RESULTS
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 2016–
BOARD MEMBERS POSTING LOCATIONS
John Catlett Desert Breeze
Community Center-8275 W.
Dee Gatliff,
John Getter, Chair
Darby Johnson, Jr.
Angie Heath Younce
Mike Shannon, Town Liaison (702) 455-8338
Diana Morton, Secretary (702) 254-8413
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. PROCEDURES/CONDUCT
A. Conformance
with the
B. Meeting Guidelines
C. Approval of Agenda Posted, Including Any Deletions or Corrections
Item 2
heard first, Items 3&5 concurrently
D. Approval
of Minutes of
IV.
COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC – None
V. TOWN BOARD
INPUT None
VI. GENERAL BUSINESS
A.
Liaison/County Staff Business Notice of
upcoming
B. ACTION ITEM: Discussion and recommendation regarding proposed Consolidated Land Use Categories
There
was significant discussion. TAB members reflected the comments in earlier
meetings from the public opposing the plan as incomplete and not understood. A
motion was offered and approved unanimously ( 5-0 ) to
recommend the proposed categories be rejected by the PC and
The
motion:
The Spring Valley
Town Advisory Board has been asked to provide comments on proposed Consolidated
Land Use Policies. The effort to create these policies had three stated goals;
·
Create a unified set of land use policies
·
Improve planning guidance using updated
planning theories
·
Reduced non-conforming zone changes
Whereas the role
of the Spring Valley Town Advisory Board is to provide recommendations by board
vote for the Planning Commission and Board of County Commissioners, and
Whereas the SVTAB
has been presented information known as the Consolidated Land Use Policies, and
Whereas the
proposed categories do not meet the stated goals, and
Whereas the
citizen response to the limited public information available has been generally
negative with requests for complete presentations and an opportunity to see a
complete land use process as it would be modified by the proposed goals,
policies, categories, code changes, and
Whereas the SVTAB
expressed significant concerns that the proposal as presented is incomplete,
apparently unwieldy and would create significant unknown and unforeseen changes
in the current land use system , and
Whereas the
proposal is described by Advanced Planners as incomplete and lacking in Title
30 and related regulations and procedures to clarify if and how the changes
would work, and
Whereas the work
of the Community Planning Work Group was arbitrarily suspended by the Advanced
Planning staff despite objections from group members including town board
representatives who believed the work was incomplete, and
Whereas efforts
to confirm the involvement of Current Planning staff to assure the proposal is
workable and would be functional have been unsuccessful, and
Whereas the
proposal and categories are substantially similar to a system used in the 1990s
commonly referred to as “Bubble Zoning with accompanying land use categories”
that was rejected as unworkable and was replaced by the current system by 2004,
A Motion:
The Spring Valley
Town Advisory recommends that the Planning Commission and the Board of County
Commissioners reject the proposed Consolidated Land Use Categories. If they
wish to continue the process, return the matter to the Community Planning Work
Group to finish its work to create a complete product and schedule appropriate
public events to allow for citizen education, input, understanding and support.
John Getter
Approved 5-0
VIII. COMMENTS BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC – None
IX. Set next meeting date –
X. Adjournment
ATTACHMENT A
1.
TM-0219-15 -
TENTATIVE
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
2.
WS-0919-14 (ET-0001-16)
– kulstad,
WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FIRST
EXTENSION OF TIME to
complete a reduction in setbacks for an existing patio cover addition to a
single family residence on 0.3 acres in an R-1 (Single Family Residential)
Zone. Generally
located on the northeast corner of Torrey Pines Drive and
Approved 5-0 with staff
conditions
3.
UC-0906-15
– ABC
USE PERMITS for the following: 1) modify the pedestrian
realm; and 2) reduce parking in conjunction with proposed mixed use
development.
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following: 1)
permit non-standard improvements within the right-of-way; and 2) permit
an over-length cul-de-sac.
DESIGN REVIEW for
modification to an approved mixed use development on 9.9 acres in a U-V (
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
4.
UC-0005-16
– FISHER HOLDING COMPANY, LLC:
USE PERMIT for a proposed food cart/trailer not located within
an enclosed building.
DESIGN
REVIEW for a food cart (Hawaiian
shaved ice) in conjunction with an existing commercial center on 1.7 acres in a
C-2 (General Commercial) Zone. Generally located on the southeast corner of
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
5.
VS-0907-15 – ABC
VACATE
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
6.
UC-0010-16
– THE HOWARD HUGHES COMPANY, LLC:
USE PERMIT for modified wall and common element standards in conjunction with a
master planned community on 449.0 acres
in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone, an R-3 (Multiple Family
Residential) Zone, and a P-F (Public Facility) Zone all in a P-C (Planned
Community Overlay District) Zone for Summerlin Village 16A. Generally located on the
west side of
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
7.
UC-0014-16 –
USE PERMIT for a proposed massage establishment in conjunction
with an existing shopping center on 4.6
acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) Zone in the
Approved 5-0 with staff conditions
8.
ZC-0477-15 (WC-0005-16)
– wilke famly invest group, llc:
WAIVER OF
CONDITIONS of a zone change
requiring no bathrooms or sinks in the units in conjunction with an
office/warehouse complex on 5.0 acres in an M-D (Designed Manufacturing)
(AE-60) Zone in the
Denied 5-0 per staff recommendations
The applicant strongly
argued for the waiver saying it was unfair and arbitrary. TAB members shared
the staff concern that this item had been approved with conditions less than 2
months ago and there was now an effort to change it. Concerns include, but are
not limited to reducing the potential use of this facility as a party house,
residence or other inappropriate use. There was also concern from the TAB that
surrounding BDRP uses to create jobs would be negatively impacted if the
potential for residing or occupying the units by large numbers of people were
allowed.
9.
WS-0013-16
– J & M
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following: 1)
increased wall sign area; and 2) increased logo sign area in conjunction
with an approved medical marijuana establishment (dispensary).
DESIGN REVIEW for a wall sign including logos on 0.4 acres in a C-1 (Local Business) (AE-60) Zone in the
Denied 5-0 per
staff recommendation.
The
TAB concerns were not limited to just regulations related to this use. We also
had concerns that a large sign is simply unattractive in this location. A
temporary banner sign, apparently smaller than the 30SF sign allowed by code is
currently in place and easily visible from the street. Since this is not a
location catering to customers buying products on impulse the argument for
increased signage beyond standards were not adequate to sway the TAB.
The
statements, opinions and observations expressed in this document are solely
those of the author. The opinions stated
in this document are not the official position of any government board,
organization or group. The project
descriptions, ordinances board/commission results are reproduced from publicly
available
John
Getter