Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Volunteer Apartments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Henderson council affirms Planning Commission, rejects appeal to stop 236‑unit Volunteer Apartments
Summary
The council rejected an appeal and affirmed approval of the Volunteer Apartments, a 236‑unit multifamily project at Bermuda Road and Weltman Way, after neighbors raised concerns about height waivers, missing traffic and flood studies, and notice. Staff said dozens of conditions must be met before permits proceed.
The Henderson City Council voted to affirm the Planning Commission’s approval of the Volunteer Apartments, rejecting an appeal from a nearby resident who urged the council to reverse the decision or remand the project for additional studies.
Tom Amick, the developer’s representative, told the council the site’s land use and RH‑36 zoning were established in August 2021 and the current proposal reduces the earlier 305‑unit plan to 236 units. Amick said the applicant is seeking limited waivers—including a minor height exception for a small portion of the building and reduced internal parking‑lot landscaping—to enable solar carports. “We're doing carports with solar panels on the tops of the carports…it's the first one I’ve seen on an affordable project,” Amick said, describing solar and water‑savings benefits as compensating features for landscaping waivers.
Appellant William Castle urged the council to reverse the Planning Commission’s approval, saying required studies were missing and the waivers would harm neighbors. Castle argued the waiver allowing portions of the building up to 61 feet “is 74% higher than the allowable 35 feet” within 100 feet of residential zoning, raised concerns about the lack of a traffic impact study for the site’s right‑in/right‑out access, and said a hydrology study and FEMA mapping analysis had not been submitted. “Approving the project in a floodplain without this information means that existing residents have no way to determine the risk of future flooding,” Castle said, and he also criticized notice procedures and the number of mailed notices.
Planning staff told the council the approval includes extensive conditions that address traffic, FEMA/floodplain mitigation, and fire‑safety requirements and that those items must be satisfied before civil improvements or building permits proceed. Planning staff summarized that the 2021 approvals set the land use and zoning and that this hearing is limited to the requested waivers and design review; staff noted there are roughly 48 conditions on tentative map approvals that the developer will have to meet during the permitting stage.
Several residents who live near the site reinforced concerns about traffic congestion, scale, and outreach, while other council members emphasized workforce and attainable housing needs and the developer's experience building affordable projects. Council discussion repeatedly noted that the site’s zoning permits multifamily development and that the council’s role at this hearing was to weigh the waivers and conditions before it.
A motion to affirm the Planning Commission’s decision and deny the appeal carried on a council voice vote; the decision preserves the Planning Commission’s approval. Staff and the applicant will be required to meet the conditions identified in the approval—including traffic, floodplain, and fire‑safety mitigation—before the project moves into building‑permit stages.
The appeal decision leaves in place the waivers and conditions approved by the Planning Commission; staff said unresolved conditions could require plan modifications or limit the project’s ability to proceed if they cannot be addressed.
