It's time to go ahead and call this meeting to order. Tonight is Planning Commission. Before we begin, please note that this meeting is being video recorded and streamed live to the internet. May I have confirmation of posting and roll call? Chair Lewis, the agenda has been posted according to the Nevada Open Meeting Law. All commissioners are present. Commissioner Newsom is attending via teleconference. Thank you. All right. Will everyone rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance, please? Thank you at this time I'd like to turn the meeting over to Andy Rother for a special announcement. Thank you chair good evening and before we begin tonight's agenda I'd just like to take a moment to recognize someone who's been the steady hand behind the planning commission for more than three decades and over 30 years of dedicated service here at the city of Henderson Sherry Jensen is retiring from her role as senior planning commission coordinator. Sherry has been the quiet force ensuring our meetings run smoothly, our records are precise, and our process remains consistent and professional. Her institutional knowledge, calm demeanor, and unwavering commitment to public service have supported generations of staff, commissioners, and residents. Sherry, on behalf of the Planning Commission and the community here in the City of Henderson, thank you so much for your extraordinary service, and you'll be greatly missed. So, thank you, Sherry. Thank you, Sherry, for everything. Staff, are there any changes to the agenda? Yes, Madam Chair. Item number eight, the Rainbow Canyon at Lake Las Vegas, parcel M. There is a memo to make minor revisions to the proposed acreages of the subject land use zone change and tentative map. These acreages are also reflected on the attached updated zoning map. Staff notes that the changes do not increase the overall boundary of the proposed subdivision or the Rainbow Canyon Master Plan. There is no impact to the notification radius and no impact on the proposed parcels. These revisions are to clarify minor discrepancies in the stated acreages. The following items, some of which are public hearings, are being requested for continuance. Staff recommends continuance on all the items. Item number 10, Guaraniere Carport, continue to the March 12, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. And item 16, Burke-Holder and Magic, continue the March 12, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. Thank you. Based on the recommendation of staff and in accordance with Planning Commission policy, it is the intention of the Planning Commission to make a motion to continue items as noted. For those of you who are unable to attend the meeting for which the item has been continued, please submit your written comments to Community Development and Services. Is there a motion to accept the agenda? So moved. All right. There's a motion to accept the agenda from Commissioner Boekelman. Please vote. Aye. All right, and that motion passes. And we will now have a presentation on Parks and Recreation: Make it Possible initiative. Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Lisa Corrado, Assistant City Manager. It's nice to see you all. I'm excited to be back, and congratulations, Sherry, on your well-earned retirement. I have the pleasure of introducing Anna Smith, one of our principal planners in long-range planning. I'm here from the city manager's office to really emphasize how important this master planning initiative and outreach campaign is to the city. Parks and Rec is working on a master plan update and an outreach campaign to raise awareness. And I'm not going to steal Anna's thunder. I just really wanted to emphasize how important this is. It's really great to see you all. And I'm going to let Anna take it away. Thanks, Lisa. And thank you, commissioners, for the time today to share. We're also joined today with a special member in the audience. We've got JJ Moyes, our director of Parks and Rec, with us here, too, just to kind of indicate how important this initiative is. So, without further ado, what is it? The Parks and Rec Make It Possible initiative represents a two-pronged approach. It is the theme of the city's update to our Parks and Recreation Master Plan and an outreach campaign designed to educate and engage our community about the Master Plan while generating support for continued success of our parks and recreation system. The Parks and Rec Make It Possible Master Plan identifies strategies to enhance and maintain the city's parks, natural areas, trails, recreation programs, community services, and signature events. The plan sets long-range priorities and strategic recommendations to guide future investments in parks, trails, programs, and facilities as Henderson continues to grow. Coupled with serving as the theme this initiative is also a campaign designed to raise awareness about the amazing benefits the City of Henderson's Parks and Recreation Department provides to our community while also educating our residents about an important upcoming ballot measure so the master plan reflects update reflects a celebration of accomplishments made possible by our parks and recreation system over the past 30 years and In 1997, Henderson voters approved a property tax override dedicated to Henderson Parks and Recreation. This funding source has generated $155 million alone in the last decade, and many of the achievements you see here on the screen would simply not have been possible without that funding. If you have ever visited, worked, or played here in Henderson, there's a good chance you have benefited from one of these incredible destinations, programs, or signature events. Since Henderson's incorporation, our success has been rooted in a commitment to our community. At the core of that success is a parks and recreation system recognized not just by our residents, but across the nation. We've created one of the most accessible and well-maintained park systems in the United States. Today, the City of Henderson cares for 77 parks, 8 rec centers, 105 athletic fields, and 300 miles of trails. When we talk about parks and recreation, we're not just talking about slides and swings. We're talking about a system that fuels our economy, defines who we are, and plays a critical role in supporting our quality of life here in Henderson. Last year, more than 150,000 people attended city-sponsored events, driving tourism, supporting local businesses, and building civic pride. Over the past two years, sports tournaments have generated $108 million in economic impact, filling our local hotels, restaurants, and shops. Parks and Recreation plays a pivotal role in supporting our high quality of life. We know that activated and well-maintained public spaces help deter crime and create safer places for our kids to play. Homes located near parks are worth up to 10% more, and we are proud to say that 85% of our residents already live within a 10-minute walk to a park. And as JJ would say in the back, we're looking towards 100% of that. So that's our goal. We set the threshold pretty high. We also know that living near a park provides our residents with opportunities for outdoor recreation, such as walking, jogging, cycling, and picnicking, which can all contribute to a healthier lifestyle. And people choose cities with exceptional parks, events, and open spaces. This June, a ballot question is coming up that will impact the future of Parks and Recreation here in Henderson. A ballot question for the 2026 primary election will ask Henderson voters whether to renew the existing 12-cent property tax that funds our Parks and Recreation system, and this includes things like operations, programs, services, events, and even staffing. The outcome of this ballot will impact how we maintain, improve, and invest in the park services and green spaces that help define our community. It's important to note that this isn't a new tax. It's a renewal of the existing Parks and Recreation funding that's been in place since 1997. If approved, there will be no tax increase, and most property owners will continue paying the same rate. As I mentioned before, this measure is set to expire in 2027, unless our voters choose to renew it for another 30 years. Early voting begins on May 23rd, and primary election day is on June 9th. And one thing that one clear distinction that we want to make is that we're here to provide the facts and to educate, not really to advocate one way or the other. But we want to make sure that when folks hit that ballot box, they're making that informed decision. So if the ballot measure does not pass, every city department will be affected. Major changes will be required to make up for the lost revenue. Property taxes that are collected will be distributed to other agencies. And Henderson will lose a say in how some of those dollars are spent. Currently, 12 cents of every city property tax dollar goes directly to Parks and Rec, and by law, that money cannot be used for any other purpose. A lot of what Parks and Recreation offers to our community and residents can quickly go away without the renewal of this $21 million tax override year over year. Here's a few things that could possibly happen. We could see a decline in city services, which means delayed street repairs and improvements, less responsiveness from code enforcement, longer queues for city hall services, and delays in efficient community planning, among other vital city services. We could also see a reduction of parks and trail maintenance, and we know that poorly maintained parks and trails have a tendency to decrease neighborhood appeal, which could discourage the potential for new investments. Excuse me. So a few other impacts that are possible are fewer recreation programs and events. Fewer events and activities mean fewer visitors, which reduces foot traffic to nearby businesses. We could see delays in equipment repair and replacement for broken and outdated amenities. We know that those could deter usage and diminish our public perception. And as I mentioned earlier, we see increased property values by proximity to park, but we could also see the inverse of that happen as well with decreased property values and the potential for increased safety risks if things aren't well maintained. So I'll leave you with this. Strong parks and recreation systems don't just improve quality of life. They attract businesses, strengthen our workforce, and make Henderson a place we are all proud to call home. And you and everyone in this audience plays a vital role in helping our community understand the value of our Parks and Rec system. And here's a few ways that we can make a difference. We definitely encourage folks to learn more at our website, wemakeitpossible.org. There people can orient themselves with the facts and learn a little bit more about all of the amazing benefits that Parks and Rec provide. We could also request a spokesperson to help us share the facts out with community groups. We'd love for folks to share contacts with us. For folks that might benefit from this information, we definitely encourage people to stay informed. Scanning that QR code on the screen in front of you helps you be able to sign up for updates to stay up to date as this kind of initiative unfolds. And then we'd also encourage you to share this message online and consider following and amplifying messages as they come out from the city and sharing them on your personal social media accounts. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. So I just want to help people understand in the audience that the money, if this does not get approved, then the money from the general fund will have to be shifted into Parks and Rec, a portion of it, which then takes away from funds for those other things that you mentioned, street improvements, delayed Improvements at the parks and things like that is that correct absolutely commissioner. Thanks for the question It's estimated that it's about a five percent impact to our overall general fund budget Which is the equivalent of what we've been told or what I've been told is about the impact of the great recession So that we could be looking at systemic impacts to the city of Henderson. Okay. Thank you Thank you. Thank you, how do I? All right, let's, this brings us to the consent agenda consisting of items two through six. Is there anyone here who wishes to have an item pulled from consent for discussion or public comment? Does not appear so. I'm seeing no one. May we have a motion on the consent agenda? I'll go ahead and move to approve items two through six. All right, there's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Brunson. Commissioner Newsom, how do you vote? I vote yes. Thank you. Okay, all right that motion there. We got that cleared up that motion passes. Thank you all right Let's stop may we hear the first item please good afternoon chair Lewis and commissioners item seven is a three-part request for a 26 lot residential subdivision on 17.8 acres generally located west of Palisades View Drive and Buckhorn Street The first part is a zone change from development holding to RS2 on 2.1 acres and from RS4 to RS2 on 9.1 acres, all with a hillside overlay. The second part is for four waivers to increase the height of a retaining wall from 6 feet to 20 feet without a 6-foot horizontal offset, increase the maximum combined height of retaining walls from 36 feet to 40 feet, increase the maximum vertical height of vertical cut from 35 to 59 feet, and increase the maximum allowable hillside disturbance requirement. The third part is for review of a tentative map for a 26-lot single-family residential subdivision and common lots. The proposed subdivision is essentially comprised of three separate subdivisions: Alta Vista, Serene Vista, and Amira Vista. The Alta Vista and Amira Vista plans were previously approved as separate subdivisions, and Serene Vista is now being added to redistribute the lots and apply a new slope analysis over the entire development. With the new slope analysis, a total of 33 lots are allowed, where 26 lots are being requested. The applicant states that the waivers are necessary to reduce additional grading of the site and that a horizontal offset creates a no-man's land between the walls. Further, the increase in maximum allowable hillside disturbance will remove undisturbed area from private lots 15 through 18, allowing for greater use of the lots by the property owners. As a compensating benefit, the applicant is providing enhanced landscaping and either stone veneer or stamped concrete on the walls. Staff finds that the project is compatible with the surrounding area and meets all necessary approval criteria. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the March 3rd City Council meeting. Staff has received two responses from the public notice in opposition. Good evening. My name is Nancy Amundson, 89101. I'm here to represent this project We represent the owner. As was noted, this is a 26-lot subdivision in the hillside on 17.8 acres. We are requesting a few waivers because we're in the hillside. We need higher walls, higher offsets, that sort of thing. We're also requesting rezoning. We have a piece here that is zoned out. RS 4 and then across the street at some DH and we'd like to have them match the original subdivision into an RS 2 and With that if you have any questions, I'm here to answer them. All right. Thank you Is there anyone present in the audience who wishes to speak on this item? We will open the public hearing seeing no one I will go ahead and close the public hearing commissioners any discussions questions comments motions I'll make a motion to approve CZA, 2025-017-491, WOS, 2025-017-492, and TMA, 2025-017-493, subject to findings of fact, conditions, and waivers. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Humes. Commissioner Newsom, what do you think? Yes. Thank you. I vote yes. All right, and that motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Commissioner. Item A is a three-part request for a 311-lot residential subdivision on 69 1⁄2 acres, generally located northwest of the intersection of Lake Las Vegas Parkway and Highland Shores Drive. The first part is to amend the land use from PS to LDR on 27.9 acres and from LDR to PS on 12.7 acres. The second part is to rezone from RS2, RS4, RS6, and PS to RS6, RS8, and PS with master plan and hillside overlays on 196.4 acres. The zoning request will remove the gaming overlay as well as amend the Rainbow Canyon development standards to increase the residential boundary of Parcel M to add 183 units. The amended standards also include a revision to Chapter 6A, Hillside Overlay District, to revise the language and incorporate revised ridgeline and disturbance area exhibits, as well as a revision to the circulation plan to remove the requirement for a minor residential collector to connect through Parcel M. The third part is for review of a tentative map for a 311-lot single-family residential subdivision and common lots. Staff notes that the request to add 183 units to the Master Plan will increase the overall total units within Rainbow Canyon from 1,890 units to 2,073 units, which is still below the plan total of 2,988 units for Rainbow Canyon. Additionally, while there is a loss of 15.2 acres of public and semi-public land, the applicant is proposing to incorporate approximately 14 acres of open space within the subdivision in addition to providing active open space amenities within some of these areas, which exceeds current requirements within the Rainbow Canyon development standards. The applicant is also proposing to screen the proposed road called out as Iron Duke Avenue on the exhibits from the residential subdivision to the west, and staff has added a condition that a six-foot-tall decorative CMU wall with a minimum five-foot-wide landscape buffer shall be provided along the roadway when adjacent to the Marble Mesa subdivision. Further, the applicant states that the proposal is requesting to allow development of an additional 23.4 acres that was planned to remain undisturbed through the master plan. However, the project will continue to protect prominent ridgelines and unique features within the area, including existing ridgelines that will buffer the proposed development from the existing residential development to the east. The project will also restore areas within Parcel M that were previously disturbed through prior grading of the land. Staff finds that the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding land use and zoning, meets necessary approval criteria, and complies with the standards within the Rainbow Canyon Master Plan. Therefore, staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the March 3rd City Council meeting. Staff received two responses from the public in support and 38 in opposition and notes that a memorandum accompanies this item. - Thank you. May we hear from the applicant? Please state your name and zip code for the record. - Thank you, Madam Chair, Commissioners, Michael Tasi, along with John Marciano, 218 Lead Street, as well as John Manning. He is our engineer on this project. Between the three of us, we should be able to answer all the questions that come up. Thank you, Erica. Hopefully my presentation is as thorough and as good as hers, but she's also was very patient with us throughout this entire process. So Erica and Jared were a super big help I DO WANT TO SPEND SOME TIME GOING THROUGH THIS PROJECT A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE AS ERIC MENTIONED WE HAD QUITE A BIT OF PUBLIC LEASE CARDS SUBMITTED FOR THIS ALONG WITH SOME EMAILS. WE READ THROUGH THOSE. I'D LIKE TO TRY TO PREEMPT SOME OF THOSE COMMENTS AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY CAN HERE. Just to kind of an overall summary, this is an amendment to the Rainbow Canyon Master Plan. Just to give you some context, this is Lake Mead Parkway, Lake Las Vegas. Here's the lake and we're up here in this far corner. So it's one of the last pots to be developed in Rainbow Canyon. We're going to finalize some previous hillside projects. within the master plan, as Eric had mentioned, transfer 183 units into this particular area and 311 unit tentative map. Thank you. So, just we'll start with this. This is the original, this is the existing group of pods within the M Canyon. It's kind of, all this stuff that Eric had read, it's a bit of a complicated request. But basically what we're doing is we're taking those pods and we're squishing them into one tentative map. And so that means that we have to, this is kind of gives you some context. You can see the outline of the tentative map here that we're proposing the 311 units. These are the existing pods that are out there. So what all this proposal will do will be create one about 70 acre tentative map within this 196 acre parcel. There have, just want to make it clear, there have been homes planned in the M Canyon since the adoption of this master plan in 2011. There have been several iterations over the years. As Erica mentioned, this still represents 915 units less than what is typically, than what was allowed for the Rainbow Canyon master plan when it was originally approved. This is not a unique request. This is the 21st amendment to this master plan many of those have been very similar taking units from one pod to another pod and so on and so forth so this request again would just Combine all of these lots are all these pods into one pod another part of this request has been the hillside regulations so much of what was originally Rainbow Canyon was done through masquerading before the 2011 master plan was approved a lot of it had been masqueraded so one of the things that was identified as in the master plan was this contour line, the 1790 contour line above which we weren't allowed to, or there was no, it was considered a non-disturbed area. However, even at that time in 2011, when that non-disturbed area was identified, there was already grading done. And so as we have moved through the approvals through this master plan, it's been a number of cleanup items through the master plan to represent what's actually out there. And again, these hillside regulations are a bit more nuanced than they are with the city development code. They're just different. So I just want to point out that this is an exhibit in your backup. This is kind of an overlay of areas where it was previously a disturbed area. Within that contour line that was called non-disturbing the hillside so like I said this is kind of a cleanup to the hillside regulations As Erica mentioned this proposal requests to disturb approximately 23 acres of what was considered non-disturbing area So we're doing that in exchange for thirteen point one acres of previously graded land that we're going to restore six through point three acres of restoration within the areas immediately adjacent to the master plan here look at an exhibit that shows this and So these areas here provision of almost 16 acres open space within the tentative map where only three and a half acres are required so it's a significant More significantly more than what is required and then the staff assets provide some amenities within those usable open space areas So we're doing that as well so in the landscape planets and your backup There are a number of amenities identified in those open spaces and then lastly I'd like to say that we well lastly on this particular topic is WE'RE PROPOSING TO PROTECT THE RIDGELINES IN THIS AREA. THIS REPRESENTS ALL OF THESE EXISTING RIDGELINES WITHIN THIS AREA THAT WE ARE PROTECTING. MOST SIGNIFICANT OF WHICH IS THE RIDGELINE BETWEEN US AND THE DEL WEBB COMMUNITY TO THE EAST. So this is probably a little bit better exhibit to show you. It's a 3D. You can see the ridges here and then down below is the Dell Webb community, the existing Dell Webb community. So they won't see the homes on this side of the hill. The one benefit of this process we submitted a concept plan review last year We were able to get a lot of neighborhood input early and so that gave us an opportunity to meet with the folks out there And do our best to try and address some of their concerns, so I'd like to go over those a little bit We the first thing that we did was we they asked us to remove the townhomes from what we submitted and and do our best to put larger lots closer to the existing Marble Mesa community. So we did that. Make sure I hit everything. We did have our neighborhood meeting. We had 30 people in attendance and it was a very cordial meeting and Erica was there so she was able to observe that. We have done a traffic study. I know traffic was a concern. That traffic study has been accepted by the city yet there will be an increase in traffic with the additional units, but they are within the acceptable limits by the city of Henderson that that study has already been approved. We've also had some concerns expressed about emergency evacuation and the. the public comment that was submitted to you for this project. Just wanted to point out that not only is there access out of Lake Las Vegas Parkway, but the bridge is open. So if there are any pinch points, there are more than one way to get out of the community. And then one other thing, and maybe the most important, is we also agreed to, and this isn't something that y'all can condition us, but it is a, we agreed to install the gate at Marble Mesa. So the Marble Mesa community is right about here, and they have a setup for a gate. It's all private streets, but the gate was never constructed. During our conversations with them, we felt like the additional traffic up here might lead to some looky-loos, and so if they're looking for our community, we felt if we're going to be gated, then we'll work with them on a gate. So just one Wanted to get that on the record because I told Dallas Dallas homes are President of the HOA is here. We told them we'd get that on the record We'll be meeting with them between now and City Council I Recognize that's not a condition y'all can add But I did want to get it on the record and state that we have been working with that community very closely a couple of other items and then I'll shut up is the homes that are right along Cathedral So this roadway here, these existing homes in Marble Mesa, as you can see when the road, the entryway comes in, it starts to increase in elevation. You can see the cut here. But there are a few homes here that are either at that are at grade with this roadway. And one other thing is that some of these homes, most of them actually have view fences. And so we wanted to make sure that There was some concern and rightfully so I went to the home of the Wetzel burgers and they showed me their Their brand new pool and everything they did in their backyard and they're really concerned about it And they have a view fence if you could see the road standing in their backyard So what we have shown in the landscape plan is that we're going to do a six-foot wall all along this ridge up to the top And we're gonna landscape on both sides, especially as we get closer to these homes down here so we The wall should help to mitigate noise. It should mitigate any headlights that are going up and down that road. And then we wanted to add some landscaping so they're not just looking at a wall. So in summary, oh, one last item I wanted to point out. We did have some concerns about the pump station. So the pump station, if you can, this is the end of Tadahatsu Point, which is basically right here. There is a pump station proposed for that location to pump water up to the reservoir and there is some concern about what that would look like. It's going to sit up on top of the hill. There's a significant difference in grade between these homes and where this is going to sit. It'll be landscaped and we'll have a six foot block wall. So again, this is a 311 lot single family detached subdivision all for sale product. The density is similar to the surrounding areas almost exactly the same as marble Mesa It's on the other side of the ridgeline from the del Webb community sound light will be mitigated to the maximum practical extent traffic impact is minimal and Lastly I'll just say that it's been a very Good engaging process with these neighbors, and I just want to thank Dallas homes He's reached out to me on a number of different occasions Just to make sure we're on the same page to share with me some of the concerns He's hearing so that gives us an opportunity to address it so this has been a great process at least for us So with that we're happy to answer any questions after the public hearing. Thank you Thank you This time we'll open the public hearing is there anyone present that wishes to speak on this item I? And if we have other people want to speak up, it'd be ideal if you'd kind of come down and line up behind our speaker here. All right. Name and address, or name and zip code for the record, please. Yes, Dallas Holmes 89011. I just want to come here today. You know, obviously, I'm new to Lake Las Vegas, but I've been here in Henderson for 22 years. I've actually had the opportunity to come and speak with you before as vice president of Seven Hills and gone through this process before. Now, when we bought our home in Marble Mesa, we Pulled all the plans and the permits and it was owned for 214 homes on parcel M Shortly maybe about maybe eight months after we moved in there was a change right to that plan and that called for the townhome component with an increase to the 311 that was a little shocking because we Purposely bought there because Richmond said they would be all single-family homes even up into the canyon They never said there'd be townhomes, and we just didn't want to live next to that. I'm not judging it It just was my personal choice So my partner and I we paid to have a mailer mailed out and got residents involved and I have to commend Rain tree and them they listened and they pulled the townhome part of it and they put the lower density closest to marble Mesa Which is what you could really ideally ask for right? So they they really made good on that. Um You know, unfortunately in Marble Mesa, there's nobody to really blame other than a lack of education, but a lot of homeowners were told by the developer of our subdivision, not Raintree, that it would be gated. And there was some paperwork that went around to homeowners from the builder that said it would be gated, and then they just said, well, we actually never actually filed for a permit, so you're just not going to get a gate. So obviously to learn 311 homes are going to be at your doorstep with an average count of 500 cars a day. And then to find out your builder's not going to do that. They've stepped up tremendously by offering and making this agreement with the board to put in the gate. It's probably the best forward I've seen in dealing with developers. So I just want to commend them for that. So I just wanted to go on record as well that we have entered this verbal agreement to get the gate going. In fact, we're going to be meeting with them in just a few short weeks to go over the gate process and all of that. So I just wanted to share the facts with you that they've been a good partner. You know, of course, there's a group of people who don't ever want to see anything there, but there was going to be something there. And they've really tried to put the best foot forward to make it the best it could be. So I just wanted that to be on the record. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this item? All right, seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners, any discussions or questions? We've got the applicant. I'd just like to make a comment that this is, just hearing from the HOA president down below and the representatives here tonight, that this is a great way of working with your neighbors, and I really appreciate everyone that has been involved. And with that comment, I'd like to make a motion. to approve CPA-2025-017-864, CZA-2011-500-286-821, and TMA-2025-017-865, subject to findings of fact and conditions. All right, commissioners, there's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Humes. Commissioner Newsom. I vote yes. Thank you. All right, and that motion passes. Thank you guys very much for coming. Item number nine is a four-part request for a single-family residential subdivision on 28.2 acres at the southeast corner of Boulder Highway and Texas Avenue. The first part is a zone change from RH-36 to MNRD. The second part includes four waiver requests to reduce the driveway length from 20 feet to 5 feet, reduce the front and rear yard setbacks from 10 feet to 4 feet, reduce the setback for a second floor encroachment from 10 feet to 2 feet, and reduce the patio cover setback from 5 feet to 0 feet. The third part is a tentative map for a 348-lot single-family residential subdivision consisting of 88 single-family detached homes and 260 townhomes. The fourth part is for review of architecture and site design for the development. Staff finds that the proposed neighborhood mixed-use zoning is compatible with the existing transit-oriented development land use on the site and supports the development of a medium-density pedestrian-oriented residential community. The development will provide needed for sale housing within the central core of Henderson, while adding considerable residential density to support nearby retail employment centers and existing and planned transit. As a compensating benefit for the waivers, a total of 129,953 square feet of open space is proposed, which represents a 25% increase from the 104,000 square feet of open space that is required. The project also incorporates pedestrian connections throughout the site and staff has added a condition requiring a pedestrian connection to Texas Avenue. Staff also notes that the driveway reduction request is only on six of the lots. Staff finds that the applicant is providing adequate compensating benefits and that the project is compatible with the surrounding area. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the March 3rd City Council meeting. Staff has received five responses from the public notice in opposition. Thank you. Before we start, hear from our applicant, I just want to read the following disclosure that my employer, Lewis Management Corp., has sold land to Lenara, an affiliate of the applicant and the property owner on these applications. The property sold by my employer is located in California, not in any way related to this item, nor am I involved with the sale of the property. I don't believe that my employer's land sales will materially affect my judgment in considering this matter. nor would they affect the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in my situation. I have been advised by council to make this disclosure pursuant to Nevada ethics laws, but that I do not need to abstain from this matter. All right, applicant, name and zip code for the record, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. Commissioner Tom Amick, 1980 Festool Plaza. Also with me on this application is John Marciano and Michael Tassi, both 218 Lead Street. We're here on behalf of the applicant, which is Lennar, in this application. So this is the site that is behind the Walmart on Boulder Highway, the 28-acre site. This site was previously approved for 749 apartment units, two different projects that encompass that site. So we are taking that density down significantly, over half. of the units will be gone. So we are going to do 88 single-family detached lots and 260 townhome lots, and those will all be for sale, not for rent. The waivers that we need are to try to maintain some of the density That was lost, but we need that to make the project work. A lot of these areas are utilized for open space and for drainage, so we did increase the open space by 25% to compensate for that, so we appreciate the staff working with us on those. I don't really have anything further. I think this is a We hope that you guys think this is a great option given what was previously approved there, and it'll be good to get this piece finally developed. So we can happen to answer any questions if you have them. Thank you. I will open the public hearing. Is there anyone present who wishes to speak on this item? It doesn't appear there's anyone here wanting to speak on this one. All right, I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners, discussion, questions, comments? I'm sorry, I did have one other comment that I told staff that I would make with regard to the pedestrian access to Texas. We will provide that. It'll, given the drainage and the grading over there on that side, it'll be via a staircase, but we will provide the pedestrian access. So I needed to put that on the record. I'm sorry, Madam Chair. All right, let's try this again. I'm going to go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners, discussions, questions, commentary, motions? I have a couple of remarks to make. That area has been a major original part of Henderson. And I, for one, appreciate everything you guys have gone through personally to adjust and change and adapt to. Because that is, I mean, there's a church right there. I grew up in that area many, many years ago. But I just wanted to comment and thank you. Thank you. And I'd like to make a motion. All right. All right. I'd like to make a motion to approve ZCA-20-2501-7952, W-0-S-20-2501-7955, TMA-2025017957, and DRA-2025017961. All are subject to findings of facts, conditions, and waivers. All right. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Grimanowskis. Please vote. Oh, and we need Commissioner Newsom's vote also. I vote yes. Thank you. And now motion passes. Thank you very much for coming to see us. Staff, bring on the next one. Item 10 has been continued to the March meeting. Item 11 is a waiver request to reduce the site setback from 5 feet to 3 feet for a detached accessory structure on .7 acres located at 1530 Rawhide Drive. Staff notes that a portion of the detached garage was previously constructed, but there is no record of permits being issued. The applicant is now requesting an addition to the structure, and this request will bring the entire structure into compliance. As a compensating benefit, the applicant is providing architectural upgrades to the structure, including stucco, paint, trim, roof tiles, and additional doors and windows with stucco foam finish. A letter of support from the adjacent neighbor to the east has also been provided. Staff finds that the applicant is providing adequate compensating benefits and the structure is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, staff recommends approval. This item will be final action unless appealed. Staff has received two responses from the public notice in support. Thank you. Applicant name and zip code for the record, please. I'm Brian Hale, 89002. All right. And have you read the staff recommendations? I have. I agree with it. And you agree with the staff recommendations? Awesome. Thank you. I will go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here to speak on this matter? Does not appear anyone is here to speak on this matter, so I will go ahead and close the public hearing. Commissioners, discussion, questions, comments, motions? I'll make a motion. If there is no, I'll quit. All right. I'm sorry. I wanted to join the party and make a motion. I want a motion to approve WOS-202501-18106, subject to findings of fact, conditions, and a waiver. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Newsom. And everybody vote. All right. Everyone's voted. Can we get Commissioner Newsom's vote on the record? Oh, sure. Sorry about that. Can we assume that just because he made the motion, he's voting here? Commissioner Newsom, give us your, we know. Okay, thank you. Thank you so much. And that motion passes. Staff, bring on the next guy. Item 12 is a request for vehicle sales, including sale of classic, custom, and antique vehicles only. Located at 249 Elliott Road in Suites 5 and 6. The applicant states that they will have up to 10 vehicles on site, and all vehicles are to be displayed and sold indoors by appointment only. The proposed use will occupy suites within an existing industrial building. Staff does not anticipate any impacts from the proposed use and finds it will be compatible with the surrounding uses. Staff recommends approval. This item will be final action unless appealed. Staff received one response from the public notice in support. All right, applicant name and zip code for the record please. Craig Wolt 89015. Thank you. Have you read through staff's recommendations? Yes. And do you like them? They're great. Okay, thank you. All right. Well, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this item? All right. Jared Tilly, 89011. Thank you. I oppose having an auto sales facility in that area. I have tons of pictures. I work in the area. The complex is not set up for auto sales. There's no parking, not even on the public street. There's just cars that are in disrepair. At the end of each street there, or at the end of the street going towards Boulder, there's trash dumped all the time. There's oversized vehicles. There's just nowhere for auto sales in that complex. The complex only gives them four parking spaces. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak on this matter? Seeing none, can we go on down? Name and zip code for the record, please. Jenny Wolt, 89015. I'm a party to this business. as stated all vehicles will remain inside the building at in at all times there's not going to be any parking outside of the building and everything would be done by appointment only and so it would be one visitor at a time this isn't going to be somewhere where multiple people are coming at any one time to address the that gentleman's concerns all right I guess I'll close Do you guys both want to address any questions we might have? Sure. All right. I'll go ahead and close the public hearing. I think probably we have a few questions. I have a few questions, so I'm guessing other people do. I guess one of the questions I had, how many cars will you be selling at a time? So generally it's going to be about five. The building itself is 40 by 60 and can hold 10 vehicles, but our plan is to have no more than five in the building at a time. And then how do people find you and decide they want to buy a vintage vehicle from you? So several different ways, websites, eBay, Craigslist, Facebook. Facebook Marketplace, word of mouth, things like that. Okay, and so then they'd make an appointment, and then you'd meet over at the warehouse or... Is that kind of idea? Correct. Okay. And not at what kind of hours or I guess it doesn't really matter, but I mean, it's the same normal work, reasonable hours, not two in the morning hours. No, generally not two in the morning. It should be normal work business hours. Reasonable. Okay. Thank you. I'll let my co-commissioners. So are you going to be doing any repairs there? No. Basically, we'll be buying the cars, cleaning them up, things like that, getting them ready for sale, but no intended mechanical work will be done. So strictly detailing the cars that you're buying to make them look more presentable for sale, right? And when you say they're vintage cars, what are we talking about from a vintage car standpoint? Are we talking about 69 Mustang? Are you talking about muscle cars? Well, basically, yes, it could be a 69 Mustang. It could be a muscle car. It could be a 1912, you know, just anything vintage, classic, antique. Generally, nothing would be newer than probably 1999s. So the cars, you're acquiring the cars somewhere else and then bringing them in just to clean them up and get them ready for sale? Is that what I understand? Correct. And no repairs being done except for, what, minor repairs maybe? Right, maybe minor repairs, you know, swapping out. Like if it has a dead battery and needs a new battery, we'll put a new battery in it to make it, you know. But generally just going to be clean up and then here's either... A vehicle that we have bought that's in pristine condition, we're going to flip it and resell it, or here's a project car for someone. You know, nothing, you know, too bad, but... Okay. You said that you would only have four or five vehicles at a time inside the building? Correct. Are you going to have any outside the building? No. None? No. None. Other than getting them inside and out. Okay. Correct. If I may, just from staff's perspective, there is a condition of approval that staff is proposing that the applicant must have store all vehicles indoors at all times. So that's something that they have agreed to. So it's a condition of approval. All right. Are you doing this currently somewhere else in another location or through the house? No, I am not. Okay. Thank you. I would just like to add whoever makes the motion that and if the applicant's okay with this that no repairs are being done other than detailing the cars are you okay with that? Yes. Okay so that would if anybody makes a motion that would be my additional condition. You look like a guy who could make a motion. All right. Commissioner, just if I may, too, that's a completely different use in the city's zoning code. So if they were to do vehicle repair, that would be another request. They would have to come back in front of you. So they would be out of compliance with what they're requesting to do today if that was to occur. No, thank you. That answers your question. No need to add that condition. Okay. Okay. Any other discussion? I'll go ahead and make a motion. Okay. Final approval of CUP 2025-018039, subject to findings of fact and conditions. All right. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Bockelman. Commissioner Newsom, wherever. I vote yes. Thank you. That motion passes. Thank you very much. Staff, bring on the next one. Item 13 is a two-part request for a restaurant with drive-through facility with a modification to reduce the minimum required distance of an outdoor speaker box to a residential dwelling from 300 feet to 101 feet and review of architecture and site design for a new restaurant with drive-through establishment on 1.2 acres located at 1916 North Boulder Highway. To mitigate potential noise impacts, the applicant is proposing to incorporate automated volume control. We'll be orienting the speaker box away from residential homes. We'll be installing an additional five-foot-tall wall along the east rim of the drive-thru facility and is providing a 20-foot-wide landscape buffer with trees planted at 20 feet on center. Staff finds that the proposed measures will adequately mitigate potential noise impacts from the proposed speaker box to the residential areas. Additionally, staff has added conditions that the sound system shall only be permitted between 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. with volume control at the lowest setting from 5 a.m. to 7 a.m. and evergreen trees shall be planted at regular intervals within the landscape buffer. Staff finds that the proposed design, in addition to the added mitigation measures, meets all necessary approval criteria and is compatible with the gas station used to the west. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request. This item will be final action unless appealed. All right applicant name is a code for the record please Thank You madam chair Michael Tassi to 18 lead Street and oh and five Representing the applicant on this item this is near the southeast corner of Boulder Highway and sunset as you recall a couple months back We had the Murphy Express approved at this corner At that time we didn't have this parcel in place and now that it is we do have a shared driveway for both of these parcels appreciate staff's recommendation and conditions appreciate sean allen for working with us on this project we do have some images that are in your backup showing what this is going to look like from boulder highway that was important to staff and to to the reimagine boulder highway project that there be some integration of the pedestrian environment with this proposal so we did add a Cover right at the trail right along Boulder Highway That brings you right into the building and we did a three foot tall gabion wall as well as landscaping to screen from Boulder Highway regarding the request for the modification for the sound system The speaker boxes are essentially in this location here with the sound pointing this way. I guess that would kind of be to our east. So what we did to mitigate that, in addition to the automated volume control, and if you're not familiar with that, automated volume control senses the ambient noise in the area and it reduces automatically. If it's set at its highest setting, it's going to be kicking out about 80 decibels, and that number, the decibels increase about five every time that distance doubles. So by the time it hits the the property lines, the receiving property lines of this residential, it's going to be below the 60 or 65 decibels that are in your code. However, we did want to make sure that we were working to mitigate that even more. This curved five foot wall on the backside will help to dissipate that noise and point it directly back towards the building in addition to the increased landscape buffers on both sides. And we agree with the condition of staff to close at 10 o'clock. We appreciate the opening at 5:00 because we do serve breakfast and we're going to add some trees along both those property lines to further decrease any potential impact of the noise. And then I'll say one more thing. In discussion with staff on that particular condition, this is a conditional use permit. So if you do approve it, and then staff can correct me if I'm wrong, there are a number of measures within your code if there are complaints. You know we intend to be a good neighbor if there is any complaint about the noise we don't think there will be but if there is then staff will contact us we'll work with the neighbors to reduce the noise as much as possible including adding more mitigation measures. So the use permit gives you, gives the staff, gives the city that ability to mitigate those things after the fact. So with that I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this item? Hi, my name is Charmaine DiMercato. My zip code is 89011. I actually live in one of the units where they're getting ready to build this at. So I came just to hear what was going on. And just want to understand what to expect, 'cause I just moved here to Las Vegas a little bit over a year ago, so I'm new to the area, new to that community. So if I'm understanding correctly, they are going to do something to mitigate noise for us back there? Okay. And if there's a problem, we have the right to go ahead and bring that up. Okay. I'm just trying to make sure I understand. Thank you. Oh, no, of course. Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. I'd like to address this democraut's concern. Yes, we are, like I said, doing a number of ways to mitigate any noise that's going to happen from our speaker boxes. I will hand her my card so that she can give me those, call me directly if there are any complaints or any concerns once this gets constructed. Thank you. Could you tell us what is actually on the site right now? I just was trying to piece together via the aerial. There's like a lot going on, but I was just curious what's there. There is. It's kind of a hodgepodge of, it almost is like a construction staging yard. There are a number of outdoor storage units and equipment that move things around on that property. So we are cleaning this up, both sites. Thank you. All right, I guess, does anyone, I'm close to public hearing, but does anyone have any questions, comments, motions? Just a quick question on the gas station that's adjacent to the property. Do you know the hours of operation of that gas station? Is it 24 hours? It is 24 hours, yes. Okay, helps me. Thank you. I'm really bothered about all the residential areas, and there are so many businesses moving into those areas. I know they're small businesses, And a lot of the residences have been there for a long time. So did anybody come that's here that's opposing it that lives in the area? I guess not. I'm surprised. To be more clear, the existing residential on this adjacent to us here on the north is an RV park. This RV park has some permanent units and some not permanent units just come in and park. The subdivision that is to our south is a new subdivision. So this was recently built within the last couple of years. It's called Presley Place. It's an attached development. I will say that the zoning here is for commercial. So it's not for residential. I mean you it's the type of type of zoning where you could have both and so I think that's kind of the Expectations that you have services nearby that you can walk to has it always been that zoning It hasn't always been that zoning it's been that zoning for a while But for a while does that mean five years ten years one year you'd have to ask staff. I think it's been about 20 and The main access is on Boulder Highway? Correct, the front's on Boulder Highway. Mr. Tassi, I'd like to say that between the two projects, the gas station and Bojangles, I drove by there this morning. I've known this corner since I was in high school. It's where we used to get our cars to go to Fremont Street because it was a used car lot. So... it's been a pile of junk for 50 years, the whole corner. You just tore down a motel six months ago that was just an eyesore. The construction yard that's there, a staging area, is another eyesore. So between these two projects, I think you're going to make one of the best corners on that for now. There's still two corners left, but I would like to make a motion to approve CUP 202-501-8090. DRA 2025018091, subject to findings of facts and conditions. All right. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Newsom. Commissioner Newsom? Yes. I vote yes. Thank you. And that motion passes 6-1 with Commissioner Grzymanowska voting against. Thank you very much. Thank you. Item number 14 is a request for a tattoo and body alteration studio located at 3475 St. Rose Parkway in Suite 138. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed use complies with all applicable standards for a tattoo establishment and meets all necessary approval criteria. Staff recommends approval. This item will be final action unless appealed. Staff also notes that the staff report has been updated to add conditions number three and four, which are advisory conditions from the Clark County Department of Aviation. All right. Before we hear from the applicant, I do have the following disclosure. Pursuant to Nevada ethics laws, I'd like to disclose my employer, Lewis Management Corp., leases property to an entity-related... to an entity owned by the owner of SRS Property Company, the property owner on this application. My employer's lease is for a putter's business, which is entirely unrelated to this application, and I do not administrate or otherwise manage the putter's lease. I do not believe that my employer's lease to putters will affect my judgment in considering the matter, nor would it affect the judgment of a reasonable person in this situation. I've been advised by council to make the disclosure, but I do not need to abstain from this matter. All right applicant name is it code for the record please Ryan Jenkins eight nine zero five two All right, tell us do you read staffs recommendations? Yes, I'm requesting approval for a conditional use permit I'll be operating a private appointment only tattoo studio with an existing in an existing salon suite is a professional licensed environment focused on custom work there will be no walk-in or retail storefront traffic and All right. Did you read staff's recommendations? I read staff's recommendations. Okay, perfect. All right. Well, why don't we go ahead and open the public hearing? Is there anyone who wishes to speak about this item? Apparently not. All right. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing. I guess I'll make the one comment to staff, which they know is coming, is I still don't quite understand why we regulate these so stringently. And I think in future code updates, we should really look at it because it's a pretty nominal impacting use for most retail centers. But I'll go ahead and let my fellow commissioners weigh in. I would simply concur with Madam Chair's comment, and if there's no other comments from the floor, I would like to make a motion to approve CUP 2025-018108, subject to findings of facts and conditions. All right, there's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Brunson. Commissioner Newsom, tell us how you vote. I vote yes. Thank you. And that motion passes. Good luck, sir. Item 15 is a two-part request for a new industrial warehouse building on 4.2 acres located at the southwest corner of Bruner Avenue and Amigo Street. The first part is a conditional use permit to allow an industrial warehouse as a primary use within the West Henderson Global Business District. The second part is for review of architecture and site design for a new warehouse facility. Staff notes that a nearly identical request was previously approved in 2022, but expired prior to the applicant obtaining building permits. The applicant has demonstrated that the project meets the necessary approval criteria and complies with all applicable West Henderson Global Business District standards. Staff recommends approval. This item will be final action unless appealed. All right, applicant name and zip code for the record, please. Good evening, Taylor Erdmann, 1620 Country Hollow Drive, 89117, here on behalf of the applicant. As written to the record, this was a previously approved project that did expire and now is moving forward again. We do agree with staff recommendations and happy to answer any questions. All right, well, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here on this item? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing, and I'll turn it over to my commissioners. I'll make a motion to approve CUP 202501-8095, DRA 202501-8093, subject to findings of facts and conditions. All right, and there is a motion on the floor from Commissioner Beeson, and we're waiting for Commissioner Newsom. I'll vote yes. Thank you. All right, and that motion passes. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Item 16 has been continued to the March Planning Commission agenda. Item 17 is a request for an indoor sports, recreation, and entertainment use for a new pickleball facility within the existing Boulder Marketplace located at 716 South Boulder Highway in Suite 120. The proposed use will activate a currently vacant acre tenant and thereby leverage established infrastructure. The applicant has demonstrated that adequate parking is available for the use and that the use will be compatible with the adjacent uses in the commercial center. Staff recommends approval. This item will be final action unless appealed. All right, applicant name and zip code for the record. Joseph Garvin, 89015. All right. Have you read staff's recommendations? Yes. Read staff recommendations. Understand that some of those change because of the misunderstanding that we're indoor. And there were some concerns with the level of noise that would be generated from the indoor pickleball facility. But given that it's indoor and we would not, you know, be having our doors open or, you know, letting sound out or playing loud music, some of those concerns were addressed earlier today. All right, thank you. Is there anyone here who wishes, I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Is there anyone here who wishes to speak on this? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing and we'll turn it over to our pickleball experts. I just have a question. Have you met Commissioner Humes, a professional pickleball player? We just did earlier, and he's committed to sign up for membership, so we're happy to hear about that. Very good. That's all I had. I'll save my questions for after the meeting. I'll make a motion to approve CUP 2025-01-8151, subject to findings of fact and conditions. All right. We have a motion on the floor from Commissioner Humes. Commissioner Newsom. I vote yes to pickleball. Thank you. All right. And that motion passes. So we'll have more pickleball in Henderson. Thank you. And that brings us, I think, to... The last public hearing item. Item 18 is a request for a major modification to the amended and restated cadence development agreement to allow one additional tavern within the future Warm Springs Village Center, generally located east of Boulder Highway and north of Warm Springs Road. The proposed tavern will have specific design criteria to comply with the standards for a high-quality restaurant establishment which meet or exceed current requirements for a tavern, including having 75 dining area seats separate from bar seating, providing full food service at all times the tavern is open, being designed to allow minors, and limiting the bar top area to no more than 15 gaming machines. The applicant notes that this request will bring the total to two taverns within the Cadence Plant community. The tavern is also exempt from typical distance separation requirements per the Cadence Development Agreement. Staff finds that the request to add one additional tavern is consistent with the intent of the Cadence Plant community and compatible with the surrounding properties. Staff recommends approval. This item will be heard at the March 3rd City Council meeting. Staff has received 16 responses from the public notice in support and 23 in opposition. All right, applicant name and zip code for the record. Good evening, Commissioners Lee, Ferris, 875 West Warren Springs Road. Here on behalf of the Landwell Company, who is the applicant. We appreciate staff's recommendation. We certainly concur with it. We'd make, I think, just a few clarifications. Things we want to make clear. One is originally when Cadence was entitled and approved, there was going to be a casino built in this general area at Warm Springs and Boulder Highway. It would be a replacement of Joker's Wall. That was a condition of the agreement. In addition to that casino, there were six taverns approved in the same area. When Boyd chose to move forward with Joker's Wad on their current site, which we're happy that they're moving forward, it's a great facility that they're building, we voluntarily gave up our six taverns because we couldn't tell people where they would go or how they would be developed. We didn't feel it was appropriate to retain any of them at the time because we really couldn't explain where they would go or how they would be developed. And since then, we've got one approved at Lake Mead. This is the second one. This will be the last one. This is the last commercial piece of property we have. We just want to make that clear as well as staff said, we do have enhanced standards partly because and mostly because our residents number one request is places to go eat. And we have a retail center as you may know at Lake Beaton Sunset and they are starting to fill up but Places to eat is the number one request of our residents. So we build these tavern standards in a way where the restaurant has to be full, it has to be open at all times, and it has to have 75 seats away from the bar area so that families can come in and enjoy eating. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I'm going to go ahead and open the public hearing. Do we have anyone here on the sitem? Good evening. Name and zip code for the record, please. Good afternoon, Madam Chair. For the record, Erin Midby on behalf of Boyd Gaming Corporation, 6465 South Rainbow Boulevard, 89118. And so I wanted to thank you all for the opportunity to speak here today. We are opposed to this just because we have major concerns about the approval of an additional tavern. As you all know, we're building a new Joker's Wild, the Cadence Crossing Casino, which will... be opening this year and have invested in that area. And this would be the third tavern adjacent to that property, basically surrounding it, that has been approved all within the last year. And so we're concerned about that. As staff noted, there's basically two loopholes in the code that allow for the distance separation requirement not to apply in this case. One is the way that your code is written in basically treats a non-restricted gaming license location not as a tavern and therefore doesn't make the distance separation apply. And then the other, of course, because it's in a master planned community. So if this were another regular tavern, right, that was close to essentially our property, that wouldn't be allowed because of the distance separation requirement. And we've seen this oversaturation in other jurisdictions that have basically done this and it creates a great deterioration and disruption and then takes a while to rectify i would highlight the cadence has been a tremendous partner and they have really amplified and enhanced this area along boulder highway and we've bought into that vision that the city has also bought into and are participating by doing our part of the vision boulder highway trail and landscaping requirements there and so We don't think this also jives with the vision that the city has put forth. So we would just recommend that you consider that and appreciate your time today. - Thank you. - Thank you. - Is there anyone else here who wishes to speak on this item? Seeing none, we'll go ahead and close the public hearing. We've got the applicant back up here. All right, commissioners, thoughts, comments, questions? - I'd like to ask It's not real clear what is actually around that area. I mean, close. What is it? The area, the corner that the proposed tavern will be located at is at Papco and Warm Springs Road. This parcel in cadence is what we call Village Center, which requires it to be a mixed use of residential and commercial. And so there will be a commercial section along Warm Springs Road from Boulder Highway to Papco, and then behind it will be some residential, some multifamily, and some single-family attached. On the other side of Warm Springs Road, which is about 110 foot right away, there's single family detached. And on the other opposite corner of Pabco, it is multifamily. So we feel like this is an appropriate use on this corner. One of the things that I'll just make note, too, is while I understand some may see it as a loophole, I think we would look at our development agreement as a negotiated agreement with the city of Henderson. And as part of that, we've agreed to do a lot of things that normal residential wouldn't do. Build parks, build a 100-acre sports park. We're spending a lot of money building in a lot of infrastructure that not just serves Cadence, but serves everybody. So part of that agreement of us spending that money is that we do have some things that are a little bit unique, maybe not traditional, but they're unique, and they're negotiated agreements. And that's why that separation requirements. How large is that lot? That lot, the commercial lot is four acres. Four acres? Yeah. Oh, okay. Anything that big right surrounding it? About, like, how many acres next door to them? So to the north of it in Cadence is two residential parcels that are about 16 acres, but it's within the 2,200-acre Cadence master plan, if that makes sense. Not really. So... It's in the middle of the Cadence Master Plan. It's surrounded by all of Cadence. There's hundreds of acres in and around it. But the commercial piece here, and it's the only commercial piece here in Cadence in this corner, is four acres. Okay. All right. Thank you. Could you tell us how far is it from the new Joker's Wild, plus or minus? Boy, I don't know that. I don't know. Five to 800 feet, I think. From the new portion that's been built, it's a little further, obviously, when they tear down the old portion and build that second half. And if they go to the third phase of the hotel, that brings everything closer to us. Okay, thank you. So you mentioned that the residents are looking for more opportunities or choices for restaurants. So why is the need for a tavern versus a restaurant that serves alcohol, liquor, or... I think the economics of how restaurants are going today, as I said, we have a large retail center at Lake Mead and Sunset, and we are still having problems filling even the quick service pads, partly because of what's surrounding us along Boulder Highway and part of just the economics of how commercial is going today. So whether you like it or not, and I think it's a worthy debate, the machines and the bar part of that tavern help make the restaurant possible. But for us, it's important that if we are going to provide that opportunity for the restaurant, that the restaurant stay open at any time when the tavern is open, that it be full service restaurant, not Partial service and that there be separated seats and a number of them 75s our number away from that bar so that families can come in there and enjoy it like a restaurant by those that maybe you want to come in and Use it as a tavern can do that and the facility is going to be a hundred percent non-smoking correct. That's right staff so the comment by the person That came up to speak Aaron Mention a loophole in the code. So can can you help us understand? Why there is not a separation of what is it 2,000 feet between taverns when in fact that I'm assuming that the new Location of the casino is going to have some form of a tavern inside of it But can you help us understand why that doesn't apply in this case? I think at first I'd like to say that I would say that we would consider that a loophole I think it's That's how it's written into code, so we don't see it that way. Part of the requirements for these non-restricted gaming establishments, they have to have certain amenities within, but their amenities within there aren't necessarily considered a tavern, a separated tavern based on our What other amenities they're providing? I don't know. Yeah, I would say I don't think anybody here would agree that the primary function or primary purpose of Joker's Wild is a tavern. It is a casino. It is non-restricted gaming. It's grandfathered in. It's a great part of the community. But I don't think people drive by and see it as a tavern. So it doesn't look like there's a proliferation of taverns. Secondly, as Andy said, it's in our code. We have specific distance separation between taverns. And then thirdly, as Leap Ferris pointed out, this is a negotiated agreement and it's part of the whole plan community, the give and take between the developer and the city. It's it's permissible. There's nothing that would not permit that so no loophole here Thank you. The other thing I'd like to get on the record too is you know when whenever somebody voices a concern about you know Distance separations not being met or anything of that nature. I just asked staff and it's my understanding That this tavern does in fact meet all distance separations. Is that correct? That's correct. Okay, so Mr. Ferris, you mentioned giving up seven, eight other tavern locations for this one, and that agreement was a discussion with the Boyd Group. It doesn't sound like it. Can you explain how that happened and why we're hearing two sides of that story? Sure. So that wasn't a discussion with Boyd. When Boyd elected to move forward rebuilding on the Jerkers Wild site, We didn't have any more discussion with them because they chose not to build the gaming site in Cadence. We had to replan the Cadence master plan. It really was we had to rethink what was going to go in that area. That area had been designed to be what we were calling an urban core anchored by a large casino, you know, a large neighborhood casino like you would maybe think, like a Sunset or Green Valley Grant Stations Casino. They chose not to do that. That was their right. There was no obligation that they had to do that. But our gaming site was predicated on the Jerker's Wall would go away. So once they decided to move forward on their current site, we had to come back to the city and replan the entire area. Never did they ask us to give up the six tavern licenses. We did it on our own, like I said, because there was just, we didn't know what we were going to do. We knew we had left a commercial piece, but we didn't know how that was really going to work out. And we just didn't think it was appropriate to hold on to tavern approvals when we couldn't tell anybody, well, what are they really going to be? Yeah. And we worked in good faith with the city and said we may come back and ask for one or two, but we'll do that down the road. We thought it was just appropriate to give them all away. So we had approval for six taverns in this area, and we forfeited them all when we replanned the area. So the area that you're proposing on that commercial site, Has it been on the master plan for quite a while? Yes. The difference would be when it was replanned, it went from what we call urban core to village center, but it was always a commercial. It's just we had a different set of standards for the urban core. It had to be taller and had to be more dense. And off the top of your head, how many residents are in the cadence development now? I think we're somewhere between the multifamily and the homes closed at around 8,500. Last year, we sold 1,200 units. We were the third fastest growing master plan in the community, the fastest one west of the Mississippi. And I'm really proud to say we about sold Summerlin now for two years. So for all the great shakes people want to say about Summerlin, and I love it. We sell better than they do. So we're really proud of that. Some people don't. We're really proud of that. And we are continuing to sell at a rapid pace. Okay. Some people on 215 don't think so. But... Is there any more discussion? Anything else? I do have one more question. That site that you are, the site here that you're looking, was that one of the original sites that was one of the six taverns? They could have been anywhere in the urban core. There was actually no separation requirements. They could have been built in any fashion, in any location. It could have been including potentially that site. They could have been right across the street from where the casino was going to go. And quite frankly, our plan was there was a main street. On one side was an entry to the casino. On the other side were going to be the taverns. They were going to be across the street at a much closer distance. Under those six taverns, you had by right to place those taverns anywhere? Anywhere within that area, yes. Thank you. I just think with the amount of people that Cadence has brought to this area, it will be able to support not only the new casino, but also a tavern. So I'd like to make a recommendation to approve wherever the number went. There it is, DEV, 202-501-7848. recommended for approval. All right. There's a motion on the floor from Commissioner Beeson. Commissioner Newsom. I vote yes. Thank you. All right. And that motion passes six to one. Thank you. Thank you. All right. And I think that's the end of our regular land use items. And that brings us to public comment portion of the meeting. Items discussed under public comment cannot be acted upon this meeting. Is there anyone here who wishes to address the commission? Oh, I didn't think we would really have someone. Oh, I'm sorry for keeping you later. For the record, Michael Tassigy. I know this is Sherry Jetson's last meeting, and so I wanted to take the opportunity to tell her and to tell the public that the city is going to miss you incredibly. Sherry has been an integral part in my career, and she helped me out so many times throughout my 26 years. So many times we were running to Sherry to have her help us figure some things out. So nothing got done without her. She's going to be greatly missed personally. But I just wanted to extend our well wishes from John, Tom, Misty, Brittany, and I. Thank you for everything, Sherry. You're amazing and good luck. Yeah, right? I thought Dave was going to cry instead. Is there anyone else with any public comment? Sherry, we will miss you. You can always watch us on the second Thursday of every month if you want, though. I will be guaranteed excitement. Yeah, we're on Zoom. All right. And that brings us to, I guess we'll close that public comment and we'll go ahead to staff and chair's business. Staff, what business do you have for us? I mean, I want to say one last time, we really appreciate all the time and effort Sherry has given to us. We like to say that the city is kind of a big cruise ship. And if that's the case, we like to look at the planning department as kind of the engine of that cruise ship. And if you kind of get into that engine, like Sherry's kind of the one shoveling the coal into the fire, keeping things moving. So we, we, we appreciate it. It's hard to explain how much work she did behind the scenes, keeping these things moving smoothly. She's left stuff in really good shape and she's trained so many of our staff. So we, it's, it's, Today is a big loss for the city of Henderson, and we're just happy to hear all the recognition that it's so well deserved. And so I appreciate you giving me the time to say it again, but we will miss you, Sherry. Thank you. I'd like to go ahead and use my time to thank Public Works and Utilities back there, our security guys, and our AV team. Appreciate all of you guys being here and staying with us. Is there anything else? Also, yeah, also thank the fire department. Oh, sorry, sorry, sorry. Thank you, fire department, too, back there. But we appreciate all of your hard work hanging out with us all day. I'll go ahead and adjourn the meeting. Thank you guys very much for attending. Thank you. Thank you, staff. Appreciate y'all. Thank you, Shonda. Bye. Bye.