The Zoning items will be heard on the following dates:
Planning Commission 7:00 P.M.,
HOLDOVER/RETURNED APPLICATIONS will be heard on the date in the applications header.
The PC decisions/recommendations may be appealed
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)
Note: If you ctrl+click on the blue underlined text it will take you to the detailed documents to explain the agenda item.
Approve the Minutes for the meeting held on
2. Approve the Agenda with any corrections, deletions or changes. APPROVED
1. Items on the agenda may be taken out of order.
2. The Town Advisory Board may combine two or more agenda items for consideration.
3. The Town Advisory Board may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item at any time.
The following zoning items have been held by
the applicant until the
4. UC-0202-14 – WJVC, LLC:
5. VS-0203-14 – wjvc, llc
1st Tuesday: Metro's South Central Area Command's Meeting
Tuesday, May 6th @ ,
South Central Area Command,
Receive an update on the Community Plan Project and select two representatives to serve on the Community Plan Project Working Group. (Action item)
TAB members Dave Chestnut and Cheryl Wilson were selected to be representatives on the Community Plan Project Working Group.
Planning Manager, John Wardlaw, provided the following update on the Community Plan Project.
· Community Plan Project and current Enterprise Major Land Use Update are not connected.
· Community Plan Project will seek input from the urban TABs.
o Overall schedule to be released in near future after initial meetings of the group.
· Plan to complete by November, 2014.
· Hold at least two
public meetings at the
· Community Development Plan is a more comprehensive look at community development than the current land use plan.
· The community plan is being developed.
· If the Community Development
Plan is approved by the
· The intent of this process is to give all parties more information and input as the plan is developed.
TAB recommended APPROVAL
That the urban town boards and citizens advisory councils discuss whether to allow large livestock in R-U, R-A, R-E, and R-D zoning districts at 1 animal per 7,500 square feet of lot area. (For possible action)
The following points were discussed:
· Horses are herd animals. They are better off in a group of two or more.
· Some homeowners are not aware their ½ lot is slightly less than 20,000 sq. ft.
· Standard consistency with adjacent towns helps home owners along the county/town borders.
· Some concern that a large animal could be present on a small lot.
· A large home may not leave sufficient open space for a large animal.
· The zone districts included are all 10,000 sq. ft., or greater, minimum lot sizes
· It is at the homeowner’s cost to obtain a Special Use permit.
· Special Use Permit may not be appropriate if this change is approved, consider removing this option.
2. ZC-0140-14 – CHURCH REMNANT MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL & CUNNINGHAM FAMILY TRUST:
A Motion was made as follows:
APPROVE Zone Change
APPROVE Use Permits 1 & 2
APPROVE Waivers of Development Standards #1
DENY Waivers of Development Standards #2
Waivers of Development Standards #3 was WITHDRAWN by applicant
APPROVE Waivers of Conditions 1 & 2
APPROVE Design Review 1 & 2
ADD Current Planning conditions:
· Design Review as a public hearing for lighting and signage with a suggestion to use motion sensors and timers on lights;
Current access on
· Pedestrian access be added to both corners, east and west corners of Placid, with a cross-walk.
Also, recommend (not a condition):
· Landscaping and block wall for the eastern portion of the parking lot be moved south to next property line;
· Western parking lot to be constructed before construction of expansion of existing church building.
Motion APPROVED: Per staff conditions
USE PERMITS for the following:
1) A place of worship; and
2) A parking lot.
WAIVERS OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS for the following:
1) Reduced on-site parking;
2) Allow access to a residential local street; and
3) Reduced street landscaping.
WAIVERS OF CONDITIONS of a zone change (ZC-0219-04) requiring the following:
1) Per plans submitted at the Board of County Commissioners’ meeting; and
2) The office portion of the project to be 1 story only at a maximum height of 17 feet.
DESIGN REVIEWS for the following:
1) An expansion to a place of worship on 2.0 acres
in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone and a
2) An off-site parking lot on 1.9 acres in an R-E (Rural Estates Residential) Zone.
Generally located on the south side of
The neighbors to the south of this project are very concerned with this project. The project is a major church expansion. The neighborhood concerns include:
· Traffic into the RNP-1.
· Parking along Placid St.
· What effects will the eventual build out bring to the neighborhood?
· Where should the buffering be placed? And what should its intensity be?
· What is the plan for all the church owned property?
The TAB recommendations were hampered because the application only covered one of three phases. The applicant did present a concept for the phase two and three. The opinion is all project phases should be presented in one application. The TAB has found creeping expansion through multiple applications results in poor planning, unanticipated effects, and prolonged conflicts with the neighbors and insufficient land to meet the vision.
The TAB considered the following points:
· There is a significant pedestrian safety hazard created because of the parking being separated from the church.
Any curb cut on
Placid will create a queue at
· The church construction will further restrict parking around the church.
· The new construction will significantly increase the mass of the building.
· The parking lot’s southern wall and landscaping should be placed on the southernmost project border shown on phases two and three.
· Lighting and signage were not covered in this application.
· No access to a local street as the only traffic mitigation being applied.
· Current landscaping south of the church is excellent and should be replicated on west of placid St.
· When the day care Use Permit was granted in 2007, the parking lot portion was not completed.
The TAB recommends that no vehicle access be granted on
Pedestrian access should be created in western parking
lot at the northeast corner and church parking lot at the northwest
corner. In addition, a painted cross walk
should be added at the southern intersection of
Building construction will reduce parking around the church below what is approved in this application. The western parking lot should be completed before building construction beings. This will provide adequate off street parking during the construction.
The TAB recommends a Design Review as a public hearing for lighting and signage because they were not included in this application.
Some lots in phases two and three were not included in
this application. The TAB could only
suggest the following. A training area
and additional parking is planned along
USE PERMIT to increase the size of an accessory structure in
conjunction with a single family residence on 1.2 acres in an R-E (Rural
Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.
Generally located on the
south side of
This application was strongly opposed by a neighbor. The neighbor’s position is this barn is not allowed by Title 30, is an unsafe structure and not appropriate for the neighborhood. The neighbor’s solution was to tear down the barn and build a smaller one. No other solution was acceptable to the neighbor.
The TAB considered the following;
· The applicant has cleaned up what was a junk yard.
· The applicant’s parents will live on the property.
· The applicant purchased the property approximately one year ago.
· The ongoing CCPRO action was not revealed during the property closing.
· The applicant’s plans enhance the barn design.
· The aerial photos show the house and barn together occupy approximately the same building area as the surrounding properties.
· The barn design is appropriate for the area.
The TAB option is the Use Permit should be granted.
One question raised during the discussion, is the CCPRO information readily available so it can be disclosed to the property purchaser prior to property purchase?
4. UC-0202-14 – WJVC, LLC:
HELD by the applicant until the
USE PERMIT for a major training facility (gymnastics).
WAIVER OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS to reduce parking.
DESIGN REVIEW for an office/warehouse complex on 2.2 acres in an M-1
(Light Manufacturing) Zone. Generally located on the southwest corner of
5. VS-0203-14 – WJVC, LLC:
HELD by the applicant until the
6. ZC-0192-14 – SHER-INN, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions and,
ADD Current Planning conditions:
• Design Review as a public hearing for building lighting and site signage;
• All pole-mounted lighting to be fully shielded.
USE PERMIT to increase building height.
REVIEW for a
hotel and restaurant with all associated accessory and incidental uses. Generally located on the south side of
This application was generated because there was a long series of administrative time extensions on the 2005 application. Commissioner Sisolak felt it was time to bring this project back into the public hearing process, and have all the issues discussed and a decision made.
There are several adjacent residents opposed to this application. The original conditions on this property included a condition for no restaurant. The primary objection is the inclusion of a restaurant in the hotel. The residents are concerned with noise from trash pickup; smells emanating from the restaurant kitchen operation and trash disposal; attracting additional traffic to the area and bar operation within the restaurant.
The operation of a bar within the restaurant was questioned due to the close proximity of two elementary schools. The residents were informed the granting of any liquor license is done by Business Licensing. Business Licensing will review the site for appropriate separation from the schools. The separation distances are not considered in a land use application because distances are not part of Title 30.
The land use on this property is Commercial General since the major land use update in 2004. Given the property history (11 administrative approvals for the zone change application), the TAB could not find sufficient reasons to recommend a zone district other than C-2. Because this is a new application the current Title 30 applies. In a C-2 zone district, a restaurant is allowed by right.
If the hotel restaurant changed to a named restaurant, the change would generate sufficiently more traffic on the property.
The TAB recommended lighting and signage design be a public hearing. Parking lot lighting is currently in Plans Check and would be delayed if a design review is required. The applicant agreed to the following: Design review for the building lighting and signs. Also, all pole-mounted lighting to be fully shielded. This will allow the applicant to keep the plans check moving forward.
The TAB requested the applicant ask the property owner to fully shield the parking lot lighting along the southern residential border. This could not be included as a condition because the southern border area is not included in this application. The TAB has received several complaints from residents about the light spillover from the parking lot.
1. A resident commented that housing developments are too dense at 8 units per acre. There are not enough schools to support this many residents. Yards are too small for children to play and there are no open spaces for them play in.
2. At the intersection of Jefferies St. and St. Rose Pkwy, near some new town homes, is a cross walk at St. Rose and a no-crossing sign, but people cross anyway. This is a safety hazard.