Clark County Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Now you can participate. Today's agenda includes different types of items the Board of County Commissioners will discuss and may vote on. Some items are routine and may be approved together in one vote, while others are considered individually and may include a public hearing. Sometimes an agenda item may be held at the request of a commissioner or county staff. When an item is held, it will not be discussed or voted on during today's meeting and will be brought back at a future meeting. There are two opportunities for public comment during this meeting, and it's important to understand the difference. The first public comment period takes place at the beginning of the meeting. This public comment is only for items that are listed on today's agenda. Comments during this time must relate to a specific agenda item. If you wish to speak about a particular agenda item, 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 the 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. Welcome to the continuation of the Clark County Commission meeting. Today is September 2nd, 2026. I will begin the meeting with our first time set aside for public comment. This is an opportunity dedicated for individuals to speak on any item that is on today's agenda. If you would like to speak on items that are posted on today's agenda, please come forward at this time. Items 21 through 53 are already scheduled for separate public hearings. Good morning.

Good morning. My name is Susan Florian from Taney Engineering, 6030 Sadgles Boulevard. Items 14 through 17 are being held today, but if there are any neighbors here for those items, I can definitely meet them outside if they have any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak, please come forward, state your name for the record. Good morning.

Good morning. My name is Ed Ulin. I wanted to ask about item number six, I believe it is. This is a project right in front of our house, and it involves using 16 acres of land to build a care facility. This land is right on Maryland Parkway, one of the main arteries of the whole county. This city is going to grow drastically in the next 10, 20 years. And what is needed is for high intense residential to be built on streets that have transportation on our major streets. Otherwise, you're going to continue this building practice of sprawl. We're going to have another Los Angeles in 20 years. and having to build highways way out in the country. So I know this has negative, to build a 20 story apartment building on this property, would mean that the transportation would be used. It would mean that people wouldn't have to travel so far. Not as many roads would have to be built. All those things. It would interfere with our view, of course. It's right in front of our property. But I really... And I'm sort of a hypocrite with this. I went to the meetings two years ago when this was first... HEARD AND AGREED TO AGREE WITH THIS. I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS COMING UP. IT'S JUST A PURE COINCIDENCE I'M HERE TODAY. SO ANYWAY, I AGREED WITH IT THEN. I'M NOT SO SURE I AGREE WITH IT NOW. THEN IT SAYS THAT ITEMS 1 THROUGH 20 ARE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA yet 18, 19, and 20 are public hearings. How does that, can someone explain how that works?

Thank you.

Thank you. Good morning. Good morning to everyone on the commission. My name is Aaron Ibarra. I'm with the Southern Nevada Building Trade Unions. I'm here to speak on an agenda item Number 39 to 42, it's the Veteran Development Project.

Just a point of clarification, 39 through 42 will be heard separately. Okay. You're welcome to speak now or then. You just can't speak at both times. Okay. So it's your choice.

No worries, no worries. So I'll just speak right now. So just want to let everyone know that we were able to secure a project labor agreement with that project, which is especially important because it's a housing project. It's very rare that we're able to ensure that local labor is being built, is building local projects specifically for housing, especially in that PLA where we have provisions that hires veterans first. So we're ensuring that we're giving veterans pathways into the trades by having that Helmet to Heart has language, ensuring that they're building the actual housing that they're going to hopefully be living in. So just want to let you know that we have that agreement that also ensures that we're hiring local and that we're hiring people from that area of District E. So we appreciate you guys' consideration. We hope you guys vote yes on the Veterans Project. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Good morning. Good morning. My name is Ryan Matthews. I'm with the electricians local here in Las Vegas. Thank you for having us. I'm here today to support the Patriot Housing Las Vegas project. This project is important because it will create 348 affordable housing units dedicated to veterans and veteran families. Not only veterans, but female veterans as well. We all know Southern Nevada needs more affordable housing, but veterans deserve housing options that are built around stability, dignity, and long-term support. Too many veterans are dealing with housing insecurity, high rents, and a lack of affordable options. Patriot Housing Las Vegas helps address that need directly by creating Housing 4, for dignity and long-term support for veterans and their families. The project includes housing for different household sizes, including studios, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, and three-bedroom units. It also includes ADA accessible units, which is important for disabled veterans and veterans with mobility challenges. The project is designed to include supportive services, including housing stabilization, benefit navigation, employment assistance, wellness programming, and other resources that can help veterans remain stable long term. I am in support of this project because it is built with strong union labor and labor standards. When we build housing for veterans, we should make sure it's built safely, responsibly, and by a skilled and trained workforce. Union-built housing means quality construction, safer job sites, trained workers, and accountability. This project can also help veterans beyond housing. There have been commitments to create MC3, pre-apprenticeship pathway for veterans to work with helmets to hard hats. That matters because veterans should have access not only to stable housing, but also to career pathways that can lead to good union jobs in the building trades. Supporting this project is a way to invest in housing, workforce development, apprenticeship, And it creates good union jobs and invest back into the community. I have a personal stake in this as well. I am a veteran. I have been homeless. I know what it's like to hunt for your next meal. I also know what it's like to come back from deployment after a long deployment and not have anywhere to go. or a place to stay. I would greatly appreciate if you guys would approve this and push it on so we can get our veterans into someplace that's more stable and not off on the streets. I appreciate your time. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak during this first time set aside for public comment, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public comment period. Good morning.

Good morning, commissioners. The second item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda after considering any additions or deletions of items. Commissioners, staff has received the following requests, which may require re-notification fees in accordance with Title 30. Hold to the September 16th, 2026 zoning meeting. Item 29, VS-26-0398. Item 30, UC-26-0397. Item 31, VS-26-0436. Item 32, UC-26-0437. Item 33, SDR-26-0438. and hold to the October 7th, 2026 zoning meeting. Item 14, ZC-26-0433. Item 15, VS-26-0435. Item 16, WS-26-0434. Item 17, TM-26-500104. These items are going to be opened as a public hearing and immediately recessed until the dates as previously stated. With these deletions, which are items 14, 15, 16, 17, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33, the agenda is ready for approval.

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

Thank you. There's a motion for approval. Please cast your vote. The motion passes.

The third item on the agenda is the approval of minutes. The minutes from the August 5th, 2026 zoning meeting are ready for approval.

I move approval of our meeting minutes.

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

Next are routine action items, which consist of items four through 20, except for any items that have been previously held. These items may be considered together in one motion and are subject to the conditions listed with each agenda item. If there are no objections, the public hearing is now open and the routine action portion of the agenda stands ready for approval.

I move approval of our routine action items. There is a motion, please cast your vote.

That motion passes.

So the next item would normally be 21 and 22. Did we want to?

Yeah, there's been some requests that we advance items 39 through 42. So I'd like to go ahead and move to item 39. Okay.

Great, so items 39 through 42 are companion items that will be heard together. 39 is PA-26-700-022, holdover plan amendment to redesignate the existing land use category from public use to urban neighborhood on a 15.2 acre portion of a 31.58 acre site, generally located south of Vegas Valley Drive and west of Treeline Drive alignment within Sunrise Manor. Item 40 is ZC-26-0257, holdover zone change to reclassify a 15.2-acre portion of a 31.58-acre site from PF zone to RM32 zone, generally located south of Vegas Valley Drive and west of Treeline Drive alignment within Sunrise Manor. 41, VS-26-0258, holdover vacate and abandon a portion of right-of-way, being Vegas Valley Drive, located between Home Ownership Lane and Treeline Drive within Sunrise Manor. And 42 is DR-26-0259, holdover design review for a proposed multifamily residential development on 15.2 acres in an RM32 zone, generally located south of Vegas Valley Drive and west of Treeline Drive within Sunrise Manor.

Thank you. Good morning. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Commissioners. My name is Bob Gronauer, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. I'm here in this matter representing the applicant in the following matters that are before you. The first thing I'd like to do is, before I get into the application itself, is explain to you what we are proposing to you that's before you today. What we are proposing is an active military and veteran family apartment complex that's an affordable apartment complex. What this means is that this is going to be specifically designated for active military members and their families and veterans and their families. What this is not, and I got to clarify for the record, this is not a homeless shelter. This is not a halfway house. in this is not a rehabilitation center in matter of fact the people that are going to be living here aren't going to be your violent criminals that are walking the streets or they're not going to be your sexual offenders that we've been told throughout this process in matter of fact the kinds of people they're going to live here are no different than people like you and me the only difference is these people actually have served in the in the military or today serving in the military These are people that you and I know, okay, that are going to live in this community. These are people who are food servers. These are managers. These are some of your county employees. These are also people who are construction workers. There are some security guards. I'm sure security that is taking care of us here today in Clark County. I bet you some of those people are veterans and are from, excuse me, veterans that have served our military. We also have clerks, we have truck drivers, bus drivers, we have electricians, we have plumbers, and we have a long list of people. Those people that are in our community today are the people that are veterans or family members of active military members that would live in this community. So I need to clarify that for the record because as we've gone through this process over the last several months, I've heard a lot about those people and those people who are these type of people who are going to be walking in a neighborhood and they're going to commit crimes and they're going to go to schools and do this. These are not these people, okay? These are the people that I just explained to you. So now let me get into the presentation and and you can understand what we're trying to do here so the first thing i'm going to do is get you located to the property the property that you see here i've highlighted in yellow this is about fifteen acres of property on the irony here and when i go through my presentation this property is already rezone for are you dean two thousand and four for residential development for two hundred sixty eight homes It subsequently changed over where it's a solar farm in this area located here today. The area that you see and I'm going to go through is trended over the last 30 years for residential development. This is Vegas Valley Drive which is on the north portion of our property. We have the drainage channel that is to the west of us. and you have tree line which goes in this area here. This is Hollywood and this is Sahara up above and then you have Desert Inn that's located in this area. So the next thing that I'd like to do is since now I gave you the location of the property, now I want to give you the justification why this project fits this area, okay? And the question is, is that as I go through this is, is this residential project compatible and harmonious with the other projects and existing uses in this area? So to do that, we got to go back in time and as I'm going to go and I'm going to show you on this aerial here. This is a 1990 aerial and I'm going to go through this quickly in decades because I want to show you the trends that you have seen for development in this area. This is the property back in 1990. You had existing uses. You have the reclamation plant located here. The NV Energy plant located here, you have two industrial uses there. Those uses and everything I pointed out have been there since 1950, 1960. This area was planned for a lot of public facility and industrial uses. As you move forward to the years up to 2000 in this area here, what you'll see now is residential starting to be approved. In 1998, there was a mobile home park approved. In 2000, you had R2 that was approved. You also had public facility. This was all big public facility. You had residential homes that were approved at that point in time. As you move forward in 2010, now you're gonna see additional homes that have been built, or excuse me, improved. So between 2000, 2010, Excuse me. You had this development that was approved. This took industrial zone property into residential. These are existing townhomes today. There's about 317 of these units that are located on this property here. 2005 and 2007 we had additional residential development that has been approved in this area. In a matter of fact, although I didn't mark it, but I said it in the beginning of my presentation, the irony is you can't tell me residential is not appropriate in this property when in 2004 we had 268 homes that were approved for RUD zoning on this piece of property. So as we move on now to 2020, now you see the golf course here in this area has been taken down to residential zoning in 2020. And in 2014, this property was changed from industrial to residential development. So now you're starting to see a sea of blue in this area in the trend. So now, where are we? Today, just two weeks ago, in 2026, two weeks ago, this county commission approved a residential project for For more homes in this area and now if you take a look at this entire map You cannot disagree with me the trends that you've seen over the last 30 years in this property this area has changed from vacant land plan for an industrial and public facility uses to Residential in this area a matter of fact when you start doing the calculations here There's been thousands of acres of property in this area here that has been rezoned for residential development And, excuse me, it's 1,000, 2,500 units of residential units have been approved in hundreds of acres that have actually been developed for residential. Now, when you look at the trends here, and I'm gonna go through this a little bit more, is you're gonna look at your policies. You just adopted your master plan policies, you got a new county code, and what you asked for, your goals, and one of your goals in 1.1 talks about diversification of housing. When you look at diversification of housing here, you have a lot of single-family homes, you have some mobile home parks, but you don't have that multi-family component in here, what we are proposing. As a matter of fact, we also hit the policy goal of 1.2, is it talks about having affordable housing. That's exactly what we're doing here, is affordable housing. And then when you look into Sunrise Manor policy and goals, it talks about diversification building in infill areas and making an investment. This project is an infill property, and more importantly, it's a $90 million investment. The irony is, in the last six months, I came in with a $30 million project right here for a school, and today I'm standing here for a $90 million project. That's $120 million of projects and development in this area that has been proposed, which is amazing. because this area deserves it, and you can see the growth that you see. So the other point that I want to point out on the trends is I use this as somewhat of an analogy. This is somewhat similar to if you're in north Las Vegas with the pig farm. Those of you who know and been living in the city or been here in southern Nevada, the pig farm used to be there as just being an industrial commercial use, and it was said you're not going to have residential be built around there. There is no more pig farm because residential came in and removed everything here. So the reason why I use that somewhat of an analogy is because you cannot tell me that we cannot put multi-family here when you put residential development all around this area. Because if anything, what we're showing you here, it does work. As a matter of fact, when you take a look at another example, You could see the county's reclamation water treatment facility. This one here, you could see in this area off of Flamingo, you have homes all around it. So putting a multifamily project in this area does not have a negative impact whatsoever. So the next thing that I want to get into is the design. The most important thing that I want to point out with this design here, we are asking for zero waivers. There's no variances. There's no deviations. What we're coming in is we're meeting code. We're not only meeting code, but we are actually exceeding code in many ways. We're almost doubling the amount of open space that's being proposed. This is a 348-unit development. This is going to have anywhere from studios all the way up to three bedrooms, one, two, and three-bedroom apartments. Access is going to be off of Vegas Valley Drive. And then we also have access coming in off a tree line. This is a gated community. This will be securitized 24-7 to address some issues with as far as security in this area. The other thing that I want to point out within the community, one of the things that we're doing which is unique that you don't see with a lot of affordable projects, is we wanted to make sure we came in with a lot of amenities here. In doing so, what we're proposing is we have two pools, we have two recreation facilities, we have tot lots, we have pickleball courts, we have dog parks, we have a community garden, we have a community center, and we have a bunch of other picnic areas throughout this development here. So what we are doing here, which is special and unique, is we're creating a community within a community. And the goal here is you have like people living together because they share the same experiences together. And of course, we're going to have wraparound services in there, which is no different than what you have for your senior projects and other projects also. So I do want to mention that we will have that. There's been some questions about transportation, okay? Number one, because we met with the developer and they were concerned that we didn't have enough parking. We have more than enough parking on the property. We're not asking for any parking waivers. Then I got into, well, what happens if they don't have a car? Well, just right over here, there is a regional transportation bus stop that goes regionally throughout the valley. Depending on the day of travel, the bus stops there every 30 minutes about 29 to 36 times a day, depending on what day that is. So you have all around, wrap around the valley services from a transportation from bus. if you don't want to take the bus and you don't have a car we have shuttle services on the property okay but more importantly i i always say when you look at projects is all about location no matter if we have a residential development no matter if we have commercial if you're in those businesses we always say it's about location location location That's no different than this project. I'm going to explain to you why there's no difference here. Number one, and the veterans will tell you this and the active military members, this location is 20 minutes away from Nellis Air Force Base. This location is 30 minutes away from the VA hospital. This location is 11 minutes away from the veterans' resources. this location is about five minutes three to five minutes away from your shopping center your commercial uses your restaurants in this area so if you're going to tell me that location is a problem and because this is residential near reclamation plant i don't i did respectfully cannot agree with that because we believe that the location is perfect and the project that we're proposing fits within the residential neighborhood so now i'm going to conclude with a couple facts here is that I think is important as I round everything out here. I think the first fact that I think we all can agree in this room is we are a military community. We have Creech Air Force Base, we have Nels Air Force Base. I think we all can agree we have an affordable housing problem here in Southern Nevada. Number three, I believe we all can agree, and you just heard the veteran that stood up here, is there is a need for military families. We've talked to Nellis and we've talked to veterans, and there's a need for veterans and their families. You've heard that just already on the record before I came up here to speak. In today's presentation, I hope I gave a compelling enough justification to let you know that there is a need for military and veteran type of housing in this area. I hope I at least gave you a compelling reason to see that there is residential in this area, and residential has been approved on this property, so you can't tell me it does not fit in this area. And the last thing is, I said about this, is location, location, location. the veterans will tell you that this is a location of where and what we need. So I'm going to ask you, I'm going to plead with you today, let's not find reasons to find reasons to not support this project. We're here to stand here with you and ask for collaboration to find a win. More than willing to open our arms up and figure out how we can make this project work. And then there's one statement I'm going to leave with some irony here, okay? And I think you can all understand this. So I find the ironic side of this is when we're at football games or watch sporting events on TV, you see at halftime or intermissions that we always go and honor at some point in time or a special event, we honor our veterans. We honor our active military members, right? Even when you go on Southwest, you know, there's special accommodations and so on. And I'm one, I know all of us are the same. We stand up, we clap, we thank our veterans, we thank our military members, right? But here's the kicker. When those military members and those veterans, when they turn around to us and they ask, can we live in your community? There's a pause, right? And that pause is we say, well, maybe we could look at another person's backyard because there's a better place for you. So today, if we deny this application, what I'm asking is, if this is not a great location where you put a place like this, tell me where. I hope it's not in a commercial industrial area because they don't belong there. What the active military members belong is in a community within a community of what we're proposing. So as I started out the conclusion I'm going to end this way, we are a military community and I'd ask you to approve these applications.

Thank you very much for the presentation. At this time we'll go ahead and open up the public comment on items 39 through 42. Those wishing to speak please come forward, state your name for the record and you may speak for up to three minutes.

Good morning. Good morning. My name is Vincent Palmieri. I'm the commander of Chapter 711 here in Las Vegas. I'm also the National Director of Suicide Awareness for the Military Order of the Purple Heart. As a veteran, I know that service to our country does not end when a veteran takes off their uniform. Neither should our responsibility to those who served. A veteran cannot begin rebuilding his or her life without a safe and stable place to call home. Housing provides more than four walls and a roof. It provides stability, dignity, and a foundation for rebuilding a life. We often say that we support veterans. Those words must be followed by action. I have attended meetings and heard people say, I support our veterans. They deserve a safe place to live, a decent place to live. But when veterans housing is proposed near their neighborhood, the message sometimes seems to become, I support veterans, but not in my neighborhood. We cannot have it both ways. At the same time, when we provide veterans housing matters, if our goal is to give struggling veterans a hand up, we should place them in an environment that gives them the best opportunity to succeed, not one that adds more obstacles and challenges they already face. This is one reason why I strongly support the Patriot Housing Project. This is not simply about putting a roof over a veteran's head. Patriot Housing provides a wraparound service where veterans live, including assistance with employment, mental health, and other challenges. Instead of saying, here is an apartment, good luck, We are providing a veteran with a home and a support system. This is what a hand up should look like. We shouldn't simply ask, where can we put veterans housing? We should ask, where can veterans have the best opportunity to succeed? Supporting veterans cannot simply be something we say at a ceremony during a parade or during Veterans Day. If we are sincere when we say thank you for your service, then we must also be sincere when we say you deserve a place to live in our community. In closing, I would like to thank personally the Clark County Commission, especially Commissioner Jim Gibson and Marilyn Kirkpatrick for honoring the military order of the Purple Heart on Purple Heart Day. Thank you, and I hope you'll all see the need for this needy project. Thank you.

Thank you, Commander.

Good morning.

Good morning, Commissioners. I'm Levi Schultz, President and Founder of Nevada Veterans Fund and Nevada Veterans Caucus. Right now, I have 21 military families on my roster for food delivery. We deliver formula and diapers to those families. We also have four veterans that are seeking affordable housing, and I have to call around to folks that I know that have apartment units open, and I have to beg, borrow, and plead to try to get them into those units. This is 348 units that will allow for those families that don't have essential goods that we have to deliver, not the government, we do as a private organization, to be removed from these traps of the marketplace apartment, the standard market rate apartment. So one of the folks that I've had to deliver to is a mother who just had twins. Her husband's an E3 in the Air Force stationed at Nellis. One of the things you may not know is that when you're in the military, sometimes your needs of the Air Force, you don't get to pick where you live. It's not like, oh, I want to go here. No, you're ordered to be there. You're on orders. So why should they have to live in a place that's unaffordable or pick a market rate apartment that's subpar with no amenities and live in squalor when they're serving our country and wearing the uniform? You know, I once was an E1, E2, E3 in the United States Navy and I know how difficult it is to find affordable housing. I was stationed up at Whidbey Island in Washington where the rates are through the roof and your housing allowance only goes so far. But right now, because Nellis is the Langley of the West, we have folks in the Gulf Arab States that have drones raining fire down on their heads and their families are here and they can't afford milk and diapers for their children. That is absurd to me. And for our service, it's heartbreaking, because I personally deliver these meals to them. And I really beg and plead with you that if you do not approve this project, at least have a plan, because I haven't heard one yet. This is a $90 million investment into our military and into our veterans. And I have to look at people like me, people like Evelyn Pacheco, people like Vince Palmieri. We have to look these families in the face when we deliver services to them. It's unfair if this is voted down. And I personally take this as a slap in the face to the veteran community. We can light up all the signs we want. We can go to all the games we want and stand during the pledge. We can do all of those things. But if when it comes down to truly honoring veterans, we don't approve their housing, then you don't actually care about veterans. And I don't want to hear the lip service because I'm the face that they see when they get their box of food because they can't afford to eat. Thank you.

Thank you. Good morning. And just a point of clarification, if anybody needs assistance with the microphone, Victor is right there. He's got a handheld and would be happy to help if that's easier for anybody. Good morning.

Good morning. My name is Mark Christensen. I'm the Paralyzed Veterans of America legislative director for the state of Nevada. The gentleman that you just listened to brought two points out that I would like to emphasize to the commission. One, you guys and ladies up here stand, you say the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. What's behind that flag? You are living in a country that all of our veterans and our active duty persons and personnel out there stand every day between you and harm's way. We provide that blanket of freedom that you live under. This project is critical to our nation's individuals who stand on the front line every day. The second point that I would like to bring up is If not now, when? When do we have a plan to support those individuals who are out there on the front line? What is your plan? I haven't heard it. I spent 26 years as an Army Green Beret defending this country. I've been to places that God forgot about when he started this planet spinning. I come back and I see the exact same thing at 75 that I did at 35. When does this country stand up and protect those who protect you? Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning.

Good morning, Commissioners.

Stephanie Phillips, Political Affairs Director with Veterans and Politics. I am in strong support of the Patriot Housing Community Agenda's items 39 through 42. This proposed development would be the first of its kind in Clark County, a community specifically designed to provide affordable housing for veterans, active duty military personnel, and their families. For those who have served our country, access to safe, stable, and affordable housing should not be a privilege. It should be a priority. Patriot Housing Community offers more than a place to live. It provides a supportive environment where military families can build stability, strengthen connections, and thrive. The development includes a secured, gated entrance with controlled access, a clubhouse, two fitness centers, pickleball and basketball courts, family recreation areas, walking trails, a dog-friendly park, and welcoming community gathering spaces. These amenities, along with many others, will promote safety, wellness, recreation, and a strong sense of community. Just as importantly, residents will have access to critical support services. The community will include a computer lab, a business center, along with an on-site veteran service coordinator who can assist residents with VA benefits, counseling, enrollment, and other essential resources. Additional programs will include financial workshops, employment and job placement assistance, health and wellness services, legal aid referrals, educational and vocational training, partnerships, onsite notary services and transportation assistance or shuttle service to VA facilities, just to name a few. Having these resources available in one community can make a meaningful difference. Veterans and military families often face unique challenges when transitioning to civilian life, securing employment, navigating VA programs, continuing their education, or accessing health care. Patriot Housing Community is designed to address those needs in a practical and comprehensive way. This project is not simply about constructing buildings. It is about creating opportunity, restoring stability, and honoring service with action. It will give veterans, active duty personnel, and their families access to affordable housing while surrounding them with the resources necessary to succeed. The proposed location is appropriate for this development. and the project will be a valuable addition to Clark County. It reflects the kind of thoughtful investment our community should make in the people who have sacrificed so much in service to our nation. I respectfully urge each commissioner to support agenda items 39 through 42 and approve Patriot Housing Community. Thank you for your time, your consideration, and your commitment to Clark County's veterans and military families. Thanks so much.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning, everyone. I'm Evelyn Pacheco. I am the first woman to be commander of American Legion Post 51. I served in the Army from 1986 through 1992. I am also a disabled veteran. I'm the president of Nevada Women in Trades, which most of you up there know what I do in the community to help veterans and women get in the trades. I'm also retired out of the Plumbers and Pipefitters Union, who will be taking part in this. Not only will this help veterans, this will help this community. It would help for those to get jobs, veterans to get jobs, which is a big, big thing, right? And I'm also wanting you to approve this, and I agree with my colleagues before, if you don't approve this, what is the plan? What is the plan that you have? Thank you.

Thank you. Good morning.

Hello, my name is Al Rojas. I live in Sunrise Manor. I started a Neighborhood Watch program about a year and a half ago, digitally based, because we wanted to move in the direction of public safety. I think this is a no-brainer. Let's get it done. I welcome a group of veterans who understand that the foundation of prosperity is public safety and education. I would love to have these citizens here in my community because we are moving in a direction, we're sending a message that Sunrise Manor is a safe place to live in and this is exactly the people that I would like to be in my community. If you don't know who El Rojas is and who Safe Communities Networks is and Sunrise Manor Neighborhood Watch, I'm asking you to go find out. This is a no brainer. There's nothing to think about. We're moving in the direction of safety and I will welcome our veterans as our citizens. Thank you.

Thank you. Good morning.

Good morning. My name is Robert Davison. I'm a Vietnam veteran. I was shot in the Asha Valley of Vietnam with the 101st Airborne Division. Most of you probably know that approximately a year ago, a group of very good people known as Tunnels to Towers purchased a large piece of property immediately adjacent to the Veterans Administration Hospital. The purpose of the purchase was housing for veterans. The zoning commission and the city council of North Las Vegas turned their back on the veterans and said no. This project that we are proposing now is not something as the AMVET housing that you have at Bonanza and Las Vegas Boulevard where you have veterans who are on the ragged edge of society. Some of them may have been on drugs, perhaps alcohol, very little family support, perhaps very serious PTSD. This is an upscale housing project, not just for veterans, but for veterans and their families. Please do not turn your back on these veterans as the city of North Las Vegas has done. Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. And if anybody else is here to speak during the public comment for this period, if you want to start making your way forward.

Yeah. My name is Ed Euling. And there couldn't be a better illustration of what I said in my earlier comments than this project here. This project is going to take 15 acres. Item number six is going to take 17 acres. In other words, two acres more exist in number six. Here, $90 million are going to be invested in an apartment complex, apparently. And of course, knowing the feds, it'll probably cost, you'll probably only get 90 apartments, a million dollars each. But just that, imagine it's only 90 apartments. 90 apartments sitting on the Boulevard Mall property would provide access for all of those 90 people immediately to get in buses, not to have to travel 11 minutes here, 25 minutes over there, 50 minutes over here to get to where they have to get. They would be able to go in buses and not cars. Not only that, they would have their jobs, their things to do in the immediate area. This shows the incredible incompetence of the urban planning of this city. Imagine this could be built there. They could use the buses. Everything is already there. The neighborhood would approve it. Then I have one question about this. Apparently, one can discriminate on who can live in apartments. I thought that was illegal. I have property that I'd love to be able to discriminate for gay people, and so how does that work? It works for some, if it doesn't work for others. And then just an item of curiosity, I'm wondering if this farm that you're talking about is the farm that Commissioner Gibson's father sent me to work on 63 years ago in the area that you're talking about.

Thank you, Mr. Euling.

All right, I had to say something else.

I'm sorry, Commander. Our rules don't allow you to come back up. There is another time set aside for public comment at the end of the agenda, but our rules don't allow that. Anyone else wishing to speak on items 39 through 42? This will be your last call. Please make your way up to the podium. Good morning.

Good morning. Good morning, Chair and Commissioner. My name is Steve Sanson. I'm a disabled United States Marine Corps Gulf War veteran and President of Veterans and Politics International. I'm here today to strongly support the Patriot Housing LV Veteran Housing Plan. Our veterans answered America's call and defended our homes, freedoms, and way of life. Now Clark County has an opportunity to stand up for them. Too many veterans struggle to find safe and affordable housing. Some live on fixed incomes. Others face disabilities, unemployment, or difficulty navigating the complicated system created to assist them. They need more than a temporary roof over their heads. They need stability, dignity, and an opportunity to move forward. The Patriot Housing LV provides that opportunity. This income-based community would offer secure professional managed housing for veterans, active duty military personnel, and military families. It would include accessible apartments, on-site management and security, fitness and recreational areas, walking trails, playgrounds, study rooms, and gathering spaces. Most importantly, this plan goes beyond housing. An on-site veteran service coordinator would help residents obtain VA benefits and connect them with healthcare, employment assistance, vocational training, legal services, transportation, and other essential programs. Veterans would also have access to financial education, budgeting, assistant, peer support meetings, and family reunification services. As residents improve their employment, credit, and income, they could transition into home ownership or other permanent housing, opening in spaces for veterans in need. Eligibility would be income-based and include background screening to help protect residents, families, and the surrounding neighborhoods. Commissioners, supporting veterans require more than thanking them for their service. It requires meaningful action. Patriot Housing LV is not simply another apartment complex. It is a safe and supportive community where veterans can rebuild their lives, strengthen their families, and regain their independence. They defended our homes. Now we have the opportunity to help provide them with homes of their own. I respectfully ask you to support Patriot Housing LV. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. This will be the last opportunity to speak on items 39 through 42 for the public hearing. Anyone wishing to come forward? He will be our, anyone who's not in line here will be last call.

Go ahead. Thank you. Lou DiSalvio for the record, Labor's Local 872 president. Just gonna say, if you support this project and you're in this room, please stand up.

thank you very much thank you all right have a seat and we will invite mr groenauer back up um i i could before uh commissioner sager bloom i'm going to turn over to you in just a second but if i could just set the table for a second because i i think we heard a couple things that are really important um related to a plan right a couple of you mentioned a plan for housing in this community so i think it is important just to inform everybody who's here and those who might not be that this body has not arguably but factually done more on affordable housing, inclusive of veterans, nationally. We are nationally recognized since 2022. This board has supported financially 47 affordable housing communities at 30%. AMI. That's 4,700, 5,700 units that are now on the marketplace. We have provided gap funding. We have provided land free of cost for dozens of affordable housing communities, some of which are under construction now, all of which are veteran eligible, all of which are eligible to those who are within that average median income range. And so I just think the members of this board and particularly the staff in this building who again are nationally recognized for the work that they're doing on affordability and have dedicated unbelievable amounts of time to providing for affordable housing. I think that's just personally important that it's known no matter where any member of this board is on this particular item, you can't argue with the track record from 2022 to today that has happened related to affordable housing. And I'm sorry to be on a soapbox, but Commissioner, this is in your district, I'll turn it over to you.

No, I appreciate that because at the end of the day, that's what we're trying to do is affordable housing. So Mr. Gronauer, can you tell me, is this affordable housing project financed by some government entity or is it under some government program?

Currently, we have a pre-certification through Clark County approved. With the approval, if approved with this project, we'll be moving forward with that process to get the completion of that application to be approved for affordable housing in Clark County. We have already applied to several of the agencies of what you need to do for LIHTC funds and for additional federal housing. So that is all to come, and as you guys know this, is you can't get all these commitments until you actually get the land in hand and move forward with the project.

All right, so at this point you have no financing?

We have financing that's conditioned, which is no different than any other project that you approve that when I stand up here and represent other developers. Money is conditionally approved subject to approval of a project.

the state money is conditionally approved subject to the approval of the project?

I don't know if the state money is approved. I think you have to go through that process. Actually, I think you apply for that at that point in time once when you get the approval of that process. But regardless, as we've made representations to everybody, is this is an affordable project and we have to go through that process. We cannot build this project if we don't have the service, excuse me, if we don't have the financial wherewithal to build the project. We're not going to get the deed to build, but we're comfortable with what we have with the team that's in place.

All right, but specifically, do you have, this is considered to be an affordable project under state law, under federal law? This is not just a department complex?

Correct. We're going to be complying with whatever the state and federal requirements are for affordable housing, so whatever restrictions that are gonna be required for that development that will be put on this, yes.

All right, and at this point, you don't have that financing?

As I mentioned, as everything's conditioned.

All right. Rob, maybe you can answer this. If we approve the zoning, this is mainly a zoning and land use plan hearing. If we approve this zoning and change it from what it is currently to 38 units per acre, Is that something that if the project falls through, we can pull back?

No, the ordinance we've passed, the zoning would be changed, and another apartment complex that's not affordable housing could go forward.

All right. And can you tell me why the city picked this particular area for affordable housing?

My understanding is, just like any other jurisdiction, when you have builders come in, people... As Commissioner Neff mentioned, everybody is looking to fill the void for affordable housing. So every jurisdiction is looking at different ways. My client has been looking for this type of project for many years. As you guys know, land is scarce, right? Then you've got to find the location, you've got to find the price. There's a lot that goes into the formula. So in this case, they were vetted out by the city. And I do want to make a note, since you brought this up, this project is going to be deed restricted, okay? Once when this project, if this project gets approved, then prior to this project going into the hands of the developer, we have already agreed to do a deed restriction in Clark County. And we are required by the purchase and sale agreement to have a deed restriction in the, with the city. So there would be a double deed restriction placed on this property. We have no problems, no issues with that to make sure that it is zoned in what we're representing. And my understanding is, in all due respect, is I do know that once when this gets approved, if, not once, if it got approved, then we would have to go through the process with the city. We put the restriction on there. Now, just like any other zoning case, you know, out there, There are, I believe, going through the code, the county can always rezone, replan a property. You replan properties. We just went through the big transformation plan and so on. There is a process to do that. We could also work with the city to rezone the property back if this property does not get its funding and does not move forward with construction. There's ways to work on these things, too. to make sure, because the representation is that this is going to be for affordable housing. We could do a deed restriction within 30 days, put a deed on this immediately, and ensure that nothing is gonna be built for market rate housing on this property.

Okay, Rob, could you clarify that? Because my understanding is constitutionally, once we recognize this is an affordable, an area for 32 units an acre, that's gonna be, we can't just unilaterally go back.

Well, the deed restriction would be a private agreement between the developer and I guess the city and whoever else. I don't think the county would have any control over the deed restriction. So once the zoning ordinance, zoning is in place, this zoning, as far as the county is concerned, another project can go forward and it wouldn't be an affordable housing project or a project that's solely for veterans and their families.

And I think for clarification, we would agree, and I thought we agreed to do a deed restriction at the Planning Commission. I could be wrong, but we're willing to do that with the county.

Commissioner, I think the challenge there would be that you have the deed restriction that is being proposed between the city, which I believe is only 15 years.

In the county, we require minimum 50 years, typically up to 99. In clarification, we agreed to do 50.

The 50 years only sticks to the design review. So just stating some facts, staff can correct me, but... The 50 years would only apply to this applicant. As you know, people come before this podium and projects switch hands routinely, and applications change, and that 50 years would be null once it switches hands.

Right, that's correct. The zoning and the master plan would be permanent, and that deed restriction for 50 years would only be for this project if this project were approved. But that zoning would allow somebody else to come in with the project. Thank you. Commissioner Gibson?

Just to clarify, so the deed restriction would be a condition that we impose upon you and you agree to that.

Yes, I agree. We'll sign the deed restriction within one week. I mean, we're not going to build something in one week. The county has a standard deed restriction for 50 years. If you put it on that property, we agree to put it on the property and it gets recorded. As you know, as an attorney, it runs with the property and then the county is in control of that deed restriction and whether or not it's going to be removed regardless what the city does with the deed restriction on that property. Although we've already agreed to we can't buy the property with the city from the city until we have a deed restriction on there and it was initially 15 and talking to the city they're fine boom doing 50. you know what the city is charging for this property The fair market value ranged from $9 million-ish, plus or minus, to $14 million. And it's on the low end of what we've agreed to. And the money is going to stay within their reclamation district there, their sewer fund, because the sewer funds legally purchased this property because it was in private hands. It was residentially zoned before. And so that money, what I've been told by the city, has to stay within that fund and that account.

whatever the money is. There's not a limit on what the money must be. There's just a condition. The reason I say that is that one of the things that we've done is we've found land that carries with it a value, maybe no value when it comes to the development of the affordability aspect of the project. So we donate land or we enable the donation of land. And in a circumstance like this, we're facilitating the city charging whatever the fair market value is of the property, encouraging all along that it be something that is affordable, but doing nothing, in my view, in terms of the things they control to encourage or maybe even require affordability. And that's troublesome to me. We all ought to be doing the same thing. In our instance, we're working to find property that carries with it a price tag that truly encourages and conditions affordability. In this instance, it's fair market value. And that's a bit of a disturbing thing to me because they want the credit, they just don't want to give up the value for it. And that's troublesome.

May I ask a question of Rob? So this is a land use application, but typically at the county, we are a little bit different than everybody else. We bring the design review and everything all at the same time. I think I can count on less than two hands to where we've just approved the zoning and not everything else that comes with it. So how is it that we can put any conditions on it? Because it's a zoning application. There's nothing to tie it to, is my first question.

No, right, I mean, once the ordinance is, the zoning's changed, it's permanent, and then another project could come in. I don't know if that answers your question or not.

Well, what I'm seeing is typically we have a design review to say, okay, you gotta have this many parking spaces, this is where the landscaping goes. We don't have that before us today. We have a vacation, we have a zone change. Where do you tie that deed restriction to?

Well, there is a design review on this, but you could tie it to that, but then something can come out, and we have no control over the deed restriction. It's in favor of the city and maybe other private parties, but another project can come in and ask for a new design review that wouldn't be subject to those conditions that you attached to the design review that's before you.

What about a tight approval with a review, a one-year review to determine whether or not the conditions we've imposed that remain intact and subject to them remaining intact.

Right. What I would suggest if you're going to go that route is that the ordinance for the zone change not be made and adopted until all the conditions are satisfied, if you're going to go that route. And then is there's... Yeah.

Let me ask this question. So I want to ask some other questions because I heard a lot of things here today and I represent Nellis and I do yeoman's work in Nellis, in the Nellis area. And I work specifically with the colonels. I work to get the level three trauma center over there. I work to bring a grocery store. And we have, this board, supporting me, have approved housing for veterans, three projects, and they've never come to fruition, which is, we've tried everything to give it further. And they're always at Las Vegas Boulevard and Nellis, they're at Cheyenne and Lamont. I mean, we have done that. And in fact, in the Northwest, which is in the city, and I know I worked with you, Mr. Garner, many years ago, for that project in the Northwest that we worked to get the housing, right? So to say that we've done nothing, what's the plan? We keep trying to do things. And for me, I get it. There is a need for active duty. There is a need for veterans. But we have 5,700 units in the hopper that will allow for veterans to actually live in those places, right? We've done things from... We put in new manufactured homes because we worked with the base to see what kind of housing that they would like. We actually built a brand new subdivision off of Hollywood, the East Gate over there. So we, to say that what's the plan, we keep trying to get developers to come through. But what happens is the financing always falls apart because there's a lot of rules that you have to follow, right? LIHTC funds, they work. Sometimes, but not so much now, and we know that because Ovation and Nevada Hand tell us that they're not working so well. One-offs, you know, I worked with Nellis to get, when we had sequestration, we lost a lot of things at Nellis. It took us seven years to get things back onto the base. In fact, I think I did a fundraiser so that they could have books to actually, go from an E2 to an E4, right? So to say that we've not done things, this board has supported me 100%. We're actually the biggest supporter of Aviation Nation, so we get it. We understand that. So I don't want it to be, you know, to say that we don't support is a little disingenuous, Mr. Groner, you specifically, because you said it that way, and it bothers me because I do yeoman's work. I have been at the food banks. I built a school on there. We've done all those things. But I am trying to understand, if you look at the property, is all of that solar stuff going away or just a portion of it? Because it looks like the site doesn't. Let's talk about the real issues here today for the land use instead of telling us what we're not doing right.

Well, first of all, for clarification, I apologize. I'm not saying you have done anything wrong. I was making my presentation I believe it's a compelling location, okay? So I apologize. I didn't mean to imply there's no plan in the county.

Well, I'll invite you out to Nellis the next time so you can, you know, hand out food with me.

I'm fine. I've been in Nellis and Creech, so I'm fine. But I want to clarify that for the record because I had no intentions to say the county has no plan. My point is I believe this property is appropriate at this location, and we can disagree respectfully. I get it, okay? I respect your decision. So that being said, This is 15 acres of about, I forgot if it's about 30-something plus or minus acres in there. So it's a portion of the property that we are actually doing the, we're removing the solar panels.

Can we have that up on the... Victor, are you able to put the overhead up? Thank you.

So what you see here is, this is the entire site that's located here. The yellow area is about 15 acres of the property that we would be taking down and we would be doing development on that property. This is the tree line in here. This is alignment that goes north and south. We would do the improvements in here and we'd have access coming in here. And then this is Vegas Valley where we'd have access coming into the northern portion of the property also.

So let me ask this though. According to this site plan that you have, there will be solar that's remaining, right? So it'll butt the project?

Yes, it will be, solar will be remaining roughly down in this area we're going to be re there's going to be some things that are going to be reconfigured in this area based off removing some and working with the city so that's on us and working with the city which we spent a lot of time and money and effort with our consultants in this area is redoing this area in here and ensuring that you do have the solar panels down to the south here and then on our property those would be removed in there

So one of the issues that we see on the east side in particular, next to the sewage treatment plant, whether it's north Las Vegas, it's on Cary and Nellis, or whether it's this one, we get tons of calls of complaints. We get complaints on the smell. We get complaints on the gnats. We get complaints on all of those things. And so what mitigation efforts have you put in to address all of those?

Well, number one, we've gone through environmental phase one analysis. and looking at and see what the property is in the surrounding area. The second thing is in taking a look at the other projects in the area, if need be, and this is something that we're willing to address, is if we have to do some type of disclosures for the future rental, for the tenants that are in the area, we can do so. If there are some other issues that we need to address, more than willing to do so there. Because if there is a specific thing that the county has been doing, we can implement that.

So what prohibits the city from coming in and taking out all of those solar arrays? Although I agree that they were bought with sewer funds, right? So the money has to go back into the sewer fund, right? So that's the law. What prohibits you from coming back in, you know, two years and saying, no, there's a precedent that's been set, now we're going to take out the solar fields and there's nothing else that could go there?

That's a very good question. So one of the reasons why I didn't see the whole field taken away is because I, I want to be careful because I'm not an expert in this, but how I understand this.

I know the answer to the question. That's why I asked you.

Okay, so let's see then if I'm going to answer it the way you think, or maybe what I think is what I know, is the city has certain requirements for renewable energy, and they've got to meet those certain requirements. They still meet those requirements with what the things that we're doing here. And so this field here, I don't want to say I can never guarantee 100%, but at least in my conversations with the city initially when we were going through that process about a year ago, this field needed to stay to be a part of, I want to say it was maybe the 2030 energy plan, renewable energy plan or whatever the city, is involved with or required to meet. So that is why that's staying there for now. And that's why we didn't touch anything else in that area in working with the city.

Well, you kind of answered it. It was a state law on the 2030 RPS, but that can be changed, and I bet it's going to be changed this time because a lot of people can't meet it. So let me ask this. Why not closer? Like I said, I've approved things, and Mr. Borgel brought one of the projects. I could almost point to all the people that brought all these projects closer to Nellis. There's a plethora of pieces right there, and honestly, Nellis even has some industrial pieces that they're going out to an RFP for. Why are we not looking at those pieces that are closer to the base, that they have the... One of the issues for military families is... You know, they have to be able to get to the grocery store, they have to have schools, which this one does have schools, but they can't always be on the commissary shopping. Veterans can't always go to the pharmacy on the base, so they gotta have all these things, which we worked really hard to bring. in that vicinity, from the east gate all the way to the north gate past O'Callaghan. So why, I could help you find a different property. Honestly, that's better.

Yeah, my client has been looking for properties, and as you know, you know, there could be price. They didn't ask me. It exceeds constraint, and sorry, you know, I... I don't know what else to say, but more than willing to work with you or anybody else, if there is property and there's property that makes sense, then that's great. Better than this, that's even better. But as you go through, it's hard to find properties. And you're right, nobody asks you. I apologize, but that's something we can do.

I don't have any more questions.

Commissioner Jones. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Following up on Commissioner Gibson's question, I guess I'll go back to an agenda item we had a few weeks ago where the Elks Lodge had proposed a change in the zoning that was adjacent to an RMP off of rainbow. And I was comfortable with the use that was proposed, however it required going to a more intense zoning category and so we ended up asking the applicant to pull back because of the same concern that was raised, which is Elks Lodge, cool, but it could also be all sorts of other uses if the Elks Lodge didn't proceed. So I guess help me get to a point in which if this proposed project, which I would support, does not go forward, that it doesn't simply become a higher intense use that is not affiliated with any veterans affordable housing project.

And I'll start with I believe Mr. Warhol was on the right path there where you're able to hold back the ordinance from being recorded on the property. And then I'm going to couple that with Commissioner Gibson's comments about doing a short review on the application, on the design review. Because the truth of the matter is it's going to take a year plus to go through development. That's just how that goes. But at least you will have in that time period, I'm thinking out loud, is we could record deeds or whatever in favor of the county on that property. We could work through whatever we need to work through. And if we're not moving in six months or whatever it is, and I'm using a six-month time frame, then at that point in time you make that decision. And if we don't have financing, don't have our applications submitted, there's a lot that has to be done that we're waiting to get released. And if those representations I make today, it gives you the ability to not support an extension on the design process. and then your ordinance doesn't get recorded on the property, and you can hold off on the deed, whatever you want to do with the deed.

And just to clarify, with regards to applications for LIHTC and home funds, et cetera, do those require that the zoning be in place, or simply that there's a commitment for the zoning to be in place, which is what you're asking?

Yeah, I'm going to double-check one second. Hold on. What we need is, it's defined as site control, so we could work with the city and make sure we have site control to move forward with those applications. And the scenario that we're going through, we're comfortable that we could get the definition to be met of site control as we move forward, because we're gonna be moving forward with the applications based on the actions of today's board, if it goes that way.

Okay, Mr. Barbarale, you wanna chime in on that?

Yeah, a lot of times with contingency contracts, it's based on whether they get the zone change or not, and the zone change is recorded, and that, I guess, then activates the actual contract. So it would go back to the wording of the contract. We haven't seen it, so we don't know what it says, but... Okay. Well, I'll just say...

I've supported every affordable housing project that's come before this board, as I think pretty much everybody on this board has. And there's a whole lot of not in my backyard in all of our districts all of the time. So this is not a perfect site. It's probably not a perfect applicant, but I think that From my perspective, it is, you know, we can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. And so if there are those safeguards in place that allow for if this doesn't go forward with the financing that they have suggested, they don't get their home and LIHTC funding as they have proposed, then it just reverts to what it is right now. So, but I will defer to my colleagues.

Thank you. And frankly, that's been my problem. is how can we do that? Because in talking to the state, it looks to me like LIHTC funding is probably not going to happen. But again, we can be optimistic. We want to help veterans. But at the end of the day, there's so much unknown about the project, but the zoning is finite. That's what they want us to do today, right? Is there a way we can postpone this, at least till we get more detail on what they're trying to build?

Yes, like I said earlier, what we can do is not introduce the zoning ordinance to change the actual zoning, if this is approved, until the review period. If they satisfy all conditions in the review period at that point, then we could then introduce the zone change ordinance to actually change the zoning and turn it into hard zoning. But we would delay that until they satisfied all conditions at this review period, one-year review, two-year review, whenever it would be.

Could we also ask that our

affordable housing department evaluate this and and make it fit all the standards that that clark county requires for affordable housing yes absolutely and commissioner um through mr warhol we could also if if that is your appetite we could also require or get um commitment from the city the landowner currently to revert to come back here with a zone change to put it back to the current

zoning if this project should fail um to get the financing yes can i ask a question um you know trust is a big deal with me so i'd like to see the contract the contingency contract to know what is being agreed upon because why we're in the property tax lawsuit this is why other deed restrictions don't work out because we never see the contract so i would like i think the city would be open to all of these things if they could move forward but i think we need to see that contract as well so uh one what i think one last question um

So there's a PLA on this project. Is there a beginning and an end date for the PLA?

There is a schedule that we have with the city, and I will explain the schedule in a second. So the PLA is, sorry, the PLA is getting finalized. We're hopeful, and if that's a requirement in there, that would be fine because we're looking at the next 60 days for the PLA. The schedule would be, we would start if there is some form of approval with conditions, we're able to start with the city. We'll start that process immediately. And we're hoping to start commencement of construction within that two-year period of the window that we have. Actually, I believe once when we get the property, the city's requiring us to commence within one year, I believe it is, right? Yeah, I believe if one year they don't see us commencing with construction, they have the ability to take the property back.

Okay, so that you understand, I think you do really well. The contingencies that, end up out of our control are the thing that are bothersome to us. So to the extent that we can do something that precisely results in what we're hearing from you today gives this project life in my mind. To the extent that we can't ensure that what all of these folks are here to support will really happen, not can really happen because we know it can happen, but because we lose control given the limitations that we have unless we get a bunch of concessions from you and commitments from you that become real and enforceable conditions on any approval. There's nothing we can do. We can just all say, well, we sure do hope that it ends up being what you all hope this becomes. And I think this is one of those times when we have a unique opportunity to align all of the expectations in a way that provide hard conditions that prevent there from being something different when this project finally gets developed and built. And I think that's what our concern is.

And I agree. And more than willing, as I said in my presentation, to work with you on collaborating, on get you comfortable so you can see that this is going to be a real project. And if it isn't, there is an end date quickly. You pull the plug and move on. And I understand that.

And I don't mean to be speaking for Commissioner Sagerblum. I'm just, for me, it's awfully hard not to support something that uh... is described as this was described in the beginning but when you start looking at the detail you realize we lose control unless there are a series of conditions that are hard conditions you've agreed to that are enforceable yes and a part of this too is whatever if it's a list of conditions that we want to go through we're fine we can meet that as i said we we came here today to say hey

We are willing to collaborate to see if we can make something out of this. Please, yes.

Commissioner McCarty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So your understanding to this point, based on some of the conversation that's been had, what are some of the conditions, the most stringent conditions that you're willing to agree to at this point?

Yeah, so what I'm thinking, I'm putting the hat on on both sides here, is I would believe that you would want a review and a shorter review just to see the progress. I mean, you could do a one-year review. I'm going to tell you the thought process here. One year is a long time. You know, there's a lot of things that can happen in a year. I would look at six months, if anything, because I think in six months you're going to see movement or you're not. Because the other thing is, well, we've got to work with the city. The city's given us like a year, right, to see some progress. So if we don't progress anywhere in six months, I don't want to stand up here and look at you if I don't have any compelling reasons, whatever. to say, hey, we can move forward. So I think you're looking at a six-month review. Now, in that review, I would look at part of the condition is you don't record the ordinance, okay, that was discussed.

Can I ask a point of clarification first before we get too far down this? I understood I was comfortable with holding it until you go back and get that stuff from the city and give us all those things. If you're asking me... TO APPROVE IT TODAY WITH THE BUDGET CONDITIONS. I'M NOT INTERESTED IN THAT BECAUSE Things get lost in the shuffle, then you have to go back and do all those things. We're fine. Okay, so I just want to make sure we're holding and we're not moving forward.

Yeah, if that's the request. Look, I'd rather get it over with, okay? I've been living with this forever. Oh, no, you've got to get more info.

We're going to hold your feet to the fire.

Yeah, I'm okay with that because I think we should put things in writing, and I want to make sure if I make a representation before you, it's in writing, okay? is I don't want to misrepresent anything but I got the tenor of what we need to do is put a lot of teeth in this and give you that comfort level on the list of things and Rob and I can go through and work with the commissioner and all of you on those conditions. We'll go back to the city and if it's a letter or some type of an agreement that if this project doesn't move forward.

I think we call them MOUs or interlocals.

Okay, if you want an MOU, interlocal, that means I got a lot of work, but that's okay, all right? But the point is, is if there's other concerns, then at least I could work with legal, with Rob, and getting in your staff and getting this all put together. I know the city's amenable in talking to the city is if we got to open something up and deliver whatever we need to deliver, they're cooperative with us and willing to do this.

So what I'm hearing is contingent on Commissioner Sagerbloom being willing to offer this hold. It would be the expectation of this board that the commitments that were made today, including the PLA, the contract language being viewed by this board, the deed restrictions, minimum of 50 years, the willingness of the city to return the zoning to the original, to the current zoning, and Commissioner Sagerbloom would like continued review and certification from our Office of Affordable Housing

And also something showing the LIHTC has been applied for or something. Explain how you're going to finance this project. But the PLA is fantastic. That is news to me today. So that's a huge step forward.

So I will get all that stuff. I have somebody back there I know writing everything down. I didn't write it, but I will review this tape to make sure we get everything to get addressed. And we'll have the whole LIHTC stuff laid out for you also.

So, Commissioner, Mr. Gronauer, how long do we think we need to take to get that done right?

I mean, we could do two things. We could hold it for two weeks and see where we are, but 30 days is probably, you're probably going to take about 30 days is to get everything what we need to get done. I can say we try for two weeks in good faith and get there because I want to, like you, get this stuff done.

Commissioner, it sounds like we'll see them on September 30th. Yeah, I would say at least a month.

May I ask a question of Rob? So when we talk about a reversionary clause, we've been screwed before on those. So I don't want that same kind of reversionary clause where I got to buy it. Do you know what I mean?

Yes, I know what you mean.

Okay. I just want to make sure that I'm not interested in buying something that I didn't want to begin with.

The idea was we would effectively rescind the zoning and I think the land use plan. The master plan as well.

The good thing is that we are not the one who has this property. So it reverts, but it isn't something where there could be any requirement for us to pay a dime.

I know, but I didn't think they were going to sue us on property tax either. So I'm just saying.

Well, I understand that part too.

I'm protecting the county.

If there's anything that makes us think twice about anything that we're hearing right now, it is that exactly what's happened to us. I mean, we've got a case pending in the state Supreme Court today. that never should have been brought.

Well, the crazier thing, we have to provide the services, right? So if that makes a big deal on a land use, we will be the ones providing those services, whether it be fire, roads, all those other things. So I just want to make sure what we're going to get.

Sorry mr.. Chair if I could for the record we will have to renotify this application since it's the third hold so Two weeks is out of the question, but we can do the October 7th meeting which would be a first zoning the first zoning meeting in October October 7th I Think October I think the October date makes sense if everyone here is as serious about getting this done and is anxious to make sure that it happens the right way as we have heard people say and

then all y'all who have something to do can get after it and get it done right in plenty of time. That's what I think, so.

Commissioner, sounds like there is a motion to hold. Is that your intention?

Yes, I would second that a motion.

There's a motion to hold until October 2nd, 7th. Please cast your vote. While those votes are being tallied, if I could just invite the audience. It's really exciting for us to have a group of people that care so much about affordable housing. It's a topic that we discuss on almost every one of our Tuesday agendas so I just want to invite everybody to take a look at Clark County's welcome home initiative it has a website all of the work that has been done since 2022 is listed there and I just invite you to engage with us on it since we have a mutual passion for it welcome home Clark County that motion passes thank you for everyone being here thank you thank you for the discussion I appreciate it have a good

All right, next item on our agenda is.

While you're reading that, just for the audience, we have 50 more items to discuss today, 30 more items. So thanks for coming. We'll give them just two minutes to exit. Continue our board meeting in just a second here. And while the board is reassembling, I want to thank everybody who was patient here on other items while we advanced that one.

Let's do it. All right, next items on the agenda are 21 and 22, which are companion items. They'll be heard together. 21 is AR-26-400-060, ZC21-0095, holdover zone change, first application for review, To reclassify 4.7 acres from an RS-20 zone to a CP zone, use permits for the following. One, major training facility. Two, recreational facility with temporary outdoor commercial events. And three, live entertainment. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, reduce parking. Two, reduce separation from a temporary commercial outdoor event to a residential use. Three, reduce separation for outdoor live entertainment to a residential use. And four, allow modified driveway design standards. design review for a major training facility, office uses, and recreational facility in conjunction with a non-profit disability service provider, generally located north of Windmill Lane and east of Gagneer Boulevard alignment within Spring Valley. And number 22 is UC-26-0424, use permit for a restaurant and related facilities in conjunction with an existing training facility on 4.69 acres in a CP zone, generally located north of Windmill Lane and east of Gagneer Boulevard alignment within Spring Valley. Good morning.

Hi, good morning.

Thank you for being here.

Yes, thank you for having me.

For the board's edification, we have seen this property many times here before. We've got a slightly different use, so I'll let you go over it.

Yes, thank you so much. My name is Taylor Chaney. Our address is 8390 West Windmill Lane, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89113. Thank you for your time this morning, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today. The Garden Foundation is a non-profit organization. We serve adults with disabilities. We are eight years old and we recently purchased the property at Windmill Lane in January. We provide continuing education, recreation, and vocational services for adults with disabilities after they age out of the school district. So, as Commissioner mentioned, this is the request for a two-year review of the current entitlements attached to the property. We would like to keep all of the existing attachments. However, I would like to mention that it is not our intention, we will not be marketing the property to the general public as an event space in which it was previously done. The Garden Foundation and its tenants are able to use the property for events. The second request here today is the cafe use. So I'm going to share a photo here just so you have a good idea of the property. And so this here is Windmill Lane. And the second condition in which we're asking for is a approval of permit use for a cafe that's located right here. We are hoping to open this cafe to the public. We are currently using it as a training facility for adults with disabilities. Employment for adults with disabilities, as you know, there's a large gap there. We hope to be a solution for that. And so our intention is to open this cafe for public use for adults with disabilities to earn competitive wage employment and obviously be a part of the community.

Very good. Thank you. At this time, I'll open the public hearing on items 21 and 22. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Thank you for the presentation. I'm prepared to move for approval of items 21 and 22, I believe, in order just to ensure what you've offered today is appropriately translated here. Director, you've got...

So just to ensure that only tenants of the property are allowed to do events, we'll say that the recreational facility, including but not limited to indoor and outdoor events, shall be for the use of tenants of the property.

That condition meets your understanding?

Yes, it does.

Very good. So with that condition, I'll go ahead and move for approval of item 21 and 22. Please cast your vote. Motion passes.

Thank you so much. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Next item on the agenda is number 23, UC-26-0403, holdover use permit for vehicle maintenance or repair, waivers of development standards for the following, one, reduce buffering and screening, two, general parking area design, three, modify residential adjacency standards, four, waive off-site improvements, allow attached sidewalks to remain, and five, alternative driveway geometrics. Design review for proposed shopping center on 2.26 acres in a CG zone, generally located south of Desert Inn Road and west of Nellis Boulevard within Paradise.

Good morning, thank you. Good morning, Sheldon Colon, 2140 Pebble Road, representing the applicant. Beyond what staff has described here, this is for a new development on a currently unoccupied piece of land. And we are asking for a few waivers. The majority of it is not as drastic as a waiver describes, but we are asking for the proximity of the tire shop and the QSR to the residential. and to lessen that impact we do have a retail building at the back of the property which is blocking a lot of that from the residences and as with the residential adjacency there is a fifteen foot requirement for landscaping but we are uh... increasing the landscaping along the back and so the neighboring partner properties will not be as affected as the Description is we did work with staff to lessen the impact coming off a desert in They asked us to move the throat depth and make it a little more and I am here to answer any questions you may have Thank you very much, this is a public hearing on item 23 those wishing to speak please come forward Seeing no one seeing someone Please come forward state your name for the record

My name is Al Rojas, and I'm a little familiar with this area. I don't recall the empty lot. We had to clean up a lot of homeless. There's a school around there. It's called, I believe, Hal Smith or something. And if there is a vacant lot, there's a lot of homeless in that area. We've known that developing an area does help with that and I'm gonna leave my card here We're part of a neighborhood watch program and you need some help and I would support some kind of development on these vacant lots Especially that's a hot spot.

Thank you very much Thank you seeing no one else wishing to speak I'll close the public hearing Commissioner Gibson Thank you for the reasons that are indicated.

I mean, this is a challenging area for us and uh... development will dramatically influence in a positive way uh... things that are happening in that area and for that reason i move approval of uh... of item twenty three there is a motion for approval please cast your vote

The motion passes.

Thank you. The next item is 24, which is a companion with 25 and will be heard together. 24 is VS-26-0379, holdover, vacate, and abandon easements of interest to Clark County located between Campbell Road and Kevin Way and Azure Drive and Regina Avenue within Lone Mountain. And 25 is WS-26-0380. Holdover waivers of development standards for the following. One, allow a gated community. Two, eliminate street landscaping. Three, increase retaining wall height. Four, increase fill height. Five, reduce call box setbacks. And six, waive full offset improvements. Design review for proposed single family residential development on two and a half acres in an RS-20 zone within the Neighborhood Protection RMP overlay. generally located north of Azure Drive and east of Campbell Road within Lone Mountain. Thank you, 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 north of Azure, east of Campbell. It's a four-lock cul-de-sac. We are asking for waivers. However, a little bit about the background. It is zoned RS20 with a land use of RN, and it's in the RN PNPO overlay district. The lots range from 20,153 to 23,351 with an average lot size of 27,553. All the lots meet the net square footage for the Lone Mountain Overlay District, which is above 18,000. The first waiver that we're asking for is to allow a gated community. The second one is to eliminate street landscaping, but this is only for the east side, and there will be a retaining wall of three feet, then the landscape of six feet, and then another retaining wall. So it is not fronting the street, that's why we had to ask for a waiver, but we're not eliminating any landscaping essentially. We're also asking for an increase of wall height to seven feet. This is because there is a differential of 12 feet between these lots, so we're trying to match in the middle with the four-lot cul-de-sac. We're also asking for an increase of fill, and then we're asking to reduce the call setback to 30 where 50 is required. There are other lots to the west side where the call box is smaller than 30 feet, and it's an A-lock cul-de-sac. We're also asking to waive full off-site improvements as it correlates with the rest of the area. With that, I conclude my presentation. I'm here to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you very much. We'll open the public hearing on items 24 and 25. Please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Becker.

Yeah, I am comfortable with this. I know that we talked about the fill and the wall height. I think this is the safest option. And also I wanted to just note that these will be one-story houses. So really the effect is on your clients more than the existing neighbors. So with that, I would move for approval.

Thank you. There's a motion for approval on items 24 and 25. Please cast your vote. the motion passes thank you commissioners have a good day

Next item is 26, which is companion with 27 and 28, and they'll be heard together. 26 is VS-26-0381, holdover, vacate, and abandon easements of interest to Clark County located between Rainbow Boulevard and Rosanna Street and Aquendo Road and Patrick Lane, and a portion of right-of-way being Rainbow Boulevard located between Aquendo Road and Patrick Lane within Spring Valley. 27 is WS-26-0382, holdover waiver of development standards to reduce throat depth design review for a proposed office building on 2.04 acres in a CG zone within the airport environs, AE60 overlay. Generally located west of Rainbow Boulevard and south of Aquindo Road within Spring Valley. And 28 is TM-26-500-096, holdover tentative map consisting of one commercial lot on 2.04 acres in a CG zone within the airport environs, AE60 overlay. Generally located west of Rainbow Boulevard and south of Aquindo Road within Spring Valley.

Thank you, good morning.

Good morning, Jennifer Lazovich, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive here this morning on behalf of the applicant. The site is located right here just to the west side of Rainbow and we held it for two weeks so that we could work on some cross access. We did provide to staff the revised plans that I'm showing you now which does provide cross access to the project that is to the north of us and then as well cross access to the existing project that is to the south of us. We are not providing any cross access to the west but we think that that makes sense because there is a hotel being developed here and there's access road I'll call it that a driveway maybe that's a better word a driveway that runs right in this area you can see it down all the way down here and then it shows on their site plan is running all the way north so with that they've got some cross access within their site to get either to the north or to the south and our site will now have that cross access to the retail to the north as well as I believe it is an office complex to the south. We revised the plans, we submitted them to planning staff so they have it updated our justification letters to reflect this plan and we would ask for your approval.

Thank you very much. Thank you for holding it so that we could get that cross access to the north and the south. With that I'll move for approval after I open the public hearing on items 26 through 28. Anyone wishing to speak please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing and move for approval of item 26, 27, and 28 with the cross access to the north and the south. Please cast your vote. That motion passes.

Items 29 through 33 were previously held. That brings us to 34, which is a companion with 35, and they'll be read together. 34 is VS-26-0449, vacate and abandon easements of interest to Clark County located between Martin Avenue Alignment and Mall Avenue and Valley View Boulevard and Procyon Street Alignment within Enterprise. And 35 is WS-26-0448. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, eliminate street landscaping. Two, eliminate buffering and screening. Three, increase retaining wall height. And four, waive full offsite improvements. Design review for proposed single family residential development on 2.2 acres in an RS-20 zone within the airport environs and neighbor protection RMP overlays. Generally located east of Valley View Boulevard and north of Mall Avenue within Enterprise.

Good morning. Good morning. Mark Mall, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, here on behalf of the applicant. The site is just over two acres located there at the northeast corner of Valley View Boulevard and Mall Avenue. The applicant is proposing a development with four homes at a density of 1.8 dwelling units per acre, so conforming to that ranch estate neighborhood land use plan. Within the application, there are some waivers. So along the north, south, and east, there is increased retaining wall. It's necessary for the site. Additionally, too, just wanted to point out briefly that a similar development by the applicant was approved just recently on the northwest corner. So now they're coming on the northeast corner to continue the development. along this portion of the 215 that sits there to the north. One of the waivers is a similar waiver that was included in the last application package. That is for buffering and screening along the 215. That was approved. That is uncommon in this area. There still will be a wall It's set back from the 215. The homeowner will be able to have that side yard landscaping. Additionally, to keep in line with the area, especially east of Valley View Boulevard, we are requesting waivers of landscaping and waivers of offsite improvements. The applicant does agree to the condition to construct the five foot asphalt trail. that's there on the application, but we want to keep it consistent with the area. I'm happy to answer any questions on this project. Thank you.

Thank you very much. This is a public hearing on items 34 and 35. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing and go ahead and move for approval of items 34 and 35. Please cast your vote. The motion passes, thank you. Thank you.

Next item is 36, WS-26-0334, holdover amended waivers of development standards for the following, one, reduce street landscaping, two, reduce parking area landscaping, which is no longer needed, three, waive fall offset improvements, and four, alternative driveway geometrics. Design review for proposed warehouse on 0.34 acres in an IP zone, generally located north of Park Street and east of McLaurin Avenue within Sunrise Manor.

Mr. Chairman, the applicant doesn't appear to be here. I'm not sure. We met with them in the interim and thought we had a deal. So is it better to do that without prejudice or can we postpone it without having to do another mailing?

So, yeah, we never got the revised plans from them. So I don't know if they wanted more time to work on that.

I'd like to at least reach out to them, but I don't know what happened. It's probably best to hold it.

Yeah, we can hold it. So this one, if we do hold, it has to be re-notified as well because it's the third hold. So as soon as we can get it back to you is October 7th, and then the applicant's going to have to pay for the re-notification.

All right, great. They were in such an urgency, but I guess urgency has different definitions. Thank you.

Sounds like there is a motion to hold Item 36 until October 7th. Please cast your vote. The motion passes.

Next item is 37, WS-26-0369, holdover waiver of development standards to allow modified driveway design standards and design reviews for the expansion of an existing park, Echo Trail Park, including the following, one public facility, community center, two accessory structures, and three signage on a portion of 36.3 acres in a PF zone, generally located at the northwest corner of Buffalo Drive and Russell Road within Spring Valley.

Thank you. Before they start their presentation, I was surprised. I thought this was the item everybody was here for today. But I'll just preface it by in advance thanking this board for allowing us to get to this point. This is what will be after many, many, many years of having no community centers in the entire township of Enterprise. The team before us with RPM and Parks brought a Silverado Ranch Community Center, and now this board has asked you to move forward with a design for Echo Trail Park. I'll turn it over to you.

Good morning, Chair and Board. Thank you for having us. My name is Jason Georgorian. I'm with Alexia Chin. We're with LGA Architecture. As Commissioner Naft mentioned a moment ago, this project has a background, a little bit of background history. A few years ago, we partnered with Clark County on creating the first new community center in probably nearly a decade in Clark County. Huge success in Silverado Ranch community, a lot of great uses, it's well loved. So this project takes all those great functions and programs, including a demonstration kitchen, multi-purpose event space, multi-generational programming, art rooms, dance floor, gymnasium, and what really the community wanted was an indoor walking track. That was all included, one of the first public community centers with that, I believe. We want to take all those ingredients into this new neighborhood and improve upon them. That was the mission before us. So new, improved means nearly doubling the size of the gymnasium, nearly double the length of the walking track that's raised above the whole community center, creating a good, great environment for that community. I'm going to turn it over to Alexia. She's going to get into the design aspects of it, and we'll answer any questions you may have for us.

All right, good morning. So as you can see here, and I don't know when staff will switch over to the overhead camera. There you go. We're on the corner of Buffalo and Russell, and there is an existing park that's already there, and it's very popular and well in demand. What we're doing is on the southwest corner of the property to develop a community center that's roughly 58,000 square feet and then roughly five acre of a site development area along with the community center and on the parcel that's overall 36.3 acres. We're also including a new parking lot. that will bring up currently the current park has only 33 parking spaces and it's already a fight to park every time commissioner has an event there so this project will add a lot more parking spaces bring the total parking for this park up to 320. so i think the the you can see here there's two new driveway that's added off of russell on allowing direct access to the community center and not to, you know, there's no connection with the existing part because it's already built around and there's future development to the north that we're considering. So there's potential connection to the north on development. This is part of our request for waiver standards to reduce the 100 foot throw depth requirement for both of these driveway and we're offering one driveway at 58 and the other at 151 to accommodate the size of the parking lot, the amount of parking that's in the space. I can switch over and show some of the elevations.

The board would love that, I'm sure.

This is the front entrance. And in this case, The front entrance is on the east end of the community center, faces the existing development of the park. And between the park and the community center, there is an area of turf that's being developed as a multifunctional turf that has some mounding designed for it. So connecting to the existing, when I say turf, I mean natural grass turf area. That's already in the current park. So connecting that, transitioning to a new community center, and connecting the two areas together. and then next we have this is kind of the south elevation so looking from russell this will be the view but there will be a lot more landscaping in front of the building once all the trees grow up we are showing For the parking lot design, all of the sidewalks that are between the parking stalls are lined with trees. One of the important things to point out is the current park in the undeveloped area, there is currently a dirt trail. Wrapping around the whole park and is a very popular with their residents In this new development the area where the dirt trail is will be developed into a concrete paved trail But continue the same arrangement so you can still do the full loop around the entire property But we're also making sure that along the trail there's multiple trees planted for shade as we know It's getting hotter every summer and we know trees are you know, always a great asset to the community Especially in the park and community center development So there are several new ways of meandering the parking lot under the tree shade for the trail access there. Thank you. Do you have any photos of the indoor track?

bring anything with us but you're welcome to visit silver arbor ranch commuter it will look almost just like that with different you know painting on the wall we can go on a race up there sometime if that concludes the presentation i'll open the public comment period on item 37 anyone wishing to speak this is your chance Seeing no one, I'll close the public comment period and just say from my perspective, this is about as exciting a thing as we get to do here. Jason, Alexia, if you weren't already intent on bringing the vision forward, I know Tiffany and Monica were going to make sure you did, that we not only highlighted everything about Silverado Ranch Community Center that works, but expanded on it, improved upon it. You listened to the actual people who use that center along with the staff who run that center and i think this is just an incredible thing for that neighborhood surrounded by residential we know that places like this improve property value they give people safe healthy places to be and this is just going to be a wonderful asset for that community i will say that clark county saved significant capital dollars with this project by re by a repurposing the similar design to Silverado Ranch. I would encourage everybody to do that. I think it's a perfect design, and we were able to save a lot of capital dollars in doing that. So before I lose any votes, I'll move for approval, but I also want to acknowledge and thank Lisa, who has been there every step of the way on this, and Jessica, of course, too. I'll move for approval of item 37, the Echo Trail Community Center.

Mr. Chair, I just want to chime in and say I have serious issues with this proposal. Congratulations on getting this done. It's going to benefit District F also and look forward to a forthcoming plan for the Mountain's Edge Community Center very soon.

Absolutely. If there is a motion, please cast your vote. That motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you, Tiffany. Thank you, Monica.

Next item on the agenda is 38WS-26-0417, Waiver of Development Standards to Reduce Setbacks, Design Review for Single Family Residential Development on 7 1⁄2 Acres in an RS-20 Zone within the Neighborhood Protection, RMP Overlay, generally located south of Cougar Avenue and east of War Bonnet Way within Enterprise. Good morning.

Good morning again. Jennifer Lazovic, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, here this morning on behalf of TriPoint. The project is located south of Cougar and just to the east of Warbonnet Way. The project was previously approved for a different developer in November of 25. These are all half acre lots. A new developer has come in to do the lots. It's going to be now TriPoint Homes. Again, it remains all half acre lots. So the application in front of you today gets the elevations approved that are tri-points elevations with the project. Excuse me, they're right here. Gets the elevations approved. All of the plans include really three-car garage. You see this, but what you're not seeing is that there's a garage that is also to the side as well. So we also have a front yard setback. This shows the whole community. The waiver for the front yard setback is only being requested on this side. This side lots one through six already has the waiver for the front yard setback. To the extent that they needed it code does allow a 20-foot front setback over here So tri point was asking to mirror that setback on this side.

However in working with Commissioner Jones We want to

condition into the record that the waiver of development standards applies to lots 7, 8, 11, 12, and 13 only. The reason that we're not applying it to lots 9 and 10 is because there are existing homes just to the south of us which have that 40-foot setback right next door. So we're going to mirror that setback for those two lots. But then for the remaining lots, which are 7, 8, 11, 11, 12, and 13, we'd be able to have that reduced front set back to 20 feet. In the world in which we live in, in terms of where you recreate, it's in the backyard. The houses aren't getting any bigger. It's just that we give that extra space into the backyard for them to do more with in the backyard. In addition to that, we have worked with Public Works on Miller Lane. Miller Lane comes right through right here. And then I don't, I think Public Works has a condition regarding offsites that would just involve paving only. And in order to match what's to the north and south, we would not put in curb, gutter, sidewalk, or streetlight.

Very good. At this time, we'll open the public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Posian, do you want to chime in on language for Miller Lane?

Thank you, Commissioner. As you can see on the aerial that nobody north or south of this subdivision has offsites. And we're OK with just having the 32 feet of paving to match what's north and south. So if I can add, if you're OK, offsites along Miller Lane to include 32 feet of paving only. And because we're removing the curb and gutter, we would also like to add the drainage study and compliance condition.

Very good. I do have one question for Mr. Allswing, because my colleague asked about it. With the set-offs, we changed the code so that that could be done administratively, but I guess there's a distinction between if it is in a private street or a public street.

Right, so we put things back to how the old code was. So on private streets in the old code, essentially it was a 20-foot setback. The public streets under old code was still the 40-foot setback, and so that's how the code is today. This is a little bit of an unusual subdivision. They have the one private street on the west side, and then Miller Lane being a public street that bisects the property. That's why they need the 40-foot setback there.

All right. Well, maybe at a future meeting we consider the smaller public streets not on larger ones looking at that also but with that i'll go ahead and move for approval agenda item number 38 with the additional conditions as read in today thank you you've heard the motion please cast your vote the motion passes thank you

Okay, items 39 through 42 have been held. That brings us to 43, and that is companion with 44 and 45. I'll read those together. 43 is ZC-26-0421, zone change to reclassify 10.08 acres from an RS-80 zone, and H2 zone to IP zone, generally located west of US 95 and south of Spring Canyon Road within South County. 44 is VS-26-0422, vacate and abandon easements of interest to Clark County located between Spring Canyon Road and Facility Access Road and between Whidbey Road alignment and US Highway 95 within South County. And 45 is UC-26-0423, use permit for public utility structures, the BESS facility, electric substation, and overhead transmission lines, and associated equipment. Waivers of development standards for the following. One, increase structure height. Two, eliminate street landscaping. Three, reduce security fencing height. Four, reduce gate setback. Five, waive fall off-site improvements. And six, alternative driveway geometrics. and design review for public utility structures and associated structures and equipment on 10.08 acres in an IP zone generally located west of US 95 and south of Spring Canyon Road within South County.

Welcome back. Good morning, Bob Gronauer, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive. I'm here representing the applicant on these three matters. I'll just give you the location here. As you can see here in the green, you just previously approved one of our facilities here within the last year that's highlighted in green. The application that's before you today is highlighted in yellow. This is a zone change that staff is recommending approval for. We have the use permit with waiver development standards that staff is also recommending approval. in the vacation application that's before you. There's one note, to keep the presentation short, is we've worked with the Clark County Fire Department in regards to the site, just like we've done with our existing site here. And then on this project, we've also worked with Boulder City, and I got two conditions that we're agreeing to in meeting with Boulder City so we could put on this application with their support. That would be number one would be the applicant will extend and connect to Boulder City's water system no later than January 1, 2030, unless an extension of time is filed and approved. And then the second condition is the applicant will provide fire hydrants in locations approved by Boulder City. within the Amcor Avenue right-of-way once extension and connection have occurred. So with those two conditions, and I believe Boulder City submitted a revised letter on Monday of this week, and we agreed to these two conditions. So that being said, I'm here to answer any other questions you may have.

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

Thank you. Yes, thank you for working with Boulder City. They're concerned about a number of things that are unique to them. These conditions meet with their approval. These are the things that they finally agreed upon, as you suggested. And with that, I move approval with these added conditions that you've read into the record related to the Boulder City requirements.

Thank you. We have a motion by Commissioner Gibson. Cast your vote. Motion is adopted.

Thank you very much, and have a good day.

Next item is 46, which is companion with 47 and 48, and I'll read them together. 46 is ZC-26-0443, zone change to reclassify 0.86 acres from an RS 5.2 zone and an RM 32 zone to CR zone, generally located east of Koval Lane and north of Tropicana Avenue within Paradise. 47 is VS-25, sorry, VS-26, dash zero four four five vacate and abandon a portion of right-of-way being coval lane located between tropicana avenue and tompkins avenue within paradise and number 48 is uc-26-0444 use permit for long-term short-term lodging waivers of development standards for the following one reduce street landscaping to reduce and eliminate buffering three modify residential adjacency standards four reduce parking five, reduce pedestrian walkway width, six, reduce access gate setback, seven, allow attached sidewalk, and eight, alternative driveway geometrics, and design review for long-term, short-term hotel on 0.86 acres in a CR zone within the airport and Byron's AE65 overlay, generally located east of Koval Lane and north of Tropicana Avenue within Paradise.

Welcome.

Good morning. Mark Mahal, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, here on behalf of the applicant. And so with this application, it's important to understand the location. It's just under an acre, 0.86 acres. located there north of Tropicana and east of Coval Lane. There are existing buildings on the site. There are weekly rentals in this portion of the Coval Lane corridor. And so with this small site, you heard the list of waivers that come along with it. So there are unique things related to this redevelopment and infill in this area. First, I'll touch on The zone change we are requesting a conforming zone change to commercial resort. As you can see, being just off the strip corridor, that is what dominates the area. It conforms to the entertainment mixed use land use designation. And as such, staff is recommending approval, which we appreciate. Additionally, The applicant is a fourth generation real estate group that really focuses on revitalization. So they want to come into this area and rehab the existing buildings that are on the site, which is listed here as building B and building C for a hotel use. The other buildings will be demolished to make way for building A. for lobby and amenities. On the site, we do have access from Coval Lane. With that, we did have a waiver related to reducing the width of the Coval Lane driveway. We have worked with public works and stakeholders related to Coval Lane. So we are withdrawing without prejudice that waiver 8A. so that we will conform to RTC standard drawings, and that driveway will conform to those. Again, as mentioned, many of the waivers are related to the site constraints, and that's evident within the staff report. And then some of the waivers as well are related to residential adjacency standards. But these sites largely operate as weekly, daily rentals, more transient lodging, which is akin to this rather than the zoning designation that overlays those. So with that, happy to answer any questions. We are excited for this project. Thank you.

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

Thank you. Mr. Papazian, did you have anything related to the alternative driveway geometrics or any of the other items here?

Nope. They worked with us, Commissioner, and we appreciate them working with us. I did want to point out the attached sidewalk on Decau. The frontage is not large enough to do a detached sidewalk. So even though we're not supporting it, there's no way that they can meet that detached sidewalk requirement.

Yeah.

So as it turns out, this is an area where we really have hoped over considerable time that we would get some redevelopment. And finally, we have some. And when we talk about daily weeklies, my expectation, I think that the expectation of the proposer is that this will not be our typical standard daily, weekly. This will work in conjunction with the resort corridor in a mutually helpful way. I'm anxious to see the development come forward. And with that, I move approval of these items, which approval would include the withdrawal of waiver 8A. So that would be, I think, really subject to the if approved conditions.

There is a motion on items 46 through 48. Please cast your vote. The motion passes.

All right, thank you very much. Thank you. Next item is 49, WC-26-400-059, UC-23-0529. Appeal waivers of conditions of use permits requiring the following. One, traffic study update and compliance. And two, coordinate with Public Works for the installation of school zone pedestrian flashers on Desert Inn Road in conjunction with a school and daycare. on 0.64 acres in a CP zone, generally located north of Desert Inn Road and east of Torrey Pines Drive within Spring Valley. And this item was appealed by the applicant since the Planning Commission denied the application.

Welcome.

Good morning. My name is Lillian Aguirre and I'm here on behalf of Blessed Day Academy at 6440 West Desert and Road. Since the last commissioner meeting, I have continued working in good faith to address the county's concern regarding traffic mitigation and the school zone. flashing beacon condition. I have now consulted with two civil engineers and provided detailed information regarding our proposed drop off and pick up procedures including anticipated vehicle volume, scheduling staff supervision on site circulations and measures intended to prevent vehicles from backing onto Desert Inn Road. I have also written correspondence from engineer and public works indicating that because there has been no increase in the proposed enrollment, the existing traffic study remains sufficient. My engineers have therefore encouraged me to ask whether the county would consider modifying the flasher condition rather than requiring immediate installation. We accept the county's safety objective. The question is whether immediate construction is proportionate and necessary at our present enrollment and traffic level, or whether the same objective can be accomplished phase compliance. The engineers have explained that flasher installations may require additional surveying, utility coordination, right-of-way review, design work, and potentially permanent easement depending on the power condition for a small program. The immediate cost and timing of those improvements create a significant burden. This delay has already had a meaningful financial impact on the academy and the families it has served. It has been a setback in opening and operational projections. At this time, transportation has already been part of our five-year growth plan. As the academy expands, we intend to provide organized student transportation, which should further reduce individual vehicle trips and minimize traffic congestion. I am not asking the county to disregard the existing conditions or compromise safety. I am asking for reasonable modification or phase-compliant approach that reflects our current enrollment, actual traffic conditions, and planned transport model. We want to comply, we want to collaborate with the county, and we want to create a safe and much-needed resource for families in this community. I respectfully ask the commissioner boards to help us identify a reasonable pathway moving forward. Thank you.

Thank you very much. This will be a public hearing. If anyone's here on this item, they can come forward at this time. Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Commissioner Jones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for enduring our long meeting today as previous meetings. I think there's been a lot of miscommunication over the course of this, and I think that's unfortunate. I think what you're trying to do there benefits what we're trying to do at Department of Family Services. That said, still got to follow rules. I think you really tried to find a location that already had entitlements. It was already set up for This kind of activity you're not trying to drop a school in the middle of an r&p. But there was conditions on that property that had not been complied with before, can you clarify with regards to the childcare or the daycare facility whether you're operational right now.

So because it's been vacant and I want to keep my families happy, I have done events with the families, social skills group just to get the families on-site, get them comfortable. I also wanted to test trial what that would look like for traffic pickup and drop-offs. And so, yes, we are not in operations, but I have had families on the property to tour, to come visit, just to keep that connection and, quite frankly, just to keep that hope and to show them that we are here and we're going to continue to have a program to support them.

I think what you had suggested to the Planning Commission and that we had talked about was opening the daycare facility immediately, and that would not require a flasher. It doesn't require one for a flasher. My suggestion today is that we allow for the applicant to move forward with immediately opening the daycare facility. With regards to traffic, steady update, there hasn't been a You still have to do an update. Your engineer is still going to have to do an update. But given that there was previously a traffic study, it shouldn't be a significant burden on doing the update, and that once that traffic study update is completed, then Public Works can review that and determine uh what safety measures are necessary i will say it's a bit frustrating as as we have talked and as i've talked with with our team here that for a very small school on desert inn there may be a requirement for a flasher but if it's the las vegas day school which has thousands of people going in and out of there every single day there's not a flasher on desert inn or on jones so I think that we have to look at what's reasonable under the circumstances and given that there is no expectation for the kids that you intend to serve with the school to be walking to or from school, what is a reasonable ask and also what is required under our statute.

mr all swing you want to chime in on that yeah so okay so we're going to still require the traffic study or the traffic study update um one of the conditions is to waive the the school flashers um if the traffic study says that flashers are needed then she'll have to comply is that correct yes okay go ahead anthony

No, I don't want to.

And then she could operate the daycare immediately, and we suggested a one-year time period to commence and review, obviously. As soon as she opens the daycare, she's commenced. She'll have to come back in one year for review. At that time, the board can evaluate the traffic study and the school flasher situation and then decide whether or not she can open up the school. However, we did discuss that if the flashers are done, if the traffic study's done and everything is completed prior to that one-year review, then we will be able to sign off on her business license for the school ahead of time. Fazian.

Thank you, Commissioner. Just for my clarification, just the daycare is opening right now? Correct. And then if and when the school opens, they'll be back in front of the board for that approval? Or she does what's required. What's required of the treasurer. Okay, gotcha. Thank you.

All right, that's my motion.

There is a motion. Please cast your vote. Sorry, one more. Can I add one question? It's going to help her. Sorry. One of our conditions calls out the wrong standard drawing. We're asking her to construct a commercial curb return driveway. I don't think she's got the room to construct a commercial curb return driveway. So if I can delete and add a condition. I would like to delete, again, because it calls out standard drawing 224. 224 is a commercial PAN driveway. So I'd like to delete reconstruct driveways as a commercial curb return driveway per the uniform standard 224, provide a five foot wide concrete sidewalk behind the existing driveway for compliance with ADA. And I'd like to add reconstruct driveway as commercial PAN driveway per uniform standard 224 or provide a five foot wide concrete sidewalk behind the existing driveway for compliance with ADA. I was just correcting the note in the...

Okay, in the nick of time, that motion I'm sure reflects those comments, and you can post the vote. The motion passes.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next item is 50, UC-26-0303, appeal use permit for proposed recreational or entertainment facility within an existing office warehouse complex on a portion of 5.31 acres in an IP zone within the airport environs AE60 overlay, generally located west of Tenaya Way and north of Sunset Road within Spring Valley. I do want to clarify that the staff report in your agenda indicates that the Planning Commission denied this item. The Planning Commission approved the item, subject to a list of conditions, and then we received an appeal from an aggrieved person who disagrees with the Planning Commission decision.

Very good. Hello.

Good morning, Commissioner, Chair, Commissioners, Denicio Gordillo, 204 Belle Isle Court, Henderson, Nevada, 89012 here on behalf of the applicant for item number 50. I'm going to keep my comments brief, but I do want to get a couple things on record. of encapsulates everything that we've done throughout this whole process just so that it's understood what we are proposing what conditions we're agreeing to and what we're not proposing if you look at the overhead which is the map that you have in your agenda packet we are located within what is commonly referred to as tinea lofts A number of lofts there that are existing and under construction. It's on the west side of Tenaya, 300 feet north of Sunset Road. Our property, the suites that are under this request are highlighted there in pink, if you can kind of see that. Zoom in, I'll give you a larger exhibit here in a second. The property is zoned industrial park, so it's industrial zoning. The applicant which owns these two suites, not a leasee, they're not leasing, he's actually owner, owner of the two suites. And it's centrally located within 10A Lofts, which is pretty much insulated from all the other perimeter boundaries of the property. Here is the larger exhibit, if I can flatten that out. Again, our two suites are located, Suites 110, Suites 135. Central building, we've got some six-unit lofts that are under construction now on the north. These four units will be under construction here in the next couple of weeks. So again, we're fairly insulated from the perimeter of the development. But what you have before you today is a special use permit for a small scale competitive computer gaming facility where participants basically sit at a desk or a table with a personal computer in front of them and compete against each other. That means that the interior space is basically going to be computer gaming stations. some video content rooms and limited gaming spectator viewer areas. There will be no exterior construction alterations or added signage of any kind. All improvements are strictly interior to ensure that, you know, of course the appearance and the impact on the adjacent properties is unaffected or unchanged. The facility is not open to the general public and no walk-in access is permitted. All events are pre-planned, ticketed, and or invitation only, and managed by trained event operations staff. As is reflected in the staff report, we believe that this project will not have any impact on any adjacent properties, including the units in Tenet Loft. Again, the suites, the two suites are fully insulated from everything else. The request is only for interior improvements, The site has ample parking. If you look at your staff report, we are more than adequately parked for our use in the existing complex as well. But notwithstanding that, one of the conditions that I'll read here in a few is that we will have a coordinated offsite transportation plan for attendees via shuttle service. And I would submit to you. terms of what we're proposing that our use is substantially less intense than a permitted use in that IP zoning district staff has recommended approval we appreciate that and working with them over the last five months or so four months Spring Valley Town Board unanimously approved the request as well subject to a list of conditions that were that they took from our original justification letter Planning Commission unanimously approved the request as well with conditions. And then finally, I'd like to just end with a simple statement that the property owner that bought these, he is part of the neighborhood. He's part of this community. He's not a leasee. He's not a fly-by-night. He's working on some larger issues in terms of a community initiative related to this use. So he wants to see, just as much as anyone else, that this neighborhood stays stable the way it is now, that there are no impacts associated with the use, and that it is controlled and compliant with Clark County regulations at all times. So with that, we would respectfully request your approval. Subject to, if you can give me just one second, and staff should have a copy of of these conditions. Now, these conditions have been circulating for, I don't know, maybe a couple months. They were part of our file, our initial submittal. But in the file, they're called out as operational controls. What we've done is we've shortened those, we've condensed them. This is the final iteration of conditions, and if I may, I'd like to read them into the record. And I know, even though staff has it, I'd like to read them in. And again, we can discuss these conditions if that's what it comes down to. We're amenable to anything, but these are the conditions as we've proposed them. One year review as a public hearing. Use is limited to the two suites there, which are 110 and 135.

Maximum of 150... Denise, just in the interest of time, since you put them up on the screen, you can leave them up there because I'm going to change some of these, I suspect. So I won't make you run through them since some of them might be changed.

Yeah, that's fine. Maximum of six events per month.

No, I'm saying you don't have to run through them. Oh, so you can read them from there? Thank you. Fantastic. Anything else?

That should do it. That completes my presentation.

Okay. In that case, I'll go ahead and open this up for the public hearing. As a reminder, this is here to us on an appeal. if you want to probably remove the conditions so that we can have the map. Thank you. Good morning.

My name is Whitney Horky. I live at 6329 Arcade Fire Street in the neighboring neighborhood. I am here asking you to approve this appeal and deny the special use permit for visible noise because I do not believe it meets the standards required under Clark County Title 30. The application describes Loftworks as an office warehouse complex, but it is a live where you can work community where people reside. Title 30 requires the intensity, scale, and operations of proposed use to be harmonious with and compatible with the surrounding development and not create an undue adverse effect on adjacent properties, neighborhood character, traffic, parking, or the general welfare. No matter the good intentions of the applicant and their willingness to accept conditions, the fundamental question is whether the use is compatible with this location. The applicant was also unable to answer many questions during the town board meeting including whether they intend to sell or serve alcohol as their sister property does on the strip. The 11 proposed conditions themselves highlight the compatibility problem when conditions are needed to control occupancy, event frequency, hours, noise, parking, transportation, crowd control, loitering, and guest conduct. That raises a serious question about whether this use is appropriate for the location in the first place. After one year, the residents will be expected to come back and address whether these conditions were followed. That places an unreasonable burden on the residents to monitor, document, and report problems while potentially having to live with these impacts for an entire year before their voices can be heard again. Our neighborhood has already been through a similar process with a nearby recreational facility that was denied their special use permit and continued to operate. These residents have spent countless hours documenting, reporting the activity with little meaningful enforcement. We should not again be asked to take on that burden again. Conditions should not be used to make an otherwise incompatible use fit a location at the expense of nearby residences. For these reasons, I respectfully ask you to approve the appeal and deny the special use permit.

Thank you, Ms. Horky. Anyone else wishing to speak on this item, please come forward. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing. That was a good question. They can't, by right, serve alcohol, can they?

No, they cannot. They'd have to get a license, too.

Okay. And that was... Just to answer that question, you can't... That's what I did answer at the town board, actually.

That was not part of our request. Okay. Alcohol consumption, on-premise consumption of alcohol. is not part of our use permit request.

Okay, good. Good question. Okay, Ms. Horky, thank you. Everything you said is accurate. The burden of enforcement has fallen too hard on other applications, on the community. And what I've tried to do here, and we talked about in previous applications, is that sometimes the reality is a denial um doesn't give us a lot of teeth so i am going to try to here to approve something that gives us a lot of teeth and in response to your comments uh puts the burden on frankly me but uh the county To enforce so the one-year review as a public hearing is going to be from today The applicant has suggested it will probably take them between five and six months to get up and running So that means it won't be a year of activity before the community has an opportunity to weigh in It'll be more like six or seven months That's understood it is but if I can add one more thing and I put this on record that if we need to the applicant has agreed to

that we can always add an additional year review as well after that, if there are other issues that we might have to address as well. Yeah, very well might be the case.

He doesn't have to agree to that, though. I can just impose it. I know, right. The applicant has suggested the use is limited to 110 and 135, so that will be a condition of approval. The applicant has offered a condition of a maximum of 150 occupants for any event. I'm going to cut that back to 100. uh the applicant has suggested as a condition a maximum of six events i'm going to take that back to four and for the audience the reason i'm going to do that is because i think it is much more manageable from uh county enforcement to enforce four events versus six events a month I think that'll give us an ability to do that. And to give us even more of an ability to do that, the applicant is going to submit to my office the dates of the events in a minimum of one week in advance of the event. So we will be put on notice. We are also going to expect that since a condition of the approval is that shuttle services be provided and mandated, copies of the invoices for shuttle services are going to be submitted to my office so we can verify that that is happening. The hours of operation will be limited from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. Sound mitigation and soundproofing with the interior remodel construction will be required, and I believe, is it inaccurate that you've already worked with the building department on that?

Yes, I mean, we're basically just at this point in time waiting for your consideration of this item before we can move forward with actually securing the permit. But those are already called out on the plans.

Okay, and then two additional conditions of approval would be the loitering in or around the exterior of the building will be prohibited. Attendees are admitted only during scheduled events and must remain within the facility's designated interior areas. And lastly, reentry is not permitted during events. Once a guest exits the facility, readmission is not permitted. Are there any questions from staff? No, I'm good. Any questions from the applicant?

We agree to everything that we've discussed tonight.

Okay. Seeing no questions from the board, my motion is inclusive of those conditions read into the record. Please cast your vote. The motion passes.

Thank you, Commissioners. Appreciate it.

Next item is 51, AG 26-900614. Discuss standards for fences and walls within neighborhood protection, rural neighborhood preservation overlay, and direct staff accordingly. If you recall, in October 2025, the board discussed and adopted an ordinance to amend Title 30 to allow some waivers for walls within the side with the side property lines in front yards in the rural neighborhood protection overlay commissioner becker has requested that we bring this item before you to discuss whether or not additional waivers might be allowed to those standards thank you commissioner becker

Yeah, it's just been an issue a couple of times in my district because changing the wall height has, it's currently prohibited and I would just like it to be not permissible so that we do have some discretion in certain situations. The end result is going to be the same. I'm going to find a way to do it, but it's sometimes more complicated. Like we had an issue last meeting that parcels had to be taken out of the RNP because the development had already been half completed before Title 30 was done. So we wanted the new homes to at least match what was already there. So they had to be removed and nobody wanted them to be removed, but that's what had to happen because it's prohibited to make the walls match. So I just thought it was something that we could consider changing that language to not permissible so that the board has discretion in certain odd situations that we can make our districts look more compatible with what's already existing.

Thank you. Happy to open up discussion. From my perspective, I think not every RMP is the same as every other RMP, and so giving board discretion, I think, makes some sense in this case, and I'm happy to support it.

I do think we should tell the RAC committee, too, as well, if that's the direction that we're going, so that they don't see it and not know what's going on. So I think we should have it on the next RAC committee, if that's the direction. I'm not opposed. But I don't want it to become the development standard. Because when we put waivers in, they try to ask for a waiver every time. So in District B, we like the tiered fence. We like some other options.

Very good, you need anything further for direction?

No, direction received, thank you.

Great, thank you, thanks for bringing it.

And then items 52 and 53 are ordinances for introduction. 52 is ORD 25-900, sorry, 901039, introduce an ordinance to consider adoption of a development agreement with SCW Diamond LLC for a vehicle wash on 1.30 acres, generally located south of Wigwam Avenue and east of Arville Street within the enterprise planning area. 53 is ORD-26-900588, introduce an ordinance to adopt the development agreement with Grand Flamingo Capital Management, LLC, for a restaurant on 0.82 acres, generally located west of Rainbow Boulevard and south of Gray Avenue within Enterprise. Staff recommends you introduce the ordinance and set the public hearing for September 16th, 2026.

I will introduce the ordinance and set the public hearings for September 16th, 2026.

Thank you, and that concludes our agenda.

This is the final time set aside for public comment. Anyone wishing to speak, please come forward. Seeing no one, I will close the public hearing, adjourn today's meeting, and the board will enter into a closed-door session. Thank you.