81°F
weather icon Clear

Ballot question might bring right amount of growth

Question No. 1 is coming: Are you ready? Many may try to frame the outcome from one extreme to another, so may I be the first to say, if ballot Question No. 1 passes, we will not grow like Las Vegas, and if it doesn’t pass, we will not turn into Radiator Springs prior to Lighting McQueen saving it.

When I first heard of Question No. 1, which basically gets rid of the 30-home per developer per year restriction while leaving in place the overall limit of 120 homes, I was very opposed to it. I have looked at our 120-home limit, not as a goal, but as a maximum that there is no need to regularly achieve. When I heard we had averaged 68 homes a year since the growth ordinance, I said, “Sounds perfect to me. Why change?”

As I studied the numbers, however, I realized I was wrong. We only averaged that number because, early on, there were land sales and plans in the works that preceded the growth ordinance and the limitation of the sale of land. In fact, according to the city building records that I reviewed, we averaged 106.4 homes per year from 1978-1987, 70.9 homes per year from 1988-1997, 36.5 from 1998-2007 and 11.4 from 2008-2015. (This excludes 2009, because I had no data from that year.)

Some may argue that these rates are merely market driven, but the numbers continued to drop from the early to mid-2000s, when the rest of Southern Nevada was going through the biggest housing boom of its history. At what point do we say we have gone from “controlled growth” to “no growth”? And what are the consequences? Perhaps our home values will rise, but will we inadvertently price out our own children from ever moving back here to raise their kids in the town we taught them to love (except perhaps in our basements).

What number is right for Boulder City, and how do we get there? If you feel the right number is more than 11.4, what is to be done? The way I see it, there are several levers we could pull to get out of our near-zero growth trend:

1. Amend the city charter that requires a vote to sell more than 1 acre of land.

2. Amend the city charter that requires the city to charge as much as the current appraised value for the land.

3. Adjust the 120-home limit.

4. Adjust the 30-per-developer limit

5. Lower zoning standards to allow for smaller lots, no sidewalks or smaller right of ways.

Lastly, we could do any combination of these five.

Which would you change?

For me, the two that I’m willing to alter are what we charge for land and the number of homes per developer. Wait a minute, you say, we don’t need to change anything. StoryBook Homes will buy land at our price and stay within our 30-home rule. The recent development with StoryBook is exactly the reason I am convinced we need a change. Are we really comfortable having only one bidder?

Especially when that bidder, from day one, is asking to limit sidewalks, narrow streets and alter lot widths? I am not slighting StoryBook. After all, I’m glad someone came to the table. But I care far more about the quality of development than exactly meeting a given appraised value or the exact number of homes the developer can build in a year.

Don’t misunderstand me. I do not love Question No. 1. I liked it much more as an advisory question, and I’d rather see the 30 homes per developer be adjusted to 50 or 60 instead of just being thrown out. But in the end, I think we do need minor adjustments to our ordinance, and I am willing to give Question No. 1 a chance.

No matter which side you fall on, I hope you will study the facts and realize the majority, both for and against this question, are fighting for same thing: the right amount of controlled growth. If we remember that, we will get there no matter which way the vote goes.

Nathaniel Kaey Gee resides in Boulder City with his wife and six kids. He is a civil engineer by day and enjoys writing any chance he gets. You can follow his work on his blog www.thegeebrothers.com.

MOST READ
LISTEN TO THE TOP FIVE HERE
THE LATEST
Mayor’s Corner: Helmets save lives

Emergency personnel in Clark County estimate they respond to four accidents each day involving bikes, e-bikes, or e-scooters. A few of these accidents have involved fatalities of minors — a grim reminder of the dangers of these devices when not used responsibly. Our goal as city leaders is to prevent tragedies from occurring. Any loss of life has a dramatic impact on families, loved ones, friends, as well as on the entire community.

Cheers to 40 years in the biz

I thought I’d talk a little about the newspaper business on the heels of the Review winning seven statewide awards the other night in Fallon.

AI is here. Just ask your neighbors

“I’ve done 10 albums in the past year,” my across-the-street neighbor, Dietmar, told me Sunday morning as we stood in the street between our two houses catching up. He added that his wife, Sarah, had put out two collections of songs in the same time period, adding, “You know it’s all AI, right?”

Astronaut lands in Nevada, so to speak

I wish to begin by noting that when it comes to politics, I am registered nonpartisan. So when writing about Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, I’m focusing (well, for the most part), on his role as a retired NASA astronaut, not as a politician.

The patriot way

Today is Patriot Day, a day most of us refer to as 9/11. In the U.S., Patriot Day occurs annually on Sept. 11 in memory of the victims who died in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

Program helps homebuyers in Boulder City

Owning a home is part of the American Dream. Unfortunately, the steep rise in rental rates and increasing costs for goods and services have left many home buyers struggling to save enough for a down payment.

Helmets could be matter of life and death

Nobody likes a mandate. After serving in city and state government for more than 30 years, that is one of the biggest lessons I learned. But sometimes, mandates keep us safe and even save lives.