NV - Reno: Reno City Planning Commission Meeting

Get alerted when your passions are being discussed in Reno, Washoe and more for free

Issues discussed this meeting include:

Get Alerts On New Meetings
Sign Up
When and Where is the Next Meeting?
[ See More ]

Reno City Planning Commission Meeting

Commissioners Mark Johnson, Chair 326-8864

Kathleen Taylor, Vice Chair 326-8859 Ed Hawkins 326-8862 Peter Gower 326-8860 John Marshall 326-8863 Britton Griffith 326-8858 Paul Olivas 326-8861

Posting: This agenda has been physically posted in compliance with NRS 241.020(3)(notice of meetings) at Reno City Hall One East First Street, Washoe County Downtown Reno Library 301 South Center Street, Evelyn Mount Northeast Community Center 1301 Valley Road, McKinley Arts and Culture Center 925 Riverside Drive, Reno Municipal Court One South Sierra Street, Washoe County Administration Building 1001 East 9th Street and Reno-Sparks Convention and Visitors Authority 4001 South Virginia Street, Suite G. In addition, this agenda has been electronically posted in compliance with NRS 241.020(3) at http://www.reno.gov, and NRS 232.2175 at https://notice.nv.gov/.

Accommodation: Reasonable efforts will be made to assist and accommodate physically disabled persons attending the meeting. Please contact the Community Development Department at (775) 334-2576 in advance so that arrangements can be made.

Tagged Passions:legal, streets, disability, arts, development, downtown, conventions, Development, compliance, community center, library, court, and community development

Support Materials: Staff reports and supporting material for the meeting are available at the City Clerk's Office. Please contact Ashley D. Turney, City Clerk, 1 East 1st Street, Reno, NV 89505, (775) 334-2030; turneya@reno.gov. Staff reports and supporting materials are also available on the City's website at http://www.reno.gov/meetings. Pursuant to NRS 241.020(6), supporting material is made available to the general public at the same time it is provided to the Planning Commission.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, streets, and materials

Order of Agenda: A time listed next to a specific agenda item indicates that the specific item will not be heard before that time it does not indicate the time schedule of any other items. Items on the agenda may be taken out of order and the public body may combine two or more agenda items for consideration. The Planning Commission may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time.

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Public Comment: A person wishing to address the Reno City Planning Commission shall submit a Request to Speak form to the Secretary. Public comment, whether on action items or general public comment, is limited to three (3) minutes per person. Unused time may not be reserved by the speaker, nor allocated to another speaker. No action may be taken on a matter raised under general public comment until the matter is included on an agenda as an item on which action may be taken. The presiding officer may prohibit comment if the content of the comments is a topic that is not relevant to, or within the authority of, the Planning Commission, or if the content is willfully disruptive of the meeting by being irrelevant, repetitious, slanderous, offensive, inflammatory, irrational or amounting to personal attacks or interfering with the rights of other speakers. Any person making willfully disruptive remarks while addressing the Reno City Planning Commission or while attending the Reno City Planning Commission meeting may be removed from the room by the presiding officer, and the person may be barred from further audience before the Reno City Planning Commission during that session of the Reno City Planning Commission. See, Nevada Attorney General Opinion No. 00-047 (April 27, 2001); Nevada Open Meeting Law Manual, 8.05.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning, legal, and boards and commissions

Agenda Reno City Planning Commission August 21, 2019

Appeal Process: Any final action (not including recommendations) or failure to take action by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Reno City Council by the applicant, the Mayor or a City Council Member, or any person who is aggrieved by the action or inaction. An appeal (together with fees) must be filed with the City Clerk within ten calendar days starting on the day after written notice of the action is filed with the City Clerk, and if the tenth calendar day falls on a weekend or holiday when the Clerk's office is not open, the appeal may be filed on the next business day. Watch Meetings: Planning Commission meetings are streamed online when the Commission is in session in Council Chamber at http://www.reno.gov/meetings and broadcast on Charter Channel 194.

Tagged Passions:planning, business, council, boards and commissions, and holiday

1
Pledge of Allegiance

2
Roll Call

3
Public Comment (This item is for either public comment on any action item or for any general public comment.)

4
Approval of Minutes (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

4.1 Reno City Planning Commission and Washoe County Planning Commission - Joint - May 7, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

4.2 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - May 15, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

4.3 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - Jun 6, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

4.4 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - Jun 19, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

4.5 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - Jul 3, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

4.6 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - Jul 17, 2019 5:00 PM (For Possible Action)

5 City Council Liaison Reports

Tagged Passions:planning, council, and boards and commissions

6
Zoning Code Update

Tagged Passions:zoning

6.1 Staff Report (For Possible Action): Presentation, discussion, and potential recommendations on Zoning Code RENOvation Issue Sheet 3A (Administration and Procedures)

Tagged Passions:zoning and procedure

Agenda Reno City Planning Commission August 21, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

7
Public Hearings - 6:30 PM (Items scheduled to be heard at a specific time will be heard no earlier than the stated time, but may be heard later.) Any person who has chosen to provide his or her public comment when a Public Hearing is heard will need to so indicate on the Request to Speak form provided to the Secretary. Alternatively, you may provide your comment when Item 3, Public Comment, is heard at the beginning of this meeting.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:hearing

7.1 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Approval of tentative map and special use permits): Case No. LDC19-00065 (Rancharrah Village 4) - A request has been made for tentative map for 74 units (37 duets) and for a special use permits to allow for a three story building. The 7.74 acre project site is located approximately 50 feet east of the intersection of Falabella Way and Silver Charm Way. The site is located within the Rancharrah Planned Unit Development zoning district and has Master Plan land use designation of Single-Family Neighborhood. [Ward 2]

Tagged Passions:development, zoning, subdivision, Development, and neighborhood

7.2 Staff Report (For Possible Action): Case No. LDC19-00064 (Sierra Pallet Pavement and Condition Amendment) - A request has been made for a special use permit: 1) for site improvements; and 2) an amendment to the conditions of approval associated with LDC16-00031 (Sierra Pallet 400 Western Road) to allow for an increase of fence height from six to eight feet tall. The 5.0 acre site (400 Western Road) is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Western Road and Link Lane within 300 feet of residentially zoned property. The subject site is located within the Industrial Commercial (IC) zoning district and has a Master Plan land use designation of Industrial (I). hrm [Ward 4]

Tagged Passions:industrial, zoning, property, and commercial

7.3 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Approval of SUP and tentative map): Case No. LDC19-00071 (Comstock Cottages Phase 2) - A request has been made for: 1) a tentative map to develop 196 single family attached residential subdivision; and 2) special use permits for: a) townhomes; b) hillside development; c) grading that results in cuts greater than 20 feet in depth and fills greater than ten feet in height. The 36.26 acre site is located 500 feet southeast of the intersection of Talus Way and North Virginia Street on the east side of the Union Pacific rail line. The site is located within the Single-Family Residential - 4,000 square feet (SF4) and Single Family Residential - 6,000 square feet (SF6) zoning districts and has Master Plan land use designations of Mixed Neighborhood (MX) and Single- Family Neighborhood (SF). [Ward 4]

Tagged Passions:development, zoning, transportation, subdivision, Development, grading, and neighborhood

Agenda Reno City Planning Commission August 21, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

7.4 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Recommendation to City Council): Case No. LDC19-00074 (Lakeridge Tennis Club Zone Change) - A request has been made for: 1) a zoning map amendment from 9.48 acres of Club Lakeridge Specific Plan District (SPD) to 9.48 acres of Community Commercial (CC); and 2) an amendment to the standards of the Club Lakeridge SPD to remove the 9.48 acres containing the existing Lakeridge Tennis Club from the SPD. The project site consists of three parcels generally located at 6000 Plumas Street, south of McCarran Boulevard and between Plumas Street to the west and Lakeside Drive to the east. The project site has a Master Plan land use designation of Suburban Mixed-Use (SMU). aml [Ward 2]

Tagged Passions:council, zoning, property, and commercial

7.5 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Recommendation to City Council): Case No. LDC19-00068 (Ginsburg Clock/Parklane Clock Zoning Map Amendment) - A request has been made for a zoning map amendment to add the designated landmark Ginsberg Clock located at 30 North Virginia Street to the Historic Landmark (HL) overlay district. The landmark is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of North Virginia Street and West 1st Street within the Mixed Use/Downtown Reno Regional Center/Truckee River (MU/DRRC/TRUCKEE) zoning district. The site has a Master Plan land use designation of Downtown Mixed-Use (DT-MU). [Ward 3]

Tagged Passions:council, historic, zoning, downtown, watershed, and commercial

8
Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Liaison Report

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning

9
Staff Announcements

9.1 Report on status of Planning Division projects.

Tagged Passions:planning

9.2 Announcement of upcoming training opportunities.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:training

9.3 Report on status of responses to staff direction received at previous meetings.

9.4 Report on actions taken by City Council on previous Planning Commission items.

Tagged Passions:planning, council, and boards and commissions

10
Commissioner's Suggestions for Future Agenda Items (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

11
Public Comment (This item is for either public comment on any action item or for any general public comment.)

No additional detail provided

12
Adjournment (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

IF THE MEETING GOES BEYOND 11:00 PM, THE PLANNING COMMISSION MAY POSTPONE REMAINING ITEMS.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Washoe County Community Services Department, Planning and Building Division 1001 E. Ninth St., Reno, NV 89512

Telephone: 775.328.6100 Fax: 775.328.6133 www.washoecounty.us/csd/planning_and_development WASHOE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and services

CITY OF RENO PLANNING COMMISSION

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Amended Meeting Minutes

The Washoe County Planning Commission convened jointly with the Reno City Planning Commission for a
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

portion of the meeting (Item 8A only), all other matters were

heard by only the Washoe County Planning Commission
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Washoe County Administration Complex, Commission Chambers,

Tagged Passions:boards and commissions

1001 East Ninth Street, Reno, NV 89512

Washoe County Planning Commissioners Sarah Chvilicek, Chair

Tagged Passions:planning and streets

Larry Chesney, Vice Chair Francine Donshick

James Barnes Philip Horan Thomas B. Bruce Michael W. Lawson Reno City Planning Commissioners Mark Johnson, Chair
Tagged Passions:planning

Britton Griffith, Vice Chair Paul Olivas

Peter Gower John Marshall Ed Hawkins Kevin Weiske The Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission met in a scheduled session on Tuesday, May 7, 2019, in the Washoe County Commission Chambers, 1001 East Ninth Street, Reno, Nevada.
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and streets

NOTE: The Washoe County Planning Commission convened jointly with the Reno City Planning Commission for a portion of the meeting (Item 8A only); all other matters were heard by only the Washoe County Planning Commission.

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

1.
*Determination of Quorum

Chair Chvilicek called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The following Commissioners and staff were present: Washoe County Commissioners present: Sarah Chvilicek, Chair Larry Chesney, Vice Chair James Barnes Thomas B. Bruce Francine Donshick 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 18 Philip Horan Michael W. Lawson Reno City Commissioners present: Mark Johnson, Chair Britton Griffith, Vice Chair Ed Hawkins Paul Olivas John Marshall Kevin Weiske Commissioners absent: Peter Gower (Reno City Planning Commissioner) Staff present: Trevor Lloyd, Washoe County Secretary, Planning and Building Chris Bronczyk, Washoe County Planner, Planning and Building Kelly Mullin, AICP, Washoe County Senior Planner, Planning and Building Dave Solaro, Washoe County Assistant County Manager Julee Olander, Washoe County Planner, Planning and Building Nathan Edwards, Deputy District Attorney, Washoe County District Attorney s Office Katy Stark, Washoe County Recording Secretary, Planning and Building
Tagged Passions:planning, legal, boards and commissions, administrator, and manager

Donna Fagan, Washoe County Office Support Specialist, Planning and Building

Claudia Hanson, Planning Manager, Reno Community Development Karl Hall, Reno City Attorney, Reno City Attorney s Office Greg Salter, Deputy City Attorney, Reno City Attorney s Office
Tagged Passions:planning, legal, development, Development, manager, and community development

2.
*Pledge of Allegiance

Commissioner Horan led the pledge to the flag.

3.
*Ethics Law Announcement

Nathan Edwards, Deputy District Attorney, provided the ethics procedure for disclosures.

Tagged Passions:legal, procedure, and ethics

4.
*Appeal Procedure

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:procedure

Secretary Trevor Lloyd recited the appeal procedure for items heard before the Planning Commission.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and procedure

5.
*General Public Comment and Discussion Thereof

No additional detail provided

Lori Beach, Washoe County Resident/City of Reno Tax Payer, requested consideration for storage containers. She stated there are many residents who live in rural areas with acreage. She said she uses the storage container to store feed for her animals and provide storage for those who are being flooded. She read from the staff report regarding visual appeal.

Tammy Holt-Still, Swan Lake Recovery Committee, said there was a commissioner who was hosting an information table at a Northern Nevada Business Weekly breakfast. It got back to Ms. Holt-Still that this table had fun making jokes about the residents of Lemmon Valley and the effluent water at the school grounds. Lemmon Valley residents were the butt of their jokes. She said the Commissioners are professionals. They represent the citizens, but they also represent businesses. And those businesses should be professional. The Commissioners try to make money when they re not here, so it is not appropriate to make residents who have had major 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:rural, business, taxes, Taxes, utility, Utility, beach, water, flooding, commercial, and education

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

issues happen to them the butt of jokes. We d like to have you come live out there. We d like you to live in that and work around it and be there 24-7 and see how you feel about it. It s not funny. It has taken Ms. Holt-Still two years, five months, and however many days to finally get it understood that there is an issue out there. The water is higher this year than it was two years ago, and development is the issue when it comes down to the bottom of it, between effluent and stormwater runoff. We had the winter of all winters. But it didn t winter right on the lake. It came from everyplace else to the lake. The water had to get there somehow. It s time to not be the butt of jokes. It s time for each and every one of you to start looking at helping us figure out how to fix this situation and not put more people in danger. Because the more water you put in, the higher the water is going to move. And those HESCO barriers can t stay there forever.

Denise Ross spoke for Danny Cleous and herself. She said she was not going to be as vague as Tammy was. She shared that there is a lot of hurt in Lemmon Valley. She asked the Commissioners to re-examine why they serve on the board. She said that for those who have meals with United Construction, Toll Construction, and your father is a developer, for you to be sitting in public and making statements that make fun of Lemmon Valley residents and how pathetic we are and how sad it is that we are crying because there is effluent on our playground where our kids go to school, things like that it is very hurtful. Danny is losing everything he has because of the flood. He loses his home and has no way to repair it. What about compassion? What about understanding? What about caring about what you say in public to other people? It is inexcusable, and Ms. Ross will never understand why anything like this would take place in our County. Ms. Ross said, Britton Griffith, you know exactly what I am talking about. You know exactly why I am calling you out on this. Tammy had asked Denise to be nice on the way to the meeting; if you can t say something nice, don t say anything at all. Ms. Ross said, Britton Griffith, I m calling you out. As there were no further requests to the call for public comment, Chair Chvilicek closed the public comment period. 6. Approval of Agenda In accordance with the Open Meeting Law, Commissioner Donshick moved to approve the agenda for the May 7, 2019 meeting as written. Commissioner Horan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with a vote of seven for, none against.

Tagged Passions:construction, utility, development, Utility, water, flooding, parks, Development, education, and stormwater

7.
Possible Action to Approve April 2, 2019 Draft Minutes of the Washoe County Planning

Commission meeting In accordance with the Open Meeting Law, Commissioner Donshick moved to approve the April 2, 2019 Draft Minutes of the Washoe County Planning Commission meeting as written. Commissioner Horan seconded the motion, which passed unanimously with a vote of seven for, none against.

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

8.
Public Hearings

The following item only (Agenda Item 8.A.) will be heard jointly by the Reno City Planning Commission and the Washoe County Planning Commission.
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and hearing

A.
Master Plan Amendment Case Number WMPA19-0001 and Regulatory Zone Amendment Case Number WRZA19-0001 (Buck Drive) For possible action, hearing, and discussion:

(1) To approve a Master Plan Amendment from the Medium Density Suburban/Suburban Residential (MDSSR) to the Commercial (C) master plan designation on one parcel of 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:regulation, property, hearing, and commercial

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 18 land, totaling approximately 1.003 acres; because the subject property is within the Reno-Stead Corridor Joint Plan, which is a master plan under the joint jurisdiction of the City of Reno and Washoe County, amendments require approval by both entities. If approved, authorize the chairs of the Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission to sign resolutions to this effect, and to forward their recommendations on to the Washoe County Commission and Reno City Council for possible approval; and
Tagged Passions:planning, council, boards and commissions, property, and corridor

(2) Subject to final approval of the associated Master Plan change and a finding of conformance with the 2012 Truckee Meadows Regional Plan, to approve a Regulatory Zone Amendment from the Medium Density Suburban (MDS) regulatory zone to the General Commercial (GC) regulatory zone on one parcel of land, totaling approximately 1.003 acres, and, if approved, authorize the chair to sign a resolution to this effect. The existing manufactured home is subject to a condition precedent that the residence be removed before the amendments take effect.

Applicant: Lumos Associates, Attn: Angela Fuss Property Owners: Alan and Debra Squalia

Tagged Passions:regulation, property, and commercial

Location: 330 Lemmon Drive

Assessor s Parcel Number: 552-190-03 Parcel Size: 1.003 Acres Existing Master Plan Category: Medium Density Suburban/Suburban Residential (MDSSR) (Washoe County Designation) Proposed Master Plan Category: Commercial (C) (Washoe County Designation) Existing Regulatory Zone: Medium Density Suburban (MDS) (Washoe County Designation) Proposed Regulatory Zone: General Commercial (GC) (Washoe County Designation)
Tagged Passions:regulation, property, and commercial

Area Plan: North Valleys (Washoe County)

Citizen Advisory Board: North Valleys CAB Development Code: Authorized in Article 820, Amendment of Master Plan; Article 821, Amendment of Regulatory Zone Commission District: 5 Commissioner Herman Prepared by: Chris Bronczyk, Planner Washoe County Community Services Department Planning and Building Division Phone: 775.328.3612 E-Mail: cbronczyk@washoecounty.us Chair Chvilicek opened the public hearing. Chair Chvilicek called for member disclosures. There were no member disclosures from Washoe County Commissioners. Reno City Commissioners stated they spoke with the representative.
Tagged Passions:planning, regulation, boards and commissions, development, services, Development, and hearing

Chris Bronczyk, Washoe County Senior Planner, provided a staff presentation.

DDA Nathan Edwards confirmed copies of the resolutions were available for the public.

Angela Fuss, Lumos Associates representative, provided a presentation.

Public Comment: 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 18 Denise Ross asked for no master plan amendments. She requested a moratorium which has been mentioned by City Council. The community is under water. There needs to be joint agreement for their sewage and their water. She said the City of Reno approved in December 2018 for Prologic Phase 4 to use the sewer line on which they are working now. Prologic Phase 4 has been given that capacity. There were no further requests for public comment.
Tagged Passions:planning, council, sewer, boards and commissions, utility, Utility, and water

Commissioner Questions and Discussion: Reno City Commissioner Weiske asked Ms. Fuss if the application was for a project or a zone change. Ms. Fuss said it was for a zone change and master plan amendment, no project. Commissioner Weiske said we have no project so we have no addition to sewer use and no additional draw from the water or gas or power in the area; this is strictly what can be built on this property in the future. Ms. Fuss said there is no demand or use for services at this point because there isn t a project.

Reno City Commissioner Marshall mentioned that this site has the potential to go to the Buck Drive line to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF). He asked Ms. Fuss if there was capacity in the Buck Drive sewer line available for that at this time. Ms. Fuss said that when you come forward and request a sewer will serve, depending on what your demand is, Washoe County will evaluate if there is capacity. At this point, there is capacity in the line, but it is based on when the project comes forward. With this zone change, if the project does not come forward for five years, there may or may not be capacity in that line. If it came forward today, then there is capacity in that line today for a one-acre commercial development. Commissioner Marshall addressed Ms. Fuss regarding the January 18, 2019, feasibility analysis letter. He asked for further explanation of the Truckee Meadows Water Authority (TMWA) water demand and the proposed zoning. It would essentially be a little more than tripling what he assumed was imported water that would serve this area. Ms. Fuss replied that for all water at this point, water rights are purchased through TMWA; where they get that water is TMWA s decision. You buy water from TMWA, and TMWA has one giant pot from which you purchase water. Commissioner Marshall said the demand can triple, but then when you go down to sanitary sewer, there is a reduction for commercial over the existing three lots of sanitary sewer. He was trying to reconcile the increased demand for water with the decreased demand for sewer. He assumed that it was due to fewer showers, dishwashers, toilets, etc., for commercial, but he wanted to know what the fairly significant percentage of increase in water demand is used for. Ms. Fuss answered that when you look at a home, TMWA has a calculation for water rights. A single family home has a calculation of generally 0.3 acre feet per home. They have the ability to develop three homes based on the current zoning. The lot could be split into three, and three homes could come forth. That would generate a water demand of almost one acre foot of water, slightly less than that. If you come in with a commercial project, each project will be viewed independently. You have to put in landscaping, so you are required to come up with perhaps 20 percent of your site; the amount of landscaping and water generated from that is calculated. Also, depending on your use, if you are a restaurant with bathrooms, sinks, and dishwashers, then your water demand is going to be higher. If you are a discount tire, the only water generated is going to be from your bathrooms. So the water calculation is going to be based on your use. When Ms. Fuss put the calculation together, she based it on an assumption. It is a one-acre lot, so about an 8,000 square foot building would make sense. Based on that, Ms. Fuss came up with needing approximately 3.2 acre feet of water, based on a generic use and landscaping. When you come up with sewer calculations, it is again based on the use. Because it is a residential use, you could do three of those homes, and there is a standard that they use. They came up with three homes generating 975 gallons per day. When coming up with sewer, the calculation is based on acreage and use. With one acre of 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:facility, sewer, utility, development, restaurants, Utility, zoning, services, water, purchasing, Development, property, and commercial

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 18 commercial and using standard calculations that the cities and counties use, generally speaking it would generate 780 gallons of sewer per day. There is probably more sewer from residential because of multiple toilets versus commercial use with generally one or two toilets. Ms. Fuss said that it is really dependent on your use, but based on the standards that we have in front of us today without a specific use, these are the calculations that we came up with.
Tagged Passions:planning, sewer, boards and commissions, utility, Utility, and commercial

Commissioner Marshall said that through the zone change, they are potentially increasing the demand for water, which he thinks is probably imported water into the closed hydrographic basin, and decreasing the demand for sewer. He asked if it was reasonable to conclude that the net impact of this zone change is actually going to be an increase in the amount of water that is put into this hydrographic basin either through infiltration or runoff from whatever. He was not talking about stormwater; he was talking about imported water. He asked if he was comparing these two things correctly, that the net result will be to some degree an intensification of water into the closed hydrographic basin. Ms. Fuss suggested that they were talking about two different things. The water will come from a pipe, and TMWA provides the water from wherever TMWA chooses to get the water. At the end of the day, you drink the water, you flush your toilet, and it goes to a sewer treatment plant. The import-export would be dependent on TMWA giving them water, then that water is being flushed, and it goes to the TMWRF facility, which is not in this basin.

Commissioner Marshall said this did not answer his question and part of the problem is going from gallons per day in the sanitary sewer and trying to compare it to acre feet for the water importation. He was worried about increasing the amount of water going into this basin, which already has significant problems with flooding, as a result of this zone and master plan change. That was the key question he was trying to answer. Ms. Fuss asked if Commissioner Marshall was really asking about stormwater runoff. He said no, because that has to do with the existing condition and whether or not you have enough treatment capacity. He wanted to know about the water that was being imported to serve this commercial use. Is the result of the zone change and the master plan change going to be an increase in water coming into the basin as a result of this admittedly-small, one-acre commercial development than what is there currently? Ms. Fuss said that right now TMWA has water rights and they have pipes. They recently put in a pipe that is bringing in water from the Fish Springs. She could not say if the water that is serving this particular property is coming just from Fish Springs or if it is coming from somewhere else. Commissioner Marshall said, for the sake of this argument, to assume it is imported. Ms. Fuss said the water goes in the toilet or in the shower and goes in a pipe that then takes it to the TMWRF sewer treatment plant in Sparks. Commissioner Marshall said, Potentially. (Commissioner Weiske made a comment to Commissioner Marshall that was not recorded by the microphone.) Commissioner Marshall answered that he was trying to figure out if there was a connection between the fact that we are increasing water importation as a result of the zone change, but the net result is a decrease in the sanitary sewer contribution. Are those two things connected, or am I manufacturing something that those two things do not relate to each other? Commissioner Weiske said that he understood Commissioner Marshall s question and was not going to respond to it. Ms. Fuss said that if this property was being served by well and septic for the commercial use, then Commissioner Marshall s point might be better understood. If it was on well and septic, then the well would take water 100 percent from this basin because it takes ground water. When it leaves, it goes into a septic system, so it goes back into the ground under this parcel. But in this particular case, because you are required to tie into water lines and sewer lines, it is basically pipes. Nothing goes in the ground. If it was going to the Lemmon sewer treatment plant, then she would say yes, ultimately it ends up in the Lemmon treatment plant where it is processed and treated and then goes into Swan Lake. Because it is not going into the Lemmon treatment plant and is instead going to the TMWRF plant in the City of Sparks, 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:facility, sewer, utility, development, Utility, water, flooding, plant, Development, property, commercial, and stormwater

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Ms. Fuss believes this validates that they are not adding any additional water or sewer into the ground water of this basin.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:sewer, utility, Utility, and water

With no further questions from the Reno City Planning Commission, Chair Johnson turned it back over to the County.

There were no questions from the Washoe County Planning Commission. Chair Chvilicek explained that the item needed to be approved by both councils. The Washoe County Planning Commission would vote first. Chair Chvilicek received clarification from DDA Edwards advising the Commission to vote separately on the master plan amendment and regulatory zone amendment. Washoe County Commissioner Lawson said Ms. Fuss presentation was excellent. He said the feasibility study was thorough. He understood that she was using theoreticals for the import of water and that a strict determination could not be made without a specific project. He thought her explanation on it being piped coming in and going out left no doubt in his mind that there is a net no effect in terms of saturation of the basin. He spoke to the people representing Lemmon Valley who had expressed their concerns about moratoriums. He said he was a strong advocate for making regional decisions based on citizens input. He said, We hear you, and some of us are compassionate. But he said there is a difference between developing property and making a zone change. In this particular instance, Commissioner Lawson saw the change from Residential to Commercial as an enhancement to the community. It allows opportunities for shopping and reduces traffic on the regional network. He said he is loath to make master plan amendments and loath to develop further in the North Valleys without a thorough environmental investigation. However, in this particular case, he was going to support this amendment because he sees it enhancing, rather than deterring from the community.

Tagged Passions:planning, regulation, council, boards and commissions, utility, Utility, water, environment, property, commercial, and traffic

With no further questions or comments from the Washoe County Planning Commission, Chair Chvilicek turned it over to Chair Johnson for any City of Reno questions or comments.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Reno City Commissioner Marshall thanked Commissioner Lawson for his comment regarding the increase in locally serving commercial, which he thinks is a critical element to reduction of VMT and other trip generation. He agreed it was a positive change. He said 780 gallons per day is 0.89 acre feet per year. So we are actually going to be increasing the importation of water into this particular basin as a result of this increase and assuming that it is actually built out to the amount projected or reasonably determined by the applicant s consultant. He agreed that this will enhance the services and reduce trips per day. He said it put him in a particular quandary, because as we are having issues up there, if we are taking actions that are increasing, although not a great amount, the amount of importation of water without resolving the issues up there, he has significant problems with that. He said they just did some zone changes right across the street, next to the Walmart, so he is cognizant of the fact there have been some commercial changes there. He is on the fence.

With no additional discussion items, Chair Johnson turned it over to Chair Chvilicek. MOTION BY WASHOE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Master Plan Amendment Case Number WMPA19-0001: Vice Chair Chesney moved that, after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission adopt the resolution contained at Exhibit A of the staff report to amend the Master Plan as set forth in Master Plan Amendment Case Number WMPA19-0001 having made the following five findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.820.15(d). Vice Chair Chesney further moved to certify the resolution and the proposed Master Plan Amendments in WMPA19-0001 and having made the findings in 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:planning, grocery, boards and commissions, streets, utility, Utility, services, water, hearing, commercial, and large retail

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

accordance with the North Valleys Area Plan as set forth in the staff report for submission to the Washoe County Board of County Commissioners and authorize the chair to sign the resolution on behalf of the Planning Commission.

1. Consistency with Master Plan. The proposed amendment is in substantial compliance with the policies and action programs of the Master Plan. 2. Compatible Land Uses. The proposed amendment will provide for land uses compatible with (existing or planned) adjacent land uses, and will not adversely impact the public health, safety or welfare.
Tagged Passions:planning, health, boards and commissions, program, and compliance

3.
Response to Change Conditions. The proposed amendment responds to changed

No additional detail provided

conditions or further studies that have occurred since the plan was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, and the requested amendment represents a more desirable utilization of land.

No additional detail provided

4.
Availability of Facilities. There are or are planned to be adequate transportation,

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:transportation

recreation, utility, and other facilities to accommodate the uses and densities permitted by the proposed Master Plan designation.

5. Desired Pattern of Growth. The proposed amendment will promote the desired pattern for the orderly physical growth of the County and guides development of the County based on the projected population growth with the least amount of natural resource impairment and the efficient expenditure of funds for public services.

Tagged Passions:funding, utility, development, Utility, services, Development, Public Works, public works, growth, and recreation

North Valleys Area Plan Findings Policy 20.3 (a part of the Master Plan)

In order for the Washoe County Planning Commission to recommend approval of any amendment involving a change of land use, the following findings must be made:

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and policy

a.
A feasibility study has been conducted, commissioned and paid for by the applicant, relative to municipal water, sewer and storm water that clearly identifies the improvements likely to be required to support the intensification, and those improvements have been determined to be in substantial compliance with all applicable existing facilities and resource plans for North Valleys by the Department of Water Resources. The Department of Water Resources will establish and maintain the standards and methodologies for these feasibility studies.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:sewer, boards and commissions, utility, Utility, water, compliance, and stormwater

b.
A traffic analysis has been conducted that clearly identifies the impact to the adopted

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:traffic

level of service within the North Valleys planning area and the improvements likely to be required to maintain/achieve the adopted level of service. This finding may be waived by the Department of Public Works for projects that are determined to have minimal impacts. The Department of Public Works may request any information it deems necessary to make this determination.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning, Public Works, and public works

c.
For amendments that propose new or intensified commercial land use, the scale of the intended use has been shown to be community serving in nature.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:commercial

d.
For residential land use intensifications, the potential increase in residential units will not

exceed Washoe County s applicable policy growth level for the North Valleys Area Plan, as established under Goal One.

Tagged Passions:policy and growth

e.
If the proposed intensification will result in a drop below the established policy level of

service for transportation (as established by the Regional Transportation Commission 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions, transportation, and policy

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

and Washoe County) within the North Valleys planning area, the necessary improvements required to maintain the established level of service are scheduled in either the Washoe County Capital Improvements Program or Regional Transportation Improvement Program within three years of approval of the intensification. For impacts to regional roads, the Washoe County Planning Commission, upon written request from the Regional Transportation Commission, may waive this finding.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, streets, capital spending, Capital Spending, transportation, and program

f.
If roadways impacted by the proposed intensification are currently operating below

No additional detail provided

adopted levels of service, the intensification will not require infrastructure improvements beyond those articulated in Washoe County and regional transportation plans AND the necessary improvements are scheduled in either the Washoe County Capital Improvements Program or Regional Transportation Improvement Program within three years of approval of the intensification.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:capital spending, Capital Spending, transportation, and program

g.
Washoe County will work to ensure that the long range plans of facilities providers for

transportation, water resources, schools and parks reflect the policy growth level established in Policy 1.2.

Tagged Passions:utility, Utility, transportation, water, parks, education, policy, and growth

h.
If the proposed intensification results in existing public school facilities exceeding design

capacity and compromises the Washoe County School District s ability to implement the neighborhood school philosophy for elementary facilities, then there must be a current capital improvement plan or rezoning plan in place that would enable the District to absorb the additional enrollment. The Washoe County Planning Commission, upon request of the Washoe County School Board of Trustees, may waive this finding. i. Any existing development in the North Valleys planning area, the Forest planning area, or the Northeast Truckee Meadows planning area which is subject to the conditions of a special use permit will not experience undue hardship in the ability to continue to comply with the conditions of the special use permit or otherwise to continue operation of its permitted activities. Commissioner Lawson seconded the motion. Commissioner Horan said he will support the motion but hesitates since we don t have a project. He agreed with Commissioner Marshall that it is probably a positive thing having the services out there. He said he is very concerned about the overall impact and what our plan is to solve the problems out there. Commissioner Bruce opposed. Motion carried six to one (6-1) in favor by the Washoe County Planning Commission. MOTION BY WASHOE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION: Motion for Regulatory Zone Amendment Case Number WRZA19-0001: Vice Chair Chesney moved that after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission adopt the resolution included as Exhibit B, recommending adoption of Regulatory Zone Amendment Case Number WRZA19-0001, having made all of the following findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.821.15. Vice Chair Chesney further moved to certify the resolution and the proposed Regulatory Zone Amendment in WRZA19-0001 as set forth in the staff report for submission to the Washoe County Board of Commissioners and authorize the chair to sign the resolution on behalf of the Washoe County Planning Commission.
Tagged Passions:planning, regulation, boards and commissions, development, capital spending, zoning, Capital Spending, services, Development, hearing, education, enrollment, and neighborhood

1.
The proposed amendment is in substantial compliance with the policies and action programs of the Master Plan and the Regulatory Zone Map.

4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:regulation, program, and compliance

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

2.
The proposed amendment will provide for land uses compatible with (existing or planned) adjacent land uses, and will not adversely impact the public health, safety or welfare.

Tagged Passions:health

3.
The proposed amendment responds to changed conditions or further studies that have

occurred since the plan was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, and the requested amendment represents a more desirable utilization of land.

4.
There are or are planned to be adequate transportation, recreation, utility, and other

facilities to accommodate the uses and densities permitted by the proposed amendment.

Tagged Passions:utility, Utility, transportation, and recreation

5.
The proposed amendment will not adversely affect the implementation of the policies and action programs of the Washoe County Master Plan.

Tagged Passions:program

6.
The proposed amendment will promote the desired pattern for the orderly physical

growth of the County and guides development of the County based on the projected population growth with the least amount of natural resource impairment and the efficient expenditure of funds for public services.

Tagged Passions:funding, development, services, Development, Public Works, public works, and growth

7.
The proposed amendment will not affect the location, purpose and mission of the military

installation. Commissioner Donshick seconded the motion to approve Regulatory Zone Amendment Case Number WRZA19-0001. Commissioner Horan said his comments from the previous motion stand for this motion. Commissioner Bruce opposed. The motion carried six to one (6-1) in favor by the Washoe County Planning Commission.
Tagged Passions:planning, regulation, boards and commissions, and military

Chair Johnson called for a motion from the Reno City Planning Commission.

MOTION BY RENO CITY PLANNING COMMISSION: Motion for Master Plan Amendment Case Number WMPA19-0001: Based upon compliance with the applicable considerations, Commissioner Weiske moved to adopt the amendment to the Master Plan by resolution and recommend that City Council approve the Master Plan amendment by resolution, subject to conformance review by the Regional Planning Agency. He could make all of the findings as set forth before them. Commissioner Hawkins seconded the motion and said he could make the findings. Commissioner Marshall opposed. Motion carried five to one (5-1) in favor by the Reno City Planning Commission.

Tagged Passions:planning, council, boards and commissions, and compliance

Chair Johnson asked for a motion to adjourn for the Reno City Planning Commission. Commissioner Weiske moved, and Commissioner Hawkins seconded. The motion to adjourn carried unanimously.

The Reno City Planning Commission adjourned at 6:51 p.m. The Washoe County Planning Commissioners took a brief recess and reconvened at 7:01 p.m.

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

B.
Development Code Amendment Case Number WDCA18-0005 (Cargo Containers) For possible action, hearing, and discussion to amend Washoe County Code Chapter 110 (Development Code) within Article 306, Accessory Uses and Structures, at Section 110.306.10, Detached Accessory Structures, to revise the allowable quantity, location, aesthetic, permitting and other standards associated with the placement of cargo containers

4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:development, Development, and hearing

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 18 as detached accessory structures used for storage; within Article 310, Temporary Uses and Structures, at Section 110.310.35 (h), Temporary Contractor or Owner-builder Materials or Equipment Cargo Containers, to update the point in the permitting process at which a cargo container may be placed upon a vacant piece of property to support construction, and to establish additional timeframes regarding when such a cargo container must be removed; within Article 902, Definitions at Section 110.902.15, General Definitions to establish a definition for Cargo Container ; and other matters necessarily connected therewith and pertaining thereto. The Planning Commission may recommend approval of the proposed ordinance as submitted, recommend approval with modifications based on input and discussion at the public hearing, or recommend denial. Any material modifications that exceed the scope of the amendments being considered at this hearing, however, may require continuation of the hearing for possible action at a future meeting.
Tagged Passions:planning, ordinance, construction, equipment, boards and commissions, materials, property, and hearing

Prepared by: Dave Solaro, Arch., P.E., Assistant County Manager Kelly Mullin, AICP, Senior Planner

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:administrator and manager

Washoe County Community Services Department Planning and Building Division

Phone: 775.328.3624 (Dave) and 775.328.3608 (Kelly)
Tagged Passions:planning and services

E-Mail: dsolaro@washoecounty.us and kmullin@washoecounty.us

Chair Chvilicek opened the public hearing. Chair Chvilicek called for member disclosures. Commissioner Bruce said he attended a public meeting.

Tagged Passions:hearing

Kelly Mullin, Washoe County Senior Planner, and Dave Solaro, Assistant County Manager, provided a staff presentation.

Public Comment: Lori Beach said she appreciated the presentation. She would like reconsideration of item xi, regarding livestock. Please allow for use of livestock. She appreciated the part about neutral painting of the cargo container required. Denise Ross declined her public comment.
Tagged Passions:arts, beach, administrator, manager, and livestock

With no further public comment, Chair Chvilicek closed the public comment period.

Commissioner Bruce asked about the timeframe of six months expiration after paid permit. He suggested a 12 month time period. He inquired about cargo containers being placed side-by- side. He asked about placing them end-to-end. Ms. Mullin noted end-to-end placement of the cargo containers language was added. She said under subsection 9a, this does not allow for cargo containers to be placed end-to-end for the concern of creating a barrier or compound. Ms. Mullin addressed his question about the six month timeframe. Commissioner Bruce said he understands the limit, but he would be comfortable with 12 months instead of six months.

Vice Chair Chesney thanked Ms. Mullin and Mr. Solaro for their hard work. He said he is fine with the time limit of six or 12 months. 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 18 Chair Chvilicek referred to item xii within Exhibit A-1 and asked what would constitute an agricultural building as a main use . Ms. Mullin explained the term and clarified that the prohibition on cargo containers being used as an agricultural building as a main use is a carryover from the previous policy. Commissioner Lawson commended the staff for their hard work. He said he is concerned with the language and asked if changes can be made or if the Commission can only consider the language as a whole, either voting for or against it. Ms. Mullin said there is opportunity to change language within the limits noted in the agenda description. DDA Edwards stated changes depend on the specific modifications. Commissioner Lawson said he doesn t like the idea of a container on less than acre, nor two containers on one acre. He said he would like to see at least one acre to have one container. Ms. Mullin noted the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) provided specific direction as to number of containers based on the sizes of parcels, but this Commission can also provide recommendations. Commissioner Donshick said she was confused about the complaint process. Ms. Mullin said standards would need to be abided by. If there was a complaint, they would report to Code Enforcement, and Code Enforcement would go out and investigate to see if the standards weren t being met. Commissioner Donshick asked how someone who wants to place a cargo container on their property can ensure they are in compliance. Ms. Mullin recommended that someone who wishes to place a cargo container or shed on their property check with staff ahead of time to confirm placement and make sure they are in compliance with standards. Commissioner Donshick expressed concerns with parcel size and containers. She said she is concerned with allowing a 40-foot container on a acre lot. Vice Chair Chesney said they need to meet the setback requirement, but doesn t think a 40-foot container on acre lot would happen. Commissioner Donshick said we need to be clear. Ms. Mullin indicated on properties 1.25 acre or less, a cargo container cannot be placed between the main home and street.
Tagged Passions:planning, recognition, boards and commissions, streets, agriculture, voting, property, compliance, policy, and codes enforcement

Chair Chvilicek thanked staff for their hard work.

DDA Edwards advised if the Commission wants to allow cargo containers without a permit on smaller parcels, it could most likely affect older neighborhoods without CC Rs, rather than newer subdivisions with CC Rs. The Commission should consider whether that would result in possible unfair impacts on older, less affluent neighborhoods. He stated the current requirement for a placement permit acts as a deterrent to some degree, and eliminating the need for a permit may open that up as an issue.
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions, subdivision, property, and neighborhood

Dave Solaro, Assistant County Manager, said he appreciated the discussion held by this Commission, by the Board of County Commissioners, and community input. He said that based on the discussion, smaller lots could be limited to a 20-foot length container. He said, currently, a container less than 200 square feet doesn t require a permit anyway, and that would not change with the amendment.

Vice Chair Chesney spoke about crafting a motion to reflect the Commission s discussion about adjusting the timeframe of the permit and parcel size. Commissioner Bruce said after a motion is made, the following amendments can be made: Section 110.310.35 (h) 6 months is changed to 12 months. Commissioner Lawson said Commissioner Bruce is on the right track with amendments. He agreed with changing the timeframe from six to 12 months in regards to building permits. He agreed with the suggestion by Dave Solaro regarding one cargo container not to exceed 200 square feet for smaller parcels and indicated this should also address the concerns voiced by 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions, property, administrator, and manager

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 18 DDA Edwards. He wanted clarification from Ms. Mullin about 40x10x9 from old code, and can it be included as definition of a cargo container. She said it was proposed to take it out. He asked if it can remain in order to define the cargo container. Commissioner Bruce said a standard container is 9.5 feet tall. There are two types of container: 8 feet and 9.5 feet tall. Ms. Mullin said there are several sizes of cargo containers. She stated she was uncomfortable with establishing a new maximum size without researching sizes.
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Commissioner Horan supports amending the language with the limitations discussed by the Commission so far.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:boards and commissions

Mr. Lloyd said limitations need to be specific, such as under acre of land cannot exceed a 200 square foot container size.

Chair Chvilicek referenced page 4 of 9 item (ii) that addresses sizes of lot. She said Only one cargo container of maximum size of 200 square feet. MOTION: Development Code Amendment Case Number WDCA18-0005: Vice Chair Chesney moved that, after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission recommend approval of WDCA18-0005, to amend Washoe County Code Chapter 110 (Development Code) within Articles 306, 310 and 902 as identified in Exhibit A. Vice Chair Chesney further moved to authorize the Chair to sign the resolution contained in Exhibit A on behalf of the Washoe County Planning Commission and to direct staff to present a report of this Commission s recommendation to the Washoe County Board of Commissioners within 60 days of today s date. This recommendation for approval is based on all of the following four findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.818.15(e): 1. Consistency with Master Plan. The proposed Development Code amendment is in substantial compliance with the policies and action programs of the Washoe County Master Plan;

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, program, Development, hearing, and compliance

2.
Promotes the Purpose of the Development Code. The proposed Development Code amendment will not adversely impact the public health, safety or welfare, and will promote the original purposes for the Development Code as expressed in Article 918, Adoption of Development Code;

Tagged Passions:health, development, and Development

3.
Response to Changed Conditions. The proposed Development Code amendment responds to changed conditions or further studies that have occurred since the Development Code was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, and the requested amendment allow for a more desirable utilization of land within the regulatory zones; and,

4. No Adverse Affects. The proposed Development Code amendment will not adversely affect the implementation of the policies and action programs of the Conservation Element or the Population Element of the Washoe County Master Plan. Commissioner Bruce moved to approve the motion with the following amendments Section 110.306.10 (g) item ii, shall be amended to read one cargo container of not more than 200 square feet of floor space shall be allowed on a parcel of land of less than acre in size. Two cargo containers shall be allowed on a parcel of land and 5 acres in size; parcels larger than 5 acres are limited one container per acre or portion thereof. And Section 110.310.35 (h) is amended to read if building permit has not been issued in 12 months of the date of original payment of plan review fees, the cargo container shall be removed 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:regulation, development, program, Conservation, Development, and property

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 18 from the property at the owner s expense. Issuance of building permit at later date will allow the cargo container to be placed on the property again. Any cargo container remaining onsite after issuance of final building inspection or certificate of occupancy shall conform to the standards within Section 110.306.10. Commissioner Lawson seconded the motion as amended. Vice Chair Chesney adopted the amendments by Commissioner Bruce. Commissioner Lawson also adopted the amendments stated by Commissioner Bruce that were adopted by Vice Chair Chesney. Ms. Mullin wanted clarification that there were no size limitations on containers for parcels of land acres to 5 acres. Chair Chvilicek said the only size limitation is on containers for parcels of less than acre. The motion carried unanimously.
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and property

C.
Amendment of Conditions Case Number WAC19-0002 (Blackstone Estates) for Tentative Subdivision Map Case TM15-001 For possible action, hearing, and discussion to approve the amendment of one condition of approval for Tentative Subdivision Map TM15-001. The request specifically seeks to amend condition 1(y), which required a neighborhood park to be constructed prior to recordation of the 80th lot in the subdivision. The amendment would change the timing for construction of the park to occur prior to recordation of the 107th lot, or issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the 80th home, whichever comes first.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:construction, subdivision, parks, hearing, and neighborhood

Applicant/Owner: JC Blackstone, LLC

Location: 350 Calle de la Plata

Assessor s Parcel Number: 534-571-01 Parcel Size: 58.49-acres Master Plan Category: Suburban Residential Regulatory Zone: Medium Density Suburban Area Plan: Spanish Springs
Tagged Passions:regulation and property

Citizen Advisory Board: Spanish Springs

Development Code: Authorized in Article 608 Commission District: 4 Commissioner Hartung Prepared by: Kelly Mullin, AICP, Senior Planner
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions, development, and Development

Washoe County Community Services Department Planning and Building Division

Phone: 775.328.3608 E-Mail: kmullin@washoecounty.us Chair Chvilicek opened the public hearing. Chair Chvilicek called for member disclosures. There were no member disclosures.
Tagged Passions:planning, services, and hearing

Kelly Mullin, Washoe County Senior Planner, provided a staff presentation.

Public Comment: Dan Herman said this park borders his backyard. He said he is concerned with recording of 80th or 108th lot of this project. This is a big give to the developer. It s a public park funded by our tax dollars. The developer is requesting change. The developer states the delay to park construction is six to seven months which Mr. Herman said he didn t have issues with. He said his problem is with the fact that the park is not being built. If the economy goes south, the developer can delay the park project if his units don t get built. The developer needs to comply with the original agreement that was approved. Add a condition that the developer has seven months to complete after signed agreement. 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:construction, taxes, Taxes, parks, and economy

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

With no further public comment, Chair Chvilicek closed the public comment period.

Commissioner Horan asked who is funding the park. Ms. Mullin said it needs to be funded by the developer and maintained by the HOA. The park construction tax is allocated on each lot. The applicant said the Residential Construction Tax pays for a portion of the construction of the park. He said the citizens don t pay for it. There is no change with funding the park.
Tagged Passions:funding, construction, taxes, Taxes, and parks

Commissioner Lawson spoke about the potential delay of construction. He asked about modifying language in the conditions. Ms. Mullin referred to the agenda description with the amendment in timing of recordation. She cautioned making changes outside of the scope of the description per Open Meeting Law limitations. DDA Edwards said usually you can act within what is allowed in the agenda but not go beyond what is described on the agenda. He said any changes that would be within the amount of extension of time would be allowed.

Commissioner Horan asked why we want the delay. The applicant said the delay isn t by us; it cannot happen until the residential tax agreement is in place. The budget and timing has to be set. The Parks Department is working on the agreement. The delay is on the Parks Department. Vice Chair Chesney said this has come before the CAB and they didn t have an issue. He suggested supporting the local CAB s decision. Commissioner Bruce asked what this extension will do for the project. The applicant said he has a grading permit and is still trying to record the maps. He said they are still going through the review process, and due to staffing, it s slow. He said changing the recordation will move things forward. He said construction will stop if they cannot complete the second phase with recordation by meeting these conditions.

Tagged Passions:construction, budget, taxes, Taxes, parks, human resources, and grading

MOTION: Amendment of Conditions Case Number WAC19-0002: Commissioner Horan moved that, after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and information received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission approve Amendment of Conditions Case Number WAC19-0002 for Tentative Subdivision Map TM15-001 for Blackstone Estates, with the amended conditions as included in Exhibit A, having made all ten findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.608.25:

1) Plan Consistency. That the proposed map is consistent with the Master Plan and any specific plan; 2) Design or Improvement. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the Master Plan and any specific plan; 3) Type of Development. That the site is physically suited for the type of development proposed; 4) Availability of Services. That the subdivision will meet the requirements of Article 702, Adequate Public Facilities Management System; 5) Fish or Wildlife. That neither the design of the subdivision nor any proposed improvements is likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantial and avoidable injury to any endangered plant, wildlife or their habitat;

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, subdivision, services, environment, plant, Development, and hearing

6) Public Health. That the design of the subdivision or type of improvement is not likely to cause significant public health problems;

4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:health and subdivision

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 18 7) Easements. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through, or use of property within, the proposed subdivision; 8) Access. That the design of the subdivision provides any necessary access to surrounding, adjacent lands and provides appropriate secondary access for emergency vehicles;
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, subdivision, emergency, property, and easement

9) Dedications. That any land or improvements to be dedicated to the County is consistent with the Master Plan; and

10) Energy. That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision. Commissioner Lawson seconded the motion to approve Amendment of Conditions Case Number WAC19-0002. Commission Bruce opposed. The motion carried six to one (6-1) in favor.
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions, subdivision, and energy

D.
Development Code Amendment Case Number WDCA19-0001 (Building Placement Standards on Nonconforming Lots) For possible action, hearing and discussion to initiate an amendment to Washoe County Code at Chapter 110 (Development Code), within Article 406, Building Placement Standards 110.406.05, General, to add a requirement regulating setbacks on legal non-conforming lots, when the lot size does not meet the minimum lot size for the actual regulatory zone applicable to the lot, the allowed setbacks will be based on the regulatory zone thresholds for the next densest regulatory zone for which the actual lot size does meet the minimum lot size requirements; and to remove Section 110.406.35(e) Side Yards, Prior Zoning, regarding the option to use the side yard setback requirements of the land use category comparable to the parcel size for lots created prior to May 26, 1993; and other matters necessarily connected therewith and pertaining thereto.

If the proposed amendment is initiated, public hearing and further possible action to deny or recommend approval of the proposed amendment and, if approval is recommended, to authorize the Chair to sign a resolution to that effect.

Tagged Passions:regulation, legal, development, zoning, Development, property, and hearing

Applicant: Washoe County

Location: County wide Development Code: Authorized in Article 818 Commission District: All Commissioners Prepared by: Julee Olander, Planner Washoe County Community Services Department Planning and Building Division Phone: 775.328.3627 E-Mail: jolander@washoecounty.us Chair Chvilicek opened the public hearing. Chair Chvilicek called for member disclosures. There were no member disclosures.

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, services, Development, and hearing

Julee Olander, Washoe County Planner, provided a staff presentation.

With no requests for public comment, Chair Chvilicek closed the public comment period. 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 18
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Motion for Development Code Amendment Case Number WDCA19-0001:

Initiation Commissioner Lawson moved that, after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission initiate the amendment to Washoe County Code Chapter 110 within Article 406, Building Placement Standards, as described in the staff report for WDCA19-0001.
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, Development, and hearing

Vice Chair Chesney seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).

Amendment Commissioner Lawson moved that, after giving reasoned consideration to the information contained in the staff report and received during the public hearing, the Washoe County Planning Commission recommend approval of WDCA19-0001, to amend Washoe County Code Chapter 110 within Article 406, Building Placement Standards, as described in the staff report for this matter. He further moved to authorize the Chair to sign the resolution contained in Exhibit A on behalf of the Planning Commission and to direct staff to present a report of this Commission s recommendation to the Washoe County Board of County Commissioners within 60 days of today s date. This recommendation for approval is based on all of the following four findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.818.15(e): 1. Consistency with Master Plan. The proposed Development Code amendment is in substantial compliance with the policies and action programs of the Washoe County Master Plan;

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, program, Development, hearing, and compliance

2.
Promotes the Purpose of the Development Code. The proposed Development Code amendment will not adversely impact the public health, safety or welfare, and will promote the original purposes for the Development Code as expressed in Article 918, Adoption of Development Code;

Tagged Passions:health, development, and Development

3.
Response to Changed Conditions. The proposed Development Code amendment responds to changed conditions or further studies that have occurred since the Development Code was adopted by the Board of County Commissioners, and the requested amendment allow for a more desirable utilization of land within the regulatory zones; and,

4. No Adverse Affects. The proposed Development Code amendment will not adversely affect the implementation of the policies and action programs of the Conservation Element or the Population Element of the Washoe County Master Plan. Chair Chvilicek re-opened Item 8D to include the amendment. Commissioner Donshick seconded the motion to approve the amendment. The motion carried unanimously (7-0).

Tagged Passions:regulation, development, program, Conservation, and Development

9.
Chair and Commission Items

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:boards and commissions

*A. Future agenda items Commissioner Lawson requested to report back to the Commission regarding the information he learned regarding the process for reviewing technical tentative map approvals. Mr. Lloyd said an information item regarding the process can be agendized.

4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01
Tagged Passions:boards and commissions

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) May 7, 2019 Washoe County Planning Commission and Reno City Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 18 DDA Edwards said the clerks requested action for item 8D initiation and amendment. He said there is a motion on initiation, but the language needs to be read for the amendment. Chair Chvilicek re-opened item 8D.
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

*B. Requests for information from staff No requests.

10. Director s and Legal Counsel s Items
Tagged Passions:legal

*A. Report on previous Planning Commission items Nothing to report.

*B. Legal information and updates DDA Edwards said Prado Ranch judicial review was dismissed based on lack of standing. He was unsure of the appeal.

Tagged Passions:planning, legal, and boards and commissions

11.
*General Public Comment and Discussion Thereof

With no requests for public comment, Chair Chvilicek closed the public comment period. Chair Chvilicek said they are diligently working on the Regional Plan Update and recommended that the Commissioners follow the updates.

12.
Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:29 p.m.

Respectfully submitted by Misty Moga, Independent Contractor. Approved by Commission in session on August 6, 2019. Trevor Lloyd, Secretary to the Planning Commission 4.1 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M , 2 01

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) MINUTES Regular Meeting Reno City Planning Commission
Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Commissioners Mark Johnson, Chair 326-8864

Britton Griffith, Vice Chair 326-8858 John Marshall 326-8863 Peter Gower 326-8860 Paul Olivas 326-8861 Ed Hawkins 326-8862 Kevin Weiske 326-8859

1
Pledge of Allegiance

Commissioner Hawkins led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2
Roll Call

Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Mark Johnson Chairman Present Britton Griffith Vice-Chair Absent Ed Hawkins Commissioner Present Peter Gower Commissioner Late 6:38 PM John Marshall Commissioner Late 6:04 PM Paul Olivas Commissioner Present Kevin Weiske Commissioner Present The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM.

3
Public Comment

William Pochet discussed concerns regarding billboards blocking scenic views.

Tagged Passions:advertising and signage

Tammy Holt-Still discussed concerns regarding flooding in the North Valleys.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:flooding

Lori Beach discussed concerns regarding flooding in the North Valleys.

Irene Tudor spoke in opposition to the expansion of the Reno Stead Water Reclamation Facility at this time.
Tagged Passions:facility, expansion, utility, Utility, beach, water, and flooding

4
City Council Liaison Reports

None 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Tagged Passions:council

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

5
Off-Premises Advertising Display Presentation

Carter Williams, Planning Technician, presented to the Planning Commission. The presentation looked at the administrative processes and code requirements currently in place to establish billboards within the city through the use of banked receipts. Public Comment:

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, advertising, and signage

Lori Wray discussed issues regarding the Summit Club sign.

Kathy Bohall discussed issues regarding billboards.
Tagged Passions:advertising and signage

John Hara discussed issues regarding billboards and the need to notify the public before they are approved.

Tagged Passions:advertising and signage

Commissioner Weiske stated that he asked for this to come back on the agenda as a discussion item based on a billboard, not specifically for that sign location but in general city-wide.

Mr. Williams explained for Commissioner Weiske that the required distance between a billboard and residentially zoned property is 300 feet. He clarified that the requirement is not based on property use but zoning. He also explained that a Title 18 text amendment would be required to change that. Claudia Hanson, Planning Manager, explained for Commissioner Weiske that the sign section of Title 18 will be processed on a separate track during the Title 18 update. Mr. Williams explained for Commissioner Weiske that signage boundaries are regulated based on the specific zone. Mr. Williams confirmed for Commissioner Marshall that at the time of annexation, based on the roadway segment analysis, the sign was not allowed. We observed the zone specifically for Tourist Commercial and that zone did allow for the sign. Commissioner Marshall asked about noticing requirements.

Tagged Passions:planning, zoning, advertising, signage, property, commercial, manager, and annexation

Mr. Carter explained that there is no notice requirement within Title 18 for signs but it is recorded with the City Clerk to open it up for appeal to City Council.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:council

Ms. Hanson confirmed that there is no requirement for notification and it is recorded with the Clerk's office.

4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Commissioner Marshall asked if the City can provide a courtesy notice to Scenic Nevada whenever a billboard permit is issued given that they have a particular interest and history in billboards in the City of Reno.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:advertising, signage, and history

Ms. Hanson would have to think through the process for solidifying how that would happen in the future without putting it into code.

No additional detail provided

Commissioner Olivas express concern with starting to pick out individual types of permits that you will give courtesy notices to. If we are going to do that it should be in Title 18.

5.1 Billboard Presentation - Presented/Distributed at Meeting

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:advertising and signage

6
Public Hearings

Tagged Passions:hearing

6.1 Staff Report (For Possible Action): Case No. LDC19-00044 (The Z Bar)-A request has been made for a special use permit to establish a night club use. The 0.12 acre site is generally located 75 feet southwest of the intersection of Wonder Street and Holcomb Avenue. The site is zoned Mixed Use/South Virginia Street Transit Corridor/Commercial (MU/SVTC/MC) and has a Master Plan land use designation of Urban Mixed-Use (UMU). bjo [Ward 3] 6:46 PM

Archie Granata, owner of Z Bar, gave an overview of the project. Brook Oswald, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff recommended the addition of a Condition No. 7 stating that noise levels shall not exceed 60 decibels at 150 feet from the project site. The commissioners present disclosed that they visited or are familiar with the site, and/or spoke with the applicant's bartender and code enforcement staff.
Tagged Passions:streets, zoning, commercial, nightlife, corridor, codes enforcement, and noise

At this time Chair Johnson opened public comment for this item.

Ashley Schumacher did not wish to make a statement but was in favor of the project. Hearing and seeing no further public comment requests, Chair Johnson closed public comment. Mr. Oswald confirmed for Commissioner Hawkins that there have been a number of enforcement actions on this property, mainly related to building without a permit. The applicant has removed some structures that were not previously permitted and has submitted a building permit to get the structures they have built permitted. There was also a complaint for amplified music on the patio. The amplified system was removed 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )
Tagged Passions:property and hearing

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

and they have not had another noise complaint since then. Alex Woodley, Assistant Director to Neighborhood Services, confirmed that the applicant has been very responsive to their requests to come into compliance. Mr. Oswald confirmed for Commissioner Weiske that the increase in square footage will change the calculation for restrooms required. He also confirmed that this is registered as a bar and the clientele would have to be 21 and over. They discussed requirements for open fencing and Mr. Oswald confirmed that language for that requirement can be added to Condition No. 5. Mr. Oswald explained for Commissioner Olivas that staff recommended a condition that limits the noise volume at a certain distance. Mr. Oswald explained for Commissioner Hawkins that when the applicant submits a building permit it will be reviewed by the Fire Department and they will make a determination regarding signage for occupancy capacity. Mr. Brook explained for Commissioner Gower that this property is not adjacent to residential property and would not be subject to adjacency standards for noise. The ambient noise level in the area was reviewed and staff recommended adding Condition No. 7 in order to make sure they do not add to that noise level.

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, fire departments and districts, advertising, signage, services, property, compliance, noise, and neighborhood

Commissioner Hawkins pointed out that the staff report indicates there is still a problem with getting fire apparatus to places like this in Midtown.

It was moved by Commissioner Weiske, seconded by Commissioner Hawkins, in the case of LDC19-00044 (The Z Bar), based upon compliance with the applicable findings, to approve special use permit, subject to conditions with a correction to Condition No. 4 changing the starting time for hours of operation on Sundays to 10:00 pm, the addition of Condition No. 7 as read into the record by staff, and modification to Condition No. 5 for open fencing with a clarification that landscaping will not grow up into the fencing blocking the view and that SEPTED Standards will be met. The motion carried unanimously with six (6) commissioners present.

Tagged Passions:compliance

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kevin Weiske, Commissioner SECONDER: Ed Hawkins, Commissioner AYES: Johnson, Hawkins, Gower, Marshall, Olivas, Weiske ABSENT: Britton Griffith

4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

6.2 Staff Report (For Possible Action): Case No.LDC19-00060 (Reno-Stead Water Reclamation Facility) A request for a special use permit to allow for the expansion of an existing wastewater facility to increase the treatment capacity from 2.0 to 4.0 million gallons per day (MGD) adjacent to residentially zoned property. The 46 acre site is located on the northwest corner of Military Road and Lear Boulevard (4250 Norton Drive) in the Public Facility (PF) zone. The site has a Master Plan land use designation of Public/Quasi-Public (PQP). skr [Ward 4] 7:15 PM

Joe Coudriet, Public Works Associate Civil Engineer, presented the staff report with an overview of the project. Commissioners Gower, Johnson and Olivas had no disclosures. The remaining commissioners present disclosed that they visited or are familiar with the site and/or spoke with an applicant representative.
Tagged Passions:facility, sewer, expansion, streets, utility, Utility, zoning, water, Public Works, public works, property, and military

At this time Chair Johnson opened public comment for this item.

Denise Ross discussed concerns regarding effluent discharge.

Lori Beach discussed concerns regarding effluent and access for emergency vehicles.

Tagged Passions:beach and emergency

Tammy Holt-Still discussed concerns regarding effluent and other issues related to the special use permit request.

Tim Fadda discussed the need for flood mitigation to be taken care of before approving anything else. Carli Fripp discussed the need to address the current flooding issues in the North Valleys before considering approval of the special use permit request to increase capacity. Hearing and seeing no public comment requests, Chair Johnson closed public comment. Mr. Coudriet confirmed for Commissioner Weiske that the expansion is designed to accept more wastewater. He also explained that the flow shave project will create additional capacity at the Reno-Stead Water Reclamation Facility (RSWRF) by pumping raw, degraded sewage to the Truckee Meadows Water Reclamation Facility (TMWRF) without being discharged to Swan Lake. Mr. Coudriet clarified for Commissioner Weiske that the flow shave project is already in place with or without the proposed expansion project. The flow shave will provide additional capacity to issue additional will serves up to a plant capacity of 2.38 MGD 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Tagged Passions:facility, sewer, expansion, utility, Utility, water, flooding, plant, and hearing

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

compared to the existing plant capacity of 2 MGD without increasing effluent discharge to Swan Lake.

Tagged Passions:plant

Mr. Coudriet provided more technical details to answer questions from Commissioner Olivas regarding why the flow shave cannot be turned on to its full capacity today. He also discussed the process that would be involved in order to use the pipeline for effluent.

No additional detail provided

Mr. Coudriet explained that the past incidents where the permit capacity was exceeded occurred during high flow weather events. Additional analysis has been done taking those high inflows into consideration with the plant design. They have also worked with NDEP in order to avoid exceeding the permit capacity in the future.

Mr. Coudriet explained for Commissioner Gower that TMWRF is also limited on capacity. The flow shave is an interim project and it will sunset. He also confirmed that TMWRF does not have the capacity now to serve all of the North Valleys at build out. In order to pump 2 MGD to TMWRF, various improvements would be needed and the available capacity at TMWRF would be reduced. Arlo Stockham, Community Development Director, further explained that shipping effluent to TMWRF is limited due to Truckee River water quality. If this effluent from RSWRF is conveyed to TMWRF, pretty soon this would shut down growth in downtown Reno. There are effluent disposal options being investigated now that do not involve the discharge of effluent into Swan Lake above what is currently permitted. Mr. Coudriet stated they will not issue additional will serves until there are effluent management strategies in place. Mr. Coudriet explained for Commissioner Marshall the NEDP discharge permit in relation to the elevation of Swan Lake. He stated the NDEP permit allows the City to discharge up to 2,072 acre feet per year regardless of the level of the lake and that the city in its role as floodplain manager evaluated base flood elevations through the 2007 North Valleys Study that considered both effluent discharge and storm flow inputs. About 1,400 acre feet of effluent were discharged in 2018. The 2,072 acre feet per year limit would be reached before the expanded plant capacity is reached if additional effluent management strategies are not in place. Mr. Coudriet explained for Commissioner Hawkins that spring water is going to Horse Creek year round. Sienna Reid, Senior Planner, provided more detail in terms of will serves and the allocation program. 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Tagged Passions:utility, development, Utility, downtown, events, program, water, watershed, flooding, plant, Development, manager, growth, and community development

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Mr. Coudriet answered questions for Commissioner Hawkins regarding retention basins, odor control, and advanced treatment for Grade A+ water.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:utility, Utility, and water

Ms. Reid explained that not all future projects that could come online have started their mapping process yet. In addition, not all future projects are located within the service boundary for the Reno-Stead Water Reclamation Facility. Ultimate potential buildout is something that is being contemplated for future facility planning, but is not something that would be accommodated with the 2.0 MGD expansion.

Mr. Coudriet discussed for Commissioner Weiske several plans to allow for alternate effluent management options in the future. Commissioner Hawkins discussed the need for limitations on hours for concrete pours. Mr. Coudriet confirmed for Commissioner Marshall that the city will not be requesting an increase in the allowable effluent discharge to Swan Lake.

Tagged Passions:planning, facility, expansion, utility, Utility, and water

Commissioner Marshall expressed concern that we do not have disclosure or analysis of the impacts associated with the increase in capacity. He also expressed concern that the reason we are using Swan Lake instead of pushing it to TMWRF is because it's cheaper to flood a few peoples' property than it is to ship it and treat it. There are substantial problems with pushing this expansion ahead of any concrete plans for the effluent reuse. Promoting this development at this time is inconsistent with a number of Master Plan policies that are not discussed in the staff report.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:expansion, development, flooding, Development, and property

Commissioner Weiske stated he cannot make findings d and f and does not feel comfortable that there are enough future plans in place to address all of the issues.

Commissioner Olivas stated if this were a developer coming before us with this many holes in the project, it would be an easy no. He cannot make findings a, c, d, and f. Commissioner Gower expressed concerns related to findings b and c. With the Master Plan we are saying we want to be proactive with our infrastructure investment but we don't have all of the pieces in place yet to understand where this fits in and where we want to go. We need to take a step back and be more thorough and vetted with our communication and overall strategy for the North Valleys and what we are going to do with the effluent and storm water and stop trying to piecemeal it. Commissioner Olivas discussed the fact that the permits being mentioned tonight that have been granted were based on an engineering model that is erroneous because the 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )
Tagged Passions:grant, strategic, utility, Utility, water, communications, investment, Communications, and stormwater

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

flooding that is going on out there. Those permits would probably never have been issued if we had this information built into the model at that time.

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and flooding

Commissioner Gower stated that the fact that we have an allocation system is indicative that we are at a threshold. If we keep trying to push past that threshold, we will keep running into these issues.

No additional detail provided

Chair Johnson stated this is a public facility with residential adjacency seeking to expand and our discussion tonight has gone way beyond what we would normally do for a residential adjacency discussion. Also, in the past we have heard that we need to have infrastructure in place before we allow for any more development. It is interesting that the first time that comes to us is with public infrastructure that happens to negatively impact what we are trying to do. If someone was coming to us and asking for a change because we were going to increase roadway capacity, we would all be in favor of that because it would be seen as a positive benefit. Our professional staff has made the determination that this is the best approach. There is not a solution to the added effluent so what we are hearing is that the limits for effluent discharge are set and they don't change. He stated the only finding he is struggling with is finding c, but what he is seeing here is an attempt to address growth in a smarter and sustainable way.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:facility, development, Development, hearing, and growth

Commissioner Weiske stated there are a lot of questions we still have and if this was a private developer he might ask if they want a continuation for 30 days to bring back additional information.

No additional detail provided

Chair Johnson stated some of the questions we have had are long-term planning issues that may not be answered in 30 days. He agreed there are still questions regarding residential adjacency.

It was moved by Commissioner Marshall, seconded by Commissioner Gower, in the case of LDC19-00060 (Reno-Stead Reclamation Facility), based upon non-compliance with findings b, c, d, and f, to deny the special use permit.
Tagged Passions:planning, facility, and compliance

Commissioner Gower stated that he can't make finding c and will not feel comfortable moving forward with any motion that connects to any treatment facility in the North Valleys until he hears a more consolidated well put together communication of what our plan is as a city for the North Valleys related to storm water infrastructure and wastewater infrastructure.

The motion for denial carried unanimously with six (6) commissioners present. Chair Johnson read the appeal process into the record. 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Tagged Passions:facility, sewer, utility, Utility, water, communications, Communications, and stormwater

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

(Chair Johnson called for a recess from 9:18 p.m. to 9:30 p.m.)

No additional detail provided

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: John Marshall, Commissioner SECONDER: Peter Gower, Commissioner AYES: Johnson, Hawkins, Gower, Marshall, Olivas, Weiske ABSENT: Britton Griffith

7
Zoning Code Update

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:zoning

7.1 Staff Report (For Possible Action): Presentation, discussion, and potential recommendations on Zoning Code RENOvation issue sheets for residential zoning districts. 9:31 PM

Arlo Stockham, Community Development Director, gave a presentation on the Zoning Code Update. The presentation included review of an issue sheet for residential zoning districts. The issue sheet outlines options and recommendations for the residential zoning district framework and Master Plan implementation process. Staff requested feedback from the Planning Commission.
Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, development, zoning, Development, and community development

Chair Johnson asked if the commissioners had any changes to the recommendations from staff. There were no changes suggested.

Mr. Stockham explained for Commissioner Hawkins that they are putting ADUs in this to put the debate to rest, and that staff does not intend to do anything different on ADUs with this code update. Public Comment: Isaac Morrison was not present to speak but submitted a comment card in opposition to removing kitchenettes from guest quarters.

8
Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Liaison Report

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning

Commissioner Hawkins reported on actions taken by the Regional Planning Commission.

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

9
Staff Announcements

9.1 Report on status of Planning Division projects.

Tagged Passions:planning

9.2 Announcement of upcoming training opportunities.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:training

9.3 Report on status of responses to staff direction received at previous meetings.

4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission May 15, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

9.4 Report on actions taken by City Council on previous Planning Commission items. 10:01 PM

Claudia Hanson, Planning Manager, reported on City Council action. Ricciardi Abandonment was approved. Adult Business Ordinance for Title 18 was approved.
Tagged Passions:planning, ordinance, business, council, boards and commissions, and manager

Mr. Stockham reported on the status of the Regional Plan Update.

10
Commissioner's Suggestions for Future Agenda Items (For Possible Action)

None

11
Public Comment

Lori Beach thanked the Planning Commission.

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, and beach

12
Adjournment (For Possible Action)

The meeting was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. 4.2 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f M 5, 2 6: 00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes ) MINUTES Regular Meeting Reno City Planning Commission

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Commissioners Mark Johnson, Chair 326-8864

Britton Griffith, Vice Chair 326-8858 John Marshall 326-8863 Peter Gower 326-8860 Paul Olivas 326-8861 Ed Hawkins 326-8862 Kevin Weiske 326-8859

1
Pledge of Allegiance

Commissioner Marshall led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2
Roll Call

Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Mark Johnson Chairman Present Britton Griffith Vice-Chair Present Ed Hawkins Commissioner Present Peter Gower Commissioner Present John Marshall Commissioner Present Paul Olivas Commissioner Absent Kevin Weiske Commissioner Present The meeting was called to order at 6:02 PM.

3
Public Comment

Kenji Otto discussed expanding the city's sphere of influence throughout the Cold Springs Valley to plan development in a sensible managed way.

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:development and Development

4
Approval of Minutes (For Possible Action)

No additional detail provided

4.1 Reno City Planning Commission - Regular - May 1, 2019 6:00 PM (For Possible Action) 6:07 PM

It was moved by Commissioner Weiske, seconded by Commissioner Griffith, to approve the meeting minutes. The motion carried unanimously with six (6) commissioners present. 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

RESULT: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kevin Weiske, Commissioner SECONDER: Britton Griffith, Vice-Chair AYES: Johnson, Griffith, Hawkins, Gower, Marshall, Weiske ABSENT: Paul Olivas

5 City Council Liaison Reports None
Tagged Passions:council

6
Public Hearings

Tagged Passions:hearing

6.1 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Recommendation to City Council): Case No. LDC19-00056 (NVCC Phase IV Condition Amendment) - A request has been made to amend the special use permit Conditions of Approval associated with LDC18-00089 (North Valleys Commerce Center Phase IV) to amend Condition No. 31 to modify the number of days per week and total number of weeks allowed for extended hours for slab on grade (SOG) and concrete wall pours. The 94.6 acre site is located on the south side of North Virginia Street, 2000 feet southeast of its intersection with Stead Boulevard. The site is located within the Mixed Use/North Virginia Street Transit Corridor (MU/NVTC) zoning district and has a Master Plan land use designation of Industrial (I). [Ward 4] 6:08 PM

Andy Durling, Wood Rodgers, gave an overview of the project. Heather Manzo, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Staff has had contact with multiple neighbors around the site and they have expressed concerns regarding potential impacts of construction adjacent to their property. The applicant responded to those concerns by reducing their request from four to three days per week. Commissioner Marshall had no disclosures. The remaining commissioners present disclosed that they visited the site, spoke with applicant's representative, and received emails.
Tagged Passions:construction, council, industrial, zoning, property, and corridor

At this time Chair Johnson opened public comment for this item.

Gary Feero spoke in opposition of the request.

Jay C. Gibbs discussed concerns regarding the sand in the batch plant, the fact that the equipment is already on site, and the lack of a sound study.

Heidi Gibbs submitted a comment card in opposition but did not wish to speak. 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01

Tagged Passions:equipment and plant

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

Jesse Harrell asked that Condition No. 32 be changed from a 6 foot berm with a 6 foot wall to a minimum of a 20 foot berm and a 6 foot wall between the residents and the construction zone. He also requested that adult size trees be used to help with light mitigation.

Lawrence Pavilionis spoke in opposition of the request. Wes Herbst discussed the need for safety plans in case of a fire in the area. Hearing and seeing no further public comment requests, Chair Johnson closed public comment.

Tagged Passions:construction, trees, and hearing

Commissioner Weiske stated that the request for an additional day during the week for concrete pours is reasonable as it will shorten the overall duration of the pours providing relief to the neighborhood.

Mr. Durling confirmed for Commissioner Hawkins that the length of the pour time will go down if the batch plant request is approved. He also stated that request will be discussed in more detail under the next agenda item. Mr. Durling confirmed for Commissioner Gower that the project will still being built if the batch plant request is not approved. Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Gower that 72 pours are required to build the project. He also explained the same amount of truck trips will be necessary whether it is 2 or 3 nights per week. Mr. Durling explained for Chair Johnson that the OSHA requirements have been updated and flaggers may not be an option to replace truck back up alarms. If there is a determination that flaggers are allowed, that would be our option. Commissioner Marshall expressed a general process concern that this is an appeal on a condition the Reno Planning Commission imposed. While he does not see that there are any changed circumstances that would necessitate a review of this conditions, he does not know which option is better. Commissioner Weiske stated the total number of pour days is the same and he believes the sooner it gets poured out the sooner it's over with for the neighbors. He is in favor of shortening the overall time for the pours to be completed. Commissioner Gower discussed the difficulty with making a judgment on this item 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01

Tagged Passions:planning, boards and commissions, transportation, plant, and neighborhood

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

separate from the next agenda item and suggested continuing this item to after the next item.

Chair Johnson discussed the findings they are required to make and stated that item f regarding noise is the only one impacted by this request. It is still the same amount of noise over the same number of nights. He also stated there are other issues that come up based on the next agenda item that he can separate from this item. The following motion was made after Agenda Item 6.2 was addressed. It was moved by Commissioner Weiske, seconded by Commissioner Gower, in the case of LDC19-00056 (NVCC Phase IV Condition Amendment), based upon compliance with the applicable findings, to approve the request to amend special use permit Condition No. 31. The motion carried unanimously with six (6) commissioners present.
Tagged Passions:compliance and noise

RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kevin Weiske, Commissioner SECONDER: Peter Gower, Commissioner AYES: Johnson, Griffith, Hawkins, Gower, Marshall, Weiske ABSENT: Paul Olivas

6.2 Staff Report (For Possible Action - Recommendation to City Council): Case No. LDC19-00058 (NVCC Phase IV Temporary Concrete Batch Plant) A request has been made for a special use permit to establish a temporary concrete batch plant in association with the construction of an approved project (LDC18-00089 North Valleys Commerce Center Phase IV). The 94.6 acre site is located on the south side of North Virginia Street, 2,000 feet southeast of its intersection with Stead Boulevard. The site is located within the Mixed Use/North Virginia Street Transit Corridor (MU/NVTC) zoning district and has a Master Plan land use designation of Industrial (I). [Ward 4] 6:47 PM

Andy Durling, Wood Rodgers, gave an overview of the request and mitigation plans. Brandon Towne discussed the operations of the patch plant and mitigation plans for dust, light, and noise control. Heather Manzo, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Commissioner Marshall had no disclosures. The remaining commissioners present disclosed that they visited the site, spoke with applicant's representative, and received emails. 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01
Tagged Passions:construction, council, industrial, zoning, plant, corridor, and noise

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

At this time Chair Johnson opened public comment for this item.

Gary Feero spoke in opposition of the request. Jay C Gibbs spoke in opposition of the request. Heidi Gibbs spoke in opposition of the request. Jesse Harrell spoke in opposition of the request. Lawrence Pavilionis spoke in opposition of the request. Hearing and seeing no further public comment requests, Chair Johnson closed public comment. Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Griffith how the location for the batch plant was decided. He also confirmed the equipment was delivered to the site earlier than anticipated and if the project does not get approved it will be removed. Mr. Towne explained for Commissioner Weiske that the equipment on site is not connected to electrical or water systems yet. Mr. Towne explained for Commissioner Hawkins that following a proper maintenance procedure for the dust collection system will prevent a blowout. Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Hawkins the grade separation from the original request approved in September. Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Hawkins that SNC is the general civil contractor and is responsible for dust control for the project. Air Quality Control was called out to the site and the applicant has been found to be in conformance with their air quality permit.
Tagged Passions:equipment, utility, Utility, procedure, water, plant, and hearing

Mr. Durling read excerpts from the sound consultant's report regarding the operating decibel level for Commissioner Weiske.

Mr. Durling confirmed for Commissioner Weiske that if Code Enforcement is called, they will take a sound meter reading from the property line. He also confirmed that the batch plant is 650 feet from the property line. The batch plant will exceed the setback requirement by 200 feet. 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01

Tagged Passions:services, plant, property, and codes enforcement

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Hawkins that the number of concrete pours stays the same with or without the batch plant. Having the batch plant on site will reduce the overall time of the pours. Mr. Durling confirmed for Commissioner Gower that the batch plant tower is 60 feet tall. That is 15 feet taller than the building will be. Brent Olson, Olson Construction, explained for Commissioner Gower that they have offered to temporarily build up the berm as high as they can to help with noise reduction but it would be difficult to come up with a temporary structure or vegetation to block the batch plant visually. Mr. Towne demonstrated for Commissioner Gower where the lights will be bolted to the tower. He confirmed they will not turn on the lights on the southeast side. Mr. Durling explained for Commissioner Gower that he does not have a total number of cement truck trips. He confirmed that the trucks will be coming in during normal construction hours. Mr. Towne explained for Commissioner Gower that he and the concrete subcontractor will determine when the batch plant will be shut down due to high winds. Ms. Manzo stated for Commissioner Gower that she is not sure there is anything in code about the long term effects of code acceptable noise levels. Commissioner Gower asked that continuous exposure to noise and vibration be added to the Title 18 update issues to be addressed. Mr. Towne confirmed for Chair Johnson that the generator is not running while they are not producing. Mr. Durling explained for Chair Johnson the rationale for requesting a batch plant for this project. This is a large project with five buildings that will require a lot of concrete. The applicant is trying to condense the overall construction to a 2 to 3 year period. Commissioner Gower outlined his concerns related to the height of the structure and stated there may be some opportunities to incorporate additional mitigation measures relative to the visual impact of the structure. Mr. Towne explained for Commissioner Hawkins that loading material into the batch plant will be done during the day. 4.3 M in ut es A cc ep ta nc e: M in ut es o f J , 2 01

Tagged Passions:planning, construction, boards and commissions, cell tower, Cell tower, transportation, plant, and noise

9
6:

00 P M (A pp ro va l o f M inu tes )

Minutes Reno City Planning Commission June 6, 2019

No additional detail provided

Tagged Passions:planning and boards and commissions

[ See More ]
Council Map

Welcome!

Monitor up to five cities and counties and get alerts when they plan to vote on topics you're passionate about.