reached to put that as an action item for the agenda for the next meeting.
Thornton Civic Observatory 