Skip to main content

Search the Special Collections and Archives Portal

upr000025 88

Image

File
Download upr000025-088.tif (image/tiff; 25.66 MB)

Information

Digital ID

upr000025-088
Details

Rights

This material is made available to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. It may be protected by copyright, trademark, privacy, publicity rights, or other interests not owned by UNLV. Users are responsible for determining whether permissions are necessary from rights owners for any intended use and for obtaining all required permissions. Acknowledgement of the UNLV University Libraries is requested. For more information, please see the UNLV Special Collections policies on reproduction and use (https://www.library.unlv.edu/speccol/research_and_services/reproductions) or contact us at special.collections@unlv.edu.

Digital Provenance

Digitized materials: physical originals can be viewed in Special Collections and Archives reading room

Publisher

University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Libraries

LAS VEGAS MORNING SUN NOVEMBER 15, 1952 Planners Give N Sreen Light To iP- "J'J HoiisifgfProjecI Planning-- -Commissioners last night p^eSIplSe long-de^at6d re­zoning of 4f$’Scfes in the north-1 east portion of the Fifth and uak- ey .boulevard? intersection i which calls for construction of a multi­million dollar project, consisting of I 43 duplexes and*92 large-sized sin­gle family dewllings-; The vote in executive session came during the third- public! hearing held on the project propos­ed by southern California builder Philip Yousem. Board members, however,' im­posed -stringent regulations to in-i sure the high valuation of the neighborhood which included 1-1 650 foot minimum size?jor duplex­es abutting the motel area of South Fifth street, 1,200 foot min-1 imum for. 44 adjacent single-fam­ily - residences, and ' 1,500 : paini- . ttiitm for the remaining one-fam- iiiy units. T :? ' Xeland McArthur who joined Leonard Fayle in arguing /the mfewts of the program pointed out felt the feeling of the board was that the project was “in the best interest of the people, the com­munity and even the persons who objected.” The ^ best planning interests of Las ;!j Vegas were also served by the proposal, fee commissioner ? addedJjlpia Opposing (fee measure were | j Gerald Stewart, Chairman Hi. E. (Hap) Hazard, who had no vote, land J. A. Tiberti.__ “mei feingle- HazMd \te 1 handejt^|l|fef; :gMng Mwa.rt’ statute regolutacm denying fee ap­plication.^ v - , sp-J j McArtht|gi|^|oweyfir, /Appealing to parliamentary rules,:-^won a de- ”'land ior.ia -fete that the board be polled to decided whose motion be voted upon first;? Favoring the project were Fayle, McArthur, Chuck Horri- son, and Warren Stanley. Com­missioners M. M. Zenoff and Art Harris were unable to attend fee session. In granting fee application, * commissioners .imposed stringent | deed restrictions, a briekwaff corridor separating single from duplex units and pointed out feat fif they did not pass the measure: ,« would open fee area to small • homes and cheap housing which the area financially. The duplex units facing a com­mercial area on Fifth street was I fee only logical development for i the south portion of fee tract,- they pointed out. j In other aetion fee i commission voted to : , plans for an 86-room 8150,000 hotel at South Second street and .Jptah aJCeiiue by Wil­liam; Fox iWid HaroMrWagner. Fox said he anticipated rapid construc- “°n fbf-:; the dwelling which would begitt ^mediately after approval of his final blueprint. '? J 2. Defeat a proposal by t.hu> Roesselet to e^ablisli; a. grocery store • at the Charleston trailer park. 3. Grant permission to Jerry Woodbury to build a mortuary in i the 1900 block on East Charleston.1 i