Thursday, May 1, 2003 | 11:20 a.m.
Developer Jim Rhodes on Wednesday dropped the metaphorical other shoe: He applied for county zoning to build up to 5,500 homes on top of Blue Diamond Hill, the flashpoint of a controversy over land-use rules, property rights, ethics and the environment of nearby Red Rock Canyon.
The developer has dubbed the community "Hidden Hills."
Rhodes filed multiple applications to Clark County planners along two parallel zoning tracks. One would allow up to 5,500 homes on the 2,400 acres on the site, an active gypsum mine owned until March by James Hardie Gypsum. The second batch of applications would allow up to 1,500 homes at about one house per every two acres -- essentially the limit under the existing master-plan land-use guide for the area.
Both sets of applications divided the requests into four parcels, an effort to avoid Clark County's "major projects" regulations. A major-project review can take months and include numerous public meetings.
Simple zoning requests are more straightforward and often include three public meetings: A review and recommendation by a town board, in this case the Red Rock Citizens Advisory Council; a similar recommendation from the Clark County Planning Commission; and finally a vote by the Clark County Commission.
While major-project reviews can take the better part of a year, straight zoning requests can go through the process in a matter of weeks.
Rhodes called the applications "an effort to secure his property rights," a reference to proposals in both the Clark County Commission and the Nevada Legislature that would limit development options.
"We were prepared to develop applications several months ago, when the purchase rights were still under contract with James Hardie," Rhodes said. "At the request of Clark County Commissioner Mark James, we have held off submitting any applications on this property, effectively losing four months in the zoning process."
With the movement of the county and state development restrictions, Rhodes said he needed to act now to protect his ability to develop the property.
"We now face rigid timelines. ... Upon advice from my attorneys, I am doing what I need to protect my property rights as any landowner would do," he said.
County officials said the commissioners can still require the applications to go through the major-project process or hold the issue until the question of the county and state development restrictions are resolved.
"Or they can just vote it down," County Manager Thom Reilly said.
Reilly said county land-use counsel Rob Warhola, Assistant County Manager Rick Holmes and Barbara Ginoulias, assistant director for current planning, met Wednesday and were to meet again today to discuss the applications, the legal consequences and options for the commission.
Rhodes touched upon some issues that he and his representatives have already emphasized:
* The land under the proposed development is the site of 80 years of gypsum mining, "deeply scarring the area and destroying all vegetation on the property." The developer has said that building and selling homes on the land would help pay for rehabilitation of the mining area.
* The property is not within the confines of the federally designated Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area or within the area commonly called Red Rock Canyon, a favorite day trip for visitors and residents.
* The 1993 law creating the national conservation area stated that Congress did not intend to create "protective perimeters or buffer zones around the conservation area," a goal of both the state and county proposals.
* Development in Summerlin already touches the western boundary of the conservation area.
The developer launched a television advertising campaign this morning touching on the same points. The ads ask viewers to take a free tour of the mining property. The tours, according to representatives at Rhodes Homes, will be offered five times daily Friday through May 9.
"I took these ads out to set the record straight," Rhodes said today. "My property is not in the Red Rock conservation area.
"I want to give (the public) the opportunity to see the site, to see the devastation that has occurred over the past 80 years and to explain why a residential project outside the conservation area does not intrude on the beauty of Red Rock Canyon."
Lynn Purdue, a Rhodes' spokeswoman, said the media buy would blanket Clark County's television viewers.
Rhodes also is sticking close to the land-use zoning issues in his public campaign.
"The master-planned communities bordering Red Rock all started with (rural) zoning and were allowed to have that zoning changed," Rhodes said. "I think all property owners should be treated fairly and equitably."
Opponents of development, however, have argued that the creation of zoning for Summerlin included a land swap with the Howard Hughes Corp. that led to the creation of the conservation area and protection of the canyon; that a principal concern is the impact that development on the hill would have on surrounding areas, not the hill itself; and the federal law does not prohibit the state or county from adding additional land-use protections.
Some of the most vocal opponents to higher-density zoning on the property may not be able to vote on the issue. Commissioners Rory Reid, Bruce Woodbury and Chip Maxfield all work with firms that have done work for Rhodes within the last year, raising the possibility of a conflict of interest.
James, who represents the district that includes Blue Diamond Hill and most of the Red Rock conservation area, also has worked for Rhodes. James also is a supporter of the Red Rock development restrictions.
Rhodes is suing James to block his former attorney from acting on, discussing or voting on any measures affecting his property.
So far, county attorneys and staff have said the four commissioners may vote on the development restrictions because they are general law, but zoning issues may force a quartet of abstentions.
That would leave the issue up to three other commissioners: Myrna Williams, Yvonne Atkinson-Gates and Commission Chairwoman Mary Kincaid-Chauncey.
All three have indicated concerns with residential densities higher than that allowed under the existing master plan.
Kincaid-Chauncey said the more limited track of 1,500 homes on the land, however, could be approved even with the county and state development restrictions, which would hold zoning at one home per two acres.
"Pretty much by right it's already zoned for that," she said. "It depends on what happens with the other things that are going on, and I'll take a look at whatever application comes before us, but at the moment at least, it looks like he can put the homes on.
"The 5,500 would require a zone change."
Rhodes' announcement Wednesday did not have any direct reference to a plan unveiled a day earlier from U.S. Sens. John Ensign, R-Nev., and Harry Reid, D-Nev.,that would use federal funds to purchase the property, reclaim the land from mining and ultimately include the land as part of the national conservation area.
Woodbury, a supporter of the Ensign-Reid proposal, speculated that Rhodes' zoning applications were an effort to increase the value of his property, which could increase any appraisal the federal government would do before a purchase.
"This doesn't have anything to do with the Ensign-Reid proposal," Rhodes' spokeswoman Purdue said. "Nobody has come to him with anything specific on the (senators') proposal."
Recreational groups, the citizens of the small village of Blue Diamond and environmental organizations have come together to oppose development on Blue Diamond Hill, and they have expected the zoning applications since Rhodes' announced his $50 million purchase of the land in March.
"The 5,500 -- that's absolutely terrible," said Karen Hunt, a member of the group's local executive committee and chairwoman of the group's Red Rock subcommittee. "The 1,500, we will look for any loopholes, any ways to obstruct that."
The Red Rock Citizens Advisory Council passed the county development restrictions by a vote of 4-0 Wednesday night.
archive
