Proposal withdrawn for Carl's Jr. next to pet cemetery

A controversial request to build a fast-food restaurant next to a pet cemetery has been withdrawn, but cemetery supporters remained wary because the property at issue could still be rezoned for commercial use.

Property owners CT-1 LLC asked for a one-acre parcel at Craig Road and Tenaya Way to be reclassified from residential to commercial property, and applied for a permit to build a fast-food restaurant there.

That raised the ire of people connected to the 30-year-old Craig Road Pet Cemetery next door, who felt that a 24-hour restaurant would mar the corner’s tranquility.

This week, CT-1 released a statement saying it would not seek a permit for a Carl’s Jr. restaurant at that corner.

The statement does not mention the requests to change the property use from residential to commercial, though, and so opponents are not letting down their guard, said Curt Weiman, the cemetery’s manager.

“We all believe something should go there,” Weiman said today. “It needs to be something that fits with the community. A food joint is not going to do anything for this area.”

The items were scheduled to be before the Las Vegas Planning Commission on Thursday evening, but the meeting has been rescheduled for 6 p.m. Nov. 5.

Warren Hardy, a consultant who is working with the property owners, said it hasn’t been decided whether the remaining requests will stay on the agenda or be delayed.

“We would like to have some conversations with the residents out there and see if there’s something we can bring to that project that is more acceptable,” he said.

The cemetery occupies four acres on the northwest corner of Craig and Tenaya — almost the entire block, except for the one-acre parcel owned by CT-1. The site is about two blocks south of Bunkers Memory Gardens Cemetery.

There is commercial development on the east side of Tenaya Way, but the development surrounding the cemetery is residential.

Contact reporter Alan Choate at or 702-229-6435.


Comment section guidelines

The below comment section contains thoughts and opinions from users that in no way represent the views of the Las Vegas Review-Journal. This public platform is intended to provide a forum for users of to share ideas, express thoughtful opinions and carry the conversation beyond the article. Users must follow the guidelines under our Commenting Policy and are encouraged to use the moderation tools to help maintain civility and keep discussions on topic.