Wednesday, May 4, 2005 | 11:11 a.m.
Clark County commissioners today were expected to approve a moratorium that would, in effect, prevent development in 18 square miles of unincorporated Eldorado Valley as part of a long-term strategy to preserve the no-growth character of Boulder City.
Commissioner Bruce Woodbury, who is a Boulder City resident, proposed the moratorium that would prevent developers and landowners from seeking zoning changes for up to one year, or until Boulder City and the county adopt an agreement dictating the type of development allowed in Eldorado Valley.
Commissioners were to decide today whether to set the moratorium ordinance for a May 18 public hearing.
Boulder City is concerned about potential massive development in Eldorado Valley adjacent to the city's western border. One property owner, Eldorado Valley Development Co., stirred up the community in April when it proposed state legislation enabling the swap of 640 acres east of McCullough Ridge for 1,500 acres of city-owned property farther to the west.
The Boulder City Council rejected the proposal, but council members and residents were unsettled because they had no control over what is built just outside of the city's borders.
The zoning of Eldorado Valley Development's property allows for about 300 homes, but the owners have indicated they may seek a zoning change that would permit as many as 2,000 homes or even industrial development.
The proposed moratorium "is great," Boulder City Councilwoman Andrea Anderson said. "This is a first step and a vital first step. At least we won't have any uncontrolled vote in the valley in the immediate future. That gives us time to work out an agreement."
Boulder City residents are worried about the extra traffic a subdivision would generate and fear building along the foothills will take away the mountain views.
Boulder City is a major landowner in Eldorado Valley but plans to use its property as open space.
"It would be wrong for Boulder City to have another subdivision come into Eldorado Valley," said Mayor Bob Ferraro. "I like the pristine view of that valley and don't want to see any more houses there."
The interlocal agreement between the city and county would dictate the type of development allowed on the unincorporated property and set design standards, said Chuck Pulsipher, a county planning manager. Most of the 18 square miles is zoned for low-density residential, which allows one home for every two acres. Some parcels are zoned for industrial development, he said.
Woodbury said he sought the moratorium to prevent zoning changes before Boulder City and the county reach an agreement, possibly in two to three months. He said he wants the low-density residential zoning to remain in place.
"We want to preserve the integrity and quality of life of Boulder City," Woodbury said.
About 1,100 acres in unincorporated Clark County east of McCullough Ridge is in private hands, according to Brok Armantrout, Boulder City's community development director. About 380 acres are owned by the Bureau of Land Management, and 600 acres belong to the Western Power Administration, a division of the Energy Department.
Louis Cervantez, general manager of Eldorado Valley Development, said he doesn't like a moratorium but has no plans to oppose it. He said the moratorium could reduce the value of the 640 acres in the short term for any potential buyer, but he said the ordinance will result in dialogue on what is developed in Eldorado Valley.
"This is the politicians' way of getting things done," Cervantez said. "The silver lining is that it will bring parties together. We are weighing what is possible down the road, and it outweighs what can be done initially. It will take that much time to figure out what we are doing."
Cervantez said his company is "waiting for things to calm down" before deciding on a course of action.
Eldorado Valley Development is a landowner, not a developer, and ultimately plans to sell the property for someone else to develop, he said.
Cervantez said he believes it would be feasible to develop the property under the current zoning, but some Boulder City and Clark County officials said that is unlikely to happen without increased density.
Pulsipher said a Nevada Supreme Court ruling involving development at Lake Tahoe affirmed the legality of moratoriums. He said he's not aware of any zoning changes requested in Eldorado Valley in recent months.
Woodbury said owners of the land aren't entitled to zoning changes to create a better investment. The company acquired the property in 2002, and one Boulder City official estimated Eldorado Valley Development's property is worth in excess of $250 million.
"They knew what the zoning was," Woodbury said. "Nobody is entitled to a change in zoning that doesn't conform to the master plan."
Woodbury said the best solution is for the land to be annexed into the city. The county isn't in a position to provide services, and Boulder City would be saddled with being the first responder for police and fire emergencies, Woodbury said.
"Boulder City would be most impacted by the development, and I don't want to see another county island develop that is similar to what we have in the middle of Henderson with an industrial development and Henderson all around it.
"That makes no sense in Eldorado Valley," Woodbury said. "We don't want a little community growing up there surrounded by Boulder City."
Boulder City conducted a study last fall on annexing property up to McCullough Ridge, but the plan never made it to the Planning Commission or City Council, Armantrout said. He said property owners weren't interested in annexing, and the city couldn't forcibly annex the property because it couldn't afford to provide services as required by law.
Landowners were deterred by Boulder City ordinances' that limit growth to 120 homes a year and only 30 a year by a developer, Armantrout said.
Anderson said she would like the city to revisit the annexation issue and determine if the city could afford it.
archive
