December 28, 2011


The ATTACHMENT A items will be heard on the following dates:


Planning Commission 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, January 17, 2012.

Board of County Commissioners 9:00 A.M., Wednesday, January 18, 2011.

Note:  The Enterprise land use changes will be heard by the Planning Commission on January 3, 2012


HOLDOVER/RETURNED APPLICATIONS will be heard on the date in the applications header.


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 ctrl+click on the blue underlined text it will take you to the detailed documents to explain the agenda item.




1.  Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on December 14, 2011.  APPROVED


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














Rainbow Blvd left turn to Badura Ave. westbound queue is not adequate with heavy traffic.  The Rainbow Blvd left lane traffic has backed up to south of Warm Springs Rd. because of cars trying to make a left turn onto Badura Ave.  A second turn lane to westbound Badura should be created.


NEXT MEETING DATE:  January 11, 2012





01/03/12 PC


H-1    UC-0570-11 – BAHJI PARTNERS, LTD:   PC item # 14, January 3, 2012



USE PERMIT to allow a truck/trailer rental business in conjunction with an existing retail business within a shopping center on 4.1 acres in a C-1 (Local Business) Zone.  Generally located on the northwest corner of Rainbow Boulevard and Mesa Verde Lane (alignment) within Enterprise.  SS/bk/xx  (For possible action)


This applicant has an active Clark County Public Response Office (CCPRO) complaint since March 2010, ZV-2982-11, for a truck rental business without the proper approvals.  The applicant’s attorney was not prepared to discuss the application at the December 14, 2011 TAB meeting.  The item was held for two weeks.


The applicant submitted a letter to hold the application until the February 1, 2012 TAB meeting or later.  The applicant’s application is not so complex that it would take over two weeks to prepare the applicant’s position.  This should have been done when the application was submitted to Current Planning.  It appears the intent of the applicant is to delay as long as possible while continuing to operate a business without permits. 


The hold request was not accepted by the TAB.  The TAB elected to hear this item for three reasons.  First, there is significant resident opposition to this Use Permit.  Second, residents have complained about a 24 hour-a-day operation and truck noise.   This is a commercial neighborhood center and is not an appropriate location for a 24 hour-a-day operation.  Third, the applicant has continued to operate a truck rental business instead terminating the operation until the use permit and business license were obtained.  This raises doubts about the applicant’s willingness to comply with any conditions placed on the truck rental operation.


A site inspection by TAB members revealed 10 to 12 parking spaces taken up by rental vehicles.  This makes the delivery of supplies to other businesses difficult.  Also, the trucks were backed into the landscaping damaging the trees.  There is reduced clearance for emergency vehicles.


All vehicle servicing would have to be done offsite as ZC-0814-02 prohibited vehicle servicing as an activity for this shopping center.


H-2    VS-0560-11 – RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES OF NEVADA:  PC item # 18, January 3, 2012


ADD Current Planning condition:

·   Design Review as a public hearing for future plans


VACATE AND ABANDON easements of interest to Clark County and portions of rights-of-way between Boyd Avenue and Starr Avenue, and between Pioneer Way and Buffalo Drive in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned Community within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/rk/xx  (For possible action)


This community is being redesigned with larger lot sizes from 118 lots to 85 lots.  This request eliminates the map that was submitted with the original project and requires a new map be submitted.  The conditions attached to the original zone change remain in effect.


The TAB recommended a design review for the new project to ensure the concerns of the surrounding neighborhoods are taken in to account.


H-3      WS-0561-11 – MONTE CRISTO, LLC:  PC item # 29, January 3, 2012


ADD Current Planning conditions: (Applicant agreed to these conditions)

·   6 ft. landscape buffer with large trees on 20 ft. centers required on Wigwam Ave., Monte Cristo Way and Camero Ave.

·   Block wall to be split face block

·   Wall height along Monte Cristo Way not to excel 7.2 feet.




1) Allow non-decorative walls;

2) Increased wall height; and

3) Waive landscaping requirements


for a proposed single family residence on 5.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.  Generally located on the northwest corner of Monte Cristo Way and Wigwam Avenue within Enterprise.  SB/bk/xx  (For possible action)


The TAB concern was how this residence fits into the neighborhood and meets county code for the RNP.  The original plans call for block wall on three sides with no buffering.  Along Monte Cristo Way,  this would have 600 ft. of block wall without being buffered or meeting County code.  This does not fit into the surrounding neighborhood which is built to county standards.  It would degrade the neighborhood. 


The TAB held this item for two weeks to give the applicant time to work with neighbors.  Most, but not all, neighbors agreed with the compromise plan developed.  The wall is to be set back 6 ft. from the right-of- way with large trees planted every 20 feet.  This will help soften the effect of walls that extend 300 ft. on two side and 600 ft. along Monte Cristo Way.  The wall height along Monte Cristo Way was limited to the height as stated by the project architect.




01/03/12 PC


1.      CP-0978-11:   Use this hyper link to view the maps for items 1 to 8 below


That the Enterprise Town Advisory Board hold a public meeting on an amendment to the Enterprise Land Use Plan and take appropriate action. (For possible action)  


1.                  PA-0002-11



APN 176-17-801-019 (SB)


From PF (Public Facility) & RS (Residential Suburban) to PF (Public Facility) and RH (Residential High) Generally located on between Wigwam Avenue and Pebble Road and between Durango Drive and Ft. Apache Road


This request by staff is to amend the Enterprise Land Use Plan to reflect the preferred alternative as shown in the Durango-Blue Diamond Public Facilities Plan Summary report dated August 3, 2009.


If adopted, the plan will provide the following:

                        20 acres for a neighborhood park,

                        10 acres for an elementary school,

                        13 acres for a second elementary school,

                        20 acres for a junior high school,

                        37 acres for single family development and,

                        20 acres for multi-family development.


There was some opposition to the plan as presented.  The primary concern was the placement of a multi-family development on the southeast corner of the project.  The design presented is the result of several public meetings and a decision by the BCC.  The TAB opinion is this plan has been thoroughly vetted through the public process.


2.                  PA-0003-11



APN 176-34-611-017 thru 024,028 thru 035 and 047 (SB)


From RS (Residential Suburban) and MDP (Major Development Project) to MDP (Major Development Project) Located east of Tenaya Way (alignment) and south of Levi Way (alignment) in Mountains Edge


3.                  PA-0004-11



APN 176-21-201-001 (SB)


From CG (Commercial General) to RUC (Residential Urban Center) Located on SE corner of Durango Drive and Agate Avenue


This property has been reviewed several times for a land use change.  A change to another land use, other than commercial, would create development problems for adjacent property owners.  Commercial General is an appropriate land use for the northeast corner of Blue Diamond Road and Durango Drive.  The current land use on that corner provides sufficient area for more intense commercial uses.


4.                  PA-0005-11



APN 177-33-403-001 thru 007 (SS)


From CN (Commercial Neighborhood) to RS (Residential Suburban) Located on between Starr Avenue and Terrill Avenue and between Giles Street and Haven Street


This request was thoroughly discussed during the Enterprise Land Use major update.  Commercial Neighborhood is the best fit for the area.  When the Starr/I-15 interchange is completed, the traffic volume on Starr will increase.  The intersection of Starr and Las Vegas Blvd should develop after the interchange is open.  Commercial Neighborhood will provide a buffer for the RNP to the east.  In addition, approval of residential would impose design restrictions on the CT parcels to the west and to the south.


5.                  PA-0006-11



APN 177-21-801-002 (SS)


From CG (Commercial General) to RS (Residential Suburban) Located on the north side of Silverado Ranch Boulevard between Gillespie Street and Bermuda Road


The applicant submitted a new land use plan to the county staff on the TAB hearing day.  This new plan requested a large portion of the property to become Residential Urban Center (RUC).  The applicant stated the intention to only develop 24 to 26 units per acre.  However, intentions change and this property could be developed to the max allowed. The RUC was opposed by several area residents present. RUC is not appropriate for this location.


The TAB considers the last minute changes inappropriate.  The last minute request has not been reviewed by the staff and they could not provide staff comments.


The applicant’s plans appear to be in a state of flux.   The applicant’s map did not show size or location of the commercial element.  They requested a zone change to C-2 within the last month.


The TAB opinion is the Residential Suburban is a good fit with the adjacent properties.  The staff has reviewed and approved the Residential Suburban. The TAB suggested the applicant could request a non-conforming zone change with plans when their plans for multi-family firms up.  This would allow the decision makers to evaluate the increased density for the area. 


6.                  PA-0007-11

First motion to approve Change to Residential Low:  NO RECOMMENDATION vote split 2 - 2.

Second motion to remain commercial Neighborhood:  APPROVED 4 - 0


APN 177-28-803-007,008 and 014 (SS)


From CN (Commercial Neighborhood) to RS (Residential Suburban) generally located on the west side of Bermuda Road between. Cactus Avenue and Rush Avenue


The requested Residential Suburban (RS) was opposed by a number of area residents.  This area was thoroughly discussed during the Enterprise Land Use major update.   The TAB opinion at that time was the area should be Residential Low as a buffer to the RNP-1. 


The RS request is a z-shaped area that will be hard to develop and buffer the RNP to the north.  If the request is approved, it will leave 2.5 acres for commercial development, about enough land for a convenience store.  The current 10 acres would allow sufficient land to develop a Commercial Neighborhood with several businesses to serve the community.


The first TAB motion was a change to Residential Low to match the adjacent properties and expand the RNP buffer.  The motion resulted in a tie vote.  The second motion was made to have the property remain Commercial Neighborhood.  The motion was approved 4 - 0.


A side note is it appears that Residential Suburban is the fashionable land use of the day.  During the last major update, commercial was the favored land use.  This does not lead to cohesive land use planning.


7.                  PA-0008-11

APPROVED change to Residential Low


APN 177-28-201-005,008,009,014,020,022 thru 025; 177-28-302-002, 003, 004, 006, 016, 017, 018 and 033 thru 036; and 177-28-311-001 thru 003 (SS)


From OP (Office Professional) to RS (Residential Suburban)

Located between Le Baron Avenue (alignment) and Frias Avenue and between Giles Street and Rancho Destino Road


There is not a good land use solution for these properties. To the west is Commercial Tourist and to the east RNP-1.   


The property in this application was part of the RNP-1 prior to the 2009 Enterprise land use update.  The residents felt it was in their best interest to have the land planned for commercial.  However, once their property was planned for commercial, it became easier for land owners to the west to create a project that would not be acceptable next to a RNP-1.  The result was an apartment complex west of Haven St. The residents east of Haven St. believe their property has been devalued and no longer viable because of the apartments.  (The law of unintended consequences is at work in this case.)


The land owners now feel Residential Suburban is the best use of their land.  However, a significant number of property owners in the RNP-1 are opposed to Residential Suburban.  A realistic Residential Suburban project would require properties to be combined (19 separate owners).  Existing structures would need to be demolished.  With the availability of open land, it is highly unlikely a developer would make the effort required to create a project in this area.  The result is boarded up houses and no land sales.


The TAB considered the office professional land use to be impractical in this area for the reasons above and two other reasons.  Once the apartments were approved, the Office Professional area was too isolated from Las Vegas Blvd for commercial development.  The roads are local roads not suitable for commercial ventures. The compromise position between the two opposing groups is to plan the area for Residential Low.  Residential Low could be developed on smaller lots and is compatible with the current residents. 


The other option is to move this area back into the RNP and give it the protections it needs to be a viable neighborhood.


8.                  PA-0012-11



            APN 176-02-801-001, 002 and 008 thru 018 (SS)


From BDRP (Business and Design Research Park) and RUC (Residential Urban Center) to RS (Residential Suburban)

Located between Jones Boulevard and Torrey Pines Drive on the north side of Warm Springs Road


The Staff position is the application should be denied.  The scarcity of these (Business and Design Research Park) land use designations and their uses makes them difficult to replace, especially within the valley, and should therefore be protected from commercial and residential encroachment.  The TAB agrees with this position.


Most of the land in this request has already been granted a zone district and the variation of zone districts will make it difficult to establish additional BDRP in the area.  The applicant has proposed a single residential land use.  This will eliminate the jumble of zone districts that may not be compatible next to each other.


This area is an excellent example of why zone districts C-1 and C-2 should be eliminated from the BDRP land use now.  The current staff position is to wait until the next major land use update in 2014 to effect the change.  This change has already been accomplished in several townships. We cannot afford to lose land devoted to job creation.


01/17/12 PC


2.         VS-0587-11 – MIXED INCOME, LLC:



VACATE AND ABANDON a portion of a right-of-way being Windmill Lane located between Giles Street and Haven Street and Giles Street located between Windmill Lane and Shelbourne Avenue in an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) Zone in the MUD-4 Overlay District within Enterprise (description on file).  SS/co/xx  (For possible action)


01/18/12 BCC


3.         UC-1418-06 (ET-0114-11) – RICHMOND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP:



USE PERMIT SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME to commence reduced setbacks for a convenience store.


DESIGN REVIEW for a tavern, convenience store with gasoline pumps and a car wash, and retail shops on a portion of 4.5 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) (AE-60) Zone and an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) (AE-60) Zone in the MUD-3 Overlay District.  Generally located on the northwest corner of St. Rose Parkway and Maryland Parkway within Enterprise.  SS/jt/ml  (For possible action)


4.         VC-0431-98 (ET-0116-11) – ERGON ASPHALT & EMULSIONS, INC:



VARIANCE FOURTH EXTENSION OF TIME to review the manufacture and storage of petroleum products (asphalt emulsion mill) and the storage of acid where not permitted and where required to be in an M-2 (Industrial) Zone with a use permit in conjunction with an existing asphalt and heavy road oil storage and shipping facility on a portion of 4.4 acres in an M-1 (Light Manufacturing) Zone.  Generally located on the north side of Richmar Avenue and the west side of the Union Pacific Railroad within Enterprise.  SB/jt/ml  (For possible action)


5.         ZC-0380-08 (ET-0117-11) - MAJESTIC ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL:



ZONE CHANGE FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME to reclassify 34.4 acres from C-2 (General Commercial) Zone and C-2 (General Commercial) (AE-60) Zone to H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) Zone and H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) (AE-60) Zone for a future expansion to an existing resort hotel (Silverton) in the MUD-2 Overlay District.


USE PERMIT to allow a parking lot.


WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to reduce parking lot landscaping.


DESIGN REVIEW for a parking lot.  Generally located on the west side of Interstate 15, 1,500 feet south of Blue Diamond Road within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/jt/ml  (For possible action)


6.         UC-0534-11 – AGLH HIGHLAND OWNER, LLC:

DENIED:  The developer has not considered or planned for the effects of the DesertXpress adjacent to their property.  Request this application be returned to the TAB.


USE PERMIT for a residential planned unit development.


VARIANCES for the following:


1) Reduced perimeter setback;

2) Reduced building setback from a right-of-way;

3) Reduced building setback adjacent to a freeway;

4) Reduced separation from an accessory structure to buildings;

5) Reduced driveway length; and

6) Remove requirement for trash enclosures.


DESIGN REVIEW for a multi-family development on 25.7 acres in an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) P-C (Planned Community Overlay District) Zone within the Southern Highlands Master Planned Community.  Generally located on the east side of Southern Highlands Parkway and the north side of Robert Trent Jones Lane within Enterprise.  SB/rk/xx  (For possible action)


The applicant was unaware that the DesertXpress high speed train is planned along their east property line.  The result is a project that could place a residence as close as 30 ft. from the train. The TAB could not approve a project that did not take the effects of the DesertXpress into account. 


The DesertXpress plan has changed land use and project planning along its route.


The TAB was made aware of the DesertXpress plans earlier this year and has monitored the federal reports and plans since.  Any project that is located next to or near the DesertXpress tracks needs to have mitigating factors planned into the project.


This application included a 60% reduction in the distance from the residence to the I-15 right-of-way where the DesertXpress will be located along the west side I-15 right-of-way.  The DesertXpress may require an entirely different plan for this project and construction materials to reduce the sound levels and vibrations.


The applicant would not agree to hold the application and provide the TAB with how they intend reduce the effect of the DesertXpress.  The TAB is also concerned with the number of reduced setbacks and short driveways.  These reductions were not discussed.  The TAB requests the application be returned when the concerns with DesertXpress have been addressed.


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.