Editorial: Invasion of the shopping centers

IT is not easy for an elected official to admit he's made a mistake.

But at least Clark County Commissioner Lance Malone had the decency Monday evening to apologize to Mount Charleston residents during a town hall meeting, acknowledging he shouldn't have voted for a proposed shopping center on Kyle Canyon Road. "I think what I did, I shouldn't have done," Malone told a packed room at the Mount Charleston library. "I should have asked to hold this 30 days, but I felt I was losing support on the board."

What Malone and other county commissioners did recently was approve a development that will help erode the beauty and tranquility that generations of Nevadans have come to enjoy when visiting Mount Charleston. Developer Allen Nel was able to persuade the County Commission to approve zoning to accommodate a 60,000-square-foot shopping center, amphitheater and riding stables. The commission's action also means the sale of alcohol would be allowed.

Nel said his project would bring conveniences to the mountain that currently don't exist. Sorry, Nel, but the last thing Mount Charleston needs is a new development. With this "progress" will certainly come more requests from other builders to put in projects in the name of bringing more "conveniences" to the mountain's residents and its visitors.

The unfortunate situation is that too much unnecessary development has already been approved for the area. Some would suggest that since previous development has been allowed, then it's only fair to allow more building. The problem with this line of reasoning is that development would continue unabated to the point where Mount Charleston loses its character and charm. Soon it would look just like any other Las Vegas suburb.

It is not only the occasional visitors to Mount Charleston who are upset. Mount Charleston resident Jean Perry-Jones told Sun reporter Jeff Schweers she wasn't enthusiastic about the development. "We can come to town for rides, for arcades," she said. "We don't need that on the mountain."

Another concern has nothing to do with aesthetics or natural beauty but instead revolves around public safety. Malone is worried about adequate fire protection and the danger posed by drunken driving. "My concern is you have two lanes, and a high number of fatalities from alcohol-related accidents," the commissioner said. "Then to allow another bar of sorts to be built there ... I have some concerns about that."

Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani, D-Las Vegas, owns property on Mount Charleston and she has suggested that the county may have made the zoning changes in violation of the state open meeting law if, as has been alleged, a northwest planning board didn't adopt the map in public. In addition, Giunchigliani noted that under state law, the county has the authority to deny a proposal if there are public safety concerns. She also took a shot at the county's policy of approving zoning before traffic studies and other approvals were obtained.

Now that Malone has found the resolve to try and reverse a bad decision, maybe the rest of the members of the County Commission will come to their senses and agree to reconsider their vote. At least three other commissioners need to agree with Malone on reconsideration if the zoning is to be voted on again.

Too often in the Las Vegas Valley sensible planning gets thrown out the window. If developers are allowed to gain a foothold on Mount Charleston, irreparable damage will be done to the alpine paradise. The County Commission should put an end to the development nonsense on Mount Charleston, reconsider its earlier vote, and then move to halt this needless proposal.

archive