we'll Now call to order the February 1st 2023 Reno City Planning Commission um commissioner Armstrong we lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty great Heather can you please do a roll call JD draculich here Harris Armstrong here Peter Gower here Mark Johnson here Arthur Munoz is absent Sylvia Villanueva here Alex felto here we do have a quorum great thank you uh well now I'll go to agenda item number three which is public comment we'll open public comment this item is for either public comment on any action item or for any general public comment do we have any requests to speak for him let me just say this into the record real quick be noted for those in the audience that comments are to be addressed to the Planning Commission as a whole comments heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person and may pertain to matters both on and off the Planning Commission agenda please note that the Planning Commission may not take action upon any matter not agendized for possible action on today's agenda when you are called on for public comment please state your name for the record and begin speaking the timer will begin when you say your name and you will be afforded three minutes if you are an attendee in the zoo meeting and would like to make public comment at this time please raise your hand lastly while in this room please be respectful warnings will be issued by the presiding officer if there is disruptive behavior and you will be asked to leave Chambers if the behavior continues we did receive a voicemail that was General nature not specific to any item on this agenda due to vulgar language this message will not be played during the meeting a redacted transcription was emailed to the commission and is part of the record and I do not have any requests to speak forms at this time thank you okay seeing no public comment on this item we'll close public comment move on to agenda item number four which is approval of the minutes item 4.1 is approval of the Reno City Planning Commission December 8th 2022 meeting um sir chair commissioner Villanueva I have to abstain thank you commissioner Johnson I'll move to approve the minutes from December 8th Mr Garrow second motion a second all those in favor aye aye any opposed motion carries unanimously uh agenda item 4.1 approval of the Reno City Planning Commission December 21 2022 uh minutes 4.2 I did item 4.2 commissioner Johnson will move to approve the meeting minutes from December 21st commissioner Gower second uh all those in favor aye any opposed okay the motion carries unanimously uh we'll now go to agenda item number five which are public hearings we'll open up 5.1 which is case number ldc23-00037 Carmel caramela Ranch tentative math extension we have a presentation oh that's right uh Jeff are you on the zoom I I am and if uh you guys moved me over to panelists I'll start hearing my screen so just give me one second we're doing it right now Jeff hold on let me just get my screen up real quick foreign can everyone see that yes we can Perfect all right well good evening chair valto um and good evening members of the Planning Commission sorry for not being able to be with you in person tonight I'm in Las Vegas at a conference right now so I'll be sure to stop by and say hello sometime soon um so the project before you tonight's a request to extend the approval on our existing approved tenant map for Caravan caramela Ranch for two years um for those I'm familiar with the site it's located between Domani Ranch High School and Brown Elementary School adjacent to the rylight aggregate pit the last remaining Village that has yet to be final mapped is Regency unit 5 here highlighted in red oh kind of go over some of the history here this project was originally approved with the tentative map back in March of 2017 it was originally for 935 Watts um and the uh first final map was recorded in um in December of 2017 that was for uh this tiny little piece here up in the north uh east corner then eventually we made our way through with the second map the third map the fourth map um throughout 2017 and 2018. um we came back in in 2019 and amended the tentative map to add 20 additional Lots up in the northeast corner right where that first map was was done um we called that the Cottages um and right after that we recorded this second Regency Village it was our sixth map um and then we came back in and mount this Cottages Village and then we mapped Regency Village three regions the ability for it and all that's left right now at this point is Regency five and we have submitted this application uh the final Maps been under review um and you know as you can see we recorded Regency four within four months of Regency three and this was done at the time when sales were booming Final maps typically take about 10 to 12 months from this Middle Point to Recreation and then construction for a village this size typically takes about nine months and so it takes quite a bit of forecasting and you know we base everything on forecasting on current data and deciding whether we want to proceed with a village and with that said we ended up mapping Village four and submitting our Regency five plans uh based on the 2020 and 2021 demands well all of you guys know 2020 2021 early 2022 um we had very very high demand here in the Reno area but then the Federal Reserve started to increase interest rates in fact if you follow the news you'll know that the FED has increased interest rates at the fastest rate in the last 35 years and so this has had a direct impact on our mortgage rates and the affordability of homes it's also significantly slow to our sales and so now we have enough Lots with the Regency three villages the Regency four villages to accommodate our current demand and so while we were going through the processing of the Regency 5 Village calculating fees and and understanding the construction costs we realized wow this is this can be about a million dollars in fees and then we have to begin construction once we record this map per our subdivision Improvement agreements and we're like okay well we do we do we really spend this amount of money um and pay all of our interest carry costs well we really don't need these Lots so what we're really looking to do right now is um extend our our tentative map approval so we can spend a little bit more time focusing on phasing and aligning our improvements closer to when we need those lots and so we're going through and understanding how to back into that timeline and so essentially that's that's what our project proposal is tonight we're asking for a two-year extension um this is allowed under state law um it allows us time to finish our design record smaller phases of construction so that's what we're looking at now I mean it also allows us to kind of focus on a few of the permits that are already issued on this remaining piece which is retaining walls our entries if you haven't driven through this site you know that Toll Brothers builds very large elaborate entries which take some time to to try to coordinate um at this time we're not planning any changes to the the conditions of approval um or anything like that just asking for a Time extension as allowed under state law and just as a piece of additional information for the actual status of this site right now we've graded the site we've installed approximately 30 percent of the utilities as part of some off-site improvements for surrounding phases and we're also working on the construction of walls and and the main entry throughout 2023 and so we have a you know significant amount of money invested in this project and we want to be able to see it to its completion we just need a little bit more time to better align our construction phasing um with our current demands oh I know you know Planning Commission likes to look at these findings so we these are the two findings under state law um so essentially the applicant agrees to comply with all the requirements of this title and all conditions of approval absolutely we're not proposing to change any of our conditions of approval um and uh we definitely agree to the second one which is uh to pay all applicable fees so I just want to hey that that's about it it's pretty simple request um I'll pop up here in my screen and I'll be able to be available for any questions if you have any great thank you so much uh Leah do we have a presentation yes we do and good evening chairman members of the commission for the record Leah Brock assistant planner with development services City of Reno this evening I am presenting the application for the caramela ranch tentative map extension the applicant Jeff just did a pretty good job explaining everything so I'll be fairly brief here the proposed site as you can see on the map is south of Del Monte Ranch High and north of Brown Elementary it is approximately 24.36 Acres again today's request is for a tentative map extension this would be for a two-year time extension for the previously approved tentative map for 955 single-family residential lots of which 106 Lots remain to be final mapped the last entitlement issued was approved by the Planning Commission on May 1st of 2019 per NRS each successive final map must be presented within two years of the prior recorded map unless that is extended by the Planning Commission which is the request we're here for today based on NRS the Planning Commission May Grant an extension of not more than two years for the presentation of any final map after the two-year period for presenting a successive final map has expired Reno Municipal Code does not have any specific findings for granting this time extension NRS specifies no requirements other than those imposed on each of the Final maps unless the requirements are directly attributable to a change in applicable laws staff has reviewed the original conditions of approval and no additions or adjustments are necessary that concludes my presentation the recommended motion is on the board and I am available for questions thank you thank you so much I will come back to the commission now for disclosures we'll start with commissioner Johnson I think Mr chair commissioner Johnson no disclosures commissioner Bill and wave I visited the site commissioner drakulich I am familiar with the site commissioner Armstrong I have no disclosures commissioner Gower no disclosures uh commissioner velto I am familiar with the site uh we'll Now open up public comment on this item do we have any requests to speak forums I did not receive any correspondence for this item and I don't have any requests to speak forms would anyone the public like to speak on this item seeing none will close public comment come back to the commission for questions or discussion Mr chair commissioner Johnson I have a question for I guess I'll ask it for Jeff um there was information in staff report and just a little explanation of potentially breaking this into two phases um I'm not sure that that necessarily has any bearing on this but one um I wasn't sure because the document that we had indicated both phases were phase two so I wasn't sure which one was phase one and if so if it was broken into phases do we have all of the um required infrastructure in place to make sure that it can be completed you know as a whole when it's broken into a phased project uh yeah um the uh lee I don't know if you could put the the map back up again because I don't happen to have a copy in front of me but the the red would be the first phase um commissioner Johnson we have we have to be able to provide access through the site and that's one of the the access points um based on that outline it allows for um adequate water looping for uh the trucking Meadows Water Authority um and then it also aligns with uh some of the existing infrastructure tie-ins that exist in that area so yes all of those Services would be able to be served that way and if and if they're not then they won't be able to approve that final map so we have to be able to show that they can stand independently okay we've already written by the engineering team too okay and that that made sense in terms of what would go first for Access so thank you Jeff thank you Mr chair no further questions thank you do we have a motion Mr chair commissioner Johnson I'll just follow that up with a motion please um based upon excuse me in case of LDC 23-00037 the caramel Ranch tentative map extension based upon compliance with NRS 278.360 I moved to approve a two-year time extension on the caramel Ranch Estates Phase 5 tentative map subject to original conditions of approval we have a motion we have a second commissioner Armstrong I'll second all those in favor okay the motion carries you nicely thanks so much Jeff good luck you everybody hope to see you soon thank you uh we'll now go to agenda item number 5.2 case number ldc23-00031 uh vintage at Redfield major deviation do we have a presentation from the applicant good evening my name is Dane Hilliard from Green Street development okay thank you uh local Reno developers we're the largest development of affordable housing in Northern Nevada uh we've done about four thousand affordable housing units in the last 25 years here so this project is a senior 100 affordable project we tied up the site about two years ago because of the zoning and density allowed us to proceed without having to go through a zone change or anything like that um we didn't know but when the new Zone laws the new Zone ordinance kicked in it triggered a step back setback that we weren't aware of so we were in we've been in plancheck in the planning department um let us know that uh because we're in full permits right now and so what we're dealing with here is a great site for senior affordable it's it's our favorite side of all the sites we have totally walkable to shopping Walmart grocery Pharmacy there's a park a half a block away Manzanita Park a lot of our residents do not afford cars can't afford cars so walkable is critical to these types of projects um and this location to me and to our whole team uh is fantastic you can see the location you probably all know where that is here's a picture of the site um Redfield Parkway Baker Lane uh you can see to the left the issue that triggered this step back at the at the top floor was single family homes on the opposite side of Baker Lane they're separated quite a bit distance wise plus walls trees and then we'll show you our amenities on our site to help protect against it one thing that came up with the knob was um one of the Neighbors in the area was concerned about our seniors crossing here to go to the Redfield shopping center and so we're proposing to put in the flashing pedestrian science so our residents have it's much safer obviously apparently speed limit's not that much but apparently people don't follow it here one of the things that came up with staff with planning was they requested a shadow study so this larger picture on the bottom there is the shortest day of the year I can't remember the date I think it's December 15th or something at like 10 A.M and their concern was that we were not casting a shadow on the single family and you can see by the study we're not we're back in the street so that was a big concern of theirs and we meet that the top right area it's kind of hard to see but you can see the building the five-story building stacked up one two three four five on the top right the lower line is what is allowed by code because the setback increases decreases the higher you go so again this is new the new ordinance we weren't aware of it so what it means here is that we would lose that fifth Story onto Baker Street side only because of the step back that step back is not required on the other side because it's already multi-family effectively this is the Baker Lane side elevation uh where my I drew my fancy red X's we basically just lose that top floor in that area we would lose approximately 20 units out of 223. the rest of the billing would maintain the five story because we don't have those setbacks on the other sides what it would mean um again we're in plan track we're almost permanent ready we're planning to break ground in April this would obviously delay the project substantially you would have to redraw the plans structural the whole process and start over basically so it would potentially push the project out at least six months a delay we all know that we need this housing as quickly as we can so um here's our landscape plan and what we've done is once again once we are made aware of this we increase the size and quantity dramatically on the Baker Lane Street side to help buffer our building from the single family the site plan these are gated communities all fobbed again a lot of the seniors are very elderly and we try to keep all of our many space as you can see inside the Courtyard area so they're very protected we do Community Gardens outdoor area barbecues cetera just to give you a taste of our projects provide a lot of amenities the the seniors are predominantly retired so we'd like to give them a lot of amenities on site we do game rooms Fitness there's a Gathering Room movie theater there's a big area with a kitchen for public not public but they do all kinds of stuff Bingo and then they do potlucks and all that kind of fun stuff the units themselves are all designed for handicap they're all grab bars they're all walk-in showers the units are completely amenitized washer and dryers in the units full kitchens and we provide we include all utilities so they pay one check a month and our rents are about 50 percent less than what a market rate would be here's some of our other communities let's give you an idea of who lives there um again our average age is is typically in the mid 70s we do have some centurions is that we call them centurions I think anyway um that's what we do and we would be again it would 20 units would go away all of our projects are full with wait lists so just made 20 seniors would not have a place to live any questions thank you will might have questions in a bit okay but I appreciate the presentation great thank you thank you Leah do we have a presentation from you tonight yes I do thank you chairman for the record Leah Brock assistant planner uh the second application is for a major deviation for the Vintage at Redfield here you can see the site is a 2.646 Acre Site this is located uh just west of South Virginia and the convention center is off to the right side there it is on the corner of Baker Lane and Redfield Parkway the request is to allow for an increase in the required two to one Building height setback ratio by 50 percent which would result in a three to one Building height setback ratio and I know that seems a little bit confusing so I'm going to do my best to explain what that Building height setback ratio really means in this specific case key issues related to this request are overall site design and compatibility with surrounding development specifically that single family to the West approval of this major deviation will allow for a taller building closer to that single-family residential zoning District across the street and that's really the basis of what this is going to allow the proposed five-story 223 unit development will be an affordable senior full-service Independent Living Community at or below 60 percent of the area medium income um here you can see the graphic on the screen this is the graphic that the applicant was trying to show but it was kind of small there Reno Municipal Code requires that any yard that is adjacent to a residentially zoned property have a step back of one foot for every two feet in Building height so what we're saying here is that I think I get the mouse to work is that the further the setback the higher the building is allowed to be before it has to step back so we're really just talking about this area right here if this if this application for the major deviation is not approved what they're going to lose is essentially that eight feet right there fronting that fifth Story if the deviation is approved they'll be allowed to have the fifth story as the applicant showed in their graphics regarding compatibility with the surrounding uses the mixed use urban zoning District pretty much surrounds this property on every side except for the single family to the West to the north and to the east we have multi-family apartment complexes to the South is Sam's Club and to the West is that single family residential that we're discussing today here's some photos of Baker Lane um that top photo there you're looking South down Baker Lane at Sam's Club there in the distance and that bottom photo you're looking north of Baker Lane toward that multi-family complex but what I do want to point out here is that Baker Lane is a 50-foot right-of-way so we already have a buffer here that step back would be required even if this was adjacent and that road wouldn't be there so we do have an additional buffer of Baker Lane in this particular case additionally when that subdivision across the way was built they put in this six foot masonry wall and all of these trees so we have mature trees a six foot and a six foot masonry wall in existence furthermore all of the houses this is to their back they front the internal streets in that subdivision so it's not like anybody would be walking out their front door and staring at the five-story building on the board are the major deviation findings for your review staff does recommend approval subject to the conditions listed in the staff report I do want to mention that as of yesterday we had one letter of opposition to this project their main concern was the height of the building and that Resident is located in the subdivision we just pointed out that concludes my presentation the recommended motion is on the board and I am available for questions thank you thank you we'll come back to the commission for disclosures we'll start with commissioner Gower thank you um received and read emails and visited the site commissioner Armstrong I received and read emails commissioner Dracula to Red received emails and visited the site commissioner Villanueva read emails I am familiar with the site commissioner Johnson received and read emails and visited the site commissioner valto received and read emails and am familiar with the site um we'll now go to public comment and open up public comment I have one one form in opposition from a San Sandra picolio would you like to speak on this item can I I believe I mispronounced your name so Sandra Piccolo okay and I am in parcel 24-372-08 I am on the west side of this project they're proposing I do have concerns um quite a few of them obviously we've been living there since 2001. we've had an empty Field behind us we do have a lot of foot traffic behind us on Baker Lane because a lot of the apartment buildings do walk over um and there's a lot of trash there's a lot of things that are left a lot of things that are thrown over our fence that we're dealing with right now I do have a concern about the 223 units I understand that you say there's not many cars um but of that I'm trying to figure out there are going to be quite a few cars there's going to be a lot of traffic going in and out of there with the people visiting it's going to be their family members are going to be visiting them Baker Lane is a very small Street it's very busy as it is now it's going to get even busier and also the concern of the pedestrians walking back and forth I'm concerned about my view that I'm going to be losing I have a view of the beautiful mountains in the West right or the East right now I get to see the sun come up I get to see the moon come up I get to see those beautiful mountains my daughter passed away a year ago and I look up at those mountains and I watch the moon come up and I pray for her and I think about her and I won't have that view anymore I'm going to have a building to stare at after all these years she was only 37 years old when she passed I'm concerned about the privacy we have people now that will be looking down into our backyard they will be looking into my kitchen window when I'm cooking dinner they'll be looking into my master bedroom I'm concerned about the traffic I already stated that I'm concerned about the snow melting on Baker Lane when you have high building like that and the sun I understand is to the South a little bit but you do have the snow on Baker Lane that's going to obscure the melting of the snow and the ice on that street I'm concerned about my property value after all this time of not having anything back there I'm concerned he did mention something about the fourth floor and the fifth floor not being approved but they're still trying to get that approved for the fifth floor and move the building back a little bit or is that what my understanding is I'm also have a question as to where the entrance will be I didn't get to see that is the entrance to this going to be on Baker Lane or is it going to be on Redfield Parkway and will there only be one entrance to this complex I'm concerned about the time frame for the completion of this product progress that they have going on to see to decide whether I need to move or not after being there that long I don't want a five-story building behind my house the age of the seniors thank you for addressing that there will be about 70 years old but they're still going to get out they're still going to walk they're still going to have family visiting them and it's going to make um it's going to be a lot busier on that street and it's already busy as it is now that's 223 units that's a lot of people I'm wondering also I didn't get to see is it a single person in your unit one one person not a couple mostly studios Okay that was another question I have that's it thank you for your time thank you are there any other requests to speak forms we did receive correspondence for this item that was distributed to the commission before the meeting I did not get any other request to speak forms and there are no voicemails thank you would anyone else in the public like to uh speak on this item when I went on Zoom like to speak on this item okay see none we will close public comment come back to the commission for questions or discussion ay commissioner jackovic thank you Mr chair uh question for Lee I guess um probably the best route so first looking at it obviously we have a major deviation I get the end there the ratio changes and I guess I would be more uncomfortable if those neighbors backed right up against it but we have that buffer with Baker Lane is that where the city kind of stood is that something that was kind of the turning point for approving this that's exactly the Turning Point um there's nothing in the step back code that specifies rather the single family residential has to be exactly a budding but when you look at our definition of adjacent it includes even the roadway so um yeah that's basically where the city sits is that this this building is um located over 70 feet from the nearest of those residential homes are okay thank you thank you thank you Mr chair thank you Mr Gower thank you Mr chairman Leah would you mind putting up that image um that you had of the the step back in the elevation view yes thank you so you mentioned that we're really talking about that that triangle portion there would the design of the buildings be compatible with that fifth Story if that fifth Story was essentially set back further into the building yes if if they were meeting the step back requirements and that fifth Story was set back at that far edge of the triangle there then they wouldn't require a major deviation in the mixed juice Urban zoning district there is no height limit so they can essentially go as high as they wanted in as many stories so what we're talking about here is only the step back of that fifth Story question why thank you for answering that question I'll direct this at him so you don't have to answer it for him um thank you so why why not just pull the building in eight feet um that fifth Story it's rather complicated because it seems like it would be an easy solution but we've gotten funding for this project from the homies Nevada program city of Arena was awarded funding for Bond capacity the home Consortium has awarded us our federal home funds so there's there's timelines involved to produce the affordable housing to to be able to to keep the financing in place this would be we have to redesign that inside side of the building effectively um structural and all that and again we were in plan check so we're this was news to us recently um and we were anticipating April 1 start so this came about at the end everything else is done so it would just require a redo of that fifth floor we would obviously have to step back to the right side of that triangle I don't know if if we still can maintain that many units because you're losing I don't know 10 feet or something I think about 10 feet so the units you know we have a hallway and then units on the other side facing the courtyard so it just we would delay ourselves quite a bit okay so you essentially had a choice of having to go through that redesign process go through this process or just lose that fifth Story yeah deadlines associated with for tax credits so it would be risking some of that in the delayed time frame it's at least a six-month delay I think okay thank you appreciate the answer on that thank you Mr chairman I do have other questions but I can pause there I was just gonna I'm sorry Mr just piggyback on that if you don't mind sir does the financing of did you have to have a certain amount of units uh is that part of the deal at all or could you lose okay to get the financing you're you're submitting applications and they they look at everything what's your rent how many units are you providing what are your amenities they look at all those things you basically get points for them so we would lose some number of units without using it it would be 20 if we took that whole top left side off um maybe we could squeeze 10 in there sideways or something but it would we may have to go back and potentially lose some of the financing okay so thank you sorry thank you for letting me jump in there please thank you Leah this is questions for you so I'm looking at the pack and I'm looking at um the work so it's our job today to review a major deviation right that is correct so some of one of the comments we heard um during the public comment section is traffic and um people safety concerns is that I I mean that kind of passed us right that's that's those decisions have already been made that this is going to get built even if we don't approve this deviation it's just going to be a matter of whether or not they get the deviation or not is that right you are correct yes okay so our purview tonight is just deviation or no deviation not whether or not we can whether or not this is going to be built exactly so again this is within the mixed juice Urban zoning District which allows for this sort of use it allows for this many units it allows for this height this is only a question of deviation but I do want to point out that that traffic and some of those other concerns are looked at through the permitting process which as he stated they're in plan review right now so things like traffic those are all being addressed they're just not being addressed by this body okay thank you [Music] Mr Gower did you have more questions thank you Mr chairman Leah I just wanted to reconfirm what you had stated before in terms of the the building height and how the city looks at Building height on a parcel like this relative to the adjacent uses so you said that the building height could potentially be taller than five stories that is correct there is no height limit in the mixed juice Urban zoning District in compatibility during the zoning code update and developed kind of the the rules around it to guide development on this site exactly so anytime you have a structure being adjacent to a residential zoning District you have to meet these step back requirements but again this is where we get a little off is that is the definition of adjacency in Reno Municipal Code because adjacency could be right up against it or it could be across a right-of-way so in this particular case we're across that right-of-way but it's still considered adjacent which is why they're these step back requirements are required I do want to point out too that in the mixed use urban zoning District um it's basically a loud height limit is not limited but anything over 85 feet does require a site plan review just to point that out thank you and last question is how so if this hadn't come to us um request what would have been the noticing requirement for the adjacent properties none none and why is that it's just not not part of the requirement and I guess I'm wondering if it should be it just doesn't trigger any requirements for for any kind of review other than just the building review okay thank you Mr chairman thank you sure I'm ready to make a motion please do Mr Villanueva uh can we do any discussion please oh I'm sorry Mr chair Mr johnsonite I guess this is probably the second second one of these we've had in a couple of months where we're looking at a major deviation and the reason we're looking at it as being acceptable from staff standpoint is because it's on the opposite side of a road and I appreciated these comments to that effect but that's not necessarily I mean to commissioner gower's point it was looked at when there was mixed-use zoning placed in next to single family zoning with the understanding that there were conditions in place to alleviate this one of which being the two to one setback so yes it's true they have unlimited height but our code has safeguards in place to minimize that impact between the two and it's you know I guess to the code it's invisible as to whether it's immediately adjacent or to cross the road so I guess I have some concerns in terms of you know the approach that we're sort of taking that seems to be hey we've got this great comment and code where we're trying to minimize the height effect on single family but if you're on the other side of a road we don't really care about that and and I I find that troubling I mean regardless of you know first the first was a school now we've got senior housing it's like all of the the buttons that you know we want to push and the projects we want to push seem to be almost just you know oh you're on the other side of a street it's okay um and I guess I have a problem with that I don't necessarily have a problem with this project although I will say that I'm a little disappointed that we've had a code out for a year now and we're finding projects going in that you know you were just made aware of it when it went in the code Title 18 has been in place for over a year now so this should not be a surprise it should not get to this point uh where it has to be there and I almost feel like you know the way the presentation was brought to us it was almost like hey all these things you guys want so just to prove the deviation I just I don't it was troubling to me that because this is what we want because of all these financing I don't have a single finding here that says I can approve a major deviation because that's what the funding of the project is wrapped up in that's not a finding that I have to make a finding that I have to make is are we granting some you know privilege inconsistent with the code I have to make a finding that we're not being materially detrimental to public health safety or welfare or that we're significantly impacting nearby property those are the things that I have to be looking at so while I appreciate the project I like the project and ultimately I'm probably in favor of the project I think the way that it was presented to us tonight was not in keeping with the way that we should be looking at Major deviations so with that said I just I wanted to get that out there that we seem to be going down a slippery slope of having a code requirement for adjacency and setback standards that we are essentially waving if it's on the opposite side of the street and I I think we either need to fix that in code so that it's not a major deviation every time and we save applicants this trouble or we become a little bit more specific as to why exactly that code requirement is there because you know again if we're at you know an 80 foot tall building before there's any other discretionary review I think the code you know should be representative of that and not change based on whether it's right on the property line or in the other side of a road so I guess we can put that also down under commissioner's suggestions for future agenda items thank you Mr chair thank you commissioner Villanueva thank you so much those were great comments um I'm glad you shared those something to consider um So based upon compliance with the applicable findings I moved to approve the major deviation subject and conditions list in the staff report for case number ldc2300031 motion do we have a second commissioner Jack did y'all second all those in favor hi hi any opposed okay the motion carries unanimously uh thank you and good luck we'll go to agenda item 5.3 case number ldc23-00034 rotor and rotor Investments of Nevada Self Storage we have a presentation from the applicant foreign thank you for having me tonight and I appreciate the work that Carter Williams has done with working through the process and if he's still here I think he is oh there he is okay um and uh I'd like to introduce tonight to all of you the uh plans that we've been making for converting the once uh Raley's grocery store which was closed in 2009 and then uh subsequently became food source and then subsequent to that became Sierra foods and upon the closing of that store we just didn't have any options for retail but several months ago we were approached by Store Quest they prefer shopping center locations and in this particular demographics they had a feasibility study that was done that showed a significant unmet demand for their product which is climate controlled storage and that they're proposing for here so I've been working with them and finding out a lot about what they do and primarily this is uh storage that is for kind of Lifestyle needs storing your kayaks during your skis storing your golf clubs close by to where you live and there is literally No Vacancy none available and the feasibility studies show that we'd be making probably delivering in about 25 percent of the need for the community there our immediate surrounding Community by doing this project [Music] uh on the other hand if we were to uh factor in the new apartments that are now being on now under construction and just about ready at some point here soon to open um that will add a significant number of uh residences in the immediate one mile area which is kind of exactly what store Quest fits that need for with climate controlled storage and they do create a very retail storefront in fact I'll have a picture of that in just a sec I just wanted to give a bit of an overview that their approach is to be really a first class operation so there'll be no changes to the shopping center we would be be providing a tenant Improvement package for the tenant and uh and then the only change really and I'll show you that in a minute is just the name change on the front of the building from Sierra foods to um to store Quest um let's see here all uh jump to the next slide and give you an idea if it's location in the mall do I have to do something there let me just right here yeah perfect okay um the store Quest facility is there in yellow and immediately to the left is the annex uh Reno Town Mall Annex we have uh six restaurants in that area and then which does require a fair amount of parking and then in the mall we have a new tenant that will be joining us shortly will be the Cup Cafe and they'll be opening in the main mall which is the if you will the white roof right next to StorQuest and that is the main Reno Town mall and then Burlington Coat Factory is uh or Burlington now Burlington stores is now out towards South Virginia uh there in the kind of the more gray roof color that you see there um let's see here the uh Sierra Foods formerly Sierra Foods hopefully soon stir Quest is a 60 000 square foot vacant space at this point and as probably all of you are pretty familiar is very difficult in this era this time I bought them all in 32 years ago I was all of 10 right anyway I bought them all and we've seen a lot of changes in retail very difficult to backfill these large boxes it was interesting because I set through the local community hearing and uh they were talking about the previous applicant was talking about putting in a hotel and restaurant casino to the South down near Fire Creek Crossing and uh they were talking about the sports Sports Authority in the Circuit City both of those large box users similar to what uh this this facility is and they had been vacant for upwards to 10 12 14 years so it uh it is a changing environment with the thanks of Amazon and others we're just seeing a different uh different need and that need now in this particular area of the community uh is the uh the demand for a climate controlled self storage uh which right now there's none available um the uh we have the some of the general statistics and I'll hit the next slide there I guess okay um this this slide will show within a two mile radius which was a good part of the feasibility report that StorQuest had provided for me um and that indicated uh about 24 500 households uh 58 rental this feasibility study was done uh probably six seven months ago uh uh 58 rental and 14 250 households um uh let's see it was 20 so uh and on average 30 percent of the renters have a need for storage units um existing uh 13 existing facilities exist uh only one of them of all of those are climate controlled and it's totally full um the uh and it is not not historical estimated once complete um we will only really satisfy about 25 29 percent and that's prior to the Advent of the new developments that are underway this feasibility study did not Factor those needs they only dealt with what was existing and the demand that was existing right now so we feel very good that we'll be meeting a community need and with the transition of of retail and the way you know people shop and their shopping habits the mall has been addressing and dealing with these transitions I would say it would be very safe to say now that we have become more of a community center rather than a retail shopping mall we only have I think it's we have five or six five maybe six retail pure retail shopping uh stores and we have uh the Sierra View Library which has been there for a good 15 20 years we transitioned um starting at about the early 2000s we started transitioning the mall to servicing needs of the community we have Access Health Care there affordable health care we have rscva of course they manage the the convention center they are located there so we have any number of we have Nevada a state of Nevada Job connect so we have encouraged reaching out to community need and we feel this will be a very significant Community need and I don't think it got in in time Carter but I just had our tenants just sign a statement just signing a letter acknowledging how long they've been in the mall and their support of having Store Quest as their neighbor um obviously the uh the having a dark empty sixty thousand square foot building would not be advantageous for them so they're looking at this it's probably bringing people to the mall that would be coming for um you know coming in to pick up their kayak on the weekend the weekend warrior or uh you know whatever they have a need for a lot of these apartments that are coming in or they don't have garages so they'll need a place for for private storage uh in fact just the the Vintage uh Redfield senior uh apartments and we're just talking about 230 units there may be folks that are coming there that may need a place to put something and that's only a couple blocks a block or two to the north so lots of growth in in that Arena of residential living that this will cater to very very well and they find Store Quest tells me that the closer you can get to where the people are living the much more beneficial it is not only to them but for those that are developing the projects to have something where they can have this close by so we'll I think be working in complement with many of the new communities that have gone in and that will also spell I think more interaction with the community and we do have now seven restaurants uh with the Advent of the Cup Cafe coming on board uh and they're all very supportive of this because they feel they'll be more engaged with the entire community so they've been very positive in support of this [Music] um let's see here the next slide please okay um this is a picture of what it looks like going through the uh through the building this would be an example of it it'll be a polished cement floor very clean very neat it's kind of very uh you know more of a climate control kind of a dust free uh very upscale storage type facility with you know maintained temperatures um and of course a lot of that pre-existing from when it was a grocery store so that works very well for for what they're what they're proposing um 523 units and interior climate controlled on-site staff they'll they'll be actually in office they'll be open in the morning I think sometime around seven or eight and they stay open I think till seven or eight at night but again Store Quest sets that so I I'm just hearing that information from what is kind of their standard operation and uh it's a secured facility they'll be bringing to the benefit of the entire shopping center a 24-hour security and it will be 24 hour security and TV monitors throughout the entire property so we're quite pleased with that addition and we'll be working with them to obviously make sure that's monitored 24 hours a day and that will be very beneficial for the shopping center as well with the times are changing and we have to spend more time trying to make sure that we keep an eye on the property and the facility uh the next slide this is on the exterior this is all that will be changing we have the Sierra foods that that sign is actually still on the building uh Sierra Foods has been gone for uh upwards just about a year now and then they're keeping the mountain because Store Quest marketing approach is to go to those folks that are active Lifestyles where they want to store their kayaks store their golf clubs store their skis or whatever and be close to their Community their apartments or wherever they live and so they want to retain the Sierra mountain look that's on top and then they would use the their name of course Store Quest on the front and that's what it would look like from the front and that's basically the only change that would happen in them coming in on the exterior and let's see here on the next slide and the uh this shows we have the annexes on the right we have six restaurants there now which has transitioned we purchased that part of the shopping center about six years ago and then did a full facial renovation there to tie into the mall and uh and then re-landscape the front of the mall and the front of the annex at that time and then we have the Cup Cafe will be in the in the actual main mall Reno 10 mall and then Burlington curse on the left and I think we've kind of covered that once before let's see here right now we're underway with a major renovation for the library they occupy the back third of the Reno Town mall first floor and uh let's see here we will be maintaining uh Dave Asher who was the owner operator of the Sierra foods and he now continues to operate in the mall with Nevada Marketplace he will be working to put forward a farmer's market which will be done either in the main mall on certain days when it's inclement windy or a problem and then out in the parking lot if he can get it set or it's a Wednesday Saturday or whatever it is we'll be working with him on that is very excited about that and then we have a convenience store ABC Market uh and they will be tripling in size and they are at the very closest space in the annex the building farthest to the right next to the self storage and any questions uh I'm here to answer them thank you so much yes oh well we might have questions we'll ask you in a little bit okay okay thank you Carter do you have a presentation for us thank you all right good evening Commissioners Carter Williams assistant planner for the record um before you today is a request for a conditional use permit for a mini warehouse facility it is located in Ward 2 um southeast of Peckham Lane and South Virginia Street um to the North and the Northeast is the Atlantis Hotel and Casino to the east is the Reno Sparks convention center it's just the south of the project site there's a number of commercial uses um and then to the West there is a large apartment complex the property in all surrounding properties are located within the mixed use urban zoning District and it carries the property carries the master plan land use designation of suburban mixed use so the specific request today is addresses the 60 000 square foot tenant space towards the southwest of the the property um in the mixed Urban Zone a conditional use permit is required to establish a mini warehouse facility key issues analyzed in the request are the mix of uses in the center compatibility with the surrounding uses and the Adaptive reuse of the um of the tenant space before he was a table showing the current and proposed mix of uses in the center now and then 2B um predominantly retail and general personal service uses um are they're predominant in in the center that will remain with this proposed use and adds to that mix of uses with this self-storage facility um recognizing that there is that apartment complex to the West in respect of that um staff is recommending a number of conditions including a security plan um that requires um external security cameras um a loading and unloading plan to um kind of preserve I mean identify where those that that operations act outdoor activities are taking place and ensuring that it's not disrupting the vehicular and pedestrian traffic like on the site um we are also uh proposing a condition that restricts customer access to the rear um which would probably have the most interface with that apartment complex to the West um and that that restriction is between the hours of 10 pm and 6 a.m the following day mini warehouse facilities support master plan policies along Urban corridors encouraging higher density development so staff recognizes that this this may be meeting a a demand with the increase in density in the area um some some of the uh issues that I think the the applicant has been having with um renting out the space our code now addresses through this section for large retail establishments um this site was proceeded to that that code requirement um for um so a lot of these standards weren't addressed um but I think it's a good guide or it was used as a guide for staff in our analysis um to identify what we can do to to make this tenant space better for adaptive reuse in the future one of the items that's addressed in that section is providing four accessible Pathways to the tenant space currently there is none so that will that's proposed and recommended as a condition um with this proposal in addition to that uh the applicant has stated that they would be upgrading the existing Islands within the center and adding 10 new trees um which is which is depicted there um other elements that um are support adaptive reuse are the um maintaining um prominent entry customer entrance features on the building within not changing the the facade and maintaining those vestibules on on the front they're doing that even though it's a storage facility it's it's it's there's some architectural Integrity with the rest of the with the rest of the center um and generally that promotes it after we use before you are the conditional use permit findings um staff has through stats review and Analysis we are able to meet all the findings and before you is the recommended motion um that concludes my presentation and I'm available for any questions great thank you hey well coming back to the commission for disclosures we'll start with commissioner Gower thank you visited the site and received and read uh correspondence commissioner Armstrong I received and write emails commissioner draculate familiar with the site read and received emails commissioner Villanueva familiar with the site and read emails commissioner Johnson same disclosures same disclosures we'll go to public comment and open up public comment do we have any requests to speak forms we did receive correspondence for this item I did not get any voicemails and I don't have any request to speak forms in front of me right now great thank you when I win the public like to speak on this item anybody on Zoom seeing none will close public comment come back to the commission for questions or discussion or emotion Mr chair commissioner Johnson I have a question for you Carter um one of the one of the conditions that I appreciated you mentioned it was the understanding of the loading and unloading plan for this um it's a little I guess in in terms of what I'm seeing I'm a little I guess concerned looking at our finding for mitigating traffic impact that that's something that we don't actually have yet the idea of Are We loading in from the back predominantly what changes are there there's some grade differential on the back side where the the road is higher and then the entrance so how how is staff I mean are you resolving that finding based on whatever is coming or has there been some discussion with the applicant in terms of how they're proposing to address people carrying equipment across a driveway and looking at you know parking areas for potential large Vehicles especially in the front since you've limited access to certain hours in the back so we didn't necessarily receive um much um like operational characteristics from the applicant at this time and that that condition was put in there so that we did have a time to address it but also pair it with the code requirements um for uh screening of loading areas in other stand we have other standards for for loading areas so staff felt comfortable with with the um knowing that the trip generation was going to decrease from retail to um to self storage and um with the code requirements in place to protect those those neighbors to the the West as well as um I mean the loading and loading plan for us was was intending to retain the existing um Community Center nature of this of this this complex so I I don't know if the applicant has any information from Store Quest that may address if like for instance they needed the comment that they they do this a lot in in centers I don't know if they have that but they may um that was something that we felt comfortable addressing later so I'll ask him in just a moment I just want to follow because you mentioned something that was a follow-up to mine which was the idea of screening and I'm wondering you know obviously we've got an existing entrance that was designed to let people know it was there and bring people in and that in looking at the plan is also a major entrance for people bringing loading items in there so how how is the reconciliation of you know a screened loading area how does that work in staff's mind with a open parking lot in front of the facility I think a lot of our attention was placed on the western portion with that apartment complex for those residences so for a lot of that area is is already screened with the Annex Building that's placed there and then there is there is landscaping that's placed along that element that I think would we would protect from from that from that area um are you referring to other like screening from the street or yeah I'm just you mentioned the screening aspect of it so is the intent that you're screening it from the immediate neighbors or you're screening it from view from anybody depending on um so from this there there is requirements from screening from the street so depending on um what what that loading and unloading plan holds it may require for some kind of screaming screening element um to be provided along the street whether that's the landscaping area that exists there along the street today or something further in to um the closer to the the tenant space itself okay thank you and then I guess I will ask the applicant Mr chair if he can maybe respond to the question about the the loading and unloading plan recorder by the way I bring this back I parked away with it um yes uh when Carter had sent over the conditions I talked with Store Quest they were very amenable because they don't plan they don't normally have really any significant activity in those late hours and they didn't plan to be utilizing that back loading area to any great extent either they're going to continue to operate this very similar to the way the grocery stores did they'll have carts and you grab your gear put it on a cart and then you wheel it in so they want to maintain the way the parking is situated and they're going to very agreeable to putting in maybe a large marked area and no parking and then we have big speed bumps on either side which we're existing prior with the grocery stores so that's a very slow area for people to Transit anyway and it is in the back if you will from the front of the building it's all the way in the southwest corner so there's not a lot of through traffic that's going there so we don't expect there'll be much traffic in front of the building less now because there won't be a grocery store there but the grocery store never had any kind of a loading zone or anything close to it it was in the parking lot everything was brought in through carts and that's the way they find most of their uses will be through a cart that they have in front there'll be a large area in the front there with a number a lot of carts for them to use so the end the anticipation for a potential renter for this is that there's no requirement that they load through the overhead doors in the back oh no they have the opportunity to load from wherever well they're basically they'll be given instructions based on what store Quest decides is the best way to do it but with the condition that we've been placed Store Quest was totally comfortable with not using the back area and their thought is that about 70 80 or maybe even higher percentage will be out of the front so they're not really thinking the back will be this is a lot different than when we had the grocery stores and the deliveries came at 3 30 in the morning and I understand that so I appreciate that I'm just trying to wrap my head around the use of because I think we've all had stuff in a storage unit at one point in time or another yeah um Mr chair if I may have one more question please um this the the image that you showed of the interior of the space was a very traditional unit which is got about a 10 foot ceiling for the floor you're substantially higher than that inside this space before you hit the structure above yes so is there is there an intent ever to try to create a second story within the interior of this space it it's pretty cost and effective to do that so it'd be very expensive to do they haven't proposed it and it would dramatically increase the cost I'm not sure we'd want to do that kind of TI package and again I'm not it's not a it was more of an understanding of how you were approaching this because there is a substantial difference if you took the number of units that were here and you know added two-thirds to that factoring in everything else that that could and it would require elevators it require structural support I'm not even sure the exterior building would be able to accommodate the structural support for that I think it would be dramatically more expensive so at this point I would agree you just need to get the question out there on the record so thank you our plan is just to do the TI's for a very simple project and thank you thank you Mr chair thank you commissioner Gower Robert before you sit down I have another question for you um thinking about this in the context of adaptive reuse and compatibility we received some comments from the public and the neighborhood Advisory Board how would you address the comment that says this is short-sighted Redevelopment well uh and I I actually met that individual uh she's part of the is it the NAB board and she uh I've read the comments Carter had sent them to me here yesterday um the uh redeveloping the mall has been undergoing uh really transitioning of the mall has been undergoing under been under underway for probably 15 20 years now so we started seeing the viability of the raleys when they were getting ready to vacate uh they gave it a last ditch with a sideline company but we could see it was kind of coming to an end so our transition is to try and focus towards the community and what the community needs versus trying to wait it out to see a Sports Authority is going to reopen again and come in and want to be there so we're not seeing the demand in that location Burlington does very well out on South Virginia but this is a very tucked away corner on the property that big a building and that tucked away there are other more much more viable sites and many of those have not even been re-let so we look at the opportunity to move in the direction that the community is really needing and I think that would give the center of Vitality for many years to come rather than trying to live in what we had when I first bought the center in 32 years ago we just don't have that same environment today so I do understand in fact I talked to her about that you know so and you're you're confident that this use is compatible with the other uses it sounds like you had we received the uh the list of tenants who signed on to it and there's okay all of our tenants are in favor of it uh and so I just thought maybe to try and help ease the concern uh that I would share that our tenants have a very positive impact on this they're also very excited about the security that it brings people that will go to the mall will have a very secure place to be we'll have a lot of security there and that's something StorQuest brings and we'll be working with them to make sure that's 24 hours a day right unrelated question if I could Mr chairman you have any plans to add additional trees to your parking area aside from those six landscape Islands well when I first met with Carter he he asked about that and said that you know that would be nice to do this project doesn't it's really a TI project so we had not really looked at redoing the exterior I think when I bought it 32 years ago it wasn't really out of Conformity today I know it is but our first jump was to say you know what we'll do is we'll just re-landscape those islands out there like we've done kind of in front of the mall in front of the annex we'll redo that and we'll add 10 trees because a lot of those trees have died and kind of gone away so we're going to replace it re-landscape it and bring it all up to looking good and that will be across the front of the um StorQuest facility and next thing's down the road but it's it's very cost it probably costs as much to redo that as it's costing us to build out these uh shells for Store Quest yeah well if you find any empty pennies or any extra pennies lying around I'd encourage you to look to add that additional landscape and and Donna City would really benefit from seeing that in that parking area yeah and and our neighbor uh Donna she mentioned that very very loud and clear yeah yeah thank you yes all right thank you Mr chair thank you commissioner Villanueva I can make a motion please based upon compliance with the applicable findings I moved to prove the conditional use permit subject to conditions listed in the staff report regarding case number ldc2300034 thank you commissioner Villanueva we have a first we have a second Mr Garrow a second all those in favor commissioner Johnson I have a quick moment of discussion no and and um I think this is actually an excellent opportunity for uh adaptive reuse for a site like this I I appreciate it I do just want to reiterate I have some concerns we have a finding about traffic impacts and we've basically been given a condition that it will be worked on separate from us I think I received enough information this evening in discussion with the applicant and staff to satisfy that they're looking at it and they understand what needs to be done but I do think that as a matter of being able to make that condition having an actual site plan that identifies the issues and the approach um would be a better way for us to have been able to make that finding and review this project so rather than just being a condition so um but other than that I am in favor of the project so thank you Mr chair thank you all those in favor aye aye aye the motion any opposed motion carries unanimously uh thanks so much and good luck thank you okay we'll now move to agenda item number 5.4 which is case number ldc23-00032 Jacob's glow Plaza and Festival area Amendment uh Garrett do we have a presentation it's nice to see all of you it's not 2 A.M we're at 7 30 still for the record Garrett Gordon uh tonight on behalf of Jacob's uh entertainment uh before you as a request to make a very slight Amendment to the existing glow plaza festival area conditional use permit so back in May of last year the Reno city council following a public hearing approved the request for conditional use permit to allow the Globe Plaza to facilitate outdoor festivals concerts Recreation and events that use permit came to this body it was approved by this body peeled up to the Reno city council and Reno city council up upheld your guys your guys's approval the request tonight is very narrow in that you can see on the left up here is the Sands soon to be rebranded and there are existing signs and let me just be clear tonight for the record this request has nothing to do with approval of signs the signs shown here a 65 foot by 65 foot reader board or LED sign and this rap reader board LED sign which replaces the Mel sign that had been there for 20 plus years these signs are approved building permit in hand purchased by Jacobs and starting to be installed as I speak today so those signs are going up and has nothing to do with your approval as of tonight a narrow request for you tonight is simply on these signs we would like to list the schedule of events what's taking place at the glow Plaza this is in a direct response but also to many master plan policies but also in direct response to this body's approval of the conditional use permit to make sure the glow Plaza is successful to make sure tourists are coming locals are coming and there was even a conditional a condition put on the original conditional use permit that said let's make sure on your signs you have a website address that lists your schedule of events because it was important not only for locals tourists but the surrounding neighborhood to be aware of when there would be an event because maybe they'd like to stay or attend or maybe they'd like to go out of town that weekend if they didn't want to be next to a downtown event so it's for transparency it's for public disclosure and really to have a successful venue and have a killer downtown Festival area so the request tonight is just to amend the original conditional use permit to add the sign the Sands APN number to the conditional use permit to allow for promoting the glow Plaza activities on the uh on the signage so you can see here there are currently seven Parcels that consist of the glow Plaza the Sands is one parcel the simple request is to add this APN to these seven APNs so the site now consists of eight APNs and we can list our schedule of events on the calendar events on those signs so everyone knows come on down to the glow Plaza and enjoy some music uh with your neighbors again our request is you can see here glow Plaza site adding the Sans APN number to the conditional use permit to allow for promoting on the sand site this is very similar if not identical to what the Eldorado currently does is that the Eldorado you drive by the Eldorado on their signs it says Guess who's coming Toby Keith where not on their premise not within the four quarters of the El Dorado or Silver Legacy but a half a block away at the Event Center which they don't own or at the ballroom so it's kind of common practice in order to have successful venues here you're advertising for uh an event um at a at a facility downtown to make sure it's successful we probably could have based on that precedent argued we didn't need this request tonight but Belton suspenders full transparency making sure the first time we listed the calendar of events that no one said who knows sign law hey technically that could be considered an off-premise advertising because the Sans APN is not listed on the Globe Plaza use permit APN so we're here tonight in response to staff to make sure we're transparent belt and suspenders and making sure it's clear to the whole Community when they see hopefully the schedule of events of what's Happening why those are on the sand signs so here you can see the decision letter that came out in May that listed the seven APNs tonight if approved you would add this APN number to the original approval I will say and I give staff I want to thank Leah she was great to work with as always but there's two additional conditions so the use permit will consist of the original conditions 1 through 23 aren't modified agree to them but conditions 24 and 25 there was some discussion uh him about the at the NAB of well if you're adding this APN to the glow Plaza use permit are you going to be allowed to have some of the Sans uses I.E gaming that somehow magically without gaming control board approval or gaming commission approval would magically be moved to the glow Plaza the answer is no that's not legal but Belton suspenders staff thought it was important we agreed condition now reads no existing uses on the Sans parcel are all automatically Allowed by virtue of tonight's hopeful approval on the Globe Plaza and vice versa at the glow Plaza we have an events outdoor Amusement event use by the use permit that now doesn't transfer to the Sands so we can't have in the parking lot at the Sands some event because we have a use permit for the glow Plaza so completely separate uses not changing the rights to either of those Parcels it's simply I couldn't have said it better I appreciate staff's uh sentence here condition number four the extension of this conditional use permit on parcel zero zero seven five four two fifteen the Sands is solely to allow for the inclusion of the re the Sands Regency Casino Hotel parcel within the glow plaza festival Site Area for the purpose of allowing on-premise glow plaza festival signage on the Sands parcel very simple request and I believe it beats all the findings I would close with a couple things here is on the right well I I came before you last year of the plan on the left that's a picture from today we are moving forward uh you can see even in light of the weather that we've had the stage is up uh to the right to the left is a shade structure and I thought it was important to show one of the questions I got when I appeared before this body is are you guys really just going to be open three or four months a year I mean how are you going to deal with the weather you can see here we're putting up a tent and we already have two festivals coming in February approved by staff special activity permits we think between 500 and a thousand people to kick off this venue now in the winter activating downtown getting people downtown and normally a dormant time of year so we're excited for those events we also have um a Cinco de Mayo event coming already we have a Latino festival coming a long list that we'd love to throw up on the the the uh the signs so all of you all of Reno any tourists coming in who maybe we bring them back again a couple months to spend more money on gaming and rooms but also forever all the surrounding neighborhood understand what's going on so I think this request meets all the findings we agree with the amended conditions of approval and going to the master plan policies that staff cited in their staff report I think this hits every single one I mean number one was policy 6.6 a community events and activities obviously you want to bring the community to these events how are you going to do it you're going to have your cattle derive events on signs that are next door to the property arts and culture you know the the Latino group as I understand it have been trying for a long long time to get in the vet in downtown Reno finally they came to us and we put together a package for them that they're very happy with tourism entertainment master plan policy encouraging tourism and entertainment obviously just like the El Dorado does trying to attract folks to come and go to a concert that's on a city property uh to come get hotel rooms and spend some money at the El Dorado no different here so appreciate your time I appreciate you listening to me uh I thank staff and I'm here for any questions thank you thank you Leah do we have a presentation I sure do thank you chairman for the record Leah Brock assistant planner I'm going to follow up on Mr Garrett's presentation with just a a few added details about how staff came to the recommendation of approval on this Quest so just to go over it um the site including the Sans parcel would be 8.373 Acres that's the seven Parcels off to the side there and the existing entitlement and then the acreage uh where the Sands is located again this is an amendment to the conditional use permit to expand the permit boundary to include the additional parcel where the Sands is located for the purpose of promoting glow Plaza on that additional parcel the existing entitlement is located in the mixed use downtown Northwest Quadrant zoning District that's on the map there in purple and outlined in blue the proposed amendment would add the parcel that's in Orange outlined in blue which is in the mixed use downtown Entertainment District but it's also in the gaming overlay to give you a little bit of background you know this was approved by the Planning Commission in March and then it was appealed and then it was approved by the city council in May of 2022 last year key issue related to this request is General Code Compliance here you can see the signage regulations in both the gaming overlay and the mixed use District here you can see that basically the same site within the gaming overlay there's no maximum area limit for freestanding signs or wall signs so approval of this amendment would allow glow Plaza to advertise events using the unlimited signage permitted in the gaming overlay on the Sans parcel again as Mr Garrett pointed out the signage is already approved building permits have been issued and my understanding is that it's going to be installed any day um staff did receive approximately 15 letters of opposition and comments from one NAB member a lot of the concerns were related to this signage and don't approve the signage so I just want to point out that the signage is approved this is really a question of content so how did we arrive at this um per Reno Municipal Code the definition of site does not require all Parcels within the site to be connected to have a common boundary line or to be adjacent the request to add this parcel with the Sans to the existing site entitlement for glow Plaza is allowed within Reno municipal code as of 2001 the City of Reno does not allow for off off-premise advertising per Reno Municipal Code if the parcel with the gaming overlay is added to the glow Plaza site advertising for events at the glow Plaza will be allowed on that parcel because it will be considered on-site signage again the purpose of the cup amendment is to allow for the glow Plaza to advertise under the gaming overlay on the Sans parcel should the application be approved staff recommends adding these two additional conditions of approval Mr Gordon went over those um on the board are the conditional use permit findings staff recommends approval of the proposed request with those added conditions that concludes my presentation the recommended motion is on the screen and I am available for questions thank you thank you okay we'll come back to the commission for disclosures and we'll start again with commissioner yeah thank you Mr chairman I have previously visited the site I spoke with applicants representative and received and read the correspondence that we received commission Armstrong I read and received emails I'm familiar with the site and I met with the applicants representative commissioner Dracula same disclosures Mr villain we've ever read emails I'm familiar with the site Mr Johnson in addition to being familiar with the site and receiving and reading emails I do have a disclosure to read regarding item 5.4 the Jacob's Globe closet and Festival area Amendment fellow Commissioners at the applicant's request I am disclosing the fact that my wife Alicia Barber publishes a Blog known as The Barber brief regarding her opinions on certain developments in the City of Reno on this matter I have sought guidance from the city attorney's office pursuant to NRS 281a 0.4204a the law presumes that the independence of Judgment of a reasonable person and the public officer situation would not be materially affected by the public officer's commitment in a private capacity to the interests of another where the resulting benefit or detriment accruing to the other person is not greater than that accruing to any other member of any general business profession occupation or group that is affected by the matter here I have a commitment and a private capacity to my wife item 5.4 is a request for an amendment to a conditional use permit to expand the permit boundary to include an additional parcel for the purpose of promoting glow Plaza on the additional parcel of a site located west of 4th Street East of Washington and 200 feet west of Ralston Street called the Drake Jacobs Club closet Festival area while my wife recently published opinions in her blog drawing attention to the potential impact of the project on residents living in the immediate vicinity the benefit or detriment of the project accruing to my wife is not greater than that accruing to any other member of general public the independence of Judgment of a reasonable person in my situation would would not be materially affected by my commitment in a private capacity to my wife and because this is not a clear case of disqualifying conflict of interest I am making this disclosure but do not intend to recuse myself from this item please accept this disclosure and Lodge it on the record for this meeting and subsequent meetings pertaining to this agenda item thank you thank you commissioner valto not the same disclosures uh I am familiar with the site I spoke with the applicants Representatives I received and reviewed emails um and with that we will open up public comments I have two request to speak forms we'll start with Mr Mark Ray good evening my name is Mark Ray and I'm the pro bono lawyer for a Civic group called Scenic Nevada which has been dealing with signs in Reno for about 23 years um I wanted to stress the importance of standards that have already been mentioned by you all in various times tonight and about we all know that sometimes hardships or unique problems cause us to vary those standards but today tonight we're being asked to vary those standards not because there's any unique hardship or unavoidable obstacle but simply because they want to we just want to do it that's the excuse and what matters is the slippery slope and the privilege inconsistent with the code that was mentioned here tonight by one or more of you I can't remember which one but as we all know casinos have unlimited signed privileges but they are casinos and that's why they get them historically whereas non-casino uses all of the rest of the businesses in town like mine have on-premise sign regulations and we can't have Billboards tonight you're being asked to give a billboard an off-premise sign for the benefit of the festival by the geyser trick or the pretense of saying that it's part of the same thing as the casino but we all know that's not true it's not true a casino is a casino and it has unlimited signs and it's specially privileged but no one else is none of the rest of the businesses in town are but we're being told the slippery slope example was given one of the other casinos advertises stuff next door and you can see how this works you approve this tonight the slippery slope is the next Casino or gaming overlay property owner is going to want the same thing so please let's have standards that's why you're here for the people the constituency I hope that you recognize is all of us not just in Nevada which has a very strong interest from our history uh with the ordinance you're all familiar with but because everyone in this town needs to count on you as being The Gatekeepers to keep the standards in place the rules that we all must follow as a lawyer I'm particularly aware of that and I know that all of you are as well the rule of law make no mistake What's Happening Here is a request for an off-premise sign off-premise from the festival onto a casino sign if you allow this for the client uh of you know Mr Gordon tonight then what's to stop the next representative from coming here from a gaming property and asking for the same thing please don't allow that to happen so respectfully with all due respect I ask you not to follow the staff's recommendation I ask you to follow the law for all of us thank you thank you Mr Ray uh we now have um Laurie Miss Laurie Ray you Mr chairman and good evening Commissioners um so I'm a director of Scenic Nevada as well we're opposed to this amendment the Globe Plaza has the right to erect its own digital sign on its own property to advertise its upcoming concert events it can also pay for advertising space on the many standard and digital Billboards in the region and I think that was incorrect in the staff report that they can't have a digital sign they can this amendment is unnecessary and it will cause problems if the in the future if it's approved allowing the glow Plaza to advertise on the Sans digital sign would change the legal on-premises signs sign into a digital billboard and as well my husband was just telling you digital Billboards are not permitted in Reno the Sands and glow plugs are just trying to get around the ban on digital Billboards and that shouldn't be allowed um the sand signs to be built are using the city's gaming overlay regulations only casinos can have them that's in footnote 11 of the sign code chart the Globe Plaza is not a casino it's a concert venue staff is not addressed footnote 11. no one else gets to do this as my husband was saying you're creating a slippery slope and anyone with a digital sign will want to take advantage of this so any on premise there's a lot of digital on-premise sign owners in town if they see this started this could really expand they could start advertising anything they want and it would really dilute our sign code um so it the amendment blurs the lines between on and off premises which have been in place for decades in many communities Across the Nation and it would jeopardize the validity of our own sign code it opens up risks of lawsuits from those who want digital Billboards they're not allowed in a digital standard billboard sign owner is going to say what the heck you know all of the on-premise signs are advertising off uh premise um are having off-premise ads so we don't want to go down that that road we worked really long and hard to ban the new construction of billboards into prohibit digitals Billboards that is if you have to approve this tonight limit the glow Plaza signs to the smaller of the two sand signs he uh the the representative to the nav the Jacobs representative at the NAB said it would only be placed on the smaller sign on the scrolling side near um the one near Mills so and condition them to that smaller sign the other thing is um we think there should be another condition that really does clearly address the fact that the glow Plaza parcel cannot have gaming overlay signs on its parcel it's the way it's presented in the staff report it's it's difficult to understand what that means so that would be another condition so actually we don't think you should approve and we don't think findings one and six can be made thank you very much thank you we have any other requests as big forms I did not get any other requests requests to speak forms we did receive correspondence that was distributed to the commission before the meeting and I don't have any voicemails thank you is there anyone on Zoom that would like to speak they probably couldn't speak without us letting them could they bear uh would it would the public like to speak on this item okay seeing none we'll close public comments uh come back to the commission for questions I I have questions Mr Johnson I don't think you can start the questioning as the chair unfortunately I just read through the bylaws and I think I'm allowed to okay then go ahead actually just a few minutes ago can we ask Council um Leah I have a question a couple questions for you uh something was said during public comment that the glow Plaza is able to erect a billboard on site is that correct um let's see just a sec let me uh find my sign code so they would be allowed a 125 square foot maximum freestanding sign with a maximum height of 25 feet it does say 35 feet if the parcel fronts a street posted at 35 miles an hour or greater but I just drove down 4th Street to see if it was 35 and it is 25 through that area interested do you have an opinion as to whether the glow Plaza advertise it created erecting a new billboard and advertising on it would be more or less detrimental to the public than advertising on a billboard that already exists uh no opinion and I just want to be clear as to what's in front of us the signs that are on the building currently on the Sands or the the Billboards those will still exist no matter what yes they will will they have the same size entitlements is that the entitlement is per 40 years from now if those signs are defunct or we have new sign and we have new kinds of signs or things like that those could be installed as well so again gaming overlay unlimited signage the existing billboard doesn't change in size as a result of our vote tonight no it does not it doesn't change in color nope it doesn't change in illumination only in content only in content so that's the only difference will be the content of the billboard that exists on Sans tonight that is correct yes it's only the content okay thank you commissioner Johnson did you figure this chair so Leah just to understand and I guess piggyback on that so they are allowed by right on the glow Plaza 125 square feet 25 foot high digital signage yes okay so that's allowed that is allowed I don't know where they're at so how does that compare to say another outdoor Festival area in town say barley Ranch Wingfield Park I don't know the zoning of those off hand but I could probably find out and get back to you with it that's okay I know what the signs look like there okay okay I guess so in staff's opinion to answer I guess the next question is the signage is being presented this evening on the sands they could do more absolutely they could do another 65 by 65 sign facing south yes they sure could and under this approval all of that would be allowed to advertise there let me go back to I guess the flip side of this if there is a digital sign allowed on the glow Plaza site under this special use permit can that sign advertise functions at the Sands no maybe and why is that Yes actually I believe that they could I'm sorry should be included in the site so it would be on on premise advertising yes so okay so basically this is allowing the advertisement because you're you're putting the two you're putting it all and considering at one site they can both locations can advertise what's happening at the other location yeah I'm gonna I'm gonna go back to that and say that our conditions of approval that we added actually do not allow for advertising the sand on the global Plaza site I believe we strict restricted that in condition number 24. okay um and then to the point I think that was raised with respect to master plan conformance and and I posed this question previously on this the my understanding is our purview on this is simply a signage purview so we're looking purely at the idea the addition of the parcel to allow for signage yes and so the master plan conformance items that you're looking at here are because you believe that putting the digital advertisement on a bigger sign than what they're already allowed is in conformance with these specific requirements yes okay all right thank you thank you Mr chair thank you Christopher so Leah can you tell me um who owns the the sands I do not have the owner's name of the owner in my packet but I'm sure that the applicant can tell you who it is the applicant is Reno real estate Development LLC okay so the applicant here is no the applicant here is who is the applicant in this the applicant for this item is Reno real estate Development LLC so and you don't know if the same applicant owns the same as I guess what I'm getting at is why isn't the Sands here asking for off-site advertising it's their it's their signage I'm gonna defer to the to okay Mr Gordon on that one okay thank you Leah for the record Garrett Gordon thank you for the question so the glow Plaza seven Parcels are owned by the applicant Tonight Reno real estate development the Sands is owned by jsr LLC all those seven Property Owners signed owner affidavits to allow for this entitlement to move forward the applicant you have to pick one is the glow Plaza because um we're amending the conditional use permit that's in Reno real estate development's name I guess why it seems like from a practical perspective it would make sense that the Sands it's their signage and they're seeking off-site content no no and why is that because I mean I get your condition you're requesting a condition Amendment right because the condition is on the festival grounds right correct the use permit is on the festival grounds and the ownership in the name of the owner of those seven Parcels for the festival grounds Reno real estate development right we want to amend the condition to allow for to add this ads parcel and part of our application process is consents from both of those owners to allow for this change but why that route why not just why because I'm trying to figure out why that why that that's the route because it could be the same application through the Sands but asking for the con I mean it's their ads and they could be able to seek off premise content whereas in this I see it like in the reverse so I'm I I mean it seems like it would be by doing it this way it would be allowing for Sans advertising on the Globe Plaza so if you look at the condition that Leah read the extension of this conditional use permit and again that's why we're here Arena real estate development is the owner of the property named applicant of the entitlement yep and I understand that they want to put you know the schedule of events on the Sands so it says here is solely to allow for the inclusion of the Sands Casino parcel we have an owner affidavit from Jay I mean just for the record yeah they're both owned by Jacobs entertainment those different facilities like different um Affiliates so this is all owned by Jacobs okay entertainment parcel within the glow plaza festival Site Area for the purpose of allowing on-premise glow plaza festival signage on the Sands Regency Hotel parcel so Sans is saying yep we consent to you putting up your calendar of events we're changing the use permit to create a a site and I would say if you look at the analysis on page two of the staff report when it talks about a site it says doesn't it can be a single ownership or has multiple owners or multiple Parcels as long as it's part of that development request so we took staff's direction of our development request for this project is now an additional parcel because we want to put up the calendar of events for it so pretty simple change so how does that really how is that similar to what's happening with the El Dorado because you said it's the El Dorado advertising off-premise content like off-premise advertising so how is this similar to that I mean there are different owners in that case it's just I imagine I mean how does that work I don't understand the analysis there between how the or the similarity between the two because this is the same owner and they're both seeking off-site content through this application but how is that the same as what Eldorado does with the Convention Center yeah I mean I think this is as straightforward as you can as you can come because it's the same owner same project same uh District moving forward with um advertising my point was some of the public comment you heard hasn't had any heartburn with the El Dorado saying Toby Keith is coming to City of Reno property I'm not here to opine on sign code or or say what entitlements they should or shouldn't have to do that but what we're saying what we're being held to here is saying if you're going to advertise for something that's not on your parcel you need to come and add that parcel to your project I guess it depends what they're advertising are they advertising rooms tied to the key I mean no they're having you've driven by downtown it says Miranda Lambert coming or Toby Keith coming or Elton John and it's off-premises and it's on it's on the El Dorado property and it's the Reno Event Center which is a block away and there hasn't been any concern about that whatsoever for the last decades we're being held I believe to a higher standard which is good because we want to be transparent and we came here before you to be transparent about what we're doing so when you drive by and see the scheduled events someone some place doesn't say wait is that really off-premise because the your parcel that Sans parcel is really not on the glow plasma parcel and so we said let's just do the right thing let's come here before you make our case and you know I look at all the findings and we meet every single one of them for Content there's no harm there's no finding that cannot be made and I would say Mr Ray is completely confused with the standards and the conditions he's talking about hardships that as this body knows is a variance we're not talking about a variance we're not talking about an exception we're talking about an amendment to a conditional use permit and can the findings be made and the answer is absolutely yes they can okay chair no further questions right now thank you thank you Mr Gower thank you Mr chair a couple questions for staff please [Music] the first question just so I'm 100 clear we're not being asked to make any sort of judgment regarding any other aspect of the project other than the inclusion of this parcel for the advertising of content on the sand sign that is correct everything else that we had looked at previously is outside the scope exactly yes okay um next question is related to the signage does the the glow Plaza set of parcels still have its um ability to construct that sign or does the inclusion of the additional parcel constitute their signage the glow Plaza site would still be allowed signage per what's allowed in the mixed juice sign code mixed-use district even though it's part of a single permitted like Site Area now yeah from an area conclusion of the additional parcel does because they're advertising their content on site yes does that constitute their sign hold on I'm trying to find my sign code I believe they would still be allowed the signage that would be allowed on that site per that District yes why I'd have to dig through sign code can you give me a second to answer that just trying to get an answer to that and I would appreciate that answer on record um Garrett maybe I can ask you a question Leah if you wouldn't mind looking that up that'd be awesome Garrett we heard in public comments um concern as I understood it essentially of setting a precedent here with um using properties within the gaming gaming overlay District to advertise content for properties outside of it and that could potentially result in the expansion of signage within the gaming overlay District do you think that we've opened a Pandora's Box here or is this I'll leave it at that do you think we've opened a Pandora's Box here uh thank you thanks for the question recording I would say absolutely not given the uniqueness of the situation I mean we have a use permit for outdoor amusement I don't think you can look at that as anyone else in and around downtown and around gaming areas having that use permit and if you without that use permit I don't know what the vehicle would be if you were having a a an activity and then one of the advertise on gaming you would maybe have to come in and ask for a variance and show hardship or you would have to come in with a development agreement and make the case right you have to modify code somehow here we're not asking the modify code there's no text Amendment there's no development agreement there's no variance there's no waiver it's just in the guise of a use permit of the defined term site which can doesn't have to be contiguous right doesn't have to have multiple owners and adding a parcel to the site for the benefit of advertising for the use on that site I think that's the concern right it's the non-contiguous nature of it so you could have you could have a property that's in South Reno that wants to be advertising its events and I'm just you know any sort of site anywhere else in the city saying we have these events hey um downtown Reno Hotel but let's use your signing privileges signage privileges to erect larger signs to advertise this content but I think that's the concern right I mean that's what I heard is that's why I'm asking you if you think that this is a precedent that we're setting because I mean it's a serious question right yeah I mean well one if there's precedent it's happening at the El Dorado and there's never been a complaint or a code violation or anything that I'm aware of and two I don't again what's the vehicle because having an event in South Reno and trying to advertise downtown you have to come to this body and change code to do that come with a development agreement and do that or have a use permit and and try to do it and you look at the definition of of of sight which here we're expanding our site that it's all within um the development request and so you know I just don't see it so to be honest I don't think we're setting any kind of precedent here I'm not worried about it staff isn't worried about it it's happening downtown already and I think it's just a really cool way to get people to activate the space that this body approved as a a really good opportunity and investment to activate downtown which is in compliance with the downtown action plan for this type of use thank you thanks Karen um Leah any any luck on that question [Music] to do with frontages and I would say that in this particular case there's two separate frontages one for the parcel with the Sands and then one for the parcels with the existing entitlement however it also says here under area wall maximums it breaks it down per parcel there so theoretically all wall sign areas shall not exceed 400 square feet per parcel so I think we can safely say that um two separate frontages for this site so each Frontage would be allowed the signage and I know that that's how we've looked at it before okay thank you I think I might be more confused now but let me digest that a minute thank you can I follow up on the line of questioning that commissioner Gower had with um Gordon sure please record so I and I appreciate your answer I think you were spot on with the you know the what's in place here and what's being presented to us and I do understand it I guess the question that I have is we also know and you mentioned in response to commissioner Villanueva that this is all actually owned by One overriding Entertainment Jacob's entertainment who does actually own more than just these two Parcels in the area so maybe to commissioner gowers point I guess I would put use the question to you specifically to this area we have a condition use permit in place which is being proposed to be added on to which is here but that's not all of the things that may be happening under the Jacobs entertainment umbrella in this area so to commissioner gower's Point are we opening up the situation where this is going to continue to be amended so that whatever activities may be occurring under the Jacobs entertainment umbrella would be able to tie in and benefit through this by continually adding Parcels to this particular application in terms of just looking ahead we're doing it very specific to this but under this amendment to the cup and this process as a precedent that we're setting should there be another you know activity space that's developed in that area could this be amended again to add additional sort of sites to this opening up the opportunity for more things to be advertised there and I guess that's it's a very again it's still specific to this particular sight and condition but I guess that's maybe just as a follow-up to commissioner gower's line of questioning I would I would answer what on the on the legal side right to meet the findings tonight it's not what could or should happen in the future it's what's before you but to your good policy question I think the answer is no because what's happening tonight is a use permit for the glow Plaza right for outdoor Amusement outdoor entertainment we couldn't amend that use permit to bring in other Parcels for other uses that's a standalone use a standalone project to advertise on the sand signage if there's other uses that come in they're going to have to stand alone on their separate entitlements like this is only to advertise for the glow Plaza if something else came down the line in the future is a would require likelihood entitlement you know or B couldn't tag on to this because this only deals with outdoor entertainment and if we did try to expand that we'd have to come back to you and meet the same findings and so then which then would be bringing up the precedent question again where if there is a different activity that comes in could that other activity whatever it is to get into the point of of precedent could that other activity also include the Sans parcel under its conditional use permit in order to achieve the same signage benefit for whatever that activity is whether it's outdoors indoors you know public private whatever I don't think there's any prohibition in code when defining a site that a site is limited to one entitlement right I mean you you know there you've had Parcels come before you and they get entitled for different things so there's no prohibition on that um so but the same understanding the same process would have to come into place as is coming in this evening is your understanding of what we're doing so again to the question of precedent the process that we're going through here tonight would have to be retained for any other similar activity because it involves some level of entitlement yeah you have to have uh as the as this as site is defined in code it talks to a development request right and has to be all the same development request and snap interpreted that as well your Sans parcel was not part of your development request it didn't have that APN right so we added that APN but so in the future if a use we had required a use permit then yeah we would list all the parcels we would want to be part of that site under that development request and you would weigh whether or not the findings could be made for some unknown future potential use thank you and I appreciate you going down the hypothetical road with me I'm just trying to understand because precedent is as everybody in this room is discussed concerning to us so thank you for that appreciate it um and then just one last question Mr sheriff for staff and we've heard this evening the example of a a situation similar to this at another property in town has there been any verification of that from staff if that's actually happening because I can't say that I have any knowledge one way or the other so I just if it's being used as something that's already happening I guess I'm just questioning if we if staff has looked into that as an existing situation Leah Brock for the record not that I know of chairman thank you may I yes commissioner please a question for actually I don't know it might be Leah um Leah so we had so I think I'm understanding this a little bit more earlier we we had chairman ask is you know is this an issue of content but now that I'm hearing that this is really just an amendment to the cup and the use it's really not content focused because if it was content focused this would be a matter of the Sands asking for permission to have off-premise advertising but really what's happening at least I'm trying to understand is so please correct me if I'm wrong what is happening is not an issue of content but just an amendment to the land or an amendment to the cup to incorporate a second parcel into what's allowed like the advertising that's allowed so this is an amendment to the to the cup to expand the boundary of that original two acres to include the parcel where the Sands is and I just want to be clear there's there's no pathway for the Sands to apply for off-premise signage that's that's not something that would be allowed so the only pathway for this would be to include the Sans parcel in the entitlement for the glow Plaza so that it would be considered on-site signage on site so that's what we're doing it's on site and it's really not content related I mean so when it comes to the signs themselves that's that's content related right because we're saying that the signs already exist and and so really when it's a question about those signs it's not whether or not those signs are going up or how big those signs are going to be or or any of that so in that aspect it's content related because those signs exist so we're not differentiating here before between offside and outside we're just basically saying it's on site we're just expanding that boundary extended content is going to stay the same exactly okay thank you discussion yeah I appreciate all the I'm sorry Link in the chair commissioner directly I appreciate all the discussion and questions because I think even going into this I had a couple of these questions felt like they were answered but expanding on those did bring me some more clarity I mean I guess what I see is you know something that can you know consistent with downtown and its goals and what they're trying to do and trying to bring activity and really my support for the Globe Plaza whatever you know a year ago when we went that about that route so I do feel a lot clearer on everything so I do appreciate the conversation it was helpful to help me make my decision I'd be approving this going forward thank you commissioner Gower thank you Mr chairman um put on the record number one um that based on staff's response to my question in terms of the limited scope of this uh request um I am able to [Music] separate the decision-making process from when we saw this the first time to be specific to this request um so I don't feel that I necessarily have to incorporate any of that information previously since it's so narrow I am concerned about the the precedent question and it I don't have any findings in my set of conditional use permit findings or general review findings that address precedent um so I have to reconcile that by thinking that each individual consideration if they were to be the same as this in the future would be evaluated under their own unique criteria um but I do want to put on the record that that is a concern relative to the potential proliferation of uh signage um to advertise what was previously considered off-premise but given the scope of our decision making and our findings I I am able to make the findings Mr Johnson thank you Mr chair um I guess the one the and appreciate commissioner gower's points because this is a very narrow request that we're looking at and I agree there's you know looking at this through that very narrow lens um a lot of the other discussion points and again to precedent are are challenging I guess the one the one issue that I still struggle with on this and commissioner gower's point and even some of my questioning is that this site is already entitled with a larger benefit for signage because it's on 4th Street it gets animated signage so the glow closet itself is entitled through our code to a larger digital sign than any other outdoor venue in the city everything else is a static display it's a smaller display indoor spaces you know there are a few that have digital signs but again they're be you know based on where they're located so there is already a benefit in our code to allow for a larger sign than would be expected to promote what is happening on the site and so I I guess I'm questioning in my mind that if you know what is already allowed there and what is allowed by right with the conditional use permit and trying to reconcile that with what is being asked and questioning whether we are actually going beyond the intent of title 18. I understand staff's interpretation of it but I just question the fact that if one parcel that is not technically part of this activity center is entitled to unlimited signage for a function that is completely different than what is happening here I just find it challenging to bring those two together for a very specific purpose to go above and beyond what our code has already emphasized so to me I do struggle with making you know Finding number one under the conditional use permit because I do question what we're doing and having that meet the purpose of the zoning District in which the site is located I'm looking at that zoning District being the glow Plaza which was the development and bringing this other site into that for the purposes of a very specific thing that was not allowed even with the added benefit to me I don't think it's meeting the intent of this title so and again I'm trying to look at it through that very narrow lens of how this signage aspect works and that is the one finding that I just cannot wrap my head around despite all of the assurances in the staff discussion that we've had this evening that's still how I struggle with it so uh thank you for the discussion and the questions this evening it's um I wanna the master plan has an entire guiding principle principle number three which is encouraging a thriving downtown and University District some of the portions of the master plan 3.1 C tourism entertainment is to encourage reinvestment in established casinos in the introduction of New Uses and activities that strengthen downtown's appeal as a tourism and entertainment destination strive to make downtown the location of choice within the region for annual events cultural celebrations and other community gatherings 3.3 B talks about tourism arts and entertainment it says we should continue to support casinos as a core component of the city's tourism industry and the downtown Entertainment District while seeking to broaden the range of Tourism arts and entertainment oriented uses that appeal to more diverse demographics I I guess I'm confused why this is an issue we agreed to support the glow Plaza and that is already going forward we should be doing everything we can to now encourage it to exist consistent with the master plan so you know I understand there's a concern about a slippery slope I think that's a fallacy for a reason I think that I agree with you commissioner Gower we should on each project individually assess our own opinion and not point back to precedent because that's a dangerous way to look at it in our role and on a case-by-case basis we should evaluate it but here this is we don't want this project to fail there's going to be a sign no matter what it's a question of what that sign says I see no special benefit I don't see any inconsistencies with the zoning code I think the way that staff reads the zoning code is the way that I read the zoning code and I think that if we have a discussion any like concern as to what it means or what Title 18 means you know what safe bet for us to assess it is to then look at the master plan and the master plan overwhelmingly supports what the applicant is trying to pursue and that's why it's easy for me to vote on this and that's partially why I took the leading questioning because I was really struggling with some of the opposition because I didn't think it was well founded in what they were proposing this is a very small change that's allowed by the code and it does good consistent with a master plan that's kind of my view on this project or may I oh I'll let commissioner Johnson go just and I appreciate that I guess the the one point of rebuttal I would make is that in that entire master plan with discussion about supporting it and supporting casinos and supporting a thriving downtown there's not a single mention about that support being based on uh approving digital signage to let everybody know what's going on down there the glow Plaza itself and the activities that are a part of this discussion by this body's finding and by council's finding meet all of those master plan code requirements and I'm not going to revisit that right now but to state that the master plan and all of the encouragement that we have to do includes the idea that all of this large-scale signage is a part of that I would question whether that is the way that I would interpret the master plan but I totally understand what you're saying in terms of that encouragement I just find that that encouragement can be done with things other than Monumental signage placed upon the building Mr Villanueva so I'm as I'm reviewing this I'm still trying to understand how this which is not a request for off-site advertising it's an expansion of a boundary ties into what the applicant said was the El dorado's off-site advertising because they're two different things this is an application this is not a request for off-site advertising it's an expansion of the boundary which I I mean I think that's what makes this particular application unique and why I don't think press it would set precedent because it's very rare I in this case it is the same applicant essentially from my understanding it's the same owner whether I agree with whether the project went through or not um that was a different decision in this case same owner it's essentially advertising on-site premises or on-site on-premises content this is not an off-site premises request um so I don't think it's I don't know why the applicant brought up the Eldorado I don't think it applies um so in any case I don't necessarily agree with everything Alex said but I think we can get to the same conclusion just in a different way um my viewpoint is because this particular application is owned essentially by the same applicant it's essentially and it's just expanding the boundary I think that's what sets us apart from other Parcels or other entities other businesses other casinos and their requests for what may be off-site premises advertising so I think that's how I can get to the yes um regardless of how I feel about the project this is a narrow request so okay do we have uh commissioner Armstrong I apologize sorry just to wrap up on discussion I want to get on record where I struggle with the slippery slope argument or the press and studying argument is that we heard through this process that there's no prohibition on this in code so it was pretty clearly answered to me that this this could happen under a very set circumstance it would come back and go through the same process but there's nothing actually prohibiting this from occurring so I don't necessarily agree with with the present setting aspect of it or that we're going down a slippery slope because this could actually happen in other settings where we would have to go through the same deliberative process so for that reason um I don't have an issue making the findings and I will be supporting a project Mr draculich thank you Mr chair I'm ready to make a motion please do in the matter of ldc23-00032 Jacobs Globe Plaza and Festival area Amendment based upon compliance with the applicable findings I moved to approve the conditional use permit Amendment subject to conditions listed in the staff report and I can make all the fightings we have a motion do we have a second commissioner Armstrong I'll second um all those in favor aye aye aye all opposed nay and I cannot make conditional use permit finding number one hey thank you the motion carries five to one um thank you and good luck with your project um for the those in the background who are interested in the appeal process or those in the audience that are interested in the appeal process any final action not including recommendation or failure to take action by the Planning Commission may be appealed to the Reno city council by the applicant the mayor or a city council member or any person who is aggrieved by the action or inaction and appeal together with the 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 if the applicant has elected to use the former zoning code in effect prior to January 13 2021 an authorized as authorized per RMC 18.01.602 appeals must be filed within 10 calendar days starting on the day after written notice of the action is filed with the city clerk and if the 10th calendar Day falls on a weekend or holiday when the clerk's office is not open the appeal may be filed on the next business day and that appeals process can be found in the uh on the agenda that is posted on the city's website as well as where it has been publicly noticed okay with that um we have on here agenda item number six which is a training and I would request that we continue that training to the next meeting because we have two items um Jason Garcia will be planning manager for the record um on as part of my excuse me as part of the staff updates I was going to update the commission that there are only two public hearing items on the February 15th meeting we also are having a RTC presentation so if you want to go ahead and have that annexation training and we can move it to then I'm also prepared for tonight of course so I think it makes sense to move into the next meeting okay appreciate it thank you Jason will do uh agenda item number seven the trucking Meadows Regional planning liaison report uh commissioner Johnson we had a meeting last week there were three conformance review items on there um all of them passed with uh um minimal discussion with the uh one exception in the City of Reno um we did have a couple questions on that but It ultimately passed the next meeting will be I guess at the end of February thank you gen 9 number eight staff announcements I think Garcia labeoux planning manager for the record again um just to kind of repeat what I just said on the February 15th meeting uh Steph has reached out to RTC and ndot to bring an update to the commission on uh road projects in the North Valleys so that'll be coming with that meeting and then as I mentioned there were there are two items scheduled and it might be of interest to know to the Commissioners that we did receive a Appeal on the Riviera tentative map project from January 18th and that's all the update stuff has at this point thank you agenda number nine Commissioners suggestions for future future agenda items Mr chair commissioner Dracula I won't belabor the point too much going back to 5.2 and commissioner Johnson's point I guess seeing that major deviation it was just frustrating know that that that makes a ton of sense that step back ratio of two to one if those Parcels are against each other and you've got a house that's single story that makes all the world of sense and all of a sudden we have a 50-foot buffer and that ratio still maintains from when I understand you know where that buffer doesn't even really go to so anyway I don't know if the mechanism is to put it on the agenda so I apologize but just for the record if staff wants to address it in any way I think he kind of got all their comments from earlier so like I said it won't belabor the point but just wanted to bring that up great thank you yep thank you [Music] please commissioner suggestions I kind of just want to repeat what was said at the last meeting where we stayed till 2 A.M just to request that we have um I don't know if this is agenda item but basically just not have maybe this is more appropriate for public comment I'll save it uh what are you just that we have limited I you know reasonable amount of items um especially if they're contested because I just don't think it allows for fair and Democratic process when people are required to be here till 2 A.M to give public comment so thank you thank you thank you um public comment will open it leave any requests to speak forums and then for this item okay seeing anybody in Zoom okay seeing no one in the audience will close public comments uh is there a motion to adjourn commissioner jacket so moved is there a second all in favor aye aye okay meeting is over