Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Red Rock threatened by development
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
Page 10 of 10.  <<First   <Prev   8  9  10
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
Aug 19, 2011
Doug Foust wrote:
If this project ever comes to fruition, I'm done living in this POS city.


Reminds me of the people that say, "If so-and-so wins the election, I'm moving to Canada!"

They never do. :)
FrankPS
From Atascadero, CA
Joined Nov 19, 2009
130 points
Aug 19, 2011
new toy
FrankPS wrote:
Reminds me of the people that say, "If so-and-so wins the election, I'm moving to Canada!" They never do. :)


I hear ya, but am actually pretty serious in this case. When I moved to vegas for a job, I only planned on staying 3-5 years. I've been here well over 8 years now, and it is the climbing in Red Rock that has kept me here.

I've been climbing in Red Rock a few early evenings in the last couple of weeks. Driving out of the park when it's dark makes you feel like you are in the middle of nowhere. It really turns my stomach to imagine what it will be like with 5,000 homes on Blue Diamond Hill.
Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Joined Sep 14, 2008
191 points
Aug 19, 2011
new toy
Brandontru wrote:
I must be becoming more localized these days. Much of what Vegas Stands for is something of the obscure. The fact that Red Rocks is even there is somewhat surreal. In many ways we look to it as not just a place but also a loved one. It may seem wierd to think about, except our climbing area is kind of growing up. this is not the last of the developments that will occur in the area. One way or another the real estate companies will have there way. I am just glad to have known Red Rock for the time I did. Doug maybe you are just ready to move on .... ;)


She's not dead yet! I've been working with some other locals and we are getting more organized to fight this development. We are also going to try to push for a blm land swap. If we get this land in public hands, Red Rock will keep it's sense of remoteness.
Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Joined Sep 14, 2008
191 points
Aug 19, 2011
Doug Foust wrote:
She's not dead yet! I've been working with some other locals and we are getting more organized to fight this development. We are also going to try to push for a blm land swap. If we get this land in public hands, Red Rock will keep it's sense of remoteness.


Absolutely!!! What's with the defeatist attitude again? I am getting kind of sick of these types of comments, particularly coming from climbers, who I thought were more tenacious than the average couch potato.

Let's keep fighting this thing. Until houses start coming up, there IS something we can do. We must at least try.
Eric and Lucie
From Boulder, CO
Joined Oct 14, 2004
154 points
Aug 19, 2011
We've already contacted the Access Fund and the amazing folks there are on the case, assisting us with multiple approaches going forward. After the council meeting this week, it is apparent that going forward we'll need a more coordinated approach and we'll definitely need legal advice after watching the Deputy DA in action.

We're optimistic, but this is going to take more than just uproar from the community- its going to take some real, dedicated research and work. The good news is that community members came forward this week- those with the expertise and ability to help us get legal evidence to oppose this project.

We'll keep folks posted as we move forward!
John Wilder
From Las Vegas, NV
Joined Feb 1, 2004
2,394 points
Aug 19, 2011
On the Leaning Tower, Yosemite.
Here is a short string of emails I had with Rob Warhola.

P.S. - Brandon you are a tru sally. I feel bad for anyone who would share a rope with someone who has a quitting attitude like yours. Move to Boulder.



Chad Umbel 5:44pm Aug 17
You should be ashamed of yourself Rob. Shame shame shame shame on you man. How you sleep at night is besides me. Way to do the right thing today.


-Chad Umbel
chad@dragonsafetysystems.com
(702) 526-2093

Rob Warhola
Apparently, you only believe in the Constitution when it suits your purpose. Personally, I was appalled when Ms. Linda Schmidt said "The land belongs to all of us." You probably cheered. Private property belongs to all of us? Really. And you say I should be ashamed?
Conversation History

From: chadumbel_151@hotmail.com
To: m+82pbj3u000000qy9gub002nxqodz6k01ut@reply.facebook.com
Subject: RE: New messages from Rob Warhola
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 18:35:51 +0000

And you sir have me mistaken. I don't believe that he shouldn't be able to build on his land. I think he should build what he bought, which is 1 house per 2 acres. Not some 7,000 plus home master plan mess. Have you ever been out to blue diamond and sat up on cross mountain at night and looked out over the darkness and stars? With a hospital, soccer fields, in and out burgers, and god knows how much other light from how many other places, I couldn't even imagine how grotesque it could be. Are you actually gonna sit there and try and tell me you think you can put eco friendly lighting on a soccer field? So yes, I do believe he should be able to build a small community. It is his land and I don't think it would be right to tell him he can't build on the land that he bought in the parcels he bought it in. You don't think that is fair? And yesterday you have the AUDACITY to SIT up there and say that there is no proof that it will harm Red Rock?? Is air pollution not proved to be harmful yet in 2011? It already seeps into the canyon on most days from the city far below. Could you imagine how bad it would be once this is underway? How about the light pollution harming all the nocturnal species in the desert night? Or the trampling of cholla and countless other plants and desert habitat that is so fragile to our impact? So You still think I should be ashamed? With all due respect Mr. Warholla, I don't know how such an intelligent man could be so clueless on something so obvious.


Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2011 23:59:28 -0700
To: chadumbel_151@hotmail.com
From: notification+ijd-1_h_@facebookmail.com
Subject: New messages from Rob Warhola

chad umbel
Joined Jan 13, 2005
537 points
Aug 19, 2011
new toy
Well written Chad. I'm really curious to get a real attorney's opinion on this, Warhola's actions almost seem criminal to me. Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Joined Sep 14, 2008
191 points
Aug 19, 2011
That was an interesting read, Chad. That reminds me of why I moved away from Las Vegas. Most people making decisions there would murder their own children to put a dollar in their pocket.

Brandontru, I hope what you wrote was tongue-in-cheek. If it wasn't, then shame on you. You are part of the problem with the valley, and part of the reason it is destined to collapse.
Carl Sherven
Joined Dec 30, 2007
224 points
Aug 21, 2011
you know what would be awesome? if we could keep this forum clear of crap so those who want to know whats going on and how to get involved dont have to wade through a bunch of crap to find out.

thanks.
John Wilder
From Las Vegas, NV
Joined Feb 1, 2004
2,394 points
Aug 22, 2011
new toy
Canned email form Sisolak and my response:

Mr. Sisolak,

You say that you "appreciate my comments" but seem to have completely ignored them.

This may be a concept plan, but the "concept" is for greater density than is appropriate for this piece of land. If you read Title 30, section 30.04.020, specifically Items, 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 14 you can make a legitimate, "in good faith" argument on why this concept plan should be denied.

I must say that you have really disappointed myself and a majority of your constituents with this ignorant decision to approve the concept plan.

Doug Foust
District A



----- Original Message -----
From: Steve Sisolak
Sent: Monday, August 22, 2011 11:03 AM
Subject: Red Rock


On Wednesday, August 17th, the Board of County Commissioners heard Item #17, a concept plan application submitted by Gypsum Resources, LLC for their proposal to develop their land holdings on Blue Diamond Hill. A concept plan is the initial step in the major projects process. The remaining steps following the concept plan review include a Public Facilities Needs Assessment (PFNA), a Specific Plan or Land Use Plan amendment, a Development Agreement and the zoning approval process. A major project is not approved and development cannot commence unless all of the above steps in the process are approved.



The County Commission’s purpose in reviewing the Gypsum Resources Concept Plan was simply to identify issues and concerns of the County and public for further analysis during later stages of the major projects process. Specifically, the issues and concerns identified during the Concept Plan review must be addressed by the applicant during the specific plan and PFNA review stages of the major project process described above. The PFNA must identify the infrastructure necessary along with any impacts of the project. The specific plan will give a more detailed picture of what the design of the site will be.



During the hearing, the District Attorney’s Office advised the County Commission that the review of the Gypsum Resources Concept Plan was subject to significant legal constraints. Last year, the County entered into a Settlement Agreement, approved by a federal district court, which required the County Commission to act in good faith when considering major project applications submitted by Gypsum Resources for their land holdings on Blue Diamond Hill. As a result, the Commission was advised that it must be fair and reasonable in considering the Plan and could not deny the application based on public sentiment or unsubstantiated allegations of harm. Since the Gypsum Resources project must undergo further analysis, the District Attorney’s Office recommended that the Commission review the proposal as an initial concept and thus reserve its final judgment until more information is available as a result of the studies and analysis that must be completed and submitted for review during future stages of the process.



In approving the Concept Plan, I decided it would be better to approve the Plan, subject to the multiple conditions attached by the County Commission, rather than gamble on a judge’s decision that could erase the conditions of approval. The County is in a much stronger position with the conditions in place, which will allow the County to maintain control over the proposed project, than being forced to accept a concept plan under Court Order without any protections.



I appreciate your comments and share your concerns for the future of Red Rock. I will continue to do all I can to ensure that any development on Blue Diamond Hill that may occur in the future is compatible with Red Rock and the surrounding areas.



Sincerely,





Steve Sisolak

Commissioner District A
Doug Foust
From Henderson, Nevada
Joined Sep 14, 2008
191 points
Sep 1, 2011
Apparently Commissioner Giunchigliani decided that an email from concerned citizens should be considered permission to add that person to her monthly spam news letter. Great Eric-D
From Las Vegas, nv
Joined Sep 19, 2010
376 points
Sep 1, 2011
Credits: Marty TwoBulls m2bulls.com  indiancountry...
Killis Howard wrote:
Yeah, let's not let this deteriorate just because the efforts of hundreds got their dicks knocked in the dirt by corrupt politicians as per usual. Let's band together and fight the true enemy...

+1
kirra
Joined Feb 1, 2006
724 points
Sep 7, 2011
Here is a recent well informed article that is critical of Clark County Deputy District Attorney Rob Warhola's claims that the commissioners had no choice but to approve the Concept Plan.

thenevadaview.com/?p=2307
Guy
Joined Jan 1, 2007
0 points
Sep 12, 2011
Access Fund? Climbing, pro-bono lawyers? Are you guys out there? What can we do?! Andy Bennett
From Tucson, AZ
Joined Mar 22, 2006
189 points
Sep 12, 2011
Isolation Canyon
Just remember any BLM action will have NEPA oversight. The important point will be to find a issue/resource that will be significantly impacted by the "action" (land swap). This will force the BLM to find the appropriate mitigation for this issue (is there really any appropriate mitigation). Unfortunately, it won't be loss of recreation. Based on the Visual assessment, this may be an issue, but it will require us to know BLM Management Plan for the RRNCA and see how this this action might be against the plan.

I can't believe the no community members looked at the Clark County Comprehensive Plan and hit the Sups over the heads with the fact that this approval violates ESL objectives/guidelines 1 and 2 and a whole bunch of newly adopted design guidelines for restraining leap frog development and using existing infrastructure. I emailed the Supervisors to point this out.....not an email back from any any of the Supervisors. I guess they don't want to be reminded that they are second hand losers to AZ in the world of sprawl and desecration of desert.
If its like here in Maricopa, staff and planners know the real outcome but atty's yell private rights/takings and everyone losses their backbone to stand up to a project like this better.

It is more likely that this project gets hung up by Mr. Rhodes not being able to fund/work the numbers and/or the BLM dragging its heals.
Laurel
From Phoenix
Joined Jan 12, 2007
63 points
Nov 5, 2012
The latest run at development of Blue Diamond Mesa seem to be an application by a Jim Rhodes entity to re-commence mining on the property. Unless there is sufficient demand for a public hearing, the permit will be issued without one. See ndep.nv.gov/docs_12/0328_pfy13...

NB- The public comment period on this application for a reclamation Permit end o/a 17 November.
Larry Dunn
Joined Dec 1, 2010
0 points
Nov 13, 2012
I don't know what's up with that BLM action,

but here's some news on Jim Rhodes & Harmony Homes
vegasinc.com/news/2012/may/14/...
tom donnelly
Joined Aug 15, 2002
299 points
Nov 13, 2012
Regardless of who owns the land the mining remediation costs will still be in the hundreds of millions of dollars. That's before they spend another hundred million getting the infrastructure in place. No one will ever build houses on that hill. The purpose behind the building permit is to try and convince the BLM to do a land swap for something cheaper to build upon in the valley. Eventually the BLM will own the land and then we the tax payers will get to pay for all of the remediation. Eric-D
From Las Vegas, nv
Joined Sep 19, 2010
376 points
Nov 14, 2012
Isolation Canyon
Jim Rhodes et al has gone under on a number of projects in Phx. He talks a good story to the city/county, alternatively wooing them with dreams of revenues and threatening them with lawsuits if they don't give him what he believes is his "right".
It is all about the entitlements that he can get to increase the "value" of the parcel in hopes he can flip it to some other party that wants to try and hold the public and the BLM hostage to their development dreams.
WAtch closely and warily iS what we do here with him.
Laurel
From Phoenix
Joined Jan 12, 2007
63 points
Jan 22, 2013
Cool snow formation at the base.
I didn't see an updated thread on this, so I thought I'd bump this one. The county commission is exploring the possibility of a land swap for Rhodes' property. Below are links to the newspaper article and resolution.

Las Vegas Review Journal Article


Land Swap Proposal

I went to the commission meeting this morning, where they voted on it. This wasn't a meeting for the public's comments, so only a few people got to speak on the issues. The Nature Conservancy and Save Red Rock were there supporting the swap.

Several issues were brought up during the comment period. No one has been on the property since Rhodes has been working on it, therefore the current condition of the property is unknown. They were worried about the cost burden to the public for the land to be remediated. Commissioner Tom Collins brought up whether the costs of the mineral rights would be included within the appraisal of the land. It seemed like this could be a ploy for Rhodes to get more land in the swap.

The proposal went through with a vote of 6-1, so the first step of the process is complete. Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani was the only one to vote against it. She pretty much lambasted Rhodes during the presentation, stating that this was Rhodes' plan all along to use his leverage to force a land swap. She stated that she couldn't vote for proposal in good conscious, therefore rewarding Rhodes' bad behavior.
sqwirll
From Las Vegas
Joined Mar 12, 2006
1,471 points


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 10 of 10.  <<First   <Prev   8  9  10
Beyond the Guidebook:
The Definitive Climbing Resource
Inspiration & Motivation
to Fuel Your Run
Next Generation Mountain
Bike Trail Maps
Backcountry, Sidecountry
& Secret Stashes
Better Data. Better Tools.
Better Hikes!