July 11, 2012


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


Planning Commission 7:00 P.M., Tuesday, August 7, 2012.

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


Enterprise Town Advisory Board



Date: Wednesday, July 11, 2012    Time: 6:00 p.m.

Location: Enterprise Library, 25 E. Shelbourne Avenue




1.  Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on June 27, 2012.  APPROVED

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





Southwest Ridge Recreational Areas Open House

Wednesday, July 25    4 to 7:30 p.m.

Desert Breeze Community Center, Meeting Room

8275 Spring Mountain Road


The Southwest Ridge area is on the western edge of the Las Vegas Valley. Future development here is expected to include three County recreation areas with a combined 1,200 acres in the foothills west of Summerlin South and Rhodes Ranch, between Tropicana Avenue and Blue Diamond Road. The open house is part of an outreach effort to encourage the public to participate in the planning of this area. For more information, contact Scott Hagen at (702) 455-2273, or by email at shagen@clarkcountynv.gov.


Public Works responded to the TAB question about the improvements to Rainbow, south of Blue Diamond.    The work is scheduled to begin in the 4th quarter 2012.









NEXT MEETING DATE:  August 1, 2012



Note: Over the last two years the Public Works analysis to the TABs has deteriorated to the point where it harms the public hearings on land use applications.   The following are examples:

·   TAB meeting July 12, 2012,

o        The Public Works analysis and conditions for 5 items were not available until 1p.m. on the meeting day. 

o        Some applicants received the Public Works comments at the meeting

o        Staff agenda sheets were not updated

·   TAB meeting June 27,2012,

o        Public Works analysis and conditions were delivered 15 minutes after the meeting started.

o        Staff agenda sheet updated after the TAB meeting

·   Bond Extension of Time applications do not explain what is covered by the bond

·   Better analysis is required to understand the conditions presented

·   Numerous late or missing analyses or conditions in the last two years.


The lack of timely Public Works analysis and conditions does not allow the applicant, TAB and interested parties sufficient time for analysis, site visits or to organize their presentations/questions.  In addition, the trend is for staff agenda sheets not to be updated until after the TAB has met.  This adds to the confusion.  The current Public Works timing and delivery of analyses and conditions is not acceptable.  The public works analyses and conditions must be distributed with the staff agenda sheet to the TAB members.  Anything else degrades the public hearing process.




07/17/12 PC


H1.   VS-0278-12 – RHODES RANCH, G.P.:

APPROVED per staff conditions

Add Public Works Condition:

·      All conditions of WC-0123-11 must be complied with.


VACATE AND ABANDON a right-of-way (unnamed street) located between Fort Apache Road and Seeliger Street and between Ford Avenue (alignment) and Hidden Mountain Way in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Rhodes Ranch Master Planned Community within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/rk/xx  (For possible action)


This item was somewhat confusing at first.  WC-0123-11 was approved by the BCC in April 2012 and appeared to settle the issue.  However, it did not allow the applicant to actually vacate the right-of-way and obtain building permits for the initial part of their project.  This application was needed to allow the applicant to proceed.  This application does not void the conditions in WC-0123-11.  The TAB added a public works condition to ensure the previous conditions would be met.



08/07/12 PC




Add Public Works conditions:

·      Pebble to use the current 32 ft. paving with a 75 ft. right turn lane into the project.

·      Raven to be constructed to non-urban road standards.

·      Conduit and pull boxes be constructed on Pebble

ZONE CHANGE to reclassify 11.3 acres from R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone to R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone for a single family residential development.




1) Landscaping and screening requirements;

2) Full off-site improvements; and

3) Permit non-standard street improvements


in conjunction with a proposed single family residential development.  Generally located on the southeast corner of Durango Drive and Pebble Road within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/al/xx  (For possible action)


This is an excellent project.  It provides a buffer to the RNP-1 and a transition to the higher density residential to the west.  This project replaces commercial uses that were planned for the property.  The project consists of:


• 11.3 gross acres

• 30 residential/6 common areas

• Density: 3.1 units per acre with lots from 9,065 sq. ft. to 14,301 square feet

• Single story residential homes from 3,196 to 3,660 sq. ft.


The TAB considered the following:

·      Objection was made to the reduced landscape along Durango for the bus turnout; the adjacent lot should be reduced.

·      The construction of Raven would increase traffic into the RNP

·      Pebble should remain at the current paving width and configuration to help control traffic into the RNP


The TAB added the conditions to keep Pebble at the current 32 ft. pavement and provide an entry into the project out of the traffic lane.  The offsites for Pebble should stop at the end of the turn radius from Durango.  Raven to be developed as shown on the plot plan and use non-urban road standards.




VACATE AND ABANDON easements of interest to Clark County located between Durango Drive and Lisa Lane (alignment) and between Pebble Road and Raven Avenue (alignment) in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/al/xx  (For possible action)



DENIED with added ‘If approved’ conditions:

ADD Current Planning conditions:

·      If more than two feet of fill is required, a new design review as a public hearing is required.

·      Buildings along northern property line to be two stories, not to exceed 28 ft.

·      Apartments to be built to condo standards

·      Design Review as a public hearing for significant changes to plans

·      Design Review as a public hearing for lighting and signage.

·      Provide dog run area

·      8 ft. decorative wall along the northern boundary

ADD Public Works conditions:

·      Provide protected left turn on Buffalo for ingress/egress;

·      Waive offsites on Pioneer except paving, conduit and pull boxes

·      Paving on Pioneer to be constructed using Uniform Standard Drawings Clark County Area 209.1

·      Traffic mitigation measure to be used on Pioneer


ZONE CHANGE to reclassify 16.1 acres from U-V (Urban Village - Mixed Use) Zone to R-4 (Multiple Family Residential - High Density) Zone and C-1 (Local Business) Zone in the MUD-4 Overlay District.


WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for reduced setbacks for garage openings to a drive aisle.


DESIGN REVIEW for a multiple family residential development (apartments) within a Hillside and Foothill Transition Boundary Area on 14.0 acres in an R-4 (Multiple Family Residential - High Density) Zone.  Generally located on the north side of Blue Diamond Road and the east side of Buffalo Drive within Enterprise (description on file).  SB/dg/ml  (For possible action)


The application is opposed by:

·      A significant number of neighbors: 27 negative cards, approximately 25 people opposed at the TAB meeting

·      The Staff recommended denial.  The analysis was excellent and was well supported.

·      The TAB is strongly opposed


The TAB considered the following:

·   Land use considerations

o           R-4 is too dense, once the zone district is granted, it will affect the area for a long time

o           Land to the north is Residential Low and in the RNP-1 overlay

o           Project residential density same as previous MUD project

o           Residential units increased from 221 to 342

o           The TAB preference is for live/work in MUD, not more high density apartments

o           Applicant stated the project will be built to condo standards

o           Transition elements within the project are not adequate to protect land uses to the north

o           The northernmost buildings start at two story and end in three story

o           Property slopes over 20 ft. from west to east, no answer to the question of fill required

·   Safety considerations

o           Three foot driveways to drive aisle is a safety hazard

o           The waiver also contributes to increased building mass

·   Traffic considerations

o           Increased area traffic without mitigation measures

o           Currently RNP is used for cut-through traffic

o           Area residents related there is little current traffic enforcement within the RNP

o           Crash gate only on Pioneer Way

o           No cohesive plans for traffic mitigation within the RNP-1

o           Buffalo is heavily use by Mountains Edge residents to avoid traffic restrictions on Durango and Rainbow

o           Need for protected left turn on Buffalo-or entry and exit

·   Effects on neighbors

o           Potential new residents’ complaints about horses and flies

o           Force existing residents to wall in their properties

o           Placement of three entry gates will drive internal traffic to northern drive aisle for exit on Buffalo

o           Pioneer Way is currently developed as a non-urban road standard.

o           There is sufficient throat depth for an entry gate off of Blue Diamond

·   The 2 acre, C-1 will not substantially affect the neighborhood.


The TAB strongly agreed with the neighbors and the staff that this project should not be built in its current form.  The TAB added ‘if approved’ conditions to help protect the area residents if this project goes forward.  The TAB ‘if approved’ conditions should be adopted for any residential project in this location.


4.      WS-0311-12 – HKM NEVADA PROPERTIES:

TAB recommended the following:

DENY Waivers of Development Standards

APPROVE the Design Review

ADD Current Planning Condition:

·      No illuminated signage on the west elevation



1) Increase the height of a freestanding sign; and

2) Permit an animated (video/display) sign where not permitted.


DESIGN REVIEW for a comprehensive sign plan in conjunction with a restaurant on a portion of 2.6 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) Zone.  Generally located on the north side of St. Rose Parkway, 350 feet southwest of Bermuda Road within Enterprise.  SS/al/ml  (For possible action)


The applicant was not able to provide any justification for the increased sign height other than “we want to.”  A visit to the site reveals this would be the second commercial sign in the area.  The first is a bill board on the south side of St. Rose Parkway.  That sign height is less than 30 feet.   There is no sight line problem to be overcome with a higher sign on this site.


The TAB opinion is a 50 foot sign is not required for this location and would set a bad precedent for future signs in the area.  The animated video is not permitted by the code.  The applicant explained the video would have a series of still pictures displayed.  The staff member present explained this is still animated video.  Any type of animated video is a bad precedent to set in this area.


08/08/12 BCC


5.      WS-0296-12 – KULAR, GURDEV SINGH:


ADD Public Works condition:

·      The bond extended until August 8, 2014.

 RECOMMEND the Board of County Commissioners seek a solution to the following circumstances:

·                     The bond holder is no longer the property owner.

·                     The property remains undeveloped

·                     The new property owner is not willing to assume the bond or take action to release the bond.

·                     It is not appropriate to call the bond at this time


WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension of time in conjunction with an approved shopping center/office complex on 4.0 acres in a C-1 (Local Business) Zone and a C-2 (General Commercial) Zone.  Generally located northeast corner of Gomer Road and Fort Apache Road within Enterprise.  SB/bk/xx  (For possible action)


This situation is occurring more often in the valley.  A project plan is approved and the offsites are bonded to allow the project to proceed.  The project goes bust and the bank forecloses.  The property is sold to a new developer.  However, the bonded offsite obligation does not transfer with the property.  The original developer is still responsible.  Currently, the original property owner must maintain the bond or construct the offsites.  This places an undue financial burden on the former property owner.


The new property owner may assume the bond or revert the development to release the bond holder.  If the new developer does not cooperate, the only method to release the bond is in the courts.  The County has no method to transfer the bond to the new owner.  The TAB recommendation is for the BCC to direct staff to resolve this issue.



APPROVED for six months

WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension of time in conjunction with an approved single family subdivision on 20.4 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.  Generally located on the northwest corner of Arby Avenue and Valley View Boulevard within Enterprise.  SS/bk/xx  (For possible action)


The Public Works analysis contained the following:

“On April 1, 2009 county engineer Dave Betley indicated that no more extensions of time to be granted until storm drain was completed.”


The applicant’s representative did have information on the status of the storm drain.  There were public comments about sidewalks being washed out in the area.  The TAB recommended a six month extension until the status of the storm drain is clarified.




ADD Public Works condition:

·      The bond extended until August 8, 2014. 


WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension of time in conjunction with an approved single family subdivision on 10.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.  Generally located on the northwest corner of Valley View Boulevard and Warm Springs Road within Enterprise.  SS/bk/xx  (For possible action)




ADD Public Works condition:

·      The bond extended until August 8, 2014. 


WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension of time in conjunction with an approved single family subdivision on 10.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) (AE-60) Zone.  Generally located north of Maule Avenue, 280 feet west of Valley View Boulevard within Enterprise.  SS/bk/xx  (For possible action)


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.