Friday, April 5, 1996 | 11:59 a.m.
THE Las Vegas City Council's ban on apartments in the northwest area is the natural result of a desire to make sense of the rapid development of this community. One can argue this sort of thing should have been done throughout the city long ago.
But it also raises the question of how far the city should go in tinkering with the local economy.
The council Wednesday imposed a ban on new apartments north of Cheyenne Avenue while consultant Jim Veltman completes a master plan for the area, perhaps by the end of the year. The reason behind the ban is that apartments aggravate traffic congestion along U.S. 95 and Interstate 15. Councilman Matthew Callister, who has long favored such a ban, convinced the rest of the council to act after the city lost two cases in court -- an apartment complex at Holly Avenue and Simmons Street, and a daily-weekly motel on North Rancho Drive.
What Callister is trying to do is redirect the runaway apartment development on the U.S. 95 corridor. He says, since most apartment dwellers work on the Strip, they should live near their workplaces, perhaps on the southeast side of town.
Callister insists he does not object to apartments as long as they are less dense and less taxing on the infrastructure. He proposes apartments be limited to low-rise, low-density units. He has a point. Road construction can't keep up with the present demands and transportation will surely break down if a few thousand more units are constructed along U.S. 95.
But then, he digresses: "The northwest portions of town have done their part for entry-level housing." But entry-level housing comes in all forms -- condominiums, apartments and even single-family houses. Callister appears to be saying he wants the riff-raff out of the northwest part of town.
That ignores the free market. Planned developments, such as Summerlin and Green Valley, are tailored to certain economic strata, which developers have managed to accomplish quite well. Upscale apartments attract working professionals, many of whom later purchase homes and condominiums.
Moreover, housing comes in all levels. There are high- and low-priced apartments, condominiums and houses, a credit to the developers who serve all elements of the community. Witness the rental and home sale advertisements in today's SUN.
The ban is reminiscent of an action taken by Palm Springs, Calif., which effectively removed all but the rich from its environs. Unfortunately, the working people, many of whom were domestics, were forced to live far from their minimum-wage jobs.
The market demands separate upscale, middle-class and entry-level neighborhoods, to be sure. People of like strata tend to live together. There's also a need to plan where and how many apartments are needed. But the city would be making a big mistake if the ban results in an apartment shortage and unaffordable rents.
But Callister has raised an important point -- should all communitywide planning take into account demographics and infrastructure needs? The idea makes more sense than allowing unrestricted growth and then forcing local governments to face the ordeal of providing services. Playing catchup has not been cheap.
The city needs a good, consistent master plan to protect the investment of property owners and the limited abilities of local governments to serve their constituents. But the developers should be given a voice in the process to ensure restrictions don't skew natural economic forces.
archive
