Results
September 25, 2013
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.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
1.
Commission Chambers
2. The
6600
3.
4.
(
Commission Chambers
5. NV Energy Public
Open House
Railroad
West Electrical Transmission Line Project
Along
Warm Spring between Lindell and Jones
6. Second
neighborhood meeting
NZC-0590-13:
Windmill Library,
7060
ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS
Discuss and take public input regarding funding
capital budget requests for upcoming fiscal year. (for possible action) Continued to the October 30 meeting.
ZONING
AGENDA:
APPROVED per staff conditions
DESIGN REVIEW for an electrical substation in conjunction with an
approved data center on a 1.7 acre portion of an 8.6 acre site in a C-2
(General Commercial) Zone. Generally located on the south side of
2. UC-0318-11 (ET-0085-13) – NAMAZ, LLC:
NO APPLICANT APPEARED.
Held until
USE PERMITS FIRST
EXTENSION OF TIME to commence the
following:
1) Retail sales and services;
2) Convenience store with gasoline sales;
3) Alcohol sales – packaged (liquor, beer and wine); and
4) On-premise consumption of alcohol (service bar) in
conjunction with a restaurant.
DESIGN REVIEW for a future commercial retail development on 3.7 acres in
an H-2 (General Highway Frontage) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned
Community. Generally located on the southeast corner of
3. UC-0500-13 –
HELD until the
USE PERMIT for second hand sales within an existing shopping center
on a portion of 1.2 acres in an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) Zone and an
H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) (AE-60) Zone in the MUD-1 Overlay
District. Generally located on the east side of
4. UC-0503-13 – GREYSTONE
APPROVED per
staff conditions
USE PERMIT to increase the retaining wall height in conjunction with
an approved single family residential subdivision on portions of a 40.2 acre
site in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay
District) Zone in the Southern Highlands Master Planned Community. Generally located
on the southwest corner of
5. UC-0531-13 – GREYSTONE
The motion APPROVED as follows:
DENY
USE PERMIT 1a and 1c
APPROVE USE
PERMIT 1b
APPROVE
USE PERMIT 2a changed to read,
·
Permits 29 and 37 foot wide private
streets with a roll curb where a 40 foot wide private street with an “L” curb
is required where currently installed.
APPROVE USE
PERMIT 2b changed to read,
·
Modify the standard roll curb design where
currently installed.
APPROVE
USE PERMIT 2c and 2d;
DENY
USE PERMIT 2f;
APPROVE
Waiver of Development Standards
APPROVE
Design Review
USE PERMITS for the following:
1) Modified residential development standards; and
2) Modified standards to off-site improvements.
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for early finished
grading.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on an
approximate 77.0 acre site in an RUD (Residential Urban Density) Zone and an
R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) Zone all in a P-C (Planned Community Overlay
District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned Community. Generally located
on the east side of
This project was started in 2003 and is now on the third
developer. The list of waivers has grown
with each developer change. The project
has four distinct neighborhoods. The TAB criticisms on this project focused on
the cluster home product. The cluster
home neighborhood has been shown to produce a neighborhood with significant
livability problems. This product has 5
foot driveways on 29 foot wide street courts.
Each house will have a 20 X 20 foot garage. No parking will be allowed on the 29 foot
streets. The applicant has provided 109
additional parking places within this neighborhood. While this meets the county minimum
standards, experience indicates this is not sufficient for the
neighborhood. Many vehicles used by the
residents will not fit in the garages provided.
This creates a street parking problem.
The design of this community is essentially the same as
the Mountain's
Edge Beacon Hill subdivision featured on the KNTV channel 13 HOA Hall of Shame,
May 6, 2013. The Channel 13 commentary illustrates
the problems created by this type of housing product.
The TAB did not like the reduced front setbacks. On a 29 foot wide street the house fronts
would be 39 feet apart. This would
produce a canyon effect. Also, there is
a concern that street parking could prevent access by emergency vehicles.
The TAB recommended denial of Use Permits 1a and 1c due
to the factors above.
The applicant wants to reduce the edge of the driveway to
back of curb radius to 1 foot. The TAB
considerers this short distance a safety factor and recommended denial.
The fire department requires a 39 foot wide street with a
30” roll curb. The some streets have
been constructed and the fire department has approved the 37 foot width. Any new street construction must be with an L
curb. The TAB added language to Use
Permits 2a & 2b to insure the fire department standards are used in the
remaining construction.
6. DR-0525-13 – RWS, LLC & PENTLAND SA:
APPROVED per staff conditions and
ADD conditions:
· Design Review as a Public Hearing
of lighting and signage;
· Public Hearing for any significant
changes to plan;
· Establish perpetual cross access to
properties on the south and west
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
proposed retail center on 2.0 acres in a C-1 (Local Business) Zone. Generally located on the southwest corner of
The TAB added the condition for a design
review for lighting and signage because they were not part of the design review
submitted.
The applicant has no tenants at this
time. There is a real possibility the
design will change. As a result, the TAB
added the condition for a design review for significant changes to plans.
Cross access is necessary for customer flow on
this corner as the properties to the west and south develops. The current design presented had an inline
building blocking any cross assess to the west. The site should be redesigned to provide
cross access to the west. The TAB has
consistently recommended cross access for businesses along Rainbow and other
arterials.
7. UC-0484-13 – LVGV PROPERTIES II, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
USE PERMITS for the following:
1) Exotic animals (wolf dog/hybrids); and
2) Allow accessory agricultural large animals (2 horses).
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to allow alternative
screening and buffering standards.
DESIGN REVIEW for an exotic animals (wolf dogs/hybrids) facility in
conjunction with a proposed single family residence on a portion of 4.1 acres
in an R-T (Manufactured Home Residential) Zone.
Generally located on the
east side of
8. UC-0511-13 – MAJESTIC
The motion APPROVED as follows:
DENY
Use Permit #1
APPROVE
Use Permits #2 and 3;
APPROVE
Deviations #1
DENY
Deviation #2
APPROVE
Design Review
ADD
Current Planning conditions:
·
Design Review as
a Public Hearing for lighting and signage;
·
Design Review as
a Public Hearing for significant changes to plan.
USE PERMITS for the following:
1) Increased building height;
2) Allow kitchens within guest rooms; and
3) Allow deviations as shown per plans on file.
DEVIATIONS for the following:
1) Permit encroachment into airspace; and
2) All other deviations as depicted per plans on file.
DESIGN REVIEW for 2 timeshare hotel towers in conjunction with an
existing resort hotel (Silverton) on 74.8 acres in an H-1 (Limited Resort and
Apartment) Zone and an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) (AE-60 & AE-65)
Zone in the MUD-2 Overlay District.
Generally located on the
southeast corner of
The tower height at 207 feet is strongly opposed by the
residents who live in the RNP to the south. It was noted that there are no tall
buildings on the west side of I-15 in this area and it should remain that
way. The TAB discussion included the
following:
·
Is the building
height excessive for the area?
·
The McCarran flight
path, arrival and departure, passes over these buildings.
·
In the 2009 Land Use
Plan, the Airport requested land, south of the tower location, be planned for
commercial neighborhood to preclude tall buildings
·
If there is any
chance that the towers would interfere with McCarran operations, they should
not be built.
·
The design of the
buildings is significantly different than the rest of the property.
·
In the two
applications presented to the TAB, three different architectural styles are
used or planned.
·
Three architectural standards
do not complement each other.
·
Building lighting
will significantly affect the surrounding area.
·
Lighting and signage
were not part of the application.
·
100 ft. building is
the county standard for H-1 zone district.
The TAB recommendation is the building be not more than
100 ft., which resulted in the Use Permit for building height being denied.
The TAB opinion is each deviation should be reviewed as a
public hearing and not allowed under a blanket waiver. The recommendation is Deviation # 2 should be
denied.
9. UC-0512-13 – MAJESTIC
The motion APPROVED
as follows:
APPROVE Use Permit;
APPROVE Deviation #1 with
Public Review
APPROVE Deviation #2;
DENY Deviation #3;
DENY Design Review #1;
APPROVE Design Review #2
with Public Review
APPROVE Design Review #3;
USE PERMIT for deviations as shown per plans on file.
DEVIATIONS for the following:
1) Allow primary means of access to a live entertainment
venue from the exterior of the resort hotel;
2) Allow vehicle sales (watercraft) when not located within 1
mile of a navigable waterway; and
3) All other deviations as depicted per plans on file.
DESIGN REVIEWS for the following:
1) A membrane structure (live entertainment venue);
2) A modular restroom building; and
3) An outside storage area
in conjunction with an existing resort hotel (Silverton) on
74.8 acres in an H-1 (Limited Resort and Apartment) Zone and an H-1 (Limited
Resort and Apartment) (AE-60 & AE-65) Zone in the MUD-2 Overlay
District. Generally located on the southeast corner of
This application has three parts.
The membrane structure is used for live
entertainment. This structure was first
put up in 2008, not the 10 years claimed by the applicant’s
representative. This structure has
always been presented to the TAB as a temporary structure until a new venue,
architectural compatible with the rest of the property, could be built. The applicant position is the materials in
the tent are now acceptable for use in permanent buildings. Therefore, the structure should be a
permanent building. The
structure should not be made a permanent building.
The Enterprise Land Use Plan states that all structures on a
development site should be of similar and compatible architectural design,
style, and color. The membrane structure does not meet that standard. The public opinion is the structure is ugly
and does not complement the property.
The structure is currently permitted and covered by the 2010 extension
of time until
The modular restrooms have not been on previous
applications. The actual design of these
rest rooms or any details was not presented to the TAB. To make modular restrooms a permanent
building without sufficient details and plans being presented should not be
done. This appears to be a “we built it,
you approve it,” scenario. The TAB
approved their use for a limited time with a review on
Deviation #1 to allow primary means of access to a live
entertainment venue from the exterior of the resort hotel is part of the live
entertainment venue. The TAB approved the
deviation for a limited time with a review on
The Bass Pro Shops requires parking and prep area for
their boat inventory. This is a long
established use that supports their business.
The TAB opinion is each deviation should be reviewed as a
public hearing and not approved under a blanket waiver. The TAB recommendation is Deviation # 3
should be denied.
10. VS-0534-13 - CHRISTOU, JOHN A, ET AL:
APPROVED with following:
CHANGE Public
works conditions # 2 to read:
·
Right-of-way dedication
to include 35 feet to back of curb for Serene Avenue, 30 to 60 feet for
ADD Public Works conditions:
·
Waive offsites on
·
Waive offsites on
Westwind except for 32 feet of paving.
·
All street lights to be
fully shielded.
VACATE
The applicant has a private north/south road in their
project. During the project discussions,
the applicant stated they are willing to move the road to the Westwind
alignment/right-of-way. This has the
benefit of not creating a cut through street in the middle of their
project. It would provide the only
north/south public street between
The TAB considered the following:
·
Alignment vacations
bounded by
·
Agate Ave. block at
Duneville as part of the application that approved The Foxborough Subdivision
·
Agate Ave to
·
·
·
No paved legal
access to
·
Planned police
facility and fire station on longer feasible due to the lack of public street access
·
Foxborough HOA
opposition to Westwind right-of-way
·
Lindell residents
want Westwind right-of-way
The TAB considers the Westwind alignment/right-of-way
essential for roadway development and emergency vehicle access in the area.
Oleta boarders the RNP-1 and Westwind leads into the
RNP-1 area. The TAB added the conditions
for no offsites except for 32 ft of paving and fully shielded street
lights. The TAB considered the
following:
·
Reduced paving widths
and elimination of offsites are traffic mitigation measures.
·
The reduction of
offsites leading into the RNP-1 helps maintain the rural character.
·
Shielded street
lights reduce the light pollution form unshielded street lights.
11. WS-0496-13 – SANDCASTLE ENTERPRISES, LLC:
DENIED
per staff recommendations and “if
approved” conditions.
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced side yard setbacks; and
2) Alternative landscaping along
in conjunction with a single family residential
development.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on 0.9 acres
in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone.
Generally located on the
southwest corner of
Both waivers are caused by a lot size too small for the
house product being placed on it. There are
no exceptional features in this project that would warrant the waivers. The reduction of one lot would eliminate the
waiver and produce a better project. The
TAB agreed with the staff analysis and recommendations.
12. WS-0533-13 – TSLV, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced setbacks; and
2) Permit encroachment into airspace.
DESIGN REVIEWS for the following:
1) A comprehensive sign package; and
2) Increase animated sign area
in conjunction with a shopping center (
13. ZC-0532-13 – CHRISTOU, JOHN A., ET AL:
APPROVED with following:
CHANGE Public
works conditions # 2 to read:
·
Right-of-way dedication
to include 35 feet to back of curb for Serene Avenue, 30 to 60 feet for
ADD Public Works conditions:
·
Waive offsites on
·
Waive offsites on
Westwind except for 32 feet of paving.
·
All street lights to be
fully shielded.
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for modified street
improvements in accordance with
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the north side of Serene Avenue and the east and west sides of
The increased density was strongly opposed by the
Foxborough HOA, the HOA to the south and some RNP residents. Their opinion is the zone district should
remain R-D with 3 units per acre. The residents are concerned with the traffic
increase in the area and how to keep it out of their neighborhoods. The solution to the increased traffic is
highly dependent on where the person lives.
The Foxbrough residents have one option and the RNP residents along
Lindell have another.
This property was changed to Residential Suburban Land
Use in the 2009
The applicant has a private north/south road in their
project. During the project discussions,
the applicant stated they are willing to move the road to the Westwind
alignment/right-of-way. This has the
benefit of not creating a cut through street in the middle of their
project. It would provide the only
north/south public street between
The TAB considered the following:
·
Alignment vacations
bounded by
·
Agate Ave. block at
Duneville as part of the application that approved The Foxborough Subdivision
·
Agate Ave to
·
·
·
No paved legal
access to
·
Planned police
facility and fire station on longer feasible due to the lack of public street
access.
·
Foxborough HOA
opposition to Westwind right-of-way
·
Lindell residents
want Westwind right-of-way
The TAB considers the Westwind alignment/right-of-way
essential for roadway development and emergency vehicle access in the area. Public work analysis on Westwind did not
provide the TAB with useful data on which to make a recommendation.
Oleta boarders the RNP-1 and Westwind lead into the RNP-1
area. The TAB added the conditions for
no offsites except for 32 ft of paving and fully shielded street lights. The TAB considered the following:
·
Reduced paving
widths and elimination of offsites are traffic mitigation measures.
·
The reduction of
offsites leading into the RNP-1 helps maintain the rural character.
·
Shielded street
lights reduce the light pollution form unshielded street lights.
14. NZC-0138-13 – DALEY FAMILY TRUST, ET AL:
HELD until the
AMENDED HOLDOVER
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Allow modifications to standard drawings for public street
sections;
3) Allow modified elevations (no longer required).
Generally located on the
north side of
15. VS-0139-13 – DALEY FAMILY TRUST, ET AL:
HELD until the
HOLDOVER
VACATE
ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS NONE
PUBLIC
COMMENTS NONE
Commission
Chambers
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.