Clark County Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

The meeting to order. Staff, can we please do roll call?

Chair Frazier. Online. Vice Chair Mojica.

Present.

Commissioner Stone. Here. Commissioner Kirk.

Here.

Commissioner Kolarski.

Here.

Commissioner Brady. Here. Commissioner Reutemann. Live and in person. Mr. Chair, we have a quorum.

Thank you. Can we please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance?

of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

The first item on our agenda is public comments. If anybody has something they would like to share with us, please remember that you have three minutes, thank you.

5409 North Moapa Valley Boulevard. I with many of my neighbors and community acquaintances came to this meeting today prepared to address four items that have now been held to a later meeting. I think you can appreciate for those of us who live in Moapa Valley how frustrating it is to come prepared. We've spent a lot of time preparing our remarks, trying to organize our presentation so that it's effective and useful for you in considering these issues and then to learn at the last minute that our efforts have been wasted essentially. I assume we'll be able to use some of our preparations at a future time. But even though I do give credit to the developer for meeting with us in a couple of neighborhood meetings previously, we don't feel like the developer has really been very interested in addressing the core issues that we have pointed out to them. Making a change to the master plan and plan land use designations and zoning classifications is a serious issue. And this is not a small development for our small community. So I guess I'd say that We're gonna come back. We'd like that the developer would engage with us more to make the fundamental changes that we think would be appropriate for this particular parcel. We're not opposed to the development in our community. We welcome anyone who comes under the definition of the master plan for what that parcel should be and find a solution that works. If they decide it doesn't make business sense to conform to the master plan, well then they should go somewhere else. We don't think it's appropriate to push the changes that they are pushing, even with staff's apparent concurrence on the plan amendment and the zone change, but on the waiver to say, no, they have a problem. And I assume that's why they're requesting a hold. That's all I want to say for now. Thank you.

Madam Chair, can I make a comment real quick? Yes, Commissioner. I appreciate that because when I met with the developer today on the item and they said they... And they said they were going to continue it and I and I found out it was from the folks in Logandale, right I said Overton do you have their names? No Why not? Do you guys go to a neighborhood meeting? Do you sign in? Where does that go? He needs to we need to make sure and it's gonna be incumbent on you and on them to to ensure that you guys exchange information so that this doesn't happen. So I said to him tonight, I said, has anybody called you? I called them to tell them. No, they're probably on the way. So I just, it's a little frustrating for us too because we understand the problem you're facing. And they're like, well, we're gonna continue the item and people are coming and they're not gonna be happy, but what else can we do? Well, I think we can do more. I think they can do more. I think if you shared your information with them, they shared those with you to make sure we have good communication. That's going to help all the way down the chain here. So just for future reference, just make sure your information is in the hand of the developer and that his information is in yours. So you can call the day of even and say, hey, is the item going to be heard tonight? Because we hear that this happens all the time. Not blaming them, not saying it's this one developer, but it happens all the time. People come from Searchlight, people come from various, Pahrump, whatever. And, well, not Pahrump. Yeah, make a supplementary comment.

I will allow it only because you guys came from really far, but you need to restate your name and address.

Okay, Marcus Jensen, 5409 North Moapa Valley Boulevard. I'd like to say that on Thursday, I called and spoke to Mr. Euling and explained to him that we had people coming to this meeting tonight And so if the developer and the planning staff were coordinating together, they would have known exactly how to get ahold of me. So you talked to the planner? I talked to Mr. Euling. Okay, thank you.

Thank you. Any more public comment? Thank you. Name and address, please.

Scott Farnsworth, 370 Deer Street, Overton, Nevada. Just kind of want to reiterate what he said. As a community, we did meet with him twice as a community and then maybe two or three times as a town board meeting. They haven't really changed anything. We've talked to them about our concerns. We've always brought up traffic, fire, all the resources that we have out there. And they still come to us and say, staff has recommended for approval all the time. And he can't really prove that to us because he always says that during the process zoning process that that's not what they do but we have a lot we have some things that were prepared for tonight like Mark said and we just we just ask that if they do redo this application or if something happens if they could go to our town board again and because our town board denied this all four and if they can come back to us and and tell us what they have on paper so we don't waste our time again coming out here to uh you know maybe some of our concerns might be alleviated with going to our town board meeting again i appreciate you guys thank you

Thank you. Any more public comments? I would like to ask that if you do have a public comment that you please line up so that we can move this forward, thank you.

Luke Whitney, 293 Piscata Grande Avenue. I want to thank Commissioner Kirk for his frustration. He may not blame the developer, but I do. They have been playing games with us for two months. They have zero respect for our community, and it's evident. I hope that you will remember our faces when we come back and take that into account in your process of denial or approval of these waivers. We drove 60 miles to be here, so that's why I'm standing here to talk. I'm not going to just drive all the way here and not say something. We have, like the others have said, we've put together a lot of information. We've studied probably more on Title 30 than any of us knew anything about it before. So it's been some education. as stated before the the developers made several false claims they keep claiming staff has made recommendations in favor of and we can see the recommendations that show the staff recommends declining the uh... the proposals they keep claiming that some of the streets are collectors And I would encourage you to check those and make sure what they're classified as. Lewis is classified as an arterial and they keep claiming that it's a collector. They want to dump multiple properties, driveways into streets on Lewis and Alma. And all these things are unacceptable to the community. We're a small community, we're rural, and we don't want to see high density uh... are are asked to development in our area that's more dense than anything that's out there We don't need a lower density or affordable housing, but we believe that that is not fitting for our community in any way. There's RS 3.3 adjacent, and we feel that that's too dense. We would like to see more like what the other more planned communities have been, RS 5, I believe it is. But those are our comments on this, and we plan to be back Again, and we hope that you remember that we were here and take that into your consideration. Thank you.

I want to address you. Your comments are being recorded. So you didn't waste your time, even though, I mean, the items are being held. And thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

And please, the only one thing I would ask of everybody in the audience is when you come up to speak on an item, if you're talking about the same item, please do not repeat the same thing, but add to it so that it's stronger.

Thank you. Hello.

Hello. Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. Name and address, please. My name is Rebecca Muehlstein, 361 Trace Paloma Street, Overton, Nevada. I actually currently live and have been for 20 years right around the corner from the proposed project. I also have seen what was just referred to. arterial, right here. Lewis is, according to the Clark County Master Plan, an arterial, and they keep saying it's not, but this is the Clark County Master Plan, so to add to it, this is an arterial. He referenced how they weren't really working with us. I feel like that is right, because if you look at these two papers, I know they're hard to see from where you're at.

Oh, I would love to.

Yes, and we can see them.

Okay, can you see them that way? This way? Can you see them this way? Perfect. OK, awesome. So this is the corner of Lewis and the Boulevard. And this is also the corner of Lewis and the Boulevard. And so if you look on the records of what was turned in for all of the different sources, it shows a picture that was posted in all of the application papers that are listed online. But the first one here on the left This is a view across the street from the parcel. Do you see a sign in that first picture? Look hard. But when you come to the second picture, you can see the sign. You notice it's located behind a bush. These guys are hiding their signs behind a bush. What else are they hiding in their application? Once again, the first sign is across the street, west of the parcel. The second picture is closer to the sign, so you can actually see where the sign is at. The developer has been deceptive. They've left off a very important point. They said that Lewis, and we could do this, whatever. But honestly, that part on Lewis, if you look at your Title 30, it says July 1 of 2000. Like was previously referenced, we've learned more about Title 30. This is not July 1st of 2000, and he's saying that it's going to be okay, but he left off the phrase of July 1st of 2000. He left off that date when he put in his application. Once again, deceptive. Thank you for your time. I don't want to steal any more. I appreciate the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, ma'am.

Just for the record, the county puts the signs up. The developer doesn't put those up.

Okay, that's good information.

Just so you know that. Thank you for teaching me. The developer didn't do it. Somebody on the county staff or somebody that we contracted with did that. An independent company, not the developer.

Okay, thank you for that. Good evening.

Jeff Summers, 335 Cram Avenue, Logandale. I'm a realtor in the area, and I've sold several houses in this area, probably seven in the last couple years. Five of those transactions, they asked what the zoning was, and that was part of the reliance in moving to the area, knowing that the front part was commercial, and then the back part was RS-20. Our real need out there, we're talking 82 households, we're talking over 200 people, that's a lot of burden on our community we roy we really need his jobs and we're looking at taking the last developable commercial piece on the boulevard and turning it into residential and having a need for another what 80 to 100 150 jobs that we don't have so they're all going to have to commute it just doesn't make sense our real need is development commercial and jobs. We have people out there that are educated, that are trained, and they can't get a job there. They're commuting to Vegas or Mesquite or St. George. And so my just, I guess, expression is if we look to the needs of the community, let's look what they really need, and that would be some commercial development and not high density housing. Thank you.

Any more public comment?

Eric King, 5319 DB Court. I wanted to comment on item 22 and say how wonderful it is that someone wants to build another tree nursery. We need a lot more trees here, or nursery in general, I'm sure they'll probably have some trees. But in particular, I wanted to comment on an item, and I don't have that one, the number in my head, but it's regarding the chickens. whatever that item was. A lot of people want to have them, and I just wanted to offer, in regards to trees and the welfare of chickens and actually humans that keep them, that maybe there'd be some kind of consideration for language or discussion of the validity of it, to have some kind of tree shading those chickens, I don't know if it exists in code now, on the west or southwest side of that coop. whenever possible. I don't know if that's possible, but that would help anybody that wants to do that, have a better experience, including the chickens. Thank you for hearing me.

Thank you, sir. Any more public comments? Seeing no one, we will close public comments. Sir, come on down, but please, if you have public comments, can you please line up? Doesn't have to be in the same item, but... You have to state your name and address, please, on the microphone.

My name is Ralph Wenger, 2625 Lindell. Do we comment by the non-consent? Will we comment by item? Thank you.

You can comment.

I didn't want to miss the comment. What's your item number?

What is your? Okay, we are closing public comment. Can we please move on? Thank you.

Good evening, Commissioners. The next item on the agenda is approval of the agenda after any deletions, sorry, additions, holds, or deletions. At this time, staff request the following. Delete the following application from the agenda that is scheduled for the September 2nd, 2026 Board of County Commissioners meeting. Item number 11, UC260424. Please hold the following to the October 6, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting, per the applicant. Item No. 14, VS. 26-0440. And hold the following to the September 15, 2026 Planning Commission Meeting, and to the October 21, 2026 Board of County Commissioners Meeting, per the applicant. Item 23, PA 2670034. Item 24, ZC 260450. Item 25, WS 260451. Item 26, TM 26500106. For the applicant's information, additional re-notification fees may be required in accordance with Title 30 for items held or deleted, or if there are modifications to the original application. The above public hearing item is going to be open as a public hearing and immediately recessed until the date previously stated. These are for items 11, 14, 23, 24, 25, and 26. If there are no requests by the Planning Commission or any members of the public, the agenda stands ready for your approval.

We are ready for a motion.

Chair, I'd like to motion to approve the agenda deleting item 11 and holding items 14, 23, 24, 25, and 26.

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

Commissioner Frazier, yes.

Next item.

The next item on the agenda is approval of the minutes. At this time, the Planning Commission briefing and regular meeting minutes from July 21st, 2026, as well as August 4th, 2026 are ready for approval.

Ready for a motion.

Chair, I'd like to motion to approve the minutes.

Motion on the floor, please cast your vote.

Commissioner Frazier, yes. Sorry.

The motion. The motion was made. I don't see anything on my screen. Did the motion carry?

Yes, Commissioner, that motion passed.

Motion carried. Please move forward.

Next to the announcements, for the audience's information, items on tonight's agenda are a final action on this appeal to the Board of County Commissioners or otherwise announced. All appeals must be filed in writing to the Comprehensive Planning Department by 5 p.m. on Thursday, September 10th, and any appeals from tonight's meeting will be heard by the Board of County Commissioners on Wednesday, October 7th, 2026 at 9 a.m. in these chambers. Per Title 30, an aggrieved person may appeal an item. An aggrieved person includes the applicant, someone who attended this meeting in person or through an authorized representative, or someone who has submitted comments in writing, which may include a postcard or letter. Members in the audience must complete the meeting sign-in sheet found near the dais to confirm their attendance at this meeting. Mailed notices of appealed applications will be sent to the property owners within the same notification radius as the original application and to those listed on the meeting sign-in sheet. Additionally, any person may call the comprehensive planning department at 702-455-4314 or go to the county's meeting agenda webpage and review the meeting notice of final action to find out if any items have been appealed. next to the routine action items, which consist of items four through 15, except those items that were previously deleted. These items may be considered together in one motion and are subject to the conditions listed with each agenda item. Staff request to read the Department of Aviation's analysis into the record for item number nine, WS260499, as follows. The development will penetrate the 101 notification airspace surface for Harry Reid International Airport. Therefore, as required by 14 CFR part 77 in section 300226B3II of the Clark County Unified Development Code, the Federal Aviation Administration must be notified of the proposed construction or alteration. And with that, if there are no objections, the public hearing is now open and the routine action portion of the agenda stands ready for approval.

Okay, everybody, we are getting ready to make a motion to approve items four through 15, deleting item 11, and holding number 14. So if you are here for any items between four and 15, you are free to come up and make a comment to be held separately. Seeing no one, we are ready for a motion.

Chair, I'd like to motion to approve the routine action items holding item 11 and 14. Oh, I'm sorry, deleting number 11 and holding number 14.

Commissioner Frazier?

Commissioner Frazier, yes.

That motion carries, thank you. Please go on.

This is final action unless appealed. The next item on the agenda is item number 16. UC 260365, holdover use permit for a place of worship, waivers of development standards for the following. One, increase retaining wall height. Two, increase building height. Three, modify residential adjacency standards. Four, eliminate parking lot landscape island. And five, reduce parking requirements. designed review for a place of worship on 1.59 acres in an RS-20 residential single family 20 zone, generally located south of Sahara Avenue and east of West Wind Road within Spring Valley.

Your name and address for the record, and we're ready for your presentation.

Good evening. Lucy Stewart, 1930 Village Center Circle, representing the church.

Greg Esposito, I'm sorry, I'm not drunk.

Greg Esposito, 1442 White Drive.

Remember that you can grab the other microphone if it's easier. Thank you.

We're here representing the We're representing the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, which is currently located over on the west side of West Wind, and right along here is Sahara. The church has been there since, I think, 2014, and they've purchased this property to build their permanent church site this is the house that's also owned by the church and then this is the korean baptist church to the south of us and to the north is an automobile dealership and then i think on your agenda in two weeks you'll see this before you um an auto dealership asking to do some automobile storage so we held this um two weeks ago so we could go back and look because you know in realizing there's quite a few waivers here and we wanted to be able to address them First, the waiver number one, the increase in the height of the retaining wall along the north side is against the commercial side. It really doesn't have an impact, but along the east side, there are residences to the east. This property slopes, unfortunately, from Westwind to the east, so I imagine these houses, when it rains, get quite a bit of runoff into their site. So we have to build our side up so we can get it to drain to Westwind. But because there's an existing five foot wall there, we didn't want to build a redundant wall adjacent to it, so we've scooted it in, we're providing in landscaping a double row of landscaping adjacent to us and we're putting the wall set back in from the residences so we'll have heavily landscaping and then the wall and then we have a wrought iron fence on top of it so basically we don't really have much of a choice on the fill but we've tried to make it as attractive and least impactful to the residents to the east items number two and three a and three b which are to allow 112 foot building adjacent to the residences. Well, we've agreed to reduce the height of the dome to 90 feet and then we have the cross which will be eight feet above it. But the bulk of the building along here is actually 38 feet in height. So the only thing that really goes above the 38, which is five feet above the residential, are the architectural features. So there's nobody looking at the houses. There's nobody in the houses. It's just, again, we did agree to reduce it so it wouldn't be as impactful. And as you can see, the dome is in the middle, and that's a critical part of the Orthodox Church. The for item waiver number C is to allow the parking adjacent to residential. So in the aerial photo, you can see these are rather long lots. And so the houses are set pretty far away. So right about here is where the parking lot would be. So as you can see, there's no it's not like it's looking at anybody's. bedroom or anything it's pretty far set far away again d and e d e have to do with the fill along here which of course we have to do in order to drain but we're trying to make it as attractive and put double row of trees so hopefully the neighbors will just look out and see intense landscaping Item number F is to allow the wall to remain, the existing five foot wall along the eastern boundaries to allow the houses, because if we had to build an eight foot wall adjacent to it, there'd be a redundant wall and it'd end up with a trash collection area. Or this way, if we push the wall in, we can still provide landscaping in that area. Item number four is to eliminate parking lot landscaping. And as you can see, we have islands along here. The only place we don't have it is in this area. And because it wasn't advertised to reduce that one parking space, we are agreeing to put some trees along here. And so we are proposing some conditions for that. And then item number five is to reduce parking lot requirements to 39 where 56 is required. But again, this is the existing parking lot for the existing church and so we would propose um that they're gonna they own that property and they own this property so once this gets built that'll be more like for activity or while church is in session for kids to be over in that area or if you had a wedding here you wanted to have your reception over there but there would be nothing that would be running concurrently And so we would propose a condition that would say that church services will not be held concurrently in both the current APN, which is 011, and the new church site, which is 014. So we're just saying that they would only run, they wouldn't run concurrent, they would just like come over there. So we have more than enough parking, and in fact, there's 129 spaces over there, and we have within 150 feet. They, I think, have also talked to Public Works to see about if they wanted us to put like a crosswalk in that area, and they said no. at this time not also because they own the house and that's where the priest lives there's a very long driveway and so if that ever becomes an issue they could also park in the driveway so the vestry could park over there the priest just walks over to church because it's an orthodox church too the high holy days such as christmas and easter are offset by a week from other churches. So it's not December 25th, it's a week later. So when other churches are having busy days, they can actually park in our parking lot. And then when we're not busy, we've actually got an agreement with the Korean church to the south and another church over on Lindale to allow us to have overflow parking and they'll shuttle people back and forth. But that's really only on the high holy days. So we're agreeing to put in a condition of a maximum height of the dome at 90 feet with an additional feet for the cross. Again, the bulk of the building is 38 feet in height that we would install. medium or large tree to be added along the north in this area, so it still provides shade. We just don't have the island. Also, the condition of church services will not be held concurrently in both the current parcel, the church and the new church parcel. And then we would like to add another one, which unfortunately isn't in my type conditions, but that the dome, which is painted and it shows kind of like a shiny gold, we would ask that the dome be painted in a matte color so it's not reflective or another. And so with that, I think that's all. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Yes, once again, Greg Esposito. So after the town board, I did a little bit of neighborhood outreach, and I went to these two houses three times last weekend. I was finally able, on the third try, to get in touch with somebody at this house, a maintenance person. I knocked on the door. They answered. It was a maintenance person. They said, I don't live here. The house has actually been divided up into one-bedroom apartments. And so what you see back here is, I don't know, the people's remnants, the people's trash, the people's cars that live there. But this is a... They're renting out apartments in this house, and then this house is completely gated. They have a squawk box that has a call button. Not sure if it works or not. I couldn't hear all the way to the doorway. But on the third try, I did leave a very detailed note about what the application is, about the waivers we're asking for, my contact information, and I included pictures of the... the site and the elevation drawings. So never heard from this neighbor right here either. So just wanna let you know, we did a little bit of outreach to the most impacted neighbors, never heard from them.

Thank you. Does that end your presentation?

Yes.

Okay, thank you. We will now open public comments on this item. If anybody has something to say, can you please come forward and please line up? Thank you.

Ralph Steven Wenger, 2625 Lindell, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89146. And I am the property owner that backs up to this project. These are my gardens. These are my beehives. This is the residential estate that the Planning Commission has upheld forever. We have a street, Laredo Street, that has been held as the boundary for the commercial. Over the last 20 years that I've been there, we've had multiple churches join our community. We've had lots of schools join our community. We've always been very supported because they build within the standards. This lot sits 16 feet higher on Westwind than the back of that block wall that they're talking about, my block wall. 35-year-old, five-foot cement block wall. It's not appropriate for the boundary for a commercial for a church of that stature please please please hold up the residential estate neighborhoods please stand behind us on this one and deny and as long as you're looking at your staff approvals and denials straight down this project does not work in this environment so please yeah please take a look at what your staff said number one staff recommends denial number two uh... a hundred and twelve staff cannot support this waiver staff recommends denial Please take a good long look at this. And if for some reason you all want to move this forward, I would certainly like to come back with the conditions for a huge church on this property and the car lot that's going in right next, they want to put in next to it. So please uphold our neighborhoods. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Come forward, sir.

Good evening. My name is Tom Shelton. I live at 5920 West Patrick Lane, section 36, which is basically between Russell, Sunset, Rainbow, and Decatur. My interest in this is probably no neighborhood has been more impacted by large faith-based projects than ours. We probably have 3,000 people at the four or five churches that have been approved for our neighborhood. It is a rural preservation neighborhood. These are disappearing and this is one of those. It is our shared heritage here in Las Vegas to be fortunate enough to have these areas. We are not against these kinds of developments, just their size and impact. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any more comments? Public comments?

We will have the applicants come back up.

Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman. Once again, Greg Esposito for the record. I wanted to address the concerns of Mr. Wenger, if I'm getting the last name correct. So this is his property right here.

Can you show it to us in the picture that you heard earlier?

Yes. So this is his property right here. I imagine these are the beehives he mentioned. And this is the existing five-foot wall that he's talking about. I wanted to point out a plan here. So in this section here, which borders his wall, there's going to be a At the closest point, there's a 15-foot gap between his existing wall and the retaining wall that's going to be built in order to build the parcel up. And, of course, you know it doesn't matter what gets built there. Houses, any sort of commercial, anything that gets built there is going to have to fill that dirt in. And so there is going to be A gap, if you can zoom in on where my finger is, I don't know. And so for the most part, it's going to be 22 feet, except for this one part where the parking lot is, it's going to be 15 feet. This is going to be filled with the intense landscaping. And they're going to be Mondale pines, so they're going to grow tall. It's not going to be the short little scrubs. It's not going to be little mesquite trees. It's going to be things that actually develop over time. and so and you know respecting the fact that wall's been there respecting the fact that the neighbor is very close uh they are they are putting in some natural separation um to where the retaining wall where the dirt is going to have to be filled won't be right on top of their property that's the best that's the best we can think of to do for anything that's built there i mean we've all seen developments where The new commercial comes in, has to be jacked up to where you can stare straight into somebody's second floor window. That's not fair. And so with this setback, we're hoping to relieve that a little bit.

Sorry, can you go back to that wall so I can understand something? Can you zoom back up at the control department down there? Okay, so here where it says parking... That is gonna, no, no, no, right, and you were just touching there, yeah, exactly. So the wall, the existing wall that is between the two properties, is that that left wall? So then it'll drop down, or is that this right wall?

The existing wall is the right wall right here, where my finger is. Got it, got it. This, where it says parking, you'll notice that that's actually just a curb height, you know, from the church level, and the rest is the wrought iron fence. It's dots right here, the wrought iron fence. So he's not going to see the retaining wall at that part, because it's basically at the same level.

And he won't see any church either because that's the parking lot.

Oh, no, I'm not going to say that. No, I'm not going to make a false representation.

Can we go up then? Zoom out. Yeah, there you go.

Because the main church, which is here, is 38 feet tall. The building as a whole, these parts right here are 38 feet tall. So I definitely wouldn't make the representation that he's not going to see the church.

Right, but it doesn't abide. And what's the waiver for staff if it has to be putting aside the dome, they're asking for 38 feet, and what would be allowed there currently?

So regarding the height of the building, so the zoning district allows 35 feet. The current plans show 112 feet, and the condition that the applicant suggested conditioning the application with was to limit it to 90 feet for the main building and then another 8 feet for the dome portion. But 35 feet is the max for the zoning district.

I'm sorry, but he didn't quite, may I correct that, please? No. the dome would be the 90 feet, 90, and this little cross right here is the additional eight.

And the rest of the building would be 38, meaning the waiver required is only a three-foot waiver above what would already be allowed for the main portion of the building?

It's really the architectural enhancements that are on the four corners of the church and, of course, the dome.

Thank you. Sorry, Chair, for interrupting. Thank you.

Are we done with the presentation? Okay.

I'm going to open this for questions from our commissioners.

Madam Chair?

Yes, Commissioner Frazier?

Yeah, I'll start. I would just say this, that I appreciate the applicant trying to be, aware of their surroundings and creating their applications such that they will fit in with the neighborhood. I would thank the neighbors from coming out and I understand that there's a lot of churches in their area. I would offer this to the commission that in my experience, churches are some of the best neighbors and their impact to the neighborhood although very heavy on, let's call it a Tuesday night Bible study or a Saturday and Sunday event, the rest of the week is very minimal with just a few people going in and out of the church for administrative or whatever the case may be, what's going on at that particular time. So I think in overall, I can support the application, and I'll be quiet and listen to other comments. Thank you.

Commissioner Stone.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got a question for our district attorney here. And it seems like in years past, on occasion, our district attorneys reminded us of the federal law in play when it comes to churches and zoning approval. And I believe the act is called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000. And I wonder if If our district attorney, Rob, if you could comment on discrimination in local zoning-related church and what that means in general and what it might mean to this application. If you could just remind us as a board, I'd appreciate it.

Yes, you're correct. There's a federal law that protects churches during zoning applications. there's a very high standard for denial. The federal law calls for a compelling justification for denial. And even if you're inclined to deny an application, then you have to use a less restrictive means test. So essentially, you have very little discretion in denying a place of worship, any place of worship. And so it was put in place, the federal law was put in place to prevent discrimination against places of worship. And so when it comes to the place of worship, Basically, you have very little discretion to deny it. You're basically in a position where you have to approve it unless you come up with a compelling justification, then use the least restrictive means for denying it. So it's a very high standard for denial.

Yeah, thank you. I know that we run into this rarely, but it's always nice to have a reminder from our legal expert here. Thank you, Rob.

Thank you, Commissioner Stone. Commissioner Kirk?

Thank you. Just real quickly, Rob, can you give us an example of what might be a compelling reason to deny? I mean, is aesthetics a compelling reason? Is parking a compelling reason?

No. Well, what would you want to do is if there was... We're talking about the place of worship part of it. So denying the place of worship part of it. But you still have discretion when it comes to parking and waivers and standards. But when it comes to the place of worship, that's where the federal law focuses on where it comes up with the very high standard for denial.

So that really is the use permit?

Yes, correct.

So I don't have a problem with that. I do not have a problem with it being a church. I'll say that. What I do have a problem with is the height of the dome and the cross at the top without a line of sight. Have you guys done a line of sight so that the neighbors, Mr. Wenger can know what he's gonna be looking at when he stands in his backyard? I mean, I know we've done this before when we've had extraordinarily tall buildings and we say, okay, it's 90 feet. Okay, 90 feet. Is there any other building on Sahara that's 90 feet tall? The Clark County School District building's not too far away. That's four stories. That's probably 50, right? So you're asking for something that's twice as tall as maybe what I think is probably the tallest building in the neighborhood. So I think it would do you well with your neighbors if you could have a line of sight rendering from a couple different perspectives around the neighborhood so people will know what they're getting. I mean, I can look at this and say, wow, that looks really big. You know, and you are kind of close to the neighbor. So that's, I think that's a problem. That's a design problem that I have a problem with. The other thing I have a problem with is the fact that your part, how big is, what's the capacity of this building? How many people are gonna fit in there?

One second.

We don't have the occupancy, but the square footage of usable area is 10,000 square feet. So if that, in our experience.

You don't have an occupancy? You don't? We have no way of knowing how many people are going to go in there. How do we know if it's going to meet code?

That's done by the fire department after the interior design is, the architectural design is submitted to the fire department.

Well, that's another reason that I think we need to have some more information because if you're going to say to me that, hey, there's going to be 80 people fit in there. We'll just say 80, okay? You have 39 parking places. Right? You're providing 39 parking places based on what you've told me.

On the property, there are 40 parking spaces in this lot, and there are 88 parking spaces in this lot.

And that's going to be you, that's your property you're going to use? Okay.

Well, it is currently, they own this property. This is where the church currently is. They're going to retain this property, and they're going to be able to obviously use this parking lot for parking as well.

All right.

I still would like to know how many people are going to be in there, but I really have a problem with the size of the dome and how close it is to the neighbors. Maybe that could be mitigated by a line of sight rendering, but right now I have no problem with it being a church. It's fine. I just have a problem with the mass so close to the neighborhood.

Madam Chairwoman, may I address the Commissioner, please? Okay. So if you'll notice in the Orthodox churches around town, they all have this dome. I didn't know this until I .

But we're not talking about those, Greg. We're talking about this one, right?

No, I understand. Hold on. But I asked the significance of it. This is actually a religious symbol for the Orthodox religion where the dome is a representation of God The word for it that I was told earlier, and I forgot it, but it is a representation of God's reaching down to the people of earth. So the dome is actually part of the religious symbolism. Mr. Mahola spoke about needing extraordinary reasons by federal law to deny a church. This is part of the religious expression, the dome itself.

Then using that logic, it could be bigger. Right? I mean, why'd you guys lower it to 90? I think the original request was 112.

To be good neighbors. Oh, and to be good neighbors, to answer your question, sir, with the 10,000 square feet, the occupancy could potentially be 1,400 people.

How many parking spaces do you have across the street?

129 spaces.

Yes. No. 88 parking spaces.

No. 168 total.

I'm sorry? 168. 168 plus? Total parking spaces.

Sure, total.

168 total?

Total. Including existing church and proposed church, new church.

160 parking spaces. 168. For a capacity of a building of 1,100? 14,000. So how many capacity?

So occupancy actually we calculate on base of square footage. So even right now basically we have about 10,000, 9,882 divided by seven we got 1,400. So but this is even they don't have members in the church so many. They have a couple hundred but technically when we calculate this we're using what is square footage, how many people could fit. but they don't have enough people to fill that.

Commissioner Kolarski.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got a couple of things. This dome, the church, is going to be on the full two acres. Because when you showed that one picture, you said something else was going down and was coming before us in two weeks. What is coming before us in two weeks, and is that a part of this church?

The notices went out. We saw the notice for the car dealership would like to, whether they get approved or not, who knows. But the parcel to the south is the car dealership to the north that wants to store cars in that area. So it will be before you in two weeks.

And is that the church's property?

No, not at all.

Okay, so that parcel that's coming before us in two weeks is not owned by the church? No, not at all. Okay. And so the church in itself is going to be on the full two acres? 1.5, I'm sorry, acre and a half. Right.

Okay. So, Commissioner, if you'll notice right here, it says Light Speed Property Enterprises, and then you'll notice right here for the used car lot, or for the car lot, it says Light Speed Property Enterprises. Okay. So this parcel's owned by these people.

Sorry, Greg, but I've gotten older and my eyes aren't quite as good as they used to be. Okay, so that's what I wanted to know. One of the big things, I don't know if you remember when we used to do a lot of churches, was cars whose lights would go into the neighbors. But you have that wall. that goes, that's on the east side, so there'll be no chance for a big SUV to have the lights go above that wall, am I correct?

Correct, and to the south, to the west is, the church owns, that's where the priest lives, and then south of that is the Korean church. And I forgot to mention, their church, when they have their Sunday service, it's at 6 a.m. to 10 a.m. It's a very early service. I don't know why, but it's, I mean, of course, they could always have a different.

One time a week on Sunday. Yes, one time a week on Sunday. Okay, then my next question is basically for staff. um because they're going to have they're asking for an intense landscaping on the east side and one of the things i thought i heard was mondale pines are mondale pines allowed so we did look it up and they are permitted on the snwa plant list on the updated plant list that came out earlier this year they are on there okay yeah i thought they had been eliminated but they've been

But I think we're open if you have an alternative.

Well, I've got to tell you, I've got a Rondeau plant in my front yard. They are the messiest. They are the dirtiest things. I wouldn't want that in my backyard. I don't know if Mr. Wengert wants that in his backyard. So I would, if this gets approved, I would strongly urge you to get with him and let him... decide which leaves he wants to go into his backyard.

In his pool, yeah.

Yeah, and bother his bees and all that other good stuff. But I would strongly, I don't know if we can make that a condition, but I would just strongly urge, recommend, whatever you want to say on that type of thing. I got to tell you, I know that in my district, we have got two, I think they're, I don't think they're Orthodox Church, I think they're mosques, and they're tall. But their temp, or what do you call it, their spire, what have you, is closer to the street, whereas this is right in the middle, am I correct, of the parcel? Yeah, and theirs is closer to the street, so it's not as bad for the neighbors. that are right behind. One is on Desert Inn and the other I think is, in fact they're both on Desert Inn, but one is right by Eastern and Desert Inn and the other is over there off of Lamb and Desert Inn. And they're tall. And they're on small parcels. I don't know, I'm on the fence. So I'm gonna be real honest about that. And with that, thank you.

Commissioner Roitman.

So just to be clear, when you say, I understand that the dome is critical to the church, but as Commissioner Kirk pointed out, we changed it from 112. So is there a minimum size, like on the record, are you saying this has to be 90 feet in order to satisfy the religious purpose? Or if we went to 80 feet or 70 feet, might we still be able to achieve that? Because I think it does matter for our obligations here and potentially federal law, it appears. What's the position?

I don't know the answer but perhaps again because as Commissioner Kirk mentioned about a line of sight and all that you know if you like we could hold it again for two weeks and now that we can get his contact information and reach out to him and perhaps work with him and see because there also could be some plants that we could plant that would be assistive to the bees too that are not detrimental to him so we'd love to work with him on that.

And maybe one more point is I do think there is maybe a doctrine or some other truism here about the right to what you look at outside of every single one of your windows that as i mentioned this is not directly abutting his the neighbor's backyard with all due respect to the neighbor this is kind of kitty corner and so being able to look out of most of your windows and not have this in your line of sight Right? Is that not, I mean, maybe from the fellow commissioners here, from the staff, that's something that I don't know if we give great deference to, is what you get to look at when you look outside your window. I'll leave that to the rest of the board to contemplate.

Commissioner Brady.

hello i'm kind of similar with some of the other commissioners here um i'm all about bringing churches into communities and all of that that's something i think is important um something that does though come in is that line of sight issue um and i was trying to look at it saying well could it be turned the other way or something so there's parking a lot more in between i'm sure you guys have done a lot of research and figuring things out part of the How many people are currently attending that church across the way? Did you say it was like 150 people? About 200, 300 people versus, it could do 1,500, but I understand where you're coming from on that. Is parking-wise, everybody's going to be walking across the street. So that parking across the street. So we're going to have to talk about crosswalks or something like that. If not, people are going to be going down, over, back. I know if I were walking there, I wouldn't do that. I'd jump across the street and hopefully not get a ticket. So that's something that would have to get looked at as well so we can protect people because that I could see being an issue. Yeah, I'm glad that you guys are holding this to kind of work with the neighbors and everything.

We offered that.

So anyway, I just wanted to mention that on the parking, we'd have to work something with to make sure that you didn't overpopulate. Both churches were at the same time that you don't overfill parking lots.

I'm sorry, I guess I'm not following your question. Because the existing church is going to still stay in ownership with this church. And we'd agree to a condition that nothing would run concurrently. So you wouldn't have like two church services.

Oh, yeah, it would definitely overpopulate the parking lots. Already it's going to probably fill up the streets, people parking on the side of the street.

Right now they have vacant spots. Okay. That's it.

Okay, if there aren't any more questions from my fellow commissioners, this is in my district, so I... Madam Chair? I'm sorry. I thought we went to you first, Commissioner Frazier. Okay, thank you. Go ahead, Commissioner Frazier. For sure.

Thank you. As I've heard my commissioner speak, I would like to just offer at the end that I do agree with Commissioner Kirk that the applicant needs to address parking. I don't subscribe to the... the concept that because there's only 150 parishioners now, that that's what it's gonna stay. I believe that if you have someone that's dynamic preaching, they're gonna fill that room. So I say that the applicant needs to figure that out and have a plan. Having said that, I'm still in support of the application because I believe churches are needed. Thank you very much.

Okay, seeing no more questions. I think I made a decision. Public Works, can we request a crosswalk between the two properties?

Thank you, Commissioner. As far as a crosswalk is concerned, typically mid-block crosswalks are not permitted without a flasher. So we can work with the applicant as far as any type of mitigation for the pedestrians walking across the street, but they would need to do a warrant analysis for that crosswalk to be installed mid-block. We typically want to go to the intersections where there's traffic control, and that's where they would walk. Okay.

Thank you so much. So I would like to thank the applicant for putting a lot of work into this and looking at the staff's recommendation and working some of those items out. And I would also like you to work with Public Works. But I also do respect Commissioner Kirk's comments and the rest of my board. So rather than denying the project, What I would like to do is I would like you to address some of the things we discussed. Now, we don't like designing at the podium, so I'm not gonna tell you to move the dome, but I do understand the importance of the dome. So I would like you guys, and I'm so glad the architect is here, to figure out some way, like Commissioner Kirk stated, line of sight. And the other thing that we need also to address is the parking situation. I am aware that you have overflow parking, and that's very important, but I didn't realize how many people you were gonna have in there. However, I think you are overstating the number of people that are gonna be in the building as well. So I think you have some things that need to be figured out. Like, first of all, try to figure out the capacity of the building, how many people you're gonna have in there. One. Two, let's figure out the parking situation, how that's going to work out, what your overflow parking is, what your current parking is. And you also share, which is very proactive of you, Lucy, that you've talked to other places of worship that are willing to help out with the parking as well. So that's three things so far. Number four, I agree with Commissioner Kularski with the tree situation. I pick up leaves all the time from my neighbor and it's frustrating. So let's try to figure out something by working with the resident on what type of tree would not only mitigate sound and mitigate sight and not be so cumbersome. And then the final item to address would be my discussion with Public Works. I'd like you to work with Public Works closely and try to figure something out. So staff, did you get all these things?

Yes, so you'd like to hold the application?

I said like five things that need to be addressed. We're gonna hold the application for two weeks, Maybe you can listen to the recording, but I got all these things on record that need to be addressed. And if you can come back, and again, I commend you and I thank you because we met before the meeting and you did address a lot of things. So are we in agreement with that?

Understood.

All right. Thank you. I appreciate it. So I'm going to make a motion to hold this item for two weeks for our next, when would that meeting be, staff?

September 15th.

September 15. There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote.

Commissioner Frazier, yes.

Thank you. Next item.

Next on the agenda is item number 17, UC 260425, use permit for small livestock, chickens and roosters, waiver development standards to reduce setbacks in conjunction with an existing single family residence on 0.14 acres in an RS 5.2 residential single family 5.2 zone, generally located north of Maple Tree Avenue and east of Pine Tree Street within Whitney.

Good evening, name and address please.

Hi, my name is Genesis Mendoza. I'm here with my husband, Christian Mendoza, and we're at 5250 Pine Tree Street.

If it's easier for you, you can also use a handheld mic, but it's up to you.

Okay, probably, because I'm going to just read it real quick. I understand my application originally was for 20 chickens, including three roosters, but I've come to understand no roosters and 10 hens is what's more comfortable for my community. We started the year with a misunderstanding about the county rules in regards to chickens at our house when I welcomed in chickens that belonged to my aunt that unfortunately passed away this January. We've since relocated them and sent in our application right away once we were informed. We also went out into our community right after our application to have open dialogue and give them the opportunity to address any concerns. We visited about 30 residents and got supportive signatures from 16 with the verbal support of others that were tenants that could not sign including that of our direct neighbor. We got no opposition and were rather welcomed with so much support for our application. We started and plan to complete a safe coop and run enclosure with soundproofing measures and automated door to instill a quiet time routine. And we greatly appreciate your time and consideration and hope to be able to bring them back home. Thank you, commissioners.

Does that conclude your presentation? Yes. Okay, thank you. Do we have anybody here for public comments on this application? Seeing none, I will ask my fellow commissioners if they have any questions. Commissioner Kirk.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I've had a discussion with the applicant and knowing that there won't be any roosters and with only 10 chickens, right? That's the understanding. And I don't have a problem with the setbacks, the waiver development standard. I think those are fine. And so if there's nothing further, I'm ready to make a motion. And so I will move to approve UC 260425.

There's a motion on the floor.

Please cast your vote. With a limit of 10 hands and zero roosters. And a one-year review. So you'll come back in 12 months.

Will do. Thank you.

Commissioner Fraser, yes.

Thank you so much, we greatly appreciate your time.

You're welcome. Next item.

Next on the agenda is item number 18, WS260366, waiver development standards to reduce rear setback for an addition in conjunction with an existing single family residence on 0.2 acres and an RS 5.2 residential single family 5.2 zone, generally located south of Robindale Road and west of Maggie Bell Court within Paradise.

Thank you. Good evening. Name and address, please, for the record.

Hello, my name is Chris Christoph, 2510 West Horizon Ridge Parkway, Henderson, Nevada, 89044, 052. I'm here on the behalf of the owner. We did the architectural plans. We applied for permit. We also did the structural plans for the addition. The proposed addition is on the west side of the property, and it encroaches in the current setback, which is 20 feet. The addition is built, and currently it's five feet from the west existing property line. I'll just leave it at the site plan, if you have any questions.

Does that conclude your presentation?

Yes.

Do we have anybody on this item for public comments? Seeing none, I will defer to my fellow commissioners for questions. Seeing none, Commissioner Reutemann, this is your district.

So this was just, they decided, this thing is already built?

It's already built, yes.

So it's not a proposed addition, it's an actual addition?

Correct, it's an actual addition, and they want to bring a current, and we went through the steps of... Well, they have to bring a current because of code enforcement. Correct.

Okay, and so how did that, did they just not know that they needed a bold building permit this is i mean this is not just a shed this is attached to the right it's an actual addition and uh... day started but they did not finish and that's when they started the process of applying for permit have you talked to your neighbor to the north there

Our client did, yes.

The client did? The client did. And they haven't, maybe this is for you and for staff, we don't have anything on record of any opposition from the neighbor to the north over there?

We're looking at it right now to verify.

It looks like there was, I only see on the briefing five approvals and no protests. So some of the neighbors did approve. Did they go and speak to their neighbors or how did that?

Yeah, they did go and speak with the neighbors. They got verbal okays from them.

Okay. Would you ask about the county owns this parcel right behind it? Yeah. But it's not a flood channel. This is a road. Maybe here's a flood channel. No, this is the road, bro. This is his house down there.

Can I ask a question?

Do you know anything about the property to the west?

The property to the west is vacant right now. I don't know what's going to be there.

It's owned by the county. I just wondered. Five and a half acres. Looks like there's a... Anyway, it's not a flood channel. I'm just curious to know. Yeah, I know. I know that's a flood channel. I'm just curious to know if there's been anything.

And there weren't any easements. I'm sorry? There weren't any easements. Okay. It was just a setup. All right. Thank you.

Commissioner? Please. Just looking at past applications on that parcel to the west, it shows that in 2025, a multifamily for senior housing came in. Obviously, they haven't developed yet or bought the property, but there was a permit to do senior housing to that property to the west. And it was approved.

Yes, it was. Okay. I thought there was, okay. In 2025. Thank you.

And Commissioner, to clarify, so we did receive five cards in support, none were in protest, none of the approval cards were from that adjacent neighbor.

And no approval nor reject? Or no, or disapproval?

Correct, five approvals, zero in opposition.

Okay. More and more, we get these things, where people have built and are asking for forgiveness rather than permission and more and more you know for the record i feel like i'm sick of doing it but on this one uh i will vote to approve it um there's no i don't i guess i don't need any conditions here besides staff's conditions um yeah motion to approve ws260366 and really it's only because you don't have any opposition from your neighbors

Commissioner Frazier, yes.

And this is final action unless appealed. And for the record, I forgot to mention if item number 17, that vote is also final action unless appealed. Item number 19 is WS260446, waiver of development standards to reduce setbacks in conjunction with an existing single-family residence on 0.17 acres in an RS 5.2 residential single-family 5.2 zone, generally located south of Boston Avenue and west of Frank Street within Sunrise Manor.

Name and address, please. Thank you.

Good evening, my name is Ruben Barriga. I'm at 4895 East Boston Avenue, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89104.

When you put it down, if it looks good to you, it will look good to us.

So basically, a couple years ago, I built this metal garage attached to my house. When I built it back then, I wasn't aware that I needed a permit because it's just metal. It's not wood. and walking around my neighborhood, there's so many bills, so I never thought that I was gonna need a permit or anything like that. Anyway, I'm here because now I got a letter that I need to get the permits or take it down. I'm trying to make it legal, so I'm then doing whatever I need to to keep it. This is one of the pictures. That's another one. That's another one.

It's right against the wall. It's clean.

So basically I just use this to storage my tools, my toys, and also shade for my dogs.

Does that conclude your presentation? Do we have anybody in the audience that would like to speak on this item? Seeing none, I will defer to our fellow commissioners. No questions? I do have a question. There's no electrical in there, is there?

No, it's no electrical, no plumbing. It's just shade.

Okay. It looks really clean. I have to commend you. It looks very nice in there. But I will tell you, just like we said earlier, people need to stop building things because pretty soon we're going to get to the point where we're going to tell you tear it down. I understand. Okay. I will... Commissioner Kolarski, this is in your area.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I drove by it. What I found interesting was that we have a whole bunch like this that are huge like this, but they're all on corner lots. So this is an old RMP3 where the lots are all different sizes, but it matches in paint color, and it is not attached to the perimeter wall. And so I can live with that because I don't want it up against that wall. And with that, I'm going to move to approve WS26-0446 with staff if approved conditions. And if you want to know what that means, come to the site and I'll give you the piece of paper. That's my motion.

Commissioner Frazier, yes?

That motion passes. Thank you, sir. Have a nice evening. Thank you.

This is final action unless appealed. Items 20 through 22 are companion applications that may be heard together. Item 20 is PA 2670033, plan amendment to redesignate the existing land use category from outlying neighborhood ON to agriculture AG on 3.54 acres, generally located south of Blue Diamond Road and east of Eagle Ranch Drive within Red Rock. Item 21 is ZC260441, zone change to reclassify 3.54 acres from an RS80 residential single family 80 zone to an AG agriculture zone generally located south of Blue Diamond Road and east of Eagle Ranch Drive within Red Rock. And item number 22, WS26-0442, waivers of development standards for the following. One, reduce lot size. Two, reduce parking. Three, eliminate street landscaping. Four, eliminate parking lot landscaping. Five, waive fall-off site improvements. And six, alternative driveway geometrics. Design review for a plant nursery on 3.54 acres in an AG agriculture zone within the Red Rock Design Overlay District, generally located south of Blue Diamond Road and east of Equal Ranch Drive within Red Rock.

name and address for the record please good evening jennifer lasovich 1980 festival plaza drive here tonight on behalf of this application it is located just south of blue diamond road and just past the turn off to go into red rock conservation area it has been a cactus nursery for the better part of five to six years And what we're doing with this application is getting it into a zoning category that would allow the use to continue. So we're asking for a plan amendment and a zone change to go to agriculture. Plant nurseries are allowed in agriculture. In addition to that, we have an application that has a number of waivers associated with it. All of them have to do with the fact that it is a plant nursery and the zone change request that we have. In agriculture, you have to have a minimum lot size of 10 acres, and this particular lot is under 3 1⁄2, so we needed a waiver for that. We're asking to eliminate the exterior, what I would call the perimeter landscaping, because it's a nursery on the inside, and if you've ever driven by it, it's actually pretty lush-looking. So we are asking to waive the perimeter landscaping because the entire... Bless you. Inside of the property is a nursery itself. Staff is recommending approval of Waiver of Development Standards 1 through 4. They are not supporting Waiver of Development Standards 5 through 6. And I will walk you through those. This is the site plan. Here's Blue Diamond right here, and there's Eagle Ranch Drive and then Wigwam Avenue. One of the waivers that we're asking for is to waive full off-site improvements. We will be paving Eagle Ranch Drive and Wigwam, but we're asking not to put in any curb, gutter, streetlights, or sidewalks. Just to reference, this property is zoned RS-80, which would allow one home per two acres. If you've been out this far west, it is very rural in nature, and it's intended to stay that way with this application. That's why they're asking for an agriculture designation rather than a commercial designation. for this to maintain that rural character. In addition, here's our driveway coming off of Eagle Ranch Drive. We want to keep the current configuration of the driveway and then there's a bit of a departure distance for where it ties into Blue Diamond here. So those are the two waivers that staff can't support. We did have a required neighborhood meeting. We had about four people, including myself, present for that. No opposition, in fact, support was expressed. And then we appeared before the Red Rock Town Board last week, and we received unanimous approval for the application there, as well as had one person speak in support. So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Do we have anybody in the audience for this item? Name and address for the record, please.

Hi, Eric King, 5319 Dubuque Court. I briefly mentioned that all four more nurseries being here in town. And I do recall, actually, on some different times I've driven by this area and noticed to myself that they really do have a beautiful property there. And it certainly is in keeping with all this air escaping. So I'd really be thrilled to see more nurseries get approved like this we definitely need them there's no way we'll catch up with the trees we need let alone all the other plants that support it in a desert adaptive way without these kind of folks that are dedicated to quality work so i'm all for it anybody else see nobody else i will open this for questions from our fellow commissioners

Commissioner Galarski?

I just have one for staff, because I forgot to ask at the briefing. Are livestock permitted in the AG zone? I'm sorry, Commissioner, can you repeat the question? Livestock, are they allowed in this zone? We will verify right now.

Any size livestock, small, medium, or large? Any livestock. Yeah, livestock are conditionally permitted in the AG zone subject to the standard conditions for the number of animals, the required pen and stall area, those kinds of conditions.

Okay. I guess I'm just thinking maybe down the road if something happens, but this nursery has been there like forever. You know, if that ever goes away and whoever comes in, if they would try and put livestock and how that would affect the neighbors and stuff. So I don't know if... If there should be, I don't know, because if they're conditionally allowed, then you can't really do anything. OK, thank you.

I don't see any more questions. This is in my area, so I will. I met with the applicant at length this afternoon and. Thank you for all the changes you made and everything we went over. So I am ready to make a motion to approve PA2670033. There's a motion on the floor. Class, you vote.

Commissioner Frazier, yes.

That motion passes. Next, motion to approve item number 21 and 22. 21 is EZ260441 and 22 WS260442. There's a motion on the floor. Please cast your vote. Commissioner Frazier, yes.

And these items will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners meeting for final action on October 7th, 2026 at 9 a.m. unless otherwise announced. And then commissioners, I want to read into the record for items seven through nine, which were on the routine action portion. Those items will be forwarded.

Thank you so much. I'm sorry. Thank you so much. Have a nice evening.

Go ahead. Item seven through nine will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners meeting for final action on September 16th, 2026 at 9 a.m. unless otherwise announced. And that completes tonight's agenda.

This is the time for public comments.

Again, Eric King, 5319 David Court. Thank you all for your leadership, your time tonight, and for the vision you have for protecting our community. I can tell you're dedicated. Being a designer in sustainability and having observed for decades now that our concrete and asphalt jungle is far outpacing our green jungle, here in the desert and seeing the rise in heat-related illness, trips to the ER, and heat-related deaths here. In fact, in the last few years, the amount of deaths from heat-related causes has outpaced the number of deaths from vehicular deaths. incidents and we have at least 10 times the amount of money put into protecting lives in that vein compared to the heat. Heat actually kills more people than any other weather related cause of death. And if somebody does get a heat stroke and goes to the hospital, it could be ruinous to their and their family's life. Certainly, think of a parent passing away. So these are all things that, you know, I'm not saying you all are police of everyone's lives to protect themselves from all these threats that we have with climate and drought and our urban heat island effect, which has grown faster, a higher temperature increase than any other city in America, and one of the top ones in the world, actually. But the great thing about trees is when we plant more of them, Commissioner Brady was talking a little bit about that, when we do that in a dry climate then they put a lot more cooling power than if say it was a jungle they would not cool near as much of course we'd have a lot more water but fervently i believe that there are solutions that are extant that do exist technology wise and resource wise that are far and well within reach of us being able to meet the demands of growth within reason you know it seems like there is some reigning in of growth but cities need to grow in general in order to thrive and I do know that it'll be hard for this city to thrive if it doesn't get anywhere near to the 25% canopy it's aiming for, which is based on current figures for what is missing. And one of the global entities that evaluates that is talking about we need another 300,000 plus trees to get to where we need to be. And that's just based on previous data. Who knows what in 10 years will actually be THE HEAT STRESSES ON OUR COMMUNITY AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN AVOID PHOENIX'S 2500 IN THE PAST FIVE YEARS HEAT-RELATED DEATHS SO THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME AND I HOPE THAT THERE IS SOME MEANINGFUL DISCUSSION YOU HAVE WITH POSSIBLY MORE INFORMANTS BECAUSE YOU HEARD ME SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THANK YOU AND HAVE A NICE EVENING ANY PUBLIC MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS SEEING NONE THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED

thank you staff for a great meeting despite everything that went on tonight