Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

on the meeting here looks like Susan has started the recording so I'll mention too if it hasn't already been mentioned that if you would like to be speaking on agenda item tonight you need to sign up to do so the instructions are on the screen you can hit on the QR code or Google search City of Aurora Planning Commission to sign up to speak. So Chairman Walz, over to you to start the meeting.

Hey, thank you so much, Brandon. Good evening, everyone. It is Wednesday, the 25th of March. Time is now 611. I now call this regularly scheduled virtual meeting of the Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission to order. I'll now call the role of commissioners. Commissioner Jachik. Present. Commissioner Bush. Present. Commissioner Becker?

Present.

Commissioner Benko?

Present.

Commissioner Riley?

Present.

Commissioner Hogan?

Present.

And Commissioner Walz is also present. We have established a quorum with seven members present. The Pledge of Allegiance will not be set tonight as this meeting is virtual. We will move on to the approval of the minutes from March the 11th. Everyone received a draft of the minutes. You all had an opportunity to review them. Are there any corrections or amendments to the minutes? I found a few non-substantive things and I'll chat with Susan about those offline, just some spelling errors, but non-substantive. So seeing no amendments, the chair moves to approve the minutes as presented without objection. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Banka. It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes without objection as presented. Any discussion on the motion to approve? Any objection? Okay. The minutes from the 11th will be approved. Tonight we've got eight items of general business across three separate applications, items 8B through 8I and one procedural item of business, item 8A. Due to a request to continue from the applicant of the items 8C through F, which is the tributary project, the chair moves to amend the agenda and continue items 8C through F to our next scheduled meeting on April 8th. Is there a second? I so second. Thank you, Commissioner Riley. It's been moved and seconded. To amend the agenda to move items eight C through F to our April 8th meeting. Is there any discussion on the motion? Seeing none, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jacek. Approve. Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Benka.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley.

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan.

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. Amending the agenda has been approved. We will now vote to adopt the amended agenda. I move that we adopt the agenda as amended. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Behnke. It's been moved and seconded. Any discussion on the motion? Without discussion, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jacek.

Approve.

Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Behnke.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley.

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan.

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. The amended agenda will be adopted. We now have four items of general business, items 8B and 8G through I, and one item of procedural business, item 8A. 8C and 8F will be continued until our April 8th meeting. I'll now read a summary of our policies and procedures for this evening's meeting. Please make sure your home or computer microphone is on mute unless you're speaking. The Planning and Zoning Commission meeting is a quasi-judicial hearing. There is no swearing in of those who will give testimony, but it is presumed that all parties are telling the truth. When addressing the Commission as an applicant or their representative, please state your first and last name as well as the organization that you're representing, and you may additionally state if you are an Aurora resident. If you are addressing the Commission as a member of the general public for public testimony, please state your first and last name and if you are an Aurora resident. For each agenda item, there will be an initial presentation by city staff. Afterward, commissioners may ask questions of staff. Discussion of agenda items by commissioners will be conducted only following a motion and a second. Following the staff presentation, the applicant or their representative may choose to make a presentation or answer questions. The applicant will have 10 minutes for their presentation. Commissioners may ask questions of the applicant. Members of the public that have signed up to speak will each have three minutes to speak on the agenda item during this public comment period. It is asked that only new information be presented. The same arguments should not be repeated. Commissioners may ask questions of the public following their comments. After public comments, the applicant will have five minutes to address any public comments. Commissioners may ask questions of the applicant. The chair will ensure all commissioners have no further questions of the applicant or staff. The chair will then call for the question. After a motion has been made and seconded, the commissioners will then discuss the case amongst themselves. After the discussion, the chair will call the question. Commissioners are finders of fact and will vote based on their evaluation of the evidence presented as compared to Code Section 146. All rulings by the Planning and Zoning Commission are normally final. Exceptions are zoning map amendments, zoning code amendments, and comprehensive plan amendments that need city council approval. Decisions by the commission may be appealed to city council by presenting a written appeal to the city manager within 10 calendar days of the public hearing. City council also has the discretion to call up any case whether an appeal has been made or not. Notices for this virtual meeting were published, posted to the city website, and the development projects were posted with signs on the projects. Notices were also mailed to adjust adjacent landowners per city requirements. Without a consent agenda, this evening's first case is agenda item 8A. I just wanted to make another announcement for any members of the public that have signed up to speak or that were interested in hearing items 8C through F. Those items have been continued to our April 8th meeting. So 8C through 8F will be heard at our April 8th meetings. Moving on, our first agenda item is 8A, which is a procedural item. We had previously laid on the table the items for 8A for the all-in one at Harmony Commercial, which is project 1908359 located in ward two. At this time, the chair rises to remove the items related to project number 1908359 off of the table. to be available to be calendared on the future agenda for the planning commission. It's been moved by the chair to remove the items from project number 1908359 from the table. Is there a second?

Second.

Commissioner Riley, thank you. It's been moved and seconded. This is a non-debatable motion. I will call the roll. Commissioner Jacek.

Approve.

Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Benka.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley. Approve.

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan.

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. Those items related to that project number will be removed from the table and available to be calendared on a future agenda. Moving on to agenda item B, which is the Aurora Places Comprehensive Plan Amendment located throughout the city. The case manager this evening is Huy Lang Lu. Huy Lang Lu, the applicant, is the city of Aurora. Huy Lang, the floor is yours. Thank you.

Chair Walz and a member of the commission. Again, my name is William Liu. I'm a principal transportation planner with the city. I am also the co-project manager. Together with Carly Camposano as a co-project manager and also Tom Walker-Brelak, the deputy project manager for Connecting Aurora, the city's multimodal transportation master plan. So today we are coming here to make the final adoption, plan adoption presentation. So after today's meeting with your recommended approval, then we'll go to city council for their approval to stop connecting rural into the city's comprehensive plan around places. So with that, I'm going to introduce the project consulting manager, Keith Forshine, to make the presentation.

Thank you again. I am Keith. I'm with HDR. We are a architecture engineering and planning firm based here in Denver. Really happy to be presenting to you all again. We just presented to you all a couple of weeks ago. So great to see you again. Much of this presentation is a repeat of that presentation, which was intended as an excuse me, an overview of the plan process and recommendations. And as we mentioned, we are here today to ask for your recommendation to move this on to council. So I will be presenting this much the same as I did a couple of weeks ago. Please do feel free to raise hands or interject with questions as I go. And I know we'll have time for questions at the end. Our agenda for this evening is to give you all a project overview, review the timeline for the planning process, present the vision and mission and goals for connecting Aurora, provide a brief overview of community engagement that was conducted throughout the process, present our vision for the future, which is a place-oriented city, go over the plan recommendations and then move forward with presenting our adoption timeline. So connecting Aurora is the city's first citywide multimodal transportation plan. This would be adopted as an amendment to the comprehensive plan Aurora Places. It will guide Aurora's transportation investments, policies, programs and projects over the next few decades. It informs the public development community, neighboring jurisdictions, funding partners, and future city council and staff. And it really builds on recommendations from that comprehensive plan by establishing a well-integrated approach with land use development throughout the city. Finally, we envision creating a network of complete streets that serve all people, no matter their travel preference. We did conduct this process over the last two and a half years approximately. We started in fall of 2023, including four key milestones of engagement with the public in the spring and summer of 2024. Then again in fall and winter of 2024, again in spring of 2025, and then our final engagement period was in the fall of 2025. All of that leading to the final plan, which is now drafted and ready to go to Council. I do like to read the City's shared vision that was developed in coordination with a variety of stakeholders around the City, as well as City Council input. The vision for our transportation future in Aurora is that Aurora safely connects all people to our places for a healthy, sustainable, and economically strong community. What City staff is committing to do to deliver that vision is here as our mission statement. The City of Aurora will provide a complete transportation system to meet the needs of all people. City will engage the public in the delivery of plans, programs, policies, standards, and projects. On the right side of the screen, you'll see our 10 goals that were developed with the community's input. The first four across the top, safe, reliable, convenient, and connected, really describe a transportation system and how it serves the people in the community. The next three, sustainable, economically strong, and healthy, describe overall community goals that the City of Aurora is pursuing and how the transportation system can contribute to achieving those goals. And then the final 3 authentic, equitable and integrated really are about how we build that transportation system that really benefits everybody in the city. Uh, we, I mentioned the community engagement as a result of all that great engagement that, um. The city staff really led, we were able to reach a wide cross section of our community, including over a 1Million touch points over 10,000 visits to the website. And and thousands of surveys that were filled out, including that pens. The city, in addition to meeting people at these events. really made an effort to go to where people are living their lives on a day-to-day basis. So you see that in these pop-up events and attendance at existing community events. The top transportation concerns that we heard are really related to safety and convenience. Again, tying back to those goals, people felt that it was unsafe to travel outside of a car. They encountered bottlenecks and dangerous driving behaviors. Their destinations and connections to those destinations are too far for people to walk or bike comfortably. And people really desire a higher quality of places in their neighborhoods and on their streets. And finally, related to transit, many issues were identified with transit being too slow, infrequent, unreliable, and sometimes feeling unsafe. Our vision for the future is that Aurora is a place-oriented city. So what this means is that we increase the number of convenient and affordable and safe mobility options for people. We're emphasizing the need to simultaneously concentrate those destinations within and near neighborhoods. We're imagining investments in walking, biking, and transit infrastructure with a focus on making those modes of transportation safer and more accessible for everybody. And finally, we envision using land efficiently and productively. In order to create that vision, we developed a layered approach to visionary networks, including a pedestrian network, bike network, a transit network, all of which really overlay on top of our street network. So you'll see these visionary networks on the right. This is a desired long-term network. So over the next 25 plus years, this network will come to fruition. And it really is intended to meet the mobility needs of today and tomorrow, drive that network design and development, and reflect our vision for the future. The visionary pedestrian network envisions that every city street must safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian movement. Particularly those streets that are near schools, transit stops, and commercial areas where we find that more people walk. What that looks like is shown on the bottom here is a couple of examples of neighborhood-oriented pedestrian improvements and a more commercial area. On the Visionary Bike Network, we include improvements such as separated bike lanes, shared use paths, and new crossings. The city of Aurora is already implementing many of these improvements across the city, and that really makes biking a more viable option and safer option for people as they move around. On the Visionary Transit Network, we're imagining a service expansion as the city continues to grow, particularly to the east, as well as higher frequency and infrastructure improvements that allow buses and trains to move more efficiently through the network. The auto and freight network will also need to expand as the city continues to grow. Capacity improvements and safety enhancements are part of the city's vision for the future to keep up with demand for auto travel as that demand grows. In order to realize these visionary networks, the city will implement a variety of policies, programs, as well as capital investments, and really work with its regional and state and national partners to make these improvements a reality. A brief summary of those follows here. We identified five new or updated policies, including a complete streets policy and design guideline, Designing streets for safer speeds, so making sure that our speeds match our desired outcomes. Updating the city's transportation impact study guidelines, requirements for new development and redevelopment, and updating those requirements potentially in the UDO in the future. And a focus on high-frequency transit corridor development. We identified 12 new or updated programs, including mostly on the left side here. These are really focused on multimodal improvements throughout the city and making walking, biking and taking other modes, alternative modes of travel safer and more convenient for folks as well as some transit programs on the right side of the screen. And, of course, enhancing the city's maintenance programs in the future. We identified nearly 900 individual project elements. You can see it's a wide variety of project elements that were identified really all across the city. Here are the maps of those project elements. I'm not going to zoom in on these maps, but I do want to highlight that. Many of the projects are focused on the well-established areas of the city. And that's really because that's where our greatest needs are. And as the city grows to the east, those complete streets policy and design guidelines are really intended to make those streets safe and convenient for everybody as that gets built out. I do want to highlight that there are some ongoing safety initiatives that are running in parallel with this plan. including the Adams County Safety Action Plan, which is slated to be completed in the spring of 2026 as well. And also, I want to highlight the very successful existing traffic calming program and the city's desire to continue to expand that program itself. This map shows the short term projects, which include intersection and crossing upgrades, complete streets upgrades across the city, Street projects that include safety and technology, as well as a few whitening projects where that that demand indicates the need. There are bikeway projects across the city as well as filling in some of our sidewalk gaps. And I want to highlight the shaded areas that are in yellow on this screen as a potential new micro transit zones that the city would like to move forward with. The total investment for these improvements is about 45 to 65M dollars per year for the next 10 years. And I want to highlight that this is. Not inclusive of the investment that the city's already making in its maintenance programs. So this would be in addition to those maintenance programs. Here is our plan adoption schedule the planning obviously we're here with the planning commission public hearing. And we'll be presenting to city council taps committee tomorrow as well, asking for their permission to move this forward into the next council study session in April. And then looking at a May adoption timeline for full city council. So that's our presentation. I'm not sure if you want to present the next two slides or take questions right now.

Thank you, Keith. And maybe we'll have Daniel Krasnowski. He's the interim manager for long-range planning. He can go over the next two slides regarding the approval procedure and criteria. Daniel, can you please? Sure. Can you move to the next slide?

Yeah, move to the next slide. These are two slides that you've seen before related to comprehensive plan amendments. The UDO defines the procedure and the voting threshold and the criteria for approval for comprehensive plan amendments. On the screen here is the procedure, basically saying that the Planning and Zoning Commission should conduct a public hearing and make a recommendation to City Council. And sort of a special feature of UDO. Comp plan amendments is that that amendment that recommendation has to be come from a not less less than 2 thirds of the entire membership. If you go to the next slide. And this is your criteria for approval, which is also defined in the, it's fairly comprehensive, but straightforward. And I'm happy to fill any questions about process. Otherwise, I'll turn it back over to Keith and the project team.

Daniel, before you leave us, just for the purposes of the record, since this is a public hearing, could you please give us your name and title or your name and position? We also have a new commissioner joining as well, and I don't believe you presented in front of Commissioner Becker.

Sure. I'm Daniel Krasinowski. I'm with the Planning and Business Development Department. My title is the Interim Long-Range Planning Manager.

Great. Thank you, Daniel. Were there any additional slides in the presentation or can we have questions from the commission at this point?

That is our final slide.

Okay, great. Thank you. I'll open the floor for questions for the commission. Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. I had two questions. 167, that page of the whole brief, you talk about micro transit. I'm just trying to get a little better appreciation for what you describe as micro transit.

Sure, and I can jump in here and please supplement as you see fit. Microtransit is it can take many forms, but most what most of what we see in the Denver Metro area are like shuttle vans that can be on demand service. So it's a service that is usually subsidized by the city and or RTD that provides lower cost rides that are on demand so people can call or use an app to hail a ride. But these are dedicated vehicles. It's not like Uber or Lyft or something like that, but it's a dedicated vehicle that's operated by the city and or RTD. And it provides service within an area. So those areas that we showed on the map would be, you know, kind of that capture area for that service. And it's generally run by just a few vehicles and it's door to door. So that's kind of the key aspect there. And it's really intended as a service that's for an area that might not support kind of what we call fixed route transit. So, you know, a typical what you think of as like an RTD bus route may not be supported in some of these growing areas. or it provides a different kind of service. So many times it's for some of our aging population to use to get to doctor's appointments or those kinds of things that are a little bit harder to use some of those fixed route services.

Yeah, very, very good. I just want to add additional information. So currently we do have to kind of on-demand transit service. One is called Aurora Rides and that serves the west part of the I-225. another one is the majestic commute that serves the majestic commerce center area to connect with the 40th airport station the community rail station so those are the existing two micro transit services and the city is also looking at some potential services near the, in the, for the North East area, east of E478, where we have a lot of employees and given the land use characteristics and fixed lot transit, as Keith mentioned, it may not be the best way of serving, providing transit service for those areas. And RTD just came out with their partnership program. So they they're providing $10 million for the southeast region sub region, and each year for the next three years from 2027 2028 and 2029. So cities actually looking at potentially we may have applied for that bonding with the city match to to provide service for that area as well as we may look at other areas when as it fits.

Okay, and the other question I had on 196 in our packet, the move freight part, there's always been a lot of concern about, you know, the 18 wheelers and where they can park. When you talk about move freight, have you considered truck stops or larger areas where they can park off I-70 to reduce that type of truck traffic that ends up providing congestion in shopping areas or on residential roads? Is that a consideration as well?

Yeah, really great, insightful question that that has come up and it actually is part of I mentioned the complete streets and policy and design guidelines. And 1 of the key components that are going into those guidelines are what we're referring to as mobility hubs. And those mobility hubs can take many forms. What you might typically think of a mobility hub as today is a real station with a park and ride. So, like, 9 mile station would be a mobility hub, but in our more industrial oriented land use areas, those mobility hubs may include those kinds of improvements as well, such as truck parking, overnight truck parking or long term parking. So, and we definitely do have some of those mobility hubs identified in those zones as well. All right, thank you both for that.

Thank you commissioner Hogan.

Yes, my apologies for missing the presentation a couple weeks ago. One is a statement, and that is I happen to be in the area that you are testing one of these, let's call it a call and ride for the elderly people. Thank you very much. But we have been highly encouraged here at Heather Gardens to use this facility. So we have several folks that are testing the logistics of it. If I call and have them take me to King Soopers, I realize that they're not going to wait for me. But then how long will it take them? Because you have limited fans with limited opportunity to come get me. Am I going to be stuck at King Soopers for two hours, for instance? So they're testing that right now. Fortunately, I am able to drive where I wish. But that's not to say I would never use that. So thank you very much. The second is a question and that's how our partners, let's call them like RTD, really working with you. So when you say they're gonna give us $10 million, are they literally gonna give 10 million in cash or have they talked about that as 10 million in service in kind and that the service in kind has to be worked out in the future on what it is that they're going to provide at a quote unquote $10 million value. How does that logistically work? And I guess the follow up to that is that if they do give it in cash, do they expect the city then to provide $10 million worth of transportation, which one might argue is not directly the role of the city?

So this is kind of a special program. RTD has started a couple years ago, and they just come up with the next round of this Dr. Cox TIP program, and this is the RTD's program. So they have this $10 million by, there's like a four or five sub-regions. So for the southeast sub-region, they have $10 million each year.

So those are

Those are cash, actually, but we need to apply and we need to compete with other projects. And I believe there's a, I forgot what is the exact match, at least 20%, maybe more in terms of the city match. But we will, when we apply, if we decide to apply for that grant, the RTD partnership grant, and we will need to have very specific transit service included in our proposal, in our application, how we will provide and what we will provide in terms of transit services that's what we're seeing maybe a similar call and ride as you call it it's an on-demand service for the worldwide maybe another right for the higher highlands area where we will have very specific service frequency how many vehicles and lots of service spend from when to when how much does it cost and we need to have all those specific information. And if we've got the grant and we need to sign the MIGA, then we'll need to provide the service with that money. So it's real, it's real cash.

Go ahead, Commissioner Hogan.

Then my follow-up question is if you do not get this grant or you get $10,000, not the whole grant, How much of this program can the city afford to implement within the next two years?

That's a great question. And this is just, it's probably, I don't remember whether Keith covered it in terms of the overall cost for the near term. I remember it was like somewhere around 65 million or more. that including transit and bicycle pedestrian and street network, so certainly there's a high demand for funding. So if we don't get this money, we're going to have to work with the city management, with city council, identify funding sources to begin to implement the near-term recommended project. So there will be a process we need to look at in terms of how do we implement all those recommended projects and programs through Connecting Aurora.

Thank you.

Sorry, I was having some internet connectivity issues there. Further questions from the Commission? One quick question in your draft. Thank you in the acknowledgements for the adoption draft of acknowledging the Planning Commission. I would just have one small request in there that former Commissioner Geiser be included in acknowledgement as well. He sat for the first presentation and also our new Commissioner Becker, since she will be voting on the ComPlan amendment this evening. So just a couple of small requests there in the acknowledgements. Further questions from the Commission? Okay, Susan, do we have any members of the public sign up to speak?

Chair Walz, we do not.

Okay, a final opportunity for questions from the commission. Seeing none, I will now close this portion of the public hearing and entertain a motion on agenda item 8B.

This is Commissioner Jetchik. Agenda item 8B, Aurora places COMP PLAN AMENDMENT BASED ON THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THE PRESENTATION, AND DISCUSSION AT THIS EVENING'S PUBLIC HEARING, I MOVE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO AURORA CITY COUNCIL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE AURORA PLACES COMP PLAN TO INCORPORATE CONNECTING AURORA MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL COMPLIES WITH THE CRITERIA IN CODE SECTION 146-5.4.1.A.3 and the provision of the Code Section 146-5.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance.

Thank you, Commissioner Jecik. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8B. Is there a second? I would like to second the motion made by Commissioner Jecik. Thank you, Commissioner Bush. It's been moved and seconded to approve agenda item 8B. I will open the floor for discussion on this agenda item. And just reminding the Commission, this is a comp plan amendment before us. So the motion to approve will require no less than two thirds vote, which is five members of the commission. I'll now open the floor for discussion on the approval. I would like to start off and just think the whole planning staff that has worked on this wheeling, Carly, the team, Daniel, where you fit into it, Keith, your team, as well as the consultants on the project, I think that you've done an incredible job. And this is, again, another example that we need to publicize what's been done through this process, just like Build Up Aurora, Connecting Aurora, and Engage Aurora. These have all been fairly successful public transparency measures in engaging members of the public. And I would have to say in a city of right around 400,000 people, citizens, Having a million touch points is incredible, and my hat's off to you. And thank you guys for the work, the many events that you've attended, the farmers markets, the night meetings, the neighborhood meetings, the town halls. You guys have gone above and beyond, and I'm really proud to be sitting here tonight getting to vote on this comp plan amendment to look forward to the next 20 to 40 years in the city of Aurora and how we can evolve and transform our transportation system. Thank you for that. Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. I'm very pleased as well because it was back in. 24 when I went to the first public hearing you all held at the Aurora Highlands Elementary School, and that's what gave me the bug to get involved in planning and zoning. I read your report. I saw my picture twice. I saw my comments four times. I saw my handwritten notes multiple times. I'm happy that I'm in there with all my favorite transportation and traffic engineers in the photo. And I think the data that you provided from all the engagements clearly demonstrated that this was a wholesale attempt to get as many people in the public engaged. And we still don't get the turnout we should get. But I can feel comfortable knowing that the city of Aurora did everything it could to provide information on this. And again, I was probably at every one of the public hearings, so I know how hard staff worked. And I think this is a very good product that can be forwarded. So thank you very much.

You're muted, Garrett.

Thank you, Commissioner Riley. I apologize again. I'm having a lot of connectivity issues this evening. So in the event that I happen to freeze up, Vice Chair Hogan, if you wouldn't mind taking over procedurally until I can get reconnected again. But we'll move on with further discussion on 8B. Commissioner Hogan.

Thank you again to staff for your hard work on this. People do underestimate how much you have done for the public. I do hope that when this is affirmed, and I say that without hopes and fingers crossed for you, that you extend our thanks to MAC, because I know that MAC has been a huge part of this endeavor for many, many years.

I will. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Hogan. Further discussion from the Commission. Commissioner Becker.

Thank you, Chair Walz. I'm just making sure everyone can still hear me. Okay, thank you. I'm kind of coming in on the tail end of this, but I have to say I was very excited for that, to read that plan and just to be able to see the robust engagement. Like you said, a million touch points in the world of, you know, civic engagement. That's pretty amazing. So I think I just want to applaud staff and, um, for doing all the work that they did on this. And just the, just that, that document is, is actually, it gets me excited to like be, you know, a member of Aurora and like a young member. It's kind of exciting. I was, you know, telling people, I was like, you should go check this out. It's pretty cool. Like, you know, it's just, it's just exciting to see that, um, that amount of, uh, That large of a document have that much information and and still be engaging. So thank you for all your hard work. This is a very cool and exciting project.

Me further discussion on AP. OK, seeing none, I will call the roll. Commissioner Jacek approve. Commissioner Bush? Approve. Commissioner Becker?

Approve.

Commissioner Venka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley?

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan? Approve. And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. We will forward our recommendation for approval to City Council. Congratulations, guys. This is a big one. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

If you are a member of the public and just joining us, we have moved agenda items 8C through 8F to our meeting on April the 8th. So we will proceed now to agenda item 8G. And we will first start by recording for the minutes commissioner visits to the site. Commissioner Jacek, Commissioner Hogan, Commissioner Banka, Commissioner Riley, Commissioner Becker, Commissioner Bush, and Commissioner Walz. Okay, agenda item 8B, which is the QuickTrip 4238 Colfax and Piccadilly site plan amendment and the two other agenda items, the site plan adjustment and the size adjustment. It will be a joint presentation for all three agenda items. Our case manager, Stephen Cabrood, the applicant, QuickTrip Corporation. Stephen, the floor is yours.

Thank you and good evening Chair and members of the Commission. My name is Steven Gubrud with Aurora Planning and Business Development staff and I'll be presenting agenda items 8G, 8H, and 8I relating to the development application 2364-02 for QuickTrip store number 4238 at Colfax and Piccadilly. And the application before you this evening is for a site plan amendment with sign adjustment requests. This development application consists of three requests by Norris Design on behalf of the applicant, the QuickTrip Corporation. 8G is a request for approval of the amended site plan for QuickTrip store number 4238 to add a multi-tenant monument sign. Agenda item 8H is a request for approval of adjustment request number one for a multi-tenant monument sign which exceeds the maximum height prescribed by the UDO. And 8I is a request for approval of adjustment number two for a multi-tenant monument sign which exceeds the maximum sign face area prescribed by the UDO. Currently on screen is a vicinity map showing the general location of the site. The QuickTrip fuel station is located in the western portion of the hatched area, which is outlined in yellow, whereas the adjacent vacant parcel intended for future speculative development is outlined in blue. The shared internal lot line is shown in black. Generally speaking, the subject parcel is located on the northeast corner of the new intersection of East Colfax Avenue and North Piccadilly Road and abuts the Interstate 70 interchange with Piccadilly Road. Now on screen is a more up-to-date aerial view of the site that's taken from February of this year. You may be able to make it out from this image, but the initial steps of development are currently underway for the QuickTrip site, and that does include the demolition of pre-existing structures on that site. This slide shows the zoning of the site and the surrounding area. As you can observe, the QuickTrip Fuel Station site is zoned MUC, or Mixed Use Corridor, as is the abutting parcel to the east. The MUC Zone District also extends to the south across Colfax Avenue and to the west across the new Piccadilly Road. There's I-1 Business Tech District zoning to the north and southwest, as well as MUR Mixed Use Regional and R2 Medium Density Residential zoning to the southeast. The site is within city subarea B and is part of the commercial hub place type, according to the Aurora Places Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the MUC district is to provide retail goods and services to satisfy the household and personal needs of the residents of nearby residential neighborhoods, those traveling on adjacent collector and arterial corridors, and to allow for higher intensity general business and service activities. In subarea B, the MUC district is intended to promote sustainable infill redevelopment of older commercial sites while mitigating the impacts of redevelopment on surrounding areas. Moving on here, we do have a couple photos of the site, and I do apologize as these are a little outdated. Lots of activity going on in this area recently, but this image does show a southwest-facing view from along I-70, and this is going to be the view of the approximate area where the sign would eventually be installed. That is along the northern property boundary, if approved. And then here we have a north-facing image as taken from the Colfax Avenue right-of-way. That's along the southern property line of that Quick Trip site. And then here we just have a photo of the posted public notice sign for this evening's meeting. In the background, you can kind of see that the lot has been cleared of those tractor trailers and other equipment as development of the site progresses in preparation for construction. Five adjacent property owners and six registered neighborhood organizations within one mile of the property were notified about the development application. No comments were received during the review, therefore a neighborhood meeting was not held. Mailed notices were sent and the public notice board was posted a minimum of 10 days prior to tonight's hearing in accordance with city code. No comments were received following issuance of those notices either. As it pertains to the site plan amendment with adjustment requests, there were two key topics that were addressed through the review process, those being analysis of the adjustment requests and integration into the site plan and design of the proposed sign and compatibility with the approved architecture for the QuickTrip site. Jumping right into those topics, this slide shows many of the elements relating to the proposed signage, including the approximate location and dimensions. The QuickTrip number 4238 site plan with conditional use application was initially heard and approved by the Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission on September 25, 2024. The site plan image in the center shows the overall QuickTrip site with the northern half of the development in hatching. The orange star indicates the approximate location of the proposed multi-tenant monument sign, which is shown to the right, the detail of the sign that is. As you can see, the adjustments requested and shown on the site plan cover are for a 40 foot tall multi-tenant monument sign, where the limit is typically 14 feet, and for an allowance of 145.5 square feet per sign face, where city code permits only 100 square feet of signage per face. The site plan data block has been modified and breaks down the various types of signage for the site. As you can see in the bottom most row of the sign data matrix, the multi-tenant sign would be 291 square feet in total with again 145 and a half square feet of signage per face. Furthermore, that ad space is broken down into areas dedicated to the Quick Trip site and space dedicated to the undetermined future user adjacent to the east. For this reason 175 square feet or 87 and a half per face will be dedicated to the quick trip fueling station site and 116 square feet or 58 per face of tenant signage would be dedicated for use by the adjacent development both parcels are currently held in common ownership by quick trip. The applicant is requesting these amendments in order to produce a sign that would have visibility for those traveling on Interstate 70, especially as the newly constructed Piccadilly Interchange will reduce visibility to site signage for those traveling east. The nearest public sidewalk is over 140 feet away from the proposed sign location, that's along Piccadilly Road, and the nearest internal sidewalk is even further located to the southeast. Larger and taller signs than what code prescribes are typically not appropriate near pedestrian areas or streets, and this sign is not located near either of those. In addition, this sign would be more than a thousand feet away from any potential residential uses that would be located in the Stafford or Horizon uptown developments to the south. These somewhat unique circumstances minimize visual impacts on surrounding properties and public areas. This slide shows the proposed sign elevation located within that red rectangle, and to the right you can see the approved QuickTrip storefront and monument sign elevations, as well as the site materials board. The particularly crucial consideration for reviewing this large monument sign proposal was compatibility with the architecture and materiality of the larger site. In many jurisdictions, freeway signs of this size would be pole-mounted and contain large digital displays. For this development application, the applicant worked with staff to ensure that the 40 foot tall monument would consist of an entirely enclosed base as required by city code and would not feature any digital display or electronic messaging. Furthermore, beyond the standard requirements of city code, the applicant has provided a masonry treatment to the bottom most 12 and a half feet of the sign. Masonry used will be the midnight black brick featured within the site plan materials board, further tying the sign architecture to that of the overall site and providing a sense of human scale for those utilizing the tractor trailer fueling area on the northern portion of the site. Colors used will be those featured throughout the site plan, including red, black, silver, and gray. The sign will be internally illuminated with no exterior affixed or directed light sources, which will help to minimize unnecessary light emissions. Approval criteria for site plans with major adjustment requests can be found in UDO section 146-5.4.3.B.3.C of the City's Unified Development Ordinance and those are currently displayed on your screen here. Approval criteria for sign adjustments can be found in UDO section 146-5.4.4.D.3 of the City's Unified Development Ordinance and are also now displayed on your screen. As it pertains to agenda item 8G, based on the approval criteria and for the reasons stated in tonight's presentation as well as the staff report, staff recommends approval of the site plan amendment to add a multi-tenant monument sign for the reasons listed on screen. That approval is to be subject to the following two conditions. Resolution of any outstanding technical issues prior to recordation of the amended site plan and issuance of any building permits. And number two, that the eastern abutting parcel, which is Adams County parcel pin number 182135401002, shall utilize this multi-tenant monument for future advertising and would not be permitted additional monument signage along its I-70 frontage. For agenda item 8H, based on the approval criteria and for the reasons stated in tonight's presentation, as well as the staff report, staff recommends approval of the sign adjustment request for a 40 foot high multi-tenant monument sign for the reasons listed on screen. And for agenda item I, based on those same approval criteria and for those same reasons stated in tonight's presentation and the staff report, staff also recommends approval of the sign adjustment request for a multi-tenant monument sign featuring 145 and a half square feet per sign face for the same reasons listed for the prior adjustment request. With that, I've completed my presentation and I'm available for any questions you may have. The applicant is also available for questions and does have a presentation following mine. Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Steven. I'll open the floor for questions from the Commission for staff. Commissioner Riley.

Going back to signage, we see a various number of, there's a public hearing signs, I mean, the numbers of signs on lots. Is there a prescribed number of public hearing signs that should be posted? My understanding is, Based on 537C, it says it's up to the discretion of the planning director.

That's exactly correct in what I was about to say. So there's not, I don't think, an actual quantified number required. I think it's a minimum of one, and then additional signs could be required as decided by the planning director.

Okay. I'll save the rest of my questions for the next presentation. Thank you.

Great. Thank you, Commissioner Riley. Commissioner Hogan.

Quick question. Stephen, you had indicated there would not be a digital sign or digital signs allowed with the exception of fuel prices, because I am assuming that that is digital, is it or is it not?

There will be no fuel pricing sign located on this multi-tenant monument, but yes, digital readers are considered to be an electronic message element. but they won't be included with this sign. If that's what you're asking, I believe.

But I'm looking at the illustration and maybe it's just my ignorance on sign. You have $2.98 per gallon or $2.98. That to me is a digital sign. It is on this signboard. I just want to make sure.

Apologies. Yeah, apologies, Commissioner. That is for the already approved monument sign for the site. So that's just meant to demonstrate that this new sign will have similar architecture to that sign and to the architecture of the building. That sign is already approved, including the price readers.

Okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood that. I just saw it and I figured, well, they've got two signs here. All right. Thank you for that clarification.

No problem. Stephen, since we're asked to put a condition on this specific approval, I wanted to ask a little bit more about that condition. Since we're removing the I-70 frontage monument site rights or potentially removing them with this condition for the eastern tenants, has the applicant gone over with you how the management of the tenant signage will work on this kind of one-fits-all monument sign?

We haven't worked through those exact specifics, I would say, and maybe this is a better question for the applicant to answer as well. But from our perspective, you know, Quick Trip is in ownership of both sites. So we do anticipate, you know, that they'll be aware of the fact that this signage is dedicated to that site and work with whoever they have down the line, speculatively looking at that site to understand that, you know, that will be required of them.

Okay, thank you. Further questions for staff? Okay, seeing none, we will move to the applicant presentation. Please state your name for the record. You may also optionally state if you are an Aurora resident, you will have 10 minutes to speak.

Terrific. Good evening, Planning Commissioners. I'm Stacy Weeks with Norris Design. I am located at 1101 Bannock Street in Denver. and pleased to be here tonight and share an update on this application for Quick Trip. I'm acting on behalf of Quick Trip tonight. Jessica Glavis with Quick Trip is not available this evening. She was traveling, but I can answer all questions that you've shared so far and that you may have. Mr. Guru, I think we can jump probably to slide, Uh, the Piccadilly project map slide, since you provided a great overview of kind of the site location and jump into. Yeah, good to the next slide. Please. Or next 1. There we go. Terrific. Thank you. So, just just for context is Mr. group was sharing. That this site, as we were going through the site plan process at the same time. The Piccadilly project moved into construction and we were working with the city on understanding the ultimate construction of that. And as we were able to understand the design plans for that, this conversation began and subsequently we were approved by planning commission for the original site plan. but we didn't know all the details of how that would influence our site. As we did some studies and evaluated the elevation of the constructed interchange at this point, we were able to determine the height, and I'll share some images here in a moment, of how That influenced the decision on what the appropriate height would be that we're requesting this evening. And then that ties to the sign face area to just in terms of scale and how the site is positioned and how it connects to the overall architectural elements of this quick trip location. If you want to jump to the next slide. Another component of this, just to keep in mind too, this is in the Aerotropolis planning area, which really is becoming a significant hub for Aurora and the I-70 corridor too. And we're very fortunate to be in this location and have a great site located at the new interchange location of Piccadilly and Colfax in I-70 here. We'll jump to the next slide. So, this is highlighted in red, the key key piece of the amendment. This is where we're locating the highway sign. And so the strategy for this location 1, it puts it into the position closest to our property boundary to the interchange for visibility from the interchange. But also strategically. With the foreground of the interchange as you're traveling. Uh, to the East, um, this makes. The, the size of the sign, uh, basically allowed us to make the sign about 40 feet. If we move the sign further to. the east, we would end up needing to look at a sign that would be higher to make sure that you had visibility from the west side of the interchange. So just to orient everyone, north is to the right on this, just to give a better snapshot of kind of how the site works. And as mentioned, you can see in yellow on the bottom of this slide, that's the adjacent lot that is yet to be developed owned by quick trip. And just to address the question as part of that purchase that this would be part of the understanding that the sign allowance that they have with the multi tenant sign, which is a great tool that. the City of Aurora has for co-locating signs together in these key areas would allot that signage for visibility for that future business or commercial user in that area. I'll jump to the next slide. So, As discussed, there's two key components to this. First of all, is the height. So we realize that the original allowance for a multi-tenant sign is 14 feet. And as requested, we are proposing the 40 foot height. Associated to that will be the also increased to sign face area. Primarily, that is to accommodate both the multi-tenants on this sign with Quick Trip as the primary tenant and then the future tenant as a secondary tenant. So that increases the per sign face allotment by the 47.5 square feet. Go ahead to the next slide, please. So here are the studies that we looked at, and this was early on in our analysis of the site. And with the information that we had available for the interchange, and what we were evaluating was sign placement and appropriate height for visibility. As you can see, this is the, we are looking towards the east. So we're on the eastbound lanes of I-70 with the future alignment of that off ramp onto Piccadilly. And we were strategically looking at how that sign would be placed and go to the next slide. This gives a snapshot of how you manage. The evaluation of the height, so you can see, basically, we were studying the different heights that would be appropriate to be able to maintain that visibility. And so what we did, if you want to go to the next slide is we went back out recently. In preparation for meeting to revisit the proposed sign and the actual construction of the interchange. And so you can see now how that sign is located in relation to the off ramp for Piccadilly and its orientation and scale in this area. So. We feel confident that this is appropriately scaled for visibility and position in a way that it works well, and is compatible for this for this area and location as proposed this evening. Jump to the next slide. And once again, as shared, we did have several discussions about how to integrate the architectural elements in this to enhance the overall aesthetic of the multi-tenant sign and make it compatible with the proposed architecture with QuickTrip. So the brick base was a key component. This brought the continuity between our monument sign and the future building. and then making sure that we had an elegant design for both the QT and future tenant with a fully enclosed frame for the signage area. Go ahead to the next slide. Just a shot of how that matches up as you saw previously relating to the architecture and the materiality in both colors and tones to make sure that this is all holistic with the site. So that's the highlights with this and I'm available for questions as discussed and working through this with the city. We are achieving the criteria with this application and the adjustments that are proposed and look forward to your support. I'm available for any questions.

Great. Thank you, Stacey. Questions from the commission for the applicant. Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. So. I continue to have concerns with how public notice signs are posted. And when I went out there on Monday, the sign was not secured. It was facing the opposite direction of the traffic. And in my opinion, the public did not have an opportunity to witness that sign. I was concerned that there was nothing put along the side of Piccadilly either, where most people would be able to witness the sign. Was there any reason there wasn't an additional sign put up or that the original sign was erected in such a haphazard manner that it didn't give public an opportunity to see the sign from the road.

Yeah, thank you for your question. There is no intent to install the sign in a haphazard manner by any means. It's always a challenge with sign postings and our strong winds in the area. We did ask that since there is construction going on Actively on site that they try to manage that the potential impact to the sign. So apologize about that. There's no intent to not promote this and make it a available to the community. If for some reason, the sign was difficult to see as discussed the intent was to have a single sign in that location at this time. And. the notices were issued to the adjacent property owners as well, and we did not receive any input. And really just based on the history of the project, we haven't received input on this project historically either.

Okay, and I know that our transportation superstar is on. There's some comments about it will not increase street parking or traffic congestion. Obviously, there's not a lot of homes going up in that area, but if you're talking about tractor trails coming off I-70 and looking at that tight turning radius to go east on Colfax and then turn around to come back west on Colfax to get in there, I'm curious as to how, as that corridor continues to develop, how traffic will be mitigated based on the increase of traffic that will arise from... you know, the exposure of the sign and actually the quick trip as well.

Yes, thank you for that question too. Location is falls into some of the well, not some, but definitely into the purview of CDOT as well. So that has been coordinated and discussed with CDOT to gain the necessary necessary approvals, both Colfax and obviously the Piccadilly interchange are governed or reviewed by CDOT in this area.

I was going to ask Dean if the traffic issues there would be mitigated with an increase in traffic coming through a very tight turning radius.

Commissioner Riley, thanks for the question. I know we've been looking at it, you know, from multiple aspects. You know, the whole Piccadilly interchange just recently completely opened. with the Piccadilly connection all the way up through Smith Road. Colfax Avenue, it's going to go, there's going to be a lot of modifications to Colfax still. You know, with the Stafford projects, even the Horizon Uptown projects, that whole area is going to be Improved so Colfax and say the rest of you know South Piccadilly Piccadilly going all the way up into Majestic Commerce Center. You know all those different areas. I look at it as a. Obviously signing is not really my purview, but yes, it will be a draw. And I obviously looking at the way the Piccadilly interchange was designed and constructed. um i i just i mean from my perspective i look at this sign like this this sign is going to draw potentially from obviously from i-70 and you know the the the interchange was built to to handle uh heavy vehicles coming on and off uh diverging uh diamond type of interchange allows for uh better mobility cleaner traffic flow and stuff like that, even though it's a little contrary to the way we drive on the right side versus now we have some left side driving a little bit. But I don't know that it's going to have a significant impact to what's going on, like right on Colfax specifically. And understanding that Colfax, especially as you come east through the intersection with Piccadilly, It's still going to be narrow. It still needs to be widened in the grand scheme of things. I'm not 100 percent sure that it's going to have a lot of impact. I know we did have a little bit of communication with CDOT. There was other issues aside, the driveway and everything affected them a little bit more than anything else. So I just, I feel like the way Colfax will ultimately be configured, I don't think there's going to be any significant issues that the sign is going to cause in general.

Okay. I thank you both for your answers.

Okay.

Further questions from the commission for the applicant?

Okay. Seeing none, Susan. And just procedurally, Commissioner Riley, If you have posting concerns, that would be germane and appropriate after we make a motion on this particular agenda item. And then we can certainly discuss any concerns you might have potentially laying on the table or postponing to a certain day if those are options that you'd like to pursue. So we'll finish up the public hearing. I'll entertain a motion. And then a subsidiary secondary motion applying to that to delay would be in order at that point. Susan, do we have any members of the public sign up to speak on G through I?

Chair Walz, we do not.

Okay. Final opportunity.

You froze again, Garrett.

Final opportunity for questions from the commission for the applicant or staff. Seeing none, I'll close this portion of the public hearing and entertain a motion on agenda item 8G. which is the Site Plan Amendment.

Commissioner Walz, 8G Site Plan Amendment. Based upon the staff recommendations, presentation, and discussion at this evening's public hearing, I move to approve with two conditions the Site Plan Amendment because the proposal complies with the requirements of Code Section 146-5.4.3.B.3 of the UDO. for the reasons stated in the staff report. Approval is subject to the following conditions. Number one, resolution of any outstanding technical issues prior to the recordation of the site plan and issuance of any building permits. Number two, the eastern abutting parcel, Adams County PIN number 182135401002 shall utilize the multi-tenant monument for future advertising and will not be permitted additional monument signage along its frontage with I-70.

Thank you, Commissioner Hogan. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8G. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Bank. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8G.

I will open the floor for discussion.

Commissioner Riley, were your concerns successfully mitigated or did you want to have a further conversation?

They were mitigated. I get concerned about signage. That's all. Thank you.

That's definitely heard and I think it's shared by the commission. As we continue to struggle with this issue of public signage, we've got to figure out a systematic way to notify the public with these signs and where you don't have to know that a sign is there and then go looking for it to figure out where it's at, like obviously the seven of us do, because we know a sign's supposed to be there. The intent and the purpose of the public signage is so that as the public surrounds this parcel or passes by the parcel, they're notified that it happened. So placing signage along public right of way that is obvious and legible to the public is highly recommended. in order to avoid delays and having to go back and do it again potentially in the future. So just a cautionary tale on this agenda item. I was not happy with the signage either, but the signage was present, just not in the best spot that it could have been to notify the public. But it does qualify as public notification nonetheless under our current code. So I don't have any issues in moving forward with approval on this agenda item. Further discussion on the adoption of 8 Okay, seeing none, I will call the roll. Commissioner Jachik? Approve. Commissioner Bush? Approve. Commissioner Becker?

Approve.

Commissioner Banka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley? I approve. Commissioner Hogan? Approve. And Commissioner Walls also votes to approve. Agenda item 8G is approved with seven votes. I will entertain a motion on agenda item 8H, which is the sign adjustment for a 40-foot high monument sign.

Chair Walls? I'd like to make a motion on agenda item 8H, sign adjustments for 40-foot high monument sign. Based on the staff recommendation and presentation and discussions of this evening's public hearing, I move to approve the adjustment to code section 146-4.10.5.E.2 to allow a 40-foot tall monument sign because the proposal complies with the requirements of Code Section 146-5.4.4.D.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance for the reasons stated in the staff report.

Thank you, Commissioner Bush. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8H. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Becker. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8H. I'll open the floor for discussion on the motions. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Juchic.

Approve.

Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Vanko.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley. I approve. Commissioner Hogan. Approve. And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. Agenda item 8A is approved with seven votes. I will now entertain a motion on agenda item 8I, which is the sign adjustment for 145 and a half square feet sign face area. Okay, the chair rises on agenda item 8i to move based on the staff recommendation, the presentation and discussion of this evening's public hearing. I move to approve the adjustment to code section 146-4.10.5.E.2 to allow a monument sign with features 145 and a half square feet of signage per face because the proposal complies with requirements of code section 146-5.4.4.D.3 of the UDO for the reasons stated in the staff report. It's been moved by the chair to approve agenda item 8i Aye. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Commissioner Jachek. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8-I. I'll open the floor for discussion. Seeing no discussion, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jachek.

Approve.

Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Banker.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley. I approve. Commissioner Hogan. Approve. And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. Eight aye is approved with seven votes. Okay, Susan, do we have any members of the public signed up to speak on non-agenda items? Thank you, commissioners. We appreciate it. You're welcome. Thank you, Stacy.

Chair Walz, we do not.

Okay. I'll now open the floor for comments by commissioners or any miscellaneous items of business or any announcements.

Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. I just want to thank Commissioner Becker for referring to us all as young Aurorans. When she said that, I said, I feel grand. So thank you very much. It made me feel wonderful. That's it.

Thank you, Commissioner Riley. Commissioner Hogan.

A couple of things for the good of the order. I was at a recent ward meeting and received a map of the police area representatives So if you are not aware in the city of Aurora, we do have new boundaries for the three districts. I would encourage you to all take a look because your police service may have changed. And it's just important to know where police officers are coming from. That was number one. Commissioner Riley or Banker, did either of you attend the PED meeting or did anyone else? I was curious as to the discussion related to fuel stations.

Yeah, they discussed it. There was concern specifically from Councilwoman Wiles because of the growth within Ward 2. And so there will be more discussion on things like how many EV stations, what's the distance between gas stations on corners and residential or gas stations on corners and industrial. It was pretty revealing. And that's, you know, one reason why having tonight's discussion on another QT station, I expect there'll be some more evolutions happening, you know, and I know Janine and Brandon were on there as well, providing great input. Staff did another good job, but they're going to continue to discuss it.

And I will give Janine an opportunity to respond too, but just notifying everyone, I was messaged today by Council Member Bergen who would like to refer the matter to the Business Advisory Board so that I'm currently in the process of calendaring that most likely for our April meeting. which will be just before the next PED meeting to solicit more community and stakeholder feedback on the idea of buffers and on the idea of distances. So now I'll go, I'll throw it to Janine, our Director of Planning and Development.

Thank you, Chair. Janine Restad, Director of Planning and Business Development. I'm actually getting to my PED notes. The feedback, one, that they really aren't looking to change anything in the um industrial areas they did ask for more information um and we limited to five years how many conditional use applications for gas stations had been approved how many have been denied and then adding some clarity to the maps um there was a lot of information on those maps so we will be focusing in on ward two and then also on havana to show the impacts whether it's a buffer around gas stations themselves or that uh proximity to um residential zones. And then finally, there was an expression that the committee would be okay if a gas station is included, for example, with the King Soopers, that that would be okay. I do want to mention, too, that Laura Perry, Deputy City Manager, and I spoke about this later after the meeting. In addition to going to BAB, we have the Development Review Advisory Board, which is comprised of developers from all sectors, commercial, residential, industrial. We will be presenting to them in May and then – which will precede the May PED meeting. So we are looking to do additional engagement.

Thank you, Director Rostad. Sunny, you also had your hand raised.

I did. I was on that meeting. And I think that Mike covered it pretty well. And Janine, you got the gist of it. But it did seem from Council Member Wiley's that she was worried that we were becoming a city of gas stations. And obviously in war two, they're going to need gas stations and clearly out at Piccadilly and Colfax, whether there was a sign or not there, I'm sure they need a gas station, but there, you know, I think there's a lot of concern. I mean, you know, Havana and what Parker road, I think we've got a gas station on just about every corner anyway. um there was there is some concern and um and i'm going to just speak up as a um you know i'm i'm glad i'm glad to see it i mean there's a need for gas stations where there's a need for gas stations but as we discussed when we did that whole sam's number three situation you know 11 gas stations in one mile is probably more than what's needed so Anyway, I was glad that somebody was looking at that on council.

Great, thank you. And also to let you guys know, I'm working with Trevor Vaughn, manager of licensing on another issue that you all might be aware of that affects sort of planning and zoning through permitting. It's the socioeconomic permitting proposal that's moving through the city council process that was presented to the BAB. I can't remember if Trevor did a presentation a SEPTED presentation during our study session or not. I've seen it in different venues, so I'm not sure if it was presented here, but I wanted to make you all aware that that is also being calendared for stakeholder feedback by the BAB. We'll be having a town hall for that as well. So as we get these things actually put on the calendar, I'll make sure that We have staff send out a notice. So if you guys would like to attend those town halls and hear the stakeholder feedback, you're certainly welcome to. Anything else as it relates to announcements, questions? Yes, go ahead.

Janine, you had mentioned, I'm sorry, Melvin, go ahead.

No, no, no, no, go ahead, Becky.

Okay. Janine, you had mentioned reaching out to the development community. Are you also reaching out to fuel stations and people like Norris or David Foster, Quick Trip, on a subject that Galloway, on the folks that do numerous gas stations, not only in the city of Aurora, but throughout the metropolitan area. Are you reaching out to them to let them know that this is going through PEDs?

We will be discussing before we bring a solid proposal forward. We're still just outlining. We'll discuss the engagement with that draft development review advisory board. We have the representation of the folks that are signing the deals with these gas stations. So Bill Wichterman, for example, was talking about restrictions and agreements he had with putting one in the industrial area, but we will look into what, if anything, moves forward and how we make sure we get the word out.

Interesting, because we did hit the news tonight at 6.03 with Kyle Clark, and he apparently captured video from this or from today's meeting and aired it to everybody that Aurora was looking to ban gas stations. Oh, wow. So just FYI.

There's going to be a lot of a wide net cast for stakeholder feedback here, both from the community and from our businesses. And I'll be leaning heavily on Janine and Cindy Perry and Deputy Director Perry to help kind of coordinate this in the best fashion so that Procedurally, no toes are stepped on and everything falls in line, but I think it's recognized by everyone, chief among those on council, that we want as much stakeholder feedback as possible. It's a serious measure to take or to even look at, but it's incumbent upon all of our different groups to solicit feedback from all the potentially affected stakeholders and the community at large. Okay, any other announcements, comments, questions, concerns there? Yes, Commissioner Bush.

All right, I just wanted to say that the study sessions that we had tonight and prior to have been very informative. And I think that that's very important for us on the Planning Commission. We have a lot of heart and compassion for the City. but I think we have to know what specifically is being done. And I think we had a very honest discussion at study session tonight, and you've really come up with some great topics. So I, as one really appreciate that. And I have one other area, GAIL AND SUNNY AND I SAID ON THE BUDGET COMMITTEE, WE HAD A SESSION, A WHOLE SESSION ON WATER, HOW WE GET OUR WATER, WHAT'S THE CAPACITY, AND I THINK IN THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WE DEFINITELY SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, TO SAY WHERE ARE WE GETTING OUR WATER, HOW MUCH WATER HAVE WE BOUGHT, YOU KNOW, what are the contracts and that gives us an idea about some of the things that Colonel Raleigh had brought up with reference to building further and further east and where's the water coming from.

I'm looking right now just to see if we have water.

Water board, not the water. We need the actual water board people because they have a lot more information. I think on the budget committee, it was split. The city does not control the water, but it is a separate board in and of itself.

Okay. let me review our schedule and see where we can, I agree, I think that's really important. We just have to see where we fit this in. So question to you as commissioners, because I know many of you still work a day job. Is it okay if we have on occasion and we have had more occasions to where we have two study sessions a month? You're okay with that? Okay. Then let me check with Brandon and Susan and Stephanie to see where we can schedule a presentation by the actual water board as opposed to just water resources, comp plan, drought, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Okay.

Cool. And that's a good segue. As you guys have areas of question or comment or concern or would like to see things covered in study session, please continue to let us know. We intend, we obviously plan for the year, but that's sort of a living agenda. If you will, we have to make changes based on scheduling and availability and all of those things. So I think with the appetite to do potentially, hopefully not every month, but every so often two meetings covering two study sessions, I think we can fit some more topics in there. So Commissioner Behnke.

You know, whatever it was I was going to say just went right out of my mind. So anyway, I'm sorry. If I think of it, I'll raise my hand in a hurry again.

No worries. I'll give you an opportunity before we adjourn.

Thanks.

Okay. Any other comments, questions, concerns before we move on to Brandon's report? Okay. Seeing none, we will hear from our planning division manager for his report. Go ahead, Brandon.

Uh, thank you. I don't have any updates as it relates to. We don't have any administrative decisions made since our last meeting, and I don't have any updates to otherwise. Provide for you, so if you have any questions, I would try to answer them.

Great questions for Brandon. Alright, that's the first you got off easy tonight, Brandon, thanks. All right, now moving on to Lena, our report by our city attorney.

No report this evening, but available for questions.

Great. Any questions for Lena? Wow, we went easy on both of you tonight. All right. Sunny, did you happen to think?

Okay, go ahead. I did. I did. I just wanted to let those that were not on the PED call today know that we don't have a standing meeting time apparently for that. So the time, the 2 o'clock on whatever Wednesday this is, is, you know, not going to be the same next month because one of the commissioners cannot or one of the council people cannot attend. So I just kind of wanted to give everybody a hugs up. that it was really, you know, when you talked about two meetings, two study sessions, it was really nice to know that we had a standing PED time, you know, before, but that is not the case right now. So I just wanted to share that with those that were not there today.

And for those of you that may not be on the email list that I believe it's Crystal Baca sends out. Yes. Make sure, send someone here, Susan, Stephanie, me, Becky, anyone an email if you're not currently on that list, and we'll make sure that we request that you get added to the PED list for those meeting invites to go out. So, okay, anything else before we adjourn? All right, seeing nothing, I move that we adjourn this evening's meeting. Do I have a second? Thank you, Commissioner.

Oh, he froze again. All right.

I just want to sing the frozen song for the guy. And now he bleeped up. So thank you again. Thank you, staff. Good night. Good luck. And we will see you soon.

All right. Bye.

Thank you all. Bye.