The discussion centered on a proposal to construct an 18-unit apartment complex, which requires rezoning a 0.88-acre site from R-12 to R-22 to accommodate higher density. A major point of contention involved the development's vehicular access and required road modifications, as the applicant introduced alternative site plans shifting the proposed access from a narrow local street to a main arterial. Because these alternate plans were submitted at the last minute, the hearing examiner established an extended open record period to allow the applicant to finalize their proposal and give staff and the public time to review the changes.
Building_development
Clark County Land Use Hearings · Aug 13, 2026 · 49:14–53:29 · Watch on CVTV ↗
Keywords: subdivision zoning density concurrency
What was said
48:12 that did access Northeast 108th Street, 18th Street, and didn't propose any connections to Lake Shore in 119th Street. And that is exhibit B within the letter I submitted. - Okay, so that was approved? - Yeah, that's correct, it was approved. Single access, because that was the code at that point in time an infill A roadway. Those roadways were created as part of these infill projects to increase density. Since then, the commissioners did remove that section of code that were stuck with these roadways that were approved back then, and that provided the only access to these properties. - Okay. - That access was approved by Clark County when the project to the east was developed. And that was the access for this piece of property, subject property we're dealing with today.
49:09 Of course, '08, '09 were difficult on a lot of people. There wasn't financing to move forward. Since then, the applicant did submit a 10 lot subdivision. And that was ELD 20-22-00107. - How did it propose access? - It proposed access to 118th Street and proposed a same right turn pocket right in from Lake Shore. - Oh, so it had both. - That's correct. It had an access to 119th right in, right out. - Mr. Johnson, are those plans part of your road modification letter? If you want me to share those, I can. - If you'd like, Mr. Manson. - Okay.
49:58 During that time, we submitted a road modification for a right in and for right in, right out on 119th Street. There were a lot of challenges with getting that road mod approved. As I mentioned earlier, in this letter, there is an additional road mod for disproportionality. And what we couldn't get to with Clark County and the review engineers was an agreement on how much mitigation needed to be done for the right in off Lake Shore and the right in right off of 119th. Ultimately, they denied the access to 119th. And the Lake Shore one, they wanted medians down the roadways. They discussed people traveling backwards down that right in, right out, and we just couldn't get there. Five months into meetings and emails and road mods,
50:58 we couldn't get the county to agree with the right in off. That would be the-- - And that was off Lake Shore? - That's correct. - So what makes you think you'll do better this time? - If I can continue with the history, Mr. Herring-Zammer. - Okay. - Then I can apologize. We couldn't get there, so we dropped the project and we found it too difficult to propose a right in off Lake Shore and a right in, right out off 119th based on comments and the amount of time it took and then the mitigation that would be required. So we come back in with this third submittal and this third submittal is what the proposed 18 unit zone change project that we have here today. - So you mean with this third submittal, you mean plan A? - Yes, plan A, correct. Sorry, Mr. Herring-Zammer.
51:53 We did not propose any accesses on Lake Shore in 119th because of, based on the comments and on the problems with the road mod on the previous project. So we thought we were taking the easy path and just connecting into the infill roadway Northeast 118th Street. - You thought you were doing what the county wanted? - That's correct. - So question about plan A though, it looks like it has full frontage improvements for the two arterials. - It does, it does. We tried to take the easy path and propose full frontage improvements. We did make a mistake and we did not make a sidewalk connection from the development as you previously mentioned. - Okay, so that wouldn't be difficult to squeeze in. So people walking, they could easily get to both of these arterials? - That's correct. - It seems like there's space, heck.
52:52 - Yeah, it's a tight site. It's a difficult site, but you know, we did have an 11 lot subdivision that was submitted and there was nothing wrong with the density of it. And then there was also an eight lot short flat. I think it was a short flat, the first middle from 2009. But there is the same amount of trips from an 11 lot subdivision in this 18 year apartment complex and the letter does go through that. So the impacts of an 18 year apartment complex in a 11 lot subdivision are exactly the same. - Okay, I'm not surprised. I know the trip generation is different for apartments versus single family homes. - During this process, during the 30 year early issues process, we had a request to cross circulation.
53:48 As you know, Mr. Herring's diameter, cross circulation, cutting this property in half or making a public roadway connection, the only place we could make it is to Lake Shore. To me, intersection spacing from 119 did have to be further south and would require another road mod on top of a road mod. And when we submitted that road modification for cross circulation, the county came back and discussed connections, different connections besides cross circulation. The subject matter was about private connections. And we wanted them to explain how private connections to this project would and wouldn't be code. We wrote the road mod for cross circulation
Evidence (2 matches)
direct keyword 49:14–49:29 subdivision, zoning, density, concurrency
as developed. And that was the access for this piece of property, subject property we're dealing with today. Of course, '08, '09 were difficult on a lot of people. There wasn't financing to move forward. Since then, the applicant did submit a 10 lot subdivision. And that was ELD 20-22-00107. - How did it propose access? - It proposed access to 118th Street and proposed a same right turn pocket right in from Lake Shore. - Oh, so it had both. - That's correct. It had an access to 119th right in, r
direct keyword 53:14–53:29 subdivision, zoning, density, concurrency
11 lot subdivision that was submitted and there was nothing wrong with the density of it. And then there was also an eight lot short flat. I think it was a short flat, the first middle from 2009. But there is the same amount of trips from an 11 lot subdivision in this 18 year apartment complex and the letter does go through that. So the impacts of an 18 year apartment complex in a 11 lot subdivision are exactly the same. - Okay, I'm not surprised. I know the trip generation is different for apa