ENTERPRISE TAB WATCH

Results

December 1, 2010

 

Planning Commission 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, December 21, 2010.

Board of County Commissioners 9:00 A.M., Wednesday, December 8, 2010.

Note the date for each item below

 

The PC decisions/recommendations may be appealed to the BCC within five business days of the date of the PC hearing.  Appeal form is found at:

 

 Clark County Appeal Form

 

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

 

Note: If you click on the blue underlined text it will take you to the detailed documents to explain the agenda item.

 

REGULAR BUSINESS

         1.  Approve the Agenda with any corrections, deletions or changes.  APPROVED

         2.  Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on November 10, 2010.  APPROVED

         3.  Discuss and make recommendations as required on AG-0967-10.  APPROVED

 

Reduce the length of time to commence and extension of time:

·         The current expiration limit for projects approved via special use permit, waiver of development standards or design review is two years to commence construction or commence the approved use.

·         No further review is required.

·         Reducing the time limit to one year may not be realistic for plans to be prepared, reviewed and construction started.

·         modify the definition of commence

·         Different benchmark to use for the time limit, such as requiring one year for building permits to be issued.

·         If a building permit is issued, plans have been prepared, plancheck fees have been paid, and studies have been completed, indicating viability of the project.

 

The Chair will prepare a letter to the Board of County Commissioners in support of the changes suggested in AG-0967-10.  It will be reviewed by the Board on December 15, 2010.

 

PUBLIC COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION

 

1.            Email addresses will be changed on Thursday, December 2, 2010 for employees using the Clark County email system. The “@co.clark.nv.us” part of the email address will change to “@clarkcountynv.gov.”

2.            Clark County will unveil a much improved website Friday, December 10, 2010, with a new address of www.clarkcountynv.gov.  Residents are being urged to update their bookmarks.

3.            A road hazard exists on Shelbourne just east of Haven.

4.            Intersection of Lindell and Warm Springs:  better traffic control device is needed.  Also, a traffic hazard exists due to irregularities in the roadway and obstructions.  Warm Springs westbound has a significant backup during the evening rush hour.

 

ZONING AGENDA

         SEE ATTACHMENT A and Holdover Items

 

NEXT MEETING DATE

December 15, 2010, 2010 6:00p.m.

Enterprise Library

25 E. Shelbourne Avenue @ Las Vegas Blvd. South

ADJOURNMENT:

 

 

Holdover Items

12/08/10 BCC

 

H1.   WS-0508-10 – L V PYLE, LLC:

Approved per Current Planning conditions

 

WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to increase the number of project identification signs.

 

DESIGN REVIEW for a comprehensive lighting and sign package in conjunction with an approved 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 Pyle Avenue and the west side of Haven Street within Enterprise.  SS/mk/xx

 

This is a very well done signage and lighting package.  The applicant has provided a detailed description for each type of lighting and signage.  Title 30 allows this project one monument sign and two wall signs.  The applicant has requested three wall signs and no monument sign, which requires a waiver of development standards.  The signs will use up-lighting.  The TAB has no objections to the signage waiver.

 

The only question was on the decorative fixtures to be used at the front door, balcony, and patio of each unit. Each bulb is 60 watts. The concern is the bulb may be visible for some distance.  The applicant stated the fixture has opaque glass, but not frosted and decorative type bulbs will be used.

 

H2.   ZC-0300-06 (ET-0169-10) – BBCME LAND, LLC:

APPROVED per Staff conditions

 

ZONE CHANGE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME to reclassify approximately 27.0 acres from R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone to R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay) Zone in conjunction with a residential subdivision in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned Community.  Generally located on the northeast corner of Starr Avenue and Buffalo Drive within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/rk/xx

 

H3.   UC-0504-10 – BBCME LAND, LLC:

DENIED due to insufficient and conflicting information which did not allow the Town Board to properly consider this application.  Request that the application be returned to the Town Board when complete information pertaining to the application is available and when conflicting opinions on the application history have been resolved. 

Note: The applicant requested an up or down vote and did not want to hold this item to obtain the necessary information.

 

USE PERMITS for the following:

 

1) Reduced front setback to a garage;

2) Reduced lot size;

3) Increased wall height;

4) Allow early grading;

5) Reduced street off-set; and

6) Modify required street improvements in accordance to the County’s Uniform Standard Drawings in conjunction with a residential development.

 

DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on 95.5 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned Community.  Generally located between Erie Avenue and Starr Avenue and the east side of Buffalo Drive within Enterprise. SB/rk/xx

 

The TAB denied this application for three reasons:

·   The applicant was not prepared to fully discuss the application details

·   The TAB has serious concerns about the design and livability of the project

·   The number of waivers required and the staff statement about not conforming with development standards

 

The applicant was not prepared sufficiently to answer the TAB questions on this request. The Board was asked to approve the use permits and design review based upon a concept - not a real plan.  When the applicant has a definitive plan, this item should be sent back to the TAB for review and recommendations.  The Board felt this applicant did not want to seriously discuss the project. 

 

Several aspects of this project were questioned or not acceptable to members of the TAB:

 

   100 of 576 lots are less than the 3500 sq. ft. required for R-2

   The location and distribution of the less than 3500 sq. ft. lots could not be determined.

   No usable open space in the entire project

   Waiver for back of curb return to 2 feet where 12 feet is required viewed as a safety issue

   Flow pattern for traffic could not be demonstrated

   What streets lead to the school site?

   What is the pedestrian flow to the school for a neighborhood to the east was answered with “this is not a gated community.” 

   Most likely, block walls would prevent pedestrian flow to the school

 

The following staff statements raised serious questions about this project:

 

“All of the modifications submitted with this request result in the creation of a subdivision which does not conform to the modified residential standards established for Mountain’s Edge and the Clark County Uniform Standard Drawings.”

 

“Staff has no issue with the concept of providing a different product type and design which may not meet exact Code requirements.”

 

This raises a question.  Why can this project not meet the development standards?  The reduction of lot size to less than 3500 ft. sq. ft. is particularly onerous.  Is the developer producing a compact lot neighborhood while calling it an R-2 development?  The lack of detail from the applicant prevented the TAB from determining the answer. With the diversity of the project, the applicant should be able to meet development standards.

 

The Board felt this applicant considered the hearing as another check mark on the way to BCC approval.  Other developers are very willing to work with the TAB on project improvement.  They have included amenities to help develop a livable neighborhood.  This is not the case with this applicant.

 

The applicant stated they were under a deadline to get this project approved.  They will close escrow later this month.   The deadline should not prevent a thorough review of the project.

 

H4.   VS-0505-10 – BBCME LAND, LLC:

DENIED due to insufficient and conflicting information which did not allow the Town Board to properly consider this application.  Request that the application be returned to the Town Board when complete information pertaining to the application is available and when conflicting opinions on the application history have been resolved. 

Note: The applicant requested an up or down vote and did not want to hold this item to obtain the necessary information.

 

VACATE AND ABANDON easements of interest to Clark County located between Erie Avenue and Starr Avenue, and between Tenaya Way (alignment) and Buffalo Drive, and portions of rights-of-way being Starr Avenue, Buffalo Drive, Boyd Avenue, Siddal Avenue, Chartan Avenue, Monte Cristo Way, and an un-named street located between Erie Avenue and Starr Avenue, and between Tenaya Way (alignment) and Buffalo Drive in an R-2 (Residential Urban Density) P-C (Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned Community within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/rk/xx

 

The applicant did not have a diagram which showed what was being vacated or abandoned.  Without a detailed diagram of what was proposed, it was not possible for the TAB to determine what this request entailed.  The TAB was not able to determine the following:

 

·   The disposition of the Chartan Paseo or how it would be developed. 

·   The road access to the school site was not defined.

·   What would be the resulting traffic flow?

·   The pedestrian flow to the school for neighborhoods to the east was answered with “this is not a gated community. “

·   Most likely, block wall would prevent a pedestrian flow to the school

·   A concept plan was presented.  The new tentative map was not presented to allow the TAB to visualize what was being requested.

 

The applicant was not prepared to answer the TAB questions on this request. We were asked to approve the vacations and abandonment based upon a concept - not a real plan.   When the applicant has a definitive plan, this item should be sent back to the TAB for review and recommendations.

 

The Board felt this applicant considered the hearing as another check mark on the way to BCC approval.  Other developers are very willing to work with the TAB on project improvement.  This produces a very sharp contrast.

 

The applicant stated they were under a deadline to get this project approved.  They will close escrow later this month.   The deadline should not prevent a thorough review of the project.

 

ATTACHMENT A

 

12/08/10 BCC

 

1.UC-0534-10 – ALMA GW AZ LLC, ET AL:

APPROVED 3-2 (Chestnut, Kapriva nay) per Staff conditions

ADD Current Planning conditions:

  The Use Permit and Design Review apply only to area shown per plans on file;

  Hours of operation limited to the current hours of operation of all existing tenants: 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.

 

USE PERMITS for the following:

 

1) Convenience store; and

2) Alcohol sales - packaged only (beer, wine, and liquor) in conjunction with a convenience store within a commercial development.

 

DESIGN REVIEW for a convenience store on 2.8 acres in an H-2 (General Highway Frontage) Zone in a MUD-4 Overlay District.  Generally located on the southwest corner of Blue Diamond Road and Cimarron Road within Enterprise.  SB/al/mb

 

The applicant is requesting approval to allow a convenience store and the sale of packaged alcohol  within this commercial development, which is located in an H-2 zone. These uses require approval of use permit applications which are discretionary and shall not be approved unless it is established that the use is appropriate at the proposed location.

 

The TAB was split on this item.  One opinion looked at this project as another business being established in this shopping center.  The other opinion did not see a compelling justification to establish a business in this location with a 24 hour operation, gaming and alcohol sales.

 

The hours of operation for the other businesses in the center are from 7:00 a.m. to 11 p.m.  The small property size, close proximity to residential, and it being next to a park site, are reasons that the TAB restricted the hours of operation.  The establishment of a 24/7 business in this center would not benefit the neighborhood.

 

The TAB did agree that the use permit should be restricted to current pad and not encompass the entire center.

 

The TAB disagrees with the staff position that this is a defacto C-2 zone district.  The staff cited two actions by the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners to support their analysis.  A close examination of these two actions does not support the staff analysis that C-2 type businesses are permitted.  In fact, the businesses cited in that staff analysis can be operated in less intense zone districts.

The staff reasoning is also valid, too, for a C-1 zone district which degrades their original argument for more intense uses.

 

Other factors that apply to this application:

·               The H-2 zone district was designed to be a combination of residential and neighborhood businesses

·               This parcel is zoned H-2.

·               The applicant has not applied to change the land use designation (residential high)

·               The applicant has not applied to change the zone district

·               The project was developed in the H-2 zone district

·               The project does not meet the Title 30 Criteria for the C-2 zone district.

·               The way to change zone districts is prescribed by NRS and Title 30.  They have not been followed.

·               There is no guarantee the public process would result in a zone change to C-2

·               The way this center has been handled could leave the county vulnerable to legal action.

 

The H-2 zone district should be converted to the appropriate County zone district through public hearings

 

12/21/10 PC

 

2.UC-0520-10 – BLACK BONGO, LP:

APPROVED per Staff conditions

ADD Current Planning condition:

Limited to 5 auctions per month.

 

USE PERMIT for an auction service.

 

WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to reduce parking within an existing office/warehouse facility on 16.5 acres in an M-D (Designed Manufacturing) (AE-65) Zone in the MUD-2 Overlay District.  Generally located on the southeast corner of Dean Martin Drive and Robindale Road within Enterprise.  SS/pd/ml

 

The auction service is an appropriate use for this location. 

 

The parking requirements for this location need to be coordinated between all the approved use permits.  To date, six use permits have been approved to allow retail sales, service uses, and a place of worship.  Approximately 40% of the space is not leased.  The current uses require 838 parking places while 599 are available.  This application has a waiver of development standards for parking with a two year review.

 

The TAB suggestion to the staff is to coordinate all the parking reviews.  This would prevent any one applicant from having to resolve the parking problems, should one arise.  It would make it easier for the appropriate commission to resolve the problem with all the uses considered at the same time.

 

3.UC-0523-10 – NV ENERGY:

APPROVED per Staff conditions

 

USE PERMIT to reduce the separation between communication towers.

 

DESIGN REVIEW for a communication tower and associated ground equipment in conjunction with an existing electrical substation on a portion of 4.6 acres in an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) Zone in the MUD-1 Overlay District.  Generally located on the east side of Las Vegas Boulevard South, 300 feet south of Ford Avenue within Enterprise.  SS/mk/ml

 

4.UC-0531-10 – EVANS, KEITH A.:

APPROVED 5-0 per Staff approved conditions:

Add Current Planning conditions:

·Enter into a restrictive covenant for off-sites if no bond is required;

·Unpaved parking surface to comply with Clark County Health District Air Quality mitigation requirements.

 

USE PERMITS for the following:

 

1) A recreational facility (zoo) with accessory commercial uses; and

2) A minor training facility

 

WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:

 

1) Reduced perimeter wall setback and street landscaping required with a recreational facility;

2) Reduced parking;

3) Waive parking lot landscaping;

4) Waive a portion of on-site paving;

5) Waive off-site improvements (excluding paving);

6) Eliminate the required trash enclosure; and

7) Eliminate the loading space.

 

DESIGN REVIEWS for the following:

 

1) Metal storage buildings;

2) Paved parking area; and

3) Unpaved parking area

 

for a proposed recreational facility (zoo) with accessory commercial uses in conjunction with an existing single family residence and exotic animal compound on 5.7 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone.  Generally located on the southwest corner of Bermuda Road and Bruner Avenue within Enterprise.  SS/jt/mb

 

The purpose of this application is to allow private and public tours of the facility, a minor training facility for instruction in the handling of exotic animals, and incidental commercial activity such as souvenir photos and a snack bar.

 

This is an existing compound.  The use permits changed the development standards applied to the compound. This results in waivers to maintain the compound in its current configuration.

 

The TAB discussions focus on two areas:

·   The parking area

·   Off sites completion

 

The parking area must have dust control applied, but does not have to be paved to accomplish this. 

 

This compound is located south of St. Rose Parkway in an undeveloped area. The off sites should be completed when the area is developed. There is a concern a bond may be required with a restricted covenant.  The result is the TAB added, “if no bond required,” to the condition for off sites.

 

5.VC-0513-10 – CANFAM HOLDINGS, LLC:

APPROVED per Staff conditions

VARIANCE to reduce the front setback in conjunction with a single family development on portions of 84.3 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone in the Pinnacle Peaks Concept Plan Area.  Generally located on the east side of Rainbow Boulevard and the north side of Wigwam Avenue within Enterprise.  SS/rk/ml

 

The variance is on a limited number of parcels and only on some designs.  The variance should not affect the overall quality of the neighborhood.

 

6.VC-0514-10 – CANFAM HOLDINGS, LLC:

APPROVED per Staff conditions

 

VARIANCE to reduce front setback in conjunction with a single family development on portions of 39.6 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone in the Pinnacle Peaks Concept Plan Area.  Generally located on the east side of Torrey Pines Drive and the north side of Wigwam Avenue within Enterprise.  SS/rk/ml

 

The variance is on a limited number of parcels and only on some designs.  The variance should not affect the overall quality of the neighborhood.

 

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 Clark County Records. This document may be freely distributed and reproduced as long as the author’s content is not altered.  Additional comments maybe added.  Additional comments must be clearly attributed to the author of those comments and published or reproduced with the document.  The additional comments author’s affiliation with any government board, organization or group must be clearly identified.  This attribution statement must accompany any distribution of this document.

David D. Chestnut, Sr.