Despite hundreds of residents pushing back Monday against plans for a multi-family development in southeast Aurora after the project received planning commission approval last month, the Aurora City Council green-lighted the plans.

Most of residents’ concerns centered on the buildings’ heights compared to the surrounding area and the project’s architectural style.

Although some councilmembers agreed with appellants, the city council voted to uphold the planning commission approval of the site development plan in an 8-3 decision meaning the development can move forward. Mayor Mike Coffman and Councilmembers Angela Lawson and Francoise Bergan dissented.

The Garrett Companies’ development plan calls for a project called Echelon at Eagle Bend, with 260 multi-family units spanning 10 buildings in the Eagle Bend Metropolitan District. The 14.7-acre site sits at the intersection of Aurora Parkway and Quemoy Way. Along the property’s southern border are two-family duplex style homes. Half of the project’s buildings are two and three stories, while the other half are four stories.

Local residents and developers offered differing interpretations of development standards the project needs to meet, ultimately splitting councilmembers.

The metro district and residents who appealed the site plan listed several concerns with the project that they said violated the community’s general development plan, or GDP. The site plan does not conform to the prairie-style of architecture called for within the GDP, and the project lacked sufficient open space, appellants said. Their main concern, however, was the height of the four-story buildings.

The building plans feature slanted roofs and at their highest point, appellants said the roofs exceed a 50-foot height limit established by the GDP.

Eagle Bend Metro District representative Will Schippers said the prairie style architecture is a design requirement within the GDP, and that the theme of every development within Eagle Bend must be “harmonious.”

A product like what Garrett plans to build is better suited to be near public transit, shopping and dining, but those amenities are lacking in the area, he said. The project could still be built with lower building heights, he said. Schippers also voiced concerns that the developers typically sell their projects once they reach a certain occupancy level.

“Garrett is not invested in this community,” he said.

A representative of Sheryl Hutchings, a resident who appealed the site plan, said 825 neighbors petitioned against the project. Their opposition is not against multifamily, but largely with the four-story buildings’ height, he said. Eagle Bend residents did not object to other multi-family developments built in the community that featured shorter buildings, Hutchings’ representative said. He asked councilmembers to send the project back to the planning department for site plan amendments.

“Never did these 825 residents say, ‘Not in my backyard.’ We knew this site would be developed,” the representative said.

Ashley Bedell, vice president of development for Garrett Companies, told councilmembers the project more than meets requirements within the GPD. The developers set buildings farther away from the duplex homes than they were required to and placed the tallest buildings on the farthest side of the property away from the abutting homes, she said.

“We’ve pushed things as far north as we can,” she said.

The land slopes downward away from the nearby residences, which will lessen how tall the four-story buildings appear, she said. The “prairie style” architecture standard is not a requirement and the building heights do not violate the GDP, Bedell said.

A retention pond on the site meets open space requirements because it incorporates landscaping and a path that will allow people to use the area, she said. The site plan is also permitted by the property’s zoning and plans for 100 fewer units than what zoning allows, she said.

Bedell told council she could not say for sure if Garrett would one day sell the project, but that although it’s a possibility they build each project as though the company will hold it indefinitely and do self-manage some properties.

City staff from the planning department said they and the planning commission found that the project met requirements needed for approval and that it was compatible with the surrounding areas.

Appellants showed the city council renderings that portrayed the four-story buildings as standing taller than surrounding developments, although Garrett engineers and Councilmember Juan Marcano disputed the rendering’s accuracy.

In response to questions from Councilmember Alison Coombs, appellants said they would not oppose a denser project if it were also built with shorter buildings, and that they would support bringing public transit to the area.

When asked by Councilmember Angela Lawson why Garrett would not agree to build shorter structures, Bedell said the developers anticipated future residents will have different preferences. Some will want a home with a kitchen on a separate floor from their bedroom, a layout that is featured in the shorter buildings, while other tenants prefer a building with elevators and higher units, such as the four-story product.

Councilmember Danielle Jurinsky noted there were hundreds of households not represented in the group petitioning the project and that she received emails from community members in support of the project. Marcano thanked community members for organizing themselves, but said he disagreed with their stance and found the project to be in keeping with the Eagle Bend community’s architectural style.

Mayor Coffman gaveled the crowd, which had reacted to both Jurinksy’s and Marcano’s comments, as well as the developer’ presentations earlier in the meeting. The group applauded appellants for taking a stance against the project and Bergan for her opposition.

Bergan voted against upholding the planning commission’s decision because the project will spur long-lasting frustrations within the Eagle Bend community, she said. As the ward representative for the area, Bergan said she anticipates receiving complaints about future traffic issues and the lack of a playground for children living at the development.

“I personally have issues with the fact that we are supposed to be guided by the GDP,” she said.