Results
Planning Commission
7:00 P.M.,
Board of
The PC decisions/recommendations may be appealed
to the
An appeal may be made in person at the Current
Planning desk or by fax (702-455-3271). Call Current Planning (455-4314) to find out how to file an appeal.
Help in filling an appeal may be obtained from the Southwest Action
Network (SWAN). You can contact SWAN at:
702-837-0244 · 702-837-0255 (fax)
email: swan@lvswan.org
REGULAR
BUSINESS:
1.Approve the Agenda with any corrections,
deletions or changes.
Approved 3-0
with the following changes:
The
following items have been held by applicant until the
5.
UC-0275-10 – DONAL SERIES 3, LLC, ET AL:
8. VS-0276-10 – DONAL SERIES 3, LLC, ET AL:
2.Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on
3.The Board to discuss and take action as required
on meeting protocol and presentation for the Enterprise TAB.
The TAB protocol will be published as an
attachment to the Agenda. Further discussion of this item is tabled. Tabled until August 11
PUBLIC COMMENTS
1. The change to the
2. The TAB is looking
for a representative and alternate to the Community Development Advisory
Committee (CDAC). The TAB nominees must
be submitted by
3. Received a request
from concerned citizens to evaluate a four way stop at the corner of Cactus and
Jones. The traffic has increased and
this intersection is used by school children daily.
ATTACHMENT
A
1. VS-0624-06 (ET-0104-10) –
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
VACATE
2. UC-0265-10
– HARRISON, RICHARD B. & JO ANNE:
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
ADD
Current Planning condition:
Trees planted on 20 ft centers along garage
south side
This project is well done. The garage plans presented match the main
house exterior. The south elevation of
the garage has no windows or doors. The
trees would break up the expanse of stucco visible to the neighbors.
USE
PERMIT to allow
the area of a proposed accessory building (garage) to exceed one-half the
footprint of the existing principal dwelling on 2.1 acres in an R-E (Rural
Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone. Generally located on the
southwest corner of
3. UC-0268-10 – MELDRUM FAMILY TRUST:
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
USE
PERMIT to allow
an unscreened outside storage yard on 5.0 acres in an M-1 (Light Manufacturing)
Zone. Generally located on northeast corner of
4. UC-0272-10 – DJ & SHIRLEY M. SMITH
FAMILY TRUST:
APPROVE
Use Permits 1 & 2
APPROVE
Waiver of Development Standards
APPROVE
per Current Planning conditions.
USE
PERMITS for the
following:
1) Allow the cumulative area of all accessory
structures to exceed the footprint of the principal dwelling; and
2) Allow existing accessory structures which are
not architecturally compatible with the principal building
in conjunction with a single family residence on
2.2 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to reduce the separation between structures.
Generally located on the
north side of
5. UC-0275-10 – DONAL SERIES 3, LLC, ET AL:
HELD
by applicant until the
USE
PERMITS for the
following:
1) A communication tower; and
2) Increase the height of a communication tower on
a portion of 5.0 acres
in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone.
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
communication tower with associated equipment.
Generally located on the
north side of
6. VS-0259-10 –
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
VACATE
7. VS-0273-10 – METEJEMEI, LLC:
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
VACATE
8. VS-0276-10 – DONAL SERIES 3, LLC, ET AL:
HELD
by applicant until the
VACATE
9. WS-0263-10 – STATE OF
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to eliminate deed restriction requirements for the State of Nevada in
conjunction with a parcel map on 94.0 acres in an M-D (Designed Manufacturing)
(AE-60) Zone, an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone, an R-E (Rural Estates
Residential) (AE-60) Zone, a P-F (Public Facility) Zone, and a P-F (Public
Facility) (AE-60) Zone. Generally located east of
10. WS-0278-10 –
APPROVED
per Current Planning conditions
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to reduce the side yard setback on 15 lots in conjunction within a single
family subdivision on a portion of 12.5 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density
Residential) Zone. Generally
located on the north side of
11. UC-0267-10 –
APPROVED
per Staff conditions
ADD
Current planning condition:
Use
Permit for reduction of rear yard setbacks applies only to single story homes.
USE
PERMIT to
reduce rear yard setbacks in conjunction with a previously approved planned
unit development on 5.3 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C
(Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned
Community. Generally located on the southwest corner of
The requested rear yard setback reduction
accommodates a new single story design. The TAB felt strongly that the setback
reduction be limited to the new single-story design only.
12. UC-0283-10 –
APPROVED
per Staff Conditions
ADD
the following conditions:
·The Waiver of
Conditions applies to this Use Permit only and is not applicable to subsequent
Use Permits.
·Comply with conditions
of ZC-0935-05 with the following exceptions.
o
The 20 ft landscape buffer along
o
A 20 foot landscape buffer be provided along the
east and north property lines adjacent to residential property
o
A 10 feet block wall to be provided along the east
and north property lines adjacent to residential property.
o
Change the following condition:
§
From - No two story structures are allowed within
50 feet of the east and north property lines
§
To – Building height not to exceed 27 ft.
USE
PERMIT for a
multi-family residential development.
WAIVERS
OF CONDITIONS of a zone
change (ZC-0935-05) requiring the following:
1) applicant shall provide a 20 foot wide intense
landscape buffer along the north and east property lines where the trees shall
be pine or similar evergreen with trees being spaced 10 feet on center; and
2) No 2 story structures are allowed within 50
feet of the east and north property lines.
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
multi-family residential development on 16.4 acres in H-1 (Limited Resort and
Apartment) Zone in the MUD-4 Overlay District.
Generally located on the
south side of
ZC-0935-05 changed the zoning to H-l was approved
by the Board of County Commissioners in March 2006. The accompanying Design Review was withdrawn.
The zone change contained a number of negotiated conditions to protect the
residential property adjacent to this project and east of Haven. In the 2009 Enterprise Land Use Plan, the
residents to the east of Haven requested and obtained a commercial land use on
their property. Their stated intent was
to gain additional value for their property when sold.
The two positions were presented to the TAB.
·
The
developer who wants to build the project
o
Retained
most of the conditions agreed upon by the neighbors in 2006
o
Changed
one condition to add a eight foot wall in the middle of a 20 ft landscape
buffer along Haven
o
Agreed
to maintain a 20 ft landscape buffer to the adjacent northeast residences
(requires a building to be moved on the current plan)
o
Agreed
to a 10 ft wall to protect animals on the adjacent northeast property
o
Requested
the 26 ft single story condition be changed to building height limited to 27 ft
·
The
neighbors are opposed to this application
o
They
are strongly opposed to any apartments in the neighborhood
o
This
project does not meet their expectations of how their neighborhood should
develop
o
Would
prefer to have a hotel/casino adjacent to their property
o
Opted
out of the RNP to increase their land value.
o
Concerned
about transient residents, additional crime, additional traffic, routes to
school for children.
o
The
project would be started, but not completed
The TAB considered the following:
·
The
developer has honored the intent of the 2006 agreement with the residents.
·
The
developer agreed to additional conditions which increased the buffering for the
adjacent neighbors.
·
The
project is well within the H-1 zone district parameters.
·
The
intensity is much lower than the previous casino project
·
The
entire complex is 27 ft high
·
The
project would help stabilize the boundary for the RNP to the east.
·
The
developer has successfully built other projects in town (Similar project
located at Robindale and
The TAB recommendations are based upon the
following:
·
The
developer has complied with the 2006 conditions negotiated with the neighbors
o
The
project is well designed
o
The
single entrance on the west will reduce the effects on the residents east of
the project.
o
Open
space for the project is well above the County standards.
·
The
intensity is well below the max for a H-1 zone district
·
The
neighbors to the east moved their property from residential to commercial land use
in the last land use update.
·
The
ZC-0935-05 conditions must remain in force, if this project does not go forward.
13. ZC-0261-10 – THE EPARCHY OF OUR LADY OF
No
recommendation: JD moved to approve the
application and added a condition: No
additional buildings are permitted without additional land being added to the
site. Motion to approve resulted in 2-2
vote, DDC, FJK Nay: RB absent. After further discussion, no additional
motions were made.
USE
PERMIT for the
expansion of a place of worship.
DESIGN
REVIEWS for the
following:
1)
Additions to 2
existing buildings; and
2) Construction of a new building (Sunday school building) in conjunction with a place of worship.
Generally located on the southwest corner of
The TAB members were sharply divided on this
application.
Points of concern:
• The
TAB is concerned about non-governmental agencies using the PF zone
district. The requested PF zoning would
effectively remove a non-governmental use from Title 30 Development
Standards. There is a potential solution
where the church can obtain the waiver without the PF zone change. However, this solution was not explored by
the staff. Also, the applicant was not
willing to hold this item to explore this solution. The applicant stated that they would rather
take their chances with “No Recommendation” from the TAB rather than explore
another solution.
• This
property is in need of upgrades. There
are currently several conex containers and trailers on the property. The additions to the two existing buildings
would help upgrade the property.
• The
TAB members felt the church has reached the point where the property cannot
support any additional development beyond the current use without additional
land. A condition related to this was
added to the motion on this application.
The TAB was divided as follows:
1.One side supported the staff position:
The staff recommended that the Design Review
for the Sunday school be denied because the parking available for that use is
inadequate. The request for the
reduction in parking is excessive. The
concern is the potential negative impacts on the neighborhood if parking proves
to be inadequate. The applicant’s desire
to press forward without examining an alternate method to obtain a parking
waiver was a factor.
2.The other side supported approval of the
entire application:
Several nearby residents stated that parking
has not been a problem. Also, the church
has been able to use the adjacent school parking lot for overflow. The thought is the parking is not a problem.
The TAB was not able to resolve these
differences of opinion.
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
David D.
Chestnut, Sr.