City to poll Eldorado Valley land owners

By Cassie Tomlin

Friday, Aug. 22, 2008 | midnight

The city will again gauge interest of Eldorado Valley private property owners before commissioning a $60,000 annexation study for the area.

The City Council voted 3-1 on Aug. 12 to send letters to about 10 owners of more than 400 acres south of Railroad Pass and west of U.S. 95 informing them of the city’s intention to study annexation of the land into its borders. Councilwoman Linda Strickland dissented, and Councilwoman Andrea Anderson was absent.

The council also decided against $12,000 for an additional legal study.

About 18 months ago, the city met with property owners of 347 acres, including the gravel operation just south of Railroad Pass and a parcel near the Boulder City Motocross Track, Community Development Director Brok Armantrout said.

Most were interested in being annexed if they were supplied water, he said.

Since the annexation would be voluntary, owners would have to petition the city to begin the process, City Manager Vicki Mayes said. The letters call for comments to the city in 30 days.

She said a Las Vegas firm would research the land’s potential police and fire protection needs, water and sewer demands, street and traffic needs and revenues from property taxes, if the owners are in favor.

She said she didn’t have a timeline for when the study would begin or finish. The $60,000 cost of the study is not in this year’s budget.

Mayes said she thinks the Gun Club and area mining operations, which are in unincorporated areas of Clark County, are interested in being included in the city limits.

The question — to adopt more land or not — is not a new one, said Mayor Roger Tobler, a lifelong Boulder City resident.

Some want to assure the land stays fairly untouched and are concerned the land could be snatched up by developers or a casino, he said.

Tobler said if the city were to annex the land, it wouldn’t provide services without a tax base there to support the costs.

Strickland agreed with four residents who expressed opposition to the cost.

“If we’re inclined to spend $72,000, we should spend it on the city where we live, not a location way down the line on the other side of 95,” she said.

“I don’t know what you’re all afraid of,” she later said. “It’s not our burden if the county wants us to take it over.”

Councilman Travis Chandler supported the study, calling the money “a trivial investment compared to what’s at stake.”

He said developer Larry Canarelli, who controls 700 acres where a gravel pit now lies, had proposed building 3,200 to 3,800 homes on his parcel, and he could build another veritable city nearby.

He said without annexation, property owners could in 10 years sell the land, and the County Commission could designate it residential.

“This may not be that prohibitively expensive for us to do,” he said. “If we do it, we will gain control, and it will be up to this board, not the county.”

Cassie Tomlin is a reporter for the Home News. She can be reached at 702-948-2073 or [email protected].