Las Vegas City Commission Minutes, November 20, 1957 to December 2, 1959, lvc000011-253

LICENSES - OTHER Commissioner Sharp moved the application of Ralph Lamb doing business as Ralph Lamb Ralph Lamb Detective Detective Service, 209 Bridger, for a private detective license be approved. Service Motion seconded by Commissioner Whipple and carried by the following vote: Commissioners Approved Bunker, Fountain, Sharp, Whipple and His Honor voting aye; noes, none. REZONING (Z-13-58) The Commissioner considered the application of M.M. Bishp and H.W. Snyder to reclassify M.M. Bishp & H.W. Snyder Lots 12 & 16 Block 8, Boulder Addition from R-4 to C-1. Approved Planning Director Bills stated that the Planning Commission recommends that the application be amended to include All of the lots on the east side of the block, which would be Lots 9 through 16, Block 8, Boulder Addition and that it be approved as amended. Mr. Bills stated further that this would expand the application to include the entire one-half block. The property in question is presently R-4 and backs up to property presently used for industrial purposes and there are now a couple of semi-commercial uses located in this area. All the property on 2nd Street is on the General Land Use Plan which has tentatively been approved. It would seem logical for this property to be used for commercial purposes at this time. One of the applicants will develop immediately if this application is granted. A person across the street asked questions about the proposed rezoning, but did not voice any protest. Commissioner Fountain moved that the application of M.M. Bishop and H.W. Snyder to reclassify Lots 12 and 16, Block 8, Boulder Addition from R-4 to C-1 be approved as recommended by the Planning Commission to include all of the lots on the east side of the block, which would be Lots 9 through 16, Block 8, Boulder Addition. Motion seconded by Commissioner Bunker and carried by the following vote: Commissioners Bunker, Fountain, Sharp, Whipple and His Honor voting aye; noes, none. STEAM ENGINE DISPLAY The Commission considered the request of Henry Bridgman, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce Chamber of Commerce Museum Committee, for permission to locate a steam engineer for display purposes at the southwest corner of 5th and Bonanza. (Approval of location was recommended by the Planning Held in Abeyance Commission.) His Honor, Mayor Baker asked what size locomotive this would be, how it was going to be transported to the site and if it was to be fenced in some manner. Mr. Bridgman spoke from the floor stating that this was NO. 3800 Engine, 125' in length, and they would propose that it be fenced. Commissioner Sharp asked if it would be placed far enough back on the corner so it would not impede the vision of traffic. Mayor Baker expressed the opinion that this particular piece of ground might be needed for further recreational facilities that are planned for the future. Commissioner Sharp suggested a rough plot of it be drawn so the Board can visualize just how it would work out. Mr. Bridgman was of the opinion that it would fit right in at this particular corner. Commissioner Fountain said he would like to give it some thought and study and also would like to see a sketch. Commissioner Whipple asked Mr. Bridgman how much time he had to find a location and Mr. Bridgman stated that these engines are being scrapped and it is important to find a place to put the engine as soon as possible and he further stated they had to have the location before the Union Pacific will send the engine out. Commissioner Bunker moved that the request of Henry Bridgman, Chairman of the Chamber of Commerce, Museum Committee, for permission to locate a steam engine for display purposes at the Southwest corner of 5th and Bonanza, be held in abeyance for further study. Motion seconded by Commissioner Fountain and carried by the following vote: Commissioners Bunker, Fountain, Sharp, Whipple and His Honor voting aye; noes, none. PLOT PLAN The Board considered the request of Royes Petersen to appear before the City Commission to St. Louis Ave. between discuss his proposed plot plan for construction of a 94-unit apartment project and the Santa Paula Drive and question of using the right-of-way adjacent to the curb for access to diagonal parking on Weldon Place all 4 sides of the project. Royes Petersen On October 9, 1958, this matter was before the Planning Commission and no action was taken. On October 16, 1958, this matter was before the Traffic and Parking Commission and they voted unanimously that the builder must conform to the ordinance and that this plan will be considered when redrawn according to ordinance. Mr. Petersen spoke to the Board stating that he was never given notice of any meeting; however, Mr. Bills, Director of Planning was requested by Mr. Cahlan to present this matter. He further stated that the buildings will be set way back from the street and could see no reason why something couldn't be worked out. He said this will be one of the most beautiful buildings that he has built here in Las Vegas. The only contact he had with the traffic and zoning man was when he pinned him down and asked him if his child was coming down this street, would he rather have him by the street or up against the buildings. He stated they said he was asked to this Traffic Commission meeting but actually that this was not so. He further stated he would like consideration for it anyway; his buildings are set way back and he would like room enough for shrubs, swimming pools and recreation area. Two sidewalks within 30' would be awfully hard to accept. Commissioner Whipple asked if his plan was to eliminate the sidewalk by the curb and put the sidewalk against the building which Mr. Petersen affirmed. Mr. Petersen went on to say that he has paid $1500.00 for each apartment for the land alone and he wants to make a beautiful presentation. Commissioner Fountain asked if he had discussed these plans with the Planning Commission and Mr. Petersen stated that Mr. Cahlan told Mr. Bills to present it to the Commission. Commissioner Bunker asked if it was legal under existing ordinance and Mr. Petersen replied that it was not. 11-19-58