Las Vegas Sun

December 4, 2009

Currently: 32° | Complete forecast | Log in

Walters fights for shopping center

Wednesday, Jan. 15, 2003 | 9:42 a.m.

Golf course developer Billy Walters will not accept anything less than a shopping center, an office complex and a golf course in a contentious battle over the future use of county land in southwest Las Vegas, one of Walters' advisors said Tuesday.

Land-use consultant Greg Borgel said Walters, who wants to shift his lease of 65 acres of county land at Warm Springs and Cimarron roads from a golf course to commercial uses, has existing county zoning approval for the three uses. While the developer is willing to listen and work with neighbors, no compromise is possible on the basic uses, Borgel said.

"It needs to be a shopping center, a medical-office complex and a golf course," he said.

Walters received County Commission approval in November for an amendment to the master plan for the Spring Valley Township, allowing commercial uses. In December, a split board approved the zoning needed for his project over the objections of numerous residents and other observers.

But in January, two commissioners who had supported the project left office, and two new commissioners, who have publicly indicated they will not as readily support master-plan changes, took office.

The new commission voted to revisit the master plan for the area -- and the zoning underneath the 65-acre project.

Residents of the Rhodes Ranch community next door to the proposed shopping center spoke against the project at a meeting of the Spring Valley Town Advisory Board Tuesday night.

John Sheehan, a community resident, said the county needs to change the commercial zoning granted last month. He said many residents did not learn that the master plan was being amended until too late.

He argued that Walters, who does not now have an amended lease, should not be driving the process of changing the land use plans for the area. The county commissioners can change it back if they want to, Sheehan said.

"It's their land. They can do whatever they want with it," he said. "They can rezone it as many times as they want."

It was a point also made by Ed Nigro, a developer with a potentially competing shopping center nearby. Nigro said the issues involved are bigger than just the competitive advantage a developer might have through using county land.

Under the existing lease, Walters "has no right to develop this commercially," Nigro said.

And Kim Friel, assistant principal at Sierra Vista High School, said the development across the street from her school would be a problem for both students and those using the proposed shopping center.

"Twice a day, we will have 3,000 students coming to and leaving our school," Friel said. "That will create huge traffic jams. ... We need to get them in, we need to get them out -- safely."

She said students also will be induced to park in the shopping center's parking lot, skip class to go to the stores and walk and drive through the commercial area.

The Spring Valley advisory board on Tuesday did not make a formal recommendation to revise the master plan again, but board Vice Chairman Brett Skinner said he would support the revision.

"In general I don't think the Spring Valley land use plan should be amended except after the benefit of a lot of public input," he said of the commission's decision last year. "That didn't happen in this case."

Skinner and two other advisory board members did not immediately make a recommendation but said they will act following a community meeting on the issue Jan. 27. The advisory board meets again Jan. 28.

Terry Murphy, a consultant working for Walters, sidestepped direct comment on the issues raised by the neighbors, but said her client has been and will continue to work with them to resolve the issue.

"We will use this process, try to work with the neighbors and come back with something that everyone can live with," she said.

Dionicio Gordillo, a planner with Clark County Development Services, said an expedited process will bring the issue before the Clark County Planning Commission Feb. 4 and the Clark County Commission for what could be a final decision Feb. 5.com

archive

  • Most Read
  • Discussed
  • Most E-mailed

Calendar »

  • 4 Fri
  • 5 Sat
  • 6 Sun
  • 7 Mon
  • 8 Tue