Clark County Planning Commission - meeting_notice

It's not giving me the on the air, but let's go ahead and... Oh, there it is, it's giving me on air. All right, so welcome to the briefing of, what day are we on? June 2nd, Planning Commission. So first item of business is roll call, please. Chairman Frazier? Here. Vice Chair Mujica?

Excuse. Commissioner Stone? Here. Commissioner Kirk? Here. Commissioner Kolarski?

Here.

Commissioner Brady? Here. Commissioner Roy?

Present.

Excuse me, I'm here.

Okay. Commissioner Mojica. Thank you, Vice Chair. So we have, let's do the first order of business, which is we're going to open this up for public comment. Seeing no one in the audience except for an applicant, that's not coming down to speak, we will close the public comment and get started with the briefing.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Jilly Roland. I am going to be presenting for tonight's meeting. So we have a total of items 4 through 12 for the routine section, and items 13 through 21 will be on the non-routine section. So I'll go ahead and start with item number 4. So item 4 is ET26-400034. That is a use permit for first extension of time. The site was reclassified back in 2003, and the previous development plan showed that there were office buildings on approximately 15 acres, and none of the buildings were constructed. Since this is a new project, the conditions of the zone change are not applicable to the site, and a waiver to those are also not required. So when UC 230891 was approved, the waiver, for encroachment into airspace was withdrawn without prejudice. The applicant is requesting an extension of time due to market adjustments, time of development and financial delays, and staff recommended approval. And there are no changes proposed to the previously approved project. Enterprise Town Board recommended approval. We received three cards in protest and one letter in protest. Item number five is a tentative map, TM26500063, that is for a one industrial lot on 2.24 acres. It's gonna be located north of Pebble Road. The site is currently undeveloped, but it's been approved for office warehouse buildings and outdoor storage, and access will be provided from Pebble Road. Enterprise Town Board recommended approval, and we did not receive any approval or protest letters. Item number six is TM26-500-065. That's a two lot commercial tentative map on 1.1 acres. This is located on the northwest corner of Pinecrest Street and Flamingo Road. The site has been approved for restaurant buildings with drive-throughs and outdoor dining and drinking. Paradise Town Board recommended approval, and we did not receive any approvals or protest letters or cards. Item number seven is UC 260210. This is a use permit to allow outdoor storage and a design review for the site. The plans are located on an industrial site, and this includes an existing equipment rental and sales business, and the applicant is proposing just to add outdoor storage on the exterior of the building. The use permit is required because parts of the screening It starts from six feet and goes up to eight in certain areas, so that's why the use permit was required. We did a design review for the site and we recommended approval. Paradise Town Board also recommended approval. We received three cards for approval and one card in protest. Item number eight is UC 260228. This is a use permit to allow a place of worship in conjunction with an existing office complex. So the complex consists of five buildings and the subject building, building five, which is the easternmost building, will include the place of worship and there's ample parking on the site. So staff recommended approval, Paradise Town Board recommended approval, We received one letter in approval and two cards in protest. Item number nine is UC 260229. This is a use permit for household pets in conjunction with a proposed recreational or entertainment facility within an existing shopping center. So this application is what we call a cat lounge in a sense. Patrons can pay a fee to come in, hang out with the animals. We did have a significant amount of protest letters and a petition that came in via email, and a concerned neighbor will probably show up tonight to pull it off consent to discuss. So I did a little bit of research. So the one approval letter that we did get was from residents from the subdivision to the east, We recommended approval, Spring Valley recommended approval. We received five cards in protest and three letters in protest. The cards and letters were from residences to the north and east and a business owner from the shopping center on Spring Mountain and Rainbow. So if that gets pulled tonight, we'll probably be hearing that first. So just a heads up on that. Item number 10, sorry.

I spoke to the property manager. For those of you who remembered, Assemblyman Nguyen gave her my number and so she called me and she said that she had sent one and she was going to come and pull it off, so we're going to hear that separately. Thank you. Okay. Mm-hmm.

Okay, item number 10 and 11 are companion items. So item 10 will be heard tonight and will stay with tonight's meeting. But item number 11, we will request to delete it. It needs to be heard over at the BCC. That was an oversight on our part. The previous approvals were approved with BCC, so it needs to be heard back at BCC. It's just a design review for an office warehouse building. The associated vacation is for a portion of right-of-way for Russell Road and for Rogers Street to accommodate detached sidewalks. And then the design review is just for the office warehouse building. So we'll only hear item 10 and we'll delete item 11. It's going to go to tomorrow's meeting. Item number 12 is... will be led, presented by Martin and Mark this evening. This is just for amending the Clark County Master Plan for the heat mitigation and other policies that are forthcoming. So on to the non-routine section.

Let's just take a quick break there and see if any commissioners have any questions about the non-routine items. Vice Chair Mojica.

no questions okay thank you continue thank you so for the non-routine section that's items 13 through 21. so item 13 is uc 260142 this is a holdover use permit for the banquet facility um i was here when i think when they this was a few weeks ago so we The first hold was from the April 21st Planning Commission meeting, the second hold was from the fifth Planning Commission meeting. Unfortunately, we received a letter from the applicant, the meeting of the, excuse me, on May 26th, after the Spring Valley Town Board, they voted to deny it, because the applicant was a no-show, but then the applicant showed up at the end of the meeting. Hopefully they show up tonight. I just wanted to let everybody know that if we hold it again tonight, they will pay for re-notification fees and we'll have to hold it a month to the July 7th Planning Commission and the June 9th Spring Valley Town Board. So I'm just, hopefully they show up tonight and then we can discuss what we need to discuss. Commissioner Ryman.

I feel like I'm having deja vu. Didn't we hold this multiple times? I felt like this was like the fourth time that we held this.

It was held twice with Planning Commission, but it was also held at Town Board. So it seems like it's four times because they just didn't show up to Town Board two times, and then they didn't show up twice. They didn't come to Planning Commission, so we held it twice.

Sorry, to have them go back. So this has been on our, this is the third time it's appeared on our agenda?

That's correct.

Only three, though. I swear, I thought it was more than that. And they have never appeared at, they've been asked to go to town board on at least three occasions.

That's correct. So they didn't show up to two, and then the third one, which was May 26th, They were supposed to go.

Because we told them here, and I told them on the record, if you don't go, then we're going to deny this with prejudice. That's correct. It's going to take you 18 months to get this done again. That's what I, well, I don't know if we're going to roll the tape, but I imagine that's what I said. Okay, and so the last one, they showed up at the end of the meeting.

That's correct. They showed up at the end. They sent an email to Mike Shannon and to our planner, And they said there was some kind of child care issue that happened.

What exactly do they want to do here?

It's just a banquet facility.

They want to have a banquet facility.

I have a copy of their letter if you want to see it that we got. I'll certainly get it.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Commissioner Kowarski, your light's on.

I was just going to say that I thought it was three times they didn't show up at town board. But my question becomes, is when they showed up the fourth time, okay, did town board, a lot of our town boards will trail till the end because you don't know if somebody got caught in traffic if something had happened. So if they don't show up, they'll trail the item until the end and then they'll vote on it and if that's what happened, then eh, but if, but I don't know.

Right, the town board rec sheet, I was trying to figure that portion out too, the town board rec sheet just says it was denied and then it says they showed up at the end. So I don't know if they actually trailed it.

Do we know if the town board's recommendation is based on the failure to appear or was it a substantive denial?

I'm not sure. I have a copy of the rec sheet, but it says that they're recommending for them to go back to town board again.

Go back to town board. Okay, and so if we did that, then they have to re-notice, they have to pay some fees, and it's going to take- Correct.

It'll take another month because we need time to re-notice.

Thank you. Okay. All right, thank you. Commissioner, I'm sorry, Vice Chair Mojica, any questions or concerns on that particular item?

No questions, but I do agree with Commissioner Roitman. This is ridiculous. I do remember telling them they had to do that.

Yeah, I think we're all in agreement that they need to get re-notified and pay their fees if we decide to go that route. Okay, go ahead, continue, staff.

Okay, thank you. Item number 14 is UC 260232. This is a use permit for vehicle maintenance and repair in conjunction with an existing vehicle sales facility within an existing office warehouse complex. The southern three units of Building B will consist of an existing 10,721 square foot vehicle sales facility, and they're proposing to add vehicle maintenance and repair use This is located basically 15 feet from the residential use to the west, where 200 feet is required, and that's why the use permit is being requested. The requirement for parking, there is ample parking, so I guess that's the positive part of it, but we're recommending denial of the use permit because we find that it's too close to the residence. It's to the west. Spring Valley Town Board recommended approval. We received one card in approval, no cards in protest. Item number 15 is WS260202. This is a waiver development standards for reduced setback, reduced building separations for existing accessory structures in conjunction with an existing single family residence. So there are two carports within the front yard, four sheds and two gazebos within the rear yard. There is an active CC pro violation for building without a permit. So they're basically asking to reduce setbacks in building separation. We recommended denial, town board recommended approval, and we received one card of approval, no cards in protest. Item number 16 is WS260206. This is a waiver to increase the proposed fence height in conjunction with an existing single family residence. The applicant is requesting to construct an 11 foot high I would say it's like a privacy screen wall within the rear yard. It runs parallel to their north property line so that you don't have view of their pool. It's probably better if they, when we see it on the plan. It's kind of freestanding. It's set back about a foot away from their, I believe it's their east property line. So it's just kind of like a privacy screen, but it is 11 feet high. So there's a request for a waiver for that. We recommended denial to Enterprise Town Board, recommended denial. We did not receive any approvals or protest cards. Items 17, 18, 19, and 20, these are companion items. I'll start with item 17, that's the plan amendment that is a request to go from neighborhood commercial to business employment. Staff recommended denial. It is surrounded by undeveloped ranch estate neighborhoods, so we don't find that it's compatible to the neighborhood. Spring Valley Town Board recommended approval. We did not receive any approval cards, but we did receive two cards in protest. The companion's own change is to reclassify the site from RS-20 to IP, which is Industrial Park. We also recommended denial since we are not supporting the plan amendment. Spring Valley Town Board recommended denial. We did receive two cards and protests. No letters or cards for approval for that one. Item number 19 is the companion vacation. That's VS-260216. That's to vacate a portion of right-of-way for Quail Avenue to accommodate detached sidewalks, and we're recommending approval for this. Spring Valley Town Board recommended approval and we received two cards and protests the Last item or one of the second to the last item is WS 260215. This is item number 20 This is waiver development standards to reduce buffering and increase parking and a design review for a proposed office warehouse for the site Basically one of the waivers is to increase the parking because the maximum number of parking spaces allowed per Title 30 is 23, and the applicant is proposing 42 spaces. A waiver is also required to reduce the landscape area for buffering and screening. So Title 30 requires a 15 foot wide landscape buffer with an eight foot high decorative screen wall. The plans are proposing a five-foot-wide landscape buffer along the north property line, an 11-foot-wide landscape buffer along the east property line, and a one-foot landscape buffer along the west property line. So since they're reducing it away from the 15, the waivers are required. Staff recommends denial. Spring Valley Town Board also recommended denial, and we received two cards in protest. And lastly, item 21 is the ordinance. This is to amend Title 30 regulations. This is related to NRS for legal non-conforming lots, RM18 standards, cannabis special events, light manufacturing, and correction of accessible space and access design requirements. And again, Martin and Mark from the Advanced Planning Team will be taking care of that presentation for tonight.

thank you very much um so i'll open up to commissioners for any questions or additional comments on the non-routine action items um vice chair mojica no questions thank you okay all right so dad i have i have one question if i could just ask staff on the last item i read it i read jason's letter i was more confused than ever but i didn't want a separate briefing can you just kind of give us the Clip notes, really quick. So we're not doing this during the meeting.

On the ordinance, correct? Yes. So for the record, Martin Gies with Advanced Planning. Pleasure to be here this evening. So this is, this ordinance includes some changes to bring our code in compliance with NRS and also to address two different directions from the board. The language for legal non-conforming lots, some of you may recall in our prior to January 1, 2024, we had R3 zoning district that allowed single family residents. That's now RM18 zoning, which does not allow single family residents. So if there is a recorded subdivision that was recorded prior to January 1, 2024, we are amending our code to make it clear that they can still develop a single family residence and it will be subject to the RS2 district standards. So we have, again, the change to the non-conforming lots and then the RM-18 footnotes and the development standards. Those two changes correspond with that item. The changes related to cannabis, this is, again, to bring the county code in compliance with current Nevada revised statutes. In the 2023 legislative session, AB 277 was signed into law, and that directed the Cannabis Compliance Board to no longer issue medical cannabis dispensary licenses unless the establishment is located in what they define as a covered jurisdiction. Clark County is not a covered jurisdiction. And the Cannabis Compliance Board, I'm sorry? Mark's got some detail on the covered jurisdiction. I'll let him jump in here.

Commissioner Kolarski, per Nevada revised statutes as used in this section, covered jurisdiction means a local governmental jurisdiction that has adopted local cannabis control measures which prohibit the operation of adult use cannabis establishments in the local governmental jurisdiction. So...

Yes, correct. Thank you, Mark. I appreciate you having that already. So since we don't prohibit it, we comply with the NRS statutes. The Cannabis Compliance Board, we consulted with them. They've confirmed that they no longer issue medical dispensary licenses, and they're actually in the process, if not now completed, of converting existing medical dispensary licenses to just adult cannabis retail licenses. So we are deleting dispensary and updating the associated definitions for medical dispensary. So the sale of cannabis will be adult retail. So retail is retail in terms of the sale of cannabis. There's no changes to where it may be sold or any other standards. It's just bringing us into compliance with the state licensing and the fact that they no longer issue that medical dispensary license type. They just have the adult use retail.

And what about special events? That confused me a little bit.

Sure, so special event, this you may recall under prior code, prior to the Title 30 rewrite, special events, we had an ability to waive or vary the residential use separation requirement. Under today's current code, the only relief from that separation requirement would be to pursue a use permit for a recreation facility. That's not necessarily the most appropriate avenue for permitting kind of a waiver to that operational standard for a special event. So we are going to be deleting the sort of it's more of a relocation rather are the following standards cannot be waived or varied from the layout and design standards so that will allow residential adjacency. to be waived or varied, so they can get a use permit to waive that standard, which they would not be allowed to today. And the change for light manufacturing, this is a similar type of change. We are currently, they are not able to waive the separation requirement from non-industrial uses and residential adjacency. In the IL and IH, they can ask for location and operation waivers and variances. We will have an amended condition for the location and operation for the IP district, which is that manufacturing shall occur within an enclosed building and that cannot be waived or varied. So it just provides a little bit of flexibility for the IP district while still not allowing that process for IL and IH, those more intense industrial districts. And then lastly, we had changes to our standard accessible and van accessible spaces. This is to bring us into compliance with ADA allowances and provisions for van accessible parking spaces. Our diagram essentially depicted too much loading space and parking space. There's a couple options they can do for van spaces, either eight feet space and eight feet of loading or 11 feet of parking and five feet of loading zone. Our diagram had 11 and eight, which is in excess of what ADA requires for those two options. And then we're clarifying that it still has to have the 98 inches of vertical space. I'm happy to answer any other questions you may have on those.

Thank you. Yeah, you're very welcome. All right, thank you, staff. Seeing no other questions, I will bring us to the last part of our meeting, which is public comments. So there's another section of our meeting where we open it up for public to come make comments. And seeing no one rushing down to make public comments, we're going to close this section of the meeting and adjourn until our meeting at 7. Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Mojica.

Lastly, text me.

Thank you. I can't text you, but thank you, guys.