Results
The Zoning Agenda items will be heard by the PC
or
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.
Call to Order,
Invocation, Pledge of Allegiance, Roll Call
Public Comment – NONE
Approval of
Approval of Agenda for
The
applicant requested an indefinite hold for the following:
12.
TM-0119-16 ·MAULE JOAN TRUST. ET AL:
16. VS-0537-16 -MAULE JOAN TRUST, ET AL:
23. ZC-0538-16 - MAULE JOAN TRUST, ET AL:
The
following items are companion items and will be heard together:
4. VS-0554-16 – LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF
5. VS-0555-16 – LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF
13. TM-0122-16 - SCHNIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
17. VS-0550-16 - SCIINIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
21. WS-0551-16 - SCHNIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
14. TM-0123-16 • UDDENBERG, RICHARD KEITH
22. WS-0561-16 - UDDENBERG. RICHARD KEITH
15. UC-0553-16 - SECTION E PARTNERS. LLC:
18. VS-0552-16- SECTION E PARTNERS, LLC:
19. WS-0528-
20. WS-0529-16-MOUNTAINS
Informational Items
1. Announcements of upcoming neighborhood
meetings and County or community meetings and events. (For discussion)
1st Tuesday
The
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
Cordially
invites you to attend...
1st
Tuesday Community Open House
At
located
at:
First
Tuesday is an open house program that anyone can attend. Tonight’s presentation will be about what the
Constables office does and how to handle squatter issues. Please enter at the
gate on
Planning
& Zoning
1. ZC-0489-16
–RONALD REISS TRUST:
Motion
to:
APPROVED per staff conditions;
ADD Current planning condition:
·
Pole-mounted lighting to be on motion sensor and
timer;
·
Generator testing between
Motion
PASSED.
WAIVERS
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for the following:
1) alternative landscaping;
2) access to a residential local street;
3) increase building height; and
4) non-standard improvements.
DESIGN
REVIEWS for the
following:
1) a proposed medical office building;
2) a lighting plan; and
3) increased finished grade for a proposed medical
office building.
Generally located on the
southeast corner of
The TAB considered this to be an excellent
project both in design and use.
The applicant has created an excellent revision
to their plan. The revised plan is a better
fit for the neighborhood. The original
plan was opposed by the Staff and some TAB members. The application was held for three weeks
while the applicant considered the TAB and Staff comments. The TAB considered the following:
·
This
is an infill project.
·
Drainage
and natural grade make designing the project difficult.
·
The
applicant has considered the adjacent neighbors in every aspect of the project.
·
This
is essentially a weekday operation.
·
The
overall building height was reduced by approximately 9 feet from the original
design.
o
Reduction
in pad height
o
Reduced
second floor celling height
o
Moved
mechanical equipment to the center of the building.
·
The
highest fill height is along
·
The
building pad is lower that the surrounding homes.
·
All
the lighting is shielded.
·
Diversifies
the employment base in
·
Provides
needed services.
The TAB recommends two additional
conditions. First, the pole-mounted
lighting to use motion sensor and timers to reduce night time lighting adjacent
to the residential. The motion sensors
provide an additional safety factor.
Second, the generator testing times should be restricted due to the
adjacent residential.
2. VS-0540-16
– LH VENTURES, LLC:
Motion to:
APPROVED per staff conditions;
CHANGE Public Works – Development Review bullet #
2 to read:
Right-of-way dedication to include 30 feet for Ford Avenue, 30 feet
for Torino Avenue, 55 feet for Rainbow
Boulevard, and associated spandrel;
Motion PASSED
VACATE
The dedication for
3. VS-0543-16 – WAGNER, JEFF & ALICIA:
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
4. VS-0554-16 – LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
5. VS-0555-16 – LEWIS INVESTMENT COMPANY OF
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
6. VS-0556-16 –
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
7. VS-0562-16 – KB HOME
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
8. WS-0520-16 – STORYBOOK
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for reduced setbacks in conjunction with an approved single family residential
development on 1.3 acres in an R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone. Generally located on the north side of
9. ZC-1313-02 (ET-0108-16) – MESCOBI REVOCABLE
FAMILY TRUST:
Motion to:
APPROVED per staff conditions;
CHANGE Current Planning Condition
bullet # 1 to:
·
Until
ADD Current Planning Condition:
• Design Review as a public hearing for plans.
Motion PASSED
The applicant position is
The TAB considered:
· The original application was in 2002.
· There has been one 6-year extension.
· Rainbow Blvd. has not been completed adjacent
to this property for several reasons.
· Public works indicated that
· Once Rainbow is paved, a commercial project
should be able to proceed.
· The TAB has observed a commercial revival in
The TAB opinion is a 3-year extension is more
appropriate for this property.
10. NZC-0560-13 (ET-0110-16) – GSQ TRUST, ET
AL:
Motion to:
APPROVED per staff conditions;
ADD Current Planning Condition:
• Design Review as a public hearing for
significant changes to plans.
Motion PASSED
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
single family residential development.
Generally located
on the north side of Serene Avenue and the east and west sides of
This was a non-conforming zone change that was
granted based upon the plans presented.
If the plans change, the reason for the non-conforming zone change may
no longer be applicable. The TAB requests
a Current Planning condition be added for a design review as a public hearing
for significant change to plans.
11. DR-0514-16
– ST. SHARBEL MARONITE CATHOLIC TRUST:
APPROVED per staff conditions
DESIGN
REVIEW for an
accessory building (storage building) in conjunction with a place of worship on
2.1 acres in a P-F (Public Facility) Zone.
Generally located
on the southwest corner of
12. TM-0119-16 - MAULE JOAN TRUST, ET AL:
HELD by the applicant, indefinite hold
TENTATIVE
13. TM-0122-16 – SCHNIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
APPROVED per staff conditions
TENTATIVE
14.
TM-0123-16
- UDDENBERG, RICHARD KEITH:
HELD by the applicant to
TENTATIVE
15. UC-0553-16 – SECTION E PARTNERS, LLC:
Motion to:
APPROVED per staff conditions;
ADD Current Planning Condition:
·
Automotive
repair uses restricted to Pad A only;
·
Design
Review as a public hearing for significant changes to plans;
Motion PASSED.
USE
PERMITS for the
following:
1) retail center;
2) convenience store;
3) reduce the setback from a convenience store to
a residential use;
4) reduce the setback from a service station to a
residential use;
5) reduce the separation from an automobile
maintenance facility to a residential use; and
6) reduce the separation from an automobile repair
facility to a residential use.
WAIVERS
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for the following:
1) alternative street landscaping;
2) non-standard commercial driveway access and
separations.
WAIVERS
OF CONDITIONS of a
zone change (ZC-0269-05) requiring a minimum 10-foot-wide landscaping along
rights-of-way; and of a zone change (ZC-1584-98) requiring the following:
1) no loading areas adjacent to or visible from
2) no loading docks within 100 feet of a
residential use
3) on-site lighting to consist of low-sodium,
inward directed features to be included in each design review;
4) A-1 landscaping along all major street
frontages;
5) B-2 landscaping along minor street frontages;
6) A-2 landscape buffer adjacent to any existing
residential developments;
7) master studies to address the entire 91-acre
development prior to the issuance of any permits or subdivision mapping,
whichever occurs first; and
8) traffic study to evaluate the surrounding
roadway network, including potential railroad/rail spur/roadway conflicts, the
possible realignment of
9) 30 feet for
DESIGN
REVIEW for a
retail center with a convenience store, service station, and auto repair
facility on 3.4 acres in an M-D (Designed Manufacturing) Zone in the MUD-3
Overlay District.
Generally located on the north side of
The plan presented uses pads instead of inline
buildings. The TAB opinion is the pads
create a better looking retail area. The
elevations presented are similar to the applicant’s other projects along
One TAB concern was the placement of
automotive maintenance pad adjacent to
Due to the close proximity of planned
residential, the TAB requests a condition for a Design Review as a public
hearing for significant changes to plans.
The Waivers of Conditions are from previous
approved applications, that are no longer appropriate.
The Staff conditions covers lighting, signage,
and cross access.
16. VS-0537-16 - MAULE JOAN TRUST, ET AL:
HELD
by the applicant,
indefinite hold
VACATE
17.
VS-0550-16
– SCHNIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
18. VS-0552-16 - SECTION E PARTNERS, LLC:
APPROVED per staff conditions
VACATE
19.
WS-0528-16
– MOUNTAINS
DENIED
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension
of time in conjunction with master planned community in an R-E (Rural Estates
Residential) Zone; R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone; RUD (Residential
Urban Density) Zone; H-2 (General Highway Frontage) Zone; C-1 (Local Business)
Zone; C-2 (General Commercial) Zone; P-F (Public Facility) Zone; and all within
a P-C (Planned Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master
Planned Community. Generally located between
The TAB cannot support the extension of this
bond.
The bonds were created to preform work under
The TAB noted that the administrative denial
was over a year ago. A year should be
sufficient time to negotiate a settlement with the insurance company. The bond has been extended 14 times since 2004,
too many times. This is not a good
precedent to set for offsite improvements.
The residents of Mountains Edge deserve to
have the civil improvements they were promised.
12 years is too long to get the job done.
20. WS-0529-16 – MOUNTAINS
DENIED
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to appeal the administrative denial of an off-site improvement bond extension
of time in conjunction with master planned community in an R-1 (Single Family
Residential) Zone; R-2 (Medium Density Residential) Zone; RUD (Residential
Urban Density) Zone; R-3 (Multiple Family Residential) Zone; C-2 (General
Commercial) Zone; P-F (Public Facility) Zone; and all within a P-C (Planned
Community Overlay District) Zone in the Mountain’s Edge Master Planned
Community. Generally located between
The TAB cannot support the extension of this
bond.
The bonds were created to preform work under
The TAB noted that the administrative denial
was over a year ago. A year should be
sufficient time to negotiate a settlement with the insurance company. The bond has been extended 11 times since
2004. This is not a good precedent to
set for offsite improvements.
The residents of Mountains Edge deserve to
have the civil improvements they were promised.
12 years is too long to get the job done.
21. WS-0551-16 – SCHNIPPLE MARK A. TRUST:
APPROVED per staff conditions
WAIVERS
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for the following:
1) reduce setbacks (residence);
2) allow alternative screening (decorative block
wall) in the front yard; and
3)
reduce setback
(decorative block wall) from a private street.
WAIVERS
OF CONDITIONS of a
zone change for the following:
1) a maximum of 22 lots with 2 other lots to be
converted to open space;
2) common area with landscaping and meandering
sidewalk per plans; and
3)
right-of-way
dedication of 30 feet for
DESIGN
REVIEWS for the
following:
1) a proposed single family residential
development; and
2) increased finished grade on 2.5 acres in an R-2
(Medium Density Residential) Zone in the MUD-3 Overlay District.
Generally located on the south side of
This is a well-designed project. The slope is accommodated by terracing each
lot and fill is only needed on the eastern lots.
The Waivers of Conditions were attached to a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) previously approved and are no longer needed.
The neighbors expressed two concerns with this
project, area traffic flow and parking.
The vacation of local roads and the UPRR overpass construction has
created an unacceptable traffic flow pattern in the area. The access to this project is serpentine
routing on public streets or through the PUD on private streets.
One solution is moving the Oleta alignment
north on the
The other concern is parking. Currently
The TAB is concerned with the right-of-way
reduction on
22.
WS-0561-16
– UDDENBERG, RICHARD KEITH:
HELD
by the applicant to
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
for full off-site improvements (partial paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and
streetlights) along
DESIGN
REVIEWS for the
following:
1) a proposed single family residential
development; and
2) increased finished grade on 10.0 acres in an
R-E (Rural Estates Residential) (RNP-I) Zone.
Generally located on the west side of
23. ZC-0538-16 – MAULE JOAN TRUST, ET AL:
HELD
by the applicant,
indefinite hold
WAIVER
OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
to allow proposed single family residential lots to have direct access to a
collector street (
DESIGN
REVIEWS for the
following:
1) a proposed single family residential
development; and
2) increased finished grade.
Generally located on the north side of
General Business
1. Discuss and review a
proposed Enterprise Land Use Vision Statement for possible inclusion in the
Enterprise Land Use Annual Update. No
Vision Statement currently exists for
Proposed
CONTINUED to the
2. Review 2015/2016
budget requests and take public input regarding suggestions for next funding
year budget requests. (For possible action)
No new items were
added
The budget request
will be reviewed in the
Comments by the General Public –
Comment by a
citizen that lot sizes are trending smaller again. This reverses the trend for larger lots.
Next Meeting Date:
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.