[Music] [Music] Good evening everyone. We are ready to begin. This planning commission 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 and can be viewed live on City of Las Vegas TV on Cox Cable channel 2. You can also watch the meeting live online and access other city content by visiting lovenvada.govconnect. The proceedings will be rebroadcast on City of Las Vegas TV the Saturday after the meeting at 10:00 a.m. Monday at midnight and the following Tuesday at 6:00 p.m. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. City clerk, would you please call the role? Chair Taylor, present. Vice Chair Kasama, Commissioner Schlottman, present. Commissioner Rogan, Commissioner Walsh, present. Commissioner Davio, present. Commissioner Munford, present. Thank you, Chair. You have a quorum. Thank you. I call your attention to the information printed in your agenda concerning our actions and the appeal and review process if appropriate. Please read this carefully and if you have any questions, staff is available. Also, the second page of the agenda contains our rules of conduct. We appreciate you're adhering to these rules so we can have a smooth meeting. Um, and speaking of rules for tonight, we have a double agenda. So, please make sure your presentations are streamlined and efficient. Um, we usually do a twominute limit on public comments and we will be starting that with our first um item of public comment which is number four on the agenda. Um, additionally, if you do plan on speaking on an item, please come down to um either side of the microphone so we can make sure we can line people up and be efficient. Um, we would like to make sure everybody is heard, but we would really like to make sure everybody is heard before tomorrow morning. Um, so let us move on then to um public comment number four in our agenda. During this portion of the agenda, um your comments must be limited to matters on the agenda for action. If you wish to be heard, please come to the podium and give your name for the record. Um as noted, the amount of discussion as well as the amount of time any single speaker is allowed may be limited. All comments comments made under this item for specific action items will be cross referenced to those items. Are there any members of the public who wish to speak under this portion of the agenda? Come on down. Two minutes. Respected officials of the city of Las Vegas, my name is Robert Kingston and I have owned and resided at my primary residence at 7100 Janette Street in Las Vegas for about 29 years now as the second owner of the property. I have lived exclusively in the city of Las Vegas city limit since 1991. I appear before you today to oppose all of the proposed planning zoning changes and variance for item 25-0027, a proposed development for profit by Summit Homes of Nevada LLC for the two plus acres at the northeast corner of Donald Road and Leyon Avenue that is immediately behind and west of my one plus acre residential estate. Our neighborhood is a quiet residential estates area that is surrounded by higher density single family residential that are buffered from gated buffered from us by gated communities with access away from them and onto higher capacity streets than our local streets as evidenced that Donald ends just beyond Janette on the east and Lead on the west. Leon does not extend beyond Elhorn on the north and Deer Springs on the south. So, with the higher density access restrictions put in place to avoid access to our neighborhood streets, our streets are quieter with less traffic and much safer for our children to play on their bikes and our residents to ride their horses and walk their dogs. Uh, all of the years that I have resided there, I'm aware that the roadways were originally put in through the dust abatement program by Clark County. So the uh roadway construction is somewhat substandard because of the dust abatement is not conformed to um the newer standards. Note that variances have previously been granted omitting street lights, curb, gutter, sidewalk, and lower standards of roadway construction because of the lower traffic demand in our neighborhood. Simply stated, our neighborhood streets are not well lit so that we can enjoy the night sky and void of larger traffic volumes so that we can enjoy the more rural lifestyle that we sought and bought years ago with our homes. Adding higher density housing defeats the concept of planning altogether and goes against the previously negotiated zoning in our neighborhood. Thank you, sir. We are at 2 minutes. And also, just so you know, that item is going to be held so you can come back next month and share some more input for that item. Thank you so much, sir. Folks, if you have comments, please come stand right by the microphone so we have people loaded and ready to go. Um, is this the time I address item number 32? It it can be. Okay. My name is Maryanne Goodsell. M A R Y A N G O O D S E L L. I'm addressing item 32, I believe, unless the agenda has changed. Thank you for your time and especially Commissioner Walsh. I appreciate it. Um, I am the president of the Picoli Ranch HOA and we are um have submitted documentation to add a freestanding sign. Um, Oops. Right. Actually, ma'am, I'm so sorry. Are you here? You're the applicant for 32. Correct. Okay. No, please wait until public hearing and your item will be presented and you can go through all this. Thank you, ma'am. No sweat. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Leonard Martin. I reside at 623 Harrison Avenue, Las Vegas Nevada 89106. I'm currently the vice president of the Historic West Side Community Association. Also, I come here in regards to item 26 that sits within 5,000 ft of my residence. I think I'm here to support this item. This being a town of hospitality, the people who work in the hospitality industry will be able to purchase by home ownership instead of renting. Seems like all the projects that's are coming up in Ward Five, the historic uh west side are renters renters. This property would be in line with single family home ownership who care about their properties who are now senior citizens and we want to be uprooted with uh tenants who doesn't care that much for their property. It's several it's several uh reports online that tell you people who rent don't care too much about who they rent for. and by the city of Las Vegas being the the uh the the renters, the t the owners of that that new development of uh fourtory uh uh 22 units at uh H and uh F and uh Vanurren. We don't want that. We want home ownership availability to the hospitality industry that built this town. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, sir. Folks, if you're coming up um on an item that is part of public hearing, you will have an opportunity to speak during that item. The this is your opportunity to speak more broadly on the agenda, but if you do speak on an item that's for public hearing, we do reserve the discretion to limit your comments in uh during the hearing item. So, sir, go ahead. Thanks. Uh good evening. My name is David Bray. I represent the Harbor Cove Homeowners Association. I was discussing item number 13. Uh we are requesting that the variance request be removed from the one motion one vote portion of the uh planning department's agenda specifically given the procedural deficiencies related to the request zoning regulations as well as the substantial community opposition from both individual homeowners and the association that the matter warrants full consideration and independent discussion before the commission. Okay. Thank you very much. Anybody else for public comment? And remember that if you uh are going to be here for a public uh hearing item, you can speak at that time. Okay, great. So, seeing no other um members of the public wishing to speak under item four, we will move on to item five uh for possible action to approve the final minutes of the planning commission meeting of March 11th, 2025. Um interim vice chair Schlottman, do you have a motion? Yes. Uh madam madam chair I move to approve the planning commission uh minutes of the meeting on March 11th 2025. Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Rogan. Commissioner Kasama. And mine's not coming up. Uh Commissioner Slottman. It would be a yay vote. Commissioner Dalvio a vote. Okay. Please post. Motion carries. Thank you. So, let's move on to our housekeeping items. Um, we heard about item 13. Are there any other items that commissioners, staff, applicants, or members of the public would like to pull forward for action? Madame Chair, Nicole Edetos, for the record. The applicant is requesting to hold item number 20 and 21 to the June 10th Planning Commission meeting. The applicant is requesting to hold item number 24 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. The applicant is requesting to hold item number 35 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. Staff is requesting to strike item number 37B25-000037-V1 as the application is no longer necessary. The applicant is requesting to hold item number 42 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. The applicant is requesting to hold item number 49 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. And staff is requesting to hold item number 57 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Miss Edos, did you say that was item 42? Uh, Madame Chair, yes. Item 42 to the May 13th planning commission meeting. Okay. Thank you. Um, do we have a Let's Um, sorry. Does anyone wish to speak on any of these items? Yes. Good evening, commissioners. Uh, Eric Beal on behalf of JSC Symphony Park LLC, and I would like to respectfully request that item 30 is held to the May 13th plan commission hearing. I'm sorry, sir. What item was that again? Item 30. 30. Thank you. Okay. Um, anyone else? All right. Hearing none. Um, vice chair, may I have a motion on these housekeeping items? Yes. And just for clarification, item 30 was May 13th. Yes. Okay. Thank you. So, Madam Chair, I'd make a motion uh to hold items 20 and 21 to the June 10th, 2025 planning commission hearing. items 24, 35, 42, 49, 57, and item number 30 to be held to the May 13th planning commission hearing. And uh for item number 37B uh to be stricken uh from from the agenda. And before that we vote on this. Madam chair, looks like we have Miss Lazovich. Uh Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. I'm sorry, I did not hear the hold request for the LA for the gentleman that just stood up. Did he say 30? He did say 30. I'm the applicant. This is for area 15. Is that okay? Oh, FBLV district. So item number 25-000011. V applicant owner FBLV district 2 is your item, Miss Lazovich. Okay. Sorry, I might be looking at the agenda from last month. So, this is 24-0495-s1 for the AC element Symphony Park Hotel. Madam Chair, that's item number 25. I'm sorry, what item is that, sir? That's item number 25. Okay, we already 25. Okay, great. Madam Chair, I'm gonna resend my motion and I'm gonna make a new motion um on item 20 and 21. I move to hold those items until the uh June in in advance until the June 10th, 2025 planning commission hearing on items 24, 25, 35, 42, 49, and 57 to hold those items in advance until the May 13th, 2025 planning commission hearing and to have 37B uh stricken from the agenda. Um, thank you uh vice chair. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Um, Commissioner Casama, Commissioner Rogan, thank you. That motion carries. Uh please post. Great. Bless you. Okay. Um, let's move on to item number seven, consent items. Consent items are considered routine by the planning commission, may be enacted by one motion. However, any item may be discussed if a commission member or applicant so desires. Um, so item number 725-0041 TM sorry Oh, okay. Um, I don't need to read those. So, do we have a motion on our consent items? Yes, Madam Chair, on the consent items 7, 8, A through 8 C, 9, and 10, I move for approval. Subject to staff's conditions. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama, Commissioner Rogan, thank you. Post, please. That motion carries. And madam chair, items seven and 10 are final action tonight unless appealed to city clerk in seven days. Item eight is final action unless appealed in 10 days. And item nine will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Let's move on to our one motion, one vote items. The following are items that may be considered in one motion, one vote. They are considered routine non-public and public hearing items with a staff recommendation of approval. All public hearings and non-public hearings will be opened at one time. Any person representing an application or a member of the public or a member of the planning commission not in agreement with the conditions and all standard conditions for the application recommended by staff should request to have that item removed from this part of the agenda. Um so we'll read through these items that will be part of one motion one vote. Um item 1125-69 Z1 applicant owner Homes for Hopefuls LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request from U undeveloped Rural Density Residential general plan designation to re residents estates on the west side of Roland Avenue approximately 1,200 ft north of Anne Road APN125-25-410--021 Ward 6 Brun staff recommends commends approval. Number 12, uh, item number 25-0079, SUP1, applicant, Thai Massage Golden Beauty LLC, owner, Charleston Heights Shopping Center, LLC, for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 1,530 ft massage establishment use with a waiver to allow a 0 foot distance separation from a parcel zoned for residential use where 400 ft is required at 5013 Alta Drive. Ward one canudson staff recommends approval. Um item number 13 is being pulled forward to public hearing. Item number 14 obeyance renotification. Um item number 24-0655 MSP1 applicant owner Silver Meadow Properties LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for an improved convenience store with with car wash development on the southwest corner of Grand Teton Drive and Wallie Way Ward 6 Brunie. Staff recommends approval number 15 obeyance renotification 24-0670 SUP1 applicant Grocery Outlet Inc. owner WRI Charleston Commons LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed 22,584 square foot alcohol off- premise beer wine use at 45 North Nellis Boulevard Ward 3 Diaz staff recommends approval 16 obeyance renotification 25-00009 ROC1 applicant Taylor Morrison owner KL LB by4 LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement request to remove condition number four from approved approved tenative map um 24-0345-TMP1 which states sign and record a deed restriction with language determined to be satisfactory by the city attorney which restricts the use of the site to an age restricted community for those persons 55 years of age or older to the full extent of the law at the northwest corner of Lake Me Boulevard and Park Drift Trail W 2 Seaman staff recommends approval item 17 obeyance renotification 25-0010- SUP1 Applicant L. Las Vegas LLC owner Bokeh Park Marketplace LV LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 3,182T alcohol on premise full use with a 1596T outdoor patio area at 8704 West Charleston Boulevard suite number 1012 Seaman. Staff recommends approval. Number 18, Abeayance Renotification 25-000014-SUP1 applicant TE509 LLC owner Borehir LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 1,967T alcohol on premise full use with 145 foot outdoor patio area at 509 509 Fremont Street. W 3 Diaz. Staff recommends approval. Item 19, obeyance renotification 25-000035 SUP1 applicant Ellen Park owner South Shores LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 1,386qt alcohol on premise beer wine use at 8540 West Lake Boulevard sweet 120 W for Alan Pollinsky. Staff recommends approval. Um may I have a motion on the one motion one vote items? Oh, sorry. I need to open this up for public comment. These items have been noticed for public comment. Um, is there anybody wishing to comment on the items that are on the one motion, one vote agenda? And Madam Chair, while they're coming up through you, uh, I'm going to have going to make an abstension on item number 18 as I have a ongoing business relationship with that applicant. Okay. Thank you. Please state your name um and spell it and your address for the record, sir. Uh my name is Jay Manning. J A Y M A N I N G. What was the other half? State my name and spell it in what? And your address, please. Oh, address 5828 Maria Delmare Street, Las Vegas, Nevada. Um I wanted to speak about the item 11, the property on Rland Street. The reasonzoning. Okay. Um we're we're a a rural estate area over there. Large properties with single family homes and all of the neighbors um we kind of feel the same way. Um we want to keep it that way. We're not looking to have that property split up and subdivided. Okay. And there's a group of us here that feel the same way. Um All right. Who's here on item 11? Just raise your hands. Okay. Thank you. Um, we we would have sent in the postcards, but we literally just got them the other day, and there's no way we could have mailed in our All right. part in time. Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay. Thank you. My name is Tracy. I live at Turn on your mic, sir. Got it. I have to push the button. Thanks. You're good. It's on. My name is Tracy Elison. I live at 5833 Roland Avenue. Um I also am here for number 11. I guess my concern is more the homes for the hopeful hopefuls LLC. Um they want to change his zoning or I'm just trying to understand what that really means that they're trying to do with the property. I live a half acre down from it. Madame Chair, Nicole Edetos, for the record, if I may, their current zoning district allows for 20,000 square foot lots. The zoning designation they're requesting now would allow them 18,000 square foot lots. So, they will still be um considered halfacre lots. Thank you. Thank you. So the okay the plan is to do two two halfacre lots, two houses. Okay. Is that what she said? Sorry, my hearing. She was saying that the current zoning designation requires a minimum of 20,000 square foot lot. The request would still require a minimum of 18,000 square feet lots. Okay. A difference of 2,000 per square,000 square feet per lot. So, the use, we don't know the use other than it's just going to be two half acre lots. I'm so sorry, sir. I'm not I can't hear you. Madam Chair, I can hear him. Okay. Yes, it will still stay residential. It will stay residential. They will they will this will allow them to take that one lot, turn it into two lots, and build two homes. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for the clarification. And I will I will just say for the record, I did speak to the applicant um and the land owner and his intent in case there are concerns is to subdivide it to build two single family homes to be owned and resided in by you know folks. It's not it's not anything that's got a commercial purpose. It's all going to be residential. And Madam Chair, if I may just make one comment through you and just for everybody this here on item number 11, this is just a resone. This isn't a SDR. This isn't tentative map. So whenever they do decide to build, they'll bring a map to us and we'll we'll have the chance to look at where their ingress egress is, uh how their sightes laid out, curb, gutter, that whole work. So at that point, that would be a good time to come and uh take a look at it. This is just a zoning matter. Ma, Madam Chair, just for clarification, um if if they're subdividing into two lots, they will not have to come back to planning commission. It's only when you have five lots or more that requires a tenative map. So, this resoning will allow the property owner to submit a parcel map to the city. We will then um record, you know, for the two separate residential lots. And then the owners of the property, as long as they they um abide by the setbacks and building height for those homes, they can then obtain a building permit to build one house on each lot. And those are for And those are residential homes, correct? Yes, they are residential. They will not be allowed for commercial use. Okay, great. Thank you for that clarification. I guess the main concern was the LLC, Homes for the Hope hopeful LLC. And I think the neighbors considered that maybe that we're going to use it for um you know, uh not homeless people, but people Madame Chair through you. Um from what has been explained to us by the applicant, that was just a cheeky name they gave it because they are hoping to build their dream house. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. That is also my understanding from speaking to the landowner applicant. Okay. Anybody else? Public hearing on any of these one motion, one vote items. Okay. Great. So, um, we can go back to our motion. Yes, Madam Chair. Through you, I'd like to make a motion on one motion, one vote. Items number 11 12 14 15 16 17 and 19, 18, and 19. Uh note in my extension on item number 18. Uh subject to staff's conditions. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Y. Commissioner Kasama. Hi. Commissioner Rogan. Commissioner Schlottman. Got it. Thank you. Um, please post. And that motion carries. And madam chair, items 11 and 12 will move on to city council on May 21st. And items 14 through 19 are final action tonight unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days. Great. Thank you. Um, okay. We are now going to move on to our public hearing items. Um, we are going to go a little bit out of order tonight. We are going to start with item number 51. Um that is um item 25-0068 applicant city of Las Vegas owner city of Las Vegas at all for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at the northwest corner of Alta Drive and Falcon Lane Ward One Canudson staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project subp parts including 51A2-0068 Z1 from R1 single family residential to CV Civic APN 138-36-201-014 51B25-0068 SDR1 for proposed one-story 12,800 foot fire station development. Um, good evening. Good evening. If you can please state and spell your name for the record, your address, and tell us about the project. Good evening, Madam Chair. Rosa Cortez, city engineer, deputy director of public works. Liz Duncan, architectural project manager, city of Las Vegas public works. Thank you for having us today to present this project. This is a much needed project for the city's fire department in regards to uh meeting the response times needed for this community. I want to just before I begin thank our fire chief Fernando Gray and battalion chief Ryan Flood for supporting this project for being part of the project and the design and also PGAL architects for getting all the site plans and design documents together for us. Here we have the overall aerial of where the project is located. The existing station is at Jones and Upland and we are proposing to build a new station at Alta and Falcon and that's depicted in the orange um circle. Here is a view of the site plan. It is what uh east of an existing church on the northwest corner of Falcon Lane and Ala Drive. What you see on your screen is a view of the layout, the fire station layout, the four bays and the station, as well as the route of how the vehicles will be entering and exiting the station. We have driveways coming in from Ala Ingress and also off off of Upland. And then the from the bays, they will be exiting off onto Ala Drive. Here we have the landscape plan with desert appropriate trees and shrubs around the perimeter of the site as well as around the building. Here we have the building elevation starting with the top. This is what you would see from the back or the north. The next one down is what you would see looking from Alta. Further down, that is what you would see from the west or from looking from the church side. And finally, the last one is what you would see from looking at from Falcon. Here is a 3D view looking from Alta and roughly Falcon. A similar view a little higher up. This is looking towards the back I guess of the station from Falcon. And finally, this is also looking from Alta but the other direction. Any questions, comments? Um, thank you for the presentation. Um, if you can just give us a moment. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on item number 51? Seeing none, um, I will close public hearing and I will, um, pass it to the commission. Starting with, um, Commissioner Kudson, I mean, sorry, Commissioner Rogan. Is there a motion? Uh, I'm not seeing any comments here on the dis. So, if you'd like to make your motion, go ahead. Um, agenda item 51, project number 2500. Make a motion for approval sub to any conditions. Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Uh, Commissioner Casana. I Commissioner Rogan. Okay. All right. That uh please post. And that motion carries. Thank you folks very much. Thank you. Um all right. Next out of order we're going to do is item number 52 which is um 25-0078 SDR1 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed one-story 4,194 square foot trade school development with waiverss of the title 19.09 09 formbbas based code development standards generally located at the southeast corner of Jefferson Avenue and D Street Ward 5 Summers Armstrong staff recommends approval. Good evening again please. Uh oh y madam chair. Sorry I was I was uh away from the dis. Uh item 51 will move on to city council on May 21st. I apologize for rushing through things while you were away from the dis director. Um Okay. May I please have the staff report? Oh, they are the staff report. Okay. May I please have the staff report starting with your name, uh, spell it, and your addresses, please. Thanks. Good evening, Madam Chair. Rosa Cortez, city of Las Vegas, city engineer, deputy director of public works. Sam Tolman, architecture project manager for the city, 8141 Orchard Glenn Avenue. First, um, I'd like to give special thanks to Dr. Tammy Malich for being a supporter of the project and helping us out with this design. This is going to complete the campus over at the historic Westside um, school area. And I'll show you some of the exhibits that we have. This project is going to be called the strong future career connection center. It will be located on the call it south norththeast corner of Adams and D Street although Adams doesn't go through the alignment there. And to the east of the boundary is an existing um strong future technology training center. And currently north of these two areas is a project under construction which is our westside education and training center. That is a co-op project with CSN. That project will be complete this summer. So this project that we're presenting today will complete this area, this campus here. Here is the overall site plan. This project, as I mentioned, is going to complete the campus buildout and it also supports the transition from the education and training that is already happening here in this area and helping the students into actual jobs. Sam can uh talk about the details. This is the uh future career connection center. Uh it's got uh classroom availability, conference room availability, individual uh areas for staff and for those who are developing their career. It's all in combination with this. The Westside School has several facilities within it as well as the historic Westside Education Training Center. Uh this is the elevation looking from the south and east. If you've we don't have picture of it here, but the historic Westside Education Training Center that is under construction were compatible with that building to tie in as well as other developments across the street. This is a rendering looking from directly towards the west. And this is another rendering looking from the the north looking south west. And then here's the another rendering looking from the south. Thank you very much for the presentation. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on item 52? Please sir, come down. Um, take one of the microphones, state your name, and spell it for the record. And, uh, the applicant could just step aside for a moment. Thank you. Um, and then give us your address. My name is William McCertie, Senior. Uh, I've been actively involved in historic West Las Vegas. I'm very familiar with the project is going on in that particular area because of the fact that doing previous council members uh I've worked uh to help uh incur to encourage uh redevelopment in West Las Vegas. So, I'm very happy that the city of Las Vegas is doing its part and uh Commissioner Armstrong along with the Mayor Shelley Berkeley is doing a good job by trying to keep things moving forward in that particular area, especially on D Street. D Street is a historical street in our community. Uh if you don't remember, it used to be the Jefferson Center. uh on that particular partial and I'm very glad to see that uh CSN has partnered with uh uh the city to develop that area and I'm very happy to know that next door uh they will have another fivetory building going up there that uh a former planning commissioner has been involved in. So, uh, I'm encouraging the commission to do the right thing by keeping West Las Vegas and historical West Las Vegas moving forward by approving that phase of the project. Thank you, sir, for your comments. Commissioner Weekley, you want to state and spell your name for the record and give us your address? Hi. Good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. Thank you so very much for this opportunity to be here this evening. Uh, first of all, I'd like to uh introduce myself, uh, Dr. Lawrence Weekly, College of Southern Nevada. Uh today, uh we are very elated uh to say that we are in 100% support of this partnership. Thank you so very much. Um Dr. Tammy Malage, I can't thank you enough and the team for making this happen. Uh, Madame Chair and commissioners, this dates back to a time when Commissioner Munford's father had the vision of making sure that there was some form of job training in this community. And when you look at all of the development that's taking place now, we call it the Wetsy, Workforce Education Training Center, which is underway. Tomorrow in Carson City up at the legislature is workforce development day. And so projects like this is being celebrated. And so thank you to the city of Las Vegas staff. Thank you all so very much commissioners uh for your support. Uh to our council woman uh we're absolutely elated uh to all the visionaries and then partnering with our commissioner William Mccertie I um it's just a great day for West Las Vegas. And so Madam Chair, we thank you and we urge you all to 100% support this item. Thank you. Thank you so much for your comments. Folks, if you're on this item, please come up. Sir, please come up to the microphone. You can come up. Yep, absolutely. He'll speak first and then you can start speaking. Good evening again, Commissioners. Leonard Martin, resident at 623 Harrison Avenue, Las Vegas Nevada 89106. Uh, the Historic West Side Community Association is in favor of these bills of training. Uh, I was looking at your offsets with the climate control rising in the city of Las Vegas. Where will the students be able to stand outside in the temperatures of 118 degrees? That offset with those trees look very slim out there. You know, I was looking at the the diagram on the monitor. But we in we encouraging more bills and training in the neighborhood and the community. Also, we would help this we reflect on the STEM center at the historic Westside Grammar School where where the community can get involved more involved in uh uh proclamating what they would like to see in the in this neighborhood. So, we would help in essence all this would come together and the the next generation will form the community. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for your comments, sir. Sir, go ahead. Hi, my name is Muhammad Abdullah. I'm uh the uh husband of Gwindelyn Walker. Uh as you all know, she's been the neighborhood watch captain for uh the Valley View a neighborhood for over 40 years. And I just want to say I'm grateful to see that you all are developing that that connector uh for employment and uh the trade school is definitely needed and we fully support that. Just want to make sure that we uh account for any type of weather uh uh exchanges that we may uh may experience particularly with the uh the the climate change and the heat that we're expecting this summer. So please consider that before you make your your decision. Thank you so much. Thank you for your comments. Hello, my name is Miriam Gibson and I'm a business owner in the historic west side and I I uh commend you for having such things like a trade school over there because it is well needed. You know, we need support uh the business people that offer services there would like a center like that in the area to train some of the local people to work in some of the jobs that that we want to bring into the community. So uh I can say that is very well welcomed and thank you and hopefully you will support support this. Thank you. Thank you ma'am for your comments. Anybody else um from the public wishing to be heard on item 52. Okay seeing none I will close public comment. Um is there anything else that you that the applicant I'll invite the applicant back up and see if you had any comments any further comments for us. No, if you have any com questions for us, we're ready to Okay. answer your questions. We concur with staff recommendations. Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Um All right. So, I'm going to turn it over to the commission starting with um Commissioner Munford. Thank you for uh everybody from the community coming up and showing support for this project and thank you for City of Las Vegas. And uh I agree with everybody. This is a project that is important to that community. Um sometimes people in the community in that area, you know, feel that they're forgotten in the in the overall mix of this city. So it's a very good project and and like uh Commissioner Weekley said, my father was an educator and he would love to see something like this in our community. Are you prepared to make a motion, Commissioner? I think I just got a question. I just want to know it says trade school. I just And anybody knows I'm for the service base as well, construction. What What exactly is just going to be taught there? That's my question. Sure. So, um when I showed the um campus buildout photo and I mentioned the CSN campus, what we have at CSN campus just north of here is advanced manufacturing medical IT and construction. So once they learn that skill and they're ready to go to the workforce, they will utilize this facility that we are going to be constructing to transition into the workforce. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Thank you for that question. Anybody else from the commission have any questions or comments? No. Okay. Um, Commissioner Runford, are you ready to make a motion? I'd like to like to make a motion for approval uh of item 52 25-000078 SDR1. I'd like to move for approval per all conditions of of the planning department. Thank you, Commissioner. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. Commissioner Rogan, please post. And that motion carries. And that it item is final action tonight and must appeal to the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you very much. Okay, let's go back to item number 13. Aance renotification [Music] 24-0640 B1 applicant owner Harbor Cove Properties LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow a proposed front yard wall that does not conform to Title 19.06 development standards for height at 2980 Harbor Cove Drive, Ward 4, Alan Pinsky. Staff recommends approval. Um, may we please have the staff report? Madame Chair, the subject site is an irregularshaped lot that meets NRS requirements for the granting of a variance. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested variance. Please note, additional documents of protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Um, can you please state and spell your name for the record, give us your address, and tell us about your project? Alan Harvey. H A R V Y 29 sorry Alan Harvey H A R V Y uh 2980 Harbor Cove Drive. Um I'm applying for a variance just to move my wall out further to the sidewalk. Okay. Did you have anything you wanted to show us from the project or pictures or anything? Going to go through everything. Sorry. Um, okay. I don't know how large that is, but that's the that's the site plan here. Um, it is one of the larger properties within Harbor Cove. The the wall itself is this wall here, and I'm hoping to bring it out within 16 in of this sidewalk here. Okay. Not along the full length, just partially um just past just past that tree there at the moment. That's not a very good photograph, but um my wall here is one block down from this wall here, which is right on the sidewalk. Um that's that's not even worth showing you. Is that it's that safety? Um, but if we look at an aerial view, this is the wall I have at the moment. Um, and this is the sidewalk. Okay, I am trying to bring the wall out towards the sidewalk. And if you can understand this drawing, the wall will actually then look like this. Okay. So, it's within 16 in of the sidewall. This is 85 ft. Um, I have all sideyard as opposed to rear yard. Um, the wall itself, the height won't change. Um, all along Harbor Cove, there are same height walls that are on adjacent to the sidewalk. In fact, there's even a let in there for the um fire hydrant. Again, this is all along Harbor Cove Street. As you can see, all that side of the street is all wall, same height as I'm going for next to the uh sidewalk on Bay Harbor. No, sorry, Sun Lake Drive. These walls here are actually over 10 feet high. Perspective, that's an 80 pound dog. Just to give you a perspective of the height, right onto the sidewalk. Again, a let in for the fire hydrant. This is the wall adjacent to my property. There's a park here. This wall is right on the sidewalk and this is where it actually turns in to inside my property. But this is over six feet high, this wall, and it is right on the sidewalk. Um that's it. I I went to several neighbors for um um uh basically confirmation of agreement is that's my wording. I put that plan to them. Um and all of the neighbors well most of the neighbors opposite uh agreed to it. A few adjacent neighbors also signed that document. Um that's it. Sorry. Okay, that's as much as I can say. Okay, fantastic. Thank you, sir. Um, if you wanted to just um step aside for a moment. This has been noticed for public hearing. So, members of the public wishing to be heard on item 13, please come down and um we'll start the two-minut timer. And if you hear something um from one of your other neighbors, um please feel free to see to say ditto if it's what you were going to say. Um, and let's try to not be repetitive. And if anybody else is here for 13, please come down, line up, um, so we can get rolling through public comment. So, welcome back, sir. Thank you. Please state and spell your name for the record, and give us your address. Uh, good evening, Madam Chair and commissioners. My name is David Bray. It's spelled B R A Y, and I am corporate counsel for the homeowner, the Harbor Cove Homeowners Association. Uh, we respectfully ask that you deny this request in its entirety. And our position rests on two fundamental points. first that the variance request does not meet the standards outlined in NRS278 or the Las Vegas Municipal Code as it is not supported by the legal framework that the Nevada Supreme Court handed out in the Enterprise Citizens Action Committee versus the Clark County Board of Commissioners and second that the request does not comply with established procedural protocols as evidenced by overwhelming lack of community support. Let me first begin by addressing the heart of the matter. Uh Mr. Mr. Harvey's request for the variance does not meet the legal definition of a hardship required under the law. As the Nevada Supreme Court clarified in the Enterprise case, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate a legal concship that justifies granting the variance. And a hardship is defined as something that significantly makes it more difficult for the property owner to u not to not be resolved without a variance. It must involve circumstances that are unique to the property such as economic loss, a deprivation of all beneficial use, or situations where the property cannot yield a reasonable return if used in according with existing zoning. Mr. Harvey's request, however, fails to meet any of this criteria. The hardship he claims is based solely on aesthetic preferences and personal convenience, such as wanting more privacy, addressing dog waste, and preventing loitering. These are not hardships as defined by Nevada law. Privacy concerns, as Mr. Harvey has expressed, can be can be easily addressed through less intrusive means such as privacy hedges or other landscape treatments. Dog waste and loitering are issues that Mr. Harvey, as the board president of the Harvard Cove Homeowners Association, has authority to address through enforcement of community rules. As such, these concerns do not justify a variance for a wall that exceeds permissible height lengths. Sir, you're at two minutes. Is that everything? Uh, I quickly I want to address another issue is the the deviation from the protocol for obtaining approval from Harbor Cove Homeowners Association. In the application, it was submitted at ARC approval. Um, there is evidence to indicate that was submitted to the commissioners that the approval was done uh improperly, was incomplete. The master association has not been has not approved it. um and that it is fundamentally flawed to rely upon that given the fact that there's significant um community opposition to this wall. Thank you. Thank you, sir, very much. Anybody else here for item 13? Come on up and line up at the microphones, please folks. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the planning commission. My name is Robert Kmer. I live at 8109 Sunset Cove Drive for the past 10 years. I'm retired land use attorney. Tonight I'm here as a homeowner and I'm representing uh or on behalf of 75 individual full-time residents who have submitted written objections to this variance request. It's in your record. That number is not incidental. 52 homes participated in the latest HOA election. 51 homes tonight uh submit objections. There's a clear indicator of deep community engagement and an overwhelming consensus among the residents that the variance must be denied. He's seeking to move an 85- ft wall directly adjacent to the sidewalk. This is a frontage wall. The examples that applicant showed you were sidewalls. We do have sidewalls along the sidewalk. We do not have a single frontage wall that goes along the sidewalk. In addition, the HOA development standards both at the subdivision and at the master community level prohibit any kind of frontage wall uh in the uh that doesn't comply with the setback. The HOA attorney has clearly stated that he provides no applicant provides no credible evidence that there's anything in the configuration of the parcel that prohibits him from using his land to the full beneficial use as it's currently zoned uh which is residential. He has deviated from the standard procedures. He's bypassed the subdivision. He's bypassed the master. He's gone directly to you. And he hasn't met the Title 19 hardship. In conclusion, to approve the variance would be to ignore title 19 standards, the overwhelming voice of the residents, the foundational design principles of our neighborhood, and I would respectfully urge the planning commission to deny the variance request so that we don't end up with a walledin corridor along one side of the street. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, sir. Anybody else? And if you're here on this item, please come stand at the microphones. Good evening, Tracy Truman on behalf of Alex Maldonado who lives directly across the street from the applicant. And I would say ditto to what Mr. Kmer and Mr. Bray have said. In addition to that, the uh the thing that Mr. Maldonado brings is his constant everyday view of what appears to be a construction company that's doing business across the street. It appears that the wall really is a guise for extending the the yard of the applicant so that he can park more vehicles and do a larger volume of business and we oppose that. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Anybody else on item 13? Good afternoon. My name is Al Alejandra Maldonado. Um, I live right across the street from the property in question. My comment is very simple. You heard pretty much everything that needs to be said, but living across the street from Mr. Paul is like living across the street from Home Depot. Every day something going on. You can see pictures. I have uh close to 500 pictures and videos of the everyday uh things that happened there. And I'm sure you didn't get more than a few because that's more or less what it's supposed to be. But uh every day people coming in and out and all he wants is to move the wall so he can put a gate there and park his equipment and trucks and everything there. And I'm the only one affected because the neighbor next door died not too long ago and the other people on the other side which is the only neighbors across the street they never here. They from Japan I think or something like that. So I'm the only one that is affected. So I had to you know make an individual effort to stop this guy from moving the wall. Thank you. Thank you for your comments sir. Anybody else for public hearing on this item? All right. Seeing none, I'm going to close public hearing. Call the applicant back up to the podium. Sir, is there anything else you would like to add? Yeah, I don't know where they're getting the idea of putting a gate in. I don't know where he's got an idea of um putting trucks behind there. Um do I run a construction business from my home? Um, actually I'm a I'm a I'm a handyman and I keep tools in my garage. I don't keep equipment. Um, yes, I put something in my truck every day because I need tools every day. Um, uh, there is um, as it was first bought up uh, when the the property opposite was being worked on, people were sat underneath my trees. I found um packets, uh candy wrappers, cans, and I'm I'm very often cleaning up dog feces. Now, um also I've had people walk along and they peer over the wall as it stands um saying they thought it was an extension to the park. Um now, by moving that wall towards the um sidewalk, keeping it the same height, I don't want to raise it up at all. Okay, it appears to be 5'8 because the land actually is on a gradient at the moment. Okay. Uh when you walk up to the wall up the um across the land, it's only about 5 ft. Um and that's all I want to do is just bring the wall forward. I'm not interested in putting another gate in it. Many years ago, I put an application in to see if I could put a gate. They said no. Wiped away. Um, yes, it is on the frontage of my property, but I do have 212 ft of frontage. Um, I don't really have a side because everything is on the side of my property. Uh, there is still going to be over 100 ft of frontage. Um, Mr. Maronardo does live opposite me, opposite the front of my house in the garage. He doesn't live opposite where the wall will be built. the wall will be over in that direction, but the the wall will have nothing to do with what my business does. I don't understand that uh argument. Sorry, that's it. Sorry. Okay. Thank you very much. Um I'm going to turn this back over to the commission, starting with Commissioner Kasama. Thank you, Chair. I cause a lot of feelings on both sides and I appreciate hearing each of us as it stands to this I think are brief in my discussion it seemed that this does a 27 regarding because of the regular as a traditional we are things through NRS codes and with that in mind requirement for um request for so with that in mind the commission I will motion to approve okay um seeing no other comments from the commission there is a motion on the floor for this item. Um motion to approve item 13. Please cast your votes. Oh, are there con sorry subject to all conditions? And sir, you agree to all those conditions that are in that are provided by staff? Yes. Okay. Right. Commissioner Rogan, hi. Commissioner Casana. All right. Uh please post and that motion carries. And madam chair that item is final action tonight unless appealed to the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you very much. Okay, let's move back in order um to item number 22 that is obeyance 24-0631 applicant Stone Land Holdings LLC owner Clark County vacant series of the CAB properties LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project request at the northeast corner of Alexander Road and El Capitan Way Ward 4 Alan Pollinsky staff recommends denial on the Land use entitlement subp parts item 22A obeyance 24-0631 Z1 from RE residents estates to R1 single family residential 22B obeyance 24-0631 VAR1 to allow private streets that do not conform to title 19.04 complete street standards for private street requirements and street terminations other than at intersections. Item 22 C Aance 24-0631 TMP1 Alexander and El Capitan for proposed 19 lot single family residential subdivision with a waiver of the perimeter landscape buffer requirements. May we have the staff report please. Madame Chair Jonathan Boils for the record. Staff notes the submitted tenative map has been amended from 19 lots to 12 lots. However, staff does not support the requested variances that would allow substandard street widths, street terminations, and allowing residential lots to extend into the street center line to satisfy setback requirements in the R1 single family residential zoning district. Therefore, staff recommends denial of all entitlement requests. Please note that there is a revised staff report and new landscape planned date stamped March 24th, 2025 in your supplemental packet. Also staff notes two additional conditions of approval must be added to tenative map 24631 TMP1. The first condition states post no outlet signs at entryway of private streets and the second condition states paint the curbing red and post no parking signs on the non-standard street termini. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. if you could please uh state your name and give us your address and give us an overview of the project. Yes. Good evening. Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here tonight on behalf of the applicant. The site is located just to the north of Alexander Road and on the east side of El Capitan Way. As your staff indicated, the plan has changed from what was originally submitted. The original submitt contained a request for 19 lots and with that there was a number of lots that were less than 10,000 square feet in size. The site is part of the planning area B of the interlocal agreement. And so the revision that's before the planning commission tonight reduces the total number of lots from 19 lots to a total number of 12 lots. and it does comply with the requirement that they all be 10,000 uh square feet. The subdivision will be accessed off of this street. Uh the street that I'm pointing out is in gray right here. And then this is our turnaround. We have worked with fire uh during the application process and it indicates on this uh the hammerhead turnaround shown complies with the city of Las Vegas turnaround amendments. So that um complies with what fire needs it to look like. In addition to that though, to address some concerns that we have heard, we would be agreeing to those two additional conditions which would require a no outlet sign to be posted and maintained privately but towards the front of our private street so that nobody would think this was a through street. And then in addition, the second condition addressed this area where the turnaround is. The curving around that would be painted red and there would also be no parking signs there to ensure that it was clear for any type of turnaround that needed to occur in that area. We are providing a 10-ft pathway along Alexander Road. Um we do have a waiver to allow 5t of landscaping. It's actually detached, but 5t of landscaping instead of six feet. What we did is we expanded the um area of that sidewalk. Instead of being eight feet, it's 10 feet. And so um because of the nature of the way this parcel sits uh and how we had to lay it out, that one foot actually makes a big difference if we want to try to do some singlestory homes. This is a community of one and twostory homes. Um, all the homes to the north of us are every home in red is a twostory home. And so you can see we've got some two stories to the north of us. And so um, we would like our buyers to have the option for one or twostory homes. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. And again, we do agree to the additional uh, conditions of approval that were read into the record by staff. Um, okay. This item has been noticed for public comment. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on item 22? Uh, looks like we've got a couple. Miss Lazovich, if you could just step back, that'd be great. Good evening. My name is Robert Phillips and I live a few streets away from this property at 8704 Monarchy Court. The builder's requesting a zoning variance to change this parcel from RE to R1, which in itself is a very drastic change. That's a change from a minimum lot size of 18,000 square ft down to 6,500. This is a drastic change and does not align with the existing neighborhood. The homes immediately to the north of this parcel sit on lots of approximately uh uh 20,000 square ft. Reducing lot sizes from 20,000 square ft all the way down to 12,000 square feet is excessive and out of character with the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, our neighborhood recently or or our neighborhood currently averages about 8.2 homes per 5 acre parcel. This developer is proposing 12 homes on the same amount of land, 5 acre parcel. That's a staggering 46% increase in housing density, population density, and the schools in our neighborhood are already overcrowded. Centennial High School is overcrowded. There's an elementary school up the street. It is overcrowded, and this is just going to add to it. uh conclusion approving this variance would be would set a troubling precedent for our neighborhood and I strongly urge you to to deny this zoning variance request. Thank you. Thank you for your comments, sir. Anybody else on item 22 for public comment? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment and I will invite the applicant back up. Um Miss Lazovich, is there anything you would like to add? Uh yes, just two quick points. Um just want to reiterate again that the plan that's before you tonight has all minimum 10,000 square foot lots. The original plan showed lot sizes that were reduced down to 6500. In addition, this application doesn't have a general plan amendment associated with it and it's noted in the staff report that the density and the zoning that we're asking for does comply with the general plan for the area. As you can see on this overhead, thank you. As you can see on this overhead, the yellow is consistent just to the uh east of us with the same zoning designation that we are asking for. In addition, Alexander Road is, I believe, 100 foot wide street and El Capitan is 80. And um but I think the most important point is that this does comply with uh the the master plan for the area and we are complying with the interlocal in terms of lot sizes. Great. Thank you, Miss Lazovich. Um I'm going to turn it back over to the commission. Um before I turn it over to Commissioner Kasama, Commissioner Rogan, I'm going to turn it over to you first. Thank you, Chair. Um I just need to make a record that I'll be standing on this matter. The staff report indicates that this item lies within the planning area B of the interlocal agreement between Clark County and the city. I'm an attorney for Clark County. It would be the responsibility of my office to enforce any violations of the interlocal agreement between the county and the city and for that reason I cannot vote on this matter. Thank you, Commissioner Commissioner Casama. Thank you, Chair. Also apologize, but regarding the the questions with the zoning issues local street. So with that make a motion to approve. [Applause] Okay. Um, commissioner is breaking up a little bit. I think there's a motion to approve this item, but let me just make sure any comments from the dis. Okay. So, there is a motion to approve item 24-0631 and all its subp parts subject to all conditions um including the two new conditions that were just read in and Commissioner Kasama, just wanted to get that on the record since you were breaking up a little bit. Um, so that is the motion. It's on the floor. Um, Commissioner Kasama. Hi. Okay, great. Uh, please post. And that passes and Madam Chair, that will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Thank you. All right. We are going to temporarily trail item 23. Um, and we are going to go to item 26. This is obeyance renotification-24-0616 applicant CBLC LLC. Owner Cindy El Braden for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at the southeast corner of Harrison Avenue and Owens Avenue. W five, Summer Armstrong. Staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project subp part or sub application 26A obeyance renotification 24-0616 VR1 to allow sub street termini where a culde-sac or hammerhead terminus is required and to allow a private street that does not conform to title 19.04 04 complete street standards for public street requirements. Item 26B obeyance renotification-24-0616 WVR1 to allow a single family attached residence that does not conform to title 19.09 formbbase code standards for setback and frontage standards lot 1 2 obeyance renotification 24-0616 WVR2 to allow a single family attached residence that does not conform to title 19.09 09 form-based code standards for setback lot coverage and frontage standards lot 26D obeyance renotification 24-0616 WVR3 to allow a single family attached residence that does not conform to title 19.09 formbbase code standards for setback lots coverage and frontage standards lot 3 26E obeyance renotification 24-0616 WVR4 to allow a single family attached residence that does not conform to title 19.09 09 formbbased code standards for setback lot coverage and frontage standards lot 4 26F obeyance renotification 24-0616 WVR5 to allow a single family attached residence that does not conform to totalit 19 title 19.09 form-based code standards for setback and frontage standards lot 5 26G obeyance renotification 24-0616 SDR1 for proposed three-story 6-unit multif family residential development with waiverss of title 19.09 709 formbbased code standards and 26H obeyance renotification 24.0616 TMP1 Owens and Harrison residential for a five lot single family attached and one six-unit multifamily condominium subdivision with waiverss of title 19.09 formbbased code standards. Um may we please have the staff report? Madame Chair, staff finds the proposed residential development is compatible with the adjacent development and redevelopment vision within the surrounding area of the subject site. Typical yard spaces and setbacks are difficult to meet given the unusual site shape. The unique shape and limited dimensions of the subject site create an extraordinary circumstance wherein it would be a hardship to achieve conformance to title 1909 formbbased code requirements. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the requested waiverss, varants, site development plan review, and tenative map. Please note, additional documents of support were received after publication. Thank you. Uh thank you. Good evening. Um folks, if you can please state and spell your name for the record and um tell us a little bit about your project. Good evening. Landon Christopherson spelled C H R I S T O P H E R S O N 2885 East Quail Avenue 89120. With me today is Cindy Braden, the developer. And what we have for you is a 1.55 acre parcel that's nestled between Owens Avenue, which is a oneway heading to the west, and Harrison, which is a oneway heading to the east. the parcel itself um is those those streets are are master streets which limit the amount of access that can be on those streets. So therefore working with staff we developed an on street private street that comes in to give access to both the town homes and the condo. The street itself, the variance is because it is a dead-end street and it doesn't meet those standards. But we do provide 28 feet from flow line to flow line which meets the requirements for public safety. The along with that on street on on-site street staff has asked that we dedicate an additional six feet for a detached sidewalk along Owens. And with that would be an amenity zone at the back of curb and also provide a pedestrian access across to the island to provide um crossings there at H the the project itself meets all parking standards. We do have an additional five spaces which is the driveways for the town homes but we can't count those towards the parking spaces but they can be used by the homeowner. The units themselves the town homes is 1584 ft. Three bedroomedroom two and a half bath with a onecar garage. the condominiums. There's two different floor plans, six total units. Three twobedroom, one bath, 933 square ft. Three threebedroom, two bath 1,137 square ft. And these products are again for sale. The landscaping provided is will meet the requested landscape material for the city of Las Vegas ward five. It is spaced at uh 20 ft apart and the architectural is a contemporary modern with uh with the accents either being material or color and texture. And with that the condominium also matches so it it becomes one contiguous project. We have uh read staff's report. We appreciate their approval. We concur with their findings and conditions and here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you very much sir. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any item or sorry are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item? If you're here for this item, please come down and stand up at a microphone so we can move through. Um sir, you did you spoke on this item during the general public hearing? Correct. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Got anything else to add that we didn't hear now that you've heard the presentation? I support it. I'm in love with it. And if I wasn't disabled, I would buy me a property. I'm right adjacent across the street from that 623 and I'm tired. I don't want to look at no funeral home and death for my rest of my days to be here. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Ma'am. Yeah. My name is Marian Gibson and I am the uh president of the historic black uh community uh neighborhood association. Saturday, me and the vice president of the organization went out and talked to the neighbors all around adjacent to that property that that they're building and they all in agreement. 80 85% of them that we we we interviewed said that they all agree because they want more uh properties coming into the neighborhood that is extending uh ownership. So, they are in agreement with that. Just thought I'd let you know. I just want to thank her. Yes. Thank you, ma'am, for your comments. Ma'am. Hi. Yes. My name is Gertie Pulk. I own the property at 420 Harrison. Uh is right next to uh East Street, which was uh closed off and no longer a street. And I don't know if that's what they mean when, excuse me, they're talking about the dead end street. And that's what I need to figure out because I own half of that street. I purchased it back in the 80s and I don't know if that creates a problem. Yeah. So, where's the where's the project? your property 420 is right next to Yeah, that that doesn't affect Okay, that's all I needed to know. That's all I needed to know. Um sir, on the right Oh, you guys pick who wants to go first. Okay, go ahead, commission. Great. I want you to speak. Yes, my name is Muhammad Abdullah and representing Gwen Walker and the uh Walker African-American Museum and Research Center which is right in that impacted area. We want to say we're in full agreement and support of that particular project. We need it. Thank you so much. Thank you. I am William McCertie Senior. Um I am very much in support of that particular project because of the simple fact in the Edund Town Center is 90% full. There is a potential grocery store wants to come to West Las Vegas which is a California company but they cannot reside or they could not go into the old bo's market because after doing a feasibility study there's not enough rooftops in historical West Las Vegas to support that. So therefore, in order to get rooftops in West Las Vegas, uh I am supporting this project because we need rooftops so we can get another major grocery chain in our community. Back in the 50s and 60s, uh, I was very much involved in the Golden West Shopping Center and the Lucas Plaza across the street where we had all of these fine fine stores, Wonderorld West and Ben Franklin's and a lot of different stores in that community. But without these rooftops, we would not be able to rebuild or bring businesses into West Las Vegas. So, I'm very much in support and I will do anything to support economic uh survival in that community. As you are aware, Clark County Commissioner William Mccuri second uh who's my son, he got a project being built close to that area. Also, we got all kind of development and during Oscar Goodman's term as mayor, he wanted to change the course from residential to multiuse. And I thank God that Oscar did that during his term and Carolyn's carried on and now Shel's carrying it on. Thank you, Mr. McCree for your comments. Anybody else for public comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I am going to uh close public comment and invite the applicant back up. Are is there anything you'd like to add? No. Okay, thank you so much. Um at this point, I'll turn it over to the commission starting with Commissioner Munford. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, just a few questions. Uh, the main entrance is coming off of Harrison. Yes, sir. That's that's the only entrance is off of Harrison. That will be the only entrance. Okay. Um, and are you going to have HOA or CCNR? Is there anything that has been requested? Yes, there will be an HOA. Okay. I was talking to uh the council woman. She was asking about that. Yes. Um, is there tandem parking? There is. That that that's the what I had mentioned, the driveways in front of each town home that the the the onecar garage is counted towards the parking, but that driveway is not, but it will be as usable for the homeowner. Okay. And then the the town homes have a garage. Correct. Yes, sir. One car. And the tan the tan parking isn't in the garage though, right? No, no, it's a the garage with the driveway behind it. Okay. Um are anybody are are you going to have any kind of restrictions in terms of if somebody buys the units, can they rent those can they flip those units to investors or rent those units out as investors? No. Okay, good. This is strictly for this community and uh we will not be selling or renting to anybody that are investors. We're looking for the firsttime home buyer. We've put this price point for this community specifically for this community. May I ask what the price point is? Uh 280 to 325. Okay. Um and then um for your landscape plan um what what kind of trees do you have trees on the I think yeah I see you have trees are what what size of trees are you going to be installing there? There will be 24inch box. Okay. Um, and again, I do have two species that are on the recommended list that staff has said that if it is approved, I do have to change those and we will make those corrections. Would it be possible to to go to 36 in just uh from the get-go to supply have a better canopy and shade in that area? We can look at that, Commissioner. The the the concern is is price point. We're trying to to meet a price point. So with every dollar that we spend on construction, it's an increase in the cost to the homeowner. So we're just trying to keep those costs low, but we can look into that. Appreciate that. Yeah. And then is it is the is the area around is that gated or fenced in? Yes, it will be uh rot iron. Okay. All right. Any that's all the questions I have. Thank you very much. Um, seeing no other comments from the commission, although um, and I didn't hear from Commissioner Kasama or Rogan that they had comments. Are you prepared to make a motion? Um, madam commissioner Fred Solis for the record. Um, I'd like to read a condition in oh for this item. Okay. Thank you. So this would be for 26H and the condition is in conjunction with creation, declaration and recordation of the subject common interest community and prior to the recordation of the covenants codes and restrictions CCNR uh or conveyance of any unit within the community. The developer shall record a declaration of private maintenance requirements DPMR as a covenant on all all associated properties and on behalf of all current and future property owners. The DPMR shall include a listing of all privatelyowned and/or maintain infrastructure improvements along with assignment of maintenance responsibility for each of the common interest community or the respective individual property owners and shall provide a brief description of the required level of maintenance for privately maintained components. Uh the DPMR must be reviewed and approved by the city of Las Vegas Department of Field Operations. prior to recordation and shall include a statement that all properties within the community are subject to the assessment for all associated costs should provide should private maintenance uh obligations not be met and the city of Las Vegas be required to provide for said maintenance. Also, the CCNR are to include a statement of obligation of compliance with the DPMR. Uh following recordation, the developer shall submit a copy of the recorded DPMR and CCNR documents to the city of Las Vegas Department of Field Operations. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. CIS. So, um Madam Chair, just in the uh just to let you know that the council woman, she was she was asking about the DPMR and those CCNRs. So, yes. Okay. Yeah, we were aware. Okay. Um, do you have a a motion, Commissioner Meford? Uh, I'd like to motion for approval um um for item 26 uh 24-0 advance notification 24-06 uh 16 and items additional items of 26A through 26 H uh per uh what uh what the uh planning staff just talked about with with uh the deep uh the DPMR. I I I'd like to motion for approval per um per planning um recommendations and that's subject to all conditions. Subject to all conditions. Correct. Thank you, Commissioner. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Uh Commissioner Kasama, I. Commissioner Rogan, Please post. And that motion carries. And that item will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Okay. We're now going to go back to item 23, obeyance renotification 24-0668, applicant Silver Desert Estates Limited Partnership, owner, United States of America, for possible action on the following land use entitlement project request at the northeast corner of Hickham Avenue and Jordanville Street. Ward 4, Alan Pinsky. Staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project 23A obeyance renotification 24-066801 from U undeveloped PCD planned community development general plan designation to PD planned development 23B oveance renotification 24-0668 mod to amend the Lone Mountain West master development plan to change the land use designation from PF public facilities to MFM multif family medium residential obeyance ance re oh sorry 23 C obeyance renotification 24-0668 V1 to allow 21t tall retaining walls where 6 feet is the maximum allowed and an overall wall height of 21 ft where 12 ft is the maximum allowed. Item 23d obeyance renotification 24-0668 SDR1 for proposed three-story 282 unit senior citizen apartments development. Um, may I please have the staff report? Madame Chair, the proposed development will provide senior housing to the Low Mountain West community, which has the capacity to accommodate the higher density required for this project. The development has been designed with sensitivity to existing adjacent single family residential properties as well as incorporating the existing topography into the site for use as open space. The requested variance for retaining and perimeter wall heights meets the requirements set forth by NRS for the granting of a variance with the site's extreme topography. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the requested resoning modification variance and site development plan review. Please note additional documents of protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Uh good evening. Can you please state and spell your name for the record and give us your address and tell us about the project? Yes. Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here tonight on behalf of the applicant. This is the location of the property. This is the 215 to the east and to the south is Hickham Avenue. The project um by way of background, the BLM owns the property today and it's my understanding that the city has a reservation on it uh to be used for a very specific purpose. The intended use for it is for seniors, those are 55 and older who are on a fixed income. In January of 2024, the city put out a request for proposal to see if they could attract developers to develop this in a 55 and older um project for people on a fixed income. And in April of 2024, the RFP was awarded to Palendrum. The um RFP puts forth the AMI or the area median income levels that the city wants to see the rent set at and the target range is 30 to 80% AMI. What's before you tonight is a multifamily project again for people who are 55 uh years of age and older on a fixed income. And the entrance and access access would be here off of Hickham to the south. Um, I'm going to spend a minute talking about the what I'll call the aoyo in the middle. We do there's a pretty significant amount of fall that runs from the west to the east towards the 215. It's about 41 ft. That drives the need for the wall variance. Um, the wall variance is going to specifically be along our west boundary and along our north boundary. There are existing screen walls or subdivision walls on those two boundaries today. And while our variance is asking to go to a height of 21 ft, that's because of that significant retaining and um slope that goes from west to east. So that 21 foot tall wall will be seen on our side of the project interior to the site. It will not be seen above those existing walls that are to the west and to the north. In terms of site layout and site design, we have this existing kind of a royal wash that goes through the middle. I'll show you a rendering of what we anticipate that that would look like, but we are trying to take advantage of what some of the topography is within the the center of the site. This um site, I think this colored site plan, I think, is maybe one of the most important that I can show. Uh, everything in blue is a twostory building. Everything in blue is a two-story building. So, everything along our western edge, again, there are homes that sit on the other side of Jordanville Street here. So, everything on our western edge is a maximum height of two stories. That would be right around 30 feet. Everything on our north is also in blue. Again, there are homes to the north of us. That too is at a twostory elevation for a maximum height of right around 30 ft. Where you get the 35 ft or the threetory component of this project is everything in this beige color. So that would be along the beltway here and then right in the center of the site. So, when this application was filed, um there was specific attention paid to the fact that there are homes to the north and to the west, and we wanted to make sure that the three-story component to this was over by the beltway and not to the north and not to the west on our site plan. This gives you an idea, kind of a rendering of what that aoyo part would look like in the middle of the site. You can also see how uh the elevations of the twostory would look in this area and then kind of in the middle you see here where that threetory component is. This is just a not as pretty of a picture. Um and then that gives you let me see if there's any other ones I wanted to show. I think that the two things we did do a neighborhood meeting in January. Um a number of neighbors were there. I'm sure there there will be some here to speak tonight. They had concerns over the traffic on Hickham. Um there are already a number of cars that park up and down Hickham, the density. Um at one point this was uh planned um for a library as they told us. So I had to go and research what that was about. But a lot of it also there was talk about the views or what's this what is this going to look like from our front yard or our backyard. So we had the architects create this rendering. This would be if you were sitting on the other side of Jordanville Street. And those front yards face Jordanville, which is this street right here. And then this is that subdivision's block wall. Our block wall will not be taller than this. Again, that very tall wall sits on our side, not to the uh existing neighbors. And then beyond that, um you'll start to see the roof lines of the twotory building. I won't say you won't see anything, but it's just the top of the roofs. It's not the entire 30 ft of that twostory building. And then if you're to the north of this project, again, two-story homes sit on the other side of this, but this would be if you were in the backyard of one of those homes and you were looking southbound. You we we're putting in landscaping on our side. And then beyond that, kind of in this area, you can start to see that roof line. So, I thought that that was an important exhibit to show relative to um what the neighbors would see to the north and to the south or excuse me to the north um looking south. A couple of other things came up during the neighborhood meeting. One was so this has this project has 282 total units. And when you talk about seniors, the code does allow for a little bit less parking than would otherwise be required for say a market rate or non senior project. We met the parking, but what we heard um was a concern because of the existing cars that are parking on on Hickham today that perhaps our project wasn't providing enough. So again, we have 282 units and by code, we'll be we would be required to provide 22 parking spaces. That takes into account that this is a senior apartment complex. However, we're now going to provide 282. So it's significantly overparked relative to how your code looks at this. But again, that was to address the concerns that cars from this project would also add to the cars that are um parking on Hickham. So, we increase the number of parking spaces that we're providing along or inside of our project. Uh we do appreciate staff recommending approval of all of these items, including the wall variants. Um just a couple of other things. These are all fully interior hallway units, which means every building will have elevator access, whether it's twotory or threetory. There will be elevators in every building. In terms of amenities for the residents who live here, um the interior amenities will include community room, exercise room, a computer room, which includes Wi-Fi for the residents, uh library, game room, and laundry. And then for the exterior, we plan on doing pool, community garden, and those walking paths that I described earlier. Um, and so with that, I am going to pause. Uh, I'll be happy to answer any questions now or after the neighbors have an opportunity to come up and talk. And we do agree with all of staff's conditions. Thank you, Miss Lazovich. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Any members of the public wishing to be heard on this, please come down to the podium. And uh I see folks moving down. Um who all here for this item? Can I get a show of hands? Okay, folks, come on down so we can like get you lined up if you're planning on speaking. Um okay. All right. Good evening, sir. Please uh state and spell your name for the record and give us your address. My name is Von Richards. V A U G HN R I C H A R D S. I was at that meeting. It sounds like she's really trying to make that that public meeting at the YMCA and she's trying to cover those items, but she's not nearly come close to the problem of parking. You got two people in, you got a twobedroom in there. If you got two people there and is for active retirees and working people, they're going to have to have a place to park. And if they're not giving them, well, they she said it would give us one parking space per per spot. But if there's two people, they're going to be two cars. It's going to be a mess. There needs to be much more parking there. The other problem that's the main problem for me is that that project does not belong there at all. That project is going to be isolated. There's no shopping. There's no stores for you know markets or hospital I mean doctors office any there's nothing in that area so it's and there's no public transportation there so it's going to be a major problem for those people I believe let's see I did a a um one of those petitions online petition things and I don't want to really read it, but I did it and I got 188 people signed that petition online and I thought that was pretty good because most people are interested in it but they're not interested enough to um get that much involved. I mean, we don't have 188 people here tonight and I don't know why not. you know, we got to not have this project here. I also have all of these right here that are in your staff report and these are all complaints about this project. Some of them have to do with the same things we're talking about and others are just other things that came up and I don't we don't need to bring all those up unless you well you already have them so your staff should have looked at them and they should know. I'm concerned. I guess my final thing would be or two final things. Uh the neighborhood I don't think is opposing this development out of a motion or resistance. We're advocating for proper land use, safety, and long-term community benefit. This parcel was placed here for a reason. It's a public facility and it's not to sell out for the future of the mountain for a poorly placed project. All right, sir. You're almost a minute over. If you could please wrap up. Okay, this is this is the last thing. No, I'm not going to say I'm let All right, partner speak first and then I will say one more thing if I might. Thank you, sir. Please state your name and spell it for the record and give us your address. Yes, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Scott Ceserone. C E S A R O N E and my address is 10539 Brownsville. Uh my property is going to be directly north of the uh proposed um property. Um I'm just here to respectfully ask this committee to deny the request um due to the fact that this part of land was zoned for public facility not multifamily dwelling. um public facility zones are designated for to serve our community and taking this away I think does not benefit the residents in our community. Um and like voiced earlier, the strain on the infrastructure um traffic talking about 20 285 units uh by a couple residents in each unit. That's quite a bit. Um Cliff Shadows, the road it's on is a 35 mile per hour. There's a uh right at Hickham and Cliff Shadows a uh school bus pickup. um just really concerned on the amount of traffic that this property is going to bring to our community. Um and finally, just the pallet of our community as well. These threestory structures in the area isn't going to fit isn't going to um be in line with uh the pallet of of what the Lone Mountain Vista's community is. So for those reasons, I'm asking um respectfully to deny this zone variance change. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Casserone. Anybody else here for public comment? If you're here for public comment on this item, please come down so we can get a sense of how many people are going to be speaking. Go ahead, Matt. Hi, Melinda Vargas for Sorry. Um I'm nervous. 4233 Jordanville. Um, I also just wanted to mention that originally we were told that it was a senior community and yes, somebody 55 and over does have to live there, but anybody else can live in that community. And I mean, that just to me, it just doesn't sit right with me, you know, because to me, if it was truly a senior community, I'm okay with that. But because anybody else can live with that senior, I mean, that to me isn't truly a senior community. So for me that's just at that point I wasn't on board with it. So um and like they said that community it there's just not enough parking for that. You know you can have two to four people living in those those units. That's like up to what 400 is 800 people living in that tiny space. It just doesn't make sense. Thank you. Thank you for your comments ma'am sir. Go ahead. Hello ma'am. I'm Stan Wilkinson. I live at 10550 West Alexander Road, which is the condominium complex uh directly to the south east of that three-story portion of the uh senior apartment is going to build. I'm probably a 100 ft from that three-story portion. So, uh I'm in opposition to the threetory aspect of it. I know most seniors don't want to live in twotory, let alone threetory. A lot of people a lot younger than that in the condos don't even want to live in a second story. Um, so I I find that a little bit out of line with the senior department portion. Um, I'm not necessarily opposed to some type of project going in there. Uh, the only other thing is I don't know what kind of background information you have on this contractor. There's a lot of information online that they did another uh, high density residential project in New Mexico. Uh, the contractor didn't finish it or upkeep the property to standards and the uh, residents are suing the contractor there in the midst of a big lawsuit that's in New Mexico. So, that can all be looked up online. So, um I'm not necessarily against the project, but I think it should be a different contractor and maybe the threetory portion goes away. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Go ahead. Hi, my name is Donna Moretti. I do live in the area. My concern about the loca about the putting so many seniors in that location is our emergency services aren't exactly in abundance in that area. I personally care for my elderly father and there have been occasions needing to call for emergency services where oftentimes it just they're really backed up and that would be my concern for myself and my family but also all of those seniors if they need to care for call for emergency services like what's the weight going to be what's the backlog and what is that going to do to the rest of the community thank you ma'am for your comments sir go ahead yeah hi my name is George Mayfield M- a file I live at 4309 Jordanville which is directly at the corner of the northwest side of the proposed site. Um, echoing with the other ditto to that what Mr. Richard said and Mr. Ceserone, um, I don't really foresee these units being kept on to one or two senior people. As the young lady just stated, it could be upwards of 850 people. Hickham Avenue, calling it an avenue, it's more like an alley. And again, right now it's fully crowded with vehicles on either side. Uh, parking is going to be expansive. And uh we do appreciate um the reservation to make the the unit bringing the level down so the this our line of sights better. However, there's no again there's no there's no public anything. There's a small Walmart about a mile away. There's no transportation and uh I think it's going to be a problem with the school children getting on and off of buses on cliff shadows. It's already heavily burdened. So, I I would I would uh be willing to compromise for units that are maybe just twotory and one story with maybe half the occupancy level. But again, that small 15 acre BLM land is uh it's it just seems like we're just trying to put a lot of people in the postage stamp. So, thanks for your time, ma'am. Thank you for your comments, sir. I am really happy that all these people came. I didn't know I had that many people that responded. That's wonderful. I'll give you 30 more seconds. 30 more seconds. 30 more seconds. That's all I want to say. Okay. What I want to say is that I know you guys are all up here and you're all concerned about does it meet the code. Does it go by all the rules that are established that this project is not a good fit for the neighborhood? It's not good for the city. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Um, is there anyone else for public comment on item 23. Okay, seeing none, I am going to close public comment and invite the applicant back up. Um, is there anything you would like to add, Miss Lazovich? I think just a couple of points I want to raise. Again, I I I do want to emphasize this is for seniors who are 55 and older. It's required to be that. That's what the RFP that the city put out. It was for seniors. What that means is that every that at least one person in the unit must be 55. Meaning you can't have somebody living in the unit who's not 55. Now you could have somebody who's 58, I suppose, married to somebody who's 52, but that 58-y old is the qualifying age. You couldn't have two 40 year olds living there. And the only way that you could have, this came up at the neighborhood meeting, only way that you could have a minor living there is if that senior was the legal guardian of that minor. In terms of this being two and three stories. Again, there was a lot of care paid to the way the site plan laid out. Um, you see very few buildings that are three-story. The majority of them are all twotory. And again, the comment was made that I don't know that seniors want to live in even a two-story, let alone a three-story. All the buildings have an elevator. So that changes the nature of wanting to live on the second story or even the third story because you're getting there by elevator rather than walking upstairs, which happens sometimes in non uh 55 years and uh uh 55 years and older communities. So I think that I will pause there and answer any questions that you might have. Thank you, Miss Lazovich. Um I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to the commission starting with Commissioner Kasama. Thank you Shar. Once again please let me know if I am cutting out um regarding this application. First and foremost, I do understand the staff and poverty as well and the request of these varies is due to the extreme topography of the land. Also very familiar with this neighborhood particularly with the neighborhood south of this uh site. And so with that I I do applaud the forward of local senior housing community. Um I think that with the elevators place it to make sense for those feature stories. Um, and once again due to the unusual topography of this particular site and the fact that these, you know, higher walls than normal um they're not inhibiting lines more than I would say normal property on a normal topography would. Um, and also speaking with public works and having city staff verify that it's not that this project would cover the parking around this area. I'm making a motion to approve item 23 of the renotification 24-068. Okay. Thank you. Um seeing no other comments from the dis um there is a motion on the floor to approve item 23 subject to all conditions. And madam chair that's 23 A through D correct? Yes sir. Thank you. 23 A through D subject to all conditions. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Rogan, Commissioner Kasama. Hi. Okay, great. Please post. And that does pass. And that item will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Great. U moving on to item 27. This is obeyance renotification 24-0650. Applicant Ibara's Commissary LLC owner Juan and Norma Martinez Family Trust for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 634 Northeastern Avenue ward 3 Diaz. Staff recommends denial on 24-0650 VR1 and SUP1. Staff recommends approval on 24-0650 SU2. 27A is the Oh, sorry. Uh 27A is the obeyance renotification. 24-0650 VR1 to allow existing perimeter walls and fences that do not conform to title 19.08 outdoor storage screening requirements. 27B is obeyance renotification 24-0650 SUP1 for proposed commissary use. 27C oveance renotification 240650 SUP2 for proposed open air vending transient sales lot use. Uh, may we please have the staff report? Madame Chair, staff finds that the proposed commissary development is not compatible with the surrounding commercial land uses in the area as evidenced by the requested variance to allow existing perimeter walls and fences that do not conform to outdoor storage screening requirements. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested variance uh 240650 VR1 and associated special use permit 24650 SUP1 for the proposed commissary land use. Also, the applicant has requested a special use permit to allow an open air vending mobile food vendor to operate on the subject site within a parking space in the front parking lot area directly in front of the building from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. where 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. is allowed adjacent to residentially zoned lot. Staff has determined that the request is suitable for the subject site due to the fact the existing residential land use located to the east of the subject site is approximately 205 ft away from where the food truck will be located and will not ne be negatively impacted by the use and operation on the subject site. Therefore, staff recommends approval of special use permit 24650 SUP2 with conditions. Please note additional documents for protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Can you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and then tell us about your project? Yes. Good evening. I'm Jonathan Ibara with Ibara's Commissary. Uh, you said spell my name. Jonathan, uh, J A T H, last name I B A R R A. Uh, I am here today to propose the approval of 634 Northeastern Avenue as a food truck and food trailer commissary. The approval of this project will also aid in the approval of 38 more business licenses for mobile food trucks. This will also keep businesses from seeking licenses in other jurisdictions. This is occurring due to the shortages of commissaries in the city of Las Vegas. As the food truck industry continues to grow in southern Nevada, we hope that we can count on your support in opening our second commissary. Thank you. Thank you. This item has been noticed for public uh comment. Are there any members of the public wishing to provide comment on this item? Good evening, ma'am. Please uh go ahead grab a microphone and state and spell your name for the record and give us your address. Good evening. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. I am uh my name is Leah Roberts. I'm the trustee of the of the Joseph G. Robert's revocable family trust that is the owner of the property at 640 and 650 northeastern which is aation to the property 60 34 that is in question tonight. I am not here to for to speak against this project. I'm here only for a clarification and that concerns the fact that right behind my building I have a design here that I made myself with my own writing being an engineer I could do that very fast right here when I'm speaking if you can see it I don't know is it this way you want to see it or the other way you can flip it okay I think okay so we this is northeastern south this way north this way Uh, this ma'am, my proper I'm sorry, ma'am. Can you move it into the box that's marked with the black tape? See? Right underneath the microphone. I don't know what you're saying. Oh, right here. Yes. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I didn't realize that. Yes. So, this is north. This is eastern south this way, north this way. This is Poppy Lane. Uh, my property is here. There, in fact, there are two parcels. This is one parcel where there is a Mexican restaurant and this is 650. That's another parcel. The 613 in question is right here south to my property. The only thing I'm here for is to clarify and I hope I do do get that tonight. Uh who is the owner of this alley that is right behind my building? Because it's an alley that comes off Poppy Lane and it's right behind my building. through your madam chair Lucian plan for the record that is public rightway so it is the city's right of way it's the city's alleyway yeah poppy lane I I couldn't hear what they said if you could repeat that sure through you madam chair it is the city of Las Vegas's public right of way okay which is exactly what I was mad madam chair through you poppy lane is is the right of way however there is a small piece of the subject site which creates an access to poppy lane which is part of the proposed Abara commissary that is part of their subject site. So there is a small piece of their site which provides access to Poppy Lane directly behind her property. I don't know what you're talking about. What is the piece of whatever it is? What is it? Is it a fence? Is it how? Because if there's there's the question about that fence that is between my property and the property east of that in other words here that is the fence that was put by the uh tenant of the that used to be here at 634 is not my fence. I have nothing to do with that fence. Okay. Absolutely none whatsoever. What is the other item that you're talking about if there is another one? Hold on one second. Let's do this because I think it's going to require a visual. So, we're gonna go ahead and trail this. I'm gonna let you speak to Mr. Boils. You guys can you can look at his maps and figure it out and then we'll bring you back up. And in the meantime, we will move on to item 28. Okay. So, just uh step over there and you can speak with our our staff. Sure. Sure. Okay. Great. That's what I'm here for. I appreciate your time. Thank you. Absolutely. Okay. So, let's move on to item number 28. Uh obeyance 25- 0003 applicant owner 712 Holdings LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 710 and 712 South First Street W3 Diaz. Staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project 28A band 25-00003 EOT1 for an approved 30173T liquor establishment tavern use with a 3,936T outdoor patio area 28B Oayance 25-00003 EOT EOT2 for the approved conversion of a single family dwelling and commercial building into a 3,173t liquor establish establishment tavern with a 3,936t outdoor patio area. Um, may we please have the staff report, madame chair, this is the applicant's fourth request for an extension of time and staff is recommending denial. Thank you. And madame chair through you. Uh I'm just going to make an abstension on this particular item as I'm under contract with the uh applicant for this property and I have an ongoing business relationship. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner. Um good evening sir. Can you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us a little about this item? Yes. Good evening madam chair and commissioners. My name is Evan Boyd BYD 2913 Bernardo Lane 89102. I'm here on behalf of the applicant Mr. Mosler and 712 Holdings LLC. Uh, as a brief history, we purchased the property back in 2024 and got right to work. We engaged Tanny Engineering for the Civils and we are working with Tanny uh uh Trinity Haven Development, excuse me, on the architectural and buildout plans. In addition, we've had our preapp with the city and are currently working through their utility request. Um, we'll likely be back before you in the next few months regarding our SDR. Um but in the meantime, it's important to us to maintain these approvals. We look forward to um developing a project that is beneficial to the neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you. Um this item has been noticed for um public comment, public hearing. Is there anybody from the um public wishing to make comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I'm going to close public comment and pass it back to the commission. Uh given that Commissioner Schlottman has recused himself, um is there anybody else on the dis that wants to make a Commissioner D Salvio? Um just one question. Are you opposed to uh a one year instead of a two? One one year is fine. One year is fine. Okay. I would like to make a motion of approval based on one year. Okay. Um for agenda item number 28 2500. Madam Chair, through you. I just want to bring up um for a one-year this is for an alcohol use. I don't know that they would be able to complete get a certificate of occupancy, go through the background checks for a privilege license within one year would be my only concern. And you might be right on that. Okay. Then I will uh amend that motion to to use. Right. There is a motion on the floor to approve it. Um and to approve I'm sorry to approve item 28 subject to all conditions. And sir, you would agree to all conditions? Yes, we do. Okay. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kama. Hi. Commissioner Rogan please post. And that motion carries. And that is final action tonight unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you, madam chair and commissioners. Thank you very much, sir. Okay. Okay. Item 29, obeyance renotification 25-00008 SUP1, applicant owner 7676 Lakeme Buffalo LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 4,99 foot cannabis dispensary use at 7676 West Lake me Boulevard, sweet number 101, Ward One Canudson. Staff recommends approval. Good evening, sir. Can you please state your name? and give us your address for the record. Oh, sorry. Through you, May I give a staff report? Yes. May I please May you please have the staff report? Madame Chair, the subject site meets all minimum special use permit requirements set forth by title 1912 for a cannabis dispensary and staff recommends approval of the special use permit. Please note, additional documents of protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Now, sir, would you please state your name um and give us your address for the record? Yes. Good evening. My name is Chandler Cooks. C H A N D L E R C O Ks at 1108 Freeman 89106. So, um I'm representing 7676 Lake Me Buffalo LLC, the owner of the property located at 7676 West Lake me Boulevard, Sweet 101. We're here respectfully requesting your approval for a special use permit for a 4,99 square f foot can dispensary at this location. This application meets every technical and regulatory requirement under title 19 and title 6.95 including all minimum distance separations from sensitive uses such as parks, schools, churches, and other dispensaries. A certified land survey has verified full compliance and planning staff has recommended approval. Uh key component of this project is safety and security. Uh upon approval, a robust security plan in in line with state cannabis compliance board regulations will be developed. This includes 247 surveillance, secure interior access, and licensed on-site personnel during business hours. While we do not have a dispensary operator in place yet, but negotiations are underway. Uh we are preparing the site for a qualified future tenant. Uh the proactive entitlement allows us to ensure that the site is compliant, secure, and aligned with community expectations before operations ever begin. Uh the purpose of this SUP is to proactively prepare the space for a future license operator who will be thoroughly vetted and held to the highest security, compliance, and operational standards. Uh no on-site consumption is allowed. Miners are prohibited, and the dispensary will be subject to by interim review by the city. We respectfully ask for your approval and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much, sir. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Uh are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I will close um public comment and I will turn it over to um the commissioners starting with uh Commissioner Rogan. Thank you, Chair. I've reviewed this item and I agree with the applicant that it meets all the necessary title 19 requirements. I'm ready to make motion for approval unless Thank you, commissioner. Anybody else have any comments from the dis. Okay, seeing none, please make your motion. With regards to agenda item 29, project 25-000081, make a motion for approval of the staff position. And sir, you would agree to all conditions? Yes. Thank you, sir. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. And then Commissioner Rogan. I. Great. Please post. That motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Director Floyd. And Madam Chair, that item will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you, sir. Okay. Um, okay. Okay. Sorry. Let's move on to number 30. Obeyance re [Music] notification 25-000011 VR1 applicant owner FBLV District 2 LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow proposed per perimeter and retaining walls that do not conform to Title 19.08 development standards for height and spacing at 3010 Regal Avenue, Ward 3 Diaz. Staff recommends denial. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, the submitted justification letter states the applicant is seeking modification to the approved project design due to changes of the construction documents caused by an equipment redesign required by NV Energy. The initial equipment specified by NV Energy was revised in the field and has increased the overall height. However, no evidence of unique or extraordinary circumstance has been presented and that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by proposing a wall height that does not meet Title 19 wall development standards. Alternative design of the commercial development would allow conformance to Title 19 requirements. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested variance. Please note additional documents of protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Uh good evening. Can you please state um your name and give us your address for the record? Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here today on behalf of Area 15. This is district 2. In the red areas, uh here, here, and here are the areas where we need to screen some mechanical equipment. And just to give you an idea of what that mechanical equipment, uh it doesn't all look like this. And every um every each little area has its own example, but this is by way of anam one of the examples. That's why we're asking for the increased uh wall height or screen height so that we can screen that. Okay. Thank you. Um this item has been noticed um for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Seeing none, I'll close public comment and turn it back over to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Schlottman. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I I've reviewed this item and usually I'm opposed to, you know, bringing up wall heights higher than standards, but this one it it does serve a purpose of hiding the uh Envy Energy gear, which is um always not the not the most pleasant thing to be staring at as you're driving down the road. So, uh, after looking at it and you providing all the pictures and documentation, uh, thank you for for sending that over over the past couple of weeks, uh, I I'm in support of this and I'm ready to make a motion. Thank you, Commissioner. Anybody else have comments? No. Please make your motion. Madam Chair, on item 30, advanced renotification 25-001 VR1, move to approve subject to staff's conditions, and you agree to all staff's conditions? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama. I. Commissioner Rogan. I. Please post. That motion carries. And that is final action. Let's appeal to city clerk in 10 days. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we are going to call back up um item 27. Um those who were here for public comment if you want to come back down but why don't we have um staff uh walk through we clarified it we clarified we it's very clear okay I'm I'm that's why I was here to clarify that item and I'm done okay that's it fantastic very simple thank love it when we get something. I wanted it to be here in a public session to have that done. So, okay. Not through back doors and so on. Thank you very much. I appreciate your time. You're very welcome. Thank you, ma'am. Uh, good evening. My name is Samantha Silox, S I L C O X, and I am also here on behalf of Ibara's commissary. uh the proposal of this commissary. I really want to reiterate the importance of the need of the commissary for business licenses for mobile food trucks and food trailers. Right now there is a shortage in multiple jurisdictions for commissaries. Commissaries are required by uh Southern Nevada Health District in order for mobile food trucks and food trailers to get their business license. Uh in regards to the wall that is not meeting um variance I guess or the coding uh right now there is a 6ft CMU wall and then uh the senior I believe it's a senior citizen living center right behind us had put up that 4ft raw iron uh fence on the top. Um it is also a 25- foot gap between that fence and their in their center. So I do not believe it will cause any sort of disturbance. There's no generator. There's no mechanical work being done. It is a very quiet business. We currently have a commissary at 1935 Fremont Street and we've had no complaints from our neighbors as far as disturbances of smell, waste, noise. And I just the biggest point that I want to point out when it comes to this commissary is the business license. We help with licensing for our clients when we rent out our food trailers and we hear it all the time that there is no commissaries for them to get so they can start to operate, you know, their small business. So, as a small business ourselves, we want to really push that so we can continue to help other small businesses grow. Thank you. Thank you very much. Um, anybody else for public comment on this item? Okay. I will then close public item public comment on item 27 and pass it back to the commission starting with Commissioner Schlottman. All right. Thank you, Mr. Ch uh Chairwoman. Um, if I could ask the applicant to come back up. You were um you were at off of 15 at one point, right? Yes. Uh, that's where I build the food trucks right next to Area 15. Yeah. Okay. Are you still in that location as well? No, I moved about a year ago over on the to the north uh because um the uh project with Area 15, they took over the front. So, we went ahead and just uh moved about a year ago. It's been about a year. Okay. Cool. I I I actually live across the street from your spot on Fremont. Oh, yeah. 1935 Fremont. Yeah. I'm at 1980. So, at the three-story lofts across the street. So, Got it. And you know, I How long have you been there? Uh 10 years. You've been there 10 years. 10 years. Huh. Um I thought you've been there three years, but No, 10 years. It's been a while. I I can say I I hadn't had any trouble out of uh your spot over there. If anything, it helped uh our community because, you know, we've we've had a problem with squatters and a lot of the buildings uh up and down Fremont Street and that particular area. Uh with all the activity that you have there, it kind of keeps keeps the riff raff away. Um and you know, I I did hear that there was a little bit of concern about being on Eastern and traffic going in and out of your commissary. um or or they're expecting a lot of traffic going in and out of the commissary, but I don't know when the when do the trucks go in and out of your spot on on Fremont right now. It it's the because they have different hours of operation. It's very sporadic. So you've we've never experienced a backflow of cars or trailers or food trucks or anything like that. Um so that's never been a problem. Same with this new property. Uh it's actually even longer. Okay. So, uh if that was a concern, I could tell you there's nothing to worry about. uh we will never run into that problem. I mean I in all the years of you being across the street, I think I've only seen maybe four four trailers going in and out. I it maybe it's just a timing thing, but um so it it it would have less of a traffic impact than a lot of other businesses. How many trailer or how many trucks do you think you'll have at this new location? At this new location, I'll be able to house 38 new food trucks. Okay. Um, and you know, I I would be opposed to the screen and the the different I mean, the the one thing about this property that's unique is that the apartments or the houses behind you are uh there's such a grade difference that when you're looking directly out the back of your lot, you're looking at the roof of the the neighbors. So, they're not having to come out in their backyard and look directly into your yard. So, for those reasons, I can get behind this. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Any other comments? Okay, great. Uh, are you prepared to make a motion? Yes. Uh, Madam Chair, through you. Uh, on item 27, advance re notification 24-0650 uh 27 A through C. Move to approve subject to staff's conditions. And you agree to all staff's conditions? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. Hi. Commissioner Rogan. I please post. That motion carries. And Madam Chair, that will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Item number 31, obeyance renotification 25-0013 V1. Applicant Alisa Alicia FA owner Nicholas Charles FA for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow existing residential accessory structures shed and detached garage a proposed patio cover and home addition that do not conform to title 19.06 development standards for separation and setbacks at 5517 Rebecca Ward 6 Brun staff recommends denial. May we have the staff report please? Madame Chair, the subject site is developed with an existing single family dwelling that was constructed with multiple unpermitted and structurally failing structures. The applicant is proposing to renovate the property. The submitted justification letter cites enhancing functionality of the single family residence and repairing unpermitted and improper renovations from previous owners as justification for these variance requests. However, no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance has been presented in that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by proposing a wall height that does not meet Title 19 development standards. Alternative design would allow conformance to Title 19 requirements. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested variance. Please note additional documents for support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. if you could please uh state and spell your names for the record and give us your address and then tell us a little bit about the project. Sure. Uh my name is Alicia FA. Uh that's ali. Last name is P as in Paul. F is in Frank Au. My husband Nick is Nick Foul. Yeah. Is uh same last name. Um we own this house. We bought this house. It's a it's a 1970s. It was out in the middle of the desert. Rural residential staple of the house. we are um on a well with eight other homes actually at the same time. So um with that we kind of got some of the nuances of a 70s house. So one of the things that we got pointed out was this garage that was built as far as I can tell in the county assessor's records. It's been on there since the 80s. Um that was not permitted. We would like to keep it. Um and then there's a shed to the north up here that's a little close to this wall and five instead of six feet from the edge of the house. the neighbor to the north has emphatically uh brought us postcards that are very excited about supporting that. Um and then the rest of the postcard kind of read really wonky. Some of the neighbors that we spoke to didn't really fully understand what we were talking about. The home edition is really just this wall. It's pushing it out three feet to be flush with the house. The house wasn't actually built to setbacks in the 70s because they were out in the middle of nowhere and they kind of did what they wanted. Um, so that would put us at 43, but we're looking to put on a porch on here to both um add to the roof line and shade the house and and cut down energy consumption in that area. Um, and that would put us at 319. I think the the staff reports always go down. So, it was at 31 ft. And then the final part is this um separation between this trellis for a for a patio on the south end here. Instead of six feet, it's 39. Um, one of the things that we're really looking to do is kind of help to beautify our neighborhood. Our across the street, we look at the backyard wall of a subdivision. We don't have any homes that actually look at us. We look at their backyard and their their wall. Uh, there's four homes on our street are including ours. And um, as one of the main points of the well, our well association, this this home is is registered as the head point of that. We would also like to be a a community point within our group to have somewhere to to commune and do all that and like get together with our neighbors on water consumption and different things but without necessarily having to vacuum every single time they see something. Um so some of the other things that we had seen I went to some of our neighbors anyone that we spoke to was very supportive of it. The only people I did not get a response was because they weren't home. um anything was just really they just were curious on the wording and so I made this little graphic for them. Um but we'd be happy to answer any any other questions questions. Sorry words. Thank you very much. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment to pass it back to the commission starting with myself because it is in W six. Um, I had the opportunity to come out and see the project. Um, I, you know, I I think it's going to be a really great um, set of upgrades to the community. Um, I know there are, you know, a number of items that have to come on for variance, but I think it overall is going to be really beneficial and uh, harmonious and compatible for the rest of the community. And I I know you did show me one of your neighbors support letters that said, "Beautiful remodel, great addition." Yeah, there you go. Fully support this. This is a very good remodel and upgrade. Um and that's your neighbor that's immediately um to the north. So um unless there's anybody else with comments on this item, I'm prepared to make a motion to approve um number 31 oveance renotification 25-0013 V1 subject to all staff's conditions. And you do agree to all staff's conditions? Yes. Okay, great. Fantastic. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Casama I. Commissioner Rogan. I. Great. Please post. And that motion carries. And that is final action unless appeal to city clerk in 10 days. Thank you so much. Thank you so much. Okay. Item 32, obeyance renotification 25-000021 VR1 applicant owner Polei Ranch Community Association for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow an electronic message unit LED illuminated display within 200 feet of property zoned for residential use or such as prohibited at 9501 Red Hills Road. W Seaman staff recommends denial. May I please have the staff report? Madame Chair, the proposed sign is within 200 feet of existing single family homes as and does not meet the distance separation requirements. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested variance. Please note additional documents of protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Uh good evening, ma'am. Can you please again state your name, spell it for the record, and give us your address and tell us a little bit about the project? Um my name is Maryanne Goodsell. G O O D S E L L. I live at 1608 Taylor Woodro Drive. I am the president of the Pakoli Ranch HOA. We currently have um to orient you. This is our clubhouse. This is a set of tennis courts, a very small parking lot. This is Red Hills, which is um within Picoli Ranch, not an enormous street, but it is a public road with two lanes and a center turn lane. Currently, we have a marquee that sits opposite of this. This little black line is actually the line of the new proposed marquee. The current one is um is original to the property. So, it's about 34 years old and it runs parallel with the road this way. It is lit with fluorescent tubing. So, that tells you about how old that is. Um we are proposing doing a a marquee that will run now perpendicular to the road. There are residents their backs of their homes run this way. Um so we'd like to propose that the replacement marquee run only directional towards the roads. Um adjacent to this little parking lot is Pigot Elementary School and they installed um a digital marquee. I think it was um Commissioner Walsh, you may remember when they much larger than ours. It's a probably about double the size of ours. It also just simply faces traffic. Um I think there might be some homes there, but that would that's our our request to to turn it the other way and replace the old sign. Okay. Thank you. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I'm going to close public comment. Um, and I will turn it over to Commissioner Walsh. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Um, yeah, I went over the details with your your contractor that's going to build a new sign. What's unique about what I've seen here is you're reversing the sign to where it's not going to be facing the homes. And the first thing that came to my mind was the public school system putting their signs up and real strict requirements on time and things like that. This project does not do that. If anything, it it beautifies the the front of the building and and complex. So, if there's no other uh questions from council, I'm ready to make a motion. I just got one comment. Go ahead, Commissioner. Thank you, ma'am. M madam chair. Um, the only thing I I can get behind it, but we've when we've done with the school, we've put hours of of the signage uh being lit and just to stay, you know, with past practice. I would respectfully ask that we put some business hours on it. So, because it's exactly what we just made the school do too as well. During school hours, they can have it lit and then after school hours, um, that sign was not lit just so it wasn't light pollution within the neighborhood. So I I would ask that maybe there'd be some kind of hours put on that side. We did we did discuss that um this this evening we discussed about the portion of it. It would not be on any hours 10 or after. We have on our tennis courts that are just on the other side of the parking lot. Those do have lights and we have a 10:00 shut off. So that would be entirely within and we have a playground that's also lit at night with a 10:00 shut off. So it would be completely consistent with we'd be more than happy to comply with keeping it. We don't want to irritate our neighbors. So the 10 p.m. shut off and what time to turn on? Um we allow the um I don't know what the school regulations are. We allow the tennis courts to turn on at six o'clock. Um I'm not I guess we could take that for a test drive. I don't know if that's too early and Um, I'm the school light seems to always be on. So, I don't know. I don't We'd be more than happy to investigate what what they have or maybe Commissioner Walsh knows what they time frame they were permitted to do, but we'd be happy to comply with um whatever seems reasonable. Madame Chair, through you, the typical condition for the school district does allow them to turn them back on at 6:00 a.m. prior to school. Yeah, that was my recollection. So, you had that as a condition. You okay with that? Yes, that would be fine. Okay, we can add a condition that would read um the monument sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 1000 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. daily. Thank you. Okay, not a problem, Commissioner Walsh. Okay, with that uh through you, Madam Chairperson, I'd like to make a motion to approve item number 32 for the variance 25-0021-V1 for approval. And that's subject to all condition and subject to the additional conditions. And you agree to those conditions, ma'am? Yes, ma'am. Okay, great. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kas, Commissioner Kasama I. Commissioner Rogan I please post and that motion does carry. Thank you. And that is final action. Let's appeal the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you Mr. Director. Okay. Item 33, obeyance renotification 25-000022 SDR, applicant owner 551 GA Holdings LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed five-story mixeduse development consisting of 87 residential units and third 3,464 ft of commercial space at the southwest corner of Gas Avenue and 6th Street W Diaz. W3 Diaz. Staff recommends approval. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, staff has determined this proposal for a mixeduse development aligns with the downtown master plan's vision for higher density development, maximizing the potential for downtown parcels for mixed use, transit oriented growth, and placemaking initiatives. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the requested site development plan review subject to conditions. Please note additional documents for protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. if you can please state and spell your name and give us your the your address for the record and then tell us a little bit about this project. Uh good evening Sheldon Coen CNN 40 2140 East Pebble Road representing the applicant. Uh the project in front of you um has a first story of retail and four stories above that of the apartments. Uh this project um was designed previously and we had um had entitlements prior to seeing you today and then it expired and the client has asked me to get them restarted and doing so we also brought the project within the new title code per um working with staff and other than that I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment and I will um pass it back to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Schlotman. Yes. Uh Chairwoman, this uh project was previously approved. Um and I' I'd love to see this uh get built downtown. It's exactly what we're looking for and um I'm ready to make a motion. Okay. Thanks. Anybody else have any comments? No. Seeing none, please make your motion, Commissioner. Yes, chairwoman. On item number 33, advanced renotification 25-0022 SDR1, move to approve subject to staff's conditions. And you agree to all sub staff's conditions? Yes. Thank you. Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. I. Commissioner Rogan. I. Thank you. Please post. That motion carries. And that is final action. Let's appeal the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you. Thank you so much, sir. Item 34, obeyance renotification 25-0026, applicant Taylor Morrison of Nevada LLC, owner Phantom Group LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project request on the west side of Tonopod Drive, approximately 442 ft north of Vegas Drive, W 5 Summers Armstrong staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project um 34A obeyance renotification 25-0026 VR1 to allow A 22 foot lot width where 35 ft is the minimum required. Lot 24 34B obeyance renotification 25-0026 VR2 to allow a 25 ft lot width where 35 ft is the minimum required lot 25 34 C obeyance renotification 25-0026 V3 to allow a 25 ft lot width where 35 ft is the minimum required lot 26 34D obeyance renotification 25-0026 TMP1 Tonapon Vegas for proposed 27 not single family residential subdivision. May we have the staff report please? Madame Chair, due to an existing easement, the applicant was unable to vacate. Staff supports the requested variances as this is an extraord extraordinary circumstance that prohibits the applicant from meeting title 19 requirements for lot widths. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the requested variances and tenative map. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, ma'am. Can you please state and spell your record and give us your address for the record and then tell us a little bit about the project? Yes, Rebecca Cheraboga, C H I R I B O GAA, 6030 South Jones Boulevard, representing the applicant. Uh you have a 27 lot subdivision uh before you. It's uh complies with the current zoning residential compact. Uh the project will be uh all the lots will front public streets. Uh they're uh full width public streets, so there's parking on both sides. Um the uh there is common elements that are in uh planned for the subdivision. So there will be an HOA that maintains those the landscape within these areas. Uh the lots range in size from about 3,000 to 5,000 square feet depending on uh which lot it is. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Thank you very much, ma'am. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are they any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item? Come on down, grab a mic. Uh, William McCertie, senior, uh, 117 Hart Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada 896, resident award 5 for over 70 years. Uh, I'd like to commend uh this developer for wanting to put more rooftops in our community because we are in need of rooftops. Without rooftop, we cannot bring economic survival to historic West Las Vegas. And I support the congresswoman for her efforts to work with the developers to ensure that uh we get quality homes. And uh I'm against HOAs, but sometimes you have to have HOAs to uh make quality uh communities. Thank you for your comments, sir. Anybody else? Okay, seeing no one else, I will close public comment. I will pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Munford. Thanks, Madam Chair. [Music] Um, from what uh the planning department was uh talking about, there was a was there an easement issue with your first plans or something? Yes, this was originally approved uh in 2022 uh with a slightly modified site layout. However, you see this shaded area here. There was an access easement um that's private that was originally thought could be removed. However, there were some uh issues with the ownership of that easement and they were unable to get it relinquished in a timely fashion. So, we're coming forward with a site plan that can accommodate it mostly within the public rightway. Okay. What's your uh what's your price point? Sorry, can you say that one more time? What's the price point on the homes? Mid300s. Okay. Um, yeah. I'd like to, uh, Madam Chair, I'd like to or if there's anybody else on any other comments on this item. Okay. Commissioner Runford, please make your motion. Madam Chair, I'd like to add a condition to um 34D. Okay. Thank you. Please do. In conjunction with the creation, declaration and recordation of the subject common interest community and prior to the recordation of the covenants codes and restrictions CCNR or conveyance of any unit within the community, the developer shall record a declaration of private maintenance requirements DPMR as a covenant on all associated properties and on behalf of all current and future property owners. The DPMR DPMR shall include a listing of all privatelyowned and/or maintain infrastructure improvements along with assignment of maintenance responsibility for each of the common in interest community or the respective individual property owners and shall provide a brief description of the required level of maintenance for privately maintained components. The DPM DPMR must be reviewed and approved by the city of Las Vegas Department of Public Works prior to recordation and shall include a statement that all properties within within the community are subject to assessment for all associated costs should private maintenance obligations not be met and the city of Las Vegas be required to provide for said maintenance. Also, the CCNR are to include a statement of obligation of compliance with the DPMR. Following recordation that the developer shall submit a copy of the recorded DPMR and CCNR documents to the city of Las Vegas Department of Public Works. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Is that fine with you? Yes. Okay. Um, I'd like to make a motion for approval subject to all conditions and with the added conditions read on the record by staff. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Mumford. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Casama, was that 34 A through C? Oh, yes, that is 34 A through C. Thank you very much. Oh, 34 A through D. Commissioner Kasama. I, Commissioner Rogan, I Okay, please post. That motion carries. And that will move on to city council on May 21st. Okay, let's move to item 36. Obeyance renotification 25-0031. Applicant Contour Builders LLC owner Decatur Lake Me LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests located on the west side of Decatur Boulevard approximately 1,000 ft south of Lake Me Boulevard. Ward 5 Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project 36A obeyance renotification 25-0031 VR1 to allow a private street that does not conform to title 19.04 development standards for street termini 36B obeyance renotification 25-0031 TMP1 contour vesper for proposed 39 lot single family attached residential subdivision. May we have the staff report please? Madame Chair, staff finds the variance request to be a self-imposed hardship and outside the realm for granting variances. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the variance request and associated tentative map. Please note, additional documents for protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. U Good evening, sir. If you could please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and then tell us briefly about the project. I'm Greg Borguel, 3747 Heritage Avenue, here representing the proposed developer of this project which uh probably is familiar to several of you uh because it has previously been presented and was approved uh through the process. But um there were concerns by neighbors that uh the applicant agreed to pursue the alternatives of cutting off the access to Fair Haven. Fair Haven. I'm switching exhibits here. Uh Fair Haven uh is this street here. And uh the primary entry to the property always was Decatur. But uh neighbors came out uh and um uh notwithstanding the prior approval uh at uh the council level um the neighbors uh did uh uh ask that the developer attempt to resolve the no access to Fair Haven issue. and um he has done so and this is the variance that is required to fulfill that understanding with the neighbors. And in light of that and in light of the fact that the project has separately been approved um and we appear to have resolved the question of uh access to Fair Haven, we would ask for your favorable action and I believe that the neighbors uh are in fact here uh in some numbers or perhaps they've gone home um to say that uh the project is acceptable. Okay, thank you. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to provide comment on this item or your neighbor? Okay, great. Uh, go ahead, state your name and give us your address. Madam chairperson and commissioners, thank you for allowing us to speak here. My name is Joseph Gomez. I live at 1875 Fair Haven. I will be directly impacted because I live basically across the street from the crash gate that they have so graciously accommodated us with because when they started to talk about this development, we wanted a solid brick wall across the whole thing and no ingress or egress onto Fair Haven. We didn't get that, but we got the next best scene, which is the why we're here tonight. completely agree and accept the uh what is proposed tonight. Although I do have a question. The community offers seven guest parking spaces. I know that there is there's enough parking for each one of the 39 units. However, with a pedestrian gate there, it's probably going to encourage people that don't want to go all the way to Decar to get in to just go in and out of that pedestrian gate and park on Fair Haven Street. So, I'm asking for advice from you to how do we proceed to have either restrictions on parking on Fair Haven Street or no parking at all on Fair Haven Street, the main Fair Haven Street. I'm sure that all the neighbors would be in agreement. So, any suggestions? We'll go through public comment and the applicant can come up and we can discuss it. Okay. Okay. Thank you so much for your comments, sir. Next. Yeah, I'm Matthew Stewart. I live at 1921 Fair Haven Circle, which is the uh culde-saced north of uh where Joseph lives. I ditto owe everything he says. Um we do have a problem on Fair Haven where it's a quiet street and you know a lot of times we have people park their motor home. We have to complain that we have problem with uh um semis parking on that street. So, we just don't want more of an issue of people parking on that street and, you know, especially at overnight parking. That's uh probably my biggest concern, but I'm in uh in favor of this this project. Um I'm looking forward to seeing some more development in the area. So, yes, I'm in agreement. Thank you, ma'am. Hello, commissioners. My name is Michelle Tombari. M I C H E L E T O M B A R I. I've lived in the neighborhood uh for almost 25 years and I spoke at the city council meeting on November 6 when this project was discussed. All of the people who spoke were opposed because we didn't want all this new traffic coming on to Fair Haven. I am happy now that the developer has presented a great solution with this new application. Uh I am in support of this new plan um to use an emergency gate and not allow traffic onto Fair Haven. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Sir, David Grin, 1885 Fair Haven Street. We ask for your approval on this. Our main concern is no cars uh to and from uh onto Fair Haven and uh appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Uh anybody else, sir? Anyone else on public comment for this item? Please come down to the podium. Hi, good night. Uh my name is Eduardo Nolasco. I live in 1961 Fair Haven Street. Like everybody said, we got already problems with semis and you know a lot of traffic with the cars. They leaving there probably two three days. We care. you call the police and all that stuff and they come and you know it takes a lot of time to re all those trucks cars and if it's going to affect us with more cars because it's not going to be park enough for this building it's good for them to having you know this building you know on our street but I I believe if you got if they consider not to park you know those cars behind on our I'm sorry on our own street if they can use decator I think we'll be okay for everybody for our neighborhood. Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments sir. Anybody else for public comment on this item? Okay, seeing none I will close public comment and um applicants back up. Is there anything more you would like to add? Um, the neighbors had asked the question about Fair Haven again of me while while the meeting's been going on and I advised them that because Fair Haven is a public street that the developer of the neighboring property, my client, uh, isn't in a position to enforce the city's rules on uh, Fair Haven. However, I can say that I have the authority to volunteer that uh if the city determines that this that Fair Haven should not be allowed for parking that and that involves some cost of signage and whatnot that uh that condition could be imposed on the applicant here uh to pay for the signage uh that would result on Fair Haven. uh uh if that's a determination that public works makes uh and you make uh and other than that I probably should have mentioned going in because it's been an issue for the neighbors as well but uh this is a forale project. This is a developer who only does for sale. So this is not uh although the character of the area may largely be rental uh he does not build rental and so uh that has seemed to be an issue as well. Okay. Thank you very much. Um all right I'm going to pass this back over to the commission starting with Commissioner Munford. Thank you Madam Chair. Uh are these uh are these town homes or single family units? I wasn't sure. Uh they are town homes sir. Um uh that's what the product here by Contour Developers which is U Mo Seabback uh he has built these properties or very similar properties all over town and tends to pick up parcels that uh might otherwise be undevelopable but that he can do them as um as town houses and and has been successful. Okay. Um and then I see because I think the planning department the concerns with that street was turnaround but you put a cutout in there. Uh yes u the uh uh issue raised was raised uh when uh the prior version of the project was approved. uh that um staff said that a variance would be needed to not have uh a standard turnaround on the property and that is this variance. So it's basically the variance that they were asked to do and their engineers have uh approached to the various parties of interest and uh the first solution is the crash gate which uh the neighbors referenced earlier uh which would allow in a true emergency uh uh just the withdrawal of the gate and access for emergency vehicles. But in addition, there is on for more standard situations, there is a turnaround being built right here um at Fair Haven so that if someone got lost uh andor u a trash truck u didn't want to do a three-point turn that there would be uh an obvious uh solution uh being provided here on the property uh which inc coincidentally perhaps is next to an additional um landscape area which was uh a natural fit for the parcel once it be was designated as a turnaround facility. Okay. Yeah. I used to I used to manage the uh shopping center on the corner of Lake Meat indicator and I drive by that lot and I know there was a lot of squatters and homeless people that were making that that kind of their temporary home. So I think this would be a I think this would be a good project for that area. Um it seems like the residents, you know, they they are all for the project. Um, you settled the the issue with, you know, with the traffic uh going on to uh is that Far Lane? Far Haven. Fair Haven. Yes. Fair Haven Street. And uh and I've driven down Fair Haven Street quite a bit when I was that was I would take that route if I didn't want to go down to Kater to go to the shopping center if I had to check something out. But um I would uh Is there any other comment? Um uh Commissioner, I just had a question for Mr. Payatt possibly um to address the question about parking on Fair Haven. Is there anything that we could do now or between now and city council to address those parking concerns for Fair Haven? U Madam again Lucian P for the record. Madam Chair, Chairwoman, we can look into it. I I would say I wouldn't say we should um remove parking this time on Fair Haven. We're going to have um half street improvements and at the same time the city can only enforce parking on the east half of Fair Haven because the west half is Clark County. Um we are requiring a pedestrian gate and our you know connectivity. So I would at this time I wouldn't recommend posting no parking on Fair Haven. It could be done and maybe even after the project is built, if it's determined to be an issue, we could city staff could or prior to closing their project out, we could possibly add no parking to Fair Haven. But at this point, I wouldn't recommend it. Okay. Um, that was my question. I'll um turn it back over to Commissioner Munford. Oh, sorry, Commissioner Schlman. Yes, Chairwoman, through you. I I'm just wondering if we could get the same condition on this one where there's a since there's not a good culde-sac and there's just that little turnaround no outlet sign um and um and a condition that they post no parking signs on the turnaround um and they did they do strike that that way uh people don't uh just park in there. Would you be opposed to that, Mr. Borgel? Uh yes, and uh if I didn't say so earlier, uh the applicant has accepted all of the uh other conditions that staff has has proposed and the posting of signs to control the location you're talking about on the turnaround that the uh applicant is perfectly happy to do that. So, so commissioner, so basically at the entrance, you're recommending to put a sign that there's no through traffic or there's no outlet. Yes. So, yeah, going into the property, if you could put something so people coming driving on Decatur knows that, you know, they can't get through that property. It's residential. So, signage down at Decatur and uh up here uh as well. Yeah. No parking and, you know, and your turn. I'm sure that's acceptable. Okay. So, if there's not Yeah. Could you um add that condition about no the signage for no outlet and parking and read something in for us so that we can put it in the record? Madame Chair, yes. Uh those conditions would read post no outlet signs at entryway of uh is this a private street or is this going to be a public? It is private street. Okay. So we would say post no outlet signs at entryway of private street. And then for the painting of the curb at the end, we would have paint the curbing red and post no parking signs on the non-standard street termini and that's agreeable. All right. Well, if there's nothing else, um, Madam Chair, I'd like to Madam Chair, Madam Chair, one more thing, too. Um, those two conditions would be added to the tenative map. So that would be added to 25-000031-TMP1. And we also have an added condition um for the DPMRS for this site that we would need to add to the uh tenative map as well. And that would read in conjunction with creation, declaration and recordation of the subject common interest community and prior to recordation of covenants, codes and restrictions CCNR a or conveyance of any unit within the community, the developer shall record a declaration of private maintenance requirements DPMR as a covenant on all associated properties and on behalf of all current and future property owners. The DPMR shall include a listing of all privatelyowned and/or maintained infrastructure improvements along with assignment and maintenance responsibility for each to the common entrance community or the respective individual property owners and shall provide a brief description of the required level of maintenance for privately maintained components. The DPMR must be reviewed and approved by the City of Las Vegas Department of Public Works prior to recordation and shall include a statement that all properties within the community are subject to assessment for all associated costs should private maintenance obligations not be met and the city of Las Vegas be required to provide for said maintenance. Also, the CCNR are to include a statement of obligation of compliance with the DPMR. Following recordation, the developer shall submit a copy of the recorded DPMR and CCNR documents to the city of Las Vegas Department of Public Works. Thank you. Thank you. Um, okay. So, did you make your motion? Yes. Yeah. I would I would like to uh motion for approval um of uh item number 36. OB uh obeyance notification 25-000031 uh through 36A 36B uh subject to all conditions with the added conditions read into the record by staff and you agreed to all those conditions? Yes, ma'am. I heard it for the first time uh tonight, but I heard it three or four times so uh looks standard to me. Okay. Thank you, sir. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama, I. Commissioner Rogan, I please post. That motion carries. Thank you very much, sir. And that will move on to city council on May 21st. Okay. Thank you very much for your time and uh if we don't see them again, we want to thank our neighbors for having worked with us on issues. Thank you, sir. Have a great night. Thanks to all the neighbors for coming out and being engaged. Um, okay. We are going to do I'm going to call three items up at once. Um 37 obeyance renotification 25-000037 applicant owner Canyon Walk LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests located at the terminus of Centennial Parkway of Clark County Ward 4 Alan Pollinsky. Staff recommends approval 37A obeyance renotification 25-000037 mod to amend the sky summit design guidelines master land use plan phase map and the parks agreement including associated exhibits uh item 3825-0036 tmp sky summit 125 applicant Olympia companies owner Canyon Walk LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 570 lot single family detached residential subdivision generally located southwest of the intersection of Centennial Parkway and the Sheep Mountain Parkway alignment lots 1.4 1.5 and 1.6 Six of book 174, page 52 of final maps and parcel 2, file 131, page 15 of parcel maps, ward 4, Allan Palinski. Staff recommends approval. Item 39, 25-0038 TMP1 sky summit parcel 1.8. Applicant Trioint Homes owner Canyon Walk LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed 147 lot single family attached and detached residential subdivision generally located at the intersection of Centennial Parkway and the Sheet Mountain Parkway alignment lot 1.8 of book 174 page 52 of final maps Ward 4 Alan Pollinsky. Staff recommends approval. Since these are all um aligned staff, can we please have the reports on items 37 through 39? Madame Chair, the proposed modifications to the design standards provide more flexibility to homebuilders and will not negatively affect the master plan community as a whole as it develops. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of the modification. The proposed tenative maps conform to Nevada revised statutes, title 19 and the sky summit development standards and has been approved by the sky summit project review team. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the tenative map as well. Please note additional documents of protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Can you please state your name, spell it, give us your address for the record, and tell us about the project um for items 37 through 39? Good evening, madam chair, commissioners. My name is Bob Gronower, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. I'm here representing the master developer uh Sky Summit on these matters that are before you. Um the first matter is the major modification to our design guidelines and some other documents within the uh development agreement. Uh staff is recommending approval. I want to thank your staff for working with us more or less. We're refreshing some of these standards and guidelines that we're a part of from Sky uh Sky Canyon and Sky Hills. So, we made those changes and a matter of fact, we've added some additional open space within the master plan community. So, we believe the changes are good overall for our developers when they come here in the future. Uh with that being said, we also have ten of the maps um uh which is item number 38 where staff's recommending approval. I would ask on item 39 because we have a late change here with our uh proposed uh developer that we're going to need to table item 29 uh for discussions tonight but have 37 and 38 to move forward. Okay. So that's item 39. Not yes 39 we're going to ask to be tabled but 37 and 38 we're going to ask you to approve uh per staff's recommendations. Do you want it tabled or do you want it held? Table. I tabled. Yep. Okay. All right. Um, great. Uh, anything else to add on the projects? Not that I know of at the moment. Okay. Thank you. Um, these items have been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on items 37 or 38? Okay, seeing none, I'm going to close public comment. Um, and I will pass it back to the commission, starting with um, Commissioner Casama. But really quickly, staff, is there anything or director that we need to do other than the applicant's request to table 39? Yeah. So, Madam Chair, I think what we'll do is we'll just once we get there, we'll do each item on its own motion. And when we get to 39, the motion will be to table that item. Okay. Perfect. Thank you, director. Madam Chair, we should open 39 for a public hearing prior to prior to the motion. I'm sorry. We should open 39 for public hearing prior to the motion. Should I open up 37 and 30? Okay, I got you. All right. All right. I know what we need to do. Okay. So, we're going to for items 37 and 38. I'm going to turn it back to the commission starting with commissioner Kasama. Thank you chair regarding this item. I know it's been long long discussions with board and so I appreciate applicant and cooperation. Um any other considerations commission I make a motion to approve both items 37 A and B as well as 38. Um, okay. Madam Chair, just a correction. Not on B. Yeah. 37B was It was already stricken. Yeah, it was already stricken. Okay. All right. Um, so, anybody else? We we'll we'll clean this up real quickly, but anybody else on the commission have substantive comments about 37 and its subp parts and 38? Okay. Seeing none, then Commissioner Kasama, just for clarification, since 37B was earlier stricken during housekeeping, your motion then would be on to approve items 37, 37A, and 38. Is that correct? Correct. Subject to any and all conditions. Madam Chair, if we if if we could just do separate motions, one on 37A and one on 38, then we will take them as separate motions. So, um the motion then on the floor, Commissioner Kasama, is 37. Motion to approve 37 and 37A subject to all conditions. Okay, great. There's a motion on the floor, please cast. Commissioner Rogan. Okay. Commissioner Kasama, I please post. That motion carries and that will move on to city council on May 21st. Great. And then Commissioner Kasama, do you have a motion on item 38? Yes. Make a motion to approve item 385-003. Subject to Okay, thank you. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Rogan. Commissioner Kasama, I please post and that item carries. Okay. Um, and Madam Chair, that item also move on to city council on May 21st. All right. Thank you. Sorry, director. All right. So, for item 39, this item was also, even though it's been tabled, this item was also um noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on item 39? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment. I will turn it back over to Commissioner Kasama for a motion on the applicant's request to table item 39. Thank you, Chair. With that, any comments from the commission, I make a motion to table item 39-00. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Rogan I. Commissioner Pasama, please post. That motion to table carries. Thank you very much. Have a good night. Okay. All right. Item 40, 24-05671. Applicant Han Chang LLC owner 8454 Stellar Drive LLC at all for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 4,992 ft² alcohol on premise full use at 2051 North Rainbow Boulevard suites 102 and 103 W 5 Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends approval. May we have a staff report please? Madame Chair, the proposed use will operate within an existing shopping center meant to provide a variety of commercial uses. This proposed use is consistent with the uses allowed in the C1 limited commercial zoning district and can be conducted in a compatible and harmonious manner with the surrounding land uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit request subject to conditions. Please note, additional documents for protests were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Uh good evening. if you could please uh give your names, state and spell your names and give us your address uh for the record and tell us a little bit about your project. Okay. Good evening um chairman and commissioner. My name is Wendy Ru and represent this is the it's for the restaurant Japanese restaurant. We just want to change to the alcohol for um your name is spelled Can you speak into the microphone a little more clearly please? Thank you. My name we can't hear you ma'am. Can you speak a little more clearly? Yeah. My name is Wendy Ru and good evening and chairman and commissioner is wy lu. So, I'm the I I present I represent this applicant to um to you do it. Hi, my name is Kevin Zang, K V I N Z H A NG. Um I'm talking on behalf of our customer, Hanung LLC. They do own a Japanese restaurant. Um it's here in this plaza. Um we're moving to convert them from a wine and beer to a full use alcohol. Um this is because they do serve habachi um cooking in front of you. So we do want to be able to serve customers with um full drink service. Thank you. Anything else? Yeah. Um Mr. W owner restaurant in town like K County for eight locations. So he he has like four um city for lesson already. So it's all approved. only this one is B and Y. So that's the reason we want change this to for liquor too. Okay. Thank you very much. Um all right. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on item 40? Okay. Seeing none, I will close public hearing and I will turn it over to the commissions. Starting with Commissioner Munford. Uh thank you, Madam Chair. um meeting with uh staff and stuff, it seems like this will be fine for this area and for this uh for the uh shopping center. So, I would like to make a motion for approval. Uh if if uh any other commissioners have any Okay, thank you very much. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote and you the motion is subject to all conditions. Correct. Okay. Yes. Correct. And you agree to any and all of staff's conditions? Is that a Can you say yes? Yes. Thank you. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Kasama. Hi, Commissioner Rogan. Hi. Okay. Um please post. That motion carries. Oh, we've Motion carries. Um and the director has stepped away. Madame Chair, that uh item is final action tonight unless appealed to the city clerk within 10 days. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you folks. Okay. Thank you. Good evening. Uh item 41 uh 25-000032 applicant Shalom Buganam owner ASD Group LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at the southwest corner of Owens Avenue and Henry Drive Ward 3 Diaz. Staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project. 41A 25-000032 GPA1 from M medium density residential to H highdensity residential 41B 25-0032 Z1 from R3 medium density residential to R4 highdensity residential 41 C 25-000032 VR1 to allow 32 parking spaces where 72 parking spaces are required and to allow two handicap parking spaces where three handicap parking spaces are required. 41D 25-0032 VR2 to allow a 70 foot residential adjacency setback where 102 ft is required. 41E25-0032 SDR1 for proposed three-story 50unit multif family residential development with waiverss of the perimeter landscape buffer requirements. May we please have the staff report. Madame Chair, despite the proposed multifamily residential development representing muchneeded multifamily housing within the East Las Vegas neighborhood planning area and fulfilling the city's 2050 master plan goal for the provision of additional housing units, staff cannot support the requested variance of parking and residential adjacency requirements and requested waiverss for a reduction of perimeter landscape buffer requirements. These requirements or these requests reinforce the unsuitability of the proposed development to the surrounding area. For these reasons, staff recommends denial of the proposed development and all associated applications. Please note additional documents for protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Can you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us a little bit about this project? Good evening, commissioners. My name is Nasco Balchiev and my address is 1025 South First Street, Sweet 140. Um I am the architect representing uh the the property owner for this project. We're proposing a three-story multifamily development consisting of 50 units um that are going to be a mix of one-bedroom and studio units. Uh and the property is located off of East Owens and Henry Avenue just a couple of blocks east of uh POS. Um it's a.7 approximately.7 acre parcel and we are providing 32 parking spaces where 72 are required. So we're asking for a parking variance. Um we are also asking to reszone the property from R3 to R4. Uh as well as a general plan amendment from um uh medium to highdensity residential. Um, in association with that, we also have the site development review um, as well as a couple of of landscape um, buffer reductions. So, switching over to the landscape plan. Um, we're providing the correct number of of of trees and shrubs. Uh, we just want to push the building a little bit closer to the eastern property line and northern property line. So, we're asking for a reduction from 15 feet to 10 feet along the north and uh 15 feet to 10 feet along the east as well. I believe there is a an error in the in the staff report that said 15 to five, but it's actually uh a 10-ft buffer along the east. Um, with that being said, uh we're we're providing, you know, desert appropriate landscaping. Landscape is extremely important to to the project. And then we're also requesting a variance for residential uh adjacency. Um predominantly throughout this area to the to the west and to the south is all multif family. Um there is one single family residence across uh the street on um on Henry Avenue. And through this diagram here you could see what part of the building here in the blue is is clipping that um residential adjacency. So, we feel that's a pretty small impact on that neighbor. Um, and we haven't gotten any, you know, complaints from from them. Um, moving on to some of the renderings, we're we're designing a, you know, a greatl looking building that's going to be a great addition to to this neighborhood and offer some some new housing options. Um, so you know, kind of paying respects to the mid-century modern architecture we have here in Vegas from the 50s and 60s and uh taking inspiration from some other projects we've seen throughout town like like Share Downtown and um that was a big big inspiration for for this project. So uh the facade is is pretty simple, but uh every unit is is kind of angled um to create some some dynamic rhythm throughout the facade. And all of these units actually point towards the strip. So the angles have some um some meaning behind them. And then you can see Sunrise Mountain uh to the east just behind the property with some great views that way as well. And there's a elevation of of the the the west facade. This is the east facade. And then this is kind of a top down aerial perspective so you can get a better idea of what's what's around there. So you can see the single family residence across the street on Henry. Um but to the this is south and this is west. This is predominantly multif family that's you know not as high density as this but we we feel that this project you know is a little bit of a higher higher density. It could it could be a pivotal project to help redevelop this this area in the future. Thank you very much. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment and I will turn it back over to the commission starting with Commissioner Schlottman. Thank you, Madam Chair, through you. Um, just a couple questions. The dumpster, it looks like it may be recessed into the building on the south side. Is that correct? Correct. It's it's part of the the building right here. So, we'll have a trash shoot within the building to drop into the dumpster. Okay, cool. And, um, you know, I've looked at this project. I mean, we've we've gone down to like 0.5 spaces um parking spaces per unit uh especially when we're dealing with studios and we're we're above that. So, uh on this particular project um so I don't have a big problem with the with the park in considering uh we every one of these are are are studios and some of the setbacks. I know that there's um you know the heat island effect and all all of that and so the trees are important and um where you are minimizing there's been some talk about um where you're minimizing some of the the buffers and the landscape buffers that they might not grow. I mean I feel that they can grow um we we put them underneath tree grates and all sorts of stuff all the time. Um, but just as long as as long as your client realizes that these conditions of approval when they go on, they go on for the life of the project. And I remember people coming back um, uh, projects were approved in the 80s and then they cut down their trees and, you know, five years ago they come back to us for a review of condition uh, trying to get rid of their trees and we denied it. So, just make make sure they know that maintain their trees and and um and keep up with the landscape. And I I do like the fact that you do have um the parking lot fingers in there too with the trees. Um that usually is the first thing that gets cut so we can get more parking spaces in in there, but um I think it adds a nice touch and will also add some cooling to the vehicles parked around it. So, I have no other questions. Thank you, Commissioner. Anybody else? Seeing none, if you would like to make a motion. Yes, Madam Chair, through you on item 4125-032. Um 41 A through C. Uh A A through E. Um I move to approve subject to staff's conditions and you agree to all of staff's conditions. We agree to staff conditions. Thank you. Okay. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. Hi. Commissioner Rogan. I thank you. Thank you. Please post. And that motion carries. And madame chair, that item will move on to city council on May 21st, 2025. Great. Thank you. Um, at this time I would like to take a fivem minute break. Um, so we will be on break and then next up we will have item 43. [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] All right. Good evening. Let's come back on the record. Um, and let's go to item 43 25-0043 VR1. Applicant owner Charles Edward Groves and Carrie Renee Groves Living Trust for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow a proposed patio cover that does not conform to Title 19.06 development standards for setbacks and height at 6235 North Ula Street Ward 4. Allan Pinsky staff recommends denial. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, per the submitted justification letter, the applicant is proposing to construct a patio cover to provide shade for a recreational vehicle parking. However, no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance related to the physical characteristics of the property has been presented to warrant the requested variance. As such, the hardship is self-imposed and therefore staff recommends denial of this variance request. Please note, additional documents for protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, ma'am. Can you please state your name, spell it, and give us your address for the record and tell us a little bit about your project? Sure. Jessica Lane with Proficient Patios representing the applicant, Mr. and Mrs. Gross. Um, so yes, we are here um requesting a side setback reduction from a 5 foot to um a 4 foot. So, we have 4 foot to the edge of the patio cover that we're proposing to construct. It's not built yet. We were actually just waiting for approval. Um, it is an aluma wood patio cover. Uh, colors would be to match the exterior of the home. So, very similar to your beiges of the exterior of the home. Uh, just to give kind of an idea of where the structure is going. This is the front property line. This is the rear. The patio cover would be going on the side. Obviously, these are um larger lots and he was wanting to build a patio cover there for his RV on the side of the property. We're just asking for a 1 foot obviously um exception for the setback reduction from a five to a four. Uh there is no HOA on this community. Uh we did get a letter from the neighbor that's right adjacent to where the patio cover would be built saying he would have no issues um with the patio cover being built at that measurement in distance. That is all I have unless you have other further questions. Thank you very much, ma'am. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on item 43? Okay, seeing none, I will clo I will close public comment and I will pass it back to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Kasama. Thank you, Chair. Regarding the item, um, I see no issue really. So the rest of the commission I'm happy to make approve item [Music] 4324 subjectition. Thank you. Um there's a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Uh Commissioner Rogan. Sorry. I was going to ask her as the motion was ma'am. The motion on the floor is to approve it. Do you agree to all staff's conditions? I apologize. Yes, ma'am. Okay, great. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Rogan, Commissioner Kasama have cast their votes. Um, please post. That motion carries. And madame chair, that item will move on to city council on May 21st, 2025. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you. Good evening. Thank you. Item 44 25-0045. Applicant Ali Ca owners ops1 LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests generally located at the northwest corner of Sahara Avenue and Fort Apache Road W 2 Seaman. Staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project 44A25-000045 SUP1 for a proposed mixeduse development 44B 25-000045 SDR1 for a major amendment to an approved plot plan and building elevation review Z-139-88 uh parenthetical 16 for proposed fivetory mixeduse development with 252 multif family residential units in 2550 ft of commercial floor area in conjunction with an existing shopping center. May we please have the staff report? Madam Chair, the proposed mixeduse development will create a transitoriented development that supports an environment suitable for a light rail or bus rapid transit line, thereby helping to address overall traffic congestion for Sahara Avenue and is an example of infill development. As a result, staff finds the proposed development will be harmonious and compatible with the surrounding area and recommends approval of the requested special use permit and site development plan review. Please note, additional documents of protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. If you can please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and then tell us about the project. Okay. Good evening, Madam Chair. Commissioner Stephanie Gronower, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. here on behalf of the applicant grown hours gruer. Um this property on the overhead you can see this is located in village square um at the corner of Sahara and Fort Apache um in this back portion that's highlighted in yellow was the movie theater. I don't know if you all ever went to the movies there but it was a great little movie theater. Unfortunately it closed back in 2023 and has not um reopened. And so this project is proposed to create a mixeduse development within that existing commercial shopping center. Um the site is currently zoned C1 which allows for the mixeduse development. There's multifamily to the north as well as to the west of the site and we're proposing 252 multifamily units within this this area here. This is the site plan that's before you. This was the entrance to the movie theater area right here. So, that will be the leasing office and the entrance to the multifamily um project with the 252 units to the west and to the east of it. There'll be gated parking for the residents um on in the back and on the sides and then also shared parking within the center. Um the applicant is going to be adding trees to the existing site. There's 52 36inch box trees that will be added to supplement the landscaping in and around the project. Also, at the commissioner or the chairperson's request, um we're happy to add 20 trees within this back parking lot area, um parking diamonds so that they'll uh further eliminate the heat island effect in that um area and also be a nice amenity for the residents back there. And I know staff has that condition that we're willing to offer today. Um, other than that, the use permits are just um because it is infill development, normally the commercial would face the ride ofway. This is obviously in the back of the center, so it can't face the rightway. Also, the parking is typically required to be behind the building or on the sides. There's existing parking within the center, so that's impossible to meet as well. Staff supports uh those use permits and the site development plan review and recommend approval, and we would ask for your approval this evening. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard? Okay. Seeing none, seeing none, I will close this item for public comment and turn it back over to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Walsh. Thanks. Thanks, Tiffany. Um, the other the provision was put in for the additional trees, right? So, that's pretty much it. There's no other issues I have here other than the motion, unless anybody else has something. Madam Chair, I'd like to read that condition into the record for the clerks. Sure. Let's just make sure nobody else on the commission has any comments. Nope. Okay, great. Please, Miss Edos, read that condition. 20 parking lot landscape diamonds with 36 inch box shade trees shall be added in the parking lot north of the building. Thank you very much. Um, so go ahead, Commissioner Walsh. A motion to approve item 43 25-0043-v1. Um, sorry, I get the wrong number there. Item 44 25-000045 and uh with all conditions on that motion to approve, please. And madam chair, just for clarification, the condition will be added to 44B the SDR. All right. Would that be 40 A, B and C or just A and B with the additional one? The tree condition is added to B and your motion would be for A and B. Okay. So move. Okay. And you do agree to all staff conditions. We just didn't hear it. Yes. Okay. Great. Thank you. So there was a motion on the floor for approval on item 44 and its subp parts. Please cast your mo your votes. Commissioner Kasama. I. Commissioner Rogan I. Great. Please post. That motion carries. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Have a good night. Yep. You have a great And madam chair, that item those items are final action unless appealed to the city clerk within 10 days. Thank you. Thank you. Item 4525-000046 SDR1 applicant owner GoodCluck West LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed 2380T restaurant with drive-thru and a 3,67 foot office building development with waiverss of perimeter landscape buffer requirements at the southeast corner of Martin L. King Boulevard and Kerry Avenue Ward 5 Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends approval. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, the proposed development as designed is compatible and harmonious with the surrounding and future land development in the area. It also adheres to minimum title 19 development standards except for a landscape waiver, which staff finds to be minor in nature. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the requested site development plan review subject to conditions. Please note additional documents for support were reach were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Uh good evening sir. Could you please state and spell your name for the record? Give us your address and then tell us a little bit about the project. Yes. Uh good evening. Steven Winfield. S P H W I N F I L D located at 6865 Antler Court. Uh this is a uh 3,000 foot uh restaurant with both sitdown and drive-thru service and we agree with staff recommendations. Thank you. Thank you very much. This item has been noted for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on item 45? Come on down, sir. Yes. William McCertie. I live in the Vegas Heights area where that proposed project is being built right across street from the Martin Luther King Center. That's is a site of a of a uh uh Sunrise Cafe back in the day. So, I'm very happy that they're developing that area. That area has sat vacant for the last 25 years that I can remember. So, I'm very happy that they're developing that area. Thank you for your comments, sir. Anybody else? Seeing none, I'll close public comment on item 45 and turn it over to the commission, starting with Commissioner Menford. Thank Thank you, Madam Chair. Um would there did you have any uh did you have a neighborhood meeting or anything? I'm sorry. Could you please repeat that? Did you have any neighborhood meeting? No, that was not required for this project. Okay. I was just council lady council woman was asking. Um yeah, I I I think u the that that's this is a good project for that for that uh area. Uh would like to make a motion if uh is there any other comments from from any of the commissioners? Um seeing no other comments on this item from the commission. Please make your motion. Madam Chair, I'd like to add a condition to this, please. Oh, yes, sir. Please go ahead. All right. Um, prior to the exercising of the site development plan review as expressed in title 19.16.100J, the developer shall be required to record a declaration of private maintenance requirements, DPMR, as a covenant on all associated properties and on behalf of all current and future property owners. The DPMR shall include a listing of all privately owned and/or maintain infrastructure improvements along with the assignment of maintenance responsibility for each of the subject sites landscape areas including but not limited to perimeter landscape buffers, parking lot landscaping and foundation landscaping and shall provide a brief description of the requested level of maintenance for privately maintained components including but not limited to building elevations, parking lot striping, trash enclosures, and driveway pans. The DPMR must be reviewed and approved by the city of Las Vegas Department of Community Development prior to the exercising of the site development plan review as expressed in title 19.16.100J and shall include a statement that all properties within the subject sites uh are subject to assessment for all associated costs should the private maintenance obligations not be met and the city of Las Vegas be required to provide for said maintenance. Following recordation, developer shall submit a copy of the recorded DPMR document to the city of Las Vegas Department of Community Development. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Commissioner Runford, your motion please. I'd like to make a motion for approval uh subject to all conditions with the added conditions uh read into the record by staff. That would be approval for item 45 2500 46-dr1 and you agree to all staff conditions. Yes. Okay. There is a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama. I. Commissioner Rogan. I. Okay. Great. Please post. And that motion carries. And madame chair, that item will move to city council on May 21st, 2025. Thank you. Thank you very much. Item 46, uh, 25-0056, SUP1. Applicant Shortline Gaming LLC owner 95 LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed gaming establishment restricted use one to five machines with waiverss to allow an 80oot distance separation from an individual care center licensed for more than 12 children and a 255- ft distance separation from a church/house of worship where 400 feet is required at 6702 West Cheyenne Avenue Ward 5 Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends approval. May we please have the staff report. Madame chair, staff finds the requested waiverss of distance separation will not negatively impact the surrounding protected uses and the proposed use can be conducted in a manner that is harmonious and compatible with that surrounding area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit. Please note, additional documents of protest and support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, ma'am. if you could please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us a little bit about this project. Yes, my name is Liz Lutz. I'm here for Shortline Gaming, 7330 East Gate Road, Sweet 120 Henderson, Nevada. Um, we're proposing the gaming establishment within a 7-Eleven. It's had gaming before. It got a new franchisee, so we had to switch and get a whole new license. So, okay. Thank you very much. Uh, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I am going to close public comment and I am going to turn it back over to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Munford. Uh I feel that this is this is fine. Uh and would like to move for approval per stack, you know, per staff recommendation. Are any other commissioners that have any uh any comment? Okay, thank you. Seeing no other comments from the commission, no comments from staff. All right. I would like to uh make a motion for approval subject to all conditions. Um the uh for item 46 20 uh [Music] 25-0056 SC1 special use permit. And ma'am, you agree to all all of staff's conditions? Yes. Okay, great. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama. I. Commissioner Rogan. I. Okay. Please post. And that motion carries. And madam chair, that item will move on to city council on May 21st, 2025. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Item number 4725-000059 VR1 applicant owner Las Vegas Clark County Library District for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow an animated wall sign that does not conform to Title 19.08 development standards for size and residential protection at 1861 North Martin Luther King Boulevard. Word five, Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends denial. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance has been presented in that the applicant has created a self-imposed hardship by proposing an animated wall sign that fails to comply with Title 19 development standards. In view of the absence of any hardships imposed by the site's physical characteristics, it is concluded that the applicant's hardship is preferential in nature and is hereby outside the realm of NRS chapter 278 for granting variances. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the requested variance. Please note, additional documents for protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Would you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us about this project? Sure. Good. Good evening, madame chairman and members of the board. Uh, my name is Melvin Green. Um G ren the e 50195 South Durango Road, sweet 10389113. John Vino, general services director for the Las Vegas Library District. Thank you. Yeah, we are excited about this this project here. It's a 43,000 foot two-story library that sits on approximately 5 acres. Uh we went through um a SDR review a couple years ago was approved and in that uh review we had a LED sign and so uh it was stated that we needed to go and get a application for that signage. So, we applied for it and we were denied because of the fact that we were 15% over the the 10% requirement for facade as well as within 200 ft of a residential um property. So, we just wanted to um to come before you to uh give give an idea of what we wanted to do. uh this this project here in terms of the signage itself has been um reviewed by their the staff. Uh we looked at the uh location of the sign. Um this sign is not just on the side of a building or or a freestanding sign. It is integrated into the building itself. So, if you looked at the uh north side, we created a buffer that sets the sign back on the on the on the building versus having it protruding out. We also have a uh side where it's uh integral signage that goes into the uh south side of the of the uh u facade as well. And then we created a canopy on the top that uh will also integrate the sign in itself. The one of the questions is on the the location of the sign itself. Uh we're approximately 160 ft from the property line. Uh there is a major uh primar primary arterial street that uh is is MLK is very busy. So, we're we're saying that it doesn't need to be um a single family um um residential area that we are going to be impacting because it eventually the uh church that owns the property is going to get this reszone to commercial which we're in the process of working with them right now. Um we're going to submit the application prior to the uh 24th which is the deadline for the pre-application uh submitt. So hopefully this will all go away in a in in a couple of months. Uh this single family uh property is in um is not in a great area because of the fact that there's a lot of traffic and so it would be very detrimental to the people that are going to live in that that that neighborhood to uh be able to access MLK when it's a very very uh busy street. And we also show the uh the radius if we were to if we were to provide a a radius of 200 feet, it's only going to affect a small portion of of of the property in this area here. So again, we feel that this would be uh uh a a project that would be uh uh conducive to what we we want to do. Uh if you look at the general plan, it's it's called for TOC2 uh and as future use. Um with the fact that the um church wants to re reszone this, it's going to give us opportunity to uh to to provide the the necessary um distances since it will be commercial. Uh and then the the the last thing I just wanted to uh state is that we got approval from the um architect review committee with the Enterprise Park as well as we got a support letter which I like to enter into the records from Evergreen uh Missionary Baptist Church uh there in support of the project. Um and with that said, we respectfully request your approval. Um, and also we want to make this a final item since this project is under construction and uh we're approximately 65% complete and we're looking to have the building completed by October of this year. Thank you very much. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. I see there are some members of the public wishing to make comment. Um, gentlemen, come on down, grab a microphone, and share your thoughts. Hi, uh, my name is Jerry Washington. um the uh trustee chairperson at Evergreen Missionary Baptist Church and we are um in appliance with this uh project. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Washington. Sir, my name is Grenell Martin. I'm an officer of Greater Green Missionary Baptist Church also and we basically support this project. Thank you, sir. My name is William McCertie, senior. Uh I support this project because of several reasons. Number one that West Las Vegas uh historical West Las Vegas do not have any LD signs located nowhere like other parts of the city and other parts of the valley. And if you talk about a hardship, I think it's a hardship on Lake me when you go east and west on Lake me where we have some home development there and that's a busy busy uh street. Uh Martin Luther King is a north south uh egress route truck route which have over 100,000 cars traveling that road a day. Right across the street from the library currently is the property that Evergreen owned that is zoned residential. But Evergreen has need to change the zoning from residential to commercial. The church has no intentions according to the leadership of the church to ever to develop that into uh single family a multifamily residence across the street. On the corner of Jimmy Street, just uh across the street from the library is a commercial building. And to the south side of that street, which is called Dittle Little, is another church that's located on that corner, which has no residential neighborhoods. So across the street from that property, also next to the library is the United States Post Office. So currently there's no homes developed in that area and due to the project they're in the process of reszoning or trying to get the property resone to commercial that will eliminate the problem. Thank you Mr. McCertie. Anybody else wishing to be heard on this item? Seeing none, I will close public comment. Um call the applicant back up and see if there's anything you'd like to add. If if I could I this has been a joint project with the city. We we can't speak highly enough. Um I would point out that architectural review from the city of Las Vegas at schematic at design at CD was required and none nothing was brought up until uh this time. So, it's a little bit of a shock to us to to find out um you know, staff's um non-approval um uh considering this was kind of a a pretty active joint uh project on behalf of the district. So, appreciate your consideration. Thank you very much. Um okay, with that, um I will go ahead and pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Munford. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I uh I toured the property library uh about a month ago, and I think this this project, this uh the the library uh project is going to be a another project for W five that's going to add a lot of lot of uh positive benefit to the community. Um, you know, it's it's not your typical library. There's going to be a lot of lot of things that are going to uh benefit the people in this community. And um uh I've I've uh I was on a phone call with the the church that owns the land across the street and um they they uh indicated to me that they want to switch the zoning of that property to commercial which you know with that many cars and the amount of commercial that's being developed on MLK you know me personally I think that would be a great idea in terms of uh of of them moving that to commercial. Um I think the the big challenge that that planning staff had with this was that residential across the street. And so if it if it uh I'm I'm pretty confident that the the the church is going to move forward and switch that over to commercial. If that's the case, I don't find any problem with that with that type of signage. Um, did you make some modifications in terms of setting the sign back a little bit? Uh, I see that it's set back a little bit now or Yeah, we uh actually didn't make uh any modifications. It was already set back and 59 ft. Uh, and again, like I said, we integrated it within the building, so it's not looking just like it's uh plastered on the building as well. Yeah. And I I like that that it's set back a little bit. Uh especially I think that'll help with the traffic going by that it kind of sets back like that with the uh kind of the barriers around it like it's framed. Sure. But um I would I would uh I would like to make a motion for approval uh if any of the other commissioners have questions. Okay. Salvia, thank you. Um just to stay with past practice again, I would just want to implement uh doing hours on it. Uh just like I had stated earlier just to stay with consistency. Other than that, I I 100% support it, but I'd definitely like to see some hours on it. And then my second question would be more of a question. Are you just going to be advertising the stuff that's going to be going on at the library or do you plan on advertising uh for any other business? I'll answer the first question. The hours are going to be from 8 in the morning to 8 um at closing for the library and I'll defer the other question to John. It it's not for commercial advertising. It's really to promote the programs within the library. I mean they if if and community events so it's not necessarily just for library events. So if there's other community events that we can promote but it wouldn't be commercially um is that is that a condition then would you like uh Madame Chair through you would you like a condition read into the record for the hours of illumination to be limited? Yes please. Um, do you have a suggestion for at nighttime when to shut it down? The applicant just basically stated that they were fine with from 8 to 8. Okay, Madam Chair, that condition would read, "The animated wall sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 8 a.m. daily." you okay with that condition? I I don't know we could go that way. We we the library normally closes at 8, but because we have a very active event center within the space that we're building for the community, there was the suggestion that we'd be allowed to keep it uh advertising the event that might be going on slightly longer. Um, so if you would consider uh 10:00 I think would be reasonable uh for events outside of the library. I'm f I was fine with 6 to 10 like past practice if you want schools and the other things. Sure. That works for I'm fine. I'm fine with that. Okay. Thank you. Perfect. 6 a.m. Right. Okay, Madam Chair. So then that would read, "The animated wall sign shall not be illuminated between the hours of 1000 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. daily." Okay. And that is an acceptable condition. Yes. Yes. Fantastic. Commissioner Menford. All right. So, I'd like to uh make a motion for approval subject to all conditions and also add conditions read into the record by staff. If that's okay with the applicant, I'd like to move for approval. Thank you. Uh for item that's item 47 25-02 59 var V1 variance. Thank you Commissioner Runford. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Casama. Hi. Commissioner Rogan. I please post. That motion carries. And madam chair that will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Um item 48 25-000060 SUP1 applicant Armando Santiago Delgado owner VIV Rancho Pavilion DE LLC at all for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed 2100 square foot alcohol on premise full use with a waiver to allow a zero foot distance separation from an individual care center licensed for more than 12 children and a 60oot distance separation from a church/house of worship where 400 ft is required at 721 1 North Rancho Drive, Ward Five, Summers Armstrong. Staff recommends approval. May we have the staff report, please? Madame Chair, the proposed use is consistent with the uses allowed in the C1 Limited commercial zoning district and can be conducted in a compatible and harmonious manner with the surrounded land uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the special use permit. Please note, additional documents of protest were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, sir. Can you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and then tell us about your project? I'm Gaspar Andrade GP R 3200 Arville Street. Um, a restaurant is um it's another Mexican restaurant and the reason we asking for the licenses because we need to compete with our neighbors. We have a couple of restaurants to north of Rancho and they all have alcohol. You know, who doesn't like a Mexican food with a nice cold margarita, right? So, in order for us also to compete and keep our doors open, we need to we need to have this license and we uh we requesting your approval if it's possible. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, sir. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to provide comment on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I will close public comment and pass it back to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Munford. Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, from what I understand, this might have been this location, our site might have been approved for alcohol before, but um, I think I don't, you know, I I recommend that we go with uh with staff's appro approval, recommendation approval. Any other commissioners, any questions? Anybody else? Okay, seeing none, um, Commissioner Munford, if you're prepared to make a motion. I'd like to make a motion for approval subject to all conditions, uh, for item 48, uh, 250060 SUPI, special use permit. Thank you, sir. Do you agree to all staff conditions? Yes. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Um, Commissioner Kasama, hi. Commissioner Rogan, I please post. That motion carries and that item will go to city council on May 21st. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Okay. Item number 50 25-000065. Applicant Trioint Homes owner CSWDE382 LLC at all for possible action on the following land use entitlement project request generally bounded by the Rustin Road, Larry McBride Street, Sheep Mountain Parkway and Trails and Avenue Street alignments, Ward 6, Brun. Staff recommends approval on 25-0065 GPA1 and Z1. Staff recommends denial on 25-0065 VA1 VAC1 and TMP1 50A 25-0065 GPA1 from PCD planned community development to ML medium low density residential 50B 25-0065 Z1 from U undeveloped PCD planned community development general plan designation to RSL residential small lot 50C 25-0065 VR1 to allow proposed private gated streets that do not conform to title 19.04 04 complete street standards for street termini 50D25-0065 BAC1 for petition to vacate US government patent easements and portions of public rightway trails and Avenue and Rustin Road and 50E25-0065 TMP1 Rocky and SMP for proposed 77 lot single family detached residential subdivision with waiverss of the perimeter landscape buffer requirements. May we have the staff report please? Madame Chair, staff finds the proposed general plan amendment and resoning are appropriate for the area and this land use category and zoning dis as this land use category and zoning district accommodate single family detached residences and is consistent with the intent of the Kyle Canyon special area plan. Staff recommends approval of the general plan amendment and resoning. Staff does not support stub street termini and supports complete street standards. Therefore, staff recommends denial of the variance, vacation, and tenative map. Please note, additional documents of support were received after publication. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. Would you please state and spell your name? 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here tonight on behalf of Trioint. The site is located just to the north of Kyle Canyon and on the east side of uh Sheep Mountain Parkway. Uh this is the site plan for the site. This is where Rocky sits right here. So there's a site to the north and a site to the south. Uh both are gated. We have included a um little park open space area that has a soccer um area for uh with goals for kids or adults to practice their goals. Then we have a more active open um open space here with checker tables and a bag toss. And then um in addition along this side we also have like an exercise station area. Uh we do have a couple of stub streets which um requires the variance but we don't have too many houses that front onto those stub streets and so we would ask for your consideration and approving that. This blue area is a retention or detention basin which is common with the projects that are out in this area for now. So that's what that blue area depicts and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Um, thank you very much, Miss Lazovich. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment. I will turn this item back over to the commission, starting with me. Um, and on that retention basin, um, Miss Lazovich, uh, we've had this in the past, like you noted. It's common in this area. I think we had previously discussed a condition um related to density should that ever be turned over and able to be developed. So, is there a condition that can be read into the record for that? Madame Chair, the basin is approximately 1.03 acres. If we were to match the density of the existing neighborhood, which is 4.35 dwelling units per acre, that would allow up to 4.22 or four homes on that basin to be approved. So, we could read we could add the condition that if and it would read if in the future the on-site detention basin is determined by by the city engineer to no longer be needed, a maximum of four additional lots could be added. Thank you. And are you is that uh you prove that condition? You okay? We agree with that condition. Okay. Thank you so much. Um and then I know you've got rolled curbs already planned. Do you have 20 foot driveways already planned? We do. We we know what is uh is expected out here in W 6. Thank you so much for working with us. And I also just want to say thank you for the continued innovations in um the little green spaces that we're trying to develop in your trioint subdivisions because what we really hope for are communities, not just buildings, neighborhoods, not just subdivisions. So really want to uh thank you for bringing um this forward and uh anybody else have anything on this? Otherwise, I'm prepared to make a motion. Okay. Um, so on items 50, uh, 250065, Madame Chair, I'm sorry to interrupt. Um, the the condition I read into the record would be added to the tenative map. So that would be added to 25-0065-tmp. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Miss Edos. All right. So, I'm going to make a motion to approve item 50 and it's subp parts 50A through 50E subject to all conditions. Miss Lazovich, you agree to all conditions? We do. Okay. Thank you very much. There's a motion on your the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Casama, I. Commissioner Rogan, I. Great. Please post. That carries. Thank you very much, Miss Lazovich. Um, and that item will move on to city council on May 21st. Okay. Have a safe flight back to Carson. Thanks. Right. Um item 53 25-000080 SDR1 applicant owner Nevada Health and Bioscience Asset Corporation for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a major amendment to an approved site development plan review 24-0161 SDR1 for proposed reduction in square footage of an approved medical office development with waiverss of title 19.09 09 form-based code development standards at the southeast corner of Pinto Lane and Shadow Lane, Ward One, Canudson. Staff recommends denial. May we have the staff report, please? Um, Michelle Bridga 888. Sorry, did you say introduce myself? I'm sorry, madam. No, sorry. Sorry. We are waiting for staff to give us their report first. That's okay. Madame chair, staff finds that the applicant is proposing to underdevelop the subject site in a manner that does not ultimately support the vision 2045 downtown master plan. As such, staff recommends denial of the site development plan review application. Please note that there is a revised site, landscape, and floor plan and elevations in your supplemental packet. Please note, additional uh document of support was received after publication. Thank you. Thank you very much. Now, please, ma'am, state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us about the project. Sure. Michelle Brida, 8882 Spanish Ridge Avenue, um, architect for NHBC, Nevada Health and Bioscience. Um, I'm Kurt Shriner, uh, SC HR I Ner, um, address 3152 Alip Prima Avenue, um, representing NHBC on their behalf tonight. Okay. Thank you very So, some of you may remember our application previously. Um, unfortunately, the fourtory scenario came in over budget for Nevada Health. And, um, we work with them to make sure the project still happens, but instead of a fourstory building, we're now a twostory facility with a similar footprint. And, um, as far as site concept for the site, all that remains the same, right? But our challenge is we're no longer a four story. Um if you want I can go through the site a little bit. Sure. Okay. So um building location uh in the same spot. Pinto is located towards the um north here of the property. It's a laboratory building with some office components to support the lab use. The tenant will be UMC. So um we're making sure that we're creating some synergies with the existing Kirk Concoran campus. So the entry um that relates to Kirk Kirkan the medical school is off of the main um campus and then entry to the blood bank remains in the same location. Okay, that's mainly it. All right, thank you. Um, as far as architecturally, we believe we still have a nice building. Um, formally, proportionally, still trying to introduce some graphics to break up the mass. Um, introducing metal panels, graphic that represents NHBC and ties into the UMC colors as well. Simple facade. This is the entry to the blood donation center. And then that's what the building sets up to be within um the internal courtyard of the campus. Okay. Thank you. Um this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item? Okay. Seeing none, I will close public comment and turn this over to the commission. Starting with Commissioner Rogan. Thank you, Chair. Um, we approved this in the past. It's just a slight deviation from our prior approval. So, I'm ready to make a motion for approval. I'm not further comment. Anybody else? I I do have one probably stupid question. No. If for some reason there was additional funding in the future, are you able to is it going to be constructed in a way that you would have the structural ability to like go continue going vertical? So, not at this moment because that would impact the way that we designed the structural. We did consider that um but it couldn't play into this project at the time. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Rogan, if you would like to make a motion. Thank you. Um, with regard to agenda 53, project 25.00 made a motion for approval subject to all of conditions. And you agree to all staff conditions? Yes. Great. Thanks. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. Commissioner Rogan. I Please post. Motion carries. And that will move on to city council on May 21st. Thank you so much. Thank you. Right. Item 54, 25-0081. Applicant Schulman Development, owner, Union Pacific Railroad Company for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at the northeast corner of Charleston Boulevard and Grand Central Parkway One Canudson. Staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project 54A25-000081 SUP1 for a proposed 250 foot tall building within the 200t airport overlay district 54B 25-0081 SUP2 for proposed valet parking use 54 C 25-0081- SUP3 for proposed 260,400T alcohol on premise full use 54D 25-000081 SDR1 for proposed 18story 20 254 room hotel development with waiverss of appendix F interim downtown Las Vegas development standards and 54E2-0081 TMP1 attorney resort mixed use for a one lot commercial subdivision including condominium units may please have a staff report madam chair staff has determined the proposed hotel, health club, and medical uses are consistent with the long range goals for the downtown Las Vegas civic and business district and can be conducted in a harmonious and compatible manner with surrounding land uses. Therefore, staff recommends approval of all associated entitlements. Please note there is a revised staff report in your supplemental packet. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening, ma'am. Can you please state and spell your name and give us your address for the record and tell us about the project? Yes. Good evening. Liz Olsson 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here on behalf of the applicant. Um you saw this project several months ago. Um our client now has a new partner. So we have changed it up just a little bit but the overall premise is still the same. Um we are located on Grand Central and Charleston 254 unit hotel condominium project and a medical institute. Um, we've made two main changes to the project. Our building on the east side along the railroad tracks was originally our medical building. This is now a standalone sevenstory parking garage. And we have incorporated all of our medical um square footage into our main building, which you see there in the uh blue. In order to do that, we had to increase our building from seven stories to 18 stories. So, we are now looking at a high-rise building, but again, overall premise is the same. Uh, will be a great addition to this corner. I'd really like to appreciate um staff on this quickly because they have been continuing to work with us on these revisions and um they've been really great uh moving forward with this. I believe there is one condition change from public works, but other than that, again, appreciate staff and happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much, Miss Olsen. Uh, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to provide comment on this item? Seeing none, I will close public hearing and I will pass it back to the commission. Starting with uh, Commissioner Rogan. Thank you, Chair. Um, there's there's not much more to say on this. The third time we've seen this project here, and each time I I thought a good project, so hasn't changed. I'm ready to make a motion for approval. for the comment. U Madame Chair, Lucian Pi Public Works, I do need to modify the condition for um item 54D, condition number 30. and just replacing the second sentence to read, "The developer shall construct a retaining wall along the Charleston Boulevard rightway to facilitate the future elimination of slope paving, including a dedicated right turn lane if required in the approved traffic impact analysis to meet the approval of the city engineer and city traffic engineer respectively and the Nevada Department of Transportation and DOT." and that has been also submitted uh to the city clerks. Okay, thank you. Um any other comments from commissioners? Seeing none. Okay. Um Commissioner Rogan, then just can you please just restate your motion? Sure. With regard to agenda item 54 project 25-00 P1 make a motion for approval subject to staff condition of the amended condition of the record. And that's for 54 A through E. Yes. 54 A through E. Okay. Thank you very much. There is Oh, and do you agree to all staff conditions, Miss Olsson? Yes. Thank you. Okay. And there's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Kasama. I Commissioner Rogan I please post that motion carries and that's final action tonight unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days. Thank you very much. Um um item 5525-000055 TXT1 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for possible action on a request to amend LVMC19.12.120 to adjust the standards for on- premise signs with off-remise messaging that may be approved in connection with convention convention facilities. ities. Staff has no recommendation. May I please have the staff report? Madame Chair, this request proposes an amendment to modify the floor space requirement for convention facilities from between 250,000 square feet and and 500,000 square feet to a minimum of 250,000 square feet, effectively removing the upper limit. In addition, this request removes the provision prohibiting such signs from facing or being visible from freeway or expressway tra travel lanes. Staff has no recommendation of this text amendment. Thank you. Thank you. Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard? Thank you for coming down, sir. Please state your name and spell it and your address for the record. Good evening, Madam Chair. John Leelu, Lleu, 6037 South Fort Apache. Uh, here on behalf of World Market Center Las Vegas. Uh, World Market Center is in full support of this text amendment. Um, the best way to describe this text amendment other than the uh the way staff just described it, which is perfect, is to uh describe what it is not. And it is not a an authorization for more signs. What it is is a um it gives large convention centers the ability to carry off- premise messaging on their current on premise sign entitlements. So really this text amendment is about content. It's not about more signs. Um and uh and again uh the planning commission city council maintains all control over the signage on the large convention facilities through the U master sign plan. amendment process. Um, and this ordinance um if passed will still subject the um the the uh sign holders to all state, local and federal laws. So, um World Market Center is in full support. We thank staff for uh its help and we have um we're open ourselves up for any questions you may have. Okay. Thank you very much. Miss Lazovich. Good evening again. Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. One question, and I appreciate uh Mr. Leelu's testimony. We've been talking beforehand, but perhaps I just wanted to ask where it's planning or your city attorney. Um, will the ordinance moving forward include provisions that require any type of off- premise messaging that could be seen from the freeway to comply with and state regulations which would include endot regulations, spacing, size, etc. John Medillo, assistant city attorney for the record. Yes, the the changes to municipal codes still require conformance with all NRS and particularly NDOT requirements for placement of signs adjacent to the freeways. Thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Um, okay. Seeing no other public comment, I will close public comment and pass it over to the commission. Commissioner Dalvio. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I dug into this one pretty deep. So to answer Miss Lazvich's questions, NAC410 uh has those stipulations through NDOT where application process and it has to be vetted and the whole from uh NRS410 320 inclusive to 410 350 uh pretty much covers that criteria of anything that's facing a uh major intersection or uh thoroughfare from NDOT. um with knowing that this gives the ability uh or at least opens the door for those with convention space along the freeway. I'm fine with it because again, NDOT has to have the final say based on the application if it's going to move forward or not. Uh so with that, I I support it knowing that there's that caveat right there to for the justification. So, if there's no other comment, I'll entertain a motion to uh approve agenda item 5525-000055. Any other comments, Commissioners Rogan or Casama? Okay. Hearing none. Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Commissioner Rogan. I'm just a little bit confused by this. The only entity that this would apply to, World Market Center, Madam Chair, I I think the Mad Go ahead, Nicole. Madame Chair, through you. Currently at this time, the city of Las Vegas, the only convention um facility that we have active right now is the World Market Center. So yes, it would apply currently to them. Um hopefully we'd get more convention space in the future, but for right now it would just be world market. And I would just add to that, Madam Chair, that the way the ordinance will be drafted is gener it's will be generally applicable to any convention facility that meets that definition under our code. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Rogan. Um, okay. Seeing no other questions, did someone want to make a motion? Did you want to make the motion, Commissioner Dalio? Um, I make a motion to approve agenda item 55 uh 25-0055. Great. Great. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama. Commissioner Rogan. No. Okay, please post. That motion does carry and that item will move on to city council in ordinance form. Thank you very much. Next up, item 5625-000072 TXT1 applicant owner city of Las Vegas for possible action on a request to amend LVMC19.12 and 19.18 regarding the condominium hotel use and to provide for other related matters. Staff recommends approval. May we have the staff report. Madame Chair, the purpose is to amend the hotel, motel or hotel suites land use to consolidate the hotel, motel and hotel suites use and to establish the condominium hotel use. Currently, the hotel motel or hotel suite use allows for temporary lod lodging with the only difference being that a hotel suites that the hotel suites allows kitchen facilities or sitting rooms in addition to the sleeping room. To simplify, the proposed amendment will delete the hotel suites use and combine it into the existing hotel motel land use category in order to streamline the approval process for these types of operators. The proposed condominium hotel use category combines traditional hotel accommodations with privatelyowned condominium units that may be either owner occupied or included for rent by the hotel operator. Similar to a traditional hotel room, the building operates like a hotel, offering amenities such as housekeeping, front desk services, room service, concierge, fitness centers, spas, restaurants, and other services typically found in hotels. There are several such properties in neighboring jurisdictions, and this amendment will allow condominium hotels to be located within the city of Las Vegas to maintain regional consistency and economic competitiveness. Rental units will be required to be booked through this the hotel operator and cannot be rented by individual property owners for periods of less than 31 days. Staff recommends approval of this text amendment. Thank you. Thank you. This item has been noticed for public hearing. Are there any members of the public wishing to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, I will close public comment and turn it over to the commission. Commissioner Dalio. So, just so I understand the way it's drafted, it it will protect from short-term rentals. Madam chair, through you, yes, this will not essentially turn into a building full of short-term rentals. These units will have to be offered as hotel rooms from a single operator and not the individual uh condominium unit owners. Thank you. Thank you. Any other comments from the commission, Commissioner Kasama or Rogan? I just have a comment. We see these in the in the county and others and I think they work very well. So, I'm very um opportunity and Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Rogan. Uh, Commissioner Schlottman, I'm ready to make a motion if there's no other comments. Okay. Please go ahead. U on item number 5625-0072 TXT1. Move to uh move to approve. Thank you, Commissioner. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your votes. Commissioner Kasama. Commissioner Rogan. Hi. Great. Please Commissioner Schlottman. Okay, please post. Uh, that motion carries and that will move on to city council and ordinance form. Thank you. Uh, and finally, 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 and give your name for the record. The amount of time of discussion on any single subject as well as the amount of time any single speaker is allowed may be limited. Is there anyone wishing to make public comment under this item? Yes, chairwoman. Yes, sir. I'd like to make a hourlong speech so I can win the overunder. Not really. Not really. Well, I'm going to limit you to two minutes for your hourong. You did a you did an excellent job with running a very smooth meeting tonight. So, thank you for that. Thank you, Commissioner Schlottman. Okay, seeing no other comments at a two-minute or hourong uh duration, I will go ahead and adjourn our meeting.