Las Vegas LDS temple clears another hurdle

The Las Vegas Planning Commission voted Tuesday night to approve for the city to give up an easement within the 17.5 acres upon which the church has received approval to build a temple with a steeple with a height of almost 200 feet.

“Since planned development is approved for this site, no access to the adjacent property is necessary for roadway, drainage or sewer purposes at the easement location,” city staff wrote before the vote. “The Department of Public Works has no objection to relinquish the City’s interests in these U.S. Government Patent Easements.”

The temple — a 70,000-square-foot facility that is to sit on 20 acres at Hickman Avenue and Grand Canyon Drive — has been a point of contention for some nearby residents who have spoken out against the project and filed for a legal review in Clark County District Court.

The church noted that easements are commonly placed on underdeveloped land and that those rights can later be abandoned if the areas will not be used for roadways or utilities. The easement runs along what would have been Park Street had it extended through the property.

‘Public issue’

A half-dozen opponents spoke during Tuesday’s Planning Commission meeting.

Carol Chaney said residents hadn’t received proper notification about the agenda item.

Chaney is a board member with the Nevada Rural Preservation Alliance, which filed a legal review petition, alleging that the city “abused its discretion” and made “errors of law” when it reviewed and approved the project.

“Many of us from the neighborhood are here asking why we were not notified and why this is even on a one-motion, one-vote as this is a public issue,” she said about the agenda item that was packaged with other items and required a single vote.

The city in planning documents said it had notified 16 neighborhood associations.

Opponents have said that the project clashes with the neighborhood’s rural aesthetic. The court petition, which isn’t as wide ranging as a lawsuit, cited residents’ concerns, including heavy traffic, construction noise, environmental impact and “aggressive lighting.”

That challenge is ongoing.

Another coalition board member, Sue Kristensen, said the city should’ve waited for a court to rule before taking further action.

Three neighboring residents said during Tuesday’s meeting that they supported the temple.

The City Council already approved the temple earlier this year, a fact the church noted when asked for comment this week.

“The current agenda item does not change any aspect of the approved project,” the church said.

Contact Ricardo Torres-Cortez at rtorres@reviewjournal.com.