Are you ready?

Oh, this is a briefing.

Yeah, that's Commissioner Kirkpatrick's.

Okay.

I am going to call the January 6, 2026.

Plan Commission briefing to order.

If we can have our roll call, please.

Madam Chair Kalarski.

Here.

Vice Chair Frazier.

Here.

Commissioner Stone.

Okay.

He was he was running a little late.

Commissioner Kirk.

Here.

Commissioner Mohica.

Commissioner Gibson.

Here.

Commissioner Reutman.

I am here.

Okay, if we can have our presentation.

All right.

Good evening, Commissioners.

Happy New Year to all.

So our agenda tonight.

The first item, always on your your first meeting of every year.

It'll be item number four on the agenda is the election of the chair and the vice chair.

Sorry, actually, they made it number two.

Election of the chair and the vice chair.

So that'll be right after the initial public comment.

So then our first item on routine is number five.

And that is AR 25400130.

That's a use permit application for review for a massage establishment on Flamingo and Spencer.

Staff and town board recommended approval.

Item six is ET 25400 123.

It's a first extension of time for uh waivers for uh single family residents, um Palmyra and Sorrell, and uh both staff and town board recommended approval.

Uh we do have three cards in support and one card and two letters in protest for that item.

Item number seven, UC 250784.

It's a use permit for recreational facility at a an existing place of worship.

It's a temporary approval to have a boys and girls club on the property of the place of worship.

Uh both staff and town board recommended approval, and we have three cards in protest.

Item number eight is UC 250793.

This is a use permit for a massage establishment.

Uh it's located on Patrick and Rainbow.

Uh staff and town board recommend approval, and we have one protest card.

Item nine is VC 250805.

This is a variance for a patio cover in Summerlin.

Uh staff recommends approval, and we have two cards in support and four cards in protest.

Item 10 is uh vacation VS 250792, uh vacation of easements and a portion of right-of-way staff and then the Red Rock CAC both recommend approval.

We have two cards in support and one letter in protest.

And items 11 through 14, which are the last ones on routine, are companion items.

Uh 11 is uh plan amendment PA 257051.

Uh, that is to change the master plan from neighborhood commercial to business employment.

Um these four items are located on Mohawk and Saab Avenue.

Um staff and town board recommend approval.

We have one uh card in support and six cards and one letter in protest.

Item 12 uh is ZC 250795, and that's to change the zoning from RS20 to Industrial Light IL.

Um staff and town board recommend approval, one card in support, six cards and one letter in protest.

Item 13 is a vacation, VS 250796.

This is for um easements on the property, staff and town board recommended approval, uh, one card in support, seven cards and one letter in protest, and item number 14 is uh WS 250797, um, and this is the waiver and design review for the proposed office warehouse building.

Um staff recommended approval, uh Spring Valley Town Board recommended approval with some additional two additional conditions.

Uh one is to install a six-foot-high sound attenuation wall and trees on the west property line, and the second one was hours of operation limited to 8 a.m.

to 8 p.m.

Um if you all choose to impose those conditions, uh we would just need clarification on what the where the where exactly the trees are supposed to be since a portion of the west property line is a street and there's already street landscaping there, um, and the other portion of the West property line is adjacent to industrially zoned property, um, and there's no landscape requirements.

We would just need to know what you want as far as landscaping goes.

And then on this one, we have one card in support and six cards and one letter in protest, and that completes the routine action.

Okay, does anybody have any questions on the routine action items?

Saying none, I will have you continue on, please.

All right.

Moving to non-routine, our one and only hold request for tonight is item 15, UC 25080.

Um so uh the applicant um is asking to hold it until our um the February 3rd, 2026 Planning Commission meeting.

Uh they went to Whitney Town Board.

Uh Whitney Town Board denied the application, um, and then the applicant, like apparently after the meeting said that they wanted to make some changes and go back to town board.

So if you all want to send it back to town board as part of your motion, um you would hold it to the 2-3 February 3rd Planning Commission and then direct us to put it on the January 29th, 2026 uh Whitney Town Board agenda.

Um on that item we did get four cards in support and sorry, five cards in support and one letter in support and five cards in protest.

Item 16 is WS 250734.

This is a waiver for a uh six-foot-high non-decorative wall in the front setback where a maximum uh three-foot-high decorative decorative wall would be allowed.

Um staff and town board both recommended denial, and we have four cards in protest.

Item 17 is WS 250785.

This is a waiver for um, well, the request is for a balcony um with an existing single-family residence.

Uh so the residents already is there, they already have a patio cover.

Um I believe they have a pretty nice view of the strip, and so they want to add an additional what would normally be a patio cover, uh, but it's going to have a roof deck on it, so it actually turns it into a balcony.

Um staff's recommending denial.

The town or the citizen advisory council recommended approval, but without the balcony component.

So they approved it as a patio cover only.

So if you approve it as is, as submitted, it would be for the balcony.

Um if you approve it per the Citizens Advisory Council, um, they would be approved to just have an additional patio cover on their house.

Uh we do have three cards in support and four cards in protest.

Uh number 18 and 19 are companions.

18 is WS 250787, and this is a um uh small remodel, and sorry, 19 is uh TM25500 194.

So it's a minor remodel of a project that uh was previously approved for a 41 lot single family subdivision.

Um it's uh Wigwam and Cimaron.

Uh so with the original approval, there was a request to vacate Cougar Avenue.

Um if Cougar Avenue was vacated, then one of the properties that took access off of Cougar needed to get an access easement from the property that would be landlocking them.

Uh that property owner does not want to grant access, which means uh cougar cannot be vacated, and um, in order to not vacate cougar has to remain a public street, and they want to terminate it at their subdivision.

So it has a cul-de-sac and then so it has a public street, a cul-de-sac, and then it continues on as a private street within their subdivision.

The enterprise town board recommended approval of the retaining wall height waiver and denial of the rest of the application.

With their with their recommendation for approval of just the retaining wall height, um they want the um they want them to uh the applicant to terrace and landscape any combined retaining wall and screen walls that exceed nine feet in height, and then unrelated to the retaining wall, but um the town board added and wanted to add another condition to eliminate the cul-de-sac for the connection between the private and public portions of Cougar Avenue.

Um I have a note in here that this is not within the purview of the planning commission since it's an off-site-related waiver that has to be heard by the board.

Um, however, we will discuss it with the district attorney when uh when he gets here and see if that is something that you wanted to do, whether or not if there's anything in Title 30 that would allow you to do that.

Um had the applicant asked for it, this would have gone to the board and not to your meeting.

Let's see.

So with 18, number 18, we have no approvals and uh 11 cards in protest and four letters in protest.

Um, and then on the tentative map, town board recommended denial and no cards since we don't send notices on those.

Next dynam is 20 WS 250788.

Um so this is uh waiver for increased fence height and access gate setback for an existing restaurant and hookah lounge.

It's on Fremont Street north of Oakie.

Um the uh staff's recommending denial, um, town board recommended approval.

We did not get any cards on this one, and then the last four items are companion.

Um these are for a project um on Edmund and Russell.

So item 21 is the plan amendment PA 257049.

Uh this is to change the land use plan designation from neighborhood commercial to business employment um staff and town board recommend denial.

Uh we get we had three letters in support, nine cards and one letter in protest.

Item 22 is the zone change, it's ZC 250767, um, and that's to go from RS20 to IP Industrial Park.

And on that one, both staff and town board recommended denial.

Uh we have three letters in support and eight cards and one letter in protest.

23 is the vacation VS 25768.

Um, this is a vacation for easements and right-of-way.

Um staff and town board recommend approval.

Um we've got two cards and one letter in support and seven cards and one letter in protest.

And item 24 is WS 250769, and this is uh waivers uh for retaining wall height and throat depth, and then uh design review for uh warehouse and distribution center.

Um since we're not supporting the plan amendment, we ultimately can't support the project.

Um, however, if we took this if it was in conformance with the zoning and the master plan, um, we would be okay with uh portions of the uh design of the project, uh such as number waiver number one, which is a retaining wall height increase, um, because it's the the requested increase is adjacent to undeveloped land that's planned commercial, um, and they have all the required um landscaping buffer landscaping that is uh required per code.

Um, and then we're generally okay with the design of the project, except for the loading areas, they're not properly screened from the street, and so we don't support that part of it.

Um as far as town board, um so this was interesting.

Um the town board recommended denial of the plan amendment, but they made a motion to approve um did they approve the whole thing?

Yeah, so they approved the they approved 24, the waiver and design review, but they recommended denial on the plan amendment and and the zone change.

So normally we would have just said you don't need to vote on that because you've recommended denial of the only thing that makes it possible, which is the plan amendment.

So um, and then on this item we had three letters in support and eight cards and one letter in protest.

And that's it.

You know, on that type of thing, we need to make sure that our planners who go to town board when that type of thing happens, that they tell them once you deny this, you really shouldn't be voting for it.

The rest of it.

Just kind of kill it all.

They know now.

We have some we have some newer, we had some newer staff there.

That that particular one did.

Okay.

Uh is there anyone else that would like to ask any questions?

Commissioner Mohica.

Um, I want to go back to uh 18 and and 19.

All right, it is my understanding that this was approved twice already before, and then now that there's a new owner, because the house was sold, now they don't want the vacation.

So uh what I know from what I had heard is that the yeah, they uh that in order to vacate Cougar Avenue, um, which is really what's spurring this the majority of this change.

Um, in order to vacate Cougar Avenue, uh, the owner that's at the corner of Cougar and Gagnear would have to grant the person to their east an access easement, um, as it would be the only way to access their property.

Correct.

That owner does not want to grant that easement, so cougar cannot be vacated.

Right.

So we're gonna leave it.

So it's gonna be a public street.

Exactly.

So we're gonna leave it as a public street.

It'll be a public street with a county approved.

So what does legal need to talk about?

What I'm sorry?

You said we were gonna ask legal when that when they came in.

If you wanted to do what town board said, which is not have a county approved turnaround, which meaning to uh so cougar's gonna come from Gagnir on the west, it'll head east, um, and it needs to terminate in a cul-de-sac, which is what's shown on the plans.

The enterprise town board uh said that they don't want a cul-de-sac, they just want the street to go through and essentially have like a line on the street that says this is private, this is public.

So we don't do that.

And had the applicant asked to not do a cul-de-sac, the item this item would have been before the board of county commissioners because any public works waiver has to go to the board, not to the planning commission.

So basically, I mean I'm probably getting putting the cart ahead of the horse here, but um if I just want to approve it as is what they're asking for, is that possible?

Correct, it is.

Yeah, if you wanted to it well, if we'll ask the DA just in we don't know what's gonna happen.

So if you do want to consider what the enterprise town board said, um I'll talk to the DA before the meeting starts and we will find out what that authority is.

Uh again, because generally if the applicant would have asked for it, it would have just gone to the county commissioners.

Yeah, okay.

But yeah, if you approve it as submitted, then it's a moot point.

Yeah, based on based on my conversations with them, I want to approve whatever they're asking for.

The applicant.

Commissioner Gibson.

Yeah, I I saw that plan, and I guess I don't understand why there has to be a cul-de-sac.

I understand the the difference between private streets and public streets, but the fact if if we go back to circa 1990, a private street didn't get inspected like county streets publicly streets do, but now they do.

If HOA wants to turn over private streets to the public in the future, they can now because the private streets go through the same scrutiny as a pro public street.

Uh uh commissioner, if the private street was to be turned over to a public street, they would have to build a public standards, meaning sidewalk, street lights, and the width.

The their these streets are proposed less than 39 feet wide, so it doesn't meet the public street criteria.

And remember, in these subdivisions, the private property goes out to the center line.

So at any time a property owner, they can propose gates or anything like that.

So typically all public streets got to end in the county approved turnaround.

So and these streets don't meet uh the public street criteria.

We do inspect it on initial um build out, but after it's built, it's HOA's may uh may uh maintenance responsibility, not to counties.

So the streets not wide enough for RMP standards.

Your your your minimum pavement is only 32 feet, but the street width has to be a minimum 60 feet wide.

You can you can reduce it down to 48 feet within a subdivision, but the minimum public street width is 48 feet.

Minimum payment pavement requirement is 32 feet.

So that's the difference between RP standard and what would be a full build out of a street.

Okay.

I just think it's silly to have a cul-de-sac as a drive-through.

And and if I'm not mistaken, that width of that cul-de-sac and try and take it up that is also what's causing that one lot to be not meet the requirement of the 20,000 square feet.

Yeah, and a safety issue as well, right?

I mean, um your emergency vehicles and um uh vehicles wouldn't back be uh back out back into the street, they would actually have a turnaround to be a safe uh movement.

So that's why the cul-de-sacks are required for public streets.

But it's not gated.

There's no it could be gated in the future.

We have no way to police that.

That's that's the reason why we want the cul-de-sac, just in case in the future they would it could be gated.

Okay.

Okay, and I just have a question on number sixteen.

It was held at our last meeting.

It's a six-foot non-decorative solid wall.

They've taken down half of it and now it's decorative throughout the whole thing.

When they come down here, I guess is are they even required to come down here?

I have pictures of it that I took today.

So I'll show that to you, but just so you're aware that uh they've check the top half almost.

And we'll just we'll talk about it after.

That's the first time hearing of it.

It would be great if they come talk to us before the meeting.

Or okay, I'll see how I can find them.

All righty.

And that's it.

Anyone else?

Okay.

There are any new or upcoming ordinances?

So an upcoming uh I'll say it's gonna potentially be a pending ordinance.

There is an open house on January 22nd uh from 6 p.m.

to eight p.m.

for um i in blue diamond uh to consider changes to the Red Rock um overlay district.

Um so they're just in the Where at uh Blue Diamond at their community the Quanset Hut community center.

So normally they meet at the library, but the library's not big enough, so there's a quantit HUD, it says community center, a small sign on top of the door says community center.

Yes.

Can you please send us an email with the information?

Sure.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anything else?

How about any administrative items?

Uh only administrative item is you see that uh Michael Hewling is now sitting over here instead of over there.

So he was just promoted from senior planner to principal planner.

So he'll be shadowing us for a while and then he'll be sitting in the hot seat pretty soon.

Well, congratulations on the promotion, and uh look forward to working with you.

Anything else?

None?

That's all.

Then I am going to open this to public comment, but seeing nobody in the audience, I'm going to assume we have none.

The what?

Go ahead.

See none, then I'm going to adjourn our our our meeting.

And we'll see everybody at seven.