Okay, this is the city of Reno Planning Commission meeting dated [clears throat] Wednesday, March 4th, 2026. The time is 6:00 p.m. We will start with the pledge of allegiance. Uh, Miss Mcadin, would you like to lead us off? Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. >> Madame clerk, roll call. [clears throat] >> David Jockman >> here. >> Jacob Williams >> here. >> Manny Bera >> here. Christina Delviar >> here. >> Tina Gianiantini >> here. >> Carrie Roier >> here. >> Alex Belto >> here. >> We have a quorum of the Reno City Planning Commission. >> Uh right back to you. Uh public comment, Madam 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 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 3 minutes. If you're 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's disruptive behavior and you'll be asked to leave chambers if the behavior continues. We did receive correspondence that was general in nature and not specific to any items on the agenda. These were forwarded to the planning commission and have been entered into the record. With that, I do not have any requests be forms for general public comment and we do not have any hands raised in the Zoom meeting. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. And we will have an opportunity for public comment during every item as well. Uh we will now move on to approval of the agenda. >> U Mr. Chair, if you mind, um I'd like to make a move u approval to of the agenda, but of possible to amend it to move C5 and C6 to the top and if possible expedite. >> Any other thoughts from the commission regarding that change? >> Commissioner, I would second that change. >> Commissioner Sarah is >> Could we for the public um just clarify what those items are and why there's a reason to expedite The items of of question there are the Ramirez rear setback deviation and the uh 118 West Street fence height deviation. >> Okay. And is what's the rationale for expediting exactly though? >> I believe uh I guess I'll let Commissioner Williams speak to that. >> Commissioner Williams, for the record, uh two very um basic proposals in front of us. Uh just setbacks and fence height. And >> what does basic mean, Commissioner? >> Uh >> it's public again. >> Yeah. Rear yard setback from a reduction of 3 ft and uh a height standard of um over less than four feet would be the scenario, but I'm sure they can. >> Chair, might we ask if anyone in the public has come to speak on these items or there's some people in the Zoom room perhaps they've come to speak on these items? We will still address public comment under each item too. [snorts] >> But don't you think it would be valuable to hear the topic if somebody has come to hear it? >> I think hearing this, let's just proceed with the agenda as presented. >> Yeah, I was just Yeah, Mr. Chair, I was going to say if there is an issue, they could just we could just say that there's an issue and move forward. Uh I'd still like to bring them up to the front of the menu to get those addressed first. Do we have any further discussion on a motion to move items C5 and C6 to the beginning of public hearings? >> Want to vote? >> If not, let's uh proceed with a motion. happy to make uh happy to make a motion though I think you could probably unilaterally move around the agenda but if you'd like a motion I would move to move agenda items C5 and C6 to the top of the agenda. Was that the motion you wanted or do you want a motion to approve the agenda? >> I think my motion and second was to move it to the front and and expedite if if the commissioners unwilling to expedite. I think this moving it to the top of the agenda still stands. >> If that's a motion, I will second that. Commissioner Williams, >> we have a motion and a second to approve the agenda, moving items C5 and C6 to be the first items in section C. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. We will now move to item B, staff. I'm sorry. We will now move to item A5, approval of the minutes. This is from our 18th February 18th 2026 meeting at 6 p.m. Can I get a motion to approve those minutes? >> So moved. >> Second. Commissioner Bera. >> Motion from Gonfini. Second from Bera. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. That now moves us to item B, staff announcements. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple quick announcements tonight. At our next meeting on the 18th, uh Jackie Bryant, our city manager, will be making a presentation on seaax. As you remember, that got postponed from a couple months ago. Um also on the February 25th city council meeting, uh council confirmed the appointments of commissioners Delvr and Gfantini to the regional planning commission. Um subsequently, um commissioner Delvr has declined to um declined her appointment. So, on our next meeting, we will have an agenda item to point to appoint another new regional planning commissioner. Um, and lastly, at council's next meeting on the 11th, they will consider the whispering road zoning map amendment, which this board voted to recommend approval on at your first meeting in March or excuse me, your last meeting in February. >> Thank you, Mr. We will now move to our public hearing. So, we will take item C5 first. This is a staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-000037 Ramirez rear setback deviation. We will begin with a presentation from staff. Mr. Foster. Thank you, Chair Jockman. Jeff Foster, associate planner. For the record, uh the case I'm bringing you tonight is LDC 26-37, which is the Ramirez rear setback deviation. The project site is about.14 acres in size. Uh located at 8630 Sopwith Boulevard about 435 ft north and south of Red Baron Boulevard. And this is near Silver Lake Elementary in the North Valleys. It is currently developed with a single family home and the request before you is a major deviation to reduce the required rear yard setback from 20 ft to 17 ft. Uh zooming in, you can see that the site is surrounded entirely by single family homes. And the key issue that staff analyzed is compatibility with surrounding land uses. Uh the master plan, single family neighborhood zoning, single family, eight units per acre. Uh some background, uh the house two is a two-story single family home that was built in 1992. The project proposes uh a new 425 ft bedroom addition in the area here. Um and a 268 square ft back porch in the area here. Uh the ground floor addition is located primarily along the side of the existing home and extends beyond the existing rear wall into the rear yard resulting in a minor uh encroachment into the rear yard setback of approximately 2'6 in. and that's shown in the area in turquoise on the screen there. The configuration minimizes impacts to the site, preserves usable rear yard open space, and avoids alterations to the street facing elevation. The major deviation request was submitted for a three-foot reduction to allow a conservative maximum maximum encroachment into the rear yard setback, which is a deviation of 15%. Regarding the the issue that staff analyzed compatibility with surrounding land uses, uh the surrounding parcels are developed with similar single family homes. The side and or sorry, in general, side and rear yard areas function as private open space and are generally appropriate locations for residential additions. The proposal does not compromise the health, safety, or welfare of adjacent property owners. and staff is recommending condition number five to limit the allowable days and hours of construction to help reduce impacts on the adjacent residential uses. Here are the recommended findings for a major deviation and staff can make all recommended findings. And here's the recommended motion. I'm available for questions. The applicant's representative should be here um not sure and but will not be making a presentation. >> Thank you, Mr. Foster. We will now move to disclosures and public comment. Uh, starting with Commissioner Valto. >> Commissioner Valto, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Delr, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Giantini, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Jockman, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Williams, same. >> Commissioner Bera, read and review material. >> Commissioner Romeire, same. >> Madame clerk, do we have any request to speak under this item? I did not receive any comment forms in person and we do not have anyone online with their hand raised. >> Thank you, Madam Clerk. Do we have any requests to speak in chambers on this item? Seeing none, we do have one. Please step forward. State your name for the record. You will have three minutes. Hello. Uh, my name is Juliano Segoiano. I'm representing my parents, Jose Maria Mongia for 8570 Sapwith. So we'll um excuse our ignorance about this but we were concerned of the letter and I just heard heard um the sir speaking about um the changes they want to do. So my parents were concerned will that reduce from their property of their land or like the 3 ft or not at all. They just were kind of didn't understand in that area. If the family do any construction, will that reduce part of their um land or so? >> We do not answer any questions during public comment, but we as commissioners have the ability to ask questions of the applicant. You're welcome to say what you would like pertaining to the item. >> Oh, okay. Okay. that we were just wanted to um know in regards that. Well, pretty much that was it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Do we have any other requests to speak in chambers [clears throat] under this item? >> Seeing none, we will now close public comment and proceed to questions from the commission. Commissioner Visera. >> Thank you. I would just like to, I guess, ask a question on behalf of the member of the public that just spoke. Could we uh Jeff, would you mind addressing that question just so she and her parents have an answer? >> Absolutely. Jeff Foster, associate planner. Um, so the deviation is for a three-foot reduction to the rear yard setback for the parcel that owned by the applicant. Um, it does not affect in any way any adjacent parcel. Um, so no, it would not affect the the parcel in question. >> Great. Thank you, Jeff. >> Do we have any other questions from the commission? >> Seeing none, we will now go to deliberation where we will entertain a motion. >> Commissioner Williams, I'm happy to entertain a motion. Uh, Commissioner Williams, for the record, in the case of LDC 26-000037 Romero setback, uh, based upon compliance with the applicable findings, I move to approve the major deviation subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, and I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Ber, I second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. [snorts] >> Any opposed? Hearing none, motion carries unanimously. That concludes item C5. [clears throat] We will now move to item C6. This is a staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-000055 118 West Street fence height deviation. For this item, we will hear a presentation from staff. Miss Picotti. >> Yes. Good evening, chair, members of the commission. 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 a fence height deviation over on West Street. So the project site is on the corner of First and um and West sorry and it is an older building so some people might recognize it but it's a 64 acre site and they are asking to exceed the 4ft fence height that is required for front yard setbacks by 50% to allow for a six-foot fence. This is uh located in the mixeduse downtown riverwalk district. Key issues that we looked at were general code compliance and compatibility with surrounding development and uses. We did expedite this project because it was kind of a matter of safety um to get this fence installed pretty much as soon as possible. There is ongoing construction at the building which I'll get into here in just a second. So I want to give you a little bit of background because it's kind of interesting. Uh this building was originally built in 1907 and it was the colonial apartments. It was it is historically significant but it is not on the city's historic um registry. Additionally, the fence was installed in 2008. So there's no historical significance to this fence. They are currently undergoing a renovation and have been since about 2024. There is an existing 28 in fence that sits on a small retaining wall. Um, again, not historic. Sometime around 2008, they are asking for the fence um upgrade proposed due to trespassing, vandalism, and theft that is going on during these renovations. So, here you can see some of the pictures of this place. I got these from um renoistorical.org. It's a fabulous website. I'll just give it a plug. Uh this is about 1930. That area right in front where those trees are is the area in question. You can see that there's no fence at that time. Then fast forward to today. This is about what it looks like today. So here during the renovations, you can see that retaining wall and you can see that 28 in metal fence that's on top of it. The applicant is going to install a fence that's extremely similar to that same one. You can kind of see it in that photo up on the top. It'll look like that, but it'll be painted black. Because it has that small retaining wall, we measure fence heights from the top of the retaining wall. So, even though it's going to be a sixft fence, it's going to be approximately 8 ft above the sidewalk, which is going to improve the security for both the contractors and the ongoing renovations and also um future tenants. regarding compatibility. Uh across First Street right there is the Century Theater and to the west is Reno um First United Methodist Church. We haven't heard any input from any of the neighbors. Nobody has showed any concern with this. It's consistent with the area character and again it's going to improve access, control, safety, and functionality during these renovations. So, the major deviation recommended findings are on the board. There's not going to be an impact. There's no shared property lines with this fence other than to the street. It's going to contribute to a safer, well-maintained downtown environment. Um, doesn't constitute a special privilege because other properties can also apply for major deviations. And we see no detriment to public health, safety, or welfare. The recommended motion is on the board. I believe the applicant is here, but does not have a presentation. And I am available for questions. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Hearing there will be no applicant presentation. [clears throat] We will move to disclosures from the commission. Commissioner Valto. >> Commissioner Valto, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Delr, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Confientini, read and review materials. Familiar with site. >> Commissioner Jockman used to live across the street from the site. >> Commissioner Williams familiar with the site read and viewed material. Commissioner Harrison, >> sorry. Uh, Commissioner Sarah read and reviewed materials and famil. >> We will now move to public comment. Madame clerk, do we have a request to speak on this item? >> I have not received any request to speak forms in person. We do not have anyone online with their hand raised either. >> Do we have any request to speak in chambers on this item? Seeing no hands raised, we will now close public comment and move to questions from the commission and deliberation. Uh, Commissioner Bisera. >> Uh, thank you. Uh, just a quick one. Um, Leah, you know, since front yard fences are limited to 4 feet as you touched on, could you just clarify whether similar height deviations have been approved in the downtown area when properties are trying to address security or trespassing issues? >> Thank you, Commissioner Bisera. That's a great question, Leah Picotti. For the record, I I have not seen any fence deviations in the downtown area. I don't think in general that we have a lot of fenced open space. I know that we have done it for you know construction allows for that six-foot fence but unless you know of anything Mike >> Commissioner Bera Mike really for the record there are some instances within the code itself that allows the administrator to um increase fence heights if it's consistent with the surrounding area. A couple that I can think of um that are in the MU zone is the depot on Fourth Street and the it's the former pizza place I'm I think it's Dopo Pizza and Pasta at the corner of Center and Pine. >> Yeah, the old Sizzle Pie. Okay, great. Thanks Mike. >> Commissioner Roar Meer. Yeah, I just want to confirm um because fences are those sort of pedestrian killing features and I understand the need for construction safety that is a little different than operational safety. Um I wondered I just want to confirm that this is going to be an open f open metal fencing in its long life. Um because they used to have the pretty grass and I think a fountain at one time in that that space and it was such a nice feature for that corner. Do you have any sense of what or does the applicant have any sense of what the landscaping and how that's going to not just look like a 8-ft barrier to entry? >> Um yes I do. Commissioner Roier Leakotti again um the applicant did submit a landscape plan to go along with this application. It may not have been included as an exhibit, but it is in the application and I'd be happy to send it over to you. It's quite beautiful. >> That's all I wanted to know that it's a nice feature for our downtown, such a scenic um location. Thank you. >> Do we have any other questions from the commission? >> Seeing none, we will now move to disclosures and entertain a motion should one be made. >> [clears throat] >> I think we did disclosures, correct? >> I said disclosures. Thank you. Um, [clears throat] what what's the word? Uh, deliberation. So, uh, Commissioner Velto, please ready to make a motion. The matter of case number LDC26-000055. Based upon compliance, the applicable findings, I move to approve the major deviation subject to the conditions listed in the staff report, and I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Gianini, I second. We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. That concludes item C6. We will now move back to the beginning of our public hearings. Item C1. This is a staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-000041, Crescendo Town Homes. For this item, we will begin with a presentation from staff. Miss Mcaden. >> Good evening, commissioners. Grace McAdin, senior management analyst for the record. Um, and I'm here to present on Cresendo Town Homes. So, the subject site's located in South Reno, west of Demani Ranch Parkway, just south of the future downtown Demani site. Um, the site is about 20.65 acres and the applicant is requesting a tenative map for a 147 unit single family attached subdivision. the sites within the mixed development area of the Demani Ranch PUD. So, this area has no maximum density or lot size minimums um or lot size maximums either. Um and so it's really kind of seen as a flexible more liberal type of area within this PUD. So, for a master plan, we have suburban mixed use. This has multiple policies that support things like housing, mixed use, um especially kind of this missing middle type of development that we hear so much about. And so again, we're looking at a project for 147 attached single family town homes um with 3.21 acres of common area, about four parking spaces per unit, and it's a mix of two or three bedrooms. So, this is kind of a one of those great projects. It offers a modest density with ample parking. Um, and I think that's a great thing to present to this body because it it kind of offers all those things we're usually asking about. When we look at compatibility, this fits in quite nicely with the surrounding area. We have the future downtown to demani to the north. Um, the steamboat center kind of to the northeast and then the ex an existing apartment complex to the east. Um, and we have kind of some easy pedestrian access to a number of these neighborhood centers to help facilitate that pedestrian environment that's already existing down there. So, kind of to touch more on pedestrian connections, if you've spent any time in this area, this neighborhood's really, really good at having pedestrian connections and kind of treating them like trails. Um, and so we wanted to make sure it was important to staff that we continued some of those pedestrian connections, espec es especially with the future downtown Demani to make sure that these people that live in these um town homes can access some of those um amenities that will soon be there. The trail that kind of leads to the right of your screen that leads all the way to that new Tahoe Natural Cafe. It's also a Chevron station. So that kind of walks along a ditch um all the way to that um neighborhood center as well. All right. So that's my presentation. Staff was able to make all of the recommended findings. There is a typo that the applicant pointed out to me. It's uh the second finding mentions Talis Valley. Um I did copy this from that uh we used it as a template. So I forgot to to update that. So I apologize. This is the Demani Ranch PUD. Um, but still staff was able to make all applicable findings and that's the recommended motion and I'm available for questions. The applicant is also here with a presentation um if you'd like to hear it. >> Yes. Uh, let's please proceed. [clears throat] Good evening, Gabe Whitler, Odyssey Engineering. Thank you for having me. And thank you, Grace. Kind of stole my thunder there. It was pretty pretty thorough. Again, this is a tenant map application for 147 uh unit single family attached uh subdivision, hence the the town home designation. Uh you'll see here the the site plan highlighted in color. Uh the tan is is lot area. The bright green is is common area internal to the development. And then the dark green on the east side is a landscape buffer that's part of the Demani Ranch PUD handbook requirement. That's already landscaped along uh Deonti Ranch Parkway. To the south, the light blue is a flood control channel that's also existing was built as part of the master infrastructure for the area. Again, the site's located just southwest of the intersection of Deonti Ranch Parkway and Steamboat Parkway. Uh it's at the current uh gated terminus of Deonti Ranch Parkway uh just north of the Liberty Dogs facility. On the right, you'll see the uh site location uh within the the Monty Ranch handbook zoning designations. All of the red you see is the mixed development that Grace had mentioned. There's a a good mix already of existing uses within this this designation from retail to commercial multifamily office. So uh the town home brings another another component to the mixed development in this area. This is just the master plan uh designation. So you can see the site again is located in a suburban mixeduse area which is significant along the I580 corridor. The site is located adjacent to this is a site plan in in a little more detail. So backbone roadway network on the north end will be constructed. Uh this will be part of the uh uh network system that that's coming with the future downtown Demani development. uh this is a a separate parcel currently and and is is standalone from that but it will share backbone and utility infrastructure again as part of the PUD all the the main roadway and and utility infrastructure network is in place uh previously planned for we'll have an emergency connection a secondary this the site will have a primary entrance uh kind of in the middle there on the north side off the new backbone extension and then we'll have two emergency access uh connections one in the northwest corner and one on the southeast corner. You see the uh Deonti Ranch Parkway offramp is on the west side and there's there's already a pretty significant vertical and horizontal buffer from from the freeway to the site. The flood control channel is in place. There'll be a trail and and maintenance access component uh between the the development and the uh the flood control channel. The site will include a private clubhouse area for for the residents as well as some other pocket common areas to uh enhance the internal uh use. You'll see that everything is labeled as private street currently. Uh that'll be a gated private street. Uh we do reserve the right to switch to public streets as uh we've had some discussion with staff. Uh there's been some changes in ownership of utilities within the roadways and that that may affect the final map designation, but currently it's planned to be private roadways. This gives you a typical lot uh example with setbacks, 10 foot rear, 5 foot men is a typical uh for this this designation. However, they've been increased to seven to assist with construction and and ultimate residential uh use, give them a little more usable sideyard. There's a 10-ft minimum set back to the house in the front and a 20ft driveway minimum. All all of the units will have a a twocar garage, a minimum two spaces on site, and then uh all the streets are are designed to accommodate parking on both sides. So, there's a a a plethora of parking within the within the community itself. Um, in addition to the the standard 10-ft rear yard, uh there'll be a two-foot encroachment with a a covered patio to allow for for some additional shaded area on the patio in the rear yard. Again, this mixed development lot standard is is um pretty lenient. there really aren't any restrictions within uh within the main zoning. So on the right you'll see kind of an area breakdown just giving you lot area, common areas, private streets, that sort of thing to our gross density is just over seven units per acre in a net of of just over 12. And I I believe you can go up to 105 units per acre in this area if so desired. This is just the site plan overlaid with a fairly recent aerial just to give you a little more context on the south there. You can see the Liberty Dogs campus under under construction. Multifamily to the east. It's still vacant future downtown to the north and and a freeway on the west. And just a a larger overview just to kind of put it in context. As Grace mentioned, there's already a a pedestrian crossing being constructed with activated flashers to get across Demon Ranch Parkway. And that ties you into the trail network, which takes you throughout the Dew Ranch development and also gives you kind of a an idea of how the connectivity to the commercial center will function. You also see a concept of the roadway network to the north that that'll be taking place with downtown Demani. So this site eventually will have access to three signalized intersections for access to Demi Ranch Parkway. U the site isn't enough units uh in itself to to trigger a formal traffic study. However, it's again it's part of the master plan development. And so um this type of infrastructure was anticipating this sort of development. So that's that's kind of the overview. If you have any questions, please feel free. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. We will now move to disclosures from the commission and then public comment. Commissioner Valto. >> Uh Commissioner Belto, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Delvr received and read material and I'm familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Gianini reviewed materials familiar with the site. Commissioner Jockman, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Williams read the material and also familiar with the site. >> Commissioner, same. >> Commissioner Vera read and reviewed material and I am familiar with the site. >> We will now move to public comment. I apologize, my voice is horsearo tonight, so if you can't hear me, bear with me. But u madam clerk, public public comment. >> I did not receive any request to speak forms in person. We do not have anyone online with their hand raised. >> Do we have any requests to speak in chambers at this time? >> Seeing none, we will now move to questions from the commission. Commissioner Delvr, >> thank you. Um, I think Grace, this is probably for you. Uh, first off, I'm super excited to see this area finally being developed. I think that's great. um we received public comment and somebody asked they said that they're totally behind this but they're just kind of curious about um affordable housing or things like that and I know that that's not necessarily part of what we're talking about here today but just kind of curious as to was there any thought in put input into that and then just in general maybe more for Mike or somebody else like what what is Reno's thought process around trying to bring more affordable housing? >> Yeah. Um obviously very important to think about um there's such a need for affordable housing. So by design these the diversity of housing options that like the more diversity of housing options you can provide the more affordable it will be. Um and so in this area is actually really good. You have the we all think of Demani Ranch as being detached single family kind of typical subdivision. Um but you have apartments across the street. Further down the way on Steamboat, you've got um kind of some some town homes or some uh yeah, some town homes and then you have some other attached single family. You have some duplex product in this area. And so this will just add to that diversity of housing type uh affordable housing, which is subsidized affordable housing. We only have maybe three developers that do it regularly in this area because it's so difficult. Uh going through the HUD process or getting these funds from these different entities and organizations takes a really long time. And so from our perspective, getting units to market fast is probably number one. Um obviously subsidized affordable housing we prioritize internally. Um we make sure that they're expedited. We do with the best we can. But we would never turn away something like this and say it has to also be affordable because we just want to get it to market. >> Great. Thank you. That makes that makes sense. Understood. And then the only other question I had is regarding the Liberty Dogs next door. Are there um any like specific construction? I just want to make sure that the dogs and trainers and everybody are being thought of as the construction process is happening. >> Sure. Um, typically with uh I guess any development, we have certain hour restrictions for construction construction, but we also have that pretty large drainage channel that separates these two projects. Um, and so we think that's going to be a pretty good mitigation measure in of itself. >> Uh, Commissioner Vis uh Roar. >> Great. Yeah, thank you for the presentation. Um I just wanted to get clarification on what you know what is the city's take on missing middle because this you know is one of those kind of uh definitions that can vary and so in terms of this project specifically how is this the missing metal >> definitely I think it's it can be used as a buzzword and I apologize for throwing it out there um I when we've been processing text amendments or affordable housing we typically use missing middle to refer to duplex or town home type products. So anything in between multifamily and detached single family um and so duplex forplex um and and and I guess maybe those town homes could be kind of a stretch if that's what you're kind of getting at there. But to me anything between your typical apartment multif family um and your detached single family is is that missing middle. >> Okay. No, I appreciate that. Yeah, single family zero lot line is slightly different in my opinion, but I appreciate the density definition by the city. Um, did we see a street view or a front articulation elevation? >> We did. I believe there were some included in the application materials. They're they're not part of this exhibit uh or they weren't part of an exhibit for this particular staff report just because those can change as uh with this tenative map. they have certain requirements they have to meet with articulation. Uh, and so we didn't we didn't feel the need to tie them into any articulation standards at this time. I bring it up because these are really at a unusual angle. Um, if you look at the way they're positioned and when you have high multi-story single family attached, it can start looking a little canyon-like. And so I wondered if the plan, and this is maybe for the applicant architect, is to step them back a foot or two off of the front, or is it just going to be a long row? Because again, these are positioned at a very interesting angle versus a lot of sort of lowdensity suburban development. So it really has to be positioned right if you're not going to go with the usual grid structure. >> And I could defer to the applicant. >> And Commissioner Roire, if I can interject as well. This is Mikey. If you look at the plan that the applicant presented, you'll see that some of the the the homes have like a a side load garage while some have a a a head, you know, front and standard garage, which that will help break up the the streetscape as well. Um, also in terms of architectural standards, the Dmani Ranch PUD has fairly strict architectural standards that far exceed what minimum code would be. So that addressing many of those concerns that you just raised. >> Okay. Do we have any visuals just to reflect that? >> I don't think we have any available but I can we're no we don't have any. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh Commissioner >> Commissioner Jockman. I'll ask one question on the pedestrian site plan and I think you touched on it a little bit. [clears throat] Can you describe the um pedestrian portion that's crossing the road there midb block that'll access the trail >> and that that can be but for the applicant >> Gabe Whitler for the record. Uh yeah, so with the uh the last phase of the extension of Demani Ranch Parkway uh that was actually processed and and recently constructed with the Liberty Dogs project uh at midblock uh pedestrian crossing was included. So it's it's got pedestrian activated flashers and then the median is set up so that it's uh provides a refuge midcrossing. it it directs the pedestrian to turn to 90, face oncoming traffic before they turn again and and cross. So, and that's that's if it hasn't been constructed, it will be before that roadway is accepted, but it should be um should be with the completion of my ranch parkway here any any time now. >> Great. Thank you. >> Any other questions from the commission? Seeing none, we will now move to deliberations. Uh, Commissioner Williams, for the record, uh, I like this project. I think it's a perfect addition to that area. Uh, encouraged by the parking and the pedestrian maps. Um, so I'm happy to make a motion if you guys are good. >> Commissioner Romeer. >> Yeah, I think the density is a welcome addition, especially that location. Um, I think that's a real win for this project. I'm a little disappointed that when we have these sorts of I I don't I'm afraid to call them atypical because I think they should be a more norm um designs that we don't get to see exactly what the features look like. Um I think the public and and and [clears throat] all of us on the planning commission would benefit because they can get a canyon effect and because they can be a little different than what we're used to seeing on the landscape. So, um, you know, that's just a a comment for the future. Thank you. >> Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I'll say I think it's great that we have the crosswalk as a part of this approval. Uh, I don't think you would actually be required to do that per code, but I can see that there would be jaywalking, especially in that area without it. So, I think that's great. Uh, Commissioner Roar Meer, you still have your hand raised. Would you like to say something? >> No, apologies. Any other deliberations from the commission? >> Hearing none, we will entertain a motion should one be made. >> Commissioner Williams, I'm happy to make the motion. Uh, in case of LDC 26-000041, uh, based upon the compliance of the applicable findings, I move to approve the tenative map and I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Delvier, I second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? hearing none. Motion carries unanimously. Project that concludes item C1. [clears throat] We will now move to item C2. This is a staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-000027, South Valley's Park expansion phase 2. For this item, we will begin with disclosures from the commission and then proceed with a staff presentation. Commissionerto for disclosures. Uh, Commissioner Velto, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Delvr, familiar with the site and read and received and read all the material. >> Uh, Commissioner Gapantini, read and reviewed the materials. Familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Jockman on this matter. I sought guidance from the city attorney's office and I have been advised that I have a personal commitment in a private capacity to the interest of my employer. I have also been advised that the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in this situation would be materially affected by my commitment in a private capacity. As such, I will not be participating or voting on this item today. Um, Mr. Vice Chair, would you please take over in my absence? And, uh, Madame Clerk, please lodge this disclosure for the record. Thank you. >> All right. Uh, Commissioner Williams, uh, disclosures read and view material for me with the site. Pretty sure I was here for the first approval. >> Uh, Commissioner Bera, >> uh, read and reviewed materials and I'm familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Marmmyer, read and review materials. >> Okay, leads us right into staff report. >> All right. Good evening, commissioners. Grace McAdin again, senior management analyst for the record. And now I'm presenting on South Valley's park expansion phase two. Um, quick presentation. I think we're all familiar with the site. Um we or this body heard a zone change to bring it to parks, greenways, and open space not too long ago. And so now this is the actual development of the expansion. Um the park as a whole is about 69 acres. Um it has that parks, greenways, and open space zoning. Now the applicant is requesting a major site plan review for disturbance of a major drainage way and non-residential development adjacent to residential zoning. Some key issues staff looked at were site design, compatibility, um, and drainage and traffic. So, let's start with site design and compatibility. I think we all know that or I I hope we all know park seems to be compatible with this area. It's been here forever. Um, I think it functions really well. It's surrounded by residential and neighborhood supporting uses. And then it also has that PGOS zoning which is intended for parks and open space. The site design was important to look at. This park is massive. Um the area can become quite congested. If any of you have been there for baseball games or um been to the ice rink that's down there um during kind of a busy time, you might know that parking and traffic can become a little difficult. Um, so it's hard to see here, but one of the requirements of the applicant is to construct a new roadway at the northern end of the site that connects to Virginia. And so this will help alleviate some of those issues that maybe some of you have experienced um when accessing this park. The next thing to discuss is drainage. So as I mentioned, they are disturbing a major drainage way to construct this roadway that's required of them. Um, however, most of the drainage way is not in a great state right now. there's a lot of debris and erosion happening. And so as part of this process, they will actually clear out the drainage way and help it function a little bit better. Um the clearing and channelization might actually help kind of stabilize some of those flows. So that's my presentation. Uh staff was able to make all recommended findings. We're also super excited about the um this phase of the expansion of the park and we look forward to kind of future expansions. That's recommended motion and I'm available for questions. I believe the applicants here um if you'd like a presentation from them or um they actually might just be available for questions. >> Great. Thank you, Grace. Uh did the applicant want to present? >> Or just a couple comments. >> I just have a a couple of um plan sheets I just wanted to show you. >> Would you mind just stating your name for the record? >> I will. I'm Greg Lyman. I'm with Dal Engineering. I represent Wo County. Um, so just really briefly, I mean, we're putting in two uh girls softball fields as part of the little league organization. We're working really closely with the local little league. Um, we did a phase one where we expanded parking through the facility. This is phase two where we where we'll put in the first couple fields and then this figure shows the the long driveway if you will to get out to Virginia to help alleviate some of the traffic there. Can we go to the next picture? [snorts] Um this one shows I guess what we intend to build with buildout. In the lighter gray you can see additional baseball fields, additional soccer fields, multi-use. There's a dog park to the upper left and then there'll be a playground um kind of right in the middle. Um and then this just is a quick overview of our landscape plan showing trees throughout the park and and uh the darker hatch is the current sod we're adding. The lighter hatch is future sod for the future fields. So that you know that's my whole presentation. Just wanted to show you what we're doing and then I am available to answer questions. >> Great. Thank you. Uh Madame Clerk with open up public comment. >> We have anybody that like to speak? >> Sure thing. I have not received any public comment cards in person. Um we don't have anyone online, but if there's anyone in chambers who wants to make public comment on this item. [clears throat] >> Great. If you just come up to the mic, uh state your name for the record. You got three minutes. >> Absolutely. Uh my name is Wes Muse and I'm here representing the Wash Little League. Um the the said partner as the Dell presentation has uh has aptly pointed out. Um obviously the Wash Little League is extreme support of this overall project and this particular consideration um as far as the road that connects to Virginia Street and the drainage in the area. Not only as a member of the board of directors, as a dad who has two girls who will benefit from these uh fields and the eventual expansion of the park. Um I'm also I live in the Geno Meadows um housing division just up. Um and this road will help to alleviate uh the traffic concerns that are there. Um and then this drainage ditch as far as being cluttered and and not having strong drainage and water collection uh during weather events like we had earlier this week um is a welcome addition to this plan. So, as a little league, um as a dad, as a constituent of the area, as a member of Wo County, strongly, uh recommend that you support this project, the fine work that D's done um in the development and phase two of this project. Thank you. >> Wonderful. Thank you, sir. Anybody else in chambers? Okay, I think we'll close public comment. That opens us up to uh questions from the commission. Who'd like to start? Do we need to do disclosures and then um >> we did we did at the beginning, right? That's why we did the switcheroo. >> Yes. >> Okay. But uh just just for what it is worth though, we did lose video signal uh remotely and it might be impacting anyone else tuning in uh from the public. >> Uh >> yes, we're trying to reestablish the video connection. Um, if the commission would like to take a break while we work through it, I think, um, Jasmine, you can correct me, but I think we just need to maintain audio. But if the commission would like to take a break while we try to fix it. >> That's correct. You can continue or you can take a break. >> Uh, two minute. >> Take a break. >> Yeah. Okay. Oh, we'll take a two-minut break. All right. Okay, with everybody back and present, we're going to resume the Wednesday, March 4th meeting at 6:55. Uh, vice chair, I'm just going to let commissioners Bera and Roier know the the video sharing to the Zoom feed is experiencing an error. Um, video sharing to the live YouTube meeting is still active and working. Um, I realize it's inconvenient, but if you want to open the live Zoo, the live YouTube stream, you'll be able to see everything there. Additionally, the presentations have been added to the meeting online at reno.gov/meings. Um, so it looks like with the commission in person, we're going to continue. Um, audio should still be connected, but please let us know if you start to experience issues with audio. >> Aces, thank you. >> Yeah, thank you so much. >> All right, Commissioner Wr, I think you had your hands up. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, where were we? [laughter] Oh, yeah. I have I have a question. Um, I'm not sure who it's for, but the question really is I see I see where the road is going in. Is there a sidewalk or a path that's part of this plan as well for the north to Virginia Street? >> This is Greg Lyman again. Um there is not and part of the problem is there's no pedestrian accommodations on Virginia Street. So, we didn't want to take people down there and have nowhere to go. Um in future phases, we expect there to be many. If they're if if I endot expands pedestrian then we would add that in a future phase. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> All right, Commissioner Bera. >> Great. Thank you. Uh just a couple questions for staff. Maybe just one if depending on how the you know this first one goes. Um, since since portions of the project seem to be located near existing residential uses in a mobile home park, would you mind clarifying how the site design and screening requirements will help ensure the park facilities and access road remain compatible with those nearby homes? >> Sure. Um, so the actual expansion of the park facilities are quite a bit south of the mobile home park and the adjacent residential. Um the roadway we did have kind of we looked at that when um reviewing of some of these cars that might be exiting and coming onto the site. And so there are screening requirements. There's an existing fence there. Um and so we made sure to kind of make that that fence was closed view so it's not you know like a chain link or open view fence. Um and then there's some landscaping that will go in to do some additional screening for those residents um to the north. >> Okay. Fantastic. Can I just one follow up? Uh, a little bit bit of a different topic, but um, so since it does involve a little bit of a disturbance or partial channelization of like a major drainage way, would you mind just kind of walking us through how this project improves the existing drainage conditions in the site and ensures there's no downstream impacts? >> Sure. Um we our utility services department looked at that extensively to make sure that the improvements to this site won't negatively impact downstream um neighbors I guess. Uh there is some debris um and just erosion on the drainageways on site currently. And so with the channelization and kind of the improvements that they'll make to the drainage way, we anticipate that that will help as well. Um I'm not sure if that helps answer your questions. We have our uh but let me know if you have additional ones. >> That provides some insight, Grace. Thank you. And but if there is someone that would like to elaborate on that, by all means. >> Uh Commissioner Bera, this is Mike again. You know, the overall disturbance to the drainageway is very minimal. I mean, you these are come before the commission on a fairly regular basis. Um essentially, it's just the roadway crossing itself. the rest of the drainageway will remain in its natural state and as Grace mentioned will be improved with removal of the the debris and whatnot that has accumulated there throughout the years. Um they did do a a full hydraology analysis that our engineering and utility services divisions have reviewed and they're comfortable with with the uh post-development conditions. >> Great. Thanks Mike and thanks Grace. Okay. Any other questions from the commission? >> All right, we can move on to commission deliberation and a possible motion if somebody's got one. >> I'm happy to make a motion if somebody can put it up. Thank you. Unless anybody else has any more discussion. Uh okay. In the matter of case LDC 2600027 based upon compliance with the applicable findings, I move to approve the major site plan review subject to the conditions listed in the staff report and my I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner, I second. >> All right, we got a motion uh from Commissioner Delvar and a second by Gon Vientini. Um all those in favor? I >> I >> And any opposed? All right. Motion passes unanimously and just give us a second for Chair Dman. >> Our next item tonight is item C3. This is a staff report for possible action. LDC26-000030 steamboat RV and storage. for this item. We will begin with a presentation from staff. >> All right, it's like Groundhog's Day. I'm back. Um, good evening, Grace McAdin again for the record to present on Steamboat RV and Storage. Um, this site is also located in South Reno. It's between Toll Road and Virginia Street just south of Geer Grade. It's about just under 10 acres or [snorts] about 9.4 acres in size. Its own mixeduse suburban. Uh the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit for mini warehouse disturbance of a major drainage way and non-residential development adjacent to residentially zoned property. Key issues we looked at with this project were compatibility with surrounding uses, drainage, and project design. So we'll start with compatibility. The site is surrounded by residential and neighborhood supporting uses. Um I brought a mini warehouse to this body not too long ago. Uh we kind of talked about how staff looks at these as neighborhood supporting uses. They're typically very low impact. They allow people to store kind of some overflow items um that they can't fit in their garages. And the uses supported by the MS or mixeduse suburban zone. It has a gated entry with our limitations and that kind of also helps with some of these um compatibility findings of making sure that it's it's extremely low impact for the nearby residential. Next thing to talk about is site design. Um so the applicant is proposing access to the site through the apartments that are to the north. Um this is allowed through an existing access easement. Uh the applicant is also proposing all storage to be incl exclusively indoors. So there's not going to be any trailers or boats kind of stored outside like we've seen with some of those other mini warehouse facilities. And that helps um really lower these impacts for this this particular project. There is a transmission line that goes through the center of the site. You can kind of see a gap through the the middle of the site. They they can't put any buildings um under that transmission line and they have to get approval through NV Energy before construction. Um there's a 47 foot buffer between the residential to the east and then this particular project. Um and so that kind of uh it's a little bit of a burm as well and so that helps mitigate any potential impacts. So this site design helps the project be more compatible with surrounding uses as well as the land characteristics. So drainage is important to look at for this site not only because the applicant is disturbing a major drainage way. Um that disturbance is limited to the crossing at the entrance of the site. Uh there's no other disturbance to that drainage way and so really really minimal disturbance to that drainage way. Um but it also has uh the crane plow ditch to the kind of on the left of your screen on the um west of the site and then further west is steamboat ditch. Um so any or additional drainage from the site discharges to the cranecloud ditch and steamboat. Um there will be maintenance agreements in place required u prior to building permits being approved to ensure all parties associated are aware of improvements. But we did look at all the uh the drainage for this site. Um and our engineering and utility services department was satisfied. All right. Staff was able to make all required findings. Recommended motion is on your screen. Um the applicant is here for questions, but they do not have a presentation and I am also available for questions. >> Thank you. We will now move on to disclosures. Commissionerto. Uh, Commissioner Velto, I think there was one public comment that I received and reviewed. Other than that, no disclosures. >> Commissioner Delviar, read and reviewed materials, and I'm familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Gfantini, read and reviewed materials, familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Jockerman, phone call with the applicant representative. >> Commissioner Williams, uh, read and reviewed material, um, comments and familiar with the site. Commissioner Vera read and review the materials and I am familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Roer, same. >> Madame clerk, do we have any public comment under this item? >> Yes, I have one in person uh from Francis Tryion. >> Please state your name for the record. You'll have three minutes. >> Good evening. For the record, my name, sorry, my name is Francis Tryan. Uh I am a resident of Wo County. I live on Vegas Street, the West End, and this development will impact my life. It not only mine, but also my communities. My parents, just for a little history, bought this property in 1971. It has been my family home for over 50 years. We have had access to this land. We've walked down past Steamboat Creek. It It's always been beautiful. moved out here when there was nothing south so we could sit in our front yard and at night the stars were incredible. Spent many many nights sitting with my father with him explaining the constellations. Those those stars are now dimmer every time the city moves further south and we get more and more development. We get more and more light and the stars disappear. So I don't get that enjoyment. Not saying I can't, but it's not in Nevada. I have to go out of state. It also is a right past my house is where the wild horses go. They take that path every night to get down to the water in Steamboat Creek. This is going to impact them. They're going to have to use Geiger grade, which means more dead horses because people go 15, 20 miles an hour faster on Geiger grade. They don't follow the speed limit. It it impacts my community because there are a lot of us that walk. I like to walk from my home up to Summit. I'm going to have to take toll road, which means I have to go down Geiger grade, which means I have to compete with cars and bicycles. There's no accommodations for us to walk through the property to get up to up to Summit. I can drive and then walk Summit, but if I'm going to do that, why don't I just go to Virginia City? I'm I'm just got a lot of concerns. I have an entire paper full, but there aren't three minutes isn't going to cover all of it. I I just feel like I'm losing my community. I'm losing my connection to my community. I am not considered. They are not putting any connectivity between my community and the rest of the community. And it makes me sad. So hopefully you'll take that into consideration as you think as you consider this development. Um I'm I'm concerned about the amount of light, the noise, the alarms that are going to be on the on the storage facilities because you know they have them hours of operation. It all is a concern. I want my peace. I want my my home to be my peaceful refuge, which it always has been. Thank you for your time. Do we have any other request to speak on this item? >> I do not have any additional public comment on this item. >> We do have one request to speak in chambers. Please state your name. Uh step forward to the podium. State your name for the record. You will have three minutes and when you're done, if you could please fill out a form. >> I have it there. Hello. Uh my name is Jeff Atkins and uh uh I just concerned with the uh to learn more about the uh impact of the drainage um as far as uh the creek the Bailey Creek that comes into there if there's any uh upstream impact to that or uh if they plan on doing something with that or just interested more in the disturbance to the drainage. Thank you. Do we have any other requests to speak in chambers at this time? Seeing none, that concludes public comment. We will now go to questions from the commission. Commissioner Visera. >> Great. Thank you. Um I guess a question for staff. Um uh we had some some public comment uh both written and verbal uh this evening. And so I was just curious on on their behalf, would you mind helping address some of their concerns as they relate to access, light, noise, including the most recent one I think around drainage? >> Yeah. Um, sure. Grace Mackin again for the record. Um, I'll start with the most recent one. I think he was referring to the ditch at the northern end of the property, the front. So that Yes. That um drainage way >> floods that was >> Yeah. >> You know, when the snow comes and then the rain, then we're in trouble. >> Yep. That >> that drainage way will primarily be undisturbed. They they're constructing a crossing over it similar to um there's some additional ones upstream that are uh crossings over it. And so the rest of the ditch will be undisturbed. Um that I'll start with that one. Uh and we do have our engineering manager here to to elaborate on that if necessary. Um as far as the access uh it it it's a a little difficult because um you know this is private property and so they have security measures that they would probably like to employ on site. So, so having kind of pedestrian access through the site might not be um the most practical for this type of use. Um but there are hour restrictions um and with that kind of reduces the amount of lights traffic impact during some of those sensitive hours. Um and so staff was hopeful that that could kind of be a compromise. Um, additionally, you know, this isn't warehouse or manufacturing, so there won't be, you know beeping alarms um significant lighting on site. These these usually kind of tend to sit pretty dormant until the weekends when everyone goes to get their RVs. Uh, so hopefully that kind of addresses some of those comments. Um, but as far as access, that's a difficult situation where where the the private property owner kind of has has some of those rights as well. Sure. Thanks, Chris. Just a quick followup. You mentioned um that that I guess maybe tenants of of these um storage units tend to go on the weekends. Is that just um is that based on data or is just a general idea or guesstimation? >> Well, there's not data that we've done to sit there and at a storage unit and count the amount of people that come in on the weekends versus a weekday. um we unfortunately don't have staff to do that, but uh just anecdotally, typically if you're storing RVs and boats um or you're moving on the weekends, um but uh either way, there's hour restrictions and so the traffic to the site will be during the day. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Commissioner Valto. Um I have a I'm a little concerned about the finding number two in the conditional use permit. Um so conditional use find permit finding number two says the proposed land use and project design is compatible with surrounding developments. CUP finding number five talks about the characteristics of the use as proposed um is compatible with the types of uses permitted in surrounding areas. Um can you help me understand why you think we can make finding number two based on what the surrounding development is? >> Sure. So you recently saw a similar development up on Military Road. Um also surrounded by residential type uses. Um we see some of these sites especially mini warehouse pop up in these commercial types area of type areas. This particular site would not be compatible for a retail center and obviously depends on how it was proposed. But generally um a high traffic high impact use would not be suitable just because of this access point. Um we're looking for kind of a low impact. So residential probably not going to make sense just based on how they have to get in and out of the site. Um we're looking for low impact and neighborhood supporting. Uh you're not going to want to see industrial here. Um and so that this type of use is probably one of the few uses that could sit here um and be as little impact as possible. Um and so when we look at kind of highest and best use for this property based on how this is packaged, um we can get there with that finding just based on some other uses that might not be as suitable. >> And does the the the fact that just north of it is a bus storage. So now I'm kind of looking at >> see >> preview. >> Yeah. Okay, I understand. Thank you, >> Commissioner Roar Meyer. >> I have kind of a bigger picker picture question here. U do we have a running total of how many mini warehouses we're approving? It does seem that they are on, if not every agenda, at least every other agenda. And the reason I bring it up is I I don't necessarily think that this is the wrong place for this use with the overhead lines and the access issues, but it does seem that we are filling our, you know, non-industrial sites with things that look a hell of a lot like a warehouse um and yet are being considered very differently >> next to residential. >> Yeah. So, we weirdly get them in chunks. Um, it seems when I was going back to kind of look at some other mini warehouse type uses, we'll get a couple in a in a year and then we'll have a maybe a two-year break and then we'll get another couple in a year. Uh, I can't unfortunately, you know, supply and demand. These are in high demand. Um, right now everyone has a a lot of stuff and extra toys. uh when we look at them we and you know I think this body knows that we can't really say well no we'd like another use there and for this particular site I actually think we we wouldn't probably want another use there but for another site maybe we'd rather have a restaurant or some multif family but we can't make that decision um and and so we try to look at maybe the architectural features and see if we can condition some of those to make them more compatible or the um layout of it to make it more compatible. Um, but unfortunately we see a lot of these just in demand right now. >> Comm Commissioner Roire, if I can chime in too, we have seen a trend where these storage uses seem to follow shortly after largecale multifamily projects. Multifamily projects generally the tenants don't have very limited on-site storage. And if you look, there's an apartment complex obviously directly to the north. Another large multifamily complex at the um Veterans Geer grade roundabout and then another large apartment complex uh over by the Summit Sierra with another one planned on the way. So these generally tend to follow those trends, so to speak. So that's another reason very similar to the one that Grace pointed out up off Military Road. Same situation. Okay, thank you. >> Commissioner the art. >> Um, yeah, Grace, I had a couple of questions. One goes to the horses, the wild horses there. So, obviously, >> h how do we as a community sort of deal with that? >> Um, I mean, I've seen the horses all over the place there. Um, and how do we mitigate that or how are we working with the the wildlife folks to ensure that we are cognizant of the horse traffic and how we can help with that. >> Yeah, we do have um some standards and code for projects that abut the Virginia range. It's kind of a very specific boundary. Uh more typically we see this with things like Talis Valley that this body's seen recently, those that are kind of right up against that range. We've seen fencing and horse guards that have had to be put in place. Um looking at kind of their uh not migratory pattern, but the the traffic route they take to to go water and then go feed. Um we we don't want to obviously bring these horses closer to roadways for people's safety. Um, and so that is kind of dealt with on a broader level of the city of looking at when we abut that Virginia range, we have horse fencing going in um that the city council's just paid for. And so that that's kind of how we look at that with this particular project. Um there's if they are going to water to and from steamboat property. Um this particular project doesn't have it's not the horse fencing or the cattle guards got not not anticipated uh with this particular project. >> Okay. Thanks. And then also um so it's called steamboat RV and storage but it's all indoor. >> So there'll be indoor RV storage. Okay. Um and then to the the light. I mean, I I recognize the hours and obviously we can't sort of predict when some of that traffic is on the weekends for sure. Um, but to the point about like dark skies and things like that, what like are there motion lights there or is it just that just trying to understand that better? >> We have some standards in code that address lighting especially when residentially adjacent um that you can't exceed certain foot candles which is a unit of measurement for lighting um at that property line. So they can't exceed a 0.5 foot candle at that property line. All lighting has to be covered directed downwards. Um it can't be that ballarded lighting that just shines straight up in the sky. Um and so with those types of standards, we're we're hopeful to kind of help that. Any development is is going to add light to an area unfortunately. Um especially for security reasons, but we try to encourage applicants obviously they have their standards covered directed down in the foot candle standards. Um and also brightness standard. >> Right. Thank you. >> Uh Commissioner Jockman. So this question is directed at the fifth finding under the [clears throat] major site plan review. So um for a project per the staff report the square footage of the of the development is more than 124,000. My understanding is that that typically would require two points of access. >> The site plan proposes one. Do we have buy off from fire for this or what's the reason for only having one access in this location? >> Sure. Um, so the fire marshall did review this project. They had no specific concerns. I did talk to him again today um and he did specifically say just because these are low traffic generating uses um and the scope and scale of this project, they didn't require secondary access. >> So it's low traffic as the basis. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm seeing no seeing no questions from the commission. We'll move to deliberations. Uh Commissioner Alto, I was uh initially concerned about the finding uh one of the findings under the conditional use permit uh specifically condition finding number two. I I think I understand why it's compatible after looking at some of the aerial maps. Uh and it looks like in my opinion it is consistent with the surrounding uh land use and zoning. So I that remedies my concern. Commissioner Williams, for the record, for my part, uh, you know, I am sympathetic to the paths and trailways um that the the homeowner mentioned, I think this one of the unfortunate fallouts of, you know, um, undeveloped private property that it does become, you know, kind of a free-for-all. Um, but it is inevitably private property. Um, I do also like appreciate Grace's comments about that while we all individually have ideas of what we would like to see um, built on these things, that's not necessarily in our per purview, um, we just get to make a decision based on what the property owner wants to build on his private property. um for that matter. Looking at the maps on the line, this you know organization pretty much owns that entire area, not just this lot, the surrounding lot, the rivers, the north, pretty much south. I mean, it's there's there's some big ownership there. So, I'm comfortable in it. Um I I get the concerns. Um I think I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Roar Meyer. Yeah, just to the point that was just made, um, yes, private property is subject to the discretion of the land owner and the desires of said development, but the reason we do planning is to direct development towards better, more def desirable uses. Um, and so I do believe that the city of Reno should, you know, be looking closely at the number so that we're not oversupplying our lands with low density uses like mini warehouses of which I agree we get in sort of clusters, but we've had a flurry of them. Um and so uh often we have to take a look if we're you know using the land in a way that is the highest and best use and when we have limited private land available um we have the tool of zoning to decide what belongs where and here we're looking at a case where there's incompatibilities. Now, I think there are some constraints and this would be even a variance situation with the overhead lines and the single point of entry um that could, you know, help justify this use. But I'm I'm really starting to wonder why we're not planning for um more sustainable land uses that bring more variability than just warehouses. That's my two cents. Any other comments from the commission in deliberation here? Uh, Commissioner Jockman, I'll say. So, [clears throat] for me, this is a question of, okay, we have the fire code and in my eyes, it appears that we're maybe deviating a little bit from that. I'm so sorry about this tonight. It's getting worse with every item. So, the uh hearing that the fire marshall is okay with this, that makes sense to me because obviously these buildings are not occupied at that time and that would be when this is this piece of code is most applicable. So, hearing that the fire marshall from staff is okay with that, that that allows me to proceed with that finding. Commissioner Mer, I just wanted to echo that I'm glad some of the uh other commissioners raised some of the questions and concerns that I had. So, I didn't mean to um say some of those things, but I'm glad that they were raised and I concur with some of those concerns and how we look at uh uh [clears throat] projects in general uh near-term and long term. If we have no other comments from the commission, we'll entertain a motion should one be made. >> Commissioner Williams, I'll get one started. Um, in the case of LDC 26-000030, uh, based on the compliance with the applicable findings, I move to approve the conditional use permit subject to conditions. and I can make all the findings. >> Commissioner Confantini, I second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Hearing? None. Motion carries unanimously. That concludes item C3. We will now We will now move to item C4, staff report for possible action. Case number LDC26-00000033, Trio Grid Battery Energy Storage System. Presentation from staff. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, planning commissioners. For the record, I'm Nathan Gilbert, principal planner with development services. Uh again, presenting tonight LD620 LDC 2633 TRO grid battery energy storage system. Uh the subject site includes a 25 acre portion of an overall 60 acre site located directly north of the existing Miraloma substation and east of the Talis Valley East sub uh subdivision which is currently under construction. The request this evening is for a conditional use permit to uh approve a 200 megawatt battery energy storage system or best system and substation. These are both considered major utilities. also uh uh CU for hillside development, fills greater than 10 feet and residential adjacency. So the master plan designations on the site are single family neighborhood and unincorporated transition and key supporting master plan policies are electrical transmission infrastructure and regional utility corridors. These are in our master plan, but they're also uh in the regional plan. This is a project of regional significance and will be reviewed by the regional planning commission for that finding. Major utilities and substations need to be within the um mapped regionally mapped utility corridors. Uh also supporting poly energy facilities would support um sustainable grid networks and hillside development. The zoning district is single family uh residential three units per acre SF3 and HDR and GR that's highdensity rural and general rural in Wu County. Upon annexation uh that area would be zoned SF3 and unincorporated transition 10 acres. Major utilities are allowed in all uh districts all zoning districts with an approved conditional use permit under B municipal code. uh key issues include the overall site design, fire safety, environmental impacts, and appropriateness of grading practices. So, this is the first uh best application that we've had moved forward to hearing. We do have another one in the queue at another location. We do receive uh fairly frequent interviews on on the facilities and our standards. So, essentially what these are, they're peaking power plant to provide system stability to the overall grid. They utilize existing grid energy to charge batteries during low peak demands and they provide energy during high peak demands. I mean essentially they're like a a utility grid scale infrastructure of a of a a power wall that you might have with a with a home solar system. So the proposed site design is 256 best units and 16 clusters that gradually move up up the hillside. There's also a 7 acre maintenance area and 1acre substation equipment area which is fully screened. Um the substation uh and one 70 ft transmission pole are adjacent and connecting to the Mariloma substation on the southernmost portion. Uh the nearest best unit is approximately 430 ft from the nearest residential lot to the west and approximately 50 feet in height above it in elevation. The overall uh site has retaining walls and screening sound walls concealed uh the facility in its entirety. So this is an unmanned facility other than for routine maintenance. Um there's an on-site control room that houses remote monitoring and communications. Performance alarms and safety conditions are monitored 247. [snorts] The units include the latest technology for fire detection, thermal monitoring, alarms, venting, and fire suppression. and there are self-contained units designed to prevent fires from spreading. Uh Reno Fire Marshal John Beck uh is joining us virtually this evening if you have any further questions with that and also provided a synopsis memorandum included uh in your staff report. So some environmental concerns uh that were evaluated included noise. There was a noise assessment report provided uh evaluating the project at peak operating conditions. Um [snorts] so in this example this is uh daytime noise levels uh with the facility running at at 100% capacity. Um the noise modeling indicated that uh uh the project would not exceed re R reno municipal code residential adjacency decibel standards for daytime or nighttime. Um project water to the site is only for um fire suppression and landscaping. The units themselves use coolant and fans instead of water for cooling. Condition of approval number 11 requires a formal plan to return the site to a natural state at the end of its life cycle. And as we discussed in the earlier presentation, Reno code has feral horse management standards which required horse fencing before any sight disturbing activity occurs at the site. So, this is a hillside development, which means that the site has slopes greater than 15% on 20% or more of the site. Overall, it's a it's a relatively flat site with that 15 to uh 20% topography on the easternmost portion of the site. [snorts] The project has stepped up the hillside to reduce overall grading and enhance the screening. A 1 acre of open space is required per code and nine acres are provided. Overall, the project meets or exceeds all hillside development code standards. There are seven areas of fill with greater than 10 feet with the maximum fill of 12 feet. Uh the discretionary threshold for cuts or for fills is uh is 10 feet. This is what's proposed is only two feet above discretionary thresholds and these are necessary for the terrace development concept. So key findings for the CUP include the location of of use consistent with zoning districts. Again, major utilities are allowed in all zoning districts with an approved CUP and the the site location is ex adjacent to an existing substation and utility corridor which is where it's required to be. The land use is compatible with surrounding development per code standards and with recommended conditions including the setback screening and the findings of the noise study. The project layout is designed to minimize grading and meets all code discretionary grading standards and exceeds the open space requirements. So with that, the recommendation for approval is on your screen and I'm available for questions at the appropriate time. Thank you. And do we have a would the applicant like to make a presentation? All right. Thank you. Uh my name is Eric Hasty. I'm with Wood Rogers and I'm representing the applicant um who's also here in attendance tonight. Um Nathan did a great job of going through uh the conditional use permit and and everything. So, I'll try not to be too repetitive here, but just give a little bit of history of the site and then uh go into some of the design as well as some of the operating procedures for the best system. Um, so currently right now the northern port parcel um which is about 53 and a half acres is uh going to be an or is proposed to be annexed into the city of Reno. uh the seven acres of this site to the south was currently or was annexed into the city in November of 2019. So, uh it was is by the same the same applicant. So, this this has been in in the works for a number of years now. Um this is a larger site, so we're coming back with the full annexation. So, uh the annexation will go to city council if the C is approved tonight. Um again the the adjacency to the Mirloa sub substation is critical for uh this to to operate. Um but understanding that this is also adjacent to the Talis Valley East subdivision. Um so upon annexation this is what the zoning will will look like and how the site layout is fit fits within that zoning. Um, like Nathan said, uh, this is a major utility and in within any of the zoning designations within City Reno Code, it's, uh, requires a conditional use permit. Um, he went over pretty well what we're asking for. Uh, major utility, hillside development, fills over 10 ft, and then the residential adjacency. Uh so just to give a little more context of the battery energy storage system um like Nathan said uh there's going to be a 120 kilovolt transmission line on the south end that will tie in to the existing substation. Uh and it will utilize the energy that is already being produced from the various uh power plants that feed this area. uh it will be the these these uh battery arrays will then be charged during uh the the low demand. So typically the high demand is in the morning and when everybody's getting ready to go to work and then when they return to work. Um so typically it's discharging during those times pushing energy into the grid and then charging um during those off hours during the daytime and then overnight again with the overall goal to because of the growth that has happened within South Reno. I mean every project that was presented tonight is in within South Reno. So uh this this whole um facility is required to help provide grid stability uh for the the entire south south Reno area. So just to give you guys a little bit better understanding of what's actually contained inside one of these um the the application is proposing the Tesla mega packs 2. Uh there is different products out there um that can be utilized in here um but most of them have the the same safety features that are presented uh in the Tesla Mega Pac 2. Um a lot of the a lot of the um a [clears throat] lot of the the things that are in the news about some of these older facilities that have had this thermal runway and caught fire. um the those those type of things have been solved with this with this new technology. Um a lot of that is the way the man the batteries are manufactured uh with these [clears throat] different um [snorts] materials as well as they're less susceptible to uh flaws which can lead to thermal runway and failure. So each unit is self-contained. So that number one in there is like a little cabinet has all those batteries that are plugged in there. Um there is uh an air cooled uh fan on top of each one of those. So that's the number four there [snorts] uh showing that. And then there is a coolant that is circulated in a closed loop system. So this is not utilizing water. A lot of those uh older systems utilize water and sometimes when that water interacts with the battery it kind of corrods. So there's there's less chance of that with with the mega the Tesla mega packs. And then um there's also monitors in there that will automatically shut down if a battery starts to reach a temperature that's unsafe. So it'll prevent it from either charging or discharging. And then there's additional sensors to detect fire and alert uh somebody uh 24/7. So now moving into the actual conditional use permit and talking about safety for uh as for keeping people out and and wildlife as well. Um, we are proposing to put a temporary feral horse uh fence up around the perimeter of the property prior to any grading to ensure that new no feral horses wander onto the site as well as any type of wildlife. [clears throat] This will be removed once the uh permanent fencing has been installed. That's showing shown in the red there. Um, there are seven fire hydrants that are proposed to be on site and this is not to combat the fire for uh batteries. um if if there if that is in the unlikely event that does happen. This is more to uh aid fire um with wildland fire suppression if if that does come through. [snorts] There's an internal uh fire access road that provides adequate access through the facility. Um this also helps with the defensible space. So not having the vegetation uh in here and near the uh energy or near the best systems will help with that. And there's going to be a fire safety management plan that will be submitted with this and training is also available on uh for the for the fire department on how to respond to a battery fire if that does happen. Uh Nathan went over this pretty well. We are with the hillside development standards and the areas that we are proposing. We're proposing to disturb a little bit over 16 and a half acres. Uh that requires about 1 acre of open space. we're providing a little close to nine. Um I just like to point out too that the area disturbance that we have in here um the the the batteries are pushed up farther uh to the east to really try to help give the residential residents that are going to be adjacent to this uh a little more buffer. So, a lot of that area that's in between uh the the system and and the residents adjacent to this will have an undisturbed uh natural buffer uh between them and the best system. Uh just just touching on drainage real quickly. Um drainage has been accommodated for this. This will uh the drainage that's on site will come into uh three proposed uh detention basins and then the drainage that will be created from the best systems itself as well as the roadways will be directed into valley gutters and and directed towards these um these tension ponds that will help decrease peak flows compared to existing conditions. I think we we touched pretty well on where those fills are going to occur. Um but just to give you an idea how this is stepped um here's a cross-section that runs um west to east um to give you an idea of how this is going to be staggered. It's very uh very stepped in a way and then for each one of those steps there is a proposed sound and screening wall which will do two things. It will help screen the the visual of of the actual uh batteries from from the site as well as uh help with sound mitigation. So looking at residential adjacency uh code requires us to have a minimum 10 foot wide landscape strip with trees uh featured every 20 ft. As you can see, we're accommodating that. Um, we are also proposing these sound walls to help not only with screening but also with sound. And the nearest uh best unit because we did were able to push these right to the to the east is about 445 ft from the closest uh residence and about 45 ft in elevation difference. Um, going back to the sound study, um, just to give you a little more context on this, uh, we did run the sound study, uh, based on the, you know, the worst case scenario operating for both the daytime and the nighttime and compared those to the the city of Reno code for residential adjacency. Um, it's my understanding that they were able to meet the city of Reno codes without the screening and sound walls. Um however the applicant uh understood that um you know there will be residents adjacent to this and decided to include the sound walls as part of this. Um and you can see that the sound is really mitigated. If you look on the eastern portion that sound is kind of you know bows out where on on the western portion near the residents those sound walls really help to uh impact or to reduce the amount of sound that those residents will be hearing. And again, this is from uh the fans that will be on top of the the batteries systems. And so these usually run when they're either charging or discharging into the system. And again, this is for uh the worst case scenario. They're still well under the the allowed um decibb for residential agency for city code. Uh here is the here's just a look at the site. Um, we did some photo simulations to give everybody an idea of what this looks like. This is from the perspective of Veterans Parkway, but this was also taken from a drone, so it's much higher than uh most of the residents will be when they're looking at it. So, here's what it looks like now, and here's what the site will look like. Again, you can see that we're proposing to use materials and colors that will help it blend in with the hillside um as much as possible. um to give you a better idea of what that looks like from the development. Um it's it's kind of hard to see on this, but we added a little area. Um the residents that are most directly adjacent to this will not be able to see that. So, I didn't include those photo simulations in this. Um but this gives you an idea of what the what it'll look like from from the resident's point of view. And um for the conditions of approval, we are requesting that there is modifications to the language for four of those. Uh we did run these modifications by uh city of Reno staff, uh planning staff, and they indicated they didn't have any concerns. Um I did email those to you earlier today. Hopefully you had a chance to look at those. I would be happy to go over those details um with you if if we wanted to get into that. Um, but really what it comes down to is requirements prior to issuance of a grading permit. Just kind of adding clarity on on when the grading permit is going to be able to go forward. Um, potential wall types and materials that are that that could potentially be used to help the site blend with the natural surroundings. And then the clar clarity on how the wall height will be measured uh to ensure screening. Um so overall these amendments will not change the original intent of the conditions. So just to recap uh we did submit this in December. We did go to the NAB. Um we heard a lot of comments there. We try to address all those in our presentation uh tonight. Um and then staff has recommended approval because it can meet all the findings. We are requesting a uh change or modification to those conditions that were listed. and I'm happy to answer any other questions. Thank you. >> We will now we will now go to disclosures from the commission. Commissioner Velto. Uh Commissioner Velto received and reviewed correspondence um from the applicant as well as community members and spoke to a battery storage uh leader in Nevada about the project. Commissioner DeviR received and read all of the material that was sent and familiar with the site. >> Commissioner Gianiini met with representation at Wood Rogers and had phone calls with representation for the product. Familiar with the site? >> Commissioner Jockman, I saw guidance from the city attorney's office and a phone call with the applicant representative. Commissioner Williams, I've read and reviewed material um which included public comment that was submitted um and had a call with the applicant's representative. >> Commissioner Roar Meyer received um public comments from interested uh non-governmental organizations and uh read and reviewed um information contained in the staff report. >> Uh Commissioner Bera, I am familiar with the site. I read and reviewed the material, including public comment. And just bear with me. I have a a longer one that I'd like to lodge in the record here. Um, let's see. All right. Uh, fellow commissioners and public, I need to disclose the fact that I'm a former longtime Tesla employee and own Tesla's stock, and this project may likely utilize Tesla mega batteries. On this matter, I've sought guidance from the city attorney's office. Pursuant to NRS281A.4204A, 424A. The law presumes that the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in the public officer situation would not be materially affected by the public officer's significant peculinary interest where the resulting benefit or detriment acrewing to a public officer is not greater than that occurring to any other member of any general business profession, occupation or group that is affected by the matter. Here I have no peculinary interest in the Trio grid battery energy storage system. I do have a significant pecunary interest in my Tesla stock. However, the resulting benefit or detriment occurring to me and my family will not be greater than the acrewing to any other member of the general public that owns Tesla stock. C. in regards to Weber common op number 09-47C 2009 mere ownership of property not sufficient to implicate disclosure requirements the fact that I'm a former Tesla employee or own Tesla stock will not impact my ability to impartial review and render a decision upon this particular agenda item in light of foregoing the independence of judgment of a reasonable person in my situation would not be materially affected by my pecunary of interest and because this is not a clear case of disqualifying conflict of interest, I will be voting on this matter. Please accept this disclosure and lodge it on the record for this meeting and subsequent meetings pertain to this agenda item. Thank you. >> Thank you, Commissioner Visera. Commissioner Jockman, I will make an additional disclosure on this item. Uh my my wife is a current employee of Tesla. My understanding of this agenda item is that Tesla has no involvement in this item at all. She does own stock in the company similar to Commissioner Basera's uh disclosure and I will ask city attorney's office here. Is there any other disclosure that I should make pertaining to this agenda item? Uh Jasmine >> no, I think that's sufficient as long as um, you know, any pecuniary interest acrewing to her would be the same as any other stockholder. >> That that would be correct. That would be my understanding. >> Chair, if I might, um, are are we all disclosing ownership of Tesla Scott stock? Um I because I would have to participate if I >> if so in this situation um it's tenuous at best but in the interest of full disclosure if you do own Tesla stock not just you know stock as part of um mutual fund or something but individual shares then you should probably make the same disclosure. Okay. Are you okay with me um on the record saying that I have and [snorts] own individual Tesla socks and I have the same disclosure as Chair Jockaban for the record? >> Yes, that would be fine. >> Does anybody else need to make that? >> Commissioner Delvr, I have the same disclosures as Commissioner Jakaman and Williams >> except the spouse part. Correct. Well, yeah, my spouse does not work at Tesla. >> Commissioner Valto, same disclosure. >> Do we have any other disclosures from the commission before we proceed to public comment? Hearing none. Uh, madame clerk, would you please proceed with public comment? >> Yes, we did receive correspondence for this item and I do have at least one request to speak for him in person for Ann Nolan. Uh, good evening, Commissioner. My name is Anne Nolan. I am a resident of uh, Wo County. I work in Reno at the university. Um, Reno is the fastest warming city in the US and the urgency to decarbonize our grid has never been greater. That's why I support among many other reasons uh this responsibly cited battery energy storage project like the this the trio best system. Um I want to identify a number of advantages that uh haven't been brought up tonight but I'm sure you already know these but I just want to say them out loud for the record. Um improved grid stability and reliability. I live in South Reno and I know that the grid's unstable. I own a Tesla power wall which helps with when we have uh brief power outages. The response time is it's instantaneous and and it works tremendously well. I have huge support for renewable energy. This project continues to support that and it is in align with the WO County climate action plan. So, um I think that's important to keep in mind. It captures excess solar and wind power, allowing for this more consistent integrated integration of renewable renewable energy into our grid. And it also puts Reno kind of more at the forefront of renewable energy activities. So, it' be nice to see that. Um, apparently it has significant economic and tax benefits, perhaps providing as much as 9 million in state and local taxes over its lifetime. [snorts] Um, environmental benefits. It doesn't produce air or water pollution. It's safe and modern technology. It's a lithium iron phosphate um uh chemical system for the batteries which are safer. Uh and it also has a relatively minimal environmental footprint. Um so these this project like other best projects do align with Nevada's broader goal to be a hub for renewable energy transmission and to pro improve Reno's and Nevada's overall energy security. Thank you. With that, I do not have any additional public comment. >> Do we have any requests to speak in chambers? Seeing no hands raised, we will now move to questions from the commission. >> Uh, Commissioner Williams, I got one, I think for the applicant. >> Eric, just want to confirm uh one thing. Is the stepped sound wall uh that you have proposed is that required by code or is that something the applicant went in and did above and beyond code? >> No. Yeah, thanks for the question Air Casey for the record. So, no, that's not required uh by code, but based on you know the residential adjacency understanding that there's going to be viewing and and um also concerns with sound uh the applicant is proposing those. So, yeah. >> Perfect. That's it. Thank you, >> Commissioner Vizera. >> Great. Thank you so much. Um, I guess I just first want to start off by acknowledging that I guess many of the comments that we received focus on safety concerns and rightfully so. Uh, particularly around the battery fires and energy response. So, I do appreciate the fire marshals memo confirming that the project meets uh, most current international fire code standards. And I think my line of question is going to kind of start there and hopefully provide uh the public some reassurance or help address some of those uh concerns or help others chime in and build upon those uh concerns or just kind of questions. So, I guess one thing I'd like to um clarify uh for folks is like my understanding is that each mega pipe functions as an independent unit designed to contain an incident within the enclosure and that UL 954A testing specifically evaluates like fire propagation between units. And so I guess this question is for perhaps staff uh or or either you guys can keep on. Uh can you walk us through how the systems design and spacing ensures that if a thermal event were to occur in like one unit, it does not cascade across the site. [clears throat] >> All right, Eric Hasty, for the record, I'll try to try to answer that. Um so yeah, so thanks for the question. So, kind of going back to the slide we had that showed how this is and just just want to just want to point out, right, like this is the Tesla Mega Pack is is one of the products doesn't necessarily mean that it's the only product available. Um, but most of them are designed this way. And so each one of those cabinets, right, that that's shown here. So, wherever there's a one there, uh, that's that's designed to be self-contained. So, if there is going to be a fire that occurs in one of those, it's it's it's designed to to contain that fire within that and prevent it from not only spreading uh within the the uh battery system itself or to those other cabinets uh but also to the other ones. Um, and so this kind of works two ways. So, not only will it help prevent fires that occur within it, [clears throat and cough] but also if there was a wildland fire that came up against it, it helps protect those batteries from from thermal runway. So, hopefully that answers your question. >> Yeah. Yeah, it totally does, Eric. And I think it's more, you know, trying to make sure that we provide some edification for our general public and anybody else that has these kind of concerns. And I think while I have you there, just to kind of build upon on this line of questioning, particularly for the nearby residents, uh Eric, would you mind briefly explaining and you can tag team Mike or whoever else uh could you briefly explain what the emergency response plan would look like in the unlikely event of a city that's not contained or self-contained? >> Commissioner Bisera, we do have Fire Marshal John Beck on and I would defer that to to him. He's definitely the expert to to answer that question. >> Excellent. >> For the record, John Beck, Fire Marshall, Reno Fire Department. Uh, can you hear me? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh, so this is actually a very benign project and and it's it's not a typical response that you would uh really regularly think of as far as fire. we come and and we we put water on the fire and put the fire out or we mitigate some fashion. >> This is actually very simple and straightforward. Our response is going to be notification from the site if there was some kind of thermal event that occurred. Um if there is a spike in in in one of the units, it's automatically going to trigger notification uh to to the monitoring company that's going to that's going to um bring it to the Reno Fire Department's attention. we're going to respond and we're going to come to the staging area and we're just basically going to stand by. Um and then what we're going to do is is ensure that none of the products of combustion um within the site reach to the exterior of the site because that's what we're standing by for is to make sure that nothing gets beyond the actual site itself. So our our crews are going to come. We're gonna we're gonna uh stage and standby to make sure that if anything escapes that we're going to be looking at more of like a wildland scenario where if anything gets into the um to the wildland urban interface area that we're going to we're going to get that fire knocked down before it has any chance to go anywhere. Um if that pretty much answers your question. >> It it very much does. Uh thank you fire marshall. I really appreciate that and on behalf of the public as well or the nearby residents, thank you. >> Of course. and I'll be here um standing by for any more questions. >> Thank you. >> Uh Commissioner Delvr, I have a question for you, Fire Marshall Beck, and that is and and maybe or actually could be anybody, but I'm just trying to understand the route in and out of the area to get to the area that you're trying to protect. Um I couldn't quite tell like is it coming off of veterans? Are you going down Rio Wrangler? Just trying to understand what that path looks like. >> Um so I didn't specifically look at the route we're going to take cuz right now that there is some um infrastructure infrastructure that's still being put in place. >> Makes sense. >> But whatever that whatever that route's going to be if it's coming down South Meadows where it connects all the way over um and then routing up through um that Talis area. I I I don't have that actual route in front of me. I'm I'm mainly just looking at the site as it was um I I I don't know a specific road route that the crews are going to take. >> Okay. It looks like somebody here might want to answer. I just know there's a there's a roundabout there and so I'm just trying to >> I'll just I think I have a slide that might show this. So, okay. So you can kind of see from this aerial here [clears throat] um the the road that comes in to the substation to the south, right? That's called Antler Ridge Road. Um and so that's that's part of the Talis development. And so now you have, you know, you have the connection where it South Meadows goes across the Steamboat Creek and goes up to Rio Wrangler and then can come up to Anler Ridge. And so their access uh for the actual site is going to be through the Envy Energy site. >> Okay. >> And they wouldn't necessarily or maybe we don't necessarily know yet. They might come from the the north side, but right now the idea would be South Meadows, left on Rio Wrangler, right on Antler up through Envy Energy. >> Yeah. Okay. I believe so. >> Thank you. Um and I have a couple more questions. These are probably for Nathan. Um, one of the questions I had, and this has come up a couple of times, and and so I'm just trying to understand sort of the the annexation question, like why it's like I don't know, catch 22, chicken before the egg. I'm not really sure, but why would we be looking at this when the land hasn't been uh annexed yet? >> We would look at it no matter what. Uh the properties in our sphere well the small portion that 7 acre portion to the south was was annexed back in 19 2020. [snorts] >> Um the whole property is in our sphere of influence which means that if they come in for an application such as this the city of Reno is reviewing it. Fire responsibility and any t and any taxation is going to go to the county. So you know it's it's it's sort of an odd process. is called an interlocal agreement where the city of Reno has land use authority but the but the county has to service it and the county gets the tax benefit. >> So sorry I was asking about the annexation process. Why if if we're if the annexation itself has not happened yet because that's going to go to city council. >> That would be a condition of approval. I I guess what I'm saying is that this body would be reviewing it and annexation is a condition of approval. So whether it's annexed or not, this B this is the deciding body of whether that's an appropriate facility or not. >> Okay. Okay. And then that also goes to my the zoning question that I have. Um because I know that the the Miraloma uh station it's it's a public public facility. Is that right? PF. Um, and just kind of curious as to why. I mean, again, I get that major utilities can go obviously and and I get why we're doing it and and that all makes sense, but I'm just kind of curious as to why we wouldn't um zone it for public facilities versus having to go through the cup process. >> Well, it goes with the master plan. So, that's in in 2017, you know, the master plan designations. Again, if you look at where where major utilities are within the city, this is pretty much a one-off that it's actually zone public facility. Um, it varies broadly. >> So, you wouldn't um you wouldn't zone it for its use. You just take it for whatever the >> that's code allows. Yeah. Major utilities are allowed in any zoning district. Doesn't need to be industrial or public facility. >> Got it. Okay. Thank you. Commissioner Roar Meer. >> Hi. Yeah, I have a couple of questions. Um, what is the proximity of this to the regional the TMRPA regional utility corridors? I know they're going through an update of those because they were created quite a long mapped quite a long time ago. How is this project in relation to that? >> Yeah, that's a good question. Thank you. Um, this is adjacent to it and we've had ongoing discussions uh with TMRPA staff as to whether this would require a regional plan amendment or not. And so they did provide a memo um that was included in your staff report. We did have follow-up meetings with a more uh with a concrete response that they would not consider this an expansion of a excuse me, they would not consider this a new substation or a new transmission line. that uh that they would consider this uh an expansion which would not require the regional plan amendment. So what this will require is uh regional planning commission review as a as a a project of regional significance for that new substation um and and utility u but they they will not be requiring any new regional plan mapping because of its adjacency. I appreciate the clarification for the public because these are complicated matters, but I also wanted to follow up and say um I think we had the project uh Cypress Creek in North Reno up in the north valleys and was this project already included and approved in the NV Energy IRP? because the previous project we reviewed was not and there was some questions around getting a CUP now versus the amount of years it would take if the CUP will be in place and whatnot. So, I was curious about the timing and has Envy Energy approved this, you know, what what is that? >> Can I get some clarification on the Cypress Creek Renewable? Is this the one next to the Red Rock substation? Cuz that hasn't gone that hasn't gone to the planning commission yet. That that application came in July and we continue to work with the applicant. We expect that application to move forward in the next month or two. Uh, but that has not uh been presented to the planning commission. I believe they did present to the NAB though. >> Okay. Maybe that was it. I So, there's two projects circulating in Reno now. Correct. Um, did this has this one been included and approved in the NB Energies IRP? >> I would have to defer that to the applicant. Uh, the correspondence with NB Energy that I had was simply the letter acknowledging uh this project uh included in your staff report. >> Ricardo Best from Yolian. Uh, so the project was actually selected as part of the RFP. Um, and so the project was selected uh roughly about a month or so ago. Um, so this is integrated into their IRP. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, that that would make sense with this EUP ask. Um and then could we just talk bigger picture Nathan about the need for this kind of resiliency and um you know how many hours of backup this so that the count the citizens and public can understand why battery storage is something that is important to our economy especially in light of these large load users like electrification of our transportation system or lots and lots of data centers. Yeah, >> bigger picture. >> It certainly provides uh grid enhanced grid reliability. Um reduces brownouts. Um provides for the opportunity uh to better effectively use renewable energies as that are that are on the grid. Do you have a sense of is there any prioritization in a situation where we need that battery backup for municipal? Like would the backup assist um 24-hour operators first? Would it help alleviate blackouts to residential and schools? Yes. Are there any prioritizations? >> My understanding is that uh it would um definitely benefit during peak demand. And just out of curiosity and maybe again for the land for the applicant itself is there prioritization among land uses. >> Ricardo Benz from Yolian Energy. So typically the way that it goes is is battery storage is really geared towards resiliency for the area. So wherever the need for the electrons are is where it goes. But mainly this is to support uh NVE with the additional low growth that's taking place in in the area especially within the South Reno area. So essentially this will actually support that for the additional low growth that's taking place in the area. And when you mean South Reno, are you saying largely the part of the city that is more residential in nature or are we supporting larger industries? Can you can you help define what that is? >> So this is a contracted project withinve essentially, right? So the demands is for the overall use for the enance. So like we wouldn't be able to determine exactly if it it is going directly toward residential use, if it's a commercial use. It's for the for the better well-being of the the grid. >> All right. Thank you. >> Sure. Any other questions from the commission? >> Seeing none, we will now move to deliberation. Uh Commissioner Bisera. >> Sure. Uh thank you. just a a few remarks. I think there's kind of a a theme going here and so I'll just kind of reiterate a couple things, but um you know, battery energy storage systems are definitely becoming an important part of our our modern electric grid as renewable energy expands. So, that's a good thing. And and I think as I mentioned earlier too, many of the public comments that we received were focused on safety concerns and particularly around battery fires and emergency response and understandably so. So, I hope some of the some of the conversation that has taken place this evening, even if it was just, you know, not an hour's length, has helped alleviate some of those concerns and appreciate the fire marshall's memo confirming the project meets the current international fire code standards and that Reno Fire has reviewed the site's uh safety planning. And I also think it's great that the uh the proposal's location is directly adjacent to a major substation. So, that's also good. And I think that uh ultimately many of the concerns raised tonight do relate to understanding the technology. And I believe or at least hope some of tonight's discussion has helped clarify how these systems are designed and regulated to operate safely particularly in coordination with our local and regional firefighters. So um I will be leaning in support of this project. >> Commissioner Roar Meer. >> Yes. Thank you. Um, yeah, battery storage is a part of our modern world. I think the stadium sighting is sort of an interesting aesthetic choice. I'm not sure um how the new Talis Valley residents will feel about having that in their backyard, but I appreciate the additional sound walls for making it quieter. That's very important. Um I bring up the need for such a thing because we are experiencing as a region sort of this large market growth in heavy demand uses particularly data centers and AI which are going to put stresses on our grid. So we're going to need battery storage. Um we haven't come to a place on how we feel I guess as a community um about standards around some of this heavy large or heavy load use growth. uh it is something we need to grapple with. Um but as long as we approve it, we also need to improve uh approve projects like battery storage. So we have to for me ultimately I think in this industry it's very important that these projects be accepted by NVI energy so that they're functioning as part of a larger grid system. I think the projects that come as sort of a speculation and don't have that um are ones we need to look out for. So, if this is the first in line, I'm sure it won't be the last. Um, and it's something that is part of the world uh that's changing and rapidly in our top tier market for data centers. Um, and if people want to ask questions around resiliency, other states and other places are prioritizing curtailments. So when there are blackouts and brownouts from heavy industry uses that their homes aren't the first ones turned off or that the battery backup system actually serves the people who live there first. Um and so that's very important to consider in these discussions. Uh with that I can support this project um because it has that recognition. However, we're only going to be seeing more of these and I can tell you they're not going to be wildly popular um as adjacent to residential uses. Commissioner Velto. >> Um, I can support the project and I was going to say I'm ready to make a motion. Oh please. >> Sorry, Commissioner Delvr. Um, I I [clears throat] can I I can make the findings and can totally support this. I think this is needed and necessary um to Commissioner Roers. We're going to see more and more um needs and uses for this. So, I can get behind that. My my only concern is with the addendum to the conditions which we haven't really discussed yet and so I'm not sure how that plays into it but would love to hear a little bit more about the conditions so that when we do make the motion we incorporate that. >> Can I ask a question about that actually because I uh hear what you're saying. Uh maybe I can just get we can get confirmation from Nathan if the city supports >> I could appreciate it. >> Mr. here. >> Okay, >> please proceed. >> Yes, the staff has reviewed uh this material before it was sent to the planning commission. We asked if the applicant to to send it to the commissioners and bring it in the presentation. I do have a copy for the record. I know all the commissioners were were forwarded that the conditions um they're they're very minor. There's very technical uh >> yeah, I just want to make sure that when he makes the motion they're included the way they need to That's amendment to condition 6, 7, and 11 uh in the material forwarded by the applicant to the planning commission. >> Perfect. >> Thank you, Commissioner Jockman. I do have one question about the conditions. So, [clears throat] the applicant has stated that the um project may or may not use Tesla mega packs. The condition 10 reads as though the project shall utilize Tesla mega bees systems. It goes on after that. So I think um I I guess I'll direct this question at the applicant first. Would you like to weigh in on that condition? That's more rigid than what I've heard in the presentation. So I'm I'm a little confused about that condition. >> Mr. Chair, if I may, just real quick. Um the on and on is alternatives may be proposed subject to the administrator. The the point of this condition is um the 2024 fire code specifically outlines um you know best standards and they they need to um provide uh spec sheets, product sheets. That's what the sound study used because these are de it's detailed information on the product. We don't care if it says Tesla on the side of the box. we we care that that that the the quality that's presented and is presented to this commission is is consistent with whatever product type is used. So, it does allow for um flexibility. We just want to make sure that uh that the the quality of product and safety of the of the product is consistent with what was presented. >> Thank you. That that's sufficient for my question. Commissioner Valto, uh Commissioner Bisera, apologize. I think your hand has been raised for a minute. Oh, I'm sorry. You know, I I mentioned lower because uh you and Commissioner uh Deli uh elevated the questions I was kind of uh noodling on. So, thank you. So, go ahead and pass to Commissioner Belto. >> Uh yes, and Nathan, I liked your use of the on and on as a way of saying the rest of the sentence. I haven't heard that before. That was very well done. Uh in the matter of case number LDC26-0033, strike that. In matter of case number LDC26-00000033 uh based upon compliance to the applicable findings, I move to approve the conditional use permit subject to the conditions listed in the staff report with the following exceptions. Condition number six shall be modified to add the sentence quote this requirement shall not restrict the issuance of grading or site improvement permits which may proceed prior to approval of the boundary line adjustment. Condition number seven, little C, shall be eliminated and replaced with permitted retaining wall types, including cast inplace concrete, textured or colored concrete systems, and Gabon wall systems. Gabon walls shall be constructed with rock or similar natural materials and designed to be visually compatible with the surrounding area prior to the issuance of any grading permit. The applicant shall submit details demonstrating visual appearance of all retaining walls subject to staff approval. Condition number 7D shall be modified to read. Screening walls shall be of sufficient height measured from finished grade to fully screen. the BESS units from view. And condition number 11 shall be modified to include a new sentence after the first sentence which reads, "This requirement shall not restrict the issuance of grading or site improvement permits which may proceed prior to approval of decommissioning plan." Uh, and I can make all the findings. >> Mr. Bisera, a second. >> We have a motion and a second. All in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed hearing? None. Motion carries unanimously. That concludes item C4. [clears throat] And that concludes our items under public hearings. Uh item D, business items. >> Uh nothing tonight, Mr. Chair. >> Item E, Truckucky Meadows Regional Planning Liaison Report. Uh Commissioner Gonfentini, can you please give that update? I don't want to talk. Um uh it was my first meeting participated. Uh they gave a presentation on the tiered approach that regional has. They distributed um manuals out to new commissioners as well as existing commissioners in the regional space. And that's about it. >> Thank you. Uh item Future agenda items from staff. U as I mentioned uh earlier we will on our next meeting have a presentation from city manager Jackie Bryant on seax as well as we will have an action item to appoint or make a recommendation for an appointment to the regional planning commission. >> Mr. Sure. May I ask one question under that? In the NAB in some of our communication today, there was um some comments made about the parking a um automotive organization in south. Did that stop at the NAV and it's not going to come to planning? >> The I assume you're referring to the Corin for conditional use permit. Yes, they've withdrawn that application and removed the vehicles is my understanding. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Sorry. Item G, public comment. Madame clerk. >> I do not have any closing public comment. >> Seeing none, we will now uh move to adjurnn. Can I get a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Commissioner Williams second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. Meeting adjourned. >> Have a good evening.