Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Okay, good evening, everyone. It is Wednesday, the 24th of June. Time is 610. I now call this regularly scheduled virtual meeting of the Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission to order. And I'm getting feedback, I think, on Becky's microphone. Becky, would you mind muting? Okay, I'll now call the role of commissioners. Commissioner Jachik? Present. Commissioner Bush?

Present.

Commissioner Becker?

Present.

Commissioner Banca.

You didn't present. I'm here.

Thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner Hogan.

Present.

And Commissioner Walz is also present. We've established a voting quorum with seven members present. The Pledge of Allegiance will not be said tonight as this meeting is virtual. We'll move on to the approval of the minutes for June the 10th, 2026. A little bit of an unusual circumstance for these minutes. The minutes included in the packet were amended yesterday via email. Susan sent out an email just checking all the planning commissioners saw the amended minutes or the new minutes. They won't stand as amended for us, but just wanted to make sure everybody was looking at those minutes when considering this motion.

Cool.

Great. Are there any amendments or corrections to those minutes? Seeing none, the chair moves to approve the minutes as presented. Without objection, is there a second? Second. I so second. Thank you, Commissioner Riley. It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes from June the 10th. Without objection, as presented, is there any discussion on the motion? Without discussion, is there any objection? Without objection, the minutes from the 10th will be approved. Tonight, we've got three items of general business across two applications, items 8A through C. The chair moves to approve the agenda as presented. Without objection, is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Bank. It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda as presented. Without objection, any discussion on the motion? Without discussion, is there any objection? The agenda will be adopted. 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's 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 the representative, please state your first and last name as well as the organization that you're representing. You may additionally state if you are an Aurora resident. If you are addressing a 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 the 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 in second, 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 can be appealed to the 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 properties. Notices were also mailed to adjacent landowners per City requirements. And this evening, brand new, as an additional note for this virtual meeting, The Commission asked that any applicant or applicant representative please turn on their camera, if able, when speaking or presenting to the Commission. Without a consent agenda, our first case this evening, agenda item 8A, is the ABC cross-docking. I will first record for the minutes Commissioner site visits. Commissioner Jachik, Riley, Bush, Banka, Hogan, and Becker. Okay, agenda item 8A, ABC cross-docking, which is a conditional use permit for motor freight terminal in I-1. Located in ward two, our case manager this evening is Caitlin Fortner, applicant ABC cross-docking. Caitlin, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Caitlin Fortner, and I'll be presenting this first case. The request is for the approval of a site plan and conditional use of a motor freight terminal in I-1. The site is located south of East 38th Avenue between Helena Street and Jasper Street. And the comprehensive plan place type is the industrial hub. For reference, this is where we're at, just east of Chambers Road and just south of I-70. Here is a clear aerial image of the site. And then here is a zoning map. The entire site is within the I-1 zone district, but the site was actually rezoned from rural residential back in August of 2022. To the south and east are either vacant lots or residences, that is the rural residential zone. And to the west is an outdoor storage RV storage business. This photo is taken facing east, directly to the left is I-70. What we're facing now is where the proposed building would be located and directly behind is the RV storage business. This photo is taken from 38th facing south, so directly behind would be I-70. Some other features of note, there are existing overhead power lines through the site. The applicant worked with Excel and Excel will be removing them. There's currently no power in those lines. And then to the right, the image shows the closest southern residential abutting property. Something to note is reviewed concurrently with this application is a replat and right-of-way vacation. As a result of that, 30 feet of right-of-way would be returning to this southern property owner. That combined with the required 25-foot setback means that there's 55 feet of distance between what you see here as the lot line with this home and the proposed structure. Six adjacent property owners and six registered neighborhood organizations were notified. A neighborhood meeting was not held. The proper noticing signage and mailings were done prior to the hearing. One comment was received upon the initial mailing and the applicant did address those concerns in subsequent submittals. Now I'll go through the issues resolved during review at a high level. So the residences within the rural residential zone, those lots are considered protected lots. And so additional standards apply to non residential uses adjacent to them. In this case, that resulted in an additional 25 foot, or rather, I should say, larger than is normally required 25 foot setback from that southern abutting property owner to the proposed building. Additionally, There is a 12-foot landscape buffer, and then highlighted in red here is an 8-foot opaque masonry wall for additional screening. That is along the southern side. On the other side, there is also an 8-foot opaque screening fence. Additionally, the maximum height of the building was reduced to meet those protected lot standards. Initially, the proposed building location was here in the south east area of the lot. We felt that it would be more appropriate to relocate the building further away from those rural residential lots and closer to the existing vehicle oriented and non residential businesses. So that's where the building is now currently proposed. Additionally, there are two access points proposed. They are both off of 38th Avenue. This serves to Limit any traffic impacts to the surrounding area because any truck traffic would be coming only from the West off of the highway and then to get back on the highway they would also have to turn left. There's no entrance to get on I-70 by turning right, so it limits the traffic impact. And then in the lower left hand area there's a blue diamond that represents the additional 30 feet of right of way that will go to the southern abutting property owner as part of the right-of-way vacation. So now I will review the staff recommendations. I'll start with the conditional use component. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use for a motor freight terminal because the use complies with the standards of the zone district and any other regulations. The application is consistent with the industrial hub comprehensive plan place type and because a motor freight terminal is an appropriate industrial use. The proposed motor freight terminal is compatible in size, height, and use with the existing commercial and industrial activity to the west. The proposed use will not change the predominant character of the area due to the other vehicle-oriented uses as well as its proximity to I-70 and The existing and planned infrastructure is adequate to accommodate the new development. There's no dislocations involved, and the proposal mitigates any negative external effects through its buffering, its screening, and then those access point locations. And for the site plan component, staff recommends approval because the site plan complies with the standards of the zone district and the industrial hub comprehensive plan place type. we recommend two conditions of approval, the resolution of any outstanding technical issues, and then the approval of that aforementioned replat and right-of-way vacation, which has been reviewed concurrently with the site plan and conditional use permit application. That is the end of my presentation. The applicant will not be making a presentation, but they are here and available for any questions. And then for any folks on the call that haven't signed up, here is the QR code if you are here to speak on this application. Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation, Caitlin. I will open the floor for questions from the commission for the applicant or staff. And this was a joint presentation for items A and B. Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. So I heard you. Address specifically the right away returning to 3560 Helena. And in my mind, that apparently mitigates any concern they have about having an industrial use right next to him. That's my question.

Would you, Caitlin? I can I can address that. I'm here. My name is Andrea Morton. I'm the architect and you're representing the applicant. We had extensive conversations with the abutter And there they are supportive of the return of the right of way and the agreement has been filed and they are supportive of this use as a neighbor.

OK, that's all I had, because when I toured the site, I saw how close they would be. And again, there's a lot of other residents around there with all this industrial capability. I just felt that they might have been. but hearing about the right-of-way, that made me feel a little more comfortable, and I assumed that there was a dialogue. So I appreciate that report. Thank you.

Were there questions for the applicant or staff?

Yes. I just wanted to compliment both the staff and the applicant for really working together to resolve the issues. And it seems to me, when I took a look at it, that it that it should work pretty well. So it's always good when we can agree upon stuff. So good job.

Thank you, Commissioner Bush. Further questions for the applicant or staff? Okay, seeing none, Susan, do we have any members of the public sign up to speak on A or B?

Chair, we do. And The first speaker is Aurora. Okay.

Aurora, you will have three minutes to speak. Please state your name for the record and if you are an Aurora resident.

Hello, I'm here. I'm going to be translating for my mother. We are both residents here in Aurora. My name is Ania Avila and hers is Aurora Banuelos. And I'll translate in between.

Go ahead.

What do you want to say? We don't agree with what they're doing there because the area is already saturated with so many trucks.

okay so for that first part she is just stating that we um haven't really been um to agree with this like development just because there's a lot of like saturation with a bunch of actual other illegal illegal um like dump trucks a lot of other like commercial well they're not commercial they're not there it's all resident I know she did present that area where it's all residential but if you guys were to like actually step into this neighborhood you would very much notice how it's on violation with dump trucks with commercial trucks and it's pretty saturated here it's not really even residential it's not a good place to live and there is a lot of homes here so there's a lot of like crashes here there's a lot of other like trashes here And there is, we have prairie dogs around here as well. And those are, those prairie dogs are actually being killed and ran over with a lot of these trucks. So there's that as well. ¿Qué más?

Ok, que nadie hace nada al respecto al accidente que tuvimos hace ratito, que un camión se nos echó encima en el carro. Y pues nada, no queremos camiones aquí en el área de residencial, ni en la entrada, ni en la salida.

Okay, so something else you just did want to state was there is a lot of like kind of dangerous outings. These streets are pretty tight and they're not as well for commercial trucks as well because they're really huge trucks as well. Earlier, I actually had almost a very close incident with a commercial truck of like transportation and all that. They were too high up there to even notice me and we were about to crash and it was super tight here in these... So that's another thing to consider as well. And I know she did mention that this would be kind of apart from some of these residential areas. But that street, 38th Street, is actually a very much like transported street. A lot of it's the only kind of outage to get out of this area from the whole neighborhood. So a lot of people use that street as well. Yes, sir. So something else is she just wanted to mention again that is the only like kind of exit we have to come out and she has children so she takes them day in the mornings and in the afternoons and she would find it kind of hard to consider that with commercial trucks coming in and out of there and having like that kind of like extra extra like how do I put this like just a lot of traffic coming in out of here of these neighborhoods because it is pretty peaceful here but there is just a lot of motion now and I would imagine there's a lot more motion with those commercial trucks in Coming in and out.

Okay, your time has expired. Thank you for your testimony. I'll open the floor for questions from the commission for the member of the public. Okay, seeing none Susan, do we have any other members of the public sign up to speak on a, or B.

Chair, we do, and that would be Randy Walker.

Okay. Randy, bear with us for just a minute. Oh, it looks like you are unmuted. You'll have three minutes to speak. Please state your name and if you are an Aurora resident.

Yes, my name is Randy Walker. I live two and a half blocks from the project. That particular road is a very heavily traveled road. I happen, I'm watching this neighborhood over here. I've been here for 30 years. I'm watching this neighborhood over here go from across the street from me. Caddy Corner was the biggest daylily garden. in Colorado too. Now they have, we have two junkyards in here, especially that road over there on 38th. They're running vehicles up and down and up and down. I mean, they're just allowing it. They're letting this neighborhood turn to garbage. I mean, there's tons of dump trucks. I mean, I have a lung disease. I can't even sit out at my port, you know, at the table. And now we're going to have this big project over here. That's our main entryway. I mean, I have, you know, my grandkids, you know, are here all the time. And this is going to be a nightmare. I mean, I can't hardly breathe as it is. It's going to be horrible. I'm totally against it. It's awful. So I don't know what to do. It's just, this is terrible. Thank you for your time. And I don't understand why code enforcement's not doing it. I've already called. I mean, we have junkyards, two of them in this neighborhood, and they're running up and down that road. I mean, I've watched them 10 times today. And then add on top of that, this new project with all the trucks. I mean, there's going to be what? I mean, it's going to take me, what, 15 minutes to get out of my neighborhood? It's just so sad. I've watched this neighborhood. I've been here for 30 years. And it was a beautiful, it was my little slice of country in the middle of the city. Now it's a nightmare mess everywhere, you know? So it's just sad, you know? I guarantee you, if all you lived in this neighborhood and, you know, you wouldn't want this project, I promise you, this is terrible. So I'm done.

Okay, thank you for your testimony, Mr. Walker. Questions from the commission for Mr. Walker? Okay, Susan, who's next?

Chair, we do not have anybody else signed up.

Okay, I see someone with their hand raised. Are you a, Susan, go ahead and unmute them or give them the ability to unmute. We'll see if they're a member of the public wanting to speak on either of these agenda items.

They should be able to speak now.

Okay. Hi. Yes. My name's Armando Botello and I live in the corner of 35th and Kellysburg. We're a resident. And I totally agree. I mean, we have had issues where they'll just park RVs in the middle of the street and just leave them there. I mean, we'll call the cops and they wouldn't show up or nothing like that. Also, in my corner now, there used to be a beautiful house. Now it's all gated and semis, dump trucks. Also, right in my other corner, there's I don't know, it's a junkyard and they park cars all through the street. They take up through the thing and They block up the road. I mean, I mean, have the time to see trash everywhere. You see tires everywhere. And now with this, it would just make it worse. I mean, throughout the day, you already have semis parking in the corner when they're getting lunch and burking. Also, when there's food trucks right there and they're parked there to go eat. I mean, half the time, that pathway is already blocked by semis and stuff like that, by people trying to go get lunch. Now with this, it's just going to make it even worse. I mean, I agree with everybody here in this neighborhood that, I mean, you complain to the city, you call the cops, and they don't care. They don't pass by. They don't come. And, I mean, you have people speeding by all the time. You have people have kids, and they're out here playing. They want to be out here playing. And it's getting to a point where I'm going to be like, no, you cannot go out. You can't go ride bikes. You can't. go outside and kick the ball because, I mean, I have times where there are people with semi-trucks and they come in, they get in our yard, they get in our lawn. I mean, I had to replace our mailbox twice because they'd knock it over. Even though there's signs saying that the street is closed or no way over this, they still pass by. So I disagree, man. It's That's a terrible idea, especially for us. That's all I got to say.

Okay, thank you for your testimony. Any members of the commission have questions for Mr. Botello? Okay, Susan, did anyone else sign up in the interim?

Chair, no, no one else has signed up.

Thank you. Okay. Andrea, Ms. Morton, you'll have five minutes to address any of the concerns raised in public testimony.

Yeah, thank you for the opportunity. I appreciate the comments from the neighbors. I know what neighborhoods that are in transition can feel like, and I hear what you're saying, that perhaps what really is needed is code enforcement and occupancy enforcement for some of the existing neighbors who have really violated the spirit of this neighborhood the purpose of this development is to really be connected to the highways that are adjacent to your neighborhood and to limit the traffic to that frontage i think the parking that you talk about is not going to be an issue with this particular use there's a substantial parking lot it's a gated lot This is to serve only people who are in contract with this operator, who are coming off of the highways and transitioning from larger loads of semis to smaller loads for distribution locally. And all of that traffic will be contained along 38th and will be contained to those two entrances and exits. So, and I will tell you that working with these particular clients, they're concerned with being good neighbors. They really care about this community and they recognize that they're right in this transitional zone between industrial and residential. But the proximity to the highway really makes it a natural fit for their business. And they've been really conscious of observing the buffer zones for setbacks and landscaping. Their operating hours also are within normal business hours. And so the disruption and normal weekday business hours as well. So I recognize that some of that disruption you're talking about, that sort of casual parking in the street, going to local food trucks or local food establishments, there will be parking within their lot. So you will see perhaps increased foot traffic, but it won't be an increase in truck traffic for this particular use. And I'd just say on a personal level, I'm hopeful that the city of Aurora can take your concerns more seriously because I agree that it's not pleasant to not feel that you can have your children play outside or that, you know, kids riding bikes in the streets in the country is how I grew up as well. So I think that is a serious consideration. And this particular client and development is really not, going to impact the adjacent streets. They really are only concerned with that connection to the highways and that frontage along 38th. So I appreciate your comments and I appreciate the opportunity to respond. Thank you.

Great, thank you. Final opportunity for questions from the Commission for the applicant or for staff. Okay, Caitlin, by any chance, do you have a slide with the code requirements for 146543A3 for the conditional use? If we could show that on the screen, that would be great while the commission is deliberating.

I wonder how to present from the slide I'm already on, but these are the approval criteria. I'll just skip forward to them, I apologize.

Thank you for putting that up. Okay, I'll close this portion of the public hearing and entertain a motion first on agenda item 8A, which is the conditional use.

Chair. Commissioner Bush, go ahead.

Yes, thank you. On agenda item 8A, conditional use for motor freight terminal in an industrial one zone district. Based on the staff recommendation, the presentation, and discussions at this evening's public hearing, I move to approve the conditional use for the motor freight terminal station in the business tech industrial one zone district because the proposal complies with the criterias of code section 146-5.4.3.a.3 of the unified development ordinance for the reasons stated in the staff report great thank you commissioner bush it's been moved to approve agenda item 8a is there a second second commissioner riley thank you it's been moved and seconded to approve 8a i'll open up the floor for discussion

I'll start us off. I think when I saw this in our packet and started to go through it, I think I had some significant concerns and concerns that were echoed by the community that testified tonight. However, when I started to dig through and actually look at the site plan from our next agenda item and balance it against the code, I think that my concerns were mitigated. Specifically, I flipped directly to the traffic report, looked at how many traffic generation how much traffic generation this particular project would create. And seeing that it was limited to 38th in the traffic report, seeing where the entrance and the exit are, the ingress and the egress, that mitigated my concerns of the neighborhood traffic flowing down south on Helena. It makes sense that they're getting off of 70, going on 38th, then going right back out and getting back onto 70. And then looking at the extended buffer or the setback and the landscape buffer with the masonry wall, it gave me a real sense of separation between. So I think any of the adverse impacts or the potential adverse impacts to the surrounding community have been successfully mitigated with this proposal before us. So I could support this conditional use. Further discussion? Commissioner Riley.

Thank you. looked at the packet in pretty detail as well because of the same concerns. Then I looked at what the building is going to look like, how it will enhance that particular part of the neighborhood. I did go through the other areas and beyond where the zoning change was being proposed and saw what the residents were talking about. I think having that nicer structure there will change the atmosphere a little bit. And I also appreciate looking at how the fencing will be constructed because the current fence, either the chain link or the old wood fence, that'll be gone. And so there'll be somewhat of an enhancement to that neighborhood. And maybe court enforcement will get by there someday and realize that they've got some work to do. But I think this is going to make this corner look much better. Thank you.

Further discussion on the adoption of 8A? Okay. Seeing none, I will call the roll. Commissioner Jachik?

Approve. Commissioner Bush? Approve. Commissioner Becker?

Approve.

Commissioner Benka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley? I approve. Commissioner Hogan?

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. 8A is approved with seven votes. I will now entertain a motion on agenda item 8B, which is the site plan.

Thank you, Caitlin.

This is Commissioner Jachek. Agenda item 8B, site plan. Based on staff recommendation, the presentation, and discussions at this evening's public hearing, I move to approve with two conditions, the site plan because the proposal complies with requirements of Code Section 146-5.4.3.B.3.C of the Unified Development Ordinance for reasons stated in the staff report. Approval to be subject to the following condition. Resolution of outstanding technical issues prior to recordation of the site plan and issuance of any building permits. And number two, approval and recordation of the Peterson subdivision filing number two, subdivision plant and street vacation.

Great, thank you, Commissioner Jacek. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8B. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Becker. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8B.

I'll open the floor for discussion. Commissioner Hogan.

Question procedurally. Assuming we approve this, does the approval and recordation of the Peterson subdivision, must that occur before anything is triggered on the site to begin construction?

As a condition of our approval, that would be my understanding, but we can defer to staff.

That is correct. Before the building permits can be approved, both of those conditions would need to be met. Awesome. Thank you very much.

Further discussion on the adoption of 8B? Seeing none, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jachik? Approve. Commissioner Bush? Approve. Commissioner Becker?

Approve.

Commissioner Benka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley?

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan?

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. That is seven votes to approve. Agenda item 8B is approved. Okay. Agenda item 8C is the East 56th Ave and Valley Head Street annexation. I'll first record for the minutes. Commissioner Sight visits. Commissioner Jachik, Riley, Bush, Becker, and Hogan. Hey, Agenda Item 8C, East 56th Avenue and Valley Head Street Annexation. It's a zoning map amendment located in Ward 2. Our case manager this evening is Stephen Gubrud, the applicant ACM Park Hill. Stephen, the floor is yours.

Thank you, and good evening, Chair and Commissioners. This is Stephen Gubrud with Aurora Planning and Business Development staff, and I'll be presenting Agenda Item 8C for your consideration this evening. The applicant's agent, Martin and Martin, Inc., on behalf of the property owner, ACM Park Hill JV7 LLC, is requesting approval of a zoning map amendment for the initial zoning of one parcel totaling 165 acres to the AD Airport District zoning classification. The subject property is located within unincorporated Adams County and is also being requested for annexation into the city of Aurora. As a reminder, annexation requests are not heard by the Planning and Zoning Commission. This hearing is intended to provide a recommendation regarding the requested zoning to City Council as Council approval is required for all zoning map amendment applications. There are currently no proposed plans for the development of this parcel. The initial zoning application is simply intended to address the proposed change in jurisdiction. And for reference, the site is identified as being within the industry hub place type in the Aurora Places Comprehensive Plan. Currently on screen is a vicinity map showing the general location of the subject property. The parcel is located directly north of the intersection of East 56th Avenue and Valleyhead Street, otherwise approximately two-thirds of a mile east of the northeast corner of 56th Avenue and Powhatan Road. The proposal encompasses lands on both the east and west side of North Valleyhead Street. Here we have a more up-to-date aerial image of the subject property taken from February of this year. As you can see, the land is currently vacant and abuts an existing Amazon warehouse facility to the northwest. That is part of the Porteos master plan development. Denver International Airport is also nearby, directly to the north of the site. Now on screen is a zoning map showing the existing city zoning surrounding the property. As you can observe, the parcel is bordered to the south and west by the AD airport district zoning designation. The property is currently located within unincorporated Adams County, as I mentioned, and it is bordered by unincorporated areas to both the north and east. The site is also located within the DIA and Colorado Air and Spaceport airport overlay districts, meaning an avigation easement will need to be established prior to any development of the property. This slide shows the resulting zoning for the area if this initial zoning application were to be approved. AD zoning for this site would create contiguity with existing AD zoned areas to the west and south, as well as those located further to the east past Monaghan Road. This slide shows the Aurora Places comprehensive plan place type map for the subject parcel and surrounding areas. The site and surrounding areas all fall within the industry hub place type according to the comprehensive plan. The industry hub place type includes areas typically dedicated to manufacturing, warehousing, distribution and fulfillment centers, freight operations, renewable and renewable energy enterprises. I'll now go through a few photographs of the site. This first one is an image taken facing north from the East 56th Avenue right of way. You can see North Valleyhead Road in the foreground there, or North Valleyhead Street in the foreground, which bisects the subject property. And then here we have a southwest facing image taken from the North Valley Head Street right of way near the northern property boundary. And then this is a southeast view that's also taken from Valley Head Street. And lastly, we have images of the public hearing notice signs that were posted for this evening's hearing. Four adjacent property owners and three registered neighborhood organizations were notified of the application. No public comments were received during the formal review and therefore no neighborhood meeting was held. Mailed notices were sent and the public notice hearing boards were posted a minimum of 10 days prior to tonight's hearing in accordance with the requirements of city code. No comments were received by staff following these noticing procedures. The major issue discussed during review of this initial zoning request was demonstration of compatibility with the underlying industrial hub place type designation. The industry hub place type is intended to support a variety of light to heavy industrial activities in addition to urban agriculture. This is also the only city place type which encourages development of manufacturing plants, factories, large open air operations, and heavy equipment storage. Restaurants, commercial, retail and services, and office facilities are identified as supporting land uses within the industry hub. The airport district zoning designation meets the intent of this place type by permitting a broad array of storage, distribution, manufacturing, and agricultural land uses, while allowing for supportive commercial, restaurant, retail, and institutional development. The AD zone district also strictly prohibits all forms of residential development, further demonstrating compatibility with the intent of the industry hub and exhibiting compliance with the residential restrictions incumbent on properties located within the 65 plus LDN airport noise contour. Again, as a reminder, no development plans have been submitted for this site at this juncture. Currently listed on screen are the zoning map amendment approval criteria identified within UDO section 146-5.4.1.C.3. Regarding the proposal to initially zone approximately 165 acres to AD airport district zoning, to the extent and location described in this presentation, staff recommends approval to City Council for the reasons currently listed on screen and within the staff report. And with that, I've concluded my presentation, and I'm available for any questions you may have. The applicant is also present and available for questions. They do not have a presentation following mine this evening. Thank you.

Great. Thank you for the presentation, Stephen. I'll open the floor for questions from the Commission to staff or the applicant. Commissioner Bush.

Yes. Is this partial part of the Aerotropolis that's being – formed out at the airport? Because there are different guidelines and rules, I think, for that particular area. It's just a question.

It's certainly not part of any existing master plan or planned area that I'm aware of, so I don't believe so. But perhaps the applicant will have more information on that detail.

Hi, Planning Commission.

My name is Jackson Klein and I'm with the applicant Westside and ACM Park Hill. I apologize, my camera isn't working, but Mr. Bush, to answer your question, I do not believe we're part of the Aerotropolis District, but we are part of that airport influence overlay boundary, which requires no residential and plan to work with the airport on the letters that they've sent us and comply with the regulations that they've imposed on us if that is kind of what you meant.

Right.

Okay. Thank you. Further questions for the applicant or for staff? Okay. Susan, do we have any members of the public sign up to speak on 8C?

Sure, Walsh. We do not.

Okay. Final opportunity for questions from the Commission. Seeing none, I'll close this portion of the public hearing and entertain a motion on agenda item 8C.

Commissioner Hogan.

You're muted, Commissioner.

Thank you. Regarding the item 8C zoning map amendment to initially zone to airport district. Based upon the staff recommendation, the presentation and discussion, At this evening's public hearing, I move to recommend approval to City Council for the East 56th Avenue and Valley Head Street initial zoning to AD Airport District because the proposal complies with the requirements of Section 146-5.4.1.C of the Unified Development Ordinance for the reasons

stated in the staff report great thank you commissioner hogan it's been moved to approve agenda item 8c is there a second thank you commissioner benka it's been moved and seconded to approve 8c i'll open the floor for discussion on the motion I would just like to add for discussion, this seems to make sense. All of the other property that is annexed into the city is currently zoned AD surrounding this property. So this proposal makes a lot of sense for annexation to move forward and fits within the place type for industrial and non-residential use. So it makes sense I can support this. Further discussion on the adoption of 8C. Seeing none, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jachek. Approved. Commissioner Bush. Approve. Commissioner Becker.

Approve.

Commissioner Benka.

Approve.

Commissioner Riley.

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan.

Approve.

And Commissioner Walz also votes to approve agenda item eight. He is approved with seven votes. Susan, do we have any members of the public signed up to speak on non-agenda items?

We do not.

Okay, moving into agenda item number 10, comments by commissioners or any miscellaneous items of business. I'll start off just by reminding everyone of the adjusted schedule for July. Our next meeting will be on the 15th. Thank you, Susan, for the reminder. So 15th, mark your calendars, accept the invite from staff, and we'll see you on the 15th. Next, we will go to Commissioner Riley. I will pick on him to give us our PED update from this week's meeting.

Thank you. And I'm glad to be involved in these things. I find that they're very intuitive. They are very educational. And I think that they do provide us with some insight into what council is thinking of as far as what we should be concerned with. There were four items. One was on notice and appeals. One was on accessory dwelling units. One was on the AEDC update and the other was on the food truck update. A primary concern was the notice and appeals. And I think it's quite germane to our current discussions on public notices and transparency. And Sarah Weil, who was the project manager, stated that public notice improves transparency and and offers more meaningful public engagement for public hearings. What I would have liked to have heard even more so was that, Oh, by the way, that the planning, uh, commission is currently looking at these items. Um, you know, and, and of course the planning and business development staff was on the call. It would have been nice that, you know, some of the things that we have been bringing up now, such as, uh, signs that need to be a little darker, such as the one we just looked at, or that they need to be posted on a harder structure, which was the first item we looked at. I think we're still missing the whole idea of transparency and getting notices out. At any rate, after the presentation was given, the three PED members, council members Wiles, Bergen, and Jackson, had were asked questions. And of course the questions they were asked is should staff continue to explore options to update notice and appeals requirements? And they said yes. Then should there be enhanced notice requirements for applications requiring a public hearing compared to administrative decision? And there were three S's for that. The question is how far in advance should public notice signs be posted? And I was very happy to hear Council Member Bergen say more than two weeks. Because in my opinion, things that I talk about all the time is we need more folks aware, not two weeks prior to public hearing, but while things are occurring. The next question was, should the mailed notice continue to go out to adjacent property owners or should the city consider expanding it to property owners within the buffer? And there was talk about, there were three S's to that. And Council Member Bergen agreed with a mile radius and to expand it. to adjacent properties because right now a lot of these notices are going to HOLAs or metro districts and they're not going out to the communities that are impacted. So this would be more transparency. It likely would be more work for staff as well because now there are more mailings that have to be conducted. The next one, should the committee support signpostings at the beginning of the process for projects that require a public hearing? Again, they're going to ask staff to look at this because that would be a burden on staff and developers to go further out than maybe a month. The fifth question was, should appeals of administration decisions go to the council or another body such as planning and zoning? They all said no, they don't need another oversight body. There may be consideration, however, in the future to send appeals to the Planning and Zoning Commission. And then they were asked if there were any other changes related to the topic that they're hoping to see. they all said that there was none for the accessory dwelling units the only one question that was relevant to planning zoning was whether the planning zoning commission should review adus for conditional use the the ped was inclined to revisit this once there's updated language in the udo for the aadc update uh, expectation for growth in the aerospace and defense industry is really the only thing I took out of it. And as we look at the potential for more growth, and I look at war too, because of all the space out here, um, there's the likelihood that AADC is looking to, uh, bring more people in, uh, to do growth in aerospace and industry. And then on the food truck update, uh, staff is going to develop proposed UDO changes, um, I don't know if this is something we're going to get in the future to look at, but those were my notes from the PED.

Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Riley. Anyone have questions for Commissioner Riley? OK, thank you again. Any other miscellaneous items of business? Any announcements by commissioners? Commissioner Hogan.

This question is for Miss Asha. Since Brandon is out, Who actually fills out the yellow signs?

Do you mean the slip or the signs themselves?

The signs themselves, the signs that are posted.

Staff does? Yes, the case planner fills it out.

Is there a requirement of what they need to use to fill out the signs? Because in the case of the last one, and I really did have to think hard about this, it was just not legible. It was just super, super, it looked like somebody took an ink pen versus a thick black Sharpie. And clearly you could not read it from the road because I actually took a picture of it. And I was then five and a half, five feet, maybe even three feet from the sign. And it was still hard to read. So I wondered if there was some kind of standard way something that the planners are able to use to make that legible. And I do recognize that things, you know, weather could impact this, but it couldn't have gotten that light with weather impacting it. It just physically couldn't have. So I wondered if there was a standard that all planners use, you know, a thick black Sharpie, just because it's hard enough sometimes to read these.

Give her a chance to respond, Commissioner.

I'm sorry. We do definitely use black permanent ink. We have a really, really thick marker that we keep in the file system. Sometimes it does get taped over to protect it from the weather because even Sharpies do get washed away sometimes. So I'll have to look at that sign and I can certainly... know we can revisit how we fill out those signs with the staff and make sure we're all consistently filing filling them out awesome and i'd be happy to send it to you if that would be helpful oh that's okay i i saw it thank you though okay other comments concerns announcements from the commission well one thing that we continually talk about is

Is the developer going out and making sure the signs aren't blown down and are legible? And then my laminated posting signs announcing public hearings and administrative decision, which I take with me so I can go through and make sure everything's correct. I think it should say in there, you know, when they say I've read this sheet, it also should say in there, and I go out and inspect these once a week to make sure they're still up. Because we continue to have issues, like one of the signs, it was on the west side, of Valley View was bent. And in addition to being faded, it was bent and you couldn't read it. So we're very, very adamant about public notices. And I know that you all have been looking at this, but we still find some errors. And I think I'm going to be sending in a note to Brandon because when I went around looking at signs, there are still signs up from four months ago, one month, one year ago, five years ago, And I volunteered to take them down. He told me not to, but they're still up. And I guess if I send them in, then staff will contact those developers and tell them to clean up their mess.

OK, other comments, questions, concerns from the Commission?

Seeing none, we will move on to our planning division manager report. And we have filling in a wonderful substitute for Brandon. One of our planning supervisors, Asia Tips, is here with us.

Thank you, Chair. Good evening, planning commissioners. Well, the stars have aligned. Brandon has a day off and we have no AD decisions. So I have very little to report, if not nothing. I am definitely here if there's any questions. updates, questions, anything else going on that you didn't already cover, but there are no ADs for me to report on for you this week.

Okay. Any questions for Asia? All right. Well, glad you were here nonetheless.

Anytime. Thank you.

We'll go to our city attorney report.

Lina, you are up. No report from me this evening, Chair. Okay. Any questions for Lina this evening?

All right, guys, I think that about wraps it up unless there are any final announcements. Seeing none, I move that we adjourn this evening's meeting. Do I have a second? Second. Thank you, Colonel Riley. Meeting adjourned. Have a great evening, everyone.

All right, see you everybody later. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks all. Bye.