"If we could all have a dollar for every time someone says 'Safeway,' whether it's online or in person, we'd probably be able to finance part of the project," City and County Manager Jennifer Hoffman said at a special council meeting in July, as the Broomfield Enterprise reported.
The vacant store north of 120th Avenue has been city property since 2015. On Tuesday, Oct. 13, City Council takes up the next step in a process that could revoke the approved site plan for Broomfield Town Square, the project that was supposed to bring the building back to life. Whatever the result, Broomfield's agreement with the developer gives the developer team exclusive rights to build on the site through 2044, and pulling a site plan doesn't end that agreement. The real question for the 39 acres next to city hall is what it would cost to unwind the 2019 deal, and this summer the two sides were millions of dollars apart.
What the 2019 deal promised, and what it committed
Town Square was planned as a walkable gathering place that could serve as Broomfield's downtown. The roughly 39-acre site sits north of 120th Avenue and east of Main Street. Plans could include hundreds of apartments, some townhomes, retail, dining and workspace, the redevelopment of the former Safeway, and a human-made lake. That's according to the Broomfield Enterprise, drawing on the city's project page.
The city bought the Safeway in 2015 for $3.6 million, and it has been empty since. Under the 2019 reimbursement and redevelopment agreement, Broomfield agreed to contribute $20 million in publicly owned land and up to $54 million in tax increment financing toward a project estimated at about $200 million. Tax increment financing returns new tax revenue from a project to the developer to help cover costs. Under the current agreement, the city has committed 100% of the project's property tax and 50% of its sales tax through 2044.
The year 2044 matters for more than taxes. It's also when the developer's exclusive development rights end. The developer team includes Outpost Partners and City Street Investors, according to council information cited by the Enterprise.
A groundbreaking date that kept moving
The city attorney, Nancy Rodgers, laid out the history at the July 16 meeting. Here's how the schedule slipped:
- 2015: The city buys the former Safeway for $3.6 million.
- 2019: The city and developer sign the reimbursement and redevelopment agreement.
- 2021: Projections call for the Safeway redevelopment to begin by early 2023.
- 2023: A developer update moves construction and opening of the first phase, including the Safeway, to 2025.
- September 2023: The city approves the site development plan, which starts a three-year clock to get building permits.
- Early 2025: The developer team expects a groundbreaking by fall 2026.
- 2026: The estimate moves to 2027.
- Sept. 12, 2026: The site plan deadline passes.
Broomfield's municipal code gives a project three years from site plan approval to get building permits for construction. If it misses that deadline, City Council may revoke the plan. The city's July FAQ says the developer had submitted infrastructure plans and permits for a boathouse and a restroom. It had not submitted permits for the Safeway redevelopment or the main residential and mixed-use buildings. The city doesn't consider accessory buildings alone enough to meet the requirement.
Where the talks broke down this summer
Earlier this year, the developer asked for two things: more time on the site plan deadline and a six-year extension of the tax financing agreement. The city estimated the financing extension at about $14 million in additional taxpayer funds. The developer said the plan extension was needed because of the project's complex infrastructure and financing, and because investors wouldn't proceed without more certainty. The city asked for concessions in return.
Here's how the main sticking points lined up, based on the city memo and the developer's responses as reported by the Broomfield Enterprise:
| Issue | City's request | Developer's position |
|---|---|---|
| Affordable housing | Affordable units spread throughout the project | Spread-out units only with $8 million to $17 million more in city funding, or grouped in a separate building; called its offer "a conditional yes, not a refusal" |
| Cash-in-lieu fee | The 2026 rate of about $109,000 per unit if the developer needed more city money at 2026 costs | Willing to pay the fee instead of building units, but at the 2019 rate of about $27,000 per unit |
| Parking | Parking stays free | First three hours free, citing concerns about residential parking |
| The lake | Free for Broomfield residents | "Generally agreed," with a third-party operator that could use reservations and timed access; "no project without the lake" |
| Progress milestone | A permit application for a main building at least six months before the extended deadline, or the financing agreement ends automatically | Securing bond financing as the milestone instead, with termination requiring a council vote |
In June, the developer withdrew both extension requests. Its counsel wrote that the city wanted "additional concessions and changes to the Project which cannot be feasibly delivered." The city's FAQ framed it differently. Once the developer asked for 18 more months and changes to the 2019 agreement, the city said, Council had to judge whether the project could still deliver the benefits behind the original partnership.
Two prices for walking away
Getting out of the agreement now has two competing price tags. In late July, the developer offered the city a choice, according to the Daily Camera, which ran the Broomfield Enterprise's report. The city could approve the withdrawn extension, or it could pay $6 million to end the agreement. Mayor Guyleen Castriotta said the city rejected that and would offer $2 million instead.
"It's not a negotiation, and it's not a reward for performance," Castriotta told the paper. "It's a practical business decision to restore certainty, regain control of our community's future and allow Broomfield to pursue a partner capable of delivering the town center our residents have wanted for more than a decade."
The $6 million matches a figure from the July memo. The developer had proposed that if the financing agreement ended because financing couldn't be secured, the city would reimburse 100% of eligible project costs. The developer estimated those costs at about $5.2 million as of May 2026 and $6.0 million by the end of 2026. Castriotta said the developer didn't provide documentation for the $6 million figure, and the city doesn't plan to negotiate further.
If the developer turns down the $2 million, a city spokesperson said, Broomfield will "maintain the status quo," meet its obligations under the existing agreement, and hope the developer begins to perform.
Why revoking the plan doesn't clear the site
The September council vote is easy to misread. On Sept. 22, Council voted unanimously to start the process of revoking the site development plan. Ward 1 Councilmembers Julie Twiss and Katie Peterson brought the request. "The project remains in construction plan review and significant engineering questions remain unanswered," Twiss said, according to the Broomfield Enterprise. "We have received no substantive work product from the developers in over two months."
City staff were direct about how far that step goes. The FAQ says revoking the site plan "would not terminate the 2019 Redevelopment and Reimbursement Agreement." The developer keeps exclusive development rights through 2044 and could submit a new site plan, and "a different developer could not simply take over the property while those contractual rights remain in place."
Developer Joe Vostrejs described the same situation from his side at an April meeting, as quoted by the Daily Camera. "The city can't sell the land, it can't bring in another developer, it can't build something else," he said. "The outcome of this skepticism is a vacant 40-acre site next to city hall tied up in legal agreement while we wait potentially for another 18 years."
The city's FAQ also asks whether the project could stay stalled even after a revocation. It answers yes and calls that "one of the most important risks facing the City." The developer has said it could leave the 2019 agreement in place without moving the current project forward.
So revocation and termination are separate tools. Revocation is the process Council started on Sept. 22. Termination needs the developer's agreement, which is why the gap between $2 million and $6 million carries so much weight.
What the rest of Broomfield did instead
The city's FAQ acknowledges that higher interest rates, construction costs and housing affordability have made residential development harder to finance, in Broomfield and nationally. It also points to a pattern elsewhere in the city. Baseline, Flatiron Crossing and the Village at West View all moved retail or commercial pieces forward first.
The city's stated concern is whether Town Square has a realistic plan to adapt while keeping its commitments. In the Town Square plan, the piece that would come first is the one residents bring up most. In July, Hoffman said nobody at the city knew what the developer's "recalibrating" meant, but staff were "hoping it starts with the word 'Safeway.'" As of the latest coverage, there's no new plan for the building.
What's on the calendar after Oct. 13
The Oct. 13 council agenda, posted Oct. 7, lists "Broomfield Town Square - Notice to Show Cause" as action item 7.C, Resolution No. 2026-133. It's on the same agenda as the public hearing on the 2027 operating and capital budgets. This post was written the day before that meeting, so it covers the vote as scheduled, not its outcome.
Rodgers told Council in September that a final vote to revoke the plan is expected later this year or early next. If the plan is revoked, the developer team would decide what comes next, which could include resubmitting the existing plan or submitting a new one.
Whatever happens with the site plan, the agreement underneath it runs through 2044 unless both sides agree on a price to end it. "We're just in a position of sitting on the porch waiting for a prom date to show up," Ward 5 Councilmember Todd Cohen told the Broomfield Enterprise in July. "It's been seven years, and it's a long time to wait."
If you own a home near 120th and Main, a project that may arrive in 2027 or may not is hard to factor into what your place is worth today. Dianne Goldsmith can walk you through recent sales around the site and talk through how an unbuilt project next door fits into pricing. Get your free home valuation to start the conversation.
This article is general information, not legal, tax or financial advice. Consult a qualified professional about your situation.
