Sunday, March 19, 2000 | 9:32 a.m.
Rodney Helm's new next-door neighbor is likely to be a 130,000-square-foot Home Depot store. And he's not happy about the prospects.
The Clark County Commissioners approved the zoning and use permits to build the "big box" store in Helm's residential neighborhood earlier this month, just one of dozens of zoning and master-plan changes the commission has approved this year.
Helm and his family live in a ranch-style home in Enterprise. Before buying the house, Helm checked the zoning status with county staffers, the county's land-use plan and his real estate agent. All of them assured him that the "worst that could happen" is an office might move into a nearby home.
But now Helm is fighting a much more intensive commercial project. He isn't alone. In recent years thousands of other families in the Las Vegas Valley have found their residential neighborhoods invaded by big commercial projects, from casinos to restaurants to superstores.
The culprits, residents say, are the Clark County Commissioners and the valley's city councils, which approve the changes to land-use plans, use variances and zoning.
"It's not a plan if you change it whenever you feel like it," said Dina Titus, state Senate minority leader. "That allows politics to replace planning."
Rezoning is fast becoming a dirty word in neighborhoods all over Las Vegas.
"No one is immune from some of the bad zoning decisions we see in the valley," said environmental activist Jeff van Ee. "Everything's in a constant state of flux ... I think no matter where you live, I think everybody in the valley is battling rezoning."
The County Commission stands as a chief target of critics of plan and zone changes, because cities have taken steps to strengthen long-range land-use plans. The commission has also made a number of controversial land-use and zoning changes in recent months.
Among them:
The 3-1 vote has sparked an appeal that for the first time will test a state law designed to limit the growth of casinos in residential areas.
But nearby resident Cheralin Zaugg said the change to the master plan most frustrated and angered residents who were assured by the county's development plan and real estate agents that casinos wouldn't be a part of the community.
Helm and nearby resident Linda Turner said they will appeal the decision.
The project passed despite recommendations for denial from the Enterprise Town Board and the Planning Commission -- both advisory boards -- and the county staff.
The 5-1 vote -- again, with Woodbury the lone dissenting vote -- was unsuccessfully challenged in District Court. Residents are appealing that decision.
Those are among dozens of decisions that the County Commission makes while serving as the zoning board. The commissioners routinely look at about a half-dozen zoning and use variance applications that go against land-use guides in their twice-monthly zoning meetings.
Critics, such as land-use attorneys Garry Hayes and Chuck Gardner, are among many who say it should be tougher for the county to pass those changes. Gardner is representing residents appealing the union hall approval; Hayes is representing Spring Valley residents appealing the casino approval.
They charge that many decisions are motivated by politics and campaign contributions, and that the impact on the community is often overlooked.
The commission changes master plans that are only a few months old and represent years of work and input from all sectors of the community. Rather than working to amend the land-use plans during their development, commercial developers do an end-run around the process to fulfill their zoning desires, critics say.
The Police Protective Association, for example, lobbied hard for the union hall a few months after the commissioners adopted Enterprise's master plan. Gardner and neighbors said the decision amounted to a back room deal.
Criticism of the commission's decisions comes from throughout the community: homeowners, state politicians, town board members, and -- privately -- by employees of the county's Comprehensive Planning Department.
Some of the county's professional planners argue that the department's difficult job becomes even harder when long-term development plans are thrown out against their recommendations.
Paulette Carolin, Nevada chapter president of the American Planning Association, carefully echoed some of the concerns expressed by planning department employees.
"As a chapter, we are this year, and probably for succeeding years, going to take a very hard look at the enabling statutes," she said. Those "enabling statutes" are the state laws that grant county and city governments wide latitude in zoning and land-use issues.
Dramatic changes in land-use plans are "not optimal from a planner's perspective," Carolin said. "We would hope that our elected officials would have more confidence in us."
Others defend the status quo. Commissioners, developers and the leadership of the county's Comprehensive Planning Department argue that the zoning changes are necessary because of the region's intense population growth.
With the county population growing by an estimated 6,000 people a month, once residential or rural areas are quickly being surrounded by high-traffic artery roads and commercial projects.
People are going to disagree with the decisions that the commission makes, but those decisions aren't simple, Commissioner Erin Kenny said. Kenny has been under fire for her support of the Spring Valley casino.
Kenny said getting a use permit or zoning change contrary to land-use plans isn't easy. The proposals get public hearings before the town boards and the Planning Commission, then a final public hearing and vote before the County Commission.
"There are so many elements that go into planning recommendations and planning decisions, that are so much more complicated than they appear at first blush," Kenny said. "The whole issue of housing, construction and development is really complex.
"It's not always as easy as a headline," she said.
Developers say the volume of approvals for zone changes and use permits isn't out of line with the pace of growth in the valley.
"Some of those requests make perfect sense, especially in a place that's growing by 50,000 or 60,000 people a year," said Calvin Champlin, president of Quadrant Planning, a private company that represents developers in the land-use process.
"There are instances when county and city staff definitely are not in agreement with what is proposed," he said. "But the flip side to that is, that's why you have the public bodies who have the responsibility for making those decisions."
Land-use plans are "a snapshot" of where the County Commission and town boards think development will go, but the political leadership of the valley needs to be free to change those plans on a case-by-case basis, said Lesa Coder, director of the Current Planning Department.
She said the county commissioners take the recommendations from staff, the Planning Commission and town boards seriously.
Coder and her boss, Comprehensive Planning Director John Schlegel, agree that their employees sometimes feel frustrated with the commissioners' decisions.
Coder said those frustrations are to be expected anytime professionals have their recommendations overturned, such as when a client ignores advice from an attorney.
"Professionals always feel that way when they work hard," Schlegel said. "But we all keep in mind that (the commissioners) are the ones elected to make the decisions."
Woodbury believes the master plan should be more than just a guide and should be strengthened. Titus, a Las Vegas Democrat, said she is mulling legislation that would create stronger buffer zones around residential and environmentally sensitive areas.
Titus doesn't think that the commission is following the intent of state laws when it comes to protecting Residential Neighborhood Preservation areas or keeping casinos out of areas previously zoned for residential use -- laws passed in recent years to limit zoning and master-plan changes.
Although state law generally gives local governments the right to make zoning decisions, some people stung by commission decisions argue that the board members aren't following state law when it comes to granting use variances in opposition to land-use plans, or changing those plans.
Use variances in opposition to master plans, for example, by law require "showing of a legal hardship to justify the variance."
Critics such as Gardner argue that among the hundreds of variances granted in a year, only a handful met the legal requirement.
Coder, however, said she carefully follows the arguments during the public hearings on proposed variances and makes sure that commissioners or variance applicants state for the record reasons the variance should be granted.
She pointed out that when Commissioner Dario Herrera introduced the motion to allow the Home Depot in Enterprise -- which is within Herrera's district -- he justified it with two arguments: The large hardware and garden store would benefit the area's economy, and it would cut air pollution from cars driving longer distances to get to alternative stores.
Gardner, however, countered that under those criteria, almost any commercial project in the Las Vegas Valley would be acceptable.
Most residents "give up in frustration," Gardner said.
"The developers have the greater staying power," he said. "After the first couple of rounds, (residents) come to the conclusion that the entire system is corrupt from top to bottom, so they throw in the towel. They quit."
Paul Richitt, a UNLV environmental studies teacher and planning researcher, said the deck is stacked against appeals of any county land-use decision. The law and the courts define land-use decisions as "discretionary acts" by local governments.
"Discretionary acts cannot be challenged very easily," Richitt said.
Richitt and Titus argue that a better regional approach to planning is necessary.
Titus has tried before, and said she may try again, to create a regional agency to decide land-use policy similar to that in Portland, Ore., where an elected board oversees land-use.
Coder, however, argues that a one-size-fits-all approach from the state won't help the valley.
"The very intricate details of land-use, that should be left to the local body," Coder said.
A regional planning body with real power will not be easily accepted by the commissioners, all of whom say they want to maintain power over the development process.
But Richitt and others say something needs to change.
"You cannot, should not make isolated decisions," Richitt said. "One of the first things we teach in environmental systems is interrelatedness. Everything you do will have an effect on everything else.
Ignoring or invalidating regional land-use plans constitutes spot zoning and ultimately planning chaos, Richitt said.
One thing that all sides agree on: If the present system stays in place, people should get used to land-use changes in their neighborhoods. The changes might be as dramatic as a superstore at a major intersection, or as subtle as offices moving into former homes.
Champlin said the only exception to that would be in master-planned communities such as Green Valley or Summerlin, which are protected by separate agreements between the developers and the local government.
"If you are not within a master-planned community, you're going to run a risk," Champlin said. "Sooner or later something is going to pop up in your neighborhood that you are not in favor of."
"People better know -- if there is a vacant lot in their neighborhood, it's up for grabs," Gardner said.
Launce Rake covers growth issues for the Sun. He can be reached at (702) 259-2318 or by e-mail at [email protected]
archive
