NRS
278.030 Creation by cities and counties; number of members.
1. The governing body of each city whose
population is 25,000 or more and of each county whose population is 52,000 or
more shall create by ordinance a planning commission to consist of seven members.
2. Cities whose population is less than
25,000 and counties whose population is less than 52,000 may create by
ordinance a planning commission to consist of seven members. If the governing
body of any city whose population is less than 25,000 or of any county whose
population is less than 52,000 deems the creation of a planning commission
unnecessary or inadvisable, the governing body may, in lieu of creating a
planning commission as provided in this subsection, perform all the functions
and have all of the powers which would otherwise be granted to and be performed
by the planning commission.
[Part 3:110:1941; A 1947,
834; 1943 NCL § 5063.02]—(NRS A 1973,
914; 1989,
1917; 2001,
1967; 2011,
1181; 2023,
267)
Notes of Decisions
Glover v. Concerned Citizens for Fuji Park, 50 P.3d 546 (Nev. 2002).
· cites it 2× “Additionally, NRS 278.030 to NRS 278.265 provide for the creation of a planning commission to adopt long-term development plans and zoning regulations, and to consider any changes.”
Garvin v. Ninth Jud. Dist. Court of the State of Nevada, 59 P.3d 1180 (Nev. 2002).
“BACKGROUND Douglas County created a Planning Commission in compliance with NRS 278.030, and the Planning Commission prepared and adopted a comprehensive long-term master plan for the county’s physical development in compliance with NRS 278.”
City of Reno v. Citizens for Cold Springs, 236 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2010).
“5 million square feet of new commercial space and 6,860 new residential units. After the annexation, Nevada’s statutory scheme required the Reno Planning Commission and City Council to modify the City’s master plan and zoning provisions before development could begin.”
Gypsum Resources, LLC v. Masto, 672 F. Supp. 2d 1127 (D. Nev. 2009).
· cites it 2× “Plaintiff also argues that SB 358 makes it “impossible for Clark County to comply with its statutory mandates” because the enabling statutes, Nev.Rev.Stat. § 278.030 et seq., require Clark County to prepare and adopt a Master Plan as the basis for all development.”
Forman v. Eagle Thrifty Drugs & Markets, Inc., 516 P.2d 1234 (Nev. 1973).
“NRS 278.030, 278.150. Elements of the plan include community design, conservation, economics, housing, land use, public buildings, public services and facilities, recreation, streets and highways, transit and transportation.”
Serpa v. Cnty. of Washoe, 901 P.2d 690 (Nev. 1995).
“NRS 278.030; NRS 278.150. Nevada law also authorizes county governments to divide their regions into zoning districts, in which they may regulate development and use.”
Garvin v. Ninth Dist. Court Ex Rel. Douglas, 59 P.3d 1180 (Nev. 2002).
“BACKGROUND Douglas County created a Planning Commission in compliance with NRS 278.030, and the Planning Commission prepared and *1182 adopted a comprehensive long-term master plan for the county's physical development in compliance with NRS 278.”
— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 278.030(1) — 2 cases
City of Reno v. Citizens for Cold Springs, 236 P.3d 10 (Nev. 2010).
“5 million square feet of new commercial space and 6,860 new residential units. After the annexation, Nevada’s statutory scheme required the Reno Planning Commission and City Council to modify the City’s master plan and zoning provisions before development could begin.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.