Okay, good evening.

We are ready to begin this planning commission meeting is called to order.

This meeting has been properly noticed and posted in compliance with the open meeting law.

These proceedings are being video recorded and can be viewed live on City of Las Vegas TV on Cox Cable Channel too.gov backslash connect.

Commissioner Slotman.

Commissioner Rogan.

Commissioner Walsh.

Commissioner DeSalbio.

Present.

Commissioner Munford.

Present.

You have a quorum.

And if you have any questions, staff is available.

Also, the second page of the agenda contains our rules of conduct.

We appreciate your adhering to these rules so we can have a smooth meeting.

Thank you.

Public comment during this next portion of the agenda must be limited to matters on the agenda for action.

If you wish to be heard, please come to the podium and give your name for the record.

The amount of discussion as well as the amount of any of time any single speaker is allowed may be limited.

All comments made under this item for specific action items will be cross-referenced to those items.

Are there any members of the public who wish to speak under this portion of the agenda?

Okay.

Seeing none, uh, thank you.

And we will move on to item number five.

Uh may we have a motion to approve the minutes of the planning commission meeting of August 12th, 2025.

Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes from last month's meeting.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

Let's move on to our housekeeping items.

Are there any items that commissioners, staff, applicants, or members of the public would like to pull forward for action?

Madam Chair, Nicole Edoes, for the record.

The applicant is requesting to hold item number 13 to the October 14th planning commission meeting.

The applicant is requesting to hold item number 14 to the October 14th planning commission meeting.

The applicant is requesting to table item number 15.

Staff is requesting to strike item number 16A.

The applicant is requesting to hold item number 17 to the October 14th planning commission meeting.

Staff is requesting to hold item number 27 to the October 14th planning commission meeting.

And staff is requesting to strike item number 33B.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Does anyone wish to speak on any of these items?

Madam Chair, uh Commissioners, Bob Gronauer, 1980, Festival Plaza Drive.

I'm uh representing the applicant on items 18, which is 18A and B.

We'd like to hold that matter for 30 days so we can continue to work with uh the commissioner and the councilwoman on some of the elevations.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Any further comments?

Okay, seeing none, um Vice Chair Kasama, would you like to make a motion on these housekeeping items?

Chair, I'd like to make a motion to obey item 13 to the October 14th planning commission meeting to obey item sorry item 13 and obey item 14 to the October 14th planning commission meeting to table item 15 to strike 16A to obey item 17 to the October 14th planning commission meeting to obey item 27 to the October 14th planning commission meeting to strike 333b and to obey agenda item 18A and B to the October 14th planning commission meeting.

Thank you.

There is a motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Um please post and that motion carries.

Right.

Um moving on to consent items.

These are considered routine by the planning commission and may be enacted by one motion.

However, any item may be discussed if a commission member or applicant so desires.

Right.

Um seeing none on this, um, can I have a motion, Vice Chair Kasama?

Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve consented uh the consent item agenda.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that item is final action tonight unless appealed to the city clerk in seven days.

Thank you.

We'll move on to one motion, one vote.

The following IR the following are items that may be considered in one motion one vote.

They are considered routine non-public and public hearing items with a staff recommendation of approval.

All public hearings and non-public hearings will be opened at one time.

Any person representing an application or a member of the public or a member of the planning commission not in agreement with the conditions and all standard conditions for the application recommended by staff should request to have that item removed from this part of the agenda.

So number eight, 25-0215.

Applicant, Southern Nevada Water Authority, owner, Las Vegas Valley Water District for possible action on the following land use entitlement projects requests at 6930 West Oakie Boulevard, Ward 1 Knutson.

8A, 25-0215, Z O N1 from R.E.

residence estates to C V Civic 8B, 25-0215 SDR 1.

For proposed one story 2,373 square foot pump station building and equipment addition to an existing water reservoir facility.

Item 9 25-0299 VAC1.

Applicant Greystone Nevada LLC owner DRP Solaris NV1 LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for petition to vacate a portion of a public drainage easement generally located at the southeast corner of Alta Drive and Wallop Highway Ward 2 Siemen.

Item 10 25 0319 SUP1 applicant owner, the Owens Family Trust for Possi on a Land Use Entitlement Project Request for Proposed Residential Accessory Dwelling Unit Us at 5075 Arrow Ranch Court, Ward 6 Bruni.

Item 11 25 0320, SUP1, Applicant ADTLV L L C Owner, the B L V D Series 1, LLC et al.

For possible action on the following land use entitlement project request for proposed 4,505 square foot alcohol on premise full use with a 927 square foot outdoor patio area and alcohol off-premise ancillary full use at 1130 South Casino Center Boulevard, suites 110, 130, and 140 ward 3.

Item 12, 25 0341, applicant Shulman Development Owner Union Pacific Railroad Company for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at the northeast corner of Charleston Boulevard and Grand Central Parkway, Ward 1 Knutson.

12A, 25 0341 SUP1 for proposed nightclub use.

12B 25 0341 SUP2 for proposed valley parking use.

12C 25 0341 SUP3 for proposed 208,000 square foot alcohol on premise full use.

12D 25 0341 SUP4 for proposed 250 foot tall building within the 200 foot airport overlay district.

12E 25 0341 SDR for proposed 21 story 312 room hotel development with waivers of appendix F interim downtown Las Vegas Development Standards Area 12F 25 0341 TMP1 for a one lot commercial subdivision including condominium units and with that I understand public works has um a condition to correct thank you chair tailor yes public works has a minor correction on item number 12E 250341 SDR1 Condition number 29 relates the retaining wall required in condition 31 but it should say the retaining wall required in condition number 32 that's it thank you thank you all right these matters were noticed as a public hearing would anyone like to be here heard on any of the items read forth in our one motion one vote section come on down and if everybody wants to just line up at microphones um and we can just move through everybody you know we can hardly hear you really over there yeah that is I mean not normally something people say um okay yeah so if you can just each line up at a microphone uh please give your name uh your address and if we can just give everybody two minutes on the clock okay that's right my name is Victoria Richester and I'm at 1550 Montessori Street this is about the rezoning on the Oaky for public water um for the water district to rezone from residential to civic and we are against it yeah and that's for item number eight okay um where do I put this you can hand it to the clerk anybody else wishing to speak on this item please come up to the microphones and lineup I'm Kathy Tapostel my husband uh I'm representing myself and my husband we live at 1510 Montessori Street um he's unfortunately not here which is probably a good thing because he has a little long-winded um we are here to represent also the neighborhood that uh backs up to uh that water district and uh we're just concerned about the changing of the zone from a residential estates to civic um the uh all current development standards in 19.08.040 must be brought up to current standards to include but not limited to as cited by the staff in the paragraph E of the proposal um about the interior screen walls so what we're saying is if if we have to be rezoned they need to come up to the standards of what is required in 2025 compared to 1977 when it was uh originally the the fences were originally built against our properties we right now have um we do have uh barbed wire and uh um fencing that the along the

So what we're saying is if if we have to be rezoned, they need to come up to the standards of um what is required in 2025 compared to 1977 when it was uh originally the the fences were originally built against our properties.

We right now have um we do have uh barbed wire and uh um fencing that the along the the properties.

So um what we're we're we're looking at is if they're going to rezone and it's not stated anywhere in the proposal that they will be building a wall along that uh that portion of um the the uh water district and we're concerned about that.

So we what we're trying to say in short is that uh they must remove the chain link um fencing, replaced with decorative walls and or landscaping as outlined in uh the codes of the of uh civic the civic codes um current plans are insufficient and must be updated to all stated requirements before rezoning can be approved.

Thank you.

Sir, are you that item as well?

Are you here for that item as well, sir?

Yes, okay.

My name is Warren E.

Kane.

I live at uh 1580 Montessori.

And um I wish to speak uh against uh the rezoning okay.

Um that's it for now.

Okay, thank you, sir.

Um chair, I can just be heard.

Is the SNWA here tonight to speak on that issue?

Could we could we pull that so the SNWA can give a presentation and we can hear from staff in the staff report as well?

And then we could just cross-reference the comments to the item as well.

That'd be great.

Thank you.

All right.

Um thank you.

So we will pull item eight out for the public hearing portion of this.

Anyone else on any other items from one motion one vote?

Okay, seeing none, um, I will ask the vice chair to make a motion um on items the one motion, one vote items, and numbers eight through twelve.

Madam Chair.

Yes.

Um Ludisalvio.

Oh, sorry.

I want to abstain on uh item number 10 out of abundance of caution due to the fact that I'm also on the R committee uh for that HOA that would still need approval.

Okay.

And Madam Chair, I'd like to abstain on item number 11 as I'm under contract on that particular project.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

Chair, with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve the one motion, one vote agenda items, and that would be agenda items nine through twelve, since we are pulling agenda item eight for public hearing.

All right, thank you.

There is a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote and please post, and that motion carries.

And madam chair, each of those items is final action tonight unless appealed to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you.

Okay, we will move on to our public hearing items.

Um, and if we could just make a request that folks keep their presentations to around 10 minutes, that would be great if there's something um needing longer than that.

Uh let us know.

But otherwise, if we can keep it to around 10 minutes.

Um so I am going to first pull forward item number 34.

Um, and that is 25-0321 DIR1, applicant owner, City of Las Vegas discussion for possible action on a report by Seth Floyd, Director of Community Development regarding the implementation of the City of Las Vegas 2050 master plan, all wards and staff recommends approval.

Madam Chair Seth Floyd for the record, my stunt double will be doing the presentation tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh, Planning Commissioners Marco Vallada, City of Las Vegas Department of Community Development for the record.

Uh tonight is a uh our fourth annual update on the progress of implementation of our 2050 master plan.

Before you you have a report that details a lot of the outcomes and their status that we've been tracking.

We've done this uh every year.

This is a one of the requirements as part of the master plan uh implementation ordinance and Nevada revised statutes.

Uh we'd like to do this to help inform the uh the city council, and this is your opportunity as planning commissioners to uh provide any recommendations regarding implementation of any of the aspects of the plan.

We also have another opportunity with respect to our citywide strategic plan.

We've had our strategic plan in place since uh 2020 with the aspects of public safety, health care, and uh economic diversification as kind of the core tenants.

Uh we're in the process right now of undergoing an update to that uh to that strategic plan.

But with this uh report and so and the ones that precede it, uh this any of the information here that you would like to advise the city council on as part of the strategic planning process, which is taking place now and will uh conclude with a special council meeting at the end of this month.

Uh we can certainly provide that information to our strategic services staff about that.

Um I'll get into uh uh this a little bit uh from uh from a higher level.

Uh again, we're we're trying to show how uh our progress is with respect to different uh parts of the of the master plan itself, whether that's implementing uh specific policies or zoning actions or things to that effect.

Uh we're starting to show progress over time.

And right now, in that report, we we're about half and half in terms of positive outcomes, positive trends.

Uh there are some things that uh that are not going as well for different reasons, and they are all outlined there, and we'll have uh additional information on our over our our our entire plan in different aspects of of implementation on our master plan dashboard at masterplan.vegas.

Uh, some of the things that uh did want to highlight.

I mean, we have done a lot of investment in in downtown Las Vegas, and we just had the the uh ribbon cutting and the um the uh opening of Civic Plaza across the street.

We've seen a lot of economic development, especially in Symphony Park, a lot of new things that are that have been under construction for a while are now wrapping up and will be soon be uh operational.

Uh we've seen a lot of progress with respect to infrastructure, a lot of schools that have been replaced.

Uh our uh historic west side education training center also is is uh has wrapped up.

We've done a lot of special area planning.

I've been in front of the planning commission and city council on a number of these, most recently for Kyle Canyon, Lamadric Footh Hills, and Charleston.

And uh that has also been one of those tools that we've used to help implement the 2050 plan and get into uh a little bit more granular detail for different uh uh different neighborhoods across the city.

Uh and as you can see, a lot of the development has that has occurred over the past year has been in the suburbs.

We have had some of those infill projects uh as mentioned in downtown, but really again to stress the importance of this longer term vision that we have.

We're trying to we're at the point where we're reaching our our western boundaries or northwestern boundaries, and the concentration uh going forward is going to be infill and redevelopment.

I'll return to that here in just a second, but uh again, a lot of that uh activity is out there.

Uh I won't belabor it.

I mean, we've seen a lot of the reports in the in the media, uh national and local about some of the recent economic trends that have been going on.

Uh as we I'm sure we've all heard and we've all seen, you know, domestic and international visitation has been down.

Uh traffic through the Harry Reed International Airport is down about six percent.

Uh at Interstate 15 at state line, it's been down about four percent.

Hotel occupancy on the strips down uh is at about 80 percent.

Uh and yes, this is a summer low.

Uh we're going into uh into the holidays and uh we have uh NFL and NHL uh that they're about to start back up again.

We'll likely see some of those uh numbers uh tick back up.

But again, the the underlying message here is that you know, with our tourist dependent economy, and despite our diversification efforts, uh you know, with an economic downturn, we see that the further impacts on the uh on other sectors of the economy, the higher cost of living for residents, uh less consumer discretionary and non-discretionary spending, and then that translating into higher uh unemployment and impacts on the city's tax revenue.

And if you look at if you look at it across the city, it's different in different neighborhoods.

You have lower unemployment rates in the suburbs and higher unemployment rates uh in a row.

And um, and why is that?

I mean, it's a combination of factors, of course, uh inflation, academic national economic policies, changes in business practices in the tourism industry.

There are a lot of different things that feed into this, but it's something to be aware of, and the council has been aware of it as part of the strategic planning process as well.

In terms of our housing market, similar narrative uh we have.

I mean, we hit uh we hit some of those, some of those major increases in terms of uh prices over the last year.

Uh the median price of a single family home in June 2025 reached a peak at 485,000, and the average monthly mortgages and rental rates in different parts of the city have also been seen those steadily increase.

And you can see different differences in different neighborhoods based on geography.

The underlying theme here is that you know of the total housing units that were built this in the last year, about 4100 total units, only about 1.4% of were actually built affordable, whether those were single or multi-family.

Um we had 57 affordable housing units that were completed, and that's well below where the pace that we need to be on.

But we do have 200 units that are under rehab, 48 new apartments that are under construction, and about another thousand that are uh under planning right now, including Marble Manor and some of the other uh projects that are immediately around downtown Las Vegas.

Uh add to that, you know, some of the land and housing, land and housing dynamics that that go on.

We're working with RTC on Southern Nevada Strong and their update of the comp of the comprehensive regional plan.

Um and again, there's this inflection point that we've been at, and a lot of it has been talked about, uh especially as the one big beautiful bill was being debated.

Uh we have you know possibility of continuing to expand out.

Is that federal land that that goes up for sale?

Is that for affordable housing?

Do we continue a march towards PRIM in the state line along the I-15 corridor?

Or do we concentrate our efforts on transit-oriented development, infill development, and what we've been doing in downtown Las Vegas?

And because we are landlocked, we kind of have a direction, a clear signal.

I mean, Summerlin West will develop itself out, the Northwest will develop itself out in the next 25 years, but we have another strategy that we need to focus and double down on, and that is on our major corridors because our land supply is finite, and as a result, housing costs have and uh property costs have gone up.

Add to that is the water supply situation.

And we're at the end of the uh of the interim agreement that's been in place between the the basin states.

Uh the lake levels uh are for both Lake Powell and Lake Mead are at a critical point.

Uh we do see uh tier two cuts at below uh elevation 1050, and we're slowly approaching that.

And this water year, uh the projections are that we'll probably get right in that realm.

We have seen what that can do.

Our allocation of 300,000 acre feet can get further cut.

But if you factor in housing, you know, where does that where does new development go?

The new development outside of the Las Vegas Valley requires infrastructure to pump back to Lake Mead to get return flow credit.

This is an important thing that we need to be cognizant of going forward.

Southern Nevada Water Authority has been our steward for this.

Um again, they they have uh been at the at the table talking with the other basin states and the other water purveyors, other the other municipalities that are stakeholders in the process, both in the upper and the lower basin.

So, what can you do as planning commissioners?

Um, you know, in terms of the most direct impact, we've been working with you as staff on amendments and updates to Title 19, and that's in the form of the zoning code or other or other titles of Las Vegas Municipal Code with housing and uh and infill development.

Uh, we'll bring back after getting some comments from uh from the commission, specifically the TOD overlay zoning standards.

Uh that item will hopefully set the stage for that infill and redevelopment to make more housing available at uh different price points, uh, as well as uh the affordable uh affordable housing incentives.

Uh there are some provisions from Assembly Bill 540 of this last legislative session that increased the thresholds for area median income and the incentives that can be made available to different uh income level uh thresholds uh as a result of that.

We'll also bring forward parking standards.

Uh we've done a an in-house parking study uh to again right size some of our dated parking standards for different uses that will require a pretty comprehensive update of many of the uses and parking standards in our zoning code.

And then tree and landscaping standards were wrapping up an urban forestry management plan which recommends some changes uh in line in light of the drought and uh urban heat island effect uh to try to get more tree canopy for both residential and commercial uses.

So, in terms of the upcoming uh strategic plan, um, you know, we have heard through that process, um, you know, there was a community survey in which uh we had a very high priority placed on maintaining our existing infrastructure, economic development, and quality of uh police services, so essentially public safety.

Uh that was something that the public wanted uh wanted the city to pay most attention to when that survey was conducted.

Our directors and management uh group, uh team Las Vegas is we call it, uh held a summer a summit over the summer, and in terms of the staff priorities that uh that shook out of that, uh really it came back to public safety, uh addressing homelessness, uh addressing affordable housing, education, and health care.

Very much in tune with the 2020 strategic plan.

And then with that um strategic services kind of filter down a little bit more what some of our strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats were again some of the same themes I kind of covered already, uh making that diversification effort to the economy happen, uh continuing our conservative fiscal and financial management, and then our public service delivery and making sure that we make good on that.

However, we have to be cognizant of the housing, land, and transportation limitations that we have because we're in this uh in this footprint we are and we are landlocked.

Uh we do have the opportunity to continue on with our workforce development efforts uh both locally and uh at a statewide basis, uh, but we need to maintain our uh our our oversight on on revenue, making sure that we're we're in line with uh with revenue that's coming in and and any change in the economy can certainly uh be a threat to that.

So with that, um that is the the uh annual report on the master plan.

But as mentioned at the beginning, we do have an opportunity here to take in any recommendations or anything that you would like to pass on to City Council for their consideration as they embark on their strategic plan, because again, these two are related to each other, and if there are some things that we want to pass to them in terms of policy change or things related to master plan implementation, uh this would certainly be the time and mean to do that.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Vellata.

Um, this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay.

Seeing none, I will pass this back to the commission.

Anyone have any questions, thoughts on Mr.

Villata's report?

Commissioner Walsh.

Uh good evening.

Um was anything addressed about um the communications increases in technology and some of the futuristic things that have come up uh that may be more advanced during the time that the project starts.

Have you looked at that, I guess, as communications and like uh the technology is moving so fast it can't even keep up.

Marco Vallada for the record, um, if I follow what you're asking, Commissioner, um I I don't think in terms of technology like AI or or communication like telecommunication, can you can be yeah, telecommunications mostly cell phone towers going in that will reach you know in certain parts of the city and that kind of items.

Okay.

Uh as far as as far as um specific uh uh communications changes or anything like that.

I mean, we we took a look at at broadband access and um access to um you know small cell things like that, where that's where that's available.

Um, but that really hasn't been so much of a focus.

It's it's um not not one of the things.

I mean, we we taught touch a little bit about it on the master plan, but I mean if there's something that we can address.

It would be interesting to see the companies, the cellular companies that provide services already, the city, if they have any futuristic plans they're looking at 10, 20, 30 years from now as a recommendation.

The other one is uh you addressed the uh water.

What about gas?

Natural gas.

Yeah.

So again, um Mark of Villar for the record.

I mean, in terms of our overall uh energy consumption, I mean, natural gas is the primary driver for a lot of power generation locally.

Um it's also you know something that we use you know domestically for the you know residential purpose for for um heating and and cooking and things to that effect.

Um we have one major uh natural gas supply pipeline Kern River that um that that really serves the entire Las Vegas Valley, and you know, Wyoming and Utah is really the the end point for that.

I mean, you know, the supply is uh what it is.

Um we do have uh you know, we have had pro previous concerns about about that.

Um that's something we work with with the public utilities commission, um, but really in terms of big major infrastructure intertying us to other regions that are there really isn't anything on the table.

Yeah, because one of the developments out in Surmerlin, they had to bring in uh propane tanks, gigantic ones for the use of the development go in a couple of the houses uh converted to it until the pipelines got in to service that development.

I'm just wondering if there's if that infrastructure is gonna hold projects up.

That's something else I would recommend take a look at.

And that's it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Commissioner Rogan.

Thank you, Marco.

Your your wealth of knowledge never ceases to amaze me.

And I know we've had offline conversations on many of these subjects.

So I thank you for your presentation tonight.

I think you did an excellent job in conveying sometimes difficult concepts to us folks who are not in the planning and strategic development world.

Um I like the fact that you're addressing the form-based code.

One of the things I wanted to discuss is we we did the form-based code years ago, and we're still not we haven't seen full implementation of the form-based code and whether we're proceeding with that or not in the remainder of the jurisdiction of the areas that we intended that to go.

Um, I would like to just see some movement forward or just some information.

If you could come back and let us know whether we're we're doing something different in those areas we initially planned for form-based code.

Um then one of the a few of the recommendations from the Charleston area plan that I think are worth looking at, I think was the simplification of the residential zoning classes.

Um that might be something that I think um deserves a second look, as well as its relationship to the multitude of of overlay districts that we now seem to have as we've discussed privately.

Um I like the fact that where I don't like the fact that we've only had 57 affordable housing units put forward.

I think that's something that the city really should address.

And some of the recommendations that did come from the Charleston uh area plan was the community land trust or revolving fund for the development of affordable housing.

And I think those are worthwhile pursuits to to take a look at and see um if we can accomplish that like other jurisdictions.

And then also um, I mean you don't have to answer the question now, but I'm just not sure whether our affordable housing incentives for uh density bonuses and height bonuses are actually working.

I mean, we only see a portion of what comes through for development, so I can't say that our perspective is accurate.

Um, but it doesn't seem as though it is.

Um and so I don't know whether there's something that we can do to incentivize even further in that regard.

If not, um what other options we have to either require or induce affordable housing demands.

And so those are those are my comments.

Thank you, Commissioner Rogan.

Um Commissioner Cassan.

Okay, okay.

Um I'm sorry, I missed the opportunity to ask a question.

Um so let's let the commission wrap up and then I will briefly reopen.

So you are here to make a comment on this.

Okay.

Um so we'll hang on one second.

Well, no, stay up here, it's okay.

You can stay up.

I just have a couple questions and comments.

Um Commissioner Rogan actually took some of the uh questions or comments that I was gonna have, which is again that the density and height bonus just does not seem to be effective.

We've had projects come before us that seem really appropriate based on where they are to meet workforce housing um needs, and we've been told by developers that they're that they're not taking advantage of the density and the height bonus.

So I don't know again what we can do to further incentivize that.

I know that in um for what it's worth in Vancouver, and it is British Columbia, but it's basically not a you may take advantage of this incentive.

It is a if you want this density and you want this height, you shall put this many units in that are affordable.

Um I you know, again, totally different country, but um that's how they do it up there.

Um I'm excited that you are actually putting in um working on some additional urban forestry language, and we'll look forward to seeing that because you know that that is something that's near and dear to my heart, which is the you know, urban heat islands, um, and want to make sure we can do everything we can to mitigate those.

Um and I don't know if it's worth looking even at the landscaping standards, increasing you know, the requirements, um, you know, increasing the requirements so that we're not coming in with waivers and variances, especially in like parking lot islands, um, because that's again where you've got the heavy pieces, the heavy coverage of asphalt that is gonna lead to that urban heat island impact.

Um then I I'm curious, Mr.

Vallada, like when you look at the affordable housing, when you look at the I guess the multifamily housing that's coming in, what what I am curious about, and I don't know the answer, is what we seem to see is a lot of apartments.

And again, a lot of those apartments are not for workforce housing, they are high-end fantastic complexes, really neat amenities.

Um, but what we're not seeing are those smaller like those multifamily units, condos, and the ability to come in and use that as an entry level for purchasing.

And so I don't know what analysis maybe you guys have done about lost opportunities for folks to be able to do entry-level purchases by incentivizing multifamily for purchase rather than apartments.

So maybe that's something that could be analyzed.

Um then I think if you could pull up, it's right after the major accomplishments and trends.

It's that next slide where you highlight recent regional economic trends.

Um one more, I think.

Yeah.

I'm I'm really curious about the slide on the right, Mr.

Vellata.

I'm not sure why you chose to put up a screenshot of um the Las Vegas Raiders losing to the Broncos.

I just wanted to highlight that that maybe next time you could analyze your shots a little bit better.

It's a great example of uh allegiance stadium, but I just think that the score is maybe not the best optics, so just throwing that out there for further consideration.

Madam Chair, Seth Puller for the record, I would also add our master plan has Pete Carroll still coaching the Raiders in 2050.

So I just wanted to point it out.

So we'll keep reporting on that.

Oh, thank you.

I think that's going to be really important.

Oh, and actually, one more substantive comment.

Um, harking back to uh former chair Sam Cherry, when we went through this last time, he did talk about you know, are there opportunities to better define how what we look at for workforce housing?

And so just wondering if you had done some of that work as well, and that you know that can be something that we continue to refine and also you know, don't be putting Bronco scores up being the Raiders.

So with that, I will, like I said, open it up really briefly, ma'am, um, for comments.

Thank you.

Um my question is um though affordable housing is very important because housing is becoming unaffordable, especially for people who cannot put hundreds of thousands of dollars into purchases.

Do you plan on restructuring current neighborhoods or developing it in new neighborhoods?

So if it's in current neighborhoods, then all of our property values are gonna go down.

And um that's really um not what we bought our houses for.

Okay, not to lose because we have a homeless shelter on the corner, or we have uh um other affordable housing with a lot of crime in it in the city.

So that would be my question.

Where is it being developed?

Thank you.

Um sure.

Uh and that seems to be the challenge when we do affordable housing projects where you have surrounding residents.

One thing I might suggest that we look at doing is educating people about the effects of affordable housing coming into their neighborhoods.

I don't I don't I've been in real estate for quite some time.

A lot of times I don't agree that when you you know when you bring an affordable housing project in there, uh I had a house uh affordable housing project come before me.

And one of the things that I talked to them about is having proper property management and maintenance and and screening of the people that are coming in and to educate people about those projects that are coming in, because it doesn't mean all the time that property values will go down.

When we do comps and residential, we actually go into that particular um uh residential neighborhood, that community, and do do comps on similar properties.

So if you there's if there's another development across the street, a lot of times it doesn't even affect the price of that home inside of that community.

Just just something I wanted to say, because sometimes sometimes the public, you know, there's a stick stigma with you know with affordable housing, that's probably one of the biggest challenges we have.

I understand uh what you're saying from my experience and I have been in all kinds of neighborhoods all over the country.

If there's an apartment building across the street from a residential one family house uh neighborhood, the property values go down automatically.

That's why no one wants apartments in a residential street.

And you can educate people all you want.

I was a kid, as you probably were a child before.

Who listens to the rules?

Rules are made to be broken by teenagers.

And uh the crying to break into cars, the trash on the streets, that all has to be uh addressed before the neighborhoods are being restructured to bring affordable housing.

And I'm both for it.

Um for affordable housing.

It's it's needed.

It just needs to be addressed and well, not addressed, it needs to be put strategically in a place so we don't wind up with a bottleneck like we have Charleston closed, we have Oki closed, we have Sahara closed, all in the same area.

We cannot even get east to west.

Yeah, if you can please wrap up and just give your name and address for the record, please.

Yeah, my name is Victoria Rochester.

Yeah, thank you.

And your address, and please spell your last name for the record.

R E C H E S T E R 1550 Montessori Street.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

Okay, any other comments from the commission.

Uh seeing none, um, I'm gonna go ahead and make a motion to approve uh the planning commission 2025 annual report um dated September 9th, 2025, item 3425-0321 DIR1.

Motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Please post.

That motion carries.

Thank you, Mr.

Vellato, for your continued fantastic work and again your your wealth of knowledge and innovation.

Thank you.

And Madam Chair, that report will move on to City Council on October 15th.

Thank you very much.

Okay, going back to the top of the agenda, uh, we are going to go to item number eight, uh, 25-0215 applicant Southern Nevada Water Authority owner Las Vegas Valley Water District for possible action of the following land use entitlement project requests at 6930 West Okey Boulevard, Ward 1 Knutson.

So that's 8A 25-0215 ZON1 from RE residence estates to C V Civic and 8B 25-0215 SDR 1 for proposed one-story 2,373 square foot pump station building and equipment addition to an existing water reservoir uh facility.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, staff has determined that the proposed rezoning to civic is appropriate for the site and surrounding area as it will allow the proposed expansion of the existing reservoir and pump station as a conforming use.

Furthermore, the proposed expansion of the reservoir and pumping station will improve the existing water supply and will have a minimal impact on the s on the existing site and the surrounding residential and commercial land uses in the area.

Therefore, staff recommends approval.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, ma'am.

Can you please state and spell your name for the record and give us your address and tell us about this project?

Sure.

My name is Robin Rocky, Southern Nevada Water Authority, the applicant.

Uh good evening, planning commissioners.

Thank you so much for letting us provide a brief presentation on our request for reliability improvements to the Las Vegas Valley Water District's rice reservoir and pumping station site.

But we will defer to you for the appropriateness of the of the zoning concerns right now.

As the regional water wholesaler, the Southern Nevada Water Authority initiates infrastructure projects and programs with member agencies like the water district to strengthen water delivery.

These are known as reliability projects.

Tonight we're requesting approval for a new water pumping station at the Rice site near Oakie and Rainbow.

Your green light will allow the water authority to establish redundancy and reliability of the this area's water delivery system.

In the world of heavy civil engineering uh reliability and redundancy is our Hippocratic oath, if you will, kind of our uh our do no harm.

Uh our reliability projects are the keystone of our robust and world-class water system.

We achieve these goals by providing looped connections between large diameter laterals and service lines.

We have a beautiful looped water system throughout the valley.

Uh that's so that water can be directed to other areas in the valley in the event of emergencies or unplanned outages.

To give you the big picture, we're planning to make a new loop via future pipeline between the existing rice reservoir and pumping station and the existing Spring Mountain Durango reservoir and pumping station to push this water through the new connection between rice and the Spring Mountain site will require a new 30 million gallon per day pumping station at the rice site, which is the focus of tonight's approval request.

The existing rice reservoir, uh, this is mentioned by the neighbors and pumping station became operational in 1978 to consistently and reliably meet customer needs in the area.

The new pumping station will protect, enhance, and even go beyond that ability.

The new pumping station will be co-located at the existing site, and that's shown here.

This is the entire rice reservoir and pumping station site.

The new projects include an open-air pumping station, which is also the current format at the site, by the way, and an enclosed operations building, and surge control.

And I also just want to point out that our proposed facility new facilities are at the far east side of the site.

Our Montessori neighbors are on the west side of the site, uh, over here, I believe, off the map.

Uh so I just wanted to point out the entire site and then uh where our proposed facilities would be going.

I think you had this one up already, but I'll show it again.

The buildings will match the aesthetics of the existing facilities at the site, landscaping, site access, security walls, and the boundaries will remain unchanged or will be replaced in kind following construction.

Once complete, the site will continue to be unmanned with periodic visits by the water district for uh operations and uh security personnel.

It will be operated only as necessary to meet planned or unplanned water deliveries.

Construction is expected to start in May of 2027 and be completed by May of 2030.

Uh lastly, this project is part of the larger Horizon Lateral program.

That's a package of transmission and storage projects currently in design to protect our regional water distribution network so that when you turn on the tap, your needs are consistently and reliably met.

And that concludes the presentation.

Thank you.

Uh now you know everything that I know about this project, but I do have experts here who can answer uh any tough questions that you might have.

Okay, thank you.

Uh this item has been noticed for public hearing.

If there are members of the public who wish to be heard, please come down.

However, if you have already spoken on this, please, you know, anything new.

Let's not repeat ourselves from the original public hearing, and we're going to keep this to two minutes per person.

The question the question I have is um why can't we leave it as a residential estate instead of zoning it to civic?

What we are afraid of is that in the future, with the way government moves, that's other other projects will be put on this property, and we do have a view of the strip.

We do not want our property values to drop if something else is put on there.

So we don't trust uh civic zoning.

That's why we would prefer to have the um estate uh zoning.

Okay, thank you.

Oh, I'm so I'm so sorry, ma'am.

Did you state and spell your name for the record and give us your address?

I'm sorry.

Uh Kathy Tapplett, uh stell and I'm at 1510 Montessori and just spell your last name for the uh it's uh T-A-P-L-E-T-T-A-U-S-T-E-L-L.

Okay, thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

I just want to add to what Kathy said and to what we said in the opening that we're not against water.

We are against rezoning.

Why can't they get uh variance?

Why can't they act on the same laws and rules as they are acting now?

We don't mind the construction.

We mind the rezoning.

So that's what I had to say.

Victoria Richester, 1550 Montessori.

Thank you, ma'am.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else for public comment on this item?

Would I be able to read what my husband had put on his his card uh or explanation of what we're sure?

Is it it's uh there is absolutely no reason to rezone for small building, none.

All buildings proposed must rezoning must meet rezoning requirements as you have 24 resident states zoned properties at directly abut or are adjacent to this facility.

We currently have and demand the right for the city and SNWA to be good neighbors by complying with current current codes, regulations, and any required variances to rezone this property is an extreme government overreach to usurp all adjacent property owners' rights on this and all future building projects.

This proposal will potentially severely affect our property values, which are driven by the aesthetic value of unobstructed city and strip use.

More importantly, any rezoning rezoning could potentially destroy the enjoyment of our properties that one resident has enjoyed for nearly 50 years.

We cannot state this more emphatically.

The planning commission must say no to rezoning.

Please make this very easy, cost effective, and simple decision to say no.

The last thing we as residents of Las Vegas need is more protracted legal battles within our city.

Okay, thank you very much, ma'am.

Anybody else for public hearing on this item?

Okay.

Seeing none, I'm gonna close public hearing, call the applicant back up for any uh comments.

Do I have any comments?

Yes, it is your turn to.

I'll just defer to you on the zoning issue.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Uh with that I will turn it um back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Rogan.

Thank you, Chair.

Um Ms.

Rocky, thank you for your your presentation.

I'm I'm sure you didn't expect to have to give this tonight.

Um, and I thank you for coming up and in doing so.

Um I think the a couple of the concerns that the neighbors have had, I think I can address, and they're addressed in the staff report.

Um, but the one thing that I that I can't is um there were some comments about the existing wall that may be in need of repair or in future enhancement.

So before the evening is over, I'd like, if you don't mind, to exchange your contact information with the folks that are here tonight.

Um, because for the folks that are here from the neighborhood, this is this is just a recommending body.

We don't make the final decision.

The city council will make its decision next month on this application, and so there's still time to um talk about it with the the water authority and with councilman canute.

Um tonight is not the final decision, it's just a recommendation.

But with regard to some of the comments that were made, the staff report indicates that even though it's a rezoning to civic, the um adjacency standards for buildings that are built still applies, so it's a three to one ratio for every foot in height that a building is going to be placed on there, it has to be three feet from your property line.

That's no different um than any other commercial development that exists today.

So your views will not be affected by this change from its existing zoning zoning to civic zoning.

Um if I'm wrong about that, if staff could correct me.

And then I think also the the wall standards as indicated in the staff report also continue to apply.

And to the extent that you need those walls updated, Miss Rocky will be happy to address those concerns before the next city council meeting.

Um with that being said, I think that the rezoning is appropriate.

It's a civic use under our code.

It just it's this is just a pro forma update to match the zoning that exists under our current code as opposed to what we did in 1977.

I think the site development plan review is appropriate, but I would make the recommendation that again, Miss Rocky, work with the neighbors to see if there's any updates that need to be done to the rest of the facility.

Does anyone else chair if anyone else has any comments?

Madam Chair, uh Fred Solis for the record.

Just a quick point of clarification, Commissioner, through you, Ms.

Madam Chair.

Um Title 19 does require the adherence to the wall and landscape standards for this property.

However, once it becomes a public hearing, then what's shown on the site plan is what is approved.

So that's certainly the clarification.

Chair, if I could.

Thank you, Mr.

Solis.

But ultimately, City Council will make that determination.

It's not us tonight, so there's still time to to amend that or put conditions on it between now and city council.

And madam chair, I'd also like to make a clarification on the rezoning.

This is a conforming rezoning to align the general plan designation of this property is public facility.

The civic zoning is meant for uh government, quasi-government, schools.

So this will remain a water district facility.

There will be no homes, no commercial, no nothing built.

Anything else built on this will remain.

This is just strictly a conforming rezoning that will bring it into conformance with the general plan designation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Uh okay.

Seeing none, um, go ahead and make your motion, Commissioner Rogan.

Thank you.

And subject to my comments this evening and make a motion for approval to agenda item eight twenty-five-zero two one five subparts A and B.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that item will move on to City Council on October 15th.

Okay, thank you.

Um next we have item 16, abeyance 25-0208.

Applicant owner grind mode 2 LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 2901 North Rancho Drive.

Ward 5 Summers Armstrong staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project.

And uh the subparts for this are 16B, abeyance 25-0208 SUP1 for a major amendment to an approved special use permit U 012896 for an 818 square foot reduction of an existing 3600 square foot car wash or auto detailing use and 16C abeyance 25-0208 SUP2 for proposed 4,931 square foot alcohol off-premise full use.

May we have the staff report please Madam Chair.

The applicant submitted revised plans to staff, which eliminated the need for the parking variants, and staff finds the proposed development is able to operate in a manner that is harmonious and compatible with the surrounding area and is recommending approval of both special use permits.

Please note the revised plans and the staff report with the updated date stamp are in your supplemental packet tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am.

If you could please state and spell your name to the record, give us your address and tell us about the project.

Sure.

Um Simona Stevens, uh S D E P H E N S 1950 East Worm Springs.

Um I'm here on behalf of the owner and uh the owner wants basically take the portion of his existing store and convert it into a liquor store, um, 818 square feet of it.

Umrigal site plan as as mentioned was short of uh parking, and so um we really appreciate working with staff and uh with the commissioner um and and revising the the site plan it's so it's all all meets all the requirements.

Okay, thank you very much.

This item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item?

Okay, seeing none, I will close public hearing.

I will turn it back over to the commission, starting with Commissioner Munford.

Thank you, madam chair.

So the um can you just kind of show us the the changes on the on the um for the parking and the uh any addition that you added?

Sure.

Um so a portion right here.

So this used to used to be um a car wash um area, so the owner is going to be removing the canopy, so these two stalls are gonna be converted into a regular ones.

And then this area right here.

It's technically already being used as a parking area, so we'll we'll just basically restripe it and make it uh official parking because the cars are already parking there.

And we can't we kind of talked about the U-Halls up front.

Are they going to maybe move those or adjust them so there's a little bit better?

Parking.

Yeah, owner can answer that question.

Hello.

Yes, uh we will be moving those U-hauls from there, so they're totally out of the way, and they will be on the top left-hand side there.

They who see so they won't even be here.

Uh yeah, right, right okay.

So it'll be away from all of this stuff right here.

So he's saying it's gonna be away from all of this, he's gonna be moving them to the road.

So you move them further down.

Yes, there will be no trucks or trailers in that area at all.

Okay.

Yeah, that because I get gas every once in a while, and that's that's a kind of a congested area.

Yes, sir.

And if people are going in for you know, to your store for the liquor and stuff, it just be better access for for that whole area.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

Sir, could you please state and spell your name for the record?

First name is Melu, M-A-N-N-U.

Last name is Baines, B-A-I-N S.

Okay, and your address.

Uh 7025 North Eulas Street, Las Vegas, Nevada.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Any anybody else have any comments on this item?

Anybody else?

Okay.

Um, seeing none, uh, Commissioner Runford, I'll let you make a motion.

All right.

So you, Madam Chair, I'd like to uh make a motion to approve uh subject to all conditions.

You're fine with all conditions.

Ma'am.

Yes, sorry.

Um and move for approval for item 16 abeyance uh 25 02 08 uh 16B 16 COVID.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Please post.

And that motion does carry.

And those items are final action unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Awesome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item 19, 25-0181 applicant Clark County School District Owner School Board of Trustees for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests on the north side of Washington Avenue, approximately 620 feet west of Valley View Boulevard, Ward 5 Summers Armstrong.

Staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project 19A 25-0181 SDR1 for proposed three-story 170,640 square foot public primary school development and 19B 25-0181 MSP for proposed signage in conjunction with a public institution school.

May we have the staff report, please.

Good evening, Madam Chair.

Steve Swanton, senior planner with community development for the record.

Staff finds the proposed school to be appropriate for the site.

The school building and parking areas are well buffered from residential development.

Minor deviations from Title 19 standards will not affect the compatibility of the proposal with existing adjacent development.

Therefore, staff recommends approval of the site development plan review, subject to conditions if approved.

The proposed master sign plan provides a unified sign design for the school, is compatible with adjacent commercial recreation and residential development and conforms to residential protection standards.

Therefore, staff is recommending approval subject to conditions.

Please note there were additional documents of support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

I'm Chris Dingle with the Clark County School District, D I N G E L L 1180 Military Tribute, Henderson, Nevada.

This is the replacement of the Robert Gibson Leadership Academy.

It's a middle school.

It's currently located.

If I can right here, this is Washington.

It's on two sides.

It is the unique golf course, and then there's some residential here.

So the school was built in 1953.

It's passed its useful life, and we are proposing to replace it.

So one of the things I wanted to point out was right now there are two parking areas.

The buses come in here, they mix in the parking lot, and they turn around here, and there's one way to get into the school right now, and there's no parent drop-off or anything like that.

So what we're proposing to do is flip the site to this.

And what you'll notice down here is this driveway now becomes exclusive for buses only.

They come in, they drop off in the back, there's a turnaround for them that segregates them away from all the other traffic.

Since we are in Washington, we are going to have it.

So there are three parent drop-offs right here.

So people will be able to come off of the street onto the site, drop off.

There'll be two parking areas.

Now I'm gonna turn this over to our architect and he's gonna finish up the presentation.

Good evening.

Uh Wade Simpson Simpson Cultural Studio, 151 Warm Springs, Las Vegas, Nevada 89119.

Um we held a public um a neighborhood meeting where we had some um good turnout and good discussion with the residents on the other side of Washington and on the other side of our um of our new drive right here.

Um and so I just wanted to point out the way we've designed the school, are most all of the school building windows are north-south to get the right um natural daylight.

So we don't have any windows here except for one up um three up high in the library, and we're 185 feet away from the property line with a landscape buffer, and then there's the drainage channel.

Um this part here is three stories.

This part right here is the gymnasium, so one story.

Um staff um with public works, getting the design of Washington or redesign of Washington down.

Um we went back and forth a lot, and I think we've got something that everybody's happy with.

You know, just trying to do the best we can with traffic and mitigation and and just making it a nicer facility.

So once again, the um the new school will get built, and then we'll demo the old school and build the ball fields where the old school is in general.

Um yeah, if you we are putting in a new uh 10-foot multi-use trail along Washington as part of the development.

And agree with staff recommendations and here to answer any questions.

Thank you very much.

Uh this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, um, we'll close the public hearing and we will turn it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Menford.

Thank you for your presentation.

Um very familiar with with uh what we call the Gibson Middle School back in the day.

And uh I've actually coached a few um youth teams over there.

They've it's it's in the school is very very old, and I'm happy that the uh that this community is going to get a new addition uh for the for the school.

Um I uh and I like I like how you uh one of the biggest challenges because I drive by there from time to time is the traffic when school gets out.

So I like I like what I see with with your traffic flows in and out of the property.

That's that's probably um I'm sure the residents and people that commute that way are gonna really appreciate that, especially and it'll be more safer for the kids as well and the parents.

So I I like this project.

I uh you know if it is there any other comments.

Um I just was gonna say I I just think it's really exciting, everything that's kind of going on in that area with the big mixed use development that we approved a few months ago.

So I think it's fantastic that that new community is also going to get this new you know newly built school and have sort of a vibrant little hub right there for for the kids in that might be in that in that development as it goes up.

But that was my comment.

Anybody else?

No?

Okay, Commissioner Runford, if you're prepared to make a motion.

Yeah, I would like to make a motion for approval, subject to all conditions, and you said you're all fine with all conditions.

Um this is for uh 25-010 or 25-0181.

Also uh 19A and 19B would like to motion for approval.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Okay, please post.

And that motion carries.

And those items are final action tonight, unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Item 20, that 25-0279, applicant Barbara Fuentes, owner care access NVI LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 3117 Piedmont Avenue, Ward 3 Diaz.

Staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project.

20A, 25-0279 VAR1 to allow two parking spaces where four are required.

And 20B, that's 25-0279 SUP1 for proposed individual care group home use.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, due to the subject site's inability to meet minimum parking requirements, staff is unable to support the requested variants and special use permit and therefore recommends denial.

Please note additional documentation of protest have been received since publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, give us your address and tell us about your project.

Good evening.

My name is Barbara Fuentes, F-U-E-N-T-E-S.

And um I live at 3117 Piedmont Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89102.

Um and I am re I'm respectfully requesting a special use permit and parking variants to obtain my licensed in-home child care business, which is called Barbara's Baby's Child Care.

Um, I moved to Las Vegas from Connecticut, where I where I began my career in early child education.

Um, and I came with an associate's degree in the field.

And while I worked my way up in the career ladder to a director and finished my education to obtain a bachelor's degree in early child education, I have worked in several different licensed child care center-based settings, including Head Start.

In total, I have almost 30 years experience working with children and families.

So in October of 2019, I stepped out in faith and quit my job to partner with the Las Vegas Urban League as a family friend and neighbor provider.

As I provided child care services to low-income families, I embarked on this journey with care of Nevada to own and operate my own in-home state licensed child care program.

I love living in Las Vegas.

I love my neighborhood.

I love being a child care provider.

And I am dedicated to this field and the children and families that I serve.

High quality, licensed, in-home child care programs like mine, support working families, and contribute to the broader economic health and livability of our community.

The program that I will be operating will be licensed by the state.

The property is guaranteed to pass inspections conducted by the Southern Nevada Health District and the state fire marshal.

My licensing paperwork, which details all of my business processes and procedures, as well as the curriculum I will use and various emergency preparedness plans, is completed and approved by the state child care licensor.

Once licensed, an assistant and I will be able to care for no more than 12 children at a time.

The children will range in the ages from infants to five years old and school age children when school is not in session, and there's actually a school right down the street.

The state outlines strict ratios for the ages of children that I will be allowed to have on site at any point in time.

And I will use both indoor space and my backyard for child care, which are designated for this purpose only.

Within those program hours, I am flexible to drop off and pickup times to make sure that parents have just what they need to accommodate their work schedule.

This is one of the reasons that families choose in-home child care, because our enrollments are more flexible for parents who have non-traditional hours and jobs, or have multiple shift schedules in their households.

This means that while I am requesting a parking variance for this use, I do not expect that the number of cars parked at or near my home will typically exceed three for any significant period of time.

Parents tend to drop off and pick up their children very quickly and at varying times throughout the day, which is why the vast majority of the time the only cars parked on the site will be mine and my assistants if she chooses.

We will do everything within our control to ensure that drop off and pickup times have a minimal impact on the neighborhood and my fellow residents.

In addition, the house is located on a corner, so there is street parking available as well, although drop-off and pickup routines are very quick.

Since moving to the property in April of this year, I have been able to communicate and speak with many of my neighbors who have shown approval and support in me operating my child care out of this home.

I appreciate your consideration for this request, and I am confident that with your approval, Barbara's Baby's Childcare will provide safe nurturing and much needed child care services for Las Vegas families.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much, ma'am.

This item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, I am going to close public hearing and pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Schlottman.

Thank you, Chair.

Through you.

A couple of questions for the applicant.

This is just child care.

This isn't for adults or any anything of the sort, is that correct?

Correct.

They're just going to drop off their kids so they can go to work and they're come back and pick them up when they're done for the day.

Are you fine with conditioning uh conditioning this to have it for children only?

Absolutely.

Okay.

And uh, I mean, looking at the parking, I mean, you you you have a really deep driveway.

We can't count that as more than you know, whatever two parking spaces, whatever.

But if you and your assistant are parked all the way up the front, you could have two other people parked behind you, and you you do have parking out on the street, and I I doubt all of these parents are gonna be showing up at the same exact time.

So I don't really have a big issue with this uh chairwoman if there's no other comments.

Okay, thank you.

Any other comments from the commission?

Okay, seeing none of your property.

Oh, madam chair, I'd just like to read that condition into the record.

That would be added condition for 25-0279-SUP1, and the condition would read the facility shall provide care for children only.

Thank you.

And you agree to that condition and all other conditions have approved.

Yes, I do.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, I'd like to make a motion.

So I I move on item number 20, 25-0279, 20A 25-0279 VAR1 and 20B 25-0279 SUP1 with the added condition as read into the record and agreed to by the applicant.

My motions for approval.

Thank you.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that is final action tonight, unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, item 21, 25-0281 SDR1.

Applicant Buddy Norse uh Narciso Kenga Guitero, Junior Owner, the Buddy and Nita Quitero, Nevada Trust for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow an existing one-story, three unit, multifamily residential development with waivers of appendix F interim downtown development standards, area two at 519 South Eighth Street Ward 3 Diaz.

Staff recommends denial.

May I have the staff report, please?

Yes, uh good evening, Madam Chair.

Um second.

Madam Chair, this request stems from an ongoing code enforcement case regarding unpermitted structures.

The previous entitlements that accommodated the existing three residential units have expired.

Staff does not support the requested area two waivers and recommends denial of the site development plan review subject to conditions if approved.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

If you can please state and spell your name from the record and give us your address and tell us about this project.

Good evening, Madam Chair and the rest of the panel.

My name is Buddy Gittorio, and I'm the owner along with my wife, Nita Kittorio, owner of 519 South 8th Street.

I'm just here to reapply for the variance in approval, a request for approval for its existing use.

And if you have some further questions, I would be happy to answer the question.

Thank you very much, sir.

Um this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item?

Okay.

Seeing none, I will pass this back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Schlottman.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, I had an opportunity to talk to the applicant prior to this meeting.

Um I I read this one and um at the beginning I was uh uh I had a lot more concerns, but this was originally approved back in 1975 for two dwellings.

Um back in uh 2026, no 2016, it was approved by city council and uh with all the waivers and variances for this third one.

Um seems like Buddy didn't realize that he needed to get building permits after he after he got the uh entitlement.

So I spent the uh first part of this before this hearing started uh started uh going through every one of those conditions to make sure that he understood what each one of those conditions means and um and buddy is it correct representation that you understand every one of those conditions if if this is approved tonight.

Correct, and I will try of course to comply with all of the requirements.

Okay, and you you took pictures of that and I also showed you how to get to uh the the city website uh to pull up those conditions.

So you know it you you have two years, but don't wait two years because I guess this time since I learned my lessons, I won't I will go immediately as soon as I and two more years we'll have you tear down one of those structures if you if you don't have it.

I think you can get it done, but I'm telling you you you you need to you're about to go out in town for five months.

You need to get this into the city and get it processing prior to you leaving.

That way by the time you get back, you can call for your your building inspections because it's not as simple as going down there and and just saying, hey, we're we're getting our building permits.

And then they'll have to come out and they'll have to do some inspections.

So you'll have to open it up and uh allow your uh let your tenants know that we're the city is coming in there to do some inspections.

So just trying to give you uh get as much warning as you you possibly can.

And it sounds like you're you're aware of what what needs to happen now.

Totally understood.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Anybody else on the commission have any questions on this item?

Okay, seeing none, Commissioner Schlottman, are you prepared to make a motion?

Yes, uh Madam Chair, through you uh based on the testimony tonight and based on this already being uh approved by plan or city council back in 2016.

I move to approve subject to conditions.

Um that's for item number 21 25-0281 SDR1.

Move to approve.

Thank you very much.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Thank you.

Commissioner Munster.

Oh.

Uh please post.

Okay, that motion does carry.

And that item will move on to city council on October 15th.

Thank you very much.

Okay, item 22 uh 25-0289 VAR1 variants.

Applicant owner Landy Molero Fenseca for possible action on the land use entitlement project requests to allow existing residential accessory structures, chicken coop and carports one and two, and a front yard wall fence that do not conform to Title 19.06 development standards for height separation setback size and aesthetic compatibility at 7208 Grassland Circle Ward 4 Alan Palenski staff recommends denial.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, staff finds the requested variants to be self-imposed hardship and is recommending denial.

Please note additional documentation of support and protest has been received since publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening.

If you could please state and spell your names for the record, give us your address and tell us about the project.

Hi, good evening.

My name is Landy.

I'm the owner of the seven to OIG Raslan Circle.

When I bite this property two year ago, is already make a beer.

The car the car everything the mayor was really beer on the she can co-op or something.

When I make uh any change in my probability last time from my garage, I uh I make everything le legal corporal pass on the everything pass.

Um I use for the these car pro because I buy the RB.

I use uh be for the weekends and the Sony, I have for saying okay, so his name is Landy Moleiro Fonseca.

So I'm his wife.

We bought this house two years ago, and everything was already there.

So we didn't know at that time that we need to get permit, because it was already there.

We just bought the house.

And two years ago, we make um we get a permit for a garage corporation.

And we pass every permit and nobody tell us the carp or the terrace is it was it wasn't it didn't have permit.

So we are here to could the barbians approve or we apply.

I don't know if you guys have condition for us.

Anything else, ma'am, right now?

That was all okay, thank you.

This item has been noticed for public hearing, or are there any members of the public wishing to be heard on this item?

Come on up.

Get up, please state your name, um, state and spell your name and give us your address.

Sure.

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening.

Let's try again.

My name is Lori Farina, F-A-R-I-N-A.

I live at 7209, Grassland Circle 89129.

I've lived in that my house for 21 years.

Um the property next door has had many, many um tenants and owners, and I can vouch for the fact that the backyard was done in 2018, and the metal uh roofing was done in 2019.

And the reason I know that is because when they were doing whatever they were doing in the backyard, they knocked down my brick, my block fence.

So I, you know, we had to get into whole thing about getting replaced and everything else.

They didn't move in until 2023.

So they shouldn't be really be held responsible for something that the prior owner did and didn't get the proper permits for.

But I um, you know, I have my little card here, I support them.

They've been great tenants, I mean great uh neighbors.

Um I just hope you guys will be kind and give them the option of keeping that pro all of that uh work that was done out on their property.

Okay, thank you very much, ma'am.

Anyone else on this item?

Okay.

Seeing none, uh, I will close public hearing.

I will turn it back to the commission, starting with Vice Chair Kassama.

Thank you, Chair, and this item is is difficult because you know I did confirm that all all of these um accessory structures have been, you know, predate your moving into there in 2023.

Um I don't have an issue with um you know approving the chicken coop as well as the front yard wall and fence.

Um the carports one and two are very they they do stand out, they are quite um in excess of our code.

And so I would suggest if there's any other members of the commission um that do have any comments.

Um I do I feel comfortable with the yard with the fence, um, but if there's any suggestions, perhaps um deny the carports one and two, and then you are welcome to bring back plans for another accessory structure of that nature that is conforming, but I also defer if there's any other members of the commission.

Oh, Commissioner Worgan.

Yes, uh I I agree with you, Commissioner Kasama.

I think that the the chicken coop is fine.

I think the block wall is staff noted as needed.

Um it is just the RV um carport is out of character for the neighborhood.

It's not aesthetically compatible with the house.

Um and it needs to be so I think like Commissioner Kasama was suggesting.

Um if you want to come back because you have an RV and you want to park it underneath the carport, uh go get a design for something that's aesthetically compatible with your house and bring it back.

And if variances are needed, then we can consider those at that time.

But I can't support um the the structure as it exists now, uh consistent with what can Commissioner Cassama said.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay.

Um are you prepared to make a motion, Commissioner?

Okay.

Um, sorry.

Any uh any response?

I just wanted to see give you guys one minute to have any other comments or so we need to remove the corporate or what is I didn't get it.

Uh yeah, so you you would have to remove the carports one and two.

All the other structures can remain um that are part of this, and then you would have to reapply for a permit um and have new designs that are harmonious and compatible.

Okay, when you say one and two, what do you mean?

Just the uh the R V carport structure on the left side of the house?

On the left on the left side, just that one.

So we have to remove our o or can't we just lower down or I think what the idea is is there are multiple elements on your application.

And so the commissioner is going to make a motion related to the specific elements.

And then if there are elements that are not approved, you can come back with and staff can correct me if I miss stating any of this.

You can come back with some suggested designs for what you would like to do.

So for example, for the two RV car ports that are to the left, because it looks like there's one and then there's one behind it.

If you wanted to suggest lowering them as an option to make it more harmonious and compatible with your cul-de-sac, then you could bring that back as a suggestion and we would review that.

Does that make sense?

Did I get that right, staff?

Okay.

Um so I think with that, we'll go ahead and let the commissioner make her motion.

Madam Chair, uh, with that, we do have conditions of approval that directly address the car ports that I would need to edit before that motion was made.

Okay, please do.

So for the condition of approval, um, starting with we would have to change number, condition number one, number two, number three, number four, number five, and number six to read a variance is hereby denied.

And then conditions of approval seven, eight, and nine would remain approval, and those would address specifically the chicken coop and the wall.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you, Ms.

Edows.

I will pass it to Commissioner Cassama.

Thank you, Chair.

Um so with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve and staff, you can correct me on this motion if I mess up.

But to approve the chicken coop and the front yard wall fence items.

So that's subject for approval, but deny carports one and two subject to the staff conditions that were read on the record.

And do you agree with the staff conditions that were read?

Yes.

Okay, there's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Okay.

Please post and that motion carries.

Uh Madam Chair, that is final action unless appeal to the clerk in 10 days.

Okay, thank you.

10 days.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, item 23 250291 applicant new life solutions LLC owner KNK property management LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 1502 South Las Vegas Boulevard Ward 3 Diaz.

Staff recommends denial on the land use entitlement project 23A 25-0291 SUP 1 for proposed single room occupancy residency use.

23B 25-0291 SUP2 for proposed facility to provide testing, treatment, or counseling for drug or alcohol abuse use.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, the proposed uses are located within the gateway district, which is undergoing efforts to encourage infilled redevelopment by promoting higher density, transit-oriented residential developments within the gateway and other neighboring downtown districts.

Similarly, the revitalization of commercial areas along Las Vegas Boulevard, which is a major thoroughfare linking the city's commercial and cultural attractions is a major component of the Vision 2045 downtown Las Vegas master plan.

Based on these efforts and approved development in the area that include a six-story mixed-use development and a parking garage with commercial space, staff finds that the proposed uses cannot be conducted in a way that is harmonious and compatible with development in the area and is recommending denial of both special use permits.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, give us your address and tell us about the project.

Yes, good evening, Madam Chair and members of the commission.

My name is Jim Di Fiore of D Fiori Businesses Defiori Consulting and Business Services at 8550 West Charleston Boulevard.

I apologize for not coming forward with this sooner, but we'd like to request an abeyance for the uh until the October 14th 2025 meeting if possible.

Okay.

Um can you just give us a little bit more of detail on what your the the basis of your request is?

We we um have a few um items that we were preparing for tonight, but we have not concluded that, and we need a little bit more time to do that.

Okay, I'm gonna pass that over to Commissioner Schlottman for any other questions or concerns.

I'm sure if they would like to hold and not present to us uh because they don't have all the information, I have no no problem uh making a motion for advance.

Okay, if you would like to make that motion.

Yes.

Um Madam Chair, in what is the October October 14th plan commission hearing?

So on item number 2325-0291, move to approve, I mean move move to obey until uh the uh October 14th, 2025 plan commission hearing.

Thank you very much.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Item 24, 25-0296, applicant owner Canyon Walk LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests located at the terminus of Centennial Parkway west of Clark County 215, Ward for Alan Pelanski staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project 24A 25-0296 MOD1 to amend the Sky Summit Design Guidelines, Master Land Use Plan, Master Phase Map, Master Trail Plan, Master Street Section Exhibit and Park Agreement, and to modify the park triggers.

24B 25-0296 TMP1 for a 17 lot subdivision parent tentative map APNs 1262610105, 12623-30101, 126-2330102, 12623-69902, and 1262379901.

May we have the staff report, please?

Madam Chair, the proposed major modification to the Sky Summit Master Plan Community Documents conforms to the LaMadre Foothills area plan of the Las Vegas 2050 Master Plan and will not have a material effect on the overall plan development.

The proposed tentative map will expunge and replace the previously approved tentative map for the area of Sky Summit that it affects.

A final map of phase one has already been recorded and is not part of the requested parent tentative map.

Staff therefore recommends approval of the requested items.

And please note there were additional documents of protest and support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

You can please state and spell your name for the record.

Give us your address and tell us about the project.

Good evening, Madam Chair, Commissioners.

My name is Bob Gronauer, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive.

I'm here representing the master pl uh master developer in this master plan community.

You're very familiar with this.

This was approved within the last year.

This is uh Sky Summit.

Uh we're asking to do a major modification, which is somewhat uh some housekeeping items that are before you.

We appreciate staff's recommendation for approval, and I'm here to answer any questions that you may have on these two matters that are before you.

Thank you very much.

Um this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing that I will close public hearing.

I will turn it back over to the commission, starting with Vice Chair Kasama.

Thank you, Chair.

Um this item is to your point pretty routine and a cleanup.

Um it is you know subject uh to the master plan.

It's a conforming to it and with staff recommending approval.

I have no issue, and I'm ready to make a motion to approve unless there's other comments by the rest of the commission.

Thank you.

Are there anybody else on the commission wishing to make comments on this item?

Okay, seeing none, uh please make your motion.

Great.

And with that, I'd like to make a motion to approve item 24.

That is 25-0296.

Um that is 24A and 24B.

Thank you.

For the motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

Thank you.

And those items will move on to City Council on October 15th.

Okay, item 25, 25-030, SUP1 applicant, your space, banquet hall, owner, 95 LLC for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for propose banquet facility use at 6818 West Cheyenne Avenue.

Ward 5 Summers Armstrong staff recommends approval.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, staff finds the addition of full alcohol to an existing banquet facility that already serves beer and wine, can be conducted in a manner that is harmonious and compatible with the surrounding area and is recommending approval of the requested special use permit.

Please note additional documentation of support and protest have been received since publication.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, uh, give us your address and tell us about the project.

Madam Chair, uh Nathan Taylor, 8414 West Farm Road, representing the applicant.

Um this should only take me about 30 minutes or so to go through.

Um first, I'd like to um orientate you with uh where we're at real quick.

Um this is Cheyenne and Rainbow.

We're all familiar with this.

This is the famous olive garden that most of us have ate at.

Um this is a very small um area banquet facility within the shopping center.

Um I would like to uh thank Commissioner Munford for taking the time to do a site visit.

Um these these are uh conditional uses obviously in the C1.

Um it's already a banquet facility.

They just obviously needed a special use permit so they could expand their operations.

Uh we just ask that you follow staff's recommendation for approval, and I'm here to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you very much, Mr.

Taylor.

Um this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, I'm going to close public comment and pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Munford.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Uh yeah, I I did a site visit and uh and uh and you know I I think this is a good project.

I have no problem problem with uh with approving it.

If there's any other comment from okay, thank you.

Anybody else on the commission have any other comments?

Okay, seeing none, Commissioner Menford, if you're prepared to make your motion.

Yeah, I'd like to make a motion uh for approval, subject to all conditions for item uh 25.

So item 25-030-SUP1.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your votes.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that is final action tonight, unless appealed to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Have a good evening.

Thank you.

Okay, item 2625-0302 VAR1 applicant Tony Musso, owner Anthony Musso 2003 Revocable Living Trust for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow a seven foot side yard setback for 10 feet is required.

For proposed home addition at 3009 Astoria Pines Circle, Ward 1 Knutsen.

Staff recommends denial.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance related to the physical characteristics of the property has been presented to warrant the requested variance.

As such, the hardship is self-imposed and therefore staff recommends denial of this variance request subject to conditions if approved.

Please note there are additional documents of support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, ma'am.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, give us your address and tell us about the project.

Rebecca Chiriboga, C H I R I B O G A, 6030 South Jones Boulevard, representing the applicant.

The request here is very simple.

There's an existing home.

They're looking to remodel and expand their south uh property, the south building wall by about just over a little bit two feet.

The request in the uh the setback request was modified to be a whole three feet for a round even number.

Uh the property to the south is uh Catholic school.

It sits higher than the existing property, and there is a series of planter walls that actually face the subject property uh instead.

There's no um we agree with all of staff's conditions and I'm happy to answer any other questions.

Thank you very much.

This item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, I will pass this item back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Rogan.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, and thank you.

Um Ms.

Cherbeekia, I'm sorry.

For um for your uh uh meeting with me the other day.

I don't really have a problem with this.

If if anyone's looked at at Google Maps, you can see the the church has a bunch of sheds that are right up against the property line that this would be immediately adjacent to.

And um, as the applicant has stated, there's a for some reason they they put some planter walls that actually face out.

That unfortunately means that the homeowner has to take care of because otherwise they would uh make his neighborhood or his property look terrible if they were not cared for.

So I think it's a fair trade for a couple feet, um, and I have no problem with it, and so I'm ready to make a motion.

Okay.

Anyone have any other questions or comments on this item?

Okay, seeing none, uh Commissioner Rogan, please make your motion.

Um with regard to agenda item 26, project number 25-0302 V A R 1, and make a motion for approval subject to staff's conditions, which the applicant said she agreed to.

Thank you very much.

There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that is final action tonight, unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you very much.

Item 28, uh 25-0313 SDR1.

Applicant owner KLA Capital Series L L C Series 7 for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for a proposed one-story 6,324 square foot commercial development with waivers of appendix F, interim downtown Las Vegas Development Standards Area 1, and Title 19.08 screening standards for collection areas and dumpsters on the east side of Casino Center Boulevard, approximately 100 feet north of California Avenue.

Ward 3 Diaz, staff recommends denial.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, the requested waivers are evidence of the applicant attempting to overdevelop the site by proposing a structure that covers approximately 90% of the subject site, leaving no room for a trash enclosure or utilities to be contained on site.

Therefore, staff is recommending denial the requested site development plan review.

Please note additional documentation of protest has been received since publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

If you could please state and spell your name for the record, uh give us your address and tell us about the project.

Good evening, Planning Commission.

My name is Adam Fulod.

My address is 7980 Castle Pines Avenue.

I'm the owner, also the developer.

Um do you want me to go ahead and tell you about the project?

Yes, please.

Okay.

So the plan is to we do a lot of projects in the arts district.

This is one of the newer ones.

The plan is to do uh restaurants and bars, uh things to serve the community with all the apartments coming to the arts district.

I understand the issue regarding the trash enclosure.

I do intend to enclose it.

I talked to Commissioner Schlockman earlier today regarding that.

Uh with this initial submittal, we didn't show the exact details, but we will do something with ornamental metal.

Uh we've done a lot in the area, like Esther's Kitchen about a brewerworks.

Um we just finished one of the corner of commerce in Wyoming.

We do all the metal work in-house.

So I do intend to do something to keep vagrants from getting into our trash enclosure, also to contain it on site.

Uh regarding the uh building, it will be straightforward.

We will be putting some patio in front.

It'll be a CMU structure, approximately 6,000 square feet plus.

Uh so we get about two tenants in there.

Okay, thank you very much.

Um this item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, I will close the public uh hearing and pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Schlottman.

Thank you.

Um thank you, Chair, and through you.

Um Mr.

Fulad, thanks for taking the time to call me this morning and go through this project.

Uh I I think at the beginning um we we thought that there might be big RPDAs on the city sidewalk, and um and you know, the the water district doesn't allow it to go behind the building uh because they changed state law years ago not allowing these devices to go where they should go, like out of public view, where you want to put it and where you show it on your plans.

Unfortunately, it's not going to be able to go there.

Um and you know, I don't think there's water in casino center, so you're not gonna be able to put it there.

So what what we've been doing, and I uh Fred Solis and Mike Jansen and Doah uh from the water district and uh Tom Burkhardt and a lot of us got together years ago and Doa come up with the idea of alley, but like close to uh the public street, and then um and hopefully here within the next 60 days we'll have agreements drafted between the Las Vegas Valley Water District and the city to start sharing these uh RPDAs amongst multiple businesses down there.

So then stop being ISOR, and so we stop having to put one in on every project that we're building down there, which is just becoming a nuisance, and we've been working on this for 10 years, and I think we're we're we're just about there to have the final solution, and and I'm gonna have one of these projects built out by the end of the year.

So I was able to talk to Adam, he was unaware of you know putting these uh in the alley, but give me a call.

I want to bring you around.

I want to show you a few of them that that we put in already.

Um, and one of the concerns was where he was showing his trash, it was right where there's an egress door, so I just wanted him to uh look at that.

And now that we're moving that, he's getting that RPDA moved, he's gonna be able to put that trash in.

And he did agree to putting in like a decorative uh a decorative fence around it.

And if you go through anywhere downtown, you know when Adam and his dad have worked on a project because they do the best job with their decorative metal facades and and and their fences, and so I'm sure it'll it'll look great.

I know our code only says that you can put in uh CMU and uh and and a metal like uh uh roof uh structure.

I'd like to change that, uh Director Floyd, at some point.

Um, because I think that uh uh uh a masonry trash enclosure with the roof is not always the best thing.

Um if we want to screen these from people getting in and pulling out trash, there's a lot of ways to do that.

Um and I think that this is actually more appropriate for this particular project.

But I like the project, like what you're doing.

Um we're gonna start seeing a lot more ground up projects down here.

And uh so uh uh you you'll see my support and and give me a call uh this week, next week.

Be happy to take you around and show you some of the uh ways that you can put in some of those utilities uh that will make it look look better for our arts district.

Thank you.

Yep, thank you for all those comments.

Thank you, Commissioner.

Anybody else have any comments on this one?

No, okay, no pressure on your decorative metal.

So um okay, if you're prepared to make a motion, Commissioner Schlottman.

Yes, uh through you, Chair.

On 2825-0313 SDR1, move to approve, subject to SAS conditions.

And could we get a staff condition uh for the new enclosure?

Yes, um, and we're doing that enclosure with no trellis on top, no roof structure.

Is that correct?

For right now, uh I think we'd like to proceed with doing a ornamental perimeter for it.

Uh yes.

Yes, okay.

Then uh we would need to edit condition of approval number six, and that would read a waiver from title 1908.

Okay, then we would need to edit condition of approval number six, and that would read a waiver from Title 1908.040 is hereby approved to allow a metal enclosure with no roof or trellis structure where required for a trash enclosure.

And then we would add a condition of approval that would read a decorative metal trash enclosure with gates shall be provided.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's perfect.

And you agree to that condition and all standard conditions.

I agree to that.

That is well.

Thank you.

So my motion stands with the added and modified record condition as read into the record by Miss Edoes.

Move to approve.

Thank you, Commissioner.

There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your votes.

Commissioner Rogan.

Oh.

Great.

Okay, please post.

And that passes.

Thank you so much.

That is final action.

Let's build a city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Have a great night.

Thank you.

And item 29, 25-0314 V A R1 applicant owner, Nancy Cotheran for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow a proposed residential accessory structure casita that does not conform to Title 19.06 development standards for size and coverage at 8252 Cimmeron Ridge Drive Ward 2 Siemens.

Staff recommends denial.

Madam Chair, no evidence of a unique or extraordinary circumstance related to the physical characteristics of the property has been presented to warrant the requested variance for size and coverage.

As such, the hardship is self-imposed, and therefore staff recommends denial of the variance, subject to conditions if approved.

Please note there are additional documents of support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, gentlemen.

If you can please state and spell your names for the record, give us your address and tell us about this project.

Thank you, Madam Chair and Commission.

My name is Daniel Witt, D-A-N-I-E-L-W-I-T-T.

This is Eric Wagner, W E A E R I C W A G G E N E R located at 304.

South Jones Boulevard 240 representate uh representing the homeowner Nancy L.

Cawtheran, located at 8252 Cimmerin Ridge Drive.

Um looking for a variance subject to uh pursuant to Title 19.06.080 uh referencing the uh maximum square footage of an accessory structure um which is at 50 percent of the main dwelling unit.

Um we are asking for variance of uh increasing that to 8 percent.

Uh super accurate, it would be 7.4 percent.

Um how that mouth works is uh the proposed accessory dwelling unit is actually 702 square feet.

The home is um uh 1659 square feet.

The issue is that the main home has a covered patio, which is an accessory structure and then has to be included in all of the accessory structure in there, right?

So obviously it's a nice covered patio.

Shade is a premium in Las Vegas, um tearing down a nice patio, covered patio area just to remove that 250 square feet that has to be included in in ours is what's causing the issue.

So um when you take the 702 square feet of the accessory dwelling unit and add the 250 square feet of the pat of a covered patio, um that's 952 feet, and our max 50 percent is 829 feet.

So that extra 7.4 percent is 122.5 square feet.

Um, this is supplying a real need for a family member.

Um the Nancy who is not here tonight is uh aging, and uh her daughter and fiance who are her are here in the building um or here in the room are are there to take care of her.

So this accessory dwelling unit at 702 feet feet is for them to live in and take care of the mother.

Um when you take that cover patio and add it in, it takes us over that that square footage.

Um related uh to the 50 percent coverage of the rear area.

Um so the rear area is the rear yard is 1764 feet.

Um and we are uh the the so the the 50 percent max coverage is 882 uh 882 feet.

So again um we run into that uh we need an extra 70 feet, which is point which is 4%.

So instead of 50% max coverage, we need a variance of 54 percent to meet that.

It's not even a full kitchen.

So it's not a reduction of the square footage.

And the only other option would be to remove a very nice covered patio when shade is at such a premium here in southern southern Nevada, right?

So those are those are what we're we're requesting is an increase of 7.4% to the structure, especially structure, and an increase of 4% to the max rear area.

The other item that we might want to mention is just how the rear, how the rear yard is figured.

So we're not all we're not getting any of the side yard, which is behind the gates on either side of the home.

None of that side yard is calculated in the rear area.

If any of the rear yard was calculated in that rear area, we would not be needing to request a 4% increase in the rear yard max coverage of 50%.

Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Okay, seeing none, I will close public hearing.

I will pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Walsh.

Thank you, madam chair person.

Um yeah, there was no other information updated uh in the office.

We didn't receive any complaints or or negative things that came back.

Um we think it's reasonable to request, so I'm going to uh recommend for approval.

Well based that you will follow the conditions that are related to it.

Yeah, the other conditions were laid out of removal of the stove and and remove the 220.

That's we're good with that.

And yeah.

Okay.

We had a couple of neighbors that came out with support.

They they wrote letters, so but yeah, no no complaints.

Yeah, that's pretty much what we were hearing back too.

And this is you won't really see the visible visual impact of the way it works.

So unless there's no other comments from commissioners, I'm ready to make a motion.

Any other comments from the commission?

Okay, seeing none.

Um Commissioner Walsh, go ahead and make your motion.

Yes, I'd like to make sure uh make a motion to approve item number 29.

That's 25 dash 0314 dash V A R1 for the variance.

There is a motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Uh please post.

And that motion carries.

Thank you so much.

And that is final action tonight, and let's appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Thank you.

Item 30, 25 0315 V A R 1, applicant owner.

I'm gonna butcher this, and I'm sorry.

In a inadmised donus, Harita Martinez for possible action on a land use entitlement project request to allow an existing home addition with a patio cover and existing residential accessory structure shed that do not conform to Title 19.06 development standards for setbacks and aesthetic compatibility at 10 Diamond Circle.

Madam Chair, staff finds the requested variance to be self-imposed hardship and is recommending denial.

Please note additional documentation of protest has been received since publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, sir.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, give us the address, give us your address, and tell us about the project.

Uh yes, uh good evening, uh Madam Chair, good evening, commissioners.

My name is Jaime de la Vega.

I was 6944 Ed in Circle, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89145.

And uh I represent the owner.

And uh well, this is the thing.

Uh according to the owner, well, I was told that the addition, this addition, was built before they acquired the property, but he be this patio cover and the shed structure that is here.

And um they're not complying with the setback here and in right here for the patio cover.

And uh, but I believe and um it's a hundred percent uh like uh architectural compatible, you know, with existing and uh obviously you know the the the owners are willing you know to to do any improvements or any changes because they really want to keep the addition.

The addition basically is this.

They have a uh this is existing residence.

This is an existing door, and they have uh some kind of a leave in area here in a master bedroom bathroom in Little Walking Closet.

This is the Padre Cover.

And um, probably uh the the only thing that does at least not a hundred percent uh compatible is the shed.

But it should needs to be repayed, it needs to be re-roofed, but uh uh if they get the approval, uh they are willing to make the thing or the improvements.

Okay, and uh willing to answer any questions.

All right, thank you very much, sir.

This item has been noticed for public hearing.

Are there any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Okay, seeing none, I will close um public hearing.

I will pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Rogan.

Thank you, Chair.

Um Mr.

Delavega, just to be clear, your your client is willing to make the shed aesthetically compatible with the principal dwelling unit.

That's correct.

Okay.

Um did you speak with the neighbor to the south at 14 Diamond Circle?

Are you through the south?

No, no, we'd done or the immediate next door neighbor at 14 Diamond Circle.

Right.

Okay.

This is this is what I'd like.

This is my proposal to you is that um I need to see specifically how you're gonna make that shed aesthetically compatible.

I do want to see that carport and um how close it is to that neighbor, and I'd like for you to to try and knock on that neighbor's door and and see how they feel about these things.

There was someone that made a complaint, I don't know who it was.

I presume that it's someone that is immediately affected by these structures.

So I'm gonna be asking to continue this to next month.

Um for that reason, and I'm happy to share my phone number with you so that you and I can meet and then um hopefully see um this project or this property together to see what can be done.

Okay.

Does that work for you?

Yeah, or yes, I can anybody else have any questions?

Okay, great.

If you'd like to make your motion, Commissioner.

Thank you.

Um, with regard to agenda item 30, project 25-0315 V A R 1, make a motion to continue this to the October 14th Planning Commission meeting.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Uh please post, and that carries.

Thank you so much.

Yeah.

Okay.

Uh item 3125-0317, applicant CN Cashat Inc., owner of Smoke Ranch Plaza LLC for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests at 6671, 6673, and 6675 Smoke Ranch Road.

Ward 5 Summers Armstrong staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project.

Uh 31A 25-0317 SUP1 for a proposed 1,869 square foot alcohol off-premise beer wine use 31B, 25-0317 SUP2 for proposed gaming establishment restricted one to five machines use.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, the applicant is proposing to relocate an existing convenience store with on-premise beer and wine sales and one to five gaming machines.

Staff finds the proposed uses can be conducted in a manner that is harmonious and compatible with the surrounding area, and staff is recommending approval of both special use permits.

Please note additional documentation of support and protest have been received since publication.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, ma'am.

If you can please state and spell your name for the record, give us your address and tell us about the project.

In fact, the proposed location, the proposed space is less than 500 feet from where the market currently operates.

This comes to you with a favorable recommendation from staff, and we ask for your approval as well.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

This item has been noticed for public hearing.

Any members of the public wishing to be heard?

Come on down.

Hi.

Um my name is Beverly Prock, P R O C K.

I represent the owner.

He has made a statement he is out of the country.

I am the owner of Smoke Ranch 2560 Silver Shadow Drive, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89108.

I would assume you are aware of the attached.

This outlines a proposal for liquor and gaming establishments in our area.

I am strongly opposed to these measures.

There are enough places in Las Vegas for people to drink and gamble.

We do not need another one in our area, which it will only result in more traffic and more people and make smoke ranch less of a desirable place to live.

The question is that they have is the association involved in this?

And has something been sent to the owners, he has not received anything.

And then what action can an owner take to oppose the proposal.

Okay.

Thank you very much for your comments.

I'm going to go ahead.

I think all right.

Thank you, ma'am, for your comments.

And uh anybody else for public hearing on this item.

Okay, seeing that I'll close public hearing.

I'll pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Munford.

I just had a question.

Did you want to respond to what she what she said or it's difficult for me to respond because I don't know if she's representing the owner from the existing location versus the proposed location.

However, relocating this store from 400 feet away doesn't increase the um the amount of this use in the area.

Uh it just simply transfers it from one place to the next and has no impact on the neighboring community more or less at all.

Oh, and also to clarify, people don't drink on the premises.

It's off-premise beer and wine only.

And you but you you do have a couple gaming machines in there currently at our current location, we have seven machines, which was allowed under the licensing in 2007 when we first obtained a bill a gaming license.

Moving to this location would reduce the amount of machines to five.

That's because there's there's a 7-Eleven on the corner and they have gaming machines too.

So is that what it's more because prior to 2022 gaming was uh a function of business licensing, and then 2022 and after it became a planning uh use permit, a different structure.

I don't know if you want to clarify more than that, Step Seth.

Uh thank you, Madam Chair, through you.

So yeah, that that's uh basically covers it.

We did change how we do our entitlements for gaming in 2022.

One to five machines have no distance separations anymore.

So the fact that there is a 7-11 nearby wouldn't have any impact because this is the uh lowest cat lowest number category for gaming that we have under the current code.

All right, is there any other comments from any other comments?

No, okay.

You're prepared to make a motion, Commissioner.

All right, there's no other comments.

Uh I'd like to know.

I'd like to make a motion for approval.

You know, the like I've if it's this business was already existing in the area.

I I can't see where it's going to be, you know, a major impact to that to that area if it was already there and it's already been approved.

So I'm gonna make a motion for produce uh approval subject to all conditions.

Um that's for item number 31 25-0317.

Motion to approve.

Thank you.

There's a motion on the floor, please cast your votes.

Please post.

And that motion carries.

And that is final action tonight, and let's appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

Item number 32 25-0323 SDR1, applicant, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department owner, United States of America, City of Las Vegas lease for possible action on a land use entitlement project request for proposed two-story 95,984 square foot government facility, emergency services communication center at the northeast corner of Rome Boulevard and Schomburg Road, Ward 4 Alan Palenski.

Staff recommends approval.

May we have the staff report, please.

Madam Chair, this proposed public facilities project is designed to be unobtrusive to neighboring properties in the primary building and communication towers are set back far into the interior of the property.

The development is generally in conformance with applicable cliffs edge design standards, and the requested deviations are minor in nature.

Staff therefore recommends approval of the site development plan review subject to conditions.

Please note there were additional documents of protest and support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Good evening, gentlemen.

If you can please state and spell your names for the record, give us your address and give us a summary of the project.

Certainly.

Good evening, Madam Chair, Commissioners.

My name is Rich Hogan.

I'm the chief financial officer of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department located at 400 South Martin Luther King Boulevard.

With me is Mike Ens.

I'm with uh Tacazi Nevada.

My address is 10548 North Country Club Drive, MEC1, Wisconsin.

I'm just going to give a brief uh introduction of the project and turn it over to Mr.

Ans for a presentation of the details of the uh how uh the project in general.

What you see is a flyover representation of uh what the uh what we're proposing the project designed to be.

Uh essentially as as background, uh there are two uh participating entities essentially that uh will be uh housed out of this facility.

For those of you that may be interested, all a 911 calls uh in the city of Las Vegas and Clark County come to one place uh and that's on uh Russell Road.

Um whether they be police fire or medical related, if it's a uh fire or medical call, those calls are then transferred to the combined communications center uh located uh administered by the city of Las Vegas for the fire departments of Hint of uh North Las Vegas, the city of Las Vegas, and Clark County, and they then dispatch to the respective uh location based on the uh need of the call for service.

Um that uh location, as you might imagine, represents kind of a single point of failure for all uh services, 901 services in southern Nevada, regardless of the nature of the issue.

It it does uh represent a single point of failure.

Uh some years ago uh we uh uh set out about set about to uh design a secondary center, which will kind of essentially serve as our primary center and co-locate both the uh uh uh Metro 911 Center as well as the Combined Communication Center for Fire.

Um this will represent a huge enhancement to the public safety of the citizens of North Las Vegas and Clark County, as well as North Las Vegas providing uh not only a uh combined communication center where both police and fire are in one place, uh providing an ability for us to respond to uh emergencies, especially big emergencies that cross both entities in one place, but we'll also uh be a secondary facility.

So the Russell campus will stay open and fully staffed, and both locations will be entirely uh redundant and geodiverse.

Uh so uh with that as background, uh I'll turn it over to Mr.

Anz.

One second.

Sorry.

Oops.

Sorry, for give me one second.

Uh-oh.

Okay.

I'm just gonna go off this.

I'm sorry, it's not uh cooperating right now.

Um so the project is Red Rock Communications Center.

I'm gonna go through this fairly quickly.

Um Rich already kind of address who the clients are.

Some of the project information and data, it's a seven-day week facility, 365 days a year, uh 24 hours a day.

There's roughly 300 people assigned to the facility.

However, that's not how many people will be there at a typical time.

There's nine overlapping shifts, depending on volume, what's going on.

The highest spot occupancy will be around 172, and ironically, it's at a Wednesday morning uh each week.

But that there's a lot of the shifts do not come in on at the same time, it's just how things are staffed.

Um as far as the traffic, it's gonna be low impact to the area.

It's gonna represent roughly one percent increase to the actual uh road traffic volume on Chamber, roughly 95 additional trips per day in that location.

Um just to go through the site.

Um there's a public side, there's a private side.

We're separating who has access to the site, public and members of service.

Um, really, public does not uh go to this location.

It's typically not something that's actually encouraged, it's not a police station, so they're not taking reports.

Um so it is honestly because it's such an important center.

Um there's a lot of features that are designed to the site for security and other reasons for that.

This is a bird's eye view of the site.

Um the separations between the public and private, and that's just kind of how we're looking at it.

There's three entrances to the site.

There's the public entrance to the north, which also functions as an employee entrance.

There's an employee entrance to the south, um, and then there's an emergency entrance on the far uh east side of the facility.

We think most of the traffic's gonna go through the north for the employees, we'll go through the north, and then the actual south uh entrances.

We have gates throughout the entire property, so the public side will remain open unless there are reasons to close it down due to current events and things like that.

And then there's a lot of separations and uh gates on the site so that traffic can be managed on the site effectively and allowing for a secure facility.

Um this is what like one of the gates looks like.

This is the gate off Deer Springs uh Road, um or way, excuse me.

This would be off Rome Boulevard.

So these are all set back, they're not off uh off Chamber Road.

We did that as an intentional purpose, and so a lot of the design on the project has been intentional.

It's to provide a lot of features that the police need and uh the users of the facility, but then also to provide security, but also to be really gentle to the actual surrounding neighborhood.

So that's one of the things that we looked at was how do we create a low impact to the neighborhood?

And so we're showing day and night renders, and we'll kind of go through this.

This is the emergency entrance on the back side of the facility, and so again, security, but low impact of the site.

Um there are two turns into the site.

If you're coming south on Chamber into the site, it's a left in, you can do a left out.

If you're coming north on Chamber, it's a right in and a right out.

So we early on when discussions with uh the the DPW staff, we probably would not be able to get a left in in the middle of the site, so we just kind of used what what was there, and I think through the volume of traffic and things like that.

I think it made a lot of sense.

Um we will have a perimeter fence around there.

Uh we would prefer we we are asking for a slotted wall to go through the public areas, which would be on uh West Deer Springs Way, Chamber, Rome, and then Larry McBride Street.

And then we really want observation in those areas.

We don't want to create alleyways on the back side of the property or against some of the other areas, which could be theoretically uh problematic.

There's a lot of illegal dumping in the area, and we don't want the project to kind of contribute to that going forward.

So that's kind of how that looks.

This would be off Chamber Road.

Um I'll talk about the landscaping and other materials, but again, we're trying to, and you can see the facility is set back quite a ways.

Depending on where you're at, it's between 400 and 700 feet off the property line.

So again, the site is gently sloping.

So I'll show this a little bit more in depth, but we we tried to make it present, but not overly present to the neighborhood, being respectful of the houses and the surrounding areas so that it kind of makes the area uh we didn't want to stick a 20-story building up on top of the hill.

So you're seeing some of the renders with the different fence types on the back side of the fence.

We are looking to do a training link fence, just simply we want security and observation in those areas.

Um a key component to any communication facility are the towers.

So we have 200 foot communications towers.

Um they will be on the rear of the site facing two highway 215.

Um that is essential to this facility in order for it to operate.

We spent a lot of time looking at the heights.

We tried to go as low as we possibly could during our community meeting.

We actually received no comments whatsoever on the towers.

We were prepared to have a lot.

But as you can see here, it's roughly 16 feet higher than the actual communications building uh roof, it's roughly 16 feet higher than the actual building, and it's uh 30 feet lower, 30 feet lower than the actual uh power lines that are line Chamber.

Um this gives you an idea.

If I'm a resident across a Chamber Road, I'm at a two-story level looking in.

There's power lines looking into it, and then you'd see the you'd see the towers in the background.

So again, we tried to be minimal impact of the area.

Um this is a different view, similar uh area again, day and night.

Uh that's kind of we're looking.

We have two partially or two enclosed uh mechanical areas on either side of the building.

That's for redundancy.

Um it basically follows the aesthetics of the actual building.

We have a trash enclosure also on the rear of the building.

So if you're thinking of the project, we have a public side and we have a private side, we have front of house, back of house, and that's how we're looking at that.

And we're hoping that blends into the site.

Um we do have an exterior video.

If you'd like to see it, it shows the perimeter of the the facility.

I think I'm I'm looking at your deck, and since you are the second to last item, and this is an item on for approval.

Yes.

And you're on uh slide 34 of 75.

Oh no, no, no, that's this just render.

So what I was gonna do is I was gonna show the video.

It does have music in case anyone wants it.

But then if there's any questions, I can show images.

So I'm not gonna go through 75.

Okay, but if you'd like to see the video, more than happy.

If you want to stop, more than happy.

We are here to kind of do whatever makes you most happy.

And uh, but this kind of hopefully shows a little bit of the site, and I can stop any time you want.

But this shows the perimeter with all the the landscaping.

Um there is a whole landscaping presentation.

There's a whole solar array because one of the questions is that we've asked uh is the reflectivity.

We took a lot of time to look at the solar, we did a lot of solar studies.

The front of the building is gonna be in shadow most of the year, summer or winter, and I can show that what the studies actually showed approve like to demonstrate that.

But um, but again, all the landscaping on the exterior conforms to either uh uh cliffs edge or city of Las Vegas.

When we made when our landscape architect made the selection, it's usually to make it a more hardy selection, so it didn't die.

All the trees are at 36 inches, uh, which we know is something that was very essential and concerning.

But again, if the species selection is not something that would be approved, we would just go back to the cliff's edge.

But we try any the decision we typically try to make were for the for a better reason.

Uh this is going down Shambur, looking at the site.

So again, we want kind of the building to poke.

It's it's roughly uh 40, 30 to 40 feet below, depending on where you're at, below actual Chamber.

It's a kind of a in a bowl, but it's a gently sloping site.

It's a beautiful site, by the way.

It's an absolutely gorgeous site.

Um the vegetation strategy on the public way is to follow all the rules for the city of Las Vegas or Cliff's Edge, and then interior, we're gonna do native restoration, native revegetation.

So we're gonna go with a lot of like vegetation that's not require a lot of watering, but we have a lot of uh you'll see a lot of bouldering in there.

There's that's for many reasons, one of which is aesthetic, but it's also to provide some security features on the site as well.

So I'm happy to show any of the solar studies or any of that.

I can stop this and take any questions if there are any.

But um happy to proceed however you would like.

Well, let's um let's uh take a break from the presentation.

We'll open up public hearing and then we'll see if the commission has any uh questions related to some of those other elements.

So um item has been noticed for public hearing.

Any members of the public wishing to be heard.

Seeing none, I'll close public uh comment.

I will pass it back to the chair, the commission, starting with Vice Chair Cassana.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, regarding this item, you know, staff recommends approval.

It it meets the requirements that it needs to, and furthermore, I just think that it's a wonderful addition to the community.

I think it's part of like the critical infrastructure, what we talk about with kind of our public safety goals for the 2050 master plan.

Um you've done a fantastic job with the design and the landscaping and also doing your best to make sure that you know the communication towers are harmonious and compatible with surrounding area and helps with the elevation changes as well.

So with that, I am happy to make a motion to approve unless there are other comments from the rest of the commission.

Anyone else have any comments?

No, thank you for all of the really um great detail in the presentation, and uh it's a gorgeous looking project.

So thank you.

Um perfect.

With that, I'd like to make a motion to approve item 32, and that is 25-0323 SDR1, subject to staff conditions.

Madam Chair, um as not to overly complicate this process, but a revised staff report was provided to the uh commissioners in your supplemental packet, and it had a number of conditions that were either amended or added.

Um I'd like to go through those first.

And then um one in particular, which uh Mr.

Ednes mentioned about the reflectivity that you may want to amend.

So condition number six was revised to read, and this is for uh item 25-0323 SDR1.

Condition number six was revised to read reflective glass shall not be permitted.

Um so if you so choose to uh amend that condition, we would read a different condition into the record that allows reflective glass.

So it's not a percentage, it's just a straight prohibition.

Straight prohibition.

Okay.

And that's the current condition is the straight prohibition of reproductive glass.

Okay.

The second condition uh, which would be a new condition was added to be placed after condition six to read a waiver from section six point two point eight of the cliff's edge design guidelines is hereby approved to allow chain link fencing along the north, east, and south perimeter or unfinished or painted concrete block wood, vinyl and chain link fencing are not permitted for product walls.

And then an a new condition was added to be placed after that previously added condition to read a waiver from section 8.5.3 of the cliffs edge design guidelines is hereby approved to allow zero parking lot trees in uncovered parking areas or eight trees are required.

And finally, condition number seven regarding perimeter walls for commercial industrial properties was removed.

Okay.

Um thank you.

Gentlemen, can you come back up for one second just so we can get some um affirmations on those conditions?

Uh and then I will let Commissioner Kassama walk through the conditions and see if there's anything she wants to change or amendment.

I don't, unless there are any other comments from the commission.

I would just uh ask staff, do I have to withdraw, or can I just say that you know make the same motion to approve subject to the revised staff conditions I read on the record?

Correct.

And then if you wish to approve with the reflectivity that they are showing on their plans or requesting, then I can read another amended condition into the record that replaces the one I just read in the reflectivity.

So just to clarify, the plans as submitted have a certain level of reflectivity.

Your current condition says no reflectivity.

That is correct.

Okay.

So they would have had to have changed their plans to conform to that.

To conform to the no.

Gentlemen, are you okay with no reflective glass on the building?

Um we would prefer to have reflective glass if that's possible.

Uh my thought is on that is to not have reflective glass on the building.

But I'm not an architect, I'm not a designer.

I would, you know, folks on this commission that have more experience with that, but it seems to me that you're trying to keep it all kind of blending with the environment, so you wouldn't want reflectivity.

So what's interesting about this statement, um it's partial architectural, and there's some other reasons why we did this.

There's a high thermal mass wall behind this.

And here's we can't hear you.

Oh, I'm sorry.

We have a high thermal mass wall behind.

So there's part architectural, but we were trying to create.

Um if you have reflective glass on a site like this and you have sloping down, it's gonna reflect back the site.

It's gonna be very interesting on the site.

So it's gonna look more or less like you're looking at a desertscape kind of in the in the windows.

And and yeah, it's good.

It's I think it's gonna be really kind of a nice effect.

Secondly, behind that window, there's a high thermal mass wall.

There's reasons that I I prefer not to say it here.

I can tell you offline why that is, but it also helps.

So we would have to go to a different type of solution.

There's ways of doing that, obviously, with glazing.

Um but you know, i we also have a smaller space.

We'd like to keep it as open as possible, but uh it it we prefer to have reflectivity if possible.

It's it's not a deal breaker, obviously.

Um I I wrote uh Steve today we will not fight City Hall on this if you say no, obviously.

So uh we wanna it's it's not critical, but it it's interesting part of it.

It makes it look nice.

Chair.

Yes, sir.

Can I just ask staff what what the big deal is about the reflective glass and and why it's prohibited?

Madam Chair, um reflective glass can create a solar glare and it can concentrate heat as well.

Um so it it does pose an issue in our desert climate, so we prefer not to see the reflective glass in uh and new in new structures.

Chairwoman.

Madam Chair.

Yes, Commissioner Schlein.

I think maybe the uniqueness of this particular property would be that it's far enough away from from the streets.

Uh I mean if we're dealing with other properties that are, you know, on city sidewalks and things where that heat would radiate back down on the particular individuals that may be more important.

Uh and on might be missing the the fact here, but like I I feel that it's far enough removed from the street that it's not gonna not gonna be blind into people or or I mean really it's just gonna be a creating heap for for themselves if it does create any heat.

So and I guess my only other question then is with that and the idea of like having that reflective heat, then you're also not having landscape trees in the parking lot, and so then you've got like additional asphalt radiated heat, urban heat islands there.

So I mean I guess that would be my only other consideration for the reflectivity versus not reflectivity, but it the visitors parking is the only area that would be affected.

It's offset for security purposes.

So there is a kind of a buffer between that.

We also spent a lot of time um looking at Chamber and then highway 215 to make sure that we're not putting reflected light into those spaces.

So if you're thinking of highway 215 from the bottom side of the site or the front, so let's say we I'm not sure we're gonna go with reflected glass in the back side.

We'll have some reflectivity, but it's roughly 50 feet inset off the actual, it's 71 feet from the the first floor lower level.

I mean, it would be almost impossible for for that window to reflect into 215.

And then on Chamber, conversely, it's uh Chamber is roughly I think it's 40 feet uh above the actual bottom first level, and then we have the wall and the trees.

So it there's a lot of buffers before it hits Chamber, and then to your other point, creating a heat island's gonna reflect right into the desert scale, which is gonna get, you know, it's there.

There is some something to that, but it's you know, we're I we're trying to be delicate and respectful in that regard as well.

Okay, if that matters.

Any other questions or comments?

Yeah, I just had a quick question, kind of switching gears to the chain link um component.

If you could just kind of walk through on the side plan where the chain link fencing would go in.

Yes.

Can I show it to you?

That'd be that you welcome to.

Okay.

Are they so the chain link goes across the beltway trail and then on the back sides?

Uh basically the purple you're seeing here, that would be your community wall, and then roam boulevard around.

So the non-public areas are gonna have the chain link.

And uh I would say this is a budget constrained project, so that's part of the reasoning behind it.

And again, you know, trying to be respectful to the public areas and putting good use of public dollars on funds.

Uh it's also important for us to have a visual line of sight out there for security reasons.

We can't, I mean it's extremely important for us not to have that area blocked.

We need to see what's coming at us.

Chair, can I ask a follow-up question real quick?

Sure.

And then we'll go to Commissioner Schwartman.

I can defer to Commissioner Schottman.

Have have you considered doing like a beta fence or something along those lines where it's actually a kind of like chain link, but it's just not chain link.

It's you know, the uh just the wire um the the wire uh fencing.

Um it goes up and then it has like the little curves.

Yeah, and uh it's just a lot more decorative than the than the uh chain link, but uh still it doesn't bust the budget like a a block wall.

Yeah, that's it would be that would be considerably less than a block and slotted fence.

Um worked in Europe.

That's very common in Europe where we do that quite a bit actually.

It's very common out here in the United States too on on nicer fences.

But I don't know.

We don't have a problem with that.

I mean that's something we would consider absolutely.

So okay.

Yeah.

Um it it I know it as a beta fence, but it that's just a manufacturer.

Um what what would you call this?

It's called like anti-climb.

So honestly, you'll make me happy on a security fence.

So we'll we'll look at uh if you call it a beta fence, I know what you're saying, and then we can go with that.

Maybe we could we could uh say like a like a wire fence that that is similar to what beta fence manufactures.

I don't know.

So the only thing I would say that as part of the we have a security team that assesses this through Metro has a I don't think they're gonna have a problem with that because it's at a higher level of security than so they'll probably be happy.

But we are a lot of the fencing requirements, that's a lot of careful coordination with their AT anti-uh terrorism force protection people.

We also have a force protection person, but I think it would be fine.

So that's my staff.

Are there are there any issues with I was gonna say I think Commissioner Rogan, you're good.

Commissioner Schwartman.

Yes, I just looked it up.

It it is a um weld it mesh panel fence.

Okay, yes.

Yes.

Okay.

It's harder to climb.

It's actually, it's good.

Do we need, Commissioner Cassana, do you need to have them kind of like walk through the conditions again so we can sort of like condition by condition, make sure that it's with you want in your motion.

Um yes, I would just say that the only change I have is from the chain link to the welded mesh mesh panel fence.

Uh the reflectivity uh has no change on my part.

Or sorry, would I would like to allow the reflectivity?

So there would be that revised staff condition as well to be read on the record.

Yes, madam chair, through you.

The amended condition would be number six of uh 25-0323 SDR one, and it would read a waiver of the cliffs edge design guidelines is hereby approved to allow reflective glass where such material is not permitted.

And then we would add a condition with regard to the chain link fencing that go ahead.

Um we can we can create a condition such as a fencing material similar to beta fence shall be used in lieu of chain link.

Okay.

All right.

And so then gentlemen, you agree with all the existing conditions and those that are then revised as discussed tonight.

Correct.

Yes, yes.

All right.

So with that, there is a motion on the floor to approve item uh 25 0323 SDR 1, subject to the revised conditions and the prior drafted conditions.

So please cast your vote.

And please post.

And that motion carries.

Thank you.

And that is final action tonight, unless appeal to the city clerk in 10 days.

And item 3325-0324 applicant, the Colita Group, owner Palm Fund LLC et al.

for possible action on the following land use entitlement project requests on the south side of Alta Drive, approximately 420 feet west of Rampart Boulevard ward to Siemens staff recommends approval on the land use entitlement project.

Item 33A, 25 0324 MOD1 to amend the Queens Ridge Towers Development Standards regarding land use, building setbacks, building height, parking screening materials, and finishes and exterior colors, uh item 33C, 25-0324 SDR 1 for a major amendment of an approved site development plan review SDR 4206 for the addition of a proposed proposed four-story 332 unit multifamily residential building to an existing 18-story multifamily residential development, 8.17 acres on APN 138 3221007.

May we have the staff report, please?

Madam Chair, the proposed amendments to the Queens Ridge Towers development standards include adjustments that apply to the proposed phase two only, leaving the phase one language as previously approved.

As the office building is no longer proposed, standards that applied to it are proposed to be removed.

Proposed reductions in the requirements for perimeter landscape and parking are minor and will not compromise the compatibility of the phase two development with phase one or the adjacent properties plan for future residential development.

Staff therefore recommends approval of the major modification.

The proposed development will be adequately screened from the existing adjacent condominium towers and sufficiently set back from planned single-family residential to uh development to the south and to the west.

Staff therefore recommends approval of the site development plan review.

Please note there were additional documents of protest and support received after publication.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh good evening, sir.

Can you please state and spell your name for the record?

Give us your address and tell us about the project.

Good evening, Madam Chair, Commissioners.

My name is Bob Gronauer, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive.

I'm here representing the Kalita group.

As many of you may know, the Colita Group is a multifamily uh high-end luxury developer who's been developing in Southern Nevada, Las Vegas since about 2007.

Uh this this project that's before you is one of these exciting projects up in uh Queens Ridge Badlands area.

I'm gonna give you where this property is actually located, and then I'll get into the project that we're proposing here.

So as you can see on the overhead, this is Alta Drive, which is north of our property and adjacent to our property in this area here.

The Sun Coast is just north of Alta Drive in this area here, as I'm showing you.

We have the existing Queens Ridge Towers, the two towers that are located in this area that I'm showing you on the overhead.

And this is Rampart Boulevard.

Just to the northwest of us is the Tudor subdivision, which is an existing single-family residential subdivision.

And just to the west in the south of us, as you can see in this area here.

This is the proposed Lenar homes development that was just recently approved in the Badlands area.

So what we are proposing here is on this is approximately eight acres of property.

We are asking for a high-end luxury multifamily development, which will have approximately 332 units on the property.

As staff has mentioned, this is phase two of the initial development that was approved back in 2004.

In 2004, there was approved for four towers, which was these two towers that are located here that are 18 stories, and then we had a 14 and 16-story tower that was also located in this area that was a proposed uh phase two.

What has been built four years later, after 2004 of those approvals were these two towers that are existing here.

In 2014, about 10 years after initial approval, there was an amendment to the there was a major modification to phase two, which was to approve a 22-story tower for residential units along with an office complex with just shy of about 18,000 square feet.

That tower was supposed to be 266 feet in height.

The amendment that we have here for the major modification tonight is to come in for a high-end luxury development.

It's going to be a for four-story development.

Uh then I'll go and walk you through the site plan here.

It's about approximately 60 feet.

Um the site plan, I'm gonna walk you through the proposed development.

The theme of this is going to be a health and fitness type of theme and planned area, and I'll go through some of the amenities.

This is highly amenitized development.

If you're familiar with the Allesion project uh product that's already existing here in southern Nevada, it's similar to that.

Um, this is what we call the Ainsley development.

Uh we are gonna have our main access is gonna come off of Alta via the uh clubhouse drive in this area, where we would have ingress and egress coming out in this area.

Uh the building would be located as you can see, as I'm showing you on the overhead.

Our amenities start here at the main uh main building entry, and then you have a uh full-size pool, Olympic pool, excuse me, a pool and spa area.

We have a yoga area, which is located in the in this area here.

We have a Zen garden and other type of amenities that would be used in here, and as you go through the walkway in here, you have a sports court area along with other amenities, like a 20-foot wide or 20-foot-tall uh LED TV.

We have some red light therapy that would be used within the property here.

We have saunas, we have a cold plunge.

These are all type of those uses to meet that theme of a health and fitness type of uh living scenario here that we are proposing.

Uh rents in this area are gonna be on an average of just shy of 2,500 a month, is the average.

Uh the range is gonna go from anywhere from $1,800 a month all the way up to about $6,800 a month for the penthouses.

We have about 14 penthouses that we're proposing within the project itself.

To give you an idea of the elevations that we're proposing here, you can see these are the four stories that uh is the Ainsley project, our product that we have.

So this is gonna be a similar product that we are proposing to uh locate on the property here.

And the excuse me.

Um that being said, uh what we did is is it wasn't required to have a neighborhood meeting.

Um, what we because we know this area very well, and and there's been a lot of discussions with developments, and matter of fact, Khalida has uh built an elesian project just on the other side of Rampart uh within Boca Park.

So we are aware of some of the concerns of development in this area.

So what we did is we had a voluntary neighborhood meeting on August 26th.

We actually had the neighborhood meeting in our lesion project that's just across across the way on Rampart, and we had about 30 of the 35 neighbors in the area that showed up for the neighborhood meeting.

I think I could report to you the meeting went fairly well with respect to the product as the neighbors got to see an existing product of what Kalita builds, their luxury uh type of amenities and the and the uh building that they have just across the way, so we can show them exactly what you're gonna get from a similar type of development here.

One of the issues that came up and I want to address tonight, and I have a proposed condition, is with respect is to traffic in the area, and that's why I went back to this site plan here.

One of the concerns, and especially from the Tudor neighborhood, which is located here.

Their concern is for future traffic in this area.

Because what you have here today, it essentially dead ends here, the property, and you only have ingress and egress for the uh for the Tudor subdivision, which comes out to Alta Drive, which you have a signalized light section here.

However, things have changed over the last couple of years.

Uh matter of fact, just recently, as I mentioned to you, you had the Lenar project that's approved here, which has about I think four ingress and egress areas throughout the development in Badlands, and one of those areas is going to be located here, as you can see, a little uh roundabout in this area, but you're gonna have ingress egress coming out of here of that Lenar development, although you also have ingress egress coming out of here on rampart for that Lenar development.

But the concern is that you have 332 units coming out in this area along with the existing residential that's there.

So, as we uh discuss with the neighbors at the neighborhood meeting, we have a concern also because we want to make sure that our future tenants are going to be able to have easy access into the property and out of the property, because if you don't have easy access, I say, like just like if you don't have enough parking, you're gonna have a failed project.

And when you put in this much money in a project like this, you want to make sure it's successful.

So the good news is the neighbors that uh had some concerns with traffic are similar to us because we want to make sure we can make things work.

So, one of the things that we mentioned at the neighborhood meeting that we're gonna look at potentially getting access out onto uh Alta Drive.

So we've uh sent in a proposed condition working with staff in public works.

I have something I want to read into the record if you're inclined to approve the application, because I believe I I did speak to a couple neighbors that were here earlier.

They just left because it was late uh for the meeting, and one of the representatives is located here in Tudor, and he was surprised and happy that our commitment of looking at ways to solve this uh uh the traffic in this area for future traffic is have an ingress or having some type of uh exit here out on the altered drive.

So, because of that, I want to just read the proposed condition here because that's our commitment as we go through the traffic impact analysis.

I don't think so much the development as far as what is being built here as quality, definitely fits this area.

It's to make sure that we could have that traffic circulation.

And so the condition, if you're inclined to approve the application would state that a construction of a secondary driveway and alter drive may be approved, subject to all public works conditions outlined in the traffic impact analysis approval letter.

If allowed by the traffic engineer, these conditions may include exit only or other limited access, including the possible construction of a restricting median in Alta Drive, and then the proposed driveway, uh the proposed driveway, public right-of-way accessibility guidelines.

Um that's a condition that I believe my my office was working with public works earlier today.

I believe that's sufficient enough to address that issue and that traffic in the area.

Your staff is recommending approval, and I want to thank your staff that we put a lot of work into this uh to get to where we are today, and we appreciate their recommendation for approval, and I'm here to answer any other questions that you may have.

Thank you, Mr.

Grunauer.

Uh, this item has been noticed for public hearing.

If there are members of the public, come on down and take a microphone.

Please be sure to state and spell your name for the record and give us your address.

Okay, sorry.

Good evening.

Honorable members of the Planning Commission.

I serve in a volunteer role and I know what it takes.

My name is Mike Riando, R E A N D E A U.

I own the property at 9164 White Kirk Place.

I'm also serving as the president of the Queens Ridge Owners Association.

Queens Ridge.

Part of it is this uh development here we call Tudor Park.

I'm here tonight speaking for myself about the proposed Ainsley development and its potential impact on our community, specifically concerning the traffic on Clubhouse Drive.

The developer's attorney, Bob Gronauer, noted that a new traffic study for the project will be required.

Our primary concern is the existing and future traffic flows on Clubhouse Drive, which is a two-lane street.

The Ainsley development with its proposed 332 units is one of three developments that will be using Clubhouse Drive.

The other two are Queens Ridge's existing Tudor Park, 166 units, and Lenar's planned development project named the preserve, and it's hundreds of homes clustered in this area.

We believe that future traffic demand will exceed what the street can safely handle.

Imagine rush hour with hundreds of cars coming and going each hour, at times gridlocked, waiting for the light to change.

Murphy's law, and there's a medical emergency.

With a current street configuration in one of these high volume moments, fire and medical access can be limited.

With 332 units proposed for Ainsley and two other large developments sharing the same roadway, the estimated number of drivers will be significant.

The developer's belief that traffic demand will exceed the previously approved study is not reassuring, especially since that study was completed years ago.

To truly accommodate the planned luxury experience, the developer intends to provide, and to ensure the safety and convenience of all residents, we ask the developer to redesign Clubhouse Drive.

A four-lane street with two lanes in each direction and a dedicated center turn lane would be a safer and more efficient solution for all residents and visitors.

Expansion will help traffic flow issues help prevent traffic flow issues on Clubhouse Drive, which have been a point of concern for many residents.

One attendee at a recent meeting even requested a traffic signal at the tower's entrance to facilitate lift turns, which highlights the existing problems.

Thank you for your time for considering the safety and well-bearing of our community, and I'm open to discussing this further with the developer and the commission.

Thank you very much, sir.

Um one else for public comment.

Nope.

Okay.

I will close public comment.

I will pass it back to the commission, starting with Commissioner Walsh.

Thank you, Mayor.

Madam Chairperson.

There is a point of note 33B has been stricken out of this out of this portion of the two or the three.

Is that correct?

Yes.

Yeah.

Yes.

I just wanted to just wanted to clarify that, make sure that everybody knows that.

Um there's been so much discussion and things on this one, but I don't see any further problems.

Um you'll probably have to the applicant will probably have to reach out to a certain person.

You can read that.

So with that, and accepting the conditions, uh and the removal of item 33b, I have no problem, Madam Chairperson, to uh make a motion.

Okay.

Let's see, is anybody have questions or comments on this item?

Um I have a question, if nobody else does.

Um there is a lot going on on Alta now.

You have a Kalita project going basically kitty corner from where this one is.

You have all the Badlands project going in.

There's just a lot going on.

And so I wanted to ask public works kind of what the status of the traffic study is, because to me that proposal of trying to expand Clubhouse Drive doesn't seem unreasonable.

And so just wanted to get your input on where you guys are and what you're thinking right now.

Uh thank you, Chair.

Umta Drive is currently at about 23 capacity, and with this project it would be increased to 28 percent of capacity, which is okay.

Uh the driveway on Kalita, or the private driveway leading leaving from there is currently private property, so it could be it is not infeasible.

The uh the proposed exit from Alta Drive would also help with traffic around there.

Um the traffic impact analysis study will will come up with options around that area, and there will be recommendations made from that, which our condition that Bob read in earlier will uh require.

Okay, thank you.

Anybody?

Um, yes, Commissioner Rogan.

Just a comment, Mr.

Gronauer.

Um seems to be a lot of ingress and ingress if you added that additional um entryway onto Alta.

That's also the neon to nature bike lane that runs up and down Alta, and that's a it's a pretty decent hill right there, and a lot of bicyclists they fly right down it just to hit that light.

So if we're gonna have entrance entryway after entryway after entryway, right at that point, I just would hope that public works takes in that into consideration.

Yes, like we have something to say.

So if you would like to go ahead and make any comments.

Thank you, Chair.

Through you.

Um the proposed driveway is proposed to be exit only, so that would help with traffic flow.

And then the bike lane is taken into account.

Okay, thanks.

That that that hopefully will deal with my concern.

I just I just want to be very protective of those folks that are if there's going to be a lot more traffic because of the development, that any change in that traffic element that that the bicyclists be protected from any kind of uh from injury.

Thank you.

Okay.

Anybody else?

All right.

Uh Commissioner Walsh, sorry, if you would like to go ahead and make your motion.

Thank you, madam chairperson.

Um, I'd like to make a motion for uh to approve item number 33, 33A, 33b uh will be stricken and 33c.

Um that is item number 33 item 25-0324 for um this particular one with the other two remaining.

That's the motion.

And I believe that's with the added condition that I mentioned.

Correct.

Yeah.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

There should be a motion on the floor.

You want it he would even though we have it recorded on the record.

Um Mr.

Gronauer, can we get a copy of that condition for the clerk?

I have a copy of the condition and I can read it in for the record.

All right, Madam Chair, you I have correct wording.

You see, look, everybody has it, okay?

But you.

And Josh has it.

Okay, so everybody agrees that what Mr.

Gronauer read into the record is an accurate depiction of the condition to be included.

Yes, I can read it in to the record just for yes.

I think we're good.

Uh please add the condition for item 33C on 25-0324-SDR1 as follows.

Condition 15, construction of a secondary driveway on Alta Drive may be approved subject to all public works conditions outlined in the traffic impact analysis approval letter.

If allowed by the city traffic engineer, these conditions may include exit only or limited access, including the possible construction of a restricting median in Alta Drive.

The proposed driveway shall meet public right-of-way accessibility guidelines or pro wag.

Thank you.

And since it has been read into the record, Mr.

Gronauer, do you agree?

Well, I I concur.

You concur you agree with that condition.

Okay.

All right, thank you, sir.

Okay, there is a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote uh commissioner Rogan.

Commissioner Munford.

Yay.

Yay.

Okay, great.

Please post.

And that passes.

Thank you, and have a good night.

And that will move move on to city council on October 15th.

Okay.

Uh and finally, citizens' participation number 35.

Uh public comment during this portion of the agenda must be limited to matters within the jurisdiction of the planning commission.

No subject may be acted upon by the planning commission unless that subject is on the agenda and is scheduled for action.

If you wish to be heard, come to the podium and give your name for the record.

The amount of discussion on any single subject as well as the amount of time any single speaker is allowed may be limited.

Uh do you see anybody here for citizens' participation?

Okay.

Seeing none, we will close that and we will call this meeting adjourned.

And I will robustly gavel it out.

Great.

Thanks, everyone.