Red Rock threatened by development

So, while I'm not saying precedents can't and won't be set, but is there a precedent for a development like this being stopped successfully in the past in that region? Or is there still a damn the torpedoes grow at any cost mentality?

Also, I was looking through the comment section on the article in the Las Vegas Review Journal. There were a lot of encouraging comments, such as people urging others to show up at the meeting on the 17th. On the other hand, I saw a couple comments about it being an improvement on "useless desert," and a lot of comments chastising those against the project for being against something that would create jobs.

I'm not a local, but I'll be sure to send some emails in the run up to the coming meeting. To those closer by, be sure to make yourselves heard at the meeting! I suspect the only way this will be stopped is if the commissioners actually feel like there might be some opposition to their re-election over this.

What pisses me off is that Rhodes has done such a good job of divirting us away from the heart of the argument: Is RU the appropriate zoning for this land?

I think almost everyone except Rhodes and his people would say yes.

Both the State and County overwhemingly answered yes to this question when they enacted laws to prevent submission of a zone change. Just because these laws were challenged doesn't change the fact that RU is appropriate zoning.

All of a sudden Rhodes has us debating whether a road is possible from the east, how long temporary construction access from 159 will last, what will be seen from where....distracting everyone from the main point:

RU IS APPROPRIATE ZONING FOR THIS LAND, ANY HIGHER DENSITY IS NOT!!!!!!!!!!

Bump, keep voicing your opinion!

Here's the contact info (sources: saveredrock.com & blm.gov):

BLM Southern Nevada District Office:
Mary Jo Rugwell, District Manager,
4701 North Torrey Pines Drive
Las Vegas, NV 89130
Phone: 702-515-5000
Fax: 702-515-5023
Email: lvfoweb@blm.gov

Clark county commissioners:
All commissioners can be reached at: (702) 455-3500
All commissioners can receive faxes at: (702) 455-3271
Clark County Commissioners, 500 S. Grand Central Parkway, Las Vegas, NV 89155
Steve Sisolak, District A, ccdista@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Tom Collins, District B, ccdistb@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Larry Brown, District C, ccdistc@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Lawrence Weekly, District D, ccdistd@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Chris Giunchigliani, District E, ccdiste@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Susan Brager, District F, ccdistf@ClarkCountyNV.gov
Mary Beth Scow, District G, ccdistg@ClarkCountyNV.gov

US Senators and Representatives for NV: (and yes, even if you don't live in NV, it doesn't mean you shouldn't contact them)
Senator Harry Reid (D- NV), 202-224-3542, reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm
Senator Dean Heller (R- NV), 202-224-6244, heller.senate.gov/contact_form.cfm
Representative Shelley Berkley (D-01), 202-225-5965, shelley.berkley@mail.house.gov
Representative Joe Heck (R-03), 202-225-3252, heck.house.gov/contact-me/e…

I e-mailed several days ago, but just got this response, it shows that one of the commissioners is on the right path:

"Thank you for your email. On behalf of Commissioner Giunchigliani:
As you know, I voted against allowing the development last year and my concerns have not changed.

Regards,
Marcie Whelan
Executive Assistant to
Commissioner Giunchigliani"

Check out this shot from the top of Crymson Chrysalis

emails sent. please keep this up.

bump

I sent my personalized email and signed the petition, If I lived closer or knew anyone who did I would certainly be attending or getting friends to attend the meeting on the 17th.

Doug Foust wrote:The more I think about it, it seems like it should be a simple issue for the commission: This land was zoned RU when it was purchased This land is currently zoned RU RU is appropriate zoning for this land The consensus of the residences of Clark County is overwhemingly in favor of this staying zoned RU I don't know how anyone could justify changing the zoning. What would be a justifiable argument to change the zoning?

Tom Mulholland wrote: Hi Doug, Can you please explain what RU means, for those of us unfamiliar with zoning law? Thanks

That land still needs to be remediated from the mining that has taken place, and infrastructure for any development would also be extensive.

So at the current zoning of 1 house per 2 acres, it will be unlikely for anything to be actually built up there. Even if some houses are built, it's definately not the track housing Rhodes is proposing.

After reading the county planners recommendation I just sent the following email to all of the county commissioners. Hopefully my piss poor grammer doesn't hurt our cause too much. Feel free to use any of it for your own emails.

Dear Commissioner ____,

I am writing you again today about the proposal/plan to develop Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area. I have several concerns with your County Planners Recommendation and Review that I would like to discuss.

1) Under the Background/Land Transfer portion it says that the land exchange process is ongoing and still in the works. However, according to an email that was recently received from Bob Ross, the field manager for BLM in the area, there has been no applications or proposals received from the developers.

2) Under Analysis/Major Projects-Planning/Item 2: I would ask how you would prevent that from happening? I have been to the area several times and have reviewed all of the diagrams and proposals. I would imagine that if this development was allowed to happen, that at some point the residents of the development would demand access to SR 159.

3) Under Analysis/Major Projects-Planning/ Item 11: The developer has attempted to address this in their proposal. Their claim is that it will have little if any impact. I am confident any independent analysis or analysis by the EPA, BLM, DFW, or other government agency would prove otherwise.

4) Under Analysis Major Projects-Planning, it is also stated that the conservation area will, "be impacted by the proposed project whether those impacts are real or imagined". I would first argue that the impacts are real. Second, I would argue that if people who enjoy RRCNCA "imagine" negative impacts, that for them when they visit the conservation area afterwards, the impact will be real.

5) The staff recommends that this development should be approved. First of all I firmly believe this is the wrong answer. Second, how can you take this recommendation seriously? They recommend that it is approved based on the number of residences being reduced as determined by the County Commissioners. Are the County Commissioners all engineers and scientists who are able to determine how many houses are appropriate? I propose that before the Board of Commissioners even thinks about approving it that they create an independent committee of scientists and engineers from both the private and public sector, paid for by the developer, to analyze how many residences would be appropriate IF approved.

My final issue with this recommendation is that they seem to ignore all the issue's that they bring up when giving their recommendation. They have so many issues with the proposal and plan, and then say to go ahead and approve it as long as you reduce the residences, which doesn't address most of their concerns. I would ask that you deny this developers plan to develop in the area. If you cannot bring yourself to flat out deny the proposal, then I ask that you at least force the developer to conduct independent studies of the issues that the County Planners Staff, Clark County Residents, and RRCNCA visitors have brought up, and postpone your final decision on whether to approve or deny the proposal until this is complete.

I thank you for your time and hope that you will seriously consider the negative impact this development will have on Red Rock Canyon Conservation Area.

Sincerely,

Daniel Lemley

We're on board John!

Mountain Gear has started urging county commissioners to consider the impacts of the development on recreation and climbing in the NCA. We feel all climbers should be involved with this issue, so let's hop to it everyone!

For those new to the thread, and somehow wandering around this far toward the end... www.saveredrock.com to sign the petition.

Wyeth Larson
Sustainability Coordinator
Mountain Gear

I took the time about 3 weeks ago to send a message and opositional letter to every email address on that list. I got quite a bit of responses from everyone I wrote too.

If everyone takes the time to write one letter and CC all the Email addresses there it could be overwhelming, Lets fight this thing, I wish I could go to the meeting.

They did respond to most of them, so keep them busy.

There are plenty of places in the dessert to build new cities. and that is what this is going to be a City.

bump. Thanks Mountain Gear for jumping on it! Good to have some corporate support for this endeavor.

I just spoke to Susan Brager for quite a while about the development situation. Her position is that they are going to approve the concept plan and then handcuff the project with density and with where they can put streetlights and such.

Ms. Brager said that the board legally has to approve the conceptual project. And she stated that part of the oppositions problem is that they're not bringing legitimate obstacles to the table. In other words, are there tortoises up there? What are the water issues? Is there an endangered plant up there? And so on...

In the phone call, I got the impression that she is opposed to the project. She said that the first proposal was 16,000 houses and that she's worked it down from there.

So it seemed like she was on our side. And if she's telling the truth and can put so many restrictions on the project that it isn't reasonable to build, then maybe...just maybe...it won't happen...

That said, it was clear that she had been through the ringer listening to people complain about the project. WE HAVE TO KEEP THE PRESSURE ON!!!!

Jason

Jason,

Isn't the land still zoned RU? Does the commission legally have to approve a zone change? I guess we really need a real estate lawyer/developemnt lawyer, because this doesn't make sense to me. I'm going to try to call Susan myself.

Thanks,

Doug

I left commissioner Brager a message. I'm trying to find out why they would have to approve a conceptual plan that exceeded the current zoning.

I just spoke with Steve Sisolak's assistant. She really didn't tell me much on his viewpoint but did say they've received 1,100 emails....that's seems like a low number....let's step it up!

BUMP