good evening we're ready to begin this planning commission meeting is called to order this meeting isn't properly notice 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 2 please note customers of CenturyLink and Cox communication can view this program in high definition on channel 1002 and in standard definition on channel 2 you can also watch this meeting live on Apple TV Roku in amazon firetv on-the-go vegas app the Planning Commission the Planning Commission meeting as well as all their KC LV programming can be viewed on the internet at WWE TV Ford slash live the proceedings will be rebroadcast in KC L V in the web the Saturday the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Monday at 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 chair cherry vice chair Giselle vo present Commissioner schlattman present Commissioner Tucson present Commissioner Williams present Commissioner rogen present commissioner cheetah thank you thank you I called your attention to the information printed in your agenda concerning our actions in the appeal and review process if appropriate there's agendas on both sides of the podium if any would like to grab any to follow along please read this carefully if you have any questions staff is available also the second page of the agenda contains our rules of conduct we appreciate you adhering to these rules so we can have a smooth meeting moving on to item number five this is public comment portion 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 under this portion of the agenda seeing no one will move on to item five can we get a motion vice chair on the meeting minutes yes thank you mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes of July 23rd 2019 thank you there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes these post I motion carries moving on to our housekeeping are there any items of commissioners staff applicants or members of the public would like to pull forward for action mr. chairman we have some housekeeping items the applicant is requesting to obey item 16 and 17 to the September 24 2009 teen planning commission this is the second advance request for this item thank you Thank You vice chair to Salvio did you want to speak please come forward I need your name and address for the record please thank you very much ladies and gentlemen I'm Linda fee and a 93 90 West Elana I don't understand the reason for the advance and I've been through this before since 1994 as vice president of Northwest Citizens Association so I do know upon occasion we have continual advances maybe just to where the neighbors down maybe to where you folks down but the staff did recommend denial what I need to know is how many times does someone get to obey something when they have a revisor plan they haven't done another meeting they they don't seem to want to do anything but obey the plan and so that's my one question September 24th I tend to be the most vocal in our group of neighbors but September 24th is inconvenient for me because I have a previous commitment that I cannot change and I'm wondering and unfortunately 60 days is that way as well I have a previous commitment so I'm wondering if we can either make it October 5th or 90 days something and I would like to encourage the developer to think about me revamping his map because 10,000 acre 10,000 square foot properties are really not acceptable to us so anyway my questions how many times does it get to a baya before we say enough is enough 3 chairman in in the unified development code an applicant has the ability to request an abeyance more than one time basically he can go on the third time the Planning Commission has to make a finding of cause to actually approve that recommendation for in another advance so basically at the third time there is a finding that the Commission has to make but the applicant continue can continuously ask for advances however there is a practice on from the Planning Department side of things if it if the duration goes for a long enough period we will request that the item be tabled which means it is no longer on an agenda and when the applicants ready to come back they would then have to reno tiss the item ok ok so if it is paid to September 24th I'm I would like I don't know how many people are here today on this but I would like to put my letter of opposition is am I able to do that today yes absolutely very good that's all I have thank you very much thank you very much and to anyone else out there if they wanted to to leave anything for the record you're welcome to do that now or and if or attend the meeting when it comes back before us Matthew de l'eau 4265 North chieftain and I just had a couple comments on this project you'll probably hear the same into the September meeting but what the developers plan to do with this development is an increase in density of nearly 100% if there's something you'd like to leave for the record sure we can we can have that and then I would encourage you to come back for the meeting he's considered yes great okay thank you thanks I appreciate that sure mr. chairman at this time I'd like to make a motion to approve the housekeeping items items number 1617 to be obeyed until the September 24 2019 Planning Commission meeting thank you as a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries moving on to the consent items of the agenda consent items are considered routine by the Planning Commission and may be enacted by one motion however any item may be discussed if a commission commission member or applicant so desires no vice chair can we get a motion on the consent agenda yes Thank You mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion to approve the consent items number seven through nine thank you there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman those items will move forward to City Council on October 2nd 2019 thank you 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 areas will be open at one time any person representing an application or a member of the public remember the Planning Commission not an agreement with the conditions and all standard conditions for the application recommended by staff should request to have that item removed from this part of the agenda item number 10 su p76 974 applicant Eldorado Tivoli 55 LLC owner great wash park LLC for posture and request for a special use permit for proposed 6266 square foot restaurant with alcohol use including 447 square feet of outdoor seating area with the waiver to allow 141 foot distance separation from a city park where 400 feet is required at 430 South rampart suite 110 Ward 2 staff recommends approval that's the final item this was notice as a public hearing on these items anyone would like to be heard seeing no we'll close the public hearing and I will go to vice chair mr. chairman I'd like to make a motion to approve item number 10 under the one motion one vote thank you there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes commissioner jessalyn please post that motion carries its chairman that item is final action unless appealed to the city clerk within 10 days all right moving on to the public hearing items item numbers 11 through 15 related items 11 through 15 11 abeyance GPA 75 954 applicant owner gold L tre LLC for possible action request for a general plan amendment from dr to SC at 554 45 north rainbow boulevard Ward Forest Drive staff recommends approval item number 12 of Bane's EO and 750 955 for posture and request from a rezoning from re to see one ward for staff recommends approval related item abeyance var seven six six nine six for possible action on a request for a waiver for a request for a variance to allow 36 parking spaces where 6500 required ward for staff recommends denial related item 14 abeyance var seven six six nine seven four posturing request for a variance to allow a 10-foot residential adjacency setback where seventy-five feet is required Ward for staff recommends denial related item 15 AB ance SDR seven six six nine eight for possible action request for site development plan review for proposed 7632 square-foot general retail building and a 1,400 square foot restaurant with drive-through lane with waivers to allow the building not to be orientated to the street front edge where such as required a 5-foot landscape buffer along the north and east property lines where 8 feet is required a six-foot landscape buffer along the South property line where 8 feet is required in a 10-foot landscape buffer along the west property line where 15 feet is required ward for staff recommends denial could get this staff report please mr. chairman the rainbow Boulevard north corridor plan recommends commercial development the and rainbow intersection and on vacant parcels most accessible to the surrounding residential subdivisions the subject parcel is along rainbow Boulevard a 100 foot primary arterial and has no other access except rainbow Boulevard staff finds the proposed general plan amendment and rezoning request to be compatible with surrounded development and recommends approval of these requests however as evident by the requested variances and waivers staff finds the proposed development to be too intense for the subject parcel and recommends denial of the site level and plan review and variance requests please note there is an updated staff report with neighborhood meeting information located in your supplemental information packet also note that there are additional letters of protest since publication thank you can you name an address please for the record James Smith 91 59 was flamingo representing the applicant we held this item in abeyance a couple of times we've been trying to work with the neighbors and with staff trying to come up with a plan that works to mitigate most of the problems that everybody had come up with our latest meeting last week neighborhood meeting a very successful meeting and I think the main concern was this rear landscaping to the neighborhood residential neighborhood to the east here and there before condition we had about five feet of landscaping we've gone away over what was quired I think is eight foot so we have a full 15 foot plus landscaping in the rear here an intense landscape buffer now to to shield the the the rear neighbors here we've also decreased the size of the building over 25 percent to 55 hundred for this retail building here and we've also changed the way the drive works for the stacking now that the drive comes up to the front here and we have this speaker now a little bit closer to the street I know there was another concern with this speaker so that's going to be closer to the rainbow and it's going to be out there towards that in addition our building now is a full 20 feet from the property line so quite a bit I'm sorry did you say is 15 or 20 on 15-foot landscape that's the five-foot sidewalk additionally 20 foot now where the that building is okay so like I said we've had a meeting at a pretty good meeting here with this we have a letter of acceptable use from the neighbor in there in the adjacent where we think this is a great improvement to the original plan and this intense intense landscape over that we have designed is adequate for for that so I'm here to answer any other questions Thank You mr. Smith this was notice as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard in this item seeing no and I will close the public hearing and turn over to the Commission for discussion come ashore Tucson I think we yes I met with mr. Smith we did have a neighborhood meeting over at the library on on Buffalo and he did answer a lot of the questions I think that the applicant has gone above and beyond the call of duty as far as putting the landscaping in the back of the property to shield for any light or sound and the way the the trees are going though the pine trees though actually shade the backyards of the people that live there so I think they were pretty happy about that the only question I have for you mr. Smith is the restaurant are you gonna have hours of operation I mean because people not gonna want to hear that speaker you know 10 o'clock at night well the design is for some type of coffee use so I would imagine a coffee you starts a little bit earlier than normal business hours about them I think 5:30 to 6:00 a.m. and they close typically around 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. so you'd be agreeable to closing around 6 o'clock in the evening I think we can agree that we're gonna be 24-hour uses most food uses closed down around you know 9 10 o'clock in the evening but this isn't a design for that again you know this are our design right now is for a the type of drive-through limited impact so you know we would like to see that use from 6:00 to 2:00 9:00 p.m. I think that would be would be various enough so we can get enough developers to look at it yeah I drove by the property actually when I first heard about this I wasn't too excited about it but after talking with mr. Smith and in talking with thank you Jason being sands and Sally Christensen who were very very helpful at our neighborhood meeting I am in favor of this project so that no one has anything else to say I will make a motion please do Commissioner to sit on a balanced GPA seventy five nine five four move to approve some motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries on item 12 0 in 75 955 moved to approve its a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries item 13 var seven six six nine six move to approve some motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries on item 14 var 766 97 moved to approve cast your votes please post in that motion carries Commissioner Tucson I think on 15 is where if there was a time condition so you're agreeing to the time condition on this yeah we would be willing to agree to that condition that time was 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. 9 yes correct mr. chairman that condition would read the hours of operation shall be from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. for the drive-through restaurant okay okay what's it with that item number 15 STR seven six six nine eight moved to approve all right there's a motion on the floor with the added conditions please cast your votes please post that motion carries mr. chairman all of those items will move forward to City Council on October 2nd 2019 thank you thank you so much Thank You mr. Smith moving on to items eighteen through twenty eighteen Gon seven six nine nine three applicant owner el capitan partnership at all for possible action request for a rezoning from u to TC on the south side of deer Springs way west of Durango Drive Ward six staff recommends approval related item number nineteen su P seven six nine nine four four possibly and request for a special use permit for high-density single use Ward six staff recommends approval related item twenty SDR seven six and nine ninety five for possible action request for site development plan review for a proposed four-story 334 unit multifamily residential development with waivers of the town center urban zone development standards Ward six staff recommends approval will commit to staff report please mr. chairman the proposed rezoning conforms to the existing Town Center general plan designation and staff staff finds the proposed development meets the goals and objectives of the urban center mixed use district of town center by providing a multi-family development that is compatible with the adjacent single-family homes to the west as well as the existing commercial land uses to the east staff for the staff therefore recommends approval of all applications please note that there are additional letters of protest since publication thank you thank you good evening mr. chairman commissioners my name is Bob grown our 1980 Festival Plaza Drive I'm here representing ovation development in this matter the first thing I'd like to do is get you oriented to the location of our property miss can see here on the overhead here we have approximately ten acres of property it's just south of deer Springs near Springs Way runs east and west and north of our property as you can see here to the south of our property have the Beltway here the 215 which you have Durango located here if this property is located in town center it's approximately 250 feet off of Durango to the west of Durango itself this area is planned for very intense uses for intensity and density a matter of fact the project was proposed about 12 about a dozen years ago for a higher density project which allows up to seven stories of development a matter of fact just to the north of here there's a hotel that was just approved not too long ago for a four-story hotel itself so this area here in this corridor has always been planned for a higher intensity and density in this area representing Ovation development I'm sure you're very familiar with their developments across the valley itself mr. Alan mulaskey does a class-a development that's top-notch I will go through and show you some of the elevations along with some of the interiors of the project itself but more importantly on this piece of property here the applications are being recommended approval by your staff but what we did is although it's not required we went out and had a voluntary neighborhood meeting and actually one of my colleagues Jennifer lavage one of my partner's had a neighborhood meeting there's about 14 people that showed up at that neighborhood meeting itself there are a few issues that the neighbors wanted to discuss one of the issues that was discussed was about a challan point as you can see here h-line point would die sex by sex or property in this area here and I'll show you on the site plan how it goes through the neighbors would like us to vacate that street area there so you would not have any access coming back into the neighborhood itself I know that's an issue that we may be discussing with some of the neighbors here my understanding and working with traffic as latest today and your staff is this is an issue that if you are requiring us to come back later on the vacate this area we're fine with that but also we would like to move forward tonight with the approval of the project as proposed itself that's something I believe as we get up to the City Council level and be continuing meet with the neighbors with respect to whether or not a challan point is going to be there that's something for somebody else to make that decision I believe the most important thing though that speak or use the project itself that we're proposing as you can see here if you could zoom out a little bit as I was mentioning this is where excellent point comes through the project itself we have approximately 334 units that's being proposed on the property itself one of the unique things at mr. mulaskey has done with this project is because of this we understand some of the sensitivity with the single family here to the west of our property what he's done and I'll show you on the elevations to step the development from two stories to three stories excuse me this is what I want to make sure that this correct yeah to the west over here so we wanted to do is go from two stories to three stories to four stories and stepping of the property itself as you know there's residential adjacency standards that are not applicable to town center however in taking careful design here we wanted to make sure we even met those residential adjacency standards and your staff has mentioned that in the staff report there were as appreciative of the design itself I show you on the elevations this is the elevations that you would see to the east and west facing of the property itself but you get a better idea when you're looking at the property here this is the South elevation as this is what I was mentioning you have two storeys three stories 4 stories that are stepped in this area and the reason for that is you want to put the higher portion of the building under the taller portion of the building closer to Durango itself so these are some of the things that although that your code does not require us to do this we build up to approximately seven stories in this area this is one of the things that we wanted to make sure we address because of any sensitivity to the west of to the west of us one of the things if you're inclined to approve the application also what we'd ask you to do is approve it subject to adding some additional landscaping and then the additional landscaping would be along the west property line as as I'm showing you here and along the west property line we'd be doing 36 inch box trees I believe that be 20 foot on center from separation there we had a phone call after a neighborhood meeting in some contact with some of the neighbors had asked us to increase the landscaping in that area and Alaska has no issue with doing that so I'm sure there's some people here that may have some additional questions or issues with with respect to what we're proposing but I think it's very important to note that the project that's before you is actually a lower intensity than what has already been projected or proposed for a plan in this area that being said your staff is recommending approval and I can answer any other questions that you might have thank you very much this was notice as a public hearing and it would look like to be heard in this item if so we have three microphones I'll need your name your address for the record if you're for or against and I'll give everyone a minute and a half to to go through the demon council Jason called in 8910 bucco Reef Avenue pls license one eight nine seven one and active if I could see those the site plans again they the objections that we have is the the increase to the higher medium density residential designation that you're requesting and the setbacks the setback distances that are to the adjoining coral bait subdivisions I live in Coral Bay too which is the southern phase of the of the less residential so if you look here my home it's actually right here we have two other neighbors and the one thing that I didn't see that was taken in consideration what the elevation view was the grade on this particular property drops only approximately ten fifteen foot max from the edge of pavement on the west side to the edge of pavement on the east side at the goodwill property the goodwill thrift store well at the forefoot stories setback at a fifty five fifty five foot tall building I don't believe the elevation plan that they're showing is in reality of what's actually going to be there I haven't seen the topographic survey to show to see what the buildings will actually look like at at the proposed great and that's one of the things are one of the items our neighbors are concerned about the other is echelon point itself as the gentleman discussed just to the west we have a crest for where National point actually crusts over and it has a pretty pretty decent rate of slow our concern is that traffic in the rate of speed that people come from driving down national on point right adjacent to my lot as a pedestrian access gate to our community pool on the north side and we have we have children with parents and stuff that crossed through that pedestrian gate to go into Coral Bay one to use our community park and pool so there's a way that I wasn't able to attend the neighborhood meeting because I wasn't I wasn't aware of it until after the fact I would like to sit down with the client with the other neighbors and I may go discuss a few more of our concerns alright thank you thanks for coming up name is Curt Newell 67-64 Byron Bay for Las Vegas Nevada eight nine one four nine I purchased my home God is my witness to what I'm saying unto you all it's nice to see you honor the flag in our country if I would have known this was not commercially zoned I believe it was now they're worried is wanting to rezone for apartments I never would have purchased my home I'm 100% against this I would rather see a prison built there then I would this I think it's unfair I'm asking you to honor that because if you purchase something from me and I decided to come in and take your mountains away your trees away it would be unfair I really believe that thank you mister no thanks anyone else like to be heard in this item we do have three microphones anyone else after this last two people Heather Saunders 66 forty-four seahorse reef just our main thing is just the area there is so small for such a huge complex it just I don't see how we're just it's gonna be crammed over 800 more people coming through in and out of our little Street that's two lanes back and forth like I said our children cross that Street that is dead-ended right now to go to our pool that we pay for at the different communities where there's three communities already that come off Campbell into that Street and now you're gonna add another thing of apartments I just think that entrance is absolutely horrible there's accidents almost every day there as it is excuse me all walls where they want to come are so short that kids already are jumping the walls and I'm going to put apartments with kids it's just crime and our property values I just don't think that area is good for it across the street is wide open I mean it's huge but that area is just really small I think thanks for coming out appreciate it thank you yeah Danielle sparker six six six eight salt pond Bay Street and I'm reiterating a lot of the comments from my neighbors I know but I want to just state for the record that we do oppose high-density housing in this area we feel that you know there was probably a good reason why it wasn't zoned it that way in the first place very concerned with the amount of traffic that 334 units would bring you know this is only feet away from access to a community pool to a bus stop where there are a lot of small you know school-aged children that are walking you know literally just feet away from this plan project very concerned for safety the the additional traffic that that this project would bring also concerned you know there's a lot of open land in the valley right so what we just don't think that this spot is big enough for a 334 unit high-density housing wanted to voice that for the record and you know I think I've covered like I said a lot of what my neighbors have shared as well and and I can submit this for the record as well the in writing please do thank you great thank you thanks for coming out okay I will close the public hearing go back to the applicant for a couple minutes of a rebuttal if you like Thank You mr. chairman just uh I'm gonna address a couple of comments that were made first with respect to the topography on the property itself as you know most of the property in the valley slopes from west to east in here from north to south down in this area going west to east usually you're gonna be lower than the existing properties to the west of us it's roughly about up to probably about four feet plus or minus in this area so even though we are proposing to three and a four-story buildings as they step back we're also gonna be a little bit lower in that area to address that in addition what we wanted to do we move the buildings away because one of the waivers I believe it requires us to be up on the bill building its excuse me property line itself or as close as possible to maximize the intensity and density what we've done in this matter here is tried to move the buildings away as far as a way as we can and as I mentioned doing the two stories to the three in the four stories there with respect to the distance separations that's why it was key in my presentation to mention your staff also pointed it out that although residential Jason C standards don't apply in this instance if we were in title 19 those requirements would apply and we would meet those requirements itself so we meet and exceed those requirements so we could have came in here with the seven storey building and ended up at the end of the day with the two and A three and a four story that's not the way Ovation development wants to operate that's not the way they operate they want to come in and do the right thing that we think is appropriate with respect to protection of views and the property itself as your staff report mentioned I mentioned the presentation this is the type of property in this area that's been planned for higher density intensities a matter of fact as I mentioned in the past there's been other projects proposed to be up to seven storeys in this area there's a reason that those those types of uses of Heights that are allowed because they want those mixture of uses along the Durango corridor if you're familiar with the Northwest up in this area north of the 215 here that's the intensity that they want to have to help fulfill the employment opportunities the commercial opportunities that are already out there and this this fits perfect in there and I think with respect to the type of development as a Class A you're it's a little bit different way that people rent today and I think it's important to note that a lot of people rent by choice with projects like this because they come in with the type of amenities and the type of development in in closing and just to show you this is an example of one of the projects that was that's recently built is as you can see the type of quality of the interior of the common space and common open space here you can see monies a lot of money's actually spent also in the unit's itself which is way better than probably some of the apartments that I know I've lived in in the past and but if anything with that being said look this is a quality development if it's within your plan here we're more than willing to continue to meet with the neighbors who address additional concerns and we'd ask you to follow these staffs recommendations thank you I will turn it over to the Commission for discussion commission to sow yeah thank you Thank You mr. chairman so we had lengthy meetings and I appreciate Jason and Curt and Heather and Daniel for speaking and like mr. grown our said this is a less intense use on this property which I'm grateful for him bringing that forward miss Pulaski does put out a high quality product we did go around around with traffic week I try to make it a point to meet what I was told happened in the neighborhood meeting which was the main focus was the wall elevation and was also the the thoroughfare through that street we did come up with some scenarios what you're still being vetted but this fits this works I would hate to see something more intense come forward should this not work and I don't think you guys would appreciate that in any way shape or form like mr. Cronauer said there's nothing stopping somebody that wanted to come in there with a seven-story tower and they took it upon themselves to be harmonious and compatible to the community to step that project and keep putting their most intense use towards Durango where it really doesn't affect anybody and I think that that shows that they are trying to be neighborly because they don't have to do that but they chose to which I commend him for that and mr. gros now it does represent some people and he knows he knows what a good product is and this is a good product and this does work for that area totally works for that area especially right across the street we had just to proof I think it was Hilton suites which is more transient so yes you have people that come in from the hospital I need a place to stay because they have a significant other that might have got hurt or injured and they can stay there this these people have skin in the game and as you can see on the overhead you can see the quality of product that would be coming in your neighborhood so I I do not see anything as such as worrying about property values if anything now it's built out and people know what will be there and this is a high quality and apartment complex what we came up with today is we did have a lengthy meeting with traffic all the game players were in the room and and it was my my goal my plan to try to make some type of coal de sac so that way did not intrude through the neighborhood what we came up with was a traffic is once between now and and City Council we definitely want to have another neighborhood meeting and we want traffic involved because what we got from traffic out of that meeting was before you guys say you want to block it off here I'm out because they're telling me and they're telling everybody in that room that you'll be sorry that you did if you did however there was also another promise made so if we did make that road go through and and wind up and I guess and I learned something too today I didn't know traffic had a grading schedule A through F F meaning you just don't want it okay and a B and the greatest thing since sliced bread right now this area was like the CD if it didn't change based on the the load of the apartments in that they proposed to put here that at some point in time the people of the community would be able to come back and gate that Street off and make that then a private private area that's what I got told today that could possibly happened down the road once it goes through all the rest of the process so I support this because I think in the best interest of you guys this is truly a developer who was really looking out for you guys and making sure at the end of the day that you do have a high quality product that backs up to your residential area and the last thing we'd want is something bigger than that there so if there's no other comment I would definitely like to make a motion to approve this agenda item okay please do I'd like to make a motion to approve item number 18 zero and seven six nine nine three please cast your vote these posts and that motion carries okay that's what I want to make sure okay on the make a motion to approve item 19 su P seven six nine nine four there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries and under number 20 SDR seven six nine nine five I'd like to make a motion to approve 'l with the following condition that will not a conditioned direction that the applicant hold another neighborhood meeting and invite traffic to attend so that way everybody can kind of get a better understanding of why it might not be such a great idea to block that street and then we also have staff has a couple conditions and then if you would just tell me if you agree to that three mr. chairman adding sorry I'm ending condition number six on the site development plan review to add an additional bullet point that would read as follows the western perimeter landscape buffer shall include trees of 36 inch box in size we're in agreement with that with those conditions if that's the case then I would make a motion to approve item number 20 s dr seven six nine nine nine five with all conditions and direction okay there's a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries thank you very much and Commissioner will let you know when we have that neighborhood meeting with the neighbors also invite you Thank You mr. chairman those items will move forward to City Council on October 2nd 2019 okay moving on to related items 21 through 22 21 VAR seven six nine nine one application or SquareTrade Holdings LLC for fossil action on a request for a variance to allow three parking spaces where seventeen are acquired at eighteen twenty-one santa paula dr ward three staff recommends denial related item SDR seven six nine nine two for posture and request for site development plan review for proposed two-story 12 unit multi-family residential development with waivers of the perimeter landscape buffer standards war three staff recommends denial between its staff for please mr. chairman no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance has been presented in that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by proposing a development that is too large for the subject site staff therefore recommends denial of both applications please note that there are additional letters of protest and support sent publication thank you thank you mr. chairman commissioners Nathan Taylor 84 14 West Farm Road representing the applicant I'm gonna try and be brief like a normally am we're really excited to bring this project this is an infill project downtown it's our hope that this will spur other developments downtown similar to this and hopefully encourage older properties to renovate make their properties look better downtown this happens to be my old stomping ground back when I was in high school so I have an affinity for this area personally I mean our efforts to bring more affordable housing downtown we believe this will be a great addition to the area we're also in support of the city's efforts to encourage more walkable communities just as a point of fact 62% of Millennials say that they prefer living in communities where they can walk to work or catch mass transit just a couple items I'd like to point out we're proposing five feet of landscaping on the north and south property lines where I believe six feet is required 20 feet of landscaping along the street frontage along Santa Paula I believe I was trying to talk to a deputy director low esteem footing I believe the 20 feet of landscaping along Santa Paul is double what's required by code and finally I want to address our request for the parking variance it was expressed to us by some of the neighborhood stakeholders that they prefer to see more landscaping as opposed to parking in addition while we have four spots on site which includes the handicapped spot there is plenty of street parking along Santa Paula and yesterday I counted ten spots does that bring us up to 14 available parking spaces in front of this development I'd like to present to the clerk if I can for the public record the letter of support from the Beverly Green Neighborhood Association for the record that they support this project and with that I would respectfully request your approval and I'm here to answer any questions you may have thank you very much this was notice as a public hearing and it would look like to be heard for the record and you're against and why good evening Heidi Swank live at five four six Barbara way I have a lot of comments so I'll try to get all into a minute and a half we are asking you to please approve this project we would love to have this project in our neighborhood we are an urban neighborhood we are a neighborhood with high dental mid density but we're not out in Summerlin we're not in the suburbs we are in downtown Las Vegas and we know where we live also the price point as we were told that our neighborhood meeting is just what we need I believe they're gonna be somewhere between 700 and $1,000 a month for apartments in downtown Las Vegas we need something that's not four thousand dollars a month so we need a place for folks who have regular jobs to be able to live currently that as an empty lot and I'll say that the photos you have caught it on a good day we definitely have a lot of folks who are attracted to that empty lot and definitely some questionable characters often a bunch of junk sitting out there so we really would like to see something on that lot um there used to be when I've lived that neighborhood for 15 years and there was a great little apartment building on there very much similar to the ones right next door to it and it burned and that's the only reason we don't have an apartment there right now the previous building had I believe four parking spaces and it had four parking spaces since it was built in probably the 1950s seemed to work fine in our neighborhood for a very long time as the gentleman said that adding more spaces would likely result that those parking spaces would be in front of the building if you look at the building to the south of this one it does have parking spaces in front so we have no landscaping which is just not a really good look for the street there is ample parking on ellen barbara bonita Canosa i own two houses in the neighborhood five for six barbara way and five for four Canosa i offer those spaces in front of my house parking we know that when you have people parking and walking in neighborhoods we have safe neighborhoods and definitely we have property crime problems in Las Vegas so I would love if people would park in front of my house every day get out of their car see my house walk walk home and then walk back later I think more traffic on our sidewalks is a really good thing for our neighborhoods and that's all I have I'm happy to answer any questions thank you so much and please do approve this project we really do want this I'll give you a little more time if you want no anyone else like to be heard good evening my name is mark Hoffman I am the vice president of the aforementioned Beverly Green Neighborhood Association and I am a resident Beverly Green at 549 East st. Louis Avenue as a homeowner and business owner in the neighborhood I also would like to see this project go forward the applicant made a presentation to our neighborhood association meeting a few weeks ago they were very open to comments and concerns that we had both for design and construction and paint schemes and things of that sort there was a lengthy question-and-answer session and the issue of parking and landscaping did come up no one expressed any concern about that at the meeting we've had subsequent discussions with them about that and with our neighbors and for the most part everyone's on board with the parking variance and street parking as Miss Swank said we are for it because we would like to see some more pedestrian traffic to alleviate crime issues and to deter illegal illegal behavior we also would like to see the project go forward because we would like to see other this developer and other ones come forward to identify other empty lots and other blighted structures and buildings and rehabilitate those and build new single and multi-family homes for a market rate housing in the neighborhood so we are myself as a resident and as a representative of the Neighborhood Association do wish that you would ok these variances thank you thank you anyone else like to be heard in this item so you know we'll close the public hearing and did you have nothing to add mr. chairman ok thank you to the Commission for discussion Commissioner Schladming yes I'm mr. chairman through you I did this is one of those projects that you look at right off the bat and immediately a gut feeling is you don't know how you could possibly get behind it but that again you hear from people and it changes your mind which reminds me to always never never make up my mind before I walk into this hearing and hear from you know members so the public eye when I originally got the email I thought somebody hacked how do you swing see no and wrote me a fake email saying that they're supporting it but but it would come down to the parking and once I start hearing the reasons why they were behind it and looking at the park in the neighborhood and then I was thinking that this building was likely built larger than what was there in the past and there's a lot of six and eight unit apartment complexes with the same amount of parking in that neighborhood and I do like the fact that you're not parked in the front yard like the unit to the south you know it does have a little bit more definition than some of the other apartments what the first floor but written out a little further than the second floor is it I I'm not gonna say that the the design couldn't be improved somewhat but I think it's a big improvement over what is in that neighborhood right now and those older apartments and one points that I'd like to make when I was looking at the landscape and it sometimes can be confusing when you're looking at the variances if you look at the north and south landscape buffer word I think they're requesting 0-0 feet were 5 feets required it's where a trash enclosure is against a property line on the north and on the south it's where a sidewalk connects from the parking lot in the back to the interior courtyard so no matter what they wouldn't be able to meet that condition due to due to the sidewalk so for these reasons I think I could get behind the project if any other commissioners had any comments commissioner schlub and he'll quickly add I remember I think it was at our last meeting we had a similar application to the north of downtown and here they're not backing out into the street it's going out into the alley and the other one we had so a lot of testimony or some testimony from people in opposition for a good reason and I think and I think there was a lot more single-family residential in that neighborhood as opposed to what we're seeing in this area so with that I'd be able to support this one it's not great and and and in some of those reasons I I'm just gonna say that this building looks a lot better than some of the other buildings that I've seen in the past similar to this so anyway so if there's no other comment so make a motion on item number 21 var 7 6 9 9 1 moved to approve subject to staff's conditions there's a motion on the floor please cast votes please post and that motion carries hey mr. chairman item 22 SDR 7 6 9 9 - moved to approve subject to staff's conditions there's on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion carries mr. chairman those items are final action unless appealed to the city clerk within 10 days Thank You commissioners Thanks okay moving on to related items 23 through 24 23 var 7-6 984 applicant owner DR horton inc for possible request for a variance to allow a 21-foot front yard setback where 25 feet is required at seventy 12 Arabian Ridge Street Ward six staff recommends denial related item 24 var seven six nine eight five four possible action request for a variance to allow a 21 foot front yard setback where 25 feet is required at seventy 24 Falabella Ridge Avenue Ward six staff recommends and now can we at the 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 single-family dwelling with a floor plan that does not fit the required setbacks staff therefore recommends denial of both applications please note that there are additional letters of protest since publication thank you thank you is the applicant here tonight on items 23 and 24 I do not see the applicant vice chair preference I don't mind making a motion to approve it I was out there it's just because of the way the so you want to hear it yeah okay can we get we have the staff report public hearing this was notice as a public hearing anyone from the public like to be heard seeing no one will cause the public hearing and I'll go to you vice chair mr. chairman from what I understand and what I viewed out there it just comes down to the way the house is aligned where the garage or whatever might sit up a little bit further than the front door of the house and therefore that's why they're asking for the variance it's just the nature of the lot and how so I really don't have a problem with it I haven't had not no calls on it at all okay so if nobody else does anything I'd like to make a motion to approve var seven six nine eight four I think it is a motion on the floor please cast your votes he's posted and that motion carries as well as var seven six nine eight five motion to proof is a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post that motion carries mr. chairman those items are final action unless appeal to the city clerk within ten days thank you okay is the applicant I know they were trying to get here for the meeting Friday own over 25 great okay item number 25 var 77083 applicant owner Seth T Floyd for possible and requests for variance to allow a 5-foot side yard setback where 10 feet is required for proposed addition to an existing single-family dwelling and a 5-foot corner side yard setback or side setback where 15 feet is required with a 0 foot distance separation from the primary dwelling where 6 feet is required for proposed accessory structure at 1760 Belle Castro Street Ward one staff recommends denial we had staff report please mr. chairman staff finds no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance and then the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by building a home edition that encroaches in the required setback area of the residential lot therefore staff recommends denial of the proposed variance request please note that additional letters of support have been received since publication thank you thank you can I enter name and address for the record please hi Atlanta Graham 1760 Belle Castro Street I have more letters I don't know if I could just leave those with you please thank you and I don't want to waste waste your guys's time tonight but what this is is my husband and I moved into this house and then we have three other people move in which are our three boys and we are trying to add a bedroom so that like when our in-laws come or my parents want to stay the night or my sister or brother and their kids will have a little additional space and then our neighbor immediately to our which would be our right which would be our East they support it everybody in our cul-de-sac report supports it and everybody on Belle Castro and so unless you guys have any more questions what it does is it allows us to get within five feet of our Karen and Kevin is their name to the right of their their property line okay thank you 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 turn over to the Commission Commissioner Rogan Thank You mr. chairman I've reviewed this one familiar with that subject site for the record I have known Elena Lee Graham and South Floyd for quite some time and my recommendation tonight has nothing to do with the fact of knowing them previously but I would like to disclose that for the record I do believe that based upon the condition of this specific lot that the variance that's requested is appropriate in it unless there's other comment I'd move for approval with staff conditions okay because the motion on the floor please cast your votes please post and that motion is denied mr. chairman that an action this items final action unless an appeal to the clerk within 10 days thank you okay moving on to item number 26 and 27 26 s u P seven six nine seven five applicant owner decatur concord LLC for possible action request for a special use permit for an open-air vending transient sales lot use at nineteen thirty four north decatur boulevard ward five staff recommends denial related item number twenty seven s dr seven six nine seven six four paws motion request for a site development plan review for proposed open-air vending transient sales lot development ward five staff recommends denial you the staff report please mr. chairman the subject site is a partially developed corner corner parcel zone c2 and is subject to title 19 development standards the applicant is requesting to locate for food trailers on new pavers at the center of the parcel the applicant is requesting a special use permit so that vendors can operate on a single parcel for more than twenty four hours within a 24 hour period and also some more than two vendors can operate on a single parcel within 24 hours staff finds that the hours of operation until 2 a.m. are incompatible with the surrounding area the mobile trucks will be in direct line of sight several homes and will have no buffer to the noise associated with mobile food vending such as generators compressors idling vehicles patron queuing and drilling operations therefore staff recommends denial of the proposed entitlements please note that there are additional location aerial and special maps in your supplemental information packet and that additional letters of support and protest have been received since publication thank you thank you your name and address the record please Samms ear 37 35 north Nellis mr. zero pardon can you spell your last name for me EER thank you I do have a letter of support if I may submit this parcel is a unit of commercial subdivision that's existing there at that corner and the proposal was actually for an open-air vending the conditions that had been placed F approved as to condition number four that suggests that an existing business that is operating since 2010 be seized I don't think we can we would be able to do that and then there is comments several other comments from Public Works a couple of comments that conflicts with actual circumstances that are there as to connections to the sewer and water which is that property is already a stubbed end parcel from a commercial subdivision that's existing in an operation presently I I have been trying to get all the staff to clarify some items and I couldn't get a hold of them in the pre meeting many of the issues that were brought in the report were not or at least not discussed in the premiering so these are the issues that we have that we hoping to discuss here today if you like okay thank you mr. zero this was noticed as a public hearing and from the public like to be heard in this item seeing no one I'll close the public hearing and go to Commissioner Williams Thank You mr. chair mr. zere can you so just to understand because the proposed use again and you're requesting it doesn't confirm confirm conform with the hours right and so you you're you're asking to operate from 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. yes that was but you know that that was the stretched out intent but however we just wanted to have an open time limit because I believe one of the other conditions that are here that needs to be discussed is the planners are saying that that these mobile units although we propose to bring mobile units on wheels however like if the if there is a weekend or something like that they're not gonna leave on a Friday night come back Saturday morning and leave Saturday night and the way the planners are writing it is you have to leave every night correct was not the intent correct but the intent of the use requirement is no more than four hours no more than two vehicles to clorox yes and that's why we're here the we're asking for the some additional hours we were willing to that out whatever is also not to be not to commit to living every night because like if a truck is there for the weekend most likely they're going to stay the trucks are self-contained they're licensed by the Health Department and have all the required drainage and as well as water circulation etc and they will take them out to clean them or refurbish them however to do it every night is not a practically not most likely not possible well technically the way that the way that it works is the trucks pull in service service a meal period or yes and a van or something and that's why you have the four hours and then they pull away correct yes but some of these trailers are appalling on another truck they're not a drivable situation not necessarily could be an RV that you can drive or it could be like a fifth wheel where it's has got wheels and it's movable but you have to hook it to a to a truck or another vehicle to move it around right mr. zir unfortunately the requirements are four hours and no more than two trucks and so at this time I'm ready to make a motion mr. chair I'd like to make a motion on items item 26 su P seven six nine seven five agree with staffs recommendation for denial and item 27 we'll hear at this one first we'll cast our votes got it yeah thank you there's a motion on the floor Thank You commissioner a yes vote is for denial please post and that motion carries and item 27 STR seven six nine seven six make a motion agreeing with staffs recommendation for denial Thank You Commissioner Williams there's a motion on the floor please cast your vote please post no motion carries mr. chairman those items will move forward to City Council on October 2nd 2019 thank you moving on to item number 28 may I make a comment please since it's going to the council I would like to request if we can have a meeting with planning to review all these conditions absolutely mr. Chen's contact contact I've called five times and no answer and mr. zero have you say that's initiate if I can get a card or something there you go thank you moving on to item number 28 I will be abstaining from this I owner of a cultivation facility go ahead and just abstain on this versus disclosed because I've worked with Aimee pageant on quite a few different projects in the past and also rich the owner so I'll be up staining on this matter thank you Thank You commissioner okay item number 28 SCP 7 7 1 55 special use permit applicant RG Island Enterprise Inc owner 1916 Island properties Ltd for the possible action on a request for the special use permit for a proposed 17,000 754 square foot marijuana cultivation facility used at 30 20 and 30 30 South Valley View Boulevard and staff recommends approval can I have the staff report mr. chairman the proposed marijuana cultivation facilities permitted within the industrial zoning district and meets all minimum distance separation requirements the subject site is located within 300 feet of an existing martial arts studio but the applicant has submitted a signed affidavit that indicates that less than 50% of the studios clients are 17 years old or younger therefore staff recommends approval of the proposed entitlement please note that additional letters of protest have been received since publication thank you thank you please state your name for the record good evening Commission Amy Sugden s ug DN and I'm representing the applicant RG Highland enterprises he was here as well with me I know it's the end do you guys only have a couple more items this has received for staff approval I do want to point out in particular that my client was actually displaced previously he was in Ward 3 operating a fully functional conservation facility he was one of the first in the city actually of Las Vegas to become operational because of project neon which we appreciate but also unfortunately caused him to shut down he had to then go acquire new property it's very difficult you can imagine in the city of Las Vegas to find vacant industrial property that meets all the requirements you see we're not asking for any variances everything is compliant with the distance requirements we did get the affidavit as was mentioned in the staff report from a nearby gym confirming that all of the requirements are met so that there's no youth nearby and we believe that this is going to be a very compatible use for the area and more importantly it's going to help my client reestablish himself for again something that wasn't his fault we understand public progress needs to occur but he is trying to go back and rebuild he's lost now several years unfortunately being untrue facility to acquire and open so we're hopeful that the Commission will support our request as staff has recommended and I'm happy to answer any questions 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 any thank you mr. vice chair I did view this existing property it is in an area that is well suited for this type of use there's a marijuana dispensary located not far to the south of where this cultivation facility would be located I do have a question for that applicant at the previous location did you have any problems or concerns with an odor that caused any complaints to be lodged with the city a good question that has actually come up before in the city's great because you cannot even get your certificate certificate excuse me of occupancy until you have an independent odor assessment done well that says that you cannot that confirms rather that you cannot smell any marijuana owners from the four corners of the property so one I think it's important to know that my client as you had noted at its previous facility didn't was able to comply with that requirement so you know he's a good operator doesn't emit any odors and to because the city's ordinances requiring that you'll have an independent assessment again before he can even become operational that makes sure that there's no odor emissions and that was my one concern so I'm satisfied that that that will be done unless there's any other comments from other commissioners I would move to approve please be subject to staff conditions you've heard the motion please cast your vote and a motion passes Thank You vice chairman this item will be going to City Council on the October 2nd 2019 agenda thank you okay thank you moving on to item number 29 SDR 77057 applicant owner Hellfire Media LLC for paws watch and request for major amendment to a previously approved site development plan review to amend previously approved waiver to allow five-foot corners side yard setback or 10 fee was approved at 600 East Charleston Boulevard Ward 3 staff recommends approval can we get the staff report please mr. chairman the proposed building addition was previously approved by the planning commission but during the preparation of construction documents an incorrect property line was identified to correct this issue the applicant is requesting a 5 foot setback where 10 feet was previously approved the proposed building supports the goals of the vision 2045 downtown master plan which encourages higher density development to deliver an energetic urban way of life and high quality physical environment for residents and visitors alike therefore staff is recommending approval please note that additional letters of protest have been received since publication thank you thank you before I ask your name I will disclose that I live just I think inside the notification area of this place it won't affect me any greater lesser so I will be voting on the application can I get your name and address record please Jason may you 652 middle gate in Henderson representing the owner when we started doing the construction documents we had a survey done of the property and we realized that the property line was not at the back of the sidewalk as we assumed it's 5 foot in from that that is the reason we're asking for this variance versus the 10 foot that was approved prior just a technicality when we actually got a physical surveyor out there to locate where we were I am more than happy to answer any thank you very much just notice as a public hearing you know what if the public like to be heard seeing no and I will close the public hearing turn it over to Commissioner schwaben yes mr. chairman this one I'm pretty simple the way it was explained to me from staff was I mean the building didn't change sauce building didn't change it's just basically where the building or where the property line is and it actually meets our new downtown form based code or master plan whatever we want to call it you know a lot it's a lot closer aligned with with that than our current code so seeing or seeing all those items I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion on item number 29 SDR 77057 for approval subject staff's conditions thank you as a motion on the floor please cast your votes please post carries thank you very much for your time have a wonderful night you too Thank You mr. chairman that item is final action unless appeal to the city clerk within 10 days okay moving on to 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 that subject is on the agenda and is scheduled for action if you wish to be heard come to the podium give your name for the record the amount of discussion on any single subject as well as the amount of any time of time any single speakers allowed may be limited anyone from the public like to be heard no Commissioner Tucson yes I just would like to wish happy birthday to Commissioner Slaton Thank You Commissioner Tucson and you know my birthday gift would be us all considering maybe going back to one meeting a month seeing as we're doing this in our in 15 minutes you know and we hadn't been past 8 o'clock in a while so I'm just gonna go ahead and throw that out there I'm sure everybody wants to come to twice a month I think it's something that should be taken under consideration definitely duly noted okay with that our meeting is adjourned