Mr. Chair, it's 6 o'clock. If you're ready to call the meeting to order. >> Do we have the two commissioners joining remotely online? >> Yes, we do. You're okay. Okay. All right. The time is 6 p.m. This is the City of Reno Planning Commission meeting dated Thursday, December 4th, 2025. First item, pledge of allegiance. Uh, Commissioner Belto, I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands for it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> A2 roll call. Madame uh, Mr. Clerk, >> Commissioner Bera, >> uh, here. Delvr >> present. >> Jacquaman >> here. >> Gonfantini >> here. >> Roar >> here. >> Velto >> here. >> Williams >> here. Mr. Chair, you have a quorum of the Reno City Planning Commission. >> Item A3, public comment. Uh, Mr. Clerk, >> it should be noted for those in the audience that comments are to be addressed to the planning commission as a whole. Comments heard under this item will be limited to three minutes per person and may pertain to matters both on and off the planning commission agenda. Please note that the planning commission may not take action upon any matter not agendaized for possible action on today's agenda. When you're 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 3 minutes. If you are an attendee in the Zoom meeting and would like to make public comment at this time, please raise your hand. Lastly, while in this room, please be respectful. Warnings will be issued by the presiding officer if there is disruptive behavior and you will be asked to leave chambers if the behavior continues. Mr. Chair, I've not received any public comment cards for in-person comment. >> Do we have any request to speak in chambers under this item? >> Is there anyone on Zoom? Mr. Chair. Oh, I don't believe we have any o opening public comment. Uh, Commissioner Bisera, please. >> Oh, no. I'm I'm okay. >> Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I misunderstood. >> Yeah. Thank you, though. >> Okay. Item A4, approval of the agenda. Can I get a motion to approve tonight's agenda? >> Commissioner Williams. Motion to approve. >> Commissioner Belto second. We have a motion and a second. All those in favor? >> I I >> I. For tonight's meeting, we will take uh the presentation from staff D1 in advance of C1. So, we will uh we can proceed with that now. Uh or would you prefer to do staff announcements? >> I can actually do staff announcements. Well, Grace is coming up because they're very short. The only update I have is that the childcare text amendment that actually Grace presented recently that was approved by council yesterday and we'll go for second reading in the coming weeks. >> Miss Packin, please proceed. Good evening, commissioners. Um, Grace McAdin, senior management analyst for the record. I'm here to present a training that was requested by this body regarding neighborhood plans. So, I wanted to start with a brief history of neighborhood plans. You'll see as we kind of move throughout this presentation, it gets pretty complex. Um, so just kind of starting before our current master plan, we had the Great Reno master plan. And this identified three different level of applicable plans. We had city-wide plans. We had center and transit corridor plans. And then we had neighborhood plans. Neighborhood plans specifically were seen as areas appropriate for more detailed planning. So these are areas we thought uh maybe they had specific character or uniqueness or something that made them different from other areas in the city. Um what we found is everyone thinks their neighborhood's special and unique. So this became very fragmented. We basically had a patchwork of different neighborhood plans throughout the city um with you know stacks and stacks of policy in this master plan um regulating some of the projects we would review specific to those neighborhoods. So the great Reno master plan was around from 2007 to 2017 just to give you an idea of how many plans we had. This was the center and corridor plans. I think there's 13 up there. And then we had 11 neighborhood plans. So essentially we had 24 area plans in this great Reno city master plan. Um and again just stacks and stacks of papers that regulated kind of these neighborhood plans and made them somewhat different from each other. We had a lot of overlap. We had a lot of duplication in each of these neighborhood plans. So it was just really difficult for staff to administer these. So, one of our goals when we adopted Reimagine Reno um was to retire many of these neighborhood plans. The remaining ones we have left are Country Club Acres Greenfield Mortonson Garson Northeast, Wells Avenue, and West University. And that's in our master plan. Um the the direction we received at the time was uh this is too difficult for us to administer. It's getting out of control. Let's consolidate. Let's streamline um and let's simplify this master plan. I took this next bullet straight out of our master plan. I think it kind of summarizes why we did what we did or why we got the direction we did. Uh to maxim maximize the city's limited resources and maintain a more userfriendly master plan. The city does not intend to develop additional neighborhood plans. Rather, the intent is to focus on the city's limited resources on strategies and improvements over time that will help design principles as they apply in different neighborhoods. So the intent was we understand each uni each um neighborhood is unique and special um but let's kind of add those policies to the neighborhood's plans as a whole in the master plan. Let's add them to the master plan document um and not have this fragmented approach. So then we had the annexation and land development code update in 2021. So the neighborhood plans were evaluated during the master plan update. we [snorts] were directed, let's consolidate, let's retire, let's simplify. So, the zoning code update in 2021, the remaining master plan overlays we have. Um, so these are essentially boundary lines around these neighborhood plans and they tell us country club acres is this boundary. It's this area and this is what regulates in that area. It might regulate things like setback or heights. um different from the master plan neighborhood plans that are more policy big picture neighborhood plans in in that document. So this is where it gets a little complicated so stay with me. Um but in the zoning code we have country club acres, Greenfield, Mortonson Garson, McQueen, Plumis, Southeast Wells Avenue and West University. So there were some that were evaluated to be retired in the master plan. Ultimately when we did the update they weren't retired. um it was difficult for some people during the zoning code update to think that their neighborhood plan was going to be retired. So, a lot of people held on to the idea of these neighborhood plans and so some of those were carried forward. So, I kind of briefly touched on this or briefly referenced this in place of neighborhood plans in the master plan, we got these area specific policies. And so you'll see these in staff reports that come forward for um in projects that we bring to this body. Um they're in the structure plan. So you'll see foothill neighborhoods, outer neighborhoods, central neighborhoods, and different policies that are supported by that area plan. So this is kind of a more this was our broader more comprehensive look at these neighborhood plans. We didn't get rid of those policies. Um we kept the policies, but we transitioned them into broader areas. So, if you're in a foothill neighborhood, there's different policies that maybe should be incorporated to your project because it's probably hilly. It's probably maybe on the outskirts of town. Um, whereas before those were in maybe 15 different neighborhood plans. So, we tried to move away from this fragmented neighborhood plan approach to take a more comprehensive look of the city. This is easier to administer. It's easier to decipher. it's easier for staff and planning commission, I think, to understand, you know, what the goals of each area are. However, we've had a recent push to maybe preserve neighborhood plans and go back to that. Um, especially, you know, Reno is unique. A lot of our neighborhoods have very specific character. Um, and so wanting to preserve that character is definitely always going to be a want and need um of a of the community. So, going back to our neighborhood plans and what they regulate in our zoning code, they're intended to address unique land issues, um, opportunities or challenges, uh, and and really preserve certain development pattern or character. So, maybe brick houses or brick certain materials that are used, certain heights. Um, we see it a lot of times when you're driving through a beautiful neighborhood and then all of a sudden there's a huge massive monstrosity that clearly doesn't fit in. So the intent is maybe to preserve something or prevent something like that from happening in certain neighborhoods and ultimately the neighborhood plans will override underlying zoning. So a great example is if you're in the Wells Avenue and your underlying zoning has a certain setback and the Wells Avenue district has another setback, we'll apply that Wells Avenue District setback. It's more specific. So when reviewing a project, planning staff typically goes to those neighborhood plan overlays first. These regulate things like setbacks, building coverage, relationship to surrounding development signs access uses etc. And I think this body's seen a couple of them. Some of our more common or bigger neighborhood plans are Wells Avenue and West University. Um, and so it's important to think when you're reviewing those projects is what are we preserving? making sure that we're still consistent with those neighborhood plans because they are still in place. So, talking about planning commission and kind of your role when you see something come forward that is in an existing neighborhood plan, city council really sets a policy related to neighborhood plans. So they get to decide which what ultimately what's retired, what stays, if any new ones are brought into place, and then staff and planning commission are tasked with enforcing and applying those policies. So city council says, "Here was what we think we should do." And staff and planning commission have to say, "Okay, here's the setback or here's the height or here's the character we're trying to preserve." So that's my presentation and I'm available for questions. Uh, Commissioner Williams, for the record, I'll just say great presentation. Thank you. Um, I only had one question. You asked it about which one overrides the other. So, thank you. >> Great. Uh, Commissioner Bizera. >> Great. Thank you, Chair. Um, hey, Grace. Uh, howdy. Thanks for the presentation as always. Um, just had a few questions. Um, you know, as Reno continues to grow in population, how can overlays, I guess the ones we have, evolve to balance the neighborhood character and the housing needs, sustainability of the city's long-term vision? >> Sure. I uh I might have misunderstood the question, but um we definitely see some neighborhood plans that get a little outdated. Um, and so the there's always a uh or there may be desires in the future to kind of update some of these neighborhood plans and ultimately that would take council direction to initiate a text amendment if they wanted to update some of these overlays. >> Okay, great. And that's a good one for a followup because I know as you mentioned as well, we we've had um a few projects before us in in neighborhoods that have a um a neighborhood overlay. Uh some I think were last updated probably about 30 years ago. So, do you know if if staff or council is considering any policy updates to to some of these or code amendments just to kind of keep it times and if so, what does the public outreach or engagement look like for for that effort? >> Yeah, not at this time. Um, you know, we we do stay um keep our council up to date on these neighborhood plans and definitely developers when they develop in these neighborhoods um are in communication with their council person um whichever ward they're in. Um, but there hasn't been direction to update any of these neighborhood plans. Um, if we were to update them, it would follow our our text amendment process. So, we'd go to the neighborhood advisory boards. Um, we would do stakeholder meetings, we would come to this body, and then we'd go to city council. >> Okay. And just kind of one last one there, then I since staff is waiting for direction um from council, do you to you as staff collectively, and Mike, maybe this is a question to you as well. Do do you guys feel like it's time for reviewing these overlays uh based on the projects that have come before us in order to kind of keep with the times or are they pretty current and aligned with uh you know our goals as a city as we grow and are trying to do like the um missing middle and infill and so forth. Yeah, I think um you know some of the more common ones like I said are Wells or West University. And although those are older plans, I actually think that they've grown with the times pretty significantly. Um we also have specific plan districts and um plan unit developments which are totally different. Um and and some of those are extremely outdated. Um but those are, you know, different training for a different day. I actually think some of these neighborhood plans have evolved pretty well. Um, so I and we're not uh, you know, necessarily awaiting for direction from council, but there just hasn't been any initiative from any council member to change or update or retire any of these overlays. >> Okay. And what's the what's the oldest overlay as far as like when was like what what's the overlay that was most recently updated as far as like date? Was it 5 years ago? And what's the oldest? >> Um, I would say I think Wells was updated the most recently. Um, as far as oldest, I have no idea. >> Okay. All right. Thanks, Grace. I appreciate it. This is helpful. Hopefully helpful to others as well. We have any other questions from the commission hearing? None. This item was just for discussion only. So, uh, thank you, Miss Mcadin. I appreciate the presentation. We will move on to C1. This is a staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-00007, Riverbend tenative map and conditional use permit. We'll start with a staff presentation. We will then the applicant will have the opportunity to provide a pres presentation. Uh we will go to disclosures then public comment and then questions. Please proceed. Miss Picatti. Thank you, chair. For the record, my name is Leah Picotti and I'm an associate planner with the city of Reno Development Services. This evening, I am presenting an application for the Riverbend tenative map and conditional use permit. So, the subject site that we're looking at today is um in Verdi. It's just north of the 80 and it is just south adjacent to uh old US Highway 40. We're looking at a 14.9 acre site that's comprised of four parcels. And in today's request, we have a tenative map for an 82 lot single family detach subdivision and then a conditional use permit for cluster development, relocation of a regional utility corridor and disturbance of a major drainage way. So starting with the zoning here, you can see the site outlined in blue up there. The western 9 acres is located in the single family residential zoning district. It's SF8. So, this allows eight units per acre. And then the three parcels on the east side are located in the general commercial zoning district. Key issues that we analyzed in this request are the overall site design, compatibility with surrounding development, parking, access and circulation and preservation of natural resources which includes the Truckucky River drainage, the waterway and also uh wildlife in this area as well. So here we're looking at the overall site design. This is that SF8 parcel. So, what we're looking at is 9 acres of development area. This is going to accommodate 82 single f single family detached homes with an average lot size of about,62 square ft. This does come out to a density of 9.1 dwelling units per acre, which is allowed under cluster development. They can increase that density up to 15% as long as they meet the cluster development findings. In this particular case, it would allow a maximum density of approximately 9.2. So, we're still just under that maximum density. This plan includes approximately 297 parking spaces, which I'll talk about here just a minute. And I just want to point out that the area to the west of this is owned by the adjacent subdivision, but it's a 100 foot buffer uh with a major drainage way that is essentially open space. So, while it's not necessarily part of this project, it does provide a nice buffer between the adjacent subdivision and this one as well. So, moving on to the regional utility corridor. Um, it's a little bit hard to tell on here, but what you're looking at is the whole site with that SF8 parcel kind of right in the middle and then those general commercial off to the right hand side there. So, the existing regional utility corridor pretty much runs right through the center of the site. That presents all kinds of problems for development because you can't really put houses underneath the regional utility corridor. So, back in 2021, um the there was an application on this site to relocate it. It was approved, but it just never came to fruition. So, the applicant today is asking to relocate it pretty much in the same way that it was approved in 2021. So, what it's going to do is what you see in green there. It's going to jut up the side of that SF8 parcel and then it's going to run along Highway 40 in an existing utility corridor that that is there. Because this is a regional utility corridor, that makes this a project of regional significance. So, should this application be approved tonight, it will move on to Truckucky Meadows Regional Planning Agency, um, and they will have a hearing by their planning agency, uh, on the relocation. At this point, they did supply a memo. They are in support of the application, and that memo was included in your staff report. Uh, furthermore, the disturbance of the major drainage way is right here. So, part of the reason this isn't the development itself, the housing is not being um built on top of the drainage way, it's really just this corner where the emergency access is going to be located. They're going to have a little dog park and a community garden over there that the drainage way is going to be channeled through. And um it's just that regional utility corridor is going to go right through that area. So, that's why we have that major drainage way included in the application today. Regarding traffic access and circulation, this is um coming down Old Highway 40 headed west. The roundabout that you can see here is the roundabout that will provide access to this. This is an N DOT road. There is no on street parking. Again, there's an existing roundabout and RTC has identified a future multi-use path along here. So when we looked at frontage improvements and things like that, RTC said, "Hey, we got a big picture project coming in here." And so we're not asking the applicant to do any of those sidewalks or things we would normally have done because of RTC's future project. Regarding parking, uh the applicant is proposing 297 parking spaces. Parking per Ren Reno municipal code is based on square footage for single family homes. So we require one parking space for,250 for the first 1,250 square feet, two spaces for the add next two, 1250 ft² and then it caps out at three. So basically anything under 2500 square ft requires two parking spaces. Anything over 2500 square ft requires three parking spaces. Now the applicant hasn't exactly figured out how big these homes are going to be. So we want to allow room for that. Plus, because this particular subdivision is going to be landlocked, no parking on Highway 40. No. And the streets are going to be private and narrow. So, there isn't going to be any on street parking except for the 15 designated on street parking spaces that you saw on the site plan there. So, while it seems like 297 parking spaces is a lot, that includes the true two garage spaces and the two driveway spaces. it comes out to about 4.3 parking spaces per um per unit. So, uh also we have a condition of approval on there that the garages must be maintained for parking use. This is something that we do fairly often when we have parking concerns on a particular project. And because this is located out in Verdi, there is no public transit. Um basically the only option if you're not driving would be to ride your bike into town. Tenative map findings are on the board. Basically, all services and utilities are available and it complies with all the applicable policies. Conditional use permit findings. The purpose of the single family residential single family residential zone is literally straight out of code intended primarily to accommodate single family detached residential uses. So, this complies with code. We have same use res sing single family residential detached uh to the west and to the north with a very similar density. We have public park and river access right down the way. Not going to be materially detrimental in any way. Cluster development. Um compared to traditional development, does it provide more open space, preserve existing trees, vegetation coverage, view corridors? In this case, yes. Approximately 22% is being preserved as open space. We have several amenities that meet that cluster development requirement. Uh clustering can have no significant impact on adjacent properties. Again, we have a very similar scale to what we have similar density, similar residential character. We have open space, common area, street trees, landscaping, um all that will help buffer this development from those a those adjacent properties and clustering must meet all other applicable requirements. In this case, they meet and exceed all those other applicable requirements. That concludes my presentation. The recommended motion is on the board. I'm available for questions and the applicant's representative is here as well. Thank you. >> Good evening, commissioners. Can you hear me? Okay. These are Yeah, I got the new sound system here. John Kmpotic. I'm with KLS Planning representing the applicant, Rob Fitzgerald. Our full uh engineering design team is here. our civil engineer, hydraologist, and traffic engineer. This evening, I'm not going to take a lot of time. I'd like to echo the highlights of I think what was important to staff. We find equally important. Uh, by the way, um, we do agree with the 20 conditions as proposed as written and including the staff report. I think it's very well done. Thank you to Leah and Todd was the engineering lead on this project. um key issue site design cluster being a part of that subset the natural resource protection I think is the single bit most significant community issue in this in terms of benefit long-term to the community and parking I would hardly ever talk about but there's been a little bit of drama associated with it so uh I'd be glad to engage with the commission on that in terms of um uh site design just know that there there's the concept of which we've put together. We've been at this for quite a while on this and really what goes into when you look at that is a, you know, firmly normally shaped site with the exception of the one southeast corner, but challenging in a lot of ways. So, we think about what house footprint, what house product, size of house that's going to go on there, the mapping of the of the product, open space, open space, amenities, density, parking, street width, sidewalks, street trees, all of that. In attacking a site like this, density is obviously key because there's no public policy that talks about making a product work in in in the marketplace. and that's fundamental to having a real project. So density is always part and the way we manage the footprint of the project is always significant to what really comes forward in this. Um we think we've hit all of the key points in terms of justifying the cluster and again the commission can engage however you want. But the alternative I would ask or point out if you did a lot and block subdivision and think about this and track with me. That usually means lots and streets, zero open space, uh, privacy fencing, closed to views, closed to access. We create in our I believe in this case a nice open neighborhood feel with significant shared space on an infill site with small house footprints. that is a footprint mapping type of project. It obviously meets a lot of cluster criteria with 22% open space and you can see the labeling of the uh amenity areas. Um the CUP uh staff touched on it here is um the power line that is a tweak to the regional utility corridor. that red line, the black lines existing of the 120 KV line as we see it today. The big ugly H frame uh that's going away. The the solid red line is the approved line that we did four years ago. There's the little dash up in the northwest corner that is the subject of the CUP this evening. And we found a better route. And I say a better route because none of us are electrical engineers in the crowd that I know of. But NV Energy said there's a preferred route for a lot of reasons. And so we did that little dog leg from one angle point on the horizontal paralleling the highway up to that black leg. It works. We have an easement from that property owner. It works more favorably and we're not we're not having to knock on River Oak store uh for an easement with them. So we're thankful that we uh were managing that. So, just know that the red line for the bulk of it is already approved in a cup from years ago and a regional utility record corridor relocation and that little tweak of red dashed as as the as the cup this evening. Um, I think uh I, you know, I want to touch on this public benefit because actually I think it's best shown in the zoning map, but uh you look at the green band of uh of uh open space along the south end of the parcel. Um, kudos to Mr. Fitzgerald. He's been at this, he tells me, for 50 years now. But I I I think when you have an opportunity for a little subdivision of which we're promoting and a land exchange initiated by him to create this SF8 parcel, the 9 acres that were are the subject this evening and then that big swath of open space and what you see does this does this uh pointer work here? I I always forget each chambers is different. >> It does not. Right. Um let's see. There's the there's this option, isn't there? Is that how this works? See this easement right here? That's a legally established easement from now to the end of time for pedestrian access through the the east boundary of the site into the open space parcel, which is all of this. I showed it more clearly on the zoning map. nine acres in addition to this easement here. Improved parking right there, a path for access to that easement that gives the public access to the river. So imagine buying a home in here and you have a connection here to the open space parcel. You have connection here and then you have unobstructed public access along that access point there. I think it's it's very unique in my experience and I think it's just a magnificent opportunity for public public benefit. Um I'd also like to touch on I I think I I mentioned early on in in natural resource protection but there has been you know at the NAB level mule deer and wildlife migration. Those paths are still kept as we know them today on the west side of the project and there will be some ability to traverse on the east side. legal p public access to the river. It's trespassing today. People don't know that. Some I call it innocent trespassing, but the fact that we don't have an easement until this is ratified, which is which has been recorded recently. Uh that that is that is material. The storm water staff touched on pretty simple concept here. You can see the drainage that was improved with the project across the street. It traverses in a covert right here. You can sort of see that head wall there. And so there's a little tiny bit of improvement there that's necessary. Bottom line with engineering, we take storm water channelize it with culverts with open channels and now in a more refined basis these bio retention basins and bioils to make it a little bit easier on the eye and certainly on the environment. So that's really the extent of that. There's a there's um uh Mr. Gan's with us who's a a very accomplished um surface water hydraologist and uh he could get into great detail on this but they've modeled it to death and figured it out and created the improvements to wind through this property and then uh ultimately toward the river. Um so I think that pretty much covers it. I'm going to leave parking. Actually, you know what? Let me go to uh go to parking. that that little slide that I had. So, here's two parking spaces per unit, 270 proposed. We've agreed to the condition. We want the parking as it's proposed. Um, so really that boils down to the two garage spaces for the two so excuse me, two two spaces per two-car garage, the single car garage, driveway, and then shared parking on street and off street. So, let me go to the the other exhibit. You see what's going on here? Now, now if you want to talk about heat island effect, I don't think we could do anything more responsible because what we did by intent is the narrow streets. Street parking takes up a lot of space. It's junkier. Narrower streets are much more charming. So, you want to be able to hit the mark. And we think we've done that with this bank of nose in parking here. It doesn't affect anything. We're going to have, you know, the islands there for deciduous tree planting. Also in that open space parcel to the north, you've got some here. Same idea. And you've got some over here. So, um there's good distribution of those. But I, you know, in some 45 spaces that's guest and shared parking for for uh a project of 82 units. I I think it's the right amount of parking. You know, it's it's more of an art form than it is science, but we um we feel that we've got adequate parking for the units. That's just on driveways and then that common area shared parking. Uh so with that, commission, thank you very much for your time. Um, I think I will just uh turn it over to you guys for any questions and comments we have for me or for um our our professional team. Thank you. >> So, we will run through disclosures and then we will go to public comment and then to questions for disclosures. We'll start with Commissioner Velto and then go through [clears throat] here and then online. Uh, Commissioner Velto spoke with the applicant's representative, spoke with a community leader from uh, the Somerset area. Uh, also reviewed all the materials and received and reviews cor reviewed correspondence/public comments. >> Commissioner Devr read received and read all the correspondents and am familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Gpantini read and reviewed all the materials. Um, familiar with the site. Uh, Commissioner Jockman, phone call with the applicant representative and fellow city planning commission members and madam Mr. Clerk, in the interest of full transparency on item C1, I'm disclosing that I'm currently working on a project in Wo County where we under contract with a consortium of property owners while I and my employer have no contract or agreement with Mr. Kradic, the applicant representative. He frequently consults on project decisions which involve me separately. Lumis and Associates are a subconsultant of ours on a project in the city of Fernley that I'm working on. In this agreement, they are employed by my firm, Kimley Horn. On this matter, I've sought guidance from the city attorney's office here. I do not have a commitment in a private capacity to the interests of the applicant or their representatives and can be fair and impartial in my deliberation regarding this item. Mr. Clerk, please accept this disclosure and lodge it on the record for this meeting and subsequent meetings pertaining to this agenda item. Thank you. >> Uh, Commissioner Williams, I'm f familiar with the site. Uh, I attended the NAB uh when this was up. I met with the applicant's representative um and I've read and reviewed material. >> Uh, Commissioner Roar Meyer. >> Um, I have a disclosure. Fellow city planning commission members and madame clerk, in the interest of full transparency on item C1, I am disclosing that in 2000 I represented Lumis and Associates and Wo County Parks on the Riverbend parking lot and access path SUP and variance that was LDC200052. The request for an SUP for disturbance of a major drainage way and a variance for parking lot screening standards that never came to fruition. While I represented Lumis and Associates and Wo County Parks on the project five years ago, I have no precinary interest and in the proposed application on this matter. I have sought guidance from the city attorney's office here. I do not have a commitment in a private capacity to the interest of the applicant or their representatives and can be fair and impartial in my deliberation regarding this item. Madame Clerk, please accept this disclosure and lodge it on the record for this meeting and subsequent meetings pertaining to this agenda item. Uh, thank you. And also, I spoke with the applicant's representative and read and reviewed emails. >> Commissioner Bisera, for the record, um, I spoke with the applicant's representative and some area residents. I'm familiar with the site and surrounding area and region, and I reviewed the staff report, exhibits, and all public comments as well. Very good. We will now move to public comment on this item. Mr. Clerk, do we have any requests to speak? >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. We do not have any request to speak forms for this item. Is there anyone in the room or on Zoom who'd like to give public comment on this item? >> If you are in chambers and would like to speak on this item, please raise your hand. >> Mr. Chair, I do want to note for the record that we did receive correspondence on this item. It has been logged in the record and forwarded to the planning commission. >> Thank you, Mr. Clerk. We will now proceed with questions from the commission. >> Commissioner Visera. >> Great. Thank you, Chair. Um, great. I'll just start with a few questions for staff uh then the applicant and if there are any reviewing agencies present chambers, I'll probably uh go to them, but not all at once. Obviously, I'll kind of step back from time to time. Um, I guess starting with the first one, I guess we'll go with uh staff. So we uh would you mind just summarizing the the key themes from the public comment on this project? Um for example, you know, drainage, traffic, the utility relocation and neighborhood compat compatibility for instance, and uh explain how those concerns were addressed or or not in the staff analysis and recommended conditions. >> Thank you, Commissioner Bizar. Leah Picotti for the record. I'm sorry. Were you asking me the concerns that we received from public comment or were you asking me about the key issues that were analyzed in the staff report? >> The the the former more or less like the uh if you wouldn't mind summarizing like the key themes they could be issues or positive things from public comment and how they were addressed and incorporated into the um recommended conditions. >> All right. Um I can do that. So, up until yesterday, we only received two public comments. And one was from a mule deer biologist who works with Endow, Nevada Department of Wildlife, and they were contacted by one of the NAB members, um, asking about mule deer in the area. So, originally when this application was proposed, there was some talk about wildlife corridors. We reached out to NDOT because they have a a program where they install corridors along their roadways in areas where that's needed. And then in they have to work in conjunction with Endo. So what we basically discovered in that process was that most of the deer in this area are not healthy and really uh would probably not utilize a corridor if one were put in. So the suggestion from Endow Endot and the wildlife biologist who provided the public comment was basically to incorporate uh wildlife fencing in this area which the applicant has done and we have conditioned that in the conditions. Second public comment we received was about moving the entire utility station and the the qu the question was why would we move the whole giant utility station off the hill but I think that that was a misconception the whole utility station is not moving it is just the lines so it's essentially the corridor where those lines run is being adjusted and I did reach out to that applicant and clarify that those were the only two comments that we received. up until yesterday. And then between yesterday and today we received a few more comments and uh one of the key issues there was the capacity of the school. Included in the staff report is a letter from Wo County School District. We did reach out to them on this project and ask if there was sufficient capacity. They stated that there is plenty of capacity. They've got a bunch of money for improvements. there's a dedication for a school for an elementary school up in Quulise Ranch and that they'll have no problem accommodating students for 82 houses and again that's included in the staff report. Um, another concern that we had was the proximity to the park and the fact that this has been used as access to the river. Um, again, I think John covered it in his presentation, but there are trail access easements that go across the adjacent property. So, that's part of that GC side. It's not going to go through the um SF uh 8 9 acre parcel, but it's going to go through that GC parcel. And the applicant has been working with Wo County to establish those trail easements and connect those into existing trails. So, I feel like not only do we have um an improved trail network that's not um trespassing innocently across private land, but we also have this excellent park that's been developed there. And I don't know if any of you guys have been out there, but it's really a fabulous park. There's adequate parking. There's restroom facilities, and it connects into this great trail. And also the kayakers use that trail when they're coming down the Truckucky River so that they can get past that dam that's there. So they pull out, they get off, they drag their boats around, and then they drop them in the other side. So if nobody has had an opportunity to go out there and check that out, I would highly suggest it. But again um and the the park is an amenity for not only these applicant, this applicant and their proposed subdivision, but everybody else in that area. And I think that everybody should be able to enjoy that equally. So I think that was pretty much everything that was in the public comments. There were questions about traffic, but um I end looked at it. Really with an 82 unit subdivision, our trips per day aren't going to increase to the point that the roundabout is going to get backed up. Uh that should be just fine. Our staff has analyzed that. INDOT staff has analyzed that and everybody said that um the roads and the network that is existing can can handle that. >> Rockstar Leah, thank you so much. Uh appreciate that. That's u really helpful and I think uh >> uh touched on a really good uh a lot of good elements of this project so far that um I think you guys worked really well on with the applicant and their representative. I just had a quick follow-up kind of a um segue into perhaps the major drainage way disturbance um for that or particularly for the cup for the major drainage way disturbance. Would you mind walking us through the existing drainage condition and the projected condition post development like specifically how does the propo the proposal affect 10 year and 100year storm events downstream flows and adjacent properties? >> Thank you. That's a good question. The existing drainage way is uh very disturbed. Um it's currently comes down from those parcels to the north. It's piped under Highway 40 and then it kind of comes out and runs across the property, that general commercial property and down into the river, but it's been extremely disturbed. That that site has um was historically developed and probably not with not much consideration for that drainage way. So basically what this is going to do is this is going to take that disturbed drainage way. It's going to improve it. It's going to improve the flows and it's going to direct those flows in the direction that it should go rather than uh what's happening now which is kind of it just going all over the place. If you have more questions about that, I'm sure the applicants team can talk more about what exactly they're going to do to improve that drainage way. But from staff's perspective, uh this is an upgrade. >> Excellent. Leah, thank you so much. Uh I'm going to take a step back for a bit, chair. Um thank you >> uh Commissioner Valto. >> Yes, thank you. Um my question uh Leah is about some of the conditions talk about specifically condition 8 as well as condition 11 say that prior to the approval of final map the applicant shall provide documentation of an HOA or an equivalent entity. um what is the requirement of code and do we know if this will be an HOA or an equivalent entity and what can those be? >> So um that's a good question. Uh code I'm not sure if code specifically requires the HOA. I think it's just something that is good practice and we've moved forward through our tenative map application so it comes on there. Yes Mike. >> I'll chime in here. So because this has common open space, um the city does not maintain that. So they will have to have an HOA to maintain common areas within the project boundaries, an HOA or equivalent >> such as an LMA or something like that that there are other options, but typically that's handled by an HOA. >> Okay. Um and is there any indication as to what this will be or is it the city's preference not to decide to let the applicant pick what is sufficient? Um it it's the city uh perview to let the applicant decide because we don't um have a specific development. We put that condition in there as an HOA or equivalent entity. Basically from the city's perspective, what we want is those private streets and those common areas to be maintained and we need it to be maintained by somebody >> other than the city. >> Do do you mind if I also have the applicant weigh in on this as well? I'll make it easy for you, Commissioner Velto. Uh, it will be an HOA. There's too much amenitized area and as Leah touched on, we've got some other maintenance requirements, street trees, private streets, and then all of those amenity areas that forces an HOA. >> Great. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. >> I I do not see the folks online anymore. I can't tell if any hands are raised there, Mr. Clerk. I guess if there Yeah, Commissioner. >> Sure. Chair, >> do you mind if I ask a couple question? >> Yeah, sorry. Let's go to Commissioner Williams and then to Commissioner >> Vera again. >> Uh Leah, I think I got one for you. Commissioner Williams for the record. Uh condition 10 in there that addresses parking. Does that allow for any variances up or down depending on how this all pans out? >> Uh good question, Leah Picotti. the record. I think the way that we wrote it, and I don't have it sitting in front of me, but I think the way that we wrote it, it did allow for some fluctuation. How did we fall on that, John? >> Um >> 3.5. >> So, we ran with 3.5. So, that won't come out to exactly 297. It's going to be potentially I think about seven to 10 spaces less than less than that if math is right. >> Okay. >> Yes. And and I'm sorry. and also that we had 57 common spaces. We did reduce that down to 40 to make sure that we at least had um half of the residents could have guests that required those common spaces at one time. >> Okay, great. And if you wouldn't mind, um the 22 open the 22% open space, is that a standard or is is this property above or below? >> That that is that is not a standard. um that technically when you create a subdivision, you don't have to have any open space. So, we do have you do have to have 20% landscaping, but it doesn't necessarily have to be open space. So, in this particular case, the applicant um combined some of those uh common areas that surround the houses along with the amenities and the community garden and the dog park and the pocket park and all of that, it comes out to 22%. So, it greatly exceeds code. >> Great. Okay. And then I just have one for the applicant or representative. >> Yes sir. >> That uh easement access to uh the east that is going to come along with this application. Is there plans to formalize that or what does that look like currently? Is it >> It is formalized. It is already. Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. We had our attorney negotiating with uh somebody at uh WO County. Then we had FA Marie who's the parks planner also involved. That is recorded now. It's official. >> Okay. And is it improved? Is it >> No, it will be. It's not improved now. It's just legally >> established. Is there plans to improve it? I mean, we just Is it going to continue to be a dirt path or >> It's going to be a dirt path. We're trying to make it a little more organic out there in Very and, you know, obviously traversible and comfortable, but yes. >> Yeah. Okay, great. That's all I got. >> Thank you, >> Commissioner Visera. >> Great. Thank you, Chair. Uh, I think I'll go with Leah first and then uh John, I'll I'll segue over to you for a few. Uh, Leah, I just had a Commissioner Bur for the record. Sorry, but Leah just had a couple more for you. Uh, probably a quick ones. Just uh for clarity, have have all the relevant reviewing agencies signed off on the drainage design or are there any outstanding concerns or conditions related to erosion and maintenance or the flood risk? >> Leah Picotti, for the record, no, everybody has signed off on it. >> Cool. And then for the uh cluster development cup, what is the effective net density compared to what would be built under a more conventional layout? >> It comes out to 9.1. The proposed is 9.1. It would allow for 9.2 dwelling units per acre. >> Excellent. Awesome. Um, thanks Leah. I'm going to uh say or transition over to John if you don't mind. >> Hello Commissioner Bisera. >> Uh, Mr. Compotic. Always uh good to have you back in. >> Thank you very much. I appreciate that. >> Yeah, absolutely. Uh would you mind walking us through why a cluster development layout was chosen here and like why you believe it's a better outcome for both future residents and the existing neighbors than a standard subdivision pattern. >> I I tried to touch on this. Can we go? There we go. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um you and I spent a fair amount of time talking about, you know, how we make it all work, right? Mhm. >> And we know that cost control is a function of density, right? So there's that which then bottom line, Mr. Fitzgerald asked yesterday, I said, "What are we talking about for price points?" He says 550 and it's probably if that's today's market $600,000 per house, >> you know, and and so we're constantly challenged with imagine doing four to the acre there or pick a number and delivering $1.5 million houses and then find out how many buyers you really have. It >> it just doesn't work. A and and so what we're what we're always mindful of on the private side is making a nice community. You see the amenities here. We had the space to get 9 to the acre. We're obviously to be open and transparent in this process. Looking for a tool to get to nine to the acre that supported with you can see it. It's all in front of you there. >> And uh the only to you know we used to have that small lock provision in the code and I'm going from memory now. We used to use it a lot which is allow you to go to 2400t lots. We're very small and get to 10 or 11 to the acre and now we have cluster. We got to meet cluster provisions which we have and uh and it makes a difference. It adds about eight or nine or I think 10 units extra without compromising anything to the community. And what we found, you know, we spent a lot of time with the Verdai Coalition with the adjacent community to the west, River Oak, uh, River, excuse me, uh, River Oak. Yeah. Is that they're the HOAs get confusing? >> And, uh, um, and and feel like, you know, that's kind of hitting the mark. >> Uh, uh, and and it took the cluster, uh, CUP to to get us to the 822 units. I hope I answered your question, sir. Yeah. Yeah. Fantastic. And just uh one more kind of pivoting over to the utility corridor uh as far as the relocation. >> Yeah. >> Or before I kind of go into that, I did want to just acknowledge though something that you mentioned during your presentation and I saw in the map that was just before us and that's the um the trail access easement which I thought was a great thing that by your uh your client and yourself to to make that happen. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's really cool. >> Appreciate that. And as far as the utility corridor relocation, would you mind speaking to the visual and physical impacts of that of the new corridor configuration like pole height, spacing, proximity to the homes, and any mitigation you've incorporated? >> So, so the mitigation, you know, is modern technology. So, look at that. You know, that's going through the heart of the site right now, right? The kind of big ugly yucky poles >> and and I don't have the new one because there's a menu of options. I I think you know that. But the bottom line is in the approved corridor right there is a distribution line here and that is the transmission line. So so vi you know visually speaking imagine both of them combined in one easement that's favorable to the eye it's favorable to the community. Uh what we've found in this process, I did represent the SUP four years ago to put the main line of the corridor uh as you see it in red there. Uh it was fairly wellreceived because we're going to the singular pole now. They're a lot softer looking than the big H-frame poles. And so I think that's a positive visual impact. And then we also lost a poll in doing this new dog lane which again is as I mentioned the subject of this cup. So, you know, you know, power lines uh are probably not ideal uh visual stuff to look at, but you know, we do our best to have the single pole. They're smaller, they're less bulky, and they're a little more favorable and part of the infrastructure uh frankly that we have to deal with. >> Okay, great. Uh thank you so much, John. Uh >> thank you for your questions. >> Absolutely. I think those are a lot of my core questions. If others come up, I'll raise my hand. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I'll just ask one simple question here. Um, it said there was a traffic study prepared. Was that a request from NDOT? Since you're below the city threshold. I'm just curious why that >> Good question coming from a chair that happens to be a traffic engineer. And what is the threshold? >> 80 trips. >> I I know it is. And I I don't know why I'm tripped up on uh cuz I've done this a few times too. And uh Marissa, do you know why we did it? Do you remember? >> Per Oh, per Okay. >> Okay. Discretionary. >> So that that's the reason then. Thank you. >> Good question. Yeah. Thank you. >> Uh nothing else from me. >> Happy to uh Commissioner for the record, happy to go into deliberation if others are ready. And >> if there no further questions, yeah, let's please proceed into deliberations. Great Commissioner. Sure, >> happy to do that. You know, I think from my perspective, this project really hinged on a few key factors like ensuring the drainage way is genuinely improved and protected. Uh confirming the regional corridor relocation is handled responsibly as as Mr. Compotic just described and demonstrating that the cluster layout delivers a better not just simply denser neighborhood pattern. um the clarity of those answers and the conditions tied to them uh at least tonight are what so far allowed me to make the tenative map and uh cut findings and and again I think what I mentioned earlier I did want to acknowledge the applicant Mr. Kapot for proactively working with the residents and for incorporating like meaningful planning principles into the design including the public access easement in perpetuity. So taken together, uh I think these efforts give me confidence that this is a project I can support and I'm happy to make a motion if uh if others when others are ready. >> Uh Commissioner Velto, I I am ready to make a motion. I think this is a very good project. Happy with what I've heard. So that's where I'm at. >> Uh based on your question previously, did you have any desire to rephrase that condition that you asked about? >> Uh I did not. I feel I feel comfortable with it as with it as is unless somebody else disagrees. >> Okay. Um I believe Commissioner Visera you indicated that you would like to make a motion. So if if so please proceed. >> Sure. Uh thank you chair and thank you commission. Uh on the matter of LDC 26-00007 riverband tenative map and conditional use permit based on compliance with the applicable findings. I move to approve the tenative map and conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report and I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Gianiantini I second. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed hearing? None. Motion carries unanimously. That concludes item C1. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Uh we will move on to item E. Truckucky Meadows Regional Planning Lee is on report. We have not had a meeting since our last city planning commission meeting and the uh I believe I was just told that the meeting for this month has been cancelled. So our next meeting will be in January. And then uh item F, future agenda items. Do we have anything from uh staff for this item? >> Do we have any requests from members of the commission? Hearing none, we will move to uh G1, public comment. Mr. Clerk. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've not received any public comment cards. Is there anyone in the room or on Zoom who'd like to give public comment? If you'd like to give public comment by Zoom, please use the raise hand button at the bottom of your Zoom window. >> Hearing none, do we have any requests to speak in chambers? If so, please raise your hand. >> Okay, seeing none, that is the last item. Can I get a motion to adjurnn? So moved. >> So seconded. >> We have a motion and a second. All those in favor. >> Meeting [clears throat] adjourned. >> Good night everyone.