[Music] all right thank you all for coming tonight we will call the meeting to order of the regular meeting of the Reno City Planning Commission on Wednesday September 6th we'll start off with item number one Pledge of Allegiance commissioner Becerra will you please lead us in the United States thank you all right we'll move to item number two roll call Michelle please Harris Armstrong president Manny becero president Arthur Munoz here Carrie romier here Alex felto here Sylvia Villanueva here JD draculic here we have a quorum excellent thank you all right we'll move to item number three public comment this item is for either public comment on any action item or for any general public comment Michelle do we have any requests to speak forms voicemails Zoomers okay before I do that let me read this into the record please members of the public may call into the meeting to provide public comment by using the zoom link provided on the agenda specifically https colon forward slash forward slash links dot reno.gov forward slash 47wt2yr it should be noted for those in the audience that comments are to be addressed to the Planning Commission as a whole comments heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person and may pertain to matters both on and off the Planning Commission agenda please note that the Planning Commission may not take action upon any matter not agendized for possible action on today's agenda when you are called on for public comment please state your name for the record and begin speaking the timer will begin when you say your name and you will be afforded three minutes if you are an attendee in the zoom meeting and would like to make public comment at this time please raise your hand lastly while in this room please be respectful warnings will be issued by the presiding officer if there is disruptive behavior and you will be asked to leave Chambers if the behavior continues that we did not receive any correspondence no request to speak forms and no voicemails thank you does anybody in the chambers wish to speak on General Public comment and I don't think we had anybody on Zoom either okay I'm sorry great thanks seeing none in the room wishing to speak we will close item number three public comment and move to item number four approval of minutes for possible action item 4.1 looking for approval of Reno City Planning Commission regular meeting minutes of July 20th commissioner beltov who to approve okay sorry commissioner so you need to sing I have a motion and a second all in favor any opposed great I mean it's approved moving on to item 4.2 the Reno City Planning Commission regular meeting minutes of August 2nd commissioner I have to abstain I was not present that's what I wanted to approve commissioner I'm showing a second we have a motion and a second all in favor all right you opposed great thank you we'll close item number four move to item number five public hearings 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 three public comment is heard at the beginning of this meeting we will open up with item five uh looks like item 5.1 has been postponed so we'll move to item 5.2 which is case number ldc24-00001 North Valley's fed I believe we'll get a presentation from the applicant I don't think so here we go good evening Mr Warren and chair um thank you Commissioners for being here today my name is Anne-Marie Lane I'm a senior planner with Dal and I am representing the applicant on the proposal that's before you today I also have with me senior civil engineer for Dallas katherham and he is available for questions at the end if you have more specifics in relation to engineering let's see let's see first timer you can use the arrows on the keyboard there you go perfect thank you so as the healthcare needs of our communities grow um Northern Nevada Health System continues to expand their services to our region uh nnhs is a recognized and honored by national state and local organizations we're delivering high quality Care pioneering Innovation and also for their commitment to our communities with me today I have representatives from nnhs in attendance our senior vice president miss Jamie Crane and er director Miss Christine Strand and consultant Miss faraza there we go Northern Nevada offers a comprehensive range of healthcare services in our region and has been expanding access to emergency care to our Region's suburban and Rural residents up here on the map identified with number one they opened the first Region's fed in the Northwest Reno after approval by this board in 2018 the second location is in Sparks open in January of this year and the Third location in South Reno is out of Monte Ranch it is scheduled to open in December of this year the request before you is for a fourth location in the North Valleys so why a freestanding emergency department and what is a freestanding emergency department an fbd is a facility that provides emergency care but is structurally separate from a Hospital campus freestanding emergency departments are a growing Trend in the healthcare industry as they reduce the overcrowding with traditional hospital-based emergency rooms and improve access to emergency care for our Rural and Suburban residents quick access to Emergency Care is especially important given the burden of existing emergency rooms and Urgent Care Centers due to our Region's growth the proposed facility will operate 24 hours a day seven days a week and will have several treatment and examination rooms services that they offer include CT scans x-rays ultrasounds and lab draws the facility will be staffed by doctors nurses and lab technicians some of the conditions that they treat are chest pain broken bones minor lacerations asthma allergic reactions flu and other ailments it is important to note that patients who need more serious care will be transported to the appropriate Hospital facility including Priority One and priority two remsicles the question for you is for conditional use permit to allow 24 operation use grading resulting in fields greater than 10 feet in height and non-residential development adjacent to residentially zoned property a hydrology study geotechnical evaluation sewer study traffic evaluation lighting and photometric Analysis and acoustical noise study were all prepared and evaluated as part of this request all of those documents and report findings can be found on the City of Reno public meeting website the purpose of today's presentation is to introduce you to the proposed project identify areas that may be of concern to the surrounding community and explain how the project proposes to mitigate those concerns the project site is located west of the intersection between Sky Vista Parkway and Vista Knoll Parkway is located Southwest of the Walmart off of Lemon Drive and west of the Smiths off of lemon drive it is bordered by Sky Vista Parkway to the north and us-395 to the South the site totals approximately 7.2 Acres with approximately 2.6 Acres of the proposed disturbance for the FED project so the remaining of the site will be Mass graded as part of this project in the future the remainder of the site is expected to be developed for commercial uses those commercial that commercial development would be regulated by the allowed uses in The General commercial zoning District the 24-hour use request is specific to the FED site only any future development that is wanting or requesting 24-hour use would require approval by this board the subject site is located in The General commercial zoning District it is surrounded by General commercial zoning to the north and east multi-family to the west and industrial commercial to the South surrounding uses of the site we've got a commercial development West some of the businesses that are located there are Smith's ATT Bank of America Jack in the Box Papa Murphy's um just north of Sky Vista Parkway we've got a super or a Walmart Supercenter Verizon Wingstop and other personal facilities and Retail facilities the proposed presidential use north of the subject site The Ridge Park Townhomes are currently under construction for Mass grading only and located within The General commercial zoning District the proposed residential use west of the subject site the Sky Vista Parkway Apartments have been Mass graded the proposed uses on the two vacant Parcels adjacent to the east of the subject property are for a car wash and fast food establishments located centrally within this parcel is an existing drainage way existing culverts will be extended to a loud buried conveyance through the parcel the existing drainage way on the west end of the parcel will remain largely undisturbed and that's the drainage between the residential use and the fut site Mass grading will include fills over 20 feet in two areas this is due to two large goalies existing on the site filling these goalies will bring the site near the to the existing grade of Skype Vista Parkway the site earthwork has been considered and balanced so material does not need to be brought on site the fud building is oriented towards the primary Street Frontage of Sky Vista Parkway the proposed building is just a about 10 500 square feet and the project is designed to accommodate 55 parking spaces including Six Ada species and an ambulance Bay to the West access to the site is provided by a break in the median on Sky Vista Parkway with a left-hand turn the driveway exit out of the site is restricted to a right turn lane only so a traffic exiting the site will be heading away from the residential uses to the West the average trip read estimates 12 daily amp hour trips and 16 daily PM peak hour trips Peak our vehicle trip generation estimates fall far below the thresholds that require a traffic impact analysis or traffic entry and access study and based on those estimates the additional peak hour traffic will not impact the roadway capacity [Music] so noise the Primary Residential impacts associated with this proposed fud building site would be the noise generated by ambulance service and the use of a backup emergency generator an environmental noise assessment was conducted to ensure compliance with the City of Reno noise standards operationally approximately one percent of patients that usually utilize Standalone emergency departments arrive by ambulance the remainder and the majority of the patients that use these facilities arrive by car again it is important to note that the FDD is not a trauma facility and it does not accept priority one and two calls as outlined in rims those protocol the operation of feges does not include the use of a helicopter transport and as such a helicopter landing pad is not proposed or planned for in the future in relation to the operation of ambulances the state of Nevada actually requires all drivers to successfully complete What's called the emergency vehicle operator training and these programs train operators on special circumstances special circumstance driving procedures including the use of lights and sirens the use of lice and lights and Sirens are only used in circumstances in which they would have a positive impact on the patient's outcome and drivers follow emergency response qualities that reduce the use of lights and sirens here locally with remsa the operational protocol is to shut down lights and Sirens upon entering neighborhoods as for residential buffering the proposed residential use west of the subject site the Sky Vista apartment buildings and the FED um building both have been designed to include landscape and setback first the distance between the proposed fed building and the nearest proposed adjacent apartment building is 260 feet the distance between the fpd building and the apartment complex storage facility is 184 feet if you look at the design of that overlay on um the projector both of these facilities are buffered by a driveway access and then a landscaping buffer and then in between them is that drainage way the proposed project does Orient parking away from the residential use the only parking that faces the residential to the to the West are located on the opposite side of the FED building so that the lights will be blocked from the residential use and there are no proposed signs that would face the residential use to the West this is a three rendering of what the proposed building will look like you can notice the three signage and emergency locator signs that we'll all be facing Sky Vista Parkway um the entrance canopy is designed to engage the entry festival and the building is designed to have variation in its design so that residents looking towards the building from the West aren't looking at a blank wall um the app client has reviewed the proposed conditions of approval from staff and his agreement with staff's recommendations with the exception of condition number six the applicant requested staff to reconsider condition number six that prohibited the proposed ambulance sign on the South Bay building elevation the applicant reevaluated the purpose and intent of that sign and concluded that the proposed sign should read emergency instead of ambulance so this is what um this south facing sign would look like and it would face U.S 395. this emergency provider locator sign is critical to the facility and Emergency Operations of the North Valleys fed in the event of a broad emergency disaster or even single incident rapid identification of emergency service providers this is is essential the elevation difference between the freeway and the project site is approximately 14 to 20 feet and so that will allow the proposed south facing sign to be seen from people on the highway but the highway sits up high enough that it will block any uses south of the highway um also have noticed that the applicant has stated that the customer feedback from the North McCarran fud site identifies the need for improved location signs with uh the visual impact of the sign on residential uses south of the freeway mitigated and the intent and purpose of the south facing emergency locator sign thoroughly vetted staff did agree to the amendment of condition number six to read as follows I'll just read through that briefly condition number six as amended a future signed permit plan shall be consistent with the signage presented in Project materials included in Exhibit C with the exception that the proposed ambulance sign on the south elevation be eliminated or replaced by the emergency sign shown on the updated rendering the healthcare needs of our communities continue to grow and the north Valley's fpd project proposes greater access to emergency cares emergency care which will provide a benefit to not only the employees and patients of the fud but also as well as the neighboring residents providing localized access to Emergency Care will improve both the safety and quality life for the neighborhood residents as such the applicant respectfully requests the setting of Reno Planning Commission Grant approval of this request um it is my sincere hope that I was able to introduce the project and address any concerns and show how the project has been designed to mitigate those concerns I would like to take a moment to thank City of Reno planning and Engineering staff particularly Mr Jeff Foster and Mr Frank Peralta for having open and direct communication throughout the process Mr Foster and Mr Peralta provided excellent customer service and they also utilize their professional expertise to help the design bring team bring forth the best possible project I would also like to like thank the Planning Commission for your time and attention to this request Mr Callahan and I are available to answer any questions that you might have thank you for your time thank you we will now get a presentation from the city so no pointer now just the keyboard the little okay right we'll make do I'll be left-handed tonight okay so Jeff Foster associate planner for the record bringing to you tonight ldc2400 how many others did I say zero zero zero zero one North Valley's fed um and let's get going so this undeveloped site and I will acknowledge that Ms Lane did a fantastic job going through a wealth of information much of what I have in my slides is duplicate is duplicative so bear with me I'll try and run through it as quickly as possible so the end of Elf site is approximately 7.2929 Acres it is a couple blocks west of lemon drive on Sky Vista Parkway and the requested conditional use permit that we have as she outlined is for 24-Hour operations feels greater than 10 feet in height and non-residential development adjacent to residentially zoned property I did want to call your attention to the fact that your agenda says that it also involves disturbance of a major drainage way as that is how the original case was noticed however it was determined throughout the process that the that it is not a major drainage way as was also determined for the Ridge Park tentative map to the north across Sky Vista Parkway same drainage way was not a major drainage way then isn't a major drainage way now so that one has been removed and is not in the staff report but it was carried forward on your agenda so just wanted to clarify that key issues are compatibility with surrounding land uses and operational impacts as we zoom in here a little bit closer I did want to point out that we do have single-family residences that are in the county to the South you've got General commercial to the east on the multi-family project to the west and the single-family townhome project to the north across Sky Vista Parkway so the zoning is General commercial the master plan is Suburban mixed use and these are a few policies and goals that that the project lines up with the site design again it is a freestanding emergency department or fed it's approximately 10 500 feet square feet a single story building the ambulance Bay on the West Side the higher activity parking area on the east side and I did want to point out specifically that there is a screening wall proposed on the west side in between the use and the multi-family to the west and that screening Wall comes into play later in in some other areas so the site design it does meet minimum Landscaping the parking area will be screened from Sky Vista Parkway the remainder of the site will be masqueraded for the future commercial development and there are the two areas where the fill would be greater than 10 feet in height primarily in the central portion of the site within the drainage area and it's necessary for a more consistent grade across the site as far as compatibility with surrounding land uses goes the future single-family residences to the north are separated by Sky Vista Parkway which is in the process of being widened from two to four lanes the commercial adjacent uh to the the commercial portion is adjacent to a proposed commercial to the east the existing single-family residences to the South are separated by Highway 395 and the future multi-family project to the West has the landscape and setback buffers and again that screening wall proposed under the current application staff did include allowable hours and days and hours of construction and condition number five due to the residential adjacency as far as operational impacts go the project will not create greater than 0.5 foot candle of spillover light at the adjacent residential property line that comes straight from code as far as residential adjacency as Ms Lane pointed out there's approximately 260 feet between the proposed fed building and the nearest multi-family building substantial distance Sirens are authorized to exceed noise thresholds and are not expected to result in adverse noise impacts that's primarily because the sirens are already there they're already traveling on Sky Vista they're not expected to really be too many more the distance etc etc it's all in the noise study but again not expected to have adverse noise impacts even if they weren't expected to have adverse noise impacts they're required they're allowed to do so so there's essentially nothing we can do about that um and the sound uh the noise study did recommend a sound attenuation measure um for the Emergency generator on the south side of the project and that's outlined in the blue area on the screen the little blue wall that will keep the noise enclosed in that area as well as a type 2 sound attenuation enclosure around the generator itself and that's in condition number eight here are the recommended findings staff can make all the recommended findings and here's the recommended motion and I'm available for questions thank you very much we will start off with disclosures from the Commissioners commissioner Villanueva can you start us off please I'm familiar with the site commissioneros this is in my ward I also had a short presentation from the applicant's representative and don't think I saw any emails about this commissioner Armstrong I spoke with the applicants Representatives saw the same presentation and I'm familiar with the site foreign familiar with the site and spoke with the applicant as well commissioner Aurora Meyer I am familiar with the site and I spoke together uh commissioner volto same disclosures commissioner Dracula same disclosures thank you all right we will now open up public comment Michelle do we have any requests to speak forms I did not receive correspondence voicemails or request to speak forms for this item and I don't believe I have anybody on Zoom requesting to speak on this item either anybody in the chambers wish to speak on this item seeing none will close public comment and move to the Commissioners for questions of the applicant or staff commission immune knows please thank you uh this will be for Steph thank you uh the the only thing I have or that I'm concerned with and I'm hoping you can call that is what are the we keep hearing that it's greater than 10 feet for the fills what are the actual numbers for the fields because I know it's a very large drainage Stitch there let's see if that number and and the engineer is here Silas Callahan so he can probably speak to that did that make it onto one of my slides I think it was on one of your slides but do you want to exhibit is it okay if the applicants Callahan for the record uh the two fills are 25 and 27 feet okay go please go ahead let's do anything else no that's it okay uh is there any concerns whatsoever with how that's going to impact the roadway uh how that drains into because I know obviously this area is one that drains directly into um into Swan Lake there um is there any concerns with uh the drainage because this comes from p-vine under the freeway for there's I think it's a very large uh Culvert or I'm not sure what it's called there right that I'm assuming that culverter that drainage system is going to be continued underneath at level there so there's no Pump Station or anything that's going to be so it's going to be a a gravity fed drainage across through the roadway to the North of Walmart and then down towards Swan Lake is that correct yes yeah um Silas you may want to speak more but the staff felt that overall it was actually an improvement to the existing condition if you look at the in a I don't remember if you were on the site or not but the existing condition is you've got a culvert coming out from underneath 395 and just pouring into you know a goalie erosion things like that so by Channel or not channeling it but putting it in a culvert and improperly containing everything the flows and whatnot I think sap believes it's actually an improvement to the existing conditions okay and City agrees with that yeah okay great thank you commissioner Villanueva thank you thank you and I just want some clarity um so the so where does that water go now and how I mean does it get pretty full that drainage ditch go to Swan Lake eventually it ends up in Swan Lake correct yeah yes yeah okay so um can you can work about like how or maybe probably not you but probably your the applicants engineer yeah or and our our engineering is here as well so yeah applications fine if you yeah it says Callahan for the record I did a pretty thorough analysis looking through that entire system uh there's a lot of water that is backed up before the freeway side uh over on the other side of the freeway on that 48-inch Culvert water detains in there and then goes through the site and what we're doing is essentially the same thing it's just putting a convenience street from one side of a culvert to another so it has virtually no change as far as what the Hydraulics are doing right now at the system and with the fill what I mean what was what are we filling into the natural form of the mountain that's being filled or what type of grating is that correct it's where they're at one point in time was a natural Gully that has since been filled by both the freeway and Sky Vista so you're left with this basically gigantic hole in the ground is it Disturbed it is not currently Disturbed okay all right thank you thank you if I may commissioner Dracula Jeff I have a question for you it's just more point of clarification or just walk me through a little bit more about the remaining part of the parcel that isn't being developed um we're General commercial and then obviously the master plan is SMU so just help me out what what can they do with that after they build this project can they parcel it off can they sell it can you know with the SMU zoning what can come up or what will happen so they certainly can parcel it off um that's potentially contemplated but certainly under General even if they don't uh parcel it off the uses that are allowed in General commercial vary but I would imagine in that Corridor you probably have a continuation of other neighborhood serving restaurants and shops and things like that so the general retail restaurants those kinds of things under GC but yes they could parcel it off okay and then we have that master plan use of SMU and they could go under those zoning correct okay correct yep yeah and I guess oh yeah one more while I have you up here for that uh I know there's some housing going up uh what's the likelihood that that would be put into place I'm just curious if they'll know before you know homeowners will know before purchasing what they're moving in next too so that they at least have the option do you know what the anticipated date for that construction I mean it probably came through this body so the anticipated date of construction of the of the housing the housing but the housing yeah I think there's housing currently in the process of being developed so yeah tentative or sorry uh Town Homes across the street single family Town Homes across the street that's uh currently in the process of being graded um I don't know the the ETA on delivery of of those homes themselves the multi-family to the West is also in the process of being graded so there's a good possibility that that those units will be at least partly under construction before this even breaks ground in any way keep in mind that this process will that this project will still have to go through a building permit process which will likely last several months so it's likely that whoever decides to buy those homes will probably have some knowledge that they're going to be moving in there's a distinct possibility absolutely all right thank you commissioner be Sarah please sure it's a question for Mr Foster um is the city or the staff in alignment with the applicant with the proposed amendment for condition number six thank you for asking that question I do appreciate that because I had a hidden slide at the back here that I was waiting depending on how things unfolded tonight um so yes this is the proposed revised language striking out the word prohibited at the end of condition number six and adding the rest of the phrase eliminated or replaced by the emergency sign shown on the updated rendering yes staff is in support of that revise revision if you're curious why it was because the word ambulance didn't seem to make any sense on the back side of a building facing a freeway so that's why we had recommended striking that that's uh sign in the first place however since emergency could be have uh have a benefit of of being seen from the freeway staff was in support of that great thank you would we like to move into discussion commissioner Munoz please go ahead sure um as everybody on the board knows and I'm sure soon the the uh the commission knows and the new Commissioners will learn um I am very Pro um commercial building in Ward four uh our infrastructure and our services up there have been extremely lacking for years and for me this is a a good project that takes a large chunk of land that could potentially 7.29 Acres have potentially been used for uh apartments or anything else that fits into that zoning and this takes away that opportunity for this to be turned into turned into homes which is is what I've been pushing for the last three years so I am I'm very much in support of this uh it's a service up there that we need it's a service up there that um anything as emergency service has been lacking um and and I've called for the last several years for uh build build build you know anything that helps the infrastructure anything that helps the the people that live up there not have to have to travel uh into the main area of Reno and that we can we can do business up there and Ward four is something that I'll all in favor favor of and looking forward to so that's how I feel about it commissioner Dracula commissioner Munoz I read this and thought immediately about you and pretty much everything you said and it looks like it's a project that's going to serve this community at a higher level and different from housing so everything said I have the same thoughts and you know being with you up here for the past couple years so commissioner Roto yeah commissioner volto I absolutely agree with everything that's been said I look at this very similarly to some of the other to the ER off McCarran very similar building very similar proximity to other houses uh it seems like it fits and it serves a good purpose in that area I'm glad that it'll serve a good purpose in uh commissioner munoz's Ward and with that I'm happy to make a motion please do in the matter of case number LDC c4-00001 North Valley's fed baseball compliance the applicable findings I moved to approve the conditional use permits subject to the conditions listed in the staff report including the amendment agreed upon between the parties and I can make all the findings we have a motion commissioner reserve a second all right we have a motion in a second any further discussion all right all in favor aye on the opposed seeing none motion passes good luck with your project thank you [Music] all right we'll close item 5.2 move to item 5.3 case number ldc23-00021 Valley View Estates and I believe we will get a presentation from the applicant thank you Mr chair can you guys hear me okay yes yep we're good John chromatic I'm with kls planning representing the applicant's co-applicants this evening one person owner Chris tormy the other is Chico McCauley on behalf of the Macaulay Family Trust they're I think most of you are familiar with this location the Canyons PUD has been through here for the last several years an amendment to it so we have a good orientation to it basically just to the east of Damonte Ranch High School and adjacent to the Palisades project on the east side of the valley here is the current master plan notice the site has noted as UT staff will drill into this in more detail there's the proposed master plan what I think jumps out in this map is that you can see a lot more green it makes sense that intuitively we're into the more constrained land on the east side of the town on the above the valley floor and you see mostly green because of the topography up there and other topographic features so there is UT there's the 17 Acres as proposed of single family in the master plan corresponding zoning HDR and the county staff has noted the translation in the staff report to llr 2.5 but the same finger identical to the master plan in in the amount of acreage that's suitable for development and then again the proposed zoning to planned unit development foreign this is probably the most uh significant map that I would share with you this evening in my view because what it tells me we we spent some time pulling all the project Footprints together on the kind of end of the end of this part of town and you look at the canyons and then the Canyons Edge canyons in the red Canyon's Edge became an annexation to Canyon's PUD open space to the east again where there's that more severe slope and then the Valley View footprint that we show in blue again 70 what is it eight percent open space and then the blue is the develop the area suitable for development and then dp2 which again came to this Commission in city council about a year ago then you also see here the backbone circulation for this project dp2 canyons and canyons Edge you can kind of see how it all fits together and it speaks to the remaining land in this part of town I think also important to kind of comprehensive planning here is the Tumwater tank you see on the north and east of Canyon's Edge that tank has been sized and engineered to accommodate all of this development so everybody gets a fair share portion of the tank is needed to serve these projects here um the tier map this is important and it kind of shows how everything fits together it started with regional planning this is regional planning tier map you see in blue this site is tier two which allows for the development as proposed tier three is adjacent to the East and then further up the way to the east again where there's more strict topography and then the last map that I have again on Regional I just wanted to show all the big picture from all I'm on City master plan City Zoning and the regional Planning Development constraints map you can see this kind of greenish Brown that spattered through this site and then a little more heavy as you go up the hill to the east and to the South so the blue is our Development Area consistent with the regional plan and the development constraints in the tier in the master plan and the city plan that's all I have I'll leave the rest for you guys for questions thank you very much for your time thank you John uh if I may too it's been kudos to staff night but um where's Brooke at Brooke and I have worked a lot together and I wanted to acknowledge he's a he's a great talent to the city and he has a really unique skill set in dealing with this kind of terrain and my observation and dealing with city planners for 25 years so I really respect his ability and we always seem to work through the issues so thank you thanks Sean all right well now I'll get a presentation from Brooke good evening Planning Commission uh my name is Brooke Oswald for the new folks uh um I'm associate planner with development services and I'll be running through the project tonight the case tonight is LDC 2300021 Valley View Estates so looking at the project site we are in Ward 2 and as was mentioned this is a tier two Regional tier two Regional is basically land that has been determined from our regional to be suitable for Suburban development or other little nodes of more density so what we're seeing tonight would be uh comparable to that Suburban development the project sites approximately 80 acres kind of run through it so you know this is Damani Ranch High School the D on the hill and so we're just east of that D on the hill uh what I've just brought in there is the Canyons PUD which is important to the discussion tonight because the Pud handbook that we'll be looking at is based on that previous approved handbook we are looking at master plan Amendment zoning map amendment in addition there's an Associated annexation the property is currently our properties are not currently in the City of Reno those will need to be annexed that is a motion that goes by the city council but just to make you aware of that the properties are within our sphere of influence so we currently have jurisdictional uh authorization over them they are contingent and then obviously as I went over that tier two they are suitable for development come in just a little bit closer as you can see at that point that's the end of tellurium Mine Road those roads have been stubbed out which you would indicate that future development is sort of anticipated in that area additionally just above that we're seeing the other stubbed out road that would go up to the Canyons this property here is um dp2 it was called it is it was a tentative map that has been approved for 18 town homes so we're we're seeing a number of development and approvals coming in in this area so to quickly go over our master plan on the left there uh that is UT or unincorporated transitional so that is a master plan that we lay on land that is not quite ready for development but would be ready for development is in the future so what we're seeing is we have Development coming up to here we're seeing stubbed in roads we're seeing those Utilities in place and so to look at the master plan as we propose moving forward we're coming forward with that 17 Acres of single family neighborhood master plan and then the pgos is our Park screen ways in open space so this master plan really sets that high level of what we'd anticipate development under that as you can see those are our spots Alex and I think the applicants representative John Capote did a great job of representing why that is with those constrained areas that we're seeing through Regional to going over to the other side um we have a large lot residential 2.5 so that you would require two and a half acres um to build a home on and then the ut40 is an unincorporated transition one unit per 40 acres these are translations taken from the County zoning we currently don't have a zoning on these properties and what we'd be moving that is to the Pud or planned unit development that would be Valley View Estates quickly run through a planned unit development as you the the project on the right as you can see this is coming from the handbook this is their land development plan the orange representing the developed areas as you notice this matches what we see as our master plan directly so those are matching up you can see a trail Network moving through that and then the black being that roadway connection moving up connecting up into the Canyons project and creating a Loop Road um when you're looking at planning unit development we really want to implement that master plan that zoning needs to be um in line and conforming with that master plan we want to encourage flexibility of that development of land this is a constrained land but there are unique opportunities for development on here we want to look at appropriate and compatible uses as I noted before this PUD handbook was based on the Canyon's handbook so there's a consistency across how they are going to approach Trail networks architecture deal with the natural resources uh and then the other big thing that we have up there is is feral horses or the Virginia range I'll go in a little bit more in a minute we want to improve the design we're looking to facilitate provision of services and utilities as I I stated this is based on the Canyons we have the water tank which will provide that water we have those stubbed out roads and that extension of that that circulation access points and other utilities and then finally we're looking at preserving the natural and Scenic features of of the open areas this is a very unique area where we're starting to see those Rock Cliffs directly to the east of this some larger major drainage ways and other natural features here that they've really outlined to preserve through that that uh Parks Greenway is an open space so with the Valley View Estates it's promoting that responsible Hillside development we are we have uh we're becoming restricted on our land and we're seeing more and more of of this Hillside development Foothill development uh this handbook sets sort of a framework to do that properly um it's providing those recreational opportunities so that does go into that Park Greenways and open space but what we'd anticipate we'll see a tentative map would come forward before this Planning Commission to develop those 39 homes that they're proposing on on this 80 acres that tentative map we would apply conditions that would deed restrict that Park screen ways in open space and then also provide public access to that so right now where it's private property uh even though people are using that they do have the the right within the property rights to restrict that access this would now provide that Recreation to the public of having Public Access up through those Trail systems in open space uh we're seeing enhanced architectural requirements those come in some of the design conference we're looking at and we're also looking at Hillside adaptable architecture what we anticipate so those are the step out basements or other things that starts to reduce overall grading impacts on that for Barrel horses one of my favorite topics this has in enhanced feral horses and mitigation member measures so what we're looking at is is coming in with a fence line and looking at this PUD and and setting this up as a PUD we're able to outline where the fences are going to be and then how those will connect to the other fences because you can build a fence but it it means nothing if it doesn't connect to the end of the fence anyway as somewhere else additionally we have some different Gates allowing pedestrians through safely by restricting horses some other gates for the horse Advocates if we do get horses in our neighborhood they are able to move those horses back up through there and get them on the Virginia range safely and then any point that we have to preserve access to those other properties we'd have a Associated cattle guards and and safety gates there we are on the wild interface which has enhanced fire standards that we're going to see those are outlined in that handbook further outlining those and and having some additional uh considerations as we look at that and then there are considerations for wildlife as we look at uh there's requirements through these handbooks to work with endow and other agencies to make sure that any existing Wildlife prevention or those are mitigated through uh the construction process and this is where this is important this is looking at that Canyons PUD as you can see these two PDS really work together um and we've maintained consistency and and design and other standards between those we'd anticipate they would be developing in close periods of time to each other as they move forward uh staff could make all that uh master plan findings and zoning map findings and I'll leave you with a recommendation available for questions thank you Brooke appreciate it we'll go to the Commissioners for disclosures commissioner velto Please Mr belto familiar with the uh familiar with the site received and reviewed emails uh also attempt to speak with the applicant representative I was reached out to and my apologies for not getting back to you commissioner familiar with the parcels and spoke to applicant and the City commissioner familiar with the site and spoke with the applicants representative Mr Armstrong I am familiar with the site I was reaching out to you by the applicant but I did not have a meeting with the applicant commissioner is familiar with the site and had a quick text messages change with the app because it's representative commissioner Villanueva I visited the site commissioner Dracula Chan familiar with the site and the applicant reached out via text and read and received emails and thank you guys okay we will now open it up to public comment Michelle any requests to speak forms tonight I did not receive any requests to speak forms voicemails or correspondence all right thank you anybody in the chambers wish to speak on this item oh ma'am please if you can uh you can come up go to the mic announce your name yo three minutes but please go to Michelle and oh you have a request to speak for me okay great yeah that's fine hi my name is Catherine toles I live down in the Domani Ranch area I'm representing myself my husband we live there um and it is beautiful area as you all know and I appreciate your time to let me speak I know development is going to happen and it always continues to happen and I'm not looking here to stop it one of my concerns is the feral horses um when you look at the map is where they're going to start building it's immediately next to the tank and that area is a diversionary feeding area for the horses during the winter time there are in excess of 80 horses over there I live over that area I see them they survive there let's diversionary feeding really helps them and I'm concerned what this will do to them when you've got housing immediately on top of their area now I don't know if they're what other if there's other options so I would request consideration for some type of review more careful review because with that dp2 happening this right there there's just this narrow little area for them to migrate through and they do spend a good six months in that area I know in the winter in the summertime you don't see them much because they go farther south but in the winter time we see them all the time so that was a concern of mine another was the the um what it's going to do to the traffic there's going to be a lot more homes there and they're going to be allowing edus as well which is just going to increase you know it's you know I understand you know there's going to be more housing there's more people but there's only gonna be one maybe two routes in there and there's already only one route to what the housing is already there so is there any other way to help with traffic diversion as well because it becomes a challenge with the school there and during when the school's in session you have the flashing lights and so things slow down and construction would be kind of difficult um and I know I had something else to say but I can't remember it so I'm a little nervous so I think I will stop there while I'm ahead thank you for your time thank you as well we appreciate it yeah if you can just give that forward to Michelle thank you thank you anybody else in the chambers wish to speak on this item thinking none we will close public comment and open it up for questions of the Commissioners for staff or the applicant commissioner Armstrong please thank you chair I have a couple for staff if you'll indulge me thank you Brooke um so initially I was kind of confused how we got from the ut40 LL 2.5 into the sf3 but I think you and the applicant did a good job of explaining it I just want to make sure I understand it it's basically tied to the other PUD and you're using that as kind of a benchmark for how you get to sf3 and why that's appropriate for kind of a myriad of factors that you walk through is that right sure it's outlined in the the handbook also we're looking at some of those site and development constraints applying an sf3 over the entire property and then bringing it back now you could take a traditional zoning and do it that way and use a clustering the applicant has decided to use the handbook for consistency with the neighboring coming up with with that same uh basically allowable units of 39 on that 80 acres which is coming out to about one dwelling unit per two acres perfect and so when you get further down in the staff report on that it mentions that I think by right a 10 modification today to density is allowed which is great up to 42. is the applicant asking for 42 or are they asking for 39 with the understanding they they are currently asking for 39. obviously we would see um what is allowable coming through with that tentative map which really establish establishes those lots so at that time we would address if that was appropriate not and I think you kind of look at that from a point of view of of your um lot size right and that ability if they came in with they are allowed attach product which has a small could have a smaller impact providing more homes so that would be analyzed through through the tentative map okay and then um to the point that we heard in public comment regarding the traffic at some point further when it becomes more advanced would there be a trigger for a traffic study or other traffic mitigants that we would have to entertain um now this is a minimal amount of units we do have an approved tentative map on the Canyons that was for 79 units and then we have uh or 71 we have eight units up above when we did the amendment so we have 79 there was a a traffic analysis was done upon that the impacts not being found substantial to have those impacts now with the tentative map we would also continue to analyze those traffic when we came in and we knew an actual unit count in that okay thank you and then last one I appreciate it this is related kind of further down in the staff report to the financial implications you just give me kind of a better understanding of the actual general fund and treat fund impacts to the city it seems like the fees generated would just exist otherwise they'd be raised by an HOA if some other mechanism for building it but there's not like a debit agreement in place with the city is that right no what we do is because of that annexation and that uh master plan it triggers the requirement through our Reno municipal code for that impact analysis or that financial analysis so what we look at is that is of a course of I believe it's 20 years of is it a deficit to the city or is it a game so we see a property tax increase but we have Road to take care of right and so it do it and what we saw on this is a minimal gain over that 20 years so it's kind of a wash it it doesn't impact the city financially now additionally what we would see because of the open space and that open space being within that PUD and how that's held uh what that would be the requirement of the the HOA to maintain that open space and some of those other things and that wasn't considered within that but as an additional benefit that the city sees excellent thank you really appreciate it [Music] commissioner yeah I have questions for staff um so could this project 39 to 42 units be achieved by standard zoning uh it could be achieved by standard zoning yes I think one of some of the challenges we have is that um the handbook gives us a more certainty of how that would be developed those standards that would be in place uh versus our code we are seeing some enhanced standards and some other things also that compatibility another big one we are seeing with this that I I think should be mentioned with our current Title 18 update we have some new PUD requirements and standards and some of that one of that is within five years if they haven't moved forward with a development they need to go to Planning Commission or sorry to city council and either say give a phasing of how they're going to start to do it or or or you know work through that now Council gets that opportunity to review that wouldn't happen with standard zoning so what is interesting in this is that that we are anticipating we've set the standards and now they're kind of on a timeline to get that and have to work with Council to make sure that we get uh Development coming in on that very good was um I have a question for Mr company um I was very curious to see uh or understand if there was opportunities to come in as an annexation with the Canyons PUD for a more comprehensive it's kind of hard to implement and govern many puds in my opinion so could you were you able to have discussions on that oh uh meaning one PUD and we annexed to that yeah you know I came into the game late here I think you know that um I understand without knowing a lot of detail to be open as I Know It uh that they tried to get together it didn't work out and so these two gentlemen with their 40 acre Parcels each said let's go form our own PUD obviously reflects very much as staff pointed out the nuts and bolts of the Pud to the north you know the Canyon's ped so there's a lot of overlap and a lot of Marion up certainly on the infrastructure on the horses on the trails and Open Space Management and then everything else that goes with the Pud Could you um explain what you see being achieved by the Pud as opposed to just going with sort of traditional single family and open space zoning I think because of the environmental constraints the staff noted um they're a little bit more robust in the Pud you know 70 and 80 open space and like what are you going to do with that the Willy standards that are pretty robust in the Pud the phasing of infrastructure the management of the trails in the open space those are kind of things that were um a little bit heavier addressed in the PD's Hillside development um architecture that's another thing that Brook pointed out and so um you know going back in time and looking how it started with the Canyons then Canyon's Edge got to a point where he said you know what let's roll this into a PUD and customize these standards and deal with them comprehensively and we're a reflection of that great and I just have one more question for Steph thank you the handbook mentions housing affordability which was interesting to read is there a split or how is that calculated between what gets credit for the Adu and what gets credit for that affordable housing fund how does that be how is that determined for a council for the record um so where we don't know what's going to be built yet is the adus what we have we do not allow adus within the city as a whole we do see them in certain puds and and certain areas that we have allowed so by allowing the adus in this it allows an alternative form of housing to be established will that be established or how that will be to established that's yet to be determined and it is really becomes down to the property owner and is not something the city can necessarily regulate where we do have more um abilities through that agreement which is an affordable housing donation agreement now we have seen this on a number of projects uh starting on the Daybreak which is now the Telus Valley Project and through some of our other puds uh this has sort of been established that through each housing unit there will be a donation uh that um goes to either a charitable trust for the the city or to the city itself to help with affordable housing issues throughout the city so it's as far as it's a challenge with the affordable housing there um the location of that is really key we're not seeing public transit in that area some of those amenities and services some of the other things in there so affordable housing what we have done in some of those outers or more Suburban areas is really look to this this fund to help help to support our affordable housing needs in our area commissioner novelto please so adus could is it contemplated there'll be an HOA I can answer that there will be an HOA associated with this uh that would be the overall maintenance of landscape but also that open space so an HOA would be required is there any ability to ensure that the adus could be used like aren't just separate dwelling units that are just used by the homeowners for someone to stay at their house like it seems like if we're talking putting under a section under affordable housing we'd want to make it so the adus could be rented out yeah I think from a city's point of view we we wouldn't manage or Market that um we would hope that that would create a diversity of Housing and those could be rented and what we can what we have done through this zoning is create the opportunity for that to happen uh for to further regulate that that not somewhere where the city is I think that would be up to you know the applicant and how they they would determine that or the it really this would come down to an individual property owner and their rights within their property John do you have any thoughts on that we uh we're not that far down the road on design right uh we get into product development now the 39 or 42 depending on we got the footprint and it gets into lot size and what target market you're trying to hit on pricing and then adus we just make the compo you know we have to meet Adu compliance uh code section don't know that there's going to be adus at this stage understood I guess I'm just I like the idea of Adu yeah I do too but I would like the idea of them actually being used as potentially dwelling units and not just separate buildings that are used I mean like a casita yeah I see yeah so for rent right yeah yeah makes perfect sense it's a great you know um you know going back a couple years ago we had that opportunity and somehow it got blown up at city council but uh uh the way I look at it is you've paid for the infrastructure as a city the impacts are nominal and you got another form of housing there and it's more attainable so I I I'm a big fan of adus I don't know and I think the two gentlemen that I'm working for it do not know at this stage if it's a candidate for adus do you know if there's a way to ensure that the adus could be used as rentals has it written we're just looking for the provision to have them in the Pud I cannot ensure that okay Angela's assistant director of development services so are you asking is there a way for the city to enforce that you don't put your kid living in there as a college student that you put somebody no condition and allowance that a property owner if they're permitted to have an Adu within the handbook that they would also be able to operate that Adu as a rental oh I gotcha and like supersede any type of ccnrs for an HOA that would prevent that from happening so um from a zoning perspective we we do have certain areas of town not very many where we do allow adus and that is written into either a PUD or a specific area and they have the right through this PUD process to allow audus um so if the HOA is formed and conflicts with the Pud then that is something that is in Conflict so I think if they choose to write that adus or allowed and allowed use within the Pud then the HOA and the ccnrs would have to match that so would yeah sorry to harp on this I guess I'm trying to I'm trying to see if it's possible to ensure that adus are used as I view 80 s and I think that people have them not just I think I think is it being an allowed use the opportunity is there and that opportunity would be for them to rent those as an Adu that would come down to the individual property owner but it isn't allowed use and so as an Adu that gives them the right to rent that as a separate dwelling unit if that does that help kind of answer it does but I guess I'd be concerned that values are still permitted so there's no conflict with the Pud I think what we would be looking through is those ccnr's as we saw that come in in the formation of that in the city would be reviewing those and making sure they're not in conflict with the handbook as prescribed perfect thank you looks like you got your answer yeah thanks for uh work with me on that appreciate it uh commissioner Villanueva please thank you um so I know we're still in the very very very very early stages there's no design in place so I'm going to ask them just early stage questions um the are there any prominent and this is for whoever wants to answer at the applicant or city um are there any prominent Ridge lines here that we need to be and how what's a prominent Ridge line defined as yeah so we have a prominent Ridgeline map none we're identified on these two properties specifically but there are very notable rock formations and rock outcroppings just uh to the east of this we really start to see more of a cliff as we go up that that major Cannon way in there on this particular site we're not identifying any uh major Ridge lines on that okay and then what would you consider as the I know we're but this is a PUD so I guess that doesn't really it's still in our master plan so we have what we have our master plan and that Master uh proposed master plan would be single family neighborhood and part screen and open space but we also have a structure planned and so when we talk about a Foothill neighborhood that comes into our structure plan and what we're looking at is is really it's a little bit more fine-tooth of saying the structure of this area so you'll see sort of those downtown area ways you'll see our corridors but this would be considered a Foothill neighborhood so what what would you consider here as meeting like the network connections how do you how would you describe that I think I think one of the big things we're seeing is that continuation of some of the existing and re and establishing new Trail networks through it is that what as far as a neighborhood and the connectivity uh we're looking at uh things that reduce overall grading impacts in that area so some of that Hillside adaptable architecture uh those smaller Footprints uh some of those other things that we're allowing through here that are in support of that Foothill neighborhood structure plan do you happen to have any um maybe you or the applicant GIS mapping I I like to see the drainage and because I did visit the site and there it is I I can identify where where the major major drainage is on that I don't have a GIS necessarily but if we can we can see the two project sites here if you can see uh between the red you have the green area that comes up through there um that is a major drainage way we are seeing the two the purple and the orange Village uh right where the canyons and the Valley View come together there that drainage way runs up through there but we have major drainage waste standards and so when we came in that time of the tentative map we would enter if they are impacting that in any way uh per our standards that would require what we have uh that uh major site plan review for a disturbance of a major drainage way we'd also probably anticipate the cuts and fills that we see and then the 10 and then the tentative map but we could see potentially conditional use permit coming through some of the clustering and some of the other things they're proposing can you use your mouse to demonstrate that so people can see sure oh let's see if I can get so this is the green area it comes up through here it's kind of established with major drainage we are seeing the two Villages here that drainage does go up through there but as I I stated even though we're not seeing this that is an open space that area is um as you can see I think the main reason that's connecting is you can see you we have the roadway coming through there which would trigger that that review of that major drainage way and how that will be disturbed okay just two more questions the uh what was I gonna say uh oh yeah what do you anticipate the cuts and fills to be you know it's really hard to to say at this point without seeing a development planner tentative map um I would anticipate just because the slopes and some of the roadways and things are going to have that we would trigger that that uh cuts and fills uh uh 10 feet and 20 feet that that is pretty standard that comes before this this body and then if this were to not get annexed I mean I mean it doesn't matter what we do here anyways it may or may not get annexed um but what would the I mean Washoe County what I mean is this something that they would ever even develop or uh I mean the the applicant has the right to develop on it under Washoe County I think what they would be looking for and we're going to provide services the roadways utilities uh our sewer so we would require them to Annex if they are they're going to come into the City and you know be part of the city and and taxed accordingly and everything like that to pay for those Services all right thank you commissioner Brazier please thank you chair uh Mr Oswald it um a couple questions first Miss tolst thank you for coming up and sharing your feedback and concerns uh to the public comment I know that commissioner Armstrong had already brought up the traffic diversion point but there was a concern about the horse access to water during the winter has there been consideration sure um I've uh the feral horse issue in the Virginia ranges something I've worked on uh over several years and worked on across this sort of the foothill development here and as we move we've really developed some standards and how we're approaching this um one we are looking at that fencing now we do have a diversionary feeding area those are these horses are managed through the Nevada Department of Agriculture and they're under their control so they set the standards of that diversionary feeding in those areas they have specific areas they can feed there and those have to be currently working with them they they like to see those a half a mile away from development so we'd anticipate now that we've seen devel development up there that we would see that diversionary feeding area being moved to a more appropriative place away from development um additionally um one of the great things that's happening is they they've actually hired two more people who will um with NDA who will be working directly with the horse Advocates to help address their concerns working with them on these diversionary feedings finding appropriate areas and as they move through there so there's a lot of positive things happening and a lot of support and and making that whole structure work we know how important it is and and then from our Public Safety of horses in our neighborhood and everything else the fence becomes very important and we're seeing the establishment of this fence through these developments one of the other things that should be noticed the ongoing maintenance and upkeep of those fence uh will be the requirement of the HOA so now we're finding a funding source and something which helps The Advocates even more so they're they're not required to fix and and maintain those and we have entities that are maintaining those in The Advocates can work on their Outreach education and some of the other important things they're working on great thank you Mr Oswald on the Note our topic of Maintenance my my head's still a little fuzzy on the street fund impact um the report shows that over the course of 20 years there'll be a deficit to the City of Reno for road maintenance or the street fund can you yeah so so in this sort of um is going to really we'll look at this a lot more through the tentative map because we would look at what roads are going to be dedicated and will be the responsibility so a lot of times those are the backbone roads at some other ways roads um there may be other roads that we decide to maintain as private this was looked at as once we have a road debt they build the road they install the infrastructure it's dedicated to the city and then we in perpetuity take care of that so that's that upcoming road maintenance they set together a schedule of how they're going in times that they will repair and fix those roads as necessary and that becomes on our overall schedule so yes there becomes uh you know roadway it at some point it's going to to flip where those roadways are are or become a deficit at some Point Okay so maybe a little naive here but um that wouldn't be something that would be covered by an HOA just as much as the fences would now anytime it dedicate once the road is dedicated and becomes a right-of-way that is the city's responsibility so any private roadway would could be the responsibility of an HOA or another entity that they have to to maintain and provide the safety on those roadways thank you and just one more uh on the open space since uh one of commissioner beltos questions to trigger the HOA topic is the open space available to the general public or is it just to residents of the beauty yeah and I mentioned that briefly so what we would uh right now it will be open to the general public and that will be through the tentative map we will deed restrict and have conditions so it'll actually be on the deed that we have a public access easement across that that's in perpetuity so the public will have uh um proper access um you know the trails will be maintained so they'll have safe access and they'll also it will not be potentially trespassing anymore because it it does have we do have that access easement over that great thanks Mr Oswald my time thank you and welcome yeah commissioner Munoz thank you um I think it's going to be for you Brooke uh I haven't seen you mention I'm going through and looking this again to make sure I didn't miss it what are um who are we Consulting as far as the uh the horses now let me word this correctly the horse is now impeding on uh the wildlife on the hillside because they are being pushed up further and further each time we approve one of these um I saw a a report last week about the um the mule deer population in Nevada and the Wild Horse population Nevada last 30 years has flip-flopped so where it was and I'll throw out a number here 300 000 wild mule deer 30 years ago and a hundred thousand wild horses that has now flip-flopped to 300 000 Wild Horses to a hundred thousand uh wild mule deer and again these are generalizations but the potential damage I see done now that we're moving these horses further up into uh the Virginia Highlands and there is a lot of wildlife up there that by us approving and continue to prove these uh projects that are moving up on the hillside are damaging our wildlife in Nevada and Northern Nevada who are we Consulting to make sure that this isn't going to water fall into a situation we can no longer handle or that gets completely out of hand before it's too late sure um staff Works um with the Nevada Department of Agriculture realtor who is the owner basically the owner of those horses the manager of those sources there are some set plans of population up there it's anticipated right now they're anywhere between 3 500 to 400 or 4 000 horses on on the Range up there there's been some different studies of what is appropriate and um so what the applicants are working on through American Horse Association I believe they do the darting so they're working at the Depot and trying to reduce populations um in in a humane way through that aspect uh habitat is is is is huge and water on the Range is is huge the other notable species up here who definitely sees competition from some of the larger horses and some of the is the bighorn sheep so we have those and and that habitat staff will be working they'll be uh endow which are the Nevada Department of Wildlife we'll be working on them we would have a a full kind of assessment value of impact of wildlife in this area through that I would anticipate they would start to look at potential horse impacts as we're moving uh or or maybe redirecting some of these horses uh and NDA also will be working with endow to some extent to to make sure that these resources are are are are looked at and and are preserved okay so thank you thank you for that just for clarification so before a tentative map is approved for this that that is something that will be brought before this board that we can actually have a look at before we make a determination or what I'd anticipate is that would be conditioned through the tentative map that that would be required prior to the approval of a final map is when we'd anticipate that Wildlife maintenance manual or Wildlife overall okay assessment thank you seeing more no more questions we want to move into discussion or entertain a motion I'm happy to entertain discussion [Laughter] um so first I want to say uh commissioner Romer that was is it rommeyer room that was great questioning because I actually was going to ask her similar questions about the Pud so thank you for saved some of my time um so we're in the very early stages obviously we don't know whether this is going to get annexed or not get annexed it's probably you know gonna get annexed but I think um I just don't see that this is an area that we need to be developing for you know multiple reasons it's very hilly I think that the cuts and fills are going to be severe I think the wildlife is an issue um network connections I just don't see I think it's non-existent especially how I'm looking at the City of Reno master plan for a Foothill development and I'm looking at all the different features protection of natural features cluster developments grading cut and fills so on and so forth including network connections internal connections and you can turn to page 155 if you are interested but I just don't think that the policies that are set forth in this master plan are going to be met by this kind of development um and also to the questions that commissionermeyer asked I think whenever we use a PUD it's a lot of times because they can't fit they're trying to fit a square peg into a round hole sometimes it's actually really beneficial to a community in this case I don't think that's I just don't think that's the case here so I'm gonna be a no on this thank you thank you commissioner velto first and then we'll go project looking at it through the lens that we've already approved are very very similar PUD right next to it and I have trouble with us changing course as a commission when we approve the Canyons PUD and the Canyons PUD was used as a model for this this handbook think that a lot of the issues that were raised in the prior hearings when we were talking about Canyons were a very similar was raised here and as a commission we concluded that this was an acceptable project so the findings could get made and I haven't heard anything unique about this project that is so different from what we've already considered to have me change my perspective and be able to make the findings for this project I think it's difficult for the development Community if we as a commissioner are not looking back to how we ruled previously that creates some predictability for applicants when they're trying to put projects together in case predictability for staff and I think it's really important that we look to decisions that we've already made and if we've already decided a very similar project I think we should likewise decide it very similarly here and I can make all the findings I'm not going to go in depth on each issue but I think we've already looked at issues very similar that are right next to it that should help us understand how we look at this project please commissioner yeah I appreciate my fellow Commissioners points of view I definitely see the value of residential in this area I think it is a transition between the Wildland and the urban Suburban interface um I'm interested in using the Pud for me I had some trouble making findings between pewdie's really about having a blend of non-residential and residential land uses and to me this is a single family residential project and there's an appropriate entitlement process for that I think there are staff did a good job of giving me some confidence in knowing that every five years this has to come before city council for review or an update if the project isn't built or developed so that gives some certainty as to how this moves forward the thing that I'm still struggling with a bit is the idea of the Adu as affordability which I do think has a place in Reno but not in this place as a tool for affordability I believe that these are going to be nice homes with big views that's going to be reaching a Target demographic that is not looking to provide affordable housing on their Lots um I again I support this as a land use in terms of residential I would have liked personally to see this as a part of the Canyon's PUD for a more comprehensive approach thank you and I'll jump kind of the back side of commissioner velto I guess when I looked at this and and seeing it from a bird's eye view and looking at this here I I understand that we're pushing building up you know to pretty much the limits in this neighborhood and and they've been taking a lot of development over the past decade if not more um but it looks like the end of the line for development because they're going to be jumping up against some you know sharp Cliffs and rocks um I don't know if we'll ever um incorporate that area or Annex that area so I hear what you're saying Commissioner of Villanueva and understand your opinion there but I'm also kind of seeing the end of the line for that so maybe that's not the right and only way to look at it but that's what I'm seeing Jeremy I respond to you and please so I know commissioner Roberto mentioned that we did approve the you know the Canyons PD and and the one right next to it and I actually did support the Canyons mainly because it was a way to protect a lot of that open space with you know have that private space private owned land protect that open space um but the the um what's the word topography there is slightly different it's in the same it's in a very similar area but it's very different where the housing is placed in the Canyonlands area versus where it's going to be placed in this project so those somewhat similar they're not identical there's there is some distinction there there's it is different um and the Topography is different it would be nice to have a GIS so I can actually see like kind of those where the hills are where the group you know where the drainage ditches are I don't have that here but um but I do think that there is a difference here just because they're you know adjacent to one another doesn't necessarily mean that they're entitled to the same approvals when there are differences between the two applications [Music] thank you I'm probably that good John I appreciate uh commissioner villanuevas comment and I just wanted to share with you that I know this map is not telling the whole story but in terms of topographic analysis this is identical to what we did on Canyons zero to fifteen percent you get full density 15 to 20 and so on so it so happens that the ordinance is the ordinance math driven and this is exactly what went on with the Canyons here you get 17 Acres of usable so I I don't know if that helps you but I I I'm I've dealt with that ordinance many times in the City of Reno and you know we get 78 open space as a result of the aggressive constraints of the ordinance on this topography but I promise you that it's identical same analysis to the to the Canyons less a major drainage way there's a more significant drainage way that goes through that but that's been well addressed and taken care of thank you thank you appreciate your time sure any more uh oh Commissioner of Alto please yeah yeah I shared your concerns with the Adu issue being in affordable housing concept and I think it almost is as though it shouldn't have been included pdb I wouldn't have jumped all over it but uh hearing that City staff would possibly look at ccnr's and there might be the potential for those to be used as rentals gives me hope that in the future other portions of the city May it may create some momentum so that's why I think I'm going to entertain this as potentially being towards affordable housing because I don't actually know if we can force people to build affordable housing but I totally share your concerns about that and largely agree with everything you said commissioner please sure thanks chair I share similar sentiments as my fellow Commissioners to the right am I right I think I have my question answered already by John there really isn't anything uniquely different between canyons and um Valley View other than the steepness on Valley View right the topography okay and then chair when you say end of the line would you mind clarifying what that means does that mean that this would be potentially the last build out in that I'm just thinking yeah and I'm sorry that was probably not great vernacular but really what I see is that we're going to be struggling to develop to the east of that it doesn't mean that I can I just when I see it on this one specifically in that rock outcropping and the uh the grading up there it appears that we're going to have trouble going to the east I mean I'm just looking at the overall you know South Meadows area in general and I understand that we're kind of creeping up those Hills but knowing that area well I mean coming to a point where development is going to be undoable and we've really got a lot of parks Greenway and Open Spaces stopping that from happening obviously in this specific parcel okay great thanks chair can I ask a quick question here uh just came to mind um and I'm probably going to be for staff if that's okay please that's fine uh I'm a little and not understanding so from the East of this property on how far how many privately owned Parcels are there before we hit BLM land our our Foresters there is very little to no Forest Service land here this is all private land so most of the Virginia probably 90 of the Virginia ranges private land so what we're seeing we up to the Washington or Washoe County uh story uh would is in our sphere of influence I think one of the biggest restraining factors we have there is is what we're seeing is that is classified as a tier three through our regional that tier three does not support development so what would any development would require a tier change um which is something that we saw recently based here and Regional was able to make it because what we did is we turned this area the tier two and our open space is still considered tier three so what really is that overall Regional plan that starts to restrict that development or has to go through a public process that we're looking at is development appropriate we we see you're seeing over 30 slopes for a large percentage of this as you get higher up on this towards that County Line there are flatter areas that potentially could be developed in the future but I don't I would not anticipate anytime uh soon okay yeah thank you what my concern is and and we've seen it a lot in in Lemon Valley and Golden Valley is the large tract homes um end and then we have a lot of single homes across all if you're if you're in the middle of of Lemon Valley and look around there's homes everywhere on the hillsides and there's single homes on on uh who's private Lots um does the city believe or does the city feel that we are towards the edge of where we're capable of building out and if not if there is some flat areas or areas that can be developed what is the best guess scenario that those areas will eventually be built out as well I mean is there any plan I know we have uh Master plans for years out is there any plan other than at the edge where we're at now that there could be development further up um so that as I said that's in our sphere of influence which at one point in time the the commission or the city council determined that was a appropriate place for us to grow now we see a lot of constraints up there uh we don't have access to utilities now we don't have um access to roadways uh so all that would have to be developed and moved forward is that so um I cannot say certainly we would not see development past this what I think I could say is if you were looking in the valley and looking at the hillsides it is more than likely that you would not see the development that happened up top this this would be sort of that end of development that you would see where we as as residents of the city Arena would say is Foothills okay thank you a little question please uh Mr Oswald since there is a school literally below this area was there consideration given to the impact of that school if it's single family units and could they take on the additional FTE or enrollment certainly so that that school does provide us comments um those come through the Ten of tentative map stage usually when they actually know how many homes are going to be developed and what's going to happen and so the overall student load would be um looked at at that point the the school district has bonded and they have sort of a plan in place that is is looking and anticipating uh growth as we would anticipate um our our city growing thanks thank you please it's more it's kind it's Kushner Muniz um I I get where you're what you're talking about because I grew up in Las Vegas and I saw Henderson just completely develop all the way up the hill and I thought I couldn't go any higher and then I went back to visit I'm like oh wow it went all the way up there to the top and so it's private land a lot of this is private land um it is Washoe County Land uh currently but it is private so I mean we you know we we cannot be arbitrary or capricious but make you know when making these decisions um but when I look at the policies here and I and I go through one by one and I try and make the findings I just I can't do it so I you know I struggle um you know and I and I appreciate you know what my what each of you shared but I stand by my position in the sense that um I I just don't think developing here meets the goals of the master plan the policies especially um you know just kind of as a citizen as well it doesn't seem like something that um the city um can benefit from so thank you commissioner please um I appreciate all of the dialogue fellow Commissioners I think some of the great points to raise ultimately I fall more in line I think with the comments made by uh chair draculitch commissioner Roberto with that I am ready to make a motion unless there's further discussion please do in the case of ldc23-00021 Valley View Estates mpa-zma based upon compliance with the applicable findings I moved to adopt the amendment to the master plan by resolution and recommend that city council adopt the master plan in zoning zoning map amendments subject to conformance review by the Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Commission and I can make all the findings we have a motion commissioner about 12 second we have a motion and a second any discussion so you know discussion Michelle can we get a roll call vote please [Music] Bel two yes Munoz yes [Music] Armstrong yes draculich yes Villanueva no Sarah yes Earl Meyer yes okay is six to one go to six to one motion passes good luck with your project thank you thank you all right thank you all for the robust robust conversation we are closing item five and now moving to item six Planning Commission training series American Planning Association APA video presentation and discussion on legal decision making Miss Foods all right so we have about a 30 minute video and then we will have a quiz at the end so make sure you pay attention do we need a short bathroom break for anybody other than commissioner velta yes please okay we will take a five minute break good coach all right yeah I think she knows all right we will call the meeting back to order from our short recess and continue on with our training video well thank you I'm Michael blue and we're here with Greg Jones of the law firm of Ansel blank and we're going to talk about the legal aspects of decision making related to plan Commissioners so Greg thanks for joining us thanks for having me Michael so let's start with just that what are the legal implications of a plan commission recommendation how cautious do they have to be do they need to pay attention to any legal precedent or start us off with that sure well at its heart a plan commission is is supposed to conduct a thorough public vetting of a development proposal or anything that comes before it and make a recommendation to the city council or the village board whichever municipality it may be so the recommendation matters uh and and the conduct of the hearing matters because in theory the facts and testimony provided at the hearing will provide the basis for the plant commission's recommendation plan commission needs to allow as many people or interested parties to speak at the public hearing as possible because you want to make sure you have a well-rounded full body of evidence to make a recommendation on and you know Village boards and City councils tend to pay attention to playing Commissioners you know the mayor appoints plan commissioner and they're typically confirmed by the city council so they've placed trust in them there's an expectation that they will go ahead and do their job thoroughly and diligently so the recommendation absolutely matters okay so but for the commission they don't have to worry too much about the city getting sued if they're doing their job if they're going through the process correctly and ultimately there's a elected body behind them that's making the final decision that's right the commission needs to stay focused on the standards for approval uh for the request in front of it so what does that mean that's if there's a variance request the zoning code will have specific standards that the plan commission should consider when determining whether to support or recommend denial of a variance there's different standards for special use planned unit developments typically have much longer standards because it's a more involved process so as long as the plan commission views the testimony that's provided at the hearing through the lens of those standards to determine whether or not the applicant is Meeting those standards the city is pretty well protected from from a lawsuit one of the questions we get a lot from commissions and Commissioners in the work we do is they're always worried about setting a precedent so if we allow this variation or approve that special use haven't we set a precedent that allows the next one to come through that maybe we don't like we can't say no to it tell us a little bit about precedent there's a lot of of misconception around the concept of setting a precedent the short answer is if if you approve offense variance for Joe Jackson you're not required to go ahead and approve the next fence variance that comes in for Sally Smith each request should be evaluated on its own merits its own facts and its own circumstances so we'll take Joe Jackson's fence variance request say he comes in and asks to build an eight-foot fence in a zoning District where only six foot fences are allowed uh maybe that eight foot fences is warranted because there's a drive-through on the property next door or there's an alley next door or there's a dog kennel now when Sally Smith comes in you know her house backs up to another residential property so there's there's differences factual differences between the two cases so the way that a a plan commission can really protect itself from arguments uh of well you approved you know Joe's variance you have to approve Sally's variance is to focus and drill down on the facts if you focus on the facts and testimony presented at the hearing it should become apparent that there are differences between the two now that's the legal answer it's difficult to set a precedent by approving you know one variance uh there's also the public perception or political angle as well now the public is not necessarily going to understand the Nuance between the two variance requests and this also re-emphasizes the importance of making sure you clearly State on the record why you're supporting the variants what those facts are that way when someone comes in later you can say yes but you're not located next to a kennel or a drive-through or an alley that has a lot of traffic okay that's great we talk a lot about findings of fact as part of the deliberation first of all what are they and second of all why are they important findings of fact are it's an analysis of the testimony and facts presented at the hearing so it's all the reasons why or in some cases why not a proposal meets the zoning standards in the organs it's important to note that the findings of fact need to be based only on the testimony provided at the hearing or the meeting you're not supposed to take into account any outside factors uh haven't been presented on the record so they're important because it shows that the plan commission is doing its job and it's considering the appropriate legal factors when it makes its its recommendation So the plan Commissioners again I'm going to it's going to be a common theme that runs throughout our talk talk they need to be familiar with the standards and they need to view all testimony that's provided at the hearing through those standards and it's pretty common for Commissioners to actually have the standards written down on the diocese next to them and that's that's part of part of having a quality staff report as well and in terms of those findings of fact they ultimately become part of the record they ultimately find their way to the elected body that's making the decision who writes them staff secretary chair of the commission somebody randomly selected from the commission it varies and a lot of it depends on the capacity of the municipality both in terms of how much staff support they have um and and things of that nature so there's a there's three common approaches um first uh it's a really good idea to have the applicant submit draft findings a fact with his application the applicant at the end of the day is the one asking for approval he's asking for Relief have him make his case in writing uh and and that serves a couple of purposes first it'll provide the commission with the general idea of what findings of fact may be if they wanted to support the case and two it'll help get the applicant in the right mindset before the hearing because it's basically his presentation or his argument uh written down which is good it'll it'll make for a more fruitful hearing it'll get him focused on on those standards as well alternately the commission can draft its own findings that can happen during the meeting uh we certainly work with clients that have worksheets basically that have here's here's standard number one and there's five or six lines below it and the commission after the public hearing is closed still during an open meeting we'll discuss what facts and what testimony presented at the hearing satisfy that factor and they'll walk through all of them and that's a little bit more labor intensive it can make the meeting a bit longer but on the other hand it also helps show the public how the sausage is made so to speak it's it's very transparent it's very apparent what what the commission is doing there's no activity behind closed doors or alternately if it's a community with more resources you can have staff prepare findings either draft findings prior to the hearing or findings based on the testimony after the so there's there's no one right way to do it if you have staff they're typically you know the professionals the experts it's great to rely on them we certainly recognize that not every Community has a professional Planner on staff but those findings written around those standards those are those are really kind of the heart of the evaluation or the the testimony process aren't they they absolutely are and they'll be forwarded on to the city council for their consideration prior to the vote certainly if you end up in court the findings made by the plant commission are a consideration so it's it's important that you should take time with them so you mentioned we talked about that there are standards that these findings of fat address and that sometimes there's more of them they're generally similar to not the same in every Community um but sometimes you can say there's a lot of money for a planned unit development there might be more of them this is the application have to meet all of these standards or just most of them the application needs to meet the standards uh it's not you know one out of three or two out of three it's not more than not uh it's it's clear that the application needs to address each standard so that's part of the burden that applicants carry and that's why they need to be carefully consider at the application they're bringing forth and whether or not they can State a claim and substantiate support for for that proposal it's aren't some of those standards written where there's some room for interpretation I mean those standards are not is the building six feet tall the standards talk about there's adequate facilities or there's adequate capacity and there may be something about impact trend of development those might be kind of fuzzy things is that true and what if you can make a case the other way yeah there's there's absolutely room for argument and that's that's why we have attorneys they're they're not yes or no answers in many questions in many cases it's it's a lot of analysis based on the facts and circumstances related to the property which is what this is supposed to be about it's a hearing about what's going on on the property so with that in mind what what should a commissioner keep in mind to be sure that as they're either asking questions or making their comments or deliberating amongst themselves what should the Commissioners keep in mind uh so that they're making a good case that they're helping form those findings of fact all those standards well first and this is probably one of the more difficult things for Commissioners to do is you need to be able to discern between relevant testimony and facts and what we'll call all the other noise some of it's obvious personal tax obviously have no place at a public hearing but there are a lot of you know other things that fall into a gray area where the commission you know especially if it's not a particularly experienced one May place a false emphasis on it so um an example of this uh I participated in a hearing where there was a drugstore that wanted to move into a neighborhood it was adjacent to a park and it was predominantly a single family residential area around there there was a member of the public who stood up and testified and and she had through the Freedom of Information Act obtained copies of police reports for a drugstore located in a different Community not even the same drugstore and she proceeded to read pages and pages and this was years of police reports talking about how children were going to be kidnapped out of the parking lot of this this drugstore and how rapists and pedophiles tended to frequent Pharmacy parking lots that's not relevant that's totally irrelevant and it's important for the plant commission to recognize that and that also emphasizes the importance of having a chair that has a pretty strong handle on meeting conduct because in that case she was you know gaveled gaveled quiet and said listen if you have a testimony that relates to the factors that the plan commission is required to consider please provide that but recognize that what you're talking about right now is is not necessarily relevant so the best advice really is to be familiar with those standards and view the testimony through the lens of those you mentioned gaveling a resident who's making a comment and in terms of taking testimony and how much testimony and cutting off testimony is there a legal answer to the question of how much testimony is enough how much is too much when can you cut people off should you cut people off generally err on the side of providing more testimony um it's painful it can make for some long nights you're going to see your family less but that's your job the the city council has the ability to curtail public comment largely out of necessity they're governing the entire municipality the plan commission's purpose is different they're there to take testimony they're there to listen to a wide range of claims some more relevant than others some clearly irrelevant they don't have to listen to those but if there's you know a degree of relevancy in what is being presented the plane commission is obligated to listen and and that that serves the purpose of making sure they're doing a thorough job uh evaluating each proposal and giving it the time that it deserves and it also protects the community the city uh from lawsuits in the future that someone's due process rights were cut off folks have a right to be heard that's what we have public notice requirements that's why we have open meetings and that's kind of the Bedrock principle of democratic government okay that's that's great so that's just part of the process yes in terms of the operations of a commission or a plant commission uh I know a lot of them have got their own bylaws their own set of rules and procedures is that a requirement do they have to have those and if they don't is it a good idea to have them it's a good idea to have them and laws can vary do vary I should say from state to state the bylaws are important because it it's really the playbook for how the plan commission is supposed to function so it talks about membership it talks about obligation to attend meetings it talks about conduct of meetings uh a variant of Robert's Rules of Order is commonly used by a lot of planned commissions but you don't have to use Rapid rules of Robert's Rules of Order wholesale you can make changes is really a good idea because Robert's Rules of Order is really intended to govern deliberative bodies that are in constant session and plant commissions aren't they hold a meeting once or twice a month and they're done so the bylaws establish the ground rules they can establish limits uh within reason on public comment as well so if the situation comes up where the plant commission needs to limit public comment and there are bylaws that have been adopted by the community that's a a stronger legal position if you ever need to defend it sounds to me like a lot of these rules a lot of the structure really is ultimately to the benefit of the commission so that if you have a bylaw rule that says you know we're going to try and end the meeting by 11 o'clock we're not going to start a new case after a certain time and that you've got to stick with these findings of fact and consider those that that this structure can really be very helpful to the staff and the Commission in managing what can be an emotional situation that's exactly right it's it's the rules of the road and it establishes expectations and to your comment about ending meetings at a certain time uh you know we've all been in situations where we've sat through the small hours of the morning listening to deliberations for Commissioners who have been on the dice for you know five six seven eight hours and you know it's hard to make good decisions when you've been sitting up there and it's two o'clock in the morning from a legal perspective you might not make the best decision I would agree with that um so the motion the way motions are made a lot of times you see Commissioners get a little bit hung up in how they do this one of the key understandings though is that motions are always supposed to be made in the affirmative is that right and tell us why yeah that's correct uh and and an example will help uh highlight why or how this can go wrong because it can go very wrong so imagine you've got a controversial land use proposal say it's a glue factory it's it's loud it's noisy uh it smells and and they want to locate next to a park in the middle of a residential neighborhood so you know basically the least consistent land use you can imagine uh with children playing uh in the property next door in the backyard uh and at some point during the hearing it becomes very apparent that everyone in the audience is opposed to this other than the applicant and one of the Commissioners is just fed up and he's you know a moment of passion says you know what I'm going to make a motion that we deny this proposal so in the motion seconded so the motion on the floor is now a motion to deny so it's it's in the negative so the role is called and and everyone starts voting those voting yes on that motion are are voting to kill the proposal those voting no on that motion are voting to support it now take a step back think about a referendum question or anytime you step into The Ballot Box uh it says Michael do you support a tax increase to pay for constructing a new Village Hall your yes vote means yes in the circumstance of this plan commission that just stated a negative motion your yes vote would mean no so that's confusing and it also confuses the folks in the audience who are sitting there watching an entire Diocese of people vote Yes To Kill a project and this goes on it's not just an immediate concern because the meeting minutes from a legal perspective when something goes wrong and there is a lawsuit later the minutes are very important it's frequently the only copy of the record what hearing and the minutes can be very confusing when it says motion to deny you know and it says who voted yes and you've got yeses and you've got no's we've seen circumstances too where you've had a negative motion stated and a commissioner has realized after the fact either at that meeting or a subsequent meeting saying Hey I meant to vote the other way so then you've got another procedural hurdle and and it you know it not only confuses the plan commission it makes the community look bad and disorganized in certain respects you want to come across as looking professional so all this is easily dispatched by just stating motions in the positive so even if you hate the glue factory you make a motion to approve the glue factory and let everybody vote no all said okay um that Glue Factory no let's take something that can get approved may have some conditions placed on it as part of the approval and what we see is that sometimes conditions are things that get talked about so one of the Commissioners might say we need better Landscaping over there but that's not part of the motion it's not part of the approval it might be in the minutes um but ultimately that notion of hey we need more landscaping that's not really binding it's only binding if it's done how if you want it to be binding it needs to be in the motion and it will only be binding if the village board adopts an ordinance that expressly includes that condition so if you feel strongly as a commissioner about a specific item whether it's landscaping or the color of the building or signage or what have you your motion to approve the development should State I make a motion to approve the development subject to uh Bob the Builder painting his building purple otherwise it's not legally enforceable otherwise the public who attended the meeting and heard the commissioner speak about the purple building will likely think that the building's supposed to be purple and and we'll probably end up calling Village Hall when it ends up being painted yellow I think I think a lot of planners have been in a situation where a meeting had to be changed or rescheduled or a case removed because public notice was not properly made so there are these legal terms that we hear a lot we hear about public notice and open meetings and they seem to just be very controlling in what goes on can you explain those Concepts a little and why it really is important to pay attention to those sure this is a the the public process is quite possibly the most important component of of the entire zoning review government's credibility is largely reliant on how responsive and accountable it is to the public and the zoning process in Illinois and elsewhere requires open public hearings to be conducted for zoning proposals this provides the public an opportunity to come out and express either their support or dissatisfaction with the proposal and it allows a full record to be built without a public process you get a lot of Palace Intrigue frankly like there was a meeting behind closed doors smoke-filled or not uh and these decisions were made and I didn't have an opportunity to speak and that really contradicts what you know the basic principles of responsible government are so in order to build credibility in government in order to lend credibility to the decision that will ultimately ultimately be made by the city council you need to have a big tent process where everyone's invited in and and folks can come out and share their views about it so I want to turn a little bit to the the legal elements of being a commissioner things that the Commissioners have to know what kind of Ethics rules are there that are Bindings that are binding on Commissioners the ethics rules that's a good question and the ethics rules vary from state to state but there's some certain common elements that run throughout them for example Illinois has what's commonly known as the gift ban Act uh and and it as the name implies uh prohibits Commissioners from accepting gifts from prohibited sources now I'm not going to sit here and lecture you uh the specifics of the law and all the elements because we don't have time and you don't have patience uh but the a lot of this is common sense so um an example if you're a commissioner and someone who is uh before the commission whether it's a developer or your neighbor who wants to get a variance to reduce a side yard setback offers to buy you a new car or something expensive or something anything really significant uh and that seems out of the ordinary you should probably think about it so there's a couple important things to know here a um acknowledge that there are laws that govern conduct for plant Commissioners the typical plant commissioner is not going to spend time digging through statute books to understand what each of those laws are but but just know they're out there and and exercise some common sense b as a commissioner you're not an island unto yourself you have a support network typically there's staff typically there's an attorney if you find yourself in a situation where you don't feel comfortable or something doesn't smell right talk to staff talk to the attorney and they'll provide you with with counsel through it it can be a little bit awkward in the moment when somebody offers you something and you say hey you know what I really appreciate it but you know I don't know if this is appropriate I'm going to talk with staff let me get back to you that's typically all it takes uh and and it can keep you out of a out of trouble and it can keep the community out of trouble too because what you really want to avoid is the Specter of impropriety because that can taint both the proceedings that are before the plan commission whether it's a specific development proposal and can also implicate just The credibility of government in general so there's a lot of folks out there who think the government's on the take and that's not the case in the vast majority of circumstances but proceeding cautiously understanding that there are laws that implicate your conduct and and realizing that you have resources that you can rely on will get you a long way kind of related to that is the notion of a conflict of interest so a lot of times you hear Commissioners talk about well they have a conflict or do they have a conflict and sometimes they recuse themselves from a matter so can you tell us what constitutes a conflict of interest and when somebody should recuse themselves sure sure the term conflict of interest gets bandied about particularly in the public uh more than it should but there are situations where there are legitimate conflicts of interest and Commissioners should be aware of those situations first and an example will probably be most helpful here because the conflict statutes do vary from state to state but take for example a plant commissioner who owns a property that's located next to a car dealer luxury car dealer big beautiful cars and the car dealer approaches the plan commissioner and says hey we're thinking about expanding our dealership we're going to sell even more cars this is great for the town increase tax revenue everybody's going to be happy we think you're going to love our beautiful dealership there's glass windows and everything else I the commissioner says yeah you know that sounds great so they enter into a purchase and sale agreement that's contingent on getting zoning approval the developer then comes before the plan commission asks for his rezoning in order to build his new dealership plane commissioner sitting up on the dice does he have a conflict it's a pretty obvious example that absolutely is a conflict of interest he has a contractual interest in the property that is part of the development proposal so it's it's not okay for him to cast a vote on that that undermines his ability to think in the public interest and keep the public interest and those zoning factors in mind because no matter how hard he tries he's going to have that dollar value stuck in the back of his head that he wants to get for selling the property that's a clear conflict of interest uh those situations if they do come up nine times out of ten probably more than nine times out of ten that commissioner is going to recuse himself um those are are pretty obvious there are other situations which fall into more of a gray area so same example uh but say there's no zoning contingency involved in the contract say the luxury dealer just buys the property outright and then comes back for approval a year or 18 months later and that proposal comes before the plan commission and that commissioner who 18 months ago sold the property to the car dealer sitting up there is an open question as to whether or not it's okay for him to vote on it in a lot of States it's okay there's not a contractual interest so there's not a clear conflict of interest that's the legal answer and the legal analysis based on the statute but as a commissioner you also have to keep in mind the Optics and the appearance of impropriety how would it look if a resident or the paper found out that that commissioner sold the property and then during the meeting was a vocal advocate for the development and It ultimately went through and got approved so there's a there's a public perception component of it too and just because there's not a legal conflict of interest it's a good idea for Commissioners to keep the public perception in mind and if you think there's an issue you can always recuse yourself there's absolutely nothing wrong with that what about there are times where people might think there's a conflict of interest but there really isn't so if the church you're part of is coming for a special use before you or your country club comes before the commission um or if there's a rezoning for an entire zoning District in the downtown and you happen to own a property in the downtown um you're connected to it but are those necessarily a conflict of interest not necessarily it's you really have to take a closer look and this is this is where this is where the public and and sometimes you know the media that's reporting on it can get it wrong you end up with sensationalized headlines of you know commissioner on the take he's voting for his own self-interest uh you really need to look at the specific facts and circumstances like an example that comes up frequently say you know Apple everybody loves apple and Apple store is coming to town uh and uh Michael you're a commissioner and you own Apple stock uh and you know what you voted to support that Apple Store uh does that that's not necessarily a conflict now if you own 10 of Apple's stock that probably would be a conflict because that's I'm sorry to hear that uh that would be pretty close to a controlling interest but most people don't own 10 of Apple stock they own some shares and and they have it you know set aside for retirement or what have you uh so the facts are important and the analysis is important and you know it never hurts too in these situations to State on the record um listen I'm a Commissioner of this church but I'm not involved in the business management or Affairs of this church and and I feel comfortable voting on it and you might catch some flags from some people the public but a lot of them are going to appreciate that you've been up front and you've explained your relationship and uh and explained that there's no more Palace entry going on here and I'll go back to the advice you gave with the last question we had about ethics is if there's a question about a conflict of interest contact your staff contact The Corporation Council always always and and that's another really good point I know a lot of communities don't have Corporation Council at the meetings but they certainly can help and this is one of the situations they can there are legal issues that will come up that will inevitably be outside of the chairman or the commission's comfort zone and having legal counsel there can really help you navigate those Waters in the most sensitive situation in a meeting that's televised or in front of a bunch of your neighbors and Friends so one more thing about the Commissioners that's got to be important because I think it's Latin this idea of ex parte communication or talking to people outside of the meeting why is that an issue and what should be avoided there the whole purpose of you know the plan commission and the public meeting process is to have these deliberations in the public there's nothing to hide here everything's upfront the decision the recommendation that the plan commission it makes is based only on the testimony and evidence presented at the hearing so there's no hide the ball everything that you need to see is in front of you ex parte Communications are when a an applicant or an interested party lobbies a plant commissioner city councilman behind the scenes so they invite you out for dinner they show up at your door and say hey I bought you a cup of coffee let's sit down let's sit down and talk now this is going to happen you're a public official a lot of these meetings are televised on TV in some communities people are going to understand that you're serving your community and that's a great thing and as but as a result of them being aware of your service they're going to go to you if they think there's an issue that you can help with you're not going to go run and hide in the bushes or if you see Joe your neighbor coming down the street you don't run across the street to avoid him that's it's not realistic but the best advice is you want to keep all of these discussions in the public so if someone comes up to you and says hey I really want to talk to you about this development proposal say thanks you know I really appreciate it but you know as a plane commissioner we're supposed to hold these hearings please come to the hearing we'd love to hear what you have to say that's the best way to make a difference and your input really matters if we can't make it send a letter perhaps or an email to staff yeah absolutely and and staff is you bring up another good point with staff come to the meeting or you know you can also direct folks to staff say hey if you have input about the proposal staff's really managing this they're doing the whole you know the public input prior to the meeting so you know call you know Sally the planner or send an email to this email address and give them your thoughts those thoughts will be shared with the commission those thoughts will be shared with the city council your voice will be heard it just provides structure around the the communication process and it's you know also provides a barrier protecting the commission from you know allegations that there's something nefarious going on goes back to what you said before about the Optics it doesn't look like there's something going on everything's out front yeah yeah exactly and and you know one last thought on this too if you do happen to have a conversation with someone uh and you know these it's a friend and these conversations can happen you start on one topic and you shift to another and he brings up a relevant point about a development proposal that's before the commission disclose it during the public hearing say hey you know what on Sunday uh I Joe over we're watching the Bears game and uh we he brought up a point on this that I think is relevant and I want to share it with the public it tells them that the conversation happened it puts it on the record it shows that there's nothing to hide so there are options to deal with it other than finding a bush to jump into and I think that's great advice because I think a lot of times Commissioners are uncomfortable with this idea of disclosure letting people know what happened but you know as we used to warn people you don't want Joe to come and stand at the podium and go hey when I was talking to Greg commissioner Greg about this the other day he thought it was a fine idea so it really there's again it's another one of these ways that the structure of the system really helps the commissioner protects the Commissioners they do their job that's exactly right it's uh being being called out in a public hearing for a private conversation is definitely a red face moment absolutely all right well Greg thank you for sharing your insights on the legal aspects of the commission function and we thank you for your time it's been a pleasure thank you Michael thank you that wasn't too painful was it just quiz I did want to I do have a quiz um if somebody wants to buy you a car is that okay yes what if it's a Mercedes good answer um just uh one thing that we run into quite a bit is when we have discussions with applicants and you know you ask them questions um you know are you gonna paint the walls blue on the outside and maybe they're saying yep we're gonna paint them blue that's important to you we run into a lot of Staff where they make agreements that you think is their agreement and then two years later when they go to build it if it's not written down as a condition of approval we have no ability to go back and say you agreed to this um that happens a lot and again a lot of it's because whoever's presenting the project maybe is the the developer and maybe they get the project approved and then they sell it to somebody else and that somebody else says whoa I never agreed to those things right that's not a condition of approval so just know that when you're having those dialogues with the applicant or the developer unless you condition it they're not tied to it like the biggest one is probably zone changes I know Council gets really frustrated when a developer comes for a zone change and he says hey I'm gonna do you know this this type of use and then they get the zone change and that use doesn't go in and there's like this feeling of well they lie to us and again we cannot condition a zone change so keep in mind that while they may say they're going to build a certain use we have no you know no way to bind them to that and more often than not just because of development and cost they end up selling the properties to somebody else who had a completely different Vision so I always caution you when you ask at a zone change level what are you going to build they should not be presenting that at all like that should not be part of the discussion because we have no way to bind them to actually build that so just keep that in mind um yeah the other one is just conflict of interest generally speaking I think you know you guys are pretty good when you feel that maybe there's a conflict or a perceived conflict of bringing that up and recusing yourself but if ever you have questions of course our City attorney Carl Hall can can give you um advice and then even if you need to make some disclosure on the record he can help you with that language to disclose as to what the perceived conflict is or is not so use him as a resource and then maybe just one other thing I know they talked about public comment is more better than less you know generally we we do limit public comment to three minutes A lot of times people want to go over that and it's at the discretion of the chair if you want to allow them more time or not um generally the expectation at least for the audience is they we try to keep them limited to three minutes just so you know one person doesn't get three and the next person gets 15 because then it's not fair for everyone so um again it's not your discretion any other thoughts on the comments yeah I just want to highlight one thing that he pointed out but it was kind of it was really quick um I mean a lot of us well a lot of the Commissioners have expertise Communications and disclose that they had a communication but oftentimes don't disclose what the communication was and how that conversation went and any viewpoints that were shared that actually is required to be part of the disclosure just saying that you had a conversation is not enough to it's not a full disclosure so I just want to share that he did touch on it but it was very quick yeah I think it's a good point Carl can you speak on that just for clarity you know I think when you're talking to the applicant I think it's pretty apparent that you know he's telling you about the project and he wants your support but I think you know if you wanted to say I spoke with the applicant but obviously there was no uh indication as to whether or not I was going to vote for it I'm going to listen to all the facts and Circumstance before I make a vote so um if you're talking to other people that may have a personal interest in it then it's probably worth going into a little more detail as what the conversation was to make sure that you're not biased thank you at the end of the day I think it's the issue is whether or not you're predetermined to make an approval or denial by virtue of that conversation so I think that's the the piece that you want to make clear is that you had a conversation but I'm I'm still willing to hear all the evidence and all the facts before I make a decision that's the the core what and allow for rebuttal so if an applicant presents something in a another interested party you know if if you know if it's something that's not going to be presented on the record just make sure that it's clear so that there you know if there's any opposition that they can rebut any of those claims it just needs to be allow both sides to have to be able to build their own record um that's the point of a public hearing right is to get all the facts out and the conversations out to make sure that we're not biased so that's a quick question please Carlos for your recommend ations that in the future will we disclose we've had communication with applicants we add a line saying that we have not made a decision on the project we are interested in hearing because I mean I I've been at meetings obviously I've never told someone like you're not supposed to tell people how you're you think you just want to listen during those meetings and I think that's pretty clear but do you think we should add that to our disclosure well in my eight years I've never had that issue come up where somebody was accused of being for or against a Project based upon their communication with the applicant I don't think it would be a bad idea you know to state that you know I'm completely open to you know hearing all the facts before I make a decision I did meet with them and I'll consider everything here at the hearing before I make my final decision so certainly wouldn't hurt thank you [Music] Mrs any more questions no I think we're good okay any more questions from my Commissioners while we're on this topic okay we will close item number six and move on to item number seven Trucking Meadows Regional planning liaison report oh I'll take this one so we had a trucking Meadows Regional planning uh meeting on August 24th it was a very short meeting there was two agenda items the first one was to uh do some cleanup to the project Regional significance guidelines uh there was some cleanup language and then other minor changes and then there was a training on the RPC website and notification that we need to be complying with our training requirements the next meeting is scheduled for September 28th 2023 other than that there's nothing to report thank you we'll close item seven move to item eight staff announcements all right Angela Foose assistant director so just updates from previous City Council meetings the oracrest zone change did go to council for the first reading and it was approved that was the one in Ward four they were going from a residential to a mixed employment zoning and then the Viewpoint Apartments which was the apartments those are located near Home Depot off of McCarran and I-80 that project one of the conditions of approval has been appealed so that will be heard in front of City Council next Wednesday and that was the one specific to the condition about you can't start grading until we have a recorded secondary fire access um they've appealed that condition that is it closing item eight moving on item nine commissioner suggestions for future agenda items commissioner Villanueva uh do we have an outcome on the ward or the redistricting I haven't kept up with that so I don't know what's going on there and then um we haven't seen any legislative updates um so we they did vote on the redistricting let me see if I can find the map that was approved and I can send that out to the group so you can see which version they approved in terms of legislative updates was there we typically don't do a legislative update other than land use issues uh I think there was a couple land use uh something that impacted the development code but I think actually I think it died so I'm not really worried about it but but it's a special request right we can make requests for presentations you can yep let me go back and see maybe more let me know if there was one in particular there was some affordable housing yeah any of the land use and affordable yeah anything related to a land use zoning um affordable housing our purview basically I mean we don't need an entire city council review but um just a little you know very nearly tailored to our governing body absolutely and yeah we generally don't but I think multiple Commissioners have requested that and on that topic I would I would indicate that nixacone a representative from our office um well from the city's office attended all those so if you wanted to get a hold of him I'm sure he could give you a breakdown on all that information we can't have it publicly presented we certainly can I'm just saying if you wanted a one-on-one he's the guy okay not public is fine I anything that I hear I I'd like the public to hear sure thanks chair uh Angela maybe this is for you but uh would we be able to get an update on the title 18 zoning code cleanup no okay you're kidding kidding yes um I will agendize an item and give you guys an update on kind of all the outstanding pieces there's a lot of moving pieces so that is actually a great Point especially for some of the new Commissioners um there's going to be a lot coming before you in the next couple months so I'll give you a heads up great thank you okay we'll close item nine moving to item 10 public comment Michelle any communication to be heard no correspondence no voicemails and no request to speak forms would anybody in the chambers wish to speak on item number 10 public comment seeing none we will close item 10 in public comment and move to item 11 and before we do that um when's our next Planning Commission meeting we have let's see known for their planning commissions meetings for the month of September we don't have any other items so our next meeting is not till October enough October 4th October 4th I'm going to send out a notice of cancellation for the September 20th okay Planning Commission meeting it'll go out this week that is during fall break for any of you that are have children or are involved in the school district so let us know if you're not going to be around all right with that said so during the meeting all in favor of a journey in the meeting hi great have a good evening