Clark County Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

You may comment at the beginning of the meeting, or you may wait to see if that item is discussed later and includes an opportunity for public comment when the item is being considered. Some routine items may be approved together as part of what is called the consent agenda. If you do not agree with a staff recommendation for one of these items, you must request that that item be removed before the Board takes action. If it is not removed, it may be approved early in the meeting as part of a single vote. Items that are not routine are considered one at a time and may include an opportunity for public comment before the Board votes. When it's time to speak, please come forward. There are three microphones available, including a handheld microphone if you have documents you would like to show. If you wish to show a document, an overhead camera may be used at the direction of the Board Chair. Please do not display documents that contain personal or sensitive information. When speaking, please talk directly into the microphone, clearly and at a steady volume. This helps ensure your comments are heard and recorded as part of the public record. Speakers are required to state their name, spell their last name and state their address. At the end of the meeting, there is a second public comment period. This final public comment is for items not listed on the agenda. No action may be taken on those comments at that time. All public comments are limited to three minutes unless otherwise announced by the chair at the beginning of the meeting. During all public comment periods, board members may listen but are not allowed to respond. Thank you for being here and for taking the time to participate in your local government.

Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the July 22nd continuation of the Board of County Commissioners. We will begin the meeting by welcoming our new director, Jason Allswang. Co-piloted today by Jennifer Ammerman. Thank you. Would you like to take it away, director? after I call the first period for public comment, which is on any item on today's agenda. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward at this time, but you have to speak on items that are on the agenda. Seeing no one, I will close the first time set aside for public comment.

All right. Good morning, commissioners. First item, or sorry, second item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda after considering any additions or deletions of items. Staff has received the following requests. Hold to the August 5th, 2026 zoning meeting, number 29, WS26-0332, number 30, PUD26-0329, Number 31, TM26-500-086. And hold to the August 19, 2026 zoning meeting. Item 10, PA26-700-019. Item 11, ZC26-0243. Item 12, WS26-0244. And item 16, WS26-0113. Applicants advised on these that re-notification fees may be required in accordance with Title 30 standards. Those public hearing items are going to be opened as a public hearing and immediately recessed until the date is stated. With these deletions, which are items 10, 11, 12, 16, 29, 30, and 31, the agenda's ready for approval.

Thank you. On items 10 through 12, I know we have received a request, but I would not like to grant that request. I want that item heard today.

With those changes written to the record, I move approval of the agenda.

There's a motion for approval. Please cast your vote. That motion passes.

Okay, item three is the approval of the minutes. Minutes of the June 17th, 2026 zoning meeting are ready for approval.

I move approval of the June 17th, 2026 meeting minutes.

Thank you. There's a motion. Please cast your vote. Motion passes.

Next are the routine action items, which consists of items 4 through 15. These items may be considered together in one motion and are subject to the conditions listed with each agenda item and as amended below. Staff has the following request to change conditions on item number 6, ET25-400136, WS-23-0439. Add a public works development review condition to read Applicant to construct a five foot wide asphalt path along Ponderosa Way and Duneville Street. Item seven, ET26-400-053, NCC21-0209. modify comprehensive planning's first bullet to read until April 4th, 2030, and add a public works development review condition, stockpiles to be removed from the drainage easement, and submit photos to show removal by August 20th, 2026. And then item number eight, ET26-400-054, UC25-0072, DELETE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING BULLET NUMBER TWO. IF THERE ARE NO OBJECTIONS, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW OPEN AND ROUTINE ACTION AGENDA IS READY FOR APPROVAL.

WITH THE ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS MADE RIGHT INTO THE RECORD, I MOVE APPROVE OF THE ROUTINE ACTION ITEMS CORE THROUGH 15.

THANK YOU. THERE'S A MOTION. PLEASE CAST YOUR VOTE.

SORRY, COMMISSIONER, DID YOU WANT TO POLL 10 THROUGH 12?

EXCUSE ME, YES. THANK YOU. WITH 10 THROUGH 12 BEING POLLED, THERE'S A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. That motion passes.

Okay, next items on the agenda are 10 through 12, which are companion and will be heard together. Item 10 is PA26-0700019, plan amendment to redesignate the existing land use category from public use to neighborhood commercial on 4.8 acres, generally located west of US Highway 95 and north of State Route 164 within Searchlight. Number 11 is ZC26-0243, zone change to reclassify 4.8 acres from an RS80, H2, and CG zone to CG zone, generally located west of Highway 95 and north of State Route 164 within Searchlight. And item number 12 is WS26-0244, Waiver of Development Standards to Eliminate Buffering and Screening Requirements and Design Review for Communication Utility Buildings and Associated Equipment on a 0.23 acre portion of 4.8 acres in a CG zone, generally located west of US Highway 95 and north of State Route 164 within Searchlight.

Thank you. There is no applicant here today on this item. There was a request to hold it. I don't want to do that. There was some involvement with the Searchlight community. They've made several trips here already. And I'll be placing some additional conditions and denying a portion of the request today. So without an applicant here, I'm going to go ahead and open the public comment period. Anyone wishing to speak on items 10 through 12, please come forward at this time. Seeing no one, I will close the public comment period. A couple comments I want to make, and perhaps Mr. Warhola, I could ask you to weigh in on this. This was on the routine action agenda today. My intention today is to deny the waivers that are being requested. That doesn't leave us with much to deny. Could you speak a little bit to that, to what would be remaining without the waivers?

Yeah, it would be the plan amendment and the zone change and the design review. And both of those have staff's recommendations, the planning commission's recommendations, and really at least there's no opposition here today against those. So it would be my recommendation that we approve those with conditions. It would be tough to defend those, and we're better off approving them with conditions than denying them and going to court. Okay.

This use could also be done by right, could it not, in commercial zoning without coming through any public hearing process, planning, commission, town board, or this body? Yes, that's correct. Okay. And that zoning is only 100 feet away from where this current zoning is, so they could simply move 100 feet and do this by right without any conditions being placed on the application?

That's also correct, yes.

Okay, so I think it I feel pretty strongly that the best thing to do to protect the Community is to move forward with the three requests today to deny all of the waivers which would mean. That they are required to put in the decorative concrete block wall. that they're required to put in the appropriate landscaping and trees by code. It will be appropriately installed and maintained and effectively screening the facility. In addition to following code, because the waivers have been, will be denied, I'm gonna place some additional conditions on the application. I'm gonna require that a design review, I'm gonna require a design review for any additional buildings or structures proposed on that site, meaning that any changes, as a public hearing, so any changes that were to come related to the site would have to come back through this body, could not be done by Wright or administratively. Is that right, Director Alswing?

That is correct.

We're also going to require that all structures be painted in neutral brown or tan colors to blend in with the natural surrounding and the landscape. And then the significant issue from the only residential neighbor had to do with sound, which I think is a valid concern. So we're going to limit their request for generators. The generators are only to be used in cases of emergency. There is some required testing, but I'm gonna limit the testing between the hours of 12 to 2 p.m. once per month on a 28-day cycle. Is that condition clear?

Yes, did you want to specify what day or perhaps maybe not on a Sunday since it is on a church property?

I think it's appropriate to be a weekday, but we'll leave a little bit of flexibility if the neighbor who's impacted has a preference, then maybe through administrative request we can resolve that. Okay, great. Okay, if there aren't any questions, I'm going to go ahead and move for approval of items 10 through 12, noting that the waiver of development standards 1A and 1B will be denied, and the three additional conditions read into the record will be applied to the application. Please cast your vote. That motion passes.

Next on the agenda is number 17, UC26-0254, Holdover Use Permit for Outdoor Storage and Display. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, eliminate street landscaping. Two, reduce screening and buffering. Three, modify residential adjacency standards. Four, eliminate full off-site improvements. Five, allow attached sidewalk. And six, alternative driveway geometrics. Design review for outdoor storage and display, equipment rental, sales and service facility on a portion of 1.73 acres. in a CG zone and an R3 zone, generally located northeast of Boulder Highway and southeast of Hamilton Avenue within Whitney.

Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. Brooke Holmes with Brownstein and Peering on behalf of the applicant, BAKS LLC, 100 North City Parkway, Suite 1600, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89106. The property site here is located along Boulder Highway in Hamilton. It's approximately 1.73 acres and the majority of it is zoned commercial general CG. The applicant has acquired the portion of this site back in 2019 and recently acquired this portion in 2025 and has been operating for several years as a tent and full service event rental business. As part of the business, the applicant utilizes large structural frames for the tents with the membranes that are stored indoor. And as a necessity to that, they have to store those large structural portions on the exterior of the site, which is what necessitates the outdoor storage. The applicant was notified by a long-term client from Clark County that there was business licensing issues because of the outdoor storage, which is why we are here before you today. The request to have outside storage is a conditional permit in a CG zoning. It meets all of the conditions except for that it's not in conjunction with the motor speedway. And so we have to ask for a special use permit. Rather than having outdoor storage on the entirety of the site, the applicant's gonna limit it just to this parcel. And as a accommodation, they're gonna put a prefabricated structure On the northern end of the site that will serve as buffering to the interior, it will be painted neutral colors and there will be additional landscaping that's located on the northern end of the site as well adjacent to the residential. These existing structures have been there since 1982. The applicant is gonna update those structures, specifically repaint these three buildings to give them some articulation and make them more neutral toned. The applicant's also gonna update the building along Boulder Highway to repaint, put some decorative facade, and do a glass storefront. Looking at the site plan two, along Boulder Highway in this corridor, the applicant has put additional landscaping. They've modified sort of the driveway here to sort of beautify this area along Boulder Highway. As previously discussed, we're gonna put one row of evergreen trees adjacent to the residential property. The applicant met with Public Works to discuss the driveways and various throat depths. The applicant has agreed to close off this driveway. When the applicant acquired the property, it currently has three driveways. The closest driveway to Dodge Street in Hamilton will be closed off. And the other two driveways will be replaced in the area with concrete to be ADA compliant. The applicant is also moving an existing structure that's currently located here. They're gonna move it to the interior of the site to meet setbacks. The applicant's gonna put additional parking to meet all of the required parking spaces. There's a number of waivers that are being asked. A lot of them have to do with residential adjacency. Unfortunately, since 2019, the property to the north became residential, and so a bunch of residential adjacency requirements now apply. One of the waivers as well is to waive off-site improvements along Dodge Street as well as street landscaping. The applicant tried to count how many landscape trees would otherwise be required and plant them around the site, which would make more sense to put on Boulder Highway and adjacent to the residential. The applicant has worked very closely with Commissioner Gibson and staff and public works, and we really appreciate all the time. We think all of the modifications here are compatible with the surrounding development, that they beautify the area, and they overall improve the site from what exists today. And we'd be happy to answer any questions that you have.

Thank you. If that completes your presentation, I'll open up the public comment period. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll turn it over to Commissioner Gibson.

Thank you very much. So the applicant agrees to a cost participation for full off-sites in Dodd and Hamilton as determined by Public Works not to include the relocating of the NV Energy poles. That's a part of the agreement, right?

That's correct, as a condition, yes.

And then the applicant to close the driveway closest to Hamilton and Dodd, and you've mentioned that. Although the applicant will pay their portion of the off-site improvements, Public Works will still require the restrictive covenant um to be executed until the cost sharing agreement is finalized and paid you could probably even say finalized and or paid but and you understand that but you're not right and the cost participation condition and future cost sharing agreement will not delay permits business licenses or other project approvals as long as the applicant agrees and

I think it's to say to pay the fee.

And the fees are paid, yeah. This has taken an awful lot. I know that one of the concerns has been that when we see new development, we require all kinds of things, right? And when we change the approvals, that is the land uses in an area, and we have a use permit, for instance, whether or not we like it, we have to do things that bring things to code where we can. We've got a residential neighborhood, we've got a school. I appreciate the fact that your client is willing to work on the offsites with us. All of that is something that will really make a difference over there. So thank you very much. Thank you for your cooperation. And at this time, I would move approval, unless there is something that you've got to say, Antonio.

Thank you, Commissioner. I just want to clarify that although the cost participation condition will not delay permits, it will delay their certificate of occupancy. So until all the conditions are satisfied, they will not be able to move into their building.

Right, and I think that's been understood as we've had our conversations.

So just want to clarify, so as long as we enter into the cost sharing agreement, the offsites have to be completed before they can get the certificate of occupancy?

No, we won't hold, so for the cost participation of the offsite improvements on DOD, we will not hold up a CFO for that, but the fees have to be paid prior to the CFO.

Yeah. Is that clear?

That's clear.

Okay. Then I move approval of these companion items or this item. What do we got? This is just item 17. So I move approval of item 17 with the additional conditions that have been read into the record.

There's a motion. Please cast your vote.

Motion passes. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Next item on the agenda is number 18, UC26-0325, use permit to allow a daycare. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, modify residential adjacency standards. Two, eliminate and reduce buffering and screening. three, eliminate setback, four, parking area design access, and five, alternative driveway geometrics in conjunction with a proposed daycare on 0.2 acres and an RS 5.2 zone, generally located southwest of Council Avenue and east of Caravelle Street within Sunrise Manor.

Hi, good morning. My name is Lani Fleites, an owner for Kiley Family Home Daycare. The address is 5269 Council Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89142. Thank you for considering my special use of payment and my application. If you have a question, then let me know. Thank you.

Thank you. If that completes your presentation, I'll open the public hearing on item 18. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Go ahead and use the microphone on your right. Or that one. I got a bad back.

Okay, my name is Al Rojas. We're very active in Sunrise Manor. I just had one question for the applicant over in a different area. We were doing some canvassing in the community and we parked on the street And then somebody came out from one of these daycare centers that takes care of the children, and they told us we couldn't park on the street. So where is your parking gonna be? Are people gonna be able to park in the street in front of your daycare center, or do you have special parking when they pick up the people and when they leave? That's my question.

So you don't have to answer that. It's a public hearing. So go ahead and sit down if you've completed your public comment. And the commissioner can ask that question.

Okay. Maybe the commissioner could ask that question. But I do also want to bring it up to the board that, you know, we're running into these issues out on the streets and we wanted to clarify what the rules were on that. Thank you.

We hear you. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on item 18, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Sagerblum.

Thank you, can staff lay out the conditions that we wanna impose on this? Just hold on.

So we don't have any conditions other than, sorry. Other than our standard so one year to for them to complete any kind of building permits that they may need and then That will just ensure whatever they're doing is in compliance with code. So it's just standard conditions for us It is a use permit because it's between seven and twelve kids So as I make the motion to comply with standard conditions, we're okay Okay, there's a motion for approval please cast your vote I

That motion passes. While we're on the subject, Director Allswing, you can go ahead and sit down. Your motion passed, you're good. But while we're on the topic in a public setting, Director Allswing, do you need some direction on this related to a code update?

Yeah, if we could. Our previous version of Title 30 was a little bit more flexible with seven to 12 children. So if we could have some direction to bring something back with a code amendment, that would be great.

That's what I just want to put on the record. We're in the process of of working on this, but thank you for being willing to participate, and obviously child care is really important to East Las Vegas, so thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you. Great. Next items on your agenda are 19 through 21, which are companion and will be heard together. Number 19 is VS26-0218, holdover, vacate, and abandon easements of interest to Clark County, located between Mandalay Bay Road and Four Seasons Drive, and Las Vegas Boulevard South and Haven Street, and a portion of right of way being Mandalay Bay Road located between Las Vegas Boulevard South and Haven Street within Paradise. Number 20. is UC26-0219, holdover use permits for the following, one, expand the Gaming Enterprise District, two, resort hotel, and three, recreational facility, waiver of development standards to allow non-standard improvements in the right-of-way, and design review for proposed resort hotel and recreational facility on 11.95 acres in a CR zone within the airport environs AE60 overlay, generally located east of Las Vegas Boulevard south of Mandalay Bay Road within Paradise. And number 21 is TM26-500-056, holdover tentative map consisting of one commercial lot on 11.95 acres in a CR zone within the airport environs, AE60 overlay, generally located east of Las Vegas Boulevard South and south of Mandalay Bay Road within Paradise.

Good morning.

Good morning, commissioners. Nancy Ammonson, 520 South 4th Street, here representing the applicant and the owner of the property. They've just finished purchasing the property. You may know this property. It has two matchsticks, as we call them. They were originally going to put up a Ferris wheel. So the matchsticks are there, and they've been there since the early 2000s. I know MGM, I've spoken with them a number of times. They just want something to happen. Either the matchsticks go down or the property gets developed. As you can see, it's in the resort corridor, zone commercial resort. This is probably the best way to put this. The proposal is for a resort tower. The recreation facility and outdoor venue is going to be right in front of it. And I'll show you in some of the renderings. We're going to have something similar to Fremont Street, except, of course, not as big as High. But that's the concept, where you have a pedestrian way. you have a number of restaurants and retail facilities up front and we have a parking garage that will be going over what is now a drainage channel the applicant and their engineers have been talking to the airport they've worked with regional flood the concept is is agreed to of course we're going to have to get down to the building permits we've also talked to the fire department because the fire department needs to be able to get under the parking garage into the tunnel if there's any kind of an emergency. So we're thinking about all of those. We're looking at an LED facade on the tower. Of course, we're going to have to come back for a comprehensive sign plan. The reason we didn't bring it through is, I'll explain to you, had more to do with the FAA, not the sign, but the fact that we had to reduce the height of the building by about 60 feet. in order to get our FAA approval. So we've been working with FAA and the Department of Aviation and we didn't want to start changing all of our signage plans. So that's one of the things that you'll see me again for. The two uprights would be turned into We would add another pillar, of course, strengthen those two uprights and have a Sky Tower restaurant here, another venue, and hopefully make it look a little nicer than your two matchsticks onto that site. And again, just another look. This is from the back. This is looking from east to west and the parking garage over the drainage channel. and I'll get you to something that looks a little better. I have to thank staff on this one because they were able to modify the write-up before this meeting because before FAA approved it again we had to reduce the height of the building of the main building. We also had to reduce the number of rooms. So at this point, FAA has given their approval. We've talked to the Department of Aviation. Of course, they're going to be following it. There were concerns originally talking to the Department of Aviation. We made sure we showed you. These are the Department of Aviation fuel tanks. So the concern was to make sure that The east-facing side of the building did not have windows that opened. The glass couldn't be easily broken out, and we are working with the Department of Aviation on that. As I had noted before, this is our pedestrian tunnel and the restaurant venues up front. And I have opened any questions on this one.

As that completes your presentation, I'll open the public comment period. Anyone wishing to speak on items 19 through 21, please come forward. I think no one. I'll close the public hearing and turn it to Commissioner Gibson.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You've worked with the FAA. We were able to accommodate the schedule. I move approval subject to staff conditions. Is there anything more from Public Works at all? I move approval subject to the staff conditions.

Thank you. There's a motion for approval on items 19 through 21. Please cast your vote. The motion passes.

Thank you very much, and congratulations to Jason. And I want you to know that your staff has worked wonderfully with us on this. They've been very accommodating, and we appreciate it. Thank you.

We believe it. Thank you.

Thank you. Next on the agenda is number 22 and 23, which are companion items. They'll be heard together. 22 is VS-260316, vacate and abandon a portion of right-of-way being Tanay Way, located between Washburn Road and Verde Way within Lone Mountain. And 23 is WS260315, waivers of development standards for the following. One, eliminate full offset improvements. Two, allow modified driveway geometrics. And three, allow additional driveways in conjunction with a proposed single family residence on 0.9 acres in an RS20 zone within the Neighbor Protection RMP overlay, generally located west of Tenaya Way and north of Rosada Way within Lone Mountain.

Good morning.

Good morning, commissioners. My name is Susan Florian from Taney Engineering, 6030 South Jones Boulevard, here on behalf of the applicant. What we have here is one parcel subdivision. We are asking for waivers, so we're waiving offsites on Rosada and Tenaya. The second waiver we would like to eliminate, we're going to be meeting the requirements for a three-car garage instead. And then for number three is to allow two more driveways where just one is allowed. So we'll have three driveways instead of just one. We are also asking for a vacation from Washburn to Verda Way for a 10 foot on the right of way for each of these parcels. I can refer to Public Works if they want to say something about the vacation.

We'll wait until it's their time.

Okay, perfect, sorry. With that, I conclude my presentation. I'm here to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. I'll open the public hearing on items 22 and 23. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Becker.

Yeah, would Public Works like to make a comment on the vacation?

Thank you, Commissioner. If I may as well, it appears since they're accommodating to that increased driveway, increased driveway width, she said they will, from 34 to 28 feet, 28's our standard, so we probably don't need that waiver anymore, so we appreciate them withdrawing that. So, Tenaya in this area, south of Lone Mountain, Tenaya's already a 60 foot wide right of way. On the north of Tenaya on the west side, sorry, north of Lone Mountain on Tenaya on the west side, we have a 40-foot right-of-way dedication. On the city side, we have a 30-foot right-of-way dedication. Our transportation maps, Our city the city on the east side and even south of this is all 60 feet in right away with so we're just trying to make it consistent with the area. We don't need the 40 foot right away with we're just trying to be consistent with what the city has done. We're trying to be consistent with what we've done south of low mountain. So the overall right away in this area should be 60 feet to match not only the city, but also our maps.

My apologies. I know that they also wanted to add a condition that if there are any gates, they won't be on the right-of-way.

Okay, and Public Works did ask for this vacation, and I think that it is needed to make it consistent with what the city has, and the waivers are consistent with the area in maintaining the rural nature, so I would move to approve.

There is a motion. Please cast your vote. Sorry, Commissioner, can I add one? Just for clarification, I think what Susan is trying to say is if gates are to be installed, gates must meet site visibility zone requirements, if I can add that, please.

Commissioner, that works for you. Great. There is a vote. That works for you? Yeah. Very good. There's an item for approval. Please cast your vote.

That motion passes.

Thank you, Commissioners. Thank you.

Next on the agenda is 24, which is a companion with 25, and it is actually right down the street from 26, so we'll read all three of those together. 24 is WC26-400-035, ZC-0239-05, waivers of conditions of a zone change requiring the following, one, drainage study and compliance, two, right-of-way dedication to include 30 feet for Ringe Lane, three, right-of-way dedication to also include 40 feet for Alto Avenue, and four full off-sites for a previously approved outdoor storage facility on 0.83 acres and an IL zone within the airport environs, AE75 and APZ1 overlay, generally located east of Ringe Lane and north of Alto Avenue within Sunrise Manor. Number 25. is UC26-0179, use permits for the following. One, outdoor storage and display, and two, vehicle sales. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, eliminate street landscaping. Two, reduce setbacks. Three, allow a non-decorative fence. Four, increase fence height. Five, reduce driveway width. And six, waive off-site improvements. Design review for an existing outdoor storage and display and vehicle sales facility in conjunction with an existing vehicle tow yard on 0.83 acres in an IL zone. within the airport environs AE75 and APZ1 overlay, generally located east of Ringe Lane and north of Alto Avenue within Sunrise Manor. And number 26 is WS26-0180, waivers of development standards for the following. One, modify residential adjacency standards, and two, waive off-site improvements. Design review for proposed vehicle maintenance or repair facility and outdoor storage and display on 2.82 acres in an IL zone. within the airport environs, AE80 and APZ1 overlay, generally located south of Cheyenne Avenue and west of Betty Lane within Sunrise Manor.

Good morning. Good morning, commissioners. Rick Salem, RK Design, representing the client. Address is 596 Kellsford Drive, Las Vegas, 89123. The first property that we talked about that was read into is on Ridge and Alto. It is an existing tow yard, has an existing... office building on it we have worked very closely with commissioner kilpatrick's office and staff to make sure that everything was within their guidelines commissioner kilpatrick has asked for a few modifications and we agree with all her recommendations we have shown here the new street gate there are is one existing gate on alto that is going to be closed near the corner for recommendations of staff and public works there was an existing gator long ridge it is going to be closed also permanently public works and commissioner you know the gate will be this one open during store open during uh... normal business hours and a secondary gate closing off the storage yard the storage yard is completely fenced decorative uh... Mesh across the top of it.

So there's no vision visual from the street into the tow yard This one if there's any questions on this one I'd be happy to answer them if you could just present them all at the same time because then we'll Go through them after you present them all at the same time.

Absolutely commissioner the second site is is the site located on Betty Avenue. It is two sites that are combined, single entrance, meeting all standards with Public Works, fenced and screened across the front, completely fenced around. A secondary area has been screened and fenced off for small repair facilities. This is for repair and storage of material. If you have any questions and again all the fencing and landscaping everything is in and also the owner Has agreed to and will sign the s ID when it's ready to go Very good at this time.

I'll open the public hearing on items 24 25 and 26 anyone wishing to speak. Please come forward. I

My name is Al Rojas, and we're very active in the Sunrise Manor area. And I have a prepared statement, but generally speaking, it's intended to hopefully we can work with you to clean this area up. It is of my opinion that this is the worst area in Sunrise Manor, and I've got a prepared statement. I drove around this area and I saw many RVs and abandoned vehicles surrounding this location. That's both of those locations. Our commissioners have been very active in cleaning up this area, particularly Betty Lane and Cheyenne, and it is time that the community take an active role in maintaining this area. I'm part of a neighborhood watch program, and we are working with three businesses in the area to keep RVs, abandoned vehicles, homeless people, and garbage off of Betty Lane between Cary and Alto. Keep in mind, there is an elementary school on the other side of Cary. Our neighborhood watch program has been accused of removing the homeless around the Sunrise Post Office and channeling them over to these streets. when we were at the last advisory meeting for Sunrise Manor. As a consequence, we offered to work with him to help clean up Betty Lane and Alto and Range in that area. Keep in mind that it is against the law to have vehicles on the street, RVs or commercial vehicles, you can get a ticket and have them towed. We see that there are tons, those two areas are probably two of the major areas that have all of these types of vehicles, and we're working with other companies in that area to clean that up. In closing, generally speaking, we would like to work with the applicant and start a neighborhood watch program, which is supported by Metro. And we will be in partner so we can clean this area. And I want to thank our commissioners for cleaning up Cheyenne, which is a disaster. and they put these K-lanes or whatever, and that's been very well maintained. We think that a neighborhood watch program is a good long-term solution to maintain this area, which, again, I consider to be the worst area in Sunrise Manor. Thank you very much.

Anyone else wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Kirkpatrick.

Thank You mr. Chair in to address the public piece I know that you've forgotten that I've been working on this for ten years and had to get 95 residents to our property owners to come together so let me just explain what the plan is which is why I asked you don't need to work with the neighborhood because we're already doing it we already have a plan we've already been working pretty hard with it so one This is going to be an SID from Nellis and Cheyenne to Nellis and Alto all the way to DeRye, which comprises of about 96 different owners and many out-of-state owners on top of it. Two in the SID, which everybody but two have agreed, and I'm happy to give you their phone number, and you can go bug them. But with the exception of those two, everybody else has agreed to do this. And in the SID, what will happen, and I know I've explained this before, but I'm gonna explain it again, they'll have landscaping, they'll have street lights, they'll have cameras, they'll have a nine-inch curb, And they will have access for us to see what's going on there. So I have worked for a long time. This was not created overnight. And at the end of the day, there's a lot of bad actors throughout Sunrise. I don't think it's the worst area. It is the number one dumping ground. But Clark County spends a minimum of $25,000 a month trying to clean it up. but until we could get the owners to all come together, and you know, everybody thinks it's easy, but try and get 100 people to agree to the same item. It doesn't work so well, and we still have two more steps, but we are at 80% design. This particular owner came to us before, and we said no, right, Mr. Munoz? You'll tell me, I told you that you said no. He has been doing everything that he can to keep it from going. But until the legislature starts fining all these people for dumping their RVs and dumping all these other things, there's not much I can do, right? I can only do what the legislature allows me to do. And number two, we are working on a piece of legislation so that we can get rid of these vehicles that do not have titles. That's half the problem. People have passed away and or we have these vehicles that have been through a chop shop and they're gutted and they dump them. there's no way to get rid of them so again when the legislature helps then we can make some of those so i know that you have an in with some legislators so it's good bill drops for them to do so mr muniz uh thank you for working with me i know it's been a long two years i appreciate you doing what you could to get after those people that are dumping he is on it every single day trying to stay on top of it as many folks are but i wanted to hear them all at once so that people could understand what we're doing the big picture because the big picture is we hope to go out to bid early next year that's how close we are and then you know we'll have to get those other couple business owners to agree otherwise we'll We'll visit them often with code violations if they want to be part of the problem. So here's what I would like to do. On item number 24, I can't support waiving the drainage study, because I just am consistent, and we've talked about this. But as I said, there's been a couple drainage studies in the area, so it should be a pretty quick update for you all. Number two, Denying the waiver number two, because I need you to give me that right away so that we can move forward on our plan. Denying waiver number three, which is the same on Alto. I'm approving waiver number four. Waiver number four is the off-site improvements, and it's because... we're going to do them all together right we're going to do street by street over there and it's going to be amazing so you've agreed to participate in the sid that's coming up which will include all of those things also there will be a two-year review just because i'll be on my way out and i want to make sure but i'm pretty confident that public works is gonna let me cut one last ribbon on my way out so it may not be necessary so we'll do an administrative review just to ensure that everything's completed um and i just want a reminder that there's no parking on no customer parking on alto which will help us see who who's dumping stuff um so i want it inside the gates and i think that you agreed to that On item 25, I'm going to allow that outdoor storage because that's really what it is. I'm hesitantly allowing the vehicle sales, but you've assured me that it's going to be done on the inside of the property, and it's not really where customers come and go. It's more where you're taking it to your other location. So I just, you know me, I'm in the neighborhood twice a month, so I'll be visiting. I'm allowing for the waiver of the landscape because it's part of the SID. We are okay with the reduced setbacks on Waiver 2A. On Waiver 2B, the gates need to be out of the sight of visibility zones, which you're addressing by making sure that that happens. And then you've agreed to work with Public Works as we start that SID, because some of that will be impacted. um i'm gonna allow the non-decorative fence to stay because i think it's a waste of money to tear it down and start over but you still but i also said that if i drive over there and there's graffiti on the mesh i'm calling you at home right so uh because it's just it's the broken windows theory you see one and then it everybody continues to do it so you've been a good actor so we're gonna keep you to do in that. And I'm okay with increasing the existing fence height because it's really already there. So why make you tear down something that you don't have to? Also reduce the width of the proposed commercial driveway along public Alto. You'll be working with public works on that issue to ensure that it's there. You're going to close the driveway closest to Range Lane and Alto. That'll help everybody because if you've ever tried to be over there, it's hard to be two cars on the same road. However, the waiver states that it's gonna be a customer only when they come onto your property, right? So there shouldn't be a lot of movement. Item six is waive the off-site improvements. And some of this is redundant, but I have to keep seeing it, so I address them. And then I'm okay with the design review, the two-year administrative review, no outside signage on the property, unless it's your name, contact information, how do we reach you? Because you know I like to call people in my district when we hear problems. And all the storage needs to be onsite and no parking on the streets. And it's going to help everybody that way. And as you know, that's a shot spotter area. So once we have the electricity, it'll be that much better. So we'll know everything. Item 26. We're going to allow for the that really isn't a residential area over there and hasn't been for a couple of decades. However, there are two residents there that live within the area. So we're going to and we've spoken to them. So we're going to approve the the residents area. AGENT ADJACENCY STANDARDS. WE'RE GOING TO WAVE THE OFF SITES ON THIS ONE BECAUSE YOU'VE AGREED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SID. ON THE DESIGN REVIEW, THIS COMES TO THE VEHICLE MEETING REPAIR WHICH I SAID I WAS UNCOMFORTABLE WITH BUT I'LL GIVE YOU A CHANCE. But what can't happen is what's happening on Judson and Marion. And you said that it's going to be for trucks. So if anybody comes and leaves their truck overnight, guess what? It'll be towed before you see it in the morning. I promise. So all the storage, all the repairs, all the customers must be inside on site your property. no parking on the street, and no customers gathering outside and hanging out. So hopefully that is every condition that I was supposed to address. Oh, Jawan, did I miss one? Okay.

Thank you, Commissioner. No, you got all the conditions. We just wanna modify one of the conditions about the dedication for wrench lanes. It's not consistent 30 feet, so if the applicant would just work with us so we can get an overall picture of what that right-of-way's gonna be on wrench lane.

So whatever it is, and I think we talked about that in the big meeting that we had with all the residents, not the residents, the business owners in the area, so to kind of sure it up. So it's been a mess, 70 feet, 60 feet, 20 feet. It's vacated, not vacated, so this will bring it all together. So hopefully I've addressed Mr. Rojas' things, but I am on this, so... I'll give you the numbers of the two people that are still outliers, but I promise you this has been a hill to die for me since 2015, and I'm almost there. So, Mr. Munoz, do you have any comments or questions? Also, I want to applaud you for being part of the community. You know our pathway thing and our business stuff that we do over there, and you've been a big help, so we appreciate that.

and we'll work with you. Like I said, we're working with you and we are gonna work with you. Okay, perfect.

Don't make me regret truck repair and that kind of sales. All right, with that, that's my motion for approval on items 24, 25, and 26.

There is a motion for approval. Please cast your vote. That motion passes. Thank you.

Next item is number 27, WS26-0305, waivers of development standards for the following. One, eliminate access gate setback. Two, allow a non-decorative wall. And three, modify driveway geometrics in conjunction with an existing single family residence on 0.45 acres in an RS20 zone within the neighborhood protection RMP overlay, generally located north of Eldora Avenue and west of Torrey Pines within Spring Valley.

Good morning.

Good morning. My name is Mary Britton, 2677 South Torrey Pines Drive. I want to thank you for taking time to consider my application today. I have some supporting documents here to further explain my project. I presented these at the town advisory board meeting, so there's some page numbers that I'm going to reference. But is this correct?

Just give, there you go. Perfect, okay.

So when I purchased my home, I was a first-time home buyer and with very little experience navigating building regulations. Unfortunately, I placed my complete trust in a contractor who assured me that because I was rebuilding within the footprint of the existing wall, as shown here on page six, that I could move forward without any issues. I later learned that that information that I was given was incorrect and the wall did not comply with current developmental standards. So as soon as I became aware of the issue, I have been working with Clark County staff to bring the project into compliance wherever possible. I've already lowered the block to the requested three feet as shown here as well on page six. The iron fencing is currently under three feet, but I will be modifying it so that it meets the required 50% open standard. Once everything is complete, I will paint the wall white so it matches the existing walls surrounding the property and maintains a consistent appearance within the neighborhood. I'm respectfully requesting approval to keep the existing secondary driveway that exists on Eldora Avenue. This driveway has existed on the property for decades as a gravel pass-through, as you can see in the aerial image. Here on my next page, page 7, shows that properties within my neighborhood have similar layouts. Using Eldora Avenue does allow me to safely drive out of my property. Backing into Torrey Pines carries a higher safety risk as there is more traffic and people exceeding the posted speed limit. As I do have my young children in the vehicle with me the majority of the time, Eldora provides me with the safer alternative as it experiences much less traffic. I'm also requesting approval for the solid block wall along Eldora that connects the existing back wall along Eldora to the front wall at the driveway gate. Rather than using block with iron on the top of that section, I'm requesting permission to keep it as a solid block wall. This creates a consistent transition between the existing backyard wall and the new front wall, providing additional security and privacy for my family, and it results in a clean uniform appearance along the side of the property. Once painted white to match the existing walls, it will blend seamlessly with the rest of the property. The gate that I'm requesting will provide security for my family while remaining aligned with the existing wall and gates that are already installed along Torrey Pines for the additional residents, as you can see in this picture, and the project will preserve the established character of the neighborhood. I do understand the importance of following county standards, and I regret relying on incorrect advice instead of doing my own research. Since learning of the issues, I have made every effort to cooperate with the county staff and make the necessary corrections. My goal was never to avoid the rules, but to complete a safe, attractive, and secure improvement for my home. I am respectfully asking for your approval of the requested waiver so I can complete these improvements in a manner that is safe, aesthetically consistent, and respectful to the neighborhood. So thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you very much. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate, Ms. Britton, that you have taken full responsibility for relying on a contractor and are doing everything in your power to correct what you can. Out of curiosity, did you report the contractor to the Contractors Board? I have not. Okay. Just a suggestion, because you are not alone in dealing with contractors who purport to understand the code and obviously do not. So, Mr. Alswain, I know you had a condition you want to modify.

Yes, so there was some confusion when we originally took the application in about whether or not she could have a solid wall along Eldora within that front setback. And we initially told her she could not apply for a waiver for that. And in fact, she could have. So if you're amenable to it, we would like to add a condition that allows a non, she can have a non-decorative fence or wall along Eldora Avenue within the front setback, which is what she had originally had.

right uh and that is really as a result of recent changes that we made to to our code uh so with that i'll go ahead and move for approval agenda item number 27 with the oh sorry sorry commissioner i have to uh since it sounds like we're amenable to leaving that wall at el dora i would like to mention that there are site visibility requirements and those are not waivable and she would have to meet those site visibility requirements so some of that wall even though Sounds like you may allow it. We'll have to accommodate the site visibility. And if I could clarify one of our conditions, because we asked for the right-of-way dedication for an intersection, and it should say Spandrel, so right-of-way dedication to include the Spandrel on the southeast corner of the parcel at Torrey Pines Drive and Eldora Avenue.

Do you understand the additional clarifications there?

Yes, I did receive that email yesterday.

Okay, very good. Then I'll go ahead and move for approval agenda item number 27 with the additional conditions that have been read in today.

Thank you. There's a motion. Please cast your vote. That motion passes. Thank you very much.

Next item is number 28, WS26-0314, waivers of development standards for the following. One, waive full offset improvements, and two, eliminate the drainage study in conjunction with a proposed minor subdivision on 1.13 acres and an RS 5.2 zone, generally located north of Benelli Avenue and west of Anderson Street within Moapa Valley.

Good morning.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, commissioners. My name is Riley Fry. I own the subject parcel. I grew up out in Wafaa Valley. My parents moved there in 66. We've been there a very, very long time. We moved away. My wife and I have been married 30 years. We moved away and came back to finish raising our family here and purchased this particular parcel with the idea that we would give a piece of it to each of my daughters. And so our intentions here are to essentially change a couple of the smaller parcels into just slightly larger parcels. pieces so that they would essentially have quarter acre lots instead of .17 and .16 respectively. So essentially we're moving a property line from each direction to combine into a slightly larger parcel. The reason for my being here today is essentially just to kind of help you understand a little bit what this piece is. It's actually an orchard, and it's right downtown Overton. It's been that way for a very, very long time, and it is flood irrigated. I own two water shares there, and there are two structures on it now, two houses that are there. Again, I would be asking to be able to build more structures on it for my children as time permits. The waivers that we're requesting essentially, and again I understand The consistency of not waiving drainage studies, et cetera, my compelling argument, I think, is that it's flood irrigated, has been for 100 years, and so we're suggesting that getting a foot of water on it every week sort of helps us to understand how the drainage works on this parcel, and we're willing to bear the liability for that. So appreciate your time in listening to me today and considering our proposal.

Thank you, this is a public hearing on item 28. If you're wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Kirkpatrick.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So let's start with the easy ones. So I'm good with waiving the offsites because there is no other offsites, but we just can't, we gotta be consistent on the drainage study because there's larger impacts that happen. So I'm sure you understand that, although I know it's flood irrigated. FEMA, there's all these other things and it just impacts the whole valley. We are always dealing with that. So I just can't, we have the drainage study and that's consistent with what the town board, because we've seen what's happened when we do. I appreciate that it's an orchard, but I promise you'll thank me someday when the water rises three feet in an hour, because it's a lot more than flood irrigating. So I'm happy to move forward with eliminating the off sites, but to keep, to deny the drainage study waiver. Antonio.

Commissioner, since I feel you're going that direction, I'd like to change our condition to say drainage study and compliance.

Yes. So I know you don't love it. No one ever does from out there, but they thank me when it does flood. So are you good with that? You don't have to be good with it, but can you live with it?

Understood.

Okay, perfect. Okay, that would be my motion to approve the waivers of the full offsites and deny the elimination of the drainage study.

Mr. Chair, can I just make a comment real fast? I have an agenda item coming up I think on our next in which it is similar in a rural area and we use the same language in the rural areas that really makes no sense whatsoever in the environment. in town, and perhaps we could work on language that is not so obviously inappropriate in rural areas when it comes to off-site improvements and the like. I don't know if you need to agendize a discussion item, but when we talk about sidewalks improving pedestrian flow, it doesn't really make sense out in rural areas.

Happy to do that on a separate agenda item. But sometimes in the rural areas, crazy enough, we do have to put sidewalks because somebody else has put them around the school. But we always try, if there's no off-sites anywhere around, maybe there's language where, but you don't have the ability in the testament and the code to waive it without them coming before us. So maybe that's the bigger discussion, right?

I see Director Allswing has taken note of that. Yes, sir.

OK.

If there's nothing else, there's a motion on item 28. Please cast your vote. That motion passes.

And Mr. Pryor, I know Ms. Metz reached out to you, and maybe we could do a working group on some more attainable housing out there that makes it, because it is very expensive, but I also asked her to pass along the information with the rural housing uh division to see if there's some grants that you can get for some of these um things that you have to do i believe the new 21st century bill that passed put some specific money in for a rule and you guys do qualify but also the state has the rule housing component that has today I think they have about 11 million dollars in there that could be spent so if you want to call our office later I'll walk you through it I get it it's expensive all these little things we add but maybe there's a way we can help you with some grants Thank You commissioner

Okay, items 29 through 31 were held, so that brings us to 32 through 35, which are companion items that will be heard together. Item 32 is PA 2670010, plan amendment to redesignate the existing land use category from neighborhood commercial to compact neighborhood on 2.64 acres, generally located east of Decatur Boulevard and south of Moberly Avenue alignment within Enterprise. Number 33 is ZC26-0137, zone change to reclassify 2.64 acres from a CG zone to an RS2 zone, generally located east of Decatur Boulevard and south of Moberly Avenue alignment within Enterprise. Number 34 is WS26-0138, waivers of development standards for the following. One, increase building height. Two, eliminate and reduce setbacks. Three, increase wall height. Four, increase retaining wall height. Five, reduce street width. And six, modified uniform standard drawings. Design review for an attached single family residential development on 2.64 acres in an RS2 zone, generally located east of Decatur Boulevard and south of Robindale Road within Enterprise. And number 35 is TM26-500033, tentative map for a 19-lot and common lot subdivision on 2.64 acres in an RS2 zone, generally located east of Decatur Boulevard and south of Robindale Road within Enterprise.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning, Simona Stevens, 1950 East Warm Springs. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. Before I go into the project, I was advised to bring up the waiver number four that we talked about during planning commission. When we were discussing the waivers, we were talking amongst ourselves, and I guess by mistake I said that waiver number four was gonna be removed, and we have to have that one, so I just want to bring that up. But anyway, so the applicant is... applied for the master plan amendment to rezone back to the residential, and they want to build 19 homes that are divided into two buildings. It's a two-story proposed homes with large garages on the bottom. We do have a private street, some amenities, detached sidewalk, four-sided architecture. I'll answer any questions, I guess.

If there's nothing further, I'll close the, I'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak on items 32 through 35, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Do you have the graphic that you could show just so my colleagues know what we're talking about here?

The site plan or the 3Ds?

Well, I think that's the site plan, the illustration. Okay. Okay, there it is, thank you. So you're meeting the driveway standards

Yes.

Okay. If there's no discussion on this item, I'm gonna go ahead and move for approval on item 32-33. On 34, I'm gonna add a condition that a retaining wall up to six feet in height be allowed for a maximum of 60 linear feet in the northeast corner of the property as shown on the site plan. And with that additional condition, I'll approve waiver of development standard number two and six And item 35 will be approved If there's nothing further, that's my motion, please cast your vote I'm sorry commissioner.

Sorry, mr. Papazian. Don't I Was I was waiting in fact because we've worked a lot on this particular project parcel and Can we go back to that plan? Is this the original plan that they had submitted? And is the original plan show the 26 feet private street or are we at 37?

37.

We are at 37? Okay, so I got you. So five is not required because they are meeting the standard and six is still, this looks like the old plan, that's why I'm asking. So are we meeting the radii for six?

No. This is the side plan that was presented at Planning Commission.

Is that what we're going back to then?

Commissioners, this is the, yes, this is the plan It's the first revised plan. There were some plans that were submitted over the weekend that we did not accept as revised plans. So this is what Planning Commission saw, what they approved. We'll make it clear for the record that they did withdraw waivers one, three, four, and five at the Planning Commission. So those are not for consideration anymore. And then we had discussed going with what the Planning Commission approved, even though they denied Waiver 6 for the RADI-I. We had discussed that it was best to just leave it as it was shown at Planning Commission.

Mr. Papazian, can Public Works live with that?

Yes, sir. Thank you. Okay.

Very good. There is a motion on the table. Please cast your vote.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Next items on the agenda are 36 through 40, which are companion items that can be heard together. 36 is PA 26-70025, plan amendment to redesignate the existing land use category from neighborhood commercial to compact neighborhood on 4.51 acres, generally located north of Blue Diamond Road and west of Montessori Street alignment within Enterprise. 37 is ZC26-0271, zone change to reclassify 4.51 acres from a CG zone to an RM18 zone, generally located north of Blue Diamond Road and west of Montessori Street alignment within Enterprise. 38 is VS26-0272, vacant and abandoned easements of interest to Clark County, located between Agate Avenue and Blue Diamond Road and Belcastro Street and Montessori Street alignment within Enterprise. 39 is WS26-0273, waivers of development standards for the following. One, reduce setback. Two, reduce lot size. Three, increase retaining wall height. Four, eliminate parking area landscaping. Five, reduce street landscaping. And six, allow modified driveway geometrics. Design review for a proposed single family attached residential development on 4.51 acres in an RM18 zone, generally located north of Blue Diamond Road and west of Montessori Street alignment with an enterprise. And number 40 is TM26-500-070, tentative map consisting of 52 single family residential lots and common lots on 4.51 acres in an RM18 zone, generally located north of Blue Diamond Road and west of Montessori Street alignment within Enterprise. Good morning.

Good morning, county commissioners. My name is Susan Florian from T&E Engineering, 6030 South Jones Boulevard. I'm here on behalf of the applicant. What we have here is a parcel. It is consistent of a 52-lot subdivision. We are asking for a plan amendment to go from neighborhood commercial to commercial neighborhood and also a zone change from commercial general to RM18. We are asking for waivers to reduce the rear setback from 10 to 15 where it is required. We're also asking to reduce the lot sizes from where it's required 1,800 to 1,497. We're also asking to increase the retaining wall from three to four. We are eliminating waiver number four to eliminate parking landscape. We're also asking to reduce the landscape from six feet where one foot is required. We do have landscaping around Blue Diamond, but it does reduce over here to one foot. And then we also are asking to reduce the separation from 6 feet to 2.5. With that, I conclude my presentation. I'm here to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you. This is a public hearing. Anyone wishing to come forward at this time? Seeing no, we'll close the public hearing and turn it over to Commissioner Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair, and thank you, Ms. Florian, for working with our staff on this design. I did want to note that one of the neighbors, Jeffrey Peters, had reached out both to me and to Ms. Florian, and we did have discussions about this proposal and appreciate his insight. If you could, Ms. Florian, just talk about the common area space real quick.

My apologies, yes. For the common area space right here, the client is proposing a dog park.

Okay, and Mr. Dodson, can you just comment on, I know as we've been working with NDOT on what Blue Diamond's gonna look like in the future, can you just confirm that this is in compliance with the future intent for Blue Diamond?

That is correct, Commissioner D'Arceau and sidewalk in the common area along Blue Diamond.

Great, all right, with that, I'll go ahead and move for approval, agenda items 36 through 40 with the withdrawal of waiver of development standard number four on agenda item number 39.

It's a motion on the floor. Cash or vote? Motion is adopted. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioners.

Next on the agenda are items 41 through 44, which are companion items that can be heard together. 41 is ZC26-0267, holdover zone changes for the following. One, reclassify 2.44 acres from an RS20 zone to an RS5.2 zone. And two, remove the Neighbor Protection RMP overlay, generally located north of Agate Avenue and west of Warbonnet Way within Enterprise. Number 42 is VS26-0268, holdover, vacate, and abandon easements of interest to Clark County located between Agate Avenue and Raven Avenue alignment and Cimarron Road alignment and Warbonnet Way within Enterprise. 43 is WS26-0269, holdover waivers of development standards for the following. One, increase retaining wall height, and two, increase fill. Design review for a proposed single-family residential subdivision on 2.44 acres in an RS5.2 zone, generally located north of Agate Avenue and west of Warbonnet Way within Enterprise. And number 44 is TM 26-500-069, a holdover tentative map consisting of six single-family residential lots and common lots on 2.44 acres in an RS 5.2 zone, generally located north of Agate Avenue and west of Warbonnet Way within Enterprise.

Good morning. Good morning. Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. Here today on behalf of tri-point homes which was formerly party homes. As you can see from the aerial, there is quite a significant wash that runs through this area in general. The alignment of the street right here is agate and the wash travels in this direction. The site is located right in this area and as you will note, we do not have a plan amendment associated with this application. The zone change that we're asking for does comply with the master plan and this is the site plan. We are asking for six lots that will be accessed off of Agate Avenue. Our density is 2.46 dwelling units per acre. Our minimum lot size is just over 13,000 square feet and our maximum lot size is 14,600 square feet. These are single-story homes, roughly with a height of about 21, 22 feet. We do have some waivers on the agenda, specifically as it related to what you can kind of see shaded out in this site plan, the significant wash that runs through our site. So the natural slope of the site falls from the west to the east, And then it's fairly flat from the north to the south. But our challenge is that our internal street has to drain from the north to the south down to Agate. And so when we set that street, that drives the needs for the wall heights that we have, which run along our east and a little portion of our north boundary. That concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much. We'll open the public hearing on items 41 through 44. If you're wishing to speak, please come forward. I think no one will close the public hearing. Commissioner Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll move approval to items 41 through 44.

There is a motion. Please cast your vote. That motion passes. Thank you.

Item 45 is AG 26-900518, discuss potential amendments to Title 30 related to standards for massage establishments and direct staff accordingly. Just a little background on this. Current code, we only allow massage as a primary use in two districts with a use permit. However, they have to meet a 200-foot separation from the tenant space. to a residential property and also 1,000 feet from tenant spaces between massage establishments. So we'd just like to discuss to see if there's any need to make some changes to the code.

Thank you very much.

Commissioner Jones. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This came to my attention as a result of a proposal at The Bend, a very nice mixed-use development where one of the tenants that they would like to see there is a high-end massage spa there. However, because there are apartments that are adjacent, they are unable to move forward without without the ability to at least seek a waiver. This is not across the board, but at least provides the ability to seek that kind of a waiver. So I encourage us to consider it.

Yeah, I support that. We've had the same thing at Uncommons, a very similar circumstance. I think it makes sense to at least allow for a waiver process. Seeing no other discussion, you've got direction?

Direction received. Thank you. Thank you. And the next item on the agenda is number 46. It's an ordinance for introduction, ORD-26-900512. Introduce an ordinance to amend the official zoning map reclassifying certain properties as approved by the Board of County Commissioners on June 3rd, 2026. Staff recommends that you introduce the ordinance and set the public hearing for August 5th, 2026.

I'll introduce the ordinance and set the public hearing for August 5th, 2026.

And that brings us to the second public comments.

This is the final time set aside for public comment. We are on our zoning agenda. Anyone wishing to speak related to our capacity in the zoning world, please come forward.

I don't know if this is appropriate. Your name for the record? My name is Al Rojas. I don't know if this is the appropriate time. I wanted to discuss a proposal project for the Sunrise, for the Speedway at Sunrise Manor. So is that possible?

You can speak to anything you want that's within our capacity as zoning officials.

All right, I'll make it really quick. Okay, so my name is Al Rojas and I live in North Nice Manor. I wanted to make a public comment about reaching out to a huge untapped resource here in Clark County, and that is our teenagers. We need to create summer events to keep them off the streets and give them a vision as to what they will do after high school. Our teenagers are the ones who will diversify our economy, and we must start investing in them now. Let me further explain. As many of our elected officials are aware, teenage takeovers are becoming a problem all over the country. Many of these teenagers are participating in takeovers are from our inner cities and are attacking our tourist towns. As the entertainment capital of the world, we are a target and I am glad to report that I have spoken with some law enforcement agencies and they're keeping an eye on these teenage takeovers. psychologists claim that these teenage events psychologists claim that these teenage events which usually lead to violence and destruction of our public and private businesses are a result of teenagers having no structured events to attend especially during summertime I am suggesting the Clark County use the Las Vegas Speedway located in Sunrise Manor to sponsor three summer events yearly for our teenagers. Clark County is a blue-collar town, and all we need is a high school education to get a job. These events should include job fairs with entry-level jobs that only require a high school education. This will give teenagers a vision into their future, and in many cases, it'll help them make decisions, not just stay out of trouble. Being the entertainment capital of the world comes with a responsibility that we have to keep tourists safe. Investing in teenagers will make our streets safer for tourists and for the locals while diversifying our economy and investing in our best resource. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

You might turn this one off on me. Yes, a good morning or afternoon. I have the paperwork. Could you give this to them? That is the state evidence in which I wanted to present to you concerning the 22 million. First of all, I want to throw the towel in of peace. This is the flag of peace. I wanted to bring that. Thanks, but I'm throwing the towel in. concerning my efforts. My name is Margaret Ann Coleman, and I'm temporarily under the HUD control, whereas I'm being belittled due to the fact I am placed into a homeless situation. As I gave you this evidence concerning overthrow and overwritten, and a creation of conspiracy evaluations by partnerships and by next door neighbors, creating squatters in my home and taking over my state farm payment and grant upon collection concerning their break-in of my property that was not under foreclosure, not under sale by me as the plaintiff ownership of the Coleman estate. since 2001 to 2026. Now today, the Homeless Courtyard Administration, Airborne, have created Bradley Shinskey, CEO, that is also the state treasurer of issuing money, the conspiracy overthrow with the next door neighbor 1312. That is an attorney for the defendant of the golden nugget that was supposed to give me my money concerning the $22 million and which you have placed into your pocket, me and my Shannon. Deputy Shannon Moe Hughes have created this neighborhood overthrow and all this has been is due to my court order 8204984 that was issued 19 of 82 for me to be a controller receiver. This creation of the street being dug up on Martha Luther King with the snakes and it have caused another community of the Engelbenstein community complex as it was supposed to have been an exchange for me to move. That's one reason why I must take control, 1316 Wizard, and stop your partnership of creating criminal matters and putting me into the streets of my children. Thank you, Ms. Coleman.

Thank you very much. Anyone else wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and adjourn this meeting. Chair Jones, you'll convene redevelopment agency in about 10 minutes, if that's all right. Thank you.