Tuesday, April 7, 1998 | 9:48 a.m.
Developers who want the general plan of the City of Las Vegas amended will only have two chances a year, according to an initiative which will be discussed at Thursday's Planning Commission meeting.
The measure, which is open for public comment at the meeting, will limit the number of times the general plan can be amended to only two special meetings a year. Under current provisions, the general plan can be modified at any City Council meeting.
The general plan is supposed to be used as a long-range design. The idea is to keep the city from being developed piecemeal with noncompatible uses. It also allows homebuyers and builders to see what kind of uses will surround new developments. In fact, real estate agents are required by law to notify homebuyers of what the general plan has slated for the property surrounding their home.
Instead, the general plan is being amended at every City Council meeting, usually by developers asking for higher residential densities on their parcels. In 1997, there were 71 changes made to the general plan, 57 in 1996, 60 in 1995 and 67 in 1994.
In comparison, many other cities won't change their general plan save for once every few years. North Las Vegas is in the process of changing its general plan, which it hasn't touched since 1993.
Henderson, however, also is altering its general plan almost every meeting. Clark County makes zoning changes at every meeting, but doesn't put those changes on the master plan until once every few years -- which can make the general plan even more outdated than Henderson or Las Vegas.
Not having a current general plan can lead to big problems with homebuyers. If a plan is outdated, it can mean buying a house without really knowing what is, or could go, next to it.
"If they (homebuyers) check the general plan and decide they like the property, by the time they buy a house and close, the property around them might have changed," Planning and Development Director Director Theresa O'Donnell said.
This happened recently with the homeowners of the Timber Lake housing development in the Northwest. Though residents were made aware of their proximity to the planned Northwest Town Center, the exact definition of Town Center was not included in the paperwork they signed to buy their homes. As a result, residents weren't fully aware that there could be commercial, industrial or office buildings in adjacent to them.
"The definition of Town Center was voted into the general plan on Dec. 18, 1996," said Denise Devlin, a resident of Timber Lake. "But they didn't put the definition in until much later. I signed papers in march of 1997 and it wasn't in there."
Moreover, residents concerned about the changes in their neighborhoods are forced to come down to discuss the issue at City Council meetings several times a year.
Las Vegas Mayor Jan Laverty Jones and City Councilman Larry Brown are in support of the proposed ordinance -- both have publicly stated they're sick of making changes to the general plan at every meeting.
"The general plan is supposed to be THE document for what is appropriate," Brown said. "But changing it every two weeks is not a good plan for responsible growth."
The proposed initiative would schedule two meetings a year that would be devoted solely to changing the general plan. That way, city planners say, the original intent of the general plan isn't lost.
"What kind of plan for the future, long-range vision for the community is changed every two weeks?" O'Donnell asked.
Local developers who have heard of the proposal are already crying foul.
"We have great concern about what's being proposed," said Joanne Jensen, spokeswoman for the Southern Nevada Homebuilders Association. "Largely because of the added time that this is going to impose on getting a house built."
Time is money for a homebuilder, Jensen conceded, but she argued that her association's members are upset for more than monetary reasons.
"We are behind the curve in keeping up with building enough residences for the number of people moving into the community," she said. "Anything that the government is proposing that is going to change how readily housing is available and affordable is going to concern us."
Jensen further argued that the politicians who decry developers asking for higher densities are the same politicians who ask developers to build housing at high densities to keep infill lots full and reduce urban sprawl.
"If they want to stop or curtail changes in density by limiting how often the general plan can be amended, that doesn't jibe," she said.
archive
