At the July 15 Planning Commission briefing, a planning department staff member summarized an application to redevelop a private golf course in Village 18 of Summerlin that would convert part of the course to 15 single‑family homes and replace the clubhouse complex.

The applicant proposes nine homes north of the golf complex and six to the south, demolition of the existing clubhouse, construction of a new clubhouse (and a temporary clubhouse during construction), comfort stations across the course, and new maintenance and guardhouse buildings. Staff said the project includes requests for multiple modified development standards and waivers, including a reduced front setback, eliminated interior side setback on one side, an increase in clubhouse height from 40 to 45 feet, retaining walls up to 9 feet where 3 feet are typically allowed, and a reduced street width of 25 feet where 40 feet is required.

Planning staff said most of the waivers were supportable given the site’s natural topography and prior modified standards for Village 18. The staff member said the front‑setback reduction was the primary concern: the applicant requested a blanket reduction for all 15 lots, and staff recommended against a universal waiver but said staff could support a condition limiting a reduced front setback to only specific lots. Public comment tallies provided to the commission showed mixed views: the vacation application drew 20 cards and one letter in support and 31 cards and three letters in opposition; the use permit application showed 25 cards and one letter in support and 31 cards and four letters in opposition.

Why it matters: the requested modifications would change development standards previously set for Village 18 of Summerlin and affect street widths, frontages and buffers between residential lots and the golf course. Staff noted reduced street width and taller walls can be appropriate given topography but said limiting certain waivers to specific lots could reduce neighborhood impacts.

Staff recommendations and next steps: the staff member told commissioners that public works did not object to the reduced street width and that staff could support most waivers except for a broad front‑setback reduction without conditions. The item was moved from the routine to the nonroutine portion of the agenda for separate hearing; no formal vote was taken at the briefing.

Context and public response: the briefing record shows dozens of written and card comments for and against the proposal; the staff presentation noted that some modified standards for Village 18 had been approved previously and that the applicant’s current requests were partly driven by lot configuration and topography.

The commission will consider the application as a nonroutine action at a future hearing where the public record and formal motions will be taken.