[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6479802,"mediaKeyId","5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261","parentId",5692098,"title","Planning commission approves Dutch Bros. Pomeroy drive‑through and site plan amid a single traffic comment","audioSeconds",352,"startMs",1174000,"endMs",1526000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261&start=1174&end=1526","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261/thumbnail_1174000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6479802/Aurora-City/Douglas-County/Colorado/Planning-commission-approves-Dutch-Bros-Pomeroy-drivethrough-and-site-plan-amid-a-single-traffic-comment","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6479802-d79226b5f36e077b9e757fd8c95dc8b3/orig.mp4?Expires=1770881121&Signature=mP6QV4QjWiuIHX3BxkoRbrgxWzmybOIN9dxGhm45hhFCYxpTavihp3wpWyIPYX0Y8t-LB7QDb2TNWTW37Dw5ZzdLXmf0FQHlvJ9kz8n3pVjsfB3AEZc37UJr43McSWvytxB04qLxDljod9cScD9uByuLkLGT-6Dv4dJT9~1G2FA0lqZ6QL6IMRRCgzV7ZTsflx45229sHWVj8iDNo0jmkdQEVP0QIYBbQYn~Voe0WZStN~U8V7NoAl4cgETQyMK7IpalVfcWzruYmCBn5LaZVQHTld8oJfA1y-g~y1DlCZXaSSy53u~bWxdaXkVyV3LqGDCnCsHSEILrYl6ZkZuXJA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Aurora City, CO","date","2025-08-28T22:26:03Z","article","Aurora — The Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 27 unanimously approved a conditional use permitting a drive‑through and a site plan for a 1,025‑square‑foot Dutch Bros. Coffee at the northeast corner of South Aurora Parkway and South Elkway.

Ariana Mooka, the city planner assigned to the case, told the commission the parcel is zoned Mixed Use Regional (MUR) and that the application requests conditional‑use approval for drive‑through service and a site plan for a new coffee shop. “The applicant, Coal Valley Partners LLC, is requesting approval for a conditional use for a drive through and a site plan for a new 1,025 square foot coffee shop,” Mooka said. Staff mailed notifications to adjacent owners and published legal notice; one resident called staff on Aug. 26 to raise traffic concerns.

The applicant’s consultant, Michael Beck of Barkhausen Consulting Engineers, said the team agreed with staff recommendations. “We agree with staff’s recommendations, and, we’re happy to answer any questions,” Beck said.

Staff’s report described a site layout that orients the building toward South Aurora Parkway and places two drive‑through lanes internal to the property, accessible from a private road at the north property line rather than Aurora Parkway. The design includes a walk‑up window, an outdoor patio and landscaping intended to screen the drive‑through from the parkway. Staff concluded the proposal meets the conditional‑use design standards in UDO §146‑3.3.6.E (drive‑through standards) by placing the drive‑through to the side or rear, minimizing view and vehicle‑pedestrian conflicts.

Chair Walls and other commissioners noted the applicant exceeded the city’s car‑stacking requirement. “I believe the city's requirement was 7 spaces in car stacking, and I believe they're providing 17, if I remember correctly,” Walls said during deliberations.

Commissioner Hogan moved to approve the conditional use for the drive‑through, citing staff’s findings; Commissioner Banka seconded. The motion carried 7‑0 in a roll call that recorded approvals from Commissioners Dutchek, Bush, Geiser, Reilly, Banker, Hogan and Walls.

Commissioner Geiser then moved to approve the site plan, subject to resolving outstanding technical issues prior to recordation and building permit issuance; Commissioner Bush seconded. Commissioners discussed traffic and the traffic study’s finding that projected levels of service are acceptable in the study years (2027 and 2045). The site‑plan motion likewise passed 7‑0.

Why it matters: The proposal converts a vacant parcel in a regional mixed‑use area to a commercial use with a drive‑through; staff and the applicant said the layout minimizes frontage visibility and pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. The single comment from a nearby resident raised traffic concerns; staff reported it had discussed the resident’s concerns and that a traffic analysis was part of the application review.

What’s next: Approval is subject to technical clearance before recordation and building permits. The applicant will need to resolve outstanding technical issues identified by staff prior to permit issuance.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning and Zoning Commission - Aug. 27, 2025 Regular Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","Aurora — The Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 27 unanimously approved a conditional use permitting a drive‑through and a site plan for a 1,025‑square‑foot Dutch Bros. Coffee at the northeast corner of South Aurora Parkway and South Elkway.","taxTitle","Aurora City, Douglas County, Colorado","taxId",5767,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6479807,"Aurora planning panel backs UDO change to separate National Register and local landmark listings",449,253000,702000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261&start=253&end=702","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261/thumbnail_253000.jpg","/articles/6479807/Aurora-City/Douglas-County/Colorado/Aurora-planning-panel-backs-UDO-change-to-separate-National-Register-and-local-landmark-listings","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6479807-cb71cabe99f66fddc63398e08eef9ec9/orig.mp4?Expires=1770881121&Signature=WuFOyIeSe46VXr~vH~ODQsp7ReYg-Pjh7ShZ-jAOmhdC95V88qgGB1LkepNj7mnJNAjzl4hEZgk6ppLG6JIZQf6h5gTctF6av0onBVuXu9lzmWepDfL8rga2-g2iktnUrLyQOWJHJl4ev1FO1rPogCVXw6hLcI2CQ8SIukuN1ojhth24wJjo-r9OsRLv4jWyOXCSBmPeTFAUD98qtk8zQCd72fP1UWYP7QjyLe9K72vBOto6iJMW2y4gbx-kN8ikY4jtSWsKZxy1cGx7Smxb0CJyt9nV5ymKGwp99Ysn4fTRCg5wlaTL96LTsFS43dF-8eSQpN~dNItlJrh8YObtJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Aurora — The Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 27 voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council amend the Unified Development Ordinance to stop automatically making a property a local landmark when it is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

The proposal would require a separate local process — including owner notification and an owner consent form — for local landmark designation. Staff said the change is needed to comply with Certified Local Government (CLG) guidance and to preserve Aurora’s access to related grants and tax-credit benefits.

City historic preservation specialist Chris Geddes told commissioners the city’s CLG quadrennial review recommended the change; Aurora’s next review is scheduled for Oct. 14. “When a property in the city of Aurora is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, it is automatically made a local landmark. … We have been asked to disconnect these two processes,” Geddes said. He said the amendment would grandfather properties already locally landmarked before Jan. 1, 2026.

The amendment would revise Chapter 146, section 2.6.5.C.2 of the Unified Development Ordinance so National Register listing remains recognition only unless the property owner separately pursues local landmarking. Geddes said local designation triggers local review procedures and potential regulatory review, whereas National Register listing is largely honorific and used primarily to access state and federal incentives.

Commissioners asked whether local designation imposes the same restrictions as National Register listing. Geddes replied that “the strongest guidelines and review and regulation come at the local level,” and that state or national listings are primarily recognition and do not automatically impose local regulation. He cited local examples where alterations were permitted through the local review process.

Commissioner Hogan, who said he recently used the certificates-of-appropriateness process for a memorial project, asked whether he needed to recuse himself; city attorney Lena McClellan advised the commission the amendment is a legislative action and not quasi‑judicial, and she did not identify a conflict.

The commission’s motion, made by Commissioner Jechek and seconded by Commissioner Vanka, was approved unanimously in roll call votes from Commissioners Dutchek, Bush, Geiser, Reilly, Banker, Hogan and Walls. The motion recommended City Council adopt the ordinance text amendment for the reasons set out in the staff report.

The commission’s recommendation will go to City Council for final action; staff indicated the amendment is scheduled for Planning and Economic Development Committee review on Sept. 10 and council readings in October.

Why it matters: Aurora’s CLG status gives the city access to State Historic Preservation Office guidance, trainings and a limited pool of grant funds. Staff said noncompliance with CLG handbook guidance could put those benefits at risk, and separating federal/state recognition from local regulatory designation increases notice and due‑process protections for property owners.

What’s next: The commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to City Council for consideration. Staff told commissioners properties already locally landmarked before Jan. 1, 2026, will be grandfathered and will not be subject to the new separate process.","The Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend that city council amend the Unified Development Ordinance so National Register listing will not automatically create a local landmark designation; existing local landmarks will be grandfathered.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6479797,"Commission postpones Green Valley Ranch East Filing 17 site plan after traffic and access concerns",2361,1966000,4327000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261&start=1966&end=4327","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5692098-6edea15f04058cf8843b2f61dead9261/thumbnail_1966000.jpg","/articles/6479797/Aurora-City/Douglas-County/Colorado/Commission-postpones-Green-Valley-Ranch-East-Filing-17-site-plan-after-traffic-and-access-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6479797-d363a841d5f84e687fb14038230f7747/orig.mp4?Expires=1770881121&Signature=NkZnneylvdS2ACZx8ON3S4PU05XXN3kVPpljJDAaxya6M4~X4cImREchExlvRabMG85JDqaup132l7nr8JrT1Ic7GNEGci~0uof~7vJjB7gydHP8Rjcgd7GvjkyN0UmwX31dgArJZ~kqMqO69bRdSZX8pBJsMMoD5XopIAh-RMIdjeMvYTcJDCb6cgKj4OluUy-AqIPAd-Dx-ypikmti3zd7QvfJYGokkEHgCp-mpyfzq24ASlVGbfXf8nl9FhD9PXelq3oXFaFwzt5ms-dQEMInLYnQxbDJ6oOnahQNqccUDM7JtJgGwV~xmMRC~8u~rlfNswbGq3Am4YVMsmUzYw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Aurora — The Aurora Planning and Zoning Commission on Aug. 27 voted to postpone action on the Green Valley Ranch East Filing 17 site plan and two adjustment requests until Sept. 24 after commissioners and traffic staff identified unresolved technical and access concerns.

Debbie Bickmeyer, senior planner, presented the applicant’s proposal for 244 units on roughly 44.5 acres in an R‑2 (medium‑density residential) zone within the Green Valley Ranch East master plan. The filing is the final phase of an age‑restricted active‑adult community. Proposed product types include single‑family front‑loaded homes, single‑family motor‑court homes, two‑family (duplex) front‑loaded units, and duplexes on motor courts. The filing provides shared amenities and connects to the existing active‑adult neighborhood; staff reported 48 adjacent notices mailed and three signs posted.

The applicant requested two adjustments: (1) an adjustment to access and connectivity requirements (UDO §146‑4.5.0.3.b.1) to allow certain lots on North Sicily Street to be accessed by three local streets after departing the adjacent collector; and (2) an adjustment to exceed the maximum block perimeter of 2,800 linear feet (UDO §146‑4.3.9.B) because the drainage corridor limits vehicular connections and results in an approximately 4,200‑foot block perimeter in places. The applicant said the project is a gated active‑adult community and that reduced external access preserves the development’s intended security and privacy; the applicant’s planning consultant, Mike Wire, said pedestrian connections and 30‑foot landscape/open‑space tracks would break up continuous frontage and provide walkability.

Staff found the site plan meets most UDO criteria but noted the two adjustment requests; staff was neutral on the block‑perimeter request and supported the access/connectivity adjustment with pedestrian‑connectivity compensations. The proposed density is 5.5 dwelling units per acre, within the master‑plan allowance of 6.2 units per acre for the planning area. The developer’s materials show 259 guest parking spaces (exceeding the 52 required) and roughly 279 street parking spaces; all lots are within 1,320 linear feet of a park or open space.

Traffic and emergency‑access concerns dominated the hearing. Dean Kaiser of Development Services (traffic) said his unit had remaining comments and that the two‑access configuration required closer review. He described the applicant’s vehicle analysis as using a “two‑stage operation” assumption for some turning movements and said staff needed to revisit those calculations. Kendra Nagami from engineering confirmed that the proposed standard local street section (34‑foot pavement width within a 64‑foot right‑of‑way) should allow passage when parking is present, but commissioners remained concerned about fire and emergency access, cul‑de‑sac lengths, and the effect of a long block perimeter on circulation.

Commissioner Banka initially moved to approve the site plan with the two adjustments and one condition (resolution of outstanding technical issues prior to recordation and permits); Commissioner Bush seconded. After extended deliberations in which several commissioners expressed significant reservations about the adjustments and outstanding traffic questions, Chair Walls moved to postpone the decision to Sept. 24 to allow staff and the applicant more time to address technical referrals. Commissioner Hogan seconded the postponement. The roll call to postpone recorded approvals from Commissioners Jechek, Bush, Geyser, Reilly, Banker, Hogan and Walls.

Why it matters: The filing completes the planned active‑adult community in Green Valley Ranch East and requests UDO adjustments that, if approved, would change connectivity and block perimeter standards for this planning area. Commissioners flagged unresolved traffic review items and emergency access as material public‑safety and circulation concerns.

What’s next: The item is scheduled to return to the Planning and Zoning Commission on Sept. 24. Staff and the applicant were asked to provide more detailed traffic and emergency‑access analysis and to address remaining technical comments before the commission acts again.","The commission postponed consideration of a 244‑lot, 44.5‑acre active‑adult site plan and two requested UDO adjustments (access/connectivity and block perimeter) to Sept. 24 after traffic staff indicated outstanding comments and multiple commissioners raised safety and emergency‑access concerns.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission approves Dutch Bros. Pomeroy drive‑through and site plan amid a single traffic comment

Aurora planning panel backs UDO change to separate National Register and local landmark listings

Commission postpones Green Valley Ranch East Filing 17 site plan after traffic and access concerns