Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

speak on one of the agenda items tonight, you'll need to sign up to do so. You still can do that if you have not. The instructions are on the screen. You can use the QR code or Google City of Aurora Planning Commission will also take you to that place to sign up to speak.

Thank you.

Okay, Susan, I saw that the recording is going. Just confirming with you that we're all set. Chair, we are ready to roll. Great, thank you. Good evening, everyone. It is Wednesday, the 29th of July, 2026. I now call this regularly scheduled virtual meeting of the Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission to order. I'll now call the roll of commissioners. Commissioner Jetrick. Present. Commissioner Bush.

Present. Commissioner Becker.

Present.

Commissioner Banka?

Present.

Commissioner Riley? I am present. Commissioner Hogan? Present. And Commissioner Walz is also present. We have established a voting quorum with seven members of the commission present. The Pledge of Allegiance will not be said tonight as this meeting is virtual. We will move on to the approval of the minutes from July the 15th, 2026. Everyone received a draft of those minutes. Did you all have an opportunity to read, review them? Are there any amendments or corrections to the minutes? Seeing none, the chair moves to approve the minutes as presented without objection. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Riley. It's been moved and seconded to approve the minutes from the 15th of July, 2026 without objection as presented. Is there any discussion on the motion? Without discussion, is there any objection? Without objection, the minutes from the 15th of July will be approved. Tonight we have three items of general business across two applications, items eight A through C. The chair moves to approve the agenda as presented without objection. Is there a second? Thank you, Commissioner Riley. It's been moved and seconded to approve the agenda as presented without objection. Is there any discussion on the motion? Without discussion, is there any objection? Without objection, the agenda will be adopted. I will 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, the commissioners may ask questions of staff. Discussion of agenda items by commissioners will only be conducted following a motion at 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 the public comment period. It is asked that only new information be presented. The same arguments should not be repeated. Commissioners may ask questions to 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 can 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's website, and the development projects were posted with signs on the properties. Notices were also mailed to adjacent landowners per City requirements. As an additional note for this evening's virtual meeting, the Commission asks that any applicant or applicant representative please turn on their camera, if able, when speaking or presenting to the Commission. Without consent agenda, this evening's first case is agenda item 8A, which is 1372 North Kenton Street, ADU. First recording for the minutes, Commissioner site visits. Commissioner Riley, Commissioner Jetchik, Banker, Hogan, Bush, Becker, and Walz. Agenda item 8A is 1372 North Kenton Street, ADU, which is a conditional use located in Ward 1. Our case manager this evening is Morgan Jennings, the applicant. Roberto Landrieu's development and, sorry, Roberto's, sorry, my agenda is kind of squeezed together. Morgan, the floor is yours.

Thank you. Hi, I'm Morgan Jennings, City and Commissioners. I'm a planner with the City. Tonight I will be presenting the 1372 North Kenton Street ADU Conditional Use Application. The applicant Roberto Landeros is requesting approval of the conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit with the condition that building permits submittals for ADU must be consistent with the proposed plan and elevations. The parcel is zoned original Aurora residential and is within sub area A. No adjustments are being requested. The subject site is located at 1372 North Kenton Street south of East 14th Avenue on the east side of North Canyon Street. It's directly surrounded by residential parcels on all sides. Directly east, south, and west of the subject property is original Aurora low-density residential zoning. North is the original Aurora medium-density residential zone district. And the original Aurora general is located further north of the site. And some original Aurora residential mixed use is located to the east. In this photo, we're facing east. We do see the existing home with the no-design posted out front. This is a site photo also facing the primary home with a glimpse of the existing garage's roof behind the home. And this is a bird's eye view of the site with the primary home and the existing garage. So 11 adjacent property owners and 22 registered neighborhood organizations were notified of this application. One comment was received from the north adjacent property owner concerning window placements of the ADU while also generally supporting the ADU request. The comment has been addressed and the neighborhood meeting was not held. Issues that were discussed during the review included the building and site design and the use of specific standards for accessory dwelling units. So the building and site design includes a new 480-square-foot ADU located in the rear yard of the lot on top of the existing garage with its parking spot off of the alley, and it has approximately 1,102 square feet of private outdoor common space. The building design of the ADU as proposed meets all requirements of code regarding maximum square footage and height, building design, colors, and materials. The new unit will use similar colors and materials for the roof, siding, and windows to complement the primary home and existing garage, which are constructed with horizontal fiber cement lap siding and asphalt shingles. As mentioned on the previous slide, one comment was received from the north adjacent property owner concerning the window placement at the ADU. and the lack of privacy they might cause. The applicant did address this comment by explaining the north window faces the very back of the neighboring property's yard, avoiding putting the house in view of the neighboring property. And additionally, the applicant responded that the window serving the ADD's living area was placed on the west elevation to avoid a northern placement viewing the neighbor's yard and home. As demonstrated in this table, the application complies with all of these specific standards found in Code Section 1.6-3.3.6.G.1 for detached accessory dwelling units. An important standard to note is the setback requirement for a desert dwelling unit. Code states that ADUs must meet the setbacks of accessory structures, which is five feet from the side property lines and three feet from alleys, unless the ADU is built on top of the existing garage, as in this case. The ADU is then allowed to match the setbacks of the existing garage. So in this case, it's two feet from an alley and inches from the side property line. A conditional use is needed to allow for the use of the land in the way that's not automatically permitted by zoning, provided that the proposed use meets the applicable use of the standards and complies with the conditional use criteria discussed on the slide. So this conditional use complies with the criteria for approval as follows. So it complies with the comprehensive plan by allowing accessory dwellings to accommodate extended family arrangements or generate income. It will have minimal impact on and can be accommodated by existing city infrastructure. It controls external negative impacts by incorporating compatible building design and high-quality materials. It provides an additional housing option and does not cause any dissipation of tenants. And it mitigates adverse impacts on the neighborhoods. In conclusion, staff finds that agenda item 8A meets the criteria for approval with the condition that building permits submittals for the ADU must be consistent with the proposed plan and allocations. This concludes my presentation. The applicant and team are present and we are available to answer any questions you may have.

Great. Thank you so much, Morgan. I'll pause really briefly just before we move on with the hearing and just get confirmation from the commissioners. You were able to hear enough of the staff presentation to be able to impartially decide this particular agenda item. Great. Thank you. That's an affirmative signal from all commissioners. Do any commissioners have questions of the applicant or staff? Okay, seeing none, Susan, do we have any members of the public sign up to speak on 8A?

Sure, Walz, we do not.

Okay. One 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 8A.

Commissioner Riley.

I move to approve agenda item 8A. a conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit in the mixed-use original Aurora low-density residential district. And that would be based on the staff recommendation, the presentation we just had, and discussion at this evening's public hearing. So I move to approve with one condition, the conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit in the mixed-use original Aurora low-density residential district, because the proposal complies with the requirements of Code Section 146-2. 5.4.3.alpha.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance for the reasons stated in the staff report. This approval is to be subject to the following condition, that the building permit submittals for the ADU must be consistent with the proposed plan and elevations.

Thank you, Commissioner Riley. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8A. Is there a second? thank you commissioner benka it's been moved and seconded to approve 8a i'll open the floor for discussion i would just like to say we haven't had a ton of adus before the commission but again i think this is a great example of what adus can be i i think this is a great design that fits uh well with the neighborhood And I appreciate the applicant for being willing to adjust to the feedback from your neighbor. As we all know, happy neighbors make happy lives. So that's appreciated. And I think this is a great example of what we can do to implement ADUs in our community. So thank you. Further discussion on the approval of 8A? Seeing none, I will call the roll. Commissioner Jetic? Approve. Commissioner Bush?

Approve. Commissioner Becker?

Approve.

Commissioner Benka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley?

I approve. Commissioner Hogan? Approve. Commissioner Walz also votes to approve. Agenda item 8A is approved with seven votes. Okay, we will go to agenda item 8B and C, which will be a joint presentation, which is Jumbo Motors. First recording for the minutes, Commissioner Seif visits. Commissioner Jetic, Commissioner Riley, Commissioner Becker, Banka, Hogan, Bush, and Walz. First up is the conditional use, so agenda item 8B, Jamba Motors conditional use for automotive sales in MUSC located in Ward 3. Our case manager this evening is Caitlin Fortner and the applicant, Jamba Motors. Caitlin, the floor is yours.

Hi, good evening, commissioners. My name is Caitlin Fortner, and I'll be presenting this application this evening. Uhm, the request is for a conditional use permit for an auto dealership in the mixed use corridor zone district along with a redevelopment plan. The site is located South East of the intersection of Tennessee Ave and Havana St. Here's another aerial image of the site. The site is within the mixed-use corridor zone district. It's surrounded to the north, east, and south by the mixed-use corridor zone district. Directly to the west, those horseshoe-shaped buildings are multifamily apartment buildings. That's actually within Denver. I'll also note that the uses directly north and south are also auto-oriented businesses. This is looking east from the other side of Havana Street. You can see that there was previously this construction fence at the property. Repairs related to fire damage have been ongoing at the site for quite a while now. This is looking north. If you were walking along Havana, you can see that previously this site was a restaurant. This is from the intersection of Tennessee and Havana looking southeast. And then if you walk east along Tennessee and look south, this is the rear of the site. Five adjacent property owners and 16 registered neighborhood organizations were notified. No comments were received and a neighborhood meeting was not held. The required mailings and publishing and signposting were also completed. So now I'll touch on things that came up during review. So the touch rule applied in the case of this application. What that means is for infill projects like this one where no change in gross floor area is being proposed, we want to limit our requirements to be proportional to what is being proposed. So you'll see that we did not require the site be brought into up to code compliance standards. Also, you'll notice that it is a redevelopment plan, This is a type of site plan specifically for these types of infill projects where the touch rule is applied, but no site plan currently exists. The goal is to balance the city's need to get a record of existing conditions without imposing undue burden on the applicant who's not proposing external site changes. And so you'll have noticed that the site plan set that you reviewed is kind of a pared down version of what we usually require. Per the standards of this section of a redevelopment plan, we ask that to the extent practicable, things like the streetscape be improved. And to that end, the applicant is providing street trees along Havana Street. I'll touch also on the conditional use analysis. In the orange box, so to the west side of the building, that's where the cars are going to be displayed along Havana. There will be bollards in between those cars and the sidewalk, and the cars cannot drive to and from Havana from that location. There are garage doors in the building, so they'll actually come from the building. And then there is designated employee and customer parking. Additionally, this business is not going to change the predominant character of the area because there are two abutting auto oriented businesses and other auto dealerships all along Havana St. You'll have also noticed there's a future garage on the plan. We included this because we wanted any accessory auto service use to be considered along with this conditional use permit for an auto dealership. We didn't want them when they build this garage to have to get another conditional use permit to do auto service in this zone. Though when they do come in to build this garage, they'll have to do a site plan amendment and comply with all code requirements at that time. Now I'll run through the findings for the conditional use permit portion. The conditional use complies with all standards of the zone district and other applicable standards. The application is consistent with the city corridor place type, and this is an appropriate retail use. The proposed dealership is compatible in size, height, and use with the existing area. The proposed automobile sales use will not change the character of the area. The existing infrastructure is adequate to accommodate it. There are no dislocations, and the proposal mitigates negative external effects to the extent practicable. And then for the redevelopment plan, the redevelopment plan complies with the standards and review criteria of the MUC zone district and the city corridor place type. That concludes my presentation. I'm available for questions. And then Jambo, the applicant, is also available for questions.

Great. Thank you for the presentation, Caitlin. I'll open the floor for questions from the commission of staff or the applicant.

Commissioner Riley.

All right, so when I was walking that site the other day, I was trying to figure out how they can put cars in between the street and the building. It seemed very, very narrow. I'm just curious as to how they intend to put cars on the west side of the building. I realize you could probably put garage doors in there and slide them out, but they're going to be right on the street. I don't know if that's a cost or concern or what the impact will be on the sidewalk there.

The cars would not be allowed to encroach into the right of way that is noted on the site plan. As for, I guess, the physical capability of doing that, maybe I can defer to to Jambo. Jambo, are you there? Are you able to speak? Yes, I am. Okay.

Thank you for the opportunity. My name is Jambo. I'm a proud owner of Jambo Motors and as Kathleen mentioned, we're concerned about that. There's a lot of dealers. They just park it, you know, very much like, you know, the plan as you guys see that. And those vehicles, we are not moving from there. There's a fence. There's a lot of protection, which is we're not going to move the cars from there. In fact, we park it from the inside the building. We have a showroom. I don't know, Kathleen, if you have that design, we can show them. Inside the building, there is like six, seven cars. We park it through outside from the building. That the vehicle is a door, as you guys see that it's commercial door, a sliding door, just go park it. We pull from there. So we know the concern and we already did all the necessary adjustment to save for all of us.

Commissioner Riley, does that sufficiently answer your question?

Yeah, because it just says the display area is on the west side of the building. No vehicles can be driven on the sidewalk. Obviously, I understand that. So I'm assuming the garage doors will open up, and if they want to move a car out there, they can do that. There's enough room to do that. It just didn't seem like there was adequate space to put a car. I guess if you put them diagonally, you can do that. That was my only concern. Thank you.

Okay. And just for your reference, drawing... PLAN PAGE 3, PDF PAGE 67, KIND OF SHOWS THE LAYOUT OF THE CARDS THERE IN BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK. RIGHT. FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? COMMISSIONER BECKER?

I KNOW THAT THAT SITE PLAN IS LIKE A LESS, I GUESS, WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR? IT'S NOT AS DETAILED. MY ONLY KIND OF question or concern, and I know this will be covered, but it might be good to kind of make sure, because it's transitioning from a restaurant use to a car dealership. I'm just worried about like lighting, like on that site, you know, because the back half of it, I'm not sure if that was shown on the site plan, but just some kind of, because I feel like with all the other car dealerships on that road, they have quite a bit of lighting at night as well, which is really nice. I'm just wondering kind of what the approach will be with that.

I know from a code standpoint, just due to the limited applicability of code sections due to the touch rule, lighting was not something that we required the applicant to add, though I think that's certainly a good recommendation for security and safety purposes. Jonbo, had you planned to over and above, I guess, what we would have required here on the plan, had you considered what lighting you might include?

That's a really great question. In fact, that light is going to help us, and we're going to put as much as you can, the light. I wish if you're going to work 24 hours, but there's a lot of dealers on Havana, as you guys seen it. It's not less than that kind of light. We're going to make it down, but we're going to have enough light, more than enough, and we already even purchased those lights in the entire lot, not only on the street, only inside the lot and the security camera too.

I think to follow that up, Jumbo, in your operational plans, you didn't really touch on security at all. Would you mind walking us through kind of how, because it is a big concern, Something that we noted during COVID, car dealers were hit very, very hard. It's something I'm sure you're very familiar with. What are your plans in condition or in conjunction with the lighting to secure the site?

I mean, you are absolutely right. I've been involved with this committee for the last 25 years and closely advocated for transparency. from the governor office about this theft. It comes to the last two years ago, it comes to number one crime from all over the states. So I work about this catholic converter bill stuff and closely I follow up all the thing. I don't know if you guys know it. I'm the CIA director, Quaro Dealer Association. We have so many problem. Over 1300 dealers in Colorado, the safety concern, we lost a lot of vehicles, cutting catalytic converter, vandalizing steel and a lot. So, just to avoid, I have to corporate it, work with the law enforcement, especially on Havana. the Havana business supported that I'm going to just go with standard above and beyond to support to work with this security concern as a committee leader. I have that concern and hand to hand, I'm just willing to work with you guys. Hope in the future we'll see some changes gradually we've seen in Aurora. A big difference, and we're going to keep continuous work engaged. And my businesses and others' neighbors, too. So I have that concern, and I want to work with you guys, I believe.

Great, thank you. Further questions from the Commission for the applicant or staff? Okay, seeing none, Susan, I believe that we have members of the public signed up to speak on this item.

We do. The first speaker is Arnie Schultz.

Arnie, please state your full name for the record. And if you are an Aurora resident, you'll have three minutes to speak.

Yes, Mr. Chair. and members of the Planning Commission. I am an Aurora resident. I've lived here for 51 years. I am the referral contact for the Village East Neighborhood Association, and our board is unanimously opposed to this. I don't know how many of you watched City Council this past Monday night when they disapproved a gas station in the undeveloped Harmony neighborhood along Havana, along Alameda rather, because there are already three there. And to be honest, we're getting tired of having restaurants replaced with car washers, used car dealers, gas stations, convenience stores, And we're running out of places to eat on Havana. It's becoming trash now. In addition to the eight individual used car dealers already on the Havana corridor and the 4.3 miles, there are also all those used car dealers from the major auto dealers. And the individual used car dealers Well, first of all, this site is right next to Goodyear Store, which is 1060 South Havana Street, which already offers repair services. And then there is Addi Autosport, 1960 South Havana, Etho Motors, 840 South Havana Street, Jordan Motors, 590 Havana, Maliki Motors, 709 South Havana, FSL Motors, 282 Havana, Carhop Auto Sales, 658 South Havana, Mizzell Motors, 1852 South Havana, and Automart USA of Aurora, 835 South Savannah. And I think it's about time for Planning Commission to consider the same thing that City Council considered in denying the application for the gas station. How many similar things do we need in a given area and i think it's time for planning commission to adopt that criteria as well thank you thank you for your testimony members of the commission questions for mr schultz okay susan who's up next we have chance harushi

Hi, good evening, Planning Commission. This is Chance Horiyuchi. I am an Aurora resident in Ward 4. I wanted to share Jumbo's community engagement in the community and an active leader. We've actually volunteered together quite a bit with the African Leadership Group, but not only does he engage in the Ethiopian and the African community, he is very active in the global community. He shows up at chamber events, the Korean War Memorial, He definitely attends a lot of the meetings and town halls and also even sometimes the crime forums that are hosted in the community. So I'm really more here to share that with his investment in Aurora and along on Havana Street, he also is an engaged community leader and engaged business person. Even though the business is not operating, he still attends public meetings and also the community events. whether it's a picnic, a gala, or a war memorial dedication. He's always there to support. And he's not just always there in support of attendance, but he also does make significant investments back in Aurora. I work very closely with the global community as well with the African businesses. And he's always been the go-to entrepreneur that assists and advocates for a lot of the new startups and also even the businesses that may be struggling. So I just wanted to share that little testimony that as an engaged business owner, John Bull would be very much so a part of our community and continue to be a part of our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Ms. Horiuchi. Questions from the Commission for Ms. Horiuchi? Okay, thank you very much. Susan, do we have anyone else signed up to speak on this agenda item?

Chair, we do not.

Okay, a final opportunity for questions from the commission of the applicant staff.

Commissioner Benka.

I just want to clarify that, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm of the impression that our job is, if it meets the UDO, if it meets all the criteria, That is not our job to determine whether there are too many gas stations or too many auto shops. I know I brought this up months ago on one and was shot down, and I just want to make sure that that is still true, just for my own clarification, you know, and that kind of goes back to what we had what the council, you know, the Monday night thing as well, and Mr. Schultz's comment. So I just want to verify our job is to make sure that this is dotting the I's and crossing the T's and not determining necessarily what the use is, you know, or if we've got too many gas stations or whatever. So that's really not a question for the applicant. It's more of a general question.

Thank you, Commissioner Banka. I'll take that question. You're 100% correct. Our task this evening is a narrow task. Our task is to measure the two agenda items before us with regard to this application against the code requirements. And Caitlin had them up on the screen just a moment ago. Can you please put the requirements for the conditional use? Thank you. And just leave that on until we get to agenda item C. Then if you could switch to the redevelopment plan. Our scope this evening is very narrow, and it's related to Code Section 146 and the applicable subsections that you see on the screen. Our task is not policy-related. It's not related to density or concentration. It's related to measuring the application before us strictly against these criterion. Does that answer your question, Commissioner Banca?

It does, and that's what I thought, and I just wanted to make sure that I was thinking the right way. So thank you, Chair.

Thanks. Further questions for the applicant or staff? Okay, seeing none, I will close this portion of the public hearing and entertain a motion first on agenda item 8B, which is the conditional use. Commissioner Hogan.

Chair Walz, regarding item 8B, conditional use for automotive sales and then MU-C, Based upon staff recommendations, the presentation, and the discussion at this evening's public hearing, I move to approve the conditional use for auto sales in the mixed-use corridor MU-C zone district because the proposal complies with the criteria of Section 146-5.4.3.A.3 of the Unified Development Ordinance for the reasons stated in this staff report.

Thank you, Commissioner Hogan. It's been moved to approve Agenda Item 8B. Is there a second? I so second. Thank you, Commissioner Bush. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8B. I'll open the floor for discussion on the item.

This is Commissioner Cechek. I dearly respect Arnie Schultz and his comments, but I know the history of this property being a restaurant. It was Bill and Kathy's and then Sylvia DeSantiago, and they always had problems with it. And then this last one was the Ethiopian Eritrean, and they had a fire. So I think we've tried restaurants in this area. So having a good entrepreneur with a good business plan is highly preferred over another restaurant that might fail.

Thank you, Commissioner Jacek. I would also like to add, with respect to the community testimony or community comments, I I think that this is a perfect application for this particular parcel. It would be within the Havana Motor Mile, which is branded for automotive use. It has its own branding and is promoted by on Havana Street by the Havana Business Improvement District as an automotive use. And I think that the selection of restaurants on Havana is incredibly diverse. And again, a reminder that Planning Commission is not here to make policy decisions or step on or off the box and talk about whether we want this business or don't want this business. We have an application before us in my understanding of Code Section 146 that meets the requirements of Code Section 146. And were I voting and not abstaining, I would be happy to support this particular agenda item and the next. Further discussion on the adoption of 8B. Commissioner Hogan.

I too am supporting this conditional use, particularly because it does not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. That to me is extremely important. I welcome the diversification of ownerships. We have a few ownerships that own multiple dealerships. And in this case, I believe the jumbo will attract business ownerships that may be a diversification in our community. So I think this is great and I will be supporting this.

Thank you, Commissioner Hogan. Commissioner Benko.

I, too, will support it. And I just want to say I appreciate that we have a business owner, a potential business owner, I should say, that is engaged in the community and involved. I appreciate the comments that Chance made. I think it's important as a business owner to be involved in the community. So I applaud that. And I agree, this is the Havana motor miles. So anyway, it seems like it's a good fit.

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

I approve.

Commissioner Riley?

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan? Approve. Commissioner Walz will abstain. 8B is approved with six votes and one abstention. I will now entertain a motion on agenda item 8C.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate all of you guys too.

I'll have you withhold your comments, John Bowe. I'm calling for a motion on agenda item 8C by the commission.

Commissioner Bush, you're muted. Chair Walz, I'd like to make a motion on agenda item 8C.

Based on the staff recommendation and presentation and discussion at this evening's public hearing, I move to approve with one condition, the redevelopment plan because the proposal complies with the requirements of the Code Section 146-5.4.3.B.3.C of the Unified Development Ordinance for the reasons stated in the staff report. Approval to be subject to the following conditions, resolution of outstanding technical issues prior to recordation of the site plan and issuance of any building permit.

Great. Thank you, Commissioner Bush. It's been moved to approve agenda item 8C. Is there a second? Commissioner Becker, thank you. It's been moved and seconded to approve 8C. I'll open the floor for discussion. I would like my comments for purposes of the minutes to stand for 8C as they did for 8B. And I would also like to add during our discussion, during the hearing, John Lowe, you heard concerns about lighting. You heard concerns about security. we would ask as a commission in our discussion on approving this particular redevelopment plan that you would pay attention to those comments, heed those comments and work as best you can as a business owner joining on Havana to make sure that you're providing a safe business for the public and securing your inventory and assets as well. Further discussion on the adoption of 8C.

I would second those comments and I would just say it'd be for your own good to get good security at that location.

Further discussion on the approval of 8C? Seeing none, I'll call the roll. Commissioner Jachek? Approve. Commissioner Bush? Approve. Commissioner Becker? Approve. Commissioner Benka?

Approve.

Commissioner Riley?

I approve.

Commissioner Hogan? Approve. Commissioner Walz will abstain. Agenda item 8C is approved with six votes and one abstention. And at this time, John, we'll all open the floor for your comments. Go ahead.

Well, I have no word just to how I am so happy. I mean, this is not easy for me. I chose Aurora because so many people encouraged me to bring my dealership here. Aurora celebrates one of the most diverse cities in the United States, and I truly hope it improves to be a business-friendly city. actively to support a small business in the future. So I heard all the comments, and I will take all the comments just to improve it with my capacity. And I truly, truly appreciate for you guys' dedication for this great city. I look forward to work with all of you guys, and I just want to say thank you and God bless you.

Thank you for your comments. Have a good evening. Susan, do we have any members of the public signed up to speak on non-agenda items?

Sure, Walsh, we do not.

Okay, moving into agenda item 10, comments by commissioners, any miscellaneous items of business? Do any commissioners have any announcements, miscellaneous items of business to discuss? Commissioner Hogan?

I do have a question for staff. Do we have a policy on redactions from site plans? Those have come more frequently as we are reviewing our packets. Some of them are consistent, some of them are not consistent. I'm not sure, you know, what we see in public is sometimes not different or is slightly different than what we may see on the city system. I just am not aware. Do we have a policy on this? And if so, what's policy?

Thank you, Brandon Camerota, planning manager. You know, I think we've had, well, really across the country, I think there was actually an article in the APA publication about basically fraudulent invoices generated from public hearings and the the information done. And so it's basically a routine thing that's going on. We first noticed it very evidently with our BOA in particular and those folks who definitely aren't familiar with our process and how our things look. And so we've been redacting their information as best we can and really kind of exploring how to best do the best we can. And so we have focused on the information that's at a public hearing level. because I think that's the most attainable information for those looking to, you know, make a fraudulent invoice. You know, the timing of making that invoice immediately after a public hearing is probably more apt to, you know, fool somebody. Certainly there's information available on the public, but there's more dots that they would have to put together to try to make a convincing fraud there. So we're really exploring, you know, the capabilities and trying to do the best we can to protect our applicants as well as folks who may have submitted public comment in our packages. So we know for a fact that all the stuff on the portal is not going to be redacted, and won't have the capability of doing that, but we're looking at the ability to do it for the stuff that's on the public hearing as some means that we're able to do. Now, will we miss something? Probably. Probably, yeah. But we're doing our best to try to explore that capability and see where it takes us. So that's my comment on that.

Commissioner Hogan. So I have two follow-up questions on that, Brandon. Number one is the development community or any of their service providers, was this communicated to them that some of their information would be redacted? Or did they, because it appears that staff is doing the redaction, not the development community. Is that correct?

Correct. So we haven't communicated them that we're redacting their documents in the public hearing. So.

That might be helpful, I think, because I would wonder why someone was and who was and who had the permissions to do that. My second question is that if I were to do due diligence on a project five years from now and I'm searching through city records to find who the engineer was. Am I able to do that without a redaction?

Certainly, we have the information available at the city. And to that degree, the information associated with those applicants, we could find for you.

So that's a yes. It would come clean, just like a normal site plan. where the engineers listed and their contact information is listed?

I believe so.

Yeah. I think I'll sort of chime in and add on. I think the last meeting I was a little bit taken aback with the redactions. And I would just say a couple of things here. Number one, I think less is more. And I am by trade, I'm an IT professional and I understand the need to secure contact information for the public. And so I get the goal. I would just urge extreme caution. I came very, very close to asking the commission to continue one of our agenda items last meeting because the redaction was done in mistake and sections of the photometric plan had been redacted that we as commissioners should be able to see when we're judging if a particular application meets the code requirements. And I was sort of angry when I came across the bulk redaction that had occurred, especially when it occurred on a sheet plan that we need to see. And we're being asked to judge a particular agenda item against code. So I would just say I would urge caution and say less is more. And number two, I think before redactions were ever put into place, there should have been a published policy about it. And that should have been advertised to the public. I think that that's paramount as we continue to try and achieve the highest level of transparency that we can with our community. I think it's important that we have these written policies and we get them out there. We advertise it, we talk about it, we have some discussion about it, and then the public starts to see it in place. I think there's a cadence for how these things happen, and I just don't feel that that happened here. But I do understand what you're trying to do. And it is an appreciated goal. I get it. I understand it. And I'm happy that the city's taking lengths to protect our partners, our developers, our members of the public, protecting their information. That is important. But we also need to understand how it's done and make that clear.

Anyone else have any comments, questions, concerns about that?

Okay, further comments, questions, concerns? Commissioner Riley.

So again, back to Aurora Public Schools and ensuring that the community gets more engaged. I think that they should have a requirement to put the yellow signs out as well. I think that's going to demonstrate that we want the transparency. I realize some of these homeowners association metro districts, they may have one point of contact. And if that person isn't sending the information out, then you've got 800 homes that are not getting engaged. And I mean, I think this is great that Oakwood has deeded this land and they're going to build a school and we're going to take care of the kids, but I want more public engagement. I just think we're not ensuring people are aware of what's going on. And I'm going to trumpet this when I'm at the commission open house, why we need people engaged as public citizens. So I just want that Noted the other thing is, do you want the ped update? I can do it real quick.

Yeah, and just a minute. I'll just add one comment on to that. Just making aware because we we had discussed. I can't remember if you were on the Commission or not, but we've sort of been over the school presentations kind of in detail at this point and just letting you know that that schools do follow statutory requirements, not necessarily city of Aurora requirements. and the city can't necessarily go above and beyond what's in Colorado revised statute. So just letting you know that schools have a totally different path, obviously where it concerns building permits and civil service and things like that, they obviously need to submit with the city, but they're coming to us and sort of coming to the community as consideration, not because they're required to do so, because they certainly aren't required to do so by statute. So just one thing to note. We've been over the school thing many, many times.

Okay, thank you.

Go ahead, Commissioner Hogan, before we hear the PED report.

But I guess to just clarify, we could approach our legislators about this, correct?

Yes, you can do, and good luck. Go ahead, Commissioner Riley.

OK, so there are four items. The first one was the industrial landscape UDO amendment and director Rudstead. She provided an exemplary presentation on why they want to look at this primarily for water conservation, for viable landscapes and methods, and then to mitigate the building heat islands and things like that. So again, this is probably something we'll see in the future. Gas station buffers came up and they're looking at a frequency and distance requirements for existing gas stations, residential sites, and EV chargers needing to be put in there. Of course, we can look back to Monday night's meeting and smile about what happened there as well. So the third item was housing code analysis update, which Brandon gave. And again, just looking at allowances, expanding development to balance needs. It's just looking at how Aurora wants to ensure that there's housing availability and looking at design standards. And then the comprehensive plan amendment to assign a place type designation to a property adjacent to Regis Jesuit High School. They just wanted to get a designation because they've got some land there that's splitting different localities. So those were the items that had come up at the PED. It was last week, yes. So that's the report I got.

Great, thank you. Any questions for Commissioner Riley? All right, other miscellaneous items of business, comments, questions, concerns? All right, seeing none, we will go to our Planning Division Manager report. Brandon, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Chair. Administrative decisions since our last meeting, I believe that we had one, which would be a 104-unit multifamily building on Colfax near the Gleam car wash location there. So that's a few, probably a half mile east of airport, I believe, airport parkway. Um, that's the only 1 we had, uh, for that, uh, as, as you're all aware, uh, the all in 1, um. Call up, uh, was heard by the. City Council, I think they made a decision that we're still working on what the next steps will be for that. It may, in some fashion, I think is remanded to the Commission, at least the site plan portion. So we're trying to figure out what that all means and what the applicant wants to do with things. I'll be limited in my comments per that.

I'll be careful in how I ask this. How, in a general sense, not speaking to the substance of that particular application, but in a general sense, if an item comes back, an item being a site plan comes back to Planning Commission for review against the UDO and the comp plan, but a major component of that site plan is a conditional use. How do we as a commission look at that item or that application? I'm curious how we could do one, but not the other. Like when we vote down a conditional use, it's sort of automatic that the next, the following agenda item, the site plan is denied as well. So I'm curious how, without a conditional use for a particular use being granted, how the commission would look at a site plan? And maybe that's a question for you and Director Rustad and Lena, I'm not sure, or maybe just you.

Yeah, well, you know, taking a step back, you know, why do we have a site plan accompanying a conditional use? It's because the use may or may not be appropriate at any particular location. And a lot of time that may relate to the site design specifics. You know, you could think of Is there a difference between you can take a different type of use, like an auto repair place that does fleet repair and takes up a whole block? Or is it just two garage doors, you know? And so there's oftentimes a different scale that may. be judged in the compatibility context. So it is site plan specific. But now that we, I think I don't have a good answer for you, and I think that's what we'll be discussing internally and with the applicant as well about what they want to do for their next steps, at least as it relates to their application. So I have more to come. I don't have an answer for you specifically on that.

Okay. And as we're planning for that, if we could just keep a heads up, if we need to in between meetings, if we're anticipating that that gets put on the agenda, if we need an executive session for counsel with a city attorney, could we just think about that in planning a meeting ahead or making sure that we plan that in just so we can get some legal advice when that comes back to us? I want to make sure that our record is

as perfect as possible from our perspective yeah yeah definitely we'll be in communication depending on what circumstance we're bringing to you great uh commissioner benka um you know what chair walls i appreciate your question i listened to all of that and um and i truly have been scratching my head ever since then is you know how this how does how what what next i won't get into all of it so i appreciate your question i appreciate your comments and um anyway um and i appreciate the opportunity that we might have you know an executive session with some attorney you know um guidance there my big question is in my humble opinion um i feel like there's a lawsuit just absolutely waiting or potential. And I want to know, could that be extended to us? I mean, in my mind, we approved the last thing unanimously when we were lining the pegs up to the UDO and meeting all the criteria. But I really do feel that, I don't know. What is our status if there were a lawsuit against council? Could they sue us?

Is it something that I think I think at this point, I'll go ahead and stop you. I just I don't want to discuss any of the merits or any of the substance of what we have done or what we might do. Any questions for the city attorney's office? I'll be happy to make sure that we get an executive session planned and we can discuss all of that. But at this time, before we have anything on the agenda, I don't think that would particularly be appropriate. So I'll defer to Lena as well.

And I apologize. It's been a worry.

I understand. Many of us watch Monday night, and there's a lot of confusion and a lot of worry, and so I will defer to our legal counsel.

Thank you, Chair Walz. I think for right now, I'll just say, in an effort to not give too much legal advice in a public meeting, I will just say that... You can always be sued. It's just whether or not there's merits to that case or not. And I would say that generally, if there was a 106 on any decisions that were made, it would be for the body that made that decision. So unlikely that you all would be subject to a 106 claim for a decision that was made by... City Council.

Thank you.

Commissioner Hogan?

You're muted, Commissioner Hogan.

Thank you. You know, I look at this as a learning opportunity. And what I heard is very directly Council saying Planning Commission made a mistake. And I guess my feeling was when we come to conditional uses and when we look at different perspectives, that sometimes people share a different perspective or can be influenced differently. But it would be helpful, I think, just in a general discussion for both staff and maybe some coaching with city council to say it's not an issue of making a mistake. It's a difference of perspective. I think it's more respectful to the people who spent hours and, frankly, twice reviewing some of the conditional uses, whether it be for a school or an auto dealership or anything like that. But I would really hope that, and I know, staff, that puts you in a precarious position, but it has happened with more frequency. And perhaps looking at, OK, if we're lifelong learners, let's learn from this as opposed to keep making the mistake over and over, because it also sets a tone for anything going forward.

OK, further questions, comments, concerns for Brandon? OK, thank you, Brandon. Lena, you are up next with our city attorney report.

Good evening, Chair and members of the Commission. I do not have any specific report for you this evening.

Okay. Comments, questions, concerns for Lena? All right. Final opportunity for any announcements before we adjourn. Okay. Seeing none, I move that we adjourn this evening's meeting. Do I have a second? Thank you, Commissioner Riley. Moved and seconded. Meeting adjourned. Have a great evening, everyone. Thank you.

Have a good night.