all right should I just good to go all right hey good evening everyone thank you for joining I will now call to order the regular meeting of the Reno City Planning Commission today is Thursday December 5th 2024 and we're at the City of Reno Council chamber we'll begin with agenda item one the Pledge of Allegiance commissioner velto will you please lead us flag States thank you we'll now close item one and move to item two roll call Carrie rer Manny Sarah Christina delvar here JD draulic Alex fto Sylvia villino is absent Harris Armstrong here we have a COR thank you we'll close item two and move to item three public comment this item is for either public comment on any action item or for any general public comment members of the public may call into the meeting to provide public comment by using the zoom link provided on the agenda specifically https Callin links. reno.gov pc125 d24 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 3 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 a 4 to 3 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 disrupted behavior and you will be asked to leave Chambers if the behavior continues with that we did hang on we did receive um corresponden for a future agenda item that was for to the Planning Commission and has been added to the record I did not receive any public comment cards for this item nor did I receive any voicemails for this item thank you do we have anyone in Chambers wishing to speak under general public comment it looks like we have somebody on Zoom that wishes to make public comment during this item okay great we will move to zoom Kim are you there yeah did you want to make public comment on this item or did you you want to make public comment during a specific item on the agenda uh I'm sorry during the during the discussion so we have general public comment and then we have public comment during specific agenda items so do you wish to make public comment now or do you want to wait no I Will Wait thank you okay which item are you here for so we can bring you in the Lage Tennis Club okay thank you okay anyone else on Zoom wishing to speak under public comment hearing none I'll just bring it back to Chambers one more time do you have anyone in Chambers wishing to speak under general public comment seeing none we'll go ahead and close item three and open item four public hearings um just want to note that we do have a floating agenda and we can take items out of order uh based on that I propose that we move item 4.5 lc2400 one6 plum Redevelopment to the first item on the agenda I can second that commissioner draulic we have a second I I actually don't think we need a motion on this but is anyone on the commission opposed to moving the item no opposition okay no opposition we will take item 4.5 first and I think we'll get a presentation from staff hello hello good evening chairman members of the commission for the record my name is Leah picotti and I am an associate planner with the City of Reno development services this evening I am presenting the application for plumis redevelopment I think most everybody is familiar with the location of this site but it is located on McCaron between plumis and Lakeside it is a 9.48 acre site and today's request before you is for a conditional use permit for a 273 unit multifam apartment complex and Grading resulting in fills greater than 10 ft um just to explain why those things are required conditional use permit is required in the GC zoning district for any multifam use with over 100 units that's why we're looking at the conditional use permit and any grading resulting in fills greater than 10 ft requires a major site plan view Ren Municipal Code allows us to combine these applications into one conditional use permit hence why you're looking at a conditional use permit for both of these items tonight regarding the zoning District this is located in The General commercial zoning district Key issues that were analyzed in this request were overall site design compatibility with surrounding developments and uses traffic access and circulation and tree preservation to give you a little bit of background here um this was previously Club Lakeridge and in 2019 the city council approved a zoning change uh from the club Lake Ridge spe uh specific plan District to The General commercial zoning District following up on that in 2021 a tentative map and conditional use permit were approved for 314 Condominiums and that's what you see on your screen right there that's the 2021 approval today they came in looking for a modification um we asked them to come back in with a fully different application so at first this was being processed as an amendment but because it was so different from the original 314 condos we asked them to bring it in as its own application so again this is a 273 unit multif family apartment complex it would be two buildings those buildings are going to be four to five stories in height 45 to 56 ft in height The General commercial zoning District does allow for a height of 65 ft so at 56 fet that is allowed they are proposing 437 parking spaces uh a a development like this generally requires 305 so they are exceeding those parking requirements also they're adding a couple of amenities in there including an approximate 8,000 ft dog park located down at the bottom of your screen there the grading that we're looking at there's been some misconceptions here about grading and that I've looked at the public comment and people have mentioned that this is being built up into these large pads that are then going to be built that's that's not what's going on if you've gone and looked at the site you'll see this which is a giant hole in the ground uh this was left over from the demolition of the tennis club so essentially what they're doing is filling that hole in and it's going to be maximum fills of approximately 23.2 ft heard a lot about compatibility with the public comments so I'm going to go through that couple of slides here so this is high density residential it comes out to approximately 29 dwelling units per acre um I do want to point out that across McCarron that that's a multif family 30 which allows for 30 dwelling units per acre and it is surrounded by moderate density residential most of everything that's around this is either town homes or Condominiums um it is surrounded by arterial streets that's something we like to see when we're looking at these larger multif family developments McCaron is a major arterial and Lakeside and plumis are both minor arterials so we've got good modes of transportation that connect this particular area to other City centers and then we've heard a lot about the height um increased height equals increased setbacks so you can either push this development out into multiple buildings around the site or you can centralize it which gives you larger setbacks more of a buffer and more screening we're looking at these buildings being approximately 44 ft from plumis 112 ft from McCaron 48 to 64 ft from the uh property to the East and approximately 60 to 100t from the properties to the South also I want to talk about compatibility here for a second because I saw a lot of public comment that said that this is not compatible with the area if you look up the definition of compatibility the definition is two things that can coexist without conflict it doesn't mean that it has to look the same or be the same height it means that two things can coexist without conflict so in this case regarding the compatibility findings staff was able to make them so furthering that compatibility conversation we have front set back buffers plus existing mature trees that will mitigate the building Mass what you're looking at on your screen here everything that's outlining the property in red is that 10-ft front yard setback everything in yellow is additional front yard setback it's buffering that's been put in and that's somewhere in the range of 15 to 80 feet um also what this is showing us is that all of those little green dots are existing trees that are going to be saved so they are proposing to preserve 155 existing trees on site and add another 154 trees so we'd look be looking at 309 trees total on this 10 Acre Site just to give you a an idea Reno Municipal Code would require about 219 additionally they're looking at 26% Landscaping Reno municipal code in The General commercial zoning District requires 15% so we are exceeding that code requirement as well also they're installing and there is existing vegetative screening on the South Side adjacent to the trash compactor the maintenance building and the dog park right down here in this area so that just increases that compatibility because it mitigates the potential conflicts between this development and those developments to the sou traffic access and circulation I've heard a lot about traffic access and circulation on this project I do want to point out that the traffic study was done we do have uh I think people here tonight representing the firm the engineering firm that that did that study so what we're looking at is a slight increase in the delay we are aware that there's already congestion in this area I think everybody who drives this knows that there's congestion but the increase that we're looking at from this development is really going to be around one or two seconds and McCarron is going to be widened in the next 5 to 10 years per um RTC they are doing some operational and safety improvements coming um this in the summer fall of 2025 that widening project was originally expected in the 2030 to 2050 time frame but what I've heard from RTC is that they are bumping that up uh we just don't know exactly when they haven't set the list of priorities yet so it'll depend upon where this particular project ends up falling in that priority list that will probably be determined next year when the 20125 um Regional Transportation plan is released additionally a project like this is going to uh provide approximately 96,000 in Impact fees this is money that would go directly back into uh fixing Regional road infrastructure not necessarily directly adjacent to this property but in the region and the application is also going to provide a sidewalk and partial landscape property along the along McCarron there um if you've been down there you would know that the sidewalk currently ends at the intersection of McCaron and Lakeside so that's going to be extended up past this project and there is a sidewalk that goes down plumis so that would provide connectivity down there there will also be several points of connectivity from within the site to the sidewalk Network out on the outside I'll go through some findings here so these are our general review criteria findings um first one is it consistent with the Reno master plan yes very much so it's consistent with the plan goals it's consistent with the policies and it's consistent with the strategies is it compant with Title 18 yes with the conditions of the approval the project not only meets but exceeds Reno municipal code in several ways does it mitigate the traffic impacts well delays will be minimal one to two seconds and really you know we're looking at those future Road improvements that are going to come along in the next few years will it provide a safe environment yes um the increase setbacks the addition of the sidewalk the landscaped Parkway that'll improve the environment for pedestrians and people on bicycles coming through that area now we have the conditional use perit findings so is the use in accordance with Reno municiple code and the purpose of the zoning District well the purpose of The General commercial zoning district is intended to accommodate a mix of higher density residential retail commercial and other employment and service oriented uses so yes is the design compatible with surrounding development it's surrounded by residential uses and arterial streets we've got a largely increased setback we've got a large percentage of landscaping we have a large number of trees they've provided extra screening and staff has found that this will exist with the surrounding development without conflict is the design consistent with the development standards again meets and exceeds Reno municipal code are there available Public Services yes there are this is a 10 acre infill project characteristics are reasonably compatible with the types of uses permitted in the surrounding area characteristics or distinctive features um proposed will coexist with the types of uses permitted in the surrounding area and finally it will not be detrimental to the public health safety or welfare and staff believes that once developed noise smoke odor dust vibration illumination and other hazards will all be mitigated that concludes my presentation the recommended motion is on the board and I am available for questions thank you thank you do we get a presentation from the applicant good evening uh for the record Andy derling withw Rogers uh here representing the applicant uh with me also tonight K Gordon um representatives from Headway Transportation the traffic engineer um our engineering team team from wood Rogers and as well as Joe Ryan with Thompson Thrift the applicant so have a whole slew of folks to answer your questions tonight if if necessary um Leah did a fantastic job and gave you a fantastic overview so unfortunately some of this is going to be a little redundant and I'll and I'll kind of cruise through that as as applicable but uh this is a conditional use permit for the 100 more than 100 units in The General commercial zone so we're have 273 units and also for those uh fills greater than 10 ft as as Leah pointed out you know that kind of large hole um there's also quite a bit of fall across the site and and with the large buildings in the middle it does necessitate kind of more of a flattening of the site so that's that's kind of the ne what the Nexus is for that grading here's a look at the site right now uh as Leah mentioned you know a lot of multif family around this um so these are like uses um this is Master PL sub Urban mixed use and just kind of pulled these out to to further kind of solidify that you know this is a supported use in the master plan um that this provides you know SMU provides for opportunities for broader mix of uses in a more Suburban context while also preserving opportunities for higher density infill and Redevelopment as well as provide opportunities for higher density housing within close proximity to services and employment and I think you know on McCaron um you know on the McCarron ring itself and obviously in this area of South Reno um fantastic opportunity um for for providing higher density housing in proximity to those Services zoning General commercial does allow for that mix of commercial and higher uh higher density residential Thompson Thrift is a new developer into our region um they're a national uh multif family mix and mixed use developer and just want to kind of give you a little bit of a flavor um for what they do um they have uh you know more than 23,000 units currently constructed uh 86 residential communities uh and over six billion in development uh in the US this is just a look at you know they've they've developed kind of across the United States they've got offices uh uh you know across the Midwest and Southwest uh as well uh this there so essentially they're they're not new to this they may be do to Rino but they are experts in the field of developing uh you know luxury multif family developments the specifics of this project 9.3 Acres 273 units uh those are concentrated in two buildings located in the center of the site uh building one which is on on the left side of your screen or the West Side um is is a four-story building uh it is split level um so on the um if I can point there we go on just this Eastern side of building one that one of units is essentially one hallway in units that's a daylight basement so it's a basement level it doesn't count as a story so it's a four-story building um but on that side of the building it is about 55 ft in height um but next to the other building obviously that that is a a very good screening of that and then building two on the on the east side uh the kind of backward seven shape there 45 foot four-story building itself uh we do have increased setbacks on the front both in the landscape setback um to the parking itself as well as obviously setting that uh those buildings back quite a ways from plumis uh and South McCarron uh 2.4 Acres of landscaping where we're you know is an acre more than what were required by code um 219 trees are required and we have 309 trees will'll be provided consisting of 155 mature existing uh trees uh and 154 new trees uh on-site amenities you'll see kind of that pool area in that you know Courtyard of building one a dog park um also some indoor amenities as part of of the buildings themselves and finally ample parking you know one when this project came through originally and we'll highlight it later in the presentation but one of the complaints was uh you know that pluma street has on street parking there's a lot of uh of on street parking that's used from the other multif family developments in the area uh and there there was a complaint that the previous project uh the currently approved project didn't have enough parking um this you know we're required just over 300 parking spaces uh and we've got 438 spaces provided looking at the tree preservation um by code uh we're only required to preserve trees that are in the front setback so really that that red line represents the the 10- foot setback along our street frontages we've expanded that obviously there's a lot of mature trees out there and we're trying to save as many of them as possible uh 155 have been identified um you know obviously some are being disrupted um that are still there and would be removed there's a few dead ones out there those will obviously be removed as well uh one of the things that came up at the at the NAB was criticism of the aesthetic of these buildings um I think they were referred to as prison-like uh unfortunately you know what we presented at that time were were two-dimensional uh elevations uh you know for for Architects planners you know we're kind of used to seeing that for the general public those are difficult to read and so uh the applicant prepared um some some more robust uh 3D renderings that I'll kind of scroll through here and you get really a a flavor for you know these are more contemporary architecture um a lot of different colors and and textures to these and a lot of different articulation and fenestration in these buildings uh look at that Central Courtyard area uh this would be the entrances to the buildings view Bird's eyee view from from McCarron obviously those mature trees kind of help uh to um reduce the mass of those buildings and obviously the the increase setback as well this would be the view between the two buildings so you get a little bit of a flavor on the right side of your screen there is that fivestory element again it's kind of you know paired up with the other building so the the mass of that is not overwhelming a little bit more on Thompson Thrift um really focusing you here kind of on the right side of these columns um some they averages this again because you know they have properties throughout the US their average renter is 35 years old uh average household size 1.6 people uh average household income over 109,000 uh so they they attract kind of a diverse community of young professionals and mature couples uh that are looking for these premium um living environments um some of their site criteria which really is is why they're most interested in this site is they they like being adjacent to high traffic thorough far is obviously McCarron uh proximity to good jobs so South Reno is is definitely provides that uh proximity to other high-end housing and schools South Reno provides that uh and a proximity to high-end retail which would be to the um east of this traffic also has come up uh we did prepare updated traffic study as I mentioned headways here to answer any questions that you may have on that uh that was completed in October of this year uh it will utilize or the project itself will utilize two existing driveways one on plumis one on Lakeside uh the the uh access on Lakeside is a shared driveway with the adjacent multif family to the south of us um there was uh there well currently is and was proposed to be continued to be used with the existing approval uh a driveway on McCarron uh it used to be a full access uh on McCarron there for the old Tennis Club um U endot came through a couple years ago and Clos the median to close the left outs or the lefts uh left hand movements there is a right in right out driveway it's still out there um the previous project proposed to at least use the egress of that and this project is using is proposing to not use it at all um why is that relevant um essentially you know because there is that increased traffic on McCaron removing some of that friction from McCaron helps will help the situation overall uh existing intersection operations will have some negligible impacts uh as staff mentioned you know in the kind of 1 second range um so they're negl neg negligible to the public at large uh rtc's 2015 50 RTP identifies that widening of South McCarron um that RTP is in the update stage right now and scheduled to be adopted early next year uh and then we'll be adding that safety component of of sidewalk on McCaron uh just to give you kind of a compare and contrast to to leave you here this is the approved plan um from back in 2021 uh it consisted of eight buildings that were really oriented towards the edge of uh of the site um so you see those eight buildings all four stories um and and essentially you know 40ft SE backs on the North side 25 foot setbacks on the south and east side um it had a central amenity and pool it was gated um and it had driveways on plumis Lakeside and McCaron as I mentioned previously the new plan uh the it's two buildings uh oriented towards the center of the property uh on the North side adjacent to McCaron 80 to 112 foot setb on the west side next to pluma somewhere around 140 foot setback on the South Side 50 to 120t setback and on the east side a 64 foot setback so staff hit this we wanted to hit it as well you know those increased setbacks really do add to the compatibility of of this multif family use adjacent to other multif family uses still has a central amenity with that pool uh and as I mentioned previously just the driveways on plumis and Lakeside getting rid of that uh egress to South McCarron so that comparison kind of kind of by the Numbers here um you know originally or you know GC zoning allows for the high density residential products uh the approved plan was Condominiums this is Mark rate Apartments by and large those are very similar housing products um you know still a a stacked flat type style uh the density we could have up to 419 units uh the previous plan had 314 this is 273 um that's relevant for a number of reasons one it's you know that just overall intensity but also you know as we talk about traffic um the old plan had um average daily trip generation of about 2,300 trips uh this new one is about just over 1,800 trips so it's a 20% reduction in the amount of traffic that that'll be generated from this over what's currently approved uh Building height we can go up to 65 ft current plan has uh 40 to 50 foot in in uh Heights in four-story buildings the snoo pan 45 to 55 foot in and again in four-story buildings with that basement level uh so those are compatible there I would add on the building height uh you you'll hear that you know there's nothing that like that mass in this area that's not true to the East End of the west of this there's commercial properties that have three-story 40ft tall buildings um there's a Wells Fargo Building to the to the West there's the Magnolia kind of shopping center and a larger office building to the east of us that are just on the adjacent blocks um so along McCarron there there there is some Mass along that stretch um front set backs were CR of 10 feet um the old plant had 40 feet and as I mentioned previously we've got 80 to 140t along those plumis and McCarron frontages um parking again big issue um uh or big you know concern that was raised by the public during uh the 20 uh 21 approval uh we were required at that time to have 325 stalls we had 392 um this one actually typo there we're required to have 305 stalls uh and we have 438 so quite an increase in the number of parking uh that concludes my presentation as I mentioned we have our whole team here to help answer any of your questions uh we are in agreement with staff's recommendation and would be happy to answer any questions great thanks so much we'll bring it back to the Commissioners for disclosures commissioner Basera please start sure um familiar with the site read and reviewed materials spoke with the applicants representative and some residents commissioner roor Meer familiar with the site I read and reviewed emails I did not speak to the applicant um and I listened to the voicemails commissioner delvar and I have read the materials seen the site um and I spoke with members of the applicants as well commissioner Dracula read and received emails familiar with the site and spoke with the applicant's representative uh commissioner VTO same disclosures commissioner Armstrong same disclosures uh we'll now move sorry we'll now move to public comment I do have two requests to speak forms do we have anyone on Zoom wishing to speak on this item we do have one person on Zoom that I'm aware of um that registered to speak during this item we also have voicemails that we need to play during the meeting too okay great maybe should we start with voicemails move to zoom and move to Chambers sure and then I'll just um while we're doing that I'll just make note that we did receive um correspondence and um that was forwarded to the Planning Commission and has been entered into the record great thanks so much hi this is Brett Glover I'm commenting on uh 6,000 plumis uh LDC 25- 000016 uh I'm I'm opposed to the project as presented uh that doesn't a it uh it doesn't fit into the rest of the the neighborhood as far as the architecture of it uh I think instead of having two large block buildings they need to break it up so there's smaller units and not such an eyesore uh I'm also concerned about the the traffic I think we're already getting uh it's already backing up through Lakeside and plumis now and and just adding that many more people trying to get into it there is going to cause a problem I also have a a problem with like I said this thing just doesn't fit with a neighborhood at all and what this is going to do to our property values and finally I'm not sure if you guys look at what the if the schools can handle you know this this inflect some people so I think that's it thanks my name is Karen rates our AIT TS the case number is LDC 25 [Music] 066 that's wrong it's LDC 2516 6,000 plumis I am against such a big apartment complex going in 273 units way too many for that area way too big I live in the Lakeside Lewis homes so I will deal with all that traffic bring from all those people so I am against LDC 2516 thank you hello my name is Lori Glover um my address is Lake Ridge Terrace East I'm a neighbor adjacent to the LD c 25 000016 6000 plumis apartment complex I'd like to state that I am against building the apartment complex as it is now proposed the proposed entrance and exit from the apartment complex onto Lakeside Drive is too close to the McCaron intersection and will be unsafe for through traffic and turning traffic from McCaron it will back up like a crazy bottleneck there and create problems for all drivers on McCaron the traffic already backs up through the stop lights at plumis and Lakeside at where they intersect McCarron and I don't know what it that will look like if you add another 200 200 to 400 cars and drivers coming out of that uh new apartment car complex it won't be pretty the apartment complex is Too Tall at four and five stories high it doesn't fit in architecturally with the surrounding Community Lakeside living is adjacent to the proposed complex and it has pitched roofs and they are only twostory buildings the noise from jamming that many new residents into the neighborhood will also reduce our quality quality of life and be very problematic for our enjoyment of our neighborhood this project has come in many iterations from its first proposal and this one is not appropriate it doesn't have enough parking places for the number of cars and drivers that'll be at 273 new apartments they will need to increase the parking on this uh when they widen when endot widens McCaron that's going to take away that whole front section of this apartment complex land and it'll also take out some of those parking places and then our neighborhood will have a problem with that apartment complex's residents parking on plumis and Lakeside where there already is not enough spots for the residents that live at again my name is Lori Glover I live across from the new proposal and I am against it 100% thank you hi my name is Sandra Bankston and I just called a bit ago I was cut off I'm calling um in regard to the plumis project LDC 25-16 um I had just discussed the compatibility issue and the block cell block type construction with four and five stories not being compatible um the other thing I would like to address is traffic apparently they are going to close the McCaron entrance and exit and it will use Lakeside and plumis there's so much traffic and exit on on Lakeside making a leftand turn out of there will be absolutely impossible it's just such a short turn it can't happen it makes no sense at all um the third thing I'd like to address um apparently with 273 units and I believe it's 4 and forget how many 69 maybe um and parking places apparently that total meets code but I asked the question I think um 121 of the units are two bedroom and one bedroom and some three bedrooms I ask the question how many of those spaces are dedicated to Residents how many guest parking and how many for service Vehicles just because it meets code doesn't mean that it it makes any sense at all I don't think the project is up to the standards of the neighborhood again I own the home at um on Lakeridge Terrace West across the street so I see the traffic I dislike that that um empty lot for these past what five years anyway I hope that you take a really really hard look at this project again not opposed to developing development but needs to be done right because these developers from Indiana they're going to go away and we have to live with it anyway I appreciate your time thank you that's it for voicemails um do you want to do Zoom or do you want to take public comment first uh let's do Zoom hello yeah Kim yes okay um it go ahead and um state your name for the record and then you'll be given three minutes to speak thank you my name is Kim bakus I live in Lakeridge Shores I would just like to point out there's there's a concern with traffic for every day but today I was on McCarron at 11:00 and the traffic was backed up to Greensboro because there was an accident at plumis there were cars heading east that turned across the median to get back over to the lane going west so adding another 500 cars to uh the traffic there just might add to more uh potential accidents and traffic jams so my concerns are essentially the same as all of those that have been presented to you uh Lage is a planned community and this is not something that was planned for this community I think you do need to take into account those of us who have purchased properties who have built properties who've raised families and who are uh have certain expectations for what we will be driving past and contending with over the uh everyday for this property I'm interested in knowing where the land will come from for this widening of McCaron is it this uh property that will be taken or are you going to impinge upon the lerage um Condominiums to North I'm concerned about people crossing the street when they do have to park on M on uh on uh Lakeside or plumis that's a pretty heavyduty arterial to have to take your children across the street for the schools I'm certain are not adequate for a number of families that I expect the Builder realizes will want to move in there and I think that there's uh a definite need for public services that I don't see being addressed by these this um this uh developer there's going to be a need for buses there's going to be a need for police there's going to be a need for uh a whole lot of things and the the number of me the amount of traffic that's coming is not just the people who live there it's the services they require it's the packages being delivered it's the um ambulances that may be showing up whatever deliveries thank you very much I'm not opposed to development I would prefer the two-story options of multiple buildings thank you thank you Kim anyone else on Zoom or was no it doesn't look like we have anybody else on Zoom that wishes to speak okay great thank you we'll bring it back to Chambers for public comment we'll start with Terry rert thank you uh please state your name for the record and you will have three minutes okay I'm Terry rert I am representing Lakeridge Villas HOA and it is 127 homeowners we are directly across from this development and we are directly impacted by this project uh I do not want to be repetitive all the things that have previously been said you don't need to hear again I ask all of you to please look at this project with a critical eye for safety and for all the concerns that the residents of this area it is a planned Community um it's you know been in Reno that that particular area is old Reno and this new proposal uh I don't feel will coexist without conflict if that's the de definition of um uh compatibility um we are concerned in lakid vill is we already are having some problems with increased crime and when you have Apartments versus condos and Tow houses we feel like the risk of crime increases it's a little bit uh more transient population if we have to hire security for our development and pass that on to our homeowners in our HOA fees this this is not reasonable for our development um again I'm not going to sit here and go over all the concerns that have already been brought to your attention but we please ask that you really look at this with a critical eye um we don't feel it's as it's presented now is compatible with the area thank you thank you next we have Steve Tel thank you sir please state your name for the record have three minutes uh my name is Steve toppel and I live on Spiner Drive in Laker Shores I've lived there since uh 19 I buil bought a lot there in 1978 and built my home in 1983 and I've been there ever since since um my family uh was one of the Prime Developers for Lakeridge Community with Mr jaxi we built all the multif family homes that were there on uh the golf course and um and uh we built the and the Laker tennis club uh which was a part of our Laker Department's phase three and of which I ran from 19 uh 1985 until 1991 when it was uh when we had to get rid of it uh so I've had a lot of experience I'm still still living there and I love being there and I just wanted to I don't want to repeat what everybody else talked about but uh Kim back has mentioned that uh there was an accident today in the corner of uh of U uh let's see McCaron and plumis and I have pictures because I drive I was driving by uh this morning and the the traffic was just horrendous and um I I have the photos here I don't know can I stick one down here and see what happens oh yeah there it is um oh nice picture um anyway that was basically what was going on and the traffic was backed up from from uh from plumis back to my to uh Greensboro where I turn in to go to Laker Shores it was it's a mess and it happens not a lot but we do have accidents there and the safety issue is really really really significant especially now with all the increased traffic and and mccaran Boulevard seems to be busier and busier and busier now because of I don't know people are staying off the freeway I don't know what they're doing but they're coming down McCaron Boulevard from from the uh from U God knows where uh Herm and coming in and going to whatever destination they have they have around lak Ridge and so it just it's it's really really difficult and very scary and um the uh one of the things I wanted to mention to you is that as far as the consistency of this project lerage is a planned community and it has been since it was built by Mr Jaxon and he was a want to laid it out I still have the um exist the uh information guide for Lakeridge uh from 1978 and it show and everything it's it's there is it's still the same nothing's changed the buildings are all the same everything is all the same except now we're going to have a new building you start have 30 seconds huh okay okay except there's going to be a new building that with with a massive amount of of uh of apartments and as opposed to the smaller um uh you know four and eight units four units eight units units that they have there and uh it it's just not consistent with what we've we've had and it's going to stick out like a zore thumb I've looked at the U oh my time is up so thank you very much I'm opposed to this project next we have Laura minat good evening I live at Sorry Miss could you please state your name for the record I'm sorry Laura manat thank you I live at 4960 plumis which is the third driveway off of McCaron if you know plumis from McCaron it is rather curvy and with the traffic we have already it's dangerous just to come out of our driveway there are seven H tow houses there that were built by hulet Wells and we're there from 70 and preceded both the golf course and lak Ridge Condominiums we have a hard time getting out because of the traffic right now every street that goes north is two lanes not four until you reach Plum and even then it goes down our street has a 30 mph traffic allow but everybody coming off McCaron is going 40 and 50 I get ped just because I'm trying to turn into my driveway by traffic that wants to go faster it's so curvy that 30 miles should be 20 or 25 not what it is and nobody goes what it is the property values I think will app with all those apartments architecturally I know very little I've only lived in Reno at this address for 10 years moved here in 2010 from South Lake parking right now is on the street because the Lake Ridge terce Apartments don't allow a lot of parking in their parking area if you can't put it in the garage you can't have it there you can't park in front of your garage you can't park in any other spaces overnight they're for guests the parking on the street already is unbelievable and now you want to add all these apartments that will increase that and then increase the crossing of the street and the traffic that is already terrible I urge you not to give these people a permit for all these apartments we have above that piece of land a great deal of apartments and so thank you for your time thank you for your comments next we have Mary and Mar thank you Miss uh please state your name for the record and you have three minutes good evening Commissioners I'm Maryann Mariam I live at 8600 Lakeside Drive I am a near neighbor of this project and I urge you to vote no on the current configuration design some key concerns I believe must be addressed before any approved approval are Lakeside Drive access this should be for an emergency access use only the entry on the plumis which is further from McCarron would manage traffic better traffic is already problematic with the potential addition of hundreds of new vehicles the Lakeside access must be restricted to emergencies only due to safety concerns at the ward 2 NAB uh meeting it was uh discussed that the proposed site plan does not accurately reflect the planned widening of McCaron which will take out significant landscaping and mature existing trees I think an actual accurate representation is crucial for evaluation how do you know what you're going to get unless they actually show you what you're going to get mass transit there were no bus stops bike Lanes shown I mean this is part of increased density you need to eliminate cars you have to provide for people to have other ways to get to work and get around the city there's there was nothing on the plans water runoff management we need to prioritize our water conservation in our desert environment um need to include bios swells detention basins maybe the um dog park is designed to flood I mean that's common practice I think one of the largest concerns I have is the architecture I think it's horribly monolithic the root Roes are so boxy there's no Saving Grace none um there should be stepped floor horizontal setbacks to transition from the ground to the upper levels I mean even the things they've built over at ranera do that um this design is little more than a rectangular box with some windows and a two-tone color scheme thank you but I think we already have enough warehouses in this city hi compatibility um the fact that you're they're going to ask for a conditional use permit to raise the grade 10 ft and then build four and five story building on this there's nothing that's going to be compatible with that in the neighborhood it'll be taller than everything except the Peppermill and the Atlantis casinos Thompson Thrift has a history of cookie cutter designs across numerous States um they say themselves that they have three primary standard designs providing construction efficiency predictability and an end product well let's be clear this Builder does not care about our community they care about their Investment Partners have them design something worthy of the site please thank you thank you for your comments do we have anyone else in Chambers wishing to speak under public comment for this item seeing none we'll close public comment and bring it back to the commission for questions commissioner Basera sure thank you um thanks everyone great questions uh Leah let's kick it off with you please um you you you mentioned that uh staff could make the findings and the numbers of this new project it does seem promising from at least its currently approved uh plan uh but what's not clear to me just yet is really by what measure or measures uh are these findings evaluated like when you when you say that this project can coexist uh with the surrounding neighborhood in regards to compatibility how is that evaluated exactly like what tangible measures thank you commissioner basara Le picotti for the record um well trying to figure out the best way to answer that um the so when we analyze the findings we look at number one um what those surrounding uses are and can this new use exist there without conflict so for example and this is an extreme example um we're not there's no quantifiable standard here so we're not rating this on a scale of 1 to 10 and saying everything that's a seven passes we're just looking at the types of uses that are generally permitted in a neighborhood commercial General commercial residential type of area and do these uses um coexist I mean we have a we have other ones that we've looked at where a gun range adjacent to something and we can clearly look at that and say yeah these these two things are probably not going to be okay being next to each other but I think in this case when I'm looking at um a use that's the same as the other uses that are all around it it's probably okay and in terms of um compatibility too looking at the fact that there are three arterial streets surrounding this I mean arterials are are direct connections to other parts of the city right so I know that there's been a lot of talk about um public transportation in this area but the reason that there's not public transportation in this area is because the demographics in this area don't require it right these are mostly single family households with vehicles and they're using those streets that are adjacent to this project to access the other areas and I think that when we look at a project like this coming in we're expecting those same types of demographics to come in so in terms of compatibility um is it going to function the same as the uses that are around it and I think the answer is yes is there going to be slightly more traffic yeah there is but we all know that's a chicken or an chicken and an egg sort of scenario where you you have the traffic and then you get more of the buildings in and you get more of those fees so that you can fund more of those Transportation projects and so on and so forth if uh I'm sure that if the area down there on South McCarron um starts um requiring public transportation then RTC would look at that but RTC just did a study like six months ago about um what the areas Transportation needs are and where bus stops need to be added and what bus stops are not being used and I looked at that plan and necessar it didn't come up so again when we're looking at compatibility we're looking at those residential uses with vehicles there's neighborhood commercial nearby there's a Starbucks nearby um there's walkability there are bike paths um so I think in terms of what we're looking at for a multif family residential this this checks all the boxes great thank you chair may I just a quick followup yeah please great thanks Leah um so so just to clarify there is no uh tangible scorecard by which you say you know what there's this this it's yeah there's no quantifiable standard okay so um because you you did mention that gun range right and I do recall just for um everyone's um friendly reminder that staff did recommend approval and this body you denied it because it wasn't compatible and that's where're I'm trying to find you know like this overlap yeah where we can work together for finding a better making this a better project if possible so is there a comparable project like this somewhere else in the city whether it was two years ago three years ago in the last six months that we can say hey people had concerns but look at this project it it worked out better than we expected yeah I mean I've worked on countless multif family projects with um single family uses adjacent and in all of those cases um the applicants have worked real hard to exceed Renown Municipal C code standards and when they do um that increases the compatibility and I haven't seen any problems from that um another another thing that we do look at just for the audience and for everybody is school capacity can the schools in the area handle this can the infrastructure in the area handle this do we have adequate sewer lines do we have adequate water lines do we have all of those things and again um yes I I did talk to wasel County School District no problem handling the capacity of a 273 unit apartment complex coming into here but again I've had um similar uh similar projects up in the North Valleys a couple of them um one over on mayanne I've had I mean there's been several multifamilies that go in adjacent to single family we see it all the time every day great and um I haven't I haven't really heard any problems with those projects okay thank you Leah thank you commissioner commissioner belto thank you uh hi Leah um so for the uh there were questions raised about uh traffic and Ingress and egress off of Lakeside um are could this project be developed without there being Ingress and egress off of Lakeside like could you just have the plumis entrance and exit or do you need to have a second exit that is a great question but I don't think it's a question for me let me um I can either turn it over to the applicants or um potentially Mike Michelle I think it's here too whoever do you all know the answer Andy derling for the record uh commissioner belto um I can start and then I can maybe pass it along to either engineering staff at the city uh or uh staff with Headway Transportation traffic engineer so um yes we looked at it we had extensive discussions with um City engineering staff um both Public Works uh as well as development services uh and the determination was made that you know due to the fact that you know um this is if we can bring my presentation up we a visual may help but you know this is the panhandle if you will of the site uh it is not essentially you know directly adjacent to uh all the parking um so the the Lakeside Drive is on the uh this side over here um so you know you have a little bit of parking on that side really that would just be for convenience for folks that maybe live on that east side of the property um the traffic study anticipated about 10% of the traffic would be going that way um so 90% going to plumis um all told yes we have to have two me two means of access um limiting that access or doing something diff different there becomes problematic because it is a shared driveway with the adjacent uh multif family to the South so talk through that with City staff and I I don't want to put words in their mouth they can come up here and and and say it themselves but essentially the the um determination was made that it is appropriate to remain as is okay and I get some can I ask a few more questions because I seem to remember talking about the Verdi ey projects that you have to have entr two entrances for every project for fire safety correct other reasons um did you consider trying to put two entrances off plumis would that yeah there's just not quite enough room there um so essentially it would be you know further south South here to you know and then you've got two driveways close to each other they're both existing driveways right so that was those were the existing driveways that served the old Tennis Club a commercial use um those are the driveways that served um you know the the adjacent multif family both on both sides there so we're essentially using the existing infrastructure gotcha and I think I didn't fully understand that the driveway on Lakeside is already that's already Ave it's already in place and I would further add you know your your point about you know needing two means of access that is an international fire code um and so international fire code requires two means of access and they have a actually have a formula that has to be double the hypotenuse of the site and all these things so essentially it forces you to have access points on opposite sides of the site okay thank you uh do we have any further questions from the commission commissioner DVR yes thank you this commissioner DVR um just to follow up on the the question um from commissioner velto regarding that ESS is it I mean I'm I'm assuming that the fire department has come by and checked it out and everything and I don't even know how a fire truck can make that curve presentation again uh yes Andy derling again um so if you'll note I believe commissioner you're discussing if a firet truck could get through this is that the cor yeah yep yeah so if you look at actually the just the design of this so we um utilize a software called Auto autoturn it's it's in our CAD software that we use um that can take a fir Tru and and simulate it going through these um and so these if you look at how wide um these the radius the radi are on those um those returns there there and there that's to accommodate a fire truck so yes a fire truck can absolutely get through there excellent and I have a few more questions probably for you see as well just hang tight um or you can pass it off if it's it's for somebody else um you know I've read a lot of the emails that have come in and heard the the voicemails and obviously the folks that came here today and I appreciate their their input um one thing that kind of the term that keeps coming up is bait and switch right so it was the club and then it was supposed to be condos and uh now it's supposed to be these apartments um but my understanding is that Thompson Thrift hasn't actually purchased this site yet so just Leo I didn't know if Leo was Raising her hand um so just kind of curious as to what the like what the process is for for Thompson Thrift at this point yeah no absolutely I can um so yeah just maybe and I didn't we talked about it a lot right but there is an existing approved project on this site for 314 condos um so when you're talking you know in the context of traffic generation and all these you know changes it's changing from there's an existing approval for four- Story 3 304 four story building 314 condos right so that's our sort of Baseline where we're starting from now um this proposal yes Thompson Thrift came in um they're offering to purchase this property to develop what their kind of um uh model is U right within their business plan and business model um they are under contract to purchase it um it is very common that um their purchase of the property would be contingent upon these approvals right they're not going to purchase it until they know that their plan is approved and they can move forward to construction documents I won say 100% but nearly 100% of the projects we work on that are in front of you that are in this situation have that kind of contingency thank you I have questions for Leah or if somebody else has questions they can go ahead and I'll come back to Leah commissioner warer sure I have a question for Andy could you just tell me that just ification for a such a large over parking requirement sure um so kind of a few different reasons right I mean some it is market-based um I realize that code um code has a requirement right it used to be based on bedroom size uh the new code that we're operating under now is based on the square footage of of the residential units um so that doesn't always maybe quite capture it fully um essentially you know my understanding of of of the rationale behind going to a square foot base is that it puts the onus on the developer to know their market and and provide parking appropriate for for their uses um so again Thompson Thrift a nationwide developer they've built you know all over the country they know their product inside and out and that's their model um for you you know to maybe address some of the the concerns or comments from the public right of of yeah that the overp parking does allow for service Vehicles guests um you know assigned parking under you know either in garages or under carports um secondary parking for additional residents that may be living in the same unit so Allin right that's that's sort of the the rationale for providing more parking that coupled with the feedback that we heard last time when we came through with the current approval is that there was a concern that there wasn't enough parking with that plan with more units uh and that there would be spill out onto pluma Street of you know on street parking that's already a a pretty you know pretty well utilized on street parking on pluma may I just ask a followup has there been some the the visuals that were shown didn't show shade shaded structures for the parking or any sort of EV charging can you tell me a little bit about that yeah so this one you do get a glimpse in the in know kind of foreground behind the trees there would be some of those garages um and going back to the site plan so um there are a number of house doesn't always work great uh so garages you know kind of around the perimeter and then these these yellow hatched are those carports um so there is quite a bit of covered parking uh as far as EV charging I would need to consult the client I believe they would probably install some of those I think that's pretty common now in in these um uh developments that you would have a few uh EV charging spaces as well maybe when staff comes back we can go back to the staff questions we can ask if there's a requirement thank you got it uh commissioner Del VR did you want to ask your questions to staff sure thank you thank you um I think you mentioned in your presentation the traffic numbers that were there when the club was sort of in full swing or was that my imagination that might have been my imagination okay we we'll skip that one um The lak Ridge apartments that are to the I guess east of where this lot is do you know the the height of those off the top of your head um let's pull up my presentation yeah I think that you can so are we talking about the lake rage Apartments uh this the the mf211 over here yes yes correct so I I don't know the height offand but I can tell you that the height in the MF 21 zoning District would be 45 ft okay perfect thank you that that was uh that was all I had thank you commissioner VTO thank you um I think my question is for Julia but then I'd also like to ask the applicant this question um given that there was already a prior approval for a condition use permit and there was a tentative map approved uh when we we're evaluating the findings how do we evaluate this proposed application versus what has already been approved like do we look at do we assume there is nothing or are we supposed to consider this compared to what has already been approved when we're making our findings thank you for that question commissioner VTO this that that's a great question um this is kind of what I was getting at during my presentation when I said that originally this was looked at as doing an amendment to that project and if we had done it as an amendment yes we would be looking at that previous project and is it I is it you know making findings based off of that however since this is a completely separate project I would recommend that we look at this with fresh eyes I did um have the the this area with the background because a lot of people were talking about what this should be developed as and I think it's important to point out that that tentative map is actively approved and I can't say that this is going to be built if this multif family complex doesn't get approved but I just do want to show that this site has been zoned and vetted for this sort of use already um um and the findings were made at that time thank you I I appreciate that I'd also like to hear the applicant's perspective on that question as well but I'd really appreciate that thank you thank you Andy derling for the record yeah we uh yes we definitely share staff's um sentiment on that right this is uh this is an existing approved project right that's up there this this could still be built so this would be uh and you have a condition in there that essentially has that sort of strike point of you know when the first build permit is is um pulled for this project in front of you tonight then that map uh goes away right but not until that point it's still alive and could still be built so from our perspective right you're you looking at it yes as a new project and have to make the findings but on some level right the findings have already been made for a more intense project that it is compatible uh it is appropriate use for this property uh and that body made that approval you know made that approval um a couple years ago thank you commissioner R Leah can I ask you a question about parking what are the EV requirements for multif family obviously this is going to be a high-end luxury Market I assume there'll be a few nice electric cars thank you commissioner r r Leah pakati for the record um that's an excellent question but as of right now we don't require um electric vehicle stations in code however that could change would that change with our request for a condition or would that change because ordinance is being examined um I think our ordinance is being examined I'm not I I'm unfortunately I'm not real up to date on what changes are happening in parking but if you wanted to put a condition of approval in there it's absolutely under the purview of this body to do so I guess I would ask the applicant if they're open to something like that uh Andy derling for the record um so yes EV charging is is definitely a growing um U need and desire especially for developments like this um maybe get to the actual plan um talking with the applicant um yes they do incorp they do incorporate you know EV charging into some of the garages and they would have some spaces dedicated with EV charging next to it um right at this point it's Market driven right um so putting a condition on it I I fear would be arbitrary um to say that you have to have x% or something like that um going back a few years or not not in the too distant future a couple years ago um the Planning Commission was making those kind of um um queries at that time especi you know when it came to single family right that hey we should have 10% or you know or one out of four houses should be Eevee ready and it's just you don't know who's going to want it and who's not and it just became kind of an arbitrary and and and it was determined at that time like that's not going to be a condition that we're going to put on projects um so my my um my preference would be no that we would not have a condition to that effect but it is Market driven the growth of EV Vehicles obviously is dictating that uh and that's something that the developer would be you know probably responding to out of the gate and then continuing to respond to as as EV adoption grows go ahead commission b or can we quickly ask Mike um yeah Mike is there some ordinance work on this there is internal discussion but so far nothing is being carried forward what we have found as projects come forward similar to what Mr derling said it's Market driven if the tenants demand it then they're being put in um I think of if you look at most of the new complexes that have gone in there there are EV Char charging um spaces but those were not mandated necessarily by the city were you commissioner B thank you uh I'm going to piggyback off this current theme and maybe for Leah if I may first off you're a rockstar thanks for always being so thorough um what what specific sustainability approaches did staff um maybe ask of the applicant to to meet and or did they even meet them uh with this project specifically around Reno sustainability and action plan I think there's one in place that yeah there there is some stuff about sustainability in the master plan I just got to look at it real quick but I can come back and answer your question in a couple minutes sure all right Mr chairman for the record Garrick Gordon commissioner who spoke with Thompson and Thrift they are agreeable to adding a condition um for EV charging stations to add 5% of the required parking would be EV parking stations so I think that math would equate to about 15 and a half charging stations or 16 we're definitely agreeable to adding that on and uh may I have a fell up there CH yeah please commissioner berser I guess since Garett graced us let's uh let's keep him up here um since you do have a kind of a direct line there Garett um related to the the E charging um would the client be amenable to some sort of solar on those rooftops since there was questions about them being flat and uh that's probably a prime prime space for solar or for some of the Shaded structures to complement or supplement that EV charging as well do you mind I just want to please I I'm very concerned I I like solar I like electric vehicles I'm very concerned that we might be overstepping and what we're allowed to do by placing these conditions unless they're tied to our ability to make findings and I just want to put that out there as a concern making these requests as a commission um just want to put that on the record as a concern I appreciate that commissioner belto and I do uh think highly of you I'll do a friendly push back on this one because um Leah did say that it's uh upon this body's disc question to ask those things so here I am asking for record G Gordon appreciate the ask I think solar is a little more complicated right than just agreeing to a number of charging stations where how infrastructure what is it used for is it net metered you know all those things I don't think I'm in position to answer that today other than I've made commitments to you before for projects I'll do the same here th Thompson and Thrift is in the room listening I can guarantee they'll they'll use their best efforts to try to incorporate solar if possible great thank you Garett I have a question for staff this kind of ties into commissioner bto's point which I agree with I do get a little nervous around slippery slope type reest has there ever been a condition to put solar on any kind of residential or commercial development by this body or even city council uh that's a good question Leah picotti for the record uh I've been with the city three years and I've never seen it okay yeah what I'm driving at is just precedent right like I I think it's probably reasonable and clearly the applicant is amenable to um EV charging stations and it kind of has a Nexus with with parking so we can sort of check that box but if there's no precedent for it maybe this better question for um for City attorney because I'm asking kind of a legal question but yeah just concerned about over conditioning or like overstepping kind of our our bounds as a body with respect to what we can do yeah I don't think that would be an appropriate condition to try and design the project I mean you have to look at the findings that you have before you and make a decision whether to uh pass the conditional use permit or not but uh if the condition isn't related to the finding I don't think it's appropriate understood thank you for weighing in uh that's all I had do we have other questions from the commission commissioner DVR I have a question for you um a couple of people have brought up the widening of McCarron and and I know that they have it's like 100 foot um right now on there and there's the bike lanes and so I'm just kind of wondering how that would kind of consolidate and it might actually not be a question question for you but how would that consolidate that um what's there now once that widening goes into place um thank you that's a great question I'm gonna turn it over to somebody who knows more here he is thank you Andy derling uh for the record yes we have looked into that um in and that's you know some of the rationale because for um why there's such a wide you know landscape there obviously it you know in the current state it it preserves a lot of those trees um in the future state if if an additional Lane is going to be widened on the South Side there of McCarron um there is room for it we did test it um and it doesn't have as big of impacts as you would think because um right now you know I talked about the existing driveways that used to serve the tennis club they had pretty substantial acceleration and deceleration Lanes so there kind of is an extra Lane there for a portion in the center so really you'd be kind of having some impacts to the East and the West as you get closer to to plumis and Lakeside to combat kind of the the um potential loss of those trees there is a condition in there that staff put in it was in the last plan it's in this plan um that you know even going into the future right 10 years from now if that gets widened or you know whatever that is um the owner of this property at that time has to then reinstall trees to help mitigate that great thank you and then one more question for you um a lot of people have brought up the design and um is there the potential that you would consider or that that Thompson Thrift would consider a different design um um not to be tur but no um you know there there's a a a wide variety of architectural Styles in this area um there are already flat roofs um the the new Toll Brothers that's being built or flat roofs there's pitched roofs there's you know there there's a lot of architecture that dates back to the 70s um so this is a more contemporary architectural style um there's definitely a richness in the materials you know you saw kind of those um you know those those kind of mimicking wood siding plus Rock and different things that were on there so um no we think it's a very attractive building and it is it is you know um typical of what you're seeing for you know elsewhere in the city right now great thank you that's all I have do you have further questions from the commission commissioner B sure I I I I believe Leah was looking up uh something that she was going to respond to and wasn't sure if you had an opportunity to find that yes I did and so I was looking at the master plan so we have a section in Reno municipal code that's labeled sustainability and then right before that it says coming soon so we don't actually have sustainability codes in Title 18 and the reason that we don't my understanding of the reason that we don't is that when we did our master plan in 2021 alongside that we wanted to do a sustainability and climate action sort of plan and then I think that our sustainability standards were in turn going to come from that sustainability and climate action plan to my understanding it hasn't been completed yet and so while we we say things in the master plan like explore sustainability when looking at new projects and things like that we don't have a real definition of you know that means um increased Landscaping less uh less parking more public transit you know all of those things you kind of look at when you're looking at sustainability so again I don't have I don't have a scorecard for it I gotcha so um I did find a a um kind of sustainability action plan of Reno with um specifics and a lot of praising of Reno's efforts around sustainability so I figured there must be something so my last question is currently how would staff tie sustainability initiatives to the findings whether it's this project or another project well that's a that's a good question um but I think that really when we looked at those findings we weren't we weren't analyzing sustainability in there so I I don't have a direct answer as to how we can identify that what I can say is that a lot of our codes in Title 18 are leaning toward that sustainability option and and I'm talking about percentages of landscaping and um infield developments where there's already access to infrastructure and things like that that a lot of that stuff could be under that sustainability section it's just not okay thank you commissioner baser if I can follow up if you if you look at our master plan policies um we have some policies for example related to Transit oriented development and promoting higher densities long Transit quarters that sort of the things a lot of that has been codified in our code when it comes to renewable energy for example if if you read the policies is to promote solar wind geothermal encourage it doesn't mandate it so we have certain policies that have been taken from the master plan and are essentially cified through our through our development standards While others have or encourage it but they do not mandate it right so how would we in practice um encourage it well I think if you look for example in reviewing the findings if if they had come with with a project that was completely contrary to what was encouraged through through master plan policies um I I think it's very rare that we would have one project that met every single policy of the master plan so we look is it consist consistent with the master plan which in Lee's analysis it is um but you know as a as a commissioner you can you very much can look at that yeah thank you Mike and I'll just follow up on that um I think for me when I'm analyzing these projects and I'm looking at those master plan policies when I do see something come forward with solar you know there's going to be another project coming up here in a few weeks where they did Implement some sustainability options and those are definitely plus marks you know what I mean so when we're looking at um the first finding in that does it conform to the master plan uh they're going to get bonus points in that area let's put it that way great thanks Leah thanks Mike thank you I think commission is probably ready for discussion or did we have any questions okay we'll bring it back to the commission for discussion commissioner dracul thank you appreciate it uh thanks for everybody's questions you you answered a lot um I I'll go backwards a little bit I I completely agree with commissioner VTO the the solar request I do think it was us over stepping um I was honestly even a little uncomfortable with the EV charging request great if they want to put that in cool and if that's something you want to do in your original application do it but I I do think we're overstepping a little bit there um so thank you for your comments commissioner VTO um going back to this project it was hard not to consider looking at the old project uh this was my very first Planning Commission meeting um it was a tight one and similar folks came up and probably 20 more public comments um 43 vote I would say two of the three no votes a lot of it was architectural and a lot of it about traffic so what I saw with an overlay of that last meeting and trying not to make my decision based on it is a better project in that we solved a lot of the public comments um issues with traffic uh they were going to have an entrance and an egress off of McCarron that's not here anymore also seeing the buildings in the previous project were on the perimeter of the parcel and that was an issue it was a budding against those uh town homes and multif family to the south and east so we've got a more centralized building um I like a lot more what I see the immense amount of parking um do I want to see more units yes so I approved this the last time so we are lacking some units from it but I do see an overall better project and looking forward to supporting this thank you commissioner commissioner VTO did you have uh comments for discussion uh yeah so I um uh largely agree with what commissioner draulic said I think that I can make the findings uh for the project and I think they've done a good job improving the project from what its current iteration was um I wanted to come back to this discussion of I guess my concern commissioner baser was like I don't if we want to get to a place where we require solar or other things like that I think we need to change ordinances or possibly what thew law says before we can do that cuz I would be concerned that if we were to try to condition that and the applicant were to not agree and then we were to vote against the project that would probably make our decision susceptible to challenge later on and the the opposite is true where if if we were to condition and they didn't like it it would also make our decision likely to be challenged later on so I'm that's why I was concerned about that and wanted to bring it up but I like where you're heads at trying to figure out a way to kind of push towards more environmental concerns I think we want to try to maybe we would address that in the future with the actual what our uh master plan says hopefully but uh yeah other than that I I can make all the findings and I think they've done a good job uh making the project look good I mean I frankly I like the way it looks but I that's in the eye of the beholder I guess thanks commissioner belto uh commissioner delr did you have any comments for discussion um you know it's this is this is tough I wasn't here the first round I'm not originally from Reno so they're you know this is an area that I'm not as familiar with um you know I'm just kind of listening to what the public is saying about safety and and the look and feel um I mean obviously you know change is hard development's going to happen the question is is this the right um the right project for this space and I'm I'm still on the on the fence right now thank you commissioner rire did you have comments for discussion yeah I was going to say that I app appreciate that this is Transit oriented development and that there is density going in at this location I don't necessarily agree that overp parking isn't something that shouldn't be conditioned that's a special circumstance um in which case mitigation would be something like EV parking Chargers um and this isn't this isn't a brand new land use so maybe solar isn't the appropriate ask but something like an EV charger uh which it sounds like the uh develop is willing to do is something that we should take advantage of this opportunity to get that in print so that has to be done thank you commissioner commissioner baser did you have any comments sure Echo um commissioner roer sentiments there obviously um and totally respect um commissioner drage and bto's point of view and appreciate that um and I agree I I don't necessarily want to mandate anything uh hopefully my Approach is usually like how can we negotiate a you know a better project and pushes towards something that maybe will take a lot longer if if we don't say or speak up for the community and and for these initiatives that we say we want to push towards um and I just looking at this with a fresh set of eyes because I think Leah encouraged us as well that this is a brand new project so let's just look at it from the very beginning um and I'm kind of on the fence there uh particularly because of my my line of questioning and conversation with Leah in that there isn't a tangible scorecard if you will for making the compatibility it's just kind of like um we're we're just seeing if it works right and we're doing our best if if we can and I know Leah and staff are definitely doing that U not saying otherwise uh I'm just having a hard time making that tangible uh checkbox myself but it is an improvement thank you commissioner uh I largely uh just want to Echo commissioner VTO commissioner dracul's comments I will say uh to commissioner worm's Point uh I think it makes perfect sense if the applicant is um motivated and and willing to condition for the EV parking it's going to be a nice addition to the project and I don't see why we wouldn't um put it in ink so I I would very much support a recommendation that um that conditions for that um I can make the findings um and yeah I guess to the point of compatibility I guess I just struggle seeing how not H like how multif family housing in the area would not be compatible given that there is a lot of multifamily or condo quasa residential housing um so I don't actually have any issues getting to the compatibility issue even though it's not I guess uh you know like a quantifiable scorecard I I think maybe just common sense would suggest that it tends to fit um so those are my comments do we have any further comments commissioner valto uh just want to point out I was very persuaded uh commissioner or by you're tying this to the traffic or I'm sorry the overp parking and traffic mitigation is very persuasive very well said um agree with compatibility just for the Commissioners that might be on the fence I'll tell I used to live like a baseball throw away from where this is being developed and if you look around there I mean you have like mf2 right across the street you have the I think it's a Wells Fargo building that's very high so if you're talking about height compatibility uh this would be right in line with what is directly across the street on the other side I think it's plumis or Lakeside I foret which street that is um so if multif family I think does fit there um I guess there's an argument potentially for like aesthetic compatibility um but you know my recollection is that even one of the apartment complexes has a similar like blue color in the area so I'm not sure you know where that plays into but I think just in terms of what type of housing is around there like I lived in an apartment complex right down the street there's other more densely more dense apartment complexes that are closer so that's how I can make the compatibility finding if I'm looking at just the type of housing there are some you know single family housing on the other side of Lakeside and then if you go up you know plumis and Lakeside both ways but in this area in particular there is a there is a lot of multif family great um chair may I ask a question of Staff really quickly or sure just one question just one promise okay it's a multi-prong question but just one I'm just teasing uh nuances right um hey Leah um I'll try not to make it multi-prong but just really direct uh what is the uh current level of service for that area and what is it anticipated to be and what is the city's acceptable standard of level of service for traffic it's a great question for somebody other than me perfect let me get someone up here this this will help me with the my fence line I promise hello Marissa harned with Headway Transportation um so in the traffic study the current level of service on McCarron at plumis and Lakeside or sorry at plumis the intersection does currently operate at like an EF level um but with the project it the project adds minimal traffic so the delay won't actually increase by much about 1 to two seconds um and then the plumis inter or sorry the Lakeside intersection currently operates at D which is within policy and then um in the future with the McCaron widening those level of service letters will drop to D which is within policy with and without the project great thank you so much anyone willing to make a motion or do we have further discussion I will entertain a motion uh in the matter of case number my bad WR one matter of case number LDC 25-16 uh based upon compliance of the applicable findings I move to approve the conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report uh and I can make all the findings strike that with the additional condition that 10% of the required parking 5% of the required parking be uh have EV Chargers and with that additional condition I can make all the findings second we have a motion in a second can we get a roll call vote please sure can who second I'm sorry thank you Comm did thank you okay um Armstrong yes Basera yes delvar yes dulich yes rer yes VTO yes motion passes unanimous thank you good luck with your projects before we close item 4.5 I will read the appeal process into the record any final action not including recommendations or failure to take action by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Reno city council by the applicant the mayor or a city council member or any person who is agreed by the action or in action an appeal together with fees must be filed with the city clerk within 10 business days starting on the day after written notice of the action is filed with the city clerk that will close item 4. 5 and move to item 4.1 case number LDC 25-13 awf at American flat we'll get a presentation from staff ready Jeff let's just wait till the room clears a little bit okay actually is now a good time maybe for a f minute break then while folks clear out sure great we'll take a five minute break and reconvene e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e all right we are going to reconvene this meeting of the Reno City Planning Commission and open item 4.1 with a presentation from staff thank you Jeff thank you commissioner Armstrong Jeff Foster associate planner for the record tonight I'm bringing you LDC 25-13 which is the advanced purified water facility at American flat this project uh involves a site that is around 52 Acres located on the northwest and southwest corners of Military Road and Lear Boulevard near Swan Lake um it involves four Parcels uh one of which is vacant uh one of which is the rostad Water Reclamation facility and two sliver Parcels that are adjacent to Military Road the request before you tonight is a conditional use permit to allow a non- single family use in the Sky Vista planned unit development 24-hour operations a non-residential development adjacent to residentially zoned property and last but not least a disturbance to a major drainage way uh zooming in here uh the surrounding land uses are primarily warehouses and single family uh residences uh the Sky Vista homeowners association parcel immediately to the south of the primary site contains Horse Creek uh shown here uh between the site and the single family residences to the South mayor's park is north and west of rarf you can see that in the green area uh to the left there the key issues are compatibil ility with surrounding land uses site design and major drainage way disturbance the zoning district is the plan unit development again that's the Sky Vista PUD and public facilities PF the master plan land uses are Suburban mixed use public quasi public and no land use the two sliver Parcels adjacent to uh Military Road are the are the nolu uh Parcels in terms of some background the Sky Vista PUD and the supporting h were approved in 1994 and contemplated approximately 2300 single family homes convenience commercial and open space the proposed project is located on a parcel that is designated in the Sky Vista uh land use plan as convenience commercial and that's the parcel pictured here the parcel was sold or transferred to the city in 2006 the city purchased the property due to its proximity to rzw Warf um which uh was contemplated to allow for a future related use further background um the applicant will provide um extensive background information on the project ex itself um much of it is also included in the staff report so I won't be going into that now uh the requests are disturbance to a major drainage way which typically requires a major site plan review non-residential development adjacent to residentially zoned property which typically requires a site plan review and then per the Pud handbook all uses other than single family require a special use permit which is is of course now a conditional use permit and then lastly we had the conditional use permit for uses operating between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. therefore the entire application was elevated to a conditional use permit moving on to compatibility with surrounding land uses um the single family residences are located a significant distance from the proposed uh APW again the advanced purified water facility building and the other components on the primary site and Horse Creek Prov vies a buffer for the closest residential uses to the South note that operations are enclosed within the buildings and and extensive care was taken during the design process to design the site with consideration for the adjacent residential uses uh there will be a couple of um quote unquote chemicals used liquid oxygen and hydrogen peroxide um the use of those is isolated to the west and the front sides of the building away from the residential uses to the South and and they will be stored indoors or outside near the project entrance in double in a double walled steel tank which will be designed in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations to ensure maximum safety therefore the project will not be materially detrimental to the surrounding land uses or public health safety or welfare continuing continuing with compatibility uh the new processed building at rzw Warf will not be generally visible from the surrounding land uses due to its location within the existing rzw Warf complex uh distance to the new building and intervening screening shown in the picture here back at the awf building there are drive up doors proposed on the south elevation facing the residences to the South uh staff recommends a condition limiting hours of uh truck arrivals and departures idling and on-site movement in condition number five um and again because of residential adjacency uh we are proposing the standard construction hours limitation in condition number six um the project applicant is proposing to adhere to noise mitig to implement noise mitigation options from the Project's acoustical study um and those will be implemented throughout construction and on an as-needed basis given all of the above the proposed use is generally compatible with existing land uses in the area moving on to site design the project proposes an approximately 42,000 ft primary process building and two supporting Pump Station buildings underground and above ground tanks and Associated infrastructure the site plan identifies a future second phase of the primary process building total in approximately 22,000 Square ft and that's shown in the area here there is no construction schedule for the expansion however the future footprint is included in the application to ensure that all code requirements are met and that no additional impacts are anticipated if and when uh the second phase is constructed um dealing with lighting uh there their interior and exterior light sources are directed away from the residentially zoned properties to the South and all lighting complies with code with less than 0.5t candles of spill over light at the residential property lines there one more thing on lighting the exterior lighting system will be mostly off until a maintenance need arises some lights will need to be on during the evening for Safety and Security reasons including the main doors that face away from the residential uses to the South as well as light poles at the main entrance continuing continuing with site design the project adheres to setbacks and height limits in the Pud handbook uh Street facing faades appear to meet the required articulation and ground floor transparency requirements in RMC and the South elevation utilizes metal panels instead of traditional Windows to simulate windows so that uh the internal lighting is eliminated um that would otherwise be seen from the adjacent residential uses to the South uh last but not least on site design uh there's extensive Landscaping proposed both inside and outside the perimeter fence to fulfill requirements to screen the fence itself and the building facades to enhance the project entrance and to create a community amenity along Horse Creek the Pud hamic requires 25% minimum landscaping and the applicant is proposing approximately 35% including approximately 313 existing and new trees with a double row of trees along along the South property line again buffering between the residential uses to the South one more thing on trees um Street trees are programmed every 30 ft in the adjacent rideway along Lear um per RMC however because uh the project is unable to plant trees immediately adjacent to the Military Road RightWay due to the existence of sanitary sewer and storm water pipes to meet the intentive code and to provide a pleasing and shaded walking environment the project proposes class four trees adjacent to the perimeter fence to create a canopy effect over the proposed shared use path last but not least we looked at Major drainage way disturbance uh the project sorry there's a well Worn Path and a pole Crossing of horse creek currently uh from the adjacent subdivision to the site the project uh proposes to install a formal pedestrian bridge as an amenity to access The Pedestrian path that surrounds the project area two approximately 280 cub Ys of Phil are proposed for grading uh for creation of that pedestrian path as well as slope Landscaping the security fence and an expanded land area for additional landscape screening and buffering again for those residences to the South the grading activities are not anticipated to impact the existing riparian species in the bottom of horse creek and construction sediment fencing or other suitable treatment will be implemented uh to protect the channel from sediment loaded runoff in compliance with code here are the recommended conditional use permit findings staff can make all recommended findings and here's the recommended motion I'm available for questions thank you do we have a presentation from the applicant well good evening Mr chair members of the commission my name is Joe krier I am a senior civil engineer at the City of Reno so I'm happy to be here tonight I'm going to be co-presenting with Lady AEL with the trucky Meadows Water Authority um so we'll we'll pass it off in a moment um anyhow just excited to present on this project that we've been working on for some time um and to discuss the conditional use permit application um just a little history in this project so it's a regional effort um the city has been working on this project in some former fashion since early 2000s so there's a long history and we're really excited about the Innovation this project brings and just the fact that it's important it's an important project for the region so tomw is our project partner so we have a inter local agreement we're cost sharing on this project and working very closely together on the design um and I also just wanted to just let you know so if you have any other questions for others we so Lydia is presenting with me but we also got Dustin Waters he's our assistant director in utility services and we've got representatives from tomwa Dave deagle engineering manager water consultant aom so VJ sunum here uh Angela lroy is managing the project and our Cynthia Albright's our planner for the project and we have RTC represent Austin mcco here in case there's any questions on sort of the connection with Military Road or ler Boulevard um all these folks are available I don't think I missed anybody so um we we did also go to the Nab in November to discuss the project um councilwoman Ebert was there there were some questions that we'll get into but there were some questions regarding um noise hours views and Landscaping so some of those were discussed already and we'll get into a little more detail on that in this [Applause] presentation so this is just to orient everybody to the project um you can see this project is in the North Valleys and Reno and really the project occurs in two primary sites that are called out just there it is two two primary areas uh this is Swan Lake this is right next to rwf and then this is a site north of the Reno Airport however for the purposes of this conditional use permit it's really the focus on this [Applause] facility this is just a a brief overview of the facilities and then Lydia is going to get into a lot more detail on the facilities so in a nutshell if you look at um what what's called out with this call out number one that's the location of rzw Warf the Reno Water Reclamation facility owned and operated by the city and then this call out number two is depicting the advanced pufi water facility that's proposed and it's part of this conditional use permit application and then the linew here is showing the the the piping connecting this site to what we're calling American flat with some other infrastructure that's proposed at that location want to give a little history on what we I call rzw Warf so Sereno that recation facility so rzw Warf treats waste water that serves about 25,000 residents um we produce high quality recycle water that currently goes for irrigation of golf courses um construction water um and then the remainder of that go is an environmental discharge that goes to Swan Lake so the region has Decades of experience using recycle water I'm talking as a region like trumo North Valleys many decades the North Valleys it's about 25 years and as as I stated a moment ago but I'll just kind of just state that again so we we send water both to our recycle water customers and then to Swan Lake with that I'm going to turn it over to Lydia thank you thank you I'm Lydia teal with trucky Meadows Water Authority work in the operations department at our drinking water facilities and have ran the pilot units and the experiments that we've done for this project for many years and so I'll give you a couple slides just really on what is Advanced purified water cuz maybe you're thinking like what is this facility going to do and this is going to be really the first facility in Nevada so it's very important I think for us to just spend a couple minutes on what is this facility and then we'll turn it back over to Joe so he can start talking about specifics on lighting noise and and other questions so this is Nevada's first category A+ large scale facility and on the next slide I'll talk about what is A+ but really it's just we're treating waste water to drinking water and there can be a lot of misconceptions or like feelings from the public where it's you know the ick factor and that's common but um through education and going through that there's a lot of safety factors and there's Advanced treatment that's proven um this is really a safe and sustainable resource so this facility is proposed to be a 2 million gallon per day facility that is again what Jo Joe said it's joint operated and owned by City of Reno and Tuma so it's a joint venture and the the great thing about Advanced purified water is it's a drought proof Supply you're always going to have that Source um that you can treat to the advanced treatment Advanced purified water and have that Supply so it's very sustainable and as a drought stricken Community it's just another drought drop in the bucket and this was actually recommended to look at after um Governor sand deval's drought task Forum so the state looked at this and approved regulations this is a $220 million project cost we have received $39 million in Grants to date 30 million of that is a Bureau of Reclamation grant that we received earlier this year and that's actually the max that a project can get and we actually receive the most of any project in the entire country for this type of project so I think that says a lot to um this project and how it's proposed and this project also has a part of this is after this water is treated it will be injected back into the aquafer for a period of time to have Mother Nature do additional treatment and so we propose a phased implementation where this water isn't going to be served to the public tomorrow it's it's a long time to have testing and working with the state to ensure that water quality is safe and so this is not going to happen tomorrow and we have um plan for the future for this so again just what is category a plus this Advanced purified water regulations were adopted in NADA in 2016 and really it's as simple as taking waste water and treating it to drinking water but there are a lot of steps that go through that so rzw Warf as Joe mentioned that water is used for irrigation and is our starting point so you might see purple pipes around town um for the reclaimed or recycled water that's used for irrigation of ballparks so that's our starting point that then goes across the street to this facility we're discussing today the advanced purified water facility and from there we have several Advanced treatment processes and after that it pretty much it meets drinking water standards and from there that's where we um pipe it North up by the American flat Farm just north of the stead airport and from there it would be injected into the aquifer for a period of time several years it would remain in the aquafer aquafer before being extracted and then potentially provided to the public um once we meet that phased implementation approach and the A+ water has to meet all federal and state drinking water regulations we have to remove um Pas you might be hearing about in the news those forever chemicals Pharmaceuticals that this treatment process removes all of this and it's very common throughout the United States um if you've been to Disneyland you've drink the water Orange County is kind of the uh granddaddy of them all and they've been doing this for decades and so this is not new it's very safe and sustainable practice and has been performed across the US and really the world for many decades we are looking at the being the first facility in Nevada and so I think that's really special to be the first mark on the map working with our Regulators working with um a lot of folks on this and many years of testing treatment technology and so um Joe's going to talk about that number two dot there and so he mentioned that that number one is where Renoe is number two is where this proposed facility is there would be um a pipeline to the American flat farm and also back and so we have options for maintenance of those Wells but those well Fields would be up on four and five on a County parcel um for that injection and extraction and then down the road that water could be introduced into the stad water system um just w west of the airport and that number two dot on the map again is just this is zoomed in really simplified version of that APW building to show on the corner of military and Lear um showing the walking path around the outside on the next slide Joe's going to talk about the landscaping and so this is just showing you know the main entrance really on Lear Boulevard where um the majority of the traffic will be coming in and um this facility as our drinking water facilities go it's it's it's not a facility where you have a ton of traffic coming in out you know it's not a shipping facility it's not a commercial building it's you this facility will probably have two operators on shift that are there so you might have a couple operators a couple students coming here and there um occasional maintenance activity and most of that occurs during the daytime there's minimal nighttime activity unless um there's emergency maintenance that needs to be performed so with that I'm going to turn it over to Joe he'll provide renderings but we just felt it was really important for you um to hear a little bit about what Advanced purified water is and if you want to learn more on onewater nevada.com there's a lot about the technology but I won't ner out on that so I'm going to pass it back over to Joe thanks Lydia you turned my page for me go so kind so this uh this is the same uh slide that was shown previously during the first presentation by City staff and you can see that there's a lot of um screening and vegetation so really want to point out a few key things that we really strove to incorporate into the design was the trees along Le and a military and then Horse Creek and we really looked at this not just um in terms of what Landscaping was required but we really wanted to make horse creek and amenity so the way we're doing that is by there is an existing path you can come out of the neighborhood and come across in the direction now and you'll be able to do that with the proposed project but we're proposing a bridge um here a pedestrian bridge and then once you cross the bridge you'll be able to walk around the entire site on the other side out onto the multi-use path that's proposed back on another multi-use path that's proposed and around the site and then back into the neighborhood and get across the the creek safely so that in on top of the trees um well there are many trees these are being planted for screening and then as well here trees here trees here um some are being planted on the outside of the fence and some are being planted on the inside of the fence for the awf site there's a th000 shrubs and 15,000 perennial herbs in potted plants um I'm going to go through some renderings quickly and then we'll we'll wrap this up so this is a view this a rendering looking from Lear toward the APW this is year one of vegetation growth then that's year 15 here's the rendering looking from the neighborhood to the South this would be from the the two-story houses uh close to the facility that'd be year one of vegetation growth that's year 15 so you can see substantial screening and here's another Rend rendering the the view from L it's the same view again it's just the nighttime um typically those interior lights will be off at night so this would be a worst case if somebody was coming and going and it was dark uh otherwise the interior lights will be off during during the night when no one's working there that's year one year 15 and then same thing from Horse Creek it's the same view that we saw previously but at night year one of vegetation growth and then year 15 with that I just want to point out a few key things on the lighting and the noise we have complied with the lighting PL for the dark sky or with the dark sky ordinance via our lighting plan all the treatment processes that are proposed in this project will be indoors so it's inside the facility concrete walls it's inside it's got a roof so it's all enclosed um and we're going to follow all the recommendations for the acoustical study to ensure that the noise levels are within the allowable levels for operations um we're limiting delivery hours it's operated um just like lety was saying this is during the day we'll have deliveries during the day um some staff limited amount of staff that actually need need to work at the facility and then some student visits for collaborative work occurring there and potentially a couple tours a month um that could be students or other um I did just want to mention that the Sona the National Environmental Policy Act the mitigation measures that we have from that study will be um incorporated into our construction specifications for this job in terms of lighting and noise and then the staff report which talks about hours that Jeff went over um hours of operation no idling um limitations on construction hours those are all incorporated into this project as well briefly the construction schedule looks I'm going to kind of focus on we're we're in the green here moving quickly toward construction um we'd like to begin construction breaking ground around fall 25 so that's next year it's a 30mon construction window then moving into an extensive testing and monitoring period followed by recharge of the aquafer and extraction of water to be used for irrigation and as Lydia was referring to it's not until out into the future ways that this water will be extracted and used for portable uses after it's been the robustness of the process is proven up and all pering is in place um so with that I'm going to just show this last slide with some project information contact information and I thank you for your vote of approval and the applicant agrees to all the conditions placed uh on the project great thank you for your presentation bring it back to the Commissioners for disclosures commissioner VTO uh commissioner velto no disclosures commissioner dracul no disclosures commissioner DVR no disclosures commissioner burm no disclosures commissioner Basera familiar with the site and with the applicants representative commissioner Armstrong no disclosures uh we'll now move to public comment I have no request to speak forums at this time is anyone wishing to speak via Zoom or do we have voicemails um we do not have anybody via Zoom no voicemails were received we did receive correspondence that was forwarded to the Planning Commission and has been entered into the record thank you is anyone in Chambers wishing to speak on this item under public comment seeing none we'll go ahead and pl sorry we'll close public comment and bring it back to the commission for questions commissioner baser sure thank you chair just one um so I I guess Jeff why not uh as you're coming up do you want to say that this project is really thorough uh really sets the bar high for multi- agency collaboration it's it's obvious it's seen really appreciate Miss alright for coordinating some of the coordination leading up to this event and uh engaging with me so thank you so much and Jeff as well I was just curious what contingencies might be in place to address potential delays in the RTC coordinated Military Road improvements particularly since they're important for the Project's traffic man management plan you know did Mike disappear he's like Lake R done I'm out of here do I tow it's all good David Eagle Tom for the record um we've been coordinating with rtc's military widening uh along that Corridor we've actually uh will avoid uh the impacting their expansion along there they're actually going to put in some storm drain and we'll be coordinating with that the access road uh the entrance in there we're coordinating with uh Austin Coy is RTC representative and that that whole impact there they they are likely to get ahead of us and um along Lear because they're doing a little widening there the only impact is they're going to leave a little buffer for us to do some Landscaping so we've been coordinating directly with them on a monthly basis to make sure that our two projects have Synergy and that way when they get in there before us at the end of the project we'll end up putting some trees along there and meeting what you see there on the on the figure great thank you sir do you have any other questions from the commission commissioner DVR yeah commissioner DVR and I'm not sure this might be for Jeff um you know you talked about the the lighting and I mean the trees that are going to be there in 15 plus years are great but uh in the interum uh can you kind of help me understand sort of the the lighting and how it might impact things and if there might or is already a condition to somehow diffuse some of the lighting that's there for those especially for the uh apartments that are on the other side of horse creek so on the south side of of the project site on the south side of horse creek uh single family residences there yes thank you um so there's limited lighting proposed On The Backs side of the building in the first place um uh there happen to be two light poles that are within 100 feet of the residential property lines that staff uh requested be brought down in conformance with code uh to an allowable height uh per The Zone um and sorry per the uh residential adjacency lighting standards um all lighting complies with as Joe mentioned the Dark Skies ordinance slash the title 18 RMC lighting standards in terms of uh down lighting uh lighting uh not uh spilling off of the property lines they meet the foot candle requirement for the adjacent residential zoning um uh so even from day one um we're not depending or the applicant is not depending on you know multiple years of growth to to Shield the building that the lighting should be very much um nonintrusive uh from the get-go and recall that the um uh the backside of the building also not only does it have limited lighting but uh instead of putting windows on the backside they're putting those metal panels so it it looks visually interesting like Windows but they won't be Windows shining uh you know that would be a light source perfect thank you thank you so much and and again appreciate all the everybody's um coordination on the effort um I think this question might be for for Lydia it has to do with the the affluent flow that you mentioned was going potentially to Swan Lake um can you I'm just not sure exactly what or one of you sorry I don't what that kind of means and like if there's any potential of contamination or anything like that yeah so right now maybe I can bring up the is this is the uh presentation still let me just go back to the site plan this might be as good as any um this go back one more here okay Horse Creek basically goes past this site um so the Water Reclamation facility currently discharges to one of two places either we send the recycle water so it's treated water water it's recycled to class a category is what it's called goes to purple pipe customers the rest of it goes into Horse Creek and then flows through Horse Creek all the way down to Swan Lake so that's occurrently right that's that occurs now that's about 75% of the water goes to Swan Lake about 25% goes to reuse customers so that's what's going to happen with this project is those things will still happen but the vision is to basically to take advantage of that water it's a water recovery project we're going to recover that water instead of sending it to the leg build this facility and treat it through a whole separate and new process that will take it to a drinking water quality standard and then and then pipe that water north of the St airport so I don't know if that answers the question those things will still be happening but this this will create a whole new classification of A+ water got it and then will um so will Swan Lake be impacted by this will the Swan Lake will actually be positively impacted and that's one of the the major reasons that the city has invested in this project is because during wet years particularly and with the flooding we saw in 2017 particularly there are flooding concerns so anything that we can do to reduce that that footprint of water going to Swan Lake is a benefit and at the same time creating a new a sustainable Water Resource a drought proof Water Resource that's where the Water Authority came in it was just a really good partnership between two agencies great thank you that was all I had thank you you have any further questions from the commission do we want to move to discussion do we have any comments for discussion or a motion oh good okay um commissioner B yeah we're playing ping pong here um well it's clear that this project enhances like water um uh reliability and protects the environment it's just good for the community so I'm I'm good with them I'm happy to make a motion commissioner rer did you have a comment same appreciate the amount of work and level of detail here it's a wonderful project so uh drum roll in the matter of case LDC 25-13 based upon compliance with the applicable findings I move to approve the conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report and I can make all the findings commissioner R Meer second we have a motion and a second all those in favor I I motion passes unanimously good luck with your project we will now close item 4.1 and move to item 4.2 LDC 25- 014 web data center looks like we'll get another presentation from Jeff whenever you're ready indeed all right so Jeff Foster associate planner for the record uh the second case I'm bringing you tonight LDC 25-14 which is the web data center um so this project uh is appro approximately six acres in size uh located on the north side of North Virginia Street approximately 1100 uh feet east of its intersection with stead Boulevard near the Amazon uh Distribution Center shown there uh the project is three vacant part uh the request before you tonight is a conditional use permit that would allow development of a data center as well as business operations between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. uh you might recognize the site most of you who were on the Planning Commission earlier this year the your body approved LDC 24-35 in March uh which was a request for a conditional use permit to allow 24-hour operations grading resulting in fills greater than 10 ft and disturbance of a major drainage way associated with an industrial Warehouse development that request uh includes the three subject Parcels that are before you tonight as well as the parcel uh to the West that uh contains the major drainage way again that parcel is not part of tonight's request uh zooming in uh the surrounding land jues are primarily in industrial to the north east and south and a vacant parcel to the West the one with the major drainageway um there are several non-conforming in residential uses um in in the form of mobile home parks that are located uh the first one is approximately 470 ft to the east shown here uh that is separated from the subject Parcels by a parking lot and a business industrial Flex development there's a second mobile home park shown here uh that is separated from the site approximately 550 ft away and again separated by a parking lot and a third mobile home park further away to the Southwest shown here uh the key issues are compatibility with surrounding land uses as well as site design the zoning district is mixed use suburban and the master plan is industrial and here are uh six policies that are supportive of the application moving on to Data Centers my understanding is that this is the First Data Center project that is coming before this body um in January of this year January 25th the definition of a data center was incorporated into Title 18 through an administrative interpret administrative interpretation or decision um and it defined a data center as a facility that is you that is used primarily for the storage management processing and transmission of Digital Data and which houses computer and or network equipment systems servers appliances and other Associated components related to Digital Data operations such facilities may also include Air Handlers power generators water water cooling and storage facilities utility substations and other Associated utility infrastructure to support sustained operations of a data center so that's the definition of a data center that is now incorporated into Title 18 as of January of this year data centers are now a recognized uh permitted use in the MS Zone with the approval of approval of a conditional use permit they are recognized as having significantly less truck traffic loading and unloading operations and dock doors for uh for their purposes as opposed to a traditional Warehouse or Distribution Center um because of that they typically do not require as many dock doors and so the use standard uh that is in code limits the number of dock doors to three per building and the required parking for a data center is the same as a warehouse or Distribution Center which is one space per 3,300 square ft of building area moving on to the compatibility with surrounding land uses the proposed operations are 24 hours around the clock but they're indoor operations this area is generally characterized by industrial zoning and uses that would allow the 24-hour indoor operations by right the nearest residentially zoned properly property is about 1500 feet away and separated from the site by the freeway and that's shown there um and then again as I talked about earlier there are significant buffers between the site and the two mobile home parks uh that are within 550 ft shown here so it is anticipated that the project operations these indoor operations would not have any impacts on these nearby non-conforming residential uses there is a proposed uh truck Dock and drive up door uh in the nor on the northwest corner of the building and for the exterior oper exterior operations as well as the location of those dock doors a dock door and drive up door staff is recommending condition number five to limit the hours of truck arrivals and departures aling and on-site movement and then again condition number six is recommended the standard construction hours uh restriction given all of the above the proposed use is generally compatible with existing land jues in the area moving on to site design the site plan includes two Chiller yards and a backup generator yard with around 10 emergency generators which are limited to being used during a power failure and during necessary periodic testing or maintenance per condition number seven uh one Chiller yard faces North Virginia Street and that's shown at the top here and there the generator yard is also visible from North Virginia Street shown here the chillers are about 10 ft tall with additional height for piping and the generators generators are about 25 ft tall there's a 15t tall screening and Security Fence uh shown here on the two different exhibits um and that fence is proposed to screen the chillers as you can see on the second graphic you can't see the the chillers any longer because of the screening fence um and it will also screen most of the height of the generators as you can see on the Seline study uh the proposed street street tree canopy along North Virginia will further obscure uh the top of the generators and condition number eight is included to have the the southernmost generator facing uh North Virginia Street painted a custom color to coordinate with the building in some total the mechanical equipment that is visible from North Virginia Street will be screened by the screening fence and the um uh the vegetation that is planted there and I'll get into into more of that here in a minute uh the MS Zone requires a minimum of 20% Landscaping um and approximately 20% is proposed um the site plan does include a 20ft buffer uh landscape buffer between the proposed sidewalk and the screening fence and that's that double row of trees on the U bottom of the picture that is a mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees that are proposed uh in that buffer area in a staggered Arrangement at two elevations to help obscure the screening fence itself the top of the generators and the building and that is per condition number nine uh here are the recommended conditional use permit findings and staff can make all recommended findings and here um is the recommended motion and I'm available for questions great thanks so much Jeff do we have a presentation from the applicant great whenever you're ready just stay your name for the record good evening chair and members of the commission as well as City of Reno staff uh Veronica Bon uh for the record I'm here on behalf of tectonics Design Group group and the web data center project LDC 25- 000014 I also have with me our entire team uh John Browning Sean Tubman project Engineers uh Ken and Owen Bartlett uh Architects and then we also have the applicant Dave Hardy with Ellis Partners to answer any questions that you might have on the project first of all thank you uh for taking the time to review our application and allowing us the opportunity to share more about this exciting and groundbreaking project this proposal marks an important milestone for the City of Reno it is the First Data Center within the city's uh jurisdiction and the first time that such a use is coming before the commission we are thrilled to bring this project forward and to demonstrate how it aligns with city of Reno's vision for growth and Innovation through previous discussions with this commission uh we've learned a lot about the unique needs of this area which is primarily Industrial and often associated with higher traffic volumes this project offers a thoughtful Solution by creating significantly less traffic than traditional industrial uh uses while also IND also introducing high quality job that matches Reno skilled Workforce our goal is to establish a state-of-the-art energy efficient facility that not only addresses the growing demand for technology infrastructure but also serves as a valuable asset to the community so I'm excited to walk you through the details and to answer any questions later on Jeff did a fantastic presentation going over the side details uh so I'm not going to repeat some of those details but it is a 80 thou 82080 square foot data center on those three Parcels that you can see up on your screen and our request is for the approval of a data center used that re requires operations between 11:00 p.m and 6: a.m. so 24hour operations okay so what is a data center a data center is more than just a building it's the infrastructure that powers the digital world that we rely on every day whether it's cloud computing secure data storage or network connectivity data centers make it possible the types of data centers you have your in-house that are operated by individual businesses you got Cloud providers these are large scale operations like you know Amazon AWS azour you have your hyperscale similar uh data centers that require 200 megga volt ampere Plus data centers like the switch um and then you have collocation these are shared facilities offering secure costeffective solutions for small to medium businesses which are the backbone ofer local economy our facility um provides scalable and energy efficient IT solutions that align with Reno's values and goals Jeff Wy went through the administrative decision that was adopted uh earlier this year so I'm not going to go into detail so we are proud to partner with Kore LLC uh who's a leader in energy efficient data centers and a p a Pioneer in liquid cooled technology their track record speaks volumes uh their Santa Clara facility in California was awarded uh the 2023 Ash technology award for uh reducing carbon footprint uh sorry carbon emissions by 50% and saving over 6,000 tons of carbon annually um the Civ operates as a boutique sized facility is much smaller in scale uh 30 MGA volt ampere which is modest compared to the hyperscale data centers that are 300 megga volt ampere um we did sorry we did uh get some questions during our nap presentation um on what the what mega Volt ampere means and it's it's the uh unit that is used to measure uh Transformer electrical capacity um you might be more familiar with megawatts which uh is basically the efficiency data centers are highly efficient so this 30 MVA would kind of translate to 27 to 28 megawatts if here's the site plan um I kind of colorcoded uh this to give you an idea of what the different components of this data center is going to look like you got the 10ft high Chiller yard uh North South um you got the main building that's kind of divided into three parts front of the house the data halls and the power management and then you have your 20ft high generator yard kind of in the Eastern uh side with the true two Transformers north and south of that um I'm trying to see the parking count because I cannot REM remember but it is compliant with the RMC uh we are providing underground retention detention Basin um there's a possibility that uh the corner one uh to the western side might be uh above ground this is the Landscaping plan uh as Jeff mentioned um we are compliant with the mixu Suburban standards of providing 20% Landscaping uh it is pretty extensive landscaping for this particular area uh versus a different use which could take advantage of uh making a zone change into IND industrial that would not require this many trees here's a close-up view of the Landscaping plan here are the elevations again you because this the zone is mixu Suburban it conforms with the five out of nine architect architectural standards um that is code required for this Zone along with the ground level interest uh along Virginia Street that requires 40% transparency so it complies with that and is a nicer looking building than maybe an industrial use uh would produce or an indust really zoned parcel would produce so one of the highlights of the project is the way it supports and enhances the infrastructure in the North Valleys uh the the applicant Lis Partners have partnered with the EnV energy to fund and facilitate a new substation that will add 60 MVA of capacity and this facility will use just half of that so you have ample room for future velopments to take advantage of the the remaining half capacity and all the electrical feeds will be underground um there's existing fiber connectivity in the area that's going to serve the project coming to the um Air Cold uh chillers and water cooling the cooling systems are designed to meet the highest standards of efficiency and sustainability using a closed loop air cool system uh the facility avoids the water intensive processes of a of a traditional data center this means no water is required for heat dissipation during nor normal operations inside the storage racks are cooled with precis uh Precision water again in a closed loop system to maintain reliability and efficiency combined these systems use only3 acre feet of water annually and the total operations are projected to be right around half .5 acre feet of water annually which is a remarkable achievement that reflects our commitment to Reno's environmental priorities here's a quick overview uh of that substation that we just talked about um and the underground lines in relationship with our project site so sustainability is at the heart of this project by incorporating highdensity liquid cooled technology we are reducing energy usage by up to 50% compared to traditional methods uh the building is PV ready and we're planting 175 trees you know transforming this Barren BL s uh land um into a Greener more vibrating uh vibrant and inviting space economic and Community contributions uh the project is more than a data center it's an investment in Reno's future it will create high quality jobs in areas like Network managing uh network engineering Facilities Management while fostering Partnerships with local businesses for it support and maintenance and we believe Reno skilled Workforce and academic institutions are well equip uh equipped to support this roles ensuring the community directly benefits Beyond jobs the project brings significant infrastructure improvements from six uh 6 foot sidewalks in coordination with RTC to enhance utilities benefiting everyone in the area trip uh this is a quick snippet from the trip generation letter that was prepared by Headway as you can see the proposed project is anticipated to generate up to 81 daily trips 9:00 a.m. peak hour trips 7:00 p.m. peak hour trips very low compared to what a traditional Warehouse fulfillment center or Distribution Center might have um so this is this is that so as per uh our due diligence uh comprehensive noise study was conducted to assess the potential impacts on the surrounding area including those resident uh nearby Residential Properties and I would like to share the key findings and how they reflect our commitment to maintaining or minimizing the noise impacts the study measured existing noise levels um and the study was prepared uh by wise Consulting by the way uh they measured existing noise levels along North Virginia Street and the northern boundary of the property which is closer to the nearest residences the findings show that the ambient noise in the area is already in influenced by significant truck traffic from North uh North Virginia Street and nearby industrial uses at the northern boundary the average noise was recorded at 40 approximately 49 D with a peak of 69 D and along North Virginia Street the average was higher at 54 dcel with a peak of 73 D and this is similar uh given the industrial nature of this entire area uh the data center has been carefully designed to operate well below these ambient noise levels our primary noise sources the chiller units and the backup generators are positions strategically to minimize impact on residential areas the chillers located on the east west sides of the building uh produce noise levels ranging from 42 to 45 uh which are significantly lower than ambient noise levels and the generators generate about 47 DB under worst case conditions uh that they're going to be used during power outages or the maintenance periods these results uh demonstrate that the data center will not contribute significantly to the existing noise environment and in fact operates well within the limits required to preserve the surrounding community's quality of life General finding uh this project exe exemplifies through planning and careful design that it complies with uh the master plan's vision and uh all of the Reno municipal code standards while introducing new opportunities to the community from sustainability and infrastructure upgrades to job creation minimal traffic impact we've worked hard uh to ensure that this data center becomes a valued part of Reno's future we're excited to bring this project to life in partnership with the city and its residents uh we're grateful for the commission's time and thoughtful consideration of the project the web data center represents a significant step forward for Reena blending Cutting Edge technology with community-minded planning it's a project that we believe will serve the city well for years to come again we're very happy to answer any question that follows this thank you for your time great thank you for your presentation oh do you have more to add hi um David Hardy with Ellis Partners um we um I represent the applicant um and Veronica did a fantastic job I just wanted to correct one um uh typo that was in the report which is um just for the record the3 acre feet of water uses which is actually per acre not total so um so it would Round Up to um about two acre feet of water usage per year total which is still an exceptional exceptionally low amount of water used for an industrial use let alone a data center um however I just wanted to correct the record on that so there's no uh confusion in the future great thank you for the clarification bring it back to the Commissioners for disclosures commissioner VTO commissioner VTO no disclosures commissioner dra no disclosures commissioner Del V I am familiar with the site and have read the documentation that's been sent commissioner rorer read the comment letter that came from the public and spoke to the applicants representative commissioner Basera very familiar with the site and same disclosures as commissioner RM commissioner Armstrong no disclosures uh we'll now move to public comment do we have anyone wishing to speak on Zoom no we do not we did receive um correspondence for this item I think it was NAB comments that was forwarded to the Planning Commission and was entered into the record no voicemails were received and no public comment cards thank you uh bringing it back to the chambers do we have anyone in Chambers wishing to speak under public comment for this item seeing none we'll close public comment and bring it back to the commission for questions commissioner DVR uh commissioner DVR I have several questions um um let me start with um gosh where to start um I guess one of the questions I have and I'm not sure who should be addressing this but um you know you talk about job creation but if you think about the ratio of square footage for that particular facility to the ratio of employees it's it's actually pretty small um and uh so that's that's a concern that I have so I'm just wondering if there's other job creation that you're discussing or talking about when it comes to that um yes thank you for the question uh commissioner DVR um so the this data center um you know we think of job creation in a number of different ways um first is construction of the project so there'll be a lot of construction jobs created um and this is not like a typical industrial box or Distribution Center this this building will be filled floor to ceiling with um with equipment that is going to it's so it's like 4X the amount of you know labor and materials that that would go into um a traditional box so that all creat substantially more uh construction uh labor hours um and and local for local suppliers to supply uh goods and materials to the site um secondly is the when the data center is up in operation there is the on-site um staff which um will certainly not have the employment density um that you know next door Amazon has um in their facility however um you know we can proudly say that uh the the employment within the site will be will be highly skilled labor you know Network Engineers uh facilities managers um sales sales professionals um so there'll be many jobs created in that in that fashion and then um additionally uh the the equipment that serves this building um the service and maintenance of that equipment uh will will create substantial you know a multitude of positions for um local you know mechanical electrical and plumbing contractors to have service agreements and and and service the the agreement uh service the data center on a yearly on a regular basis so okay thank you and then another question I think for you but um the you know there's the Amazon site next door and I don't I don't know if it's already been um leveraged for usage but have you have you considered using other warehouses in Reno that have already been developed and potentially developing that land for something other than a big box uh um well we I can tell you we we certainly would consider that and have considered that uh and there's um the this data center and any data center it it's very difficult to fit it into an existing building it really needs to be a purpose-built facility in order for it to get the um Energy Efficiency it needs for the um business model to work um you know with the the specialty equipment um um and and the the very efficient layout and and of and sequencing of that equipment um it's it is possible you know we actually um in Santa Clara California have developed a have have repurposed an existing uh Warehouse building for um that use and we would do that again but um that's like a needle and Hast stack to find one that really actually works um with that reuse so um that's why we're we're developing this purpose build facility thanks I have more questions but I'll I'll release it for now and let other people talk great I'll be sure to come back to you uh while we're on this side of the commission do we have any questions uh commissioner warm do you have any questions at this time many um but I'll start with Jeff Jeff can you tell us a little bit about um the process or what you receed from Envy energy going around finding number four about the public services that are available what is the applicant's process what is the city looking for so the applicant there's no um so first of all let's all acknowledge that we're forging new ground right in terms of what what is what is required to be analyzed for a data center um as a part of the standard conditional use permit process there's not a uh uh a requirement or or something along those lines to have a full vetting with the the local energy supplier IE EnV energy um the applicant did prepare or sorry did indicate in their application that they have a full commitment from NB energy to provide uh energy to this data center um I asked for documentation of that they did provide a uh a will serve letter if you will that um that uh is a part of the uh application record um beyond that I have not seen any other documentation the can certainly speak to that but my understanding is they have a a full commitment to provide for the energy um Visa the uh 60 MBA uh substation proposed up the road so um that's that's as far as staff looked at it and just out of curiosity do you know of any other land uses that are anywhere near the kind of energy loads that are being sought here today um I don't personally it's not an area that I had a chance to research um the applicants may be able to to speak to kind of how this their facility Stacks up to a traditional you know Casino or hospital or something that would obviously be an intense energy user um but I don't have that that research as a part of uh the staff analysis I'd like to punt that question then to the applicant um the so the question about uh other uses that have as substantial um energy use um you know there are there are industrial uses that that use a substantial amount of energy um but you know data centers obviously are the the are one of the you know larger power users of of um per square foot um uh for industrial uses um I can't say I know the uh I'm familiar with the amount of power that you know other you know casinos or other other uses like that actually need but um and um I don't I'm not a expert on every single use type or how much power it needs but um I think your your point that on a the the power uh Demand on a per square foot basis um is substantial but that's that's the that is what is required in order to um make the use work fair enough commissioner bisera you beta and I promise not to make legal squirmish with my sustainability questions um I guess for Jeff yeah yeah we'll just kind of set the stage here uh since this is the first uh data center before us and I'm sure not the last um were there specific master plan goals and policies that were key in supporting the recommendation for approval tonight um Michelle can you pull up my uh or someone pull up my SL my presentation so um yeah so recognize that at the time that the master plan was prepared there are no policies um or no language whatsoever that specifically addresses data centers yeah um I would imagine in the next master plan that that will be rectified but um keep in mind that the that the use again was only formally codified uh January of this year so uh for for Reno so there's not there's not uh a a uh an analysis framework within Title 18 or the master plan that addresses data centers as a use other than the administrative interpretation uh that was uh you know came out in January of this year um which is very limited in terms of what IT addresses so having said that um I was able to find a a handful of of policies and goals that support the uh kind of the industrial use uh in that area um and you know just kind of the overall economic strategy for the city and and things like that um you know parking and loading to the back side of the building as opposed to the front facing you know the street things you know things of that nature um but there's not a there's not a a a master plan framework that I could pull out that would specifically address data centers as a use in general or in this location in particular okay um I know we're all doing our best this is New Territory and and I do have the language of all of these policies should you want me to explore what they are um but I I I don't put that on the screen all good I trust you you're always really Thor so that kind of tees me up for um going to go back to the infamous sustainability action plan that I mentioned in the last um uh project and it highlights the importance of initiatives that improve residents quality of life while enhancing the city's Global reputation and that whole plan is um supposedly tied to the master plan to the best of one can for tonight's discussion so I was curious if there are specific opportunities for renewable energy integration uh that we can explore for this particular project or that were probably already uh unbeknownst to to myself and the rest of the body you certainly can explore that I would I would um let's go back 30 seconds or a minute um the what I would say is that um the there probably are other master plan policies that would have been appropriate to include when you compare the technology that the applicant is proposing versus a traditional data center as Veronica talked about a few minutes ago so there might have been something in terms of water conservation and and um those kinds of policies from the uh uh sustainable portion of the master plan I know you're talk you're referring to a separate document but um there there might have been additional policies that would have uh reflected on what the applicant is proposing in terms of their approach back to your question about uh energy uh you know sustainable energy Technologies or whatever that might be adopted or incorpor into the project I think is what I'm hearing you say correct like um like I know that uh the the word of the night is solar uh for example I know that wouldn't Alone um supplement the the demand uh should power fail right uh but it it is a good option for non-critical loads uh and I was just wondering if if it was explored for those things particularly in this area it was not explored as a part of the application or the uh subsequent kind of dialogue between staff and the applicant um so no that was not something that was uh proposed nor requested um okay uh as a part of the the staff analysis so but they're here tonight so you can ask them fantastic thank you Jeff I'm goingon to uh Bali over to commissioner RM whoever would like to go next we'll just kind of oh did you have a comment to make to the last question yeah address address the yeah please just come up state your name for the record and address the comment hi uh David Hardy Ellis Partners um so to to address the the question um regarding uh on-site uh renewable energies or solar um it is something that we have studied um and you know because of the equipment coverage on the on the roofs and around the site um because of the you know structural and waterproofing requirements uh for the roof um solar is just simply not an economically feasible option for for this project um but um you know we uh following our conversations um earlier this week and you know and and hearing your um goals uh to implement sustainable you know features onto the project um you know we went back through the general pl's um sustainability uh goal um and evaluated how our project you know fits with those um so I'd love to just tick through those um briefly here um you know the the the first one sd22 um Indoor Water use um you know as was presented in the report um you know the Clos looped air cooled mechanical system uses zero water in the operation of it um and so when compared to uh typical industrial uses um let alone data centers that typically use evaporative cooling and are very water intensive um we have infinitely less water use um we will also uh you know commit to using um lowf flow fixtures for all the domestic fixtures in the building um and I'm happy to have that be conditioned on the project um as far as sd23 Energy Efficiency um you know this will be a liquid cooled highdensity data center um that is you know significantly more energy efficient than um your typical data center um Kore uh our our tenant um is a Pioneer in developing this liquid cooled technology and um as was also stated in the in the slide deck um they've won ashray awards for you know reducing carbon emissions and uh compared to uh their their data center peers um and um sd24 you know renewable energy like we said we can't do on-site solar it just does not work uh for the business model it also just doesn't work logistically for many reasons um but um we uh have following our conversation committed to upgrading the roof structure so that it can carry PV in the future um for if this changes from a data center down the road to another use the roof structure will be upgraded and it will be able to carry PV in the future um um sd25 recycled building materials um you know we will commit to on-site Source separation of construction debris um we have our our contractor Devcon here um who you know is adept at doing that and um it's something we would we would add um as a condition on the project um I'd also like to point out um you know this use is very low there's there's very minimal truck traffic so the emissions from Trucking will be substantially less for the STA Center than it would be for the shipping and receiving centers or many industrial uses that may take place uh would would would take its place at the site um we're also planning 175 trees um uh which is substantially more trees than would be required in an IC zoning um we have double loaded trees um along North Virginia Street um and then we're also um implementing storm water management um which will greatly storm water management will be greatly improved as part of the project we're um going to have storm water detention systems for 130% of volume so Germaine to the the prior uh application with the um storm water system this will U mitigate runoff uh to Swan Lake in this area so um I we we hear you know uh commissioner uh RoR Meer and and and commissioner Basera um uh requests and and want for for on-site generation and honestly you know share in your in your desire for that um but it's just not a feasible um a feasible aspect for this project but we we really hope that um the other uh uh sustainable advantage of this project and the above code um agreements um that we uh are happy to make would be um uh would the the the body here and uh and get your approval thank you thank you uh commissioner delvar did you uh want to pick up with your additional questions sure um so I I think this might be for jet but I'll ask the question and then we can we can sort that out um well first off this was the first I heard about the uh the substation so I guess one question I have is what if the substation can't be built or cannot provide the amount of energy that's needed um yeah I'm not sure what what the process is and what the order is so um the the substation actually has already been approved okay by the Planning Commission the city council and the regional Planning Commission so it's a done deal that done in in the sense of an approval process got it and What's the timing of that to be um that would be a question that you might be able to answer more and in terms of financials and anything else but in terms of timing yeah I'm not aware of the of the timing so okay because I mean the timing could impact their project right um so we um we're actually funding the uh uh purchase of the equipment for this substation um and and you know I stated in the in the presentation um it's a 60 uh MV a substation and um 30 and and we have a 30 MBA um uh commitment uh to to our project so there'll be 30 MBA um available um that should be online um in year 2029 um however uh the first uh phase of our data center will come online sooner than that we we certainly hope um there's some existing power available that's going to help us get the get the um get the project started and start to uh fill a portion of the center until the rest of the rest of the project comes online and then or sorry until the the the substation the pine substation comes online and then all of the Power will be uh fed from that substation got it and so do you like have a and and let me clarify one thing sorry there is an existing um there's there's existing substation um or an existing bank that uh we will be able to um Power the initial um uh phase off of and then when the substation is online we're going to be able to underground uh from there to power the rest of the facility okay do you get you have like a roll out plan like you're going to try to build out 10% of the facility 50% until you get the energy or is it kind of like a staged approach you're looking at or um there's a load ramp schedule okay um and then we've worked through that with NV Energy um and have commitments and agreements with for the delivery of the power okay um I don't you guys want to uh commissioner dracul commissioner velto do either of you have questions at this time uh commissioner warm did you want to pick up your questions yes uh for the applicant please so um just out of curiosity what was the reasoning or have you explored the idea of a clean trans ition tariff things like Google are doing for their data centers to ensure 100% of the energy is renewable in Nevada we have not explored that and why um I would need to get back to you on us for an answer for that I mean it's just not something that we have um has been you know required or needed uh for the for the project did you want to ask a question uh sure I'm gon s go ahead yeah absolutely I'm going to Pivot just a little bit um uh towards uh fire safety actually just because it's the first one it might be for Jeff but you're welcome to stay um just because it is the first one of its kind and so forth did uh fire get a chance to chime in and just evaluate how they would uh be able to service um the the the new land use there wor worst case scenario or maybe a yeah fire fire did evaluate it um and I received no specific feedback other than the feedback that they provide for a lot of uses in terms of access roads and and things like that so uh and compliance with the international fire code so um yeah they evaluated it with no specific call out for anything out of the ordinary okay good deal okay thanks Jeff be bet yep just kind of sticking with our rotation commissioner delard did you have additional questions at this time um yeah I think this one is um for for Jeff um so if we approve this um condition um you know again it's set for 247 and again right now there's not going to be a lot of employees there's not going to be a lot of traffic or or truck um noise etc etc but if it's if it is approved here then it's technically approved for manufacturing 247 correct no no so the the the 247 request is part and parcel with the data center use okay so so if if a if a if if another uh Manu or industrial use came came along if if if Kore you know closed up shop and and uh you know went away and another data center sorry not another Data Center another industrial use came along um uh would require its own separate entitlement um another data center could come along and occupy it as the entitlement would run with the land but a different use would have to go through another process okay great thank you you bet commissioner rer do you have additional questions one for the applicant um I was curious what the contingency plan plan is from time to time Envy energy de energizes lines for things like wildfire or strong winds uh what's the plan to keep 30 megawatts going um well there's redundancy within the grid um there's also multiple feeds coming into the building um so if um if a transformer blows at the at the um substation um well far far from ideal um there uh the data center would be able to keep operating there could be some um impacts of that operation certainly um but there's redundancy built in to the to the plan quickly um is that the diesel generators um no it is not and um th those would be run for it for temporary power outages those would not be run you know in continuation um if there was a a a sustained you know power outage uh at um or or you know a Transformer or to blow you know in the system um that's dedicatedly serving the the project just one more question about battery storage was that an option at this project site no B battery storage also I mean similar solar not an option um um you know frankly it it um well battery storage doesn't really it doesn't work too well without the the solar the onside Generation Um frankly and um so therefore it wasn't studied but um battery storage would wouldn't be able to provide um you know the the voltage that's necessary to power the the equipment okay thank you thank you do you have any further questions from the commission at this time commissioner Basera thank you chair uh I guess for Jeff please um seems like we're voling um between not just sustainability but maybe where we set the bar especially for something new like this uh because I again I suspect we'll have a few more before us in the next three months or four months or whatnot and um if we set the bar I don't want to say low but at a certain level um you know are we setting us ourselves up as a community uh maybe to be reactionary in the future for how we sustain energy demand so it's was kind of curious if in your conversations with NB energy um if three more went online data centers to you know in the next three to four months would they be be able to meet that demand uh part one and part two what drives companies uh I won't say their names but companies out at trick to go all in on sustainability whether it's on-site storage solar and so forth to to make those decisions without any local ordinance and folks to not do it like what's the incentive do you know so okay uh the first question um uh recognize that I've not had any direct conversations with NV Energy so in for this project or just kind of the overall uh process or or and whatnot um we may need to decide uh as the city and and and I've had conversations with uh Mike and uh our principal planner um you know that that we may need to bring in other elements of a larger policy discussion uh with regard to Data Centers and the energy usage for this particular project we didn't do that um and Title 18 doesn't require and the conditional use permit process doesn't require For Better or For Worse doesn't require that so um we didn't it wasn't uh looked at in terms of um other than when the applicant indicated in their application that they had a commitment from Envy energy I did ask for documentation to that effect why not um but in terms of uh um a specific finding that needs to be made um my perspective is that there wasn't a finding that that addressed the requirement for energy to be documented um the uh overall City's concurrency process documented in the master plan requires at a building permit stage that various things I.E water storm water uh schools other uh infrastructure and services be provided and and clearly documented prior to issuance of building permits so in a way we could kick the can down the road punt it to the building permit stage to to confirm that NV Energy has you know the ability to serve at this point we've taken their word for it that they have the ability to serve the project and um you know that's for better for worse kind of how the approach has been at this point again Mike um it looks like you may be wanting to speak here but um we we we may need to um use this opportunity as a learning example to uh look into uh augmenting our process for future applications right because I do remember during the Spring April title 18 cleanup presentation some of the some questions did arise from this body about uh sustainability and uh providing that feedback to staff you know to do the rounds through Council and everyone else and obviously it seems like it didn't make it in um to address this particular type of land use case um and so just wondering if we're uh uh I don't know um I kind of wish we would have something more solid to work off of you know with Title 18 and and so forth um the scope of the of the code cleanup uh I think it's more limited to literally clean up as opposed to kind of adding substantial uh sections or or uh areas to analyze um so I'm I'm not privy to the particular request that this body made uh but my understanding is that that's generally outside of the scope of the current code cleanup effort but did did data centers were they part of Title 18 or where did they come in through I I can't remember that as a land use oh that's the administrative interpretation from January 25th of this year uh where they became part of of code Mike and I'll jump in here Mike reallyy for the record so prior to January of this year we did not Define a data center use right in our code mhm we've we received numerous inquiries literally almost on a daily basis from developers on looking to locate data centers and we we were kind of for a lack of better term winging it on how we defined it is it a warehouse is it a quasa commercial use so we set some basic standards for what a data center is um we Define parking standards we added supplemental standards I believe it's no more than three dock doors for example and we identified the zones that data centers would be permitted along with the process which is a conditional use permit we did not dive into details based on you know power usage or sustainability we simply created a category so we could Define where these go um within and that's why we have the cup as a discretionary review because we know most of them operate 24 hours for example um granted we see data centers come in all the time there are different sizes different demands um as Jeff mentioned I think it's probably a higher level policy discussion to to have but this is to coin just phrase I think you know we're we're charting unfamiliar Waters at this point right and I'm all for being Star Trek you know I love exploring and just really going all out just afraid that um um it seems like we've had ample time since as as as a city uh not necessarily just folks in this in this room to uh from January to now to explore those areas and to set us up for more success tonight by saying when you when this goes before yall here's a set of not just guidelines but a pol policy you know and I think that's uh sorely lacking tonight but uh trying to do my best here and I know you are as well so I appreciate you Jeff do we have any further questions looks like we're ready to move into discussion commissioner rer sure I appreciate the difficulty of being first you know it's this is a new thing um and 30 megawatts is there's nothing in Renos Sparks was O County comparable that would be three or four renowned hospitals that would be three Allegiance stadiums where they have the Super Bowl three so we don't have anything to really compare this to that's a tremendous amount of energy that Envy energy will probably have to include include an a queue of 20 gaw in Northern Nevada of data center requests I've spoken to EnV energy and the uh the answer is simple that the pucn says that you have to be served you put in an application you have to serve but there's no time frame there's no detail provided to us if that can be served in the next year in the next 5 years in the next 10 years so these projects are not clear so making the case for finding number four for me is very challenging that the public infrastructure services are there I also feel like there's nothing in finding five which we typically think in terms of visual character there's no other use this is 5,000 homes the equivalent of power for 5,000 homes there's no equivalent use or character that I can match this to so when I see a project that doesn't come forward with its own generation or some sort of consideration for how to help this process because this is unfolding real time in our state and I'll tell you we're looking at the end of the supply chain but there's a whole bunch of rural communities in Nevada who are getting huge solar arrays on public lands that they hate um and that's the beginning of the supply chain and we're just trying to sort of match these things but the demand for these data centers is incomparable there's nothing that we can compare this to and so I'm not clear on findings four and five so I'm looking for some of my Commissioners opinions to help me make this decision commissioner VTO uh I'll tell you all from the outset I don't think data centers data centers are good for society they are not good for the community they reside in they're super energy intensive They Don't Really create jobs um I don't think any of that is particularly relevant to my analysis of this uh I think we're getting way far a field of what we should be looking at um data centers are recognized use so long as there's a conditional use permit if we're looking at what is uh compatible with the surrounding area my view of compatibility is does it generally fit what's around it and while there's no data centers around it there's no data centers in Reno so we'd never be able to make a compatibility finding if we were only saying are there other data centers which makes it impossible for the city to contemplate there being data centers and allowed use if that was the metric we have to use to determine whether it's compatible so I look at what is around it bunch of warehouses things that look super similar to what they're proposing I don't think we should look at necessarily what they're doing in the building to make a determination as to whether or not it's compatible with the surrounding area does it fit the mold it's a warehouse there's a bunch of warehouses there so I can say it's compatible so I think that addresses finding number five under the cup analysis as far as finding number four um if Envy energy can't serve the project that's on the applicant they have come forward with a letter which I wish we would have seen I don't know if that's in the packet but I'm being told that there is a will serve letter that in my mind is sufficient to say that there are sufficient facilities and services available for them to operate if there's not they spend a bunch of money they can't get service that is not on us it's just a question of whether or not they have the ability to tell us hey we have a will serve letter we can get energy so that therefore I can make finding number four um beyond that you know I just don't think we should be making value statements on whether there should or should not be data centers that's a policy decision for city council to do if they want to put in place a moratorium by all means go for it we shouldn't be looking too far into what they're proposing if telling us it can be served and it looks like it belongs in the area I think that's really how I look at this uh I can generally make the rest of the findings I don't think the rest of the findings are in super contention but I I'm just concerned we're kind of evaluating whether or not we think this is a good idea and I I don't think that's really our job so I I just I think that if they say it can get served I can make finding number four and it looks like the buildings around it and generally is a warehouse so I can make fining number five so that's kind of my analysis of it commissioner delr do you have comments um yeah so you know as part of uh Ward 4 I mean we're disproportionately affected by these massive buildings so you can say yes there's already warehouses there but how many more warehouses are we going to shove in toward four or how many massive buildings so so I have concerns with that and in the public um feedback showed that as well um and and I think the the overall conversation we're trying to have here is this is the first one so we are setting precedence and there there are still some questions out there about the guidelines and what the policy should be and and my concern is if we just say well we don't have anything to go by so we should just go ahead and prove it then the next one will have precedent set for that and so so my concern is you know what what's the balance between um this being the first one and sending precedence um and making sure that we have you know thought about this and and thought it through you know do do we have enough energy here you know we're going to have to start building more and more substations and um because if this is just one and they're using half the energy of a substation and we're getting one request a day we'll just never have the capacity unless we're thinking about it from a more sustainable um standpoint and so that's that's that's my concern thank you commissioner commissioner draculus did you have any comments for discussion no I'm listening and thinking right now you can keep it going understood uh commissioner Basera do you have comments for discussion uh yes sir just some comments thoughts um appreciate your your your take as always uh commissioner VTO and everyone else I think Alex um you know when you mentioned that we should go with what's before us and not overreach or and so forth I I take that to heart in a good way I appreciate that but in this particular case by admission of Staff as well um and our administrator uh we actually don't have a policy to go off of right um so I I mean that's their words right if if if I were a little startup right now what I would say is okay we're going to Rally up a quick all hands on deck and we're going to get around this and create a policy we don't have to wait a year we don't have to wait 2 years let's all get together and get a policy around this um so our Planning Commission and other stakeholders can actually uh have some some guiding principles and something hard and concrete to work off of but since we do not have a um policy uh the best thing we can do is what we are doing tonight and trying to find that balance and hopefully not overreach right but uh serve in the best advisory capacity that we can to our fellow Council and ourselves and staff uh commissioner if I may clarify something for the record um I wouldn't say that related to the policy whether we have a policy we do have development standards for data center uses those are defined in we Define what a data center is there are limitations on what that use is we don't have a specific policy in the master plan related to Data Centers but there are other uses within the code that we don't have specific policies for so I just want to clarify that yeah thank you m so it seems like there are some some areas that might cover but there's still some potential critical um uh gaps that that need um policy language around them thank you have further comments for discussion commissioner warer would it be all right if I asked one question of Jeff yeah of course Jeff do you have a copy of that will serve that you could put up on the screen um not with me but do you guys have a copy of it I'd be happy to run upstairs and get it real quick sure you I I can tell you I think it's from October 26th so not that long ago um but yeah it is in the record I do have it in my in my uh electronic files so just okay might technology who has her magnifying glass oh there we go okay all right thank thank you I appreciate that for me the last sentence doesn't demonstrate enough information to meet finding number four is there I have a question for you is commissioner RAR is there like is there something else they could get that would be more more concrete than this from MV energy there are studies and things that can be presented that supply that would tell us time frames and loads that could be served I would if it pleases the body I could share those on I want to hear from CHR first she knows a lot about this s want to know if she has any perspective so I give an equivalent um Tuma has what's called a discovery one and Discovery 2phase investigation that a preliminary project would submit for application and then get a thorough report not unlike the noise report or not unlike the sewer study or Hydro study that are included in the cup and so this just feels a little light for us to be deciding groundbreaking new land uses but what what happens though if like they get approved they build it and then MV energy can't serve them like why why is that a reason like why why should we refuse to take the risk of approving them when they are the ones that suffer if we're if MV energy can't serve them that's a solid point I I really appreciate that point of view um I feel that there's so much interest in data centers that this is the first of many we already know that there are two more on two subsequent planning commissions and so there is no code asking us to look at cumulative effects but we have to have discernable information then I think we have to have a standard of detail about what utility demands this entails and when it's coming and some additional information like can it be served this year can it be served within a time frame is this going to expire long before the cup expire long before this project will ever get built is is there a way to condition it then to like require service for it to be operational or I I don't know I don't know what the language would be but it seems like if your concern is there might not be energy for it can we condition it in a way that resolves that because they obviously can't operate if they don't have energy well staff brought a good point about the building permit but we don't want to be I think Planning Commission doesn't need to be reviewing case after case after case without a set standards of what to look for in the application we need a certain I feel at least some Commissioners myself need a certain level of detail Beyond a will serve because this is not again it's not in character of anything else we have to compare to can I ask the applicant to weigh on in on this discussion um I I have uh planning memos that are referenced in um this letter um that I can show on the screen if I don't really know what that means so this includes um in this includes detailed information about um the service sizes um the inservice dates the infrastructure that's required uh to implement them um and the lead times I guess why I struggle with that is even if you were to give me all that information it would not assist me in determining whether or not you would have sufficient energy which is kind of my point here is that no matter what you tell me yeah I'm only going to care about whether or not MV energy says you're going to get power and I can't really do analysis over like we need this many kwatts there's a substation here that provides X they're going to do y to improve it like I I I just think that's kind of my point here is like it seems like we're trying to like make them do a lot more because we don't think that there's specific languager requirements when all that is required under the law is can we make findings under the CP and I don't think we should be having a process for applicants to come in and say say you can apply with a cup and then like move the goal poost once they get here by saying well we need to see all this other stuff that's kind of how I view it and I I totally give your cover but that's that's my view on this is I feel like we're trying to create additional hurdles that I I don't know that we should be doing I respect your opinion but we ask that of them in sanitary Ste we ask that of them in storm drain we ask that of them in water supplies we ask them in every other utility so why should we not be asking the same level of detail but do we get something more than that letter though like genuinely I oh yes the appendices are full of sewer studies Hydro studies noise studies traffic studies all of those things that help with the scientific Valley and we've done sir can you please your name record and grounding tonic Design Group we've had a pending potential sewer shortage in North valys for years and then we've warned applicants as a city and a community that it's first in first out and if you get in after the state you may not be guaranteed sewer and we've still approved them we haven't a held up potential development on that historically again true but we're talking about what could the applications look like going forward so that we can base decisions um and that's that this is a nuanced difference but I think again because the difficulty of first is setting the process in so many ways of how to do this how to make these decisions so I hear what you're saying I don't think we're going to probably persuade each other but I respect what you're saying and I think I understand your perspective um is there what anyone else like to weigh in commissioner dracul yeah you guys are making it tough those are some solid points on both sides not going to lie um yeah at first when I read this um staff report seeing staff recommending approval um I could make the findings and obviously I want to be at the meeting before I actually make that final decision I didn't have any true concerns but there were some very good questions you guys bring up some very solid points and it is tough that we don't have data center policies to go by Mike a question for you if this was December of 2023 and we didn't even have this issue of not having policies for a data center our Dev velopment standards would staff still recommend approval with the same level the same formula and would we be in front and making different decisions as a board because we don't you know we're going with what we have set in place would it be the same result generally speaking had this project come in last year we would have likely have classified it as a warehouse made it gone through it would have gone through condition use permit process regardless for the the 24-hour operation yeah so we probably would be at the same point with are now okay and that's probably where I land a little bit on that topic and I would love nothing more for this conversation to carry over to staff's Monday through Friday night at five and what they need to do to help us do a better job but I would land on I'm going to follow staff's recommendation of approval to your two points they're solid and it stinks but I'm gonna I'm I'm on commissioner vel's side and we're here to let them go have a chance at getting this done and if they can't that's their problem and I wish them luck I understand the consequences of that decision and I respect the other side of it but that's probably where I'll I'll land as well good luck you know hopefully EnV energy can handle what you know they need to provide and it serves a community to the point of compatibility there's not going to be any residential or housing in that area I don't think retails a fit Warehouse is going to go there minimal traffic impacts which military struggles with W for is tough I'm I'm four years in listen and commissioner Muno fight his tail off and I love every word he ever said and this is probably as good as it gets on this parcel for me I mean maybe there's a better use and it's slightly better um but that's where I kind of land there I would really love the chance to to speak if sure um to just address a couple points that have been going around um with regard to just generally U electrical capacity um in the area um and other other projects other theoretical projects abilities to um to secure that electrical capacity I can't speak for other projects I can only speak for our project we are funding the construction of a substation it is already under construction okay we have the we have the power allocated to us and we have commitments from NV Energy you can put conditions of approach that we provide you with those commitments if you would like but we have power allocated to us because we are paying in advance and funding for the construction of the substation that is providing that power and is also providing uh 30 additional MVA of power to serve any number of uses throughout the North Valleys I would like to just clarify one thing as as Jeff mentioned in his presentation this project would not be issued a building permit from the city of Mareno if they could not demonstrate that they had service from NV Energy thank you commissioner Basera sure but do you want to go no go ahead all right um yeah is a tough one I see commissioner VTO and dracul's uh points really well um I also kind of take a step back and think uh I know we don't have a full house tonight um there are some other applicants waiting patiently and so forth but in the off chance that someone's listening in outer space and says you know I'm going to appeal this and it it goes to city council city council themselves is going to say well you know we don't even have anything to go off of we don't have our own policy so how do we evaluate even the appeal right so there isn't no beginning or end on this I I do love the initiative I do appreciate what data centers have to offer we wouldn't actually be here talking broadcasting without data centers the irony uh but we do owe applicants and The Wider public predictability and I it gives me serious pause knowing that we don't have that tonight um and so currently I'm I'm on H commissioner rm's side with um not making the findings and I do think it's worth mentioning that we did have a project before us through Nevada Energy some months ago where I believe their project hit a kind of wall and and for my understanding it's it's still kind of at a standstill but it did relate to the North Valleys and be able to provide long-term resiliency um so that's a factor to consider um so I'm just kind of noodling all this thr it out there and um if someone can you know share some of their thoughts or insights that'd be great but as of now I'm with commissioner [Music] Vermeer do we have further comments from the commission or are we effectively maybe at an impass time for a motion did you have additional comments commissioner DVR yeah just just you know kind of going back again to to um uh commissioner perera's Point like North Valleys is in a unique situation where we um again have a lot and and and and I understand you know commissioner Dracula's Point like what else could potentially go there um I do have concerns about the employment it's it's not going to bring a lot of employment granted it's not going to bring a lot of traffic with that um and and again I'm I'm just concerned about setting precedent and um especially in terms of the the energy usage and the sustainability um of of any other projects which I understand is not on the table tonight but um I just I have some concerns with this Jeff did you have a comment yeah if I can make uh a couple of comments um immediately addressing your U position commissioner delv um uh and I don't have a a dog in the fight or what no what is a horse in the race a dog dog in the fight whatever doesn't matter to me you know um so but just as a kind of um clarification on that particular site there is an existing entitlement that this body approved in March of this year for a warehouse development so in in theory that could move forward next week so just as a point of clarification um and that was before your time on the B yeah it was before your time that would employ more people at least so true um the other point that I wanted to make is that the um I I fully respect and appreciate everyone's um positions here tonight um I think that I would have a problem with it as a staff recommendation were the um existing sorry the approved uh substation not approved if that you know if we were putting the cart before the horse right you know kind of hoping that some project was going to come down the pipe to provide the energy that would be you know uh malens I think might be the the word or something along those lines that I would have not done my job but um uh since that project was approved it's gone all the way through Regional and in effect apparently is already under construction um per the applicant uh you know we didn't put the cart before the horse um so I just just for that for consideration uh have uh so to that point and and again I know that this isn't we're talking specifically about this particular applicant but going forward what what kind of position is the city going to take are they going to require that you know x amount of energy is used or are we going to put sustainability um in in place where they can you know use you know different forms of energy in not in in certain areas and and things like that it's it's a concern you know like again there's another one coming up probably next meeting and will they have enough energy and to you know do do we do we care I don't know I mean I think we should um so I'll let you talk Manny sure one one last thought there uh I'm going to throw out just a uh suggestion um so holidays I'm not sure if um Dave Rodin career on like a a time crunch with you know next steps but um if there's some wiggle room uh because I'd hate to say like a no as much as a not right now and uh our illustrious uh council member Lon is here taking wonderful notes I'm sure and I'm just wondering if it would be uh prudent of us to say you know what can we continue this uh and ask Council to rally and say hey help us out here let's get some standards going uh listen to our meeting tonight some of the uh feedback that's been shared some of the things that are probably desired and needed to have and let's set something in place and then once that's in place hopefully in January I know I'm wishful thinking because I like to move but uh assuming that did happen then we would be ready for every other data center project before us in 2025 a continuance definitely crossed my mind several times I think it would give some adequate time to prare additional information or provide additional information referen to those memos for example I'm not sure we would want to have the same level of uh dialogue the next go around um but I think that that is something I could support more time for more information for the record can I just clarify with I'm I think I'm hearing two things commissioner rer is saying a Contin continuance to allow for preparation of additional information commissioner berera you're saying a continuance from some sort of policy direction from the council um I guess what can we clarify what exactly we would be looking for in that continuous period sure I'm a I'm a big fan of and statements not just or so I don't think in this case it needs to be just hers or mine but a kind of a combination of the two right where we get the additional information that uh commissioner RM mentioned that is common place for other utilities uh to provide and some policy direction from Council um and other stakeholders that need to be at the table um do that answer your question so sorry just quickly clarifying point I don't actually know how practical it is for the city council to formally contemplate this in sort of the time frame that that you're suggesting um I also don't it's almost like a chicken or egg thing like I I think typically the council sets the policy framework at their behest and then we tend to follow it I don't know if you're making my point to say no like I just I I genuinely don't know we're getting in kind of murky territory I mean I don't know if like staff or or anyone wants to weigh in on on that piece or maybe commissioner VTO if you have thoughts I I think we should just asked the applicant this so I uh 33 if that were the outcome is a technical denial and you have the opportunity to appeal to city council would you prefer that we take a vote tonight or would you prefer to have an opportunity to give us more information and get a continuance I'm sorry can you ask a question yes so a 33 would be a technical denial I don't know how many's going to vote possibly it's a 3- three um if that's the case your option would be to appeal to council the alternative is we are considering potentially doing a continuance if we did a continuance you'd have the opportunity to give us more information later on and we'd come back to Planning Commission would you like us to take a vote tonight or would you like to have a continuance the continu sounds like it's to get from Council well to the podium yeah he's gonna ask the question I'm gonna ask I'm just concerned I'm not concerned I'm still a little confused on how much time we're talking about because we're asking for the council to chime in during the holiday or post holidays and their agenda is usually chalk full so I don't know if this could be six months I don't I'll make my mind clearer I I think in a couple of weeks there could be some additional reporting and some additional information from the utility that would clarify my questions from the applicant from the appc asking direct I'm being asked you're asking for you're asking for clarity and more certainty on the provision of the power or person or are there new standards that are going going to be applied to our project you have different Commissioners have different perspectives commissioner RoR Meer is seeking more information about ability to service the project with energy commissioner Basera would like to get more input from Council um is our new is that fair that new standards would be applied to a project that was submitted that meets and exceeds code if if you're asking me my persp might be different than some of the other Commissioners I'm I'm well I'm just confused if that if your your project is red reviewed under the standards at the time you submitted so the the development standards do not change so a change in standards would not apply to our project because we have a existing application that we've been diligently pursuing I would look illegal but I think that would be correct yes it's carar Hall City attorney that's correct so yeah so I guess if for my sake I guess I'm what's the for commissioner B's question I don't think that's to commissioner AR point I don't know if it's practical to actually get that information and make a better decision in two three four months necessarily right and just my assumption at this point commissioner rorer is asking for more information that you can you acquire more information I'm actually trying to show you the information on the screen right now if that that would be yeah okay then attack okay thank you sorry commissioner Armstrong you can tell him to attack I'm sorry yeah please uh whenever you're you're ready I I think that would be helpful thank you it was it was habit chair Armstrong it was only like three months ago that and I just want to clarify that if there were a continuance it would be just to further analyze this information from Envy energy wouldn't be that new standards would be able to be applied uh to the application I don't think anyone on the commission can give you an answer to that question but this the city uh Mr Mr Hall what was the question if there was continuance it was just if there was a I just want I I'm I'm I'm I did not hear your response about if there were a continuance to for to hear city council um de Vel a set of new standards associated with data center development if that would apply to our existing application that we're not going to change the standards for your uh discussion of your application that is not going to happen thank thank you um just out of my own curiosity um because I'm the one processing the next two data center projects that are in the queue um when we talk about standards when we're referring to standards I'm interpreting that to mean um and just please clarify the data center data center standards in particular I.E parking spaces at 1 per 3,300 ft three dock doors things like that what I thought you were talking about commissioner Basera is more policy level uh direction from the council in other words the council is not going to prescribe a specific amount of parking or or dock doors or something along those lines what I thought you were saying was more policy level uh theoretical bigger picture Direction sure exactly Jeff more policy oriented um maybe in the same vein that um my line of questioning fell for the Lake Ridge plumis one where I brought up uh certain sustainability questions but they weren't really policy oriented right so uh my hand got slapped rightfully so right um and and so in in that same in that same vein I'm wondering like if there's no policy here how can we proceed and I know uh Mike mentioned there's certain standards but there's no policy so I'm just thinking worst case scenario as well if somebody appeals this either way council's going to review it and they're going to say we don't have a policy to go off of we're just doing our best here right so I'm sure we'll find a path forward my whole goal is path forward best case scenario you know uh Let's find let's find something as a further clarification to the process um Carl would while the standards might not any new standards that might come down the road would not be applicable to this application based on when it was submitted would policy level direction or contemplation from the council be brought to bear uh if this was continued could that uh be considered I think you just have to go with the findings that uh you would typically make an conditional use permit and I don't know the policy is going to change anything in terms of their application as it stands now so if policy changes down the road it's not going to affect this application um so this this is a document with a lot of information on it um confidential um and this is why the quickly this this might help um with clarification I I think what commissioner rorer is looking for is like a designation of resource from from your power provider is that effectively what this document is where it's saying like we've agreed to build this uh this substation and you're paying for it as the developer and so the implication of your point was that we have an agreement to build this utility infrastructure and as a result of your contribution to that you're effectively guaranteed a designation for up to 30 MVA or 30 megawatts for for the sake of arguing and then there's an additional 30 that exists for other uh for other applicants to potentially interconnect to but is that your point is that you have like a certification or formal designation that says as a result of the collaboration on this project that you're entitled to that power um yes we are we there are several stages of agreement uh with NV Energy um we um are and there I mean there are multiple agreements with them um some of which are executed some of which are being negotiated and going to be final executed now but um we have um certainty uh that we have the power um allocated to us and it will be delivered to us um otherwise we wouldn't be making this investment okay thank you does that help on your end or do you have anything to add commission yes thank you commissioner chair Armstrong I think that's the kind of documentation that would be wonderfully um helpful in these sorts of application submittal is is it possible to get that documentation tonight and maybe we pause this hearing move to the next one only so we can try to finish this hearing tonight is that doable if you have a comment you can you can come up sounds like maybe you're closer to it you all don't like that idea I'm fine I'm just throwing it out there it's great let's solve the problem we're here let's get cozy I want to make some final remarks from a planning perspective uh I think we heard a lot and I Echo some of the thoughts and ideas and concerns that were brought up I appreciate each and every member that being said we are submitting this application under the current code and we have done our due diligence to follow the cup process that has been formalized and set forth for something like this um as ma Mike rley mentioned a little bit um few minutes ago had this come last year this would be classified under uh Warehouse use but now we have defined a data center use and development standards and we are hold to that as part of this up process we go through some additional documents like a drainage report a sewer report um a traffic report if applicable a a sound study if applicable those are all parts and uh components of a cup for SE especially um in the North Valleys as John has mentioned in the past often times there's not enough capacity that being said that is a decision that gets denied at the building permit phase projects have stalled for for years and and have fallen through the cup process has helped us kind of understand that the power is a big issue here and has Mike Ry mentioned it we will need to prove this at a building permit phase um that there is power to make this project a reality um and echoing again um uh Alex Vos and some of the other Commissioners if we find out that Envy energy is not able to provide what they have quote unquote committed to us this is not going to get built but as of now they have committed to it as of now the project has already gone through some Regional agencies for the substation and hasn't has gotten approved um that being said the sewer capacity water rights and now energy which is a new thing I'm assuming would be in a first come first serve basis and would be under Envy Energy's purview into what to approve that falls uh as a burden on them excuse me I I totally understand I hear what you're saying I think we just we really want to know if we can is it possible to see the other documents about energy in tonight it it was the same document that was pulled up if we could you could move on to other applications so my suggestion this this is the chair's Choice obviously that would be my recommendation is we try to hold the hearing hopefully see it later i' open to your feedback well you make the call so yes is your feedback I don't know I have a couple thoughts right um the applicant is building the substation um either in full or mostly whatever whatever the arrangement is and frankly that's not really any of our business Commercial Point we're not we're not discussing commercial aspects to this project or any project I think if they are paying for the power that they're supposed to have and they don't get it they have bigger problems than us kind of pontificating on whether or not they have the energy um so I I don't act he also just had the document up I don't know specifically like what in the document that had confidential like plastered all over it we we want to zoom in on um but no like seriously like I I think we've gotten to a point where this is just kind of silly and I don't see any value in like continuing the hearing for 30 minutes and coming back to scan again a confidential do I think we have enough to just make a decision based on the fact pattern that we've been provided I personally I I feel the same way I but I think my impression in Reed is that there may not be enough votes to vote in favor and if we could possibly if our fellow Commissioners could see something that makes them possibly change their perspective I think that could be of benefit I mean maybe specifically I think commissioner Ro me this is sort of the point that you've drilled down on specifically if you could give more clarification on maybe like what language you're wanting to see or what specifically you need to see and then to the extent the applicant is actually comfortable like getting into it like I would be more comfortable with that but I I kind of turn it to you on that point yeah well I think that you know this is a these sorts of things are somewhat iterative I mean the code doesn't tell the applicant what studies to provide that's not in the title that's staff tells the applicants which technical documents are helpful in the application process like the sewer study that's not in code right that's it's a requirement for condition a condition use permit application has a submitt checklist which those are those are requirements for submitt of a conditional use permit application but that doesn't come from the title that's staff's determination correct what you guys over time and through your expertise came up with that checklist some of it is in code and some of it is based overtime and I think the issue here for me uh since you know this is possibly a 3 three split that would be unfortunate um is that that checklist hasn't really been created for data centers and data centers are different than anything else we've encountered and so in some ways it's a conversation with staff and probably applicant and Industry at large for figuring out what kinds of information are available and are appropriate to make these determinations and I think I'll leave it at that I don't I'm ready to make my vote I think it's pretty obvious how I'm going to vote finding number four is a challenge for me I I would um ask for as as um suggested by commissioner belto the opportunity for us to show you the agreements that we have with NB energy um if my I don't have them at my fingertips um is it possible for a colleague of mine to zoom into the meeting to walk you through the process uh uh the the uh the agreements and and more information on the Envy energy process I'm not staff as and so it's not really appropriate for me to ask for extra time to sit down and go over these documents I I ask for you were asking for that yes I'd be happy to join a meeting but I can't direct staff to have that meeting what do you think at this point I think staff takes direction from the commission whether that's a route you want to go um then I think that that meeting should be held maybe post I think you should I think there should be consideration for a two or 3 week continuance to Hash this out we trust but want to verify and here's a cool thing you know yall are setting the foundation and everyone else after this is going to be hopefully a lot smoother and just a I don't think um I don't think you're going to persuade anybody at this point I think the question really is would you like a continuance or would you like a vote and the opportunity to appeal if it doesn't go your way I have a couple remarks and unfortunately my first remark is not a direct answer to your question so I apologize um so there I heard two conflicts um just language wise the ADM um that was adopted this year January 25th of early this year formalizes the data center approval through a cup so I I'm sorry I hear what you're saying it's like 10 o00 and I'm just going to tell you I don't think you're going to persuade anybody it is most important that you for me personally say whether you would like a continuance or a vote I can make that decision based on a question I wanted to ask uh Carl Hall so the current AQMD uh that went into effect January 25 25th of this year says that the data centers is an approved use um through a c in the zones Ms I I Etc I cannot remember um then this was brought by commissioner R Meer that the cup current process does not recognize um data centers it it is not sufficient of a review process uh in terms of checklist in terms of what's what documents needs to be provided for a data center what does that mean from a legal perspective well I think commissioner ry's problem with the application is she doesn't know that you're going to have uh the ability to meet finding number four which public services and facilities are available to serve the project so she's looking for that information to make her findings uh other than that if you know I think what commissioner velto is asking do you want a continuance tonight to provide further information to the commission or would you like a vote and then you can appeal it to city council let me confirm with the client just give us a couple minutes I appreciate the response um well we would like to show the agreements and then go to a vote if we are allowed to do so I think the reality would be that we would continue it to the next meeting which is two weeks from today is that right yes sorry just to confirm it is two weeks from you continue to the next yeah is it de is John Browning techn is it being suggested that there's a question about the power and if we demonstrate that votes will change we can't really answer that question for you but I'm just I know you can't directly answer it in fairness we're being asked we're being asked a very black and white question go to go to vote or go to continuance and it would be helpful to know from the desent Commissioners if if you know in order to answer that question from the descending Comm Commissioners if we were to show the documentation and give you a reasonable level of assurance if you would then change your vote I'm certainly open to that I'm certainly open to sitting down looking at your documentation talking with City staff in a joint meeting and saying is this the appropriate information to guarantee that this project is going to be served by energy that there's sufficient capacity in Greater Northern Nevada and and so forth and to make sure that we have documents DNR for example um that are the kind of information that going forward in subsequent because there are other data centers that are following this one can provide so that we have a we have a set set of documents to review to make a decision and commissioner delar do you feel the same way I do commissioner Basera uh correct um you know my other stuff is aspirational but that'll come in due time yeah um I I think the other three Commissioners are already a yes vot so I won't make you say yes or no um so we um given that um and the we would have a continuance to is it December 18th December 18th will be our next meeting um we would like the opportunity to maybe in a meeting prior with with you with the entire commission well you can't do that because they would be violating open meeting law so you get two of us at a time okay so we can meet with you all two at a time or individually over the next two weeks um walk you through everything we can even have Envy energy potentially join those meetings to give further assurances um and if and we go through that we'll be back December 18th that's what we that's that's what we would like to do just to clarify you are welcome to meet with Commissioners the city cannot mandate that they meet with you though they would have to be agreeable to to meet we're just you send an email yeah to no more than two of us at a time so we don't violate open meeting law fair enough with that commissioner or chair would you entertain a motion to continue to date certain the next meeting I would uh I'll move to continue this item to the next meeting we have a motion do we have a second second we have a motion and a second all those in favor I motion passes uh the item is continued to date certain uh next meeting is it December 18th 2024 thank you we will thank you for all the time and discussion and thank you to to Jeff and the whole Reno staff for their uh coordination and attention to detail through the process and appreciate the commission as well I'll see you in a couple weeks or probably before then cheers thank you have a good night thanks y uh before opening the next item we are going to take a five minute break and then we will be back thank [Music] you e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e all right I will bring the commission back to order and we will open item 4.3 LDC 25-19 or Crest Drive zoning map Amendment and it looks like we'll get a presentation from a very patient staff member thank you thank you Daniel martoma associate planner specialist for the record so before you is a request for recommendation to the city council for a zoning map Amendment and uh here the project site it's located uh on the north side of orrest drive it's approximately 1.18 acres and it's uh just about 240 ft east of orrest dries intersection with Carson Lane and So currently the Zone the the current Zoning for the subject site is large lot residential 1 acre or llr one and uh because the site's uh master plan uh land use designation is mixed employment uh this request is really intended to bring the sites zoning into master plan conformance by rezoning the property to mixed employment zoning and so key issues related to this request were zoning compatibility of the subject site with surrounding properties as well as master plan conformance and so here is a graphic illustrating the proposed zone change and as you can see here there was a similar request uh uh for rezoning for the property addressed at 550 orrest drive just on the south side of the street and uh here's another graphic illustration uh showing the shared master plan land use designation of M mixed employment uh for the subject site as well as surrounding properties in the area here's a table listing the development standards for both uh zoning districts and as you can see here uh the me zoning uh District allows for greater Building height as well as greater uh develop develop aable uh area and uh at present uh it should be noted that at present uh the applicant has indicated that there are no uh plan projects for the site and so here's uh uh the recommended findings for zoning map Amendment and staff can make all of the findings and uh here's the recommended motion and I'm available for any questions you have great thanks so much do we have a presentation from the applicant or is it just staff tonight it's just staff tonight uh I believe the applicant was available uh I I'm not sure they're still available or not we understand um you're great we'll work we'll work with you thank you not a problem so we'll bring it back to commissioner for disclosures commissioner velto disclosures commissioner dracul no disclosures commissioner DVR I'm familiar with the site commissioner r no disclosures commissioner berera um familiar with the site and read the comment that came in related to this sometime this afternoon commissioner Armstrong no disclosures we'll now move to public comment uh I have no request to speak forms is anyone wishing to speak via Zoom we did not receive any request to speak forms we did um receive a voicemail and correspondence that was forwarded to the Planning Commission we'll play the voicemail and I don't believe we have anybody on Zoom that wishes to make public comment at this time sounds good thank you good afternoon my name is Alicia Tapia I live on or Crest Drive in Reno Nevada I'm calling regarding case number LDC 25- 000019 project name or Crest Drive zoning map Amendment I'm calling to let you know that it's should not be changed to any other type except residential uh we have an issue with the street that connects to orc press which is called Tanaya Creek and trucks cannot turn around and they block the street for up to 10 minutes and you have to sit there and wait because you can't maneuver yourself back so I am not in agreement to changing the Zoning for this parcel if you have any questions give me a call 775 843 3355 I appreciate your time thank you that's it for public or voicemail thank you do we have anyone in the Chambers wishing to speak on General or sorry on public comment for this item seeing none we'll go ahead and close public comment bring it back to the commission for questions commissioner baser thank you chair uh one for you is Daniel let twofer uh just for clarification this is to bring it to Conformity is that correct uh Daniel mtoa for the record uh yes it is to bring the parcels uh zoning into master plan conformance okay perfect so kind of procedural cleanup if you will okay and then with that and given the the voicemail we just listened to are are there conditions or recommendations that uh can be added to to mitigate traffic or those those kind of concerns that we just heard and the email I received earlier or Mike really plan manager for the record at this point this is a zoning map Amendment so we cannot condition zoning however this uh site regardless of what is built in the future will trigger a site plan review for residential adjacency so there will be discretionary review in the future tan I'm good thank you Daniel and Mike any other questions on the commission commissioner DVR yeah commissioner delr so the can you explain how it's being brought into the master plan because right now there's residential there pretty much all around it so I'm just that uh Daniel martoo for the record again um yes that's a great question uh so essentially um that Parcel Plus the parcels around it uh were um uh assigned the master plan land use designation of mixed employment through the re-imagine reeno Master Plan update and so um with that there are some inconsistencies with some of the current zoning and master plan land use designation and so uh this allows a uh uh bringing or this request allows uh bringing that site's uh zoning into master plan comps so and and again right now it's there's a lot of residential there and and as you probably heard if you stuck through the last conversation um as part of word for we're looking for more services and housing and restaurants not more necessarily where houses and light industrial so um I'm just you know I have concerns about that but I guess one question is could if somebody wants to build housing there could they no just no okay could they get it rezoned let me I'll I'll jump in it this was read so I'm actually looking at an era photo now this originally just give you some history was largely the parcels that are developed were developed within unincorporated waser County before it was in the City of Reno um if you look along there even though there's residential zoning you'll see if you look at an area there's numerous non-conforming Parcels that are operating with quasi industrial uses now so as part of the reimagined Reno update that entire area was kind of seen as a transition between heavier industrial to the South and to the west to the residential so that mixed employment which is a slightly less intense than our industrial right like manur so this as Daniel mentioned brings it into conformance um we we don't actually even charge a fee to process these zone changes we do it free of charge to to bring those into compliance um but to do for example to subdivide that and do Residential subdivision it would take a master plan Amendment put it back to residential okay so it's sort of a moot point there's really nothing we can do except I mean it I mean in theory I mean like I say this this for us is is essentially bringing it into compliance if if somebody did want to assemble parcels and do Residential they could petition the city to do a master plan Amendment if they if they so choose and then it would be up to this board and the commission whether or in the council whether they thought that was appropriate okay thank you any further questions from the commission any discussion from the commission happy to make a motion happy to entertain a motion all right let's do it uh based upon commissioner Basera based upon compliance with applicable findings I move to recommend that city council approve the zoning map amendment by ordinance sorry commissioner can you state the uh the matter number as part of your recommendation uh yeah commissioner where for the win here LDC 25-19 um wait wait you said LDC 25 it's not oh it is what am I looking at oh it's up there let's start over in in the matter of LDC 25-19 uh based upon compliance with the applicable findings I move to recommend that city council approve the zoning map amendment by ordinance how's that great we have a motion do we have a second we have a who's second thank you can you state your name when you vote please should we just do a roll call vote okay uh okay all those in favor I I I I that's weird motion passes unanimously we'll close sorry I just got to pull this up we'll close uh uh item 4.3 and open item 4.4 lc25 D15 Reno Housing Authority at Carval master plan and zoning map amendments looks like we'll get a presentation from staff whenever you're ready Carter thank you good evening Commissioners Carter Williams associate planner for the record for you tonight is a master plan and zoning map Amendment um for the Reno Housing Authority at the corner of sorry it's the northeast corner of Sutro and Carval Drive the property is less than Acer um nearby so to the uh um west of Sutro Street is livestock Event Center and to the south of the waser county Administrative Building for context so from a master plan perspective and and I should clarify that this is just a master plan and zoning map Amendment so we're not looking at any um project um components um so we're just looking at the impacts of the the master plan and the zone change um this request for M the master plan is from mixed neighborhood to multif family neighborhood uh the I have a number of uh uh master plan policies and goals on up there but I think the ones that I I would like to point at are the transit oriented development and the increase in and density that um generally supports affordable housing retention um the multif family neighborhood master plan zone change would support the change from uh multif family 14 units per acre to 30 units per acre so it's a it's a some some increase in density and this would be conforming to that M faster plan um and there is similar density in adjacent parcels and that's represented here from a land use perspective this um actually section or this uh block um that uh this uh project resides on is mostly occupied by multifam um and what's not represented because it would kind of blow out the scale of the is uh to the uh sorry the north of the project site there's an existing 44 unit multif family project and to the south of Carville Drive there's a 208 unit multif family project that are both conforming um with their zoning designations there is an existing bus stop that serves two routes that's directly adjacent to the site on Sutro SE street so this there's a clustering of of uh density that's happening around that that um that Transit service which from a master plan perspective it's it's supporting a Transit oriented development or it's an example of Transit oriented development at this increase so from a use standpoint this is obviously going to increase the density which is consistent with the area um but it also adds to the opportunity for several commercial uses um that are compatible with neighborhood corridors within the mf30 Zone in any case if there is a commercial use that is proposed it require a site plan review so there's an additional review that will um analyze the compatibility of such uses against the residential in the area um the development standards um there's not there is some intensification that would be expected so there is the setback on the rear would decrease by 10 ft um the maximum height would be increased by 10 ft uh and then the stories will increase marginally and then again we're talking about density so the potential um for units would increase by 23 units if they were to use the maximum density bonus um for the property um and generally from a development standards perspective there are existing um residential standards that respect um adjacent massing to smaller buildings or low lower intens zones as well as um shadowing ordinances that would come into play for specifically the properties to the east that are the mf14 that lower density area on the screen are the uh findings for a master plan amendments through staff's review analysis we were able to meet all the findings specifically that the that this is consistent with the neighborhood um that public services are available with it being tier one area um in the mcaren ring it's kind of where we're looking for this kind of density increase and then these are the recommend uh findings for a zoning map Amendment um or uh again that mf30 is in conformance with the master plan and continues a a zoning scheme um through Transit oriented development contemplated by the master plan and it's generally in conformance with NRS and on the screen is the recommended motion with this this does come with a master plan Amendment so um we would be looking for a resolution adoption today from you all and a recommendation for the master plan and zoning map Amendment um to the city Council and then following it would go to the Ral Planning Commission or sorry Regional Planning Commission and I am that's my presentation I'm available for any questions thank you so much Carter do you have a presentation from the applicant good evening finally um Stacy Huggins for the record with wood Rogers I do have a presentation um and I'm happy to go through it but Carter did a great job summarizing um the project so um if you have quite specific spe questions I'm happy to answer them but I think the you know the the real um takeaway here and I'm just going to scroll to the to the end here um you know this master plan Amendment and zone change allows the housing authority to take four Parcels that they currently own um that are currently developed with some aging um residential units on them and redevelop those bring in double the amount of units that exists there today which would allow something that we desperately all know we need in this community is additional affordable housing and because it's the Housing Authority we're comfortable and confident saying that it'll be affordable housing um as it's truly defined um and as the master plan and the city um policies have been um encouraging in the past year or two so um again I'm happy to answer any specific questions you have um but that's kind of the the gist of why we're here tonight great you thanks so much we'll bring it back to the commission for disclosures commissioner Basera uh sure I grew up in that neighborhood uh I'm I'm familiar with the site um read and reviewed material commissioner roor Meer no disclosures commissioner DVR I have been to the site and talked to the traffic police that hang out there um and read the documentation thank you commissioner draulic familiar with the area and spoke to the applicants representative briefly commissioner VTO same disclosures commissioner Armstrong no disclosures uh we'll now move to public comment I have no request to speak forums is anyone wishing to speak via Zoom we did not receive any correspondence no voicemails and no one on Zoom is anyone in the chambers wanting to speak on this item seeing none we'll go ahead and close public comment and bring it back to the commission for questions do we have any questions sure commissioner B thank you chair um I'll just throw it out on whoever wants to come up uh so I guess since you mentioned that there are existing um homes or complexes what happens to the attendants if thank you for the question commissioner Basera JD klippenstein for the record the director of development for the Renown Housing Authority so there are currently six occupied units on these sites um all of those tenants um if we were to move forward um would receive relocation assistance uh the Housing Authority is actually going through lots of Redevelopment currently so we have a thirdparty relocation firm that provides relocation counseling helps them identify a new place either within rha's portfolio or somewhere else in the community and also provides financial assistance to cover all moving costs um and we work with the families about four six to four to six months prior to them actually having to move so that it's a pretty seamless transition great thank you so much J um should I stay up I think you're good thanks bud uh commissioner delard did you have a question yeah I just have a quick question um because we didn't see sort of potentially what it might might be like I you know I did go visit that that site and um it's it's tight and and I understand the need for the um the development and increase ing the number of units I just want to understand uh the parking and how that is being evaluated because there's there's no no parking right now yeah so um Carter Williams associate planner for the record um so I know you know this but as it is a zone change and a master plan we don't have a project and they don't have anything to put forward for us now however when they do come forward they would have to meet the the the standards for the and it would actually be the increase technically technically so if they add additional units they would have to meet that standard for increase and it um that's that's analyzed at the building permit stage perfect thank you I have one quick one uh follow for Carter commer please yeah thank you chair um you you mentioned in the slide Carter that there was uh it would also be good for commercial use is that right or so the zone change um so mf30 does allow for actually the most it's probably mixed use residential Zone like it allows for a lot more more commercial uses than any other the any other residential Zone um but they are limited like it's it's even more limited than um neighborhood commercial which is probably our next tier for these these um so retail um may be an option um I think restaurant without alcohol or something so there's a couple options for these popup neighborhood centers that could that could come through through zoning um but it again it would require a site plan review we we analyze compa ility at that time um but it is more of a direction and a mixed use Direction which is supported by the master plan in this location because of the the transit services there well awesome anything with you through behind it is usually a good project so I'm all for it y any further questions or should we move to discussion do we have any discussion from the commission do you want us to have discussion chair I would entertain a motion JD looks like he wants to make a motion in the matter of or commissioner Dracula in the matter of in case number LDC 25-15 Reno Housing Authority at Carville master plan and zoning map amendments based upon compliance with the applicable findings I move to adopt the master plan amendment by resolution and recommend that city council approve the master plan and zoning map Amendment subject to conformers review by the regional Planning Commission commissioner delvar I second the motion we have a motion and a second all those in favor hi hi motion passes unanimously good luck with your project we'll now close public hearings and move to item five trucky Meadows Regional planning liaison report uh I was sick on Monday and was not in attendance so do any of my other fellow Commissioners that serve on the regional Planning Commission want to take this one do our best um commissioner roor Meer I'll give you a quick update we approved the update to the 2024 Regional plan including the new public infrastructures and the natural resources sections so that is um going to the regional governing board um and they will vote on that December 12th we also heard um a case for going from tier three to tier two in Woodchuck Lane which is in Washo County great thank you you we will close item five and move to item six staff announcements I've got a lengthy presentation I'm just kidding um no I'll be quick uh just some quick updates the a leaf zone change project that you heard and the zoning code update that you heard at your last meeting will go to Council next week for consideration um also Council provided input to Angela and her team on updates to the sign code so they're going to begin their Outreach on that or continue their Outreach with updates to the sign code that will come back before you and the security Circle zone change that you also approved at your last meeting will go actually go on the 8th of January just because the applicant was going to be out of town so requested that that be pushed back so that will go and then um as a staff Angela and I are working to on some training sessions for the Planning Commission that will be brought forward after the first of the year great thanks so much we'll close item six and move to item seven commissioner suggest for future agenda items i chrish b would request that staff put together a presentation on what other cities and counties are doing in terms of local ordinances with data centers any further commissioner Basera yes uh similar to that one but uh maybe it's an ask or presentation I'll let Mike decide um kind of in in in the spirit of sustainability um uh how we can move that forward uh so it makes its way into the appropriate ordinance chapter book fill in the blanket great thanks any further suggestions seeing none we'll close item seven move to item eight general public comment do you have anyone on Zoom wishing to speak under general public comment no no Zoom no request to speak forms no correspondence received and no voicemail thank you anyone in the Chambers wishing to speak under general public comment seeing none we'll close item eight move to item nine adjournment areed almost made it to 11: