good evening everybody I'm gonna call the meeting to order six o'clock Jena item number one who's just called to order number two the meeting has been properly noticed and posted in compliance with the Open Meeting Law the proceedings are beginning our video recording as well as presented live on kcl V cable channel 2 please note customers are sensually can Cox communication can view the program in high definition on channel 1002 and in standard definition on channel 2 you can also watch the meeting live on Apple TV Roku and an amazon firetv on the go vegas app the Planning Commission meeting as well as all other KC LV programming can be viewed on the internet at wwlp.com and the web the Saturday of the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Monday at midnight and the following Tuesday at 6 p.m. can I have the role called officers please share to sabe o present vice-chair schlattman present Commissioner Jarry Commissioner Toussaint present Commissioner Williams present commissioner rogon present commissioner chata present thank you thank you I call your attention to the information printed on your agenda concerning the actions and the appeals and review process if appropriate please read this carefully and if you have any questions staff is available also the second page of the agenda contains the rules of conduct we appreciate you adhering to these rules so we can have a smooth meeting item number four is public comment during this portion of the agenda must be limited to matters on the agenda for action if you wish to be heard please come to the podium give your name for the record the amount of discussion as well as the amount of time any single speaker is allowed will be limited this is notice this is public comment does anybody wish to speak okay I'll close it and if I can get everybody to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance okay moving on the agenda item number five for possible action to approve the final minutes from the Planning Commission meeting on January 28 2020 in February 11 2020 mr. chair mr. Chairman I make a motion to approve January 28 2020 in February 2020 Planning Commission meeting minutes thank you you've heard the motion please cast your vote and that motion passes Genda item number six for possible action any of these items on the Planning Commission staff and or the applicant wish to be stricken or held in abeyance to a future meeting may be brought forward and acted upon at this time anybody go ahead please state your name for the record thank you chair to Salvio for the record Jennifer gainer from the firm Dickenson right here on behalf of my client wal-mart Stores Inc I know it's deja vu from the last meeting but I'm asking for the second and final 30-day of bans on item number 45 which is our OC 78043 thank you thank you 30 days yes mr. chair we have some housekeeping items the applicants wish to withdraw without prejudice items 22 through 26 35 36 and 42 and 43 the applicant wishes to bay items 27 28 to the April 14th 2020 Planning Commission meeting this is the second advance request for this item staff wishes to obey item 47 to the April 14th 2020 Planning Commission meaning this is the first abeyance request for this item thank you thank you does anybody wish to speak on these items seeing none can we face Chairman's lemon yes mr. chair I'd like to make a motion to withdrawal without prejudice items 22 through 26 35 and 36 42 and 43 and to hold in abeyance till the April 14 2020 plan Commission hearing items 27 28 45 and 47 okay you for a demotion please cast your votes and that motion carries moving on to consent items when said items are considered routine by the Planning Commission may be acted upon by one motion however any item however any item may be discussed if a commission member applicant so desires item number 70 MP 7 8 149 applicant Greystone Nevada LLC owner eastland LLC for a possible action on a request for a tentative map for a 217 lot single-family residence subdivision at the southeast corner of O'Hara and log cabin way Ward 6 staff recommends approval item number TMP seven eight one five one applicant Greystone Nevada LLC owner eastland LLC for a possible action action on a request for a tentative map for a 199 lot single-family residential subdivision on the north west corner of o'hara Road and north sky Canyon Park Drive Ward 6 staff recommends approval and TMP 78230 applicant Shaya homes limited partner owner eastland LLC et al for a possible action or request for a tentative map for a 15 unit multifamily condominium and a 159 lot single-family residential subdivision at the northeast corner log cabin way and sky point drive Ward 6 staff recommends approval thanks Jeff yes mr. chairman I'd moved to approve items 7 through 9 on the consent agenda you all heard the motion please cast your vote and that motion carries and mr. chairman those three items will be final action this evening unless appealed to the City Clerk's office within seven days thank you and one vote the following items that may be consider in one motion one vote they are considered routine on public and public hearing items all public hearing and non public hearings will be opened at one time any person representing an applicant or a member of the public or a member of the Planning Commission not in agreement with the conditions and all standard conditions for the application recommendation by the staff should request to have these items removed as part of the agenda related items 10 and 11 item 10 var 785 one applicant Excel chart development only a champion center of Las Vegas for the possible action or requests for a variance to allow deviations from title 19 point 10 point zero two zero CV development standards at 3900 East Bonanza Road Ward 3 staff recommends approval item number 11s dr seven eight two five two four a possible action on request for a major amendment to a previously approved rezoning in plot plan review Z zero zero seven three - 86 for the proposed addition of a two-story of a - two-story building addition and parking lot expansion to an existing school and church house of worship development Ward three staff recommends approval VAR 777 72 applicant owner AR GD 1 5 1 pc k 0 0 1 LLC for a possible action on a request for a variance to allow a 6 foot side yard setback where 10 feet is required for an existing building at 1 5 0 South Valley View Boulevard board 1 staff recommends approval related items 13 and 14 SGP 78253 applicant applicant owner city of las vegas for the possible action on a request for a special use permit for an alternative parking standard to allow 12 parking spaces where 50 spaces are required for a clinic use at 1425 Main Street Ward 5 staff recommends approval Str 78254 for the possible action or the quest for a site development plan review for a proposed 8812 square foot clinic Ward 5 staff recommends approval item number 15 su p 781 six afternoon a plug-in as IHOP restaurant company owner SSD Nevada Properties LLC for the possible action or request for a special use permit for a proposed 6610 square foot restaurant with alcohol use at 1809 South Las Vegas Boulevard Ward 3 staff recommends approval item number 16 SGP 7 8 2 to 7 applicant otm Hospitality Group owner Main Street investments - LLC for the possible action or request for a proposed 1477 square foot tavern eliminate establishment you said 100 East California Avenue war3 staff recommends approval I don't know 17 SGP 7-8 235 applicant owner 1025 Main Street LLC for a possible action on a request for a special use permit for a proposed 4124 square-foot urban lounge use with 815 square foot of outdoor seating and just for the record I want to make a correction on the address it is supposed to be 10 31 Main Street not 1301 Main Street and that's where three staff recommends approval related items 18 and 19 VA c7 1836 applicant owner twin lakes Baptist Church for a possible action on a request for a petition to vacate US government patent easement at the northwest corner of West Cliff Drive in Rainbow Ward lawn staff recommends approval SPR 78237 for a possible action I request for a site development plan review for a proposed one-story 14,000 625 square foot church house of worship including fellowship hall and administrative building and a two-story five thousand seven hundred and ninety square foot multi-purpose building with the waiver not to orient the building to the corner where such is required Ward 1 staff recommends approval item number 20 SDR 785 19 owner fortress Ogden LLC et al for the possible action or request for a site development plan review for proposed five-story mixed-use development consisting of 2714 774 square foot a commercial space and 80 multiple multi-family residential units with the waiver of title 19 point zero 9 from base code standards at 1 1 1 6 East Ogden Avenue Ward 5 staff recommends approval and item number 21 V AC 789 for alpha canola told south LV LLC for the possible action on a request for a petition to vacate public drainage easements and sewer easements generally located at the corner of Far Hills Avenue a ridge prime street or to staff recommends approval disclosure yes that's a chairman go ahead mr. chairman we had some requested can do changes for item number 11 the applicant proposes the following condition changes and additions for item number 11 amend condition number 10 to read install a pedestrian crossing on Harris Avenue at a location to be determined by the city of Las abejas Travis traffic engineer prior to the start of the 2020 2021 school year add the following conditions upgrade the existing school flashers on Bonanza Road and install a rectangular rapid flashing beacon or rfb system for the crosswalk at Honolulu Street prior to increasing enrollment beyond 1,100 students or the start of the 2021 2022 school year whichever may occur first there shall be an administrative review by the Department of Public Works 60 days after the school has opened to ensure compliance with the approved traffic impact analysis as it relates to the school pick-up and drop-off plan and the overall school traffic operations corrections for any non-compliance must be completed by the applicant within 60 days of written notice from the city thank you thank you and the applicant or applicants rep agrees to those added conditions good evening mr. chairman commissioners Bob grown our 1980 Festival Plaza Drive I'm here representing the applicant in this matter and we accept those revised conditions and I want to thank your staff for working with us on them Thank You mr. chairman we got one more condition change on item 14 so if I could just read that on item 14 condition number 10 should be modified to read practitioners of any permits dedicate an additional four feet of right away for total full street with of 90 feet on Main Street and a 20-foot radius at the southeast corner of for master lane and Main Street thank you that's the city's right did they agree to it okay Commissioner yes mr. chairman the one motion one vote items I would I'm gonna go ahead and say I'm gonna be abstaining on items 16 and 17 I don't even launch within the notification area and I'm under contract on one of these as well so in 15 I am is far enough away I'll go ahead and disclose but it's far enough away so on items 10 10 321 I would move to approve with the amended conditions as written to the record for items 11 and 14 okay you've heard the motion please cast your vote mr. chairman just clarify that's amended and added as on items number 11 and 14 yes and as amended thank you okay that motion carries and just for the record welcome Commissioner chair Thank You chair okay chairman I'm sorry about this sir so this evening final action on items 10 11 15 through 17 and item 21 those are final action and less appeal to the City Clerk's office within 10 days items 12 through 14 in items 18 through 20 will move on a City Council and be you're heard as a part of their agenda on April 15 2020 thank you at this time I'm going to pull forward item number 49 for presentation so mr. chairman I'll be taking care of this one unfortunately our city attorney was going to be here as a part of this in he is out ill today so after you read the item into the record I will go ahead and give the staff report on that one okay thank you abeyance text seven eight two two five Apogee nona city of Las Vegas for the possible action on request to amend lvm C title 19 point 12.0 7-0 permissible use descriptions and applicable conditions and requirements and nineteen point eighteen point zero three zero measurement rules regarding waivers of distance separation requirements and to provide of other related matters staff has no recommendation staff report or presentation mr. chairman su and members of the Commission so this amendment was before you last month it was held in abeyance because there was some additional discussion that was requested by some members of the public and this board my understanding is that there has been some reach out to some council offices on this in your supplemental material you'll find that there's a rebuy staff report that is eligible for your consideration this evening that just addresses the allowance for a record of survey that was established prior to January 1st of this year in around a and an item that is considered a protected use so a day care a school a house of worship that if a record of survey had been established prior to January 1st of this year that that could be used for purposes of establishing the distance separation between a new in this case marijuana establishment and that protected use so you have the original staff report that included the distance waivers it's my understanding from conversations that I've had with the City Attorney's office that the original requester of this was okay removing that so that's why you have the two staff reports and if you have any questions I will be happy to try to answer those thank you okay at this time I will open it up to the commissioners Commissioner schlattman this is notice as a public hearing anybody from the public wish to be heard on this item please come forward state your name for the record evening mr. chair Commissioner is Ryan Arnold here tonight representing Station Casinos as well as Fremont Street Experience I appreciate director Summerfield's presentation but I guess I'm still a bit confused I'm not sure what's being presented tonight or is the waiver discussion off the table now and it's just the new version for locating marijuana location so mr. chairman through you so there is a supplemental back up to their material staff has prepared a report that just addresses the perdy adjustment that allows for a record of survey to serve as a line of measure for protected use to marijuana establishments technically the original staff report and the original item is available for them to discuss but staff has updated the request to just be the record of survey they can as their deliberations go they can recommend either neither or some variation thereof as a part of their discussions ok I guess my comments are going to be very similar to what I had last time and that is we're not quite sure what the language says we have yet to see the updated staff report my clients we're not concerned about the marijuana element it's simply the waivers with the liquor there's a bunch unknowns in fact I thought this thing was going to be tabled or removed up until I walked in the door tonight so the other I guess comments how each share is that it's my understanding that the city has hired a new consultant to help you guys take a look at your liquor code and probably over the I'm assuming the next year or so reach out to a lot of my clients and others to have discussions and figure out what's best on what changes make the most sense so it's much more of a holistic view that's something we support and I would just encourage this board if there's still any consideration for the liqueur element let's go through that process give us all the chance that kind of input and and let's see where that goes so I appreciate the board and listening to me and we'll leave it there thank you chip just just for the record the City Attorney's Office is an agreement with that in terms of the fact that we do are hiring consultant with regard to the waiver aspect of this ordinance and we ask that you probably delay that portion and just consider the actual distance separation that the director was speaking thank you please come forward state your name for the record good evening Aaron McMullen on behalf of Boyd gaming for the record I would like to echo many of mr. Arnold's comments obviously we have the same concerns or members of the FSC and have properties all throughout the jurisdiction so we obviously also have concerns about the alcohol use and would like to do more of a comprehensive solution than something like this that we think has some grave concerns for legal precedent setting and things of that nature moving forward very similar to my last time comments so appreciate any work we could do with you all to come to a good resolution thank you Thank You Virginia Valentine for the Nevada Resort Association I would just like to say that we agree and with the comments made by miss McMullen and mr. Arnold also this latest revised staff report is we haven't seen it it's news for me and we would definitely like some opportunity to review it and comment on it thank you thank you good evening cami Dempsey representing golden entertainment for the record Thank You chairman and members of the Commission not to reiterate everything that has already been said but golden entertainment is the largest provider of the tavern industry and we have already invested significantly in the communities and we were thrilled that there's growth and opportunity for others to enter the market but we also want to be sure we're not penalizing those that have already established so much and invested so much so we are also looking forward to seeing that staff report and being involved with future discussions thank you thank you just notice there's a public hearing anybody else wish to be heard seeing none I'll close the public hearing and turn it over to Commission Commissioner slummin yes mr. chairman thank you you know we reviewed this and we had quite a debate at last month's Planning Commission here and probably one of the best debates that we've had to date with this body and I'm glad we took that extra 30 days because it kind of helped me think through this a little bit further some of those thoughts don't pertain to this new bill with a lot of this stuff that has now been struck from this bill so I won't really touch on the alcohol relating as far as the marijuana related items go I understand what we're looking at on this revised ordinance in text amendment is relating just to marijuana and dispensaries cultivation facilities production facilities social venues so on so forth anything cannabis related and this is pretty much establishing you know how we measure the distance separation from one location to another location and you know I've constantly struggled with the distance separations in the past with the way that we measure and you know you always hear different people saying well why are we measuring you know 1,500 feet as a crow flies sometimes we'll look at that stuff and this gets into a bigger conversation which I won't get into tonight but just to touch briefly on it sometimes you can have a particular project where it might be 3,000 feet as Simonne walker drive from a particular location around a commercial subdivision around the block wall and back into a neighborhood but there's zero feet away because there's a residential touching that commercial subdivision I think at last month's meeting I made a comment that if we take into account some of the bigger shopping centers such as the one at Decatur and Charleston if there's a alcohol-related use on the west side of Decatur that pretty much could eliminate all the potentials for any of those uses to go anywhere within the shopping center of the Walmart Petsmart Lowe's the the Big Lots or whatever smart and final that whole shopping center is that the best way to to measure that and as it pertains to marijuana and I mean cannabis related facilities it would be the same thing if there's one on the west side of Decatur you might not have another one for another thirteen twelve thirteen thousand one of your feet even though our code is and somebody can correct me if I'm wrong I think is fifteen hundred feet or whatever the distance separation is so the record survey I see is a tool it could be viewed by you know different people in different different ways but I think that I think that there's it it actually does something it creates a boundary around a particular business now if that's arbitrary and somebody decides just to draw a line around that business it's still from that business to another another business or another protect at use I guess my biggest problem and I don't I don't know why this should just apply to the ones prior to January 2020 why it wouldn't apply to the once after so I would be willing to either don't apply it don't apply this to just the ones up to January 2020 applied to all of them even then in the future or deny all of them don't allow records to survey at all and I'm fine with not allowing records to survey but whenever I look at when I look at doing something where it goes to records to survey or accept it only to a particular day that means I mean to me it seems like it's benefiting a few or a few versus benefiting the entire community the same so those are my thoughts like them or not I'll put them out in the record Thank You Commissioner Commissioner Thank You mr. chairman I do have some questions and I do before I do I do share Commissioner shamans concerns and so that's why I'm going to be directing some of my questions to to mr. Sommerfeld as you heard from Miss Commissioner schlattman I mean there there's concern that he has there's concern that I have about this arbitrary date of January 1st 2020 and it seems to me that that's creating essentially two classes of situations people who filed a record of survey before January 1st 2020 and then those commercial subdivisions that did so afterwards the ones that filed before January 1st 2020 might be able to avail themselves of this proposed ordinance but everybody after that date is precluded is is that how this ordinance reads mr. chairman 3 you Sonia's Commissioner so the the question that was presented was that in the past there had been landowners who used a record of survey to divide up their land not realizing that that record of survey didn't constitute a regulatory division of their and it was a financial division of their land but not a regulatory one and so since they didn't avail themselves of other mapping actions and that was something that happened in some past that there should be some allowance for those that didn't know that that mechanism didn't apply on the regulatory side so that's why you have a date because January 1st is essentially when we came out with this adjustment and so the idea was for those in the past who may have used a record of survey to create a lot without realizing that it didn't have any regulatory component to it or didn't allow them to use it as a regulatory component that would provide some alleviation for them of the distant separation but that it wouldn't constitute some way for someone to now come after the fact and after this rule was changed and tried to establish a maybe a false expectation of what that distance should be so it gets my question still stands so there will be two classes of people correct so anyone who did a record of survey today would not be able to use that line for a record of survey to use for the distance to the protected use right and then the other question I have is that the second subsection of this proposed ordinance and that's with regard that the parcel containing the protected use is separated from the marijuana establishment by oh right away with the width of a hundred feet to me that seems a bit arbitrary is that also not creating us another class or another subdivision where you have the potential for some protected use that's separated by a right-of-way of say 80 feet as opposed to a hundred feet it doesn't apply isn't that true so mr. chairman through you so yes commissioner so yes this is another distinction we use and have historically the city has used the hundred foot right-of-way as the level of service for delineating the the barrier that a hundred-foot right-of-way creates as a primary arterial Street between two areas and as you'll find in multiple places in our code we use that as you know the the general roadway that creates an opportunity for separation of the uses that you're trying to protect so that's the level of service roadway that we use 80 foots still have the potential for elementary schools and middle schools and they have much more residential traffic typically than what you would find on a hundred-foot right-of-way and so that between the level of service the nature of the traffic on there the nature of the other types of things that are are placed on 100-foot right-of-ways that has historically been why we've used 100-foot wire right-of-way as kind of that that barrier between uses that could allow for an exemption from the distant separation okay but just just to be clear so if if I'm locating if I'm trying to establish a marijuana dispensary in the north side of Charleston which is a 100 foot right-of-way say it Jones which is an 80 foot right-of-way and there is a church a thousand feet across Charleston from my marijuana establishments a thousand and one feet I'm okay I can get the distance separation but if that church were located across from Decatur that 80 feet right away I can't avail myself of this of this ordinance well I want to be very clear so the distance to a church is only 300 feet I'm sorry school to a school so if you changed Church to school then yes you would be able to if the school was created by record or survey now the likelihood of a school being created by a record survey is pretty non-existent because they're almost exclusively on civic zone parcels usually owned by the BLM or the school district with the school district having leases on those that are on BLM property but in the scenario of just in a scenario basis yes if the lot that the school was on was created by a record of survey and is on the south side of Charleston in that scenario across 100 foot right away the marijuana dispensary would be able to avail themselves with this adjustment of the distance separation and be eligible to seek the approval to to be placed there if it was across Jones and an 80 foot right away it would not that is correct okay I guess that leads to my next question which is do you know how many different records of survey have been recorded that this would that this ordinance would affect do we have any idea of that number mr. chairman through you I'm gonna look at my staff I know we did some mapping exercise but I don't know if we've got a definitive number so I'll look to mr. Lowenstein who was working with our staff Oh mr. chairman we don't have a definitive number of how many records our survey they are and we can get a number of how many commercial subdivisions but a record of survey is an administrative action that's filed at the County Recorder's rate does not come through the city at all therefore we wouldn't have no record as as record of it unless we're looking at each individual commercial subdivision as they come in to see when lines have been drawn with inside the boundaries of that commercial subdivision so we don't know whether this ordinance is going to affect certain wards more than others because we don't know how many records of survey have been filed or recorded with the County Recorder yeah that's correct okay but we do know that since there are some wards that have more 100-foot right-of-ways than others that those wards will be more affected by this than others potentially yes sir okay why are we doing this for marijuana only why are we changing the measurement method for marijuana only and not for other types of uses so mr. chairman three so commissioner so originally this this was all packaged as you will recall from last month the reason that marijuana was separated out the original ask was to address the ability for these record of survey these historically who a survey created Lots within commercial subdivisions that had protected uses so that you weren't actually measuring all the way out to as Commissioner schlattman mentioned all the way out to a large commercial subdivision lot line under the original scope of this amendment the allowing the council and the Planning Commission to have back their discretion on approving a waiver solved that problem for everything that currently has a non-waivable distance separation except for marijuana establishments because marijuana establishments are the only use that has a distance separation established by statute instead of by ordinance we had to address marijuana establishments separate from that waiver provision now that the other portion of this amendment has gone away the request was to move this part forward understanding that we have the alcohol or consultant on board we actually will be beginning meetings with them excuse me the first week in April and so we plan we expect to have working with the constituents we plan to we expect to have a new package of alcohol-related licensing and subsidy and parallel land-use recommendations for the Planning Commission and City Council to hear at the end of this year that would address those other uses which is why this one is still moving forward because even if we change things on the alcohol side it does not affect the marijuana because those are statutory distance separations so didn't finally is there a particular impetus behind this ordinance relating to marijuana was there an application a particular note that caused this to to be suddenly an issue there was an appeal of a director's decision actually we're I think we may almost be a year ago now since it was heard by the council the council did table that appeal and gave direction to staff to look into the conversation around distance separations all across the the entire spectrum of protected and uses that required distance separation after quite a bit and in looking at other best practices in other places and looking at our code and why our code reads the way it does staff to address that request of council to look into that had proposed a a solution if you believe a solution needed we made a solution to that which is evolved into what we have before us today okay but was there a particular marijuana establishment that looked to be located but was precluded because of distance separation we that appeal was based off of a a marijuana related application and where was that and whose was that I do not remember the actual applicant I believe it's an LLC but that was a request I believe it was in Ward one so the word that you represent and I can't remember I'll be honest I cannot remember the dispensary that they were representing at the time okay thanks I may have some other questions but I want to open it up to the other members of this commission for their chance to ask questions or offer comment thank you thank you any other commissioners wish to be heard Commissioner Jarry through the chair I just wanted to disclose my families in the cannabis business this won't affect us any greater or lesser so I will be voting thank you anybody else wish to be heard on this agenda item okay I just got a couple of comments just this towards mr. Sommerfeld so marijuana is the distance separation is just so I understand correctly is in state statute yes mr. chairman so that they establish distance okay and then also the the licenses there's just a limited amount of those as well correct correct there's an limited number of licenses for the dispensary operations cultivation and production do not have limitations but dispensaries do yes okay I just wanted that for clarification okay so anybody else have any other comments or questions thank you just to follow up on that question the there's actually a measurement Sommerfeld in the statute for distance separations in terms of marijuana establishments obtaining licenses correct yes yes and that's an actually different method of measurement isn't it correct so mr. chairman through you yes commissioner the way the state outlines as the the base model for establishing distance is different than how we measure it ours is a more conservative measure and more consistent across all of our uses at present all right I do have some just general comments based upon the answers that I received tonight and I want to share those with the commissioners I am concerned as commissioner schlattman raised about the disparate treatment that we certainly have based upon the I guess two subsections in the proposed ordinance first being that a regular survey has to be recorded on or before January 1st of 2020 that establishes two distinctive classes of people that are affected by this but that's further compounded by the fact that you have also this this and I understand it may be used in the code before but this just arbitrary idea that if there's a hundred foot distance I'm sorry a hundred foot a right-of-way between the two particular uses then suddenly they can avail themselves of this ordinance whereas if it's an 80-foot right-of-way or something less than that they can't to me a thousand feet is a thousand feet or three hundred feeders three hundred feet regardless of the level of traffic that may be on a roadway and if we're going to be looking at seriously looking at the distance separations in marijuana which we certainly need to do then why not we do it the way that the statute does it which is essentially door to door or door to lot line and that way everyone's treated fairly there's not this distinction between whether there was a record of survey filed January 1st 2020 or not there's not this distinction based upon a hundred-foot right-of-way it's tape measure a thousand feet 300 feet that to me seems the simplest solution to this problem and the most clear this ordinance is not clear this ordinance to me seems more difficult and it's more difficult I think for the public to comprehend this well I agree it's an issue I think that we should probably take it under more consideration maybe that's for City Council and not us but I just don't think that this method is the way to go thank you thank you Commission Rowland okay yes mr. chairman just still gathering just a few last thoughts here the director through You mr. chairman director summit failed could she just would you mind let me know how the it doesn't matter I was wanting to know how the state does but we're not looking at the way the state does it right now so you know I'll take a ticket shot it at this and then if everybody shoots down in flames and no no big deal I won't be offended so here we go and then we'll see what comes comes about so on item number 49 txt seven eight 225 I would I would make a motion to approve striking the the January first 2020 date and strike in number two on the 100-foot right away because as commissioner this Commissioner Rogan was stating if it's a 60-foot 80-foot 100-foot right away you know it it really wouldn't matter to me that much so and then again we might be striking too much of this to even have a text amendment but mr. sheriff I if I could please but sure if you were going to make a strike of those particular provisions of the code you'd need to come up with some suggestions as to what you'd like to see there I'd rather see if you don't mind if you strike this particular ordinance let us come back before what you said you've understood what the the people in opposition should have said let us come back with a clean ordinance that kind of reflects those what you've said today and just started to but I'm just wearing and instead of and I appreciate that I'm just wondering instead of us kicking this thing around if this should be somehow approved or denied and kicked up to council since we already already held it and we didn't make a lot of progress this past month with the exception of the ordinance or a text amendment getting becoming smaller should we go ahead and make a motion send it to Council and let it go to recommend body and also they can they can figure out what they want to do vice chair you'll need to actually again you know if you're gonna strike the January first 2020 date you'll need to come up with some date that you think is more appropriate and then with regard to the 100-foot right-of-way you'll need to come up with some distance separation you believe to be sufficient for that provision as well okay can I make a ask a question instead of using the word strike can he use the word Senate you know make a motion to approve with the recommendation that the City Council kick around that the removal of that date and not so much use the word strike and then have to rewrite it it was just basically you would make a motion I think I see where he's going with it with those two recommendations so that way when City Council has a chance over the next 30 days or 45 days whatever it is they have the ability to take what came out of here and see if they can work with those recommendations mr. chairman my suggestion would be I think something in between I mean this is certainly not ripe I think to send up to City Council there's serious concerns that I have and I think that other members seeing their heads nod up here have I I would recommend that rather than strike rather than move up to City Council let's just table it and staff and City Council and of course we can we can we can table it and then you know within the next six months it comes back before us with changes that are made after due consideration we had 30 days and honestly that 30 days I think was valuable because we did have the opportunity to discuss at length the the liquor issue and and obviously that had an effect because now it's it's almost gone so I think there's this needs some massaging certainly I mean it was almost stricken tonight in its entirety and then suddenly five minutes before Planning Commission its back on so there's there's just something that's that's needs work and I think tabling it's not striking it's tabling allows that to happen so in chemistry I'm sorry and I probably gave you some some incorrect information even though you do have the ability to a base or or table stern item Fran you've already I think bade this item once and as a commission you only have the ability to base something for 30 days so so I spoke with you about obeying it so yeah I forgot that you had already made this item once so we have the ability for 30 so the rules are if we obey it we can't table but if we table we can event occur echt you only have the ability under City Council's ordinance to obey anything for 30 days so we're not a bang we're tabling well table is essentially paying it for a certain period of time or it's it's keeping in limbo so the City Council's desire was that you don't have the ability to hold anything that long so they decided that you only have the ability to hold anything for third for a 30-day period okay well at least let's mr. chair if I could try this again I think mr. Scott actually clarified that we can't obey this tonight so it's got to be voted on tonight I agree with chairman DeSalvo and with making those recommendations sending it up to City Council as it stands with our recommendations and having them vote on it and if anybody else has anything thank you I still think our concerns are valid and yes we can we can do one of two things we can strike it and I certainly think that we need to officially for the record strike the portions that were removed from the current staff report that was given to us as opposed to what was presented 30 days ago that was whispered in my ear by the city attorney as a part of the motion I would request that the motion be on the version that was in the supplemental material submitted to the Planning Commission by the staff that today not the version that was in the online backup okay so for the record that would be the clarification there okay and I would support a motion to strike at this time I still think if we can't table it which I would certainly support and certainly seems reasonable despite the rules that were given to us by City Council if if it's not ready it's not ready and we shouldn't waste City Council's time trying to figure this out make them do the work beforehand and send it back to us so that we can consider it again I think there's some ideas that we have that should be tossed around when we're talking about something as controversial as marijuana Thank You commissioner I so would you be amending your most because there is a motion on the floor he made a motion but he used the word strike I just want to know if he wants to rescind that motion and and update that motion okay mr. chair I'm a recent on motion I'm I'm go back to to my fruits the way that I've always done these when they don't make sense and we don't have everything figured out I mean instead of they can approve in this with striking this and striking that which is striking pretty much everything in this how about we I'll try this and we'll see where it goes I'll deny it with the recommendation which the plan staff or the directors can state to City Council the reason why we denied it and I wouldn't make a motion to deny it text amendment whatever we're on my screen is item 49 here we are item 49 txt seven eight two two five with the recommendation to City Council that they look at that January 1st 2020 date because it should go before and after and in my opinion and also they should really take a strong look at that hundred-foot right away maybe it needs to be 60 foot or 80 foot that whole portion maybe could be taken off that text amendment but that's my motion motion to deny with those recommendations to City Council and just to make clear that recommendation for denial is based on the supplemental version of the staff report that was submitted to the Commission this evening yes director okay you've heard the motion please cast your vote that motion carries mr. chairman then I don't will move forward to counsel in ordinance form for the record I want to make sure a couple things are clear all of the testimony and discussion that was presented at the first meeting as well as all the testimony and conversation that was at this meeting will be forwarded to the requester of this text amendment for their consideration prior to their sponsorship of a bill and will be given to them for their consideration on what that final bill may look like thank you okay item number 50 vir 777 9-0 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for discussion and possible action on report from the city of Las Vegas 2050 master plan all wards staff recommends approval good evening commissioners chairman for the record marco Velata city of las vegas planning departments i'm here tonight to give an update and a progress report on the city's 2050 master plan as we've done in previous Planning Commission meetings we want to give you the same information that we've provided to City Council we presented this this item at the February the second meeting of City Council in February and it was also discussed at length at the City Council's special meeting at the last week of February we had our consultant team Smith group come out that during that time frame to discuss the the master plan and give a general overview and tonight I'm going to give you a just a quick refresher as to where where we are at with the plan as well as an overview of some of the the place types and recommendations that are there are going to be under consideration as we conclude our drafting of the plan and preparing it for this body's consideration later on this year so again just a just a quick recap the 2020 master plan it's at the end of its life cycle and the 2050 master plan is intended to provide that comprehensive comprehensive look at the next 30 years considering a lot of the changes both demographic and socio-economic that we've gone through over the over the last throughout the duration of the 2020 master plan and looking forward to 2050 we're projecting a lot of big changes that that will be happening in line with UNLV projections we're looking at at adding another three hundred thousand new residents just to the city of Las Vegas itself bringing the metro areas population to more than 3 million those 300,000 new residents are gonna need to live in a hundred thousand new housing units of some form whether they're single-family residential or multi-family residential and to go along with that there's there are going to be additional needs with respect to public services and a new infrastructure having space for for commercial activities we will need new police officers new teachers new city staff members all to support that that growth in population that's going to take place over time with the master plan we've we've done quite a bit of laying the groundwork already as we've previously presented to you and and again this plan is intended to provide a clear vision and framework for the future of Las Vegas and direction for for future developments it's intended to be implementation folk focused adaptable to change so that the Commission and City Council can adjust as trends change over time and it was supported with with a lot public involvement in outreach we've done quite a bit up to this point and we're still continuing to take public outreach we'll have some additional opportunities for public outreach on the draft itself as soon as it's released but literally doing surveys throughout the community and doing going out to public to the public itself to get information about the about what is most important to to members of the public and stakeholders and and again just as a recap the big challenges that we've heard consistently on and and this is no by no means a an abridged list there there we heard a lot of issues from all across the spectrum but the ones that we heard about the most organ education crime and safety homelessness preserving open space and our the the prospects of our of our long-term water supply so our vision which which the City Council and Planning Commission has has heard about again really speaks to being bold and innovative over the next thirty years and that's what this plan looks to do it's - it's really to provide a baseline for access to services and education and and jobs over over the next 30 years and and doing so in a thoughtful equitable way and to help guide us to to achieve some of the goals that are contained within the the plan we have a set of principles that that the entire plan considers we want to make sure that that we're equitable that we're resilient that we're healthy that we create a livable community and we do so in a way that's that's innovative so to get into some some more detail on some of the things that that are in the draft itself we're planning and anticipating a hotter drier future and really considering what what water resources are going to be like it over the next over the next 30 years and how planning itself can help reduce water demand and and impacts too from urban heats what we do know based on information we've received through the Southern Nevada Water Authority is that density impacts water use and there is this correlation between lot sizes and building sizes that court that correlates nicely with some missing middle housing the how the housing types that we don't currently have right now so mid rise multi-family residential happens to be a lot more water efficient than your standard conventional suburban single-family residential that's not to say that that's that's not a bad building type to have and will continue to have more of it but increasing the diversity of housing types and the diversity of housing units helps with with the story of water we also know that there's a lot of changing trends that that are going on and and adapting to those those changes in a way that helps that's market driven is something that will definitely need to do millenials are definitely shaping how urban environments across the country looking look and feel how people get around and how people live so there's going to be a lot of a lot of changes that this plan helps prepare for with respect to shifts in density and shifts in affordability and shifts in mobility and we have a we also have another another intersection with different development types and train and transportation and moving around there's a there's a good correlation of having these missing middle housing types plan really well with with these new place types that our consultant team and planning staff have worked together to to develop and really this medium density mixed use transit oriented development provides sufficient density to house and accommodate these 300 thousand new residents that we're anticipating over the next 30 years so with the plan itself we're prioritizing transit corridors both present and future and trying to connect different parts of the of the valley together we've worked a lot with the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada on the on board mobility plan and the plan for high-capacity transit to really mesh well with with this land use plan and these new place types that we're going to go through really quickly so primarily some of the the big place types that we have established already our regional centers and that's downtown Las Vegas and in Centennial Hills Town Center more or less these are the big hubs of the of the city's share of Southern Nevada with the greatest density and intensity and there they're certainly employment centers and and regional hubs in their own right new new mixed-use centers are envisioned as a part of this plan so connect between regional centers are these opportunities for transit oriented development along arterial corridors that we have in place today that have good transit service already and might be ripe for the addition of high-capacity transit this is certainly appropriate for transit oriented development and along those corridors this planning envisions retrofitting corridors with infill how infill housing and corridor mixed-use to help improve walkability and aesthetics and build transit support of density at a suburban level we're looking at neighborhood centers as well conversion of of shopping centers that might might be gray fields or might be areas that that need some needs some improvements that could be reconverted into other other types and while still providing some community support and providing some additional city in the areas outside of the the corridors there are opportunities that we can work with the Planning Commission on with respect to changes to zoning to add some more mixed residential so much of our housing within the city is single-family right now but there might be areas within our existing neighborhoods especially in urban the urban core of the of the city where multifamily type housing units could be built outs that provide more units with less space and and also accommodate a variety of different income types and income levels again to help address housing affordability we we also want to make sure that we strengthen older neighborhoods there are some areas that are going to be appropriate for these types of transformative changes in other areas where we want to be sensitive to preservation that being said there is the possibility of integrating non detached houses in some of our older traditional neighborhoods with some smaller accessory dwelling unit types that we don't have today and of course we're going to continue to have the build-out of new subdivisions areas like Summerlin West and and Skye Canyon where we have existing development agreements they're still going to be new subdivisions that are built in the northwest and the western parts of the valley but there there are going to be additional opportunities in a few places where new subdivisions could be thought of in different ways and then finally rural preservation this is something that statute does require us to to address but making sure that those areas that are that are in the periphery do have do have that that that rural character and have that preservation that area preserved at low densities that makes sense with with respect to the the surrounding character of the of the valley so this is a simplified land-use map of more or less the general plan as it as it stands today and as you can see I mean there's there's not a lot of area to really grow out to the the focus with this plan is really infill and redevelopment building up instead of building out while and that being said we do still have some opportunities in the in the northwest but land availability today is is shrinking it will continue to shrink because we are landlocked we don't have the ability to really go much further in any direction due to topography or to federal lands and as you can see from mm I mean that's that's really been that's really been changing that's really been getting eaten up at a quick rate so this this land-use plan that we're proposing that you'll that you will have in front of you at a later meeting date really boils down to these these primary place types the transit oriented development place types that will be the that will serve as the impetus for new general plan categories that that really focus in on that transit oriented development and infill and redevelopment and as you can see they match up and align really well with some of our existing corridors Charleston Boulevard for example linking those regional centers with those mixed-use hubs and the corridor mixed-use and as mentioned the regional transportation Commission's on board mobility plan really does focus in on those same exact corridors that was done deliberately to make sure that there's supportive alignment with with the transit service that is being anticipated in the future one of the unique things that this plan is going to do is take a deeper dive at individual parts of the city so within each within each part of the city we're going to have different planning areas that are comprised of neighborhoods that we can build a new sense of place a new character we've done quite a bit of that already with downtown Las Vegas and then in some areas particularly Summerlin some of the North Summerlin West they've done an excellent job at really creating a unique sense of place and character we intend to do this deeper dive on other parts of the city and and really focus in on ways we can incorporate other parts of the plan and and really find out what what people what people need and want as we as we implement the plan into the future so each planning area in the city will eventually have all these all these elements we want to make sure that they are being they're being guided with the principles that we talked about and the a little bit earlier and and really to help achieve the goals in the months and the years ahead or over over a long period of time over the next 30 years and again this addresses a lot of the requirements of the plan in a comprehensive fashion to give an example of that we look at East Las Vegas and really get a get a sense of what might potentially be looked at with respect to new place types so where can we really focus mixed-use senators and corridor mixed-use Eastern Eastern Avenue which might have eventually have bus rapid transit or high-capacity another form of high-capacity transit on it Charleston Boulevard which might have light rail on it at some point in the future we look all the way down at the parcel level and then look at a number of other factors with respect to water use with respect to Park acreage demographic and job information and by doing that in a way that we did specifically with with the downtown master plan we can help work with the community and and really help bring bring these individual parts of town together so just a quick overview of where of where the plan is at in terms of structure we've broken the the entire plan into a couple of different chapters each with individual goals and all of this complies with NRS 278 160 which has all the required elements of a master plan we've also gone above and beyond and addressed things that are a little bit outside of the scope of what the city does specifically with education and workforce development again things that are important for the city to address and and to to hand handle with respect to quality of life in the future this is an implementation oriented plan so there are measurable outcomes and strategies that that can be employed to to implement and and see how we do over time in a way that we can benchmark where we are now and see how we improve over the over the future and and by extension you know we we can take a place like Charleston and Decatur today and if we apply if we apply the place types to to an intersection like this and really focus in on making those transportation improvements doing doing things to make this neighborhood and this corridor more walkable provide additional options for housing more diversity protect the neighborhoods that are immediately off of the corridors itself themselves you know we can make a neighborhood that's truly iconic something that aspires to those guiding principles and ultimately that vision that that was laid out earlier in the presentation so with that if there are any questions I'd be willing to answer those for you we intend to come back with with a draft here towards the end of this month and provide some again some time for feedback on specific parts of of the plan itself and really hone in on anything that any of the commissioners want to hear more about and understand this is this is the city's plan this is this goes beyond just the planning department and the Planning Commission we we really are intending to be comprehensive in nature about this and we really do on behalf of our division a long-range planning division in our department and our consultant team we really are looking for your feedback and direction on what we can do to make the city of Las Vegas a better place for 2050 thank you thank you this is notice as a public hearing anybody wish to be heard on the report see you then I'll close it commissioners rogen I just want to thank you you guys are doing a great job and I know this is a long time coming and it's hard work so your efforts are really appreciated and I mean I can't wait for Decatur and Charleston to look like this so get working you've got to keep the car wash though gotta keep that famous car was alright thank you very much thank you mr. chairman if I might I just want to give a special thanks to Marco and the long range team who've been spearheading this but it really is the entire planning department in the city of Las Vegas as a whole the cooperation amongst the various departments as well as our partners at the other local government agencies as well as just the community that has reached out and done work on this I think it'll be something we will really be proud of later this year when we bring forward the final plan and I would just encourage that any member of the Planning Commission who wants to get involved in that review let us know we have plenty of documentation for folks to take a look at at least internal for the moment but we'll be going public with that review here very soon so thank you Thank You mr. chairman and I missed the day when when when are you thinking that you're gonna bring it back to plan commission so again I work over a lot for the record we intend to have a draft done at least out for a review at the end of this month we're working on on some of the some of the components of it right now but we have we have most of the most of it built out we pursuant to an arrest to seven to seventy eight to ten to twenty we have a two-step process we'll definitely have the public hearing here at the Planning Commission and then this will be in front of the City Council for review and adoption as well there will be if at least a few other times we'll have that opportunity available and I work with director Sommerfeld to schedule some time specifically to get in front of the Commission with something concrete that you can review and look at and comment on but mr. vice chair we anticipate that the plan itself after public comment and everything that we will be back before this body for as the the Planning Commission is the statutory caretaker of the city's master plan or general plan we hope to have that actually here for you to take action on late summer or the beginning of fall at the latest okay perfect and I appreciate the presentation and if you don't mind shooting me an email when you have the review package put together I'd like to take a look at it it'll probably take a month to read through all the work that you put together but I think you have my email address and just as early as you can get us that information before applying the Commission what would be nice is if when you have the final draft written to come to Planning Commission if it didn't just hit our our backup information because I imagined this is a few hundred pages long and it's going to be really difficult for us to try reading that and within like a few days prior to Planning Commission so if we had a little bit more time that would that be really helpful we probably can give a lot more feedback so I'd appreciate you looking into that as well yes absolutely thank you anybody else wish to make um it all right accept that report thank you very much thank you just motion motion to accept okay moving on to related items 29 through 34 29 GPA 783 for a topic in ODIs city of Las Vegas for a possible action on request for amend the planned streets and highways map of schedule 31 - 1a and 2a men map to see of the transportation and streets and highways element of the Las Vegas 2020 master plan to add remove and a man various roadways alignments within the Northwest portion of the city Ward 6 staff recommends approval I don't know of a 30 GPA 7-8 349 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for a possible action I request to amend a map number one and two of the trail element of the Las Vegas 2020 master plan Ward six staff recommends approval item number 31 abeyance three notification GPA seven eight zero three three applicant 19 mr. chairman I think the remaining items are not related I think it's just 29 and 30 correct I had it on my sheet is 29 to 34 but I could stop there at 29 30 years chair so the remaining items are dependent on those first two Jeep or to DPS so they are somewhat related I don't know if we want to separate them or not I would ask the council then that's fine thank you okay 31 abeyance read notification GPA seven eight zero three three applicant one nine zero octane ft partner LLC only United States of America for a possible action on a request for a general plan amendment from PF public facilities and dr desert rule density residential to PCB plant community development on the west side of puli road and farm road in tropical parkway Ward six staff recommends approval item number 32 zero and seven eight two four one for the possible action or request for rezoning from undeveloped meant to desert rule density residential general plan designation cv2 PD plan development Ward six staff recommends approval item number 33 V AC 78242 for the possible action on a request for a petition to vacate Bureau of Land Management right away grants Ward 6 staff recommends approval and item number 34 TMP 783 six five four the possible action or request for a tentative map for a 12 lot master plan residential subdivision on Ward six staff recommends approval may have staff report please mr. chairman GPA seven eight three four eight is a request by city staff to amend the master plan of streets and highways by removing segments of pulley Road and to add a segment of Darrell lane the requested changes are required to ensure adequate traffic circulation and capacity for future development in the Northwest area of the city staff recommends approval GPA seven eight three four nine is request by city staff to amend the trails element within the Las Vegas 2020 master plan by replacing the multi-use equestrian trail alignment along the west side of pulley road between tropical Parkway and grant Eaton drive with a multi-use non equestrian segment the approach the proposed change would not affect any existing constructed equestrian trails staff recommends approval the remaining general plan amendment rezoning vacation and tentative map would allow the development of a master plan residential subdivision with up to 1600 residential units an overall gross density of 5.8 Twala units per acre and associated Parkin trail elements the density intensity of proposed development would be similar to or less than the adjacent development staff recommends approval all applications please note that additional letters of protests those publication thank you you state your name for the record Thank You mr. chairman commissioners good evening Bob grown our 1980 festival Plaza Drive I'm here representing the olympia group who is the as you may know is the master developer for sky canyon the reason why i mentioned that is is because they're actually as i go through this presentation is this is sort of what we call mini sky canyon master plan community i have a large map here so you can appreciate the location of the property itself of what's before you today what's before you today is approximately 270 acres 275 acres of BLM property that the applicant here was a successful bidder in August's and and currently owns the property that is here the property was master plan through the BLM through the city was master plan for public facility and there's a rural area although it's been master plan that way it's the intent was never to necessarily build a couple hundred acres of public facility and the desert rural itself that is why we're coming in with the general plan amendment we had a neighborhood meeting a few months ago with respect to our proposed plan here we had I think about 40 to 50 people mainly from the Providence area here show up at the meeting itself they had questions with respect to why we're coming in with the general plan amendment there are some questions about why is a property plan for public facility why aren't you building parks and other things on the property itself as we explain to them that this was a Beall impre parcel itself for those who have been walking on that piece of property and walking their dogs and hiking or doing whatever that's property that was owned by the BLM today it's in private hands the city nominated this parcel allah are the this property along with the county to go through this process to encourage more development what you see here is this proposal is for strictly a residential development mainly a single-family detached homes this is going to be very similar what we have up here which as you can see this is sky canyon we have sky canyon up here which is going through development over the last several years many of you have visited sky canyon and you understand the development standards and design guidelines as part of this packet which is a zone change for the planned development we've submitted and it's in your back up you should probably have think a couple hundred pages of this document here which is known as the development standards and design guidelines it's essentially sky canyon and we've cleaned up some things that we didn't like in sky canyon to add to to give it a better better flare with respect to the development itself as you can see the property is we're adjacent to the future sheet mountain Parkway as you can see will connect into 215 down here to the south which is tropical which runs east and west in this area this is Centennial Parkway Centennial Parkway is expected to go across sheet mountain Parkway and connect to future BLM whenever that's going to go through the auction itself you have Durrell which is runs east and west we have farm Road actually Durrell will also go across sheet Mountain Parkway also into the future development of whatever is going to be planned on the other side of sheet mountain Parkway you have farm Road which is located here to the north of the property one of the general plan amendments to the master streets and highways plan is pulley itself as you can see in green that is being proposed as a linear park the good news with this is instead of having a hundred and ten or a hundred foot right-of-way going north and south which is currently the road is proposed to back up to the Providence residents here they're very excited to hear that we're going to come in and build a linear park here where what you'll have in here with respect and we've been working with staff and it's in our standards and guidelines is you're gonna have a place where you're gonna be able to bike you're gonna be able to run there's gonna be connectivity here when certain areas we're gonna have pop-out parks we're gonna have specific amenities we'll be finalizing those as we go through here so not only is this master plan community it's gonna benefit the people who are going to be moving here in the future but also it's going to be used by Providence and everybody else in the general vicinity so we'll be constructing that it's at a significant cost it costs up to I think it's about four point four four point five million dollars that will be building in this area of this park green space in here well also I have pocket parks as we go through and parks within the subdivisions itself if you're familiar with Sky Canyon you'd see in the subdivisions where they have their pocket parks and so on with respect to the open space we do have two vacations our vacation request of on the northern part and southern part we from utility purposes staff is recommending approval of the vacation itself we do have a tentative map where we call as a master tentative the map on the property to cut up some of these properties here as we get ready for development as we told the neighbors who are to the east of us here which is Providence is essentially what you have in Providence is essentially what you're gonna see out here with respect to this development UNF home prices anywhere from the low end of three hundred thousand all the way up to six hundred is six hundred and fifty thousand in that area so we're excited sky canyon in the city of las vegas has been a beautiful master plan community it's it's it's being completed a little bit quicker than we anticipated when we started which is really good news and we're looking to carry that momentum down here south along this area here as we said it's a mini master plan community or sky canyon tuesday we're looking at it in the last thing i want to mention is because all these documents your staff had to go through they've done a wonderful job and we've had numerous meetings with public works with the planning department and to be quite honest they've done a fabulous job going through all these documents here because it's pretty intense in a very short period of time to go through all the documents that they did so we do appreciate their recommendations for approval we're excited to get to step two here with respect to another development and the good news is it's all residential as i mentioned to you we don't have the apartments that are planned in this area at the highest density that we have would be duplexes which is to change a product mix itself because as you know you want to have a diversity a product diversity a product outside a single family but give us something different also which what we're looking at probably an attached project or the development as we go through so with that being said we'd ask you to approve the applications that are before you and we're here to answer any other questions that you may have Thank You mr. grown our this is notice as a public hearing any from anybody from the public wish to be heard please come forward and state your name for the record my name is Gary Ellsworth I lived Haymarket just east of the property that's proposed and I'm actually surprised to hear that there was a meeting local each away master HOA that I pay my dues to well I didn't sing one card from them but however and jokingly I go out and I just moved here last year I just bought the house in August I asked all the Realtors everybody else what's going behind that nothing you sure yes they'll never be anything near that there's a retention pond back there they're not building there thank you for that but I've been around a long time as a matter of fact my father used to be the chairman of the Zoning Board so I respect what you people do god bless you all because it's never easy you have two sides to everything all I would ask and look I know about progress I love it I happened to be one of the last ones in the development so I get that beautiful view of the mountains every morning that's why I bought the house what is progress I know things have to happen things are gonna change all I would ask and with all due respect to the gentleman he said it thank you for being so fast and quick about this things have changed rapidly I can't find one neighbor and I'm out there talking everybody I got a big sorry but in any case I go out there and I wanted to meet my neighbors I like to know who I live with I'm old school I like neighborhood I like everybody helping each other I can't find one person that knew what was going on back there nobody was told this happened quickly and I'm online I go on then on the next store app for Providence and everybody's like well what do you mean we were told nothing what happened out there which is the general consensus and people have sent in postcards and all that stuff all I would I'd like to ask today is can we have an abeyance of 30 days I would love to meet with this gentleman and have another meeting I don't know and in order to be fair I like the proposal of putting that buffer between us and not having a road there I think that's that's good I mean obviously they do want to work with the homeowners I just wish there was a bigger chance for the homeowners to get have a meeting and send something out to where I talked to people with the postcard and they thought it was an advertisement for you know don't talk or something they were just kind of ditch it I need to get you to wrap it up yes sir so I would just ask we don't know a lot of what's going on we haven't seen any plans I would just ask for 30 days I would love to set up a meeting with them and get some neighbors and meet within a week or two and then come back to you next month and say okay here's give us a chance to see what else they have and what else the neighbors have to say about the property thank you I respect your time thank you appreciate it does anybody else from the public wish to be heard on this these agenda items seeing none come on up sir and just state your name for the record I'll give you a minute please set the clock at a minute hi Jeffrey Hoover and I live in in the area that we're speaking about in the Franklin Park area matter of fact my back wall is can I get you to stay any more time I missed it oh I'm sorry Jeffrey Hoover and I'm the Franklin Park area that we back up against pulley Road there it's the back wall of my residence we bought about three and a half years ago and I just want a second what the gentleman just said we didn't know anything about this I found out about it through the he Town Hall website thing that went out when I moved in three and a half years ago when we had the house built we asked the same questions what's gonna be back there and we were told because of the water retention basin yeah nothing that's BLM land it's nothing to worry about no it's our retirement home great view nice place after coming out of the military trying to get the something settled and then this surprise came up and I only heard about it last week and the lady that did post it on the the website did say that they had a meeting but we were not yeah most of us were never notified and ever had anything to mail so I would like to be able to have some input into it if possible okay thank you very much for your comments I appreciate him thank you thank you for coming tonight okay seeing none nobody else I'll close the public hearing and turn it back over to mr. gros now for your rebuttal yes Thank You mr. chairman again Bob grown our couple comments understand the two gentleman's concerns we not only had one neighborhood meeting that was mandatory and I mentioned we had about 40 or 50 people in in attendance and I believe it's in your back up but when we told the neighbors we did two things we took names and email addresses and contact information and we told them we're gonna have another neighborhood meeting we told them when we were gonna hold the matter from 30 days ago in the second neighborhood meeting that we had we had maybe less than ten people I believe that ended up showing up to a neighborhood meeting so we have no problem between Planning Commission and City Council meeting with the individuals here in any other neighbors that they do have but for the record we did go through that process of the neighborhood meeting and I apologize the guy if that mentioned he lives right adjacent Napali but we've worked as you know with the city with the mail labels and sending out the postcards and all that information so if anything we'd like to move forward we believe we've made a lot of advance work and I would believe that if we really had a significant opposition the 50 people that were at that first neighborhood meeting would be down here tonight itself with respect to the concerns well comfortable we'll be able to address some of the issues that the gentlemen have because those are the same issues that we address to the neighbors over the last two neighborhood meetings that we've had thank you okay if not this is my area so I'll take it over no I know yes there was at least 1,800 cards that went out this is in my area this is my ward I know extensive group of work went in but the only thing that I had a question on so far was on the linear park is that gonna be actually 100 foot wide is that gonna take up that bad hundred foot right away it's gonna be approximately 110 feet and then there's some areas that we'll have to have access in from the pulley street into the subdivision as I'm showing you on the overhead here like where the arrow is but where you see the green itself and I believe it's over it's it's it's a little over approximately 15 acres of park space go on the linear trail itself so it will be programmed I actually can show you here so in our second neighborhood meeting some of the things that we did is starting on farm we we had drawings of the park itself so you can see actually you have ingress coming off a farm we have a little Turner roundabout and located in this area we have some many's that are planned in a park aeri here then you come down on the street itself matching to the next matching line here and I could go all the way through for the linear park but this gives you the gist of what you're looking at what we're planning to propose within the park itself I was familiar with that I don't want you to have to great detail I just wasn't sure what the width was but you said it's about a hundred and ten yeah that's 110 buffer from insisting I mean I definitely would want that buffer instead of a street like I said I looked at this and went over it and had a meeting with you over it I believe that it is a good plan I think you definitely did your due diligence by the two neighborhood meetings like you said the first one was like forty or fifty and the second one was like ten people there I think this is a good project I'd like the difference in uses and a another question I had to which I meant to ask you when I spoke with you is what backs up to the freeway there would that be more density as far as maybe talking about the mix your two stories that you were talking about would that go closer to the freeway as a sound buffer what we're gonna do is because there so there are some topography issues there with sheep mountain Parkway so we're gonna have some walls up there acting as sound walls in then it will be actually you're gonna have you know single two-story single-family detached homes I don't know exactly looking from the existing homes that are existing what the line of sight is but it's a few hundred feet away from where the mountain Parkway is if anything this property is going to act as a buffer to Providence with respect to having a major arterial that's gonna be on the west side of us okay and and just to answer Jeff and Carrie it's it's a shame that if the real estate agents you know told you that nothing's going to go there unfortunately it's BLM they put it up for sale somebody jumped on it and bought it you know for them to make promises like that shame on them because they really they don't know they have no control over that and I'm sure they'll say say whatever they got to say to sell something but we got we have no control of us no Sarah sit down we have no control over that all we could do is you know take what is sold to a developer and try to build the best product that we can to be harmonious paddle to the surrounding area and I think by what they they presented here and what they've been working on with listening to the to neighborhood meetings and like mr. Cronauer said if if if it had not happened that way I'm sure there would have been you know probably 40 50 people down here to protest it so I'm sure those concerns were met I think it's a great product and that's why I'm gonna make a recommendation for approval unless I have any other comments for my fellow commissioners not seeing any I would make a motion to approve item number 29 GPA 7 8 340 and that motion passes motion to approve GPA 783 49 and that motion passes item number 31 abeyance Reno Reno notification GPA 7 8 0 3 3 motion to approve and that motion passes item number 32 zo n 7 8 241 what's that motion to approve yes and that motion passes item number 33 V AC 78242 motion to approve and mr. chairman if I might just interject on item 34 I have a condition change or a typo to fix in item 34 okay fair enough it would be a motion for approval ago that motion carries an item number 34 TMP 7 8 365 motion to approve we just want to replace the word space and condition number 16 with spare they're providing us to spare streetlights on items condition number 16 I don't mostly to approve with the conditions has read into the record and that motion carries Thank You mr. chairman those items will move forward to City Council we heard as a part of their agenda on April 15th 2020 thank you okay moving on to related items number 37 through 40 abeyance var seven eight zero to two applicant DR Horton only United States of America for possible action a request for a variance to allow dead-end stub streets terminations where cul-de-sacs are required for public streets on the north side of Hickman Avenue and west of cliff shadows Parkway Ward for staff recommends denial item number 38 bans var 78023 for a possible action or request for a variance to allow a 16-foot tall retaining wall where six feet is the max Heights allowed what for staff recommends denial item number 34 abeyance SDR seven eight zero two four four the possible action on a request for a site development plan review for a proposed seventy nine lot single-family residential development Ward 4 staff recommends denial and item number forty abeyance TMP seven eight zero two five four the possible action or request for a tentative map 479 lot single-family residential subdivision and ward four staff recommends and now staff report please mr. chairman no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance has been presented and that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by proposing a residential subdivision that does not meet the minimum title 19 and lone mountain west development standards staff therefore recommends denial of all all applications please note the applicant proposes the following added conditions for items number 39 and 40 add conditions of approval to SDR seven eight zero two for the approval for the proposed subdivision shall be a total shall be for a total of 77 Lots the applicant shall submit a revised site plan depicting the combining of lot number 42 and lot number 43 into one lot and lot number 59 and lot number 60 into one lot added conditions of approval to TMP seven eight zero to five the approval for the proposed subdivision shall be for a total of 77 Lots the applicant shall submit a revised tentative map depicting the common the combining of lot number 42 and lot number 43 into one lot and lot 59 and lot number 60 into one lot thank you thank you mr. gros now boy Thank You mr. chairman commissioners again Bob drone our 1980 Festival Plaza Drive in these matters and representing DR Horton just enjoy your memory with respect to these applications about a month ago one of my colleagues Liz Olson was representing the our horton actually might have been in two meetings ago where we came in with a GPA from open land some medium residential we had a zone change from open land to plan development and we had a major modification to take put this property in the lone mountain master plan those applications were approved by you and subsequently they were just approved last Wednesday by the City Council we held the applications that are before you today and the reason is is use this you know there's significant topography and great issues on this property here that you can see in the square box so what we did is since the last time we saw you as we looked at our grading plans again we mentioned there's some water pressure issues out in this area where they'll work with the Las Vegas Valley Water District and so in essence what we're gonna do is we're going to take the current site down 20 feet okay we're going to take that and take out the 20 you know 20 feet on the property itself and actually on the side note we're moving it over to and into 15 where there's some low spots over there and so we'll be as the air horton's building at and into 15 they'll be moving all that dirt over there so in a way it kind of worked out is where they're short on dirt on one site and found out that they could take this down by 20 feet so you can meet the water pressure issues and address the issues that were addressed at the first neighborhood meeting with the neighbors with respect to a block wall itself that's where we get to the variance with respect to the wall height we're asking so it's to be it's 16 feet but because we've lowered the property itself from the grading standpoint now what the neighbors will see is a what we've done is we moved the block wall about five feet away from their property and what they'll see from their side is about another foot high of block wall when it's all said and done we have an exhibit to illustrate this is from one of the backyards with respect to one of the neighbors you can see currently where that block wall is so essentially we'd be five feet further back and then about a foot above the current block wall that they have on their property line we feel by making those changes with respect to what we're initially proposing where the wall would have been much higher the univers een that this is definitely a significant betterment for the neighbors in this area and it makes it easier for us to with respect to development purposes we've we've asked to reduce two Lots we worked with your staff as late as this afternoon both Eric and Peter want to thank them very much there are some added conditions if you're looking to approve the application that we would be knocked down to 77 Lots instead of 79 we'd be combining two lots and the lot numbers I think are they'll call out on the act on the action itself so we'd ask you to approve the application with respect to those changes on the last on the last two applications for the conditions that are gonna be drafted we did have a second neighborhood meeting with respect to the grading issues itself that Liz had we had a couple people I think two couples showed up to the neighborhood meeting that lived somewhere actually down in this area here but we believe that by the changes that we've made over the last thirty to sixty days that it's for the benefit of everybody in this area especially when you're dealing with the topography issues that we started out with all right thank you this is notice there's a public hearing anybody from the public wish to be heard on this item seeing none I'll close the public hearing and turn it over to Commission commissioner to son hi mr. growl growl now hurry up I met with mr. growl now or the other day and we discussed this project and I think this is a really great project it is compatible for this area when it comes to the stub streets we've approved stub streets before and I don't see how we could deny this since we've approved it in other locations so I think we really need to be consistent when it comes to that area and as far as the wall goes I believe that the water pressure issue has been taken care of and the wall issue is a non-issue at this point in time so I believe that these the problems or the issues that people in the community did have I think are set set now they're there at rest and I would like to make motions to approve if I may on item number 37 var seven eight six zero two two motion to approve you've heard the motion please cast your vote and that motion carries item number 38 var 78023 motion to approve for the motion please cast your vote and then motion carries item number 30 are 38s dr 7 8 0 2 4 moves to approve with conditions 39 you mean the motion please cast your vote with the written but the conditions written to the records and you accept those yes yes I do I want to make sure that the conditions are applicable to this okay and item number 40 TMP 78 0 2 5 motion to approve with conditions ok 39 passes and 40 is with the conditions as well motion proofing okay you've heard the motion please cast your vote and you accept that it's grown out yes yes sorry and that motion carries thank you very much have a good night and I'll see you in April Thank You mr. chairman those items are final action this evening on items 37 through 39 their final action unless appeal to the City Clerk's office within 10 days on item 40 its final action this evening unless appealed within seven days okay moving on item number 41 abeyance GPA 7 7 8 9 1 applicant for companies on our MLK carry LLC for the possible action on a request for a general plan amendment from mixed use to service commercial at 236 0 North Martin Luther King Boulevard Ward 5 staff recommends approval staff report please mr. chairman the proposed general plan designation aligns with the existing c1 limited commercial zoning district and it's harmonious and compatible with the surrounding parcels staff therefore recommends approval thank you thank you please state your name for the record good evening mr. chairman fellow commissioners for the record john curran 985 white drive here on behalf of the applicant to briefly describe this the middle and answer any questions you may have this general plan amendment before you is to reclassify the westernmost parcel of this project site at Martin Luther King and Carey reclassify it from mxu to SC all the parcels would remain c1 and with that consolidation we'd be able to consolidate all those parcels into one and make this site more developable the project site has remained vacant for over two decades so we believe this general plan amendment would again improve the develop ability of this site we did withdraw the related site development of view and variance but we request that you follow staffs recommendation for approval on this general plan amendment with that I'm happy to answer any questions thank you sir this is notices public hearing anybody from the public wish to be heard seeing none I'll close the public hearing turn it over to Commissioner Commissioner Williams Thank You mr. chair and in alignment with staffs recommendation we believe that this is compatible to the area and so I'd like to make a motion to follow staffs recommendation for approval on item GPA 7 7 8 9 1 you've heard the motion for approval please cast your vote and that motion carries thank you mr. chairman that item will go forward to City Council we heard as part of their agenda on April 15 2021 on to item number 44 vans var 781 33 applicant ulna Bruce and Lori Werner for possible action and request for a variance to allow an existing single-family dwelling addition carport with zero foot corners side yard setback with fit we're 15 feet is required in a six foot tall front yard fence we're five feet is allowed at 46 13 del Monte Avenue Ward 1 staff recommends the now staff report please mr. chairman a variance var for 384 or was approved by the City Council on August 4th 2004 to allow 0 foot corner side setback we're 15 feet is required for proposed addition however the entitlement was expunged as a building permit was never pulled further submitted justification letter the applicant states that they were unaware that a building permit was required for the approval of their original variance entitlement as no evidence of Anik or extraordinary circumstance has been provided staff recommends denial of the requested variance thank you thank you please state your name for the record Bruce Warner at 4613 Dante okay if you'd like to explain the application please mr. chairman mr. Warner was here last time correct answer proposals so it's up to you I think I think we're ready to make a proposal though just yeah I just wanted to be done okay well it's a public hearing anybody from public we should be heard seeing none thank you Thank You mr. chairman mr. Warner thank you for meeting with me I gave me great insight into the project and into what you do in that carport this is not something that I would normally say this is we should approve this but I think last time I mentioned given the fact that Planning Commission in 2004 and City Council in 2004 approved this and but for your negligence and going to get a building permit we wouldn't be here today and I want to be consistent with what was done back in 2004 and approved this but there are conditions attached to this mr. Warner if we do approve this you understand that you have to comply with those conditions so yes yes all right you understand you have to go through permitting okay good and you understand that there is the issue of that around the light pole if there were light pole you're gonna have to move your you understand all of those things I already got somebody guys somebody lined up to redo the fence all right so you're not gonna be back here again if I am you guys can shoot me well if I get 600 pounds my wife can do the same okay all right well unless there's any further comment from my fellow commissioners I'd moved to approve etherion seven eight one three three three three mr. chair - the motion maker if I may make a quick comment I would I could get behind this if you could amend condition number two that says all necessary building permits shall be obtained in final inspections completed in total in compliance with title 19 in all codes that's required by the Department of Buildings safety within 180 days or something so because he possibly could forget another six months so we want to make sure we have a time frame I got somebody else mr. Warner I'm okay with that his staff okay with the 180 day timeline okay then I would make a motion to approve I am 44 abeyance variance seven eight one three three subject to conditions as amended to allow for 180 days to obtain the building permits and all final inspection is completed and the applicant was okay with that yes go get it right now you've heard the motion please cast your vote mr. just one one thing we had 180 days on condition two on condition 5 we have 30 days I mean to move that into a days as well I just want to make note that it says 30 days unconditioned 5 and I want to be clear so those are kind of two separate things one is to remove the block wall that is impeding access to the streetlight that easily is achievable in less than 30 days the permits and final inspections 180 days is a reasonable time for existing construction for that to be accomplished if as the applicant says he has everything ready to go yeah it's not it's a fence whatever it is further motion please cast your vote and that motion passes then you're a fast talker I gotta say and mr. chairman so this item is final action tonight and let's appeal to the City Clerk's office within 10 days which means after 10 days you will be eligible to pull those permits and based on that timeline I would encourage the applicant to have those submitted and ready for review so at least 10 days to pull the permit you can submit tomorrow but you can't get the permit pulled until after the 10 day period for appeal has a letter from you guys that says I'm good to go on the permit you'll get an action letter they'll mail that out probably tomorrow afternoon or Thursday morning when you get that you can include that with your information but again you can go to building a safety now and file for your permits you just will not be able to get them issued to you for 10 days so then so they'll know when to issue them that correct the planning on there and I paid the fees and that they would I just have to wait yeah for them for the 10-day period for us to be able to approve it okay but I can start getting the guy didn't move the fence and tomorrow all right just take it to the side there so let me get this going all right item number 45 bands roc 78043 applicant wal-mart Stores Inc oh that was a baby okay that's right okay item number 46 var 7 8 2 2 9 Apogee no no Michael and Ruby quell snare for a possible action on request for a variance to allow an existing at secretary structure class to carport that is not aesthetically comparable to the principal dwelling to allow a 2 foot separation from the main building where 6 feet is required a 0 foot side yard setback where 3 feet is required to be located in front of the principal dwelling unit where such is not allowed to exceed the height of the principal dwelling unit where such is not allowed and to allow an 11 foot rear yard setback where 15 feet is required for an existing for excuse me were required for an existing addition to a single-family dwelling at 7 1 7 South Mallard Street Ward 1 staff recommends denial staff report mr. chairman no substantial evidence has been presented to warrant the requested variants staff finds that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by developing the site without complying with title 19 development standards therefore staff recommends denial of this request please note that there are additional letters of support and protest since publication thank you thank you please state your name for the record Michael Kelsch from seven-one-seven south Mallard Street would you like to elaborate on your application just want to get it solved before I can pull any type of building permits to correct the issues there I need this variance has what I've been told by the city staff people and that's what I'm doing I'm trying to apply for the variance and once that is approved or denied will be you know follow whatever it needs to be done later I know no see I'm I'm Way out of my element here of all you professional people it's just that it's created a tremendous amount of stress in our family and we need to fix it and that's why I'm here to try to fix the issues that I created years ago okay appreciate that this is notice as a public hearing anybody from the public ocean you heard on this agenda item please come forward state your name for the record good evening honorable commissioners mr. chairperson mr. director mr. Scott my name is Gerry bengi I reside at 700 South Mallard Street just two houses down across the street I appear tonight on my behalf also on behalf of my mother Sandra Bunge who also resides at 700 South 9th Street she is homebound so she could not be here I also appear on behalf of Mary Kozlowski of 709 South Mallard two houses down from mr. Hill CH she has MS and does not function this time of night so she couldn't be here finally I'm here on behalf of Byron Belle Isle of 704 south knowledge Street who could not be here because he's sick and unless he wanted to get sick we thought it best he stay home all of us and the other neighbors I've talked to have no objection at this carport we are glad to have people investing in our neighbourhood we instead have a problem of people who do not invest in their homes the carport he's put up while maybe not traditional we actually rather like it unlike the pictures it actually appears very light it's simple metal it frames the garage beautifully and it's so high that it's almost Cathedral like it's in addition to the street we all think it should be there and this is a case where variances are appropriate yes I admire what the staff has looked at they're right it doesn't meet exactly but this is where a variation is right it's better for the neighborhood the neighbors approve and I'll request that you grant the variances thank you thank you this is notice as public hearing anybody else we should be heard on this item see you none I'll close public hearing if you want to come back up further comments that you would like me just one other comment I've made is I did accountable drive around in the neighborhood and there's four other car ports that are not built unit too closely to the standard that I have right now and there's actually almost attaching to the homes and where mine is not the big difference is the height okay I understand it's a lot higher some people don't like it particularly the people that brought this whole thing to your attention or to the city's attention but I'm just trying to be a good neighbor it's all I've ever tried to do since I've lived there for the last 14 years appreciate that okay at this time I'll turn it over to Commissioner Commissioner Rogan Thank You mr. chairman well I appreciate that the neighbors some neighbors are out here in support of you and it seems as though you're a great neighbor this is not a great carport this is not something that is harmonious and compatible with the neighborhood it's not something that's compliant with the rules that we have about what can be built on your property I don't think that this is something that I can support with the variance however your room addition that was enclosing a patio even though you built it without permits I'm okay with that I think uh variances hold on okay it's I think it's appropriate I think the variance is warranted with regard to that rear yard setback it's four feet it's not a lot this is a major variation this is a huge huge carport that just doesn't comport with the style of your home the size of your home and I can't support that if you're willing what I want to do tonight is move to approve the variance in so far as the enclosed patio den but I cannot support a variance for this carport and I'd be moving and I don't know what my fellow commissioners think that it'd be removed do you understand that remove you can't have this one so you'd have to go through the process of obtaining a variance and coming forward with their plans and working with staff coming before us again for that but this one I can't support and that's what's before us tonight so do any of my fellow commissioners have anything to say anybody I would have to concur with the Commissioner too as well I'm in favor of the addition but the carport is just it does not look harmonious incompatible I'm sure it's you love it cuz you get the shade and all that but it just doesn't fit that's I got a rub with that myself I mean personally I just got a rub with that myself so I couldn't support it either there's no way I can keep this part making any adjustments to it I don't know because it just doesn't fit I mean it's even baked almost as big as a house it's not bigger than the front of that house no size of the garage but yes so that's where I'm at with that anybody else mr. chairman three if I might to the motion maker so based on those comments my suggested motion would be a motion for approval of this variance limited to the portion that allows an 11 foot rear yard setback where 15 feet is required for an existing addition to the single-family dwelling with an additional condition related to a time frame for removal of the unpermitted component which would be the carport and again what is the usual time frame that you give people for a demolition is usually 90 days so you can usually get the permit to demo something and remove it within 90 days sir whatever decision is made tonight it certainly it's appealable to City Council so it's not the final option that you have just strange that I didn't use a permit to put it up but I have to get one to take it down yeah we got to make sure everything's safe so I would make a motion sir do you understand it would if your appeal to City Council doesn't go through 90 days from from that and time okay I can appeal you can appeal so it's not this is just Planning Commission if you don't like what we do you can appeal that decision to City Council so it's not the end of the road for you all right okay all right with that being said I would make a motion in conformance with what the director said insofar as the variance would be approved to allow for a 11-foot set rear yard setback but no variance for the carport with the additional condition condition five that the carport be taken down within 90 days thank you okay you've heard the motion please cast your vote and that motion carries and mr. chairman that item is final action this evening unless appeal to the City Clerk's office within 10 days sir so ten days if you wish to appeal okay item number 48 STR 78245 applicant mo construction LLC on a cv v LLC for the possible action a request for a site development plan review for a proposed 3855 square-foot commercial building with a drive through with a waiver to not orient the building to the corner where such is required and to allow a waiver of title 19 landscape buffer standards at 3801 west charleston Boulevard Ward 1 staff recommends denial staff report please mr. chairman koala commercial use is appropriate for the subject site the proposed development as designed is not compatible in harmonious with the surrounding and future land development in the area this is evidenced by the requested associated waivers regarding building orientation and landscape buffer requirements therefore staff recommends denial of the requested site development plan review please note that there are additional letters of protest since publication thank you thank you is the applicant present seeing none I don't have an applicant this is notice as a public hearing anybody wish to be heard on this item seeing none I'll turn it over to the Commissioner Commissioner Rowland well this makes it easier I didn't like this project I didn't think that it fit that that corner I didn't think the special use permit was warranted considering the waivers that were being requested and for that reason I would unless there's other comments I would move to deny SDR 78245 vote and that motion carries and mr. chairman that item will actually move forward to City Council and be heard as part of their agenda on April 15 2020 okay moving on 51 the second portion of the citizens participation public comment during this portion of the agenda must be limited to matters within the jurisdiction of the Planning Commission no subject may be acted upon by the Planning Commission unless the subject is on the agenda and scheduled for action if you wish to be heard please come to the podium give your name for the record the amount of discussion on any single subject as well as the amount of time any single speakers allowed will be limited I will now open that agenda item anybody from the public wish to be heard seeing none enjoyment