Results
The ATTACHMENT A items will be heard on the
following dates:
Planning Commission 7:00 P.M.,
Board of
HOLDOVER/RETURNED
APPLICATIONS will be heard on the date in the applications header.
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
Note:
If you ctrl+click on the blue underlined text
it will take you to the detailed documents to explain the agenda item.
REGULAR
BUSINESS
1.
Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on
2.
Approve the Agenda with any corrections, deletions or changes. APPROVED with
following changes:
Companion items to be heard together:
1.
VS-0536-12
- TODARO, MARIA
3.
ZC-0535-12 - TODARO, MARIA:
2. ZC-0526-12 –
5. VS-0589-12 –
To be
heard after item #5:
9. WS-0573-12 – KB HOME DIAMOND RANCH EST,
LLC
Additional
Business will be heard after the zoning agenda.
One person wanted to know how to have any of jargon used during
a presentation explained.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1. Clark
County Administrative Services is taking applications for TAB Members for
2013-2014. The application can be
found at:
http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/Depts/admin_services/tlservices/Forms/TOWNAPP%202012.pdf
2. Rock
'n' Roll
http://runrocknroll.competitor.com/las-vegas
ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS
1.Receive a report from the Enterprise Town
Advisory Board Committee on RNP Traffic Mitigation. (For possible action). Note: This item to be heard after the zoning
agenda.
·The committee presented the results from the meeting with the
A motion was APPROVED:
·Two traffic committee members are authorized to meet with Dennis
Cederburg or his designated representative to discuss traffic concerns within
the RNPs.
2.Capital budget requests for fiscal year
2013. (For possible action).
The TAB discussed a list of possible capital
budget items for 2013. The decision was
made to refer the traffic related items to the traffic subcommittee for
discussion with Public Works.
ZONING
AGENDA:
PUBLIC
COMMENTS
The
observation was presented that the amount of water runoff in some areas has
increased with each new development. At
present, two agencies are responsible.
Public Works reviews and approves drainage plans for each project. The regional flood control agency is
responsible for the valley wide routing of runoff. It was suggested that a briefing from regional
flood control be presented to the TAB.
ATTACHMENT A
Three items from the
September 26 Enterprise TAB meeting are being sent back to the TAB at the
direction of Commissioner Sisolak. These
items incorrectly noted the Enterprise TAB meeting location and time. They will be re-noticed and sent to the
October 31
1. VS-0536-12 - TODARO, MARIA:
APPROVED
per staff conditions
HOLDOVER VACATE
2. ZC-0526-12 –
Approved
per staff conditions with the following:
CHANGE
the Waiver of
Development standard #1:
·
Up
to 9 foot retaining wall may be used
·
ADD Current Planning condition:
·
Coach
lighting to be use on the cul-de-sac and Neal.
ADD Public Works conditions:
·
Waive
off-sites for Neal, except for paving
·
Neal
to be developed as non-urban road standards using
HOLDOVER
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Increase wall height; and
2) Increase the length of a cul-de-sac.
Generally located on the
east side of
The development will utilize the existing
planned land use Residential Medium designation to reclassify the property from
The primary concern was the retaining walls’
height and length required on this project.
The retaining walls are required because the sewer connection to be used
is located on Placid and the land slopes away from Placid. The sewer connection
could not be taken to
No retaining wall is required on Neal. On
Neal is developed to non-urban road standards
on the south side and the TAB recommends the north side be developed to the
same standard.
The applicant stated they could use coach
lighting on the cul-de-sac instead of street lights. This would be appropriate for the area.
3. ZC-0535-12 – TODARO, MARIA:
APPROVED per staff conditions
HOLDOVER
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduce the off-set between street intersections; and
2) Increase the length of a cul-de-sac.
Generally located on the south
side of
This is an infill project. There was neighborhood opposition to the
density of this application. Their
request was to match the lot size adjacent to the applicant's property. The adjacent property is zoned R-2 that was
developed with approximately 10,000 sq. ft. lots.
The TAB considered the following:
·
The
R-1 zone district requested is a lower zone district than the surrounding
property
·
The
project density is greater than the actual surrounding density.
·
The
proposed density is slightly higher than the surrounding density.
·
The
land use would allow R-2 zone district
The TAB requested the developer work with residents to
procure permission to attach new block walls to the current boundary
walls. This would prevent building
redundant walls within a residential area.
4. VC-0580-12 – CANFAM HOLDINGS, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
VARIANCE to increase the length of architectural enclosures on 54.4
acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone in the Pinnacle Peaks Concept
Plan Area. Generally located on the south side of
5. VS-0589-12 –
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
6. WS-0586-12 – ADF-SUNSET 7, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for early grading of a parcel by waiving the requirement for an approved land
use application in conjunction with a grading permit on 4.4 acres in a C-2
(General Commercial) (AE-60) Zone in the MUD-3 and
In several applications in front of the TAB,
the property owner assumed that the OK by one inspector was all they needed to
meet all county requirements.
This property has been visited by several
county agency inspectors, each with a different concern. The inspector did not provide the property
owner with the information to bring the property into full compliance. This situation is created by the number of
specialized regional agencies each with its own inspectors. It would be helpful if the various inspectors
carried an information sheet on what agencies to contact to ensure compliance with
all county regulations and requirements.
7. UC-0566-12 – JONES, STACY A.:
APPROVED per staff, if approved conditions with following
changes:
The applicant will meet all the Animal Control
conditions prior to the November 21
Current Planning Bullet # 1 replaced with:
·
The
Use Permit will expire on
ADD Current Planning condition:
·
The
use permit is limited to the four named chimpanzees and 1 capuchin monkey.
USE PERMIT for exotic animals (1 capuchin monkey and 4 chimpanzees)
in conjunction with a single family residence on a portion of 2.1 acres in an
R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone.
Generally located on the
southwest corner of
After extensive testimony and discussion, the TAB
determined this site is not suitable for exotic animals over the long term due
to increasing residential density and public safety concerns. The TAB
recommendation is intended to give the applicant time to relocate the
chimpanzees to an area that is more suitable.
The TAB opinion is this application must not be extended beyond the time
required to relocate the chimpanzees to a suitable habitat.
This application has had a lot of publicity and is very
contentious. There were over 1600 emails and 100 phone
calls in opposition to this item. At the
TAB meeting, there were 6 people in opposition and 6 people in favor. The people in favor were adjacent residents.
The opposition portrayed chimpanzees as intelligent animals
that can be very aggressive and dangerous.
They cited several well published incidents to back their case. They also implied the care for the chimpanzees
in this application was not up to standards. Their position is to deny the
application. What was not presented was
a follow on solution if the application is denied.
The adjacent neighbors were in favor of the chimps at the
current location. These neighbors did
not view the chimpanzees as a threat or hazard.
Part of their position is their area was an RNP that has been chipped
away by developers. They felt their
lifestyle should not be restricted by the new development. The new development should adapt to the long
established lifestyle in the area.
Animals, including exotic animals, are part of that lifestyle.
Animal Control inspected the applicant in 2010 along with
the USDA inspector. In 2010, the Animal
Control officer indicated all was in order.
The applicant was not informed that a Use Permit is required to house
the chimpanzees in a residential area. The TAB is finding inspectors from various
departments are not providing information on other county requirements that
must be met for the activity being inspected.
This delays the staff or public review of these activities.
The TAB concerns:
·
As the residential
density increases the suitability for exotic animals decreases.
·
What happens to the
chimpanzees if the application is denied?
·
Are the current
chimpanzee facilities sufficient to protect the neighborhood for the short
term?
The
following areas were presented to or discussed by the TAB:
·
The density of
surrounding area has significantly increased since the original Use Permit was
approved in 2002.
o
Density in the area
will continue to increase.
o
Increased density
makes control of an escaped chimp more difficult.
o
When houses are
built to the south, the offset will be 15 ft. from the applicant’s property.
·
Unlike many land use
applications, the resolution of this application will have direct effect on
living, intelligent creatures.
·
The temperament in
chimpanzees is highly variable and can change over their lifetime.
o
Older males tend to
be more aggressive.
o
The young and female chimpanzees tend to be less
aggressive.
o
Conditions they are
kept in can affect temperament.
o
The trainer’s care
can make a difference in an individual chimpanzee’s temperament.
·
Currently The USDA
and Clark County Animal Control set and enforce care and housing standards.
o
No testimony was
presented to show there are current violations of care.
o
The current
violations are for no Use Permit and Business License.
o
Animal Control
indicated the current situation was acceptable for short term housing.
·
2010 visits by
Animal Control to the site left the impression that no further action was
required by the applicant.
·
August, 2012, the
applicant was informed he would require a Use Permit and a Business License to
continue at the current location.
·
Any animal in a
residential area can be dangerous.
o
Statistics on dog
attacks resulting in human deaths was presented as a counter point to the
danger level presented by the chimpanzees.
One question not asked.
What is the availability of tranquilizer weapons to the animal control
officers? Are they carried in their
vehicles or dispatched when needed?
8. UC-0577-12
–
Held until
USE PERMIT for an accessory structure not compatible with the
principal structure.
DESIGN REVIEW for an accessory structure (storage building) in
conjunction with a place of worship on 4.3 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates
Residential) (RNP-I) Zone. Generally located on the southwest corner of
9. WS-0573-12 – KB HOME
DIAMOND RANCH EST, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced rear setback; and
in conjunction with an approved single family residential
subdivision on a portion of 5.0 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential)
Zone. Generally located on the west side of
This application was after the drainage study was
completed and Public Works required
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 may be 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.