Golden Valley rezone gets second look
KINGMAN - A request by Board of Supervisors Chairman Pete Byers to set a public hearing to reconsider a denial of a rezoning and minor amendment request for a commercial center on Bolsa Road in Golden Valley created a few pointed remarks during the last Board meeting of the year on Monday. The Board denied the requests for the commercial center during its Dec. 1 meeting.
"By allowing this to go forth, you are setting a precedent of discrimination against those land owners that were denied because they do not have water," said Golden Valley resident Susan Bayer. She reiterated her argument from previous meetings that the property was surrounded by residential properties, was partially in a flood zone, did not have adequate water and was a violation of the Golden Valley Area Plan.
"This is recorded, and the citizens will ask that all property be rezoned that was denied, if you allow this prejudice to continue against Golden Valley."
"Ms. Bayer, do you live within 300 feet of this property?" County Manager Ron Walker asked.
"No, sir, I don't," Bayer said.
"Do you own property within 300 feet of this property," he asked. Bayer said she didn't, but she knew people that did own property nearby.
"Do you have commercial property somewhere else that this might be in competition with?" Walker asked.
"No, sir," she said.
"I just wanted to see if Ms. Bayer had legal standing relative to this affecting her personally," Walker said.
The issue at hand was not whether the property had water or what engineering problems it might have, but if the Board should reconsider the item, he said.
Resident Robert Holsinger thought reconsideration of the development might be a violation of Robert's Rules of Order, a guide that is commonly used to conduct governmental meetings.
The development was a serious deviation from the Golden Valley Area Plan, he said.
"I think it's a slap in the face of the people in Golden Valley who set out to determine how their valley is going to grow and how it will develop," he said. "It also seems to me that Rhodes (Homes) and the applicant's lobbyist, Mr. (John) Gall, seem to have more influence than the people of Golden Valley."
Walker asked Holsinger if he lived within 300 feet of the project.
Holsinger said he did not and only owned one acre of property within the Golden Valley area.
"I think we had four speakers here from Golden Valley. I guess I don't know how they got authority or were indorsed to speak for all the people of Golden Valley. It's something I guess I don't understand," Walker said.
"I really don't understand how it could be brought back. I was under the impression that once the board denied something it had to wait a year before it could come back before the board," said resident Jim Kanelos.
"Or it could be reconsidered by one of the supervisors," Byers said.
"Well, I guess that must be a big ol' loophole that I wasn't aware of," Kanelos said.
"I have brought properties of my own to be rezoned before the Board," said resident Verna Schwab. "I was denied because there was no water publicly in front of the property."
She was told that a water storage tank on the property wouldn't make a difference and she would have to wait a year before bringing her request back to the Board.
"I have some other properties I want rezoned in Golden Valley. So, if I come to one of these supervisors after it has come before this Board and been denied, I can come to one of the supervisors immediately thereafter and bring it back or have that supervisor bring it back for reconsideration prior to the one year requirement," she said. "Is there a legal aspect that I'm not looking at?"
Walker reminded the Board and the audience that the Board was only considering the property rights of the applicant who wanted to build a commercial center on Bolsa Road, not Schwab or any other property owner.
"I think, Mr. Chairman, that unless she lives within 300 feet, this is not affecting her property rights," Walker said. "That's all well and good, but I don't think that's what's been agendized here today."
"I own property, what happens to my property rights when I come before this Board and am rejected?" she asked. "Do I not have the same property rights as this person?"
"It's an item that is being reconsidered. You are not the property owner and you do not have a legal standing. If you have some concerns about how things have happened, by all means that needs to be addressed," Walker said.
The applicant for the development had several letters of support from adjacent property owners and had yet to see any opposition from landowners within a mile of the property, said Don Rodriguez from Empire Development, representing the property owner.
The owner had tried to address all concerns with nearby landowners, and studies show there is ample water, said John Gall from Arizona Land Quest, who represented the property owner.