MINUTES
CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS
PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING
March 10, 2021
BRIEFING
5:30 p.m., Caucus Room, 2250 Las Vegas Boulevard North,
North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030
CALL TO ORDER
6:00 PM, Council Chambers, 2250 Las Vegas Boulevard North,
North Las Vegas, Nevada 89030
ROLL CALL
COMMISSIONERS PRESENT
Chairman Kraft
Vice Chairman Warner
Commissioner Berrett
Commissioner Calhoun
Commissioner Greer
Commissioner Guymon
Commissioner Riley
STAFF PRESENT
|
Land Development and Community Services Director Jordan Senior Deputy City Attorney Moore Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman Principal Planner Michaels Chief Deputy City Clerk Purcell Deputy City Clerk Tapia-Rojas Traffic Engineer Reesman Development and Flood Control Manager McLaughlin |
|
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - BY INVITATION
Chairman Kraft |
|
There was no public participation.
|
|
1. |
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING AGENDA OF MARCH 10, 2021. (FOR POSSIBLE ACTION) |
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED AS AMENDED; ITEM NO. 13, ZN-01-2021 TO BE HEARD BEFORE ITEM NO. 12, SUP-04-2021 |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Calhoun |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
|
2. |
APPROVE PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 10, 2021. (FOR POSSIBLE ACTION) |
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Greer |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Planning
and Zoning Manager Eastman presented the item and stated that the applicant
requested reclassification of the subject property from C-1 Neighborhood
Commercial District to PUD/PID Planned Unit Development District/Planned Infill
Development District to allow a 59-unit multi-family development on 2.55 gross
acres with a density of 23.14 dwelling units per acre which is located west of
Valley Drive,
approximately 270 feet south of Craig Road. He noted that a Planned Infill
Development was intended for smaller, harder to develop infill sites surrounded
by existing development, was less than ten acres in size and compatible with
the surrounding neighborhood. He stated that the applicant was proposing a
three-story building for an age-restricted, multi-family development. He noted
that the buildings were approximately 33 feet in height and consisted of three
buildings; two resident buildings and one open space clubhouse. The
development provided the required open space and included a pool area,
clubhouse, exercise room, bocce ball court, community garden, dog park and
additional open space for picnics. He stated that the site met the parking
requirements and included a minimum of one covered parking space per unit. He
noted that the site would provide a double row of trees between the
multi-family and single-family developments and staff recommended that the
applicant install evergreen trees to provide additional buffering. He noted
that to the west and south were single-story homes on 6,000 square foot lots
and three commercial sites to the north. He noted that the proposed
development was larger than a single-family home but the building height was
allowed in the current C-1 zoning as well as the R-1 Single Family Low Density
District and meets the compatibility requirements for both of the neighboring
uses. Staff recommended approval of the application.
Jennifer Lazovich, Kaempfer Crowell, 1980 Festival Plaza
Drive, Las Vegas,
represented the applicant and provided information regarding the 55+
age-restricted multi-family development. She noted that additional care was
considered to provide adequate buffering for the homes to the west and south of
the project. Residential building number one was set back a distance of 58
feet from the south property line and was the side of the building with no
units facing to the south. The distance from the west side was 157 feet from
the homes and building number two was set back 114 feet from the homes to the
south. She noted that a 35-foot building would be allowed in the C-1 zone and
the proposed development, although three stories was 33 feet in height
and compatible to the existing zoning. Gated access to the property would be
from Valley Drive with an exit-only access through the commercial development
onto Craig Road. Ms. Lazovich described the open-air amenities that would be
part of the development. She noted that the development would be for residents
55 years of age and older and included 23 one-bedroom units and 36 two-bedroom
units which can be accessed by interior hallways. She addressed resident
concerns regarding crime, noise and traffic.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing.
The following residents expressed their opposition to the development citing concerns regarding obstructed view of the mountains due to the height of the development, constant influx of traffic from Valley Drive, reduction in privacy due to units facing residential homes, increased noise levels from first responders to a senior living development and overall residents’ quality of life.
Michael Sweet, 4310 Valley Sage Drive, North Las Vegas
Courtney Bruner, 4286 Valley Spruce Way, North Las Vegas
Robert Rasmussen, 4411 Valley Regal Way, North Las Vegas
Having no additional requests to speak and no callers, Chairman Kraft closed the public hearing.
Ms. Lazovich noted that any development on the site would have a driveway on Valley Drive. The proposed development would have less parking than any commercial development and would be less intense. She stated that the applicant would agree to build a secondary eight-foot block wall which was a concern made at the neighborhood meeting.
In response to a question from Commissioner Berrett, Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman stated some examples of C-1 commercial developments included professional offices, commercial retail stores, convenience stores, fast food restaurants, laundromat, and equipment rentals.
Responding to a question regarding balconies or other plans for the south side of the building, Ms. Lazovich noted there were no plans for balconies on the south side of the building but per the Municipal Code, balconies are required. Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman stated that the Multi-Family Design Standards require a patio or balcony for every unit to have private outdoor space.
Commissioner Berrett stated he understood the residents’ concerns and felt that knowing what other types of developments would be allowed on the site, the proposed development had the least impact on the adjacent residential homes. He questioned whether the balconies and/or patios could be removed from the south side of the building.
Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman reiterated that balconies and/or patios are a requirement of the Multi-Family Design Standards since 1999 and noted that the PUD zoning was not intended to allow an applicant to circumvent the existing codes and ordinances. He was not in favor of removing the balconies on the south side and not allowing one building to have a lesser dwelling unit than the other.
Ms. Lazovich confirmed that the project consisted of a three-story building but the height was in compliance with the requirements.
Responding to a question from Commissioner Greer regarding storage facilities in a C-1 zone, Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman stated that a mini-storage facility would be allowed with a special use permit.
In response to a question from Commissioner Calhoun, Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman noted that balconies on the south side could impact the adjacent residential homes but the south side of the building would have windows which was the reason for requesting the double row of evergreen trees to provide all-year screening between the two uses.
Commissioner Riley asked Mr. Sweet what type of development he would like to see on the site. Mr. Sweet felt the property should have single-family homes compatible to the surrounding area at the same height.
Chairman Kraft noted there were no good options for an infill development. Responding to a question from Chairman Kraft, Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman noted that the setback from a commercial development to residential was 30 feet and the setback in an R-CL zone could be as little as 15 feet.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING AMENDED CONDITIONS; CONDITION NO. 3 CHANGED FROM SHALL TO SHOULD; CONDITION NO. 11 DELETED; FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. THE RESIDENCES SHALL BE LIMITED TO PERSONS 55 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER.
3. HOURS OF OPERATION FOR ALL OUTDOOR RECREATION ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO THE HOURS OF 8:00 AM TO 10:00 PM.
4. THE TREES USED FOR SCREENING THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE AN EVERGREEN VARIETY.
5. LIGHT POLES USED AROUND THE RECREATION AREAS SHALL BE LIMITED TO 12 FEET IN HEIGHT.
6. ALL KNOWN GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SHALL BE SHOWN ON ANY PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. SUBSEQUENT IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL HAZARDS MAY SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
7. APPROVAL OF A DRAINAGE STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.
8. THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS
AND THEIR LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF NORTH
LAS VEGAS TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND
9. ALL DRIVEWAY GEOMETRICS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS’ CONSTRUCTION OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS DRAWING NUMBERS 222.1.
10. APPROVAL OF A TRAFFIC STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. PLEASE CONTACT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AT 633-2676 TO REQUEST A SCOPE. A QUEUING ANALYSIS MAY BE REQUIRED.
|
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Calhoun |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer and Guymon |
|
NAYS: |
Commissioner Riley |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman presented the item and stated that the applicant requested a waiver of the parking requirement to reduce the required 503 parking spaces to 400 parking spaces on the northwest corner of Las Vegas Boulevard North and Hamilton Street. He noted the item was related to SPR-06-2020, a multi-family development approved at the February 10, 2021 Planning Commission Meeting. He stated that the waiver was supported by the Zoning Ordinance because the applicant was allowed to request up to a 25% reduction of the parking requirement for any multi-family development within one-quarter mile of a bus rapid transit stop. Staff recommended approval of the waiver.
Mike Ballard, 2831 St. Rose Parkway, Henderson, thanked staff for their support and was available for questions.
Bill Fisher, Sonoma Housing Advisors, 16182 Dallas Parkway, Dallas, Texas, represented the applicant and provided information regarding the development, which he felt would complement the downtown area and provide affordable rental units for working families.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Berrett expressed his opposition to the reduction in parking.
Responding to a question from Vice Chairman Warner regarding a cross-parking agreement with Maya Cinemas, Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman stated that the parking for the commercial component of the multi-family development is part of the Maya Cinemas development and is providing some of the additional parking requirements for the mixed-use development.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Greer |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
Commissioner Berrett |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman presented the item and stated that the applicant requested a special use permit to allow an adult daycare in an existing building located behind the Burger King and Jack-in-the-Box at 2048 Las Vegas Boulevard North. He noted the proposed hours of operation are Monday through Saturday from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and closed on Sundays. Parking requirements are in compliance due to the shared parking with the fast food restaurants. He stated that the landscaping would need to be brought into compliance and the two existing speed bumps would need to be converted to speed humps. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions.
Rahul Sodhi, 2048 Las Vegas Boulevard, North Las Vegas, represented the applicant and concurred with staff’s conditions.
Responding to a question from Commissioner Calhoun, Mr. Sodhi stated there would be approximately 30-35 people per day at the facility.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. ALL EXISTING REQUIRED LANDSCAPING AREAS SHALL BE BROUGHT INTO COMPLIANCE WITH CODE BY ENSURING THERE IS 50% GROUND COVERAGE WITHIN TWO YEARS OF PLANTING.
3. ALL TRAFFIC CALMING DEVISE SHALL BE CONVERTED TO SPEED HUMPS.
4. A MAXIMUM OF 40 PEOPLE ARE ALLOWED TO USE THE DAY CARE FACILITY.
|
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Berrett |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman presented the item and stated the applicant requested a special use permit to allow the on-sale of beer and wine in conjunction with a restaurant located at 6584 North Decatur Boulevard, Suite 140. The restaurant is 1,777 square feet and serves breakfast and lunch with the intent to serve popular brunch drinks. Staff recommended approval.
Representative from Griddlecakes, stated that she concurred with staff recommendations.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Calhoun |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Planning and Zoning Manager Eastman presented the item and stated the applicant requested approval of a tentative map in a PCD/R-CL Planned Community District/Medium Density Residential District to allow a 117-lot single-family residential subdivision within the Villages at Tule Springs in Village 3 with an overall density of 6.96 dwelling units per acre. He noted there was a large entry feature at the northeast corner of Deer Springs Way and Gliding Eagle Road and trail connection that will connect to a future regional park. The lot sizes ranged from 3,721 square feet to 7,996 square feet. He stated that the streets were 47 feet wide with a five-foot sidewalk on both sides. The perimeter landscaping along Deer Springs Way has been completed by the Village developer. He stated that the required pathway is 25 feet in width with an eight-foot wide sidewalk centered within the landscaped area. The applicant has provided three connections to the village trail and an additional connection to the pathway along Deer Springs Way. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions.
Jennifer Lazovich, Kaempfer Crowell, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Las Vegas, represented the applicant and concurred with staff recommendations.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES, INCLUDING THE SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR PARK HIGHLANDS EAST (VILLAGES AT TULE SPRINGS), AND THE VILLAGES AT TULE SPRINGS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES. 2.
ALL KNOWN
GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
TENTATIVE MAP AND THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. GEOLOGICAL HAZARDS SUCH AS
FAULT LINES OR FISSURES AFFECTING RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES MAY SUBSTANTIALLY
ALTER THE TENTATIVE MAP LAYOUT AND REQUIRE THE SUBMISSION OF A REVISED
TENTATIVE MAP WHICH MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL OF
THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. THE FOOTPRINT OF PROPOSED STRUCTURES SHALL BE
PLOTTED ON ALL LOTS 3. APPROVAL OF A DRAINAGE STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.
4. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY SLOPES SHALL NOT EXCEED TWELVE PERCENT (12%).
5. ALL COMMON ELEMENTS SHALL BE LABELED AND ARE TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOME OWNERS’ ASSOCIATION.
6. THE STREET NAMES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NORTH LAS VEGAS STREET NAMING AND ADDRESS ASSIGNMENT STANDARDS, AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF LAS VEGAS CENTRAL FIRE ALARM OFFICE.
7. APPROVAL OF A TRAFFIC STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. PLEASE CONTACT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AT 633-2676 TO REQUEST A SCOPE. A QUEUING ANALYSIS MAY BE REQUIRED.
8. ALL DRIVEWAY GEOMETRICS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS’ CONSTRUCTION OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS DRAWING NUMBER 222.1.
9. THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS AND THEIR LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND MUST MEET THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN NORTH LAS VEGAS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.24.040. CONFORMANCE MAY REQUIRE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE.
10. THE PUBLIC STREET GEOMETRICS AND THICKNESS OF THE PAVEMENT SECTIONS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
11. ALL NEVADA ENERGY EASEMENTS, APPURTENANCES, LINES AND POLES MUST BE SHOWN AND SHALL BE LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPE AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. DISTRIBUTION LINES, EXISTING OR PROPOSED, SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND IF IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OR IF THE POLE IMPEDES UPON THE PROPER ADA CLEARANCES FOR SIDEWALK. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL NEW DOWN GUY WIRES BE PERMITTED.
12. ALL LOTS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 16.20.02.B WHICH STATES: “THE SIDE LINES OF LOTS SHALL BE APPROXIMATELY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE STREET UPON WHICH THE LOT FACES, OR APPROXIMATELY RADIAL IF THE STREET IS CURVED.” COMPLIANCE WILL REQUIRE MINOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE CURRENT LAYOUT.
|
|
MOTION: |
Vice Chairman Warner |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Principal
Planner Michaels presented the item and stated that the applicant requested a
special use permit to allow an approximate 797 square foot accessory dwelling
unit in the rear yard at 6006 Magic Mesa Street in an R-1 Single-Family Low
Residential District. The applicant’s letter of intent indicated that the
accessory building will be an accessory dwelling for the homeowner’s parents to
live in to be closer to their grandchildren. She noted that the floor plans
submitted showed one bedroom, one bathroom, laundry area, kitchen area and a
living room. Single-family homes with a minimum lot area of 6,000 square feet
may be allowed one guest house/casita not to exceed 50% of the living area of
the principal dwelling or 800 square feet, whichever is less. She stated that
the accessory dwelling unit meets the required setbacks and will be painted to
match the existing dwelling unit. The proposed site plan showed a new driveway
located to the side of the existing dwelling unit for the proposed accessory
dwelling unit which has been reviewed by Public Works. The applicant will be
required
to provide curb per the Clark County Standards and a new vehicle rated utility
box. She stated that the Code requires an off-street parking space for the
proposed unit and the applicant will be permitted to use the existing
residential driveway as a tandem parking space for the off street parking space
requirement.
Jacob Wooten, 10424 South Eastern Avenue, Henderson, represented the applicant and was available for questions.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing.
Martin Trumble, 705 Dry Valley Avenue, North Las Vegas, stated he was the Vice-President of the Azure Estates Homeowners Association. He read a statement into the record requesting that the decision be held until such time that the homeowner could submit an architectural package to the management company, First Service Residential. He noted that no package has been submitted which is required, prior to work on any home in Azure Estates.
Cynthia Anderson, 722 Azure Banks Avenue, North Las Vegas, stated she lived in Azure Estates which consisted of single-family homes and none of the homes contained a mother-in-law unit. She requested that the unit be annexed into the community if the application was approved and billed as a separate unit to enable the assessments to help the Association.
Mr. Wooten stated that the intent was to submit the plans once approval was given by the Planning Commission and prior to submitting construction documents to the Building Department.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
Vice Chairman Warner asked how the City could be assured the accessory dwelling unit did not become a rental facility in the future. Chairman Kraft stated the issue was outside the scope of the use permit and not what the Commission was considering for approval.
Responding to a question from Vice Chairman Warner, Principal Planner Michaels stated that the City does not get involved with the Homeowners Association and proceeds with the application process when submitted to the City.
Commissioner Riley stated that the Homeowners Association has the ability to deny the request and he noted that the applicant should go to the Association first and then submit the application to the Planning Commission.
Responding to questions from Commissioner Greer, Principal Planner Michaels stated that the applicant would utilize the tandem parking in the existing driveway as the off-street parking requirement. She noted that the accessory dwelling unit had to be architecturally compatible to the principal structure.
Commissioner Berrett noted that the Homeowners Association or the City could deny the request no matter which one reviewed it first. Commissioner Riley advised that the application should be reviewed by the Homeowners Association before presenting it to the Planning Commission.
Chairman Kraft stated that the rules and regulations are part of a contract with the Homeowners Associations and is a private matter, not something that the City gets involved with. He provided information regarding rentals and complying with all City codes and ordinances. Principal Planner Michaels noted that the dwelling would not be allowed to be used as a short-term rental and the Homeowners Association had jurisdiction over rentals.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE EXISTING PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT.
3. APPLICANT MAY USE THE EXISTING
DRIVEWAY AS A TANDEM PARKING SPACE FOR THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENT. |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Greer |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Principal Planner Michaels presented the item and stated the applicant requested a special use permit to allow a 597 square foot accessory dwelling in an R-E Ranch Estates District. She noted that the floor plan indicated one bedroom, one bathroom, a kitchen area and a living room. Title 17 allows an accessory dwelling unit in a Ranch Estates District with a special use permit. She stated that single-family homes with a minimum lot are of 6,000 square feet may be allowed one guest house/casita not to exceed 50% of the living area of the principal dwelling or 800 feet, whichever is less. The applicant provided elevations for the proposed accessory dwelling unit and the site plan shows an off-street parking space. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions,
Jeffrey Terry, 4620 Cattleman Avenue, North Las Vegas stated he was the applicant and had received approval from the Homeowners Association. He concurred with staff’s recommendations.
Chairman Kraft opened the public and having no request to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE EXISTING PRINCIPAL DWELLING UNIT. |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Berrett |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Principal Planner Michaels stated that Item Nos. 10, ZN-03-2021 and 11, T-MAP-02-2021 were related and would be presented together but voted on separately. She stated that the applicant requested reclassification of the property from C-2 General Commercial District to PUD Planned Unit Development District on 6.5 acres and a tentative map to allow a 70-lot single-family attached subdivision on property west of Scott Robinson Boulevard, approximately 581 feet north of Craig Road. She noted that the applicant proposed a duplex development containing 35 duplexes with 70 dwelling units. The preliminary development plan contained one access point to the development from a gated access off of Scott Robinson Boulevard with 30-foot private internal streets. She stated the project proposed a larger seven foot sidewalk around the perimeter and between homes in the center of the project. There are additional four-foot sidewalks throughout the project and three pedestrian access gates along Scott Robinson Boulevard to further promote pedestrian connectivity and walkability. She stated that the applicant proposed a pedestrian corridor in the middle of the site that will have a landscape easement over it between the porches for each unit. The landscaping provided in this area between the porches and at the rear between the garages will be maintained by the Homeowners Association. Staff recommended approval of both items.
Jennifer Lazovich, Kaempfer Crowell, 1980 Festival Plaza Drive, Las Vegas, represented the applicant and provided information regarding the proposed development.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS; FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE 70-LOT ATTACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS REQUIRED.
3. THE FOLLOWING AMENITIES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITHIN THE OPEN SPACE AREAS: AGE APPROPRIATE PLAYGROUND EQUIPMENT WITH EPDM SURFACING; TURFED OPEN PLAY AREAS; SHADED PICNIC AREAS; AND DOG STATIONS.
4. THE LANDSCAPING THAT IS PROVIDED BETWEEN THE UNITS; THE PORCHES; AND THE GARAGE AREA SHALL BE MAINTAINED BY THE HOME OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
5. SETBACKS FOR THE LOTS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
· SIDE YARD SETBACK BUILDING (INTERIOR) – 5-FEET · SIDE YARD SETBACK BUILDING (CORNER) – 5-FEET · ATTACHED BUILDING TO BUILDING SETBACK – 0-FEET · REAR SETBACK – GARAGE – 4-FEET · REAR SETBACK – LIVING – 4-FEET
7. APPROVAL OF A DRAINAGE STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.
8. THE STREET NAMES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NORTH LAS VEGAS STREET NAMING AND ADDRESS ASSIGNMENT STANDARDS, AND MUST BE APPROVED BY THE CITY OF LAS VEGAS CENTRAL FIRE ALARM OFFICE.
9. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO GRANT ROADWAY EASEMENTS WHERE PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS INTERSECT.
10. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO GRANT A PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT FOR SIDEWALK LOCATED WITHIN A COMMON ELEMENT, OR ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, WHEN THAT SIDEWALK IS PROVIDING PUBLIC ACCESS ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
11. THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS AND THEIR LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEWAND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND MUST MEET THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN NORTH LAS VEGAS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 17.24.040. CONFORMANCE MAY REQUIRE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE.
12. ALL DRIVEWAY GEOMETRICS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS’ CONSTRUCTION OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS DRAWING NUMBERS 222.1 AND 222.
13. THE PUBLIC STREET GEOMETRICS AND THICKNESS OF THE PAVEMENT SECTIONS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
14. ALL NEVADA ENERGY EASEMENTS, APPURTENANCES, LINES AND POLES MUST BE SHOWN AND SHALL BE LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPE AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. DISTRIBUTION LINES, EXISTING OR PROPOSED, SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND IF IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OR IF THE POLE IMPEDES UPON THE PROPER ADA CLEARANCES FOR SIDEWALK. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL NEW DOWN GUY WIRES BE PERMITTED.
15. APPROVAL OF A TRAFFIC STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. PLEASE CONTACT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AT 633-2676 TO REQUEST A SCOPE. A QUEUING ANALYSIS MAY BE REQUIRED. |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Riley |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
(Please refer to comments in Item No. 10, ZN-03-2021)
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS FOR
ZN-03-2021. |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Riley |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Staff requested that Item No. 13, ZN-01-2021 be heard prior to Item No. 12, SUP-04-2021.
Principal Planner Michaels presented the item and stated that the applicant requested reclassification of the site from O-L Open Land District to M-2 General Industrial District, on approximately 39.41 acres located north of Belt Road between Clark County 215 and the Union Pacific Railroad. She noted that the applicant’s letter of intent proposed a batch plant, rock crushing plant and hot mix asphalt plant. The property reclassification is consistent with the Employment and Heavy Industrial land use designations and staff recommended approval.
Robert Cunningham, Taney Engineering, 6030 South Jones Boulevard, Las Vegas, represented the applicant and concurred with staff’s recommendations.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED; FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Greer |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Principal Planner Michaels presented the item and stated that the applicant requested a special use permit to allow a batch plant (concrete or asphalt) located north of Belt Road between Clark County 215 and the Union Pacific Railroad. She noted that the site plan indicated the hot mix asphalt operation will be located on the western portion of the site; the concrete batch plant is on the eastern portion and the rock crushing facility is located on the northern portion. The site plan also indicated a mechanical shop, recycling material area and a truck parking area as part of the batch plant daily operations. She stated that access to the site is from three drive isles located off Belt Road. Staff recommended approval subject to conditions.
Robert Cunningham, Taney Engineering, 6030 South Jones Boulevard, Las Vegas, represented the applicant and concurred with staff’s recommendations.
Chairman Kraft opened the public hearing and having no requests to speak or callers, closed the public hearing.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. UNLESS EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED THROUGH A VARIANCE, WAIVER OR ANOTHER APPROVED METHOD, THIS DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES.
2. THE SITE PLAN SHALL BE AMENDED TO COMPLY WITH ALL ZONING ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
a. PROVIDE 10 FEET OF PERIMETER LANDSCAPING ALONG BELT ROAD, SAID LANDSCAPING SHALL INCLUDE 24-INCH BOX TREES PLANTED 20 FEET ON CENTER AND SHRUBS / GROUNDCOVER TO PROVIDE 50% GROUND COVERAGE WITH TWO YEARS OF PLANTING.
b. ALL PARKING AND VEHICLE STORAGE AREAS SHALL BE ON A CONCRETE OR ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACE.
3. ALL KNOWN GEOLOGIC HAZARDS SHALL BE SHOWN ON ANY PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. SUBSEQUENT IDENTIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL HAZARDS MAY SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS.
4. APPROVAL OF A DRAINAGE STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. CONFORMANCE MAY REQUIRE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SITE PLAN.
5. APPROVAL OF A TRAFFIC STUDY IS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE CIVIL IMPROVEMENT PLANS. PLEASE CONTACT TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AT 633-2676 TO REQUEST A SCOPE. A QUEUING ANALYSIS MAY BE REQUIRED.
6. THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS
AND THEIR LOCATIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF NORTH
LAS VEGAS TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND
7. ALL DRIVEWAY GEOMETRICS SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM STANDARD DRAWINGS FOR PUBLIC WORKS’ CONSTRUCTION OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS DRAWING NUMBER 222.1 AND 225.
8. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS REQUIRED TO GRANT ROADWAY EASEMENT(S) FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS.
9. DEDICATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOLLOWING STREETS AND/OR HALF STREETS IS REQUIRED PER THE MASTER PLAN OF STREETS AND HIGHWAYS AND/OR CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 16.24.100:
a. NORTH BELT ROAD
10. THE PUBLIC STREET GEOMETRICS AND THICKNESS OF THE PAVEMENT SECTIONS WILL BE DETERMINED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS.
11. ALL NEVADA ENERGY EASEMENTS, APPURTENANCES, LINES AND POLES MUST BE SHOWN AND SHALL BE LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPE AREA OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. DISTRIBUTION LINES, EXISTING OR PROPOSED, SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND IF IMPACTED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCEL OR IF THE POLE IMPEDES UPON THE PROPER ADA CLEARANCES FOR SIDEWALK. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES WILL NEW DOWN GUY WIRES BE PERMITTED.
|
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Calhoun |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
Principal Planner Michaels presented the item and stated that the applicant requested reclassification of the site from O-L Open Land District to M-2 General Industrial District for 8.87 acres of property located at the southeast corner of Tropical Parkway and Beesley Drive. She noted that the site is surrounded by undeveloped industrial land to the north, east and west and an existing warehouse /distribution center located to the south.
Jennifer Kimura, 3933 South Kelley Avenue, Portland, Oregon, represented the applicant and was available for questions.
|
ACTION: |
APPROVED; FORWARD TO CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL CONSIDERATION |
|
MOTION: |
Commissioner Riley |
|
AYES: |
Chairman Kraft, Vice Chairman Warner, Commissioners Berrett, Calhoun, Greer, Guymon and Riley |
|
NAYS: |
None |
|
ABSTAIN: |
None |
|
ABSENT: |
None |
|
Land Development and Community Services Director Jordan thanked the City Clerk’s Office staff for all their assistance providing support for the Planning Commission meeting. |
|
There were no items. |
There was no public participation.
|
Chairman Kraft adjourned the meeting at 7:48 p.m. |
APPROVED: April 14, 2021
|
|
|
Kenneth L. Kraft, Chairman
|
|
|
|
Marie E. Purcell, CMC, Chief Deputy City Clerk
|