Toll Brothers gets split decision

The development of the area near Boulder Creek Golf Course known as Tract 350 (the sale of which is slated to pay for the majority of the planned replacement for the aging municipal pool) may have hit a snag last week as the planning commission voted 5-1 to deny the developers’ request to build houses closer to the street than is allowed under current law.

In a separate vote, the commission voted on a 4-3 split to approve the request to make the streets in the development private so they can be narrower than the minimum width required in Clark County.

In the case of both proposals, a healthy contingent of neighbors showed up to oppose the plans and when a technicality in meeting procedure meant that there was no public hearing for the private street portion of the ask, their mood went from concerned to angry with many saying they will be back when the city council has to vote to approve or deny the developers’ request.

Note that developers is plural, despite the fact that the sale of the land was to a single developer, the luxury home builder Toll Brothers. In what some called an attempt to get around the city’s growth ordinance, which says that no single developer can pull allotments for more than half of the 120 homes per year limit, Toll Brothers has released plans calling for a large percentage of the planned homes to be built by Storybook Homes.

Storybook was a Las Vegas-based developer that built the last large development in Boulder City 15 years ago. That development will abut the proposed Toll Brothers/Storybook “collections.” Storybook was bought out by Toll Brothers in 2021.

And, indeed, in what could be seen as confirmation of the theory put forth by Tony Simon, a resident who lives near the proposed development, in an interview earlier this year, Janet Love, Toll Brothers division president in Las Vegas, said the overall development will feature both Storybook and Toll Brothers branding with only minor differences in square footage. She also said that it was too early to determine pricing differences, this despite the fact that Storybook is primarily known as a developer that caters to first-time home buyers while Toll Brothers touts themselves as the nations leading builder of luxury homes.

“I was going to ask a question but there’s no questions allowed, correct?” Simon began. “So it’s just the opposite of Jeopardy. Instead of putting it in a question, I have to make it a statement. Toll Brothers separated their designs to have two different developers developing so they could double the amount of homes that could be built in one year, that’s why they did that.”

The difference was not lost on the neighbors with several saying they did not want any Storybook homes in what will be a now-rare new housing development immediately adjacent to a golf course in Southern Nevada. This is due to the drought-driven Southern Nevada Water Authority moratorium on new golf courses in the region.

“The applicant is requesting minimum front yard setbacks that are ranging from 8 feet to 19 feet dependent on the housing plan and our city code requires 20 feet,” City Planner Nakeisha Lyon told the commission at the top of her presentation. Eight of the 10 proposed housing designs would require a variance to the city’s current setback requirements.

Lyon summarized the applicant’s justification for the request as “overall irregular shape and narrow width” of the proposed lots. The neighbors weren’t having it.

“First off, the the developer knew what they were buying and they knew what the zoning was for those lots and now I think it’s terribly ironic that they would design these lots and then come in and stand upon their request for variances because the lots that they designed are irregular,” said Victor Miller, who started his comments by noting that he lives “about 50 feet” from the proposed development and that he was speaking as a private citizen and not in his capacity as the city’s acting municipal judge.

Isaac Summers, vice president of land development with Toll Brothers referred to a “modern aesthetic” and “house-forward designs” and told the commission that most current buyers preferred more indoor and backyard space over large front yards calling the designs, “things that kind of make the the community seem a lot more appealing.”

When the public’s turn was over and commission members began discussing the request, only commission member Lauren Krumm spoke of the request positively.

“I would be in favor of granting a variance,” she said. “I just don’t see any negative impact in doing so. There’s been a lot of Storybook hate today but I just don’t see any negative impact and, as a homebuyer, I would prefer more room in the backyard.”

Only Krumm voted in favor of granting the request.

The private street request was granted but just barely with commission member Matt DiTeresa saying, “As far as the private streets part of this, I see no need at all for a private street. I mean what comes next? A gated community? We just don’t do that in Boulder City.”

While, according to city staff, there are several neighborhoods with private streets maintained by a homeowners association in Boulder City, gated communities are actually against the law. An ordinance passed in 2006 and now part of Title 11 of city code reads, “Residential developments of more than one lot or unit shall not have gates across streets, whether the streets are publicly or privately owned and/or maintained.”

The street request would appear to be more about buildable space than about exclusivity. Clark County street requirements call for a minimum street width of 51 feet terminating in a L-shaped curb with 5-foot-wide sidewalks. The developer is asking for 45-foot wide streets with a rolled curb and 4-foot wide sidewalks.

Things got heated when the chair of the commission, Fritz McDonald, called for a vote and members of the public wanted to speak first. “This is not a public hearing,” he told the attendees.

Jody Jeepson, who had also spoken out against the setback request, said she was OK with the street being private but was opposed to the narrower streets because they would not match the surrounding neighborhood.

“The one thing I’m very upset about is, I would like you to please think about again is the street width. We cannot have these smaller streets. We are on a golf course. These streets need to at least match the community. They need to be 51 feet. They need the sidewalks to be 5 feet because this is on a golf course. This needs to be a higher level.”

Dennis Walcott said he was disappointed there was no public hearing on the variance request covering the streets.

“I don’t know why,” he said. “I’m sure you guys have your rules but respectfully, Chairman McDonald, I disagree with you. We live on Sequoia Street. Forty-five-foot streets. Narrow sidewalks. Cars parked on that street. Kids on bicycles. Kids on scooters. We’ve had close calls backing out of the driveway. It needs to be wider.”

Miller, again with the same disclaimer, noted that the decision of the commission is not final. “I know it’s not over here. You’re making recommendations to the city council. So, we’ll all be back.”