County to revisit sticky zoning issues

Thursday, Jan. 9, 2003 | 11:05 a.m.

Clark County Commissioners indicated they are ready -- some even eager -- to take a fresh look at a handful of controversial zoning decisions that split the board and the community late last year.

With a 5-2 vote, the commission reopened discussions on a plan to build commercial development on county-owned land in Spring Valley that was originally slated for a golf course.

The commissioners also voted 7-0 to bring back a contentious issue of a 304-unit housing project, also in Spring Valley, under the departure route for jets at McCarran International Airport.

The vote to reconsider the zoning approval for the residential development followed a few short comments from Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, who represents the area and has always opposed the project. He noted that county airport and planning staff opposed the Woodside Homes development and the project did not fit the existing master plan for the area.

But the debate over the shopping center planned on what would be a county golf course was longer and sharper.

Commissioner Yvonne Atkinson Gates, a former business partner of a competing shopping-center developer, moved to reexamine the land-use guide, or master plan, for the commercial development planned by Las Vegas golf course magnate Billy Walters.

Changing the underlying master plan could stop commercial uses on the site at Warm Spring Road and Cimarron Drive. Airport Director Randy Walker said his department, which controls the land, would not lease it for any purpose not approved by the master plan.

Gates had the support of Commissioners Woodbury, Chip Maxfield, Rory Reid and Mark James, who now represents the area.

Reid and James this week replaced Commissioner Erin Kenny and Dario Herrera, who had supported both issues. Kenny and Herrera ran unsuccessfully in November for other offices.

Commission Chairman Mary Kincaid-Chauncey and Commissioner Myrna Williams opposed the motion to look at the land-use rules underneath the proposed 65-acre commercial development. Both said that reopening an issue passed 5-2 in December -- and that survived an attempt at formal reconsideration by the same vote -- would set a bad precedent for the county.

"It seems to me that this is a misuse of the system," Kincaid-Chauncey said.

"It is unfair to go back after something has been finalized," Williams agreed.

Unlike a motion for reconsideration, as in the case of the residential development near the airport, reexamining the land-use rules underneath a project is a very unusual procedure, the pair noted.

"I really think it is circumventing the process to come back with a zone change," Kincaid-Chauncey said. "I think it is not only bad for economic development but also for the community's perception of what the word of this board is worth."

"There is nothing that would stop anybody from coming back on anything we've approved and saying there was not enough input," Williams said.

Kincaid-Chauncey, Williams and former Sen. Richard Bryan, who represented Walters, argued that a process called a design review would give community members concerned about the project adequate opportunity to comment on the ultimate appearance of the development.

But the majority of commissioners said the community needed more of a chance to affect the development.

"To kind of start fresh and new with all this, I think this may be the way to do this. ... We ensure that the consensus-building process has been accomplished," James said. "There has to be some compromise."

The compromise may be a much more limited development than the 65-acre project that Walters originally envisioned. The entire board agreed that some commercial development is appropriate at the intersection.

But Gates and a handful of community activists who opposed the project said they want to see the commercial uses scaled back.

"Does it have to be that large? Does it have to be that intense?" she asked.

Gates gave a pep talk to those activists outside the commission chambers moments after the vote. Those activists, according to the board's vote, can now participate in neighborhood meetings, a Clark County Planning Commission meeting and a Spring Valley Town Advisory Board meeting in an effort to change the land-use plan for the golf course area.

"You have to go tell them what you want," she said.

Lisa Mayo, a community activist who backed James' candidacy, called the vote "a huge win" for Spring Valley residents who opposed the project. She predicted that the outcome for the project would be a much smaller development, or one that restricts retail uses that Walters originally wanted.

Ed Nigro, the competing developer with a shopping center essentially across the street from the Walters project, said he is pleased that the land-use plan has been reopened for discussion.

Discussion and action on both the golf course commercial development and the residential development near the airport are scheduled to be heard Feb. 5.