Results
The ATTACHMENT A items will be heard on the
following dates:
Planning Commission 7:00 P.M.,
Board of
Because
the TAB meeting was not held on
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. APROVED
1. Items on the agenda may be taken out of
order. Revised TAB agenda was use to hear items in the same area.
2. The
Town Advisory Board may combine two or more agenda items for consideration.
2. VS-0796-13 -TOCK 5
IRREVOCABLE BUSINESS TRUST; ET AL:
7. UC-0795-13 TOCK 5 IRREVOCABLE BUSINESS TRUST,
ET AL:
8. VS-0799-13
12. WS-0798-13
9. VS-0802-13
13. WS-0801-13 U.S.A
17. NZC-0822-13 TRAN
18. NZC-0823-13 TRAN ENTERPRISES, LLC:
23. NZC-0842-13 KINERET, LLC:
26. TM-0241-13 KINERET, LLC:
30. VS-0843-14 KINERET, LLC:
24. NZC-0844-13 DRB HOLDINGS, LLC, ET
AL:
31. VS-0845-13 - DRB HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL:
36. TM-0230-13 -
39. WS-0812-13
41. VS-0661-13 -
PHANTOM GROUP, LLC:
42. WS-0662-13
PHANTOM GROUP, LLC
3.
The Town Advisory Board may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion
relating to an item at any time.
4. WS-0791-13 RICHMOND
AMERICAN HOMES NEVADA, INC:
5. WS-0792-13 RICHMOND
AMERICAN HOMES NEVADA, INC:
21. NZC-0833-13
25. TM-0240-13 -
33. DR-0621-12
(ET-0125-13)
24. NZC-0844-13 DRB
HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL
31. VS-0845-13 - DRB
HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL
40. ZC-0841-13
43. WS-0726-13
GRAFIADA, ENRIQUE & KAMI: Applicant
requested a hold on this item. The Board
decided to hear the application.
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
CLARK COUNTY OUTSIDE AGENCY GRANT (OAG) Program Year 2013-2014
The application for Outside Agency Grant (OAG) funds will become
available beginning
The application must be completed and submitted online through
ZoomGrants. The online application can
be accessed via a web link found on the Clark County Community Resources
Management webpage at:
www.clarkcountynv.gov/depts/admin_services/comresmgmt/Pages/ZoomGrants.aspx
Application instructions will also be available on the same
webpage.
Only those agencies who meet the application submittal
requirements will be eligible to be considered for FY 2013/2014 OAG funds. After the review of all eligible
applications, applicants will be notified at
a later date of funding decisions.
To be considered for funding, a project must provide services
and assistance that substantially benefits
The deadline for submitting completed OAG applications is
No paper applications will be accepted.
ADDITIONAL
BUSINESS
Approve the
TAB calendar for 2014 (For possible action) APPROVED
January 1 Canceled July 9 (Traffic Committee
15 30
29 August 13 (Traffic Committee
February 12 (Traffic Committee
26 September 10 (Traffic Committee
March 12 (Traffic Committee
26 15
(Traffic Committee
April 9 (Traffic Committee
30 November 12 (Traffic Committee
May 14 (Traffic Committee
28 December 10 (Traffic Committee
June 11
(Traffic Committee
25 January
2015 14
ZONING AGENDA
1. UC-0779-13 750 E. PYLE, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
USE PERMIT for secondhand sales within an existing commercial center
on a portion of 1.0 acre in a C-1 (Local Business) Zone. Generally located
on the north side of
2. VS-0796-13 -TOCK 5 IRREVOCABLE BUSINESS
TRUST; ET AL:
APPROVED
per staff conditions
VACATE
3. WS-0785-13 GOODELL, REX & JOAN:
APPROVED
per staff conditions
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for a reduced front
yard setback for a garage addition in conjunction with an existing single
family residence on 0.9 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (AE-60)
(RNP-1) Zone. Generally located on southwest corner of
4. WS-0791-13 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES
NEVADA, INC:
HELD by the applicant to the
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Increased wall height;
2) Allow an increased artificial grade; and
3) Exceed the maximum site disturbance in conjunction with a
hillside development.
DESIGN REVIEW for a final grading plan for development within a Hillside
& Foothills Transition Boundary Area in conjunction with an approved 124
lot single family subdivision with common lots on 21.5 acres in a RUD
(Residential Urban Density) Zone.
Generally located on the
north side of
5. WS-0792-13 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES NEVADA, INC:
HELD by the applicant to the
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for modified
standards for a hillside wall in conjunction with an approved 35 lot single
family subdivision with common lots on 5.4 acres in an RUD (Residential Urban
Density) Zone. Generally located on the northeast corner of
6. ZC-1388-98 (ET-0118-13) JONES WIGWAM
COMMERCIAL, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions: and,
CHANGE
Current Planning bullet
#1 to read:
·
Until
The applicant requested a 5 year extension to
allow for
7. UC-0795-13
TOCK 5 IRREVOCABLE BUSINESS TRUST, ET AL:
APPROVED per staff conditions and:
ADD a Current Planning condition:
· Density limited to requested 5.6
units per acre
RECOMMENDATION to look into moving the entrance east from Huntington Cove.
USE PERMIT for modified
residential development standards in conjunction with a single family
subdivision.
WAIVERS for the following:
2) Allow early finished grading.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential subdivision on 21.0 acres
in an R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) P-C (Planned Community Overlay) Zone in
the Rhodes Ranch Master Planned Community.
Generally located on the
south side
This property was originally zoned as R-3
allowing up to 18 residential units per acre.
It is now being developed as less dense single family residences. The only objection to the project was the location
of the entrance across from
The TAB is concerned about numerous small
projects cumulative impact in the area will have a significant impact on the
need for schools; require creation of primary job opportunities; conveniently
located retail/commercial, additional roads and public facilities.
The TAB added a condition to restrict the
density to no more than 5.6 units/acre.
TAB reasoning is the schools are overcrowded and each new residential
project will add to that overcrowding.
8. VS-0799-13
APPROVED
per staff conditions
VACATE
9. VS-0802-13
HELD to the
VACATE
10. ZC-0031-12 (WC-0123-13) DR HORTON, ET AL:
APPROVED:
Applicant not to energize installed
light poles.
WAIVER OF
CONDITIONS of a zone change requiring full
off-site improvements in conjunction with a single family subdivision on 10.0
acres in an R-1 (Single Family Residential) Zone. Generally located
on the northwest corner of
The staff agenda sheet was not accurate. The public works development review did not
match the photos provided by the applicant which showed full of-sites installed
including the light poles. The area in
question is two Ό cul-de-sac sections.
One located on the northeast property corner and the other on the
northwest corner. The applicants request
is not to energize the street lights.
Given the location, this is a reasonable request.
11. WS-0797-13 NATURE
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced residential driveway geometrics; and
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential subdivision on 5.0 acres
in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone.
Generally located on the southeast corner
of
12. WS-0798-13
WAIVER of DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS #1
WITHDRAWN;
APPROVE WAIVERS of DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS #2 and #3
DENY DESIGN REVIEW
ADD Current Planning conditions:
· No gated community,
· CC&Rs may not prohibit any
county standard allowed by the zone district.
MOTION PASSED
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Increased wall height;
2) Waive full off-site improvements (partial paving, curb,
gutter, sidewalk, and streetlights); and
3) Modified street improvements in accordance with
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on a 7.5 acre
portion of an overall 108.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I)
Zone. Generally located on the north side of
There is strong objection to the applicants plot design
by the adjacent neighbors and area residents.
The opponent group includes neighbors who supported the developer in
previous projects. The opposition is not
opposed to building additional homes. Residents made the following points
·
The RNP rural
character is based upon an open neighborhood
·
The dominant RNP development
pattern is homes facing local roads and 4 house cul-de-sacs.
·
This project is
another walled in group of houses that detract from the RNP
·
The RNP purpose and
structure is being slowly deteriorated project by project.
·
The area residents
do not want a series of long block walls created by walled in subdivisions.
The developer was not willing to hold the application for
further talks with the neighbors.
The TAB determined the following:
·
The subdivision design
does not blend into the neighborhood
·
Two access points
are taken off a collector when access to a local roads are available
·
Access should be
taken off Tomsik and
·
Applicant is trying
to keep traffic off Tomsik
·
Applicant is not
will to reconfigure the layout to front 4 to 5 houses on local street
·
Use of rural road
standards is appropriate on the collector and arterials roads
·
The applicant is
only looking at one option for drainage and utilities.
·
This type of
subdivision will remove the rural charactere form the RNP if allowed to
continue.
·
TAB has received
information than HOA CC&Rs are restricting items allowed by Title 30.
The TAB agreed with the staff that increased wall height
approval at this time is not appropriate.
The Board experience is wall height waiver given at this time can
produce results detrimental to the RNP.
If increased wall height is needed the request should be made after the
final grading plan is made.
The architectural design does fit into the RNP. However, the TAB found that the subdivision
design presented does not blend into the neighborhood as it isolates this
subdivision from the rest of the RNP. The
two access point on the collector contribute to the isolation of this
subdivision. In the future, access on to
a collector road may become a safety factor as traffic increases. The property has fronts on two local roads
that can be used for access. The TAB
recommends the Design Review be denied and be replace with a more open design.
The
13. WS-0801-13
HELD to the
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Increased wall height;
2) Waive full off-site improvements (partial paving, curb,
gutter, sidewalk, and streetlights); and
3) Modified street improvements in accordance with
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on a 15.0 acre
portion of an overall 108.0 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I)
Zone. Generally located on the south side of
14. ZC-0454-13
HELD by the TAB to the
Motion PASSED:
AMENDED HOLDOVER
DESIGN REVIEW a single family residential development in a hillside
transition area (previously not notified).
Generally located on the
west side of
15. DR-0831-13 DM RAINBOW, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions: and,
ADD a Current Planning condition:
· Design Review as A Public Hearing
for lighting and signage.
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
restaurant in conjunction with an existing shopping center on 0.4 acres in a
C-2 (General Commercial) Zone. Generally
located on the west
side of
This application is for a KFC restaurant. KFC has recently updated the design of their
stores with cleaner lines. The new
design is different from the current inline buildings. The TAB opinion is the new design will blend
into the area. Lighting and signage are
not part of this application. The TAB
recommends a Design Review for lighting and signage as a public hearing.
16. NZC-0819-13
APPROVED per staff conditions:
ADD Current Planning condition:
·Comply with Mountains Edge
lighting, landscape standards and architectural color palette.
·Density limited to 4.1 units/acre
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the south side of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood
development and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
This is out parcel, as well as an infill projected. The applicant has a good project that will
fit in the area. The TAB added the
condition to comply with the Mountains Edge standards due to the location of
the parcel.
The only concern raised is the project entrance is on Mountains
Edge parkway and will be right in, right out.
This may lead to an increase in U-turn in front of the fire station.
Numerous small projects cumulative impact in
the area will have a significant impact on the need for schools; require creation
of primary job opportunities; conveniently located retail/commercial, additional
roads and public facilities.
The TAB added a condition to restrict the
density to no more than 4.1 units/acre.
TAB reasoning is the schools are overcrowded and each new residential
project will add to that overcrowding. And
second, any increase in density for this project should require a public
hearing due to the effect on public services.
17. NZC-0822-13 TRAN
APPROVED per staff conditions:
ADD Current Planning condition:
·Design review as a public hearing
for significant changes to plans.
ADD Public Works condition:
·All pole mounted 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 south side of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood
development and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
This area is predominantly residential and the project
will blend into the neighborhood. The
requested density is 7.5 units/acre as a result the TAB did not limit the
project density.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
18. NZC-0823-13 TRAN ENTERPRISES, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions:
ADD current planning condition:
·Design review as a public hearing
for significant changes to plans.
·Density limited to 5.1 units/acre
ADD Public Works condition:
·All pole mounted street lights to
be fully shielded.
·No single family residential
driveways on
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for modified street
improvements in accordance with
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the northwest corner of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the cumulative
effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood development and
public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
This area is predominantly residential and the project
will blend into the neighborhood. The
one TAB concern is the homes facing Levi and
Numerous small projects cumulative impact in
the area will have a significant impact on the need for schools; require
creation of primary job opportunities; conveniently located retail/commercial, additional
roads and public facilities.
The TAB added two conditions. First, the density to be restricted to no
more than 5.1 units/acre. TAB reasoning
is the schools are overcrowded and each new residential project will add to
that overcrowding. And second, any
increase in density for this project should require a public hearing due to the
effect on public services.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
19. NZC-0830-13 SPEARS, FRANK T.:
APPROVED per staff conditions:
ADD current planning conditions:
·Design review as a public hearing for significant changes to
plans.
·Density Limited to the requested 5.8 units/acre
ADD Public Works condition:
·All pole mounted street lights to be fully shielded.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the south side of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood development
and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
This is an infill project in a residential neighborhood
that will bend into the area.
Numerous small projects cumulative impact in
the area will have a significant impact on the need for schools; require
creation of primary job opportunities; conveniently located retail/commercial, additional
roads and public facilities.
The TAB added two conditions. First, the density to be restricted to no
more than 5.8 units/acre. TAB reasoning
is the schools are overcrowded and each new residential project will add to
that overcrowding. And second, any
increase in density for this project should require a public hearing due to the
effect on public services.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
20. NZC-0832-13 PANNEE LEITCH MCMACKIN
SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST:
DENIED: Incompatible with Land Use Plan.
Staff analysis was based on the MUD overlay to justify increased density.
DESIGN REVIEW for a multi-family residential development. Generally located
on the east side of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood
development and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
The application compelling justification was based upon
the assumption the property could be developed as a MUD-3 project. The analysis was not based upon the Residential
Medium (RM) land use designation. This
project is only residential while the MUD-3 project would require a commercial
element that was not included in the staff analysis. When the RM land use is used for comparison,
the project is significantly greater density that currently planned.
The TAB opinion is MUD-3 is not a proper analysis
standard unless the U-V zone district has been previously granted. The
Compelling Justification as stated did not provide the TAB information required
to base an approval upon. The TAB used
RM as the base line for analysis and found the project is a significant
increase in density and demand for public services.
A density increase of this magnitude is better
accomplished through the land use process.
21. NZC-0833-13
HELD by the applicant to the
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the
following:
1) Reduced lot area; and
2) Allow modifications to standard drawings for public street
sections.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the southeast corner of
22. NZC-0838-13 CML-NV
APPROVE Zone Change to R-2;
DENY Waiver of Development Standards #1a
APPROVE Waiver of Development Standards #1b
and 2;
ADD Current Planning conditions:
· 10,000 foot lots fronting on
Rosanna to be single story;
· Residences along Rosanna to front
on Rosanna;
· Density limited to 4.3 units per
acre;
ADD Public
Works condition:
· Pebble design be similar to that
used at Pebble and
CHANGE Public Works bullet # 4 to read:
· Right-of-way dedication to include
55 feet to back of curb for Rainbow Boulevard, 50 to 55 feet for Pebble Road,
30 for Rosanna Street and associated spandrels;
Motion PASSED
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the
following:
1) Landscaping and screening; and
2) Off-site improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk,
streetlights, and reduced paving).
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the southwest corner of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood
development and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
The staff is opposed to this project. The TAB has seen a series of MUD and
commercial projects that could not be funded on this parcel. The other side of Rainbow north of Pebble is
trending toward residential. This
project is less dense than the planned commercial. The residential on this parcel provides a
better buffer to the RNP. The TAB
opinion is this is viable residential site.
The developer has made several changes based upon input
from the neighborhood meeting. The
changes increased the buffering to the RNP.
The TAB recommended Waiver of Development Standards #1a
be denied. A detached sidewalk along
Rainbow is the preferred because it is safer for pedestrians. The additional land needed for the detached
sidewalk can be obtained by fronting homes on Rosanna. This would eliminate the six foot landscape
buffer along Rosanna. The homes fronting
on Rosanna continue the buffering pattern established around this RNP.
Traffic control and mitigation are critical to this
project and the RNP. The TAB recommended
Pebble be designed similar to intersection segment east of Pebble and
The other traffic mitigation discussed is the vacation of
Raven at Rainbow. Raven was vacated at Pebble
to reduce RNP cut through traffic. The
Raven vacation at Rainbow would help mitigate cut through traffic in the
RNP.
The Enterprise TAB Traffic Committee has discussed RNP
traffic mitigation over the last year with the following conclusions.
·Entry into the RNPs should be through and along collectors
and arterials.
·Within the RNP rural standards be used for collectors and
arterials
·Where the arterial traffic requires more than 32 ft. of
pavement, provide a center line island that restricts left turns on to local
roads.
·Left turns for the arterials into and out of the RNP only
at collectors
·Provide choke down to rural standards prior to the RNP
boarder
·Local roads entering the RNP from an arterial be vacated
where possible
·Local roads to be used to help buffer the boarder of the
RNP
·Local roads within the not be vacated to help distribute
traffic
·Local road vacations should be denied until the
neighborhood development reaches 60% or greater.
Numerous small projects cumulative impact in the area
will have a significant impact on the need for schools; require creation of
primary job opportunities; conveniently located retail/commercial, additional
roads and public facilities.
The TAB added two conditions. First, the density to be restricted to no
more than 4.3 units/acre. TAB reasoning
is the schools are overcrowded and each new residential project will add to
that overcrowding. And second, any
increase in density for this project should require a public hearing due to the
effect on public services.
23. NZC-0842-13 KINERET, LLC:
Per staff "If Approved" conditions:
APPROVE Zone Change;
APPROVE Waiver of Development Standards for off-site improvements for
APPROVE Design Review;
ADD Current Planning conditions:
·
Density limited to 4
units/acre;
·
Residences along to
·
Residence along to
ADD Public Works conditions:
·
All pole mounted street
lights to be fully shielded.
·
Vacate
CHANGE Public Works Development Review Bullet # 3 to Read:
·
30 feet for
Motion PASSED
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for off-site
improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, and reduced paving) for
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located
on the southeast corner of
The TAB position on the non-conforming zone changes was
based upon answering the following:
·
What significant
changes have occurred in the neighborhood to compel this application?
·
What is the
cumulative effect of numerous non-conforming zone changes on neighborhood
development and public services required?
·
Does the
non-conforming zone change significantly alter surrounding land uses?
·
Has the applicant
met the Title 30 compelling justification?
This area is moving from commercial land use to
residential development. This project
continues the trend. The strip of
commercial along arterials, adjacent to the residential has not worked well as
a land use plan. It causes buffering
problems. The strips are not deep enough
for good commercial development. Too
much land use has been allocated to commercial.
The trend to replace these commercial strips with residential is make
better use of the land.
The other traffic mitigation discussed is the vacation of
Ford from
The Enterprise TAB Traffic Committee has discussed RNP
traffic mitigation over the last year with the following conclusions.
·Entry into the RNPs should be through and along
collectors and arterials.
·Within the RNP rural standards be used for collectors and
arterials
·Where the arterial traffic requires more than 32 ft. of
pavement, provide a center line island that restricts left turns on to local
roads.
·Left turns for the arterials into and out of the RNP only
at collectors
·Provide choke down to rural standards prior to the RNP
boarder
·Local roads entering the RNP from an arterial be vacated
where possible
·Local roads to be used to help buffer the boarder of the
RNP
·Local roads within the not be vacated to help distribute
traffic
·Local road vacations should be denied until the
neighborhood development reaches 60% or greater.
If ford is not vacated, the choke down to rural road
standards should begin after the crash gate on Ford.
Numerous small projects cumulative impact in
the area will have a significant impact on the need for schools; require
creation of primary job opportunities; conveniently located retail/commercial, additional
roads and public facilities.
The TAB added two conditions. First, the density to be restricted to no
more than 4 units/acre. TAB reasoning is
the schools are overcrowded and each new residential project will add to that
overcrowding. And second, any increase
in density for this project should require a public hearing due to the effect
on public services.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
24. NZC-0844-13 DRB HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL:
HELD by the applicant to the
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development. Generally located on the south side of
25. TM-0240-13 -
HELD by the applicant to the
TENTATIVE
26. TM-0241-13 KINERET, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions: and,
ADD Public Works condition:
·All pole mounted street lights to be fully shielded.
·Vacate
CHANGE Public Works Development review Bullet # 4 to Read:
·30 feet for
TENTATIVE
The dedication of Lisa is required for RNP buffer and
internal traffic flow. Lisa is a boarder
to the RNP and should develop to rural roads standards.
The other traffic mitigation discussed is the vacation of
Ford from
The Enterprise TAB Traffic Committee has discussed RNP
traffic mitigation over the last year with the following conclusions.
·Entry into the RNPs should be through and along
collectors and arterials.
·Within the RNP rural standards be used for collectors and
arterials
·Where the arterial traffic requires more than 32 ft. of
pavement, provide a center line island that restricts left turns on to local
roads.
·Left turns for the arterials into and out of the RNP only
at collectors
·Provide choke down to rural standards prior to the RNP
boarder
·Local roads entering the RNP from an arterial be vacated
where possible
·Local roads to be used to help buffer the boarder of the
RNP
·Local roads within the not be vacated to help distribute
traffic
·Local road vacations should be denied until the
neighborhood development reaches 60% or greater.
If ford is not vacated, the choke down to rural road
standards should begin after the crash gate on Ford.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
27. UC-0818-13 RENAISSANCE
APPROVED per staff conditions
USE
PERMITS for the
following:
1) Vehicle maintenance;
2) Vehicle repair; and
3) Vehicle paint/body shop.
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the
following:
1) Allow existing service bay doors to face a public street (
2) Permit a vehicle paint/body shop that is not an accessory
use to a vehicle sales facility;
3) Permit a non-decorative metal structure;
4) Permit a structure with a flat roof and no parapet wall;
and
5) Allow unscreened mechanical equipment
on 1.9 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) Zone in a MUD-3
Overlay District. Generally located on the north side
The plans depict 2 existing buildings on the parcel. The
site was approved for an automobile repair and service facility in 1999 and was
later used as a sales facility for pools and spas. The applicant is requesting
to re-establish vehicle maintenance and repair and add a vehicle paint and body
shop to the site. The development code
in effect at the time this facility was constructed did not have a requirement
for service bay doors to face away from a street. The Waiver of Development Standards
#1 is required due to the changes in the code.
The other waivers are related to the new paint facility. The applicant
will add a landscape buffer along the northern property line to help shield the
new paint facility.
28. UC-0820-13 PETERS, EDWARD W. &
APPROVED
per staff conditions
USE PERMIT to allow accessory structures to exceed one-half the
footprint of the principal structure in conjunction with an existing single
family residence on 2.1 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I)
Zone. Generally located on the southeast corner of
29. VS-0829-13 HARMONY
APPROVED
per staff conditions
VACATE
30. VS-0843-14 KINERET, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions: and,
ADD Public Works conditions:
·All pole mounted street lights to
be fully shielded.
·Vacate
CHANGE Public Works Development review Bullet # 2 to Read:
· 30 feet for
VACATE
The dedication of Lisa is required for RNP buffer and
internal traffic flow. Lisa is a boarder
to the RNP and should develop to rural roads standards.
The other traffic mitigation discussed is the vacation of
Ford from
The Enterprise TAB Traffic Committee has discussed RNP
traffic mitigation over the last year with the following conclusions.
·Entry into the RNPs should be through and along
collectors and arterials.
·Within the RNP rural standards be used for collectors and
arterials
·Where the arterial traffic requires more than 32 ft. of
pavement, provide a center line island that restricts left turns on to local
roads.
·Left turns for the arterials into and out of the RNP only
at collectors
·Provide choke down to rural standards prior to the RNP
boarder
·Local roads entering the RNP from an arterial be vacated
where possible
·Local roads to be used to help buffer the boarder of the
RNP
·Local roads within the not be vacated to help distribute
traffic
·Local road vacations should be denied until the
neighborhood development reaches 60% or greater.
If ford is not vacated, the choke down to rural road
standards should begin after the crash gate on Ford.
The TAB has consistently recommended street
lighting be fully shielded. This helps
produce an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood while maintaining a safe
lighting level.
31. VS-0845-13 - DRB HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL:
HELD by the applicant to the
VACATE
32. WS-0837-13
APPROVED
per staff conditions
WAIVER OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for modified street
improvements in accordance with
33. DR-0621-12 (ET-0125-13)
HELD by the applicant to the
DESIGN REVIEW
FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME for a public park
and all associated uses including but not limited to, soccer fields, basketball
courts, restrooms, shade structures, and playground equipment on a 10.0 acre
portion of an 80.3 acre site in a P-F (Public Facility) Zone. Generally located
on the south side of
34. VS-0516-11 (ET-0131-13) -
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
35. ZC-0336-09 (ET-0133-13) - ROCKY-G LIVING
TRUST, ET AL:
APPROVED per
staff conditions: and,
CHANGE Current
Planning bullet #1 to read:
· Until
This area has not developed in to a commercial area since
the last land use plan. It has remained
residential. This project has had five
years with no progress. The TAB opinion
is a shorter extension is appropriate.
36. TM-0230-13 -
APPROVED
per staff conditions
TENTATIVE
Excellent addition to the RNP. The development continues the open
development pattern already established in the neighborhood.
37. UC-0834-13 LEWIS INVESTMENT CO NV, LLC:
DENIED per staff recommendation.
ADD Current Planning "If Approved" conditions:
·
Design review as a
public hearing for significant changes to plans.
·
Design review for
signage and lighting as a public hearing.
USE PERMITS for the following:
1) Reduce the setback for a convenience store and gasoline
station from a residential use;
2) Reduce the setback for a vehicle wash from a residential
use; Withdrawn
by applicant
3) Reduce the setback for vehicle maintenance from a
residential use; and Withdrawn by applicant
4) Reduce the setback for outside dining from a residential
use.
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduce the minimum street landscaping width along
2) Reduce the minimum street landscaping width along
3) Allow talk boxes not set back behind a building or
oriented away from adjacent residential development for drive-thru windows.
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
shopping center on 6.6 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) Zone. Generally located on the northwest corner of
The TAB opinion is this site is no longer
suitable for Commercial General uses.
The Title 30 Commercial General standard is 10 acres or greater. This site is down to 6.6 acres. Originally
this site consisted of 40 acres planned for commercial general. The land owners have elected to sell of most
of the land reducing the land available for commercial activities. The L shape parcel that remains commercial is
not deep enough to support the setbacks required from residential.
The TAB view is land owner has created the
conditions where the Title 30 standards for many Commercial General uses cannot
be accommodated. It is a self-imposed
hardship. The application should be
denied.
The TAB added two if approved conditions. Lighting and signage were not cover in the
application and any change to plans should be a public hearing. There are potential deleterious effects on
the adjacent residential that need to be reviewed before any intense commercial
is permitted on this property
38. ZC-0261-12 (WC-0132-13) WALMART
APPROVED per staff If Approved conditions
WAIVER OF
CONDITIONS of a zone change requiring
construction of full off-site improvements in conjunction with a large scale
retail building (Walmart) on 16.8 acres in a C-2 (General Commercial) P-C
(Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountains Edge Master Planned
Community. Generally located on the south side of
The staff recommendation is denial. The TAB does not
agree with staff analysis or recommendation. The staff analysis only covers one
of three Walmart request concerning reimbursement. The other two requests would allow Walmart to
begin construction. Three requests are:
·
Walmart
will immediately construct half street improvements and related civil
infrastructure for its frontage along
·
Walmart
will design and build, at their own expense, temporary transitions from its
improvements to the existing roadways and related improvements
·
Walmart
requests a refund or reimbursement of the expense for the improvements
mentioned above, at such time when the Special Improvement District (
Walmart
desires to begin construct but cannot do so if the off-sites are not in
place. The county prefers Walmart wait
for the County to make the improvement to Rainbow, at least three years
out. This period is too long for Walmart
plans. In addition, Walmart has
contributed to $300,000 to
The TAB recommendation is Walmart should be
allowed to proceed with their off-site improvements and be reimbursed for
off-sites improvements that were included in
39. WS-0812-13
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Allow a proposed single family residential lot to have
direct access onto a collector street (
2) Off-site improvements.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential development on a 5.0 acre
portion of a 70.0 acre parcel in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I)
Zone. Generally located on the north side of
This project is an excellent addition to the RNP. The development continues the open
development pattern already established in the neighborhood. The one property that accesses a Wigwam is
planned with a circular driveway, this consistent with other properties along
Wigwam.
Wigwam in this area is current developed a rural
road. The rural road development along
Wigwam should be continued until such time traffic volume requires additional
pavement.
40. ZC-0841-13
HELD by the applicant to the
USE PERMIT for a congregate care facility
DESIGN REVIEW for a congregate care facility on a 3.2 acre portion of a
5.2 acre parcel in a C-2 (Commercial General) Zone in the MUD-4 Overlay
District. Generally located on the north side of
41. VS-0661-13 - PHANTOM GROUP, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
(Held over from the
(Held over from the
(Held over from the
42. WS-0662-13 PHANTOM GROUP, LLC:
APPROVE Waiver of Development Standards #1 for lot #10 only;
APPROVE Waiver of Development Standards #2, 3, & 4;
APPROVE Design Review for subdivision map;
Per staff "If Approved" conditions;
ADD Current Planning conditions:
Architectural
design review for the houses;
Single story
houses only;
Motion Passed:
WAIVERS OF
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced lot size;
3) Waive off-site improvements (curb, gutter, sidewalk,
streetlights, and reduced paving); and
4) Allow non-through street improvements in conjunction with
a proposed single family residential subdivision.
DESIGN REVIEW for a single family residential subdivision on 12.5 acres
in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone and an R-E (Rural Estates
Residential) (RNP-I) (AE-60) Zone.
Generally located on the
west side of
·
Held
over from the
·
Held
over from the
·
Held
over from the
The neighborhood meeting was held by DR Horton
when this project was first proposed.
Approximately 25 people attended this meeting. After hearing the DR Horton presentation, the
neighbors had no objections. The project
layout has not changed since that meeting.
This project
has been delayed because two developers have back out over the last year. The property owner is proceeding with the
project. The architectural renderings
are not available at this time. The TAB
elected to recommend approval of the sub-division design and a public hearing
for the architectural design at a later date.
The TAB opinion is one lot 365 ft. below the
20,000 standard is not sufficient reason to deny the application.
A drive along Maule revealed, the only section
of Maule that is full developed is the north side adjacent to the water
reservoir. The south side is developed
to rural standards. There are no other
offsites developed in the area. The full
off-sites around the reservoir is out of place for the area and seems to be an
expense the water authority did not need to make. Public Works analysis does not reflect the
actual road construction in the area.
Only full off-sites in the area are around the
water reservoir which does not reflect how the area is developed.. The TAB opinion is the rural road standard is
throughout the area and should be continued.
Maule in this area is not a true
collector. It is shown as a collector
from Arville to Valley View on the Master Transportation Map. It is blocked in the west by the UPRR tracks
and in the east by 215/I-15 interchange.
It is not likely that Maule would bridge either of these obstacles. Maule should be downgraded to a local street
on the Master Transportation Map along with Arville north of Warm Springs.
43. WS-0726-13 GRAFIADA, ENRIQUE & KAMI:
DENIED per staff recommendations
HOLDOVER
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Increase accessory structure height; and
2) Reduce the separation between buildings and
structures in conjunction with an existing single family residence on 2.2 acres
in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone.
DESIGN
REVIEW for an
accessory structure (tower). Generally located on the west side of
·
Returned
to the TAB by Planning Commission action.
Previously DENIED by the TAB
at the
The TAB elected to hear this item because it
was generated by CCPRO complaint and the PC may hear the application on
BV-1948-13 is an active case for the
construction of the tower which was filed in February 2013 and is pending the
outcome of this application.
The applicant stated that the area residents
are no longer opposed to the tower.
However, no documentation was presented to back up this position. Also, stated is tower engineering specification
have been determined to be sound, again no documentation presented.
The TAB recommendation is based upon the
following:
·
The
tower was constructed without land use wavier or building permits.
·
It
is not similar to any other structure in the area
·
It
is does not comply with the Title 30 height limit of 25 feet.
·
Had
the correct land use process been followed the TAB would have had the input
from surrounding neighbors who were notified of the project.
PUBLIC
COMMENTS NONE
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
authors 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 authors 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.