Tue, Dec 24, 2002 (11:07 a.m.)

Clark County Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates is asking the commission to revisit two contentious zoning decisions that have put the spotlight on the county's land-use process in the last month.

Gates, one of a trio of commissioners who have fought for greater deference to existing land-use guides or "master plans," has placed the issues on the Jan. 8 commission zoning agenda.

The trio -- Gates, Chip Maxfield and Bruce Woodbury -- could have new support on the zoning issues at the upcoming meeting. Commissioners Dario Herrera and Erin Kenny leave office this month, and newly elected Commissioners Rory Reid and Mark James will take their seats. Reid and James have indicated they will grant greater weight to existing land use guides and community master plans.

Gates' move targets approvals to build a 64-acre commercial development on county-owned land once planned for a golf course and a 63-acre industrial park on land that was zoned for open space.

Both projects sparked opposition. The commercial development, planned by Las Vegas golf course builder Billy Walters, was opposed by commercial developers of neighboring properties who said the commission was giving Walters an unfair advantage in the market.

The commercial development was approved by a 5-2 vote Dec. 18, with Gates and Woodbury casting the votes against it. Maxfield expressed concern about the impact the complex of retail and offices would have on traffic and services in the area, but voted for the project but later indicated he might ask for formal reconsideration.

Nearby residents and Clark County planning and public works staffs opposed the industrial park, which received approval Nov. 20 by a 4-2 vote. Maxfield and Gates both opposed the zoning.

Woodbury, absent from the meeting and recovering from surgery, had indicated he also opposed the project, which was in his district.

Land-use consultant and former Clark County planning director Greg Borgel worked on both projects. He said those backing the projects have not yet had an opportunity to discuss Gates' move, but will very likely be prepared to bring their cases back to the commission.

During the Nov. 20 debate over the proposed industrial park, land use attorney Chris Kaempfer argued that the land beneath the park could never be developed as anything other than intense commercial or industrial because it is within a high-noise area affected by McCarran International Airport.

The $70 million industrial park had the support of the Nevada Development Authority, which argued that the project would bring in new business and tax revenue to Southern Nevada.

Homeowners living near the site of the proposed industrial park have filed a suit to overturn the commission's zoning approval.

The suit, filed by attorney Garry Hayes, asks the district court to throw out the zoning decision. Hayes represented residents during the contentious zoning hearing.

The suit argues that the zone change application violated county ordinances and that the county failed to comply with the existing master plan for land use.

That may not be the last suit filed in this case.

Kaempfer said if the county blocks development through another zone change Jan. 8, the developers probably will sue.

"It raises significant legal questions," Kaempfer said. "Transactions have closed with reliance on that zoning."

The Dec. 18 debate over the Walters development lasted more than three hours.

Richard Bryan, a former Nevada governor and United States senator, represented Walters on the development planned for the golf course area. He said the lease -- which is likely to be renegotiated if the zoning is changed from a golf course to commercial uses -- would make money for the county.

And those moving into Walters' project would not see any benefit from cheaper land because the county's rules would require any tenant to pay fair market value, Bryan said.

The two projects are among about a half-dozen high profile cases that have sparked community opposition and divided the county commission.

Gates said her goal with the two she wants commissioners to talk about on Jan. 8 is "not necessarily to turn it back to what it was, but at least work with the neighbors."

"They didn't work with the surrounding neighbors," she said.

Barbara Ginoulias, Clark County assistant director for current planning, said the Jan. 8 request is not a formal reconsideration. However, the commission could overturn the earlier zoning, effectively stopping both projects, she said.

Borgel said such a move is not common but not unprecedented either.

"At any point and at any time the county has the right to consider any zoning change," Borgel said.

archive