Tuesday, March 30, 2004 | 11:29 a.m.
Developer Billy Walters appears to have the water, the land and the legal obligation to build a golf course just outside Rhodes Ranch, officials with several affected government agencies agree.
The developer, however, said Monday that he doesn't have that obligation and cannot build a golf course under the terms suggested by the various county-associated agencies.
Walters leases land from the Clark County Aviation Department, and last year won a controversial rezoning on the land that allowed him to switch some of the land from a promised golf course to commercial purposes. On March 2 the Clark County Commission approved a new lease that gave him 65 acres for commercial development but also required him to develop the adjacent golf course if water is available.
Walters said he does not have to build the course because he would have to mix cheaper recycled water with more expensive potable, or drinking quality, water, and because new rules restricting the number of irrigated acres to 45 make a successful course impossible.
"We're prepared to fulfill that commitment, but we're not going to go in there and pay potable water rates and try to build a golf course on 45 acres," Walters said. "We're not changing our position."
The contract calls for the use of recycled water when available, mirroring the county rules for golf courses. It does not specify the amount of irrigated turf. Walters, however, said those elements were included in the lengthy and combative public discussions on the issue last year.
In the middle are Spring Valley residents who fear that they will never see a golf course or other type of open space on the 200 acres adjacent to the commercial development -- although they know that they will see the commercial properties they fought during the earlier zoning battle.
Residents in the area who had battled the commercial zoning said they did not believe that Walters would build the golf course. They argue that the county struck a deal with the developer that allows the commercial space, but may not ever deliver the open space that was always part of the area's master plan.
J.C. Davis, a spokesman for the Las Vegas Valley Water District, said water is available, both in its recycled form -- treated effluent -- and in the drinkable form. A treatment facility provides recycled water to the area, but any new golf course would have to share with other customers on the same line, he said.
In the winter, a golf course at Durango Drive and Warm Springs Road would have enough of the recycled water to irrigate the course. In the summer months when demand is high, potable, or drinking-quality, water would have to supplement the recycled water, he said.
That should not stop construction of a golf course, Davis said.
"There is no rule requiring that golf courses just use recycled water," he said. Large-scale irrigators have to use recycled water "when available," but that "does not mean they have to use exclusively nonpotable."
Other officials agreed.
"There's nothing in our code that prohibits a golf course from using potable water," Clark County planner Chuck Pulsipher said.
He said there is no moratorium on the use of water for new golf courses, and so nothing to impede Walters from going ahead with a new course. However, the 45-acre limit on irrigated turf could have an impact, he added.
"He can build a golf course," Pulsipher said. "He may not have as much turf as he'd like."
Walters and representatives from the county Aviation Department had said, citing water agency officials, that no water was available for the development. Technically, they were right, officials from the water district said, but only because the developer hadn't applied for the right to take water from either the recycled or potable systems.
Now that the aviation department is aware that the water at least could exist, Walters will have to apply to get the water, Aviation Department Director Randy Walker said.
"Now that the lease is executed, he has to apply," Walker said.
Walters responded that his negotiations were not with the water district, but with the Clark County Sanitation District, now the Clark County Water Reclamation District. Both agencies have the same board: the Clark County Commission.
"As far as water being available from the Las Vegas water district -- that's great, but that's not what we committed to," Walters said. "All we're going to use is recycled water. We're not going to buy from the Las Vegas Valley Water District and pay those rates."
If there isn't enough recycled water to supply a golf course with more than 100 acres of irrigated turf, than the sanitation district can build a new treatment facility to supply the proposed golf course, Walters said.
In the contract ratified by the county commission, Walters has 24 months to begin construction of the 200-acre golf course from the time he begins construction of the adjoining commercial property -- if water is available. Failure to comply with that timeline would mean the loss of any commercial land that is not already under construction and the forfeiture of a $500,000 bond.
Residents say they don't believe the golf course will ever be built.
"We're confused in the neighborhood as to whether water is available or not," said John Sheehan, a board member of the Rhodes Ranch Homeowners Association across Durango from the would-be golf course site. "If water is available, and he doesn't go forward with the golf course, then he shouldn't be allowed to do the commercial.
"We in the community are upset that there's never a straight answer," Sheehan said.
Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, who represents the area east of Durango including the land for the commercial and golf course development, said the county will have to enforce the provisions of the contract.
"It's a matter of legal enforcement," Woodbury said. "A contract's a contract unless we work something out."
But the commissioner is concerned that because of the drought, this may be a bad time and place to build another golf course.
"In fact, I think we should consider a moratorium on all golf courses," Woodbury said. "I'd much rather see that property diverted to some kind of public use. I think we need to figure out what the viable alternative is."
He said if the golf course is scratched in favor of a park or other alternative, the developer should have to contribute to the effort.
Walters said he would be willing to discuss some other fate for the land than a golf course. He said his representatives met with the Spring Valley residents more than two dozen times in last year's controversy and would be willing to do so again.
Sheehan and other community activists agree with Woodbury. They say that they want to see some sort of protected open space, which could include a park as well as a golf course.
"Why can't it be a desert preserve with pathways on it for people to enjoy?" Sheehan said. "The whole idea is what fulfills the need."
archive
