Red Rock Canyon is one of the few places where you can escape the hustle and bustle of the city of Las Vegas, but throughout the years of exploding development, the city continues to encroach closer to the peaceful ruralness of the national conservation area.

Now it's not just the tip-toeing of the expanding city that is threatening the outskirts; developer Jim Rhodes wants to cozy up to the canyon to plant a mini city. The mining company Gypsum Resources requests a rezoning of 2,000 acres to build 5,025 homes with the possibility of schools and shops. The scenic loop and some trails are only 3 1/2 miles northwest of the proposed development, and a spokesman claims that only 10% of the community would actually be visible from Red Rock.

Jim Rhodes at the Blue Diamond Gypsum Mine. (April 16, 2014)

There are many opponents to the development, and there has been for the 15 years the battle has raged. The most formidable of which is an organization called Save Red Rock. It is largely the efforts of that group - bill boards, phone calls, television advertisements - that brought much attention to the county commissioners' meeting on Wednesday, February 22.

The meeting had a record number of public comments: Almost 100 people pleaded with officials to vote no on the proposed plan, and the rest of the wave of red filled the room and overflowed into the hallways. Many testifying spoke on personal experiences at the canyon and their love for Red Rock. Save Red Rock came to the meeting with a petition of just under 45,000 signatures at the time and survey results showing 79% of Clark County voters opposed the development.

Some of the more famous supporters of Save Red Rock and the "no" vote are The Killers, Imagine Dragons, and Robin Slonina. Dina Titus (Representative, district 1), Jacky Rosen (Representative, district 3), Ruben Kihuen (Representative, district 4) also spoke out against the development.

The following list was compiled by Trent Billingsley and Heather Fisher on November 17, 2016, on saveredrock.com to argue that the new development would

• allow doughnut hole development miles from the nearest infrastructure
• favor a single developer over the public interest (of over 20,000 in opposition to this zone change)
• change the rural character of the canyon
• penetrate the mountain that blocks the canyon from the city, with another city
• introduce the congestion, haze, noise, and traffic that accompany high-density development
• flood the dark sky in the canyon with light pollution from thousands of headlights
• cost taxpayers millions to maintain the infrastructure and pump the water 1000 feet up the hill
• impact and endanger tourists and locals seeking to enjoy the natural beauty of Red Rock Canyon with increased traffic volume and disparity
• impose an additional 10-15,000 cars each morning and night from their proposed 6 lane highway to the 4-lane SR 160
• choke the already-congested 2 lane corridors in the Southwest and Mountain’s Edge areas, such as Fort Apache, Durango, Buffalo, and Rainbow
• penetrate 2 major open space reserves, Arden Ridge Open Space and the Southwest Ridge Recreation Area
• directly overlook Red Rock Canyon’s only campground
• forever change the Las Vegas sunset view and natural skyline
• violate the Clark County Title 30 guideline to “correspond with the character and physical limitations of the land”
• violate the Clark County Title 30 guideline to “encourage the most appropriate use of land throughout the county”
• violate the Clark County Title 30 guideline to “protect existing neighborhoods and communities, including the protection of rural neighborhoods”
• violate the Clark County Title 30 guideline to “otherwise further the general prosperity, health, safety, and welfare of the community”
• create liability for the county with concurrent mining, building, and residential conditions
• violate the 2014 Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan provision that “proposed developments be compatible with adjacent land uses”
• violate the 2014 Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan provision that “discourages urban sprawl”
• violate the 2014 Clark County Comprehensive Master Plan provision that “encourages new development to be around existing or future transportation corridors”

The supporters of the development believe that Gypsum Resources owns the land and has a right to do with it as it pleases. Arguments were also made for job creation, and the development would be the best use of the land.

Ron Krater stated that "the site is not nature", pointing to the lack of vegetation due to the mining activity.

In October 2016, the Planning Commission, which serves as an advisory board to the commissioners, voted unanimously against Rhodes' proposal. The county commissioners, however, voted 5-2 to allow it to continue the process. The votes went down as the following:

Steve Sisolak (District A) - yes

Marilyn Kirkpatrick (District B) - yes

Larry Brown (District C) - yes

Lawrence Weekly (District D) - no

Chris Giunchigliani (District E) - no

Susan Brager (District F) - yes

Mary Beth Scow (District G) - yes

This is not the final vote, however, and construction will not begin anytime soon. Another vote will have to be taken later to make a final approval of a final plan.

In the meantime, contact your commissioner and let them know your thoughts on the issue. Save Red Rock is also still taking signatures on their petition and donations in their strive to "Keep Red Rock Rural".