good evening we are ready to begin this planning commission meeting is called to order this meeting has been properly noticed and posted in compliance with the Open Meeting Law these proceedings are being video recorded as well as presented live on KC L V cable channel to please know customers of CenturyLink and Cox communication can view this program in high definition on channel 1002 in standard definition on channel 2 you can also watch this meeting live on Apple TV Roku n-- amazon firetv on-the-go Vegas the Planning Commission meeting as well as the other KC ovule program can be viewed on the internet at www.pedestrians of the Saturday the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Monday I midnight in the fine Tuesday at 6 p.m. would everyone please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance Madame clerk would you please call the roll yes chair cherry vice chair Gustavo present Commissioner schlattman present Commissioner Toussaint present Commissioner Williams is excused Commissioner roben present Commissioner Chadda present thank you thank you call your attention to the information printed in your agenda concerning our actions and the appeal and review process if appropriate they're our agendas on both sides of the podium for you to follow along with please read this carefully and if you have any questions staff is available also the second page of the agenda contains our rules of conduct we appreciate you hearing to these rules so we can have a smooth meeting I have number four all comments made under this item for specific action will be cross-reference to those items are there any members of the public who wish to speak speak under this portion of the agenda seems chairman commissioners Loughman yes if I could just make a quick comment public comment I just wanted to recognize my parents that are in the audience tonight Betty Ann Metz you come out from Ennis Texas and Chaney and Haley my cousins and Tom ELISA who their parents who drove out here with them so they'll be sitting in tonight so anytime you want to call Betty and Mitch up okay moving on to the final minutes Vice Chair Thank You mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion to approve the Planning Commission meetings from October 22nd 2019 thank you there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes these posts and that motion carries moving onto our housekeeping items are there any items the commissioners staff applicants for maybe the public would like to pull forward for action mr. chair we have no housekeeping items tonight thank you well that might be a first it's great alright vice-chair to Salvio at this time as well alright alright moving on to the one motion one vote the following are items that may be considered in one motion one vote they are considered routine non-public and public hearing items all public hearings and non public hearings will be opened at one time any person representing an application remember the public or a member of the Planning Commission not an agreement with the conditions and all standard conditions for the application recommended by staff should request to have the item move from this part of the agenda item number 7 VAR 7 7 4 8 8 applicant owner Terry r Helms living trusts for possible action requests for a variance to allow a 24 foot rear yard setback where 35 feet is required in the 7 foot side yard setback where 8 feet is required for an expansion of an existing detached single-family dwelling at 800 Campbell Drive Ward 1 staff recommends approval item number 8 su p 7 7 5 8 8 applicant HUD L Brewing Company owner pro view series 32 LLC for possible action request for a special use permit for proposed 5520 square foot beer wine cooler on an off sale establishment with 1,800 square feet of outdoor seating area at 13 27 South Main Street Ward 3 staff recommends approval item number 9 su p77 625 applicant on our Michelle Clark for posture and request for a special use permit for proposed 808 square foot accessory structure use at 58 61 gold Inlet Drive Ward 6 staff recommends approval item number 10 SD r 7 7 6 3 8 applicant owner quadtree LLC for possible request for a site development plan review for proposed 60 unit addition to an existing multifamily development with waivers of the perimeter landscape buff requirements at North Alexander Road east of Elk Ridge Elk Ridge Drive Ward 4 staff recommends approval and item number 11 V AC 7 7 685 applicant owner good hood LLC for posture and request for petition to vacate 20-foot white alley between Las Vegas Boulevard and sick Street south of course in Ward 3 staff recommends approval this was notice as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard in these items see no one I'll close the public hearing and I'll quickly disclose an item number eight that my company is working on a project located within the notification area it won't affect us any greater or lesser I will be voting on the project tonight yes I mr. chairman on item number eight I own an urban lounge in the arts district it's just about 20 feet outside the notification area so I'll be making disclosure on that but I have filled that I can vote on it thank you thank you thank you for the disclosure vice-chair Thank You mr. chairman at this time I'd like to entertain a motion for approval on item 7 to 11 under one motion and one vote so motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman item 7 through 10 our final action less appealed within 10 days to the city clerk and item number 11 will move forward to the City Council on the January 15 2012 art of the agenda I'm point forward items number 65 and related item 66 item 65 var 7 7 699 applicant city of Las Vegas owner Southern Nevada Housing Authority Authority for possible action request for a variance to allow 47 parking spaces where 65 are acquired at the northeast corner of Bonanza Avenue and Ward L Street Ward 3 staff recommends denial and related items 66's dr7 7700 for a possible action requesters site develop and plan review for proposed 14400 square-foot individual care center and a 3700 square foot clinic or three staff recommends denial we get the staff report please mr. chairman the proposed individual care facility and family clinic provides much needed services within this area of the city the proposed development is compatible and consistent with development in the area and is appropriate for this location however the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by not providing the required amount of on-site parking specified by title 1912 as such staff is not able to support the variance requested and recommends denial of both applications please note additional letter an additional letter of support has been received since publication thank you thank you very much get your name and address for the record please hello Sean Coulter 151 East Warm Springs Las Vegas I'm the architect for the project so let me just briefly explain the project what you're seeing on the the site plan is that the the site obviously is located at the corner of bonanza and Wardell and so so what we've done is basically the site was actually chosen because of its proximity to a lot of residential areas in the neighborhood this is going to basically be a childcare facility for 2 to 5 year olds and what we're looking at is we're looking at the variance for the parking and so let me show you the site plan No so we have Wardell on the west and bonanza on the south of the site the blue is the footprint of the building what you have is you have the school itself which will house about 200 students 2 to 5 years old and then we have the health clinic located that's part of that facility one of the things that we were looking at with the traffic flow in the area is we were going to be coming into the site off of Wardell and flowing through the site and back onto Bonanza so what we'll have is we have 47 parking spaces total where 65 is required what we have is we have 20 five is actually required for the staff for the school 20 is required for the health clinic so we have those and what we're looking at is there is also an additional 20 spaces that's required for the number of students we have 200 students and it's you know one space for every ten students so what we're looking at though is that reduction from sixty five to forty seven because we have a good opportunity to have on street parking along Wardell and then also the flow of traffic through the site we've we've tried to make this as kind of as easy as possible for people the other thing with this project is because it's conveniently located within this housing area is that a lot of the students we see coming from there's going to be a new apartment complex just to the north basically located on the north property line of art our site a lot of students will be coming from that area and we also see talking with the the user group that they see a lot of parents walking their kids to school they're not sure exactly how many but that's the idea and then also we've set it up kind of going back to the site plan you can see the blue that our sites obviously in red the blue is on street parking along Wardell on both sides of the street so we could see if there's any overflow potential for that and pick up pick up and drop off times they could be parked along Wardell if needed but the idea is that the traffic flows from Wardell through the site back onto Bonanza and analysis you also see that there's potential parking along Wardell on the other side of Bonanza and there is actually a signaled crosswalk that's highlighted in yellow that was put in a while back actually and so that's how we would see the students coming to the to the property see we thank you we also have five drop-off spaces right in front of the building so so we have the 47 spaces plus the five so we're at what's at 52 total spaces potentially but you can and the other thing too is that we we do allow you know like I say we have the parking for the health clinic located along the east property line and in most of the parking for the the staff along the north and so we you can see that you know because of the size of the site we want to make sure that we we made the site as efficient as possible because this neighborhood really needs this type of project and so by developing the site in this way we feel that this is probably the best solution that we could come up with and it's actually maximizing the the site the square footage that's needed for the school as well as the the amount of parking that we can squeeze on there thank you very much this was noticed as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard on this item seeing no one I will close the public hearing turned over to the Commission for disco yes mr. chairman a few questions for the applicant through you when I was reading this particular Adam I was a little bit confused and I'm glad to be able to hear you tonight but could you talk a little bit more about the project so this is a school for what what age yeah this is a school for pre-k so it's two years old to five years old okay and then how how does the clinic incorporate into this site well I don't see how the two go together not they were I just need to wrap my head around that so one of the things working with the the user group is that they wanted to integrate this in this facility the health clinic facility into the project because they see that there's a definite need in the neighborhood for a health clinic and the idea is that the students here and the students families will become first to get help here at that clinic and then it's also opened up to the neighborhood as well but this is yeah it's all it's all based on low-income families and so there's a couple of a couple other facilities like this throughout the valley to others or three others is that correct believe there's three other locations right there's one on alte one in the park lorenzi Park I'm not sure where the third one's out and how do is this is this public or probably funded with the city of Las Vegas this is funded with of bonds okay and some CDBG funds okay thank you and can you tell me how the other other facilities operating in town are they in similar income groups I is there an abundance of parking do you see a need for more parking what do you see in the other facilities that that are already existent so one of the facilities located on Alta it's actually just a school and it's about the same size in terms of the number of students there's about 200 students there they actually have 27 parking spaces there mr. Alton what I'm sorry to and what what's the cross street okay okay yeah and so they they don't have a health clinic but it's just a school but they have I think 27 spaces there and they somehow make it work I'm not sure but they do okay well it sounds like a great project and you know I I think with the comments about the Wardell street and having parking along Wardell I think it works I think it actually works in this neighborhood fairly well as people probably will be walking to to the score to the clinic it's an interesting concept I have I haven't seen the others and but I had hard time wrapping my head around the school and the clinic all in one but yeah I think I could support this okay there's no other comments I'd like to make a motion mr. chairman on item number 65 var seven seven six nine nine I moved to approve a subject to staff's conditions based on testimony heard tonight thank you please cast your votes please post and that motion carries and then mr. shermin on related item 66 STR seven seven seven zero zero moved to approve subject to staff's conditions thank you as a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman those items are final action unless appeals to the city clerk within ten days thank you Thanks and go to item number 69 and directors business txt 77845 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for PHA special request to amend LVM C title 19 116 aber hood meeting requirements 19 1 802 Awards in words and terms to find regarding the definition of open space and to provide for other related matters staff has no recommendation we get staff for please mr. chairman this amendment adds general language to clarify the purpose of a neighborhood meeting when a meeting is required and what public notification is required it adds a requirement for a neighborhood meeting when certain golf courses and/or open spaces are repurposed for other uses and it revises and clarifies the definition of open space staff has no recommendation for this amendment thank you thank you so notice as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard in this item so you know we'll close the public hearing go to the Commission vice-chair its chairman if there's no other comments I'd like to make a motion for approval of item number 69 okay there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman that item will move forward to City Council and ordinance forum thank you thank you going to related items 12 through 14 number 12 abeyance var 7-6 939 apathy owner land Capital Partners LLC for poss Western request for variance to allow 23 parking spaces where 29 spaces are required at the southwest corner of Charleston Boulevard and hillside place Ward 3 staff recommends denial related item abeyance var seven six nine four zero four posturing requests for a variance to allow 90-foot residential adjacency setback from the South property line where a hundred and thirty eight feet is required Ward 3 staff recommends denial and related item abeyance sdrs seven six nine four one four pause fashion request for site development plan review for proposed 5031 square foot commercial shell building with waivers of the perimeter landscape buffer standards ward three staff recommends denial Queen at the staff court please mr. chairman while the proposed development is in close proximity to the founders district and supports the goal the founders district it is not part of the district and subject to the development standards set forth by title 1908 the applicant is proposing to over develop the subject site as evidenced by the requested variances waivers and exception therefore staff has recommended denial of all applications thank you thank you very much chant your name in address record please Brian a go from green tunnel architecture group three zero four seven East Warm Springs Las Vegas Nevada eight nine one two zero we've been notified this weekend that the owners are have directed us to request a hold it possible for another 30 days so that we can go through a couple internal issues with the site tell me the reason again I couldn't hear they didn't really clarify exactly why I have a feeling it's inside of their company directives okay so the request is for an abeyance commissioner Schladming mr. chair chairman if we do hold this in advance I would encourage the architect to work with owners I read through this out of my remember seeing this item previously there's certain things on here which I think you can easily get around such as there's four trees where six is required in the eastern border you actually have five one of them's on-site so it doesn't get counted but I think he could easily put those two trees in get rid of that waiver and I think you could add one more tree up front and then we've seen something like this in past so I altogether I don't think this is a bad project it's what we need down there but I encourage you just work with them to try getting rid of some of those waivers yeah no I'll set up another meeting with staff thank you would this be the second abeyance yes this would be the second abeyance if it's approved okay this was notice of public hearing and for the public like to be hardness seeing no one will close the public hearing and commissioners lobby yes mr. chairman I would okay so seein as how we hold items for 30 days and the second meeting in December is going to be vacated we're gonna be holding this too until the second Tuesday of January which would be January 14th Planning Commission hearing okay so with that being said I would go ahead and make a motion on twelve thirteen and fourteen to hold those items to the January 14th 2020 Planning Commission hearing okay there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries thank you Thanks moving on to related items 15 through 19 item 15 0 & 7 767 applicant owner cm sagebrush 1 3 0 8 2 LLC for possible request for rezoning from you to c1 at the southwest corner of Kyle Canyon Drive and also Blanco Drive Ward 6 staff recommends approval related item 16 su p77 6 to 8 for possum and request for a special use permit for a 5100 square-foot liquor establishment used Ward 6 staff recommends denial related item number 17 s u P seven seven six two nine four pause fashion request for a special use permit for proposed 3,000 square-foot ear wine cooler off sale establishment use Ward six staff recommends denial related number item number 18 SDR 77630 for poss action request for a site development plan review for proposed commercial development consisting of three thousand square feet restaurant with drive-through a 3,000 square foot convenience store with fuel pumps in canopy a 5,500 square foot liquor establishment tavern with waivers of the perimeter landscape buffer requirements and to not orient the building towards the corners and street frontage where such as required ward 6 staff recommends denial and related item number 19 TMP 776 31 for possible action request rotated a map for 1 lakh commercial subdivision Ward 6 staff recommends approval can we get staff for please mr. chairman the proposed rezoning aligns with the existing general plan land use designation and staff recommends approval of the rezoning the proposed one light commercial subdivision meets the minimum requirements for a tentative map and staff recommends approval of the total amount however the applicant has provided no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance to support the requested waivers staff therefore recommends denial as a site development plan review and associate especially use permits thank you thank you can enter name and addresses record please thank you chairman members of the Commission Bryan Hardy with the law firm of Markey arbok coughing on behalf of the applicant address number 10,000 1 Parker and drive a one nine eight nine one four five this application comes before you it's a it's an application that's really suited for this particular area we believe it's prudent to be able to put that here we've discussed with the fact that the plan and the city really desires in order to change our landscape plan just slightly by moving it from 24 inch box trees to 36 inch box trees we've accepted that we're willing to do that in order to make sure that we have more mature landscaping here on behalf of the the application to make sure that this place develops exactly the way the city wants it to we've been a good city partner we continue to want to do so in fact this is an application that we're excited to tell you that we're ready to build we have leases in place we have everything ready to go this is not going to be an application where this land is gonna sit for any period of time we're ready to develop ready to go now and so we look for your approval on this matter thank you thank you very much this is notice as a public hearing anything from the public like to be heard in this scene no one I'll close the public hearing and go to Vice Chair Thank You mr. chairman yep I have worked with Brian on this and in the Mayor Pro Tem and this is a good project like he said he's ready to move he's got lease agreements he agreed to 36 inch box trees which I believe is like over a hundred trees for that property at 2 acres so unless there's any other comments to entertain a motion to approve items number 15 0 n 7 767 okay motion on the floor please cast your votes that motion carries and just for the record here what item would you want me to attach the 18 and motion to approve item number 16 su p77 6 to 8 this motion on the floor please cast votes these posts then I motion carries thank you mr. chairman also a motion to approve item number 17 su p77 six to nine please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman they could make a motion to approve item number 18 with the conditions that they move them from 36 inch box trees to uh scuse me from 24 inch box trees to 36 inch thank you sir your chair the condition will read prior to the issuance of building permits and updated landscape plan will be submitted replacing all projected 24 inch box trees with 36 inch box trees thank you I'm Brian Kerr it's acceptable thank you okay with that said I'd like to make a motion to approve with those conditions item number 18 STR 77630 motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries and finally I'd like to make a motion to approve item number 19 TMP 776 31 please cast your votes these posts and that motion carries mr. chairman those items will move forward to the January 15 2020 city council meeting Thank You chairman vice chair members the commissioning moving on to items number twenty and twenty 120 v AR seven seven six four two applicant Dutch brothers coffee owner Decatur meadows shopping center LLC for a postural quest for advanced will have 407 parking spaces were 449 are required on the west side of Decatur Boulevard south of Meadows Lane Ward 1 staff recommends denial related item 21 SDR 7 7 6 4 3 4 pause watching requests for site development plan review for a proposed 865 square foot restaurant with drive-through Ward 1 staff recommends denial we get the staff board please mr. chairman the applicant has provided no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance to support the requested variance staff therefore reckon Anala both applications please note that their additional letters of protest and support since publication thank you thank you hi Paul Debbie 13:30 Olympic Boulevard Santa Monica California nine zero four zero four on the architect for Dutch bros coffee think the Planning Commission foreseen us and having us on the agenda tonight staff mentioned its applications for 862 square foot Dutch brothers Dutch bros coffee stand with double drive-thru stack holding 17 cars in the stack where six is only required we are seeking a parking variance to allow for a nine percent reduction across the entire centre as you can see here across the entire centre and meadows Lane at Decatur Boulevard other than the parking variance that we are seeking we're in agreement with we're in compliance with all other aspects of the development code as staff has acknowledged and are in agreement with all the rest of the conditions that they've proposed if you have any questions I'm here and we have also damn baby with director of development for best for us great thank you this is known as a public hearing and from the public like to be heard in this item see no one we will close the public hearing and I'll go to Commissioner Logan Thank You mr. chair I've gone out to this property and I've met with the applicant and I think that this is an appropriate variance request I think that generally this property is a little bit rundown and the parking lot on the multiple times that I visited it never even came close to being full also this is intended to be a drive through not so much a sit in coffee shop so I don't think that it's necessarily going to drive significant EPIK that would be utilizing the parking lot rather than the drive-through which as was said by the applicant holds 17 cars so unless there's any other comment I would make a motion to approve item 20 VAR 7 7 6 4 2 subject any conditions Thank You missioner is a motion on the floor please cast your votes please posts that motion carries and also I'd make a motion to approve item 21 STR 7 7 6 4 3 subject to any staff conditions thank you as a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman those items will move forward to see Council on the January 15 2020 meeting thank you very much thank you okay moving on to related items 22 through fifty nine items 22 through 56 we are seven seven six four five through var seven seven six seven nine thanks applicant Olympia companies owner up growth envy Partners LLC for posture requests from multiple variances to allow a 50-foot lot width where 60 feet is required and lot sizes ranging from six thousand fifty to six thousand 165 square feet where 6500 square feet is required on Lots 101 40 through 149 and Lots 151 through 175 were proposed 218 lot single-family residential subdivision on the northeast side of Clark County 215 generally bounded by an Road Hualapai Road Washburn Road in Clark County 215 Ward 6 staff recommends denial and we have related item 57 var 776 8:04 possible action request for variance to allow a 1.11 connectivity ratio or 1.3 is required a non standard street designed for by were adherence to title 1904 is required 32 foot wide public streets with no amenities zones in miquellee crest way and Egan crest Way Drive were 60 feet 60 foot Complete Streets are required dead-end stub Street terminations where cul-de-sacs were hammer hammer heads are required and private streets with no sidewalks with a gated community were 33 feet wide 33 foot wide streets with sidewalks on one side is required for proposed 218 lost single-family residential subdivision Ward 6 staff recommends denial related item 58 var 7 7 6 a 1 for pasta fetch request for vans 2 allowed no external street lights on wall pipe the Kelly quest lay Alpine Ridgeway in Eagan crest drive were such a required Ward 6 staff recommends denial and related item 59 TMP 7 7 6 8 2 4 posture request for tentative map for a 218 lost single-family residential subdivision Ward 6 staff recommends denial Cugat staff for 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 to over develop decides by providing lot sizes and widths that do not adhere to the minimum requirements of title 1906 for the r1 zoning district in addition the applicant has proposed public and private street sections I do not provide complete Street elements such as amenities zones streetlights and sidewalks staff therefore recommends denial of all applications please note that there are additional letters of protest since publication thank you thank you your name and address please Thank You mr. chairman commissioners good evening my name is Bob grown our 1980 Festival Plaza Drive I'm here representing the property owner which is Olympia companies which is under one of their entities known as up growth and I'm also here representing the applicant which is DR Horton which is going to be the Builder for this development if I could get your attention to the overhead we do have a very unique circumstance with this piece of property as you can see as it's highlighted in yellow the 30 of something applications that are before you are located this is the Beltway itself that bisects the property itself so the first 30-some applications are before your on this piece of property and the 85 acres and then later on on about 11 acres I'll be talking about on the west side of 215 some of you were here over the last two years others weren't here over the last two years to understand the inner local agreement the battles and discussions that we've had with the neighbors out here Councilwoman Mayor Pro Tem Fiore asks us to make sure we worked with the county on this issue and there's a reason why a lot of the variances that you see today and I'll get into it is the reason why we have these variances because essentially we've been working with the county county commissioner Larry Brown sue Baker the liaison for our Commissioner Brown in the neighbors about a year ago or so or several months ago we came up with and approved site plan that essentially on this 80 something acres we had a certain amount of half acre Lots we had certain amount of our D Lots and our one Lots the problem is is that you run into the reason why you have these variances initially in the city of Las Vegas half acre Lots who were required to have 20,000 square foot Lots in Clark County it's eighteen thousand so when we're cutting the deal and the understanding with respect to the half acre lots we were based on the eighteen thousand which is the county standard because that's who we were dealing with with the county residents that being said since we submitted the applications the city adopted a new text amendment in that ordinance allows for eighteen thousand square foot Lots which therefore know that we no longer need those additional variances for the half acre development a matter of fact I'll show you on the landscape plan so on the landscape plan here this is an Road which runs east and west we have Hualapai and we have the this is part of the Beltway or this is adjacent to the Beltway 215 so in this area is he half acre lots and I'm showing you that we agreed to to build on the property itself the next area is the Rd Lots which actually does conform with respect to the county code in the city code with respect to the Rd lots that are located here the r1 Lots that I have here the city code in the county code are and they have two different requirements in the county when you're dealing with r1 you have lots that are up to 5200 square feet in the city of Las Vegas you have lots that are minimum 6500 square feet with a minimum 60 foot wide width because of that and because of as I said which is similar to the agreement that we had on the half acre lots same same analysis goes here with respect to working with the county working with the county standards although this this is a city property here we agreed to the it is a city property yes it is a city property but as we were talking as I said it's why here exactly and but the point is is for Commissioner and Larry Brown because is very important because he's been in the northwest for probably 12 16 years as a representative here and mayor pro-tem made it a point that we had to work with the county and work all these issues out so that being said the are one that you have there is is the reason why we have those differences between the r1 in the city and the county and then in addition now that you have DR Horton in as a true developer they move certain product type around here because when you're dealing on 80 something acres you can't have just one type of product segmentation you need multiple product segmentation because of that we have some larger homes on some of these lot sizes itself so a majority of the variances that you see in as you can see here in the yellow and the yellow itself is we have 50 foot wide lots or 60 foot wide Lots are required in the pink lots that you have located here these are additional variances on top is we have reduced lot sizes that are less than 6500 square feet but a greater than 6000 square feet which which is goes along with the site plan that we showed the neighbors for the last year or so and this is substantially similar with respect to the street network it's substantially similar with to all of the requirements and the things that we've been discussing for the last two years with the neighbors that being said we would ask you to approve the application the variances that you have that are before you and I could answer any other questions that you may have with respect to the application itself and again one of the things that staff said in the beginning that we disagree with that this is a unique piece of property this is part of the inner local agreement in a subsection in the inner local agreement allowed us to do some of the lots less than half half acres because of the impacts of the Beltway and when the belt was finally completed we were able to come in and make some changes to the property itself so again this has been a very long process and hopefully now with the Oh Horton here ready to move along with the development here this could be the last time I could stand up here on the an and 215 property and you don't have to hear me go on and on on another 60 more applications thank you Thanks this is known as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard in this item please come up I'll need your name and address for the record then if your for against why I'm John Kristen ik five five six five Michelle crest away I've also been to the meetings over the last couple of years and heard the arguments for this and I heard the arguments for that I'm surprised to hear that our representative agreed to go since we are in the city to go to 18 squirt eighteen thousand square foot for a half acre a lot which is sort of ridiculous and anyway the the lots that he's talking about why why ends is not in the plan since it's an unusual lot they have something like an open space or Park why they didn't discuss that they squeezed the the the turnip to get every ounce of blood out of that property to give them a further variances I've been going to these things like I said for two years and every time there's been a change a change a change a change one other thing I really don't like is when I'm looking at Lots I don't have any indication of what lot 140 to 175 is that's 35 Lots where are they he's showin 85 acres or 87 acres it's like smoke and mirrors must be honest and forthcoming I vehemently denied it every time and I'm also denying my request or his request on these variances thank you thank you for coming out need your name and address for the record please sir my name is Marvin Rogi I live at five five eight five crest lived there since 1996 I really didn't come prepared to give you a good argument but I've really agree with your committee they have found this to be unsatisfactory on every item listed in this Bulletin of yours so you're talking about a gentleman that's building $200,000 houses or less squeezed in on little Lots and we have houses in that immediate area that are valued at 2 million and a million so that just ain't gonna be good for guys like us that have been there a long time so I'm not going to grant you I just appreciate the fact you're hearing us and believe yo should follow the recommendation of your board thank you thanks for coming out Marvin can get your name and address for the record please yeah Jason McLemore 555 Michelle e crest way I'm actually on the corner house here the and we have this you know Stephanie our Steven Street right here and I'm not sure what that's going to be I've had you know developer come out and offer me different things for that like give up my my easement rights to make that by a non public easement so I'm kind of confused on what's going on right here there's been no clarification from the developer on that because they said that this was going to be the main entrance front to the neighborhood but then they came out like you know three months ago and said if we don't do that we're gonna make this give up your easement rights and we'll just make that a private easement and there will be no road there so I don't know if that's still the story today or what if that's actually gonna be a road ok thank you Jason and yeah I guess what they're trying to plan here it's just been very smoky mirrors thank you very much anyone else from the public like to be heard seeing no one I'll close the public hearing I'll give the applicant a couple minutes for rebuttal yes so I'm gonna focus up in this area here to address the issues fairly quickly so the irony here is the lot sizes that you see here where the individuals are living and I believe that's the area where they're living is no different than the lot sizes that are here okay that's we're meeting the county requirements in the county same county standards that are in these existing forelock cul de sacs and the eight la cul de sacs they're similar in size similar meaning you have 18,000 the Plus 20,000 square foot Lots in that area so with respect to the concerns of the neighbors who have shown up in this area it's essentially like for like lots that we do have the gentleman that lives probably in one of these two houses a few months ago we had to come through as part of the city's conditions of approval we had to go back over to Clark County and ask for some vacations for County land use this is what happens when you deal with city and county properties so we ended up and I know my client said speak with the individuals here because the county commissioner asks us to made sure and liaison asks us to make sure we're working with them this area here is going to be vacated this is land that is going back to the individual owners here I believe I was not in those conversations but it's been relayed to me and when we were at the County Commission having those hearings we have lengthy discussions about this on and off the record with respect to this area and there's some other areas that are adjacent to this project where we already came in with vacation applications to address any of the concerns that we had that we had through this process so again the property here south of these properties of the existing properties will go back to those individuals with the vacation and as far as lot sizes that the three individuals have mentioned we're similar in size here if you understand as I'm pointing out these forelock cul-de-sacs are no different than what you see here from lot sizes so that being said I think I'm going to just keep it to that issue itself unless if you have any other questions I answer those questions also I guess I'll just quickly start if you don't mind what's a quick so that's a dedicated unimproved right away right now in the county correct and and that'll vacate correct and that's that's something the county can do automatically and it goes back to the homeowners or do they have to have the consent of the homeowners to vacate we've already went through the vacation process the vacation was already approved by the County Commission I want to say everything runs together but in the last several months we've had those hearings so that's County initiated it was a city requirement on the conditions of one of our approvals that we had to come in and we had to vacate right-of-way and we ended up vacating the right-of-way that was requested by by this which I think is always pollution of city condition right in this scenario yes sir mr. chairman so with with the the whole entire project they had a parcel map that came in and they had to vacate rights away in the county and the city so they want to give her the city side we don't usually allow the city side to go away unless we know the county is going to also release their side because we don't want to leave like a half of a street available want to make sure the entire streets gonna be gone in this case I was actually looking through while you're speaking about I think the vacation may have already recorded and what's what's available online is not the most accurate information right now so I couldn't actually couldn't verify that but okay I know from the city side their parcel map is already recorded and the The Associated vacations in the city have recorded and I'm about 90% sure that the county ones if not all most of them are recorded as well so that in that case the property would go back to the adjacent property there's right away would go back to jacent property owners okay so I guess the Jason that was up here he would need to go with the county to find out how that that we could work with them I'll have my client contact them he's they've already been in contact before when we're coming through on the vacations itself and as Lucien pointed out I'm almost sure because the maps have been recorded these parcel maps out here that we had to get those County vacations recorded before we're recording the parcel map so on all the shirts it's been so this board can't really do much with stuff in the county we can't really it's something you know I don't normally speak out to the crowd but Jason you'll have to go out to the county and mr. grow now is offered to connect you so you can know how to navigate it but it sounds like it's in progress and that land is coming back to you and to the neighbor I guess as well yes okay okay Vice Chair big mr. chairman and as mr. Cronauer said this has been going on for some time this was not an easy task it started out something totally different than what it looks like now many neighborhood meetings many contentious meetings but at the end of the day the consensus was is to try to marry up the and match up the surrounding existing properties to where as mr. Cronauer pointed out to ensure that the the way of life that they they push towards and no streetlights and everything was pretty much meant that was asked over the last two years and including density of by 250 including density 215 acting as that buffer to speak to or believe it was Marvin was or John they wanted to know what Lots were affected so miss grow now if he could show them again the yellow and explain to them that that's the ones that were here for today nothing surrounding their existing homes where the density would be less than what they already have yes so for point of reference here on the plan these are the existing homes the forelock cola sacs in this area one of the things that we agreed to early on neighbors did not want to have a main ingress egress coming out of this area so to address one of the issues that was brought up the main ingress egress is coming out over here further to the west as you can see we have the half acre lots that are matching the half acres in this area if you then come over you have the transmission lines if you're familiar in the you have the transmission lines and you also have the old Beltway that comes through this area here that's where these are Dean lots are going to be okay minimum I think ten to twelve thousand square foot Lots in this area where you see the shaded area this is also the what we call during the negotiations of demarcation line so this demarcation line is the power lines in this area where we'd come in with the r1 so the r1 is tucked away in here adjacent to the Beltway between the power lines and the Beltway itself now the only Lots that we are asking to reduce the square foot sizes and width are going to be the ones that you see highlighted here in yellow okay those are up again to the Beltway itself and the ones and highlighted in pink will have a reduction in the width size but it will also be a little bit slightly less than 6500 square feet now that gets to what I was mentioning is the product changes with DR Horton they wanted to put different sized homes on these different Lots so you don't sell just for models for 80-something acres so in this area that this is the only area for clarification that you do have any changes in the r1 zoning district with respect to the square footage and width of the Lots itself the remaining portion as you can see we're not reducing lot sizes were in compliance with the code itself on both now in the county and city code requirements we beat we meet those and exceed those requirements thank you and and another great concern was exactly working with Commissioner Larry Brown to make sure that at the end of the day he put his blessing on because there is the interlocal agreement and like I said this has been going on for a couple years I've been to the meetings I attended them I listened to it the people said it went back and forth and back and forth this is a tough piece of property to work with I kind of like the idea of having those buffer homes there to cut down and reduce the noise into the half acre lots a lot of hard work you went into this one Jason picked up a little bit of land and so this neighbor I think we pretty much did basically everything that could possibly be done because it's gonna get developed some way shape or form and I think this does conform and it is harmonious incompatible nobody likes change but you know this is a good thing we fought you know here we are standing here two years trying to get this on so unless anybody else has any other comment I would entertain to make a motion but my motion is gonna be to approve items 20 through through 59:22 259 that's correct okay there's a motion on the floor please cast your vote I do remember a robust discussion on this item a couple years ago with a lot of homeowner input on it please post and that motion carries mr. chairman items number 22 through 58 our final action unless appealed within 10 dates to the C clerk an item number 59 is final action unless it kills the clerk within seven days thank you two related items sixty through sixty to sixty var seven seven six eight nine applicant owner domani Centennial LLC for posture and request for a variance below 100 parking spaces were 133 spaces are acquired at the northwest corner of Centennial Park Wayne Durango Drive Ward six staff recommends denial and related items 61 su P seven seven six nine zero four pause fashion request for a special use permit for proposed auto smog check use Ward six staff recommends denial and related item 62 STR seven seven six nine one for posture and request for a major amendment of a previously approved site development plan review for proposed 81 square-foot auto smog check building Ward 6 def recommends denial we get the staff report please mr. chairman the existing site has an active parking variance allowing 102 spaces where 100 required the proposed development would allow 100 parking spaces where 133 are required the applicant has provided no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance to support the requested variance which would intensify the existing development while decreasing available parking staff therefore recommends denial of all applications please note that there are additional letters to support since publication thank you thank you very much name address record please good evening mr. chair fellow commissioners for the record john curran nine eight five white drive here on behalf of the applicant to briefly describe our project and answer any questions you might have we are proposing to build a 81 square-foot smog check kiosk in this existing shopping center on north Durango and centennial in Ward six the site about in terms of the site development review the the structure would match the aesthetic of the the existing structures similar stone accent paint scheme and roof furthermore the the placement of the site on the site plan is completely screened from public right-of-way so you really can't see it from from the street with regard to the parking variance the headline might be somewhat misleading perhaps it is an existing retail center we are requesting to remove one parking space for the structure itself and then of course a space for the customer to be serviced we this stabilized shopping center has operated for over a decade we believe to be more than sufficient parking on site furthermore I have five letters of support from existing tenants in that shopping center I did share those with the city clerk previously so they should be on the record but with that we respectfully request your vote for approval and happy to answer any questions you may have thank you mr. Curran this was known as a public hearing and from the public like to be heard seeing no one I will close the public hearing and turn it over to vice chair miss obviously yes I view on this agenda today okay so I did get with the applicant and I I'm the one who asked for the letters of support I personally know there's a need for it it's also very screen I cut and through that shopping center at least once a week doing business in there myself and I could tell you that the spots are really never full and whether I want to place it is probably the most ideal spot to put it where it's not it's not in a way of anybody it shouldn't affect any other business seeing the letters of support that's great that's exactly what I wanted to see another condition was that it had to match the pre-existing billing tour it looked like it was built the same time that this was and they did that and it works and we needed in that area so I if there's no other comment I'd like to make a motion for approval all right number 60 var 7 7 6 8 9 please catch boots please post that motion carries thank you like to make a motion for item number 61 su P seven seven six nine zero for approval please cast your votes please post and that motion carries and motion for approval on item number 62 STR seven seven six nine eleven Thank You Vice Chair there's a motion on the floor please cast your vote please post and that motion carries is Sharon those items are final action unless appeal to the city clerk within ten days thank you thank you all right moving on to item number 67 var seven seven six four four a pecan or Jana Berkeley for posture request for a variance to a 17 foot front yard setback where 20 feet is required for an existing front porch tradition at six one one three iris Circle Ward one staff recommends denial creates staff report please I did skip yeah let's hear 67 now okay mr. chairman no unique or extraordinary evidence has been presented to warrant the requested variance as such the hardship the hardship is self-imposed and therefore staff recommends denial of this request please note additional letter of protest has been received since publication thank you Thank You H your name and address for the record please Janet Barclay okay would you like to tell us about the application I'm sorry would you like to tell us about the application and we purchased the home in August of this year and deaf porch was on it and we would like to keep it okay this was known as a public hearing and from the public like to be heard seeing no one I will close the public hearing and Thank You mr. chairman I went out to the property site and the porches it's fine it looks great it looks a lot like the other porches in the neighborhood and of course as the applicant mentioned this was done by the previous owner it looks like there was some code enforcement issues when the previous owner was improving the property for sale and this one unfortunately ended up in the lap of the new owner so I don't believe that there's some any reason why we should deny this request and if unless there's any other comment I would make a motion for approval subject to staff conditions Thank You Commissioner there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries thank you mr. chairman that item is final action unless appeal to the city clerk within 10 days and just so your words all necessary building permits will be needed for them put the structure thank you thank you okay going back to 63 to 64 bring the meeting back to center here okay number 63 we are seven seven six nine three applicant Olympia companies owner up growth NV Partners LLC for posture action request for variance to allow 1.13 connectivity ratio where one point three is required non-standard private streets where such as required in the dead end stub Street terminations where coldest Sakura Hema has required for a proposed 86 lot single-family residential subdivision with southwest of Clark County to 15 general mount generally bounded by Washburn Road Alpine Wood Ridge Way in Clark County to 15 wood six staff recommends denial and related item number 64 TMP seven seven six nine four four possible ash and request for a tentative map for an 86 law single-family residential subdivision Ward six staff recommends denial can we get staff report please mr. chairman staff finds the requested waiver and variance to be self imposed hardships as the subject site does not provide an exceptional or extraordinary circumstance that would warrant the requested variance and waiver staff is not able to support the requested variance intended amount and recommends denial of both applications we do have a condition of approval correction please delete condition number 16 from application TMP seven seven six nine four if approved thank you thank you Thank You mr. chairman commissioners good evening I will be very brief here since I do have reservations with my son who's in from college and my girls so that's the only reason why it mattered to me that you usually I don't care because I know I'm here all night as you guys know if you have kids you understand you want to get out especially when they come home I have a 13 day old anyway I'm here representing Olympia companies and DR Horton this is a carryover from the previous matters that we discuss the property is located on the other side of 215 here it's adjacent to the bus farm that's located here again this is our CL this is something that we've agreed to a long time ago we'd ask you to approve the two applications that are before you thank you very much this was noticed as a public hearing you know one from the public like to be heard seeing no one I will go to the Commission Vice Chair Thank You mr. chairman and the same echo the same words this was all part of the whole deal that we've been working on for two years so if there's no other comment just make a motion for approval on item number 63 var 7-7 693 so motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries thank you very much and congratulations dad and happy Thanksgiving to everybody I remember a 64 mostly to approving is that the one that we're gonna talk about the leading item number 16 okay or delete an item number 16 yes and that'd be a motion to approve TMP 7 7 6 9 4 Thank You motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and a motion carries all right I know I'm a dope but now I'm out of here okay those are a final action item 63 his final national appeal to see Clark in ten days I am 64 his final action unless appeal to the city clerk in seven days and give regards to the kids Bob all right moving on to 68 wvr 775 96 applicant Michael Cornthwaite the owner Nevada good luck Investments LLC forepaws watch and request for a waiver of appendix F interim downtown Las Vegas development standards at 1301 South Commerce Street war3 staff recommends denial mr. Slovin yes mr. chairman I'm gonna stain on this item is I'm on a contract by the owner thank you thank you and I will disclose that I have a project within the notification area I did talk to our city attorney about this I will be voting on doesn't affect us any greater less or we'll be voting on the application tonight can staff record please mr. chairman staff is not able to support utility placement and direct conflict with appendix F and is recommending denial of the request if approved staff has added conditions of approval to allow placement within the alley thank you thank you very much H your name and address record please good evening mr. chairman commissioners I'm here representing the ownership 13:01 Commerce LLC and Nevada good luck Investments LLC my name is Michael Cornthwaite by the way and this is my daughter Amelie quietly she's having a civics lesson tonight so we're trying to work with the city right now to to allow us to put in the the utilities that are going to be necessary to improve the building on Colorado and commerce it's sixteen thousand six hundred square feet of building and we're attempting to improve it and and keep it in in harmony with the improving neighborhood so in trying to do that we are bringing in new utilities or improving each of the spaces and our contractor is working with the city but also the Las Vegas Valley Water District to bring in the new service required so what what we know at this point is that we're required to bring in the backflow devices for the water service and for the fire sprinkler system we have attempted to design them behind the building and on private property but the Water District rejected our design for that and we the Water District rejected the design to extend the water main down the alley to the back of the property so at this point we submitted a plan to put the RP da and the rppa in front of the building to the city and the water district at that time there was a meeting between the water district and the city and in the city and we decided it would be best to keep the small rppa and the backflow device is near the street at the back of the curb and relocate the RP da for the sprinklers into the alley so we revised our plans and have submitted your visor plans to show this but however we still need the waiver as the devices are not on our property in the alley so we're trying to comply and we've submitted three separate designs to the water district and for the city's comments and at this point we've we've tried to accommodate all the requests so that's where we are right now okay q this was noticed as a public hearing anyone from the public liked to be heard so you know what I will close the public hearing and I can quickly start off and say these downtown projects that have hardships with backflow preventers and I've tried so hard on on every project we do it's different when it's ground up and you can incorporate it but when you have an existing building and you don't have the space and I have checked and I do know you got denied multiple times I've talked to both your contractor and people at the city to just see what the conversations were it's it is unfortunate in my opinion that we don't have a detail or a standard that's approved with them not just for water but for power as well on clearances and everything's needed I recently had a meeting with NV energy to to discuss you know looking at a different standard for downtown for these kind of urban settings as opposed to the suburbs we have big open spaces and everyone hears the hardship but no one's really taking a step forward on their side I know the city's worked hard to to try to help accommodate and even working with you on this what you're proposing here so I know I don't like to see him on the sidewalks you know cuz it's just something where it's out there it gets tagged up and it looks bad I think the alley can work are there bollards around it I assume in the detail yeah I think there will be bollards yeah in in the one the rppa that's placed in the alley or the our PDA it'll narrow the alley but it's really just the trash service I know that goes through there that that's looking for the for the access going up and down so I don't I don't have a problem with I do hope as a comment that you know we can still push at the city to find some solutions especially you when something like this is is put forward so with that I am prepared to make a motion on item number 68 wvr seven seven five nine six I will make a motion for approval I'm sorry chair were there added conditions or did I hear that correctly you know it was just my comments just kind of rambling off I thought the planner had referenced that I apologize mr. chairman through you we had just I just mentioned in the introduction that if he did approve it we had a condition that would have it located in yeah we just wanted to reiterate that that we did have an alternative if it was approved okay Lucien do you want to read it sir mr. Ansari are you part of the conditions its condition five right okay I'm so it's in there already and you agree with the improve the condition I do okay all right there's a motion on the floor with approval with the condition number five please please post an ad motion carries mr. chairman that's final action of us appealed to the city clerk within 10 days great thank you tonight everybody good night okay moving on to item number 70 citizens participation this is where the schlafen family is up public comment during this portion the agenda must be limited to matters within the jurisdiction the Planning Commission no subject may be acted upon by the Planning Commission unless that subject is on the agenda and it's scheduled for action if you wish to be heard come to the podium give your name for the record the amount of discussion of any single subject as well as the amount of time any single speakers allowed may be limited they take moyen give you a Mazel Tov for your thank you you Michelle blessed thank you very much thank you Commissioner Tucson well I'd like to welcome so Zelda cherry family I want to wish all my fellow commissioners Happy Thanksgiving and for my four little grandkids they're home watching TV Kings Orion Wizard and Lachlan ands il I'll be home in a few minutes Thank You mr. chair I just wanted to say I'm glad nobody else dug into their cookie the mayor pro-tem gave us because I've been stuffing my face off this all me long that's probably that's cookie I've ever had so maybe mayor pro-tem know and anyways so glad the slot man's got to come hang out tonight and you want to come up and give a presentation okay please please come on up I'll need your name and address for the record please my name's Cherise Mooney I'm with new Aria rentals LLC 5575 Simmons Street unit when - were three eight and we came today about the qual tree vacates but did we miss that we were just two three minutes late is that the first thing what number was it what do you want that prj number or the item number on the agenda if you have it s IDR seven seven six three eight that was item number ten an SDR seven seven six three eight this is the addition to the existing multifamily development at Alexander Road close to Tenaya that was approved yes one motion one vote okay can I just make some comments about what's going on at that apartment complex sure I own the property at four thousand Elk Ridge Drive the back of my property butts up against the entrance of the call to qual tree apartments two and a half years ago in the green belt or the the landscaping break they removed a bunch of pine trees they came in and they erected 16-foot poles right on my property line right up against the cinder block wall their intent was to build a billboard that started at six feet high and extended up to 16 feet high the width of the billboard was going to be 16 feet wide I made repetitive calls to the apartment complex and never got a return call from the management company I called the city of Las Vegas because I thought the sign was probably out of spec the city approved a three temporary sign two and a half years ago that's still sitting there on the property I called today and nobody could find any permit for that sign also I found out today that they just had another sign permit approved for a free-standing sign they already have a free-standing sign at their entrance and they pending request for another three pool sign and I have no idea where these signs are gonna go but the sign they they've erected we used to have a view of the mountains from the backyard now for the past two and a half years we've been looking at their advertisements and I was just wondering when this temporary I might be coming down and where these two no signs were going to go and they're already removing green belts and now they variant two with out a green belt yeah I understand your concern make sense it wasn't on our agenda to discuss the sign tonight it was just for an edition I know I can go to mr. Lowenstein here who probably had some texture on I talked to the director of Building and Safety who you spoke to yesterday okay once yesterday yes so on the follow-up research on that there was a temporary sign permit that allows for the real estate sale sign that is offset from your property line by probably five feet see it is now yes that temporary sign permit has expired so I forwarded it on to code enforcement for them to reach out to them however the code allows for them to reinstate the temporary sign permit the code does not have a time duration in which it would lapse and then have to be removed as long as they continue to re renew a temporary sign permit that sign would be permitted okay if there's issues with landscaping haven't been removed we can also address that through the code enforcement review the site as far as the other building permits they have their one freestanding sign that's on the east side of the driveway entrance there's only existing the sign that you're referencing and then they have their non advertising flags that are out on the okay on the street frontage I'm not aware of any current permits in for review for any new signage when I talked to director he said one was just I'm gonna stop the discussion here cuz it wasn't on the agenda and it's something if you'd like to get the contact information of staff they'd be happy to discuss it with you yeah because this has been going on for years yeah and no they're not on the rules they they put up what they think they want deserve sir I'm gonna have to stop you right here this isn't the forum for that right now so if there's if there's anything else won't they want to say for citizens participation this isn't the forum for this discussion on this okay well it is noted and like I said you can continue with staff tomorrow they can help you through the process with okay and who's gonna give me that information I mean you gotta realize I'm looking at advertisements out of my back you understand it frustration I just there's nothing we can do at this point on this for this agenda anyone else like to be heard for the citizens participation portion seeing no one we will adjourn the meeting that's right have a happy Thanksgiving everybody