Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Public Safety Access Control topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sunrise Manor board approves design review for private gate on Linden Avenue after residents debate safety and turning access

5871178 · January 16, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Sunrise Manor Town Advisory Board on Jan. 16 voted to approve a design review (DR24-0685) for a private gate across a vacated portion of Linden Avenue, forwarding the matter to the Clark County Board of County Commissioners.

The Sunrise Manor Town Advisory Board on Jan. 16 voted to approve a design review (DR24-0685) for a private, motorized access gate across a vacated portion of Linden Avenue, concluding the advisory hearing and forwarding the item with staff recommendations to the Board of County Commissioners.

The proposal would place a metal gate across the private segment of Linden Avenue, seven feet tall in the middle and six feet at the sides, with solar-charged automation, a keypad for authorized users and manual override features for emergencies. Board members and staff emphasized the hearing focused on the gate’s appearance and code compliance; the earlier legal vacation of the road was completed years ago.

The gate’s proponents said the barrier is intended to reduce persistent trespass, vandalism and fireworks use at the end of the street. Resident Ray Panawaz, who said he has lived on Linden Avenue for 46 years, described repeated incidents of people camping and leaving trash and said the neighborhood formed the Linden Security Association in 2021 to pursue the gate project. “We did traffic studies, we did everything that was required of us,” Panawaz said. “We’re on the final leg of this thing, and we want to see it through.”

Other neighbors expressed reservations that locking the top of the street would merely push problematic activity downhill. Jim Weigel, who lives below the proposed gate, said similar measures had previously moved the disorder rather than eliminated it: “Whatever problems they have outlined… just moved down to this side. So now they’re in front of our house.” Joel Sanchez, who lives directly below the gate location, said Metro Police response has sometimes been limited when no injury or serious crime is reported and warned that access restrictions could concentrate issues in front of lower homes.

Planning staff addressed technical concerns raised at the public hearing. The applicant and the planner told the board that a code-required vehicle turnaround exists at the site and that the gate includes safety features: a manual release for power loss, an automatic open on loss of power, and an ABI loop/transponder activation to allow access for fire, ambulance and police vehicles. The applicant said the automation company used for the gate provides a manual override and that a maintenance agreement and recorded association letter are in place to cover repairs and operations.

Board members repeatedly noted that the gate application before them was a design review; broader crime problems and longer-term community solutions lie outside the board’s regulatory authority and would need follow-up with Metro Police and the county commissioner’s office. At the hearing the board’s planner and liaison referenced a prior meeting with Commissioner Kirkpatrick where an alternative landscaping plan and other improvements were discussed; the record shows staff found the gate design to meet applicable development and fire standards.

After public comment and applicant responses, a board member moved to approve the design review “per staff recommendations.” The motion carried; the advisory board’s approval and the public record will be transmitted to the Clark County Board of County Commissioners, which is scheduled to take the matter up on Jan. 22.

The board’s action is advisory to the County Commission; a final decision and any additional conditions or appeals will be determined at the Commission hearing.