Officials hear high-rise debate

Thursday, March 17, 2005 | 9:41 a.m.

The Clark County Commission heard extended debate over proposed changes to the county's rules governing high-rise, "mixed use" developments Wednesday, but ultimately decided to postpone decisions on the potentially thorny issues until the commission's land-use meeting next month.

Some of the speakers at Wednesday's meeting, which was scheduled to consider changes small and large in the sweeping mixed-use development rules adopted last month, said they wanted to see the proposed changes in writing. Those changes were still being drafted in the seconds before the issue came before the commission.

Many of those who spoke at the meeting wanted the zones allowing taller high-rises extended to their properties. But community activists also suggested rolling back some of the zones that now allow the tallest buildings.

The rules were drafted in a series of community meetings over the last year in response to a flood of applications for such mixed-use high-rise projects, which typically bring together residential condominiums with retail, office and other commercial uses. Advocates say the projects sparking a "Manhattanization" of Las Vegas make sense environmentally and in terms of increasingly expensive real estate.

Others, like M.J. Harvey, chairwoman of the Paradise Town Advisory Board, worry that they could squeeze thousands of residents and their cars into traffic arteries already overfull. Harvey argued before the commission that traffic studies should be required for any mixed-use application that comes before the county.

"Applicants must show how local traffic volume will be mitigated," Harvey said.

Greg Borgel, a land-use consultant who frequently represents developers before the county, said developers don't mind doing traffic analyses for "billion-dollar projects," but he said a requirement that those analyses go to the county 30 days before mandatory pre-application conferences and formal request submittals would slow down the construction process.

The county commission did not make a decision on when or how such traffic studies would have to be submitted, but Commissioner Lynette Boggs McDonald, who has expressed her concerns about the impact of the large projects on roads and other infrastructure, said the information has to come in early enough for the town advisory boards and the Clark County Planning Commission to consider traffic impacts.

The planning commission and town advisory boards both make land-use recommendations to the county commission.

Boggs McDonald noted that the mixed-use projects are forcing the Nevada Department of Transportation and the Regional Transportation Commission to consider populations densities never envisioned when drawing up traffic models for the region.

"We're going into territory that we've never been in before," she said. "The more data we can empower the (advisory) boards with, the town boards and the planning commission and us, the better land use decisions we can make."

Community activist Carolyn Edwards said she was disappointed that the county mixed-use plan did not provide incentives for developers to build lower cost housing. Such "affordable housing" proposals were included in earlier drafts.

Commission Chairman Rory Reid said such incentives could be a product of the county's Growth Management Task Force, which is scheduled to bring recommendations to the county commission on a host of growth-related issues next month.

Michael Diaz, chairman of the Sunrise Manor Town Advisory Board, expressed concern that high-rises could soon be going into areas near his home off Boulder Highway.

"We just feel like we're moving a little too fast, a little too far," he told the commission.

The commission voted unanimously to schedule further discussion and possible revisions to the existing rules for April 6. Reid warned those attending the discussion that the commission would only consider issues already raised at earlier meetings on the mixed-use rules.