Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission upholds Spring Creek rezoning for Shanks project with conditions after appeals hearing
Summary
After hours of testimony from neighbors and developers, the Elko County Commission upheld the Planning Commission's conditional approval of a proposed 110-lot subdivision but added requirements for water review, traffic/impact studies, road agreements and an HOA, and capped lots at 110.
The Elko County Board of Commissioners on a voice vote upheld the Planning Commission's conditional approval of a rezoning request affecting roughly 160 acres near Spring Creek, but attached several new conditions the board said are required before any subdivision can proceed. The motion's added requirements include a county-approved impact study, a water assessment by the state engineer and a binding agreement with the Spring Creek Association on access, rebuilding and road maintenance.
Appellants John George (speaker 16) and Scott Wilkerson (speaker 18) and dozens of residents argued the Planning Commission lacked sufficient information on water, traffic and road maintenance and that procedural timing under NRS 278.395 may have been missed. George told the board he had filed his appeal on Nov. 27 and said he believed the county had exceeded the 60-day decision window. "It technically closed on the 2nd because we had a holiday in there. So we're about 67 days past that," he said. Neighbors also raised concerns about groundwater, septic suitability and safety at the Palace Parkway/State Route 227 intersection.
Developer Mike Shanks (speaker 21) and his team defended the rezoning, citing the county master plan and work they'done such as a traffic study conducted by Headway Transportation. Shanks said scaling the applicant's traffic model from 180 lots to the approved 110 lots reduces expected delays and argued Great Basin Water and other local supplies would support the proposal. "With 110 lots, that's 60% of what we analyzed ... we'll still go to a level of service of E, but we'll have instead of 25, we're looking at 38 seconds," he said.
Commissioners said they were balancing private-property rights with broad community impacts. The final motion (moved by Committee member speaker 3 and seconded by speaker 8) kept the Planning Commission's 110-parcel limit and added the conditions noted above, required an HOA to cover subdivision road maintenance, and directed a development agreement that must be approved by the Planning Commission and the County Commission. The board voted in favor and the motion carried.
